A Quaker Behind the Dream

By Brenda Walker Beadenkopf

This intimate, fascinating biography of Quaker visionary Charles Walker illuminates his struggles for racial justice and his role in promoting the teachings of nonviolence within the American Civil Rights Movement. Volume 2 focuses on his contribution to the movement of the 1960s and his relationships with Dr. King and other civil rights leaders.

• Language: English
• Publisher: EABooks Publishing
• Release date: Mar 22, 2023
• ISBN: 9781953114648

Book preview

Introduction to Volume 2

Crozer Meeting with Martin Luther King Jr., 1949

Do you know how many students will be at the meeting? A.J. Muste asked young Charlie Walker, driver of the old, blue Ford heading to Chester, Pennsylvania in the fall of 1949. Charlie had picked the older man up at the Philadelphia train station on this pleasant, November day. Muste had traveled from New York City, national headquarters of the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) of which he was its executive director. Tall and almost skinny, the 64-year-old with slightly balding, wavy, gray hair and high forehead projected a thoughtful, intellectual air. Friendly and outgoing, he smiled at Charlie and leaned forward, rubbing his hands together.

The married father of four looked over and grinned. No, I don’t. But the seminary students at Crozer were so excited when I spoke to them about the success of Gandhi’s recent nonviolent movement in India. I expect lots of kids to attend. I felt it would be a great idea to schedule you a meeting there, because you are much more experienced as a speaker than I am.

Muste assured his protégé his speaking had improved every day as executive secretary of both the Philadelphia branch of the FOR¹ and the Mid-Atlantic Region. Also, that he had made significant progress in the organization’s goal to reach the nation’s future religious leaders with its message of peace. A.J. suggested it was Charlie’s exceptional speaking skills that had excited the seminary students about Gandhi, the world’s supreme pacifist, who not only sent the British packing but also brought the cruel caste system to its knees.² ³

This unexpected praise from his boss spread a glow across his strong features, his hazel eyes brightening in his handsome face. He ran his fingers nervously through his wavy, light brown hair, then concentrated on turning into Crozer Theological Seminary. He slowed the car upon reaching a narrow lane surrounded by lush bushes and tall trees, typical of a Pennsylvania campus.

Looking for a place to park, he asked, What did you decide to title your talk?

‘The Implications of Nonviolence for the Christian Church.’⁴

That sounds terrific! Charlie could hardly wait.

Gandhi had been the first to apply nonviolence on a national scale, and the world had looked with wonder at this phenomenon. Basing his movement on passive resistance, Gandhi had talked about the power of truth and love as a force to be used by the human spirit to break the power of evil in one’s enemies and turn them into friends. He claimed nonviolence was not a weapon of the weak, but of the strong—those persistent and committed enough to protest the right way and suffer victoriously for the sake of freedom.

Following Charlie’s introduction at the meeting, most likely a required convocation in the seminary chapel, Muste electrified the audience with his talk on nonviolence, pacifism, and what Gandhi’s powerful campaigns could offer Christians today.5

Afterwards in the question-and-answer period, a former veteran flew out of his seat and shouted, What right do you have to assume what soldiers think in battle? When have you ever faced war? He yelled some more and stomped out.

Muste called after him, Wait a minute, Brother, come on back and let’s talk about this. He did not return, and as the group sat in stunned silence, an older man got to his feet and proceeded to give a religious message.

Charlie suddenly realized this was the janitor waiting for the meeting to be over! That roiled the waters even more, he later recollected.

Attending that meeting was young Martin Luther King Jr. in his second year of Baptist seminary!⁶ His parents had sent him to school in the North before he found his calling in the South.

That event had been particularly memorable for Charlie. I was the organizer, as an FOR staff member then, and recall the occasion clearly. If Martin said anything or asked a question I cannot recall.⁷ But Charlie did not know him then. That would come later.

It was also an unforgettable experience for the young King, who wrote in his autobiography, I was exposed for the first time to the pacifist position in a lecture by A.J. Muste. I was deeply moved by Dr. Muste’s talk.⁸

Charlie, pleased with the fact that he had originated, facilitated, and attended that event near Philadelphia, later wrote that Martin was somewhat impressed, but not convinced. Once he was convinced, however, King became a member of the FOR. He trusted Muste and members of the FOR, and accepted their advice, writing, [T]he power of A.J.’s sincerity and his hardheaded ability to defend his position stayed with me through the years . . . and I would say unequivocally that the current emphasis on nonviolent direct action in the race relations field is due more to A.J. than to anyone else in the country.⁹

Martin Luther King again paid tribute to the Fellowship of Reconciliation, when he said that the only group that came into Montgomery and did not tell them how to run the Montgomery boycott was the FOR, and it was the only group to help over the long haul.¹⁰

So, 29-year-old Charlie Walker helped start the nonviolent movement in the United States of America in 1949, the FOR becoming a key ingredient in the burgeoning movement’s staunch commitment to nonviolence. Volume 1 of A Quaker Behind the Dream features this little-known story.

Beginning with Charlie’s birth in 1920, it continues with his childhood in Lancaster County Amish country, higher education at a Brethren College, and maturing in his Quaker convictions as a conscientious objector during World War II. In the early 1950s Walker worked with predominant civil rights movement leaders such as James Farmer, Bayard Rustin, Rev. James Lawson and George Houser—all recruited by A.J. Muste—who began their careers with the FOR. Walker helped provide training and organization in nonviolent direct action freely offered by the FOR to the movement.

A Philadelphia Quaker, Charlie helped set the tone by writing and speaking about nonviolence and working tirelessly to keep protests peaceful. As the Philadelphia head of a leading peace organization, the FOR, he became a radio news commentator, while he grew into his eventual role as an energetic activist and visionary. A man ahead of his time.

Volume 2 begins with Charlie’s trip to Montgomery to meet with and encourage movement leaders. It moves on to the sit-ins, Freedom Rides, 1963 March on Washington, 1964 Mississippi Freedom Summer Project, Selma in 1965, and the Poor People’s Campaign in 1968—all these movements benefitting from Charlie Walker’s experience as a key organizer, trainer in nonviolence, and writer of training materials. Readers will see how Charlie meets Rev. King in person. They will follow Charlie’s inspiring correspondence with Dr. King and witness how they both grow in their deep commitment to nonviolence.

Charlie develops friendships and working relationships with major leaders and has a hand in the founding and/or development of three of the four major civil rights organizations: Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). The fourth is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), founded in 1909, before Charlie was born.

Charles Coates Walker plays a significant part, however small, in the successes which the leaders’ steadfast commitment to nonviolent direct action made possible. These victories lead to significant strides in race relations, from the time of the Montgomery Bus Protest in 1955 to the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968. This volume also describes Walker’s subsequent contribution to the movement’s last-ditch, big effort, the Poor People’s Campaign.

Chapter 1

Montgomery Bus Boycott, 1955–1956

We have no more urgent problem to face than to find nonviolent alternatives to conflict . . . . If nonviolent resistance can be carried on with real persistence, in spite of severest provocations and on a mass scale, here is a phenomenon that deserves more attention and study.

—Charles Walker, Gains Achieved By Peaceful Methods, letter to editor published in Philadelphia Evening Bulletin, January 1957.

On public transportation in the South in the early 1950s, black people rode in the back of the bus by law, just part of the humiliation and discourtesy faced by African Americans leading up to the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Charlie Walker wrote, A Negro college student was arrested for ‘intimidating passengers’ from riding the bus, but he had actually been helping an elderly relative INTO the bus. Claudette Colvin, a schoolgirl, had refused to move back in a somewhat similar affair. She was handcuffed and taken to jail. Mothers with children had been harassed while getting change, and on one occasion like this, children were injured when the driver started off with a sudden jerk.¹ Martin Luther King added, Negroes pay their fare in the front of the bus and then are forced to step back off and then climb into the back entrance. But often the bus drives off without them.²

Rosa Parks arrested in Montgomery

Charlie Walker described the incident that prompted the Montgomery Bus Boycott: "On the first of December, 1955, Mrs. Rosa Parks, a 42-year-old Negro³ seamstress, was riding a bus in Montgomery, Alabama. She was tired after the day’s work and had her arms full of packages. Since the Negro section of the bus was full, she was sitting in the front section. When some white people got on board and wanted seats, Mrs. Parks and three other Negroes were told by the driver to give up their seats and move to the rear. Mrs. Parks refused. She said later: ‘I was just tired. I had paid my fare, and I was tired and all at once I just didn’t move. It was a matter of dignity.’ The driver summoned the police and Mrs. Parks was arrested. On the 5th of December, she was convicted and fined $14. The arrest of Mrs. Parks struck a spark in the Negro community."⁴

Rosa Parks wrote about the incident in her autobiography:

The next stop was the Empire Theater, and some whites got on. They filled up the white seats, and one man was left standing. The driver looked back and noticed the man standing. Then he looked back at us. He said, Y’all better make it light on yourselves and let me have those front seats, because they were the front seats of the black section. I could not see how standing up was going to make it light for me. The more we gave in and complied, the worse they treated us . . . . No, the only tired I was, was tired of giving in. The driver of the bus saw me still sitting there, and he asked was I going to stand up. I said, No. He said, Well, I'm going to have you arrested. Then I said, You may do that. . . . These were the only words we said to each other . . . . He got out of the bus and stayed outside for a few minutes, waiting for the police. As I sat there, I tried not to think about what might happen. I knew that anything was possible. I could be manhandled or beaten. I could be arrested. People have asked me if it occurred to me then that I could be the test case the NAACP had been looking for. I did not think about that at all. In fact, if I had let myself think too deeply about what might happen to me, I might have gotten off the bus. But I chose to remain."⁵

E.D. Nixon, a Pullman porter and former state president of the NAACP, posted Rosa Parks’ bail early Thursday evening, December 1. He spearheaded the idea of a boycott by calling Dr. Martin Luther King and other ministers to a meeting the next day, Friday morning, where King volunteered his church for another ministers’ meeting that evening. They were to discuss a one-day protest, asking the 50,000 Negroes in Montgomery to stay off the buses on Monday. Although there were many questions at that meeting, the group of black community leaders decided to endorse the boycott. King was assigned to a committee to write the leaflet, which read in part, Don’t ride the buses to work, to town, to school, or anywhere on Monday. If you work, take a cab, share a ride, or walk. The committee distributed 7,000 leaflets on Saturday and took the issue to their congregations on Sunday. The handouts contained an announcement for a mass meeting Monday night at a local church.⁶

On his weekly radio show, Mr. Average Citizen Views the News, Charlie explained, "E.D. Nixon wouldn’t have got very far, quite probably, if the Montgomery Advertiser hadn’t put it on the front page as a warning, but what that did was to let most of the Negroes in town know about it. The police commissioner went on TV—he’s a member of the White Citizens Council—and promised to give protection to any Negro who did ride the buses. More publicity."⁷

Sunday night, a weary Dr. King read the local paper with its diatribes against the pending protest, and he started questioning the whole boycott. Something began to say to me, he wrote, ‘He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it.’ So, in order to be true to one’s conscience and true to God, a righteous man has no alternative but to refuse to cooperate with an evil system. This I felt was the nature of our action. From this moment on I conceived of our movement as an act of massive noncooperation. From then on I rarely used the word boycott.⁸

Monday’s noncooperation movement was a roaring success. I was jubilant, exalted King. Instead of the 60 percent cooperation we had hoped for, it was becoming apparent that we had reached almost 100 percent. A miracle had taken place. The once dormant and quiescent Negro community was now fully awake.⁹

Parks had been a secretary for the local branch of the NAACP, so it was rumored by enemies that she was planted by that organization. King adamantly objected: She was not ‘planted’ by the NAACP, or any other organization; she was planted there by her personal sense of dignity and self-respect. She was anchored to that seat by the accumulated indignities of days gone by and the boundless aspirations of generations yet unborn.¹⁰

Before the Monday night meeting, community leaders met in the afternoon to map out plans for the mass gathering, to form an ad hoc organization to decide how long the protest should last, and to map out strategies. Another Montgomery minister, a young Rev. Ralph Abernathy, suggested the name Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA).

King said he was caught unaware when they unanimously elected him president of the organization. He was only twenty-six and new to town, but he knew God was calling him—loud and clear—and despite inexperience, hesitancies over legalities, and worries about reprisals, King could not turn it down. The group unanimously agreed the protest should continue until certain demands were met, and a committee would draw up the demands and present them to the mass meeting. King was to give the main address.

He went home with less than an hour to prepare his speech. Most of the time he spent in prayer and trying to ascertain what words would inspire and give courage without calling forth bitterness—from which he knew violence often springs. The words finally came and the speech was ready. A traffic jam forced him to park four blocks away from the church. Three or four thousand people stood outside with good humor and patience, listening to loudspeakers. The church had been packed since five o’clock. No more did King worry about attendance and support for the protest.

King described the beginning of the meeting. When the mammoth audience stood to sing, the voices outside swelling the chorus in the church, there was a mighty ring like the glad echoes of heaven itself . . . Then his speech:

We are tired, tired of being kicked around by the brutal feet of oppression . . . . Sometimes we have given our white brothers the impression we liked the way we were treated. But we come here tonight to be saved from that patience that makes us patient with anything less than freedom and justice . . . . One of the great glories of democracy is the right to protest for right . . . . But in our protest, there will be no cross burnings. No white person will be taken from his home by a hooded Negro mob and brutally murdered. There will be no threats and intimidation. We will be guided by the highest principles of law and order . . . .  Our method will be that of persuasion, not coercion . . . our actions must be guided by the deepest principles of our Christian faith. Love must be our regulating ideal. Once again, we must hear the words of Jesus echoing across the centuries: Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, and pray for them that despitefully use you. If we fail to do this our protest will end up as a meaningless drama on the stage of history, and its memory will be shrouded with the ugly garments of shame . . . . Let no man pull you so low as to make you hate him.¹¹

Making his closing statement, If you will protest courageously, and yet with dignity and Christian love, when the history books are written in future generations, the historians will have to pause and say, ‘There lived a great people—a black people—who injected new meaning and dignity into the veins of civilization.’ This is our challenge and our overwhelming responsibility.¹² The crowd rose to their feet and wildly applauded.

King silently gave thanks to God that the people had been as enthusiastic when he urged them to love, as when he urged them to protest. Never before had he seen such enthusiasm for freedom tempered with amazing self-discipline. The black people of Montgomery, fifty thousand strong, had been willing to substitute tired feet for tired souls.¹³

From Philadelphia, Charlie described the aftereffects. At first, the white authorities were sure the protest would collapse under pressure. After all, Montgomery’s Negroes had always ‘behaved’ before . . . . But this time it was different.¹⁴

The Montgomery Improvement Association only asked for the right, under segregation, to seat ourselves from the rear forward on a first come, first served basis. In addition, we ask for courtesy and the hiring of some Negro bus drivers on predominantly Negro routes.¹⁵

Mr. Average Citizen, Charlie’s secret identity, went on the air:

Let me give some more of the story about Montgomery, Alabama, and the passive resistance movement there. Almost everything the bus company and the authorities did to try to break that boycott served only to strengthen the determination of the Negroes . . . . Negro [car] drivers were harassed by the police. Taxi drivers found themselves [accused of] violating all sorts of regulations. This led to a key development in the protest: organizing the car pools. Money was collected at mass meetings and in the churches for gas and oil, and anybody wanting rides could get them free through the car pool. Those meeting to ride in car pools were told [by police] not to congregate on the streets, to move on. They then gathered at parking lots owned by Negroes or at churches. But many of them walked, some as much as fourteen miles a day.¹⁶

Charlie wrote that on December 9, 1955, Mayor W.A. Tacky Gayle invited Negro leaders to a conference, presumably for negotiations. Members of the White Citizens Council were with the mayor at that meeting. When the mayor predicted that on the first rainy day the Negroes would be back on the buses, the black leaders knew his intentions were to not give an inch. Although it rained the next day, protesters did not ride the buses.¹⁷

Imagine Charlie Walker’s amazement to hear Dr. King teaching Gandhian methods combined with Christian ideals! Charlie felt an inner joy when King described a movement led by a personal God.

Some extra-human force labors to create a harmony out of the discords of the Universe, King jubilantly explained. There is a creative power that works to pull down mountains of evil and level hilltops of injustice. God still works through history His wonders to perform. It seems as though God had decided to use Montgomery as the proving ground for the struggle and triumph of freedom in America. And what better place than the leading symbol of the Old South? It is one of the splendid ironies of our day that Montgomery, the cradle of the Confederacy, is being transformed into Montgomery, the cradle of freedom and justice.¹⁸

Charlie pre-recorded his Christmas segment of Mr. Average Citizen so he could be with his family on Christmas Day. On the evening of December 25, 1955, the airwaves filled with his Christmas message. Toward the end of the broadcast, Charlie compared significant political matters to so-called insignificant things like stables and mangers and inns and shepherds. ¹⁹ He continued:

The birthday of Jesus may also be a day to take a look at what has come to be called the great American religious revival, a revival in both the Christian and Jewish faiths. A hundred years ago, only sixteen percent of the American population was affiliated with a church. Now, more than sixty percent publicly profess some form of religious faith, and many of those who don’t belong to a church still consider themselves religious in one sense or another. How do you account for this tremendous surge, in church membership, in church building, in religious best sellers in the bookstores? . . . For one thing, there is a hunger in America, not for food but for a meaning in life . . . . I’m convinced [religious hunger is] there—and it can’t be overcome by cynicism even as the guns are barking in the little town of Bethlehem. There have been bad times before, there have been evil days—but man’s hunger for meaning persists. At least, that’s the way this average citizen sees it. What do you think?²⁰

Founding of Liberation magazine

In the month of December, Charlie had been eager to become part of a new publishing venture. "Five of us were starting Liberation magazine [an independent monthly], when the Montgomery movement was getting started and under way,"²¹ he wrote. "I was one of five founding editors who met weekly . . . in New York City. Bayard Rustin was another editor and friend well before this. The title was my contribution. In the New York Post appeared news of these startling events in Montgomery . . . . Bayard alerted us to the potential, and we started keeping close track."²²

The five on the editorial board were Charlie and Bayard, Dave Dellinger, Roy Finch, and A.J. Muste.

Traveling once a week to New York for planning meetings, Charlie found himself away from home even more than usual, but Marian, Charlie’s wife, remained happy for him, as it became a significant undertaking.

Late December, arriving home in the dark of early evening after a long Liberation editorial trip to New York, Charlie drove up the long and winding lane to Tanglewood, the Walker home. Gunning the old Ford through deep snow, he almost reached the top of the hill, but the car sank hopelessly in big drifts. Stopping and turning off the ignition, he pulled on big rubber boots fitted over the good shoes he had worn to the meeting, eased himself out of the car, yanked his dark gray fedora hat down over his head, and grabbed his briefcase. He trudged the rest of the way up to the old stone house where his big family awaited him. The children deserted their new Christmas toys to run with laughter and cries of Daddy’s home! Daddy’s home!

He shook off a layer of snow from his heavy wool coat and gave hugs to Marian and his kids, while a delicious, hot, vegetarian meal beckoned. A happy din always accompanied the Walker family meals. Two adults and six children, one in a high chair, produced noisy cacophony. Family members served themselves supper from the homemade, extra-large Lazy Susan in the middle of the table.

Afterwards, as Charlie and Marian cleaned up in the kitchen, she asked him how the meeting had gone.

"The meeting itself was fine. We’re planning our first Liberation issue for March, and it’s going to be a dandy. But I just received a letter from one of my bosses, John Swomley, saying he’d just seen my name on a leaflet announcing the board members of Liberation. He raised the question of its having a bearing on my continuing work and effectiveness at the FOR."

Now, why would he do that? He knows you can handle countless things at once! Marian retorted.

I have the letter here, Charlie mumbled as he grasped for it in his pocket. "Swomley says, ‘How much time are you obligated to give to this magazine? Will you be doing only writing and editorial work or will you be promoting it, securing subscriptions, etc.? Will you be doing any of this on FOR time or using FOR facilities?’

"I really won’t be doing any of that. I’m just on the editorial board, but he brings up other things. ‘On a number of occasions I have urged you to write for Fellowship [the FOR news magazine], and Al [Hassler] has similarly encouraged you, but you have not gotten around to doing this except on one occasion. Do you not have a primary responsibility to Fellowship both in terms of writing and promotion?’"

Marian frowned, "Well, is it true you have been ignoring Fellowship?"

"Somewhat, but I don’t plan to write much for Liberation. I should probably give more attention to Fellowship. He says I can do the radio broadcast because it’s reaching people and is in the Philadelphia area, but a magazine published in New York requiring regular time should involve committee discussion."

Why is everything you do with your spare time up for discussion?

Well, he says, ‘Since the forming of a Middle Atlantic Region, there are areas outside Philadelphia that have had little or no servicing.’ So, on one hand he says I’m doing a top-notch job on projects within Philadelphia but then asks if I am covering the region adequately in organizing, fund raising, and pastoral capacity.’

You have to be a pastor, too?

Well, he says A.J. is the only one he knows of who can do an equally good job in many areas, and that even the ablest operator in this field does have to neglect some important work or let it fall on the shoulders of others if he takes on too many jobs.

"Are you going to let this stop you from going ahead with Liberation?"

"No, I’m just determined to prove him wrong. He does say, ‘You have so much to contribute to FOR that I hope you will construe this letter as a very strong hope on my part that you will not scatter your shots,’ and he wishes you and me both his best during the Christmas season."²³

I hope this all works out, Marian mused. Especially now that we have six kids and they are growing out of their clothes and shoes, et cetera. You go and prove Swomley wrong! She gave Charlie a long hug.

The civil rights movement propitiously arrived on the heels of Mohandas Gandhi’s sensational nonviolent movement in India. Gandhi, at this point, was a world hero. Even General Douglas MacArthur said of him, In the evolution of civilization, if it is to survive, all men cannot fail eventually to adopt Gandhi’s belief(s).

And the philosopher Martin Buber wrote, Gandhi strove to make religious faith re-enter the realm of politics.

And Albert Einstein: I regard Gandhi as the only truly great political figure of our age.²⁴

It was exhilarating to Charlie that the great man’s teachings had wiggled their way into the civil rights movement—a cause so near and dear to his heart and in his own country.

Charlie strove to pattern his life after the life of Gandhi and kept on his desk a tribute to Gandhi written in 1914: Be careful in dealing with a man who cares nothing for sensual pleasures, nothing for comfort or praise or promotion, but is simply determined to do what he believes to be right.²⁵

Remembering the King connection

During this time Charlie put two and two together and realized the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who led the bus boycott in Montgomery, was one of the Crozer Theological Seminary students who had come to hear the speech by A.J. Muste back in 1949! Charlie tried to remember if King had said anything at that meeting and noted that the youngster had not stood out at the time. It struck Charlie that he himself had arranged that meeting, a seed which had eventually flowered and now was producing great yields in Montgomery! Charlie decided this young man was someone very special and worthy of his help. And Charlie had had a small part in this unleashing of the power of the human spirit, or human personality, as King liked to phrase it. This was a God-led freedom movement whose strength came from moral truth and whose only weapon was love.

Another event had taken place while King studied at Crozer. Curious after the Muste lecture to learn more about nonviolence, the young King attended a sermon in Philadelphia about the life and teachings of Gandhi by Mordecai Johnson, president of Howard University, at Quaker-affiliated²⁶ Fellowship House. King described this lecture as profound and electrifying. Close to the same time, Charlie reported attending a Mordecai Johnson lecture at Race Street Friends Meeting House in Philadelphia, likely part of the same speaking tour."²⁷

After these two lectures—by A.J. Muste and Mordecai Johnson—a completely exhilarated King rushed out and bought every book he could about nonviolence and Gandhi.²⁸ King wrote, "As I read, I became deeply fascinated by [Gandhi’s] campaigns of nonviolent resistance . . . . The whole concept of Satyagraha (satya is truth which equals love, and agraha is force; Satyagraha, therefore meaning truth-force or love-force) was profoundly significant to me. Gandhi was probably the first person in history to lift the love ethic of Jesus above mere interaction between individuals to a powerful and effective social force on a large scale . . . . I came to feel that this was the only morally and practically sound method open to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom."²⁹

King later studied with Reinhold Niebuhr at Boston University and was aware Niebuhr had previously been National Chairman of the Fellowship of Reconciliation for several years. So, King had heard of the FOR through Niebuhr as well as from A.J. Muste. King explained that "[Niebuhr] interpreted pacifism as a sort of passive nonresistance to evil expressing naive trust in the power of love. But this was a serious distortion. My study of Gandhi convinced me that true pacifism is not nonresistance to evil, but nonviolent resistance to evil."³⁰

The Sermon on the Porch and King arrested

Tensions increased in Montgomery, Alabama, despite tireless efforts by Dr. King and others. By the middle of January 1956, the number of threatening letters and phone calls to King, many signed by members of the Ku Klux Klan, had risen to thirty to forty a day.

Charlie Walker wrote, "On January 26, Rev. Martin Luther King, one of the protest leaders, was arrested for going more than 30 miles an hour in a 25-mile-an-hour zone. This was about two hours before a scheduled mass meeting. The word spread rapidly and that night seven meetings had to be held to accommodate the people."³¹

Police released King when they realized the extent of the backing he had in the city. His defenders rallied around him and other Montgomery Improvement Association leaders.

On January 30, while King attended a mass meeting, word came that his house had been bombed.

He dashed home and rushed past the mayor and police commissioner who stood in his dining room to offer apologies. The bomb had ripped a hole in the porch and cracked a porch column. After finding his wife, Coretta, one as close to him as his own heartbeat,³² and his baby daughter, Yoki, uninjured, King returned to the bombed porch.

He told the crowd of 1,500 angry blacks gathered around it, If you have weapons, take them home; if you do not have them, please do not seek to get them. We cannot solve this problem through retaliatory violence. We must meet violence with nonviolence. Remember the words of Jesus: ‘He who lives by the sword will perish by the sword.’ We must love our white brothers, no matter what they do to us . . . . We must meet hate with love.³³

Charlie Walker dubbed this speech King’s Sermon on the Porch, his first huge stand against violence which, Charlie wrote, stamped the seal of authentic nonviolence on the movement.³⁴

Charlie and Marian talked about the bombing.

Oh, my, Charlie! Thank goodness no one was hurt!

Martin Luther King is trying to keep it nonviolent. When I think of how I’m a family man, I know how I’d feel if we got one threat a week, let alone forty a day.

Forty death threats a day? Why is there all this violence in the South when the Negro people are trying to keep it nonviolent?

Well, whenever someone tries to change a system that’s been around for a long time, many, especially those who benefit from the system, object, and they object violently. Just try to change anything, and you find out. But since the Negroes are doing this in a nonviolent manner, it is having quite a positive effect.

What kinds of positive effects?

"Well, Marian, before Montgomery, the black people had realistically three choices—do nothing, go north, or fight back. But doing nothing was becoming increasingly impossible. They couldn’t all go north, and they couldn’t fight back, because ‘whitey’ had all the weapons. But then nonviolence provided them with two more possibilities! They could go the CORE way by sitting on the front of the bus, or they could walk instead. Walking provided them with a new way to act."³⁵

A new way to act. I like that, Charlie.

With nonviolence as their method, they were able to allay fears. Whites feared if blacks started to act, that blood would flow. Since blacks had the same fears, many had chosen apathy, but King said, ‘We don’t intend to retaliate in kind; we won’t do to white people what white people did to black people.’³⁶

I can see that’s the right way to do things, Charlie, not switching top dogs and underdogs, but everyone working and living together in a democratic system, as it should be.

I agree. Other good things have happened because of nonviolence, such as crime in Montgomery has declined during the boycott. And nonviolence united the black community and divided the opposition.

That’s good!

Also, the churches have been strengthened because they could provide a physical base for operations that could not be boycotted by whites.³⁷

Is there anything we can we do to help?

Well, I’ve been thinking of going down there myself and seeing what I can do.

Charlie believed Martin Luther King to be the best orator and the best at teaching, encouraging, and explaining these new methods to his people. Charlie later wrote, Nonviolence was an emerging feature. It was truly a corporate effort, and powerful voices, worthy of the tradition of Southern Baptist preaching, portrayed its meaning in vivid exploits of oratory.³⁸ He continued, The Montgomery experience seems to have defined [King’s] characteristic leadership pattern. He emphasized that Rev. King spoke not only out of Negro life and feeling; he enunciated American themes and invoked American heroes; he gave new meaning to biblical story and affirmed values deep in Judeo-Christian and Western culture. Few of his allusions were Asian or Eastern. While he echoed universal themes, he was a black, American Christian.³⁹ King struck deep chords within his followers, which in turn resonated with people of good will everywhere.

But not everyone. The first of February, just two days after the bombing of King’s house, someone threw a stick of dynamite onto the home of E.D. Nixon of the NAACP, who had spearheaded the first Montgomery protest. He was not home, and no one was hurt. Once again a big crowd gathered, but it was orderly and composed.

King exalted over the people’s reaction to these bombings. Nonviolence had won its first and its second tests.⁴⁰

However, more trouble was brewing. The town fathers in Montgomery found an outdated state law against boycotts, charging a misdemeanor for intentionally, economically hurting a business.

Mr. Average Citizen came on the air Sunday, February 19, with, Good morning, friends . . . . The situation in Montgomery, Alabama, with regard to the Negro boycott of buses ever since December 6, is now moving into a critical phase. I understand the arrest of the main Negro leaders will be coming any day now. The next question is: Should they call off their boycott? Some are saying yes; others that it would be a great mistake to do so. If the struggle goes on, and the top leaders are arrested, then comes the critical question of the caliber of the secondary leadership. As it is now, the top leadership like Reverend King has been calling for self-discipline and for no violence. Will the secondary leadership have the same authority or moral stature?

Charlie ended by saying, The mood is that of action and doing something, rather than calling a halt. So the South is still in for critical times ahead.⁴¹

Martin and Coretta, to allay the fears of their friends, agreed to put up floodlights around the house and hire unarmed watchmen to guard the house twenty-four hours a day. Furthermore, King would no longer travel around the city alone.⁴²

On February 21, a grand jury called the protest illegal and indicted twenty-six ministers and almost one hundred citizens. King was arrested in an almost holiday atmosphere,⁴³ his co-ministers hoping they were on the arrest list. Still, there was lingering tension and worry over the outcome of the trial set for March 19.

Bayard Rustin and Glenn Smiley travel to Montgomery

Bayard Rustin became executive secretary for the War Resisters League, a pacifist organization. On February 20, the league received a request from a former FOR board member in the South⁴⁴ for Bayard to go to Montgomery to consult with leaders of the boycott. The league wanted to strengthen forces exploring nonviolence in the Negro community, so it voted to send him immediately by plane.⁴⁵ They felt he would fit in because he was black and could advise the young King best on matters of pacifism.⁴⁶

This roiled the waters in the Fellowship of Reconciliation. John Swomley, who replaced A.J. Muste as executive secretary of the FOR, wrote in a letter to a colleague, "There have been complications regarding our work in the South. Bayard Rustin has decided to fly to Montgomery with the idea of getting the bus boycott temporarily called off while he organizes a workshop or school for nonviolence with a goal of 100 young Negro men who will then promote it not only in Montgomery but elsewhere in the South.

"Charles Lawrence [FOR New York staffer, who coincidentally was brother to one of Charlie’s later neighbors at Cheyney⁴⁷] feels strongly that it was better if Bayard did not go South, that it would be easy for the police to frame him with his record in L.A. and New York, and set back the whole cause there . . . . Bayard has indicated to Al [Hassler] that he does not plan to work with NAACP but try to organize an independent show."⁴⁸

The letter went on to say National FOR staff agreed to neither compete with nor collaborate with Bayard, but they would send a white minister, Glenn Smiley, FOR’s national field secretary, to Montgomery and other places in the South to see what could be done in the way of workshops and institutes in nonviolence. If Bayard were successful, then fine; but if he were to fail, FOR would see if Glenn could run some workshops in Montgomery instead of Bayard.⁴⁹

A.J. Muste, despite the opposition of many in the FOR, was in favor of Bayard’s project, and that carried much weight in the War Resisters League sending him.⁵⁰

So, Glenn and Bayard both went to Montgomery in late February, 1956. Glenn met Rev. King for the first time at a press conference after King’s house had been bombed.

King, in answer to questions about whether or not he was a communist, had declared to the press he was a Christian and a Baptist minister.

Glenn afterwards asked King if he was afraid he would be killed, and King’s answer was that he and his wife had faced that question on many a dark night and had made up their minds it would not stop them. Then they asked the FOR to help instruct the people on nonviolence.⁵¹

Bayard brought letters of recommendation to Montgomery but discovered he did not need them, as Coretta Scott King remembered him from her youth. Representing the FOR, Bayard had lectured at her high school in Alabama in the 1940s. She had a great talk with Bayard while waiting for her husband to return from a meeting in town. Bayard told her Montgomery could expand into a countrywide nonviolent movement. When King himself arrived, they talked further, and Bayard offered to help in any way possible.⁵²

On a different visit later that month, Bayard entered the King home and saw a gun resting on an armchair in the living room. As they chatted in the kitchen, Bayard told his host it had no place in the home of a Gandhian leader. After this talk, King rid himself of the two weapons he owned.

Bayard wrote correspondence and publicity material, composed songs for mass meetings, and organized carpools and other alternatives to bus transportation. He influenced black families with two cars to donate their second cars to the carpool and secured loans and funds from Northerners.⁵³

Charlie received a copy of a February 25 confidential letter from Bayard saying, Bear in mind there must be no talk of my being here. Already they are watching me closely, and I am sure they report telephone conversations. Many, perhaps all, Negro leaders’ phones are tapped. I have been followed by police cars and never go out after dark alone.⁵⁴

Bayard reported the white press in Montgomery had falsely accused him and Abernathy of being communists who planned a violent uprising. Abernathy now has ten men, without arms, watching his home as the family sleeps . . . . Lights are strung all around the Kings’ house. I am opposed to the lights, for psychologically they provide a kind of inescapable target.⁵⁵

Swomley wrote Glenn Smiley, "It was the conviction yesterday that we should not try from the North, or otherwise, run the nonviolent campaign in Montgomery,