African American Women and the Niagara Movement, 1905-1909
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1905, between July 11 and July 15, twenty nine African American men met in Buffalo, New York to launch a new movement, Niagara Movement. Spearheaded by W. E. B. DuBois, Niagara Movement lasted just four years and became precursor to National Association for Advancement of Colored People, also led by DuBois, in 1909. While no African American women were part of original group of twenty nine that formed Niagara Movement yet, in many ways Black women became an integral part of movement. This article will present their story. Black women were gender capital of Niagara Movement, though perhaps that was not intention of 29 men who came together to form this group. This article is divided into four sections in order to create story of women in Niagara Movement: Mary Burnett Talbert, Carrie W. Clifford, Gertrude Morgan and Membership Lists. MARY BURNETT TALBERT The first meeting of Niagara Movement opened on July 11, 1905 at house of Mary Burnett and W.M Talbert. A graduate of Oberlin College, Mary Talbert became one of the most widely known activist[s] in by turn of century. (2) (photo #1) Talbert was an active participant in many different organizations in Buffalo including those created within and outside of church. In her lifetime, she held such high positions as President of Buffalo Phyllis Wheatly Club in 1899, President of National Association of Colored Women in 1916, and led National Association for Advancement of Colored People's anti-lynching crusade in 1922 as National Director of Anti-Lynching Committee and became first woman to speak before Norwegian House of Parliament in 1920. As a result of her many years of hard work in support of improvement of lives of African Americans, and her work with Anti-Lynching campaign, Talbert became first woman to receive highest award given by NAACP, Spingarn Medal in 1922. (3) Mary Talbert was also an acquaintance of Booker T. Washington, as well as Washington sought Talbert's assistance in keeping him informed of actions of participants in Niagara Movement. In a letter dated July 8, 1905, Washington wrote to his wife Margaret asking her to, write to Mrs. Talbert to keep you closely informed about proceedings and names of people connected with Buffalo meeting next (4) Expressing her usefulness as an informant in another letter dated same day, Washington wrote, Tell Crosby look after Buffalo meeting sharply. It is to be held next week. Inside data can be gotten from Talbert (5) Washington seemed to have been aware that meeting was to be held at Talbert's residence from a latter correspondence by Clifford H. Plummer to Washington. In letter he states, My dear Mr. Washington: I arrived home this morning and called you up first thing ... report was not true; in fact there really was no conference in Buffalo where delegates were in attendance ... I was located near 521 Michigan Avenue from Wednesday morning until Friday and I can state positively that none of men named in report were present except DuBois. (6) It is not certain as to which report this was, however, 521 Michigan Avenue was Talbert's address. The meeting began at their residence on July 11th and next day moved to Erie Hotel on Canadian side of Falls. (photo #2) Washington's spy arrived at residence a day late. The fact that Niagara Movement meeting began at Talbert's residence on July 11, 1905 is corroborated by other contemporary sources. A letter dated June 13, 1905 written by DuBois to Mr. W.M. Talbert, Mary Talbert's husband informs him of proposed meeting. DuBois writes to him about finding accommodation for gentleman who would be coming to Buffalo for meeting. The letter has address, 521, Michigan Avenue at top. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".