Analysis: Rothschild Francis and the Fight for Democracy

By Dale Francis
Rothschild Francis was a civil rights leader in the Virgin Islands after the 1917 transfer from Danish to
United States sovereignty. His foray into politics was born from a need to address the causes of the
economic, social and political disparities that created undue hardships for Virgin Islanders.
To address those needs Francis considered the sociological and government ideals in the philosophy of
prominent individuals as diverse as Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglas and Karl Marx. Francis
determined that civilian government and true democracy would best resolve the issues of social
oppression inherent in the colonial systems.
His activities included informative public speeches, publishing articles locally and nationally, the formation
of a labor union, colonial council membership, collaboration with the American Civil Liberties Union, and
testifying before the Congress of the United States for citizenship and a civilian democracy for the natives.
The model of government Francis proposed was designed to minimize autocratic political powers in order
to maximize the social and economic well-being of the people.
For 30 years after the 1848 emancipation, freedom was limited to freedom from being enslaved. It did not
establish political representation or principles of justice and equality. The planters continued to exploit and
control the people through restrictive employment and travel laws. The onerous restrictions were the
basis for the Oct. 1, 1878, Fireburn. From then until 1936, despite the 1917 transfer, the ruling class
continued to control the government by using wealth qualifications to exclude the working class people
from participation in the political process.
In the period between 1917 and 1928, Rothschild Francis contested the ruling class operational systems
and took action to advance the society. His knowledge of the comprehensive functions of government and
vision of equality and justice set a leadership standard that should be a benchmark for government
officials in the Virgin Islands.
As a child, Rothschild (Polly) Francis experienced verbal taunting from his white and near-white
classmates based on their differences in appearance. People in that era were highly class and color
conscious. However, the incidents likely strengthened Francis self-esteem for similar challenges he
would face as a civic leader. Despite the unfavorable experience in school, Polly had a passion for books
and read history, psychology, anthropology, philosophy, English and American literature. This helped to
develop the great intellect with which Francis addressed the people, the Colonial Council and the U.S.
Congress.
Like his father, Polly shared his knowledge. He instilled in his black history students that deportment,
tolerance, and compassion would triumph and negate the prejudicial claims of white supremacy.
When the United States acquired the islands in 1917, it was inexperienced in owning territories. As a
temporary measure its Navy was appointed to govern. With a declining economy and decreasing
population due to emigration, there was economic regression under Navy rule. No considerable effort was
taken to vitalize the economy. Neither were there initiatives for the political empowerment of the people.
The Navy reform focused on social services, such as public health, water, sanitation, streets and roads,
fire protection and public education. Expectations fell short in other aspects of Navy rule and its
coexistence with the natives. According to Francis, navy officers had political amnesty while citizens were
political peons.
The Navy persisted with its Americanization and the natives waited for justice.
The Congressional Act of March 3, 1917, stipulated that all the powers acquired from Denmark, including
civil, military and judicial, should be vested in the governor, who was appointed and directed by the
president. The president was given authority to assign a military officer to govern pending confirmation by
the Senate. At that time, Colonial Council members were also appointed by the president. Although laws

could be repealed, altered or amended by the respective colonial councils, they were subject to approval
by the president. Two municipalities were established: the St. Thomas/St. John and the St. Croix districts.
Education and sanitation improvements were immediately implemented by the colonial administration.
This raised the natives quality of life.
On the other hand, the natives then relegated to a status of inhabitants or refugees were denied many
rights, including U.S. citizenship and voting. Congress did not pass the citizenship act until Feb. 15, 1927.
The tough qualifications for voting included property yielding $60 a year or $300 in annual income. At that
time, salaries were only 40 to 60 cents a day. Only 2 percent of the natives could vote in a community run
by outsiders, the Navy. The islanders likely expected to take part in a U.S. system of democracy.
The Calling
Many locals gathered at Pollys shoe shop and complained about the living conditions. Francis
empathized and used his voice to protest the intrusions on the civil liberties of the citizens by the ruling
class.
He encountered stiff criticism from most of the seven Navy governors, council members and members of
the judicial branch of government. The criticism did not deter his fight for justice. Francis continued to
make speeches at the Market Square, Barnaba well in Savan and around the field.
He organized longshoremen and others to form the Virgin Islands Federation of Labor, union No. 17261.
By April, one month after receiving the certificate of affiliation Francis called a walk-out to protest a local
shipping agents boycott of the longshoremen. In a ruling class attempt to intimidate labor leaders, the
Navy assisted planters and merchants with importing cheap labor from nearby British islands. Francis
opposed the workers erection of two oil tanks at the West Indian company dock.
Francis spoke at mass gatherings, published his views in local papers and forwarded his articles to
papers in New York to inform and garner support from Virgin Islanders who migrated there to work. His
published views were also a source for conflicts with the military government. In addition, some local
newspaper such as The Bulleting, The St. Thomas Tidende, and Mail Notes, upheld Danish policy and
rejected Francis hardline charges which they branded inflammatory. There was a need for a printing
press for the working class; the natives of Savan, Coal Wharf, Buckhole and Up Street. His help came
from Harlem.
Roger Baldwin, founder and director of the American Civil Liberties Union, saw an article by Francis in
The Messenger of Asa Philip Randolph. His article highlighted the riotous conduct of the Marines, the
supremacist attitude of naval officers, and the exodus of the natives. Baldwin told Randolph he wanted to
meet Francis.
When they met at a luncheon in New York City's Civic Club, Francis was assured half of the money for a
printing press if he raised the other half. With this press, he intended to eradicate ignorance and
superstition. Elizabeth Hendrickson of the Virgin Islands protective league called on Virgin Islanders to
attend a mass meeting organized by Francis in July 1920 at St. Marks Hall in Charlotte Amalie. From that
gathering, the fundraising was successful and Francis became editor and publisher of The Emancipator.
Conflicts and Opposition Begin
At the time of transfer, the doctrine of incorporation was presumed. However, in 1921 the Federal Court
declared that the Constitution did not extend to the islands. In effect, the Danish colonial law of 1906
remained in force. This made it easy for Gov. Henry Hough to deport the substitute editor of the
Emancipator, Thomas Fitzhugh Morenga-Bonaparte, in November 1922 by declaring him to be an
undesirable alien.
In response, Francis insisted that the governor understand that we are not subjects of the United States,
but form a part of it. As a council member, Francis subsequently passed a resolution with unanimous

support in favor of free speech and free press. The following evening at a massive meeting at Market
Square, he severely criticized the governors action and annual report critical of the native leaders.
Holding the report above his head, Francis exclaimed:
Who are the real malcontents, who are the race mongers, who are the ones that are trampling the rights
of the people? How much longer, I ask you, will they keep their heels on the necks of the people? Are we
going to lay down and play dead?"
In 1923 Francis wrote a letter to the New York Times exposing the poor economic condition. Years later,
Herbert D. Brown, chief of the U.S. Bureau of Efficiency, reported that economic conditions have grown
constantly worse since 1917. He noted that the seven Navy governors over 14 years did not take the
initiative in developing a program of either political or economic reform and development, although
governors had autocratic power.
Brown's statement affirmed the accuracy of Francis views that political reform and development was
needed, and that the governors autocratic power was not beneficial to the people of the Virgin Islands.
However, Francis' social, political and economic views, as well as his fearless stance against the
disparities, attracted criticism. Main Street merchants, government officials and some of his own people
considered him a braggart. Francis was bombarded with criticism and labeled an agitator. As a member
of the Colonial Council, opposition persisted from all sides.
His presence was not welcomed among his own ethnic group on the council. So his reelection was
challenged by opponents, including some of his constituents. Despite the opposition on the council,
Francis exemplified unselfish dedication to resolving the controversial issues. After introducing a
resolution to the council for a ways and means committee, Francis concluded that:
As for me, I serve no selfish purpose. I desire no undue adulation. All I desire and I am endeavoring to do
is to show my constituents, the government, and the world that I have done my part as a man yes, a
man without a party. I adjure you, gentlemen, if you should unnecessarily block this resolution, in any way,
shape or form, you and you alone will answer at the bar of our islands history and suffer the opprobrium
and censure which you would so justly merit and deserve.
Rothschild Francis Moves Ahead
Francis was the first to introduce a bill for a permanent form of civilian government. His plan was to
correct the defects of the military, civil and judicial systems and to limit and control the power of the
executive branch. Being aware that he would lack support from his colleagues, Francis relayed his plan to
the American Civil Liberties Union in New York. He was informed of a competent New York lawyer, Adolph
A. Berle, who was familiar with Virgin Islands conditions, and advised to wait until they could meet.
In the interim, Gov. Sumner Kittelle dissolved the council. That created a good opportunity for attorney
Berle to enter into island politics. The ACLU, through Berle, advised Francis to continue his mass
meetings and press for backing from Virgin Islanders in New York for the economic and civil rights of the
natives.
Berle and Francis, as counsel and chairman of the Virgin Islands Committee, drafted and submitted a
memorandum in support of legislation that would be introduced into Congress by U.S. Sen. George P.
McLean. Berle testified on behalf of the Virgin Islands Committee in a hearing of the Committee on
Territories and Insular Possessions on March 5, 1924, to consider the legislation for a civil government
drafted by Francis.
Berle referred to the 98 percent literacy rate in the Virgin Islands and stated that the natives had some
experience with organized government. Subsequently, he made comparisons showing that the Jibaros of
Puerto Rico and the Moro of the Philippines had high illiteracy rates but were citizens of the U.S. and the
Philippines respectively. Virgin Islanders voted for the islands to be sold to the U.S. with the

understanding that they would be citizens, but at present they have the anomalous status of citizens of
no man's land, he said.
Francis referred to Section 2 of the March 3, 1917, congressional act stating that the government of the
Virgin Islands is temporary until Congress shall otherwise provide. Then he referred to Article 6 of the
Danish-American treaty that said Congress should determine the political status of the people in the
islands. His proposal provided for rights and government representation equal to those enjoyed by U.S.
citizens on the mainland. Unfortunately on April 3 and 4, 1924, the colonial councils of St. Thomas and St.
Croix adopted a joint resolution in opposition to Bill S. 2786.
Prosecution and Freedom of the Press
The opposition against Rothschild Francis persisted. After a letter writing duel in the New York Times, with
Judge Williams criticizing Franciss position and justifying his own, it became clear why Williams would
want to persecute and prosecute him. The prosecution started with Francis being denied trial by jury in
the light of his articles that cried out for justice.
In that case, a police officer contended that he was identified in the article and the government attorney
filed criminal libel charges against Francis. District Court Judge Williams denied Francis a trial by jury on
the grounds that the right to a trial by jury guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment did not extend to the
unincorporated territories.
Francis was tried, found guilty by Williams, and sentenced to 30 days in jail. This judgment explicitly
expressed the doctrine that the court was an agency for the regulation of the press. The judge cited from
The Windows of Westminster by Joseph Pulitzer, Utopia by Sir Thomas More, and The Warden by
Anthony Trollope, then passed judgment on behalf of his opinion of the press.
An appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia reversed the judgment on the grounds that proof
of identification was lacking and that it is not the function of a trial judge to exercise control over the press.
This was a monumental win for freedom of the press and expression, and a boost in the continued
struggle for equal rights in the islands.
The vendetta against Francis did not end there. Before the circuit court had reversed the conviction,
Francis had published a stinging article about the case. In response Williams instituted a proceeding for
contempt of court. After a hearing, Francis was found guilty and sentenced to 30 days imprisonment and
$100 fine. Francis moved for an appeal, which was denied, then moved to appeal the denial of the appeal
which Williams allowed.
Francis appealed and lost. According to Judge Wolly, the judgment of the district court was law until it
was changed by orderly process.
Francis then petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court and was denied a hearing. The contempt case against
Francis was upheld. However, Williams was promptly summoned to appear before the U.S. Senate
Committee on Territories and Insular Possessions, which was then holding hearings for a constitution for
the islands. Williams was questioned intensely for several days on the Francis proceedings.
Finally, Francis was framed by a conspiracy perpetrated by the Navy and his political rivals. In the
incident, Francis was approached to keep $80 safe for a young lady to whom he gave a receipt. She
returned on a holiday and requested her money. Francis responded that it was deposited in the bank for
safekeeping and it would be available as soon as the bank reopens, but she could have $50 that was
readily available. She reported the incident to her employer who told the prosecuting attorney Gibson.
Gibson urged Judge Williams to charge Francis.
Francis was tried with the $30 in his pocket and sentenced to one year hard labor in Richmond
Penitentiary and $100 fine.

On October 31, 1926, Francis was arrested to serve a sentence of 30 days and $200 fine at Fort
Christian. He was again incarcerated on Nov. 23, 1927, when he failed to win his appeals. He served 30
days in Richmond Penitentiary on St. Croix. After serving what he thought was his last sentence, he was
again picked up in St. Thomas on a warrant to serve his embezzlement sentence in Richmond
Penitentiary on St. Croix. In May 1928 he was declared a free man.
The Post Francis Legacy
After serving the people and serving his prison sentences, Francis left the islands and moved to New
York, where he died in 1963. There is no indication that he ever returned to the islands. A statue of
Francis in Charlotte Amalie bears the inscriptions, "Persecuted (martyr) Banished Territorial Medal Of
Honor."
So far, no evidence has been found indicating that the people he fought for supported him at the time of
his prosecution. Similarly, there may have not been any significant effort to continue the fight for
democracy and the government reform needed to acquire equality, justice and representation for the
working class. However, in his wake a series of events transpired that relate to Francis or his work.
In August 1930, Gov. Waldo Evans summoned Judge Williams to his office. The governor angrily
confronted Williams about disrupting his home the night before. Williams tense defense accused Evans
of putting himself above the law. After an obscenity laced discourse about his job to lock up the natives for
gambling, Evans replied in kind, then exclaimed "You are fired!" and summoned a guard to escort Judge
Williams out of the office. This case is another example of the autocratic power of the governor at work.
After a devastating hurricane in 1928 and a stock market crash in 1929, agitation for a new constitution
shifted to the immediate need for economic rehabilitation to prevent starvation. The natives continued to
be dissatisfied about the economic welfare of the islands. Herbert D. Brown, chief of the Federal Bureau
of Efficiency and a strong-willed, influential Washington bureaucrat, intervened with a proposal. The
proposal would have enabled the Congress to fulfill its desire to lead the islands to self-sufficiency and
end annual appropriations. In the process of executing the initiative, a conflict arose between Brown and
Evans over supervision of the $141,000 special fund and control of the rehabilitation program. So, rumors
spread that the islands had two governors.
As a result of the conflict, on his return to Washington, Brown asked President Herbert Hoover to
withdraw the Navy from the islands. As a result, Brown was directed to find a competent person to be the
first civilian governor.
Dr. Paul M. Pearson of Swarthmore Penn., was selected because of his humanitarian, civic and social
orientation.
Believing that a civilian government would produce better administration of the islands, Hoover
announced a reorganization of the Virgin Islands government on Jan. 31, 1931, and nominated Pearson
to be governor. He was approved on Feb. 15 by the Senate and on Feb. 28 Hoovers executive order
transferred the administration of the islands to the Department of Interior.
This establishment of a civilian government was a step toward reaching the goals of Rothschild Francis.
The Organic Acts
Francis is credited with being the father of the Organic Act. This distinction recognizes his foundational
work developing and proposing a plan for a civil government in the Virgin Islands. His ideal civil
government would have provided representation equivalent to the representation enjoyed by citizens in
the United States. Although this has not yet been achieved, the Organic Act replaced the temporary
government Act of 1917 and served as a constitution for the Virgin Islands.

The 1936 Organic Act advanced the concept of Francis ideal to provide a civilian democratic government
structure. A key provision in this act is that it extended voting rights to all literate Virgin Islanders.
Generally, the government structure in the act was a step toward decentralization of government powers
that Francis deemed necessary to establish a legitimate democracy. The act also included municipal
representation for people in two districts St. Thomas/St. John and St. Croix. This means that the
governor would not have full control over the municipal operations.
However, the legislative body was formed by assembling the two municipal bodies. Therefore, the same
officials filled both positions. According to modern public management standards, the officials in this
system served across jurisdictions. This created problems regarding the mingling of legislative power and
municipal authority. More specifically, from an accounting standpoint, there were issues regarding
commingling of funds. Similarly, there were accountability issues regarding the mingling of the authority to
both allocate funds in one capacity and spend in another. This anomaly defeated the purpose of
segregating the levels of government. Consequently, there was still unrestrained government power and
authority within the hands of the ruling class.
The next step toward fulfilling Francis ideal could have been fulfilled by enabling the legislative and
municipal bodies to function autonomously without double-agent officials.
Less than two decades later, the 1954 Revised Organic Act reorganized the legislature and executive
branch of government. In comparison to the Rothschild Francis initiative, that act restrained advancement
towards democratic representation and the potential to develop professional municipal management.
From an operational perspective, it re-centralized government power under the authority of the ruling
class. It counteracted the potential of the 1936 Act by creating a centralized government. In the
centralized system as it exists today, there is evidently no meaningful interaction between the people and
government officials after they are elected.
The centralized government is an organizational structure that helped the ruling class to maintain control
over government operations in the slave and early colonial era societies in the Virgin Islands. In the
absence of Rothschild Francis and with the acquiescence of the people, the ruling class reestablished the
centralized government that enables colonial authoritarianism. More specifically, the 1954 Act eliminated
the municipal representation system and placed the municipal authority under the jurisdiction of the
governor. In that new structure, the Legislature garnered control of municipal funding. Both branches
absorbed the municipal power and authority which could have been controlled by the people.
Operationally, neither the legislature nor executive branches are designed to manage municipalities. The
1954 Organic Act eliminated the potential for representatives to ensure that the districts affairs are
managed professionally in the interest of the people through a system of city and county manager offices.
Consequently, almost all the government failures can be directly linked to the absence of a municipal
system. The absence of a good municipal system has since negatively impacted the advancement of
economic opportunities, equality, and justice that Francis envisioned and espoused.
The revisions in the 1954 Act are contrary to Francis initiative to limit the autocratic power of the
governor. His model sought to establish a true democracy that exemplified the ideals of government by
the people directly or through representatives. The alternatives were the mechanistic military rule from
1917 to 1931, or the preceding oligarchic rule by the ruling class that triggered the 1878 Fireburn. The
legacy of the 1954 Revised Organic Act is that it created a mechanistic oligarchy rather than a
democracy. That system spawned a form of totalitarianism that has been strengthening since the
establishment of the first political party in 1952.
Impact of Colonialism
Over time, a political culture emerged in which people accept and perhaps admire the totalitarian system.
A segment of the culture can now be classically conditioned by the colonial principle that government
controlled by one group is ideal. That ideology ignores the evidence that totalitarianism and
authoritarianism have historically been the antithesis of democracy in the Virgin Islands.

The profound statement Francis made about lying down and playing dead apparently refers to the
elimination of the resistance to colonialism and will for democracy. From another point of view, the
success of the ruling class in the midst of a free and modern U.S. democracy is a mystifying
phenomenon. Perhaps this phenomenon identifies the ignorance and superstition that Francis wanted to
eradicate through the press.
The colonial power structure has been politically successful for almost a century. However, the economic
and social failures are evidently caused by the absence of a democracy. Over the last 50 years, there is
substantial evidence that the oligarchy is a primary factor in the decision-making and management
failures. Consideration of the mismanagement of the Hess Oil Company refinery agreements since 1966
could provide some examples.
Under the totalitarian system there has been a culture of deferred maintenance, discretionary use of
public funds, poor budgeting, and lack of research and development, planning, and data collection. In the
absence of these management protocols, the decision-making appears to be driven by the entity with the
most political capital at the time. The government operates almost exclusively as a political entity. To the
contrary, decision-making in a properly functioning democracy is supported by data collected from the
communities and processed by municipal analysts.
The absence of demographic data, proper analysis and need assessments has contributed to bad public
policy and systemic corruption. These issues are exemplified in the periodic political policy of transferring
financial liability from government operations to the retirement system. Other negative impact policies
include deferring payments on service contracts, pension funds, and other deferred-maintenance
budgeting practices. These practices that have been common in the Virgin Islands for generations are
rooted in the colonial system of governance that Francis fought to reform.
In the recent recession years, those in need of government services seem to be most affected by the
austerity cutbacks. While the ruling class remained privileged to receive new contracts or exorbitant
salaries, hundreds of necessary government employees were laid off between 2010 and 2013. Such
government disparities are characteristic of moral corruption in the colonial system. These sociopolitical
idiosyncrasies of the power structure are what Rothschild Francis sought to subdue with government
reform and democracy almost 100 years ago.
More specifically, the use of demographic data is a key factor for effective public management. Under the
colonial system, the collection and use of data and demographic studies has been lacking in political
decision making. Evidently, the politicians have been indoctrinated into functioning according to the
colonial mode of operation. Characteristics of the colonial operations include the gentlemans agreement,
political clout, and the greasing of palms to insure prompt service. It also included the establishment of
marital relationships to keep the bonds secure. These were functional elements in the colonial culture of
political decision making. Consequently, throughout the departments, there is a lack of data compiled for
decision making. In the absence of adequate data, politicians are able to spin the issues to make bad
policies look good. The government tends to only compile data in order to meet federal funding
requirements.
Demographic data would reveal economic idiosyncrasies. For example, the high budget for the
Legislature is likely due to high senators salaries, and other inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in staffing
and operations. The Legislature can learn to be more efficient by adopting the best practices in legislative
operations from other U.S. jurisdictions. Salary comparisons published by news organizations reveal that
Virgin Island legislators are third highest paid in the nation. However, Virgin Islands legislators receive
100 times the salary per capita of the highest paid legislators under the U.S. flag. Per capita, Virgin
Islands senator salaries are likely the highest in the world.
Also, the U.S. Virgin Islands budget is more than $1 billion for approximately a one hundred and ten
thousand population. This calculates to more than ten thousand dollars for every adult and child,
compared to states such as New Jersey with operational cost less than half that of the Virgin Islands.

While the operations cost is twice as high, Virgin Islands government operations are substandard and
increasingly dysfunctional in light of advances in public policy, management and decision making.
The Absence of People Power, Unity, and Leadership
The Virgin Islands totalitarian system uses political power as a system of management. Lord Acton
summarized the negative influence of power in his statement power corrupts and absolute power
corrupts absolutely.
Virgin Islanders experience the reality of absolute power daily. The corruption is no secret. The lyrics in
the calypso "Think It Over," by Short Shirt of Antigua presents a clear picture of the effects of government
corruption.
Although the song is extremely compelling, and many identify with the theme, there is little evidence that
individuals are compelled to participate in actions that would change their circumstances. Similarly, many
identify with Bob Marley's song "Get Up Stand Up," but dont get up or stand up for their rights.
Francis, a working-class man, was compelled to respond, not for his self-interest, but in the best interest
of the society. Such duty to community was a powerful factor in the actions of General Budhoe, Queen
Mary, and Queen Cosiah to name a few. Their lives were at risk but they were not subdued by fear.
The Arab Spring uprisings of the new millennium suggest that people around the world are standing up to
reject totalitarianism in favor of democracy. In light of the 1960s civil rights movement in the United States
and what has been called the Arab Spring, the Rothschild Francis revolution for democracy in the 1920s
was groundbreaking. However, due to generations of colonial conditioning, the power of reason at that
time was apparently not prevalent enough among the populace to stimulate the desire for a system of
equality.
Democracy was advanced through the leadership of Francis with strategic outside assistance but not
fulfilled by the people. In lieu of fighting for reform, complaining became a miniature freedom, a safe
alternative action that became culturally acceptable to both the working and the ruling class.
Considering the absence of a peoples revolution for government reform since 1878, the relapse into the
acceptance of colonialism is a primary factor in the difficulty of enticing individuals to participate in an
organized response to change the system. One notable ruling against the colonial government system
occurred in the early 1970s, when a U.S. Peace Corps worker on St. Croix initiated legal action that
forced the U.S. Virgin Islands government to admit children of immigrant workers into the public education
system.
In light of well-known governmental ills, the religious organizations' lack of leadership in resolving
prevalent issues have been scrutinized. Those who read the Bible see different roles for the church. One
point of view is that Jesus exemplified servant leadership and taught his disciples to be doers of the word.
His doctrines produced protgs such as Jon Hus, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King Jr., other servant
leaders, and social and religious reformers. Others embrace religion as an institution for sacraments and
worship. That view comes down from the doctrines of the scribes and Pharisees, a view which, Jesus
says, in Luke 11:42, neglects justice and the love for God.
In the Virgin Islands, the latter view has prevailed.
Although the segregation of groups in such a small community is an increasing challenge to organizing for
political reform, it should be noted that worshippers in those same diverse groups stand upon cue when
the priest, pastor or worship leaders raise their hands. Political reform would be easy if pastors could
elevate their hands to raise the ethical conscience of the people. However, the people have to be ready to
rise up.

According to the Scriptures, God parted the Red Sea on cue with Moses, and followed Israel in a pillar of
cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. But the Israelites were still afraid to cross the Jordan to fight for
their inheritance. In comparison, the Francis leadership excluded only asking God to part the Caribbean
Sea. He knew the natives were not ready to fight for their inheritance.
The powers of resistance to change, saturnalia, and religion likely played a role in preventing the injustice
from becoming intolerable enough to require immediate action. Resistance to change is natural, and
stability helps people feel secure. The sense of security is also what challenges individuals to make
changes when the change appears to have an uncomfortable level of insecurity or uncertainty.
The Rothschild Francis initiatives may have raised questions of insecurity and uncertainty in the minds of
the skeptics and pessimists.
Saturnalia became a Roman tradition of a day of reversal of roles between the slaves and masters. It
helped to release the stress of slavery, thereby decreasing the potential for revolts. The tradition of
masquerade in the Virgin Islands was linked to the tradition of saturnalia. Historical documents indicate
that holiday masquerades and other social events were popular in the 1920s. That era is recognized for
producing the donkey masquerade song "Hold Him Joe."
Francis, also, engaged in music activities as a bandleader who held dances in his home. From a stresslevel point of view he was exposed to indicators that the people were not agitated enough to prefer
change over the status quo. Due to the lack of agitation, the change would have to come from other
compelling forces. Therefore, Francis acquired support from outside the Virgin Islands.
The Virgin Islands Carnival festivals are successors to the saturnalia and masquerade. The carnival and
festival masquerades enable participants to be the aristocrats and royals they really are. Perhaps
escaping into the alternate reality works too well. With the ideology of wellbeing, some individuals may be
able to disconnect from the societal adversities or overlook issues that are not personal threats. On the
other hand, individuals and organizations theoretically would find an urgent need to use their power and
organizational skills to acquire government reform if the government were to ban carnival.
There is another religious explanation for the situational blindness of individuals who ignore societal
dysfunctions. According to the philosopher Hegel, some religious doctrines enable individuals to retreat
into an internal existence that minimizes the emotional dynamics of the harsh external realities. Some
enslaved people endured the injustice of slavery, relying on their faith that they will have a just life in the
Kingdom after the resurrection. That religious viewpoint could be a factor in the cultural philosophy of
ignorance of political affairs and activities. The retreat into religion is similar to the retreat into Carnival.
Fear Implied
Perhaps due to conditioning over the years, even those of great financial and educational means in the
community are relegated to fear of the colonial system. Rothschild Francis worked around the fear and
demonstrated that the ideals of democracy can be achieved in the Virgin Islands. Hegel, a slavery-era
philosopher, determined that slavery was possible because of two key elements force and fear.
According to Hegel, the slave's fear of the fight to the death empowers the master to subdue and control
him. Force characterizes power, including the fear that keep the body and mind enslaved. When the mind
is enslaved, the person is enslaved.
Frederick Douglas, who literally fought for his freedom, notes the concept in his writing:
I have found that, to make a contented slave, it is necessary to make a thoughtless one. It is necessary
to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate the power of reason."
Douglass wrote.
Douglasss statement also suggests the desire for freedom can become subdued. Apparently, the Virgin

Islanders in Francis day were as subdued by fear as the Israelites were in Moses day. Francis made a
valiant effort to overcome the phenomenon of fear and subjugation in his campaign for democracy and
government reform. His campaign for democracy, justice, equality and reform against great odds of
retribution was itself a display of fearlessness.
Cultivating thoughtlessness and annihilating the power of reason has been a successful strategy for
maintaining the ruling class. Considering human nature, Douglass comment about creating a contented
slave would also apply today. Francis counteracted this strategy used by the ruling class by informing the
masses through speeches and published articles. His thought-provoking communications stimulated
reasoning.
However, it would be difficult to suggest or accept that the current oppressors are a class within your own
ethnic group. Perhaps from his childhood school incidents of discrimination, Francis had an astute
understanding of the societal power structure.
For the natives in general, the division of classes and the roles in the power structure would not be a
cause for alarm or suspicion. It would seem more rational to associate oppression with European
oppressors in the slave era. Today, a European ethnicity may still be viewed as a necessary element for
imperialist ideologies and supremacists views, and to qualify a group as an oppressor. This was further
reinforced as the society observed the ethnic distinction between the classes in the 1960s U.S. civil rights
movement.
Rothschild Francis may have been one of the first to distinguish power and control as the marquee
elements of oppression in relation to government structure and operations.
Today, almost 100 years after the transfer of the Virgin Islands to U.S. sovereignty, still display a general
lack of knowledge of U.S. municipal government systems, intergovernmental relationships, and
representation. The absence of civics courses in Virgin Islands schools over the years may be one among
several factors that help annihilate the power of reason regarding representation. Over the years, the
ruling class has not demonstrated that cultivating thought and the power of reasoning is a priority in
education.
Further, the isolation of the islands limited exploration of alternative government models and exposure to
progressive ideals. Under these circumstances, perhaps only a few Virgin Islanders can articulate how a
typical municipal government like the one Francis proposed works.
In the governance there has been inadequate thought and reasoning about the operations of government.
Proportionately, there has been opportunity for covert control, disenfranchisement, exploitation, injustice,
and corruption.
As a result of the lack of information, the working class may not be aware of the critical need to secure a
functioning democracy as identified by Rothschild Francis. Therefore, uniting for government reform and
societal advancement has been categorized as an extremist ideology. In the 1920s, the communications
contest between Rothschild Francis and his opponents was to establish their ideology as centrist and the
opponent ideology as extremist. The governors report and Judge Williams's articles sought to brand
Francis as radical. From the neutral outside communities such as the ACLU, Herbert D. Browns
Efficiency Office, the U.S. Congress, the Department of Interior and Virgin Islanders abroad, the Francis
ideology prevailed as the rational view on democracy.
As a result of the battles with Rothschild Francis, the ruling class views were recognized as extremist
colonial views from the dark past in world history. Yet, under the influence of colonialism, the people were
not determined to claim their rights already guaranteed by U.S. sovereignty. To date, from an operational
perspective, the Virgin Islands operations are still dictated according to the limitations and sovereignty of
the local ruling class.
The Hegelian theory articulates the effectiveness of fear as a factor for control of the enslaved. So, if a

failure to act is caused by fear, Virgin Islanders have feared for too long, and have grown accustomed to
the bondage of the colonial autocratic government. The fight for freedom starts with the fight against fear
itself to overcome the fear of failure as well as the fear of success.
Fortunately, as the world advances and technology and globalization exposes the society to global ideals,
a new opportunity for enlightenment arises. In such a case, there still exists a need to fight for what is
good for the Virgin Islands; to demand government reform, and to acquire representation equal to that
enjoyed by U.S. citizens on the mainland.
Oppressors never willingly relinquish control and power. In this case, Virgin Islanders have waited 96
years and have not taken possession of their homeland by having government for the people.
Consequently, the indigenous people have been waiting to receive a social, economic, and political status
of equality for generations, but continue to be deceived by the ruling class.
There will be no freedom without a fight. The options are few. Being peaceful and religious people, since
1878 Virgin Islanders have abstained from the fight and by default chosen fear over freedom. In the
1920s Rothschild Francis fought well and lived a fulfilled life of freedom in a society that is still enslaved to
old world ideals.
The Silence of Social Consciousness
The historical records indicate an ominous silence of the people when Rothschild Francis was being
persecuted and prosecuted. There is a sense that his supporters dispersed and fled into hiding, much like
the disciples did when Jesus was arrested.
Today, despite the designation of Oct. 5 as Rothschild Francis Day, there is still no public recognition of
his vision of democracy for the Virgin Islands.
In lieu of educational activities to develop knowledge of government operations, there is a new brand of
ominous silence regarding his work for democracy; liberation, justice, equality and political representation.
This time the silence may suggest that the people are afraid to arouse his political ideals.
Francis, perhaps prophetically, publicly addressed the issue of the silent acquiescence of the people in
his statement when he said, How much longer, I ask you, will they keep their heels on the necks of the
people? Are we going to lay down and play dead?
His analogy about acquiescent silence in this statement has biblical significance. The symbolism of the
heel on the neck is in chapter 10 of the book of Joshua. In chapter 1 Joshua, the new leader of Israel,
was told to cross the Jordan into the land they will be given, and that the Lord will be with him.
Joshua was told just be determined, be confident obey the whole law ... do not be afraid or
discouraged
In their second battle after crossing the Jordan, they fought a combined force of five kings who, facing
defeat, hid in a cave. When Joshua retrieved the kings, he called all the men of Israel to him and ordered
the officers present to put their feet on the kings necks. After they did so, Joshua said to them: Dont be
afraid or discouraged. Be determined and confident because this is what the Lord is going to do to all your
enemies.
In the ancient Near East, placing the foot on the neck was symbolic of the victors dominance of his
captives. According to Scriptures, other kingdoms were allowed to defeat and enslave Israel because the
Israelites lost their relationship with God by adopting foreign, vain lifestyles.
The feet on the necks of those powerful kings were also symbolic of the victory through redemption with a
superior power, their God. The five kings were terminated along with their kingdoms, and Joshua's
Israelites continued to fight and acquired their homeland.

The Peoples Choice

Both Rothschild Francis and Moses had to contend with reports that caused their people to be afraid and
discouraged. Consequently their people did not fight and did not acquire their homeland. After assessing
the promised land for Moses, 10 of the 12 explorers spread a false report that the land doesnt even
produce enough to feed the people who live there, and that the people there are more powerful than we
are.
Contrarily, two explorers, Caleb and Joshua, reported that the land we explored is an excellent land. If
the Lord is pleased with us, he will take us there and give us that rich and fertile land. Do not rebel against
the Lord and don't be afraid of the people who live there. We will conquer them easily; the Lord is with us
and has defeated the gods who protected them; so don't be afraid.
Like the Israelites, the Virgin Islanders were faced with choosing whose report to believe. They heard
Rothschilds report for acquiring democracy as opposed to the governors report for accepting colonial
subjugation as a way of life.
The governors report criticized Francis and other community leaders. Francis raised the Governors
report above his head and said:
Who are the real malcontents, who are the race mongers, who are the ones that are trampling the rights
of the people?
Both Moses and Francis were called to be leaders as an answer to the complaints of the people.
Similarly, the Israelites and Virgin Islanders complained about their circumstances but were afraid and
undetermined when help became available.
The Israelites complained that: It would have been better to die in Egypt or even here in the wilderness!
Why is the Lord taking us into that land? We will be killed in battle and our wives and children will be
captured Numbers 14.
As a result of that complaining, the whole community threatened to stone Moses leadership team to
death, but saw the dazzling light of the Lords presence above the tent. Then the Lord spoke to Moses:
How much longer are these wicked people going to complain against me? I have heard enough of these
complaints! Now give them this answer I promised to let you live there, but not one of you will, except
Caleb and Joshua. You said that your children would be captured, but I will bring them into the land that
you rejected, and it will be their home. Your children will wander in the wilderness for 40 years, suffering
for your unfaithfulness, until the last one of you dies. You will suffer the consequences of your sin for 40
years, one year for each of the 40 days you spent exploring the land
How much longer will these people reject me? How much longer will they refuse to trust in me, even
though I have performed so many miracles among them?... Numbers 14:11
Rothschild Francis made a similar statement in response to lack of faith displayed by the people:
_______________
How much longer, I ask you, will they keep their heels on the necks of the people? Are we going to lay
down and play dead?
- Rothschild Francis
_______________
There will be many possible interpretations of Rothschild Francis' quoted statements. What is certain is
that this statement refers to an act of domination of one group by another. They refers to the ruling
class, the people, the people of the Virgin Islands, and we is inclusive of the residents responsible for

responding to the pillaging assaults on the people of the Virgin Islands.

Are we going to play dead is a rhetorical question that points out what the response to the domination
has been. The entire quote asks, how much longer will we play dead? This contends that playing dead
has not stopped the attacks. To the contrary, playing dead enabled the assailant to attack, and
encouraged the attacks to continue. Further, this quotation, which uses battle terminology such as heels
on the necks, and playing dead, made it clear that there was a battle for control, power and authority over
the Virgin Islands. The sense of urgency in the prose conveys that choosing not to fight would have dire
consequences for the people. This speech was meant to depict the circumstances, and motivate people
to take a stand to defend themselves, their families and future generations of Virgin Islanders.
Regarding the show of force, the phrase how much longer will they keep ... implies that they, the ruling
class, used their power to keep their heels on the necks of the people. Directing this question how much
longer? to the people suggests that the people possessed enough power to remove the heels of
domination from their necks.
Despite having the power to acquire their freedom, the peoples choice was to play dead. This response
left the power and control in the hands of the ruling class, and the people under their feet at their mercy.
According to the biblical perspective from which Francis likely drew his inspiration, his rhetoric could have
been contemplating: 1) How long will the Virgin Islands people be subjugated? 2) Would this subjugation
be until death or until redemption to the sovereignty of God? These were issues Francis would have
contemplated from the case of the Israelites. The Israelites transformation from condemnation and fear to
victory and freedom took 40 years.
Moreover, his statement gives notice that the people were responsible for acting to defend their own
freedom and dignity. This Rothschild Francis quote confirms that the people were informed about the
circumstances regarding the fight for control and domination of the islands and its people. The peoples
lack of determination was more powerful than Francis inspiration for self-determination.
One of his most compelling quotes is taken from what he said on the floor of the Colonial Council. I have
done my part. Considering the political challenges that remained, this means that others needed to do
theirs.
In the execution of his initiatives, Francis, a consummate reader, displayed a command of the philosophy
in the books of Numbers and Joshua. Considering his interaction with the community, it is likely that he
knew the people did not have the requisite faith to fight for their political inheritance of the land they
purchased with their blood, sweat, and tears. So, after doing all that he could, he left inconspicuously. His
exodus to the U.S. amounted to a death in leadership for the Virgin Islands. In comparison to Moses'
Israelites, both groups believed the wrong report, became fearful, and through their complaining and
faithlessness were condemned to live without a homeland.
After wandering 40 years, the redeemed Joshua Israelites claimed their land. Perhaps Virgin Islanders
need redemption. Francis died in New York in 1963 at the beginning of the civil rights movement there.
Approximately 40 years after Rothschild Francis left the Virgin Islands, 1968, activists in the U.S.
overcame their civil rights challenges. The civil rights movement was a faith-based fight for equal rights.
Through a fervent fight with demonstrations, sit-ins, and other protest activities, the faithful secured
equality and justice for African Americans who had endured the vestiges of slavery there.
The people of the Virgin Islands looked on, disconnected, without leadership, singing "We Shall
Overcome" on special occasions, in church or for Black History Month, giving moral support to the cause.
There was no follower of Francis to lead the people in the fight for equal rights and justice.
The Virgin Islands civil rights movement had passed. Then another 40-year period passed. In light of the
scriptures, 2008 would mark four generations of Virgin Islanders wandering for the unfaithfulness of their

parents, and their lack of redemption.

Knowledge is power
The references to Bible events in Rothschild Francis speeches indicate he 1) read and believed the Bible,
2) valued the wisdom it shared, and 3) used its principles to execute his initiatives. His broad scope of
principles supported by faith, knowledge of human nature, and knowledge of government operations were
factors in his success. As he responded to the needs of the community, he was mindful that the internal
dynamics would cloud the judgment of those affected.
So from a sociological perspective, his assessment that support from outside the territory would be
necessary to implement his initiatives is a testament to the thoughtfulness and power of reason he
acquired through self-education.
Considering the status of African Americans in the 1920s, approximately 40 years before the civil rights
movement in the United States, his national fight to establish democracy for the natives was monumental.
The planning, organizing and lobbying congressional support as well as acquiring the opportunity to
testify before Congress was groundbreaking in regards to promoting civil rights of African Americans. But
his goal was altruistic. It was to help make life better for working class people who had been struggling for
equality and recognition since the abolition of slavery in the Virgin Islands. According to the social,
economic and political advantages, the ruling class had still not relinquished its power over the working
class in the 1920s. The knowledge Francis acquired through reading was a great equalizer in his contests
with the ruling class.
Evidently, his power came from faith and knowledge as opposed to wealth or the political connection that
controlled the government.
Some of the powers employed by the ruling class to maintain autocratic control have been wealth,
political connection, education, knowledge, unity, planning, and will. In the absence of a democracy, the
working class was subjugated through a deficiency in those components of power.
In a democracy, the power is dispersed among the people, districts, and interest groups. The needs of the
people and their interests are represented in the system of constituency. The goal Rothschild Francis
pursued was to empower the people through democracy.
The Rothschild Francis initiatives provided the first steps to democracy, and a model of government that
would empower the people by providing representative government. In sum, his work laid a path out of
colonialism and totalitarianism. Francis employed some of the ruling-class elements of power to achieve
success in that colonial environment. He acquired pertinent knowledge, planned, and had the will to
succeed. He went as far as to become a member of the colonial council. However, he did not adopt the
prevalent colonial ideology.
With his morality, he overcame the colonial powers of his day. His faith overcame the fear that caused
others to just complain, and his excellent communication skills were likely a primary factor that enabled
him to acquire assistance and cooperation from abroad.
Rothschild Francis introduced a compelling ideology that was later suppressed. The suppression of his
ideology is a factor in the current colonial status that negatively impacts the people and government
operations in the territory.
According to the ideals Francis promoted, the Virgin Islands is still in need of a democracy. Rothschild
Francis, a cobbler and musician, became a journalist, labor and civil rights leader who fought for
citizenship, freedom of the press, and government reform.
What Happens Next?

Today, the fight is in the hands of the people to acquire political reform that would establish a democracy.
Rothschild Francis laid out a model for acquiring reform that should work just as well today.
First, the proponents should become informed, second, they must organize and plan a course of action,
third, take action without fear, and last, have faith throughout the process. These steps can be identified in
the Joshua movement and the Rothschild Francis movement, as well as in the civil rights movements in
the United States. Following these guidelines, the Virgin Islanders could achieve participation in a
democracy before 2017.
For the 50th anniversary of the passing of Rothschild Francis it is fitting to recognize Leon A. Mawson, the
author of "Persecuted and Prosecuted," for his documentation of the Rothschild Francis story. As a
contemporary, his document provides various aspects of the events in the life of Rothschild Francis.
Gratitude is also extended to Geraldo Girty, also a researcher and writer who carried a torch for the
recognition of the Rothschild Francis legacy.
For the people, the only meaningful recognition of Rothschild Francis would be to fulfill their part in the
work started in his era of activity. Today every individual in the Virgin Islands can participate in the
movement out of colonialism and into democracy. The first step could be to communicate for outside
assistance by sending an email to the Department of Interior about acquiring government reform for
democracy in the Virgin Islands. Second, team up with others to organize, support, and implement
strategies for reform.
Throughout the process, be fervent and faithful; be determined and confident, not afraid.
It is not known if Rothschild was ordained by a denomination as were other civil rights leaders, but his
actions, speeches, fearlessness and victory suggests that he was at least highly favored. He acted boldly
with the premise that Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. In this analysis, it is
recognized that God provides empowered leaders, servants, and authors according to His will. God also
provided these significant findings of Rothschild Francis relationship with his holy word.
So, all honor, glory and praise go to God for His hand in this product, and for the redemption of the Virgin
Islands.
This anniversary may be a Pentecostal year for the exodus of Virgin Islanders. It could be the appointed
time for the people to unite for the cause of freedom, to tear down the strongholds of the colonial systems
in the local government, and finally acquire democracy; equality, justice, and representation. In honor of
Rothschild Francis, 2017 should not be 100 years of political peonage for indigenous Virgin Islanders. In
this new millennium, Virgin Islanders have access to sufficient information about the issues to act
responsibly and responsively to complete the unselfish work started by Francis in the early 1920s.
So, in honor of Oct. 5, 2013, Virgin Islanders can exercise their power of reason freely to make the 50th
anniversary of a passed hero a new era marked by the acquisition of democracy in a newfound
homeland.
Dale Francis