THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, April 21, 1996 TAG: 9604190730
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J2 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: BOOK REVIEW
SOURCE: BY RUTH WALKER
LENGTH: Medium: 84 lines
Harry Byrd was a dominant personality in Virginia politics for four decades.
His achievements as a reform governor in the late 1920s included a streamlining of the bureaucracy and the passage of an antilynching law. He led the Democratic Organization (or ``machine,'' as many preferred to call it) and gave the nod to would-be contenders for the governorship. He loathed bonded indebtedness; his name was linked to ``pay-as-you-go'' financing.
As a U.S. senator - he served for 32 years - Byrd was a watchdog over federal expenditures and a notable foe of the New Deal. Most significantly, he gave his leadership and prestige to Virginia's program of ``massive resistance'' to desegregated schools in the 1950s.
Byrd (1887-1966) is a fit subject for extensive biographical treatment, and he has received it here. Ronald L. Heinemann, a professor of history at Hampden-Sydney College, pursued the biographer's task with eminent zeal. He gathered an impressive amount of information, but he did not always lay it out to the best advantage of the reader.
The author seems always aware of his subject's strong points and his limitations. He refers to Byrd's ``amazing eye for detail'' and his ``quick and persevering, if somewhat limited, intellect.'' Byrd, he judges, ``came close to being a political genius.''
Heinemann quotes Byrd to great effect: ``Higher education is all right for those who desire it and can afford it, yet the foundation of all education is the attainment of knowledge which will be useful in the transaction of the duties of everyday life . . . It is a waste of time and money to prepare the school children of Virginia for university educations when 90 percent of them cannot afford or do not desire to go to a university.''
Byrd himself did not finish high school. At 15 he took over the rescue of his father's ailing newspaper in Winchester. He showed his business aptitude there and in later enterprises, most especially apple orchards.
Certainly Byrd lacked the cultivation and erudition of one of his ancestors, William Byrd II of the great house called Westover on the James River. That Byrd, a member of the Royal Society in England, accumulated one of the most extensive libraries in the colonies and made enduring contributions to colonial literature, including The History of the Dividing Line, which concerned the boundary between Virginia and North Carolina.
Harry Byrd was one of three brothers - Dick, Tom and Harry. Dick was Adm. Richard E. Byrd, the explorer and national hero. The brothers' father, ``Mr. Dick,'' was speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates.
In 1913, Byrd married Anne Douglas Beverley, a childhood friend who was an invalid for many years by the time she died. They had three sons, including Harry F. Byrd, Jr., who was appointed to succeed his father in the U.S. Senate. The Byrds' only daughter, Westwood, died from an overdose of sleeping pills.
As to massive resistance, which closed some schools, the author speculates on why Virginia abandoned its tradition of racial moderation and concludes that Byrd and other Organization leaders saw race as an issue with which they could maintain their political hegemony, a hegemony that had faced recent threats.
``Massive resistance,'' Heinemann writes, ``was designed, in effect, to revitalize a dying political machine.''
He points out that massive resistance did not prolong the life of the machine but contributed to its demise ``by further dividing the Democratic party, stimulating black political participation and encouraging more federal interference.''
Unfortunately, this book bogs down in two of the most important sections: those relating to Byrd's governorship and to his role in massive resistance. The material is complex, and Heinemann doesn't always lead the way through it effectively.
Then there are occasions when the author, despite his mass of material, leaves a reader wanting more information. For example: How many schools and pupils and how much time were involved in the closures that resulted from massive resistance?
And more information would be desirable about the legal proceedings, in state and federal courts, that said ``no'' to school closings. by CNB