The name change of White Settlement failed

For 219 8 percent
Against 2,388 92 %

Looks like most people didn't see a problem with the name and didn't want "West Settlement" (west of Fort Worth)

Here's one article:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110AP_White_Settlement.html

There is a more in depth interview on NPR if you have the time to listen to it.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4993235&ft=1&f=2

I guess the overwhelming majority of white citizens have spoken.

Plus, we already have a Texas town named West just off of I-35 north of Waco. Home of the Czech Stop, which makes some damn good kolaches and sausage puffs. And don't forget Westfest, either.

Every time we visited Crawford to stand with Cindy Sheehan, we always stopped at Czech Stop for post-protest food. From our experience, Czech Stop is a blue establishment, and we're proud to shop there.

I don't have a problem with the name White Settlement because of the origin of the name. It's not a racist name, it's a historical name of record.

Ft Worth is my big city.

No matter.

Not my fight, I'm a blue stater at heart and I try not to judge the people in the south or Texas.

It was just where some people who considered themselves to be ethnically white settled. It's about as racist as Chinatown or Little Italy. Now, were the people who settled the town racists? Almost certainly, but you would have had a hard time finding people in the nineteenth century who weren't, so even that is not remarkable.

Frankly, until the controversy about the name came up, I had assumed that the town was where some family named White settled.

Like I've said before, if you want an example of a racist town name, try Matamoros.

had a lot of settlements and colonies. (Peter's Colony, for example, where single men could come to get 320 acres and families 640, or La Reunion around Dallas that was a French Settlement-and had a tower named after it). Yes, they were racially white people making a settlement but one might as well also change the names of every place that had to do with some type of infighting against natives (such as Fort Worth).

IF there was anything overtly racist about it at the time, it's sure not the case now, any more than, say, Whitesboro in northern Texas is racist.

Whitesboro, founded in 1890 or so, was not named for some guy named White.

Whitesboro, home of the yearly peanut festival, is in the next county over from me. Back in the early sixties they had a primitive billboard on Highway 82 on the outskirts of town that said something like - black people welcome, just be gone by sundown. Another little town around here had a sign that said "the blackest land and the whitest people", a reference to the local good soil.

During the 2000 census, Whitesboro had a 96.57% white people population. Not many black kids on the local high school football team which gets their ass kicked every Friday night.

But to the original question. There is no need or real reason to change the name of White Settlement or Whitesboro.

For many years they had 100% white population.
I was embarrassed to say I lived there after I graduated.

Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism
by James W. Loewen

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/156584887X/104-3552660-1266334?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance

Haven't actually read it! But I heard a radio discussion on it and will get around to it -- really -- apparently these sundown towns were (and are) pretty common.

I am referring to the "blackest land..." sign.

It had and still may have, I think, a black mayor. The town was named for an investor who bought up the land in advance of the railroad's arrival. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/WW/hjw10.html The area was noted for the presence of some northern (gasp) carpetbaggers after the Civil War.
Whitesboro, Texas according to the Handbook of Texas was named for a family named White. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/WW/hgw9.html
White Settlement, Texas seems to derive its name from the fact that a number of white families had settled in the midst of country previously held by several Native American tribes. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/WW/hew6.html Many Texans during that period were virulently anti-Indian; yes, racist. For example a Texan from the prominent Baylor family operated an anti-Indian, pro-secession newspaper out of Jacksboro, Texas (a little to the west of White Settlement) called The White Man. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/WW/eew11.html As a boy growing up in the 1950's west of Fort Worth I would cringe at the mention of the town's name on local news broadcasts.

Is that it was called 'White Settlement' because, at the time, it was ringed by Indian settlements. Doesn't seem racist to me. In fact, growing up, it never even occurred to me that it might be. I assumed it was settled predominantly by a family of the name of White. There are loads of places in Texas with weird names. And since it isn't actually racist (as in 'White Only Settlement'), and is historical, I don't really see a problem. But I think people voted against it because the city admitted that a change would cost several tens of thousands of dollars in the form of repainting police cars, city stationery, etc.

:shrug:

to hide the practical usage of the name White Settlement. What I mean by that is that when the town was being developed (or subdivided), each plat¹ was filed for record at the Tarrant County courthouse with Restrictive Covenants attached to the plat itself, which was and still is a rather uncommon practice. This seemed to be standard practice for White Settlement through the 40s and 50s.

In the early years of the development in White Settlement, the covenants included language stating the minimum square footage of dwellings, limitations on keeping livestock, etc. Also included in the covenants was language prohibiting "Negro persons" or "colored persons" from owning lots within the subdivisions, or otherwise occupying any dwellings, unless those dwellings were of a secondary nature to the primary structure. In fact, they even referred to the secondary structure as "servants quarters." No bullshit.

The language, which was pretty standard in White Settlement's plats at this time (meaning that this stipulation seemed to always show up as Restrictive Covenant #8 or 9), wasn't limited to any one developer or land owner, so in my opinion, this appears to be something that, while maybe not explicitly spelled out by the local government, was certainly followed as a practice.

The covenants in later years (maybe 1955+) as shown on the plats no longer included any mention of race. And, it's important to note that the covenants were set up to "sunset" after 25 years, if they lasted that long.

I look at a lot of plats in my line of work and this is something that has always stuck out to me as well, not exactly unique in Tarrant County, but let's just say that there's never been any mystery in my mind as to the reasoning behind the name White Settlement.

And I don't mean to paint anyone with a broad brush, but I find the name quite fitting (well, except for the missing word "Trash"). What shocks me is how much of a pass this is getting with absolutely zero mention of what I just wrote. And they keep on saying "history" without any knowledge of what they're saying...

OK, Land Surveyor geek time is over!


¹ plat - a map of a subdivision showing property lines and the general arrangement of individual lots

That's enlightening.

And condemning without being judgmental-chalk one up for geeks.

I have a feeling that even if most of the residents did know this, it wouldn't matter.

Thanks, man.

Welcome to DU!

Tarrant County-was White Settlement the only town to actually do that?

I revise my earlier statements about history to say that if, as you suggest, the town specifically platted its land for exclusion, then the origin of the name *is* racist.

WHEN did they name it that? My understanding was that it was named that like 150 years ago when there were, in fact, a bunch of white settlers surrounded by Indians.

And how many places in Texas never had racist planning (or other!) laws?

hrm...

just that the name dovetails well with the actual practice of land development in the town. Racism and White Settlement might not have gone hand-in-hand right out of the gate, but at least for awhile, the name actually took on the meaning everyone seemed to be reacting to at the outset of this referendum discussion.

StellaBlue, you have a valid point. However, I wanted to point out that White Settlement does indeed have a history of exclusion, which is being denied in the media attention surrounding this or at the very least is being glossed over based solely on the explanation of the origin of the name some 150 years ago.

I looked into this topic some this morning, going over some plats filed in 1945 and I actually did manage to find a reference to one of these exclusions on a plat in Fort Worth (Colonial Addition, near the golf course of the same name). None of the other plats dividing land in Fort Worth I looked at (with Restrictive Covenants on the plat) filed around the same time had this exclusionary language. Of course, I haven't spent a whole lot of time looking, but based on my experience, it's rare outside of White Settlement. However, several did have Restrictive Covenants filed on attached or consecutive pages, which goes against my claim that the covenants weren't often filed with the plat. Those Restrictive Covenants were almost exclusively used to specify building size, use and restrictions of animal husbandry.

This whole 'plat' issue had never even occurred to me... just goes to illustrate how those of us born after the 60s have no clue about how insidious Jim Crow really was.

until I started surveying in Texas 11 years ago, I didn't know either. I grew up here brought up by a mom from North Dakota and a dad from Mass. without any frame of reference for racism. Until I was in high school, I thought it was a problem in the distant past that had been solved. End of story.

As I've been in the workplace and as I've been seeing these historical documents I've spent hours with my jaw open stunned with the reality of how "close" this is to my generation. I don't know how many "no wonder" moments I've had as a result of this in the past 11 years. In fact, I just had a conversation with a co-worker whose 10-year old son is serving detention for telling a girl in his class he didn't want to be her boyfriend because she's black. The hate that came out of her mouth shocked me. Who's to blame?

I just hope I never get to a point in my life when I start expecting people to believe or behave in this way.

Now, to actually finally comment on this issue...

I don't believe the town name should be changed. I think it's more detrimental to erase or sanitize the past than to live with some ugliness. If these documents had been removed from the public record or had been modified, I would probably never know. And without that knowledge it's entirely possible I'd still view racism as a terrible wrong that was corrected years ago.

I've lived within 10 minutes of White Settlement for the last 20 years and had no idea about the actual history of the name. I can attest that there seems to be no shortage of Rebel flags stuck to the back of numerous '88 Chevy pickups.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

Hard to find politically "Kindred Spirits" around here although I suspect that there are more than just a few. BTW, I did not mean to impugn the integrity of the '88 Chevy pickups in the area.

I'm feeling pretty much alone in my neck of the woods, too.

And while I'm not particularly fond of Chevy's, I'm sure that their image will not be tarnished too badly. :)

It was well known when I was young. The mention of "White Settlement" was always an excuse among my more racist acquaintences for a well placed comment or two using the "n" word.