– Fifty-five years after being convicted of mutiny in what he claims was a racially charged trial, a retired African-American sailor is seeking a pardon from US President Bill Clinton.
Frederick Meeks, who is 79 years old and lives in California, is still haunted by his mutiny conviction and believes that a presidential pardon is his last chance to set the historical record straight.
"After all these years, the world should know what happened at Port Chicago," he told the press last month from his home in Los Angeles. "It should be cleared up that we did not commit mutiny and that we were charged with that because of our race."
Although 49 other men were convicted along with Meeks – in the biggest mass mutiny trial in US naval history – he is one of only a few who are still alive. The pardon request is now pending before the US Justice Department, and could take up to 18 months to be resolved.
In 1944, Meeks and other black seamen refused an order to load ammunition onto a Navy ship – just days after an accidental blast killed 320 men and wounded nearly 400.
The trial stems from the US Navy's policy during the Second World War of exclusively using black seamen – at a time when all US institutions were segregated – for the dangerous task of loading live munitions without safety equipment or training.
White officers reportedly even competed with each other over whose crews could load the ammunition the fastest.
After an explosion at a California naval base resulted in the deaths of 320 mostly black sailors and the destruction of two ships, Freddie Meeks was one of 258 African American survivors who defied an order to resume loading ammunition.
The sailors argued that they feared for their lives, after witnessing and then cleaning up the effects of the blast – which had the explosive power of a five-kilotonne bomb and left a trail of damage for a one-mile radius around the California base, now known as Port Chicago.
The disaster accounted for 15 percent of all black naval casualties during the Second World War, and was the worst domestic military accident of the conflict. Its exact cause was never determined, but a Navy report said that mishandling of the volatile cargo was a likely factor.
Testifying at his trial in 1944, Meeks said that he would be willing to fight at the front, but would not load ammunition. Yet 50 of the 258 men, including Meeks, were eventually court- martialed.
Instead of the lesser charge of disobeying a direct order, an all-white Navy panel convicted them of mutiny – which carries a penalty of up to 15 years – although their prison sentences were later reduced to 17 months. All 258 were also released from the military without honourable discharges.
The sailors were defended by renowned African American lawyer – and later Supreme Court Justice – Thurgood Marshall, who complained at the time that "I can't understand, then, why whenever more than one Negro disobeys an order, it is mutiny."
Critics of the case say that the mutiny charges were a result of the blatant racism faced by black recruits at the time. At Port Chicago, 71 white officers commanded more than 1,400 black sailors, who often loaded the ammunition with their bare hands, in seven-hour shifts.
In the entire US armed forces, African Americans were rarely promoted, and were assigned the most menial tasks, including the cleaning of latrines and mess duty. As a result, some Port Chicago sailors saw the munitions assignment as an advancement.
"This was the unlocking of the traditional 'Jim Crow' (segregationist) doors the Navy had always maintained, just as other military units did," said one survivor, Robert Routh, Jr., who was blinded by the accident.
"I was a proud sailor … although we weren't doing traditional sailor duties," he added.
It was not until 1948 that the armed forces were desegregated by a decree signed by President Harry Truman.
Renewed interest in the case – including a 1989 book by University of California sociologist Robert L. Allen – won a review of the charges in 1994. But the Pentagon ultimately refused to overturn the convictions, asserting that they "were not tainted by racial prejudice."
Many African-American groups disagree.
"In 1995, the Navy and Department of Defense admitted that racial prejudice during the Second World War was a factor in the types of assignments African Americans performed in Port Chicago," said Sandra Evers-Manly, president of the Black Hollywood Education and Resource Centre.
"However, they continued to ignore the injustice," Evers- Manly said. "These men should have their names cleared because they served their country well during the Second World War, as well as be recognised for their outstanding contributions."
Some legal experts say that the armed forces are clearly reluctant to set a precedent that could allow soldiers to disregard commands, under any circumstances.
Justifying the convictions to Congress five years ago, then- Secretary of Defense William J. Perry wrote in a letter that "sailors are required to obey the orders of their superiors, even if those orders subject them to life-threatening danger."
But some Port Chicago survivors and their supporters assert that their actions were not insubordination, but rather rebellion against the systemic racism of the US armed forces.
Even a National Park Service brochure available to tourists visiting Port Chicago's memorial to the sailors acknowledges the racial dimensions of the incident. "For many people, the explosion on July 17, 1944, became a symbol of what was wrong with American society," the brochure says. (end/ips/ks/fah/99
