Vermont State Archives and Records Administration
Office of the Vermont Secretary of State
Spotlight on Records
_________________________________________________
Vermont’s Refugee Problem of 1942
Contributed by Gregory Sanford
Vermont’s refugee history stretches from at least Shays Rebellion in 1787 to the current resettlement
of Syrian refugees in Rutland. By refugee I mean people fleeing war, persecution, or other direct
threats; I use “refugee” interchangeably with “evacuee,” the more common term in the 1940s planning
effort described below.
Vermont’s responses to refugees mirror our changing cultural, social, and other values. Shays Rebellion
is a good example [see Records of the Governor and Council, v.III, Appendix F]. High taxes, bad
harvests, and economic depression threatened to dispossess western Massachusetts farmers. Believing
their state government unresponsive to their plight, the farmers asserted their right to rebel. When the
Massachusetts militia crushed their rebellion Daniel Shays and other leaders fled into Vermont to avoid
capture and possible execution.
Massachusetts demanded their return. Vermonters, however, saw in Shays an echo of their own
rebellion against an unresponsive New York government. Ethan Allen, as was his wont, thundered that
those who “held the reins of government in Massachusetts were a pack of Damned rascals and there
was not virtue among them.” An aside: is it just me or do I increasingly hear Ethan Allen speaking with
a Brooklyn accent?
As governor, Thomas Chittenden [see Governors’ Records Finding Aid] faced a different reality. He
could not afford alienating the thirteen original states if Vermont’s right to exist was to ever gain
recognition. In February 1787 Chittenden issued a proclamation to Vermonters, but for broader
consumption, warning them not to “harbor, entertain or conceal” Shays or the other leaders. That
Shays was living at the farm next to Chittenden’s did not seem to unsettle the Governor’s conscience.
None of which has anything to do with the subject at hand: the anticipated refugee crisis of 1942. By
1940 the Nazis appeared unstoppable, inspiring fears of spies, saboteurs, and, after 1941, invasion. To
protect the Vermont home front restrictions were put on possible subversive groups and sabotage
laws were strengthened. Vermont actually had some connection to one potential subversive group.
The Silver Legion of America, a pro-Nazi group, was led by William Dudley Pelley, one time owner and
editor of the St. Johnsbury Evening Caledonian.
In the event of invasion the Vermont attorney general cautioned Vermonters that if they used firearms
to defend their families and homes they would be considered “snipers” and therefore not subject to
the rules of war—they could be summarily executed.
The attorney general also proposed amending Article 16th of the Vermont Constitution to read: “That
the [people] citizens have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State, but the
General Assembly may regulate or restrict this right for the purpose of preventing crime—and as
standing armies in peacetime are dangerous to liberty, they ought not be kept up; and that the military
1
should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power” (proposed deletion in
brackets and additions in italics). The attorney general’s 1940 biennial report, which contained the
proposal, did not elaborate on its origins. If it had been adopted, the proposal could have been used
against subversives, criminals, and non-citizens alike.
The national, regional and Vermont governments worked together on how to care for refugees if the
Nazis started bombarding southern New England, particularly the naval yards around Boston and
elsewhere. It was anticipated that refugees from coastal regions would stream northward into
Vermont. The national Red Cross helped coordinate the plan through state evacuation committees.
The Vermont committee advised the governor and drafted a comprehensive plan for addressing an
influx of refugees. The committee identified likely classes of refugees starting with school children with
teachers; pre-school children with mothers; and the aged, inform, sick and injured.
Temporary refugee reception areas were designated and surveys conducted to identify more
permanent shelter. In phase one the evacuees would be housed in Vermont’s larger municipalities,
using their churches, auditoriums, and lodge halls for shelter. The Red Cross would provide temporary
feeding, housing, and clothing facilities through its local offices. “As fast as possible” refugees would be
given medical exams and moved to more permanent homes.
Phase two called for the mobilization of a wide spectrum of volunteers and public officials. Social
workers would be available to periodically check on how the evacuees were adjusting. The Department
of Education would train volunteers to provide education for the displaced children while the
department’s “home making division” would provide child care training for high school students so
they could volunteer their services. The nutrition division would prepare a market list of food for young
children. The state Welfare Department would train volunteers for “welfare work.” Additional
volunteers would be sought for child care, day nurseries, play school, recreation, and community
health.
Clearly Vermont, in setting up a coordinated, statewide response, took being a “sanctuary state”
seriously. Though, as previously noted, how we treat refugees reflects our cultural values of the
moment. Within their framework of coordinated compassion Vermonters—and the Red Cross-reflected some less than uplifting values. In the event Boston was bombed the evacuees might include
“a large number of able-bodied persons, probably from a slum area such as the section known as
Charlestown, which is adjacent to the Boston Navy Yard. Such a group would present a difficult police
problem.” The Vermont Evacuation Committee, after meeting with the Red Cross, looked at several
“subjects for intensive discussion and settlement. The third subject listed was “Shelter—including racial
segregation (e.g. negroes).”
A particular Vermont issue was that our municipalities still operated under 18th Century settlement
laws. A town could warn recent arrivals out of town if they might become a drain on local social
services. Towns could also seek reimbursement for the support of indigent new arrivals from the town
they had emigrated from. These laws did seem particularly charitable to southern New England
refugees. I will leave it to you to contemplate a Vermont select board writing a municipality now under
Nazi control for re-imbursement.
The attorney general urged state government to update the settlement laws and issued an opinion
that the federal government might eventually pick up the cost of resettling out of state refugees. He
further urged state government to look for ways to fund local refugees.
The tide of war began to change in 1942 and the evacuation plans were never implemented. So what,
if anything, does this breathless history tell us?
First, harking back to the Shays Rebellion refugees, sometimes we act on our moral or political beliefs
to protect refugees in ways counter to national expectations.
Second, the 1940-42 experience is a reminder that in times of danger we evince tremendous faith in
our governments. We believe those governments represent our collective will; will coordinate and
inspire us to collective action; and will use public institutions to provide education, training, health
care, and other services. We also saw this as a statewide effort, not simply leaving it to self-selected
“sanctuary cities.”
Third, refugees from southern New England could have been easily assimilated since we shared a
language and many social values. Yet we remained suspicious of those who were different—those able
bodied men from the “slums” or African-Americans who were to be segregated. We have always had
to look into our own hearts when confronting those who are less familiar; those who may be outside
our routine experience.
Finally, we have always had to confront realities that may shape our ability to respond. We no longer
operate under the settlement laws but planning must always include finding the resources needed to
be a successful shelter.
We live in a world that seems to have an infinite capacity for creating refugees. Repressive
governments, wars, persecution, and increasingly climate change contribute to the dislocation of large
populations. How prepared are we for future influxes of refugees? What will we see reflected about
ourselves in our responses to the needs of others?
Contact Us
VSARA Reference Room
Visit our website
1078 US Route 2, Middlesex
Montpelier, VT 05633-7701
http://www.sec.state.vt.us/archives-records/state-archives
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (802) 828-2308
Fax: (802) 828-3710
Twitter: @VTStateArchives