Bicentennial Philadelphia: An Excerpt

Book Excerpt, Unique Content, , Leave a comment

By Marc Stein

The following text is reprinted with permission from Bicentennial: A Revolutionary History of the 1970s by Marc Stein, published by The University of Chicago Press. © 2026 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.

When the PBC [Philadelphia 1976 Bicentennial Corporation] board met on October 23 [1970] at the Penn Mutual Building to vote on its bicentennial plan, racial conflicts exploded anew. According to multiple media reports, board chairman Henderson Supplee Jr. (also board chairman of Atlantic Refining) called for the vote by asking, “Will those in favor please raise their white hands?” Supplee later contended that he had said “right” hands, but most reporters and many African Americans heard him say “white.” The [Philadelphia]Inquirer called it a “slip of the tongue,” but [Edna] Thomas commented, “Supplee really showed us his racist self. Up to now he’s kept it hidden, but he really made it public this time.” The board then voted thirty-seven to fifteen in favor of the proposal, but eleven out of twelve African American members present voted no. After [Samuel] Evans denounced the vote, Mayor [James] Tate reportedly said, “Shut up, boy, and sit down.” Seven African American members then walked out, as did Thomas and other critics.1

Thomas and her allies, however, did not leave the building. Instead, they took an elevator to PBC’s main offices, where Thomas, [Walter] Palmer, Rev. Wycliffe Jangdharrie (president of the Delaware Valley Association for Family Services), the NAACP’s Bruce Cornell Webb, and others staged a sit-in. They began by telling the receptionist, “Get out. You no longer work here.” When she hesitated, a minister warned her to leave “before you get hurt.” After she retreated to an inner office, the protesters responded to telephone calls by claiming that PBC was out of business. Two policemen arrived but made no arrests. Jangdharrie was quoted as saying, “What does the black man have to celebrate? We don’t have any reason to have a Bicentennial. The black man is still not free.”2

In the aftermath of October 23, African American community groups met in North Philadelphia. Approximately one hundred representatives of seventeen groups agreed to oppose the PBC plan and demand “low-income housing for relocation of those displaced,” community control over concessions, and guaranteed conversion of exposition buildings “for educational, cultural and economic purposes.” Using a phrase that would later be appropriated by others, Thomas declared, “We weren’t kidding when we said it’s the people’s Bicentennial.” According to the [Philadelphia] Tribune, “One speaker after another expressed the view that they were not against the holding of a 200th birthday party as such. What they were against, however, was the holding of such a celebration at the expense of the black community.” Organizers also emphasized that they had broad community support, with one saying that at the recent demonstration at Broad and Chestnut, “all sorts of people, blacks, whites, working class people and middle class people told us they were behind us 100 percent.”3

In November, two prominent African American leaders joined the chorus of critics. At a Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce conference, Rev. Leon Sullivan declared that the bicentennial could not be celebrated “without doing something about 50,000 uninhabitable houses that poor black and brown people live in all over the city.” He also asserted that the city “cannot have a Bicentennial celebration here unless black people are major participants.” Several days later, Wilson Goode questioned whether the founding of the country should be celebrated: “In 1776, it just so happened that black people really were not a part of this country. . . . Even up to the early fifties, black people were really not a part of this country. . . . No, I can’t celebrate.”4

Thomas and her allies also gained support from multiracial and predominantly white groups. In a “Germantown 1976 Declaration of Independence,” for example, the “normally moderate” Germantown Community Council denounced PBC’s plan, asserting that “the Philadelphia documents of 1776 and 1787 contained vital flaws such as support of slavery and elevation of property rights above human rights.” As for 1976, “Germantown will have no cause for ‘celebration’ until it is liberated . . . from racist ideologies and genocidal practices . . . , giant business corporations . . . , empire-sustaining foreign policy . . . , schools which are prisons . . . , [and] an urban renewal policy which uses our tax money to benefit banking, real estate, highways, commercial and institutional interests.”5

While African Americans were the earliest, best organized, and most influential critics of bicentennial planning, others became increasingly vocal after PBC released its $1.2 billion plan. At the US Commerce Department, there were concerns about the price tag and efforts to fund unrelated civic improvements.6 An informal group of Philadelphia business and civic leaders, “the Philadelphia Worriers,” had similar concerns and raised questions about financial conflicts of interest.7 Philadelphia Magazine’s publisher, D. Herbert Lipson, warned about the “impending disaster,” blaming City Hall’s lack of leadership, PBC’s “fifth-rate” management, and the “perversion” of legitimate ideas about using the bicentennial to solve urban problems.8 US Senator Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania, shocked at the cost, told reporters that White House officials regarded the plans as unrealistic.9 By December, Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, the only African American senator, was calling on Congress to block expo funding.10

Of all the criticisms made by African Americans, the one that proved most influential in the short term focused on financial conflicts of interest. On December 6, the Inquirer published the results of a two-month investigation, revealing that PBC member Gustave Amsterdam had a direct interest in ten of the thirteen privately owned acres on the east bank of the Schuylkill that were included in the PBC proposal. Although Amsterdam had offered to recuse himself from discussions and votes in which he might have an interest, the Inquirer reported that he had participated. Within days, the Republican district attorney (and future senator), Arlen Specter, launched an investigation.11 Nine days after the Inquirer published its exposé, with federal rejection increasingly likely and federal funding delays slowing the planning process, PBC’s executive committee voted to abandon the October plan, begin work on a new proposal, accept the resignation of Supplee, and reorganize the corporation.12

While African American criticisms were mentioned in several mainstream media stories about these developments, their primary contributions to the defeat of the PBC plan—and their reasons—were underemphasized. African American and alternative media told different stories. Indeed, just before PBC’s reversal, Thomas and thirteen of her allies traveled to Washington to speak with members of Congress.13 Shortly thereafter, members of the PWCA [Philadelphia Women for Community Action], the Black Panther Party, and the Young Lords disrupted a PBC meeting. According to the Philadelphia Free Press, “It wasn’t the Panthers who talked of bombing It was angry women fighting for their communities’ survival. ‘If you so much as touch one black home, I’ll blow the whole Bicentennial up myself,’ one said. And a roomful of people shouted their agreement.” On December 17, an audience of 150 at the West Philadelphia Conference on Community Self-Determination heard Thomas call for the celebration, if held, to be moved to the suburbs. On December 21, [Catherine] Leslie sued to regain her PBC position. Around the same time, Edmund Bacon complained to Thomas that it now looked likely that the expo would be held in Eastwick, a neighborhood in Southwest Philadelphia, and he would make sure she received credit. Thomas responded, “I don’t want any credit and I don’t want any Bicentennial. . . . If you put it up I’ll see it burn.”14

Reflecting on these developments, Tribune columnist Pamala Haynes mocked PBC: “Here was a nice clean little chance to clean up a few million. . . . So what if blacks and Puerto Ricans got uprooted and shoved out of their homes to make way for the Anglo-Saxon carnival? And as for whites who happen to be living in those sections, tough on them too.” She praised Thomas and her supporters: “Through perseverance and guile, leaders of the Bicentennial opposition have staggered the giant of privilege. It is a tribute to their fight that the public is now listening to their argument where before they were scorned.” Haynes concluded, “The men who sit on the board of the Bicen do indeed have a lot to celebrate. They and their ancestors have been given 200 years of uninterrupted plunder. . . . To expect the victims of all this to happily join in the celebration is just too damned much.”15 Two weeks later, in a New York Times article about the bicentennial, Jangdharrie asked, “What are they planning to celebrate? Two hundred years of prejudice and hate?”16

  1. Mike Willmann, “$1.2 Billion Bicentennial Approved at Stormy Meeting,” PI, 24 Oct. 1970; “Did Supplee Say ‘White Hands’?,” PI, 25 Oct. 1970; Len Lear, “‘We Will Not Let the Bicentennial Take Even One Small Brick out of the Black Community,’” PT, 31 Oct. 1970. See also Bill Malone, “Board Approves Bicentennial Master Plan,” PDN, 23 Oct. 1970; “Walkout, Sit-In, Mars Bicen OK,” PDN, 24 Oct. 1970; Al Haas, “Tangled Words,” PI, 25 Oct. 1970.
    ↩︎
  2. Mike Willmann, “Expo ’76 Foes Make Dramatic Objection,” PI, 24 Oct. 1970; Howard S. Shapiro, “Why Black Community Opposes Bicentennial Plans,” PI, 25 Oct. 1970.
    ↩︎
  3. William Thompson, “17 Black Community Groups Unite Against Bicentennial Plan,” PI, 28 Oct. 1970; Len Lear, “Blacks Are Mobilizing Against Bicentennial,” PT, 31 Oct. 1970. ↩︎
  4. Lou Antosh, “Midcity Vitality Tied to Black Exec Jobs,” PDN, 11 Nov. 1970; John Rhodes, “Rev. Sullivan Thunders Warning to Businessmen,” PT, 14 Nov. 1970; Gloria Campisi, “Bicentennial Board Members Verbally Slug It Out,” PDN, 20 Nov. 1970. ↩︎
  5. Helen Rothbardt, “Germantown Urged to Oppose ’76 Fete,” PI, 4 Nov. 1970; Helen Rothbard, “Germantown Council Opposes Bicentennial as ‘Hustle for Buck,’” PI, 12 Nov. 1970 ↩︎
  6. “Let’s Put ’76 in Focus,” PI, 22 Oct. 1970. ↩︎
  7. Mike Willmann, “Who’ll Share Bicen’s Profits—Or Losses?” PI, 23 Oct. 1970; “Bicentennial Funds Worry Budget Men,” PI, 23 Oct. 1970. ↩︎
  8. D. Herbert Lipson, “Off the Cuff,” PM, Dec. 1970 ↩︎
  9. Donald Janson, “Black Dissent and High Cost Snag Philadelphia Bicentennial Plans,” NYT, 14 Nov. 1970; “Expo ’76 Plan Called Unrealistic by White House,” PI, 25 Oct. 1970. ↩︎
  10. Linda J. Heffner, “Brooke Seeks Congress Ban on Expo Here,” PEB, 10 Dec. 1970. ↩︎
  11. Anthony Lame and Mike Willmann, “How an Official Stands to Profit on Bicentennial Site,” PI, 6 Dec. 1970; Anthony Lame and Mike Willmann, “Specter Seeks Probe into Bicen Interests,” PI, 7 Dec. 1970; Anthony Lame and Mike Willmann, “Bicen Site Conflict Is Denied by Supplee,” PI, 8 Dec. 1970; “No Way to Win Confidence,” PI, 8 Dec. 1970; Henderson Supplee Jr., “Bicentennial Board Chairman Responds,” PI, 8 Dec. 1970; Anthony Lame and Mike Willmann, “Specter, Bicen Chiefs Meet in First Step of Site Selection Probe,” PI, 9 Dec. 1970; John McMullan, “A Story We’d Rather Not Print,” PI, 13 Dec. 1970. ↩︎
  12. Anthony Lame and Mike Willmann, “Revolutionary Spirit Returns to Phila.,” PI, 13 Dec. 1970; Lawrence M. Campbell, “Stans Sees No Link to Exposition,” PEB, 16 Dec. 1970; Thomas J. Madden, “Variety of Obstacles Caused Scrapping of Bicen Plan,” PI, 16 Dec. 1970; Mike Willmann, “30th Street Site Dropped in Bicentennial Reversal,” PI, 16 Dec. 1970; “Somebody Woke Up,” PDN, 16 Dec. 1970; “Forward on Two Tracks,” PI, 17 Dec. 1970; Mike Willmann, “Bicen Board OKs Dropping of 30th St. Site,” PI, 18 Dec. 1970; Anthony Lame, “Report on Amsterdam’s Role Approved by Bicen Directors,” PI, 18 Dec. 1970. ↩︎
  13. “Scott Refuses to See Group Fighting Bicen,” PT, 19 Dec. 1970. ↩︎
  14. “Bicentennial Raided,” PFP, 14 Dec. 1970; “Bicentennial Wounded,” PFP, 21 Dec. 1970. ↩︎
  15. Pamala Haynes, “Right On!,” PT, 26 Dec. 1970. ↩︎
  16. Donald Janson, “Minorities Fight Plan for 1976,” NYT, 10 Jan. 1971. ↩︎

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.