This page was created by Anonymous. 

Harlem in Disorder: A Spatial History of How Racial Violence Changed in 1935

Arthur Davis arrested

Sometime during the disorder, Detective Phillips of the 28th Precinct arrested Arthur Davis, a thirty-six-year-old Black resident of 42 West 126th Street. Davis appeared in the list of those charged with burglary published in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Gazette, and the list published in the New York Evening Journal. The 28th Precinct Police Blotter also recorded the charge against Davis as burglary, with the note "Burglarised store during riot." The Daily Worker more precisely described his alleged offense as "stealing groceries," although that statement may have reflected the story being told by the paper, that the disorder had been an "upsurge of starving Negro workers," rather than details given when Davis was sentenced. There is no complainant listed in the Harlem Magistrates Court docket book, or named in any of the newspaper stories about Davis' court appearances, so the location he allegedly looted is unknown.

Davis was arraigned in the Harlem Magistrates Court docket book on March 20 with two other individuals arrested by Detective Phillips, Elizabeth Tai and Herbert Hunter, also charged with burglary, perhaps arrested at the same time and place. Magistrate Renaud remanded all three to appear again in court (he sent two others arrested by Phillips who appeared at the same time charged with malicious mischief, Charles Wright and William Norris, to the Court of Special Sessions). The docket book recorded only Phillips name and precinct; the story in the Daily Worker identified him as a detective. Both the docket book and 28th Precinct Police Blotter gave Davis' age as thirty-six years; both lists and all three newspaper stories gave his age as thirty-two-years.

When Davis appeared in court again, on March 22, Magistrate Renaud convicted and sentenced him. While the docket book records no change in the charge against Davis, stories in the New York Daily News and New York Evening Journal reported he had been convicted of disorderly conduct, not burglary, as had Tai and Hunter. In Tai's case, the docket book does record that the charge had been reduced to disorderly conduct. Only that lesser offense could have been dealt with in the Magistrates Court rather than as a misdemeanor in the Court of Special Sessions or a felony in the grand jury and Court of General Sessions. Had the prosecutor presented evidence Davis had stolen merchandise he would have been charged with either burglary or larceny; the charge of disorderly conduct suggests he may have allegedly broken store windows without taking anything.

Renaud sentenced Davis to pay a fine of $25 or serve five days in the Workhouse, according to the Harlem Magistrates Court docket book, as was Tai. He gave Hunter a longer sentence of ten days without the alternative of a fine. The 28th Precinct Police Blotter and stories in the New York Daily News, New York Evening Journal and Daily Worker record his sentence as five days in the Workhouse, making it likely that Davis was unable to pay the fine.

This page has tags:

This page references: