This page was created by Anonymous.

This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

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

"Blamed for Riot, Harlem Girl Fined. Disorders Fatal to Three Laid to Her Screaming in Store Where Boy Stole Knife," New York Times, March 24, 1935, 19.

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page is referenced by:

Andrew Lyons killed Andrew Lyons, a thirty-seven-year-old Black man, died as a result of injuries "sustained during the thick of a melee at 125th street and Seventh Avenue," according to a story in the New York Amsterdam News. A story in the Times Union, the only other source that mentioned a location, put the site of his injury a block to the east, at 125th Street and Lenox Avenue. There is no information on when he was injured or by who. The medical records obtained by the MCCH provided an explanation for that lack of details. Lyons did not receive medical attention until the evening after the disorder; an ambulance was called to his home, 147 West 117th Street, at 5:10 PM on March 20, by a friend, George Harris, according to the death record issued by Harlem Hospital. When he arrived at the hospital, he was was described as "stuporous," too groggy to tell doctors what had happened to him. The doctor who completed the death record, Emanuel Hauer, wrote that Lyons was "said to have been hit on the head during riot on 3-19-35." When Hauer testified before a MCCH hearing, he gave the same information. Arthur Garfield Hays, chairman of the hearing, responded, "That is not in my report." Hauer then read the ambulance man's report, which simply recorded that Lyons had been "Struck over the head," not that he had been hit during the disorder. If the ambulance man did not provide information that Lyons had been injured in the disorder, neither did his friend Harris. Hauer testified that Harris told him Lyons "came home stuporous but doesn't know how it happened." When he returned home on the night of March 19 Lyons had gone to bed. The autopsy report completed on March 24 did not describe Lyons as injured during the disorder: "Deceased was injured in some unknown manner." Lyons died three days after being admitted to hospital, on March 23rd; the recorded cause of death was a "fractured skull, laceration of the brain, terminal pneumonia." Lyons brother James, a resident of Stem, North Carolina, is recorded in the autopsy as identifying his body on March 25.

Lyons' delayed admission to hospital explains why he was not in any lists of the injured published in newspapers on March 20 and March 21. The first mentions of Lyons in the press are mentions of his death in the New York Post and Daily News on March 23, in the Times Union, New York Times and an AP story on March 24, and in the Atlanta World on March 27. Lyons also appeared in lists of those killed in the weekly Black newspapers, the New York Age, Pittsburgh Courier, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide as well as the New York Amsterdam News, on March 30. The only source that provided any details of the circumstances of Lyons' fatal injury was the Times Union, which described him as having been "beaten over the head with a blunt instrument during the rioting on Tuesday night." That story was the only newspaper to follow the death record in describing his injury as a fractured skull. However, neither the death record nor the autopsy mentioned a blunt instrument as the cause of Lyons' injuries.

There is no indication where the reporters for New York Amsterdam News and Times Union obtained information on where Lyons was attacked. No such evidence was produced for the MCCH. If the reporters were correct, Lyons would have been in the midst of police efforts to establish a perimeter around Kress' store, and his injuries likely the product of a police nightstick. One of Communist Party-affiliated lawyers who questioned Captain Rothengast during a MCCH hearing did claim that "Andrew Lyons died of injuries inflicted by clubs of the police." Rothengast replied, "I'd have to consult records to be exact." The MCCH had its investigators gather information on those killed during the disorder. In Lyons' case, the only material in their files are the death and autopsy records. The autopsy recorded "Detectives investigating." Given that Hauer told the MCCH hearing that Harris knew nothing about how Lyons had been injured, there are no avenues for investigation in those records. Likely as a result, Lyons death appears to have remained unexplained. Notwithstanding the claim made by the lawyer in the MCCH hearing that police were responsible for the death, the information accompanying Lyons name in a list of "Workers Killed in the Past Six Months" published in New Masses in July 1935: "Died of internal injuries received during the Harlem events of March 19."
Leo Smith arrested Sometime during the disorder, Officer Williams of the 6th Detective Division arrested Leo Smith, an eighteen-year-old white man, for allegedly "throwing a stone through a Seventh Avenue window," according to a story in the New York Herald Tribune. The specific location of the damaged store is not given. However, Smith was one of three men arrested during the disorder arraigned in the Night Court, during the disorder on March 19, the New York Herald Tribune reported, so was likely arrested near 125th Street, where the initial events were concentrated. In reporting that Smith was "accused of smashing a store window," a story in the Home News gave the address as 3180 7th Avenue, a non-existent address. He lived well to the east of Harlem, at 305 East 118th Street, between Second and First Avenues, an area with only white residents.

Smith was included in lists of those arrested in the disorder charged with disorderly conduct published in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide, in the New York Evening Journal and in the New York American, and without a charge in a list published in the Daily News. He was not included, however, in the transcript of the 28th Precinct Police blotter, likely because he was arrested and sent to the Night Court on March 19 (although one of the two other men arraigned in the Night Court, Claudius Jones, is in the transcript). There Magistrate Capshaw held him for the Magistrates Court, on bail of $500. On March 20, Smith appeared in the Harlem Magistrates Court, charged with disorderly conduct. Magistrate Renaud tried and convicted him that day, holding him for sentence, according to the Harlem Magistrates Court docket book and a story in the Home News. According to the Daily News, Smith had a white lawyer (although none was recorded in the docket book). The unnamed lawyer attracted the reporter's attention when he "sought to inject a question of race while a colored patrolman was testifying against" Smith. A slightly less cryptic account of what the lawyer said appeared in the Times Union, the only other newspaper to report the incident: "a lawyer for a white defendant hinted the trouble was started by Negroes and was racial in origin." According to that story, "Negroes in the jammed room muttered disapprovingly" and "Magistrate Renaud quickly reprimanded the attorney." The Daily News quoted the magistrate's words: "The patrolman in this case happens to be colored, the Judge happens to be white and the prosecutor is colored," said Renaud. "We recognize no race, color or creed here. We are looking for justice and law and order."" When Smith returned to court on March 23, it was for sentencing, stories in the Afro-American, New York Age, Daily News and New York Times reported. Magistrate Renaud sent him to the Workhouse for one month, a sentence in the middle of the range of punishments handed out to those arrested in the disorder.

Smith was recorded as white in the Harlem Magistrates Court docket book, in stories about his sentencing in the Afro-American, New York Age, Daily News and New York Times and in lists published in the New York Evening Journal and Daily News. Neither story about his first appearance in court, in the New York Herald Tribune and the Home News, mentioned his race. His address, well east of the areas of Black residences in Harlem, fitted with his recorded race (although the New York Evening Journal, New York Herald Tribune and Daily News mistakenly recorded his address as West 118th Street). None of the newspaper reporting offered any comment regarding Smith's race.
Margaret Mitchell arrested Officer Johnson of the 6th Division arrested Margaret Mitchell, an eighteen-year-old Black woman, inside Kress’ 5, 10 and 25c store, sometime around 5.00 PM on March 19. Police alleged that she was “throwing pans on floor and causing crowd to collect,” according to Inspector Di Martini’s report on the disorder. Pots and pans, and glasses, were knocked off counters and women screamed, after the store was closed and police tried to clear out those inside, Jackson Smith, the store manager, Patrolman Timothy Shannon, and Louise Thompson all testified. Only Thompson described the circumstances that produced that noise, most fully in an article in New Masses. After a woman she could not see screamed, Thompson joined part of the crowd who rushed to where the noise came from, the rear of the store. Police there pushed that crowd back and refused to answer when women asked “if the boy was injured and where he is,” Thompson wrote in New Masses. The officers also “began to get rough.” A woman with an umbrella retaliated; she either hit an officer, according to Thompson’s testimony, or “knocked over a pile of pots and pans,” according to her article. Many of those in the store left once the noise and struggles with police began, both Thompson and Smith testified. Thompson remained with the woman she described knocking over pots and pans, who was not arrested, but she was clearly not the only person who knocked over merchandise in efforts to remain in the store until they had information about Rivera. Mitchell could also have been the woman whose scream drew Thompson and others to the rear of the store.

Margaret Mitchell appeared in many newspaper stories about what happened in Kress’ store, but almost all truncated the extended standoff between the Black women and store staff and police into a rapid sequence of events, in the process mistaking what Mitchell was alleged to have done and when she was arrested. The Home News reported that Mitchell “attempted to take the Rivera boy from the department store detectives and cried cut that the guards were beating the youth.” La Prensa also reported Mitchell trying to intervene. Although the Home News went on to claim that Mitchell was arrested at that time, neither Hurley nor Donohue mentioned a woman being part of their struggles with Rivera, and Donahue testified he did not arrest anyone while at Kress’ store. The Afro-American, New York Amsterdam News, New York Evening Journal (and the New York Times on 3/24) reported that Mitchell was arrested after she screamed when the boy was being beaten. However, New York Times, Daily News, New York American, New York Post, New York Herald Tribune, Daily Worker and Daily Worker did not specify when she screamed (or spread rumors in the New York Times story or was “a leader of the disturbance” in the New York Herald Tribune story) – although the Daily News, New York American, and New York Post did elsewhere in their stories mention an unnamed woman running into street screaming at the time Rivera was grabbed. The New York Sun alone specified that Mitchell’s actions came later: “The woman whose cries that the boy had been murdered, rekindled the vandalism after the police had succeeded in quenching it earlier in the evening, is Margaret Mitchell, 18, of 283 West 150th street.” The next day, in reporting Mitchell’s arraignment in the Harlem Magistrate’s Court, the Home News combined its description of her trying to intervene when Rivera was grabbed with the later events mentioned in Di Martini’s report. While reiterating that she “attempted to take the Rivera boy from the department store detectives and cried cut that the guards were beating the youth,” the story added that after Rivera had been taken to the basement, she “urging other colored people in the store to demand the release of the boy, started throwing merchandise to the floor and upset many of the counter displays.” Inspector Di Martini's report, while containing few details of events in the store, did distinguish Mitchell from the woman who reacted to Rivera, whose actions he located slightly later than the newspaper stories, "upon the arrival of the ambulance [to treat Hurley and Urban]," when the "unknown female screamed that the boy had been seriously injured or killed and otherwise caused a commotion which attracted a large number of persons." Mitchell's arrest came later, after which "this commotion was soon quieted."

The more specific allegation of “throwing pans on floor and causing crowd to collect” was recorded in the 28th Precinct Police blotter as “Disorderly in Kresses 5 & 10c Store.” That language echoed the offense with which the prosecutor charged Mitchell, disorderly conduct. She appeared in lists of those arrested and charged with disorderly conduct in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide, the New York Evening Journal, New York American and Daily News. Arraigned in the Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20, Mitchell was found guilty by Magistrate Renaud, who remanded her until March 23 for investigation and sentencing. The Times Union reported that she “denied hysterically she participated in the rioting. She stood up from the witness chair screaming, then collapsed.” No other newspapers included that scene.

Mitchell returned to the court on March 23. In passing sentence Magistrate Renaud commented that “he did not believe the girl acted maliciously,” the New York Times and New York Age reported. The sentence reflected that assessment: three days in the Workhouse or a fine of $10. The Home News reported that sentence without mention of any comment by the Magistrate. Mitchell was one of only three people convicted during the disorder who paid a fine. She was also one of only eighteen of those arraigned represented by a lawyer, in her case Sidney Christian, a prominent West Indian attorney.

The lawyer was likely obtained with the help of Mitchell’s father, Thomas E. Thompson. A West Indian immigrant who had arrived in New York City in 1895, Thompson had been a postal worker for thirty-five years at the time of his daughter’s arrest, and an office holder in the Prince Hall Masons. He and his family were among the earliest Black residents of Harlem, recorded in the 1910 census living in 55 West 137th Street. While not featuring on the social pages as Sidney Christian did, Thompson would have had the resources and the standing in the West Indian community to have known of and involved the lawyer. Mitchell, one of the youngest of Thompson's twelve children, had married in April 1934, and at the time of the disorder lived with her husband, David Mitchell, a handyman in an apartment building, at 287 West 150th Street. That she was in a store twenty-five blocks south of her home indicated the distance from which the businesses on West 125th Street drew their customers.

As the only person arrested in Kress’ store, and named in newspaper stories about the disorder, Mitchell was one of the few identifiable sources of information about the beginnings of the disorder for the MCCH. However, when Lt. Battle called at her home and requested that she be at the public hearing on March 30, “she refused to come.” Asked again about her testimony three weeks later, Battle reiterated that "she absolutely refuses to come to this hearing."

Margaret Mitchell and her husband still lived in the same apartment when the census enumerator called in 1940. In January 1945, she joined 200 family and friends celebrating her parents 50th wedding anniversary, photographed alongside her siblings in an image published in the New York Amsterdam News. Her husband David was not part of the celebration; he was a sergeant in the U.S. military serving overseas, as were two of Mitchell’s brothers and four nephews.
Drug store windows broken (339 Lenox Ave) Sometime during the disorder windows were smashed in the white-owned drug store at 339 Lenox Avenue, on the northwest corner of West 127th Street. A single large hole is visible in the center of the window facing West 127th Street, and another in the adjacent window facing Lenox Avenue, in a photograph taken the next day published in the Afro-American. (The photograph caption for the Getty Images version of the photograph locates the store "at 127th Street and Lenox Avenue," and the Tax Department photograph confirms the store was on the northwest corner so 339 Lenox Avenue). The store may have been looted. There is no merchandise in the store windows in the photograph. However, the image appears to have been taken after the clean-up had begun, so the merchandise might have been removed as part of the removing debris from the windows not taken during the disorder. Frank De Thomas' candy store next to the drug store on West 127th Street was looted, as was Sol Weit and Isaac Popiel's grocery store two buildings north on Lenox Avenue. Many other stores in the surrounding blocks of Lenox Avenue had windows broken and goods taken. Few arrests were made as a result of those attacks, as police lacked the numbers to control the many crowds on the streets, but police did make two arrests for breaking windows in 339 Lenox Avenue, as well as arrests for looting the two nearby stores, suggesting that officers were stationed at the intersection. There are no details of the circumstances of the arrests for breaking the drug store windows, but the same detective is recorded as the arresting officer, making it likely the arrests occurred at the same time.

A story in the Home News is the only evidence connecting two of the men arrested for allegedly breaking windows to the drug store. Arthur Bennett and James Bright, both Black men twenty-eight years of age, appear in lists of those charged with disorderly conduct published in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide, and in the New York Evening Journal. Inexplicably, the 28th Precinct police blotter records "Annoyed pedestrians" as the charge against the men; no one else arrested during the disorder was charged with that offense. Bennett and Bright appeared in the Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20 charged with disorderly conduct, with Detective Perretti of the 6th Division recorded in the docket book as having arrested both men. They had allegedly thrown "stores through the window of the store at 339 Lenox Ave.," according to the Home News story on those proceedings. Neither man lived close to the store, with Bennett giving his address as 48 West 119th Street, eight blocks south, and Bright's address recorded as 43 West 133rd Street, five blocks north. Magistrate Renaud convicted both men. They returned to the court for sentencing on March 23, receiving a term of one month in the workhouse "for breaking windows" from Magistrate Renaud in proceedings reported in the Afro-American, New York Age, New York Daily News, and New York Times. None of those stories gave an address for the store whose windows the men had allegedly broken.

A white owned drug store is recorded at 339 Lenox Avenue in the MCCH business survey taken in the second half of 1935. The Tax Department photograph from sometime between 1939 and 1941 shows a drug store at the address; there is no information available to establish if it is the same business as operated in 1935.
Rivers Wright arrested Detective Doyle of the 5th Division arrested Rivers Wright, a twenty-one-year-old Black man for allegedly being part of a group of men who attacked an unnamed white man at 125th St and Lenox Avenue at some point in the disorder. Wright lived at 2137 7th Avenue, a block west and two blocks north of the site of the alleged assault, and in the heart of the disorder.

Only one source provided any details of the circumstances of his arrest. The Home News reported on March 21 that Wright was arrested "after he and a number of others are said to have attacked a white man at 125th St and Lenox Ave." Wright appeared in lists of those arrested during the disorder in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide, the New York American, New York Evening Journal, and Daily News. His sentencing several days later is also reported in the Afro-American, New York Age, Daily News, and New York Times.

Among the first arraigned in the Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20, Wright was charged with disorderly conduct, not assault, as was the case with half of those arrested for assault. The attack cannot have resulted in significant injury if the charge was disorderly conduct: the applicable section of the statute applied only to a person who used "offensive, disorderly, threatening, abusive or insulting language, conduct or behavior." It could also have been the case that police did not have evidence that Wright participated in the assault; he may have been part of a crowd nearby, caught up in police efforts to arrest those responsible for the assault. Those circumstances fitted the definition of the offense. Disorderly conduct was also an offense that could be adjudicated in the Magistrates Court. Magistrate Renaud convicted Wright and remanded him for sentence on March 23. On that date, he sent Wright to the Workhouse for 10 days.
John Hawkins arrested Detective George Booker of the 28th Precinct arrested John Hawkins, a thirty-year-old Black man, for allegedly inciting a riot. There are no details of his alleged offenses or where or when Hawkins was arrested. Booker also arrested Horace Fowler during the disorder, for allegedly looting Nicholas Peet's tailor's shop at 2063 7th Avenue. Booker made no mention of a crowd or anyone else being involved in that alleged looting, so he likely arrested Hawkins at some other time and place. Hawkins lived at 2357 8th Avenue, between West 126th and West 127th Streets. He could have been part of the crowds around that block of 8th Avenue, where Theodore Hughes was arrested for allegedly looting the store directly opposite the building where Hawkins lived, Emmet Williams for breaking the window of that store, and Rose Murrell for breaking a window in the store at 2366 8th Avenue.

In the 28th Precinct Police blotter, the charge against Hawkins was recorded as inciting riot, which was also the charge under which he appeared in the list of those arrested during the disorder published in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide. When he appeared in the Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20, that was also the charge recorded in the docket book. However, the charge was later crossed out and "DISORDERLY CONDUCT" stamped in its place. That change had to have been made on March 20, as Magistrate Renaud convicted him that day and held him for investigation before sentencing. The offense of disorderly conduct did not involve being part of a group of three or more, as the offense of riot did, nor inciting others to threaten to, attempt to or use violence against a person or property. Charging Hawkins with disorderly conduct thus likely indicated that police did not have evidence that he acted with or led a group of people; rather, that he had been part of a crowd on the street near attacks on property or people.

When Hawkins returned to court on March 23, Renaud sentenced him to thirty days in the Workhouse. Stories in the Daily News, New York Times, New York Age and Afro-American reported the sentencing. Three other men sentenced at the same time had been accused of breaking windows; the three newspapers other than the New York Times reported that Hawkins had also committed that offense, while that newspaper merely reported his sentence.
Dodge grand jury hearing, March 25 (1) While the grand jury was not in session over the weekend, Dodge affirmed his commitment to the investigation to several reporters on Saturday, March 23. He emphasized his concern with a specific target, those who advocated the overthrow of government by force and violence, according to stories in the New York American, New York Times, Daily News and Home News. Although the statement did not appear to directly reference Communists, most of those newspapers identified them as the target in their headlines: “Dodge Plans War on Reds in Harlem” in the Daily News; “Dodge Declares War on Red Leaders” in the Home News; and “Dodge Expects Arrest of Red Leaders” in the New York Times. The Am predictably reported the DA’s comments in more detail and attempted to link them to further charges, as it had previously in posing questions about the criminal anarchy statute. Its story quoted Dodge as invoking the Constitution, and posed questions to him about involving Federal authorities, which he declined to answer. That story, and the New York Times and Daily News, also reported that books and papers seized in the raid on the ILD offices were being examined for evidence.

When Dodge spoke to the press on Monday, he affirmed he was in fact following the path that the New York American reporter had raised. He mentioned charges of criminal anarchy, which carried a sentence of up to ten years in prison and a fine of up to $5000, in connection with the disorder. However, newspaper stories differed on just what he said, with the New York American, Home News and New York Sun reporting such charges “might be returned,” the New York Herald Tribune that the DA had evidence that “would justify” such charges, the Daily News, Times Union and New York Post that indictments would be sought and the New York World-Telegram that indictments were being sought. The New York Times did not publish a story about Dodge or the grand jury. There is no evidence that Dodge actually presented such charges; certainly, the grand jury did not vote for any indictments for criminal anarchy.

In raising criminal anarchy, Dodge told reporters that his investigators had found “some good clues,” a phrase reported in the New York American, Daily News, New York Herald Tribune, New York Sun, Times Union and Home News. The New York World-Telegram substituted “splendid new leads.” As examples, he displayed pamphlets seized in the earlier raids on the offices of Communist Party organizations, saying although he could no reveal their content, they were “hot stuff.” His claim that the documents were advocating the overthrow of the government was widely reported, in the New York Post, New York Sun, Home News, Times Union, New York Herald Tribune and New York World-Telegram, as was the assertion that they had been "distributed to young school children.” Curiously given their anti-Communist focus, none of the Hearst newspapers, the New York Evening Journal, New York American and the Daily Mirror, mentioned the pamphlets.

Instead, the New York American (in a separate, earlier story) and New York Evening Journal, joined only by the New York Post, reported Dodge again speaking about the grand jury considering new legislation so “irresponsible agitators would be prevented from goading thoughtless people toward the overthrow of the American form of government, by violence,” as the New York American reported. The New York Evening Journal summarized its purpose as “designed to curb Communistic activities in the interests of the public safety.” The New York Post described the legislation as “defining” free speech, with all three stories reporting that he insisted it would not be a restriction on free speech. The two Hearst newspapers were also alone in including in their stories that Dodge had met with Federal officials and planned to turn his evidence over to them.

For all of Dodge’s bravado, the day’s grand jury hearing resulted in only one additional indictment related to the disorder. Unreported in the Home News, New York Sun, New York Times, New York Post, New York Herald Tribune and New York Evening Journal, the indictment charged [a man] with taking goods worth 15 cents. Only the Times Union reported the value of the goods. The New York American described the alleged offense as “theft of toilet articles,” the New York World-Telegram as “stealing several rolls of paper towels from a shop window,” and the Daily News simply identified the charge as burglary. Only the New York Post, continuing its criticism of Dodge’s anti-Communist focus, made a connection between the case and the DA’s rhetoric, describing the indictment as “for nothing spectacular.”
James Bright arrested Sometime during the disorder Detective Perretti of the 6th Division arrested James Bright, a twenty-eight-year-old Black man, for allegedly breaking windows in the drug store at 339 Lenox Avenue, on the northwest corner of 127th Street. Perretti likely arrested a second man, Arthur Bennett, also a twenty-eight-year-old Black man, at the same time, also for breaking the store's windows. There was no information on the circumstances of the arrests. While other stores in the surrounding blocks of Lenox Avenue had windows broken and goods taken, police made few arrests as they lacked the numbers to control the many crowds on the streets. However, other officers made arrests for alleged looting at Frank De Thomas' candy store next to the drug store on West 127th Street and at Sol Weit and Isaac Popiel's grocery store two buildings north on Lenox Avenue, suggesting that officers were stationed at this intersection.

A story in the Home News was the only evidence that connected Bright, and Arthur Bennett, to 339 Lenox Avenue. Bright appeared in lists of those charged with disorderly conduct published in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide, and in the New York Evening Journal. Inexplicably, the 28th Precinct Police blotter records "Annoyed pedestrians" as the charge against him; no one else arrested during the disorder other than Bennett was charged with that offense. Bright appeared in the Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20 charged with disorderly conduct, with Detective Perretti recorded in the docket book as the arresting officer. Bright had allegedly thrown "stones through the window of the store at 339 Lenox Ave.," according to the Home News story on those proceedings. He did not live close to the store, but five blocks north, at 43 West 133rd Street. Magistrate Renaud convicted Bright of disorderly conduct. He returned to the court for sentencing on March 23, and received a term of one month in the workhouse "for breaking windows" from Magistrate Renaud in proceedings reported in the Afro-American, New York Age, Daily News, and New York Times. None of those stories gave an address for the store whose windows Bright had allegedly broken.
Arthur Bennett arrested Sometime during the disorder Detective Perretti of the 6th Division arrested Arthur Bennett, a twenty-eight-year-old Black man, for allegedly breaking windows in the drug store at 339 Lenox Avenue, on the northwest corner of 127th Street. Perretti likely arrested a second man, James Bright, also a twenty-eight-year-old Black man, at the same time, also for breaking the store's windows. There is no information on the circumstances of the arrests. While other stores in the surrounding blocks of Lenox Avenue had windows broken and goods taken, police made few arrests as they lacked the numbers to control the many crowds on the streets. However, other officers made arrests for alleged looting at Frank De Thomas' candy store next to the drug store on West 127th Street and at Sol Weit and Isaac Popiel's grocery store two buildings north on Lenox Avenue, suggesting that officers were stationed at this intersection.

A story in the Home News is the only evidence that connects Bennett, and James Bright, to 339 Lenox Avenue. Bennett appeared in lists of those charged with disorderly conduct published in the Atlanta World, Afro-American and Norfolk Journal and Guide, and in the New York Evening Journal. Inexplicably, the 28th Precinct Police blotter records "Annoyed pedestrians" as the charge against him; no one else arrested during the disorder other than Bright was charged with that offense. Bennett appeared in the Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20 charged with disorderly conduct, with Detective Perretti recorded in the docket book as the arresting officer. He had allegedly thrown "stores through the window of the store at 339 Lenox Ave.," according to the Home News story on those proceedings. He did not live close to the store, but eight blocks south, at 48 West 119th Street. Magistrate Renaud convicted Bennett of disorderly conduct. He returned to the court for sentencing on March 23, and received a term of one month in the workhouse "for breaking windows" from Magistrate Renaud in proceedings reported in the Afro-American, New York Age, New York Daily News, and New York Times. None of those stories gave an address for the store whose windows Bennett had allegedly broken.