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

"City Again Held Liable for Harlem Rioting as Woman Wins $804 for Store Burning," Home News, October 16, 1935 [clipping].

In the Home News

This page is referenced by:

Anna Rosenberg's notion store looted and set on fire Anna Rosenberg closed her notion store at 429 Lenox Avenue before the disorder reached it. When she returned the next morning, she found the store "in ruins," according to testimony she gave in the Municipal Court reported by the New York Herald Tribune: "most of the merchandise was either destroyed or stolen and the plate glass window had been shattered." As well as being looted, the store had been set on fire. So too was the hardware store to the store's right, at 431 Lenox Avenue. While fires set in stores often accompanied looting, particularly in later racial disorders, only one more was reported, at 400 Lenox Avenue, a block to the south. No one arrested for looting was identified as having stolen goods from Rosenberg's store.

The fire was started sometime between 11:00 PM and midnight. Herbert Canter, who owned the pharmacy five doors down from the notion store, at 419 Lenox Avenue, arrived at 11:00 PM to try and protect his business. He remained until 5:00 AM, and saw the fire but not who started it, according to the reports of his testimony in the Home News and New York Herald Tribune. What Canter did report seeing was "a mob" carrying bricks, stones, and bottles, as well as canned goods march down the street shouting, "Down with the whites! Let's get what we can," and hurling missiles through windows. A block north, David Schmoockler, the manager of William Feinstein’s liquor store at 452 Lenox Avenue, also saw a crowd of around thirty people. Between 11:00 PM and midnight, he watched as the crowd "created disturbances, hurled various missiles, broke store windows, set fire to some stores, pillaged others, and in general damaged property of various merchants in the locality," according to Justice Shalleck's summary of his testimony in the Municipal Court. The fire a block south at 400 Lenox Avenue was started just after midnight. A little over an hour later, Feinstein's liquor store was attacked by a crowd of thirty to forty people.

Photographs of firefighters attempting to put out the fire in the hardware store next door to the notion store offered further evidence of the fire at the notion store. Cropped from the version published in the Daily News, but visible in the original photograph, a hose runs in the direction of Rosenberg's notion store to the left, indicating a fire in that direction. (The captions to both versions provided an incorrect address for the location. Details in the image identified it as 431 Lenox Avenue.) A photograph of the same scene published in the Home News also included that hose running to the left in the foreground. In addition, two photographs taken the next day focused on the hardware store captured glimpses of the damage to the exterior of the notion store. Part of the storefront appeared on the left of an Associated Press photograph, with no glass and merchandise in its display window. Damage to the exterior wall below the window could be the result of the fire. Inside the store is an L-shaped counter on which a range of different goods are stacked (which distinguished the notion store from the hardware store next to it, which had a central display table). There may be some damaged items on the ground, but neither the ceiling nor the shelves and counter showed the fire damage visible in the store to the right. The whole storefront appeared in a second photograph, published in the Daily Mirror, to the left of a man on a ladder boarding up the hardware store windows. Unfortunately, details are not visible in the microfilm copy of the image.

Rosenberg had a policy covering her store with Royal Insurance. Their fire adjuster's appraisal put the cost of the damage at $980.13. However, the insurance policy did not cover damage resulting from a riot. As a result, Rosenberg joined other white merchants in suing the city for damages on the basis of the failure of police to protect their businesses. The New York Herald Tribune reported Royal Insurance was "a co-defendant with the city in the case," although the basis for the claim against the city was that a riot had taken place, at odds with the basis for an insurance claim. Defending the city, Aaron Arnold, an assistant corporation counsel, denied that a riot had taken place and maintained that the fire was unrelated to the disorder. The jury did not agree; they awarded Rosenberg $804.

The attacks on Rosenberg's store were mentioned only in stories about the Municipal Court trial in the New York Herald Tribune, Home News, New York American, and Times Union, with the later two stories not reporting any testimony, and obliquely in captions to the photographs.

Given that the court award covered the bulk of her losses, Rosenberg likely was able to remain in business after the disorder. The MCCH business survey did not include a notion store at 429 Lenox Avenue in the second half of 1935, but instead white-owned hardware and grocery stores. However, based on the Tax department photograph taken between 1939 and 1941, the investigator appeared to have mixed up addresses, as happened for other blocks in the survey, locating the hardware store at number 429, not 431 Lenox Avenue and the stationary store next to it at number 431, not 433 Lenox Avenue. Visible in the photograph was a hoisery store — a name often used for notion stores — that seems likely to be Rosenberg's business, still operating, at 429 Lenox Avenue.
In the Municipal court on October 16 (1) Anna Rosenberg's claim for damages was resolved in the Municipal Court almost a month after the trial of William Feinstein's claim. She owned a notion store, on Lenox Avenue a block south of Feinstein's liquor store, that was looted and set on fire. Who represented her is unknown, but she was not one of the business owners identified as clients of Barney Rosenstein. The city was represented by Aaron Arnold, the same corporation counsel lawyer who had appeared in the Feinstein trial. The trial took place before Judge Rosalsky and a jury, who awarded her $804. What Rosenberg claimed is unknown, but the award was 82% of her insurance company's appraisal of her losses, $980.13. Both the total award and proportion of the claim were greater than the jury verdict in the Feinstein case, likely because of the fire in Rosenberg's store. If that was the case, it represented less of a precedent than the first trial, as only two other businesses were reportedly set on fire.

The trial of the second damages claim appeared to have attracted fewer newspaper stories than the first trial. Only the New York Herald Tribune, Home News, New York American, Times Union, and New York Age published an account of the trial, with the latter three stories not reporting any testimony. All the stories mentioned the $804 award to Rosenberg. The insurance appraisal appeared only in the New York Herald Tribune and Home News.

Royal Insurance, with whom Rosenberg had a policy, was also mentioned as a party to the case by the New York Herald Tribune, Home News, and Times Union. The three stories described Royal Insurance as co-defendant with the city, but the basis for the liability of the two parties as at odds: if the disorder was a riot, the city was liable under the General Municipal law, but the insurance company was not, as its policies excluded riots. When lawyers for Royal Insurance argued that a riot had caused the damage, Arnold "denied that there had been riots in the legal meaning of the term," according to the New York Herald Tribune and Home News, and asserted that it was a coincidence that the fire in the store occurred on the date of the disorder. Those stories described Arnold responding to the arguments of the insurance company by asking for a mistrial, and later filing a motion to have the verdict set aside. Neither story specified the grounds for the motion; the Times Union reported the argument that the fire's timing was a coincidence as the grounds. Whatever its basis, Rosalsky denied the motion.

Evidence in the form of testimony from two witnesses was described by the New York Herald Tribune and Home News. Anna Rosenberg provided details of the damage done to her store during the disorder, but not how it had occurred as she had not been present at the time. Evidence of the circumstances of the damage came from the testimony of Herbert Cantor, who owned a pharmacy five doors from Rosenberg's notion store. He had not seen the fire started, but described crowds throwing objects through windows and carrying merchandise he assumed was stolen.

The number of claims still pending in court was mentioned in the New York Herald Tribune, Home News, New York Age, and New York American The first three stories reported 160 cases pending in the Municipal Court alone (claims for large sums were tried in the Supreme Court), with only the New York Herald Tribune attributing that number to Arnold, the corporation counsel lawyer, together with his description of those cases as "mostly for small sums." That total is larger than the 106 cases reported in July. There was no explanation for the discrepancy. By contrast, the New York American reported 104 other claims pending, which fits the number from July. The story gave no source for that information, which may have derived from the earlier information rather than Arnold.
In civil court on October 16 A month after the trial of William Feinstein's claim, before Judge Shalleck had published his decision on the city's motion to set aside the verdict, a second claim for damages was decided in the Municipal Court. The plaintiff who appeared on October 16, Anna Rosenberg, was, like Feinstein, not one of those identified earlier in the press nor was she represented by the attorney who filed those claims, Barney Rosenstein. She owned a notion store at 429 Lenox Avenue which had suffered damages that her insurer, the Royal Insurance Company, had appraised at $980.13. Rosenberg's lawsuit also sought payment of damages from the company, which had refused her claim on the grounds that the policy excluded losses resulting from a riot. That position put Royal Insurance at odds with the city as their defense shifted liability to the city. The Assistant Corporation Counsel who represented the city, Aaron Arnold, had also appeared in the trial of Feinstein's claim.

Like Feinstein, Anna Rosenberg had not been in her store when it was attacked. She had closed the business before crowds arrived in the area. Her testimony in the trial was therefore limited to the details of the damage done. Evidence of the cause of the damage was provided by Herbert Cantor, who owned a pharmacy five doors from Rosenberg's business. After learning of the disorder in Harlem on the evening of March 19, he had rushed to protect his store, arriving around 11:00 PM. He watched crowd "carrying bricks, stones and bottles, as well as canned goods march down the street," Cantor testified," shouting, "'Down with the whites! Let's get what we can,'" and hurling missiles through windows." Feinstein's store manager had described a similar crowd around his liquor store, which was a block north of Rosenberg's business. Cantor saw a fire break out in the notion store sometime between 11:00 PM and midnight, but could not see who started it. Missing from the reported testimony was any mention of the police, whether they were absent or ineffectual in controlling the crowd. Instead, the presence of the Royal Insurance Company appeared to have focused the attention of journalists at least on the question of whether a riot had occurred.

Attorneys for Royal Insurance argued that riot caused the damage to Rosenberg's business, while Arnold denied that a riot in the legal meaning had occurred and argued that outbreak of the fire at the time crowds were in the area was a coincidence. When attorneys for the insurance persisted in rejecting the city's position, as the New York Herald Tribune put it, Arnold called for a mistrial in response to insurance arguments. Judge Rosalsky rejected that motion. No other testimony was reported on behalf of Rosenberg, Royal Insurance, or the city.

This jury, like their predecessors in the trial of Feinstein, awarded damages to Rosenberg in the sum of $804, 82% of the insurance valuation of damage, in the process of imposing liability on the city rather than the Royal Insurance company. Arnold filed a motion to set aside the verdict, as he had in Feinstein's trial. Judge Rosalsky, unlike Judge Shalleck, simply denied the motion, perhaps aware that his colleague was already drafting an opinion on the law that would be applied to this case as well — and to the 160 claims that Arnold said were pending in the Municipal Court, "mostly for small sums."
Crowd at Lenox Avenue between West 132nd and West 131st Streets At 11:00 PM, Herbert Canter, who owned a pharmacy at 419 Lenox Avenue, on the northwest corner of West 131st Street, arrived to try and protect his business. He remained until 5:00 AM, according to stories about his testimony in a damages suit in the Municipal Court in the New York Herald Tribune and Home News. During that time, Canter saw "a "mob" carrying bricks, stones, and bottles, as well as canned goods, march down the street shouting, "Down with the whites! Let's get what we can," and hurling missiles through windows. A block north, David Schmoockler, the manager of William Feinstein’s liquor store at 452 Lenox Avenue, also saw a crowd of around thirty people. Between 11:00 PM and midnight, he watched as the crowd "created disturbances, hurled various missiles, broke store windows, set fire to some stores, pillaged others, and in general damaged property of various merchants in the locality," according to Justice Shalleck's summary of his testimony in the Municipal Court. Anna Rosenberg's notion store at 429 Lenox Avenue and the adjacent hardware store at 431 Lenox Avenue, on the same block as Canter's pharmacy, were set on fire, likely during this time. On the other side of the notion store, Gonzales' jeweler's store at 427 Lenox Avenue had windows broken. The fire a block south at 400 Lenox Avenue was started just after midnight. A little over an hour later, Feinstein's liquor store was attacked by a crowd of thirty to forty people.

The crowd Canter saw was further north than other reports of calls urging crowds to violence on West 125th Street and on 7th and Lenox Avenues within two blocks of 125th Street. It was also the only incident for which there were details that was not linked to an arrest. What was shouted to the crowd was different from the calls made to other crowds. Those calls allegedly focused on breaking windows or attacking police. While Cantor observed this crowd breaking windows, the second phrase he reported — "Let's get what we can!" — implied looting, which is what did occur in these blocks of Lenox Avenue possibly on a larger scale than elsewhere in Harlem. The first phrase shouted at the crowd identified whites as targets; mention of whites otherwise featured only in calls focused on police. But what was shouted was quite different from the calls to "Kill the whites," which only one journalist for New York Evening Journal reported. "Down with the whites" was a threat to property and power, not life.