This page was created by Anonymous.
Harry Piskin's laundry looted
Instead, after the shot at the window, Piskin testified that "they looted his laundry, broke all of his machinery and drove him out of business." George's Lunch, the neighboring business on the corner of West 126th Street and Lenox Avenue, suffered similarly extensive damage. At some point he sought help. He first found a police officer a block away at the intersection of West 125th Street and Lenox Avenue: "Report it--I can't leave my post," the officer told him, according to the New York Post. He continued across town to the police station on West 123rd Street between 7th and 8th Avenues: "Oh we know all about it," was the response there. Later, a police officer responded to Piskin's complaints about the lack of police protection by telling him, "My life is more important to me than your business is to you," testimony reported in the New York Post and New York World-Telegram. Piskin had joined other white merchants in suing the city for damages on the basis that police had not protected businesses, so he had an incentive to emphasize police failures. Nonetheless, the extent of the attacks on businesses and violence in this area, and the small number of arrests, most of which came several hours after crowds first arrived on the avenue, add weight to his complaint. No one arrested for looting was identified as taking goods from the laundry.
The only mention of the damage to Piskin's laundry was in newspaper stories about the damage claims against the city made by white merchants. Piskin was part of the group of twenty who filed the first claims identified by the New York Sun, New York World-Telegram, New York American and New York Amsterdam News and was mentioned again in stories published by the New York Sun, New York Post, New York World-Telegram and New York Amsterdam News at the end of July, by which time 106 merchants had filed suits. He appeared as an example in those stories likely because he claimed the largest sum for damages, $14,125 (the next largest claim was from the adjacent business, George's Lunch), well above the median reported claim of $733. The city lost the cases that went to resolve the merchants' claims, so it was likely that Piskin received some compensation. Surprisingly, his was not among the seven awards that resulted from a trial in March 1936 in the Supreme Court, which adjudicated large claims.
This page has tags:
This page references:
- "106 Suits Filed Under Mob Law in Harlem Riot," New York World-Telegram, July 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "Claim $38,000 Riot Damages," New York Sun, April 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "Harlem Riots to Cost Dearly," New York Sun, July 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "Cops not on Job, Say Harlem Suits," New York Post, July 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "Harlem Riot Claims," New York American, April 24, 1935 [clipping].
- "$38,000 Sought in Harlem Riot," New York World-Telegram, April 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "Owners Want Riot Damages," New York Amsterdam News, June 1, 1935, 18.
- "106 Shop Owners Ask $116,000 Riot Losses," New York Amsterdam News, July 27, 1935, 1.