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

[Photograph] "Searching Autos in Harlem," New York Evening Journal, March 20, 1935, 3.

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page is referenced by:

Edward Larry arrested At 1.00 AM Patrolman William Clements observed Edward Larry, a twenty-six-year-old Black laborer traveling in a taxi at West 123rd Street and 7th Avenue. He stopped the taxi, and found that Larry had a box containing eight shirts, with a value of $12. Not satisfied with Larry’s explanation that he had found the shirts on the street at West 129th Street and Lenox Avenue, Clements took him to the 28th Precinct for further questioning. The Magistrates Court affidavit simply described Clement as arresting Larry; the Home News report of Larry's appearance in the Magistrates Court described Clements arresting Larry "as he was about to get into a taxicab with two boxes containing a dozen shirts." The more detailed account in the Probation Department investigation described Clement stopping the cab.

Larry was one of nine men arrested away from the scene of their alleged crime, a group making up one third (9 of 27) of the arrests for which that information is known (27 of 60). He was the only one arrested in a vehicle, although a photograph published in the New York Evening Journal indicates that this was not the only instance in which police stopped vehicles. Larry told police he was returning home with the box he had found on the street, to the Salvation Army shelter at 224 West 124th Street, behind Kress' store (some reports listed the address as 218 West 124th Street; the MCCH business survey records that the Salvation Army operated in both buildings). He had lived there for a month, after spending two weeks at the Belmont Hotel on the Bowery, and the previous thirty days in the workhouse serving a sentence for pickpocketing.

At the police station, Morris Towbin saw Larry, and identified him as one of a group of men who had threatened him and robbed his haberdashery store at 101 West 125th Street at 10.30 PM the previous evening. Towbin also identified the shirts in Larry's possession as from his store, part of $2000 of merchandise stolen, $1000 of fixtures destroyed and $226.89 worth of plate glass windows smashed. Towbin's encounter with Larry is described only in the more detailed account in the Probation Department investigation. The Magistrates Court affidavit recorded only that Towbin had identified the shirts, a standard feature of a charge when an individual had not been seen stealing goods, and that he could "positively identify the defendant as one of the men" who had robbed him. In the Police Blotter the charge against Larry is burglary, suggesting that Towbin's identification came after his initial booking, and not before that information was provided to reporters, as the list of those arrested in the Atlanta World, Afro-American, and Norfolk Journal and Gazette, and the list in the New York Evening Journal both include Larry among those charged with burglary. Towbin's allegation of force changed the charge to robbery, which is the charge made against Larry in the Harlem Magistrates Court. However, there is no mention of force or robbery in the story covering his court appearance in the Home News, or in reports of Towbin's statements as president of Harlem Merchants Association in the New York Daily News and Home News. Nor did police find a knife in Larry's possession, the weapon with which Tobin said he had been threatened. Nor did Larry's history suggest he would have used a weapon; none of his convictions involved the use of force.

When Larry was arraigned in Harlem Magistrates Court on March 20, Magistrate Renaud held him without bail for the grand jury, one of only seven arrested during the disorder for which Magistrates did not set bail. Nine days later, on March 29, the grand jury indicted him for Robbery in the first degree. Rather than go to trial, Larry agreed to a plea bargain. On April 5 he appeared in the Court of General Sessions to plead guilty to Attempted Grand Larceny in the second degree, a felony punishable by up to five years in prison rather than up to twenty years, the punishment for Robbery in the first degree. Ten days later, after an investigation by the Probation Department, Judge Nott sentenced Larry to a term of between fifteen months and thirty months in the State Prison. (The 28th Precinct Police Blotter recorded a different sentence of six months to two years, but the Probation Department investigation and a response to the Parole Board in the District Attorney's case file both record the longer sentence). That was the longest sentence given to anyone arrested in the disorder, a reflection of the charge, and of Larry’s criminal record. He had been convicted three times for picking pockets in New York City in the three years before the disorder, and most significantly, convicted for grand larceny in West Virginia in 1928. New York's Habitual Offender statute, commonly known as the Baumes Act, required that in cases involving individuals with a previous conviction for a felony that any plea bargain be to a felony and set minimum sentences based on the previous felony conviction.

Larry had been born in Wilmington, North Carolina, in 1909. His mother died when he was three years of age, leaving his father, and later stepmother to raise him. In 1921, a year after leaving school at age eleven years to work in a cotton press, Larry left home. In the only response the Probation Department received to the letters they sent inquiring about Larry's history, the Wilmington Public Welfare Commission reported an interview with his half-sister Rose, in which she said he found work in a coal mine in West Virginia. Larry himself told the Probation Department officer G. H. Royal that he first worked briefly for a transportation company, traveling to Providence, Rhode Island, where he spent two months in a fish factory, followed by time on a truck in Far Rockaway, New York, then in a steel mill in Pittsburgh and a coal mine in Carnegie, Pennsylvania. Beginning in 1924, aged fifteen, he began working irregularly for carnival companies that traveled the North in the summer and the South in the winter.

In February 1928, carnival work, or perhaps coal mining, brought Larry to Welch, West Virginia, where he was convicted of grand larceny. The court did not respond to the Probation Department's request for details of the case; Larry told them that he and another man were accused of stealing money from a drunken man in a poolroom (given Larry's record, the theft was likely accomplished by pickpocketing). Sentenced to six years in the State Prison, Larry said he served four years and eight months, which would have seen him released in June 1932. By May 28, 1933, Larry was in New York City; he also said that earlier that month, while working in a carnival, he married Cora Temple, a dancer, in Elizabeth City, North Carolina. In New York City, Larry was arrested for pickpocketing, with the criminal record in the District Attorney's case file specifying "lush," slicing open the pocket of a drunken individual, and sentenced to thirty days in the workhouse. After his release he remained in New York City for at least six months, presumably with his wife Cora, but without a home and relying on charity. According to his half sister, Larry returned to Wilmington in December 1933, and found work as a stevedore until July 1934; he told the Probation Department he did not visit until July 1934, and left his wife there while he looked for work.

Almost as soon as Larry arrived back in New York City, on July 29, police arrested him for pickpocketing, again lush according to the criminal record in the District Attorney's case file. On this occasion he was sentenced to six months in the workhouse. Released in January 1935, it was less than a month before officers from the police pickpocket squad arrested him again, and he spent a further 30 days in the workhouse. In the month between his release and the disorder, he told the Probation Department that he spent a week working on a Salvation Army project in Flushing, Long Island.
Arrests (128) Police records, legal records and newspapers contain information on 128 arrests made by police across a span a period of approximately twelve hours, from around 5:00 PM to 5:40 AM. The sources include information on the precise the timing of only forty-seven arrests, just over one third (37%) of the total. Most of those occurred between 10:30 PM and 1:30 AM. The final arrests of the riot, at 5:00 AM and 5:40 AM, came after a two hour period without arrests with known times, and an hour after Deputy Chief Inspector McAuliffe had declared the streets quiet. They were made by patrolmen patrolling the avenues in radio cars. Three arrests were made after the disorder, two men arrested in their homes and a third man arrested in an unknown location.

Few of those arrests were made in the early hours of the disorder, when it was concentrated on or around 125th Street. For much of that time there were relatively few police on the street, so they were perhaps too outnumbered to make arrests, as Lt. Battle later told his biographer Langston Hughes. However, two newspaper stories do suggest some of the forty-nine arrests for which there is no information on time or location could have been made during this time. The New York Herald Tribune reported that "By 11 p.m. both the West 123d Street and West 135th Street police stations were filled with suspects arrested for alleged assaults with rocks, bludgeons, knives and revolver butts." The Home News included a similar statement in its story, that "By midnight both the W. 123d St. and W. 135th St. stations were filled with suspects arrested for assaults with rocks, knives and clubs." The New York Herald Tribune story mentioned a total of fifty arrests, likely a number police gave a reporter around the same time, an interim total reflecting when that edition of the newspaper was finalized. The New York Times, a morning newspaper like the New York Herald Tribune also reported fifty arrests in its story. Only sixteen arrests with a known time occurred before 11:00 PM, with an additional five arrests before midnight. Newspapers published later reported larger totals, closer to the number identified here: "100 or more under arrest" in the New York Evening Journal; "113 men and women, mostly Negroes, under arrest" in the New York Post; "120 prisoners" in the New York World Telegram; "more than 120 arrested" in the Times Union; "more than 125 arrested" in the Home News; "127 prisoners" in the New York American; "more than 150 under arrest" in the New York Sun; and 150 arrests in the weekly Afro-American published on March 23. Many of those numbers would have come from police when those arrested were arraigned in the two Magistrates Courts that had jurisdictions over sections of Harlem. If there were additional people arrested beyond the 128 men and women identified here, they likely were not prosecuted, as the research included the docket books that listed all those who appeared in the Magistrates Court. There are only [How many] additional individuals charged on March 20 and 21st with the offenses used against those arrested in the disorder who might have been arrested during the disorder. Unlike those included here, no sources link them to the disorder.

There are locations for 79 of the 128 arrests, 62% of the total. Police made arrests across a wide area of Harlem, with concentrations on 125th Street, where Kress' store drew crowds, on Lenox Avenue north of 125th Street, and on 7th Avenue between 125th and 130th Streets, where extensive damage and looting was reported. Only 11 (14%) of those arrests took place above 130th Street; however, the proportion may have been greater. Those arrested north of 130th Street were arraigned in the Washington Heights Magistrates Court, as that street was the boundary between the 28th Precinct based at West 123rd Street station and the 32nd Precinct based at the West 135th Street station. Thirty-one of the 114 (27%) people arrested whose names appeared in docket books were arraigned in the Washington Heights Magistrates Court, indicating they had been arrested north of 130th Street. That proportion was in line with a story in the Home News that more than 90 arrests had been made by police at the West 123rd Street station. The docket books show that statement was not accurate in the sense that officers based at that station made that many arrests, but it would reflect the number of arrests made within the precinct’s boundaries, the area south of 130th Street.

Police most commonly alleged that those they arrested had been looting, in 60 of the 109 arrests (55%) for which that information can be found. Despite their relative frequency, arrests for looting related to only a small proportion of the looted stores. Of the sixty-five looted businesses identified here, police made arrests related to twenty-eight (43%). Police made an additional 18 arrests for alleged looting that could be related to one of the other 37 businesses identified as having been looted in the sources. However, those sixty-five businesses did not represent all those that were looted: only 27 of the 171 businesses who sued or tried to sue the city were identified in the sources, meaning that a total of at least 133 businesses were looted (assuming all 65 of the identified businesses are among those that filed suits), with arrests related to at most 21% (28 of 133). The next most frequently alleged activity was breaking windows, in twenty-six arrests (24%, 26 of 109), with seven of those individuals allegedly also inciting others to attack stores or police. Those arrests related to only 24% (17 of 72) of the businesses identified in the sources that suffered damage. Again, those businesses represented only a proportion of the total with damage, estimated at around 450. Some of those businesses would also have been looted; if around 300 businesses only had windows broken, the total arrests would be related to only about 9% (26 of 300) of the damaged stores. Taken together, arrests for alleged looting and breaking windows related to only about 13% of the approximately 450 damaged businesses. Police arrests for alleged assaults were in a similar proportion to those for attacks on businesses. Despite the attention given to assaults in some white newspapers, police alleged only thirteen of those arrested (12%, 13 of 109) had committed such violence. Seven of those arrests related to one of the fifty-four reported assaults, around 13%. Similarly, despite newspaper reports of those on Harlem’s streets being armed with various weapons (including the claims that those arrested early in the disorder had used weapons quoted above), only four of those arrested allegedly had weapons in their possession. For an additional nineteen of those arrested (15%, 19 of 128) there is no information on what police alleged they had done.

Police violence was a routine part of arrests in Harlem. Newspapers treated the injuries of those who had been arrested as unremarkable. The New York Post reported that “prisoners were herded in police stations when they did not require hospital treatment” without any additional comment. Similarly, the New York Sun described several of those being transported to court the next day as “bruised and beaten and their clothing was torn.” Injured prisoners are also visible in several photographs published in the press. Mentions of police hitting people with their nightsticks in the Times Union and New York Herald Tribune focused on them being used on people in the streets not during arrests. However, five of those arrested also appeared in lists of the injured, four Black men and a white man. Details exist only in the case of the white man, Harry Gordon, who told a hearing of the MCCH that he was beaten with a nightstick while being arrested, as well as in a radio car being transported to the precinct, and while being placed in a cell. The only other evidence of the circumstances of an arrest was a photograph published in the Daily News. Two officers are visible, on the southeast corner of Lenox Avenue and 127th Street, with one standing over a Black man seated on the ground on the ground. He is “dragging a recalcitrant rioter off to prison,” according to the caption; he may also have knocked him to the ground. That officer has his nightstick under his arm, while the officer in the foreground has a revolver in one hand and a nightstick in the other, indicating they employed those weapons while apprehending the man. In addition, the New York Evening Journal published two photographs of police officers searching Black men, for weapons according to the captions. Presumably, if they had found anything, the photographs would have been of the subsequent arrests. In one, the officer is a detective in plainclothes searching a single man. In the other, police have stopped a car, and a uniformed patrolman is searching one man standing next to it with his hands in the air, while a second man sits in the car, lifting his hand to hide his face from the camera.

Other photographs of police with individuals they arrested were taken as they were entering police stations, not during the arrest itself. The officers walk alongside the arrested men, in one image grasping a man’s arm and pushing him with a nightstick. Three images, two of the same group, including the one below published in the New York Evening Journal, showed Black men under arrest for looting carrying merchandise they had allegedly stolen.
Embed from Getty Images
By contrast, there is nothing in a photograph published in the New York Evening Journal captioned “Suspected Rock-Tosser” to indicate that was the charge against the Black man in the image. Police arresting Charles Alston on Lenox Avenue and 138th Street were photographed by men working for both the International Photo service (the image below) and the Daily News as they brought him to the street for transport to the precinct. They alleged he had been part of a group of men that shot at police; the photograph captions, however, identified him as having been arrested for looting. That arrest was at the very end of the disorder, after the streets were quiet, when more journalists began to venture beyond 125th Street.
Embed from Getty Images
Police almost always arrested individuals, even when they described seeing groups involved. In only nine instances did police make multiple arrests at one time, three people on four occasions and two people on five occasions, amounting to 16% of the identified arrests (21 of 128). Although a single arresting officer was identified in seven of those incidents, they almost certainly involved multiple officers, as the arrest of the three picketers in front of Kress’ store did. Details of these arrests are limited, but do suggest one explanation for why police did not make multiple arrests more often: officers had to chase the group of which David Smith and Leon Mauraine were part, catching up with those two men several buildings away. Others in the group obviously outran police, which may have happened on other occasions. It could also have been that there were too few police to make additional arrests. Just how many officers were present for an arrest is difficult to establish as legal sources focused narrowly on the arresting officer who appeared in court.

Police overwhelmingly arrested Black men during the disorder, 103 of the 118 (87%) of those arrested with a recorded race, together with only seven Black women and eight white men (ten of the arrested men are of unknown race). Women were a larger proportion of the crowds on Harlem’s streets in most accounts of the disorder, particularly on 125th Street. However, they are only rarely mentioned as participants in attacks on stores or the looting that occurred away from Kress’ store. Given the prominence of women in stories about the disorder in Harlem in 1943, only eight years later, it is possible that their involvement in 1935 was overlooked by reporters and police focused on men they likely considered more threatening. Those women police did arrest allegedly were involved in breaking, windows, looting and inciting crowds; none were accused of assault. The four alleged Communists police arrested at the very beginning of the disorder amounted to half of the white men taken into custody during the disorder. Police also arrested one of other four men early in the disorder, Leo Smith, for breaking a store window. He may also have been part of the Communist protests. There is little evidence that white men were in the groups police encountered attacking and looting stores later in the disorder. There are details of only one of the other arrests, the last of the disorder, when a patrolman arrested Jean Jacquelin carrying clothing allegedly stolen from tailor on the block where he lived.
Events