This page was created by Anonymous. 

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

Preparing the subcommittee report

Arthur Garfield Hays began work on the report of his Subcommittee on Crime soon after the the end of their final public hearing on May 18. Publishing a report on the events of the disorder as quickly as possible had been part of the program that the MCCH had adopted at its second meeting. Two months was certainly longer than they envisioned it would take to complete that report. Difficulties getting the manager of the Kress store to testify in a public hearing, as well as the expanding examination of police brutality, had extended the process.

Hays based the report on the minutes of the hearings taken by the stenographer but did not wait for the minutes of the final hearing to draft the text. He relied on the minutes even though he considered them a “poor report” of the hearing. Newspaper stories about the hearings indicate that some of what was said was missing from the minutes, including most of the audience reaction and the identities of many of the audience members who asked questions. Nonetheless, the MCCH investigation had focused on having those who had information on the events of the disorder testify in the public hearings, so the minutes represented a compilation of the evidence they had gathered.

Hays collaborated closely with Oscar Villard on preparing the report, as he did throughout the work of the MCCH. On May 23 he sent what he described as “a very rough draft” to Villard. He described the text as a source from which Villard could “get the material for the report.” Hays’ phrasing suggested that Villard would author the report. A comparison of what he sent and what Villard returned to him suggests that his contribution to the report was somewhat greater than providing the material.
 

This page has paths:

This page references: