This page was created by Anonymous.
Sentences in the Court of General Sessions (12)
As a result, only Edward Larry was convicted of a felony. With an extensive criminal record that included previous felony convictions and charged with robbery, which carried a maximum sentence of twenty years imprisonment, Larry pled guilty to a charge that carried a maximum sentence of only five years, attempted grand larceny in the second degree. A judge imposed a sentence of fifteen to thirty months in the State Prison - longer than the sentences of several months in the workhouse he had received in recent years for pickpocketing but well short of the four years and eight month term he served after being convicted of grand larceny seven years earlier.
The other ten men who pled guilty, and Hughes, were convicted of misdemeanors. A judge sent seventeen-year-old Robert Tanner to the New York City Reformatory, as he was a youthful first offender, to serve an indeterminate sentence of up to one year. Seven other men received sentences to the workhouse, four for three months, one for four months and two for six months. The final three received suspended sentences, with two placed on probation. Although those terms were at the upper range of the sentences imposed on those convicted after the disorder, as you would expect from the criminal court which dealt with the most serious offenses, similar punishments had been handed out in both the Court of Special Sessions and the Magistrates courts. In other words, even among those charged with felonies, judges did not find acts of violence that warranted a punishment of more than half the maximum term of imprisonment available for a misdemeanor.
Given those short terms of imprisonment, it might have been expected that more than three of those convicted would have been judged candidates for suspended sentences and probation. The judge's decision to place nineteen-year-old Arnold Ford on probation would have owed something to Ford's youth and that the merchandise he was convicted of taking was valued at only $1.15. He was also likely influenced by a plea for leniency from Dr. Mason Pitman, superintendent of the Colored Orphan Asylum, where Ford had spent six years up to 1933. There he had been regarded as "a nice boy in every way." A good reputation and steady employment, and having taken only a pair of shoes, would have helped make twenty-four-year-old Charles Saunders a candidate for probation. In his case the key factor in the judge's decision appeared to be an offer from his sister and Savannah Juvenile Court Probation Department to supervise him if he returned to Georgia. While not imprisoned, both men would spend the maximum three years under the supervision of the Probation Department, having to report regularly, Saunders in Savannah, separated from his common-law wife. Julian Rogers received a suspended sentence without being placed on probation. The thirty-seven-year-old man was convicted of taking three shoes form a store, and was not part of any group which participated in riot in the assessment of a Probation officer. However, he was homeless at the time of his arrest, and could not provide information about his family or employment history, which would have it difficult for the Probation department to supervise him.
Of those sent to prison, James Hughes had most in common with Ford and Saunders: a steady employment history as a skilled worker, a shoe repairer, stable living arrangements, and a respectable supporter - in his case a clergyman whose letter persuaded the judge to let Hughes withdraw a guilty plea and instead go to trial. However, he was found guilty of throwing a rock which hit a police officer. In those circumstances, the three-month sentence was lenient, reflecting the judge's belief that a store window rather than the officer had been the intended target.
Two men convicted for looting sentenced to three month terms in the workhouse had taken merchandise of limited value, like Ford, Saunders and Rogers. Arthur Merritt had two cans of beans, a can of mile and a can of tuna in his possession when arrested, as well as a hammer. However weighing against a suspended sentence, he was without a steady job, estranged from his family as a result of heavy drinking and had a previous conviction for grand larceny. Merritt also insisted that he was innocent of the charges. Hezekiah Wright had allegedly taken four lamps and two jars of food, with a value of around $11. He too had a job, as a janitor, that came with an apartment. No criminal record weighed against those factors, only the Probation officer's judgement that Wright had lax morals as he was separated from his wife and living with another woman and gambled on the numbers, a common pastime in Harlem. The third man given a term of three months, Horace Fowler, had taken more expensive merchandise, clothing worth $25, and had two arrests for sleeping on the street, which appeared to outweigh his employment as a porter and attendance at evening classes, an activity promoted by the Probation department.
The three men who received longer sentences had less histories with less to recommend them to the judge as candidates for probation. Carl Jones, sentenced to four months in the workhouse, had not taken any merchandise but had broken a store window and reached in in an effort to do so. He gave his age as eighteen years, which would have put him in line for treatment as a youthful offender like Robert Tanner. However, the Probation department believed Jones was actually older. They had found that the information he had given them on his family and employment history had proved false. Joseph Wade, sentenced to a term of six months, was convicted of taking toy pistols worth only 60 cents, but had three previous convictions, for burglary, gun possession and rape, and had only been released from prison three months earlier. Thomas Jackson, also sent to the workhouse for 6 months, like Jones, had no stolen merchandise in his possession but had been seen breaking a store window and reaching inside. He was a somewhat unlikely looter, having had an arm amputated below elbow after streetcar accident. However, having spent the compensation he received on a failed candy store, being convicted of running numbers out of that store, having no job and being at odds with his family apparently weighed more heavily for the judge.