|
On April 15, 1920, 9:15 AM, in South Braintree, Massachusetts (a small town about ten miles south of Boston,) $15,776.51 to pay the employees of Slater and Morril's shoe factory was being carried to that factory from a nearby train station. On the way there, the carrier of the money noticed a large black seven-seater with its engine going parked on the side of the road. In front of the Slater and Morril's offices there were two more cars with people in them who appeared to be waiting for somebody. As he passed with the money, one of the drivers called, "All right,"1 and both cars drove off down the road. Once the money was inside, it was repackaged into two boxes and was to be taken down the road to where the wages were paid. Frederick Parmenter, the acting paymaster for that week, and Alessandro Berardelli, a guard that worked for the company, each took a box and started down the street. Berardelli carried a .38 revolyer. They passed several people, including fifteen dark-skinned construction workers digging a foundation for a new restaurant and two smallish men with dark clothes standing casually between two telegraph posts. One of the dark clothed men grabbed suddenly at Berardelli while the other shot him three times and shot Parmenter once. Parmenter dropped his box and staggered towards the construction workers but was shot again and fell. By now many people had looked out of windows or were running out to see what was happening. Berardelli lay coughing blood in the gutter where he was shot again twice. A seven-seater (possibly the one seen earlier) picked up the two assaulters (after they had grabbed the money boxes) and another person who was hiding behind a brick pile jumped in too. It drove away. Someone in the back seat was throwing out strips of rubber with tacks in then to pop the tires of anyone foolish enough to follow. A rail-road gate was closing ahead, but the person opposite the driver pointed a gun at the operator who opened it again. The car evaded all pursuers and escaped into the wild, thickly wooded countryside. Parmenter and Berardelli lay dead. Nicola Sacco was born in 1891 in southern Italy and came to the U.S. in 1908. By 1910 he had worked in several shoe companies, and by 1920 was a highly paid, highly skilled shoemaker who was liked by his employer. He also doubled as a night watchman. For this he bought a .32 Colt and refused to take out a license, despite nagging by his employer Bartolomeo Vanzetti was born in northern Italy in 1888. He had an enormous appetite for books even as a young boy. He came to the U.S. in 1908 and during the next nine years worked as a cook, laborer, and cordage-plant employee. By 1920 he was a small-scale vendor of fish to the Italian community of his neighborhood. In 1927 Sacco and Vanzetti went to Mexico to evade the draft (as anarchists, they were opposed to national wars.) April 17 was the day the news hit the press. The local press suggested that the leader was a gang leader who might have been hiding or had fled to Mexico to avoid fighting for the U.S. in Europe. lt also stated that the police already had clues, which was false. However, they did later that day find an abandoned Buick in the woods and thought that it was the murderers'. The tracks of another vehicle led away from the scene. Police Chief Stewart had already found an italian, Mike Boda, who owned a Buick and was thought to be connected to an earlier crime. He thought maybe he belonged to a gang. He thought that Boda's had been the car that made the tracks. That day Boda's Buick was in Johnson's repair shop, so Chief Stewart had told the Johnsons to call the police station if Boda came to collect his car. On May 15, the call came. Boda with his friend Orciani had arrived in a motorcycle and side-car along with Sacco and Vanzetti on foot. Mr. Johnson had pointed out that they didn't have a 1920 license, and they left quickly. Sacco and Vanzetti caught. a trolley. A police officer got on later and arrested them, saying, (according to him,) "Keep your hands on your lap or you will be sorry."2 Vanzetti claimed he said, "You don't move, you dirty thing."3 When searched on the trolley, Vanzetti was found to carry a .38 Harrington and Richardson revolver and several shotgun shells. When getting into the police car, the nervous officer saw Sacco put his hand in his pocket and said, "Mister, if you put your hand in there again, you are going to get into trouble."4 Sacco claimed he himself answered, "You need not be afraid of me."5 The officer claimed Sacco said, "I don't want no trouble."6 At the police station, Sacco was searched. He carried a .38 Colt automatic, fully loaded, an extra load of ammunition and a draft of a notice in Vanxetti's handwriting: Fellow workers, you have fought all the wars. You have worked for all the capitalists. You have wandered over all countries. Have you harvested the fruits of your labors, the price of your victories? Does the present smile on you? Does the future promise you anything? Have you found a piece of land where you can live like a human being? On these questions, on this argument, and on this theme the struggle for existence, Bartolomeo Vanzetti will speak. Hour--day---hall. Admission free. Freedom of discussion to all. Take the ladies with you. This implied a connection with anarchists in some peoples' minds. The judge was Webster Thayer. 500 likely jurors were called before the court, but many found excuses for not serving. The judge delivered a passionate speech about war and patriotism but by July 3 only 7 willing and fully qualified jurors could be found. On the evening of Thanksgiving Day, the judge sent the sheriff to a nearby lodge where he collected the necessary 5 more. None were Italian. The prosecutor, Frederick Katzmann, assailed Sacco and Vanzetti on three main points: that the murder bullets seemed to be from their guns, that their whole pattern of behavior showed their guilt, and that they had been identified by many eye-witnesses. One out of four shells found by a witness at the scene of the crime was a Winchester. One out of the six bullets taken from the dead men was a Winchester. This bullet was the one that actually killed Berardelli. The Police decided that the other five were from a Savage automatic pistol but the Winchester was from a .32 Colt. This was the kind of bullet which Sacco had loaded in his .32 Colt when he was arrested. Out of the 23 loose shells he carried, six were Winchesters. But the Police weren't sure that the killing bullet was from that Colt Also, witnesses had said that one man shot Berardelli but the different bullet probably meant that he had been shot by two different guns. In order to show this, the defense experimented by shooting with Sacco's Colt into piles of sawdust and decided that the fatal bullet had come from a Steyr 765 mm pistol--close but not the same as a .32 Colt. But they could not prove that the bullets had not been shot from the same gun. Katzmann's ballistics experts said that five bullets were from a Savage and one from a Colt. But now Captain Proctor of the State Police, who had originally decided the f ive=Colt/one=Savage explanation was now unsure. He told Katzmann that he would be forced to testify to that effect. Katzmann, trying to back up his position, brought into evidence a dark, working-man's cap found near the scene of the crime. He said it belonged to Sacco. Defense claimed that many people had gathered at the scene by the time the cap was found and said it was probably lost by one of them. But the truth was this: The cap had been taken to the Chief of Police of Braintree who made a hole in the lining, looking for marks of identification. Sacco always hung his cap on a nail at work and Katzmann seized the opportunity to say the hole in the cap was made by the nail. Kelley, Sacco's boss, said that the cap seemed similar to that which he had seen at work but only recognized the color, for he had only seen it from a distance. The Chief who had made the hole only came forward after the trial was over. Berardelli owned a .38 Harrington and Richardson revolver, like the one that was found on Vanzetti. Berardelli had taken it to a repair shop, but after the day of the murder, it couldn't he found. It seemed likely that he had collected it from the shop and had it that day, when the gunman took it. When Vanzetti was arrested, he had lied about the revolver, about how long he had it, and where he got it. "I was scared,"8 he said in court. Defense produced Luigi Falzini who said he had sold it to Vanzetti for $5. He said he had bought it from Orciani, originally one of the suspected gunmen, who had bought it from Rexford Slater (another workman) for $4. None of the owners had recorded its serial number or knew anything about guns, and the gun was a common, cheap type. No witness under cross examination could positively identify the gun. Employees at the repair shop had not taken the serial number and had also misrecorded the caliber in their books. Each employee there was always kept busy repairing 20 to 30 revolvers a day which made it very hard to remember one. Katzmann presented that the gun found on Vanzetti was fully loaded and Vanzetti did not carry any extra cartridges for it--consistent with him taking the loaded gun from Berardelli. But the defense countered with the question, if a killer picked up a gun from a dying man, why would he be carrying it around three weeks later? Sacco and Vanzetti, before and after the arrest, behaved as one would expect of two captured murderers. Katzmann theorized that they went to the Johnson's garage. They needed a car immediately but scattered when they were advised of their expired license. They had seen Mrs. Johnson going to the neighbors' house to call the police and guessed what was going on. Because they were afraid, they were heavily armed by the tine they were arrested. Their weapons and ammunition were consistent with at least part of the shooting. They resisted arrest and were prepared to shoot police. Upon arrest, Sacco and Vanzetti gave false alibis and accounts of where they got their guns. The defense was based on the politics of the time. Sacco and Vanzetti were seeking a car to hide their anarchist literature before the expected police raids on radicals. The incident at the garage was just drama in Mrs. Johnson's head. Sacco and Vanzetti had the guns for their own protection while working, Sacco as a night watchman and Vanzetti as a street peddler. The guns also would be hidden by the time of the police raids. Sacco and Vanzetti denied resisting arrest. The defense claimed all the falsehoods at the station were to protect fellow radicals. Also, defense began to build up Sacco and Vanzetti's alibis. Sacco's account of seeking a passport in Boston was backed up by fellow radicals, with whom he had coffee and lunch, and Italians he met and talked with at the train station or on the streets. Sacco also recognized in court a traveler who had been sitting in his car on the train. James Hayes did not remember Sacco but did admit to sitting where Sacco described. But it was now one year since the day of the murders and Katzmann delivered a satisfactorily convincing theory: the train ride probably happened, but on a difterent day. And anyway, Sacco had said on arrest that he was at work on the day of the killings. Vanzetti said he had peddled fish all morning and spent the afternoon talking to Italian friends. His witnesses had difficulty recalling the day. Katzmann easily showed that this could have been any day as well, and anyway, the witnesses were all Italian friends of Vanzetti. Four people identified Vanzetti as being in the neighborhood of the shootings. Seven recognized Sacco. Amazingly, ten of these eleven witnesses had not even seen the shooting. Lewis Pelser: A shoe worker at the Slater and Morril factory. In the defense interview he said he hid under a table during the shooting along with the other workers. Later in court he claimed he was looking out the window of the factory, witnessed the shooting of Berardelli, and himself was shot at. When he was shown Sacco by the district attorney, he said, "By George, if Sacco isn't the man, he's a dead ringer for him."9 Carlos Goodridge: A salesman. He was crossing the street when a car drove towards him. Later, to his friends, he told conflicting stories. To one he said that he recognized Sacco in the car, while to another he said that he just saw a revolver and ran. Mr. Goodridge was also going to court (where the prosecutor was also Katzmann) for a larceny charge and had a long record of bail-skipping and small thefts. When he told the district attorney that he recognized Sacco and would be a witness in court, the larceny charge was dropped. Mary Spillane: A book-keeper at Slater and Morril. She heard shots and looked out of a window. She described the hand and face in detail of the man she saw leaning out of the window of the car. She had seen a picture of Sacco in the newspaper and rapidly identified Sacco at the police station. At the preliminary hearing she was not sure if he was the man but was positive by the time of the trial. The defense used her to their advantage because she had also identified both Sacco and the escaping gunman as the man in a picture she was shown. The picture really was of an italian gangster who was in jail at the time of the shootings. Frances Devlin: Mary Spillane's friend and also a worker at Slater and Morril. She also looked out the window but was not sure at the police station if Sacco was the man she had seen. In court her doubts disappeared. William Heron: A railroad detective. He was at the South Braintree station with a lost child at 12:27 PM on the day of the murders. He saw two nervous Italians in the waiting room. When he went to the courthouse to see Sacco brought in, he recognized him. William Tracy: A real-estate man. At 11:30 AM on the day of the murders, he saw two men but could only remember that they wore dark hats and overcoats. In court, after seeing Sacco, he testIfied, "that to the best of my opinion he was the man, but I wouldn't positively say so."10 Lola Andrews and Mrs. Campbell: They were out looking for work in the South Braintree shoe factories on the day of the crime when they saw a car parked with a man at the wheel and another one underneath the car. Mrs. Andrews said that the man under the car gave them directions. Mrs. Campbell claimed that there was a car but they didn't talk to anyone. When she was shown Sacco and Vanzetti in person, she said, "I don't think I ever saw them men in the world."11 When the defense pressed hard during the cross-examination, Lola Andrews fainted. Michael Levangie: The railroad gate-opener who was stationed at the gate when the car was making its get-away. To some he said he saw a light-haired man who he identified as Vanzetti in the police station. Later his story stated that he had seen no one through the window blinds of the car. Austin Reed: Another gate--operator further along. He was starting to close the gates when the car drove up and someone yelled. "What to hell are you holding us up for?"12 He let them through and minutes later they doubled back over the tracks. He had seen Vanzetti in the paper and identified him at the police station. Harry Dolbeare: A piano repairer. He was summoned for the jury but was excused. When he saw Vanzetti in the courtroom, he said he knew him, both as the man in the news and as the man in the car at 10:00 AM. John Faulkner: A pattern-maker. He was on the 9:20 AM train from Plymouth which had one stop at Braintree. He noticed a nervous foreigner with a black moustache who had asked him if this was East Braintree. Later Faulkner recognized that man in a newspaper and went to a police station. When shown five Italian men, he chose Vanzetti as the one. There were 32 other witnesses including many of the Italian construction workers. Six refused to identify anybody and the remaining 26 said Sacco and Vanzetti were not the men. Emilio Falcone, one of the construction workers, said, "Well, for God's sake, I said they don't resemble those men. Why do you ask me again?"13 On July 14, 1921, 15 months after the day of the murders, bouquets of flowers sat behind the Judge's bench, including one from the sheriff. Clerk Worthington: Gentlemen of the jury, have you agreed upon your verdict? Early in the case, people seemed uninterested in the case. Newspapers either published little or completely ignored it, except for the Boston Post, which had early coverage, but only in daily comic form by a staff artist. The majority of public opinion in Massachusetts was aqainst Sacco and Vanzetti. They were just two murderers who had had a fair trial which had gone on way too long. At first, Sacco and Vanzettl's support came mainly from Italian workers. Then groups of liberal, wealthy New England women and their friends joined in. Soon support was growing all over the world. The Communist party tried to take over the defense committee but was too late. After temporarily attacking the committee on the uselessness of their campaign, they embarked on a fund-raiser, and in the end gave $6,000 to the committee. But it was rumored that they had raised many millions of dollars, which possibly went to demonstrations around the world. Riots at many American embassies were placing the Government under more and more pressure, but in the U.S. things were not going as well as the protesters had planned. A planned demonstration for more than 100,000 people brought less than 200. The press was not paying much attention. Although many petitions were piling up in the Governor of Massachusetts' office and the Bishop of Massachusetts was pressing him to take another look at the case, he refused. The defense filed its first appeal action, the Ripley motion. It claimed that the Foreman of the jury, Ripley, had brought in some .38 shells into the jury room, tried them in Vanzetti's revolver, and discussed them with the other jurors. This was unauthorized. One juror claimed that they discussed them, another said that they were shown but not talked about The ten other jurors remembered nothing of the incident. While the defense was completing the preparations for this motion, Foreman Ripley suddenly died. Trying to save the motion, they brought in a friend of Ripley, Daly, who, in a conversation with him had told his opinion on the case. After stating that he thought Sacco and Vanzetti were innocent, Ripley supposedly said, "Damn them, they ought to hang them anyway."15 Around the world, Sacco and Vanzettl were being viewed as two dissenters of the American lifestyle who were therefore being executed. Scores and then hundreds had gathered before; now thousands swarmed the streets. Communist propaganda continued. Pravda, a news agency in Russia, reported that Sacco and Vanzetti had been held for several years in a torture prison in South Carolina, where they had been confined in a padded cell with a mirrored ceiling. In this ceiling a dark spot would periodically grow to the form of a terrifying open-jawed creature while a human voice shouted, "Tell the names of your accomplices." Though many peaceful protests were launched, bombs were set off in New York and Philadelphia, and an attempt to bomb Judge Thayer's house was Made. The defense committee filed five more supplementary motions while Vanzetti lay sick in jail, with hallucinations and violent stomach pains. On October 1, 1924, Judge Thayer turned down all six motions. This is what Francis Russel has to say on what he observed on the day that Sacco and Vanzetti were to be executed: Police were everywhere, hard-faced and angry, some of them carrying rifles--a thing I had never seen before. Pickets with placards marched up and down. . . . Periodically the police carted groups away in a patrol wagon. . . . Almost at once their places were filled by others. . . . Those inside [buses] began to sing "The Red Flag." They looked like foreigners, most of them. . . . In spite of any pickets and red-streamed buses from New York, I knew that they were going to die that night. . . .I was glad Sacco and Vanzetti were going to die.16 On the night of their death, thousands upon thousands of protesters moved quietly through the streets of many cities; in one instance, there was so much pressure on buildings from the many people that a plate glass window was forced to cave in. Though Sacco and Vanzetti became martyred saints to many people who shaped their lives around the case, and the result of the case caused many intellectuals and others to create a vast leftist movement, the seven surviving jury members when interviewed in 1950 all said that the decades between the case and then had only served to confirm their beliefs of the rightness of their verdict. Sacco and Vanzetti's deaths on August 23, 1927, brought an end to one of the most famous cases in the United States. But many questions remain. The arrest and trial were mishandled in many ways including many witnesses going back on their stories after the trial, and Judge Thayer making many reported prejudicial remarks regarding the case. New information resulting from the Freedom of Information Act shows that a bullet which was traded by prosecutor Katzmann for a different one unrelated to the case. This bullet turned out to be the most damaging piece of evidence in the case, without which many say Sacco and Vanzetti would not have been convicted The specially appointed committee which reviewed the case overlooked many discrepancies, and the public began to lose faith in the American judicial system and other chief institutions of the U.S. The actual illegal actions that had been performed were lost in a swirl of protesters and politics while the established order killed two men as punishment for the supposed crimes against the American "way of life." Though we can not even now tell if Sacco and Vanzetti really did commit the murders on that long ago day in South Braintree, it can now easily be shown that the evidence used against them was unsatisfactory to convict two men. Much of the evidence was completely fabricated by the witnesses, judge, jury, prosecution, or the specially appointed investigating committees and police forces. There is no way that they could have been proven guilty, or innocent, but in this great, civilized, humane country of ours, is not one innocent until proven guilty? Who knows it they brutally killed two money-carriers? Sacco and Vanzetti knew. 1Brian Jackson, The Black Flag (Massachusetts: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1981), p. 6. 2Ibid. p 8 3Ibid. p. 8 4Ibid. p. 8 5Ibid. p. 8 6Ibid. p. 8 7Ibid. pp 8-9 8Ibid. p. 25 9lbid. p. 22 10Ibid. p. 20 11Ibid. p. 20 12Ibid. p. 20 13Ibid. p. 22 14lbid. pp. 47-48 15Ibid. p. 52 16Francis Russel, Tradgedy in Dedham (New York: McGraw-Hill Book-Company, Inc., 1962), pp. 1-2. Bibliography Blumenfeld, Harold. Sacco and Vanzetti. New York: Scolastics Book Services, 1972. Jackson, Brian. The Black Flag. Massachusetts: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1981. Lewis, Flora. Red Pawn. New York: Doubleday & Company Ltd., 1965. Russel, Francis. Tradgedy in Dedham. New York: Mcgraw-Hill Book-Company, Inc., 1962. Young, William, and David E. Kaiser. Postmortem. Massachusetts: University of Massachusetts Press, 1985. |