Sacco and Vanzetti Books

Many years ago as a fledging new lawyer, I read portions of the trial transcript from Sacco & Vanzetti trial. I was able to glean some of the injustice rendered in this case, but Professor Bortman's book clearly and concisely laid out the elements of a tainted legal system in Massachusetts in the 1920s. It was not until I read Professor Bortman's book that I fully understood the political elements involved at the time of the Sacco & Vanzetti trial. This book is a must read for every student of American history, especially legal history.

For a short book, the story is very well paced and still manages to give it a level of 'Hollywood Court Room' drama, although in this case, the story is real. The writing is clear and unpretentious and very accessible.

The final chapter detailing the modern day reaction to the
case serves as a warning that even one of the most advanced Western democracies has a way to go in ensuring Justice For All is more than just a slogan and that, with one or two minor exceptions, the case could occur again in modern times.

Mr. Bortman has hit the nail on the head with this informative and well-written account of the famous trial of Sacco and Vanzetti. The background, trial and aftermath are treated with evenhandedness and an admirable attention to detail. Moreover, this book is easy to read yet chock full of facts, eyewitness accounts and analyses.

This quick-read will turn even one with little prior knowledge of this episode into a well-versed expert. If more historical passages were covered as well, the historical awareness of our citizenry would skyrocket.

Two or three chapters into this novel an unaccustomed question occurred: why, exactly, had the author written it? This was a question usually put to rest, when the answer wasn't self-evident, after a few pages of a book. But in this case, I remained puzzled why Binelli had conflated anarchists and vaudevillians. Why give them movie careers? Why bother to give them so un-funny a premise as a knife-throwing act? Binelli's wit and cool precision weren't in keeping with inventions of extravagant whimsy or loopy arbitrariness; this wasn't Woody Allen. The high quality of writing kept me reading, however, and soon the raison d'etre emerged: "Sacco and Vanzetti Must Die!" is a postmodern fiction-writer's equivalent of Meditations on Being Italian-American. Hence the appearance of various stereotypes (e.g. the organ grinder, the Mafiosi) and a cast that includes Primo Carnera, Benito Mussolini and Italo Balbo, and references to other Italians and Italo-Americans from Enrico Caruso to Enrico Fermi, if memory serves. (Binelli's kin were knive-sharpeners, and no doubt other elements here are autobiographical) Once my initial perplexity was resolved, I was free to concentrate on the novel--thoroughly entertaining, imaginative, provocative (as when the real historical figures Sacco and Vanzetti are presented) and quite satisfying. I look forward to Binelli's next effort--which I somehow doubt will center on his ethnicity.

The Nic Sacco and Bart Vanzetti in Mark Binelli's novel "Sacco And Vanzetti Must Die!" are not the infamous anarchists executed for treason by the United States government, but film stars and slapstick comedians who rose to fame through a seedy New York vaudeville club, then on to Hollywood films and USO tours (where they opened with disastrous results for Bob Hope). Eventually their careers decline , slapstick becomes a kind of stand-in for anarchic freedom, the two performers begin to merge with their more infamous namesakes. An alternate history of the 20th Century, "Sacco And Vanzetti Must Die! " is a work of considerable talent and originality, documenting author Mark Binelli as a writer who has mastered wit and storytelling to produce a highly recommended, minor masterpiece of literate, thoughtful, thought-provoking, and thoroughly entertaining fiction.

This book is a triumph on a number of levels.

He started to lose me toward the end, but he deals with the subject at hand with such depth that I couldn't put it down.

What do comedy and anarchy have in common? "The ability to enter a crowded pie-shop and see nothing but possibility".

Bravo Signor Binelli!

This is a very good novel based on the life of Sacco and Vanzetti. It is an interesting, easy read (easy in the reading part of it, not so easy to stomach the situation). I recommend it very much.

The author mostly maintains a journalistic disinterestedness, and is not a creature of the passions aroused by both sides. Not until the final 5 pages does he introduce his personal views. He should have offered more personal insight since he is so conversant with the facts. For example, if Sacco is guilty, then his second crime is sending Vanzetti (whom the author believes innocent) to his death. The grounds for a re-trial, even given the time period, seem secure, and there is lots of room for reasonable doubt. The publication date is 1962 not 1971.

Introduction
According to John F. Neville in Twentieth-Century Cause Celebre - Sacco, Vanzetti, and the Press, 1920-1927; the celebrated trial and incarceration of anarchists Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti and the consequential international attention thrust two little known and cared about immigrants to international notoriety and fame - at times Neville calls the case "the cause of the twentieth century" (Neville ix, 19, 60, 98, 101,120, and 138). In this book, Neville focuses his efforts on examining the press treatment of the case and its relation to agenda based political movements surrounding and resulting from the double murder robbery case of South Braintree (Neville 1, 6, and 9). According to Neville, this backwater town and the events therein set the stage for one of the 20th century's most discussed but ironically ill comprehended of all cause célèbre. Neville posits that, both Sacco and Vanzetti where used by everyone with an agenda - an agenda that detracted from the consideration of the facts of the case. First, there was the Comintern, who saw the case as an opportunity to embarrass the United States (xiii-xiv, 19, 121, and 122), using little known Willi Munzenberg (Neville 142-143).

What Neville adds to the scholarship or "discourse" after the fact is that this international cause célèbre was not impulsively handled but rather, that it was a planned "propaganda" campaign (58, 68, and 74). Internally, the problems were made worse, according to Neville by Governor Fuller, who was not savvy enough to see a publicity campaign against him and thus was not able to react properly to it (Neville 132). Arguably, the local, state, and federal political leaders, it is argued here, were their own worst enemy. Either not ready for or ill equipped to handle a worldwide propaganda crusade designed specifically to situate Sacco and Vanzetti as martyrs (Neville 20) and actors such as Thayer (Neville 38, 50, and 87) and Fuller (Neville 104, and 132) as villains.

Controversy - The "American Dreyfus" Case
The controversial trial of Sacco and Vanzetti attracted international attention and criticism. Reading Neville, we are to understand that the drama outside the courtroom and in the local and international press was planned. With regards to the case itself, the critics first, accused Judge Thayer of, "expressing off-the-record opinions to reporters during lunch breaks" (Neville 27). These improper remarks set the racist tone of the trial. Soon enough, such notables as Felix Frankfurter come on board to denounce the handling of the case stating that Sacco and Vanzetti were not found guilty beyond the reasonable doubt (Neville 66-67). The controversy that spun around and because of this case lent credence and association to the case of Alfred Dreyfus - a Frenchman of Jewish descent whose trial equaled, if not exceeded that of Sacco and Vanzetti's. Frankfurter became the "American Zola" (Neville 66).

Characters: Hoods, Heroes, Cocaine Addicts, Racists, and the Press
Before returning to the Dreyfus comparison and the making of Felix Frankfurter as the "American Zola" we need to consider three other characters of import who Neville speaks of extensively: Fred Moore, the cocaine addicted bohemian who sensationalized the case to begin with; Luigi Galleani, the charismatic orator that spoke little, if any English; and Willi Munzenberg, who Neville focuses on as a Comintern agent equivalent to what I would call "The Communist Hearst."

Fred Moore is a problematic character, to say the least. Part solution part problem, it is alluded to in this book that it was Moore who created "sensation" or "spectacle" and situated the case around and "injects radical politics at the trial" (Neville 36). According to Neville, Moore is retained for his role and experience in the famous Ettor-Giovannitti case (15). The Communist and Anarchist machinery simply took over.

On the subject of Anarchists, soon after arriving in the United States, Luigi Galleani attracted attention in radical anarchist circles. Known as a charismatic speaker, his agenda centered on the ideological and real use of violence to expunge the "oppressors" and to free the "common man" (Neville 2). The inclusion of the examination of Galleani at this junction is because the involvement with Sacco and Vanzetti (and vice versa) cannot be and should not be overlooked. From reading Neville and various other accounts, it is this very involvement with the Galleanisti that sets the framework in Judge Thayer's mind (a topic explored previously) - of both Sacco and Vanzetti as foreign and radical.

Who was Luigi Galleani? Galleani, an admitted "anarchist" was the founder and editor of Cronaca Sovversiva (Neville 3). Although it is never established that either Sacco or Vanzetti was in the "inner circle" of the Galleanisti - actions by the Galleanisti before, during, and after the trial by the same were more a bane than a boon to Sacco and Vanzetti. Assisting the Communist through their own propaganda machine the imprint of Galleani and the Galleanisti should not be forgotten. According to Neville, the "association" with the Galleanisti "taints" Sacco and Vanzetti (149). Two more characters of import cried out in different circumstances about Sacco and Vanzetti's innocence: Celestino Medeiros, who, it is still argued up to today, was either a spy - or a common criminal, with a heart of gold; and Felix Frankfurter, the "American Zola."

Felix Frankfurter is an Austrian born lawyer whose legacy in the field is equaled by few. He penned the controversial 1927 Atlantic Monthly article accusing the court of convicting Sacco and Vanzetti to death with reasonable doubt (Neville 145). What was the cause for this "reasonable doubt"? The unlikely source of this "reasonable doubt" was the confession of one Celestino Medeiros (Neville 60, and 63).

According to Neville, Medeiros was a "small time hoodlum" (38, and 60) with an extensive criminal record who had also been convicted of murder. Needless to say, the Medeiros claim is contested by both Sacco and Judge Thayer - for different reasons. Sacco is warned by the Galleanisti of spies in the prison (Neville 60) and Medeiros was in the Dedham jail at the same time as Sacco. Sacco initially does not accept the note on the premise that he might be a planted spy - but Sacco eventually relents. It is alleged that Medeiros sent Sacco a note in November of 1925 stating that he, as a member of the Morelli gang, (Neville 60-61) was responsible for the South Braintree affair. Medeiros is motivated on the premise that he could no longer stand to see Rosina Sacco suffer (Neville 23, 39, 60, 129, 131, and 133). The confession set in motion aggressive moves by new counsel Thompson for new trial - was based on Medeiros's confession. Supported by federal agents (Neville 70, and 72) but outright "discredited" by Judge Thayer, the confession of Medeiros is quickly hidden from view (Neville 74, and 83). The situation - poorly handled by Judge Thayer and Governor Fuller is fodder for Munzenberg, Communist propaganda machine as well as Frankfurter, et al. to vilify, arguably with good reason, the whole cadre of Thayer, Fuller, and the Lowell Committee in the press. Medeiros and the truth were executed alongside Sacco and Vanzetti (Neville 134). When are those files declassified?

Conclusion
In the end, I would argue, it matters less if Sacco and Vanzetti were innocent but that the discourse surrounding their trial both never really allowed them a fair shot and that most of the evidence was, at best, circumstantial. It will forever haunt our legal and social landscape calling to question American xenophobia, humanity, and tolerance. Moreover, Neville contends that the events and propaganda adds to the confusion and makes it difficult for academics to tell the myth from the facts. One could argue that with every passing year the process of making sense of the events on that fateful mid-April day in 1920 is more difficult never dislodging the sense that Sacco and Vanzetti were prosecuted not for their crime but because they were foreign, radicals, and made an example. No one said that forming closure in the complicated world of propaganda and agenda would be easy.

Miguel Llora

This is a vibrant history of the tragedy of Sacco and Vanzetti. The book bursts with relevance when the reader imagines the "wops" of the 1920s as the "ragheads" of the 21st century. Whether S & V were guilty is not relevant (though most likely they were not guilty of any crime). The tragedy of the story is how they were denied a fair trial because Massachusetts was swept up in a xenophobic backlash against all Italians/anarchists based on isolated acts of terrorism. That a few Italians were suspected of terrorism meant that all Italians were guilty of any crime of which they were accused. The same thing is happening today, with Guantanamo, torture, rendition. The case of Sacco and Vanzetti was judged an historical failure, a tragedy. It is a mistake we should have learned from.

The 1920s was referred to as the Jazz Age. Names like Babe Ruth, Jack Dempsey, Bill Tilden, Charles Lindberg, Red Grange, Al Jolson, Al Capone, and numerous others dominated the decade. Often overlooked, however, are the names of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti who spent the greater part of the decade in a Massachusetts prison until executed in the electric chair in August of 1927. Victims of a vindictive judge, a prejudicial jury foreman, and a politically charged atmosphere against Italians both Sacco and Vanzetti remain an example of justice denied in America to two individuals who came to America in hopes of bettering their lot in life. Denied both a fair trial and a second trial this book uncovers one of America's secrets best swept under a rug, and uncovered here in this new book. Isn't it a good thing that this miscarriage of justice doesn't happen anymore? Or have we already forgotten the names of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Campeon unjustly convicted for upholding their duties along the Texas and Mexico border as border patrol guards? This book is a reminder that history repeats itself because we too often refuse to learn from the past.

Some names cannot be spoken by themselves, but must always be a part of a pair: Laurel & Hardy, Wilbur & Orville, Martin & Lewis, etc.. Thus we have the names of two immigrant Italian men whose execution took place almost exactly 100 years ago (August 22, 1927). In the ensuing years, a plethora of books, pamphlets, articles, dramas, etc. have been produced, each one arguing either their innocence or guilt. This extremely well-written book really tries to walk the thin line between the two extremes, but appears (to me, at least) to lean into the innocent side, or at least the side of an unfair trial. As an attorney, I was shocked and dismayed at the tactics shown by both the prosecution and the presiding judge, and I know with certainty that today any one of a multitude of errors would have given these men a new trial. Would that have made any difference? I truly don't know, but I know that they never had that second trial chance, and for that alone the authorities of the Commonealth of Massachusetts bear a heavy burden of their own guilt. Read this book and try to make up your own minds about these men: it's not easy.

Watson has put together a thorough study of the men and the global phenomenon surrounding their trial, appeals and eventual execution. I give him a lot of credit, for while he takes a pretty dim view of the trial judge and prosecutor (as well as S&Z's early defense team) he is objective about the question of their actual guilt and innocence.

Watson spends the early part of the book with an introduction to the accused, some family history and laying the political groundwork; but, the real yeoman's work in the book is done in his methodical trip through the appellate review (if it can be called that given that no judge other than the trial judge ever ruled on any element of the appeals - including the trial judge's potential bias). Watson's research shines through in what is a narrative heavily reliant on sources ranging from personal letters to court records and past first person and scholarly work.

Similarly, there are some really eye-opening sequences in which Watson recounts the global fervor that arose around the accusation, incarceration, trial and execution of these two world-famous criminals. As he notes, in many ways, nothing has ever risen to the level that this case and these men did as global political discourse.

Finally, as others have noted, there are some important constitutional, and legal issues brimming just below the surface of Watson's narrative that I think he - correctly - alludes to but nevers indulges in himself. contemporary Guantanamo Bay, the mid-century transformation in criminal trial practice around evidence, the Red Scares, etc. He truly keeps his eye on the ball here in delivering a definitive history not of these men, or their politics; but, of the events surrounding the "judgment of mankind."

JAW

The two names are linked forever, but have not been subjects of a book for thirty years; now _Sacco & Vanzetti: The Men, the Murders, and the Judgment of Mankind_ (Viking) by Bruce Watson brings a historic case back. The book is timely, but Watson leaves it up to the reader to draw parallels between our time and the time of the murders and trial. Americans were scared of being victims of terrorist bombs then. The world then was full of anti-American feeling, with protests that the government was imprisoning and executing poor foreigners who had no chance of getting a fair trial. There were protests at US embassies all over the world. The trial of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti has every reason to be considered "the trial of the century", especially compared to other nominees for that category, like the O. J. Simpson trial. At the time of the trial, Watson says that the pair were the most famous men in the world, and Watson has done a fine job of going through the records once again to bring out the personalities involved in the crime, the investigation, and the trial, as well as the international but unsuccessful movement to get them a reprieve. Everyone knew the case in its time, although the passage of years has inevitably made it less immediate. Almost everyone who now knows of the case already has an opinion about the guilt or innocence of the two men, and Watson's book will not change anyone's opinion. It might, however, reinforce the idea that guilty or innocent, the men were given a grossly unfair trail without a deserved chance at a second one that might have been closer to the American ideal of justice.

Whether or not Sacco and Vanzetti did the bank robbery and murder for which they were executed, they were not innocents; they were anarchists and true to their anarchist principles, and the anarchists were terrorizing America. A chief doubt about their guilt, though, comes from anarchist principles. An anarchist might have bombed a politician's office or a capitalist's home, but anarchists weren't big on other crimes. They killed for political effect, not for lucre, and the crime involved here was a simple payroll heist. They were certainly suspicious characters, but any suspicions were magnified by the worries about anarchism and the distrust of Italian immigrants. There were serious problems with the case against them. The judge was convinced that they were guilty long before the trial concluded, and had been heard telling a friend that he would "get them good and proper" and that "no Bolsheviki" could intimidate him. Albert Einstein, George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Upton Sinclair, and countless less famous protesters all over the world tried to get the decision changed, but the system merely agreed with itself on all levels, and no appeal worked. After they were electrocuted, 200,000 mourners were in their funeral procession.

Watson, unlike many previous examiners of the case, does not exhibit a point of view on the guilt or innocence of the pair. Some of the physical evidence and some of their behavior clearly implicated them, but other evidence made their guilt unlikely, and it is clear that eyewitnesses were pressured and coached towards a guilty verdict and that ballistics reports were a mess that the jury could take any way it wanted to. And like the judge, and Boston in general, the jury wanted to find Sacco and Vanzetti guilty, and did so in just three hours, though it withheld announcing the verdict for a couple of hours more to avoid the appearance of unseemly haste. Justice of the Supreme Court William O. Douglas wrote in 1969 that anyone who studies the transcript "will have difficulty believing that the trial with which it deals took place in the United States." Just before the pair was executed, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was asked by his secretary whether justice had been done. "Don't be foolish, boy," came the answer, "we practice law, not `justice'." Watson may not provide certainty of guilt or innocence, but it is clear that the trial was unfair, and that the world-wide protests to promote a re-trial should have borne fruit. The law's toll, Vanzetti realized, would make him a historic figure: "If it had not been for these thing, I might have live out my life, talking at street corners to scorning men. I might have die, unmarked, unknown, a failure. Now we are not a failure." Maybe, but the anarchist cause died out; our bomb-throwers these days have more powerful bombs, and are not motivated to destroy government but just certain governments. We can look back on the prejudices that powered the case against Sacco and Vanzetti; we can hope for a fuller expression of American justice in the legal proceedings that absorb us now.

Chomsky examines many crucial aspects to give you the entire painting. The point of this CD is to show what the real goals or motives of the war on drugs is.

1.) lead the poor Columbians to death
2.) extract profits where possible
3.) jail our poor
4.) control the remainder of the population through fear

Noam goes into specific details and cause effect relationship analysis of our actions. Did you know our food for peace program undermined the wheat commodities market in Columbia?

Speaking of small farmers, he uses the line "Sorry there will be no food this year, but there will be some next year."

What makes these type of CDs so powerful is that he not only points out the problem, be he also offers simple solutions.

Noam Chomsky is a graybeard with enormous credibility. His view of U.S. intervention in Colombia is alarming. You may or may not agree with everything said but you will agree that Chomsky forces you to think.

In "An American Addiction", activist intellectual Noam Chomsky brilliantly examines the real objectives of Plan Colombia and the role of the US government in crushing popular movements in Colombia and elsewhere in Latin America. My only criticism of this otherwise informative cd is the fact that the plight of the U'wa people against Occidental Petroleum is never mentioned. This oversight surprised me given the importance of oil in Colombia's conflict. Nevertheless, I strongly recommend this educational cd for anyone wishing to learn more about the struggle for peace and justice in Colombia and the Americas.

Mr. Chomsky presents some interesting arguements especially the parallel between narcotics and tobaco but his point of view is so one sided and cynical that it is hard to take him seriously. He makes a lot of accusations without presenting any facts, he just seems to say everyone knows this or that. He also seems to be an apologist for the FARC and ELN, the left wing rebel groups, as he ignores their well documented history of drug trafficing, kidnappings, bombings and assasination. He attributes all of Colombia's problems and human rights violations to the government and the AUC, the right wing rebels. He does mention that the FARC taxes coca production but he forgives it because they tax everything.

I think the CD is worth listening to but should not be the only source of information on the subject and definately not taken at face value as his selective use facts diminishes his credibility.

Chomsky offers an excellent introduction to the USA's increasing and significant hegemonic involvement in Colombia's internal affairs, which now runs into the multiple billions of dollars involving military aid and the widespread use of military "trainers." Chomsky discusses following:

1. The history of Colombia's 40-year civil war (which, in fact, should be dated starting with the 1940s).

2. The various government, rebel and paramilitary forces involved in the civil war.

3. The intersection of the illegal drug trade with the widespread acts of crime and terrorism in the country.

4. The policies that have allowed Colombian elites to appropriate the most productive agricultural lands and have driven peasant farmers into remote regions of Colombia suitable mostly for cultivating drug crops.

5. The Colombian government's policy (at the USA's insistence and underwriting) of fumigating drug crop areas, forcing literally millions of peasant Colombians into homelessness and exile.

6. The Colombian government's widespread repression (often murder by the paramilitaries) of dissidents.

7. Colombia's natural resources and strategic importance in Latin America, which accounts for the USA's interest in the nation.

Chomsky points out that USA tobacco production accounts for more death worldwide than Colombia's (or all other nations') coca and marijuana production. He then asks: would we think another nation has a "right" to fumigate our tobacco lands, causing widespread homelessness and exile, because our tobacco products cause people to die in that nation? Rather, wouldn't we think that nation should deal with its tobacco demand issues and not cause our people harm? Of course we would, but it is not a logic the USA applies in the case of Colombia.

This CD is quite good. However, those well acquainted with the issues involving the USA's involvement with Colombia will find most of Chomsky's presentation familiar territory. The CD is clearly intended for those not acquainted with the central issues.

I bought "A Tattered Coat Upon a Stick" from the author, who sat alone at a card table in a minor branch of a chain bookstore. I wasn't expecting much, but the subject intrigued me and, for heaven's sake, the man was sitting right there. I didn't start reading it for a couple of weeks, but carried it as my "backup book", since it was fairly light. I wish I'd read it before I met the author. I wish I'd had the opportunity to tell him what a wonderful book he's written. The story drew this reader in as only the best-written stories do. The format works beautifully, giving the narrator the opportunity to address not only the story, but the reader as well, in the person of a student recording an oral history. It's a complete mystery to me why this book was self-published. It is compelling, well written, and entertaining -- characteristics that are missing from many of the books that come to us through commercial publishers. I wish the author every success in his marketing efforts, and look forward to seeing his next book. I'm recommending "A Tattered Coat Upon a Stick" to everyone I know, especially to those with an interest in modern history, in justice, and in good stories.

The author, William Brennan, describes this first novel as a tale of the impact of the Sacco and Vanzetti case on an Irish immigrant enclave in Boston. He certainly does succeed in this. The book is much more than that though. The first-person narrator, Emmet Magawley, currently a patient in a Veterans Hospital is a small man with a crooked back, his voice thick with a lifetime of cigarette smoke, looking somewhat like a tattered coat upon a stick. He has a gift with words, words that gently take me by the hand and introduce me to his world, that of the Irish American neighborhoods in the early part of the 20th century.

Emmet's unusual for his time because he knows how to type. He's uses this skill as a clerk in General Pershing's office in France during The Great War as well as in his later job as a prison guard in the Massachusetts jail where Sacco and Vanzetti are held. Emmet is related to the Irish politicians who run his neighborhood and lives with his wife and children in a three-family house with her relatives where family meals come alive with the aroma of corned beef and cabbage as well as the loud bullying voice of his brother-in-law as the topics of the day are hotly debated. Prohibition brings changes to the neighborhood as Emmet earns extra income running liquor, and I loved his descriptions of being on a small boat as it bucked ocean waves to pick up cargo beyond the three-mile-limit at sea.

It is only when Emmet's character is fully developed and the reader completely identifies with him, that we are introduced to Sacco and Vanzetti inside the jail. There are seven years of trials and appeals and during this time we are right there with Emmet as his relationship with Bart Vanzetti develops and we discover a great range of opinions about the case from the members of his family. This was all fascinating. And at this point I discovered that I was not only reading a book about Emmet Magawley, I was having a history lesson too. At 244 pages, the book is a fast read, mostly because I just couldn't put it down. The words have a lyrical quality and the story kept me hooked from the beginning. I thank Mr. Brennan for writing this book and look forward to his future work. Recommended.

I came across this book as I was searching for something to read about Sacco and Vanzetti. Being from Brockton, Mass., the opening setting for the book, I was immediately intrigued. (The story opens in the Brockton V.A., where my mother worked for some years.)
Mr. Brennan does a great job of spinning his story. His depiction of growing up Irish in early 20th Century Boston created a world I could easily envision. In a rather original twist, his hero's adventures in WWI were not about blood and glory, but ducking out of work and doing whatever it takes to avoid danger. His tales of bootlegging, of family tension, and of struggling with the decision to do the right thing, regardless of the cost... This was a fantastic read and I look forward to future efforts.
The only problem I had with the book is that Mr. Brennan stated he wrote it to fan the flames of public outcry to overturn the convictions of Sacco and Vanzetti. These two people do not appear in the book until it is half over. Having read the author's intent before buying the book, it kept nagging at the back of my mind until the characters finally appeared. The story focuses on Vanzetti, and presents a rather weak case for his innocence. The main arguement seems to be that Vanzetti was too nice, too self-educated and too peaceful a man to commit murder. Mr. Brennan presents his view that almost everyone wanted these men to be found guilty and ignored evidence that would have vindicated them. While this is certainly possible, it doesn't mean that Sacco and Vanzetti didn't do the crime. The potential evidence presented in the second half makes a weak arguement for reopening the case.
As I've said, it's a great read. It was not the story I expected, but it was definitely a story worth reading.

A marvelous depiction of Boston Irish blue collar life from the beginning of the century to the present. It speaks of the culture of the Great War, Prohibition, the Depression, and, most prominently, the famous Sacco and Venzetti trial and executions. It's a great and moving read with the wit and eleoquence of the Irish. It accurately informs of the lives and ways of the Boston Irish who were born around 1900.

William Brennan's A Tattered Coat Upon A Stick is a provocative and engaging novel dealing with the fallout from the historical Sacco and Vanzetti case, in which two men were convicted of murder and executed nearly 75 years prior to the present day. In A Tattered Coat Upon A Stick, a prison guard believes in the convicts' innocence and stands by them at the hour of their deaths, yet remains personally distraught over his failure to save them. Written in hope of garnering a movement to annul the Sacco and Vanzetti convictions, A Tattered Coat Upon A Stick is singularly powerful and moving reading.

This book about the Sacco-Vanzetti case is presented here as a novel. It is, however, a novel in which the historic analogies are carefully observed. In reading it one shudders at the similarities between that "red scare", the McCarthy affair and today the erosion under Bush of constitutional rights. It is obvious that the "upper class" is pitted against the "working class". In democratic socialism in which the owners of a concern are the workers (understood as being from the scrub-lady to the CEO. Decidedly stock-owners who do no work but have inherited their wealth are not considered as workers. There is no question that this was a crucial time for the labour movement and for the various parasitic wealthy people who have inherited their wealth and to whom the suffering of their labourers was indifferent. Undoubtedly it is a manifestation of the "class struggle" and of great importance to us in the U.S. today with its leaning more and more to the right. The indifference and even hostility with which in the US the poor are treated and exploited has apparently not changed at all.

Dr. Erich H. Loewy
Prof. & F'dg Chair of Bioethics (emeritus)
University of CA, Davis
11465 Ghirardelli Court
Ranch Cordova, CA 95670
TEL/FAX: 916-635-7555

This mammoth book covers the Sacco / Vanzetti trial - probably the most tumultuous trial in the early part of last century. Sacco and Vanzetti were two Italian workers who were accused of murdering and stealing money from two payroll carriers in suburban Boston. The story is told through the use of a fictional character named Cornelia, who had lived a life with the rich and elite of Boston. After her husband dies, she wants to live life and takes a tough job in a rope factory. In seeking room and board, she meets and befriends Vanzetti. Experiencing the poor working conditions and associating with Vanzetti, she sees the abuse of the workers by the rich owners and becomes sympathetic to social change.

The story turns tragic, though, when the good-natured Vanzetti and his friend Sacco, are implicated in a burglary. The police seeking a guilty party intimidate and coerce Irish witnesses into telling lies about the pair. The Italians have very little hope once they reach the courtroom, when they learn that the judge is clearly against them. Being poor, they are unable to pay the necessary and customary bribe.

When they are found guilty, other countries and labor leaders throughout the world became angry with Boston. Freedom and the United States' justice system becomes a laughing matter. Ultimately, the police were called in to handle the riots that almost ensued in Boston when the pair of activists was put to death. Even today, there are shadows of doubt over Boston as a result of this trial.

Using part fiction and part history, Upton Sinclair paints a grim portrait of American justice gone awry. Over and over, Sinclair points out where the plaintiff's case was based on non-credible witnesses, a biased judge and jury, hatred of the defendants' socialistic and anarchistic beliefs, and prejudice. While the book was interesting, especially in illuminating the reader of how the system "really" works, I did find it tiring. The book was long and there were a ton of witnesses and characters that the reader had to remember. Sometimes, the same points and facts were repeated two or three times and the story had a tendency to jump around in time. Overall, though, I found the book interesting and absorbing - like all of Sinclair's works that I have read.

Boston, a novel in two volumes by Upton Sinclair, was first published by Albert & Charles Boni in 1928 and is an historical novel about the well documented Sacco-Vanzetti trials. Written in typical Sinclair fashion, the story weaves through the personal lives and motivations of Sacco and Vanzetti. In his continual search for social justice, this event gives Sinclair another opportunity to decry the social conservatism of the day. The novel presents the reader with a different perspective of this milestone in American jurisprudence.

This book provides an interesting perspective of the justice system. It compares the trial of Sacco and Vanzetti, two poor, italian, anachists, to a trial of some of Boston's Blue Blooded elite (fictionalization of a true story). Sinclair never goes so far as to claim Sacco and Vanzetti are innocent (actually one of his biographers claimed that he had his own doubts), only to show that the trial was biased by their social and political views.

When I was a young teenager, I first ran across the names Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti in a footnote to "Two Sonnets in Memory" by Edna St. Vincent Millay. At that age, the story of an injustice is always interesting and I was introduced to the myth of Sacco and Vanzetti. I may be careless to use the word "myth" since it is still such a loaded subject. But by using that term I do not mean any statement about their guilt or innocence-- that truth can never be fully established either way. I mean only that for many many years Sacco and Vanzetti were nothing to me except two soulful and handsome young men who were apparently executed for nothing except their political views-- about which I had no notion at all. My notion of anarchism was colored by a vague notion of Dada art and Futurism. My understanding of the political history of Italian-American anarchism in the US was entirely non-existent. The sacrificial lambs may well be one valid way of looking at the case, but it isn't the entire picture and also does not do justice to the context of the time.

I was interested in finding a book that covered what I did not already know. I knew quite about about the protests and the affect on literature and art. I had virtually no background as to what school of thought Sacco & Vanzetti belonged and I wanted to understand more about what it meant that they were anarchists-- in what context & to what ends.

The Avrich book succeeds admirably in providing the information that I had hoped to find. From their childhoods in Italy to the history of Italian anarchism in the US, Avrich paints the context around Sacco and Vanzetti and how they finally came to the place where they were when executed. It is not a lengthy book, but is dense and well-documented. It draws heavily from the Italian language resources that appear to have been ignored by many others who have written about the case.

Avrich is a dry writer-- unlikely to ever find himself a cross-over history best seller because of his sparkling prose. But the fact that the dryness bothered me surely says more about me as a lazy and erratic reader of history than it does about Avrich as a historian.

If you are looking for a personal biography of Sacco & Vanzetti, there are surely more charming narrative sources. As it is a fairly narrow political biography, I am also not sure that I would recommend it if you also are not familiar with the broad strokes of the case. There are also many other books which use the Sacco & Vanzetti case to examine US law and political culture at the time of the executions. The Avrich book is not the place to go in order to look at the case's impact on the United States.

However, if you are already familiar with the case and would like to know more, Avrich does present a perspective that many others neglect. It would also be a very interesting book if you were interested in the history of anarchism in the US. Recommended.

Most people know nothing of why we have such prohibitive laws against the first ammendment exist now. But long before 9/11 terrorism struck the USA, another terrorist act led to many restrictions on speech and association, similar to and in some cases more restrictive than Bush's laws. This book covers in detail what is known about the surroundings of the largest previous terrorist act in the United States, also in NYC. It is highly entertaining from start to finish. You will get to know each of the terrorists and the controversial evidence for and against them. But this isn't extreme islamic interpretation terrorism, this is anarchists from europe.

Paul Avrich has made a career out of anarchist history -- anarchistory, I suppose you'd call it. He's an excellent writer and this book is a welcome addition to his series. The title is a little misleading, as Sacco and Vanzetti, who were executed in the late 20's in one of the most controversial criminal cases of this century, aren't really dealt with too much.

What is dealt with are the Galleanists, the followers of Italian anarchist Luigi Galleani, who really framed American anti-radical policy (unintentionally) by way of a series of bombings that occurred in 1919 and 1920. These bombings offered the government the pretext for the unlawful series of police actions called the "Red Scare". These events are important even today because they framed American policy toward domestic leftist radicalism, much of which remains in force today.

The book follows the lives (and deaths) of many Italian anarchists, including Galleani himself, and is a fascinating exploration of their lives and their anarchist subculture at a time when anarchism was on the wane everywhere except Spain.

To the modern anarchist, the book offers as much of a sense of what anarchism shouldn't be as what it used to be. The Galleanist use of bombs did anarchism a considerable disservice as it gave the press something sensational to latch onto -- even today, some 70 years later, people still link anarchism with bombs. This is a direct offshoot of the Galleanists' activities, as explored in this book.

Avrich has a very readable writing style, and the book is jam-packed with historical references and interesting stories. Like all of his anarchist books, this one is worth your time.

Avrich's book is extraordinary as an account of the varied principle protagonists in the Italian Anarchist circles of 80 years ago, though it provides only a historical account of the characters without a perspective of history's judgment. The only reason I give the book 4 stars instead of 5 is that Sacco and Vanzetti are almost minor characters, popping up now and then amongst Galleani, Malatesta, Buda, Salsedo, et al, though their story and their fate is symbolic of the entire movement: All were relatively ordinary people who despised governments, and in turn were wiped off the face of America by ours. Avrich gives rich detail into the lives of Sacco and Vanzetti as well as all of the other mad bombers running around New York and Boston. The story of "Ella", the dynamite courier, with a side dish of Emma Goldman sharing her prison cell for a while, is superb. If you're an Anarchist fan, or maybe even a real Anarchist, Avrich is your man for history of the movement.
As a side note, read this book on an airplane some time and see how many people sitting next to you ask you what it's about. As significant as S&V were in American 20th Century history, their names are lost now to anyone but an Anarchist or the occasional college student doing required reading.