1
Shane McOwen
HST300 Prof Gullett
February 14, 2011
The Sacco and Vanzetti Case
The Sacco and Vanzetti case of the 1920s caused a rift among the American public, one
side believing the outcome to be a failure of the justice system and the other believing it
defended the United States from immigrants and their radical philosophies.1 Nicola Sacco and
Bartolomeo Vanzetti were tried and convicted of murder, and over an appeals process that
spanned seven years, the nation took notice and people developed strong views of the case.
Examining the two groups and their positions of the trial show the divide Americans had
regarding immigration, the Red Scare, and American justice in the 1920s.
Much like today, Immigration was a large issue during the 1920s. From the previous 40
years before the trial, nearly 26 million people came to the United States, with an increasing
number from non-traditional places in Southern and Eastern Europe.2 Some of the immigrants
either held radical political ideologies or adopted them sometime after arriving. Anarchists, like
Sacco and Vanzetti, were particularly worrisome for the American public due to their beliefs of
violent behavior and actions could precipitate change. Luigi Galleani, a noted anarchist
followed by Sacco and Vanzetti, published a manual with descriptions on how to create
different types of explosives.3 For the group advocating the trial was a defense of the threats
against America, this provided easy ammunition. Immigrants openly advocating violence to
1
Michael M. Topp, The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Belford/St.
Martin’s, 2005), 2.
2
Topp, 4.
3
Luigi Galleani, “La salute e in voi!” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History with Documents, ed.
Michael M. Topp (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 62-5.
2
Americans certainly would cause a distain for the foreigners, and sympathy for Sacco and
Vanzetti ‘s trial would be hard to come by with both men belonging to anarchist group and its
violent tendencies. Even immigrants without anarchist or socialist political views had a difficult
time in 1920s America. Gino Speranza wrote the difficulties of assimilation of foreigners to the
American lifestyle was the faults of both parties and differences would continue to mount with
the divide between the two groups.4 As Speranza shows, the influx of people from Italy and
other places were not always welcomed with open arms, and immigrants like Galleani
furthered the stigma placed upon them by Americans.
The post World War I Red Scare was the result of the fear of social revolution in the
American public. World War I was an unpopular cause for many, resulting in laws created to
suppress criticism against the government and governmental decisions.5 The success of the
Bloshevik Revolution in Russia and the widespread strikes that totaled around 4 million people
in 1919 put Americans on edge and fearful of a revolution happening on their home front. 6
Louis Post, the assistant secretary of labor during the early years of the case, saw firsthand the
effects of the Red Scare. He detailed arrests and searches made without warrants in the New
England area, to which only less than 10 had a technical cause for deportation out of the initial
800 to 1,200 arrests.7 Sacco and Vanzetti, immigrants with their association in a violent, radical
group caused enough distress to the public to receive much attention in America. Even though
4
Gino Speranza, “How it Feels to Be a Problem” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History with
Documents, ed. Michael M. Topp (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 53-5.
5
Topp, 16.
6
Topp, 15, 186.
7
Louis Post, “The Deportations Delirium of Nineteen-Twenty” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief
History with Documents, ed. Michael M. Topp (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 82-4.
3
the height of the Red Scare ended near the beginning of their trial, there was enough fear to
garnish support against them, even in a case with faulty facts and evidence.
The court case itself is where the most division across America came from. One side
found the proceedings unfair; that the trial lack crucial evidence placing Sacco and Vanzetti as
the murderers. The other side felt this was part of a larger sentiment of protecting the United
States against radical immigrants and their threats to society. Vanzetti realized that he and
Sacco were facing punishment for their radical views, and that the presiding judge of the case,
Jude Thayer, was trying to “twist” the facts to get them the death sentence instead of
deporting them back to Italy.8 There was no hard evidence suggesting Sacco or Vanzetti had
anything to with the murders they were being tried for.9 FBI agent Fred J. Weyand concluded
that the crimes were likely done by professional criminals, and the only thing they were guilty
of was violating the Selective Service rules for the draft during World War I.10
The group against Sacco and Vanzetti used jury’s verdict of proof of their guilt, but still
rallied around the larger cause. Frank Goodwin described the case being well-known as a
“blessing in disguise.” It let America’s enemies know they were not going to back down to
threats, that the American way was going to stand up to the Reds and their allies.11 Judge
8
Bartolomeo Vanzetti, “Background of the Plymouth Trial” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History
with Documents, ed. Michael M. Topp (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 86-7.
9
Topp, 18.
10
Fred J. Wayand, “Affidavits” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History with Documents, ed.
Michael M. Topp (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 122.
11
Frank Goodwin, “Sacco-Vanzetti and the Red Peril: Speech before the Lawrence, Massachusetts,
Kiwanis Club” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History with Documents, ed. Michael M. Topp (Boston:
Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 151-2.
4
Thayer said the crime committed by the two men was consistent with Vanzetti’s beliefs as a
radical.12
The major evidence of the case took a back seat to the division the case caused in
America. It was many on the left who were outraged by the conviction and questioning the
free speech in America
12
John Dos Passos, “Facing the Chair” in The Sacco and Vanzetti Case: A Brief History with Documents, ed.
Michael M. Topp (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 149.