Showing posts with label Los Angeles military companies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Los Angeles military companies. Show all posts

Saturday, July 23, 2016

The Los Angeles Common Council and Criminal Justice, 1857

Considering how fateful 1857 was when it came to crime, violence and criminal justice in greater Los Angeles, mainly with the fearful drama that followed the brutal execution-style killings of Sheriff James Barton and three members of a posse he assembled to track down the Daniel-Flores gang which had terrorized San Juan Capistrano, then part of Los Angeles County, the minute books of the Los Angeles Common (City) Council are surprisingly devoid of material on these aspects.

In fact, other than the fact that the usual regular meetings of the council were postponed for about a month, between 20 January and 18 February, while the crisis was taking place, nothing was actually stated in the recor, other than that there a vague reference that business needed to be conducted because a quorum had been lacking for the gathering scheduled prior to the latter date.

Whatever was discussed tended to be focused on what to do with city prisoners and the notorious chain gang that operated on a vicious cycle that was tantamount to an institutionalized variant of slavery for Indians arrested on Saturday night, tried on Sunday and, unable to pay the sentence of a fine, were hired out for labor, either on the chain gang or to nearby ranchers and farmers.

Just prior to the awful slaughter of Sheriff Barton and his men, city marshal William C. Getman called for the council to determine "the propriety and necessity of the formation of a chain gang," which petition was directed to the special committee on the jail.

At an extraordinary (not regularly scheduled) council meeting in early March, a new ordinance was written for street cleaning, using "all Indians imprisoned or under sentence for a term according to ordinance."  A clarification was added that, "no Indian imprisoned for any offense agains the ordinances of the City shall be detained for more than twenty-four hours in which time he will be tried and sentenced, liberated, or given over to the contractor for cleaning the streets."

While this last sounded liberal and progressive, it could be read to mean that a rushed trial and the quick assignment of Indians to the chain gang was the goal.  Yet, in April a bill presented for expenses incurred in the maintenance of Indians at the jail was disallowed because of the ordinance "which declares that no Indians shall be detained at the City Jail, at the charge of the City."  This evidently was interpreted to signify that it was the county's problem, but the finance committee did recommend paying much of the bill "in consideration of extraordinary services."  It appears that the incarceration of Indians in the jail necessitated this recommendation.

At the same time, the city numerous purveyors of liquor petitioned the council for a reduction in the license to sell spirits.  This would have the double effect of allowing more liquor to be sold in the City of the Angels, but of reducing revenues needed to deal with the problem of intoxicated citizens through the town's criminal justice system.

In mid-April, there was some discussion about a citizen petition for "the rent of a room to be paid for by the Common Council, to serve as an Armory Hall, for a voluntary company called the 'Southern Rifles."  The rise of citizen militias, no doubt as a reaction to real or perceived inefficiencies with law enforcement, was a major question in greater Los Angeles during the 1850s and, in some ways, mirrored issues throughout the United States.

This 1857 lithograph by Kuchel and Dresel and published by Britton and Rey of San Francisco as part of a series of California views, is a rare and detailed though highly sanitized view of pre-Civil War Los Angeles.  It was issued four years before the first photograph of the town was taken and about fifteen years before images were commonly published in stereoscopic form.  
While militias were the reason for the second amendment to the federal constitution and it was presumed these citizen-staffed organization were essential for common defense, the reality turned out to be very different than theory.  It can be said that there were several citizen companies that mobilized in the aftermath of the Barton slayings and some did good work in tracking the bandits, reconnaissance, and other duties, while others did shoddy work, such as letting some bandit members escape during simple guard duty.

The Civil War later would reveal just how poorly organized and train citizen militias really were and writers have observed that these groups were more social clubs for drinking and fraternizing than for defense.  Much of the reason for the formation of the National Guard was to retool the concept of citizen militias into more reliable organizations.

In any case, the Council responded that it was "considering itself without the power to dispose of city funds for the support of any volunteer company."  The use of volunteer citizen companies did continue for some time after, however--mainly, as noted above, during the Civil War, when Los Angeles was a secessionist hotbed and militias of Southern sympathizers and of northern leaning citizens were formed.

Also, in April, the council returned to the question of how city prisoners were maintained and processed through sentencing and a draft ordinace was written, followed by a police committee suggestion that the word "Indian" in the street cleaning ordinance be replaced with "Person."  Again, this has the look of a forward-thinking recommendation, but it might also have been a way to mask reality with something official that looked non-discriminatory.  On 29 April, the council approved this change and sent it to the mayor for his signature.

This was just in time for a change in personnel after the spring election in early May.  Not long afterward, an acute problem with the town's finances was shown when Mayor John G. Nichols told the council that a prevailing agreement reached with the jailer, Eli M. Smith, that would pay Smith $50 a month for all prisoner board and services was in the breach because the jailer had not been paid in four months.

In June, Nichols returned to present to the council a new contract executed with Smith "for Board of City prisoners and other matters connected therewith, whereby the City will be in a  great measure relieved from expenses on account of her prisoners."  While the council promptly approved the new agreement, the terms were not specified--it is assumed that the county agreed to shoulder some of the financial burden for prisoner maintenance.

Research in the council minute books found nothing for the last half of 1857, so that all that can be given here is for the first six months of the year.  As a recurring problem, however, the management of the jail, particularly in the outlay of funds, was a major preoccupation for a small town with a lean budget based on low tax revenues.  The Gold Rush had ended, a national depression broke out in 1857, the local cattle economy was in a doldrums and fiscal issues were becoming tougher for city officials to handle.

Friday, December 11, 2015

The Formation of the Los Angeles Rangers, 1853, Part Two

In the late spring and early summer of 1853, a spate of robberies, murders and other crimes taking place in the Los Angeles region spurred a movement to combat the growing scourge.

The 16 July edition of the Los Angeles Star reported on "a large and highly respectable meeting" at the El Dorado Hotel at which "it was resolved to organize a mounted force for the purpose of protecting the public" from rampant crime.

Among the resolutions was the statement that this force be given the power of "arresting all suspicious persons wherever we may find them and ridding the community of the same in such manner as may be advisable."

Another addressed "all persons who have heretofore harbored robbers or assassins ot furnished them means of escape," warning them that such activities would "be punished with the greatest severity."

Then, there was a "three days warning to the whole vagrant class," including the taking of names and physical descriptions and that "their failure to leave the county in the specified time" would lead to their removal "at all hazards."

Finally, these resolutions concluded with the statement "that we continue the system here adopted until the peace and seciroty of the community are perfectly established."

The 16 July 1853 issue of the Los Angeles Star covered a meeting the previous evening at the El Dorado Hotel which led to the formation of an organization to use broad powers to seek the control of rampant crime in the county.
Whatever the exasperation felt by citizens at the seemingly unstoppable criminal activity taking place, there were many problems of due process involved in the resolutions, starting with the profiling of people who were deemed, without any criteria at all, to be "suspicious" and that their explusion could be "in such manner as may be advisable," which left the door open to any forms of violence those involved felt were "advisable."

Along a similar vein, what were the conditions applicable to punishing persons deemed to be assisting criminals and what would the "greatest severity" mean with respect to the punishment?

Vagrancy could, presimably, imply a wide variety of attributes imputed to someone deemed to be a "vagrant."  Was such a person unemployed or seasonally employed?  What other factors would be taken into account to determine vagrancy?  And, again, their removal from the county "at all hazards," implied that any sort of force would be available for use.

Finally, how would the community, or at least those taking it upon themselves to act for the community, know that there was a "perfectly established" sense of "peace and security," at which time the measures adopted at the meeting would be relaxed?

Notably, this addressing of vagrancy predated by two years the passage of a state law, titled “An Act to Punish Vagrants, Vagabonds, and Dangerous and Suspicious Persons,” that addressed all manner of miscreants, from prostitutes and drunks to "healthy beggars" and ordered that those "with no visible means of living" get a job within ten days and that "lewd and dissolute persons" as well as prostitutes and drunks serve up to 90 days at hard labor for their indiscretions.

Another result of the meeting was that "a company was then formed" to carry out the mandate ratified at the gathering.  Leadership of the organization was given to Benjamin D. Wilson, late mayor of Los Angeles and a future state senator, who had no subordinates.  Even though the meeting was held just the previous day, the Star reported that "some have already started out" on the work of protecting the county.

Meantime, it was said that sixteen men at El Monte organized at their own meeting to support Wilson's company and that Charles H. Wurden of that community was elected captain of that auxiliary.

The 8 June 1853 issue of the Star reported on the formation of the Los Angeles Guards, another organization intended to fight crime in the region.
This followed a slightly earlier effort from early June, in which a meeting held on the 7th led to the creation of an organization called the "Los Angeles Guards," featurng thirty members, led by David W. Alexander, a future sheriff, attorney and judge Myron Norton, future Southern Californian publisher John O. Wheeler, common council member and future state treasurer Antonio Franco Coronel, and Samuel K. Labatt.  The Star observed that "such an organization would be a great means of securing good order in our city."  A little more than two weeks later, a formal election of officers was held, with Wheeler named Captain, Norton first lieutenant, Alexander second lieutenant, and merchant Solomon Lazard elected as third lieutenant.  It was also reported that the member roll had doubled to sixty.

It is unclear how much actual crime-fighting was undertaken by the Guards and by Wilson's company, but the Los Angeles Rangers, which also organized during the summer, definitely had more activity.  The 6 August 1853 issue of the Star reported that there were 100 enrolled members and a quarter of them were deemed to be active.  Moreover, the paper continued, "their horses [are] to be furnished gratuitously [sic] by the rancheros, as a loan to the company, with other costs to be assumed by the county "and private subscription."  For example, the Board of Supervisors earmarked $1000 for arms and expected to be reimbursed for such by the state.

The 6 August edition of the Star listed members and the elected officers of the Los Angeles Rangers paramilitary group.  Note the article underneath announcing the supposed capture of the famed bandido Joaquin Murrieta (or, at least, someone said to have been the legendary criminal.)
Among the listed members were William Little (later killed as a member of Sheriff James Barton's posse, ambushed by bandits in today's Orange County in early 1857); Thomas Rand, brother of the former publisher of the Star; Alexander W. Hope, who'd been the chief of the short-lived 1851 police department covered earlier in this blog; marshal William C. Getman, later killed in his first month as sheriff in early 1858; future under-sheriffs Eli Smith and Edward C. Hale, and a young man identified only as H. Bell.  More on him later.

A little over a month later, the first major reported activity of the Rangers appeared in the Star.  More on that and other developments in a post coming soon.