{"id":45,"date":"2021-11-22T19:25:31","date_gmt":"2021-11-22T19:25:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/?post_type=chapter&p=45"},"modified":"2023-02-24T15:55:20","modified_gmt":"2023-02-24T15:55:20","slug":"chapter-ii-clevelands-reaction","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/chapter\/chapter-ii-clevelands-reaction\/","title":{"rendered":"Chapter II: Cleveland’s Reaction"},"content":{"raw":"
In the aftermath, the simplest solution was to look for villains . . .[footnote]\u201cIce, Water and Fire,\u201d Newsweek<\/em>, LXVII, August 1, 1966.[\/footnote]<\/blockquote>\r\nIn the immediate first days of the calm following the disorders, relief was promised to the residents of the stricken area. Congressman Michael Feighan said that financial relief would be provided to riot victims and also indicated that the disorders would be the subject of a congressional investigation.[footnote]Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 22, 1966.[\/footnote] The Small Business Authority announced that it would make loans to Hough area businessmen whose stores had been damaged or destroyed and who wanted to rebuild or relocate.[footnote]Ibid<\/em>.[\/footnote] The Legal Aid Society said that more than thirty experienced criminal lawyers were offering their legal services free to indigent persons who had been arrested during the disturbances.[footnote]Ibid<\/em>., July 26, 1966.[\/footnote] Even Mayor Locher announced some plans for relief for the area in the near future. He stated that the city planned to advertise for bids on three parcels of land to be developed for 110 low-cost housing units for the Hough area.[footnote]Norman Mlacak, \u201cHough People to be Quizzed on Riot Cause,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 27, 1966.[\/footnote] But the reaction of the community to the previous week of violence and disorder was not primarily one oriented to reconstructing the damaged black community. The problem, it seemed, was to find out what<\/em> and specifically who<\/em> had caused the riots.\r\n\r\nMany civic leaders denounced the disturbances as just \u201clawlessness.\u201d Both Mayor Locher and City Council President Stanton claimed that the riots had no connection with the civil rights movement, but were instead just \u201ca matter of lawlessness.\u201d[footnote]<\/em>The citation was not available in printed version of this book.[\/footnote]<\/em> Some Negro leaders agreed with this assessment of the situation. Harry Alexander, business manager and secretary of the Negro owned and run Call and Post<\/em>, said that the riots themselves were not racial, but that they \u201cwere triggered . . . because of constant continued discrimination against Negroes.\u201d[footnote]The citation was not available in printed version of this book.[\/footnote]\u00a0 Councilman Leo Jackson of the neighboring Glenville area strongly agreed with the mayor and city council president. He classified the disorders as \u201ca struggle, not for civil rights, but a struggle by thugs for leadership of the Negro community.\u201d[footnote]The citation was not available in printed version of this book.<\/em>[\/footnote] He also went on to describe the rioters as\r\n
. . . an element which looks with contempt on the man who holds two jobs to support his family; disrupts schools and takes over playgrounds; snatches purses of women rather than seeking employment; burglarizes homes and stands around street corners treating our women with disrespect.[footnote]Norman Mlachak, \u201cLeo Jackson Warns Council of Organized Negro Thugs,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 26, 1966.[\/footnote]<\/blockquote>\r\nJackson further claimed that the action had been organized and precipitated by \u201choodlums.\u201d\r\n\r\nSuch an attitude was to be heard often in the weeks that followed. Police Chief Wagner called the efforts \u201ccriminal syndicalism,\u201d and proposed that simplified riot laws be enacted that would enable the police to charge one person with inciting a riot to replace the existing law which permitted arrests only if there were at least three persons conspiring to riot.[footnote]Robert G. McGruder, \u201cWagner Waits for Riot Law Model,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, August 8, 1966.[\/footnote] A white councilman, Edward Katalinas, from a neighboring ward, claimed that the riots had been planned purposely for when National Guard units would have difficulty mobilizing quickly. He added that some disturbances along Superior Avenue on the northern boundary of the Hough area that had occurred earlier in June were a planned \u201cdry run\u201d for the Hough disorders. However, Katalinas also mentioned that there did exist some underlying causes for the trouble, and he pointed specifically to Mayor Ralph Locher\u2019s administration as one of them. Plans were made by the administration, he said, for a $385,000,000 highway and a catch basin in the lake that prohibited them from doing more for the East Side depressed areas.[footnote]Sam Giaimo, \u201cNames of Rioters Revealed to Jury,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 27, 1966.[\/footnote] Other leaders focused their attention on both the city government and the frustration of the black community.\r\n\r\nBertram E. Gardner, the executive director of the Cleveland Community Relations Board, thought that the rioting indicated \u201ca combination of frustrations,\u201d which included housing, jobs and education problems. There was, in his words, \u201ca deterioration of the total community\u201d that stemmed from people who were \u201cunwilling or unable\u201d to handle the problems of the city. The war on poverty was not a total failure, but Gardner claimed that it was by no means the total answer to the problems of the ghetto. He asserted that the real provocation for the riots did not come from any of the specific problems that were often mentioned, but instead it came from the \u201cdeep frustration\u201d that resulted from the combination of inequities.[footnote]Doris O\u2019Donnell, \u201cRioting Blamed on Negro Frustration,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 20, 1966.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe ineptitude of the city government was also bewailed by Ernest C. Cooper, executive director of the Urban League of Cleveland. He blamed the city\u2019s power structure and the maintenance of the status quo for the disorder. \u201cAuthorities appear to be more interested in controlling the situation than attempting to work out the problems that cause violence,\u201d he stated in a press release. He also challenged the city government \u201cto give concrete evidence to those persons who find themselves frustrated . . . that a positive change is taking place around the pressing problems they face in everyday life.\u201d[footnote]Ibid<\/em>.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nState Representative Carl Stokes, a Negro who had narrowly missed unseating Mayor Locher in the election the previous fall, remarked that black leaders had been unable to offer the community any \u201cevidence of hope and progress\u201d because of a \u201clong list of studies, plans, and broken promises\u201d that had been made by the municipal government.[footnote]\u201cAnd Now Cleveland,\u201d The Reporter<\/em>, XXXV, August 11, 1966, p. 8.[\/footnote] The charge against the city government was further amplified by Councilman M. Morris Jackson. He attributed the causes to a lack of communication between Hough people and the white community and specifically referred to broken promises on urban renewal projects that the government had made to the people. Jackson stated that despite its allocated budget of millions of dollars, the urban renewal program had failed to provide adequate housing or recreation facilities. Insuffi-cient city services and the lack of an integrated police force were also mentioned by Jackson as causes of the riots.[footnote]Norman Mlachak, \u201cLeo Jackson.\u201d[\/footnote] County Judge Thomas Parrino spoke for many of the community leaders when he said, \u201cThe seeds of these riotous acts are found in grave social injustice. Poverty and a denial of equal opportunity produces enormous frustrations.\u201d[footnote]Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 26, 1966.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nNumerous members of the community reflected the sentiments of their leaders, while others exhibited bitter personal feelings toward other members of the community. Many of the neighborbood merchants were shocked and dismayed that the businesses which had taken them a lifetime to build had suddenly been destroyed so quickly and easily.\r\n\r\nJoe Berman, owner of the Starlite Delicatessen for twelve years, had locked the front door of his store with six-inch spikes the day after the first outbreak of violence. That night the spokes didn\u2019t hold the door past six o\u2019 clock, and when Berman returned the next morning, he found looters running throughout his food store in full daylight while the police cruised nearby. His reaction was typical. \u201cI\u2019ve been here twelve years and never had any serious trouble with anyone. But whether you\u2019re good or bad makes no difference when a riot comes. We all got it.\u201d[footnote]Sam Giaimo \u201cMerchants Who Felt Licked Prepare to Leave Hough,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 20, 1966.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe riots ended twenty-one years of work for Al and Louis Rosenberg, owners of the Corner Cut-Rate Drug Store, and nineteen years of labor for the owner of a meat market, Earl Gamer. The Rosenbergs, like most other merchants, could not understand why their business had been a target for destruction but the fact that two black-owned businesses across the street and next door had been left unscathed helped to ex-plain the reasons. Gamer was somewhat bitter, and his attitude probably exemplified the feelings of fellow merchants who had been wiped out. Upon viewing his ruined business, he announced, \u201cI can\u2019t and will not open again. I\u2019m completely ruined.\u201d He went on to add, \u201cWhen I moved in here nineteen years ago, there were very few Negroes. They came to me, I didn\u2019t come to them.\u201d As to the charges of low quality food at high prices, Gamer replied, \u201cThey say we are capitalizing on them. Well, that\u2019s not true.\u201d[footnote]Michael D. Roberts and James Van Fleet, \u201cPlunderers Profit; Merchants Quit,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 20, 1966, p. 1.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nMany of the area\u2019s residents, however, did not agree with Gamer\u2019s assessment of the situation. Mrs. Daisy Craggett, a leader in the Hough Community Council, claimed that the store owners that had suffered had made up for their losses in advance \u201cover and over again . . . in bad service and high prices for inferior merchandise.\u201d[footnote]Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 25, 1966.[\/footnote] She also recalled her experience of walking through the violence-torn neighborhood on the third day of the disorders:\r\n
I walked through the area. I saw those high-price stores burning down. I couldn\u2019t feel too badly.[footnote]Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 21, 1966.[\/footnote]<\/blockquote>\r\nMany of the local residents echoed the sentiments of Mrs. Craggett. Julius X, the operator of a Hough beauty salon, showed obvious resentment toward the white man. \u201cThe white man is reaping what he has sown. He is learning you can\u2019t push people around. This trouble is here because the white man won\u2019t treat the black man right,\u201d he commented after the second night of trouble. The same militancy was apparent in the attitude of James Jackson, a young resident of Hough, who claimed that \u201cabout ninety percent of the people out here want to get whitey.\u201d A black dry cleaner in Hough whose business had not been harmed in the riots lamented that the disorders had \u201cbeen a long time coming and it\u2019s about time; it\u2019s too bad some of our own people have to suffer. . .\u201d[footnote]Robert G. McGruder, \u201cOlder People of Hough Want No Part of Trouble,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 20, 1966, p. 1.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nMost of the older residents of the neighborhood were most concerned with this fact that some of \u201ctheir own\u201d people did have to suffer, and as a result, they questioned both the motives and purposes underlying the urban disorder. Mrs. Ceola King, a worker in the area anti-poverty office, wondered if the people of Hough had done all the damage. \u201cWhy would people want to harm themselves?\u201d she asked. \u201cThe hardships that are created are going to be the hardships of the people who live in Hough,\u201d she later observed.[footnote]Bob Modic, \u201cWhy Do People Hurt Themselves? Saddened Hough Residents Ask,\" Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 19, 1966.[\/footnote] Agreement with this attitude prevailed only among some of the older people. A shoestore manager in the area commented after a few days of rioting, \u201cThey are burning up their homes and their jobs. They are burning up their payday and hurting our own people.\u201d[footnote]McGruder, \u201cOlder People,\u201d p. 1.[\/footnote] The director of Halfway House, a transition center in Hough for released convicts, Reverend James Redding, said that the released convicts \u201cshook their heads, bewildered by the foolish destruction.\u201d He added:\r\n
This is all so useless and senseless. Here we are, trying to rebuild people into decent, law-abiding citizens, trying to give them a better chance -- and they spend a night watching people trying to destroy themselves.<\/blockquote>\r\nAs an after thought, Reverend Redding said, \u201cMaybe one of the problems is that no one has been listening to what we have been saying.\u201d[footnote]Modic, \u201cWhy Do People.\u201d[\/footnote] Even among those people who opposed the violence because of its self-destructive effects, there remained the gnawing feeling of frustration.\r\n\r\nEveryone in Hough seemed to be angry with everyone else. A newspaper reporter wrote that along Hough Avenue, people \u201ctalked in expressions of shame and defiance, anger and anxiety. Young men spoke of their grievances against the white man, old men of their grievances against the young.\u201d[footnote]Robert T. Stock, \u201cStores Reopen in Hough\u2019s Daylight,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 23, 1966.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nReactions varied as to the amount of support that the violent actions commanded in the black community. Bertram Gardner felt that perhaps \u201cninety to ninety-five percent of the people\u201d did not approve of the methods of destruction, and that the riots did not have \u201ccommunity approval.\u201d[footnote]O\u2019Donnell, \u201cRioting Blamed.\u201d[\/footnote] However, many of the residents disagreed with Gardner\u2019s appraisal. Phil Mason, a fieldworker in the Hough area, felt that a sub-stantial portion of the community supported and participated in the action by noting that \u201cpeople who were just sitting on their porches would run over to a store after the windows were broken and steal stuff.\u201d[footnote]Norman Mlachak, \u201cJust Like a War, Awed Policemen and Fireman Say,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 19, 1966.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nOther community residents and leaders directed their efforts toward determining the specific nature of the problems that helped to foment the trouble. The pastor of Calvary Presbyterian Church, Reverend Bruere, pinpointed several specific causes of the riots which he had observed in his work of helping his church pioneer projects to alleviate some inner-city problems. He blamed the disorder on everyone in the community, and cited specifically the churches which had moved out of the inner city as the Negro moved in, the city administration\u2019s incompetence, apathetic citizens of the city, suburbs that wanted \u201cto remain aloof from the problems of the city,\u201d \u201cabsentee landlords and irresponsible tenants,\u201d and \u201cpeople who produce large families of illegitimate children . . . people who loaf and expect to be supported by some welfare agency.\u201d[footnote]Sam Giaimo, \u201cBruere Says All to Blame for Riots,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, August 1, 1966.[\/footnote] No one was spared in Bruere\u2019s sweeping indictment of the entire community, but most other people, such as Guy Goens, a supervisor at the Hough anti-poverty office, were less broad in their diagnoses of the problem. He emphasized that one of the principle causes of the disorder was \u201cthe general frustration in Hough.\u201d[footnote]Modic, \u201cWhy Do People.\u201d[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nMany organizations across the city joined in the search for underlying causes for the riots, but most of their findings seemed to echo those sentiments expressed by individual citizens. The East Side Community Union, a group of seventy-five Glenville residents once again expressed the dominant view of the Negro community. Its report stated:\r\n
These so-called disturbances are not isolated uprisings of teen-age vandals, nor are they the result of \u2018outside agitators.\u2019 They are the expression of a despair, of an anger that is deeply ingrained into the Negro community; a despair and anger caused by years of exploitation, suppression and discrimination.[footnote]Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 24, 1966.[\/footnote]<\/blockquote>\r\nThe Congress on Racial Equality chapter charged all responsible businessmen and administrators of the city with the failure to address themselves to the problems faced by the ghettos substandard housing, poor education, large unemployment, and minimum welfare programs.[footnote]Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 20, 1966.[\/footnote] The city leaders were also singled out by the Council of Churches of Christ as a major factor behind the disorders. It claimed that the leadership\u2019s inability to understand \u201cthe depth of discontent and desperation felt by large numbers of Cleveland Negroes\u201d had caused the riots and made them so dangerous.[footnote]Ibid<\/em>.[\/footnote] The Americans for Democratic Action suggested that the city could raise the level of welfare to a decent standard and thus break the two bonds of misery, poverty and segregation, that united the Hough ghetto.[footnote]Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 24, 1966.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nAnalyses of the trouble continued to emanate from many individuals in the stricken area. At an area meeting near the Hough area held on Sunday, July 25, speakers said that the troubles there had been bad, but that they were what the city deserved. These opinions flowed from a broad spectrum of opinion -- from ministers to Black Nationalists and from middle-aged people to the more militant youth.[footnote]Ibid<\/em>., July 25, 1966.[\/footnote] The black youth and teens were almost unanimous in their feelings of hatred and distrust for the whites. Examples of their reactions follow:\r\n
You (whitey) reap what you have sown. . .\r\nWe showed we ain\u2019t scared of them. . .\r\nWe\u2019ve done the city a favor. Look at the urban renewal<\/em> we\u2019ve accomplished. . .[footnote]Bob Modic, \u201cHate, Revenge, Sorrow and Shock Divide Hough Residents,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 20, 1966.[\/footnote]<\/blockquote>\r\nWhitey, however, also reacted to the black community in less than congenial terms. Firemen talked of quitting because they were not paid to \u201cfight a guerrilla war\u201d with the black man. Fire Chief William Barry stated the opinions of many of his men when he said, almost incredulously, \u201cWe came out to protect lives and these people attacked us.\u201d A staff member of the University-Euclid Urban Renewal Project illustrated a large segment of sentiment in the white community as well as an unenlightened view of the underlying causes of the disorders when he said, \u201cPolice should be ordered to shoot all looters. . .\u201d[footnote]Modic, \u201cWhy Do People.\u201d[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nStill confused and bewildered by the events that shattered the calm summer, Clevelanders groped to find answers to the questions raised by the riots. The mixed emotions toward violence accompanied by a general feeling of frustration and a deeply ingrained resentment of whites which characterized the black community only demonstrated the need for lasting solutions to the city\u2019s problems. The black attitudes were not widely shared throughout the rest of the community by either the majority of whites or the city\u2019s leadership. If anything, the disorders served in the short run to further polarize the city\u2019s \u201cestablishment\u201d and the black community -- two groups which, in the previous few years, had been drifting further apart. The differences and problems had become more apparent as well as more intractable.\r\n\r\nIt appeared doubtful that a non-partisan investigation of the disorders by a group of \u201crespected\u201d citizens, such as the Grand Jury, would resolve any differences or settle any quarrels. Such an investigation might only further alienate the black community without resulting in any positive good. Thus, as the hot summer began to cool down, the city stood frustrated in its efforts to understand itself.","rendered":"

In the aftermath, the simplest solution was to look for villains . . .[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In the immediate first days of the calm following the disorders, relief was promised to the residents of the stricken area. Congressman Michael Feighan said that financial relief would be provided to riot victims and also indicated that the disorders would be the subject of a congressional investigation.[2]<\/sup><\/a> The Small Business Authority announced that it would make loans to Hough area businessmen whose stores had been damaged or destroyed and who wanted to rebuild or relocate.[3]<\/sup><\/a> The Legal Aid Society said that more than thirty experienced criminal lawyers were offering their legal services free to indigent persons who had been arrested during the disturbances.[4]<\/sup><\/a> Even Mayor Locher announced some plans for relief for the area in the near future. He stated that the city planned to advertise for bids on three parcels of land to be developed for 110 low-cost housing units for the Hough area.[5]<\/sup><\/a> But the reaction of the community to the previous week of violence and disorder was not primarily one oriented to reconstructing the damaged black community. The problem, it seemed, was to find out what<\/em> and specifically who<\/em> had caused the riots.<\/p>\n

Many civic leaders denounced the disturbances as just \u201clawlessness.\u201d Both Mayor Locher and City Council President Stanton claimed that the riots had no connection with the civil rights movement, but were instead just \u201ca matter of lawlessness.\u201d[6]<\/sup><\/a><\/em> Some Negro leaders agreed with this assessment of the situation. Harry Alexander, business manager and secretary of the Negro owned and run Call and Post<\/em>, said that the riots themselves were not racial, but that they \u201cwere triggered . . . because of constant continued discrimination against Negroes.\u201d[7]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Councilman Leo Jackson of the neighboring Glenville area strongly agreed with the mayor and city council president. He classified the disorders as \u201ca struggle, not for civil rights, but a struggle by thugs for leadership of the Negro community.\u201d[8]<\/sup><\/a> He also went on to describe the rioters as<\/p>\n

. . . an element which looks with contempt on the man who holds two jobs to support his family; disrupts schools and takes over playgrounds; snatches purses of women rather than seeking employment; burglarizes homes and stands around street corners treating our women with disrespect.[9]<\/sup><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Jackson further claimed that the action had been organized and precipitated by \u201choodlums.\u201d<\/p>\n

Such an attitude was to be heard often in the weeks that followed. Police Chief Wagner called the efforts \u201ccriminal syndicalism,\u201d and proposed that simplified riot laws be enacted that would enable the police to charge one person with inciting a riot to replace the existing law which permitted arrests only if there were at least three persons conspiring to riot.[10]<\/sup><\/a> A white councilman, Edward Katalinas, from a neighboring ward, claimed that the riots had been planned purposely for when National Guard units would have difficulty mobilizing quickly. He added that some disturbances along Superior Avenue on the northern boundary of the Hough area that had occurred earlier in June were a planned \u201cdry run\u201d for the Hough disorders. However, Katalinas also mentioned that there did exist some underlying causes for the trouble, and he pointed specifically to Mayor Ralph Locher\u2019s administration as one of them. Plans were made by the administration, he said, for a $385,000,000 highway and a catch basin in the lake that prohibited them from doing more for the East Side depressed areas.[11]<\/sup><\/a> Other leaders focused their attention on both the city government and the frustration of the black community.<\/p>\n

Bertram E. Gardner, the executive director of the Cleveland Community Relations Board, thought that the rioting indicated \u201ca combination of frustrations,\u201d which included housing, jobs and education problems. There was, in his words, \u201ca deterioration of the total community\u201d that stemmed from people who were \u201cunwilling or unable\u201d to handle the problems of the city. The war on poverty was not a total failure, but Gardner claimed that it was by no means the total answer to the problems of the ghetto. He asserted that the real provocation for the riots did not come from any of the specific problems that were often mentioned, but instead it came from the \u201cdeep frustration\u201d that resulted from the combination of inequities.[12]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The ineptitude of the city government was also bewailed by Ernest C. Cooper, executive director of the Urban League of Cleveland. He blamed the city\u2019s power structure and the maintenance of the status quo for the disorder. \u201cAuthorities appear to be more interested in controlling the situation than attempting to work out the problems that cause violence,\u201d he stated in a press release. He also challenged the city government \u201cto give concrete evidence to those persons who find themselves frustrated . . . that a positive change is taking place around the pressing problems they face in everyday life.\u201d[13]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

State Representative Carl Stokes, a Negro who had narrowly missed unseating Mayor Locher in the election the previous fall, remarked that black leaders had been unable to offer the community any \u201cevidence of hope and progress\u201d because of a \u201clong list of studies, plans, and broken promises\u201d that had been made by the municipal government.[14]<\/sup><\/a> The charge against the city government was further amplified by Councilman M. Morris Jackson. He attributed the causes to a lack of communication between Hough people and the white community and specifically referred to broken promises on urban renewal projects that the government had made to the people. Jackson stated that despite its allocated budget of millions of dollars, the urban renewal program had failed to provide adequate housing or recreation facilities. Insuffi-cient city services and the lack of an integrated police force were also mentioned by Jackson as causes of the riots.[15]<\/sup><\/a> County Judge Thomas Parrino spoke for many of the community leaders when he said, \u201cThe seeds of these riotous acts are found in grave social injustice. Poverty and a denial of equal opportunity produces enormous frustrations.\u201d[16]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Numerous members of the community reflected the sentiments of their leaders, while others exhibited bitter personal feelings toward other members of the community. Many of the neighborbood merchants were shocked and dismayed that the businesses which had taken them a lifetime to build had suddenly been destroyed so quickly and easily.<\/p>\n

Joe Berman, owner of the Starlite Delicatessen for twelve years, had locked the front door of his store with six-inch spikes the day after the first outbreak of violence. That night the spokes didn\u2019t hold the door past six o\u2019 clock, and when Berman returned the next morning, he found looters running throughout his food store in full daylight while the police cruised nearby. His reaction was typical. \u201cI\u2019ve been here twelve years and never had any serious trouble with anyone. But whether you\u2019re good or bad makes no difference when a riot comes. We all got it.\u201d[17]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The riots ended twenty-one years of work for Al and Louis Rosenberg, owners of the Corner Cut-Rate Drug Store, and nineteen years of labor for the owner of a meat market, Earl Gamer. The Rosenbergs, like most other merchants, could not understand why their business had been a target for destruction but the fact that two black-owned businesses across the street and next door had been left unscathed helped to ex-plain the reasons. Gamer was somewhat bitter, and his attitude probably exemplified the feelings of fellow merchants who had been wiped out. Upon viewing his ruined business, he announced, \u201cI can\u2019t and will not open again. I\u2019m completely ruined.\u201d He went on to add, \u201cWhen I moved in here nineteen years ago, there were very few Negroes. They came to me, I didn\u2019t come to them.\u201d As to the charges of low quality food at high prices, Gamer replied, \u201cThey say we are capitalizing on them. Well, that\u2019s not true.\u201d[18]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Many of the area\u2019s residents, however, did not agree with Gamer\u2019s assessment of the situation. Mrs. Daisy Craggett, a leader in the Hough Community Council, claimed that the store owners that had suffered had made up for their losses in advance \u201cover and over again . . . in bad service and high prices for inferior merchandise.\u201d[19]<\/sup><\/a> She also recalled her experience of walking through the violence-torn neighborhood on the third day of the disorders:<\/p>\n

I walked through the area. I saw those high-price stores burning down. I couldn\u2019t feel too badly.[20]<\/sup><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Many of the local residents echoed the sentiments of Mrs. Craggett. Julius X, the operator of a Hough beauty salon, showed obvious resentment toward the white man. \u201cThe white man is reaping what he has sown. He is learning you can\u2019t push people around. This trouble is here because the white man won\u2019t treat the black man right,\u201d he commented after the second night of trouble. The same militancy was apparent in the attitude of James Jackson, a young resident of Hough, who claimed that \u201cabout ninety percent of the people out here want to get whitey.\u201d A black dry cleaner in Hough whose business had not been harmed in the riots lamented that the disorders had \u201cbeen a long time coming and it\u2019s about time; it\u2019s too bad some of our own people have to suffer. . .\u201d[21]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Most of the older residents of the neighborhood were most concerned with this fact that some of \u201ctheir own\u201d people did have to suffer, and as a result, they questioned both the motives and purposes underlying the urban disorder. Mrs. Ceola King, a worker in the area anti-poverty office, wondered if the people of Hough had done all the damage. \u201cWhy would people want to harm themselves?\u201d she asked. \u201cThe hardships that are created are going to be the hardships of the people who live in Hough,\u201d she later observed.[22]<\/sup><\/a> Agreement with this attitude prevailed only among some of the older people. A shoestore manager in the area commented after a few days of rioting, \u201cThey are burning up their homes and their jobs. They are burning up their payday and hurting our own people.\u201d[23]<\/sup><\/a> The director of Halfway House, a transition center in Hough for released convicts, Reverend James Redding, said that the released convicts \u201cshook their heads, bewildered by the foolish destruction.\u201d He added:<\/p>\n

This is all so useless and senseless. Here we are, trying to rebuild people into decent, law-abiding citizens, trying to give them a better chance — and they spend a night watching people trying to destroy themselves.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As an after thought, Reverend Redding said, \u201cMaybe one of the problems is that no one has been listening to what we have been saying.\u201d[24]<\/sup><\/a> Even among those people who opposed the violence because of its self-destructive effects, there remained the gnawing feeling of frustration.<\/p>\n

Everyone in Hough seemed to be angry with everyone else. A newspaper reporter wrote that along Hough Avenue, people \u201ctalked in expressions of shame and defiance, anger and anxiety. Young men spoke of their grievances against the white man, old men of their grievances against the young.\u201d[25]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Reactions varied as to the amount of support that the violent actions commanded in the black community. Bertram Gardner felt that perhaps \u201cninety to ninety-five percent of the people\u201d did not approve of the methods of destruction, and that the riots did not have \u201ccommunity approval.\u201d[26]<\/sup><\/a> However, many of the residents disagreed with Gardner\u2019s appraisal. Phil Mason, a fieldworker in the Hough area, felt that a sub-stantial portion of the community supported and participated in the action by noting that \u201cpeople who were just sitting on their porches would run over to a store after the windows were broken and steal stuff.\u201d[27]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Other community residents and leaders directed their efforts toward determining the specific nature of the problems that helped to foment the trouble. The pastor of Calvary Presbyterian Church, Reverend Bruere, pinpointed several specific causes of the riots which he had observed in his work of helping his church pioneer projects to alleviate some inner-city problems. He blamed the disorder on everyone in the community, and cited specifically the churches which had moved out of the inner city as the Negro moved in, the city administration\u2019s incompetence, apathetic citizens of the city, suburbs that wanted \u201cto remain aloof from the problems of the city,\u201d \u201cabsentee landlords and irresponsible tenants,\u201d and \u201cpeople who produce large families of illegitimate children . . . people who loaf and expect to be supported by some welfare agency.\u201d[28]<\/sup><\/a> No one was spared in Bruere\u2019s sweeping indictment of the entire community, but most other people, such as Guy Goens, a supervisor at the Hough anti-poverty office, were less broad in their diagnoses of the problem. He emphasized that one of the principle causes of the disorder was \u201cthe general frustration in Hough.\u201d[29]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Many organizations across the city joined in the search for underlying causes for the riots, but most of their findings seemed to echo those sentiments expressed by individual citizens. The East Side Community Union, a group of seventy-five Glenville residents once again expressed the dominant view of the Negro community. Its report stated:<\/p>\n

These so-called disturbances are not isolated uprisings of teen-age vandals, nor are they the result of \u2018outside agitators.\u2019 They are the expression of a despair, of an anger that is deeply ingrained into the Negro community; a despair and anger caused by years of exploitation, suppression and discrimination.[30]<\/sup><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Congress on Racial Equality chapter charged all responsible businessmen and administrators of the city with the failure to address themselves to the problems faced by the ghettos substandard housing, poor education, large unemployment, and minimum welfare programs.[31]<\/sup><\/a> The city leaders were also singled out by the Council of Churches of Christ as a major factor behind the disorders. It claimed that the leadership\u2019s inability to understand \u201cthe depth of discontent and desperation felt by large numbers of Cleveland Negroes\u201d had caused the riots and made them so dangerous.[32]<\/sup><\/a> The Americans for Democratic Action suggested that the city could raise the level of welfare to a decent standard and thus break the two bonds of misery, poverty and segregation, that united the Hough ghetto.[33]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Analyses of the trouble continued to emanate from many individuals in the stricken area. At an area meeting near the Hough area held on Sunday, July 25, speakers said that the troubles there had been bad, but that they were what the city deserved. These opinions flowed from a broad spectrum of opinion — from ministers to Black Nationalists and from middle-aged people to the more militant youth.[34]<\/sup><\/a> The black youth and teens were almost unanimous in their feelings of hatred and distrust for the whites. Examples of their reactions follow:<\/p>\n

You (whitey) reap what you have sown. . .
\nWe showed we ain\u2019t scared of them. . .
\nWe\u2019ve done the city a favor. Look at the urban renewal<\/em> we\u2019ve accomplished. . .[35]<\/sup><\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Whitey, however, also reacted to the black community in less than congenial terms. Firemen talked of quitting because they were not paid to \u201cfight a guerrilla war\u201d with the black man. Fire Chief William Barry stated the opinions of many of his men when he said, almost incredulously, \u201cWe came out to protect lives and these people attacked us.\u201d A staff member of the University-Euclid Urban Renewal Project illustrated a large segment of sentiment in the white community as well as an unenlightened view of the underlying causes of the disorders when he said, \u201cPolice should be ordered to shoot all looters. . .\u201d[36]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Still confused and bewildered by the events that shattered the calm summer, Clevelanders groped to find answers to the questions raised by the riots. The mixed emotions toward violence accompanied by a general feeling of frustration and a deeply ingrained resentment of whites which characterized the black community only demonstrated the need for lasting solutions to the city\u2019s problems. The black attitudes were not widely shared throughout the rest of the community by either the majority of whites or the city\u2019s leadership. If anything, the disorders served in the short run to further polarize the city\u2019s \u201cestablishment\u201d and the black community — two groups which, in the previous few years, had been drifting further apart. The differences and problems had become more apparent as well as more intractable.<\/p>\n

It appeared doubtful that a non-partisan investigation of the disorders by a group of \u201crespected\u201d citizens, such as the Grand Jury, would resolve any differences or settle any quarrels. Such an investigation might only further alienate the black community without resulting in any positive good. Thus, as the hot summer began to cool down, the city stood frustrated in its efforts to understand itself.<\/p>\n

  1. \u201cIce, Water and Fire,\u201d Newsweek<\/em>, LXVII, August 1, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  2. Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 22, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  3. Ibid<\/em>. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  4. Ibid<\/em>., July 26, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  5. Norman Mlacak, \u201cHough People to be Quizzed on Riot Cause,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 27, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  6. <\/em>The citation was not available in printed version of this book. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  7. The citation was not available in printed version of this book. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  8. The citation was not available in printed version of this book.<\/em> ↵<\/a><\/li>
  9. Norman Mlachak, \u201cLeo Jackson Warns Council of Organized Negro Thugs,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 26, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  10. Robert G. McGruder, \u201cWagner Waits for Riot Law Model,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, August 8, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  11. Sam Giaimo, \u201cNames of Rioters Revealed to Jury,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 27, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  12. Doris O\u2019Donnell, \u201cRioting Blamed on Negro Frustration,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 20, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  13. Ibid<\/em>. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  14. \u201cAnd Now Cleveland,\u201d The Reporter<\/em>, XXXV, August 11, 1966, p. 8. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  15. Norman Mlachak, \u201cLeo Jackson.\u201d ↵<\/a><\/li>
  16. Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 26, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  17. Sam Giaimo \u201cMerchants Who Felt Licked Prepare to Leave Hough,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 20, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  18. Michael D. Roberts and James Van Fleet, \u201cPlunderers Profit; Merchants Quit,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 20, 1966, p. 1. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  19. Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 25, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  20. Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 21, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  21. Robert G. McGruder, \u201cOlder People of Hough Want No Part of Trouble,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 20, 1966, p. 1. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  22. Bob Modic, \u201cWhy Do People Hurt Themselves? Saddened Hough Residents Ask,\" Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 19, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  23. McGruder, \u201cOlder People,\u201d p. 1. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  24. Modic, \u201cWhy Do People.\u201d ↵<\/a><\/li>
  25. Robert T. Stock, \u201cStores Reopen in Hough\u2019s Daylight,\u201d Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 23, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  26. O\u2019Donnell, \u201cRioting Blamed.\u201d ↵<\/a><\/li>
  27. Norman Mlachak, \u201cJust Like a War, Awed Policemen and Fireman Say,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 19, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  28. Sam Giaimo, \u201cBruere Says All to Blame for Riots,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, August 1, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  29. Modic, \u201cWhy Do People.\u201d ↵<\/a><\/li>
  30. Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 24, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  31. Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 20, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  32. Ibid<\/em>. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  33. Cleveland Plain Dealer<\/em>, July 24, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  34. Ibid<\/em>., July 25, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  35. Bob Modic, \u201cHate, Revenge, Sorrow and Shock Divide Hough Residents,\u201d Cleveland Press<\/em>, July 20, 1966. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  36. Modic, \u201cWhy Do People.\u201d ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":3,"menu_order":2,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-45","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":3,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/45","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"version-history":[{"count":15,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/45\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":188,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/45\/revisions\/188"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/3"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/45\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=45"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=45"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=45"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu\/hough-riots\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=45"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}