Nicola Sacco, Italian-American anarchist (d. 1927)

The names Nicola Sacco (born April 22, 1891, died August 23, 1927) and Bartolomeo Vanzetti (born June 11, 1888, died August 23, 1927) resonate through history as central figures in one of the 20th century’s most polarizing legal cases. These two Italian immigrant anarchists found themselves at the heart of a global controversy after being accused of a heinous crime in the United States. Their story became a profound examination of justice, prejudice, and the political climate of the era, leading to their execution seven years after their initial conviction.

The Crime and Accusation

On April 15, 1920, a payroll robbery at the Slater and Morrill Shoe Company in Braintree, Massachusetts, resulted in the tragic deaths of a guard, Alessandro Berardelli, and a paymaster, Frederick Parmenter. A substantial sum of money was stolen during the armed holdup. Just weeks later, Sacco, a shoemaker, and Vanzetti, a fish peddler, were arrested and subsequently charged with the murders. Both men, pronounced [niˈkɔːla ˈsakko] and [bartoloˈmɛːo vanˈtsetti, -ˈdzet-] respectively, maintained their innocence from the outset, asserting they were targeted due to their radical political beliefs and their status as recent immigrants in a country grappling with intense anti-immigrant sentiment and a "Red Scare" following World War I.

The Controversial Trial and Verdict

The trial of Sacco and Vanzetti began on May 31, 1921, in Dedham, Massachusetts, presided over by Judge Webster Thayer. After only a few hours of deliberation on July 14, 1921, the jury delivered a guilty verdict, convicting both men of first-degree murder. Judge Thayer then sentenced them to death. From the very beginning, the fairness of the trial was vehemently questioned, with many observers and supporters suspecting that strong biases – namely anti-Italianism, anti-immigrant sentiment, and a deep-seated fear of anarchism – heavily influenced both the prosecution and the jury’s decision. The judicial process unfolded against a backdrop of widespread xenophobia and political paranoia, which, to many, seemed to taint the pursuit of justice.

A Global Outcry and the Appeals Process

Following their conviction, a tenacious battle for justice began. A private organization, the Sacco and Vanzetti Defense Committee, was formed and tirelessly raised funds to support a series of appeals. These appeals were based on several critical points: recanted testimony from witnesses, conflicting ballistics evidence that failed to conclusively link the murder weapon to Sacco, a highly prejudicial pretrial statement made by the jury foreman, and even a confession from an alleged participant in the robbery, Celestino Madeiros, who claimed Sacco and Vanzetti were not involved. Despite these significant challenges to the original verdict, all appeals were consistently denied, first by Judge Thayer himself and subsequently by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, intensifying public skepticism about the impartiality of the legal system.

By 1926, the Sacco and Vanzetti case had transcended national borders, capturing worldwide attention and becoming one of the most prominent "causes célèbres" in modern history. As details of the trial’s perceived flaws and the men’s unwavering professions of innocence spread, protests and demonstrations erupted in major cities across North America, Europe, and as far afield as Tokyo, Sydney, Melbourne, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, Dubai, Montevideo, Johannesburg, and Auckland. Intellectuals, celebrated writers, artists, and academics, including figures like Harvard law professor Felix Frankfurter (who would later become a Supreme Court Justice), publicly pleaded for their pardon or, at the very least, a new trial. Frankfurter even argued for their innocence in a widely read article for the Atlantic Monthly, later published as a book, which meticulously dissected the trial’s weaknesses. Remarkably, even the Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini recognized their suspected innocence and attempted to exert diplomatic pressure on American authorities for their release. When their execution was scheduled for April 1927, the global outcry reached a fever pitch.

Responding to a massive influx of telegrams and international pressure, Massachusetts Governor Alvan T. Fuller appointed a three-man commission to review the case. This commission, comprised of President A. Lawrence Lowell of Harvard University, President Samuel Wesley Stratton of MIT, and former Probate Judge Robert Grant, conducted weeks of secret deliberations, which included interviews with Judge Thayer, the defense lawyers, and several witnesses. However, to the dismay of supporters worldwide, the commission ultimately upheld the verdict, concluding that the trial had been fair and that no grounds existed for a retrial or pardon.

Execution and Enduring Legacy

With all legal and political avenues exhausted, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were executed in the electric chair at Charlestown State Prison just after midnight on August 23, 1927. Their deaths sparked further outrage and cemented their place as martyrs in the eyes of many. Yet, the questions surrounding their guilt and the fairness of their trial refused to dissipate. Investigations into the case continued throughout the 1930s and 1940s. The posthumous publication of their eloquent letters, which passionately professed their innocence and philosophical ideals, further fueled the belief that they had been wrongfully executed. Subsequent ballistics tests, though still debated, and later incriminating statements by individuals connected to the original robbery or the men’s acquaintances, only served to further cloud the case, never fully resolving the pervasive doubts.

Fifty years after their executions, on August 23, 1977, Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis issued a significant proclamation. He declared that Sacco and Vanzetti had been unfairly tried and convicted and that "any disgrace should be forever removed from their names." While this proclamation did not grant a legal pardon or declare them innocent, it officially acknowledged the profound injustices and prejudices that had marred their trial, offering a symbolic exoneration and a lasting testament to the enduring questions surrounding their fate.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Who were Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti?

Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were Italian immigrant anarchists who lived and worked in Massachusetts in the early 20th century. They became globally known after being accused, convicted, and executed for a robbery and double murder, a case that many believed was heavily influenced by prejudice against their background and political beliefs.

What crime were Sacco and Vanzetti accused of?

They were accused of the armed robbery and murder of a guard and a paymaster at the Slater and Morrill Shoe Company in Braintree, Massachusetts, on April 15, 1920.

Why was their trial considered controversial?

The trial was highly controversial due to strong suspicions that the verdict was heavily influenced by anti-Italian, anti-immigrant, and anti-anarchist biases prevalent in the United States during the post-World War I "Red Scare" era. Many perceived the evidence against them as weak and circumstantial.

What were the main arguments made during their appeals?

Appeals focused on issues such as recanted witness testimony, conflicting ballistics evidence that failed to conclusively link Sacco's gun to the murder, a prejudicial pretrial statement by the jury foreman, and a confession from another alleged participant in the robbery who claimed Sacco and Vanzetti were not involved.

How did the world react to the Sacco and Vanzetti case?

The case garnered immense international attention and became a significant cause célèbre. Protests and demonstrations took place in numerous major cities across North America, Europe, and other continents. Many prominent intellectuals, artists, and political figures, including Harvard law professor Felix Frankfurter and even Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, expressed belief in their innocence or called for a new trial.

What was the outcome of Governor Alvan T. Fuller's commission?

Despite the massive global outcry and new evidence, Governor Fuller's specially appointed three-man commission ultimately upheld the original verdict, concluding that the trial was fair and that no grounds existed for a pardon or retrial. This decision led directly to their execution.

What was Governor Michael Dukakis's proclamation in 1977?

On the 50th anniversary of their executions, Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis issued a proclamation stating that Sacco and Vanzetti had been unfairly tried and convicted, and that "any disgrace should be forever removed from their names." This was a symbolic, moral exoneration acknowledging past injustices, rather than a legal pardon.

Are Sacco and Vanzetti now considered legally innocent?

While Governor Dukakis's proclamation in 1977 recognized that they were unfairly tried and convicted, it did not legally pardon them or declare them innocent in a judicial sense. The case remains a subject of historical debate, but the prevailing sentiment, especially following Dukakis's statement, is that they were victims of a prejudiced justice system.