passed both the Ordinance of Labour — requiring work and fixing wages – and a vagrancy law that criminalized the refusal to work, as evidenced by begging. The initial punishment was involuntary labor, but by the 16th century, beggar laws called for more aggressive punishments. Offenders were imprisoned, branded on their chests with the letter “V”, whipped before crowds of onlookers, relieved of their ears, even executed. These same laws applied in colonial Ameica, which was controlled by England’s common law system, and in post-independence America. “In general,” William Chambliss wrote in a 1964 scholarly article on the subject that is still cited as authoritative, “the vagrancy laws of England, as they stood in the middle eighteenth century, were simply adopted by the states.” One key difference was that, in America, the laws passed throughout the new nation empowered authorities to arrest people who looked poor or homeless on suspicion of a crime. Probable cause of an actual crime did not factor into the equation.
Except in Maryland, where the vagrancy law initially applied only to “free” blacks, few blacks were charged under America’s begging statutes before 1865. Most were enslaved and therefore not free to roam, begging. When slavery ended, however, the newfound serfdom of blacks made conditions ripe for the rise of a new effort to criminalize them. With the U.S. suddenly facing a glut of jobless, landless blacks and a shattered Southern economy, America wanted to put blacks back to work to avert more economic disaster. Claiming that blacks were too lazy and shifty to work without compulsion, America’s elite called for the extensive adoption of vagrancy laws targeting blacks throughout the South. An 1863 editorial in The New York Times said: “If the [Emancipation] Proclamation makes the slaves actually free, there will come the further duty of making them work. That the whole negro race is to remain idle if it should choose so to do, being free, no one can seriously propose.” The editorial called for the application of vagrancy laws to blacks: “If the slaves choose to ‘labor faithfully for reasonable wages’ — very well …. But if they do not, they must be compelled to do it, — not by brute force, nor by being owned like cattle, and denied every human right, but by just and equal laws, — such laws as in every community control and forbid vagrancy, mendicancy and all the shapes by which idle vagabondage preys upon industry and thrift.”
As early as 1865, the kind of laws the New York Times was advocating were being added to statute books throughout the South. Specifically targeting blacks, the laws formed part of the new Black Codes, laws designed to subjugate the freedmen. These vagrancy laws penalized not begging per se, or appearing poor, but idleness itself, or loitering. Under Mississippi’s code, Blacks appearing in public with no “lawful employment or business” or “found unlawfully assembling themselves together, either in the day or night time” were subject to arrest. The arrests carried fines that could only be paid off through labor, essentially re-enslaving blacks to white farmers. Even after the 14th Amendment invalidated the Black Codes, the Freedmen’s Bureau — the federal agency created to protect blacks — backed and enforced vagrancy statutes that purported to be “color blind,” but were almost exclusively enforced against ex-slaves.
NYC CRIMINALIZES LOITERING
Until the 1870s, the NYPD and other urban police forces had helped control the unemployed northern population by functioning mainly as social welfare institutions, according to the book Paradoxes of Police Work by David Perez. “The police ran the soup kitchens and poor people would sleep in police stations,” says Amy Dru Stanley, a History of Law professor at the University of Chicago. But in the 1870s, after a depression struck, causing unprecedented levels of poverty, elites began to reconsider the wisdom of this police function. Industrialists and wealthy charity reformers wanted police to stop cushioning the blows of unemployment, because they believed it convinced people not to work. Seeing how effective the South was at controlling black labor with vagrancy laws, northern elites decided to adopt them in New York. “Part of the reformers attempt was to make the police not undercut the [labor] market,” Stanley says. A strong, healthy economy depended on every able-bodied person carrying his weight, reformers argued. While men





I had to leave my house because some individuals in my area are dangerous. Since my departure my home has been broken into several times. Currently my porch is being used as a hang out, also as a drug traffic area. I was informed to put up loitering signs, so if anyone is on my property they can be moved along or arrested. What do I do when, I am being abused over and over again, by (people just hanging out getting high), does this loitering law work for me? I am an African American woman with a latin twist. Lastly for a loitering law to be in effect, does a loitering sign have to be present on private property?
[...] One of the men arrested under this voided law was a 44-year-old homeless man named Eddie Wise. After being arrested 22 times in a 2-year span for the same voided law, he decided to do something. [...]
Fantastic article!
Yet, it must be said that groups of men who are illegal aliens are seen throughout this city everyday supposedly waiting to be picked up for work. Many have been witnessed to be drinking and doing other questionable things in or near parks, business establishment etc, yet, they are not bothered by the police. In fact, in some area, such as the Port Rchmond section in Staten island,at the directive of the mayor, police cars have been dispatched to “protect” them.Why the distinction?
That’s a good question Sonia. But I wonder what you mean by “questionable things”? And if they’re not bothered by the police it must be the case that they are not breaking any laws. Keep in mind, aggressive begging is illegal, as are a number of other behaviors that go beyond the simple act of asking for money.
Flagging down cars, congregating in front of play grounds, drinking. One can only speculate how they attend to their personal sanitation needs since they gather all day long. In NYC where the primary law enforcement tactic is stopping and frisking young African American men it’s hard to imagine groups of 20-30 gathering in public without the police relentlessly harrasing them. For some, large numbers of African American men on the street is criminally suspicious. When it is illegals doing it, it’s people asking for work that unemployed African American men would gladly do. Maybe it’s time to have that discussion as well.
My favorite (also least favorite) part of this article is page 6 where the Cheat Sheet is revealed. One of the officers is asked why chose to make an arrest, and “‘he mentioned this unofficial cheat sheet that he had and pulled it out of his pocket.’ The cheat sheet contained a quick and dirty version of the laws that cops typically charged people with.” And this cheat sheet contained the void, unconstitutional anti-loitering law. Unbelievable!
I wonder how many other cities have these kinds of cheat sheets in their police departments.
Loitering. What say us about the countless thousands of Black men in NYC doing just about nothing worthwhile and the small, but critical mass wresting safety and security from the residents whose communities they terrorize. The atmosphere is littered with negativity because of these guys and the criminal elements uses them as shields. This is similar to the Taliban or other terrorist groups that use the general population to cover their worthless existence. Though valid points, this goes beyond loitering; this is about the cowards that hide among us and are given cover by hiding behind moral people and moral stances!
The community must get out of this hamster wheel themselves. The New York City police department, with their suburban, Irish/Italian/Jewish membership and heirarchy has absolutely no interest in fixing what ails Black and Latino New Yorkers. Neither does the overwhelmingly White, safe Liberals that make the living of off that of the dying. I don’t doubt yours or Judge Scheindlin earnest desire to fix what’s broken, I just don’t think those whose interest it is to profit off of the chaos that is the containment zones known as Black and poor communities will let you do it.
Only this willing to solve this problem themselves can help themselves. The German-American cop from Middle Village or Great Neck judge is going to help. No more than any Black Intellectual since MLK’s death ever has.
Great reporting, Dax!
Great article.
This stop and frisk law in New York,is absolutly Racial Profiling..Rep.Elenor Holmes Norton [D]. District of Wash. has just introduced a Bill against Racial Profiling…Hopefully,this Bill will get through Congress and Pass.In the mean-time,Blacks will have to Fight in The Courts for Our Rights as Citizens,and File Racial Profiling Law-Suits.Let’s Fight for Our Rights as Citizens.No one has a Right To Determine What a Person Should Look Like or Dress Like.
Great article.
Great insight…great info…good stuff! I have officially been informed! Thanks Brother!
You’re welcome! Thanks for reading!
Thank you for this very informative article… Wish there was a class action for, stop and frisk! That is ruining lives criminalizing black and brown people just going about their daily business not doing anything illegal.
iiis,
Stop and frisk is definitely on the judicial horizon. The maneuverings are already happening. And when it does finally come to trial, Judge Scheindlin will be the one hearing it, which could be very important given her history and understanding NYPD policing culture.