In 1886, the Haymarket Affair occurred at Haymarket Square in Chicago. Originally a peaceful demonstration to express viewpoints, it tragically turned into a riot. This led to subsequent trials that ended in convictions and executions. Unfortunately, innocent lives were lost and unjust accusations were made during this event. Moreover, the incident revealed flaws within the judicial system as prejudice and fear triumphed over constitutional rights in an effort to satisfy public sentiment.
The Haymarket Affair was a violent riot sparked by oppressive police officers and characterized by unjust trials that claimed to support American values but actually violated constitutional rights. The arrests and trials during this event demonstrated the prevailing prejudice against labor movements advocating anarchy. Anarchists at the time believed that the government and its laws aimed to suppress the working class, which strengthened their determination to overthrow the capitalist system.
Anarchists had different political goals. These included establishing an eight-hour work day, ensuring sufficient housing, eliminating child labor, and providing free public education. Anarchists gained the trust and admiration of workers through their support for strikes and unions, spreading labor-related grievances through writings, and advocating for revolution and the removal of bosses. As a result, disgruntled laborers nationwide organized a strike on May 1, 1886 to demand an eight-hour work day. In anticipation of this planned strike and the unrest it caused, the Chicago Mail published an editorial addressing the situation.
In this editorial, the author discusses the two anarchists, Albert Parsons and August Spies, whom he considers dangerous. He urges readers to hold them accountable if any trouble arises. The writer accurately predicts that these two men will be accused of causing trouble. As expected, three days later on May 4, 1886, an assembly organized by a prominent German anarchist in Chicago’s labor movement took place in Haymarket Square.
The assembly convened to address the fatal shooting of workers by police officers during a clash with striking laborers. The incident took place the day before, when law enforcement opened fire on demonstrators in an effort to regain control. Upon arriving at Haymarket Square to disrupt the gathering, the police encountered only approximately two hundred individuals still present in the crowd. The speakers at the rally focused exclusively on condemning the violence from the previous day and did not advocate for retaliatory actions by workers. At one point, law enforcement interrupted one of the leaders’ speeches and ordered all those present to disperse.
Although the speaker claimed to be peaceable, they were asked to leave by the police. Nevertheless, chaos and uncertainty erupted when an unidentified person unexpectedly threw a bomb into the crowd of policemen. This incident greatly affected the significance of the gathering. In response, the police shot at the crowd, causing pandemonium. The exact number of casualties remains uncertain; however, reports suggest that two civilians and seven police officers died, while around seventy officers and one hundred civilians sustained injuries.
Despite the unknown identity of the undercover bomber, eight anarchists were arrested and accused of the deaths. When the trial took place six weeks later, prosecutor Julius Grinell did not directly accuse any of the men of actually throwing the bomb. Instead, the case against the eight revolved around a wide-reaching conspiracy theory that claimed the anarchists had influenced the bomber. The trial was marred by numerous flaws, including a biased jury, questionable behavior by the judge, and dishonest witnesses. Furthermore, Grinell purposely selected jurors who were inclined to believe that the anarchists were guilty.
Before being seated, multiple jury members confessed to having a preconceived notion that the eight defendants were already guilty. During the trial’s conclusion, the judge notified the jury that they had the authority to pronounce guilt on the accused even if someone who wasn’t charged committed the crime. Additionally, it was clarified by the judge that neither knowledge of the bomber’s identity nor proof of their acquaintance with any articles or posters linked to the anarchist defendants was necessary for conviction.
Although the judge, prosecutor, and jury may be considered biased and unjust in their actions, some witnesses against the accused are widely acknowledged as dishonest. Despite prejudice and discrimination, the defendants persisted with their cases and appeals until the verdicts were reached. The defendants were represented by Black and Swett who argued that Grinnell’s witnesses were lying and presented evidence that some of the accused were not even present at Haymarket Square on May 4th. Additionally, six out of the eight defendants were not near the bomb explosion site, while Spies and Samuel Fielden were in plain sight of the crowd and police. However, despite presenting a logical case, the passion and prejudice of the jury led them to conclude that there was a deliberate conspiracy behind the bombing. On August 20, 1886, all eight defendants received a guilty verdict.
The individuals labeled as “guilty” in their unwavering pursuit of justice decided to appeal the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision on November 2, 1886. Unfortunately, this court affirmed the initial verdict as accurate. Undeterred by this setback, the eight defendants sought to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court but were denied. Additionally, not only did the Illinois Supreme Court uphold their guilty verdict, but they also scheduled their execution for November 11, 1887.
These eight anarchists who faced unjust accusations and biased judgments were August Spies, Albert Parsons, Samuel Fielden, Engel Fischer, Michael Schwab, Louis Lingg and Oscar Neebe.
All of these individuals were known anarchists who openly advocated for the overthrow of the “oppressive capitalistic government that enslaved the workers.” While eight men were charged, only three of them, namely Spies, Parsons, and Fielden, were speakers at the Haymarket rally. The rest faced accusations due to societal prejudice against foreigners, as six of them were born in Europe. Interestingly, Neebe, who was not foreign, was the only anarchist spared from a death sentence.
Instead of their scheduled deaths on the eleventh of November, three others managed to prevent it. Fielden, Schwab, and Spies wrote to the Illinois Governor, Richard Oglesby, seeking help and justice. Spies specifically requested his own death in place of the others who should be released, but unfortunately, his sacrifice was unsuccessful. However, Oglesby did comply with Fielden and Schwab’s requests and changed their death sentences to life sentences.
On November 10, Lingg, the other inmate, took his own life in his jail cell by biting down on a dynamite cap. Even though Lingg’s escape was merely from the formal and public aspects of the execution, it held significance to him. He did not want the repressive government he had fought against during his lifetime to be the ones to end his life. The actions of Parsons and the final words of the martyrs reveal the profound significance of their deaths, as well as the absurd justifications for their convictions. Throughout the entire episode, supporters of the anarchists also faced discrimination.
On the day of their execution, the four individuals made their way to the gallows with a range of emotions – pride, sadness, anger, and even laughter. Despite their faces being covered by muslin shrouds, they managed to share their final words. One of the spies boldly declared, “A time will come when our silence will hold more power than the voices you are trying to silence today.” Promptly at noon on November 11, 1887, the four offenders were hanged. The unfair convictions were greatly influenced by the diverse reactions and sentiments of the public. Nonetheless, society did display some support for the anarchists during and after this incident.
Initially, public sentiment was driven by the media’s portrayal, advocating for retribution against all individuals connected to the bombing, calling for their complete and severe punishment within the limits of the law. Additionally, a memorial was erected for the police officers. However, due to repeated acts of disrespect, it had to be moved from Haymarket Square to the Chicago police station. Ultimately, the anarchists and their allies who had been accusing the police of corruption throughout the incident celebrated their triumph.
The Haymarket case encompasses a range of concerns, including prejudice against foreigners, lack of knowledge among law enforcement officials, and flaws in the judicial system. Ironically, in an effort to uphold American values, society disregarded the Constitution. The Constitution explicitly guarantees the freedom of speech and the right to assemble for intellectual discourse, granting the eight individuals the authority to conduct labor meetings and express anarchist views. While the police cannot be directly blamed for the Haymarket riot, their instructions only exacerbated the situation.
They demonstrated a lack of understanding and respect for free speech and assembly, as well as violating other Constitutional rights like the right to a fair trial. This was evident when the eight individuals were unjustly accused and convicted based on their beliefs and public prejudice (Avrich, Paul, The Haymarket Tragedy (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986) 205; Burgan, Michael, The Haymarket Square Tragedy, We the People: Industrial American Series (Minnesota: Compass Point Books, 2006), 19).
Fliege, Stu, Tales and Trails of Illinois (Champagne: University of Illinois Press, 2002), 109. Green, James Death in the Haymarket: A Story of Chicago, the First Labor Movement, and the Bombing That Divided Gilded Age America (New York: Pantheon Publishing, 2006) 269. Werstein, Irving, Strangled Voices: The Story of the Haymarket Affair (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1970), 14. [1]. Ibid. [3]. Ibid., 15. [4].
Michael Burgan, The Haymarket Square Tragedy, We the People: Industrial American Series (Minnesota: Compass Point Books, 2006), 19. [5].
Irving Werstein, Strangled Voices: The Story of the Haymarket Affair (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1970), 26. [6].
Ibid. [7].
Stu Fliege, Tales and Trails of Illinois (Champagne: University of Illinois Press, 2002), 109. [8].
Michael Burgan, The Haymarket Square Tragedy, We the People: Industrial American Series (Minnesota: Compass Point Books, 2006), 22. [9].
Ibid., 27. [10].
Stu Fliege, Tales and Trails of Illinois (Champagne: University of Illinois Press, 2002), 107. [11].
Ibid., 110. [12].
Paul Avrich, The Haymarket Tragedy (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986) 205. [13].
Ibid,. 227. [14].
Michael Burgan, The Haymarket Square Tragedy, We the People: Industrial American Series (Minnesota: Compass Point Books, 2006), 39. [15].
Ibid. [16].
James Green, Death in the Haymarket: A Story of Chicago, the First Labor Movement, and the Bombing That Divided Gilded Age America (New York: Pantheon Publishing, 2006) 286. [17].
Stu Fliege, Tales and Trails of Illinois (Champagne: University of Illinois Press, 2002), 107. [18].
Ibid. [19].
Ibid., 110. [20].
Michael Burgan, The Haymarket Square Tragedy, We the People: Industrial American Series (Minnesota: Compass Point Books, 2006), 36. [ 21 ]. Ibid. , 32. [ 22 ]. Stu Fliege, Tales and Trails of Illinois (Champagne: University of Illinois Press, 2002), 110. [ 23 ]. Ibid. ,131 [ 24 ]. Ibid. , 39. [ 25 ]. Ibid. , 43. [ 26 ]. James Green, Death in the Haymarket: A Story of Chicago, the First Labor Movement, and the Bombing That Divided Gilded Age America (New York: Pantheon Publishing, 2006) 269. 27 ]. Ibid. , 230. [ 28 ]. Irving Werstein, Strangled Voices: The Story of the Haymarket Affair (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1970), 51. [ 29 ]. Ibid. , 111. [ 30 ]. Paul Avrich, The Haymarket Tragedy (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986) 205. [ 31 ]. Ibid. , 35.
