Kristian Williams - Our Enemies in Blue - Police and Power in America

often in the streets as at the polls. And these battles determined the distributionof jobs, services, and graft. Elections decided who made the law, supplied publicservices, and controlled the city treasury. And more importantly, they decidedwhose friends would fill public jobs, which neighborhoods would receive attentionor suffer neglect, which illicit businesses would continue operation, andwhose palm would be greased in the process.POLITICAL MACHINES: THE GANG AND THE GOVERNMENTThe gang and the government are no different.-Jane's Addiction2Corruption was the foundation and the defining characteristic of the politicalmachine. Edward C. Banfield and James Q. Wilson offer a more formaldefinition: "A political 'machine' is a party organization that depends cruciallyupon inducements that are both specific and materiaL . .. ".\ Put more simply,"Machine government is, essentially, a system of organized bribery.""But perhaps even this puts too pleasant a face on it, for machines did notuse only bribery to get what they wanted; they used whatever means wereavailable to them, including threats, fraud, blackmail, and actual violence.Machines were concerned about power and resources, not principles-andcertainly not democracy.' Principles were espoused, of course, as justificationfor their actions, to differentiate one party from another, and to gain andmaintain the allegiance of a constituency committed to such values. But itwas typical of machine politics that principles were always secondary to thedemands of power.The privileging of power over principle meant tlldl every aspecl of thegovernment's activity was directed towards maintaining the ruling clique'scontrol. By the same token, every resource at the city's disposal was availableas a reward for the machine's supporters. The police served in bothcapacities. Hiring, discipline. transfers, and promotions were all governedby the convenience of the machine organization. Hence, whenever controlof the city government changed hands, turnover in the police departmentwas sure to follow. Without regard for the qualifications of the individualofficer, each party dispensed with the supporters of the other and replacedthem with their own. Very nearly full turnover of police personnel followedthe Los Angeles election of 1889, the Kansas City election of 1895, and theChicago and Baltimore elections of 1897.6In the 1907 Louisville election, when a Republican was unexpectedly electedmayor, every captain was reduced to a patrolman, and Republicans (manylacking in police experience) were appointed in their place. When theDemocrats won in the following election, the process was reversed. Againin 1917, the Republicans gained control and fired 300 from a department of429. Everyone above the rank of sergeant was replaced.?In New York, positions were so sought after that appointments relied onpolitical sponsorship or outright bribery, or sometimes both. Hence, from the56