Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.

BBCode is OFF
Smilies are OFF

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by Patrickgold » Sun May 15, 2022 3:28 pm

cavita wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 11:02 am
Patrickgold wrote: Sat May 14, 2022 6:14 pm Don’t forget the Outfit had a crew in East St Louis that was led by Buster Wortman and later Art Berne. They answered directly to the Outfit. That’s as southern Illinois as you can get. On a wiretap Art Berne is heard telling Jesse Stoneking that Trupiano in St Louis answered to Chicago just like them.

Also, as mentioned earlier, they had Fratto in Iowa. It later came out that Fratto was a CI for the feds. In the 1940s the Outfit sent people out to Dallas Tx. From my understanding it didn’t work out. So there was expansion efforts. Some successful and some not. Springfield has always been a mystery. I heard conflicting things about them. That they answered to Chicago and that they didn’t. I also heard that Zito was a last minute pick to go to Appalachia bc someone else canceled. Can’t remember. Might have been Rockford or a Chicago guy.

Rockford has been named in the past as a crew of the Outfit and the FBI has lumped them together multiple times. I think they are separate but who knows if they paid a tax at one time.

Outfit always had their hands in Wisconsin as late as the late 90s and early 2000s when the Cicero crew got busted.
I have an FBI report that stated Augie Maniaci told his FBI handlers, regarding Rockford LCN member Phil Cannella, that "he could not specifically recall what CANNELLA did to warrant membership. He said that it is his recollection that there was some trouble in Southern Illinois regarding some sort of counterfeiting operation which CANNELLA went down and “settled.”" I'm curious as to if this was in relation to any of Wortman's or Berne's dealings. This would have been approximately 1953 or so.
The Apalachin situation was that Rockford boss Tony Musso was dying of cancer and asked Springfield boss Frank Zito to attend on behalf of Rockford.
If it was in 1953 then it would have been Wortman. He was boss down there until late 60s. The sit down very well could have involved Wortman. Also could have been St Louis or Springfield. If I remember correctly, St Louis and Springfield had a disagreement in the 1940s that turned into some people getting murdered.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by cavita » Sun May 15, 2022 11:02 am

Patrickgold wrote: Sat May 14, 2022 6:14 pm Don’t forget the Outfit had a crew in East St Louis that was led by Buster Wortman and later Art Berne. They answered directly to the Outfit. That’s as southern Illinois as you can get. On a wiretap Art Berne is heard telling Jesse Stoneking that Trupiano in St Louis answered to Chicago just like them.

Also, as mentioned earlier, they had Fratto in Iowa. It later came out that Fratto was a CI for the feds. In the 1940s the Outfit sent people out to Dallas Tx. From my understanding it didn’t work out. So there was expansion efforts. Some successful and some not. Springfield has always been a mystery. I heard conflicting things about them. That they answered to Chicago and that they didn’t. I also heard that Zito was a last minute pick to go to Appalachia bc someone else canceled. Can’t remember. Might have been Rockford or a Chicago guy.

Rockford has been named in the past as a crew of the Outfit and the FBI has lumped them together multiple times. I think they are separate but who knows if they paid a tax at one time.

Outfit always had their hands in Wisconsin as late as the late 90s and early 2000s when the Cicero crew got busted.
I have an FBI report that stated Augie Maniaci told his FBI handlers, regarding Rockford LCN member Phil Cannella, that "he could not specifically recall what CANNELLA did to warrant membership. He said that it is his recollection that there was some trouble in Southern Illinois regarding some sort of counterfeiting operation which CANNELLA went down and “settled.”" I'm curious as to if this was in relation to any of Wortman's or Berne's dealings. This would have been approximately 1953 or so.
The Apalachin situation was that Rockford boss Tony Musso was dying of cancer and asked Springfield boss Frank Zito to attend on behalf of Rockford.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by Patrickgold » Sat May 14, 2022 6:14 pm

Don’t forget the Outfit had a crew in East St Louis that was led by Buster Wortman and later Art Berne. They answered directly to the Outfit. That’s as southern Illinois as you can get. On a wiretap Art Berne is heard telling Jesse Stoneking that Trupiano in St Louis answered to Chicago just like them.

Also, as mentioned earlier, they had Fratto in Iowa. It later came out that Fratto was a CI for the feds. In the 1940s the Outfit sent people out to Dallas Tx. From my understanding it didn’t work out. So there was expansion efforts. Some successful and some not. Springfield has always been a mystery. I heard conflicting things about them. That they answered to Chicago and that they didn’t. I also heard that Zito was a last minute pick to go to Appalachia bc someone else canceled. Can’t remember. Might have been Rockford or a Chicago guy.

Rockford has been named in the past as a crew of the Outfit and the FBI has lumped them together multiple times. I think they are separate but who knows if they paid a tax at one time.

Outfit always had their hands in Wisconsin as late as the late 90s and early 2000s when the Cicero crew got busted.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by furiofromnaples » Fri May 13, 2022 4:04 am

CabriniGreen wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 11:06 pm
PolackTony wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:54 am
Snakes wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:23 am Rockford and Springfield had their own families.

Honestly, there isn't much else in Illinois as the state is pretty rural outside of Chicago and a few larger cities. I figure there was more than enough money to go around in the Chicago metro area and the neighboring counties and suburbs (remember, they also controlled Lake, McHenry, and DuPage Counties as well as Northwest Indiana, which is a pretty big swath of territory for one family).
To put things in perspective, Chicago had the entire metro area of the second largest city in the country, and a major global center of finance and business (as well as the largest concentration of Italian-Americans outside of the NYC-Philly megalopolis), to itself, wherein they exacted street taxes from a wide range of illicit and semi-legitimate businesses as well as ran their own numerous and highly lucrative rackets directly and controlled a vast network of connected businesses, Union locals, etc. If anything, Chicago probably, arguably, had the biggest ratio of territory/operations to organization of any family.

This imo bears repeating. I've seen guys over the years say things like The Outfit was as strong as one of the 3 weaker NY families. This never made any sense to me whatsoever...
The Outfit was focused on a little numbers of made men and a large numbers of italian or non-italian associates while the 5 families are focused in the numbers.
The Outfit was powerful due the political connections and the control on Vegas.
Is useless to compare Chicago with NY. They are like apples and oranges.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by CabriniGreen » Thu May 12, 2022 11:06 pm

PolackTony wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:54 am
Snakes wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 5:23 am Rockford and Springfield had their own families.

Honestly, there isn't much else in Illinois as the state is pretty rural outside of Chicago and a few larger cities. I figure there was more than enough money to go around in the Chicago metro area and the neighboring counties and suburbs (remember, they also controlled Lake, McHenry, and DuPage Counties as well as Northwest Indiana, which is a pretty big swath of territory for one family).
To put things in perspective, Chicago had the entire metro area of the second largest city in the country, and a major global center of finance and business (as well as the largest concentration of Italian-Americans outside of the NYC-Philly megalopolis), to itself, wherein they exacted street taxes from a wide range of illicit and semi-legitimate businesses as well as ran their own numerous and highly lucrative rackets directly and controlled a vast network of connected businesses, Union locals, etc. If anything, Chicago probably, arguably, had the biggest ratio of territory/operations to organization of any family.

This imo bears repeating. I've seen guys over the years say things like The Outfit was as strong as one of the 3 weaker NY families. This never made any sense to me whatsoever...

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by Snakes » Thu May 12, 2022 2:40 pm

Zito was identified as boss of Springfield through his death in the mid 70s

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by PolackTony » Thu May 12, 2022 2:28 pm

As Antiliar notes, the info the we have available names Zito as the boss of his own family in Springfield. To my knowledge, there are no sources who have ever claimed that Chicago had a crew in Springfield or that Zito, or anyone else there, was a Chicago captain.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by Antiliar » Thu May 12, 2022 1:50 pm

Frank Zito had been in Springfield since 1920 and never left, so I doubt he led an Outfit crew: https://www.sj-r.com/story/news/columns ... 068008007/

The FBI does name him as the boss during the 1950s/60s: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... AND%20zito

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by furiofromnaples » Thu May 12, 2022 1:40 pm

Good answer. Thanks Antiliar. Anyway its nucleare if Frank Zito of Springfield was a boss or an Outfit capo.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by Antiliar » Thu May 12, 2022 1:35 pm

furiofromnaples wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 1:12 pm
I wrote "at it peak" So im reffering to the 1930s-1940s when the Outfit had more men than today.
Like Tony wrote, the Outfit couldn't expand to Rockford and Springfield since there were already Families there, but it did expand elsewhere. In the 1930s it operated in Des Moines, Iowa, under Charles Gioe and then Louie Fratto. It also moved in to Hollywood and worked with the Los Angeles and Genovese Families to extort the big movie studios. The Outfit also controlled an area that included southeast Wisconsin to northeast Indiana. That's a huge area. Later, under Sam Giancana (if not earlier), it expanded internationally to the Bahamas. If I recall correctly, I think at different times the Outfit tried to move some people into the U.K. The family of one of the earliest casinos on the Las Vegas strip said that Al Capone invested in them. The Outfit had a lot of people out in Las Vegas, not just Johnny Rosselli, Marshall Caifano and Tony Spilotro. John Drew is one example. The Outfit also had investments in Reno, Nevada. The Outfit also had people in Southern California like Jasper Matranga, who transferred there, and Anthony Pinelli. Frank Ferraro lived there before he became underboss, and Frank LaPorte of Chicago Heights travelled there a lot. Of course in the 1930s guys like Willie Bioff and Nick Circella moved out there. Later, Tony Accardo moved to the Palm Springs area. So I think a case could be made that the Outfit was the most expansive LCN Family of them all.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by furiofromnaples » Thu May 12, 2022 1:12 pm

PolackTony wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 10:15 am
furiofromnaples wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 9:17 am
PolackTony wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 8:30 am Should go without saying, but the mafia isn’t an army that sends out battalions of soldiers to conquer territory. They’re not street gangs that fight to defend turf. Chicago had tons of connections, nationally and internationally, which afforded them specific opportunities to exploit advantages in areas outside of Chicago. They weren’t interested in “expanding” in the sense of setting up crews with territorial power to control street rackets in the West. This wasn’t a question of “manpower”. Besides, when they deemed it was necessary, they were plenty capable of using violence outside of Chicago (just ask Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark) to support their interests.
PolackTony,Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark murders was in the 1970s,an another era,now the Outfit wasnt strong,of course had connections but its a small thing respect the 1970s and 1980s.
You didn't specify a time period. Are you asking why Chicago hasn't muscled into other cities today? Why they didn't set up entire crews in other cities in the 30s, 40s, 50s? Not sure that I'm clear on where you're going with this.
I wrote "at it peak" So im reffering to the 1930s-1940s when the Outfit had more men than today.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by PolackTony » Thu May 12, 2022 10:15 am

furiofromnaples wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 9:17 am
PolackTony wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 8:30 am Should go without saying, but the mafia isn’t an army that sends out battalions of soldiers to conquer territory. They’re not street gangs that fight to defend turf. Chicago had tons of connections, nationally and internationally, which afforded them specific opportunities to exploit advantages in areas outside of Chicago. They weren’t interested in “expanding” in the sense of setting up crews with territorial power to control street rackets in the West. This wasn’t a question of “manpower”. Besides, when they deemed it was necessary, they were plenty capable of using violence outside of Chicago (just ask Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark) to support their interests.
PolackTony,Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark murders was in the 1970s,an another era,now the Outfit wasnt strong,of course had connections but its a small thing respect the 1970s and 1980s.
You didn't specify a time period. Are you asking why Chicago hasn't muscled into other cities today? Why they didn't set up entire crews in other cities in the 30s, 40s, 50s? Not sure that I'm clear on where you're going with this.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by furiofromnaples » Thu May 12, 2022 9:17 am

PolackTony wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 8:30 am Should go without saying, but the mafia isn’t an army that sends out battalions of soldiers to conquer territory. They’re not street gangs that fight to defend turf. Chicago had tons of connections, nationally and internationally, which afforded them specific opportunities to exploit advantages in areas outside of Chicago. They weren’t interested in “expanding” in the sense of setting up crews with territorial power to control street rackets in the West. This wasn’t a question of “manpower”. Besides, when they deemed it was necessary, they were plenty capable of using violence outside of Chicago (just ask Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark) to support their interests.
PolackTony,Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark murders was in the 1970s,an another era,now the Outfit wasnt strong,of course had connections but its a small thing respect the 1970s and 1980s.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by PolackTony » Thu May 12, 2022 8:30 am

Should go without saying, but the mafia isn’t an army that sends out battalions of soldiers to conquer territory. They’re not street gangs that fight to defend turf. Chicago had tons of connections, nationally and internationally, which afforded them specific opportunities to exploit advantages in areas outside of Chicago. They weren’t interested in “expanding” in the sense of setting up crews with territorial power to control street rackets in the West. This wasn’t a question of “manpower”. Besides, when they deemed it was necessary, they were plenty capable of using violence outside of Chicago (just ask Tamara Rand or Jay Vandermark) to support their interests.

Re: Why the Chicago Outfit didn't tried to take all the Illinois?

by furiofromnaples » Thu May 12, 2022 8:10 am

Thanks for the answers guys. I doubt the Outfit apart Schiro in Arizona,have the men to expand out Chicago.

Top