THE BLACK HAND FORUM

Sit-downs, sit-downs and more sitdowns. When it comes to protection money/shakedown customers, I’ve noticed it’s not as often based on territory and more often based on who was the first person to “claim” the associate. Union rackets, for example the concrete club, garbage rackets, etc., are often more territorial because of the nature of the racket (garbage routes, union local territory). Gambling operations are somewhat territorial; we saw this when Sonny Juliano opened a gambling territory across the road from Paul Bevacqua’s Kings Highway spot. But normally I think there are enough gamblers to go around.

Sit-downs are often a great way of resolving these sorts of disputes because it often involves the two people with the dispute getting stiffed, or forced into a difficult compromise, whereas the people presiding over the sitdown (underbosses, captains, etc.) normally get a cut or a piece just for facilitating the sit-down. This prevents conflict at the higher levels because the higher-ups get paid. I don’t know if this is more of a Colombo thing because they tend to be a bit more predatorial towards underlings.

Let’s say we are talking about Bay Ridge and Bensonhurst in the 1960s-early 1990s. I mention these two neighborhoods as they had a large Italian population in those eras -

Obviously there were many soldiers, Capos, etc from all Five Families not only inhabiting, but having rackets and sports book and loan shark customers in those neighborhoods.

With so many competing guys in a small area, how would territory be divided? What kept small scale interfamily fights from happening over rackets, protection money customers, loan shark customers - and how was territory divided on a larger scale between Families?

Obviously in the grand scale, places like Jersey and Philly and such were governed territorially by the Commission. But I’m talking on a very small scale.