Family Councils / Consigli / Seggia / Elders / Inner Circle

[B.]

Great points.

- Valachi thought it was Luciano who came up with the idea of Families having a consigliere but we know that's not true. He also credits Luciano with forming the NYC-NJ consiglio which is again questionable given the Gran Consiglio and Family consiglio already existed. Maybe Luciano suggested they have one specific to the NYC-NJ area, but that's pretty funny to me -- it would mean Luciano wasn't trying to "corporatize" the mafia but rather wanted to keep a traditional body in place in a slightly different way.

Re: committee, I think you're right there was a committee set up to investigate Bonanno. Kiduknow would know for sure what that was all about. I was thinking of how the Commissione had a rule that three Commission members had to serve as messengers to a boss accused of infractions. They might well have set up sub-committees like they did pre-1931, thanks for the reminder.

I think a lot of the confusion when Maranzano took over came from the fact that a lot of leadership changes had taken place but likely weren't recognized given the chaos and warfare. While we think of Tom Gagliano and Maranzano already being bosses by 1930, they likely weren't official yet so after the war there would have been formal elections, introductions, and recognition. This, if worded poorly or not fully understood (i.e. Valachi), could give the impression of fundamental changes taking place when it was actually just new leaders being formally recognized and the nuts and bolts of Cosa Nostra needing to be explained to new members who had been made during the conflict.

Valachi was made and then immediately forced to hide out with hit teams who reported directly to Maranzano, so I don't think he had a capodecina during the war. The post-war meetings would have introduced him to a lot of new protocol and while it was new to him, it certainly wasn't "new".

[Antiliar]

1 There existed a Grand Council and a General Assembly. Within these bodies commissions could be formed if there was a disagreement over an edict. These commissions would make the case for something like attorneys. It could be an appeal system and it could also be an investigation panel.

2 The commission Traina headed was an arbitrary panel sent to mediate with Maranzano.

3 Paul Ricca approaching Gentile and discussing Mafia affairs with him surrounding the commission strongly points to his having a high or knowledgeable position by that time. He wasn't a button man by any means.

4 The West Coast was sympathetic to Maranzano. Interesting but not surprising given SF/SJ's ties to them.

5 From Gentile's perspective, Masseria was prone to totalitarianism but tried to be honorable and Maranzano was dangerous.

6 Following Masseria's murder, they wanted to elect Troia onto a commission that would replace the Capo dei Capi. Had that gone into effect the layout would have been 1 Commission, 2 Grand Council, 3 General Assembly. Makes me question why they couldn't just abolish the BOB and have the Grand Council fulfill the needs of this proposed commission.

7 After Maranzano died, the commission was implemented and the Grand Council is disbanded it appears. But it seems like it would have been one and the same. The Grand Council likely consisted of the New York Groups and Chicago (as indicated in a 1908 letter from Morello to Dispenza in Chicago) as did the commission. I can argue that it appears to be the same thing but the mafia's members seem to consider it something different. That's one thing that Gentile, Bonanno and Valachi all agree on.

8 The passage of Maranzano "reorganizing" the borgate of NY and and completed their admins is an odd and contradictory one. We know all these positions existed long before 1931, probably dating near a century by that point. But shit, that is what Nick Gentile says and all we can do is try and interpret it since its not true. Perhaps Maranzano micromanaged the administrations or perhaps some families like the Bonannos didn't have a consigliere and he sought to make everything congruent. It's open to interpretation.

Exactly. Perfect summation.

[B.]

One thing Gentile doesn't say is whether the Gran Consiglio was going to be dissolved or kept in place if the Troia-led Commission had happened. He also doesn't say whether it was dissolved when the post-Maranzano Commission was formed and seems to have told the Italian Treasury the Commission was called the Grand Council / Gran Consiglio.

Personally I believe the Troia-led Commission was going to replace the Gran Consiglio just as the later one did.

[B.]

As soon as he attained power, his prime concern was reorganizing the important Borgate
of New York. As their Capo, he elected Rappresentanti who were devoted to him and whom he
had already advised which posts they were to occupy, having accepted the condition imposed on
them by Maranzano, who seen to it that everyone was bound to his will. There came to be
formed these Borgate with their administration completed as: Capo, SottoCapo, Consigliere and
Capi di Decina.

Here is where Magaddino is telling the Bonanno reps how to go about electing a new boss now that Joe Bonanno has been deposed. Notice he uses identical language to the Gentile quote above.



It's kind of amazing they both say the exact same thing, "forming a borgata". With the Bonannos we have zero doubt about what was taking place -- a new boss was being elected and the Family was being reorganized. Because there was no boss and the captains are technically all demoted when leadership changes, the organization was to some degree broken and therefore "forming" a borgata makes some sense even though we know it was one continuous Family before and after Bonanno was taken down.

With 1931 and earlier we have fewer sources so it's easier to get confused but it's evident to me Gentile was describing the same process as Magaddino and their identical language indicates this was a common way to view it.

It also sheds light on Families like Lupo and Morello being split in the 1910s and 1920s -- because Families are essentially broken when a boss dies or steps down it probably lended itself to larger organizational changes like splitting or disbanding the Family if there was a political reason to do so. Magaddino said that almost happened with the Gambino Family after Anastasia died but the Commission named consigliere Carlo Gambino as acting boss to keep the Family together.

One of the reasons I believe we see the consigliere sometimes serve as acting boss when the official boss dies or steps down might be because all other ranks get demoted and the consigliere is the only official leader remaining throughout the process. His role as top mediator would also be a big factor given how volatile those situations are.

My understanding is captains do continue to serve after a boss steps down but it's on a tentative basis. We know they help carry out the boss election by polling their decina and casting votes on behalf of them.

[Angelo Santino]

In regards to Tony's idea that Yale might have originally been a D'Aquila guy- possible. Nothing to substantiate it but with all of these guys, we are given little snippits of info and it'd be foolish to any of us to assume we know the full story. Yale's prominence in 1921 tells me that the Sicilian-Italo worlds were fully immersed by this point. Their interests were overlapping.

In regards to B.'s "forming a family," it makes perfect sense and may be something we don't appreciate because it's not done in modern times.

The Capo Consigliere term that B. pointed out, I always assumed it was Bonanno taking away the sharpness and romanticizing the position but there may be something to it. All these positions, even that of soldier, largely depends on the individual and how they utilize it.

Lastly, the Gambinos, Sanfillippo was said to have been a consigliere of judgement, sounds alot like a panel to me. There were a few references to something of that nature during Castellano's era but if it did exist then, it all but disappeared with Gotti. We don't have any intel of Gravano mentioning anything of the sort.

[B.]

The Gambinos are the only NYC Family where some little things have surfaced, at least that I know of.

- You have SanFilippo called a consigliere of judgement despite not fitting into the timeline as official consigliere anywhere and Ray Patriarca saying in order to contact Carlo you had to go through a council.

- Going through Gentile again for this thread I noticed he said when he was leaving the US for good he met with Mangano, Anastasia, Biondo, and Toto Chiri and they decided as a group that Gentile would go to Italy instead of Mexico. Chiri would later be underboss but at this time wasn't on the admin like the other three so interesting these four were part of the decision making process in telling a departing member where to go. We know from Gentile the SF consiglio met to decide to accept his transfer into their Family, so maybe a consiglio had to meet to allow a member to leave as well.

^^^ If this was a Gambino council, Gentile could have been the 5th consiglieri which is the typical number. Mangano was utilizing him as sostituto over the Agrigento crews so he had a unique leadership role outside of the top-down hierarchy and a history as a Family boss+consigliere elsewhere and member of the Gran Consiglio. Don't know what to make of it based on the limited evidence but if the Gambinos did have a council I could see it being the three admin members plus Chiri and Gentile.

If that was the case the council would be:

Boss - Mangano
UB - Anastasia
C - Biondo
??? - Chiri (was he a captain?)
Soldier - Gentile

Be pretty similar to other consigli around the country.

[Angelo Santino]

The Gambinos are the only NYC Family where some little things have surfaced, at least that I know of.

- You have SanFilippo called a consigliere of judgement despite not fitting into the timeline as official consigliere anywhere and Ray Patriarca saying in order to contact Carlo you had to go through a council.

- Going through Gentile again for this thread I noticed he said when he was leaving the US for good he met with Mangano, Anastasia, Biondo, and Toto Chiri and they decided as a group that Gentile would go to Italy instead of Mexico. Chiri would later be underboss but at this time wasn't on the admin like the other three so interesting these four were part of the decision making process in telling a departing member where to go. We know from Gentile the SF consiglio met to decide to accept his transfer into their Family, so maybe a consiglio had to meet to allow a member to leave as well.

^^^ If this was a Gambino council, Gentile could have been the 5th consiglieri which is the typical number. Mangano was utilizing him as sostituto over the Agrigento crews so he had a unique leadership role outside of the top-down hierarchy and a history as a Family boss+consigliere elsewhere and member of the Gran Consiglio. Don't know what to make of it based on the limited evidence but if the Gambinos did have a council I could see it being the three admin members plus Chiri and Gentile.

If that was the case the council would be:

Boss - Mangano
UB - Anastasia
C - Biondo
??? - Chiri (was he a captain?)
Soldier - Gentile

Be pretty similar to other consigli around the country.

What about Phil Mangano? Might explain why his position was often placed above that of capodecina.

I'm not sold on Gentile being on the full consiglio based off of what he wrote. He was a soldier, we got that part, but his highest organizational function was to be an arbitrator between the two city Sciaccatani crews. His influence didn't seem to extend to the Palermo or non-Sicilian factions in the Gambinos.

Chiri, know nothing about the man, yet he keeps being mentioned alongside top people. He seems likely.

But what about Giuseppe Traina? He'd be a good candidate. Without more info we're playing fantasy family but what we do know is that he was the conduit to Philly. I think one could argue that he was the Gambino sostituto to the Gambinos.

Thoughts?

[Angelo Santino]

I was going to post this in the Chicago Consiglio thread but I don't want to steer the conversation in another direction.

I'll ask a theoretical but I think all of us- Antiliar, Tony, B., and myself would have the same answer and it's this: Would Sam Giancana be successful if he tried to disband the Consiglio like Balestrieri did in Milwaukee?

I don't think we can definitively say that the council was "over" or "under" the Boss because it largely depended on the players. Joe Zerilli, boss for 30 years, would naturally be a senior member and likely "above" it (but not free from it) whereas a newer, younger Boss like Giancana likely wouldn't be when faced with Ricca and Accardo. It's a system of checks and balances.

[B.]

100% with you, great points.

The SanFilippos became in-laws of the Trainas so he's in the mix there as well.

Whether they had a consiglio or not, they had select people like Traina, P.Mangano, SanFilippo, Gentile, and Chiri who may have had roles helping represent/administer the Family despite not being in the B/UB/C hierarchy at the time.

There's also the Bonannos' "senior/top captain" who shows up more than once spanning a number of years. Seems to have been a street boss but given we see Family consigli often had a captain on their council it's possible a certain captain was elected to the consiglio and was given more authority in the Family. I don't think the Bonannos had a consiglio at that time but it could have been a remnant.

[B.]

I was going to post this in the Chicago Consiglio thread but I don't want to steer the conversation in another direction.

I'll ask a theoretical but I think all of us- Antiliar, Tony, B., and myself would have the same answer and it's this: Would Sam Giancana be successful if he tried to disband the Consiglio like Balestrieri did in Milwaukee?

I don't think we can definitively say that the council was "over" or "under" the Boss because it largely depended on the players. Joe Zerilli, boss for 30 years, would naturally be a senior member and likely "above" it (but not free from it) whereas a newer, younger Boss like Giancana likely wouldn't be when faced with Ricca and Accardo. It's a system of checks and balances.

I don't think Giancana stood a chance against Chicago's consiglio. He was stripped of much of his influence, possibly taken down as boss according to Bomp, and ultimately killed. Maybe if Ricca/Accardo weren't around but with those guys on the council we can see what happened.

It wasn't just Accardo/Ricca either, but you had a strong Family of powerhouses and killers under them whereas Milwaukee was withering away with a bunch of barely active old timers.

[Angelo Santino]

I was going to post this in the Chicago Consiglio thread but I don't want to steer the conversation in another direction.

I'll ask a theoretical but I think all of us- Antiliar, Tony, B., and myself would have the same answer and it's this: Would Sam Giancana be successful if he tried to disband the Consiglio like Balestrieri did in Milwaukee?

I don't think we can definitively say that the council was "over" or "under" the Boss because it largely depended on the players. Joe Zerilli, boss for 30 years, would naturally be a senior member and likely "above" it (but not free from it) whereas a newer, younger Boss like Giancana likely wouldn't be when faced with Ricca and Accardo. It's a system of checks and balances.

I don't think Giancana stood a chance against Chicago's consiglio. He was stripped of much of his influence, possibly taken down as boss according to Bomp, and ultimately killed. Maybe if Ricca/Accardo weren't around but with those guys on the council we can see what happened.

It wasn't just Accardo/Ricca either, but you had a strong Family of powerhouses and killers under them whereas Milwaukee was withering away with a bunch of barely active old timers.

That's my point, the power of these consigli largely rested on who was on it and what state they were in. But they were the same thing in each city that had them, it's just interesting how varied its power was in checking the boss.

[B.]

Yep exactly. The boss also varied so his personality/approach would be a big factor along with who sat on the council.

[PolackTony]

These are important considerations. Same as how the official consigliere varied in power over time and between families. Depends on multiple personalities and the broader dynamic of how authority flowed within the organization.

[Angelo Santino]

Nick Gentile said it best to Chianti: "I think you are forgetting that the Mafia is composed of people." Not that anyone here forgot but his explanation is just so simple and not at all inaccurate. Going outside of New York it's amazing how most of its members weren't hardened criminals. Most of them were involved in gambling but most of them weren't considered violent. Goes into Fratianno's complaints where he estimated that only 20% of the organization were capable of work (murder.)

[PolackTony]

Going outside of New York it's amazing how most of its members weren't hardened criminals. Most of them were involved in gambling but most of them weren't considered violent.

New York and Chicago, of course. I'm thinking Philly and NE also?