Non-Italians and the Chicago Outfit

[Villain]

I avoid the "corporation = "mafia" comparisons, but this might be a good way of understanding it...

- I worked for a company that had employees (members) who officially worked for the company and there was a hierarchy (admin / captains) within that. At all levels of the company there were also independent contractors (associates) and this ranged from people who did small freelance tasks all the way up to programmers and consultants who were "like" employees but technically they weren't true employees of the company even though they had to be available during the same hours and were obligated to us.

- Some of the essential contractors were even included on the company website, part of internal company discussions, operational decision-making etc. However even the top contractors weren't subject to the same protocol and guidelines as the official employees even though some of them were truly more important to the business than we were. Officially they were assigned to work for/with certain people and had to put anything they did on record with an employee but for certain ones this was just a formality.

- These contractors of course reported to different people. Some of them worked directly with the executives, others with middle management or ordinary employees depending on what part of the company's operations they were involved with. There was one guy however who was a tech consultant that only answered to the CEO and the CEO did whatever this guy "advised" and even on the rare occasion that the CEO didn't do it, it at least involved a very in-depth meeting where the contractor's advice was taken seriously.

- My immediate boss was part of the Executive Team but she knew she had way less say than this guy in terms of operational strategy even though officially she was part of the company's top leadership and had certain duties specific to official employees that this guy didn't have. This contractor sat in on many Executive Team meetings (consiglio) and had a strong voice in these meetings when it pertained to operating strategy but if the Executive Team met about issues specific to the office or in-house matters he wasn't involved. He had no involvement in hiring or firing employees for example but if we didn't do what he said you almost certainly would have been on the carpet with the official executives and looking for a new job.

- This contractor would often contact us employees directly telling us to do something and even though he wasn't our boss or even an official employee we understood he was authorized by the CEO to do that and had his blessing. I did things for him countless times and he never had to clear it with my immediate boss nor did the CEO have to tell me it was top priority, I just understood he was "with" the CEO and if I didn't do what this contractor advised it would be a problem for me within the company and be seen as detrimental to our success. Officially he wasn't an executive but operationally he absolutely had that level of authority and privilege.

- All of us knew he had serious power within the company before, during, and after my time there yet he himself was not technically an employee of the company. He 100% made more money and had more influence than most of the official employees. The CEO saw it as a mutually beneficial relationship and felt the company depended on him. If this guy decided to leave he couldn't have been easily replaced.

- He also had his own independent people who worked for him and had no direct interaction with our staff but by working for him they were in effect doing work for our company.

So was this guy an official executive? He wasn't. Did he have a "position" in our company? Yep, on a practical level he was a de facto executive who had more operational influence than most/all official employees except the CEO. Could he have been demoted? As a contractor not officially, but there were times where the CEO talked about limiting his involvement which would have been like a demotion. They could have cancelled his contract (whacked him) too but no way was the CEO going to do that. In contrast, we had contractors who did small tasks and had no influence who were easily replaced -- it meant nothing to let them go if it didn't work out.

Interesting example. Ill give you another regarding one international firm and its hierarchy....

You have a general manager who has more than 50% of the shares and controls everything on daily basis...below him is the number two guy or "chief manager" who oversees all of the units and sectors which form the whole firm.

Now, all of the sectors and units are controlled by directors (members of the board of directors, not the governing board) with sector managers bellow them. Then comes the everyday workers who are involved in everyday situations and oversee their own areas and buyers.

Now lets get back to the General Manager....on monthly basis this guy attend meetings with two "outside" guys (who are not from the formal structure) who are officially top members of the governing board, who in turn receive monthly income and also report on how things went down and all top level decisions are made with them and these guys also have the power to vote and also have the power to demote the general manager (although it can never happen in this case because these three fellas are in a very close connection, both family and business).

So i believe you can see my point here?!

[Villain]

....for example if Accardo and Alex (members of the governing board with Accardo as president) were against Aiuppa (future general manager) becoming the new boss (after Riccas death, former president of the governing board), thats was it. No Aiuppa. They were going to look for another more capable candidate...

This corresponds with your previous info regarding the early 70s when Ricca and Accardo met with some captains (the Melrose/Cicero guys) and tried to control the organization. Those captains were Aiuppa and Nicoletti, with the first one ending up as acting boss while Nicoletti was the acting underboss. They were looking for a new boss and no one questioned Alexs position during those days, which was simply next to Accardo.

[Villain]

Btw regarding the "demoting" term....what about Steve Magaddino's talk...and he also coincidentally mentions the Chicago gang although we dont know why, meaning if its regarding the "demoting" stuff or something else...

[Villain]

In addition, i want to add and also to explain some quite informative files which are missing from my first post and also from my previous convo with B...

First, heres some additional info regarding the Accardo/Aiuppa/Alex top "triumvirate" and one informant advised that it was quite unique that a non-Italian such as Alex would be appointed to a top leadership position in OC in Chicago. And "unique" is the right word to explain the old Chicago Outfit. In fact Alex was recognized by three informants as member of the top leadership.





We can also see how the three leaders communicated between each other, meaning if one or two of them werent in Chicago, like Accardo and Alex, then it was for Aiuppa to take responsibility on the day to day activities. For example like in these files, in which we can see detailed picture on what went on...









So this means that, like for example, if something happened to Accardo and Aiuppa and they werent able to control the day to day decisitions out of various reasons, then this means that Alex and the Outfits senior members like Dom DiBella were able to take care of daily business, right?

We can also see that Aiuppa was sick in 1973 but wasnt allowed by Accardo to take a vacation until May 1974, when the Alex brothers took care or handled for him his daily contacts, which again is a proof regarding Alexs huge role within the internal affairs of the organization and his high position as OC leader and also part of the Chicago Outfit.











Some researchers ask regarding Alex's absence on some high level meetings such as the one in 1976 or the wedding of Torellos son, well according to one informant by that 76/77 period Alex was very cautious and paranoid individual and avoided any huge gatherings which involved Outfit guys. In fact, by 1977 the only top leaders Alex met were Cerone and Aiuppa, and it seems Alex was right since the Torello wedding was followed by reporters and news cameras, while a picture of the 1976 meeting also fell in the hands of the FBI.

[Villain]

I wanted to make separate thread regarding this quite interesting and also quite funny 1960 wiretapped convo between Humphreys, Alex and Cerone, but still ive decided to post it here. In the following conversation we can see that Humphreys and Alex were makin fun of Cerone by constantly "ribbing" him and Cerone didnt realized it until the end of the convo, and so he got mad about it lol.

First I want to explain the positions which these three guys held during that year of 1960:

Murray Humphreys - representative on the Outfit's board of directors for his South Side group (which included both non-Italian and Italian non-made members) and also oversaw the "connection guys" (which included made guys) and had the last word on all union activities (which included made guys)

Jack Cerone - Elmwood Park Capo for the West Side group under Giancana and Accardo

Gus Alex - leader for the Loop, South Side and First Ward

So during the following conversation, we can see and feel Humphreys' seniority and higher authority over both Cerone and Alex. It seems Cerone asked Humphreys to help him in bringing one of Cerone's associates from the West Side in one of the unions, and so Humphreys started "ribbing" Cerone and told him not to bring him anymore guys and that he is tired from the guys "out West", a statement which again confirms that Humphreys was from the South.

Another interesting statement was made by Alex who in turn stated that he previously told Cerone that most of the union spots must be kept for their relatives, like brothers, nephews etc.

In the end when Cerone was about to leave like a "sad kid", Humphreys told Cerone that he and Alex were having good-natured teasing with him because the naive Cerone didnt realized it until then and so he got mad but he didnt threaten Humphreys, but instead he turned at Alex. This shows us that even though Cerone was a powerful capo at the time, still he had to show respect towards Humphreys.

In last sentence we can see Humphreys again showing higher authority but this time over Alex by telling him to stop playing and that he will put Alex "on a trial".

Heres the whole convo. Enjoy...

[Villain]

Regarding the existence of so-called two groups within the old Chicago Outfit....

There was a top administration which was formed by a top boss, followed by the boss and underboss and also one or two semi-retired senior advisors, and below them was the board of directors (consiglio) which included capos and representatives for the Outfit's "four sides", such as the North, West, South and Chi Heights/Indiana groups.

The leading group was Cosa Nostra and so 90% of these guys were Italians but there was also another group of non-Italian "members" which formed at least 5% of the whole syndicate, who were also involved in most of the inner workings of the leading Cosa Nostra organization, except for the traditional things and official top spots (like top boss, boss and underboss), followed by their numerous associates.

As I previously explained in my first post that Jake Guzik was one of the first non-Italians who held a position on the Outfit's BOD and his place was taken by Humphreys after Guzik's death in 1956, while Guzik's protege Gus Alex inherited Guzik's second position as boss of the Loop and First Ward. We can see that during the 50's and early 60s Humphreys was present on most of the high level BOD meetings, but things changed by the mid or late 60's.

Again, according to the 1965 file, after Humphreys' death there was a meeting which was chaired by the boss Sam Battaglia who in turn gave Alex that same BOD position which the late Humphreys previously held.

Now, we can easily confirm this with one file from 1967 in which we can see that Alex held a seat and was also present on high level meetings on the Outfit's BOD from time to time, which was obvious since it was a Italian organization.

We also must not forget that by the late 60's the Outfit was number one target of the government and because of that Alex began relinquishing most of his operations around Chicago and began to avoid high level meetings which in fact was one of the main reasons for his occasional attendance on those same BOD meetings.

Even though they were not official Cosa Nostra members of the consiglio or the Outfit's BOD, still these guys had a official seat on the Outfit's commission. In this file we can see that the informant says that during those days Alex allegedly represented only the non-Italian group, something which again gives us evidence regarding the existence of a second group with a official seat, although according to numerous other and previous files and evidences, both Humphreys and Alex also represented capos and made members from their own territories and had their own votes regarding the inner workings of the whole organization aka the Chicago mob, and also sometimes had the last word on specific operations such as corruption and unions. Still, we have the non-Itals representing their OWN interests.

This was different from New York's Meyer Lansky who besides being a close Genovese associate, he also represented the interests of other families in different areas around the country and the world. Alex and Humphreys represented ONLY the Chicago Outfit and were witnesses and also probably involved in its formation, an organization which in fact was a monolithic crime syndicate and quite unique one too. So even though the non-Italians were minority at the time, still they were part of the official Chicago crime syndicate. This was the same official seat which later gave Alex a chance to go higher in the organization and to receive a seat on the top admin.

[Villain]

Heres another interesting example regarding one high level non-Italian (Murray "Curley" Humphreys) and one Italian made member (John "Boom Boom" Lardino from the Aiuppa/Maddox crew), in which we can see Humphreys showing much higher authority than the Cosa Nostra member. Besides being a former hitman, Lardino was deeply involved in union racketeering and answered to Humphreys who in turn had the last word on all union activities for the whole syndicate.





In fact, lots of capos like Jack Cerone and Frank LaPorte asked for Humphreys help regarding positions in various unions. They waited outside the old man's office for a "favor", while Alex acted as his "secretary" who later received instructions in obtaining the union jobs.








So in 1960, Lardino's financial status was on a quite low level at the time since he was ousted from most of the unions he was previously involved in, and so he ASKED Humphreys for a FAVOUR and to find him some additional or new income from some of the ventures in the union business.

Lardino's capo didnt come to ask Humphreys for the favor, but instead it was Lardino himself who either came on his own or was sent by Aiuppa to ask Humphreys for help. In fact Lardino was previously Humphreys' personal and best nominee regarding the unions.

But Humphreys rejected him because Lardino allegedly lied to Humphreys regarding some unknown situation (holding cash or something like that), which quite irritated the old man and so Humphreys told Lardino that he "washes his hands" from the whole situation, meaning the old man didnt want to have any type of business with Lardino anymore and so he was told to go and to talk to Gus Alex, who in turn sometimes also acted as Humphreys' arbiter or mediator.

[B.]

Lonardo's testimony about Rockman:

rockman.png

- Powerful with the Teamsters, had authority to control jobs and financing.

- Couldn't be a made member due to ethnicity but was treated like a made member according to the underboss.

If Rockman was from Chicago he'd be part of these same discussions. Humphreys and Alex had a similar relationship with the Chicago Family.

You're right that Lansky was different in some ways, as he had this relationship both within the Genovese group and on a national scale with the Commission.

[Villain]

Lonardo's testimony about Rockman:

rockman.png

- Powerful with the Teamsters, had authority to control jobs and financing.

- Couldn't be a made member due to ethnicity but was treated like a made member according to the underboss.

If Rockman was from Chicago he'd be part of these same discussions. Humphreys and Alex had a similar relationship with the Chicago Family.

You're right that Lansky was different in some ways, as he had this relationship both within the Genovese group and on a national scale with the Commission.

First ill make another statement and after that I have a question for you B.....

Thanks and yeah, i think that Lonardo gave a good definition of the so-called non-Ital "members" (not CN), meaning Rockman was considered as made member, but he obviously couldnt sworn in the Italian brotherhood because he was Jewish. Those are the same "members" which i previously talked to you about.

Although we also have info regarding non-Itals being present on induction dinners (not during the ritual) and also being present on meetings on which they were informed regarding their loyalty towards the organization and also which crew or boss was their new overseer. Meaning they again somehow sworn to the organization and became part of it (not the CN brotherhood, but the Chicago Outfit as whole).

I think this is also another good explanation for Chicago's non-Itals and their positions, which corresponds with Lonardo's testimony who in turn gave us even more detailed info regarding the non-Itals in Cleveland...



Now, the difference between Rockman, Guzik, Humphreys etc. and Alex, was that all of these guys received a seat on the board of directors of their own families or syndicates (i dont know about Rockman, but im sure about Guzik, Humphreys and Alex), but later Alex received even higher position on the Outfits top admin.

Im not saying that Accardo brought orange juice to Alex in his pyjamas lol, but this guy was probably the one and only non-Ital in the US at the time who breached some limits within his "OWN" syndicate or the CN family he was close with, by receiving official spot on the top admin. His previous BOD position was just a stepping stone for Alex to go even higher.

If Rockman was a "member" of the Chicago family, I strongly believe that he was going to share a spot on the top admin together with Alex, or at least a spot on the Outfits BOD.

--‐---------------------------

Now, the question I have for you B which is more historical than the ones regarding the Mafia....Rockman, Guzik, Vogel were all Jewish right?! Humphreys was Welsh right?! Alex was Greek right?! Im not sure but i wasnt able to find any historical and long time connections between the Jewish and Italian populations from the previous centuries, but I managed to find lots of connections between the Italians and Greeks.

I was reminded for this by another forum member and I also wrote about it in my Alex article from years ago.

General info on the internet says that first connection between the Greek and Italian people began almost 3000 years ago, or 800 BC, when the Greeks began the first mass colonization of Sicily and southern peninsular Italy. The Romans called the area of Sicily and the foot of the boot of Italy, Magna Graecia (Latin, "Greater Greece"), since it was so densely inhabited by Greeks.

Wikipedia talks about Griko people who are a population group in Italy of ultimately Greek origin which still exists today in the Italian regions of Calabria and Apulia.

Through the centuries, most of the Greek inhabitants of Southern Italy became entirely Italianized during the Roman Empire and later during the Middle Ages. This is due to the fact that the "traffic" between southern Italy and the Greek mainland never entirely stopped. The Greek immigration continued in the 1890s and early 20th century, due largely to economic opportunity in the U.S.

So....we know that the Chicago Outfit was ruled by Neapolitans and Calabrians from the early 1930s onward, and that the Alex family (Greek) was very close with these guys since the late 1920's and joined their criminal organization.

So do you think that Alex's Greek origin and the historical connection between Greeks and southern Italians has something to do with the situation in which Alex received a chance to be trusted by the old Italian top admin and received a higher spot right next to them???

[Villain]

Before I receive an answer regarding my previous question, again lets make a new list for all the evidences which were previously posted regarding the non-Italians within the Chicago Outfit and the role and benefits they had within the old organization, obviously if we take out the traditional induction and official CN structure...again, lets see if there was much difference between a Italian made member and non-Italian leader within the old Chicago Outfit....

1.Started as associates of the so-called 'Americanized" faction of Chicago's Cosa Nostra, especially with the so-called Mainlanders aka the Camorra

2. Played major role in creation of the "new" Chicago Outfit under Al Capone and helped him in exterminating his enemies and control all politics in Chicago

3. Killed more people for the organization than the whole Italian faction put together

4. Received official position or seat on the Outfit's board of directors which was controlled by the top Italian administration, and even though the non-Itals were minority at the time, still they represented a second and smaller group within the Chicago mob obviously after the Italians

5. Later Gus Alex was the first and only non-Italian who received an even higher position on the top Italian administration as a member of a leading triumvirate with two Italian bosses (one as a top boss and the other as acting boss)

6. Most of them were direct with the top Italian leadership

7. Transferred orders from the top Italian leadership, including murder contracts of made members and associates

8. Acted as advisors for both the top Italian leadership and the board of directors

9. They had authority on organizational level over made members and associates in their own areas (Italian members and associates inherited from deceased capos or BOD bosses from those same areas), including over made members and associates from different crews but on operational level

10. Received income from made guys, non-Italian leaders, associates etc. both on organizational and operational levels

11. Acted as mediators or arbiters between made members and associates from their own and also from different crews

12. They had operational meetings with both Italian members and associates from other families

13. They had the right to vote regarding certain issues regarding their own syndicate, including taking care of the families of imprisoned or dead Italian made members and former Italian bosses

14. They followed the same protocols as their accomplices from the leading Cosa Nostra group

15. Sometimes they were demoted from their official positions, same as their Italian partners in crime

[Villain]

I see that I posted evidences regarding all of the previous statements, except for the "They had the right to vote regarding certain issues regarding their own syndicate, including taking care of the families of imprisoned or dead Italian made members and former Italian bosses" statement.

In the following 1959 conversation between Humphreys and Sam Battaglia (west Side capo at the time) we can read regarding the financial help which the Outfit used to send for the Capone family, especially Al's son Sonny.

Now lets see some of Humphreys' most interesting statements:

First, lets see the letter in which Sonny Capone was rejected by the Outfit...



In the next piece we can see that Battaglia enters the convo and Humphreys informed him that they had a meeting on which they all VOTED regarding the Sonny Capone situation and they also commented a letter from Ralph Capone. The meeting was attended by Giancana (The Outfit's boss), Humphreys and Alex.

The vital part in this talk is Humphreys' statement regarding they having enough trouble to take care of the whole crime family by saying "we've got a big enough family" and that Sonny wasnt the only one. This is another proof regarding the non-Italians being a part of the Chicago "family".





So in the following part we can see that Humphreys was allegedly the only guy on the table who wanted for Sonny Capone to continue receiving some help from the Outfit, but Giancana and Alex immediately nixed the whole deal and Sonny was rejected, because Humphreys later also decided to vote the same way as Giancana.

Another quite interesting statement made by Humphreys was the one regarding he and Battaglia being involved in the inner workings of the Outfit during the old days, and that younger generation of mobsters like Giancana and Frank Ferraro (underboss) allegedly didnt understand those type of stuff.

This means that Humphreys was involved in the Outfit's "inner workings" since the days of Al Capone. Humphreys again mentioned that they were responsible for many widows and that their sons wasnt their (the Outfit) responsibility. This is another proof regarding the non-Italian "members" following tradition and protocols.

Humphreys also mentioned that the situation was dangerous, meaning this type of tradition went all around the country (probably the other crime families).

It seems that Humphreys felt bad for Paul Ricca (imprisoned at the time) and Accardo for not being present at that same meeting, because he believed that with Ricca's presence things might've turned out differently, obviously because Ricca was the top boss at the time and was also quite close with the Capone family since Al Capone was the best man at Ricca's wedding.






In this next piece of the convo we can see Humphreys allegedly reminding other Outfit Italian members like Joe Fischetti (made member) who were close with the Capone family, not to forget Al's son because he was part of the family. He also said that he didnt order Fischetti but instead he just reminded him. Does this mean that Humphreys was in position to give an order to Fischetti...we still dont know.



In the following piece of that same convo, we can see Humphreys trash talking Ralph Capone who allegedly had no children and also had the money to help his own nephew because he allegedly controlled the coin machine racket in that town in Wisconsin. He also said that Al's other brother Matty Capone had problem with consuming alcohol and was no good.



Humphreys showing the rejection letter to Battaglia...



Here's the whole convo...

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.htm ... a%20capone

[CornerBoy]

This was an amazing write up and the comments are tremendous.

I learned a lot and enjoyed it far more than any book related to the mafia.

Simply just wanted to express my admiration and gratitude.

i know this a hackneyed/trite question that is ubiquitous on this board but what kind of wealth in today's dollars could Alex or Humphreys have amassed?

[Tonyd621]

A rank-and-file member can't be demoted in the org, they can only be shelved (membership unrecognized, members not allowed to do business with them, activities taken away) or killed. Members can be demoted within the org but only if they have a rank / title. If a guy is forced to leave a certain business or position of operational authority you could call it a "demotion" but it's not the same as being formally demoted.

--

I avoid the "corporation = "mafia" comparisons, but this might be a good way of understanding it...

- I worked for a company that had employees (members) who officially worked for the company and there was a hierarchy (admin / captains) within that. At all levels of the company there were also independent contractors (associates) and this ranged from people who did small freelance tasks all the way up to programmers and consultants who were "like" employees but technically they weren't true employees of the company even though they had to be available during the same hours and were obligated to us.

- Some of the essential contractors were even included on the company website, part of internal company discussions, operational decision-making etc. However even the top contractors weren't subject to the same protocol and guidelines as the official employees even though some of them were truly more important to the business than we were. Officially they were assigned to work for/with certain people and had to put anything they did on record with an employee but for certain ones this was just a formality.

- These contractors of course reported to different people. Some of them worked directly with the executives, others with middle management or ordinary employees depending on what part of the company's operations they were involved with. There was one guy however who was a tech consultant that only answered to the CEO and the CEO did whatever this guy "advised" and even on the rare occasion that the CEO didn't do it, it at least involved a very in-depth meeting where the contractor's advice was taken seriously.

- My immediate boss was part of the Executive Team but she knew she had way less say than this guy in terms of operational strategy even though officially she was part of the company's top leadership and had certain duties specific to official employees that this guy didn't have. This contractor sat in on many Executive Team meetings (consiglio) and had a strong voice in these meetings when it pertained to operating strategy but if the Executive Team met about issues specific to the office or in-house matters he wasn't involved. He had no involvement in hiring or firing employees for example but if we didn't do what he said you almost certainly would have been on the carpet with the official executives and looking for a new job.

- This contractor would often contact us employees directly telling us to do something and even though he wasn't our boss or even an official employee we understood he was authorized by the CEO to do that and had his blessing. I did things for him countless times and he never had to clear it with my immediate boss nor did the CEO have to tell me it was top priority, I just understood he was "with" the CEO and if I didn't do what this contractor advised it would be a problem for me within the company and be seen as detrimental to our success. Officially he wasn't an executive but operationally he absolutely had that level of authority and privilege.

- All of us knew he had serious power within the company before, during, and after my time there yet he himself was not technically an employee of the company. He 100% made more money and had more influence than most of the official employees. The CEO saw it as a mutually beneficial relationship and felt the company depended on him. If this guy decided to leave he couldn't have been easily replaced.

- He also had his own independent people who worked for him and had no direct interaction with our staff but by working for him they were in effect doing work for our company.

So was this guy an official executive? He wasn't. Did he have a "position" in our company? Yep, on a practical level he was a de facto executive who had more operational influence than most/all official employees except the CEO. Could he have been demoted? As a contractor not officially, but there were times where the CEO talked about limiting his involvement which would have been like a demotion. They could have cancelled his contract (whacked him) too but no way was the CEO going to do that. In contrast, we had contractors who did small tasks and had no influence who were easily replaced -- it meant nothing to let them go if it didn't work out.

If I were a CI talking to the FBI I would have described him exactly the same way people like Fratto, DeRose, and Blasi described Gus Alex.

Sounds like some CIA sh*t so you can cover your ass if sh*t goes wrong.

[Villain]

This was an amazing write up and the comments are tremendous.

I learned a lot and enjoyed it far more than any book related to the mafia.

Simply just wanted to express my admiration and gratitude.

i know this a hackneyed/trite question that is ubiquitous on this board but what kind of wealth in today's dollars could Alex or Humphreys have amassed?

Thanks for the kind words @CornerBoy and you're awlays welcome.

All high level non-Italian "members" of the Chicago Outfit organization as a whole, were different.

For example gangsters like Guzik, Humphreys, Vogel, Alex, Pierce or Curry were more "cosa nostra" than some of the other original cosa nostra Italian members.

I mean bosses like Accardo and Ricca bought huge mansions in Chicago and around the country and also bought expensive cars, or Giancana who always was in the company of world famous females.

Guys like Vogel, Humphreys and Alex liked to dress well and also liked beautiful women (not the famous ones) but according to my research they loved to travel the most, including around the country and around the world. They also drove nice cars, but not as expensive as the ones Accardo bought. In plane words they werent flashy as most of their accomplices in the organization.

Humphreys was real gangster, and in fact according to one wiretapped convo he talks about on how the younger generation of mobsters couldnt handle the pressure from that type of "Life". Heres the convo:

SAM "RIP" ALEX (Alexs older brother): …so I told him, go away for a while, and relax. So he comes back, and takes whatever they throw at him. Mooney (Giancana), see?

HUMPHREYS: Well, he fights everybody. See, everybody has the same thing, only we have it all day long, all the time. He can’t take it. It’s rough for those younger guys. I tell them for fucks sake, you guys don’t even know what it is.

Guzik wasnt flashy at all and tried to be an elusive individual and acted as a real "Mafia boss". Although, there were also some quite flashy non-Italian "members" who were under the jurisdiction of Humphreys, Vogel or Alex and spent a lot of cash. So maybe we can use their underlings and their wealth, so we can calculate approximately on how much cash their bosses made. But we also must not forget that sometimes some "soldiers" made more money than their bosses.

For example, Hyman "Hy" aka "Red" Larner started under Eddie Vogel in the most lucrative coin machine racket, and later was placed under Alex, while both Vogel and Alex were represented by Humphreys on the Outfits board of directors.

By the late 1940s and early 50s, Larner owned:

Huge partment in Chicago at 3430 Lake Shore Drive

Another huge apartment in Skokie, Illinois

Owned a $50,000 house in Miami, Florida

Also owned two 27-foot yachts

Owned six cars, two Cadillacs and three Mercurys and another unidentified car which he rented for $1.000 per day

Owned two restaurants and a mortgage company in Chicago

Owned an oil firm which was called the Salinas Basin Development company with its headquarters in a building at 165 E. Ontario

Also had interest in four oil wells in Texas.

Also had interests in steel companies and other investments such as real estate around Indiana and Milwaukee

So if the bosses took 25% or 50% from Larner's earnings, we can only image how much money Alex, Vogel or Humphreys made during those days....

[Villain]

Regarding my first statement about Alex and Accardo giving advice or forbidding Aiuppa and Nicoletti to get involved in the narcotics trade during the early 70s....

It seems that Chuck Nicoletti headed the so-called faction which was eager to receive an "ok" from the bosses and to start making money from narcotics. It was like Nicoletti saw the future of organized crime in narcotics since the late 60s or early 70s.



At first Aiuppa was allegedly open minded regarding the narcotics trade, mainly because he and Nicoletti had mutual business interests for decades and it is quite possible that Nicoletti expected some support from Aiuppa regarding that same matter.

Besides many illegal activities, both Nicoletti and Aiuppa were also involved in politics and corruption especially around the Melrose Park area.









Similar story was between Alex and Nicoletti, meaning they too were involved in numerous both illegal and legit activities for decades, and Alex's alleged cousins the Bravos bros were also closely associated with Nicoletti.







And because of that, it seems Nicoletti was quite disappointed from Alexs negative attitude towards narcotics. Thats why high level members like Nicoletti and Dom DiBella began to criticize Alex regarding his reluctance to get involved in the day-to-day ops in the Loop and the North Side, mainly because Alex was one of the three top leaders and was possibly above Nicoletti.





On the other hand, Alex allegedly ignored Nicoletti's requests and allegedly continued with his absence in some of the most vital operations. It seems that high level Italian members like Aiuppa, Nicoletti and Dom DiBella asked Accardo regarding the problem, and so the old man was "forced" to talk to Alex and to place him in line regarding the day to day ops.





According to some sources during that time Nicoletti was considered as "top echelon" member and in fact, one informant stated that he and Aiuppa were the day-to-day leaders of the organization, something which indicates that Nicoletti was either an acting underboss or was the most powerful capo on the Outfits board of directors. I personally will go with the "acting underboss" statement. In addition, Alex wasnt satisfied by both Aiuppa and Nicoletti.





Regarding the Alex/Nicoletti conflict....we can see that there was some type of "cold war" going on between the two bosses, which means that we are looking at a conflict between two top echelon members, something which was quite dangerous.

Nicoletti was a known killer and money maker, and was considered quite dangerous and feared by the rest of the organization, while Alex was highly respected by the Outfits top boss Accardo and was also highly respected by most of his high level accomplices in the Chicago Outfit.

But by the end of the year 1973, a conflict also occurred between Aiuppa and Nicoletti regarding Aiuppa's complete political control of the Melrose Park area.





So by 1975, Nicoletti allegedly ordered a unsanctioned hit and so it is quite possible that both Accardo and Alex used that situation and forced Aiuppa to order for Nicoletti to get shelved in 75/76. Obviously because Alex continued on being present on meetings with both Aiuppa and Cerone during the years of 1975/76/77/78 while Nicoletti also got murdered in 1977, allegedly because he became an informant, an information which during those days can only be received by the "connection guys" under Pat Marcy and Alex.

In other words, Alex won the conflict between him and Nicoletti, or a non-Italian boss won the "beef" against a high level Cosa Nostra Italian member/underboss. Another proof that during those days Alex above the underboss and the Outfits board of directors.