I understand. I have the same problem. Stuff in my files I`ve collected and saved years ago but can´t remember from where I got them. Frustrating...

if bonanno didnt know galante was dealing drugs, he wasnt much of a don.

one question who would you guys say was most active in the cocaine trade out of the five families during the 80s?

He did allow Galante and the Montreal decina to be heavily involved though... And Gambino was actually the one who enforced the rule "deal and die" on his men. He used his Cherry Hill Gambinos zips to deal in drugs.

Since we are talking about bosses dealing or not dealing in drugs, I would like to ask: what do you think about Vito Genovese’s conviction for drug dealing? Do you think he did really make that particular deal or was it a frame-up? I have read the main witness was paid by Luciano, Gambino and Costello to testify about things he had never seen, but do you think that deal really did take place even though the informant wasn’t present or was it completely made up?

That's a good question. I don't know the answer myself but I'm sure others will.

To get back to the original question:

I believe Luciano would have been a big success today. He had lots of personal force, and the leadership qualities that enabled him to assert himself and his ideas among other powerful men by making them see what was in it for them to accept his leadership.

His background tells me he'd succeed even now: he was born in Sicily but was a thoroughly American businessman, enlisting the help of non-Sicilians and even non-Italians if he thought they could contribute. He created the Commission but wisely did not appoint himself capo di tutti capi because he didn't have to--everyone knew who he was. Instead he appointed Al Capone as "chairman" (a non-Sicilian and non-Mafioso) because he wanted to bring the Chicago Outfit into the new organization.. And he named Joe Bonanno "secretary" because Bonanno was a skeptic about new directions and needed to be stroked.

A negative: he had a fairly high public profile by Mob standards, although nothing like Gotti and Columbo. Some writers think the prostitution rap was a put-up job; Dewey allegedly wanted to get him for narcotics (which he was always involved in) but didn't have the evidence yet. Today narcotics would be even more dangerous.

I don't really know but, if I had to guess, I would say the Gambinos.

The idea of a ruling body such as the Commission circulated anong the bosses already after the killing of Masseria. But the boss of bosses, Salvatore Maranzano naturally rejected this.
This is mentioned by Nicolo Gentile, the mafioso who in the 1960s wrote his memoirs which later turned into the book "Vita di capomafia".
After Maranzano´s death, the leaders of the two warring factions in the Castellammarese war, Lucky Luciano and Joe Bonanno together materialized the idea of a ruling body, a ruling council. Bonanno suggested it to be called Commissione del pace. But because Luciano pronounced it incorrectly, they named it the Commission.
Bonanno writes in his book that because of his age, Vincent Mangano actually was selected by the Commission members as the chairman and Joseph Profaci was selected "secretary".

Turnbull, I hope I don´t get banned for writing this post.

You'll never get banned for an intelligent, well written rebuttal, Hairy. It's called "agreeing to disagree." And you've proven yourself to be a gentleman here .

But I do think that you put too much stock into Bonanno's book. Who's to say who was telling the truth? For all we know, Bonanno was completely forthright in his memoir. But I personally don't believe a lot of it.

Thanks for the kind words, Pizzaboy. I'll try to tone down my enthusiasm for the Bonanno book. A little bit anyway.
I enjoy reading all your posts. They are written with great insight, great knowledge and with a great sense of humor I really enjoy. And I think that most people in here agrees.

Aw, shucks .

Agreed 100%. Having read "The Last Testament" I have to say that my interpretation of Lucky is that of a VERY smart, business-minded individual who didn't care about race, and saw the benefits of that. He had all the qualities a great boss needs, and he was unlike Gotti, respected by all the other families. He'd have gotten VERY far, but there's a different climate today, and the feds are on their toes and you can't buy cops, so who knows.

Are you sure?

Well, what I meant was that you can't buy off cops like you could back in the day.

A very valuable and intelligent post, Hairy! There are always differing interpretations and accounts because Mob history is so imprecise. Mobsters aren't the types to leave their collected letters and papers to universities for people like us to peruse.

Bonanno's "A Man of Honor" (sic) is a great read, but like PB, I'm skeptical. All autobiographies are self-serving, and Bonanno had more reason than most to serve himself--such as denying that he was involved with drugs.

Does he mention Lucky a lot in that book? Haven't read that one, yet. Just started on "Murder Machine".

Thank you Turnbull.
In no way am I here to try to convince people to belive Bonanno.
We all have different preferences when it comes to books about the Mafia. We don´t know what is the truth and what is not. We weren´t there. We might wish, but we weren´t there.
What we can do is to compare facts, sources and hopefully draw our own conclusions. Internet is a great media to use. But we also have to be aware of the false information (deliberate or not) that is out there. When an Internet writer doing an article and show his or her proper sources anybody can check them out. But sadly to say, a great majority of them don´t.

Now, with that said I would like to comment an earlier post, in this thread, by LCN (I think it was) referring to "The Last Testament of Lucky Luciano". The book has been rejected by most crime historians and mafia experts I came across. They all point to crucial fact errors made by Hammer and Gosch when writing the book which suggests that the story did not come from Luciano himself but rather from newspaper clippings of dubious qualities.
For example, Alan May from Rick Porello´s AmericanMafia.com made an excellent report about the subject. Here´s a qoute from it:

"Witout giving a time frame, but it must be assumed it´s 1923 or earlier, Luciano says that Maranzano wants to have a meeting. During their talk he claims Maranzano asks him to join his organization. Luciano sends his driver to deliver a message: "to thank Don Salvatore for his very nice offer and just to say that this wasn´t the right time and we should sorta leave the door open.

The next ancounter between Luciano and Maranzano came on the night of september 14, 1923 during the Dempsey/Firpo heavyweight championship at the Polo grounds.
Luciano boasts that he spent 25,000 dollars to purchase choice seats to impress his gangsterfriends and politicians from New York and around the country. He claims Boss Jim Pendergast came all the way from Kansas City in a private railroad car.

- It must have been a funeral car because Jim Pendergast died in 1910.

Luciano says right before the main bout Maranzano walked over and they greeted eachother cordially, like equals, and chatted for a few minutes. At this time Maranzano asks for another meeting. When the two men met......Maranzano makes an offer to Luciano: Charles Lucania would become chief lieutenant in the Maranzano family, and Maranzano would turn over to him the family´s entire liqour territory.....

Luciano claims that he discussed the offer with his inner circle and then sent a polite message to Maranzano declining the offer. He claimed this rejection of the second Maranzano offer without any serious consequences spread quickly through the underworld and won Luciano increased respect from his elders and peers. One of the people he supposedly won the respect of was Johnny Scalise, one of the bootleg powers in Cleveland.

- We can only assume he is referring to John Scalish, who was the recognized leader of the Cleveland Mafia from 1944 to 1976. Luciano refers to Scalise a couple of times. However, in 1923 John Scalish was only eleven years old."

End of qoute.

In addition to obvious errors mentioned by Allan May, I would like to chip in by saying that Maranzano most probably was not in US prior to 1923. His immigration entry to the US shows 1925. And he certainly was not the leader of the Castellammarese at that time. So no "Maranzano family"
could have existed. Therfore, he could not have offered Luciano a lieutenant position in any family.

In my opinion, the book is fake.

Yes. Bonanno mentions Luciano several times in the book.

Could you provide us with that immigration entry? I would like to see it.

I thought I could, but after doing a little research I found out that I can´t.

In here, you will find his wife´s (Elizabetta) entry into the US. According to Ellis Island passenger manifests she travelled from Palermo, Sicily with her brother Calogero Minore. So Salvatore Maranzano (her husband) was not with her on this trip.


In an interview for the newspaper L´Ora Jan 23, 1962 former Mafia member Dr Melchiorre Allegra stated that Maranzano backed him for political office in 1924, showing Allegra around in the city of Palermo.

Former secret service agent Joseph Palma testified for the Kefauver Committee that in 1925 Maranzano moved to Canada (from Sicily).

And Joseph Bonanno (believe it or not... ) says "My life took a decisive turn at the end of 1925 when Salvatore Maranzano, a hero of mine in Sicily, immigrated to the United States."

I believe that Maranzano came to the USA after a short stay in Canada. So he likely entered through Niagara which is why I can´t find him on EllisIsland.org

Well, at least it looks like you're doing some decent research. Keep up the good work!

Shoot... Just noticed that I´m still loged in at that site. Don´t know how it works, if people can use my inlog for stuff.
Just to be safe, I will remove the link...

I thought Bonanno took a slightly denigrating tone toward Luciano in his autobiography:

Bonanno liked to portray himself as "A Man of Tradition" because he was a Sicilian and clung to "the old ways" of "honor," which you can infer, from his book, meant not associating with non-Sicilians or Jews, as Luciano did. He also said Luciano approached him after the Maranzano assassination to explain that he (Luciano) had been the the target of a Maranzano assassination plot, and so he killed him in self-defense. He wrote that Lucian spoke with him in Sicilian, but his Sicilian wasn't very good--another rap on Lucky. "I have no quarrel with you," Bonanno replied. That's just about it, except for Bonanno's description of the Commission.

Ironically, that description provided Rudy Guliani, then the US Attorney for the Southern District of NY, with the ammunition to charge the NY Mafia Dons in the famous "Commission" case under the RICO act--probably the heaviest blow against the Mafia in recent history.

But it seriously damaged the leadership of only 2 families - The Colombos and the Luccheses. The Gambino defendants (Castellano and Dellacroce) were dead before the trial, and Tony Salerno of the Genovese was just a front man. I mean, isn't the damage caused to the mafia by that trial sometimes exaggerated?

I think the commision trial helped them gather alot of intelligence and evidence for future investigations.

I think if Lucky were alive today he'd enroll in dental school.

What you say is literally true, Dwalin, from the viewpoint of NYC. But the Columbos and Luccheses never recovered from the loss of two reasonably competent Dons. Castellano and Dellacroce, although removed death not RICO, were succeeded by Gotti and Da Bull, who ran the Gambinos into the ground. More important, the Commission case provided a template for other US Attorneys to go after the Mafia in other cities.

I don't think so, Dwalin. For the simple reason that it showed other US attorneys how to use the RICO statute. It layed the groundwork for every mega-mob trial that followed.

Only the Genoveses were largely unaffected which could be an explanation why they continued to be strong for another decade.

That statute is absolutely fascinating to me. I'm a political science student in Constitutional Law with aspirations of law school, so there's two reasons as to why I love mafia forums; gangsta talk, and legal talk. The RICO statute was not easy to interpret in 1970 and Giuliani's use of it in 1985 did how U.S. Attorney's and county prosecutors how to use the law.

Why did it take 15 years for it to be implemented properly?