1

The Italian Colony of San Francisco during the

Italian Risorgimento

Federico Caria

Ma mamma io per dirti il vero, l’italiano non so cosa sia

E pure se attraverso il mondo non conosco la geografia.

Francesco De Gregori, L’abbigliamento di un fuochista, Titanic, 1982.

Alì dagli Occhi Azzurri

uno dei tanti figli di figli, scenderà da Algeri, su navi

a vela e a remi. Saranno

con lui migliaia di uomini coi corpicini e gli occhi

di poveri cani dei padri

sulle barche varate nei Regni della Fame. Pier Paolo Pasolini, Profezia, Poesia in forma di Rosa, Garzanti, 1962.

(Pier Paolo Pasolini, Ali the Blue-Eyed).

Preservation, immigration, identity

At the end of the nineteenth century Alfredo Bini, an unknown

farmer from the environs of Lucca, decided to emigrate to California.

He had no suitcase with him, but only an old pitchfork to which he

clung in the throes of nostalgia. Nothing more of him is known today:

whether his dreams for a better life came true, whether he made a

fortune, whether he died somewhere in the lonely misery or by the

slave drivers’ brutality. All that remains is that pitchfork, dating back

from 1901: as gnarled and bent as a peasant’s back, as if to testify to

the drudgery and the dreams that infused the spirits of the innumerable

faceless ‘countrymen’ like him, willing to risk everything to make a

new life for themselves, and ending up building America.

Among the many materials available, I feel compelled to choose

this example because of its neutrality, which is well suited to function

as a paradigm: I would like Alfredo’s pitchfork to be viewed as the

symbol of a specific wave of Italian immigration to the United States,

and particularly to northern California, and datable from the second

half of the nineteenth century to the dawn of the Age of Extremes.

2

The pitchfork tells us much about conditions in Italy during those

years, which form the background to the facts which I shall endeavour

to describe. Up to the mid-nineteenth century, Italy was not yet

unified, it bore the scars of foreign domination, and it suffered from

grinding poverty due to an outdated rural-based economy and a high

rate of illiteracy.

An overview of such a long period of time implies a different

chronological perspective. While patterns of Italian immigration to

California are commonly structured in two distinct waves – the first

beginning with the Gold Rush until 1870, and the second from 1880 to

1930 – the broader outlook adopted here is not arbitrary, for it meets

the need to frame Italian immigration within the context of the

Risorgimento.

I fortuitously made the acquaintance of Mr. Alessandro Baccari Jr.

on the occasion of his last two exhibitions, entitled The Making of

Modern Italy and its Meaning for Italians in California, held at the

Italian Cultural Institute and at the Old Mint Museum in San

Francisco. The present paper will trace the history of the Italian

Colony of San Francisco in words, just as these two exhibitions did

with images and artefacts. According to the theme underlying the

exhibitions, the Unification of Italy laid the missing foundations

which allowed the Colony to flourish. From this perspective, the

article will look into the Italian heritage of northern California,

undertaking to present reasons for those social and historical

conditions which allowed the Italian Colony to be regarded as a

“model of immigration” by other communities of immigrants.

After Unification and during its social evolution, the Colony gave

birth to a huge mass of heritage which, for its quality and taste, has

greatly influenced the construction of San Francisco’s own identity.

Not by chance, another aim of the paper is to raise the alarm against

the paucity of suitable cultural policies for preserving that heritage. As

emphasised by Baccari’s own words, the establishment of informed

initiatives for cultural preservation would represent both a duty for the

relevant authorities and a right for the Italian inhabitants of the Bay:

One-hundred-fifty years ago in 1861 Italy became a nation-state. By the time of

unification, more than 1,000 Italians had ventured from their homeland to San

Francisco, bringing their spirit and their talents. They started coming in the 1850s

drawn by the lure of gold. They were people who brought with them a tradition of

hard work and love for family.

It has been said that “The spirit of Italy is the soul of San Francisco”. Wherever one

looks – be it in the areas of architecture, politics, art, cuisine, the endurance of

healthy, vibrant neighborhoods, maritime development, the pre-eminence of our

universities and professions and many others as well – one will find that San

3

Francisco has been blessed by the herculean energies, the civic pride, and the

creative genius of its Italian-American citizens.

For the Italian-Americans who first established themselves in San Francisco, they

did so as a close-knit immigrant community. While they became truly cosmopolitan

in their roles and responsabilities they still resolved to maintain their strong cultural

tradition. And it has been the simultaneous preservation of the durable tradition

whith a vigorous assimilation into society that have been the great hallmarks of the

Italian-American experience.

San Francisco is a classic example of an American community which has gained

strength through the diversity of its people and the men and women of its Italian-

American community have played a major role in this enduring strength.

Uniqueness is what gives the Italian-American community its strength and vitality.

But such uniqueness can be a fragile thing, easily lost when people cease to care or

forget their rich heritage.

Preservation must be worked at. There must be deliberate community effort and

visual reminder of the past, so that people do not forget who they are and what they

brought them to this place.

This is the spirit behind this exhibit of San Francisco’s Italian Colony during and

after Italy became a nation-state in 1861.

This special exhibit of rare Italian memorabilia has been prepared through the

courtesy of Alessandro Baccari. All items on display are from his private collection.

Mr. Baccari ia a California historian, and noted authority and author on the works of

Italians in the state.

Activities and investments concerned with the preservation of history

display a society’s awareness of its own identity. By preserving its

roots, a community creates the necessary conditions for accepting

itself and its past, but also for facing the future with equanimity.

These roots are all the more valuable to present-day Italians, since the

year 2011 marks the 150th

anniversary of Italian unification:

considering the fact that Italy is now becoming the target of

immigration from developing countries, an acquaintance with our

forebears’ adaptability and sufferings is very helpful indeed. They had

the same eyes as Alfredo, the same hopes of Pasolini’s ‘Alì the Blue-

Eyed’, who lands daily on our peninsula, blinded by the desperate

mirage of a warm welcome.

4

To Alessandro and Caterina Baccari,

with love.

5

The character of the Italian Colony

The history of the Italian Colony of San Francisco boasts an

extensive literature1. For this reason, instead of repeating what has

been eloquently said by others, I shall dedicate the first paragraph to

the character of Italian immigrants in California, from a perspective

that is more sociological than historical. My use of the neutral term

‘character’ to describe the complex interactions characterising the

evolution of a community transplanted to unfamiliar territory is not

entirely arbitratry. By speaking of ‘character’, one can concentrate on

the dialectic between the system of values pertaining to the ‘Old

World’ and that which is particular to the ‘New World’. It is through

this vital tension that one can better understand the identity acquired

by a social group in alien territory and the resultant activity.

We can begin by situating the community in the appopriate

location. Observing a precious map of San Francisco2 dating back to

1862, one is immediately struck by the impressive size of the young

city. This is especially noteworthy since only twenty years before,

captain Pietro Bonzi had settled with his brother and son on the

northern coast of the peninsula: “these three Ligurians are regarded as

the first italians to settle in San Francisco”3

. I would use this as a

starting point: the camera angle is advantageous. Keeping an eye on

the sea, from Russian Hill one can make out the Telegraph Hill

neighbourhood, where Bonzi happily settled in distant 1840, curiously

ahead of his times considering the choices of later Italian immigrants.

The so-called “gente della collina” (hill people), in fact, always

attached a sentimental value to the Hill, which to this day remains

indissolubly associated with the Italian community. The steep, rugged

Hill reminded them of the Mediterranean cliffs back home4. The

Telegraph Hill district is to be considered the heart of the first Italian

settlement before they moved down to North Beach.

The passage of time has brought changes in scholarly opinions

regarding the characteristics of early Italian settlements abroad, and

especially in San Francisco. While at first scholars generally referred

to the self-isolation of Italian immigrants using the image of the

ghetto5, later they favoured less radical terminology. Consequently,

1 [Paoli-Gumina, 1978; Cinel, 1982; Patrizi, 1991; Rolle, 1968; etc.].

2 The same picture is exposed in the California Historical Society’s library.

3 [Dondero, 1950].

4 [Paoli Gumina, 1978].

5 On the “Ghetto theory”, cfr. [Cinel, 1982].

6

words like regionalism and parochialism appeared in history books,

with the aim of tracing such behaviour to immigrants’ political

background, since Italy was not yet a nation-state at the time, and

Italians consequently lacked a shared sense of ‘the state’. Admittedly,

therefore, they had to organise themselves according to alternative

principles, such as ‘region’ or ‘city’. More recently, scholars have yet

again modified their approach to the issue, paying more attention to

those external factors which are regarded as “formative experiences”

for the Colony: I am particularly referring to the role of the Latin

Quarter as a ‘primordial soup’ of romance culture, described by Dino

Cinel in his From Italy to San Francisco. According to Cinel, sharing

a small space with other romance communities was significant for the

Colony, since it deeply influenced the early stage of its social

organization.

This last perspective is interesting because it implicitly refers to

the duality between old and new and because it suggests interesting

investigation criteria relevant to cosmopolitanism, a second focal

concept which is widely invoked in descriptions of San Francisco

immigrants. However, before going further, with regard to the first

scholarly position one must not overlook two obvious structural

reasons for the clear tendency towards isolation: a) the absence of

national unity; b) the absence of linguistic unity. One needs to bear in

mind that most Italian immigrants in California, from 1848 until the

capture of Rome, had no conception of the Italian language, or of the

term ‘Italy’ itself. Cerruti, the first Consul of unified Italy in San

Francisco, expressed this clearly in writing to the Foreign Ministry:

“Immigrants coming from Liguria or Tuscany see themselves as people coming

from two different states ”. [Cerruti 1865]

This is the ideal starting point for understanding the Italian people’s

attitude to isolation and the system of values they handed down to

their second and third generations. To the scholarly observer, their

history presents itself as a disorganised series of regional and local

commentaries, literally incomprehensible to speakers of other dialects.

For these simple reasons, at least in the earlier period, a fisherman or a

farmer in 1850s Italy could not leave his local area without

endangering his survival along with the identity of the whole group. A

similar ‘state of alert’ towards ‘the other’ affected the Colony for a

period of time which even went beyond the capture of Rome – a time-

lag which recalls the mechanism whereby language evolves more

slowly in peripheral areas. These ultra-conservative tendencies,

however, did not only foster parochialism but also had some positive

effects. For example they created one of the strongest cohesive forces

7

in the immigrant community: devotion to one’s sphere of belonging,

namely, the family. I believe the director of the newspaper L’Italia,

Ettore Patrizi, alludes to a similar idea when he attributes the Italian

Colony’s success to its pronounced sense of familial attachment:

Such enviable favour was, in general, achieved gradually by the Italians of San

Francisco and California, thanks to their remarkable activity and energy, thanks to

the extraordinary flexibility of their attitudes and to no small degree thanks to the

inherent acumen and virtue of our stock, virtues which they took with them –

admittedly accompanied by defects also – from the day they emigrated, and which

can be characterised as an innate spirit of self-sacrifice and forbearance, as a strong

desire to work, as great respect and gratitude for those who welcome them and give

them the opportunity to make something of themselves, if not even a fortune, and –

especially – as their spontaneous, intense attachment to the family, which is, in our

opinion, the most powerful springboard for their every action. [Patrizi, 1991]

Let us consider the qualities inherent in the Italian people, which

Patrizi mentions above. These cannot be properly considered innate

virtues of the Italian race, unless they can somehow be attributed to an

‘Italian genome’. It is sadly known, in fact, that other Italian

immigrant communities in America, having adopted different

behavioural patterns, remained unable to gain the same ‘favour’ that

the Italian colony in California received both from natives and from

other immigrant communities6. What happened, then, in California?

Was here any particular, or even exceptional, condition which allowed

the Italian ‘character’ to develop successfully in that time and place?

A categorical answer would be inappropriate, but an analysis of

the sources available could shed some light on the issue. As we learn

from the sources, the Italian Colony of San Francisco was formed by a

specific type of immigrant. For the most part they came from the

Italian rural working class: a community composed of simple people,

often illiterate, committed to manual work in the new land as they had

been in their homeland. They literally gave up their lives in pursuit of

the wealth and welfare they finally obtained. However, this tireless

industriousness, indubitably originating from their past indigence,

cannot by itself explain the accumulation of such a ‘collective fortune’

whose echo was at times so potent as to cross the Atlantic7.

I am therefore tempted to trace the other side of the Italian

‘character’ to the cosmopolitan environment in which the young

Colony existed. In particular, the multiracial society of San Francisco

6 I am referring to Italian Immigrants on the West Coast. [Cinel 1982].

7 This was the case for the Italian Swiss Colony, founded by Andrea Sbarboro. It

was a wine factory intelligently conceived as a cooperative run by the workers

themselves, which became the biggest wine factory in the world [Paoli-Gumina,

1979].

8

influenced the mentality of some of its men who were in the right

position to counterbalance conservativism with open-minded interests

and policies. I am specifically thinking of Nicola Larco, “l’astro

maggiore della colonia” (the brightest star in the colony), who, not by

chance, landed in San Francisco after having experienced

cosmopolitanism in South America. The same goes for Ghirardelli.

Thanks to Nicola Larco and Domenico Ghirardelli’s activity, the

Italian Colony experienced an economic rise without precedent, since

they were not only the most prominent representatives of the

community, but they also managed trade, arrivals, departures and

access to employement. Alessandro Baccari best summarises their

deeds:

Nicola Larco (1818-1878): born in Santa Margherita, near Genova, he emigrated to

Peru before arriving in California in 1849, and making his fortune there. In only a

few years, he became one of the wealthiest men in the state. He profited enormously

from the import and export of foodstuffs and coffee. His financial empire, which

already included huge tracts of land, was further enlarged by several fortunate

ventures in minerals. He was the first shipowner in California who could afford a

fleet which operated regularly between Central America, Mexico and San Francisco.

Not least, Larco was one of the few businessmen to play an active leading role

within the young, disorganised Italian immigrant community. Thanks to his now

undeniable authority and his strong charitable spirit characterised by a notable sense

of solidarity, on 17 October 1858, together with several fellow countrymen, he

founded the Italian Mutual Benefit Society (Società Italiana di Mutua Beneficenza),

aiming to provide adequate healthcare for Italian immigrants. As well as convincing

and personally recruiting most of the sixty-four founding members, Larco served the

Society as its first president, a position which he held intermittently until the 1860s;

then in the 1870s he became the Society’s director. He died on 17 March 1878 in the

French Hospital, and was cremated by the Society of California Pioneers, of whom

he had been a member and Vice-President.

Domenico Ghirardelli (1817-1894) was born in 1917 in Rapallo, a small town on the

Ligurian Riviera in the province of Genova. Similarly to his friend Larco, he

emigrated to Peru in 1842 and subsequently to California in 1849. After spending

some time at the Mother Lode and Stockton, he moved to San Francisco, where he

founded a chocolate shop in 1852. Known for his generosity and patriotism,

Ghirardelli worked hard to gather funds for the cause of Italian unification. He

became one of the most fervent supporters of Larco in the foundation of the Italian

Mutual Benefit Society, and was elected Vice-President of the establishment in

1860. He also supported Larco in his endeavour to launch one of California’s first

Italian-language daily newspapers, La Parola (The Word). In the same way,

following Larco’s example, he was one of the most generous contributors in terms

of financial support for the impoverished families of Italian combatants, and

participated substantially in the accumulation of funds to purchase the weapons that

were crucial to General Garibaldi for completing his campaign. Retiring in 1889 and

twice widowed, he returned to visit his homeland and remained for long in his

beloved Rapallo before being struck down by influenza on 17 January 1894.

9

I would consider this second perspective, beyond the economic one, in

evaluating Larco’s work within the French-Italian alliance, which

Cinel underlines as the first important step towards the Colony’s

acculturation8. In those years, Italian ‘compatriots’ socially

experienced ‘the other’. From the French community they inherited

social practices such as the formation of associations, of which

Italians, lacking a sense of ‘the state’, had previously been suspicious;

in other words, this was a social practice traceable to dynamics proper

of the ‘Old World’. Though with a certain level of generalisation, such

men as Larco and Ghirardelli were able to look beyond the limits of

their own personal universe as Ligurian immigrants, laying the

grounds for the mentality which was the basis for one of the most

significant periods in the socioeconomic growth of the entire Colony.

Now that the vague concept of ‘character’ is becoming somewhat

clearer, I should perhaps venture a summary. The Italian immigrants

of San Francisco were subjected to two opposite pressures: a) a

pathological protectiveness of their own past cultural universe, which

led to self-isolation and the myth of the family; b) the open-

mindedness derived from emphasising interaction with other

communities of immigrants, which led to essential socio-economic

growth. Such a ‘character’, then, cemented by the Unification of Italy,

allowed the Colony to free itself of the chains of conservatism,

without losing itself in cosmopolitan relativism.

Pre-history of the Italian Consulate

What follows is functional to the contextualisation of important

political events which occurred before the first Italian Consulate in

San Francisco was instituted. The Consulate has been officially active

since 1865, under the first Consul of united Italy, Giovan Battista

Cerruti, though a Sardinian delegation had operated in the city some

time before. Here, therefore, let us reintroduce the theme of the

Risorgimento and its significance for the Italian immigrants of San

Francisco, by examining contacts between the Colony and the

homeland, as shown by consular activity.

8 It is worth remembering how, in the same years, it was Cavour’s political strategy

to pursue a French alliance. In 1852 Sardinia and France fought each other in the

Second Italian War of Independence.

10

A brief summary: as early as 1850 there were no more than 300

Italian Immigrants in California9. As I already mentioned, for the most

part early immigrants were genoese seamen or captains, with a long

experience of maritime business. Many waves of adventurers and gold

prospectors followed, the first of these coming from nearby South

America and, in particular, from Brazil and Peru. By 1850 or

thereabouts, the population of San Francisco had grown dramatically,

since the city was the only available location to obtain supplies. At the

time, the explorers’ demand for services reached its peak: San

Francisco became the seaport where adventurers, entrepreneurs,

merchants of all kinds and desperate fortune-seekers gathered en

masse, some with the purpose of exploiting the burgeoning economy,

others intending to find work and the money to finance their return to

Italy. The most resourceful Italians took care of their family and

friends, inviting them to come over as soon as they themselves had

gained some stability. At first, their welcome was rather basic:

fishermen, farm workers and traders used to live side by side in small

sheds perched on the hill. They were likely attracted there by lower

rents and the immediate vicinity of the Wharf, while gardeners, in

general, preferred more southerly areas. In particular they managed to

settle in the flat Mission area. Most importantly, another class of

immigrant preferred to settle on the Pacific coast, moved by very

different causes. Disappointed by the events of 1848, no small number

of republicans and disillusioned youths had left Italy10

.

Before introducing the issue of the relationship between the

Colony and the central government, let us look into this type of

political immigration11

, which was characterised by different social

implications and cultural backgrounds. In fact, one of these political

immmigrants was the young Leonetto Cipriani (1812-1888), destined

to become the first Sardinian Consul of San Francisco. Assigned the

tasks of improving trade between the Sardinian Kingdom and

California, evaluating California’s natural resources, and compiling a

list of subjects of the Kingdom resident there12

, the Consul assumed

9 Due to the general difficulties which Italians in California had to face, above all,

their irregular status as immigrants, enrolment on public registers was rare. That is

the reason why the first statistics on Italians living in California carry partial data. 10

In 1889, Cesare Piatti, an attorney from Milan interviewed by La Voce del Popolo

in San José, declared that he left Italy 48 hours after Novara; cfr. [Loverci, 1979]. In

addition, many others left to avoid military service. 11

Leone Carpi, the first Italian historian involved in immigration statistics, was the

first to mention a political immigration to the Americas, in a book entitled

Dell’emigrazione Italiana nei suoi Rapporti coll’Agricoltura, l’Industria ed il

Commercio, Firenze 1871. 12

[Loverci 1979].

11

office in 1852, in quarters which he had physically brought from

home. Curiously, the newborn Sardinian Consulate was constructed

from 1200 pieces of wood, transported by sea and personally

assembled by Cipriani and his entourage. Undoubtedly the official

representative of the Sardinian Kingdom was welcomed with “interest

and distinction” within a young Italian community which needed

political support. Cipriani’s activity in San Francisco essentially

concerned the financial enhancement13

of the Colony, by improving

maritime trade with the homeland. To this end the Consul enlisted the

help of Nicola Larco and widely favoured him, funding the most

lucrative initiatives of the Ligurian entrepreneur14

. Cipriani was also a

romantic: both his venturesome choice of emigrating to California and

his early resignation can be traced to this inclination15

. In any case,

more relevant than Cipriani’s impetuous nature is his list of citizens of

the Kingdom, which he sent to Turin in 1853: this document is the

first original report giving the names and activities of early Italian

pioneers in California16

. Thanks to the list, we are introduced to a

number of Italian residents in the West, including Larco and another

personage who would later become historically significant: a certain

Federico Biesta, vaguely and informally defined as a ‘property

owner’. Possibly even more interesting than the names included on the

list is the exclusion of certain others. For instance, though his presence

in San Francisco during the same period17

is well-established, the

Sardinian Consul did not mention Felice Argenti, founder of the 1941

North-American Chapter of the Giovine Italia. We now know that

many others were also excluded from the list as well as Argenti: the

new Consul, in fact, deliberately kept silent about the most subversive

figures, due to his visceral hate for republicans – a significant attitude

which mirrored the Consulate’s political orientation towards Mazzini

and his followers.

After Cipriani’s resignation and departure from San Francisco, the

Consulate experienced a period commonly defined “interregnum”, in

13

His policy also concerned his private interests; crf. [Falbo, 1963]. 14

On Larco and Cipriani’s friendship cfr. [Baccari, Canepa, Richardson, 2006;

Falbo 1963]; on Consul Cipriani’s economic activities cfr. [avventure, Loverci,

1979, Falbo 1972; Loverci, 1979]. 15

After only 8 months of residency in California, Leonetto Cipriani departed on a

commercial expedition which he thought would also be useful for the report on

California’s natural resources which he was to send to the central government. 16

Fully published in [Loverci 1979], the list reports 118 names and is divided into

two sections: the first mentions immigrants who personally came to the Consulate to

collect their citizenship certificates, and the second is based on secondary sources. 17

Argenti’s prosperous activity in California in this period is well documented. Cfr

[Loverci 1996].

12

which the Sardinian representative was [unofficially] active, thanks to

the support of the French Consul Patrice Guillame Dillon (1854-1856)

and Benjamin Davidson (1856-1864), an English officer and agent of

the House of Rothschild. In brief, the central government managed to

delay the next consular assignment in the city and, shocked by

Cipriani’s early resignation18

, decided to allow the Consulate to be

controlled by Dillon with the help of Federico Biesta, who had already

distinguished himself as an able collaborator under Cipriani’s

incumbency. Born in Turin in 1822, Biesta was a lawman and, at the

time, the only intellectual within the Colony. He generally enjoyed a

positive reputation among his peers, and was in Cipriani’s good graces

for his moderate beliefs: not by chance did the first Consul define him

as a man of “rare personal qualities”19

. In this way, Dillon could avail

himself of invaluable help during his double endeavour of filling both

French and Italian Consulships. 1853-56, the years of Dillon’s

incumbency, are generally remembered as an extremely fruitful period

of time for the Colony, in which the Italian and the French

communities worked together to promote shared interests20

. This

‘romance interlude’ is relevant for two substantial reasons: a) the

economic rise of some figures at the head of the Colony, such as

Nicola Larco21

; b) the influences of the French model on the Italian

Colony, which led to the shared foundation of the Società Italiana di

Mutua Beneficenza (Italian Mutual Benefit Society).

Though Dillon had always emphasised the need for a native

Italian22

representative for the ascendant Colony, after his consular

mandate came to an end, the central government was not in

agrrement: Cavour did not take into account Biesta’s self-nomination

or the petition by which 604 Italian immigrants supported his

candidature. In 1857, in fact, the wealthy English banker Davidson

took office in what was still the Sardinian Consulate. The choice of

18

“When I left Italy for California I intended to stay for several years, if I could

appreciate the climate and the inhabitants and if I could occupy myself with helpful

and enjoyable employement […] Later I realised that I liked neither the climate nor

the inhabitants, and that I could not find the employement I would have wanted”.

These are Cipriani’s words regarding his Californian experience. On their

interpretation, cfr. [Falbo, 1963; Loverci, 1979]. 19

cfr. [AST, Cipriani to the Foreign Ministry, 1852]. 20

There is a considerable amount of literature on the French-Italian alliance; cfr.

[Cinel, 1982; Loverci, 1979; Baccari, Canepa, Richardson 1982]. 21

Explicitly favoured by Dillon. The French/Italian consul helped Larco, managing

to have him exempted from returning to Italy in order to register his new ships; cfr.

[AST, Dillon to the Foreign Ministry, 1885]. On the general collaboration between

them cfr. [Baccari, Canepa Richardson, 1982]. 22

Dillon himself suggested the name of Federico Biesta.

13

another foreign Consul may well have been motivated by the central

government’s alliance with the House of Rothschild, which was the

principal supporter of the Italian cause of Independence23

;

nevertheless, the period before Davidson’s nomination deserves

further discussion.

Federico Biesta, hoping to finally gain the Consular position he

felt he deserved, continued working hard as vice-Consul – and, most

likely, as de facto Consul – and wrote up a second important report, a

treatise on the geographical and socio-economic situation of

California dated 1856. From this other fundamental source, edited in

1963 by the California Historical Society Quarterly24

, we are able to

evaluate the results reached in three years by Italian immigrants, who

had gained prominency thanks to their hard work and perseverance,

thereby creating the first conditions for better integration:

But what I can say for certain, and with a feeling of national pride, is that the Italian

population is one of the best, most active and hard working. Strong, industious, and

accustomed to suffering and toil.

Also:

Generally, whether in San Francisco or in the interior, the Italians thrive and prosper

in their businesses, and there is probably not a village in California in which Italian

business is not well represented, just as there is not a mining district where

companies of Italian miners are not noted for their good conduct, their fraternal

harmony, and for the energy which they bring to their work.

Certainly, Biesta points out, the numbers provided are far from an

exhaustive estimation of the Italians in the West, also due to a certain

“aversion they have felt so far in presenting themselves to a foreign

consul”25

. Nevertheless, among the 6.000 estimated, he listed the

Italians of San Francisco who, more than others, “represent with

honour the Italian name in California”. The list counts seventeen

businessmen and it is the first official document from which we learn

of Domenico Ghirardelli, famed at the time for being a good

chocolatier. Biesta’s Report, defined “an excellent report” by Cavour

himself, could not prevent the Foreign Ministry from assigning the

Consulate of San Francisco to yet another foreign officer. Benjamin

Davidson assumed office on September 1, 1857, doing his best to

manage a Consulate which would soon be attacked by the republicans.

23

The Rothschilds were the principal Italian supporters during the Wars of

Independence. 24

[Falbo, 1963]. 25

Ibid.

14

There are not many sources about his work, mainly due to the paucity

of newspapers at the time. The few relevant materials available today

consist of brief records to the Foreign Ministry or comments on some

conteporary figures’ businesses and behaviour. There are also few

sources on the consular assistantship of Paul Baldassarre Abbate, a

man recommended by Cavour who succeeded Biesta after his

withdrawal. Before entering into the history of Risorgimento, let us

focus again on Federico Biesta, who, prior to his resignation, signed

the first contribution from California to the Italian Risorgimento. This

was the same period in which the project of “elever des fortifications

en terre autour Alexandria” (raise earthworks around Alessandria) was

supported by the Minister of War, Alfonso La Marmora, to face the

Austrian troops’ advance: the acting Sardinian Consul Biesta sent a

subscription to fund Alessandria’s fortifications. Signatories aimed to

donate four cannonballs “alla patria loro” (to their fatherland), and

therefore sent 5,000 lire along with a dedication “All’Italia, i suoi figli

in California” (to Italy from its sons in California). This occurred on

July 20, 1857.

…

In conclusion I present the complete list of the Consuls of San

Francisco from 1852 to the present. The list has never been published

in its entirety before and has been granted by Dr Stefania Ruggeri,

from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

15

Italian Consuls in San Francisco

(1852 – present)

Consuls

Leonetto Cipriani (1852-1853)

Patrizio [Patrice] Dillon (Consul of France) (1853 – 1856)

Beniamino [Benjamin] Davidson (1857 – 1862)

Giovan Battista Cerruti (November 5, 1863 – February 20, 1874)

Diego Lorenzo Barrilis (May 28, 1874 – February 20, 1881)

Francesco Lambertenghi (February 20, 1881 – August 10, 1890)

Consuls General

Giovanni Branchi (September 21, 1891 – October 25, 1894)

Francesco Bruni Grimaldi (October 25, 1894 – May 7, 1896)

Carlo Filippo Serra (May 7, 1896 – October 22, 1905)

Giulio Jona (October 22, 1905 – April 19, 1906)

G. Naselli (April 19, 1906 – July 25, 1907)

Salvatore Luciano Rocca (August 17, 1907 – August 6, 1911)

Stefano Carrara (August 6, 1911 – November 12, 1911)

Ferdinando Daneo (November 12, 1911 – February 15, 1916)

Oreste Da Vella (November 4, 1917 – December 26, 1920)

Vincenzo Fileti (December 26, 1920 – January 18, 1923)

Vittore Siciliani (February 24, 1923 – July 14, 1925)

Gino Cecchi (July 14, 1925 – January 30, 1926)

Luigi Silliti (January 30, 1926 – April 21, 1930)

Ludovico Manzini (July 21, 1930 – June 3, 1935)

Giuseppe Renzetti (reggente) (June 3, 1935 – October 1936)

Andrea Rainaldi (October 27, 1936 – February 20, 1940)

Carlo Bossi (February 20, 1940 – November 30, 1941)

Giovanni Jack Bosio (July 6, 1945 – September 6, 1948)

Benedetto d’Acunzo (December 31, 1947 – September 16, 1949)

Filippo Muzi Falconi (September 16, 1949 – April 27, 1955)

Pier Luigi Alverà (May 13, 1955 – March 10, 1959)

Alessandro Savorgnan (March 10, 1959 – February 20, 1967)

Paolo Molajoni (February 20, 1967 – August 7, 1971)

Luigi de Giovanni di Santa Severina (December 1, 1971 – June 30, 1973)

Paolo Emilio Mussa (July 10, 1974 – December 1, 1979)

Alessandro Vattani (July 28, 1980 – September 10, 1984)

Roberto Rossi (November 8, 1984 – July 23, 1989)

Marcello Griccioli (October 3, 1989 – October 11, 1993)

Giulio Prigioni (October 11, 1993 – August 24, 1998)

Sebastiano Salvatori (August 24, 1998 - August 10, 2001)

Francesco Sciortino (September 30, 2001 – April 2, 2005)

Roberto Falaschi (April 23, 2005 – May 16, 2008)

Fabrizio Marcelli (April 30, 2008 – Present)

16

The Risorgimento in California

The Circolo Italiano (Italian Social Club) was inaugurated on

January 5, 1868, amid “general cheer and the joyful sound of Italian

symphonies”. This recreational association was established to provide

Italian immigrants with a place to spend evenings “with dignity and

honour”. With the following words, reported by the newspaper La

Voce del Popolo (The People’s Voice) on January 7, 1868, the most

important subscibers welcomed the work in progress of the society:

A. Sbarboro: To Garibaldi, Mazzini, to the Unification of Italy and to the

prosperity of the United States!

C. Dondero: To free Switzerland, which for many years has welcomed under its

flag the cream of Italians, the proscribed!

L.G. Agostini: To Mazzini and Garibaldi, the people’s soul and arm, promoters

of the truth, with their lives of sacrifice for the homeland!

This ritual appears perhaps too ‘ideological’ for what was supposedly

only a recreational society; this is all the more apparent considering

that the first Circolo Italiano was inaugurated without the first Italian

Consul, Giovan Battista Cerruti. Neither did Biesta attend the

celebration, since he was mindful of the republicans’ habitual

excesses during such meetings. Not long thereafter, in fact, the

Circolo revealed its real plan: under the name of a recreational

association there existed a broader political programme, rooted in the

projects of Giuseppe Mazzini. Angelo Mangini and Carlo Dondero, at

the time the strongest supporters of the Circolo, were not only

working for the constitution of a real political party in San Francisco,

the Associazione Nazionale Italiana (A.N.I.: Italian National

Association); they were also involved in the larger movement to

revitalise Mazzini’s thought in the Americas26

.

Now that we are discussing the efforts to establish the A.N.I.27

, a

focal point in the political agenda for a real republican party in San

Francisco, a question may arise: how could the Italians of San

Francisco, so recently preoccupied with the most basic needs of the

Colony, become significantly involved with Mazzini’s ‘Alleanza

Repubblicana Universale’ (Universal Republican Alliance) only a few

26

For the same reason, Alberto and Jessie Mario returned to their conference

activity in the East Coast. 27

The A.N.I. officially made its debut by taking part in the 92nd

anniversary of

Independence Day, invited by Consul Stevenson, marching behind Mazzini and

Garibaldi’s portraits. [Loverci, 1996].

17

years later? There are two main reasons for this rather unexpected leap

on to the international scene: a) the economic power which the Colony

had been gaining; b) the rise of an unpredictable new political

sensibility. This means that, while the time between Biesta’s last

subscription and the incorporation of the A.N.I. (1856-1868) were

characterised by a dramatic improvement in the economic status of the

Colony, the same years also witnessed an increasing immigration of

‘proscribed’ individuals more or less connected with the name of

Giuseppe Mazzini. This differed from past immigration waves in

terms of political fervour and intellectual depth: so, if the activity of

Nicola Larco, Domenico Ghirardelli or Andrea Sbarboro laid the

financial foundations of the “model Colony”, Mangini, Dondero and

Seregni worked for its political awareness. Of course, Abbate’s words

make it clear that some other significant changes had occurred, since

even in a 1863 note, the official claimed that for Italians “indigence

does not exist”, due to the outstanding success of the Italian

immigrants during those years. We need not necessarily believe that

the situation was quite so advantageous. Still, we should imagine

those years as a period of improvement thanks to Nicola Larco at the

peak of his fortune and the mass of farmers, fishermen and traders,

groups whose efforts were among the most rewarded. We should say

that immigrants, once their daily bread was assured, became more

inclined towards political involvement, and this was a direct

consequence of conditions in Italy, on the verge of Unification while

Rome still lay in the hands of the Pope.

As a consequence, the Italian Colony split into two opposing

parties, the republicans against the monarchists, in a war fought

through street demonstrations, financial support whether granted or

denied, journalistic vitriol, and not infrequently, knife blows. Among

the monarchists there were Federico Biesta, editor of L’Eco della

Patria (The Echo of the Fatherland), and Nicola Larco, who provided

significant resources to the monarchist cause. On the opposite side,

there were those whom Cerruti named ‘the faction’28

, rallied closely

around the charismatic figure of Angelo Mangini, Mazzini’s pupil,

who arrived in San Francisco in 1859 with a death sentence on his

head. Mangini, after a brief experience working with Ghirardelli

Chocolate, eventually became involved in journalism. Once arrived,

he was suddendly elected president of the Italian Mutual Benefit

Society, replacing his rival Larco: this was a clear choice which

revealed the political implications of the presidency. In a short time

Mangini found himself both the president of the Benefit Society and

28

Ibid.

18

the editor of the 1860 Cronaca Italiana (Italian Chronicle), a series of

favourable circumstances that allowed him to seize control of the

opposition. And so he did. This was the context that spawned most of

the Colony’s initiatives supporting the Risorgimento: in other

instances also, Italian immigrants in San Francisco replied to the calls

of patriots, supporting one side or the other. Obviously, when one side

supported an initiative, everything was done on the other side to

boycott it and propose an alternative. So, the monarchist side donated

3916.50 dollars to the poor families of the Armata Italiana on 18

January 1860, and three months later Mangini, together with Seregni,

raised funds to provide Garibaldi with a million guns, addressing the

collected 4,100 lire to “Italia una, grande e libera” (Italy, united, great

and free). While the first donation bore the names of Biesta, Larco and

the still-Consul Davidson, the second one, along with the names of the

‘faction’, displayed that of Domenico Ghirardelli, though perhaps as a

reflection of his family relationships rather than his true beliefs29

.

But, leaving aside this daily struggle which continued for at least

ten years, let us focus on the role of Giovan Battista Cerruti, the first

Italian Consul of San Francisco after the foreign regencies, thereby

perhaps deepening our understanding of some political issues. First of

all, it must be noted that since the first day of his incumbency in 1864,

Consul Cerruti displayed a strong diplomatic ability in those years of

unrest. From the principal sources on his work, the most important of

which is his report to the Minstry of Foreign Affairs dated 1865, we

see the work of a man inspired by a sincere humanitarian sensibility.

From those years on we see him providing assistance to Italians in

difficulty and promoting maritime trade between Italy and California.

Though his presidency of the Italian Mutual Benefit Society was due

to on-going political conflict, he nevertheless dedicated himself to

broadening assistance to the less wealthy members of the Colony30

.

Moreover, Cerruti’s work at the Consulate of San Francisco is even

more commendable when considered in view of the general loss of

consent suffered by the monarchist party in those years. This occurred

for several reasons: Biesta’s newspaper failure, the travails of Nicola

Larco, strongly challenged because of some of the Society’s policies

concerning the French Hospital31

, and the equally noteworthy entry of

Carlo Dondero, one of the “due energumeni” (two ruffians)32

, into the

ranks of the republicans. So, when contingences forced him to

29

Mangini married Ghirardelli’s daughter. 30

At the time, the right of receiving medical care was restricted to Ligurians. 31

On the Società Italiana di Mutua Beneficenza cfr. [Montesano 1978]; on Cerruti’s

report to the Ministry cfr. [Baccari, Canepa, Richardson, 1981/1982]. 32

The other was Angelo Mangini; cfr. [Loverci, 1996].

19

explicitely safeguard his faction against republican enemies, Cerruti

did it with a firm hand: in 1865 he seized the vacant command post of

the newspaper La Parola (The Word)33

before the republicans could

get hold of it, and entrusted it to the reliable Biesta. L’Eco della Patria

was born in this way, eventually becoming the official organ of the

monarchist party.

The way in which Carlo Dondero affected the crisis deserves more

than a passing mention. He arrived in San Francisco in 1862, coming

from unpleasant experiences in the goldmines, and opened the first

Italian printing house in California, at 14 Clay Street. In a short period

of time Dondero’s workshop became not only a meeting point for

artists like Twain, George and Harte, but the driving force of the

republican opposition34

.

In the beginning of 1867, hard times were on the horizon for the

monarchists, when news of the disastrous battle of Mentana crossed

the Atlantic and reached San Francisco: the republicans, tightly

gathered around Mangini, arose in protest. Among their initiatives

were a courageous epistle to Kings Vittorio Emanuele and Luigi

Napoleone, the first being described as “unworthy of being King of

Italy”, the second “unworthy of living in civilised Europe”35

, another

subscription to Garibaldi’s troups injured in Mentana36

, and a large

protest in front of the church of St. Francis of Assisi during afternoon

mass. One could consider the republicans’ success inevitable since

public opinion dramatically shifted in favour of the republicans

because of the defeat at Mentana, allowing the launch and popularity

of La Voce del Popolo (The People’s Voice)37

(1867) and facilitating

the second Mangini presidency of the Benefit Society and the

foundation of the first Italian Hospital by the Italian National Party

which had in the mean time arisen. We return, therefore, to the issue

of the Associazione Nazionale Italiana (A.N.I. – Italian National

Association), finally established in 1868.

33

Newspaper founded by the republican Raffaele Ancarani; cfr [Loverci 1996]. 34

In his memoirs Dondero recounts how it became the location where funds,

weapons and ammunition were collected for the Holy War of Giuseppe Mazzini; cfr.

[Loverci, 1996]. 35

The document was written during a meeting in Raffetto’s Hall, which Consul

Cerruti and Biesta had the misfortune to attend. Probably exaggerating, Carlo

Dondero wrote in his memoirs that the Consul risked being defenestrated into a vat

of quicklime. Ibid. 36

Garibaldi personally thanked Mangini with a letter, defining him “President of the

Italian National Party”. 37

The “most important and long-lasting instrument of the Italian Republican Party

of California”, La Voce del Popolo, Organo del Partito Nazionale Italiano di

California”; cfr. [Loverci, 1996].

20

Having described the evolution of the Colony from the perspective

of the ‘internal division’ motif, which more or less marked the whole

history of the Italians of San Francisco from the characteristics of their

settlement to the nature of the political struggle during the

Risorgimento, it is time to change perspective and look into the

A.N.I.’s policies. I stated earlier that the Colony achieved its brilliant

results thanks to the unification of Italy. In fact, an interpretation of

the years that followed would be incomplete and biased if only based

upon such single events as Mangini’s escape after bankrupcy, the

fading of republican sentiment or the new business successes of

Sbarboro, Fugazi, Giannini or Fontana. As things stood after the

capture of Rome, the republicans did not have the political success

that one might imagine, but some of their signifcant ideas continued to

flourish. In this regard, the A.N.I.’s policies provide interesting

insights: significantly, the inaugural charter of the society, published

by La Voce on July 16, 1868, referred to the foundation of a free

school, as the first step to keep alive the “true spirit of freedom and

progress”38

. If the most significant project of the association

concerned the organisation of language and calligraphy classes, we

must consider that many other cultural activities must have entertained

Italian immigrants in the period before the capture of Rome, such as

classes in English, drawing, and mathematics.

For the first time a sense of belonging to the same homeland arose

among Italians. The newspaper La Voce fostered it with its appealing

titles, addressing immigrants as “citizens” or “Italians”. National unity

was further popularised by the foundation of several societies which

derived inspiration from the hero who had dedicated his life to the

unification, above all the ‘Garibaldi Guard’. The same sense of

brotherhood would later be glorified by Ettore Patrizi in the

newspaper L’Italia, beginning in 1887. It is not by chance that the

Colony’s fortunes improved, or that there followed an enormous wave

of immigration from the south of Italy, since immigrants could finally

rely on official citizenship and the associated rights.

From the 1880s, wrote Patrizi, in California there were “Italians

everywhere”39

, from Black Diamond to San Diego, some employed in

the rail or lumber industries, others in the wine industry which

achieved unexpectedly positive results especially in the north.

Everybody, in short, worked as hard as they could, supported by

advantageous social conditions and the dramatically improved wealth

38

The same spirit characterised the intentions of the Society’s president, Mangini, to

extend to the whole community the right of using the forthcoming Italian Hospital;

cfr. [Montesano, 1978; Cinel, 1982; Paoli-Gumina, 1978; Dondero, 1983]. 39

Cfr. [Patrizi, 1911].

21

level of Italians. In a very short time San Francisco’s Fisherman’s

Wharf would be known as “Italy Harbor”40

, swarming with feluccas

and stands bustling with people who wanted to taste or buy the catch

of the day cooked in the Italian style; North Beach was resplendent

with typical Italian guesthouses and restaurants. Workers, fishermen

and farmers formed the first craft unions, as did wine growers with the

first cooperatives and businessmen withi the first Italian banks, the

prime example being Giannini’s Banca d’Italia, now known as the

Bank of America. Everybody, stated the director, flourished so that:

The mass of our immigrants is certainly the richest! There are no paupers among

them, while there are thousands with small fortunes ranging from 5 thousand to 50

thousand dollars. [Patrizi 1991].

More than anything else, it was Italian culture which fascinated the

whole of San Francisco and indeed the entire Bay Area. As Baccari

says:

The first Italian theatre was inaugurated on 12 September 1850, on the corner of

Jackson and Kearny. Just a month later, the Pellegrini Opera Company performed

La Sonnambula, the first documented complete opera performance in California. In

the years that followed, the city’s theatres hosted a succession of virtuosos: Elisa

Biscaccianti arrived from New York, to perform with the opera company; in 1854

the first dance master, Mr Galavotti, exported his art by teaching in a prestigious

school. Some years later, the ballerina Marietta Bonfanti, who had been prima

ballerina at the Scala, visited the city. Then, in 1860, the Bianchi opera company

landed at San Francisco, achieving suc a resounding success that they trod the

boards uninterruptedly for fourteen years. When Mrs Bianchi, the company’s

founder, died in San Francisco, the editorial of a major daily newspaper praised her

as “the mother of music in California”.

Italian unification represented the decisive cohesive force for the

Colony. Without it, cooperation between citizens would have been

constrained by an intricate system of rivalries inherited from the

Mediaeval age. Unification meant cooperation and progress within the

background of a shared cause. Without it, the ‘Old World’ would have

prevailed against the ‘New World’, limiting the Colony’s sphere of

activity within neighbourhood borders. In a word, every road to

progress would have been closed for our countrymen without the

unification of Italy.

40

cfr. [Baccari 2006].

22

Bibliography

Baccari, A., San Francisco Fisherman’s Wharf, San Francisco, 2006.

Baccari, A., Canepa, A. M., Richardson, O., “The Italians of San

Francisco in 1865: G. B. Cerruti’s report to the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs”, in California Historical Society Quarterly, 4

(1981/1982).

Byington, L., The history of San Francisco, Chicago, 1931.

Carducci, G., Odi Barbare, Bologna, 1910.

Carpi, L., Delle Colonie e dell’emigrazione italiana all’estero,

Milano, 1874.

Capuana, L., Gli Americani di Rabbato, Milano, 1912.

Cinel D., From Italy to San Francisco: The immigrant experience,

Stanford University Press, 1982

Dondero, C., Relazione sugli italiani della costa del Pacifico, San

Francisco, 1897.

Dondero, R., The Italian settlement of San Francisco, San Francisco,

1974.

Ferlinghetti, L., A far Rockaway of the heart, San Francisco

The Old Italians Dying, San Francisco, ca. 1970. First

manuscript version of the poem. The only specimen is owned

by A. Baccari Jr.

Filippi, M., “I distretti italiani di San Francisco”, in Tuoni, G. M., ed.,

Attività italiane in California, San Francisco, 1930.

Falbo, E., ed. “Stato di California al 1856: Federico Biesta’s Report

to the Sardinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs”, in California

Historical Society Quarterly, 42 (1963).

ed. California and Overland Diaries of Count Leonetto

Cipriani from 1853 to 1871, San Francisco, 1972.

Gumina, D. P., The Italians of San Francisco, 1850-1930, New York,

1978.

Hittel, T., Brief History of California, San Francisco, 1898.

Hogan, E., “Hills and Corners of San Francisco”, in The Californian,

5 (1893.

Lawrence, S., “The Ghirardelli Story”, in California Historical

Society Quarterly, 81 (2002).

Leopardi, G., Inno ai patriarchi o de’ principii del genere umano,

1822.

Lloyd, B., Lights and shades in San Francisco, San Francisco 1876.

London, J., Tales of the Fish Patrol, New York, 1905.

Loverci, F., “Italiani in California negli anni del Risorgimento”, in

CLIO, 4 (1979).

23

“Le idee di Mazzini in California. Iniziative politiche e

giornalistiche dei repubblicani italiani a San Francisco dagli

anni del Gold Rush al 1905”, in Il mazzinianesimo nel mondo,

Pisa, 1996.

“Giuseppe Garibaldi and the Italians in California”, in

Garibaldi and California. Centennial 1882-1982, San

Francisco, 1982.

Montesano, P. M., “San Francisco’s Garibaldi Guard”, in Garibaldi

and California. Centennial 1882-1982, San Francisco, 1982.

La Società Italiana di Mutua Beneficenza: The Italian

Hospital, 1858-1874, San Francisco, 1978.

Nicosia, F., Italian pioneers in California, San Francisco, 1960.

Norris, F., ‘Cosmopolitan San Francisco”, in Frank Norris The Wave:

Stories and sketches from the San Francisco Weekly, 1893-

1897. San Francisco, 1931.

Patrizi, E., Gli italiani in California, edited by Augusto Troiani, San

Francisco, 1991.

Radin, P., The Italians of San Francisco. Their adjustment and

acculturation, San Francisco, 1935.

Rolle, A. F., The immigrant upraised. Italian adventurers and

colonists in expanding America, University of Oklahoma

Press, 1968.

Troiani, A., L’oro di Garibaldi, Firenze, 2008.