CHAPTER 10

The Remedy 147

1

THE CASE STATED

The student of American sociology will find the year 1894 marked by a

pronounced awakening of the public conscience to a system of anarchy and

outlawry which had grown during a series of ten years to be so common,

that scenes of unusual brutality failed to have any visible effect upon

the humane sentiments of the people of our land.

Beginning with the emancipation of the Negro, the inevitable result of

unbribled power exercised for two and a half centuries, by the white man

over the Negro, began to show itself in acts of conscienceless outlawry.

During the slave regime, the Southern white man owned the Negro body and

soul. It was to his interest to dwarf the soul and preserve the body.

Vested with unlimited power over his slave, to subject him to any and all

kinds of physical punishment, the white man was still restrained from such

punishment as tended to injure the slave by abating his physical powers

and thereby reducing his financial worth. While slaves were scourged

mercilessly, and in countless cases inhumanly treated in other respects,

still the white owner rarely permitted his anger to go so far as to take a

life, which would entail upon him a loss of several hundred dollars. The

slave was rarely killed, he was too valuable; it was easier and quite as

effective, for discipline or revenge, to sell him "Down South."

But Emancipation came and the vested interests of the white man in the

Negro's body were lost. The white man had no right to scourge the

emancipated Negro, still less has he a right to kill him. But the Southern

white people had been educated so long in that school of practice, in

which might makes right, that they disdained to draw strict lines of

action in dealing with the Negro. In slave times the Negro was kept

subservient and submissive by the frequency and severity of the scourging,

but, with freedom, a new system of intimidation came into vogue; the Negro

was not only whipped and scourged; he was killed.

Not all nor nearly all of the murders done by white men, during the past

thirty years in the South, have come to light, but the statistics as

gathered and preserved by white men, and which have not been questioned,

show that during these years more than ten thousand Negroes have been

killed in cold blood, without the formality of judicial trial and legal

execution. And yet, as evidence of the absolute impunity with which the

white man dares to kill a Negro, the same record shows that during all

these years, and for all these murders only three white men have been

tried, convicted, and executed. As no white man has been lynched for the

murder of colored people, these three executions are the only instances of

the death penalty being visited upon white men for murdering Negroes.

Naturally enough the commission of these crimes began to tell upon the

public conscience, and the Southern white man, as a tribute to the

nineteenth-century civilization, was in a manner compelled to give excuses

for his barbarism. His excuses have adapted themselves to the emergency,

and are aptly outlined by that greatest of all Negroes, Frederick

Douglass, in an article of recent date, in which he shows that there have

been three distinct eras of Southern barbarism, to account for which three

distinct excuses have been made.

The first excuse given to the civilized world for the murder of

unoffending Negroes was the necessity of the white man to repress and

stamp out alleged "race riots." For years immediately succeeding the war

there was an appalling slaughter of colored people, and the wires usually

conveyed to northern people and the world the intelligence, first, that an

insurrection was being planned by Negroes, which, a few hours later, would

prove to have been vigorously resisted by white men, and controlled with a

resulting loss of several killed and wounded. It was always a remarkable

feature in these insurrections and riots that only Negroes were killed

during the rioting, and that all the white men escaped unharmed.

From 1865 to 1872, hundreds of colored men and women were mercilessly

murdered and the almost invariable reason assigned was that they met their

death by being alleged participants in an insurrection or riot. But this

story at last wore itself out. No insurrection ever materialized; no

Negro rioter was ever apprehended and proven guilty, and no dynamite ever

recorded the black man's protest against oppression and wrong. It was too

much to ask thoughtful people to believe this transparent story, and the

southern white people at last made up their minds that some other excuse

must be had.

Then came the second excuse, which had its birth during the turbulent

times of reconstruction. By an amendment to the Constitution the Negro was

given the right of franchise, and, theoretically at least, his ballot

became his invaluable emblem of citizenship. In a government "of the

people, for the people, and by the people," the Negro's vote became an

important factor in all matters of state and national politics. But this

did not last long. The southern white man would not consider that the

Negro had any right which a white man was bound to respect, and the idea

of a republican form of government in the southern states grew into

general contempt. It was maintained that "This is a white man's

government," and regardless of numbers the white man should rule. "No

Negro domination" became the new legend on the sanguinary banner of the

sunny South, and under it rode the Ku Klux Klan, the Regulators, and the

lawless mobs, which for any cause chose to murder one man or a dozen as

suited their purpose best. It was a long, gory campaign; the blood chills

and the heart almost loses faith in Christianity when one thinks of Yazoo,

Hamburg, Edgefield, Copiah, and the countless massacres of defenseless

Negroes, whose only crime was the attempt to exercise their right to vote.

But it was a bootless strife for colored people. The government which had

made the Negro a citizen found itself unable to protect him. It gave him

the right to vote, but denied him the protection which should have

maintained that right. Scourged from his home; hunted through the swamps;

hung by midnight raiders, and openly murdered in the light of day, the

Negro clung to his right of franchise with a heroism which would have

wrung admiration from the hearts of savages. He believed that in that

small white ballot there was a subtle something which stood for manhood as

well as citizenship, and thousands of brave black men went to their

graves, exemplifying the one by dying for the other.

The white man's victory soon became complete by fraud, violence,

intimidation and murder. The franchise vouchsafed to the Negro grew to be

a "barren ideality," and regardless of numbers, the colored people found

themselves voiceless in the councils of those whose duty it was to rule.

With no longer the fear of "Negro Domination" before their eyes, the

white man's second excuse became valueless. With the Southern governments

all subverted and the Negro actually eliminated from all participation in

state and national elections, there could be no longer an excuse for

killing Negroes to prevent "Negro Domination."

Brutality still continued; Negroes were whipped, scourged, exiled, shot

and hung whenever and wherever it pleased the white man so to treat them,

and as the civilized world with increasing persistency held the white

people of the South to account for its outlawry, the murderers invented

the third excuse--that Negroes had to be killed to avenge their assaults

upon women. There could be framed no possible excuse more harmful to the

Negro and more unanswerable if true in its sufficiency for the white man.

Humanity abhors the assailant of womanhood, and this charge upon the Negro

at once placed him beyond the pale of human sympathy. With such unanimity,

earnestness and apparent candor was this charge made and reiterated that

the world has accepted the story that the Negro is a monster which the

Southern white man has painted him. And today, the Christian world feels,

that while lynching is a crime, and lawlessness and anarchy the certain

precursors of a nation's fall, it can not by word or deed, extend sympathy

or help to a race of outlaws, who might mistake their plea for justice and

deem it an excuse for their continued wrongs.

The Negro has suffered much and is willing to suffer more. He recognizes

that the wrongs of two centuries can not be righted in a day, and he tries

to bear his burden with patience for today and be hopeful for tomorrow.

But there comes a time when the veriest worm will turn, and the Negro

feels today that after all the work he has done, all the sacrifices he has

made, and all the suffering he has endured, if he did not, now, defend his

name and manhood from this vile accusation, he would be unworthy even of

the contempt of mankind. It is to this charge he now feels he must make

answer.

If the Southern people in defense of their lawlessness, would tell the

truth and admit that colored men and women are lynched for almost any

offense, from murder to a misdemeanor, there would not now be the

necessity for this defense. But when they intentionally, maliciously and

constantly belie the record and bolster up these falsehoods by the words

of legislators, preachers, governors and bishops, then the Negro must give

to the world his side of the awful story.

A word as to the charge itself. In considering the third reason assigned

by the Southern white people for the butchery of blacks, the question must

be asked, what the white man means when he charges the black man with

rape. Does he mean the crime which the statutes of the civilized states

describe as such? Not by any means. With the Southern white man, any

mesalliance existing between a white woman and a colored man is a

sufficient foundation for the charge of rape. The Southern white man says

that it is impossible for a voluntary alliance to exist between a white

woman and a colored man, and therefore, the fact of an alliance is a proof

of force. In numerous instances where colored men have have been lynched

on the charge of rape, it was positively known at the time of lynching,

and indisputably proven after the victim's death, that the relationship

sustained between the man and woman was voluntary and clandestine, and

that in no court of law could even the charge of assault have been

successfully maintained.

It was for the assertion of this fact, in the defense of her own race,

that the writer hereof became an exile; her property destroyed and her

return to her home forbidden under penalty of death, for writing the

following editorial which was printed in her paper, the _Free Speech,_ in

Memphis, Tenn., May 21,1892:

Eight Negroes lynched since last issue of the _Free Speech_ one at

Little Rock, Ark., last Saturday morning where the citizens broke(?)

into the penitentiary and got their man; three near Anniston, Ala., one

near New Orleans; and three at Clarksville, Ga., the last three for

killing a white man, and five on the same old racket--the new alarm

about raping white women. The same programme of hanging, then shooting

bullets into the lifeless bodies was carried out to the letter. Nobody

in this section of the country believes the old threadbare lie that

Negro men rape white women. If Southern white men are not careful, they

will overreach themselves and public sentiment will have a reaction; a

conclusion will then be reached which will be very damaging to the moral

reputation of their women.

But threats cannot suppress the truth, and while the Negro suffers the

soul deformity, resultant from two and a half centuries of slavery, he is

no more guilty of this vilest of all vile charges than the white man who

would blacken his name.

During all the years of slavery, no such charge was ever made, not even

during the dark days of the rebellion, when the white man, following the

fortunes of war went to do battle for the maintenance of slavery. While

the master was away fighting to forge the fetters upon the slave, he left

his wife and children with no protectors save the Negroes themselves. And

yet during those years of trust and peril, no Negro proved recreant to his

trust and no white man returned to a home that had been dispoiled.

Likewise during the period of alleged "insurrection," and alarming "race

riots," it never occurred to the white man, that his wife and children

were in danger of assault. Nor in the Reconstruction era, when the hue and

cry was against "Negro Domination," was there ever a thought that the

domination would ever contaminate a fireside or strike to death the virtue

of womanhood. It must appear strange indeed, to every thoughtful and

candid man, that more than a quarter of a century elapsed before the Negro

began to show signs of such infamous degeneration.

In his remarkable apology for lynching, Bishop Haygood, of Georgia, says:

"No race, not the most savage, tolerates the rape of woman, but it may be

said without reflection upon any other people that the Southern people are

now and always have been most sensitive concerning the honor of their

women--their mothers, wives, sisters and daughters." It is not the purpose

of this defense to say one word against the white women of the South. Such

need not be said, but it is their misfortune that the chivalrous white men

of that section, in order to escape the deserved execration of the

civilized world, should shield themselves by their cowardly and infamously

false excuse, and call into question that very honor about which their

distinguished priestly apologist claims they are most sensitive. To

justify their own barbarism they assume a chivalry which they do not

possess. True chivalry respects all womanhood, and no one who reads the

record, as it is written in the faces of the million mulattoes in the

South, will for a minute conceive that the southern white man had a very

chivalrous regard for the honor due the women of his own race or respect

for the womanhood which circumstances placed in his power. That chivalry

which is "most sensitive concerning the honor of women" can hope for but

little respect from the civilized world, when it confines itself entirely

to the women who happen to be white. Virtue knows no color line, and the

chivalry which depends upon complexion of skin and texture of hair can

command no honest respect.

When emancipation came to the Negroes, there arose in the northern part of

the United States an almost divine sentiment among the noblest, purest

and best white women of the North, who felt called to a mission to educate

and Christianize the millions of southern exslaves. From every nook and

corner of the North, brave young white women answered that call and left

their cultured homes, their happy associations and their lives of ease,

and with heroic determination went to the South to carry light and truth

to the benighted blacks. It was a heroism no less than that which calls

for volunteers for India, Africa and the Isles of the sea. To educate

their unfortunate charges; to teach them the Christian virtues and to

inspire in them the moral sentiments manifest in their own lives, these

young women braved dangers whose record reads more like fiction than fact.

They became social outlaws in the South. The peculiar sensitiveness of the

southern white men for women, never shed its protecting influence about

them. No friendly word from their own race cheered them in their work; no

hospitable doors gave them the companionship like that from which they had

come. No chivalrous white man doffed his hat in honor or respect. They

were "Nigger teachers"--unpardonable offenders in the social ethics of the

South, and were insulted, persecuted and ostracised, not by Negroes, but

by the white manhood which boasts of its chivalry toward women.

And yet these northern women worked on, year after year, unselfishly, with

a heroism which amounted almost to martyrdom. Threading their way through

dense forests, working in schoolhouse, in the cabin and in the church,

thrown at all times and in all places among the unfortunate and lowly

Negroes, whom they had come to find and to serve, these northern women,

thousands and thousands of them, have spent more than a quarter of a

century in giving to the colored people their splendid lessons for home

and heart and soul. Without protection, save that which innocence gives to

every good woman, they went about their work, fearing no assault and

suffering none. Their chivalrous protectors were hundreds of miles away in

their northern homes, and yet they never feared any "great dark-faced

mobs," they dared night or day to "go beyond their own roof trees." They

never complained of assaults, and no mob was ever called into existence to

avenge crimes against them. Before the world adjudges the Negro a moral

monster, a vicious assailant of womanhood and a menace to the sacred

precincts of home, the colored people ask the consideration of the silent

record of gratitude, respect, protection and devotion of the millions of

the race in the South, to the thousands of northern white women who have

served as teachers and missionaries since the war.

The Negro may not have known what chivalry was, but he knew enough to

preserve inviolate the womanhood of the South which was entrusted to his

hands during the war. The finer sensibilities of his soul may have been

crushed out by years of slavery, but his heart was full of gratitude to

the white women of the North, who blessed his home and inspired his soul

in all these years of freedom. Faithful to his trust in both of these

instances, he should now have the impartial ear of the civilized world,

when he dares to speak for himself as against the infamy wherewith he

stands charged.

It is his regret, that, in his own defense, he must disclose to the world

that degree of dehumanizing brutality which fixes upon America the blot of

a national crime. Whatever faults and failings other nations may have in

their dealings with their own subjects or with other people, no other

civilized nation stands condemned before the world with a series of crimes

so peculiarly national. It becomes a painful duty of the Negro to

reproduce a record which shows that a large portion of the American people

avow anarchy, condone murder and defy the contempt of civilization. These

pages are written in no spirit of vindictiveness, for all who give the

subject consideration must concede that far too serious is the condition

of that civilized government in which the spirit of unrestrained outlawry

constantly increases in violence, and casts its blight over a continually

growing area of territory. We plead not for the colored people alone, but

for all victims of the terrible injustice which puts men and women to

death without form of law. During the year 1894, there were 132 persons

executed in the United States by due form of law, while in the same year,

197 persons were put to death by mobs who gave the victims no opportunity

to make a lawful defense. No comment need be made upon a condition of

public sentiment responsible for such alarming results.

The purpose of the pages which follow shall be to give the record which

has been made, not by colored men, but that which is the result of

compilations made by white men, of reports sent over the civilized world

by white men in the South. Out of their own mouths shall the murderers be

condemned. For a number of years the _Chicago Tribune_, admittedly one of

the leading journals of America, has made a specialty of the compilation

of statistics touching upon lynching. The data compiled by that journal

and published to the world January 1, 1894, up to the present time has not

been disputed. In order to be safe from the charge of exaggeration, the

incidents hereinafter reported have been confined to those vouched for by

the Tribune.

2

LYNCH-LAW STATISTICS

From the record published in the _Chicago Tribune_, January 1, 1894, the

following computation of lynching statistics is made referring only to the

colored victims of Lynch Law during the year 1893:

ARSON

Sept. 15, Paul Hill, Carrollton, Ala.; Sept. 15, Paul Archer, Carrollton,

Ala.; Sept. 15, William Archer, Carrollton, Ala.; Sept. 15, Emma Fair,

Carrollton, Ala.

SUSPECTED ROBBERY

Dec. 23, unknown negro, Fannin, Miss.

ASSAULT

Dec. 25, Calvin Thomas, near Brainbridge, Ga.

ATTEMPTED ASSAULT

Dec. 28, Tillman Green, Columbia, La.

INCENDIARISM

Jan. 26, Patrick Wells, Quincy, Fla.; Feb. 9, Frank Harrell, Dickery,

Miss.; Feb. 9, William Filder, Dickery, Miss.

ATTEMPTED RAPE

Feb. 21, Richard Mays, Springville, Mo.; Aug. 14, Dug Hazleton,

Carrollton, Ga.; Sept. 1, Judge McNeil, Cadiz, Ky.; Sept. 11, Frank Smith,

Newton, Miss.; Sept. 16, William Jackson, Nevada, Mo.; Sept. 19, Riley

Gulley, Pine Apple, Ala.; Oct. 9, John Davis, Shorterville, Ala.; Nov. 8,

Robert Kennedy, Spartansburg, S.C.

BURGLARY

Feb. 16, Richard Forman, Granada, Miss.

WIFE BEATING

Oct. 14, David Jackson, Covington, La.

ATTEMPTED MURDER

Sept. 21, Thomas Smith, Roanoke, Va.

ATTEMPTED ROBBERY

Dec. 12, four unknown negroes, near Selma, Ala.

RACE PREJUDICE

Jan. 30, Thomas Carr, Kosciusko, Miss.; Feb. 7, William Butler, Hickory

Creek, Texas; Aug. 27, Charles Tart, Lyons Station, Miss.; Dec. 7, Robert

Greenwood, Cross county, Ark.; July 14, Allen Butler, Lawrenceville, Ill.

THIEVES

Oct. 24, two unknown negroes, Knox Point, La.

ALLEGED BARN BURNING

Nov. 4, Edward Wagner, Lynchburg, Va.; Nov. 4, William Wagner, Lynchburg,

Va.; Nov. 4, Samuel Motlow, Lynchburg, Va.; Nov. 4, Eliza Motlow,

Lynchburg, Va.

ALLEGED MURDER

Jan. 21, Robert Landry, St. James Parish, La.; Jan. 21, Chicken George,

St. James Parish, La.; Jan. 21, Richard Davis, St. James Parish, La.; Dec.

8, Benjamin Menter, Berlin, Ala.; Dec. 8, Robert Wilkins, Berlin, Ala.;

Dec. 8, Joseph Gevhens, Berlin, Ala.

ALLEGED COMPLICITY IN MURDER

Sept. 16, Valsin Julian, Jefferson Parish, La.; Sept. 16, Basil Julian,

Jefferson Parish, La.; Sept. 16, Paul Julian, Jefferson Parish, La.; Sept.

16, John Willis, Jefferson Parish, La.

MURDER

June 29, Samuel Thorp, Savannah, Ga.; June 29, George S. Riechen,

Waynesboro, Ga.; June 30, Joseph Bird, Wilberton, I.T.; July 1, James

Lamar, Darien, Ga.; July 28, Henry Miller, Dallas, Texas; July 28, Ada

Hiers, Walterboro, S.C.; July 28, Alexander Brown, Bastrop, Texas; July

30, W.G. Jamison, Quincy, Ill.; Sept. 1, John Ferguson, Lawrens, S.C.;

Sept. 1, Oscar Johnston, Berkeley, S.C.; Sept. 1, Henry Ewing, Berkeley,

S.C.; Sept. 8, William Smith, Camden, Ark.; Sept. 15, Staples Green,

Livingston, Ala.; Sept. 29, Hiram Jacobs, Mount Vernon, Ga.; Sept. 29,

Lucien Mannet, Mount Vernon, Ga.; Sept. 29, Hire Bevington, Mount Vernon,

Ga.; Sept. 29, Weldon Gordon, Mount Vernon, Ga.; Sept. 29, Parse

Strickland, Mount Vernon, Ga.; Oct. 20, William Dalton, Cartersville, Ga.;

Oct. 27, M.B. Taylor, Wise Court House, Va.; Oct. 27, Isaac Williams,

Madison, Ga.; Nov. 10, Miller Davis, Center Point, Ark.; Nov. 14, John

Johnston, Auburn, N.Y.

Sept. 27, Calvin Stewart, Langley, S.C.; Sept. 29, Henry Coleman, Denton,

La.; Oct. 18, William Richards, Summerfield, Ga.; Oct. 18, James Dickson,

Summerfield, Ga.; Oct. 27, Edward Jenkins, Clayton county, Ga.; Nov. 9,

Henry Boggs, Fort White, Fla.; Nov. 14, three unknown negroes, Lake City

Junction, Fla.; Nov. 14, D.T. Nelson, Varney, Ark.; Nov. 29, Newton Jones,

Baxley, Ga.; Dec. 2, Lucius Holt, Concord, Ga.; Dec. 10, two unknown

negroes, Richmond, Ala.; July 12, Henry Fleming, Columbus, Miss.; July 17,

unknown negro, Briar Field, Ala.; July 18, Meredith Lewis, Roseland, La.

July 29, Edward Bill, Dresden, Tenn.; Aug. 1, Henry Reynolds, Montgomery,

Tenn.; Aug. 9, unknown negro, McCreery, Ark.; Aug. 12, unknown negro,

Brantford, Fla.; Aug. 18, Charles Walton, Morganfield, Ky; Aug. 21,

Charles Tait, near Memphis, Tenn.; Aug. 28, Leonard Taylor, New Castle,

Ky; Sept. 8, Benjamin Jackson, Quincy, Miss.; Sept. 14, John Williams,

Jackson, Tenn.

SELF-DEFENSE

July 30, unknown negro, Wingo, Ky.

POISONING WELLS

Aug. 18, two unknown negroes, Franklin Parish, La.

ALLEGED WELL POISONING

Sept. 15, Benjamin Jackson, Jackson, Miss.; Sept. 15, Mahala Jackson,

Jackson, Miss.; Sept. 15, Louisa Carter, Jackson, Miss.; Sept. 15, W.A.

Haley, Jackson, Miss.; Sept. 16, Rufus Bigley, Jackson, Miss.

INSULTING WHITES

Feb. 18, John Hughes, Moberly, Mo.; June 2, Isaac Lincoln, Fort Madison,

S.C.

MURDEROUS ASSAULT

April 20, Daniel Adams, Selina, Kan.

NO OFFENSE

July 21, Charles Martin, Shelby Co., Tenn.; July 30, William Steen, Paris,

Miss.; Aug. 31, unknown negro, Yarborough, Tex.; Sept. 30, unknown negro,

Houston, Tex.; Dec. 28, Mack Segars, Brantley, Ala.

ALLEGED RAPE

July 7, Charles T. Miller, Bardwell, Ky.; Aug. 10, Daniel Lewis, Waycross,

Ga.; Aug. 10, James Taylor, Waycross, Ga.; Aug. 10, John Chambers,

Waycross, Ga.

ALLEGED STOCK POISONING

Dec. 16, Henry G. Givens, Nebro, Ky.

SUSPECTED MURDER

Dec. 23, Sloan Allen, West Mississippi.

SUSPICION OF RAPE

Feb. 14, Andy Blount, Chattanooga, Tenn.

TURNING STATE'S EVIDENCE

Dec. 19, William Ferguson, Adele, Ga.

RAPE

Jan. 19, James Williams, Pickens Co., Ala.; Feb. 11, unknown negro, Forest

Hill, Tenn.; Feb. 26, Joseph Hayne, or Paine, Jellico, Tenn.; Nov. 1,

Abner Anthony, Hot Springs, Va.; Nov. 1, Thomas Hill, Spring Place, Ga.;

April 24, John Peterson, Denmark, S.C.; May 6, Samuel Gaillard, ----,

S.C.; May 10, Haywood Banks, or Marksdale, Columbia, S.C.; May 12, Israel

Halliway, Napoleonville, La.; May 12, unknown negro, Wytheville, Va.; May

31, John Wallace, Jefferson Springs, Ark.; June 3, Samuel Bush, Decatur,

Ill.; June 8, L.C. Dumas, Gleason, Tenn.; June 13, William Shorter,

Winchester, Va.; June 14, George Williams, near Waco, Tex.; June 24,

Daniel Edwards, Selina or Selma, Ala.; June 27, Ernest Murphy, Daleville,

Ala.; July 6, unknown negro, Poplar Head, La.; July 6, unknown negro,

Poplar Head, La.; July 12, Robert Larkin, Oscola, Tex.; July 17, Warren

Dean, Stone Creek, Ga.; July 21, unknown negro, Brantford, Fla.; July 17,

John Cotton, Connersville, Ark.; July 22, Lee Walker, New Albany, Miss.;

July 26, ---- Handy, Suansea, S.C.; July 30, William Thompson, Columbia,

S.C.; July 28, Isaac Harper, Calera, Ala.; July 30, Thomas Preston,

Columbia, S.C.; July 30, Handy Kaigler, Columbia, S.C.; Aug. 13, Monroe

Smith, Springfield, Ala.; Aug. 19, negro tramp, near Paducah, Ky.; Aug.

21, John Nilson, near Leavenworth, Kan.; Aug. 23, Jacob Davis, Green Wood,

S.C.; Sept. 2, William Arkinson, McKenney, Ky.; Sept. 16, unknown negro,

Centerville, Ala.; Sept. 16, Jessie Mitchell, Amelia C.H., Va.; Sept. 25,

Perry Bratcher, New Boston, Tex.; Oct. 9, William Lacey, Jasper, Ala.;

Oct. 22, John Gamble, Pikesville, Tenn.

OFFENSES CHARGED ARE AS FOLLOWS

Rape, 39; attempted rape, 8; alleged rape, 4; suspicion of rape, 1;

murder, 44; alleged murder, 6; alleged complicity in murder, 4; murderous

assault, 1; attempted murder, 1; attempted robbery, 4; arson, 4;

incendiarism, 3; alleged stock poisoning, 1; poisoning wells, 2; alleged

poisoning wells, 5; burglary, 1; wife beating, 1; self-defense, 1;

suspected robbery, 1; assault and battery, 1; insulting whites, 2;

malpractice, 1; alleged barn burning, 4; stealing, 2; unknown offense, 4;

no offense, 1; race prejudice, 4; total, 159.

LYNCHINGS BY STATES

Alabama, 25; Arkansas, 7; Florida, 7; Georgia, 24; Indian Territory, 1;

Illinois, 3; Kansas, 2; Kentucky, 8; Louisiana, 18; Mississippi, 17;

Missouri, 3; New York, 1; South Carolina, 15; Tennessee, 10; Texas, 8;

Virginia, 10.

RECORD FOR THE YEAR 1892

While it is intended that the record here presented shall include

specially the lynchings of 1893, it will not be amiss to give the record

for the year preceding. The facts contended for will always appear

manifest--that not one-third of the victims lynched were charged with

rape, and further that the charges made embraced a range of offenses from

murders to misdemeanors.

In 1892 there were 241 persons lynched. The entire number is divided among

the following states:

Alabama, 22; Arkansas, 25; California, 3; Florida, 11; Georgia, 17; Idaho,

8; Illinois, 1; Kansas, 3; Kentucky, 9; Louisiana, 29; Maryland, 1;

Mississippi, 16; Missouri, 6; Montana, 4; New York, 1; North Carolina, 5;

North Dakota, 1; Ohio, 3; South Carolina, 5; Tennessee, 28; Texas, 15;

Virginia, 7; West Virginia, 5; Wyoming, 9; Arizona Territory, 3; Oklahoma,

2.

Of this number 160 were of Negro descent. Four of them were lynched in New

York, Ohio and Kansas; the remainder were murdered in the South. Five of

this number were females. The charges for which they were lynched cover a

wide range. They are as follows:

Rape, 46; murder, 58; rioting, 3; race prejudice, 6; no cause given, 4;

incendiarism, 6; robbery, 6; assault and battery, 1; attempted rape, 11;

suspected robbery, 4; larceny, 1; self-defense, 1; insulting women, 2;

desperadoes, 6; fraud, 1; attempted murder, 2; no offense stated, boy and

girl, 2.

In the case of the boy and girl above referred to, their father, named

Hastings, was accused of the murder of a white man; his fourteen-year-old

daughter and sixteen-year-old son were hanged and their bodies filled with

bullets, then the father was also lynched. This was in November, 1892, at

Jonesville, Louisiana.

3

LYNCHING IMBECILES

_(An Arkansas Butchery)_

The only excuse which capital punishment attempts to find is upon the

theory that the criminal is past the power of reformation and his life is

a constant menace to the community. If, however, he is mentally

unbalanced, irresponsible for his acts, there can be no more inhuman act

conceived of than the wilful sacrifice of his life. So thoroughly is that

principle grounded in the law, that all civilized society surrounds human

life with a safeguard, which prevents the execution of a criminal who is

insane, even if sane at the time of his criminal act. Should he become

insane after its commission the law steps in and protects him during the

period of his insanity. But Lynch Law has no such regard for human life.

Assuming for itself an absolute supremacy over the law of the land, it has

time and again dyed its hands in the blood of men who were imbeciles. Two

or three noteworthy cases will suffice to show with what inhuman ferocity

irresponsible men have been put to death by this system of injustice.

An instance occurred during the year 1892 in Arkansas, a report of which

is given in full in the _Arkansas Democrat_, published at Little Rock, in

that state, on the eleventh day of February of that year. The paper

mentioned is perhaps one of the leading weeklies in that state and the

account given in detail has every mark of a careful and conscientious

investigation. The victims of this tragedy were a colored man, named Hamp

Biscoe, his wife and a thirteen-year-old son. Hamp Biscoe, it appears, was

a hard working, thrifty farmer, who lived near England, Arkansas, upon a

small farm with his family. The investigation of the tragedy was

conducted by a resident of Arkansas named R.B. Caries, a white man, who

furnished the account to the _Arkansas Democrat_ over his own signature.

He says the original trouble which led to the lynching was a quarrel

between Biscoe and a white man about a debt. About six years after Biscoe

preempted his land, a white man made a demand of $100 upon him for

services in showing him the land and making the sale. Biscoe denied the

service and refused to pay the demand. The white man, however, brought

suit, obtained judgment for the hundred dollars and Biscoe's farm was sold

to pay the judgment.

The suit, judgment and subsequent legal proceedings appear to have driven

Biscoe almost crazy and brooding over his wrongs he grew to be a confirmed

imbecile. He would allow but few men, white or colored, to come upon his

place, as he suspected every stranger to be planning to steal his farm. A

week preceding the tragedy, a white man named Venable, whose farm adjoined

Biscoe's, let down the fence and proceeded to drive through Biscoe's

field. The latter saw him; grew very excited, cursed him and drove him

from his farm with bitter oaths and violent threats. Venable went away and

secured a warrant for Biscoe's arrest. This warrant was placed in the

hands of a constable named John Ford, who took a colored deputy and two

white men out to Biscoe's farm to make the arrest. When they arrived at

the house Biscoe refused to be arrested and warned them he would shoot if

they persisted in their attempt to arrest him. The warning was unheeded by

Ford, who entered upon the premises, when Biscoe, true to his word, fired

upon him. The load tore a part of his clothes from his body, one shot

going through his arm and entering his breast. After he had fallen, Ford

drew his revolver and shot Biscoe in the head and his wife through the

arm. The Negro deputy then began firing and struck Biscoe in the small of

the back. Ford's wound was not dangerous and in a few days he was able to

be around again. Biscoe, however, was so severely shot that he was unable

to stand after the firing was over.

Two other white men hearing the exchange of shots went to the rescue of

the officers, forced open the door of Biscoe's cabin and arrested him, his

wife and thirteen-year-old son, and took them, together with a babe at the

breast, to a small frame house near the depot and put them under guard.

The subsequent proceedings were briefly told by Mr. Carlee in the columns

of the _Arkansas Democrat_ above mentioned, from whose account the

following excerpt is taken:

It was rumored here that the Negroes were to be lynched that night, but

I do not think it was generally credited, as it was not believed that

Ford was greatly hurt and the Negro was held to be fatally injured and

crazy at that. But that night, about 8 o'clock, a party of perhaps

twelve or fifteen men, a number of whom were known to the guards, came

to the house and told the Negro guards they would take care of the

prisoners now, and for them to leave; as they did not obey at once they

were persuaded to leave with words that did not admit of delay.

The woman began to cry and said, "You intend to kill us to get our

money." They told her to hush (she was heavy with child and had a child

at her breast) as they intended to give her a nice present. The guards

heard no more, but hastened to a Negro church near by and urged the

preacher to go up and stop the mob. A few minutes after, the shooting

began, perhaps about forty shots being fired. The white men then left

rapidly and the Negroes went to the house. Hamp Biscoe and his wife were

killed, the baby had a slight wound across the upper lip; the boy was

still alive and lived until after midnight, talking rationally and

telling who did the shooting.

He said when they came in and shot his father, he attempted to run out

of doors and a young man shot him in the bowels and that he fell. He saw

another man shoot his mother and a taller young man, whom he did not

know, shoot his father. After they had killed them, the young man who

had shot his mother pulled off her stockings and took $220 in currency

that she had hid there. The men then came to the door where the boy was

lying and one of them turned him over and put his pistol to his breast

and shot him again. This is the story the dying boy told as near as I

can get it. It is quite singular that the guards and those who had

conversed with him were not required to testify. The woman was known to

have the money as she had exposed it that day. She also had $36 in

silver, which the plunderer of the body did not get. The Negro was

undoubtedly insane and had been for several years. The citizens of this

community condemn the murder and have no sympathy with it. The Negro was

a well-to-do farmer, but had become crazed because he was convinced some

plot had been made to steal his land and only a few days ago declared

that he expected to die in defense of his home in a short time and he

did not care how soon. The killing of a woman with the child at her

breast and in her condition, and also a young boy, was extremely brutal.

As for Hamp Biscoe he was dangerous and should long have been confined

in the insane asylum. Such were the facts as near as I can get them and

you can use them as you see fit, but I would prefer you would suppress

the names charged by the Negroes with the killing.

Perhaps the civilized world will think, that with all these facts laid

before the public, by a writer who signs his name to his communication, in

a land where grand juries are sworn to investigate, where judges and

juries are sworn to administer the law and sheriffs are paid to execute

the decrees of the courts, and where, in fact, every instrument of

civilization is supposed to work for the common good of all citizens, that

this matter was duly investigated, the criminals apprehended and the

punishment meted out to the murderers. But this is a mistake; nothing of

the kind was done or attempted. Six months after the publication, above

referred to, an investigator, writing to find out what had been done in

the matter, received the following reply:

OFFICE OF

S.S. GLOVER,

SHERIFF AND COLLECTOR,

LONOKE COUNTY.

Lonoke, Ark., 9-12-1892

Geo. Washington, Esq.,

Chicago, Ill.

DEAR SIR:--The parties who killed Hamp Briscoe February the ninth, have

never been arrested. The parties are still in the county. It was done by

some of the citizens, and those who know will not tell.

S.S. GLOVER, Sheriff

Thus acts the mob with the victim of its fury, conscious that it will

never be called to an account. Not only is this true, but the moral

support of those who are chosen by the people to execute the law, is

frequently given to the support of lawlessness and mob violence. The press

and even the pulpit, in the main either by silence or open apology, have

condoned and encouraged this state of anarchy.

TORTURED AND BURNED IN TEXAS

Never In the history of civilization has any Christian people stooped to

such shocking brutality and indescribable barbarism as that which

characterized the people of Paris, Texas, and adjacent communities on the

first of February, 1893. The cause of this awful outbreak of human passion

was the murder of a four-year-old child, daughter of a man named Vance.

This man, Vance, had been a police officer in Paris for years, and was

known to be a man of bad temper, overbearing manner and given to harshly

treating the prisoners under his care. He had arrested Smith and, it is

said, cruelly mistreated him. Whether or not the murder of his child was

an art of fiendish revenge, it has not been shown, but many persons who

know of the incident have suggested that the secret of the attack on the

child lay in a desire for revenge against its father.

In the same town there lived a Negro, named Henry Smith, a well-known

character, a kind of roustabout, who was generally considered a harmless,

weak-minded fellow, not capable of doing any important work, but

sufficiently able to do chores and odd jobs around the houses of the white

people who cared to employ him. A few days before the final tragedy, this

man, Smith, was accused of murdering Myrtle Vance. The crime of murder was

of itself bad enough, and to prove that against Smith would have been

amply sufficient in Texas to have committed him to the gallows, but the

finding of the child so exasperated the father and his friends, that they

at once shamefully exaggerated the facts and declared that the babe had

been ruthlessly assaulted and then killed. The truth was bad enough, but

the white people of the community made it a point to exaggerate every

detail of the awful affair, and to inflame the public mind so that nothing

less than immediate and violent death would satisfy the populace. As a

matter of fact, the child was not brutally assaulted as the world has been

told in excuse for the awful barbarism of that day. Persons who saw the

child after its death, have stated, under the most solemn pledge to truth,

that there was no evidence of such an assault as was published at that

time, only a slight abrasion and discoloration was noticeable and that

mostly about the neck. In spite of this fact, so eminent a man as Bishop

Haygood deliberately and, it must also appear, maliciously falsified the

fact by stating that the child was torn limb from limb, or to quote his

own words, "First outraged with demoniacal cruelty and then taken by her

heels and torn asunder in the mad wantonness of gorilla ferocity."

Nothing is farther from the truth than that statement. It is a

coldblooded, deliberate, brutal falsehood which this Christian(?) Bishop

uses to bolster up the infamous plea that the people of Paris were driven

to insanity by learning that the little child had been viciously

assaulted, choked to death, and then torn to pieces by a demon in human

form. It was a brutal murder, but no more brutal than hundreds of murders

which occur in this country, and which have been equalled every year in

fiendishness and brutality, and for which the death penalty is prescribed

by law and inflicted only after the person has been legally adjudged

guilty of the crime. Those who knew Smith, believe that Vance had at some

time given him cause to seek revenge and that this fearful crime was the

outgrowth of his attempt to avenge himself of some real or fancied wrong.

That the murderer was known as an imbecile, had no effect whatever upon

the people who thirsted for his blood. They determined to make an example

of him and proceeded to carry out their purpose with unspeakably greater

ferocity than that which characterized the half-crazy object of their

revenge.

For a day or so after the child was found in the woods, Smith remained in

the vicinity as if nothing had happened, and when finally becoming aware

that he was suspected, he made an attempt to escape. He was apprehended,

however, not far from the scene of his crime and the news flashed across

the country that the white Christian people of Paris, Texas and the

communities thereabout had deliberately determined to lay aside all forms

of law and inaugurate an entirely new form of punishment for the murder.

They absolutely refused to make any inquiry as to the sanity or insanity

of their prisoner, but set the day and hour when in the presence of

assembled thousands they put their helpless victim to the stake, tortured

him, and then burned him to death for the delectation and satisfaction of

Christian people.

Lest it might be charged that any description of the deeds of that day are

exaggerated, a white man's description which was published in the white

journals of this country is used. The _New York Sun_ of February 2, 1893,

contains an account, from which we make the following excerpt:

PARIS, Tex., Feb. 1, 1893.--Henry Smith, the negro ravisher of

four-year-old Myrtle Vance, has expiated in part his awful crime by

death at the stake. Ever since the perpetration of his awful crime this

city and the entire surrounding country has been in a wild frenzy of

excitement. When the news came last night that he had been captured at

Hope, Ark., that he had been identified by B.B. Sturgeon, James T.

Hicks, and many other of the Paris searching party, the city was wild

with joy over the apprehension of the brute. Hundreds of people poured

into the city from the adjoining country and the word passed from lip

to lip that the punishment of the fiend should fit the crime that death

by fire was the penalty Smith should pay for the most atrocious murder

and terrible outrage in Texas history. Curious and sympathizing alike,

they came on train and wagons, on horse, and on foot to see if the frail

mind of a man could think of a way to sufficiently punish the

perpetrator of so terrible a crime. Whisky shops were closed, unruly

mobs were dispersed, schools were dismissed by a proclamation from the

mayor, and everything was done in a business-like manner.

MEETING OF CITIZENS

About 2 o'clock Friday a mass meeting was called at the courthouse and

captains appointed to search for the child. She was found mangled beyond

recognition, covered with leaves and brush as above mentioned. As soon as

it was learned upon the recovery of the body that the crime was so

atrocious the whole town turned out in the chase. The railroads put up

bulletins offering free transportation to all who would join in the

search. Posses went in every direction, and not a stone was left unturned.

Smith was tracked to Detroit on foot, where he jumped on a freight train

and left for his old home in Hempstead county, Arkansas. To this county he

was tracked and yesterday captured at Clow, a flag station on the Arkansas

& Louisiana railway about twenty miles north of Hope. Upon being

questioned the fiend denied everything, but upon being stripped for

examination his undergarments were seen to be spattered with blood and a

part of his shirt was torn off. He was kept under heavy guard at Hope last

night, and later on confessed the crime.

This morning he was brought through Texarkana, where 5,000 people awaited

the train, anxious to see a man who had received the fate of Ed. Coy. At

that place speeches were made by prominent Paris citizens, who asked that

the prisoner be not molested by Texarkana people, but that the guard be

allowed to deliver him up to the outraged and indignant citizens of Paris.

Along the road the train gathered strength from the various towns, the

people crowded upon the platforms and tops of coaches anxious to see the

lynching and the negro who was soon to be delivered to an infuriated mob.

BURNED AT THE STAKE

Arriving here at 12 o'clock the train was met by a surging mass of

humanity 10,000 strong. The negro was placed upon a carnival float in

mockery of a king upon his throne, and, followed by an immense crowd, was

escorted through the city so that all might see the most inhuman monster

known in current history. The line of march was up Main Street to the

square, around the square down Clarksville street to Church Street, thence

to the open prairies about 300 yards from the Texas & Pacific depot. Here

Smith was placed upon a scaffold, six feet square and ten feet high,

securely bound, within the view of all beholders. Here the victim was

tortured for fifty minutes by red-hot iron brands thrust against his

quivering body. Commencing at the feet the brands were placed against him

inch by inch until they were thrust against the face. Then, being

apparently dead, kerosene was poured upon him, cottonseed hulls placed

beneath him and set on fire. In less time than it takes to relate it, the

tortured man was wafted beyond the grave to another fire, hotter and more

terrible than the one just experienced.

Curiosity seekers have carried away already all that was left of the

memorable event, even to pieces of charcoal. The cause of the crime was

that Henry Vance when a deputy policeman, in the course of his duty was

called to arrest Henry Smith for being drunk and disorderly. The Negro was

unruly, and Vance was forced to use his club. The Negro swore vengeance,

and several times assaulted Vance. In his greed for revenge, last

Thursday, he grabbed up the little girl and committed the crime. The

father is prostrated with grief and the mother now lies at death's door,

but she has lived to see the slayer of her innocent babe suffer the most

horrible death that could be conceived.

TORTURE BEYOND DESCRIPTION

Words to describe the awful torture inflicted upon Smith cannot be found.

The Negro, for a long time after starting on the journey to Paris, did not

realize his plight. At last when he was told that he must die by slow

torture he begged for protection. His agony was awful. He pleaded and

writhed in bodily and mental pain. Scarcely had the train reached Paris

than this torture commenced. His clothes were torn off piecemeal and

scattered in the crowd, people catching the shreds and putting them away

as mementos. The child's father, her brother, and two uncles then gathered

about the Negro as he lay fastened to the torture platform and thrust hot

irons into his quivering flesh. It was horrible--the man dying by slow

torture in the midst of smoke from his own burning flesh. Every groan from

the fiend, every contortion of his body was cheered by the thickly packed

crowd of 10,000 persons. The mass of beings 600 yards in diameter, the

scaffold being the center. After burning the feet and legs, the hot

irons--plenty of fresh ones being at hand--were rolled up and down Smith's

stomach, back, and arms. Then the eyes were burned out and irons were

thrust down his throat.

The men of the Vance family having wreaked vengeance, the crowd piled all

kinds of combustible stuff around the scaffold, poured oil on it and set

it afire. The Negro rolled and tossed out of the mass, only to be pushed

back by the people nearest him. He tossed out again, and was roped and

pulled back. Hundreds of people turned away, but the vast crowd still

looked calmly on. People were here from every part of this section. They

came from Dallas, Fort Worth, Sherman, Denison, Bonham, Texarkana, Fort

Smith, Ark., and a party of fifteen came from Hempstead county, Arkansas,

where he was captured. Every train that came in was loaded to its utmost

capacity, and there were demands at many points for special trains to

bring the people here to see the unparalleled punishment for an

unparalleled crime. When the news of the burning went over the country

like wildfire, at every country town anvils boomed forth the announcement.

SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN AN ASYLUM

It may not be amiss in connection with this awful affair, in proof of our

assertion that Smith was an imbecile, to give the testimony of a

well-known colored minister, who lived at Paris, Texas, at the time of the

lynching. He was a witness of the awful scenes there enacted, and

attempted, in the name of God and humanity, to interfere in the programme.

He barely escaped with his life, was driven out of the city and became an

exile because of his actions. Reverend King was in New York about the

middle of February, and he was there interviewed for a daily paper for

that city, and we quote his account as an eye witness of the affair. Said

he:

I was ridden out of Paris on a rail because I was the only man in Lamar

county to raise my voice against the lynching of Smith. I opposed the

illegal measures before the arrival of Henry Smith as a prisoner, and I

was warned that I might meet his fate if I was not careful; but the

sense of justice made me bold, and when I saw the poor wretch trembling

with fear, and got so near him that I could hear his teeth chatter, I

determined to stand by him to the last.

I hated him for his crime, but two crimes do not make a virtue; and in

the brief conversation I had with Smith I was more firmly convinced than

ever that he was irresponsible.

I had known Smith for years, and there were times when Smith was out of

his head for weeks. Two years ago I made an effort to have him put in an

asylum, but the white people were trying to fasten the murder of a young

colored girl upon him, and would not listen. For days before the murder

of the little Vance girl, Smith was out of his head and dangerous. He

had just undergone an attack of delirium tremens and was in no condition

to be allowed at large. He realized his condition, for I spoke with him

not three weeks ago, and in answer to my exhortations, he promised to

reform. The next time I saw him was on the day of his execution.

"Drink did it! drink did it," he sobbed. Then bowing his face in his

hands, he asked: "Is it true, did I kill her? Oh, my God, my God!" For a

moment he seemed to forget the awful fate that awaited him, and his body

swayed to and fro with grief. Some one seized me by the shoulder and

hurled me back, and Smith fell writhing to the ground in terror as four

men seized his arms to drag him to the float on which he was to be

exhibited before he was finally burned at the stake.

I followed the procession and wept aloud as I saw little children of my

own race follow the unfortunate man and taunt him with jeers. Even at

the stake, children of both sexes and colors gathered in groups, and

when the father of the murdered child raised the hissing iron with which

he was about to torture the helpless victim, the children became as

frantic as the grown people and struggled forward to obtain places of

advantage.

It was terrible. One little tot scarcely older than little Myrtle Vance

clapped her baby hands as her father held her on his shoulders above the

heads of the people.

"For God's sake," I shouted, "send the children home."

"No, no," shouted a hundred maddened voices; "let them learn a lesson."

I love children, but as I looked about the little faces distorted with

passion and the bloodshot eyes of the cruel parents who held them high

in their arms, I thanked God that I have none of my own.

As the hot iron sank deep into poor Henry's flesh a hideous yell rent

the air, and, with a sound as terrible as the cry, of lost souls on

judgment day, 20,000 maddened people took up the victim's cry of agony

and a prolonged howl of maddened glee rent the air.

No one was himself now. Every man, woman and child in that awful crowd

was worked up to a greater frenzy than that which actuated Smith's

horrible crime. The people were capable of any new atrocity now, and as

Smith's yells became more and more frequent, it was difficult to hold

the crowd back, so anxious were the savages to participate in the

sickening tortures.

For half an hour I tried to pray as the beads of agony rolled down my

forehead and bathed my face.

For an instant a hush spread over the people. I could stand no more, and

with a superhuman effort dashed through the compact mass of humanity and

stood at the foot of the burning scaffold.

"In the name of God," I cried, "I command you to cease this torture."

The heavy butt of a Winchester rifle descended on my head and I fell to

the ground. Rough hands seized me and angry men bore me away, and I was

thankful.

At the outskirts of the crowd I was attacked again, and then several

men, no doubt glad to get away from the fearful place, escorted me to my

home, where I was allowed to take a small amount of clothing. A jeering

crowd gathered without, and when I appeared at the door ready hands

seized me and I was placed upon a rail, and, with curses and oaths,

taken to the railway station and placed upon a train. As the train moved

out some one thrust a roll of bills into my hand and said, "God bless

you, but it was no use."

When asked if he should ever return to Paris, Mr. King said: "I shall

never go south again. The impressions of that awful day will stay with me

forever."

LYNCHING OF INNOCENT MEN

(Lynched on Account of Relationship)

If no other reason appealed to the sober sense of the American people to

check the growth of Lynch Law, the absolute unreliability and recklessness

of the mob in inflicting punishment for crimes done, should do so. Several

instances of this spirit have occurred in the year past. In Louisiana,

near New Orleans, in July, 1893, Roselius Julian, a colored man, shot and

killed a white judge, named Victor Estopinal. The cause of the shooting

has never been definitely ascertained. It is claimed that the Negro

resented an insult to his wife, and the killing of the white man was an

act of a Negro (who dared) to defend his home. The judge was killed in the

court house, and Julian, heavily armed, made his escape to the swamps near

the city. He has never been apprehended, nor has any information ever been

gleaned as to his whereabouts. A mob determined to secure the fugitive

murderer and burn him alive. The swamps were hunted through and through in

vain, when, being unable to wreak their revenge upon the murderer, the mob

turned its attention to his unfortunate relatives. Dispatches from New

Orleans, dated September 19, 1893, described the affair as follows:

Posses were immediately organized and the surrounding country was

scoured, but the search was fruitless so far as the real criminal was

concerned. The mother, three brothers and two sisters of the Negro were

arrested yesterday at the Black Ridge in the rear of the city by the

police and taken to the little jail on Judge Estopinal's place about

Southport, because of the belief that they were succoring the fugitive.

About 11 o'clock twenty-five men, some armed with rifles and shotguns,

came up to the jail. They unlocked the door and held a conference among

themselves as to what they should do. Some were in favor of hanging the

five, while others insisted that only two of the brothers should be

strung up. This was finally agreed to, and the two doomed negroes were

hurried to a pasture one hundred yards distant, and there asked to take

their last chance of saving their lives by making a confession, but the

Negroes made no reply. They were then told to kneel down and pray. One

did so, the other remained standing, but both prayed fervently. The

taller Negro was then hoisted up. The shorter Negro stood gazing at the

horrible death of his brother without flinching. Five minutes later he

was also hanged. The mob decided to take the remaining brother out to

Camp Parapet and hang him there. The other two were to be taken out and

flogged, with an order to get out of the parish in less than half an

hour. The third brother, Paul, was taken out to the camp, which is about

a mile distant in the interior, and there he was hanged to a tree.

Another young man, who was in no way related to Julian, who perhaps did

not even know the man and who was entirely innocent of any offense in

connection therewith, was murdered by the same mob. The same paper says:

During the search for Julian on Saturday one branch of the posse visited

the house of a Negro family in the neighborhood of Camp Parapet, and

failing to find the object of their search, tried to induce John Willis,

a young Negro, to disclose the whereabouts of Julian. He refused to do

so, or could not do so, and was kicked to death by the gang.

AN INDIANA CASE

Almost equal to the ferocity of the mob which killed the three brothers,

Julian and the unoffending, John Willis, because of the murder of Judge

Estopinal, was the action of a mob near Vincennes, Ind. In this case a

wealthy colored man, named Allen Butler, who was well known in the

community, and enjoyed the confidence and respect of the entire country,

was made the victim of a mob and hung because his son had become unduly

intimate with a white girl who was a servant around his house. There was

no pretense that the facts were otherwise than as here stated. The woman

lived at Butler's house as a servant, and she and Butler's son fell in

love with each other, and later it was found that the girl was in a

delicate condition. It was claimed, but with how much truth no one has

ever been able to tell, that the father had procured an abortion, or

himself had operated on the girl, and that she had left the house to go

back to her home. It was never claimed that the father was in any way

responsible for the action of his son, but the authorities procured the

arrest of both father and son, and at the preliminary examination the

father gave bail to appear before the Grand Jury when it should convene.

On the same night, however, the mob took the matter in hand and with the

intention of hanging the son. It assembled near Sumner, while the boy, who

had been unable to give bail, was lodged in jail at Lawrenceville. As it

was impossible to reach Lawrenceville and hang the son, the leaders of the

mob concluded they would go to Butler's house and hang him. Butler was

found at his home, taken out by the mob and hung to a tree. This was in

the lawabiding state of Indiana, which furnished the United States its

last president and which claims all the honor, pride and glory of northern

civilization. None of the leaders of the mob were apprehended, and no

steps whatever were taken to bring the murderers to justice.

KILLED FOR HIS STEPFATHER'S CRIME

An account has been given of the cremation of Henry Smith, at Paris,

Texas, for the murder of the infant child of a man named Vance. It would

appear that human ferocity was not sated when it vented itself upon a

human being by burning his eyes out, by thrusting a red-hot iron down his

throat, and then by burning his body to ashes. Henry Smith, the victim of

these savage orgies, was beyond all the power of torture, but a few miles

outside of Paris, some members of the community concluded that it would be

proper to kill a stepson named William Butler as a partial penalty for the

original crime. This young man, against whom no word has ever been said,

and who was in fact an orderly, peaceable boy, had been watched with the

severest scrutiny by members of the mob who believed he knew something of

the whereabouts of Smith. He declared from the very first that he did not

know where his stepfather was, which statement was well proven to be a

fact after the discovery of Smith in Arkansas, whence he had fled through

swamps and woods and unfrequented places. Yet Butler was apprehended,

placed under arrest, and on the night of February 6, taken out on Hickory

Creek, five miles southeast of Paris, and hung for his stepfather's crime.

After his body was suspended in the air, the mob filled it with bullets.

LYNCHED BECAUSE THE JURY ACQUITTED HIM

The entire system of the judiciary of this country is in the hands of

white people. To this add the fact of the inherent prejudice against

colored people, and it will be clearly seen that a white jury is certain

to find a Negro prisoner guilty if there is the least evidence to warrant

such a finding.

Meredith Lewis was arrested in Roseland, La., in July of last year. A

white jury found him not guilty of the crime of murder wherewith he stood

charged. This did not suit the mob. A few nights after the verdict was

rendered, and he declared to be innocent, a mob gathered in his vicinity

and went to his house. He was called, and suspecting nothing, went

outside. He was seized and hurried off to a convenient spot and hanged by

the neck until he was dead for the murder of a woman of which the jury had

said he was innocent.

LYNCHED AS A SCAPEGOAT

Wednesday, July 5, about 10 o'clock in the morning, a terrible crime was

committed within four miles of Wickliffe, Ky. Two girls, Mary and Ruby

Ray, were found murdered a short distance from their home. The news of

this terrible cowardly murder of two helpless young girls spread like wild

fire, and searching parties scoured the territory surrounding Wickliffe

and Bardwell. Two of the searching party, the Clark brothers, saw a man

enter the Dupoyster cornfield; they got their guns and fired at the

fleeing figure, but without effect; he got away, but they said he was a

white man or nearly so. The search continued all day without effect, save

the arrest of two or three strange Negroes. A bloodhound was brought from

the penitentiary and put on the trail which he followed from the scene of

the murder to the river and into the boat of a fisherman named Gordon.

Gordon stated that he had ferried one man and only one across the river

about about half past six the evening of July 5; that his passenger sat in

front of him, and he was a white man or a very bright mulatto, who could

not be told from a white man. The bloodhound was put across the river in

the boat, and he struck a trail again at Bird's Point on the Missouri

side, ran about three hundred yards to the cottage of a white farmer named

Grant and there lay down refusing to go further.

Thursday morning a brakesman on a freight train going out of Sikeston,

Mo., discovered a Negro stealing a ride; he ordered him off and had hot

words which terminated in a fight. The brakesman had the Negro arrested.

When arrested, between 11 and 12 o'clock, he had on a dark woolen shirt,

light pants and coat, and no vest. He had twelve dollars in paper, two

silver dollars and ninety-five cents in change; he had also four rings in

his pockets, a knife and a razor which were rusted and stained. The

Sikeston authorities immediately jumped to the conclusion that this man

was the murderer for whom the Kentuckians across the river were searching.

They telegraphed to Bardwell that their prisoner had on no coat, but wore

a blue vest and pants which would perhaps correspond with the coat found

at the scene of the murder, and that the names of the murdered girls were

in the rings found in his possession.

As soon as this news was received, the sheriffs of Ballard and Carlisle

counties and a posse(?) of thirty well-armed and determined Kentuckians,

who had pledged their word the prisoner should be taken back to the scene

of the supposed crime, to be executed there if proved to be the guilty

man, chartered a train and at nine o'clock Thursday night started for

Sikeston. Arriving there two hours later, the sheriff at Sikeston, who had

no warrant for the prisoner's arrest and detention, delivered him into the

hands of the mob without authority for so doing, and accompanied them to

Bird's Point. The prisoner gave his name as Miller, his home at

Springfield, and said he had never been in Kentucky in his life, but the

sheriff turned him over to the mob to be taken to Wickliffe, that Frank

Gordon, the fisherman, who had put a man across the river might identify

him.

In other words, the protection of the law was withdrawn from C.J. Miller,

and he was given to a mob by this sheriff at Sikeston, who knew that the

prisoner's life depended on one man's word. After an altercation with the

train men, who wanted another $50 for taking the train back to Bird's

Point, the crowd arrived there at three o'clock, Friday morning. Here was

anchored _The Three States_, a ferryboat plying between Wickliffe, Ky,

Cairo, Ill., and Bird's Point, Mo. This boat left Cairo at twelve o'clock,

Thursday, with nearly three hundred of Cairo's best(?) citizens and thirty

kegs of beer on board. This was consumed while the crowd and the

bloodhound waited for the prisoner.

When the prisoner was on board _The Three States_ the dog was turned

loose, and after moving aimlessly around, followed the crowd to where

Miller sat handcuffed and there stopped. The crowd closed in on the pair

and insisted that the brute had identified him because of that action.

When the boat reached Wickliffe, Gordon, the fisherman, was called on to

say whether the prisoner was the man he ferried over the river the day of

the murder.

[Illustration: Lynching of C.J. Miller, at Bardwell, Kentucky, July 7,

1893.]

The sheriff of Ballard County informed him, sternly that if the prisoner

was not the man, he (the fisherman) would be held responsible as knowing

who the guilty man was. Gordon stated before, that the man he ferried

across was a white man or a bright colored man; Miller was a dark brown

skinned man, with kinky hair, "neither yellow nor black," says the _Cairo

Evening Telegram_ of Friday, July 7. The fisherman went up to Miller from

behind, looked at him without speaking for fully five minutes, then slowly

said, "Yes, that's the man I crossed over." This was about six o'clock,

Friday morning, and the crowd wished to hang Miller then and there. But

Mr. Ray, the father of the girls, insisted that he be taken to Bardwell,

the county seat of Ballard, and twelve miles inland. He said he thought a

white man committed the crime, and that he was not satisfied that was the

man. They took him to Bardwell and at ten o'clock, this same excited,

unauthorized mob undertook to determine Miller's guilt. One of the Clark

brothers who shot at a fleeing man in the Dupoyster cornfield, said the

prisoner was the same man; the other said he was not, but the testimony of

the first was accepted. A colored woman who had said she gave breakfast to

a colored man clad in a blue flannel suit the morning of the murder, said

positively that she had never seen Miller before. The gold rings found in

his possession had no names in them, as had been asserted, and Mr. Ray

said they did not belong to his daughters. Meantime a funeral pyre for the

purpose of burning Miller to death had been erected in the center of the

village. While the crowd swayed by passion was clamoring that he be burnt,

Miller stepped forward and made the following statement: "My name is

C.J. Miller. I am from Springfield, Ill.; my wife lives at 716 N. 2d

Street. I am here among you today, looked upon as one of the most brutal

men before the people. I stand here surrounded by men who are excited, men

who are not willing to let the law take its course, and as far as the

crime is concerned, I have committed no crime, and certainly no crime

gross enough to deprive me of my life and liberty to walk upon the green

earth."

A telegram was sent to the chief of the police at Springfield, Ill.,

asking if one C.J. Miller lived there. An answer in the negative was

returned. A few hours after, it was ascertained that a man named Miller,

and his wife, did live at the number the prisoner gave in his speech, but

the information came to Bardwell too late to do the prisoner any good.

Miller was taken to jail, every stitch of clothing literally torn from his

body and examined again. On the lower left side of the bosom of his shirt

was found a dark reddish spot about the size of a dime. Miller said it was

paint which he had gotten on him at Jefferson Barracks. This spot was only

on the right side, and could not be seen from the under side at all, thus

showing it had not gone through the cloth as blood or any liquid substance

would do.

Chief-of-Police Mahaney, of Cairo, Ill., was with the prisoner, and he

took his knife and scraped at the spot, particles of which came off in his

hand. Miller told them to take his clothes to any expert, and if the spot

was shown to be blood, they might do anything they wished with him. They

took his clothes away and were gone some time. After a while they were

brought back and thrown into the cell without a word. It is needless to

say that if the spot had been found to be blood, that fact would have been

announced, and the shirt retained as evidence. Meanwhile numbers of rough,

drunken men crowded into the cell and tried to force a confession of the

deed from the prisoner's lips. He refused to talk save to reiterate his

innocence. To Mr. Mahaney, who talked seriously and kindly to him, telling

him the mob meant to burn and torture him at three o'clock, Miller said:

"Burning and torture here lasts but a little while, but if I die with a

lie on my soul, I shall be tortured forever. I am innocent." For more than

three hours, all sorts of pressure in the way of threats, abuse and

urging, was brought to bear to force him to confess to the murder and thus

justify the mob in its deed of murder. Miller remained firm; but as the

hour drew near, and the crowd became more impatient, he asked for a

priest. As none could be procured, he then asked for a Methodist minister,

who came, prayed with the doomed man, baptized him and exhorted Miller to

confess. To keep up the flagging spirits of the dense crowd around the

jail, the rumor went out more than once, that Miller had confessed. But

the solemn assurance of the minister, chief-of-police, and leading

editor--who were with Miller all along--is that this rumor is absolutely

false.

At three o'clock the mob rushed to the jail to secure the prisoner. Mr.

Ray had changed his mind about the promised burning; he was still in doubt

as to the prisoner's guilt. He again addressed the crowd to that effect,

urging them not to burn Miller, and the mob heeded him so far, that they

compromised on hanging instead of burning, which was agreed to by Mr. Ray.

There was a loud yell, and a rush was made for the prisoner. He was

stripped naked, his clothing literally torn from his body, and his shirt

was tied around his loins. Some one declared the rope was a "white man's

death," and a log-chain, nearly a hundred feet in length, weighing over

one hundred pounds, was placed round Miller's neck and body, and he was

led and dragged through the streets of the village in that condition

followed by thousands of people. He fainted from exhaustion several times,

but was supported to the platform where they first intended burning him.

The chain was hooked around his neck, a man climbed the telegraph pole and

the other end of the chain was passed up to him and made fast to the

cross-arm. Others brought a long forked stick which Miller was made to

straddle. By this means he was raised several feet from the ground and

then let fall. The first fall broke his neck, but he was raised in this

way and let fall a second time. Numberless shots were fired into the

dangling body, for most of that crowd were heavily armed, and had been

drinking all day.

Miller's body hung thus exposed from three to five o'clock, during which

time, several photographs of him as he hung dangling at the end of the

chain were taken, and his toes and fingers were cut off. His body was

taken down, placed on the platform, the torch applied, and in a few

moments there was nothing left of C.J. Miller save a few bones and ashes.

Thus perished another of the many victims of Lynch Law, but it is the

honest and sober belief of many who witnessed the scene that an innocent

man has been barbarously and shockingly put to death in the glare of the

nineteenth-century civilization, by those who profess to believe in

Christianity, law and order.

5

LYNCHED FOR ANYTHING OR NOTHING

(_Lynched for Wife Beating_)

In nearly all communities wife beating is punishable with a fine, and in

no community is it made a felony. Dave Jackson, of Abita, La., was a

colored man who had beaten his wife. He had not killed her, nor seriously

wounded her, but as Louisiana lynchers had not filled out their quota of

crimes, his case was deemed of sufficient importance to apply the method

of that barbarous people. He was in the custody of the officials, but the

mob went to the jail and took him out in front of the prison and hanged

him by the neck until he was dead. This was in Nov. 1893.

HANGED FOR STEALING HOGS

Details are very meagre of a lynching which occurred near Knox Point, La.,

on the twenty-fourth of October, 1893. Upon one point, however, there was

no uncertainty, and that is, that the persons lynched were Negroes. It was

claimed that they had been stealing hogs, but even this claim had not been

subjected to the investigation of a court. That matter was not considered

necessary. A few of the neighbors who had lost hogs suspected these men

were responsible for their loss, and made up their minds to furnish an

example for others to be warned by. The two men were secured by a mob and

hanged.

LYNCHED FOR NO OFFENSE

Perhaps the most characteristic feature of this record of lynch law for

the year 1893, is the remarkable fact that five human beings were lynched

and that the matter was considered of so little importance that the

powerful press bureaus of the country did not consider the matter of

enough importance to ascertain the causes for which they were hanged. It

tells the world, with perhaps greater emphasis than any other feature of

the record, that Lynch Law has become so common in the United States that

the finding of the dead body of a Negro, suspended between heaven and

earth to the limb of a tree, is of so slight importance that neither the

civil authorities nor press agencies consider the matter worth

investigating. July 21, in Shelby County, Tenn., a colored man by the name

of Charles Martin was lynched. July 30, at Paris, Mo., a colored man named

William Steen shared the same fate. December 28, Mack Segars was announced

to have been lynched at Brantley, Alabama. August 31, at Yarborough,

Texas, and on September 19, at Houston, a colored man was found lynched,

but so little attention was paid to the matter that not only was no record

made as to why these last two men were lynched, but even their names were

not given. The dispatches simply stated that an unknown Negro was found

lynched in each case.

There are friends of humanity who feel their souls shrink from any

compromise with murder, but whose deep and abiding reverence for womanhood

causes them to hesitate in giving their support to this crusade against

Lynch Law, out of fear that they may encourage the miscreants whose deeds

are worse than murder. But to these friends it must appear certain that

these five men could not have been guilty of any terrible crime. They were

simply lynched by parties of men who had it in their power to kill them,

and who chose to avenge some fancied wrong by murder, rather than submit

their grievances to court.

LYNCHED BECAUSE THEY WERE SAUCY

At Moberly, Mo., February 18 and at Fort Madison, S.C., June 2, both in

1892, a record was made in the line of lynching which should certainly

appeal to every humanitarian who has any regard for the sacredness of

human life. John Hughes, of Moberly, and Isaac Lincoln, of Fort Madison,

and Will Lewis in Tullahoma, Tenn., suffered death for no more serious

charge than that they "were saucy to white people." In the days of slavery

it was held to be a very serious matter for a colored person to fail to

yield the sidewalk at the demand of a white person, and it will not be

surprising to find some evidence of this intolerance existing in the days

of freedom. But the most that could be expected as a penalty for acting or

speaking saucily to a white person would be a slight physical chastisement

to make the Negro "know his place" or an arrest and fine. But Missouri,

Tennessee and South Carolina chose to make precedents in their cases and

as a result both men, after being charged with their offense and

apprehended, were taken by a mob and lynched. The civil authorities, who

in either case would have been very quick to satisfy the aggrieved white

people had they complained and brought the prisoners to court, by imposing

proper penalty upon them, did not feel it their duty to make any

investigation after the Negroes were killed. They were dead and out of the

way and as no one would be called upon to render an account for their

taking off, the matter was dismissed from the public mind.

LYNCHED FOR A QUARREL

One of the most notable instances of lynching for the year 1893, occurred

about the twentieth of September. It was notable for the fact that the

mayor of the city exerted every available power to protect the victim of

the lynching from the mob. In his splendid endeavor to uphold the law, the

mayor called out the troops, and the result was a deadly fight between the

militia and mob, nine of the mob being killed. The trouble occurred at

Roanoke, Va. It is frequently claimed that lynchings occur only in

sparsely settled districts, and, in fact, it is a favorite plea of

governors and reverend apologists to couple two arrant falsehoods, stating

that lynchings occur only because of assaults upon white women, and that

these assaults occur and the lynchings follow in thinly inhabited

districts where the power of the law is entirely inadequate to meet the

emergency. This Roanoke case is a double refutation, for it not only

disproves the alleged charge that the Negro assaulted a white woman, as

was telegraphed all over the country at the time, but it also shows

conclusively that even in one of the largest cities of the old state of

Virginia, one of the original thirteen colonies, which prides itself of

being the mother of presidents, it was possible for a lynching to occur in

broad daylight under circumstances of revolting savagery.

When the news first came from Roanoke of the contemplated lynching, it was

stated that a big burly Negro had assaulted a white woman, that he had

been apprehended and that the citizens were determined to summarily

dispose of his case. Mayor Trout was a man who believed in maintaining the

majesty of the law, and who at once gave notice that no lynching would be

permitted in Roanoke, and that the Negro, whose name was Smith, being in

the custody of the law, should be dealt with according to law; but the mob

did not pay any attention to the brave words of the mayor. It evidently

thought that it was only another case of swagger, such as frequently

characterizes lynching episodes. Mayor Trout, finding immense crowds

gathering about the city, and fearing an attempt to lynch Smith, called

out the militia and stationed them at the jail.

It was known that the woman refused to accuse Smith of assaulting her, and

that his offense consisted in quarreling with her about the change of

money in a transaction in which he bought something from her market booth.

Both parties lost their temper, and the result was a row from which Smith

had to make his escape. At once the old cry was sounded that the woman had

been assaulted, and in a few hours all the town was wild with people

thirsting for the assailant's blood. The further incidents of that day may

well be told by a dispatch from Roanoke under date of the twenty-first of

September and published in the _Chicago Record_. It says:

It is claimed by members of the military company that they frequently

warned the mob to keep away from the jail, under penalty of being shot.

Capt. Bird told them he was under orders to protect the prisoner whose

life the mob so eagerly sought, and come what may he would not allow him

to be taken by the mob. To this the crowd replied with hoots and

derisive jeers. The rioters appeared to become frenzied at the

determined stand taken by the men and Captain Bird, and finally a crowd

of excited men made a rush for the side door of the jail. The captain

directed his men to drive the would-be lynchers back.

At this moment the mob opened fire on the soldiers. This appeared for a

moment to startle the captain and his men. But it was only for a moment.

Then he coolly gave the command: "Ready! aim! fire!" The company obeyed

to the instant, and poured a volley of bullets into that part of the

mob which was trying to batter down the side door of the jail.

The rioters fell back before the fire of the militia, leaving one man

writhing in the agonies of death at the doorstep. There was a lull for a

moment. Then the word was quickly passed through the throng in front of

the jail and down the street that a man was killed. Then there was an

awful rush toward the little band of soldiers. Excited men were yelling

like demons.

The fight became general, and ere it was ended nine men were dead and

more than forty wounded.

This stubborn stand on behalf of law and order disconcerted the crowd and

it fell back in disorder. It did not long remain inactive but assembled

again for a second assault. Having only a small band of militia, and

knowing they would be absolutely at the mercy of the thousands who were

gathering to wreak vengeance upon them, the mayor ordered them to disperse

and go to their homes, and he himself, having been wounded, was quietly

conveyed out of the city.

The next day the mob grew in numbers and its rage increased in its

intensity. There was no longer any doubt that Smith, innocent as he was of

any crime, would be killed, for with the mayor out of the city and the

governor of the state using no effort to control the mob, it was only a

question of a few hours when the assault would be repeated and its victim

put to death. All this happened as per programme. The description of that

morning's carnival appeared in the paper above quoted and reads as

follows:

A squad of twenty men took the negro Smith from three policemen just

before five o'clock this morning and hanged him to a hickory limb on

Ninth Avenue, in the residence section of the city. They riddled his

body with bullets and put a placard on it saying: "This is Mayor Trout's

friend." A coroner's jury of Bismel was summoned and viewed the body and

rendered a verdict of death at the hands of unknown men. Thousands of

persons visited the scene of the lynching between daylight and eight

o'clock when the body was cut down. After the jury had completed its

work the body was placed in the hands of officers, who were unable to

keep back the mob. Three hundred men tried to drag the body through the

streets of the town, but the Rev. Dr. Campbell of the First Presbyterian

church and Capt. R.B. Moorman, with pleas and by force prevented them.

Capt. Moorman hired a wagon and the body was put in it. It was then

conveyed to the bank of the Roanoke, about two miles from the scene of

the lynching. Here the body was dragged from the wagon by ropes for

about 200 yards and burned. Piles of dry brushwood were brought, and the

body was placed upon it, and more brushwood piled on the body, leaving

only the head bare. The whole pile was then saturated with coal oil and

a match was applied. The body was consumed within an hour. The cremation

was witnessed by several thousand people. At one time the mob threatened

to burn the Negro in Mayor Trout's yard.

Thus did the people of Roanoke, Va., add this measure of proof to maintain

our contention that it is only necessary to charge a Negro with a crime in

order to secure his certain death. It was well known in the city before he

was killed that he had not assaulted the woman with whom he had had the

trouble, but he dared to have an altercation with a white woman, and he

must pay the penalty. For an offense which would not in any civilized

community have brought upon him a punishment greater than a fine of a few

dollars, this unfortunate Negro was hung, shot and burned.

SUSPECTED, INNOCENT AND LYNCHED

Five persons, Benjamin Jackson, his wife, Mahala Jackson, his

mother-in-law, Lou Carter, Rufus Bigley, were lynched near Quincy, Miss.,

the charge against them being suspicion of well poisoning. It appears from

the newspaper dispatches at that time that a family by the name of

Woodruff was taken ill in September of 1892. As a result of their illness

one or more of the family are said to have died, though that matter is not

stated definitely. It was suspected that the cause of their illness was

the existence of poison in the water, some miscreant having placed poison

in the well. Suspicion pointed to a colored man named Benjamin Jackson who

was at once arrested. With him also were arrested his wife and

mother-in-law and all were held on the same charge.

The matter came up for judicial investigation, but as might have been

expected, the white people concluded it was unnecessary to wait the result

of the investigation--that it was preferable to hang the accused first and

try him afterward. By this method of procedure, the desired result was

always obtained--the accused was hanged. Accordingly Benjamin Jackson was

taken from the officers by a crowd of about two hundred people, while the

inquest was being held, and hanged. After the killing of Jackson, the

inquest was continued to ascertain the possible connection of the other

persons charged with the crime. Against the wife and mother-in-law of the

unfortunate man there was not the slightest evidence and the coroner's

jury was fair enough to give them their liberty. They were declared

innocent and returned to their homes. But this did not protect the women

from the demands of the Christian white people of that section of the

country. In any other land and with any other people, the fact that these

two accused persons were women would have pleaded in their favor for

protection and fair play, but that had no weight with the Mississippi

Christians nor the further fact that a jury of white men had declared them

innocent. The hanging of one victim on an unproven charge did not begin to

satisfy the mob in its bloodthirsty demands and the result was that even

after the women had been discharged, they were at once taken in charge by

a mob, which hung them by the neck until they were dead.

Still the mob was not satisfied. During the coroner's investigation the

name of a fourth person, Rufus Bigley, was mentioned. He was acquainted

with the Jacksons and that fact, together with some testimony adduced at

the inquest, prompted the mob to decide that he should die also. Search

was at once made for him and the next day he was apprehended. He was not

given over into the hands of the civil authorities for trial nor did the

coroner's inquest find that he was guilty, but the mob was quite

sufficient in itself. After finding Bigley, he was strung up to a tree and

his body left hanging, where it was found next day. It may be remarked

here in passing that this instance of the moral degradation of the people

of Mississippi did not excite any interest in the public at large.

American Christianity heard of this awful affair and read of its details

and neither press nor pulpit gave the matter more than a passing comment.

Had it occurred in the wilds of interior Africa, there would have been an

outcry from the humane people of this country against the savagery which

would so mercilessly put men and women to death. But it was an evidence of

American civilization to be passed by unnoticed, to be denied or condoned

as the requirements of any future emergency might determine.

LYNCHED FOR AN ATTEMPTED ASSAULT

With only a little more aggravation than that of Smith who quarreled at

Roanoke with the market woman, was the assault which operated as the

incentive to a most brutal lynching in Memphis, Tenn. Memphis is one of

the queen cities of the south, with a population of about seventy thousand

souls--easily one of the twenty largest, most progressive and wealthiest

cities of the United States. And yet in its streets there occurred a scene

of shocking savagery which would have disgraced the Congo. No woman was

harmed, no serious indignity suffered. Two women driving to town in a

wagon, were suddenly accosted by Lee Walker. He claimed that he demanded

something to eat. The women claimed that he attempted to assault them.

They gave such an alarm that he ran away. At once the dispatches spread

over the entire country that a big, burly Negro had brutally assaulted two

women. Crowds began to search for the alleged fiend. While hunting him

they shot another Negro dead in his tracks for refusing to stop when

ordered to do so. After a few days Lee Walker was found, and put in jail

in Memphis until the mob there was ready for him.

The _Memphis Commercial_ of Sunday, July 23, contains a full account of

the tragedy from which the following extracts are made:

At 12 o'clock last night, Lee Walker, who attempted to outrage Miss

Mollie McCadden, last Tuesday morning, was taken from the county jail

and hanged to a telegraph pole just north of the prison. All day rumors

were afloat that with nightfall an attack would be made upon the jail,

and as everyone anticipated that a vigorous resistance would be made, a

conflict between the mob and the authorities was feared.

At 10 o'clock Capt. O'Haver, Sergt. Horan and several patrolmen were on

hand, but they could do nothing with the crowd. An attack by the mob was

made on the door in the south wall, and it yielded. Sheriff McLendon and

several of his men threw themselves into the breach, but two or three of

the storming party shoved by. They were seized by the police, but were

not subdued, the officers refraining from using their clubs. The entire

mob might at first have been dispersed by ten policemen who would use

their clubs, but the sheriff insisted that no violence be done.

The mob got an iron rail and used it as a battering ram against the

lobby doors. Sheriff McLendon tried to stop them, and some one of the

mob knocked him down with a chair. Still he counseled moderation and

would not order his deputies and the police to disperse the crowd by

force. The pacific policy of the sheriff impressed the mob with the idea

that the officers were afraid, or at least would do them no harm, and

they redoubled their efforts, urged on by a big switchman. At 12 o'clock

the door of the prison was broken in with a rail.

As soon as the rapist was brought out of the door calls were heard for a

rope; then someone shouted, "Burn him!" But there was no time to make a

fire. When Walker got into the lobby a dozen of the men began beating

and stabbing him. He was half dragged, half carried to the corner of

Front Street and the alley between Sycamore and Mill, and hung to a

telegraph pole.

Walker made a desperate resistance. Two men entered his cell first and

ordered him to come forth. He refused, and they failing to drag him out,

others entered. He scratched and bit his assailants, wounding several of

them severely with his teeth. The mob retaliated by striking and cutting

him with fists and knives. When he reached the steps leading down to the

door he made another stand and was stabbed again and again. By the time

he reached the lobby his power to resist was gone, and he was shoved

along through the mob of yelling, cursing men and boys, who beat, spat

upon and slashed the wretch-like demon. One of the leaders of the mob

fell, and the crowd walked ruthlessly over him. He was badly hurt--a

jawbone fractured and internal injuries inflicted. After the lynching

friends took charge of him.

The mob proceeded north on Front Street with the victim, stopping at

Sycamore Street to get a rope from a grocery. "Take him to the iron

bridge on Main Street," yelled several men. The men who had hold of the

Negro were in a hurry to finish the job, however, and when they reached

the telephone pole at the corner of Front Street and the first alley

north of Sycamore they stopped. A hastily improvised noose was slipped

over the Negro's head, and several young men mounted a pile of lumber

near the pole and threw the rope over one of the iron stepping pins. The

Negro was lifted up until his feet were three feet above the ground, the

rope was made taut, and a corpse dangled in midair. A big fellow who

helped lead the mob pulled the Negro's legs until his neck cracked. The

wretch's clothes had been torn off, and, as he swung, the man who pulled

his legs mutilated the corpse.

One or two knife cuts, more or less, made little difference in the

appearance of the dead rapist, however, for before the rope was around

his neck his skin was cut almost to ribbons. One pistol shot was fired

while the corpse was hanging. A dozen voices protested against the use

of firearms, and there was no more shooting. The body was permitted to

hang for half an hour, then it was cut down and the rope divided among

those who lingered around the scene of the tragedy. Then it was

suggested that the corpse be burned, and it was done. The entire

performance, from the assault on the jail to the burning of the dead

Negro was witnessed by a score or so of policemen and as many deputy

sheriffs, but not a hand was lifted to stop the proceedings after the

jail door yielded.

As the body hung to the telegraph pole, blood streaming down from the

knife wounds in his neck, his hips and lower part of his legs also

slashed with knives, the crowd hurled expletives at him, swung the body

so that it was dashed against the pole, and, so far from the ghastly

sight proving trying to the nerves, the crowd looked on with

complaisance, if not with real pleasure. The Negro died hard. The neck

was not broken, as the body was drawn up without being given a fall, and

death came by strangulation. For fully ten minutes after he was strung

up the chest heaved occasionally, and there were convulsive movements of

the limbs. Finally he was pronounced dead, and a few minutes later

Detective Richardson climbed on a pile of staves and cut the rope. The

body fell in a ghastly heap, and the crowd laughed at the sound and

crowded around the prostrate body, a few kicking the inanimate carcass.

Detective Richardson, who is also a deputy coroner, then proceeded to

impanel the following jury of inquest: J.S. Moody, A.C. Waldran, B.J.

Childs, J.N. House, Nelson Bills, T.L. Smith, and A. Newhouse. After

viewing the body the inquest was adjourned without any testimony being

taken until 9 o'clock this morning. The jury will meet at the coroner's

office, 51 Beale Street, upstairs, and decide on a verdict. If no

witnesses are forthcoming, the jury will be able to arrive at a verdict

just the same, as all members of it saw the lynching. Then someone

raised the cry of "Burn him!" It was quickly taken up and soon resounded

from a hundred throats. Detective Richardson, for a long time,

single-handed, stood the crowd off. He talked and begged the men not to

bring disgrace on the city by burning the body, arguing that all the

vengeance possible had been wrought.

While this was going on a small crowd was busy starting a fire in the

middle of the street. The material was handy. Some bundles of staves

were taken from the adjoining lumber yard for kindling. Heavier wood was

obtained from the same source, and coal oil from a neighboring grocery.

Then the cries of "Burn him! Burn him!" were redoubled.

Half a dozen men seized the naked body. The crowd cheered. They marched

to the fire, and giving the body a swing, it was landed in the middle of

the fire. There was a cry for more wood, as the fire had begun to die

owing to the long delay. Willing hands procured the wood, and it was

piled up on the Negro, almost, for a time, obscuring him from view. The

head was in plain view, as also were the limbs, and one arm which stood

out high above the body, the elbow crooked, held in that position by a

stick of wood. In a few moments the hands began to swell, then came

great blisters over all the exposed parts of the body; then in places

the flesh was burned away and the bones began to show through. It was a

horrible sight, one which, perhaps, none there had ever witnessed

before. It proved too much for a large part of the crowd and the

majority of the mob left very shortly after the burning began.

But a large number stayed, and were not a bit set back by the sight of a

human body being burned to ashes. Two or three white women, accompanied

by their escorts, pushed to the front to obtain an unobstructed view,

and looked on with astonishing coolness and nonchalance. One man and

woman brought a little girl, not over twelve years old, apparently their

daughter, to view a scene which was calculated to drive sleep from the

child's eyes for many nights, if not to produce a permanent injury to

her nervous system. The comments of the crowd were varied. Some remarked

on the efficacy of this style of cure for rapists, others rejoiced that

men's wives and daughters were now safe from this wretch. Some laughed

as the flesh cracked and blistered, and while a large number pronounced

the burning of a dead body as a useless episode, not in all that throng

was a word of sympathy heard for the wretch himself.

The Red Record Tabulated Statistics and Alleged Causes of Lynching in the United States · 第 10 / 11 章