This throws a great deal of light on the question of 'jungle justice' and man. To speak of inflicting the so-called 'jungle justice' in a human person implies reducing him to the level of an irrational animal. But the issue is that animals in the jungle or any where else, do not carry out acts of justice because it does not pertain to their nature. Irrational animals function by instinct and are guided by the laws of nature. They kill to eat, they attack in defence of their young, they fight to show off their prowess in the mating season, but they do not set up complex judicial system.
Justice is a quality which, of all material creation, only man possesses.
Jungle justice' cannot be said to be natural law because no such thing exists in the law of nature. As a thinking creature, man must always behave in accordance with his nature. To engage in acts of lynching is to act irrationally and to go against the dignity of both the victims of the lynching and the perpetrators. This is so because the one is not treated with the dignity which his nature demands, and the others behave in a way which goes against their nature and its consequent dignity. To call for 'jungle justice' is to deny the efficacy of the legal system.