New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-03-18
A CDNTP J.ST


WHY consure Ncw-OreanS when San Fran
cisco is bonored for It's Vigilance Committee?
Tho oucs,ion is natural and common one, and
Il NAV serve useful purpose to consider the
distinction. Let it first be broadly stated that
tho presumption is always and everywhere
against Vigilance Committee also as against
any other form of lawless violence. In nearly
all cases on record such organizations nave beoh
condemned by public opinion and have meritcd
condemnation by their errors OF conduct. II
has rarely happened that such bodies nave neel
free from improper motives or strictly dcVorcd
"a the public welfare. or impartial and uncrrlhg
in Judgment. When they err the INJURY 10 So
cictv i far greater than the loss OF IA snSc
innocent life: the very foundation OF law
respecting civilization is undermined.
The san Francisco Vigilance Committee was
remarkable organization in IT'S devotion 10
nublic welfare in It's rigorous avoidance OF per
sonal. partisan or other improper motives IN Us
deliberate and careful methods oil determining
as 10 the guilt of persons accused, III It's eN-
ccp,ional scrupulouSncSS and freedom from error
Nevertheless. it has been ccnSurcd 10y many
yell-informed and intelligent men, 50 that 1t
NAV hc even now question whether the harm
The Committee saved San Francisco and that
city would not have been saved so quickly ny
any other process, and yet no man can say with
certainty that relief As complete would not nave
come in time by Lawful methods.
The New Orleans mob embraced some men
of Substance and high character, II Is said, II
50. the greater is their blame. They cannot say
that they avoided error for il Is now admitted
that there was substantially no evidence that
some OF the persons killed had been participants
in murder. The excuse offered in dispatches IS
that the responsible leaders Of tho mob could
not control few impu'svc persons who were
admitted to the prison. and that innocent per-
sons were shot by these in m .,cnt OF excite
ment. o, possibly by mistake, when the accused
Italians were huddlcl together and could not
lie readily distinguished But there Is not even
p,ctcnco that the leaders OF the mob exercised
any care in determining which Of the prisoners
was guilty. or in selecting those AMI no others
for slaughter.
: mob Of thousands was gathered by call
which openly suggested ASSASSINATION. The au-
thoriticS Of the city and the state took no eI-
fcctiyc measures 10 prevent the murder OF the
prisoncrs. Yet aims were carefully provided,
!
the prison 10 be used rs battcring rams II n'ceS-
yary. and other preparations WcIc mad" by q
few persons. with such dclibenuon that u IS
hard to suppose the authorities had not abun-
dant warning. When the leaders came to act
about fifty persons only were admitted to the
prison. it Is said, and these were the persons
who had first volunteered" and were there
fore presumably the coolest and most prudent
/ Of all men to decide which lives should be
! taken II is not easy 20 suggest less decent
! or iuGici0uS mode Of asserting III" rights OF the
| pcoDlc The fact is that the people who can
! find no better mode Of defending their rights
! bring against themselves = most gave accuNl-
! ion. When sober second though! has come, the
| thousands who formed the New Orleans mob a
well as the other citizens perhaps fifty times as
many, who did not participate, may realize that
! moro harm has been done than years of earnest
! effort can repair