The record-union., 1897-06-05
THE URBANA CASE.


ing of some of it's members by the mil
itary called to aid the officers in re-
sisting the crowd; the subsequent ruse
by which a militia company was
thrown off of the track while the mob
secured the prisoner Mitchell, and
hanged him in the Courthouse square,
was dreadful affair. The man had
been guilty of a brutal assault upon
an estimable woman of that city, a
wife and a mother, from the effects of
which she is SO Frustrated that she may
die. The fellow admitted his guilt
was put on trial and in a few mo-
ments sentenced to the full penalty i'm
prisonment for twenty years.
This result did not satisfy a popu
lace wrought up to the highest pitch
of just anger, and the negro was taken
out and hanged after several lives had
been sacrificed to the efforts of the Of
ficers of the law to protect the fellow
and transfer him to the State Prison.
The loss Of life might have been
avoided had the Governor responded
to the request made of him, and or
dered a sufficient force Of militia to
protect the Jail. But trusting to one
local company that was probably in
sympathy with the mob, and that pre-
tended to break down for want of rest,
the mob was able, when a company
from abroad was tardily ordered to
Urbana, to outwit it and thus secure
the prisoner The dramatic account of
this occurrence leaves reason to believe
that this foreign company was willing
and anxious to be deceived and that il
gladly accepted the statement of a
stranger that he was an officer. and
did not need the further aid Of the mil
itia.
As a>rule firing upon a mob disperses
1t. In this case it failed. Two of the
rioters were killed, six were wounded
severely, and one so seriously that his
death is feared. From all this we
must draw the conclusion that this was
not usual mob. 1t was not a gath
ering of merely infiamed men, mad
with passion. It was persistent and
the killing of some of its members did
not prevent it following out its designs.
1t was a mob of men otherwise good
citizens. In short the Urbana case was
that OF an entire community becoming
the instrument of the spirit of ven
geance, and resolving itself into a body
to inflict upon an offender a heavier
penalty for crime than the laws made
by these same people-in part-pre-
scribed. For it is easy to read be-
tween the lines of the report of the af-
fair and discern the strong sympathy
Of the whole city with the act that de-
prived the rape fiend of his life by
short shift.
What shall be said then, concerning
such manifestations? That death is
too mild punishment for such crime as
that of Mitchell, no one will deny ex-
cept those who oppose capital punish
ment on principle no matter what the
offenSe. Yet the law prescribed impris-
onment for the crime Mitchell COM
mitted- But mob law cannot be ex-
cused, must not be apologized for 1t
Is always bad, always demoralizing,
never defensible, never to be COM
mended. No man has the right to
usurp the function of the law. When
he does, he constitutes himself die
tator to the extent of his ability to do
so. To just that extent he is more
than lawless; he is rebellious, and
strikes at the vitals of society.
But when this is said, while all right
thinking viii condemn the methods en-
ployed, who is there to say that the
fiend was punished too severely? In
deed, death for such a fellow who has
left his poor victim a wreck, disgraced
her before the world and planted in her
blood the seeds of dread disease
death for such an one was happy re-
lease. He should have lived, and have
been kept in life with the hope of his
state being such that each day would