The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-07-15
IsLYNCHING JUsTFIABLE ?

We print elsewhere n communication
from a highly valued friend In which ne
undertakes to justify lynching for GER
eat, crime. our correspondent IS
prominent citizen OF Richmond, and we
the more regret his argument. because
he IS a. law-abiding citizen.
His contention is that lynching IN this
particular case IS justhable, because II
saves the victim from the terrible ordeal
Of testifying in court; and again DE
cause the white men in Virginia and IN
the South believe that no other Influence
except the fear of certain death would
check this crime on the part OF the
negro"
No one can have n more tender regard
than The Times for the feelings OF 70
fined woman. who has thus been brutaiiY
treated. but we put the majesty or 'he
law above everything, and we hold that
for the good of society, for the protec-
,ion NJ women as well as for the protec-
tion of men, it must be maintained at
all hazard. Provision has been made by
which a woman in such trial Is not
compelled TO testify before a gaping
crowd. but may give her evidence before
the officers Of the court and those ifnihe-
diately concerned.
We take issue with our correspondent
also I'm his contention that this crime Is
best checked by lynching. On the con-
trary we are confident that mob violence
excites men TO other acts of lawlessness
and that the lynching OF negro for this
crime simply stirs up the devil that IS in
those who are similarly disposed. The
criminal cannot be more afraid or the
mob than he is of the law, when he
knows that the penalty is sure. Moth
inc can so effectually check crime as
dieni6ed maintenance of the law else
our whole system Of law is a mockery and
should give way to the rule Of the mob.
The constitution of Virginia provides
Article /. Section 10, Virginia Bih OF
Rights: "That, in all capital or criminal
prosecutions, a man hath right 10
demand the cause and nature of his ac-
cusation. to be confronted with the ac-
cusers and witnesses, TO call for evidence
in his favor and to a speedy trial by an
impartial jury Of his Vicinage, without
whose unanimous consent he cannot be
found guilty, nor can he be compelled
TO give evidence against himself, that no
man be deprived Of his liberty, except
by the law of the land or the judgment
Of his peers"
We hold that the law Of the land Is
supreme, that it must be everything or
nothing. There is no exception to that
clause Of the constitution which we have
quoted and If men may Of their own
option make an exception in one crime
they may do so in other crimes; and it is
a notorious fact that lynching IS by no
means confined TO those who are guilty
of criminal assault upon women. il we
are to depart from this great principle
Of our bill of rights in one instance In the
name Of civilization where is the thing to
end
There is but one way in which lynch
ing may be justified, and that Is by
an amendment to the constitution by
which IL shall be provided that the clause
IN the constitution which we have quoted
shall be suspended in cases Of criminal
assault. tnat the person guilty OF such
an offence shall be outlawed, and that
whatsoever will may hang him or shoot
him down on sight. Is our correspondent
prepared TO vote for such an amendment
TO the constitution?
We believe. however that even such an
amendment would be better than TO
lynch men in defiance Of law. We be-
lieve that it were better by law 10 sus-
pend the process Of law in certain cases
than that it should be violated by mob.
for the reason. as we have tried TO show
that mob violence in defiance of law is a
menace to the law as an institution.
But there is a higher law yet There
is a divine law which says, Thou shalt
do no murder" and when man Is de-
priyed of his life by an individual. or by
any number Of individuals combined muir
der has been committed. Such are the
simple facts, and. argue against them
as plausibly as you may, there Is no es-
800. from, tbarq