The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1899-05-03

COLUMBIA, April 2O.-The Supreme
Court has rendered an important de-
cislOn III the matter OF damages in case
of lynching.
In January, 1897, Lawrence Brown
WAS arrested on the charge of burning
IL gin house. lie was dismissed by the
magistrate, and, on the night of his re-
lease, he was lynched. Action was
brought against the county of Orange
burg for damages under the cOnstitu-
tiOnal provisions. Under instructions
OF Judge james +. AldricIl the jury
rendered verdict i'll favor of the
county chiefly Oh the ground that
Brown was not Il prisoner at the time
OF his being lynchcd and that he was
not taken from the hands of he law to
be lynchcd. The lynclIing occurren on
january 3. 1897, near StitOn.
Judge Aldrich, in his opinion before
the Circuit Court. took the position
that the Constitution applied to eases
where prisoners were taken from the
custody of officers of the Court or law,
ANA the ease was not submitted to the
Jury on the evidence addmccd.
Justice Gary renders the opinion Of
the supreme Court, ali the Judges con
curing. The body of tie opinion is
made up of copies Gf the constitutional
provision, the Acts and matter leading
up to the expression of the Court.
which is us follows:
"Ihc intention of the Constitution
was to prevent the crime of lynching
In two ways: First, by visiting upon
t he officers of the law the penalties
therein mentioned, when Il prisoner
lawfully i'll their custody, was lynched
by mob, through their negligence or
cOnnivancc, and second, to induce the
cooperation Of the taxpayers. i'll pre-
venting the lynching in order that
their county might not become liable
to the penalty by way of exemplary
damages Of not less than $4,000 to the
legal representatives OF the person
lynclled.
1.-The lynching of Il prisoner, and of
one not i'll the custody of the law us
such, is murder i'll bothcascs. Itwould,
therefore, at least seem strange il the
framers OF the Constitution were care
iul to provide i'll the organic law of the
State /, remedy for preventing the
lynching OF n prisoner and remained
silent as to the remedy in AL other
cases OF lynching. The constitutional
provision, however, is not confined to
the lynching of prisoners. The words:
Without regard to the conduct of Off
GERS" when considered in connection
with the evil which the Constitution
intended to remedy, must be construed
to mean without reference to what has
been said in regard to the conduct Of
the officers, or in other words, without
reference to other provisions of the
section. They were inserted for the
purpose of showing that the proviso
was to be construed Independently and
without regard to what preceded it.
The word provided is omitted in the
Act, and this fact shows that the Leg
islature gave to the words without re-
gard to the conduct of the officers the
construction which this Court has
placed upon them.
ut must be remembered that many
OF those who were members of the
Constitutional Convention were like
wise members Of the General Assembly
when said Act was passed. While, Of
course, construction placed upon the
Constitution by the legislative branch
OF the Government would not be bind
ing upon the Courts, still in this case 1t
IS well worthy Of consideration. The
Act intended to make the county lia-
BILE for damages in those cases only
which fall within provision of the
Constitution, and it has correctly con-
strued the Constitution to make
county liable for damages when the
person lynched was not in the custody
OF the law as prisoner.
"Ihls renders unnecessary the con-
sideratiOn of the interesting question
whether the Legislature did not have
the power independently Of the consti-
tutional provision to pass the Act here
lntOfOre mentioned. 1t has been held
that statutes making community liza
BILE for damages IN cases OF iynching.
and giving right Of recovery to the
!ega! representatives of the person
lynchel, are valid on the ground that
the main purpose iB to impose penalty
on the community, which is given to
the legal representatives. not because
they have been damaged, but because
the Legislature sees fit thus to dispose
of the penalty. Such statutes are sal
utary, as their effect is to render pro-
lection to human life and make COM
munities law-abiding. But. as we have
said, Our conclusion renders unneces-
sary n consideration of this question.
1t is not necessary to consider the ex-
ceptions in detail, as our views dispose
Of the main question in the case. 1t is
the Judgment of this Court that the
Judgment of the Circuit Court be re-
versed, and the case remanded for
new trial."-Special to Ne,rs and Cou-