The Washington weekly post. (Washington, D.C.) 1878-1916, 1899-05-02
LVnShins NulCt Law.

South Cardinals lynching mBlct law,
under which the heirs Of victim OF MOP
violence may recover S2.oo0 damages from
the county in which the lynching occur
red. Is good law. according 20 the decision
OF the state Supreme Court. IL remains
70 be seen however. whether the heirs OF
a person lynched can secure VERDICT
Savannah News.
II may be good law. in a technical
sense. but IT is not good in the higher
and broader sense OF the word. 1t is not
Just. law that is deficient in or vioiat-
i've Of plain. common justice ought not
to be enacted, however great the emer-
gency. And in this country. where pub
lie opinion comes pretty near being the
supreme law Of the land, where the en-
forcement OF statutes depends on turies
drawn from the masses OF the people.
no Law which the average sentiment re-
CARDS as oppressive or unfair can be exc
cuted- The statute books of most Of the
States are numbered with dead laws
large part Of the work OF Legislatures
that are dominated by sound, practical
sense consists in wlping out the blunders
OF their predecessors by repeal or re-
constructive amendment.
There is no question OF the motive be-
hind South Cardinals lynching mulct
law. The horrible prevalence of lynching
in that State-of mob murders often lack
ing any semblance Of excuse-called for
remedial action when the Legislature
met. even more loudly than IL had In
many previous years. The best citizens,
including the Governor and the legis-
lators, felt that something must be done TO
check the current OF bloody violence. This
statute is a result OF that feeling. But il is
not fair, IL is opposed to simple justice, TO
compel the honest, tax-payiDg, law-abid-
acts Of criminals. Fifty men out of
population Of thousands-fifty men of
small property and, therefore, small tax
payers-might, under law of this kind,
ruin the property-holding citizens in
single night. And if this rule is just
when applied to lynching. why not make
II cover all crimes? If county must pay
5000 TO the heirs of victim OF mob
violence, why should il not pay. in whole
or in part, the damage inflicted by in
cendiaries, robbers; and other felons?
The citizen who obeys the laws. who
minds his own business, and sets a good
example for his neighbors ought not to
have his property taken from him to pay
for the satanic acts of men who are rid
ing abroad to Kill while he is asleep in
his bed.
Our Savannah contemporary intimates
a well-founded doubt as to whether the
heirs OF a person lynched can secure a
verdict" In a case as TO which the sym
lynchers, no such verdict can be secured,
no matter how strong the proof. 1t
would be impossible, for example, 10
enforce such a law in Ripley County,
Ind, where public sentiment Endorsed the
wholesale lynehing OF four men, cot one
of whom was accused of the one and
only crime that is held to Justify that
summary proceeding. A clergyman OF
that locality went into print in an at
tempted apology for his murderous neigh
bors. Is it likely that South Carolina will
be more favorable than Indiana to the
execution of a mulct law?
Even in counties and cases where pub
lie sentiment abhOrs the lynching for
which suit is brought, we apprehend
insurmountable difficulties in getting
verdict. The people will feel that they
ought not 10 be compelled to pay for
acts for which they are not, in any way, |
responsible. Something higher, deeper. |
and stronger than mulct laws will be re-
quired to abolish lynchings or TO limit |
mob murders TO the perpetrators of the |
crime for which public sentiment pre-
scribes lynching as the proper penalty