Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1918-03-05
TO ERADICATE LYNcHING.
Correspondent Thinks Participants in
Mob Law Should be Disfranchised.

CORRESPONDENT Thinks Participants in
Mob Law Should be Dsfranehised.
News and Courier.
TO the Editor OF The News and Cou-
ricr: Another lynching OF negro IN
this state brings again TO the lore
the oft recurring question OF law en-
forcement. The laws OF the state are
now unfavorable to lynching. Under
the law a person who actively partici-
patcs in u lynching bee commits MUIR
der. Frequently ii Is murder in ITS
most cowardly and brutal form, for
the reason that one defenscless man
|! is attacked by an armed mob. The
poor negro does not have even sport
ing chance Tor his life.
The fact that the person lynched Is
considered as deserving death IS be-
side the question. 1t is entirely irrele-
want. In former times in thickly set
tied communities OF the west vigilance
committees found it necessary. in their
| Judgment, 10 administer what they
termed swift justice to Objectionable
citizens. In most Of such cases, how
ever, the accused was at least given
u reasonable chance to show his inno-
| ccncc. In case he failed TO do so he
was executed in an orderly manner.
| There was no mob. Only grave Of
lenses received the attention OF vigil
lance committees. 1t was not exactly
fynching, but a sort OF rough and
ready Justice administered under GER
tain restrictions.
| The so-callcd lynch law Of the south
is entirely different. II is the fury OF
an irresponsible mob. often visited up
on IL wretchcd. defcnseless negro for Il
trivial offcnsc, sometimes. no doubt.
upon the innocent.
There is nothing wrong with the
law. The difficulty is with law en-
forccment. Through cowardice or i'm
proper influences juries, with one ac-
cord, refuse to convict man accused
OF lynching or mob murder. This
spirit OF lawlessness among juries
|
possible to get conviction in Il
common ordinary case Of plain muir
der Thus the spirit of lawlcss-
ness is made to increase. No doubt
this state than there were twenty
years ago. However. the abatement
OF the liquor evil is more responsible
for this condition ghan respect for the
law. In fact, in murder cases, at
least, mob and jury continue to have
a profound and far-reaching disrespect
for the law.
The statute providing that the widow
or heirs at law of the person murdered
by mob violence shall have the right
to she for damages the county In which
the lynching occurs has apparently had
no effect In discouraging mob violence.
Among ignorant. prejudiced and vicious
people lynching has lost none OF its
popularity.
What are we going to do about II?
Something should he done, and that
quickly.
Many years ago ducling was grow
ing evil in this state. II was effect
lively stopped by law providing that
any person who participates in a duel
shall he disqualified from voting and
from holding public office in this
state Why not apply this proved ef-
81 Of of nd h1
There is no constitutional or other rea
son why the law should not declare
that any person who takes part in, or
aids or abets, lynching shall be dis
franchised. In order to make the law
effective the oath of office and the oath
OF the voter required in primary and
general elections should be amended
so as to require the officeholder and
voter to swear that he has never taken
part in a lynching and was never pres
ent when one occurred. This would
disqualify a great many people in
South Carolina from holding office or
voting. However. the statute could ne
so worded as to apply to the future
only
II will he argued that n person so
lawlcss as to participate in mob muir
der would not hesitate to swear false
ly. Such u person would not dare
to swear falsely, for the reason that
his political opponent or n partisan
neighbor would not hesitate to show
his disqualification for office or chal-
lenge his vote, or prosecute him for
perjury in case he swore falsely. The
partisan In politics would remain ST.
lent in a prosecution for mob murder.
The Jury would fail to convict Of the
heinous crime of lynching. But the
partisan neighbor would rejoice to
have his opponent disfranchisCd or in
dicated for perjury. The jury might
have backbone enough to convict of so
inconseQuential an offense as perjury.
These conclusions would be we'll within
the range of probabilities. The risk
would be too great. The lyncher of
the future would hesitate long before
running the risk Of losing his right to
vote or hold office. Under present
conditions the very enormity of the
ofrense of mob murder protects him.
The divided responsibility. the improb-
ability of score or more Of white
people being convicted Of killing one
negro all encourage the lyncher in the
belief that he will not be punished.
On the other hand. under the pro-
posed law conditions would be re-
versed. The duty to vote is priced
as a right and a privilege. Hankering
for public office is a human frailty
few have the power or courage to
overcome. Most people banker in vain.
but nearly every one of them would be
willing to give up lynching rather than
give up hankering. With many the
right to vote, not the duty to vote. is
highly valued. A man without this
privilege is a sort Of political outcast.
He loses influence in the community.
The average voter wishes to continue