Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1922-09-16


Democratic "Solid South" Opposi-
ton Has Joined Hands With Radi-
calls to Oppose Law and Order
Legislation That Would Punish
Mobs and Murder.
Neutrality-suspicious. of the bills OH
the legislative program to be enacted
before the Congress adjourns is the
Dyer anti-lynching bill. This bill has
passed the House and has been re-
ported favorably to the Senate from
the Judiciary Committee. The pas
sage of this bill is demanded for
two reasons: First, because it is need
ed in order to enforce the Federal
Constitution, uphold law and order
and protect otherwise defenseless
citizens who are entitled to all pro-
lection of the government; second,
cally pledged by the Republican par
ty in it's national PLATFORM of 1920
and specifically urged by President
Harding in his message to Congress
April IL, 1921. The last Republican
national platform stated:
eve urge Congress to consider the
most effective means to end lynch
ing in this country, which continues
to be q terrible blot on our American
civilization"
President Harding in his first mes
sage to the special session of Con-
gress on April IL, 1921, said:
Congress ought to wipe the stain
Of barbaric lynching from the ban
ners of the free and representative
democracy"
There is a growing demand upon
the part of all law-abiding people to
Nod lo1 hot CT,
local communities which permit
mobs and lynching. This feeling has
become more pronounced and intense
since the increasing frequency of
such horrors as the recent mob at
Herrin, III. The mob spirit, which
is spreading, is due to several rea-
sons, all Of which have their base in
the unbridled passions of certain in
terests which seek to gain their ends
by violence and crime rather than by
orderly processes of the law. These
radical influences have added their
opposition to that of the Democratic
"Solid South" to the passage Of the
Dyer anti-lynching law.
The backbone Of the opposition to
the Dyer anti-lynching law continues
to be the Democratic party, which is
against the protection of the life and
property of the Negro. This has been
conclusively proved by the fact that
of the 1924 persons who were lynch
ed during the years 1887-1921, i'll
elusive, 2,706 were Negroes, practi-
cally all of whom were lynched in
Democratic States in the South. The
record Of 1922 promises to be great
er than for many previous years.
During the first six months of this
year there were 80 lynchings. Of
these, % were Negroes. Five Of them
were burned at the stake. All of
these lynchings occurred in States
which compose the "Solid South"
Nineteen Of the thirty were lynched
in two States-Mississippi and Texas.
These figures clearly locate the blame
for lynching.
That the Democratic "Solid South
is in favor of lynching and opposed
to any interference of the Federal
government to uphold law and order
cratic members of Congress who con-
sistently oppose all bills looking to
the stopping of lynching and the
punishment of lynchers. Practically
the solid Democratic vote in the
House was lined up against the pas
sage of the Dyer anti-lynching bill.
There has been' no suggestion that
there is any hope Of changing these
conditions by the actions of the
States themselves. II simply denies
the power of Congress to pass the
law, and with certain naivette says
this proposed intervention of the
Federal government "would tend to
destroy all sense of local RESPONSE
bility for the protection of person
and property and the administration
of justice from which sense of legal
responsibility alone protection and
governmental efficiency can be Sc
cured among free people,"
that these gentlemen dread the de-
struction of Sense of local respon-
sibility' which have in many years
never punished lyncher."
The chief objection raised against
the Dyer anti-lynching bill by it's OPP
ponents is that it is unconstitutional
because it provides for the interven-
ton and usurpation of State police
rights by the Federal government.
The most obvious and effective an
swer to the Federal Constitution and
it's enforcement. This amendment
was voted for almost solidly by the
Democratic representatives from the
"Solid South" and it was ratified by
the Democratic SOLID South" States.
How illogical and absurd it is, then,
to contend that it is unconstitutional
for the Federal government to enter
n State and arrest man, for the
sale Of liquor, but unconstitutional
for the Federal government to enter
the same State and prevent the same
man from being hanged or burned at
the stake. The plea that the anti
lynching bill is unconstitutional is
thoroughly answered in the reports
made to the House and Senate by the
respective judiciary committees of
each. These reports are very volumi-
nous and quote decision after de.
cision Of the United States Supreme
Court. Both the House and Senate
committee reports state:
"The Fourteenth amendment to
the Constitution provides that nc
State shall deny to any person with
in it's jurisdiction the equal protec-
ton Of the laws and further pro,
vides that 'the Congress shall have