The Omaha guide., 1933-08-26
ever today.

~ VIC HdNC PA0f10 ~
S~cottsboro case you have criminally
s~cuandered thousands of dollars. You
hired without authority numerous
lawyers who did nothing to defend
the innocent boys, Roddy, your first
lawyer, a Ku Klux Klan member,
asked them to plead guilty. Your fin
ancial responsibility is the more
criminal because yea have deprived
the 1. L. D. legally authorized to de-
fend the boys, Of desperately needed
funds.
Scottsboro funds we're not at first
solicited by you on the basis thas
they would be used for legal services
only. Your leadership, and not those
who contributed through you to the
Scottsboro case, demanded that the
funds go for legal services only, and
that we forego mass protest as a sup
port to legal procedure.
g. Is it not true that you have
slandered and vilified the i. u D.
in the lynch press of the South n an
effort to drive it out Of the Scots
boro case. Explain why the lynchers
endorsed your policy in S~cottsboro
and called upon you to take over the
case.
70 Explain why you so long main
tanned that Scottsboro is not an in
separable part of the liberation
struggles of the Negro masses a.
gainst jim crowism, ~lynching, ETC.,
and for the enforcement of the 18th,
14th and 18th amendments to the
United States Constitution.
These are the major issues between
our organizations. We raised them in
our letter of June 80 and you care
fully avoided them. Your indefensible
position on these points is proof OF
the inability of the leadership of the
N. A A. C. P. to defend the Scots
boro boys or the interests of the Ne
gro masses.
Now again to the questions you
raised before and which we answered
in our letter of June 80:
II Whether or not the /. L. D..
requires that no person shall be per-
mitted to contribute to the Scots
boro defense unless he subscribes in
to the philosophy and tactics of the
/. T.. D.
q The question of the role of
mass pressure in forcing the leader
ship of the N A A. G p, to seek
to get back into the Scottsboro case.
81 The question of your respect
for condolences"
We herewith very definitely and
c~ategorically state again that we by
no means demand that they who sin
cerely desire to aid in the defense of
tn innocent Scottsboro boys should
here and now give up their political
or economic views or modify them.
We want them however to realize
this profound truth. There has been
no cas- in history when an oppressor
class or an OPP Essor nation ever
created courts in which to give MEM
bers of the oppressed class or the OPP
pressed nation justice. The courts of
an oppressor class or nation are Great
ed to aid in preventing its existence.
Justice is not abstract; it is a con-
crete expression of the interests of
those who hand it down.
The lynchers' court prepared to
lynch these innocent boys on June 10,
1881. Our campaign of mass protest
and agitation stopped it. Your lead
ership after retaining a Ku Klux
Khan lawyer (Roddy) had left the
boys to the tender mercies of that
court. Again and again the lynchers'
court set a day for the legal lynch
ing, but the magnificent protest move
ment, organized and led by US, reach
ing ever wider masses, thus acquired
greater political significance, and
the ~lynchers' hands were stayed. In
joining with US in defense of these
boys and in the larger issues Of which
this defense is an ~inseparable part,
we ask no n to Subscribe into the
philosophy and tactics of the T.. L.
D" We ask only that those who
voluntarily agreed to cooperate with
the I. L. D. renounce with us any
plan endorsed by the lynchers.
You say you were not forced to
again seek to enter S~cottsboro by the
pressure of the masses A final word
regarding this. Early in 1881, after
you had accepted the decision Of a
"court Of Justice" and left the boys
to be legally lynched, the Communist
Party sent out a call for a united
front for defense against this inhu-
mar decision. The /. l.. D. imme-