The tribune independent of Michigan. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1933-1935, 1934-04-28
COMMUNAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR
LYNCHINC

In an editorial entitled "A Vicious Bill" carried
the April FL issue of the Detroit Free Press the Wagner
Costigan federal anti-lynching bill condemned
menace to state rights and infringement upon state
police power 1t Also branded unfair attempt to
establish communal responsibility for crime.
We quote from the editorial follows:
The bill contains features whose vciousness far out
weighs practical effect its enactment Will be likely
Under it, federal attorneys could bring suit in fed
eral courts against counties in which ynchngs occurred
convicted, county could be fined to $4,000, which
would go to the family of the victim.
Another provision of the bill would permit federal
attorneys to bring suit against local police officers if the
latter released prisoners to mob The thus pro-
posed to be taken to accomplish desirable end constl
tute omnous invasion of the police of the
era States for If county may be muched by the
al Courts for allowing mob murder, why not for in
dividual murder?"
In reply to this argument, which is very unconvinc-
ing, beg point out that since Government
created for the individual citizens rather than the ndi
vdual citizens for the Government hold that human
rights more fundamental than state rights.
There is also distinct difference between murder and
lynching. The average murder is usually committed by
definitely known individuals, except in the
of mystery murders 1t is not impossible to curb
crimes of this character when existing laws rgdly
and mpartally enforced, they in England and
Canada
In the case of mob murders, however it is entirely
different Mobs reflect the community spirit and
ally composed of many unidentified individuals that it
is easy task to fix responsibility and guilt upon any
suspected lynchers Even when the identity
is known few have the to testify against lynch
ers in court for fear of reprisas by the invisible mob
States either unable unwilling to apprehend and
punish nchers is the duty of the Federal Government
to step in and make lynchng federal crime and place
for mob murders, upon the counties in
which such crimes occur.
The proposed anti-lynchng bill would not infringe
upon state police powers. When officers the law who
sworn to protect human life and property fail to do
their duty and turn prisoners to mobs they should
receive the punishment they deserve.
1t is not surprising that the majority of white ct-
zens not enthused the Wagner-Costgap anti
ynching bill It is only in instances such the San
JOSE California lynchngs, and the recent attempt to
lynch Fred Lockha in Shreveport La that the lives
of white citizens endangered by mobs. If white c
zens were lynched frequently Negro citizens there
would be little opposition to the of the proposed
ynchng bill and few would feel that $4,000 is
much for county to pay to the family of victim who
is 1ynched in its borders.
Community responsibility for ordinary crimes may
not be Jusiabe but communal responsibility lynch
ngs is entirely usiabe, for mobs made up of the
masses 1t is just expeden for individual counties to be
fined $4,000 for each lynchng which occurs in their
boundaries for nation indemnify another nation
whose citizens have been murdered in our country