Viewing page 17 of 23

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

[[208]]
THE CRISIS 
To protect citizens in their lives against mob violence, in default of such protection by the States, apparently goes no farther than to correct the mischief resulting from the default.
It is now held that there is, in legal contemplation, a peace of the United States, existing within and throughout the States. It seems to be judicially regarded as comprehending at least the existence, exercise, and undisturbed enjoyment of the rights derived from or under the United States. [[7]] If this can be taken as established, it would seem to follow that citizens of the United States, whatever may be said of other persons, are entitled to live on its peace, and to have it preserved for the protection of their lives. If the United States can legislate directly for the preservation of its peace within the States,the pending bill appears to be within its powers. If the power and duty to preserve [[Image of a mustachioed man wearing a suit]] [[HON. ALBERT E. PILLSBURY]] the peace of the United States within the States being solely to the States, which it may not be wholly safe to concede, and which seems to be inconsistent with principles already established,the failure of the States to preserve it is a breach of duty toward the United States. In this view it may be contended that the United States has power to deal with such a breach as an offence against itself, on the part of all individuals who contribute to it, directly or indirectly. 
The United States has, as all governments have, a political and legal interest in the lives of its citizens. If it has not full power to protect them in their lives, within the States as it has elsewhere, it can be, as already observed, only because that duty rests solely upon the States. If so, it is a duty owed to the United States,  as well as to individual citizens. It would seem that open and notorious neglect or omission of this duty on the part of a State, by suffering lawless mobs to murder citizens for want of legal protection, maybe declared an offence against the United States, and if so, that the United States may punish all persons who contribute to it. 
It may be said that if the United States has power to protect the lives of its citizens within the States, it must have power to protect their other personal and property rights, and so to supersede State laws by a system of federal legislation, which is impossible. This does not follow. There is no doubt that so far as the express provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment extend, federal legislation for its enforcement may extend, whatever the consequences. For example, if a State should omit to enact any legislation for the protection of a certain class of citizens against crimes of violence, forbidding and punishing such crimes only when committed against the other class or classes, it can hardly be doubted that Congress, under the enforcement clause, may supply the omission by direct legislation, or may perhaps annul the whole system of discriminating laws, leaving the State to provide others which will conform to the requirement of equality. The consequences of the failure of a State to enforce laws made for protection against violence are no less disastrous to the unprotected class than the failure of the State to make any such laws. It is difficult to perceive why the power and the duty of Congress to interfere, under the enforcement clause, are not as clear in the one case as in the other.
Apart from the Fourteenth Amendment, it may well be that the United States owes its citizens protection in their lives while not owing them a complete system of laws for the protection of all personal and property rights,and that its power is coextensive with its duty, but extends no farther. 
Without attempting an exhaustive inquiry into this delicate and difficult subject, it can safely be assumed that preconceived opinions are not conclusive of the question. In view of express constitutional provisions, and in the present state of judicial decision, the existence or non-existence of this power in the federal government can be determined only by submitting a statute to the test of judicially examination. [[7 Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S, 371; 394; In re Neagle, supra; Logan v. U.S., supra]]

THE BURDEN 
[[An image of two men, kneeling and struggling to hold the masthead]] 
COLORED MEN LYNCHED WITHOUT TRIAL. 
1885....78  |1899.... 84 
1886.... 71 |1900....107 
1887.... 80 |1901....107 
1888.... 95 |1902.... 86
1889.... 95 |1903.... 86
1890.... 90 |1904.... 83
1891....121 |1905.... 61
1892....155 |1906.... 64
1893....154 |1907.... 60
1894....134 |1908.... 93
1895....112 |1909.... 73
1896.... 80 |1910.... 65
1897....122 |1911....63
1898....102 |
       Total......1,521

The alleged causes for 1911 were:
Murder..............36
Rape.................7
Attempted rape.......7
Insulting women......4
Assault to kill......3
"Prejudice"......... 2
"Suspected rape".....1
Threats..............1
"Desperado"..........1
Robbery..............1
                    63
We give the figures above from the Chicago Tribune. THE CRISIS believes that at least 100 colored people were lynched during the year 1911, and, therefore, we shall, in 1912, keep a careful list ourselves. 
Palm Beach, Fla., February 3, 1912.
Dear ---------:
I am sending you a card, which so aroused me until I purchased the entire supply, with the purpose of enlisting your aid in preventing the publication of such cards. I don't know how to begin this work, but with the cooperation of such men as you, we must accomplish something. Trusting you will give this card and the letter serious consideration, I beg to remain,
Very truly yours------
A part of the card is reproduced here. It is printed in colors and marked "Made in Germany, No. 28,293, by the H. L. Co." 

A large number of Negroes are being arrested as vagrants. A letter in the Savannah Tribune asks: "Is it because there are no loafers among the other races? Or is it on account of the explicit order from the chief of police to arrest Negroes only? A week or ten days ago 108 able-bodied men were arrested and detained in the barracks on suspicion- men who are working every day, or at least whenever an opportunity for work is offered. The 'milk in the coconut' is that the farmers want cotton pickers at starvation price and worst treatment, and at the same time there will be races with automobiles very soon- convict labor as opposed to free labor is required to further the money making scheme of a body of enterprising citizens. Why not lease some of these convicts to the M, & M. T. Co. or O.S. So. Co.? The county has no more interest in automobile races than handling of freight by the companies name. Mr. Editor, I believe the police department could find a number of white loiterers whenever they are instructed to look up such."

[[Image depicts an African American male being lynched, hanging from a tree by his neck.]]
LYNCHED