LYNCHINGS AND LEGAL EXECUTIONS FOR 1911-1914, INCLUSIVE
During these four years there were 235 lynchings in the United States. 11, North; 224, South.
In the North, 5 Negroes and 6 whites were lynched; in the South, 215 Negroes, 8 whites, and 1 Mexican. The causes for the lynching of Negroes in the South were as follows: 33, rape; 8, attempted rape; 2, alleged rape,—total, 43 for rape; 117, murder; 14, murderous assault; 3, complicity in murder; 1, suspicion of murder; 1, alleged murder; 5, arson; 5, race prejudice; 8, insulting white women; 11, by night riders in Kentucky; 1, refusal to pay note; 1, race troubles; 1, threat to kill; 1, assault and robbery; 1, horse-stealing; 1, annoying white women; remainder, cause not given. The number of legal executions in the whole country for the four years, were 381. Of these 136 were Negroes, 112 in the South, and 24 for murder in the North. In the South: 93, murder; 10, rape; 2, attempted rape; 1, burglary; 4, cause not given.
Now, adverting to the statistics for 1873-5,—not far removed from the beginning of the Negro-lynching disorder,—it is found that of the 44 Negroes lynched in the South during the three years, 30, or 70- per cent, were lynched for rape; while but 14, or 30+ per cent, were lynched for all other causes combined. Thus it is seen that at this time rape was practically the only cause for the lynching of Negroes in the South.
Moreover, it is quite evident from the statistics above given, beginning with 1885, that rape has continued to be, if not the whole cause for the lynching of Negroes in the South, anyhow almost that, with other crimes as merely incidental:
The three pairs of years,—1885-6, 1901-2, and 1906-7,—show 165 Negroes lynched in the South for rape, 160 for murder, and 127 for all other causes. Here rape takes the lead. Adding to these figures the statistics for 1892-3, the numbers for the four pairs of year are: 259, murder; 253, rape; and 227, minor causes. Again, adding for the four years 1911-14, the result for the twelve years, is: 376, or 39+ per cent, murder; 296, or 31+ per cent, rape; and 282, or 29+ per cent, minor causes. This would seem to indicate that rape was not even the leading cause.
However, according to the statistics for the twelve years under consideration, 502, or 57+ per cent of the Negroes in the South who committed murder during these years were legally executed, and but 376, or 43- per cent were lynched; while for rape, only 60, or 16+ per cent were legally executed, and 296, or 84- per cent were lynched.[53:3] The proportion may be stated thus:
57:43::16:84=7+. This shows that a Negro is more than seven times as liable to be lynched in the South for rape than even for murder.
Indeed, the belief of the average white man of the South that lynching is the most effective way of dealing with the Negro for his crime against white women also seems to be borne out by the statistics: In 1892-3, 88 Negroes were lynched for rape; in 1901-2, 59; while for the four years 1911-14, only 43. That this great reduction in rape cases and lynchings was not due to legal executions is shown by the fact that during the same time but 36 Negroes were legally executed, only 12 of these being for the four years 1911-14. Thus as a consequence of a reduction in the crime of rape by Negroes is noted a great reduction in the lynching of Negroes,—from 287 in 1892-3; 185, 1901-2; 129, 1906-7; to 91 for 1913-14.
However, during 1915 and 1916, 104 Negroes were lynched in the South as compared with 91 for 1913 and 1914. The increased number lynched for rape is very marked: being only 13 for 1913 and 1914, but twice the number, or 26, for 1915 and 1916. During the former two years, also, 6 Negroes were legally hanged for rape as compared to 12 for the latter. The proportion remains the same: thus during 1913 and
1914, 19 Negroes in the South were put to death for rape as compared with 38 for 1915 and 1916.
Although the legal execution of 12 Negroes in the South for rape during 1915 and 1916 may show a tendency to allow the law to take its course in such cases, may not the above statistics also indicate that when for a few years but few lynchings occurred, especially for the crime of rape, that the effect of such immediate and fearful punishment—consisting of burning as it sometimes does—gradually fades from the mind of the Negro inclined to such crime, with a great increase of rape as a consequence?
Again, in extenuation of lynching, it is important to observe, that, as a result of most crimes against the body, such as murder, but little, if any, humiliation attaches. But it is quite different in rape cases. Not only is there often great physical injury, but also an unutterable humiliation. Our civilization teaches that one should hold certain personal rights and considerations even more dear than life itself. To have in mind such ideas and live up to them measures our reach above lower peoples. That this feeling or spirit should be encouraged, rather than risk its check, is not to be questioned. Therefore, the average Southern white man does not believe that the innocent rape victim of a Negro should be
obliged to endure further humiliation incident upon her appearance in a court of law.
In this connection, a set of resolutions published by those who lynched a Negro at Annapolis, Md., in 1875, are interesting. These resolutions, which set forth the causes of the act, were drawn up before the lynching took place and show serious consideration. I quote:[56:4]
“Fellow Citizens: In view of the fact that we are about to take into our hands the sword of justice to do to death one who is now incarcerated in our county jail, it is meet that we should give some reason for the purpose we hope to consummate. First, then: While we can but honor the deep feeling of interest manifested by those who are the proper guardians of our lives, our property, and our honor; and while we, as true and loyal citizens of the State of Maryland, and of Anne Arundel County, do bend to the supreme majesty of the law and acknowledge trials by jury as the very arch-stone in the grand edifice of human rights, still we know the vilest criminal is accorded the same rights under the law that belong to the petty thief, nor can this devil incarnate, should he claim his rights, be denied the privilege of a change of venue, such a circumstance might
probably rob the gallows of its due and foil the aims of the law. Before God we believe in the existence of a higher code than that which is dignified by the great seal of a Commonwealth and that the high and holy time to exercise it is when the chastity of our women is tarnished by the foul breath of an imp from hell and the sanctity of our homes invaded by a demon.
“Secondly, admitting that in the event of a trial by a jury he shall be hanged—a highly probable result—yet would his execution be as illegal as though done by a band of wronged citizens; for must not a juror be a peer, and with a mind free of bias, and where can a man be found competent to try this case? Who can be found of his level, and who that has heard has not already convicted him in his mind? At best, that which would be done under the semblance of law would be a more sham by force of all the circumstances connected with this horrible deed, and if under the law the penalty is death, and we know the deed was committed by him—we claim that there is no moral difference in the means of destroying him, and we act upon this conviction.
“Thirdly, we are not willing that the victim shall be dragged into court to tell over and over again the story of her terrible wrongs, or that her name shall be entered upon the records of
our criminal jurisprudence for future reference.”
Further comment on this lynching is unnecessary—unless indirectly: the Negro, child of Africa, but lately removed from the jungle, because of the necessity of the habitat of his origin, has had developed in him by nature, possibly, stronger sexual passion than is to be found in any other race.[58:5] But he is infinitely lacking in the high mental, moral, and emotional qualities that are especially characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon, and it is a grievous mistake to attribute such high qualities to him. When proper restraint is removed from the Negro he gets beyond bounds. The Anglo-Saxon, indeed, or members of that race, has a way of meeting extraordinary conditions with extraordinary means—hence lynching in order to hold in check the Negro in the South.
Indeed, a country occupied by two races so widely apart in origin, characteristics, and development as the whites and the Negroes of the Southern States—one race of the highest mental endowments and culture, the other of the lowest—one having a civilization that reaches back hundreds, if not thousands, of years, the other in the early dawn of civilization—might reasonably have two codes of law suited, as nearly as possible, to each race, respectively.
A mode of punishment that would be out of place as to the white man may be well suited to the Negro. Small-pox is not to be treated as chicken-pox. Barbarous criminals require barbarous laws. The innocent and law-abiding citizens of a State have rights as well as the criminals—at least, the right to protection from the criminals. But let some crafty scoundrel finally get in jail, and he will be flooded with letters of consolation and sympathy from sentimental women and soft-headed men.[59:6] And let some Negro brute, guilty of rape, suffer the punishment he so richly deserved at the hands of an outraged community, and one would think, if he considered the bitter censure from distant quarters, that the foundations of the government were being undermined, or that a poor lamb was set upon by a pack of howling wolves, thirsting for its blood, but not a word of commiseration for the family, or the victim, of the fiendish Negro’s unbridled bestiality.
Moreover, instead of a Negro’s being over-awed by the solemn deliberations of a court, rather, as he is the center of interest, he all but
enjoys it. For once in his life he finds himself in a position of prominence. It would be contrary to the Negro nature if he were not somewhat elated at being the object of so much attention. Even were this not the case, he has no such appreciation of his degradation as the white man feels under similar circumstances. Indeed, it would sometimes appear as almost a triumphal procession for him from the time he gets in jail until he reaches the gallows. The two quotations below may help to justify this idea:
“Joe Clark, colored, . . . was hanged at this place on Friday forenoon, in the presence of about 3,000 persons, mostly Negroes. Clark spoke about fifteen minutes, giving a detailed account of the murder and fully confessing the crime. He advised all present to live an upright life. . . . After he had shaken hands with his friends the trap was sprung, and thus the sentence of the court was duly executed. Clark’s last request was that the black cap be kept off, so that all might see how easy he could meet death.”[60:7]
The second one is taken from accounts of the execution at Denton, Md., of “Wish” Shepperd, colored, for the outrage of a fifteen-year-old white girl:[60:8]
“He told his spiritual advisers that he had a message for the public: ‘Tell all the young men to avoid the fate that awaits me by joining the church and attending its services.’ [Evidently inspired by his preacher advisers] . . . He slumbered soundly, the guards noticed, and awoke early this morning apparently indifferent to his doom. . . . With a firm step he accompanied the officers and his spiritual advisers to the scaffold which was erected near the Choptank River. Passing undismayed through the throng which had gathered along the way from the prison to the gallows. His gaze passed fearlessly around surveying the people.” . . .
Again, in connection with the lynching of Negroes in the South, one must not lose sight of the conditions that are peculiar to that section. The greater the number of Negroes in proportion to the whites in any State or community the easier it is for the Negro to commit crime and escape. And the Negro criminal does often escape. Seldom is it found that the Negro will aid in the detection of the Negro criminal, rather otherwise. Even the hope of escape is a wonderful encouragement to the criminally inclined.
Now, before the War, as is well known, the South was almost entirely an agricultural section.
It had but few cities and these were small. In the last thirty or forty years, however, it has been rapidly developing manufacturing industries. Some of the cities have become great industrial centers.
Nor is manufacturing confined at all to the large cities. Indeed, almost every town in some parts has a cotton mill or other establishment. As illustrations, I may mention Hickory, N. C., and La Grange, Ga. Hickory, with a population of about 5,000, has two large cotton mills; the Piedmont Wagon Shops, which employs hundreds of men; several furniture factories, saw mills, and other industrial interests. La Grange, a city of about 6,000, has ten cotton mills, one of which is valued at $1,000,000, and four of the others at $500,000, each. In the manufacture of cotton alone the South has increased from 316,000 bales in 1885 to 3,193,000 bales in 1915.
As a consequence the white people have largely been drawn to the towns and cities: the wealthier own and control the various business interests while the poorer ones contribute their help or labor. Few Negroes work in the factories, for the Negro seems to lack the qualities necessary: namely, punctuality, dependability, and a certain amount of mental alertness. So, in some parts of the South the whites are nearly all living in the towns
and cities, while the country districts are filled with Negroes. However, even in such places there are some whites in the country, and as is evident, in additional danger.
Moreover, the population of several Southern States is nearly half Negro, while in two,—South Carolina and Mississippi,—it is even more than half Negro, being 55+ per cent and 56+ per cent, respectively. Indeed, in 53 counties of the South the Negro population of each exceeds 75 per cent. In Tensas Parish, La., and Isoquena County, Miss., the Negro population is 91.5 per cent and 94.2 per cent, respectively. That is, in every 1,000 persons one meets in Isoquena County, Miss., 942 are Negroes and but 58, white. Such conditions should be readily appreciated. Is it any wonder that the white man thinks it necessary to strike terror into the soul of the possible or incipient Negro criminal by any method that may cause him to stand in fear of an immediate and dreadful death?
Further, the origin of a great part of these Negroes, especially those of the farther South, is, also, worthy of consideration.
During the operation of the internal slave trade, it was usually the most undesirable, unruly, and the criminally inclined Negroes of the border slave States that were sold to the States of the
farther South; nor should it be forgotten that between 1808 and 1860 the farther South received around 270,000 Negroes from outside the United States.[64:9] It seems likely that the greater part of these were barbarous Negroes, directly from Africa. It was these criminal and barbarous Negroes, along with their children and grand-children, who by the fortune of war, without home or master, were turned loose on the South.
Thus it is that the white woman is obliged to be constantly on her guard against the Negro,—otherwise rape cases would be multiplied.[64:10] An idea of the necessity of this and the hardship of it may be had from the following quotation:
“In a population about evenly divided in North Carolina was a family of unpretending intelligent people.
“There was a school house only a mile and a half away, but they could not let their two daughters go to it. They could not let them stir away from home unprotected. They had to pay for their education at home, while at the same time they were being taxed for the education of the Negro children of the district.
“‘Do you think,’ was asked a leading Negro educator, ‘that those girls could safely have gone to school?’
“‘It would depend upon the district,’ was the reply. ‘In some districts the girls could have gone to school safely enough; in others, no.’
“This I think was a terrible admission.”[65:11]
As the world is to be made safe for democracy, so ought the South to be made free for white women. Is it not the business of the South to endeavor to make the South safe for white women by whatever method appears to be most effective? The women of the South should be just as free to go when, where, and as they please as women in other sections of the country and not be, as has been so aptly put by John Temple Graves, “prisoners to danger and fear”:
“In a land of light and liberty, in an age of enlightenment and law, the women of the South are prisoners to danger and fear. While your women may walk from suburb to suburb, and from township to township, without escort and without alarm, there is not a woman of the South, wife or daughter, who would be permitted or who would dare to walk at twilight unguarded through
the resident streets of a populous town, or to ride the outside highways at midday.
“The terror of the twilight deepens with the darkness, and in the rural regions every farmer leaves his home with apprehension in the morning, and thanks God when he comes from the fields at evening to find all well with the women of his home.”[66:12]
A few words now as to the minor causes of lynching. In reading the annual summary of lynchings given by the Chicago Tribune, one may get the impression that Negroes are often lynched for very trifling things. Investigation, however, is apt to show that back of any such lynching was something much more serious than what appears on the face. Many illustrations might be given but one may suffice: thirteen Negroes lynched in Arkansas, March 26, 1904, cause, race prejudice.[66:13] The following account of this affair is abbreviated from an Arkansas paper:[66:14]
“Dewitt (Ark.), March 25.—Five Negroes who had been arrested as a result of the race troubles at St. Charles, were taken from the
guards by a crowd of men last night and shot to death. . . . The five victims make nine Negroes that have been killed within the past week in the vicinity of St. Charles. . . .
“A few days ago a difficulty occurred over a trivial matter at St. Charles between a white man by the name of Searcy and two Negroes by the names of Henry and Walker Griffin. One of the Negroes threatened to knock Searcy in the head with a beer bottle. The trouble was stopped for the time being, but on Monday last the two Negroes met Searcy and his brother in the store of Woolfords and Marsworthy in St. Charles, and the difficulty was renewed. One of the Negroes without warning, struck both of the Searcy boys over the head with a table leg, rendering them unconscious and fracturing their skulls, one of them to such an extent that he may die. The Deputy Sheriff, . . . James Kirkpatrick, attempted to arrest the Negroes and he, too, was knocked down.
“The Negroes then gathered and defied the officers, declaring that ‘No white man could arrest them.’ Their demonstrations aroused the fear of the citizens of St. Charles and they phoned to this place for a posse to come out and protect the town. P. A. Douglass, deputy sheriff, went out with five men, Wednesday morning. Constable
L. C. Neely went forward with a posse of several men to capture the Griffin Negroes. The constable met three Negroes . . . in the road. He inquired of them if they knew where the Griffins were and one of them replied that they did, but ‘would tell no —— white ——’ the Negroes then attempted to draw their pistols, but the posse fired, killing all three of them.
“Yesterday sixteen men left this place for the scene of the trouble. . . . Large crowds in from Roc, Ethel, and Clarenden. During the day while the Sheriff’s posse was searching for the Griffin Negroes, they were fired upon by a Negro . . . from ambush. Three of the posse were hit, but the shot used were small, and no serious damage resulted. The posse returned the fire, and a shot . . . felled the Negro to the ground. Several other shots were fired into him, killing him instantly.
“Five other Negroes . . . who were the Negroes that had defied the officers, were arrested, and last night a crowd of men took them away from the guards and shot them to death.” The next issue of the same paper stated that two more Negroes had been killed, and the Daily Arkansas Democrat, March 29, reported that the Griffins who were the cause of the original trouble had been killed, completing the list of thirteen.
The above quotation is given merely as an example of a state of affairs so apt to exist in connection with what usually passes as trivial causes for lynching. May those at a distance from such conditions the better understand!
Thus far I have not discussed lynching in the North, nor do I purpose to do so; but a few words in passing seem pertinent. There is no basis for the assumption, which some seem innocently to hold, that the people of the North are inherently good and law-abiding, while those of the South are inherently wicked and lawless. Indeed, statistics would seem to indicate the opposite.[69:15] In 1910 over 750 persons to the 100,000 population were committed to prison in New England as against less than 450 in the South. I take it that the people of the North are neither better nor worse than those of the South. The same conditions in either section would produce about the same results. The statistics of lynching I gathered for the North were merely incidental. However, for 1901 and 1902, I find that nine Negroes were lynched in the North, four for murder and five for rape.
Further evidence that the people of the North will engage in lynching when necessity dictates may be had from the early history of California.
Vigilance committees for the protection of the better class of citizens against the disorderly and criminal elements, were organized without warrant of law. In writing of one of these committees H. H. Bancroft says that it was well represented by men of wealth, intelligence and industry, and that “the largest element comprised men from the Northeastern part of the United States.”[70:16]
Of remedies for lynching I have none. Of proposed remedies, I have only to say that those which seem in any way practicable might result in unmerited hardship to whites and an increase in rape cases as well. Any hope of escape or mitigation of punishment that even unintentionally may be held out to the criminal serves as a wonderful stimulant to crime. The positive knowledge on the part of those criminally inclined that punishment will be immediate, sure, and adequate, is the best deterrent. The Negro is a creature that lives in the present and even postponement of punishment robs it of much of its force. The law sanctions personal self-defense. The white man in lynching a Negro does it as an indirect act of self-defense against the Negro criminal as a race.
When the abnormally criminal Negro race (partly so, no doubt, because he is not yet
adjusted to his environment) puts himself in harmony with our civilization, if ever, through assimilating our culture and making our ideals its own, then may it be hoped that his crimes will be reduced to normal and lynching will cease, the cause being removed.
FOOTNOTES:
[48:1] Lynchings in the country for the past thirty-two years according to The Chicago Daily Tribune, Dec. 30, 1916:
| 1885 | 184 | 1901 | 130 |
| 1886 | 138 | 1902 | 96 |
| 1887 | 122 | 1903 | 104 |
| 1888 | 142 | 1904 | 87 |
| 1889 | 176 | 1905 | 60 |
| 1890 | 127 | 1906 | 60 |
| 1891 | 191 | 1907 | 65 |
| 1892 | 205 | 1908 | 100 |
| 1893 | 200 | 1909 | 87 |
| 1894 | 190 | 1910 | 74 |
| 1895 | 171 | 1911 | 71 |
| 1896 | 131 | 1912 | 64 |
| 1897 | 106 | 1913 | 48 |
| 1898 | 127 | 1914 | 54 |
| 1899 | 107 | 1915 | 98 |
| 1900 | 115 | 1916 | 58 |
[51:2] It seems fair to count rape, alleged rape, attempted rape, and so on,—all as rape; for it often happens that a Negro commits rape and escapes entirely. As an example, see account of the lynching of Ed. Berry (Baltimore Sun, Aug. 27, 1915). Berry confessed to twelve cases of criminal assault, each victim being a white woman.
[53:3] This argument assumes, of course, that all Negroes who murdered whites in the South were either lynched or legally executed, and that all Negroes caught who committed rape against white women were likewise dealt with. It seems to be about as fair in one case as the other to assume this.
[56:4] Baltimore American, June 15, 1875.
[58:5] To make up for the high death rate.
[59:6] Joliet, Ill., Sept. 10 (1917), Riot in State Prison. Rioters numbered about fifty. Had become angered at impositions of restrictions. “Among the privileges previously enjoyed by the convicts was an almost unlimited correspondence with sentimental women.”—Washington (D. C.) Star, Sept. 10, 1917.
[60:7] Taken from Richmond Enquirer, May 4, 1775.
[60:8] Baltimore Sun, August 27-28, 1915.
[64:9] W. H. Collins, “The Domestic Slave Trade,” p. 20.
[64:10] It is unlikely that all rape cases get in the papers. An intelligent resident of Rapides Parish, La., told the writer that four cases of rape occurred in that parish once within a month.
[65:11] William Archer, “Through Afro America,” London, 1910, p. 22.
[66:12] Address: John Temple Graves, New York Times, Sept. 4, 1903.
[66:13] The Chicago Daily Tribune, Dec. 31, 1904.
[66:14] Arkansas Gazette (Little Rock), March 26, 1904. See also Daily Arkansas Democrat, March 29, 1904.
[69:15] Statistical Abstract of the U. S., 1915, p. 55.
[70:16] H. H. Bancroft, “Popular Tribunals,” Vol. II, pp. 666-7.
CHAPTER IV
THE CRIMINALITY OF THE NEGRO
The present criminal status of the Negro,—and his criminal record since the Civil War as well,—should cause every member of the race in America to hang his head in shame.
Yet, may it not be that, after all, the Negro is, to a large extent, an irresponsible creature of circumstances, and that his crimes are upon the heads of those who unwisely placed him in a position that he was unable to occupy,—except with injury to all concerned?
Scholars hold that the average citizen of the ancient Athenian Democracy, the greatest of ancient democracies, was as intelligent as the average member of the British Parliament, or of the American Congress. The Negro, however, with all his barbarism and ignorance, totally unrelated to the white man in origin, character, and race, directly after his emancipation, was made a full-fledged citizen in the greatest of modern democracies. The fact is appalling.
Stupidity unsurpassed, unless by the pacifist visionaries of the present day who seek to usher in the millennium by proclamation,—peace treaties, world federations, or leagues to enforce peace. Human nature cannot be changed overnight by edict. When the sun fails to rise wars will cease. It is to be hoped that enough sanity yet remains in the American people to save them from such nonsensical vagaries of sentimental dreamers.
But the Negro, son of a wild and tropical race, content for thousands of years to roam the jungles of Africa, supplied by bountiful nature with all his heart’s desire, failing thus to develop any controlling trait of character, or mental stamina, and although civilizations rose and fell beside him, it meant nothing to him. And even now in the midst of American civilization he is moved to action, mainly, by the gusts of primitive emotion and passion. This is the creature that was expected to take an equal share in the government of the most enlightened and progressive people that the world has ever known.
“Who sows to the wind shall reap the whirlwind.” So to-day all other domestic problems or questions pale before—“What shall be done about the Negro? The mob acts upon it, conventions of learned sociologists discuss it. Every superficial thinker has a solution of the problem,—ready
made, but never in good working order. The Negro is such a problem in our society mainly, no doubt, because he represents the chief criminal element,—how criminal, let statistics, by way of comparison, declare:
In the Northern and Western States in 1910, one white person was in a penal institution for every 982 of the white population, and one Negro for every 123 of the Negro population; while in the South, the ratio was one to every 2014 for the white, and one Negro to every 308 of the Negro population. Thus in the North Negroes had eight times their proportion in prison, and in the South six and one-half times. That Negro crime is on the increase is evidenced by the fact that in 1890 the Negroes had hardly six times their proportion in prison in the North, and hardly five times their share in the South.
In this connection statistical tables should be helpful and interesting as well. Table I gives a comparative showing of whites and Negroes in some State penitentiaries. Instead of giving the number of prisoners on hand at a certain time, some prison reports give the number received and discharged during a certain period of time while a few give both. In Table II is given the number of prisoners received by the penitentiaries of a few States during a specified time.
TABLE I
| State | Population in 1910 | Number in Penitentiary | Times the Number of Negroes to Whites, Year 1910, or Thereabouts | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| White | Negro | Year | White | Negro | ||||
| Alabama | 1,228,833 | 908,882 |  | 1902 | 201 | 525 |  | 7- |
| 1910 | 416 | 1,976 | ||||||
| 1914 | 357 | 2,252 | ||||||
| Georgia | 1,431,802 | 1,176,987 |  | 1905 | 291 | 1,989 |  | 11 |
| 1910 | 248 | 2,300 | ||||||
| 1914 | 380 | 2,692 | ||||||
| 1916 | 412 | 3,170 | ||||||
| Mississippi | 786,111 | 1,009,487 | | 1901 | 107 | 928 | | 7+ |
| 1913 | 156 | 1,552 | ||||||
| 1915 | 145 | 1,336 | ||||||
| Maryland | 1,062,639 | 232,250 | | 1906 | 354 | 586 | | 8- |
| 1910 | 369 | 663 | ||||||
| 1915 | 402 | 682 | ||||||
| Tennessee | 1,711,432 | 473,088 | | 1910 | 532 | 1,236 | | 8- |
| 1912 | 613 | 1,297 | ||||||
| 1914 | 651 | 1,208 | ||||||
| Arkansas | 1,131,026 | 442,891 |  | 1906 | 244 | 603 |  | 8- |
| 1912 | 213 | 643 | ||||||
| Texas | 3,204,848 | 690,049 | | 1908 | 1,094 | 1,987 | | 8+ |
| 1910 | 1,119 | 2,095 | ||||||
| Louisiana | 941,086 | 713,894 | | 1904 | 249 | 1,143 | | 5+ |
| 1910 | 382 | 1,663 | ||||||
| 1915 | 382 | 1,663 | ||||||
| Kentucky | 2,027,951 | 261,656 | | 1911 | 603 | 729 | | 9.4 |
| 1915 | 674 | 726 | ||||||
| Connecticut | 1,098,897 | 15,174 | | 1904 | 419 | 52 | | 8.4 |
| 1910 | 542 | 63 | ||||||
| 1914 | 578 | 56 | ||||||
| Kansas | 1,634,352 | 54,030 | | 1902 | 874 | 299 | | 17- |
| 1914 | 508 | 269 | ||||||
| New Jersey | 2,445,894 | 89,760 | | 1910 | 1,049 | 346 | | 9 |
| 1915 | 1,020 | 329 | ||||||
| Ohio | 4,654,897 | 111,452 | | 1909 | 1,216 | 407 | | 15- |
| 1911 | 1,110 | 417 | ||||||
| Vermont | 354,298 | 1,621 | | 1904 | 149 | 5 | | 12- 17- |
| 1910 | 147 | 8 | ||||||
| 1912 | 167 | 13 | ||||||
| 1914 | 212 | 13 | ||||||
TABLE II[76:1]
| State | Population in 1910 | Convicts Received at the Penitentiary During— | Times as Many Negroes as Whites Committed in Proportion to Population of Each Race | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| White | Negro | Year | White | Negro | |||||
| Arkansas | 1,131,026 | 442,891 | | Nov. 1, 1912 to Oct. 31, 1914 | | 606 | 776 | 3.4 | |
| Alabama | 1,228,832 | 908,882 | | Sept. 1, 1910 to Aug. 31, 1914 | | 587 | 2,414 | 6- | |
| N. Dakota | 569,855 | 617 | | July 1, 1908 to June 30, 1910 | | 217 | 11 | 43 | |
| Missouri | 3,124,932 | 157,452 |  | 1906 | 513 | 306 |  | 11+ | |
| 1909 | 560 | 374 | |||||||
| 1910 | 543 | 303 | |||||||
| 1912 | 660 | 389 | |||||||
| 1914 | 803 | 378 | |||||||
| Maryland | 1,062,639 | 232,250 | | Year Ending Nov. 30, 1910 | | 129 | 199 | 7+ | |
| Texas | 3,204,848 | 690,049 | | Sept. 1, 1908 to Oct. 31, 1910 | | 835 | 1,251 | 7 | |
| Louisiana | 941,086 | 913,874 | | 1910 | | 202 | 549 | | 4- |
| 1915 | 257 | 654 | |||||||
| Ohio | 4,654,897 | 111,452 | | Year Ending Oct. 31, 1907 |  | 402 | 145 | | 14- |
| Year Ending Oct. 31, 1910 | | 504 | 169 | ||||||
| W. Virginia | 1,156,817 | 64,173 | | Two Years Ending Sept. 30, 1908 | | 519 | 428 | 15 | |
For the Southern States considered, Table I shows that the number of Negro prisoners around 1910, varied according to the State from five plus times their proportion in Louisiana to eleven times in Georgia. While in the North, the number varied from eight times in Connecticut to seventeen minus times in Kansas. Thus showing that the Negro is everywhere many times more criminal than the white man, and that his criminality is more pronounced in the North than in the South.
That he is discriminated against by the court,—and otherwise,—is sometimes given as a reason for the great criminal showing of the Negro; that for the same kind of crime the Negro gets a much longer sentence than a white man, etc. This is hardly to be held as against the North, and that it is true to any appreciable extent in the South is doubtful, but hard to determine,—absolutely.
As Table I gives the number of prisoners on hand at a certain time and Table II the number committed to prison during a period of time,[77:2] other things being equal, it is clear that if the Negro is discriminated against through the length of sentence imposed on him by the court, it should be shown by a smaller number being sent to prison
in proportion to the respective population of the two races in any State than is to be found on hand at a certain time. For instance, at the Maryland and the Texan penitentiaries, according to the above tables, in 1910 the numbers of Negroes on hand were, respectively, eight-minus times and eight-plus times their proportion, while those committed for the same year were seven-plus and seven, respectively. This would seem to indicate that in neither Maryland nor Texas was there but little, if any discrimination against the Negro. But a comparison of the statistics for Arkansas and Louisiana seems to show that the Negro is discriminated against in these States. However, upon further investigation it is found that ninety-one Negroes were sent to the Louisiana penitentiary in 1911 for murder and manslaughter, and thirty-two for shooting with intent to kill, as against thirty white men during the same year for these crimes. Again, in the Arkansas penitentiary in November, 1912, there were 213 white and 643 Negro prisoners. Of the whites but 50 had committed homicide, while 218 of the Negro prisoners were guilty of the crime.
Moreover, one might naturally expect that the whites, on account of greater influence, would be much more likely to secure pardons. It is doubtful if the whites are thus favored to any large
extent. Between November 1, 1910, and October 31, 1912, Arkansas granted pardons to 121 whites and 86 Negroes, while during the year ending November 30, 1911, Kentucky pardoned nine white men and eighteen Negroes. If statistics were available from all the States it might be rather conclusively demonstrated that the Negro is discriminated against but little by the courts.
In this connection it may be well also to note the fact that in Ohio fourteen-minus times as many as their proportion (according to Table II) were sent to the penitentiary; in West Virginia fifteen times, and in North Dakota forty-three times their proportion.
A comparison of the number of whites and Negroes arrested a year in some of the large cities is given in the following table:
TABLE III
Table III shows that for the cities given, one white person to twenty-one-plus of the white population was arrested during 1910 or thereabouts, but one to eight-minus of the Negro. In the cities of the North one to twenty-three whites were arrested and one to six Negroes; in the South excluding Wilmington, Del., and Washington, one to twenty whites and one to eight for the Negroes. In Detroit: one for every two plus Negroes were arrested.
In this connection, it would seem that a comparison of the jail population of a Northern and a Southern State might be of interest. For this purpose Alabama and Connecticut were selected. In 1910, Alabama had a white population of 1,228,832 and 908,282 Negroes while Connecticut had 1,098,897 whites and 15,174 Negroes.[81:3]
In both Alabama and Connecticut the ratio of whites and Negroes sent to jail during the fiscal year ending September 30, 1914, was about the same, one white to four Negroes.[81:4] However, in Alabama one white person to 216 of the white population as against one to 54 of the Negro, while in Connecticut, one white person to 100, and one Negro to 20 was put in jail.
Again, the four counties of Connecticut embracing the large cities of the State, and having nearly all the Negro population, sent to jail one white to 92 of the white population, and one Negro to 24 of the Negro, or nearly four times their proportion.[81:5] But in the other four counties with an
aggregate of 187,058 whites and 1,661 Negroes the ratio was one to 174 for the whites, and one to 64 for the Negroes or hardly three times as many.
Now, taking the three counties of Alabama in which the cities of Montgomery, Mobile, and Birmingham are located, with an aggregate population of 207,295 whites and 182,211 Negroes, one white person to 90 was sent to jail and one Negro to 21, or nearly four and one-half times as many.
Moreover, twenty-two counties with no towns of more than 1000 population each, and having a total population of 293,187 whites and 274,533 Negroes one white to 523 was sent to jail and one Negro to 141, or nearly four Negroes to one white.
Also, in fourteen counties with cities of 1000 to 10,000 population, and a total population of 205,844 whites, and 207,966 Negroes, the races being almost equal in numbers, one white to 400, and one Negro to 75 were sent to jail, or six times the Negro’s share.
Furthermore, six counties consisting almost wholly of white people, having a total population of 119,496 whites and 5,670 Negroes,—had in jail one white to 363 and one Negro to 27, or twelve Negroes to one white person.
Moreover, eight counties of Alabama, with an aggregate population of 41,323 white and 185,222 Negroes, about four and one-half times as many Negroes as whites, one white to 689 were sent to jail and one Negro to 156, or about four and one-half times as many.
In studying the jail statistics of Alabama, whether cities or counties, it soon becomes evident that the criminality of the Negro increases as his proportion to the whole population decreases; in other words, the fewer the Negroes in a given population the more criminal they appear. An examination of Tables I, II, and III will show that this is not only true of Alabama, but true, with scarcely an exception, both North and South. Negro crime seemingly increases in the cities and in the North and the West. So does the crime of the white man increase, although not to the same extent.
In general, the denser the population the more likely is friction to occur, or collisions among its
units. But this is not an adequate explanation for the increase of Negro crime. Nor can it be accounted for except in small part, by attributing it to the more complex social environment of the cities and of the North. However, it is not to be doubted that the unstable character of the Negro is easily influenced by the temptations incident to city life. More important, no doubt, is the assumption that where Negroes are few in comparison with the whites, they are more tempted to commit acts of thievery, robbery, and burglary. Again, in the cities, officers of the law are on the watch, consequently more apt to detect and catch a criminal; also, where the Negroes are few they are likely to be held more strictly to the white man’s standard of conduct. However, in some parts of the South, a white man sometimes may be arrested when for the same act a Negro would hardly be bothered. The idea seems to obtain that for certain things allowance must be made for the ignorance of the Negro, but no excuse is made for the white man.
Again, a great deal of the friction between the two races in the South is caused by the resistance of Negro criminals to officers of the law. Not only so, but relatives, friends and other Negroes as well often attempt to shield the Negro criminal
in order that he may escape detection and arrest. This is not exceptional but rather of frequent occurrence. It is one of the ways in which the black man shows himself to be an enemy of law and order. He does not seem to realize the attitude in which he places his race in acting thus. Now, where the Negroes form a large part or the greater part of the population, it is much easier for him to aid Negro criminals, and it is often effectively done. But where there are but few Negroes in the population, it is to that extent more difficult for the Negro criminal to escape detection and arrest. These seem to be the main reasons why Negroes appear more criminal where there are but few in the population.
In addition to statistics, a few newspaper clippings may aid one more fully to appreciate Negro criminality.[85:7] It is hardly probable that anywhere in the United States has the Negro, on the whole, had better advantages than in Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware, especially is this true of the Eastern Shore of Maryland. For this reason the following are the more significant:
RESISTING OFFICERS, ETC.
“John E. Goode, a Negro, blew off the top of his head at Bedford City this morning in preference to appearing as a witness against Thomas W. Preston, the Negro murderer of M. D. Custy, a saloon-keeper. . . . Goode was present when the murder was committed. A Negro family named Davis, relatives of Preston, are said to have threatened Goode’s life, if he testified.”[86:8]
A Negro in Chestertown, Md., being tried on three charges of arson, attacks the officers of the court:
“Pointing to the Negro, State’s Attorney Vickers intimated that he had set fire to the beautiful buildings on the grounds of the Washington College near Chestertown. Suddenly the Negro made a leap for the States Attorney, but was stopped by Deputy Sheriff Brown. The enraged Negro turned and struck the deputy sheriff a stunning blow under the chin. . . . It required seven men to quiet the Negro.”[86:9]
“John Carter, the Negro who shot Policeman Elizabeth Faber and Patrolman George W. Popp
on October 17 on the Edmondson Avenue bridge when they attempted to arrest him died in the city jail at 3.10 o’clock yesterday morning.”[87:10]
“The final decision in the Brownsville incident is closed finally and the verdict will give entire satisfaction to everybody except Hon. Joseph Foraker of Ohio; the Negro soldiers who shot up the Texas town and their comrades who concealed the guilt of the bloodthirsty marauders.”[87:11]
“Negro soldiers of the Twenty-fourth United States Infantry had planned a riot of bloodshed among the white residents of Houston (Texas) August 23, two days before the deadly attack which cost the lives of 15 Houston citizens last month, according to the report of the Civilian board of inquiry which reported to the Houston City Council to-night. . . .
“The committee says that the undisputed and convincing testimony of witnesses proves that the Negro soldiers went forth to slay the white population indiscriminately: that no Negro was hurt or molested by them, not one Negro house was fired into, and that the Negroes were warned beforehand . . . to stay off the streets.”[87:12]
“The police of the Northwestern district are looking for about 25 Negroes who late Saturday night attempted to break down the front door of the boarding house conducted by Miss Mary Ashten at 906 McCulloh street.”[88:13]
“Centerville, Md., Jan. 7. The Rev. J. D. Jackson, colored, pastor of Bethel-African Methodist Episcopal Church, was arrested and placed in jail here to-day charged with housebreaking and burglary.”[88:14]
“Middletown, Del.—The Rev. Aaron Gibbs, a Negro preacher, is being held in $500 bail for court for alleged theft of 280 pounds of meat from the farm of Daniel Ford, near this place. The meat was recovered at the home of Gibbs by Chief of Police, Lee Cochran.” . . .
“Another Negro, Arthur Brewington, wanted for theft of meat and chickens held the whole Smyrna police force at bay for hours, until his ammunition gave out. He then retreated escaping from the force into a deep swamp five miles away.”[88:15]
“Seaford, Del., July 3.—Negroes who live in and around Bridgeville attempted to take the town last night. . . . About 10 o’clock at night the Negroes began firing among themselves, and Bridgeville being without police protection, was at the mercy of their revolvers, which were being fired in rapid succession. The town seemed to be alive with brawling blacks, and several fights were started in different parts of the town. At the railroad station a large crowd collected and fired shots in every direction. At a colored church another crowd got together, firing desperately among themselves. The citizens being utterly helpless stayed in their houses behind locked doors.”[89:16]