“I swear that I will keep secure to myself a secret of a Klansman, when same is committed to me in the sacred bond of Klansmanship—the crime of violating this solemn oath, treason against the United States of America, rape, and malicious murder, alone excepted.”
Note this clause well! “The crime of violating this solemn oath” comes first! Treason against the United States of America, rape and murder are afterthoughts. Under this clause, a Klansman can go to another Klansman and confess to having committed robbery, seduction, burglary and nearly every other crime in the calendar, and the one to whom the commission of the crime was confessed would be bound to keep the information secure to himself. But, however, if a Klansman should confess to one of his fellows that he had broken his Ku Klux oath, that violation of the obligation is a crime of so heinous a nature that it is of more importance to the Ku Klux mind than the crime of treason against the United States of America, which crime comes second.
The most deadly part of the oath is saved for the end. The candidate has been led up to it by high-sounding words about “Klanishness,” and has sworn allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America. “Emperor” Simmons knew very well that had he started off his oath with this clause, most of his victims would have backed out, so he tacked it on at the end. It reads:
“I swear that I will most zealously and valiantly shield and preserve, by any and all justifiable means and methods, the sacred constitutional rights and privileges of free public schools, free speech, free press, separation of church and state, liberty, white supremacy, just laws, and the pursuit of happiness, against any encroachment, of any nature, by any person or persons, political party or parties, religious sect or people, native, naturalized, or foreign of any race, color, creed, lineage, or tongue whatsoever.”
My contention is that this part of the obligation is absolutely illegal, that it is an accessory before the fact to lawlessness and mob violence, and brands the entire proposition as an outlaw enterprise that should be abolished and suppressed by the United States and State governments. Let us study a few of the words, as they stand out so strikingly. “Zealously and valiantly,” “shield and preserve,” “any and all justifiable means and methods,” “against any encroachment,” “of any nature,” “any person or persons,” “political party or parties,” “religious sect or people,” “native, naturalized, or foreign,” “any race, color, lineage, or tongue whatsoever”! Just read these groups of words over and over again! When individuals or a group of individuals proceed to “zealously and valiantly” use “any and all justifiable means and methods” to accomplish a certain specified end, they take the law into their own hands. When the Barons wrested Magna Charta from King John at Runnymede, they “used any and all justifiable means and methods”! When the Germans invaded Belgium, and cynically declared that a treaty was a “scrap of paper,” they used “any and all justifiable means and methods”! When a mob of masked outlaws takes a helpless old man from his bed and beats him up, they use “any and all justifiable means and methods”! When masked men drive up to a hotel and seize a helpless woman, convey her to a secluded spot, strip her clothing from her body and cover her with tar and feathers, they have used “any and all justifiable means and methods.” Under this outrageous oath, any band of ruffians or outlaws can defend any lawless action they wish to commit on the ground that the “means and methods” were “justifiable.”
In the concrete instance I have previous mentioned, where the Johnson City Staff undertook to protest against the coming of Ku Kluxism to the town, the spirit of the “Invisible Empire” interpreted “freedom of speech” to mean freedom only in so far as the Ku Klux Klan was allowed to proceed with its affairs unmolested. As soon as opposition developed the Ku Klux “freedom of the press” manifested itself in a desire to boycott the newspaper. Under the obligation to use “any and all justifiable means and methods” I see no reason to deter a local organization from taking an editor out and administering a liberal coating of tar and feathers, in case he should presume, in the columns of his paper, to antagonize the “Invisible Empire.”
I have been a student of the Constitution of the United States for twenty years, but until I saw the oath of the Ku Klux Klan, I never knew before that “white supremacy” was a “sacred constitutional right.” The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Federal Constitution removed all political barriers against “race, color, and previous condition of servitude,” and guaranteed all citizens of the United States equal protection under the laws. The Ku Klux oath, on the other hand, binds its followers to “use any and all justifiable means and methods” to enforce “white supremacy,” and I see no reason why members of the organization would not interpret it to excuse any and every shade of mob violence, lynching, hanging, or burning of negroes.
By the term “separation of church and state” is usually meant the resistance to the advance of the Catholic people in the political affairs of the country. Preachers of Protestant Churches may get up in their pulpits and talk politics, may make speeches on the stump, and may take upon themselves the general duties of running a community, but their actions are seldom criticized. The advance of the Catholics in politics, however, is a “union of church and state,” in the popular conception, and this advance, the Ku Klux swears that he will resist by “any and all justifiable means and methods.” The methods may be lawful and they may not be, but to the “Invisible Empire’s” obligation they would be “justifiable” if they succeeded in driving the Catholics out of public life.
It would also be well to note the blanket phrase “the pursuit of happiness.” The oath says “use any and all justifiable means and methods” to secure the “pursuit of happiness,” which, by the way, is also classed as a “sacred Constitutional right.” This covers a multitude of things. A Ku Klux might derive unbounded happiness out of covering his neighbor’s body with tar and feathers, while the victim of the performance might become a most unhappy individual as a result of the operation. The oath means in a few words that whatever suits the Ku Klux mind, whatever it wants to do in a community, it is going to use “any and all justifiable means and methods” to accomplish. The midnight prowler in his mask and white robe might well ask the question: “What does a little thing like a police force and sheriff’s posse matter. If they attempt to interfere with us, we will simply remember our Ku Klux obligation, and ‘zealously and valiantly shield and preserve our pursuit of happiness by any and all justifiable means and methods.’”
Under this section, any sort of crime can be excused in the mind of the person who commits the crime. “But,” the answer probably will be, “an act is not justifiable unless it is legal.” The obligation might easily have been written so that the distinction could have been clearly stated, but it was not. That oath on its face is an accessory before the fact to any and all kinds of crimes and outrages, and placing such an obligation indiscriminately in the hands of men of average intelligence is like giving dynamite to little children and expecting them not to be blown to pieces.