In California nineteen indictments were returned against persons who engaged in the lynching of four men and a boy on May 31, 1901, at Lookout, in Modoc County, and it was said that the State’s attorney worked up the case against great opposition.[[316]]
There were several persons under indictment in Wyoming in February, 1904, for connection with a lynching which occurred in Big Horn County on July 19, 1903.[[317]]
No convictions of persons participating in lynchings in either Tennessee, Kentucky, or Texas have been brought about under the anti-lynching laws which were enacted by those States in 1897.[[318]] The case of the State vs. Hughes, charged with participating in a lynching, came up in DeKalb County, Tennessee, in July, 1902, but it was found impossible to get a jury to try the case. The court exhausted a venire of three hundred and fifty, and “found every man in the lot disqualified—probably having themselves aided in the affair.”[[319]] On November 13, 1902, John Davis, colored, was lynched in Marshall County, Tennessee. Two men, W. P. Hopwood and W. H. L. Johnson, were later arrested on the charge of participating in the lynching. On January 7, 1903, thirty masked men appeared at the jail where the prisoners were confined, obtained the keys to the jail, and released the prisoners.[[320]]
The measures adopted by Georgia and North Carolina for the suppression of lynchings have likewise remained inoperative. Numerous lynchings have taken place in both of these States since 1893, but no lyncher has yet suffered any of the penalties prescribed by law. A resident of North Carolina recently made this statement with reference to the punishment of lynchers in his State: “Judges have charged juries against the crime, and Governor Aycock—risking his political fortunes for his convictions—recently offered a reward of $400 each for the conviction of a party of seventy-five who lynched a negro near Salisbury. But never yet has the law punished a North Carolina lyncher.”[[321]]
In general it may be said that the laws proposed far outnumber the laws enacted against lynching, and that wherever such laws have been enacted their enforcement has not as yet been such as to warrant any great reliance on their effectiveness to prevent lynching. It can scarcely be said that the remedy for lynching lies at present in the direction of additional State legislation specifically directed against it.
By many it is thought that a federal law on the subject would be most effective in the suppression of lynchings, and several bills have been introduced in Congress with this end in view.[[322]] On January 13, 1902, Mr. Crumpacker of Indiana introduced a bill in the House of Representatives for the punishment of persons taking part in the lynching of aliens. The bill was designed to cover cases similar to the lynching of the Italians at New Orleans, and jurisdiction over such offenses was given to the federal courts, persons who had taken part in lynchings being disqualified from serving as jurors.[[323]]
Others would have Congress enact a law making all who lynch, whether the victims be citizens or aliens, and all who instigate, aid, abet, or shield lynchers, guilty of a crime against the United States. In support of such a law it is urged that a lyncher could be as easily discovered and punished as a moonshiner, or a counterfeiter, or a mail robber; that if the object of our constitution is to insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, it ought to include the power to punish those who defy the government established by the constitution and take life without due process of law; and that if it was worth while to amend the constitution to prevent the denial of the electoral franchise, it is also worth while to amend the constitution to prevent and punish the denial of justice.[[324]]
A further ground for bringing lynching within the jurisdiction of federal courts and federal law is the fact that the lynching of an alien may involve the United States in international complications, although the federal government can take no action in the premises. Diplomatic intercourse was actually broken off between Italy and the United States during the controversy over the matter of an indemnity for the lynching of Italian citizens at New Orleans in 1891.[[325]] In a number of other instances foreign countries have successfully demanded indemnities from the United States through the Department of State for injuries done their citizens by mob violence. The following table gives the sums of money that have been paid to foreign countries since 1880 in the settlement of such claims.
| INDEMNITIES PAID FOR INJURIES TO ALIENS.[[326]] | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YEAR WHEN PAID | COUNTRY TO WHICH PAID | LOCALITY WHERE INJURIES WERE INFLICTED | AMOUNT OF INDEMNITY |
| 1887 | China | Wyoming | $147,748.74 |
| 1888 | China | Pacific Coast | 276,619.75 |
| 1892 | Italy | Louisiana | 24,330.90 |
| 1896 | Italy | Colorado | 10,000.00 |
| 1896 | Great Britain | Louisiana | 1,000.00 |
| 1896 | Great Britain | Nebraska | 1,800.00 |
| 1897 | Italy | Louisiana | 6,000.00 |
| 1898 | Mexico | California | 2,000.00 |
| 1901 | Mexico | Texas | 2,000.00 |
| 1901 | Italy | Louisiana | 4,000.00 |
| 1903 | Italy | Mississippi | 5,000.00 |
| Total | $480,499.39[[327]] | ||
With the exception of the payment to China in 1887, “in consideration of the losses unhappily sustained by certain Chinese subjects by mob violence at Rock Springs, in the Territory of Wyoming, September 2, 1885,” these indemnities have been paid “out of humane consideration, without reference to the question of liability therefor.” While they have thus not been paid in discharge of an express obligation recognized by the United States, there has been a moral obligation recognized and the federal government has felt it to be incumbent upon itself to redress grievances of this nature.[[328]]