The following table, if unexplained, tells a startling tale of the Negro’s criminal propensity:
Prisoners in the United States, 1890.[50]
| Total. | Male. | Female. | ||||
| White | 58,052 | 53,519 | 4,433 | |||
| Colored | 24,277 | 22,305 | 1,972 | |||
| Male, per cent. | Female, per cent. | |||||
| Proportion of Negro criminals to total (over 15) | 29.38 | 30.79 | ||||
| Proportion of Negro population to total (over 15) | 10.20 | 11.09 |
The Negro element, which constitutes only 12 per cent of the population, commits 30 per cent of the crimes. Before concluding that this preponderance of crime is due to “race traits,” let us examine more closely into the circumstances of the case. The discrepancy in the administration of the law in the South has undoubtedly some effect upon this relative showing. In order to escape the charge of slander, I will use the words of a distinguished Virginian who boasts of “my southern ancestry, birth, rearing, residence and interest.”
“And is not the law the same for all, and does it make any distinction between rich and poor, white and black? Literally, the law is the same for all. Then what more can be desired? The trouble is not that the laws are partial, through some of its enactments, namely, the whipping-post, chain-gang, and poll-tax laws, were aimed principally against the Negro; but the trouble is with the interpretation of the laws by the juries, who merely voice the public sentiment, which is superior to the law itself. The average jury is a whimsical creature, subject to all kinds of influences, though mostly of a sentimental character. In criminal matters where whites are concerned, it seems ever to lean to the defense; and the strongest arguments of the prosecution are easily offset and upset by appeals on behalf of youth, family, station, respectability, etc.; or, perhaps the whole family, weeping, is placed in full view of the jury, and the susceptible jury, sure at least in such cases to weep with them that weep, speedily brings in a verdict of acquittal where guilt is clearly manifest; or it says jail where it ought to say penitentiary; or one year where it ought to say ten; and ten years where it ought to pronounce death. But the Negro has none of these sentimental advantages. Too poor to employ competent counsel, his liberty and life are necessarily committed to incompetent hands, when the proverb of ‘poor pay, poor preach’ becomes reality ... But are Negroes treated unfairly by juries and public opinion? Yes, and the experience and observation of every fair-minded man will confirm the assertion. One cardinal proof is that a white man seldom receives punishment for assault, however brutal, however unprovoked, however cowardly, be it maiming, homicide, or murder upon a Negro unless, forsooth, the assailant be some degraded creature, disowned by his own caste. Of the numberless instances—running into the thousands—during the past twenty-three years, of homicide and murder of blacks by whites, there is no single instance of capital punishment, and few, very few, instances of imprisonment beyond a few months in jail, or a slight fine. The fact is the juries, which are the sole judges of the evidence, will accept testimony against a Negro that they would reject in the case of whites; and on the other hand they will frequently reject, or at least discredit, testimony of the Negro against the white man, however well supported it may be. But to compound for sins we are inclined to by damning those we have no mind to, in case of any difficulty between white and black, and the former is injured or loses his life, lucky is the latter if the homicide is not declared murder—when courts of justice, though sure to inflict the highest penalty in his case, are found to be too slow, and he is dragged forth and slain, unshrived and unshriven, as if he were a monstrous wild beast of whose presence earth could not be rid too quickly.”[51]
The social degradation of the Negro is the greatest factor contributive to this high criminal record. We naturally associate poverty, ignorance, and crime as being indissolubly connected. The Negroes represent the stratum of society which commits the bulk of crime the world over. If we exchange places the same story would be narrated of the whites. The census records nowhere show that there is any connection between crime and race, but between crime and condition.
The Negro has a higher criminal record than the Caucasian, it is true, but so has the foreigner a greater average than the native whites. The strongest possible argument in this connection rests upon the fact that the presence of a large number of Negroes in any community does not increase its total criminal average. The North Atlantic division, including the states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, has a criminal record of 833.1 to the million, while the South Atlantic division, including the states of the Southern Atlantic coast shows a record of 831.7. The Western division has an average of 1300. The section that has the fewest Negroes has the highest average, and the states that have the largest quota of blacks show the lowest criminal rates. If we compare state with state the same interesting results are revealed. The criminal record of New York (million basis) is 1369, of South Carolina 702.6, of California 1703, of Alabama 720.1.
But, says the objector, a difference in the rigidity of the enforcement of the law may account in some measure for this disparity. Let us then take the city of Washington, one-third of whose population are Negroes, and compare its police reports with those of Boston, whose Negro element is a negligible fraction. It will be conceded, I think, that the enforcement of law in both cities is rigid. The major of police for the District of Columbia, in his last report remarks: “Those familiar with the conduct of police affairs in this country generally contend that there is a constant increase of crime; that it keeps pace with the growing population. While such may be true of the principal cities of the United States, facts and figures support the claim of this department that in this respect the District of Columbia occupies a distinct standing of its own. Its comprehensive moral status is above that of most communities. Were it not for the depredations chargeable to theft, there would be comparatively little crime to chronicle. This offense must always exist here, unless through some unexpected agency a complete change should be effected in the social conditions which prevail. The abiding place of a large class of idle, illiterate, and consequently vicious persons, it is but reasonable that the respectable element should be preyed upon to a considerable extent.”[52]
The percentage of arrests for Boston during 1896 was 9.37, whereas for Washington it was only 8 and a fraction. These facts would seem to furnish sufficient evidence that crime adheres to circumstances and condition and not to race and color.
But, says the author, in the North (where legal processes are acknowledgly fair so far as the Negro is concerned) the race shows a criminal record which is out of all proportion to its numerical strength. In Pennsylvania 2.23 per cent of its population commit 16.16 per cent of the crimes; in Chicago 1.30 of the population are responsible for 9.84 of the offenses, and so for other Northern communities. The Negro’s criminal status is from six to eight times greater than his numerical weight. It has been shown in another place that from a social and economic standpoint the Northern Negro is completely submerged. The criminal outbreak under the circumstances is only natural.