640
THE GREEN BAG
by whole communities, continues. I do not minimize the value and virtue of public opinion upon any important movement in the interest of better governmental condi tions. It is of paramount importance in a democracy. But it is neither the "ulti mate" nor sufficient remedy for the crime of the mob. How can there be an effective "strong sentiment" against lynching unless the intelligent oppose the crime? And our author has shown quite clearly that the most frequent lynchings do not occur among the illiterate and ignorant classes. The crime, moreover, has grown more fre quent during the last decade, and the tor ture accompanying the execution of the victims of the mob has also increased in both frequency and severity. The certainty of prompt and adequate punishment for crime is, I am convinced, one of the most positive and satisfying preventatives. Punishment awakens fear; it inspires respect. Our author has already been quoted as saying that the American people are wanting in respect for law, and lynching is one form of the manifestation of that disrespect. And what is law but the orderly arrangement of all existence. Does not the term imply not only the precept, but the penalty also? "Indeed, law, without punishment for its violation, is impossible in the nature of things." There is no doubt that the conviction of the mob under existing laws is extremely difficult and practically impossible. It need not be so. Legislation is possible which will effect certainty of punishment for the mob. Such legislation might require amend ments to both the federal, and most, if not all, of the state constitutions. For I be lieve that the only hope of conviction of the mob can come by having its trial elsewhere than in the "district wherein the crime shall have been committed." We are all solic itous to have those accused of crime given a speedy trial by an impartial jury. But how can such trial be "impartial" when the history of all prosecutions of the mobs
have been prompt acquittals in spite of the fact that ample evidence has been sub mitted establishing the guilt of the mob beyond a reasonable doubt? Is the lesson of judicial experience to have no meaning? No jury of the vicinage, where the lynching was committed, has ever convicted the mob. The conclusion is irresistible that too many j friends, relatives, and sympathizers of the accused are either members of the jury or other officers of the court to guarantee j the due administration of justice. While it is never desirable to have the criminal procedure of the country so rigid and severe as to make remotely possible the conviction ! of the innocent, it is most desirable, yea, imperative, that where our criminal proce dure has proved inadequate, to meet actual conditions of lawlessness, and this inade quacy has been uniformly established in the actual trial of causes, as in that of the trial of whole communities that have participated in the illegal execution of a human being, then it is the business and duty of the lawmaking branch of our government to so amend our laws as to effectually meet the needs of the case. It is my contention that the state, in criminal cases, should be given the absolute right to remove for trial such cases as are now under consideration, to some other part of the Commonwealth than the county wherein the offense is alleged to have been committed. Perhaps the proposed amendment or statute ought to go further, and make it mandatory on the part of the state to remove all such cases to some territory in the state far away from the scene of the commission of the alleged crime. Such a change in our criminal procedure would require amendment of those state constitutions which require trial by a jury of the vicinage similar to the 6th Amend ment of the Constitution of the United States, and the writer believes that the im portance of the question requires it. Indeed. he would even go so far as to advocate amend ment of the federal constitution and legis lation by Congress if the states failed to act.
