Chapter IX: Some Conclusions (2)

There are two errors here. Lynchburg was not named for him but for his
brother, John Lynch, and the plan was started later than “some seventy
or eighty years ago.” Mr. Matthews disagrees with the writer in saying
that this account is entirely independent of what Wirt had written on
the subject. It seems to the writer, however, that these two
inaccuracies indicate that Martin was drawing wholly from his own
sources of information. He was, apparently, merely writing down what
was considered a matter of common knowledge among the older men in
that section of the country, many of whom were emigrants from
Virginia.

Footnote 56:

“Publications of the Southern Historical Association,” November, 1900,
(4: 463).

Footnote 57:

Charles Augustus Murray, in his “Travels in North America during the
years 1834, 1835, and 1836” (2 vol., N. Y., 1839), gives a traditional
account of the origin of the term “lynch-law,” such a one as might be
given around a camp-fire. He also describes the operation of lynch-law
at that time in the Mississippi Valley. See Vol II, p. 79. G. W.
Featherstonhaugh, in his “Excursion through the Slave States” (N. Y.,
1844), gives “An account of the first Judge Lynch, and the state of
Legal Practice in his Court,” pp. 89–90. He speaks of a certain Judge
Lynch in Arkansas and of “a famous Virginia ancestor of his.” He says
that “this ancestor, the first Judge Lynch, was a miller and a justice
of the peace in the back woods,” and then gives a traditional account
of his methods of inflicting punishment. See also David Schenck:
“North Carolina, 1780–81” (1889), pp. 309–310. L. P. Summers: “History
of Southwest Virginia and Washington County” (1903), p. 243.

Footnote 58:

Mr. Matthews holds a somewhat different view. See article, “The Term
Lynch Law,” _Modern Philology_, Vol. II, No. 2, October, 1904. This
article should be consulted by any one desiring to investigate this
matter further.

Footnote 59:

In the _Salem Gazette_, July 17, 1812, p. 3, the rise and domination
of mobs in a community was characterized as “Mob Law.” (M.)

Footnote 60:

Jan. 9, 1819 (15: 384). (M.)

Footnote 61:

July 24, 1819 (16: 368). (M.)

Footnote 62:

June 1, 1822 (22: 224). (M.)

Footnote 63:

“Memorable Days in America” (1823), p. 304.

Footnote 64:

Ibid., p. 318.

Footnote 65:

Vol. 26, p. 326.

Footnote 66:

“An Excursion through the United States and Canada,” pp. 233–236. (M.)
An extended extract is given in the following chapter on p. 79.

Footnote 67:

pp. 291, 292. A more extended extract is given in the following
chapter on p. 81.

Footnote 68:

C. A. Hanna: “The Scotch-Irish” (1902), p. 60.

Footnote 69:

C. A. Hanna: “The Scotch-Irish” (1902), p. 60.

Footnote 70:

New Hampshire Provincial Papers, VI, 262–266. (M.)

Footnote 71:

W. H. Smith: “The St. Clair Papers” (1882), II, 351, 374, 376,
396–397. (M.)

Footnote 72:

New Jersey Archives (1897), XIX, 225–226. (M.)

Footnote 73:

New Jersey Archives (1897), XIX, 326–327. _New York Gazette_, December
31, 1753. (M.) This is the earliest use of the word regulate in
connection with illegal punishment for corrective purposes that has
come to the writer’s notice.

Footnote 74:

See monograph on “The Regulators of North Carolina,” by Professor John
S. Bassett of Trinity College, N. C., for a full and complete account
of this organization. It was published in the Annual Report of the
American Historical Association for 1894.

Footnote 75:

F. X. Martin: “History of North Carolina” (1829), II, 218–219. H.
Williamson: “History of North Carolina” (1812), II, 130–131, 261.

Footnote 76:

H. Williamson: “History of North Carolina” (1812), II, 262–263. J. H.
Wheeler: “History of North Carolina” (1851), II, 306.

Footnote 77:

H. Williamson: “History of North Carolina” (1812), II, 270–271.

Footnote 78:

See Alexander Gregg: “History of the Old Cheraws” (1867), Ch. VII.
This chapter contains quotations from original sources on the
Regulation movement in South Carolina, and has, therefore,
considerable value.

Footnote 79:

See Gregg’s “History of The Old Cheraws,” p. 134.

Footnote 80:

See Gregg’s “History of The Old Cheraws,” p. 134.

Footnote 81:

J. B. O’Neall: “The Annals of Newberry” (1859), pp. 75–76.

Footnote 82:

See Gregg’s “History of the Old Cheraws,” p. 136. This is the earliest
use of the word Regulator in connection with the disturbances in the
Carolinas known to the present writer.

Footnote 83:

On April 18, a Circuit Court Act was passed, but afterwards failed to
become a law.

Footnote 84:

See Gregg’s “History of The Old Cheraws,” p. 138.

Footnote 85:

See Gregg’s “History of The Old Cheraws,” p. 139.

Footnote 86:

David Ramsay: “History of the Revolution in South Carolina” (1785), I,
63–64. According to this author these events took place “about the
year 1770.” O’Neall says (Annals of Newberry, p. 75): “The Regulators
and Scofelites, in 1764, met in battle array,” &c. Johnson says
(Traditions and Reminiscences, p. 92): “In 1769 great commotions arose
in the upper parts of the State, between what were called ‘Regulators’
and ‘Schofilites.’” In reality, the crisis in the strife between the
Regulators and Schofilites occurred in March, 1769. This is shown by
the following extract, dated Charlestown, (South Carolina), April 6,
which appeared in the _Boston Chronicle_ of May 11–15, 1769 (No. 92,
II, 155): “The prudent conduct of government, in ordering Joseph
Coffill, who had assumed the title of Colonel, and some extraordinary
powers, and with his party had committed divers excesses, to disperse,
has had the happy effect of once more restoring peace and good order
amongst the inhabitants of the western settlements, who, exasperated
by the tyrannical conduct of this man, has assembled in a large body
towards the close of last month, in order to compel him to shew what
powers he was invested with, and if they had found that he was not
cloathed with authority, to have brought him to justice, at all
events. Both parties were incamped within musket shot of each other,
on Saludy river, when the orders to Coffill arrived, and thus a great
deal of bloodshed was prevented. The Colonels Richardson, Thompson,
and M’Girt, gentlemen of great reputation, and highly esteemed by the
whole body of honest back settlers, we are told, exerted themselves
upon this occasion, with great spirit, discretion, and success.”

Footnote 87:

Joseph Johnson: “Traditions and Reminiscences” (1851), p. 45.

Footnote 88:

Ibid.

Footnote 89:

See Gregg’s “History of the Old Cheraws,” pp. 151–152.

Footnote 90:

This is likewise Gregg’s view of the matter.

Footnote 91:

In the year 1765 and for several succeeding years the “Sons of
Liberty” were particularly active in stirring up resistance to the
acts of the British government, which were considered oppressive. The
“Sons of Liberty,” elsewhere as well as in Boston, seem to have been
regularly organized and to have held secret meetings at which
resolutions were adopted and definite plans of action were determined
upon for either driving away or punishing certain “Stamp Masters,”
“infamous importers,” and “informers.” Warning notices were frequently
posted and published, signed by “P. P., Clerk,” “M. Y., Secretary,”
&c. Hanging and burning in effigy, flagellation, tarring and
feathering, and ducking, were the punitive measures generally
threatened and not infrequently carried into effect.—These statements
are based on a collection of notes on “Sons of Liberty” which were
loaned to the writer by Mr. Albert Matthews.

Footnote 92:

For an exposition of the condition of society, its state of
dissolution and lack of organization, during the Revolutionary period
and subsequent to that period, see W. G. Sumner: “Alexander Hamilton”
(1890). On page 13 this statement is made: “The Union was from the
start at war with the turbulent, anarchistic elements which the
Revolution had set loose.”

Footnote 93:

A correspondent of the _New England Gazette_ in 1776 asked “whether it
would be featherable for a man to be detected with one of them
(pardons from the king) in his pocket.”—Frank Moore: “Diary of the
Revolution (1875), p. 226. Paul Leicester Ford, when writing his
historical novel “Janice Meredith,” treated tarring and feathering as
an ordinary incident of Revolutionary times. See Chapters XVII,
XXXVIII.

Footnote 94:

John Drayton: “Memoirs of the American Revolution” (1821), I, 273.
Frank Moore: “Diary of the Revolution” (1875), p. 44. Joseph Johnson:
“Traditions and Reminiscences” (1851), p. 70. Edward McCrady: “South
Carolina in the Revolution 1775–1780” (1901), p. 24. The date on which
the tarring and feathering of Thomas Ditson of the town of Billerica
took place was March 9, not March 8, as given by the above writers.
For an explanation of the discrepancy in the date and for a
description of the occurrence, see _Boston Gazette_, March 13, 1775
(No. 1039, p. 3); March 20, 1775 (No. 1040, p. 3).

Footnote 95:

Joseph Johnson: “Traditions and Reminiscences” (1851), p. 71. “The
punishment of banishment, preceded by the more dreadful operation of
tarring and feathering,” was put in execution by a “judicial
Association” in the early days of a settlement on the Bay of Islands,
New Zealand. See R. G. Jameson: “New Zealand, South Australia, and New
South Wales” (London, 1842), pp. 190–191.

The _Yankee_, June 4, 1813, p. 4, cited one of the laws of the naval
code established during the reign of Richard I as the “Origin of
Tarring and Feathering.” By this law any one lawfully convicted of
stealing should have his head shorn, and boiling pitch poured upon his
head, and feathers or down strewed upon the same, whereby he might be
known until the next landing place was reached, where he was to be
left.—See Hakluyt’s “Voyages,” II, 21.

Footnote 96:

The writer is indebted to Mr. Albert Matthews for the facts which are
here presented in regard to the practice of tarring and feathering
previous to the year 1775.

Footnote 97:

_Salem Gazette_, Sept. 6–13, 1768 (No. 7, p. 27). _Boston Evening
Post_, Sept. 12, 1768 (No. 1720, p. 3). “Diaries of B. Lynde & B.
Lynde, Jr.” (1880), p. 192.

Footnote 98:

_Boston Evening Post_, Sept. 19, 1768 (No. 1721, p. 3).

Footnote 99:

_Essex Gazette_, Sept. 20–27, 1768 (No. 9, p. 37).

Footnote 100:

_Boston Evening-Post_, June 19, 1769 (No. 1760, p. 3).

Footnote 101:

_Boston Gazette_, Sept. 25, 1769 (No. 755, p. 3).

Footnote 102:

_Boston Gazette_, Oct. 16, 1769 (No. 758, p. 2).

Footnote 103:

No. 140, II, 351.

Footnote 104:

_Boston Gazette_, Jan. 1, 1770 (No. 769, p. 1); June 11, 1770 (No.
792, p. 2); July 2, 1770 (No. 795, p. 2); August 20, 1770 (No. 802, p.
1); _Boston-Gazette_ Supplement July 30, 1770 (No. 799, p. 2); Aug. 6,
1770 (No. 800, p. 2); _Boston News-Letter_, June 21, 1770 (No. 3480,
p. 3); _Essex Gazette_, June 19–26, 1770, II, p. 191; June 26–July 3,
1770, II, p. 195; Aug. 7–14, 1770, III, p. 11; _London Gazetteer_,
Nov. 17, 1770 (No. 13016, p. 2); “The Letters of James Murray,
Loyalist,” edited by Nina Moore Tiffany (1901), pp. 165, 175–178.

Footnote 105:

_Boston Gazette_, Nov. 1, 1773 (No. 969, pp. 1, 3). See also _Boston
News-Letter_, Jan. 27, 1774 (No. 3669, p. 2).

Footnote 106:

_Boston Gazette_, Nov. 15, 1773 (No. 971, p. 3).

Footnote 107:

_Boston News-Letter_, Jan. 27, 1774 (No. 3669, p. 2); Feb. 3, 1774
(No. 3670, p. 2); _Massachusetts Spy_, Jan. 27, 1774 (No. 156, p. 3).

Footnote 108:

_Boston Gazette_, Jan, 31. 1774 (No. 982, p. 3); _Massachusetts Spy_,
Feb. 3, 1774 (No. 157, p. 2).

On January 17 a handbill signed in the same way had been distributed,
giving notice that any “TEA CONSIGNEES” who should come to reside
again in Boston would be given “such a Reception as such vile Ingrates
deserve.”—_Boston Gazette_, Jan. 17, 1774 (No. 980, p. 3); _Boston
Evening Transcript_, Feb. 27, 1903, p. 14.

Footnote 109:

No. 976, p. 3.

Footnote 110:

_Boston News-Letter_, Nov. 18, 1773 (No. 3659, p. 2).

Footnote 111:

“History of Rhode Island” (1878), II, 308–309.

Footnote 112:

No. 761, p. 3.

Footnote 113:

_Boston News-Letter_, Jan. 27, 1774 (No. 3669, p. 2); _Massachusetts
Spy_, Jan. 27, 1774 (No. 156, p. 2); _Essex Gazette_, Jan. 25–Feb. 1,
1774 (No. 288, VI, p. 107); March 1–8, 1774 (No. 293, VI, p. 127);
_Boston Gazette_, Feb. 28, 1774 (No. 986, p. 2); March 14, 1774 (No.
988, p. 1). For a brief account of the whole affair see S. Roads, Jr.:
“History and Traditions of Marblehead” (1880), pp. 91–94.

Footnote 114:

For an account of the doings of mobs in Massachusetts see Frank Moore:
“Diary of the American Revolution” (1875), pp. 37–42.

Footnote 115:

John Drayton: “Memoirs of the American Revolution” (1821), I, 273–274.
Frank Moore: “Diary of the Revolution” (1875), pp. 90–91. Edward
McCrady: “South Carolina in the Revolution, 1775–1780” (1901), p. 24.

Footnote 116:

John Drayton: “Memoirs of the American Revolution” (1821), II, 17.

Footnote 117:

Frank Moore: “Diary of the Revolution” (1875), p. 138.

Footnote 118:

Ibid., p. 178.

Footnote 119:

Frank Moore: “Diary of the Revolution” (1875), p. 359.

Footnote 120:

W. M. Sloane: “The French War and the Revolution” (1893), p. 239.

Footnote 121:

“Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry” (1818), pp.
232–233.

Footnote 122:

Hening’s “Statutes at Large,” X, 195.

For an account of the measures taken which were not strictly warranted
by law, see L. C. Draper: “King’s Mountain and its Heroes” (1881), pp.
384–387.

“An act to indemnify Thomas Nelson, Junior, esquire, late governor of
this commonwealth, and to legalize certain acts of his
administration,” was passed in 1781.—Hening’s “Statutes at Large,” X,
478.

Footnote 123:

_Southern Literary Messenger_, II, 389 (May, 1836).

This reference comes to the present writer through Mr. J. P. Lamberton
of Philadelphia, Mr. Edward Ingle, the author of “Southern Sidelights”
(See pp. 191–193), and Mr. Albert Matthews.

Footnote 124:

The name of one of the younger sons of John Lynch, the founder of
Lynchburg, was William, and Mrs. Cabell says that he was a “Colonel in
the late war.” This William Lynch, however, married in early life and
made his home in the city of Lynchburg. See Mrs. Julia Mayo Cabell:
“Sketches and Recollections of Lynchburg” (1858), p. 20.

A writer in _Harper’s Magazine_ for May, 1859 (p. 794) refers to a
“Mr. Lynch” who “was for many years the senior and presiding Justice
of the County Court of Pittsylvania.” This writer also says that
Lynchburg was named for this Mr. Lynch, and that his advanced age
prevented him from taking the field during the War of Independence.
This, however, is an account from memory of a story heard when a mere
boy from an old man, and, as there are inaccuracies in several
particulars, it cannot be regarded as reliable.

Footnote 125:

Hening’s “Statutes at Large,” XI, 373.

Footnote 126:

“Memorable Days in America” (London, 1823), pp. 304, 305.

Footnote 127:

See pp. 96–98 for this extract. (M.)

Footnote 128:

W. N. Blane: “An Excursion through the United States and Canada,
1822–1823” (London, 1824), pp. 233–236.

Footnote 129:

See pp. 291–292 for this extract. The letters which compose Judge
Hall’s book were mostly printed in _The Port Folio_ between 1821 and
1825, but the letter in which he speaks of lynch-law first appeared in
the printed volume of 1828. (M.)

Footnote 130:

This expression is used in the Illinois agreement of 1820 (see below),
and that document, if genuine, furnishes the earliest instance of its
use known to the present writer.

Footnote 131:

This statement is made on the authority of McConnel (see below), but
compare C. J. Latrobe: “Ramble in America,” (N. Y., 1836, 2d ed.),
Let. VII, I, 96.

Footnote 132:

J. L. McConnel: “Western Characters or Types of Border Life in the
Western States” (1853), pp. 244–245. (M.) This extract is copied
verbatim, the names of the twelve men being omitted by McConnel. Of
the genuineness of the document McConnel says: “I am not sure that I
can vouch for its authenticity, but all who are familiar with the
history of those times, will recognise, in its peculiarities, the
characteristics of the people who then inhabited this country. The
affectation of legal form in such a document as this would be rather
amusing, were it not quite too significant; at all events, it is
entirely ‘in keeping’ with the constitution of a race who had some
regard for law and its vindication, even in their most high-handed
acts. The technical phraseology, used so strangely, is easily
traceable to the little ‘Justice’s Form Book,’ which was then almost
the only law document in the country; and though the words are rather
awkwardly combined, they no doubt gave solemnity to the act in the
eyes of its sturdy signers.”

Footnote 133:

J. L. McConnel: “Western Characters,” &c., p. 176.

Footnote 134:

_Niles’ Register_, July 19, 1834 (46: 352).

Footnote 135:

The _Liberator_, Nov. 5, 1831 (1: 180).

The publication of this paper was begun in Boston in 1831, by William
Lloyd Garrison, the enthusiastic agitator of the anti-slavery cause.
His efforts to make his lists of “Southern Atrocities” as large as
possible render his paper a valuable source of information on the
subject of lynch-law, particularly lynch-law as applied to negroes
prior to the Civil War.

Footnote 136:

_Liberator_, Oct. 29, 1831 (1: 174).

Footnote 137:

Ibid., Oct. 1, 1831 (1: 157).

Footnote 138:

Ibid., Dec. 3, 1831 (1: 194).

Footnote 139:

For the fullest and, on the whole, most trustworthy account of this
insurrection, see W. S. Drewry: “Slave Insurrections in Virginia”
(1900). This book has been very largely drawn upon for what is here
said on the subject.

See also, _Liberator_, Oct. 1, 1831 (1: 159); Dec 10, 1831 (1: 198);
Dec. 17, 1831 (1: 202); Dec. 24, 1831 (1: 206).

See also, _Niles’ Register_, Aug. 27, 1831 (40: 455); Sept. 3, 1831
(41: 4); Sept. 10, 1831 (41: 19); Sept. 17, 1831 (41: 35); Jan. 7,
1832 (41: 350).

Footnote 140:

See p. 84 in Drewry’s book.

Footnote 141:

The slavery question was the subject of prolonged debate at the next
session of the Virginia House of Delegates. See _Niles’ Register_,
Jan. 28, 1832 (41: 393).

In a speech made during the course of this debate, William H. Broadnax
said: “I have certainly heard, if incorrectly, the gentleman from
Southampton will put me right, that of the large cargo of emigrants
lately transported from that county to Liberia, all of whom
_professed_ to be _willing_ to go, were rendered so by some such
severe ministrations as these I have described. A lynch club—a
committee of vigilance—could easily exercise a kind of inquisitorial
_surveillance_ over any neighborhood, and convert any desired number,
I have no doubt, at any time, into a willingness to be removed.” See
W. L. Garrison: “Thoughts on African Colonization” (1832), p. 74. This
reference comes to the present writer through Mr. W. P. Garrison and
Mr. Albert Matthews.

Footnote 142:

See _Niles’ Register_ for the year 1834.

Footnote 143:

_Liberator_, Oct. 18, 1834 (4: 168).

The _New England Magazine_, November, 1834 (7: 409), gives some
comments on the times under the heading “The March of Anarchy.”

Footnote 144:

_Liberator_, Sept. 27, 1834 (4: 153).

Footnote 145:

Conditions were apparently much like those which existed recently in
Memphis, Tennessee, when a Committee of Public Safety was organized
and a crusade started against gambling. See _New York Times_, July 14,
1904; July 17, 1904.

Footnote 146:

See _Niles’ Register_, July 25, 1835 (48: 363); Aug. 1, 1835 (48:
381). Also _Liberator_, Aug. 8,1835 (5: 126–7).

Footnote 147:

For a brief account of the conspiracy led by Murrell, see _Niles’
Register_, Aug. 8, 1835 (48: 403–4). A complete account may be found
in the _American Whig Review_, November, 1850 (12: 494); March, 1851
(13: 213).

Footnote 148:

See _Liberator_, Aug. 8, 1835 (5: 126–7).

Footnote 149:

The “South-West,” II, p. 185–7. In Mississippi, at this time, eleven
crimes were punishable by death.

Footnote 150:

See _Liberator_, Aug. 1, 1835 (5: 123).

Footnote 151:

_Boston Advertiser_, Sept. 12, p. 2.

Footnote 152:

Similar punishments have been inflicted upon Mormons. Joseph Smith,
Jr., and Sidney Rigdon were tarred and feathered on the night of March
25, 1832.—See W. A. Linn: “The Story of the Mormons” (1902), pp.
133–137.

Footnote 153:

Issue of Aug. 22, 1835 (48: 439).

Footnote 154:

Issue of Sept. 5, 1835 (49: 1).

Footnote 155:

See also Harriet Martineau “Society in America” (1837), I, 120, 121,
122.

Footnote 156:

_Niles’ Register_, Oct. 3, 1835 (49: 65).

For a caustic satire on the “proceedings of Judge Lynch,” see “The
Enemies of the Constitution Discovered,” &c., by Defensor (N. Y.,
1835), pp 48–52.

Footnote 157:

_Liberator_, Nov. 21, 1835 (5: 188).

Footnote 158:

See _Liberator_, June 8, 1838 (8: 89), for an editorial from the
_Philadelphia Daily Focus_.

Footnote 159:

_Liberator_, April 16, 1836 (6: 63).

Footnote 160:

_Leisure Hour_, Nov. 24, 1877, p. 750.

Footnote 161:

This was Garrison’s view of the matter. See _Liberator_, Aug. 10, 1838
(8: 127).

Footnote 162:

Woodrow Wilson: “Division and Reunion” (Edition of 1898), pp. 115,
117.

Footnote 163:

W. G. Sumner: “Andrew Jackson” (1882), pp. 364–365; pp. 428–429, in
edition of 1899 in American Statesmen series.

Footnote 164:

_Liberator_, July 4, 1835 (5: 108).

Footnote 165:

See _Niles’ Register_, June 4, 1836 (50: 234).

Also _Liberator_, May 14, 1836 (6: 79), and May 21, 1836 (6: 83).

A negro slave was burned to death in a similar way in Arkansas in
November, 1836, for murdering his master and several negroes. See
extract from the _Arkansas Gazette_ in _Niles’ Register_, Dec. 31,
1836 (51: 275).

Footnote 166:

_Liberator_, June 25, 1836 (6: 102).

Footnote 167:

“Abraham Lincoln, Works,” I, pp. 9–10.

Footnote 168:

F. J. Grund: “The Americans in their moral, social, and political
relations” (London, 1837), I, 323. (M.)

Footnote 169:

“Diary in America” (1839), III, 232–233.

Footnote 170:

Harriet Martineau: “Retrospect of Western Travel” (1838), I, 236–237.
Marryat: “Diary in America” (1839), II, 201. _Liberator_, Aug. 24,
1838 (8: 135), &c.

Footnote 171:

See Chapter II.

Footnote 172:

_Liberator_, Oct. 27, 1837 (7: 174).

Footnote 173:

_Niles’ Register_, June 15, 1839 (56: 256).

Footnote 174:

_Liberator_, Sept. 14, 1838 (8: 146).

Footnote 175:

_Liberator_, March 16, 1838 (8: 44).

Footnote 176:

_Liberator_, Feb. 9, 1838 (8: 24).

Footnote 177:

This is not wholly in accord with the opinion expressed by Mr. Albert
Matthews in the _Nation_, Dec. 4, 1902 (75: 441), but in a private
letter to the writer Mr. Matthews has accepted this modification.

Footnote 178:

See _Liberator_, Dec. 19, 1835 (5: 204).

Footnote 179:

Philip Hone: “Diary 1828–1851” (1889), I, 150. (M.)

Footnote 180:

See _Niles’ Register_, Oct. 25, 1845 (69: 115).

Footnote 181:

Sir Charles Lyell, who was in Macon, Georgia, a short time after this
occurred, gives an account of it in his book, “A Second Visit to the
United States of America” (1850), II, 31–32.

Footnote 182:

_Liberator_, Oct. 19, 1855 (25: 168).

Footnote 183:

During the period 1830–1860 the word “slick” was occasionally used at
places in the Mississippi Valley, in the same sense as “lynch.” See
_Liberator_, Oct. 3, 1835 (5: 157), and compare _Niles’ Register_,
Oct. 5, 1833 (45: 87).

Footnote 184:

_Liberator_, Sept. 14, 1860 (30: 146).

Footnote 185:

See _Liberator_, Oct. 2, 1857 (27: 160).

Footnote 186:

See _Liberator_, Aug. 24, 1860 (30: 160).

Footnote 187:

See _Liberator_, Jan. 18, 1856 (26: 12).

Footnote 188:

_Liberator_, Oct. 16, 1857 (27: 167).

Footnote 189:

_Liberator_, Sept. 24, 1858 (28: 155).

Footnote 190:

_Liberator_, April 3, 1857 (27: 56).

Footnote 191:

See _Liberator_, Dec. 19, 1856 (26: 204). It is possibly to this case
that F. L. Olmsted refers in “A Journey in the Back Country” (N. Y.,
1860), pp. 442–443. He says a negro killed his master “a few months
since in Georgia or Alabama”; and “was roasted, at a slow fire, on the
spot of the murder, in the presence of many thousand slaves, driven to
the ground from all the adjoining counties.”

Footnote 192:

See H. H Bancroft: “Popular Tribunals” (1887), I, 749. In his two
volumes on “Popular Tribunals” this author presents very forcibly the
arguments and the conditions urged in justification of the acts of
these “Tribunals.” He also exhibits the methods and inner workings of
these organizations. In “Literary Industries” (1890), pp. 655–663, he
tells how he obtained his knowledge of what went on behind the scenes.

For a somewhat different view of the Vigilance Committee movement in
California, see Josiah Royce: “California” (1886), Chapters IV and V.

See also, John S. Hittell: “History of the City of San Francisco.”

Footnote 193:

Quoted from Bancroft: “Popular Tribunals” (1887), II, 666.

Footnote 194:

_New York Tribune_, June 7, 1858, p. 3.

Footnote 195:

In a message written by Governor Clarke of Mississippi in 1865, this
passage occurs: “The terrible contest through which the country has
just passed has aroused in every section the fiercest passions of the
human heart. Lawlessness seems to have culminated in the assassination
of Mr. Lincoln.”—Quoted in J. W. Garner’s “Reconstruction in
Mississippi” (1901), p. 59. The message is printed in the _New York
Times_ of June 11, 1865.

Footnote 196:

See “Report on the Condition of the South,” No. 261 of Reports of
Committees of House of Representatives for 2d Sess., 43d Cong.,
1874–75.

See, also, article on “The Southern Question” by Charles Gayarré in
_North American Review_, November and December, 1877 (125: 472).

For a comprehensive view, briefly stated, of the great social changes
begun in the South during the reconstruction period, see editorial
“The Way Out,” in _Outlook_, Dec. 26, 1903 (75: 984).

Footnote 197:

See Reports of Committees of House of Representatives for 2d Sess.,
42d Cong., 1871–72.

Footnote 198:

The best apparently reliable source for information as to the
character and purpose of this organization is a little book entitled
“The Ku-Klux Klan,” written by J. C. Lester and D. L. Wilson, and
published at Nashville, Tennessee, in 1884. See also, article “The
Ku-Klux Klan,” signed D. L. Wilson, published in the _Century
Magazine_, July, 1884 (6: 398).

A less valuable but an interesting book is “K. K. K. Sketches,” by J.
M. Beard, published at Philadelphia in 1877.

Many writers make incidental reference to the Ku-Klux Klan; for
example, Charles Stearns: “The Black Man of the South and the Rebels”
(1872), Chap. 39; James Bryce: “The American Commonwealth,” II, 479.

An account of “The Ku-Klux Movement” is given in W. G. Brown’s “Lower
South in American History” (1902).

Some of the characteristic, possibly exaggerated, features of the
“Ku-Klux Movement” have been presented in fiction. See, for example,
A. Conan Doyle: “Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, The Five Orange Pips”
(1902), p. 104; Thomas Nelson Page: “Red Rock, a chronicle of
Reconstruction” (1898).

Footnote 199:

The committee appointed to select a name reported among others the
name “Kukloi,” from the Greek word _kuklos_, meaning a band or circle.
At mention of this some one cried out: “Call it ‘Ku Klux.’” The word
“Klan” at once suggested itself, and was added to complete the
alliteration. It has been said that the society was named in imitation
of the click heard in cocking the rifle, but this seems to be without
foundation in fact.

Footnote 200:

See, for example, _Nation_, March 23, 1871 (12: 192); _New York
Times_, Feb. 15, 1871; _New York Times_, Aug. 26, 1873; _New York
Tribune_, July 31, 1878.

Footnote 201:

For a list of the “Molly Maguire” outrages in the mining region of
Pennsylvania, and for an exposition of the origin, growth, and
character of that organization, see F. P. Dewees: “The Molly Maguires”
(1877).

Footnote 202:

No claim for completeness is made in regard to these statistics.
Particularly in the case of lynchings in the West they are doubtless
incomplete.

Footnote 203:

_Outlook_, Dec. 26, 1903 (75: 984).

Footnote 204:

Compare the opinion expressed in the _Nation_, Sept. 7, 1876 (23: 145)
on the subject of “intimidation” at the South. In the year 1879, a
“Negro exodus from the Southern States” took place, which, on account
of its size and character, attracted considerable attention. Numerous
reasons were assigned as the cause. See F. L. Hoffman: “Race Traits
and Tendencies of the American Negro.”—Publications of the American
Economic Association, August, 1896 (11: 1); _Nation_, April 10, 1879
(28: 239, 242); Report and Testimony of the Select Committee of the U.
S. Senate to investigate the causes of the removal of the negroes from
the Southern States to the Northern States, 2d Sess., 46th Cong.
(Washington, 1880).

Footnote 205:

It is of interest to note that the Sons of Liberty of the period
1765–1775 seem to have had a regular organization and that in their
use of disguises and in their methods they were not wholly unlike the
Ku-Klux.

Footnote 206:

“Lynching and Mobs,” _American Journal of Social Science_, No. 32, p.
67 (November, 1894).

Footnote 207:

Edward Leigh Pell, writing on “Prevention of Lynch-law Epidemics,” in
the _Review of Reviews_, March, 1898 (17: 321), questions the accuracy
of the _Tribune_ figures for Alabama, Florida, and Virginia in the
year 1897. It is to be noted, however, that he refers to lynchings and
seems to have regarded number of lynchings as synonymous with number
of persons lynched.

Footnote 208:

In a recent article, entitled “The Facts about Lynching,” written by
George P. Upton, who for a number of years has been associate-editor
of the _Tribune_, a similar table may be found. [See the
_Independent_, Sept. 29, 1904 (57: 719)]. In this table, however,
there are numerous inaccuracies, and the fact that Mr. Upton does not
discriminate between number of lynchings and number of persons lynched
detracts materially from the value of all of his statistical summaries
on the subject.

Footnote 209:

Compare p. 182.

Footnote 210:

The negro had escaped from the mob and gone to a neighboring county
where he gave himself up to the authorities for protection. Later,
according to a letter received by the writer from the mayor of the
town where he sought protection, he was taken back by the sheriff and
brought before a justice for a preliminary hearing. The evidence was
considered insufficient to bind him over to the grand jury and he was
released.

Footnote 211:

Principally New York City and New Haven, Conn., papers.

Footnote 212:

To be strictly accurate the number of lynchings should be taken rather
than the number of persons lynched, but for the purpose of comparison
from year to year the latter may be considered sufficiently exact. See
p. 185.

Footnote 213:

Henry M. Boies has shown from the _Tribune_ record of murders that
there has been, within the last twenty years, “an alarming increase of
homicides, accompanied by a proportionate decrease of executions by
law and lynching.”—“Science of Penology” (1901), p. 120.

Footnote 214:

See W. S. Drewry: “Slave Insurrections in Virginia” (1900), pp. 22–25.

Footnote 215:

The liberty has been taken of coining this word to designate the cause
for lynching the class of individuals known as desperadoes. No other
word seems to express the idea so clearly. The word “brigandage” is
too narrow in meaning and too nearly obsolete; the word “outlawry” is
not sufficiently inclusive and is generally used only in its technical
sense.

Footnote 216:

“Statistics and Sociology” (1900), p. 271.

Footnote 217:

This may be taken as an indication of the trustworthiness of the
_Tribune_ record of lynchings as a basis for statistical
investigation.

Footnote 218:

See p. 164.

Footnote 219:

See the daily issues from July 23 to July 27, 1886.

Footnote 220:

These figures are taken from the Twelfth Census, where the term
“illiterates” is used to designate all persons ten years of age and
over who can neither read nor write, or who can read but cannot write.

Footnote 221:

The figures given by the Twelfth Census were used. The figures of the
Eleventh Census would be more nearly typical for the period under
consideration than those of the Twelfth Census, but a difficulty was
met with in an attempt to use them, owing to the fact that new
counties have been formed since 1890. It was found that counties in
which lynchings have occurred did not appear at all in the Eleventh
Census, and that for the sake of completeness it was necessary to use
the Twelfth Census.

Footnote 222:

Alfred Holt Stone, In a paper read before the American Economic
Association in December, 1901, attributed the amicable relations
existing between the whites and the negroes in the Yazoo-Mississippi
delta to the absence of a white laboring class, particularly of field
laborers. In his opinion one of the gravest causes of trouble between
the two races is contact on a common industrial plane.—“Publications
of the American Economic Association,” February, 1902 (3d Ser., Vol.
III, No. 1, p. 235).

Footnote 223:

See p. 109.

Footnote 224:

_Liberator_, April 19, 1839 (9: 63).

Footnote 225:

_Liberator_, April 30, 1836 (6: 72).

Footnote 226:

“Diary in America” (1839), III, 226–230.

For a description of the beginnings of legal procedure in isolated
settlements on the frontier, see “Narrative of the Life of David
Crockett,” written by himself (1843), pp. 132–135. (M.)

Footnote 227:

_British and Foreign Review_, 14: 29 (1843).

Footnote 228:

Cora Montgomery (Jane M. Cazneau): “Eagle Pass; or Life on the Border”
(1852), pp. 153, 164–167.

Compare the justification of the frontier type of lynch-law given by
Owen Wister in his recent novel, “The Virginian.” After describing the
lynching of some Wyoming cattle-thieves, and emphasizing the fact that
“many an act that man does is right or wrong according to the time and
place which form, so to speak, its context,” the author puts into the
mouth of “Judge Henry” these words: “They (the ordinary citizens) are
where the law comes from, you see. For they chose the delegates who
made the Constitution that provided for the courts. There’s your
machinery. These are the hands into which ordinary citizens have put
the law. So you see, at best, when they lynch they only take back what
they once gave.... We are in a very bad way, and we are trying to make
that way a little better until civilization can reach us. At present
we lie beyond its pale. The courts, or rather the juries, into whose
hands we have put the law, are not dealing the law. They are withered
hands, or rather they are imitation hands made for show, with no life
in them, no grip. They cannot hold a cattle-thief. And so when your
ordinary citizen sees this, and sees that he has placed justice in a
dead hand, he must take justice back into his own hands where it was
once at the beginning of all things. Call this primitive, if you will,
but so far from being a _defiance_ of the law, it is an _assertion_ of
it—the fundamental assertion of self-governing men, upon whom our
whole social fabric is based.”—pp. 435–436.

Footnote 229:

C. A. Murray: “Travels in America” (1839), II, 81.

Footnote 230:

Bancroft’s justification of popular tribunals and vigilance societies
has been referred to above. See Chapter IV, p. 133.

Footnote 231:

“History of the Negro Race in America” (1883), I, 121, 131.

Footnote 232:

See J. A. Tillinghast: “The Negro in Africa and America”—Publications
of the American Economic Association, May, 1902 (3d Ser., Vol. III,
No. 2). This monograph presents an admirable historical perspective of
the native characteristics and of the acquirements of the colored race
in America.

Footnote 233:

Fanny Kemble, writing in 1838–39, attributed the “personal
offensiveness” of negroes to dirt and habits of uncleanliness,
asserting that the negroes had no respect for their personal
appearance, and that this lack of respect was due to slavery. In her
journal, these words are found: “The stench in an Irish, Scotch,
Italian, or French hovel are quite as intolerable as any I ever found
in any of our negro houses.” In another connection, however, when
describing a certain negro named Isaac, she refers particularly to his
strong physical resemblance to a monkey, and says that she is much
comforted by the fact that this individual “_speaks_.” See “Journal of
a Residence on a Georgian Plantation” (1863), pp. 23–24, 219.

In describing “The Negro in General,” Ratzel writes: “The specific,
but hardly definable negro smell is certainly possessed by all, in
varying degrees. Falkenstein refers it to the somewhat more oily
composition of the sweat, which with uncleanly habits easily develops
rancid acids.”—“History of Mankind” (Trans. from 2d German ed. by A.
J. Butler, 1897), II, 315; see also II, 266, 301.

A practising physician in the city of New Haven, Conn., has assured
the writer that the peculiar odor is again apparent very soon after a
negro patient has been given a bath and a change of clothing.

Footnote 234:

Compare statements made in “An Apology for the Short Shrift”—_Saturday
Review_, May 28, 1898 (85: 717).

The following passage is found in “The Selling of Joseph,” by
Chief-Justice Samuel Sewall, printed in Boston, June 12, 1700, the
first printed protest against slaveholding in Massachusetts: “and
there is such a disparity in their Conditions, Colour & Hair, that
they can never embody with us, and grow up in orderly Families, to the
Peopling of the Land: but still remain in our Body Politick as a kind
of extravasat Blood.”—See “Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical
Society” for October, 1863 (Vol. 1863–64, p. 161).

Footnote 235:

William Wells Brown makes this statement in his book, “The Negro in
the Rebellion,” pp. 361–362.

Footnote 236:

Compare the manifestation of race prejudice in South Africa, in
Australia, and in the Philippines. See article “The Negro Problem in
South Africa,” by Arthur Hawkes, _Review of Reviews_, September, 1903
(28: 325), and the editorial comments on pp. 264–265 of the same
issue. See also, article “Race Prejudice in the Philippines,” by James
A. Le Roy, _Atlantic Monthly_, July, 1902 (90: 100).

Footnote 237:

George W. Williams: “History of the Negro Race in America” (1883), II,
72.

Footnote 238:

Evidence for this statement has been presented above. See Chapter IV.

Footnote 239:

_Outlook_, Dec. 26, 1903 (75: 984).

Footnote 240:

_Outlook_, Dec. 26, 1903 (75: 984).

Footnote 241:

_Outlook_, Dec. 26, 1903 (75: 984).

Footnote 242:

See p. 200 of monograph “The Negro in Africa and America,” referred to
above. That this crime is of recent origin is either stated or assumed
by almost every writer who discusses the lynching of negroes. See, for
example, article by Thomas Nelson Page in _The North American Review_,
January, 1904 (178: 33).

Footnote 243:

From a study of the prison statistics furnished by the United States
census, Professor Walter F. Willcox came to the positive conclusion
that “a large and increasing amount of negro crime is manifested all
over the country.”—See an address on “Negro Criminality,” delivered
before the American Social Science Association, on Sept. 6,
1899—“Journal of Proceedings,” No. 37, p. 97.

A like opinion is expressed by many writers. See, for example,
_Forum_, October, 1898 (16: 167); _Outlook_, Oct. 31, 1903 (75: 493);
_Outlook_, Dec. 26, 1903 (75: 984).

Footnote 244:

For a number of references on the subject of rape and its punishment,
and also on the subject of burning alive as a legal punishment for
crime, during the colonial period, the writer is indebted to Mr.
Albert Matthews.

Footnote 245:

“Acts of Assembly of the Province of Pennsylvania” (1775), pp. 45–46.

On May 5, 1722, it became the law of Pennsylvania that importers of
servants who have been convicted of rape must pay a duty and enter
security for good behavior for one year.—Statutes at Large of
Pennsylvania, III, 264.

Footnote 246:

Colonial Laws of New York, I, 765–766.

Compare law of Aug. 8, 1688, in the Island of Barbadoes, which
provided that two justices and three freeholders were to “give
sentence of Death upon” negroes, for murder, rape, burning houses,
&c.—Acts of Assembly Passed in the Island of Barbadoes, From 1648, to
1718 (1721), pp. 140–141.

Footnote 247:

Laws of the State of Delaware (1797), I, 102–105.

By an act passed in January, 1797, thirty-nine lashes well laid on
were added to the punishment for an attempted rape on a white woman or
maid.—Laws of the State of Delaware (1797), II, 1321–1324.

Footnote 248:

Laws of Maryland (1799), Chapter XIV.

Footnote 249:

See John S. Bassett: “Slavery and Servitude in the Colony of North
Carolina”—Johns Hopkins Historical Studies (1896), XIV, 199. In
Virginia the punishment of castration was so frequently inflicted upon
slaves by the county courts that the Assembly deemed it necessary to
enact that “it shall not be lawful for any county or corporation
court, to order and direct castration of any slave, except such slave
shall be convicted of an attempt to ravish a white woman, in which
case they may inflict such punishment.”—See Hening: “Virginia Statutes
at Large,” VI, 3; VIII, 358; Samuel Sheperd: “Virginia Statutes at
Large” (New Series, 1835), I, 125.

Footnote 250:

“Records of the Court of Assistants of the Colony of the Massachusetts
Bay” (J. Noble, 1901), p. 74.

The following passage is taken from the _Boston Chronicle_, Sept.
26–Oct. 3, 1768 (No. 42, I, 383): “We hear that a negro fellow was
tried at the Assizes held lately at Worcester, for a rape, and found
guilty, and received sentence of death.—A white man was also tried and
found guilty of the same crime, and sentenced to sit on the gallows.”

Footnote 251:

See “Proceedings of the New Jersey Historical Society” (1874), 2d
Series, III, 178.

Footnote 252:

See J. R. Brackett: “The Negro in Maryland” (1889), p. 131.

Footnote 253:

_Pennsylvania Gazette_, Dec. 14, 1744 (N. J. _Archives_, XII, 244).

Footnote 254:

The basis for these statements is a collection of notes on legal
burning alive made by Mr. Albert Matthews. Compare John Fiske: “Old
Virginia and her Neighbours” (1897), II, 265.

Footnote 255: