riotism and statesmanship? And is it pos sible to minimize the importance of the question from even an humane point of view? It has been intimated that there is a grow ing want of respect for the legally consti tuted authorities in this country. It is ar gued that the statistics submitted justify the making of this claim. The increase in the number of homicides, annually, during the last decade, and the decrease in the number of convictions for the same, through the courts, go far to sustain that claim. The in creasing frequency of the reign of Judge Lynch, practically unmolested, also sustains the same view. The adoption of exceedingly cruel and unusual methods of punishment by the mob, as that of burning the defence less victims, still further confirms the lawless tendencies of the times. These conditions would not, could not, exist, if public opinion did not assure immunity from adequate pun ishment to the murderous hordes who par ticipate in these lawless and brutal proceed ings. We cannot escape the conclusion that the reign of lawlessness is securing a firm hold in this country, is upon us with a strong and relentless grip. It is undoubtedly true that whole com munities are wrought up to a high state of frenzy and fear over the commission of atro cious crimes. And it is but a short step from this feeling to the crime of the mob itself. If, however, the mob knew that cer tain and adequate punishment would quickly follow its breach of the peace, it may well be doubted if it would so willingly and unblushingly violate it. As conditions exist today, the mob entertains little fear of pun ishment at all, never any such dread of the infliction of a penalty as the enormity of the offence committed warrants. So the mob undertakes to be the self-appointed conserv ator of law and order at the very expense of good government itself. This condition ha? been steadily growing from bad to worse
until today the situation is little less than alarming. It was Thomas Jefferson who once wiselysaid of mob law: "It is more dangerous that even a guilty person should be punished without the forms of law than that he should escape." There is much need for the preach ment of this doctrine. Not that there is any thing particularly sacred or magical around the term law, but because it comports ex actly with the best that all human govern ments and civilized life afford. Passing from a mere academic consider ation of the question, let us see if there is any adequate remedy for the existing evil. It has already been said that the mob feels secure against any punishment being in flicted upon it by the constituted authorities for its crime. The history of all trials for riot amply justify the making of this state ment. It is apparent, therefore, if punishmen is to be visited upon the mob, some change in the criminal law and procedure will have to be made. The constitutional provision requiring that every person accused of crime shall have a speedy trial by a jury of his peers in the county where the alleged offense is said to have been committed, will, as it appears to the writer, have to be amended. This is necessary because no jury of the accused's peers, in the county where the alleged of fence is said to have been committed, will, in almost every case, render other than a verdict of not guilty. Public opinion de mands such a verdict and the jury responds to that demand, at the sacrifice of both law and justice. The proposed amendment should nvke mandatory that the place of trial of the mob should be far removed from the place where the alleged crime is said to have been com mitted. The purpose of this amendment is not to secure a certain conviction of the mob, but to obtain a jury of fair, impartial and unprejudiced men, who will protect
