After the lynching, Negroes were advised to stay inside as whites planned to invade their community. They refused to respect this admonition and attended church and civic meetings where they planned methods of protection. They organized squads and canvassed homes for guns and ammunition. The Governor of Missouri was called by phone. One of their leading ministers was spirited out of town when word was passed down that local officials were familiar with his efforts to solicit State aid and were planning reprisal.

Most of the Negro section is owned by Negroes. A steady exodus from this area disrupted business and commerce. Shops, churches, and schools closed. Whites with Negro servants and employees hastily arranged to have them sent elsewhere. Within a week the community had ceased to function as a social unit. The assistance of the NAACP was requested to hasten a return to normalcy.

LOCAL PRESS REACTION

The Sikeston Herald, speaking editorially January 29, 1942, remarked that the entire white community was guilty of deceiving Negroes in the belief that the two races can mix socially. Although it was also guilty of not enforcing a city council's zoning ordinance (unconstitutional), the Herald did not feel that the community was guilty of mob violence. The fault, it pointed out, rested with the local police in refusing to keep temporarily unbridled passions in check.

The Sikeston Standard, in its letters-to-the-editor-columns on January 30, published an anonymous letter calling for official action to:

1. Keep all Negroes off the streets after dark and issue passes through the police department for those who must use the streets at night.

2. Segregate the living quarters of Negroes.

3. Provide whites with adequate police protection.

The "pole cat editor" of the Standard declared that the lynching would teach Negroes to be good, or leave the community, or expect the same treatment.

The Enterprise Courier of Charleston, Mo., the only paper to comprehend any aspect of the total situation remarked editorially on January 29, 1942:

1. That whites and Negroes alike must clean up backyards.

2. That whites must stop requenting the Negro community and stop preferring Negro women to their own.

3. That the policy racket owned by whites for the exploitation of Negroes must be discontinued.

4. That Negroes must clean up their own community, discourage liquor-drinking parties, and evict "bad actors."

ECONOMIC BACKGROUND

Intimidation of Negroes in Sikeston and its environs was an economic necessity of the moment, our investigators reported. In southeastern Missouri, Negroes are employed only as cotton pickers. "Negroes have always been beasts of burden in southeast Missouri and since" it is important to the economic set-up that they remain in this status, they are not encouraged to develop.

With the aid of labor unions and a gradual growing political consciousness the Negroes have made gains in independence. The feeling that they "should be put back in their places where they belong" was shared by a majority of employers. Land in five southeastern Missouri counties was river waste until bought by a few farsighted persons for small price several years ago. Cleared, drained, made productive, it created much wealth for a few people. Seventy-five percent of the land of Pemiscot County, as of 1942, was owned by only 35 persons.

The country is feudal in many respects. After 1924 and the invasion of the boll weevil in the deeper South, cotton became the principal crop. Ten thousand Negroes were imported. While vast fortunes were piled up by a few, the gross income of Negroes and whites remained low. Prior to the war, white sharecropper families averaged yearly an income of $415, while white farm labor families averaged $264. Negroes of all tenure groups averaged on $251 per year per family.

One well known planter remarked: "We are like the South; still we are different. Our landowners are not as sophisticated, and our labor is not held down by traditions as in the deep South. So the problems of feudalism come to the surface and break out here more than they do in the South. It is a sore spot of change and upheaval. This lynching is only one incident. We are not through with our troubles yet."

FEDERAL ACTION

A Federal grand jury, sitting at St. Louis, Mo., on July 30 handed up a special report on the Sikeston lynching case, describing the occurrence as a "shameful outrage" and censuring the Sikeston police force for having "failed completely to cope with the situation."

The report stated that the grand jury sought to determine whether any Federal statutes had been violated, but "with great reluctance, has come to the conclusion that the facts disclosed do not constitute any Federal offense."

A GENERATION OF LYNCHING IN THE UNITED STATES, 1921-46

[A supplement to Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States, 1889-1918] (By the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, New York 18, N. Y.)

FOREWORD

Because the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People believes truth to be the most eloquent spokesman of the message it wishes to convey, we are presenting in this pamphlet a documentary record of lynchings that have occurred in the United States within the past 25 years.

And because we sincerely believe a Federal law to be the only means of stamping out this heinous crime, we have also included a summary account of the fight carried on by the NAACP over a period of years to secure the passage by Congress of adequate antilynching legislation.

This pamphlet is a sequel to Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States, 1889-1918. Within that period 3,224 persons were killed through mob violence. The data contained in this supplement does not include the year 1919 during which 33 lynchings occurred, nor does it list the 65 lynchings which took place in 1920. While increased public expression against lynching has been an important factor in lessening the extent of this crime, the same public expression has forced lynching "underground." We feel we should call this to your attention. Newspapers no longer advertise lynching events. The mob is currently being succeeded by smaller bands of determined hatelers who murder with less spectacle but with the same grim efficiency. Bodies of victims are more hastily disposed of. Little news, if any, "leaks out" for general circulation. For this reason reports of many instances of lynch murders that have actually occurred are not available for publication. We apologize for this omission.

No effort is made here to describe the deep personal loss experienced by families of lynch victims nor the dread of whole southern Negro communities terrorized by the specter of uncertain death. We do not feel, however, that these factors can be overlooked. The resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan is spreading with amazing rapidity. No. 1 Klan hate is the Negro. "We're supposed to be bigots," declared William H. Morris, one of Alabama's KKK incorporators, “but the Klan is made up of Christian gentlemen. All we want to do is keep the Negro in his place."

Next Klan hate is the unions. Grand Dragon Samuel Green, of Georgia, announced recently, "We have officially declared war against the CIO" Union organizers are reporting threats of Klan murder.

Klan anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic propaganda can be expected to produce large harvests of hate. Its campaign against minority groups brings the personal issue closer each day. Unchecked, its lawless power will leave few free from fear of personal safety and few tenets of our American creed free from destruction.

LYNCHING RECORD FOR 1946

July 20: Rupert's District, Taylor County, Ga. (Daily Worker, August 25): "Macio Snipes, veteran, the only Negro to vote in the Georgia primary from Rupert's District, was shot and killed on the porch of his home by 10 white men who pretended they had come to collect a $10 debt."

July 24: Lexington, Miss. (metropolitan press):

"The lynching of Leon McTatie, whose body was found by a Negro fisherman in a Sunflower County bayou, occurred on or about July 24.

72144-48-ser. 14- -5

"McTatie had been accused of stealing a saddle, a fact later disproved. He was set upon and beaten by six white Mississippi farmers when he denied knowledge of the theft.

"Sheriff W. L. Murtagh said 'It was evident' that McTatie had been thrown into the bayou from a car and that he was dead at the time.

"His attackers have been apprehended. They deny all knowledge of his death."

July 25: Monroe, Ga. (metropolitan press):

"Roger Malcolm, George Dorsey, a veteran, together with their wives, Willie Mae and Dorthy, were dragged from a car and shot to death by an unmasked band of 20 white men.

"Loy Harrison, a well-to-do white tenant farmer who allegedly needed their labor on his farm, drove to Monroe on July 25 with three of them to make bail for Roger Malcolm.

"Malcolm had been jailed in Monroe on a charge of stabbing his former employer, Barney Hester, during a quarrel which arose over the undue attention being paid Mrs. Malcolm by the latter. Malcolm's temporary release was obtained.

"As the five were returning to Harrison's farm they were halted by a mob. Harrison was held at gun point while the Negro couples were lined up and shot.

"The coroner reported that at least 60 bullets were used to riddle the victims. Their mutilated bodies, scarcely recognizable, were found sprawled beside a clump of bushes on a lonely road."

August 3: Gordon, Ga. (NAACP investigator):

"John J. Gilbert, participant in unionizing activities of chalk mines, died of 'gunshot at the hand of unknown parties' on the morning of August 3, about 500 yards from his home while on his regular route to work at 5:30 in the morning.

"It was rumored in Gordon that his death came as a result of making enemies among the whites by his union activity."

August 8: Minden, La. (New York Times, New York Herald Tribune, August 16):

"John C. Jones, 28, discharged veteran of European service, was found dead 2 miles from Minden in Dorcheat Bayou. His body had been horribly beaten with 'some flat object-such as a wide leather belt or a thick plank,' his face and body burned with a blowtorch so that his eyes were "popped" out of his head and his light complexion seared dark. His wrists were mutilated with a cleaver and he had been partially castrated.

"He and his 17-year-old companion, Albert Harris, were turned over by the sheriff to a mob in two cars, containing white men and one woman, a few minutes after their release from Minden Parish Jail, where they had been confined a week for allegedly attempting to break into the house of a white woman who refused to press charges. Jones and Harris were driven to the bayou, where Jones was tortured and killed and Harris beaten and shot in the shoulder. Left for dead, Harris managed to escape, however.

'Jones, who had brought a German automatic from Europe, had been told by a white neighbor that he would get Jones' gun if he had to kill him to do it."

CIVIL RIGHTS STATUTES ARE INADEQUATE: ANTILYNCHING LEGISLATION MUST BE

PASSED

One of the most popular misconceptions held by law-abiding citizens is the belief that protection of our "inalienable rights" to life and liberty falls within the purview of our Federal Government whenever State and local authorities fail. The experience of the Department of Justice proves the wide limitation to such practice. There has never been a successful Federal prosecution of lynching in the United States.

Only passage of a Federal antilynching statute will permit the Department of Justice to prosecute lynchings with hope for conviction.

H. R. 1689, latest NAACP antilynching bill, was introduced in Congress on January 24, 1945, by Representative D. Lane Powers (Republican), New Jersey). The legislation has never been released from the House Judiciary Committee.

On March 21, 1945, discharge petition No. 3 was submitted in an effort to obtain a requisite number of signatures and get the bill before the floor of the House. A significant number of names is still lacking.

Alabama.
Arkansas
Florida.

Georgia.

Kentucky.

Louisiana

Maryland.
Mississippi.

Missouri.

North Carolina.

Oklahoma.

South Carolina.

Tennessee.

Texas.

Virginia.

H. R. 1689 makes lynching and mob violence a criminal offense.

It defines a mob as any three or more persons.

It establishes lynching as death through mob violence.

It provides that any person who fails to protect his prisoner from lynching shall be guilty of felony and subject to a fine of not more than $5,000, a prison term of not more than 5 years, or both.

It makes local law-enforcement agencies responsible for the safety of prisoners. It provides trial in a United States district court instead of a local one.

Our Congress is elected to represent the will of the people. Every candidate to national office should be asked to commit himself to actively support and vote for passage of Federal antilynching legislation.

Total.

64 61 28 15 17 33 20 10 12 23 11 8 26 16 24 10 8 7 4 5 5 5 3

A comprehensive listing of victims lynched during the years 1921-45 is available upon application to the national office.

Source: Division of information, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, New York 18, N. Y., October 20, 1946.

EFFORTS TO SECURE ANTILYNCHING LEGISLATION, 1921-43

The first sustained effort for a Federal antilynching bill was made in April 1921 when Representative L. C. Dyer (Republican), of St. Louis, Mo., introduced the Dyer antilynching bill. The Dyer bill was supported by numerous agencies and individuals headed by National Association for the Advancement of Colored People under Secretary James Weldon Johnson. It passed the House in January 1922, by a vote of 230 to 119, but was filibustered to death in the Republican Senate. Republican Senators, who formed an overwhelming majority, refused to invoke cloture. The bill was talked to death and withdrawn from the floor.

The Dyer bill was reintroduced in succeeding years by Representative Dyer but was never acted upon.

In 1933, after an all-time low of 10 for 1932, the total number of lynchings climbed to 28. The NAACP began mobilizing organizations and individuals behind the Wagner-Costigan antilynching bill sponsored by Senator Robert F. Wagner (Democrat, New York) and Senator Edward P. Costigan (Democrat, Colorado). It was felt that the time was favorable to get action in the Senate rather than in the House. Hearings were held before the Senate Judiciary Committee in February 1934 and broadcast over a Nation-wide radio network. After an up and down existence, the bill finally reached the floor April 26, 1935. It remained there until May 1. A filibuster was continued against it by southern Senators. It was finally laid aside after four votes had been taken on a motion to adjourn.

In January 1936, upon the convening of the Senate again, an effort was made to have a senatorial investigation launched of the number of lynchings which had taken place in 1935. Money for this investigation ($7,500) was withheld by the Committee on Audit and Control, whose chairman was Senator James F. Byrnes, of South Carolina.

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

1940

1941

Senator Costigan left the Senate. This, together with certain other considerations, made it advisable to begin again in the House. In January 1937, some 60 antilynching bills were introduced, most of them at the instigation and investigation of the NAACP. One of these bills was sponsored by Representative Joseph A. Gavagan, of New York. Mr. Gavagan's bill, like the rest, was buried in the House Judiciary Committee whose chairman, Representative Hatton W. Sumners, of Texas, refused to hold any hearings or to move them out of committee.

By means of discharge petition, Mr. Gavagan's bill was brought to the floor. It was passed by the House by a vote of 277 to 119 on April 15 and sent to the Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committee kept the title of the bill and struck out the text, substituting for it the text of the Wagner-Van Nuys antilynching bill which was before the Senate.

The bill became known as H. R. 1507-the Gavagan-Wagner-Van Nuys antilynching bill.

Out of the tangle of Senate legislation in August 1937, Senator Wagner secured the floor and brought up his antilynching bill. It consumed the time of the Senate for several days when an agreement was reached postponing the measure. Argument on the bill proceeded in November, when a special session of Congress was held, but it was not until January 6, 1938, that the Senate really took up consideration of the legislation.

The first skirmish was won on January 7 when supporters of the bill defeated by a vote of 52 to 18 a motion by Senator Tom Connally, of Texas, to adjourn the Senate. Then began a filibuster against the bill on the part of southern Senators aided by Senator William E. Borah, of Idaho, which lasted for nearly 7 weeks. A petition for cloture was filed on January 25. This first attempt to limit debate was lost on January 27 by a vote of 51 to 37. On February 14, Senator Wagner filed a second cloture petition and this too was lost on February 16 by a vote of 46 to 42.

Although an attempt was made to reschedule debate on the legislation, the antilynching bill was finally displaced.

On January 10, 1940, the Gavagan-Fish antilynching bill (H. R. 801) passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 252 to 131. Immediately the NAACP began securing witnesses to testify at hearings before the subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hearings were held on February 6-7 and again on March 12. The companion measure, the Wagner-Van Nuys-Capper antilynching bill (S. 845) was favorably reported to the Senate by a vote of 12 to 4 on March 25. In its efforts to have the bill brought up before the adjournment of Congress, the association, in September, wrote to 14 key Senators of both parties requesting action. As a result, Senator W. Warren Barbour, on October 8, asked Majority Leader Alben W. Barkley "if there is to be an opportunity to bring up the antilynching bill in this session before we adjourn or recess." To this Senator Barkley replied that he was "willing to take the responsibility of saying that in the midst of our international situation, our defense program, and the condition in which the world finds itself, it is impractical at this time to make a futile effort to obtain a vote on the bill." This killed hope for the bill in the Seventy-sixth Congress.

On January 3, 1941, Congressman Joseph A. Gavagan again introduced his antilynching bill in the House. Because, however, he resigned his position as Representative during November of 1943 to accept a judgeship in New York, the Gavagan antilynching bill died and the NAACP was forced to seek a new sponsor.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions?

Mr. DEVITT. Mr. White, a memorandum I have here reflects that anti-lynching legislation has passed the House on three occasions, the Sixty-seventh, Seventy-fifth, and Seventy-sixth Congresses. Mr. WHITE. That is correct.

Mr. DEVITT. Presumably it has never passed the Senate. Now, what needs to be done or should be done with the Congress as a whole, not only with one body, to get effective legislation in this field?

What I mean is, that it is a useless gesture for only one body of the Congress to pass a bill. You have been in this field for a long time. Is there any way of accomplishing your aims?