The Terrors of Mob Law
January 20, 1900
Summary
A mob in Roanoke lynches a young black man accused of sexual assault though it seems that he was innocent.
Transcription
The Terrors of Mob Law
[Richmond, Va., Times, Jan. 18, 1900.]
We take the following from the editorial columns of the Roanoke Times:
From Newport News now comes the report that the lynching of young Watts in that city for an alleged criminal assault, a few days ago, was all a horrible mistake. From the statements now made it looks as if Watts were the victim of a woman’s desire to hide her shame. The whole affair is most revolting, yet it is an instance of the miserable effects of mob violence. Too often have communities allowed themselves to be wrought up and led into the commission of deeds that they could not but regret upon calm reflection. In the case of Watts, if the above statements are true, all of the facts would have come out in the course of a fair trial and the lynching of an innocent man avoided. Of course there are times when men are so much worked upon by the horror of the crime committed that they can hardly be expected not to lose their heads, yet there are no cases in which the exercise of the law would not be a better course. The Watts instance is a striking example of the result of overzealous law and order committees.
We make this the occasion for relating a most remarkable incident which has recently come to our knowledge. Hon, W. W. Baker, member of the House of Delegates from Chesterfield county, gives us the story and in the interest of law and order authorizes us to use it. In the same spirit and for the same purpose we publish it. Some time ago a citizen of Chesterfield, upon the complaint of a married woman, was arrested on a charge of criminal assault. The woman was heard to scream and the man was seen to run from the house. There was no question as to his identity, because he was well known to the community. The woman declared that he had assaulted her and even went so far as to show finger prints upon her throat. There was great indignation in the community and a party was organized to lynch the man. But fortunately for him, a special grand jury was summoned and immediate steps taken to have the case regularly tried in court. Mr. Baker was foreman of the grand jury, and although the evidence against the man seemed to be conclusive, he determined to do everything in his power to get at the facts. The woman told a straight forward story, and as we have already said, exhibited finger marks on her throat which she declared were inflicted by the prisoner. After her testimony was given, Mr. Baker impressed upon her the fact that this man’s life was in her hands: that is he was guilty of the terrible crime of which she had charged him, he deserves to be hung, but that if he was not guilty she would be guilty of murder in swearing away his life. The woman finally broke down and confessed that she had told her story in order to conceal her own shame and the bruises on her throat were made by her indignant husband because of her infidelity. Of course the grand jury did not return a true bill and the incident was closed.
This shows how dangerous mob law is. Human liberty and human life are precious and the organic law of the land provides that whenever a man has been accused of a crime he shall have a fair trial before a jury of his peers and shall have the privilege of introducing testimony in his own behalf. It is the business of our courts to thoroughly investigate all such cases and ascertain the exact truth. But the mob does not pursue such a course. The mob acts upon impulse and often upon ex parts evidence and never gives the accused opportunity of introducing testimony to prove his innocence. When the mob rules no man’s life is safe, for the mob hangs men upon their suspicion.
[Richmond, Va., Times, Jan. 18, 1900.]
We take the following from the editorial columns of the Roanoke Times:
From Newport News now comes the report that the lynching of young Watts in that city for an alleged criminal assault, a few days ago, was all a horrible mistake. From the statements now made it looks as if Watts were the victim of a woman’s desire to hide her shame. The whole affair is most revolting, yet it is an instance of the miserable effects of mob violence. Too often have communities allowed themselves to be wrought up and led into the commission of deeds that they could not but regret upon calm reflection. In the case of Watts, if the above statements are true, all of the facts would have come out in the course of a fair trial and the lynching of an innocent man avoided. Of course there are times when men are so much worked upon by the horror of the crime committed that they can hardly be expected not to lose their heads, yet there are no cases in which the exercise of the law would not be a better course. The Watts instance is a striking example of the result of overzealous law and order committees.
We make this the occasion for relating a most remarkable incident which has recently come to our knowledge. Hon, W. W. Baker, member of the House of Delegates from Chesterfield county, gives us the story and in the interest of law and order authorizes us to use it. In the same spirit and for the same purpose we publish it. Some time ago a citizen of Chesterfield, upon the complaint of a married woman, was arrested on a charge of criminal assault. The woman was heard to scream and the man was seen to run from the house. There was no question as to his identity, because he was well known to the community. The woman declared that he had assaulted her and even went so far as to show finger prints upon her throat. There was great indignation in the community and a party was organized to lynch the man. But fortunately for him, a special grand jury was summoned and immediate steps taken to have the case regularly tried in court. Mr. Baker was foreman of the grand jury, and although the evidence against the man seemed to be conclusive, he determined to do everything in his power to get at the facts. The woman told a straight forward story, and as we have already said, exhibited finger marks on her throat which she declared were inflicted by the prisoner. After her testimony was given, Mr. Baker impressed upon her the fact that this man’s life was in her hands: that is he was guilty of the terrible crime of which she had charged him, he deserves to be hung, but that if he was not guilty she would be guilty of murder in swearing away his life. The woman finally broke down and confessed that she had told her story in order to conceal her own shame and the bruises on her throat were made by her indignant husband because of her infidelity. Of course the grand jury did not return a true bill and the incident was closed.
This shows how dangerous mob law is. Human liberty and human life are precious and the organic law of the land provides that whenever a man has been accused of a crime he shall have a fair trial before a jury of his peers and shall have the privilege of introducing testimony in his own behalf. It is the business of our courts to thoroughly investigate all such cases and ascertain the exact truth. But the mob does not pursue such a course. The mob acts upon impulse and often upon ex parts evidence and never gives the accused opportunity of introducing testimony to prove his innocence. When the mob rules no man’s life is safe, for the mob hangs men upon their suspicion.
About this article
Source
Location on Page
Upper Right Quadrant
Topic
Contributed By
Elizabeth Lopez-Lopez
Citation
“The Terrors of Mob Law,” Black Virginia: The Richmond Planet, 1894-1909, accessed January 20, 2026, https://blackvirginia.richmond.edu/items/show/115.