The Red Record: Tabulated Statistics and Alleged Causes of Lynching in the United States

In Chapter 7, Wells explores how recent attention to lynching and white mobs is a direct result of international activism. American social activists appealed to English audiences to combat the genocide of Black citizens in the American South, and supporters of Lynch Law suggested that this appeal was unpatriotic. However, Wells argues that the more than 10,000 murders by lynching are enough justification for international exposure and intervention:

If America would not hear the cry of men, women and children whose dying groans ascended to heaven praying for relief, not only for them but for others who might soon be treated as they, then certainly no fair-minded person can charge disloyalty to those who make an appeal to the civilization of the world for such sympathy and help as it is possible to extend (89).

Wells argues that descriptions of her reports as vindicative are ironic since she uses white testimonies and records to shed light on lynchings. She argues that international attention has spurred politicians to begin speaking out against the violent act. Efforts made to eliminate lynchings are a direct result of America experiencing pressure from foreign governments and concerns over its standing as a morally superior nation.

In October of 1894, six Black men were arrested on suspicion of arson after a barn caught on fire. Law enforcement officers knowingly drove the six men into the middle of a white mob in the middle of the night. The officers stood by while the crowd killed the men with shotguns. The officers then returned to town to spread a lie that the crowd forcibly took the prisoners from them.

Although the governor of Tennessee and white newspapers condemned the actions of the mob and law enforcement, Wells argues that their outrage had little to do with concern for the six victims. The case of the six men in 1894 is no different from the thousands of other cases just like it. Instead, international focus on lynching in the United States drew attention to a case that otherwise would have disappeared from public consciousness in a day or two. Wells contrasts this story with a lynching that took place only two years prior. When three well-respected Black men were arrested for resisting a mob that sought to attack their store, a dozen men entered the jail where they were held and shot them. Wells argues that Memphis was more than willing to accept this lynching without investigating the white men who committed the crime.

Furthermore, suggestions that lynching exists to protect the sanctity of womanhood fail to consider how lynching is used against Black women. In another arson case, three Black men and one Black woman were arrested. They went to jail peacefully, claiming that they had solid alibis that would prove their innocence during trial. However, they never had the opportunity to share their evidence; a white mob killed them in their jail cell. If not targeting Black women through violence, lynching strips them of other protections. The wives and children of executed Black men are often left behind to fend for themselves. Wells argues that lynching is not about protecting women, particularly because it so often targets women either directly or indirectly.

Wells includes a statement by Governor Jones of Alabama in 1893, who vehemently denounced lynching and established a call to action. Jones criticized the public’s weak response to lynchings and the failure of law enforcement to do its duty. He suggested that unchecked racist violence would destroy America’s reputation, proving that concerns about how the country is perceived outweigh its moral obligation.

An English judge named Robert B. Porter established the British perspective of American lynchings. Porter asserted that he was unwilling to do business with the United States so long as lynchings continued, arguing that a country that places such little value on human life would do the same for property.