no class of american citizens stands in greater need of the humane and thoughtful consideration of all sections of our country than do the colored people, nor does any class exceed us in the measure of grateful regard for acts of kindly interest in our behalf. it is, therefore, to us, a matter of keen regret that a christian organization, so large and influential as the woman's christian temperance union, should refuse to give its sympathy and support to our oppressed people who ask no further favor than the promotion of public sentiment which shall guarantee to every person accused of crime the safeguard of a fair and impartial trial, and protection from butchery by brutal mobs. accustomed as we are to the indifference and apathy of christian people, we would bear this instance of ill fortune in silence, had not miss willard gone out of her way to antagonize the cause so dear to our hearts by including in her annual address to the w.c.t.u. convention at cleveland, november 5, 1894, a studied, unjust and wholly unwarranted attack upon our work.

in her address miss willard said:

the zeal for her race of miss ida b. wells, a bright young colored woman, has, it seems to me, clouded her perception as to who were her friends and well-wishers in all high-minded and legitimate efforts to banish the abomination of lynching and torture from the land of the free and the home of the brave. it is my firm belief that in the statements made by miss wells concerning white women having taken the initiative in nameless acts between the races she has put an imputation upon half the white race in this country that is unjust, and, save in the rarest exceptional instances, wholly without foundation. this is the unanimous opinion of the most disinterested and observant leaders of opinion whom i have consulted on the subject, and i do not fear to say that the laudable efforts she is making are greatly handicapped by statements of this kind, nor to urge her as a friend and well-wisher to banish from her vocabulary all such allusions as a source of weakness to the cause she has at heart.

this paragraph, brief as it is, contains two statements which have not the slightest foundation in fact. at no time, nor in any place, have i made statements "concerning white women having taken the initiative in nameless acts between the races." further, at no time, or place nor under any circumstance, have i directly or inferentially "put an imputation upon half the white race in this country" and i challenge this "friend and well-wisher" to give proof of the truth of her charge. miss willard protests against lynching in one paragraph and then, in the next, deliberately misrepresents my position in order that she may criticise a movement, whose only purpose is to protect our oppressed race from vindictive slander and lynch law.

what i have said and what i now repeat—in answer to her first charge—is, that colored men have been lynched for assault upon women, when the facts were plain that the relationship between the victim lynched and the alleged victim of his assault was voluntary, clandestine and illicit. for that very reason we maintain, that, in every section of our land, the accused should have a fair, impartial trial, so that a man who is colored shall not be hanged for an offense, which, if he were white, would not be adjudged a crime. facts cited in another chapter—"history of some cases of rape"—amply maintain this position. the publication of these facts in defense of the good name of the race casts no "imputation upon half the white race in this country" and no such imputation can be inferred except by persons deliberately determined to be unjust.

but this is not the only injury which this cause has suffered at the hands of our "friend and well-wisher." it has been said that the women's christian temperance union, the most powerful organization of women in america, was misrepresented by me while i was in england. miss willard was in england at the time and knowing that no such misrepresentation came to her notice, she has permitted that impression to become fixed and widespread, when a word from her would have made the facts plain.

i never at any time or place or in any way misrepresented that organization. when asked what concerted action had been taken by churches and great moral agencies in america to put down lynch law, i was compelled in truth to say that no such action had occurred, that pulpit, press and moral agencies in the main were silent and for reasons known to themselves, ignored the awful conditions which to the english people appeared so abhorent. then the question was asked what the great moral reformers like miss frances willard and mr. moody had done to suppress lynch law and again i answered nothing. that mr. moody had never said a word against lynching in any of his trips to the south, or in the north either, so far as was known, and that miss willard's only public utterance on the situation had condoned lynching and other unjust practices of the south against the negro. when proof of these statements was demanded, i sent a letter containing a copy of the new york voice, oct. 23,1890, in which appeared miss willard's own words of wholesale slander against the colored race and condonation of southern white people's outrages against us. my letter in part reads as follows:

but miss willard, the great temperance leader, went even further in putting the seal of her approval upon the southerners' method of dealing with the negro. in october, 1890, the women's christian temperance union held its national meeting at atlanta, georgia. it was the first time in the history of the organization that it had gone south for a national meeting, and met the southerners in their own homes. they were welcomed with open arms. the governor of the state and the legislature gave special audiences in the halls of state legislation to the temperance workers. they set out to capture the northerners to their way of seeing things, and without troubling to hear the negro side of the question, these temperance people accepted the white man's story of the problem with which he had to deal. state organizers were appointed that year, who had gone through the southern states since then, but in obedience to southern prejudices have confined their work to white persons only. it is only after negroes are in prison for crimes that efforts of these temperance women are exerted without regard to "race, color, or previous condition." no "ounce of prevention" is used in their case; they are black, and if these women went among the negroes for this work, the whites would not receive them. except here and there, are found no temperance workers of the negro race; "the great dark-faced mobs" are left the easy prey of the saloonkeepers.

there was pending in the national congress at this time a federal election bill, the object being to give the national government control of the national elections in the several states. had this bill become a law, the negro, whose vote has been systematically suppressed since 1875 in the southern states, would have had the protection of the national government, and his vote counted. the south would have been no longer "solid"; the southerners saw that the balance of power which they unlawfully held in the house of representatives and the electoral college, based on the negro population, would be wrested from them. so they nick-named the pending elections law the "force bill"—probably because it would force them to disgorge their ill-gotten political gains—and defeated it. while it was being discussed, the question was submitted to miss willard: "what do you think of the race problem and the force bill?"

said miss willard: "now, as to the 'race problem' in its minified, current meaning, i am a true lover of the southern people—have spoken and worked in, perhaps, 200 of their towns and cities; have been taken into their love and confidence at scores of hospitable firesides; have heard them pour out their hearts in the splendid frankness of their impetuous natures. and i have said to them at such times: 'when i go north there will be wafted to you no word from pen or voice that is not loyal to what we are saying here and now.' going south, a woman, a temperance woman, and a northern temperance woman—three great barriers to their good will yonder—i was received by them with a confidence that was one of the most delightful surprises of my life. i think we have wronged the south, though we did not mean to do so. the reason was, in part, that we had irreparably wronged ourselves by putting no safeguards on the ballot box at the north that would sift out alien illiterates. they rule our cities today; the saloon is their palace, and the toddy stick their sceptre. it is not fair that they should vote, nor is it fair that a plantation negro, who can neither read nor write, whose ideas are bounded by the fence of his own field and the price of his own mule, should be entrusted with the ballot. we ought to have put an educational test upon that ballot from the first. the anglo-saxon race will never submit to be dominated by the negro so long as his altitude reaches no higher than the personal liberty of the saloon, and the power of appreciating the amount of liquor that a dollar will buy. new england would no more submit to this than south carolina. 'better whisky and more of it' has been the rallying cry of great dark-faced mobs in the southern localities where local option was snowed under by the colored vote. temperance has no enemy like that, for it is unreasoning and unreasonable. tonight it promises in a great congregation to vote for temperance at the polls tomorrow; but tomorrow twenty-five cents changes that vote in favor of the liquor-seller.

"i pity the southerners, and i believe the great mass of them are as conscientious and kindly intentioned toward the colored man as an equal number of white church-members of the north. would-be demagogues lead the colored people to destruction. half-drunken white roughs murder them at the polls, or intimidate them so that they do not vote. but the better class of people must not be blamed for this, and a more thoroughly american population than the christian people of the south does not exist. they have the traditions, the kindness, the probity, the courage of our forefathers. the problem on their hands is immeasurable. the colored race multiplies like the locusts of egypt. the grog-shop is its center of power. 'the safety of woman, of childhood, of the home, is menaced in a thousand localities at this moment, so that the men dare not go beyond the sight of their own roof-tree.' how little we know of all this, seated in comfort and affluence here at the north, descanting upon the rights of every man to cast one vote and have it fairly counted; that well-worn shibboleth invoked once more to dodge a living issue.

"the fact is that illiterate colored men will not vote at the south until the white population chooses to have them do so; and under similar conditions they would not at the north." here we have miss willard's words in full, condoning fraud, violence, murder, at the ballot box; rapine, shooting, hanging and burning; for all these things are done and being done now by the southern white people. she does not stop there, but goes a step further to aid them in blackening the good name of an entire race, as shown by the sentences quoted in the paragraph above. these utterances, for which the colored people have never forgiven miss willard, and which frederick douglass has denounced as false, are to be found in full in the voice of october 23,1890, a temperance organ published at new york city.

this letter appeared in the may number of fraternity, the organ of the first anti-lynching society of great britain. when lady henry somerset learned through miss florence balgarnie that this letter had been published she informed me that if the interview was published she would take steps to let the public know that my statements must be received with caution. as i had no money to pay the printer to suppress the edition which was already published and these ladies did not care to do so, the may number of fraternity was sent to its subscribers as usual. three days later there appeared in the daily westminster gazette an "interview" with miss willard, written by lady henry somerset, which was so subtly unjust in its wording that i was forced to reply in my own defense. in that reply i made only statements which, like those concerning miss willard's voice interview, have not been and cannot be denied. it was as follows:

lady henry somerset's interview with miss willard

to the editor of the westminster gazette: sir—the interview published in your columns today hardly merits a reply, because of the indifference to suffering manifested. two ladies are represented sitting under a tree at reigate, and, after some preliminary remarks on the terrible subject of lynching, miss willard laughingly replies by cracking a joke. and the concluding sentence of the interview shows the object is not to determine how best they may help the negro who is being hanged, shot and burned, but "to guard miss willard's reputation."

with me it is not myself nor my reputation, but the life of my people, which is at stake, and i affirm that this is the first time to my knowledge that miss willard has said a single word in denunciation of lynching or demand for law. the year 1890, the one in which the interview appears, had a larger lynching record than any previous year, and the number and territory have increased, to say nothing of the human beings burnt alive.

if so earnest as she would have the english public believe her to be, why was she silent when five minutes were given me to speak last june at princes' hall, and in holborn town hall this may? i should say it was as president of the women's christian temperance union of america she is timid, because all these unions in the south emphasize the hatred of the negro by excluding him. there is not a single colored woman admitted to the southern w.c.t.u., but still miss willard blames the negro for the defeat of prohibition in the south. miss willard quotes from fraternity, but forgets to add my immediate recognition of her presence on the platform at holborn town hall, when, amidst many other resolutions on temperance and other subjects in which she is interested, time was granted to carry an anti-lynching resolution. i was so thankful for this crumb of her speechless presence that i hurried off to the editor of fraternity and added a postscript to my article blazoning forth that fact.

any statements i have made concerning miss willard are confirmed by the hon. frederick douglass (late united states minister to hayti) in a speech delivered by him in washington in january of this year, which has since been published in a pamphlet. the fact is, miss willard is no better or worse than the great bulk of white americans on the negro questions. they are all afraid to speak out, and it is only british public opinion which will move them, as i am thankful to see it has already begun to move miss willard. i am, etc.,

may 21

ida b. wells

unable to deny the truth of these assertions, the charge has been made that i have attacked miss willard and misrepresented the w.c.t.u. if to state facts is misrepresentation, then i plead guilty to the charge.

i said then and repeat now, that in all the ten terrible years of shooting, hanging and burning of men, women and children in america, the women's christian temperance union never suggested one plan or made one move to prevent those awful crimes. if this statement is untrue the records of that organization would disprove it before the ink is dry. it is clearly an issue of fact and in all fairness this charge of misrepresentation should either be substantiated or withdrawn.

it is not necessary, however, to make any representation concerning the w.c.t.u. and the lynching question. the record of that organization speaks for itself. during all the years prior to the agitation begun against lynch law, in which years men, women and children were scourged, hanged, shot and burned, the w.c.t.u. had no word, either of pity or protest; its great heart, which concerns itself about humanity the world over, was, toward our cause, pulseless as a stone. let those who deny this speak by the record. not until after the first british campaign, in 1893, was even a resolution passed by the body which is the self-constituted guardian for "god, home and native land."

nor need we go back to other years. the annual session of that organization held in cleveland in november, 1894, made a record which confirms and emphasizes the silence charged against it. at that session, earnest efforts were made to secure the adoption of a resolution of protest against lynching. at that very time two men were being tried for the murder of six colored men who were arrested on charge of barn burning, chained together, and on pretense of being taken to jail, were driven into the woods where they were ambushed and all six shot to death. the six widows of the butchered men had just finished the most pathetic recital ever heard in any court room, and the mute appeal of twenty-seven orphans for justice touched the stoutest hearts. only two weeks prior to the session, gov. jones of alabama, in his last message to the retiring state legislature, cited the fact that in the two years just past, nine colored men had been taken from the legal authorities by lynching mobs and butchered in cold blood—and not one of these victims was even charged with an assault upon womanhood.

it was thought that this great organization, in face of these facts, would not hesitate to place itself on record in a resolution of protest against this awful brutality towards colored people. miss willard gave assurance that such a resolution would be adopted, and that assurance was relied on. the record of the session shows in what good faith that assurance was kept. after recommending an expression against lynch law, the president attacked the antilynching movement, deliberately misrepresenting my position, and in her annual address, charging me with a statement i never made.

further than that, when the committee on resolutions reported their work, not a word was said against lynching. in the interest of the cause i smothered the resentment. i felt because of the unwarranted and unjust attack of the president, and labored with members to secure an expression of some kind, tending to abate the awful slaughter of my race. a resolution against lynching was introduced by mrs. fessenden and read, and then that great christian body, which in its resolutions had expressed itself in opposition to the social amusement of card playing, athletic sports and promiscuous dancing; had protested against the licensing of saloons, inveighed against tobacco, pledged its allegiance to the prohibition party, and thanked the populist party in kansas, the republican party in california and the democratic party in the south, wholly ignored the seven millions of colored people of this country whose plea was for a word of sympathy and support for the movement in their behalf. the resolution was not adopted, and the convention adjourned.

in the union signal dec. 6, 1894, among the resolutions is found this one:

resolved, that the national w.c.t.u, which has for years counted among its departments that of peace and arbitration, is utterly opposed to all lawless acts in any and all parts of our common lands and it urges these principles upon the public, praying that the time may speedily come when no human being shall be condemned without due process of law; and when the unspeakable outrages which have so often provoked such lawlessness shall be banished from the world, and childhood, maidenhood and womanhood shall no more be the victims of atrocities worse than death.

this is not the resolution offered by mrs. fessenden. she offered the one passed last year by the w.c.t.u. which was a strong unequivocal denunciation of lynching. but she was told by the chairman of the committee on resolutions, mrs. rounds, that there was already a lynching resolution in the hands of the committee. mrs. fessenden yielded the floor on that assurance, and no resolution of any kind against lynching was submitted and none was voted upon, not even the one above, taken from the columns of the union signal, the organ of the national w.c.t.u!

even the wording of this resolution which was printed by the w.c.t.u., reiterates the false and unjust charge which has been so often made as an excuse for lynchers. statistics show that less than one-third of the lynching victims are hanged, shot and burned alive for "unspeakable outrages against womanhood, maidenhood and childhood;" and that nearly a thousand, including women and children, have been lynched upon any pretext whatsoever; and that all have met death upon the unsupported word of white men and women. despite these facts this resolution which was printed, cloaks an apology for lawlessness, in the same paragraph which affects to condemn it, where it speaks of "the unspeakable outrages which have so often provoked such lawlessness."

miss willard told me the day before the resolutions were offered that the southern women present had held a caucus that day. this was after i, as fraternal delegate from the woman's mite missionary society of the a.m.e. church at cleveland, o., had been introduced to tender its greetings. in so doing i expressed the hope of the colored women that the w.c.t.u. would place itself on record as opposed to lynching which robbed them of husbands, fathers, brothers and sons and in many cases of women as well. no note was made either in the daily papers or the union signal of that introduction and greeting, although every other incident of that morning was published. the failure to submit a lynching resolution and the wording of the one above appears to have been the result of that southern caucus.

on the same day i had a private talk with miss willard and told her she had been unjust to me and the cause in her annual address, and asked that she correct the statement that i had misrepresented the w.c.t.u, or that i had "put an imputation on one-half the white race in this country." she said that somebody in england told her it was a pity that i attacked the white women of america. "oh," said i, "then you went out of your way to prejudice me and my cause in your annual address, not upon what you had heard me say, but what somebody had told you i said?" her reply was that i must not blame her for her rhetorical expressions—that i had my way of expressing things and she had hers. i told her i most assuredly did blame her when those expressions were calculated to do such harm. i waited for an honest an unequivocal retraction of her statements based on "hearsay." not a word of retraction or explanation was said in the convention and i remained misrepresented before that body through her connivance and consent.

the editorial notes in the union signal, dec. 6, 1894, however, contains the following:

in her repudiation of the charges brought by miss ida wells against white women as having taken the initiative in nameless crimes between the races, miss willard said in her annual address that this statement "put an unjust imputation upon half the white race." but as this expression has been misunderstood she desires to declare that she did not intend a literal interpretation to be given to the language used, but employed it to express a tendency that might ensue in public thought as a result of utterances so sweeping as some that have been made by miss wells.

because this explanation is as unjust as the original offense, i am forced in self-defense to submit this account of differences. i desire no quarrel with the w.c.t.u., but my love for the truth is greater than my regard for an alleged friend who, through ignorance or design misrepresents in the most harmful way the cause of a long suffering race, and then unable to maintain the truth of her attack excuses herself as it were by the wave of the hand, declaring that "she did not intend a literal interpretation to be given to the language used." when the lives of men, women and children are at stake, when the inhuman butchers of innocents attempt to justify their barbarism by fastening upon a whole race the obloque of the most infamous of crimes, it is little less than criminal to apologize for the butchers today and tomorrow to repudiate the apology by declaring it a figure of speech.