The Cross and the Lynching Tree

by James H. Cone

During the first trial, with Clarence Darrow as the lead defense attorney, the jury could not reach a decision. But, in a second trial that involved only the shooter, Darrow was able to convince the jury to put themselves in Henry Sweet’s shoes, and they brought back a “not guilty” verdict, which surprised many blacks and whites. What made Darrow so effective was his capacity to empathize with blacks and to persuade others to do so, arguing that blacks have as much right as whites to defend themselves when their home is under attack. According to Niebuhr, Darrow “made everyone writhe as he pictured the injustices and immoralities of our present industrial system.” But, Niebuhr continued, “The tremendous effect of his powerful address was partially offset by the bitterness with which he spoke. . . .” When Niebuhr thought a little more deeply about Darrow’s empathy with black suffering, however, he said, “I suppose it is difficult to escape bitterness when you have eyes to see and heart to feel what others are too blind and too callous to notice.”[29]