1 EXECUTING WHITENESS: POPULAR REPRESENTATIONS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE UNITED STATES, 1915-1940 Daniel LaChance1 This is a work in progress; please do not cite or circulate without the permission of the author. A hush falls over the death house. The witnesses assemble in the death chamber. The final curtain in this drama, where human life plays the leading role, is about to rise.2 Whitner Cary, The Atlanta Constitution, 1928 Over the course of the nineteenth century, elites in the United States increasingly sought to privatize executions and standardize execution protocols. The source of this change is well known to historians of punishment: a fear that public executions had become unwieldy spectacles drove state actors to move these events into jail yards, at first, and then, with the advent of new technologies like the electric chair (1890) and the gas chamber (1924), into the interior of centralized prisons that were often far from the county in which the crime had occurred.3 Access to executions was dramatically curtailed—limited, in most places, to professionals whose restraint and solemnity would reinforce the emerging technocratic ethos of the punishment.4 In some states, newspapers were unsuccessfully banned from reporting details beyond the fact that the execution had been carried out.5 Indeed, the desire to bring an end to the 1 Assistant Professor of History, Emory University (
[email protected]). My thanks to Princeton University students Julie Chen, Ghita Guessous, Lawrence Liu, and Jessica Zou for their excellent research assistance on this project. Thanks also to Rebecca McLennan and peter Brooks, who provided helpful commentary on earlier versions of this essay at the 2013 Annual Meetings of the American Society for Legal History and the April 21, 2014 Seminar in Law and Public Affairs at Princeton University, respectively.