Such is the strongest evidence bearing directly on the point under consideration. It is true that Martin’s account, as well as Howe’s, was not written until more than forty years after the death of Charles Lynch. It is true, also, that many stories have referred to a man by the name of Lynch in Virginia, sometimes specifically mentioning Charles Lynch or Colonel Lynch, at other times naming some other Lynch.[57] But it is likewise true that it is in this way that tradition has been persistent in attributing the origin of lynch-law to a member of the Lynch family in Virginia. Furthermore, since no evidence whatsoever has been found for tracing the beginning of lynch-law to any other member of that family, it may be said that tradition has thus persistently pointed to Colonel Charles Lynch as the first lyncher. Traditions are in general far from trustworthy, but, on the other hand, they usually have _some_ basis in fact. In this case Wirt’s statement gives, at the very least, a presumption in favor of the tradition, which facts to the contrary only can remove.[58] The earliest use of the expression “Lynch’s law” that is known at the present time is this one found in Wirt’s book which was published in 1818. Judge Roane wrote that there were many suits in the year 1792 for inflicting Lynch’s law. From his statement it does not follow that the term Lynch’s law was in use in the year 1792. It does follow, however, that the term was at least a localism in Virginia in the year 1817. Other terms were also in use for summary and illegal punishment in the period 1780–1830. The following appeared in the Salem Gazette of October 2, 1812: “People who clamored violently against Mr. Adams’ ‘_gag law_’ in ‘99, see nothing to disapprove in the ‘club law’ enacted at Baltimore, as a substitute for it.—_Messenger._”[59] In the year 1819 two passages entitled “Summary justice” appeared in Niles’ Register. They read as follows: “_Summary justice._—A tin pedlar at Easton, Pa. was discovered to have two negro children in his cart. On examination, one of the little sufferers was found to have been crammed in such a manner, that his ear was rubbed off! The people indignantly rose and cut off the fellow’s ear. I am no advocate for the violation of the laws, but from my heart I can’t feel sorry for him.—_Village Recorder._”[60] “_Summary justice._ After a late extensive fire which happened at Charleston, a fellow was found secreting some goods that had been stolen during the calamity. The alternative was offered to him, whether he would be prosecuted at law, or suffer punishment on the spot; he chose the latter, was tied to a tree, received fifty lashes well laid on, and got off _clear_, having restored the stolen goods.”[61]