A Comparison of Exigence in Wells-Barnett and Wilson

In Wells-Barnett's and Wilson's texts, we see similar intent and purpose but with different outlook, tone, perceptions and assumptions. In "Lynch Law", Wells-Barnett writes to enrage and provoke with an eyes toward reform. She cites contemporary examples of lynching, including figures from the Chicago Tribune (Wells-Barnett 2-3), as well as information designed to be taken as shameful or remorseful, like the indemnity payments to other countries (ibid 3) or the accusation of injustice and inequality in treatment. The implication that the populace condones the behavior ("... the silence and seeming condonation grow more marked as the years go by." [ibid 4]) is given to force the audience into action; in other words, if you don't act, you support lynching. Her persuasive, combative, polemic tone is used to promote her exigence in her anti-lynching, pro-equal treatment agenda.
While Wells-Barnett writes to provoke a change in conscience, Wilson seems to want a reflection on antebellum values, desiring reform on the slavery issue (including the interpretations therein, like indentured servitude), and money to survive (given the consequences of the former). She is an example of a victim, whereas Wells-Barnett is victim by association. Her exigence is less marked in that she never points out what, besides the monetary concern (Wilson 3), is her desire to write. We can safely assume, though, that at least in part Wilson writes to expose a state of inequality and injustice that she wants remedied, similar to Wells-Barnett. When Wilson writes, "I have purposefully omitted what would most provoke shame in our good anti-slavery friends at home." (ibid 3), we know that some shameful deeds had been perpetrated in the North which would contrast with their perception as abolitionists and promoters of equality (especially because of Wilson's experiences in Milford, NH, an abolitionist stronghold [ibid 82]; note that Wells-Barnett would not hesitate in using any of this to fulfill her exigence). Promotion of civil rights and egalitarianism are common in both, then, but the methods of inducing these in a reader are quite different.