What social justice / civil rights activism sounded like back in 1895

Meet Ida Wells, a campaigner against lynching and in favour of female suffrage. Her words:

It is a well established principle of law that every wrong has a remedy. Herein rests our respect for law. The Negro does not claim that all of the one thousand black men, women and children, who have been hanged, shot and burned alive during the past ten years, were innocent of the charges made against them. We have associated too long with the white man not to have copied his vices as well as his virtues. But we do insist that the punishment is not the same for both classes of criminals. In lynching, opportunity is not given the Negro to defend himself against the unsupported accusations of white men and women. The word of the accuser is held to be true and the excited blood-thirsty mob demands that the rule of law be reversed and instead of proving the accused to be guilty, the victim of their hate and revenge must prove himself innocent. No evidence he can offer will satisfy the mob; he is bound hand and foot and swung into eternity. Then to excuse its infamy, the mob almost invariably reports the monstrous falsehood that its victim made a full confession before he was hanged.

It seems to me that a lot of what passes for social justice activism these days is almost diametrically opposed to the above, though I think the above standard is a good one to aim for.

It doesn't deny that a lot of those accused of an offence are probably guilty, yet it attempts to hear all sides of the case rather than jumping to conclusions and also seeks to treat all equally.