The lynchings you speak of had nothing to do with what is commonly understood to be vigilante activity.
It was none-the-less vigilante activity, and I made the point only because somebody claimed that each and every example of vigilantism in history was, 'without exception', directly related to either a corrupt or inadequate government. Though he was essentially correct, my point is that it's never wise to make such a sweeping statement without considering all the angles first. There are always exceptions. Another example of vigilantism within a very adequate and just government was the union thugs in the early 20th century taking to the streets with clubs, hammers and crobars, bringing their own form of "justice" to folks whom they declared to be their enemies.