irely in his estimate of this class of
officials, especially as to his footnote statement about their
dishonesty; neither does it give the impression that they were
worthy, as a whole, of the important positions they occupied. If
Evans, as described by Rhodes, following Garner, was not typical,
neither was Bruce.

Mr. Lynch gives figures for 1875 and 1907 on financial matters
and on the basis of these claims that the profligacy of
Reconstruction finances is not proven. The manifest unfairness of
taking figures for 1907 may be passed over; but the necessary
basis of comparison must be wider than this. Nor do his
conclusions agree with any others that I have seen, nor, which is
more important, with other statistics. Both those of the census
or those given annually by Appletons' Annual Cyclopaedia lead to
other conclusions. Just as an illustration of what is said on the
other side take this statement, which seems to be that of the
land tax. This was 1 mill in 1869, 5 mills in 1870, 4 mills in
1871, 8-1/2 mills in 1872, 12-1/2 mills in 1873, 14 mills in
1874, 9-1/4 mills in 1875, 6-1/2 mills in 1876, 6-1/5 mills in
1877, 3-1/2 mills in 1878. Another point that should be
considered is that Mr. Lynch confines his figures to state
finances; while it is for local finances that the Reconstruction
government of Mississippi is most severely condemned.

Conceding a point in this case, he says:

Mr. Lynch is correct in saying that the Mississippi senators at
the time of the state election of 1875 were Alcorn and Bruce.
Pease had been succeeded by Bruce on March 4 of that year. Pease
opposed Ames but he was no longer senator.

Mr. Lynch, in upholding the Reconstruction policy of Stevens and
Sumner and what he calls their desire to delay restoration, seems
to have overlooked the fact that the wisest of all the Civil War
statesmen desired to get the states back into the Union before
Congress should meet in December, 1865. Mr. Lynch is right in
thinking that the 14th Amendment was essentially a correct
measure, but so also does Mr. Rhodes. The 15th Amendment is quite
a different proposition, however. Nor does it follow, because
legislation of some sort might have been necessary to enforce the
14th Amendment or to take its place when the South refused to