National Republican., 1874-07-07
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. REGARD
ING THE SOUTH

While no honest man will deny that the
reconstructed States of the South have been
subjected to a system of plunder since the
war for which politicians of recent origin
are mainly responsible, it is also true that
these politicians do not belong to any par
ticular political organization. In fact, hu-
man nature, as It is evidenced in the acts of
political leaders in the South, is the same as
it is in the North. The robberies of Tweed
in New York are offset by the thcfts of
Moses in South Carolina The railroad
management of the Harrisburg Legislature
finds its counterpart in Richmond. But it
has become fashionable to hold the South
ern States up as examples of misrule and
the responsibility therefor is generally ac-
credited to the ''carpet-baggers. South
Carolina is the most frightful example of
this kind-the ever-standing exposition of
carpet-bag dishonesty. Yet the truth is
that, with one exception, the executive Of
ficers of that State are natives. and that
there are in fact, only two nOn-natives in
the State Senate while the lower House of
the Legislature is also mainly composed of
natives, and with rare exceptions the same
may be said of the county officers
A similar misspprehension exists in re-
gard to the debts of these same States. The
statistics, however, show that those in
which the carpet-baggers and Republicans
have had control, and now have control,
are in better financial condition than
those in which the Democrats have had the,
management Of affairs. The Alabama
State Journal has been investigating this
subject with rather curious results We
quote as follows: ''The debt of South Caro-
lima was So, 1872, 74S in 1860, and it was
increased to 81, ,665, 900 in 1870. The debt
''of Virginia in 1860 was S33, 0o5, 159; in
''1S7O it had been increased to S45, TIE, ,000.-
"The increase In South Carolina was only
'1S1, ,473, 1885, in Virginia, S12, 6O6, 4S1I. Or a
crate of increase in Democratic Virginia of
about ttOeEus dollars to ono dollar in Re.
publican South Carolinal Tennessee in
creased its debt from SIG. 643. 6O7 in 1860
ITO $32, $50, 900 in 1872, and that, too, after
"having sold out all its railroads and re-
''duced its Indebtedness by the amount re-
''alized from their sale!' In 1850 the debt
"of Louisiana was $40, ,7O1. .642; in 1870 it
was S25, ,O21, 900, an increase of $14,
"319,35S in Louisiana, while the
increase in. Tennessee, after de-
'ducting the amount claimed from railroad
''sales, was S15, ,918, ,S73, or an increase in
Democratic Tennessee of tu10 dollars to
zone in Republican Louisiana But
Georgia is the great exemplar of Democ-
''racy in Democratic eyesl Let US see
what tale her debt tells /: In 1860 the debt
''of Georgia was SS, S54, 75O; in 1870 it had
"been increased to $6,014, 500, an increase
lin ten years of $2,65O. $50. The debt of
Alabama in 1860 was S., O9S. 900; in 1870
'eit had been increased to s., 3s2, 900, an in
Grease in Alabama in ten years OF only
1894, 900. Here, then, is a rate of increase
''in the debt of Democratic Georgia of about
'ten dollars to one dollar in Republican
Alabama Or a rate of increase in Ala
''bama less than any other Southern State
Virginia, white mans government has
piled up debt faster than any other South
''ern State Both Tennessee and Virginia,
''boasting Democratic State governments,
''have virtually repudiated their bonded in
''debtedness And Georgia, another Dem
''ocratie State government, has deliber-
lately repudiated over eight millions of its
''bonded Indebtedness.