The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-05-17
Pendleton's Life Of
 Alexander H. Stephens
By sam.. cailaway in Macon telegraph.

1 statements, he cites his auth critics This gives stability to the work. for the reader feels that he is not reading romance, but history. Yet. the facts are so marshalled, the truths so chamingly stated. that they interest like a novel.
 But the author could not invade the land of romance. or dwell on what we call the poetry of life" for Mir. Ste- phen's career began and ended without romance.
 But he became enamored of our sys- tenn of government--that system with out a model-and the author shows all through the biography that 1t was a lifelong infatuation with him-to such an extent even that when the Confederacy was in its direst extremi- ties. and the exigencies demanded in- stant results, Mir. Stephens was over sensitive about constitutional rights and powers --gofng so far as to openly oppose the policies of the Confederate administration, injurious to the cause and comforting to the enemy
 At this time Ben Hill was in the prime of splendid manhood and was a bold and aggressive Confederate upon whom President Davis relied for the maintenance of his policies. and Mir Hill regarded as sheer puerility MT. stephens contentious over "constitu- tional rights" and military despot- ism" when the fight was for exist ence. And the author informs his readers of Mir. Hill's views and criti- cisms. During the war many Geor- gians thought MT. Davis's decided pre- ference for MT. Hill created some pi- que in MT. Stephens, especially so as the two were repellant long before the war.
 D~..
 paint of truth. He does not color lik e a partisan nor detract like an enemy. He paints Mir. Stephens as he was, as he lived and moved and acted. And to do this. Mir. Stephens appears in grandeur from his entrance into pub lie life to the organization of the Con- federacy-and from the close of the war to the day of his death. His lapse was during the war. so .
 MT Stephens weakness is his war record. Indeed, the author shows that Mir. Stephens. by nature and tempera- ment, was not suited for the vice. presidency of nation whose existence had to be won at the cannon's mouth. From the beginning MT. Stephens in- sisted on defensive" policy.
 In fact. the author regards that de fensive policy" as the mistake of the Confederacy. Mir. Davis being -onN that line. MT. Toombs was the opposite. He was for quick work. He was for calling out every available man in the Confederacy at once. Where shall we get arms for them?" asked Mir. Davis. By God, sir, we will capture them in the first battle. Nothing can with stand the enthusiasm of our people" And at the first Manassas Jackson said to MT. Davis, Give me 10000 yea, give me 5000 fresh troops and I'll have Washington for you by sunrise" But Toombs' advice had not been taken.
 But in the great battles of the South for her rights in the Union the author shows that MT. Stephens was her greatest champion-a matchless leader His career in Congress, his speeches on the hustlings. his love for the Union his devotion to the rights of the States. his opposition to sectionalisrn, his war on centralism. his arraign- ment of the North for her bad faith, her failure to keep the compact, her determination to revolutionize our system her greed in demanding all the territories despite the Missouri Com