MISMANAGEMENT AND OTHER TROUBLES 55 
said that “every colored politician down South 
was the enemy of the Bank.” Robert Somers, 
the English traveler, after observation of the 
workings of the bank pointed out in 1870 certain 
weaknesses and predicted trouble. He called 
attention to the fact that, although the bank 
was established under the patronage of the 
United States government, the latter was not 
bound to make good any losses; that these would 
fall upon the depositors alone.’ 
The state governments in the South opposed 
the operation of the branch banks because they 
were not under local control, and because they 
sent money away from the local communities, 
while the white men’s banks were often un- 
friendly to the objects and methods of the Negro 
bank. There is evidence that debtors were slower 
in settling with the Freedmen’s Bank than with 
other banks, that the Freedmen’s Bank would 
get what was left after the others had made 
choice of what they wanted. Many white men 
disliked the Freedmen’s Bank because they be- 
lieved that it was connected with the Freedmen’s 
Bureau, and all who disliked the Negro disliked 
the Negro bank. It was a “race bank,” as Fred- 
erick Douglass said, and it aroused “race 
opposition.’ 
There was a persistent belief which came to 
be shared by depositors, that the bank officials 
took too much part in southern politics. In 1872 
a rumor that funds of the institution were being 
2 Douglas Report, p. 78 (statement of Purvis, of Philadelphia). 
3 Somers, Southern States, p. 55. 
4 Douglas Report, pp. 20, 21, 181, 240, 248, 249; Ho. Ex. Doc. No. 
#4, 44 Cong., 1 Sess., p. 5.