Full text of "Inquiry into the causes which have retarded the accumulation of wealth and increase of population in the southern states: in which the question of slavery is considered in a politico-economical point of view"

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http : //books . google . com/

441 II

$B Ml SB5

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

■ I

Digitized by

Google

INQUIRY

INTO THK

CAUSES WHICH HAVE RETARDED

THE

ACCUMVIATIOR OF WEAITI IHD INC11EA8E OF POnilATION IN TIO:
SOUTHEBN STATES:

IN WHICH

THE QUESTION OF SLAVERY

CONSIDERED IN A FOUTIGO-ECONOMICAL POINT OF VIEW.

BY A C

AHOLlNIAN-cD^^'^^-^'^^'-'^'- ":-'

WASHINGTON, D. C.i

W. BLANCHAItD, PRINTER, PENN. AV«»UE,
One door west of Jackion HmlL

1846.

Digitized by

Google

•Digitized by

Google

PREFACE.

The author would more particularly direct the
reader's attention to the second and the following
chapters, which embrace those of his views, which
may be regarded as new. The first chapter is merely
introductory; and although the facts there stated
present a striking view of the subject, they are
such as have been frequently brought to the atten-
tiqn of the public. I reiterate them here, for the
information of those who have not met with them
elsewhere, and also as showing the necessity of fur-
ther inquiry into the causes which have produced
such a difference in the wealth and importance of
the North and South. In the third chapter I have
availed myself of the Report of the Secretary of the
Treasury to illustrate my theory of the Unproduc-
tiveness of Slave Property.

320284

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

INQUIRY

INTO

THE CAUSES WHICH HAVE RETARDED

THE

ACCUMULATION OF WEALTH AND INCREASE OF POFULA-
. TION IN THE SOUTHERN STATES.

CHAPTER I.

In examining the causes which have retarded the accumulation
of wealth and population in the Southern or slaveholding States, it^
will be proper to advert to the particular circumstances in which
the inferiority of the South, as contrasted with the North, consists.
The reader will perceive, by mrning to the map, that the slavehold-
ing States, fourteen in number, commencing with Maryland, con-
stitute much the larger portion of the Union, and according to the
computation of geographers, contains an area of six hundred and
eighty thousand square miles :* whereas the fourteen free States, to-
gether with Iowa and Wisconsin,! contain only four hundred and
fifty thousand square miles. The Southern climate generally, is
esteemed the more wholesome, her soil equal to that of the North-
ern States, and her productions surpassing in importance those,
perhaps, of any country in the world. For while her capacity for
the production of grain, and all other articles which make up the
staple of human subsistence and human comfort, is unsurpassed,
she enjoys an almost exclusive monopoly in the supply of two
articles, cotton and tobacco, which form of themselves, if not the
chief object, certainly the greatest item of the commerce of nations.
To these must be added the important articles, sugar, rice, and indi-
go, the production of which in the United States is entirely confined
to the South. Her mineral resources, and her natural facilities of
internal and external commerce, are equal or superior to those of
the Northern States. If, therefore, the Southern States are behind
the Northerh in all the elements of social improvement, the cause

* This BiippoMs that the limits of the State of Texas, when detached from the vacant ter-
nloiy which pertains to it, will be fifty thousand square miles: which is about*the ayeraca
size of the large States.

t This oompntatioa sapposes that Iowa and Wiaconsin will contain fifty thousand square
miles each.

Digitized by

Google

is clearly not traceable to physical impediments. For with superior
soil, climate and productions, equal natural facilities of inland^ navi-
gation and external commerce, and greater extent of territory, it is
quite reasonable to infer, that, all other things being equal, the
•South would have been in advance of the North in population and
Icommerce, and as a consequence, in the number and size of her
■towns and cities, and the general improvement of the country.
iBut for some cause, the reverse of all this is the case. The North-
I em States contain a much larger population upon a much smaller
territory. They monopolize nearly all the foreign commerce of the
country, besides carrying on a more extensive internal trade than
the South ; their manufactures, and peihaps agriculture, are greater
in quantity, as both are unquestionably superior in quality. The
Northern cities are numerous, large, and elegant, and evince a ra-
pidity of growth at every successive census to which no parallel is
to be found in history. On the other hand, the towns and cities in
the Southern States (excepting those upon the Northern border,
and New Orleans, which, as the emporium of the whole Mississippi
valley, receives its principal contributions of trade from the North-
west,) are few in number and meagre in appearance, exhibiting
little of the activity and spirit which is to be seen in the Northern
cities, and many of them are retrograding in population.

If we revert to the history of the cfiuntry, we find that the South-
ern part of it was settled by Europeans even before the Northern ;
and that at the period of 1790, when the first census was taken
under the Constitution, the population of the South was but little
behind that of the North — the former being one million nine hund-
red and three thousand ; the latter two millions and forty thousand,
the difference amounting to only one hundred and thirty-seven
thousand. It must be regarded as a circumstance which renders
the present great disparity of numbers, amounting to nearly three
millions according to the census of 1840, the more remarkable, that
the breadth of frontier which lay contiguous to the Southern States,
at the period of 1790, was several times greater than that of the
North ; and consequently admitted o*f an earlier and more rapid
settlement than the remoter parts to which the Northwestern emi-
grants must resort. The early settlement of the Northwest was
likewise retarded by the presence of warlike Indians, which is
another circumstance favorable to the increase of population in the
South and Southwest, as it would naturally turn the tide of North-
ern and European emigration in that direction. And the result has
been, accordingly, that two States had risen up along the Southern
frontier, (Kentucky and Tennessee,) before the settlement of any
Northwestern State. These advantages of position, climate and
productions, it would be quite natural to suppose, would have given
to the South, at the expiration of fifly years, a population much
greater than that of the Northern part of the Union — not only
greater in the aggregate, but greater in proportion to extent of
tanitory — ^greater to the square mile. The reverse of all this, how-
ever, is strangely true.

Digitized by

Google

But the contrast will become more striking, if we compare the
contiguous parts of the North and South with each other; this
narrower view of the subject is the fairer likewise, there being less
dissimilarity of circumstances. New York and Virginia, though
not contiguous, enjoy nearly equal advanta.ges of position; each
touching the Atlantic, and possessing an excellent harbor upon its
coast. If the harbor of the city of New York is superior to that of
Norfolk, the difference is fully compensated by the advantage of a
more extended communication with the interior. New York has
but one natural communication with the interior, while Norfolk has
many. The territorial extent of the State of New York is estimated
at fifty thousand square miles, that of Virginia at sixty-five thous-
and ; so that, if there be any superiority in the soil of the former,
which may be questioned, the more genial climate and extensive^
territory of the latter may be set down as a fair equivalent. One
would think that the ratio of increase of population in the two
States, under these equal circumstances, would-be equal ; and that
the State which contained the larger population at the beginning
of any series of years, as at the period of 1790, would maintain a
proportionate superiority of numbers at the end of that series in
1840. Thus, Virginia in 1790 ^ontamed a population of seven
hundred and forty-seven thousand — that of New York was only
three hundred and forty thousand ; and the ratio of one to the other
was something more than two to one in favor of Virginia.

After making due allowance, therefore, for a greater emigration
from the more populous State, it would be reasonable to expect,
without the intervention of some latent evil, that the population of
Virginia, at the expiration of fifl^ ye^rs, would be nearly twice as
great as that of New York. But the census of 1840 developes the
astonishing fact that the population of New York is within a small
firaction of being double that of Virginia — the former being two
millions four hundred and twenty-nine thousand C2,429,000) — the
latter only one million two hundred and forty thousand (1,240,000) —
a ratio of nearly two to one in favor of New York. If the com-
parison be made between Virginia and Pennsylvania, the result,
though less striking, will show much to thy disadvantage of the
former. But Pennsylvania, it must be remembered, lies remote
from the Atlantic, and bears no comparison with Virginia in its
natural facilities of internal communication: its great centre of
commerce, Philadelphia, has a rival, too, as the emporium* of the
back country, on either hand, in New York and Baltimore.

If the comparison be extended to the Western States, it will he
attended with similar results — as for instance, Kentucky and Ohio.
The former in 1790 containing a population of seventy-three thous-
and, the latter only three thousand ; but in 1840, the population of
Ohio amounted to one million five hundred and twenty thousand,
(1,520,000), while that of Kentucky was only seven hundred and
eighty thousand, (780,000). The general improvement of the face
of the country, the construction of roads and canals, agricultural
irt)proTem«nts, public and private buildings, the growth of towns

Digitized by

Google

and cities^ in the States of New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, seem
to be more than commensurate with their increase of population, if
compared with the condition of things in Virginia and Kentucky.
' These results, so unpromising of the future prosperity of the
South, have excited much speculation in regard to their causes ;
but public. opinion seems to have settled upon the conviction that
slavery is the source of all the evils, or the chief evil which roars
the prosperous career of the Southern States.

. CHAPTER 11.

Reflection upon the facts set forth above, has led the author of
these pages into the common opinion that slavery has been the
obstacle which has retarded the improvement and population of the
JBouthern States. But at this point another question arises. How
does slavery present that obstacle ? The common, and I believe
the universal opinion is, that slavery affects the prosperity of the
country by its tendency to degrade labor in the estimation of the
poor, and to engender pride in the rich ; and as a consequence, to
produce ' idleness and inattention tj> business in all. And besides,
it is said to have the effect of keeping away foreign immigrants,
. whose sentiments are averse to the institution. These combined
I causes, it is thought, have produced the great disparities between
the North and South above adverted to.

It will not be attempted to deny the existence or the operation
of the causes assigned ; but my present purpose will be to show,
that the chief evils of slavery to the body politic result from prin-
ciples more stubborn and powerful than its moral effects upon the
people.

If a farmer in Ohio own one hundred apres of land, with the
cattle, the food to subsist them, and utensils of husbandry neces-
sary in its tillage, he will, as is obvious, be able to enter upon its
cultivation with an additional ready capital sufficient to supply his
laborers with maintenance. Thus, if the food and shelter of a free,
laborer be worth fifty pilars per annum, and one laborer be neces-
sary to the cultivation of ten acres, then five hundred dollars would
be the additional capital necessary in the case above supposed.
The laborers' wages invariably come out of the sale of the crop, and
consequently there existed no necessity for the employer to have
it by him.

The illustration may be varied by estimating the amount of capi-
tal necessary to the making a given product — one hundred bales of
cotton for instance. If, as is asserted, one man can produce ten
bales of cotton, (of course the product per hand is immaterial to
the illustration), then the capital necessary to the production of one
hundred bales, apart from the land, etc., as above, will be five hund-
red dollars.

I will now inquire the amount of capital necessary to employ
6lave labor in the cultivation of one hundred acres of land, or the

Digitized by

Google

production of one hundred bales of cotton. If men slaves be worth
seven hundred dollars, and the food and clothing of a slave fifty
dollars per annum, the cultivation of one hundred acres of land by
the labor of ten slaves in Alabama, requires a capital of seven
thousand five hundred dollars, apart from capital invested in land,
cattle, &c., as above. Or the production of one hundred bales of
cotton by slave labor requires a capital of seven thousand five
hundrejd dollars, apart from the value of land, &c. I have based the
illustration, for convenience, upon the supposition that the labor of
men only is employed^ but it is perfectly obvious that the principle
is true generally of all free and all slave labor.

Again. The average annual cotton crop of the United States
for uie last three or four years is estimated to have amounted to ^
two millions of bales, (2,000,000). If it be supposed, for conveni-
ence, that the labor of men slaves only is employed in its produc-
tion ; and the same suppositions remaining as above with reference
to the value of slaves, the product per blind, and the price of pro-
visions and clothing ; then the number of slaves employed in the
production of the crop of the country will be two hundred thous-
and ; and the capital necessary to employ them will be one. hundred
and fifly millions of dollars, (j^ 150,000,000), which sum includes .
the value of the slaves and the cost of their yearly maintenance.
Butjf^slavery were out of the wayj, anjd/ree labor employed in the
production of the cotton crop, the ready capital necessary to pro-
duce it^ ap^Jrom the vjilueofland, cattle, utensils, &c., as in the
above calculations, will be«ten millions of doUais, ($10»000,000) ;
which is the sum necess^iry tp feed and shelter the laborers for
twelve months.

It follows from the foregoing illustrations, that the ready capital
necessary to employ slave labor, is to the ready capital necessary to
employ free labor, in the production of a given quantity of cotton,
or the cultivation of a given number of acres of land, in the ratio
of the value of a slaVe, together with the cost of his yearly main-
tenance and clothing, to the price of board and shelter for a free
laborer. U pon the ab ove suppasitionaof 4b» vftkte-of-«Uve pmp-
ertyj^Jhe_j^ij.fti)f jjtrQxisipnSi &c., the ratio ij fifleen to.oiie, (15 to
1). But it must not be inferred from hence that the whole capital
employed to yield a given product with slave labor is fifleen times
greater than Uiat necessary where free labor is employed ; because
in this case the value of land, cattle, tools of husbandry, &c., come
into the calculation, and constitute a part of the capital invested ;
and since these items will be the same in the two cases, the ratio
of capital to product, which with reference to labor only is fifteen
to one, is varied in proportion to the value of lands, &c* To speak
arithmetically, it b the addition of a constant quantity to the ante-
cedent and consequent, or to the numerator and denominator of a
fraction, and of course has the effect of lessening the ratio, or the
quotient. Thus, in the cultivation of one hundred acres of land,
the ready capital necessary to employ slave labor, at the rates sup-

Digitized by

Google

posed above, is seven thousand five hundred dollars, ($7,500).
Add to this sum the value of the land at ten dollars per acre, or
one thousand dollars, ($1,000), together with the value of the
cattle, their provender, aAd the utensils of husbandry necessary in
its cultivation, which may be worth five hundred dollars more,
($500), and the whole amount of capital employed becomes nine
thousand dollars, ($9,000). In the cultivation of the same quantity
<^ land with fi'ee labor, the whole capital necessary is the price of
provisions and shelter for* the laborers, which by the above suppo-
sitions amounts to five hundred dollars, ($500), together with the
value of the land, one thousand dollars, ($1,000^, as before, and of
the cattle, utensils, &c., five hundred more, ($500), making the
whole capital two thousand dollars, ($2,000). Hence the whole
capital invested in the cultivation of one hundred acres of land
with slave labor, is to that necessary where fi-ee labor is employed,
as nine thousand is to two thousand, or as nine to two, or four and
a half to one. This ratio of course becomes less in proportion as
the value of land, cattle, &c., is augmented.

Thus, if the land be worth one hundred dollars per acre, or ten
thousand dollars ($10,000); then, the other items remaining as be-
fore, the capital becomes, where slave labor is employed, eighteen
thousand dollars ($18,000); and where firee labor is employed,
eleven thousand ($11,000); in this case the ratio is something more
than three to two (3 to 2).

It is apparent firom this, as well as from the preceding illustra-
tions, that without reference to the ratio; the capital invested, where
slave labor is employed, in the cultivation of a given number of
acres, or the making a given product, exceeds the capital necessary
where free labor is employed, by the value of the slaves.

All the foregoing calculations are based upon the supposition
that slave labor is necessarily and exclusively employed in the
slaveholding States, and that each planter is the owner of the slaves
he employs. This is not true in fact, much of the labor of the
Southern States being performed by freemen ; but that circumstance
by no means affects the principle involved, it only serves to miti-
gate its consequences upon the prosperity of the country ; and it
is obvious, that to make such an objection to the principle is to
acknowledge its operation in every case where slave labor is em-
ployed. The employment of hired slave labor forms no exception
to the case; the hired slaves being nothing else than borrowed
capital.

It may not be improper here to anticipate a probable objection
to the principle maintained in the preceding pages. It may be
thought irreconcilable with the well known fact, that agriculture
is equallj or perhaps more profitable where slave labor is used than
is the case where the labor of freemen is employed. This difficulty
will be removed by reference to the illustration above, where one
hundred acres of land are supposed to be cultivated by ten men.
The capital necessary where the labor of slaves is made use of was

Digitized by

Google

nitie thousand dollars ($9,000); vdiere free labor is employied, only
two thousand ($2,000). The product being the same, it is thought
unaccountable that the smaller capital should not yield a larger
profit. This is accounted for by considering that the employer of
free labor is compelled to give up a large portion of his crop, or
money derived from the sale of it, as the wages of labor ; and this
sum corresponds tp the profit upon the excess of capita] which the
employer of slave labor makes use of. . But this necessity which
the employer of fi-ee labor is under of distributing a large part of his
crop among his laborers, had no tendency to check its production,
the wages not being paid until the end of the year, out of what is
produced by the laborer himself; and it is equally obvious, that the
distribution of it can have no effect in enhancing or diminishing
the aggregate product. I have already remarked upon the case of
hiring slave labor, that it is nothing else than borrowed capital ; and
consequently, that the making a given product, or the cultivation
of a given number of acrea of land with hired slave labor involves
an equal invested crpital, as when the slaves are the property of the
enipToyiers. But the employer of hired labor is under the same
necessity of parting with the wages of his laborers as is the em-
ployer of fi-ee kbor. Hence, though the capital employed is thd
same as would be necessary had it all been the employer's, his
profit is only equal to that of the employer of free labor; and
whether he pays the wages to the laborer, or to a master who hold«
him as property, the aggregate wealth produced is the same.

The difference- bet w e en the two capitals Ja sevea thoosand dol-
lars ($7,000), which is the value of the slaves. Now, if a firee la-
borer be estimated to be worth the same to himself that a slave is to
his master, the agricultural operation with free labor may be regard-
ed as a joint stock or partnership business, in which the employer
invests two thousand dollars, and each laborer seven hundred, or
the ten seven thousand, which would make the capital equal to that
where slave labor is employed.

CHAPTER III.

I have based the foregoing reasoning upon facts and suppositietis
which all must admit to be correct and legitimate ; but, to give the
subject a more practical bearing, I will call to my aid the volumi-
nous statistical report of the Secretary of the Treasury, recently
published by order of Congress. It is known to the reading public
that Mr. Walker, during the past year, addressed circulars to ail
the principal Agricultural, Commercial, and Manufacturing men of
the country, in which he propounds to them numerous questions
connected with their several occupations. His object was to
obtain from them such information in relation to the profits of
capital in the different branches of industry, as would enable Con-
gress to apportion the tariff laws with an enlightened regard, to

Digitized by

Google

the interests of all. It is ao p^rt of my purpose at piesent to ex-
press any opinion upon the merits of the design or the execution
of the work ; or to draw any inference from it in reference to the
Tariff Policy. I may, however, make use of facts in illustration of
my subject, which were collected for a totally diflferent end.

Mr. Walker issued two series of questions, (marked Nos. 1 and
2), each series embracing quite a number of inquiries with which I
have nothing to do at present. The fourth, in the first circular, in-
quires of the manufacturer, what is the amount of his capital in-
vested in grounds and buildings, water-power and machinery. The
fifth inquires the average amount of materials, and cash for the pur-
chase of materials and payment of wages, necessary to be kept
constantly on hand. The twelfth inquires the number of men,
women, and children employed, and the average wages of each
class.

^ To these questions, Mr. Samuel Bachelor (I presume a direc-
tor or agent) replies, that the York Cotton Manufacturing Com-
pany, at Saco, in Maine, has a capital, in grounds, buildings, and
machinery, amounting to five hundred and fifty thousand dollars,
($550,000). Their business capital, invested in materials and for
the payment of wages, is four hundred and fifty thousand dollars,
($450,000) — ^the whole is therefore one million of dollars, ($1,000,-
000). But I have reason to think this sum is pver-stated, in this
way : The amount set down as the business capital probably em-
braces the whole sum employed in that way during a year. But
it is not necessary to have on hand the cash to purchase materials
and pay wages for the current year in advance, since these charges
can be met by the income of the establishment, which I presume
comes in almost daily, or at short intervals. The only amount
of business capital necessary would be that sum which would
keep the machinery in motion until the completion of a fabric and
its sale. I see confirmation of this view of the matter in a case
which I will introduce presently. However, in this case, let the
capital, fixed and floating, be set down as above, at a million. The
number of men employed is 200 — the number of women fi-om 900
to 1,200 : Let us put down the number of women at the low aver-
age of 1,000. The whole number employed will be twelve hundred
men and women. Here, then, in a ftee State, one million of dol-
lars invested in the manufacture of cotton, employs twelve hundred
adult persons. In a slave State, if slave labor be used, the capital >
of a company doing equal business, and employing an equal
amount of labor with that at Saco, must exceed it by the whole
value of twelve hundred slaves. That number of slaves, at present
prices^ would be worth little short of a million. They would at
any rate command $700 each, or $840,000 for the whole. This
sum, added to the other necessary capital, would make the invest-
ment in an establishment like that at Saco, but employing slave
labor, one million eight hundred and forty thousand dollars,
($1,840,000). It is true that the employer of slave labor would be

Digitized by

Google

exempt from the payment of wages, though not from the charge of
maintaining his slaves ; and, in view of the consideration above
adverted to, that there could exis^t no necessity for keeping in hand
the whole business capital spent in a year, I think little abatement
need be made on that score — at any rate not more than forty thou-
sand dollars, which would leave the slaveholder's capital eight hun-*
dred thousand dollars ($800,000) greater than that of tl^ Saoo
company.

I have here supposed that a slave will do an equjal amount of
, labor with a freeman, while the experience of men in every depart-
ment of industry proves the contrary. It has grown into a proverb
in the Southern States, that the labor of a white man is worth that
of two slaves. At that rate, it would require a large addition to
the above estimate of the capital necessary to carry on manufac-
turing with slave labor. If in the simplest agricultural operations
there exists such a disparity in the efficiency of free and slave
labor, it must, in the nature of things, be still greater where skill
and intelligence are requisite, as is the case in manufactures. Sap-
posing it practicable to employ slaves extensively in manufactur-
ing, it will hence be necessary to procure the most intelligent and
faithful, and consequently such as command the highest prices.
But notwithstanding that so large a capital is necessary to employ
slaves iii manufactures, an investment of that kind may yet be prof-
itable. The excess of capital, which consists in the value of the
slaves, though it produces nothing, saves the payment of wages.
It may, in that way, yield as large a dividend to the owner as his
other investment. I however find, by Mr. Walker's report, that
Southern manufacturers almost invariably use hired labor — free
generally, no doubt.

It is not my purpose to show that manufacturing at the South is
impracticable : on the contrary, I incline to believe that the coarser
fabrics may be made there with much advantage to the capitalist
and to the community. But the fact that ^very^a bsorbs the yy^at
bulk of Southern capital must always present an obstacle to exten-
sive operations. So it is with commerce and all the other interests.
They all exhibit a dwarfed or deformed appearance in comparison
with similar occupati6ns in free countries. Even agriculture, which
is more profitable in the South than almost any where in the world,
is conducted in the worst way imaginable. Slavery sits like the
Old Man of the Sea upon the necks of the people, paralyzing every
effort at improvement. This I shall show, in another place, is not,
as is commonly supposed, attributable to inertness or indolence,
but to slavery as an unproductive absorbent of capital.

Mr. Enoch Hews is a tobacco, snuff, and segar manufacturer.
In reply to questions four and five, he states his capital at thirty
thousand dollars, ($30,000), of which twenty thousand is perma-
nent, and ten thousand used in the purchase of materials and the
payment of wages. He employs one hundred persons, mostly
females. One hundred slaves of similar ages would be of the aver-

Digitized by

Google

age value of $600 each, or sixty thousand in the aggregate. Add
to it the capital invested by Mr. Hews, and ninety thousand dol-
lars will be the sum necessary to conduct a similar establishment
with slave labor. This sum is however subject to some abatement,
for the reason stated in the preceding case, viz : that the employer
of slave labor is exempt from the charge of wages. This item,
however, would not exceed two or three thousand dollars.

Mr. Calvin J. Mills states, in answer to question fourth, that,
the capital of the Eagle Furnace, at Buffalo, New York, invested in
buildings and machinery, is thirty-five thousand dollars, ($35,000),
and that the sum spent in a year in materials is thirty thousand
dollars, ($30,000) — that expended in wages fifteen thousand dol-
lars, ($15,000). The fixed capital, together with the business capi-
tal absorbed in a year, is eighty thousand dollars, ($80,000). But,
in answer to the thirty-third question, Mr. Mills states, that the
capital of the company is fifty thousand dollars, ($50,000). He
evidently discriminates between the whole business capital absorbed
in a year, and that portion of it which it is necessary to keep on
hand at any one time. This is the case to which I referred in
speaking of the Saco company. I have little doubt that the sum
set down there as the business capital embraces the whole amount
expended in a year. According to the statement of Mr. Mills,
the current outlay in materials and wages is three times greater
than the amount of cash necessary at one time. If a similar abate-
ment is to be made in the other cases, it is evident that I have not
presented the question in its strongest light.

Mr. Mills states that the Eagle Furnace employs eighty men,
at $1.50 per day. Slaves, possessing equal skill, would not be
worth less than $900 each, at present prices, and aggregately,
seventy-two thousand dollars, ($72,000). Hence, if we allow that
the employer of free labor will need $7,000 in ready cash, to pay
wages, an establishment of equal extent, using slave labor, will
require a capital of one hundred and fifteen thousand dollars,
($115,000).

But I deem it useless to multiply instances, as any one who
wishes to examine the subject further may do so by referring to the
Secretary's report. I have searched in vain for a case where slaves
were exclusively employed in a manufacturing establishment in the
Southern States, in order that I might present the subject under
another aspect. It is mentioned that a factory in Alabama em-
ploys thirty laborers, fifteen of whom are slaves belonging to the
proprietors. The capital is thirty thousand dollars, ($30,000). If
the fifteen slaves are of the average value of $600 each, they are
aggregately worth $9,000, which, deducted from the whole invest-
ment, leaves twenty-one thousand dollars, ($21,000),^for the pro-
ductive capital employed. If none but slaves were employed, then
their value would be eighteen thousand dollars, ($18,000), which
is more than half the capital stock.

I have not been able to find a distinction drawn in the accounts

Digitized by

Google

of the production of sugar, between the value of slaves and of real
and other capital invested. But it is stated that the whole capital
engaged in the production of sugar, in 1840, was fifty millions of
dollars, ($50,000,000); and that fifty thousand slaves of all ages are
employed on the estates. Suppose the slaves to be worth $400
each, their aggregate value will be twenty millions, ($20,000,000),
which is an unproductive capital. But in the sugar-growing busi-
ness, a great number of free laborers are employed, directly or in-
directly. If all such persons were slaves, the capital unproductively
employed in that branch of industry would bear a much larger pro-
portion to the whole.

I have used the phrase " unproductively employed" for conve-
nience, but without a proper regard to accuracy. Capital invested
in slaves cannot be said to be employed. T^sJ^Qd.Jind.£lQtMjig
of a slave is a productive investment^ because it is an essential
outlay i but his value as property cannot contribute any thing to
production, for the reason that the destruction of the property by
the liberation of the slave would in no degree destroy the efficiency
of his labor.

CHAPTER IV.

It follows, from the foregoing reasoning, which I humbly think
incontrovertible, that property in slaves has nothing to do with pro-
duction ; for in every instance of the employment of slave labor,
the capital must exceed the amount necessary where free labor is
employed, by the value of the slaves. And hence all the wealth of
individuals which has assumed that shape has added nothing to the
resources of the State or Nation. It adds nothing to the taxable
value or productive energies of the country : and yet has not been
accumulated without the same expense of capital and industry
which are necessary in producing other species of wealth. The
abolition of slavery, therefore, while it would be attended with
much individual loss, if effected without compensation to the own-
er, would destroy none of the resources of the country. It would
possess the same labor, and the same land and other materials to
employ it — the same means and stronger motives — the hope of gain
in a greater number. The tax which the slave bears as property,
he would be equally able to pay in the character of a free citi-
zen. The military strength of the country would be augmented,
not simply by the number of slaves manumitted, but by that num-
ber together with the number of freemen which would now be ne-
cessary to hold the slaves in subjection. Slavery merely serves to
appropriate the wages of labor — it distributes wealth, but cannot
create it. This will be regarded as a strange peculiarity of slave
property : that it is actively employed in productive pursuits, and
yet yields nothing. The reason is this : It is Ihe necessity which
exists of appropriating the brute creation, and all inanimate sub-

Digitized by

Google

Stances, in order to render them productive, and the absence of
that necessity with reference to human beings. The ox never vol-
untarily assumes the yoke, nor the horse the saddle — both require
a master to give them any agency in the production of wealth —
and the same is true of all inanimate substances. But man, as all
experience proves, will labor more assiduously in the accumulation
of wealth, under the incentive of interest, than at the bidding of a
master — the hope of gain having a more salutary effect upon him,
than the fear of punishment.

Since property invested in slaves is unproductive and useless, as is
apparent from the above reasoning, the direct effect of its admission
into any State, is, consequently, to divert the energies of the peo-
ple from its improvement. But slavery is not simply unproductive ;
it has a peculiarity which belongs to no other species of unproduc-
tive capital. It substitutes the place of free citizens, by supplying
all the demands for labor; and yet the substitute, as I have demon-
strated, requires seveial times more capital to furnish it than is ne-
cessary to obtain a supply of free labor. Thus, if the cotton plan-
ter of Alabama desires to extend his operations by the cultivation
of an additional hundred acres, with ten additional laborers, (the
same suppositions remaining,) he must first accumulate nine thou-
sand dollars.

But if the farmer in Ohio of equal means should desire to extend
his operations in equal degree, it would be necessary for him to
accumulate only two thousand dollars for that end. Or if a citizen
of New York should emigrate to Ohio with two thousand dollars,
a pumber of laborers would thereby be induced to follow him, ,or
he would add as much to the population and resources of the State
as would be added to those of Alabama by an emigrant from Vir-
ginia with a capital of nine thousand dollars. This, of course, sup-
poses, as before remarked, that slave labor is exclusively employed
in Alabama, and that the price of land is the same, ten dollars per
acre, in the two States.

The slave population of Virginia, in 1840, amounted to within a
fraction of four hundred and fifty thousand, (450,000). They have
been acquired, like other species of property, by the joint opera-
tion of industry and capital ; and if the average value of the slaves
be three hundred dollars each, the sum of their value will be one
hundred and thirty-five million of dollars, [135,000,000]. Had
slavery never been admitted into Virginia, the wealth which at
present exists in thjit. sbapie would of course have assumed some
other — and would now appeal in the form of improved lands, bet-
ter and more numerous houses, towns, cities; more commerce and
manufactures i and the place of the four hundred and fifty thous-
and slaves would have been supplied by nearly frve times the num-
ber of free citizens, as I have demonstrated above. Such an addi-
tion to the present free population of Virginia would place her, in
point of numbers, before any State in the Union, But if the im-
mense amount of wealth in slave property which has been taken

Digitized by

Google

to the Southwest coold be brought into the computafiou, thle pop-
ulation of Virginia would at this time have exceeded that of her
sister States in a degree proportionate to her superiority of num-
bers fifty years ago.

The monopoly which the Southern States have enjoyed, of sup-
plying the market of the world with the important articles cotton
and tobacco, has had great effect in palliating the evils of slavery ;
or rather, it has introduced, sustained, and extended the system
much further than could be done under other circumstances. This
end has been seconded, likewise, by the vast extent of territory over
which the institution has been extended. This circumstance has
admitted of the abandonment of exhausted lands, which I will pres-
ently show it is impracticable to improve to any extent in a slave-
holding country. The Southwestern States, in consequence of
these favorable circumstances, have increased rapidly in population ;
but there is every reason to think that the prosperity of these States
is doomed to be as short-lived as it has been rapid. There is no
assignable cause why it should go beyond the point at which that
of the older Southern States ceased, viz : the occupation of all the
good lands. The census tables show that Virginia and the Garo-
linas increased rapidly in population up to the period of 1830, since
which time there seems to be a tendency to retrograde, particularly
in the eastern parts of those States, to which slavery is almost ex-
clusively confined. Those who have the curiosity to examine the
census tables minutely, will find that the slight increase in the pop-
ulation of Virginia, from 1830 to 1840, has been confined to the
western part of the State, while there has been an actual diminu-
tion east of the mountains, and this in spite of the fact that the
tobacco region is chiefly confined to the east. The same small
tendency to increase in the western counties of North Carolina is
observable, with a corresponding stagnation in the east. The num-
ber of white inhabitants of South Carolina exhibits no increase
from 1830 to 1840 — the blacks increased slightly. The result, com-
mon to the three States, is clearly traceable to the same origin, the
occupation of all the lands in them adapted to the growth of tobac-
co, cotton, and rice.

The surplus labor arising fi'om the natural increase above what
is necessary for the cultivation of those lands, is taken to the South-
west, which accounts for the rapid increase of the new States. But
the same circumstances will necessarily bring about the same re-
dundancy io the supply of labor there, so soon as the lands adapted
to cotton and sugar are occupied ; and the same tendency to the
deportation of the slaves will exist, so long as there are other new
lands further west to place them on.

it. might be supposed that the adaptation to the production of

articles of prime marketable value, as tobacco, cotton, rice, &c.,

would hold out the greatest encouragement to the improvement of

the soil ; and that a State, Virginia, for instance, which had been

Digitized by

Google

engaged in the profitable cultivation of one of those articles for
two centuries, would be in the highest condition of improvement.
The case, however, is quite the contrary : most of the good lands
in the eastern part of the State having been cleared and worn out,
a large part of them having undergone that process two or three
times. Perhaps the river bottoms may form an exception to this
rule, as they are nourished by occasional inundations. That the
kinds are suffered to wear out, is not attributable to the indolence
and bad husbandry of the people, as some imagine, but to the ex-
pensiveness of the process — ^the inadequacy of the means. Nearly
all the people of Eastern Virginia are engaged in agriculture —
there being scarcely a respectable town or village in that section of
the State, excepting Richmond, Norfolk, and Petersburg ; which
places would hardly afford a market for the beef and butter of ^
dozen square miles. This sparsity of population, I have shown
above, has resulted from the system of slavery, which absorbs the
chief part of the accumulated wealth of the people, leaving but lit-
tle for investment in the manufacturing arts, commerce, &c. Its
effect is to dispense with the necessity of breeding beef cattle,
there being no market to justify it, and consequently to cut off the
principal source from which manure is obtained.* No one could
afford to breed cattle merely for the sake of the manure ; and ex-
perience, as well as the custom of the country, shows that beef will
not be substituted for bacon in subsisting the slaves.

So trifling is the market for products of this kind, that they are
almost wholly neglected wherever slavery abounds to a considera-
ble extent ; and even such markets as exist are badly supplied, at
a high price. The consequence is, that living, in the towns of the
Southern States, is greatly more expensive than is the case in the
North, which accounts for the fact that the mechanic arts are found
to languish in the slaveholding States. The mechanic is compelled
to advance the price of his manufactures in proportion to his ex-
pensive living, which brings him in competition with the similar
article admitted free of duty from the Northern States. It is thus
that slavery at first opposes the introduction of the manufacturing
arts, by turning the chief part of the wealth of the South into a dif-
ferent and unproductive channel, and then discourages their prose-
cution by the extra expense which attends them. Such of the me-
chanic arts as can only be exercised at the spot, or near where the
manufacture is to be consumed, being exempt from Northern com-
petition, are found in the highest degree profitable, whenever a
demand exists. This is true of house-building, some kinds of
smith's work, &c.

The census tables show that slavery exists to a very limited ex-
tent in the mountain regions of the Southern States, which are

• See Smith's Wealth of Nations, rol 1, page 182.

Digitized by

Google

unsuited to tobacco and cotton ; and the number of slaves in Ken^^
tucky and Tennessee is also disproportionately small, compared
with the more Southern and Atlantic States. These States and
parts of States contain the bulk of the white population of the
South, and exhibit a slow, steady growth. The towns and villages
in this region, though smaller and less prosperous than those of the
free States, present an agreeable contrast to the, squalid dilapida-
tion which is everywhere visible upon the borders of the Atlantic.
There is scarcely a respectable town in any part of the Southern
States where slavery has long been the chief interest, excepting
those engaged in the external trade, and these are retrograding in
population, or making no advance deserving of mention ; such is
the case with Norfolk, Richmond, and Petersburg, Charleston,
Wilmington, North Carolina, and Savannah. The counties in the
interior, wherever slavery exists to a considerable extent, are al-
most destitute of these evidences of civilization. But in those
counties further back, where there are but few slaves, the villages
are numerous, and present a lively appearance ; and the manurac-
turing arts and agriculture are found to flourish in a ratio inversely
to the amount of the slave property. Here but a small portion of
the accumulated wealth of the people assumes the shape of slavery,
and the consequence is that the general face of the country pre-
sents some signs of improvement. But it is quite apparent that
slavery, though existingbut partially in this part of the country, has
had great effect in retarding its improvement and population. This
is manifest, by comparing it with the contiguous parts of the free
States.

CHAPTER V.

In the foregoing chapters I have maintained that slavery is the
great cause of the unprosperous condition of the South ; and have
endeavored to show in what way it affects the productive energies
of the country. I will now notice another circumstance to which
the same evils have been attributed. It is asserted by the advo-
cates of Free Trade that the South owes its misfortunes and pov-
erty solely to the Protective Policy, which benefits the manufac-
turer at the expense of the agriculturist. I have no wish to con-
trovert the doctrines of Free Trade, or Protection, at present ; but I
shall endeavor to show that neither can be an adequate cause for
the great disparity which exists in the condition of the Northern
and Southern sections of the Union. It is contended by the ad-
vocates of Free Trade that the duties which are imposed on for-
eign manufactures coming in competition with similar articles
made in this country, operate as a tax upon the consumer for the
benefit of the home producer; and that when such duties exceed
the revenue standard, they in effect take money out of the pocket
of the farmer without any equivalent, in order to enrich the manu*

Digitized by

Google

facturer. The extent to which the Tariff is alleged to perform this
operation of robbing the cultivator of the soil is equal to the differ-
ence between the price at which foreign goods would sell in our
market without a Tariff and that at which they sell with it, or
at which the home-manufacturer can afford his. The advocates of
the Tariff deny all this, and maintain that the tax mainly falls on
the foreign producer, while the home competition renders prices
as low or even lower than they would be without a Tariff, to say
nothing of the advantages of the domestic market, which is inci-
dent to the manufacturing establishments. But, for the purposes
of my argument, it may be admitted that the free trade theory is
correct — allow that the Tariff is as injurious as they contend it is
to agriculture and commerce — why, I would ask, should all the
evils fall upon the South and none upon the North ? Why is not
the North impoverished? Why do the free States, without an ex-
ception, whether they be engaged chiefly in agriculture, manufac-
tures, of commerce, continue to increase in population and wealth
in an unprecedented ratio, while the South languishes ? In the free
States, whet)ier new or old, towns and cities are everywhere to be
met with, exhibiting every element of prosperous growth; and,
whether the Tariff be high or low, they go on from year to year to
increase in importance. But the reverse of all this is true in the
South. Tariff or no Tariff, the older slave-holding States appear
to be subject to an irreversible law of decline. This cannot be at-
tributed to the density of their population, which is in fact very
small compared even with our own free States, and almost nothing
in contrast with the States of Europe.

From 1830 to 1840 the population of Virginia and the Carolinas
made almost no advance. On the other hand, Alabama, Mississip-
pi, and Louisiana, increased rapidly. If the Tariff produced the
misfortunes of the former, what caused the prosperity of the latter ?
But now the same stagnation is beginning to be felt in the new
States, which has hitherto been witnessed in the old. The good
cotton lands are becoming exhausted, and slavery has performed
its mission. Emigration to tho.se States will in a few years cease,
and the tide will pass on to Texas, which, in its turn, will undergo
the same process of rapid settlement, early maturity, and speedy
decline.

If the Tariff injuriously affects agriculture, it must be most se-
verely felt by that species which is least profitable. Those sections
of the country which are chiefly or wholly concerned in the pro-
duction of grain, fruits, and vegetables, and cattle and horses,
would, if the position I am combating be true, exhibit an appear-
ance of the greatest exhaustion and poverty ; while the sections
producing tobacco, cotton, and rice — articles which enjoy the mo-
nopoly of every market in the world — would be supposed to suffer
least from the burthens of the Tariff. But in fact the grain-growing
States are in a far better condition than those producing the great

Digitized by

Google

staples. A glaiice at the map of the United States will show, by
those exponents of social advancement — towns and cities — that
the fanning States are much ahead of the planting in all the con-
stituents of national wealth.

The proportion of capital invested in manufactures in the North-
ern States is very inconsiderable, compared with that engaged in
other branches of industry-— apd that portion of capital engaged in
the manufacture of articles which depend on protection, is still
less. The protective policy, therefore, cannot account for the pros-
perity of that section, any more than it can cause the impoverish-
ment of the South.

But the commerce of the South languishes as much as its agri-
culture. It is true, that the Southern ports are further from Eu-
rope; but that circumstance cannot account for the fact, that
nearly all the imports of the country are through Northern ports.
The difference in distances is trifling ; and the Southern harbors,
particularly Norfolk and Charleston, are equal to any north of them.
But admitting that they lie under some disadvantages of position,
it is much more than counterbalanced by the consideration that
three-fourths of the exports of the couniiy are necessarily made
through them. The chief exports of the United States, cotton and
tobacco, amounting to some seventy- five or eighty millions per
annum, are, of necessity, sent abroad through Southern ports. It
would be in the natural course of trade for the vessels which take
abroad these products to return to the same ports with cargoes of
merchandise in exchange for them ; but instead of doing so, they
return to Northern cities with the imports, from whence that por-
tion of them destined for the South are taken in the coasting ves-
sels afler a transhipment. This is caused by the fact, that the
great bulk of Southern capital is unproductively invested.in slavery,
leaving none to be otherwise employed. If the free States furnish- .
ed the great bulk of the exports, their commercial prosperity would
be undoubtedly ascribed to that circumstance ; or if the exports
from the two sections of the Union were equal, it might be plausi-
bly alleged that the commercial superiority of the North was at-
tiibutable to its more favorable position. But nearly all the ex-
ports being from Southern ports, their' meagre and languishing
commerce is inexplicable upon any other ground than that I have
assigned.

I have now to combat the very opposite opinion, viz : that Free
Trade caused the ruin of Italian Agriculture.

I have seen an article in Blackwood's Magazine for March,
1844, which makes use of the historical facts, in an argument
against free trade, which I had intended to adduce in corrobora-
tion of my views of slavery. The writer of the article attributes
the decline of Italian agriculture to the practical free trade which
existed between the various parts of the Roman empire, whereby
the agriculturist of Italy was brought in competition with the fer-

Digitized by

Google

tile plains of Egypt and Lybia. It seems that the free traders in
England have controverted this reasoning of the Reviewer and of
Allison, from whom he borrows the idea ; and they have assigned
the same cause, slavery, for the decline of agriculture which I do ;
but I presume that they attribute the evil to slavery without at-
tempting to show how it operates. This I think I have done/ I
have shown that three or four times more capital is necessary, in
this country, to carry on agricultural operations with slave labor
than is requisite with free labor. Where the price of land is very
high, the proportional difference is not so great in favor of free
labor; but the actual difference is alwavs equal to the value of the
slaves. This is the case, notwithstanding the profitableness of
slavery to the individual owner of that species of property. Its
profitableness is easily accounted for, and consists of the laborer's
wages being transferred to the pocket of his master.

The Reviewer contends that slavery existed in equal degree in
Egypt and Lybia as in Italy ; but without equal means of informa-
tion upon the subject, I doubt the correctness of the statement.

The Roman people, for a long period before and after the fall of
the republic, were engaged in continual wars, which, as history
informs us, and reason makes probable, had the effect of with-
drawing most of the free agricultural population from their homes;
and the introduction of thousands of prisoners, to adorn the
triumphs of her successful generals, would naturally supply the
place of the freemen. We learn that such was the case ; and
that 1^1 y was abandoned to the wretched cultivation of slave
labor.

On the other hand, the distant provinces were less likely to have
their population withdrawn to support the wars; and the inferior-
ity of the Egyptian peasantry to the Roman people would disqual-
ify them for the army. Doubtless the peasantry of Egypt and
Lybia were in a condition little better than slavery, morally speak-
ing ; but if they were not actuaUy chattels — if each individual was
so far free as to be under the necessity of providing for himself
and family — the political evils of such a state of things would be
far less. The great political evil of slavery is its absorption of
capital which would otherwise be employed in some species of im-
provement. If, therefore, the political <^ondition of the peasantry
in those countries was in any degree similar in that age to what it
is now represented to be, it must have been much more favorable
to production than a state of absolute slavery.

To show that free trade, without reference to slavery, could not
have proved destructive to Italian agriculture, I would appeal to
the condition of our own country. What portion of the American
Union exhibits the highest agricultural improvement? Is it not
invariably the case (except in the blighted regions of slavery) that
the oldest and most populous parts are under the highest state of
cultivation ? And yet the same free trade exists here that existed

Digitized by

Google

in the Roman empire. It wouU) be strange if that portion of the
country which produces the greatest quantity of manure should be
rumed by the rivahry of remotei regions. The only effect of that
competition would be a fall in the price of land; but there could
be no necessity for abandoning its cultivation.

The injurious rivalry of the Western States canpot affect the
Eastern longer than is necessary to exhaust or tire the new lands,
which, for a few years, yield a rich harvest without the expense of
manuring. This has already taken place in all the new States
where lands have been long subjected to their careless husbandry ;
and in a few years the Atlantic States will be relieved from any
unequal competition of that kind.

I have been a little surprised to see the free trade party in New
York objecting to a further improvement in the facilities for trans*
porting Western grain to the seaboard. What is that but demand-
ing protection to the New York farmer ? — ^t)ie protection of space
and difficulty — which is no less effective than the highest tariff.

CHAPTER VI.

The value of the slave to his master is the difference between
what he produces and what he consumes ; in ether- words, the
slave is a charge to his master, or to the land he tills, to the amount
of his food and clothing : the necessity of feeding and clothing the
slave population, therefore, so far from enhancing, must diminish
the value of land. But the reverse of this is the case with reference
to the free laborer. He is under the necessity of feeding and
clothing himself, and consequently, so far from being a charge
upon the landlord, furnishes a market for the products of the soil.

This proposition is predicated on the known fact that nearly all
the slaves in the United States are employed in agriculture, or by
agriculturists as domestics. Of the few who are owned by persons
unconnected with tillage, the proposition is not true, because the
owner must purchase of the farmer whatever is necessary to the
maintenance of his slave ; and the wants of the slave, therefore,
contribute to make a market for agricultural products. But the
number thus situated is too inconsiderable to affect the general
principle above laid down. It is to be remarked, further, that if
the planter or farmer employing slaves, fails to maintain them upon
the products of his own soil, he must make up the deficiency by
purchasing from other agriculturists; in this way, the wants of
the slaves afford encouragement to the agriculture of the State or
district whence their support comes. But this gain to agriculture
is counterbalanced by the loss it sustains in the State or district
where the slaves are thus supported.

The proposition above stated, that the necessity of feeding
slaves is a burden to the soil, while the wants of the free laborer

Digitized by

Google

are^conducive to agricukural improvement, will become evident by
consi3ering^-^first,'lhat whatever the free laborer eats, he pays for;
and. secondly, that if he ate nothing, if he were a mere machine,
the necessity of producing whatever he consumes would be dis-
pensed with, and, consequently, the market for the products of the
soil would be in that degree narrowed. If the merchant, the me-
chanic, and the professional man, could live in society without
food, it is evident that the farmer could never employ their services,
for the reason that he would have nothing to pay with. Therefore
their wants hold out an inducement to the cultivation and improve-
ment of the soil. 3pt the laborer pays no less than the merchant
or lawyer for what he consumes; therefore, the supply of his wants
is equally conducive to agricultural improvement. In effect, the
merchant, mechanic, and professional man, are as much the
employees or laborers of the agriculturist, as he who ploughs his
field — they do what he bids them for a consideration ; so does the
common laborer. It is of course not the interest of the agricul-
turist to pay wages; but, having to pay them, it is to his advantage
that the laborer, in common with the community at large, is a con-
sumer of the products of the soil. In like manner, it is against the
interest of the farmer to pay for the services of the physician or
lawyer ; but such expenses must be incurred<^physicians and law-
yers are necessary, and they must be paid ; and they are in that
way a necessary evil, a drawback upon the resources of the farmer.
But, as consumers of the products of the soil, their presence js bene-
ficial to the farmer, and raises the demand and the price of what-
ever he sends to market. The same is true of his dealings with
the merchant and the mechanic. The payment of their bilks is con-
trary to his interest ; but, as consumers, their presence adds to the
value of his land by enhancing the value of its products. And in
what particular differs the case of the common laborer? He is un-
der no moie necessity to work without wages than the lawyer or
physician, the merchant or tradesman, and he equally pays for what
he consumes; therefore, the market which his wants create, is
equally beneficial to the farmer, and equally promotive of agricul-
tural improvement, as that which is created by the wants of any
other class of society. The slave, on the contrary, labors from
compulsion. He is allowed no wages, and the necessity of feeding
him is so much loss to the master, which it is his interest to dis-
pense with as far as possible. The slave lives at the expense of his
master, and of course what he consumes can hold out no induce-
ment to improve the soil, but on the contrary must retard improve-
ment. The free laborer lives at his own expense, and, therefore,
what he consumes must promote improvement.

The farmer who employs free labor prefers boarding the laborer,
for the reason that he thus discharges a large part of the wages
without advancing money. If the laborer boards himself, his wages
are higher. Hence his wants, like those of other classes, combine

Digitized by

Google

to make a market for the products of the soil. But it would be
greatly to the advantage of the slaveholder if his slave could main-
tain himself; in that case the master w6uld reap the whol^wrages
of the laborer, without any drawback. It follows from hence, that
the abolition of slavery in the United States would disburden the
landed interest of the expense of supporting two and a half millions
of people, and at the same time would add to the value of the lands
by opening a market in the wants of two and a half millions. The
necessity of feeding and clothing the slaves is a drawback upon
the improvement of the land ; and the abolition of the system, by
bringing into existence an equal number of freemen, who would be
und^r the necessity of maintaining themselves, would be an en-
couragement to improvement. Thus the free population of the
Southern States, by the census of 1840, amounted to four-and-
three-quarter millions — Ae slave population to about two-and-a-half
millions ; and, consequently, the inducement to improve the soil
is made up of these circumstances, viz : the profitableness of grow-
ing cotton, tobacco, and other articles for foreign and Northern
markets, together with the dbmestic market which the wants of
four-and-three -quarter millions of free people create, diminished by
the wants of two-and-a-half millions of slaves, which must be fur-
nished gratis ; the difference being two-and-one-quarter millions.
But the abolition of slavery would add the wants of the manumitted
slaves to the other circumstances ; and the inducement to improve
the land would then be made up of the profitableness of growing
cotton, tobacco, and the like, for the foreign or Northern markets,
together with the advantage of supplying the wants of seven-and-
one-quarter millions of people. In this case, the wants of the ne-
groes are added to, in the other substracted from, the inducements
to improve; and the difference is therefore equal to twice the
wants of the slave population. Hence the abolition of slavery
would have the same effect upon the value of land, and hold out
the same encouragement to its improvement, which would be pro-
duced by»the introdui^tion of five millions of free people by immi-
gration, under present circumstances. What the positive addition
to the value of lands would be, from the abolition of slavery, it is
difficult to say with exactness ; it would certainly bear a large pro-
portion to their present value. Of course, the lands in those parts
of the South where the slaves are most numerous, would receive
the greatest augmentatibn of value, inasmuch as they would be at
once relieved from the heavier burden, and be offered the better
market in the wants of the greater number manumitted.

I have thus shown that the slaveholders, being also the land pro-
prietors, would, in a few years, be compensated for the manumis-
sion of their slaves by the augmented value of their lands. In con-
sidering the compensation which should be made to them,, in the
event of abolition, therefore, it would be asking too much of. Gov-
ernment to pay down the market value of the slaves.
4

Digitized by

Google

Having endeavored to show that slsCv^^y, at any time, is incon-
sistent with the accumulation of wealth and with the increase of
populftion, I will now advert to the particular circumstances which
mdce it )iighly desirable to the Southern people to rid themselves
of slavery at the e^iest practicable period.

In the course of fifteen years more, the supply of slave labor in
the new States will equal that of the older States at present ; the
good lands will have been occupied^ and much of them, doubtless,
have undergone the process of wearing out ; and this state of things
will generate the same tendency to the deportation of the slaves
which has been seen to exist so strongly for years past in Virginia
and the Carolinas. This tendency denotes the excess of supply
over demand in the State where it is produced ; and unless there
exists a market elsewhere, the price must necessarily fall, as would
that of any other valuable commodity. But there is this peculi*
arity about this species of property — that the production or supply
of the article cannot be limited in proportion to the diminution of
the demand. The slaves will go on to increase in numbers, with-
out reference to their value, which, in consequence, may become
nothing.

The acquisition of Texas can only postpone this event for a few
years. All the States east of the Mississippi river, except the States
of Mississippi and Florida, have a sufficient, or nearly sufficient,
supply of slave labor. The former will, in five or six years, have re-
ceived its full share, while the latter, owing to its barrenness, can
never require a large number. It may be fairly predicated, there-
fore, that, afler five or seven years, the whole increase of the slave
population must find a market in the States west of the Mississippi
river. Afler that period, the increase in ten years will fall little
short of a million. To suppose that so many can find a ready mar-
ket, would be to anticipate a great increase in the consumption of
cotton, with an unlimited extent of fertile land adapted to its
growth. The accounts of Texas are so various and contradictory,
that it would be hazardous to conjecture what may be its capacity
to furnish profitable occupation to slaves ; but supposing that one
hundred thousand square miles of it is equal to the State of Missis-
sippi in fertility, it would not afford a field for the employment of
more than a million and a half of slaves. I arrive at this conclu-
sion by referring to the number of slaves possessed by the older
States, which are under the necessity of sending off the increase.
In fourteen years there will not be less than a million, perhaps
more than that number, of slaves within the States to be formed of
the Texan Territory ; for it must be remembered that afler five
or six yfears the whole natural increase of more than three millions
must find occupation there, or become a burden to their owners.

In 1790, when the first census was taken under the Constitution,
the population of the whole Union was little more than three mil-
lions, although the country had been settled for more than one

Digitized by

Google

kuDdired and eighty years^ But in the next fifty years, ii» popula-
tioR had risen to more than seirenteen millions. In like manner
the slave population every year increases in a greater ratio, while
the territory adapted t9 its employment is limited, A generation
has sufficed to supply the new e&Mies east of the Mississippi with
slaves, whereas it required a centnry and a half to supply a smaller
territory in the older States. What has been the work of a genera-
tion, will &OW be accomplished in a few years. The surplus slave
population of the Atlantic States has not diminished, while that
firom the new States will, in a short time, be i^ded to it, and the
whole must find a market or employment west of the Mississippi.
It is hence evident that the Southern country is approaching a
period of great and ««dden depreciation in the value of slave prop-
erty.

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

RETURN TO the circulation desl< of any
University of California Library
or to the
THERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
. 400, Richmond Field Station
srsity of California
mond, CA 94804-4698

300KS IVIAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS

month loans may be renewed by calling

10) 642-6753

year loans may be recharged by bringing

30ks to NRLF

jnewals and recharges may be made 4

3ys prior to due date.

DUE AS STAMPED BELOW

B 03 1998

)EC0l1999
MARolZUUU

NOV 2 2000

JAN 2 1 2006

1(11/95)

IPf

Digitized by

Google

[

Lo..