The examiner. [volume] (Louisville, Ky.) 1847-1849, 1849-06-16

"oih moi al all, but Ike Dives, iaTe sum
lnously every day." "Good, good. good
This is what the Null 6ers, and MIR. Fishe
call a.syslem of perfect civilisaton. Q
page 81, MIR. F. demonstrates
obtests-against all "that philan,hrop
which would overturn this unriualled 81
tenn of southern civllisation," by emancipi
ting the slaves.
What would these philanthropic-thes
christian admirers Of southern civilisatio
say, il they were called upon to act III
part OF slaves in this unrivalled system?--
How would they feel, if by some turn {
human affairs, they found themselves seize
by slave-traders, and without fault Of thei
own, condemned with their posterity t
endless degradation and bondage, for tn
benefit OF strangers TO whom they owe,
nothing, and whom they had never injured
Would they not curse this unrivalled sys
tenn, as the most iniquitous that the selfish
ness OF man ever invented? Now il is
bad rule that will not work both ways.
is bad system, that is founded on a viola
lion OF the christian rule--"Do unto other
as you would have others do unto you"
la the next place Mr.. Fisher, instead o
proceeding TO investigate the causes O
southern triumph" as he calls it, throw:
his argument into confusion. by diverging
into another topic. We shall endeavor "a
bring order out Of his confusion, by stating
the three main propositions which he en-.
deavors to establish through the remainder
Of his argument.
l. There is less inequality Of property
in the south than in the north.
2. Agriculture is more productive oil
wealth than other branches Of industry
This he assigns as the first cause of "south.
ern triumph"
s. Cities are nuisance. He began upon
this theme before, but started off suddenly
to inequality Of property.
Having belabored these propositions to
his own satisfaction, he concludes a.
iecting to ell schemes Of emancipa
We shall follow him 10 the end.
He argues the first proposition on pages
IL and II. He attempts by means OF a
few statistical facts which have no direct
bearing on the subject, to make out that
property is less unequally distributed among
the citizens Of the slave States than among
thoss Of the free States.
But to what purpose IS the argumentl-
Suppose il Were 50. iha, ite ,,-a. Of p,ol
white laborers in The north ,.ele entirely
superseded in The south by the poorer and
mole degraded slaves what would humani.
ty or civilisation gain by the more equal
condition o. southern freer1enl II the white
laborers Of the north were reduced to slave
~. for the purpose OF equalising the condi.
ton OF the remaining freemen, that is, of
the capitalists; would human rights and
happiness gain anything oy that But let
US see how MIR. Fisher argues for southern
equality and northern inequality Of wealth.
First, from the estimated number Of vo
tiers, he iniers that two-thiIds Of the adult
male citizens Of Virgins sre either free
holders, ledse-hOlders for 8 years, or house
keepers. Hence he infers that the two-thirds
are nearly equal in wealth. Tie inference
is absurd in itself and contrary 10 fact
Every Nirginian knows, and every reflect
ing man may Judge, that voters in Virginia
differ by all the degrees OF wealth and pow
erty, between the lordly master OF 10 plan
,ations with 500 slaves, and the poor hut
keeper who votes upon living hOrSe-boaes
worth So, on which he pays a tax of 10
cents per annum.
And how does MIR. Fisher prove that the
citizens Of the north are more unequal in
wealth than these happy tree-hoiders. lease
holders; and hOuse-keepers Of Virginia!--
Why thus; 81 have seen (says he) detail.
ed statement Of one Of the interior counties
Of New York, from which it appears that
only half the voters were tree-holdsrs. =
10 this grand statistical argument. he adds
hat there are more paupers in the north,
han among the white men of the SOUTH
Now you have the whole argument, good
eader. "What, the whoIe" Yes, in sum
md substance, every whit. Judge for your
elf, good reader, if this be not a mighty
.lame) argument.
But he has second just as mighty. "In
ohio (says MIR. Fishers printed Lecturer
here are $4,000 pleasure carriages, and in
Virginia 10000" This proves (says he)
hat the comfort which such establishments
he means the cauiagesl indicate, is more
Infused in Virginia !han Ohio"
Now, we must in charity, suppose that
he 80" is misprint for '15"--otherwise
he argument would be too ridiculous, even
or MIR. Fisher TO put forth. In 1876, the
Attest return that we have seen, the "plea.
ure carriages" of Ohio were in number
g, 707; and in 1S48, those of Virginia. in.
'luding gigs and carry-alls, amounted to
less than $4,000. We may as
ume, therefore, that in the latter year,
'oung industrious Ohio had at least as many
f these establishments, as indolent old
Virginia, who will roll in her pleasure car.
isges, until her old fields can produce mel. |
her corn nor tobacco.
To show the utter worihlessness of this
carriage" argument, we cite the returns OF
he value Of pleasure carriages in the two
states Of Tennessee and Ohio in the year
645. Their assessed value was in Ten
lessee, $685., 900, and in Ohio. s7S3, 000,~
greater diffusion of "cauisge"
omfprt in the free State.
This shows how fallacious MIR. Fishers
Method Of statistical reasoning is. He rum
nages among the tax bills and assessments
{ the 30 States, and finding in the mass
omething which he can turn to the appa-
ent advantage Of one slave State compared
With one free State, he pounces upon il, falls