Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-01-04
An Argument against the Policy Of Rs-opening the
African Slave Trade.

~ SioNNtNi SlSo eioS IL NV
An Argument against the Policy Of Rs-opening the
African Slave Trade.
IcoNrISrEp.
We have now in the Southern States about
three and n half millions Of Slaves. IT the
trade from Africa was re-opened, how long
would it be before that number would be
doubled! In Western Africa, which contains
n population of 40 or so millions, slaves are
sold at 90 or .e3 q head. Tho supply which
that entire country would furnish is incalcula-
BILE and inexhaustiblc. The vast profits OF the
trade, considering the difference in their value
here, and the cost of their purchase or OF KID
mapping in Africa, and their transportation
hither, would make it the most lucrative trade
in the world, and would consequently enlist III
it vast means Of importation. The kidnapping
propcnsities of New England would return to
har. with an accumulated shipping capacity OF
q h"f century, and with an appetite increased
in propoo.ion to the advanced value OF the ne
Share of the trade. She is skilled in the arts
OF the business, having p~racticcd it long upon
the negro property OF her sister States. Her
conscience is prepared Cor its horrors having
lcng been scared by fanatlc,~n rs with n hot
IRON. And rs long as there was a ,>,lar 10 he
made in me traffic, she would cling to :. bcr
mercensry soul clings to filthy lucre. How
long would it be before the number of slaves
in the South would be seven millions instead
of three and 4 half: Even the feeble state of
Brazil imported, prior to 1850, about 10000
slaves a year from Africa, and did it under the
diScouragemcntS and harraSsments of a British
squadron on the African coast. which oppressed
and coerced her traders, as Great Britain Will
ever do a weaker. power. How much greater
would be the commercial ability OF this country
to import, than that Of Brazil: And great as
the demand now is in this country for slaves.
the low prices at which they could be imported
and sold, would manifcstly tend, at first, to en-
pand the demand, by bringing negro property
within the reach of a larger class Of purchasers.
So that it must be admitted that it would not
be many wears before the slave population
would be doubled
At that point of increase. let MS examine the
result. OF course the productions of Slave Ia
Dor would be doubled. How would that effect
the price of those staples: Suppose should
put the question to every Spectator and every
commission merchant, and every farmer engaged
in the business of cotton-what effect would 1t
have upon the price Of the article to double the
quantity of the crop; is there one who would
not say that it would reduce the price? We
are accustomed to calculate with much concern
the probable amount of the growing crop, with
4 view Of estimating the chances ola good price.
And vet, some men will stand up and face the
plain business men of the South, and deny that
this increase of the cotton crop would affect in
i~uriously the price of cotton. IL they do not
deny it directly, they do indirectly. They de-
ny that the increase of slave labor. by the poll
CIV under consideration, would result in this re-
duction Of price in proportion to the increase Of
the crop produced. This Report to the South
ern Convention. which, with due respect to the
patriotism and ability of its distinguished all
thorS, | must say, seems to me, to set ut dcii-
ance ali established principles, asserts that 1T
is not supposable that the foreign Slave Trade
will much reduce it" They would doubtless
admit, if the valley of the Amazon was sudden
" about TO be converted into a cotton growing
province, and supplied with n half a million ne
gro laborers from Africa-so that q million bales
would be added to the cotton production OF the
world-that the price Of our cotton would be
affected iniuriously by it. But the same result
worked out by the other process, they alb
surdly reject. We were jealous enough of
the experiment made by Great Britain. to
produce cotton in the Indies and of the eXpe-
riment now being made to promote the growth
of cotton in the western portion of Africa and
of the culture of cotton in China. We readily
admit, that the quantity grown out of our linz
its, which is about one-third Of the amount con-
sumed in the world, and of such all inferior qua
litv that it must be mixed with American cot
ton to make it available, has the inevitable effect
Of keeping down the market value of our W
product, to a degree corresponding to the guam
tity and quality of the foreign article. And yet,
this plain law of political economy, some are
ready, in the zeal of their enthusiasm, to deny,
when made applicable to the question in hand.
Reduce the quantity Of the crop onc-half, and
it is easy to perceive that the price would rise.
Double that crop, and the price will fall. by
reason Of the converse operation ot the same
principle.
1t may be replied, that, if this reasoning is
correct, it proves that the fewer negroes we
possess. the more We would make by their la
Dor; and, therefore, it would be expedient to
lessen the number in order TO enhance their
value, upon this principle. 1t is undoubtedly
true, that the reduction of the number would
enhance the value Of those that remained; but
the conclusion does not follow that there would
be eXpediency, good policy, or practicability in
destroying one-half Of our property to enhance
the value ofthe rest. The value of that which
Tcm1lIlcu WItlt lIiuS ClllisttltVl tDull OILY DG,
at most, equal to the whole. and then nothing
would be gained by the process Of diminishing
the number. And. on the other hand. it is to
be remembered that the reduction of the value
of negroes, by an over-supply Of negro labor,
and by reducing the value Of the staples pro-
duced by h atlabor. in proportion as it approx
mates that point Of cheapneSs at which free Ia
Dor can be most economically employed,
endangers the existence and perpetuity of
the relation Of Slavery, rs an institution
Nor would the principle aforementioned,
make it proper, or polite (cven if possibly
TO cut off that natural increase Of the pro-
duction of our staples and increase and growth
of negro property, which is the gradual and
natural Development Of the existing order and
condition of things. But a very different thing
it surely is, when we discuss the eXpediency Of
disturbing that natural order and condition of
things, of society, property, production and
prices, by such policy Us re-Openins our ports
to the unusual and unnatural supplies of slaves,
in which, before they are introduced, no inter-
est is invested and no property existing.
1t may be further replied, that the reduction
of the price of cotton by the increase Of slave
labor, and the consequent increase of crops,
would be compensated by the reduction of the
cost of its production, which would arise from
the fact that it was produced by negroes in
whom less money was invested. and conse-
ouently could be sold cheaper, with the same
per cent. Of profits upon the capital employed
in its production. This would doubtless be
true, to some extent, But the question is,
what would be gained by a policy which
cheapened our staple productions, and then re-
paired the loss by cheapening the capital in
vested in their production: This only goes to
show that all would be on the decline together,
the productivcness of capital, and the capital
itself 1t would surely be but poor consolation
to the owners of our present slave population,
when the price of their staples is thus reduced