The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1859-07-13

lhefe IS therefore, mourning ielt Ior US Out
advocate repeal
Mr.. Brown avoids this difficulty Ny doubt
ing that it would be cheaper labor. ALabo
is cheap says he, "only as it is profitable
"A slave laborer is cheaper at 81 500 if b
made LOCO pounds of cotton worth IL cent
than he would be at $500 making the sam
amount Of cotton worth Z cents per pound
and why ? The cost of production must al
ways be paid before We commence countin
profts,'' &c. Granted. What follows
Let us make small calculation. If negroe
cost $500, man who could purchase one a
$500 before importation, could purchas
three afterwards. Three negroes by tn
honorable Senator's own showing, Qor W
take his fgures) could make 5000 pounds 0
cotton. which, at clear gain Of three cents
I would bring the produce $40 whereas, b
the one negro he would realize $40. Thi
would be the result upon the basis of thu
Senator's calculation leaving out of consid
Grafton the casualties of death, accident, &c
The assumption, though, that the well known
law of supply and demand would justify ths
proposition, that the immediate effect of al
unfettered importation of Africans would be {
fall of .fUe cents per pound an cotton, is one
we think, devoid of a reasonable foundation
| III luSbs IL SOSS upOh PICouAhpOlOi bhn
all the labor thus introduced would be erclu
siUely appropriated to the raising of cotton
that it would not be diverted into the thou
sand channels through which slave labor may
be made conducive to the agricultural and
commercial aggrandizement of a people thai
the bleak hills Of the mountain regions woulc
not rejoice in the culture by slaves Of the
life-giying grape, and their valleys wave with
fields of feathered wheat; that the sugal
fields of Louisiana, and the rice plantations o
South Carolina would not demand their quots
of this labor; and that the rail road and the
steam boat would not seek supply for theil
greater practical efficiency.
That the demand for cotton at particular
functions, is less than the supply, no one can
doubt but as general thing the supply has
never yet kept pace with the demand, and
the negro has been pressed from every direc-
ton into the cotton growing regions-much
to the injury of those localities from which
they have been brought. If the permanent
supply of cotton exceed the demand, (Which
we insist will never be the case labor, slave
labor, will Immediately assume an aggressive
attitude, and seek other pursuits; it will be-
come diversified and benefit American society
in other ways. The world has not yet be-
come fully acquainted with the uses to which
| cotton can be applied the consumers of the
great staple are daily increasing China, ia
pan, and Persia, will make requisition upon
us for their pro rata, and the Isles of the
ocean, awaking amid the blazes of civilization
and the beneficent, evangelizing influences of
christianity, will follow in the train. The
whole argument of Mr.. Brown is limited
to individual aggrandizement, not by the
nobI ,Io+ Of md xryaII
expended, but by making the supply an
article of pure necessity, considerably less
than the demand Certainly very unphilo-
sophie mode of discussing great, national
question
There would, says he, be "a sad falling off
in the present price of slaves Not accord
ing to his calculations. There might in time
be falling off, but what would be the con-
sequence? Virginia, South Carolina, and
kentucky, instead of sending their slaves to
Southern markets, would employ them in
profitable occupation at home and thus be
saved from the impending danger of gradual
emancipation. The South would continue to
import Africans it may well be admitted, un-
til her demand was satisfied The increased
importation would enhance the price of "bread
Htsss sfcs N6t HsFpfissz, diH'
would send additional all0ronaants to othor
fields of industry; African labor would be
diverted to them; and cotton, by the Senator's
rdie and argument, which we are here adopt
ing, would Immediately appreciate in value,
instead of alone being reduced. 1t is an arti-
Gle Of pure commercial importance, and segu-
lates the price of almost every thing else, and
to say that its commercial importance will
continue, as it must is tantamount to yielding
the whole question.
But lands fit for the production Of cotton,
would rise in Uaiue, says Mr.. Brown. We
answer, yes until the demand for such lands
ceased and this would be determined by the
demand for cotton in connection with the sup
ply. Cotton will always be remunerative as
long as the supply and demand are CO.
equal and owing to the limited region suit
able for its growth, the supply in all probabil-
ity, never will exceed the demand. If lands
appreciate in value. they can only do so to a
limited erteRt, and no harm result Ger
tainly it would require more than ordinary
reasoning to establish the converse.
Mr.. Browns argument addressed to the
poor man is equally fallacious with that pro-
duced upon what he terms the supply and
demand. /" If he could not pay family expen-
ses and buy negro for fifteen hundred dol
lars, and pay for him in cotton at IL cents,
he could never pay expenses and buy at five
hundred dollars in cotton at cents.'' And
why? Because ''he would find almost every
article of ordinary family consumption an
creased and the price of cotton decreased
/" Non shareholders do not generally raise
cotton and the argument, with the context,
is absurd. But suppose the non-slayeholder
would, instead Of raising cotton, pursue his
customary ayocation of raising articles of
ordinary family consumption these being
increased in price, would remunerate him
handsomely, and afford him the desired op-
portunity for purchasing negro. This would
not, however, be the direct or remote effect
of decrease in the price of cotton. If cot
ton became so depressed that it would not pay
to raise it, and the articles specified by Mr.
Brown would enhance in value Immediately,
according to the well known laws of trade,
diversion of labor would take place, and the
equilibrium be restored.
The arguments drawn from the insecurity
of the whites and the driving out of white
labor, suggest to them our answer. Men
usually take care of self-interest and the
instinct of selfpreservation exists in unim-
paired efficacy among Shareholders as well as
any other class Of men; and it is not too
much to say that white labor would always
be necessary.
But we forbear. We have, we trust in
spirit of proper Difference and respect, sug-
gested some objections to Mr.. Browns argu-
ments, and may hereafter have something
more to say on the subject, should suitable
occasion present ITSELF SlLEA. =