New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-01-26

well know, m fast-good csuse for complaint T 49,.
that you viii grant me brlef hearing, asd, e. -
least asaesde that can reasonably be made, puh -
sroondless hsre.s which, IN the coarse Of yoor s.s
what elaborate criticisms of my work on Slaverv-
"Tbe Impending Crisis OF the South"-yo bripe
against me, In your editions of last Saturday and
Monday.
In accusing me Of having fals6ed statistics, you
have made laundering mtsstatemcnt, and that nis-
statement, uncoTected does me gross injustice You
say, for instance:
Among tables, the author then quotes the following
purpong have been taken the United States Census
port Of 1850, which !. introduced thus a.. a..
annual hay crop Free States considerably IN
soa cane snnasy Produced ia The een slave states:
nay cEoS OF rHE VnEE srArss-lsso mo-
s1S s rKODTcIs OF THE SLAVE ;iITsis
Cotton ma g ,s ssi'' At go ID. ss
Rice iroughl.......2i53ls,4s7 Ms 49,. s,sl2s5s
hhsy:..'....::: s4sis tons ia o. Ssss
Cane sugar....... 49, lss,ooo fbs 7..... is,seeso
slas sos 10
REHABILITATION.
suSdy products Oftbe Slave s'sss''''''''.' l@een9
Balance IN favor ofthe Free States ssssar7s
Ir,roducinO the above table (which, whatever may
he said 10 the contrary IL correct even according 70
quantities and prices first fixed upon by fro-Slasery
Officials themselves you speak OF u az PurPonang1
hove been taken from the United States census report
Of 1880" Now, Sir no one can make from ny BOOK
eTt,act that "pnrports" anything Of the kind
opIy as regards the quantity OF the seVerI PooIo'
On the Goth page of the compend OF my inPepahg
Cr;ss as ever one may by referring theresoi
,a,e distinctly that in arriving at the yalne OF tpe
various agricultural products OF the NORM ana ooue
resnectjyeIy, was guided by prices emanatlng noe
from the Census report by DeBo~, but from me ne-
reau of Agriculture in Washington; and mere PeIm'
me to suggest, that, as there are, perhaps no Two
things precisely alike, there 10, ID all prosaony sy%
difference betw cen the Bureau of Agriculture and -
ID. B. DeBOw.
book was 10 advance from the highest and pest an-
thories facts absolute, rref1ahle facts, exooning
the mental moral and material inore particularly the
materially disadvantages Of Slavery IhIoughoat me
entire work l endeavored to be candid, far, noerA,
inst In most cases. in my tabular statements nave
merely reproduced the figures found IN the ociai re-
ports of Pro-Slavery men; and, III every instance,
have either referred TO the sources whence obtained
the information or ready, at any time TO give my
authorities when called upon for them.
Az well as my memory serves me, OF the severSi
hundred pages of my work ~ pages IN the Original,
2l4 in the Compend, the latter, however, containing
oujte az much reading matter as the formerly only one
te ne and that line Of figures In regard 70 hay
the ,rtoe of hiy not the gHanty-has been called In
nuestou Ii has been ignorauty asserted with refer
epce TO this particular kind of provender, that nave
fixed the price too high. did not hx the pnce ~ all
fixed the price of nothing. The Bureau OF ARrcul-
tnre fixed the price, and they fixed il right, or, not
absolutely right rather too low think, than too high,
and to them properly belongs the ourdeu OF d'epu'
If matters of business do not press me too closely
other points of your criticisms shall 10 the course OF
day or two, receive attention, provided you will agree
to publish ny article.
Only few days since, in The Richmond veg OF
a recent date ] noticed an article, repubhshec from
some other paper giving estimate Of the value OF
the leading agricultural products of the country for
the current year. and the value of the bay crop ae-
cordDg to that statement, amounts, or VIII Amount,
TO the enormous OF $500 600, while the value
of the cotton crop, according to the same 10 OF wl
be- only $3.50 600 900 showing conceded superiority
of slI6, 600 OOO in favor of hayl ii. K HELPER