Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1862-12-11

s0tcoScIuDED raox rnsr PAGE
sr property. 1t is no less trne for havin,
been often sail. that the people of tn
South are no more responsible for the in
PRODUCTION of this property than are th,
people Of the North; and when it is re
inembered how unhesitstingly we all ms,
cotton AMI sugar, AMI share the profits il
dealing in them. it may not be qnite SAT,
10 say that the South has been more res.
pon>ibIe than the North for its cont inu.
aace. Ii. then. for a common object. thi.
property is TO be sacrificed, is it not Just
that 1t be done at a common charged
And II with less money more easily paid
we can preserve the benefits OF the Union
by this means. than we can by the war a.
lone. is il not economical to do it?
AN ECONOMICAL. VIEW
Let as consider i, then; let us ascertain
the sum We have expended in the wa since
compensated emancipation was proposes,
last March. and consider whether, if that
measure hail been promptly accepted by
even SEINE of the slave State, the same
sum would not have done more to close
the war thaa has been otherwise DONE
Ii so. the measure would save money; and
IN that view. would be pruden. and eco
nomical measure, certainly.
Ii Is not so easy to pay something as it
Is to pay nothing, but 1t is easier to pay a
large sum than larger one.
The aggregate sum necessary for COM
pensated emancipation of course wonld be
large, but it would require no ready cash
nor bombs any faster than the emancipa-
ton pro presses.
SHARING THE BURDEN WITH PosTERrrY.
This might not and probably would not
close before the end of the thirty seven
years. AT that time we shall probably
have 100. 900. 900 people to share the bur
den instead of 81 .000. 900 as now. and not
only So, bnt the increase of population
may be expected to continue for a long
time after the perio'l as rapidly as before,
because our territories will not have become
fall. do not state this inconsilerately
At the same ratiJ of increase which we
have maintained on an average from our
first national census in 100 until 1860,
we should in 1900 have a population of
1O3.2 POS Ais. and why may we not eontin-
ne that ratio far beyond that period.
ouR TERRrroRY.
Our abundant room. our broad national
homestead, is an ample resource. Were
our territory as limited as the British isles,
certainly our population could not expand
as stated Instead of receiving the for
eign born as now, we should be compelled
to send part of the native born away. but
suchisnot our condition. We have 1868
600 OF square miles. Europe has 1885,
UoO square miles. with a population aver
aging s3A persons to the square mile
Why may not our country at some time
average as many? Is il less fertile? Has
IT more waste surface by mountains. rivers.
lakes, deserts anil other causes? Is it in
ferior to Europe in any natural advantage?
PROSPECTIVE GROWTH OF POPULATION.
Ifthen we are at some time to be as pop
ulous as Europe. how soon? As to when
this may be. we may judge of the past and
present as towhen. it will ever depend. much
onwhether we maintain the Union. Several
uf our States are above the average Of Eu-
ropean population, of 734 to the square
mile. Mtsacirsets has Isl. Rhode ISL
AMI 1873. New York and New Jersey each
80. als' two other great states, Pennsylva
MIA AMI Ohio are not far below; the former
having 63 and the latter 50. The States.
direct above the European average. except
New York haze increased in as rapid ra-
ito since passing that point as ever before,
while no one of them is equal to some other
parts OF our country in natuaral capacity
for sustaining dense population. Taking
the ratio in the aggregate we find its popu
lation anl ratio of increase for the several
decimal periods as follows: