Nebraska advertiser., 1862-12-13
can preserve the benefits OF the Union
by this means, than we can by the war
alone, is it not economical to do it!

can preserve the benefits OF the Union
by this means, than we can by the war
alone, is it not economical to do 1t
AN EcoNoMICAL VIEW.
Let us consider it, then let as ascer-
tain the sum we have expended on the
war since compensated emancipation was
proposed last March, and consider wheth-
er, if that measure had been promptly
accepted by even some of the slave States,
The same sun would not have done more
to close the war than has been otherwise
done. If so, the measure would save
money and in that view would be a Pru-
dent and economical measure, certainly.
1t is not so easy to pay something as It
is to pay nothing, but It is easier to pay
.. large sum than a larger me-.
The aggregate sum necessary for COM
pensated emancipation of course would be
large, but it would require no ready cash
nor bonds any faster than the emanCipa-
ton progresses.
SHARING n BURDEN WITH P~osTERITY.
This might not and probably would
not close before the end of the thirty
seventh year. At that time we shall
probably have 100, 000, 900 people to
share the burden instead of 31,0OO,0OO
as now. and not only so. but the increase
Of our population may be expected to con-
linue for a long time after that period as
rapidly as before, because our territories
will not have become full. lido not state
this inconsiderately. At the same ratio
Of increase which we have maintained on
an average from our first national census
in 1890 until 1860, we should in 1900
have a population of 103, 20S,4l5, and
why may we pot continue the ratio far
beyond that period
OUR TERRITORY.
Our abundant room, our broad national
homestead, is an ample resource. Were
our territory as limited as are the British
isles, certainly our population could not
expand as stated. Instead of receiving
the foreign born as now, we should be
compelled TO send part of the native born
away bar such Is not our condition. We
have 1858 900 Of square miles. Europe
4Auo O3COO, OOO VI SQudlO nlllCSS Will q
population averaging 73 1-3 persons to
the square mile. Why may not our
country at some time average as many ?
Is it less fertile Has it more waste
surface by mountains, rivers, lakes, des-
erts and other causes? Is it inferior to
Europe IN any natural advantage!
GROWTH IN POPULATION.
If then we are at some time to be as
populous as Europe, how soon? As tc
when this may be, we can Judge by the
past and present; when it will be, de-
ponds much on whether we maintain the
Union. Several Of our States are ABOVE
the average of European population, of
70 l-3 to the square mile. Massachu-
sets has 157, Rhode Island 1873. New
York and New Jersey each 50, and also
two other great States, Pennsylvania and
and Ohio, are no.; far below, the former
having 63 and the latter 80. The States
already above the European average, ex-
cept New York, have increased IN as
rapid a ratio since passing that point as
ever before, while no one Of them IS
equal to some other parts of our country
in natural capacity for sustaining a dense
population. Taking the ratio in the ag-
gregate we find its population and ratio
of increase for the several decimal peri
DDS as follows: