The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1869-08-15
Ths auestion OK Labor In the South
The Two Views.

The Two Views. -
The July number Of DeBoD's Reuieu
contains two articles which very we'll set
forth;the opposing views on the great
question now attracting the attention of
the South and Of the whole country.
Under the head of "Science and the Ne
ehdnic Arts against Coolies" the writer
gives &o s.lo argument against the Chinese.
AS regards ,Sonsider derations political and
social he assumes that no one would
pisha TO import Asiatics. From them we
could not have amalgamation with our
selves ia sentiment, in interest, in desti-
ny. He then, considers the remaining
indncement-that the South needs addi-
tiona labor. On this subject, the writer
makes the point that the effect of an in
creased number of laborers would be to
cheapen cotton, for the benefit of the
Northern and European manufacturer
rather than of the South He contends
that the Southern people are now MAX
ing double as much money as formerly
by the culture. of staples, with half the
laborers formerly employed. This being
the case, he suggests that to increase our
manufactures would be better than to
augment our agricultural force. To IL
lussrate the propositions: Say that the
present value of cotton and sugar is $780,
900, 900 Of specie. Is it not better sys-
tenn to convert cotton into cloths and to
refine sugar, and thus double their va
lues, than to rely upon added agricnltu-
raj labor alone to keep up our exported
values and our domestic prosperity9 Is
it not better to get more manufacturers
and mechanics than to get more agricul-
tural laborers? Is it not better to get the
Saxon army of artisans than the Asiatio
horde of field hands? These views de-
serve confederation. The writer next
proceeds to argue that, whilst for moral
and political reasons the introduction of
Asiatic labor would be runwise. the eco
,nonical, industrial expectations of those
who advocate il will not be Iealized. He
contends that coolie labor here cannot
compete with coolie labor in India; that
to omake more cotton and augar would
be to cheaper the rates of these staples
forithe benefit Of the North ern and Eu-
rogean* consumer, at the cost, to US. of
domestic peace and security. In fine,
the writer suggests thatwe look to other
means than cotton, and sugar, and rice,
to accomplish onr redemption and build
up our prosperity. Why make every
thing hinge upon increasing the number
OF cotton bales, and hogsheads of sugar,
and tierces of rice, to the neglect of the
loom and the anvil? If, he pertinently
asks, the Southern people have all the
elements for manufacture in their midst,
all the facilities for commerce in their
ports, why should they be restricted to
cultivate cotton and sugar for the rest of
the world, or why should the rest of the
world secure cheap cotton and sugar by
making the South the Botany Bay of
Asia and Africa? The query is pointed
So much for one side of this great ques-
tion.
Per contra. Another writer, under
the heading of Southern Labor" takes
the opposing view. Referring to the
broad acres of the South TINT lie uncul-
tivated, where the summer sun paralyzes
the energy of the white laborers, and
where the negro has been arrested in his
labors and doomed to determination, he
asks, what is to be done? The products
OF fSouthern soil and manufactures being
scarcely one-fourth Of what they would
have been, had 40 disturbance taken
place. What is to be done2 This writer
has no difficulty in answering the ques.
tion. The Chinaman is the God-ap-
pointed man. The South is the field of
his labors. China teens with its mil
lions. See the mystery unravelled. In
the wonderful adaptation OF means to
ends. The Pacific Railroad is built.
Here is the soil-there are the laborers,
and the power of steam brings them
together. The immigration from the
arH