Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-08-12

slaves, valued st 50, sic, 1927 1852 in 1850,
hid only 81, 403, goa, 1873 in 1S70-a loss of
$4I3, 000,0 900, or about $50 in gold for every
man, woman, and child, white or black,
now living in those States. Tzese-.'si
But this is by no means the worst. By
examination OF the tables Il will be seen
that three of these States, Missouri, Mary
land, and Delaware, have Jared verQ differ.
entity from those which were enlisted in the
Rebellion, aud havs gained in wealth.
Missouri nearly $600,000,00O; Maryland,
$1SS, 000, 900; and Delaware, $50, 100000
in all, $18l, 523, 167. The loss of property
(not including slsves) In the remaining
States was, therefore, $1,231 100000, or
$lO9 for every man, woman, and child,
white or black, now living within their
borders. e h -lf.-.3. ~. ~.
Twelve hundred and thirty millions in
| golt-a sum two-thirds as large as the en-
tire bonded debt of the United States-lost
from the property of thirteen States. Their
entire property, exclusive of slaves, in 1860
was S3,993 ,909,628, and the loss is 80 per
cent of that sum. N should we alt0geth-
er forget that the property in slaves was the
! chief wealth and main supporte of large
part of the Southern people; thfir earnings
| were invested in it; their industry depend
| ed on ii; their wives and children had no
| other security from want. To the nation
! it was not wealth; to individuals it was alt
the wealth they possessed; and this loss,
! added to that already mentioned, makes a
| total of $3,230 000, 000-over one-half of
| the entire property of the people of thir-
| teen States, and $2S7 in gold for each per-
son. s.a- +e4E
LOST BY PREVENTION OF NATUR RAJ IN
CREASE.
The full extent of this loss can only be
appreciated by comparison with the pro-
gress of Northern States. These have gain.
ed-and Missouri, Maryland and Delaware
| have also gained-about 100 per cent in
wealth since 1860. New York has gained
| in gold value 1S5 per cent; Iowa, 135; Mis-
souri,, 134; Pennsylvania, lit; Michigan,
| 126; Massachusetts, III; California, 14S;
Wisconsin, LOT per cent, and all the States
except the thirteen already considered have
gained Ill Fer cent. This, In spite of the
| waste and losses of war, which afflicted
Missouri and Maryland, peculiarly, and i'm
posed heavy burdens and Great waste of
productive force unoD all Northern States.
Had the Southern States been equally
favored, their wealth would have increased
four thousand millions, whereas it has dim.
inished twelve hundred millions. Why has
it not ithus increased? Missouri suffered
from the war more than Georgia or Alaba
ma, yet Alabama has lost II per cent and
Georgia IL per cent of all its wesIth while
Missouri has gained 134 per cent. Arkansas
and Missouri had almost the same number of
slaves In 1860, yet Arkansas has lost %
per cent of its wealth. Whatever cause has
deprived these Is States of their share of the
general gain in wealth has therefore cost the
country not only the twelve hundred mil
lions which they have lest, but the four
thousand millions which they have not
gained by prosperous industry. A sum
more than one-tifth as great as our entire
national wealth, sum more than twice as
great as our whole national debt, has thus
been thrown away. Five thousand millions
more of property at the South ought now
TO be bearing its share Of taxation, light
ening the buEden borne by Northern peo-
pie, and adding by its increase for all time
to come to the national wealth and power.
The causes of this great decrease of
wealth in certain States, and still greater
loss through the prevention Of their natural
increase, deserve separste examination, and
the serious attention of the Northern peo-
pie.
INDUSTRY AT THE SoUTH-Loss OF ONE |
HALF OF THE VALUE OF FARMS.
Some idea Of the condition of industry |
at the South may be formed from the fact |
revealed by the census reports, that the |
value Of all farms in the Southern States |
in 1870 was less in currency than it was in |
1850 in gold, by more than S750,000,000!
According TO the census of 1860 the cash |
value o. all farm land in the then slave
holding States was g, 550,237, sos. Omit |
ting from the mFarison Delaware, Mary |
land snd Missouri, the value of farms in the |
Is States hitherto separately considered was |
$,l42. POS. AS. But in the same States the
value returned at the census Of 1870 was
only 81, 1881, 776 804 in currency. During |
the agricultural year prior to the taking of |
the census, the average value Of this cur |
rency was only 753 cents on the dollar; the
cash value in gold was therefore 81 ,049, 432,-
2S7, and the loss in gold value since 1860
was 81, 092, 773, 161, or more than the entire
value now remaining.
Railroads give additional value to farms,
and at the South, since 1850, fully $3.50 |
miles of railroad have bean built, costing,
with equipment, 500, 100000, and raising
the proportion of miles of road to acres of
farm lard from two TO seven miles to the
100000 acres. Notwithstanding this invest
ment, and the added value it has given 10
lands adjacent 10 the new roads, the South
has lost more than one-half the entire value
of its farming land. During the decade
ending in 1860, the value spent in building
Of railroads in that section, as in the whole |
country, was returned mole than three-fOld
in the increased value of farms alone. The
increase in value of Southern farms from
1850 to 1860 was more than 100000, 900;
but the loss from 1860 to 1870 has been still
greater, 60 that the entire valu, of farms in
Is States is less than it was in 1850, %
years SGD. In other words, these States
have lost quarter of a century.
EMANCIPATION NOT THE CAUSE,
Does any one imagine that the ravsges of
war or the emancipation of slaves has
caused this destruction of values? Let him
then consider Maryland, in which the val
ue of farms in 1860 was $145, 100000, and
in 1870 had risen to $40, 0O0,0 900; Delaware
in which the value in 1860 was S31, 100000
and had risen in 1870 to sac, 100000, and
Missouri, in which the value in 1860 was
$230,G00, 900, and in ITO had risen to $780,
100000. What other State, except per-
haps, Virginia, was more harried and torn
by coDtending armies than Missouri? Did
any other State witness mere desperate
and merciless neighborhood warfare, broth
er against brother, and father against son?
Was there not slave labor in Missouri be-
fore the war, and were not 1l4,931 slaves
there emancipated? Yet in that State the
value Of farms has increased Sl60 100000.
What has caused the loss elsewhere?
Missouri has increased nearly so per cent.
In the area of improved land in farms, add
ing about 100000 acres since 1860. But
The thirteen states have lost nearly 7,000,- [
900; in 1860 their area of improved lands
in farms was Ga, 476,350 acres, and in 1870
only 1851, 1897 acres. This is not the only
oss. Nearly 30,000,000 acres of unim- {
proved land, included in farms in 1860, are t
no longer farms, but waste land. The en- 6
ire area of land in farms in these thirteen
States has decreased nearly one-sixth within
en- years.
Nor is this abandonment in land due to s
my decrease in the laboring population.
The number both of whites and of colored
,eople has increased, in spite of the l-sses j
y war and the immigration of population L