New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-01-31
THE PLANTER AND THE LABORER.

| $500
Our consideration of this question ha
attracted the attention of several gentle
men interested in sugar culture. We pub
lished a communication of Mr. Gourrie
yesterday, and one from Mr.. Lapice i,
our present issue. We have likewise hat
call from Mr.. Bringier, the patron O
the process for obtaining the saccharint
contents Of the cane by communion and
solution.
AS each of these gentlemen represents
a separate view of the causes of sugar de.
cline, they pretty well comprehend the
elements necessary to the discussion OF
this important subject.
| 1. As to the partition of product be-
tween the planter and laborer, Mr.. Gour-
rier represents the planter. He disputes
our capacity to treat the subject ''inan-
cially or agriculturally. He charges
upon us that we have produced this loss
of product by emancipation, and INDUCES
in good deal of partisan defamation.
When the state of finance and agricul-
ture is as he reports, it is plain the plant
ers can not have understood the subject
themselves, and can not complain of
others who have taken it up, as they have
right to do. Looking impartially at the
subject of capital and labor throughout
the continent the press is better authority
than gentleman whose opportunities of
judging the subject are limited 70 parish
or two, and who looks upon the subject
through the binocular delusion of party
prejudice and personal interests.
We made no party or political illusions
in the article referred to, but Mr.. Gour-
rier breaks out into defamation and
logic altogether Gallo in attributing all
the evils which have be-allen the sugar
crop to political misgovernment. As this
cause does not seem to affect the cotton
crop, which grows alongside of the sugar
crop, we are not inclined to adopt this
solution.
We have dealt with existing facts, as
Mr.. Courier would have to deal with q
crevasse which came upon him. An essay
upon the causes of the crevasse-a violent |
quarrel with the neighbor that cut cart
way through the emDankment-would not |
stay the rushing waters nor replace the |
ruined hopes Of the planter. So the |
most we can make of Mr.. Gourrier's dia-
tribe against abolition is, he has very
confused idea of what is really the matter
with him or the planters whose advocate
be appears. His insinuation that the
legislative committee proposed by us will
be "a commission Of one educated Office
holder and two ignorant dittoes'' is ex-
pressive of his incapacity to make fair dis
,ussion, and his assertion that we suggest
, committee ''to secure the laborer q bet
er showing is unvarranted by anything
which he has read in our columns. We
propose an inquiry to see whether the
profits of sugar planting can not be SO
as to make it better for the
PLANTER, and SO 'enable him to pay the
aborer better wages" Mr.. Courier having
attributed the decline of the sugar crop
o political misgoyernment. Mr.. Lapice
'ssigns another comprehensive cause. 1t is
g The deterioration Of seed cane.
We publish to-day letter from Mr.. La
,ice, which explains his views in very de-
orous and temperate language. We ac-
ord to him perfect competency to speak
or the class of planters to which ne has
o long belonged. We also accord to him
aluable services in his voyage to India
nd to Java for the purpose Of procuring
resh cane plant for Louisiana. 1t is,
lowever, patent from the facts stated in
lis communication, that bad cane is not
he sole cause of sugar decline. The crop
f Louisiana before the war had gradu-
lily increased to something less than half
million hogsheads. There was an inter-
al Of five years within which very little
ugar was produced. Since the resump-
ion the crop has declined to about one
ourth of the product attained before
be war. 1t is not proper, therefore,
0 argue that plant which had been by |
areful culture brought by an annual in
rease to the ante war standard, should have
,ithin a few years thereafter declined be-
a,lse alone of the deterioration of the
liant Especially when there are other
auses obviously patent to have at least
ontributed to produce such result. 1t
aay be proper to admit that the renewal
the cane plant by importation from
oreign stock will improve the exotic
taple planted among us. and we should
e glad to see the subject investigated in
be manner suggested. But We refer Mr..
Iapice to Mr.. Courier and respectfully
uggest that they reconcile their respective
Jews. Certainly each will convince the
Their that the sugar decline is not con-
ned to single causes. whether Of rotten
attoons or political corruption. Mr..
,ringier called to inform us that the
ugar chat, OF chips, of cane resulting
rom the process Of solution. have been
xamined chemically and found to con- i
ain only one per cent OF saccharine l
natter. This for the early stage of the I
Experiment. is wonderful. 1t remains
0 be inquired what is the compare {
i've cost of the two processes employed {
n extracting cane juice. 1t costs no more {
q time, fuel and attendance to obtain the |
ugar by solution than by pressure. Then