The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1880-06-23
The Southern Land system.

The discussions raised by the negro exodus
are now turning on the question OF whether
there are not some radical defects IN the
present land system of the south. Mr.. l.
r. Morehead, President of the Mississippi
Valley Cotton Planters Association, makes
an interesting contribution to the literature
of the subject in a recent address from which
we quote:
q planter in the old time needed no CO.
operatIon of hi. neigh b0rs, his estate being
a community within itself, with its black
smith shop, carpenter shop, hospital, etc,
our Institutions and customs fostering moth
ING but agriculture. Then we raised our
corn and meat, and importations were con
fined nearly 70 manufacturing articles
Now we raise nothing comparatively but cot
ton. and import everything Then 1t was
pleasure to behold the fine cultivation of
Ceutleman's estate, the deep plowing, hne
drainage good bridges, we'll made ana kept
fences, one 10 two bales Of cotton, and sixty
to eighty bushels of corn produced on every
acre Of ground, respectively planted, iuIl
crib. Of corn and stacks of fodder Land by,
fat mules, hogs and stock, systematic Work
at the ginhOuse and shops, everything III
place and a general air Of thriitiness perva-
ding the atmosphere. Property was worth
then auy price party chose TO ask. Now,
on the same land, with double the quantity
Of labor to the acre, half the quantity Of
cotton and corn Is raised, the mules are
badly fed and half attended, the bitches,
fences bridges etc, are IN very ordinary IL
not had repair, and property has no salable
value | claim that the system Of making
tenants and share partners Of pauper labor
ers IS the cause Of this difference between
our former prosperity and our present de
pressed condition. Take first the case OF
the tenant who j. sold a team on time. and
agrees 70 pay a rental of eight or ten dollars
per acre for this he receives a house to live
in water, wood, garden and pasture for any
amount Of stock he may have, and IS then
ad vauced by the planter or some store food
and clothing for himself and family. In
other words, the planter sets an ignorant
Dauper for an independent landlord TO work
his crop as he chooses. The consequence Of
which is the planter ends by taking his
mule back at the end Of one or two years,
with a heavy ditchng and fencing bill TO
pay to induce another thrlttless pauper to
take the land the first one had nearly ruined.
The share system or partnership story is
quickly told: The planter gives the ground,
Implements team and feed for team, house,
garden. water wood, and pasture for any
cows, hogs or stock, and the laborer for this
agrees to give hi entire labor for the year q
would here state, by way Of parenthesIs,
that laborers only get one-third Of the crop
against the landlords capital in the north
and west), and / challenge the best man
aged place in the south, to show where its
labor has put in $50 days Of work in the
year, working on this half or tenant system.
eve must come to a system Of fair wages,
and let intelligence direct our farming
diversity our crops, and make Us a self-sus-
tanning people. We must take the initia-
tive in this change, and very short time
will elap-e before the laborer Is in hearty
sympathy with it, He can understand
cash payments, but cannot comprehend ac-
counts interests aud credits"