Year: 1859

results ana causes III tue NOrCn, WHICH, HaVc
confessedly driven slavery from their limits,
should be held up TO Southern men for their
admiration. The "wave of foreign power" as
! it is called, which the North have enjoyed, and
to which they are welcome, would not have
benefited the slaveholding South. If it had
come in competition with slave labor here, it
would not have benefited the owner of the
slave; nor would it by the same competition
with our native laboring population have bene-
fitted them. It might have settled upour lands
and enhanced their value-and it might have
contributed to bring about that more advanced
condition of things so beautifully depicted to
the North; but it could not have benefited
the institution of slavery by settling and en-
hancing the price of lands, and bringing cheap
white labor in competition with it. In the
next place, have this to observe in reference
to the argument of the Report above quoted.
If it is good for anything at all-if there is any
.soundness in it, and if the contrast drawn be-
tween the prosperous condition of that model
state Of society in which it is said "the PEOPLE
have the comforts of wealth, and the further
satisfaction of being regarded as the most enter
prlsing and jul;cious people in existence" and
the declining condition Of the unfortunate South,
where many Of us in the older sections wonll
fail to sell our estates to-day for as much as we
paid for them in market fifty years ago." { be-
cause we are suffering so for want of negroes, J
is true contrast, and if it proves anything, it
proves little too much for the cause of slave
ry. 1t would so to prove, that of the "too
distinct and antagonistic forms of society which
have met for contest upon the arena of this
Union," the Northern form is superior to the
Southern. have known these ndivious COM
parsons to be made, by those who are opposed
to our institutions and the difference attributed
by them, not to the fact that we did not have
slaves enough, but that we had any at all but
I have not known these boastings of their su-
perior prosperity to be taken up and confessed
by Southern men, and worked into the argu-
mept Of Southern question. If our people
were all to become convinced Of the views here
presented and should fall in love with tue fls.
cnating condition, Of the North under their
cheap labor and dense population systems. it
might be difficult to persuade them that relief
was to le found in tue importation of hnrtles of
barbariuns from Africa. As for Inc, repudiate
the comparison utterly. maintain that South
ern society and Southern prosperity, in all the
material respects here indicated, is not fairly
presented nor Justly constrasted. The income
INV
such as to show that we are declining, nor are
we suffering from the high value Of labor. A
ESSSuntry oxhbit~the three great proofs
of prosperity, which are to be found in the
South, and which are confessed by this argu-
ment, to wit Productivcness OF vested interests


high priced labor and high wages Of labor, and
cheap lands is in the most enviable position
that any republican society can ever occupy


Our hardy agricultural population who can own
the cheap lands and are attached to tue soil,
and whose labor is valuable III tue samo prOpor-
ton that other labor in the country il valuable,
would not be willing to exchange fur the mas
ses of Northern landiess laborerS, who, by their
cheap labor, contribute to the wealth Of the few
who can possess the land. The idea conveyed
in this Report, that our lands would not sell
for as much now as they brought fifty years
ago, and that result would have been avoided
by increased numbers OF slaves, or that it would
now bc obratcd by an influx Of slaves, is a
novel thought Those very lands have been
worn out by slave labor, and it would have been
a strange remedy to have doubled the number
of ncgroe, upon them. The truth, on the con-
trary, is, that slave labor agriculture has re-
quired fresh lands to keep it profitable, and the
character Of the products has been such rs not
to admit OF the same improvement in lands rs
other branches of agriculture. Neither could q
cotton State support such dense population as
those countries have where there arc lou and
800 to the square mile, and continue proiitably
the culture of cotton or any other article OF
Southern export In such state of things, the
consumption Of provisional products would be
so great that it would require the land to be
devoted to the production of the cereals as is
the case in the North and Europe. So that the
cotton culture and those branches Of agriculture
to which negro labor is best adapted, would
disappear under the auspices Of that halcyon
prospect held out to us in this Report.


But the great mistake in the argument of the
Report, lies in applying tile reasoning which is
applicable to free labor OF the North to the
slave labor of the South. Now, if it were adj
mitted for the sake of argument, that dense
population and cheap labor, were really bles-
sing to q nation-that is to the greater number
of the people Of nation where slavery does
not exist-it by no means follows that dense
slave population and cheap slave labor in the
South would work out similar benefits to the
people of the South. Under the free labor sys-
tenn of society the "vested interests" or the
landed estate, is separate and distinct interest
from the aboring interest. Capital there is one
thing, and labor is another And as capital can
reduce the wages Of labor it enhances its own
profits. And as labor can enhance its own
wages, 1t decreases the profits of capital The
contest Is betHssh the capitalist and The lahorer


and in the language Of thit report II labOr
goes down, The prodact hciuE he slrlc, Tug sub.
lrct of It's employment Must 80 np. and, ikea
scc.saw, the ont end canllut tall without the


4 jo 4tr,t kny-1 ri
it MAY be very true sThen applied to the case
ut the North for there tie labcr ts cn ore eng
and the subjects of lis cmtploWreh:, Or the capl-
talist, on the other end. And when the lhborer
goes down. the capitalist goes up, very truly
But slave labor in the South does not ride upon
one end of the scc-saw and the landlord upon
the other end. The slave himself is consldera.
bic part of the proprietor's "vested interest"
He see-saws on the same end OF the plank with
his MASTER and when he goes down, bis master
goes with him, and the vested interests 90 TOO


IF lie were free laborer working for wages lie
would get on the other end Of the plank, anu
of course the lower his wages could be reduced
the higher would be the profits OF the landlord.
The idea of reducing the value OF the labor "i
a mans negro, and thereby increasing the profits
Of his land, is fallacious conception. Ihls ex-
hibits the error into which the distinguished au


thor of the Report fell. 1t is an error OF the
most radical nature am persuaded that he
fell into it by applying the logic which Is appll-
cable to the vested interests of the free SOIL pro-


prietor, to the case of the Southern Shareholder.
Would it benefit the free soil proprietor to re-
duce the price of his land2 If it would not; IL
could not benefit the Southern proprietor to
reduce the value of that important part ot his
capital, bis negro labor. Now, just here in tfls
mistaken conception, begins un error whlcn
runs through all the reasoning OF the author OF