Negro-Slavery, No Evil.
In obedience to a resolution adopted by the Platte County Self-Defensive Association, we proceed to lay before the public the immediate causes which led to the formation of the Association; to explain its purposes, and to suggest the means, which seem to us proper to be adopted by the citizens of the slaveholding States, to defeat the designs of the abolitionists.
In adopting this resolution, the Association was not influenced by any desire to defend itself at home, against the absurd and false reports of its action and purposes, which have been so widely circulated by abolitionists and freesoilers; for at home no defence is necessary; the members of the Association are too well known, to need defence against any charges which abolitionists might bring against them. We do but justice to the Association, when we say, that it is composed of men, who for integrity, moral worth, orderly conduct, intelligence and patriotism will favourably compare with the members of any association, of any kind, in any country. Of those who originally composed the Association, there were a few unworthy exceptions. Such must be the case of all associations; the more is it inevitable, where, as in ours, all were invited to join. The wonder is, there were so few, as in this instance, the hope, thus to ward off suspicion, was to the unworthy the strongest inducement to join.
The purpose of the Association in adopting this resolution, was to expose fully the dangers to which slave-property in Missouri, and especially on the borders of Kansas, is subjected; to arouse the attention of all good citizens, not of slaveholding States alone, but of the whole Union, to the results which must follow, if the abolitionists succeed in their purposes; and, if possible, to suggest means by which those results may be prevented.
It is known, that on the passage of the bills for the organization of Kansas and Nebraska, the leading abolitionists of the Eastern cities organized associations under the name of "Emigration Aid Societies," the avowed purpose of which is to throw into Kansas a horde who shall not only exclude slaveholders from that Territory, but in the end abolish slavery in Missouri.
Were these miscalled "emigrants" poor and honest farmers, seeking a home and the advantages of a new country for themselves and families, we might applaud the charity of those who originated the scheme: were these associations fair means of deciding the contest between the friends and opponents of negro-slavery, we might admire the energy of the abolitionists: but when we find these miscalled emigrants really negro-thieves, their purpose not to procure a home in Kansas, but to drive slaveholders therefrom; that they are not freemen, but paupers, who have sold themselves to Ely Thayer & Co., to do their masters' bidding; who hesitate not to proclaim that they are expert in stealing slaves; that they intend to follow their calling, self-defence requires that means equally active, equally efficient, should be adopted by those who are threatened.
Situated on the border of Kansas, we were the first to receive the attack. Those among us, who had hitherto been restrained by fear, emboldened by the prospect of such efficient aid begun openly to avow their sentiments; the timid, became freesoilers; the bold, abolitionists. The emissaries of the "Emigration Aid Societies" were arriving; they were boasting that "they would shortly be the strongest, and then they would drive slaveholders from Kansas!" They declared that "they had run off slaves, would run off more, and would, finally, drive slaveholders from Missouri!"
In our streets, one of the least prudent proclaimed, that he would "willingly help to burn the, d—d slaveholding town."
It seemed as if Weston were about to become the head-quarters of their operations. It was feared, and subsequent events have vindicated, that our fear was not without foundation, that among our traders and merchants there where those who at heart were against us; others who loved money so much more than their country, they would, for the gain from the abolition trade, encourage them to come among us.
There were among us, too, a large number of free negroes, most of, them, as usual, of bad character; their houses, the natural places of resort for abolitionists, at which to meet, and tamper with slaves, corrupt them, entice (hem to run away, and furnish them facilities for escape.
About this time, a large number of slaves made their escape: three, from the neighborhood of Weston, were taken in Iowa, and free papers, with full instructions as to their route, were found upon them.
Abolitionists were not content to confine their efforts to the expulsion of slaveholders from Kansas, but were evidently already at work in "abolishing slavery" in Missouri. The law, seldom sufficient to punish, was wholly inefficient to prevent their crimes. It was evident, that the active, individual efforts of all good citizens would be
5needed to aid the law in the protection of our rights, in the preservation of our property.
The security of our slave-property was not alone involved; our very lives were endangered. The negro-thief, the abolitionists, who induces a slave to run away, is a criminal of a far more dangerous character than the house-breaker, or the highway robber, — his crime of a far higher grade than that of the incendiary — it ranks, at least, with that of the midnight assassin. To induce a slave to escape, involves not merely to the master the loss of that slave, of that amount of property; but it brings in its train far more serious consequences. Other slaves are thereby induced to make like attempts; a hatred for their masters, whom they begin to regard as their oppressors, is thus begotten; and (his, too, often is followed by arson and murder.
To guard as far as possible against such fearful evils, was the immediate cause of our organization.
Not only was the immediate pressing necessity such as to compel our organization, but the future consequences which must follow the success of the schemes of the abolitionists, are such as to awaken the fears, and to call for the active and continued efforts of all good citizens.
Even in the future, we are more immediately interested than those who are more removed from the field of their operations. Already the effect of the coming of such a band of abolitionists to our border, has been not only to reduce the value of our slaves, but of our land. Slaveholders fear to come among us; good men who are opposed to slavery, will not come; and should Kansas be made a harbour for negro-thieves, ours, now the most prosperous portion of our State, will in a short lime become a desert waste. We must at once sell our slaves, abandon the culture of hemp, our great staple; suffer our fields to lie idle, until slaveholders driven from our State, Missouri shall fall into the hands of freesoilers, and a new people be brought to take our places.
Not less is the interest which other slaveholding States have in the end, though seemingly it be less in the beginning of this struggle. The abolitionists are fully awake to the true nature, the future consequences of this struggle. They proclaim the purpose of their efforts to be, to surround Missouri with non-slaveholding States; force her to abolish slavery; then wheel her into their ranks for an attack upon the States south of her.
Missouri vanquished, Arkansas and Texas are looked upon as easy victims. Slavery then restricted to a small space, they rejoice in the contemplation of an early exhibition of another Haytian liberation.
Let not our friends in the other slaveholding States fold their arms, and by their supineness suffer us to fall victims to abolition energy. If
6they do, the day will come, and that not far distant, when they too, will have a battle to fight at home, at their, very doors.
The plan of our Association is not aggressive, but as our name imparts, truly self-defensive. We are pledged diligently to investigate and promptly bring to punishment every violation of the laws which have been enacted for the protection of our slave-property.
We have determined to adopt all proper means to rid ourselves of the free negroes, who are unfit and have no right by law to remain among us: and to prevent all such as are not members of some white family, and subject to their control, from residing in our county.
We have also pledged ourselves to expel from our county all who shall be found proclaiming principles which tend to induce our slaves to escape, to lead them to insurrection and rebellion.
Though we fully recognise the duty of all good citizens to obey the law, to rely upon the law, where there is no law, the right of self-defence requires that we should resort to the strong hand for self-protection. We have no law by which the expression of abolition sentiments is made a penal offence, and yet it is a crime of the highest grade. It is not within even the much abused liberty of speech; but in a slaveholding community, the expression, of such sentiments is a positive act, more criminal, more dangerous, than kindling the torch of the incendiary, mixing the poison of the assassin. The necessity for a law punishing such a crime, has not, until now, been felt in Missouri. Until such a law is enacted, self-protection demands that we should guard against such crimes.
Such are the means we propose to adopt for the immediate protection of our property. We have thus fully stated them, not to excuse our action, but to awaken our friends, in other portions of our slave-holding territory, to the dangers which will ere long surround them, if we are overcome: to arouse them to the necessity of coming to our aid, and thus keep the enemy from their borders.
There is another measure which we have proposed, which may be deemed local and personal, and which has been grossly misrepresented by the abolitionists and their sympathisers. We have been charged with pledging ourselves to assist in the expulsion of all settlers who go to Kansas from the non-slaveholding States. This, like most other abolition statements, is purely false. On the contrary, the only pledge we have given touching the expulsion of any person from Kansas, is one which we expect ere long to be called on to redeem by the good men who have gone to Kansas from the non-slaveholding States. That pledge is, that we will, when called on by the citizens of Kansas, aid them in expelling those who are exported to that Territory by the Abolition Aid Societies. With these, the honest men, who go to Kansas from the non-slaveholding States, are not to be confounded.
7The latter go with the spirit of freemen to secure a home for their children, they go respecting the rights of others; the former go, the slaves of Thayer & Co. and his associates, to do their masters' bidding; to drive others from the Territory, to steal negroes from Missouri.
For the one class, however, much we may regret that they should differ with us in opinion, even though that difference may in the end result in our ruin, we feel respect, such as one freeman should feel for another. To them we shall appeal, as to good men, equally interested in the prosperity and happiness of our common country; to them we shall present such arguments, as should influence true hearted patriots.
But to that other class, hired slaves of corrupt masters, who are sent for the purpose of driving our brothers from Kansas, of stealing our property, driving us from our homes, we offer no argument, but that of the strong hand. We have not, it is true, done that, which natural right would have justified us in doing. There is no law to bind them to keep the peace — there can be none, until it is enacted by the Legislature of that Territory; they are to us as would be a band of Blackfeet or Camanches, who should encamp upon our borders, for the avowed purpose of stealing our cattle and horse, of plundering our farms and villages. We would be justified in marching to their camp, and driving them back to their dens, without waiting for their attack. We are not bound to wait, until they have "stolen our negroes," "burned our slaveholding towns." But we have been so "law abiding and orderly," that we have not done this: we have simply said, "we will when called upon," go to the aid of our friends, and assist in expelling those who proclaim their purpose to be the expulsion of our friends. Robbers and murderers have no right to call on the law for protection.
In connection with these immediate and local features of the contest, it is proper we should say a word of the character of the Territory, and its adaptedness to a slaveholding population. Politicians may prate, and letter-writers may scribble, about the homes for the poor, to be found in Kansas, but it is not the less true, that it is the least desirable country to the poor man ever opened for settlement.
The absence of timber, there not being enough for fuel and fencing, much less a foot for cultivation, renders it utterly unfit for him who has to rely on his own unaided arm. Dwellings must be of brick, of stone, or if of timber, framed, at a heavy expense; fencing of plank, or hauled a great distance.
In the timber, the poor man with his own strong hand can build his cabin; with his axe can fell his trees, and with his one horse plough, can put his little field in cultivation. There is no such land in Kansas!
8It will require money to build his house; to break prairie, six yoke of cattle are necessary; fencing will be too costly for small fields. To the man of capital, to him who can command labour alone, is Kansas desirable. To such, it is easiest and cheapest to make a farm in the prairie. The soil is adapted to the culture of hemp, the raising of stock. Its climate peculiarly healthy to the negro. Nature intended it for a slaveholding State; necessity will force it to be such, unless our friends foolishly abandon it to those who cannot occupy it.
Our friends can thus see that to them the land is worth a struggle. Were there no other interest at stake, they will be paid for doing their duty.
We have now shown the immediate evils to which we are exposed; the means by which we propose as far as practicable to meet those evils: we have shown, that we are now in that condition to which, if the abolitionists succeed, other slaveholding States will ere long be driven. We propose now to consider that which lies at the foundation of all these troubles — opposition to negro slavery.
To slaveholders, we will first address ourselves.
With all due deference to the wisdom of the great and good men who have so long governed the councils of the slaveholding States, though it may seem presumptuous, we yet feel that we are justified in saying, that experience has shown the error of their course. In decrying discussion, in seeming to admit negro-slavery an evil to be borne, not an institution to be defended, we have not only strengthened the arm of our enemies, but tied the hands of our friends. By such seeming admissions, we have deprived ourselves of the sympathies of too many good men. Our silence has been construed into a confession that the institution could not be defended. We should have learned long ere this, that the more we protest against agitation, the more abolitionists agitate; we should remember, that victory is rarely won by retreat; that courage wins half the battles. We have been so much accustomed to hear slavery denounced as an evil, that we have ourselves, with the evidence of its effects before our eyes, feared to look and examine them. With this daily cry resounding in their ears, with all the monstrous exaggerations of the poet's fancy, the knave's cunning, to mislead them still further, it is not strange that good men who could not see and judge for themselves, should have been taught to look with horror upon the master, with pity upon the slave. With so many to denounce, so few to defend, it is not strange, that even those who were willing to sustain our strict legal rights, the honest good men of the north, should yet feel reluctant to do any act by which so great an evil should be extended. It has been well said, that in our country truth loses nothing by discussion. We, who have lived in slaveholding States, have had an opportunity to see and to feel the
9effects of negro-slavery, have felt that it was no evil. Until now, we have had no simple striking rule, the correctness of which all would admit, by which to test its effects. We now have the test, and it is our duty to apply it. It is due to ourselves, it is due to our friends in the non-slaveholding States, that we should have more than bare assertion for proof. If it be true that negro-slavery is, as represented by the abolitionists, not only a crime, but a political and moral evil, degrading the character of the master as well as the slave, retarding the advancement of our country in prosperity and happiness, we should at once as men teach ourselves to look the evil in the face — we should go about ridding ourselves of such a curse.
If, however, it be found that negro-slavery is no crime: if it be found neither a political nor a moral evil, but that it elevates the character of the master, promotes his happiness, contributes to the advancement of the country in, wealth and prosperity, is the best possible condition for the slave race, all good men, all real philanthropists, all practical statesmen, all true patriots, will say, let us preserve such an institution, let us extend its blessings.
Let us not be understood as suggesting that the number of slaves should be increased by violence, by opening again our ports to the importation of those whom the now abolitionists would then capture in the wilds of Africa. Though it has been wisely suggested, if this were done, abolitionists would give us no further troubles, they would as did their fathers, become slave-catchers, and thus being able to make a profit of slavery, would cease to hate slave-owners; would forget their mock love of the negro in their real love of money; though it may easily be shown that slavery has done more to civilize and christianize the African, than all the schemes of all the pious missionaries; yet our sympathies for the African are not such as for his good to induce us to bring among us a horde of savages. Our philanthropy does not extend, so far as to become the civilizers of savages, by bringing them into our families. We are now reaping the benefit of our fathers' good works; we have the civilized Christian man, in place of the rude, vicious, and degraded heathen.
We propose to consider slavery as it exists in our country; to test its effects on the white race and on the negro; to try it, not by bold assertion, but by facts and figures, about which there can be no dispute.
We assert that negro-slavery, as it exists in the United States, is neither a moral nor a political evil, but on the contrary, is a blessing to the white race and to the negro.
This broad proposition will doubtless cause the abolitionist to sneer — it will strike as bold, the good men of the north who have been so long deceived; it may even seem hard of proof to those in the slave-holding
10holding States who have feared to investigate the subject; but we have the evidence at hand. A good lesson has been taught us, and we have profited by it. So long and so oft had it been proclaimed from the pulpit, that slavery was a violation of God's law, men begun to doubt whether a slaveholder could be a Christian. Men of the world, too little versed in the teachings of the Bible, feared to investigate the question. Our Divines, misled by their text-books, took for granted the dogmas of their Doctors. Yet so soon as one man dared approach, the Holy Book, dared to "search the scriptures," it was found, that instead of being a violation of God's holy law, slavery was actually established by that law! The truth was proclaimed; discussion followed; the result was, that investigation fixed beyond controversy the fact, that by the first law given to man by his Maker, the law proclaimed from Sinai, slavery was established! Moses, the divine law-giver, was a slaveholder! Slavery was recognised and regulated by our Saviour! A "fugitive slave," instead of feeing aided in his escape, was returned to his master by Paul, the great Apostle, to the Gentiles!
So triumphantly and conclusively was the consistency of slavery with the Christian religion established, that abolitionists were driven to infidelity, to blasphemy: they trampled under foot the Bible, spurned the God and Saviour of slave-holders!
With such a lesson, it is strange our politicians have had less boldness than our parsons, have not dared to discuss the political, social and moral effects of negro-slavery. The, victory was as certain and complete in the one case as in the other.
Though we be but private citizens of a border county, with neither the leisure nor the means, had we the ability fully to present all the evidence which can be brought to sustain our position, so abundant is the evidence, so accessible the proof, we feel no hesitancy in saying, we will furnish so much that none but those who are willfully blind, shall fail to see the truth of our assertion.
Slavery is no evil to the negro. If we look at the condition of the negro in Africa, the land of his nativity, we find the most pitiable victim of a cruel master, the most wretched slave in America, when contrasted with a prince of his tribe in the deserts of Africa, is as a man contrasted with a beast! The migthiest of the negro race, in his native land, not only sacrifices his human victims to his Gods of stone, but is so loathsome in his filth and nakedness, that Giddings, or Gerrit Smith, would fly from his presence. Mrs. Stowe could not in fancy picture him a kinsman of poor Topsy; Fred Douglass would disown him as a country-man. It is not for us to question God's purposes, but it is certain that from our first knowledge of the negro race, those only have been rescued from the lowest stage of heathen barbarity,
11who have been made slaves to the white man — those only have learned to know the God of the Christian, who have been instructed by their masters. Ages have rolled on, and still the labour of the pious, missionary has been in vain; the African in his native land is still an idolator! Even now the only hope of his elevation, in the scale of humanity, is by means of the liberated slave.
So far, then, as the condition of the slave can be contrasted with that of his tribe in Africa, to the negro slavery is no evil.
But we go further and say that wherever the negro has been the slave of the white man, his condition has been better, not only than that of his race in the deserts of Africa, but better than when freed from the control of the white man, in whatever land the comparison be made. Whether we look to his condition in St. Domingo, the slave of the light-hearted Frenchman; In Jamaica, of the energetic Englishman; in the United States, of the indolent Creole of the South, or of the enterprising Kentuckian, as a, slave, the negro has ever been better and happier than when free.
In St. Domingo and Jamaica, which once contained a population, prosperous and wealthy, the masters kind and indulgent, the slaves joyous and happy, with their light labors yielding abundant harvests, robbed of the care, protection and forethought of the white man, we see them fast sinking to the starving miserable condition of wretched savages.
In our own country, with the advantage of the white man's example before them, with all the watchful care of their friends, the abolitionists, to aid them, the condition of the free negro is far worse than that of the slave. Politically their condition is worse than that of the slave, for as to all the honors and offices of government, the privileges of a citizen, freedom is to the free negro worse than an empty name. Subject to the burdens, they are even by the abolitionists deprived of the benefits of government. They who so love the slave, that they will steal him from the care and protection of his master, will exclude the unhappy free negro from a home in their State. Unlike the slave, they have none to protect them. To the slave, the master is the government, a ruler with limited powers, whose interest is identical with his subject. To the master alone docs the slave owe allegiance, from him he receives protection. To the free negro, the government is that of a stranger — he is as an alien, with all the burdens, with none of the privileges of a citizen. Until the free negro is made politically that which nature has not made him, the equal of the white man, his political privileges are in fact the worst species of oppression.
We will then contrast the social, moral and physical condition of the slave and negro.
On this the census is sufficient to leave no doubt.
Loss of speech, of hearing, of sight, as certainly indicate physical, as idiocy and insanity do mental suffering. By the extent to which the negro, slave and free, is subject to these afflictions, we are enabled to determine his condition. Blindness, insanity and idiocy especially result from destitution and distress. By the census of 1850, we find that the negro race is much more subject to these afflictions than the white, the ratio being
Of Deaf and Dumb, 1 to 2151 White, 1 to 3005 Free Negro
"Blind 1 to 2445 " , 1 to 870 " "
"Insane and Idiots 1 to 1374 " , 1 to 980 " "
We thus see that to blindness, insanity and idiocy, the negro, when free, is far more subject than the white. Such being the natural liability of the negro to these afflictions, we yet find that as a slave the negro is almost exempt from them all — not only is he far less afflicted than the free negro, but even less than his master.
We give from the census the ratio of each, and ask thinking men to reflect on the exhibit.
|Deaf and Dumb.||Blind.||Insane and Idiots.|
|White||1 to 2151||1 to 2445||1 to 1374|
|Free Negro||1 to 3005||1 to 870||1 to 980|
|Slave||1 to 6552||1 to 2645||1 to 3080|
But one explanation can be made of this extraordinary development. It is one which must present itself to every unprejudiced mind, which at once occurs to all who are familiar with the real condition of the negro slave. It is found in the watchful care of the master, the simple genuine happiness of the slave.
This exhibit sufficiently refutes the foolish falsehoods of abolitionists, which represent, the master as a monster, the slave a victim of cruelty. Were there neither facts nor figures, the least thought would suffice to convince any man not blinded by fanaticism, that the condition of the slave must be the reverse of that which abolitionists would paint. Were there no other inducement, selfishness would compel the master to be kind to his slave; it is to his interest to watch and tend him with care; to nurse him in sickness, to guard him against disease, to protect him from injury. As mere property, its value is too great to be destroyed by cruelty, sacrificed by neglect. Torture is too expensive a luxury to be indulged in but by a fiend. No man in his senses would treat a valuable horse with cruelty. The Berkshire pig, the Durham bull, the blood horse, are all fed, tended with care; much more is the slave, whose value is far greater. The abolitionist alone can afford to indulge in the pleasure of poisoning his servant for drinking his wine. The death of the hireling is at most a slight inconvenience to his employer; the death of a slave is his master's loss.
We have considered slaves as mere property, to show how absurd are the ravings of fanatics, the idle dreams of poets and novelists which represent slaveholders as not only monsters, but idiots, reveling in the destruction of their property. But when it is remembered, that the affection which naturally springs up between the master and slave, is little less than that of parent and child, it is easy to explain the seemingly strange results shown by the census. The care of the master, made watchful by affection and interest, guards them, and preserves them from that physical suffering which would produce loss of the senses, while their real wants all supplied, with the simplicity of the child, taking no thought for the morrow, with no care to disturb them, there is nothing to derange their intellect. Kindly treated, carefully tended, they grow healthy and happy; unlike the miserable free negro, they are neither insane nor idiots.
But we have further evidence of the better condition of the slave. Although the census does not give us the statistics, we need them not to show the vast number of paupers to be found among the free negroes. The instances are rare in which they are able to live without labor, without toiling for their daily bread. In sickness, in old age, there is none to care for, to provide for them. We find in the census that of the free negroes there are 24,160 over the age of sixty. Who shall provide for these decrepit men, these helpless women? Left to the cold charity of strangers, they linger out a miserable existence.
Not such is the condition of the slave: of them we find also 114,752 over the age of sixty; yet are they for their faithful services kindly treated by their masters, petted and beloved their old age by the very children of their owners.
The vast numbers of slaves who attain to extraordinary old age, greatly exceeding in proportion the white race in the non-slaveholding States, is of itself a powerful argument to show how happy has been their condition. The non-slaveholding Spates, with a population of 13,000,000, have but 5641 whites over the age of ninety, while of the slaves, with a population of only 3,200,412, there are 4109 over that age.
Of the moral condition of the slave, as contrasted with that of the free negro, the census also gives us no information. But so full are the annals of crime, of evidence on this head, we would waste time in making the contrast. Of the slave we fearlessly assert that as to all the higher grades of crime, he will contrast favorably even with the white man. But "children of a larger growth," kindly, affectionate in their dispositions, their wants all simple, amply supplied, they have neither the temptation nor the inclination to commit crime. They may be led astray, they are easily ruled, they may commit a petty trespass;
14but let alone, with none to corrupt them, they pass through life happy, contented and innocent.
On the other hand, the unhappy free negro, thoughtless and improvident, driven from the society of the good and the virtuous, an outcast among the vicious, is regarded as a nuisance even by the abolitionist! He is not a mere nuisance, but the criminal statistics of the North show, that crime of the highest grades, offences which are punished by confinement in the penitentiaries, prevail among the free negroes to an unheard of extent. In Massachusetts, composing less than one-hundredth part of the population, they furnish one-tenth of the convicts. In other States, the proportion is even greater. In the South, on the other hand, offenses of this character are even more rare than among the whites.
Negro slavery is no evil to the white race.
The most interesting aspect in which negro slavery presents itself, is in its effects upon the white population in the slaveholding States. We have been so long accustomed to listen to the bold statements of abolitionists, to suffer their broad charges, to go uncontradicted, that we have been almost led to give them credit: they have not forgotten that "a lie well stuck to is as good as the truth," and we have too long neglected to expose them.
We were in common with others, who had the opportunity even slightly to contrast the condition of the slaveholding and non-slave-holding States, convinced that the condition of the former was better; but that they were so far in advance in all the essentials of happiness and prosperity, even we were not prepared to realize. To Ellwood Fisher, of Cincinnati, we are pleased to acknowledge our obligation for an able exposition of the relative condition of the two portions of our country: and we take special pleasure in now being able by unquestioned evidence to verify the correctness of his statements. He had not the official statements, now for the first time given in an authentic shape; his statistics were denied; and so strangely were they at variance with the general impressions of the people, that men of the north were reluctant to give them credit.
We have now the statistics furnished in the census: they are in reach of all; their truth can not be disputed, and we are now enabled to determine beyond controversy the effects of negro-slavery. The men of the north are peculiarly, a "calculating" people, accustomed to deal with facts and figures; and a large majority of them we believe disposed to be just, to listen to fair argument, to yield to the force of truth: to them we submit with confidence the startling evidence furnished by the census.
Although it be true that we can not by figures with mathematical precision determine the religious, social or moral condition of a people;
15yet there are facts and figures which so greatly elucidate their condition, we can have little difficulty in our conclusion.
It does not, for example, necessarily follow, that those who build churches, should be peculiarly pious; the old adage "the nearer the church, the further from God," is not without foundation. Vanity, pride of purse, petty ambition, may and do induce many to contribute to the erection of a church, as they would to the erection of a court-house, or a theater, from mere ostentation, the hope to have their names emblazoned as public benefactors, or from a more excusable though mere interested desire to ornament their town or city.
When, however, churches are erected not for mere ornament, but for the accommodation of those who desire to meet together and worship God, when the purpose is to afford to the greater number facilities for worship, the fair presumption is in favor of the purity of that people's religion: they will reasonably be esteemed more truly religious than those whose piety is manifested in display, in idle ornament.
Abolitionists have so long represented the people of the non-slave-holding States, and especially the people of new England, as a devout, God-fearing, saint-like people, free from all "pride, vain, glory and hypocrisy;" they have been held up as such models of humble piety, virtue and sobriety, that their land has been known as "the land of steady habits." So strict are they in the outward observances of God's law, that from the puff of the steam-car, to the kissing one's wife on the Sabbath, has been made a penal offense. On the contrary, the slaveholder is held up as God-forsaken, God-despising heathen, as one regardless of all law, human and divine, as vicious, reckless, lavish of his wealth only to gratify his pride. The humble piety, the strict morality claimed for the people of New England is attributed to their having freed themselves from the curse of negro-slavery; to the blighting effects of which charity charges the alleged moral degradation of the slaveholder.
In answer to these proud boastings, these sweeping denunciations, the men of the South have been silent, content to be judged by their works. Modesty is no longer a virtue; the evidence is made public, and we now propose to show that slaveholders are more truly religious than the sons of the Puritans.
For this purpose we will take Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, the States composing New England, and will contrast them with Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, the old slaveholding States, which are still slaveholding States. We give the abolitionists every advantage: we take their models of religion and piety; we take the very homes of the good old Puritan fathers; and we will compare them
16with those who are denounced as "fire-eaters," "cut-throats," "traffickers in human flesh."
The free population of the New England States and these five Southern States is so nearly equal, they may be rated as equal.
We give from the census of 1850 the number of churches, the value of church property, and the number of worshippers who can be accommodated in the churches, in each of these portions of our country.
|Free Pop.||No. of Church.||Value.||Accom.|
|Me., N. H., Vt., Mass., R. I., Connt.||2,728,016||4,607||$19,362,634||1,893,450|
|Md., Va., N. Ca., S. Ca., Georgia||2,730,214||8,081||11,149,118||2,896,472|
These five Southern States, with a free population of only 2,198 greater than the six New England States, have nearly double the number of churches, capable of accommodating a million more worshippers, at but little over half the cost!
We have here these facts conclusively established, that slaveholders are more disposed to build churches; that their object is not display, but to accommodate those who wish to worship God: while the degenerate son of the simple-hearted, humble-minded Puritan, the pharisaical abolitionists, who "thanks God he is not as other men are," seeks to glorify himself rather than his God by the erection of costly temples from which the humble Christian is excluded.
But these southern States have even yet a brighter picture to present. The "poor slave," who is represented by the abolitionist as virtually deprived of Christian teaching, is in these Southern States furnished with more room for his feet in God's house, than the pious white man can find in the temples of New England!
|Free Pop.||No. of Churches.||Ratio.|
|Me., Vt., N. H., Mass., R. I., Conn.||2,728,016||4,607||1 to 592|
|Md., Va., N. Ca., Free||2,730,214||8,081||1 to 336|
|S. Ca., Ga., Total||3,448,426||"||1 to 426|
In New England there is one church to every 592 of its inhabitants, while in these Southern States there is one to every 836 of its free, to every 426 of its whole population!
These Southern States contain a population, including slaves, of 720,410 more than New England: yet in New England there are 200,000 more who cannot find a seat in the house of God! These Southern churches can not only accommodate every man that could be crowded into the temples of New England, but would then give room to more than a million of slaves!
In New England 934,566, nearly one third of its population, is excluded from a seat in their churches! while in these anathematised
17Southern States there is not only room for all its free population, a seat for every man, woman and child that is free, but there is even then room for 166,258 slaves.
These facts are startling; when we look further at the origin of their respective populations, at other circumstances which attend them, they are almost incomprehensible. When we remember that the population of New England is so much more dense than in these Southern States: it being in the former 43 to the square mile, in the latter but 33: that in New England the price of labor, the cost of materials, is so much less; that the people of New England live so much more generally in towns and villages; that in these Southern States, they are on large, farms, scattered far apart, rarely even in villages: that thus the inducements and facilities for the erection of churches are so much greater in New England, we are the more forcibly impressed with the character of these exhibits.
When we further remember that New England is the land to which the Puritans fled when prosecuted for their religion, the land in which they found a home, where they could worship God in their simple form, fervently without ostentation; that these Southern States were first settled by adventurers in search of fortune, by Chevaliers of Charles, who in sheer hatred of the pious zealots who had vanquished them, affected a looseness of morals, a contempt of religion, which made them a mock and a by-word of reproach to the Puritans; we are the more at a loss to comprehend such a revolution.
It is even stranger still, for it reverses all experience, all history, which teaches us that men of a northern latitude are more religiously inclined than those of a southern clime.
There is yet another fact shown by the census, which will strike many as worthy of reflection. Of the small number of churches in New England 202 are Unitarian, 285 Universalists; while of the large number in these Southern States there are but 1 Unitarian, 7 Universalist!
While we do not intend by this to imply that the members of these churches are not good men, we purpose thus to call attention to the fact that opinions usually deemed by the Christian world heterodox, or infidel, find no place among slaveholders: they "run not after strange Gods," invent no new religions, but are content with old-fashioned humble Christianity.
Out of the census, we can point to Mormonism with its polygamy; Millerism, Spiritualism, as taking their birth, flourishing alone where abolitionists are found. The Stowes, and Beechers, with the Fanny Wrights, and Abby Folsoms, are to be found alone in that land which produced Joe Smith, Miller, the Misses Fox.
What is it which has thus reversed the condition of these people, set at naught all our experience; has converted the indolent thoughtless Southerner into the humble orthodox Christian; while the men of the north, the world over noted for religious enthusiasts, the sons of the Puritans, have fallen from their simple stern devotion, become setters up of strange doctrines? We may ere we conclude be able to suggest an explanation — in the meantime we ask the good men of the north to think on this matter for themselves.
We turn now from the religious the social condition of the people of the slaveholding and non-slaveholding Slaves. We will take them as they are, not as they are represented; we will test bold assertions by stern facts. We again take the six New England States and the five old slave States: we shall contrast their condition, because again we design to give to the abolitionists every advantage. When we assert, that these slaveholding States are far in advance of New England in all the elements of real prosperity, that the people are richer, healthier, happier; that their natural increase of population is far greater; we know that we shall be met with a sneer at our presumption: we are aware, that again we undertake to show the laws of nature reversed, to overthrow all the teachings of history, of experience in other countries; and yet the task is easy: the facts and figures are before us, the calculation is simple.
We appeal again to the census of 1850. We find in the census the first great test of the superior condition of our own over other countries, is in the larger proportion of our dwellings, to our families. It needs no argument to show that country the happiest which has most homes for its people. Not only is their physical condition, their mere comfort promoted, but there is nothing which more certainly conduces to health and good morals. The watchful care of the home circle, the cheerful happy fireside, preserve not alone the body from disease, but the mind, the heart from corruption and vice. We turn then to the census, and compare the homes and families of New England with the homes and families of these old slave States.
Me., N. H., Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn., 518,532 Families. 447, 789 Dwellings. Md., Va., N. Ca., S. Ca., Georgia, 506,868 Families. 496,369 Dwellings.
With equal population, New England has 11,564 more families, these Southern States 48,580 more dwellings! New England has 70,743 families without a home! In New England, the land whose "homes" the abolitionists delight to praise, one in every seven of the families is homeless! while in these Southern States but one family of fifty-two is without a home. Taking the average of the number composing
19a family, and New England has 373,700 of its population thrown upon the world, who have no place for a home!
Could we trace in the census the full consequences of this vast difference in the condition of the people, it would present a picture far from flattering to the abolition moralist. There is no father in New England who would not place his family in the humblest cabin, his own home, there to learn the lessons of virtue, rather than for the luxury, expose them to the corrupting influence of the public house: there is no mother who would not toil with aching bones to guard her daughter with the shield of the domestic hearth. At home the virtues nourish; abroad vice plants its seeds, takes root and thrives. If examples were needed, we could point to our cities, where in the crowded dens of poverty such appalling scenes of vice and debauchery are exhibited; and to the country, where the hearth of the cabin is the bed of man's integrity, of woman's purity.
We have no wish to point out and gloat over the evils which must attend such a destitution of dwellings in any portion of our country — we are content to show how much superior is the condition of the slaveholding States.
But there are consequences exhibited in the census, which we can in some degree trace to this cause.
It is claimed that New England has far outstripped the slaveholding States in the growth of its population.
This should not seem strange, nor need we look to the "curse of negro-slavery" for its explanation. Since the barbarians of the north overrun the Roman empire, the northern countries have been deemed the bee-hives of population, from which to send forth its swarms to the more southern climes. Such has been the case in Europe and Asia: the hardy, healthy, vigorous north men have ever furnished supplies of their sons to the enervating regions of the south. Such should naturally be, and such is claimed to be the case in our country. Let us not take assertions, but again apply the test of truth — let us appeal again to the census. We take again New England and the same five old slaveholding States.
Me., N. H., Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn. 2,728,118 Population. 518,532 Families. 61,148 Annual Births.
Md., Va., N. Ca., S. Ca., Ga. 2,730,314 Population. 506,968 Families. 77,683 Annual Births.
With equal population, with 11,564 more families, New England has 16,535 less annual births: the natural increase by birth being 27 per cent. greater in the Southern States than in New England! Estimating the number of families, the proper mode of estimating natural increase, and these Southern States increase by birth more than 29 per cent faster than New England. Here again we find the laws of
20nature vanquished; the rule reversed: the North, instead of supplying population to the South, is far behind in natural increase.
Of the five Southern States, which we have selected for our comparison, two of them, South Carolina and Georgia, are deemed so fatal in their climate, a northern Life Insurance Company would forfeit its policies for a visit to their territories, and yet we find them more prolific than the nurseries of the North! We must look beyond the climate for the cause. We find one in the greater number of dwellings, the consequent increase of comfort to their occupants in the slaveholding States. But this alone is not sufficient to produce so extraordinary a difference: other causes, equally efficient, much conduce to this result; and those causes may, without difficulty, be traced by their effects.
The natural increase of population indicates both the physical and moral condition of a people. To "increase and multiply," a people must be healthy and happy, virtuous and vigorous: they must labor, not toil, their diet be nutritious, their habits regular. Luxury and indolence as naturally beget effeminacy, as do destitution and oppression produce imbecility.
A people, virtuous, with comfortable homes, ample, provision, without excessive toil, will even overcome the obstacles of climate, and increase more rapidly than these who in the most favorable climate, without a home, toil for a scant subsistence, become vicious from destitution; and those who from excessive wealth, with no stimulus to healthful exercise, become idle and effeminate. Virtuous women and vigorous men, are the materials with which to produce rapid population. We trace the cause by its effects.
When it is thus found that the people of the Southern States, with all the obstacles of climate to overcome, have reversed the laws of nature, have increased by natural increase more rapidly than the people of New England, with all the advantages of climate in their favor, we are driven to the conclusion, that the physical and moral condition of the former must be far better than that of the latter.
But we have other evidence on this question, no less startling, not less conclusive.
Although as we have said, two of these Southern States are so unhealthy, a northern Life Insurance Company would forfeit a policy for a visit to their limits, not only suffer under the usual fatality of a hot climate, but are liable to deadly diseases peculiar to their locality; yet we find that the number of deaths is far less than in the bracing climate, the pure air, the hill country of New England.
Me., N. H., Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn., 2,728,118 Population. 42,368 Deaths. 1 to 64Ratio.
Md., Va., N. Ca., S. Ca. Ga., 2,730,316 Population. 32,216Deaths. 1 to 85 Ratio.
In New England, there are 10,182 more deaths annually than in these fatal Southern States. In the former, the deaths are in the proportion of 1 to 64; in the latter of 1 to 85, or nearly 33 per cent, in favor of the slaveholding States.
Here again we find nature conquered. The physical and moral condition of the people of the South is so much better, that climate and disease are overcome, death vanquished, and his victims far less than in New England, with its pure air and learned physicians.
We thus find that these slaveholding States which abolitionists would represent as becoming depopulated, actually increase 62 percent, per annum faster than New England, not taking into account, the artificial increase by importation; the excess of southern births being 29 per cent., of northern deaths 33 per cent. We have not taken into consideration the increase in the population of New England by immigration, because we can only look at natural increase, to ascertain the physical and moral condition of a people. When we come to consider the political condition of the respective portions of our country, we propose to notice the effect of an increase of population by immigration, and it will be found that it is by no means so clear that the north has cause to congratulate itself on its advantage in this particular.
But while we thus exhibit the condition of the white race, the master in the slaveholding States, we may be told by the abolitionist, that we dare not look at the condition of the "poor slave," that the master's ease is their oppression; that the master escapes by casting his ills on the shoulders of the slave,
While then we do not pretend that the condition of the slave is equal to that of the master; for such we know is not the case, whether the slave be the son of Africa, or of New England, his master a chevalier, or Puritan, we will not shrink from this investigation. We have the right to object, because the census does not give us the statistics of servants, the "help" in New England, of those who are the hewers of wood and drawers of water, for the fortunate few whose wealth exempts them from toil and suffering. It is not fair that we should be required to contrast the condition of our slaves with that of the masters' of New England. With such odds against us, we are still not ashamed of the contrast.
We refer to the census.
|Free Population.||Annual Births.|
|Me., N. H., .Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn.||2,728,116||61,148|
|Md., Va., N. Ca. S. Ca., Ga.,||Slaves||1,618,210||40,496|
|New England,||Annual Deaths.||42,368|
|Southern Slaves,||" "||24,790|
|New England,||1 to 44||1 to 64|
|Southern Slaves,||1 to 39||1 to 65|
|" Free,||1 to 35||1 to 85|
We find that although the slaves are not so fortunate as their masters, they are more prolific, less liable to die, than the free men of New England. A class composed almost exclusively of those — the laborers — who in all estimates of life rank lowest in the scale; a race, physically inferior to the white man, outranks the white man in the scale of life! What would be the result, could class be compared with class; those who in New England occupy the position assigned to the slave in the South, be compared with the slave? Nominal freedom would kick the beam, when weighed in the scale with nominal slavery; sad realities would be found, fearfully arrayed against sounding names.
We have still further evidence of the better condition of the slave-holding States. That country, which has greatest wealth, is not necessarily the happiest or most prosperous. On the contrary, excessive wealth too often brings in its train vice and degradation. Real happiness is rather to be found where wealth is distributed; where each is above want, all are able to live free from the harassing exactions of poverty. This is it, which has ever presented the striking contrast between town and country; which has so fully warranted men in regarding towns as "sores on the body politic," has given rise to the adage "God made the country, man made the town." In the latter, great wealth gathered in the hands of the few, the toiling millions struggling for bread; the one class is corrupted by luxury, the other debased by destitution. In the country it is the reverse: there though there be no excessive wealth, there is no poverty: fortune is distributed, if not with exact equality, yet in such fair proportions, that none can oppress another, with neither luxury nor idleness to corrupt, nor want nor oppression to tempt and degrade, the people are happy, virtuous and prosperous.
While in New England, we admit there are more overgrown fortunes, more towns, more seeming wealth and prosperity, in (hat distributed wealth, which marks real prosperity, in exemption from poverty with its ills, we assert that the slaveholding States are far in advance. Of necessity, a slaveholding people must mainly be an agricultural people. Among such, whatever wealth there be, must be better distributed than among the inhabitants of the cities: there must be fewer paupers. The census proves this.
We take again the New England States and the same five old slave-holding States, and quote from the census.
|Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut,||$ 33,431|
|Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,||$ 14,221|
|Excess in New England||19,210|
New England, with all her boasted prosperity, has nearly double 135 per cent. more paupers than these Southern States, which abolitionists would represent as impoverished by slavery. In New England, the land of thrift, 1 in 81 is a pauper, while in these Southern States there is but 1 in 191.
To this, abolitionists will at once reply that these paupers in New England are foreigners. If this be so, those foreigners did not come from slaveholding States! they came from States like New England, miscalled "free," where they have been taught to look on negro-slavery as a curse, blighting with influence the energy of the white race. We have, too, another answer to this excuse: to these foreigners is New England indebted for her boasted increase of population! Without their aid, she would be far behind the South even in numbers, for we have seen how greatly the South exceeds her in natural increase. To these foreigners she is indebted, too, for much of her boasted prosperity; to their strong arms is she indebted for her railroads, her canals, her highways, her public works. She has no right, then, to cast them off when in this matter they count against her.
But this excuse will not avail, for unfortunately the census has distinguished the native from the foreign paupers: and we are thus enabled to compare the native-born, full-blood New Englander, with all his "thrift, frugality and industry," with the "idle wasteful improvident" Southerner.
|Me, N. H. Vt., Mass., Rhode Isl., Conn.,||Native Paupers,||18,966|
|Md., Va., S. Ca., N. Ca., Ga., " "||" "||11,728|
|Excess of Native New England Paupers||7,238|
New England has of her sons almost double the number, nearly 70 per cent. more paupers than these impoverished slaveholding States.
We have still further evidence of the superior condition of these slaveholding States. From those afflictions which result from physical suffering, from mental agitation, the people of the slaveholding States are far more exempt than the people of New England.
|Deaf, Dumb, Blind, Insane and Idiots.|
|Me., N. H., Vt., Mass., R. I., Conn.,||8,781|
|Md., Va., N. Ca., S. Ca., Ga.,||7,809|
|Excess of New England||972|
New England has 12 1/2 per cent more of those so terribly inflicted.
But the difference in the number of the Insane is most striking.
|Excess in New England||1,254|
In the "land of steady habits," among a people, cold, calculating in their temper, claiming to be peculiarly sober, temperate, practical, we find the number of the Insane nearly 50 per cent, greater than among the excitable, ardent sons of the South.
Will the abolitionist tell us whether this sad condition be the result of physical destituion, of the anxious struggle with poverty, or is it the effect of a troubled conscience? Crime and destitution are alike fruitful causes of insanity.
We have now contrasted the condition of the New England States with that of the five old slaveholding States, and have found that it is conclusively shown by the statistics given in the census, that the latter are more religious, have more homes, are surrounded with more of those comforts which contribute to health and good morals, that the natural increase of their population is far greater, their wealth more equally distributed, they are far more exempt from poverty, and from those afflictions which result from crime and destitution. We now propose to contrast their aggregate wealth — and see if even in this, the ordinary experience of man is confirmed.
We deny that excessive wealth is a benefit to a State, or an individual. But we need not slop to point out its evils. In a Republic excessive wealth is least desirable. As between the individual citizens, it creates an improper distinction, corrupts the morals of the people, leads them from that simplicity and purity indispensable to the existence of the government. But in a Republic, wealth, fairly distributed, so that each of it members, easy and independent in his properly, shall feel himself practically equal to his fellows, is all important. That State which exhibits a population practically equal, with such reasonable wealth that all are free, is the happiest, the most likely to preserve its liberty. Hence is an agricultural life the most suitable to republicans. All history verifies the truth of our assertion. Commerce, and manufactures, though they being great gains, enrich the few, the masses are poor; in their train follows luxury, with all its corrupting tendences. The love of money, the desire of gain crush out the feeling of manly independence; men become slaves to fortune, and are then fit to be the slaves of a despot.
We must not then take for granted, that the country which has the greatest aggregate wealth, is really most prosperous. We must
25rather look to the source of its wealth; to the distribution of that wealth.
We have shown that slave-holding States must be mainly agricultural, and their wealth of necessity more equally distributed than in those which are engaged in commerce and manufactures. The census has continued our position, by the vast disproportion in the number of paupers in the slave holding and none-slave-holding States. Even then, it it were true, that the aggregate wealth of the none-slave-holding States is greater than that of the slaveholding, we should still deny their greater prosperity.
But even this vain boast is not left to the abolitionist! Not only is wealth in the slave-holding States so much more equally distributed, that paupers are almost unknown; but their aggregate wealth is far greater than that of the none-slaveholding States.
We take again for our comparison the six New England States, and the live old Slave-States. Again we give the Abolitionist every advantage. We take their models of commercial and manufacturing prosperity, and contrast them with those which are ever held up, pointed at as emblems of poverty; we compare the frugal, ingenious, energetic, thrifty Yankee with the idle, improvident, careless and wasteful slave-holder.
We remember that the free population is equal — and appeal again to the census.
The assessed value or the property real and personal is in
|Value of property.|
|Me., N. H., V., Mass., R. I., Conn.||$1,003,466,181.00|
|Md., Va., N. Ca., S. Ca., Ga.,||$1,420,989,573.00|
|Excess of Southern wealth,||$417,523,392.00|
|Of this excess there is|
|Of personal property,||290,215,054.00|
|The ratio of wealth to the individual is, in|
|New England,||$367.00 per head|
|Southern States,||$520.00 " "|
The poor worn out slave-holding States, have in fact $417,523,392, more wealth than New England with all its boasted prosperity!
This is result is the more extraordinary because it reverses again all our experience. Since the days or Tyre and Sidon, commerce and manufactures have been regarded as sources of greater wealth, agriculture of least profit. In Europe tariffs are made to protect the farmer; commerce and manufactures are able to protect themselves. With us on the contrary, the farmers are not only richer than the trader, the merchant, the manufacturer, but tariffs are enacted to protect the latter — Agriculture not only protects itself, but carries on its
26shoulders commerce and manufactures. In despite of oppressive legislation, we find these agricultural, slave-holding States, in wealth, far in advance of New England, with its unequalled commerce, its unrivalled manufactures.
But we will be told that in this estimate we include our slaves that they should not be counted its property, but rated as persons, entitled to a share!
This objection comes with an ill grace from those whose greatest objection to slavery is its unprofitable character: who regard slaves as the poorest investment of capital, a spinning jenny as more profitable; bank-bubbles, "emigration" stock as better investments of their money. This is the very question we are considering; we are testing the results of the investment, and when it is found that instead of being unprofitable, slaves are the best possible investment, it will not do to turn round and say they are not property.
But we will give them this double character of properly to the master, and of persons entitled to a share, and still we find the South is far richer than New England.
Me., N. H., Vt.,Mass., R. I., Conn., 2,728,016 Total population. $367.00 per head, Ratio of property.
Southern States, 3,448,426 Total population. 412.00, Ratio of property.
We may be charged with selecting for our comparison the poorest of the non-slave-holding States, and be challenged to a contrast with New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio, the giants of the non-slave-holding States. The general impression, it is true, is, that these are the richest and most prosperous of all our States, but this is like many other general impressions a most egregious error. These States are not only in their aggregate, and proportional wealth, far behind the slave-holding States, but are far behind New England: the ratio in these States being as follow:
New York per head $231.00
Pennsylvania " " 214.00
Ohio, " " 219.00
The other non-slave-holding States are still lower in the scale.
Indiana has $154.00 per head
Illinois has 134.00 " "
While of the new slaveholding States
Mississippi has $702.00 per head
Louisiana has 806.00 " "
Kentucky with her barren mountains is far ahead of Ohio; and Missouri, the poorest of the slaveholding States, with a mere handful of slaves, under all her disadvantages is richer than Illinois, the "young giant of the West;" than Indiana, with her unrivalled soil, her favourable position.
We give the ratio of each:
Taking the whole Union, with the exception of California, which as yet is of no fixed character, we find that though the non-slave-holding States contain a free population more than double that of the slave-holding States, their whole property is only 16 per cent, greater! While the proportionate wealth of the South is nearly twice as much as that of the North.
We give again the exhibits of the census.
|Non-slaveholding States,||Free Population||13,214,380|
Property to the person:
|Non-slaveholding States,||To Free,||$233.00|
|Slaveholding States,||To Free,||439.00|
We have now contrasted the condition of the six New England States with those of the five old slave States, so fur as the facts exhibited in the census enable us to contrast their condition, with a view to determine their religious and moral character, their progress in wealth and population. We have selected these States for our comparison, because their free population is equal, and because they fairly exhibit, for they have fully tried, the effects of negro-slavery. They are not, like the new States of the South and West, creatures of a day; pushed forward, puffed up by accident; peopled by hazard, their condition all unsettled. We have taken those tried by time, and the result is, that we find all experience set at naught; the laws of nature vanquished.
The people of the North, elsewhere noted for religious devotees, here are found less pious than the thoughtless Southerner. The northern clime, elsewhere the very hot-bed of population for the South, here falls far behind the fatal regions of the South in the number of its births, greatly exceeds the South in the number of its deaths. The men of the North, by nature more vigorous and energetic, here, though noted for frugality and industry, with every advantage which legislation can give, thus levying an enormous annual tax upon the people of the South, are yet far behind the people of the South in the acquisition of wealth.
Commerce and manufactures, elsewhere the sources of greatest wealth, here are found less profitable than slaveholding agriculture.
To all the ills to which man is subject, both menial and physical, the men of the north, with all the advantages of climate, are far mere liable than the southern slaveholder.
In short, under all the disadvantages of climate, the cramping influence of oppressive legislation, in despite of the very laws of nature, by the so called "curse of slavery," the people of the slaveholding States are more religious, healthier and happier, multiply faster, live longer and better, and are far richer than the people of the North.
But there are effects procured by negro slavery, which are not exhibited in the census, can not be set down in figures, of far more importance than the acquisition of wealth, as mere increase of population. These are, its tendency to elevate the character of the white race, to give to that race a more exalted tone of moral sentiment; and in a republic of vital importance is its influence in giving to the white race a higher, holier, more stern and unyielding love of liberty; in making the white race emphatically a race of Sovereigns, fit members of a free government.
In 1775, in a speech delivered in the British Parliament, Edmund Burke, the Philosopher and Statesman, in support of his motion for the adoption of measures to conciliate America, referring to the influences which in the respective Colonies would induce opposition to the British government, and among others to the religious opinions of the northern Colonies, and to the supposed attachment of the southern Colonies to the church of England as likely to incline them favourable to the government, said:
"There is however a circumstance attending these southern colonies, which fully counterbalance this difference and makes the spirit of liberty still more high, and haughty, than in those to the Eastward. It is, that in Virginia and the Carolines, there is a vast multitude of slaves. Where this is the case in any part of the world, those who are free are by far the most proud and jealous of their freedom. Freedom to them is not only an enjoyment, but a kind of rank and privilege. Not seeing there that freedom, as in countries where it is a common blessing, and broad and general as the air, may be united with much abject toil, with great misery, with all the exterior of servitude, liberty looks among them like something that is more noble and liberal. I do not mean Sir, to commend the superior morality of this sentiment, which has at least as much pride as virtue in it; but I can not alter the nature of man. The fact is so; and these people of the southern colonies are much more strongly and with an higher and more stubborn spirit attached to liberty than those to the northward. Such
were all the ancient commonwealths; such were our Gothic Ancestors; such in our day were the Poles; and such will ever be all masters of slaves, who are not slaves themselves. In such a people, the haughtiness of domination combines with the spirit of freedom, fortifies it, and renders it invincible."
History attest the truth of every word uttered by him. Not only does the institution of slavery elevate the character of the master, and where the master is free render his devotion to liberty a high and holy feeling, fortify it and render it invincible, but, where, as in our country, the slave is of a different lace, marked and set apart by his colour, it elevates the character not only of the master, the actual owner of slaves, but of all who wear the colour of the freeman. With us, colour, not money marks the class: black is the badge of slavery; white the colour of the freeman: and the white man, however poor, whatever be his occupation, feels himself a sovereign. Though his estate be but an empty title, he will not disgrace his station by stooping for moneys' sake to become the slave of another: he will treat with others as his equals, exchange his labour for their money, not honoured by their service, but reciprocating the favour of equal to equal. His class respects him, with the jealousy of rank will stand by him, and for the sake of their order will sustain him.
Not only docs negro slavery thus elevate the character of the white man, it ennobles woman. Relieved by the slave from the abject toil, the servile condition to which the white woman is so often subjected by necessity where negro slavery does not exist, and which strip her of woman's greatest charm, modesty; which make of her the rude drudging, despised servant of a harsh master; the white woman becomes, as she is fitted to be, not the slave, but the queen of her house, fit mate for a sovereign.
Virtuous, modest, sensitive, retiring, her only ambition to merit the love of her husband, her only pride to point to her children and say, "these are my jewels"; worshipped in her sphere, her gentle sway undisputed, the white woman in the slave-holding States needs no conventions to give her, her rights. Whether she be the mistress of a mansion, or the humble tenant of a cabin, to her the seat of honour is ever accorded — at home or abroad, every son of the south deems himself her champion.
Such is the estimate placed upon woman, such her condition in the slave-holding States. It is no fancy sketch, but a picture for which we are sneered at by Utilitarians, who would have us "put woman to use." So too would the savages: with them woman is useful; she relieves her lord of his labour, bows her head in his presents: kneels to him; waits on his pleasure; is his slave! Not such is the use to which slave holders put woman. The only use to which they would
30put her is that for which her maker intended her, "a help meet for her husband"; to be "with him one flesh."
Negro slavery has a further effect on the character of the white woman, which should commend the institution to all who love the white race more than they do the negro. It is a shield to the virtue of the white woman.
So long as man is lewd, woman will be his victim. Those who are forced to occupy a menial position have ever been, will ever be most templed, least protected: this is one of the evils of slavery; it attends all who are in that abject condition from the beautiful Circassian to the sable daughter of Africa. While we admit the selfishness of the sentiment, we are free to declare, we love the white woman so much, we would save her even at the sacrifice of the negro: would throw around her every shield, keep her out of the way of temptation.
Such are the effects of negro slavery upon the individual character of the white race.
Upon the character of the white man, as a member of the Republic towards the preservation of the government in its purity, its very form, its effects are not less important.
It was truly said, by Burke, "where slavery exists, those who are free are by far the most proud and jealous of their freedom," "are more strongly, and with an higher and more stubborn spirit attached to liberty," "freedom is to them not only an enjoyment, but a kind of rank and privilege." This is the more strikingly illustrated in a Republic, where the slaves are of a different race, distinguished from the freeman by their colour. In such a Republic, the white looks upon liberty as the privilege of his colour, the government peculiarly his own, himself is sovereign. He watches it with the jealous eye of a monarch: "proud of his freedom," he is "jealous of his privilege;" with "a stubborn spirit," with the haughtiness of domination he will resist every attempt to rob him of his dominion. "Not accustomed to see all the exterior of servitude" attached to his colour, but taught to look on slavery as fit only for a negro, he will not stoop to call any, master, he can not be made a slave. Where negro slavery exists, money is not necessary to make the freeman; the white man takes rank by his colour; it is his patent of nobility, and until forfeited for dishonour, entitles him and commands for him all the privileges of his class.
Not so can it be, where "all the exterior of servitude" attaches to the nominal freeman: there of necessity money must distinguish the classes — mark the master, separate him from the servant. There colour gives no privilege, but the white man and the white woman driven to "service," are excluded from the presence of their masters,
31dare not claim to be their equals. Where money gives honour, poverty is looked upon as disgrace. To those who envy the negro his position, we urge no argument; but to those who would see their race respected, fit to be free, we confidently appeal to reflect upon the difference which is thus effected in the condition of the white race. With all the pride and haughtiness attributed by the abolitionist to the slaveholder, we challenge a comparison of the rank in society held by the poor white man in the slave-holding, and non-slave-holding States. The northern mechanic, who has once put foot within the limits of a slave-holding State, has felt this vast difference, and can bear witness to it. The humble seamstress, the despised chambermaid, whose fortune has led her to the home of the slave-holder, has had cause to remember his courtesy to woman. Slave holders are proud of their colour, they can not but respect it.
But the influence of negro-slavery on the future destiny of our Republic, is even more potent than its effects upon the character of those who compose the government. We have said that the preservation of our Republic in its purity, depends on the institution of slavery. For this we shall be denounced by abolitionists, as denying the truth of that principle which lies at the foundation of our government.
They who daily in practice deny it, give the lie to every word in the sentiment, are, ever most ready to prate about "liberty and equality;" in their denunciations of slave holders, are accustomed to insist on a literal interpretation of the declaration "that all men are created equal." "That they are endowed by their creator with certain in-"alienable rights"; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of "happiness."
It is common with abolitionists to condense this with the declaration that "all men are born free and equal."
Neither is true when taken literally. On the contrary, as has been wittily said, the first word is a falsehood, for men are not created! Children are created, not men. Nor is there more truth in the declaration, that men are created equal, as applicable to the physical, or mental condition of man. The helpless idiot, the cripple, the blind, are not equal to the bright, the beautiful, the strong: unequal in fortune is the "beggars brat," and the petted child of a wise and wealthy father. No two of all who are created, are equal.
Nor is it literally true, that "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable." On the contrary life is taken, the pursuit of happiness is regulated, liberty is restrained from the hour of birth, to the day of death. If the abolitionist were right in their interpretation of this principle, our army should be disbanded, our navy dismantled, our prisons thrown up, our very laws blotted out; they are all practical refutations of their construction.
Though of this declaration not one word is true when taken literally; yet as a political principle, as applicable alone to those who are members of a government, it is the very foundation of liberty.
But as a political principle, applied as it must be to those alone who compose the government, it has no relation to the question of negro slavery.
Ours is in fact, whatever it may be attempted to make it in theory, essentially a government of white men: it can not be necessary that we should say a word to show, that it should be so. Wisdom suggests it, necessity compels it: the negro is a race inferior to the white; they can not meet as equals.
When we say that the negro is an inferior race, we need not claim that his race is different or that its origin is not common to that, of the while. We care riot to engage in a controversy of so little profit. To gratify those who so love the negro, we may admit that they spring from the same source, and still maintain that they are inferior to the white. The blood horse of Arabia, the dray horse of Holland, and the Shatland poney, are all horses, and naturalists tell us they spring from a common stock; yet none will pretend that they are equal. So too the great greyhound, the sagacious Newfoundland, the mangy cur, the diminutive despicable flee, are all dogs; it may be of common origin, yet is the one inferior. They can neither be fed nor trained into equality! We may then admit that negroes are men, sprung from a common origin with the while race, and still claim that they are inferior. That they are so, we can call abolitionists to witness for however much they love the slave, they exclude a free negro from their presence, drive him from their States.
Of the right of a people to declare, who shall compose the government, who enjoy its full privileges, of the propriety of exercising this right so as to exclude many, to one who appreciates the blessings of liberty, no proof need be given. There never was, there never can be a free government, to the full privileges of which, all who may happen to be within its limits, are admitted. We have restricted this right, even in the case of the white man: and it is conceived by many that we have even been too liberal in our permission to others of the white race to come end after a short probation share with us our proud privileges.
Whatever the opinion as to the propriety of cur course towards the white race, we will not admit it debatable as to the negro. Positive legislation is not necessary to exclude them, so universal is the feeling: abolitionists indeed would never entrust the government to their hands.
If then negroes can no take part in the administration of the
33eminent, if they are never to be admitted to a share in its privileges; it will be asked, how are they to affect its duration, preserve its purity?
Our answer is, by continuing to occupy that position for which their maker intended them: that of slaves to the white man.
In a Republic, where all are politically equal, wealth becomes the great object to be attained; for wealth alone gives distinction, wealth is indispensable to the enjoyment of real liberty, wealth distinguishes the freeman from the slave. There, money makes the real master, poverty the real slave. A contest between wealth and poverty necessarily begins. Each seeks by the means within its command to increase its power. Wealth by the aid of talent to increase and to secure its fortunes. Poverty by its political power, in numbers the stronger, seeks to better its condition, to free itself from real slavery, to become at least really "free and equal." Capital seeks to extort the greatest gain for least expenditure. Labour struggling for bread, demands a higher recompense for its services. The interests of the employer and the hireling, the capitalist and labourer, are antagonistic, for the gain of the one, is the loss of the other. As a country continues to increase in population, these interests conflict the more: wealth becomes more absorbed in the hands of the few, the demand for labour is than the supply, the labourers become weakened by their very numbers: at last the starving millions become desperate.
Politically the pauper, and the man of wealth are equal: labour has thus the power of numbers; while on the other hand wealth has the power of money, the command of talent. The contest has ever proved unequal; the brute force of numbers may prevail for a time, it effects a mere convulsion: Agrarian laws may be called for, a distribution of property demanded; in the end talent and wealth will conquer; and then, to protect itself, to guard again: a like convulsion, strong laws will be enacted, a government of force be established. The scenes of the French revolution but illustrate the issue of this contest: Anarchy under the cry of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," rules for a day, to be followed on the morrow by an Empire!
Here it is proper we should again refer to the boasted increase of population in New England.
We have seen that this is not so much the result of natural increase, as of foreign emigration; we now propose to consider whether such increase be evidence of prosperity.
We may, as political economists insist, trust that providence in its wisdom does regulate the natural increase of population by the capacity of a country to sustain its population, and may hence properly rate such increase as an evidence of prosperity. But the capacity of
34a country may be increased by wise, be diminished by injudicious legislation; and hence mere increase of population is not necessarily evidence of prosperity. So too, population may by artificial means be increased far beyond its natural increase, and may greatly exceed in tins manner the capacity of the country to support is population: this would be the reverse of prosperity.
There is none more ready than we to extend all the blessings of our free government, the almost boundless resources of our favoured land, to the poor and the oppressed of all nations; yet, it is possible that our hospitality may be extended too far. The statesmen of the slaveholding States have been, and are still willing, to extend the welcome hand to all who come to us; their generous hospitality has not been cramped by the herd Struggle for bread.
But it is not so at the North: there, the increase of population is beginning to be felt as far from evidence of prosperity. Already the cry for a repeal of the naturalization laws has been raised; political parties, secret societies, with this for their basis, have been organized. It is not that our foreign population wield too great an influence in our government; it is not that our naturalized citizens are corrupting, or debasing public morals; but it is that the struggle for bread is becoming desperate, that the contest between capital and labour is hastening to a close; this it is that leads the efforts to repeal the naturalization laws, to the growing opposition in the North to the further admission of emigrants; the capitalist fears the vast addition to the ranks of its enemies: the labourers of the North feel the dread consequences of such a host of competitors.
We have seen the vast number of families in New England who are without a dwelling; its host of paupers, the inequality in the distribution of its property: those, with "strikes" for higher wages, associations demanding a distribution of land, "barnburners" the designation of a party, are all, but clouds which indicate the approach of the storm, mark the progress of the contest.
Let the influx of foreign labourers continue, daily reducing the rate of wages; let, as is threatened, the prisons and poorhouses of Europe be emptied on us; let thus labour be consumed by its own strength, capital be thus still further monopolised by the few until the thousand famished victims of excessive population cry out for bread, rise in the power of numbers and demand their "equal rights," their "equal share;" what then shall save the Republic from wreck?
When that day shall come, which may a kind Providence long defer, if in the mean lime they do not forget that, we are their brothers, do not force us to disown them for our kindred, the men of the North will find the slave holders ready with heart and with purse, with
35head and with hand, as were our fathers in days gone by, and seemingly forgotten, to save them from destruction.
Upon the South, as upon the strong arm of a brother, so long as negro slavery exists, the North can rely ; it will furnish materials to its workshops, a market for its manufactures; wealth to its capitalist, wages to the labourer. In the South no struggle between labour and capital can arise. Where slavery exists, capital and labour are one, for labour is capital. There the capitalist, instead of exhausting his labourer, must strengthen, protect and preserve him, for he is his money. The interest of the labourer and the capitalist, the slave and his master, are identical; they cannot conflict. The prosperity of the master is the happiness of the slave, for his condition is improved as his master prospers; the master prospers, as his slave is healthy, vigorous and happy.
To negro slavery is the South indebted for its unrivalled prosperity, its exemption from the fearful struggle of wealth and poverty; the happy equality in the condition of its people; its practical enjoyment of the full blessings of republican government.
Let abolitionists succeed, let slavery be abolished, the negroes turned loose: the whites, driven from their homes, will seek a refuge among the crowded population of the North; or else the whites victorous in the conflict which would follow, the miserable negroes would fly to their professed friends: the northern labourer would find a ruinous competitor; the northern capitalist a fearful addition to the strength of his enemy. In either event the struggle would be hastened to an issue. The fall of the South would bring ruin on the North; the Republic would give place to Anarchy, to be followed by the rich man's rule, a despotism.
In the history of the world, there is no instance of a Republic, which endured for a generation, without the institution of slavery. We have shown the cause. It is in the contest which of necessity arises between wealth and poverty. That cause operates to-day in our own country with even more force than in the earlier ages of the world. We have seen that now, as heretofore, there is but one remedy for this evil: it is to identify the interest, of the capitalist and labourer. And we have seen that this end can be attained but in one way: by the institution of slavery. If then we would preserve our Republic, let us protect its only safe-guard.
We have now presented to our friends at the North, the facts on which we rely for our declaration, that negro slavery, as it exists among us, is no evil. In the contrast which we have made of the condition of the shareholding and non-slaveholding States, our purpose
36has not been to "see moats in a brother's eye," but it has been to disabuse our friends of error, to enable them to judge us fairly.
To the good men of the North we are grateful for the manliness with which they so often come forward, and in despite of the denunciations of demagogues and fanatics, in despite even of their own prejudices, sustained our rights, done justice to our institutions. We are ready, too, to accord to them all praise for their many excellencies. We admire their efforts in the cause of education; we would not diminish their praise, nor lessen our blame, by reference to the greater facilities for extending to all the benefits of education where population is dense. We claim not that we are perfect; nor while we deny that negro slavery is an evil, do we deny that it may be attended with evil. The execution of laws, the very existence of human government, is attended with evil; religion itself is attended with evil. We may then admit as an evil attendant upon slavery, (for slavery makes a people agricultural, and this prevents great density of population,) the difficulty of extending the benefits of education to all. But if education, or rather learning, do not produce the good fruits — virtue, morality, religion, happiness — it is of little profit. All else must not be sacrificed to mere learning. Let then our northern friends contrast the condition of the slaveholding and non-slaveholding States, in all those things which advance man's happiness, and we confidently rely on their aid to crush out those who would deceive them; would lead them to sever the ties which bind us together; would seek to destroy us, though with us must fall the republic.
We have confined our comparisons of the condition of the slaveholding and non-slaveholding States to the facts shown by the census, because we have not the time to investigate other statistics, which would further and fully exhibit the contrast; and for the additional cause that other statistics might be disputed. Those given in the census can not be questioned, are accessible to all, and are ample to sustain our position. We had thought to give the statement of the number of convicts in the penitentiaries of the different States, as well as the number of actual members of churches, but our private engagements forbid our devoting such time as might be necessary to obtain satisfactory information on these and other subjects equally interesting. We will simply state that, in each of these instances, the slaveholding States are beyond all conception in advance of the non-slaveholding States. The proportion of convicts to population is, in the non-slaveholding States, nearly double that in the slaveholding States; while in the latter, the proportion of actual members of churches to population is nearly double that in the non-slaveholding!
The contrast of bastards and prostitutes is still more favorable to the South. We hope that others who have more time and better
37opportunities for obtaining full information on all such matters of interest, will at once dare the abolitionists to the investigation. We know that the result will be favorable to the South; will enlighten the good men at the North; and we may hope it will help to rescue the country from the curse of abolition.
But if we have failed to satisfy our northern friends that negro slavery is no evil, we have yet a further matter to submit to their reflection.
Admit it an evil, how is it to be mitigated? No immediate cure is practicable; temporary alleviation only can be given. We propose now to alleviate it, if it be an evil; to extend its benefits, if it be a blessing.
To extend the limits, open a wider field for the employment of slaves, is, of all others, the remedy for the evil, if it be an evil; the most effectual to extend its benefits, if it be a blessing.
By this, not one is added to the number of the slaves; on the contrary, the number is thus most likely to diminish. The inducement which more than all others leads the master to liberate his slave, is the affection of the master. To the growth of that affection, the good conduct of the slave, intimate and familiar intercourse with the master, the sympathy of association mainly conduce. The master does not liberate his slave from hatred, but from love; from a desire to benefit him; as a reward for fidelity.
Where a master is the owner of but few slaves, is personally associated with each of them, it is natural that he should feel a deeper interest in them, a more lively attachment for them, than where, by their very numbers, they are excluded from his presence; are as strangers to him; of necessity, too, often subjected to the control of another. Such is the difference in the attachment of the employer to his domestic "help," his housekeeper, his chambermaid, the servants of his household, and to those of the field or the factory.
By opening a wider field for the employment of slaves, they are divided into smaller parties; the number of owners increased; the proportion of slaves diminished; a closer intimacy necessarily arises between them; affection springs up, and liberty becomes the reward of fidelity.
This same cause equally contributes to the advancement of the moral and physical condition of the slave; tends to fit him for liberty. The watchful eye of the master is brought more closely to bear, and he is stimulated by affection to guard and protect his slave with a kinder care. Not crowded together, they are of necessity healthier; their numbers meet for social intercourse, not such as to corrupt by association, with their masters' example constantly before them, their moral condition is equally improved.
All, then, who feel for the slave, not mock but real sympathy, should unite to extend the limits within which they may be employed.
We have not appealed to the men of the North to recognize our rights; we've have not, as we might have, reminded them that our slaves were purchased from them: that they are in possession of the money paid by our fathers to theirs for these very slaves; we have not appealed to them to look into the future and consider the end, should the abolitionists succeed in confining the slaves to a limited space — the violent destruction of the slaves or the whites. To those who need such appeals, an appeal would be idle.
In conclusion, we will say a word further to our southern friends. If, in violation of all right, we are still to be held as outlaws, to be robbed of our property, excluded from an equal share of our country's blessings, but one course is left to us. It is to follow the example set us by the good old Puritan patriots — to say to them in the words of our resolution:
"Those who hate slaveholders, have no right to slaveholder's money. Our purpose is to trade with our friends; our enemies we will let alone, so long as they let us alone."
If no other appeal prove effective, appeal to their pockets! Let those at the North, who can control the abolitionists, feel that it is to their interest to do their duty. Cease to trade with them; to send your children to their schools; to spend your money at their watering places; to travel on their roads; and you will not only escape the insults and outrages daily heaped upon you, but you will find, ere long, an abolitionist as hateful to the people of the North, as he now is to the slaveholders of the South! Forbearance is ceasing to be a virtue.
B. F. STRINGFELLOW,
Chairman of Committee.
|Deaf & Dumb.||Blind.||Insane & Idiots.|
|Free Negro||1 to 3005||1 to 870||1 to 980|
|Slaves||1 " 6552||1 to 2645||1 " 3080|
|5 Southern States,||8,081||11,149,118||2,896,472|
New England has Free Negroes, — 22,961
Whites, — 2,705,055
Southern States have Free Negroes — 168,410
Whites, — 2,561,804
New England excludes from church, Whites — 811,605
Free — 834,566
Southern churches will hold every white man, woman and child, and have room for — 334, 668 slaves,
Will take in all the Free Negroes and hold — 166,258 slaves
Will hold all who could get into the N. England churches and then hold — 1,003,022 slaves.
New England has 1 church to 587 White,
" " 1 do to 592 White and Free Negro.
South. States have 1 do to 317 White,
" " 1 do to 336 White and Free Negro,
" " 1 do to 537 total including slaves.
|New England,||11,564||more families,||48,580 less dwellings.|
New England has 70,743 families without a home!
Southern States but — 10,599 " " "
New England has 1-8 of its families houseless,
Southern States have 1-50 " " "
|New England has||—||518,532||—||61,148|
|Southern States have||—||506,908||—||77,683|
New England with 11,564 more families, has 16,535 less births.
Natural increase by birth is over 27 p. c. greater in the Southern States.
Excess of New England, deaths of free population, 11,152 — 33 per cent.
Increase of population by birth and death 60 p. c. in favour of the South.
|RATIO OF BIRTHS||DEATHS.|
|New England||1 to 44||1 to 64|
|Southern States, free population||1 to 35||1 to 85|
|Slaves||1 to 39||1 to 65|
|New England excess||19,210||7,238|
|New England||1 to 81.||1 to 143|
|Southern States||1 to 171||1 to 232|
|Excess of property in southern States||$417,523,392|
Of this the excess of land is — 127,308,338
" " personal property 290,205,054
But this is even less than it should be. Land in the southern States is rated by value of its argiculture — while in New England it is at the fictious value of town lands.
|Value of Property|
|Non-Slave Holding State||$3,186,683,824|
|Non-slaveholdin States excess of free population||109 per cent.|
|" " " " wealth||16 per cent.|
|Non-Slaveholding States||free||to person||$233.00|
|Dividing with slaves as persons||"||291.00|
|Non-Slaveholding States||Slaveholding States|
|Massachusetts, — $548.00||South Carolina, — $1,001.00|
|Rhode Island, — 526.00||Louisiana, — 800.00|
|Connecticut — 321.00||Mississippi, — 702.00|
|New Hampshire — 289.00||Georgia, — 638.00|
|Vermont, — 228.00||Alabama, — 511.00|
|Maine, — 166.00||Maryland, — 423.00|
|New York, — 231.00||Virginia, — 403.00|
|Pennsylvania, — 214.00||Kentucky, — 377.00|
|Ohio, — 219.00||North Carolina, — 307.00|
|Indiana, — 154.00||Tennessee, — 248.00|
|Illinois, — 134.00||Missouri, — 166,00|
|South Carolina has||$42.00|
|North Carolina "||244.00|