History of the World/History of the World (Bureau Development, Inc.)(1992).BIN/dp/0099/00999.txt

Text File | 1992-10-11 | 29KB | 465 lines

$Unique_ID{how00999}
$Pretitle{}
$Title{Democracy In America
Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races - Part IV}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{De Tocqueville, Alexis}
$Affiliation{}
$Subject{slavery
south
states
slaves
labor
free
state
north
population
slave}
$Date{1899}
$Log{}
Title:       Democracy In America
Book:        Volume I
Author:      De Tocqueville, Alexis
Date:        1899
Translation: Reeve, Henry

Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races - Part IV

     But this truth was most satisfactorily demonstrated when civilization
reached the banks of the Ohio.  The stream which the Indians had distinguished
by the name of Ohio, or Beautiful River, waters one of the most magnificent
valleys that has ever been made the abode of man.  Undulating lands extend
upon both shores of the Ohio, whose soil affords inexhaustible treasures to
the laborer; on either bank the air is wholesome and the climate mild, and
each of them forms the extreme frontier of a vast State: That which follows
the numerous windings of the Ohio upon the left is called Kentucky, that upon
the right bears the name of the river.  These two States only differ in a
single respect; Kentucky has admitted slavery, but the State of Ohio has
prohibited the existence of slaves within its borders. ^h

[Footnote h: Not only is slavery prohibited in Ohio, but no free negroes are
allowed to enter the territory of that State, or to hold property in it.  See
the Statutes of Ohio.]

     Thus the traveller who floats down the current of the Ohio to the spot
where that river falls into the Mississippi, may be said to sail between
liberty and servitude; and a transient inspection of the surrounding objects
will convince him as to which of the two is most favorable to mankind.  Upon
the left bank of the stream the population is rare; from time to time one
descries a troop of slaves loitering in the half-desert fields; the primaeval
forest recurs at every turn; society seems to be asleep, man to be idle, and
nature alone offers a scene of activity and of life.  From the right bank, on
the contrary, a confused hum is heard which proclaims the presence of
industry; the fields are covered with abundant harvests, the elegance of the
dwellings announces the taste and activity of the laborer, and man appears to
be in the enjoyment of that wealth and contentment which is the reward of
labor. ^i

[Footnote i: The activity of Ohio is not confined to individuals, but the
undertakings of the State are surprisingly great; a canal has been established
between Lake Erie and the Ohio, by means of which the valley of the
Mississippi communicates with the river of the North, and the European
commodities which arrive at New York may be forwarded by water to New Orleans
across five hundred leagues of continent.]

     The State of Kentucky was founded in 1775, the State of Ohio only twelve
years later; but twelve years are more in America than half a century in
Europe, and, at the present day, the population of Ohio exceeds that of
Kentucky by two hundred and fifty thousand souls. ^j These opposite
consequences of slavery and freedom may readily be understood, and they
suffice to explain many of the differences which we remark between the
civilization of antiquity and that of our own time.

[Footnote j: The exact numbers given by the census of 1830 were: Kentucky,
688,-844; Ohio, 937,679.  [In 1890 the population of Ohio was 3,672,316, that
of Kentucky, 1,858,635.]]

     Upon the left bank of the Ohio labor is confounded with the idea of
slavery, upon the right bank it is identified with that of prosperity and
improvement; on the one side it is degraded, on the other it is honored; on
the former territory no white laborers can be found, for they would be afraid
of assimilating themselves to the negroes; on the latter no one is idle, for
the white population extends its activity and its intelligence to every kind
of employment.  Thus the men whose task it is to cultivate the rich soil of
Kentucky are ignorant and lukewarm; whilst those who are active and
enlightened either do nothing or pass over into the State of Ohio, where they
may work without dishonor.

     It is true that in Kentucky the planters are not obliged to pay wages to
the slaves whom they employ; but they derive small profits from their labor,
whilst the wages paid to free workmen would be returned with interest in the
value of their services.  The free workman is paid, but he does his work
quicker than the slave, and rapidity of execution is one of the great elements
of economy.  The white sells his services, but they are only purchased at the
times at which they may be useful; the black can claim no remuneration for his
toil, but the expense of his maintenance is perpetual; he must be supported in
his old age as well as in the prime of manhood, in his profitless infancy as
well as in the productive years of youth.  Payment must equally be made in
order to obtain the services of either class of men: the free workman receives
his wages in money, the slave in education, in food, in care, and in clothing.
The money which a master spends in the maintenance of his slaves goes
gradually and in detail, so that it is scarcely perceived; the salary of the
free workman is paid in a round sum, which appears only to enrich the
individual who receives it, but in the end the slave has cost more than the
free servant, and his labor is less productive. ^k

[Footnote k: Independently of these causes, which, wherever free workmen
abound, render their labor more productive and more economical than that of
slaves, another cause may be pointed out which is peculiar to the United
States: the sugar-cane has hitherto been cultivated with success only upon the
banks of the Mississippi, near the mouth of that river in the Gulf of Mexico.
In Louisiana the cultivation of the sugar-cane is exceedingly lucrative, and
nowhere does a laborer earn so much by his work, and, as there is always a
certain relation between the cost of production and the value of the produce,
the price of slaves is very high in Louisiana.  But Louisiana is one of the
confederated States, and slaves may be carried thither from all parts of the
Union; the price given for slaves in New Orleans consequently raises the value
of slaves in all the other markets.  The consequence of this is, that in the
countries where the land is less productive, the cost of slave labor is still
very considerable, which gives an additional advantage to the competition of
free labor.]

     The influence of slavery extends still further; it affects the character
of the master, and imparts a peculiar tendency to his ideas and his tastes.
Upon both banks of the Ohio, the character of the inhabitants is enterprising
and energetic; but this vigor is very differently exercised in the two States.
The white inhabitant of Ohio, who is obliged to subsist by his own exertions,
regards temporal prosperity as the principal aim of his existence; and as the
country which he occupies presents inexhaustible resources to his industry and
ever-varying lures to his activity, his acquisitive ardor surpasses the
ordinary limits of human cupidity: he is tormented by the desire of wealth,
and he boldly enters upon every path which fortune opens to him; he becomes a
sailor, a pioneer, an artisan, or a laborer with the same indifference, and he
supports, with equal constancy, the fatigues and the dangers incidental to
these various professions; the resources of his intelligence are astonishing,
and his avidity in the pursuit of gain amounts to a species of heroism.

     But the Kentuckian scorns not only labor, but all the undertakings which
labor promotes; as he lives in an idle independence, his tastes are those of
an idle man; money loses a portion of its value in his eyes; he covets wealth
much less than pleasure and excitement; and the energy which his neighbor
devotes to gain, turns with him to a passionate love of field sports and
military exercises; he delights in violent bodily exertion, he is familiar
with the use of arms, and is accustomed from a very early age to expose his
life in single combat.  Thus slavery not only prevents the whites from
becoming opulent, but even from desiring to become so.

     As the same causes have been continually producing opposite effects for
the last two centuries in the British colonies of North America, they have
established a very striking difference between the commercial capacity of the
inhabitants of the South and those of the North.  At the present day it is
only the Northern States which are in possession of shipping, manufactures,
railroads, and canals.  This difference is perceptible not only in comparing
the North with the South, but in comparing the several Southern States. Almost
all the individuals who carry on commercial operations, or who endeavor to
turn slave labor to account in the most Southern districts of the Union, have
emigrated from the North.  The natives of the Northern States are constantly
spreading over that portion of the American territory where they have less to
fear from competition; they discover resources there which escaped the notice
of the inhabitants; and, as they comply with a system which they do not
approve, they succeed in turning it to better advantage than those who first
founded and who still maintain it.

     Were I inclined to continue this parallel, I could easily prove that
almost all the differences which may be remarked between the characters of the
Americans in the Southern and in the Northern States have originated in
slavery; but this would divert me from my subject, and my present intention is
not to point out all the consequences of servitude, but those effects which it
has produced upon the prosperity of the countries which have admitted it.

     The influence of slavery upon the production of wealth must have been
very imperfectly known in antiquity, as slavery then obtained throughout the
civilized world; and the nations which were unacquainted with it were
barbarous.  And indeed Christianity only abolished slavery by advocating the
claims of the slave; at the present time it may be attacked in the name of the
master, and, upon this point, interest is reconciled with morality.

     As these truths became apparent in the United States, slavery receded
before the progress of experience.  Servitude had begun in the South, and had
thence spread towards the North; but it now retires again.  Freedom, which
started from the North, now descends uninterruptedly towards the South.
Amongst the great States, Pennsylvania now constitutes the extreme limit of
slavery to the North: but even within those limits the slave system is shaken:
Maryland, which is immediately below Pennsylvania, is preparing for its
abolition; and Virginia, which comes next to Maryland, is already discussing
its utility and its dangers. ^l

[Footnote l: A peculiar reason contributes to detach the two last-mentioned
States from the cause of slavery.  The former wealth of this part of the Union
was principally derived from the cultivation of tobacco.  This cultivation is
specially carried on by slaves; but within the last few years the market-price
of tobacco has diminished, whilst the value of the slaves remains the same.
Thus the ratio between the cost of production and the value of the produce is
changed.  The natives of Maryland and Virginia are therefore more disposed
than they were thirty years ago, to give up slave labor in the cultivation of
tobacco, or to give up slavery and tobacco at the same time.]

     No great change takes place in human institutions without involving
amongst its causes the law of inheritance.  When the law of primogeniture
obtained in the South, each family was represented by a wealthy individual,
who was neither compelled nor induced to labor; and he was surrounded, as by
parasitic plants, by the other members of his family who were then excluded by
law from sharing the common inheritance, and who led the same kind of life as
himself.  The very same thing then occurred in all the families of the South
as still happens in the wealthy families of some countries in Europe, namely,
that the younger sons remain in the same state of idleness as their elder
brother, without being as rich as he is.  This identical result seems to be
produced in Europe and in America by wholly analogous causes.  In the South of
the United States the whole race of whites formed an aristocratic body, which
was headed by a certain number of privileged individuals, whose wealth was
permanent, and whose leisure was hereditary.  These leaders of the American
nobility kept alive the traditional prejudices of the white race in the body
of which they were the representatives, and maintained the honor of inactive
life.  This aristocracy contained many who were poor, but none who would work;
its members preferred want to labor, consequently no competition was set on
foot against negro laborers and slaves, and, whatever opinion might be
entertained as to the utility of their efforts, it was indispensable to employ
them, since there was no one else to work.

     No sooner was the law of primogeniture abolished than fortunes began to
diminish, and all the families of the country were simultaneously reduced to a
state in which labor became necessary to procure the means of subsistence:
several of them have since entirely disappeared, and all of them learned to
look forward to the time at which it would be necessary for everyone to
provide for his own wants.  Wealthy individuals are still to be met with, but
they no longer constitute a compact and hereditary body, nor have they been
able to adopt a line of conduct in which they could persevere, and which they
could infuse into all ranks of society.  The prejudice which stigmatized labor
was in the first place abandoned by common consent; the number of needy men
was increased, and the needy were allowed to gain a laborious subsistence
without blushing for their exertions.  Thus one of the most immediate
consequences of the partible quality of estates has been to create a class of
free laborers.  As soon as a competition was set on foot between the free
laborer and the slave, the inferiority of the latter became manifest, and
slavery was attacked in its fundamental principle, which is the interest of
the master.

     As slavery recedes, the black population follows its retrograde course,
and returns with it towards those tropical regions from which it originally
came.  However singular this fact may at first appear to be, it may readily be
explained.  Although the Americans abolish the principle of slavery, they do
not set their slaves free.  To illustrate this remark, I will quote the
example of the State of New York.  In 1788, the State of New York prohibited
the sale of slaves within its limits, which was an indirect method of
prohibiting the importation of blacks.  Thenceforward the number of negroes
could only increase according to the ratio of the natural increase of
population.  But eight years later a more decisive measure was taken, and it
was enacted that all children born of slave parents after July 4, 1799, should
be free.  No increase could then take place, and although slaves still
existed, slavery might be said to be abolished.

     From the time at which a Northern State prohibited the importation of
slaves, no slaves were brought from the South to be sold in its markets.  On
the other hand, as the sale of slaves was forbidden in that State, an owner
was no longer able to get rid of his slave (who thus became a burdensome
possession) otherwise than by transporting him to the South.  But when a
Northern State declared that the son of the slave should be born free, the
slave lost a large portion of his market value, since his posterity was no
longer included in the bargain, and the owner had then a strong interest in
transporting him to the South.  Thus the same law prevents the slaves of the
South from coming to the Northern States, and drives those of the North to the
South.

     The want of free hands is felt in a State in proportion as the number of
slaves decreases.  But in proportion as labor is performed by free hands,
slave labor becomes less productive; and the slave is then a useless or
onerous possession, whom it is important to export to those Southern States
where the same competition is not to be feared.  Thus the abolition of slavery
does not set the slave free, but it merely transfers him from one master to
another, and from the North to the South.

     The emancipated negroes, and those born after the abolition of slavery,
do not, indeed, migrate from the North to the South; but their situation with
regard to the Europeans is not unlike that of the aborigines of America; they
remain half civilized, and deprived of their rights in the midst of a
population which is far superior to them in wealth and in knowledge; where
they are exposed to the tyranny of the laws ^m and the intolerance of the
people.  On some accounts they are still more to be pitied than the Indians,
since they are haunted by the reminiscence of slavery, and they cannot claim
possession of a single portion of the soil: many of them perish miserably, ^n
and the rest congregate in the great towns, where they perform the meanest
offices, and lead a wretched and precarious existence.

[Footnote m: The States in which slavery is abolished usually do what they can
to render their territory disagreeable to the negroes as a place of residence;
and as a kind of emulation exists between the different States in this
respect, the unhappy blacks can only choose the least of the evils which beset
them.]

[Footnote n: There is a very great difference between the mortality of the
blacks and of the whites in the States in which slavery is abolished; from
1820 to 1831 only one out of forty-two individuals of the white population
died in Philadelphia; but one negro out of twenty-one individuals of the black
population died in the same space of time.  The mortality is by no means so
great amongst the negroes who are still slaves.  (See Emmerson's "Medical
Statistics," p. 28.)]

     But even if the number of negroes continued to increase as rapidly as
when they were still in a state of slavery, as the number of whites augments
with twofold rapidity since the abolition of slavery, the blacks would soon
be, as it were, lost in the midst of a strange population.

     A district which is cultivated by slaves is in general more scantily
peopled than a district cultivated by free labor: moreover, America is still a
new country, and a State is therefore not half peopled at the time when it
abolishes slavery.  No sooner is an end put to slavery than the want of free
labor is felt, and a crowd of enterprising adventurers immediately arrive from
all parts of the country, who hasten to profit by the fresh resources which
are then opened to industry.  The soil is soon divided amongst them, and a
family of white settlers takes possession of each tract of country. Besides
which, European emigration is exclusively directed to the free States; for
what would be the fate of a poor emigrant who crosses the Atlantic in search
of ease and happiness if he were to land in a country where labor is
stigmatized as degrading?

     Thus the white population grows by its natural increase, and at the same
time by the immense influx of emigrants; whilst the black population receives
no emigrants, and is upon its decline.  The proportion which existed between
the two races is soon inverted.  The negroes constitute a scanty remnant, a
poor tribe of vagrants, which is lost in the midst of an immense people in
full possession of the land; and the presence of the blacks is only marked by
the injustice and the hardships of which they are the unhappy victims.

     In several of the Western States the negro race never made its
appearance, and in all the Northern States it is rapidly declining.  Thus the
great question of its future condition is confined within a narrow circle,
where it becomes less formidable, though not more easy of solution.

     The more we descend towards the South, the more difficult does it become
to abolish slavery with advantage: and this arises from several physical
causes which it is important to point out.

     The first of these causes is the climate; it is well known that in
proportion as Europeans approach the tropics they suffer more from labor. Many
of the Americans even assert that within a certain latitude the exertions
which a negro can make without danger are fatal to them; ^o but I do not think
that this opinion, which is so favorable to the indolence of the inhabitants
of southern regions, is confirmed by experience.  The southern parts of the
Union are not hotter than the South of Italy and of Spain; ^p and it may be
asked why the European cannot work as well there as in the two latter
countries.  If slavery has been abolished in Italy and in Spain without
causing the destruction of the masters, why should not the same thing take
place in the Union?  I cannot believe that nature has prohibited the Europeans
in Georgia and the Floridas, under pain of death, from raising the means of
subsistence from the soil, but their labor would unquestionably be more
irksome and less productive to them than to the inhabitants of New England.
As the free workman thus loses a portion of his superiority over the slave in
the Southern States, there are fewer inducements to abolish slavery.

[Footnote o: This is true of the spots in which rice is cultivated;
rice-grounds, which are unwholesome in all countries, are particularly
dangerous in those regions which are exposed to the beams of a tropical sun.
Europeans would not find it easy to cultivate the soil in that part of the New
World if it must be necessarily be made to produce rice; but may they not
subsist without rice-grounds?]

[Footnote p: These States are nearer to the equator than Italy and Spain, but
the temperature of the continent of America is very much lower than that of
Europe.

     The Spanish Government formerly caused a certain number of peasants from
the Acores to be transported into a district of Louisiana called Attakapas, by
way of experiment.  These settlers still cultivate the soil without the
assistance of slaves, but their industry is so languid as scarcely to supply
their most necessary wants.]

     All the plants of Europe grow in the northern parts of the Union; the
South has special productions of its own.  It has been observed that slave
labor is a very expensive method of cultivating corn.  The farmer of corn land
in a country where slavery is unknown habitually retains a small number of
laborers in his service, and at seed-time and harvest he hires several
additional hands, who only live at his cost for a short period.  But the
agriculturist in a slave State is obliged to keep a large number of slaves the
whole year round, in order to sow his fields and to gather in his crops,
although their services are only required for a few weeks; but slaves are
unable to wait till they are hired, and to subsist by their own labor in the
mean time like free laborers; in order to have their services they must be
bought.  Slavery, independently of its general disadvantages, is therefore
still more inapplicable to countries in which corn is cultivated than to those
which produce crops of a different kind.  The cultivation of tobacco, of
cotton, and especially of the sugar-cane, demands, on the other hand,
unremitting attention: and women and children are employed in it, whose
services are of but little use in the cultivation of wheat.  Thus slavery is
naturally more fitted to the countries from which these productions are
derived.  Tobacco, cotton, and the sugar-cane are exclusively grown in the
South, and they form one of the principal sources of the wealth of those
States.  If slavery were abolished, the inhabitants of the South would be
constrained to adopt one of two alternatives: they must either change their
system of cultivation, and then they would come into competition with the more
active and more experienced inhabitants of the North; or, if they continued to
cultivate the same produce without slave labor, they would have to support the
competition of the other States of the South, which might still retain their
slaves.  Thus, peculiar reasons for maintaining slavery exist in the South
which do not operate in the North.

     But there is yet another motive which is more cogent than all the others:
the South might indeed, rigorously speaking, abolish slavery; but how should
it rid its territory of the black population?  Slaves and slavery are driven
from the North by the same law, but this twofold result cannot be hoped for in
the South.

     The arguments which I have adduced to show that slavery is more natural
and more advantageous in the South than in the North, sufficiently prove that
the number of slaves must be far greater in the former districts.  It was to
the southern settlements that the first Africans were brought, and it is there
that the greatest number of them have always been imported.  As we advance
towards the South, the prejudice which sanctions idleness increases in power.
In the States nearest to the tropics there is not a single white laborer; the
negroes are consequently much more numerous in the South than in the North.
And, as I have already observed, this disproportion increases daily, since the
negroes are transferred to one part of the Union as soon as slavery is
abolished in the other.  Thus the black population augments in the South, not
only by its natural fecundity, but by the compulsory emigration of the negroes
from the North; and the African race has causes of increase in the South very
analogous to those which so powerfully accelerate the growth of the European
race in the North.

     In the State of Maine there is one negro in 300 inhabitants; in
Massachusetts, one in 100; in New York, two in 100; in Pennsylvania, three in
the same number; in Maryland, thirty-four; in Virginia, forty-two; and lastly,
in South Carolina ^q fifty-five per cent.  Such was the proportion of the
black population to the whites in the year 1830.  But this proportion is
perpetually changing, as it constantly decreases in the North and augments in
the South.

[Footnote q: We find it asserted in an American work, entitled "Letters on the
Colonization Society," by Mr. Carey, 1833, "That for the last forty years the
black race has increased more rapidly than the white race in the State of
South Carolina; and that if we take the average population of the five States
of the South into which slaves were first introduced, viz., Maryland,
Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia, we shall find that from
1790 to 1830 the whites have augmented in the proportion of 80 to 100, and the
blacks in that of 112 to 100."

     In the United States, in 1830, the population of the two races stood as
follows: -

     States where slavery is abolished, 6,565,434 whites; 120,520 blacks.
Slave States, 3,960,814 whites; 2,208,102 blacks.  [In 1890 the United States
contained a population of 54,983,890 whites, and 7,638,360 negroes.]]

     It is evident that the most Southern States of the Union cannot abolish
slavery without incurring very great dangers, which the North had no reason to
apprehend when it emancipated its black population.  We have already shown the
system by which the Northern States secure the transition from slavery to
freedom, by keeping the present generation in chains, and setting their
descendants free; by this means the negroes are gradually introduced into
society; and whilst the men who might abuse their freedom are kept in a state
of servitude, those who are emancipated may learn the art of being free before
they become their own masters.  But it would be difficult to apply this method
in the South.  To declare that all the negroes born after a certain period
shall be free, is to introduce the principle and the notion of liberty into
the heart of slavery; the blacks whom the law thus maintains in a state of
slavery from which their children are delivered, are astonished at so unequal
a fate, and their astonishment is only the prelude to their impatience and
irritation.  Thenceforward slavery loses, in their eyes, that kind of moral
power which it derived from time and habit; it is reduced to a mere palpable
abuse of force.  The Northern States had nothing to fear from the contrast,
because in them the blacks were few in number, and the white population was
very considerable.  But if this faint dawn of freedom were to show two
millions of men their true position, the oppressors would have reason to
tremble.  After having affranchised the children of their slaves the Europeans
of the Southern States would very shortly be obliged to extend the same
benefit to the whole black population.