Viewing page 9 of 16
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
December 1862 DOUGLASS' MONTHLY. 761 [[line]] [[3 columns]] [[column 1]] persons, with their own consent, at any place without the United States. I beg indulgence to discuss these proposed articles at some length. Without slavery, the rebellion would never have existed, and without slavery, could not have continued. Among the friends of the Union, there is great diversity of sentiment in regards to slavery and the African race amongst us Some would abolish it suddenly, and without compensation; and some, gradually and with compensation; and some would remove the freed people from among us, and others would retain them with us; and there are yet other diversities. Because of these diversities we waste much strength in struggles among ourselves; by mutual consession, we should harmonize and act together, and it would be a compromise among the friends, and not the enemies of the Union. These articles are intended to embody a plan of such mutual concessions, which, if adopted, it is assumed that emancipation will follow in at least several of the States. The first article-The main points are, first, the emancipation. Second-Length of time for consummating, 37 years. Third-Compensation. The emancipation will be unsatisfactory to the advocates of perpetual slavery, but the length of time should greatly mitigate the dissatisfaction. The time saves both races from the evils of sudden derangement; in fact, from the necessity of any degrangement which most of those whose habitual course of thought will be disturbed by the measure, will have passed away before its consummation. They will never see it. Another class will hail the prospect of emancipation, but will deprecate the length of time. They will feel that it gives too little to the now living slaves, but it really gives them much. It saves them from the vagrant destitution which must largely attend immediate emancipation in localities where the numbers are very great, and gives the inspiring assurance that their posterity shall be free forever. The plan leaves to each State choosing to act under it, to abolish slavery now or at the end of the century, or at any intermediate time, or by degrees extending over the whole or any part of that period, and it obliges no two States to proceed alike. It also provides for compensation, and generally the mode of making it. This it would seem must further mitigate the dissatisfaction of those who favor perpetual slavery, and especially of those who are to receive compensation. Doubtless some of those who are to pay and not receive will objeet; yet, that the measure is both just and economical, is certain. The liberation of the slaves is the destruction of property acquired by descent, by purchase,-the same as acquired by descent, by purchase,-the same as any other property. It is no less true for having been often said that the people of the South are no more responsible for the introduction of this property than are the people of the North; and when it is remembered how unhesitatingly we-all of us-use cotton, sugar, and share the profits of dealing in them, it may not be safe to say that the South has been more responsible for its continuance. Then it, for a common object, and if with less money or money more easily paid, we can preserve the benefits of the Union by this means than we can by the war alone, is it not economical to do it? Let us consider it then. Let us ascertain the sum we have expended in the war since compensated emancipation was proposed last March, and consider whether, if that measure had been promptly accepted by some of the Slave States, the same sum would not have done more to have closed the war than has been otherwise done. If so the measure would save money, and in that view would be a prudent and economical measure. Certainly, it is not so easy to pay something as nothing; but it is easier to pay a large sum when we are able, than before we are able. The war requires them at once. The aggregate sum necessary for compensated emancipation would of course be large, but it would require no ready cash nor bondsmen any faster than the emancipation progresses. This might not and probably would not close before the end of the thirty-seven years. By that time we shall probably have 100,000,000 of peopl to share the burden, and not 31,000,000 as now but the increase of our population may be expected to continued for a long time after the period as rapidly as before, because our territories will not have become full. I do not state this inconsiderately. At the same time ratio of increase which we have maintained on an average from 1790 to 1860, we should in 1900 have a population of 103, 208, 405; and why may we not continue that ratio far beyond that period. Our abundant room, our broad national homestead is an ample resource-were our territory as limited as the British Isles, very certainly our population could not expand as stated. Instead of receiving the foreign born as now, we should be compelled to send part of the native born away; but such is not our condition. We have 2,963,000 square miles. Europe has 3,000,000 with a population averaging [[/column 1]] [[column 2]] 73 1/3 persons to the square mile. Why may not our country at some time average as many? Is it less fertile? Has it more waste surface by mountains, rivers, lakes, deserts or other causes? Is it inferior to Europe in any natural advantage? Then we are at some time to be as populous as Europe. How soon? As to when this may be, we may judge by the past and the present. As to when it will, if ever, depends much upon whether we maintain the Union. Several of our States are above the average of the European population of 73 1/3 to the square mile. Massachusetts has 157, Rhode Island 133, New York and New Jersey each 80; also two other great States, Pennsylvania and Ohio, are not far below the former, having 63, and the latter 59. The States already above the European average, except New York have increased in as rapid ratio since passing that point as ever before, while no one of them is equal to some other parts if our country in natural capacity for sustaining a dense population: taking the ratio in the aggregate and we find its population and ratio of increase for the several decimal periods to be as follows: 1790-3,929,827, 1800-5,305,937. Ratio of increase 35 and 62-100 per cent. 1810-7,239,814. Ratio 36 and 45-100. 1820-9,688,131. Ratio 33 and 13-100. 1830-10,866, 020. Ratio 33 and 13-100. 1840-17,089,453. Ratio 32 and 67-100. 1850-23,191,876. Ratio 35 and 87-100. 1860-31,443,700. Ratio 35 and 58 100. This shows an average decimal increase of 34.60 per cent in population through the seventy years from our first to our last census taken. It is seen that our ratio of increase at no one of these seven periods is either 2 per cent. below or 2 per cent. above the average-thus showing how inflexible, and consequently how reliable the law of increase in our case is. Assuming that it will continue, it gives the following result: 1870 - 42,323,372 1880 - 56,466,216 1890 - 76,677,872 1900 - 103,208,415 1910 - 138,918,526 1920 - 186,985,335 1930 - 251,680,914 These figures show that our country may be as populous as Europe now is at soms point between 1920 and 1930-say about 1925. Our territory at 73 1//2 persons to the square mile, being of the capacity to contain 217,186,000, and we will reach this, too, if we do not ourselves relinquish the chances by the folly and evils of disunion, or by a long and exhausting war springing from the only great element of discord among us. While it cannot be foreseen exactly how much one huge example of secession breeding lesser ones indefinitely, would retard the population, civilization and prosperity, no one can doubt that the extent of it would be very great an injurious; the proposed emancipation would shorten this war, perpetuate peace, increase this increase of population, and proportionately the wealth of the country. With this we should pay all that emancipation would cost with our debts easier than we should pay our other debts without it. It we had allowed our old national debt to run at 6 per cent. simple interest, from the end of our revolutionary struggle, without paying anything on either the principal or interest, each man of us would owe less upon that debt now than each man owed upon it then; and this because our increase of men through the whole period has been greater than 6 per cent., and has run faster than the interest upon the debt. Thus, time relieves a debtor nation so long as its population increases faster than unpaid interest accumulations on it debt, and this fact would be no excuse for delaying the payment of what is justly due; but it shows the great importance of time in this connection-the great advantage of a policy by which we shall not have to pay till we number a 100,000,000, what, by a different policy, we do now when the number is 31,000,000. In a word, it shows that a dollar will be much harder to pay for the war than a dollar for emancipation on the proposed plan, and then the latter will cost no blood-no precious life. It will be a saving of both. As to the second article, I think it would be impracticable to return to bondage the class of persons therein contemplated; some of them doubtless, in the property sense, belong to loyal owners, and hence provision is made in this article for compensating such. The third article relates to the furture of the freed people. It does not oblige but merely authorizes Congress to aid in colonizing such as may connect. This ought not to be regarded as objectionable on the one hand or the other, in so much as it comes to nothing unless by mutual consent of the people to be deported and the American voters, through their representatives in Congress. I cannot make it better known than it already is that I strongly favor colonization, and yet I wish to say there is an objection against the colored persons' remaining in the country which is largely imaginary if not malicious. It is said their presence would injure and displace white labor and laborers. If there ever could be a time for mere arguments, that time surely is not now. In times like the present, men should utter nothing for which they would not willingly be responsible through time and eternity [[//column 2]] [[column 3]] Is it true then that colored people can displace any more white labor by being free, than remaining slaves? If they stay in the old places, they jostle no white laborers-if not, they leave them open to white laborers. Logically, there is neither more or less of it. Emancipation even without deportation, would probably enhance the wages of white laborers, and very surely would not reduce them, thus the customary amount of labor would still have to be performed. the colored people would surely not do more than the old proportion of it, and very probably would do less for a time, leaving an increased part to white laborers bringing their labor into better demand, and consequently enhancing the wages of it. With deportation even to a limited extent, enhancement of wages of white labor is mathematically certain. Labor is like any other commodity in the market. Increase the demand for it and you increase the price of it. Reduce the supply by colonizing the black labor out of the country and by so much you increase the demand for wages of white labor-but it is decided that the free people will swarm forth, and cover the whole land. Will liberation make them any more numerous? Equally distributed among the whites and there would be but one colored to seven whites. There are many communities now having more than one free colored person to seven whites, and this without any apparent consciousness of evil from it. The District of Columbia, and Maryland, and Delaware, are all in this condition. The district has more than one free colored to six whites, and yet in its frequent petitions to Congress I believe it has never presented the presence of free colored persons as one od its grievances. But why should emancipation South sent the free people North? People of any color seldom run unless there is something to run from. Heretofore colored people have fled North, to some extent from bondage, and run, perhaps, from both bondage and destitution; but if gradual emancipation and compensation be adopted, they will have nothing to flee from. Their old masters will give them wages, at least until new wages can be procured, and the freed men in turn will gladly give their labor for the wages till new homes can be found for them in congenial climes, and with people of their own blood and race. Their proposition can be trusted on the mutual interests involved, and in any event cannot the North decide for itself to receive them? Again, as practice proves more than theory, in an case has there been any irruption northward, because of the abolishment of slavery in the District of Columbia last spring. What I have said of the proportion of free colored people to the whites in the District of Columbia is from the census of 1860, having no reference to persons called contrabands or to no person made free by the act of Congress abolishing slavery here. The plan, consisting of these articles, is recommended, not but that a restoration of the national authority without its adoption, nor will the war or proceedings under the proclamation of Sept 22, 1862, be stayed because of the recommendation of this plan. Its timely adoption, I doubt not, wou'd bring restoration, and thereby stay both. And notwithstanding this plan, the recommendation that Congress provide by law for compensating any State which may adopt emancipation before this plan, is hereby earnestly renewed. Such would only be an advance of a part of the plan, and the same arguments apply to both. This plan is recommended as a means, not as a conclusion of, but in addition to all others, for restorating and preserving the national authority throughout the Union. The subject is presented exclusively in its economical aspect. The plan would, I am confident, secure peace more speedily than can be done by force alone while it would cost less, considering amount, and manner and times of payment, and the amounts would be easier paid than will be the additional cost of the war, if we rely solely on force. It is very likely that it would cost no blood at all. The plan is proposed as permanent, constitutional law. It cannot become such without the concurrence, first, of two-thirds of Congress, and afterwards three quarters of the States. The necessary three quarters of the States would necessarily include seven of the slave States. Their concurrence, if obtained, will give assurance of their severally adopting emancipation at no distant day upon the new Constitutional terms. This assurance would end the struggle now, and save the Union forever. I do not forget the gravity which should characterize a paper addressed to the Congress of the nation by the Chief Magistrate, nor do I forget that some of you are my seniors, and that many of you have more experience than I in the conduct of public affairs. Yet I trust that in view of the great responsibility resting upon me, you will receive no want of respect to yourselves in any undue earnestness I may seem to display. Is it doubted, then, that the plan I propose, if adopted, would shorten the war, and thus lessen its expenditure of money and of blood? Is it doubted that we here, Congress and Executive, can secure its adoption? [[/column 3]]
