It, nevertheless, but ill becomes the home British to say much about the United States’ slavery, or, indeed, about any slavery. The causes which operate to promote or prevent direct slavery, have never, that I am aware of, been clearly pointed out. Slaves (direct) are found only where land is cheap. When the land, from its redundancy in proportion to population, as in America, is of little or no value, the whole property consists of labour, or the produce of labour; and the covetous man not being able to satisfy his lust for riches by the produce of his own labour, has no other way of gratifying it but by obtaining possession of the persons of his fellow-men, and compelling them to labour the otherwise unprofitable ground for his emolument; and this he finds profitable, because the produce of labour, even of slave-labour, in this favourable field for production, is more than sufficient to support his slaves as reproductive labouring-stock, or to purchase new ones should they wear out. On the reverse, slaves (direct) are not found when the land has been all occupied, and has reached any considerable value or rental. Wherever this has taken place, and population has become dense, hired or piece-labour becomes more profitable than slave-labour, and drives it from the field. The reason of this is obvious: man, in a state of comparative liberty of action, has more of mental energy to stimulate and carry on his corporeal exertions, and to direct them to more profitable effect, than when under direct slavery, while at the same time he can be maintained at less cost as a reproductive animal when in semblance free. Besides, when the land has been all taken up, and has come into the hands of a small number of the community, these, from being the possessors of property, generally obtain the governing power, and form a land-aristocracy class. They proceed to legislate and levy taxation in the most partial and unjust manner to forward their own selfish interests, they secure the land-property to themselves and their posterity, and, by taking advantage of the poverty and necessity for food of the labouring population, make out to obtain a more complete command over their labour, and more power to render them subservient to their pleasure and luxury, than if the working population were slaves direct.
In this way, by means of a food-monopoly for the emolument of the heir or eldest male of the family, and excessive taxation upon the necessaries of the working people for the support of the younger branches, our governing land-aristocracy have done every thing in their power to bring the working population to a complete state of indirect slavery, the only slavery which, from the nature of things in Britain, is profitable or practicable, and they have succeeded,—the destitution and hollow cheek of wife and children being a more powerful incentive to severe toil than the whip of the hippopotamus hide. A sufficient emigration would help to reform this. The purpose of the “sufficient price” (a high price upon fresh land in colonies) to compress population together, will be seen by the reader at a glance. It will, as Mr Wakefield naively tells us, “render slave-labour a loss.” The indirect slavery, as in Britain, will be more profitable!!
POSTSCRIPT.
The Scots scheme of colonization is in itself calculated to have an efficient selecting power to procure emigrants of moral and intellectual superiority, and eminently fitted for colonists. A power of selection in the scheme itself, is preferable to any inquisitorial committee. The condition of working small-capitalists is generally the consequence of some mental superiority, which has led the individual to be providently industrious, and to despise mere momentary sensual gratification. It is the boldest and wisest of these who will join in this scheme. And amongst the working classes, those who possess the greatest share of moral courage, intelligence, and determination of purpose, will be the men who will join the Emigration Societies, and work out their own and their family’s independence, at whatever cost of present exertion and self-denial. The general diffusion of wealth, the possession of some property by a large majority of the people, is necessary to human comfort and rational liberty: Equal political rights and property in the hands of the few cannot co-exist. Did our working men form an emigration-fund of the money (collectively, at least, thirty millions Sterling yearly) they, in self-indulgence, waste upon pernicious liquors and tobacco, which enervate body and mind, they would soon be able to carry out and supply with land and stock, one-half of their number, and the increase of value of their colonial property under the management of those sent out (the most trusty individuals of the association, chosen by ballot), would be sufficient to transplant, if necessary, the remaining half, while the time and strength saved from being wasted in dissipation, would serve greatly to increase the comforts of themselves and families, independent of the rise of the wages of labour which would ensue. The greatness of the object ought to be appreciated,—the change from mere labour-drudges (most frequently in unwholesome occupations) in a country where a property-class have in a manner secured every thing to themselves, to the condition of proprietors in a most beautiful, fertile, and salubrious country, is surely a sufficient motive for exertion. An association of twenty working men, by subscribing each 2s. weekly, can transplant two, or with a family, one of the members yearly; and, aided by the increase of the value of their colonial property, in the course of six years, or with families, eight or ten years, the whole could be proprietors residing on their own estates, the value of which every passing year would increase for ages to come.
P. M., Chairman.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] While two-thirds of the world are lying almost waste, it is yet rather premature to speak of preventive or destructive checks—war, nunneries, infanticide, single-blessedness. The latter, recommended as preferable to colonization by political economists, may be left to their own especial practice.
[2] “‘It is a most beautiful country. I have visited the Brazils, the whole of Van Diemen’s Land, and New South Wales, and been on the Continent, but I never saw a country in the world that equalled it (New Zealand). In scenery, climate, and productiveness, it is a perfect paradise.’—(See T. B. Montefiore, Parliamentary Evidence, 1838.)”