labor, &c.

The fact is admitted by all, but the reason is not very clear to every
one. Many cannot comprehend, why it is, that the farmer who pays his
laborers nothing, should be less prosperous than his neighbor, who
pays his laborers from ten to fifteen dollars per month. The idea that
those who work slaves, pay nothing for their labor; or in other words,
that slave labor costs a man nothing, is incorrect. If a farmer breeds
and raises slaves, it is at a cost of at least a thousand dollars per
slave. If he purchases a slave with his money, the slave frequently
costs him one thousand dollars. If we suppose his money worth ten per
cent interest, per annum, the amount of the interest on the purchase
money, is one hundred dollars per annum. Here is eight dollars and
thirty-three and one-third cents per month, that the farmer is paying
for labor. To this add fifty dollars per annum for clothing, viz.,
four dollars and sixteen and two-third cents per month; making an
aggregate of twelve dollars and fifty cents per month, that the farmer
expends for slave labor. During a residence of forty four years in the
South, I never knew the time when white laborers could not be procured
for that amount, and frequently for less. To this we may fairly add at
least twenty-five per cent for loss of time by sickness, loss of slave
property by death, physician's bills, &c., so that we may put down
slave labor at fifteen dollars per month. Fifty per cent more, than
white labor ordinarily costs in the slave states. This is a fair
statement of the case. But the disadvantages of slave labor do not
stop here. As a general rule, land cultivated by white laborers, will
produce from twenty-five to fifty per cent more than land cultivated
by slave labor. This is owing to the careless, slovenly manner in
which slave labor is performed. To this we may add the destruction of
farming utensils and implements of husbandry, over and above what