The State of Kentucky was founded in 177_Democracy in America

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.

[ 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

[ 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

[ 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.

[ 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.]

[ 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 Emerson’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.

[ 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?]

[ 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.

[ 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.

Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part V

In the North, as I have already remarked, a twofold migration ensues

upon the abolition of slavery, or even precedes that event when

circumstances have rendered it probable; the slaves quit the country to

be transported southwards; and the whites of the Northern States, as

well as the emigrants from Europe, hasten to fill up their place. But

these two causes cannot operate in the same manner in the Southern

States. On the one hand, the mass of slaves is too great for any

expectation of their ever being removed from the country to be

entertained; and on the other hand, the Europeans and Anglo-Americans

of the North are afraid to come to inhabit a country in which labor has

not yet been reinstated in its rightful honors. Besides, they very

justly look upon the States in which the proportion of the negroes

equals or exceeds that of the whites, as exposed to very great dangers;

and they refrain from turning their activity in that direction.

Thus the inhabitants of the South would not be able, like their

Northern countrymen, to initiate the slaves gradually into a state of

freedom by abolishing slavery; they have no means of perceptibly

diminishing the black population, and they would remain unsupported to

repress its excesses. So that in the course of a few years, a great

people of free negroes would exist in the heart of a white nation of

equal size.

The same abuses of power which still maintain slavery, would then

become the source of the most alarming perils which the white

population of the South might have to apprehend. At the present time

the descendants of the Europeans are the sole owners of the land; the

absolute masters of all labor; and the only persons who are possessed

of wealth, knowledge, and arms. The black is destitute of all these

advantages, but he subsists without them because he is a slave. If he

were free, and obliged to provide for his own subsistence, would it be

possible for him to remain without these things and to support life? Or

would not the very instruments of the present superiority of the white,

whilst slavery exists, expose him to a thousand dangers if it were

abolished?

As long as the negro remains a slave, he may be kept in a condition not

very far removed from that of the brutes; but, with his liberty, he

cannot but acquire a degree of instruction which will enable him to

appreciate his misfortunes, and to discern a remedy for them. Moreover,

there exists a singular principle of relative justice which is very

firmly implanted in the human heart. Men are much more forcibly struck

by those inequalities which exist within the circle of the same class,

than with those which may be remarked between different classes. It is

more easy for them to admit slavery, than to allow several millions of

citizens to exist under a load of eternal infamy and hereditary

wretchedness. In the North the population of freed negroes feels these

hardships and resents these indignities; but its numbers and its powers

are small, whilst in the South it would be numerous and strong.

As soon as it is admitted that the whites and the emancipated blacks

are placed upon the same territory in the situation of two alien

communities, it will readily be understood that there are but two

alternatives for the future; the negroes and the whites must either

wholly part or wholly mingle. I have already expressed the conviction

which I entertain as to the latter event. *r I do not imagine that the

white and black races will ever live in any country upon an equal

footing. But I believe the difficulty to be still greater in the United

States than elsewhere. An isolated individual may surmount the

prejudices of religion, of his country, or of his race, and if this

individual is a king he may effect surprising changes in society; but a

whole people cannot rise, as it were, above itself. A despot who should

subject the Americans and their former slaves to the same yoke, might

perhaps succeed in commingling their races; but as long as the American

democracy remains at the head of affairs, no one will undertake so

difficult a task; and it may be foreseen that the freer the white

population of the United States becomes, the more isolated will it

remain. *s

[ This opinion is sanctioned by authorities infinitely weightier than

anything that I can say: thus, for instance, it is stated in the

“Memoirs of Jefferson” (as collected by M. Conseil), “Nothing is more

clearly written in the book of destiny than the emancipation of the

blacks; and it is equally certain that the two races will never live in

a state of equal freedom under the same government, so insurmountable

are the barriers which nature, habit, and opinions have established

between them.”]

[ If the British West India planters had governed themselves, they

would assuredly not have passed the Slave Emancipation Bill which the

mother-country has recently imposed upon them.]

I have previously observed that the mixed race is the true bond of

union between the Europeans and the Indians; just so the mulattoes are

the true means of transition between the white and the negro; so that

wherever mulattoes abound, the intermixture of the two races is not

impossible. In some parts of America, the European and the negro races

are so crossed by one another, that it is rare to meet with a man who

is entirely black, or entirely white: when they are arrived at this

point, the two races may really be said to be combined; or rather to

have been absorbed in a third race, which is connected with both

without being identical with either.

Of all the Europeans the English are those who have mixed least with

the negroes. More mulattoes are to be seen in the South of the Union

than in the North, but still they are infinitely more scarce than in

any other European colony: mulattoes are by no means numerous in the

United States; they have no force peculiar to themselves, and when

quarrels originating in differences of color take place, they generally

side with the whites; just as the lackeys of the great, in Europe,

assume the contemptuous airs of nobility to the lower orders.

The pride of origin, which is natural to the English, is singularly

augmented by the personal pride which democratic liberty fosters

amongst the Americans: the white citizen of the United States is proud

of his race, and proud of himself. But if the whites and the negroes do

not intermingle in the North of the Union, how should they mix in the

South? Can it be supposed for an instant, that an American of the

Southern States, placed, as he must forever be, between the white man

with all his physical and moral superiority and the negro, will ever

think of preferring the latter? The Americans of the Southern States

have two powerful passions which will always keep them aloof; the first

is the fear of being assimilated to the negroes, their former slaves;

and the second the dread of sinking below the whites, their neighbors.

If I were called upon to predict what will probably occur at some

future time, I should say, that the abolition of slavery in the South

will, in the common course of things, increase the repugnance of the

white population for the men of color. I found this opinion upon the

analogous observation which I already had occasion to make in the

North. I there remarked that the white inhabitants of the North avoid

the negroes with increasing care, in proportion as the legal barriers

of separation are removed by the legislature; and why should not the

same result take place in the South? In the North, the whites are

deterred from intermingling with the blacks by the fear of an imaginary

danger; in the South, where the danger would be real, I cannot imagine

that the fear would be less general.

If, on the one hand, it be admitted (and the fact is unquestionable)

that the colored population perpetually accumulates in the extreme

South, and that it increases more rapidly than that of the whites; and

if, on the other hand, it be allowed that it is impossible to foresee a

time at which the whites and the blacks will be so intermingled as to

derive the same benefits from society; must it not be inferred that the

blacks and the whites will, sooner or later, come to open strife in the

Southern States of the Union? But if it be asked what the issue of the

struggle is likely to be, it will readily be understood that we are

here left to form a very vague surmise of the truth. The human mind may

succeed in tracing a wide circle, as it were, which includes the course

of future events; but within that circle a thousand various chances and

circumstances may direct it in as many different ways; and in every

picture of the future there is a dim spot, which the eye of the

understanding cannot penetrate. It appears, however, to be extremely

probable that in the West Indian Islands the white race is destined to

be subdued, and the black population to share the same fate upon the

continent.

In the West India Islands the white planters are surrounded by an

immense black population; on the continent, the blacks are placed

between the ocean and an innumerable people, which already extends over

them in a dense mass, from the icy confines of Canada to the frontiers

of Virginia, and from the banks of the Missouri to the shores of the

Atlantic. If the white citizens of North America remain united, it

cannot be supposed that the negroes will escape the destruction with

which they are menaced; they must be subdued by want or by the sword.

But the black population which is accumulated along the coast of the

Gulf of Mexico, has a chance of success if the American Union is

dissolved when the struggle between the two races begins. If the

federal tie were broken, the citizens of the South would be wrong to

rely upon any lasting succor from their Northern countrymen. The latter

are well aware that the danger can never reach them; and unless they

are constrained to march to the assistance of the South by a positive

obligation, it may be foreseen that the sympathy of color will be

insufficient to stimulate their exertions.

Yet, at whatever period the strife may break out, the whites of the

South, even if they are abandoned to their own resources, will enter

the lists with an immense superiority of knowledge and of the means of

warfare; but the blacks will have numerical strength and the energy of

despair upon their side, and these are powerful resources to men who

have taken up arms. The fate of the white population of the Southern

States will, perhaps, be similar to that of the Moors in Spain. After

having occupied the land for centuries, it will perhaps be forced to

retire to the country whence its ancestors came, and to abandon to the

negroes the possession of a territory, which Providence seems to have

more peculiarly destined for them, since they can subsist and labor in

it more easily that the whites.

The danger of a conflict between the white and the black inhabitants of

the Southern States of the Union—a danger which, however remote it may

be, is inevitable—perpetually haunts the imagination of the Americans.

The inhabitants of the North make it a common topic of conversation,

although they have no direct injury to fear from the struggle; but they

vainly endeavor to devise some means of obviating the misfortunes which

they foresee. In the Southern States the subject is not discussed: the

planter does not allude to the future in conversing with strangers; the

citizen does not communicate his apprehensions to his friends; he seeks

to conceal them from himself; but there is something more alarming in

the tacit forebodings of the South, than in the clamorous fears of the

Northern States.

This all-pervading disquietude has given birth to an undertaking which

is but little known, but which may have the effect of changing the fate

of a portion of the human race. From apprehension of the dangers which

I have just been describing, a certain number of American citizens have

formed a society for the purpose of exporting to the coast of Guinea,

at their own expense, such free negroes as may be willing to escape

from the oppression to which they are subject. *t In 1820, the society

to which I allude formed a settlement in Africa, upon the seventh

degree of north latitude, which bears the name of Liberia. The most

recent intelligence informs us that 2,500 negroes are collected there;

they have introduced the democratic institutions of America into the

country of their forefathers; and Liberia has a representative system

of government, negro jurymen, negro magistrates, and negro priests;

churches have been built, newspapers established, and, by a singular

change in the vicissitudes of the world, white men are prohibited from

sojourning within the settlement. *u

[ This society assumed the name of “The Society for the Colonization of

the Blacks.” See its annual reports; and more particularly the

fifteenth. See also the pamphlet, to which allusion has already been

made, entitled “Letters on the Colonization Society, and on its

probable Results,” by Mr. Carey, Philadelphia, 1833.]

[ This last regulation was laid down by the founders of the settlement;

they apprehended that a state of things might arise in Africa similar

to that which exists on the frontiers of the United States, and that if

the negroes, like the Indians, were brought into collision with a

people more enlightened than themselves, they would be destroyed before

they could be civilized.]

This is indeed a strange caprice of fortune. Two hundred years have now

elapsed since the inhabitants of Europe undertook to tear the negro

from his family and his home, in order to transport him to the shores

of North America; at the present day, the European settlers are engaged

in sending back the descendants of those very negroes to the Continent

from which they were originally taken; and the barbarous Africans have

been brought into contact with civilization in the midst of bondage,

and have become acquainted with free political institutions in slavery.

Up to the present time Africa has been closed against the arts and

sciences of the whites; but the inventions of Europe will perhaps

penetrate into those regions, now that they are introduced by Africans

themselves. The settlement of Liberia is founded upon a lofty and a

most fruitful idea; but whatever may be its results with regard to the

Continent of Africa, it can afford no remedy to the New World.

In twelve years the Colonization Society has transported 2,500 negroes

to Africa; in the same space of time about 700,000 blacks were born in

the United States. If the colony of Liberia were so situated as to be

able to receive thousands of new inhabitants every year, and if the

negroes were in a state to be sent thither with advantage; if the Union

were to supply the society with annual subsidies, *v and to transport

the negroes to Africa in the vessels of the State, it would still be

unable to counterpoise the natural increase of population amongst the

blacks; and as it could not remove as many men in a year as are born

upon its territory within the same space of time, it would fail in

suspending the growth of the evil which is daily increasing in the

States. *w The negro race will never leave those shores of the American

continent, to which it was brought by the passions and the vices of

Europeans; and it will not disappear from the New World as long as it

continues to exist. The inhabitants of the United States may retard the

calamities which they apprehend, but they cannot now destroy their

efficient cause.

[ Nor would these be the only difficulties attendant upon the

undertaking; if the Union undertook to buy up the negroes now in

America, in order to transport them to Africa, the price of slaves,

increasing with their scarcity, would soon become enormous; and the

States of the North would never consent to expend such great sums for a

purpose which would procure such small advantages to themselves. If the

Union took possession of the slaves in the Southern States by force, or

at a rate determined by law, an insurmountable resistance would arise

in that part of the country. Both alternatives are equally impossible.]

[ In 1830 there were in the United States 2,010,327 slaves and 319,439

free blacks, in all 2,329,766 negroes: which formed about one-fifth of

the total population of the United States at that time.]

I am obliged to confess that I do not regard the abolition of slavery

as a means of warding off the struggle of the two races in the United

States. The negroes may long remain slaves without complaining; but if

they are once raised to the level of free men, they will soon revolt at

being deprived of all their civil rights; and as they cannot become the

equals of the whites, they will speedily declare themselves as enemies.

In the North everything contributed to facilitate the emancipation of

the slaves; and slavery was abolished, without placing the free negroes

in a position which could become formidable, since their number was too

small for them ever to claim the exercise of their rights. But such is

not the case in the South. The question of slavery was a question of

commerce and manufacture for the slave-owners in the North; for those

of the South, it is a question of life and death. God forbid that I

should seek to justify the principle of negro slavery, as has been done

by some American writers! But I only observe that all the countries

which formerly adopted that execrable principle are not equally able to

abandon it at the present time.

When I contemplate the condition of the South, I can only discover two

alternatives which may be adopted by the white inhabitants of those

States; viz., either to emancipate the negroes, and to intermingle with

them; or, remaining isolated from them, to keep them in a state of

slavery as long as possible. All intermediate measures seem to me

likely to terminate, and that shortly, in the most horrible of civil

wars, and perhaps in the extirpation of one or other of the two races.

Such is the view which the Americans of the South take of the question,

and they act consistently with it. As they are determined not to mingle

with the negroes, they refuse to emancipate them.

Not that the inhabitants of the South regard slavery as necessary to

the wealth of the planter, for on this point many of them agree with

their Northern countrymen in freely admitting that slavery is

prejudicial to their interest; but they are convinced that, however

prejudicial it may be, they hold their lives upon no other tenure. The

instruction which is now diffused in the South has convinced the

inhabitants that slavery is injurious to the slave-owner, but it has

also shown them, more clearly than before, that no means exist of

getting rid of its bad consequences. Hence arises a singular contrast;

the more the utility of slavery is contested, the more firmly is it

established in the laws; and whilst the principle of servitude is

gradually abolished in the North, that self-same principle gives rise

to more and more rigorous consequences in the South.

The legislation of the Southern States with regard to slaves, presents

at the present day such unparalleled atrocities as suffice to show how

radically the laws of humanity have been perverted, and to betray the

desperate position of the community in which that legislation has been

promulgated. The Americans of this portion of the Union have not,

indeed, augmented the hardships of slavery; they have, on the contrary,

bettered the physical condition of the slaves. The only means by which

the ancients maintained slavery were fetters and death; the Americans

of the South of the Union have discovered more intellectual securities

for the duration of their power. They have employed their despotism and

their violence against the human mind. In antiquity, precautions were

taken to prevent the slave from breaking his chains; at the present day

measures are adopted to deprive him even of the desire of freedom. The

ancients kept the bodies of their slaves in bondage, but they placed no

restraint upon the mind and no check upon education; and they acted

consistently with their established principle, since a natural

termination of slavery then existed, and one day or other the slave

might be set free, and become the equal of his master. But the

Americans of the South, who do not admit that the negroes can ever be

commingled with themselves, have forbidden them to be taught to read or

to write, under severe penalties; and as they will not raise them to

their own level, they sink them as nearly as possible to that of the

brutes.

The hope of liberty had always been allowed to the slave to cheer the

hardships of his condition. But the Americans of the South are well

aware that emancipation cannot but be dangerous, when the freed man can

never be assimilated to his former master. To give a man his freedom,

and to leave him in wretchedness and ignominy, is nothing less than to

prepare a future chief for a revolt of the slaves. Moreover, it has

long been remarked that the presence of a free negro vaguely agitates

the minds of his less fortunate brethren, and conveys to them a dim

notion of their rights. The Americans of the South have consequently

taken measures to prevent slave-owners from emancipating their slaves

in most cases; not indeed by a positive prohibition, but by subjecting

that step to various forms which it is difficult to comply with. I

happened to meet with an old man, in the South of the Union, who had

lived in illicit intercourse with one of his negresses, and had had

several children by her, who were born the slaves of their father. He

had indeed frequently thought of bequeathing to them at least their

liberty; but years had elapsed without his being able to surmount the

legal obstacles to their emancipation, and in the mean while his old

age was come, and he was about to die. He pictured to himself his sons

dragged from market to market, and passing from the authority of a

parent to the rod of the stranger, until these horrid anticipations

worked his expiring imagination into frenzy. When I saw him he was a

prey to all the anguish of despair, and he made me feel how awful is

the retribution of nature upon those who have broken her laws.

These evils are unquestionably great; but they are the necessary and

foreseen consequence of the very principle of modern slavery. When the

Europeans chose their slaves from a race differing from their own,

which many of them considered as inferior to the other races of

mankind, and which they all repelled with horror from any notion of

intimate connection, they must have believed that slavery would last

forever; since there is no intermediate state which can be durable

between the excessive inequality produced by servitude and the complete

equality which originates in independence. The Europeans did

imperfectly feel this truth, but without acknowledging it even to

themselves. Whenever they have had to do with negroes, their conduct

has either been dictated by their interest and their pride, or by their

compassion. They first violated every right of humanity by their

treatment of the negro and they afterwards informed him that those

rights were precious and inviolable. They affected to open their ranks

to the slaves, but the negroes who attempted to penetrate into the

community were driven back with scorn; and they have incautiously and

involuntarily been led to admit of freedom instead of slavery, without

having the courage to be wholly iniquitous, or wholly just.

If it be impossible to anticipate a period at which the Americans of

the South will mingle their blood with that of the negroes, can they

allow their slaves to become free without compromising their own

security? And if they are obliged to keep that race in bondage in order

to save their own families, may they not be excused for availing

themselves of the means best adapted to that end? The events which are

taking place in the Southern States of the Union appear to me to be at

once the most horrible and the most natural results of slavery. When I

see the order of nature overthrown, and when I hear the cry of humanity

in its vain struggle against the laws, my indignation does not light

upon the men of our own time who are the instruments of these outrages;

but I reserve my execration for those who, after a thousand years of

freedom, brought back slavery into the world once more.

Whatever may be the efforts of the Americans of the South to maintain

slavery, they will not always succeed. Slavery, which is now confined

to a single tract of the civilized earth, which is attacked by

Christianity as unjust, and by political economy as prejudicial; and

which is now contrasted with democratic liberties and the information

of our age, cannot survive. By the choice of the master, or by the will

of the slave, it will cease; and in either case great calamities may be

expected to ensue. If liberty be refused to the negroes of the South,

they will in the end seize it for themselves by force; if it be given,

they will abuse it ere long. *x

[ [This chapter is no longer applicable to the condition of the negro

race in the United States, since the abolition of slavery was the

result, though not the object, of the great Civil War, and the negroes

have been raised to the condition not only of freedmen, but of

citizens; and in some States they exercise a preponderating political

power by reason of their numerical majority. Thus, in South Carolina

there were in 1870, 289,667 whites and 415,814 blacks. But the

emancipation of the slaves has not solved the problem, how two races so

different and so hostile are to live together in peace in one country

on equal terms. That problem is as difficult, perhaps more difficult

than ever; and to this difficulty the author’s remarks are still

perfectly applicable.]]

Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part VI

What Are The Chances In Favor Of The Duration Of The American Union,

And What Dangers Threaten It *y

[ [This chapter is one of the most curious and interesting portions of

the work, because it embraces almost all the constitutional and social

questions which were raised by the great secession of the South and

decided by the results of the Civil War. But it must be confessed that

the sagacity of the author is sometimes at fault in these speculations,

and did not save him from considerable errors, which the course of

events has since made apparent. He held that “the legislators of the

Constitution of 1789 were not appointed to constitute the government of

a single people, but to regulate the association of several States;

that the Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the States, and

in uniting together they have not forfeited their nationality, nor have

they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people.” Whence

he inferred that “if one of the States chose to withdraw its name from

the contract, it would be difficult to disprove its right of doing so;

and that the Federal Government would have no means of maintaining its

claims directly, either by force or by right.” This is the Southern

theory of the Constitution, and the whole case of the South in favor of

secession. To many Europeans, and to some American (Northern) jurists,

this view appeared to be sound; but it was vigorously resisted by the

North, and crushed by force of arms.

The author of this book was mistaken in supposing that the “Union was a

vast body which presents no definite object to patriotic feeling.” When

the day of trial came, millions of men were ready to lay down their

lives for it. He was also mistaken in supposing that the Federal

Executive is so weak that it requires the free consent of the governed

to enable it to subsist, and that it would be defeated in a struggle to

maintain the Union against one or more separate States. In 1861 nine

States, with a population of 8,753,000, seceded, and maintained for

four years a resolute but unequal contest for independence, but they

were defeated.

Lastly, the author was mistaken in supposing that a community of

interests would always prevail between North and South sufficiently

powerful to bind them together. He overlooked the influence which the

question of slavery must have on the Union the moment that the majority

of the people of the North declared against it. In 1831, when the

author visited America, the anti-slavery agitation had scarcely begun;

and the fact of Southern slavery was accepted by men of all parties,

even in the States where there were no slaves: and that was

unquestionably the view taken by all the States and by all American

statesmen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, in 1789. But

in the course of thirty years a great change took place, and the North

refused to perpetuate what had become the “peculiar institution” of the

South, especially as it gave the South a species of aristocratic

preponderance. The result was the ratification, in December, 1865, of

the celebrated 13th article or amendment of the Constitution, which

declared that “neither slavery nor involuntary servitude—except as a

punishment for crime—shall exist within the United States.” To which

was soon afterwards added the 15th article, “The right of citizens to

vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, or by any

State, on account of race, color, or previous servitude.” The

emancipation of several millions of negro slaves without compensation,

and the transfer to them of political preponderance in the States in

which they outnumber the white population, were acts of the North

totally opposed to the interests of the South, and which could only

have been carried into effect by conquest.—Translator’s Note.]]

Reason for which the preponderating force lies in the States rather

than in the Union—The Union will only last as long as all the States

choose to belong to it—Causes which tend to keep them united—Utility of

the Union to resist foreign enemies, and to prevent the existence of

foreigners in America—No natural barriers between the several States—No

conflicting interests to divide them—Reciprocal interests of the

Northern, Southern, and Western States—Intellectual ties of

union—Uniformity of opinions—Dangers of the Union resulting from the

different characters and the passions of its citizens—Character of the

citizens in the South and in the North—The rapid growth of the Union

one of its greatest dangers—Progress of the population to the

Northwest—Power gravitates in the same direction—Passions originating

from sudden turns of fortune—Whether the existing Government of the

Union tends to gain strength, or to lose it—Various signs of its

decrease—Internal improvements—Waste lands—Indians—The Bank—The

Tariff—General Jackson.

The maintenance of the existing institutions of the several States

depends in some measure upon the maintenance of the Union itself. It is

therefore important in the first instance to inquire into the probable

fate of the Union. One point may indeed be assumed at once: if the

present confederation were dissolved, it appears to me to be

incontestable that the States of which it is now composed would not

return to their original isolated condition, but that several unions

would then be formed in the place of one. It is not my intention to

inquire into the principles upon which these new unions would probably

be established, but merely to show what the causes are which may effect

the dismemberment of the existing confederation.

With this object I shall be obliged to retrace some of the steps which

I have already taken, and to revert to topics which I have before

discussed. I am aware that the reader may accuse me of repetition, but

the importance of the matter which still remains to be treated is my

excuse; I had rather say too much, than say too little to be thoroughly

understood, and I prefer injuring the author to slighting the subject.

The legislators who formed the Constitution of 1789 endeavored to

confer a distinct and preponderating authority upon the federal power.

But they were confined by the conditions of the task which they had

undertaken to perform. They were not appointed to constitute the

government of a single people, but to regulate the association of

several States; and, whatever their inclinations might be, they could

not but divide the exercise of sovereignty in the end.

In order to understand the consequences of this division, it is

necessary to make a short distinction between the affairs of the

Government. There are some objects which are national by their very

nature, that is to say, which affect the nation as a body, and can only

be intrusted to the man or the assembly of men who most completely

represent the entire nation. Amongst these may be reckoned war and

diplomacy. There are other objects which are provincial by their very

nature, that is to say, which only affect certain localities, and which

can only be properly treated in that locality. Such, for instance, is

the budget of a municipality. Lastly, there are certain objects of a

mixed nature, which are national inasmuch as they affect all the

citizens who compose the nation, and which are provincial inasmuch as

it is not necessary that the nation itself should provide for them all.

Such are the rights which regulate the civil and political condition of

the citizens. No society can exist without civil and political rights.

These rights therefore interest all the citizens alike; but it is not

always necessary to the existence and the prosperity of the nation that

these rights should be uniform, nor, consequently, that they should be

regulated by the central authority.

There are, then, two distinct categories of objects which are submitted

to the direction of the sovereign power; and these categories occur in

all well-constituted communities, whatever the basis of the political

constitution may otherwise be. Between these two extremes the objects

which I have termed mixed may be considered to lie. As these objects

are neither exclusively national nor entirely provincial, they may be

obtained by a national or by a provincial government, according to the

agreement of the contracting parties, without in any way impairing the

contract of association.

The sovereign power is usually formed by the union of separate

individuals, who compose a people; and individual powers or collective

forces, each representing a very small portion of the sovereign

authority, are the sole elements which are subjected to the general

Government of their choice. In this case the general Government is more

naturally called upon to regulate, not only those affairs which are of

essential national importance, but those which are of a more local

interest; and the local governments are reduced to that small share of

sovereign authority which is indispensable to their prosperity.

But sometimes the sovereign authority is composed of preorganized

political bodies, by virtue of circumstances anterior to their union;

and in this case the provincial governments assume the control, not

only of those affairs which more peculiarly belong to their province,

but of all, or of a part of the mixed affairs to which allusion has

been made. For the confederate nations which were independent sovereign

States before their union, and which still represent a very

considerable share of the sovereign power, have only consented to cede

to the general Government the exercise of those rights which are

indispensable to the Union.

When the national Government, independently of the prerogatives

inherent in its nature, is invested with the right of regulating the

affairs which relate partly to the general and partly to the local

interests, it possesses a preponderating influence. Not only are its

own rights extensive, but all the rights which it does not possess

exist by its sufferance, and it may be apprehended that the provincial

governments may be deprived of their natural and necessary prerogatives

by its influence.

When, on the other hand, the provincial governments are invested with

the power of regulating those same affairs of mixed interest, an

opposite tendency prevails in society. The preponderating force resides

in the province, not in the nation; and it may be apprehended that the

national Government may in the end be stripped of the privileges which

are necessary to its existence.

Independent nations have therefore a natural tendency to

centralization, and confederations to dismemberment.

It now only remains for us to apply these general principles to the

American Union. The several States were necessarily possessed of the

right of regulating all exclusively provincial affairs. Moreover these

same States retained the rights of determining the civil and political

competency of the citizens, or regulating the reciprocal relations of

the members of the community, and of dispensing justice; rights which

are of a general nature, but which do not necessarily appertain to the

national Government. We have shown that the Government of the Union is

invested with the power of acting in the name of the whole nation in

those cases in which the nation has to appear as a single and undivided

power; as, for instance, in foreign relations, and in offering a common

resistance to a common enemy; in short, in conducting those affairs

which I have styled exclusively national.

In this division of the rights of sovereignty, the share of the Union

seems at first sight to be more considerable than that of the States;

but a more attentive investigation shows it to be less so. The

undertakings of the Government of the Union are more vast, but their

influence is more rarely felt. Those of the provincial governments are

comparatively small, but they are incessant, and they serve to keep

alive the authority which they represent. The Government of the Union

watches the general interests of the country; but the general interests

of a people have a very questionable influence upon individual

happiness, whilst provincial interests produce a most immediate effect

upon the welfare of the inhabitants. The Union secures the independence

and the greatness of the nation, which do not immediately affect

private citizens; but the several States maintain the liberty, regulate

the rights, protect the fortune, and secure the life and the whole

future prosperity of every citizen.

The Federal Government is very far removed from its subjects, whilst

the provincial governments are within the reach of them all, and are

ready to attend to the smallest appeal. The central Government has upon

its side the passions of a few superior men who aspire to conduct it;

but upon the side of the provincial governments are the interests of

all those second-rate individuals who can only hope to obtain power

within their own State, and who nevertheless exercise the largest share

of authority over the people because they are placed nearest to its

level. The Americans have therefore much more to hope and to fear from

the States than from the Union; and, in conformity with the natural

tendency of the human mind, they are more likely to attach themselves

to the former than to the latter. In this respect their habits and

feelings harmonize with their interests.

When a compact nation divides its sovereignty, and adopts a confederate

form of government, the traditions, the customs, and the manners of the

people are for a long time at variance with their legislation; and the

former tend to give a degree of influence to the central government

which the latter forbids. When a number of confederate states unite to

form a single nation, the same causes operate in an opposite direction.

I have no doubt that if France were to become a confederate republic

like that of the United States, the government would at first display

more energy than that of the Union; and if the Union were to alter its

constitution to a monarchy like that of France, I think that the

American Government would be a long time in acquiring the force which

now rules the latter nation. When the national existence of the

Anglo-Americans began, their provincial existence was already of long

standing; necessary relations were established between the townships

and the individual citizens of the same States; and they were

accustomed to consider some objects as common to them all, and to

conduct other affairs as exclusively relating to their own special

interests.

The Union is a vast body which presents no definite object to patriotic

feeling. The forms and limits of the State are distinct and

circumscribed; since it represents a certain number of objects which

are familiar to the citizens and beloved by all. It is identified with

the very soil, with the right of property and the domestic affections,

with the recollections of the past, the labors of the present, and the

hopes of the future. Patriotism, then, which is frequently a mere

extension of individual egotism, is still directed to the State, and is

not excited by the Union. Thus the tendency of the interests, the

habits, and the feelings of the people is to centre political activity

in the States, in preference to the Union.

It is easy to estimate the different forces of the two governments, by

remarking the manner in which they fulfil their respective functions.

Whenever the government of a State has occasion to address an

individual or an assembly of individuals, its language is clear and

imperative; and such is also the tone of the Federal Government in its

intercourse with individuals, but no sooner has it anything to do with

a State than it begins to parley, to explain its motives and to justify

its conduct, to argue, to advise, and, in short, anything but to

command. If doubts are raised as to the limits of the constitutional

powers of each government, the provincial government prefers its claim

with boldness, and takes prompt and energetic steps to support it. In

the mean while the Government of the Union reasons; it appeals to the

interests, to the good sense, to the glory of the nation; it

temporizes, it negotiates, and does not consent to act until it is

reduced to the last extremity. At first sight it might readily be

imagined that it is the provincial government which is armed with the

authority of the nation, and that Congress represents a single State.

The Federal Government is, therefore, notwithstanding the precautions

of those who founded it, naturally so weak that it more peculiarly

requires the free consent of the governed to enable it to subsist. It

is easy to perceive that its object is to enable the States to realize

with facility their determination of remaining united; and, as long as

this preliminary condition exists, its authority is great, temperate,

and effective. The Constitution fits the Government to control

individuals, and easily to surmount such obstacles as they may be

inclined to offer; but it was by no means established with a view to

the possible separation of one or more of the States from the Union.

If the sovereignty of the Union were to engage in a struggle with that

of the States at the present day, its defeat may be confidently

predicted; and it is not probable that such a struggle would be

seriously undertaken. As often as a steady resistance is offered to the

Federal Government it will be found to yield. Experience has hitherto

shown that whenever a State has demanded anything with perseverance and

resolution, it has invariably succeeded; and that if a separate

government has distinctly refused to act, it was left to do as it

thought fit. *z

[ See the conduct of the Northern States in the war of 1812. “During

that war,” says Jefferson in a letter to General Lafayette, “four of

the Eastern States were only attached to the Union, like so many

inanimate bodies to living men.”]

But even if the Government of the Union had any strength inherent in

itself, the physical situation of the country would render the exercise

of that strength very difficult. *a The United States cover an immense

territory; they are separated from each other by great distances; and

the population is disseminated over the surface of a country which is

still half a wilderness. If the Union were to undertake to enforce the

allegiance of the confederate States by military means, it would be in

a position very analogous to that of England at the time of the War of

Independence.

[ The profound peace of the Union affords no pretext for a standing

army; and without a standing army a government is not prepared to

profit by a favorable opportunity to conquer resistance, and take the

sovereign power by surprise. [This note, and the paragraph in the text

which precedes, have been shown by the results of the Civil War to be a

misconception of the writer.]]

However strong a government may be, it cannot easily escape from the

consequences of a principle which it has once admitted as the

foundation of its constitution. The Union was formed by the voluntary

agreement of the States; and, in uniting together, they have not

forfeited their nationality, nor have they been reduced to the

condition of one and the same people. If one of the States chose to

withdraw its name from the contract, it would be difficult to disprove

its right of doing so; and the Federal Government would have no means

of maintaining its claims directly, either by force or by right. In

order to enable the Federal Government easily to conquer the resistance

which may be offered to it by any one of its subjects, it would be

necessary that one or more of them should be specially interested in

the existence of the Union, as has frequently been the case in the

history of confederations.

If it be supposed that amongst the States which are united by the

federal tie there are some which exclusively enjoy the principal

advantages of union, or whose prosperity depends on the duration of

that union, it is unquestionable that they will always be ready to

support the central Government in enforcing the obedience of the

others. But the Government would then be exerting a force not derived

from itself, but from a principle contrary to its nature. States form

confederations in order to derive equal advantages from their union;

and in the case just alluded to, the Federal Government would derive

its power from the unequal distribution of those benefits amongst the

States.

If one of the confederate States have acquired a preponderance

sufficiently great to enable it to take exclusive possession of the

central authority, it will consider the other States as subject

provinces, and it will cause its own supremacy to be respected under

the borrowed name of the sovereignty of the Union. Great things may

then be done in the name of the Federal Government, but in reality that

Government will have ceased to exist. *b In both these cases, the power

which acts in the name of the confederation becomes stronger the more

it abandons the natural state and the acknowledged principles of

confederations.

[ Thus the province of Holland in the republic of the Low Countries,

and the Emperor in the Germanic Confederation, have sometimes put

themselves in the place of the union, and have employed the federal

authority to their own advantage.]

In America the existing Union is advantageous to all the States, but it

is not indispensable to any one of them. Several of them might break

the federal tie without compromising the welfare of the others,

although their own prosperity would be lessened. As the existence and

the happiness of none of the States are wholly dependent on the present

Constitution, they would none of them be disposed to make great

personal sacrifices to maintain it. On the other hand, there is no

State which seems hitherto to have its ambition much interested in the

maintenance of the existing Union. They certainly do not all exercise

the same influence in the federal councils, but no one of them can hope

to domineer over the rest, or to treat them as its inferiors or as its

subjects.

It appears to me unquestionable that if any portion of the Union

seriously desired to separate itself from the other States, they would

not be able, nor indeed would they attempt, to prevent it; and that the

present Union will only last as long as the States which compose it

choose to continue members of the confederation. If this point be

admitted, the question becomes less difficult; and our object is, not

to inquire whether the States of the existing Union are capable of

separating, but whether they will choose to remain united.

Amongst the various reasons which tend to render the existing Union

useful to the Americans, two principal causes are peculiarly evident to

the observer. Although the Americans are, as it were, alone upon their

continent, their commerce makes them the neighbors of all the nations

with which they trade. Notwithstanding their apparent isolation, the

Americans require a certain degree of strength, which they cannot

retain otherwise than by remaining united to each other. If the States

were to split, they would not only diminish the strength which they are

now able to display towards foreign nations, but they would soon create

foreign powers upon their own territory. A system of inland

custom-houses would then be established; the valleys would be divided

by imaginary boundary lines; the courses of the rivers would be

confined by territorial distinctions; and a multitude of hindrances

would prevent the Americans from exploring the whole of that vast

continent which Providence has allotted to them for a dominion. At

present they have no invasion to fear, and consequently no standing

armies to maintain, no taxes to levy. If the Union were dissolved, all

these burdensome measures might ere long be required. The Americans are

then very powerfully interested in the maintenance of their Union. On

the other hand, it is almost impossible to discover any sort of

material interest which might at present tempt a portion of the Union

to separate from the other States.

When we cast our eyes upon the map of the United States, we perceive

the chain of the Alleghany Mountains, running from the northeast to the

southwest, and crossing nearly one thousand miles of country; and we

are led to imagine that the design of Providence was to raise between

the valley of the Mississippi and the coast of the Atlantic Ocean one

of those natural barriers which break the mutual intercourse of men,

and form the necessary limits of different States. But the average

height of the Alleghanies does not exceed 2,500 feet; their greatest

elevation is not above 4,000 feet; their rounded summits, and the

spacious valleys which they conceal within their passes, are of easy

access from several sides. Besides which, the principal rivers which

fall into the Atlantic Ocean—the Hudson, the Susquehanna, and the

Potomac—take their rise beyond the Alleghanies, in an open district,

which borders upon the valley of the Mississippi. These streams quit

this tract of country, make their way through the barrier which would

seem to turn them westward, and as they wind through the mountains they

open an easy and natural passage to man. No natural barrier exists in

the regions which are now inhabited by the Anglo-Americans; the

Alleghanies are so far from serving as a boundary to separate nations,

that they do not even serve as a frontier to the States. New York,

Pennsylvania, and Virginia comprise them within their borders, and they

extend as much to the west as to the east of the line. The territory

now occupied by the twenty-four States of the Union, and the three

great districts which have not yet acquired the rank of States,

although they already contain inhabitants, covers a surface of

1,002,600 square miles, *c which is about equal to five times the

extent of France. Within these limits the qualities of the soil, the

temperature, and the produce of the country, are extremely various. The

vast extent of territory occupied by the Anglo-American republics has

given rise to doubts as to the maintenance of their Union. Here a

distinction must be made; contrary interests sometimes arise in the

different provinces of a vast empire, which often terminate in open

dissensions; and the extent of the country is then most prejudicial to

the power of the State. But if the inhabitants of these vast regions

are not divided by contrary interests, the extent of the territory may

be favorable to their prosperity; for the unity of the government

promotes the interchange of the different productions of the soil, and

increases their value by facilitating their consumption.

[ See “Darby’s View of the United States,” p. 435. [In 1890 the number

of States and Territories had increased to 51, the population to

62,831,900, and the area of the States, 3,602,990 square miles. This

does not include the Philippine Islands, Hawaii, or Porto Rico. A

conservative estimate of the population of the Philippine Islands is

8,000,000; that of Hawaii, by the census of 1897, was given at 109,020;

and the present estimated population of Porto Rico is 900,000. The area

of the Philippine Islands is about 120,000 square miles, that of Hawaii

is 6,740 square miles, and the area of Porto Rico is about 3,600 square

miles.]]

It is indeed easy to discover different interests in the different

parts of the Union, but I am unacquainted with any which are hostile to

each other. The Southern States are almost exclusively agricultural.

The Northern States are more peculiarly commercial and manufacturing.

The States of the West are at the same time agricultural and

manufacturing. In the South the crops consist of tobacco, of rice, of

cotton, and of sugar; in the North and the West, of wheat and maize.

These are different sources of wealth; but union is the means by which

these sources are opened to all, and rendered equally advantageous to

the several districts.

The North, which ships the produce of the Anglo-Americans to all parts

of the world, and brings back the produce of the globe to the Union, is

evidently interested in maintaining the confederation in its present

condition, in order that the number of American producers and consumers

may remain as large as possible. The North is the most natural agent of

communication between the South and the West of the Union on the one

hand, and the rest of the world upon the other; the North is therefore

interested in the union and prosperity of the South and the West, in

order that they may continue to furnish raw materials for its

manufactures, and cargoes for its shipping.

The South and the West, on their side, are still more directly

interested in the preservation of the Union, and the prosperity of the

North. The produce of the South is, for the most part, exported beyond

seas; the South and the West consequently stand in need of the

commercial resources of the North. They are likewise interested in the

maintenance of a powerful fleet by the Union, to protect them

efficaciously. The South and the West have no vessels, but they cannot

refuse a willing subsidy to defray the expenses of the navy; for if the

fleets of Europe were to blockade the ports of the South and the delta

of the Mississippi, what would become of the rice of the Carolinas, the

tobacco of Virginia, and the sugar and cotton which grow in the valley

of the Mississippi? Every portion of the federal budget does therefore

contribute to the maintenance of material interests which are common to

all the confederate States.

Independently of this commercial utility, the South and the West of the

Union derive great political advantages from their connection with the

North. The South contains an enormous slave population; a population

which is already alarming, and still more formidable for the future.

The States of the West lie in the remotest parts of a single valley;

and all the rivers which intersect their territory rise in the Rocky

Mountains or in the Alleghanies, and fall into the Mississippi, which

bears them onwards to the Gulf of Mexico. The Western States are

consequently entirely cut off, by their position, from the traditions

of Europe and the civilization of the Old World. The inhabitants of the

South, then, are induced to support the Union in order to avail

themselves of its protection against the blacks; and the inhabitants of

the West in order not to be excluded from a free communication with the

rest of the globe, and shut up in the wilds of central America. The

North cannot but desire the maintenance of the Union, in order to

remain, as it now is, the connecting link between that vast body and

the other parts of the world.

The temporal interests of all the several parts of the Union are, then,

intimately connected; and the same assertion holds true respecting

those opinions and sentiments which may be termed the immaterial

interests of men.

Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part VII

The inhabitants of the United States talk a great deal of their

attachment to their country; but I confess that I do not rely upon that

calculating patriotism which is founded upon interest, and which a

change in the interests at stake may obliterate. Nor do I attach much

importance to the language of the Americans, when they manifest, in

their daily conversations, the intention of maintaining the federal

system adopted by their forefathers. A government retains its sway over

a great number of citizens, far less by the voluntary and rational

consent of the multitude, than by that instinctive, and to a certain

extent involuntary agreement, which results from similarity of feelings

and resemblances of opinion. I will never admit that men constitute a

social body, simply because they obey the same head and the same laws.

Society can only exist when a great number of men consider a great

number of things in the same point of view; when they hold the same

opinions upon many subjects, and when the same occurrences suggest the

same thoughts and impressions to their minds.

The observer who examines the present condition of the United States

upon this principle, will readily discover, that although the citizens

are divided into twenty-four distinct sovereignties, they nevertheless

constitute a single people; and he may perhaps be led to think that the

state of the Anglo-American Union is more truly a state of society than

that of certain nations of Europe which live under the same legislation

and the same prince.

Although the Anglo-Americans have several religious sects, they all

regard religion in the same manner. They are not always agreed upon the

measures which are most conducive to good government, and they vary

upon some of the forms of government which it is expedient to adopt;

but they are unanimous upon the general principles which ought to rule

human society. From Maine to the Floridas, and from the Missouri to the

Atlantic Ocean, the people is held to be the legitimate source of all

power. The same notions are entertained respecting liberty and

equality, the liberty of the press, the right of association, the jury,

and the responsibility of the agents of Government.

If we turn from their political and religious opinions to the moral and

philosophical principles which regulate the daily actions of life and

govern their conduct, we shall still find the same uniformity. The

Anglo-Americans *d acknowledge the absolute moral authority of the

reason of the community, as they acknowledge the political authority of

the mass of citizens; and they hold that public opinion is the surest

arbiter of what is lawful or forbidden, true or false. The majority of

them believe that a man will be led to do what is just and good by

following his own interest rightly understood. They hold that every man

is born in possession of the right of self-government, and that no one

has the right of constraining his fellow-creatures to be happy. They

have all a lively faith in the perfectibility of man; they are of

opinion that the effects of the diffusion of knowledge must necessarily

be advantageous, and the consequences of ignorance fatal; they all

consider society as a body in a state of improvement, humanity as a

changing scene, in which nothing is, or ought to be, permanent; and

they admit that what appears to them to be good to-day may be

superseded by something better-to-morrow. I do not give all these

opinions as true, but I quote them as characteristic of the Americans.

[ It is scarcely necessary for me to observe that by the expression

Anglo-Americans, I only mean to designate the great majority of the

nation; for a certain number of isolated individuals are of course to

be met with holding very different opinions.]

The Anglo-Americans are not only united together by these common

opinions, but they are separated from all other nations by a common

feeling of pride. For the last fifty years no pains have been spared to

convince the inhabitants of the United States that they constitute the

only religious, enlightened, and free people. They perceive that, for

the present, their own democratic institutions succeed, whilst those of

other countries fail; hence they conceive an overweening opinion of

their superiority, and they are not very remote from believing

themselves to belong to a distinct race of mankind.

The dangers which threaten the American Union do not originate in the

diversity of interests or of opinions, but in the various characters

and passions of the Americans. The men who inhabit the vast territory

of the United States are almost all the issue of a common stock; but

the effects of the climate, and more especially of slavery, have

gradually introduced very striking differences between the British

settler of the Southern States and the British settler of the North. In

Europe it is generally believed that slavery has rendered the interests

of one part of the Union contrary to those of another part; but I by no

means remarked this to be the case: slavery has not created interests

in the South contrary to those of the North, but it has modified the

character and changed the habits of the natives of the South.

I have already explained the influence which slavery has exercised upon

the commercial ability of the Americans in the South; and this same

influence equally extends to their manners. The slave is a servant who

never remonstrates, and who submits to everything without complaint. He

may sometimes assassinate, but he never withstands, his master. In the

South there are no families so poor as not to have slaves. The citizen

of the Southern States of the Union is invested with a sort of domestic

dictatorship, from his earliest years; the first notion he acquires in

life is that he is born to command, and the first habit which he

contracts is that of being obeyed without resistance. His education

tends, then, to give him the character of a supercilious and a hasty

man; irascible, violent, and ardent in his desires, impatient of

obstacles, but easily discouraged if he cannot succeed upon his first

attempt.

The American of the Northern States is surrounded by no slaves in his

childhood; he is even unattended by free servants, and is usually

obliged to provide for his own wants. No sooner does he enter the world

than the idea of necessity assails him on every side: he soon learns to

know exactly the natural limit of his authority; he never expects to

subdue those who withstand him, by force; and he knows that the surest

means of obtaining the support of his fellow-creatures, is to win their

favor. He therefore becomes patient, reflecting, tolerant, slow to act,

and persevering in his designs.

In the Southern States the more immediate wants of life are always

supplied; the inhabitants of those parts are not busied in the material

cares of life, which are always provided for by others; and their

imagination is diverted to more captivating and less definite objects.

The American of the South is fond of grandeur, luxury, and renown, of

gayety, of pleasure, and above all of idleness; nothing obliges him to

exert himself in order to subsist; and as he has no necessary

occupations, he gives way to indolence, and does not even attempt what

would be useful.

But the equality of fortunes, and the absence of slavery in the North,

plunge the inhabitants in those same cares of daily life which are

disdained by the white population of the South. They are taught from

infancy to combat want, and to place comfort above all the pleasures of

the intellect or the heart. The imagination is extinguished by the

trivial details of life, and the ideas become less numerous and less

general, but far more practical and more precise. As prosperity is the

sole aim of exertion, it is excellently well attained; nature and

mankind are turned to the best pecuniary advantage, and society is

dexterously made to contribute to the welfare of each of its members,

whilst individual egotism is the source of general happiness.

The citizen of the North has not only experience, but knowledge:

nevertheless he sets but little value upon the pleasures of knowledge;

he esteems it as the means of attaining a certain end, and he is only

anxious to seize its more lucrative applications. The citizen of the

South is more given to act upon impulse; he is more clever, more frank,

more generous, more intellectual, and more brilliant. The former, with

a greater degree of activity, of common-sense, of information, and of

general aptitude, has the characteristic good and evil qualities of the

middle classes. The latter has the tastes, the prejudices, the

weaknesses, and the magnanimity of all aristocracies. If two men are

united in society, who have the same interests, and to a certain extent

the same opinions, but different characters, different acquirements,

and a different style of civilization, it is probable that these men

will not agree. The same remark is applicable to a society of nations.

Slavery, then, does not attack the American Union directly in its

interests, but indirectly in its manners.

[ Census of 1790, 3,929,328; 1830, 12,856,165; 1860, 31,443,321; 1870,

38,555,983; 1890, 62,831,900.]

The States which gave their assent to the federal contract in 1790 were

thirteen in number; the Union now consists of thirty-four members. The

population, which amounted to nearly 4,000,000 in 1790, had more than

tripled in the space of forty years; and in 1830 it amounted to nearly

13,000,000. *e Changes of such magnitude cannot take place without some

danger.

A society of nations, as well as a society of individuals, derives its

principal chances of duration from the wisdom of its members, their

individual weakness, and their limited number. The Americans who quit

the coasts of the Atlantic Ocean to plunge into the western wilderness,

are adventurers impatient of restraint, greedy of wealth, and

frequently men expelled from the States in which they were born. When

they arrive in the deserts they are unknown to each other, and they

have neither traditions, family feeling, nor the force of example to

check their excesses. The empire of the laws is feeble amongst them;

that of morality is still more powerless. The settlers who are

constantly peopling the valley of the Mississippi are, then, in every

respect very inferior to the Americans who inhabit the older parts of

the Union. Nevertheless, they already exercise a great influence in its

councils; and they arrive at the government of the commonwealth before

they have learnt to govern themselves. *f

[ This indeed is only a temporary danger. I have no doubt that in time

society will assume as much stability and regularity in the West as it

has already done upon the coast of the Atlantic Ocean.]

The greater the individual weakness of each of the contracting parties,

the greater are the chances of the duration of the contract; for their

safety is then dependent upon their union. When, in 1790, the most

populous of the American republics did not contain 500,000 inhabitants,

*g each of them felt its own insignificance as an independent people,

and this feeling rendered compliance with the federal authority more

easy. But when one of the confederate States reckons, like the State of

New York, 2,000,000 of inhabitants, and covers an extent of territory

equal in surface to a quarter of France, *h it feels its own strength;

and although it may continue to support the Union as advantageous to

its prosperity, it no longer regards that body as necessary to its

existence, and as it continues to belong to the federal compact, it

soon aims at preponderance in the federal assemblies. The probable

unanimity of the States is diminished as their number increases. At

present the interests of the different parts of the Union are not at

variance; but who is able to foresee the multifarious changes of the

future, in a country in which towns are founded from day to day, and

States almost from year to year?

[ Pennsylvania contained 431,373 inhabitants in 1790 [and 5,258,014 in

1890.]]

[ The area of the State of New York is 49,170 square miles. [See U. S.

census report of 1890.]]

Since the first settlement of the British colonies, the number of

inhabitants has about doubled every twenty-two years. I perceive no

causes which are likely to check this progressive increase of the

Anglo-American population for the next hundred years; and before that

space of time has elapsed, I believe that the territories and

dependencies of the United States will be covered by more than

100,000,000 of inhabitants, and divided into forty States. *i I admit

that these 100,000,000 of men have no hostile interests. I suppose, on

the contrary, that they are all equally interested in the maintenance

of the Union; but I am still of opinion that where there are

100,000,000 of men, and forty distinct nations, unequally strong, the

continuance of the Federal Government can only be a fortunate accident.

[ If the population continues to double every twenty-two years, as it

has done for the last two hundred years, the number of inhabitants in

the United States in 1852 will be twenty millions; in 1874, forty-eight

millions; and in 1896, ninety-six millions. This may still be the case

even if the lands on the western slope of the Rocky Mountains should be

found to be unfit for cultivation. The territory which is already

occupied can easily contain this number of inhabitants. One hundred

millions of men disseminated over the surface of the twenty-four

States, and the three dependencies, which constitute the Union, would

only give 762 inhabitants to the square league; this would be far below

the mean population of France, which is 1,063 to the square league; or

of England, which is 1,457; and it would even be below the population

of Switzerland, for that country, notwithstanding its lakes and

mountains, contains 783 inhabitants to the square league. See “Malte

Brun,” vol. vi. p. 92.

[The actual result has fallen somewhat short of these calculations, in

spite of the vast territorial acquisitions of the United States: but in

1899 the population is probably about eighty-seven millions, including

the population of the Philippines, Hawaii, and Porto Rico.]]

Whatever faith I may have in the perfectibility of man, until human

nature is altered, and men wholly transformed, I shall refuse to

believe in the duration of a government which is called upon to hold

together forty different peoples, disseminated over a territory equal

to one-half of Europe in extent; to avoid all rivalry, ambition, and

struggles between them, and to direct their independent activity to the

accomplishment of the same designs.

But the greatest peril to which the Union is exposed by its increase

arises from the continual changes which take place in the position of

its internal strength. The distance from Lake Superior to the Gulf of

Mexico extends from the 47th to the 30th degree of latitude, a distance

of more than 1,200 miles as the bird flies. The frontier of the United

States winds along the whole of this immense line, sometimes falling

within its limits, but more frequently extending far beyond it, into

the waste. It has been calculated that the whites advance every year a

mean distance of seventeen miles along the whole of his vast boundary.

*j Obstacles, such as an unproductive district, a lake or an Indian

nation unexpectedly encountered, are sometimes met with. The advancing

column then halts for a while; its two extremities fall back upon

themselves, and as soon as they are reunited they proceed onwards. This

gradual and continuous progress of the European race towards the Rocky

Mountains has the solemnity of a providential event; it is like a

deluge of men rising unabatedly, and daily driven onwards by the hand

of God.

[ See Legislative Documents, 20th Congress, No. 117, p. 105.]

The State of Kentucky was founded in 1775, the State of Ohio only