SHEEP HUSBANDRY IN THE SOUTH. 75 



furnish such a surplus 1 Where is the present supply to be diminished, 

 or the demand increased 1 



Where agricultural competition exists, as a matter of course the pro- 

 ducer who can supjjly the market with the least expense to himself, has 

 an advantage which nothing but a disparity greatly against him in capital 

 can overcome. Large capital, satisfied with less gains than small capital, 

 will sometimes sustain competition with the latter, with the advantages of 

 the cheapness of production sotnetchat against it. But where the diifer- 

 ence in first cost is considerable, the cheaper producer can always drive 

 his rival from the market. The aggregate agricultural capital in a region 

 of given size in New-York, probably would ordinarily exceed that of an 

 equal territory in South Carolina or Georgia. But it is not so with indi- 

 vidual or personal capital. While the agricultural territory and capabilities 

 of the latter States are in a comparatively few hands, those of New- York 

 and New-England are parceled out among a multitude of small holders, 

 who must realize the first class of agricultural profits, to support them- 

 selves and their families. The advantage of capital is therefore, in reality, 

 on the side of the South. 



But independent of this consideration, I have already attempted to show 

 that the South can produce wool so much cheaper than New- York, that 

 the latter will stand no chance whatever in competing with her more 

 favored i-ival — so soon as that rival sees fit to avail herself of her advan- 

 tages. North of latitude 40° there will he hut little dis])arity in the cost of 

 producing wool ; and therefore if the South can drive New-York to relin- 

 quish the production of this staple, she can do the same with all portions 

 of the United States lying north of this parallel, unless on the shores of the 

 Pacific, where the isothermal line is at least 5° north of its course east of 

 the Missouri. I will now enter upon some specifications, and, where ne- 

 cessaiy, proofs, to sustain this proposition. 



New-England has, concededly, no advantages over New- York for the 

 cheap production of wool. Northera Pennsylvania is higher, colder, and 

 more sterile than most of southern New- York. South-eastern Pennsyl- 

 vania, and the fertile portions of New-Jersey, are the natural producers of 

 bread-stuffs for the less favored regions of those States, and of provisions 

 of all kinds for the New-York City and Philadelphia markets. The high 

 price which good lands bear in the vicinity of such markets, would prevent 

 them from competing with cheap interior lands in wool-growing. There 

 are sheep lands of good quality in western Pennsylvania ; and in the 

 southern section, the winters are perceptibly a little shorter than in New- 

 York. This will render the production of wool upon them somewhat 

 less expensive than in the latter State, but it will not reduce it low enough 

 to allow them to compete with the cheaper lands and still shorter win- 

 ters of the South. The same remarks will apply to the hilly region con 

 stituting the south-eastern portion of Ohio. 



Proceeding still farther west, we find a region extcjiding to a vast distance 

 whose topographical and geological features, flora, &c., taken in connec- 

 tion, eflbcfually distinguish it from the territory lying east of the Missis- 

 sippi and Ohio. Vast plains, ctiWcA prairies, (so named by the early French 

 settlers from the French word signifying meadow,) which can be purchased 

 of the Government in the natural state for Si 25 per acre, and which are 

 usually covered with natural grasses — would seem, if these gi^asses are 

 adapted to the summer and winter subsistence of sheep, and there are no 

 counterbalancing disadvantages, to unite facilities for the cheap production 

 of wool not poss«>ssed in any other region of our country. And such supe- 

 rioritv has actually and often been claimed for them, 



(171) 



