SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR. 
163 
landed property no value independent of the labor bestowed 
upon it. The negro is the investment rather than the land 
We must buy a mule for the negro to plow with ; we 
must buy land for the negro to put the plow into; we 
must buy a wagon for the negro to haul home his crop 
with. The mule, the land and the plow are the inci- 
dents — the negro is the essential. The value of the negro 
is instantly affected by a change in the price of cotton, 
while the value of the land which grows the cotton, is 
comparatively unaffected. It is an extraordinary anomaly 
that perishable labor should take precedence of imperish- 
able land. No one who has read our article in the March 
No. ofthis journal, will think usinclined to depreciate slave 
labor. After varied observation, we have no hesitation 
in giving it a preference over any other form of labor, as 
being most agreeable, humane, constant, economical and 
profitable. But it may be misused. We may give it a 
false position, and thereby lose much of its benefits. We 
consider the relation of labor to land at the South as an 
instance of the falsity of position. 
We have heard young men on the sea coast of Georgia 
and South Carolina, giving it as a reason for their enter- 
ing a profession that while they had a large body of land, 
they owned only twenty or thirty negroes, and it would 
be impossible to make a support with so small a force — 
observe, it was not the number of acres but the number 
of hands which constituted the deficiency. We have 
asked, how do the rest of the world manage, who have 
no negroes 7 The reply was, that “their system is dif- 
ferent from ours — that ours required a great deal of labor.” 
Precisely, and therein it is defective, and until that defect 
be cured, however high labor may be, land will continue 
to be a comparative drug in the market. The operation 
of the cause we are considering, is varied and disastrous 
as to effect upon the value of land. A lady, left a widow 
and with a large landed estate, finds the responsibilities 
of her position too onerous, and a change is made into 
stock which will pay a moderate interest, without trouble 
to her. A guardian, administrator, or trustee, having an 
estate thrown into his hands for management, and fearing 
the complicated responsibility of a plantation, in addition 
to his own private affairs, invests also, in stocks, as being 
equally safe and giving less trouble. The effect of every 
such preference upon the market price of land must be 
very great. We contend, and hope to be able to show, 
that it is possible to give land a value independent of any 
county or complicated annual labor to be bestowed upon 
it. 
4th. Our system of agriculture includes a succession of 
crops, of a most exhausting, or otherwise injurious charac- 
ter. In one respect, cotton is among the least exhausting, 
considering the amount of vegetable matter it returns 
to the soil But wherever land is hilly, the clean 
culture necessary for this plant, must necessarily induce 
the washing of the soil. The same objection with other 
injurious results, is attendant upon the cultivation of corn. 
Our farmers talk of resting their lands by sowing them 
down with small grain. The English farmer would ask, 
“If you ' 'll that rest, pray, what do you call workT’ 
The severest crop to which he submits his land, is a crop of 
small grain, always manured and never followed by ano- 
ther small grain crop until an ameliorating crop has in- 
tervened. The lands of England were once exhausted 
and comparatively valueless. It is by a system which 
annually improves them, that they have attained their 
present enormous value. The adoption of an improving 
system gives to landed property an advantage, which 
few other kinds of property possess. A share in a bank 
or Railroad, costing SlOO, may occasionally run up a 
few dollars above par, while it continues to pay the owner 
a fair dividend. Apiece of ground, originally costing 
$100 may, improved management (where it is general and 
has given to landed estate its true value,) pay annually, 
a good interest, increase in saleable value, and perhaps, 
in a few years sell for enough to buy ten of the Bank or 
Railroad shares, one of which was, originally, its equal 
in value. 
5th. Our crops are not only very exhausting, but they 
require an amount of labor not known elsewhere. Our 
farmers and planters generally hold large tracts of land. 
Much of this, as we have seen, is annually idle and un- 
productive. In the cultivation of that portion in use, we 
use less land and more labors perhaps than any other in- 
telligent agricultural population, whatever. . The average 
of labor (steady labor) on a European farm in high cul- 
ture, will, perhaps, not exceed two hands to the hundred 
acres. This will include pasture, meadow and plowed 
land, but it is all annually productive — that which is not 
plowed yielding a return, including interest and expenses 
quite equal to that which is plowed. There is no dead 
capital in the case. 
In the Northern States of this country, the average of 
labor to the number of productive acres, is perhaps still 
less. It may be of interest to offer a few instances taken 
from the transactions of the New York Agricultural So- 
ciety, the details of which were given under oath. These 
instances will show that at the South we have no practi- 
cal idea of the amount of income which may be derived 
from a given number of acres of land with a small amount 
of labor. 
J. V. Grove’s farm, 234 acres, of which 37 are woods. 
Gross sales $6,752.89 ; amount paid for labor, besides 
the farmer’s own labor, $526.15 — at the usual rate of 
wages, this would about pay three hands, yet there are 
cash sales of nearly $7000. 
J. Westfall’s farm, 202 acres. Gross sales $4,973.14. 
Paid for labor, $663. This includes the labor of the farm- 
er at $20 per month, and all the labor expended in im- 
provements, manuring, &c. 
W. Holmes’ farm, 185 acres. Gross receipts, $6,720. 
Paid for labor, $650, including labor of the farmer — equal 
to between three and four hands. 
L. D. Clift’s farm, 160 acres. Gross sales, $6,344. 
Two regular hands, including extra help, paid for labor 
$495. 
R. J. Swan’s farm, 325 acres. Gro^s sales, $10,771. 
Paid for labor $900. = 
We might multiply these instances from the invaluable 
volumes before us. They are indeed exceptional cases, 
being prize farms, but they illustrate the points at which 
we are aiming, the proportion of labor in the manage- 
ment of productive land. It is to be borne in mind, that 
in offering these farms for premiums, it was necessary in 
the specification of details, to mention the amount of ma- 
nure, as no farm would receive a premium which was 
not under a system o*f management which would improve 
it annually. The returns mentioned by these contestants 
indicate an average of from thirty to forty two-horse 
wagon loads of manure to each acre of plowed land. 
Under such treatment, the older the land is the better it 
becomes — thus not only the same revenue of the farmer 
but his capital in land annually increases. In entering 
a county represented by such farming, a purchaser will 
not enquire as he would at the South, “How long will 
this land last,” but, “how long has it been improved T’ 
The difference in these natural questions- in the two sec- 
tions of country, offers a key to the difference in the value 
of land. 
We cannot forbear giving another instance originally 
published in the Valley Farmer^ of the farm of a Mr, 
Gentry, of Missouri. The instances previously given are 
on a small scale. This is on a large, and on this account 
may be more instructive to our large planters. This farm 
consists of 3500 acres under fence, and mostly in di- 
