VIII
AMERICA IN THE PAST
THE history of American colonization can be divided into three periods, of which the latter two largely overlap; the period of exploitation, the period of the classic civilization of the South, and the period of the individualistic civilization of the North.
For centuries after the discovery of America the new continent was a field of forcible exploitation, but no serious attempts at settlement and organization of new communities were made.
The European nations, Spaniards, Portuguese, etc., attracted by the treasures of gold and silver, came to plunder, but not to settle and stay; few remained, and the white population thus grew very slowly—and even then strongly intermixed with the native Indian population.
The gold and silver fleets carried the loot of the new continent, gathered by murder and rapine, to Europe, to the disaster of the exploiting nations. Spain and Portugal, becoming parasites by the spoils of America, followed the fate of the Roman Empire, decayed and fell from their height. When the plunder ended these nations had ceased to be self-supporting; poverty thus overtook them, and only to-day, after centuries, are they beginning to recover.
The new continent was despoiled, no constructive work was done, no new nations were created, and when finally the period of exploitation came to an end, and the Spanish-American countries rose and gained their liberty in the beginning of the eighteenth century, it was to exchange exploitation for anarchy; there was nothing on which to build a stable self-governing nation, and revolution followed revolution, until finally a few fairly stable governments emerged—Argentine, Brazil, Chile, Mexico. And even these governments are not very stable; impoverished by their forcible exploitation of their European masters in former times, they largely had to depend on foreign capital for their development, and what this means we see in the Mexico of to-day; development by foreign capital means development for foreigners, but exploitation of
the nation, and if the country is not unusually rich, its population unusually capable—as was the case in the United States—or other fortunate circumstances intervene and change the trend of development, sooner or later a reaction sets in, a revolution against foreign exploitation, and then it is doubtful whether a stable government of the natives for their own interests will ultimately arise, or whether anarchism will end the nation as an independent unit, as seems to be now the fate of Mexico.
Here probably the European war may be a godsend, may be the saving of the smaller nations of this hemisphere; the vast destruction of European capital by the world's war forced the extensive withdrawal of foreign capital from the South American nations. The first effect, naturally, was wide-spread disaster; industry, trade, and agriculture suffered; but the final outcome may well be a gradual rise of these nations by their own resources; very slowly indeed, compared with the rapid advance possible by foreign capital, but what is accomplished in this manner is by the nation and for the benefit of the nation, is constructive advance and not destructive exploitation, and here the United States, as the big brother of these nations, who has successfully passed the same trials, from foreign exploitation to industrial independence, may offer material help and assistance. But this will require a great deal more patience and forbearance than we have usually shown in our dealings with other nations.
In the United States the immigration from the beginning was for colonization. No wealth of gold or silver attracted the plunderers of Europe, and the northern shores of the American continent thus were neglected long after Central and South America had been overrun and exploited. But when finally the colonization of the United States began, it was for settlement, and the colonists, driven to our shores by political and religious persecution, and later by Europe's unfavorable industrial and social conditions, came to stay, to form a new nation.
The Southern colonies languished for a long time, the climate being too hot for white farm labor. It was the introduction of the negro slave which made Southern colonization a success and created the historical South, an agricultural community raising tobacco, cotton, etc., on large plantations operated by slave labor. Thus arose a civilization based on slave labor; a small master class in control of all political, industrial, and social power, free to devote their time to administration, literature, art, and science, highly civilized and superior intellectually to the uncouth farmers and sailors of the Northern States, thereby for generations in control of the political government of the entire nation. Below them was a mass of human beasts of burden, slave laborers, as a rule well kept and taken care of, just as, and for the same reason that, we take care of our cattle now, and therefore as a rule not seriously dissatisfied with their lot; and a number of poor white people, serving the masters as overseers, helpers, etc., or drifting idly as "poor white trash." In short, it was a civilization identical in almost every respect with the classic civilization of ancient Greece and Rome, which after twenty centuries reappeared on this continent. Such civilization inherently is agricultural, relying for its industrial products on foreign trade, and free trade thus was the necessary requirement of it.
Entirely different was the colonization of the Northern States, Small individual farmers and traders settled in New York, Pennsylvania, New England. The climatic and agricultural conditions were unsuitable for negro labor, and slavery thus never gained a foothold, but individual freeholders settled and lived together in small communities, eking out their living from the rather poor soil of the Northern States, or by hunting and trading with the Indians, or sailing the oceans.
It is in these communities of the early colonial days in the Northern States, that our present American Government originated with its great fundamental democratic principle that "all men are born free and equal" and "that government can exist only with the consent of the governed." But here also the foundation was laid of the terrible defect of our Government which has made it a byword of inefficiency throughout the world—the "rotation in office for the distribution of spoils."
Historically, the nearest analogy to this early colonial society of the pioneer days probably is found in the organization of the German tribes in the pre-feudal days, in the later days of the Roman Empire; an aristocratic democracy, small communities of citizens, equal in rights and freedom, similar in occupation, knowledge, and experience, though differing in their standing in the community, their influence and authority; very strongly individualistic and self-reliant; trained by experience and necessity to take care of themselves in fighting against the hardship of their existence, against the barren soil, unfriendly nature, hostile Indians. Little help was to be expected from a Government which was practically non-existing; locally the loosest kind of government, essentially a voluntary co-operation with little mandatory power, and far away across the ocean a central government in the English king, which essentially limited itself to foreign relations, but took little part in the local issues of the community, and where the British colonial governor attempted to govern the internal affairs of the colony it usually was a failure and led to resentment and opposition, and finally to the Revolution. Thus the relation of the American Colonies to the British king was similar to that of the German tribes in the pre-feudal days to the Augustus in Rome as their far-distant overlord.
In the small agricultural community of the Colonial days, consisting of citizens of similar occupation, character, and intelligence, any member of the community could carry out the simple functions of the Government about equally well, but the office was a duty rather than an honor, and however little time it demanded, it would have been unfair to ask the same citizen to carry it for many years.
Thus in those days and under this simple form of social structure it was natural that any intelligent citizen was considered eligible to any office, but that the office-holder changed at every term.
Thus became ingrained in the American national character the conception that any intelligent citizen can fill any office, and that it is desirable to change the office-holder at every election.
While this was feasible and worked satisfactorily in the simple colonial society, it has become a serious handicap in our present highly complex civilization. When in rapid succession a theater-director, a physician, a minister, a lawyer are placed in administrative charge of a municipality—all good men and true, but none of them by professional experience qualified to the administration of the municipal corporation of to-day—or where a barber is placed in charge of the city water-works, a saloon-keeper in the administration of the public works, no matter how capable, honest, and intelligent the men may be, the failure of any professional qualification, the absence of the knowledge and experience required for the efficient administration of the office necessarily must lead to the incompetency and inefficiency which we see displayed throughout all our political life; and when, then, the incumbent in the office is changed by the election or appointment of his equally incompetent successor, just when he begins to understand a little of the duties of his office, the necessary result is the failure of political government, which is the characteristic of our nation.
This is the bad inheritance from our early Colonial days, which we shall have to overcome to reap the full benefit of the great principles created then and later laid down in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution.
Politically, the first period in the history of our country represents its consolidation as an English-speaking nation: the Dutch, French, Spanish, etc., colonies were absorbed or forced into a position where they could no longer threaten the supremacy of the English colonies, and wars between European nations could no longer be waged on American battle-fields. Hereby the American colonies were withdrawn from all direct interest in the controversies fought out between European nations, and their relations with the "Mother Country," England, thus became the predominant issue. No longer disturbed by the reflection of European wars, the colonies grew in strength and self-confidence, and when England failed to recognize their claims to control their own destiny, the Revolution was the result.
It left the colonies independent, but as thirteen separate nations, and the issue then was whether and how far they should co-operate. They might have remained independent and separate, other nations formed on the continent, and what is now the United States would have become a number of separate and independent nations, just as South America is to-day, with constant rivalries and contentions. Fortunately we escaped this; the Union was formed by voluntary co-operation of the thirteen States, and ever since the progress toward closer co-operation and centralization of the nation has gone on steadily.
However, as the States had voluntarily entered the Union, so, naturally, it might be held that they could withdraw again from the Union whenever they desired. Thus when in 1812, during the unsuccessful war with England, delegates of the New England States met at Hartford and seriously discussed the advisability of again becoming British colonies, the withdrawal from the Union did not appear such treason as it seems to us now. Even when, in 1860, the South lost control of the national Government and the Southern States withdrew from the Union and formed the Confederation, many people considered that they had the right to do so and recommended to let them go. Fortunately, better counsel prevailed. Otherwise we would have two nations, and in the agricultural depression of 1893 the North would probably have split again into an industrial East and an agricultural West, and with three nations with different and antagonistic interests dividing the continent, America would have been led into the same path which Europe followed, with the same result.
Thus it was Lincoln's administration which established forever the principle, "The Union, One and Indivisible." It was this issue which was fought out in the Civil War, and the Civil War thus created the American Nation, not the Revolutionary War; the latter made the States independent of England, and thus separated the development of America from that of Europe, but it did not yet permanently settle the character of the American development, whether it should be that of a stable, peaceful nation, or an equilibrium of nations balancing on the sword's point, like Europe. The development of the South as a stable, civilized community antedates that of the North, and during the period from the Revolutionary War to the Civil War, the South governed the Union. However, the classic organization of the South was that of a low population density, while the individualistic society of the North is capable of far greater population density, with its numerous small farms operated by citizens instead of the few large plantations operated by slave labor found in the South.
But the New England farms, never very fertile, became more and more exhausted, hunting ceased with the disappearance of the game, the Indian trade vanished with the Indian, and when the population penetrated farther into the interior of the country, the ocean-carrying trade contributed less to the support of the nation. Thus industrial development appeared the only saving of the steadily increasing population, and the numerous small water-powers along New England's mill-streams invited. But there could be no successful development of industries in competition with England's established superior industrial power, without protection of the new industries by tariff laws.
But the agricultural South required free trade for the exchange of its crops against England's industrial products.
Thus the issues were joined between the free trade demanded by the South and the protective tariff required to raise the industries needed for the support of the North.
The South controlled the Government, but the North was growing more rapidly in population, and all efforts of the Southern statesmen politically in charge of the nation could not forever postpone the day when the North got control of the Government, with Lincoln's election.
The emancipation of the slaves broke the power of the South by destroying its labor, and the South was ruined, the classic period of our civilization ended, and the individualistic era of industrial capitalism ruled supreme on this continent.
For many years the South was conquered territory, received the treatment which now the conquered nations—Belgium, Serbia, Egypt—receive, while the North, protected against England's competition, and with the vast territories of the West and the South as assured markets, rapidly developed its industries.
For a generation the South was suffering in poverty, then, in the 90's, came the beginning of the new South and the decadence of the New England States.
The industries had advanced to such manufacturing units that the small mill-streams of New England did not satisfy the power requirements any more, while the numerous large rivers of the South offered abundant power. Electrical engineering had advanced far enough to make the place of the power consumption independent of the source of power, by long-distance transmission, and the same economic laws which had taken the cotton industry from England and transferred it to New England, as nearer to the source of supply of raw materials and of demand for the finished products, these same laws now began to withdraw the cotton industries from New England and locate it in the Southern States within the cotton-fields, and the New England mills began to languish, the Southern cotton-mills increased and multiplied. In 1894 the first electrically driven cotton-mill in the South started at Columbia, N. C, built with Northern capital. The next year the Peltzer Mill, owned by Southern capital, started electrical operation, and since that time the South has rapidly become an industrial country, like the North a generation ago; cheaper power, better and cheaper raw materials, cheaper living conditions in the Southern climate, gave all the advantage to the South, while New England had to find its saving by the increasing emigration of its population to the middle West and the far West of our country, and New England's farms are standing abandoned.
The antagonism of interests between the South and the North, which caused the Civil War, thus has vanished before the industrial development of the South, made possible by electrical power, and the only differences still remaining are those due to the later industrial development of the South, which thus far has failed to protect its labor supply by adequate educational laws, and laws against the exploitation of child labor and women labor. These are now the issues, and are the black marks against
the present South—illiteracy, exploitation of children and of women. Just as the industries of the North prosper in spite of the withdrawal of the children for education, and the limitation of their exploitation, under the still more favorable conditions of the South the same will be the case.