How long will it be before our modern knowledge of the fundamental facts of American history are accepted and used in our political and social thinking? Slavery continued in the South and died out in the North not because our people were different at the start. They were quite the same. But the climate was different. Crops were different. In the South the slaves produced cotton, tobacco, and sugar-cane during a long growing season, and hence slaves were profitable to their masters. In the North where they produced only food and fodder crops during a short growing season, slaves were an economic loss. Short summers and long winters do not permit the Negro to become a permanent inhabitant of Northern climes. So the few Northern slaves were mostly sold South and total emancipation followed. Meanwhile, let it not be forgotten that during the period when cotton was king, the North shared with the South in the profits of slave labor. The economic system of our country was based upon cotton and tobacco. For a full generation it took the following form: the South sent her products to Europe, America received, in return, not commodities but capital. This capital was invested in railroads and other public improvements. Pennsylvania, New York and New England furnished the articles of manufacture which the South needed at prices much higher than obtained in Europe. These high prices were maintained through a protective tariff. The profits of slave labor were thus divided between the South and the North. When, in the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Virginia led the border states in demanding the Constitutional prohibition of African slave trade, the New England delegates joined with those of the far South in keeping this nefarious traffic open for twenty-one years more. When we say to-day that the problem is in every sense a national problem, we base our statement not only upon present necessity--but also upon the basis of historical facts which lead to definite conclusions.