The old South : $b A monograph — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
The old South : $b A monograph
John Stuart Mill · en
So for more than fifty formative years of our history the Old South
was the dominating power in the nation, as it had been in the
foundation of the colonies out of which came the republic, and later
in fighting its battles of independence and in framing its policies
of government. And I make bold to reaffirm that whatever strength
or symmetry the republic had acquired at home, or reputation it had
achieved abroad, in those earlier crucial years of its history were
largely due to the patriotism and ability of Southern statesmanship.
Why that scepter of leadership has passed from its keeping, or why
the New South is no longer at the front of national leadership, is
a question that might well give pause to one who recalls the brave
days when the Old South sat at the head of the table and directed the
affairs of the nation.
Socially, the Old South, like “all Gaul,” was divided into three
parts—the slaveholding planters, the aristocrats of the social
system, few relatively in numbers but mighty in wealth and authority;
the negro slaves, who by the millions plowed and sowed its fields and
reaped its harvests, and who for hundreds of years, both in slavery
and freedom, have found contented homes in the South; and lastly the
nonslaveholding whites, a distinctly third estate.
The nonslaveholding white of the Old South was essentially _sui
generis_. He was really a vital part of a singular semifeudal system,
yet, as far as he could, he maintained his independence of it. He
was between two social fires. His lack of culture and breeding, his
rude speech and dress, barred him from the big house of the planter,
except as a sort of political dependent or henchman. On the other
hand, to the negro he was variously known as “poor folks,” “poor
white trash,” and at best as “half-strainers.” While there was not
a little in common between him and the master of slaves, he had
literally no dealings with the negro. Here and there, if one rose to
ownership of land or slaves by dint of extraordinary industry or good
fortune, his social position was scarcely improved. He became like
the shoddy “New Riches” of our own time, in a class to himself.