Wealthy Democrats And Slavery In The 1850s

Before talking about how much wealthy Democrats paid for slaves, or how much they spent keeping slaves, or how Democrat slaveholders created poverty in the South because of their grip on slavery, let's talk about why the average White American living in the South could not afford to buy or own a slave. Let's talk about why owning slaves was limited to the wealthy Democrat elite in the South in the 1850s. 

Frankly, the limiting factor of owning slaves has to do with how much money the average White American worker earned in the 1850s. While there was no official "median salary" tracked on a national scale in 1858. Instead, the U.S. economy was an agricultural society and localized. Most working Americans were paid hourly or daily wages, which generally ranged from $200 to $500 per year if they were employed full-time year-round.

Before we get into how much an average American worker made, let's briefly talk about how many hours a week was considered full time employment in the 1850s and later during the Old West. It's important because we need to understand that they did not work 8 hour days during that time period. The standard 5-day / 40-hour workweek as we know it today was not established until the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed in 1938. 

Prior to that, American workers typically worked 10 to 14 hours a day, 6 days a week. So yes, in the 1850s, and throughout the Old West which is roughly defined as 1865 to 1895, "full-time" employment meant working 60 to 80+ hours a week. Yes, 60 to 80+ hours a week.   

Of course it did vary by trade. For example, cowboy and ranch hand work was dictated by daylight and seasonal cattle drives. That meant in many cases weeks of regularly working in excess of 90 to 100 hours -- especially during roundups or trail drives, without overtime or set days off. 

Homesteaders and farming required sunup-to-sundown labor, 7 days a week, which amounted to 80 to 100+ hours depending on the season. Miners and railroad jobs in the mining camps and the transcontinental railroad frequently required 7-day workweeks. They were pushing totals to 84+ hours of grueling manual labor a week. As for the general laborer, and those working in manufacturing jobs, it was extremely common for those workers to toil 70+ hours a week. In many industries, schedules were 12 to 14 hours a day, six days a week, leaving Sundays as the only day of rest. 

How much did they get paid for that? Well, in the past, I've talked about how cowboys and drovers in the Old West were paid $20 to $30 per month. And yes, during that era, unskilled laborers and farm hands, those working in manufacturing, typically earned between $0.75 and $1.50 per day. That means that made roughly $200 to $400 per year.

Teachers were in a class of their own. No pun intended. While some were paid seasonally, others were paid monthly. In 1858, an average male teacher made around $30 to $40 a month. Female teachers earned $20 to $26 a month. Yes, same job but less pay. 

Just as it is today, learning a skilled trade in 1858 typically required an apprenticeship, where young workers trained for a few years under a master craftsman, a journeyman. Common skilled trades during that era included carpenters, joiners, cabinetmakers, coopers (barrel makers) and wheelwrights (wagon makers), tailors, seamstresses, cobblers, shoemakers (cordwainers), printers, typesetters, blacksmiths, tool-and-die makers, machinists, and iron molders. Employment of skilled trades in 1858 America was heavily defined by the ongoing Industrial Revolution, especially in industrialized cities, expanding towns, and the transition that the Industrial Revolution was bringing about.

And no, times have not changed in regard to which American workers make more money than others. Today, many skilled tradesmen and women, make pretty good money. Frankly, they should since they put in a lot of time and effort learning their trade. 

Back in the 1850s, Americans who were skilled tradesmen, those who were carpenters, blacksmiths, wheelwrights, and other journeymen in the trades, typically commanded $2.00 to $3.00 a day. Remember, that was for working 12 to 14 hours a day, six days a week. 

That means they were the Americans on the top of the labor ladder who were making a yearly income upwards to $800. Yes, that's a year. The average for a skilled craftsmen was $600 in 1858, which is the equivalent to approximately $24,521.20 today in 2026 purchasing power.

Since the average man earned roughly $1.00 to $3.00 per day, which equals about $365 to $800 a year, could the average White American in 1858 afford to buy a slave of any color, or an indentured servant, African, Irish, Italian, German, or any other race?

No, the average White American in 1858 could not afford to buy a slave. Slaves were major capital investments for wealthy Democrats. Slaves typically costing between $800 and $2,000 depending on age, gender, and skill level. Since the average annual income was roughly $365 to $800, purchasing even one slave would cost multiple years of a laborer's total gross wages.

Imagine, if you would. Someone is a skilled craftsman at the top of his game, and makes $800 a year. To own an African slave, he would have had to not spend a single dime of his earnings. And yes, that's why only wealthy Democrats owned slaves in the 1850s -- prior to the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation freeing slaves.

So no, the average White American in 1858 could not afford to buy an African  slave. They simply didn't have the money to do that. And, because a single African slave cost, on the low end $400, but averaged between $800 and $2,000, purchasing one represented a massive capital investment which at the time was equivalent to buying a small farm or a large house. It was something that completely out of reach for everyone other than wealthy Democrats. 

Why Do I Emphasize That Only Wealthy Democrats Could Afford Slaves? It's Because Only Wealthy Democrats Owned Slaves. 

Let's remember that the Republican Party was not created until 1854 as a political party to end slavery. So while there were both White and Black Democrat slaveowners, there were never Republican slaveowners of any color. History show that there were Republicans who were former slaveowner. But they owned slaves when they were Democrats, before relinquishing their slaves and joining the newly formed Republican Party. 

As for Black slaveowners, records from the period confirm that free Black Americans owned slaves. And yes, like their White slaveowner counterparts, their political affiliation was to the Democratic Party.

The bottom line is that the purchase of an African slave was restricted to the wealthy Democrat plantation owners. They were the wealthy elite just as they are today.

Because of cost and practicality, since the average White American worker making $1 a day couldn't afford or support a slave, and had no use for a slave, owning a slave was generally a privilege reserved for the wealthy plantation class which were Democrats. 

Of course, White Americans such as the Irish, Italians, or Germans were not legally classified or sold as property under the antebellum legal codes, nor were they ever part of a formalized, racialized slave trade which was outlaws in 1809 when the importation of African slaves into the United States was made illegal. Poor White Americans were utilized as Indentured Servants in earlier American history

So How Much Did Wealthy Democrats Pay For Slaves In 1858?

In 1850, wealthy Democrats in slave states paid $400 for an enslaved person of any age or condition -- while slaves classified as "Prime Field Hands" and slaves who were Skilled Laborers cost between $1,200 and $2,000.

The average price, which was $400 in 1850, was about $800 by 1858. The price of a "Field Hand," which was an average adult, in 1850s between $700 and $900. A slave classified as a "Prime Field Hand," which were young adult males, commanded between $1,200 and $1,600. A slave who was a "Skilled Craftsman" cost between $2,000 and $5,000+. And here's something else, in 1859, a highly skilled, unnamed male slave who was a carpenter was sold at a New Orleans Auction for an astonishing record price of  $5,000. That's over $160,000 in today's money. His price was driven by his youth, physical fitness, and highly sought-after construction expertise. 

For most of America in 1850, the average annual per capita income in the United States was only about $110. So really, purchasing a single prime field hand for $1,200 represented more than a decade's worth of income for an average free laborer. That's why only wealthy Democrats owned slaves.

Only The Democrat Elite Could Own And Afford Slaves In The 1850s

Because of the steep prices, slavery was concentrated among the wealthiest Democrats. Wealthy Democrats invested the bulk of their capital into human property, the Democratic Party fiercely defended the institution of slavery.

How much of the United States economy was the Democrats' slave ownership? Democrat slave ownership in 1860 was the most valuable financial asset in the entire United States economy at the time. The Democrats' worth in slaves exceeded the value of all northern railroads and factories combined.

Wealthy Democrats had to be very wealthy to own slaves in the 1850s. How much would a slave cost a slave owner in room, board, food, clothing, medical, dental, education, and extras in the 1850s? Well, for Democrats to own slaves after their initial purchase, it would cost them between $80 and $110 a year depending on whether the slave was skilled labor or unskilled labor.

Add to that the cost that Democrats spend property taxes, since slaves were legally classified as property and taxed. Also add what Democrats paid out in "Overseer" salaries. Wealthy Democrats paid an "Overseer" roughly $200 to $600 annually to manage slaves -- and execute punishments.

Democrats also paid "slave patrol taxes" which were used to fund armed militia patrols that captured runaway slaves. And since many wealthy Democrats financed their purchases via bank credit, that in itself added significant annual interest payments. So the total cost for a large plantation was significant.

Political power within the 1850s Democratic Party in the South was concentrated among the wealthy Democrats who made up an elite "Planter Class." Their status was such that they had to own 20 or more slaves to be associated with that class of Democrats. For very wealthy Democrats owning an estate of 50 slaves, the baseline capital asset value alone exceeded $30,000 to $40,000 in 1850s money, paired with a recurring annual overhead of roughly $2,500 for maintenance, taxes, and security.

Slavery Was Not Good For White American Workers In The South

Here's something that most folks don't think about when it comes to slavery in the 1850s, slavery severely depressed wages for White Americans in the South.

In the 1850s, wealthy Democrats, those Southern plantation owners who were predominantly members of the Democratic Party, built an economy heavily dependent on slave labor. The widespread use of unpaid African slave labor severely limited paid job opportunities and depressed wages for landless, non-slave-owning White Americans. This created a vast underclass of impoverished White Southerners.

Because slaves were forced to perform both agricultural and manual labor without compensation, the number of paid, low-skilled jobs available to poor Whites was significantly reduced. When White Americans sought work, they were forced to compete with an immense pool of slave strikebreakers, which kept wages suppressed. 

Democrat elites in the South overwhelmingly invested their capital in purchasing slaves and land. This deterred the development of manufacturing and diversified industries. The lack of a thriving industrial sector meant fewer opportunities for White Southerners to escape agricultural poverty. 

It's true. By concentrating wealth in slavery, Democrats had no incentive to invest in industrial development. This created a massive pool of unpaid labor, the plantation system suppressed the overall value of labor and stunted the economic mobility of poor White workers. Talk about "reparations," Democrats should have to pay reparations to the families of White Americans it kept in poverty -- along with reparations to the families of the dead Confederate troops who died because Democrats took the South into a Civil War just to maintain their wealth through slavery.

People don't talk about the economic dynamics of how Democrats used the slave system to keep wages and living standards exceptionally low for the non-elite White population. Because slaves were forced to perform agricultural and craft labor without compensation, the perceived market value of all unskilled and semi-skilled labor plummeted.

Because of that, like today with Americans competing with Illegal Aliens who are getting paid "slave wages," wages lower than the standard, back in the 1850s, White American workers were forced to compete with the unpaid labor of millions of slaves. Also, Democrat slaveholders regularly trained their slaves as skilled artisans and mechanics which forced poor White American laborers in the South to seek other trades. Of course, how does a person compete with slaves when it comes to wages? It was through slavery that Democrats suppressed craft wages.

The economy of the South was dominated by a wealthy Democrat planter class that monopolized land and capital. Because they invested virtually all their wealth into slaves and land, the South never developed a robust manufacturing or industrial sector like the Northern States. That's why slavery in the South in the 1850s led to widespread underemployment and an impoverished White underclass.

As for poor White Americans who labored in the cotton belt, wealthy Democrats, and their slave population, were able to keep the wages for White Americans low. Democrat slaveholders were the reason that White Americans in the South frequently experienced long bouts of unemployment.

Poverty in the South became generational because of the Democratic Party's control of slave labor. Wealthy Democrats had the system rigged in their favor, and White Americans in the South understood that fact. The reality of life for White Americans in the South in the 1850s was understanding that Democrat slaveholders could easily replace them or suppress their wages with slaves.

So when you write to ask why Democrats took our nation into a Civil War to keep slavery, a war that cost hundreds of thousands of men to be killed, you should understand that Democrats have a history and legacy of sacrificing others to keep their wealth and status. They didn't care how many died so they could keep their slaves, or if their desire to keep slavery intact would destroy our nation. That's their slaveholder mentality.

Democrats have always been calculating, scheming, or secretly plotting to do something morally wrong, illegal, or self-serving. For example, to maintain power and prevent poor White Americans from allying with African slaves or Northern Abolitionists, conniving Democrat plantation owners promoted division by pushing a rigid racial hierarchy between Whites and Blacks. Their legacy is still with us today. 

Believe it or not, one of the greatest con jobs to ever take place was when wealthy Southern Democrats sold White Americans in the South the notion that poor Whites were "socially superior" to Black slaves. I call it a "con job" because that's what it is. A "con" is an informal term for a fraudulent scheme, deception, or swindle. It refers to an act where someone tricks or manipulates another person to gain their trust, to steal their money or get their way. That's exactly what wealthy Democrats did in the South. 

It's true. In the antebellum and post-Civil War South, the Democratic Party maintained its political base among White Americans by defining White Supremacy as a "social and political necessity" to divide Americans. Following the Reconstruction Era, the Democratic Party successfully positioned itself as the "White Man's Party," utilizing the "Redemption" movement to overthrow biracial Republican coalitions. Their plan worked for over 100 years until after the Republicans passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. 

To keep their century-long regional monopoly, Democrats used voter suppression and the KKK which was the paramilitary wing of the Democratic Party to terrorize Blacks and Whites alike in the South. It's true. Democrats used the Ku Klux Klan and other militant groups like the Red Shirts to violently intimidate Black voters.

Democrats later instituted formal Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, and literacy tests to permanently strip away African American political power. Yes, all to prevent poor White American farmers from aligning with poor Black American citizens over economic grievances. 

In the antebellum and post-Civil War South, the Democratic Party maintained its political base among White Americans by defining and defending White Supremacy. They did that by promoting the idea that race, rather than economic class, is what determined someone's place in society. Their scam was to convince White Americans that other citizens, regardless of wealth, were their enemies. And yes, Democrats did that. 

Sadly, and it is really is sad when you think about how they were able to do what they did, wealthy Democrat leaders convinced poor uneducated White Americans that they were inherently socially superior to Blacks and other freed people. It's the enduring legacy of the Democratic Party. It's all about division to control groups of people. It that sounds a lot like what Democrats do today. It should, because it is.

Why Did Democrats Create The Division Between The Races? 

It was simply an act of self-centered economic preservation. The wealthy Democrat elite wanted to prevent working-class solidarity among poor White and Black American laborers to preserve the status quo. It was an effort by many wealthy Democrats to keep the South functioning as a pre-Civil War social society of slaves and masters, and poor Whites. 

To do that and secure the political loyalty of poor uneducated White Americans and maintain the slave system that made them rich, scheming Democrats knew that they needed to persuade impoverished uneducated White Americans that maintaining the institution of slavery was in their best interest. 

Democrats did that to prevent a biracial, class-based uprising of the poor against the wealthy elite in the South after the Civil War. It worked, and their divisiveness is part of their playbook today. And it still works, and should since Democrats have had a lot of practice at dividing Americans against each other.

This is all just a matter of historical facts. 

Tom Correa