Actually I was asking the question for information and not as accusation. But I stand the first point which I was trying to make and must have been misunderstood due to my imprecise grammar-Confederate apologists IN THE 1860s defended slavery on the basis that their slaves were better off than Northern factory workers. On that same basis the slavers of pre-1865 should have been happy to spend a year in that blissful condition that they blessed the black population of South for so many years.
Thankfully for the Deep South, the humane attitude of the great Abraham Lincoln still carried enough weight to reduce the burden of Reconstruction. But if the worst day for the Deep South was when the South Carolina hotheads seceded, the second worst day for Dixie was when Booth murdered the South's greatest friend in Washington.
My information was that his policies were carried forward by Andrew Johnson for a couple of years, and then Stevens and the Radicals took over and did it the way they wanted to, working through the Union League clubs and the Freedmen's Bureau.
And what is your point about the comparative conditions of industrial American employment versus agrarian slavery? Agrarian slaves have always been treated worse than anyone else in the labor force, going back to classical times.
Also, working hours might not have told the whole story. Englishwomen imported to America under contract told diaries and memoirs that they found that in America they had to work very much faster than they had in England. The work over here was much tougher and the machines much faster than their British counterparts. But heavy-industrial labor after the Civil War was tougher still, with work in the steel mills about the worst, and coal mines.