On the record
The North could easily justify itself by argument, but the statement without argument apparently showed that the South had been deceived.
Source
gutenberg.orgJames Blaine: “The North could easily justify itself by argument, but the statement without argument apparently showed that the South…”
Editor's note · Context
Blaine discusses the justification of the North's actions in the context of the Missouri Compromise, highlighting the perception of deception felt by the South.
Share
More from James Blaine
But what if the feeling in any State against the United States should become so universal that the Federal officers themselves (including judges, district attorneys, and marshals) would be reached by the same influences, and resign their…
All these provisions are made to protect the States, not to authorize an attack by one part of the country upon another; to preserve the peace, and not to plunge them into civil war.
Under such circumstances, to send a military force into any State, with orders to act against the people, would be simply making war upon them.
Is any portion of the people bound to contribute their money or their blood to carry on a contest like that?
Other voices in this conversation
