It was not an escape from the clash of positive purposes by a resort to a negative and feeble expedient.
James Blaine: “It was not an escape from the clash of positive purposes by a resort to a negative and feeble expedient.”
Editor's note · Context
Blaine emphasizes that Garfield's nomination was a strong decision rather than a weak compromise.
Share
More from James Blaine
But this is a totally different thing from an offensive war to punish the people for the political misdeeds of their State Government, or to enforce an acknowledgment that the Government of the United States is supreme.
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.
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…





