The essential difference between the upholders and the opponents of this theory was not shown in the practical treatment proposed for the States which had been in rebellion.
James Blaine: “The essential difference between the upholders and the opponents of this theory was not shown in the practical treatment…”
Editor's note · Context
Blaine identifies a key ideological divide between supporters and opponents of a specific theory regarding the treatment of rebellious states.
Share
More from James Blaine
The right of the General Government to preserve itself in its whole constitutional vigor by repelling a direct and positive aggression upon its property or its officers cannot be denied.
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.
The States are colleagues of one another, and if some of them shall conquer the rest, and hold them as subjugated provinces, it would totally destroy the whole theory upon which they are now connected.
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.





