On the record
Surely, if an anti-slavery restriction were needed for Oregon, it was needed for Dakota which lay in the same latitude.
Source
gutenberg.orgJames Blaine: “Surely, if an anti-slavery restriction were needed for Oregon, it was needed for Dakota which lay in the same latitude.”
Editor's note · Context
Blaine argues for the necessity of anti-slavery restrictions in territories with similar geographical conditions.
Share
More from James Blaine
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.
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.
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.
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
