The war would thus have practically injured the negro, for after taking from him that form of protection which slavery afforded, it would have left him an object of still harsher oppression than slavery itself--an oppression that would be inspired and quickened by a spirit of vengeance.
James Blaine: “The war would thus have practically injured the negro, for after taking from him that form of protection which slavery…”
Editor's note · Context
Blaine warns that the aftermath of the war could lead to even harsher oppression for freedmen if protections were not maintained.
Share
More from James Blaine
If this view of the subject be correct, as I think it is, then the Union must utterly perish at the moment when Congress shall arm one part of the people against another for any purpose beyond that of merely protecting the General…
Is any portion of the people bound to contribute their money or their blood to carry on a contest like that?
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.
You can use force only to repel an assault on the public property and aid the Courts in the performance of their duty.





