 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
TASK FORCE TO STUDY THE HISTORY AND LEGACY OF SLAVERY IN MARYLAND (Final Report) 1999/12/31 MdHR 991422 MdHR 991422, Image No: 296 Print image (40K) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
TASK FORCE TO STUDY THE HISTORY AND LEGACY OF SLAVERY IN MARYLAND (Final Report) 1999/12/31 MdHR 991422 MdHR 991422, Image No: 296 Print image (40K) |
| the process facilitated a significant shift in the demographics of black labor in the state. As in the tidewater counties, black Baltimoreans—both new and old-confronted the prejudices of the white community. Like their rural counterparts, urban conservative Unionists and Democrats opposed black progress of any sort, and radical Unionists and Republicans— although far more numerous in Baltimore than elsewhere in the state—remained steadfastly attached to a philosophy of black self-help with minimal assistance from whites. Furthermore, even the staunchest supporters of urban black residents' economic, civil, and educational rights refused to countenance integration in churches, meeting halls, and public transportation facilities. Nor did they advocate anything approaching what was called—in the parlance of the day--"social equality." Certainly, the work of the army, the Freedmen's Bureau, and radical politicians assisted rural and urban freed and already free blacks in making real and lasting accomplishments. In the end, however, these proved insufficient in number and strength to challenge the power of deep seated racial attitudes. The ultimate effect of conservative strength and radical restraint was to undermine both |