My source was one used by TexConfederate in the past. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Mr. Moneyhon, if he is well-read, is probably aware that black codes were not the exclusive province of Southern legislatures, although they wrote them; they had good company in a number of Northern and Midwestern States, including your own favorite.
The difference being that while the pre-war laws in the North may have made conditions for Blacks in some states almost as bad as they were for free Blacks in the south, conditions were changing. Blacks were gaining more rights post war. But the south was moving in the other direction, making their already restrictive laws even more restrictive, and trying to return slavery as much as possible.
And I'm still waiting for your answer to the other question, wise guy.
Patience is a virtue.
Oh, pshaw. Cat's out of the bag now, pal. You didn't read that piece at all. It directly addressed this topic, and you show zero evidence of having even shouted at it from across the street, much less shaking hands.
The fact is, the status of blacks was changing everywhere, glacially, but more in the South than the North, if only because the gulf from slavery to freedman status was so much greater.
You are soft-pedaling, for polemical reasons, the fact that the Northern and Midwestern States were dragging their feet on rights for blacks with every bit as much recalcitrance as the ex-Confederates. I posted it, and you're contradicting my historical source without support. Buncombe!
You belabor the Southern States for passing restrictive black codes, while scoffing at the very real concerns they had, which TexConfederate pointed out to you, and at the same time exonerating the Northern States' absolute refusal to grant the pitiful numbers of ex-slaves and free blacks in their midst the same suffrage rights that the Radicals were demanding for armies of ex-slaves in the South.
What was that crack about sauces and ganders?