Tariff of 1816 History & Significance | What was the Tariff of 1816? . . . When the gentleman says the Constitution is a compact between the states, he uses language exactly applicable to the old Confederation. The Webster Hayne Debate. . . This feeling, always carefully kept alive, and maintained at too intense a heat to admit discrimination or reflection, is a lever of great power in our political machine. Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. Visit the dark and narrow lanes, and obscure recesses, which have been assigned by common consent as the abodes of those outcasts of the worldthe free people of color. Pet Banks History & Effects | What are Pet Banks? The Webster-Hayne debates began over one issue but quickly switched to another. Sheidley, Harlow W. "The Wester-Hayne Debate: Recasting New England's Sectionalism", Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 179899, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WebsterHayne_debate&oldid=1135315190, This page was last edited on 23 January 2023, at 22:54. . What they said I believe; fully and sincerely believe, that the Union of the states is essential to the prosperity and safety of the states. Go to these cities now, and ask the question. . The Senate debates between Whig Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Democrat Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina in January 1830 started out as a disagreement over the sale of Western lands and turned into one of the most famous verbal contests in American history. Such interference has never been supposed to be within the power of government; nor has it been, in any way, attempted. We, sir, who oppose the Carolina doctrine, do not deny that the people may, if they choose, throw off any government, when it becomes oppressive and intolerable, and erect a better in its stead. I am opposed, therefore, in any shape, to all unnecessary extension of the powers, or the influence of the Legislature or Executive of the Union over the states, or the people of the states; and, most of all, I am opposed to those partial distributions of favors, whether by legislation or appropriation, which has a direct and powerful tendency to spread corruption through the land; to create an abject spirit of dependence; to sow the seeds of dissolution; to produce jealousy among the different portions of the Union, and finally to sap the very foundations of the government itself. It was motivated by a dispute over the continued sale of western lands, an important source of revenue for the federal government. Beyond that I seek not to penetrate the veil. Who doesn't? Debate on the Constitutionality of the Mexican War, Letters and Journals from the Oregon Trail. . Rush-Bagot Treaty Structure & Effects | What was the Rush-Bagot Agreement? If these opinions be thought doubtful, they are, nevertheless, I trust, neither extraordinary nor disrespectful. [2] We deal in no abstractions. Which of the following statements best represents the desires of the Northern states during the debate of Missouri statehood? The faction of voters in the North were against slavery and feared it spreading into new territory. Chris has a master's degree in history and teaches at the University of Northern Colorado. Even more pointedly, his speech reflected a decade of arguments from other Massachusetts conservatives who argued against supposed threats to New England's social order.[2]. We resolved to make the best of the situation in which Providence had placed us, and to fulfil the high trust which had developed upon us as the owners of slaves, in the only way in which such a trust could be fulfilled, without spreading misery and ruin throughout the land. Hayne entered the U.S. Senate in 1823 and soon became prominent as a spokesman for the South and for the . On January 19, 1830, Hayne attacked the Foot Resolution and labeled the Northeasterners as selfish and unprincipled for their support of protectionism and conservative land policies. But, sir, we will pass over all this. Rachel Venter is a recent graduate of Metropolitan State University of Denver. In January 1830, a debate on the nature of sovereignty in the American federal union occurred in the United States Senate between Senators Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Hayne of South Carolina. We are ready to make up the issue with the gentleman, as to the influence of slavery on individual and national characteron the prosperity and greatness, either of the United States, or of particular states. . Can any man believe, sir, that, if twenty-three millions per annum was now levied by direct taxation, or by an apportionment of the same among the states, instead of being raised by an indirect tax, of the severe effect of which few are aware, that the waste and extravagance, the unauthorized imposition of duties, and appropriations of money for unconstitutional objects, would have been tolerated for a single year? The debate continued, in some ways not being fully settled until the completion of the Civil War affirmed the power of the federal government to preserve the Union over the sovereignty of the states to leave it. She has worked as a university writing consultant for over three years. If I could, by a mere act of my will, put at the disposal of the federal government any amount of treasure which I might think proper to name, I should limit the amount to the means necessary for the legitimate purposes of the government. God grant that on my vision never may be opened what lies behind. We met it as a practical question of obligation and duty. I understand him to maintain an authority, on the part of the states, thus to interfere, for the purpose of correcting the exercise of power by the general government, of checking it, and of compelling it to conform to their opinion of the extent of its powers. . I must now beg to ask, sir, whence is this supposed right of the states derived?where do they find the power to interfere with the laws of the Union? Understand the 1830 debate's significance through an overview of issues of the Constitution, the Union, and state sovereignty. . Before his term as a U.S. senator, Hayne had served as a state senator, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, South Carolina's Speaker of the House, and Attorney General of South Carolina. . And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gentlemans doctrine a little into its practical application. In the course of my former remarks, I took occasion to deprecate, as one of the greatest of evils, the consolidation of this government. He was a lawyer turned congressional representative who eventually worked his way to the office of U.S. Secretary of State. . Though Webster made an impassioned argument, the political, social, and economic traditions of New England informed his ideas about the threatened nation. . Webster scoffed at the idea of consolidation, labeling it "that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusion." What Hayne and his supporters actually meant to do, Webster claimed, was to resist those means that might strengthen the bonds of common interest. Shedding weak tears over sufferings which had existence only in their own sickly imaginations, these friends of humanity set themselves systematically to work to seduce the slaves of the South from their masters. I maintain that, from the day of the cession of the territories by the states to Congress, no portion of the country has acted, either with more liberality or more intelligence, on the subject of the Western lands in the new states, than New England. Our Core Document Collection allows students to read history in the words of those who made it. . Are we in that condition still? The Virginia Resolution asserted that when the federal government undertook the deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of powers not granted to it in the constitution, states had the right and duty to interpose their authority to prevent this evil. It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. . flashcard sets. Sir, I am one of those who believe that the very life of our system is the independence of the states, and that there is no evil more to be deprecated than the consolidation of this government. Would it be safe to confide such a treasure to the keeping of our national rulers? . Differences between Northern and Southern ideas of good governance, which eventually led to the American Civil War, were beginning to emerge. Now, have they given away that right, or agreed to limit or restrict it in any respect? [was] fixed, forever, the character of the population in the vast regions Northwest of the Ohio, by excluding from them involuntary servitude. . . Broadside Advertisement for Runaway Slave, Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free-Soiler, Free & Slave-holding States and Territories. . But his standpoint was purely local and sectional. This was the man to fire an aristocracy of fellow citizens ready to arm when their interests were in danger, and upon him, it devolved to advance the cause of South Carolina, break down the tariff, and fascinate the Union with the new rattlesnake theories. During the course of the debates, the senators touched on pressing political issues of the daythe tariff, Western lands, internal improvementsbecause behind these and others were two very different understandings of the origin and nature of the American Union. . This was the tenor of Webster's speech, and nobly did the country respond to it. These irreconcilable views of national supremacy and state sovereignty framed the constitutional struggle that led to Civil War thirty years later. Hayne maintained that the states retained the authority to nullify federal law, Webster that federal law expressed the will of the American people and could not be nullified by a minority of the people in a state. Even the revenue system of this country, by which the whole of our pecuniary resources are derived from indirect taxation, from duties upon imports, has done much to weaken the responsibility of our federal rulers to the people, and has made them, in some measure, careless of their rights, and regardless of the high trust committed to their care. The speech is also known for the line Liberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable, which would subsequently become the state motto of North Dakota, appearing on the state seal. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 19, 1830. But I do not understand the doctrine now contended for to be that which, for the sake of distinctness, we may call the right of revolution. Some of his historical deductions may be questioned; but far above all possible error on the part of her leaders, stood colonial and Revolutionary New England, and the sturdy, intelligent, and thriving people whose loyalty to the Union had never failed, and whose home, should ill befall the nation, would yet prove liberty's last shelter. What started as a debate over the Tariff of Abominations soon morphed into debates over state and federal sovereignty and liberty and disunion. Well, you're not alone. I said, only, that it was highly wise and useful in legislating for the northwestern country, while it was yet a wilderness, to prohibit the introduction of slaves: and added, that I presumed, in the neighboring state of Kentucky, there was no reflecting and intelligent gentleman, who would doubt, that if the same prohibition had been extended, at the same early period, over that commonwealth, her strength and population would, at this day, have been far greater than they are. Now, I wish to be informedhowthis state interference is to be put in practice, without violence, bloodshed, and rebellion. God grant that, in my day, at least, that curtain may not rise. Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illin Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Douglas Faction), (Northern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. . The Union to be preserved, while it suits local and temporary purposes to preserve it; and to be sundered whenever it shall be found to thwart such purposes. Sir, when the gentleman provokes me to such a conflict, I meet him at the threshold. I understand him to maintain this right, as a right existing under the Constitution; not as a right to overthrow it, on the ground of extreme necessity, such as would justify violent revolution. Hayne quotes from the Virginia Resolution (1798), authored by Thomas Jefferson, to protest the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798). There was an end to all apprehension. In all the efforts that have been made by South Carolina to resist the unconstitutional laws which Congress has extended over them, she has kept steadily in view the preservation of the Union, by the only means by which she believes it can be long preserveda firm, manly, and steady resistance against usurpation. He entered the Senate on that memorable day with a slow and stately step and took his seat as though unconscious of the loud buzz of expectant interest with which the crowded auditory greeted his appearance. We look upon the states, not as separated, but as united. . Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses. Van Buren responded to the Panic of 1837 with the idea of the independent treasury, which was a. a system of depositing money in select independent banks The Webster-Hayne debate laid out key issues faced by the Senate in the 1820s and 1830s. Speech on the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise. . . All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. . The idea of a strong federal government The ability of the people to revolt against an unfair government The theory that the states' may vote against unfair laws The role of the president in commanding the government 2 See answers Advertisement holesstanham Answer: . . Sir, I cordially respond to that appeal. . The main issue of the Webster-Hayne Debate was the nature of the country that had been created by the Constitution. They cherish no deep and fixed regard for it, flowing from a thorough conviction of its absolute and vital necessity to our welfare. But I take leave of the subject. Webster believed that the Constitution should be viewed as a binding document between the United States rather than an agreement between sovereign states. . I will struggle while I have life, for our altars and our fire sides, and if God gives me strength, I will drive back the invader discomfited. What interest, asks he, has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio? Sir, this very question is full of significance. In The Webster-Hayne Debate, Christopher Childers examines the context of the debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and his Senate colleague Robert S. Hayne of South Carolina in January 1830.Readers will finish the book with a clear idea of the reason Webster's "Reply" became so influential in its own day. The militia of the state will be called out to sustain the nullifying act. It is the common pretense. The next day, however, Massachusetts senator Daniel Webster rose with his reply, and the northern states knew they had found their champion. . Sir, I have had some opportunities of making comparisons between the condition of the free Negroes of the North and the slaves of the South, and the comparison has left not only an indelible impression of the superior advantages of the latter, but has gone far to reconcile me to slavery itself. Ah! Sir, when arraigned before the bar of public opinion, on this charge of slavery, we can stand up with conscious rectitude, plead not guilty, and put ourselves upon God and our country. Webster's description of the U.S. government as "made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people," was later paraphrased by Abraham Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address in the words "government of the people, by the people, for the people." Religion and the Pure Principles of Morality: The American Anti-Slavery Society, Declaration of Sent Constitution of the American Anti-Slavery Society, Appeal to the Christian Women of the South, Protest in Illinois Legislature on Slavery. For one, Hayne and Webster were arguing for the fate of the West and, in particular, whether the North or South would control western development. Northern states intended to strengthen the federal government, binding the states in the union under one supreme law, and eradicating the use of slave labor in the rapidly growing nation. If the government of the United States be the agent of the state governments, then they may control it, provided they can agree in the manner of controlling it; if it be the agent of the people, then the people alone can control it, restrain it, modify, or reform it. And here it will be necessary to go back to the origin of the federal government. They undertook to form a general government, which should stand on a new basisnot a confederacy, not a league, not a compact between states, but a Constitution; a popular government, founded in popular election, directly responsible to the people themselves, and divided into branches, with prescribed limits of power, and prescribed duties. . Certainly, sir, I am, and ever have been of that opinion. . If the gentleman provokes the war, he shall have war. Foot calling for the temporary suspension of further land surveying until land already on the market was sold (to effectively stop the introduction of new lands onto the market). Hayne quotes from Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, December 26, 1825, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-william-branch-giles/?_sft_document_author=thomas-jefferson. Hayne's few but zealous partizans shielded him still, and South Carolina spoke with pride of him. We love to dwell on that union, and on the mutual happiness which it has so much promoted, and the common renown which it has so greatly contributed to acquire. . He must cut it with his sword. Nor those other words of delusion and folly,liberty first, and union afterwardsbut everywhere, spread all over in characters of living light, blazing on all its ample folds, as they float over the sea and over the land, and in every wind under the whole Heavens, that other sentiment, dear to every true American heartliberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable! In many respects, his speech betrays the mentality of Massachusetts conservatives seeking to regain national leadership and advance their particular ideas about the nation. . . It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. Then, in January of 1830, a senator from Connecticut introduced a proposal to the Senate stating that the federal government should stop surveying the lands west of the Mississippi River. They will also better understand the debate's political context. Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Breckinridge Facti (Southern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. The growing support for nullification was quite obvious during the days of the Jackson Administration, as events such as the Webster-Hayne Debate, Tariff of 1832, Order of Nullification, and Worcester v. Georgia all made the tension grow between the North and the South. . Under the circumstances then existing, I look upon this original and seasonable provision, as a real good attained. His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. I did not utter a single word, which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. I will yield to no gentleman here in sincere attachment to the Union,but it is a Union founded on the Constitution, and not such a Union as that gentleman would give us, that is dear to my heart. Far, indeed, in my wishes, very far distant be the day, when our associated and fraternal stripes shall be severed asunder, and when that happy constellation under which we have risen to so much renown, shall be broken up, and be seen sinking, star after star, into obscurity and night! [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. It is the servant of four-and-twenty masters, of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. . Foote Idea To Limit The Sale Of Public Lands In The West To New Settlers. . Strange was it, however, that in heaping reproaches upon the Hartford Convention he did not mark how nearly its leaders had mapped out the same line of opposition to the national Government that his State now proposed to take, both relying upon the arguments of the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 179899. Hayne maintained that the states retained the authority to nullify federal law, Webster that federal law expressed the will of the American people and could not be nullified by a minority of the people in a state. Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you . Let their last feeble and lingering glance, rather behold the gorgeous Ensign of the Republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscuredbearing for its motto, no such miserable interrogatory as, what is all this worth? The excited crowd which had packed the Senate chamber, filling every seat on the floor and in the galleries, and all the available standing room, dispersed after the orator's last grand apostrophe had died away in the air, with national pride throbbing at the heart. we find the most opposite and irreconcilable opinions between the two parties which I have before described. It has been said that Hayne was Calhoun's sword and buckler and that he returned to the contest refreshed each morning by nightly communions with the Vice-President, drawing auxiliary supplies from the well-stored arsenal of his powerful and subtle mind. The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Senator Daniel Webster] has gone out of his way to pass a high eulogium on the state of Ohio. Correspondence Between Anthony Butler and Presiden State of the Union Address Part II (1846). . Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? The action, the drama, the suspensewho needs the movies? Inflamed and mortified at this repulse, Hayne soon returned to the assault, primed with a two-day speech, which at great length vaunted the patriotism of South Carolina and bitterly attacked New England, dwelling particularly upon her conduct during the late war. The great debate, which culminated in Hayne's encounter with Webster, came about in a somewhat casual way. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. Create your account. . Edited and introduced by Jason W. Stevens. Those who would confine the federal government strictly within the limits prescribed by the Constitutionwho would preserve to the states and the people all powers not expressly delegatedwho would make this a federal and not a national Unionand who, administering the government in a spirit of equal justice, would make it a blessing and not a curse. Consolidation!that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusionconsolidation! What was going on? I wish to see no new powers drawn to the general government; but I confess I rejoice in whatever tends to strengthen the bond that unites us, and encourages the hope that our Union may be perpetual. Post-Civil War, as the nation rebuilt and reconciled the balance between federal and state government, federal law became the supreme law of the land, just as Webster desired. The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches presented to the United States Senate by senators Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. . . The debaters were Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. . So they could finish selling the lands already surveyed. If an inquiry should ever be instituted in these matters, however, it will be found that the profits of the slave trade were not confined to the South. . These debates transformed into a national crisis when South Carolina threatened . Thirty years before the Civil War broke out, disunion appeared to be on the horizon with the Nullification Crisis. . It is, sir, the peoples Constitution, the peoples government; made for the people; made by the people; and answerable to the people. . He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. Hayne began the debate by speaking out against a proposal by the northern states which suggested that the federal government should stop its surveyance of land west of the Mississippi and shift its focus to selling the land it had already surveyed. The people of the United States cherish a devotion to the Union, so pure, so ardent, that nothing short of intolerable oppression, can ever tempt them to do anything that may possibly endanger it.
Has Diane Abbott Son Been Sentenced Yet,
Ccsso Legislative Conference 2021,
Indot Greenfield District Staff,
Articles W