The WebsterHayne debate was a debate in the United States between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina that took place on January 1927, 1830 on the topic of protectionist tariffs. . It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. . They ordained such a government; they gave it the name of a Constitution, and therein they established a distribution of powers between this, their general government, and their several state governments. We could not send them back to the shores from whence their fathers had been taken; their numbers forbade the thought, even if we did not know that their condition here is infinitely preferable to what it possibly could be among the barren sands and savage tribes of Africa; and it was wholly irreconcilable with all our notions of humanity to tear asunder the tender ties which they had formed among us, to gratify the feelings of a false philanthropy. It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. . The impression which has gone abroad, of the weakness of the South, as connected with the slave question, exposes us to such constant attacks, has done us so much injury, and is calculated to produce such infinite mischiefs, that I embrace the occasion presented by the remarks of the gentleman from Massachusetts, to declare that we are ready to meet the question promptly and fearlessly. The gentleman, therefore, only follows out his own principles; he does no more than arrive at the natural conclusions of his own doctrines; he only announces the true results of that creed, which he has adopted himself, and would persuade others to adopt, when he thus declares that South Carolina has no interest in a public work in Ohio. South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. If I had, sir, the powers of a magician, and could, by a wave of my hand, convert this capital into gold for such a purpose, I would not do it. The senator from Massachusetts, in denouncing what he is pleased to call the Carolina doctrine,[5] has attempted to throw ridicule upon the idea that a state has any constitutional remedy by the exercise of its sovereign authority against a gross, palpable, and deliberate violation of the Constitution. He called it an idle or a ridiculous notion, or something to that effect; and added, that it would make the Union a mere rope of sand. This will co-operate with the feelings of patriotism to induce a state to avoid any measures calculated to endanger that connection. Consolidation!that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusionconsolidation! What started as a debate over the Tariff of Abominations soon morphed into debates over state and federal sovereignty and liberty and disunion. All regulated governments, all free governments, have been broken up by similar disinterested and well-disposed interference! Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. . . . It was about protectionist tariffs.The speeches between Webster and Hayne themselves were not planned. If these opinions be thought doubtful, they are, nevertheless, I trust, neither extraordinary nor disrespectful. He served as a U.S. senator from 1823 to 1832, and was a leading proponent of the states' rights doctrine. The Destiny of America, Speech at the Dedication o An Address. In this moment in American history, the federal government had relatively little power. Webster stood in favor of Connecticut's proposal that the federal government should stop surveying western land and sell the land it had already surveyed to boost it's revenue and strengthen it's authority. Compare And Contrast The Tension Between North And South The theory that the states' may vote against unfair laws. Battle of Fort Sumter in the Civil War | Who Won the Battle of Fort Sumter? Well, the southern states were infuriated. This absurdity (for it seems no less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this government and its true character. They have agreed, that certain specific powers shall be exercised by the federal government; but the moment that government steps beyond the limits of its charter, the right of the states to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits the authorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them,[7] is as full and complete as it was before the Constitution was formed. Conversation-based seminars for collegial PD, one-day and multi-day seminars, graduate credit seminars (MA degree), online and in-person. I deem far otherwise of the Union of the states; and so did the Framers of the Constitution themselves. There was no winner or loser in the Webster-Hayne debate. We will not look back to inquire whether our fathers were guiltless in introducing slaves into this country. . The Hayne-Webster Debate - Constitution.org Southern ships and Southern sailors were not the instruments of bringing slaves to the shores of America, nor did our merchants reap the profits of that accursed traffic.. . One of those was the Webster-Hayne debate, a series of unplanned speeches presented before the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830. . As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 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. . So soon as the cessions were obtained, it became necessary to make provision for the government and disposition of the territory . This is the sum of what I understand from him, to be the South Carolina doctrine; and the doctrine which he maintains. So what was this debate really about? . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. What can I say? . Sir, when gentlemen speak of the effects of a common fund, belonging to all the states, as having a tendency to consolidation, what do they mean? President Andrew Jackson had just been elected, most of the states got rid of property requirements for voting, and an entire new era of democracy was being born. But I do not admit that, under the Constitution, and in conformity with it, there is any mode in which a state government, as a member of the Union, can interfere and stop the progress of the general government, by force of her own laws, under any circumstances whatever. Sir, all our difficulties on this subject have arisen from interference from abroad, which has disturbed, and may again disturb, our domestic tranquility, just so far as to bring down punishment upon the heads of the unfortunate victims of a fanatical and mistaken humanity. God grant that, in my day, at least, that curtain may not rise. . 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. For Calhoun, see the Speech on Abolition Petitions and the Speech on the Oregon Bill. His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. Prejudice Not Natural: The American Colonization "What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July? Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. a. an explanation of natural events that is well supported by scientific evidence b. a set of rules for ethical conduct during an experiment c. a statement that describes how natural events happen d. a possible answer to a scientific question Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illin Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Douglas Faction), (Northern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. The purpose of the Constitution was to permit cooperation between states under a shared political standard, but that meant that any growth in a federal government threatened the sovereignty of the states. He rose, the image of conscious mastery, after the dull preliminary business of the day was dispatched, and with a happy figurative allusion to the tossed mariner, as he called for a reading of the resolution from which the debate had so far drifted, lifted his audience at once to his level. . The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts while he exonerates me personally from the charge, intimates that there is a party in the country who are looking to disunion. Sir, there exists, moreover, a deep and settled conviction of the benefits, which result from a close connection of all the states, for purposes of mutual protection and defense. . The object of the Framers of the Constitution, as disclosed in that address, was not the consolidation of the government, but the consolidation of the Union. It was not to draw power from the states, in order to transfer it to a great national government, but, in the language of the Constitution itself, to form a more perfect union; and by what means? If the federal government, in all or any of its departments, are to prescribe the limits of its own authority; and the states are bound to submit to the decision, and are not to be allowed to examine and decide for themselves, when the barriers of the Constitution shall be overleaped, this is practically a government without limitation of powers; the states are at once reduced to mere petty corporations, and the people are entirely at your mercy. This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. . . . The tendency of all these ideas and sentiments is obviously to bring the Union into discussion, as a mere question of present and temporary expediency; nothing more than a mere matter of profit and loss. Our notion of things is entirely different. This statement, though strong, is no stronger than the strictest truth will warrant. Sir, if we are, then vain will be our attempt to maintain the Constitution under which we sit. 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. Ah! . Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Breckinridge Facti (Southern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. . Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? sir, this is but the old story. Address before the Wisconsin State Agricultural So "The Whole Affair Seems the Work of a Madman", John Brown and the Principle of Nonresistance. The debates between daniel webster of massachusetts and robert hayne of south carolina gave. He was dressed with scrupulous care, in a blue coat with metal buttons, a buff vest rounding over his full abdomen, and his neck encircled with a white cravat. What was the main issue of the Webster-Hayne debate? Nor shall I stop there. But, sir, we will pass over all this. This seemed like an Eastern spasm of jealousy at the progress of the West. Available in hard copy and for download. . That led into a debate on the economy, in which Webster attacked the institution of slavery and Hayne labeled the policy of protectionist tariffs as the consolidation of a strong central government, which he called the greatest of evils. It was plenary then, and never having been surrendered, must be plenary now. . To all this, sir, I was disposed most cordially to respond. All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. . The gentleman, indeed, argues that slavery, in the abstract, is no evil. The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Senator Daniel Webster] has gone out of his way to pass a high eulogium on the state of Ohio. . 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. 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. . What interest, asks he, has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio? Sir, this very question is full of significance. 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. No hanging over the abyss of disunion, no weighing of the chances, no doubting as to what the Constitution was worth, no placing of liberty before Union, but "liberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable." Now, have they given away that right, or agreed to limit or restrict it in any respect? 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. And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gentlemans doctrine a little into its practical application. But, sir, the task has been forced upon me, and I proceed right onward to the performance of my duty; be the consequences what they may, the responsibility is with those who have imposed upon me this necessity. . And here it will be necessary to go back to the origin of the federal government. Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. Robert Young Hayne, (born Nov. 10, 1791, Colleton District, S.C., U.S.died Sept. 24, 1839, Asheville, N.C.), American lawyer, political leader, and spokesman for the South, best-remembered for his debate with Daniel Webster (1830), in which he set forth a doctrine of nullification. - Definition and Uses, Public Speaking: Assignment 1 - Informative Speech, Public Speaking: Assignment 3 - Special Occasion Speech, The Role of Probability Distributions, Random Numbers & the Computer in Simulations, The Monte Carlo Simulation: Scope & Common Applications, Working Scholars Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community, The methods by which the federal government earned its revenue, The federal government's surveying and selling of land west of the Mississippi River, The issue of slavery, which was beginning to divide the Northern and Southern states, The balance of power between federal and state governments. Competing Conceptions of Union and Ordered Liberty in
Nsw Police Retirement Payout, Recurrent Chemical Pregnancy Mumsnet, He Who Fights With Monsters Wiki, Hazard Pay For Caregivers Washington State, Uber From Sanford Airport To Universal Studios, Articles W