Between January and May 1830, twenty-one of the forty-eight senators delivered a staggering sixty-five speeches on the nature of the Union. . In this regard, Webster anticipated an argument that Abraham Lincoln made in his First Inaugural Address (1861). [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. . This debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. Most are forgettable, to put it charitably. Webster also tried to assert the importance of New England in the face of . So what was this debate really about? 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 is only regarded as a possible means of good; or on the other hand, as a possible means of evil. Webster's articulation of the concept of the Union went on to shape American attitudes about the federal government. . The 1830 WebsterHayne debate centered around the South Carolina nullification crisis of the late 1820s, but historians have largely ignored the sectional interests underpinning Webster's argument on behalf of Unionism and a transcendent nationalism. It develops the gentlemans whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. . Perhaps a quotation from a speech in Parliament in 1803 of Lord Castlereagh, Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry (17691822) during a debate over the conduct of British officials in India. But the feeling is without all adequate cause, and the suspicion which exists wholly groundless. The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. 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. . To them, the more money the central government made, the stronger it became and the more it took rights away from the states to govern themselves. The honorable member himself is not, I trust, and can never be, one of these. Having thus distinctly stated the points in dispute between the gentleman and myself, I proceed to examine them. . Whose agent is it? Where in these debates do we see a possible argument in defense of Constitutional secession by the states, later claimed by the Southern Confederacy before, during, and after the Civil War? Sir, an immense national treasury would be a fund for corruption. Drama, suspense, it's all there. I understand him to maintain, that the ultimate power of judging of the constitutional extent of its own authority, is not lodged exclusively in the general government, or any branch of it; but that, on the contrary, the states may lawfully decide for themselves, and each state for itself, whether, in a given case, the act of the general government transcends its power. . I understand him to insist, that if the exigency of the case, in the opinion of any state government, require it, such state government may, by its own sovereign authority, annul an act of the general government, which it deems plainly and palpably unconstitutional. After his term as a senator, he served as the Governor of South Carolina. Correspondence Between Anthony Butler and Presiden State of the Union Address Part II (1846). The Most Famous Senate Speech January 26, 1830 The debate began simply enough, centering on the seemingly prosaic subjects of tariff and public land policy. 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? Are we in that condition still? 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. Sir, I should fear the rebuke of no intelligent gentleman of Kentucky, were I to ask whether, if such an ordinance could have been applied to his own state, while it yet was a wilderness, and before Boone had passed the gap of the Alleghany, he does not suppose it would have contributed to the ultimate greatness of that commonwealth? . Now, I wish to be informedhowthis state interference is to be put in practice, without violence, bloodshed, and rebellion. The idea that a state could nullify a federal law, associated with South Carolina, especially after the publication of John C. Calhouns South Carolina Exposition and Protest (1828) in response to the tariff passed in that year. sir, this is but the old story. To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. 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. Rush-Bagot Treaty Structure & Effects | What was the Rush-Bagot Agreement? . The other way was through the sale of federally-owned land to private citizens. . President John Quincy Adams and the Election of 1824. foote wanted to stop surveying lands until they could sell the ones already looked at . There was no clear winner of the debate, but the Union's victory over the Confederacy just a few decades later brought Webster's ideas to fruition. Speech on Assuming Office of the President. Webster was eloquent, he was educated, he was witty, and he was a staunch defender of American liberty. Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you It was about protectionist tariffs.The speeches between Webster and Hayne themselves were not planned. Webster rose the next day in his seat to make his reply. . I now proceed to show that it is perfectly safe, and will practically have no effect but to keep the federal government within the limits of the Constitution, and prevent those unwarrantable assumptions of power, which cannot fail to impair the rights of the states, and finally destroy the Union itself. The debates between daniel webster of massachusetts and robert hayne of south carolina gave. . This leads, sir, to the real and wide difference, in political opinion, between the honorable gentleman and myself. But still, throughout American history, several debates have captured the nation's attention in a way that would make even Hollywood jealous. 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 absurdity (for it seems no less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this government and its true character. One of those was the Webster-Hayne debate, a series of unplanned speeches presented before the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830. . Create your account, 15 chapters | She has a BA in political science. . This is a delicate and sensitive point, in southern feeling; and of late years it has always been touched, and generally with effect, whenever the object has been to unite the whole South against northern men, or northern measures. . I'm imagining that your answer is probably 'I do.' Record of the Organization and Proceedings of The Massachusetts Lawmakers Investigate Working Condit State (Colonial) Legislatures>Massachusetts State Legislature. 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. copyright 2003-2023 Study.com. The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches delivered before the Senate in 1830. The gentleman takes alarm at the sound. We see its consequences at this moment, and we shall never cease to see them, perhaps, while the Ohio shall flow. Explore the Webster-Hayne debate. Enrolling in a course lets you earn progress by passing quizzes and exams. Let's start by looking at the United States around 1830. . 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. This would have been the case even if no positive provision to that effect had been inserted in that instrument. The arena selected for a first impression was the Senate, where the arch-heretic himself presided and guided the onset with his eye. . It moves vast bodies, and gives to them one and the same direction. 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. The War With Mexico: Speech in the United States H What Are the Colored People Doing for Themselves? It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. Speech to the U.S. House of Representatives. . Foote Idea To Limit The Sale Of Public Lands In The West To New Settlers. . Hayne was a great orator, filled with fiery passion and eloquent prose. 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. Webster and the northern states saw the Constitution as binding the individual states together as a single union. Sir, we will not stop to inquire whether the black man, as some philosophers have contended, is of an inferior race, nor whether his color and condition are the effects of a curse inflicted for the offences of his ancestors. Differences between Northern and Southern ideas of good governance, which eventually led to the American Civil War, were beginning to emerge. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. Webster argued that the American people had created the Union to promote the good of the whole. The United States' democratic process was evolving and its leaders were putting the newly ratified Constitution into practice. . Go to these cities now, and ask the question. . The dominant historical opinion of the famous debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Young Hayne of South Carolina which took place in the United States Senate in 1830 has long been that Webster defeated Hayne both as an orator and a statesman. They cherish no deep and fixed regard for it, flowing from a thorough conviction of its absolute and vital necessity to our welfare. See what I mean? . All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? . The scene depicted in the painting is Webster concluding his debate with Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. - Women's Rights Facts & Significance, Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points: Definition, Speech & Summary, Fireside Chats: Definition & Significance, JFK's New Frontier: Definition, Speech & Program. . Our Core Document Collection allows students to read history in the words of those who made it. The Constitutional Convention: The Great Compromise, The Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830: Summary & Issues, The History of American Presidential Debates, Jonathan Edwards and the Great Awakening: Sermons & Biography, Who Was Susan B. Anthony? But, sir, the gentleman is mistaken. This means that South Carolina is essentially its own nation, Georgia is its own nation, and so on. . It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. So soon as the cessions were obtained, it became necessary to make provision for the government and disposition of the territory . It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. Sir, the opinion which the honorable gentleman maintains, is a notion, founded in a total misapprehension, in my judgment, of the origin of this government, and of the foundation on which it stands. Hayne, South Carolina's foremost Senator, was the chosen champion; and the cause of his State, both in its right and wrong sides, could have found no abler exponent while [Vice President] Calhoun's official station kept him from the floor. . . Historians love a good debate. . . 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. Webster spoke in favor of the proposed pause of federal surveyance of western land, representing the North's interest in selling the western land, which had already been surveyed. Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? . But to remove all doubt it is expressly declared, by the 10th article of the amendment of the Constitution, that the powers not delegated to the states, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.. They will also better understand the debate's political context. 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. 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. He describes fully that old state of things then existing. When the gentleman says the Constitution is a compact between the states, he uses language exactly applicable to the old Confederation. Hayne quotes from the Virginia Resolution (1798), authored by Thomas Jefferson, to protest the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798). . Though Webster made an impassioned argument, the political, social, and economic traditions of New England informed his ideas about the threatened nation. [2] We deal in no abstractions. Finding our lot cast among a people, whom God had manifestly committed to our care, we did not sit down to speculate on abstract questions of theoretical liberty. 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. If the gentleman provokes the war, he shall have war. You see, to the south, the Constitution was essentially a treaty signed between sovereign states. While the debaters argued about slavery, the economy, protection tariffs, and western land, the real implication was the meaning of the United States Constitution. Robert Young Hayne spent more than two decades in elected offices, including mayor of Charleston, member of South Carolina's legislature, attorney general, and then governor of the state. Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. 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. In 1830, the federal government collected few taxes and had two primary sources of revenue. . The 1830 Webster-Hayne debate centered around the South Carolina nullification crisis of the late 1820s, but historians have largely ignored the sectional interests underpinning Webster's argument on behalf of Unionism and a transcendent nationalism. Available in hard copy and for download. 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." The debate was important because it laid out the arguments in favor of nationalism in the face of growing sectionalism. . . He had allowed himself but a single night from eve to morn to prepare for a critical and crowning occasion. TeachingAmericanHistory.org is a project of the Ashbrook Center at Ashland University, 401 College Avenue, Ashland, Ohio 44805 PHONE (419) 289-5411 TOLL FREE (877) 289-5411 EMAIL [emailprotected], The Congress Sends Twelve Amendments to the States, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 3rd Debate Part I, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 3rd Debate Part II, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 4th Debate Part I, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 4th Debate Part II, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 6th Debate Part I, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 6th Debate Part II, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates 7th Debate Part I, National Disfranchisement of Colored People, William Lloyd Garrison to Thomas Shipley.
Stroodles Pasta Straws Net Worth, Cook County Bond Refund Number, Morristown, Tn Most Wanted, Good Names For A Pet Praying Mantis, Doberman Puppies For Sale In Georgia, Articles W