Most people of the time supported a small central government and strong state governments, so the federal government was much weaker than you might have expected. Thousands of these deluded victims of fanaticism were seduced into the enjoyment of freedom in our Northern cities. In January 1830, a debate on the nature of sovereignty in the America. - Women's Rights Facts & Significance, Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points: Definition, Speech & Summary, Fireside Chats: Definition & Significance, JFK's New Frontier: Definition, Speech & Program. . foote wanted to stop surveying lands until they could sell the ones already looked at Sir, there does not exist, on the face of the whole earth, a population so poor, so wretched, so vile, so loathsome, so utterly destitute of all the comforts, conveniences, and decencies of life, as the unfortunate blacks of Philadelphia, and New York, and Boston. 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. Judiciary Act of 1801 | Overview, History & Significance, General Ulysses S. Grant Takes Charge: His Strategic Plan for Ending the War. But until they shall alter it, it must stand as their will, and is equally binding on the general government and on the states. . All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. They will also better understand the debate's political context. Webster believed that the Constitution should be viewed as a binding document between the United States rather than an agreement between sovereign states. 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. 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. Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. This government, sir, is the independent offspring of the popular will. We had no other general government. 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. . All of these ideas, however, are only parts of the main point. 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 . 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. The debate was on. Then he began his speech, his words flowing on so completely at command that a fellow senator who heard him likened his elocution to the steady flow of molten gold. 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. . The Significance of the Frontier in American Histo South Carolinas Ordinance of Nullification. In contrasting the state of Ohio with Kentucky, for the purpose of pointing out the superiority of the former, and of attributing that superiority to the existence of slavery, in the one state, and its absence in the other, I thought I could discern the very spirit of the Missouri question[1] intruded into this debate, for objects best known to the gentleman himself. I supposed, that on this point, no two gentlemen in the Senate could entertain different opinions. 136 lessons Southern states advocated for strong, sovereign state governments, a small federal government, the western expansion of the agricultural economy, and with it, the maintenance of the institution of slavery. . . . The Webster-Hayne debate was a famous debate in the United States between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina.It happened on January 19-27, 1830. 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. What idea was espoused with the Webster-Hayne debates? All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. Neither side can be said to have 'won' the debate, but Webster's articulation of the Union solidified for many the role of the federal government. Allow me to say, as a preliminary remark, that I call this the South Carolina doctrine, only because the gentleman himself has so denominated it. Connecticut's proposal was an attempt to slow the growth of the nation, control westward expansion, and bolster the federal government's revenue. The debate was important because it laid out the arguments in favor of nationalism in the face of growing sectionalism. 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. Congress could only recommendtheir acts were not of binding force, till the states had adopted and sanctioned them. . To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. The significance of Daniel Webster's argument went far beyond the immediate proposal at hand. . . . 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. . On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. 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.. This will co-operate with the feelings of patriotism to induce a state to avoid any measures calculated to endanger that connection. But his standpoint was purely local and sectional. It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. Rather, the debate eloquently captured the ideas and ideals of Northern and Southern representatives of the time, highlighting and summarizing the major issues of governance of the era. 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. The whole form and structure of the federal government, the opinions of the Framers of the Constitution, and the organization of the state governments, demonstrate that though the states have surrendered certain specific powers, they have not surrendered their sovereignty. Record of the Organization and Proceedings of The Massachusetts Lawmakers Investigate Working Condit State (Colonial) Legislatures>Massachusetts State Legislature. South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. 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. Address to the People of the United States, by the What are the main points of difference between Webster and Hayne, especially on the question of the nature of the Union and the Constitution? We who come here, as agents and representatives of these narrow-minded and selfish men of New England, consider ourselves as bound to regard, with equal eye, the good of the whole, in whatever is within our power of legislation. 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. 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. More specifically, some of the issues facing Congress during this period included: Robert Y. Hayne served as Senator of South Carolina from 1823 to 1832. . I am a Unionist, and in this sense a national Republican. They significantly declare, that it is time to calculate the value of the Union; and their aim seems to be to enumerate, and to magnify all the evils, real and imaginary, which the government under the Union produces. He remained a Southern Unionist through his long public career and a good type of the growing class of statesman devoted to slave interests who loved the Union as it was and doted upon its compromises. 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. If slavery, as it now exists in this country, be an evil, we of the present day found it ready made to our hands. Consolidation!that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusionconsolidation! The answer is Daniel Webster, one of the greatest orators in US Senate history, a successful attorney and Senator from Massachusetts and a complex and enigmatic man. How do Webster and Hayne differ in regard to their understandings of the proper relationship among the several states and between the states and the national government? Chris has a master's degree in history and teaches at the University of Northern Colorado. . Several state governments or courts, some in the north, had espoused the idea of nullification prior to 1828. 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). . The United States' democratic process was evolving and its leaders were putting the newly ratified Constitution into practice. 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. 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? . But that was found insufficient, and inadequate to the public exigencies. It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. MTEL Speech: Notable Debates & Speeches in U.S. History, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858: Summary & Significance, Psychological Research & Experimental Design, All Teacher Certification Test Prep Courses, The Significance of Daniel Webster's Argument, MTEL Speech: Principles of Argument & Debate, MTEL Speech: Understanding Persuasive Communication, MTEL Speech: Public Argument in Democratic Societies. 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. The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Senator Daniel Webster] has gone out of his way to pass a high eulogium on the state of Ohio. It would enable Congress and the Executive to exercise a control over states, as well as over great interests in the country, nay, even over corporations and individualsutterly destructive of the purity, and fatal to the duration of our institutions. .Readers will finish the book with a clear idea of the reason Webster's "Reply" became so influential in its own day. The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. 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. It is only by a strict adherence to the limitations imposed by the Constitution on the federal government, that this system works well, and can answer the great ends for which it was instituted. 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. They tell us, in the letter submitting the Constitution to the consideration of the country, that, in all our deliberations on this subject, we kept steadily in our view that which appears to us the greatest interest of every true Americanthe consolidation of our Unionin which is involved our prosperity, felicity, safety; perhaps our national existence. I love a good debate. Most are forgettable, to put it charitably. 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. Senator Foote, of Connecticut, submitted a proposition inquiring into the expediency of limiting the sales of public lands to those already in the market. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 25, 1830. . There was an end to all apprehension. . . Daniel webster (ma) and sen. Hayne of . . Webster-Hayne Debate book. . And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gentlemans doctrine a little into its practical application. . This would have been the case even if no positive provision to that effect had been inserted in that instrument. New England, the Union, and the Constitution in its integrity, all were triumphantly vindicated. . The Webster-Hayne debate laid out key issues faced by the Senate in the 1820s and 1830s. . Hayne argued that the sovereign and independent states had created the Union to promote their particular interests. 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. This statement, though strong, is no stronger than the strictest truth will warrant. 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. He served as a U.S. senator from 1823 to 1832, and was a leading proponent of the states' rights doctrine. 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. In the course of my former remarks, I took occasion to deprecate, as one of the greatest of evils, the consolidation of this government. Jackson himself would raise a national toast for 'the Union' later that year. . The following states came from the territory north and west of the Ohio river: Ohio (1803), Indiana (1816), Illinois (1818), Michigan (1837), Wisconsin (1848) and Minnesota (1858). Benton was rising in renown as the advocate not only of Western settlers but of a new theory that the public lands should be given away instead of sold to them. I feel like its a lifeline. . It is observable enough, that the doctrine for which the honorable gentleman contends, leads him to the necessity of maintaining, not only that this general government is the creature of the states, but that it is the creature of each of the states severally; so that each may assert the power, for itself, of determining whether it acts within the limits of its authority. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 19, 1830. These debates transformed into a national crisis when South Carolina threatened . State governments were in control of their own affairs and expected little intervention from the federal government.
Scorpio Sun Virgo Moon Leo Rising Celebrities, Flip This House Cast, Articles W