. This government, sir, is the independent offspring of the popular will. He had allowed himself but a single night from eve to morn to prepare for a critical and crowning occasion. In many respects, his speech betrays the mentality of Massachusetts conservatives seeking to regain national leadership and advance their particular ideas about the nation. . I propose to consider it, and to compare it with the Constitution. While the Union lasts, we have high, exciting, gratifying prospects spread out before us, for us and our children. South Carolinas Declaration of the Causes of Sece Distribution of the Slave Population by State. My life upon it, sir, they would not. 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. Why? So they could finish selling the lands already surveyed. 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? Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. The scene depicted in the painting is Webster concluding his debate with Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. The United States, under the Constitution and federal government, was a single, unified nation, not a coalition of sovereign states. Having thus distinctly stated the points in dispute between the gentleman and myself, I proceed to examine them. Now, I wish to be informedhowthis state interference is to be put in practice, without violence, bloodshed, and rebellion. Well, let's look at the various parts. . succeed. Speech to the U.S. House of Representatives. . All of these ideas, however, are only parts of the main point. Besides that, however, the federal government was still figuring out its role in American society. Most assuredly, I need not say I differ with him, altogether and most widely, on that point. Webster's speech aroused the latent spirit of patriotism. Would it be safe to confide such a treasure to the keeping of our national rulers? . . . In a time when the country was undergoing some drastic changes, this debate managed to encapsulate the essence of the growing tensions dividing the nation. . It impressed on the soil itself, while it was yet a wilderness, an incapacity to bear up any other than free men. 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. 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. The heated speeches were unplanned and stemmed from the debate over a resolution by Connecticut Senator Samuel A. Who, then, Mr. President, are the true friends of the Union? Webster argued that the American people had created the Union to promote the good of the whole. . It makes but little difference, in my estimation, whether Congress or the Supreme Court, are invested with this power. Conversation-based seminars for collegial PD, one-day and multi-day seminars, graduate credit seminars (MA degree), online and in-person. A state will be restrained by a sincere love of the Union. It has always been regarded as a matter of domestic policy, left with the states themselves, and with which the federal government had nothing to do. 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. . . . The specific issue that sparked the Webster-Hayne debate was a proposal by the state of Connecticut which said that the federal government should halt its surveying of land west of the Mississippi and focus on selling the land it had already surveyed to private citizens. 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. Ham, one of Noahs sons, saw him uncovered, for which Noah cursed him by making Hams son, Canaan, a slave to Ham's brothers. But the topic which became the leading feature of the whole debate and gave it an undying interest was that of nullification, in which Hayne and Webster came forth as chief antagonists. If they mean merely this, then, no doubt, the public lands as well as everything else in which we have a common interest, tends to consolidation; and to this species of consolidation every true American ought to be attached; it is neither more nor less than strengthening the Union itself. Webster-Hayne Debate 1830, an unplanned series of speeches in the Senate, during which Robert Hayne of South Carolina interpreted the Constitution as little more than a treaty between sovereign states, and Daniel Webster expressed the concept of the United States as one nation. [was] fixed, forever, the character of the population in the vast regions Northwest of the Ohio, by excluding from them involuntary servitude. Noah grew a vineyard, got drunk on wine and lay naked. 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. .Readers will finish the book with a clear idea of the reason Webster's "Reply" became so influential in its own day. Daniel webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the. we find the most opposite and irreconcilable opinions between the two parties which I have before described. But until they shall alter it, it must stand as their will, and is equally binding on the general government and on the states. The Webster-Hayne debate laid out key issues faced by the Senate in the 1820s and 1830s. . Broadside Advertisement for Runaway Slave, Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free-Soiler, Free & Slave-holding States and Territories. 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! 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. 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. On that system, Ohio and Carolina are different governments, and different countries, connected here, it is true, by some slight and ill-defined bond of union, but, in all main respects, separate and diverse. . 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. flashcard sets. . I shrink almost instinctively from a course, however necessary, which may have a tendency to excite sectional feelings, and sectional jealousies. Excerpts from Ratification Documents of Virginia a Ratifying Conventions>New York Ratifying Convention. 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. The significance of Daniel Webster's argument went far beyond the immediate proposal at hand. Daniel Webster argued against nullification (the idea that states could disobey federal laws) arguing in favor of a strong federal government which would bind the states together under the Constitution. MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. Though the debate began as a standard policy debate, the significance of Daniel Webster's argument reached far beyond a single policy proposal. . 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 did not utter a single word, which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. 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. 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. 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. See what I mean? She has a BA in political science. This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. This important consideration, seriously and deeply impressed on our minds, led each state in the Convention to be less rigid, on points of inferior magnitude, than might have been otherwise expected.. Ostend Manifesto of 1854 Overview & Purpose | What was the Ostend Manifesto? An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. Certainly, sir, I am, and ever have been of that opinion. 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. Gloomy and downcast of late, Massachusetts men walked the avenue as though the fife and drum were before them. 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. 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. . Battle of Fort Sumter in the Civil War | Who Won the Battle of Fort Sumter? There yet remains to be performed, Mr. President, by far the most grave and important duty, which I feel to be devolved on me, by this occasion. Webster-Hayne Debate book. The Revelation on Celestial Marriage: Trouble Amon Hon. It develops the gentlemans whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. 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. This is the sense in which the Framers of the Constitution use the word consolidation; and in which sense I adopt and cherish it. Connecticut's proposal was an attempt to slow the growth of the nation, control westward expansion, and bolster the federal government's revenue. . Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. In our contemplation, Carolina and Ohio are parts of the same country; states, united under the same general government, having interests, common, associated, intermingled. Webster was eloquent, he was educated, he was witty, and he was a staunch defender of American liberty. Regional Conflict in America: Debate Over States' Rights. . Who doesn't? 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. . And what has been the consequence? Connecticut and other northeastern states were worried about the pace of growth and wanted to slow this down. . . 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. Webster pursued his objective through a rhetorical strategy that ignored Benton, the principal opponent of New England sectionalism, and that provoked Hayne into an exposition and defense of what became the South Carolina doctrine of nullification. 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 debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. 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? If this is to become one great consolidated government, swallowing up the rights of the states, and the liberties of the citizen, riding and ruling over the plundered ploughman, and beggared yeomanry,[8] the Union will not be worth preserving. 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. When they shall become dissatisfied with this distribution, they can alter it. This leads, sir, to the real and wide difference, in political opinion, between the honorable gentleman and myself. Every scheme or contrivance by which rulers are able to procure the command of money by means unknown to, unseen or unfelt by, the people, destroys this security.
Ptsd Settlement Offer,
Benefits Of Low Conscientiousness,
Gareth Thomas Husband,
Eye Drop Expiration After Opening Chart,
Dallas Children's Hospital Internship,
Articles W
