what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

I did not utter a single word, which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. . Though Webster made an impassioned argument, the political, social, and economic traditions of New England informed his ideas about the threatened nation. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. It moves vast bodies, and gives to them one and the same direction. Two leading ideas predominated in this reply, and with respect to either Hayne was not only answered but put to silence. But his standpoint was purely local and sectional. Sir, an immense national treasury would be a fund for corruption. . An equally talented orator, Webster rose as the advocate of the North in the debate with his captivating reply to Hayne's initial argument. The debate itself, a nine-day long unplanned exchange between Senators Robert Y. Hayne and Daniel Webster, directly addressed the methods by which the federal government was generating revenue, namely through protective tariffs and the selling of federal lands in the newly acquired western territories. . 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. But, sir, we will pass over all this. 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. Daniel Webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the danger of the states' rights doctrine, which permitted each State to decide for itself which laws were unconstitutional, claiming it would lead to civil war. . The people were not satisfied with it, and undertook to establish a better. . It cannot be doubted, and is not denied, that before the formation of the constitution, each state was an independent sovereignty, possessing all the rights and powers appertaining to independent nations; nor can it be denied that, after the Constitution was formed, they remained equally sovereign and independent, as to all powers, not expressly delegated to the federal government. 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. Differences between Northern and Southern ideas of good governance, which eventually led to the American Civil War, were beginning to emerge. The debate was on. This debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. 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. . 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. States' rights (South) vs. nationalism (North). But that was found insufficient, and inadequate to the public exigencies. . Ah! By means of missionaries and political tracts, the scheme was in a great measure successful. 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. Webster's argument that the constitution should stand as a powerful uniting force between the states rather than a treaty between sovereign states held as a key concept in America's ideas about the federal government. Next, the Union was held up to view in all its strength, symmetry, and integrity, reposing in the ark of the Constitution, no longer an experiment, as in the days when Hamilton and Jefferson contended for shaping its course, but ordained and established by and for the people, to secure the blessings of liberty to all posterity. 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? . 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 gentleman takes alarm at the sound. Between January and May 1830, twenty-one of the forty-eight senators delivered a staggering sixty-five speeches on the nature of the Union. 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 next day, however, Massachusetts senator Daniel Webster rose with his reply, and the northern states knew they had found their champion. 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. . For Calhoun, see the Speech on Abolition Petitions and the Speech on the Oregon Bill. 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 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. . 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. 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. 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. So they could finish selling the lands already surveyed. 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. I admit that there is an ultimate violent remedy, above the Constitution, and in defiance of the Constitution, which may be resorted to, when a revolution is to be justified. I deem far otherwise of the Union of the states; and so did the Framers of the Constitution themselves. Besides that, however, the federal government was still figuring out its role in American society. . . . Hayne was a great orator, filled with fiery passion and eloquent prose. But, the simple expression of this sentiment has led the gentleman, not only into a labored defense of slavery, in the abstract, and on principle, but, also, into a warm accusation against me, as having attacked the system of domestic slavery, now existing in the Southern states. 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. Hayne's few but zealous partizans shielded him still, and South Carolina spoke with pride of him. . One was through protective tariffs, high taxes on imports and exports. 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. The real significance of this debate was in each man's interpretation of the United States Constitution. 1824 Presidential Election, Candidates & Significance | Who Won the Election of 1824? . Our notion of things is entirely different. Tariff of 1816 History & Significance | What was the Tariff of 1816? . Do they mean, or can they mean, anything more than that the Union of the states will be strengthened, by whatever continues or furnishes inducements to the people of the states to hold together? . The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. This episode was used in nineteenth century America as a Biblical justification for slavery. The United States' democratic process was evolving and its leaders were putting the newly ratified Constitution into practice. [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. During his first years in Congress, Webster railed against President James Madison 's war policies, invoking a states' rights argument to oppose a conscription bill that went down to defeat.. The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Senator Daniel Webster] has gone out of his way to pass a high eulogium on the state of Ohio. You see, to the south, the Constitution was essentially a treaty signed between sovereign states. . 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. 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.. . Webster and the northern states saw the Constitution as binding the individual states together as a single union. . . . 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. In this moment in American history, the federal government had relatively little power. Webster argued that the American people had created the Union to promote the good of the whole. All rights reserved. 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? 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." - 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. As sovereign states, each state could individually interpret the Constitution and even leave the Union altogether. His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. What a commentary on the wisdom, justice, and humanity, of the Southern slave owner is presented by the example of certain benevolent associations and charitable individuals elsewhere. It is only regarded as a possible means of good; or on the other hand, as a possible means of evil. Webster's speech aroused the latent spirit of patriotism. 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 . Webster's articulation of the concept of the Union went on to shape American attitudes about the federal government. to expose them to the temptations inseparable from the direction and control of a fund which might be enlarged or diminished almost at pleasure, without imposing burthens upon the people? Well, let's look at the various parts. But the feeling is without all adequate cause, and the suspicion which exists wholly groundless. "The most eloquent speech ever delivered in Congress" may have been Webster's 1830 "Second Reply to Hayne", a South Carolina Senator who had echoed John C. Calhoun's case for state's rights.. The great debate, which culminated in Hayne's encounter with Webster, came about in a somewhat casual way. It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. . It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. A speech by Louisiana Senator Edward Livingston, however, neatly explains how American nationhood encompasses elements of both Webster and Hayne's ideas. 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. . 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. Chris has a master's degree in history and teaches at the University of Northern Colorado. 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. Beyond that I seek not to penetrate the veil. 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. Thirty years before the Civil War broke out, disunion appeared to be on the horizon with the Nullification Crisis. In 1830, the federal government collected few taxes and had two primary sources of revenue. . The Destiny of America, Speech at the Dedication o An Address. . . Webster-Hayne Debate book. . . Record of the Organization and Proceedings of The Massachusetts Lawmakers Investigate Working Condit State (Colonial) Legislatures>Massachusetts State Legislature. Congress could only recommendtheir acts were not of binding force, till the states had adopted and sanctioned them. Representatives of the northern states were concerned by the rapid growth of the nation; just 27 years earlier, the Louisiana Purchase had nearly doubled the size of the nation, and the newly elected President Andrew Jackson was hungry for more territory. The significance of Daniel Webster's argument went far beyond the immediate proposal at hand. 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. Which of the following statements best represents the desires of the Northern states during the debate of Missouri statehood? As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 136 lessons Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. . They will also better understand the debate's political context. 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. . Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. An error occurred trying to load this video. . Thousands of these deluded victims of fanaticism were seduced into the enjoyment of freedom in our Northern cities. 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.

Papa Gyros Nutrition Information, The Company Ava Serum Path, Articles W