Prelude to States Rights and secession Procedure to annex states was set up through the Northwest...

29
Prelude to States Rights Prelude to States Rights and secession and secession Procedure to annex states was Procedure to annex states was set up through the Northwest set up through the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 Ordinance of 1787 Slavery to be prohibited Slavery to be prohibited Throw out with the Procedure to Throw out with the Procedure to add Missouri add Missouri

Transcript of Prelude to States Rights and secession Procedure to annex states was set up through the Northwest...

Prelude to States Rights and Prelude to States Rights and secessionsecession

Procedure to annex states was set up Procedure to annex states was set up through the Northwest Ordinance of through the Northwest Ordinance of 17871787

Slavery to be prohibitedSlavery to be prohibitedThrow out with the Procedure to add Throw out with the Procedure to add

Missouri Missouri

The Missouri Compromise The Missouri Compromise

In 1819, a time of serious economic In 1819, a time of serious economic problems, President Monroe was faced problems, President Monroe was faced with another crisis. Missouri was the first with another crisis. Missouri was the first state to be carved out of land acquired state to be carved out of land acquired through the Louisiana Purchase, which through the Louisiana Purchase, which Monroe had helped negotiate in 1803. It Monroe had helped negotiate in 1803. It was on the verge of being admitted to the was on the verge of being admitted to the Union at a time when there were 22 Union at a time when there were 22 states. Eleven states allowed slavery and states. Eleven states allowed slavery and 11 did not. There was an argument in the 11 did not. There was an argument in the U.S. Congress about whether Missouri U.S. Congress about whether Missouri should or should not allow slavery.should or should not allow slavery.

the Senate and House of the Senate and House of Representatives worked out a deal Representatives worked out a deal that allowed Massachusetts' that allowed Massachusetts' northernmost counties to apply for northernmost counties to apply for admission to the Union as a non-admission to the Union as a non-slave state called Maine while slave state called Maine while Missouri would be admitted as a Missouri would be admitted as a slave state. slave state.

Senate equalSenate equal

With the admission of Missouri and With the admission of Missouri and Maine to the Union, the number of Maine to the Union, the number of slave states and non-slave states slave states and non-slave states remained equal at 12 each, which remained equal at 12 each, which prevented the South from having prevented the South from having more representation in the Senate more representation in the Senate

In addition, slavery would be In addition, slavery would be forbidden north of the latitude line forbidden north of the latitude line that runs along the southern Missouri that runs along the southern Missouri border for the remaining Louisiana border for the remaining Louisiana Territory (36 o 30 ’)Territory (36 o 30 ’)

States Rights and States Rights and Theory of NullificationTheory of Nullification

Postponing the inevitablePostponing the inevitable

States RightsStates Rights

According to this theory, the federal According to this theory, the federal Union is a voluntary association of Union is a voluntary association of states, and if the central government states, and if the central government goes too far each state has the right goes too far each state has the right to nullify that law. to nullify that law.

Nullification is a constitutional theory Nullification is a constitutional theory that gives an individual state the that gives an individual state the right to declare null and void any law right to declare null and void any law passed by the United States passed by the United States Congress which the state deems Congress which the state deems unacceptable and unconstitutional. unacceptable and unconstitutional.

BeginningsBeginnings The origins of The origins of

nullification are found nullification are found in the Federalist-in the Federalist-Republican debate of Republican debate of the late 1700s. James the late 1700s. James Madison and Thomas Madison and Thomas Jefferson in the Jefferson in the Virginia and Kentucky Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (1798) Resolutions (1798) declared that the declared that the states had the right states had the right to nullify laws by to nullify laws by which the federal which the federal government government overstepped its limits overstepped its limits of jurisprudence. of jurisprudence.

Northern States use the Northern States use the theorytheory

Another states' rights dispute Another states' rights dispute occurred over the War of 1812. At occurred over the War of 1812. At the Hartford Convention, New the Hartford Convention, New England states voiced opposition to England states voiced opposition to President James Madison and the President James Madison and the war, and discussed secession from war, and discussed secession from the Union.the Union.

Tariff issuesTariff issues

The The Tariff of 1816Tariff of 1816 was put in place was put in place after the after the War of 1812War of 1812. Britain had . Britain had developed a large stockpile of iron and developed a large stockpile of iron and textile goods. Because this stockpile was textile goods. Because this stockpile was so large, the price of British goods soon so large, the price of British goods soon plummeted in comparison to that of plummeted in comparison to that of American goods. Consequently, many American goods. Consequently, many Americans bought British goods rather Americans bought British goods rather than American goods, hurting American than American goods, hurting American manufacturers. manufacturers.

The northern United States were quite The northern United States were quite pleased by this tariff. Many of its industries pleased by this tariff. Many of its industries and workers competed with British imports and workers competed with British imports and benefited from the tariff. and benefited from the tariff.

The Southerners, however, were outraged, The Southerners, however, were outraged, since they were net consumers of the since they were net consumers of the manufactured goods which now cost more; manufactured goods which now cost more; further their agricultural exports to Britain further their agricultural exports to Britain might be threatened if Britain retaliated. might be threatened if Britain retaliated.

““Tariff of Abominations”Tariff of Abominations”

The "tariff of abominations" of 1828 The "tariff of abominations" of 1828 revived the issue. By this time in the revived the issue. By this time in the United States, the North had become United States, the North had become economically dominant due to economically dominant due to manufacturing, and the South was manufacturing, and the South was beginning to suffer from exhausted beginning to suffer from exhausted land. The government enacted tariffs on land. The government enacted tariffs on foreign manufactures to protect foreign manufactures to protect Northern business, which raised the Northern business, which raised the price of goods to be sold throughout the price of goods to be sold throughout the US. US.

These tariffs provided subsidies to mainly These tariffs provided subsidies to mainly northern interests, thereby serving to exact northern interests, thereby serving to exact "tribute" from the Southern economy, to the "tribute" from the Southern economy, to the Northern states in power; this was likewise Northern states in power; this was likewise in full spite of the fact that Article I, section in full spite of the fact that Article I, section I Constitution only permitted Congress to I Constitution only permitted Congress to lay and collect taxes of any kind "for the lay and collect taxes of any kind "for the common defense and the general welfare," common defense and the general welfare," and hence such tariffs were viewed as mere and hence such tariffs were viewed as mere theft by federal legislation. theft by federal legislation.

Southerners vocally expressed their Southerners vocally expressed their tariff opposition in documents such tariff opposition in documents such as the as the South Carolina Exposition and South Carolina Exposition and ProtestProtest in 1828, written in response in 1828, written in response to the “Tariff of Abomination”to the “Tariff of Abomination”

South CarolinaSouth Carolina

South CarolinaSouth Carolina's 's Nullification OrdinanceNullification Ordinance declared both the declared both the tariff of 1828tariff of 1828 and the and the 18321832 null and void within the state borders null and void within the state borders of South Carolina. This action initiated the of South Carolina. This action initiated the Nullification CrisisNullification Crisis. Passed by a state . Passed by a state convention on November 24, 1832, it led, convention on November 24, 1832, it led, on December 10, to President on December 10, to President Andrew JacksonAndrew Jackson's proclamation against 's proclamation against South Carolina, which sent a naval flotilla South Carolina, which sent a naval flotilla and a threat of sending federal troops to and a threat of sending federal troops to enforce the tariffsenforce the tariffs

Jackson RespondsJackson Responds

Jackson authorized this under color of Jackson authorized this under color of national authority, claiming in his 1832 [national authority, claiming in his 1832 [Regarding NullificationRegarding Nullification] that "our social ] that "our social compact in express terms declares, that the compact in express terms declares, that the laws of the United States, its Constitution, laws of the United States, its Constitution, and treaties made under it, are the and treaties made under it, are the supreme law of the land; and for greater supreme law of the land; and for greater caution adds, "that the judges in every caution adds, "that the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding contrary notwithstanding

Hence under Hence under Jackson's view, Jackson's view, federal law was federal law was final, and states final, and states had no choice had no choice but to obey it. but to obey it.

South Carolinians in South Carolinians in particular were upset by particular were upset by their inability to afford their inability to afford these goods which the these goods which the South could not produce. South could not produce. South Carolina South Carolina threatened to secede threatened to secede from the Union. from the Union.

John Calhoun, then Vice-John Calhoun, then Vice-President in the Jackson President in the Jackson administration, administration, promoted nullification as promoted nullification as a moderate alternative a moderate alternative to secession.to secession.

Calhoun’s theoryCalhoun’s theory

A state would be able to nullify a A state would be able to nullify a federal law and exist as part of the federal law and exist as part of the Union unless three-fourths of the states Union unless three-fourths of the states passed the law as a constitutional passed the law as a constitutional amendment. In that case, the state amendment. In that case, the state would secede from the Union. would secede from the Union. Calhoun's theory of "concurrent Calhoun's theory of "concurrent majority" essentially gave each majority" essentially gave each regional interest an absolute veto. regional interest an absolute veto.

Calhoun wanted to preserve the Union Calhoun wanted to preserve the Union and intended to use the threat of and intended to use the threat of nullification simply to force the federal nullification simply to force the federal government to reduce tariff rates, but government to reduce tariff rates, but the 1830 Webster-Hayne debate in the 1830 Webster-Hayne debate in Congress divided the nation over Congress divided the nation over nullification. A North versus West nullification. A North versus West controversy about public lands in the controversy about public lands in the frontier turned into a Southern and frontier turned into a Southern and Western ideological struggle against Western ideological struggle against Northeastern "tyranny." Northeastern "tyranny."

Webster- Hayne DebateWebster- Hayne Debate The resentment that the citizens of the southern The resentment that the citizens of the southern

states held towards the people of New England states held towards the people of New England erupted on January 19, 1830, when Senator Hayne erupted on January 19, 1830, when Senator Hayne attacked the people of New England in a speech. attacked the people of New England in a speech.

Robert Y. Hayne, a supporter of John C. Calhoun, Robert Y. Hayne, a supporter of John C. Calhoun, proposed an alliance of southern and western proposed an alliance of southern and western interests based on a low tariff and cheap land. interests based on a low tariff and cheap land. Affirming the principle of nullification, he called on the Affirming the principle of nullification, he called on the two sections to unite against attempts by the two sections to unite against attempts by the Northeast to strengthen the powers of the federal Northeast to strengthen the powers of the federal government. government.

Webster responseWebster response

Daniel Webster of Massachusetts Daniel Webster of Massachusetts answered Hayne in one of the most answered Hayne in one of the most famous speeches in American history. famous speeches in American history. The United States, Webster proclaimed, The United States, Webster proclaimed, was not simply a compact of the states. was not simply a compact of the states. It was a creation of the people, who had It was a creation of the people, who had invested the Constitution and the invested the Constitution and the national government with ultimate national government with ultimate sovereignty. If a state disagreed with an sovereignty. If a state disagreed with an action of the federal government, it had action of the federal government, it had a right to sue in federal court or seek to a right to sue in federal court or seek to amend the Constitution, but it had no amend the Constitution, but it had no right to nullify a federal law. That would right to nullify a federal law. That would inevitably lead to anarchy and civil war. inevitably lead to anarchy and civil war.

The final few paragraphs are generally The final few paragraphs are generally noted for their passion. Webster concluded noted for their passion. Webster concluded with the famed "Liberty and Union, Now with the famed "Liberty and Union, Now and Forever, One and Inseparable!" line. and Forever, One and Inseparable!" line.

This did bring the conflict between New This did bring the conflict between New England and the Southern States into the England and the Southern States into the light, and served as a hard reminder of the light, and served as a hard reminder of the resentment that many people in the South resentment that many people in the South felt toward the residents of New England. felt toward the residents of New England.

President Jackson considered President Jackson considered nullification to be treasonous. Jackson nullification to be treasonous. Jackson stated his view with the following toast stated his view with the following toast at a Democratic Party banquet: "Our at a Democratic Party banquet: "Our FederalFederal Union- Union-it must be preserved.it must be preserved." " John Calhoun responded: "The Union-John Calhoun responded: "The Union-next to our liberty most dear." Calhoun next to our liberty most dear." Calhoun would resign as Vice-President and would resign as Vice-President and accept a Congressional seat from South accept a Congressional seat from South Carolina. Carolina.

In 1833, Congress In 1833, Congress passed a "force passed a "force bill" which bill" which authorized Jackson authorized Jackson to use violence to to use violence to preserve the preserve the Union. Union.

CompromiseCompromise In Congress, Henry Clay, the “great In Congress, Henry Clay, the “great

compromiser” who had engineered the compromiser” who had engineered the Missouri Compromise of 1820, worked Missouri Compromise of 1820, worked feverishly to reduce South Carolina’s feverishly to reduce South Carolina’s sense of grievance. “He who loves the sense of grievance. “He who loves the Union must desire to see this agitating Union must desire to see this agitating question brought to a termination,” he question brought to a termination,” he said. In less than a month, he persuaded said. In less than a month, he persuaded Congress to enact a compromise tariff Congress to enact a compromise tariff with lower levels of protection. South with lower levels of protection. South Carolinians backed down, rescinding the Carolinians backed down, rescinding the ordinance nullifying the federal tariff. As a ordinance nullifying the federal tariff. As a final gesture of defiance, however, the final gesture of defiance, however, the state adopted an ordinance nullifying the state adopted an ordinance nullifying the Force Act.Force Act.

DelayedDelayed

Secession was avoided but would Secession was avoided but would become an issue in the 1860’s and become an issue in the 1860’s and result in the Civil Warresult in the Civil War