what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

. The Northwest Ordinance. Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illin Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Douglas Faction), (Northern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. . . lessons in math, English, science, history, and more. . 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? . Sir, we narrow-minded people of New England do not reason thus. Webster-Hayne debate - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Our notion of things is entirely different. The Webster-Hayne Debates | Teaching American History . One of those was the Webster-Hayne debate, a series of unplanned speeches presented before the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830. South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. 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. But his reply was gathered from the choicest arguments and the most decadent thoughts that had long floated through his brain while this crisis was gathering; and bringing these materials together in a lucid and compact shape, he calmly composed and delivered before another crowded and breathless auditory a speech full of burning passages, which will live as long as the American Union, and the grandest effort of his life. This statement, though strong, is no stronger than the strictest truth will warrant. The faction of voters in the North were against slavery and feared it spreading into new territory. My life upon it, sir, they would not. 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. ", What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?. Webster and the northern states saw the Constitution as binding the individual states together as a single union. They had burst forth from arguments about a decision by Connecticut Senator Samuel Foote. At the foundation of the constitution of these new Northwestern states, . 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. 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? 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? 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. . Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. 1. emigration the movement of people from one place to another 2. immigration a situation in which resources are being used up at a faster rate than they can be replenished 3. migration the leaving of one's homeland to settle in a new place 4. overpopulation the movement of people to a new country 5. sustainable development a situation in which the birth rate is not sufficient to replace the . It makes but little difference, in my estimation, whether Congress or the Supreme Court, are invested with this power. But until they shall alter it, it must stand as their will, and is equally binding on the general government and on the states. Webster's articulation of the concept of the Union went on to shape American attitudes about the federal government. . But still, throughout American history, several debates have captured the nation's attention in a way that would make even Hollywood jealous. The Webster-Hayne debate, which again was just one section of this greater discussion in the Senate, is traditionally considered to have begun when South Carolina senator Robert Y. Hayne stood to argue against Connecticut's proposal, accusing the northeastern states of trying to stall development of the West so that southern agricultural interests couldn't expand. Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Breckinridge Facti (Southern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. At the time of the debate, Webster was serving his term as Senator of Massachusetts. Understand the 1830 debate's significance through an overview of issues of the Constitution, the Union, and state sovereignty. President John Quincy Adams and the Election of 1824. Their own power over their own instrument remains. For Calhoun, see the Speech on Abolition Petitions and the Speech on the Oregon Bill. 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. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) | Case, Significance & Summary. Web hardcover $30.00 paperback $17.00 kindle nook book ibook. Are we yet at the mercy of state discretion, and state construction? The Commercial Greatness of the United States, Special Message to Congress (Tyler Doctrine), Estranged Labour and The Communist Manifesto, State of the Union Address Part II (1848). 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. Congress could only recommendtheir acts were not of binding force, till the states had adopted and sanctioned them. The gentleman, indeed, argues that slavery, in the abstract, is no evil. So soon as the cessions were obtained, it became necessary to make provision for the government and disposition of the territory . 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. 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. . On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. . I propose to consider it, and to compare it with the Constitution. The debate, which took place between January 19th and January 27th, 1830, encapsulated the major issues facing the newly founded United States in the 1820s and 1830s; the balance of power between the federal and state governments, the development of the democratic process, and the growing tension between Northern and Southern states. This is the sense in which the Framers of the Constitution use the word consolidation; and in which sense I adopt and cherish it. Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. Even Benton, whose connection with the debate made him at first belittle these grand utterances, soon felt the danger and repudiated the company of the nullifiers. An equally. I love a good debate. The Destiny of America, Speech at the Dedication o An Address. . He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. The people read Webster's speech and marked him as the champion henceforth against all assaults upon the Constitution. These debates transformed into a national crisis when South Carolina threatened . 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. Sir, I deprecate and deplore this tone of thinking and acting. The discussion took a wide range, going back to topics that had agitated the country before the Constitution was formed. The people were not satisfied with it, and undertook to establish a better. When the gentleman says the Constitution is a compact between the states, he uses language exactly applicable to the old Confederation. Andrew Jackson & the Nullification Crisis | The Hermitage Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. Sir, if we are, then vain will be our attempt to maintain the Constitution under which we sit. Hayne launched his confident javelin at the New England States. The real significance of this debate was in each man's interpretation of the United States Constitution. Create your account, 15 chapters | Daniel Webster stood as a ready and formidable opponent from the north who, at different stages in his career, represented both the states of New Hampshire and Massachusetts. webster hayne debate Flashcards | Quizlet I would definitely recommend Study.com to my colleagues. And what has been the consequence? On the one side it is contended that the public land ought to be reserved as a permanent fund for revenue, and future distribution among the states, while, on the other, it is insisted that the whole of these lands of right belong to, and ought to be relinquished to, the states in which they lie. The people had had quite enough of that kind of government, under the Confederacy. As sovereign states, each state could individually interpret the Constitution and even leave the Union altogether. South Carolina nullification was now coming in sight, and a celebrated debate that belongs to the first session exposed its claims and its fallacies to the country. I deem far otherwise of the Union of the states; and so did the Framers of the Constitution themselves. . . To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. 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. Nor shall I stop there. [O]pinions were expressed yesterday on the general subject of the public lands, and on some other subjects, by the gentleman from South Carolina [Senator Robert Hayne], so widely different from my own, that I am not willing to let the occasion pass without some reply. 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? . Prejudice Not Natural: The American Colonization "What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July? 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. . For all this, there was not the slightest foundation, in anything said or intimated by me. In fact, Webster's definition of the Constitution as for the People, by the People, and answerable to the People would go on to form one of the most enduring ideas about American democracy. 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. 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. So they could finish selling the lands already surveyed. If these opinions be thought doubtful, they are, nevertheless, I trust, neither extraordinary nor disrespectful. Webster and the North treated it as binding the states together as a single union. Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts [Senator Daniel Webster] has gone out of his way to pass a high eulogium on the state of Ohio. In whatever is within the proper sphere of the constitutional power of this government, we look upon the states as one. 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. Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. Let us look at his probablemodus operandi. Sir, as to the doctrine that the federal government is the exclusive judge of the extent as well as the limitations of its powers, it seems to be utterly subversive of the sovereignty and independence of the states. flashcard sets. Rush-Bagot Treaty Structure & Effects | What was the Rush-Bagot Agreement? Nullification Crisis | American Battlefield Trust The action, the drama, the suspensewho needs the movies? Sheidley, Harlow W. "The Wester-Hayne Debate: Recasting New England's Sectionalism", Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 179899, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WebsterHayne_debate&oldid=1135315190, This page was last edited on 23 January 2023, at 22:54. All rights reserved. . Hayne entered the U.S. Senate in 1823 and soon became prominent as a spokesman for the South and for the . 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. States' rights (South) vs. nationalism (North). Gloomy and downcast of late, Massachusetts men walked the avenue as though the fife and drum were before them. . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. Webster and Hayne on the American Constitution 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. 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. I must now beg to ask, sir, whence is this supposed right of the states derived?where do they find the power to interfere with the laws of the Union? As a pious son of Federalism, Webster went the full length of the required defense. . Consolidation, like the tariff, grates upon his ear. 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. . . Certainly, sir, I am, and ever have been of that opinion. . Will it promote the welfare of the United States to have at our disposal a permanent treasury, not drawn from the pockets of the people, but to be derived from a source independent of them? Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. 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. Record of the Organization and Proceedings of The Massachusetts Lawmakers Investigate Working Condit State (Colonial) Legislatures>Massachusetts State Legislature. But, sir, we will pass over all this. 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. Competing Conceptions of Union and Ordered Liberty in The Webster-Hayne Is it the creature of the state legislatures, or the creature of the people? 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.. The idea of a strong federal government The ability of the people to revolt against an unfair government The theory that the states' may vote against unfair laws The role of the president in commanding the government 2 See answers Advertisement holesstanham Answer: Sir, I may be singularperhaps I stand alone here in the opinion, but it is one I have long entertained, that one of the greatest safeguards of liberty is a jealous watchfulness on the part of the people, over the collection and expenditure of the public moneya watchfulness that can only be secured where the money is drawn by taxation directly from the pockets of the people. . . . Webster-Hayne Debate book. 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. Daniel Webster - Facts, Career & Legacy - HISTORY Under the circumstances then existing, I look upon this original and seasonable provision, as a real good attained. . Thousands of these deluded victims of fanaticism were seduced into the enjoyment of freedom in our Northern cities. . The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. It impressed on the soil itself, while it was yet a wilderness, an incapacity to bear up any other than free men. Francis O. J. Smith to Secretary of State Dan Special Message to the House of Representatives, Special Message to Congress on Mexican Relations. . I did not utter a single word, which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. What idea was espoused with the Webster-Hayne debates? . This would have been the case even if no positive provision to that effect had been inserted in that instrument. South Carolinas Declaration of the Causes of Sece Distribution of the Slave Population by State. 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. 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. We look upon the states, not as separated, but as united. We met it as a practical question of obligation and duty. . It would be equally fatal to the sovereignty and independence of the states. When, however, the gentleman proceeded to contrast the state of Ohio with Kentucky, to the disadvantage of the latter, I listened to him with regret. Correspondence Between Anthony Butler and Presiden State of the Union Address Part II (1846). Pet Banks History & Effects | What are Pet Banks? This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. The heated speeches were unplanned and stemmed from the debate over a resolution by Connecticut Senator Samuel A. He served as a U.S. senator from 1823 to 1832, and was a leading proponent of the states' rights doctrine. . He joined Hayne in using this opportunity to try to detach the West from the East, and restore the old cooperation of the West and the South against New England. Broadside Advertisement for Runaway Slave, Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free-Soiler, Free & Slave-holding States and Territories. Sir, I cordially respond to that appeal. . 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. But that was found insufficient, and inadequate to the public exigencies. . Northern states intended to strengthen the federal government, binding the states in the union under one supreme law, and eradicating the use of slave labor in the rapidly growing nation. Webster argued that the American people had created the Union to promote the good of the whole. . For one, Hayne and Webster were arguing for the fate of the West and, in particular, whether the North or South would control western development. An undefinable dread now went abroad that men were planning against the peace of the nation, that the Union was in danger; and citizens looked more closely after its safety and welfare. What interest, asks he, has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio? Sir, this very question is full of significance. This was the man to fire an aristocracy of fellow citizens ready to arm when their interests were in danger, and upon him, it devolved to advance the cause of South Carolina, break down the tariff, and fascinate the Union with the new rattlesnake theories. The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches delivered before the Senate in 1830. This leads, sir, to the real and wide difference, in political opinion, between the honorable gentleman and myself. . Webster-Hayne Debate - Federalism in America - CSF Between January and May 1830, twenty-one of the forty-eight senators delivered a staggering sixty-five speeches on the nature of the Union. Be this as it may, Hayne was a ready and copious orator, a highly-educated lawyer, a man of varied accomplishments, shining as a writer, speaker, and counselor, equally qualified to draw up a bill or to advocate it, quick to memories, well fortified by wealth and marriage connections, dignified, never vulgar nor unmindful of the feelings of those with whom he mingled, Hayne moved in an atmosphere where lofty and chivalrous honor was the ruling sentiment. Far, indeed, in my wishes, very far distant be the day, when our associated and fraternal stripes shall be severed asunder, and when that happy constellation under which we have risen to so much renown, shall be broken up, and be seen sinking, star after star, into obscurity and night! Who Won the Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830? - Abbeville Institute This debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. . The measures of the federal government have, it is true, prostrated her interests, and will soon involve the whole South in irretrievable ruin. There was an end to all apprehension. I said, only, that it was highly wise and useful in legislating for the northwestern country, while it was yet a wilderness, to prohibit the introduction of slaves: and added, that I presumed, in the neighboring state of Kentucky, there was no reflecting and intelligent gentleman, who would doubt, that if the same prohibition had been extended, at the same early period, over that commonwealth, her strength and population would, at this day, have been far greater than they are. Webster-Hayne Debate. First, New England was vindicated. There was no winner or loser in the Webster-Hayne debate. 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.