what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

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. There was an end to all apprehension. Well, the southern states were infuriated. This is a delicate and sensitive point, in southern feeling; and of late years it has always been touched, and generally with effect, whenever the object has been to unite the whole South against northern men, or northern measures. The Confederation was, in strictness, a compact; the states, as states, were parties to it. 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. He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. 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. . One of the most storied match-ups in Senate history, the 1830 Webster-Hayne debate began with a beef between Northeast states and Western states over a plan to restrict . These verses recount the first occurrence of slavery. 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.. . The people of the United States cherish a devotion to the Union, so pure, so ardent, that nothing short of intolerable oppression, can ever tempt them to do anything that may possibly endanger it. . His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. Francis O. J. Smith to Secretary of State Dan Special Message to the House of Representatives, Special Message to Congress on Mexican Relations. 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. Hayne quotes from the Virginia Resolution (1798), authored by Thomas Jefferson, to protest the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798). 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 scene depicted in the painting is Webster concluding his debate with Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. . Such interference has never been supposed to be within the power of government; nor has it been, in any way, attempted. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll hopefully stay awake until the end of the lesson. Compare And Contrast The Tension Between North And South. 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 . . . . foote wanted to stop surveying lands until they could sell the ones already looked at What can I say? 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 Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches presented to the United States Senate by senators Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. In this regard, Webster anticipated an argument that Abraham Lincoln made in his First Inaugural Address (1861). 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. Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? His ideas about federalism and his interpretation of the Constitution as a document uniting the states under one supreme law were highly influential in the eyes of his contemporaries and would influence the rebuilding of the nation after the Civil War. The states cannot now make war; they cannot contract alliances; they cannot make, each for itself, separate regulations of commerce; they cannot lay imposts; they cannot coin money. The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of unplanned speeches in the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830 between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. 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. And here it will be necessary to go back to the origin of the federal government. 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! . This seemed like an Eastern spasm of jealousy at the progress of the West. Webster's "Second Reply to Hayne" was generally regarded as "the most eloquent speech ever delivered in Congress."[1]. . 1824 Presidential Election, Candidates & Significance | Who Won the Election of 1824? 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. All regulated governments, all free governments, have been broken up by similar disinterested and well-disposed interference! 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? If I had, sir, the powers of a magician, and could, by a wave of my hand, convert this capital into gold for such a purpose, I would not do it. . I love a good debate. 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. This leads, sir, to the real and wide difference, in political opinion, between the honorable gentleman and myself. 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. Sir, we will not stop to inquire whether the black man, as some philosophers have contended, is of an inferior race, nor whether his color and condition are the effects of a curse inflicted for the offences of his ancestors. . Are we in that condition still? Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. . .Readers will finish the book with a clear idea of the reason Webster's "Reply" became so influential in its own day. You see, to the south, the Constitution was essentially a treaty signed between sovereign states. They attack nobody, and menace nobody. 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. . It was plenary then, and never having been surrendered, must be plenary now. We met it as a practical question of obligation and duty. 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. But, according to the gentlemans reading, the object of the Constitution was to consolidate the government, and the means would seem to be, the promotion of injustice, causing domestic discord, and depriving the states and the people of the blessings of liberty forever. Webster-Hayne Debate book. Are we yet at the mercy of state discretion, and state construction? Some of his historical deductions may be questioned; but far above all possible error on the part of her leaders, stood colonial and Revolutionary New England, and the sturdy, intelligent, and thriving people whose loyalty to the Union had never failed, and whose home, should ill befall the nation, would yet prove liberty's last shelter. I'm imagining that your answer is probably 'I do.' This episode was used in nineteenth century America as a Biblical justification for slavery. Hayne began the debate by speaking out against a proposal by the northern states which suggested that the federal government should stop its surveyance of land west of the Mississippi and shift its focus to selling the land it had already surveyed. This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. In our contemplation, Carolina and Ohio are parts of the same country; states, united under the same general government, having interests, common, associated, intermingled. 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. A speech by Louisiana Senator Edward Livingston, however, neatly explains how American nationhood encompasses elements of both Webster and Hayne's ideas. . Two leading ideas predominated in this reply, and with respect to either Hayne was not only answered but put to silence. These debates transformed into a national crisis when South Carolina threatened . This statement, though strong, is no stronger than the strictest truth will warrant. The gentleman insists that the states have no right to decide whether the constitution has been violated by acts of Congress or not,but that the federal government is the exclusive judge of the extent of its own powers; and that in case of a violation of the constitution, however deliberate, palpable and dangerous, a state has no constitutional redress, except where the matter can be brought before the Supreme Court, whose decision must be final and conclusive on the subject. 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. . One of those was the Webster-Hayne debate, a series of unplanned speeches presented before the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830. 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. 136 lessons What followed, the Webster Hayne debate, was one of the most famous exchanges in Senate history. Besides that, however, the federal government was still figuring out its role in American society. Explore the Webster-Hayne debate. Try refreshing the page, or contact customer support. . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. . Battle of Fort Sumter in the Civil War | Who Won the Battle of Fort Sumter? For Calhoun, see the Speech on Abolition Petitions and the Speech on the Oregon Bill. . . . . 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. 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 Revelation on Celestial Marriage: Trouble Amon Hon. What interest, asks he, has South Carolina in a canal in Ohio? Sir, this very question is full of significance. 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. They have agreed, that certain specific powers shall be exercised by the federal government; but the moment that government steps beyond the limits of its charter, the right of the states to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits the authorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them,[7] is as full and complete as it was before the Constitution was formed. . 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. . The gentleman takes alarm at the sound. Sir, I will not stop at the border; I will carry the war into the enemys territory, and not consent to lay down my arms, until I shall have obtained indemnity for the past, and security for the future.[4] It is with unfeigned reluctance that I enter upon the performance of this part of my duty. It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. Which of the following statements best represents the desires of the Northern states during the debate of Missouri statehood? Nor shall I stop there. President John Quincy Adams and the Election of 1824. . I propose to consider it, and to compare it with the Constitution. I feel like its a lifeline. 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. Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. It is the servant of four-and-twenty masters, of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. But his standpoint was purely local and sectional. So what was this debate really about? Congress could only recommendtheir acts were not of binding force, till the states had adopted and sanctioned them. Webster argued that the American people had created the Union to promote the good of the whole. . There is not, and never has been, a disposition in the North to interfere with these interests of the South. All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. Sir, if we are, then vain will be our attempt to maintain the Constitution under which we sit. Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? . Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. Broadside Advertisement for Runaway Slave, Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free-Soiler, Free & Slave-holding States and Territories. Would it be safe to confide such a treasure to the keeping of our national rulers? The gentleman, indeed, argues that slavery, in the abstract, is no evil. It was a speech delivered before a crowded auditory, and loud were the Southern exultations that he was more than a match for Webster. 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. Sir, we narrow-minded people of New England do not reason thus. They had burst forth from arguments about a decision by Connecticut Senator Samuel Foote. But, sir, the gentleman is mistaken. In whatever is within the proper sphere of the constitutional power of this government, we look upon the states as one. 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. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. In this moment in American history, the federal government had relatively little power. Tariff of Abominations of 1828 | What was the Significance of the Tariff of Abominations? In January 1830, a debate on the nature of sovereignty in the American federal union occurred in the United States Senate between Senators Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Hayne of South Carolina. I say, the right of a state to annul a law of Congress, cannot be maintained, but on the ground of the unalienable right of man to resist oppression; that is to say, upon the ground of revolution. . . . Is it the creature of the state legislatures, or the creature of the people? So soon as the cessions were obtained, it became necessary to make provision for the government and disposition of the territory . If slavery, as it now exists in this country, be an evil, we of the present day found it ready made to our hands. This is the true constitutional consolidation. Who, then, Mr. President, are the true friends 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. What was going on? 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. 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. Web hardcover $30.00 paperback $17.00 kindle nook book ibook. I shrink almost instinctively from a course, however necessary, which may have a tendency to excite sectional feelings, and sectional jealousies. . See Genesis 9:2027. 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. 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 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: 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. The significance of Daniel Webster's argument went far beyond the immediate proposal at hand. The theory that the states' may vote against unfair laws. Drama, suspense, it's all there. As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 Why? . T he Zionist-evangelical back story goes back several decades, with 90-year-old televangelist Pat Robertson being a prime case study.. One of the more notable "coincidences" or anomalies Winter Watch brings to your attention is the image of Robertson on the cover of Time magazine in 1986 back before the public was red pilled by the Internet -as the pastor posed with a gesture called . copyright 2003-2023 Study.com. Though Webster made an impassioned argument, the political, social, and economic traditions of New England informed his ideas about the threatened nation. 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. Understand the 1830 debate's significance through an overview of issues of the Constitution, the Union, and state sovereignty. All rights reserved. . 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. . An error occurred trying to load this video. But his calm, unperturbed manner reassured them in an instant. 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. We found that we had to deal with a people whose physical, moral, and intellectual habits and character, totally disqualified them from the enjoyment of the blessings of freedom. . Well, let's look at the various parts. 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. South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. . Sir, the very chief end, the main design, for which the whole Constitution was framed and adopted, was to establish a government that should not be obliged to act through state agency, or depend on state opinion and state discretion. Hayne launched his confident javelin at the New England States. Sir, I cordially respond to that appeal. 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? - 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. At the foundation of the constitution of these new Northwestern states, . 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. . 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. I did not utter a single word, which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. . But it was the honor of a caste; and the struggling bread-winners of society, the great commonalty, he little studied or understood. . . Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) | Case, Significance & Summary. When my eyes shall be turned to behold, for the last time, the sun in Heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union; on states dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood! Who doesn't? On this subject, as in all others, we ask nothing of our Northern brethren but to let us alone; leave us to the undisturbed management of our domestic concerns, and the direction of our own industry, and we will ask no more. | 12 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. 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. . He was a lawyer turned congressional representative who eventually worked his way to the office of U.S. Secretary of State. Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. To them, this was a scheme to give the federal government more control over the cost of land by creating a scarcity. Webster was eloquent, he was educated, he was witty, and he was a staunch defender of American liberty. Mr. Hayne having rejoined to Mr. Webster, especially on the constitutional question. Whose agent is it? Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. . 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. . But still, throughout American history, several debates have captured the nation's attention in a way that would make even Hollywood jealous. 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." What idea was espoused with the Webster-Hayne debates? . She has a BA in political science. Webster replied to his speech the next day and left not a shred of the charge, baseless as it was. The debate can be seen as a precursor to the debate that became . 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. 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). 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? . Well, it's important to remember that the nation was still young and much different than what we think of today.

Does Bala Hatun Have A Baby In Kurulus Osman, Articles W