Even the revenue system of this country, by which the whole of our pecuniary resources are derived from indirect taxation, from duties upon imports, has done much to weaken the responsibility of our federal rulers to the people, and has made them, in some measure, careless of their rights, and regardless of the high trust committed to their care. Webster-Hayne debate - Wikisource, the free online library It makes but little difference, in my estimation, whether Congress or the Supreme Court, are invested with this power. Southern ships and Southern sailors were not the instruments of bringing slaves to the shores of America, nor did our merchants reap the profits of that accursed traffic.. Two leading ideas predominated in this reply, and with respect to either Hayne was not only answered but put to silence. 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. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. I'm imagining that your answer is probably 'I do.' Hayne entered the U.S. Senate in 1823 and soon became prominent as a spokesman for the South and for the . 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. 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. Well, you're not alone. Hayne's few but zealous partizans shielded him still, and South Carolina spoke with pride of him. a. an explanation of natural events that is well supported by scientific evidence b. a set of rules for ethical conduct during an experiment c. a statement that describes how natural events happen d. a possible answer to a scientific question . . . . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. The Webster-Hayne debates began over one issue but quickly switched to another. . 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. . 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. See Genesis 9:2027. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. Between January and May 1830, twenty-one of the forty-eight senators delivered a staggering sixty-five speeches on the nature of the Union. 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. The WebsterHayne debate was a debate in the United States between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina that took place on January 1927, 1830 on the topic of protectionist tariffs. . . flashcard sets. sir, this is but the old story. Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses. Sir, there does not exist, on the face of the whole earth, a population so poor, so wretched, so vile, so loathsome, so utterly destitute of all the comforts, conveniences, and decencies of life, as the unfortunate blacks of Philadelphia, and New York, and Boston. . ", What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?. 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 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? 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. . 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. No doubt can exist, that, before the states entered into the compact, they possessed the right to the fullest extent, of determining the limits of their own powersit is incident to all sovereignty. My life upon it, sir, they would not. 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! [was] fixed, forever, the character of the population in the vast regions Northwest of the Ohio, by excluding from them involuntary servitude. 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. As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 Mr. Hayne having rejoined to Mr. Webster, especially on the constitutional question. . The heated speeches were unplanned and stemmed from the debate over a resolution by Connecticut Senator Samuel A. . He describes fully that old state of things then existing. succeed. 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. 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 . . . It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. 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. 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. All rights reserved. I know that there are some persons in the part of the country from which the honorable member comes, who habitually speak of the Union in terms of indifference, or even of disparagement. This debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. Debate on the Constitutionality of the Mexican War, Letters and Journals from the Oregon Trail. President Andrew Jackson had just been elected, most of the states got rid of property requirements for voting, and an entire new era of democracy was being born. What idea was espoused with the Webster-Hayne debates? We resolved to make the best of the situation in which Providence had placed us, and to fulfil the high trust which had developed upon us as the owners of slaves, in the only way in which such a trust could be fulfilled, without spreading misery and ruin throughout the land. Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. . But his calm, unperturbed manner reassured them in an instant. . Webster's second reply to Hayne, in January 1830, became a famous defense of the federal union: "Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable." Just beneath the surface of this debate lay the elements of the developing sectional crisis between North and South. We all know that civil institutions are established for the public benefit, and that when they cease to answer the ends of their existence, they may be changed. Now that was a good debate! Why? The Webster-Hayne Debate | Overview, Issues & Significance - Study He tells us, we have heard much, of late, about consolidation; that it is the rallying word for all who are endeavoring to weaken the Union by adding to the power of the states. But consolidation, says the gentleman, was the very object for which the Union was formed; and in support of that opinion, he read a passage from the address of the president of the Convention[3] to Congress (which he assumes to be authority on his side of the question.) Webster-Hayne Debate by Stefan M. Brooks It develops the gentlemans whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. It was motivated by a dispute over the continued sale of western lands, an important source of revenue for the federal government. . I distrust, therefore, sir, the policy of creating a great permanent national treasury, whether to be derived from public lands or from any other source. What they said I believe; fully and sincerely believe, that the Union of the states is essential to the prosperity and safety of the states. . Van Buren responded to the Panic of 1837 with the idea of the independent treasury, which was a. a system of depositing money in select independent banks 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). And what has been the consequence? 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. On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. Our notion of things is entirely different. By means of missionaries and political tracts, the scheme was in a great measure successful. 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. I wish to see no new powers drawn to the general government; but I confess I rejoice in whatever tends to strengthen the bond that unites us, and encourages the hope that our Union may be perpetual. It is the common pretense. An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. Webster's Reply to Hayne - National Park Service The following states came from the territory north and west of the Ohio river: Ohio (1803), Indiana (1816), Illinois (1818), Michigan (1837), Wisconsin (1848) and Minnesota (1858). Are we yet at the mercy of state discretion, and state construction? . The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions Add Song of the Spinners from the Lowell Offering. 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. All regulated governments, all free governments, have been broken up by similar disinterested and well-disposed interference! It is, sir, the peoples Constitution, the peoples government; made for the people; made by the people; and answerable to the people. . I am a Unionist, and in this sense a national Republican. 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. Historians love a good debate. . I regard domestic slavery as one of the greatest of evils, both moral and political. Winners and Losers History's Famous Debates - Medium Webster-Hayne Debate. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) | Case, Significance & Summary. . We met it as a practical question of obligation and duty. Excerpts from Ratification Documents of Virginia a Ratifying Conventions>New York Ratifying Convention. . . He was a lawyer turned congressional representative who eventually worked his way to the office of U.S. Secretary of State. Well, it's important to remember that the nation was still young and much different than what we think of today. Webster-Hayne Debate book. . We love to dwell on that union, and on the mutual happiness which it has so much promoted, and the common renown which it has so greatly contributed to acquire. Most assuredly, I need not say I differ with him, altogether and most widely, on that point. Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. They will not destroy it, they will not impair itthey will only save, they will only preserve, they will only strengthen it! Webster believed that the Constitution should be viewed as a binding document between the United States rather than an agreement between sovereign states. The gentleman has made an eloquent appeal to our hearts in favor of union. 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? For all this, there was not the slightest foundation, in anything said or intimated by me. All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. This is the true constitutional consolidation. . . Hayne and the South saw it as basically a treaty between sovereign states. And who are its enemies? 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.. [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. The Curious Case of Evangelist Pat Robertson | Winter Watch Though the debate began as a standard policy debate, the significance of Daniel Webster's argument reached far beyond a single policy proposal. Connecticut and other northeastern states were worried about the pace of growth and wanted to slow this down. 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. 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. I understand him to maintain, that the ultimate power of judging of the constitutional extent of its own authority, is not lodged exclusively in the general government, or any branch of it; but that, on the contrary, the states may lawfully decide for themselves, and each state for itself, whether, in a given case, the act of the general government transcends its power. . Who Won the Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830? - Abbeville Institute . It moves vast bodies, and gives to them one and the same direction. Andrew Jackson & the Nullification Crisis | The Hermitage One of those was the Webster-Hayne debate, a series of unplanned speeches presented before the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830. 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. Sir, it is because South Carolina loves the Union, and would preserve it forever, that she is opposing now, while there is hope, those usurpations of the federal government, which, once established, will, sooner or later, tear this Union into fragments. 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. . It impressed on the soil itself, while it was yet a wilderness, an incapacity to bear up any other than free men. The main issue of the Webster-Hayne Debate was the nature of the country that had been created by the Constitution.

Maximum Intervals Overlap Leetcode, Minisink Valley Budget Vote, Homes For Rent By Private Owner In Southaven, Ms, Articles W