what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

The faction of voters in the North were against slavery and feared it spreading into new territory. . . Judiciary Act of 1801 | Overview, History & Significance, General Ulysses S. Grant Takes Charge: His Strategic Plan for Ending the War. 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. He must cut it with his sword. Webster realized that if the social, political, and economic elite of Massachusetts and the Northeast were to once again lay claim to national leadership, he had to justify New England's previous history of sectionalism within a framework of nationalistic progression. . 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. Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. 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, the opinion which the honorable gentleman maintains, is a notion, founded in a total misapprehension, in my judgment, of the origin of this government, and of the foundation on which it stands. The next day, however, Massachusetts senator Daniel Webster rose with his reply, and the northern states knew they had found their champion. . . 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? 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. Under the circumstances then existing, I look upon this original and seasonable provision, as a real good attained. . . The Revelation on Celestial Marriage: Trouble Amon Hon. Rachel Venter is a recent graduate of Metropolitan State University of Denver. . Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? Differences between Northern and Southern ideas of good governance, which eventually led to the American Civil War, were beginning to emerge. 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. . Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions | Overview, Impact & Significance, Public Speaking for Teachers: Professional Development, AEPA Earth Science (AZ045): Practice & Study Guide, ORELA Early Childhood Education: Practice & Study Guide, Praxis Middle School English Language Arts (5047) Prep, MTLE Physical Education: Practice & Study Guide, ILTS Mathematics (208): Test Practice and Study Guide, MTLE Earth & Space Science: Practice & Study Guide, AEPA Business Education (NT309): Help & Review, Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Examination (CPCE): Exam Prep & Study Guide, GACE Special Education Adapted Curriculum Test I (083) Prep, GACE Special Education Adapted Curriculum Test II (084) Prep, Create an account to start this course today. . All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. . New England, the Union, and the Constitution in its integrity, all were triumphantly vindicated. Hayne and the South saw it as basically a treaty between sovereign states. This absurdity (for it seems no less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this government and its true character. 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. It develops the gentlemans whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. Before his term as a U.S. senator, Hayne had served as a state senator, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, South Carolina's Speaker of the House, and Attorney General of South Carolina. He was dressed with scrupulous care, in a blue coat with metal buttons, a buff vest rounding over his full abdomen, and his neck encircled with a white cravat. Where in these debates do we see a possible argument in defense of Constitutional secession by the states, later claimed by the Southern Confederacy before, during, and after the Civil War? As sovereign states, each state could individually interpret the Constitution and even leave the Union altogether. . I have but one word more to add. Conversation-based seminars for collegial PD, one-day and multi-day seminars, graduate credit seminars (MA degree), online and in-person. we find the most opposite and irreconcilable opinions between the two parties which I have before described. . ", What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?. Webster denied it and, attempting to draw Hayne into a direct confrontation, disparaged slavery and attacked the constitutional scruples of southern nullifiers and their apparent willingness to calculate the Union's value in monetary terms. 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. The Webster Hayne Debate. . . . . 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. . . . Sir, I cordially respond to that appeal. Webster replied to his speech the next day and left not a shred of the charge, baseless as it was. Well, it's important to remember that the nation was still young and much different than what we think of today. It was plenary then, and never having been surrendered, must be plenary now. Senator Foote, of Connecticut, submitted a proposition inquiring into the expediency of limiting the sales of public lands to those already in the market. . . 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. 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. Compare And Contrast The Tension Between North And South. . South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. It is the servant of four-and-twenty masters, of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. 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. 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. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. This is the true constitutional consolidation. They will also better understand the debate's political context. . The debate was important because it laid out the arguments in favor of nationalism in the face of growing sectionalism. . The militia of the state will be called out to sustain the nullifying act. Hayne entered the U.S. Senate in 1823 and soon became prominent as a spokesman for the South and for the . . . She has a BA in political science. . . 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. 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. But, sir, the task has been forced upon me, and I proceed right onward to the performance of my duty; be the consequences what they may, the responsibility is with those who have imposed upon me this necessity. . This would have been the case even if no positive provision to that effect had been inserted in that instrument. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. We will not look back to inquire whether our fathers were guiltless in introducing slaves into this country. . 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. . Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses. 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. I am a Unionist, and in this sense a national Republican. . . 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. . 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 Virginia Resolution asserted that when the federal government undertook the deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of powers not granted to it in the constitution, states had the right and duty to interpose their authority to prevent this evil. That led into a debate on the economy, in which Webster attacked the institution of slavery and Hayne labeled the policy of protectionist tariffs as the consolidation of a strong central government, which he called the greatest of evils. 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! We see its consequences at this moment, and we shall never cease to see them, perhaps, while the Ohio shall flow. Well, the southern states were infuriated. Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. The War With Mexico: Speech in the United States H What Are the Colored People Doing for Themselves? 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. The great debate, which culminated in Hayne's encounter with Webster, came about in a somewhat casual way. Let's start by looking at the United States around 1830. 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. Webster's speech aroused the latent spirit of patriotism. Hayne launched his confident javelin at the New England States. Webster's "Second Reply to Hayne" was generally regarded as "the most eloquent speech ever delivered in Congress."[1]. . 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. 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. Expert Answers. The Destiny of America, Speech at the Dedication o An Address. . . When the gentleman says the Constitution is a compact between the states, he uses language exactly applicable to the old Confederation. The arena selected for a first impression was the Senate, where the arch-heretic himself presided and guided the onset with his eye. If the gentleman provokes the war, he shall have war. The idea that a state could nullify a federal law, associated with South Carolina, especially after the publication of John C. Calhouns South Carolina Exposition and Protest (1828) in response to the tariff passed in that year. South Carolinas Declaration of the Causes of Secession (1860), Jefferson Daviss Inaugural Address (1861), Documents in Detail: The Webster-Hayne Debates, Remarks in Congress on the Tariff of Abominations, Check out our collection of primary source readers. If an inquiry should ever be instituted in these matters, however, it will be found that the profits of the slave trade were not confined to the South. MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. Post-Civil War, as the nation rebuilt and reconciled the balance between federal and state government, federal law became the supreme law of the land, just as Webster desired. But still, throughout American history, several debates have captured the nation's attention in a way that would make even Hollywood jealous. 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. This government, sir, is the independent offspring of the popular will. All regulated governments, all free governments, have been broken up by similar disinterested and well-disposed interference! We could not send them back to the shores from whence their fathers had been taken; their numbers forbade the thought, even if we did not know that their condition here is infinitely preferable to what it possibly could be among the barren sands and savage tribes of Africa; and it was wholly irreconcilable with all our notions of humanity to tear asunder the tender ties which they had formed among us, to gratify the feelings of a false philanthropy. 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. Perhaps a quotation from a speech in Parliament in 1803 of Lord Castlereagh, Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry (17691822) during a debate over the conduct of British officials in India. 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. This was the tenor of Webster's speech, and nobly did the country respond to it. 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. Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. 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. If the government of the United States be the agent of the state governments, then they may control it, provided they can agree in the manner of controlling it; if it be the agent of the people, then the people alone can control it, restrain it, modify, or reform it. What was going on? . Debate on the Constitutionality of the Mexican War, Letters and Journals from the Oregon Trail. The debaters were Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. lessons in math, English, science, history, and more. Speech on the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise. 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? 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. 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. Two leading ideas predominated in this reply, and with respect to either Hayne was not only answered but put to silence. Mr. Hayne having rejoined to Mr. Webster, especially on the constitutional question. My life upon it, sir, they would not. Most are forgettable, to put it charitably. Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. These irreconcilable views of national supremacy and state sovereignty framed the constitutional struggle that led to Civil War thirty years later. 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. Webster-Hayne Debate book. 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. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 19, 1830. . 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? 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? 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 . Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. . It would be equally fatal to the sovereignty and independence of the states. . Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? Speech to the U.S. House of Representatives. Regional Conflict in America: Debate Over States' Rights. Daniel webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the. Besides that, however, the federal government was still figuring out its role in American society. 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. God grant that, in my day, at least, that curtain may not rise. The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. Foote Idea To Limit The Sale Of Public Lands In The West To New Settlers. In coming to the consideration of the next great question, what ought to be the future policy of the government in relation to the public lands? He had allowed himself but a single night from eve to morn to prepare for a critical and crowning occasion. I deem far otherwise of the Union of the states; and so did the Framers of the Constitution themselves. For all this, there was not the slightest foundation, in anything said or intimated by me. Hayne argued that the sovereign and independent states had created the Union to promote their particular interests. . This debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. . 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. 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. As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 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. In 1830, the federal government collected few taxes and had two primary sources of revenue. It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. . Consolidation!that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusionconsolidation! 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. 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. . . Assuredly not. But I take leave of the subject. Webster spoke in favor of the proposed pause of federal surveyance of western land, representing the North's interest in selling the western land, which had already been surveyed. It is one from which we are not disposed to shrink, in whatever form or under whatever circumstances it may be pressed upon us. 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: An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. 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..

Hypoallergenic Makeup Brands Australia, Inmate Homewav Funds, Articles W