what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

Judiciary Act of 1801 | Overview, History & Significance, General Ulysses S. Grant Takes Charge: His Strategic Plan for Ending the War. Gloomy and downcast of late, Massachusetts men walked the avenue as though the fife and drum were before them. It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. 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. The growing support for nullification was quite obvious during the days of the Jackson Administration, as events such as the Webster-Hayne Debate, Tariff of 1832, Order of Nullification, and Worcester v. Georgia all made the tension grow between the North and the South. 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. This feeling, always carefully kept alive, and maintained at too intense a heat to admit discrimination or reflection, is a lever of great power in our political machine. . All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. . What started as a debate over the Tariff of Abominations soon morphed into debates over state and federal sovereignty and liberty and disunion. webster hayne debate Flashcards | Quizlet Webster-Hayne Debates, 1830 - Bill of Rights Institute A four-speech debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Hayne of South Carolina, in January 1830. He must say to his followers [members of the state militia], defend yourselves with your bayonets; and this is warcivil war. An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Breckinridge Facti (Southern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. 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. This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. Pet Banks History & Effects | What are Pet Banks? 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. Andrew Jackson & the Nullification Crisis | The Hermitage Nor shall I stop there. They will not destroy it, they will not impair itthey will only save, they will only preserve, they will only strengthen it! . . Webster also tried to assert the importance of New England in the face of . It is observable enough, that the doctrine for which the honorable gentleman contends, leads him to the necessity of maintaining, not only that this general government is the creature of the states, but that it is the creature of each of the states severally; so that each may assert the power, for itself, of determining whether it acts within the limits of its authority. Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. Most assuredly, I need not say I differ with him, altogether and most widely, on that point. Webster rose the next day in his seat to make his reply. 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. Ham, one of Noahs sons, saw him uncovered, for which Noah cursed him by making Hams son, Canaan, a slave to Ham's brothers. He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. What was going on? foote wanted to stop surveying lands until they could sell the ones already looked at Competing Conceptions of Union and Ordered Liberty in 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. . Competing Conceptions of Union and Ordered Liberty in The Webster-Hayne It is worth noting that in the course of the debate, on the very floor of the Senate, both Hayne and Webster raised the specter of civil war 30 years before it commenced. . Inflamed and mortified at this repulse, Hayne soon returned to the assault, primed with a two-day speech, which at great length vaunted the patriotism of South Carolina and bitterly attacked New England, dwelling particularly upon her conduct during the late war. I now proceed to show that it is perfectly safe, and will practically have no effect but to keep the federal government within the limits of the Constitution, and prevent those unwarrantable assumptions of power, which cannot fail to impair the rights of the states, and finally destroy the Union itself. we find the most opposite and irreconcilable opinions between the two parties which I have before described. As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 He entered the Senate on that memorable day with a slow and stately step and took his seat as though unconscious of the loud buzz of expectant interest with which the crowded auditory greeted his appearance. I understand him to maintain this right, as a right existing under the Constitution; not as a right to overthrow it, on the ground of extreme necessity, such as would justify violent revolution. 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 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: . Available in hard copy and for download. 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. . Webster-Hayne Debate - Federalism in America - CSF Tariff of Abominations of 1828 | What was the Significance of the Tariff of Abominations? 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. Lincoln-Douglas Debates History & Significance | What Was the Lincoln-Douglas Debate? They will also better understand the debate's political context. 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. . Speech on the Repeal of the Missouri Compromise. . My life upon it, sir, they would not. Webster's speech aroused the latent spirit of patriotism. . What was the main issue of the Webster-Hayne debate? Webster-Hayne debate - Wikisource, the free online library . This would have been the case even if no positive provision to that effect had been inserted in that instrument. . Consolidation, like the tariff, grates upon his ear. It makes but little difference, in my estimation, whether Congress or the Supreme Court, are invested with this power. More specifically, some of the issues facing Congress during this period included: Robert Y. Hayne served as Senator of South Carolina from 1823 to 1832. Having thus distinctly stated the points in dispute between the gentleman and myself, I proceed to examine them. Webster-Hayne Debate by Stefan M. Brooks . Consolidation!that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusionconsolidation! . Create your account, 15 chapters | Hayne's First Speech (January 19, 1830) Webster's First Reply to Hayne (January 20, 1830) Hayne's Second Speech (January 21, 1830) Webster's Second Reply to Hayne (January 26-27, 1830) This page was last edited on 13 June 2021, at . 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. The gentleman takes alarm at the sound. 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. . Well, you're not alone. The debaters were Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. See Genesis 9:2027. She has worked as a university writing consultant for over three years. This is the sum of what I understand from him, to be the South Carolina doctrine; and the doctrine which he maintains. [was] fixed, forever, the character of the population in the vast regions Northwest of the Ohio, by excluding from them involuntary servitude. Connecticut's proposal was an attempt to slow the growth of the nation, control westward expansion, and bolster the federal government's revenue. 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. 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. 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. The United States, under the Constitution and federal government, was a single, unified nation, not a coalition of sovereign states. He was a lawyer turned congressional representative who eventually worked his way to the office of U.S. Secretary of State. . 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. - 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. Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? Which of the following statements best represents the desires of the Northern states during the debate of Missouri statehood? 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. . It is the servant of four-and-twenty masters, of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. . Differences between Northern and Southern ideas of good governance, which eventually led to the American Civil War, were beginning to emerge. He accused them of a desire to check the growth of the West in the interests of protection. 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 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.. Hayne, Robert Young | South Carolina Encyclopedia 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 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, I have had some opportunities of making comparisons between the condition of the free Negroes of the North and the slaves of the South, and the comparison has left not only an indelible impression of the superior advantages of the latter, but has gone far to reconcile me to slavery itself. It develops the gentlemans whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. Webster's Reply to Hayne - National Park Service . . 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 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). It is not the creature of state Legislatures; nay, more, if the whole truth must be told, the people brought it into existence, established it, and have hitherto supported it, for the very purpose, amongst others, of imposing certain salutary restraints on state sovereignties. Winners and Losers History's Famous Debates - Medium . Webster's "Second Reply to Hayne" was generally regarded as "the most eloquent speech ever delivered in Congress."[1]. 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. And what has been the consequence? 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. . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. 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. APUSH CH 9 Flashcards | Quizlet Webster-Hayne Debate | Encyclopedia.com Under the circumstances then existing, I look upon this original and seasonable provision, as a real good attained. 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? It has been said that Hayne was Calhoun's sword and buckler and that he returned to the contest refreshed each morning by nightly communions with the Vice-President, drawing auxiliary supplies from the well-stored arsenal of his powerful and subtle mind. 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. It is only regarded as a possible means of good; or on the other hand, as a possible means of evil. 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. 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. 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. Are we in that condition still? 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. . . . 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? The Senate debates between Whig Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Democrat Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina in January 1830 started out as a disagreement over the sale of Western lands and turned into one of the most famous verbal contests in American history. 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. 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. 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. 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. Rush-Bagot Treaty Structure & Effects | What was the Rush-Bagot Agreement? One was through protective tariffs, high taxes on imports and exports. Hayne argued that the sovereign and independent states had created the Union to promote their particular interests. The 1830 Webster-Hayne debate centered around the South Carolina nullification crisis of the late 1820s, but historians have largely ignored the sectional interests underpinning Webster's argument on behalf of Unionism and a transcendent nationalism. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. All of these ideas, however, are only parts of the main point. 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. 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. 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. In many respects, his speech betrays the mentality of Massachusetts conservatives seeking to regain national leadership and advance their particular ideas about the nation. Do they mean, or can they mean, anything more than that the Union of the states will be strengthened, by whatever continues or furnishes inducements to the people of the states to hold together? Hayne quotes from the Virginia Resolution (1798), authored by Thomas Jefferson, to protest the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798). It is one from which we are not disposed to shrink, in whatever form or under whatever circumstances it may be pressed upon us. So what was this debate really about? 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. It moves vast bodies, and gives to them one and the same direction. The debate can be seen as a precursor to the debate that became . 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. In the course of my former remarks, I took occasion to deprecate, as one of the greatest of evils, the consolidation of this government. The Webster-Hayne Debate: An Inquiry into the Nature of Union by Stefan MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. Webster's articulation of the concept of the Union went on to shape American attitudes about the federal government. 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. Help if you can :) please and ty On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. Let their last feeble and lingering glance, rather behold the gorgeous Ensign of the Republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original luster, not a stripe erased or polluted, nor a single star obscuredbearing for its motto, no such miserable interrogatory as, what is all this worth? The Confederation was, in strictness, a compact; the states, as states, were parties to it. There is not, and never has been, a disposition in the North to interfere with these interests of the South. . We had no other general government. 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.