what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debatesUncategorized

Well, you're not alone. 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. . It has always been regarded as a matter of domestic policy, left with the states themselves, and with which the federal government had nothing to do. See what I mean? Nor shall I stop there. One of those was the Webster-Hayne debate, a series of unplanned speeches presented before the Senate between January 19th and 27th of 1830. Shedding weak tears over sufferings which had existence only in their own sickly imaginations, these friends of humanity set themselves systematically to work to seduce the slaves of the South from their masters. . 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. I did not utter a single word, which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. Speech to the U.S. House of Representatives. MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. But his calm, unperturbed manner reassured them in an instant. I regard domestic slavery as one of the greatest of evils, both moral and political. . While the Union lasts, we have high, exciting, gratifying prospects spread out before us, for us and our children. 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. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. The War With Mexico: Speech in the United States H What Are the Colored People Doing for Themselves? 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). 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 . Web hardcover $30.00 paperback $17.00 kindle nook book ibook. 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 Confederation was, in strictness, a compact; the states, as states, were parties to it. So what was this debate really about? Robert Young Hayne, (born Nov. 10, 1791, Colleton District, S.C., U.S.died Sept. 24, 1839, Asheville, N.C.), American lawyer, political leader, and spokesman for the South, best-remembered for his debate with Daniel Webster (1830), in which he set forth a doctrine of nullification. . 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. . 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. Chris has a master's degree in history and teaches at the University of Northern Colorado. Massachusetts Senator Daniel Webster's "Second Reply" to South Carolina Senator Robert Y. Hayne has long been thought of as a great oratorical celebration of American Nationalism in a period of sectional conflict. In our contemplation, Carolina and Ohio are parts of the same country; states, united under the same general government, having interests, common, associated, intermingled. Sir, an immense national treasury would be a fund for corruption. He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. . It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. . . Compare And Contrast The Tension Between North And South. Correspondence Between Anthony Butler and Presiden State of the Union Address Part II (1846). . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. . Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. Under that system, the legal actionthe application of law to individuals, belonged exclusively to the states. 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? 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 heated speeches were unplanned and stemmed from the debate over a resolution by Connecticut Senator Samuel A. Lincoln-Douglas Debates History & Significance | What Was the Lincoln-Douglas Debate? . I love a good debate. But still, throughout American history, several debates have captured the nation's attention in a way that would make even Hollywood jealous. All rights reserved. Webster-Hayne Debate book. So soon as the cessions were obtained, it became necessary to make provision for the government and disposition of the territory . When they shall become dissatisfied with this distribution, they can alter it. . 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 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. . I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. I understand the gentleman to maintain, that, without revolution, without civil commotion, without rebellion, a remedy for supposed abuse and transgression of the powers of the general government lies in a direct appeal to the interference of the state governments. 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. 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? 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 . 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! . And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gentlemans doctrine a little into its practical application. 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. Our notion of things is entirely different. By the time it ended nine days later, the focus had shifted to the vastly more cosmic concerns of slavery and the nature of the federal Union. In this regard, Webster anticipated an argument that Abraham Lincoln made in his First Inaugural Address (1861). Webster believed that the Constitution should be viewed as a binding document between the United States rather than an agreement between sovereign states. The people had had quite enough of that kind of government, under the Confederacy. 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. We who come here, as agents and representatives of these narrow-minded and selfish men of New England, consider ourselves as bound to regard, with equal eye, the good of the whole, in whatever is within our power of legislation. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 27, 1830. . God grant that on my vision never may be opened what lies behind. Rush-Bagot Treaty Structure & Effects | What was the Rush-Bagot Agreement? The Revelation on Celestial Marriage: Trouble Amon Hon. This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government, and the source of its power. You see, to the south, the Constitution was essentially a treaty signed between sovereign states. Under the circumstances then existing, I look upon this original and seasonable provision, as a real good attained. 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. 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 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. The debaters were Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. To all this, sir, I was disposed most cordially to respond. What followed, the Webster Hayne debate, was one of the most famous exchanges in Senate history. . 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. . Southern states advocated for strong, sovereign state governments, a small federal government, the western expansion of the agricultural economy, and with it, the maintenance of the institution of slavery. At the foundation of the constitution of these new Northwestern states, . Address before the Wisconsin State Agricultural So "The Whole Affair Seems the Work of a Madman", John Brown and the Principle of Nonresistance. Webster and the North treated it as binding the states together as a single union. It was not a Union to be torn up without bloodshed; for nerves and arteries were interwoven with its roots and tendrils, sustaining the lives and interests of twelve million inhabitants. . . Tariff of 1816 History & Significance | What was the Tariff of 1816? It is only regarded as a possible means of good; or on the other hand, as a possible means of evil. Two leading ideas predominated in this reply, and with respect to either Hayne was not only answered but put to silence. 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. . succeed. [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. 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. . . Hayne and the South saw it as basically a treaty between sovereign states. 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. . . They will also better understand the debate's political context. On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. Debate on the Constitutionality of the Mexican War, Letters and Journals from the Oregon Trail. . Certainly, sir, I am, and ever have been of that opinion. 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. . The discussion took a wide range, going back to topics that had agitated the country before the Constitution was formed. 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. . 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. Daniel webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the. . . 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. . 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. 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. . When the honorable member rose, in his first speech, I paid him the respect of attentive listening; and when he sat down, though surprised, and I must say even astonished, at some of his opinions, nothing was farther from my intention than to commence any personal warfare: and through the whole of the few remarks I made in answer, I avoided, studiously and carefully, everything which I thought possible to be construed into disrespect. I feel like its a lifeline. . This debate exposed the critically different understandings of the nature of the American. Excerpts from Ratification Documents of Virginia a Ratifying Conventions>New York Ratifying Convention. . . . . . An equally talented orator, Webster rose as the advocate of the North in the debate with his captivating reply to Hayne's initial argument. And here it will be necessary to go back to the origin of the federal government. South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification 1832 | Crisis, Cause & Issues. 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. The measures of the federal government have, it is true, prostrated her interests, and will soon involve the whole South in irretrievable ruin. While the debaters argued about slavery, the economy, protection tariffs, and western land, the real implication was the meaning of the United States Constitution. It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. 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. The Webster-Hayne debates began over one issue but quickly switched to another. 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. As sovereign states, each state could individually interpret the Constitution and even leave the Union altogether. 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. The Farmhouse Wedding And Event Space Sarver, Pa, Articles W

Welcome to . This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!