what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates what idea was espoused with the webster hayne debates

And who are its enemies? [Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. . . But I take leave of the subject. Tariff of Abominations of 1828 | What was the Significance of the Tariff of Abominations? Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? Tariff of 1816 History & Significance | What was the Tariff of 1816? And what has been the consequence? 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. An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. Who, then, Mr. President, are the true friends of the Union? The Northwest Ordinance. The Hayne-Webster Debate was 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. 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: . 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. On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. 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? But his calm, unperturbed manner reassured them in an instant. . Rachel Venter is a recent graduate of Metropolitan State University of Denver. Let's start by looking at the United States around 1830. But I do not understand the doctrine now contended for to be that which, for the sake of distinctness, we may call the right of revolution. Webster and Hayne on the American Constitution These debates transformed into a national crisis when South Carolina threatened . 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. If they mean merely this, then, no doubt, the public lands as well as everything else in which we have a common interest, tends to consolidation; and to this species of consolidation every true American ought to be attached; it is neither more nor less than strengthening the Union itself. . 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. 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. In the course of my former remarks, I took occasion to deprecate, as one of the greatest of evils, the consolidation of this government. Foot calling for the temporary suspension of further land surveying until land already on the market was sold (to effectively stop the introduction of new lands onto the market). . TEST: THE WESTWARD MOVEMENT Flashcards | Quizlet The gentleman has made an eloquent appeal to our hearts in favor of union. Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. Excerpts from Ratification Documents of Virginia a Ratifying Conventions>New York Ratifying Convention. Correspondence Between Anthony Butler and Presiden State of the Union Address Part II (1846). ", What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?. . Daniel webster (ma) and sen. Hayne of . . The next day, however, Massachusetts senator Daniel Webster rose with his reply, and the northern states knew they had found their champion. 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. Hayne and the South saw it as basically a treaty between sovereign states. 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? Sir, we narrow-minded people of New England do not reason thus. New England, the Union, and the Constitution in its integrity, all were triumphantly vindicated. A state will be restrained by a sincere love of the Union. Webster argued that the American people had created the Union to promote the good of the whole. Wilmot Proviso of 1846: Overview & Significance | What was the Wilmot Proviso? 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. 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. . The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches delivered before the Senate in 1830. But, sir, the gentleman is mistaken. Debate on the Constitutionality of the Mexican War, Letters and Journals from the Oregon Trail. 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. . Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. 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. 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. 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. copyright 2003-2023 Study.com. The Destiny of America, Speech at the Dedication o An Address. They had burst forth from arguments about a decision by Connecticut Senator Samuel Foote. Differences between Northern and Southern ideas of good governance, which eventually led to the American Civil War, were beginning to emerge. . Webster-Hayne Debates, 1830 - Bill of Rights Institute . flashcard sets. . We do not impose geographical limits to our patriotic feeling or regard; we do not follow rivers and mountains, and lines of latitude, to find boundaries, beyond which public improvements do not benefit us. I must now beg to ask, sir, whence is this supposed right of the states derived?where do they find the power to interfere with the laws of the Union? Competing Conceptions of Union and Ordered Liberty in It would be equally fatal to the sovereignty and independence of the states. As a pious son of Federalism, Webster went the full length of the required defense. This is the sense in which the Framers of the Constitution use the word consolidation; and in which sense I adopt and cherish it. It was a great and salutary measure of prevention. Having thus distinctly stated the points in dispute between the gentleman and myself, I proceed to examine them. It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. Senator Foote, of Connecticut, submitted a proposition inquiring into the expediency of limiting the sales of public lands to those already in the market. Their own power over their own instrument remains. Robert Young Hayne spent more than two decades in elected offices, including mayor of Charleston, member of South Carolina's legislature, attorney general, and then governor of the state. It is the servant of four-and-twenty masters, of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. The senator from Massachusetts, in denouncing what he is pleased to call the Carolina doctrine,[5] has attempted to throw ridicule upon the idea that a state has any constitutional remedy by the exercise of its sovereign authority against a gross, palpable, and deliberate violation of the Constitution. He called it an idle or a ridiculous notion, or something to that effect; and added, that it would make the Union a mere rope of sand. His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. 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. No hanging over the abyss of disunion, no weighing of the chances, no doubting as to what the Constitution was worth, no placing of liberty before Union, but "liberty and union, now and forever, one and inseparable." 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). Sir, when the gentleman provokes me to such a conflict, I meet him at the threshold. They switched from a. the tariff of 1828 to national power . 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. Consolidation, like the tariff, grates upon his ear. 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. I know, full well, that it is, and has been, the settled policy of some persons in the South, for years, to represent the people of the North as disposed to interfere with them, in their own exclusive and peculiar concerns. And here it will be necessary to go back to the origin of the federal government. . Webster-Hayne debate - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 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. - Women's Rights Facts & Significance, Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points: Definition, Speech & Summary, Fireside Chats: Definition & Significance, JFK's New Frontier: Definition, Speech & Program. The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions Add Song of the Spinners from the Lowell Offering. 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. 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. Prejudice Not Natural: The American Colonization "What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July? . 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. 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. Hayne, Robert Young | South Carolina Encyclopedia foote wanted to stop surveying lands until they could sell the ones already looked at 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. 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. They attack nobody, and menace nobody. 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. . The impression which has gone abroad, of the weakness of the South, as connected with the slave question, exposes us to such constant attacks, has done us so much injury, and is calculated to produce such infinite mischiefs, that I embrace the occasion presented by the remarks of the gentleman from Massachusetts, to declare that we are ready to meet the question promptly and fearlessly. Conversation-based seminars for collegial PD, one-day and multi-day seminars, graduate credit seminars (MA degree), online and in-person. 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. It was a speech delivered before a crowded auditory, and loud were the Southern exultations that he was more than a match for Webster. The dominant historical opinion of the famous debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Young Hayne of South Carolina which took place in the United States Senate in 1830 has long been that Webster defeated Hayne both as an orator and a statesman. . Available in hard copy and for download. Under the circumstances then existing, I look upon this original and seasonable provision, as a real good attained. . Compare And Contrast The Tension Between North And South A speech by Louisiana Senator Edward Livingston, however, neatly explains how American nationhood encompasses elements of both Webster and Hayne's ideas. Is it the creature of the state legislatures, or the creature of the people? These irreconcilable views of national supremacy and state sovereignty framed the constitutional struggle that led to Civil War thirty years later. . . To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. 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 He had allowed himself but a single night from eve to morn to prepare for a critical and crowning occasion. The debate can be seen as a precursor to the debate that became . 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. All rights reserved. The 1830 WebsterHayne 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. Webster also tried to assert the importance of New England in the face of . 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. Compare And Contrast The Tension Between North And South. .Readers will finish the book with a clear idea of the reason Webster's "Reply" became so influential in its own day. 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. MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. I would definitely recommend Study.com to my colleagues. Let us look at the historical facts. . Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you Though Webster made an impassioned argument, the political, social, and economic traditions of New England informed his ideas about the threatened nation. The excited crowd which had packed the Senate chamber, filling every seat on the floor and in the galleries, and all the available standing room, dispersed after the orator's last grand apostrophe had died away in the air, with national pride throbbing at the heart. . . The Webster Hayne Debate - DEBETE CJK Sir, an immense national treasury would be a fund for corruption. I love a good debate. They cherish no deep and fixed regard for it, flowing from a thorough conviction of its absolute and vital necessity to our welfare. I regard domestic slavery as one of the greatest of evils, both moral and political. Daniel webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the. | 12 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. This means that South Carolina is essentially its own nation, Georgia is its own nation, and so on. Chris has a master's degree in history and teaches at the University of Northern Colorado. She has worked as a university writing consultant for over three years. . Beyond that I seek not to penetrate the veil. . I am a Unionist, and in this sense a national Republican. The debate was important because it laid out the arguments in favor of nationalism in the face of growing sectionalism. 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. 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. Who Won the Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830? - Abbeville Institute . 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. It is the common pretense. Every scheme or contrivance by which rulers are able to procure the command of money by means unknown to, unseen or unfelt by, the people, destroys this security. . . This will co-operate with the feelings of patriotism to induce a state to avoid any measures calculated to endanger that connection. I spoke, sir, of the ordinance of 1787, which prohibited slavery, in all future times, northwest of the Ohio,[6] as a measure of great wisdom and foresight; and one which had been attended with highly beneficial and permanent consequences. Gloomy and downcast of late, Massachusetts men walked the avenue as though the fife and drum were before them. In this moment in American history, the federal government had relatively little power. 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. Now, have they given away that right, or agreed to limit or restrict it in any respect? Help please? What idea was espoused with the Webster-Hayne debates? The But his standpoint was purely local and sectional. He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. Drama, suspense, it's all there. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. 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. . The Revelation on Celestial Marriage: Trouble Amon Hon. While the debaters argued about slavery, the economy, protection tariffs, and western land, the real implication was the meaning of the United States Constitution. 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.