During his first years in Congress, Webster railed against President James Madison 's war policies, invoking a states' rights argument to oppose a conscription bill that went down to defeat.. webster hayne debate Flashcards | Quizlet But his standpoint was purely local and sectional. Webster-Hayne Debate book. Hayne, Robert Young | South Carolina Encyclopedia . 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. Rush-Bagot Treaty Structure & Effects | What was the Rush-Bagot Agreement? Webster and Hayne on the American Constitution Judiciary Act of 1801 | Overview, History & Significance, General Ulysses S. Grant Takes Charge: His Strategic Plan for Ending the War. To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. But the feeling is without all adequate cause, and the suspicion which exists wholly groundless. Let us look at his probablemodus operandi. flashcard sets. In whatever is within the proper sphere of the constitutional power of this government, we look upon the states as one. Having thus distinctly stated the points in dispute between the gentleman and myself, I proceed to examine them. Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses. Well, let's look at the various parts. The people were not satisfied with it, and undertook to establish a better. 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. 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 episode was used in nineteenth century America as a Biblical justification for slavery. The debaters were Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. Assuredly not. Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? Sir, if we are, then vain will be our attempt to maintain the Constitution under which we sit. And who are its enemies? Who, then, Mr. President, are the true friends of the Union? This would have been the case even if no positive provision to that effect had been inserted in that instrument. Ah! Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illin Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Douglas Faction), (Northern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. 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. In this moment in American history, the federal government had relatively little power. . . 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. 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. Those who would confine the federal government strictly within the limits prescribed by the Constitutionwho would preserve to the states and the people all powers not expressly delegatedwho would make this a federal and not a national Unionand who, administering the government in a spirit of equal justice, would make it a blessing and not a curse. The Webster-Hayne debates began over one issue but quickly switched to another. 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.. Sir, when the gentleman provokes me to such a conflict, I meet him at the threshold. . Plus, get practice tests, quizzes, and personalized coaching to help you This absurdity (for it seems no less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this government and its true character. 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 honorable member himself is not, I trust, and can never be, one of these. 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. Try refreshing the page, or contact customer support. Record of the Organization and Proceedings of The Massachusetts Lawmakers Investigate Working Condit State (Colonial) Legislatures>Massachusetts State Legislature. His speech was indeed a powerful one of its eloquence and personality. 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. He accused them of a desire to check the growth of the West in the interests of protection. If I could, by a mere act of my will, put at the disposal of the federal government any amount of treasure which I might think proper to name, I should limit the amount to the means necessary for the legitimate purposes of the government. But I do not admit that, under the Constitution, and in conformity with it, there is any mode in which a state government, as a member of the Union, can interfere and stop the progress of the general government, by force of her own laws, under any circumstances whatever. It would enable Congress and the Executive to exercise a control over states, as well as over great interests in the country, nay, even over corporations and individualsutterly destructive of the purity, and fatal to the duration of our institutions. Winners and Losers History's Famous Debates - Medium 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. But, sir, we will pass over all this. . 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. . . . 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: 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? Why was the Hayne-Webster debate important? - eNotes.com At the foundation of the constitution of these new Northwestern states, . 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. The Webster Hayne Debate - DEBETE CJK The gentleman, therefore, only follows out his own principles; he does no more than arrive at the natural conclusions of his own doctrines; he only announces the true results of that creed, which he has adopted himself, and would persuade others to adopt, when he thus declares that South Carolina has no interest in a public work in Ohio. Webster replied to his speech the next day and left not a shred of the charge, baseless as it was. An error occurred trying to load this video. 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 scene depicted in the painting is Webster concluding his debate with Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina. The next day, however, Massachusetts senator Daniel Webster rose with his reply, and the northern states knew they had found their champion. 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. 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 . The gentleman, indeed, argues that slavery, in the abstract, is no evil. 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. . 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. 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. We see its consequences at this moment, and we shall never cease to see them, perhaps, while the Ohio shall flow. . 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. But still, throughout American history, several debates have captured the nation's attention in a way that would make even Hollywood jealous. The Confederation was, in strictness, a compact; the states, as states, were parties to it. The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches delivered before the Senate in 1830. 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. 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.. 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. . . Wilmot Proviso of 1846: Overview & Significance | What was the Wilmot Proviso? . 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. . All of these ideas, however, are only parts of the main point. - 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. Those who are in favor of consolidation; who are constantly stealing power from the states and adding strength to the federal government; who, assuming an unwarrantable jurisdiction over the states and the people, undertake to regulate the whole industry and capital of the country. She has worked as a university writing consultant for over three years. Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? . 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. 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. What was going on? 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? . If slavery, as it now exists in this country, be an evil, we of the present day found it ready made to our hands. The Webster-Hayne Debate between New Hampshire Senator Daniel Webster and South Carolina Senator Robert Young Hayne highlighted the sectional nature of the controversy. Web hardcover $30.00 paperback $17.00 kindle nook book ibook. While the debaters argued about slavery, the economy, protection tariffs, and western land, the real implication was the meaning of the United States Constitution. If I had, sir, the powers of a magician, and could, by a wave of my hand, convert this capital into gold for such a purpose, I would not do it. . 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." . Create your account. . 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. . Consolidation!that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusionconsolidation! Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 25, 1830. . . 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. Thousands of these deluded victims of fanaticism were seduced into the enjoyment of freedom in our Northern cities. . 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. . It is only by a strict adherence to the limitations imposed by the Constitution on the federal government, that this system works well, and can answer the great ends for which it was instituted. Nullification Crisis | American Battlefield Trust If this Constitution, sir, be the creature of state Legislatures, it must be admitted that it has obtained a strange control over the volitions of its creators. Whose agent is it? Who Won the Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830? - Abbeville Institute This seemed like an Eastern spasm of jealousy at the progress of the West. 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. Even more pointedly, his speech reflected a decade of arguments from other Massachusetts conservatives who argued against supposed threats to New England's social order.[2]. The Webster-Hayne debate laid out key issues faced by the Senate in the 1820s and 1830s. Sir, I cordially respond to that appeal. 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. 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 means that South Carolina is essentially its own nation, Georgia is its own nation, and so on. Consolidation, like the tariff, grates upon his ear. It was motivated by a dispute over the continued sale of western lands, an important source of revenue for the federal government. It was plenary then, and never having been surrendered, must be plenary now. Robert Young Hayne | American politician | Britannica But until they shall alter it, it must stand as their will, and is equally binding on the general government and on the states. 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. The Significance of the Frontier in American Histo South Carolinas Ordinance of Nullification. If the gentleman provokes the war, he shall have war. 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. 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.) . - Women's Rights Facts & Significance, Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points: Definition, Speech & Summary, Fireside Chats: Definition & Significance, JFK's New Frontier: Definition, Speech & Program. 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.