The people of the United States have declared that this Constitution shall be the Supreme Law. . . . | 12 But, sir, the gentleman is mistaken. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) | Case, Significance & Summary. But the gentleman apprehends that this will make the Union a rope of sand. Sir, I have shown that it is a power indispensably necessary to the preservation of the constitutional rights of the states, and of the people. . 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. Battle of Fort Sumter in the Civil War | Who Won the Battle of Fort Sumter? We had no other general government. . Expert Answers. When the gentleman says the Constitution is a compact between the states, he uses language exactly applicable to the old Confederation. . . Webster's speech aroused the latent spirit of patriotism. Let us look at the historical facts. Now, have they given away that right, or agreed to limit or restrict it in any respect? It was of a partizan and censorious character and drew nearly all the chief senators out. They attack nobody, and menace nobody. Webster's "Second Reply to Hayne" was generally regarded as "the most eloquent speech ever delivered in Congress."[1]. 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. The Confederation was, in strictness, a compact; the states, as states, were parties to it. The gentleman takes alarm at the sound. By means of missionaries and political tracts, the scheme was in a great measure successful. . The United States, under the Constitution and federal government, was a single, unified nation, not a coalition of sovereign states. Broadside Advertisement for Runaway Slave, Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Free-Soiler, Free & Slave-holding States and Territories. . 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. Webster believed that the Constitution should be viewed as a binding document between the United States rather than an agreement between sovereign states. It is the servant of four-and-twenty masters, of different wills and different purposes, and yet bound to obey all. Eloquence threw open the portals of eternal day. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 27, 1830. . These verses recount the first occurrence of slavery. . Webster and the North treated it as binding the states together as a single union. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. It is only regarded as a possible means of good; or on the other hand, as a possible means of evil. Chris has a master's degree in history and teaches at the University of Northern Colorado. Hayne argued that the sovereign and independent states had created the Union to promote their particular interests. 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. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. My life upon it, sir, they would not. They will also better understand the debate's political context. 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. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. sir, this is but the old story. If the gentleman provokes the war, he shall have war. 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). 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 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. . 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. We will not look back to inquire whether our fathers were guiltless in introducing slaves into this country. But that was found insufficient, and inadequate to the public exigencies. Webster also tried to assert the importance of New England in the face of . . There was an end to all apprehension. . But, sir, we will pass over all this. In January 1830, a debate on the nature of sovereignty in the America. . That's what was happening out West. They will also better understand the debate's political context. Edited and introduced by Jason W. Stevens. . See Genesis 9:2027. . Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses. 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. Foote Idea To Limit The Sale Of Public Lands In The West To New Settlers. He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. What followed, the Webster Hayne debate, was one of the most famous exchanges in Senate history. . 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. Connecticut and other northeastern states were worried about the pace of growth and wanted to slow this down. 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. Hayne, South Carolina's foremost Senator, was the chosen champion; and the cause of his State, both in its right and wrong sides, could have found no abler exponent while [Vice President] Calhoun's official station kept him from the floor. All of these ideas, however, are only parts of the main point. 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. . 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. Daniel Webster argued against nullification (the idea that states could disobey federal laws) arguing in favor of a strong federal government which would bind the states together under the Constitution. . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. Sir, I may be singularperhaps I stand alone here in the opinion, but it is one I have long entertained, that one of the greatest safeguards of liberty is a jealous watchfulness on the part of the people, over the collection and expenditure of the public moneya watchfulness that can only be secured where the money is drawn by taxation directly from the pockets of the people. The tendency of all these ideas and sentiments is obviously to bring the Union into discussion, as a mere question of present and temporary expediency; nothing more than a mere matter of profit and loss. 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. 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. . Hayne and the South saw it as basically a treaty between sovereign states. 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. Is it the creature of the state legislatures, or the creature of 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. 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? Gloomy and downcast of late, Massachusetts men walked the avenue as though the fife and drum were before them. This will co-operate with the feelings of patriotism to induce a state to avoid any measures calculated to endanger that connection. 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. The Significance of the Frontier in American Histo South Carolinas Ordinance of Nullification. . Thirty years before the Civil War broke out, disunion appeared to be on the horizon with the Nullification Crisis. we find the most opposite and irreconcilable opinions between the two parties which I have before described. 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. 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! 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? Which of the following statements best represents the desires of the Northern states during the debate of Missouri statehood? For the next several days, the men traded speeches which contemporaries of the time described as the greatest orations ever delivered in the Senate. . . As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 . 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. Francis O. J. Smith to Secretary of State Dan Special Message to the House of Representatives, Special Message to Congress on Mexican Relations. Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? 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 . 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. 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 . Now that was a good debate! 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. They have agreed, that certain specific powers shall be exercised by the federal government; but the moment that government steps beyond the limits of its charter, the right of the states to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits the authorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them,[7] is as full and complete as it was before the Constitution was formed. . Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. At the foundation of the constitution of these new Northwestern states, . I understand him to insist, that if the exigency of the case, in the opinion of any state government, require it, such state government may, by its own sovereign authority, annul an act of the general government, which it deems plainly and palpably unconstitutional. Between January and May 1830, twenty-one of the forty-eight senators delivered a staggering sixty-five speeches on the nature of the Union. The Webster-Hayne debate was a famous debate in the United States between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina.It happened on January 19-27, 1830. Finding our lot cast among a people, whom God had manifestly committed to our care, we did not sit down to speculate on abstract questions of theoretical liberty. The Webster-Hayne debate concluded with Webster's ringing endorsement of "Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable." In contrast, Hayne espoused the radical states' rights doctrine of nullification, believing that a state could prevent a federal law from being enforced within its borders. 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.