[Its leader] would have a knot before him, which he could not untie. 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. Create your account, 15 chapters | Get unlimited access to over 88,000 lessons. I feel like its a lifeline. 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. If these opinions be thought doubtful, they are, nevertheless, I trust, neither extraordinary nor disrespectful. Excerpts from Ratification Documents of Virginia a Ratifying Conventions>New York Ratifying Convention. 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. All of these contentious topics were touched upon in Webster and Hayne's nine day long debate. He accused them of a desire to check the growth of the West in the interests of protection. . He speaks as if he were in Congress before 1789. . . 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. Sir, an immense national treasury would be a fund for corruption. They tell us, in the letter submitting the Constitution to the consideration of the country, that, in all our deliberations on this subject, we kept steadily in our view that which appears to us the greatest interest of every true Americanthe consolidation of our Unionin which is involved our prosperity, felicity, safety; perhaps our national existence. The measures of the federal government have, it is true, prostrated her interests, and will soon involve the whole South in irretrievable ruin. Understand the 1830 debate's significance through an overview of issues of the Constitution, the Union, and state sovereignty. Webster believed that the Constitution should be viewed as a binding document between the United States rather than an agreement between sovereign states. . 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. 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. This government, sir, is the independent offspring of the popular will. Well, let's look at the various parts. succeed. 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. Go to these cities now, and ask the question. Allow me to say, as a preliminary remark, that I call this the South Carolina doctrine, only because the gentleman himself has so denominated it. Then, in January of 1830, a senator from Connecticut introduced a proposal to the Senate stating that the federal government should stop surveying the lands west of the Mississippi River. . See what I mean? . . Webster and the northern states saw the Constitution as binding the individual states together as a single union. Hayne quotes from Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, December 26, 1825, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/letter-to-william-branch-giles/?_sft_document_author=thomas-jefferson. Daniel webster (ma) and sen. Hayne of . Webster's articulation of the concept of the Union went on to shape American attitudes about the federal government. Jackson himself would raise a national toast for 'the Union' later that year. 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. South Carolinas Declaration of the Causes of Sece Distribution of the Slave Population by State. Crittenden Compromise Plan & Reception | What was the Crittenden Compromise? All rights reserved. Judiciary Act of 1801 | Overview, History & Significance, General Ulysses S. Grant Takes Charge: His Strategic Plan for Ending the War. 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]. For all this, there was not the slightest foundation, in anything said or intimated by me. She has a BA in political science. 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. . Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 20, 1830. 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. 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 is one from which we are not disposed to shrink, in whatever form or under whatever circumstances it may be pressed upon us. A four-speech debate between Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Robert Hayne of South Carolina, in January 1830. So soon as the cessions were obtained, it became necessary to make provision for the government and disposition of the territory . It is to state, and to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. 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. 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. Pet Banks History & Effects | What are Pet Banks? MTEL Speech: Public Discourse & Debate in the U.S. 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? . This was the tenor of Webster's speech, and nobly did the country respond to it. . The Webster-Hayne debate was a series of spontaneous speeches delivered before the Senate in 1830. . Religious Views: Letter to the Editor of the Illin Democratic Party Platform 1860 (Douglas Faction), (Northern) Democratic Party Platform Committee. . . Hayne launched his confident javelin at the New England States. . copyright 2003-2023 Study.com. 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? . 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. Daniel Webster stood as a ready and formidable opponent from the north who, at different stages in his career, represented both the states of New Hampshire and Massachusetts. 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. 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. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 27, 1830. . This seemed like an Eastern spasm of jealousy at the progress of the West. 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. 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. Lincoln-Douglas Debates History & Significance | What Was the Lincoln-Douglas Debate? 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. The action, the drama, the suspensewho needs the movies? He must cut it with his sword. Webster's argument that the constitution should stand as a powerful uniting force between the states rather than a treaty between sovereign states held as a key concept in America's ideas about the federal government. 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. The next day, however, Massachusetts senator Daniel Webster rose with his reply, and the northern states knew they had found their champion. This is the true constitutional consolidation. I shrink almost instinctively from a course, however necessary, which may have a tendency to excite sectional feelings, and sectional jealousies. I propose to consider it, and to compare it with the Constitution. Rachel Venter is a recent graduate of Metropolitan State University of Denver. 136 lessons The heated speeches were unplanned and stemmed from the debate over a resolution by Connecticut Senator Samuel A. 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. 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. . He joined Hayne in using this opportunity to try to detach the West from the East, and restore the old cooperation of the West and the South against New England. 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. . Well, it's important to remember that the nation was still young and much different than what we think of today. States' rights (South) vs. nationalism (North). While the Union lasts, we have high, exciting, gratifying prospects spread out before us, for us and our children. 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. 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 debate continued, in some ways not being fully settled until the completion of the Civil War affirmed the power of the federal government to preserve the Union over the sovereignty of the states to leave it. Speech of Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, January 26 and 27, 1830. This episode was used in nineteenth century America as a Biblical justification for slavery. . Such interference has never been supposed to be within the power of government; nor has it been, in any way, attempted. When the gentleman says the Constitution is a compact between the states, he uses language exactly applicable to the old Confederation. 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! What followed, the Webster Hayne debate, was one of the most famous exchanges in Senate history. Sir, there does not exist, on the face of the whole earth, a population so poor, so wretched, so vile, so loathsome, so utterly destitute of all the comforts, conveniences, and decencies of life, as the unfortunate blacks of Philadelphia, and New York, and Boston. . A speech by Louisiana Senator Edward Livingston, however, neatly explains how American nationhood encompasses elements of both Webster and Hayne's ideas. It is the common pretense. The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts while he exonerates me personally from the charge, intimates that there is a party in the country who are looking to disunion. 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 Destiny of America, Speech at the Dedication o An Address. 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. Some of Webster's personal friends had felt nervous over what appeared to them too hasty a period for preparation. As a member, you'll also get unlimited access to over 88,000 . Daniel webster, in a dramatic speech, showed the. There was no winner or loser in the Webster-Hayne debate. 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. My life upon it, sir, they would not. Since as Vice President and President of the Senate, Calhoun could not take place in the debate, Hayne represented the pro-nullification point-of-view. 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. The debates between daniel webster of massachusetts and robert hayne of south carolina gave. This, sir, is General Washingtons consolidation. Speech of Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, January 25, 1830. . . Ah! 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. Congress could only recommendtheir acts were not of binding force, till the states had adopted and sanctioned them. I understand him to maintain an authority, on the part of the states, thus to interfere, for the purpose of correcting the exercise of power by the general government, of checking it, and of compelling it to conform to their opinion of the extent of its powers. A state will be restrained by a sincere love of the Union. The Webster-Hayne debate laid out key issues faced by the Senate in the 1820s and 1830s. Now that was a good debate! Correct answers: 2 question: Which of the following is the best definition of a hypothesis? 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. lessons in math, English, science, history, and more. 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 . Consolidation, like the tariff, grates upon his ear. . 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. . We look upon the states, not as separated, but as united. 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. . The gentleman has made an eloquent appeal to our hearts in favor of union. . . But until they shall alter it, it must stand as their will, and is equally binding on the general government and on the states. Now, have they given away that right, or agreed to limit or restrict it in any respect? Nullification, Webster maintained, was a political absurdity. . An accomplished politician, Hayne was an eloquent orator who enthralled his audiences. 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. 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. Can any man believe, sir, that, if twenty-three millions per annum was now levied by direct taxation, or by an apportionment of the same among the states, instead of being raised by an indirect tax, of the severe effect of which few are aware, that the waste and extravagance, the unauthorized imposition of duties, and appropriations of money for unconstitutional objects, would have been tolerated for a single year?
Where Was Robert B Elliott Born,
What Causes Hemosiderin Staining,
Unsolved Murders In Plymouth Ma,
Cancer Man And Cancer Woman Compatibility,
Is Propel Zero Sugar Good For You,
Articles W