Changes

[[File: Andrew_Jackson_Portrait.jpg|300px250px|thumbnail|left|The Seventh American President, Andrew Jackson (1767-1845) (In Office 1829-1837)]]__NOTOC__

==Which state caused the Nullification Crisis?==The Nullification Crisis was a volatile political situation whereby the state of South Carolina, led largely by Vice President and then -Senator John C. Calhoun, declared the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 null and void. As the rhetoric surrounding the controversy heated up, Jackson threatened to use the military on South Carolina to enforce federal law, while South Carolina politicians ordered its state militia to be on guard. The tensions were high, as was the possibility of secession. Finally, largely due to Senator Henry Clay, a compromise tariff was enacted in 1833 that diffused the situation, but not before the crisis made a great impact on America’s political landscape. The conflict of state’s rights versus unionism made its first showing in what would be the first of many debates leading up to the Civil War. President Jackson’s political capital was damaged by the crisis, but the prospects of his old enemy, Henry Clay, grew as a result of his efforts. Finally, the Nullification Crisis led directly to the formation of the Whig Party.

====The Background of the Nullification Crisis==== [[File: 1828_Electoral_Map.png|300px|thumbnail|left|Electoral Map of the 1828 Presidential Election]]In order Finally, largely due to understand how the Nullification Crisis became such an important part of American historySenator Henry Clay, a compromise tariff was enacted in 1833 that diffused the idea of government spendingsituation, tariffs, and how but not before the future crisis made a great impact on America’s political landscape. The conflict of the country was envisioned state’s rights versus unionism made its first showing in the early nineteenth century must what would be understood. Speaker of the House and one of the leaders of the National Republican Party, Henry Clay of Kentucky, envisioned a grand idea whereby the United States would be modernized through a series first of programs and projects, which he termed “The American System.” Most Americans agreed with Clay that America should be brought many debates leading up to the same standards as Europe in terms of its roads, canals, and railroads, but there was no consensus on how it should be fundedCivil War. Clay proposed using tariffs to fund his program, which President Jackson’s political capital was agreed to damaged by the majority of his partycrisis, including President John Q. Adams (in office 1825-1829). After but the Democrats took control prospects of the House of Representatives in 1826his old enemy, Henry Clay lost , grew as a result of his position as Speaker and it may have seemed like tariffs were deadefforts. Finally, but the Democrats had their own ideas. Hoping Nullification Crisis led directly to build a successful coalition that would thrust Jackson into the White House, formation of the Democrats proposed a tariff that set duties on wool at 50%. <ref> Wilentz, Sean. <i> The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln.</i> (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2006), pgsWhig Party. 243; 299 </ref>

Adams signed the tariff into law in 1828, which not only set a high import charge == Why did Democrats support tariffs on wool imports, but also on hemp, and pig iron, and rolled linen? == [[File: 1828_Electoral_Map. The tariff was supported by hemp farmers in png|250px|thumbnail|left|Electoral Map of the 1828 Presidential Election]]In order to understand how the westNullification Crisis became such an important part of American history, as well as some manufacturers in the northeastidea of government spending, where the Democrats were attempting to make inroads and form a coalition. Jackson publicly supported the tarifftariffs, arguing that the United States should protect its infant manufacturing base and use how the revenue derived from future of the duties to pay for country was envisioned in the national debtearly nineteenth century must be understood. <ref> Ellis, Richard. <i> Union at Risk: Jacksonian Democracy, State’s Rights, Speaker of the House and one of the Nullification Crisis.</i> (Oxford: Oxford University Pressleaders of the National Republican Party, 1987)Henry Clay of Kentucky, p. 43 </ref> But not everyone in envisioned a grand idea whereby the new Jackson coalition was happy with the tariffUnited States would be modernized through a series of programs and projects, which he termed “The American System.”

Many southerners, whose economic well-being was based on exporting cotton, were so upset Most Americans agreed with the 1828 tariff Clay that it became known America should be brought up to them the same standards as “The Tariff of Abominations” and nowhere was this attitude more prevalent than Europe in South Carolina. The leader terms of the anti-tariff movement in South Carolina was a former congressman and secretary of state and future vice president its roads, canals, and senatorrailroads, John Cbut there was no consensus on how it should be funded. Calhoun. Although Calhoun supported the 1816 tariff for the purpose of national defense, he was against anymore, arguing that Clay proposed using tariffs were anti-free trade. <ref> Freehling, William W. <i> Prelude to Civil War: The Nullification Crisis in South Carolinafund his program, 1816-1836.</i> (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 95</ref> An anti-tariff philosophy began which was agreed to be disseminated throughout South Carolina and in Washington by some the majority of South Carolina’s congressional representatives. They logically argued that the tariffs could start a trade war that would hurt their export based livelihoodshis party, but there were also political and racial components to their anti-tariff stanceincluding President John Q. Many Adams (in South Carolina’s slaveoffice 1825-owning planter class saw tariffs as a violation of state’s rights1829). They supported the “slippery slope” argument by stating that if South Carolina’s economic freedoms could be usurped by tariffs, then it was only a matter of time until the federal government told them they had to free their slaves. <ref> Freehling, pgs. 115-16</ref>

After the Democrats took control of the House of Representatives in 1826, Clay lost his position as Speaker and it may have seemed like tariffs were dead, but the Democrats had their own ideas. Hoping to build a successful coalition that would thrust Jackson into the White House, the Democrats proposed a tariff that set duties on wool at 50%. <ref> Wilentz, Sean. <i> [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0393329216/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0393329216&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=59b7b81793feacabb7c67da67df141a7 The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln.]</i> (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2006), pgs. 243; 299 </ref> Adams signed the tariff into law in 1828, which not only set a high import charge on wool imports, but also on hemp, pig iron, and rolled linen. The tariff was supported by hemp farmers in the west, as well as some manufacturers in the northeast, where the Democrats were attempting to make inroads and form a coalition. Jackson publicly supported the tariff, arguing that the United States should protect its infant manufacturing base and use the revenue derived from the duties to pay for the national debt. <ref> Ellis, Richard. <i> [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/019506187X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=019506187X&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=fb48b18b423c473a9bc54584cb1a2288 Union at Risk: Jacksonian Democracy, State’s Rights, and the Nullification Crisis].</i> (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), p. 43 </ref> But not everyone in the new Jackson coalition was happy with the tariff. Many southerners, whose economic well-being was based on exporting cotton, were so upset with the 1828 tariff that it became known to them as “The Tariff of Abominations” and nowhere was this attitude more prevalent than in South Carolina. The leader of the anti-tariff movement in South Carolina was a former congressman and secretary of state and future vice president and senator, John C. Calhoun. Although Calhoun supported the 1816 tariff for the purpose of national defense, he was against anymore, arguing that tariffs were anti-free trade. <ref> Freehling, William W. <i> [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195076818/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0195076818&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=5948c6859f2ec8b4f647ea93084c0c7d Prelude to Civil War: The Nullification Crisis in South Carolina, 1816-1836].</i> (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 95</ref> An anti-tariff philosophy began to be disseminated throughout South Carolina and in Washington by some of South Carolina’s congressional representatives. They logically argued that the tariffs could start a trade war that would hurt their export based livelihoods, but there were also political and racial components to their anti-tariff stance.  Many in South Carolina’s slave-owning planter class saw tariffs as a violation of state’s rights. They supported the “slippery slope” argument by stating that if South Carolina’s economic freedoms could be usurped by tariffs, then it was only a matter of time until the federal government told them they had to free their slaves. <ref> Freehling, pgs. 115-16</ref> <dh-ad/> ==What was the Nullifcation Crisis? ==

[[File: 1832_Electoral_Map.png|300px|thumbnail|right|Electoral Map of the 1832 Presidential Election]]The politics of supporting the 1828 tariff paid off for Andrew Jackson and the Democrats, as it helped him win the presidency by taking states in the west and northeast whose industries were helped by it. Jackson cruised to an easy victory in tariff of 1828 and was able to focus on the bank war and Indian removal for his first term, but 1828 was still a political issue that could have possibly derailed Jackson’s presidency.  During the summer of 1833 a compromise tariff was passed through Congress and sent to Jackson’s desk, which he readily signed. But it was still too much for the Nullifiers of South Carolina. Although Jackson cruised to an easy victory in his 1832 reelection bid, thanks in large part to support in the northeast, South Carolina electors cast all their votes for Virginia governor John Floyd – the Nullification movement was officially born.

As stated above, Calhoun represented The compromise satisfied most of the national Nullifiers nationally and publicly articulated an idea that the entire debate , but something was about state’s rightsneeded to appease Webster, which the Nullifiers supportedJackson, versus an ever encroaching federal system. Diametrically opposed to these ideas was the idea of national supremacy and the union as being the absolute authority in the countryUnionists, whose decisions could not be usurped by the individual states. Senator Daniel Webster (1782-1852) of Massachusetts was one of the most vociferous proponents of the union philosophy during the Nullification Crisis. Finally, Jackson represented so a position that “Force Bill” was somewhat in attached to the middle but also unique. As a populist, Jackson believed tariff that authorized the majority use of force to collect the citizens favored the tariffs and that their will should duties if need be respected and followed. As a nationalist, Jackson saw Although the Union as compromise tariff had the identity of votes to go through Congress, it ultimately came down to how the nation and although he respected the idea of state’s rightsstate Nullifiers in South Carolina viewed it. On March 11, at least rhetorically1832, he believed that the Union was indissolubleNullifiers held another convention where they voted to accept the compromise. <ref> WilsonEllis, Major L. “ ‘Liberty and Union’: An Analysis of Three Concepts Involved in the Nullification Controversyp.” <i>Journal of Southern History</i> 33 (1967) pgs. 332-4176</ref> At the height of the Nullification Crisis it was less a matter of a clash of The crisis had been averted, but immense political parties but more so a fight between Unionists and state’s rights advocatesdamage had been done.

====What was the Impact of the Nullification Crisis Averted==? ==

In early 1833, The impact the Nullifiers appeared unwilling to budge Nullification Crisis had on their position and some of the more radical members political landscape of the movement began whispering about secession. The ever bellicose Jackson was antebellum America may not in the mood to deal with such talk and let some of this own threats leak to the press. As all of this was going onhave been very apparent, Henry Clay, who but it was then a Senator from Kentucky, stepped forward to earn his title as the “Great Compromiser.” Working with Calhoun, he crafted a compromise tariff that used the 1832 tariff as a base point but reduced duties over a nine-year period to 20%profound. <ref> Ellis, p. 168</ref> The compromise satisfied most of philosophical battle between Unionism and state’s right first manifested itself during the national Nullifierscrisis, but something was needed to appease Webster, Jackson, and the Unionists, so a “Force Bill” was attached to would continually grow until the tariff that authorized the use of force to collect the duties if need beCivil War finally happened. Although The philosophical battle between the compromise tariff had the votes to go through Congressconcepts also became more heated and personal, it ultimately came down to how with the state Nullifiers in South Carolina being viewed it. On March 11, 1832, as a threat to the Nullifiers held another convention where they voted to accept Union by the compromiseUnionists. <ref> Ellis, ppgs. 17646-47</ref> The crisis had been averted, but immense political damage had been done.

===The Impact of the Nullification Crisis===The impact the Nullification Crisis had on the political landscape of antebellum America may not have been very apparent, but it was profound. The philosophical battle between Unionism and state’s right first manifested itself during the crisis, but would continually grow until the Civil War finally happened. The philosophical battle between the concepts also became more heated and personal, with the Nullifiers being viewed as a threat to the Union by the Unionists. <ref> Ellis, pgs. 46-47</ref> Conversely, the Nullifiers/state’s rights advocates became much more entrenched in their positions, especially in the state of South Carolina. In 1834, the Nullifiers who ran the state -required state militia and civil office holders officeholders to swear an oath of loyalty to the state of South Carolina over the federal government. <ref> Ellis, 180</ref> It was merely a sign of things to come.

====Conclusion====The Nullification Crisis of 1832-1833 was an American political crisis that has been largely overlooked today by many, but was one that had far-ranging impacts on antebellum American history. The crisis set the stage for the battle between Unionism and state’s rights, which eventually led to the Civil War. The Nullification Crisis also stalled the agenda of President Jackson’s second term and led to the formation of the Whig Party and the Second American Party System. If there is one single event in early American history that foreshadowed the Civil War, it was truly the Nullification Crisis. After all, the Civil War began in South Carolina.

{{Contributors}}[[Category: United States History]] [[Category: Jacksonian America]] [[Category:Wikis]]