Changes

Finally, Jackson represented a position that was somewhat in the middle but also unique. As a populist, Jackson believed that the majority of the citizens favored the tariffs and that their will should be respected and followed. As a nationalist, Jackson saw the Union as the identity of the nation and although he respected the idea of state’s rights, at least rhetorically, he believed that the Union was indissoluble. <ref> Wilson, Major L. “ ‘Liberty and Union’: An Analysis of Three Concepts Involved in the Nullification Controversy.” <i>Journal of Southern History</i> 33 (1967) pgs. 332-4</ref> At the height of the Nullification Crisis it was less a matter of a clash of political parties but more so a fight between Unionists and state’s rights advocates.

In early 1833, the Nullifiers appeared unwilling to budge on their position and some of the more radical members of the movement began whispering about secession. The ever bellicose Jackson was 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 on, Henry Clay, who 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%. <ref> Ellis, p. 168</ref>

<div class="portal" style='float:right; width:35%'>

====Related Articles====

{{#dpl:category=History of the Early Republic|ordermethod=firstedit|order=descending|count=7}}