15,697
edits
Changes
no edit summary
[[File: Andrew_Jackson_Portrait.jpg|300px250px|thumbnail|left|The Seventh American President, Andrew Jackson (1767-1845) (In Office 1829-1837)]]__NOTOC__
Andrew Jackson is one of the best known, most influential, and certainly one of the more controversial presidents in American history. The populist president transformed the way in which presidential campaigns are conducted and championed a number of ideas and causes that were not always successful, but defined his presidency nonetheless and set the course of American history for the following few decades. Most people know about President Jackson’s bank war and his policy of Indian removal, but just as important as those policies was the Nullification Crisis of 1832-1833.
==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.
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> ==What was the Nullification Crisis? ==[[File: JohnCalhoun.png|300px200px|thumbnail|left|John C. Calhoun (1782-1850)]][[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.
Shortly after the 1832 election, on November 24, the South Carolina Nullifiers held a convention to declare the 1828 and 1832 tariffs null and void, which triggered a variety of responses in Washington and South Carolina. In response, President Jackson issued a testy proclamation denouncing the Nullifiers on December 10, 1832 and Calhoun resigned as vice president on December 28, although he was nearly at the end of his term and was to be replaced by Martin Van Buren. Calhoun then became the national face of the Nullifiers, putting South Carolina on alert that they might have to use force to stop the collection of duties in their state. As all of these events unfolded, the philosophies driving the nullification debate became clearer.
[[File: 1832_Electoral_Map.png|250px|thumbnail|left|Electoral Map of the 1832 Presidential Election]]
As stated above, Calhoun represented the Nullifiers nationally and publicly articulated an idea that the entire debate was about state’s rights, which the Nullifiers supported, 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 country, 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 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.
== How was the Nullification Crisis ended? ==
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>
====What was the Impact of the Nullification Crisis Averted==? ==[[File: Clay_portrait.jpg|300px|thumbnail|left|250px|Henry Clay (1777-1852)]]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 the tariff that authorized would continually grow until 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.
For President Jackson, the Nullification proved to be a setback to his expansive political agenda. The coalition he worked so hard to build was fractured, as many state’s rights Democrats quickly soured on the ever-capricious president over his handling of the conflict. Calhoun took many of his supporters and formed what many at the time would have seen as an unlikely alliance with Henry Clay, which was metaphorically spitting in Jackson’s face. <ref> Ellis, pgs. 181-2</ref>
Of all the major players involved in the Nullification Crisis, Henry Clay probably emerged from it the victor. The compromise he crafted cemented his position in American history as a savvy negotiator and compromiser who was only motivated by the best interests of the country. Clay used this political capital, and the new alliances he formed during the Nullification Crisis, to found the Whig Party in 1834 from the remnants of the National Republican Party, along with the Nullifier Democrats, some former Jackson supporters, and the Anti-Mason Party. <ref> Wilentz, p. 402</ref>
====References====
<references/>
{{Contributors}}[[Category: United States History]] [[Category: Jacksonian America]] [[Category:Wikis]]
[[Category: Antebellum History]] [[Category: 19th Century History]] [[Category: Political History]]