Civil War and Reconstruction in AlabamaFleming, Walter L. (Walter Lynwood)
History
Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama
Fleming, Walter L. (Walter Lynwood)
Alabama -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865; Reconstruction (U.S. history, 1865-1877) -- Alabama
Immediately after the nullification troubles, the general government
attempted to remove the white settlers from the Indian lands in east
Alabama. The lands had been ceded by the Indians in 1832, and the
legislature of Alabama at once extended the state administration over the
territory. Settlers rushed in; some were already there. But by the treaty
the Indians were entitled to remain on their land until they chose to
move; and now the United States marshals, supported by the army, were
ordered to remove the 30,000 whites who had settled in the nine Indian
counties. Governor Gayle, who had been elected as an opponent of
nullification, informed the Secretary of War that the proposed action of
the central government meant nothing less than the destruction of the
state administration, and declared that he would, at all costs, sustain
the jurisdiction of the state government. The troops killed a citizen who
resisted removal, and the Federal authorities refused to allow the slayers
to be tried by state courts. There was great excitement in the state, and
public meetings were everywhere held to organize resistance. The
legislature authorized the governor to persist in maintaining the state
administration in the nine Indian counties. A collision with the United
States troops was expected, and offers of volunteers were made to the
governor,--even from New York. Finally the United States government
yielded, the whites remained on the Indian lands, the state authority was
upheld in the Indian counties, the soldiers were tried before state
courts, and the Indians were removed to the West. The governor proclaimed
a victory for the state, and the 30,000 angry Alabamians rejoiced over
what they considered the defeat of the unjust Federal government.[4]
Thus in Alabama nullification of Federal law was successfully carried out.
And it was done by a state administration and a people that a year before
had refused to approve the course of South Carolina. But South Carolina
was regarded in Alabama, as in the rest of the South, somewhat as an
erratic member that ought to be disciplined once in a while. A strong and
able minority in Alabama accepted the basis of the nullification doctrine,
_i.e._ the sovereignty of the states, and after this time this political
element was usually known as the State Rights party. They had no separate
organization, but voted with Whigs or Democrats, as best served their
purpose. Secession was little talked of, for affairs might yet go well,
they thought, within the Union. A majority of the Democrats, for several
years after 1832, were probably opposed in theory to nullification and
secession when South Carolina was an actor, but in practice they acted as
they had done in the Indian disputes which concerned them more closely.
The Slavery Controversy and Political Divisions
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account