Slavery and four years of war : $b a political history of slavery in the United States, together with a narrative of the campaigns and battles of the Civil War in which the author took part, 1861-1865. Vols. 1-2Keifer, Joseph Warren
History
Slavery and four years of war : $b a political history of slavery in the United States, together with a narrative of the campaigns and battles of the Civil War in which the author took part, 1861-1865. Vols. 1-2
Keifer, Joseph Warren
Slavery -- United States; United States -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865 -- Campaigns
A debate arose in the United States Senate over a resolution of
Senator Foote of Connecticut proposing to limit the sale of the
public lands, which took a wide range. Hayne of South Carolina
elaborately set forth the doctrine of nullification, claiming it
inhered in each State under the Constitution. He boldly announced
that the Union formed was only a _league_ or a _compact_. This
called forth from Webster his celebrated "Reply to Hayne," of
January 26, 1830, in which he assailed and apparently overthrew
the then new doctrine of nullification. He denounced its exercise
as incompatible with a loyal adherence to the Constitution, and
showed historically that the government formed under it was not a
mere "compact" or "_league_" between sovereign or independent States
terminable at will. He then asserted that any attempt of any State
to act on the theory of nullification would inevitably entail civil
war or a dissolution of the Union.
The first real attempt, however, at nullification, or the first
attempt of a State to declare laws of Congress nugatory and of no
binding force when not approved by the State, was made in South
Carolina in 1832, under the leadership of John C. Calhoun, then
Vice-President of the United States, and hitherto a statesman of
so much just renown, and esteemed so moderate and patriotic in his
views on all national questions as to have been looked upon, with
the special approval of the North, as eminently qualified for the
Presidency. He hopefully aspired to it until he quarrelled with
President Jackson; he had been in favor of a protective tariff.
Cotton was, as we have seen, the principal article of export, and
the slaveholding cotton planters conceived the idea that to secure
a market for it there must be no duties on imports, and that home
manufactures of needed articles for consumption would restrict the
foreign demand for the raw material. Besides, the South with its
slave labor could not indulge in manufacturing. A tariff on imports
meant protection to home industries and to free white labor, both
inimical to slavery. Some leading Southern statesmen, adherents
of slavery, had vehemently opposed the ratification of the Constitution
of 1787, on the ground that as it empowered Congress to levy import
duties, it would encourage and build up home industries, with free
labor; and they prophesied that with them slavery would eventually
become unprofitable and therefore unpopular, hence would die. This
idea never left the Southern mind, so, when the Confederacy of 1861
was formed, its Constitution (framed at Montgomery, Alabama)
prohibited such duties for the express reason that no branch of
industry was to be promoted in the new slave government, using this
language:
"Nor shall any duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations
be laid to promote or foster any branch of industry."(45)
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