1 / 9

Section 1 – Part III

Section 1 – Part III. State’s Rights. The issue of tariffs fueled a national debate The argument was really over the balance of power between federal & state governments Defenders of state’s rights thought states should be able to make decision without interference by federal government.

aizza
Download Presentation

Section 1 – Part III

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Section 1 – Part III

  2. State’s Rights • The issue of tariffs fueled a national debate • The argument was really over the balance of power between federal & state governments • Defenders of state’s rights thought states should be able to make decision without interference by federal government

  3. State’s Rights • 1828 – Congress passed a bill that raised tariffs sharply on: • Raw materials • Manufactured goods ~ Southerners came to call this the “Tariff of Abominations” • Southerners felt strongly that the economic interests of NE were determining national policy • Tariffs were a prime example because they hurt the South & helped the North • Southerners depended on European trade, which tariffs made more expensive • Tariff funds were often used for infrastructure projects based mostly in the north

  4. Summary/Quiz Questions • Which was NOT a reason why Southerners objected to high tariffs? • They believed tariffs hurt them, but helped the North • They bought many products from Northeastern manufacturers • Tariff funds were used to pay for improvements in the North • The South’s economy depended on trade with Britain

  5. Nullification Crisis • John C. Calhoun, AJ’s VP, sympathized with Southerners, but did not support their plans to secede • Instead he proposed a doctrine of nullification • Nullification meant that a state government could cancel a federal law if it felt the law was unconstitutional • Calhoun’s proposal caused major controversy

  6. Nullification Debate Senators Daniel Webster of MA & Robert Hayne of SC debated the issue openly Webster argued that the Union could not exist in its intended form if nullification was allowed Hayne argued that nullification was simply a mode of lawful & peaceful protest

  7. Nullification Debate • AJ was torn on the matter • He was a strong supporter of state’s rights • He did not, though, believe a state had the authority to cancel a federal law

  8. South Carolina Threatens to Secede • Even though AJ worked to limit the government, he was committed to keeping the Union intact • He asked Congress to reduce the tariffs • Congress did so, but SC was still not satisfied • SC voted to nullify both tariffs and build its own army

  9. South Carolina Threatens to Secede • After AJ won reelection in 1832, he made a strong statement to SC • He had Congress pass the Force Bill • This stated that if SC tried to secede, the Army would be sent in to stop them

More Related