Conflict over States’ Rights Chapter 12 Section 3

Rising Sectional Differences In 1829, U.S. pulled apart by conflicts among its three main sections: the Northeast the South the West Cheap land attracts workers needed in Northeast factories Westerners want cheap land in the West to attract settlers

Northeast and West wanted internal improvement roads, canals transportation of food, raw materials, manufactured goods South opposes internal improvement funded by tariffs on imports South opposes tariffs, economy depends on foreign trade Northeast supports tariffs, encourages purchase of domestic products

Tariff of Abominations At end of John Quincy Adams’s presidency, Congress passes tariff bill Significantly raises tariffs on raw materials, manufactured goods Angered by tariff bill, southerners call it Tariff of Abominations Southerners claim Northeast interests control government policies

Why the North liked it …….

Crisis over Nullification Vice-president John C. Calhoun creates doctrine of nullification: state has right to reject federal law it considers unconstitutional any state can nullify (reject) a federal law within its borders Congress has no right to pass tariff favoring one area of nation Doctrine gives South Carolina the right to nullify the tariff

The States’ Right Debate Senate debates doctrine of nullification, Webster- Hayne debate (1830) Senator Robert Y. Hayne, South Carolina, supports nullification: gives states a lawful way to defend their freedom Senator Daniel Webster, Massachusetts, opposes nullification: the people not the states make the Union President Andrew Jackson opposes nullification

South Carolina Threatens to Secede Congress reduces tariff (1832), Southerners not satisfied South Carolina threatens secession—withdrawal from the Union Andrew Jackson says he will enforce federal laws Congress passes compromise tariff (1833), South Carolina stays in Union