Daniel Webster was a nationalist who dedicated his life in defending the laws that met their application

History

Students Name

Institution of Affiliation

Course Title

Date

Daniel Webster was a nationalist who dedicated his life in defending the laws that met their application to all states made by the federal government. Robert Hayne supported states’ rights at the nullification or Webster was a supporter of the federal government powers are the earth’s right to create laws that protected that union and I was opposed to the nullification. Webster declared that freedom and the union went together. Daniel Webster says that all the origin of the government and of the foundation on which it starts is erected by the people and those who minister it, are responsible to the people and can only modify the constitution just as the people make sure it to be.

The Southerners thought that the reduced rate of tariffs was still too high. South Carolina threatened that the tariffs of 1828 and 1830 were not abolished they would withdraw from the union if the federal government tried to correct the tariffs. According to the southerners, the two acts enacted were an authorized by the United States’ constitution. They violated the true definition of democracy, and they were therefore null and void at the new law. Abiding upon the state, citizens, and all assurances, contracts, as well as the applications made into with the aim of securing the duties introduced by the act, and all judicial proceedings facilitated in the name of the act shall be deemed to be null and void.

In my view, the most effective primary document is that of the South Carolina. It defends the people and is against the rise of the tariffs on raw materials as well as the manufactured goods and this affects the production and the income of the producers and manufacturers of the United States. According to the southerners, the old tariffs had to be abolished to give room for new tariffs to be enacted through new legislation.

In the 1851 political cartoon, they southerners are protesting against the north of the 1850 fugitive slave act to where the national government made laws that considered the slaves or the people of the African origin as fugitives. In the cartoon, the national government to whom enacted the slave act takes away the slave as they are named fugitive, but the states have its own rules that prohibit and oppose the national law. The states claim that they have a higher law and that they don’t recognize any law from the national government of the United States. The political cartoon also applies to the document one and two as it argues that both the national government and that of the state are different and that the national government law does not with any effect affect the state law.

The 1856 political cartoon document 4, relates to the Kansas-Nebraska act which enacted by the US Congress on May 30, 1854 allowing the people of Kansas and Nebraska to make their decisions against the issues of slavery in their individual states. According to the cartoon, the national government allowed the individual states to make their own decisions on onto whether they could retain slavery or abolish it. The black men were considered to be slaves, and the act of leaving the decision to the individual states would only encourage the white to continue oppressing the blacks. In the picture senator, Stephen Douglas, President Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan and Levies Cars who all are running to be the Democratic Party nominees for president in the 1856 elections are seen forcing a black man against his will an intimidating action, indicating how the whites are racist.

From the picture, the background of making the decisions on whether the states will vote against slavery is made to be seen as democratic, but in the other side, the grounds to which democracy is to be practiced is limited as the black people have no room to express themselves.

Dred Scott, a slave who demanded to seek his freedom via judicial system of the United States, to which emanated with the worst ruling ever. In the year 1857 decision by the Supreme Court of the US in the case against Dred Scott, implies that no Negro would never become an American citizen regardless of the provision by the constitution of citizenship by birth. The term Negro was used to refer to the people of the African origin. The decision by the Supreme Court did not only deny Scott justice but also contributed to the invalidation of the Missouri compromise enacted in 1820 which are the anti-slavery in certain US territories.

Frederick Douglas in document 6 asked whether the significant principles of natural justice as well as political freedom that are bestowed in the declaration of independence are similarly represented to the people of black origin as well. The speech on 4th of July was directed to the American slavery where Douglas condemns the Americans for not being true to their founding principles, in both present and in the past. The audience to his speech must therefore fulfill the quest of the founding fathers in natural justice, Douglas tells the audience that the 4th of July was a sham, as the slave tends to boast of liberty, and as shouts of liberty and equality are a just hollow mockery.

Dred Scott decision during the case of nullification of the Missouri act, confirms Frederick Douglass arguments that the Africans were just considered useless, worthless and treated as slaves and the call for equality was just an active form of mockery to the African population. According to the decision by Dred Scott, any person of African origin could never be an American citizen by birth or immigration, and that’s the call for the natural justice that is embedded in the declaration of independence does not apply to the Negros.

According to William H. Seward, irresponsible conflict refers to the collision of the socio-economic institutions of the north or South America. According to William, in states to which the slave system existed, prevents the slave masters from directly or indirectly securing all the political power and therefore constitute a loading aristocracy while in countries where there existed the free labor system, it prevented the universal suffrage, necessarily obtained adverse state that inevitably becomes a democracy later.

The definition of the Confederacy by Alexander Stephens is based on the idea that; the newly formed government was formed on the opposite ideas to which its foundations are build. The cornerstone of the foundation rest upon the significant truth and that the Negros are not equal to the white men and that subordination of the slaves to the whites as a higher race is the slaves natural as well as normal conditions. According to Alexander Stephens, the Confederate states were founded with the main aim of preserving and expansion of slavery institution.

President Abraham Lincoln in the Gettysburg 1863 claims that the forefathers brought for the continent of America, a nation was born in liberty and dedication to the proposition which called for equality of all men as they were created equal. And that now that they were engaged in a great civil war, they were being tested as to whether the nation born and dedicated to equality, could long maintain the equality prospects. It is through this equality that erupted the full scale of civil war due to the peculiar institution regarded as slavery that was present at the creation of the republic.

In thinking about the primary documents, the states have the power to nullify federal laws if they disagree with them. The reason behind is because the state government originate from the individual countries and form the national government and the will of the people lies in the states. Also, each of the states has a representative to whom addresses the problems of its people. Just like the case of southern Carolina, the tariffs had been raised to a higher cost making their manufacturers pay more, thus reducing the productivity.

It would have resorted to financial losses contributing to the economic fall to the country, and it is to this situation that the state’s government came to the rescue nullifying the act that was formed by the government. They further warned that any act of the judiciary to rule over cases regarding the act would not be respected and would be treated as null and void. In the event where the nullification would not be successful, then the government would take that opportunity to exploit the manufacturers as well as producers of all products.

And this would lead to the collapse of their businesses as well as the gross domestic product of the country which has an overall effect on low income as well as a low standard of living. On the other side the nullification of the Missouri act in Dred’s case showed the American viewed the people of African origin and how they saw them as subjects doomed to slavery and can never attain the American citizenship nor freedom despite the call for equality.

References

Abraham Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address” (November 19, 1863)

Alexander Stephen’s “Cornerstone Speech” (March 21, 1861)

Excerpt of Daniel Webster’s “Liberty and Union” Speech (January 26, 1830)

Excerpt of Majority Decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford (March 6, 1857)

Frederick Douglass “The Meaning of the Fourth of July for the Negro” (July 5, 1852)

Political Cartoon “Forcing Slavery Down the Throat of a Freesoiler” (1856)

Political Cartoon “What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander” (1851)

South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification (November 24, 1832)

William Henry Seward’s “On the Irrepressible Conflict” (October 25, 1858)