South Carolinians were against the Tariff of 1828 due to the fact that it increased the price of imports tremendously. South Carolina was already suffering from agricultural depression caused by low cotton prices and exhausted farmlands, and the tariff further worsened the situation. The state leaders claimed that the tariff was clearly favoring the northern manufacturers because South Carolina would either have to pay the higher price for imported items or they would have to buy the goods from the north. Calhoun, a fellow slave owner in the South, sought to protect states’ rights. Accordingly, he came up with his theory of nullification: states have the right to nullify any federal law that is deemed unconstitutional. Therefore, South Carolinians
…show more content…
Calhoun had listed several reasons to the Senate and House of Representatives of South Carolina for protesting against the tariff. To summarize, Calhoun declared the power Congress has should be limited, the government does not have the right to impose tax without justification, the tariff is unconstitutional because protecting domestic industry, the power could result in the risk of the government gaining total control, and the lack of foreign commerce resulting from the tariff would impair South Carolina’s market. His compelling argument drew in South Carolinians to protest against the unjust tariff. Calhoun wrote South Carolina Exposition and Protest as an opposition to the tariff and Haynes defended it during his debate with …show more content…
The Tariff of 1828 increased the price of imports exceedingly, by almost fifty percent. It hindered the already staggering agricultural economy in the South because it declined commerce. The tariff was created to eliminate foreign competition for northern manufacturers, and it was seen as unconstitutional by Calhoun, Hayne, and nullificationists. Meanwhile, Webster was more concerned with the nation being unified, and Jackson followed the majority’s opinions. The issue grew once South Carolinians adopted the nullification policy and created their own state army. Jackson continuously tried to lower and enforce the tariffs, so no trouble, such as seceding, would arise. The controversy was finally solved with Henry Clay’s compromise, and both sides were able to obtain what they
Calhoun had listed several reasons to the Senate and House of Representatives of South Carolina for protesting against the tariff. To summarize, Calhoun declared the power Congress has should be limited, the government does not have the right to impose tax without justification, the tariff is unconstitutional because protecting domestic industry, the power could result in the risk of the government gaining total control, and the lack of foreign commerce resulting from the tariff would impair South Carolina’s market. His compelling argument drew in South Carolinians to protest against the unjust tariff. Calhoun wrote South Carolina Exposition and Protest as an opposition to the tariff and Haynes defended it during his debate with …show more content…
The Tariff of 1828 increased the price of imports exceedingly, by almost fifty percent. It hindered the already staggering agricultural economy in the South because it declined commerce. The tariff was created to eliminate foreign competition for northern manufacturers, and it was seen as unconstitutional by Calhoun, Hayne, and nullificationists. Meanwhile, Webster was more concerned with the nation being unified, and Jackson followed the majority’s opinions. The issue grew once South Carolinians adopted the nullification policy and created their own state army. Jackson continuously tried to lower and enforce the tariffs, so no trouble, such as seceding, would arise. The controversy was finally solved with Henry Clay’s compromise, and both sides were able to obtain what they