Editing Nullification crisis (section)

{{short description|Event during the presidency of Andrew Jackson}}
{{Over-quotation|date=November 2019}}

{{Use American English|date = September 2019}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=July 2014}}

{{Infobox historical era|start=1828|end=1833|key_events={{plainlist|
* [[Tariff of 1828]]
* [[Webster–Hayne debate]]
* [[Tariff of 1832]]
* [[Ordinance of Nullification]]
* [[Compromise Tariff of 1833]]
}}|image=Democracy-1832-1864-Jackson.jpg|name=Nullification crisis|alt=An 1864 political cartoon remembering the nullification crisis depicting Andrew Jackson in military uniform, captioned "Gen. Jackson", standing with a fist raised above his head. In front of him is a man in a suit who is bowing captioned "Calhoun" (likely John C. Calhoun). Jackson says, "By the Eternal! this Union must and shall be preserved: A Traitor's doom to him who acts against it." Calhoun says, "Pardon! "Pardon!" The entire image is additionally captioned "1832".|caption=An 1864 political cartoon recalling the crisis|including={{plainlist|
* [[Presidency of John Quincy Adams]]
* [[Presidency of Andrew Jackson]]
}}|location=[[United States]]}}{{Events leading to US Civil War}}
{{Andrew Jackson series}}
The '''nullification crisis''' was a [[sectionalism|sectional]] political crisis in the [[United States]] in 1832 and 1833, during the [[presidency of Andrew Jackson]], which involved a confrontation between the state of [[South Carolina]] and the federal government. It ensued after South Carolina declared the federal [[Tariff of 1828|Tariffs of 1828]] and [[Tariff of 1832|1832]] unconstitutional and therefore null and void within the sovereign boundaries of the state. 

The controversial and highly protective [[Tariff of 1828]] was enacted into law during the presidency of [[John Quincy Adams]]. The tariff was strongly opposed in the South, since it was perceived to put an unfair tax burden on the Southern agrarian states that imported most manufactured goods. The tariff's opponents expected that Jackson's election as president would result in its significant reduction.<ref>Remini, ''Andrew Jackson'', v2, pp. 136–137. Niven, pp. 135–137. Freehling, ''Prelude to Civil War'', p. 143.</ref> When the Jackson administration failed to take any action to address their concerns, South Carolina's most radical faction began to advocate that the state nullify the tariff. They subscribed to the legal theory that if a state believed a federal law unconstitutional, it could declare the law null and void in the state. In Washington DC, an open split on the issue occurred between Jackson and [[Vice President of the United States|Vice President]] [[John C. Calhoun]], a native South Carolinian and the most effective proponent of the constitutional theory of state nullification.<ref>Craven, p. 65. Niven, pp. 135–137. Freehling, ''Prelude to Civil War'', p. 143.</ref>

On July 1, 1832, before Calhoun resigned the vice presidency to run for the [[United States Senate|Senate]], where he could more effectively defend nullification,<ref>Niven p. 192. Calhoun replaced Robert Y. Hayne as senator so that Hayne could follow James Hamilton as governor. Niven writes, "There is no doubt that these moves were part of a well-thought-out plan whereby Hayne would restrain the hotheads in the state legislature and Calhoun would defend his brainchild, nullification, in Washington against administration stalwarts and the likes of Daniel Webster, the new apostle of northern nationalism."</ref> Jackson signed into law the Tariff of 1832. This compromise tariff received the support of most Northerners and half the Southerners in Congress.<ref>Howe p. 410. In the Senate, only Virginia and South Carolina voted against the 1832 tariff. Howe writes, "Most southerners saw the measure as a significant amelioration of their grievance and were now content to back Jackson for reelection rather than pursue the more drastic remedy such as the one South Carolina was touting."</ref> South Carolina remained unsatisfied, and on November 24, 1832, a state convention adopted the [[Ordinance of Nullification]], which declared that the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were unconstitutional and unenforceable in South Carolina after February 1, 1833.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://historyengine.richmond.edu/episodes/view/300 |title=South Carolina Legislature Passes the Ordinance of Nullification |website=History Engine |publisher=[[University of Richmond]] |df=mdy-all |access-date=2019-11-21 |archive-date=February 13, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200213024052/https://historyengine.richmond.edu/episodes/view/300 |url-status=live }}</ref> South Carolina initiated military preparations to resist anticipated federal enforcement,<ref>Freehling, ''Prelude to Civil War'' pp. 1–3. Freehling writes, "In Charleston Governor Robert Y. Hayne ... tried to form an army which could hope to challenge the forces of 'Old Hickory'. Hayne recruited a brigade of mounted minutemen, 2,000 strong, which could swoop down on Charleston the moment fighting broke out, and a volunteer army of 25,000 men, which could march on foot to save the beleaguered city. In the North, Governor Hayne's agents bought over $100,000 worth of arms; in Charleston, Hamilton readied his volunteers for an assault on the federal forts."</ref> but on March 1, 1833, Congress passed both the [[Force Bill]]—authorizing the president to use military forces against South Carolina—and a new negotiated tariff, the [[Tariff of 1833|Compromise Tariff of 1833]], which was satisfactory to South Carolina. The South Carolina convention reconvened and repealed its Nullification Ordinance on March 15, 1833, but three days later, nullified the Force Bill as a symbolic gesture of principle.

The crisis was over, and both sides found reasons to claim victory. The tariff rates were reduced and stayed low to the satisfaction of the South, but the [[states' rights]] doctrine of nullification remained controversial. By the 1850s, the issues of the expansion of [[slavery]] into the western territories and the threat of the [[Slave Power]] became central issues in the nation and replaced nullification as the primary conflict over states' rights.<ref name="Wilentz pg. 388">Wilentz, p. 388.</ref>