[Footnote 1: Houston's A Critical Study of Nullification in South
Carolina; Parton's Jackson, Vol. III., Chaps. 32-34; Schurz's Life
of Clay, Vol. II., Chap. 14; Von Holst's Life of Calhoun, Chap. 4;
Lodge's Life of Webster, Chaps. 6, 7; Rhodes's History of the United
States, Vol. I., pp. 40-50.]
Jackson, who had just been reëlected, was not terrified. He bade the collector at Charleston go on and collect the revenue duties, and use force if necessary, and he issued a long address to the Nullifiers. On the one hand, he urged them to yield. On the other, he told them that "the laws of the United States must be executed…. Those who told you that you might peacefully prevent their execution deceived you…. Their object is disunion, and disunion by armed force is treason."
%335. Webster's Great Reply to Calhoun.%—Calhoun, who since 1825 had been Vice President of the United States, now resigned, and was at once made senator from South Carolina. When Congress met in December, 1832, the great question before it was what to do with South Carolina. Jackson wanted a "Force Act," that is, an act giving him power to collect the tariff duties by force of arms. Hayne, who was now governor of South Carolina, declared that if this was done, his state would leave the Union.
A great debate occurred on the Force Act, in which Calhoun, speaking for the South, asserted the right of a state to nullify and secede from the Union, while Webster, speaking for the North, denied the right of nullification and secession, and upheld the Union and the Constitution.[1]
[Footnote 1: Johnston's American Orations, Vol. I., pp. 196-212; Webster's Works, Vol. III., pp. 248-355, 448-505; Rhodes's History of the United States, Vol. I., pp. 50-52.]
%336. The Compromise of 1833%.—Meantime, Henry Clay, seeing how determined each side was, and fearing civil war might follow, came forward with a compromise. He proposed that the tariff of 1832 should be reduced gradually till July, 1842, when on all articles imported there should be a duty equal to twenty per cent of their value. This was passed, and the Compromise Tariff, as it is called, became a law in March, 1833. A new convention in South Carolina then repealed the ordinance of nullification.
%337. War on the Bank of the United States%.—While South Carolina was thus fighting internal improvements and the tariff, the whole Jackson party was fighting the Bank of the United States. You will remember that this institution was chartered by Congress in 1816; and its charter was to run till 1836. Among the rights given it was that of having branches in as many cities in the country as it pleased, and, exercising this right, it speedily established branches in the chief cities of the South and West. The South and West were already full of state banks, and, knowing that the business of these would be injured if the branches of the United States Bank were allowed to come among them, the people of that region resented the reëstablishment of a national bank. Jackson, as a Western man, shared in this hatred, and when he became President was easily persuaded by his friends (who wished to force the Bank to take sides in politics) to attack it. The charter had still nearly eight years to run; nevertheless, in his first message to Congress (December, 1829) he denounced the Bank as unconstitutional, unnecessary, and as having failed to give the country a sound currency, and suggested that it should not be rechartered. Congress paid little attention to him. But he kept on, year after year, till, in 1832, the friends of the Bank made his attack a political issue[1].
[Footnote 1: Roosevelt's Life of Benton, Chap. 6; Parton's Life of
Jackson, Vol. III., Chaps. 29-31; Tyler's Memoir of Roger B. Taney,
Vol. I., Chap. 3; Von Hoist's Constitutional History, Vol. II., pp.
31-52; Schurz's Clay, Vol. L, Chap. 13; American History
Leaflets, No. 24]
%338. The First National Nominating Convention; the First Party Platform.%—To do this was easy, because in 1832 it was well known that Jackson would again be a candidate for the presidency. Now the presidential contest of that year is remarkable for two reasons:
1. Because each of the three parties held a national convention for the nomination of candidates.