|
|
An Early Threat of Secession: The Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Nullification Crisis
Introduction
“How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers
of negroes?” This question of English author Samuel Johnson strikes at the
core of the slavery controversy in the American quest for self-government. Americans
affirmed their independence with the ringing declaration that “all men are
created equal.” But some of them owned African slaves, and were unwilling
to give them up as they formed new federal and state governments. So “to
form a more perfect union” in 1787, certain compromises were made in the
Constitution regarding slavery in hopes that they would eventually be able to
wean themselves off the “peculiar institution.” This settled the slavery
controversy for the first few decades of the American republic.
This situation changed with the application of Missouri for statehood in 1819.
It changed the political landscape so dramatically that when former president
Thomas Jefferson heard about the enactment of the Missouri Compromise of 1820,
he wrote, “This momentous question, like a firebell in the night, awakened
and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union.”
There had always been differences between northern and southern states, the
former more commercial and the latter more agrarian in outlook and livelihood.
But no difference was so potentially divisive as the South's insistence on the
right to hold slaves and the North's growing aversion to it. The newly acquired
territory to the West, resulting from the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, brought
the issue of the extension of slavery to a slow boil in 1819. Both sides, North
and South, were concerned about the balance of power in the Senate being disrupted
by the admission of new states carved out of the Louisiana Territory. The legislative
and rhetorical interventions of Kentucky Representative Henry Clay, a slaveowner
who worked for gradual emancipation and colonization, were crucial to averting
a sectional division of the American union.
When Maine requested admission as a free state in 1820, Congress agreed to
a compromise where Missouri was permitted to come into the union with a constitution
of its own choosing, which meant no restriction regarding slavery. In addition
to Maine's admission in 1820 as a free state and Missouri's eventual admission
as a slave state (in 1821), Illinois Senator Jesse B. Thomas suggested that
in the balance of the Louisiana Territory north of the 36º30' parallel (which
ran along Missouri's southern border) slavery would be prohibited forever. The
Missouri Compromise thereby maintained an equal number of free and slaveholding
states in the American union. But it proved only a temporary settlement of the
slavery controversy. Another territorial dispute, involving Texas and Mexico,
would later stoke the fires of sectional conflict over the spread of slavery
into the western territories.
But slavery in the territories was not the only issue dividing North and South.
The question of tariffs (or taxes) on foreign imports proved so volatile that
one state tried to nullify an act of Congress and threatened to secede from
the Union. South Carolina saw tariffs imposed by the national government on
foreign imports not for general revenue purposes, but to help domestic, manufacturing
industries located mainly in the North. With depressed cotton prices and reduced
foreign demand for raw goods from the South, the 1828 and 1832 tariffs eventually
provoked South Carolina to desperate measures.
Flags were flown at half-mast in Charleston, South Carolina, and throughout
the South there was talk of boycotting northern goods. By 1832, when Congress
passed a new tariff bill that did not lower tariff rates enough to please the
southern states, talk turned openly to nullification. South Carolina went so
far as to call a state convention that declared the Tariff Acts of 1828 and
1832 "null, void, and no law, nor binding upon" the state. Whereupon President
Andrew Jackson rebuked South Carolina and threatened to invade the state. When
Congress passed his 1833 “Force Bill,” which empowered the military
to collect the tariffs, the now Senator Henry Clay fashioned yet another compromise
that revised the tariff to South Carolina's satisfaction. This kept the tariff
on the books and South Carolina in the Union.
After completing this lesson, students will gain a better understanding of
how the controversies over slavery's expansion and federal tariffs further entrenched
the dividing line between northern and southern interests.
Guiding Questions
- How did the Missouri Compromise of 1820 attempt to settle the debate over
the future of slavery in the growing American republic?
- How did the Nullification Crisis a decade later demonstrate the widening
divide between northern and southern states?
Learning Objectives
At the end of this lesson students will be able to:
- Use a map of the Missouri Compromise to understand the geographical changes
it brought to the U.S. and why the changes provoked a debate over the expansion
of slavery in the U.S.
- Explain how the proposed admission of Missouri as a state threatened the
Senate balance between free and slaveholding states
- List the main provisions of the Missouri Compromise of 1820
- Highlight the basic economic differences between the commerce of the North
and the South
- Describe South Carolina's application of the theory of nullification and
explain the compact theory of federal government upon which it is based
- Articulate President Andrew Jackson's understanding of the federal government's
supremacy over the states
Background for the Teacher
1. Missouri Compromise
The Missouri Compromise was the product of a struggle in Congress for regional
control of the national, legislative process. Southern states had lost majority
influence in the House of Representatives because of their slower growing population
as compared with the northern states. This led to an effort by slaveholding
states to maintain equal representation in the Senate with free states as the
nation added territories and hence new states to the Union. When Missouri asked
to enter the Union as a slave state 1819, New York Congressman James Tallmadge,
Jr. added a proviso that would ban the importation of slaves into the state
and would free slaves born after Missouri's admission at the age of 25. Southerners
in the Senate blocked Tallmadge's amendment, with Georgia Representative Howell
Cobb predicting that if Tallmadge insisted on his amendment, "the Union will
be dissolved!" To which Tallmadge replied, “If civil war, which gentlemen
so much threaten, must come, I can only say, let it come!”
The impasse was finally resolved the following year when Maine requested entry
as a free state. Illinois Senator Jesse B. Thomas offered an amendment that
produced the Missouri Compromise. In addition to Maine's admission in 1820 as
a free state and Missouri's eventual admission as a slave state (in 1821), Thomas
suggested that in the balance of the Louisiana Territory north of the 36º30'
parallel (which ran along Missouri's southern border) slavery would be “forever
prohibited.” While Henry Clay became known as “the Great Compromiser”
for his work on the Missouri Compromise, he was more instrumental in the 1821
compromise that actually brought Missouri into the Union as a slave state than
in the 1820 Compromise, where Senator Thomas laid out the famous Mason-Dixon
Line separating free states (and slave state Missouri) from slave states.
2. Federal Tariffs and Nullification
South Carolina's attempt to nullify federal tariffs she deemed unconstitutional
was not the first time a disgruntled state considered rejecting specific federal
laws. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, which countered the federal
Alien and Sedition Acts, maintained that the federal government was a compact
of sovereign states and could only act according to powers specifically delegated
by the states. Any broad interpretation and exercise of federal authority beyond
the express grant of authority could therefore be considered null and void by
individual states. In late 1814, five New England states also showed they could
find enough reasons to complain of federal actions that appeared to favor one
section of the Union over another. The Hartford Convention, called in response
to the War of 1812 and its associated economic measures, debated (but rejected)
secession from the United States and recommended amendments to reduce what they
saw as a disproportionate southern influence in the Congress.
The Tariff of 1828 was somewhat more complicated than a simple disregard of
the South by the North. This “Tariff of Abominations,” as southerners
took to calling it, originated as a result of a plot on the part of congressional
Democrats to do political damage to President John Quincy Adams. Adams had narrowly
won the election of 1824, and Democrats wanted Andrew Jackson to win the presidency
in 1828. Democrats, therefore, including southerners such as John C. Calhoun,
devised a scheme to discredit the Adams administration by raising the tariff
rates so high that not even New England congressmen would support it. The plan
backfired, however, as Congress passed the tariff bill with just a few amendments.
However conceived, the Tariff of Abominations was widely protested in the South.
These early threats of secession show that Americans had long disputed the
meaning of the American union and its connection to securing individual liberty.
Did it rest on a compact theory of the federal union, with the Unites States
acting more like a league of sovereign states than a nation of individuals?
Or was the country based more fundamentally on the action of the American people
as a whole, making the U.S. Constitution truly "the supreme law of the land"
in its delegated spheres of governance? Tragically, for a nation founded upon
ideals and not mere tradition or blood, this important question would eventually
be answered by war instead of words.
Preparing to Teach This Lesson
To teach this lesson about the seeds of American sectionalism, four activities
are provided below: two on the Missouri Compromise and two on the Nullification
Crisis. Review the activities, then locate and bookmark websites and primary documents
that you will use.
If your students lack experience in dealing with primary sources, you might use
one or more preliminary exercises to help them develop these skills. The
Learning Page at the American Memory Project
of the Library of Congress includes a set of such activities. Another useful
resource is the Digital Classroom
of the National Archives, which features a set of Document
Analysis Worksheets. Finally, History
Matters offers a page on "Making
Sense of Maps" which gives helpful advice to teachers in getting their students
to use such sources effectively.
Suggested Activities
(a) The Economic Divide between North and South
(b) The Philosophic Divide Separating South Carolina from the Federal Government
1. The Missouri Compromise: Mapping
the Slavery Controversy in 1820
Instruct students to access the interactive
map of the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
Ask them to view the map and become familiar with the location of the free
states, the slave states, the regions identified as U.S. territories, the regions
identified as not belonging to the U.S., and the 36º30' line. By clicking on
each state, students can bring up statistical information about each state in
the year 1820, compiled by reference to the U.S. Bureau of the Census from the
Department of Commerce. Students will find particularly interesting the statistics
of their own state, if it existed by 1820. They will do a comparative study
of regions and states by using the pop-up information.
Two worksheets with question and answer charts are provided for student use with the interactive map:
Worksheet I: A comparative
study of regions and states using the pop-up information
Worksheet II: An analytical study of changes brought about by the Missouri Compromise.
2. The Missouri Compromise: A Textual
Analysis
Have students read the text of the Missouri
Compromise of 1820 located at the EDSITEment-reviewed website National
Archives and then answer the questions that appear on page
1 of the PDF.
3. Nullification Crisis: The Widening
Rift between the North and the South
If time permits, both the economic and philosophic activities should be completed.
Otherwise, choose one to show the growing sectionalism of American.
(a) The Economic Divide between North and South
This section will help students to deepen their understanding of the basic commercial
differences between the industrial North and the agricultural South. The South,
especially South Carolina, was sorely aggravated by the imposition of the tariffs
of 1828 and 1832, causing them to resort to the threat of nullification and secession.
In this activity, students will use internet resources from the EDSITEment-reviewed
websites of American Memory and Digital
History to read primary sources and analyze graphs and a map.
Have the students visit the following sites, and answer the corresponding
questions on pages
2-3 of the PDF
When students return with the information gained from this activity, begin a discussion
about the basic differences in the commercial economies of North and South, and
about how the tariffs embittered the relationship between the two regions. If
students do not bring this up, point out that while the diversified manufactures
of the North were occupying a greater part of the overall U.S. economy, the southern
agricultural economy was growing increasingly dependent on one crop—cotton.
(b) The Philosophic Divide Separating South Carolina from the Federal Government
When Congress enacted the Tariff of 1832, which lowered the tariff but not substantially,
the legislature of South Carolina responded by calling a special convention. They
issued what was called the "South
Carolina Ordinance of Nullification." President Jackson responded three weeks
later with a "Proclamation Regarding Nullification."
Print out and distribute to students pages 1-4
of the PDF. Have students read the text of the South
Carolina Ordinance of Nullification and excerpts from Jackson's
Proclamation Regarding Nullification. Then ask the students to answer the
questions that correspond to each document. In the third column of the worksheet—the
one labeled "Citation"—students should indicate where in the document they
found the evidence that allowed them to answer each question.
Assessment
1. Have students write a paragraph to answer each of the following questions about
the Missouri Compromise:
- Why was the Missouri Compromise called a "compromise"?
- What did each section of the country, North and South, gain and what did
each give up?
- What is the role of compromise in a self-governing society, considering
that many convictions are deeply held but not shared by everyone in the community?
Further, is some level of compromise necessary to the survival of a democratic
republic?
2. Have students write a paragraph to answer each of the following questions about
South Carolina's struggle against federal tariffs:
- What are South Carolina's basic arguments supporting a state's right to
nullify an act of Congress and even secede from the federal union?
- What arguments did President Andrew Jackson give to refute South Carolina's
claim to nullify federal laws it deemed unconstitutional?
3. Have students write a couple of paragraphs to answer the following question:
- Was South Carolina's attempt to nullify a federal tariff inevitable, given
the geographic, political, and economic context of the Missouri Compromise?
Alternatively, have students use the matrix provided on Comparing North and South PDF to summarize the major differences between the North and South
on the key issues brought up in this lesson, such as the respective view of the
North and South on slavery in the south, slavery in the western territories, and
tariffs, as well as major differences in their regional economies.
Extending the Lesson
1. The Tallmadge Amendment (1819)
The debate in Congress over the admittance of Missouri to statehood was complicated
by New York Congressman James Tallmadge's amendment. Have students read
the amendment in the EDSITEment-reviewed American
Memory collection.
Ask students to answer the following questions:
- What is the main point of this amendment?
- Why did this amendment trigger a passionate debate about Missouri's application
for statehood?
2. Thomas Jefferson's Letter to John Holmes (1820)
Have students read and interpret a famous letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote about
the effect of the Missouri Compromise on the slavery controversy in America. Have
students go online to the Jefferson
Exhibit at the EDSITEment-reviewed American
Memory website at . Instruct them to jot down answers to the following questions:
- What two metaphors does Jefferson use to describe America's slavery controversy?
- Taken together, what impression do these metaphors convey about the intensity
with which Jefferson viewed the slavery question?
- What did Jefferson imply that he would be willing to do if he thought it
would help?
- What did he mention as a possible two-pronged solution to the slavery problem?
- On what personal note does he end his letter?
3. Nullification Proclamation (1832): Additional Primary Source Documents
and Contemporary Accounts
For additional primary source documents and contemporary accounts dealing with
Andrew Jackson and the nullification crisis, see Nullification
Proclamation at the EDSITEment-reviewed website Library
of Congress: Primary Documents in American History.
Related EDSITEment Lesson Plans
The 1828 Campaign
of Andrew Jackson and the Growth of Party Politics
Selected EDSITEment Websites
Standards Alignment
View your state’s standards
|