PL EN RU
THE WEBSTER-HAYNE DEBATE. THE BEGINNING OF THE NORTHSOUTH DISPUTE ABOUT THE INTERPRETATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION DURING THE ANTEBELLUM PERIOD
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Katedra Doktryn Polityczno-Prawnych, Wydział Prawa i Administracji Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
 
 
Publication date: 2019-12-18
 
 
Studia Politologiczne 2018;49
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The Author analyses a famous debate in the United States between Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts and Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina that took place on January 19–27, 1830 on the topic of protectionist tariffs. These constitutional debate gave fateful utterance to the differing understandings of the nature of the American Union that had come to predominate in the North and the South. To Webster the Union was the indivisible expression of one nation of people, but to Hayne was the voluntary compact among sovereign states. The Author presents Hayne’s argument for states’ right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional, and Webster response for Supreme Court jurisdiction. Their classic expositions of their respective views framed the political conflicts that culminated at last in the secession of the Southern states and war between advocates of Union and champions of Confederacy.
PEER REVIEW INFORMATION
Article has been screened for originality
 
REFERENCES (37)
1.
Barnett R., The Original Meaning of The Judicial Power, Boston University Working Paper 03-18.
 
2.
Bartlett I.H., Daniel Webster as a Symbolic Hero, „The New England Quarterly” 1972, vol. 45, nr 4.
 
3.
Calhoun J.C., Union and Liberty. The Political Philosophy of John C. Calhoun, Indianapolis 1992.
 
4.
Donald D., Lincoln Simon and Schuster, New York–London–Toronto–Sydney 1995.
 
5.
Dubofsky M., Daniel Webster and the Whig Theory of Economic Growth: 1828–1848, „The New England Quarterly” 1969, vol. 42, nr 4.
 
6.
Ellis R.E., Aggressive Nationalism. McCulloch v. Maryland and the Foundation of Federal Authority in the Young Republic, Oxford 2007.
 
7.
Ellis R.E., The Union at Risk. Jacksonian Democracy, States’ Rights, and the Nullification Crisis, Oxford–New York 1989.
 
8.
Fields W., The Reply to Hayne: Daniel Webster and the Rhetoric of Stewardship, „Political Theory” 1983, vol. 11, nr 1.
 
9.
Freehling W., The Road to Disunion, Volume I: Secessionists at Bay 1776–1854, New York 1990.
 
10.
Freehling W.W., Prelude to Civil War. The Nullification Controversy in South Carolina, 1816–1836, New York and London 1966.
 
11.
Gordon D. (red.), Secession, State & Liberty, New Brunswick and London 1998,.
 
12.
Hall K.L., Patrick J.J., The Pursuit of Justice. Supreme Court Decisions that Shaped America, Oxford 2006.
 
13.
Howe D.W., What Hath God Wrought. The Transformation of America, 1815–1848, Oxford 2007.
 
14.
Jefferson T., The Works of Thomas Jefferson, (Correspondence and Papers 1816–1826), New York 1905, XII.
 
15.
Jervey T.D., Robert Y. Hayne and his times, New York 1970.
 
16.
Koch A., Ammon H., The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. An Episode in Jefferson’s and Madison’s Defense of Civil Liberties, „The William and Mary Quarterly” 1948, vol. 5, nr 2.
 
17.
McDonald F., States’ Rights and the Union. Imperium in Impero, 1776–1876, Lawrence 2000.
 
18.
McManus E.J., Helfman T., Liberty and Union: A Constitutional History of the United States, New York and London 2014.
 
19.
Newmyer R.K., John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court, Baton Rouge 2001.
 
20.
Newmyer R.K., Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story: Statesman of the Old Republic, Chapel Hill 1985.
 
21.
Parrington V.L., Główne nurty myśli amerykańskiej. Romantyczna rewolucja w Ameryce 1800–1860, przekł. H. Katz, Warszawa 1970.
 
22.
Peterson M.D., The Great Triumvirate: Webster, Clay, and Calhoun, New York and Oxford 1987.
 
23.
Purcell E.A. Jr., Evolving Understandings of American Federalism: Some Shifting Parameters, 50 New York Law School Review 2006.
 
24.
Read J.H., Living, Dead, and Undead: Nullification Past and Present, „American Political Thought” 2012, vol. 1, nr 2.
 
25.
Sheidley H. W., The Webster-Hayne Debate: Recasting New England’s Sectionalism, The New England Quarterly, vol. 67, nr 1 (Mar., 1994).
 
26.
Sheidley H. W., The Webster-Hayne Debate: Recasting New England’s Sectionalism, „The New England Quarterly” 1994, vol. 67, nr 1.
 
27.
Smith C. R., Daniel Webster and the Oratory of Civil Religion, Columbia and London 2005.
 
28.
Taylor J., Tyranny Unmasked, Indianapolis 1992.
 
29.
The Webster-Hayne Debate on the Nature of the Union, Indianapolis 2000.
 
30.
Tomza A., Spór o poprawną interpretację Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych. Od pasywizmu do aktywizmu sądowego, Łódź 2016.
 
31.
Tulejski T., Kontraktualizm versus federalizm. Argument konstytucyjnoprawny Johna Caldwela Calhouna w okresie kryzysu nullifikacyjnego, „Studia Prawno-Ekonomiczne” 2015, XCVII.
 
32.
Vandenburg Ames H. (red.), State Documents on Federal Relations: The States and the United States, Philadelphia 1906.
 
33.
Webster D., The Works of Daniel Webster, Boston, 1866, III.
 
34.
Wilson L. Major, „Liberty and Union”: An Analysis of Three Concepts Involved in the Nullification Controversy, „The Journal of Southern History” 1967, vol. 33, nr 3.
 
35.
Wilson W., Division and Reunion, 1829-1889, New York and London 1893,.
 
36.
Wolfe Ch., The Rise of Modern Judicial Review. From Constitutional Interpretation to Judge-made Law, Lanham 1994.
 
37.
Zavodnyik P., The Age of Strict Construction. A History of the Growth of Federal Power, 1789–1861, Washington 2007.
 
ISSN:1640-8888