Over many years, beginning in the early 1830’s and onward the United States was not so united. The Tariff act of 1828 or more well known by its nickname “The Tariff of Abominations” was designed to help support the northern industries by an increase of taxes on the British bringing in raw materials to sell. By taxing the British it gave the northern port economy’s an influx of wealth from the taxes. However, the South grew angry that the north was no longer purchasing the southern goods, lowering profits with their once best trade partner. “The opposition to the tariff of 1828 was led by the state of South Carolina and John C. Calhoun, who was now beginning his career as an advocate of states’ rights and a defender of the institution of slavery
…show more content…
In the court case ruling of States v Peters, Chief Justice John Marshall stated that “if the legislatures of the several states may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States, and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments, the constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery; and the nation is deprived of the means of enforcing its laws by the instrumentality of its own tribunals.” John Marshall meant if the states within the United States can tell the federal government what to do, what’s the point of having a country if there is no ruling factor.
The current president at the time, Andrew Jackson, supported states’ rights, but completely opposed the theory of nullification. President Andrew Jackson saw the theory of nullification as the doctrine of treason and disunion, he “expressed his determination to use force to implement the tariff of 1832” (Ellis). With feelings of a civil war evident they later adopted a new tariff replacing the last one delaying the inevitable for a ten-year …show more content…
This issue was found so dire that it was taken to the U.S supreme court, and it was found that it “invalidated the antislavery decision of the Wisconsin court in Ableman v. Booth. Despite the decision of the Supreme Court, South Carolina, a proslavery state, seceded from the Union less than 18 months later, an act that led to the start of the American Civil War in April 1861” (Gale). Secession from a country means to withdraw formally from membership in a federal union, an alliance, or a political organization and that is what the south begins to do. The states cannot accept what the federal government is doing by excising their ability to perform taxation, the south feels wronged by all the tariffs that have been created because it lessens the amount of business they receive because the north is becoming more independent without the southern cotton and crops.
The theory of Nullification is important to the United States history because it shows how the taxation and conflict between the northern and southern states laid the framework for the upcoming US Civil War which greatly impacted our country for many years. Secession in a way is the highest form of nullification, by directly leaving a federal body and country you are therefore nullifying all their laws to which you once had to abide.
In the court case ruling of States v Peters, Chief Justice John Marshall stated that “if the legislatures of the several states may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States, and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments, the constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery; and the nation is deprived of the means of enforcing its laws by the instrumentality of its own tribunals.” John Marshall meant if the states within the United States can tell the federal government what to do, what’s the point of having a country if there is no ruling factor.
The current president at the time, Andrew Jackson, supported states’ rights, but completely opposed the theory of nullification. President Andrew Jackson saw the theory of nullification as the doctrine of treason and disunion, he “expressed his determination to use force to implement the tariff of 1832” (Ellis). With feelings of a civil war evident they later adopted a new tariff replacing the last one delaying the inevitable for a ten-year …show more content…
This issue was found so dire that it was taken to the U.S supreme court, and it was found that it “invalidated the antislavery decision of the Wisconsin court in Ableman v. Booth. Despite the decision of the Supreme Court, South Carolina, a proslavery state, seceded from the Union less than 18 months later, an act that led to the start of the American Civil War in April 1861” (Gale). Secession from a country means to withdraw formally from membership in a federal union, an alliance, or a political organization and that is what the south begins to do. The states cannot accept what the federal government is doing by excising their ability to perform taxation, the south feels wronged by all the tariffs that have been created because it lessens the amount of business they receive because the north is becoming more independent without the southern cotton and crops.
The theory of Nullification is important to the United States history because it shows how the taxation and conflict between the northern and southern states laid the framework for the upcoming US Civil War which greatly impacted our country for many years. Secession in a way is the highest form of nullification, by directly leaving a federal body and country you are therefore nullifying all their laws to which you once had to abide.