Andrew Jackson Repeal The Tariffs

This caused a crisis in the United States in 1832-1833 when South Carolina continued to nullify tariff acts issued by the federal government under the presidency of Andrew Jackson. Jackson released a Nullification Proclamation that took away a states’ right to nullify any federal law. After this Proclamation, Jackson sent ships to South Carolina to collect the tariffs. This message is seen as an act of preserving the Union because Jackson was trying to prevent a state from seceding. He worked to strengthen the federal government to prevent any state from seceding from the Union, preserving

South Carolina thought the tariffs had no value to them and no legal force or effect. Radical South Carolinians saw protective tariffs and agitation against slavery as two sides of the paper. Both of these appeared to be tyranny of the majority. Nullification seemed like the reasonable defense. On November 24,1832, the convention passed an ordinance of nullification. This

In 1828, Congress passed a protective tariff that made the southern states extremely angry, because they felt it only benefited the northern states. Calhoun argued the federal government only existed for the will of the states, so if a state found a federal law unconstitutional and did not support it, the states have the right to "nullify" that law within its borders. This is similar to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions because they stated that the Alien and Sedation acts were unconstitutional. It argued that the states had the right to declare unconstitutional acts. Also, both of these were written anonymously at the time by vice presidents, Calhoun and Jefferson.

South Carolina had resorted to the nullification of the tariff controversy of the early 1830s because tariffs increased the prices that southern agriculturists had to pay for manufactured goods.This made it difficult for farmers to buy equipment to harvest their farms and make a profit from it. South Carolina (and the South as a whole) was afraid of federal encroachment on the states rights because they did not want to end slavery. The nullification created tension between Jackson and Calhoun. Jackson thought Calhoun was going against the constitution because Calhoun thought that a state should be able to nullify a law. Jackson saw that nullification was a threat to the survival of the union. The nullification crisis showed that the people

South Carolina wanted to nullify a federal law which was refusing to pay federal tariffs and by doing so South Carolina is going against the constitution. Jackson viewed that South Carolina was misusing

At this time, Jacksonian Democrats had dubbed themselves guardians of the United States Constitution. Andrew Jackson himself did his best when it came to acting like a guardian of the United States Constitution, but for the most part he only upheld it when it benefitted him, his popularity, or was in accordance to his own beliefs. In 1832, President Jackson signed the Tariff of 1832 into law. This tariff was to compromise for the Tariff of 1828, and it gained the support of most northerners and half of the southerners in Congress. South Carolina, however, was not pleased with the reduction and declared, through the Nullification Ordinance, that the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 be nullified in South Carolina because they were unconstitutional. When the vice president at the time John Calhoun voiced his support for

The north tried to compromise with them, but it was tough. The state started to think about wanting to succeed when “In 1828, Congress passed a high protective tariff that infuriated the southern states…”. Many people in the South did not like these tariffs. South Carolina decided to then on take measures into their own hands. On the 24 of November, The South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification was passed, and they did not care about what the federal government would say about the act (The South).

products. Manufacturing industries in the North benefited from this tariff, since they no longer had to compete with cheap British goods, but negatively affected the southern states, with mostly planters that relied on imports. Congress forced Adams to choose between a stronger protective tariff than he would’ve preferred, to having no tariff at all, so Adams chose the tariff. The Tariff of 1828 was denounced as unconstitutional and oppressive, called the “Tariff of Abominations” by the Virginia legislature. Even Vice President John C. Calhoun condemned the tariff and drafted the South Carolina Exposition, which declared that it was in the states’ rights to nullify federal laws that were blatantly harming the state’s best

The Tariff of 1832, despite pleas from Southern representatives, failed to moderate the protective barriers erected in earlier legislation. South Carolina passed an ordinance of nullification on November 24, 1832, and threatened to secede if the federal government attempted to collect those tariff duties. Robert Hayne and John Calhoun had resigned from their original positions in office. These two men were the leaders of the nullification drive. When the Jackson administration failed to take any actions to address their concerns, the most radical faction in the state began to advocate that the state itself declare the tariff null and void within South Carolina.The tariff sought to protect northern and western agricultural products from competition with foreign imports; however, the resulting

Jackson began his proclamation by outlining the reasons and reservations that led South Carolina to pass the ordinance. The major concerns for the Southerners were the tariffs. “ I, Andrew Jackson, President of the United States, have thought proper to issue this my PROCLAMATION, stating my views of the Constitution and laws applicable to the measures adopted by the Convention of South Carolina”

The Tariff of 1828 raised taxes and the Southerners did not like this at all. South Carolina threatened to leave the union if the taxes were not lowered. Calhoun wanted to nullify the taxes in South Carolina, but Jackson threatened to bring military forces to South Carolina to solve the problem.

He pleaded Henry Clay, an old friend, to draft a solution with him. Clay developed a compromise proposal, which lowered the high tariffs by ten percent over eight years. The Compromise Tariff of 1833 barely passed through Congress, but it significantly changed the tariff. These new rates were not nearly as low as the Southerners had hoped they would be, but it was a better compromise than the Force Bill had offered. South Carolina’s legislature voted to recede their efforts to nullify the tariff acts, but they did attempt to nullify the Force Bill. Even though their nullification of the Force Bill was insignificant, it allowed South Carolina to feel slightly victorious.

He promised the south a reduction in the taxes and duties they were enduring to the levels first established in1828. These set levels were acceptable to the southerners as opposed to the higher rates enforced since then. In 1832 Jackson reduced these rates by a small margin, not nearly as much as his original promise. Regardless of South Carolina upset, in 1833 Jackson passed the Force Bill. This coerced them into paying the tariff no matter what.4

Everyone was hoping Andrew Jackson would lower tariffs once he became president. When Andrew Jackson did not address tariffs South Carolina decided to take charge. A convention place in South Carolina in 1832. It ruled that the tariffs of 1828 and and 1832 were unconstitutional and not enforceable in South Carolina after February 1, 1833. Just before this date Andrew Jackson created a force bill that allowed him to use military forces against South Carolina. He then created a new negotiated tariff for South Carolina, which was passed by congress.

The seventh president of the United States; Andrew Jackson, was not only notorious for his success as a general but also for his actions as president. The Removal Policy is still discussed today because of the question of whether or not the removal of Native Americans benefited them or not. The intent of Jackson's actions is controversial because it is not clear if he acted in the best interest of Native Americans or for white settlers. Robert Remini's writing Andrew Jackson and his Indian Wars he concludes that Jackson's removal act was the only way to protect the Native Americans from conflict with impeding settlers. Albert Cave writes in Abuse of Power: Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal act of 1830, that Jackson broke promises