Andrew Jackson Repeal The Tariffs

South Carolina then threatened to secede from the union. While Jackson was pro-state’s rights he was against secession. Andrew Jackson threatened to send troops to South Carolina to prevent secession. Thankfully, a compromise proposed by Henry Clay in which tariffs will be reduced over the course of 10 years to which South Carolina agrees.

To avoid military confrontation, Congress passed a different tariff that South Carolina was able to accept. The South took such measures because they felt that the North (Washington) was attacking them by passing laws that favored one section of the country’s economy over theirs. South Carolina later repealed their Nullification

The Nullification Crisis, which transpired under Andrew Jackson’s administration created a controversy not only during its time, but also in the years to follow and ultimately was one of the many causes of the Civil War years later. The Nullification crisis soon developed in the early 1830’s when the state of South Carolina began to have issues with the protective tariff (which was designed to protect the industry in the northern United States by taxing imports). At this point in history, many of the leaders of South Carolina were under the idea that a state did not have to follow a federal law and could “nullify” the law. This was a result that many colonists from South Carolina felt that the protective tax was benefiting the

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.

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.

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.

While the United States worked hard to set up a working government, a heavily debated topic was states’ rights. “When high protective tariffs were passed by Congress in 1828 and 1832, South Carolina, led by John Calhoun, threatened to nullify them, making them null and void within that state” (What Caused the Civil War). Nullifying the law means that the state would ignore it. The Southern states were angered by the tariffs because they benefited the North and made it more difficult for the South. Hinston Helper states, “It is a fact well known to every intelligent Southerner that we are compelled to go to the North for almost every article of utility and adornment, from matches, shoepegs and paintings up to cotton-mills, steamships and …; that almost everything produced at the North meets with ready sale, while at the same time, there is no demand, even among our own citizens, for the productions of

State’s rights were the main interest of John C. Calhoun during the nullification crisis. He argued that states had the right to nullify a law or an act passed by the government, such as a tariff, and render it void. Through a convention held in South Carolina discord arose as the result of the convention clearly expressed that the tariff’s taxes were not to be collected within that state. Although it was Calhoun that approved the convention’s ruling, it was the majority that favored the idea of stronger state’s rights, and the ability to nullify what they viewed as unconstitutional. Consequently this resulted in a swift response from Jackson in the form of the Force Bill, allowing the use of military to enforce the acts in South

The changing nation reflected a growing sense of national pride and identity by introducing many different acts and rights. After the War of 1812, there was a growing surge of nationalism all throughout the United States. This feeling of happiness originated from the United States recent victory of the War. The Era of Good Feelings, The Age of Jackson, and changing the states’ rights and the economy were all huge factors in the changing nation, and it all reflected from the nation's previous victory. With the new found sense of nationalism and pride, the government took advantage of the states’ and the people. They did this by putting tariffs on imported goods, separating the natives from their homeland, and setting many other

The north was becoming increasingly industrialized while the south was still mainly agricultural. Congress passed a tariff that benefitted the producers of cloth, mostly north, however it shrunk the demand for southern raw cotton. The south were infuriated and looked to Vice President, John C. Calhoun, for support against the "tariff of abomination." Calhoun supported the first tariff, however, if he ever wanted a future political career he needed to rethink his position. Calhoun proposed the idea that the power of states should be greater than the federal. South Carolina then believed they had the right to nullify the tariff. Jackson who did not approve of nullification threatened to send troops in. He also forced Calhoun into resigning his position. Meanwhile, South Carolina threatened to secede the union. Jackson was granted a bill from congress to enact and send troops in, however, Henry Clay revised the tariff before armed confrontation was

Despite Jackson’s support for the growth and prosper of the West, both he and his constituents lobbied to raise tariffs on imported textiles such as fur, flax, hemp, liquor and wool to about 50 percent their intended value. The increase of prices from other countries was greatly beneficial to the Northern economy, who were able to sell more of their products, but detrimental to the South. Because the South simply produced raw goods, it was essential that they imported manufactured goods for their general well being. This tariff not only threatened to reduce the flow of goods from Britain, but the loss of money made it difficult for them to purchase raw materials. Representative of South Carolina and long time foe of Jackson, John C Calhoun spoke

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

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