Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, and Daniel Webster and Their Differing Vi

The 1820 Missouri Compromise played a large role in the campaign against slavery. In 1819 Missouri became a statehood and congress considered framing a state constitution, with this a representative attempted to add a anti-slavery legislation with it. This is what started the process of the campaign against slavery. Henry Clay made a large contribution toward this compromise in 1820, with his new ideas on how to settle the conflict between the North and the South, which lasted until 1954.All the compromise’s made from 1820's to the Kansas Nebraska compromise

Abraham Lincoln is one of the most well known presidents in the history of the United States of America. He as thought to be the man who led this great country through the toughest times it had to encounter. His determination to get the United States through the Civil War is one of the best things that have ever happened for this country. Lincoln’s argument about the relationship between slavery, the Constitution, and the Union changed throughout the Civil War. Lincoln’s view of the purpose of the war was to save the Union because of the southern states seceding from the Union. However, the argument changed to the war being about slavery because of Fredrick Douglass’s speeches and the Confederates surrendering at

The compromise of 1850 was a settlement on a series of issues plaguing the unity of the states. The primary issue to address was the institution of slavery, which was causing much dissension between the north and the south. Additional items to be addressed were territory issues and to prevent secession by the south. Henry Clay stepped forward to present a compromise, which had Congress in an eight-month discussion known as the “Great Debate”. As a result of the proposal, there were strong oppositions. One outspoken person who opposed the proposal was John C Calhoun. Calhoun was an intellectual southern politician, political philosopher and a proponent to the protection of Southern interests. He was an advocate for states’ rights and

As with Calhoun, Lincoln’s notion of the Union and state sovereignty also ties into the principle of majority rule. However, Lincoln has a far different opinion than Calhoun, arguing that within the Union, the people, not the states, are the sovereign body, founded on the principle of majority rule. Furthermore, in Lincoln’s opinion, if you have a government based on majority rule, secession cannot possibly be considered legal or constitutional. While Calhoun fears majority rule will lead to tyranny and the infringement of the minority’s liberty, Lincoln believes it is the foundation of our government and protects majority will from suppression by a smaller party. Discussing this point further, Lincoln writes, “Unanimity is impossible; the rule of the minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the

John C. Calhoun was not only a United States statesman, but also a nationalist and outspoken supporter of the slave and plantation system in the pre-Civil War South. In his early days as a War Hawk and congressman, Calhoun helped to guide the United States into war with Great Britain. He also had a hand in establishing the Second Bank of the U.S. He was in staunch opposition to President Polk's Mexican-American War and admitting California as a free state. He was a very vocal and well known leader in the fight to have slavery as a secure institution in the South, if not the whole United States. In the late 1820's, Calhoun drafted an Exposition and Protest for the South Carolina legislative body, thus beginning the Nullification Crisis faced

Each of the persons ,John Brown, Stephen Douglas, and Abraham Lincoln, with their own niche roles contributed greatly to the coming and the inevitability of the Civil War. Lincoln being chief among these people in respects to importance to the coming of the Civil War was a huge catalyst to the civil war through his election to presidency without the votes of a single southern state, and his debates with Stephen Douglas. Douglas was another large part of the fruition of the Civil War through his Compromise of 1850, and the Douglas-Lincoln debates which lead to Lincoln winning the election. John Brown while not contributing to the coming of the war as Lincoln or Douglas still played his role by becoming a martyr for the Republican-Abolitionist cause. Each person while contributing unique aspects to the onslaught that was the Civil War had one thing in common, they all progressed it 's coming heavily making the Civil War almost inevitable.

When Andrew Jackson took office in 1829, he was forced to respond to the growing conflict over tariffs. Vice President John C. Calhoun joined his fellow southerners in protest when Congress passed the Tariff of Abominations. In response to the tariff, Calhoun drafted the South Carolina Exposition and Protest. It urged states to nullify the Tariff of Abominations and used it to argue that since the states created the national government they decided when the national laws apply. Calhoun’s theory was controversial, and it drew some fierce challengers. Many of them were from the northern states that had benefited from increased tariffs. These opponents believed that the American people, not the individual states, made up the Union. Conflict between the supporters and the opponents of nullification deepened. The issue of nullification was intensely debated in the Senate, between Robert Y. Hayne and Daniel Webster. Hayne, senator from South Carolina, defended states’ rights. He argued that nullification gave states a way to lawfully

Henry Clay was the writer of The Missouri Compromise, he tried to limit the slavery boundaries, and it was later acknowledged as an unconstitutional and it’s also considered one of the several events that led to the American civil war. The compromise was an example for the settling from North and South differences over the slavery and duty issues and it also remained in result until rescinded by the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854.The Missouri Compromise relieved pressures among the North and the South delaying the civil war The American Civil War. According to the history February

Henry Clay and Andrew Jackson both helped the development of America. Although, they helped they both did it in different ways. They may have had similar ideas but they did not like some ideas that one or he other had. Henry Clay being The Secretary of State wanted the best for the people and Andrew Jackson looked more towards the whole country.

The American System was a plan created by Henry Clay. It had three parts to it, that Henry Clay was hoping would bring the nation closer together, and benefit everyone. It called for a strong banking system that would provide easy and abundant credit, He also put in place a protective tariff. The revenue from the tariff would pay for the third part of the American System, the creation of roads and canals, mainly into the new Ohio Valley. Food and equipment would flow freely over these new routs, increasing trade and business greatly throughout most of the states. The American System of Henry Clay never came to fruition, however. President Madison deemed it unconstitutional, and instead, Congress voted to distribute $1.5 million to the states,

The Compromise of 1832 signified the peaceful olive branch, and this compromise sought to appease the enraged state of South Carolina by reducing the rates of tariffs. The Force Bill signified the powerful sword, and this bill certified Jackson with the special ability to use military force for the purpose of extracting the overdue tariffs from South Carolina. This compromise allowed the Union to strike a fine balance between gracious and forceful given the explosive political climate, since “Without the passage of the Force Bill, they believed that the passage of a compromise tariff would appear to authenticate the nullifiers’ extreme federal or states-rights position; and they could not accept the intellectual defeat that would have entailed” (Ericson, pg. 253). The “olive brand and the sword” compromise was engineered by Kentucky senator Henry Clay, who used his legendary negotiating skills to placate the people of South Carolina and save the immediate future of the

Henry Clay was the first Speaker of the House that really helped to establish the position and increase the power. Clay served three terms as Speaker of the House and in those years demonstrated how his tactics were effective as well as successful. Henry Clay was personable, and his youth and assertiveness made him a popular choice for Speaker. Clay used his position to place his allies in important committees to achieve these goals. As Clay gained clout in the House of Representatives, he was able to introduce his American System and ideas founded in the American Colonization Society. Henry Clay’s greatest accomplishment as Speaker of the House was the drafting of the Missouri Compromise, which gained him the title of the Great

Henry Clay Sr. was an American attorney, farmer, and statesman who spoke to Kentucky in both the U.S. Senate and HOR.Henry Clay was also known as, The Great Compromiser, and the Great Pacifier because of his capacity to bring parties into understanding. He was an individual from the 1st Party Framework to 1824.The Missouri Compromise was a demonstration intended to make a bargain in the increase troublesome U.S. Senate, however it in the end prompted more pressure about subjugation and was a contributing element in the American Common War. The demonstration enabled Missouri to join the country as a slave state, Maine to join as a free state, and restricted subjection in any new states north of Missouri. It was later esteemed

     In this paper I am going to talk about how Henry Clay Frick was an important man to our history and some things that he contributed. Not only was he a successful industrialist, but an art patron and a philanthropist. He was one of the most important people that helped put Pittsburgh on the map.

Abraham Lincoln is by far our most revered president in the history of the United States. He had a strong moral vision of where his country must go to preserve and enlarge the rights of all her people, but he was also a good man with a strong sense of character and a great discipline in the art of law; and he sought to continue the great and mighty legacy of the Constitution. He believed that the Founding Fathers had drawn up the Constitution without the mention of slavery because they felt that it would later die of a natural death. He would soon learn that that would not be the case.