The Unreliable Militia
Author: George Washington was the author. He was leading a makeshift army and was being badly defeated. He was discouraged and struggled to keep the
minutemen in line. He regarded the militia as “poor fighters, poor soldiers, and prone to desertion.”
Place and time: The Unreliable Soldier was written in 1776. Washington wrote this letter after he and his army “finally” forced the British out of Boston in March, 1776 and sometime while they were defending New York City. Washington wrote this letter when he was being badly defeated by the British and he was trying to keep his militia in line. Washington was forced to “beat the fleeing militia into line with the flat of his sword”. He seemed to be fighting two battles at once: one against the British and the other against his own men. This letter shows Washington’s frustration with the state of the militia.
Prior Knowledge: Washington had fought with the professional British army against the French and now he has to fight against the British with his less than sufficient militia. He has seen what a disciplined and trained army looks like and understands what is needed to beat the British.
Audience: The letter was written to the president of congress. The letter was written to a superior and it was an account of the condition and skill of the militia. It
is detailed and informative and offers his first hand experience with the militia. It is a primary source sothe president of Congress would count it a very reliable
source.
Reason: It was produced to inform the congress that the militia could not be counted on to preform and hold together like properly trained standing army. Washington said that militia (which was made up of “men just dragged from the tender scenes of domestic life, unaccustomed to the din of arms, totally unacquainted with every kind of military skill”) was ready to dissert when they faced the superior British army. He also said that lacking a standing army would lead to a loss in the war. He said, “the consequence of wanting (lacking) one, according to my ideas formed from the present view of things, is certain and inevitable ruin.”
The Main Idea: Washington is going into war with an unreliable and untrained militia. He wanted the President of Congress to know that the militia does not have the discipline or skill to be successful in the war. He said, “men accustomed to unbound freedom and no control cannot brook the restraint which is indispensably necessary to the good order and government of an army.” Washington believes that a standing army is needed because the militia does more harm than
good. He said that, “if I was called upon to declare upon oath whether the militia have been most serviceable or hurtful upon the whole, I should subscribe to the
latter.”
Signifgance: At this time in History, while fighting for independence from England, things were not easy. The letter seems to be written to congress in response to specific questions about the state of the militia and using a standing army. He states, “The jealousies (suspicions) of a standing army, and the evils to be apprehended from one, are remote, and in my judgment, situated and circumstanced as we are, not at all to be dreaded.” Washington also states, “To place dependence upon militia is assuredly resting upon a broken staff.” Washington was very discouraged and doubted the abilities of the militia. He listed all the reasons why he could not win the war for independence from Britain using the militia.
Obviously, we did win the war for independence. So my questions are: What was Congress’ response to this letter? Did Washington continue to use the militia? Did congress send a standing army to support Washington?
minutemen in line. He regarded the militia as “poor fighters, poor soldiers, and prone to desertion.”
Place and time: The Unreliable Soldier was written in 1776. Washington wrote this letter after he and his army “finally” forced the British out of Boston in March, 1776 and sometime while they were defending New York City. Washington wrote this letter when he was being badly defeated by the British and he was trying to keep his militia in line. Washington was forced to “beat the fleeing militia into line with the flat of his sword”. He seemed to be fighting two battles at once: one against the British and the other against his own men. This letter shows Washington’s frustration with the state of the militia.
Prior Knowledge: Washington had fought with the professional British army against the French and now he has to fight against the British with his less than sufficient militia. He has seen what a disciplined and trained army looks like and understands what is needed to beat the British.
Audience: The letter was written to the president of congress. The letter was written to a superior and it was an account of the condition and skill of the militia. It
is detailed and informative and offers his first hand experience with the militia. It is a primary source sothe president of Congress would count it a very reliable
source.
Reason: It was produced to inform the congress that the militia could not be counted on to preform and hold together like properly trained standing army. Washington said that militia (which was made up of “men just dragged from the tender scenes of domestic life, unaccustomed to the din of arms, totally unacquainted with every kind of military skill”) was ready to dissert when they faced the superior British army. He also said that lacking a standing army would lead to a loss in the war. He said, “the consequence of wanting (lacking) one, according to my ideas formed from the present view of things, is certain and inevitable ruin.”
The Main Idea: Washington is going into war with an unreliable and untrained militia. He wanted the President of Congress to know that the militia does not have the discipline or skill to be successful in the war. He said, “men accustomed to unbound freedom and no control cannot brook the restraint which is indispensably necessary to the good order and government of an army.” Washington believes that a standing army is needed because the militia does more harm than
good. He said that, “if I was called upon to declare upon oath whether the militia have been most serviceable or hurtful upon the whole, I should subscribe to the
latter.”
Signifgance: At this time in History, while fighting for independence from England, things were not easy. The letter seems to be written to congress in response to specific questions about the state of the militia and using a standing army. He states, “The jealousies (suspicions) of a standing army, and the evils to be apprehended from one, are remote, and in my judgment, situated and circumstanced as we are, not at all to be dreaded.” Washington also states, “To place dependence upon militia is assuredly resting upon a broken staff.” Washington was very discouraged and doubted the abilities of the militia. He listed all the reasons why he could not win the war for independence from Britain using the militia.
Obviously, we did win the war for independence. So my questions are: What was Congress’ response to this letter? Did Washington continue to use the militia? Did congress send a standing army to support Washington?
John Francis Mercer
John Francis Mercer, born on May 17, 1759, was the fifth of nine children born to John and Ann Mercer of Stafford County, VA. He attended the College of William and Mary, and in early 1776 he joined the 3d Virginia Regiment. Mercer became Gen. Charles Lee's aide-decamp in 1778, but after General Lee's court-martial in October 1779, Mercer resigned his commission. He spent the next year studying law at the College of William and Mary and then rejoined the army, where he served briefly under Lafayette.
In 1782 Mercer was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates. That December he became one of Virginia's representatives to the Continental Congress. He later returned to the House of Delegates in 1785 and 1786.
Mercer married Sophia Sprigg in 1785 and soon after moved to Anne Arundel County, MD. He attended the Constitutional Convention as part of Maryland's delegation when he was only 28 years old, the second youngest delegate in Philadelphia. Mercer was strongly opposed to centralization, and both spoke and voted against the Constitution. He and fellow Marylander Luther Martin left the proceedings before they ended.
After the convention, Mercer continued in public service. He allied himself with the Republicans and served in the Maryland House of Delegates in 1778-89, 1791-92, 1800-1801, and 1803-6. Between 1791 and 1794 he also sat in the U.S. House of Representatives for Maryland and was chosen governor of the state for two terms,1801-3. During Thomas Jefferson's term as President, Mercer broke with the Republicans and joined the Federalist camp.
Illness plagued him during his last years. In 1821 Mercer traveled to Philadelphia to seek medical attention, and he died there on August 30. His remains lay temporarily in a vault in St. Peter's Church in Philadelphia and were reinterred on his estate, "Cedar Park" in Maryland.
Chapter 6 section 1
- The new government takes shape
o Washington took charge of a bold experiment
§ Government based on enlightenment ideals of republican rule and individual rights had never been done before
§ No one knew it would work
o Constitution provided a strong foundation but not a detailed blueprint for governing
§ Washington and congress had to make practical decisions
· How to raise money
· How to provide defense
§ There were no other examples to follow
· James Madison “we are in a wilderness without a single footprint to guide as”
o Judiciary act of 1789
§ Washington and congress had to create a judicial system
· Constitution authorized congress to set up a federal court system
o It was to be headed by a supreme court
o Constitution failed to spell out details
§ What type of additional courts
§ How many
§ What if federal/state system decisions conflicted
§ Judiciary Act 1789
· Answered these questions
· Remains essentially intact today
o Provided for a supreme court consisting of a chief justice and five associated justices
o It set up three federal courts
o It set up 13 federal district courts throughout the country (the number of courts and justices has increased with time)
· Section 25 of the judiciary act
o One of the most important provisions of the law
o Allowed state court decisions to be appealed to federal court when it involved constitutional issues
o This ensures that the supreme courts remain the “supreme law of the land”
§ Written in article 6 of the constitution
§ Washington shapes the executive branch
· While congress shaped the judiciary Washington shaped the executive branch to make policies and carry out laws passed by congress
o 1789- (when Washington took office) the executive branch had 2 officials
§ The president and the VP
· To help, congress created three executive departments
o The department of state (foreign affairs)
o Department of war (military matters)
o Department of treasury (manage finances)
o Washington chose leaders he trusted to head these departments
§ Thomas Jefferson- Secretary of State
§ Henry Knox- Secretary of War (he was Washington’s general of artillery during the revolutionary war
§ Alexander Hamilton – Secretary of treasury
§ Finally, Edmund Randolf was appointed the attorney general (chief lawyer for the federal government)
o These four department heads became the president’s chief advisors (cabinet)
· Now and then
o The constitution provided President Washington (and successors) the right to “require the opinion of the principal officer of each of the executive department”
§ Washington sought the opinion in person on a regular basis
§ 1793- James Madison called the assembly of secretaries the cabinet based on the british term of the advisors to the king
o The number of departments has increased to 14
§ Cabinet officers also included (in addition to the 14):
· Director of the CIA
· The administrator of the EPA
· Vice President
o The cabinet meets at request of the sitting President and his varies from one president to another
- Hamilton and Jefferson Debate
o Both brilliant thinkers but very different political ideas
§ Caused a bitter disagreement
§ Mostly about Hamilton’s economic plan
o Hamilton and Jefferson in conflict
§ Hamilton believed in a strong central government led by prosperous, educated, elite upperclass citizens
§ Jefferson distrusted strong central government and the rich
· He favored strong state and local governments rooted in particular participation
§ Hamilton believed in commerce and industry to make a strong nation
§ Jefferson favored famer citizens
§ Hamilton’s vision was like Great Britain
· Strong central government , commerce, and industry
· Found support in the north- particularly New England
§ Jefferson’s vision
· Strong local and state government
· Distrust strong central and rich
· Supporters in south and west
o Hamilton’s economic plan
§ Hamilton was Secretary of Treasury
· Set nations finance in order
· Put economy of firm footing
§ He proposed a plan to:
· 1 - Manage the countries debt
· 2 - Established a national banking system
§ Hamilton wrote “report on the public credit”
· The public debt of the us in 1790
· Most incurred during the Revolutionary war
· The amount was many millions
o Government responsible for 2/3
o Individuals for 1/3
· New government owed
o foreign government
o private citizens
§ including soldiers who reviewed bonds (certifications that promised pay plus interest) for service during war
o Hamilton’s Proposal
§ Pay off foreign debt
§ Issue new bonds to cover old ones
§ Federal government should assume the debts of the states
· Although this increased the federal debt, he thought he would get the support of the state creditors. ( the people that originally loaned money to the states)
· If the government failed then creditors would never get their money
· This proposal mad southerners furious
o Southern states already paid off most of their debts
o Feared they would be taxed to pay the debts of northern states.
– Washington Heads a New government (continue)
- Hamilton and Jefferson Debate (continue)
o Plan for National Bank
§ Hamilton proposed a national bank funded by
· Federal government
· And wealthy private investors
o Link wealthy investors to country’s welfare
§ The Bank of the United States would:
· Issue paper money
· Handle tax receipts and other government funds
§ Proposal was controversial
· Opponents (including James Madison)
o Claimed made an alliance between government and wealthy business interest
o Madison argued that Constitution made no provision for a national bank
§ Congress had no right to authorize it
§ This began the argument between
· Those who favored a strict interpretation of the constitution (government had limited powers)
· And those who wanted a loose interpretation of the constitution (favored greater federal power)
o This group used the “so-called” elastic clause of constitution
§ Article 1, section 8, Clause 18 – which gives congress the authority to do whatever is “necessary and proper” to carry out its specific enumerated powers, such as regulating commerce
o Hamilton convince Washington and a majority in Congress to accept
§ So the federal government established the Bank of the United States
o The District of Columbia
§ To win over southerners Hamilton suggested moving the capital from NY further south (along the Potomic River)
· This pleased southerners (especially Madison and Jefferson and Virginians)
o Believed a southern capital would make it more responsive to southerners
o Virginia agreed to debt plan
· 1790, it passed the Congress
· Along with constructing a new capital between MD and VA
o Pierre L’Enfant (French engineer) drew up plans for new capital
§ Washington fired him for being obstinate
o Replaced by Andrew Ellicott (kept L’Enfant’s vision)
§ Benjamin Banneker (African-American surveyor) assisted Ellicott
§ The plan was of grand scale incorporating
· Boulevards
· Traffic circles
· And monuments (similar to European capitals)
o By 1800, capital moved to its new site (Potomac River)
- The First Political Parties and Rebellion
o Washington tried to stay out of fight between Hamilton and Jefferson
§ However they clashed over government policy
§ They divided the Cabinet and further divided national politics
o Federalists and Democratic-Republicans
§ The division of Washington’s cabinet started the country’s first political parties
§ The parties were formed around one key issue – the power and size of the federal government in relation to the state and local governments
· The Federalists – a strong central government (Hamilton’s plan)
· Democratic-Republicans – strong state government (Jefferson’s plan)
o First called Republicans )no relation to today’s Republicans)
o Later called Democratic-republicans (ancestors to today’s democratic party)
§ The two party system was well established when Washington left office
o The Whiskey Rebellion (Washington’s second term)
§ 1789, Congress passed a protective tariff – an import tax on goods from Europe
· Meant to encourage American production
· Brought in a great deal of revenue (money)
o This provided the majority of the federal governments revenue until the 20th century
§ Hamilton wanted even more money so he pushed through the excise tax – a tax on a product’s manufacture, sale, or distribution
· Tax was to be on the manufacture of whiskey
· This reflected the tension between federal and regional interests
o Most producers were small frontier farmers
o They grew corn and distilled the corn into whiskey
§ Corn was too bulky to carry over Appalachian Mountains and whiskey could be carried on mules and sent to market
· Hamilton knew the excise tax would make frontier farmers furious
o 1794, western Pennsylvania farmers refused to pay the tax
§ They beat up federal marshals who were collecting the tax
§ And threatened to secede from the Union
· Hamilton used the Whiskey Rebellion to show that the federal government could enforce laws among the western frontier
o 15,000 militia were called up
o Hamilton accompanied the militia all the way (Washington part of the way)
o The militia hiked over the Appalachians and scattered the rebels w/o any loss of life
§ Whiskey Rebellion was a milestone of federal power in domestic relations
§ But (at same time) the new government face political problems in foreign affairs
· Particularly with Europe and Native Americans west of Appalachians
o Washington took charge of a bold experiment
§ Government based on enlightenment ideals of republican rule and individual rights had never been done before
§ No one knew it would work
o Constitution provided a strong foundation but not a detailed blueprint for governing
§ Washington and congress had to make practical decisions
· How to raise money
· How to provide defense
§ There were no other examples to follow
· James Madison “we are in a wilderness without a single footprint to guide as”
o Judiciary act of 1789
§ Washington and congress had to create a judicial system
· Constitution authorized congress to set up a federal court system
o It was to be headed by a supreme court
o Constitution failed to spell out details
§ What type of additional courts
§ How many
§ What if federal/state system decisions conflicted
§ Judiciary Act 1789
· Answered these questions
· Remains essentially intact today
o Provided for a supreme court consisting of a chief justice and five associated justices
o It set up three federal courts
o It set up 13 federal district courts throughout the country (the number of courts and justices has increased with time)
· Section 25 of the judiciary act
o One of the most important provisions of the law
o Allowed state court decisions to be appealed to federal court when it involved constitutional issues
o This ensures that the supreme courts remain the “supreme law of the land”
§ Written in article 6 of the constitution
§ Washington shapes the executive branch
· While congress shaped the judiciary Washington shaped the executive branch to make policies and carry out laws passed by congress
o 1789- (when Washington took office) the executive branch had 2 officials
§ The president and the VP
· To help, congress created three executive departments
o The department of state (foreign affairs)
o Department of war (military matters)
o Department of treasury (manage finances)
o Washington chose leaders he trusted to head these departments
§ Thomas Jefferson- Secretary of State
§ Henry Knox- Secretary of War (he was Washington’s general of artillery during the revolutionary war
§ Alexander Hamilton – Secretary of treasury
§ Finally, Edmund Randolf was appointed the attorney general (chief lawyer for the federal government)
o These four department heads became the president’s chief advisors (cabinet)
· Now and then
o The constitution provided President Washington (and successors) the right to “require the opinion of the principal officer of each of the executive department”
§ Washington sought the opinion in person on a regular basis
§ 1793- James Madison called the assembly of secretaries the cabinet based on the british term of the advisors to the king
o The number of departments has increased to 14
§ Cabinet officers also included (in addition to the 14):
· Director of the CIA
· The administrator of the EPA
· Vice President
o The cabinet meets at request of the sitting President and his varies from one president to another
- Hamilton and Jefferson Debate
o Both brilliant thinkers but very different political ideas
§ Caused a bitter disagreement
§ Mostly about Hamilton’s economic plan
o Hamilton and Jefferson in conflict
§ Hamilton believed in a strong central government led by prosperous, educated, elite upperclass citizens
§ Jefferson distrusted strong central government and the rich
· He favored strong state and local governments rooted in particular participation
§ Hamilton believed in commerce and industry to make a strong nation
§ Jefferson favored famer citizens
§ Hamilton’s vision was like Great Britain
· Strong central government , commerce, and industry
· Found support in the north- particularly New England
§ Jefferson’s vision
· Strong local and state government
· Distrust strong central and rich
· Supporters in south and west
o Hamilton’s economic plan
§ Hamilton was Secretary of Treasury
· Set nations finance in order
· Put economy of firm footing
§ He proposed a plan to:
· 1 - Manage the countries debt
· 2 - Established a national banking system
§ Hamilton wrote “report on the public credit”
· The public debt of the us in 1790
· Most incurred during the Revolutionary war
· The amount was many millions
o Government responsible for 2/3
o Individuals for 1/3
· New government owed
o foreign government
o private citizens
§ including soldiers who reviewed bonds (certifications that promised pay plus interest) for service during war
o Hamilton’s Proposal
§ Pay off foreign debt
§ Issue new bonds to cover old ones
§ Federal government should assume the debts of the states
· Although this increased the federal debt, he thought he would get the support of the state creditors. ( the people that originally loaned money to the states)
· If the government failed then creditors would never get their money
· This proposal mad southerners furious
o Southern states already paid off most of their debts
o Feared they would be taxed to pay the debts of northern states.
– Washington Heads a New government (continue)
- Hamilton and Jefferson Debate (continue)
o Plan for National Bank
§ Hamilton proposed a national bank funded by
· Federal government
· And wealthy private investors
o Link wealthy investors to country’s welfare
§ The Bank of the United States would:
· Issue paper money
· Handle tax receipts and other government funds
§ Proposal was controversial
· Opponents (including James Madison)
o Claimed made an alliance between government and wealthy business interest
o Madison argued that Constitution made no provision for a national bank
§ Congress had no right to authorize it
§ This began the argument between
· Those who favored a strict interpretation of the constitution (government had limited powers)
· And those who wanted a loose interpretation of the constitution (favored greater federal power)
o This group used the “so-called” elastic clause of constitution
§ Article 1, section 8, Clause 18 – which gives congress the authority to do whatever is “necessary and proper” to carry out its specific enumerated powers, such as regulating commerce
o Hamilton convince Washington and a majority in Congress to accept
§ So the federal government established the Bank of the United States
o The District of Columbia
§ To win over southerners Hamilton suggested moving the capital from NY further south (along the Potomic River)
· This pleased southerners (especially Madison and Jefferson and Virginians)
o Believed a southern capital would make it more responsive to southerners
o Virginia agreed to debt plan
· 1790, it passed the Congress
· Along with constructing a new capital between MD and VA
o Pierre L’Enfant (French engineer) drew up plans for new capital
§ Washington fired him for being obstinate
o Replaced by Andrew Ellicott (kept L’Enfant’s vision)
§ Benjamin Banneker (African-American surveyor) assisted Ellicott
§ The plan was of grand scale incorporating
· Boulevards
· Traffic circles
· And monuments (similar to European capitals)
o By 1800, capital moved to its new site (Potomac River)
- The First Political Parties and Rebellion
o Washington tried to stay out of fight between Hamilton and Jefferson
§ However they clashed over government policy
§ They divided the Cabinet and further divided national politics
o Federalists and Democratic-Republicans
§ The division of Washington’s cabinet started the country’s first political parties
§ The parties were formed around one key issue – the power and size of the federal government in relation to the state and local governments
· The Federalists – a strong central government (Hamilton’s plan)
· Democratic-Republicans – strong state government (Jefferson’s plan)
o First called Republicans )no relation to today’s Republicans)
o Later called Democratic-republicans (ancestors to today’s democratic party)
§ The two party system was well established when Washington left office
o The Whiskey Rebellion (Washington’s second term)
§ 1789, Congress passed a protective tariff – an import tax on goods from Europe
· Meant to encourage American production
· Brought in a great deal of revenue (money)
o This provided the majority of the federal governments revenue until the 20th century
§ Hamilton wanted even more money so he pushed through the excise tax – a tax on a product’s manufacture, sale, or distribution
· Tax was to be on the manufacture of whiskey
· This reflected the tension between federal and regional interests
o Most producers were small frontier farmers
o They grew corn and distilled the corn into whiskey
§ Corn was too bulky to carry over Appalachian Mountains and whiskey could be carried on mules and sent to market
· Hamilton knew the excise tax would make frontier farmers furious
o 1794, western Pennsylvania farmers refused to pay the tax
§ They beat up federal marshals who were collecting the tax
§ And threatened to secede from the Union
· Hamilton used the Whiskey Rebellion to show that the federal government could enforce laws among the western frontier
o 15,000 militia were called up
o Hamilton accompanied the militia all the way (Washington part of the way)
o The militia hiked over the Appalachians and scattered the rebels w/o any loss of life
§ Whiskey Rebellion was a milestone of federal power in domestic relations
§ But (at same time) the new government face political problems in foreign affairs
· Particularly with Europe and Native Americans west of Appalachians
South Carolina Threatens Secession 3/5/13
Author:
The author is the delegates of the convention in Columbia, South Carolina. The delegates met a special convention to discuss the tariff act of 1832. The authors believes that the tariffs are unconstitutional and are “null, void, and no law,” The authors are from South Carolina and feel they are being unfairly treated by the government in favor of the northern states
Place and Time:
The document was written in Columbia in 1832. This might affect the meaning of the source because the people from other states might view the tariffs differently.
Prior Knowledge:
The more agricultural states didn’t like the tariff of 1828. Vice President John Calhoun referred to the tariff as “Tariff of Abominations”. John Calhoun was from South Carolina and felt pressure from his home state to represent them better. The tariffs forced planters to buy the more expensive northern manufactured goods, which allowed the North to get rich at the expense of the South.
Audience: The audience was the American people. This might affect the reliability because it was written to
warn the Union that the secession of South Carolina would cause the dissolution of the Union. It tried
to rally the other agricultural states to also nullify the tariff because it only serves the north and it
warned the north that without South Carolina (and other agricultural states) in the Union, the north
would also be ruined.
Reason: This document was written because the South Carolinians didn’t felt the tariff was unconstitutional and would not be binding in the state of South Carolina. They “formerly declared that the two tariffs acts unauthorized by the constitution of the United States, and violate the true meaning and intent thereof, and are null, void, and no law; nor binding upon this state, its officers or citizens.” They also know that this would lead to the secession of South Carolina from the Union and “The separation of South Carolina would inevitably produce a general dissolution of the Union”
The Main Idea: The main idea is that the South Carolinians believe that this tariff is unconstitutional. They feel
the tariff favors the north and ruins the south. “If we submit to this system of unconstitutional oppression, we shall voluntarily sink into slavery, and transmit that ignominious inheritance to our children”. They also feel they have the right to nullification, “we will not, we cannot, we dare not submit to this degradation; and our resolve is fixed and unalterable that a protective tariff shall be nolonger enforced within the limits of South Carolina.”
Significance: This source is important because it sets the needs of the individual states against the need of the Union. South Carolina threatens to secede from the Union if they are forced to pay the tariffs to the federal government and other states will follow which would dissolve the Union. “If South Carolina
should be driven out of the Union, all the other planting states, and some of the western states, would follow by an almost absolute necessity.” South Carolina is prepared to fight to death to be independent rather than stay part of a Union that oppresses them unjustly. “We would infinitely prefer that the territory of the state be a cemetery of freemen than the habitants of slaves” This became one of the issues of the civil war. The prediction of South Carolina that other planting states would follow them eventually happened and they did unite against the northern,
non-planting states.
The author is the delegates of the convention in Columbia, South Carolina. The delegates met a special convention to discuss the tariff act of 1832. The authors believes that the tariffs are unconstitutional and are “null, void, and no law,” The authors are from South Carolina and feel they are being unfairly treated by the government in favor of the northern states
Place and Time:
The document was written in Columbia in 1832. This might affect the meaning of the source because the people from other states might view the tariffs differently.
Prior Knowledge:
The more agricultural states didn’t like the tariff of 1828. Vice President John Calhoun referred to the tariff as “Tariff of Abominations”. John Calhoun was from South Carolina and felt pressure from his home state to represent them better. The tariffs forced planters to buy the more expensive northern manufactured goods, which allowed the North to get rich at the expense of the South.
Audience: The audience was the American people. This might affect the reliability because it was written to
warn the Union that the secession of South Carolina would cause the dissolution of the Union. It tried
to rally the other agricultural states to also nullify the tariff because it only serves the north and it
warned the north that without South Carolina (and other agricultural states) in the Union, the north
would also be ruined.
Reason: This document was written because the South Carolinians didn’t felt the tariff was unconstitutional and would not be binding in the state of South Carolina. They “formerly declared that the two tariffs acts unauthorized by the constitution of the United States, and violate the true meaning and intent thereof, and are null, void, and no law; nor binding upon this state, its officers or citizens.” They also know that this would lead to the secession of South Carolina from the Union and “The separation of South Carolina would inevitably produce a general dissolution of the Union”
The Main Idea: The main idea is that the South Carolinians believe that this tariff is unconstitutional. They feel
the tariff favors the north and ruins the south. “If we submit to this system of unconstitutional oppression, we shall voluntarily sink into slavery, and transmit that ignominious inheritance to our children”. They also feel they have the right to nullification, “we will not, we cannot, we dare not submit to this degradation; and our resolve is fixed and unalterable that a protective tariff shall be nolonger enforced within the limits of South Carolina.”
Significance: This source is important because it sets the needs of the individual states against the need of the Union. South Carolina threatens to secede from the Union if they are forced to pay the tariffs to the federal government and other states will follow which would dissolve the Union. “If South Carolina
should be driven out of the Union, all the other planting states, and some of the western states, would follow by an almost absolute necessity.” South Carolina is prepared to fight to death to be independent rather than stay part of a Union that oppresses them unjustly. “We would infinitely prefer that the territory of the state be a cemetery of freemen than the habitants of slaves” This became one of the issues of the civil war. The prediction of South Carolina that other planting states would follow them eventually happened and they did unite against the northern,
non-planting states.
Plessy v. Ferguson
Plessy v. Ferguson made African Americans second class citizens and created two societies: one white; the other black. The Plessy v. Ferguson Supreme Court decision of 1896 started in Louisiana. In 1892, Homer Plessy was arrested for violating the Louisiana Separate Car Act of 1890. The Louisiana Separate Car Act of 1890 required separate (and equal) accommodations for blacks and whites on railroads. Plessy said the act violated his 13th and 14 constitutional rights. It was ruled on by Judge John Howard Ferguson. He dismissed Plessy’s claim that the act was unconstitutional and Louisiana could regulate rail as it wanted as long as within the state boundaries. The Louisiana Separate Car Act was an example of a Jim Crow anti-black law which was meant to restrict the interaction between black and whites. Plessy took the cas to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decision of Plessy v. Ferguson which decided that Plessy’s 13th and 14th constitutional rights were not violated led to more Jim Crow laws and two separate yet equal societies: one white, advantaged and superior; the other black, disadvantaged and oppressed.
Plessy v Ferguson was brought to Supreme Court on May 18, 1896 The majority vote ruled that the Louisiana Separate Car Act did not violate Plessy’s 13th and 14th constitutional rights. The majority opinion was written by Associate Justice Henry Billings Brown. He rejected Plessy’s argument that it violated the 13th amendment, which ended slavery, because “it did not reestablish slavery or constitute a “badge” of slavery or servitude (school.eb.com).” Brown also argued that it did not violate the 14th amendment, which gave full and equal rights to all citizens, because the amendment only meant to ensure the legal equality of African Americans and whites. As long as the state provided accommodations for each race that were legally equal then segregation would preserve “public peace and good order “(Brown. school.eb.com).
Although Plessy v. Ferguson was decided by a majority vote, it was not unanimous. Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote the minority opinion. He believed the constitution is color blind because “the law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when civil rights are guaranteed by supreme law of the land (school.eb.com).” Harlan also feared that, “it is competent for a state to regulate the enjoyment of citizens of the civil rights solely upon the basis of race (school.eb.com).”
Harlan’s fears were realized as many southern and border states started to impose Jim Crow laws. Jim Crow laws were anti-black laws meant to regulate social interaction between the races. They peaked during the years 1877ntheough the 1960’s. These states were able to establish laws that separated African Americans from whites legally. Plessy’s message to the southern states and some border states was that discrimination against blacks was acceptable and legal.
The Jim Crow laws effectively created two societies. The first class society was the white class. The whites felt they were superior in intelligence, morality and civilized behavior to the African Americans. Whites felt that blacks must be kept at the bottom of the racial hierarchy and deemed themselves as the superior and dominant race. The second class was the African American class. The African American class was disadvantaged and oppressed. African Americans were regulated and forced to use “black only” services. Typically, these services were not equal to the whites’ services. Less money spent on “black only” services such as buses, parks, hospitals, and schools. These services were in poor condition or lacked the supplies needed to maintain them. African Americans were also politically oppressed. Many states implemented voting requirements which prohibited African Americans from voting. One requirement was a literacy which limited the vote to people who could read. Another requirement was a poll tax which an annual tax that had to be paid before qualifying to vote. Both requirements were added to prevent African Americans from voting. The Plessy decision was a legal way for states to ignore constitutional rights of black citizens.
The two societies created were supposed to be separate but equal. Segregating African Americans touched every aspect of their everyday life, for example; African American children were forced to go to “black only” schools, there were separate hospitals for blacks and whites, separate prisons, separate churches, cemeteries, public restrooms, and water fountains. These facilities were very inferior and not equal to white facilities. Blacks were also forbidden from interacting with whites; blacks had to give whites the right of way at all intersections, sidewalks, and roads, they must address whites formally, were not allowed to show public affection, and could not eat with whites. Violation of any of these restrictions often led to severe punishment. Whites felt they could legally beat African Americans if they violated the law. This led to lynching and riots throughout the south. Plessy v. Ferguson remained the law of the land until Brown v Board of Education 1954. Plessy’s decision stated that legal equality is not the same as social equality and the states took advantage of this.
The Plessy v. Ferguson decision allowed southern and border states to treat African Americans as second class citizens. The decision created two societies with whites kept as the dominant society. The states created more Jim Crow anti-black laws which were devised to restrict African Americans socially, financially, and politically. Although the Plessy v. Ferguson majority decision stated that Plessy’s 13th and 14th constitutional rights were not violated, the decision allowed states to legally violate the 13th and 14th amendments of all African Americans until the 1950’s.
Plessy v Ferguson was brought to Supreme Court on May 18, 1896 The majority vote ruled that the Louisiana Separate Car Act did not violate Plessy’s 13th and 14th constitutional rights. The majority opinion was written by Associate Justice Henry Billings Brown. He rejected Plessy’s argument that it violated the 13th amendment, which ended slavery, because “it did not reestablish slavery or constitute a “badge” of slavery or servitude (school.eb.com).” Brown also argued that it did not violate the 14th amendment, which gave full and equal rights to all citizens, because the amendment only meant to ensure the legal equality of African Americans and whites. As long as the state provided accommodations for each race that were legally equal then segregation would preserve “public peace and good order “(Brown. school.eb.com).
Although Plessy v. Ferguson was decided by a majority vote, it was not unanimous. Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote the minority opinion. He believed the constitution is color blind because “the law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when civil rights are guaranteed by supreme law of the land (school.eb.com).” Harlan also feared that, “it is competent for a state to regulate the enjoyment of citizens of the civil rights solely upon the basis of race (school.eb.com).”
Harlan’s fears were realized as many southern and border states started to impose Jim Crow laws. Jim Crow laws were anti-black laws meant to regulate social interaction between the races. They peaked during the years 1877ntheough the 1960’s. These states were able to establish laws that separated African Americans from whites legally. Plessy’s message to the southern states and some border states was that discrimination against blacks was acceptable and legal.
The Jim Crow laws effectively created two societies. The first class society was the white class. The whites felt they were superior in intelligence, morality and civilized behavior to the African Americans. Whites felt that blacks must be kept at the bottom of the racial hierarchy and deemed themselves as the superior and dominant race. The second class was the African American class. The African American class was disadvantaged and oppressed. African Americans were regulated and forced to use “black only” services. Typically, these services were not equal to the whites’ services. Less money spent on “black only” services such as buses, parks, hospitals, and schools. These services were in poor condition or lacked the supplies needed to maintain them. African Americans were also politically oppressed. Many states implemented voting requirements which prohibited African Americans from voting. One requirement was a literacy which limited the vote to people who could read. Another requirement was a poll tax which an annual tax that had to be paid before qualifying to vote. Both requirements were added to prevent African Americans from voting. The Plessy decision was a legal way for states to ignore constitutional rights of black citizens.
The two societies created were supposed to be separate but equal. Segregating African Americans touched every aspect of their everyday life, for example; African American children were forced to go to “black only” schools, there were separate hospitals for blacks and whites, separate prisons, separate churches, cemeteries, public restrooms, and water fountains. These facilities were very inferior and not equal to white facilities. Blacks were also forbidden from interacting with whites; blacks had to give whites the right of way at all intersections, sidewalks, and roads, they must address whites formally, were not allowed to show public affection, and could not eat with whites. Violation of any of these restrictions often led to severe punishment. Whites felt they could legally beat African Americans if they violated the law. This led to lynching and riots throughout the south. Plessy v. Ferguson remained the law of the land until Brown v Board of Education 1954. Plessy’s decision stated that legal equality is not the same as social equality and the states took advantage of this.
The Plessy v. Ferguson decision allowed southern and border states to treat African Americans as second class citizens. The decision created two societies with whites kept as the dominant society. The states created more Jim Crow anti-black laws which were devised to restrict African Americans socially, financially, and politically. Although the Plessy v. Ferguson majority decision stated that Plessy’s 13th and 14th constitutional rights were not violated, the decision allowed states to legally violate the 13th and 14th amendments of all African Americans until the 1950’s.