The Webster-Hayne Debate was between a man named Daniel Webster and a man named Robert Hayne.
In the debate, Webster argued that states did not have the power to nullify a federal law. He also argued that states could not secede from the Union. Daniel Webster held several offices throughout his career, including Senator from Massachusetts.
Derpyderp
Derpyderp
Daniel Webster strongly opposed nullification and believed that the federal government was above the states. This is made clear in the Webster-Hayne Debate of 1830, where Webster argued against pro-nullification South Carolina senator Robert Hayne.
http://www.ehow.com/about_5070480_significance-websterhayne-debate.html This website gives you the resolution and everyone's personal view!! it helped me tremendously!!
Doctrine of Nullification.
Doctrine of Nullification.
In 1830 In 1830
It was over the doctrine of nullification
The debate was on January 19, to January 27, 1830
no one won- it was a tie!
In the Webster-Hayne debate of 1830, Senators Robert Hayne and Daniel Webster engaged in a heated discussion primarily centered around states' rights versus federal authority. Hayne argued for the rights of states to nullify federal laws and emphasized the importance of state sovereignty, while Webster defended the supremacy of the federal government and the Union. The debate highlighted the growing sectional tensions in the U.S. and set the stage for future conflicts over states' rights and federal power. Ultimately, Webster's eloquent defense of the Union and national unity resonated strongly, shaping public opinion at the time.