no one won- it was a tie!
whether or not states had the right to nullify a federal law (ノ◕ヮ◕)ノ*:・゚✧
Daniel Webster
It was the doctrine of nullification
slavery
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.
The Webster-Hayne Debate was between a man named Daniel Webster and a man named Robert Hayne.
Derpyderp
Derpyderp
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
whether or not states had the right to nullify a federal law (ノ◕ヮ◕)ノ*:・゚✧
The Webster-Hayne debate, held in 1830 in the U.S. Senate, is often seen as a clash of ideas rather than a clear victory for one side. Daniel Webster, representing Massachusetts, defended nationalism and the Union, while Robert Hayne of South Carolina advocated for states' rights and nullification. Webster's eloquent arguments and defense of the Constitution resonated widely, ultimately making him the more influential figure in this historic debate. The debate is frequently viewed as a pivotal moment in the discussion of federalism versus states' rights in American history.
Hayne, a politician during Jackson's presidency, raised many issues about State's rights and Slavery. Some of his comments revolved around the tariff of 1828. He said the Tariff, "was producing a spirit of jealousy and distrust" (Meacham 127).
It was also a debate about the issue of slavery.