States' Rights VS National Rights:
Who should have the power? Should the States have it, or should it be National power? There were many debutes within this region. There was the Missouri Compromise, which the National won. (they were with the agreement of no slavery) Then there was the Kansas/Nebraska Act that canceled the Missouri Comromise. Next was the Compromise of 1850. This compromise stated that California. was a free state, but other states were "nullified". Nullification is getting to choose whether they want to be a free state or a slave state. The North was Federal. They wanted to basically be told what to do and thought that the Nation knew best. The South wanted States' Rights. They wanted slavery and wanted to make their own laws. All they wanted to do was be left alone. John Caldwell Calhoun was on the South's side. John Calhoun was an American Politian and supporter on slavery and states' rights. He served as vice president to Andrew Jackson and was instrumental in the South Carolina Nulification crisis.. Daniel Webster was all for National rights.. He was an American lawyer and statesman. He spoke out against nulification and states' rights. He believed that the country should stay unified.
|
WHO WILL RECIEVE THE POWER? THE STATES, OR THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT? |