| |
|
Wall Street History
https://www.gofundme.com/s3h2w8
|
05/23/2003
The Tariff of Abominations
This past May 19 was the 175th anniversary of the signing of the
Tariff of 1828, better known as the “Tariff of Abominations,” so
I thought it was a good time to review an act that many feel was
an important step leading to the American Civil War. In light of
various moves on today’s trade front, whether it is protectionism
in the form of Europeans denying entry of U.S. genetically-
modified food, or U.S. protectionism on the steel front, a little
history can lead to an insight or two.
Following the War of 1812, America began to transform itself
from a purely agricultural nation to an industrial one. The
building of the Erie Canal, 1817-1825, had a lot to do with the
revolution in transportation, for example, and the domestic
economy boomed, save the period surrounding the Panic of
1819.
But the presidential election of 1824 proved to be a mess. Battle
of New Orleans war hero Andrew Jackson won the popular tally,
but no one had a majority of the electoral vote in a four candidate
race; Jackson, John Quincy Adams, William Crawford and
Henry Clay. The election was thrown into the House and it was
there that Adams, the second place finisher, offered Henry Clay
the office of secretary of state in exchange for his support, with
Adams then winning on the first ballot The Jackson forces
immediately labeled this the “corrupt bargain.”
Adams not only lacked a mandate, he lacked conviction, while
Jackson’s people vowed they would make his life miserable, and
succeeded in doing so.
Few were as prepared to be president as John Quincy Adams.
The son of John Adams, John Quincy was a U.S. Senator and
served as secretary of state under President Monroe. It was
Adams who was most responsible for formulating the Monroe
Doctrine.
Historians described Adams as “a lonely, friendless figure,
unable to express his burning love of country in any way that
would touch the popular imagination.” Wrote Adams himself,
“With a knowledge of the actual defects in my character, I have
not the pliability to reform it.” [Source: “The Growth of the
American Republic”]
Adams was respected rather than loved. He also wasn’t the
hardest worker in history, enjoying a swim in the Potomac over
dealing with Congress, and he was constantly complaining about
the unending chores associated with his office, like catering to
the stream of visitors who called on the White House in those
days.
By 1828, what would be his last year in office, Adams was a
beaten man. Andrew Jackson’s supporters, keen on taking the
election later in the year, sought to exploit Adams’s weakness.
The pro-Jackson forces thus sought to present their candidate to
the South as a free-trader, and to the North as a protectionist.
In those days, competition from Great Britain on the trade front
was fierce and Congress was continually dealing with demands
to raise tariffs in order to protect domestic companies. In August
1827, delegates to a convention in Harrisburg, PA signed a
petition to force Congress to do something about the grievances
of both farm and manufacturing interests by increasing tariffs.
The northern states were generally in favor, but southerners
weren’t because the higher tariffs meant higher prices for the
manufactured products they didn’t produce themselves, while
southerners also felt Great Britain and France would retaliate on
items like cotton, forcing the region into poverty.
The result was the Tariff of Abominations in 1828. Historian
Robert Remini described it as a “ghastly, lopsided, unequal bill,
every section of which showed marks of political preference and
favoritism.”
Many feel as though the authors of the bill actually sought its
defeat, in order to embarrass Adams. But the President refused
to even take a stand, leaving it up to Congress, where both
houses ended up signing it. Adams described the majority as a
coalition of factions “united by a common disappointment into
one mass envenomed by one spirit of bitter and unrelenting
persecuting malice” against him. [Henry Graff]
The volatile Virginia Senator John Randolph characterized the
Tariff of Abominations as a measure truly concerned with no
manufacturers except the manufacture of the next president of
the United States. While Randolph’s Virginia colleague, Senator
Littleton Tazewell, supposedly said to Senator Martin Van
Buren, a key figure in passage: “Sir, you have deceived me once;
that was your fault; but if you deceive me again the fault will be
mine.” [Robert Remini]
The Act is confusing, but the managers had to concede that their
chief purpose was to overthrow Adams in 1828 by bringing
Ohio, Kentucky, and Missouri into the Jackson camp while
keeping New York and Pennsylvania within the fold.
Vice President John C. Calhoun, however, was provoked and
South Carolina’s leading statesman wrote his “South Carolina
Exposition and Protest” in response. This argued that a tariff for
protection rather than for raising revenue was unconstitutional;
passage thus left his state no alternative but to assert its right of
“interposition” against the “despotism of the many.” In other
words, Calhoun was raising the principle of “nullification.”
Andrew Jackson was of course elected in 1828, whipping Adams
178-83 in the electoral vote. While he was a southerner and
favored states’ rights, he was also a Union man. This set the
stage for a big fight with Calhoun, who was also Jackson’s vice
president, when another oppressive tariff was passed in 1832.
The South Carolina legislature then adopted the “Ordinance of
Nullification,” which declared the tariff void, not “binding upon
this State, its officers or citizens.”
Calhoun sought to preserve the Union by protecting the minority
rights that the agricultural and slaveholding South claimed. The
tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were seen as symbols of Southern
oppression. The principle of nullification, meanwhile, meant a
state could in effect repeal a federal law, following the process
the original thirteen states had used in ratifying the Constitution.
The states, according to Calhoun, could declare a law null and
void within its limits while remaining in the Union. All they had
to do was hold a special state convention. Then, either the
federal government would have to abandon the law, or there
would have to be a constitutional amendment removing all doubt
as to its validity.
Faced with this crisis, President Jackson said, “States’ rights will
preserve the union of the states,” but nullification “will dissolve
the Union.”
In 1833 a compromise was reached. The Union was saved, for
now, but the marker had been laid.
Sources:
“John Quincy Adams” Robert V. Remini
“American Heritage: The Presidents” Michael Beschloss
“Presidents” edited by Henry Graff
“America: A Narrative History” George Brown Tindall and
David E. Shi
“The Growth of the American Republic” Samuel Morison, Henry
Steele Commager, William Leuchtenburg
Wall Street History will return next week.
Brian Trumbore
|
|
|
