Andrew Jackson: Proclamation to the People of South Carolina Regarding Nullification

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

President Jackson's Proclamation regarding Nullification begins by stating that the South Carolina convention advocates a course of action contrary to South Carolinians responsibilities as citizens, which violates the Constitution. Appealing to Revolutionary heritage, the patriotism of South Carolinians, and the idea that the Union has been sanctioned by God, the proclamation outlines Jackson's reasons for nullification. Deeming nullification “strange,” the proclamation argues that a state cannot be a part of the Union and reject federal laws. The proclamation defines the relationship between the people and the federal government as a “social compact,” one that dates from colonial times, and it maintains the supremacy of federal laws and treaties over state and local interests. It also rejects the argument that South Carolina is uniquely and unfairly burdened by the tariff, noting that states have at times shared unequally in the burden of sustaining the federal government. It also suggests the improbability that the nullifiers have found a new and legitimate right within the Constitution.

The Proclamation regarding Nullification focuses on a significant weakness in the Ordinance of Nullification, the argument that the tariff legislation is intended to benefit manufacturing interests and is therefore unconstitutional. It suggests that it is impossible to divine intent and that it is “an absurd and dangerous doctrine” to believe so. Further, if the Constitution has within it the power to both make and disobey laws, then it is “self-destroying.” The proclamation, again appealing to Revolutionary memory, states that the Founders could not draft a document with such a flaw. The document notes that the Constitution gives Congress the right to pass revenue legislation and suggests that, even if it does not and people have a choice between allowing the states or Congress to determine revenue policy, the rights of the people would be protected by their representation in Congress. It also charges the nullifiers with disregarding the constitutional provisions for the judiciary as well as with nullifying the judiciary act by prohibiting an appeal to federal courts.

The proclamation refutes the nullifiers' theory of government, arguing that the Constitution has produced a nation, not a league of sovereign states. It agrees that the government is formed by a compact, as the nullifiers maintain, but argues that a compact is a “binding obligation” that the parties to it cannot depart from it and that the federal government possesses the means to execute its laws. The proclamation tries to affirm Jackson's respect for states' rights, while supporting the power of the federal government. It takes up two propositions: the argument that states retain sovereignty when entering into the Constitution and the right of state secession. Repeating the argument that the people created a union that was made more perfect only by the Constitution, the proclamation rejects claims of state sovereignty and the right of a state to remove itself from its responsibilities under the Constitution. It denies the right of secession because a government formed for the benefit of all cannot permit a single state to involve others “in these and countless other evils.” The proclamation blames nullification on a small majority of its citizens who demand citizens either repeal the tariff or accede to secession without exhausting constitutional means to redress grievances through a convention of the states. Finally, observing that the governor suggests raising an army to effect secession, the proclamation warns the people of the state not to obey the “illegal and disorganizing ordinance of the convention.”

The final sections adopt Jackson's personal voice, identifying South Carolina as the president's native state. Jackson's role as president is akin to a father trying to prevent his children from approaching danger. The proclamation acknowledges that the tariff economically hurts South Carolina but maintains that the claims are exaggerated and charges nullifiers with using passion, pride, courage, and injury to manipulate public opinion and erroneously link nullification with the Revolutionary right to oppose unconstitutional laws. The people of South Carolina neither are the heirs of Revolutionaries' efforts to defend liberty nor are they oppressed by something akin to colonial vassalage, but instead they are “free members of a flourishing and happy Union.” Noting that the nation is attempting to reduce the tariff, the proclamation catalogues the benefits of the Union, including promoting commerce, protecting the frontier, and advancing arts and education. The proclamation contrasts these images with those of an independent South Carolina, warring with its neighbors, divided in opinion, and fearful of insurrections. Appealing to the Revolutionary heritage of South Carolinians, it calls upon its people to reset their course and tell their leaders that they will not tolerate disunion and will not take up arms in its cause.

In its conclusion, the document addresses not the people of South Carolina but the citizens of the United States, framing the nullification controversy as a threat to national prosperity, the country's political existence, and the cause of free governments throughout the world. It promises that Jackson will use “moderate but firm measures” to preserve the Union but that if force is necessary, it will not be the fault of the federal government. In return, it appeals to the citizens of the United States for their support and to the “Great Ruler of nations” for his continued blessings and to show the nullifiers the error of their ways so that the divinely sanctioned Union will be preserved.

Additional Commentary by Michael J. O’Neal, Ph.D.

In 1832 Andrew Jackson faced down South Carolina in what came to be called the “nullification crisis.” In this context, the word nullification refers to a declaration that a federal law is “null,” or without effect, in this case in the state of South Carolina. The issue that led to the nullification crisis was tariffs, but the far larger issue was the relationship between the federal and state governments. In attempting to nullify the nation's tariff laws, South Carolina was reserving to itself the right to declare a federal law unconstitutional and unenforceable. Jackson responded by asserting the authority of the federal government to pass laws that were applicable in all the states.

The crisis had been brewing for a number of years. It started with the Tariff of 1816, which required American merchants to pay tariffs of up to 25 percent of the value of imported goods such as iron and wool. The public largely supported this tariff, but resistance to high tariffs began to grow with the Tariff of 1824, which increased tariff rates to 35 percent and was passed to raise funds for “internal improvements”—chiefly the building of roads and canals. Then Congress passed the Tariff of 1828, which quickly became known in the South as the “Tariff of Abominations.” Southern states such as South Carolina were bitterly opposed to these tariffs because, in their view, they favored the interests of northern industrialists at the expense of the agricultural South. Additionally, the southern states in general opposed the nation's plans for internal improvements, believing again that the system of roads and canals funded by the tariffs favored northern manufacturing interests. Portions of New England were also opposed to the tariffs.

Opponents of the tariffs believed that the new president, Andrew Jackson, would move to lower them. While he did lower tariffs, he did so only slightly, and South Carolina, with its major port cities, was not satisfied—though it must be noted that even South Carolina was divided between the “Nullifiers” and those who wished to remain loyal to the Union. Meanwhile, South Carolina had been hurt badly by the Panic of 1819 and the country's general economic malaise in the 1820s. Prior to that, the state had enjoyed a booming economy, primarily through such crops as rice, indigo, and cotton. The state blamed the tariffs for its declining economic fortunes, though other factors, such as soil erosion (cotton, in particular, depletes the soil) and competition from newer states in the West and Southwest, contributed. After the Tariff of 1828 was passed, South Carolina attempted to mount a concerted southern response to it. When that effort failed, radicals in the state began to argue that the state should act on its own. Jackson and his vice president, John C. Calhoun, openly split when Calhoun agreed to write a document called “Exposition and Protest” in 1828 in which he argued that states had the right to nullify laws they regarded as unconstitutional.

In the years that followed, the issue of tariffs remained very much on the front burner, and passions in the state ran high as the Nullifiers gained momentum and support. Finally—as Jackson points out in the opening paragraphs of his proclamation—the state's lawmakers held a Nullification Convention in November 1832. At this convention, the lawmakers declared the Tariff of 1828, as well as a new tariff bill passed in 1832, to be unconstitutional and unenforceable in the state; asserted that the issue was not one that could be resolved by the federal courts; and threatened withdrawal from the Union if the federal government attempted to enforce the tariffs in South Carolina. Jackson makes clear his opposition to South Carolina's position and warns “of the consequences that must inevitably result from an observance of the dictates of the Convention.”

The remainder of the document is a passionate plea for the supremacy of the Union and the Constitution. Jackson argues that South Carolina's actions seem to be based on the “strange position” that a state can be a member of the Union and a signatory to its Constitution yet at the same time decide on its own that it will not adhere to a particular law that it regards as unconstitutional. Jackson goes on to argue that two mechanisms check the federal government if it passes or attempts to pass an unconstitutional law: the court system and the people of the country who elect their lawmakers. After Jackson states his unequivocal belief that nullification is inconsistent with the Union and the Constitution, he devotes the remainder of the proclamation to defending his position: that the United States are one people; that members of Congress are paid by the United States and are required to act for the “general good”; that the United States is not a league but rather a single government; and that as president, he will exercise his duty to enforce the laws that he is sworn to uphold. Finally, Jackson appeals directly to the people of South Carolina, urging them not to be deluded by a small majority who want to enjoy the advantages of the Union but bear none of its burdens. He further argues that the Nullifiers “are not champions of liberty emulating the fame of our Revolutionary fathers, nor are you an oppressed people, contending … against worse than colonial vassalage. You are free members of a flourishing and happy Union.”