Nullification Threatens to Lead to Civil War

South Carolina Prompts a Sectional Crisis by Defying Federal Law

Jul 29, 2009

South Carolina's response to perceived onerous federal taxation led to one of the first major sectional conflicts in U.S. history and helped sow the seeds of civil war.

In 1828, a new tariff law was enacted that raised taxes on imported goods to unprecedented levels. The law’s supporters were mostly Northerners who believed that higher taxes on imports would protect Northern industrial goods from European competition.

However the law disproportionately harmed the South because that region relied more on European imports. In addition, high tariffs could prompt European countries to retaliate with high tariffs of their own, which could disproportionately harm the South because Southerners relied more on exporting their goods than Northern manufacturers.

Consequently Southerners condemned this new law, calling it the “Tariff of Abominations.” An anonymous pamphlet called “The South Carolina Exposition and Protest” was distributed that declared the tariff was “unconstitutional, oppressive and unjust.” The pamphlet also argued that states could “nullify” federal laws deemed harmful to state interests. The tract’s author was later revealed to be Vice President John C. Calhoun.

The Theory of Nullification

Calhoun's theory of nullification was not an original idea. Some have argued that the original nullification document was the Declaration of Independence, in which Thomas Jefferson proclaimed that the states were independent of Great Britain and therefore no longer subject to her laws.

Jefferson and James Madison also encouraged state resistance to federal authority in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolves of 1798. In addition many Northerners also supported nullification, especially abolitionists who urged people to ignore laws requiring the return of runaway slaves to their owners.

Many founders believed that since the federal government derived its power from the states' consent, the states had the inherent right to defy federal laws considered harmful to their existence. Much state resistance to federal power stemmed from the War for Independence, which was a war of secession from Great Britain. American fears of a tyrannical central government prompted many to declare greater loyalty to their state than the federal authority.

For three years, Southern resentment was tempered by the hope that President Andrew Jackson, a Southerner, would be sympathetic to their interests. When prospects of the desired sympathy turned bleak, John Calhoun became the first vice president to resign from office. He returned home to South Carolina to encourage the people to oppose federal authority regarding the tariff.

In an effort to ease the bitterness, a new tariff law was enacted in 1832. Although this lowered taxes on imports, the taxes were not low enough to appease South Carolina. On November 24, a state convention passed an “Ordinance of Nullification” which declared the tariff “null, void and no law.”

President Jackson furiously declared that no state could nullify a federal law and he initiated the Force Act, which empowered him to mobilize the U.S. military to collect tariffs if necessary. South Carolinians responded by mobilizing the state militia to repel a potential invasion. Meanwhile politicians led by Calhoun and Kentuckian Henry Clay scrambled to find a compromise to avert war.

The Uneasy Compromise Tariff

Congressmen eventually agreed upon a new law known as the Compromise Tariff of 1833. This gradually reduced taxes on imports over 10 years in exchange for South Carolina officials revoking the Ordinance of Nullification. After all parties agreed to the terms, in a final act of defiance South Carolina symbolically voted to nullify Jackson's Force Act, even though it was never enforced.

Both sides claimed victory in the tariff standoff. Some saw this as a defeat for the theory of nullification, and others saw it as a Southern victory because tariffs were ultimately lowered. Many Southern states began citing this incident as an example that states were empowered to secede, and the flames of secession began growing hotter.

While the compromise temporarily pacified both sides, the tariff would be one of many issues that would divide the North and South for the next 30 years and lead to civil war.

Davis, Kenneth C.: Don't Know Much About the Civil War (New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1996)

The copyright of the article Nullification Threatens to Lead to Civil War in US Civil War is owned by Walter Coffey. Permission to republish Nullification Threatens to Lead to Civil War in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.