Started By
Message

Andrew Jackson's letter on Secession

Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:13 pm
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
56613 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:13 pm
Ole Hickory had a few things to say about secession when South Carolina looked at leaving the Union.

Note from Digital History

quote:

Although President Jackson owed his election to the presidency to southern slaveholder votes, he was an ardent unionist who was willing to risk civil war in order to defy South Carolina's nullification threats. In the proclamation that follows, Jackson declared nullification illegal and became the first President to declare the Union indissoluble. He then asked Congress to empower him to use force to execute federal law; Congress promptly enacted a Force Act. Privately, Jackson threatened to "hang every leader...of that infatuated people, sir, by martial law, irrespective of his name, or political or social position." He also dispatched a fleet of eight ships and a shipment of 5000 muskets to a federal installation in Charleston harbor.


Secession part of letter:

quote:

On such expositions and reasonings the Ordinance grounds not only an assertion of the right to annul the laws of which it complains, but to enforce it by a threat of seceding from the Union if any attempt is made to execute them.

This right to secede is deduced from the nature of the Constitution, which they say is a compact between sovereign States, who have preserved their whole sovereignty, and therefore are subject to no superior: that because they made the compact, they can break it, when, in their opinion, it has been departed from by the other states. Fallacious as this course of reasoning is, it enlists State pride, and finds advocates in the honest prejudices of those who have not studied the nature of our Government sufficiently to see the radical error on which it rests.

The people of the United States formed the Constitution, acting through the State Legislatures in making the compact, to meet and discuss its provisions, and acting in separate conventions when they ratified those provisions; but the terms used in its construction show it to be a government in which the people of all the States collectively are representative. We are ONE PEOPLE in the choice of the President and Vice President. Here the States have no other agency than to direct the mode in which the votes shall be given.... The people, then, and not the States, are represented in the Executive branch....

When chosen, they [members of the House of Representatives] are all representatives of the United States, not representatives of the particular State from which they come. They are paid by the United States, not by the State; nor are they accountable to it for any act done in the performance of their legislative functions; and however they may in practice, as it is their duty to do, consult and prefer the interests of their particular constituents when they come in conflict with any other partial or local interest, yet it is their first and highest duty, as representatives of the United States, to promote the general good.

The Constitution of the United States, then, forms a government, not a league, and whether it be formed by compact between the States, or in any other manner, its character is the same. It is a government in which all the people are represented, which operates directly on the people individually, not upon the States--they retained all the power they did not grant. But each State having expressly parted with so many powers as to constitute jointly with the other States a single Nation, cannot from that period possess any right to secede, because each secession does not break a league, but destroys the unity of a Nation, and any injury to that unity is not only a breach which would result from the contravention of a compact, but it is an offence against the whole Union....

No one fellow citizens, has a higher reverence for the reserved rights of the States than the Magistrate who now addresses you.... The States, severally have not retained their entire sovereignty. It has been shown that in becoming parts of a nation, not members of a league, they surrendered many of their essential parts of sovereignty. The right to make treaties--declare war--levy taxes--exercise exclusive judicial and legislative powers--were all of them functions of sovereign power. The States then, for all these important purposes, were no longer sovereign. The allegiance of their citizens was transferred in the first instance to the Government of the United States--they became American citizens, and owed obedience to the Constitution of the United States and to laws made in conformity with the powers it vested in Congress.... Treaties and alliances were made in the name of all. Troops were raised for the common defence. How then, with all these proofs that under all changes of our position we had, for designated purposes and with defined powers, created national Governments--how it is, that the most perfect of those several modes of union, should now be considered as a mere league that may be dissolved at pleasure? It is an abuse of terms....

Fellow citizens of my native State! let me not only admonish you, as the first Magistrate of our common country, not to incur the penalty of its laws, but use the influence that a Father would over his children whom he saw rushing to certain ruin.... You are free members of a flourishing and happy union. There is not settled design to oppress you.--You have indeed felt the unequal operation of the laws which may have been unwisely, not constitutionally passed; but that inequality must necessarily removed. At the very moment when you were madly urged on to the unfortunate course you have begun, a change in public opinion has commenced. The nearly approaching payment of the public debt, and the consequent necessity of a diminution of duties, had already produced a considerable reduction, and that too on some articles of general consumption to your State....

If your leaders could succeed in establishing a separation, what would be your situation? Are you united at home--are you free from the apprehension of civil discord, with all its fearful consequences? Do our neighboring republics, every day suffering some new revolution or contending with some new insurrection--do they excite your envy?.... The laws of the United States must be executed. I have no discretionary power on the subject--my duty is emphatically pronounced in the Constitution. Those who told you that you might peaceably prevent their execution, deceived you--they could not have been deceived themselves. They know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the execution of the laws, and they know that such opposition must be repelled. Their object is disunion: but be not deceived by names: disunion, by armed force, is TREASON


Don't show this to the Kennedy brothers.
Posted by TutHillTiger
Mississippi Alabama
Member since Sep 2010
49741 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:15 pm to
MAGA will not like this they are already ready to succeed
Posted by Riverside
Member since Jul 2022
8098 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:16 pm to
President Trump is doing in California what President Jackson did in South Carolina. A show of force is necessary sometimes to prevent civil war and rebellion by democrats.
Posted by The Boat
Member since Oct 2008
175379 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:16 pm to
quote:

MAGA will not like this they are already ready to succeed

We have succeeded quite a bit in the last 6 months.
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
56613 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:16 pm to
South should be glad Lincoln and not Jackson was president at the time.

There would have been some executions.
Posted by nicholastiger
Member since Jan 2004
53527 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:18 pm to
I’m gonna watch Hamilton on this day
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
56613 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:20 pm to
Watching GWTW right now actually. Pop in Yankee Doodle Dandy next.
Posted by CSATiger
The Battlefield
Member since Aug 2010
6770 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:40 pm to
Jackson was wrong, Calhoun was right
Posted by DesScorp
Alabama
Member since Sep 2017
9453 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:42 pm to
quote:

South should be glad Lincoln and not Jackson was president at the time.

There would have been some executions.


Jackson was a great president, but he was wrong about this. He also couldn't stand being told that he was wrong. He'd fly into a rage. Ole' Hickory wasn't an easy man to serve under.
Posted by hansenthered1
Dixie
Member since Nov 2023
2100 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:45 pm to
Actually it's the commie left who are talking session right now...you need to update your talking points from 2020 to 2025
Posted by Gnash
Cypress, Tx
Member since Oct 2015
9351 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:47 pm to
quote:

A show of force is necessary sometimes to prevent civil war and rebellion by democrats.

Some of yall need to take a break from all forms of media.
Posted by Lou the Jew from LSU
Member since Oct 2006
5203 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:49 pm to
Hamilton has nothing to do with truth or actual history.
Posted by BluegrassBelle
RIP Hefty Lefty - 1981-2019
Member since Nov 2010
105854 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:49 pm to
quote:

. A show of force is necessary sometimes to prevent civil war and rebellion by democrats.


Oh FFS.

Touch some fricking grass.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
71772 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:52 pm to
quote:

MAGA will not like this they are already ready to succeed


Oh look, more nonsensical, divorced from reality blabbering from someone suffering from TDS.
Posted by REG861
Ocelot, Iowa
Member since Oct 2011
37731 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 5:57 pm to
Man he was based huh.
Posted by SoFla Tideroller
South Florida
Member since Apr 2010
38569 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 6:00 pm to
It’s TutHill. He might legitimately be the stupidest person on this site.
Posted by Fat and Happy
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2013
19391 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 6:01 pm to
The southern states succeeded due to states rights.

The south made up about 3/4th the income in taxes for the US. I don’t remember exactly but something like 80% of the world’s cotton.

The southern states were extremely wealthy back then so then when Washington DC decided to up the taxes on agriculture, the southern folks told the north that their mother was a lady of streets and that the northern folks could go F themselves because DC wanted more money and didn’t like that they southern states were quite boujie up in this bitch.

So, when the south succeeded, the north couldn’t let go of its gold mine and had to fight for that
Posted by riverparish
Member since Dec 2007
1522 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 6:05 pm to
quote:

There would have been some executions.


Which means the war probably wouldn't have been over after Appomattox. You would've seen fighting continuing and probably guerrilla groups being formed.
Posted by BFIV
Virginia
Member since Apr 2012
8668 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 6:12 pm to
quote:

succeeded


This word does not mean what some of yall think it means.
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
56613 posts
Posted on 7/4/25 at 6:17 pm to
You think union would go through three years of bad generals with Jackson in charge?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram