American Civil War: Trails of Political, Economic, Social, and Cultural Sectionalism

Name
Course
Professor
Date
American History: Give Me Liberty Unit 4
Question 1
Daniel Webster, Massachusetts Senator Daniel, opposed South Carolina’s ability to nullify federal law. He was responding to a South Carolina senator, Robert Hayne, who argued that any state could protect its people from an unconstitutional federal law. Webster held the sentiment that the federal constitution was the supreme law and truth, which protected previous legislative acts from the declaration of Independence. Further, he argued that Congress enacted federal legislation and only they can decide its deserved changes. Additionally, he held sentiments that nullifying the suggested laws was against the constitution and the supreme rule, and the state did not have the right or authority to modify the laws ( Webster, liberty and Union Speech).
Notably, Webster argued that the constitution is the supreme law by the people, for the people, and answerable to the people, which presents their will, and ignoring it was ignoring the will of the people. This meant that if people did not feel protected by the constitution had no choice but to call for a revolution to change the constitution. Also, both federal and state governments presented the will of the people. They were a different agent from the same source, and thus if there were a dispute between the state and federal government, a neutral body, the judiciary, through the supreme court, would resolve the dispute.
Conversely, the South Carolina government gave a counter-argument of nullifying some acts of federal laws deemed unconstitutional. This was after a convention held in November 1832 and its position on the state's power. They held that they needed to recognize the new legislation on law laying custom duties and impost on goods of foreign origin, citing that they violate the original posit of the federal constitution. Further, South Carolina firmly held that they recognize the state constitution, which has the mandate and authority to offer legal protection against all other legislations.
Therefore, the customs duties introduced on foreign commodities were unconstitutional as they did not align with the taxes on domestic items. The State of Carolina argued that the federal government intended to protect domestic manufacturers and generous rewards to some classes. This meant the employment created would be at the expense of some individuals and classes' oppression while exempting taxes on others. Thus, the move was unconstitutional. It provides equal rights to taxation for all citizens( South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification)
Even though Webster had a valid argument, the state of Carolina was more persuasive. Its argument was rational and presented adequate facts of equality and the need to follow the constitution, which is the supreme law of any given country. Despite any situation or crisis, the constitution, which presents the people's will, should be respected and obeyed at any given time. 
Question 2
In his speech, The Meaning of the Fourth of July for the Negro, Fredrick Douglas admires and respects the founding fathers who fought for independence, terming them great and brave. He also showed respect for the United States of America. However,...