SOWING THE SEEDS OF DISUNION: SOUTH CAROLINA’S PARTISAN NEWSPAPERS AND THE NULLIFICATION CRISIS, 1828-1833 by ERIKA JEAN PRIBANIC-SMITH A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Communication and Information Sciences in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2010 Copyright Erika Jean Pribanic-Smith, 2010 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT Ultimately the first state to secede on the eve of the Civil War, South Carolina erupted in controversy following the 1828 passage of an act increasing duties on foreign imports for the protection of domestic industry. Most could agree that the tariff was unconstitutional, unequal in that it benefited the industrial North more than the agrarian South, and oppressive to plantation states that had to rely on expensive northern goods or foreign imports made more costly by the duties. Factions formed, however, based on recommended means of redress. Partisan newspapers of that era became vocal supporters of one faction or the other. What became the Free Trade Party by the end of the Nullification Crisis began as a loosely-organized group that called for unqualified resistance to what they perceived as a gross usurpation of power by the federal government. The Union Party grew out of a segment of the population that was loyal to the government and alarmed by their opposition’s disunion rhetoric. Strong at the start due to tariff panic and bolstered by John C. Calhoun’s “South Carolina Exposition and Protest,” the Free Trade Party lost ground when the Unionists successfully turned their overzealous disunion language against them in the 1830 city and state elections. Once the Nullifiers dropped their disunion focus in favor of sound Republican doctrine combined with patriotism reminiscent of the American Revolution, they became an unstoppable force. Through their new, moderate rhetoric, the Free Trade Party was able to convince the public that they valued the Union as much as anyone, that the people’s rights and the Constitution itself were in danger, that the states had the authority to interpose in such a case, and that the rightful remedy of nullification was the peaceful medium between submission to tyranny and outright revolution. ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated first and foremost to my husband and partner Jason Smith, without whose emotional, financial, moral, and editorial support I never could have completed the task. I only hope that one day I can repay him for all that he has done without uttering a single word of complaint. I also dedicate this work to my mentor and friend of more than a decade, Dr. Wm. David Sloan. Through good fortune, I was assigned as his research assistant and learned about journalism history. Through his guidance, I became an historian myself. Finally, I dedicate each and every word to the wonderfully colorful men of nineteenth- century South Carolina, whose passionate beliefs and eloquent writing made researching them an absolute delight. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to several of the faculty and staff at The University of Alabama whose assistance has made this work what it is. I am fortunate to have assembled a committee of excellent scholars and all-around great people, whose wisdom, guidance, patience, and moral support have helped me to craft a work I can be proud of without losing my sanity in the process. I owe many thanks to my chair, Karla Gower, and committee members Kimberly Bissell, Caryl Cooper, Lawrence Frederick Kohl, and Margot Opdycke Lamme. I also am indebted to Pat Causey and the rest of the interlibrary loan staff, who went above and beyond the call of duty to get as much newspaper material as possible sent to Tuscaloosa for my research. I also appreciate the kindness and encouragement of Patti Olvey and the circulation staff, whose smiling faces made the daily trips to Gorgas Library a pleasure. In no way would I have made it through my doctoral program, let alone the dissertation phase, without the guidance and support of Jennings Bryant and Diane Shaddix. Words never could express my gratitude for everything they both have done for me. I owe special thanks to the entire journalism department, which trained me as a master’s student, gave me an opportunity to teach many amazing classes for the past four years, and has been wholly on my side throughout the dissertation process. Above all, I am eternally grateful for my massive cheering section of family and friends, who had every confidence that I could do it, which gave me confidence in myself. iv CONTENTS ABSTRACT ………………………………………..…………………………………………… ii DEDICATION …………………………………….…………………………………………… iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ………………………….……………………………........................iv 1. INTRODUCTION ……………………………….…………………………………………… 1 2. THE TARIFF OF ABOMINATIONS…………….………………………………………......27 3. CONFLICT IN THE WAKE OF THE EXPOSITION AND PROTEST…………………….52 4. NULLIFICATION, CONVENTION, AND THE ELECTION OF 1830…………………….76 5. THE RISE OF CALHOUN AND THE BUILDING OF NULLIFICATION POWER…….100 6. THE TARIFF OF 1832 AND NULLIFICATION………………………………………..…124 7. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………...150 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………....166 1. INTRODUCTION “I am a disunionist! I am a traitor!” The words of Congressmen Robert Barnwell Rhett reverberated through the hall in Columbia, South Carolina, where Rhett and his fellow States’ Rights activists met on September 29, 1830. The stirring oration included the revelation that George Washington, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Jefferson were all disunionists and traitors in their time, “and they broke the British Empire and redrew the map of the world with the sword.” He continued that under the current administration, the Union had no choice but to dissolve. “It requires no conspiracy to destroy—no exertion on our part to drag it to its dissolution,” he said. “It goes down with the inevitable weight of its own gravitation, into that dark abyss of anarchy and ruin, where all tyrannies have fallen.” To end his speech, Rhett asserted that if his sentiments constituted him as a disunionist and a traitor, then “I am a disunionist! I am a traitor!” 1 Rhett’s words during the heated Nullification Crisis in South Carolina represented the sentiments of but a few radicals in the early years of the antebellum period, men who felt that actions perceived as threatening to the southern states required drastic actions to protect their rights, much like the colonies had against the British. Initially, these sentiments sparked tension not only between the northern and southern states, but also among southerners, as a war of words exploded over issues concerning states’ rights. Tension between the State Rights and Unionist factions characterized the South during the antebellum period, and their debates originated the ideology behind southern secession and 1 Speech in Columbia, S.C., 29 September 1830, Charleston Mercury , 19 October 1830. 1 eventually, the South’s entry into the Civil War. Print culture dominated American society, creating a public dependent on the printed word for information, communication, and entertainment, via books, pamphlets, broadsides, magazines, and most importantly, newspapers. 2 Partisanship marked Southern newspapers of the day, making them at the very least a forum for expression of public opinion if not setters of the political agenda. 3 In many cases, politicians used newspapers as their official mouthpieces, occasionally to the extent of controlling the editorial position, as in Rhett’s case with the Charleston Mercury. In other cases, politically- conscious editors could not help but take sides as tensions mounted. South Carolina was anomalous in many ways. Its unique geography and demographics created an economic dependence on agriculture exceeding that of any other southern state, and its aristocratic origins created a ruling planter class intent on preserving its slave-driven way of life as well as its political and social dominance. These attributes created a radical element that advocated disunion earlier and with more vigor than any other Southern state. This element produced the Nullification Crisis and test oath controversy of the 1830s, led the Bluffton movement in favor of Texas annexation, instigated the Nashville Convention and South Carolina’s first secession crisis following the Compromise of 1850, crippled an anti-slavery northern congressman, attempted to coerce other states into secession before the 1860 election, and passed the first ordinance of secession after Lincoln had won. It easily could be argued that, had this radical element not existed, South Carolina would not have seceded, the other southern states would have remained similarly complacent, and the Civil War would have been avoided. 2 See for example David Crowley and Paul Heyer, eds., Communication in History: Technology, Culture, Society , 2 nd ed. (White Plains, NY: Longman, 1995); Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1994); and Paul Starr, The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communication (New York: Basic Books, 2004). 3 Gerald Baldasty, “The Press and Politics in the Age of Jackson,” Journalism Monographs 89 (1984); Carol Sue Humphrey, The Press of the Young Republic, 1783-1833 (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1996); Wm. David Sloan, “The Partisan Press, 1783-1833,” in The Age of Mass Communication , ed. Wm.