"Disunion by force is treason"
About this Quote
The terse verdict, "Disunion by force is treason", crystallizes Andrew Jacksons response to the Nullification Crisis of 1832-33. Confronted with South Carolinas attempt to nullify federal tariffs and threaten secession, Jackson cut through legalistic hedging with a constitutional claim and a moral warning. The Union, he argued in his Proclamation to the People of South Carolina on December 10, 1832, is not a temporary pact among sovereign states but a government established by the people. Taking up arms to sever it is not an eccentric theory of states rights; it is levying war against the United States, which the Constitution names as treason.
The line draws a bright boundary between political dissent and violent rebellion. Jackson conceded that citizens could debate, vote, petition, and seek repeal of unjust laws. What he refused was the idea that a state could, by force, nullify national authority and fracture the Union without committing a crime against the constitutional order. Coming from a Southern slaveholder and champion of states rights on many issues, the assertion carried special weight. It announced that loyalty to the Union superseded local loyalties when the survival of the nation was at stake.
Jackson paired this uncompromising doctrine with practical statecraft. He secured congressional authorization to use force if necessary, yet supported Henry Clays Compromise Tariff of 1833 to lower rates and give South Carolina a dignified retreat. The combination embodied his political theory: firmness about the principle of union, flexibility about policy.
The phrase echoes forward to the secession crisis of 1860-61. Abraham Lincoln would similarly treat armed secession as insurrection, not a lawful act. Jacksons formulation thus sits at the hinge of American constitutional development, rejecting the compact theory that made secession a right and asserting a national sovereignty rooted in the people. It remains a stark reminder that the line between argument and violence is also the line between politics and treason.
The line draws a bright boundary between political dissent and violent rebellion. Jackson conceded that citizens could debate, vote, petition, and seek repeal of unjust laws. What he refused was the idea that a state could, by force, nullify national authority and fracture the Union without committing a crime against the constitutional order. Coming from a Southern slaveholder and champion of states rights on many issues, the assertion carried special weight. It announced that loyalty to the Union superseded local loyalties when the survival of the nation was at stake.
Jackson paired this uncompromising doctrine with practical statecraft. He secured congressional authorization to use force if necessary, yet supported Henry Clays Compromise Tariff of 1833 to lower rates and give South Carolina a dignified retreat. The combination embodied his political theory: firmness about the principle of union, flexibility about policy.
The phrase echoes forward to the secession crisis of 1860-61. Abraham Lincoln would similarly treat armed secession as insurrection, not a lawful act. Jacksons formulation thus sits at the hinge of American constitutional development, rejecting the compact theory that made secession a right and asserting a national sovereignty rooted in the people. It remains a stark reminder that the line between argument and violence is also the line between politics and treason.
Quote Details
| Topic | Justice |
|---|
More Quotes by Andrew
Add to List
