use of force.[1] From all sides came testimony that everything was promising for a reduction of the tariff, as both parties now seemed to admit the necessity of it.[2] The question still remained, however: Would it be a reduction acceptable to the State Rights party?
Some men, however, believed that no reduction of the tariff would be voted, because there was a party in the North just as desirous of a separation of the sections as any faction in South Carolina. According to this view, the tariff advocates not favored by the taxes desired disunion, and the aristocracy in both sections saw in disunion a "multiplication of offices and taxes by which alone they can live without labor on the sweat and toil of the people." Other men believed that though the existing Congress would not reduce the tariff, the composition of the new Congress guaranteed a reduction which could be accomplished by special session in April or May.[3]
- ↑ Calhoun Correspondence: Calhoun to J. E. Calhoun, January 10, 1833.
- ↑ Mountaineer, January 12, 1833; Messenger, January 23; Niles' Register, January 5.
- ↑ Van Buren Papers: Michael Hoffman to Van Buren, December 7, 19, 1832; Hoffman to A. C. Flagg, December 18; T. H. Benton to Van Buren, December 16.
