CALHOUN, JOHN CALDWELL American statesman and parliamentarian, was born in Abbeville district, S.C., on March 18, 5782. He was of Scotch-Irish descent, his ancestors who came to America having settled originally in Penn sylvania during the first part of the 18th century and later gone southward across the mountains to the up-country of South Carolina. Calhoun's family were people of moderate means, own ing but few negro slaves, and more representative of the frontier farming class than of the established and wealthy slave-holding families of the southern coastal plain section. His father, Patrick Calhoun, was a man of some prominence in his community, repre senting it in the colonial assembly, and later in the State legisla ture. Calhoun's mother's name was Martha Caldwell.
As a small boy, Calhoun had little opportunity for education, but when he was 12 years of age he was sent to live for a year in the family of his brother-in-law, the Rev. Moses Waddell (177o-184o), a Presbyterian minister, who subsequently, from 1819 to 1829, was president of the University of Georgia. Later, under the direction of the Rev. Waddell, he prepared for college, entering the junior class at Yale in 1802. In 1804 he graduated from Yale with distinction, and commenced the study of law at a law school at Litchfield, Conn. Thereafter, he completed his law studies in a law office in Charleston, S.C., and in 1807 was admitted to the bar, and began practice in his native Abbeville district. Almost at once he entered politics. In 18o8 and 1809 he was a member of the South Carolina legislature, and from 1811 to 1817 he served as a member of the House of Representatives of the national legislature.
In the year that Calhoun entered Congress, he was married to a wealthy cousin, Floride Bonneau Calhoun, whose family was identified with the Charleston aristocracy, and this, together with the acquisition of a plantation and negroes, associated Calhoun's interests with those of the slave-holding and propertied classes of the South. However, when he ran for Congress in 1811, he advocated a warlike policy against Great Britain more as a repre sentative of the frontier which was not concerned with British interference with shipping, but thought that her influence among the Indians was inimical to the western expansion of the United States. When Calhoun entered Congress, Henry Clay was then speaker of the House and one of the leaders of the group that was eager for war with England. Clay named Calhoun to a place on the important committee on foreign affairs. This com mittee, of which Calhoun soon became the dominating member, recommended the adoption of resolutions urging war with Eng land. These resolutions were adopted by the House of Repre sentatives, and it is estimated that no other two members of Congress were more influential in precipitating the War of 1812 than were Clay and Calhoun.
During the period of the embargo and during the War of 1812, manufacturing thrived in America, but with peace between the United States and Great Britain, and the termination of the Napoleonic regime on the continent of Europe, the American manufacturers began to feel the effects of European competition. In discussion of the tariff proposals that resulted, Calhoun, in 1816, delivered a speech in favour of protection. Ever after this speech was cited by his opponents in subsequent tariff contro versies as evidence of his inconsistency as an opponent of pro tection. At this time Calhoun also advocated internal improve ments and was an exponent of the "Nationalism" advocated by the younger men of the West who were intent upon building up that section of the country and developing its resources.
In 1817 Calhoun became secretary of war in Monroe's cabinet, the duties of which office he is credited with having performed with much ability. Following his service in Monroe's cabinet, he was, in 1824, elected vice president of the United States, and again re-elected in 1828. In 1832, in the course of the famous nullification controversy, he resigned from the office of vice president and was elected to the U.S. Senate, where he voiced the political philosophy of "States' rights" on behalf of the con servative slave-holding interests of the South, forming one of a remarkable company of legislators who comprised the Senate at that time. In 1844 Calhoun's name was considered for the presidency, but he declined to become a candidate, and in that year was appointed by President Tyler to the office of secretary of State, serving until March 1845. Upon his retirement as secretary of State he returned to the Senate, where he remained until he died in 185o.
His extraordinary faculties of mind were applied very arduously to the fundamental principles of the American governmental structure, and he is justly looked upon as one of the most astute of political thinkers among the public men of the United States. The significance of his career, aside from his endeavours for supremacy in the field of national politics at a time when affairs were in the hands of men of striking personalities and unusual capacities, lies in his advocacy of the doctrine of "States rights," as it related to the interests of the slave-owning aristocracy of the South and of the concomitant theory of nullification. It has been sometimes thought that Calhoun's political philosophy was developed as a result of his failure to attain a dominating position in the national Government and to achieve the presidency of the United States, to which it is said he aspired, and that he naturally turned his energies to strengthening those political entities, his own State, and his own section, in which he had come to occupy a place of supremacy. It is, however, more reasonable to explain his support of the theories to which he adhered upon the ground that they were the result of a class and economic consciousness of the group to which he belonged as an integral part and which as a leader he was called upon to def end •in the realm of political thought. The South as a section was losing its place of dominance politically and economically, and, in addition, was on the defensive with respect to the morality of the institution of slavery. Cal houn's philosophy served to check the opposing forces with a threat and eventually, when put into practice by secession, pre cipitated civil war.
The immediate cause of the controversy leading to an advocacy of the States' rights or strict construction theories was the tariff. In 1824 there was a very large increase in protective duties. In 5828 a still higher tariff act, the so-called "tariff of abomina tions" was passed. The acts were disadvantageous to the agri cultural South and of advantage to the North. The power of Congress to pass these discriminatory laws was questioned, and Calhoun, in an essay, "The South Carolina Exposition," took the position that the Federal Constitution was a compact between sovereign States by which each delegated to the central Govern ment thereby set up certain limited powers. The acts of the U.S. Government must be within the sphere of power contemplated by the compact. Acts beyond the scope of the delegated power a State might in the exercise of its sovereignty nullify, or it might, within its rights, even withdraw altogether from the Union. This was not a new theory in American government, but Calhoun so clarified, expounded and amplified the "State's rights" philo sophy that he became inseparably identified with it.
In 1832, Calhoun, who had up to that time been a regular Jeffersonian Democrat, broke with Jackson, who was head of the Party, arid during the remainder of the Jackson regime, was a severe critic of Jacksonianism. He attacked the spoils system and opposed the removal of the Government deposits from the U.S. Bank. In 1831, in an "Address to the People of South Carolina," he elaborated his views as to the nature of the Union, and in 1832 addressed an essay letter to the governor of South Carolina, stating in final form his theory of the American govern mental system. This last document resulted in the "nullification" by South Carolina of the Tariff acts of 1828 and 1832. There followed in 1833 the historic debate between Webster and Calhoun on the so-called "Force Bill," which had been introduced into the U.S. Senate to enlarge the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and to give Jackson, as president, power to cope with the South Carolina situation. Webster maintained the doctrine of Federal supremacy as the expounder and interpreter of its own powers under the Constitution, while Calhoun argued the cause of State sovereignty. The opposing sides in this famous nullification controversy compromised. Congress reduced duties to an ultimate revenue basis, and South Carolina repealed the acts of nullifica tion. Its consequence was, however, an acceptance by the South of Calhoun's doctrine as a protective political philosophy for slavery. To it and to Calhoun the slave-holding interests turned for a constitutional argument against any interference with the controverted institution. As the abolition movement developed and the question of the extension of slavery became a bitter one, it was Calhoun whose voice was heard in the Senate protesting on constitutional grounds against receiving abolition petitions, and it was under Calhoun's leadership that the forces opposing the Wilmot Proviso against the extension of slavery in the territory acquired from Mexico were marshalled and the Proviso defeated in the Senate. Calhoun took the extreme position that it was the duty of the U.S. Government under the Constitution to pre vent any interference with slavery in the territories. In the course of the great debate on the admission of California into the Union as a free State, Calhoun died. In that controversy Webster made his famous "Seventh of March" speech, and Clay achieved his last great feat as peacemaker by the Compromise of 185o. Had Calhoun lived, the Compromise of 185o might never have been made.
Calhoun was tall and slender, and in his later years emaciated. His features were angular and somewhat harsh, but he had a striking face and very fine eyes of a brilliant dark blue. To his slaves he was just and kind. He lived the modest unassuming life of a country planter when at home, and at Washington lived as unostentatiously as possible, consistent with his public duties and position. His character in other respects was of stainless integrity.