Page:Nullification Controversy in South Carolina.djvu/79

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
60
Nullificatiom Controversy in South Carolina


Another large class, then becoming known as the Union party, decried nullification in any form whatsoever. To them the doctrine, however disguisedly spelled revolution.[1]

During the greater part of 1830, men were reading and talking, and perhaps thinking; they were preparing themselves to be aligned when party lines became rigidly and severely drawn. By the middle of the year the moderates seemed to be gaining the upper hand in a way that set the action party on its guard.[2] Judge William Smith, General Stephen D. Miller, and General James Blair were now looked upon by the nullification supporters as prominent among the advocates of moderation whom it would be desirable to crush or cajole into shifting their position. More work of education had to be done in the cause of nullification; the people did not understand it well enough. Pickens thought the Nullification party was neglecting its campaign of education by not publishing more pamphlets, which he considered

  1. Patriot, Jiily and August, 1830; Columbia Southern Times & State Gazette, July 8. On this date the Southern Times took this new title. It will still be referred to hereafter simply as the Times, The Unionists will receive more attention below.
  2. Hammond Papers: Pickens to Hammond, June 26, 1830.