In the antebellum era there was an inextricable link between the issue of slavery, the demand for states' rights, and the weakening of the federal platform. These rights reserved a number of powers for state governments, powers that the federal government could not touch. The divisions caused by the issue of slavery led the South to reclaim these rights, as the founding fathers had previously limited them, to ratify a Constitution and guarantee a united nation. The reason these two issues became so closely related can be seen in the federal reaction to the growing economic and social tensions between the North and the South. Economically, the North was developing industrially and commercially, while the South remained in the agricultural sector, heavily dependent on slave ownership. In the North, an economic system that saw no need for slavery, combined with distaste for the South's proslavery ideology, led to the development of an abolitionist fervor in the North that condemned their counterpart's way of life. It was political involvement in attempting to pacify a divided nation that intensified the struggle between Southern plantation owners and Northern industrialists for control of the federal government, ultimately triggering Southern demands for states' rights. The South believed that such a method of self-government was the only way to protect the practice of slavery and, consequently, their own livelihood, as the federal government was unwilling to give them what they wanted. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The very different economies of the North and South served to increase the South's demand for states' rights. The South maintained a cotton economy, the most important feature of which was the plantation system, a system dependent on slavery, while the North was experiencing rapid industrial and commercial expansion. During the first phase of industrial expansion, the North saw the development of the textile industry, a factory system based on the extensive use of machinery and the employment of a large workforce. Developments were rapid; by mid-century, successful industrial states contained nearly five hundred factories and employed nearly 100,000 workers. As in the South, the need for slave labor was not evident in the new Northern economy, as the focus was on skilled workers. The success found in the North has only worsened relations between the two poles of the United States, with the South denouncing the alternative work system practiced in the North. The relationship between the issue of slavery and states' rights is clearly seen when examining the federal government's response to these new economic developments. The English had begun their industrial transition much earlier, around 1780, meaning they produced and exported large quantities of goods, and by the mid-nineteenth century they were producing half of the world's textile output. In the United States, however, Southern cotton still accounted for nearly half the value of total exports in 1834. Therefore, to protect the new growing industry from rival British experts, the federal government introduced a series of tariffs on exports, culminating in the Tariff of 1832, raising the tax on foreign goods to 50%. The South saw this as an "oppressively high" protective tariff, which encouraged the growth of antislavery settlements in the North. This was because the export of raw materials to Great Britain fueled the southern economy, but the high taxes onexports to the United States meant that Britain had less money to buy southern cotton. The result of this saw a Southern determination to devise barriers against violations of their rights, and the Nullification Crisis of November 1832 saw the first major call for states' rights in response to federal intervention. South Carolina declared the tariff null and void, threatening to secede if it was not removed. Considering this extreme reaction, John Ashworth suggests that it was the federal government's "support" of an anti-slavery economy that drove many states' rights advocates out of the Democratic Party. The South sincerely feared the subversion of its slave system, and so the demand for states' rights arose as a solution. The issue of states' rights arose not only because of economic differences, but also because of the extreme social tensions that were becoming evident. When the North lost the need to own slaves, many developed thoughts that resembled the abolitionist mentality of the early days. Because of such a wide economic gap, many Northerners felt compelled to limit the effects of slavery, and this occurred through feverish speeches and writings. The focus of the early abolitionists was the attack on the South's slave ideology, the most important text being "Uncle Tom's Cabin" by Harriet Beecher, which sold 3,000 copies on its first day of publication. Beecher's text infuriated Southerners, drawing attention to the cruelties of slavery and bringing much support to the practice of abolitionist writing, evidenced by its popularity. Likewise, in 1816, Presbyterian minister George Bourne challenged slave owners by suggesting that whenever Southerners were challenged on the issue of slavery, “they were soon choked, for they had a negro stuck in their throats.” Thus it was that Northern abolitionists began to attack time-honored practices with extreme criticism, often targeting the "ideological and spiritual" importance of slave owners, which infuriated the South. Not only had early abolitionists contested the Southern ideology, but had also begun to infiltrate their way of life, influencing a violent slave revolt in Virginia in 1831. For a society concerned with upholding the honor of deeply held beliefs, Northern criticism was not received well. , pushing Southerners even further into the hands of those who had already called for the exercise of states' rights. Furthermore, it was federal attempts to cool the dangerous social tension over slavery across the country that truly saw the demand for states' rights become a majority in the South. Tensions between the two halves of the country are growing, the decision doesn't help us of the government to call the law Kansas Nebraska. The act allowed popular sovereignty in the states of Kansas and Nebraska, regarding the issue of slavery, in the hope that this would begin to appease the nation. However, due to a strong resolution to eradicate slavery, many Northerners flocked to the two states to secure a favorable outcome. This was apparently the tip of the iceberg for Southerners, who now feared, real and imagined, that a hostile Northern majority would subvert their slave system. This act made it clear how the federal government would stand on the issue of slavery. During the Nullification Crisis, the southern state of South Carolina was deemed "traitor" by President Andrew Jackson, but Northerners who acted to change the outcome intended for popular sovereignty were simply allowed to do so. Southern anger had reached its peak and.