Close Read: Spanish American WarCR

Objective

Should the United States invade Cuba in 1898? Or should the United States not engage Spain in war?

CRIntroduction

In 1898, the questions above were being debated by Americans across the nation after tension in Cuba reached a boiling point. Fueled by newspaper reporters & politicians, the intense debate came to a pinnacle at the start of the Spanish American War.

Pre-Analysis: Before closely analyzing the dawn of the Spanish American War, first watch this video to gather some pertinent background information. Prior to watching the video, read the questions below. While viewing the video, answer the questions below.

1) How many miles from the United States is Cuba? a. 90b. 70c. 50

2) Whose colony was Cuba? a. Mexicob. Spain c. Brazil

3) What did Cuba export? a. Sugar, Fruit, and Wheat b. Sugar, Cotton, and Tea c. Fruit, Sugar, and Tobacco

4) Were American businessmen investing money into Cuba? a. Yes b. No

5) What was the name of the Navy ship that President McKinley moved into Havana? a. USS Oklahoma b. USS Montanac. USS Maine

6) What happened to the US Navy ship that had been moved into Havana? a. It was destroyed by a storm b. Nothing happened to it c. An explosion tore it apart & many died

7) When did the United States invade Cuba? a. June 1898

b. December 1899c. April 1898

Debate - Should America declare war on Spain & invade Cuba?

In 1898, there were many opinions as to whether or not the United States should invade Cuba. In this debate, you will be assigned a position - for or against war with Spain. In order to prepare for your classroom debate, please review the documents included below for your position & answer the appropriate questions. Review these individually. When your whole team has finished reviewing the documents, share & compare answers to the analysis questions.

When you have completed reviewing the documents take the following steps as both a team & individual to prepare for the in-class debate:

1) Begin working on the document titled “Team Position Outline”.

2) Review the debate protocol & based on student interest, assign roles to each student in your group. Note: Each role may have up to two students working together - but no more than 2!

3) Based on the documents provided, and the thoughts your team generates in the “Team Position Outline”, begin working on your role and assigned task in preparation for the debate. Prepare your remarks or your questions.

4) Review the rubric provided. Ensure that you are aware of the expectations for your participation in this debate.

5) Be ready to debate!

Debate Documents

“For the invasion of Cuba”

“Against the invasion of Cuba”

Team Position Outline

Debate protocol

Team Roles

Rubric

Analysis Questions:

Do you think this song was meant to inspire nationalism? Why? Cite textual evidence to support your answer!

According to this song - why should the United States declare war on Spain?

For the Invasion of Cuba

Document 1: Awake US! - song & lyrics by Mary Elizabeth Lamb 1898

This song was written in 1898. It was rushed to print between the sinking of the Maine in February 1898 and the declaration of war on Spain in April 1898. The lyrics to the song are below:

Eagle soar on high, and sound the battle cry!

Verse 1: How proudly sailed the warship Maine,a Nation's pride, without a stain!A wreck she lies, her sailors slain.By Treacherous butchers, paid by Spain!

Refrain / Chorus: Eagle soar on high,And sound the battle cryWave the starry flag!In mire it shall not drag!

Verse 2: Why does the breeze such sad thoughts bring, Like murmuring seas the echoes sing? Why do clouds thus backward roll. Like wave on wave, on rock on shoal!

Refrain / Chorus

Verse 3: Awake! Thy Stars and Stripes unfurl,And shot and shell and vengeance hurl!Though clouds gather, they will go,and sunlight follow after woe.

Refrain / Chorus

Awake! it is no dream; Dost hear the sailors scream?Comrades will you go?

Avenge the cruel blow!

Refrain / Chorus

And crush their marble heart!

Document 2: President William McKinley's war message to Congress April 1898

The forcible intervention of the United States as a neutral to stop the war, according to the large dictates of humanity and following many historical precedents [examples set before] where neighboring states have interfered to check the hopeless sacrifices of life by involvement in conflicts beyond their borders, is justifiable on rational grounds.

The grounds for such intervention may be briefly summarized as follows:

First, in the cause of humanity and to put an end to the barbarities, bloodshed, starvation, and horrible miseries now existing there....*

Second, we owe it to our citizens in Cuba to afford them that protection and indemnity for life and property which no government there can or will afford ....

Third, the right to intervene may be justified by the very serious injury to the commerce, trade, and business of our people, and by the wanton destruction of property and devastation of the island.

Fourth, and which is of the utmost importance.... With such a conflict waged for years in an island so near us and with which our people have such trade and business relations; when the lives and liberty of our citizens are in constant danger and their property destroyed and themselves ruined; where our trading vessels are liable to seizure and are seized at our very door by warships of a foreign nation, ... -- all these and others ... are a constant menace to our peace....

I have already transmitted to Congress the report... on the destruction of the battleship Maine... The destruction of that noble vessel has filled the national heart with inexpressible horror...The destruction of the Maine, by whatever exterior cause, is a patent and impressive proof of a state of things in Cuba that is intolerable....

The Spanish government cannot assure safety and security to a vessel of the American Navy in the harbor of Havana on a mission of peace, and rightfully there....

* The first reason refers to the reconcentration camps that the Spanish set up for Cubans to protect them from warfare in the countryside between Cuban rebels fighting for independence and the Spanish army. The government of Spain claimed they could protect their Cuban citizens there safely, but newspaper reports revealed horrible conditions and violence.

Analysis Questions:

1) McKinley lists 4 reasons he is urging Congress to declare war on Spain. List the four reasons below in your own words.

a) b) c) d)

2) Which reason is the most important, according to McKinley? Do you agree or disagree with him? Why or why not?

3) How could this primary source be used to gain support for declaring war on Spain?

Document 3: The Monroe Doctrine by James Monroe 1823

The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers....

The citizens of the United States cherish sentiments the most friendly, in favor of the liberty and happiness of their fellow men on that side of the Atlantic. In the wars of the European powers, in matters relating to themselves, we have never taken any part....

It is only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced, that we resent injuries, or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this hemisphere, we are, of necessity, more immediately connected....

We owe it, therefore, to candor, and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers, to declare, that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere, as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered, and shall not interfere. But with the governments who have declared their independence, and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration, and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling, in any other manner, their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States....

Analysis Questions:

1) When was this primary source written? Who is the author?

2) In the first paragraph, what does Monroe declare about the people and nations on the American continent? What does this mean?

3) In third paragraph, Monroe suggests that there is only one instance in which the United States would get involved with European powers. What is that instance?

4) How could this document be used in support of an argument for the US declaring war on Spain?

Document 4: Excerpt from Albert J. Beveridge’s Senate campaign speech - March of the Flag, September 16, 1898

Fellow citizens, — it is a noble land that God has given us; a land that can feed and clothe the world.... It is a mighty people that he has planted on this soil.... It is a glorious history our God has bestowed upon his chosen people; ... a history of soldiers who carried the flag across the blazing deserts and through the ranks of hostile mountains, even to the gates of sunset; a history of a multiplying people who overran a continent in half a century....

The Opposition tells us that we ought not to govern a people without their consent. I answer, The rule of liberty that all just government derives its authority from the consent of the governed, applies only to those who are capable of self-government. I answer, We govern the Indians without their consent, we govern our territories without their consent, we govern our children without their consent....

They ask us how we will govern these new possessions. I answer: ... If England can govern foreign lands, so can America. If Germany can govern foreign lands, so can America. If they can supervise protectorates, so can America…

What does all this mean for every one of us? It means opportunity for all the glorious young manhood of the republic—the most virile, ambitious, impatient, militant manhood the world has ever seen. It means that the resources and the commerce of these immensely rich dominions will be increased....

In Cuba, alone, there are 15,000,000 acres of forest unacquainted with the axe. There are exhaustless mines of iron.... There are millions of acres yet unexplored….

It means new employment and better wages for every laboring man in the Union....

Ah! as our commerce spreads, the flag of liberty will circle the globe.... And, as their thunders salute the flag, benighted peoples will know that the voice of Liberty is speaking, at last, for them; that civilization is dawning, at last, for them—Liberty and Civilization, those children of Christ's gospel....

Fellow Americans, we are God's chosen people....

Analysis Questions:

1) What emotions is Beveridge trying to evoke in the first paragraph? Cite textual evidence to support your claims.

2) Explain, in your own words, the main point of the 2nd paragraph of Beveridge’s speech.

3) Why does Beveridge support the US invasion of Cuba? What does he think the United States can gain from Cuba?

4) Why do you think this speech is called “March of the Flag”?

Against the Invasion of Cuba

Document 1: George Washington’s Farewell Address Sept. 19th, 1796 “As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot…Such attachment of a small or weak nation to a great and powerful nation dooms the smaller weaker nation to become a dependent of the great and powerful nation. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities... It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them. Taking care always to keep to ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. …"

Analysis Questions:

1) Who wrote this primary source? When was it written? Was it written before or after the time period you are debating in?

2) Is Washington arguing for or against alliances with other nations? Why?

3) Is Washington arguing for or against getting involved in foreign affairs? Why?

4) How can Washington’s suggestions be used as a foundation for an argument against invading Cuba?

Document 2: Platform of the American Anti-Imperialist League, 1899 - Following the Spanish American War, the United States occupied Cuba for many years & annexed the Philippines from Spain (formerly Spanish territory). This was not a popular political maneuver. The American Anti-Imperialist league was founded by a group of protesters who were against the Spanish - American War & the American occupation of Cuba & the Philippines. Below is their league’s platform.

We hold that the policy known as imperialism is hostile to liberty and tends towards militarism - as is evidenced in the case of Cuba, and an evil from which it has been our glory to be free. We regret that it has become necessary in the land of Washington and Lincoln to reaffirm that all men, of whatever race or color, are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We maintain that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed….We protest against the extension of American sovereignty [supreme power or authority] by Spanish methods.

We demand the immediate cessation of the war against liberty, begun by Spain….

If an Administration may with impunity [freedom from punishment] ignore the issues upon which it was chosen, deliberately create a condition of war anywhere on the face of the globe, debauch [violate] the civil service for spoils to promote the adventure, organize a truth suppressing censorship and demand of all citizens a suspension of judgment and their unanimous support while it chooses to continue the fighting, representative government is itself imperiled [endanger].

We hold, with Abraham Lincoln, that “no man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent. When the white man governs himself, that is self-government, but when governs himself and also governs another man, that is more than self-government - that is despotism”.

Analysis Questions:

1) According to the American Anti-Imperialist league, “...imperialism is hostile to liberty and tends towards militarism…”. What does this mean? What are the members of this league fearful or weary of?

2) What does “...governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed…” mean? How could that idea be used to argue against the war with Spain for Cuba’s independence?

3) The American Anti-Imperialist league was morally opposed to the invasion of Cuba. Why do you think that was based on this platform?

Document 3: - What is yellow journalism? What was its impact on the Spanish American War? Below is an excerpt of an article that appears on the website of the US Department of State. It summarizes the concept of yellow journalism it’s impact on the support for the Spanish American War.

U.S. Diplomacy and Yellow Journalism, 1895–1898

Yellow journalism was a style of newspaper reporting that emphasized sensationalism over facts. During its heyday in the late 19th century it was one of many factors that helped push the United States and Spain into war in Cuba and the Philippines, leading to the acquisition of overseas territory by the United States.

The term originated in the competition over the New York City newspaper market between major newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst. At first, yellow journalism had nothing to do with reporting, but instead derived from a popular cartoon strip. Published in color by Pulitzer’s New York World, the comic’s most well-known character came to be known as the Yellow Kid, and his popularity accounted in no small part for a tremendous increase in sales of the World. In 1896, in an effort to boost sales of his New York Journal, Hearst hired Outcault away from Pulitzer, launching a fierce bidding war between the two publishers over the cartoonist. Hearst ultimately won this battle, but Pulitzer refused to give in and hired a new cartoonist to continue

drawing the cartoon for his paper. This battle over the Yellow Kid and a greater market share gave rise to the term yellow journalism.

Once the term had been coined, it extended to the sensationalist style employed by the two publishers in their profit-driven coverage of world events, particularly developments in Cuba. Cuba had long been a Spanish colony and the revolutionary movement, which had been simmering on and off there for much of the 19th century, intensified during the 1890s. Many in the United States called upon Spain to withdraw from the island, and some even gave material support to the Cuban revolutionaries. Hearst and Pulitzer devoted more and more attention to the Cuban struggle for independence, at times accentuating the harshness of Spanish rule or the nobility of the revolutionaries, and occasionally printing rousing stories that proved to be false. This sort of coverage, complete with bold headlines and creative drawings of events, sold a lot of papers for both publishers.

The peak of yellow journalism, in terms of both intensity and influence, came in early 1898, when a U.S. battleship, the Maine, sunk in Havana harbor. The naval vessel had been sent there not long before in a display of U.S. power and, in conjunction with the planned visit of a Spanish ship to New York, an effort to defuse growing tensions between the United States and Spain. On the night of February 15, an explosion tore through the ship’s hull, and the Maine went down. Sober observers and an initial report by the colonial government of Cuba concluded that the explosion had occurred on board, but Hearst and Pulitzer, who had for several years been selling papers by fanning anti-Spanish public opinion in the United States, published rumors of plots to sink the ship. When a U.S. naval investigation later stated that the explosion had come from a mine in the harbor, the proponents of yellow journalism seized upon it and called for war. By early May, the Spanish-American War had begun.

Analysis Questions:

1) How did yellow journalism impact the start of the Spanish-American War?

2) According to this excerpt, was popular opinion and support for the war based on factual knowledge or shaped by a biased opinion? How do you know?

Document 4: Yellow Kid - Cartoon - the below cartoon was published in June of 1898 by Leon Barritt. It depicts two “yellow kids” - Joseph Pulitzer on the left the William Randolph Hearst on the right. Each man is pushing back on a set of blocks that spell war. The letters are large to reference the notion that the headlines both newspapers used to sensationalize an anti-Spanish sentiment & encourage war were getting bigger and bigger, until the front pages of their respective newspapers were simply three or four word headlines. Pulitzer and Hearst were two major newspaper owners in the 1890’s and are popularly known to have encouraged the brand of journalism known as “yellow journalism” - sensationalizing and exaggerating the news to sell papers.

On the left Putlizer’s yellow kid costume reads “Say young feller, vatch de tome. I’m de tome. You can’t but it. I’m a goot ting put don’t push me. See!” Putlizer’s odd accent here is mimicked to say “Say young feller - watch the tome. I’m the tome. You can’t buy it. I’m a good thing but don’t push me. See!” The word tome here means a book or scholarly work. Essentially, Pulitzer here is claiming that Hearst should watch his words & that Pulitzer is the “good thing” - or a scholarly newspaper that is providing people with knowledge. Implying that he is ethically, accurately and morally reporting on the tensions in Cuba & the potential Spanish - American War. But if he is pushed, he will do unethical things.

Hearst’s yellow smock reads “Say. This is my war - I bought and paid for it. And if you don’t stop bothering me about it, I’ll have you put off the earth - see!” This suggests that Hearst is threatening Pulitzer - he wants Pulitzer

to stop reporting on the war because Hearst bought and paid for it - so he sees himself as the owner of the war & the news reporting on the war.

The cartoonist here is mocking these two men, criticizing the American government for allowing the media to create a war, and informing citizens that the news reports they are reading, which urge strongly for war, are heavily biased.

Analysis Questions

1) How could this depiction of Yellow Journalism be used to argue against the US invasion of Cuba?

Team Position Outline

Team: _______________________________________

Use this document to outline your team’s argument & position. EVERY student should fill this out. Teams are expected to complete this document as a group.

Debate Context: It is March 10th 1898, a mere few weeks after the Maine has been destroyed in Havana Harbor. The country is closely watching and debating whether or not it should declare war on Spain & invade Cuba in support of the Cuban independence movement.

Debate Question: Should the US declare war on Spain & invade Cuba?

Team response to debate question (should be a COMPLETE sentence):

Reason / Argument 1:

Reason / Argument 2:

Reason / Argument 3:

Argument #1 (from above):

Supporting Evidence from Primary Source Documents:

Reasoning:

Argument #2 (from above):

Supporting Evidence from Primary Source Documents:

Reasoning:

Argument #3 (from above):

Supporting Evidence from Primary Source Documents:

Reasoning:

Debate Protocol

Debate Question: Should the United States declare war on Spain and invade Cuba?

Debate Format:

For the invasion of Cuba - Team position - 4 minutes ● Description of team’s argument ● WHY do they believe the US should invade Cuba?

Cross-Examination (of the argument presented by the “For” team, conducted by the “Against” team) - 3 minutes ● Team “Against” the invasion of Cuba questions the arguments made by the “For” team

○ Minimum of 3 questions○ Maximum of 5 questions ○ Each question may have 1 follow up question ONLY

Against the invasion of Cuba - Team position - 4 minutes ● Description of team’s argument ● WHY do they believe the US should NOT invade Cuba?

Cross-Examination (of the argument presented by the “Against” team, conducted by the “For” team) - 3 minutes ● “For” the invasion of Cuba questions the arguments made by the “Against” team

○ Minimum of 3 questions○ Maximum of 5 questions ○ Each question may have 1 follow up question ONLY

4 MINUTES PREP TIME - TEAM MEETINGS

“For” team Rebuttal - 3 minutes ● “For” team defends argument after questioning

“Against” team Rebuttal - 3 minutes ● “Against” team defends argument after questioning

Team Roles

(2) Team Leaders: - Responsible for the presentation of the team’s main argument - Responsible for organizing group

Task: Presentation of team’s argument & field questions under cross examination - Must have a clearly constructed argument with at least 3 claims - Each claim should be supported by both evidence from the documents, and relevant outside

information

Student #1 ______________________________________________

Student #2 ______________________________________________

(2) Cross Examiners: - Responsible for understanding team’s argument - Must review opposing team’s primary sources & predict opposition’s argument - Must make questions for opposing team to illustrate weaknesses in their argument

Task: Cross examine opposing team with a minimum of 3 questions, maximum of 5 questions - ONLY one follow up question per question - Do NOT become hostile or rude - Be persistent

Student #1 ____________________________________________

Student #2 ____________________________________________

(2) Rebuttal: - Responsible for strengthening argument after questioning - Responsible for emphasizing main points of the team’s argument

Task: Team Rebuttal - Clarifying position after cross examining & debate

Student #1 ___________________________________________

Student #2 ___________________________________________

Every student should know the team’s main arguments & their position

Rubric

Debate - Should the US invade Cuba?

3 2 1

Argument Arguments are clearly articulated, consistently. Arguments are coherent. Argument has at least 3

claims. When taken together, the arguments

Arguments are articulated, maybe

unclear at times, or at times are not coherent.

Argument does not have 3 distinct claims. When

Arguments are not articulated, are unclear, or at times are not coherent. Argument does not have 3 distinct claims. When

taken together, the

clearly articulate the team’s position.

taken together, the arguments do not clearly

articulate the team’s position.

arguments do not clearly articulate the team’s position. Argument is

rather weak.

Evidence Evidence from both the primary sources &

relevant outside sources are presented. Evidence supports and enhances the argument. Evidence has been thoughtfully

selected & well articulated.

Evidence is only presented from the primary sources or

relevant outside sources, not both. Evidence at

times supports the argument. Evidence is not

clearly explained or articulated.

Evidence is only presented from the primary sources or

relevant outside sources, not both. Evidence at

times supports the argument. Evidence is not

clearly explained or articulated.

Questioning Questions are clearly articulated, suggest that the argument has been

closely analyzed & listened to, and illustrate

the cross examiner's understanding of the opposing argument.

Questions are not always clearly articulated, suggest that the

argument has been vaguely analyzed &

listened to. Questions are rhetorical, unclear, or too

challenging to answer.

Questions suggest that the cross examiners did not pay attention to the

opposing team’s argument. Questions are vague or have yes or no

answers. Questions show little to no thought.

Defense Answers to questions under cross examination

are clear & illustrate a strong understanding of

team’s position.

Answers to questions under cross examination are vague & illustrate a

moderate understanding of team’s position.

Answers to questions under cross examination are weak & illustrate no understanding of team’s

position.

Rebuttal Clarifies teams position following cross

examination - emphasizes all of the main points of

the argument.

Some what clarifies teams position following cross

examination - emphasizes some of main points of

the argument.

Does not clarify teams position following cross

examination - emphasizes few of the main points of

the argument.

Speaking Voice & Preparation

Speakers are clear, can be heard, and

demonstrate a high level of preparedness.

Speakers are unclear at times, can be heard

mostly, and demonstrate a level of preparedness.

Speakers are unclear, often times can’t be

heard, and demonstrate a low level of preparedness.