THE MEXICAN WAR & AFTERMATH

APUSH - SPICONARDI

THE ROAD TO WAR• PRESIDENT POLK’S GOALS

• REDUCE THE TARIFF

• REESTABLISH AN INDEPENDENT TREASURY SYSTEM

• SETTLE THE DISPUTE OVER THE OREGON TERRITORY

• BRING CALIFORNIA INTO THE UNION• THIS WOULD PROVE DIFFICULT

THE ROAD TO WAR

• POLK DISPATCHED EMISSARIES TO NEGOTIATE WITH MEXICAN OFFICIALS FOR CALIFORNIA ($30 MILLION)

• MEXICO REFUSED TO NEGOTIATE

• POLK SENDS GEN. ZACHARY TAYLOR AND MILITARY FORCES TO DISPUTED LAND BETWEEN NUECES RIVER AND RIO GRANDE

• POLK ORDERED NAVY TO SEIZE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND ENCOURAGED CALIFORNIANS TO SEEK INDEPENDENCE

MEXICAN WAR 1846 -1848

• WAR BREAKS OUT

• FIRST AMERICAN CONFLICT FOUGHT PRIMARILY ON FOREIGN SOIL

• FIRST CONFLICT IN WHICH AMERICANS OCCUPIED A FOREIGN CAPITAL

• MOST AMERICANS SUPPORTED THE WAR

• THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION IN THE NORTH

We were sent to provoke a fight,

but it was essential that Mexico should commence it

[Mexico] has passed the boundary of the United States, has

invaded our territory, and shed American

blood upon the American soil

THE MEXICAN WAR: WAS IT IN NATIONAL INTERESTS?

• READ YOUR ASSIGNED DOCUMENTS AND COMPLETE THE “T-CHART” OF ARGUMENTS FOR AND ARGUMENTS AGAINST EXPANSION

THE MEXICAN WAR: WAS IT IN NATIONAL INTERESTS?

ARGUMENTS FOR EXPANSION ARGUMENTS AGAINST EXPANSION

HENRY DAVID THOREAU’S “CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE”• TRANSCENDENTALIST,

HENRY DAVID THOREAU, WAS AGAINST THE MEXICAN WAR AND OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT POLICIES.

• REFUSED TO PAY TAXES

• WROTE “CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE”

• CAME TO INFLUENCE GANDHI AND MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

“Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to be on the alert to point out its faults, and do better than it would have them?”

TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO

• AFTER DECISIVE VICTORIES, MEXICO SIGNED THE TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO

• CONFIRMED THE ANNEXATION OF TEXAS

• CEDED CALIFORNIA AND NEW MEXICO FOR $15 MILLION

One of the most unjust [wars] ever waged by a

stronger nation against

a weaker nation.

RACE, SLAVERY, AND MANIFEST DESTINY

• THE MEXICAN WAR WOULD RESULT IN UP TO 100,000 SPANISH-SPEAKING MEXICANS AND 150,000 INDIANS INHABITING THE NEWLY ACQUIRED TERRITORIES

• TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO HAD GUARANTEED MALE CITIZENS

• “FREE ENJOYMENT OF THEIR LIBERTY AND PROPERTY”

• “ALL THE RIGHTS” OF AMERICANS

• WAR WAS SEEN AS THE TRIUMPH OF CIVILIZATION AND LIBERTY OVER THE MONGREL RACES OF MEXICO AND THE TYRANNY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH• BUT WERE THESE “MONGREL RACES

WORTHY” OF LIBERTY?

Nor have we ever incorporated into the Union any but

the Caucasian race. Ours is a government of the white man.

WILMOT PROVISO• BEFORE THE WAR ENDED, AN

ANTI-SLAVERY DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN FROM PENNSYLVANIA PROPOSED THE WILMOT PROVISO

• PROPOSED BANNING SLAVERY IN ANY TERRITORIES GAINED FROM THE MEXICAN WAR

• WHIGS AND ANTI-SLAVERY DEMOCRATS PASSED THE BILL IN THE HOUSE, BUT FAILED THE SENATE

• THE BILL CAUSED EXPANSIONIST TO BECOME EVEN MORE AGGRESSIVE

Rep. David Wilmot (D-PA)

“[The Wilmot Proviso as if by magic, brought to a head the

great question that is about to divide the American people”

WALT WHITMAN, POET AND EDITOR OF THE BROOKLYN EAGLE, EDITORIAL SEPTEMBER 1, 1847

The question whether or not there shall be slavery in the new territories…is a question between the grand body of white workingmen, the millions of mechanics, farmers, and operatives of our country, with their interests on the one side – and the interests of the few thousand rich, “polished,” and aristocratic owners of slaves at the South, on the other side.

Experience has proved…that a stalwart mass of respectable workingmen, cannot exist, much less flourish, in a thorough slave State. Let any one think for a moment what a different appearance New York, Pennsylvania, or Ohio, would present – how much less sturdy independence and family happiness there would be – were slaves the workmen there, instead of each man as a general thing being his own workman…

Slavery in a good thing enough…to the rich – the one out of thousands; but it is destructive to the dignity and independence of all who work, and to labor itself…All practice and theory…are strongly arrayed in favor of limiting slavery to where it already exists.

FREE SOIL PARTY• THE SENATE’S REJECTION OF THE WILMOT

PROVISO LED ACCUSATIONS THAT SOUTHERN POLITICIANS WERE PART OF A “SLAVE POWER” CONSPIRACY

• IN 1848, OPPONENTS OF SLAVERY FORMED THE FREE SOIL PARTY

• PLATFORM

• SLAVERY WAS A THREAT TO REPUBLICANISM

• SLAVERY THREATENED THE JEFFERSONIAN “EMPIRE OF LIBERTY”

• FREE MEN ON FREE SOIL WAS MORALLY AND ECONOMICALLY SUPERIOR TO SLAVERY

• FREDERICK DOUGLAS ENDORSED THE FREE SOIL STRATEGY

• WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON CONDEMNED THE FREE SOILERS’ FOCUS ON WHITE FREEHOLDING FARMING AS RACIST “WHITEMANISM”

FREE SOIL PARTY