Transcript The Mexican War - White Plains Public Schools

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
• WAR
•
“FREE ENJOYMENT OF THEIR LIBERTY AND
PROPERTY”
•
“ALL THE RIGHTS” OF AMERICANS
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