Texas Annexation
Texas annexation by the United
States became an issue immediately following Texas independence and was overwhelmingly affirmed by a Texas referendum
representing the desires of Texans to unite with their homeland. But annexation
would take not take place for another nine years. By 1844, Northern notions of
Manifest Destiny and Southern fears of future abolition drove the issue to the
forefront, enabling President Tyler, an ardent expansionist, to sign a joint
resolution for annexation before his administration ended in early 1845.
Initial Setbacks to Texas Annexation
Annexation efforts were first
rejected by President Andrew Jackson. Jackson
knew that annexation would be contentious, particularly in the North where the
prospect of one or more new slave states entering the Union
was anathema. Additionally, Jackson did not want
to hurt the presidential chances of Martin Van Buren who, in 1836, was Jackson’s choice as a
successor.
There were constitutional
issues as well. National leaders like Daniel Webster and John Quincy Adams
questioned the constitutionality of annexing an independent republic. Texas was not a U.S.
territory; it was the Lone
Star Republic
with its own Congress. Opponents of this view argued that Texas
had, indirectly, been part of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase
and was thus already annexed. Other views noted that the Constitution was mute on the issue.
The Propaganda Effect of John
C. Calhoun
In 1841 John Tyler became the
first “accidental” president following the untimely death of William Henry
Harrison; Van Buren had not achieved reelection. Unable to affect domestic
change following the mass resignation of his Cabinet, Tyler
turned to foreign affairs, determined to resurrect the Texas annexation issue.
Tyler’s second Secretary of State, Abel Upshur, began
working on an annexation treaty. Upon Upshur’s death, John C. Calhoun continued
the process. The propaganda issues involved alleged British influence in Texas, postulating that Britain determined to end slavery
in the republic in return for commercial preferences. This outraged the South.
For the North, according to Calhoun’s propaganda, Texas annexation would open rich new markets
for their manufactures.
The Election of 1844 Decides
the Issue
Although Texas annexation exerted much of Congressional
and Presidential energy throughout 1844, the national election – at least for
James K Polk and the Democratic Party, sealed the deal as a popular mandate by
the electorate. The popular vote, however, demonstrated polarization on the
issue: Polk’s margin of victory was only 1%.
Henry Clay, the Whig
candidate, switched positions on Texas
annexation during the campaign. This cost him crucial votes in New York and Michigan
where the Liberty Party candidate, James G. Birney, siphoned off enough popular
votes to award those states’ electoral votes to Polk. The Liberty Party
strongly opposed annexation, running on an abolitionist platform.
On December 3, 1844,
President Tyler declared that, “A controlling majority of the people…have
declared in favor of immediate annexation.” Having been unable to employ his
treaty-making powers successfully in the wake of a Senate rejection,
pro-annexation forces used a joint resolution of Congress to bring the Lone Star Republic into the Union.
Aftermath of Annexation
Despite Mexican threats of
war, no conflict arose. The Mexican-American War, however, coming later in the
Polk administration, was a direct byproduct of annexation, focusing on border
discrepancies. It was this discrepancy that prompted Polk to order Brigadier
General Zachary Taylor into “disputed” territory north of the Rio
Grande that, historically and according to maps of the time period,
clearly belonged to Mexico.
But the fever of Manifest
Destiny was sweeping the nation and Polk had promised to annex all land up to
the Pacific. Texas annexation was merely the
first phase of a long-term policy to expand into California
and to solidify U.S. claims
in Oregon.
References:
Frederick Merk, History of the Westward Movement (Alfred
A. Knopf,
1978)
Manifest Destiny and Mission
in American History
(Random House, 1963)
Slavery and the Annexation of Texas
(Alfred A. Knopf,
1972)
Anders Stephanson, Manifest Destiny: American Expansionism and
the
Empire of Right (Hill & Wang, 1995)
Albert K. Weinberg, Manifest Destiny: A Study of Nationalist
Expansion in
American History (Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1958)
Published March 29, 2010 in Suite101 by M.Streich. copyright
No comments:
Post a Comment