Historical History #3: William Ellery Channing and John O’Sullivan Ashleyann Mabatid Azusa Pacific University College
William Ellery Channing and John O’Sullivan Annexation of Texas in 1845 was about adding Texas to be a part of the United States. It would be the 28th state and it was on December 29, 1845. But before it happened there was a whole debate on adopting Texas. William Ellery Channing and John O’ Sullivan have different views on the annexation of Texas, they were either for it or against it. Their arguments for the annexation, Channing was for it and O’ Sullivan wasn’t. The U.S. delays the annexation of Texas because they didn’t want to ruin their relationship with Mexico. Mexico told the United States
…show more content…
He saw the annexation as “inevitable” and noted that “her Convention has undoubtedly ratified the acceptance” of the proposal (O’Sullivan). John O’Sullivan was for the annexation of Texas. He, like Channing before him, ignores the reasons given and the reasons in reality, behind the movement for Texas to separate itself from Mexico and to seek admission to the United States as a coequal member of the Union. His only nod to the circumstances in question comes when he advises his listeners to “cease to denounce and vilify” everything connected with the annexation” (O’Sullivan). For him, morality does not enter into the question, save as to the matter of the immorality of maintaining a no longer tenable position. That is, it was foolish and wrong to oppose annexation because it was an accomplished fact. He claims that there was “no obligation of duty toward Mexico” (O’Sullivan) while ignoring the very real disputes in territorial claims, even if one accepted Texas’ independence and her later annexation as legitimate. Roughly speaking, Mexico never accepted the notion that Texas included the territory west of a line running from modern Corpus Christi to Wichita Falls. The ongoing dispute over that territory would eventually provide the pretext for war. O’Sullivan never mentions this very real situation on the ground or its likely consequences. For …show more content…
would help pay off debt, Texas would receive protection from the U.S. Army from the Native Americans, many Texans were already from the U.S. The U.S. had an established postal system in place. A con would be the slavery of course. Some Texans wanted to remain an independent republic, Texas could grow to the west (Manifest Destiny) and be as large as the U.S., the U.S. didn't want to add any states that supported slavery. The war with Mexico happened in 1848 because the annexation of Texas happened, it caused tension, and Mexico had boundary issues between Texas and Mexico. President Polk declares war against Mexico, and the rangers joined in on the fight. The rangers and troops defeat the Mexican army. A treaty was signed at the end of the war it was called the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and in that treaty It states that the U.S. will agree to pay 15 million for a half a million square miles between the Nueces and Rio Grande rivers, and parts of what is now California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona & New
Treat, an expatriate who used to live in both Mexico and Central America was actively but unsuccessfully attempting to peacefully negotiate the annexation of Texas through his personal relationships. Through his travels he was able to foster relationships with various public officials. Treat knew they would never willingly accept a peaceful resolution unless they were going to receive some sort of personal gain. These personal connections are the precise reason Lamar appointed him to this position. By October 1840 the harsh realization presented itself with the Mexican government rejected the Texas proposition.
Collapse The war between the States and Mexico developing from the expansion of Texas in 1845 and from a disagreement about whether Texas completed at the Nueces Stream, which Mexico declared or the Rio Grande, and it was the USA claim. The war, in which U.S. qualities were dependably effective, achieved the Amassed States ' getting of over one million square kilometers of Mexican area expanding westward from the Rio Grande to the Pacific Ocean. Mexico isolated relations with the Collected States in Walk 1845, not long after the U.S. expansion of Texas. In September President of USA James K. Polk sent John Slidell on a mission to Mexico City to organize the addressed Texas periphery, settle U.S. some claims against Mexico and to buy New Mexico
The first cause is Mexican resentment over the annexation of Texas. Mexico had never recognized Texas's independence and therefore refused to accept the American action of making it a state. B. The second cause is the longing of many expansionists in the United States for California and New Mexico. Some envied the rich, fertile lands of California and its superb harbors, while others affectionately recalled the profitable trade along the Santa Fe Trail.
How was the Oregon Territory obtained by the US? -In 1846 A treaty was made and signed called the Oregon Treaty between the US and Britain. This Treaty was meant to settle boundary problems. It gave Britain property over the north part of the 49th parallel and the US the south parallel.
If Texas was annexed war with Mexico was unavoidable. Not much later after the official annexation of Texas to the Union, the Mexican American war started. On April 25, 1846 the war that many had feared began on the Rio Grande (Johnson 10.) Politicians and civilians alike had known that annexing Texas would lead to war. This was an expensive consequence that many did not want to face, therefore they strongly opposed the annexation of Texas.
This was also coupled with the “determination of some expansionists to bring Texas into the union as another slave state and increase the economic gains that would result from the expansion of slavery into the area” . Furthermore, as more and more people continuously began populating into Texas, they began to disregard the authority of government officials from both Mexico and Texas. As a newspaper from the time period states “It is uncertain to many living in the newly occupied Texas territory, as to the attitudes held by Mexicans of the new American presence in the area, and whether or not it is positive or negative, cannot yet be judged” . The uncertain feelings that were oblivious to settlers of this time quickly became negative as newcomers continued to break Mexican rules and laws including those against slavery. The actions committed by Americans in the new area grew in number as did the complaints by Mexican citizens of their new neighbors.
According to a letter by J. Miguel Falcon created in 1833, it stated, “He enclosed his Lordship and got a copy of a letter that Don Estevan F. Austin sent on October 2nd last from Mexico City to the town council. " This quote shows that for months Austin had been working with the officials in Mexico City to try to make them think that Texas should be its own state.
Slavery is one of the top reasons as they felt like they didn’t need Mexico anymore. Throughout the time there was many battles fought against each other in many cities in Texas. Many battles were won by Mexico since their army was bigger than what Texas had at the time. The Texans felt that they could be their own state since they had all the necessities to survive their own economy and felt that with all the slave they had they could do a lot more. A lot of Texans and people from the United States wanted to help out Texas get its independence from Mexico which is what caused battles like in the Alamo.
It is irrefutable that the Texas Revolution had long term effects that changed American foreign and domestic policy. The actions of one man however, was the cause of the prelude to what will become a pivotal moment in U.S. history. Samuel “Sam” Houston from Tennessee was a military leader and politician who served in the American military and the U.S. House of Representatives before moving to Texas. Although not present during the founding of the Texan colonies, Sam Houston took a stand for Texas through his military leadership, securing independence from Mexico, and setting the stage for annexation by the United States of America. Before the arrival of Sam Houston, Stephen Austin, an American, set out to colonize land owned by the Spanish
Also, Texas struggled economically after declaring independence from Mexico. Annexation to the United States was seen as an economic advantage to many Texans. They would be able to trade freely with other states within the Union, without paying tariffs if they joined the US. Therefore, boosting the economy of Texas and create jobs. Thus, many
This war happened mainly because the U.S. wanted to expand to the Pacific Ocean to fulfill their Manifest Destiny, trying to take away Mexico’s land. Mexico refused to to give land to the U.S. The big question is whether the U.S. was justified in fighting Mexico in the Mexican-American War. The United States was justified in going to war with Mexico because Manifest Destiny, too much Mexican interference, and Texas was invaded. One reason the Mexican War was justified was Manifest Destiny. In Document A, John O’Sullivan writes: “Texas is now ours...Let their reception into the “family be frank, kindly, and cheerful….”
The way they claimed annexed was by saying the Rio Grande was the southern boundary of Texas but Mexico said it was the Nueces River. In regards to the war, Americans were greatly divided. The northerners hated it because of the fact that Texas favored slavery. Those in the south liked the idea of a war because it would help expand to the west. This expansion would provide more land and opportunity.
O’Sullivan was an American columnist whom was known for his use of the term, “manifest destiny,” which promoted the annexation of Texas to the United States. He argues that the adverse attitude toward Texas’ independence from Mexico needs to end. In this article, O’Sullivan also expands on the importance of the growth of the country throughout the continent. It further acknowledges the freedom of Texas as not a rebellion, but by abandonment from Mexico. John O’Sullivan sees the future of America expanding into California and Mexico becoming a country without a real government.
Jesús Velasco-Márquez, a modern-day Mexican professor of studies wrote an article in 2006 about the Mexican-American War. He said, “US historians refer to this event as ‘The Mexican-American War’, while in Mexico, we prefer to use the term ‘The U.S. Invasion... From Mexico’s point of view, the annexation of Texas to the United States was inadmissible for both legal and security reasons. ’’’ (Velasco-Márquez, 12). During the time of the independence of Texas, Mexico was ruled by the dictator General Antonio López de Santa Anna.
The Mexican-America war was often viewed as an impactful event of the annexation of Texas. However, events during the Mexican-American war such as a disagreement over where the Mexican-American border should be located at, declining the unions incorporate, and the northern political were against of having a new slave state. Therefore, the actions during the Mexican-American war prove that Texas gained independence from Mexico, which was a positive effect for the United States because it gained land by winning the war. The Mexican-American war began of the idea if Manifest Destiny because they believe that god gave the United States the right to spread through the Pacific Ocean.