Analysis Of John L. O Sullivan's Annexation Of Texas

Improved Essays
In 1829, American settlers began to reside in Mexico’s territories in the southwest, disregarding their customs and laws. American colonists in Texas protested Mexican rule, sparking the Texas Revolution in 1835. Soon after, Mexican dictator Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna attacked Alamo and won, but the Treaty of Velasco gave Texas independence and created the border between Texas and Mexico (Berkin 314). Unfortunately, Mexicans wanted renegotiation of the treaty, threatening war. On April 22, 1846, Mexico announced that its territory had been invaded and declared war.
American soldier William Barret Travis instructs in his letter “Commandancy of the Alamo” that Texans – and all Americans – should fight for their independence from Mexicans to
…show more content…
O’Sullivan defines Manifest Destiny in order to support America’s decision to annex Texas, which was originally Mexican territory. O’Sullivan coined the term Manifest Destiny, the idea that Americans were destined by God to occupy and govern North America, to justify America’s annexation of Texas (O’Sullivan). After Texas was admitted to the Union, changes were made to her already republican government to mold her into America. In addition, O’Sullivan proceeds to address slavery and its role in annexation. He indicates that “annexation was a question with which slavery had nothing to do” (O’Sullivan). Then, he goes on to question whether there was any misery worse than slavery – an inferior to a superior race. No benefits of slavery were listed, nor were there attempts at explaining the evils of slavery. Besides Texas, O’Sullivan specifies other nations also joining America. He points out that “California [would] probably next fall away from the loose adhesion [of Mexico]” in addition to Oregon and Washington (O’Sullivan). Mexico would foolishly lose authority over California, and then California would become an independent state. By taking over land near the Pacific, America would then be able to expand and trade with eastern Asia. Thus, the spreading of America past the Mississippi River to the west coast would be immensely beneficial to trade and commerce of the world and increase power for …show more content…
Calhoun replied to. The Missouri Compromise admitted Missouri to the Union as a slave state, Maine as a free state, and banned slavery in the Louisiana Territory above 36°30’ north latitude (Berkin 245). In his compromise, Clay proposes that California should be admitted to the Union without “Congress placing any restriction on the exclusion or introduction of slavery within the boundaries of that state” (United States). He did not want to introduce slavery to states newly acquired by America because slavery was not in the law. In Maryland, where slavery still existed, slaves were not to be traded or sold outside the District without just payment and consent of state and District. On the contrary, Calhoun points out that “the North has absolute control over the government [while] the interests of the South will be sacrificed to the North” (United States). Particularly, the North wanted to abolish slavery. To balance the North and South, the North would have to amend the Constitution to restore power to the South. The ongoing debate on slavery put into prospective each state regarding its laws on the admission or ban of slaves. With its growing population and necessity for more natural resources, Americans wanted the United States to expand westward to increase its power and productivity. However, their desire to expand led to war against Mexico. The Compromise of 1850 was

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In his book, Sleuthing The Alamo, James E. Crisp goes beyond the mere description of the historical events that took place during the Texas Revolution. Crisp’s passion to uncover why certain events of the Texas Revolution were remembered in a specific way, propelled him to closely examine and critically analyze the motive behind a number of writers and historians. It was this determination that forced Crisp to take no for an answer and to “attempt to separate Texas myth from Texas history”. What makes Crisp’s book Sleuthing The Alamo so unique, in contrast with most historical books, is that Crisp involves himself in his text in such a way that it becomes very personal to him. Additionally, Crisp doesn’t conceal his own personal biases as…

    • 929 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    A quick war was fought and Mexico lost, as terms of their surrender Mexico essentially gave the United States the West Coast, which includes California, New Mexico, and Arizona. The war between the Mexico and United States could be connected to Manifest Destiny because people in Texas did not want to abide by the Mexican laws because they felt they did not have to follow because it was not in God’s will. For Manifest Destiny gave them the right to settle as far west as they want and not follow any other rules except for America, because America was permitted by God to settle west. Manifest Destiny and westward expansion was also a political factor because it allowed for President James Polk to come to power, and spur on westward expansion. Under James Polk, the victory of…

    • 1012 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the 1800s tension was beginning to build between the north and south over the issue of slavery. Three major compromises helped contribute to these tensions and lead to eventual war. These are the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. These compromises and their effects had major consequences that shaped the nation of their time.…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The United States expanded across North America to the west at a rapid rate most notably in the 1840’s through the 1850s. Many social, econonomic, and political factors lead to the nations growth and acquisition of land. Social interests included families’ desire to seek more land out west along with economic opportunities for interstate commerce and political agendas concerning territorial expansion. The Louisiana Purchase of 1803 from the French government, by President Thomas Jefferson, cost $15 million, and included territory from Canada to New Orleans, and the Mississippi to the Rocky Mountains (Westward Expansion, 2009). The purchase of these territories doubled United States’ size and according to Jefferson it was crucial to the nation’s…

    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Annexation Of Texas Essay

    • 2045 Words
    • 9 Pages

    In so doing, it worsened the divisions which were taking place over issues such as slavery and states’ rights throughout the United States at the time. With the annexation of Texas therefor contributing…

    • 2045 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Westward Expansionism

    • 1354 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In the first half of the 1800s, America would double in size from the original thirteen British colonies to the entire span of the continent, from the east to the west coast. This was mainly due to the idea of Manifest destiny, defined as the god given right to expand westward and cover the entire continent. Numerous expansionist events took place throughout the period, such as the Louisiana Purchase, the Oregon treaty, and the Mexican secession. All of these imperialistic events allowed Americans to push westward, but it created many proponent and opponents, to expansion. It greatly damaged the national unity the north and south had.…

    • 1354 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Compromise of 1850 The “Compromise of 1850” was a resolution constructed by Henry Clay in an attempt to appease both Northerners and Southerners, in regards to if the new territorial expansions acquired from the war with Mexico and subsequent “Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo” in 1848, should allow slavery. The compromise allowed California to be a free state and gave New Mexico and Utah the policy of “Popular Sovereignty” or the ability for the people of the state to decide on slavery. Texas was given relief on 10 millions dollars worth of debt in the compromise for the re-allotment of a portion of it 's land to New Mexico. The compromise also outlawed slavery in Washington DC, as the spectacle was a national embarrassment.…

    • 1157 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kansas and Nebraska lay within the Louisiana Purchase. This Act divided the Whig party into Norther and Southern wings. The Kansas- Nebraska Act banned the word slavery from the Constitution, the word slavery was treated as a cancer on the public. The Kansas- Nebraska Act the Missouri Compromise prohibited slavery from the latitude 36 degrees 30’ N. Any state above this line was a free state, any state below this line was a state for slavery. In the North Congress made laws against slavery.…

    • 1047 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of the ways the United States gained new territory is when Texas wanted to secede from Mexico and join the Union. (Doc 2) Texas wrote the Treaty of Annexation in April 22, 1844 to the United States congress granting them their property to be controlled by the United States. Texas wrote this because they wanted to have slavery, but Mexico had outlawed slavery. Mexico was not happy with this decision and resulted in the Mexican – American war, causing casualties. This war also led to more tension and bloodshed in the long run, because of an increase in sectionalism between the North and South.…

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Was America justified in going to war with Mexico? Before April 25, 1846, American you know today wasn't the same If America didn’t go to war with Mexico, American would only be half of the size it was today. This all started because Texas declared its independence from Mexico. Mexico wasn’t so thrilled about Texas actions. Which, leads to the question, was America justified to war with Mexico?…

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Whenever there is a conflict or situation with territorial more than likely there a fight or war involved. The Westward expansion was no different. While there was people like John O’Sullivan who was advocates for westward expansion, there where people like W.E. Channing who did not agree with the concept of westward expansion or Manifest Destiny. In W.E. Channing editorial Denouncing Expansion he wrote “Having unfolded the argument against the annexation of Texas from the criminality of the revolt, I proceed to second very solemn consideration, namely, that by this act our country will enter of a career of encroachment, war, and crime, and will merit and incur the punishment and woe of aggravated wrong-doing. The seizure of Texas will not stand alone.…

    • 1006 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As The United states began a time of expansion into the west in the late 1830’s, debates over whether or not slavery would be permitted in those territories vacated by the native Americans caused great disagreements in Government and Society. While slavery is the most obvious reason for succession, Westward expansion and the rights of the new states were responsible for much of the violent conflicts that lead to the Civil War. States struggled to find common ground, but the differences between North and South and new Immigration made A series of compromises were created but by 1860 compromise had failed. Southerners feared an increase in free states would create an imbalance of power and create an advantage to the abolition of slavery.…

    • 876 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Jacob Ashcraft 24 October 2016 Texas Revolution Was Inevitable In one of the first major scholarly works on the Texas Revolution, historian Eugene C. Barker in 1928 described the conflict as a “clash of cultures.” Barker maintained that Anglo-Texans and Mexicans had little in common and, as a result, concluded that the rebellion could not have been avoided. Barker is correct in his statement about war being inevitable. Some believe it was because the Anglo colonists wanted overrun Texas and break away to become a part of the United States in the venture westward.…

    • 930 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In February 2, 1848 a treaty was signed that treaty was signed in Villa de Guadalupe Hidalgo, that treaty was then called the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was a peace treaty to gain peace between Mexico and the United States, the U.S. and Mexico had been having some problems between each other like wars and a lot of bad things. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American war(war between the U.S. and Mexico!) This treaty would forever change the way that the Mexicans and the Americans would look at each other. Before the treaty started Mexico was having some government problems, Santa Anna(Mexico’s president) was elected in 1833.…

    • 987 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Mexican American War was the first war that the United States primarily fought on foreign soil of which led to great amounts of bloodshed at the detriment of Mexico. The United States originally provoked the war as U.S. president James K. Polk set his eyes on expanding west as he believed in “Manifest Destiny”. The War was a result of the United States Annexation of Texas. Texas was its own Republic from 1836 through 1845 after winning it war for Independence. Mexico although never recognized its independence while the United States did recognize Texas as a sovereign country in 1837 but it did decline to annex the territory.…

    • 1165 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays