Readers to this blog already know we have a penchant for history and how it has shaped our little corner of the world.
This past Presidents' Day we were almost tempted to publish the following post but – we admit it – we were too lazy to slog through the research on a national day off. So here goes.
Our corner of the world has been impacted deeply by the events happening east of the Mississippi ever since the original 13 colonies started eyeing the land west toward the "South Sea."After the United States' acquisition of 828,000 square miles (2,144,000 square kilometers or 529,920,000 acres) of France's claim to the territory of Louisiana in 1803, things started to get even more intense.
France controlled this vast area from 1699 until 1762, the year it ceded the territory to Spain.
Under Napoleon Bonaparte, France took back the territory in 1800 in the hope of re-establishing an empire in North America. But that never happened and then President Thomas Jefferson bought the the huge piece of real estate for pennies on the acre.
The Spanish crown was never really comfortable having such an expansionist country on its eastern and northern border, especially when settlers from the U.S. started streaming across the Sabine River and into present-day Texas.
In 1819, the U.S. and the Spanish crown signed the Adams-Onís Treaty sometimes referred to as The Florida Treaty. It was signed in Washington on February 22, 1819 and ratified by Spain October 24, 1820 and entered into force February 22, 1821.
The treaty was named for John Quincy Adams of the United States and Louis de Onís of Spain and renounced any claim of the United States to Texas. It fixed the western boundary of the Louisiana Purchase as beginning at the mouth of the Sabine River and running along its south and west bank to the thirty-second parallel and thence directly north to the Río Rojo (Red River).
Despite the treaty, Adams, when he became president, offered at least three times to purchase Texas from Mexico, which had gained its independence from Spain in 1821.
On all three occasions, Mexico turned down the offer.
Andrew Jackson, who had his differences with Adams, nonetheless agreed with him on the matter of annexing Texas to the United States. But while the treaty was in effect, Jackson could only encourage settlers and provide them with the wherewithal to settle in Texas and make its settlement by Anglo illegal liens a fait accompli. Under the "Texas formula," these settlers would pledge allegiance to Mexico, establish a colony, and then ask the United States to come to their aid when their "rights" were violated.
This happened in 1836 – a scant 17 years after Adams signed the treaty and 15 after it went into effect.
James K. Polk, a Jackson protege who made the acquisition of Texas and California the main goals of his administration, in fact, used the justification of protecting the settlers from Indian attack to send Zachary Taylor from Ft. Jesup in Louisiana to the Nueces River to "secure" the border.
When he sent the military to the mouth of the Rio Grande in 1846 , the expected confrontation took place and the Mexican War which resulted in Mexico's loss of half her territory ensued.
Palo Alto and Resaca de la Guerra in Brownsville were the first battles of that conflagration that ended in 1848 with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
Few would guess that the battle sites that Brownsville school kids visit portended such important consequences.
Present at the battles near present-day Brownsville were two future presidents, Taylor and Ulysses S. Grant. Taylor was a Whig and the last thing Polk wanted was to have him become a war hero, which he did, eventually gaining the presidency. Grant was a lieutenant then and ended up being Abraham Lincoln's most important general for the Union in the upcoming Civil War.
In fact, Lincoln was not in agreement with Polk on waging war against Mexico. He went on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives demanding that Polk point to the spot where Capt. Seth Thornton and his men had been attacked and whether the people there had ever considered themselves U.S. citizens.
For his troubles, Lincoln – dubbed "Spotty Lincoln" by the opposition press – was a one-time U.S. representative and he was voted out of the Congress, especially after some of his constituents died in some of the battles inside Mexico.
Presidents since have had an impact on our border. The latest has been the decision by federal Judge Andrew Hanen that President Barack Obama's executive orders to defer deportation action against some 5 million people here illegally are beyond the scope of his executive powers.
Will Hanen's decision be nullified by an appeals court?
Whatever the outcome, this area continues to be impacted by the actions of presidents in far-off Washington, D.C.
Under Napoleon Bonaparte, France took back the territory in 1800 in the hope of re-establishing an empire in North America. But that never happened and then President Thomas Jefferson bought the the huge piece of real estate for pennies on the acre.
The Spanish crown was never really comfortable having such an expansionist country on its eastern and northern border, especially when settlers from the U.S. started streaming across the Sabine River and into present-day Texas.
In 1819, the U.S. and the Spanish crown signed the Adams-Onís Treaty sometimes referred to as The Florida Treaty. It was signed in Washington on February 22, 1819 and ratified by Spain October 24, 1820 and entered into force February 22, 1821.
The treaty was named for John Quincy Adams of the United States and Louis de Onís of Spain and renounced any claim of the United States to Texas. It fixed the western boundary of the Louisiana Purchase as beginning at the mouth of the Sabine River and running along its south and west bank to the thirty-second parallel and thence directly north to the Río Rojo (Red River).
Despite the treaty, Adams, when he became president, offered at least three times to purchase Texas from Mexico, which had gained its independence from Spain in 1821.
On all three occasions, Mexico turned down the offer.
Andrew Jackson, who had his differences with Adams, nonetheless agreed with him on the matter of annexing Texas to the United States. But while the treaty was in effect, Jackson could only encourage settlers and provide them with the wherewithal to settle in Texas and make its settlement by Anglo illegal liens a fait accompli. Under the "Texas formula," these settlers would pledge allegiance to Mexico, establish a colony, and then ask the United States to come to their aid when their "rights" were violated.
This happened in 1836 – a scant 17 years after Adams signed the treaty and 15 after it went into effect.
James K. Polk, a Jackson protege who made the acquisition of Texas and California the main goals of his administration, in fact, used the justification of protecting the settlers from Indian attack to send Zachary Taylor from Ft. Jesup in Louisiana to the Nueces River to "secure" the border.
Palo Alto and Resaca de la Guerra in Brownsville were the first battles of that conflagration that ended in 1848 with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
Few would guess that the battle sites that Brownsville school kids visit portended such important consequences.
Present at the battles near present-day Brownsville were two future presidents, Taylor and Ulysses S. Grant. Taylor was a Whig and the last thing Polk wanted was to have him become a war hero, which he did, eventually gaining the presidency. Grant was a lieutenant then and ended up being Abraham Lincoln's most important general for the Union in the upcoming Civil War.
In fact, Lincoln was not in agreement with Polk on waging war against Mexico. He went on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives demanding that Polk point to the spot where Capt. Seth Thornton and his men had been attacked and whether the people there had ever considered themselves U.S. citizens.
Presidents since have had an impact on our border. The latest has been the decision by federal Judge Andrew Hanen that President Barack Obama's executive orders to defer deportation action against some 5 million people here illegally are beyond the scope of his executive powers.
Will Hanen's decision be nullified by an appeals court?
Whatever the outcome, this area continues to be impacted by the actions of presidents in far-off Washington, D.C.
8 comments:
That history just proved how ignorant Mexicans are and why they will never rule the world.
They had several opportunities to sell Texas to the US, pocket the money and go away in peace. But, they said no and the US got it for nothing but the cost of a pissant little war and much more of Mexico to boot.
Way to go dumb ass Meskins!
Fairly good, although biased, view of local history. Just too bad that most of our citizens have no interest in the great history of this area. Most of our students don't have a clue and BISD is more focused on dietary issues than teaching history. Too bad that our museums offer up much about our local history, but the citizens here don't care and don't support the museums. I was once asked by the history of the poor of this region was never written and the only reasonable answer is that those that are illiterate leave no written history. If that is true, unfortunately our citizens are still not leaving a historical record...because of ignorance and illiteracy in this area. Also, we must remember that even Mexico isn't a native nation here. This land may have been part of Mexico, but in the end Mexico was willing to give it away so that the new population would serve as a buffer against the possibility of an agressive U.S. Unfortunately, the buffer, as a part of Mexico failed because the Mexican government required all citizens be Catholic, speak Spanish (not the native language of the region) and have little or no voice in Mexican government. Failure from the beginning.
Hanen's decision will be nullified. A U.S. President has discretionary powers. Hanen's decision was capricious and selfish ; probably racial in his nature.
The problem with present-T-Party Republicans,they fear a new demographic wave of "new immigration" contrary to their social psyche of superiority and arrogance towards others .
The Mexican Army could have easily defeated the US. However, due to poor leadership and corruption, sound familiar, they lost. Mexico was a wealthy country at the time and the US troops were isolated from their supplies. Unfortunately, for the Mexican Army, selling supplies to US Army was good business.
http://www.alu.army.mil/alog/issues/JanFeb03/MS732.htm
History has proved that U.S. Gringos will never rule the world. Many are ignorant of world history.
I do believe history will show that U.S. Gringos have a much bigger world footprint and impact that the Meskins.
I don't know what Mexico have done on the world stage, ever. They do attract world attention with their corruption, brutality and blood lust, but it is negative attention and not positive attention.
Didn't the U.S. Initiate genocide in the Extermination of Native Ameicans by killing their food source, the buffalo and lynchings of African Americans etc. ; and the massive discrimination of U.S. Mexican Americans ?
Post a Comment