payment page
How did early land policies reflect Federalist Party political aims?
The land policy of the early expansion period was the clear result of political maneuvering. During the 1790s, the Federalists knew expansion was inevitable, but feared that it would dilute their support center in the Northeast. However, they recognized that the West could be a great source of revenue. The plan under the Ordinance of 1785 aimed for groups of farmers to join together to purchase townships. This ran counter to the aims of the Federalists because it threatened to draw many in the Northeast to the West and would not maximize government profits. To address this political problem, the Federalists encouraged the purchase of land by wealthy speculators, who not only would drive up prices, and thereby profits, but also would stem the flow of westward expansion from North and South.
What did the Republicans do to counter Federalist land policies?
The Republicans chastised the Federalists for transferring the public domain to the nation’s people too slowly and not cheaply enough. They believed that the United States—and especially the West—should belong to small farmers, who they believed were the source of the nation's democratic purity. Thomas Jefferson had long imagined and spoke of an “empire of liberty” which would stretch across the entire continent and took steps toward that goal most notably with the Louisiana Purchase. Jefferson wanted the American West be populated by small farmers, who would ensure democracy (and most likely support the Republican Party). Thus, once in power, the Republicans acted quickly to place public lands in the hands of small farmers, decreasing the minimum size of a land purchase and cutting the minimum price per acre as well.
How did expansion, Texas annexation, and slavery become linked?
Westward expansion and the annexation of Texas were tied tightly to the issue of slavery during the administration of John Tyler. Northerners feared that Texas annexation was part of a Southern conspiracy to extend American territory southward into Mexico and South America, creating unlimited new slave states, while the North would be unable to expand similarly due to the presence of British forces in Canada. Southerners saw annexation as a way to expand the nation’s cotton producing region, and as a slave state, an additional two votes in the Senate in favor of the common needs of the slaveholding South.
In the spring of 1844, Tyler and his new secretary of state, firebrand John C. Calhoun did not disguise their appeals to the South for support for Texas annexation. Calhoun seized upon reports that the British might pressure Mexico to recognize the independence of Texas in return for abolishing slavery there. Calhoun quickly spread conspiracy theories that the British could use Texas and abolition to destroy the rice, sugar, and cotton growing industries in the US and gain monopolies in all three. Accompanying Tyler’s treaty with Texas to annex it as a territory that was submitted to the Senate in April 1844 was a letter from Calhoun explaining that slavery was beneficial to Black people who he said would otherwise fall into “vice and pauperism.” The political designs underlying these strategies were clear: use southern support to move annexation forward.
How did efforts to annex Texas finally succeed?
While Tyler and Calhoun’s attempts to achieve approval for the annexation of Texas were unsuccessful, James K. Polk made the annexation of both Texas and the Oregon Territory a campaign pledge after gaining the nomination of the Democratic Party for president in 1844. After Polk won the election on his platform of manifest destiny, the North felt more confident that expansion would proceed conservatively and that that the new federal administration would take the desires of both North and South into account. However, even then the issue of slavery in the West would continue to tear the nation apart, dragging it toward civil war.
How did the Board of Indian Commissioners upend Native American culture?
During the 19th century, there was large support among whites for the complete destruction of Native American culture. For some, their hated manifested itself in overt and violent efforts to annihilate Native Americans and their culture. Others took a more superficially beneficent view of the Plains Indians, seeing it as their duty to Christianize and modernize the “savages” on the reservations. To this end, the Board of Indian Commissioners delegated the task of changing Native Americans to Protestant leaders who manned the reservations. Though cloaked in goodwill, this effort served the more practical purpose of breaking the nomadic tradition of the Native Americans and making them into permanent members of the reservations.
What tactics did the Carlisle Indian School use to curb Native American culture?
Numerous attempts were made throughout the late 1800s to “save” the Indians. The goal of the Carlisle Indian School in Pennsylvania, which operated from 1879 to 1918 was to fully integrate Native American children into white society. The school uprooted Native Americans from their homes and made no pretense of respecting Native American culture—making the children dress and behave like white Americans and assigning them Christian names in place of their given names. This sort of cultural reeducation assaulted the Native American way of life as viciously as the hunters who had slaughtered the buffalo. Founder Richard H. Pratt explained that that goal of the Carlisle School was to “kill the Indian and save the man.”
How were efforts to change Native Americans fundamentally disrespectful?
The movement to “civilize” Native Americans was infused with a sense of cultural superiority. While some of the people engaged in these activities may have been genuinely concerned about Native Americans, they showed no respect whatsoever for their culture or traditions, suggesting that the best thing for them would be to integrate the tribes into white society by instituting concepts like private property and making Native Americans less culturally distinct.
What were the goals of the Dawes Severalty Act?
Efforts to diminish Native American culture were expressed in the 1887 Dawes Severalty Act. The Act called for the breakup of the reservations and the treatment of Indians as individuals rather than tribes. It provided for the distribution of 160 acres of farmland or 320 acres of grazing land and US citizenship after 25 years to any Native American who accepted its terms. While some Native Americans benefited from the Dawes Act, others became dependent upon federal aid. In the end, both military aggression and humanitarian aid shared equally in the task of breaking the spirit of Native American tribes.
