Henry Clay and the Poinsett Pledge Controversy of 1826

1972 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-440
Author(s):  
Randolph Campbell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spanish America ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
Monroe Doctrine ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
Initial Task ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
American Nation

It is well known that the initial task of interpreting the Monroe Doctrine as a functional policy in international relations fell largely on John Quincy Adams. Somewhat ironically, the noncolonization principle in Monroe's famed Annual Message of 1823 for which Adams, then Secretary of State, was most responsible, received relatively little attention in the 1820's. Leaders in the United States and Spanish America alike were more concerned with the meaning of the other main principle involved in the Message—nonintervention. What were the practical implications of Monroe's warning that the United States would consider intervention by a European power in the affairs of any independent American nation “ as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States ” ? John Quincy Adams laid the groundwork for an answer to this question in July, 1824, when Colombia, alarmed by rumors of French interference in the wars for independence, sought a treaty of alliance. The President and Congress, Adams replied, would take the necessary action to support nonintervention if a crisis arose, but there would be no alliance. In fact, he added, it would be necessary for the United States to have an understanding with certain European powers whose principles and interests also supported nonintervention before any action could be taken or any alliance completed to uphold it. The position taken by the Secretary of State cooled enthusiasm for the Monroe Doctrine, but Spanish American leaders did not accept this rebuff in 1824 as final.

The Issue of Religious Liberty in the United States Commercial Treaty with Colombia, 1824

1970 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-301
Author(s):  
Wilkins B. Winn
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
The United States ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Latin American Nation ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
The Republic ◽  
American Nation

The Republic of Colombia was the first Latin American nation to which the United States extended a formal act of recognition in 1822. This country was also the first of these new republics with which the United States negotiated a treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation. The importance of incorporating the principle of religious liberty in our first commercial treaty with Latin America was revealed in the emphasis that John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State, placed on it in his initial instructions to Richard Clough Anderson, Jr., Minister Plenipotentiary to Colombia. Religious liberty was one of the specific articles stipulated by Adams for insertion in the prospective commercial treaty.

The Spanish American Aspect of Henry Clay’s American System

1967 ◽  
Vol 24 (01) ◽  
pp. 3-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randolph B. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Services ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spanish America ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
American System ◽  
Emerging Nations ◽  
Henry Clay

Henry Clay of Kentucky first offered his American System as a plan to guide the growth of the United States during the period of awakening nationalism that followed the Peace of Ghent in 1815. When asked just before his death in 1852 to make up a list of his most important public services for use by some friends who were having a medal struck to commemorate his career, Clay prepared a list of fourteen items which included the American System with the date, 1824. Thus, at the end of his long career, the Kentuckian identified this phrase with his most famous speech in support of the protective tariff. It may then seem surprising that his first recorded use of the term came on May 10, 1820, in a speech supporting recognition of the emerging nations of Spanish America. Clay’s use of “American System” in these two apparently different areas of discussion has led to two separate connotations for the phrase. The two meanings call for careful discrimination. Equally important, however, is the significant connection between them in the thought of Henry Clay.

The Rise and Decline of the Ariel-Caliban Antithesis in Spanish America

1978 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Reid
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Latin America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spanish America ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
Spanish Speaking ◽  
The North ◽  
Primary Image ◽  
Literary Device

Seldom has a literary device had such international political resonance as the famous Ariel-Caliban contraposition of José Enrique Rodó's essay. In the decades immediately following its publication in 1900 Ariel was an exceptionally valued credo for Spanish American youth, not only for its intrinsic grace, but also because it provided a timely answer to a widespread need. To a generation depressed by the frequently pessimistic conclusions of racist doctrines and an uneasy sense of inferiority, and irked by the admonitions of ninteenthcentury “Nordomaniacs,” Ariel offered in sonorous periods a set of values assumed to be peculiarly Latin and therefore the patrimony of Latin America. As Alberto Zum Felde says, “It was the longed-for reply of this weak backward America to the Titanic potentiality of the North: its self-justification, its compensation, its retaliation.” Luis Alberto Sánchez's generation must have derived, as he says he did, its primary image of the United States from Ariel. Arturo Torres-Ríoseco describes it as “the ethical gospel of the Spanish-speaking world.”

The Limits of Sympathy: The United States and the Independence of Spanish America

1992 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 481-505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piero Gleijeses
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Significant Loss ◽  
Spanish America ◽  
Colonial Rule ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
Congressional Debates ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Us ◽  
Private Collections

Sir, is there to be no limit to our benevolence for these People? There is a point, beyond which, even parental bounty and natural affection cease to impose an obligation. That point has been attained with the States of Spanish America.1Of course there was sympathy for the Spanish American rebels in the United States. How could it have been otherwise? The rebels were fighting Spain, long an object of hatred and contempt. This alone justified goodwill, as did the hope for increased trade and the prospect of a significant loss of European influence in the hemisphere.2 But how deep did this sympathy run?In the Congressional debates of the period there was much more enthusiasm for the cause of the Greeks than that of the Spanish Americans.3 Similarly, the press referred frequently to private collections of funds (‘liberal donations’) for the Greek fighters – not for the Spanish Americans. This is not surprising. The US public could feel a bond with the Greeks – ‘it will become even quite fashionable to assist the descendants of those who were the bulwark of light and knowledge in old times, in rescuing themselves from the dominion of a barbarian race'.4 Unlike the Greeks, however, the Spanish Americans were of dubious whiteness. Unlike the Greeks, they hailed not from a race of giants, but – when they were white – from degraded Spanish stock.5 Some US citizens felt for them the kinship of a common struggle against European colonial rule; others agreed with John Quincy Adams: ‘So far as they were contending for independence, I wished well to their cause; but I had seen and yet see no prospect that they would establish free or liberal institutions of government.

Francisco de Miranda

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey Iserov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spanish America ◽  
Historical Change ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
Interesting Phenomenon ◽  
Republic Of Letters ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
Military Commander

Francisco de Miranda (March 28, 1750, Caracas, Venezuela—July 14, 1816, La Carraca, Spain) was a Spanish American revolutionary who after a career in the Spanish Army from 1783 devoted his life to the cause of Spanish American independence. The various designs of Miranda in the 1780s–1800s were founded upon the idea of a military liberation expedition to Spanish America led by him and organized with the support of a power (Great Britain, United States, France) in conflict with Spain that would then foment existing discontent and lead to a wide-scale revolt and independence. Though these plans failed, as did his attempt to organize an expedition from New York without the support of any power (1805–1807), in 1810 the revolution in Spanish America started without his participation as a consequence of the Napoleonic invasion of Spain. Miranda was called to Caracas and eventually led the short-lived First Venezuelan Republic in 1812. After its defeat he spent the last years of his life in Spanish jails. Miranda’s failure influenced the South American revolutionaries who adopted the tactics of unconditional warfare against the Spanish troops from 1813. A shrewd and sophisticated expert in world affairs and political intrigues and an acclaimed military commander, Miranda was persistently trying to use the conflicts between great powers to achieve his goal though he knew that these powers’ leaders were eager to use him as a trump card against the Spanish Empire in their geopolitical games. His contacts ranged from US Founding Fathers, British Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger and Viscount Melville to the Prussian king Friedrich II and the Russian empress Catherine II. He was a respected peer in the high society of the European “republic of letters” in the Age of Enlightenment. In the United States his friends belonged to the Federalist Party, which represents an interesting phenomenon since Federalists are usually viewed as being generally skeptical toward foreign revolutions. In Spanish America Miranda’s ideas received no support until 1810–1812, as his failed expedition clearly shows—this is an excellent example of the interplay between “evental history” (histoire évenémentielle) and the longue durée, demonstrating how fast and unpredictable radical historical change may be. In spite of this long political solitude, Miranda entered the Spanish American symbolic pantheon as the precursor of independence.

Matías Romero and Congressional Opposition to Seward's Policy Toward the French Intervention in Mexico

1965 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-40
Author(s):  
Marvin Goldwert
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
External Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Monroe Doctrine ◽  
French Government ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
The Way

During the period of the French intervention in Mexico (1862-1867), the United States Secretary of State, William H. Seward, pursued a policy which historians have aptly termed “ cautious moderation ” and “ masterly inactivity.” Caught between the fear of French recognition of the Confederacy, or even a French-Confederate alliance, and outright war with France, Seward steered a middle course. The French government was informed that the United States disapproved of intervention in Mexico and that a monarchy established by external force held no promise of permanency. But this was done in such a way as to avoid the active antagonism of France toward a Union plagued by civil war. Although at no time was the Monroe doctrine invoked prior to 1865, these mild but consistent protests paved the way for a firmer policy toward France.

American Diplomats and Irish Coercion, 1880–1883

1967 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Owen Dudley Edwards
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
Monroe Doctrine ◽  
Spanish American War ◽  
World Power

In former years there existed a widespread assumption that, throughout the nineteenth century, the United States was an isolationist power. Its policy, according to this thesis, had been articulated in Washington's Farewell Address, was accorded bipartisan acquiescence in Jefferson's First Inaugural, and was reaffirmed in the Monroe Doctrine. Until the Spanish–American war of 1898 isolationism prevailed, confident and more or less unchallenged; and then it suddenly collapsed, virtually without a struggle, leaving the Americans free to enter without inhibition on their new status of world power.

American doctrine of pre-emptive strike from Monroe to trump: international legal aspects

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Инсур Фархутдинов ◽  
Insur Farhutdinov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Interesting Phenomenon ◽  
Monroe Doctrine

This research is devoted to the study of actual theoretical and practical problems of international security law. The unique scientific publication examines the problems of development and transformation of the American Monroe doctrine, which until now remains an interesting phenomenon of world diplomacy and international law. The path from the James Monroe doctrine of 1823 to Donald trump's "America First" concept of 2017 is dramatic and contradictory not only for the United States, but also for the entire system of international relations. The Monroe doctrine was the first official expansionist concept of the United States. If D. Monroe is considered a pioneer of the American preventive military strike, then D. trump can be called a worthy successor of the doctrine of anticipating a military attack. Based on the analysis of foreign policy doctrines of all us presidents, the author comes to interesting scientific and practical assumptions and conclusions. The work is prepared for researchers, teachers, graduate students, students, legislators, civil servants, law enforcement officers, all interested in the current problems of international law and international relations. Recommended for use as a textbook in the disciplines of "International law", "International relations".

The Spanish-American Works of Alexander von Humboldt as Viewed By Leading British Periodicals, 1800–1830

1973 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calvin P. Jones
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Thomas Jefferson ◽  
Spanish America ◽  
Spanish American ◽  
German Scientist ◽  
Alexander Von Humboldt ◽  
The World ◽  
Spanish Colonies ◽  
Scientific Survey

Perhaps the most significant scientific works published about Spanish-America during the entire era 1800–1830 were the botanical and zoological findings of the German scientist, Alexander von Humboldt. He had traveled in the Spanish colonies from 1799 to 1804. Humboldt has been acclaimed as the greatest naturalist that the world had seen since Aristotle and as the foremost man in Europe during his lifetime with the exception of Napoleon. He had taken a scientific education in several German universities and had once held an appointment in Berlin as a mining official for the Prussian government. On his way back to Europe in 1804 at the conclusion of his scientific survey in Spanish-America, he stopped in the United States to visit President Thomas Jefferson who asked him to fix the new boundaries of the United States following the purchase of Louisiana. This side trip probably saved Humboldt’s life because the ship which sailed from South America with his specimens was lost at sea.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document