What Hath God Wrought

Final Essay Prompt

Daniel Walker Howe; author of What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815–1848, an American historian who dedicated his works would more directly pinpoint the early historical periods of U.S. history’s intelligence and religious pursuits. Howe sought his time to write such piece of work on the United States history through its intellectual, religious, social, and political standpoints at the time when America’s founders were handing the leadership of the nation to a new generation to come. This book lets the reader know how the people believed to view our country, America, as an example of Democracy and the highly important forces that made American Democracy meaningful in its own. Where in Chapter 20: The Revolution of 1848, Howe in major detail pinpoints the many historical build up of events that led to the major change in American domestic affairs which also concluded in our country being a enormous part of the worldwide community of nations.

History is merely the most important aspect of what today turnouts are. The major change for America began in the year of 1848 when revolutions broke out across the Atlantic, beginning in Europe with such revolution in representation of liberal, democratic, ethnic-minority groups in the movement to overthrow authoritarian regimes. These revolutions overseas had an impact on America’s religious aspects that would become a major phenomenon in outcome of major change in overthrowing the divine vindication of the Protestant Reformation. Americans in the attempt to intervene in Europe’s revolutions was beginning the “Young Ireland” movement in New York which in hope would reach Ireland concluding in the United States apologizing to British for such intervening to secure release of the Irish Americans which whom were arrested. Little after this movement, two of the major American political parties differed from each other in response of European revolutions. Where Democrats’ party stood with their favorite principle , “the sovereignty of the people . . on the ruins of despotism in the Old World . . fraternal congratulations to the National Convention of the Republic of France . . (Howe, 793)”. Yet in the other hand the Whig party stood more with the attachment of legal order and sympathizing with the others. The separation of these parties began the major change in domestic affairs throughout 1848.

A major conservative by the name of John C. Calhoun expressed his sense of disgust at the European revolutions, for he believed France was not ready to become a Republic alone. Yet apart from the sympathies of republicans, the United States withheld standing aside Europe only for the important ties commercially and financially that kept these two tied to one another. Slave-grown cotton being one of the leading U.S. exports to Europe, the big stake on cotton trade was too highly risk to jeopardize.

Yet these ties were too strong to break; in 1848 came along one major transformation of America bigger than those European revolutions. The United States had gained an empire including its Hispanic- Catholic people, on the Pacific after the war with Mexico had came to an end. The major flow of immigrants coming into California involved the discovery of gold. America’s influx of Catholic people transformed the nation from a Protestant society to a religiously pluralistic one. In December of 1847, President Polk announced to Congress ‘Mexicans had “commenced the war”, “shedding the blood of our citizens upon our own soil” (Howe,796). After this message it is where every party stood differently when dealing with such announced message of the Mexican-American War. The Whig party refused to take territory from Mexico while Polk believed it was little amount to what they owed the United States and in which Polk suggested to Congress a substantial dictated transfer of territory when in response Whigs questioned such assertion that Mexico started the war. The domestic affairs in America had changes coming that would drastically change the standing of the many ways with dealing with any events in politics and government.

The Mexican-American War created many controversies between the two political parties on whether or not Mexico began the war and whether they owed the United States a substantial territorial transfer. There was two other possible conclusions for ending the war. Calhoun’s proposal was to draw a line in a certain area such as Rio Grande, land North of such line would be annexed whether or not the rest of Mexico signed the peace treaty. Many in administration disagreed with such proposal. Another suggestion was made by Robert Stockton & Lewis Cass, democratic imperialists. Their suggestion was to annex all of Mexico to the United States, best way to avoid a peace treaty, keeping in mind Mexico’s number one attraction to the U.S. being their silver mines. The suggestion did not fall through because the fact that “All Mexico” which meant all its people would come along with was not the best picture many liked, and would compromise the ideal exclusive white republic.

After trying to figure out what the best outcome could be that every party began to either use such situation to their advantage or to sympathize with all of Mexico in order to figure out whether Polk in reality truly was right that Mexico was the one to commence such war. Lincoln mention, ‘Polk should “remember he sts where Washington sat” and tell the truth about the origin of the war…Polk must be “deeply conscious of being in the wrong. (Howe, 799)”. Not only did Lincoln question whether Polk spoke the truth about the origins of the war, as well did majority of the Whig party. In the end, around April Mexico and the U.S. began to negotiate a peace treaty. Such event, not only caused major tragic and suffering throughout North and South America but it took a toll on America’s political parties caused them to diverge more from one another in disagreement on how they would deal with the outcome of the war.

The Whigs preference to finalize peace between the two was No Territory at all. Horace Greely said, “Let us have peace, no matter if the adjuncts are revolting” (Howe, 807). Where the Democratic side, wanted All Mexico in peace treaty but soon enough they ended accepting Whigs conclusion with no complaint at all. Trist’s treaty said, “an act of treason to the integrity, position, and honor of this Empire.” (Howe, 807). Yet, Mexican president Benito Juarez argue that Mexico did not need to sign a peace treaty in which they were in mere disadvantage and would turn out in a guerilla war. In that same period of time came along the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in which any of the people in Mexico could retain United States citizenship or remain Mexican citizens if wished to keep their citizenship. California held back from recognizing Mexican Americans as citizens until the decision by the state supreme court was held in 1870. Such movement in government and California brought out many party members ugly side adn gave Mexican Americans a difficulty in establishing themselves as legally white. Hubert H. Bancroft said, “the extermination of the Indians” .. “until the Indian race becomes extinct” ( Howe, 810). Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was stilled, John Quincy Adams had voted against the declaration of war and he wanted no territory of Mexico.
The domestic affairs had drastic changes in that year of 1848 for the major parties diverged from one another in conclusion or in finding a conclusion for the Mexican American War. These domestic affairs evolved in changing rapidly in a turnout for todays domestic affairs to be more precise on dealing with many of the issues America withholds with more delicate and detailed look over every issue. Every outcome dealing with the same process of development for every party will always withhold different opinions regardless of what issue America comes across. Historical events not only changed but shaped our domestic affairs for better and for generations to come to be able to manage such with more ease and importance.