. Public reaction to the affair,
both at home and abroad, was exceedingly negative.
The beginning of the Civil War put a damper on Manifest Destiny
desires, but they would resurface later in the century with regard to
expansion to the Caribbean. In 1898, the U.S. finally succeeded in
wresting Cuba from Spain in the Spanish American War. However, as
during the 1830s and 1840s, the benefits and drawbacks of expansion
were hotly debated. [See Spanish-American War]
Supporters of Manifest Destiny were motivated by two beliefs: the nation's God-given destiny
to expand its civilizing influence across the continent and the
practical need to expand the nation's borders. Most advocates of Manifest Destiny
believed that American society, being predominantly white northern
European, or "Anglo-Saxon," and Christian, was more advanced and
enlightened than other cultures. American novelist Herman Melville
summed up that belief when he stated, "We Americans are the chosen
people—the Israel of our time."
Adherents to the ideal of Manifest Destiny
asserted that, as the chosen nation, the U.S. had an obligation to
mankind to expand its reach and spread its culture, bringing God,
technology and civilization to the west. O'Sullivan had elaborated on
that idea in an 1839 article: [See John O'Sullivan on Manifest Destiny (Excerpts) (primary document)]
far-reaching, the boundless future will be the era of American
greatness. In its magnificent domain of space and time, the nation of
many nations is destined to manifest to
mankind the excellence of divine principles; to establish on earth the
noblest temple ever dedicated to the worship of the Most High—the
Sacred and the True. Its floor shall be a hemisphere—its roof the
firmament of the star-studded heavens....
Others stressed a more practical need for expansion. The U.S. was
experiencing a big growth in population, they said, and the U.S. needed
to expand to accommodate those people. Furthermore, they contended,
expansion would make the new nation more secure. Many agreed with
author and diplomat George Bancroft when he said: "The acquisition of
California by ourselves is the decisive point in the perfect
establishment of the Union." Now the nation rested on a "foundation
that cannot be moved," he continued. In his inaugural address, Polk
laid out further benefits:
can fail to see the danger to our safety and future peace if Texas
remains an independent state, or becomes an ally or dependency of some
foreign nation more powerful than herself. Is there one among our
citizens who would not prefer perpetual peace with Texas to occasional
wars, which often occur between bordering independent nations? Is there
one who would not prefer free intercourse with her, to high duties on
all our products and manufactures which enter her ports or cross her
frontiers? Is there one who would not prefer an unrestricted
communication with her citizens, to the frontier obstructions which
must occur if she remains out of the Union?
Advocates of fulfilling the nation's Manifest Destiny
argued that critics' concerns that expansion would weaken the union by
stretching it too far had not been borne out. Polk asserted that the
addition of new territories had in fact bolstered the Union:
our population has expanded, the Union has been cemented and
strengthened. As our boundaries have been enlarged and our agricultural
population has been spread over a large surface, our federative system
has acquired additional strength and security. It may well be doubted
whether it would not be in greater danger of overthrow if our present
population were confined to the comparatively narrow limits of the
original thirteen States than it is now that they are sparsely settled
over a more expanded territory. It is confidently believed that our
system may be safely extended to the utmost bounds of our territorial
limits, and that as it shall be extended the bonds of our Union, so far
from being weakened, will become stronger.
Other advocates simply subscribed to the romantic notion of moving west
to establish new lives on the frontier. 