International Rivalry in the Pacific Islands, 1800-1875
Brookes, Jean Ingram (1941). International Rivalry in the Pacific Islands, 1800-1875. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-8462-1630-8.
Abstract: The author has examined early nineteenth-century opinion with great care and has concluded that the United States public was neither well informed on Latin America nor united in policy; he has specifically included Clay, Adams, and Monroe in this indictment. Napoleon's invasion of Spain created a dilemma, since the United States was divided on the issues of keeping British influence out of Latin America and of helping Britain drive Napoleon out of Spain. Two things diverted the United States from its "large policy" (freedom of the New World): the growth of a grain trade with Spain during the Peninsular War, and the War of 1812.
Interesting chapters describe American and foreign "painters" (writers) who kept the public informed on Latin America. There was a gradual revival of the hemisphere program after 1815, but the "Black Legend" continued to influence many an American, including John Quincy Adams. The economic factor is stressed throughout the book, and with it the importance of our navy and the defense of our merchant marine.
A Fourth of July speech made by Adams in 1821 is discussed in great detail, and, according to Dr. Whitaker, both the audience and modem historians failed to get the point of the speech. Adams evidently believed in the destiny of democracy and preferred awaiting its inevitable arrival rather than risking a war for its defense—a real isolationist policy. It is with difficulty that this is made to harmonize with his part in the formation of the Monroe Doctrine. The controversy over the origin and authorship of the Monroe Doctrine is minutely analyzed, with the conclusion that it was largely a composite work, except for the noncolonlzation clause which is attributed primarily to Adams. Whitaker has diligently sought out and corrected the errors of previous writers. He is particularly critical of Henry Adams, whose well-known bias on Jefferson is subjected to new and devastating criticisms. Jefferson is also criticised for not knowing his own policy; this leaves Whitaker the champion in this three-sided controversy. On the whole, moot questions are presented with views on both sides, although conclusions appear to have a tone of finality.
The book is well documented and indicates the author's thorough knowledge of the literature in the field. An index of authors serves as a guide to the references in the footnotes to which is also relegated much explanatory mate- rial. There is a helpful bibliographical note.
Extra details:
DOI: 10.2307/2048943 MAG: 2903223919 CorpusID: 158069362 OpenAlex: W2903223919
