Fruits of Propaganda in the Tyler Administration by Frederick Merk; Lois Bannister MerkReview by: Robert Seager IIThe American Historical Review, Vol. 77, No. 4 (Oct., 1972), pp. 1177-1178Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Historical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1859631 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 06:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press and American Historical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to The American Historical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.157 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 06:56:32 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Americas 1177

lidity to Connecticut's total original boundary claims with a consequent threat to the Trenton decision's validity.

The last volume represents a wise editorial decision to drop the initial plan to publish twelve volumes by eliminating repetitious ma- terial such as newspaper extracts and some let- ters and documents reviewing the previous history of the controversy. Volume 1 i is con- cerned mainly with the roles of Thomas Cooper and Tench Coxe in implementing the Compromise Act that enabled Connecticut claimants to establish title to their lands within the fifteen Connecticut towns along the Susquehanna. It records also Pennsylvania's ef- forts to force other Connecticut settlers outside these towns to buy their lands. Each of the vol- umes includes an excellent introductory essay summarizing the significant developments of the period each covers. These are then illus- trated by the documentary selections.

S. K. STEVENS

Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission

FREDERICK MERK, with the collaboration of LOIS BANNISTER MERK. Fruits of Propaganda in the Tyler Administration. Cambridge, Mass.: Har- vard University Press. 1971. Pp. x, 259. $9.00.

Students of Professor Frederick Merk's bril- liant monographs on manifest destiny, the Monroe Doctrine, and the Oregon question will be disappointed in this loosely argued collection of essays. In it Merk attempts to demonstrate that John Tyler used bribery and propaganda to effect the peaceful settlement of the Maine boundary dispute in 1841-42, and that to advance the cause of Texas annexation in 1844-45 he employed Senator Robert J. Walker's ingenious "safety-valve" thesis as ad- ministration propaganda.

It is not news that Tyler and Webster en- gaged at least five paid undercover agents to swing Maine opinion toward a boundary settle- ment. Tyler candidly admitted his own com- plicity in the scheme in May 1846. What is new is Professor Merk's imaginative detective work in reconstructing just how the settlement was managecl. It is a fascinating story although the author fails to see that Tyler's devotion to states' rights (which he clearly compromised in Maine) was entirely negotiable when the Presi-

dent's political ambitions and his egocentric concerns with his role in history were involved in his decision making.

More controversial is Merk's attempt to link Tyler to the Walker thesis that Texas annexa- tion would eventually solve the racial and slav- ery questions in America. Few students of Texas annexation would deny that the "safety- valve" argument played an important propa- ganda role in the annexation debate. But there is no persuasive evidence that Tyler embraced the thesis in 1844, or that he actively worked to popularize it at the time. Merk's case for a Ty- ler-Walker propaganda alliance is based almost entirely on his contention that Tyler and Walker were close personal friends, that Tyler endorsed the Walker thesis in 1847, and that two members of Tyler's Cabinet, William Wilkins and David Henshaw, supported it in 1844-45.

The fact of the matter is that Tyler skillfully argued Texas annexation in a British-encircle- ment context and as a national economic desid- eratum-not in the sectional or slavery terms he knew would defeat an annexation treaty, as indeed it initially did in June 1844. His pass- ing remark in September i847 that Walker's thesis had "unveiled the true merits of the question" was little more than a political ges- ture toward the moderate Southern Democracy whose support he sought for the presidential nomination in 1848. Nor were Tyler and Walker personal friends. Henshaw was no longer in Tyler's cabinet during the annexa- tion debate; Wilkins was related to Senator Walker by marriage. Their support of the Walker thesis says nothing very convincing about Tyler's view or utilization of it. And to suggest, as Professor Merk does, that John Tyler introduced the Monroe Doctrine into the annexation debate because he, "was clearly seeking a bond to unite the country in support of his policy of acquiring slave territory" is near nonsense. The allegation demonstrates lit- tle grasp of Tyler's complex and often contra- dictory views of race, slavery, and slavery ex- tension.

In sum, this book fails in its attempt to sus- tain an interpretive overview of Tyler's diplo- matic methodology in propaganda terms. Per- haps this is because Tyler's Anglophilia in Maine cannot easily be harmonized with his

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.157 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 06:56:32 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

1178 Reviews of Books

Anglophobia in Texas or his Anglo-ambival- ence in Oregon. Unfortunately for Tyler-ad- ministration hypothesis makers, the tenth presi- dent was not a consistent person in his public life. He was, after all, the states' rights theoreti- cian who eagerly accomplished Texas annexa- tion in March i845 by joint resolution-hardly a strict constructionist concept.

ROBERT SEAGER II

University of Baltimore

ZANE ALLEN MASON. Frontiersmen of the Faith: A History of Baptist Pioneer Work in Texas I865-I885. San Antonio: Naylor Company. 1970. Pp. iX, 219. $7.95.

Writers of religious history are sometimes so secularly oriented as to have scant regard for religious concerns, while others are activist churchmen who seek acceptance of their per- sonal views. Professor Mason is obviously dedi- cated to religious values but approaches his data objectively. His task is made easier by the terminal date for his study (i885), before the impact of the new geology, evolution, and Bib- lical criticism caused sharp tensions in conserva- tive church circles.

The author identifies five basic Baptist prin- ciples: (i) separation of church and state, (2) individual responsibility to God, (3) conversion as a condition to church membership, (4) con- gregational church government, and (5) bap- tism by immersion. The volume parallels some- what the study of Texas Disciples of Christ (Carter E. Boren, Religion on the Texas Fron- tier [1968]), although the latter carries the story well beyond 1885. Both religious groups held similar viewpoints, the Baptists stressing im- mersion while the Disciples emphasized a creedless adherence to Christ as the cornerstone of faith. In each group some opposed Sunday schools and missionary societies as not grounded in Scripture, but lack of support for missionary activity among the Baptists seems to have been due largely to financial problems.

The author summarizes Baptist beginnings before i865 and then discusses the Texas fron- tier, northwestern, western, and southwestern. He has consulted many sources including secu- lar and religious newspapers, church records, and secondary works. The average reader may find little interest in individuals and small con- gregations that made contributions to the Bap- tist enterprise, but the author attempts a thor-

ough presentation. He supports historians such as William W. Sweet, asserting that pioneer churches moderated the frightful loneliness of frontier life and both by example and by disci- plinary action aided law, order, and decency.

The difficulties encountered included a lack of financial resources and of a trained ministry, Indian depredations, droughts, grasshopper in- vasions, the prominence of the Catholic tradi- tion among Mexican settlers and of the Lu- theran faith among Germans, and splintering divisions among the Baptists. At times relations between white and black Baptists and wide- spread intemperance also presented real prob- lems. Restricted basically to a twenty-year pe- riod and to one denomination the book makes a limited but significant contribution to Ameri- can religious history.

FRANCIS PHELPS WEISENBURGER

Ohio State University

BEVERLEY BOWEN MOELLER. Phil Swing and Boulder Dam. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Uni- versity of California Press. 1971. Pp. xii, 199. $8.50.

Although the history of the American West is a much tilled field the record of Western growth in the twentieth century is still sketchy and ob- scure. And yet it is a vital part of the national experience. Hence this well-written monograph is especially welcome, for it illuminates not only an important aspect of Western develop- ment but presidential politics and public power policies during the twenties as well.

Mrs. Moeller's compact volume is mainly concerned with the efforts of California's Con- gressman Phil Swing to secure congressional approval for the building of Boulder Dam. Be- ginning in 1921 Swing fought singlemindedly for establishment of this project. Arrayed against him were private utility interests, large-scale real-estate developers like the Hearsts, and un- interested Easteners. The author carefully traces the tortuous path of Boulder Dam legislation during more than seven years of bitter struggle. Only in 1928 did congress finally authorize con- struction of what was then the biggest dam on earth. Mrs. Moeller concludes that the redesig- nated Hoover Dam was grossly misnamed since throughout the twenties Herbert Hoover had shown himself to be an inveterate opponent of public power and consistently opposed the project. Nevertheless, many historians have as-

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.157 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 06:56:32 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions