Proposed United States annexation of Santo Domingo

When the annexation was proposed, Santo Domingo had experienced decades of political instability, marked by civil wars, coups, and foreign occupations. Dominicans suffered under Haitian rule, which repressed their Dominican culture and Spanish language in favor of French. Following their achievement of independence in 1844, they experienced periods of both Republican and Authoritarian rule, characterized by political elites like Buenaventura Baez (who favored US annexation) and Pedro Santana (who favored Spanish annexation). In 1861, the country was occupied by Spanish forces, sparking a brutal guerrilla war for independence known as the restoration war, which devastated the nation's economy and society. The post-restoration period saw ongoing power struggles between Baez and his political opponents. Baez repeatedly sought U.S. annexation to secure his grip on power, whilst also stabilizing the economy and gaining protection from Haiti. He presented the country's instability as a justification for foreign intervention, which critics viewed as prioritizing his own political power over national sovereignty. ==Annexation proposal==

Threatened by Haitian invasion, the Dominican government had asked to be annexed to the United States during President Andrew Johnson’s administration in 1867. However, refusal by Congress meant that this didn’t make any progress. As well as facing the threat from Haiti, which had been present since the invasion of Toussaint Louverture in 1801, there was the threat of internal revolt due to the tumultuous politics of Santo Domingo. There were a small group of American settlers on Santo Domingo, including William Cazneau and Joseph Fabens, who had arrived in the 1850s and, after pursuing the wealth of the island, owned one-tenth of the land in the Dominican Republic. They became involved in Dominican politics, and by the time Grant was in power self-interest caused fear of the impacts that volatile internal politics could have on their wealth. With these motives they supported the idea of annexing Santo Domingo to the US, and managed to gain the support of President Baez. However despite Baez’s attempts to sell Samaná bay and peninsula to the US in 1868, it was only when Grant was in power that Fabens managed to secure presidential support for the proposal of wider annexation. Grant initially rejected ideas of expansion, but Fabens managed to persuade him of the benefits of annexation. This may have been because Grant believed that a separate annexation project in the Caribbean would have more success than previous attempts by his predecessors to annex the territory of Saint Thomas and that he had a greater chance of success due to the control his party had over Congress and the Committee of Foreign Affairs in both houses. Rather than official diplomatic authority, Grant personally gave Babcock special agent status with an introduction letter for the Dominican president. Grant feared that other European powers would take control of Santo Domingo and used the need to maintain the Monroe Doctrine as one of his reasons behind annexation. Grant's vision aligned with the doctrine and its aim to protect US interests from that of Europe in the western hemisphere, and by using its language he justified expansion. However it went further than this in that, whilst earlier iterations of the doctrine (which was established in 1823) sought to remove European influence so the US could sustain their presence in a slave based economy, Grant aimed to use the annexation as part of his larger goal to expand liberty and freedom throughout the hemisphere. == Racial aspect to the argument ==

The annexation proposal was both reinforced and hindered by white nationalist ideas. In the post-Civil War U.S., the American notion of manifest destiny had evolved to encompass territory outside of continental America. There were many white Americans and US senators who feared incorporating a racially mixed population into the U.S., largely due to its capacity to dilute the white vote and reshape the status quo, as well as associating the prospective new population with moral decline. In addition to the coaling station, Grant felt that the Dominican Republic's immense resources could provide sustenance for the mass emigration of African Americans from the South of the U.S. to Santo Domingo. He hoped that this exodus would benefit America, Santo Domingo, and the African Americans since it would lower the chances of a race war within the U.S.; provide skilled workers to the island; and enable the 4 million newly emancipated African Americans in the southern U.S. to leave the racism and poverty of the post-war South and start their own republican nation under the guidance of the U.S. In his final annual address to the nation in 1876, Grant said that the annexation would have raised the material and political fortunes of millions of African Americans. Their mass movement to Santo Domingo would have made African Americans “master of the situation, by enabling them to demand [their] rights at home on pain of finding them elsewhere.” Grant also felt that if the U.S. used its resources and technology to turn Santo Domingo into a huge producer of tropical goods (like tobacco and sugar) then it would reduce America's reliance on trade with slave states like Brazil and Cuba, thus helping to end slavery in the Americas. Although Grant framed the proposal as a moral effort to protect Dominicans, reinforce the Monroe Doctrine, and provide a haven for African Americans fleeing persecution in the Reconstruction South, this rhetoric has been debated by historians as masking deeper concerns of racial integration and white supremacy. Grant’s list outlining his reasons behind annexation, ‘Reasons Why Santo Domingo Should be Annexed to the United States?’, argued: ‘The colored man cannot be spared until his place is supplied, but with a refuge like Santo Domingo his worth here would soon be discovered and he would soon receive such recognition as to induce him to stay: or if Providence designed that the two races should not live together he would find a home in the Antillas’ However Nicholas Guyatt argues that the annexation process should be seen in a more complex context rather than a racist plan more similar to the earlier efforts of the American Colonization Society. The annexation of Santo Domingo was discussed where it would be incorporated into the U.S. as a state of the Union and supporters of annexation believed that this would come with significant white migration to the Caribbean, rather than it being a way of removing the African American population. File:Dominican Republic, 1871)- The Diago Columbus Spring on the Ozania River, ... Seamen filling casks with fresh water LCCN2003655462.jpg File:Dominican Republic, 1871- The wife of Salnave being tried before a Justice of the Peace for an assault in Samana City LCCN2003655458.jpg File:Dominican Republic, 1871)- Group of natives around a well in Samana City LCCN2003655457.jpg File:Dominican Republic, 1871)- Cabrals coming- firing of the alarm at Azua to call together the natives to repel invasion LCCN2003655465.tif File:Santo Domingo City Taylor 1871.tif == Abolitionists and annexation ==

The prospect of annexing Santo Domingo was discussed not only among Grant and official policy makers, but also among non-state actors such as abolitionists. Within the context of Reconstruction and recent post-Civil War emancipation, annexation on equal terms to the states of the U.S. and the promise of gaining one hundred and fifty thousand new black citizens, was seen as having great potential. Despite this, annexation saw mixed views among black leadership. While P. B. S. Pinchback and Gerrit Smith argued that the move would split the Republican Party and that this was only the start of Grant’s plan to annex the whole island, other leaders, such as Frederick Douglass and Hiram R. Revels, supported annexation. Douglass supported the treaty in the hopes that it would improve poor economic and political conditions in Santo Domingo, and also believed that it would bring mutual benefits, giving Santo Domingo a stable government and providing the U.S. with rich territory. Despite opposition and the idea that annexation would make black people appear unfit for self government, he argued that Santo Domingo was too weak to survive independently and that the extension of the ideals of liberty and equality present in the U.S. would help the country progress. Revels saw the U.S. with a Christian duty to extend its institutions towards Santo Domingo. Abolitionist Samuel Howe was also a supporter of the treaty. Howe was a close friend of Sumner, and though both men were abolitionists, they were completely opposed on annexation, with Howe supporting it. Nicholas Guyatt argues that, along with Sumner, Howe was a key figure in Santo Domingo debates, but unlike his friend, supported the annexation. Despite this position and his supposed opposition to racial segregation, Howe made use of the same logic of race and climate that figures such as Sumner used in critiquing annexation. He insisted that different climates existed on the Santo Domingo side of the island compared to the Haiti side in order to gain support and also spent time trying to whiten Dominicans in comparison to their Haitian neighbors, in a bid to make annexation seem more favorable. Efforts were similarly made by Douglass, who was reported as saying the Dominicans were ‘a far superior people to the Haytians.’ ==Annexation treaty created==

In September 1869, Babcock returned to Washington with a draft treaty of annexation. Grant's cabinet was stunned, not knowing that Babcock had planned to draw up an annexation treaty. Grant presented Babcock's informal treaty for his Cabinet to read, however, no Cabinet member offered any discussion on the treaty. Grant then asked Fish to draw up a formal diplomatic treaty, since Babcock did not have diplomatic authority. Having not been consulted on the Dominican treaty process, Fish was ready to resign from the Cabinet, however, Grant intervened having told Fish he would have complete control of the State Department, except for the Dominican Republic annexation treaty. Fish and Grant privately agreed that Fish would remain on the Cabinet and support Dominican annexation while Grant would not support Cuban belligerence during the Ten Years' War. On October 19, 1869, Fish drew up a formal treaty; the United States would annex the Dominican Republic, pay $1,500,000 () on the Dominican national debt, offer the Dominican Republic the right to U.S. statehood, and the U.S. would rent Samaná Bay at $150,000 per annum for 50 years. According to Grant's biographer, Jean Edward Smith, Grant initially erred by not gaining U.S. public support and by keeping the treaty process secret from the U.S. Senate. ==Grant visited Sumner==

On January 2, 1870, prior to the formal treaty being submitted to the Senate, Grant made an unprecedented visit to Senator Charles Sumner at his home in Washington, D.C. Grant specifically informed Sumner of the Dominican Republic annexation treaty hoping for Sumner's support. Sumner was the powerful Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his support for the Dominican Republic treaty was crucial for passage in the Senate. The dialogue between the two men has been the subject of debate and controversy since the meeting. ==Treaty submitted and failure==

On January 10, 1870, Grant formally submitted Fish's Dominican Republic annexation treaty to the U.S. Senate. The treaty was stalled in the Senate until Sumner's Foreign Relations Committee started hearings in mid February, 1870. Sumner allowed the treaty to be debated openly on the Committee without giving his own opinion. However, on March 15, Sumner's Foreign Relations Committee in a closed session voted to oppose the treaty 5 to 2. Grant refused the suggestion that the treaty drop the Dominican statehood clause. Eventually on the evening of June 30, 1870, the Senate defeated the Dominican Republic annexation treaty by a vote of 28 to 28. Eighteen Republican senators joined Sumner to defeat the Dominican annexation treaty. ==Aftermath and repercussions==

Grant was livid at the treaty’s failure to pass the Senate and blamed Sumner’s opposition for the defeat; he had believed that Sumner originally supported the treaty after their meeting in 1870, despite the misunderstanding that seemed to have occurred. Shortly after the treaty’s defeat, Grant fired the U.S. Ambassador to Britain, John Lothrop Motley, which was interpreted as an insult to Sumner since they were close friends. claiming there was widespread local support for annexation. However they failed to generate enough enthusiasm in the Senate to overcome the overall opposition to the annexation. As the aforementioned local plebiscite on annexation only involved 30% of the Dominican electorate, the whole affair may have failed to adequately account for the wishes of the population regarding annexation versus continued independence. == Commission for the Annexation of Santo Domingo ==

The commission found itself in favor of annexation, despite conflicting interests amongst its members. Frederick Douglass found himself at odds with his close friend Charles Sumner, who was a staunch critic and opponent of the annexation in the U.S. senate. Douglass had also previously supported independence and self-governance for Black-majority nations in the Caribbean, only recently expressing his support for Cuban resistance in the Ten years war. Despite these reasons he ultimately found himself advocating for annexation after witnessing firsthand the poverty, political instability and devastation caused by slavery and civil war in the region. Douglass's participation was symbolic of the tensions between racial solidarity and the realities of U.S. foreign policy during the reconstruction era. Despite his efforts, the senate rejected the annexation proposal, highlighting the limits of black political influence in shaping imperial policy in this era. == Domestic political fallout ==

The annexation debate had lasting political consequences, fueling a rift within the Republican Party. President Grant's aggressive use of his power to force through the treaty — including sending a naval vessel to transport the commission without Senate approval, led to accusations of executive overreach and imperial ambition. His use of political backchannels — sending Babcock, an ally from his military days — to discuss treaty terms instead of elected state diplomats led to accusations of corruption and helped galvanize opposition amongst Liberal Republicans like Sumner. These tensions would culminate in the Liberal Republican revolt of 1872, when a coalition of disillusioned Republicans and anti-imperialists broke from the party to challenge Grant's re-election. The failed annexation was emblematic of broader concerns: the growing power of the presidency, overseas interference, imperial expansionism, and a perceived abandonment of the moral ideals that defined the party during the Civil War. ==See also==