-
American Public Opinions and the Purchase of Russian America
- University of Washington Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
American Public Opinion and the Purchase of Russian America RICHARD E. WELCH, JR. It has been accepted as axiomatic by writers ofAmerican history that the purchase ofAlaska was unpopular. Terms such as "Icebergia, " "Walrussia, " and "Seward's Folly" have been repeated from newspapers of the time to suggest that Americans thought the territory was a land ofperpetual ice and snow and that it was worth· less. Several often-reprinted editorial cartoons of the era have contributed to the familiar interpretation. There is significant evidence that the purchase was not as unpopular as the traditional interpretation holds. There was in fact a considerable body of accurate information on Alaska available in 7867, collected by observers and scientists from several nations over the years, including the U.S. Moreover, Alaska was purchased by treaty. A treaty does not become law under the U.S. Constitution unless ratified by a two-thirds majority of the Senate. Supporters of the Alaska Treaty, most particularly the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee , Charles Sumner of Massachusetts, obtained the necessary vote on the first try, when the count was 27 to 72. The final official tally was 37 to 2. Sumner's speech to the Senate on the day of the vote shows that he was quite familiar with real Alaska conditions. America was in an expansionist mood at the time, and William Seward was a generally popular Secretary of State. It should not be surprising , therefore, that despite the fact that Alaska was the first noncontiguous acquisition of the U.S., the two-thirds majority was fairly handily obtained. Why, then, has the myth of unpopularity been so persistent? It is partly because of a general ignorance about Alaska on the part of most Americans, including the writers of general textbooks. But also, there was considerably more enthusiasm in Congress for the notion of purchasing Alaska than there was for spending the money necessary to administer it, to which there was significant opposition . Also, at the very time of the purchase, Congress was involved in two of This article appeared originally in American Slavic and East European Review 17 (1958): 481-94; it is reprinted here by permission. 102 Public Opinion and the Purchase of Russian America 103 the most significant constitutional crises in American history, southern Reconstruction and the impeachment of Andrew johnson, leading to much acrimonious criticism of the executive branch. Over three decades ago Professor Richard Welch of the History Department at Lafayette College in Pennsylvania surveyed the major newspapers in the U.S. at the time of the purchase. He found that nearly all of them either supported the purchase editorially or at least did not oppose it. We reprint Welch's article here, as Morgan Sherwood did in 1967, in the hope that it will raise awareness concerning the complex nature of the reaction to the Alaska Purchase and lay to rest "once and for all" the traditional myth. Students should note also a more recent analysis of the charges ofbribery associated with the Alaska purchase, Paul Holbo's Tarnished Expansion: The Alaska Scandal, the Press, and Congress, 1867-1871 (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983). The American purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867 is often cited today as an example of providential intervention in behalf of America 's national security. Commentators shudder at the thought of Soviet air bases in what was once Russian America and praise the nearmiraculous foresight of Secretary of State William Seward. Constituting as it does the only real estate transaction ever completed by Russia and America, Seward's annexation of Alaska properly holds a rather unique place in the diplomatic annals of both countries. The tendency of textbook writers to overdramatize the role of Providence and to imply that Seward alone saw the value of Russian America is, however, both mistaken and unfortunate.1 It tends to make the Alaska Treaty of 1867 the mysterious property of a single individual, a thing foisted on the American people and accepted by them, reluctantly, only from a sense of obligation to Russia for her supposed aid to the Union government during the Civil War. It is possibly congenial to our current self-esteem to believe that only in our generation have Americans appreciated the value of American ownership of Alaska. Such a view, if gratifying, is incorrect. Contemporary public opinion-as reflected in the newspapers of the day-was far from universally opposed to our purchase of Alaska.2 The initial response of certain...