In the middle of the 19th century, the most infamous name known in the Americas was William Walker. William Walker was a private U.S. citizen who engaged in an act known then as “filibustering,” or the illegal military occupation of foreign territory by a private citizen of another country. Walker’s filibustering brings up a fascinating question when it comes to looking at U.S. imperialism in the 1850’s, and also in the general analysis of imperialism as a concept. Walker was a private citizen separate from the U.S. government, and engaged in imperialistic actions in the name of American culture and foreign policy attitudes toward Latin America. I will be arguing that William Walker’s filibuster of Nicaragua shows that during the 1850’s the U.S. was an empire that could not handle its own expansion. The fact that a private citizen like Walker could invade and occupy an entire country proves this. I also argue that although Walker was not directly sponsored by the U.S. government, he still acted as a representative of U.S. culture and ideals overseas.
Firstly, the word filibuster needs a definition and some context. When people think of the word “filibuster” in the American context., normally what comes to mind is the rhetoric tactic used in the U.S. Senate. However, during the mid-19th century the word had a completely different meaning. As scholar Andres Beer defines filibusters: “Filibusters were men who tried to invade countries by their own initiative, or supported such invasions by raising funds or supplies.”[1] The time period that filibustering was most prominent was the 1850’s up until the start of the Civil War. It typically was done solely by wealthy, private American citizens towards Latin American countries. Although William Walker is the most infamous example of filibustering there were others as well during this time, such as the American diplomat and politician Solon Borland, who like Walker also had interest in Nicaragua.[2]
William Walker was a southerner from Nashville, Tennessee. In terms of his early life, not much is known. He was born on the 8th of May 1824 in Nashville. In his adult life he studied medicine, law, and journalism. His interest in filibustering started when he moved to Marysville, California, where he met and spoke with French immigrants there: “It was from these French adventurers that Walker received his impetus to abandon the practice of law and try his talents in another field, and one which seemed to offer greater rewards for his ambition than the quiet pursuits of doctor, lawyer, or journalist.”[3] After he found his interest in filibustering in 1853 he attempted an invasion and occupation of northwestern Mexico. Specifically, the areas of the Baja California Peninsula and Sonora were of interest to him. However, he soon failed at occupying both of these areas of northwestern Mexico. Despite his failure, he was seen as a hero to Californians when he returned. Walker was put on trial for the crime of “filibustering,” but was soon acquitted. In Walker’s own work “The War in Nicaragua” (of which he refers to himself in the third person) he expresses his own defense of filibustering in Mexico: “The main fact for us to know is that those engaged in the Lower California expedition gave proof of their desire not to destroy, but to reorganize society wherever they went.”[4] Shortly afterwards, he was involved in the Californian Democratic party and then soon began looking towards his next victim of filibustering: Nicaragua.[5]
Walker in the end became more infamous for his time in Nicaragua than his time in Mexico. He had learned about the potential of invading Nicaragua from a journalist colleague of his, Byron Cole “who had developed a keen interest in Nicaragua and succeeded in imparting some of this to Walker.”[6] In 1854, Nicaragua was in the middle of a chaotic revolution that had been happening since 1830. The country was militantly split between two political parties: the Liberal party and the Legitimist party.[7] To Walker, this political chaos in the nation was the perfect opportunity for him to strike. In 1855, the conflict between the Liberals and Legitimists was resolved with an interim government under the presidency of Patricio Rivas from the Liberal party, who was essentially a puppet of Walker. The end result of this revolution would turn into Walker’s own presidency following Rivas’ for an entire year from 1856 to 1857.[8] In Walkers’ own words: “The policy of the Walker government was, of course, the same as that of Rivas, so far as the introduction of the white race into Nicaragua was concerned. But the administration of Rivas was, from its nature, transitional. It sought to increase the American element without inquiring what place the new people were to occupy in the old society.”[9] The most infamous action that Walker did during his presidency was reinstate slavery in Nicaragua. Eventually, Walker’s presidency came to an end by the hands of a military coalition of Central American governments consisting of Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. After being ousted, Walker returned to the U.S. and attempted to invade the region again in 1860, this time from the town of Trujillo, Honduras. He was caught by a British Royal Navy officer by the name of Nowell Salmon, who turned Walker into the Honduran government.[10] He was executed by a Honduran firing squad on September 12, 1860.
The story of Walker’s actions in the 1850’s is historically significant because it shows a different side of imperialism. As opposed to the U.S. government sending troops to Latin American territory or a company from the U.S. engaging in imperialistic actions, this was done by a private citizen not directly connected with the government or a company. The U.S. at this time was no longer a new nation trying to find its foothold in the world, but instead was an ever-expanding empire. Imperialism as well has its limits in what the entity engaging in it can or cannot do. Walker’s filibustering is a perfect example of showing the limits to which imperialism’s reach and effectiveness can reach. Filibustering shows that in history, imperialism evolves and takes many forms that can either greatly benefit or greatly harm the nation that is the invading force.
Not only is Walker’s story significant to understanding imperialism in general throughout history, but also specifically in the context of what was going on in the U.S. culturally and politically. During this time American slavery and its abolition, reform, or retainment was the primary political topic. Walker died before the U.S. Civil War started, however he himself had anxieties over the abolishing of slavery during this time: “The Republican party aims at destroying slavery by sap and not by assault. It declares now that the task of confining slavery is complete and the work has already commenced. Whither can the slaveholder fly when the enemy has completed his chambers and filled in the powder and prepared the train, and stands with lighted match ready to apply the fire?”[11] The fact was that Walker intended to expand and retain American-sponsored slavery in Nicaragua, as he was afraid of its abolition in the South. In his own words: “Something is due from the South to the memory of the brave dead who repose in the soil of Nicaragua. In defense of slavery these men left their homes, met with calmness and constancy the perils of a tropical climate, and finally yielded up their lives for the interests of the South.”[12] Walker wished to preserve slavery by any means possible. Although Walker was not directly sponsored by the U.S. government, he still was a representation of American culture and values. He wished to expand slavery and culturally reform Nicaragua in a Southern American vision. As well, a lack of significant response from the U.S. government in trying to stop Walker shows that he was not necessarily a burden to the reputation of the U.S. globally.
In
looking at Walker’s filibusters it is obvious that Walker was not a small force
to be ignored. Although his attempt at occupying northwestern Mexico in the end
failed, he managed to control the entire nation of Nicaragua via a puppet
president and then eventually become president for an entire year (1856-1857). Walker’s
filibusters are proof that in the mid-19th century, the U.S. was a
growing empire that could not handle its own expansion. In this time period,
private citizens like William Walker could employ an entire militia in order to
invade, occupy, and control an entire nation completely separate from the U.S.
government. When private citizens are able to do the same kind of imperialism
that an entire nation’s government can do, then it is a sign that that nation’s
imperialism is starting to get beyond its own control. Walker’s failures in
Mexico and his eventual execution by Central American governments as well
demonstrates that the act of filibustering was extremely temporary and was
bound to fail in the end. From Walker, the U.S. was learning how to handle its
own nation in engaging in imperialism.
[1] Beer, Andreas. A Transnational Analysis of Representations of the U.S. Filibusters in Nicaragua, 1855-1857. New York: Nature America, 2016, 26.
[2] Woods, James. “Expansionism as Diplomacy: The Career of Solon Borland in Central America 1853-1854.” The Americas 40, no. 3 (1984): 399-415.
[3] Scroggs, William. Filibusters and Financiers: The Story of William Walker and His Associates. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1916, 17.
[4] Walker, William. The War in Nicaragua. Mobile: S.H. Goetzel & Co., 1860, 23.
[5] Greene, Laurence. The Filibuster: The Career of William Walker. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1937, 46-50.
[6] Scroggs, 70.
[7] Scroggs, 82.
[8] Beer, Andreas. A Transnational Analysis of Representations of the U.S. Filibusters in Nicaragua, 1855-1857. New York: Nature America, 2016, 9.
[9] Walker, 251.
[10] Greene, 325.
[11] Walker, 277-278.
[12] Walker, 279-280.