when he made the decision of whether or not to send the treaty to Congress. The president had more than a fair excuse to renounce the treaty; it had been attained by a former-minister to Mexico who held no power at the time he offered the deal to Mexico. Some other foreign policy theories explain the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo fairly, but they are not nearly as convincing as the above-mentioned state-centric theory. The domestic question over slavery was not truly considered by either Trist or Polk in their actions following the break in the war. The notion that relative power played a large role does not fit either. The only power with which the US had chance to gain was Great Britain; but Polk foresaw that the world's greatest power had little interest in California after the war had begun (Britain did not value California enough to fight the US). It may be argued quite eloquently, that the US public opinion and mass ideology affected Trist, Polk or Congress in their decisions regarding the treaty. However, it is obvious from the president's diary that Polk had his sights on California long before the public. In addition, there is little evidence that Trist was acting in support of public opinion when he defied Polk's orders to return to the US. Finally, Congress may indeed have been influenced by their respective constituencies and by popular opinion, but their decision, which was inevitable, affected foreign policy the least of the three (had Congress rejected the treaty, Polk still would have controlled future foreign policy). President James K. Polk had a strong will, a sharp acumen, and a solid understanding of foreign relations. These qualities coupled with his achievement of almost all of his foreign policy goals, cause many historians to rate him as one of the half-dozen "great" presidents. Polk was able to control foreign relations for the most part by making strong-willed decisions and enacting a consistent policy; a policy...
