USA > Texas > Montgomery County > A History of Montgomery County, Texas > Part 8
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13
Ammunition will be furnished -- news from every quar- ter of the country assures us that the enemy is collect- ing rapidly on the waters of the Nueces, and that spies
J. H. Brown, History of Texas (St. Louis: Becktold and Company, 1893), Vol. II, p. 233.
122
under Woll's command have lately been recognized in the town of San Antonio.
To be successful it will require a force of 1800 or 2500 men. The citizens of this section of the country are kind and hospitable and rejoice on our arrival, Beef in abundance. We shall take up the line of march in 12 days for the enemy.
Dispatches of an earnest character have already been delivered to the counties of the West and South of Mont- gomery; and be assured that the law with all my influence will rest on the shoulders of all the defaulters. I am fully satisfied there is a formidable enemy East of the Rio Grande.
You will be required to report to me immediately on your arrival at Headquarters -- and particularly all deserters. On your arrival at the town of Montgomery E. V. Cawthorn, who is acting and aiding the march of the 3rd Regiment yet in the rear, under my order of 23rd of Sept., 1842, will report to you the number for - warded, those sick and wholly unable to bear arms and the No. of the Beat of their present residence. .
You will require all to furnish themselves with 5 days provisions, and 100 rounds of ammunition if possible.
J. L. Bennett, Col. Commanding, 3rd. Reg. 2nd Brig. , Texas M.
Endorsed: Sam Houston Washington, 18th Cctober, 1842.
The remainder of the troops of the Ist and 2nd classes of the 3rd Regiment, Montgomery County, are hereby commanded to report at Whiteside's near the Brazos, and be ready to march from that point for the West, on Thursday morning, the 27th inst. in accordance
123
with the above order.
R. Smithers, Major, 3rd Reg. 2nd Brig. Texas M
Montgomery Cty., Texas, Oct. 19, 1842. 23
The men from Montgomery County under Major Smithers reported to Colonel Bennett at the place which had been designated. After reporting the men had to wait some time before the other companies arrived. Due to waiting for the other volunteer com- panies, getting them organized into a regiment, and electing of
regimental officers, there was considerable delay. Many of the men grew impatient and the militia regiment of McCrocklin, and the greater portion of Bennett's militiamen, under various excuses and pretenses, returned home. 24
The command to march was finally given by General Somer - vell, and Colonel Bennett along with the men left from Montgomery County, proceeded to the Rio Grande in chase of the Mexican forces. They reached the Rio Grande and after much dalliance on the part of General Somervell, many of the men became disgusted with Somervell's leadership, and contention ran high to go home. Somer- vell felt the dissatisfaction among his men, so on December 11 the
23 Original order of Colonel J. L. Bennett to Major R. Smithers, commander of Third Regiment of Montgomery County, Texas Militia, October 15, 1842, in Sam Houston Memorial Museum.
24 Brown, op. cit., p, 234.
124
following actions were taken:
. . . Next morning Somervell paraded the men and said, all who desired to return home could honorably do so; but that he desired all who were willing to follow him down the river and that he would cross below anc chastise the enemy who had so devastated our frontier. The result was, no one having much faith, that Col, Bennett and a few men yet following his lead with Captains Jerome B. and E. S. C. Robert - son, with their companies, in all about two hundred men, returned home via San Patricio and Victoria, 25
The regiments from Montgomery County returned home; therefore they did not suffer what befell the men who stayed and fought at the battle of Mier.
Montgomery County took an active part in the annexation issue of 1845. Early in the year the town of Montgomery held a mass meeting for the purpose of annexing Texas to the United States. An outline of the meeting follows:
Montgomery, Texas, May 10, 1845.
Dr, E. J. Arnold presided at a mass meeting held here to annex Texas to the United States.
J. M. Wade acted as secretary; Dr. Charles B. Stewart delivered the principal address.
On the resolution committee were: Ben Rigby, N. H, Davis, H. McGuffin, G. W. Mason, J. M. Lewis, Willis Landrum, B. J, Rankin, Charles B. Stewart, and Raleigh Rogers. 26
- 23 Ibid., p. 238.
26 Newspaper clipping, May 10, 1845, in Addison Collection.
125
The annexation resolution passed the United States
Congress and the notice of this action was received by President Anson Jones of Texas. On May 15, 1845 Jones called a convention of sixty-one delegates to meet at Austin on July 4 to decide what re- sponse the people of Texas should make concerning annexation and a new constitution. 27
The number of delegates sent from each county was based upon the number of votes cast in the recent election. Each county was en- titled to at least one delegate. The counties entitled to more than two delegates were: Montgomery four, Harris three, Nacogdoches three, Red River three, Harrison three, and Washington three. 28
The convention met on July 4 and remained in session until August 27, during which time it framed a new constitution for the State of Texas and accepted the terms of annexation offered by the ates.2 United States. 29 One of the four delegates sent to the annexation convention by Montgomery County was Charles B. Stewart. 30
While the necessary procedures for annexation were being
27 Dudley G. Wooten, History of Texas (Dallas: Texas History Company, 1899), p. 305.
28 T. C. Richardson, East Texas: Its History and Its Makers (New York; Lewis Historical Publishing Company, 1940), Vol. I, p. 139.
29 Wooten, loc. cit.
30 Louis W. Kemp, The Signers of the Texas Declaration of Inde - pendence (Houston: The Anson Jones Press, 1944), p. 334.
126
carried out, Sam Houston, a great advocate for statehood, was busy lobbying and scouring about the different states while making speeches for annexation. In Greensboro, North Carolina, Sam Houston made a speech and a brother of one of Montgomery's citizens described the speech in a letter. The letter was delivered to Montgomery by Sam Houston, himself, and is quoted as follows:
A favorable opportunity presents of writing you by Gen. Houston. He has this day made a speech here on the subject of Texas. He is a happy speaker and im- pressed us all very favorably of his talents and also of his motives on the annexation of Texas. I am a strong believer now in annexation, at least so far as feeling is concerned. If there be such a thing as destiny and coming events cast their shadows before, me thinks . that state will be my abdicating place. Several gentlemen of this neighbor- hood speak of visiting Texas this winter. If the company is made I think I shall join them. I am not fit by situation to get along by the side of wealthy men who will buy the best lands at big prices, thus excludes me who have not the cash and who wont run in debt. .... Heard Gen. Houston today and he is enthusiastic for Texas. .
P. S. I recd. your letter of Aug. John McDaniel wants to know if you know anything of Douglass who ran from this country with property and leaving debts minus some hundreds and is since reported dead. How long after a man moves to Texas before he can be compelled to pay debts to foreigners ? 31
On October 13, 1845, the voters of Texas approved both the terms of annexation and the state constitution. The constitution was accepted by the United States Congress, and President Polk on 3Ī Letter of Stephen Davis to Nat Hart Davis, September 17, 1845, in Addison Collection.
127
December 29, 1845, signed the act that made Texas one of the United States of America. 32
Shortly after the reconstruction period, following the Civil War, a feud between the town of Montgomery and Willis occurred, which lasted sixteen years. The issue grew out of an attempt on the part of Willis to get the county seat moved from Montgomery to its site. Willis had newly become a railroad town with a rapid increase in population. It had mushroomed up over night by taking the business of the near by town of Danville and many of those from Montgomery. Since Willis had increased in population so much many of its civic minded citizens thought that if the county seat could be moved to Willis it would be in a short while the leading town in the county. Another reason given was the claim by the people of Willis that Montgomery was not near enough to the center of the county to make it convenient for the citizens on the east side of the county to transact county business. Montgomery looked upon Willis' efforts to get the county seat as a radical reconstruction movement, a rape of an institution which had been her birthright, and a plain front for a few to get rich by the business that a county seat would bring. 33
-
32 Wooten, op. cit., p. 306 33 Personal interview of the author with Mrs. J. B. Addison, Montgomery, Texas, July 8, 1952.
128
The beginning of the feud was in 1873 when the citizens of Willis petitioned the governor regarding the removal of the county seat to the town of Willis. The petition sent by the people to the governor read as follows:
. . . We reply further that the present court house is about 50 feet by 50 feet with a 15 feet hall and 4 rooms on the basement story 25 by 17 feet, 2 rooms on each side of Hall and on 2nd story one mail hall or Court Room. All ceiled and weatherboarded with plain Box finish -- has been erected near 20 years -- and is much worn.
The jail is only about 5 years old. A complete failure, insecure as we are ready to prove. Every criminal who expects to be hung or go to the penitentiary, unless closely guarded, goes out, to wit: Alexander Baugh for murder and Brunnan for murder and others. The pro- testants say $25, 000 or $30, 000 will be needed to re- move Court house and jail, archives etc. from Mont- gomery to Willis, The great object of this is to in- flame the mind of the People on the subject of taxation and expense and the financial ruin of the county.
We answer further, that the Town of Willis has 2 blocks donated by the Houston and Great Northern Rail Road, a beautiful location and for which Blocks said company could readily realize the sum of $2, 000. 34
By the middle of the next year the matter had become serious for the people of Montgomery because the citizens of Willis petitioned the Commissioners Court in July for an election to be held to deter- mine if the courthouse should stay in Montgomery or be moved to Willis. The court considered the petition and announced that an 34 Memorial Petitions, 1873, in Texas State Archives, Number 194.
129
election would be held on August 25, 1874. 35 When the election was held and the returns counted by E. A. Linton, the presiding justice, he found that there had been six hundred forty-six votes cast for Montgomery and seven hundred eighty-eight votes cast for Willis. 36 Linton declared that Willis did not have the two-thirds majority necessary to carry the election; therefore, he certified that the county seat remained at Montgomery.
When the opposite side heard of this clever maneuver by those supporting the cause of Montgomery, they immediately claimed that a two-thirds majority was not needed but merely a majority, so they acted accordingly:
That on the return day of said election and after the Presiding Justice, Linton, had fairly inspected, estimated, counted, recorded, determined, and declared the result of the election, and given the certificate in favor of the town of Montgomery, one A. Richards, D. A. Wiggins, and B. H. Nash being three other justices of said county, without warrants of law and without said Presiding Justice, illegally assumed and pretended to meet together as a County Court, and issued a pretended certificate in favor of the town of " illis, and issued an order for the removal of the county seat of said county from the town of Montgomery to Willis, together with the records, etc., by the 14th of September, 1874. 37
35 Montgomery County Courthouse Records, Commissioners Court Minutes, Book A, p. 45.
36 Montgomery v. s. Willis in the Supreme Court at Galveston, January term, 1875, booklet owned by T, W. Crawford, Conroe, Texas, p
37 Loc. cit.
130
The citizens of Montgomery protested bitterly over the methods used by the unauthorized presiding justices. They con- sidered that the election was a fraud and decided to let the courts determine the outcome; so the citizens filed charges against Willis. The case finally went to the Texas Supreme court which had convened in Galveston.
Willis disregarded this procedure and went ahead to make plans to transfer the county records and to select a courthouse site. By September 30, 1874 some of the county officials, those who were citizens of Willis, were meeting at the new location. The commis- sioners court met without the records, because Montgomery had re- fused to give them up, and made plans to select a site in Willis for the courthouse. The following action was recorded in the minutes:
Whereas, it having come to the knowledge of the County Court of Montgomery County now in session in the Town of Willis the County Seat of said County through Mr. J. E. George Attorney for the I & G. N. R. R. Co. that said Co. proposed and agreed in event of the County Seat of Montgomery County being removed to the town of Willis to donate and convey to said County certain Blocks or parcels of land within the corporate limits of the Town of Willis (to wit) Blocks 21 & 22 and such other lots as said Co. may see proper to convey for their purpose of erecting Public buildings, etc.
Enough of the records were stolen from Montgomery to carry on the County's business in Willis, and by October the commissioners
38 Commissioners Court Minutes, op. cit., p. 6.
131
made plans for constructing a courthouse. They authorized the pro tempore presiding justice, A. Richards, to receive plans, proposals, and estimates for the building of a courthouse in the town of Willis to be not less than fifty feet square and two stories high. 39
Matters had become so involved by the end of the year that the Texas State Legislature had to pass a special act to designate where the district court would be held for the coming year. The act that the Legislature passed is as follows:
Whereas, Litigation is now going on to determine whether the town of Montgomery, or of Willis, is the county site of Montgomery county; and Whereas, The records of said county have been moved from the town of Montgomery, heretofore the county site of said county, to Willis; and Whereas, It is proper to remove all doubts about the validity of judicial preceedings, had in said county during the pendency of the litigation or controversy about the county sit e thereof; therefore,
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas, That the sheriff of Montgomery county is authorized and required, and it is made his duty, to immediately move or cause to be moved, all the records of said county from Willis to the town of Montgomery, and to deliver, or to cause them to be delivered to the proper and legal custody of the officers entitled to them.
Sec. 2. That the terms of the district and county courts of said county shall be held at, and all officers (offices) required to be kept at, and all sales required to be made at county sites, shall be made at the town of Montgomery, until it is legally determined that some other place is the county site of said county.
39 Ibid., p. 61
132
40° Approved January 29, 1875.
In compliance with the act, on April 15 the records were moved back to Montgomery, and the Willis paper reported the incident as follows:
The County Records were moved from Villis back to Montgomery, on Monday last. Judge Masterson, dissolved the injunction, restraining the Officers from removing the records in accordance with an act of doubtful con- stitutionality worded through the Legislature by Dr. C. B. Stewart, just before that body adjourned; not- withstanding the matter was pending before the Supreme
Court. 41
In May 1875 the court had disregarded the act and continued to hold its session in Willis, for, E. A. Linton, Chief Justice, filed a protest against the court being held in Willis. 42 The feud went on through the years 1876 and 1877, each town insisting that it had the right to be considered the county seat. The county records were changed back and forth so often that some of the officials got them and guarded them in their homes. 43
The case which had been pending in the Supreme Court was
finally reached on its agenda and the decision was decided in
-
40 H. P. N. Gammel, The Laws of Texas, 1822-1897 (Austin: The Gammel Book Company, 1898), Vol. VIII, p. 605.
41 Villis Observer, April 20, 1875.
42 Commissioners Court Minutes, op. cit., p. 81.
43 Addison, loc. cit.
133
Montgomery's favor. The people of Willis immediately circulated another petition for another election.
One of the Willisites who held the office of the County Judge wrote a friend concerning the controversy and pending election. The letter is quoted as follows :
, As to the subject matter of your letter I think you have been misinformed.
Ist. I know of no probable candidates (democratic) for any important county office, and if there is any such beast in existance I know not what trail it will follow in this courthouse matter. I have no political affiliation with that party, nor ever expect to and then for I am in the dark as to any of their ultimate designs, except as to those in your delictable little village and there as I have been informed, will cling, in all events, to their bulldozing tactics.
2nd. Mr. Harrell and myself are not hoping anything, at least I am not. When this movement began we both agreed that if we took any active part in the matter the damned, infernal, disgraceful old war -whoop of the Montgomery bulldozers would be shouted forth over the country "down with it, it is a d ---- d radical trick etc. etc. " And so I have done nothing so far except to sign the petition for an election and perhaps casually converse with a friend in quiet manner about the subject.
Of course an election will be had at no distant day, but as I am not one of the managers I have made no calculations in figures as to the probable results, nor do I know what those are which may have been made by gentlemen who can speak of the matter with more im- purity than I can. If the colored people of your precinct and the white Greenbackers unite and vote together for the B. S. i. e .. Montgomery, it will be a clear race, of if the mass of the colored people either stay at home and not vote at all, or go and poll their ballots for right and justice, then Willis will have an easy go of it. But
134
how all this will be when the time comes to test it I know not. I could canvass your precinct and Willis precinct in 3 or 4 days and come pretty near guessing the result, but oh my God! I have no idea of such an adventure; I would just as soon undertake to canvass the hunting grounds of the Ute Indians.
Yourself, Lintons, Dan Womack, John Ferguson, Dave Garrol and friends that you may be able to gather around you will, which ever way you go, if you work together and are active, in my opinion, control the re- sult, for that will be taut amount to an absolute consoli- dation of the colored vote west of the San Jacinto river and give the mud hole another five years lease of rascal- ity unwhipped.
To be candid with you, the center has been and is now my individual preference and I would readily untie with any party in an effort to get the county seat there. 1st. it is the place where, is justice to all the people of the county and the county seat ought to be. 2nd. and there- fore no reasonable person could object to it. 3rd. I would put an ever lasting quietus on this disagreeable and unprofitable contentiousness between Montgomery and Willis, and would not we be glad of that? 4th. the necessary buildings could be erected at less cost etc; and many others.
But nothing can be done in that direction without cooperation with Montgomery.
However, one thing is certain that, whoever has any aspirations to any county office at the next election, had better keep his eyes open, and damned wide at that, for if every county convention which may be held this year "aint" chock full of bolters it will surprise me. Another thing is certain, if the Greenbackers stick togehter with this special motto "Fair election-no intimidation" they can easily elect their entire ticket. Division on any subject will render reorganization impossible. 44
44 Letter of J. M. Lewis to J. R, Davis, January 5, 1880, in Addison Collection.
135
The petition was considered by the court and an election was called to be held on April 2, 1880. Both towns solicited every possible vote and all methods known to politics and politi- cians were used in an endeavor to win the election. Many non-resi- dent voters were brought in by both towns from other counties to ensure victory. When the votes were counted they were watched closely by the officials from both towns. To the chagrin of Willis, at the end of the enumeration of the ballots Montgomery had 1, 308 votes and Willis had 1, 243 votes. Montgomery had a majority of 45 sixty-five votes which again enabled her to snatch the county seat away from Willis.
Willis did not give up the fight, however, for she waited anxiously for nine more years before she again saw her chance to get even with her old rival, Montgomery. By 1889 there was a new town in the county which was becoming rather important. The railroad-sawmill town of Conroe, like Willis, wished for the county seat. Through the instigation of Willis, Conroe circulated a petition for an election. On May 6, 1889 an election was held and with the combined vote of Conroe, Willis, and Leonidas; Conroe won the election by a majority of sixty-two votes.
Willis did not get the county seat but her vengeance was
45 Commissioners Court Minutes, op. cit., p. 366.
136
satisfied in that Montgomery did not keep it. Today there is still a feeling of contention between the old residents of both towns, each side claiming that the other used illegitimate tactics in the elections.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES
Most of the following biographical sketches of men of Montgomery County represent veterans of the Battle of San Jacinto. It is to be regretted that numerous individuals who played a promi- nent part in the history of this section had to be omitted for many could not be included due to limitations imposed by the scope of this thesis. Those
H. Richard Williams who lived near Danville was a native of Georgia. He came to Texas about 1834 and was in the whole of the Bexar campaign in 1835. He was in Captain John M. Bradley's company, and was severely wounded by a canister shot which struck a pistol at his side, thus saving his life, His accident occurred in what is known as the Grass Fight which happened just in sight of San Antonio, near the old grave yard west of the city. William remained until the city was taken, and he was ready for duty again by the time of the battle of San Jacinto. He fought in
137
the third company of the second regiment while in the San Jacinto battle. He was also in another campaign subsequent to the battle of San Jacinto.
In 1842 he marched with volunteers from Montgomery against Adrian Woll's Mexican forces, but due to a severe attach of sickness he was delayed along the way and therefore escaped the fate that fell to the Mier prisoners. 46
Jonathan, Jacob, and James Collard came to Texas in 1834 and settled near Danville. They were born in Missouri, and Jonathan was the oldest son of Colonel Elijah Collard, who was a member of the Consultation that convened in San Felipe in 1835. Jonathan, Jacob, and James served in campaigns prior and subsequent to the San Jacinto battle. 47
Matthew Cartwright was a native of Alabama, and removed with his father and family to Texasabout the year 1833. He was, for a time, a mess mate of J. H. Shepperd in the campaign at Bexar in 1835 while serving in Captain Joe L. Bennett's company. The army at Bexar was under the command of General Austin. When the call was made for volunteers to make a reconnaissance up river, and look out a place for the troops to encamp nearer the enemy, Cartwright turned out and was one of eighty-two raw
47 Loc. cit.
138
Texans who, under Bowie and Fannin, severely drubbed the Mexican infantry and cavalry by killing and wounding a hundred and twenty and inflicting a defeat that dampened Mexican courage for the remainder of that campaign. Cartwright was compelled to return home before Bexar fell, and his next service was in Captain J. M. Wade's company in 1836 until that company was incorporated with others before the battle of San Jacinto. He joined the cavalry which was commanded by Lamar and in an engagement on the evening before the battle of San Jacinto he had his horse killed from under him. He joined the second company which was made up of Montgomery County men and fought in the battle as an infantry- 48
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.