A twentieth century history and biographical record of north and west Texas, Volume I, Part 5

Author: Paddock, B. B. (Buckley B.), 1844-1922; Lewis Publishing Co., Chicago, pub
Publication date: 1906
Publisher: Chicago, New York, The Lewis publishing co.
Number of Pages: 968

USA > Texas > A twentieth century history and biographical record of north and west Texas, Volume I > Part 5

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).

The eyes of Mexico had been opened to the waywardness of her Texas child by a series of events on the eastern border, denominated in Texas history as the Fredonian war, and inter- esting not only for the fact that therein was spilt the first blood in the long conflict between Mexican and American, but also because it was the first visible rift in the lute destined to widen and destroy all the harmony between the two races.

Hayden Edwards, under the empresario sys- tem of Coahuila-Texas, had obtained a large grant of land about the old town of Nacogdo-

HISTORY OF TEXAS.

ches, which, it will be remembered, was one of the three vantage points in Texas where Span- ish civilization seemed to gain a secure foot- hold. It was accordingly the one center of a considerable Mexican population north of Go- liad and San Antonio. Edwards was to settle on vacant lands and not dispossess any original and valid claimants, and he was to have juris- diction and direction of affairs conjointly with the established authorities. But the practical working out of this empresario colony was in- volved in many difficulties. The Americans settled on land for which other settlers could show valid titles, and then there arose disputes, forcible ejections and a sharp alignment be- tween the empresario colonists and the original inhabitants. The courts and officers under Ed- wards' authority came into direct conflict with the civil magistrates, and the only resort was the arbitrament of arms. Petitions and lists of grievances went from both parties to the politi- cal chief at San Antonio. That executive de- cided against Edwards and revoked his grant and ordered him to leave the country. Ben- jamin Edwards, a brother of the empresario, then sought aid from Austin and likewise formed an alliance with the Cherokee Indians on the north, who also at the time had griev- ances and were disaffected toward the Mexican government. It was Edwards' plan to form an independent republic, called Fredonia, and lie sent out requests for aid and co-operation to the various American colonies and also across the line into Louisiana. But his movement was ill-timed, ill-planned and savored too much of a filibuster. Austin denounced the revolution and sent some of his militia along with the gov- ernment troops to quell the disturbance. His colony at that time had no cause to chafe at

Mexican harshness and no reason to interfere in the factional fight at Nacogdoches.

December 16, 1826, Benjamin Edwards, with htteen followers, took possession of the stone fort at Nacogdoches, and from that as his seat of power promulgated his republic, received his few adherents and continued there endeav- oring to nourish his waning power for some weeks. Finally when there were only eleven whites remaining in the fort faithful to the cause, the local magistrate, or alcalde, with about seventy men, mostly Mexicans, ap- proached to rout out the revolutionists. Ed- wards, however, his band being reinforced by nine Indians, made a fierce charge upon the enemy and scattered them like chaff, killing and wounding several, while only one Fre- donian was wounded. The "republic" lasted a little longer, but when the government troops arrived from the south it had already dissolved, and the few prisoners taken were, by the inter- vention of Austin, released. Throughout all the passages at arms that mark the long con- flict between Americans and Mexicans the manifest superiority of the former in skill of maneuvering, marksmanship, and personal bravery cannot but excite a feeling of pride in every American reader, without consideration of the worthiness or unworthiness of the cause in which it is displayed.

The Fredonian war was but a side issue, and is only important as it caused Mexico to tighten her grip on her province and resort to restric- tive measures which hastened the final destiny. But the various seeds of discontent above noted were growing, and the events of the next few years brought about the first general reaction against the central government.

CHAPTER VII.

FIRST MOVEMENTS OF REVOLT AGAINST MEXICO.

In 1829 the reins of Mexican government fell into the hands of Bustamente, whose course was marked throughout by harshness toward Texas, and he inaugurated a system of restric- tion that could only provoke antagonism among the colonists. His policy in Texas was but an extension of the one he was carrying out in Mexico-namely, the centralization of the ad- ministration which we have seen to have been the ambition of all the political chiefs of the time. Hitherto Texas had been little concerned with these factional struggles, and Austin's colony had retained its thoroughly republican form of government without serious interfer- ence from Mexico. But now she is to be drawn to the edge of the vortex and play her own part in the contest between federalism and centralism. It is with the events of this period, lasting about three years, that this chapter has to deal.

On April 6, 1830, was passed a federal law which was pregnant of evil to Texas, and which at once put the colonists on the defensive. This measure, aimed expressly at Texas, prohibited colonization from adjacent foreign countries and the importation of slaves; suspended all unfulfilled empresario contracts; forbade inter- course across the border except as sanctioned by a Mexican passport; and provided for stricter enforcement of import duties. This was in effect a military despotism, and indeed, military posts were established throughout Texas.

The federal military soon came into direct conflict with the state and local authorities. A state commissioner sent to locate some settlers

on lands was thrown into prison as violating the law of April 6, and furthermore all colonists outside of Austin's, De Witt's and De Leon's were ousted. The payment of custom duties, from which the colonists had up to this time been freed, was especially distasteful, and more so when enforced by an insolent soldiery. All the gulf ports were closed except that at Ana- huac, and later after much remonstrance, that at Brazoria. Smuggling flourished, often in open defiance of the officials, and settlers en- tered the country by round-about roads, and, once in, could not be deported. In May, 1832, a strip ten leagues wide along the coast was declared under martial law, and thus matters looked serious for the welfare of Texas.

One Davis Bradburn, a Kentuckian in the service of the Mexican government, was ap- pointed to command the post at Anahuac, and his tyrannous and overbearing conduct pro- voked the settlers beyond endurance. In May, 1832, an outrage by a Mexican soldier caused the colonists to seek redress, and Bradburn ar- rested and imprisoned several of them, William B. Travis among the number. The colonists sprang to arms at once, collected in sufficient numbers, besieged the garrison and demanded the release of the prisoners. Bradburn agreed to surrender them in return for a few cavalry- men captured a few days previous by the Tex- ans. The latter in good faith restored the Mexicans, and then Bradburn treacherously opened fire on the colonists and retained his prisoners.

The siege was renewed with a vengeance. In order to reduce the fort a company from Bra-

HISTORY OF TEXAS.

zoria returned home to bring some cannon around by water. But when they had brought their schooner, loaded with the cannon, to Fort Velasco at the mouth of the Brazos they were refused passage by the Mexican com- mander; the Americans then diverted their at- tention to the reduction of this fort. By a com- bined land and water attack the Americans, against a desperate and brave resistance on the part of the garrison, headed by the intrepid Colonel Ugartechea, forced the post to capitu- late, after a number were killed on both sides. This was on June 27. In the meantime the commandant at Nacogdoches had marched to relieve Anachuac, but on reaching there found the Texans too strong for him, and he accord- ingly agreed to remove Bradburn from com- mand and surrender the prisoners, which was done.

While these events were occurring in Texas and the settlers were in a state of open rebel- lion against the federal government, a turn of the political wheel in Mexico gave an entirely different complexion to the action of the in- surgent colonists and deferred the vengeance which otherwise would surely have been visited upon them for the attacks on two federal posts.

In January, 1832, Santa Anna had "pro- nounced" against the government of Busta- mente, and the usual war followed. Santa Anna concealed for the time his ulterior motives and championed anti-centralism and pledged his devotion to the constitution of 1824 and to various reforms. His adherents came flocking to him from all parts of the republic, and among them were the majority of the soldiers stationed in Texas, who pronounced in favor of Santa Anna and at once withdrew to the army of their chief. Thus by August, 1832, all the Mexican forces had withdrawn and left Texas to itself.

In Mexico this revolt of Texas assumed the serious aspect of a movement for entire separa-

tion from the republic, and only by a more or less premeditated shift did the Texans avert the wrath that would have soon descended upon them for their high-handed rebellion. While they were engaged in the siege of Ana- huac they drew up what has been known as the Turtle Bayou resolutions, in which they set forth their adherence to the cause of Santa Anna and their devotion to the spirit and letter of the constitution of 1824, and that their re- volt was really against the enemies of the re- public and the constitution. Soon after the Mexican soldiers had all crossed the Rio Grande, Colonel Mejia, of the Santa Anna party, was sent with a large force to quell the Texans. But he was received with every ex- pression of loyalty, the colonial councils passed resolutions of adherence to Santa Anna, and Mejia was soon convinced of the true condition of affairs and after a brief stay withdrew into Mexico.

Thus Texas passed the first crisis with little bloodshed, owing to the state of revolution in Mexico, and there was a brief respite before a second storm should break. In a convention held in San Felipe in October, 1832, at which all the colonies except San Antonia were repre- sented, various resolutions and memorials were drawn up to be presented to the state and federal governments, the general tenor of which was to the effect that Texas desired to remain leal and loyal to the general government, but was outspoken against any further restrictions upon her free and republican forms of adminis- tration. Protests were also made against the execution of the decree of April 6, 1830, and also a memorial presented praying for the sep- aration of Texas from Coahuila, but the pro- ceedings of this convention were without prac- tical results, and in Mexico its echoes were lost in the hurly-burly of revolution.

CHAPTER VIII.

SANTA ANNA IN POWER-EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE REVOLUTION-THE FORMATION OF A PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT-SIEGE AND CAPTURE OF SAN ANTONIO.

By the end of 1832 the Santa Anna party had triumphed over Bustamente, and in the follow- ing April Santa Anna assumed the office of president of the republic of Mexico. Hence- forth Texas deals not with Mexico, but with Santa Anna, who is the government itself, whether he is known as president or dictator. It was not long before he began disregarding constitutional restrictions and to play the part of the despot, but in the eyes of most Texans he wore the sheep's clothing of liberator and defender of the constitution for some months after he came into power, and his oily and con- ciliatory policy was no inconsiderable factor in the progress of events.

With the ascendancy of Santa Anna the Tex- ans believed the time was opportune to air their grievances and procure from their supposed friend an adjustment of difficulties. Agitation more or less revolutionary in character had con- tinued unabated after the previous crisis, and in April, 1833, a convention assembled at San Felipe, of which William H. Wharton, the leader of the radical party, was chosen presi- dent over Austin, who had all along identified himself with the party of conservatism and peace. The principal object sought by Texas at this time was not separation from Mexico, but formation into a separate state from Coa- huila, and in this direction the current of dis- cussion and complaint turned, although it is probable that deep down in the stream of feel- ing the entire independence of Texas was flow- ing stronger and faster day by day.

Legally, Texas could not yet rightly claim a separate state government, for her population was still far below the constitutional require- ment, but there were valid reasons for her claims. The commercial and industrial inter- ests of the two provinces were entirely dis- similar, Coahuila being inland and Texas on the gulf, and the minority representation of the latter in the state congress made it impossible to obtain much needed legislation, although on the whole the state government was generally fair and liberal toward Texas; and then also the great distance from the courts of final juris- diction made justice in Texas almost a travesty and only within reach of the rich. So that, when this convention assembled, a committee, whose chairman was Sam Houston-now for the first time a figure in Texan politics-drafted a state constitution and appointed a committee to lay before the central government for ap- proval, and also present the other matters for adjustment which had previously been ground for complaint on the part of Texas.

Stephen Austin was the only one of the ap- pointed commissioners who went to Mexico with the proposed constitution and petitions. He found the capital still in turmoil, and it was some time before he could present his cause. He obtained some vague promises, but after six months of well-nigh fruitless labors he started home. A letter that he had written to Sail Antonio counseling that municipality to join in the general movement for Texas organiza- tion, fell into the hands of the Mexican author-

HISTORY OF TEXAS.

ities, and he was arrested, brought back to the capital and imprisoned on treasonable charges. The matter of his trial was delayed from time to time, and in fact he was never tried, but was detained at Mexico partly as a hostage and not finally released until September, 1835, when it was thought his conservative influence would be worth more to the Mexican cause if he were at home. In the meantime he came into the graces of Santa Anna, who by insinuating offers and gracious treatment brought Austin to believe that Texas had a real friend and ally in the dictator. In October, 1834, a council was held by Santa Anna to determine the policy concerning Texas, Austin being present. The prohibition of immigration from the United States was suspended by Santa Anna, who also made other promises of relief, but he decided that the time was not yet mature for the separa- tion of Texas from Coahuila, and, most im- portant of all for Texas, decreed that four thousand soldiers were to be quartered at San Antonio for the ostensible purpose of guarding the frontier and protecting the settlers from Indians, but really in order to hold the Texans in check.

When this seeming compliancy on the part of Santa Anna became known in Texas, his duplicity being yet veiled to many, the division was intensified between the extremists who would see nothing but separation, and the con- servatives who hoped to continue as a part of the federal government. The latter element still held the balance of power, but the sweep of events was rapidly drawing Texas to its second crisis. The state government had in the mean- time pursued a liberal policy toward Texas, relieving the tension somewhat, but these acts were later declared irregular by the divided state government, which also in 1835 practically gave away large bodies of Texas lands, a fraud displeasing both to Texas and the federal gov- ernment. A bitter factional fight was being waged in Coahuila for the seat of government between the cities of Monclova and Saltillo, and after being settled once by Santa Anna as ar- biter, it broke out again early in 1835. By this time centralism had won a complete triumph,

and all the states of the republic were in the process of becoming departments, with execu- tive heads appointed from the central govern- ment. In line with this policy, Santa Anna sent General Cos to expel the legislature of Coahuila- Texas, which escaped this punishment only by adjourning sine die, in April, 1835-the last session of the legislature of Coahuila-Texas. Santa Anna then deposed all the state officers and appointed a governor of his own. An at- tempt was made to remove the capital to San Antonio, and when this failed many of the dis- affected Coahuilans took refuge in Texas and co-operated in the revolutionary movement now so far under way in that province.

Coahuila-Texas and Zacatecas were the only statestoprotest against the centralizing designs of Santa Anna, who had now openly declared himself, and to stand firm for the constitution of 1824. Zacatecas rose in armed rebellion, but the revolt was crushed out by Santa Anna in May, 1835; Texas was still held by flattering promises issued through the medium of Austin, who was kept as a prisoner in the capital.

The vital question was, Shall Texas submit to a departmental administration imposed by Santa Anna, or form her own government? The independents continued to inflame and agi- tate, despite threats and reassurances from the federal authorities, but peace plans prevailed at first. The majority of the Texans were willing to await the coming crisis, held to the policy of not stinging until tread upon, hoped for a fair solution of difficulties. But the agitators- many of them Mexican liberals, foes of central ism and Santa Anna-played on every string of race antipathy, pictured the threatening des- potism, the certain dispossession of settlers from their lands, indulging in all the rant that self-seeking patriotism conjures up-and thus the leaven of revolution worked until the whole body politic was ripe for war. There were many high-minded patriots, but in this first rebellion against Mexican authority and the immediately following events there are so many taints of radicalism and selfishness that the movement does not have the clear sanction

HISTORY OF TEXAS.

and the plain justification which mark the real revolution of 1836.

Peace and war now hung balanced. How would the scale tip, and what event would add the proper weight. Santa Anna's intention to yoke Texas with the rest of his team, either by force or by policy, was now apparent. A con- vention, Austin's colony being represented, was held in July, in which the pacific forces still prevailed. As long as the aggressor remained outside the borders, good and well; but intro- duction of the military would mean fierce re- sistance and immediate coalescence of the peace and the war factions.

But two events had already made war in- evitable. In June, 1835, W. B. Travis, at the head of some fifty Texans, attacked the soldiers guarding the custom office at Anahuac, where the collection of duties had been recently re- sumed under Mexican officials, and drove them off toward San Antonio. This proceeding was at once denounced by the peace party, but at the same time it compromised the entire state, and armed retaliation was certain to be met by a united people. Close following this, an armed schooner was sent to Anahuac, and after its commander had committed various out- rages the vessel was captured by the Texans and its captain sent to New Orleans on charge of piracy.

This last occurred in September, and in the same month Austin returned to the colony, having been released apparently by Santa Anna, who had primed Austin with fair prom- ises and hoped the latter would serve as a pacificator among the belligerent Texans. Austin, indeed, did counsel patience and judi- cious planning for the welfare, and proposed a general consultation of all the colonies to pro- vide therefor. But even to the wisest war now seemed inevitable. Austin as chairman of his colony's committee of safety issued a circu- lar insisting that the constitutional rights guar- anteed in 1824 be maintained, and committees of safety were organized in every municipality, militia companies were being drilled, and every male citizen had his arms ready for instant use. Demands accompanied by threats of forcible

execution had been sent ordering the arrest of various political offenders, the deposed state officials and anti-centralists who had taken refuge in Texas, and also of the perpetrators of the Anahuac affair, but these came to nothing, except to add to the heat.

The call for a general consultation had now gone out. Five members from each of the mu- nicipalities were to convene at San Felipe on October 15, but before that date arrived revo- lution was rampant, and there was need to pro- vide, not for peace, but for war, and to construct a provisional form of state administration which would endure the shocks of war until the struc- ture of republican statehood should be firmly established. Owing to the progress of hostilities the general consultation did not get itself as- sembled for business until November. Its first important act was the proclamation of a decla- ration of rights and purposes in this rebellion, and, after much opposition, it was resolved that the object of the Texans was to maintain the constitution of 1824, both at home and as the champion of republicanism in the other states, and that they would govern themselves pro- visionally until the republic should once more be established on its original lines. The other business of the consultation was to organize a provisional form of government, which, how- ever, proved entirely inadequate and inept and almost resulted in the downfall of Texas. The consultation appointed Henry Smith, of the war faction, governor, and James W. Robinson lieutenant governor, and these were to co-op- erate with a council made up of one member elected by the delegates of each municipality. The powers of these two branches were con- flicting, and harmony of action would have been possible only with most harmonious individu- als, as was not the case. Sam Houston was ap- pointed commander in chief of the to-be- created army of some eleven hundred men, his actions to be supervised by the governor and the council. Then there was appointed a com- mission of three, Austin being one, who were to proceed to the United States and negotiate in the interests of the state and particularly to obtain a loan, money being an absolute sine qua

HISTORY OF TEXAS.

non of the continued existence and prosperity of the new government and the operations of its army.

The consultation, having declared Texas as the champion of republican government for all the states of Mexico, further compromised its actions for the individual rights of Texas by listening to the schemes of the dispossessed Mexicans and especially of certain citizens of Coahuila who desired, after the invaders were expelled from Texas, to lead the victorious army across the Rio Grande and continue there the setting up of republican states-for the not disinterested and altruistic purpose of restoring certain large estates to the liberals who were most zealous in this agitation. This fatal "en- tangling alliance" took the form of an expedi- tion to Matamoras, which was sanctioned be- fore the adjournment of the consultation, and which destiny was to turn into a prime cause of the Alamo tragedy.

After thus adopting a scheme of administra- tion and setting the wheels of the provisional government going, the consultation adjourned, with the intention of meeting on the following March 1, but before that date it was superseded by an elected convention. Meanwhile the dogs of war had slipped the leash, and the second martial drama between Texas and Mexico was being played out.

In Gonzales was a cannon which had been loaned the citizens for protection against the Indians. The return of this was now demanded by Colonel Ugartechea, who sent a troop to bring it back to San Antonio. Every possible means was employed to delay the Mexicans, and in the meantime volunteers were flocking from all directions to resist this invasion. On October 1, near Gonzales, occurred a sharp con- flict between the Mexican soldiers and the Americans, in which the latter, using to great effect the very piece of artillery which was in dispute, routed the Mexicans, who fled ig- nominiously to San Antonio.

The news had already come that General Cos was on his way to San Antonio, and this diver- sion of the colonists at Gonzales enabled that general to land his force of five hundred men at

Matagorda and without hindrance reached San Antonio in October. Thus the die was cast, and there could be no more thought or possibil- ity of drawing back. Advocates of peace and the war agitators joined hands, and the war for the constitution of 1824 was begun. And there was no telling where martial fury would lead, it might even transcend its professed intentions and destroy all fragile bonds of federation and loyalty to the central government. Men were flocking from all quarters to the scene of ac- tion, andacircular by Austin proclaimed against the threatened military despotism and directed that San Antonio must be taken and the Mexi- can soldiers driven from Texas soil.

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.

A twentieth century history and biographical record of north and west Texas, Volume I, Part 5

Author: Paddock, B. B. (Buckley B.), 1844-1922; Lewis Publishing Co., Chicago, pub Publication date: 1906 Publisher: Chicago, New York, The Lewis publishing co. Number of Pages: 968

Author: Paddock, B. B. (Buckley B.), 1844-1922; Lewis Publishing Co., Chicago, pub
Publication date: 1906
Publisher: Chicago, New York, The Lewis publishing co.
Number of Pages: 968