USA > Texas > Tarrant County > Fort Worth > History of Texas : Fort Worth and the Texas northwest edition, Volume I > Part 13
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 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56
73
HISTORY OF TEXAS
necessary, to go as high as five millions." Alternate proposals were authorized for the line of the. Lavaca, the Colorado, or the Brazos Rivers, and a proportionate part of the four million dollars would be paid for it. The president was aware that the subject was a difficult one, but he hoped that the considerations to be advanced by Mr. Poinsett, pecuniary and otherwise, would enable him to accomplish the desired cession. Poinsett was recalled in October, and the same authority was extended to Anthony Butler, who, as chargé d'affaires of the United States, succeeded him. It was probably known in Mexico that Butler's special mission would be to secure a cession of Texas, and the fact was bitterly resented.
No Mexican statesman was better informed of the desires of the United States concerning Texas, or had less wish to see them accom- plished, than Lucas Alaman. It was soon after Butler's arrival in the City of Mexico, that Alaman in a report to congress urged the enactment above described. In his argument he bitterly arraigned the greed of the United States for territory and their unscrupulous methods of getting it :
"The United States of the North have been going on success- fully acquiring, without awakening public attention, all the terri- tories adjoining theirs. * *
* They commence by introducing themselves into the territory which they covet, upon pretense of commercial negotiations, or of the establishment of colonies, with or without the assent of the government to which it belongs. These colonies grow, multiply, become the predominant party in the popula- tion; and as soon as a support is found in this manner, they begin to set up rights which it is impossible to sustain, in a serious dis- cussion, and to bring forward ridiculous pretensions, founded upon historical facts which are admitted by nobody. * * * These extravagant opinions are, for the first time, presented to the world by unknown writers; and the labor which is employed by others, in offering proofs and reasonings, is spent by them in repetitions and multiplied allegations, for the purpose of drawing the attention of their fellow-citizens, not upon the justice of the proposition, but upon the advantages and interests to be obtained or subserved by their admission.
"Their machinations in the country they wish to acquire are then brought to light by the appearance of explorers, some of whom set- tle on the soil, alleging that their presence does not affect the ques- tion of the right of sovereignty or possession to the land. These pioneers excite, by degrees, movements which disturb the political state of the country in dispute, and then follow discontents and dis- satisfaction, calculated to fatigue the patience of the legitimate owner, and to diminish the usefulness of the administration and of the exercise of authority. When things have come to this pass, which is precisely the present state of things in Texas, the diplomatic management commences. The inquietude they have excited in the territory in dispute, the interests of the colonists therein established, the insurrection of adventurers, and savages instigated by them, and the pertinacity with which the opinion is set up as to their right of possession, become the subjects of notes, full of expressions of
74
HISTORY OF TEXAS
justice and moderation, until, with the aid of other incidents, which are never wanting in the course of diplomatic relations, the desired end is attained of concluding an arrangement as onerous for one party as it is advantageous to the other. Sometimes more direct means are resorted to; and taking advantage of the enfeebled state. or domestic difficulties, of the possessor of the soil, they proceed, upon the most extraordinary pretexts, to make themselves masters of the country, as was the case in the Floridas; leaving the question to be decided afterwards as to the legality of the possession, which force alone could take from them. This conduct has given them the immense extent of country they occupy, and which they have acquired since their separation from England ; and this is what they have set on foot with respect to Texas."
With this survey of external influences directed upon Texas, it re- mains to examine particularly the effects of the decree of April 6, 1830, and other issues productive of distrust between the settlers and the government.
SLAVERY ISSUE
Most of the colonists came from the South and owned slaves. As a means of discouraging immigration, the government authorities re- garded the exclusion of slavery as the readiest and most feasible method at their command.
General J. M. Tornel was the advocate of this policy in the federal congress, and twice he secured the passage through the senate of a bill which would have had the desired effect, but both times it failed in the lower house. Back of Tornel, apparently, was General Manuel Mier y Terán, commander of the Eastern Internal Provinces, and chief of the commission appointed to run the boundary between Texas and the United States. Failing to get his measure through congress, Tornel turned to President Vicente Guerrero, and, while the latter was tempo- rarily invested with dictatorial power in the fall of 1829, induced him to issue a decree freeing all the slaves in the Republic of Mexico.
Anti-slavery sentiment had been strong in Mexico since the liberation from Spain, and the first general colonization law, passed during the short reign of Iturbide, while permitting settlers to bring in their own slaves, forbade the buying and selling of slaves in the empire, and pro- vided that the children of slaves born in Mexico should become free at the age of fourteen. After the downfall of Iturbide, congress took up the matter again and passed a stringent law (July 13. 1824), against the slave trade. "Commerce and traffic in slaves," proceeding from any country were prohibited; and slaves introduced contrary to the tenor of this provision were declared "free in virtue of the mere act of tread- ing Mexican territory." There was some question as to whether the provision of the law did not make illegal the further immigration of slaves with their masters. At the time, however, it was not so inter- preted. The federal constitution, which was completed in October, 1824. did not mention slavery, and there were no more federal laws on the subject until the famous decree of April 6, 1830. The state constitution of Coahuila and Texas, however, promulgated March 21, 1827, pro-
75
HISTORY OF TEXAS
hibited the further immigration of slaves after six months, and declared that children of slaves born in the state should be free at birth. A law of September 15 following required each municipality to make a list of the slaves in its jurisdiction, and to keep a register of the children born of slaves after the publication of the constitution, which should be reported to the governor every three months. This, of course, was ex- pected to facilitate the enforcement of the constitutional provision. Shortly afterward (November 24, 1827), a decree was passed giving a slave the right to change his master, provided the new master would indemnify the old one. This was no doubt designed in the interest of the slave, but it can be readily seen that it afforded an easy means of evading the law against buying and selling slaves. We have no evidence concerning its operation, but nothing would have been simpler than for the two masters to come to a satisfactory agreement and then represent that the slave wished to change his master.
The slave question was as an intensely practical one in Texas, and settlers already in the province, as well as others who contemplated set- tling there, were deeply interested. Little free labor was to be had, and slaves were considered indispensable in breaking the wilderness. Austin had bestirred himself from the beginning to prevent the pro- hibition of slavery, and the recognition of the institution in Iturbide's colonization law was due entirely to his persistent and strenuous efforts. Again, in the state congress, it was the tireless activity of the Texans and of their agent in the capital which prevented the outright liberation by the constitution of the slaves already in the state. By 1828 members of the state congress were brought to see the practical side of the ques- tion, and a law of May 5 legalized contracts made in "foreign countries" between emigrants and "the servants or day laborers of working men whom they introduce." The object of this law was palpably to enable colonists to continue to introduce slaves under the device of peonage con- tracts, and they were not slow to use it. Just before crossing the boun- dary an emigrant would visit a notary in the United States and have his slaves sign the necessary contract.
It is doubtful whether Guerrero's emancipation decree would have affected negroes introduced under this device, since technically they were not slaves but corresponded to the peons of the Mexican haciendas. But the colonists were greatly alarmed and did not pause to draw a dis- tinction. Besides, there were probably a thousand slaves in the country who had been brought in before 1828, and these were unquestionably affected. The colonists were convinced that ruin stared them in the face, and first, in order to gain time, arranged with the various ayunta- mientos to delay the official publication of the decree, when it should arrive ; and then, as always when in trouble, they turned to Stephen F. Austin for direction. The following letter from Austin to John Durst of Nacogdoches shows how strongly Austin felt on the subject, as well as his plan of procedure to obtain relief :
"What the people of Texas have to do is to represent to the government through the Ayuntamientos or some other channel, in a very respectful manner that agreeable to the constitution, and the colonization laws, all their property is guaranteed to them without
76
HISTORY OF TEXAS
exceptions in the most solemn and sacred manner. That they brought their slave property into the country and have retained it here, under the faith of that guarantee, and in consequence of a special invitation publicly given to emigrants by the government in the colonization law to do so. That the constitution of the state expressly recognizes the right of property in slaves by allowing six months after its publication for their introduction into the state. That they will defend it, and with it, their property.
"There ought to be no vociferous and visionary excitement or noise about this matter. Our course is a very plain one-calm, de- liberate, dispassionate, inflexible, firmness; and not windy and ridiculous blowing and wild, threats, and much less anything like opposition to the Mexican Constitution; nothing of this kind will do any good; it will, in fact, be unjustifiable, and will never be approved of by me, but on the contrary opposed most decidedly. I will not violate my duty as a Mexican citizen.
"The constitution must be both our shield, and our arms ; under it, and with it, we must constitutionally defend ourselves and our property."
Partly through Austin's influence, and partly because he himself was convinced that the emancipation of the Texas slaves would be a disas- trous blow to the province, the political chief of the department of Bexar (which then included all Texas) withheld the publication of the decree until he could memorialize the president for its withdrawal or modification. His petition was forwarded through the governor of the state, and that official also addressed the president, urging relief. The arguments of these officials had the desired effect, and on December 2, 1829, the governor was notified that the president had been pleased "to declare the department of Texas excepted" from the operation of the general decree. This reprieve was transmitted by the governor to the political chief at San Antonio, and by him it was forwarded to the various ayuntamientos and formally published in the usual manner. A copy is preserved in the Texas Gazette of January 30, 1830.
The crisis thus passed, but it left scars in its wake. The colonists thought the decree a wanton interference with their rights of property, guaranteed by the constitution ; and the Mexican authorities could not forget the threatening tone of colonial remonstrances. Austin's letter quoted above plainly suggests that the Texans might resist by force the execution of the decree, and the governor in his memorial thought that its enforcement might "draw upon the state some commotions." He did not wish to imply by this, he said, that the settlers were turbulent and insubordinate; in fact, he had nothing but proof to the contrary, but he thought that resistance could be easily inferred if one reflected upon the natural inclinations of man "when, from one day to another, he is about to be ruined, as would result to many of them, whose whole fortune consists in their slaves."
MILITARY OCCUPATION
The decree of April 6, 1830, was the more resented because it seemed to be the intention of the government to enforce it. Terán had already
77
HISTORY OF TEXAS
been authorized to proceed with his plan of military occupation, and this was now continued as a means of executing the law. Garrisons were placed at Tenoxtitlan, where the San Antonio and Nacogdoches road crossed the Brazos; at Velasco, the mouth of the Brazos; at Anahuac, near the head of Galveston Bay; and troops were moved from the Rio Grande to Lipantitlan, near the mouth of the Nueces. There were gar- risons already at San Antonio, Goliad, and Nacogdoches. In spite of all efforts to enforce the law it was generally evaded; and friction soon developed between the colonists and the soldiers.
The declared object for establishing these posts was to insure the better collection of custom duties, and the protection of the frontier against the Indians, the real object was to strengthen them by sending in small detachments of troops from time to time, until the number would enable President Bustamante to enforce his arbitrary and despotic rule in Texas. With the establishment of these military posts was an order making Galveston Island a port of entry, with the custom-house at the mouth of the Trinity, which greatly annoyed the masters of ves- sels engaged in the Texas trade.
During this year, 1831, the alcalde of San Felipe had serious trouble with the authorities of the state: First, in consequence of one of the colonists inflicting summary punishment on a soldier belonging to the garrison at Tenoxtitlan, of which act Colonel Ruiz made complaint. Millican, the offending party, declared that he found the soldier butcher- ing one of his beeves. A correspondence was at once opened by the Political Chief and the alcalde of the jurisdiction of Austin, which was kept up until near the end of the term of the latter, when Millican was relieved. The next trouble was occasioned by the return to Texas of Colonel Martin Parmer, of Fredonian notoriety. He, however, eluded the vigilance of the civil and military authorities by the aid of friends. The next cause of trouble was the arrival of Alexander Thompson and a few families at Nacogdoches, where they had some trouble with the commandant of that post, Colonel Piedras, who, in compliance with orders, refused to let them pass, and ordered them out of the country. However, they made their way to Austin's colony. Austin received them as colonists, and made a favorable report to the government, which averted further trouble.
In the latter part of the year 1829 Don Juan Antonio Padilla, who had been appointed commissioner to extend titles and put the inhabitants east of Austin's colony in possession of their lands, accompanied by his surveyor, Thomas Jefferson Chambers, arrived at San Felipe de Austin, where they remained some time, and thence proceeded to Nacogdoches, where he established his office and appointed surveyors for the rural districts. Soon after this, however, he was arrested and imprisoned in Nacogdoches on a false charge of murder. Thus he was prevented from extending titles and giving the inhabitants possession of their lands. However, surveys were made for the settlers in the several districts.
Following the arrest of Padilla, Don Francisco Madero, of Coahuila was appointed to fill the vacancy. Madero, with his surveyor J. M. Carbajal, reached San Felipe de Austin in the latter part of December, 1830, or early in January, 1831, where he spent some time with Colonel
78
HISTORY OF TEXAS
Austin, whom he consulted as to the best mode of proceeding in his new mission. Instead of establishing his office at Nacogdoches, as Padilla had done, he proceeded to Liberty, on the Trinity River, established his office, created the municipality of Liberty, and held an election for alcalde and members of the ayuntamiento of the municipality. Having organized the government, he took necessary measures to have the lands of the settlers surveyed.
These measures of Madero seem to have given great offense to Colonel J. D. Bradburn, who commanded the new garrison at Anahuac. and who, in accordance with instructions from General Terán, or on his own motion, caused Madero and his surveyor, Carbajal, to be arrested and imprisoned at Anahuac under the charge of acting in violation of the decree of April 6, 1830. To further annoy the people of Liberty, Bradburn annulled the act of Madero in creating a municipal- ity, and established one at Anahuac, composed of creatures of his own and subservient to his will. However, this new creation of his was short lived, and soon fell to pieces by its own inherent rottenness. His first measure was to close the port of Brazos and make Galveston the only port of entry in Texas, with the custom house at Anahuac. Against this lawless and arbitrary act the citizens of Brazoria protested, and deputed Dr. Branch T. Archer and George B. Mckinstry to wait upon Colonel Bradburn and get the order countermanded. Bradburn pre- varicated when called upon by the committee, and said he would have to consult his commander, General Terán, but these stern republicans were not to be put off by so transparent a pretense, and demanded revoca- tion of the obnoxious order. Bradburn reluctantly yielded and issued the necessary order to re-open the port of Brazos.
In May, 1832, an outrage committed by a soldier of the garrison caused a number of citizens to assemble, and the perpetrator was severely punished. For this and on other pretexts Bradburn had William Bar- rett Travis, Patrick C. Jack, Samuel T. Allen, Monroe Edwards, and other citizens of the jurisdiction arrested and imprisoned in Fort Anahuac.
Their release was demanded on the ground that the civil and not a military court had jurisdiction. A force was hastily assembled under arms, and F. W. Johnson elected captain. On the march to Anahuac, some Mexican cavalry were captured, and on the third day of the siege Bradburn agreed to turn over the citizens the follow- ing day on condition the Texans released their prisoners and retired to Turtle Bayou. The Texans restored the prisoners, but the next day Bradburn marched out of his fort and fired on the town.
"Thus far." to quote Captain Johnson. the historian of the ex- pedition, "we had acted on our own motion, and without authority of law, and had already been denounced as traitors." A consultation ensued, and "in forming our decision we were greatly aided by certain intelligence that General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna had taken up arms against President Bustamante, and in support and defense of the constitution of 1824 which had been violated by Bustamante's despotism. In this was presented a haven of safety. A committee was appointed to draft a preamble and resolutions setting forth
79
HISTORY OF TEXAS
the causes which compelled us to take up arms, our devotion to the constitution of 1824, and our support of the gallant chieftain, General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna."
The report, adopted June 13th, was known as the "Turtle Bayou Resolutions," a protest against the military occupation and violation of civil rights-an affirmation of loyalty and devotion "to a correct interpretation and enforcement of the constitution and laws accord- ing to their true spirit."
At the same time it was voted that the investment of Anahuac should continue, and reinforcements summoned from more distant settlements. John Austin and William J. Russell were sent to Bra- zoria for artillery and ammunition. The commandant of Fort Velasco refusing permission to transport this material by water, the Bra- zorians resolved to attack and capture Fort Velasco, and then pro- ceed to Anahuac. A schooner was commandeered and three pieces of cannon put on board, while the main force moved by land. The attack was opened from the vessel and the land forces in the early hours of June 26th, and at 10 a. m. a white flag was hoisted on the fort. The terms of surrender were signed June 29th. In this battle the colonists had seven killed, and seventeen wounded-and in this respect the battle of Velasco stands out as one of the important engagements of the revolutionary period.
In the meantime Colonel Piedras had marched from Nacogdoches to relieve Anahuac, but had found the citizen army barring all approaches. In the course of a formal interview between Johnson and Piedras, a courier arrived with mail from Nacogdoches, including an official document promoting Colonel Piedras, who is quoted by Johnson as saying "I now rank Colonel Bradburn, and will cheer- fully deliver the citizen prisoners to the alcalde of Liberty." Hle proved true to his word, and thus the primary object of the campaign was achieved.
This bold attack on two military posts caused profound excite. ment through the colonies. The majority doubtless viewed the matter in the light of the immediate circumstances and approved the fortu- nate issue if not all the means employed. The grave concern felt by the more thoughtful was due to the fear of more repressive measures by the government, certain to impair and disturb the period of relative prosperity the colonists were then enjoying.
In fact, the local councils of San Felipe and Matagorda expressed formal disapproval of the forceful measures, and the political chief of the department hurried from San Antonio, but after attending the meetings and receiving the reports of the commanders of the two expeditions expressed himself satisfied with what had been done.
The people of Nacogdoches, San Augustine, Teneha and Bevil's settlement on the Neches, not to be outdone in the good work, called a public meeting, which resolved to organize an armed force, march upon Nacogdoches, invite Colonel Piedras and his troops to declare for the constitution of 1824, surrender, or fight. James W. Bullock was elected to the command.
80
HISTORY OF TEXAS
On the first of August, 1832, Colonel Bullock marched, and en- camped near Nacogdoches. Isaac W. Burton, Philip Sublett, and Henry Augustine were appointed a committee to wait upon Colonel Piedras, and communicate to him the resolutions of the citizens then in camp near the town, and numbering some three hundred men. Piedras received them courteously, but firmly declined to declare for General Santa Anna, and informed them that he would defend his position to the utmost of his ability.
The next day Colonel Bullock marched near the town, hoping to draw Piedras out, but that cautious commander remained quietly in his quarters, a large church, with strong walls, and impervious to the shot of small arms. Colonel Bullock, failing to provoke an attack by Piedras, marched into the town. On his march, the Mexican cavalry made a dash at and fired on the Texans, then wheeled and retreated to their position, with what result we are not informed. In the rally by the cavalry, Don Encarnacion Chirino, alcalde of Nacogdoches, was killed. The Texans then took possession of the "Old Stone House," the hotel of John S. Roberts, then occupied as a storehouse, and several others on the plaza, from which positions a desultory fire was kept up-the Texans firing only when a Mexican showed himself. Thus the battle was kept up until evening, when the Mexican made a sortie, but being repulsed with loss they retired to the church.
Many, if not all, of Piedras's subalterns were known to be republi- cans and under these circumstances and with communications cut, he wisely determined to retreat under cover of night, and gave the neces- sary order. He threw his ammunition, except a few rounds, into wells. but left all his stores, his dead and wounded.
The next morning his advance was fired on, while letting their horses drink at the Angelina. Piedras, believing his retreat cut off, turned over the command to Major Francisco Medina, who on assum- ing command declared for the constitution of 1824 and General Santa Anna and surrendered his force on demand to the Texans. The Mexi- cans lost in this battle forty-seven killed and as many wounded. The Texans had three killed and five wounded.
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.