USA > Texas > Tarrant County > Fort Worth > History of Texas : Fort Worth and the Texas northwest edition, Volume I > Part 51
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
The legislature responded to the sentiments of the governor and the request of the convention by adopting the following joint resolu- tions. They were passed by a unanimous vote in the house and by a vote of twenty-three to five in the senate :
"1. Be it resolved *
* * That the governor of this state is hereby authorized to order an election for seven delegates, to meet delegates appointed by the other Southern states, in conven- tion, whenever the executives of a majority of the slave-holding states shall express the opinion that such a convention is neces-
391
HISTORY OF TEXAS
sary to preserve the equal rights of such states in the Union. *
* *
"2. That should an exigency arise, in the opinion of the gov- ernor, in which it is necessary for the State of Texas to act alone, or by a convention representing the sovereignty of the state, he is hereby requested to call a special session of the legislature to pro- vide for such state convention."
On December 30, 1857, John Henry Brown presented to the house of representatives "A Report and Treatise on Slavery and the Slavery Agitation." "The main object," said Mr. Brown, "in presenting this report at this time is to get a sound pro-slavery document dissem- inated throughout the state. *
We think it takes a sound southern view of the question. * * We believe that the circulation of such a document among the population of our state, made up as it is from every country almost on the globe, will have a salutary effect at this time. It has been the great anxiety of the committee and myself to place the truth before the minds of our people, and especially of those who have come among us from states and countries where slavery does not exist." It was voted to print 10,000 copies of this report in pamphlet form; 7,500 in English, 1,500 in German and 1,000 in Spanish.
The state democratic convention met at Houston May 2, 1859, for the purpose of nominating candidates for governor, lieutenant gov- ernor and commissioner of the general land office. Runnels and Lub- bock were renominated without opposition. The platform avoided any reference to state policy, but endorsed the national democratic platform of 1856, readopted the Waco platform, declared the decision in the Dred Scott case to be a true exposition of the constitution, opposed the admission of any new state until its population entitled it to at least one representative, and favored the acquisition of Cuba as a measure of self-protection. Early in June General Houston announced that he would again make the race for governor and defined his platform as follows :
"The constitution and the Union embrace the principles by which I will be governed if elected. They comprehend all the old Jacksonian democracy I ever professed or officially practiced."
Other independent candidates were brought out, and the campaign waged between them and the regulars was state wide and full of excitement. In the previous chapter a brief account was given of the troubles with the reserve Indians during Governor Runnels' admin - istration. There was no subject for which he was more severely criticised than his Indian policy, and, while it is hard to see how any one could have done much better under the circumstances, it alienated the entire frontier and brought about his defeat. Other charges brought against him were that he was a disunionist, that his adminis- tration had been extravagant, and that he favored the reopening of the African slave trade. Some prominent democrats had declared them- selves in favor of repealing the laws prohibiting the foreign slave trade, but others equally prominent in the councils of the party had denounced the plan most severely and the convention discountenanced
392
HISTORY OF TEXAS
it. Besides, many influential public men among them ex-Governor Pease, supported the independents. Branded as a political outcast, stripped of his senatorial honors, General Houston made his last win- ning fight. His personality, energy and tact in approaching voters broke down the political barriers of his opponent and turned the defeat of two years ago into an overwhelming personal victory. Houston received 36,257 votes; his opponent, Governor Runnels, 27,500 votes; Edward Clark, who ran on Houston's ticket, received 31,458 votes; his opponent, Lieutenant Governor Lubbock, 30,325 votes.
In his general message to the legislature November 10, 1859, Gov- ernor Runnels, after dealing with matters relating to the state, reviewed the history of political parties in the United States from the beginning. The democratic party had its origin in the efforts to resist the encroachments upon the rights of the states and to curb the loose construction tendencies of the federalists. The party had adhered to its strict construction of the constitution throughout, and had thereby gained the confidence and firm adherence of the people of the South. So long as this party remained in power and followed this path state rights were not endangered. But he regretted the appearance of divisions in the party ; he denounced the doctrine of squatter sovereignty. If the northern democrats persisted in its advocacy, he said it would mean the overthrow of the democratic party, the disregard of state rights and consequently submission or secession.
"Equality and security in the Union, or independence outside of it, should be the motto of every southern state."
The death of J. Pinckney Henderson, United States senator, made it necessary for the legislature to choose his successor. Governor Runnels had appointed Matthias Ward, but the legislature on Decem- ber 5th elected Louis T. Wigfall, an ultra-southern state rights advo- cate. He was particularly obnoxious to General Houston ; his choice by the legislature, when his eligibility was very doubtful, showed how personal had been the nature of Houston's victory. The temper of the legislature had not been changed by the recent election.
General Houston discarded all precedent by refusing to deliver his inaugural address as governor to the legislature in joint session ; instead he delivered it from the portico of the capitol to a large audience gathered on the steps and lawn below. He asserted his independence of any caucus or party for the position he held, and appealed to the whole people to sustain him.
"When Texas united her destiny with that of the Govern- ment of the United States * * she entered not into the North, nor South. Her connection was not sectional, but national. * ** When our rights are aggressed upon let us be behind none in repelling the attack, but let us be careful to distinguish between the acts of individuals and those of a people."
His general message on January 13th made but a brief reference to national politics. "I cannot refrain from congratulating the legis- lature," he said, "upon the triumph of conservatism as seen in the
393
HISTORY OF TEXAS
many evidences of the determination of the masses of the people of the North to abide by the constitution and the Union, and to put down the fanatical efforts of misguided abolitionists who would endanger the safety of the Union to advance their vapid schemes. * * * Texas will maintain the constitution and stand by the Union. It is all that can save us as a nation. Destroy it and anarchy awaits us." An elaboration of his views of the course Texas ought to pursue during the existing disturbed condition of political affairs was called forth by the South Carolina resolutions, which were trans- mitted to him by the governor of that state with a request that he lay them before the legislature. These resolutions reasserted the right of secession ; they called attention to the "assaults upon the institution of slavery, and upon the rights and equality of the southern states" made during recent years; and they expressed it as "the deliberate judgment of the general assembly that the slave-holding states should immediately meet together to concert measures for united action." As if to forestall the necessity of a veto of any action the legislature might take in the premises, Governor Houston entered his "unquali- fied protest against and dissent from the principles enunciated in the resolutions," and proceeded to show many reasons for maintaining the Union. "The people of Texas are satisfied with the constitution and the Union as they are," he said.
Majority and minority reports were made in the house and the senate on the subject of the South Carolina resolutions and the gov- ernor's message thereon. The majority reports in each branch took the state rights attitude of South Carolina; the minority reports endorsed the views of the governor. Considerable debate took place, but naturally the report of neither side prevailed. The majority report in the senate was made by F. S. Stockdale and in outline was as follows :
1. "This legislature unequivocally declares: That the system of government, instituted by our state and federal constitutions, is the wisest in principles ever devised by man, and its organiza- tion the most efficient for the attainment of the objects of its crea- tion, *
* * security to political liberty and the protection of persons and property. That it is our firm resolution to maintain and defend the constitution of the United States, which is the cement of the Union, as well in its limitations and reservations as in its authorities and powers, and to support the constitution of this state and to require that the rights, authorities and powers existing in and reserved to this state and the people thereof be
respected. * * * That consistently with the foregoing it is our fixed determination to adhere to and support the Union of these confederated states, and to defend the same from all aggres- sions.
2. "Regarding the Union, upon the principles of the constitu- tion, as an unmixed blessing and its preservation upon those prin- ciples as the highest duty of the states and the people thereof, we deem it our duty further to declare: That the statutes of sev- eral of the non-slave-holding states, nullifying the fugitive slave
394
HISTORY OF TEXAS
la'ws, * * the purpose of the dominant political party in the non-slaveholding states, called the black republican party, to use, if it can get possession of the federal Government (with the view that party has of the extent of those powers) for the exter- mination of African slavery in the states by reorganizing the supreme court of the United States. * by prohibiting *
by refusing to admit * * slavery in the territories,
any new state in the constitution of which * * slavery is rec-
ognized, by refusing to exercise such powers as are constitutionally delegated to the federal Government, where it has jurisdiction, for the protection of all property, * * * by creating new states so
* as to get the requisite number to change the constitution * * are all in violation of the spirit and principles of the constitution, dangerous to the Union and at war with those institutions which. at all hazards, it is our duty to defend.
3. "Seeing, as we cannot avoid seeing, there is imminent danger that the said black republican party will get possession of all the departments of the federal government, and exercise all the powers of the same, and others not delegated, for the effectuation of the unconstitutional purposes named, and believ- ing that such an event would result in the destruction of all bar- riers between the states and an arbitrary, consolidated govern- ment of an irresponsible section, we solemnly appeal to the people of the other states to prove by their political action, in the ensuing state and federal elections, their devotion to the constitution and the Union and to the sovereignty and equality of states, and do not make the appeal without the hope of a patriotic answer ; but. in case our appeal is disregarded, and in view of the possibility of such an event, we earnestly commend the whole subject of our present and probable exigencies to the profound consideration of the people of the state, the sovereignty of Texas, that they may devise the ways and means of maintaining, unimpaired, the authorities, rights and liberties reserved to and existing in the states respectively and the people of the same."
The state democratic convention assembled at Galveston April 2. 1860. The presidential election to be held was looked forward to with eager expectation and some trepidation. The platform adopted marked out the policy of this state. It endorsed the Cincinnati plat- form of 1856 as "embracing the only doctrines which can preserve the integrity of the Union and the equal rights of the states:" it unequiv- ocally denounced squatter sovereignty : it expressed adherence to the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798 and 1799. Texas as a sovereign and independent nation joined the confederacy of the United States; she surrendered no part of her sovereignty in doing so; should the federal Government fail to accomplish the object of the confedera- tion, of which failure Texas alone could judge, she asserted a full right to withdraw from the confederacy. Under the constitution every citizen has the right to take his property, including slaves, into the territories. The people of Texas regarded with aversion the efforts of a sectional party at the North to abolish slavery, and whenever that
395
HISTORY OF TEXAS
party shall succeed in electing a president it became the duty of the people of Texas "to hold themselves in readiness to co-operate with our sister states of the South in a convention to take into consideration such measures as may be necessary for our protection or to secure out of the confederacy that protection of their rights which they can no longer hope for in it." Among the delegates sent to the national democratic con- vention were H. R. Runnels, F. R. Lubbock, F. S. Stockdale and Guy M. Bryan.
The national democratic convention met at Charleston, South Caro- lina, April 23. Majority and minority reports were made by the plat- form committee, the two disagreeing solely on the right to carry slaves into the territories under the protection of the United States. The Texan delegates had special instructions on this subject and, when the northern delegates refused to vote for a plank affirming such a right, those from Texas and from the other southern states withdrew, causing a division of the national democratic party. At adjourned sessions of the conventions at Baltimore, the northern democrats nominated Douglas for president, and the southern democrats nominated Breckinridge.
The republican party nominated Lincoln for president, and in their platform denied "the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals to give legal existence to slavery in any territory of the United States."
Texas was represented in the constitutional Union party, which met at Baltimore, by A. B. Norton and J. H. Manly, staunch supporters of Gen. Sam Houston. This party adopted for its platform "The Union. the constitution and the enforcement of the laws." General Houston received 57 votes for president on the first ballot ; Bell received 681/2 votes. On the second ballot Bell was nominated. Houston declared that the use of his name at Baltimore was without his authority ; therefore, when a mass meeting of citizens on San Jacinto battleground subse- quently recommended him "to the nation as the people's candidate for the presidency," he accepted in terms identical with those used in announc- ing his candidacy for governor the year before. In August, however, he withdrew from the canvass.
The presidential election resulted as follows :
Candidate Popular vote
Electoral vote
Lincoln 1,857,610. 180 (18 Free States)
Douglas 1,365,976 12 (Missouri and part of New Jersey )
Breckinridge 847,953 72 (11 Slave States)
Bell
590,631 . 31 (Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia )
The Lincoln and Douglas tickets received no votes in Texas; Breck- inridge received 47,548 and Bell 15,463 votes.
CHAPTER XXX SECESSION
The division of the democratic party at Charleston in May, 1860, broke down the last barrier to sectionalism in politics; it added the fateful touch to the campaign. Of the four candidates for the presi- dency, the fanatics in the North and the ultras in the South took the lead. Texas in general approved the course of her delegates at Charleston ; over three-fourths of the vote of the state went to Breckinridge. Bell was the only other candidate to receive any support in Texas. While he was not an enthusiastic supporter of Bell, Governor Houston exerted himself to the utmost for the cause of the Union; he left a sick-bed to address a Union meeting at Austin on September 22. In this speech he confessed that "I begin to feel that the issue is really upon us which involves the perpetuity of the government." He exposed many of the fallacies of his opponents. His efforts were seconded by other Union men of great ability. But the remedy they proposed was impracticable. The judgment, passions and prejudices of an overwhelming majority of the people of Texas had been slowly forming by what they observed during the past decade or longer. They had followed the course of the abolitionists in Congress, in Kansas, at Harper's Ferry. They smarted under the attacks made upon their rights and domestic institutions by a sectional press, a sectional pulpit and so-called higher law advocates. The question of slavery, so far as Texas was concerned, had been settled when Texas entered the Union ; the right to hold slaves was a preliminary condition to annexation ; had it been denied Texas would never have entered the confederation. With disgust did the Texans perceive the probability of a candidate being elevated to power on an abolition plat- form. Pendleton Murrah made an address on November 8 in which he said: "If Lincoln is elected, it is because he is a black republican. * *
* And if that be so, the 'higher law,' set above the constitution of our country by the authority of that vote, is on its way to the execu- tive mansion and to every department of this government. The inaug- uration of the black republicans into power is a revolution." The Texas Republican ( Marshall) said: "The great question that is agitating the public mind of the South is, What shall be done if Lincoln is elected ? The general sentiment in Texas, so far as we have been able to learn, is * against submission to the Black Republican administration. * *
Such a submission, in our judgment, involves the loss of everything, and if consummated will end in the prostration of the southern states." Former Lieutenant-Governor F. R. Lubbock said: "I am fixed in my opinion that if Mr. Lincoln is elected * will save us from ruin and
nothing but prompt. determined and efficient action * * degradation. Those who counsel waiting or remaining in the Union until some overt act is committed * *
* will find, when the time arrives, that through the great patronage [of the administration] * * there will have been mustered into existence, in our own midst, a horde of unsound men of sufficient numbers in some localities of the South
396
397
HISTORY OF TEXAS
to bring on Civil war and bloodshed among ourselves. These results I would avoid, and I believe secession is the remedy." Guy M. Bryan gave similar counsel: "I do not hesitate to say that if Lincoln should be inaugurated without new and efficient guarantees being given by the northern states to the southern states, in my opinion Texas could not with honor remain in the Union."
What were the "efficient guarantees" that the South demanded of the North? John H. Reagan summarized them in a letter to the public October 19. He suggested that a general convention of southern states "should submit to the free states propositions requiring a renewal of the original guarantees of the constitution in favor of our rights in such specific form as to settle forever the question as to the extent and char- acter of the rights of the slave states and the owners of slave property. One of the conditions should be that we would not continue our political connection with any state which would not repeal all its laws intended to hinder the recapture of fugitive slaves; another should be to demand an equal participation in the settlement and occupation of the common territory, and a safe guarantee for the admission of future slave states into the Union ; another should be the suspension of the agitation of the question about abolishing slavery in the District of Columbia, the forts, docks, etc .; and another that the interstate slave trade should not be interfered with by Congress. If they would agree to these, we should remain in the Union and support and cherish it as heretofore." And in a speech in Congress on January 15, 1861, Reagan said: "If there be a southern state, or a southern man even, who would demand, as a condition for remaining in the Union, anything beyond the clearly specified guarantees of the constitution of the United States as they are, I do not know it. I can speak for my own state * they have never dreamed of asking more than their constitutional rights. They are, however, unalterably determined never to submit to less than their constitutional rights."
These facts should be borne in mind. The attempt has been made continually to shift the whole responsibility for the war between the states upon the South, and in order to do this the enormity of secession. of attempting to break up the Union, has been dwelt upon and magnified. Attention needs to be given to the circumstances that led up to the secession, and to the small concessions by which it could have been avoided, as shown by such expressions as those of Congressman Reagan. However, such proposals were repulsed with scorn by the republicans. And Senator Wigfall was correct perhaps when he said: "The proposi- tion to settle the question by further amendments amount to nothing. * *
* The North will not yield an inch. They will not give us what we are entitled to. They will not agree to leave us what we have. * * * The constitution as it stands could not be now ratified in a single northern state, with our construction of it."
The right to secede needed no argument to sustain it in Texas. A considerable portion of her population had lived here when Texas was a nation. Of those who immigrated many were advocates of state rights. But granting this, and with abundant evidence to show that there was a popular desire to secede, there still remained the question,
398
HISTORY OF TEXAS
How was secession to be effected? A contributor to the Texas Almanac for 1862 states that there was no other state, except the border states, that had so many obstacles to contend with in the consummation of secession as Texas. "In the first place her population was made up of emigrants from nearly all nations, many of whom had not been here long enough to become acquainted with our peculiar form of govern- ment, or to become assimilated in their habits of thinking, or their cus- toms ; in addition to which they were spread over an extent of country almost equal in area to all the other cotton states. * * * The dif-
ficulties in the way of unity of action among a people so situated are obvious, and especially action in opposition to the existing government. But there was still another obstacle that no other of the seceded states had to contend with. We mean the opposition of the governor, who, in the absence of the legislature, controlled the state government, and with- out whose call it was not generally supposed that the legislature could convene in extra session. * *
* Hence the governor was petitioned
from all parts of the state to convene the legislature in order thereby to obtain a full and fair expression of the wishes of the people as to what measures should be adopted in the critical condition of the country. These petitions, though endorsed by nearly all the public journals of the state and by numerous meetings in all the old and more populous coun- ties, and in many of the new ones, embracing about four-fifths of all the counties and at least nine-tenths of the voting population of Texas, had no avail with our executive, who still refused to allow the people this customary method of declaring their sentiments. * *
"The governor's refusal to call the representatives of the people together compelled them to have recourse to the extraordinary alternative of calling a convention without the aid of the govern- ment, and by their own spontaneous action. The difficulty of accom- plishing this is obvious, for, as no one could claim any higher au- thority than another in such a movement, it seemed next to impos- sible to harmonize differences of opinion and bring about concert of action as to the time and place of holding a convention and the mode and manner of conducting the election. * * Still the sentiment was well-nigh universal that some action was absolutely necessary for our common safety."
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.