USA > Texas > History of Texas : from 1685 to 1892, volume 2 > Part 29
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
The legislature set apart the United States bonds as a per- petual school fund, and, in another act, provided that the State would loan to railroad companies $6,000 for each mile of road constructed, one result of which was, some years later, the State lost about $150,000, an experiment not likely to be repeated.
In 1855 it was proposed for the State to undertake the con- struction of railways on its own account. It was urged through the press and in circulars by its advocates, but utterly failed to win popular approval.
A disturbing element had been gradually growing in the southwest which culminated in the so-called cart war. A number of Mexicans, withdrawing from the turmoils and burdensome exactions of their own country, had crossed into Texas and collected in a settlement near the San Antonio River. They were peaceable, but the settlement was supposed
24
370
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
to serve as a refuge for runaway slaves and other fugitives. With their carts and oxen they could afford cheaper transport- ation of freight from the coast to the interior than the Texians engaged in the same calling. In consequence, several Mex- icans were killed and a general war upon them was threatened. Governor Pease ordered out a small armed force, the assail- ants dispersed and the war ended.
AN INDIAN RAID.
In October, 1855, a party of Lipan and Kickapoo Indians, as they had repeatedly done before, crossed the Rio Grande from their new homes in Mexico and committed robberies and murders in the country northwest of San Antonio. As senior officer of three small volunteer companies, Captain James H. Callahan pursued the retreating savages across the Rio Grande to their chief encampments near San Fernando, twenty-seven miles beyond the border, and there had a severe fight. He was soon confronted by overwhelming odds, including large numbers of Mexican outlaws, and was com- pelled to retreat, but in doing so displayed such admirable tact and courage as to not only preserve the utmost coolness among his followers, but to repulse the frequent attacks of his pursuers. His wounded (including little B. Eustace Benton, whose brains were oozing through a bullet hole in his eye, ) were successfully borne away.1
The enemy expected to greatly cripple Callahan's force, while recrossing the Rio Grande at Eagle Pass, but in this they were disappointed by the timely action of Capt. Sidney
1 This heroic youth was carried for that long distance by Capt. Wm. A. Pitts, who placed the unconscious boy in his saddle and rode behind him on the same horse, holding him in his arms. This scene, with bullets whizzing from a pursuing foe, and the agonized father (Capt. Nat Benton, with an arm broken), wrought almost into frenzy by what he considered the death wound of his only child, involuntary calls to mind the legend of Damon and Pythias.
371
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
Burbank, commander of Fort Duncan, on the Texas bank, who turned his guns so as to rake the western bank, and by this demonstration, said to the pursuers : " If you attack my countrymen while they are crossing the river, I shall pour shot and shell into your ranks." The admonition had the desired effect, and unquestionably saved many lives. It won the heart of Texas to that gallant officer, who hazarded his commission in the cause of humanity, and who was gal- lantly sustained by his second in command, Captain John G. Walker, subsequently a Confederate major-general. Willis, the youthful son of Hon, Wm. E. Jones, was the only one left dead on the field. Capt. Callahan was one of the saved among Fannin's men and about a year later was assassinated at his home in Hays County. In his honor Callahan County was named.
-
CHAPTER XXXII.
SECTIONAL AGITATION - AN INDIAN BATTLE.
Though not pertaining directly to the history of Texas it is proper to refer to certain sectional agitations in which the northern and southern States felt deeply interested. The Missouri compromise of 1820-21 prohibited slavery in the territories of the United States north of latitude thirty-six, thirty. This was commonly called Clay's compromise; but in 1850 Mr. Clay introduced another compromise in relation to the vast territory acquired from Mexico, under which Cali- fornia was admitted into the Union as a non-slave holding State, and that the remaining territory, embracing Utah and New Mexico -- besides what now constitutes Nevada, Arizona, parts of Kansas and Colorado, should be given provisional or territorial governments without reference to slavery, virtually leaving to those people, when they should come to form State constitutions, to deal with the slavery question as they might prefer. Soon afterwards the settlement of Kansas attracted marked attention, leading to bitter factional contests, between northern and southern immigrants on the subject of slavery. It is sufficient to say that many wrongs were perpetrated resulting in armed contests and more or less bloodshed. To meet the emergency and give repose to the country, a bill was introduced by Senator Douglas, of Illinois, in December, 1854, known as the Kansas and Nebraska bill ( which became a law), in which it was declared that the Missouri com- promise -
" Being inconsistent with the principles of non-interven- tion by Congress with slavery in the States and Territories, as
(372)
373
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
recognized by the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, is hereby declared inoperative and void, it being the true intent and meaning of this act, not to legis- late slavery in to any Territory or State, nor to exclude it there- from, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the constitution of the United States."
Kansas and Nebraska, under the Missouri compromise, would have necessarily been free States, but this bill of Mr. Douglas carried with it the right of slaveholders to settle in those territories. The eastern portion of Kansas was regarded by many as a desirable region for slave labor, and many southern people located in it. This only served to intensify sectional antagonisms ; and the north, being the most popu- lous and powerful section, in the very nature of things, speedily won the prize. General Houston, senator from Texas, for reasons which he elaborated, voted against this measure under the firm conviction that the attempt to estab- lish slavery in that section would prove futile and only serve still further to alienate the sections. As public sentiment then existed, General Houston lost much popularity in Texas by that vote. Such was the condition of things when on the 21st of December, 1857, a change of administration occurred in Texas and Hardin R. Runnels 1 became Governor, having received 32,552 votes to 23,628 cast for Gen. Houston.
1 Hardin R. Runnels was a native of Mississippi and a planter. As such he located in Bowie County in 1841. From 1847 to 1855 he represented that county in the legislature, and in the session of 1853-4 he was speaker of the house. In 1855 he was re-elected to the legislature, and also Lieut .- Gov- ernor - the latter office being conferred on short notice as a result of com- plications brought about by the Know-nothing agitation. He thereupon declined his seat in the legislature and served as Lieut .- Governor. In 1859 in a second race for Governor, he received 27,500 votes while Gen. Houston reversed his majority and received 36,257 votes - Runnels' majority having been 8,824, and Houston's 8,757. Governor Runnels subsequently served in the secession convention of 1861, and in the constitutional convention of 1866. He died at his home in Bowie County.
374
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
Francis R. Lubbock at the same time became Lieut .- Gov- ernor; T. Scott Anderson was made Secretary of State; Clement R. Johns, Comptroller ; Cyrus H. Randolph, Treas- urer; Francis M. White, Commissioner of the Land Ofice and Malcolm D. Graham, Attorney-General.
Governor Runnels submitted his views on the Kansas ques- tion to the legislature - taking strong ground in favor of the equal rights of the south in the territory. The legislature passed a preamble, reciting that there was a determination, by force, to exclude the citizens of the slave-holding States from the enjoyment of equal rights in the common territory, and
Resolved, "That the Governor of the 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-hold- ing States shall express the opinion that such convention is necessary to preserve the equal rights of such States in the Union, and advise the Governor of this State that measures have been taken to meet those of Texas."
The Governor was also empowered, if he should find it necessary, to call an extra session of the legislature, to take action on this subject and, in its discretion, to provide for a convention of the people, representing the sovereignty of the State. Although nothing ever sprang from this action it served to intensify public opinion, and expose Texas to the charge of favoring ultimate secession.
Gov. Runnels, in his first message, called attention to the fact that notwithstanding the liberal land bonuses and the loan of $6,000 per mile from the school fund, the building of rail- roads was by no means commensurate with the public de- mands. He urged, that all companies theretofore chartered should be held to strict accountability and opposed the indis- criminate granting of charters, well knowing that such grants
375
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
had been made theretofore to irresponsible parties whose objects were merely speculative.
During the session of 1857-8, Gov. Runnels called attention to the Indian depredations on the frontier, and urged measures for their repression. The result was, the passage of a bill, providing for raising a force of six months' rangers to operate against these Indians. Capt. John S. Ford, as senior officer, was placed in command of the expedition, and left Austin with one hundred men about the first of April, 1858, for the Panhandle region of Texas. At the Indian agency on the Brazos he was joined by Capt. S. P. Ross, resident agent of the Indians, with one hundred friendly Toncahua, Caddo, Waco and Anadarco Indians, each little tribe having its chief, as, Piacido of the Toncahuas, and Jim Pock-mark of the Anadarcoes. Among Ford's subordinate officers, were Allison Nelson (afterwards a Confederate general ), Lieutenants Edw. Burleson, Wm. A. Pitts, Preston and Tankersley. On the 12th of May, 1858, on the Rio Negra, or False Washita, Capt. Ford attacked and successfully fought the town of the noted Comanche chief Pro-he-bits Quash-o, or " Iron-Jacket" so styled from his coat of scale mail. The conflict, fierce and close, was continued for a con- siderable time. The Comanches yielded in retreat, but stubbornly fought at every favorable locality, formed by trees, mounds or ravines. The Texians and their Indian allies pursued with vigor, the enemy spreading in fan-shaped lines of retreat and causing a corresponding separation of the pur- suers. The battle began about sunrise and the pursuit was abandoned about noon. On arriving at the initial point, it was found that a large body of warriors from an encampment farther up the river were formed in battle array on a neigh- boring ridge. A charge was ordered and gallantly made on this fresh body of warriors. Lieut. Nelson, by a skillful movement, struck the enemy's left flank, which, simultaneous with a furious charge in front, broke the Comanche line. A
376
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
running fight followed for three or four miles, when Ford's party returned to the original point of attack. The results were, seventy-six dead Comanches, an unknown number wounded, four hundred horses and a large amount of Indian property captured, including several prisoners, among others, Noh-po, a little son of Iron-Jacket. Ford's loss was one ranger and one Waco killed and seven wounded.
It was known that Buffalo-Hump with his whole band was encamped on the Canadian not very far below, and, after two contests on the same day, with two distinct bands, it was deemed prudent to return at once to their camp on the False Washita, where their supplies had been left with a guard of but six men. This was done and virtually closed the cam- paign; and the command and all its portable booty leisurely returned to the settlements.1
1 The son of Iron-Jacket was reared in the Ross family at Waco and ac- companied Major L. S. Ross of Stone's regiment, when he joined Gen. Ben McCulloch's command in southwest Missouri, in the autumn of 1861.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
THE RESERVE INDIANS.
There were two Indian reservations in Texas - one located on the Brazos twelve miles below Fort Belknap, on which were located remnants of various Texas tribes, and one on the Clear Fork of the Brazos forty-five miles farther west, on which were located about five hundred Comanches - all of those tribes having herds of horses, and being fed by the United States government, the Comanches being located at Camp Cooper, a military post.
As early as 1857 the people on the frontier began to com- plain of depredations by these Indians through small parties stealing their horses and killing isolated persons. The com- plaints multiplied through 1858 and into the beginning of 1859, when several collisions took place between small bands of Indians and squads of frontier citizens. A strong demand had grown up for the government to remove the Indians from Texas and locate them with other tribes north of Red River, which course Gov. Runnels urged upon the government. Finally, a large body of citizens, from as far east as Collin and Denton counties, organized and, under the lead of Captain John R. Baylor, repaired to the vicinity of the Brazos reser- vation. In the meantime two companies of United States infantry were ordered to the agency to protect the Indians against unauthorized attacks. In passing along the road through the reservation they were fired upon by the Indians from the neighboring hills. There was a large element of the best citizens of the country in this party, and they were un- willing to provoke a collision with United States forces, and
(377)
378
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
therefore determined to return home, carrying with them, however, convictions that the Indians had been committing depredations, and greatly displeased with the course of the chief agent, Major Neighbors. In this condition of affairs Governor Runnels conceived it to be his duty to ascertain the real facts and adopt whatever course might be deemed neces- sary to protect the people. For that purpose, he appointed, as commissioners, Messrs. George B. Erath, Richard Coke, John Henry Brown, Joseph M. Smith and Dr. Josephus M. Steiner, with instructions to visit the agency and the sur- rounding country, and report the result of their investigations. About the same time, the fact was made public, that the government would, in a short time, remove the Indians to the vicinity of Fort Cobb, north of Red River. The commis- sioners reported to the Governor such facts as determined him to take steps to protect the people against depredations by the Indians, and especially during the period of their re- moval. To this end, John Henry Brown was appointed captain of two detachments aggregating one hundred men, and ordered to take position in such manner as to enable him to compel the Indians on both reservations, to remain within their limits until their final removal, unless accompanied by white men in order to collect their live stock. Major (afterwards General) George H. Thomas was in command of all the United States forces at the two reservations, with head- quarters at Camp Cooper. Captain Brown exchanged notes and courtesies with him, which led to a friendly understanding, marred only by a single skirmish near that camp, where a large body of Comanches attacked a detachment of Brown's men, but were repulsed with the loss of eleven warriors, and only two rangers wounded.
In August Major Thomas, with an escort of three or four hundred cavalry and infantry, conducted the Indians to their future homes in the Indian Territory. Brown followed in their rear to guard against straggling, thieving parties, with the
379
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
effect of but one such leaving the main body, until the whole were at Fort Cobb, and thus ended this exciting and irritat- ing episode in our Indian history, marred, however, by an act of violence that was lamented by all parties. On his return home from Fort Cobb, with a party of his subordinates and employes, all destined for their respective homes in Texas, Major Neighbors was murdered in Belknap, by a party concealed in the brush. Public opinion pointed with no small unanimity to a man named Cornett as the assassin, who, about a year later in the same section of country, was pursued and killed by two or three of the rangers then on the frontier.
CHAPTER XXXIV.
HOUSTON'S ADMINISTRATION.
General Houston's term of twelve years in the United States senate expired March 4, 1859, while Senator Rusk, who had served with him from annexation until 1857, in a fit of great mental depression, caused by the death of his wife, terminated his own career a few months before at his home in Nacogdoches, in 1857. Chief Justice John Hemphill of the Supreme Court and James P. Henderson were elected to fill these vacancies. Judge Hemphill served until the organ- ization of the Confederate government. General Henderson died a few months after his election, having barely taken his seat in the senate. Governor Runnels appointed in his stead, until the meeting of the next legislature, Hon. Matthew Ward, of Marion County, and, when that body met at the close of 1859, it elected to the senate, Louis T. Wigfall, who also served until the organization of the Confederate government.
General Sam Houston was inaugurated as Governor on the 21st of December, 1859, but a little while before the great canvass of 1860, in which the country, north and south, east. and west, was destined to be convulsed over the issues which culminated in secession a year later.
Governor Houston was soon confronted with the grave question of our frontier relations with the Indians; with the disturbed condition of the Lower Rio Grande frontier, when a renegade Mexican bandit, Nepomucino Cortina by name, at the head of an organized band of marauders, was terrorizing that border, often crossing from the Mexican to the Texas
(380)
381
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
side, robbing, murdering and harassing the people. Governor Houston appealed to the Government at Washington to stay these incursions. The government acted promptly, by direct- ing Colonel Robert E. Lee, then in command of the depart- ment of Texas, to adopt the most energetic measures to destroy Cortina and his band of outlaws, authorizing him, if necessary, to cross into Mexico for that purpose. Colonel Lee, in addition to the regulars at his disposal, was effectively aided by a body of Texian volunteers, under the command of Colonel John S. Ford. Several contests took place in the region of Matamoros, and in a short time the bandits were dispersed, leaving the country comparatively quiet.
In his message - being his first in the regular course -on January 13th, 1860, Governor Houston said :
" The first official information received by the Executive from the seat of these disorders, was a communication from Captain W. G. Tobin bearing date at Raminero, near Browns- ville, December 16th, 1859. *
" I was gratified to learn from that dispatch that the Federal government had interposed to restore order in that region, and that Major Heintzleman, an officer of discretion and valor, had assumed the control of military operations. What- ever complaints may be made against the Federal government on account of the removal of the troops from that portion of our border, its promptitude in affording relief at this time is deserving of consideration. *
" On the 10th of January the report of Major John S. Ford (previously appointed by Governor Runnels) was received, dated at Ringgold Barracks, December, 29, 1859, giving an account of the engagement at Rio Grande City, in which the followers of Cortina were fully routed and dispersed.
" The entire forces on this occasion were under the command of Major Hientzleman, to whom great credit is given for the disposition made of the troops.
" In whatsoever light we may view these disorders on the
382
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
Rio Grande, they may be readily traced to the insecure con- dition of our border caused by the removal of the Federal troops. Mexico is in a continued state of anarchy. Her population feel none of the influences of a stable government. Lawless chieftains plunder them with impunity, and light the torch of civil war at pleasure. Riot, murder and revolu- tion reign above law and order. Separated from Mexico as we are by a narrow river alone, and a continual intercourse going on between its people and ours, it is but natural that the unhappy influences of her condition should extend to our border.
" To prevent these influences operating upon the turbulent portion of our own population, as well as to check any effort on the part of the citizens of Mexico to aid them in setting the laws at defiance, the presence of the Federal troops is absolutely necessary ; and in my opinion the disturbances may be attributed to the insecurity arising from their removal, which left no check upon the influences of the civil war in Mexico. I have full confidence that the Federal government will not only guard against any such exigences in the future, but will, as it should, recognize as valid the acts of its mili- tary officer on the Rio Grande in assuming the control of our State troops and reimburse Texas for the cost of pay and subsistence."
On his induction into office, General Houston manifested equal anxiety regarding the northwestern frontier. For this purpose he successively commissioned Captains Wm. C. Dalrymple, Ed. Burleson, Jr., and John C. Conner to raise companies of rangers. A little later he called into service, three detachments, of twenty-five men each, under Lieutenants Robert M. White, Salmon and Walker. He further author- ized the chief justice of every frontier county, on emergencies, to call out a company of fifteen men. Captain Peter Tum- linson was placed at the head of forty-eight men to guard the southwestern frontier. In addition to these several forces he
383
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
anthorized Colonel Middleton T. Johnson to raise a battalion, or regiment, for a campaign into the Indian country. At the head of a fine body of men that officer advanced far up the country on the waters of Pease and Red Rivers, but the In- dians, realizing that this force was too strong to be met, fled before them and avoided any collision. Hence, after a short campaign, the expedition returned and was disbanded. It was on this trip and by some of these men that the assassin of Major Robert S. Neighbors was killed in the region of Belknap. Governor Houston, like his predecessors in nu- merous cases, felt compelled to adopt these extraordinary measures of frontier defense, because of the failure of the United States to keep on the frontier a sufficient mounted force to protect the lives and property of the people; it being an oft-demonstrated fact that infantry confined at frontier posts are wholly inadequate for such purposes.
In the fall of 1860, General Houston also placed on the northwestern frontier small companies under the command of Captains Thomas Harrison and Lawrence S. Ross, the latter of whom in December attacked and defeated a band of Indians on Pease River, in which he captured a woman and her child, who proved to be a white woman, named Cynthia Ann Parker, captured at the fall of Parker's Fort, when but nine years of age, May 19th, 1836, and for the intervening twenty- four years and seven months, had been held in captivity by the Comanches. (See Indian Wars of Texas, by the author of this work. )
POLITICAL CRISIS APPROACHING.
It is not the intention of the author to give a history of the sectional agitation or of the war between the States, but only succinctly and impartially to state facts as they trans- pired so far as they affected and controlled the action of Texas. It is deemed improper, at so early a period, to under-
384
HISTORY OF TEXAS.
take such a history by one who was a participant in it so far as Texas was concerned. That labor, to meet the demands of posterity, must be performed by an historian wholly freed from the excitement and prejudices of those times.
For the present it may be said that a president of the United States was to be elected in the autumn of 1860 to suc- ceed Mr. Buchannan, the administration of the government for the preceding eight years having been successively in the hands of Presidents Pierce and Buchannan, both elected by the Democratic party. It was during this period that the sec- tional agitations connected with the question of slavery, and the territories, had assumed proportions, foreshadowing the separation of the sections. A division of opinion sprang up in the Democratic party, in regard to the rights of the people - comparatively the first settlers of a common territory, belonging to the Union - to permit or exclude slavery, a doc- trine alleged to be sustained by the provisions of the Kansas- Nebraska bill, and commonly designated as Squatter Sover- eignty. The contrary view, chiefly adopted by the Demo- crats of the south, was that only when the people of a terri- tory, after their probationary experience as such, framed a State constitution under an enabling act of Congress, prepara- tory to their admission into the Union as a State, could take action for or against slavery. On this proposition, the party so divided that when they met in national convention at Charleston for the nomination of a presidential candidate, it was found impossible to make a nomination, the contest being for the nomination of Douglas on the part of the northern and of John C. Breckenridge on the part of the southern wing of the party. This resulted in an adjournment from Charleston to Baltimore, where a short time afterwards a separation took place and both of the gentlemen named were nominated. A third ticket was put forward by those claiming to be more exclusively Union men, headed by John Bell of Tennessee, and Edward Everett of Massachusets. The most
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.