THE QUARTERLY OF THE TEXAS STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION
VOLUME I. APRIL, 1898. NUMBER 4.
AUSTIN, TEXAS: PUBLISHED QUARTERLY BY THE ASSOCIATION. Price, SEVENTY-FIVE CENTS per number. [Entered at the postoffice at Austin, Texas, as second class matter.]
CONTENTS.
Establishment of the University of Texas O. M. Roberts.
The Real Saint-Denis Lester G. Bugbee.
The Old Mexican Fort at Velasco Adèle B. Looscan.
Recollections of Early Schools M. M. Kenney.
Some of My Early Experiences in Texas Rosa Kleberg.
Notes and Fragments.
Questions and Answers.
Affairs of the Association.
The Texas State Historical Association.
O. M. ROBERTS, President.
VICE-PRESIDENTS.
Dudley G. Wooten, William Corner,
Guy M. Bryan, Mrs. Julia Lee Sinks.
RECORDING SECRETARY AND LIBRARIAN.
George P. Garrison.
CORRESPONDING SECRETARY AND TREASURER.
Lester G. Bugbee.
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.
O. M. Roberts, George P. Garrison, Mrs. Dora Fowler Arthur,
Dudley G. Wooten, Eugene Digges, Rufus C. Burleson,
Guy M. Bryan, Z. T. Fulmore, M. M. Kenney,
William Corner, C. W. Raines, R. L. Batts,
Mrs. Julia Lee Sinks, F. R. Lubbock, Mrs. Bride Neill Taylor.
PUBLICATION COMMITTEE.
O. M. Roberts.
George P. Garrison, Dudley G. Wooten,
Z. T. Fulmore, Mrs. Bride Neill Taylor.
Papers read at the meetings of the Association, and such other contributions as may be accepted by the Committee, will be published in The Quarterly.
The Association was organized March 2, 1897. There are no qualifications for membership. The annual dues are two dollars. The Quarterly is sent free to all members.
Contributions to the Quarterly and correspondence relative to historic materials should be addressed to
GEORGE P. GARRISON, Recording Secretary and Librarian, Austin, Texas. All other correspondence concerning the Association should be addressed to LESTER G. BUGBEE, Corresponding Secretary and Treasurer, Austin, Texas.
Vol. I. APRIL, 1898. No. 4.
The Publication Committee disclaims responsibility for views expressed by contributors to the Quarterly.
[In this history I have sought to show that, from 1839 to 1883, a great many citizens of Texas have, according to the opportunities afforded them, and acting in the public positions in the government of Texas which were occupied by them, or otherwise, participated in the establishment of the University. I have referred to their acts, as exhibited in the histories of the State, and in the public records, so far as found practicable and pertinent, for my information, which has been supplemented by facts within my own recollection, or reliably communicated to me by others. These facts I have written in the same manner as if I was narrating them in person to the reader. In doing this I have tried to give every one of the participants full credit for his acts, so far as my information would enable me to state. —
The main branch of the University of Texas stands upon a beautiful eminence in the city of Austin, the capital of the State. It will remain a lasting monument to the wisdom of the people of the State. The merit of its establishment, with its endowment, is not due to any one man, nor even to any one hundred men. It is due to a great number of citizens, who, during a period of more than forty years, contributed their efforts for it—each one of them at the time acting according to the opportunity afforded him, and according to his duty in the position occupied by him in the administration of the government of Texas.
The first efforts on behalf of the University were made to provide the means for its endowment, in anticipation of its subsequent establishment. The Congress of the Republic of Texas in 1839 donated fifty leagues of land to establish two colleges—one in Eastern and the other in Western Texas—and at the same session donated four leagues of land to each county for an academy. At that time, it was only thought necessary to provide an endowment for schools of a high grade of education. That was in the administration of President Lamar. What part he and the members of Congress took in this meritorious proceeding we may not now be able to know, further than that the credit of it is due to him as the Executive, and to a majority in the Congress.
During Gov. Pease's administration in 1854, the Legislature granted lands for the construction of railroads, reserving alternate sections of land surveyed for that purpose, and one-tenth of those alternate sections, which were to be selected by the Governor, were devoted to the University. The merit of this, in intention, was not defeated by the failure to select the tenth sections, and the subsequent substituting for them of one million of acres of land by the convention of 1875.
During the administration of Gov. Runnels in 1858 an act was passed by the Legislature appropriating to the University one hundred thousand dollars worth of bonds received from the United States for part of New Mexico in the compromise of 1850 in Congress. The same session passed a law for the establishment of a University, appropriated the lands and other property that had been provided for the two colleges, and made provision for executing the law. Soon thereafter the public excitement that led to the war between the States caused the failure of that measure. That, however, does not detract from the merit due to the Governor and a majority of the members of the Legislature for their patriotic action on behalf of the University.
In the convention of 1866 it was provided that “the Legislature shall at an early day make such provisions by law as will organize and put in operation the University.”
In the administration of Gov. Throckmorton in the same year (1866) a law was passed making provision for two universities, one of which was to be styled “the East Texas University.” Under the direction of the Constitution of 1866, and a law of the session of that year, bonds were issued to the amount of $134,768.62 to restore to the University fund that amount that had been taken from it to be used as revenue by acts of the Legislatures of 1860 and 1861, which bonds were afterwards reported as of doubtful validity until their validity was recognized by an act of the Legislature of 1883. This effort to establish the Universities failed of accomplishment on account of the congressional reconstruction of the Southern States early in the next year (1867). Still there was merit in the actions of the members of the convention and of the Legislature, not only on account of the laudable purpose expressed by them, but also as exhibiting evidence of the public sentiment in favor of a high order of education in Texas.
In the convention of 1875 it was provided that “the Legislature shall, as soon as practicable, establish, organize, and provide for the maintenance, support, and direction of a University of the first class, to be located by a vote of the people of this State and styled “The University of Texas,' for the promotion of literature and the arts and sciences, including an agricultural and mechanical department.” There was also set apart the enumerated property to be the permanent fund, excluding therefrom the tenth sections of land previously set apart to the University, and substituting in lieu thereof one million acres of land. The Constitution also designated the available fund to be appropriated for the creation and support of the University, and the A. and M. College was made a branch of it. There was a further provision for the maintenance of a branch University, when practicable, for the colored youths of the State, to be located by a vote of the people, “provided, no tax shall be levied and no money appropriated out of the general revenue either for this purpose or for the establishment and erection of the buildings of the University of Texas.” Thus there was a permanent foundation laid in the organic law for a University, with directions for its accomplishment when practicable, and the discretion left to the Legislature was as to when and under what circumstances it would be practicable.
Under the general power for surveying the lands of the University in the “Revised Statutes of Texas,” adopted in 1879, the Commissioner of the General Land Office, Wm. C. Walsh, had the one million acres of land given by the Constitution of 1875 selected and surveyed for the University in the counties of Tom Green, Pecos, and Crockett.
After my nomination for the office of Governor of Texas in 1878, I devoted my especial attention to the operations of the government, including the subject of education, and became impressed with the importance of the further improvement of the common free schools, which had commenced during Gov. Coke's administration after the adoption of the Constitution of 1875, and also of the propriety of making an effort to establish a University in this State, to furnish Texas youths of both sexes the opportunity of a higher education within the State instead of their being drummed up, as had long been the case, by agents for high schools in other States. Learning that there was a convention of teachers in session at Waco, I addressed a letter to Dr. Rufus C. Burleson, requesting that a committee of eminent teachers should be appointed to visit Austin during the session of the legislature in 1879, to aid the government by their advice and influence in educational affairs. I was afterwards informed that such a committee had been appointed.
In my inaugural address on the 21st of January, 1879, to show the necessity of a more liberal and expeditious mode of disposing of the public lands than that which then prevailed, I said: “For under the present mode of disposing of these lands the scholastìc population will increase faster than the fund. * * * And the same policy will postpone indefinitely the building of a University, which should be erected at the capital of the State, for the education of Texas youths, instead of sending them out of the State to be educated, and to return home strangers to Texas.”
On the 5th of February, 1879, I delivered a message upon the University, in which was exhibited the amounts of the bonds, cash, and land sale notes belonging to its fund ($445,470.18), and said: “If steps should be taken now to have the one million acres of public land set apart, and all of the lands sold, as I have recommended, we may expect in a few years to have a university in Texas. This is equally as important as to have common schools; for while the one elevates the masses to a certain degree in the scale of civilization, the other is a necessity in this age to properly direct it in the progress to power and prosperity.”
The committee of learned educators, composed of W. C. Crane, W. C. Rote, Milton Cooper, R. C. Burleson, T. L. Norwood, and Oscar H. Cooper, joined by Dr. B. Sears, general agent of the Peabody fund, met in Austin and presented a memorial relating to the free public schools and a normal school, which, with a message, was presented by me to the Legislature on the 10th of February, 1879.
Their recommendations were adopted in the amendment to the school law in several particulars, and in the establishment of the Sam Houston Normal School; but they failed to make any recommendation about a university, because, as I learned, then, there was a difference of opinion about the plan of its organization.
Notwithstanding the failure at that time to induce any legislation on the University, what was done gave promise that the effort in its favor would be continued, which induced public discussion as to its propriety and practicability. It was meritorious, as it tended to keep before the public the necessity of a higher education than that obtained in the common schools. These schools had especially engaged the attention of the State government ever since the convention of 1845, in which ten per cent of the annual revenue had been set apart for their support; and there had been an increased devotion to their interests subsequent to the war between the States, leaving the higher education to the private academies and denominational schools in the State.
In the month of June, 1880, one of the first, if not the very first, generally attended Texas State Teachers' Associations, was assembled at Mexia. I visited that place for a single purpose, which was to solicit the aid of the members of that association in the establishment of the University. In my address to that body, I pointed out the necessity of it, and suggested that if the educators and learned men, there assembled from all parts of the State, would agitate the subject, and use their influence, this would greatly aid in its accomplishment; and that, though the funds devoted to it were not sufficient to at once establish it on a large scale, still it was important that it should be brought into existence, for the reason that until this was done it would not be known what such an institution required for its successful operation. I requested them to appoint a committee of the members of their body to meet in Austin during the session of the Legislature in January, 1881, to give their help to the movement that would then be made for it. The subject was discussed most favorably by the members of the Association, and the committee was appointed, and met at Austin as I had requested.
The question may be asked, why should this attempt to establish a university have been made at that time, when the means for doing it were very limited in amount, and the Constitution of the State required that it should be “of the first class”? It is important, even now as well as then, for it to be properly understood what the members of the Convention meant by the expression, “The Legislature shall, as soon as practicable, establish, organize and provide for the maintenance, support and direction of a university of the first class.” What sort of a school did they have in mind when they designated it as “university,” at the time that word was used by them? It can not be reasonably supposed that they meant that when it was established it should be such a school as that which is known to the highest order of professional educators in this country, and to them alone, as a university proper, as distinguished from a college—such as Johns Hopkins, and some others in the North, and those in Europe, which may be termed finishing schools, in which a man, already possessed of a collegiate education, can be admitted to increase or perfect his education upon some one or more special subjects. Persons using language even in forming constitutions and laws are supposed to use terms in the sense usually conveyed by them in the country wherein they are used. In the time of the Republic, a school established at San Augustine, Texas, was usually spoken of as the university. The same may be said of other schools in early times in Texas. The denominational schools at Waco, Georgetown, and Tehuacana, erected long before the Convention of 1875, are each styled “university.” The large granite school house, lately erected and used at Marble Falls, Texas, is called the university. None of those schools are devoted to mere specialties. The so-called universities of Alabama, Georgia and other Southern States, including even that of Virginia, are not merely finishing schools for education on special subjects, but for the higher courses of education generally. It is certain, therefore, that, by the use of the term university was meant a high school of learning, and not technically a university, as understood in Europe and elsewhere.
Such institutions have usually large endowments, and numerous teachers, and are located where there are numerous schools of an academic and collegiate order to fit students to enter them. When would it have been practicable for Texas to put up and maintain such a school? Perhaps in fifty years. Nor could it have been expected to be first-class in that sense when first put up by the State, but to be made first-class as means could be furnished it in its growth through years to come. Nor was it designed ever to become only a specialty school of the first-class, or of any such class whatever, and if it should ever assume that shape, it will be a perversion of its fund, never contemplated by the people of Texas who donated it.
Under these views, I concluded that the time had arrived to start the institution, and hoped that what had been done at Mexia would give notice generally of the movement, and incite the friends of education throughout the State to action in its favor. That it had such effect was afterwards evidenced by the prompt action upon it by both houses of the Legislature in the session of 1881.
At that session, having succeeded myself as Governor, in my inaugural address I suggested that as a safe financial condition had been attained, attention might be directed to the improvement of our laws for the protection of persons and property, and added that “while giving especial attention to that, we may maintain our free public schools, enlarge our means for their future improvement by the more rapid sale of the land set apart for the purpose, lay the foundation of a university, encourage our Agricultural and Mechanical College, establish additional normal schools, and thereby give an impetus to our educational interests generally.”
Lieutenant-Governor-elect L. J. Storey, in his inaugural address on the same day (January 18th, 1881), said: “And again, what Texan's heart does not throb with delight as he contemplates the prospects before us, and, as I believe, in the near future, for the erection of a first-class university? Already the princely fund, provided by our patriot fathers for this purpose, is believed to have reached the value of two and a half millions of dollars, and the demand is coming up from every quarter that this Legislature shall declare that it is now `practicable,' and that it shall proceed to `establish, organize and provide for the maintenance, support and direction of a university of the first class, to be styled the University of Texas.”' This shows that the members of the State Teachers' Association had agitated the subject of education to advantage before the meeting of the Legislature in January, 1881. In my message upon different subjects on the 27th of January, I presented my views as to the manner in which a general system should be organized for the State, by which all the grades, from the highest to the lowest, should be adapted to the wants of the people. I said that naturally it assumed three degrees of education, requiring common schools for the millions, academies for the thousands, and colleges and universities for the hundreds, and that each one should be instituted with distinct reference to its position in the system, without trenching upon the province of the others, which should be secured by the modes of government respectively prescribed for them. I further said: “Fortunately, Texas is now in condition to initiate measures that will eventuate in this grand result. We have the means, as you will see exhibited and explained in the report of the Board of Education, to commence THE INSTITUTION OF A UNIVERSITY. That, under the Constitution, will require the Legislature to submit the question of its locality to the voters of the State, which I respectfully recommend should be done during the present session. It is much to be desired that it shall be located at the seat of government at Austin, where forty acres of land were set apart for it, in a most beautiful situation, in laying off the city, indicating thereby the voice of the founders of our institutions as to where it should be located. It would be here, where the members of the Legislature at every session could conveniently give it their attention and encouragement, and here would be congregated the youths of the country to imbibe common ideas, acquire a love of our State, its history, and institutions, and in whatever positions in life they might afterwards be placed they would be thereby predisposed to think and act on a common design for the prosperity and glory of their own State. It should be open for females, as well as males, qualified to enter it, and such should be the rule in all of our schools, of whatever grade.”
The committee of educators, appointed by my request at Mexia, met at Austin, and prepared a memorial and presented it to me, which I promptly communicated to both houses of the Legislature on the 28th of January, 1881, together with a message, as follows: “I respectfully submit to your honorable bodies the annexed memorial of the committee appointed by the Teachers' Association of Texas on the subject of the State University, and ask for it a respectful consideration, as coming from gentlemen eminent in their profession, and who have given much attention to the subject. From having had frequent communications from, and conversations with, some of those gentlemen during the last two years, I can give full assurance that they not only feel a deep interest in the subject, but also believe the time is opportune now to initiate the establishment of the university, in which I heartily concur with them. My own views as to its organization have already been given in my message, recently submitted, for which, however, I have no such strenuous predilection as that I could not most willingly see any practical mode adopted and carried out.”
To His Excellency O. M. Roberts, Governor:
At the last annual session of the Teachers' Association of Texas, held at Mexia, in June, 1880, the undersigned were appointed as a committee to present to your Excellency the views held by the teachers of Texas concerning the establishment of a State University, and to submit to your Excellency a plan for the organization of the same.
In pursuance of this commission, the following memorial is respectfully submitted:
The increasing demand for higher education, and the inadequacy of existing institutions in the State to meet this demand, taken in connection with the fact that the resources of the university fund are now amply sufficient to found and sustain an institution of the highest order, induced the Teachers' Association of Texas to adopt, by a unanimous vote, a resolution urging the immediate inauguration of a State University.
For the accomplishment of this end, which commends itself to the mind of every Texan, and every friend of higher education, the following plan of organization is respectfully submitted:
I.One university, and only one, should be organized.
II.The control, management and supervision of the University should be vested in a board, to be styled the Regents of the University of Texas, which board shall consist of one member from each congressional district, to be nominated by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate, to hold office not less than two nor more than ten years; no person, holding any office of honor or emolument, should be eligible to the position of regent.
III.The Board of Regents should be empowered and instructed to elect the president of the University, who should be ex officio chairman of said board. The regents should determine the departments of the University, elect the professors, and, by and with the advice of the professors, arrange courses of instruction, appoint tutors and other officers of the University.
IV.The Board of Regents should fix the salaries of the president, the professors, tutors, and other officers of the University, on such a scale as to command the services of persons eminently qualified for the respective positions, and make all regulations necessary for the government of the University.
V.No religious qualification should be prescribed for admission to any office or privilege in the University, nor should any course of religious instruction of a sectarian character be taught in the University.
VI.The regents should report annually to the Governor the condition and progress of the University.
VII.A committee should be appointed by the Legislature at each session to attend the annual examinations of the University, and report to the Legislature thereon.
VIII.The reasonable expense incurred by the regents and visiting committee in the discharge of their duties should be paid out of the available University fund.
IX.The treasurer of the State should be the treasurer of the University.
X.All the expenditures of the University should be made by order of the Board of Regents, and all moneys needed to meet the same should be drawn on warrants of the Comptroller, based upon the vouchers approved by the chairman of the Board of Regents, and countersigned by the secretary of said board.
XI.The election for the location of the University should be ordered at the earliest date possible.
XII.No part of the University fund should ever be applied to the erection of dormitories, professors' houses, or mess halls.
Trusting that a measure involving such far-reaching results for the progress and glory of the State, and the advancement of education, will receive the wise and thoughtful attention, and prompt action which it deserves, we are, very respectfully, your obedient servants,
Oscar H. Cooper, Chairman; W. C. Crane, S. G. Sneed, R. W. Pitman, Smith Ragsdale, John G. James, O. N. Hollingsworth. Attest: A. J. Roberts, Vice-President Teachers' Association of Texas.
Here we have exhibited the interest of these citizens in the cause of the University, that induced them, at their own expense, and without compensation, to come to Austin and present the outline of a plan for its organization, for which they deserve great credit as active participants in its establishment. If the act establishing the University, approved 30th March, 1881 (General Laws, chapter 75, page 79), should be examined in connection with this memorial of the committee, it will be found that the general tenor of the memorial, and a number of its propositions, were incorporated substantially in that law. The act is as follows:
An Act to Establish the University of Texas.
SECTION 1.Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas: That there be established in the State, at such a locality as may be determined by a vote of the people, an institution of learning, which shall be called and known as The University of Texas. The medical department of the University shall be located, if so determined by a vote of the people, at a different point from the University proper, and as a branch thereof; and a question of the location of the said department shall be submitted to the people and voted on separately from the proposition for the location of the main University. The nominations and elections for the location of the medical department shall be subject to the other provisions of this act with respect to the time and manner of determining the location of the University.
SEC. 2.An election shall be held on the first Tuesday of September, 1881, for the purpose of locating the University of Texas, and the Governor is hereby authorized and instructed to issue his proclamation ordering an election on said day for said purpose, and returns of said election shall be made in the manner prescribed in the general election law.
SEC. 3.All localities put in nomination for the location of the University shall be forwarded to the Governor at least forty days anterior to the holding of said election, and the Governor shall embrace in his proclamation ordering said election the names of said localities: Provided, that any citizen may vote for any locality not named in said proclamation.
SEC. 4.The locality receiving the largest number of votes shall be declared elected, and the University shall be established at such locality: Provided, that the vote cast for said locality shall amount to one-third of the votes cast; but if no place shall receive one-third of the entire vote cast, another election shall be ordered within ninety days of the first election, between the two places receiving the highest number of votes, and the one receiving the highest number at said election shall be declared to be selected by the people as the location of the University of Texas.
SEC. 5.The government of the University shall be vested in a Board of Regents, to consist of eight members, selected from different portions of the State, who shall be nominated by the Governor and appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
SEC. 6.The Board of Regents shall be divided into classes, numbered one, two, three, and four, as determined by the Board at their first meeting; shall hold their office two, four, six, and eight years, respectively, from the time of their appointment. From and after the first of January, 1883, two members shall be appointed at each session of the Legislature to supply the vacancies made by the provisions of this section, and in the manner provided for in the preceding section, who shall hold their offices for eight years respectively.
SEC. 7.The Regents appointed pursuant to the fifth section of this act, and their successors in office, shall have the right of making and using a common seal, and altering the same at pleasure.
SEC. 8.The Regents shall organize by the election of a president of the Board of Regents, from their own number, who shall hold his office during the pleasure of the Board. They shall establish the departments of a first-class University, determine the officers and the professorships, appoint the professors (who shall constitute the faculty, with authority to elect their own chairman) and other officers, fix their respective salaries, and enact such by-laws, rules and regulations as may be necessary for the successful management and government of the University: Provided, that the salaries and expenses of the University shall never exceed the interest on the University fund and land sales fund, or ever become a charge on the general revenue of the State.
SEC. 9.The immediate government of the several departments shall be entrusted to their respective faculties, subject to the joint supervision of the whole faculty, but the Regents shall have power to regulate the course of instruction, and prescribe, by and with the advice of the professors, the books and authorities used in the several departments, and to confer such degrees and to grant such diplomas as are usually conferred and granted by universities.
SEC. 10.The Regents shall have power to remove any professor, tutor, or other officer connected with the institution, when in their judgment the interest of the University shall require it.
SEC. 11.The fee of admission to the University shall never exceed thirty dollars, and it shall be open to all persons in the State who may wish to avail themselves of its advantages, and to male and female on equal terms, without charge for tuition, under such regulations as the Board of Regents may prescribe.
SEC. 12.The Treasurer of the State shall be the treasurer of the University.
SEC. 13.It shall be the duty of the Governor, within thirty days after the location of the University shall have been determined, to convene the Board of Regents at the city of Austin, for the following purposes:
First.—To effect the permanent organization of said Board.
Second.—To adopt such regulations as they may deem proper for their government.
SEC. 14.Meetings of the Board shall be called in such manner and at such place as the Regents may prescribe, and a majority of them so assembled shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, and a less number may adjourn from time to time.
SEC. 15.It shall be the duty of the Board of Regents, after the organization of the Board of Regents, to meet at the place chosen for the University for the following purposes:
First.—To establish the departments of the University.
Second.—To define the general plan of the University buildings.
Third.—To advertise for plans and specifications of the same.
Fourth.—To take such action as may be deemed advisable for the creation of professorships and the election of professors.
Fifth.—To take such other action as may be deemed necessary for perfecting the organization of the University.
SEC. 16.After the plans and specifications of the building shall have been adopted, it shall be the duty of the Board of Regents to advertise for bids for the construction of the same, and to proceed as soon as practicable to the erection of the same. The buildings to be substantial and handsome, but not loaded with useless and expensive ornamentations: Provided, that the cost of the buildings shall not exceed one hundred and fifty thousand ($150,000) dollars. And provided further, that said buildings shall be so constructed as to admit of additions thereto without marring the harmony of the architecture.
SEC. 17.The Regents are empowered, and it shall be their duty, to purchase the necessary furniture, library, apparatus, museum and other appliances: Provided, that the amount expended for said purpose shall not exceed forty thousand dollars.
SEC. 18.The Regents shall have authority to expend the interest which has heretofore accrued, and may hereafter accrue, on the permanent University fund, for the purposes herein specified, and for the maintenance of the branches of the University; and the said interest is hereby appropriated for this purpose.
SEC. 19.All expenditures shall be made by the order of the Board of Regents, and the same shall be paid on warrants of the Comptroller, based on vouchers approved by the president and countersigned by the secretary.
SEC. 20.No religious qualification shall be required for admission to any office or privilege in the University, nor shall any course of instruction of a sectarian character be taught therein.
SEC. 21.The Board of Regents shall report to the Board of Education annually, and to each regular session of the Legislature, the condition of the University, setting forth the receipts and disbursements, the number and salary of the faculty, the number of students, classified in grades and departments, the expenses of each year, itemized, and the proceedings of the Board and faculty fully stated.
SEC. 22.There shall be appointed by the Legislature at each regular session a board of visitors, who shall attend the annual examinations of the University and its branches, and report to the Legislature thereon.
SEC. 23.The reasonable expenses incurred by the Board of Regency and visitation in the discharge of their duties, shall be paid from the available University fund.
SEC. 24.That all laws and parts of laws in conflict with this act be and the same are hereby repealed.
Approved March 30, A. D. 1881.
Amendment.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas: That section 5 of an act entitled “An act to establish the University of Texas,” passed at the present session of the Legislature, be so amended as to hereafter read as follows:
Sec. 5. The government of the University shall be vested in; a Board of Regents, to consist of eight members, selected from different portions of the State, who shall be nominated by the Governor, and appointed by and with the consent of the Senate; and should a vacancy occur by reason of death, resignation or removal of any of the Regents, or from any other cause, at a time when the Legislature is not in session, the Governor shall have power to fill such vacancy until the meeting of the next succeeding Legislature.
Approved April 1, A. D. 1881.
There are three distinguished gentlemen still living, each of whom claims the honor of having drawn up the bill for the establishment of the University. They are the chairman of the teachers' committee, Oscar H. Cooper, Senator A. W. Terrell, and Representative Hutcheson of Houston. Both of the latter were members of the Legislature in 1881. I have no doubt that all of them acted their part well in their zeal for the University. Unfortunately, the books and papers in the office of the Secretary of State furnish but imperfect information about the passage of that bill through the Legislature. Amongst the papers there are two bills—a Senate bill and a House bill—both in the same handwriting, apparently engrossed bills. They are duplicates, with a slight variation in the seventh and twenty-third sections. The eighth section of both provides for a president of the University, as recommended in the memorial. The twelfth section in both provides for the admission of students, without designating the sex, and a slip of paper contains an amendment by Senator Gooch providing for female as well as male students. The Senate bill appears to have been introduced on the first of February, and the House committee bill on the seventh of February.
There is no House Journal in the office of the Secretary of State, but that of the Senate is there. In the Senate Journal, it appears that the Governor's message and teachers' memorial reached the Senate on the 28th of January, 1881. On the 29th of January, on motion of Senator Homan, the reading of the message was postponed and referred to the Committee on Education.
On January 31st, Senator Wynne offered a resolution “that the Committee on Educational Affairs be requested to consider the propriety of establishing a State University, and report their action by bill or otherwise,” which was adopted. The members of that committee were Buchanan of Wood, chairman; Patton, Martin of Navarro, Terrell, Tilson, Martin of Cooke, Houston, Stewart, Stubbs, Burgess, Ross, and Gooch. On February 1, Senator Buchanan, by leave, introduced Senate bill No. 98, entitled “An act to establish the University of Texas,” which was referred to the Committee on Educational Affairs, and the same day he presented a favorable report upon it as chairman. On February 8th (Tuesday), “On motion of Senator Terrell, Senate bill No. 98 was taken up and made special order for Thursday following, after morning call.” Senator Gooch offered to amend by adding “from day to day until disposed of,” which was accepted by Senator Terrell, and the motion was adopted. On February 10th (Thursday), Senator Stubbs offered an amendment to the effect that the medical department might be located at a different place from that of the main branch of the University, which was lost by a vote of 9 for and 12 against it, 5 not voting. On the 11th of February, Senator Buchanan of Grimes reported: “Your Committee on Engrossed Bills have examined and compared Senate bill No. 98, entitled `An act to establish the University of Texas.”' On February 12th, on motion of Senator Buchanan of Wood, bill 98 was taken up and read third time, when several amendments were offered and lost, and Senator Stubbs of Galveston renewed his amendment for the medical department to be voted for to be at a different place from that of the main branch, which was adopted by a vote of 17 for and 6 against it, 3 not voting. The bill was then passed.
On March 28, “Senator Buchanan of Wood moved to take up Senate bill No. 98, entitled `An act to establish the University of Texas,' and that the Senate concur in the House amendment, which was adopted.” The character of this House amendment is in no place in the records stated, but it is presumed to be the striking out of the bill the provision for a president of the University. On March 29, Senator Buchanan of Wood introduced a bill, No. 299, to amend section 5 of the law just passed to establish the University, and on the same day made a favorable report on it.
The amendment made by bill 299 related to the powers of the regents and their appointment by the Governor, and had an emergency clause. The bill was engrossed the same day. On March 30, Senate bill No. 98, entitled “An act to establish the University of Texas,” was signed by the President of the Senate.
I have failed to find any record of the passage of bill 299 in the Senate, but on March 31st notice was received of its passage in the House. The object of the enactment of this law amending the 5th section, and providing for the appointment of regents of the University, was for them to commence action as soon as the University should be located.
April 1st, under the act (Senate bill No. 299) relating to the appointment of regents by the Governor, I nominated Hon. T. J. Devine, Dr. Ashbel Smith, Governor James W. Throckmorton, Governor Richard B. Hubbard, Judge James H. Bell, Dr. James H. Starr, Mr. N. A. Edwards, and Professor Smith Ragsdale, which nominations were approved by the Senate.
I have thus collected all of the proceedings of the Legislature to be found in the office of the Secretary of State in regard to the passage of the bill in 1881. Though they may be somewhat tedious in the perusal, they will show that nothing to be found there will indicate with any certainty who drew up the bill, and what persons exerted most influence in its passage. As I never attended the sessions of the Legislature, I can only give what I knew and was informed of at the time. The chairman of the teachers' committee, Oscar H. Cooper, after the memorial had been sent to both houses of the Legislature, came to me with one of the committee (O. N. Hollingsworth), and presented to me a bill drawn up by him, which I looked at, and then supposed to be substantially in accordance with the provisions of the memorial; and I understood that he was to give it to Senator Buchanan, chairman of the Committee on Educational Affairs in the Senate, to be introduced by him. He staid in Austin about a week, and before leaving told me that he had talked about it to a number of the members of both houses, that it had been favorably started, and that he was satisfied that it would pass successfully through the Legislature.
The prompt action taken in the Senate, as soon as the teachers' memorial was received, the course followed by the chairman of the Committee on Educational Affairs in introducing the bill on the fourth day afterwards, the favorable report thereon, and the frequent appearance of the chairman of the committee afterwards in the management of the bill, exhibit the fact that his committee, composed as it was of a number of educated gentlemen of public prominence, were in cordial co-operation in their efforts to have the University established.
As to Judge A. W. Terrell's part in it, I well recollect that I and other friends of the bill depended much upon his advocacy and influence in carrying it through the Senate, and I know that he continued for years afterwards to exhibit, by speech and action, a lively interest in the University, and was regarded as one of its leading promoters and friends.
I very much regret that the House Journal could not be found, so as to exhibit the meritorious action of the representatives in 1881 upon the bill. Some account is given of the House proceedings in J. J. Lane's “History of the University,” pages 197-199, which may be referred to.
As to the part taken in it by Representative Hutcheson of Houston, I can say that I regarded him as one of the most active and efficient adherents of my administration generally in the House of Representatives, which I gratefully appreciated. I recollect distinctly that it was reported at the time that he objected to that part of the bill which provided for a president, and that it was upon his motion that it was stricken out of the bill. It was said that the reason he did it, was that he had been a student of the Virginia University, that has a chairman of the faculty, but not a president. It is reported in J. J. Lane's “History of the University,” page 203, that Mr. Carlton, the member of the House from Austin, made an earnest appeal for the University.
The fact is that, according to my recollection, there was no active or stubborn opposition to the establishment of the University from any quarter in the Legislature of 1881, that the only difference manifested was as to a few of the provisions of the bill as it was at first introduced, which caused amendments to be offered, and a few of them to be passed, in perfecting the bill, and that when thus perfected it passed without any material opposition.
The act was approved the 30th of March, 1881, and went into effect ninety days after April 1st, the date of adjournment, which had expired by the 1st of August, 1881.
The law, in accordance with the Constitution, having required the University to be located by a vote of the people of the State, and having permitted a different place to be voted for as the location of the medical department from that of the main University, and having required the election to be held on the first Tuesday in September, 1881, and the localities put in nomination having been reported to the Governor, as required by the law, forty days before the election, the proclamation for the election was issued with the places nominated included. Not having the proclamation to refer to, I have taken the names of the places voted for, as here shown, from information obtained from the office of the Secretary of State. They are Austin, Waco, Tyler, Thorp Springs, Lampasas, Williams' Ranch, Albany, Grapevine, Matagorda, Caddo Grove and Peak, Houston and Galveston. Some of these places were nominated for the main University, but which of them I do not recollect, and it is now not material. But I do recollect that Austin was nominated for the entire University, and Galveston only for the medical department. During the canvass for the location I was personally placed under what might be considered a serious embarrassment by the nomination of Tyler, which was the place of my home, that I had prepared as a residence for the balance of my life, surrounded by many much valued friends, and situated in a section of the State where I had lived for forty years. I believed that the capital of the State was the proper place for the University entire, except the Agricultural and Mechanical College, already established, and the branch for colored youths not then located, and had repeatedly so declared officially and otherwise. It would have been unworthy of me, and of the public position occupied by me, to have changed my course, either on account of my own pecuniary interest, or of my feeling of friendship personally for my fellow-citizens in Tyler and throughout Eastern Texas, to whom I had long been under obligations for their generous public support. Therefore, I continued to support the capital, as announced in my first inaugural, and yet believe that it would have been to the interest of the State for the whole University, with the exceptions above stated, to have been located at Austin, the seat of government of Texas. Still, I as one cheerfully abide the result of the vote of the people in that election.
The votes at the election having been returned to the office of the Secretary of State, were counted there in my presence on the 17th of October, 1881, and the result of the election determined by the Secretary, assisted by his clerks, which showed that Austin was elected for the main University, and Galveston was elected for the medical department, of which public notice was given. A tabular statement of the vote was made, which is now in the office.
Pursuant to the 13th section of the law organizing the University, on the 19th of October, 1881, the following proclamation was issued to convene the regents of the University at Austin on Tuesday, the 15th of November, 1881:
Proclamation of the Governor of the State of Texas convening the Board of Regents of the University of Texas.
Whereas, the official returns of the election held September 6th, 1881, which said returns are now on file in the office of the Secretary of State, show that Austin has been selected by the people as the location of the University of Texas, with the medical branch at Galveston:
Now, therefore, I, O. M. Roberts, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the laws of this State, do hereby call the Board of Regents of the University of Texas to convene at the city of Austin on Tuesday, the fifteenth day of November, 1881, to effect the permanent organization of the board, and to take such action as the law requires for the establishment and organization of the University.
In testimony whereof, I hereby sign my name and cause the seal of the State to be affixed, at the city of Austin, this the [L. S.] nineteenth day of October, A. D. 1881.
O. M. Roberts, Governor.
By the Governor: T. H. Bowman, Secretary of State.Before the meeting of the Board of Regents, an incident occurred showing an interest in the University by persons beyond the limits of Texas. Colonel George Flournoy, having moved from Texas to California, informed me by letter that Judge Hastings, of that State, an elderly gentleman, who had been a judge of the Supreme Court in one of the Northwestern States, and afterwards Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of California, and who had donated one hundred thousand dollars to the law department of the University of that State, desired to visit Texas on some private business, and had expressed a wish to come to Austin at the time that the regents should meet, to give his assistance and encouragement in the organization of the University of Texas. I notified him of the time, and gave him a cordial invitation to be present according to his desire. He came, and was welcomed by the regents, who had been previously informed of the object of his visit. The regents met at the day appointed in the proclamation, as I now recollect, in a room of the Supreme Court house, that stood in the rear of the old capitol, that was accidentally burned in the fall of 1881, and there held their first session. I addressed them a letter, from which it may be seen that some of the regents originally appointed had declined to accept, and others had been appointed by me to fill their places. The letter had reference to the fund of the University.
The Governor's Letter to the University Board of Regents upon its assembling.
Executive Office, State of Texas, Austin, November 16, 1881.
To the Board of Regents of the University of Texas: T. J. Devine, Ashbel Smith, Richard B. Hubbard, A. N. Edwards, Thomas M. Harwood, Smith Ragsdale, and J. L. Camp:
Gentlemen: Having assembled to perform a most important duty for this State, in the inauguration of its first high school, aspiring to the title and grade of a State University, I deem it proper to present to you statements from the General Land Office and Comptroller's and Treasurer's offices, of the amount and character of property and funds belonging to said institution.
First, as to the lands: The amount of 32,335½ acres, shown in the statement of the Hon. Wm. C. Walsh, herewith submitted, constitutes the remaining portion of the fifty leagues of land set apart by the Congress of Texas in 1839. It is now subject to sale upon valuation. A large portion of that which is in McLennan county is now in litigation, by which the sale of it has been retarded. Able attorneys have been employed to maintain the title of the State. The one million of acres shown in said statement were set apart by the Sixteenth Legislature, and surveyed during the summer of 1880. They are understood to be, for the most part, good pastoral lands. They were surveyed in sections of 640 acres. There is no law for their sale, or disposition otherwise. Should your honorable board arrive at any conclusion as to best means of disposing of them for the benefit of the institution under your charge, and to make a recommendation to the Legislature at its next session, it would doubtless have its due weight.
Second, as to the funds in the treasury of the State belonging to the University: I respectfully refer you to the statements and accompanying explanation of the Hon. W. M. Brown, Comptroller.
From these statements, it will be seen that the amount of the available funds now in the treasury is much less than the amount appropriated for your immediate use by the Seventeenth Legislature, to-wit, $150,000 for buildings, and $40,000 for furniture, library, etc., making $190,000. In explanation of this, I respectfully refer you to the report of Hon. S. H. Darden, former Comptroller, for the year ending August 31st, 1880 (pages 4 and 7), which was submitted to the Seventeenth Legislature, in which it is shown that the interest, which was then the available fund, amounted to $185,385.27. That, however, was predicated, as there stated, upon the contingency that the Legislature would pass a law establishing or recognizing the validity of the bonds, amounting to $134,472.26, that had been uniformly reported previously as bonds of doubtful validity, and also to allow interest on said bonds to date (August 31, 1880), which would have amounted to $91,889.36. No such law was passed. But, had such a law been enacted, I respectfully present the question whether that part of said interest accruing previous to the 17th of April, 1876, would not have belonged to the permanent and not to the available fund, under the terms of section 11, of article 7, of the existing Constitution of the State. Attention is also called to this for consideration, in view of any recommendation that your honorable board may make to the Legislature in regard to the recognition of the validity of these bonds.
Third, the Hon. F. R. Lubbock, the State Treasurer, has submitted a statement, showing the amount of notes for which University lands have been sold, and the probable amount annually paid on said notes, as an increase of the permanent fund, which, when invested in bonds, will, by their interest, annually increase the available fund.
I have requested the Hon. T. H. Bowman, Secretary of State, to prepare and furnish to you copies of the proclamation ordering the election for the location of the University, the tabulated statement showing the counting of the votes, and the declaration of the result of the vote, in which it was determined that the main University was located at Austin and the medical department thereof at Galveston. On account of the burning of the capitol and the confusion in the business of his office consequent thereon, he has been unable to do so. The originals are subject to your inspection, and copies of them will be furnished to you as soon as practicable.
Respectfully, your obedient servant, O. M. Roberts, Governor.
The reports referred to in my letter will be seen quoted in the letter of the regents to me at the conclusion of their work during that session.
As I had appointed these regents, I felt a delicacy in being present with them in their sessions, except upon their invitation, and, therefore, I can speak of their proceedings, with one or two exceptions, only from information conveyed to me by conversations with some of the regents. In that way I learned that after examining my letter and the reports submitted to them, the smallness of the funds at their command caused them, or some of them, to rather doubt the propriety of an immediate effort to then commence the work for which they had assembled as regents. They met at night in a room in the hotel to consult freely upon it, and Judge Hastings was present in their meeting. He was a large old gentleman, whose personal appearance indicated great force of character, and after quietly hearing the views of the regents, which tended towards immediate action, upon their invitation he addressed them upon the subject, and, after recounting his large experience in such matters, he urged them to commence the work at once to the extent of their present ability, and rely confidently upon being supported in their further progress by the people of the State. Doubtless these views but reflected the sentiments of the regents, or at least a large majority of them, and encouraged them in their determination in favor of immediate action.
In the appointment of the regents I had, in compliance with the law, selected them from different parts of the State, and had sought gentlemen of ability and learning, who had held public positions, and whose reputation would inspire confidence in their performance of the duties of the position which they had been appointed to occupy.
Ashbel Smith, of Harris county, had been surgeon general of the army and minister to England and France in the time of the Republic of Texas, a colonel in the Confederate army, and, on several occasions, a prominent member of the State Legislature of Texas.
Thomas J. Devine, of San Antonio, had been a district judge in Texas, a member of the Secession Convention, a Confederate district judge during the war, and afterwards one of the justices of the Supreme Court.
Thomas D. Wooten, of Austin, had been a surgeon of high rank in the Confederate army, and was extensively known over the State as an eminent physician and surgeon.
A. N. Edwards, of Sulphur Springs, in Hopkins county, was president of the Grange, a large association of farmers throughout the State.
Richard B. Hubbard, of Tyler, Smith county, had been United States district attorney, a member of the State Legislature, a colonel in the Confederate army, had been twice elected Lieutenant Governor of Texas, and had become Governor upon the resignation of Governor Coke.
Smith Ragsdale, of Weatherford, Parker county, was well known as a superintendent of high schools, who had for fifteen years taught Latin and other branches of learning in the McKinsey private high school at Clarksville, in Red River county, which was one of the most celebrated schools that were established in the early days in Texas.
J. L. Camp, of Gilmer, Upshur county, had been a colonel in the Confederate army, a member of the State Senate, and a criminal district judge, and for many years a leading and popular lawyer in his part of the State.
T. M. Harwood, of Gonzales, had been educated in the University of Virginia and had been a major in the Confederate army, and was a distinguished lawyer, practicing in the district and supreme courts for more than thirty years.
Thus was brought together a combination of different qualifications to initiate this grand undertaking of the State.
The regents organized by the election of Col. Ashbel Smith as president, and Mr. A. N. Edwards as secretary. After they had prepared the report of their proceedings, I was present by their invitation, and heard it read, and the only addition that I suggested was that of “government” to the law department, which was made. In the informal consultation had upon that occasion I suggested to them the propriety, in view of the limited means at their disposal, of instituting but few chairs, to be filled with eminent teachers, compensated by good salaries, so as to have superior teaching in comparison with that of all other schools in the State, and stated my conviction that in that way only could they then inaugurate a first-class university, to be perfected by an increase of professors as the increase of the funds would furnish the ability to make it.
At the close of their session they made the following report:
Report of the Proceedings of the University Board of Regents to the Governor.
City of Austin, November 17, 1881. To His Excellency O. M. Roberts, Governor of Texas:
Sir: The undersigned members of the Board of Regents of the University of Texas have the honor to present to your Excellency the following statement of their proceedings and of matters relating to the University:
In obedience to the proclamation of your Excellency, the Board of Regents assembled in Austin on the 15th instant.
In conformity with the requirements of the act of the honorable the Legislature of Texas, approved March 30, 1881, the board organized by electing a president and secretary of the board.
Next in order, as required in the above recited act, the regents proceeded to establish the several departments of the University, a copy of which is herewith submitted.
The board then adopted a general plan of the building which will be first required in carrying the organization of the University into effect. They also took steps to advertise for plans and specifications of such building.
The board also appointed a committee to ascertain what buildings will be needed for the medical department of the University, which has, by public vote, been located in the city of Galveston, and to provide such buildings for said medical department.
The Board of Regents then, in order to ascertain the available means for erecting the necessary buildings adverted to in the preceding paragraphs, and for meeting the expenses of carrying on the University when put into operation, addressed the honorable the Comptroller for information on the amount of University funds in the treasury, and on other means set apart for the use of the University. The Comptroller laid before the board a succinct statement of the University funds on hand. The following is the summary:
There will be in the treasury on the first of January, 1883, belonging to the University, cash funds amounting to $37,025.11; bonds in the treasury, covering funds formerly set apart for the University, and borrowed by the Legislature for other purposes, which borrowing was perhaps proper in the peculiar circumstances of the times, amounting as principal to $134,472.26.
These funds belong of right to the University. No interest has ever been set apart on this principal sum. The board submit that the Legislature be respectfully requested to provide by appropriate legislation for the transfer to the University available funds of this sum, together with the interest which should of right have accrued thereon.
It further appears from the Comptroller's report that there has been an important misconception as to the amount of available University funds actually on hand. The late Comptroller, in his report for the year ending August 31, 1880, on the “University Fund,” arrives at the conclusion, and so states, that in justice there should be subject to appropriation “by the Legislature as available fund $185,385.27.” For the more full understanding of this subject, the report of the late Comptroller is hereto appended in full, so far as relates to the “University Fund.” Hence, referring to the report of the present Comptroller adverted to above, it appears that instead of there being in the treasury, at this time, available funds of the University, $185,385.27, there are only $37,025.11 available and subject to the order of the Board of Regents, and this includes interest on the same up to January 1, 1883. The Legislature, in the act of March 30, establishing the University, appropriated, subject to the order of the Board of Regents, $150,000 for building, $40,000 for the purchase of library, necessary apparatus, furniture, etc., for said University.
The foregoing statement exhibits the financial condition of the University at the present time. It is clear that further legislative action is necessary to carry into effect the objects of the Legislature in passing the University act of March 30, 1881.
The Board of Regents, therefore, respectfully request your Excellency, if in your opinion advisable, to present this subject of the financial condition and prospective requirements of the University before the Legislature, in the event that it shall be convened in extra session. It appears from the information derived from the General Land Office that there remains on hand of the University lands unsold and at the present time subject to sale 32,000 acres. The million acres appropriated to the University of Texas have been located, but they are not subject to sale at this time. In view of the extraordinary increase and spread of population in Texas, and of the consequent increase in the demand for land for settlement, and also in view of the rapid appreciation in value of lands on our frontier, this million acres must ere long be saleable at high prices, as compared with the present prices. The Board of Regents are informed that this million acres of University lands in question can now be leased for a term of years for pastoral purposes, at rates producing a large annual income, available for the University, and at the same time reserving to the University the great prospective certain increase in their selling value. To protect these lands—this million acres of University land—from being used for pastoral purposes as at present, without any compensation being made for this use of the same, will require appropriate legislation by the Legislature. If so protected by appropriate legislation, and leased, as they may be, on such terms as are paid for rent of lands similarly conditioned, these lands in question will afford a revenue largely contributing to the support of the University at no distant day.
The Board of Regents beg, in conclusion, to recapitulate a brief summary of their proceedings. As required by the act providing for the creation of the board, they have,
1.Organized their board.
2.Established the several departments of the University.
3.Defined the general plan of the University buildings.
4.Provided for advertising for plans and specifications of same.
The board have done everything practicable and advisable, in their opinion, to be done at this time. They have not deemed it advisable to take any steps at their present meeting to select persons to fill the chairs of professors or other officers.
The grounds set apart many years ago for an University, and known as College Hill, consisting of forty acres, are a magnificent site for a great institution for the increase and diffusion of knowledge, such as the people of Texas require that this University shall be. The executive committee of the board have been authorized to have this University ground surveyed and surrounded by a substantial fence for its protection.
In conclusion, the board would state, after careful review of the entire subject, that substantial grounds exist for the belief that the design of a University, entertained and cherished by the fathers of the Republic and State of Texas, will be carried out to a successful termination, and that the State of Texas, at no distant day, will possess a University resting on foundations broad and deep, growing with the growth, and keeping step with the population, the wealth and intelligence of the State of Texas.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
Ashbel Smith, President; Thos. J. Devine, T. M. Harwood, Thos. D. Wooten, A. N. Edwards, Secretary; R. B. Hubbard, Smith Ragsdale, Regents of the University of Texas.
UNIVERSITY FUND.
Attention is also called to the item, $10,300.41, in Comptroller's “Certificate of Debt,” appearing to the credit of the University land sales account. This certificate of indebtedness was issued to that fund by the Comptroller, W. L. Robards, June 8, 1865, in lieu of like amount of State warrants which had been paid into the credit of that fund for the purchase of University lands, under act of December 13, 1863. These warrants were destroyed, and the indebtedness of the State to the University fund recognized by the Comptroller by the issuance of the certificate of debt. This subject was mentioned in the annual report from this office for the fiscal year ending August 31, 1874, and in subsequent reports, suggesting that some action be taken by the Legislature to determine the validity of the credit, which appears to be a just claim upon the State in favor of the University fund. Recognizing this debt, and the further debt of $134,472.26, reported as debt of doubtful validity, the Texas University fund will have to its credit August 31, 1880, as follows, to-wit:
The above $134,472.26 were twelve-year bonds, and matured January 1, 1879. Interest on these bonds to date of maturity, twelve years, amounts to $80,683.35. If, however, interest is allowed from the date of maturity up to time of payment, which would seem to be just, there would be, to August 31, 1880, $11,206.01 additional interest, making total interest on said bonds to August 31, 1880, $91,889.36, which, added to the above $461,235.90, would show to the credit of the University fund $553,125.26. Of this amount $93,495.91 is interest on permanent fund already on hand, invested in bonds, and $91,889.36 interest due òn bonds quoted as of doubtful validity, making a total derived from interest, and, therefore, subject to appropriation, $185,385.27. Recognizing this class of indebtedness heretofore quoted as of doubtful validity, with interest on same, the University fund stands, August 31, 1880, as follows:
Should the above named amounts of $134,472.26 and $10,300.41 due the University fund, together with the $82,168.82 due the school fund, mentioned elsewhere, be recognized as valid debts, the bonds and certificates of debt representing the above amounts could be substituted by manuscript bonds for like amounts, and the interest due appropriated from the general revenue.
No mention is made here of the notes held by this fund for the sale of lands. The money derived from this source is invested as fast as paid into the treasury, thereby increasing from time to time both the permanent and available funds.
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS.
Board of Regents.
OFFICERS.
Ashbel Smith, president; A. N. Edwards, secretary.
CLASSES.
Class One.—Smith Ragsdale, Weatherford; T. D. Wooten, Austin.
Class Two.—Ashbel Smith, Houston; J. L. Camp, Gilmer.
Class Three.—T. M. Harwood, Gonzales; A. N. Edwards, Sulphur Springs.
Class Four.—R. B. Hubbard, Tyler; Thos. J. Devine, San Antonio.
Departments.
Academic Department.—1. English Language, English Literature and History, one professor. 2. Chemistry, one professor. 3. Natural Philosophy, Astronomy, Mechanics and Meteorology, one professor. 4. Natural History and Botany, one professor. 5. Mathematics and Practical Engineering, one professor. 6. School of Mines, Geology and Mineralogy, one professor. 7. Moral Philosophy and Ethics, and Political Economy, one professor. 8. Ancient Languages, Greek and Latin, one professor. 9. Modern Languages, Spanish, French, and German, one professor.
Department of Law.—Science of Government, Civil, Common, Constitutional Law, and Statutes of Texas, two professors.
Medical Department.—1. Anatomy, Clinical Diseases of the Eye and Ear, one professor. 2. Clin. Med. and Diseases of Children, one professor. 3. Physiology and Physical Diagnosis, one professor. 4. Science and practice of Medicine and Public Hygiene, one professor. 5. Obstetrics and Med. and Sur. Diseases of Women, one professor. 6. Materia Medica, Therapeutics, Med., Chem. and Dis. Nervous System, one professor. 7. Surgery and Chem. Surgery, one professor.
Committees.
Executive Committee.—Ashbel Smith, R. B. Hubbard, T. M. Harwood.
Finance Committee.—Thos. J. Devine, T. D. Wooten, Smith Ragsdale.
A special session of the Legislature was convened on the 6th of April, 1882, and, in pursuance of the recommendation of the Board of Regents in their report, one of the subjects of legislation submitted to that body was the University and the increase of its funds. In my general message on the 6th of April, 1882, I reported what had already been done about the University, and brought to view the inadequacy of its means, and used the best arguments that I could produce to encourage the fostering of that institution. In order to fortify my request for an additional appropriation of land to its fund, I had procured a report from the Commissioner of the General Land Office, Capt. W. C. Walsh, showing the loss of land to the University by the action of the convention of 1875, in taking from it the tenth sections of land that had been surveyed by the railroad companies. This enabled me to state to the Legislature that the land of those tenth sections would have amounted, at the time of the convention of 1875, to about one million seven hundred thousand acres of land, and if it had not been taken from the University, by the increase up to the 6th of April, 1881, it would have amounted to over three millions of acres. I thereupon recommended the appropriation of two millions of acres of land to the University fund for the support of the main University and its branches.
I also recommended the recognition of the validity of the $134,472.26 of bonds that had been reported to be of doubtful validity.
Senator Stubbs introduced a bill (No. 20) to appropriate two millions of acres of land to the University, and to provide for survey and sale of same. Senator Swain introduced a bill (No. 22) to appropriate three millions of acres of land for the University. There was an effort also by several Senators to have a bill perfected recognizing the validity of the bonds that had been reported of doubtful validity. Upon the bill for appropriating two millions of acres of land, Senator Terrell made a forcible speech rebutting the idea that the University would be only a rich man's school, and urged the real necessity of the appropriation to make the school what it should be. Extracts from it may be seen in J. J. Lane's History of the University, on pages 21-3. The bill passed in the Senate, but failed to pass in the House of Representatives. Still the effort was not in vain, for at the next session in 1883 one million acres of land were appropriated, and the bonds of doubtful validity were recognized as valid.
During the month of June, 1882, the State Teachers' Association, held at Galveston, was attended by Col. Ashbel Smith and myself. We both made addresses to that body, explaining the status of the University, the necessity for an increase of its funds, and asking their good offices for its encouragement throughout. Many expressions of good will for its successful establishment were made in response to our efforts.
Col. Ashbel Smith, actuated by his zeal in the cause, during that year, at his own expense, made a vist through the Southern States to the North, to obtain information in regard to first class educators, who could probably be secured as professors in our University when prepared to receive them. The result of his investigation gave essential aid in the selection afterwards made of professors.
The elevated locality whereon the main University stands, embracing forty acres of land, selected when the city of Austin was surveyed for the State capital, was for many years called “College Hill.” Its top was originally covered by a beautiful grove of liveoak and other kinds of trees, that were cut down, as it was reported, by order of General Magruder during the war, in order to place cannon there to defend the city of Austin.
Preparatory to the building of the west wing of the University, I was present there with Dr. Wooten and others and assisted in selecting and laying off the ground for its location, leaving room on top of the hill for the central and eastern wing of the building.
In the fall of 1882, the corner-stone of the main University was laid on College Hill, when a great concourse of people of all classes was assembled to witness the imposing ceremony. According to arrangements by the regents superintending it, speeches were made by Colonel Ashbel Smith, President of the Board of Regents, myself as Governor, and the Hon. J. H. McLeary, Attorney-General of the State, who, as ex-Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Masons in Texas, gave his attention and direction to laying in place the corner-stone, and whose speech was both interesting and appropriate to the occasion.
I here insert short extracts from my speech as being my last public act relating to the University's establishment while I was Governor. After recounting what had previously been done in the different efforts to provide for and establish a University in Texas, I said: “Thus will it be seen during the long period of forty-three years the establishment of this institution of learning has been almost constantly in the minds of the highest order of men in Texas, and has from time to time up to the present enlisted their patriotic efforts.
“Therefore, I repeat, that it can not be that the people of this State will allow the University of Texas to be anything below first class, as required by the Constitution. Let our common school system, for which an ample provision in expectancy has already been made, become fully developed; let the intermediate high schools be fostered; and let the University and its branches be more amply endowed, organized and put in full operation as a first class University—the guiding head of our educational system; then will this State have put on her armor to vie with other States and nations for superiority. And then, after a time, future generations will proudly point to the University of Texas as the brightest jewel in the crown of our greatness as a people and a State.”
Col. Cook, of Austin, an experienced building contractor, proceeded with the erection of the west wing of the University building, in a substantial manner, having placed its superstructure upon a deeply-laid foundation of solid stone, so as to insure the solidity of the whole structure when completed, and furnish a basement story.
It was near enough completion to enable the University to be inaugurated on the 15th of September, A. D. 1883, in one of its rooms.
The following gentlemen were then the regents of the University: Col. Ashbel Smith, president; T. M. Harwood, T. D. Wooten, E. I. Simkins, James B. Clark, B. Hadra, Seth Shepard, and Geo. T. Todd, with A. P. Wooldridge, secretary of the Board. The professors present, having been previously selected, were, in the academic department: J. W. Mallett, chairman of the faculty; Wm. Leroy Broun, Milton W. Humphreys, Leslie Waggener, R. L. Dabney, and H. Tallichet; and, in the law department: O. M. Roberts and Robert S. Gould. The school was opened and taught in the Temporary Capitol until the first of January, 1884, when it was removed to the University building in the west wing, which had then been completed. And thus was established the main branch of the University of Texas.
In conclusion, it should be recollected that this is not an attempted history of the University of Texas, but only some account of its establishment, by stating what had been previously done towards it, and by stating, to the extent of a limited information, what I and others said and did. In a Democratic Republic, no one man can accomplish any great measure of government. He may start or revive the movement for it, or strongly advocate it, or lead in the steps taken for it; still, there must be a public opinion actively demanding it, and those who are in authoritative control of the government must co-operate in its final consummation. If all that each person did, in his appropriate sphere of action, could be ascertained and stated, it would doubtless fill an ordinary-sized volume.
I happened to be placed in a position in which it became my duty to direct the course of public affairs in the administration of the State government as best I could, and being strongly impressed with the public necessity for a University, I simply endeavored to have created throughout the State a public opinion, pressing for it, by enlisting the efforts and influence of the teachers, and through them, the people generally interested in education, and presented the subject before the Legislature.
In a paper read before the midwinter meeting of the Association and published in the January Quarterly, Rev. Edmond J. P. Schmitt questions Yoakum's accuracy in using the name Juchereau 1 as applied to that Saint-Denis who figured in the early history of Louisiana and Texas. He also points out the error of John Henry Brown's statement that Saint-Denis was killed by the Natchez Indians in 1728. 2
Some of our Texas historians have perhaps committed a much graver fault in embellishing their pages with the interesting adventures of this hero-trader than has been indicated by Father Schmitt. It is highly probable that the story of Saint-Denis as recorded in many of our histories is, in most particulars, nothing more than one of those pretty myths that find their way into history so easily and hold their places in the popular mind so tenaciously. It is the purpose of the following article to point out some of the errors that have crept into this story, to indicate the chief sources from which we must reconstruct the true narrative, and to call attention to the real importance of Saint-Denis in the history of Texas. What is here written, however, is in no sense to be considered final; some of the most important sources of information have been beyond my reach, and from them, no doubt, much is yet to be learned; indeed, it is not improbable that a study of other sources will develop errors in what I have said in this paper.
The first mention which I have been able to find of Saint-Denis occurs in the Historical Journal of the Establishment of the French in Louisiana, 3 which is one of our chief sources of information relative to the early history of that province. The entry in the Journal, referring to March, 1700, reads as follows: “On the 22d M. de Bienville set out with M. de Saint-Denys and twenty Canadians and Indians to visit the Yatase nation, on the Red river, and watch the Spaniards.” 4 This journey of reconnoissance seems to have been a short one, as Bienville was again at Biloxi within a month. Two months later, May 29, 1700, Saint-Denis was once more sent out “to explore the country in the Red river, and to watch the Spaniards.” 5 From 1700 to 1705, he is mentioned three times by the Journal as acting in various capacities. 6
From Pénicaut's Relation 7 we learn further that Saint-Denis was in command of a fort on the Mississippi from 1702 to 1705, 8 that the fort was abandoned by order of the governor in the latter year, 9 that Saint-Denis then returned to Mobile and soon after retired from service and took up his residence at Biloxi, 10 where he remained till Lamothe Cadillac arrived in Louisiana in 1713. 11
In the year following occurred the journey to which so much of romance has since become attached. According to the common account, this journey was undertaken for the purpose of establishing commercial relations with Mexico. John Henry Brown states that Saint-Denis reached San Juan Bautista in August, 1714, fell in love with the commandant's daughter, and soon became her accepted suitor. Gaspardo de Anaya, the governor of Coahuila, also a suitor for the hand of the fair Maria, had Saint-Denis seized and threw him into prison. An offer of release on condition of renouncing the lady's hand was rejected by the Canadian “with scorn.” In the meantime Anaya pressed his suit with Maria, demanding her promise to marry him and threatening to put her lover to death in case of her refusal. In reply to this threat she bade the messenger tell the governor that, if he had Saint-Denis executed, “by my own hand or that of a trusted friend, a dagger shall be planted in his cowardly heart.” At the end of some six months the viceroy interfered, Saint-Denis was released, received with favor at court, and even offered high rank in the Spanish army; but proffered favors could not make Saint-Denis “forget his mission or his fidelity to the woman who had saved him.” While waiting for a reply from the king of Spain upon the business which had brought him to Mexico, he returned to San Juan where he found the Indians “abroad in arms.” He “pursued them alone,” and such was the persuasive power of his eloquence that he had little difficulty in putting down the insurrection. “The young Castilian beauty was his reward.” After two years' delay, an unfavorable reply of the king to his propositions finally reached him and he returned to Mobile. On a second trip to Mexico, he had all his goods seized and was again imprisoned. Once more the heroine came to the rescue, her influence aroused her relatives, secured the forcible release of her husband, and compelled the viceroy to pay for the misappropriated goods. 12
It is not my purpose to say caustic things about the writers of Texas history. Mr. Brown's book, from which the above account is taken, is, in very many respects, a most excellent and creditable production. Nor is he the only author that has accepted this pleasing story of love and adventure. It is to be found, with more or less variation in the works of Yoakum, 13 Kennedy, 14 Mrs. Pennybacker, 15 and perhaps others. Suffice it to say that the story has little or no foundation in fact, and even what little truth there is in it has been distorted almost beyond recognition by these accounts. A more serious criticism is that the real importance of Saint-Denis' mission to Mexico has been obscured, indeed totally neglected, in an attempt to capture the imagination with the details of an heroic incident. It is difficult to find moderate terms in which to express one's condemnation of the methods of investigation that have allowed such a tale to become a part of our serious history.
In the reconstruction of this chapter in our early history we must, of course, depend upon the accounts left us by the contemporaries of Saint-Denis. Besides the Historical Journal and Pénicaut's Relation which I have already mentioned, the most important of these from the French point of view are the memoirs of Dumont, 16 Charlevoix' Nouvelle France, 17 and the Histoire de la Louisiane of Le Page du Pratz. The last mentioned, who lived in Louisiana from 1718 to 1734 and who used the memoirs of Saint-Denis in compiling his work, 18 is probably our best authority on this incident. A very important Spanish authority which I have used in the preparation of this paper is the Testimonio de un Parecer, a summary of events in Texas from the time of La Salle to 1744, at which date the document was written. The author evidently had access to reliable reports concerning Saint-Denis and it will be seen that the Spanish account substantially confirms the French. 19
According to Le Page du Pratz, the immediate occasion of the journey of Saint-Denis to Mexico was a letter which reached the French governor from a Spanish ecclesiastic, Ydalgo (commonly written Hidalgo) by name, in which the father asked the aid of the French in establishing a mission among the Assinaïs (or Cenis) Indians. 20 This seems to have been precisely the opportunity which the governor was seeking. It will be remembered that in 1712 Louisiana had passed under the control of Anthony Crozat, who looked upon it merely as a commercial establishment and cared little for the claim which France held to the great territory of Texas. If the trade of Louisiana could be increased by winking at the Spanish occupation of Texas, Crozat's governor was ready to be seized with impenetrable blindness in that direction. He believed a Spanish mission in what is now eastern Texas would be of great commercial advantage to the French, particularly in the matter of furnishing Louisiana with horses, cattle, and silver; 21 hence Saint-Denis was despatched to Mexico to assist the Spaniards in making the establishment in Texas on the condition that the trade of the country should be opened to the French. 22 Accompanied by ten men, he finally reached the presidio San Juan, near the Rio Grande. 23 The commandant of this post, Don Diegue (Domingo or Diego) Raimond 24 (or Ramon), evidently regarded his mission with favor; but as the Spanish law forbade the intrusion of foreigners, he detained Saint-Denis while a messenger set out for Mexico to ask permission for the Canadian to present himself at the viceroy's court. 25
In the meantime Saint-Denis succeeded in winning his way into the affections of the family at the presidio. A widowed daughter of the commandant is said to have called into exercise her match-making skill, and before Saint-Denis left San Juan he was engaged to the granddaughter 26 of Don Diego, the niece of the match-maker.
The desired permission to proceed to Mexico was at last received, and he found himself in that city on the 5th of June, 1715. The viceroy Linares is represented as very favorably inclined towards the French, though there was a strong party in Mexico that cherished bitter feelings against their old enemy. It may be that Linares was really disposed to favor the scheme of the Canadian, or it may be that his professions were only pretended in order to secure the inactivity and even gain the help of the French,—at any rate, acording to Le Page du Pratz, an agreement was soon reached that Saint-Denis should assist the Spaniards in establishing missions in Texas, and the promise was held out that commercial privileges would then be granted to the French. 27
On his return to San Juan the marriage with the granddaughter of Don Ramon was celebrated, and soon after Saint-Denis joined the Spanish expedition which had for its object the occupation of Texas. On reaching the country of the Assinaïs, the Indians were called together, and Saint-Denis, who had great influence among them, exhorted them to receive the Spaniards and to treat them well. 28 On August 25, 1716, he was again at Mobile. 29
In this way the group of missions between the Trinity river and Natchitoches came into existence with the acquiesence of the French. There is no trace in this story as told by the contemporary French chroniclers, except Pénicaut, of anything but the best of treatment. Certainly there is not a word about imprisonment, and the governor of Coahuila 30 is not even mentioned.
The governor of Louisiana was “charmed” with the success of Saint-Denis' mission, in spite of the fact that it involved the tacit abandonment of French claims to the country west of the Red river. He proposed to Saint-Denis to return to Mexico at once, this time with goods. But goods were not easily obtained. The warehouses of Crozat were well filled and he was growing every day more discouraged because of the difficulty of disposing of them. Yet on this occasion Saint-Denis' application was declined by Crozat's agents, and even the interference of the governor could not open the stores to him. Probably such a venture was regarded as too hazardous. Finally, in October, 1716, some two months after Saint-Denis' return from Mexico, a company was formed of the most substantial men in the colony, and the agents of Crozat agreed to advance merchandise to the amount of 60,000 livres. 31
The commercial privileges which perhaps had been half promised by the viceroy had not yet been extended to the French, and Spanish law forbade even the entrance of a foreigner into Mexico. Any goods introduced in the manner here proposed were, of course, contraband and subject to seizure. The harsher term which we apply to such an act as the French traders contemplated is smuggling. The character of this second trip is, to some extent, cleared up by the significant fact that the goods were made to appear as belonging wholly to Saint-Denis. 32 He probably depended upon his connection with the family of a Spanish officer and the favor with which he was regarded by the viceroy to protect him in the violation of the law. It is very probable, too that he sought to quiet suspicion by spreading the report that he had returned to enter the service of Spain, and that the goods which he brought with him were his personal effects. 33 This supposition at least clears up many of the difficulties, and it is not at all inconsistent with the character of the man; we learn from Lamothe Cadillac that Saint-Denis “was not very zealous in the service of the king” of France, 34 and Bancroft declares that he was paid by the Spanish government for lending his aid in establishing the missions in Texas. 35
The winter of 1716 was passed by the traders among the Assinaïs Indians and the following March found them again on the road for San Juan, Saint-Denis probably going on in advance. 36 It seems that a disagreement occurred among the members of the company while at San Juan, perhaps as to the price which should be paid the Spanish officials as hush money, and the secret as to the ownership of the goods leaked out. As a result, confiscation was imminent, and it is not unlikely that some of the goods were actually seized. To prevent total loss, Saint-Denis hurried on to Mexico to secure the intervention of his friend the viceroy. 37
But affairs went ill for the trader. The friendly viceroy had been superseded by one whose attitude, says Le Page du Pratz, was as hostile as that of Linares was favorable. Priestly jealousy had also raised up an enemy in the person of Padre Olivarez, who is represented as jealous of the ecclesiastics who had successfully made the establishments in Texas under the protection of Saint-Denis. 38 Don Martin de Alarcon, the governor of Coahuila and Texas, was also unfriendly, and reported that Saint-Denis had entered the province without the proper passport and had brought goods with him which were not wholly his own. 39 Circumstances thus combined to wreck the hopes of the Canadian. He was arrested and imprisoned as a suspicious character. Most of his goods, which had been sent on to Mexico by Don Ramon, were seized as contraband, and it seems that he lost all but a bare sufficiency to satisfy certain expenses of justice. 40 He was kept in prison some two months, and when released was ordered to remain within the limits of the city; nine months more elapsed, and he finally succeeded, after forcibly dispossessing a Spaniard of his horse, in effecting his escape. He passed by San Juan, but stopped only to clandestinely visit his wife in the garden of the fort, and arrived safe in Louisiana on April 2, 1719. 41
There are few incidents in the early history of Texas which have a greater importance than the one that I have sketched above. An impartial observer living in the first years of the eighteenth century would have found the greatest difficulty in forecasting the future of the extensive, but then unoccupied, domain which we now call Texas. Its situation made it the logical battle ground of the French and Spanish in America. Both claimed it and both had made ineffectual attempts to occupy it. The important feature, then, of this journey of Saint-Denis, even more interesting and certainly, more essential in determining the destiny of Texas than the stage-like declamation of Doña Maria, is the good understanding that was seemingly established between the French and the Spanish, and the acquiesence of the former in the founding of the Spanish missions almost at their very door.
We have seen from the above sketch that commercial ideas were then dominant in the government of Louisiana; both Spanish and French sources agree that Saint-Denis warmly advocated the planting of the Spanish missions near the French settlements—indeed, it is not improbable that he was sent to Mexico for the express purpose of re-introducing the friars into Texas; we have seen that the Governor of Louisiana was “charmed” with the result of the first trip, and we further learn from Le Page du Pratz that a little later Saint-Denis was made a Knight of St. Louis in recognition of and as a reward for his services. The meaning of all this seems to be that the business-like Crozat cared little for the French claim to Texas, and willingly relinquished it in return for the prospect of a friendly trade with Mexico through the Spanish missions. On the other hand the Spaniards were made to realize the danger which might arise from the proximity of the settlements in Louisiana, and so took immediate steps to secure the country to Red river. The year 1715, says Yoakum, “may be considered the year of missions in Texas.” The occupation was permanent; San Antonio and other posts which were founded on this occasion were never afterwards abandoned.
However charitably we may be inclined to view the matter, we must severely criticise certain of our Texas historians for beclouding this really important episode with a mass of romantic details, and for failing to point out the true bearing of Saint-Denis' journey to Mexico upon the final destiny of Texas. Yoakum especially should not have gone astray in this matter, as he seems to have had access to reliable sources of information in both Spanish and French; indeed, he is often on the point of assigning to Saint-Denis his true place in our history, but the brilliant fiction of Gayarré, in the end, proved too fascinating to be omitted; after reading many pages of interesting matter, truth mingled with fiction, we close Yoakum with an uncomfortable feeling that Saint-Denis' importance consists in his having laid out the San Antonio Road. 42
In censuring the historians of Texas for accepting this story on insufficient evidence and for failing to interpret correctly the larger movement of events during these years, an honorable exception should be made of the work of H. H. Bancroft. The materials used by this author so far as concerns the story of Saint-Denis were mostly Spanish, including a number of documents which have never been printed. The facts derived by Bancroft from the Spanish sources are substantially in accord with the statements of the French writers whom I have followed in this article. There is no imprisonment of Saint-Denis on his first visit; his love affair is indeed mentioned, but it is not given more importance than is accorded to the occupation of Texas by the Spanish; we learn from Bancroft, too, that the Spanish authorities were aroused to a better realization of the value of Texas and to a clearer understandin of the danger that threatened from Louisiana, and, in consequence, at once bestirred themselves to take possession of the country. Bancroft also agrees with the French account that Saint-Denis' arrest occurred on his second trip and for the reason that the Spanish officials had grown suspicious of his intentions. 43
It must be a matter of keen regret to all who feel an interest in such questions as this that the State of Texas has as yet shown little interest in collecting the sources of our early history. Documents in Mexico, in Spain, and in France must be copied and made accessible to Texas writers before this period can be satisfactorily understood and explained. Other states have spent large sums in procuring historical data from the archives of the European countries. The State of Texas, the University of Texas, and the Historical Association of Texas can not with impunity long shirk this duty, which the world demands and expects of them. If one questions the importance of such matters he has but to look into our histories and read the story of Saint-Denis. Even the children in our schools are taught the pretty tale of love and adventure and leave the subject without knowing that they have been studying an event which materially influenced the ultimate destiny of the State in which they live,—which, in a great measure, decided that Texas should be Spanish and not French, that the boundary between the United States and Mexico should be the Sabine and not the Rio Grande. Fictions of adventure and of heroic and manly deeds are good things for children, and even for mature men, to read and enjoy; but they should not be read in text-books of history. The story of Saint-Denis is but one of a large number of such fictions that have embedded themselves in our serious histories where one expects to find scholarly investigation and accurate statement. They can be weeded out only by bringing together and making accessible the books and documents from which we must derive our information of the Spanish period of our history.
The documentary sources relative to the subject of Saint-Denis seem to be especially abundant. I have already mentioned at some length Dumont's memoirs, Pénicaut's Relation, Le Page du Pratz's Histoire de la Louisiane, the Historical Journal of the Establishment of the French in Louisiana, and some others; these are contemporary French accounts; they are by no means all the French sources on this subject, but, so far as I know, they are the most important. The Spanish accounts relative to this period are also particularly abundant. The Testimonio de un Parecer has been mentioned. The sworn statement which Saint-Denis made on his arrival at San Juan as to the object of his journey now probably reposes in the archives of the Mexican Republic. The minutes of the junta de guerra of Dec. 2, 1716, held to discuss questions as to the defence of Texas which Saint-Denis' appearance had aroused, rests in the repository; this document covers several manuscript pages and is styled by Bancroft “the best narrative extant of Texan annals from 1789.” 44 The account of the return of Saint-Denis to Texas accompanied by the Spanish friars and soldiers, and of the actual occupation of the country by the Spanish, is contained in the voluminous official report of Don Ramon who commanded the troops on that occasion. The same story is told from the ecclesiastical point of view in the works of thepadre Espinosa who was one of the friars in charge of founding the missions among the Texas Indians. The works of this friar have been published, but I doubt if there exists to-day in the entire State of Texas a astical point of view in the works of the padre Espinosa who was search among the church archives at Querétaro and Zacatecas may unearth reports that will throw much new light on this subject. Saint-Denis' Declaracion, the minutes of the junta de guerra, and Don Ramon's report have, I believe, never been published.
It is not my purpose here to follow the history of Saint-Denis beyond his return to Louisiana in 1719. This can be done successfully and in detail only when more of the sources are available than I have at hand. I may be pardoned, however, for calling attention to another conspicuous error which has become a part of at least two of our histories of Texas. At the time of the great Natchez uprising against the French in 1728, it seems that Saint-Denis was in command of a small garrison at Natchitoches. During the progress of the war the Indians sent a force to destroy this post and dispose of one of their most dreaded enemies. They attempted to gain entrance into the fort under pretence of restoring a captive woman, but their intentions were suspected and admission to the fort denied them. They then burned the captive before the eyes of the French, constructed some kind of fortification, and began a siege. I compare below in parallel columns the account of the fight that followed as given by Brown's History of Texas and the story of the same incident as told in Dumont's memoirs.
BROWN. DUMONT.
St. Denis hastily sent messengers to his friendly Indians, and with twenty men from the fort at once made a furious attack upon the Natchez. At the first onslaught all his men but eight were killed. For two hours he fought against desperate odds, hoping that reinforcements would arrive. “He was seen,” says an historian of the time, “springing like a lion among the crowd of warriors, forcing them back. He looked like an angel of vengeance accomplishing his work of destruction, invincible himself in the terrible fray. He fell at last hit by three bullets in his head and two arrows in his breast.” There were but two survivors. The Natchez ceased firing and retired. 46 They [the friendly Natchitoches who came to aid St. Denis] reached the fort, and were brought in by night, and the commandant [Saint-Denis] having armed them, sallied out at the head of his troops the next morning at daybreak, entered the Natchez intrenchment and fell upon them sword in hand. Many were killed; the rest awakened by the noise, fled, but were pursued with muskets, and after killing about sixty of the savages, the commandant returned to his fort in triumph, without having had a single man wounded, giving the survivors liberty to return to their village and tell what reception they got at Natchitoches. 45
In pursuance of a policy inimical to the interests of American colonists in Texas, and expressed in the decree of April 6, 1830, Mexican forts were built at Anahauc and Velasco. In 1832 the Velasco fort was invested with a garrison of one hundred and twentyfive men, under Colonel Dominic Ugartachea. Its location on the east bank of the Brazos river, just where the river emptied into the Gulf of Mexico, gave full command of all commerce entering the river. History contains no charge of arbitrary conduct on the part of Ugartachea, as was the case with Bradburn at Anahuac, and it was only when the fighting qualities of the commander and garrison bore the test of a severe battle that the fort became permanent. The hotly contested and bloody engagement of June 26, 1832, confers upon Velasco an honorable place in the annals of heroic warfare. The fort long remained a monument to the bravery of the men, who participated in the battle, but history is silent as to its subsequent uses. The question arises, was the fort repaired and manned by the government of the Republic of Texas, and when was it finally abandoned? A partial answer is contained in the experience of an old and highly respected resident of Brazoria county. Col. M. S. Munson, who, as a boy spent the summers with his family at Velasco, recalls an incident connected with a fort at that place occupied by a garrison of the Republic of Texas. While the date of the occurence is not accurately fixed, it was some time prior to 1841. The facts are as follows: Among the officers of the fort at that time were Lieut. Redfield and Dr. Lynch, the latter held in high esteem as surgeon and citizen. One morning, about sunrise, as young Munson looked from his bed-room window, he saw a number of men not far from the house, and noticed that pistols were given to two of them, who were placed at a short distance from each other. A duel was on hand, which resulted in the death of Dr. Lynch, who fell at the first fire of Lieut. Redfield. Dr. Lynch was a general favorite in the community, and his sudden death made a deep impression upon the witness.
The fort built by the Mexicans is described by some writers as a log cabin fortress, but according to the recollection of many who remember its construction, it was not built in the log cabin style; logs were used, but in the manner of a stockade. The description by Col. Guy M. Bryan, who saw it when entire, and again when in ruins, is about as follows: The fort was circular in shape and composed of sound drift logs set perpendicularly in two circular rows, the space of several feet between them being filled in with sand. A mound of sand in the center, raised above the pickets, was surrounded with wood to prevent the sand being blown off. On this mound was mounted a nine pound cannon, which was on a swivel so as to make a complete circuit guarding the mouth of the river; it could not, however, be depressed so as to protect the immediate vicinity, hence on the night of the attack by John Austin, it could not play upon the Texians close to the fort, but was used against the schooner Brazoria, commanded by Capt. Wm. J. Russell.
The exact location of the old fort is attended with difficulty, on account of the changes wrought by winds and waves. In the course of sixty-six years accretions of land on the eastern shore of the river have been so marked, that a certain locality known to old residents as the site of the old fort, and which was quite near the river bank and gulf shore, is now several hundred feet from the former, while the gulf shore line extends a full quarter of a mile or more beyond its early boundary. These changes were effected chiefly by the destructive storms of 1875 and 1886, which submerged nearly all this low lying coast region.
Mrs. Ellen A. Shannon, who was born at Velasco in 1841, her parents, Henry C. and Pamelia Wilcox, having moved there in 1837, gives a reliable account of the site of the old fort, which, she says, is now marked by her own residence. She lived at Velasco continuously until August, 1863, when she and her husband, James T. Shannon, moved away, not returning until June, 1867. Before their departure, her husband had often called her attention to one of the posts or upright logs of the old fort, with muskets stuck in it. During the civil war the Confederate soldiers used all the fences, posts, etc., of every kind for firewood, and probably every piece of iron that pertained to the accountrements of an army.
Still, in 1875 the severe storm revealed evidences of the location of the old fort, for, according to Mr. A. G. Follett, Sr., it washed up a number of small Mexican coins of the value of twenty-five cents and small copper cannon balls on its site. The same authority, who settled at Velasco in 1838, agrees that Mrs. Shannon's house now marks the spot where once stood the old fort. Her house was built in 1887, in consequence of the one previously occupied by her having been seriously damaged by the storm of 1886. It is a plain wooden structure, one story high, containing about four or five rooms, with a neat flower garden in front.
There are remains of forts built by the Confederate State's government, in the neighborhood of Quintana and Velasco, whose earthworks rise to a considerable height above the surrounding level. The one on the west bank of the Brazos river, about a mile above Quintana, commands a long stretch of water; near the new town of Velasco are the remains of another, and still another lies on the east side of the river, at the drawbridge across the canal, which connects the Brazos river with West Galveston Bay. The existence of these remains of a former government in the same locality with the old Mexican fort is liable to cause confusion in the minds of future searchers after true historic localities.
The consensus of opinion of those who have known the country since its earliest settlement agrees in the location of the fort on the site indicated.
The first school which I remember, though I did not attend it, was in Austin's colony in 1835, and was taught by an Irishman named Cahill. My older brother, aged about eight years, was one of the pupils of that primitive academy, which was distant about two miles from our house, and the way was through the woods without any road or path. When he started to school, our father was absent and mother went with him, carrying a hatchet to blaze the way.
Of the discipline of the school and its studies, I only know that my brother, in relating the experience of several of the boys, made the impression on me that the rod was not spared; and my recollection of the books is reduced to the arithmetic, which I afterwards studied, in which the primitive rules were illustrated by engravings; that for subtraction being a bunch of grapes, showing in successive pictures how, after eating two, three, etc., so many remained. Thinking that this must have been the work of a little boy like myself, I put the lesson into practice by purloining from a basket of “forbidden fruit” and then producing the arithmetic as authority for the appropriation—a sally which mother allowed to condone the little sin.
The next school which I remember, though I did not attend that either, was taught in 1836, at a place called Mt. Vernon, now in Washington county, by Miss Lydia Ann McHenry, a maiden aunt who lived with us. The school was at the house of Mr. Ayers, a public spirited man, who was one of the principal settlers there. I think that Mrs. Ayers and Miss McHenry joined in teaching, and they intended to make it a permanent school, but the war of the revolution interrupted and it was never renewed. I was then four years old. My sister, two years older, attended, and, as it was twenty miles away, was of course absent from home, which left me very lonesome. How long it was I do not know, but it seemed an age, and I had about given her up and ceased to grieve, when one day as I was playing under a tree before the door I heard my name called and looking up saw aunt and sister alighting from a carriage at the gate. I was so surprised and overjoyed that I cried instead of laughing—the only time I remember shedding “tears of joy;” but had I known the cause of their coming, tears would not have been out of place; it was the news of the fall of the Alamo.
After a perilous delay, father returned from the army to remove his family, and when we crossed the Brazos we heard the drums in Santa Anna's army at San Felipe.
The next school which I remember was at our own house in 1837. Miss McHenry taught a boarding school for girls and mother at the same time a class of boys. There were in all twenty or more lodged and boarded as best we could in our unfinished cabins in the wilderness. A brave and cheery little company,
“Whom, borne on fancy's eager wing Back to the season of life's joyous spring I pleased remember.”
If I were a poet I would echo their laughter and portray their plays in a volume which should perpetuate their little history and the fragrance of the primeval wilds would be wafted through its pages.
The studies were of every grade. The pupils were carefully instructed in the art of reading well, and as a help to that end were encouraged to memorize verses, some of which I can still repeat from hearing them recited so long ago. I remember also hearing them recite their grammar and spelling lessons, but of course I could not tell how well. Had the school been sustained so that adequate accomodations could have been provided, it would probably have had a notable influence in the country. But it did not prove financially successful, and after two or three sessions it was discontinued.
I have a vivid recollection of learning the alphabet when I was about four years old, and mother, who was my teacher, also remembered the difficulties of the task. The letter t, of the minor type, was the greatest stumbling block. I called it p, and remember that I thought it was meant for a picture of a pig. The letter s.I learned at once, because I thought it was a picture of a snake, and I knew that creature hissed. Men of science gathering data from ancient monuments of the East, where the childhood of the world is in some measure recorded, and from barbarous tribes where that state continues, have now at last caught up with the former discoveries of the four year olds and announce that the alphabet was originally pictures, which the exigencies of convenience and rapid use had even in very ancient times shortened into conventional signs; the foreign names of the things represented having probably prevented us from observing the same as a familiar fact. If the cultivators of science would study the mental images formed by those original explorers of the world, the three and four year old children, they might find hieroglyphics more significant than any that were ever sculptured on Egyptian obelisk or propylon.
I do not know when I learned to read. Mother attended to that in the very early morning of life, but I could already spell and read very well for a child of seven, when I first went to school It was taught in an unfinished new school house about two miles from home, to which my brother and I walked every day. The teacher proved inefficient, and after a very brief session the school closed.
The next school was at the same place in 1838 or 1839, taught by Mr. Dyas, an old Irish gentleman, and I think a regular teacher by profession. The session was three or four months and the studies miscellaneous, but the discipline was exact. He had an assortment of switches set in grim array over the great opening where the chimney was to be when the school house should be completed. On one side was the row for little boys, small, straight and elastic, from a kind of tree which furnished Indians with arrows and the schoolmaster with switches at that time. I remember meditating upon the feasibility of destroying all that kind of timber growing near the school house. My terror was a little red switch in that rank which I caught too often, usually for the offense of laughing in school. The larger switches were graded, partly by the size of the boys and partly by the gravity of the offense, the gravest of which was an imperfect lesson. The third size of rods was of hickory; tough sticks, which he did not use on the little boys, but which he did use on the larger scholars, without the least hesitation or reserve, if they failed to get the appointed lesson or were derelict in any of their duties. The fourth size of switches was of oak and would have been better called clubs. These he applied more in the style of the shillalah than of the ferule to the largest boys. Some of them ran from him, but none ever struck back, it being a point of honor not to strike the teacher, though I sometimes fancied that he looked disappointed that he did not have a more interesting bout with them. I do not remember that he ever whipped any of the girls.
As for the studies, we all had Webster's spelling book, and were ranked and classed according to our proficiency in that great classic. I have forgotten my relative rank at that time, and but few attained the end. The last few pages contained some stories and fables, intended for reading lessons, illustrated with engravings, and the last of these had a picture of a wolf, by some accident well executed—a fact which tended to establish the book in our estimation, because we saw wolves every day. “The picture of the wolf in the spelling book” thus became the synonym of graduation. Whether it originated with us or not I do not know, but the expression was long used in a humorous sense as equivalent to a diploma, and when it was said of a boy that he had studied to “the picture of the wolf in the spelling book” his proficiency was not afterward questioned. The best class in reading used a text-book called “the English Reader,” consisting of extracts from the writings of eminent authors, chiefly dry didactics and some poetry. My brother was in that class and also in a class by himself reading Goldsmith's History of Greece. The pupils brought such books as they happened to have, and one young man had Robinson Crusoe for his reading book. His recitations interested me greatly, but I apprehend that my attention was given to the adventures of Crusoe rather than to the teacher's precepts for reading well. Several had Weem's Life of Washington, in which the story of the little hatchet and the cherry tree was most impressed upon our memory. It grieves me yet that criticsm has thrown doubt on the verity of a story which so successfully impressed children with the honor of veracity. One boy had an illustrated edition of Goldsmith's Natural History, and there were a variety of other books, nearly all by famous authors.
We had a variety of arithmetics, and it was during this school that a consignment of new slates and pencils arrived, not enough to go around, but some of the boys got a new outfit. The impression it made on me was one of surprise at the seeming abundance of the material. From the care which we had to take of our fragments of old slates and stubs of pencils I had somehow imbibed the idea that with their going the world would see the last of the slates; but here, to my relief, I found that the supply would keep up with the forest of switches which I had in mind to extirpate. There were no classes in arithmetic; each boy ciphered through his text-book as fast as he could, and the stern teacher pointed to the errors with the switch held like a pen, and a minatory wag of the head that meant correction. One boy, or young man, for he was nearly grown, persisted in carelessness as to the relative position in which he wrote the figures on his slate, not under each other, in perpendicular lines, with sufficient exactness. After several admonitions Old Dyas attacked one day with one of the shillalah class of switches, but only got in a blow or two before the spry youngster sprang out of a window (there were no shutters, much less glass). But then arose the dilemma that his hat was inside the school house. To come after it was to beard the lion in his den; to go without it was to blister in the sun. After some maneuvering, however, one of the boys threw his hat out of the window, and, pulling it over his ears, he made his escape. He came back, though, in a day or two, in a good humor, and the school went merrily on. I knew this boy as a man for many years after, and, having occasion to go over some calculations with him, I was amused to see that although he neither wrote a good hand nor ciphered well, yet he placed the figures under each other with the precision of a printed book. A few days of Old Dyas in the public schools now would probably eliminate one prolific source of errors.
We walked morning and evening to school, carrying our dinners in tin pails and milk in a variety of bottles. Some had clear glass, some green glass wine bottles, and some black or junk bottles. A contention having arisen among the boys as to the relative strength of these wares, it was submitted to the test of striking the bottles together, the boys whose bottles were broken admitting defeat—which, in some vague way, I thought involved humiliation—while the boys whose bottles survived the conflict vaunted their victories. I do not see why it never occurred to us that the finer ware would suffer in the conflict and the coarser prevail, but so it was. Bottles were of vastly more value then than now, and some of the small boys having cried about their loss, brought in the teacher with his switches to umpire the game, and he decided to administer impartial fate. I do not remember the number of strokes, but I remember thinking it unjust that the boys who had lost in the game should suffer as much in the award as those who prided themselves on their stock of infrangible glass. For many years, however, I have coincided with the old teacher's view, and wish that his policy could be extended to parties and nations as well, they being but children of a larger growth.
Though the hours of school seemed to me of wearisome length, yet school was turned out time enough for us all to go leisurely home before sundown. Our house was about two miles, most of the way across a prairie, but crossing a small stream, whose clear water babbled over “the stones in the brook” where I loved to play. My brother would sometimes wait with me, but he sat on the bank, very much engaged in his books. I remember his puzzling over the mystery of the extremes and the means in the rule of three, and saying that if he could learn that rule and the square root he would be through the arithmetic and would “know it all.” The Robinson Crusoe boy, of whom I have spoken, accompanied us to school, and one day took it into his head to teach us some arithmetic. There were five cows grazing by the side of the path, and he maintained that there were fourteen, proving it in this way: There are four in a bunch on the right and one by itself on the left; four on the right and one on the left make fourteen. We admitted the correctness of the numeration in the abstract, but could not see the cows in the concrete. “Well,” said he, “apply your arithmetic; when you buy cattle count the old way, but when you sell cattle numerate them.” For some reason this little jest remains in memory, and I have moralized upon it, like Dr. Franklin on his whistle, until at times it seems that the world is divided into two principal classes—those who count in the old way and those who “numerate.”
To everything there comes an end, and so at last Dyas' school also ended, and one little scholar at least went running home joyfully carrying his books to stay. The patrons of the school were much pleased with our old teacher and he with his new location. They had arranged for him to open a permanent academy, and he departed for Ireland to bring his family. He sailed from New Orleans, but the vessel was never afterwards heard of.
The next school which I attended was taught in the same place in the year 1840 by Mr. Cummins, a young man from the States—that was as near as I ever learned the country of his nativity. He understood what he taught, and taught what he understood. His discipline was as severe, if not more so, than that of Dyas. I could not compare their teaching, but I learned more, perhaps only because I was older. We were ranked and arrayed in two spelling classes—the senior and the junior; and of course all in Webster's spelling book. I with a few others belonged to both, and it became a consuming ambition with me to be head of both classes, in which I succeeded once or twice, “and then I left it like a child.” I have followed many greater ambitions of less importance. We reached and mastered “indivisibility” and unintelligibility, and physic and phthisic and other long and hard words. Indeed, came at last to the closing lessons, where there was a column of words pronounced alike but spelled differently, the first two of which were “air, the atmosphere; are, plural of am.” Now I hear it is considered style to pronounce are arr. They don't know the spelling book; are, should be pronounced air. Further on there was a lesson in punctuation, which Mr. Cummins required us to memorize, giving it in charge on Friday evening; but the words were long and tough, and when Monday morning came, we came up unprepared. Not so the teacher; he did not go after a switch, he already had one and applied it without delay. Beginning at the head of the class, he dusted every jacket in the rank down to the foot and sent us all to our seats to learn it before playtime. We learned it. I can say it yet. There was also a lesson in the same connection, in which the letters of the alphabet occurred in a horizontal line. This lesson, a chum and I thought we could read with facility, and we had planned that when this came to us we would see which could say the a b c's the fastest. I believe he suggested this exploit, and the irony of fate awarded him the lead. He was hardly half way before the teacher was upon him with the switch. The offense was that there was a comma after each letter, indicating a pause. My old school mate is living yet. I hear that he is a preacher. I have not heard him, but will vouch for him that he knows one important lesson not always learned by clergymen, namely, to mind the stops. We got through the lessons on punctuation and read of the old man and the apple tree, old dog Tray and the rest, and finally passed the picture of the wolf, and so were graduates, if not proficients.
It was at this school that some of Peter Parley's new school books arrived: geography, astronomy, and what not. I was permitted—or required, I forget which— to take lessons in his very primitive astronomy, and in truth was much interested and perhaps vaunted my superior course of study over the other boys. Be that as it may, I came to grief over the constellation of the great bear, which was one of the pictures in the book. In that picture the bear's hind legs bent backwards like those of a dog. There was a pet bear chained at almost every other house, and all the boys knew that a bear's hind legs bent forward like a man's knees, and so they voted my new book the work of an ignorant impostor. Will the makers of books never learn that a false picture is a falsehood?
We were taught arithmetic, whether well or ill, I do not remember; but I do remember that finding our slates growing continually dirty, we thought it a good plan to take them to the creek for a general washing, and once there, the abundance of sand suggested that it was a good scouring material and we proceeded to scour the slates, covering them with marks which we had not calculated upon.
An anecdote is related that somewhere a boy carried his slate to the teacher and asked this deep question, “Where do all the figures go to when they are rubbed out?” I can tell him where our complicated marks and scratches went. They went with the slates to puzzle future antiquaries who may exhume their fragments.
We had a variety of reading books; mine was the National Reader, a compend of extracts from notable modern authors, most of them American. One boy had Aesop's Fables for his text-book, and I was greatly interested in his recitations; so much so that I attempted compositions in the same vein, compositions in which I fear that the adventures of the animals were more in evidence than the moral.
Our games and sports were much the same as now, but we had also adventures with wild animals, some of which were exciting as well as amusing. They should be memorable, though they can not recur in this country until after the next ice age.
Our teacher joined a company of volunteers to invade Mexico, known in history as the Federal Expedition, and their departure gave us an unexpected holiday. After their return, he stopped at our house, and I hardly recognized the prim and tidy school teacher in the bronzed and war-worn soldier with his grim accoutrements. I listened with eager interest while he told my father of their marches and battles and Xenophonian retreat. Time and experience has not lessened the high opinion I then formed of the military talent of their commander Col. Jordan. Mr. Cummins volunteered in the Texian army to repel the invasion of 1842, and fell at the battle of Salado.
In the fall and winter of 1841 and 1842 another school house materialized as far to the east as the other was to the west, nearly two miles from home. It was a neat log house in a grove in the prairie, with no spring near, but the patrons subsituted a well. I had then for the first time to experience a winter school. The house was an improvement on the other, in that it had shutters to windows and door; glass was still far in the future. We had also a chimney and wide fireplace where we kept a roaring log heap in cold weather, when the neighbors brought wood on their wagons, which they did turn about, and a flaming, crackling brush heap when we had to bring fuel by hand from the neighboring woods. The teacher was both competent and qualified mentally, and his scholars advanced well on all lines. Here an innovation broke in, for the world advanced backward and forward then as well as now. The new book was Town's spelling book, with columns of words arranged without the slightest regard to etymology or affinities of orthography, and further obscured by parallel columns of synonyms styled definitions, which we were required to memorize. This fool fad was of course hailed as a great improvement. I have since learned that it returns, like fashions, periodically. It has appeared and disappeared once or twice since.
Our teacher essayed to teach mental arithmetic orally to the school, assembled, as the legislative journals say, “in committee of the whole.” The teaching, as it was somewhat violently called, was carried on by sudden questions on this dense subject, which we were expected to answer in the style of an exclamation. He was more successful with his singing geography, where, beginning at Baffin's Bay and going south around the continents of the Western Hemisphere, the names of all the bays were chanted in a unity of discord and loud voices, the pupils following with finger on map and the chant continuing until the last one had found the bay as well as the name. Then followed the capes, islands, mountains, rivers, etc. There was a certain merit in this system which has not been successfully incorporated in any other. We became familiar with the outlandish proper names in geography, and formed a general idea of their import and locality. It was a sort of game, also, and we took delight in singing to a dull fellow until he found the object and escaped to the winning side, usually taking revenge by joining the screech to the next below until he also escaped. It beat a whipping to make them diligent. In reading, our teacher was fair only, but in penmanship he was excellent and successful, notwithstanding my failure to profit by his precepts and examples. He whipped the children cruelly, and I think more from petulance on his part than fault on theirs, and the girls were not spared. At this school one dark winter evening a neighbor visited us, and after we were dismissed, announced, as a piece of news to carry to our parents, that the Santa Fé expedition had arrived at that place and surrendered without firing a gun. I well remember the shade that passed over the boys' faces at the unwelcome tidings.
In February, 1842, I was taken on a journey to the States, which cut short my attendance; but soon after I left an invasion reached San Antonio; the larger boys went to the war and the school closed.
In the spring of 1843 another school opened in the same place, taught by R. B. Wells, a Methodist minister, who had been sent to our circuit that year. I think he was originally from Georgia, though I am not sure; he may have come from Virginia. Wherever he may have been born and bred, he was a scholar well qualified in every way to teach almost any branch of learning, and withal a gentleman. This school was the first I had seen or heard of that dispensed with the rod in school. He managed to keep order by keeping the children busy and by a dignified and gentle sway; he never had a switch and never needed one; he never whipped and never threatened but once, and that was to some boys or young men as large as himself. Besides the ancient routine of reading, writing, and arithmetic, he had classes in grammar, history, geometry, and surveying, and a class of one, the author of these memoirs, in Latin. He managed to give attention to all and keep the students interested, and I believe that each and every one of them was richly rewarded mentally and morally for the time and attention given at Wells' school. As a teacher, he had one fault, a very common one then, as now—he did not always begin at the beginning, and knowing the subject so well himself, he could not well discover what the difficulties were which often puzzled primary students. If once he knew what the difficulty was, no man that ever I knew could more easily and quickly lead the pupil out of it, but he was slow in discovering rudimentary difficulties. I remember puzzling over an arithmetical problem for several days; a time which seemed to me months long. The teacher could not, or at least did not, understand my difficulty, which was so simple that a very stupid fellow in the neighborhood easily explained it to me in a few moments; perhaps because he knew how to reach the comprehension of his kind, in which our excellent teacher was at fault—over-shooting as it were. But the more advanced a student became, the more easily and thoroughly did Mr. Wells carry him forward. I remember his lamenting that there was no copy of Euclid to be found in the neighborhood, and when I searched my father's library and found a copy which had been through the wars and moves, and was torn and deficient of some of the first books, he hailed it as a treasure, nor was he in the least put out that the remnant began at the 47th proposition, either because he remembered all that went before or because he did not consider the mere beginning particularly important. And here I digress to move the Text-book Board to re-elect old Euclid for another term of two thousand years, for in all that time no other text-book has appeared that will at all compare with his.
Mr. Wells did not confine his exertions for our advancement to his little school nor to his Gospel ministry, but he also started an emulation among the young men to read well in the works of the great writers of our tongue. My brother read the English translation of Plutarch's Lives and Shakespeare's plays, in the latter of which his taste chose King Henry V., which he almost memorized. A companion of his was the best reader of the English language, except one, that ever I have heard. During that summer I read Scott's Life of Napoleon and attacked Blair's rhetoric, though with problematical success. One of the boys who was not at all literary in his taste, yet mastered the Life of Putnam, and when we found a den of wolves, proposed to emulate his hero by crawling in after them, but we dissuaded him and found a better plan by smoking them out and shooting as they emerged. We had Parley's Universal History, then a new book, which had many merits in the eyes of a child and not a few in the eyes of this grown person. We had also then, as now, books called “readers intended for the use of schools,” among which the English Reader and the National Reader still held first place. The school was in summer time, and during the long hot days the wild cattle came to the grove around the school-house to stamp in the shade. Their bellowing and fighting often monopolized out attention to the annoyance of the teacher, and often serious danger to our horses. 'Tis an ill wind that blows nobody good. It was necessary to drive these cattle away, which was by no means the simple thing it is to drive gentle cattle. We had to go in force, and when the enemy was routed we were apt to become dispersed in pursuit and it took time to rally. We had many plays which I observe are still in vogue with school-boys. But our favorite sport was to ride away at noon for a swim in some shady pool in the neighboring streams, and we all became good swimmers. After the swim, we ran our horses back to the school-house. A level piece of road leading from the school-house suggested a race track, where we tried the speed of our “nags” with merry races, in which the girls rode as well as the boys, and won many equestrian contests. We also had swings for the girls and various athletic exercises for the boys. I believe that we had more sport and genuine enjoyment and at the same time gave more attention to our studies at this school than any other I have known either before or since.
With the close of summer, our school closed, when I was eleven years old. The teacher remained in the neighborhood for some time and wherever he was it seemed as if school was in session from the numbers who came to him for instruction, especially young men. He did not resume his school, but removed to another part of the country, where, years afterward, he closed his useful life. No towering monument with marble piled around marks the tomb of Robert Barnard Wells, but the light which he let shine before men still gleams through the clouds of time.
[The following is my grandmother's account of her first experiences in Texas. She is the widow of Robert J. Kleberg, Sr., who as a member of Baker's company participated in the battle of San Jacinto. She is now eighty-five years old. She related the story to me in German, which I have taken down and translated, preserving as far as possible her exact words.—Rudolph Kleberg, Jr.]
After landing at New Orleans, we took sail for Texas, intending to land at Brazoria. Instead, we were wrecked off the coast of Galveston Island on December 22, 1834. We managed to save all our goods and baggage, which included everything we thought needful to begin a settlement in a new country; and having built a hut out of the logs and planks which had been washed ashore, we were able to maintain ourselves for some time. There were no houses on the island, but there was no lack of game.
After a few days a large ship passed the island; and the other people who were with us went on board and landed at Brazoria. We could not afford to leave our baggage; and so my husband, the only one in the party who could speak English, together with my brother Louis von Roeder, went with them to Brazoria. Thence they proceeded on foot to San Felipe to find my brothers and sister, who had gone to Texas two years before, and from whom we had not heard since their departure.
The task of finding them was not so difficult as might be supposed. Entirely contrary to the fashion of the day, all had allowed their beards to grow and had adopted the dress of Prussian peasants. They found our people near Cat Spring. In the timber near Bostick's an Indian came toward them. My brother Louis was of course ready to shoot; but my husband restrained him. As it turned out the Indian was quite friendly, and told them where they would find the people they were seeking. He belonged to a troop of Indians who were camping in the neighborhood and from whom our relations had been in the habit of obtaining venison in exchange for ammunition. They found our people in a wretched condition. My sister and one brother had died, while the two remaining brothers were very ill with the fever.
My husband chartered a sloop to take us to the mainland. Captain Scott, the owner of the sloop, lived on one of the bayous, and we stopped at his house. He received us with the greatest kindness and kept us with him several days until we were thoroughly rested. I have never seen more hospitable people than those of Captain Scott's family. Three miles from Captain Scott, on the other side of the bayou, lived a Mr. Kokernot.
We went to Harrisburg where my husband had rented a house. As we were carrying our baggage into the house and I had just thrown down a big bundle, an Indian carrying two big hams upon his back approached me, saying, “Swap! Swap!” I retreated behind a table upon which lay a loaf of bread, whereupon the Indian threw down the hams, picked up the bread and walked off. As a matter of fact, the Indians were in the main quite amicable. They were constantly wishing to exchange skins for pots and other utensils. Quite a number of them was camping on Buffalo Bayou. I have often sewed clothes for them in exchange for moccasins. They were Coshattis, and big, strong men. There were also Kickapoos, who, however, were small.
We all lived together in the house during the rest of the winter. The house was very poor, and only in the kitchen was there a fireplace. My father carried on a butcher's trade, while my sister and I took lessons in sewing from a Mrs. Swearingen and made clothes for Moore's Store. We were all unused to that kind of work, but we felt that we must save our money; and, when required by necessity, one learns to do what one has never done before. We had our pleasures, too. Our piano had been much damaged; but I played on it anyway, and the young people of Harrisburg danced to the music. Toward summer, we all took the fever; and it seemed to me as if we would never get rid of it. We had no medicines, and there were of course no physicians.
In the fall my husband, who had been in Cat Spring, came to Harrisburg with a team of oxen to take us with him. The roads in the Brazos bottom being impassable on account of the mud, we camped at Weeten's. This was the first house on the road from Harrisburg to Cat Spring, and was a good day's journey from the former place. Weeten was a backwoods American, and carried on the trade of a “teamster.” He was the very personification of whole-souled generosity and hospitality. We also stopped at Hoff's. Hoff was a Pennsylvania Dutchman. At the time he did not have much; later, however, he became a rich slave-holder. We hired a little crib from him, and had to pay for all we got.
Upon arriving at our place at Cat Spring (near Millheim, Austin county), we moved into a big log house which my husband and brothers had built. There was neither floor nor ceiling to it, and in the only room was a big fire-place. As soon, however, as the most important field work was done, the men built an extra fine house for our parents. This had a floor and ceiling of logs.
We had most of our goods in common. When we decided to go to Texas, we put all our savings in a common treasury, part of which we invested in buying things we thought necessary to start a settlement. Our intention was to buy a tract of land to be held in common, and later to locate our individual claims. We had a president, secretary, treasurer, etc.; but the details of arrangement have escaped my memory. As a matter of fact, it did not work well, and after the war it broke up to our mutual benefit.
Circumstances were very different from the representations we had made to ourselves. My brothers had pictured pioneer life as one of hunting and fishing, of freedom from the restraints of Prussian society; and it was hard for them to settle down to the drudgery and toil of splitting rails and cultivating the field, work which was entirely new to them.
The settlers with whom we came in contact were very kind and hospitable; and this was true of nearly all the old American pioneers. They would receive one with genuine pleasure, and share the last piece of bread. Money was out of the question; and if you had offered it to those people, they would have been amazed. When you came to one of the old settlers, you were expected to make yourself at home. He would see that your horses were well fed, and offer you the best cheer he could; and you were expected to do the same when the next opportunity presented itself. In the main, everything was very quiet and peaceful. But there was great dissatisfaction with the Mexican government, which was in reality no government at all. The settlers were constantly saying that since the Mexicans gave them no government, they could not see why they could not have a government of their own and be rid of the Mexicans. This seemed to be the constant burden of their conversation. Old Mr. Kuykendall, who lived on a big plantation ten miles from us, had nothing else to say.
We lived about ten miles from San Felipe, where there were from two to four stores, besides a tavern and saloon and from thirty to forty private houses. In the stores you could buy almost anything you wanted in those days; but, of course, the prices were high. There were no churches, but plenty of camp-meetings, one of which I attended. There was considerable trade in cotton and cattle in San Felipe and San Antonio. Dr. Peebles owned a big gin on the Brazos, in which he employed a good many negroes. Captain York was another one of our neighbors.
Old Colonel Pettus brought us the first news of the commencement of hostilities. The unmarried men of our party then joined the march to San Antonio and participated in the capture of that city.
In the summer the people returned. Things were now quiet for a while, and every body began work once more. But when the news of the fall of the Alamo came, there was great excitement. Some of the people wanted to leave Texas altogether. There was quite a debate in our family as to what course it was most advisable to pursue, until my husband was seconded in his views by my father. Besides, we could not leave the State permanently, having no property elsewhere. And so it was finally decided that my father should stay with us, while my husband and brothers were to join the army. As the men left, their families began to move, intending to cross the Sabine river; and we set out like the rest. As we passed through San Felipe, my husband and my brother, Louis von Roeder, left us to join Houston's army. Having only one big ox-wagon, and being compelled to take in it four families and their baggage, we were compelled to leave behind much that was valuable. My father and I drove our cattle and packed horses; and I carried my daughter Clara, who was then a child of a few months, upon the saddle in front of me.
Most of the families traveled separately until they reached the Brazos, where all were compelled to come to a halt. It was necessary to drive the cattle across before the people could pass over; and this was attended with a good deal of difficulty. In this way there were collected from forty to fifty families who were trying to cross with their cattle, and the noise and confusion were terrible. There was only one small ferryboat, which carried a wagon and a few passengers. Many of the people were on foot. Deaf Smith's Mexican wife was in a truck-wheel cart (a cart with two wooden wheels made from entire cross-sections of a large tree) with her two pair of twins, but had no team to carry her forward. My brother Albrecht carried her with his team of oxen for a distance and then returned for us. Several other people showed her the same consideration, and thus she managed to proceed on her journey. The blockade continued from early morning until the late afternoon.
The next morning after crossing the Brazos, we stopped at “Cow” Cooper's, called thus from the large number of cattle he owned. Cooper told the people to help themselves to all the meat in his smoke-house, since he did not want the Mexicans to have it. He was then a man of about 50 years, and his sons were in the army. He had a beautiful herd of horses and a lot of negroes. The people kept together for about a day, after which they again separated. We camped near the Clear Creek, where young Louis v. Roeder was born in a corn-crib.
We intended to remain here as long as possible on account of my sister. During the night, however, my brother Otto v. Roeder came to tell us that the Mexicans had gone to the crossing below San Felipe and that we must move on. And so we once more set out, being compelled to stop again after the second day. We camped in the neighborhood of a house where a number of families had collected. Here we heard the sound of cannon, and the next morning came an old man, Georgens by name, whom we knew quite well. He told us that the battle had been fought; but when my father asked him about the result he told us that he had stayed with the army until he saw that everybody was thoroughly engaged, whereupon he decided that they were able to get on without him and he left.
Georgens, however, was not the only one who decided that his presence was not indispensable. Deserters were constantly passing us on foot and on horseback. The old men who were with the families laughed at them and called to them, “Run! Run! Santa Anna is behind you!”
One German whom we knew in Paderborn, and who had come to Texas several years before us, had caused to be posted on the trees on his land notices that he was loyal to the Mexican government, and had persuaded many of his German friends to do the same. But when the Mexicans actually appeared on the scene, our friend and his followers nevertheless got frightened and got away as fast as they could. Georgens' wife and children were stolen by the Indians; but Stoehlke and his family were captured by the Mexicans, who wanted to hang him. He told them that if they did so, he would die as innocent as Jesus Christ himself, whereupon they released him and his family. There were a good many Germans on Cummins Creek. They came from Westphalia and Oldenburg.
On the afternoon of the same day, we learned the result of the battle of San Jacinto. We did not believe the good news until we heard it confirmed by the young men whom we had sent to ascertain the truth of the report.
It was our intention to return home; but we heard that the Indians were in the country, and so we followed the example of the families who were with us, and went to Galveston Island. There were also a number of Mexican prisoners who were kept on the island by the Texan government. We received some supplies from the people of the United States, but we nevertheless here passed through some of our hardest experiences. Many of us were sick, and though there was a physician, a Dr. Jaeger, among us, who generously gave his services, yet he had no medicines. My sister-in-law, Ottilie v. Roeder (nee v. Donop) died here and we buried her under the Three Lone Trees.
My husband and brother Louis, who had both been in the Texan army all during this time, joined us here, and we first intended to remain permanently. But it was evident that this was impossible, and we decided to return to Cat Spring. When we came home we found everything we had left was gone. We had buried our books, but the place had been found and they were torn to pieces. We had to begin anew, and with less than we had when we started.
NOTES AND FRAGMENTS.
Mr. W. F. McCaleb of Carrizo Springs, who has held a junior fellowship in History at the University of Chicago during the past year, has just been reappointed. This time, however, he has received a substantial promotion in that he is awarded a senior fellowship and will be allowed to travel in Mexico. He will thus be able to carry on his investigations in the Mexican archives, which must be thoroughly exploited before the real pre-Revolutionary history of Texas can ever be written.
Mr. W. Roy Smith, who will take the degree of Master of Arts, from the University of Texas, next June, has just received notice of his nomination to a fellowship in American History in Columbia University, New York City. Competition for these places is open to graduates of the colleges and universities in the United States and Canada, and the award is usually made to the applicant who presents the best evidence of his ability to do original investigation. Two of twenty-four fellowships are, as a rule, conferred upon students of history. Mr. Smith's nomination was made on the merits of a paper entitled “The Quarrel Between Governor Smith and the Council of the Provisional Government of Texas, 1835-6.”
Judge Fulmore's History of the Geography of Texas, consisting of a series of maps, accompanied by explanatory notes and two tables of statistics, all comprised in a large chart, has appeared. It is intended especially for the public schools, and it will be found a useful aid in teaching the History of Texas. The outlines of the subject, and especially of the historical geography of the State, are presented by it in brief compass, and in a systematic way, so that they can easily be mastered. Probably the most valuable, as well as the most original, part of the chart is that which shows, by a graphic arrangement, how the existing counties of Texas have grown by subdivision from the few that represented the municipalities of the Republic. The table in which this growth is shown is likely to prove itself quite helpful in the investigation of the history of local government in the State.
The Gammel Book Company has undertaken the publication of the Laws of Texas, 1822-1897. This will be, when finished, an extensive work, comprising ten large volumes. It makes accessible to the general reader a great deal of important matter that has been, up to this time, in reach of but few, and to lawyer and historian alike it is most welcome.
Another recent publication, which deserves special commendation for the intelligent way in which it exhibits the evolution of the Texas system of organic and statutory law, is Batts' Annotated Revised Civil Statutes. Further notice of it will be made in a review, which is to appear in the next issue of the Quarterly.
The completest repository of Texas history that has hitherto appeared in a single publication is “A Comprehensive History of Texas,” edited by Dudley G. Wooten and published by William G. Scarff, Dallas. It has been received too late for an extended notice in this issue, but a suitable review may be expected in the Quarterly for July.
Those who like to study history from the sources have reason to congratulate themselves upon the additions that have lately been made to the list in the State library. Among these are the Pacheco and Cárdenas collection, Margry's “Découvertes et établissements, etc.,” the Thwaites edition of the Jesuit Relations, as far as hitherto published, and the Goldsmid edition of the Voyages of the English Nation to America, from the Hakluyt collection. Unfortunately, the appropriations by recent Legislatures for the purchase of books have been extremely small, but the little that has been given has been judiciously spent. In time, if the money needed to buy books be provided somewhat more liberally, the library may become in some degree worthy of the State to which it belongs.
Louis Juchereau de Saint Denis.—“One of the most striking figures on the stage of Texas history undoubtedly is Sieur Louis de Saint Denis, called Huchereau for the first time by Yoakum in his History of Texas.”
Concerning the latter clause of the above quotation from an interesting article in a late issue of the Texas Historical Quarterly, I desire to say that Henri Martin (Hist. of La.) and Charles Gayarré (Hist. of La.) both of whom preceded Yoakum, as well as several earlier writers, certainly referred to the Saint Denis sent to Mexico by Cadillac as Juchereau de Saint Denis.
Juchereau would seem indeed to have been a family name, common to all belonging to a certain branch of the Saint Denis family; as Barbe Juchereau de Saint Denis, Louis Juchereau de Saint Denis, etc., all of which names are found in the early chronicles.
The following note from Justin Winson, vol. V, p. 25, may throw some light on the subject:
“Charlevoix speaks of Saint-Denys, who made the trip to Mexico, as Juchereau de Saint-Denys. Dr. Shea, in the note, p. 12, vol. VI, of his Charlevoix, identifies Saint-Denys as Louis Juchereau de Saint-Denys. The founder of the settlement on the `Ouabache' signed the same name to the Memorial in Margry, v. 350. The author of Nos Gloires Nationales asserts (vol. I, p. 207, of his work) that it was Barbe Juchereau who was sent to Mexico. Spanish accounts speak of the one in Mexico as Louis. Charlevoix says he was the uncle of Iberville's wife. Iberville married Marie-Thérèse Pollet, grand-daughter of Nicholas Juchereau, Siegneur of Beuport and St. Denis (see Tanguay). This Nicolas had one son who was born September 18, 1676. Martin says the two Juchereaus were relatives.”
Documents, hitherto unknown, are being added from time to time to the Howard Library here. It is not improbable that some paper—one might even dare to hope for a letter! signed by the hand of Saint Denis himself, may yet be brought to light to settle the question of his name and to thrill the hearts of all lovers of romance!
M. E. M. Davis.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
In his “History of the Catholic Church Among the Indian Tribes of the United States,” p. 87, John Gilmary Shea writes:
“A full history of this [the Texas] mission was composed about the year 1783, by one of the Fathers, which is still in manuscript, and will furnish, when published, a complete account of the labors of the Apostolic men of whom the present writer can only glean occasional notices.”
In a note Shea adds: “I had the work in my hands, and was in treaty for its purchase; but contrary to every expectation on my part, it was sold without my knowledge to another, and I have since been unable to trace it.”
Can any one give me information about this manuscript?
Edmond J. P. Schmitt.
Baker, in his “Texas Scrap-Book,” writes, p. 275:
“John Rice Jones came from Missouri to Texas about the year 1831. He was postmaster-general under the first provisional government. He was for years a merchant, and he died in 1845.”
Was this the same John Rice Jones that lived at Vincennes, Indiana, in the beginning of the century? Can any one give me more information about him?
Edmond J. P. Schmitt.
Mound Prairie, as referred to by Yoakum and Thrall, is five and a half miles west of the town of Alto, Cherokee county. There is a settlement in Anderson county, about ten miles west of Palestine, called Mound Prairie, but it is not near so old as a landmark as the first named place.
Dabney White.
The Flournoy Family.—For some time Mr. Flournoy Rivers, of Pulaski, Tenn., has had in preparation for the “Virginia Magazine of History and Biography,” published at Richmond by the Virginia Historical Society, a series of articles relative to the Flournoy family in both Europe and America. The first of the series appeared in the issue for July, 1894. These articles are not based on the mere “they say” of verbal tradition, but upon authentic history, wills, deeds, court records and official data.
From the time that Laurent Flournoy, the Huguenot, fled from persecution in Champagne, France, first to Lyons after the Guise Massacre of the Protestants on March 1, 1562, at Vassy, and then to Geneva, Switzerland, after the Great Massacre of the Bartholomew in 1572 (see Agnew's French Protestant Exiles, vol. 2, p. 270), two branches of this family have lived—are now living—at Geneva. They are interested and are aiding. Between the Eupean and the American Flournoys correspondence was kept up from 1700 down to about 1758, and has recently been revived.
From Geneva Jacob Flournoy, Laurent's great-grandson, came with his family in September, 1700, to the now extinct Huguenot settlement, Manikin Town, on the James river, in the present Powhatan county. See “Huguenot Emigration to Virginia,” page 15, a compilation of State papers referring to this Colony, which was published a few years since by the Virginia Historical Society. Jacob's only son, Francis Flournoy, made his will April 13, 1770; probated at the March term, 1773, Chesterfield county court; and now of record at Chesterfield C. H., Va., in Will Book 2, page 262. He left a numerous family of sons and daughters, each of whom in turn became the head of a large connection.
Soon after Jacob came his nephew, John James Flournoy—see “Huguenot Emigration,” page 112—who, marrying in 1720, died March 23rd, 1740. His will was probated at Richmond, Henrico county, at the April term, 1740. He likewise left sons and daughters, from one of whom—Samuel Flournoy, born 1724, died 1780, in Powhatan county (Will Book No. 1, page 66)—the compiler descends.
Though so widely scattered throughout America, it is easily susceptible of legal proof that all members of this family have a common origin. The compiler, therefore, asks you to aid him in putting all of them “in touch” with each other. He receives for it— and expects—no compensation; he has, instead, devoted to it much time and labor and money. Readers of the Quarterly are, therefore, requested: (1) To furnish him the full name and postoffice address of every person of Flournoy descent within their knowledge; (2) To lay this matter before all such persons, requesting their co-operation; (3) To furnish Mr. Rivers an historical account, accurate and minute in detail, NOT in the form of a RUNNING LETTER, but a TABULATED statement—of the descent of themselves and of the members of their branch.
Give full names; be accurate and minute as to dates, civil, political, military or naval employment, giving official records; note all collegiate graduations and authorships, if any; born when and where; married when, to whom, lived where; occupation what; died when; buried where; religion what; politics what. Consult family Bibles, town records, county, State and national records, tombstones, church records, will and deed books, etc., giving book and page.
Mr. Rivers is also interested in and would be glad to correspond about and pay for colonial and revolutionary and historical data of the following names and families:
Rivers.—Antecedents of William Rivers, of Brunswick county, Va.; died in March, 1809, testate; will now of record at Lawrenceville, Va. The name existed in Lunenberg and Greensville counties, both off-shoots of Brunswick.
Brown.—Aaron Brown, father-in-law of the foregoing, William Rivers, executor of his will and testamentary guardian of his sons, John and William, whom he brought from Virginia to Giles county, Tennessee in 1813. He was born in 1757, died 1830.
Camp.—Capt. John Camp. father of Dr. John Hamlin Camp. who was Speaker of the Tennessee House of Representatives, pro tempore, 1821, Representative 1825, Speaker in 1827. Capt. Camp was a soldier of the Revolution: removed to Middle Tennessee from Brunswick (or Greenville?) County, Va., 1807; died at Elkton, Giles county, 1820, aged 66 years.
Cannon.—William Cannon, of “Mt. Ida,” Buckingham county, Va.; came to Tennessee 1807-12, and removed to Caldwell county, Ky., about 1820; died, and is buried near Princeton, Ky., on the Bennett or Catlett place. His first wife was Sarah Mosby (below).
Rodes.—Tyree Rodes, one of the founders of Pulaski, Tenn. (Act of Tennessee Legislature, Nov. 14, 1809); was son of John Rodes (2nd), son of John Rodes (1st), of Albemarle and Hanover counties, Va.
Mosby.—Benjamin Mosby, lived at what is now “Cumberland Old Court House,” Powhatan county, Va.; died testate 1774; father of (among others) Littleberry Mosby, of “Font Hill,” Powhatan county, who was a member of Cumberland Committee of Safety, 1775-76, and in the first Commission of the Peace, Powhatan county, June, 1777; county lieutenant, 1780-81; burgess, 1781; sheriff, 1797; died testate, 1809. His first wife (1748) was Elizabeth Netherland.
Harris.—The Harris family of Louisa, Albemarle, and Hanover counties, Va. Sarah Harris married John Rodes (2nd). She had a brother, Tyree Harris, who removed from the parish 1758. Is he the Tyree Harris who was in the Commission of the Peace for Orange county, N. C., 1759, in Assembly 1760, and sheriff 1766-67?
Avirett.—The Avirett family, once of Onslow county, N. C. John Alfred Avirett, Sr., lived at “Richland,” Onslow county. His son, J. A. A., Jr., wounded at New Hope Church, Georgia campaign, 1864; died soon after; Captain Fifty-eighth Alabama Regiment, C. S. A.
Markham.—John Markham, Chesterfield county, Va.; said to be the immigrant, 1717. His great-grandson, Dr. James Bernard Markham, removed from Amherst (?) county, Va., to Hale (Green?) county, South Alabama, many years ago. Lived many years in Perry county, Ala.
Holland.—James Holland, of Rutherford county, N. C.; was sheriff of old Tryon county, before its division in 1779, from July, 1777, to July, 1778; second lieutenant in Hardin's company, Locke's regiment, North Carolina militia, 1776; after the war was in the State Senate, 1783, 1797; in the House, 1786, 1789; member first Board of Trustees, University of North Carolina, 1789-1795; member second North Carolina Constitutional Convention (that adopted the Federal Constitution), 1789; in Congress, March, 1795 to March, 1797, and 1801 to 1811. (His will construed, 2 Yerger Tenn. Rep., 341, in case of Tyree Rodes and wife vs. Holland.) He died 1823. His land grants reviewed in Childress vs. Holland, 3 Haywood Tenn. Rep., 274.
Gilbert.—William Gilbert, of “Gilbert-town,” near present Rutherfordtown, N. C. In Commission of Peace of old Tyron county up to April, 1776; tax assessor, in Commission of Peace of new county of Rutherford; in House, 1779, 1780, 1782, 1783. His daughter, Sarah Gilbert, married James Holland, in January, 1780. His wife was Sarah McCandless of Philadelphia. She died at the Holland place in Maury county, Tenn., 1822. Gilbert is called “a loyalist” in Draper's “King's Mountain,” which absurd error, Mr. Rivers ascertained, is due solely to the fact that Major Forguson camped several weeks at Gilbert-town in September, 1780.
Flournoy.—The American ramifications from Laurent Flournoy, the Huguenot of 1562-72. See Agnew's “French Protestant Exiles” and “La France Protestante,” including the progeny of both his descendants, Jacob, the immigrant of 1700, and Jacob's nephew, John James, the immigrant of 1717-1720; “Huguenot Emigration to Virginia.”
AFFAIRS OF THE ASSOCIATION.
Mr. D. M. O'Connor, of Anaqua, has added to the gift of fifty dollars received from him last year, one hundred more. If the Association could find a few other such generous patrons it would be able by and by to gather a collection of materials for Southwestern history that would be known throughout the world and would attract investigators from every quarter. Then the History of Texas and the Southwest could be written by Texans themselves. Mr. O'Connor has won the hearty gratitude of the Association.
The July Quarterly will contain the reports of the Treasurer and the Librarian. These may be so far anticipated as to state that, while the collection of the annual dues for the second year of the Association's existence has not yet begun, there is nearly enough on hand to discharge all debts, including those for the current issue of the Quarterly; and, as to the library, the collection now runs to nearly two hundred volumes and pamphlets, besides a considerable list of serial publications belonging to incomplete volumes, and not yet numbered.
The second annual meeting of the Association will be held in Austin, June 16th and 17th, the two days immediately following the commencement exercises of the University. The railroads of the State have agreed to give a rate of one fare and one-third for the round trip, and the tickets will be sold under such conditions that those who wish can attend both the commencement and the meeting of the Association. It is hoped that the members will take advantage of this opportunity and gather in sufficient numbers to rouse enthusiasm for the work and spread it, when they disperse, throughout the State.
The time is favorable, for there is abundant evidence in many quarters of a growing interest in Texas history, and of more serious attention to the subject. There has never been a period in which so many earnest students have been at work in this field, and the number is constantly on the increase. The students of the public schools manifest an increased desire to know something of the history of their State, and many of them are developing an inclination towards the study that can hardly fail to bear fruit in the course of time.
Much of the credit for this new impulse is due the Daughters of the Republic. The patriotic efforts of this organization to awaken the public gratitude toward the makers of Texas by reviving the memory of their sacrifices and achievements, have contributed not a little to the stimulation of historic interest throughout the State. The work of the Association, and especially the publication of the Quarterly, also had its share in the result, as is shown by the correspondence on file in the office. But, whatever may have led to this movement, one can not question its existence.
The following names have been added to the list of members since the publication of the October Quarterly. The total membership is now 416:
Mrs. Leila Barkley Alford 2317 Main Ave., San Antonio.
Col. Phil T. Allin Cleburne.
Hon. J. W. Baines Blanco.
Eugene C. Barker, Esq Palestine.
Mrs. W. G. Belding Austin.
William G. Bell, Esq Austin.
Miss Cordelia Cora Bostick Gainesville.
Mrs. A. Belle Bradford Box 212, San Luis Potosi, Mexico.
Mrs. John Bradley San Antonio.
Supt. E. E. Bramlette Fort Worth.
Mrs. Nettie Houston Bringhurst Henderson.
Miss Daisy Bryan Quintana.
Dr. A. L. Burleson San Antonio.
Dr. J. W. Carhart La Grange.
Maj. E. B. Carruth Austin.
Dr. David Cerna San Lucas, via Nadadores, Coahuila, Mexico.
Edwin Chamberlain, Esq San Antonio.
Mrs. Fannie McAlpine Clarke Breckinridge.
Supt. W. J. Clay Dublin.
Dr. Thomas C. Cook Weimar.
Bethel Coopwood, Esq Laredo.
R. H. Connerly, Esq Austin.
Ernest D. Criddle, Esq Waxahachie.
George L. Crocket, Esq San Augustine.
John H. Cullom, Esq Austin.
Samuel B. Dabney, Esq Victoria.
Dr. James Q. Dealey Providence, R. I.
Marion De Caussey, Esq Sealy.
Mrs. J. P. Devine San Antonio.
Prof. D. F. Eagleton Bonham.
Prof. A. Caswell Ellis Austin.
Miss Rosa Freeman 906 W. Weatherford St., Fort Worth.
Mrs. J. Arch Gamel Chickasha, I. T.
Mrs. Maggie Watters Goldsmith Cleburne.
Robert E. Goree, Esq Waco.
Miss Effie Graves Austin.
Mrs. Lee C. Harby 313 W. 70th St., New York City.
Dr. J. O. Harris 129 Main St., Ottawa, Ill.
Prof. J. E. Harrison San Antonio.
Miss Mary Heard Cleburne.
T. W. Hedrick, Esq Wheelock.
J. C. Hickey, Esq Henderson.
Samuel H. Hickman, Esq Bryan.
H. E. Hildebrand, Esq San Antonio.
Prof. Robert T. Hill U. S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C.
Mrs. Robert T. Hill Washington, D. C.
Miss Mary Lee Horton Austin.
Mrs. A. W. Houston San Antonio.
Charles H. Huberich, Esq. San Antonio.
Miss Edith R. Hull Houston.
Prof. Peyton Irving Cleburne.
Mrs. H. D. Kampmann San Antonio.
C. A. Keller, Esq. San Antonio.
C. C. Kingsley, Esq. Nadadores, Coahuila, Mexico.
Bishop George H. Kinsolving Austin.
Mrs. H. M. Kirby Austin.
M. E. Kleberg, Esq. Galveston.
Maj. J. J. Lane Austin.
Hon. S. W. T. Lanham Weatherford.
Prof. Mark H. Liddell Austin.
Dr. Alfred C. McDaniel 119 Alamo Plaza, San Antonio.
Bates H. McFarland, Esq. Rockport.
Mrs. M. A. McGown Box 214, Huntsville.
J. D. Matlock, Esq. Birmingham.
William Maverick, Esq. 119 Taylor St., San Antonio.
Dr. J. E. Mayfleld Nacogdoches.
Mrs. Julia A. Miller Gonzales.
T. S. Miller, Esq. Dallas.
Miss Estelle Montelin Austin.
John Adair Monroe, Esq. Paris.
Mrs. G. Bedell Moore San Antonio.
J. M. Morphis, Esq. Austin.
J. B. Nabors, Esq. Dallas.
Mrs. O. S. Newell San Antonio.
Col. D. A. Nunn Crockett.
Thomas B. Palfrey, Esq. San Antonio.
D. R. Pendleton, Esq. Belton.
Miss Mary Perkins Nacogdoches.
J. B. Polley, Esq. Floresville.
Miss Brownie Ponton Gonzales.
Judge Murray E. Poole Ithaca, N. Y.
Robert Lee Ragsdale, Esq. San Marcos.
Alec Rhea, Esq. Dallas.
Prof. J. E. Rodgers Oak Cliff.
Eugene C. Routh, Esq. Winchester.
Rev. Edmond J. P. Schmitt. Brackenridge Villa, San Antonio.
Col. Frank B. Sexton El Paso.
Miss Maude M. Shipe Sherman.
Judge Ed R. Sinks Giddings.
Miss Martha Maude Smith Austin.
W. Roy Smith, Esq. Austin.
Herbert Springall, Esq. San Antonio.
Mrs. Eleanor A. Stribling San Antonio.
C. H. Tatum, Esq. San Antonio.
Dr. Scurry L. Terrell Dallas.
Miss Kate J. Thomas Austin.
Fred H. Turner, Esq. Dallas.
Maj. K. M. Van Zandt Fort Worth.
Mrs. Margaret L. Watson Beaumont.
Judge J. B. Wells Brownsville.
Miss Katherine E. White Salado.
Judge O. W. Williams Fort Stockton.
Benjamin Wyche, Esq. Austin.
Peter Hansbrough Bell: Governor of Texas, 1849-53. Born March —, 1810. Died March 8, 1898.
INDEX TO VOLUME I.
A. &M. College 235
Abbott, Launcelot 35
Acenay 29
Adaes 12, 13, 15, 205, 206
Adaes, Indians 27
Adams, J. Q. 17
Agreda, Maria de 29, 121-24, 226-27
Alabama 102
Alamo 222, 223
Alarcon, Martin de 274, 276
Albany 250
Alcalde 76
Alexander, Rev. R. 94
Alexander VI, Pope 10
Alibama Indians 27
Alvarez, Señora 53
Ampudia 196
Anahuac 282
Anadarkos 27
Anaya, Don Gaspardo 205, 208, 274
Anderson county 38
Annexation of Texas 18, 79-86, 80, 81, 85, 194
Apacheria 224
Appalache 167
Arana, Catherine de 124
Arkansas river 17
Arkansas Territory 16
Arroyo Hondo 15
Association, the Texas State Historical 3-8, 71-74, 129-44, 229-32
Austin 3, 60, 92-5, 237, 240-2, 250, 251
Austin, John 283
Austin, Stephen F. 108, 110-117, 131
Aute 167
Ayemat, Caddi 32
Ayers, Mrs. 285
Ayllon, Lucas Vasquez de 10
Bancroft, H. H. 19, 166, 175, 179, 184, 217, 218, 221, 223, 275, 278
Bandelier, A. F. 179
Bardstown, Ky 47, 61
Barnard, Dr. 53
Barton Springs 93
Bastrop highway 92
Bastrop, Baron de 108
Batts, R. L. 87-91, 304
Bayou Rouge 146
Bayou Tensas 146
Bedaes 27
Belcher, Jeremiah 75
Bell, Judge J. H. 248
Bell, Peter Hansborough 313
Bell, William 119
Benavides, Father Alonzo de 121, 123, 125
Bernard Diary 131
Berry, John 119
Bevil's settlement 89
Bexar 5, 21, 22, 23, 96
Beyer, Geo. E. 177
Bienville 207, 267
Big Mush 41
Biloxi 207-8
Blount, E. A. 177
Boundary of Texas 12-20
Bowles, Chief 38-46
Bowles, John 42
Bradburn, Wm. P. 34
Bray, W. L. 177, 181
Brazoria 297
Brazoria, the schooner 283
Brazos, Department of 23
Brazos river 175
Briscoe, Mrs. A. J. 74
Broun, Wm. Leroy 265
Brown, John Henry 53, 204, 205-6, 266, 268, 269, 281
Brown, Milton 80
Brown, Samuel T. 57-8
Bryan, Guy M. 74, 93, 283
Buchanan county 89
Buchanan, Senator 100, 247
Buchel county 90
Bugbee, Lester G. 77, 108, 266
Burgess, Senator 247
Burleson, Colonel 34, 39, 42-44, 118
Burleson, Dr. R. C. 236, 237
Burleson county 87
Burnet, D. G. 42, 190
Burnet county 87
Caddo Grove and Peak 250
Caddos 27, 30
Cadillac, Lamothe 204, 207, 268, 272, 275
Cahill 285
Caldera, Mission of 226
Calhoun, Secretary 194
California 22, 41
Callieres, M. de 208, 210
Camp, J. L. 256
Candelaria, Mission of 223
Caney Creek 175
Carankawas 29
Carlton, Representative 250
Carrion, Sister Louisa 123
Carter, Colonel Jim 42
Cass, General 191
Castañeda, Pedro de 181
Castillo 171
Cat Spring 297, 298-9
Cedula relative to western boundary of Texas 14
Cenis Indians 271
Chambers, T. J. 94, 103
Champigny, M. de 208, 210
Charles V. 10
Charlevoix 214, 271, 305
Cherokees 16, 38-46
Cherokee county 38
Chilili 123
Clark, J. B. 264
Clendenin, W. W. 177
Coahuila 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 22
Cockerell, T. D. A. 181
Coles, John P. 108
Coleto, Battle of 57
College Hill 263
Colorado river 19, 109, 175, 176, 177, 182, 184, 186
Columbia municipality 89
Comanches 28, 31, 32
Congress Hall 93
Connor, H. 45
Cook, Colonel 264
Cook, Louis P. 106
Cooper, “Cow” 301
Cooper, Milton 237
Cooper, Oscar H. 237, 240-2, 249
Coopwood, B. 181
Corazones 174
Cordra, Interpreter 41
Corner, W. 47, 229
Coronado 10, 171, 181
Coronel, Francis 124
Cortez 10
Cos, General 19
Coulter, John M. 166, 180
Counties of Texas, Defunct 87-91
Coshattis 298
Coushattas 27
Cox, Miss Francis 191
Cox, John 191
Crain, Colonel 44
Crane, W. C. 237, 240-2
Crockett county 236
Crozat, Anthony 11, 204, 271, 274
Cuba 10
Cullen, E. W. 97
Cummins, Mr. 291-3
Cummins, James 108
Cummins Creek 302
Dabney, R. L. 232, 265
Dancy, Colonel 35
Darlington, J. W. 125
Daugherty, George 119
Daugherty, W. C. 119
D'Avenant, Dr. 207
Davis, Jefferson 196
Davis, Mrs. M. E. M. 305-6
Davis county 89
Dawson county 90
Declaration of Independence 47
Delaware Indians 38, 42
De Leon, Alonzo 217, 218
De Leon, Captain Francisco 27
De Leon, Ponce 10
Denman, Judge 229
De Onis 17
D'Eraque 213
De Soto, Ferdinand 10
Devine, Hon. T. J. 248, 255
DeWitt county 88
D'Iberville, Lemoine 29, 207, 214
Dillon, J. 207
Dog Shoot 38
Donelson, Major A. J. 79
Dorantes 181
Douglass, General Kelsey H. 43
Drake, J. V. 37
Dumont 271, 281
Dutton, C. E. 151
Duval, Burr H. 47, 49-50, 51
Duval, John Crittenden 2, 47-67
Duval, William P. 49-50, 61, 62
Dyas, Mr. 287
Early Times in Texas 54-56
Editors and Newspapers of Fayette county 34-37
Edwards, N. A. 248, 255
El Paso 181
Enduring Laws of the Republic of Texas 96-107
English, Bud 119
English, Captain Levi 118, 119
English, William 118
Escandon 13
Espinosa, Padre 280
Espiritu Santo bay 179
Espíritu Santo de Zuñiga 223
Expulsion of the Cherokees from East Texas 38-46
Fannin, Colonel 49, 54
``Far West,'' The 35
Fayette county 34-37
Fields 34
Flacco 127
Flores, Gasper 108
Florida 10, 11, 22
Flournoy, Col. George 252
Flournoy family 308-311
Foley county 90
Follett, A. G. 284
Forbes, Colonel 40
Ford, Col. John S. 74, 118, 230
Forest, Sieur de la 29
Fort Huillers 213
Fort St. Louis 216-17
Fowler, Rev. Littleton 94
France 11, 12, 13
Franks, Alford 119
Fredonian War 16
Freedman in the Legislature 125
Frio, Fight on the 118-20
Fulmore, Z. T. 9, 72, 76, 303
Galve 217
Galveston 250, 251
Galveston Island 168
Gammel Book Co. 304
Garay, Colonel 53
Garrison, George P. 71, 72, 76, 127
Gates, A. R. 36
Gayarré, Charles 269, 270, 278, 305
Georgens 301
Georgia Volunteers in Texas 47
Gila river 19
Gobin 212
Goliad Massacre, The Last Survivor of 47-67
Gonzales 47
Gonzales, Joseph 206
Gooch, Senator John Y. 100, 247
Gossler, Mr. 37
Gould, R. S. 265
Gran Quivira 123
Grapevine 250
Greer county 90
Groce, Jared E. 108
Guadalupe county 88
Guadalupe Hidalgo, Treaty of 18
Guadalupe Mission 223
Hadra, B. 264
Hamilton county 88
Harrisburg 298
Harrisburg county 89
Harwood, T. M. 258
Hastings, Judge 252, 255
Havard, Dr. 180, 181
Hazur, François 212
Hemphill, John 103
Henderson county 38
Henderson, J. Pinckney 104, 187-203
Herrick, President 181
Hidalgo, Father 271
Hill, L. E. 76
Hill, R. T. 177, 181
Historical Journal of the Establishment of the French in Louisiana 267, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276
Hoff 299
Holland, J. K. 92, 124
Holliday, John 57, 58
Hollingsworth, O. N. 242
Homestead Act 101, 102, 103, 104
Houston, City of 250
Houston, Senator 247
Houston, Sam 40, 45, 57, 79, 92, 93, 129, 184, 228
Howard, Volney E. 19
Hubbard, R. B. 248, 255
Humboldt's map 14, 16
Humphreys, M. W. 265
Hutcheson, Representative 246, 249
Indian Territory 16
Ionies 27
Islas Blancas 224
Jackson, General 86
Jallot 205
James, John G. 242
Jefferson, President 16
Johnston, Albert Sidney 42, 103
Jones, Anson 94
Jones, Mrs. Anson 74, 77, 133
Jones, John Rice 307
Jowers, W. G. W. 39, 41
Keechies 27
Kemp, L. M. 181
Kennedy 270
Kenney, M. M. 26, 121, 124, 227, 228, 285
Kickapoo Indians 38, 119, 298
Killoughs, The murder of the 38
Kioways 28
Kleberg, Rosa 297
Kleberg, Rudolph 297
Kokernot, Mr. 298
Kuykendall, J. H. 36
La Baca county 88
La Bahía, Municipality of 22
La Bahía del Espíritu Santo 13
Lacey, Martin 38, 39, 41
La Grange Intelligencer 34
La Grange Paper 36
Lamar, M. B. 18, 38, 39, 42, 46, 96, 234
Lamberville, Father de 213
Lampasas 250
Landrum, Colonel 42, 43, 46
Lanier, Sidney 204
La Salle 10, 11, 29, 216
Leona river 118
Le Page du Pratz 266, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276
Le Sueur, Sieur 211
Linares 273
Linez, Antonio 26
Lipans 27
Lipscomb, Arthur S. 103
Longley, J. P. 34
Looscan, Adèle B. 282
Lopez, Father 123
Lotbiniere, Chartier de 212
Louisiana 11, 12, 13, 15, 16
Lubbock, Governor 100
Lynch, Dr 282
Macart, et Peyre 212
Madison county 88
Maldonado, Don Rodrigo 181
Malhado 168
Mallet, J. W. 265
Mandan Indians 27
Manzanet, Father 29, 30, 121, 220, 226
Marest, P. Gabriel 213
Margry, Pierre 266
Martin, Senator, of Cooke 247
Martin, Senator, of Navarro 247
Martin, Henri 305
Martin, W. H. 93
Mascoutens 214
Matagorda 250
Matagorda bay 170
Medina river 14
Melish's map 20
McCaleb, W. F. 126, 216, 303
McClellan, W. B. 36
McLeod, Adjutant-General Hugh 42
McDorrett, Major-General A. 189
McFarland, Bates H. 166
McHenry, Lydia Ann 285, 286
McLeary, J. H. 263
Menard county 88
Mermet, Father 213, 214, 215
Mexia 237
Mexico 17, 18
Mina county 89
Mississippi river 10, 11, 17
Mística Ciudad de Dios 124
Mobile 207, 268, 269, 274
Moore's Store 298
Moros Creek 14
Mound Builders 146
Mound Prairie 146
Mount Bonnell 93
Mount Pleasant 146
Munson, M. S. 282
Nacogdoches 16, 22, 23
Nacogdoches Indians 27
Narvaez, Pamphilo de 10, 166, 167
Natchitoches 11, 12
Navasota county 89
Neches county 88
Neches river 27, 29, 42, 44, 221
Neutral Ground 15
Neville, C. A. 75
New Orleans 15, 47
Nickels, Mrs. Anna B. 181
Niles' Register 79
Noble, Judge 39
Norwood, T. L. 237
Notes and Fragments 125-8, 226-7, 303-6
Nuestra Señora de la Conception de Acuña 223
Nuestra Señora de la Luz 222, 223
Nuestra Señora de los Dolores 223
Nuevo Leon 13, 14
Nuevo Santander 13, 14, 19
Observer, The 37
O'Connor, D. M. 129, 312
Oden, B. 119
Old Mexican Fort at Velasco, The 282-4
Olivarez, Padre 276
Ortego, Father Diego de 123
Oviedo, Lope de 169
Oyster creek 175
Palestine 146
Palm, John 125
Panola county 88
Pánuco river 10, 12, 13
Parilla 224
Paschal county 88
Patton, Senator 247
Pease, Governor 100, 234
Pecos county 236
Pecos river 181
Peebles, Dr. 300
Pénicaut. 208, 267, 268, 272
Pennybacker, Mrs. 270
Perea, Father Stephen de. 122
Perdido river 11
Pettus, Colonel 300
Phillips, J. O. 76
Piedras, Colonel 68, 69
Pike's Chart 16
Pineda 10
Pitman, R. W. 242
Pontchartrain, Jerome. 208
Ponton, Miss Brownie. 166
Posey, Albert 36
Poste Juchereau 204
Prehistoric Races in Texas. 145-50
President's Address 3-8
Prickly pear region. 170
Publication Committee 73
Querétaro 280
Questions and Answers. 129, 228, 307-11
Quivira 226
Rabb, William 108
Ragsdale, Smith. 242, 248, 256
Raimond, Don Diegue. 272-3, 274, 276, 280
Raines, C. W. 96, 129, 131
Rains, Judge Emory. 105
Randolph, Judge 20
Reagan, John H. 38, 74
Recollections of Early Schools. 285-96
Redfield, Lieutenant 282
Red river. 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 21
Refugio 223
Reverchon, J. 177, 181
Ricaree Indians 27
Rio de las Palmas. 167
Rio Guadalupe. 13, 58
Rio Grande. 4, 12, 13, 17
Rio Nueces 14
Rivers, Flournoy 308, 309
Roberts, O. M. 3, 71, 74, 100, 145, 233
Robertson, Sterling C. 68, 70
Rogers, Dr. 44
Rogers, — 125
Romero, Padre Anastasio. 222
Rosario 223
Ross, Senator 247
Ross, John 40
Ross, Ex-Governor L. S. 232
Rote, W. C. 237
Runnels, Governor 234
Rusk, T. J. 19, 42, 43, 44, 103
Rusk county. 38
Russell, Capt. Wm. J. 283
Sabine river. 15, 221
Saint Denis, Sieur de. 11, 204-15, 266-81
Saint-Lambert 215
Saint-Pierre, Comtesse de. 212
Salas, Father John de. 123
Sam Houston Normal School. 237
San Antonio. 5, 9, 14, 19, 47, 49
San Antonio river. 14, 27, 182, 183, 221
San Antonio road. 11, 38, 39, 146
San Bernard river. 175
San Francisco de los Tejas. 218, 221, 223
San Ildefonso 223
San José de Aguayo. 223
San Juan Bautista. 268, 272, 274, 275, 276
San Juan Capistrano. 223
San Lorenzo 223
San Miguel 174
San Miguel de Cuellar. 223
San Patricio county. 90
San Saba Mission. 219, 223
San Saba river. 14
San Xavier 223
San Xavier de Nagera. 223
San Xavier river. 221
Santa Anna 49, 52
Santa Dorotea 14
Santa Fé. 19
Santa Fé county. 91
Santa Maria Mission. 218, 223
Scarff, William G. 76, 304
Schmitt, Edmond J. P. 121, 204, 266, 307
Scott, Captain 298
Scott, James 104
Seale, J. H. 177
Sears, Dr. B. 237
Sexton, F. B. 187
Shackelford, Dr. 53
Shannon, Mrs. Ellen A. 283
Shannon, J. T. 283
Shawnee Indians 38, 42
Shea, Dr. John G. 121, 123, 124, 177, 219, 224, 305
Shepard, Seth 264
Shropshire, B. 37
Simkins, E. J. 264
Sinks, Mrs. Julia Lee 34, 74, 127, 131
Sinks Scrap Book, The 76, 131-2
Smith, Dr. Ashbel 248, 255, 263
Smith, Buckingham 166
Smith, Capt. R. 46
Smith, W. P. 36
Smith, W. Roy 303
Smith county 38
Sneed, S. G. 242
Some Obscure Points in the Mission Period of Texas History 216-225
Some of My Early Experiences in Texas 297-302
Spain 10, 15, 16, 17
Starr, Dr. J. H. 248
Stewart, Senator 247
Stoehlke 302
Stone, T. H. 177
Storey, Lieutenant-Governor 100, 239
Stubbs, Senator J. B. 247, 262
Swain, Senator 262
Swearingen, Mrs 298
Taff, J. A. 181
Tallichet, H. 265
Tamaulipas 13, 19
Tampa Bay 10
Tawakanees 27
Taylor, General 196
Tenehaw county 89
Tennesseeans' Road 69
Teran 219
Terrell, A. W. 100, 246, 247, 249
Testimonio de un Parecer 271, 272, 273, 275, 279
Tevis, R. M. 37
Thomson's Clandestine Passage Around Nacogdoches 68-70
Thorp Springs 250
Thoughts on Economic History 151-65
Thrall, H. S. 204
Old Three Hundred, The 108-117
Throckmorton, Governor 235, 248
Tilson, Senator 247
Todd, Geo. T. 264
Tom Green county 236
Tonkaways 28, 29
Tonty, Henri de 208
Towash Indians 27
Townsend, C. H. Tyler 177, 181
Travis 48
Tribal Society among Texas Indians 26-30
Trimble, Leroy W. 118
Trimble, Sam W. 118
Trinity river 12, 27
True Issue, The 36
Tyler 250
Ugartechea, Col. D. 282
United States 13, 15, 16, 18, 19
University of Texas, Act setting apart land for 98
University of Texas, Establishment of 233-65
Cabeça de Vaca, Alvar Nuñez 166-86
Vandenberg, J. V. 177
Vandervoort, F. 177
Vansickle, B. A. 45
Van Zandt, Isaac 104, 194
Velasco 282
Velasquez 10
Viesca county 89
Villescas 205
Von Roeder, Louis 297, 300
Von Roeder, Ottilie 302
Von Roeder, Otto 301
Waco 236, 250
Waco county 88
Wacos 27
Waggener, Leslie 265
Walsh, Wm. C. 235, 262
Ward county 88
Old Washington, Reminiscences of 92-5
Webb, W. G. 35
Weeten 299
Wegefarth county 90
Wells, Reuben Barnard 294, 295, 296
Wharton, W. H. 97
White, Dabney 307
Wileox, Henry C. 283
Wilcox, Pamela 283
Wilhouses, Murder of the 38
Williams, Daniel 118
Williams, Frank 119
Williams, J. H. 118
Williams, L. P. 118
Williams, Col. Len 45
Williams, Judge O. W. 183, 186
Williams, Samuel M. 109
Williams' Ranch 250
Wilson, Rev. Mr. 94
Wilson Serap Book 76, 132-3
Winship, George Parker 182
Woods, W. F. 177
Wooldridge, A. P. 264
Wooten, Dudley G. 77, 304
Wooten, Thomas D. 255
Wonth county 91
Wynne, R. M. 100
Xumanas 123
Yatase Indians 267
Yoakum, H. 53, 204, 205, 219, 222, 266, 270, 271, 278
York, Captain 38
Zacatecas 280
Zuber, W. P. 68
2. Edmond J. P. Schmitt, Who was Juchereau de Saint-Denis? the Quarterly, January, 1898, pp. 204-206.
3. The authorship of the Journal historique de l'établissement des Français à la Louisiane is not known; Winsor's Narrative and Critical History of America, vol. V, p. 63, says that it “is founded largely upon the journals of Le Sueur and La Harpe, though it is evident that the author had other sources of information. Within its pages may be found a record of all the expeditions dispatched by the colony to the Red River region and to the coast of Texas. The work of compilation was done by a clear-headed methodical man.” A translation into English of a part of the work may be found in B. F. French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III. My references are all to this translation. The Journal is also published in full in vol. IV of Pierre Margry's Découvertes et établissements.
4. Historical Journal, in B. F. French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III, p. 18.
5. Ibid., p. 19.
6. Ibid., pp. 28; 30, 31; 32, 33.
7. Pénicaut was at the fort on the Mississippi where Saint-Denis commanded when orders came to abandon it; he was also one of the party who accompanied Saint-Denis on his first trip to Mexico. His Relation must be used with caution, as he was fond of embellishing it with a good story; dates, and such facts as he acquired at second-hand can not be trusted. The work has been published in volume V of Pierre Margry's Découvertes et établissements. Part of it has also been translated into English by B. F. French in his Historical Collections of Louisiana, second series; my references are to the original in Margry.
8. Pénicaut's Relation in Margry's Découvertes et établissements, vol. V, pp. 425, 431, 439, 459.
9. Ibid., pp. 459, 460.
10. Ibid., p. 460.
11. Ibid., pp. 476, 495. Pénicaut says Lamothe Cadillac arrived in 1712, an error of a year.
12. John Henry Brown, History of Texas, vol. I, pp. 13-18. It is interesting to speculate on the origin of this story. It is told by Charles Gayarré in his The Poetry, or the Romance of the History of Louisiana, and it is probably from this source that it has made its way into Texas history. Yoakum refers to both Gayarré and Le Page du Pratz, but he is indebted to the former for the greater and least trustworthy part of the narrative. Gayarré's The Poetry, or the Romance of the History of Louisiana must be carefully distinguished from his second and third series of lectures on the history of Louisiana. These works appeared originally as three distinct series of lectures, but, bound together, they make up that author's four-volume History of Louisiana. The first series of these lectures, The Poetry, or the Romance of the History of Louisiana, which contains the story of Saint-Denis substantially as related above, is avowedly unhistorical; Gayarré confesses (History of Louisiana, vol. II, Preface), that he was gamboling with his imagination in these lectures, and that he looked upon the series “at the time as nugae seriae, to which I attached no more importance than a child does to the soap bubbles which he puffs through the tube of the tiny reed, picked up by him for the amusement of the passing hour.” (History of Louisiana, vol. II, Preface.) He claims that the second series of lectures, Louisiana; Its History as a French Colony, is at least founded on facts; the third series, the last three volumes of the History of Louisiana, is reliable, and is the work on which the author's reputation rests.
I quote below two passages from Gayarré's version of this story in order to furnish an example of the heroic style of this part of his work, and at the same time afford, in a small way, a basis for comparison with Brown's account. Referring to Anaya's offer of release to Saint-Denis, Brown is content to say that the proposition was rejected “with scorn.” This is too tame for Gayarré, who puts it thus: How swelled the loyal heart of the captive at this base proposal! He vouchsafed no answer, but he gave his oppressor such a look as made him stagger back and retreat with as much precipitation as if the hand of immediate punishment had been lifted up against him. (Vol. I, p. 170.) Again, compare the reply of Maria to the proposal of Anaya as given above with the following as recorded by Gayarré: “Tell Anaya that I can not marry him as long as St. Denis lives, because St. Denis I love; and tell him that if St. Denis dies this little Moorish dagger, which was my mother's gift, shall be planted, either by myself or my agent's hand, in the middle of his dastardly heart, wherever he may be.” This was said with a gentle voice, with a calm mien, as if it had been an ordinary message, but with such a gleam in the eye as is nowhere to be seen except in Spain's or Arabia's daughters. The words, the look, and the tone, were minutely reported to Anaya, and he paused. (Vol. I, p. 171.) I hope that some one may be able to prove that our historians did not accept as serious such an account as this.
But where did Gayarré get the story? Very probably it is an elaboration of the account given by Pénicaut in his Relation, which I have already mentioned. Pénicaut, so far as I know, is the only contemporary authority that introduces the Governor of Coahuila into the narrative, or calls the commandant at San Juan by the name of Vilesca (not Villescas, as Gayarré has it, nor Villesecas as it occurs in Brown). Many of the particulars of the long story of Saint-Denis' adventures in Mexico told by Pénicaut are repeated by Gayarré in almost the same language and, I believe, are to be found nowhere else. Suffice it to say that Pénicaut is our least reliable authority for this portion of the story, and even he does not say a word about the rivalry between Saint-Denis and the Governor of Coahuila. That portion of the story, and consequently most of the romance, is probably an invention, pure and simple, of Charles Gayarré. That Brown drew his account from Gayarré and not from Pénicaut is evident from the fact that he copied the romantic details added by Gayarré, which do not appear in the Relation.
13. Yoakum, History of Texas, vol. I, pp. 47-50.
14. Kennedy, Texas, vol. I, pp. 218, 219.
15. Mrs. Pennybacker, A New History of Texas, revised edition, pp. 22-24 and note.
16. Dumont, a French officer, was stationed in Louisiana during at least the last years covered by this paper. The full title of his work is Mémoires historiques sur la Louisiane; I have had access only to the translation of a part of the work in vol. V of B. F. French's Historical Collections of Louisiana.
17. I have not had access to this work.
18. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, p. 178.
19. It has been printed in Spanish in Yoakum's History of Texas, vol. I, Appendix, pp. 381-402.
20. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, p. 10.
21. Ibid., p. 11.
22. Ibid., p. 11.
23. The Historical Journal (French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III, pp. 43, 46) says that Saint-Denis was sent to Texas to learn all he could concerning the Spanish missions in that country. Nothing is said about trade. After satisfying himself that there were no Spaniards among any of the tribes that lay between the French settlements and the Assinaïs, he returned to the Natchez on the Mississippi. Five Canadians joined him, and he again entered Texas. At the village of the Assinaïs his party was increased by the addition of twenty Indians of that tribe, who accompanied him to San Juan.
According to the Testimonio de un Parecer (Yoakum, vol. I, Appendix, p. 390), Saint-Denis was sent to Texas to purchase live stock from the missions which he expected to find somewhere in that country. Disappointed in this, he sent back most of his men and continued the journey to San Juan with three companions.
Pénicaut (in Margry's Découvertes et établissements, vol. V, pp. 494-500), who was one of the party, states that Saint-Denis was engaged by Lamothe Cadillac to go to Mexico and attempt to open commercial relations with the Spanish; he set out with a quantity of goods and twenty-two men; a halt was made among the Natchitoches and ten men were left to hold a post established there; the Assinaïs furnished guides and after nearly two months of travel from Natchitoches, the party reached San Juan.
According to the statement made by Saint-Denis on his arrival at San Juan, the substance of which is given by Margry (Découvertes et établissements, vol. VI, p. 218), twenty-one of his men returned to Mobile from the Assinaïs, and he was attended on the rest of his journey by only three Frenchmen and twenty-five Indians.
We learn from an extract from a letter written by Lamothe Cadillac (Margry, Découvertes et établissements, vol. VI, p. 197) that Saint-Denis told the viceroy “conformably with his instructions that his governor had sent him with twenty-five men to Father Hidalgo” to buy cattle, and, not finding the padre, he had continued his journey to Mexico.
Le Page du Pratz is, I think, the only authority who mentions the letter from Hidalgo to the governor of Louisiana. Le Page du Pratz probably reflects Saint-Denis' own version of the story, so we should be cautious about accepting the motives attributed to Lamothe Cadillac, with whom Saint-Denis was not always in harmony.
24. Not Villescas or Villesecas, according to the common story.
25. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, pp. 12, 13.
26. Ibid., p. 14. The Historical Journal (French's Historical Collections of Louisiana. vol. III, p. 46) and the Testimonio de un Parecer (Yoakum, vol. I, p. 391) say that this lady was the niece of the commandant. Brown (History of Texas, vol. I, p. 13) calls her the commandant's daughter.
27. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, pp. 14, 15. The Testimonio de un Parecer (Yoakum, vol. I, p. 391) says nothing of the promises made to Saint-Denis.
28. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, pp. 16, 17.
29. Historical Journal (French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III, p. 47.)
30. Martin de Alarcon, not Gaspardo de Anaya, was governor of Coahuila during the years covered by this story. (Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, vol. I, p. 604.)
31. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, pp. 17, 18. The amount of goods and the dates are taken from the Historical Journal (French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III, p. 47).
32. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, p. 19.
Saint-Denis opposed the organization of this company, particularly when he learned that some of its members proposed to make the trip with him. He insisted that these members be instructed to make it appear that they were his employees and that the goods belonged to him alone. The Historical Journal does not mention this.
33. Testimonio de un Parecer, Yoakum, vol. I, p. 391.
34. Letter from Lamothe Cadillac in Margry's Découvertes et établissements, vol. VI, p. 197.
35. North Mexican States and Texas, vol. I, p. 611.
36. The Historical Journal, (French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III, p. 49) states that Saint-Denis reached the presidio in advance of the company, lost his goods by seizure, and had already set out for Mexico when the rest of the party arrived. The dates in the various accounts do not agree.
37. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, p. 19. The Historical Journal and the Testimonio de un Parecer do not mention these details.
38. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, p. 20.
39. Historical Journal, in French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. III, p. 63. Of course, even if the goods belonged wholly to Saint-Denis, their introduction would still be illegal, unless he was really removing, with permission, to enter Spanish service.
40. According to the Historical Journal, he obtained the release of his goods, but lost the proceeds through the faithlessness of a friend, who squandered the money entrusted to him.
41. Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, vol. I, pp. 20, 21. The Historical Journal says he was aided in making his escape by the relatives of his wife. There is no foundation for the story that his wife accompanied him from San Juan to Louisiana. She was sent to him later.
42. Yoakum, History of Texas, vol. I, pp. 47-52; 65-66. Mrs. Pennybacker (A New History of Texas, Revised Edition, p. 24) seems to arrive at the same conclusion.
43. H. H. Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, vol. I, pp. 609-614.
44. Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, vol. I, p. 613. 1789 is evidently a misprint for 1689.
45. History of Louisiana, translated from the Historical Memoirs of M. Dumont, in B. F. French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, vol. V, pp. 97, 98.
46. John Henry Brown, History of Texas, vol. I, pp. 18, 19. Who was the “historian of the time” referred to by Brown? Certainly it was not one of the contemporary writers whose journals have been published in French's Historical Collections of Louisiana, or in Margry's Découvertes et établissements. Le Page du Pratz gives substantially the same version as Dumont. Bancroft, who was familiar with the Spanish sources, evidently knew nothing of the version given by Brown, or else regarded it as untrue. It is not found in Gayarré or Yoakum. Rev. Edmond J. P. Schmitt (Who was Juchereau de Saint Denis? the Quarterly, January, 1898, p. 206) calls attention to this error of Brown's, and mentions a letter that was written by Saint-Denis in 1735, some six years after the above described attack on Natchitoches.
How to cite:
"Issue View", Volume 001, Number 4, Southwestern Historical Quarterly Online. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/publications/journals/shq/online/v001/n4/issue.html
[Accessed Mon Nov 23 1:29:29 CST 2009]
