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 F