THE QUARTERLY OF THE TEXAS STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION
VOLUME VII. JULY, 1903, TO APRIL, 1904.
PUBLICATION COMMITTEE. John H. Reagan, Z. T. Fulmore, C. W. Raines, George P. Garrison, Mrs. Bride Neill Taylor EDITOR. George P. Garrison. AUSTIN, TEXAS: PUBLISHED BY THE ASSOCIATION. 1904.The Texas State Historical Association.
Organized March 2, 1897.
PRESIDENT.
John H. Reagan.
VICE-PRESIDENTS.
D. F. Houston, F. R. Lubbock,
Mrs. Julia Lee Sinks, T. S. Miller.
RECORDING SECRETARY AND LIBRARIAN.
George P. Garrison.
CORRESPONDING SECRETARY AND TREASURER.
Eugene C. Barker.
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.
Mrs. Dora Fowler Arthur, George P. Garrison,
W. J. Battle, F. R. Lubbock,
R. L. Batts, T. S. Miller,
Eugene C. Barker, C. W. Raines,
Beauregard Bryan, John H. Reagan,
D. F. Houston, Mrs. Julia Lee Sinks,
Z. T. Fulmore, Mrs. Bride Neill Taylor,
Dudley G. Wooten.
CONTENTS.
NUMBER 1; JULY, 1903.
The Mejía Expedition F. H. Turner 1
Reminiscences of Early Texans, III J. H. Kuykendall 29
Mrs. Mary Jane Briscoe Mrs. Adele B. Looscan. 65
Letter From Sam Houston 72
Book Reviews and Notices 74
Notes and Fragments 81
Affairs of the Association 89
NUMBER 2; OCTOBER, 1903.
The Cherokee Indians in Texas Ernest William Winkler. 95
Miles Squier Bennett Mrs. Adele B. Looscan 167
Book Reviews and Notices 169
Notes and Fragments 172
Queries and Answers 175
Affairs of the Association 176
NUMBER 3; JANUARY, 1904.
Adjustment of the Texas Boundary in 1850 W. J. Spillman 177
Some Materials for Southwestern History in the Archivo General de Mexico Herbert Eugene Bolton. 196
The Reminiscences of Mrs. Dilue Harris, III 214
Sketch of the Texas Navy Geo. F. Fuller 223
Book Reviews and Notices 235
Notes and Fragments 242
NUMBER 4; APRIL, 1904.
The Journal of the Permanent Council (October 11-27, 1835) Edited by Eugene C. Barker. 250
The First Railroad in Texas P. Briscoe 279
Journal of Stephen F. Austin on his First Trip to Texas, 1821 287
Concerning Philip Nolan 308
Notes and Fragments 318
Book Reviews and Notices 330
Affairs of the Association 331
Vol. VII. JULY, 1903. No. 1.
The publication committee and the editor disclaim responsibility for views expressed by contributors to the Quarterly.
The Mejía Expedition extended over a period of not more than thirty or forty days during the summer months of 1832. However, in the consideration of this important affair, it will be necessary not only to relate the happenings during the course of it, but also to take note of the preceding incidents in Mexico which constituted the occasion. Nor would the subject be complete without a statement of the purpose for which Mejía left Tampico, and without an account of the results which he accomplished. Hence, my object will be to set forth as thorough and exhaustive an explanation of all these matters as, within the limits of this paper, is possible.
The causes, which in the end brought about the Plan of Vera Cruz and the Mejía Expedition, began operating, it may be said, precisely on the first day of January, 1830. On that day, Bustamante, the vice-president of the Mexican Republic, assumed executive control, and a short time afterwards, having selected his ministry, he inaugurated one of the most despotic administrations that Mexico has ever seen. Congress was forced to legalize the revolution by which he had gained supreme sovereignty over the state. The power thus attained was used to persecute the adherents of the “yorkino or popular party,” to abridge the freedom of the press, and to contaminate the courts of justice and equity. Under such circumstances the people became restless, and frequent insurrections broke out in various parts of the federation which were as often crushed by the arms of Bustamante. 1
The Houses, during the session of 1831-1832, were the mere tools of Bustamante and his cabinet. They even went so far as to establish “special courts to terrorize those discontented with the existing order of things, giving the government almost unlimited powers, decreeing proscriptions, and rewarding crime. It [the Congress] permitted the executive, without protest, to modify or construe the laws at will.” 2
Such was the status of the Mexican government when the command stationed at Vera Cruz, unable longer to stand the arbitrary acts of the existing government, published the Plan of Vera Cruz, on the night of January 2, 1832. On the invitation of Ciriaco Vasquez, commandant general of Vera Cruz, the officers of that force met, and, fearing that civil war was imminent and desiring to avoid this grave calamity, adopted the following resolutions, which were collectively known as the Plan of Vera Cruz:—
Art. 1.“The garrison of Vera Cruz renews the declarations made by the plan of Jalapa, to resolutely sustain its oath to preserve the federal constitution and the laws.
Art. 2.“It beseeches the vice-president to dismiss the ministry, whom public opinion accuses of promoting and protecting centralism, and of tolerating abuses against civil liberty and individual rights.
Art. 3.“Two officers of this garrison will be commissioned to present this proclamation to General Don Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, and to petition his honor to accept it and condescend to come to this place and take command of the troops.
Art. 4.“In such case, the garrison will abstain from directing any procedure and from taking final steps in this affair, since General Santa Anna will send this act, and the declarations which he judges convenient, to the Vice-President and to the other authorities of the federation and the states, dictating the other measures which may be opportune for carrying out the noble aims of those who may join us.” 3
Santa Anna was not slow to recognize his constituents in Vera Cruz, and on the afternoon of the 3d he arrived in that city, where he “was received with shouts by the troops of the garrison and a portion of the people.” 4
The Plan of Vera Cruz and its adoption by Santa Anna aroused no little uneasiness at the capital, and when the general addressed a communication to Bustamante expressing his desire to see the peaceable dissolution of the cabinet, the crisis came. The ministers surrendered their portfolios, but congress would not countenance their resignations. Hence, the only alternative left to the government was to attempt to stifle the incipient rebellion. This it did, and the opposition met with several reverses during the months of January and February, 1832. 5
The Mexican nation at first exhibited some hesitancy in acquiescing in the “plan,” but with the beginning of spring the standard of insurrection was floated at various places. Fernandez, the ex-governor of Tamaulipas, declared his adhesion to the party at Vera Cruz. General Moctezuma, the commandant at Tampico, “coinciding with this step, issued a proclamation in the city of Tampico on the 20th [March], placing himself at the disposal of General Santa Anna.” 6
A struggle for supremacy at once began in the quarter where the revolutionary ideas had gained a fast hold between the followers of absolutism on the one hand and the supporters of liberalism on the other. Moctezuma was besieged by General Mier y Terán, the principal commandant of the Eastern States. Later Terán drew his battalions away, and began recruiting and strengthening his lines. This threatening attitude led the commandant of Tampico to believe that Terán was preparing for a second and fiercer attack on his charge.
The foregoing summary furnishes an outline of Mexican history from 1830 to 1832, and also gives the cause for the declaration of the plan of Vera Cruz and, hence, the ultimate reason, as we shall see forthwith, for the Mejía expedition. This brings us to the next phase of our subject, which is the true starting point of this paper.
Col. José Antonio Mejía, of the Mexican army, had, some time during the spring of 1832, placed himself and his entire force under Moctezuma's orders. Laboring under the impression that Tampico would be assailed, as noted above, General Moctezuma ordered this officer to sail against Soto la Marina and Matamoros, which strongholds were defended by the “ministerial” troops, in order to attract Terán's attention thither. 7 In accordance with these instructions, Mejía passed out of the harbor of Tampico on the 22d of June, 1832, 8 with a fleet “composed of a brig, two schooners, and two other small ships,” 9 having on board some three hundred soldiers. 10 Mejía's first point of assault was Soto la Marina, but Sergeant Major Micheltorena had thrown up fortifications along the strand, and, in this way, baffled the commander of the expedition. Thus the squadron was compelled to proceed to Matamoros, or rather, Brazos de Santiago, 11 where it anchored at four o'clock in the afternoon, June 26, 1832. 12 Lieut. Col. Alexander Yhari, with a considerable number of men prepared to oppose the debarkation of the Santa Anna soldiers, “but the brave chief of the detachment of the Liberating Army,” says the Boletín, “advanced in a pilot boat, took the schooner Juanita, anchored within Pistol shot of the point occupied by Yhari, and covered the landing of his troops from the launches. As soon as the landing was effected, Yhari was invited to pronounce for Santa Anna, which he refused to do, but his troops immediately proclaimed the plan of the free, and with enthusiasm joined their Standard.” 13 “Immediately after taking possession of the Brazos Santiago,” continues the Boletín, “a party of one hundred infantry with two pieces of artillery, marched to Boca Chica, where they raised an intrenchment. 14 On the 27th, the force was augmented by a number of the military and citizens who hastened with delight to sustain the cause of the free, or perish in the attempt.
“On the 28th a party of 54 or 60 cavalry were discovered approaching, 15 and it was the desire of the commander in chief not to injure them, altho' he knew the obstinacy of the officer, Don Ignacio Rodriguez, who commanded them and who retired with his troops and occupied a position on the main road.” Lieutenant Gonzales then took the leadership of Rodriguez' men and “joined the lines of Colonel Mejía. At the same time a party of 40 infantry of the 11th battalion also joined Colonel Mejía's division.” 16
With his original companies and with those of the Bustamante party who had declared for Santa Anna, Mejía made his triumphal entry into Matamoros, June 29, without any resistance, 17 either on the side of the citizens, or on that of the hostile soldiery. The Boletín notes that “Colonel Mejía's division of the liberating army is therefore in full possession of this town, increased by a great number who have joined it. The utmost tranquillity prevails; the inhabitants are tranquil, because they now see the falsehood of what has been stated by the enemies of the cause which was proclaimed by the heroic conqueror of Tampico, Genl. Antonio Lopez de Santa Ann.” 18
Prior to Mejía's capture of Matamoros, Colonel José Mariano Guerra, the “ministerial” commandant of that place, retired to San Fernando de Presas with about seventy of his presidials. 19 Here Guerra obstinately remained, drilling and equipping his men, and preparing to defend himself to the last extremity should he be attacked by Santa Anna's adherents. Nor at first would he consent to an interview with Mejía, although the latter expressed this desire time and again. Finally, however, on July 4, Guerra received an express from Colonel Mejía, stating that the Texas colonists had stormed Fort Velasco, and that Colonel Ugartechea had been forced to capitulate. Moreover, Mejía added that they should drop their enmity for the present and coöperate to save Texas for the Mexican confederation. 20 On the following day, July 5, the “ministerial” commandant, who had been expecting Col. Paredes y Arrillaga to come to his aid with three hundred men, was informed that, on account of Terán's death, he (Paredes) could not move his division until new orders were transmitted from Commandant Don Ignacio Mora. Then Guerra made the best of his opportunities by signifying his acquiescence in Mejía's proposed meeting. Thus at 4:30 P. M., July 6, the two colonels met at Palo Blanco and agreed to a convention, which may be summarized as follows:
The compact recounted that Colonel Mejía, being in possession of Matamoros and consequently of all branches of the administration, had intercepted various letters from Fort Velasco and other Texas points addressed to the commandant of that place, and that by these communications he had been informed that the Texas colonies were in rebellion and threatened to attack Anahuac and Velasco. This attitude of the Anglo-Americans endangered the integrity of the Mexican territory, and hence it was highly essential that the Mexican forces should attempt to defend the colonies. Mejía had therefore desired, at any rate, to impart the news of the recent events in Texas to Guerra, and with this aim in view he had invited the latter to an interview.
By the articles which succeeded this review of the late occurrences it was agreed (Art. 1) that Mejía should proceed to Texas for the purpose of succoring the Mexican military, and preserving the integrity of the national domain. Moreover, (Art. 2) Guerra pledged himself to aid Mejía in this undertaking with all his resources and to force all the authorities of Matamoros to do likewise. Mejía promised (Art. 3) to leave immediately for the Texas ports. It was specified (Art. 4) that there should be an armistice between the contending partisans. Further, (Art. 5) there was a provision that the persons, property, and rights of the citizens of Matamoros and its environs, whether of one party or the other, should be equally guaranteed and respected. Again (Art. 6), should Mejía see fit to put into the Brazo on his return from the colonies, it was declared that his right to do so would not be questioned, and that Guerra should give him any assistance needed. Finally, (Art. 7) it was said that the two colonels would decide as to what should de done with the prisoners et cetera in Matamoros which had been seized by Mejía. 21
For the better understanding of the expedition which followed it will be worth while to depart from the thread of the story at this point, and take cognizance of the trend of events in Texas for the two years previous to 1832.
Anglo-Americans from the United States were invited by the Mexican colonization laws to come to a land blessed with all human requirements, rich and free, the beautiful province of Texas. They from the North were offered broad domains and equal rights with the native Mexicans, if they would swear allegiance to the flag of their benefactor, and accept, or adhere to, the Catholic creed. Many of our ancestors took advantage of this Latin liberality, and during the years from 1825 to 1830 pioneers flocked to the future “Lone Star State.”
At length the Mexican government determined to check the influx of these immigrants into Texas. The effort was made in the enactment by the general Mexican congress of the decree of April 6, 1830. The motive for the passage of this decree was that the Mexicans were jealous of the growing power and influence of the Texas colonists, and they feared that the Texans would join hands with their countrymen in the United States with the object of annexing Texas to the republic of the North. Hence, it was extremely necessary that Texas should be severed entirely from Northern tutelage, and such a law as that of April 6, 1830, was thought to be the only true way to attain the cherished end. Article eleven of this act was intended to prevent further settlement within the Texas borders by immigrants from the United States. Perhaps this section would not have had its immense significance to the colonists, if the law had not at the same time provided the means of its enforcement. By article four the Mexican executive was empowered to seize those lands which he might deem suitable for fortifications and arsenals. Moreover, in clause fourteen, the president was given leave to expend as much as five hundred thousand dollars in the construction of forts and posts along the Texas frontiers. 22
Soon after the decree of April 6 was published, in accordance with the articles cited above, General Mier y Terán, the principal commandant of the Eastern States, erected fortresses at Anahuac, Velasco, Nacogdoches, Tenoxtitlán, and elsewhere, and garrisoned them with the lowest types of Mexican soldiery under the command, in some instances, of exceedingly insolent officers. For at least two years the colonists lived under the hated rule of this despotic Mexican military, which set at naught alike the civil jurisdiction of the State of Coahuila and Texas and the individual rights of the citizens. The Texans were seriously offended by the conduct of the authorities, and they accordingly enumerated their grievances as follows:
1.“Don José Francisco Madero was appointed, in 1832, by Coahuila-Texas its commissioner to survey the lands in the District of Nacogdoches, east of the San Jacinto, and to grant landtitles to the inhabitants of that community. He arrived in Jan., 1831, and had progressed some with his duties, when he and his surveyor, José Maria Carbajal, were arrested by the commandant of Anahuac, J. D. Bradburn, because the aforesaid surveyors were operating in opposition to the edict of April 6, 1830.
2.“On Dec. 10, 1831, Bradburn annulled the Ayuntamiento of Liberty, legally established by Madero, and set up one of his own at Anahuac.
3.“Bradburn appropriated lands to his especial benefit without having the proper authority for so doing.
4.“This same officer prohibited the holding of an election for choosing the Alcalde of Liberty and the members of the Ayuntamiento, and threatened the people with military force if they attempted this.
5.“Peaceable and quiet citizens were taken into custody, because they expressed their opinions concerning Bradburn's illegal acts.
6.“Bradburn had induced servants to quit their masters, offering them protection, and, when called upon by the owners to deliver them up, had enlisted them into his rank and file.
7.“In the month of May, 1832, seven of the leading citizens were apprehended by Bradburn, who, on being asked to give the prisoners over to the civil magistrates, declared that he would send all of them to Mexico to be tried by a Military Tribunal.” 23
This last arbitrary step brought the matter to a point and the wronged colonists about Bradburn's ears. Feeling that they had been unjustly abused the residents of this province were not long in coming to the conclusion that the best and only way to procure their rights and liberties was by force of arms. About the first of June, 1832, Anahuac was therefore assailed by a party of Anglo-Americans. Some days later the colonists stirred up trouble with Colonel Ugartechea, at Fort Velasco, because he would not permit the passage of the schooner Brazoria, which had on board some cannon that the insurgents were anxious to use in the reduction of Anahuac. After a battle of eleven hours, Commandant Ugartechea ran up the white flag. Immediately thereafter he wrote to Guerra concerning his plight, and it was these letters which Mejía intercepted, which he transmitted to Guerra on July 4, and which brought about the interview between the two on July 6, 1832. 24
However, before returning to Matamoros and Mejía, attention must be called to the fact that not all of Texas even tacitly sanctioned the events at Anahuac and Velasco. Indeed, so far were they from being enthusiastic over the deeds of their fellow-citizens, that the people of San Felipe and Matagorda cried out in a way that was very injurious to the cause of the insurgents.
The action taken by the townsmen of San Felipe clearly shows the existence of a conservative spirit. Acquainting themselves with the character of the late disturbances and the critical situation in Austin's colony, the ayuntamiento, together with seventy representative residents of San Felipe, assembled on June 25, 1832, and in a series of resolutions 25 they declared themselves, in a most decided fashion, as opposed to the “precipitate steps recently taken at Anahuac and Brazoria.” 26 The meeting prayed that all who had become entangled in the troubles should return to their homes, and that an investigation should be made of the conduct of Bradburn. In the sixth resolution it is stated that the convention would resent any attempts against the government to which all had sworn obedience, and which had heaped upon them with a beneficent and liberal hand favors and acts of kindness. The inhabitants, moreover, expressed their desire of coöperating with the political chief in reëstablishing order and tranquillity in their department. Finally, the colonists invited the districts of the municipality of San Felipe to join with them.
Again, on June 30, came an urgent appeal from the “peace party” to the colonists to save their adopted country from its impending ruin. In an address of the given date from the ayuntamiento of San Felipe to the public, that body exhorted all true men to support the Mexican laws and the constitution. “Act now in your movements promptly and rapidly,” wrote the council, “and unite heartily with us in order to save the colony and other fellow-countrymen from the destruction which threatens them, so that our sons in future centuries may have the happiness of counting their ancestors as among the number of those who, in the year 1832, saved the municipality of the town of San Felipe from the terrible effects of anarchy and confusion, and the consequent annihilation with which these two menaced it.” 27
In pursuance of the San Felipe declarations, which besought the aid of the districts of the municipality of San Felipe, the residents of Matagorda convened on July 2, 1832, and proclaimed themselves in favor of the government and the constitution of the United Mexican States. They deeply deplored the untimely affairs at Anahuac and Brazoria, and promised the political chief their moral support in the forthcoming investigation of these occurrences. 28
With this evidence that there was, previous to Mejía's coming, a sharply defined division in political sentiment in Texas, the reader is prepared to follow the narrative of the expedition from Matamoros.
After the conference with Guerra, Colonel Mejía returned from Palo Blanco to Matamoros, and made preparations to reëmbark his troops. On the 8th of July he left the latter place and marched toward Brazos Santiago with his whole force, now composed of about four hundred soldiers. The embarkation took place on the 10th, and Filisola says that the expedition sailed on that day to Tampico, it being Mejía's aim to rejoin there the cavalry which he had dispatched overland. 29 Suarez y Navarro gives the same time for the departure of Mejía from Brazo. He writes that “having provided all that was necessary, he set sail on the 10th of July for Tampico, with the object of joining General Moctezuma,” but as the general had gone to San Luis, Mejía failed to see him. 30 Austin wrote from Matamoros on the 9th that Mejía would leave on the 10th, but for Texas. 31
There is, however, sufficient evidence to prove that Mejía's squadron quitted Brazos Santiago on July 14, 1832. It is a well-established fact that the expedition arrived off the mouth of the Brazos River on the 16th, and Mejía's own words show that he must have gone out from the Brazo July 4, late in the evening. He tells us: “I sailed from Matamoros with the Fleet and forces under my command, and in forty hours anchored off the Bar of this river.” 32
If, then, Mejía did start to Texas on July 14th, and there seems no way of denying it, we must, nevertheless, attempt to explain the date of the 10th of July, as the time of his sailing. The only solution for the problem is that he left Brazos Santiago twice—once on the 10th, and again on the 14th. As Suarez y Navarro says, Mejía went to Tampico on the 10th, and, not finding Moctezuma there, he immediately came back to the Brazo. Then on the 14th he passed out of the Matamoros port for the second time, and made his way to Texas. 33
Prior, however, to the Texas expedition, Mejía and Guerra, had urged Col. S. F. Austin, who was at Matamoros on his way home from the State legislature, to accompany the troops to Texas. This Austin consented to do, in order that he might contribute whatever service he could to his adopted country. He says in a letter to Colonel Mejía:—“I must say I am satisfied that there are no views among the colonists of Texas which endanger the integrity of the Mexican territory, and that the disturbances there have resulted from the arbitrary acts of the Military officials of the General Government. . . . Notwithstanding, I believe it of the highest importance to go to Texas for the purpose of calming the tumults and reëstablishing harmony.” 34
Austin's presence on the expedition perhaps obviated much trouble and many inconveniences between Mejía and the colonists, and for this reason it has been considered essential to dwell at some length upon his connection with the Texas voyage.
At six o'clock in the afternoon of July 16, the flotilla reached the mouth of the Brazos River, and, after having exchanged communications with John Austin, the second alcalde, Mejía and Austin proceeded to Brazoria. 35 The people of the precinct had previously appointed a deputation to wait upon the two gentlemen, and “on their arrival on the east bank of the Brazos, they were saluted with the firing of 3 cannon,—and after partaking of some refreshments, at Major Brigham's, crossed the river, at the bank of which they were received by the committee and by two of the signers of the Turtle Bayou resolutions 36 who were present (Capt. Wiley Martin, and Luke Lessasier),—conducted to a pavillion erected for the purpose, and saluted by one gun.” Speeches followed. “After which a further salute of 21 guns, a feu de joy, from one of the companies who were in the action at Fort Velasco, were fired, when the Colonels were escorted to the residence of John Austin Esq. 2nd Alcalde, by a numerous body of our citizens who, on returning to town, manifested their joyful feelings by illuminations, bon-fires, firing of cannon, &c, all the night.” 37
The next day at three o'clock a meeting of the townsmen of Brazoria was held for the purpose of explaining the causes of the “late disturbances” in Texas. The remaining days of the week were spent in gigantic preparations for a “public dinner and ball” to the eminent visitors. We are told that “last evening (Sunday, July 22) a splendid dinner and ball were given at Brazoria in celebration of the constitution, and in honor of its distinguished advocate, Genl. Santa Anna; at which Col. José Antonio Mexia, and Col. S. F. Austin, were invited guests.
“The dinner party was such as an occasion of patriotic rejoicing should always produce—it was large, cheerful, and convivial; and full of republican feeling and generous enthusiasm.” Toasts to the health of General Santa Anna, to the separation of Coahuila and Texas, and sundry others were heartily responded to by all. 38
Colonel Mejía had remained in Brazoria for six days and had been convinced, we may be sure, of the loyalty of the colonists in that section, when he decided to continue his expedition to Galveston with the object of bringing the Anahuac garrison over to his standard. Thus “on the afternoon of the 23rd Col. Mexia, having regulated the custom-house department, and other public matters, at Brazoria, in the most satisfactory and harmonious manner, departed to embark for Galveston and Anahuac”. 39 Granting that the ships did not leave Velasco before the morning of the 24th—for some time must be allowed for the trip from Brazoria down and for the arrangements to make sail—the conclusion is reached that on that same day, the 24th, Mejía arrived in Galveston Bay. 40 On crossing the bar, his men described two or three vessels which were coming out, bearing the troops formerly stationed at Anahuac, under the command of Sergeant Major Felix Subarán. Mejía was informed that the soldiers under Subarán had joined the republiccan party and were now on their way to swell the ranks of Santa Anna. Learning this he started on his return to Tampico, “without having heard the least report from the men who were going out from Galveston, or offering them convoy, much less money”. 41
It is probable that Mejía, on his return journey, stopped for a short period at Matamoros, as he had reserved the right to do so in the compact of July 6, and, as Matamoros was in his direct route, he may have called there for supplies, etc. 42 Thence he went direct to Tampico, where he arrived on the 28th of July. The exact date, however, is not of especial importance, since his commission was really finished, with the exceptions which will soon be taken up, when he left Galveston Bay.
The work of the Mejía expedition was not altogether completed by the adhesion of the municipality of Brazoria and the companies of the Anahuac stronghold. On the contrary, Piedras at Nacogdoches still maintained his power, and sundry districts had neither declared for nor against the plan of Vera Cruz. One of the colonists wrote that “Col. Mexia had not marched on Nachidoch on account of the Scarcity of provisions nor had he heard from them. He however left if with the Americans to send Col. Piedras on to the westward a prisoner, to take him without bloodshed if possible, if not, to use force”. 43 Thus the Texans fell heir to the unfinished part of Mejía's mission, and it devolved upon them to oust Piedras and to take such further action relative to the Plan as best suited their ideas and wishes. This phase of the subject—the aftermath of the expedition—will be discussed in full under the next sub-head, as will also the various steps taken by the colonists anent the Plan before Mejía's expedition to Texas.
When the Texans found themselves before Anahuac in June, 1832, bearing arms and endeavoring to persuade Colonel Bradburn to respect their liberties and think as they did along certain American lines, they appear to have suddenly suspected that Mexico would deem their deeds rebellious. The colonists well knew what they were battling for, but the question was, could the Mexican nation understand the meaning and character of their grievances, or would it not rather be inclined to misinterpret their operations and attribute to them a great deal more significance than was their due? Now there were two parties in Mexico—one headed by Bustamante and upholding absolute principles, the other, with Santa Anna as the nucleus, supporting “democratic-republican-federal” ideas. Hence, the colonists had two chances of putting themselves in the right with part of the Mexicans at least by sanctioning the “platform” of either side. Being Americans it was the most natural, and in fact the only, measure the “rebels” could take, to declare for Santa Anna—the defender of republican principles. Therefore, although the impression survives that the men congregated around Anahuac accepted the Plan of Vera Cruz simply as a pretext for having attacked that place, there seems no reason to doubt that, so far as they were inclined to take part in national politics at all, they would have preferred the party of Santa Anna to that of Bustamante.
Again, the circumstances surrounding the case favored the Texans. The Anahuac garrison belonged to the “ministerial,” or Bustamante, faction; and, if the colonists were fighting against the adherents of this faction, it would, in the nature of things, be out of place for them to be attached to the same party. Hence, they adhered to the other. But I repeat that they must have been pleased to sustain political theories similar to those under which they had been reared.
On June 13, 1832, the “farmers” in their camp at Turtle Bayou, six miles north of Anahuac, concurred in what were named “the Turtle Bayou Resolutions,” in favor of the plan of Vera Cruz. These resolutions are as follows:
“Resolved—That we view with feelings of the deepest regret, the manner in which the government of the Republic of Mexico is administered by the present dynasty. The repeated violations of the Constitution; the total disregard of the laws; the entire prostration of the civil power; 44 are grievances of such a character, as to arouse the feelings of every freeman, and impel him to resistance!
“Resolved—That we view with feelings of the deepest interest, and solicitude, the firm and manly resistance which is made by those Patriots under the highly talented and distinguished chieftain Santa Anna, to the numerous encroachments and infractions which have been made, by the present Administration, upon the Laws and Constitution of our beloved and adopted country.
“Resolved—That as freemen devoted to a correct interpretation and enforcement of the constitution and laws, according to their true spirit, we pledge our lives and fortunes, in support of the same, and of those distinguished leaders who are now so gallantly fighting in defense of civil Liberty.
“Resolved—That all the people of Texas, be invited to coöperate with us, in support of the principles incorporated in the foregoing resolutions.” 45
These resolutions were signed by Wiley Martin, John Austin, L. Lesassier, W. H. Jack, H. B. Johnson, and R. M. Williamson.
The reception of the plan by the Texans in general will now be described. The different municipalities will be taken up in the order in which they declared themselves concerning it, and the action of each will be followed out as completely as possible.
At Victoria.
The sentiments heralded in the declarations just noted were at once ratified in some portions of the country. In an address delivered by W. D. C. Hall of the precinct of Victoria during Mejía's sojourn in Brazoria, he remarked that the inhabitants of his district had been informed of the Turtle Bayou pronunciamento. The speaker then continued that “we were rejoiced to see this declaration, for such had been for a long time our own feelings and wishes—The people of this precinct, therefore, immediately met and concurred in the declaration for the constitution and Santa Anna.” 46
At a second assemblage in the town of Victoria, the residents again sanctioned the principles of the “liberal party”. We are told that “at a large and respectable meeting of the citizens of the Precinct of Victoria convened according to public notice on the 16th of July, they unanimously Re-solved to succeed or perish in the cause of the constitution and Santa Anna, or in other words the plan of Vera Cruz.” The body then elected a committee of vigilance for the promotion of their cause. “On the night of the same day the committee `learned of' the arrival of Col. Mexia, a friend and officer of Genl. Santa Anna, at our port, from Matamoros. . . . bringing us the joyful intelligence of the surrender of Matamoros”. 47 On hearing this welcome news the convention reiterated its strong attachment to the plan.
With these more or less fragmentary notices of the reception of the plan of Vera Cruz at Victoria, we will now pass on to Brazoria where the enthusiasm for Santa Anna was made more manifest than anywhere else in Texas.
At Brazoria.
One of the objects for which Mejía came to the colonies was to promote the cause of the “liberal” leader and to disseminate the principles recently inaugurated by the Vera Cruz garrison. He revealed his real intention in a letter to the second alcalde of Brazoria, John Austin, enclosing a copy of the compact between himself and Guerra of July 6, in which he pointed out what would have been his course toward the disturbers of the peace, “had the late movements . . . been directed against the integrity of the national territory”. But, as he had been assured by sundry respectable men that the recent events “were on account of the colonists having adhered to the Plan of Vera Cruz,” the colonel affirmed that his troops, led by himself in person, would support and “protect their adhesion to the said plan”. 48 The mild and conciliatory tone of this note was due in great part, no doubt, to the influence of Stephen F. Austin, who, it will be recalled, accompanied the expedition to Texas.
The alcalde, in answering this communication, informed Mejía that a delegation, which had been selected by the people of Brazoria, would present him with some resolutions adopted a few days before anent the Plan of Santa Anna. Moreover, he said that the acts aimed at explaining the motives by which the Texans had been governed, and contained their “true sentiments”. Austin detailed at length the reasons for attacking the Mexican soldiery, and gave the result in each case.
“This, Sir,” he concluded, “is what has passed. I hope it will be sufficient to convince you that these inhabitants have not manifested any other desire or intention, than to unite with Genl. Santa Anna, to procure the establishment of peace in the Republic, under the shield of the Constitution and Laws . . . and that the sovereignty of the States shall be respected”. 49
On the 16th day of July, 1832, the residents of the community gathered and resolved to continue their adhesion to the plan of Vera Cruz, which action was taken before they learned of Mejía's having anchored at the mouth of the Brazos. 50 The following day, having heard in the meantime of the arrival of the forces from Tampico, the citizens appointed a delegation to welcome Colonel Mejía to Brazoria. 51
This delegation met the commander of the fleet after his debarkation at Velasco, and escorted him to Brazoria. William H. Wharton, the chairman of the reception committee, immediately after the arrival of the party, read the following characteristic address:
“Col. Mexia: We view you as a fellow struggler in the same field with ourselves, and as the harbinger of the happy intelligence that the cause of the constitution and Santa Anna, or, in other words, the cause of truth and justice and liberty has triumphed most signally and gloriously. We hail the day of your arrival among us, in the sacred cause you came to advocate, as the brightest one that ever shone on the prospects of Texas.” The colonists felt in duty bound “to go heart and hand” with Santa Anna, “and not 24 hours have elapsed, since, in a numerous and public meeting, we resolved to succeed or perish with him. We declared for his cause, sir, when it was in doubt, and now that it is triumphant, we give you the most solemn pledges, that in putting down the present violators of the constitution, and bringing the government back to a strictly legitimate mode of procedure, Genl. Santa Anna shall have our warmest support and our most zealous coöperation.” 52
Mejía was apparently completely won over by all this effusion of eloquence and flattery, and he replied in choice terms that it pleased him mightily to perceive the devotion of the Texans “to the Mexican confederation, to the constitution, and to his excellency, Genl. Lopez de Santa Anna”. Moreover, the aims which the colonists sought to attain were the same as those proclaimed in Vera Cruz—“Federation, Laws, and a Liberal Ministry, which will respect the general constitution and the sovereignty of the States”. The Colonel continued that “the cause which you have thus adopted is that of the people against oppression; that of the friends of federal institutions against the military and oppressive government which the ministers of Genl. Bustamante wished to establish. These being the principles which influence this respectable community, I should be inconsistent with my own, were I not to offer them my friendship, and the support of the chiefs under whose orders I am acting.” 53
Not only were the people of Brazoria formal supporters of the plan of Vera Cruz, but they even permitted their ardor and admiration for Santa Anna to gain such a hold upon them that their impulsive expression betokened their warm feeling. Stephen F. Austin remarked that “on my arrival at Brazoria I found all the people unanimous and very enthusiastically in favor of the Plan of Santa Anna. They received Señor Mexia with the greatest pleasure and with a joy and happiness which I have never before seen in this country upon any occasion.” “Long live the constitution and the laws; long live the rights of the States; long live the Mexican Federation; and long live Santa Anna, the heroic defender of them,” were some of the distinguishable exclamations which arose from the crowd. 54
From the citations made in the last few paragraphs, the fact that the Anglo-Americans settled in and around Brazoria were firm supporters of the constitution, as against arbitrary government, is clearly obvious.
At San Felipe.
Under Section II mention was made of the resistance of San Felipe and Matagorda to the movements under taken by some of the colonists for the dismantling of Anahuac and Velasco. The observations there recorded gave evidence conclusive that these townships were uncompromisingly opposed to the action taken against the military posts and hostile to the principles sanctioned in the camp at Turtle Bayou. However, not more than a month had elapsed when the source of this conservatism—the village of San Felipe—declared vigorously for Santa Anna. This peculiar move seems anomalous and contradictory, and, although such is really the case, the explanation is not deep seated.
Horatio Chriesman, the alcalde, in defending the acts of the ayuntamiento, tells us that “it was necessary to take the step which has been taken, toward unifying public opinion and avoiding the sad results of disunion—It was the duty of the Ayuntamiento to apply remedies, and two were presented: the first was civil was within the municipality—; the other, to unify public opinion, and thus to establish harmony. The latter was adopted; and I believe that your Honor will say that the Council has done its duty as guardian of the public peace.” 55 Again, Col. S. F. Austin said that “it is not difficult to imagine that the presence of Col. Mexia exerted a decisive influence upon public opinion”. 56 These instances clearly show that the revulsion of sentiment of the San Felipe citizens was because they wished to ward off a clash with the Mexican troops under Mejía, and desired to be guaranteed in the possession and continuation of their rights—both personal and political.
The first news of the coming of Colonel Mejía reached San Felipe on July 20, 57 and the inhabitants of the latter community appear to have suddenly become eager upholders of Santa Anna. A squad of men was organized under the name of “the Santa Anna Volunteer Company,” and Colonel Austin who arrived at San Felipe on the 25th, was grandly received by the “republicans”. At 4 o'clock on the same afternoon citizens and soldiers alike met and swore fealty to the constitution of 1824. 58
The alcalde of San Felipe ordered, on July 20, an extra session of the ayuntamiento for the 26th of the same month. 59 In accordance with this notice the council convened on the appointed day and considered the question concerning the plan. It pointed out that Colonel Mejía had manifested his determination to aid the Texans in furthering Santa Anna's intentions, and that, since these aims had been highly approved by all classes, the ayuntamiento was, therefore, almost compelled to conform to them. 60
The ayuntamiento assembled again on the 27th, but this time its number was increased by the presence of many other residents. Austin expressed his opinion that the colonists in mass ought to adopt the plan of Santa Anna, and they at length did so, unanimously and rejoicingly, 61 in the following manner:
The ayuntamiento advanced practically the same reasons for joining with their fellow-countrymen, as had been put forward on the day before, and resolved (Art. 1) that they would adhere solemnly to the Plan, and to the “planks” of the liberal “platform.” In the second article it is specified that in supporting these principles, the inhabitants “have no other object in view, than to contribute their feeble voice and aid in sustaining the constitution, and the true dignity and decorum of the national flag, and the rights of the State of Coahuila and Texas which have been insulted by military encroachments in these colonies since 1830, and that they will be at all times ready to take up arms in defence of the independence and constitution of their adopted country and the integrity of its territory”. The remaining sections are the so-called “additional articles,” on the privileges of freemen, and on the formal presentation of copies of these declarations to various persons. 62
Austin's Colony was thus identified as a firm center of federalism, and as a staunch friend of General Santa Anna.
At Nacogdoches.
The earliest intimation that we have of the people of the Nacogdoches Department embroiling themselves with the troubles of 1832, is given by Col. Piedras, the commandant of the frontier, stationed at Nacogdoches, in the report of his relief expedition to Anahuac. Soon after the outbreak of hostilities at Anahuac, Piedras was apprized of it, and, on June 19, he set out with a small force with the intention of succoring the besieged Bradburn. Having advanced as far as Fort Terán, the company was met by a messenger from Anahuac by whom Piedras was informed that the colonists had declared for Santa Anna, 63 and that they were in communication with the residents of the Ayish Bayou, Bevil, and other places. The commandant of the frontier feared that the people of Ayish would be won over to the insurgents' cause, and hence he delayed in order to guard his rear. At Sabine, which he reached some days later, Piedras' worst anticipations were realized on his being told that meetings had already been held at many points in the district of Ayish, and that the settlers there had sanctioned the Plan. Although the precise date is not found, it may be inferred from the incidents mentioned in the report that the proceedings of the Ayish Bayou inhabitants occurred about June 24. 64
Piedras returned to Nacogdoches on the 11th of July where he heard that the Ayish Bayou colonists had not gone any further than to announce their acceptance of the Santa Anna plan. 65 He “doubled his guards,” however, made tremendous preparations for war, and sent a commission into the Ayish precinct to inquire into the real status of matters there—what was the purpose of those Americans and upon what forces they counted. The deputation brought back word that the only design of the citizens of Ayish was to uphold the constitution and Santa Anna against military tyranny and despotism, and to aid the civil authority and the people of Nacogdoches against the colonel of the frontier. 66
Piedras complained, on July 24, that there were sundry foreigners of American extraction stirring up the Texans by “drinking Santa Anna's health in public” and by otherwise spreading revolutionary ideas. Moreover, the plan was greeted with applause by the folk in general, but he exclaimed stoutly that he would hold out to the bitter end in the impending struggle, even though “the Alcalde and his Ayuntamiento” had turned from him. 67
The commandant made his assertion good by declining all stipulations set down by the partisans of the opposition. “Day after day, time after time,” says Frost Thorn of Nacogdoches, “the citizens of this village called on him for that object [i. e., to induce him to join Santa Anna]; I myself urged the case on him so repeatedly that I was fearful he would arrest me if I persisted—and as a stronger argument I showed him a Letter I had received from Mr. S. M. Wms. noting the arrival of yourself [Austin] and Coln Mehir &that the Colonists would assist Coln. M. if needed, &c, &c.—his replies I will not pretend to state to you, but they were all full of fight, &If in justification to the cause, &to counteract any false representation that might be made, you should wish to be made acquainted with the efforts the citizens used to prevent the effusion of Blood, a Note from you to the Alcalde of this district to take evidence will be immediately attended to—&It will appear that there was the utmost courtesy on the one Side &the most determined obstinacy on the other.” 68
On August 1, Colonel Piedras issued a statement 69 that “my officers and troop have resolved to sustain the government, the constitution, and the laws to which they have pledged themselves, and will not declare against them.” This action greatly exasperated the American settlers, and “the residents of the different districts of Ayish, Taja, 70 Sabine, Bevil, and Nacogdoches” convened on the next day, August 2, and adopted the appended articles:—
Art. 1.“That we pledge ourselves to our country and to each other in the presence of Almighty God, with all the justifiable means at our command, and under the banners of Santa Anna to defend the constitution and the federal-republican principles and the rights of the States—
Art. 2.“We consider that Señor Piedras ought to be required to approve the cause of the worthy Santa Anna,” and, should he refuse, he shall be relieved of his command.
Art. 3.provided that in case Piedras should offer resistance, a committee would demand that he turn over the troops to some officer inclined toward Santa Anna, and, if he refused, he would be forced to do so by means of arms. 71
The colonel very naturally would not consider the above orders, and hence it became essential to resort to arms. After a battle, lasting some six hours, the “ministerial” forces were obliged to retreat, which they did during the night of August 2 and in the direction of the Angelina river. 72
Some time on August 3, Piedras resigned the command of his soldiers, and on August 4, there was a meeting of the officers of the twelfth battalion at the Rancho de la Angelina where all sanctioned the plan of Vera Cruz. They invited their former colonel to join the republicans and regain his old position, and agreed to a provision that in case he did not accede, he was to be arrested and sent on to Mexico, a political prisoner. 73
The Anglo-American forces at Nacogdoches, on August 6 ratified the step taken at Angelina on the 4th, and on the 14th of the same month, the ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches, after relating the series of happenings which led up to the expulsion of Piedras, observed that the blood of eight patriots had sealed “their adhesion to the constitution and laws, and to the sustentation of the civil magistrates against military aggressions—under the banners of the invincible Genl. Santa Anna.” 74
The formal acknowledgment of the plan of Vera Cruz by the ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches is probably the last notice of the long-debated question in that vicinity, as the solution of the problem had been previously discovered and executed—viz., the ejection of Piedras.
At Bexar.
A little after the middle of July, 1832, Stephen F. Austin had begged the political chief at Bexar—the head of the local government in Texas—to call his ayuntamiento together for the purpose of upholding “the truth and the constitution.” 75 No voice, however, was raised by the authorities of San Antonio concerning this matter until several weeks later.
The news came to Bexar during the last week in August that on the 11th the plan of Vera Cruz had been proclaimed in Leona Vicario by the governor of the State. It was likewise added that the legitimacy of Pedraza's election to the presidency of the republic in 1828 was fully recognized. A contemporary document 76 states that “the Political Chief solemnly declared that the officials, all the people, and the military garrison of this city were from this moment [Aug. 30] attached to the Plan of Santa Anna . . . and consequently to the eligibility of Señor Gomez Pedraza, as President of the Republic”. 77 The same afternoon the convention of the citizens was celebrated in the main plaza by the firing of cannon and the chiming of bells. 78
At Goliad.
The last district to assert itself as to the plan of Vera Cruz was the municipality of Goliad. This town, however, took no action until about August 24 (with the exception of some irregular proceedings on July 14), when several of the most prominent persons forwarded the sanction of the civil officials to San Felipe. It will perhaps not be out of place to quote the entire communication, as it so clearly depicts the actual condition of affairs in Goliad.
“Sir:—The undersigned native citizens of the U. S. of A.—merchants residing here—have with much Satisfaction Seen the Declaration of your Ayuntamiento in favor of the plan of Santa Anna—the worthy Patriot and Defender of the Constitution and Laws of this Country.
“We perceive with increased Satisfaction, that the unanimous voice of the inhabitants of your Colony are in accordance, and we heartily concur with them. We approve the document (which will reach you by this same conveyance) addressed by the civil authorities of this place to those of yours.
“For your information we would advise you that the military force now here consists of between 50 &60 men. Most of them it is Supposed would join the Standard of Santa Anna,—Should oppt'y. offer, and the civic authorities and the citizens are undoubtedly favorable to him. These are now quiet, because they have neither force to commence, nor resources to Sustain, a Contest.” 79
Although, the writers of this note claim that the soldiers in the post of Goliad would perhaps amalgamate with the Santa Anna followers, still at the time the council met to pass upon the measures taken at San Felipe for the constitution, the commandant of the garrison refused to be present, and openly manifested his intention of remaining true to Bustamente, “untill compelled by force of arms to act otherwise”. 80
The military must have reconsidered and decided that its enmity was uncalled for, because on September 1, a committee waited upon the chief officer, and the latter came over to the federal party. The ayuntamiento assembled on the same day and publicly solemnized the resolutions embracing the faith of the Vera Cruz troops. At three o'clock in the afternoon, the townsmen and “civic militia” marched together through all the streets of the city, and announced aloud their love for and interest in the heroic General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna; while the commandant and the alcalde, now the best of companions, watched the final fusion of the discordant elements in Texas during the year 1832. 81
The question as to Mejía's real object in coming to Texas has often been raised, and has been only partially answered. In my opinion the answer is that it was primarily to preserve Texas to the Mexican confederation, and secondarily to promote the cause of Santa Anna.
As to the first of these objects, it has been observed heretofore that, when intelligence came to Mejía and Guerra of the disturbances in the province of Texas, they forthwith dropped their differences and coöperated “to save Texas to the Mexican confederation.” 82 Again, Mejía in writing to Alcalde John Austin, remarks that he would have proceeded very harshly had the movements in the colonies “been directed against the integrity of the national territory.” 83
In the second place Mejía aimed at diffusing liberal tendencies. It is only needful here to read his own words in proof of this statement. The colonel declared that since the colonists had clung to the Plan, he would “unite with them to accomplish their wishes, and that the forces” under his command would “protect their adhesion to the said plan”. 84
(Born in Kentucky, Anno 1802.)
My father, Abner Kuykendall, and his brother Joseph, with their families, left Arkansas Territory for Texas in October 1821. At Nacogdoches they were joined by their brother Robert, who had, for some time, been residing west of the Sabine. The three families crossed the Brazos river at the La Bahia road, on the 26th day of November 1821. We found Andrew Robinson and family camped on the west side of the river. Robinson had preceded us two or three days. His was the first immigrant family that crossed the Brazos river. Here we all stopped for about a month, in which time a few more families arrived. About Christmas Robt. and Joseph Kuykendall and Daniel Gilleland proceeded on to the Colorado and settled temporarily on the east side of the river near the crossing of the La Bahia road. These were the first families that settled on the Colorado.
About the first of January 1822, my father and Thomas Boatright moved ten miles west of the Brazos and settled near New Year's creek, about four miles south of the present town of Independence. We had explored this part of the country a week or two before we settled in it. During this exploration we found a herd of buffalo and killed one, but found no more during our residence there. We were now without bread. We had about two bushels of corn which we saved to plant the ensuing spring. Deer and turkies were abundant. The deer were lean but the turkies were fat and fine and constituted, for several months, the most valuable part of our subsistence. My father, myself, and two younger brothers were good hunters and our family though large, was never destitute of meat. We had a few cows which supplied us with milk. Bees were plentiful, and we were rarely without honey.
We had not been long here when the Tonkewa tribe of Indians camped near us for two or three weeks. They begged importunately but forebore from hostilities. They were much afraid of the Wacoes who had a short time previously, during the absence of the Tonkewa warriors on a hunt, fallen upon and massacred about thirty of their women and children and old men. This masscre took place on Davidson's creek twenty-five or thirty miles north of our settlement. During the winter we cleared a few acres of hammock or thicket land and planted our corn in April. It looked very promising for a while but the severe drought of the ensuing summer blighted our prospect. We scarcely raised as much corn as we had planted. In June, learning that some vessels had landed at the mouth of the Colorado with a supply of provisions, father Amos Gates and myself went down to purchase some flour. On our way down we were joined by Robert and Joseph Kuykendall and Daniel Gilleland. Just after we arrived at the mouth of the river another schooner came in and landed several immigrants. Ten Carancawa Indians were at the landing. They professed friend[ship] for the immigrants but commenced hostilities a few weeks afterwards. Father bought two barrels of flour and the rest of the party from one to two barrels each. We paid twenty-five dollars a barrel. We packed the flour on horses and mules. This flour afforded our family the first bread they had tasted for seven months. Late in the summer and early in the fall of this year, the Carancawas committed various depredations. The first chastisement they received was at the mouth of Scull creek. Robert Brotherton had been severely wounded by them. When this news was received about a dozen of the settlers led by uncle Robert Kuykendall went in pursuit of the Indians. The Tonkewas were at that time camped near his house, and the settlers thought it prudent to take their chief (Carita) with them to insure the good behavior of his people during the absence of the party, whose families would be unprotected until their return. Upon arriving near the mouth of Scull creek the party was halted in order to spy out the Indians—for which purpose uncle Robert took with him two or three men, and some time after night, they heard the Indians in a thicket pounding brier-root. 86 At early dawn the ensuing morning uncle Robert, leaving the horses in charge of Judge Wm. Rabb and the Tonkewa chief, led his little party to the attack. By the morning twilight they were enabled to find a small path which led them into the thicket and to the camp of the Indians. When the party got within a few paces of the Indians they found that but one had yet risen, who perceiving the party, seized his bow, but before he could use it was shot down by uncle Robert. The settlers now rushed on the camp and delivered a deadly fire. Nine or ten of the savages were killed on the spot and but few escaped. The scalp of one of the slain, taken by Andrew Castleman, together with his bow, six feet long, was afterwards sent me by uncle Robert.
Notwithstanding the severe drought of the season, some corn was raised in the Brazos bottom. Father was so fortunate as to obtain enough for our bread from William Smothers, who had settled on the river a little below the mouth of Caney creek.
In November 1822, father rented his place on New Year's creek to a Mr. Wheat, and moved back to the Brazos, five miles below the La Bahia road, where Josiah H. Bell, William Gates and Samuel Gates were already residing.
In December an election for civil and militia officers was held at the house of Jos. H. Bell. Bell was unanimously elected Alcalde, Samuel Gates captain and myself lieutenant. (There was but one lieutenant elected). Early in the summer of 1823, father and I went to Natchitoches, Louisiana, for salt and sugar and coffee for the use of our family. We packed these necessaries on two horses. When we returned home, a Frenchman had just arrived in the neighborhood from the Rio Grande with several mule loads of rock salt which enabled our settlement to supply themselves amply with this indispensable condiment.
Towards the latter part of this summer a party of Tonkewas stole a horse from father and several from Mr. Wheat. Father, Thomas Boatright, my brother Barzillai and myself, pursued the thieves. For a few miles their trail went northward—it then turned southward or down the country. Suspecting the Tonkewas, and learning that a portion of the tribe under the chief Carita were somewhere near “the Fort” (Fort Bend) on the Brazos, we resolved to proceed to that point. 87 Whe we arrived at the Fort we learned that the Tonkewas were encamped on Big Creek six or eight miles below that place. We immediately returned to the infant town of San Felipe—then containing but two or three log cabins— 88 and reported our suspicions of the Tonkewas. Austin raised a few men and went with us to the fort, where we were joined by a few more men—making our force thirty strong. Austin dispatched two men to look for the Tonkewas, but before they returned Carita came to us and acknowledged that five of his young men had stolen our horses. He said the horses should be restored and the thieves punished. We immediately proceeded to the camp of the Indians, where all the horses were promptly restored, save one, which Carita promised to deliver next day. He pointed out the five men who had committed the theft—each of whom was sentenced to receive fifty lashes and have one-half of his head shaved. Carita inflicted one-half of the stripes and my father the other half. The lash was very lightly laid on by Carita who frequently paused to ask Austin “cuantos.” Before he had inflicted his moiety of the stripes the culprits pretended to swoon; but as soon as father began to apply the lash they were roused to the most energetic action. The sentence was fully executed on four—of the thieves—the remaining one, being sick, was excused from the whipping but was to have his head polled after his brother offenders were disposed of; but while the castigation was proceeding, the sick man managed to save his locks by running off and concealing himself in a thicket.
We returned to the Fort, and next day Carita delivered us the missing horse. The other division of the Tonkewa tribe was, at this time, on the Colorado under the chief Sandia. 89
During the same summer a Frenchman and two Mexicans, all residents of Louisiana, returning from the Rio Grande with a small cavallada passed through our neighborhood and crossed the Brazos, at the La Bahia road. As they passed by the residence of Martin Varner (near the present town of Independence) they stole his most valuable horse. Our Alcalde, Josiah H. Bell, ordered me to raise a few men and pursue the thieves[.] The men who went with me were, Martin Varner, Samuel Kennedy, James Nelson, Oliver Jones and George Robinson. About midnight of the day we started we arrived at a creek much swollen by a recent rain. Dark as it was we swam this stream and about an hour before day, on the waters of the Trinity, we came upon the camp of the thieves[.] We remained a short distance from the camp until daylight when we pounced upon and captured them. 90 We, however, released one of the Mexicans, as, from circumstances, we did not believe he had participated in the theft. We also permitted him to keep such of the horses as he claimed. The Frenchman and the other Mexican and their horses (ten or eleven) we brought back to the Brazos. Though our alcalde (J. H. Bell) considered the guilt of the prisoners unquestionable, he thought it best to send them to the civil authorities of San Antonio to be dealt with. Accordingly, in pursuance of his order, I set out for San Antonio with the prisoners, but just after crossing the Colorado, at the La Bahia road, I met Moses Morrison and one or two other Americans returning from San Antonio, who dissuaded me [from] proceeding to that place, assuring me that the Mexican authorities would set the prisoners at liberty without punishment.
Uncle Robt. Kuykendall resided, at that time, a few miles below the La Bahia crossing. I went down to consult him—taking the prisoners with me. At Uncle Robert's I first met with and was introduced to Samuel M. Williams (then E. Eccles). 91 The prisoners were examined before uncle Robert, 92 Mr. Williams acting as interpreter. Each of the prisoners was sentenced to receive thirty-nine lashes—which sentence was duly executed; after which the Frenchman was released, it appearing that he was only accessory to the theft. I was advised to take the principal back to Bell for further proceedings, which I did, and Bell ordered me to whip him again and release him on the east side of the Brazos with orders to depart the colony forthwith—all of which was done.
I had had this fellow in charge for some time, and although it had been my unpleasant duty to punish him, I always treated him with as much leniency as was consistent with his safe custody. He appeared to like me and when I gave him a wallet of provisions and told him he was at liberty he seemed a good deal affected and begged me, in broken English, should I ever visit Louisiana to call on him. He said he was a householder, and, to cap the climax of his respectability, had (to use his own words) “a nigger to wife.”
As these thieves had given me and others a good deal of trouble, Mr. Bell caused their ponies to be sold to remunerate us.
A still greater outrage was perpetrated this summer by another party of Mexicans from the border of Louisiana. They were en route to the Rio Grande and finding a small party of Mexicans on Scull creek with a cavallada which they were driving east, the Louisianians camped with them. The ensuing night they fell upon their Rio Grande brethren and after murdering two or three and dispersing the rest, took possession of the cavallada. Carrasco, the owner of the horses, though wounded escaped to the settlement on the Colorado; whereupon uncle Robt. Kuykendall with a few men, started in pursuit of the thieves, who, it was soon discovered had separated into two parties (having divided the horses) one of which had crossed the Colorado a short distance below the Labahia road and the other many miles above it,—The latter party after crossing the river fell into and followed the San Antonio road and escaped to Louisiana—but the former was pursued by uncle Robert and overtaken on the west bank of the Brazos at the Coshattie crossing. Two of them were killed and their [heads (?)] stuck on poles at the roadside. The horses were also retaken and restored to the owner. After these examples the “border ruffians” ceased their depredations within the bounds of Austin's colony.
In November 1823, my father moved about thirty miles farther down the Brazos and settled on its right bank eight miles above San Felipe. Here he opened a farm in the river bottom and next season raised a good crop of corn. In the spring of 1824 a party of Mexicans stole some horses from the Wacoes and brought them into our neighborhood. The Indians followed them down and to indemnify themselves stole the first horses they found, which chanced to be ours. We thus lost thirteen head of valuable horses—everything of the horse kind we possessed, except one mule, which escaped from the Indians and returned home.
We pursued the thieves to the head of Cummin's creek—about forty miles, where we lost the trail and returned home by the way of the fort on the Colorado. (This fort was on the east side of the river some twelve or fourteen miles below the present town of La Grange. It was a block house enclosed with palisades. All the families of the neighborhood were then within the fort.)
In the month of July of this year, Col. Austin, in consequence of the continual depredations of the Carancawas determined to lead an expedition against them. This expedition, between forty and fifty strong, started from San Felipe, where my father, brother B. and myself joined it. When we got near the Colorado, Austin sent a detachment through the head of Bay Prairie to look for the Indians. With the remainder of the company he crossed the river a short distance below Eagle Lake and proceeded down the west side to Jennings's camp where he was joined by the portion of the command which had been detached. Thence the expedition proceeded to the Lavaca below the mouth of the Navidad. Most of our route was through a prairie country without road or path. Bordering many of the creeks which we crossed were very dense thickets. Austin detailed pioneers to open roads through such places.
After arriving at the Lavaca without finding any Indians or recent traces of them, Austin came to the conclusion that they had gone to the San Antonio river; but as our provisions were nearly exhausted, he determined to return to San Felipe get an ample supply of provisions, increase his force, and march direct to La Bahia.
Accordingly, we returned home, and after a few days, occupied in making the necessary preparations, we set out a second time from San Felipe. Nearly every man who was in the first expedition was in the second also. But our force was now considerably augmented. There were about ninety men—thirty of whom were negroes—the slaves of Col. Jared E. Groce, mounted, armed and commanded by him. This second expedition passed the Colorado at the Atascocito crossing. We marched on the Atascacito road. It was in the month of August and the weather was so oppressively warm, that, in the great prairie between the Garcitas and the Guadalupe, one of our men fainted and fell from his horse. He was bled and soon revived. That evening we arrived at the Guadalupe river and encamped for the night, on its left bank, nearly a mile above the present town of Victoria. At that time there was not a single habitation on the Guadalupe from its head to its mouth. Here we passed a merry evening. Fun and frolic ruled the hour. Col. William Pettus, known to all old settlers as “uncle Buck,” and Col. Gustavus Edwards, both corpulent, middle-aged men, but mirthful as school-boys, entertained us with a foot-race.
When we got within twelve or fifteen miles of La Bahia, we were met by an express from the civil authorities of that place, requesting Austin not to march his force nearer than three or four miles of the town. In compliance with this request the expedition camped at a creek about four miles east of town. Shortly afterwards the civil and ecclesiastical functionaries of La Bahia paid us a visit— the latter being clad in their sacerdotal garments.
These functionaries came to mediate for the Carancawas, by whom they had been authorised to say that they would not in future pass to the east of the San Antonio river. (See note 3.) Austin agreed not to make war upon the Carancawas as long as they should keep this pledge.—When the officials returned to town Austin accompanied them thither—some of the men also, by special permission visited the town. They saw no Indians there, nor could we ascertain where they were; but it was generally believed that they were not far from Labahia. Next day the expedition commenced its homeward march. It returned by the same route it had travelled going out.
A few days after the return of this expedition my father and I went on another trip in quest of the Cokes. At Peach creek on the Colorado we joined a party of ten or twelve men and proceeded thence towards Bell's landing on the Brazos. We crossed the Bernard a few miles above “Damon's Mound.” On the east side of the Bernard, near the point where we crossed it we found a herd of Buffalo and killed one.
Upon our arrival at Bell's landing we were joined by a few more men. Here we left our horses and proceeded down the river in boats. When we arrived within a few miles of the mouth the boats landed and a party of three or four men (including myself) went out on foot nearly to the Bernard to look for the Indians. We returned to the boats, however, without having made any discovery. We then proceeded down to the mouth of the river, whence parties were sent several miles east and west along the beach, but no Indians were found. We therefore returned to Bell's landing where the company was dissolved and the men returned home. Few of those who composed this little company are now living. Every one, save myself, whose name is recollected, has long since passed away, viz., my father, Josiah H. Bell, Owen N. Stout, John Elam, James Jones, and Brit. Bailey and his two sons, Smith and Gaines. The latter was killed by the Cokes a short time afterwards.
The total distance traveled by my father and myself (going and coming[)] on these various expeditions during the two months of July and August, was upwards of eight hundred miles.
This fall the Wacoes again visited our neighborhood and stole all, or nearly all, the horses of Mr. John Cummings. We followed the thieves as far as the Yegua—about fifty miles—where we lost their trail in consequence of the great number of wild horses and buffalo which then ranged through that section of country.
In the spring of 1826, Austin resolved to make a campaign against the Wacoes and Tawacanies, whose depredations had become frequent. The various companies and squads which were to compose the expedition, started for the place of rendezvous (the crossing of the Brazos at San Antonio road) about the 15th of May. My father and myself started on the 17th of May. Most of the men from the Brazos crossed that river at the Labahia road and proceeded up the river to the San Antonio road. A company from the Colorado crossed at the San Antonio road. As they were fording the river the horse of Thomas Alley of this company fell and threw his rider into the river. Alley rose and waded a short distance but was finally washed down stream by the rapid current and sank. It was supposed that he was hurt by the fall from his horse. The body was found and interred a day or two afterwards. We remained two days on the east side of the river. The few settlers thereabout were forted, in a log house inclosed with pickets.
Our entire force was about one hundred and ninety men—the command of which was assigned by Austin to Captain Aylett C. Buckner. Horatio Chriesman, Bartlet Sims, William Hall and Ross Alley were captains of companies.
The first day's march of the expedition from the place of rendezvous was to the Little Brazos a distance of fifteen miles. Here we were ordered to leave all our provisions, save rations for three days, as a forced march was intended against the Waco and Tawacanie village.
The second day after we marched from the Little Brazos the rain began to descend in torrents, rendering the ground extremely boggy and thereby greatly impeding our march. The third night after we left the Little Brazos was one of great discomfort. Our camp ground was muddy and boggy and the night cloudy, dark and drizzly. At a late hour one of the sentinels fired off his gun and cried “Indians!” For some minutes our camp was a scene of confusion beyond description. Many of our men had been unable to keep their guns dry and now, in every direction, could be heard the sharp and rapid clinking of metal, caused by their efforts to unscrew the breech-pins of their rifles in order to extract the incombustible powder. Our horses were also taken with a panic and threatened to stampede. The men groped their way through the camp, endeavoring to find out the cause of the alarm. Finally, from various circumstances they arrived at the conclusion (subsequently fully verified) that it was a false alarm raised by order of our commander. This expedient to put the men on the alert, however well intended, was considered by them ill-timed and unnecessary and caused much dissatisfaction.
Next day, though the weather continued unpropitious the march was resumed. When the expedition arrived within three or four miles of the Tawacanie village it was halted at a creek (which was swimming) and five or six men—amongst whom were uncle Robert K. and myself, were sent forward to reconnoitre the village. We found it deserted. The Waco village was on the west side of the river a little further up. We could not reach it, as the river was much swollen, but ascertained that it too was uninhabited.
Appearances indicated that the Tawacanie village had been vacated about two weeks. The Indians were doubtless gone on a buffalo hunt. Their patches of corn were in silk and tassel. There was an abundance of beans of which we picked a mess or two but destroyed nothing. When we returned and reported to Capt Buckner, he immediately ordered the homeward march of the expedition. Until we reached our deposit of provisions our march was rapid, for our three days' rations had been exhausted for as many days. When we reached the Brazos at the San Antonio road, the expedition was disbanded.
In the autumn of this year (1826) the Fredonian disturbances commenced. In November or December, Austin sent my father, Judge Ellis, and Francis W. Johnson to Nacogdoches to see the leaders of the Fredonians and endeavor to dissuade them from rash measures. They were, however, unable to effect anything. After their return to San Felipe the Mexican and colonial troops marched against the revolutionists.
So large a proportion of the men of the colony was sent on this service that Austin deemed it prudent to order my father with eight men to range the country between the Colorado and Brazos along the San Antonio road to detect any inroad of the Wacoes or other northern tribes[.] This service he performed until after the termination of the Fredonian troubles. These men he had with him were, B. Kuykendall, W. Kuykendall, Early Robbins, Thomas Stevens, John Jones, James Kiggans, John Walker and J. Furnaish. At that time the San Antonio road, except at the point where it crosses the Brazos, was from thirty to forty miles above the outmost settlements.
(To be concluded in another book.) 93
Note 1.
The Choctaws, Cherokees and other northern Indians frequently came to Texas for the purpose of hunting deer and other game and waging war against the various aboriginal tribes of the Province. On our way down to the fort we met, at Allen's creek, nine miles below San Felipe, a party of between twenty and thirty Choctaws and Coshatties[.] A night or two previously the Choctaws of this company, whilst traveling on foot, unexpectedly met a party of Cokes on the prairie a mile or two below the Fort, and killed five of them without sustaining any loss on their part. All the Cokes except one, were on foot. The one who was mounted had a large alligator tied to his saddle. As the ponderous reptile impeded his flight he cut it and dropt it in the prairie. We passed by the spot two or three days afterwards and saw the remains of both Cokes and Crocodile
Note 2.
John Tomlinson, the Alcalde for the Colorado, had previous to this time, been killed by the Indians on or near the Guadalupe[.] I think Robt. Kuykendall then held some civil office by appointment.
Note A.
My first visit to San Felipe was in May 1823. To the best of my recollection there was then but one cabin in the place. It was occupied, and probably built by, the brothers John and Achilles McFarlane.
Note 3.
I have read but a small portion of Yoacum's History, but chanced to light upon his relation of this Treaty with the Carancawas, in which he says, in substance, that it was faithfully observed by them. This is an error. Some of the greatest atrocities ever committed by these Indians in Austin's colony were perpetrated after this treaty was made.—
J. H. K.
Note B.
The number of warriors of the Tonkewa tribe did not much exceed one hundred—it certainly did not reach one hundred and fifty.
I was a sergeant in Capt. Moseley Baker's company, first regiment, Texas army, during the campaign of the spring of 1836. Our army on its retreat from the Colorado, encamped on the evening of the 26th of March, about a mile from the town of San Felipe. Early the ensuing morning, by order of Genl. Houston, I was detailed by Captain Baker with six men of his company to take charge of the ferry at San Felipe. I was instructed by Genl. Houston to let no man cross at the ferry without written permission from him. I immediately proceeded to the ferry and took possession of the boat. Shortly afterwards Capt. Baker arrived at the ferry with the remainder of his company and camped on the west bank of the river. He was detached by Genl. Houston after the army was paraded to march.
The succeeding day (Mar. 28th) Captain Baker crossed his company to the east bank of the river and began to dig a ditch the entire length of which, when completed, was one hundred and twenty-four yards. It was in the form of an L, the longer part fronting the river. The shorter part was below the road and extended eastward. The dirt was thrown outside the ditch. This work occupied us until the evening of the 31st of Mar. when Capt. Baker paraded the company and informed the men that he had received intelligence that the Mexican army had crossed the Colorado and was advancing on San Felipe; that he had been instructed by Genl. Houston, upon the approach of the enemy to burn the town, and that in obedience to said order the company would now proceed to reduce it to ashes. We crossed the river after night and it was about eight o'clock when we arrived in the streets of San Felipe, where Capt. Baker again harangued us. He stated, in substance, that he thought it was bad policy to burn the town but that Genl. Houston was inimical to him and would avail himself of any plausible pretext to injure him. He was therefore determined to execute his orders to the letter. He then commenced the work of destruction by setting fire to his own office with his own hand. The houses were of wood and the conflagration was rapid and brilliant. It was nearly midnight and the town was almost consumed, when the company returned to camp.
A large amount of goods were destroyed by this conflagration. All the merchants, with the exception of William P. Huff, had previously left the place but were represented by their clerks.
Some of our men asked permission of the clerks to take such goods as they needed; but this was refused, even when the torch was about to be applied to the stores. Neither Captain Baker's men nor the people of the town doubted that it was destroyed by order of the commander-in-chief.
The clerks crossed the river and camped with our company. Next morning (Apl. 1) we resumed working on our entrenchment. This morning Capt. Baker wrote to Genl. Houston. Before dispatching the letter he said to me and others of his mess, “General Houston is inimical to me—I have to be very cautious—I will read you this letter.” He read it accordingly. It stated, in substance, that having received intelligence that the enemy had crossed the Colorado and were advancing towards San Felipe, he had, in obedience to the order of the commander-in-chief, burned the town. 94 General Houston replied to this communication the same day. Capt. Baker read the reply to myself and others. It stated in general terms, that the commander-in-chief approved of Captain Baker's course. Shortly after the burning of the town we were reinforced by Capt. Kimbrough's company[.] Our force now amounted to one hundred and twenty or one hundred and twentyfive men, including, however, several merchants' clerks, and others, only temporarily attached to the command. For several days we were in hourly expectation of the arrival of the enemy. On the evening of the 5th Apl. James M. Bell, William Simpson and myself were selected by Captain Baker for what was deemed a perilous service, namely, to act as a picket guard the ensuing night on the San Felipe side of the river. We crossed the river—then very high—in a canoe which Captain Baker ordered should be sent back immediately—so fearful was he of its falling into the hands of the enemy and affording them the means of crossing the river and surprising his camp. We, however, managed to keep the canoe and locked it to a tree. We then proceeded on and posted ourselves on a gentle eminence in the prairie a little west of the site of the main part of the town and about three-fourths of a mile from the ferry. Bell and myself stood the first and second watches. The third and last was assigned to Simpson. As Capt. Baker had ordered us to return to camp very early next morning, Bell and I, when we lay down, requested Simpson to wake us at daylight[.]
This, however, he neglected to do and we were roused at sunrise by the clattering of horses' feet. “What is that said I?” Bell rose and exclaimed “Mexicans by G—d!” There were about a hundred cavalry, the advance guard of the Mexican army. Though not more than seventy or eighty yards distant they had not yet perceived us, their whole attention being engrossed by Simpson, who, it seems, as soon as daylight appeared, went into an unfenced garden about sixty yards from our post and was looking for vegetables when the Mexicans surprised him. They did not fire at him and seemed anxious to capture him which they very soon did. 95 In the meantime Bell and I were running at the top of our speed towards the ferry. The Mexicans discovered us before we had got half way and instantly the whole squadron spurred their horses in pursuit of us. We followed the high road which passed a little to the right of the head of a ravine. The Mexicans, aiming to cut us off from the river, bore so far to the left that they struck the ravine (which was impassable for cavalry) and had to make a detour to get round the head of it. This saved us. Yet, we would still have been lost had I listened to the rash proposition of my companion to face the enemy and fight! We had scarcely got into the canoe and pushed it from the shore when the Mexicans were on the bank and shooting at us. They fired two or three rounds before we reached the opposite shore and one of them bade us in good English, “bring back that boat!”
When Capt. Baker's men saw the Mexican cavalry galloping towards the ferry, they mistook it for Wash. Secrest's spy company, and were not undeceived until the enemy began to fire at the boat. They then returned the fire and it was supposed, wounded one of the Mexicans. The cavalry quickly retired and half an hour afterwards the Mexican army arrived and encamped in the prairie, south and west of the site of the town and from four to six hundred yards from the ferry. Capt. Baker immediately moved his camp about a fourth of mile further up the river, but a portion of the command constantly occupied the ditch. Sentinels were placed along the bank of the river for more than a mile above and below our entrenchment[.]
During the remainder of this day, the only molestation we received was from one individual of the enemy, who posted himself behind a brick oven near the bank of the river, and fired at us with a rifle, the greater part of the day. I was afterwards informed that this indefatigable rifleman was an American of the name of Johnson who had deserted to the Mexicans. At daylight on the morning of the 7th, just as I was rising from my pallet in the ditch, I was startled by the booming of a cannon which had been planted near the head of a ravine opposite the ferry, and on what was known as commercial square.
Many rounds of roundshot, grape and cannister were discharged at us, throwing the sand upon us and knocking the bark from the cottonwood trees that extended their branches over us. We also suffered a casualty. John Bricker of Capt. Baker's company, after having been relieved at his post below the entrenchment started up to the camp, but loitered on his way to pick up cannon balls and was struck by a cannister shot. Almost instant death ensued, though the ball had barely buried itself in his temple. The ferry boat was this day scuttled and sunk in obedience to an order from Genl. Houston received by Capt. Baker the evening of the 6th. The Mexicans cannonaded us daily from the 7th to the 10th Apl. inclusive. On the morning of the 11th we ascertained that the enemy had left San Felipe. About this time Captain John Byrd with a company of mounted men rode into our camp and informed Capt. Baker that he had verbal orders from Genl. Houston to supersede him in the command of that post. Capt. Baker immediately paraded his men and informed them that Capt. Byrd had been sent to supersede him, to which, he said, he was not disposed to submit. He said he had defended the crossing until the Mexican army had departed and he could not see the necessity of remaining any longer in that position—but submitted it to the men whether they would remain or march to rejoin the army. All voted to march. Capt. Baker therefore issued orders to that effect and early in the night we took up the line of march—leaving Capt. Byrd's company at our camp.
That night we marched to Irons's creek—six miles. Next morning (Apl. 12th) we crossed the creek—which was much swollen—on a raft, and encamped on the east side, where we remained two days. Meantime the Mexicans had effected the passage of the river at Fort Bend, despite the vigilance of Capt. Wyly Martin, to whom, with a company composed of the men of that neighborhood, the defense of that crossing had been entrusted. While we lay at Irons's creek, Capt. Martin and his company and many of the fugitive families of Fort Bend passed within a mile of our camp. Captain Baker went out to see them. He returned to camp much affected by the distress he had witnessed among the women and children, a number of whom were travelling on foot. Learning from one of the ladies that she had been insulted by a negro man, he sought the negro and intended, had he found him, to run him through with his sword. Captain Baker wept.
On the morning of the 14th we resumed the march and the same evening rejoined the army at Donaho's. * * * On the 18th Apl. the army arrived at Harrisburg—and encamped. On the morning of the 19th the army was paraded. Genl. Houston addressed us. He said the enemy was not far off and he was going to lead us against them—said if there was a man in the ranks who did not feel like fighting he had permission to remain with Major McNutt, who had command of the camp guard. He said, when you engage the enemy, let your battle cry be “Remember the Alamo!” Col. Rusk followed with a short but very stirring speech—he said let your battle cry be “The Alamo and La Bahia!” We were then dismissed for a short time to prepare rations for 3 days * * * On the afternoon of the 21st when the army was paraded to attack the Mexicans, Capt. Baker harangued his company. 96 He said he wished his men neither to give nor ask quarter—as a token of which he proposed that the company carry a red flag. A vote was taken whether we should or not—but one man—(John H. Money) voted against it. A red handkerchief was therefore hoisted for a flag, and carried until the battle commenced, when from some cause it was thrown away. * * * When the army started back to camp, (after the battle) it was about dusk. It was halted a moment at the breastworks of the Mexicans, and Genl. Houston addressed it in a few very eloquent sentences which I long remembered but have now forgotten. After he had concluded he said to Capt. Baker—“Captain B. have I not done my duty?” [“]Yes, Genl.,” replied our Capt. “but I wish you had done it sooner.” I was not aware that Genl. Houston had been wounded until about the time he began to address the army. * * * I was present when Santa Anna was brot. into the presence of Gen. Houston and remained until the memorandum was drawn up and signed. After it was written, Almonte asked Genl. Houston how it should be dated. Genl. H. replied `Lynchburg, I believe, is the name of the place.” Col. Wharton said “San Jacinto Genl.—let it be San Jacinto”—which was adopted.
Note 1.
Capt. Baker retained a copy of this letter. I saw him write it and assisted him to compare it with the original. He kept a copy of all his correspondence with Genl. Houston. * * * A few days after the battle of San Jacinto, Captain Baker accompanied a detachment under Col Burleson, sent to watch the movements of the Mexican army then retreating between the Brazos &Colorado. Before he left camp he handed me a package of papers—saying it was his correspondence with Genl. Houston—and enjoined me to take especial care of it until his return, which I did. Years afterwards, when it was said Genl. Houston denied authorising the burning of San Felipe and threw the responsibility of the act on Captain B. I wondered that the latter did not publish this correspondence * * * Genl. Houston's order to Capt. Baker to burn San Felipe (if ever given) was merely verbal. Capt. Baker knew very little about military matters and did not sufficiently appreciate the importance of written orders—a great error, considering his relations with the commander-in-chief. When Genl. Houston's Fabian policy began to develope itself on the Colorado Capt. B. vehemently opposed it. He was in favor of fighting the enemy at the Colorado, and during the whole campaign he denounced the commander-in-chief in unmeasured terms, and was in favor of deposing him from the chief command. He thought General Houston deserved impeachment, and after the battle of San Jacinto drew up charges and specifications for that purpose.
Note. 2.
Simpson afterwards informed me that a Mexican officer overtook and struck him with the flat of his sword—and bade him surrender, which he did. He was immediately taken before Santa Anna of whom he forthwith enquired what was to be his fate. Santa Anna replied that his life would be spared on condition that he would tell the truth. This he promised to do. He was then required to state all he knew in regard to the strength, condition, position &c, of the Texian army, which he did. The Mexicans found on his person a letter which he had recently received from his wife and which corroborated the greater part of his statement. He was detained as a prisoner and compelled to work until a few days after the battle of San Jacinto[.] When the intelligence of that event, brought by a wounded soldier, reached Felisola at Fort Bend, Mr. Simpson says, a considerable portion of that division had already crosed the river, but was immediately crossed back to the west side and Filisola began his retreat. On the march, Simpson, unnoticed, lay down in the prairie, the high grass of which concealed him from view, and after the army had passed he rose and went his way.
Round Top, Fayette Co. Texas, March, 1858. Dear Sir:
I owe you an apology for the cramped hand in which the following pages are written. I know I ought to send you a better specimen of calligraphy, but am really too indolent to copy. I have still various papers in hand, which I beg to retain until I can obtain a few additional facts, without which they are incomplete.
Should you find anything in this or the other volume which may need explanation, please write to me on the subject.
Last fall I sent you a list of errata. You will find the same list at the close of this vol.
Respectfully yours, &c J. H. K. 97
Abraham Alley and his brothers John C. and Thomas D. Alley immigrated to Texas from the State of Missouri in the spring of 1822. At N. Orleans they embarked on board the schooner James Lawrence bound for the mouth of the Colorado—the messrs Alley, however, debarked on the west end of Galveston Island.
Thence they proceeded on foot to Fort settlement on the Brazos and thence to the Atoscacito crossing on the Colorado, where they settled on the east side of the river. An elder brother, Rawson Alley, was already in Austins colony whither he had immigrated the year before. In the winter of 1824 another brother, William Alley, also emigrated from Missouri and settled on the Colorado. At the period of their immigration they were all young and single men. In the fall of 1822 or the winter of 1822-3, John C. Alley, John C. Clark and another man were coming up the Colorado in a canoe when they were attacked by the Carancawas near the mouth of Scull creek and Alley and — were killed[.] Clark was severely wounded but after three days arrived at the Atoscacito crossing. About the time of this occurrence as Robert Brotherton from the settlement near the locality of the present town of Columbus was going down the west side of the river with a horse and cart he met a party of Carancawas (supposed to have been the same that attacked the canoe) who at first affected friendship but presently shot him in the back with an arrow. With great difficulty he effected his escape to the settlement where he resided. The settlers immediately went in quest of the Indians whom they found and defeated near the mouth of Scull creek (see other accounts).—In the spring of 1824 Captain Rawson Alley commanded a company in Buckner's campaign against the Wacoes and Tawacanies. Abraham and Thomas Alley were members of this company. Thomas was drowned in the Brazos river on the upward march of the expedition. “In the summer of 1825” says Mr. Alley “a party of Wacoes and Tawacanies came to our settlement professing friendship and stating that they were on their way to San Felipe to see the `capitan grande' (Austin) but the next night they stole seventeen horses and mules. Most of the horses belonged to my brothers and myself. The mules—a valuable team—belonged to a Mexican trader who had stopped in the neighborhood. We never recovered one of these animals.
[“]Early in the autumn of 1826 a runner came to us from the upper settlement on the Colorado with the news that a party of sixteen Wacoes and Tawacanies had appeared in that neighborhood professing friendship but who were all afoot and provided with ropes and bridles. As it was believed they had come down to steal horses our aid was invoked to attack them before they could consummate their object. It was late in the evening when we received this news, and at nightfall brother Rawson, myself and a few others set out for the upper settlement—a distance of thirty miles. We arrived at the spot designated for the rendezvous—some time before day, where we found Capt. Jas. J. Ross at the head of the party of the upper settlement. Our whole force was about twentyfive men.
The Indians were encamped not far away on the bank of a creek in the open Postoak woods and within fifty yards of the cabin of a Mr. Anderson. Before leaving the place of meeting, the plan of attack was arranged. My brother in command of a party, was to get in the rear of the Indians and take a position under the bank of the creek and await the attack of Capt. Ross's party in front.
[“]About the dawn of day my brother's party, to which I belonged, gained the position agreed upon. Here we remained in profound silence until Ross's party delivered their fire. The Indians, in consternation, leaped down the bank of the creek where they met the muzzles of our rifles and fell rapidly before our aim. The thigh of the Indian chief was broken, and one of our men (Griffin) had a hand to hand struggle with him before he was despatched.
[“]Nearly all the Indians fell, either on the spot or within a few hundred yards. There was good reason to believe that fifteen of the sixteen were killed or mortally wounded. One of the latter was found a few week[s] afterwards, still breathing. The Indians were so completely surprised that it is believed they did not shoot an arrow at us.”
Mr. Alley was a member of what was known as the San Saba expedition (1829)[.] He belonged to a small company commanded by his brother Rawson. Capt. Rawson Alley died in May 1883. The surviving brothers, Abraham and William, still reside on the Colorado near the Atascocito crossing.
Anno 1857.
Note.—The Mexicans greatly feared these Indians, who frequently visited their towns and were treated most hospitable, but the Indians upon their departure, generally stole horses, or committed other depredations. The same policy did not succeed so well in the “white settlements.”
By a Private in the Texian Army. 98
Dr. Lewis B. Dayton, it is believed, was a native of one of the northern States. In the winter of 1825-6 he came to Austin's colony, stopped about eight miles above San Felipe and boarded at the house of William Robbins. He was a man of good education and thought to be an excellent physician. He was, however, evidently fond of fishing in muddy waters. He soon found fault with Austin and his secretary (Williams), and denounced them in the most violent terms. He endeavored, and with some degree of success, to convince the settlers, that Austin, who alone was in possession of the colonization laws, suppressed such as favored the colonists, who, he contended, were not receiving their rights. Hearing a young man in the neighborhood sing a doggerel ballad he determined to adapt it so as to apply to Austin and Williams. Shortly afterwards copies of Dayton's parody were placed in the hands of various persons. Indeed the song soon became popular in various parts of the colony. One quatrain is remembered. It ran as follows:
“The first of those villians who came to this State Was runaway Stephen F. Austin the great; He applied to the Mexicans as I understand And from them got permission to settle this land.[”]
(Chorus.)
The mere fact that this scurrilous balad was sung by many persons throughout the colony is sufficient evidence of the spread of a strong and dangerous prejudice against the Empresario and his Secretary. Happily for the colony Dayton's career was of short duration. Early in the autumn of 1826 whilst on a visit to Fort settlement he was arrested by William Hall and others, on the charge of uttering false and slanderous accusations against the Empresario and endeavoring to produce grave disturbances in the Colony. Dayton expected to be tried by a lawful officer. But he was taken back to San Felipe arraigned before the tribunal of Judge Lynch and sentenced to be tarred and feathered. This sentence was instantly carried into effect. His head was besmeared with tar and the contents of a pillow emptied upon it. He was then released and ordered to depart the Colony forthwith. He, accordingly, did leave it immediately and never returned.
Had Dayton possessed as much nerve as venom he would probably have rallied his friends—of whom he had not a few—and caused a good deal of commotion in the colony.
At the time of this occurrence Austin was absent from San Felipe. After his return he expressed regret that Dayton had been mobbed, and said, had he been at home, it should not have happened.
(Compiled from the recollections of myself and others.)
During colonial times in Texas the full stock rifle with flint and steel lock was the gun generally used. After the invention of the percussion lock many were slow to adopt it.
Beef cut in strings and dried, penole and coffee, were the usual provisions for a campaign. In long campaigns each mess of eight or ten men had a packhorse. The men never encumbered themselves with anything that was not indispensable. Tents were not used in campaigns against the Indians.—From the first settlement of Austin's colony until the war of Independence—a period of fourteen years—every man furnished his own horse, arms, ammunition and provisions and never received any compensation whatever.
During the war of Independence privates received eight dollars a month and three hundred and twenty acres of land for three months' service.—The soldier, when discharged, was generally without money or clothing and was often necessitated to sell scrip and Land Warrant at a very great sacrifice, to purchase a few articles of apparel. I have also known men to sell their warrants for five or ten cents an acre in order to buy an outfit for another campaign.
With here and there an exception, those who made the most patriotic sacrifices and devoted the best years of their lives to the service of their country, are now amongst the poorest men in it. In battling to extend “the area of Freedom” they have contracted the area of their purses almost to the starving point.
In that portion of the State embraced within the limits of Austin's colony, the face of the country has greatly changed since its first settlement. In 1821 and for several years afterwards, wild oats and wild rye grew in great luxuriance in the bottoms of the Brazos and Colorado. These fine grasses have long since disappeared. In many localities in the same bottoms where dense and extensive cane brakes formerly existed, scarcely a cane can now be found. Many of the prairies on which, of old, the grass waved in rank luxuriance, have been grazed and trodden by stock until weeds and bushes are fast usurping their surface. Formerly the annual burning of the grass prevented the spread of forest vegetation in the prairies.
Thirty years ago the currents of the small creeks in the hilly and undulating portion of the colony whispered along through tall reeds and flags and “flowing hair of green confervæ,” and, here and there were deep and limpid pools, on the surface of which floated the broad, disc-like leaves of the water-lily. Innumerable perch, trout, and other scaly fry tenanted these pools undisturbed by the angler.
Now, how different is the aspect which these brooks present! The reeds, the flags, the confervæ, the lilies, and even the pools (and with them the fish) have disappeared, and in many instances, deep and unsightly ravines conduct the streams over muddy beds.
The formation of these ravines is easily explained. The cattle grazed and trampled down the flags and other vegetation and sank into and destroyed the cohesion of the turf. Successive freshets did the rest.
Greatly changed is also the appearance of the wooded bottoms of the larger creeks in the same section of the country. The small confluents of such streams, during freshets, carry down their tribute of earth washed from innumerable farms. This sediment is deposited over the length and breadth of the bottoms, covering from time to time the scanty winter-range that remains.
The wild honey-bee, which once hoarded its sweets in thousands of trees in these bottoms, has nearly disappeared, and bee-hunting, an occupation which, of old, richly rewarded the pioneer, is now no longer pursued.
For at least four years after the arrival of the first settlers in Austin's colony, there was not a practicing physician within its limits. I have often heard that to supply this need Austin induced a physician (perhaps Dr. Phelps) to come from the United States and settle in the colony. After the year 1825 the desideratum was amply supplied.—Preachers also came and occasionally broke to the settlers the bread of life. I well remember to have heard an old man of dilapidated mind named Bays or Baize—preach at the house of a neighbor of my father (Moses Shipman) early in the year 1824. I never knew to “which of all the sects” he belonged.
At an early period—as early as the winter of 1823-4—the school-master was also “abroad” and began to exercise his vocation in that primitive, and, when dedicated to such a purpose,—half sanctified institution, a log-cabin. I think it highly probable that Isaac M. Pennington was the first who wielded the ferule of the pedagogue. He taught reading, writing and arithmetic.
Very many of the first immigrants to Austin's colony had not even a hand-mill, and for a long time their only means of manufacturing meal was by pounding the corn with a wooden pestle in a mortar made in a log or stump. The first saw and gristmill propelled by water was erected on Mill creek by the Cummings family. It went into operation in the year 1826. One or two horse mills had been erected a short time before.
The army took up the line of march from the camp near Harrisburg about noon or perhaps a little later, of the 19th April. After marching down Buffalo Bayou between half and three quarters of a mile it began to cross the bayou in a small, frail, leaky flat-bottomed boat. We landed on the right bank almost immediately (a few paces) below the mouth of Sims's bayou. Here, in the pine woods, the men lay down and rested until dusk, at which time the march was resumed. It was not far to Vince's Bayou, which we crossed on the bridge. Here Santa Anna had encamped only a night or two before. His camp fires (extinct) extended from near the bridge into Vince's lane. The road passed through Vince's lane and near his house. (south of it) The night was pretty dark. The army marched slowly and in profound silence. Occasionally it was halted for a few moments. Orders to halt were given by our officers in a low tone. About a mile and half or two miles below Vince's the road crossed a ravine. On the west side of this ravine and a few paces (perhaps not more than fifty) to the left of the road we were halted and ordered to lay down on our arms. Our bivouac was in the open prairie.
Early on the morning of the 20th we resumed the march—still following the road to Lynche's ferry (or Lynchburg) [.] At the distance of two or three miles we reached a point of timber where we halted to eat breakfast. A number of cattle were grazing near us and several beeves were slaughtered, but just as we began to butcher them our scouts brought some information to Genl. Houston about the enemy and the butchering was not completed. By permission, many of the men discharged and reloaded their firearms. The march was then resumed towards Lynchburg—below which place the hamlet of New Washington was then undergoing conflagration—we distinctly saw the smoke. When the army entered the valley of the San Jacinto it was halted for fifteen or twenty minutes. When it resumed the march it diverged from the road (to the left) and entered a point of timber nearly opposite (but perhaps rather above) the mouth of Buffalo Bayou. Here, on the bank of the bayou, the army again halted and again some beeves which happened to be convenient, were shot down; but they were scarcely butchered when the enemy were discovered in the prairie marching towards us in solid column from below. We were quickly undèr arms again and moving along up the bank of the bayou. The march was continued about half a mile, when we halted. The second regt. (our left wing) was posted in a point of timber—the first Regt. farther up the bayou and under its bank (where there was also a narrow strip of timber) [.] The artillery was posted in the centre. (in the prairie.) On the bank, fronting the position of the first Regiment, was a narrow fringe of thicket—which was quickly cleared away with our knives. Before the enemy were within rifle shot both of our cannon opened on them—They instantly wheeled and moved to a position in an Island of timber, whence they opened on us a fire of artillery and musketry.
Years after the battle of San Jacinto, Col. Burleson informed me that on the 20th or 21st, an order was brought to him from General Houston by his aid (Col. Wharton) to detail men from his Regiment to build a floating bridge across the bayou.—Col. B. said he told the aid that his men would fight but would not work,—and refused to execute the order. Shortly afterwards Gen. Houston himself asked Col. B. if he refused to obey this order. Col. B. replied—“No, General, but I decline to obey it.” General Houston then asked the Col. of he would vouch for his men. Col. B. replied “Yes, General, I will vouch that every man in my Regiment will fight.”
* * * I do not believe that Genl. Houston wished to avoid a conflict with the enemy. The order to build the bridge was doubtless given to test the nerve of the men—to ascertain beyond a peradventure that they were willing to “do or die.” On the morning of the 20th, Lynche's ferryboat—a large and good one—had been brought up the bayou to our camp. In this boat the army could have been ferried over the bayou in a few hours. A floating bridge was therefore unnecessary, and the idea of constructing one, was, in my opinion, for these and other reasons, never seriously entertained[.]
Charles Amsler, a native of Switzerland immigrated to Texas in the summer of 1834, and settled near Mill creek in Austin's colony. Though very poor at the period of his migration, he has, by patient industry acquired a handsome competency. Mr. Amsler says: “In the autumn of 1835 my wife and I were picking cotton on Mr. Nichols's farm on Piney creek when I learned that men were needed to strengthen our army, which was then besieging San Antonio. I at once resolved to repair to the scene of action. With not a little difficulty I procured a horse to ride, and having no arms of my own I borrowed a worthless rifle of an acquaintance and set out alone for the army late in the month of November. Near Gonzales I met Genl. Austin—then on his way to the United States—and Col. Wm. Pettus. With the latter I was very well acquainted. I told him that I was going to the wars but complained of my lockless rifle. Pettus handed me his musket—a very good one,—in exchange for the rifle, which he promised to deliver to the owner who was a neighbor of his, and I went on my way rejoicing. Upon my arrival at the camp of the Colonial army I sought the company of Capt. John York—to which a number of my acquaintances belonged—for the purpose of joining it. Not finding Capt. York, who was temporarily absent—I applied to the first lieutenant—John Pettus, for permission to attach myself to the company. Lt. Pettus rejected my application for the reason that the company already had its complement of men. I then attached myself to Capt. Fisher's 100 company Almost immediately afterwards Col. Milam called for volunteers to storm the town. I joined the storming party and after we had effected a lodgment in the town and in the midst of the conflict, Capt. York recognised me and told me he wished me to join his company, which I at once did, with the permission of Capt. Fisher.—After the reduction of San Antonio de Bexar an expedition to the Rio Grande was set on foot by Cols. Grant and Johnson. I volunteered for this expedition—which set out from San Antonio about the first of January 1836. Becoming very sick on the march I was left in the care of some Mexican rancheros two or three miles west of the mission of Refugio. Late in the month of February, being convalescent, I became very anxious to return to my family, but had no horse to ride, and no means with which to buy one. I made known my condition to some people living near the rancho who very kindly furnished me a horse and I set out for home. Late in the ensuing evening I arrived at Goliad where I procured some provisions and continuing my journey four or five miles farther stopped in a ravine a short distance from the road, tethered my horse, and lay down. About two o'clock in the ensuing morning, I awoke, kindled a fire, and was boiling some coffee when a man rode up and enquired where I was from. I told him from the mission. “I” said he “am from San Antonio and am on my way to Goliad with dispatches for Col. Fannin. I am much fatigued and will rest awhile with you.” So saying, he dismounted and tethered his horse near mine. My coffee being now ready he joined me in drinking it. He was a sociable old gentleman and I was much pleased with him. After resting an hour or more, he said, “Well, my friend, we had better be traveling”—to which I assented and rose to go after my horse. “Please bring my horse too” said the stranger—“certainly,” said I, and walked away. The stranger then picked up my gun, threw out the priming and poured water in the pan. I did not witness these acts but was soon afterwards advised of them. When I led the horses to the camp-fire the agreeable stranger cocked his gun and presenting it at my breast, said “you are my prisoner!” Never was countryman of Tell and Winkelreid more amazed than I was at that moment! I demanded by what authority and for what offence I was arrested.—My captor replied—“By authority of Col. Fannin and for stealing that horse.” I assured him of my innocence and told him how I came in possession of the horse. The stranger then said—“My friend, I trust you did not steal the horse—I scarcely believe you did—but you are charged with having done so and I shall take both you and the horse back to Goliad”[.] I was compelled to submit and we started back towards Goliad.—After daylight I showed my captor a certificate from my captain of my good conduct in the storming of Bexar. I also represented my penniless condition and the probable destitution of my wife. My captor seemed moved and handed me two dollars saying—“This is the money I have—but I can do without it and it may relieve a little.” I now enquired the name of my generous captor. He told me it was Smith—Deaf Smith!—When we arrived at Goliad I was handed over to Col. Fannin. Mr. Conrad, of Goliad, who claimed the horse I rode, made the necessary proof and took his property. After a short detention I was exonerated from the charge of theft and released. I now set out for home on foot. I crossed the Guadalupe at the Labahia road. As the Mexican army of invasion was known to be near our frontier the few settlers on the lower portion of the Guadalupe had already abandoned their homes and moved eastward. About eight miles east of the river I found a house which had evidently been very recently vacated. A fresh wagon track led from the door in the direction I was traveling. I followed this wagon-track with the hope of overtaking the movers and late in the evening got in sight of the wagon on the waters of Lavaca. I also saw the oxen grazing in the prairie. When I arrived at the wagon some trunks were lying, broken open, around it, but no person was visible. At a short remove was a thicket, and it occurred to me that the movers were encamped in it. I walked a few steps towards it and found the half naked body of a man, pierced with many wounds and scalped.—Hastily glancing around, I discovered another dead man—much mangled and scalped. I knew at once that this was the work of Indians—who were doubtless then but a short distance from that spot, as the wounds of the murdered men were still bleeding. I was greatly shocked and traveled on with reasonable fears of becoming the next victim of the savages.
An hour or two after night, being much fatigued, I turned a few paces aside from the road and wrapping my blanket around me, lay down in the grass and was soon asleep. The day had been warm, but long before midnight I awoke thoroughly chilled and a piercing norther was sweeping over the prairie. I slept no more that night. When daylight came I resumed my journey slowly and painfully, for my limbs were so stiff and numb that at first, I was barely able to move at all. Early in the day I struck the road leading from San Felipe to Gonzales. Here I found several armed men encamped, on their way to the latter place. After warming myself well at their fire and taking some refreshment which they gave me, I again set out on my solitary march. I had proceeded but a few miles when I discovered, as I supposed, a number of mounted men moving rapidly towards me. I did not doubt that they were Indians, and though escape seemed hopeless, I ran as fast as possible towards the nearest woods, but soon broke down and stopped in the open prairie. Death appeared inevitable, yet I was resolved to sell my life as dearly as possible. Turning towards my pursuers, now near at hand—I beheld a score or two of horses without riders. They were mustangs. Having made a circuit around me and viewed me to their satisfaction, they galloped away. I resumed my journey and in due time and without further adventure, rejoined my wife on Mill creek. The tide of invasion had by this time reached our frontier—the Alamo had fallen—our little army was in full retreat from Gonzales, and nearly all the families of middle and western Texas were deserting their homes and moving eastward. A few of the German settlers on Mill creek not having any means of transportation, resolved to remain at home and take their chances. Mr. Frederic Ernst, the founder of the Industry settlement, vacated his house and camped in Mill creek bottom—hoping thereby to avoid discovery by the enemy. My own effects were no great encumberance, but my wife was enciente and unable to travel on foot. I therefore camped with Mr. Ernst. Mr. Frells and Mr. Wapler—neither of whom had a family—did likewise. Here we remained until our army arrived on the Brazos, when two of our neighbors, namely, Capt John York and John F. Pettus, returned from the Brazos and urged us to leave—saying that if we should not be discovered by the Mexicans the Indians would certainly find and destroy us. Capt. York said he would walk and let my wife ride his horse as far as the Brazos, and I willingly agreed to depart the ensuing day. Capt York then requested me to accompany him to his late home—a few miles further up the creek, to assist him to hunt some horses he had left there. I immediately borrowed a horse and we set out together. We had travelled about three miles when I discovered an Indian standing in the prairie—but he disappeared before I could point him out to Capt. York—who expressed the opinion that I had mistaken a wolf for an Indian. We galloped to the spot where I had seen the Indian—but nothing was visible. York was then satisfied that I was mistaken, and we travelled on.
After a fruitless search for York's horses, we returned, in the evening, to our camp. At nightfall, as the mosquitoes were somewhat troublesome at the camp, Mr. Wepler went to Ernst's house to sleep. Late in the night we were awakened by the discharge of fire-arms in the direction of the house, andp resently Mr. Wapler came to the camp and stated that a party of Indians had fired into the house—apparently at random, and then disappeared.
In a little while it was ascertained that Pettus's horse and one belonging to Frells, were missing.
Ere an hour had elapsed we again heard guns at a distance southward, and in a short time a Mr. Jeorgen, 101 who resided about three miles distant from Ernst's, ran into our camp nearly naked and bleedingly profusely from an arrow-wound in the arm. He stated that the Indians had forced open the front door of his cabin and fired into it—and that being without arms and consequently unable to make any defence, he had, after being wounded, escaped through a back door and left his family (a wife and two children) to their fate. To ascertain, if possible, what that fate had been, York, Pettus, Frells and myself—the former alone being mounted—instantly set out for Jeorgen's house, where we arrived a little after daylight—but found nobody either living or dead—about the premises, and the presumption was unavoidable that the family had been captured and carried away by the savages. We found the trail of about twenty Indians leading from the house. After following this trail two or three miles we gave up the pursuit as hopeless, and returned to our camp. These exciting occurrences “put life and mettle in the heels” of men, women and children, and in a few hours we were all on the way to the Brazos, the few effects we were able to take with us being hauled in an ox-cart of Mr. Frells.
Note 1.
One of the men whom Mr. Amsler found murdered on the waters of the Lavaca was named Hibbins. The name of the other is not recollected. He was said to have been brother-inlaw of Hibbins. Hibbins's family—a wife and two children—were made prisoners and borne away by the Indians.—Another Hibbins and his wife were, two or three years afterwards, murdered by Indians west of the San Antonio river 30 miles below Goliad. Their children were rescued by a party of Rangers.
Mrs. Jeorgen, after a long captivity, was purchased from the Indians and sent home by a U. S. Indian agent. I believe her children were also subsequently ransomed.
Note 2.
Jeorgen, in the foregoing paper, should be written Juergen. 102
In the Biographical sketch of Genl. Rusk in the Texas Almanac for 1858, occurs the following passage: “While the army was encamped on the evening previous to its reaching the forks of the road [near McCurley's] 104 the commander-in-chief called Col. Sherman to his tent and directed him to go through the camp and inform the officers and men that on the next day they would take the road to Harrisburg—that Col. Rusk, secretary of war, had given him a positive order to move in that direction, and that he was bound to obey the order as coming from his superior. The order was received by the whole army, with the greatest enthusiasm, as it ensured a speedy termination of the retreat and gave hope of a 105 battle with the advancing Mexicans.”
I cite the above passage in order to record my conviction of the erroneousness of the concluding sentence, which implies that Col. Sherman, in obedience to the order of the commander-in-chief, actually did go through the camp and communicate to the officers and men the intention of the general to take the right hand road to Harrsburg. If Col. Sherman asserts that he received such an order from Genl. H. I have no disposition to question his veracity—but I do deny that such information was disseminated generally, among “the officers and men,” and re-assert what I have elsewhere stated, namely, that it was not generally known which road the army would take until it arrived at the point where the road forked.
Perhaps the exhilarating information was confided to the staff and Regimental officers—perhaps also to a few others, whose “enthusiasm,” however, was certainly not manifested by either words, signs, or gestures. In short, were it worth while, I think I could easily convict Col. Sherman (provided the foregoing statement is made on his authority) of at least partial disobedience to the orders of the Commander in Chief.
In a hasty perusal of a portion of Yoakum's History, I note the following errors:
In vol. 1, page 213 he says, “Among the emigrants from Pecan Point was the Cherokee John Williams. * * It is probable Garrett and Higgins were the first settlers on the Brazos.”
John Williams was not an Indian but a white man—For aught I know he may have been called by the soubriquet of “Cherokee.” Garrett and Higgins were certainly not the first settlers on the Brazos. “Dewees' letters” which Yoacum several times quotes, are not reliable.
“They” (the Carancawas) “proposed to meet Col. Austin at Labahia and make a treaty. The latter colecting a hundred volunteers met them at the creek four miles east of La Bahia. Peace was made and the Indians obliged themselves not to come east of the San Antonio. This pledge they ever after observed.” Vol. 1 page 226.—This pledge the Indians did not observe. There are other errors in the sentences above quoted. (See the true version in some of the papers sent you.)
The account of what is termed the “San Saba expediton” on pages 260 &261 vol 1. is incorrect.
“The next day, the 21st, Ward set out again towards Victoria where he and his command surrendered to the enemy as prisoners of war.” Vol 2. page 89.
Ward did not surrender at Victoria but on the Garcitas several miles east from Victoria.
Note.—Yoacum's orthography of the name McCurley (so pronounced) is probably correct. He writes it McCareley.
On page 105 vol 2. speaking of the Texian troops at Gonzales on the 12th of March, he says “They had not two day's provisions: many were without arms and others destitute of ammunition.” This statement is not true. Provisions were plentiful; very few, if any, were without tolerable arms and none were destitute of ammunition.
“The Texan army reached the Navidad on the 14th” page 107. The army reached Daniels' on the Lavaca on the 14th and the Navidad on the 15th.
“He (Genl. Houston) reached this point (Burnham's) on the evening of the 17th” ibid.
I feel almost confident that the army reached Burnham's on the 16th.
“On the 27th the army resumed its march and reached the timbers of the Brazos; and on the 28th it arrived at San Felipe” page 114 vol. 2.
It is true that the army reached the timbers of the Brazos or rather the waters of the that [sic] river, on the 27th, but it certainly did not march to San Felipe on the 28th—but up the river towards Groce's.
[“]On the 31st the soldiers buried the only one of their comrades who died a natural death during the campaign.” vol 2 page 116. The soldier alluded to was doubtless Felix G. Wright—He was the first but not by any means the only soldier who died a natural death during the campaign. He was buried on the 30th instead of 31st.
“After marching twelve miles the Texans halted at one o'clock on the morning of the 20th at a beautiful spot in the prairie.” vol. 2. page 136.
The distance is over-estimated.
“Bray's bayou runs into Buffalo Bayou at Harrisburg, on the right bank. Five miles farther down towards the bay, over Vinces Bayou is Vinces bridge. * * * After the main body of the Mexican reinforcement under General Cos had passed Bray's bayou and while the rear-guard was crossing over, the wagoners and some others of the Texan camp-guard near Harrisburg, hearing the noise, paraded under the command of wagon-master Rhorer, made a forced march to the bayou and gave them a volley, which so alarmed them that they turned and fled towards the Brazos scattering and leaving their baggage on the road. The wagoners thereupon crossed over and gathered quite a supply.” vol 2. page 141.
Most of the foregoing statement is incorrect. (See “recollections of a private in the Texian army.”)
The account of the capture of Santa Anna on pages 146 &147, vol. 2—is also incorrect. It founded on a letter of Jas. A. Sylvester of Capt. Woods comp—Sylvester wished, apparently, to monopolize all the credit of Santa Anna's capture. Some of his statements are doubtless false and I well remember were so pronounced when they were first published, in 1836.
I am credibly informed that David Cole (now residing in Colorado county, and quite blind), claims to have been, and probably was, one of the captors of Santa Anna.—This completes the list—viz:
-
Robinson.
-
Thompson.
-
Sylvester.
-
Vermillion.
-
Miles.
-
Cole.
In the recollections of Joel W. Robinson, in the account of the attack on the Kechi tribe in 1835 should have been stated that two of the Indians were —after which their village was burned. Papers were found in the village which were known to have been on the person of a young man named Edwards who was killed by Indians 20 miles below Bastrop, a few months previously.
In the recollections of G. Kuykendall in the account of the attack on the Carancawa camp at the mouth of Scull Creek in the year 1823, it is stated that Judge Rabb remained with the Tonkewa chief, Carita, in charge of the horses of the party. This is a mistake. The name of the white man left in charge of the horses, is not known.
In the Biographical sketch of John Ingram it is stated that Ingram led a party of 19 settlers against the Carancawas who were encamped on Live oak Bayou (in 1831) [.] Buckner commanded the party—Ingram was subordinate to Buckner. (second in command.)
HISTORIAN, DAUGHTERS OF THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS.
The following sketch of Mrs. Briscoe by Kate B. Shaifer was published in The Gulf Messenger (Houston) for February-March, 1898:
“In the town of St. Genevieve, Missouri, August 17, 1819, Mary Jane, third child of John R. and Jane Birdsall Harris, was born.
“John R. Harris and wife had moved from East Cayuga, New York, and were descended from two of the oldest pioneer families of the colonists; the former from the historic Harris family of Pennsylvania, and the latter from Nathan Birdsall, who settled on Long Island 1657.
.....“There were [then] few white settlers in St. Genevieve, and they were mostly French, but within a few rods of Mr. Harris' home, about 500 friedly Indians were encamped, and his young child created much interest among the squaws, and was called by them “the little white papoose”, who was probably the first white babe they had ever seen.
“Among the few residents from the eastern states, was Moses Austin, from Virginia, and an acquaintance and friendship soon sprang up between the families of Austin and Harris, which resulted in their removal to Texas. Moses Austin was then considering a scheme for the colonization of Texas which scheme impressed J. R. Harris so favorably, that he determined to embark in the enterprise.
“Not wishing to leave his family unprotected in Missouri, Mr. Harris determined to have them return to New York, while he with Austin, explored the resources of Texas. Accordingly he provided a good team for the long overland journey to Cayuga, and accompanied them as Vincennes. Here he bade them goodbye, and thenceforth throughout the long trip, the whole responsibility rested upon the wife [who was accompanied by a young brother and a sister in law].
“After parting with his family at Vincennes.....Mr. Harris went to New Orleans and thence to Texas, where he selected his location; and in 1824 received from the Mexican government a grant of 4,425 acres of land which he located at the junction of Buffalo and Bray's bayous, and in 1826 laid out a town and called it Harrisburg; but remembering the hardships experienced by his family in Missouri, and realizing the still greater trials of colonists in Texas, he would not consent that they should join him until he could at least assure them of a comfortable home.
“The country abounded in fine timber, and with an eye to business, Mr. Harris erected a steam saw-mill, equipped it with machinery and went to New Orleans to procure belting for same. He took passage on a schooner called The Rights of Man, owned by himself and brother, which plied between these two places; but scarcely had he reached his destination, when he was seized with yellow fever and died August 21, 1829.
“Feeling that she could do nothing until her sons arrived at an age to be helpful, the widow, Mrs. Jane Harris, and her children, remained with her father in New York till in 1833, when in company with her eldest son, De Witt Clinton Harris, she made the journey to Texas. Arriving at Harrisburg, she found the mill doing a flourishing business, managed by one of [her] husband's brothers, and a number of families . . . already settled in the town. Mrs. Harris opened a farm and soon made a comfortable home, but even then the rebellion of the colonists against Mexico was impending, and soon there were occurrences that imperiled personal safety.
“In June 1835, De Witt Clinton Harris, having gone to Anahuac to purchase goods of Mr. Andrew Briscoe, was arrested and thrown into prison for refusing to apply to the customhouse officials for a permit to remove the goods.
“From this time there was no longer any feeling of security, and events moved rapidly along, culminating in the war for independence, which the early settlers of Texas fought. Conspicuous among those who took an active part, were members of Mrs. Harris' own household and intimate friends.
“All who are familiar with Texas history will remember how the inhabitants of Harrisburg fled to Galveston Island; of the sacking and burning of the village by Santa Anna, and how, after the Texan victory at San Jacinto, the refugees returned to their desolate homes.
“However, matters did not remain in this state for a great length of time. The same sterling qualities and brave, adventurous spirit that brought the pioneers into Texas, now stood them in good stead. Tents were spread until houses could be built, and all manner of trials cheerfully borne—thus bridging the time . . . [until] a crop could be raised and prosperity resume its reign.
.....“[Meanwhile the] `little white papoose', [now] grown to young womanhood in her grandfather's home on the Seneca river, was anxiously awaiting a summons to join the mother and brothers in far away Texas.....At last the summons from her mother came, and in October 1836, Mary Jane, in company with her grandfather and several other relatives left New York for Texas. She tells [in her reminiscences] of the many friends who gathered to see them start on their long journey, for in those days there was no rapid transit to Texas, and these relations and friends knew that it was separation for years, if not for all time.....[Again] she tells.....of the drive of 80 miles by stage to Buffalo, from which they took passage on a lake steamer for Cleveland, Ohio, but a dreadful gale overtook them, and after buffeting with the wind and waves, they at last put in to the Canada shore, where they tied up for two night and a day; also of how she and a young Quakeress nursed and tended the sick passengers, of whom there were many, and of how, after the third day, they got back to Buffalo, where the vessel had to undergo repairs.
“[They] could not brook this delay, so took passage on another boat and made a safe run to Cleveland; thence [they traveled] by canal to Portsmouth, from there to Cincinnati, and so on, by slow transits and many changes, [until] they reached New Orleans on the first day of November.....
“After a week spent in this city, [they] embarked on the Julius Cæsar, crossing the Gulf of Mexico to Quintana, at the mouth of the Brazos. There were but a few houses at this point—roughly built—the most comfortable one being a two-story boarding house, and there they stayed a few days, meeting and being introduced to many men who had lately made their names famous in heroic action. One story is told of how the young girl from New York State watched through the wide crack in the partition wall, the notorious Monroe Edwards, as he sat at table eating; of how his entire meal seemed to consist of sweet potatoes, and of the huge proportions assumed by the pile of skins at the side of his plate; of his rich and gaudy attire, his flashing diamonds, and his gaily caparisoned horse.
“The next stage of the journey was . . . on board the Yellow-stone to Brazoria, where two weeks were spent at the boarding house of Mrs. Jane Long, whose romantic history was listened to with unflagging interest by all.
“The first congress of the Republic of Texas was in session at Columbia, only a few miles distant, and General Sam Houston, the President, with other distinguished men, were frequent guests at Mrs. Long's.....
“The final stage of the trip to Harrisburg was made on horse-back, the distance being about 50 miles, and nearly every foot being covered by water—Mrs. Harris standing in her doorway, saw them from afar, and impatiently waited to welcome them—and such a welcome after years of separation, hardships and dangers!.....
“A mutual affection sprang up between Miss Harris and Captain Briscoe and on August 17, 1837, her eighteenth birthday, they were married by Mr. Isaac Batterson, a Justice of the Peace.
“Shortly after his marriage, Captain Briscoe received an appointment from President Houston as Chief Justice of Harris county, and this necessitated his living in the city of Houston, in view of which he purchased a two-story house in process of building on Main street (the first one ever built there), one block from the Capitol. At the expiration of his term of office, Mr. Briscoe returned to Harrisburg, built a brick house and engaged in the cattle business. Here in the pursuit of a healthful and lucrative business, he and his wife enjoyed, for ten years, that full measure of happiness that comes to congenially mated people. Many hours were passed in intellectual pursuits, reading together their favorite authors, and when desiring a change, the young wife being fond of horse-back exercise, . . . would accompany her husband on excursions to the prairies, when attending to his cattle interests. In his trips over the unsettled country to look after land that had come to them through purchase, or as grants from government, they often penetrated regions into which savage Indians made incursions every few weeks.....
“Five children were born to Mr. and Mrs. Briscoe, one of which died in infancy. When the eldest arrived at an age to require school advantages, his father decided to remove to New Orleans and engage in a banking business, and so, in the spring of 1849, the move was made, but scarcely had the enterprise begun when its head and founder was taken sick and died on the 4th day of October. General Parmenas Briscoe being present at the deathbed of his son, closed up the business and took the young widow and her children to his plantation home in Claiborne county, Mississippi, and the remains of Captain Andrew Briscoe were laid to rest in the old family burying ground.
“Here Mrs. Briscoe remained for three years, at the end of which time, St. Paul's college having been established at Anderson, Texas, the family removed to that place; but this college enterprise failed in 1856, and the family then went to Galveston and remained until 1859, when at the earnest solicitation of Mrs. Harris, they returned to Harrisburg and shared with her the old family homestead in which Mrs. Briscoe had been married, and which had been built on the site of the original home burnt by the Mexicans.
“Mrs. Briscoe lost her mother in 1869, but she, with her family, continued to live in the old home. Her second son, Andrew Birdsall, was married to Anna F. Paine on the 28th of February, 1871, and her daughter, Jessie Wade, became the wife of Milton G. Howe, September 17, 1873. In 1874 Mrs. Briscoe moved to Houston, where she has resided ever since. On September 13, 1881, her youngest daughter, Adele Lubbock was married to Michael Looscan. Her oldest son, Parmenas, has never married, and has always made his mother's pleasure his first care.
“At the breaking out of the civil war, Mrs. Briscoe, with true Southern patriotism, willingly gave her sons to the service of the Confederacy and her heart and home were always open to the sick and needy soldiers. She cherishes an ardent love for everything connected with the first years of her life in Texas; feels great pride in her father's and mother's association with its early history, and one of the happiest occasions of her advanced life is the annual reunion of the Texas Veteran Association.”
Mrs. Briscoe was one of the organizers of the Daughters of the Republic of Texas; a meeting for its formation being called at her home in Houston on November 6, 1891, she was elected First Vice President, a position which she held continuously up to the time of her death. She was ever keenly alive to the interests of the Society, and up to June 29, 1897, notwithstanding her advanced age, did as much active service as the younger members. On the eve of that day, upon the occasion of the closing exercises of the Academy of the Incarnate Word, a convent situated just opposite her own residence, acting for the Daughters of the Republic of Texas, she presented this school with lithograph portraits of Austin and Houston, and in a short address inculcated the necessity for a knowledge of the history of our own State, and a deep reverence for our heroic past. This was the last time she was able to serve the cause she loved so well, for, a few hours afterwards, she sustained a serious injury, by slipping, as she ascended the front steps of her residence; she never recovered the use of her lower limbs, and passed the remnant of her life in strict retirement.
By means of a rolling chair, and an elevator constructed by her eldest son for her use, she was enabled to move throughout her home, and thus participated in many of the meetings of the San Jacinto Chapter, Daughters of the Republic of Texas, which were often held in her parlor. Several times during her long confinement of nearly six years, through the kindness of their teacher, Miss Mary Roper, some of the classes from the High School would visit her, and rehearse their exercises, prepared for the celebration of Washington's birthday and the Texas Holidays. These occasions were red letter days in her life, and were highly prized by the boys and girls, who delighted in hearing her tell of having seen Lafayette in 1825, as well as of her acquaintance with Houston, Rusk, and others of the Texas revolution; their crowning pleasure, however, consisted in being accorded the privilege of reading Travis's autograph letter to Andrew Briscoe, written just at the beginning of the revolution.
A few years before Mrs. Briscoe's accident, she was elected first President of the Sheltering Arms, a home in Houston for aged women and for those of any age needing a temporary home while seeking employment. This institution, organized under the fostering care of Christ Church always held an important place in her thought. She was reared in the Protestant Episcopal Church and was confirmed by Right Reverend Bishop Freeman, in the early days of church organization in Texas.
As a descendant of revolutionary sires, she became affiliated with the first society of Daughters of the Revolution organized in Texas, with Mrs. French state regent at San Antonio. In her own home, the two chapters, Robert E. Lee, and Oran M. Roberts, of the United Daughters of the Confederacy endowed her with honorary membership.
As a charter member and first treasurer of the Ladies' Reading Club of Houston, the first club in the State to publish its constitution and by laws, and issue yearly reports, she was a pioneer club woman. Her historical sketches, character drawings, and reminiscences, were usually marked by a vein of quiet humor which made them most acceptable to the literary program of the Club.
These organizations were unfailing in delicate attentions to her during her years of invalidism, and when the end came, they vied with each other and with other living friends in sweet tribute to her memory. Mrs. Briscoe died at her home in Houston, Texas, March 8, 1903. The last sad rites of the church were beautifully blended with features strongly illustrative of her patriotic character. As the cadets of St. Andrew, clad in gray uniforms, and bearing the Texas flag escorted her body to Glenwood cemetery, and the closing phrases of the funeral ritual so beautifully prophetic of eternal life were spoken by Rev. H. D. Aves, her pastor, the sweet floral emblems strove to rob the grave of its gloom, and one seemed to hear the words, “Right dear in the sight of the Lord is the death of His Saints.”
Endowed with a strong character which impressed itself upon all who came into her life, charity for the faults of others, and patience under suffering were traits never absent from her personality. Her strong mother love consecrated the long years of her widowhood to the interests of her children, while by example and precept she also inculcated love of God and country.
The following letter is printed from a photogravure of the original sent by Mr. James L. Norris to Judge John H. Reagan, who has placed it among the archives of the Association:
Nashville 30th Mar 1823. My dear Governor
Yours of the 11th Inst has come to hand by this days mail, and I beg leave to assure you of the heart felt pleasure which I experience from the perusal of your kind &friendly letters, at all times.
You have not received my last letter, but will find it at New Canton on your return home. It is some time since I learned you were at the agency, and it was announced here, that you had been appointed agent: I was happy to hear it, believing as I did that there was no person in the Union who cou'd more ably discharge the duties of the office. The salary is equal to any office in the gift of this state, and from my idea of the life of an agent—you cou'd meditate with good advantage, that state of being compared to which all things else can be of no avail, as they are finite and temporal, while it is infinite, and Eternal. Solitude is the situation in which we can best ascertain our own hearts. There we derive no reflection from others, but are taught to make enquiry of ourselves. There we can examine ourselves in the abstract—and draw conclusions, unbiased by passion, totally independent of the prejudice of others. We can read the Scriptures, and pursue their preceps.
But I cannot pretend to recommend any course to you; you have become a candidate for the senate, and I did anticipate much pleasure in seeing you, and spending some time with you; at Murfreesboro. If you do not accept the agency (for I have no doubt but you will receive the app't) I will yet expect to see you. As for myself I have no opposition as yet for congress, and trust I will have none. I am on the alert, shou'd any opposition arise.
You wou'd dislike that any difference shou'd take place between your “political sons” and no one wou'd deprecate the event more than myself. But I apprehend a coolness on part of Maj G—m[.] I am not satisfied of the fact, and will make every allowance until I ascertain the truth[.] I never quit a friend until I see a disinclination on his part to be friendly with me[.] I dearly love my friends because they have been everything to me[.] I part with them as the Miser does his treasure with anguish and regret[.] Therefore I will calmly await the event. I wish no hint of this matter!
Will you please state to me the probable quantity of land, within the chartered limits of this State, to which the Indian title is not extinguished, and the probable amount of money it wou'd bring if sold. I wish this information now, if you please. May all felicity, and every success present and future be yours. Unalterably thy friend
Sam Houston. Gov Jos McMinn.
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES.
Out West, in continuation of the series entitled Early English Voyages to the Pacific Coast of America (from their own, and contemporary English, accounts) prints in the February number a narrative of Sir Thomas Cavendish (1587), and in the March number begins one of Wm. Dampier (1686), which is continued in subsequent issues.
Among recent gifts to the Association is a reprint from The American Geologist for March, 1902, of an appreciative sketch of Dr. Ferdinand v. Roemer, “the Father of Texas Geology,” by Dr. Frederick W. Simonds of the University of Texas. It contains a brief account of the general scientific activities of a man in whom was spoiled what would probably have been a poor lawyer to make an eminent geologist and broad scholar. The latter part of it is a list of publications by v. Roemer on subjects relating to North America. The most interesting part to Americans, and especially to Texans, is the description of the pioneer work in the Geology of Texas that won for him the title above quoted. The author of the sketch has been honored by its being reprinted by permission in the Geological Magazine of London.
The Gulf States Historical Magazine. For March, 1903 (Vol. I, No. 5), the contents are as follows: Col. Charles C. Jones, Jr., by Charles E. Jones; Yancey: A Study (concluded), by John W. DuBose; The Bonapartists in Alabama, by Anne Bozeman Lyon; The Louisiana Historical Society, by Alcée Fortier; De Soto in Florida, by Charles A. Choate; Early Railroads in Alabama, by Ulrich B. Phillips; Newspaper Files in the Library of the Georgia Historical Society, by William Hardin; The Abercrombie and Hayden Branch of the Fisher Family, by Mrs. F. R. Abercrombie; Brief Memoranda Concerning a Southern Line of the Sands Family; Documents; Minor Topics; Notes and Queries; Historical News; Book Notes and Reviews; Reviews.
For May (Vol. I, No. 6) the contents are: Forgotten Southern Authors, by A. J. Miller; Louisiana Affairs in 1804, by W. C. C. Claiborne; Coal Barging in War Times, 1861-1865, by W. H. Blake; The Absentee Shawnee Indians, by Henry S. Halbert; Bibliographical Notes, by William Been; Newspaper Files in the Carnegie Library of Atlanta; Alabama Newspaper Files in the Library of the American Antiquarian Society; Farley Gleanings, by Mrs. Wm. C. Stubbs; Myths of the Cherokee, by O. D. Street; Documents; Minor Topics; etc.
The American Historical Review for April (Vol. VIII, No. 3) begins with a report of the meeting of the American Historical Association held at Philadelphia in December, 1902. The meeting, says the secretary, “was in all respects successful and satisfactory. Many members were in attendance, the programme was excellent, and there was everywhere indication of the great activity and vitality of the Association, and of the work it is doing for the promotion of historical scholarship in America. * * * The most important new enterprise undertaken by the Association was a plan for securing the publication of a series of reprints of valuable early American narratives. This plan was approved by the Council and favored by the Association.” Professor J. Franklin Jameson was chosen general editor of the series. The next meeting of the Association will be held during the Christmas holidays at New Orleans. The Quarterly hopes that a goodly number from the Southwest will attend.
The Review contains three signed articles. Gaillard T. Lapsley contributes The Origin of Property in Land; Simeon E. Baldwin writes on American Business Corporations Before 1789; and Henry E. Bourne on American Constitutional Precedents in the French National Assembly. The documents printed are: George Rogers Clark and the Kaskaskia Campaign, 1777-1778; A Letter from De Vergennes Lafayette, 1780; Portions of Charles Pinckney's Plan for a Constitution, 1787, A Letter of James Nicholson, 1803.
Publications of the Southern History Association, Vol. VII, No. 3 (May, 1903). In the first ten pages of this number the editor, Dr. Colyer Meriwether, prints a collection of letters which show what the Southern States are doing toward the collection of rosters of their men in the Confederate Army. It appears that the collection in South Carolina is fairly complete, though no steps have been taken toward publication; North Carolina as early as 1882 published four volumes, aggregating 2548 pages, but the work was carelessly done and in some cases deliberately falsified; Alabama has gone far toward getting its records in shape; and some attention has been given to the work by Mississippi; no report was received from Virginia and Missouri, but the other States make a very poor showing. The War Department has determined to take up the work of publishing these muster rolls so far as they can be furnished by the separate States, and letters have been addressed by the Department to the respective governors requesting their energetic co-operation. The work of collection must be done by the States.
The remainder of the number, except the reviews and notices, consists of documents: (1) The Duane Letters (continued); (2) A Southern Sulky Ride (concluded); (3) General Joseph Martin (continued); (4) Texas Revolutionary Sentiment (continued)—these documents consist mainly of the proceedings of public meetings and committees of safety during 1835, and exhibit the development of the revolutionary sentiment with the reasons therefor; (5) Early Quaker Records in Virginia (concluded).
At the meeting of the American Historical Association in December, 1901, a committee of Southern members was appointed to prepare a report on History Teaching in the South. Their report was published in the School Review, February, 1903, and in his review of it the editor of the Publications says: “It is to be regretted though that the committee did not openly frown on the weak presumption of a half dozen or so institutions in trying to give graduate courses and degrees. The Johns Hopkins alone, south of Mason and Dixon's line, is competent to do this.” As to the degrees, The Quarterly emphatically says amen; but if Dr. Meriwether means exactly what he says about graduate “courses,” The Quarterly begs the personal privilege of explaining that the University of Texas possesses both the competency and facilities for giving graduate history courses. The proof of this is the recognition accorded these courses by the graduate institutions of the North and East. This, of course, must not be understood to mean that the University of Texas confers the degree of Ph. D.
Texas: A Contest of Civilization, by George P. Garrison. [American Commonwealths Series.] (New York and Boston: Houghton, Mifflin &Co. 1903. Pp., 311.)
The above is the title of a most interesting book from the pen of Dr. George P. Garrison, Professor of History in the University of Texas, which is just issued.
A glance at the list of authors of the volumes already published and of those in preparation shows that the editor of the series has used rare judgment in selecting and has been fortunate in securing the services of distinguished men. It was with pride that some time ago I heard that Dr. Garrison had been invited to enter this goodly company. Since his work has been completed and his book put before the public, I feel that congratulations should be extended and the “goodly company” be felicitated in finding Dr. Garrison among themselves.
Were it not for the first sentence of the preface, the book might be mistaken for a history of Texas. The author, however, declares that this is not so, and I feel constrained to yield this much to his superior information, and say it is not a history of Texas, but is a history of the growth of Texas.
Then two things which tend most to prevent general reading of history are: First, the interminable detail with which the average historian proses along, and second, the persistency with which he thrusts personalities forward. What does the ordinary reader care, whether John Smith or Peter Jones commanded in a certain battle or whether he had 1700 or 1900 men? What he and his army and the man on the other side and his army were fighting about—is the real question. What forces, political, social, religious, or financial, brought on the issue, which opposed it, how the conflict was waged, and how determined, and what was the effect on the life and habits and development of the contending parties. Surely a certain meed of praise is due to those who have striven for the right and a certain amount of censure to those who have upheld the wrong, but these personal matters are merely incidental. The great question is, What of the State, in all its diversified life and varied interests? How and why did it originate? What forces have directed its destiny and what is the outcome, in its present status and institutions?
If this be a correct theory of history writing, all lovers of Texas should be grateful to Dr. Garrison for the way in which he has illustrated it in the book under consideration. Beginning with the earliest records he has patiently searched out and tried all possible sources of information, and having faithfully performed this wearying labor, he comes to us with the wrought out results, the finished product of his mind. His the toil and the pain, ours the benefit and the pleasure.
Probably the most noticeable thing about the book, after the absence of detail, is its breadth of view. Matters which the mere local historian would deem little more than neighborhood quarrels, from the author's broader information are shown to result from revolutions in Europe, or diplomacy, or treachery of men high in official position in the United States. So throughout the work, nothing is dealt with as purely local, but everything it looked upon as a part of the world's march of progress. The book ought to do good in forcing Texans away from provincialism.
While the work is free from tedious personal detail, it yet gives some most interesting insight into individual character. Take for ilustration the portrayal of the self-suppression of Stephen F. Austin in his endeavor to obtain the approval of the federal government of Mexico of the proposed State constitution of Texas, prepared by the convention of 1833. Similar character touches appear throughout the book.
Special emphasis is given to the presence, insistence, growth, and success of the sentiment in favor of public education in Texas, and of the system of schools established in response to it.
Perhaps too little is said of religious matters except in connection with the early Spanish Mexican missions, and in vindication of Austin from charges of insincerity in regard to the terms of his contracts regarding Catholicism. So far as the Republic and State are concerned, it is only by inference that we have any idea as to the prevailing religion or its influence upon the growth and destiny of the people.
The book treats quite clearly the effects of European politics, if contentions between different nations, each seeking its own interest, can be called by that name, upon the settlement and development of the country and its governmental institutions up to the time of annexation. It gives tersely, but accurately, the general situation of the country when Austin sought and obtained permission to plant his colony, and the responsibilities undertaken by him in carrying out the scheme. “The final decree conferring the grant gave Austin authority under direct responsibility to the Governor of Texas and the general commandant of the Eastern Internal Provinces to organize the colony into a body of militia commanded by himself; to administer justice and to preserve good order and tranquillity.” How crude and unorganized were the social and political conditions under which such a grant could emanate from a government or be carried out among a people. We hear much of “one man power,” but seldom do we find a more ultra example of centralization of authority than here. Austin was the sole depository of all military authority and at the same time were united in him full legislative, judicial, and executive jurisdictions, subject only to his responsibility to the distant government. The reviewer most heartily concurs in the opinion expressed by the deputation of Nuevo Leon, Coahuila, and Texas, that Austin needed no help from them as “his powers under the decree of the general government were ample.” The people with whom Austin had to deal as colonists were accustomed to self-government, and Austin knew their genius and temper; so, while he kept general supervision and reserved authority in himself for use in emergencies, he exercised most of this “ample power” by coöperating with and supplementing the efforts at local self-government which the colonists were ever putting forth in their several communities.
The book gives quite clearly the numerous and widely variant causes which led to the Texas Revolution and deals in a very interesting way with that unique period in our history. The incidents of the Consultation of 1835, which desired to secede from Coahuila, but remain in the Mexican Republic, are quite graphically portrayed. And the story of that remarkable example of a “house divided against itself,” the provisional government, and the war of words among its members is clearly told. The convention of 1836, and its permanent work come in for a due share of praise, but the author does not think much of the scheme of the government ad interim, a plan whose single element of strength was found in the provision that its powers should be determined by a majority vote of its own members. The stirring military events of the Revolution are given in a most rational way, special emphasis being laid on the fall of the Alamo and the heroism of Travis and its other defenders. The days and doings of the Republic find careful consideration. The delicacy of the foreign relations and the effect of the pro-slavery and anti-slavery sentiment upon the question of annexation are interestingly presented. The ever recurring question of Texan boundaries is dealt with, and also the causes of the Mexican war. Then come the days of the statehood, with their unexampled progress, checked only, first by the State's ineffectual efforts to get out of the Union, and second by the equally disastrous methods of getting it back, after it had failed to get out.
The book concludes with a chapter, on “The Texas of Today.” This is full of interesting and important information, and the facts enumerated speak volumes for the Texas of tomorrow.
Taken altogether, the book is readable, interesting, and instructive.
John C. Townes.
NOTES AND FRAGMENTS.
Early Courts of Fayette County.—The following facts relative to early sessions of the district court of Fayette County have been furnished by Mrs. Julia Lee Sinks:
Fayette County belonged to the third judicial district of the Republic. The first term of the district court was held in the spring of 1838. Hon. R. M. Williamson was judge, Jerome Alexander 106 was clerk, and H. C. Hudson district attorney. There is no record of the name of the sheriff, but inasmuch as John Breeding appears as incumbent of that office during the second term it may be assumed that he held it also during the first.
The names of the jurors who were summoned for the years 1838 and 1839 are as follows:
| Alexander, Robert. | Caldwell, William. |
| Alley, James, | Canby, Thomas. |
| Andrews, Micah. 107 | Chesney, John. |
| Andrews, Reddin. | Chew, Benjamin F. |
| Biegle, Joseph. | Chinault, F. |
| Berman, Henry. | Chodoin, Thomas. |
| Berry, David. 108 | Clift, Jesse. |
| Birt, S. P. | Conkright, John. |
| Blair, Jonathan. | Cottle, Lee F. T. |
| Brazil, George W. | Crisswell, John Y. |
| Breeding, David. | Crisswell, Leroy V. |
| Breeding, N. B. | Crisswell, William. |
| Breeding, Richard L. | Crownover, Arthur. |
| Brookfield, William. | Crownover, John. |
| Brown, Alexander. | Cunningham, John C. |
| Burnham, Jesse. 109 | Dancy, Charles. |
| Burnham, William P. | Daniel, Joseph P. |
| Darling, Socrates. | Morrow, Aaron. |
| Davis, J. L. | Morrow, Alfred. |
| Dibble, Henry. | Morrow, James. |
| Earthman, Henry. | Nabors, James. |
| Eastland, William. 110 | Niel, Joseph. |
| English, Henry. | O'Bar, Carson. |
| Evans, Vincent L. | O'Bar, John. |
| Faison, N. W. 111 | Price, James. |
| Farquhar, Joseph. | Price, Jerry. |
| Farris, William A. | Prim, William. |
| Ferril, Hiram. | Rabb, John. |
| Fitzgerald, Samuel. | Ragsdale, James. |
| Fitzgerald, William. | Robinson, Joel W. 112 |
| Graham, Andrew. | Sargeant, Jasper A. |
| Green, James. | Sarason, Joseph. |
| Grey, Lee. | Scallorn, J. W. |
| Harper, Jefferson. | Scallorn, Stephen. |
| Hill, Asa. | Sellers, Robert. |
| Hill, Jeffrey. | Simpson, William. |
| Holman, George T. | Smith, Hezekiah. |
| Holman, John. | Snyder, Gottlieb. |
| Hopson, Briggs. | Spier, George W. |
| Hudson, James P. | Stevens, James. |
| Ingraham, John. | Stewart, Lyman M. |
| Jarman, Richard. | Sullivan, D. N. V. |
| Lester, James S. | Tannehill, Jesse. |
| Lewis, William. | Taylor, David. |
| Lyon, George. | Thompson, Thomas. |
| Manton, Henry. | Thompson, William. |
| Maxwell, Thomas. | Townsend, William S. |
| Moore, John H. | Wells, Dr. James A. |
| Wistzner, Christian. 113 | Woods, Norman. 115 |
| Woods, Montville. 114 | Woods, Zadok. 116 |
Mrs. Sinks adds the following notes, written during the years 1876-1879:
Nearly forty years have passed since those jurors were impaneled. Judge, clerk, sheriff, lawyers, and jurors have nearly all gone to the unseen land. Each, as the law provided, was then at least twenty-one years of age, and many of them were older. The youngest would now be near the grand climacteric generally allowed to man. A number of them perished in the flush of early manhood. In 1842 the clerk and several of the jurors yielded up their lives in the sanguinary Dawson fight. One was shot in the decimation of the Mier prisoners, some perished in prison, and some escaped to die peacefully at home. One and all were soldiers when needed, offering their lives to build the foundations of present prosperity. The Red Fork fight, in which the Texans were commanded by Col. John H. Moore and Capt. Tom Rabb, and the fatal Dawson massacre stand eminent as part of the history of the county. Each took his share of the vicissitudes of the pioneer settlement, bearing its privations and bravely standing on its defense, and Fayette may well cherish with pride the memory of her early sons.
There were only two presentments by the first grand jury, one for breach of the revenue laws, and the other for horse stealing. There were but two cases on the civil docket, and both were dismissed at the cost of the plaintiff. A fine of one hundred dollars was entered against each of the six absent jurors, to be made final at the next term of the court, unless satisfactory reasons to the contrary should be given. Thus it will be seen how the dignity of the law was upheld;—four cases, and fines for non-attendance of jurors amounting to six hundred dollars!
At this term of the court two applications for admission to the bar were made and granted, one by Thomas W. Cox, the other by Willard Wadham. The judge appointed as examiners James R. Jenkins on the civil law, John Hemphill (afterwards chief justice) on the common law, and Solicitor Hudson on the criminal law.
The last of these was of Scotch antecedents, and was frequently called among his friends “Sir Jeffrey Hudson.” He prided himself on his intimate knowledge of Scotch literature. The writer still has in her possession a list of all the Scottish clans with their distinctive badges sent her by “Sir Jeffrey” many years ago.
Mr. Cox, together with another Fayette County man, Mr. John Blackburn, was among those Mier prisoners whom the Mexicans failed to recapture after they broke away from their captors at the hacienda del Salado. I well remember the address he delivered in La Grange after his escape from Mexico, and with what eagerness the people flocked to hear his tale of daring. He was a man of much native eloquence, and the graphic description he gave of his adventures made a strong impression upon his hearers. 117
AFFAIRS OF THE ASSOCIATION.
There is under consideration an amendment to the constitution of the Association that will probably be offered at the next meeting. The proposed amendment would establish a small initiation fee for the fellowship and lower the annual dues of fellows to the general level of two dollars. The fee for life membership would, of course, be correspondingly lowered.
The annual meeting of the Texas State Historical Association was held at Baylor University, Waco, April 21, 1903, 2:30 p. m. Vice-President F. R. Lubbock occupied the chair. The election of officers for the ensuing year resulted as follows: Judge John H. Reagan was re-elected president, President D. F. Houston first vice-president, Mrs. Julia Lee Sinks second vice-president, ex-Governor F. R. Lubbock third vice-president, Mr. T. S. Miller fourth vice-president, and Mr. E. C. Barker corresponding secretary and treasurer; Judge Z. T. Fulmore was elected member of the council from the fellows for the term ending 1906, and Judge Beauregard Bryan member of council from the members for the term ending in 1908. Seventy-three new members were elected whose names are as follows:
-
J. Pinckney Henderson Adams, 50 West 94th Street, New York City, N. Y.
-
W. H. Adamson, Marshall, Texas.
-
L. B. Allen, Roby, Texas.
-
B. J. Benton, Nocona, Texas.
-
Joe W. Beverly, Crowell, Foard county, Texas.
-
W. H. Bledsoe, Cleburne, Texas.
-
T. M. Brooks, Forney, Texas.
-
C. G. Carttar, 410 Garza Street, San Antonio, Texas.
-
Horace P. Chase, El Paso, Texas.
-
Jos. E. Cockrell, 471 Gaston Ave., Dallas, Texas.
-
G. T. Cope, Austin, Texas.
-
(Miss) Fannie Ellen Crockett, Manor, Texas.
-
T. J. Crooks, Denison, Texas.
-
Thos. L. Cross, Galveston, Texas.
-
Dr. Jno. Cunningham, Ravenna, Texas.
-
E. W. Curling, Montgomery, Texas.
-
J. O. Davis, 1016½ Congress Ave., Houston, Texas.
-
Willie H. Downs, Marshall, Texas.
-
William Eilers, Warda, Texas.
-
W. L. Estes, Texarkana, Texas.
-
Dr. J. W. Fallen, Wilmer, Texas.
-
C. W. Feuge, Bellville, Texas.
-
Hopkins R. Fitzpatrick, 1714 Lavaca Street, Austin, Texas.
-
E. L. Gallio, Engle, Texas.
-
Wm. R. Gardner, Winkler, Texas.
-
Geo. H. Gould, Palestine, Texas.
-
P. J. Hamilton, Mobile, Alabama.
-
T. A. Helbig, Houston, Texas.
-
Jas. C. T. Hendrix, Luna, Texas.
-
Jos. A. Hill, Moody, Texas.
-
James E. Hill, Livingston, Texas.
-
Geo. H. Hogan, Box 333, Ennis, Texas.
-
Robt. H. Hopkins, Jr., Denton, Texas.
-
A. R. Howard, Palestine, Texas.
-
J. T. Howard, 842 S. Ervay Street, Dallas, Texas.
-
Jno. J. Labarthe, 221 22nd Street, Galveston, Texas.
-
Charles H. Letzerich, Wichita Falls, Texas.
-
John Lynch, San Augustine, Texas.
-
Jas. H. Lynn, Guthrie, Texas.
-
John T. McCarthy, Galveston, Texas.
-
W. L. Martin, Marshall, Texas.
-
W. B. Mitchell, Santa Anna, Texas.
-
D. B. Mizell, Kaufman, Texas.
-
Kate Nunley, Hereford, Texas.
-
Prof. T. W. Page, Austin, Texas.
-
Daniel Parker, Elkhart, Texas.
-
F. J. Parna, Ammannsville, Texas.
-
Millard Patterson, El Paso, Texas.
-
Geo. S. Perkins, Greenville, Texas.
-
W. D. Pitts, Ferris, Texas.
-
Andrew Jackson Ritchie, Baylor University, Waco, Texas.
-
Rollin W. Rodgers, Texarkana, Texas.
-
W. S. Rowland, Temple, Texas.
-
John O. Rowlett, Edna, Texas.
-
Henry Rugeley, Bay City, Texas.
-
L. B. Russell, Comanche, Texas.
-
E. B. H. Schneider, Houston, Texas.
-
Capt. H. L. Scott, care War Dept., Washington, D. C.
-
Gen. W. H. Stacy, Austin, Texas.
-
Judge Sam Streetman, Austin, Texas.
-
Albert Tyson, Rising Star, Texas.
-
Rube S. Wells, Paris, Texas.
-
Wm. Moore White, care San Antonio Drug Co., San Antonio, Texas.
-
C. M. Wilcox, Turtle Bayou, Texas.
-
A. L. Williamson, Benjamin, Texas.
-
J. W. Williamson, Hillsboro, Texas.
-
Horace E. Wilson, Junction, Texas.
-
Thos. B. Wilson, Box 25, McKinney, Texas.
-
J. L. Young, Cooper, Texas.
-
History Club of San Antonio, 222 Craig Place, San Antonio, Texas.
Western Reserve Historical Society, Cleveland, Ohio.
Woman's Club of San Angelo, Mrs. C. E. Frazier-Hudson, Secretary, San Angelo, Texas.
Dr. Garrison, recording secretary of the Association, made a general report of its condition showing that many valuable gifts of material had been received during the year, and that there was a balance of about eight hundred dollars in the treasury. On motion of Mrs. Cornelia Branch Stone a vote of thanks was given Dr. Garrison for his faithful work on behalf of the Association.
Miles Squiers Bennet.
Honorary Life Member Texas State Historical Association, 1897-1903.
Member Texas Veterans' Association, 1873-1903.
Born, December 14, 1818.
Died, May 3, 1903.
2. Ibid., 104.
3. Miguel M. Lerdo, Apuntes Históricos de Vera Cruz, II 363-364, notes (Translation).
4. Ibid., 365.
5. Bancroft, History of Mexico, V 107 et seq.
6. Juan Suarez y Navarro, Historia de Mexico y del General Santa Anna (cited in further notes as Historia de Mexico) 282.
7. Filisola, Memorias para la Historia de la Guerra de Tejas (ed. 1848, cited in further notes as Memorias), I 254-255; Suarez y Navarro, Historia de Mexico, 314. Filisola mentions only Soto la Marina, but Suarez y Navarro adds Matamoros. From the account of what followed we may be sure that Mejía's intention was to fall upon both places See further the Texas Gazette (published at Brazoria), July 23, 1832.
8. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
9. Guerra to principal Commandant of Coahuila and Texas, July 16, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives. These five vessels were “the Brig of War Santa Anna, and the armed schooners Moctezuma of Vera Cruz, Moctezuma of Tampico, Adela, and Ameria.” See translated extract from the Matamoros Boletín in Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
10. Austin to Perry, June 29, 1832, and Austin to Ugartechea, July 2, 1832, Austin Papers. Filisola says: “two hundred and fifty or three hundred infantry of the citizen soldiery and some regulars.” Memorias, I 225.
11. Filisola, Memorias, I 226.
12. Extract from Matamoros Boletín in Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832. Austin, writing to Ugartechea from Matamoros, July 2, 1832, says that Mejía “disembarked in the Brazo on the 25th.” Suarez y Navarro (Historia de Mexico, 314) also says that he landed on the 25th. I have followed the newspaper statement, as probably more accurate.
13. The Boletín states that Yhari had four hundred men in his guard. Filisola (Memorias, I 226) says that Yhari was taken prisoner together with three or four men who had served him.
14. Filisola (Memorias, I 226) says that Mejía went to Boca Chica with his whole force.
15. Filisola's statement (Memorias, I 227) is as follows (translation) : “At dawn Mejía put his lines in motion, and pushed onward. Nearing la Burrita he descried a body of 70 or 80 cavalry drawn up in battle array.”
16. Filisola (Memorias, I 228) writes that fifteen recruits of the eleventh battalion of the twelfth infantry incorporated themselves in Mejía's ranks. Thus, setting aside as gross exaggeration the statement made by the Boletín that Yhari had four hundred soldiers and accepting Filisola's account of three or four, we may be able to reconcile the discrepancies and get at the number of men who actually went over to Mejía. Filisola says that eighty in one group and fifteen in another allied themselves with him at la Burrita, while the Boletín makes these groups respectively sixty and forty. Hence, practically one hundred men were added to Mejía's forces while at and around Matamoros.
17. Austin to Ugartechea, July 2, 1832 (Austin Papers); Filisola Memorias, I 228. Austin writes that Mejía “took possession of this city on the 28th the slightest disorder or confusion not having arisen.”
18. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
19. Guerra made this move at 6 P. M., June 28. (Filisola, Memorias, I 247.) The statement of the Boletín as translated for the Texas Gazette is that “Col. Guerra with the troops in this town, Lojexo and others well known for their anti-liberal principles precipitately fled, giving the most barbarous orders to his troops, such as to bayonet the pack mules loaded with baggage and ammunition, should they be overtaken.” (See also Austin to Ugartechea, July 2, 1832. Austin Papers.)
20. Mejía had overhauled a mail packet from Brazoria and had discovered thereon some letters from Colonel Ugartechea to Guerra from which he learned of the events in Teaxs. (Filisola, Memorias, I 247-248; Guerra to commander in chief of Coahuila and Texas, July 16, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 6.)
21. Filisola, Memorias, I 256-259.
22. Mexico had reserved, by Art. 5 of the national colonization law of Aug. 18, 1824, the right to establish arsenals in Texas. (Oldham and White's Digest, Laws of Texas, 761-763.)
23. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832; Mrs. Holley, Texas (1833), 146-149.
24. For a more detailed account of these events see the article, The Disturbances at Anahuac in 1832, in the last number of this magazine.—Editor Quarterly.
25. Preserved in the Nacogdoches Archives, box 2, no. 104.
26. Brazoria was the Anglo-American settlement on the Brazos just above Velasco and was the center of insurrection in that quarter.
27. Translated from the address in the Nacogdoches Archives, box 2, no. 92.
28. Diplomatic Correspondence, Texas Archives, Department of State, box 13, no. 1238.
29. Memorias, I 261.
30. Historia de Mexico, 316.
31. Austin to governor of Coahuila-Texas, July 9, 1832. Austin Papers.
32. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832; Mora to Elosua, same date (Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 8).
33. It is about the same distance from Brazos Santiago to Tampico as it is from the former to Velasco. Hence, if Mejía completed the journey from Brazos Santiago to Velasco in forty hours, it is reasonable to suppose that he could have gone to Tampico in the same length of time. This would have given him ample opportunity to make the round trip to Tampico with some hours to spare within the four days limit.
34. Guerra to Austin, July 7, 1832; Mejía to Austin, July 8, 1832; Austin to Mejía, July 9, 1832 (translation of copy). Nacogdoches Archives, box 2, no. 80. Also Austin to Guerra, July 10, 1832 (translation of copy). Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 19.
35. Austin to Ramón Musquiz, July 18, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 5.
36. See under IV below.
37. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
38. Ibid.
39. Mrs. Holley, Texas (1833), 142.
40. Traveling at the rate at which he came from Brazos Santiago to Velasco, he should have made the bar of Galveston in six or seven hours.
41. Filisola, Memorias, I 258-261.
42. H. More to — Perry, Aug. 5, 1832. Austin Papers.
43. Ibid.
44. A manuscript copy of the resolutions in Spanish preserved in the Nacogdoches Archives (box 1, no. 10) has an additional clause here, which is translated as follows: “and the substitution in its place of a military despotism.”
45. Edward, History of Texas, 186-187.
46. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
50. Austin to Musquiz, July 28, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 13.
51. This is the delegation referred to in the letter from John Austin quoted above.
52. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
53. Ibid.
54. Austin to Musquiz, July 18, 1832; the same to the same, July 28, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, nos. 5 and 13. (Translation.)
55. Chriesman to Musquiz, Aug. 22, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 15. (Translation.)
56. Austin to Elosua, Aug. 21, 1832, in Austin Papers; Austin to Musquiz, July 28, 1832, in Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 13. (Translations.)
57. Chriesman to Ramón Musquiz, Aug. 20, 1832. Bexar Archives.
58. Mrs. Holley, Texas (1833), 142-145.
59. Ibid.
60. Copy of proceedings of town council of San Felipe, July 26, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 10.
61. Austin to Musquiz, July 28, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 13.
62. Mrs. Holley, Texas (1833), 152-154.
63. This refers to the Texans at Turtle Bayou.
64. Piedras to Elosua, July 12, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 18.
65. Ibid.
66. Proceedings of ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches, Aug. 6, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 14.
67. Piedras to Elosua, July 24, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 9.
68. Thorn to Austin, Aug. 28, 1832. Austin Papers.
69. See proceedings of ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches, Aug. 6, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 14.
70. For Tenaha.—Editor Quarterly.
71. Proceedings of ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches, Aug. 6, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 14.
72. Austin to Musquiz, Aug. 15, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 16.
73. Proceedings of ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches, Aug. 6, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 14.
74. Proceedings of ayuntamiento of Nacogdoches, Aug. 6, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 14.
75. Austin to Musquiz, July 18, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 2.
76. Resolutions adopted by citizens of San Fernando, Aug. 30, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 44, no. 1363.
77. Ibid.
78. Ibid. See also Garza to ayuntamiento of Bexar, Aug. 30, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 2, no. 66.
79. Western et al. to S. F. Austin, Aug. 24, 1832. Austin Papers.
80. Western et al. to Austin, Aug. 25, 1832. Austin Papers.
81. Proceedings of a meeting at Goliad, Sept. 1, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 44, no. 1368.
82. Filisola, Memorias, I 256.
83. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832. Also Guerra to Mora, July 16, 1832. Nacogdoches Archives, box 1, no. 6.
84. Texas Gazette, July 23, 1832.
85. These numbers are inserted and should have been bracketed in the installments of the reminiscences given in The Quarterly for January and for April.—Editor Quarterly.
86. This brier root is common in Texas. It contains a farina as palatable and wholesome as arrow-root. The Indians extract this starch by pounding the root and washing it in water.
87. [line 2] See note 1 at the end of this paper.
88. [line 5] See note A.
89. [line 29] See note B.
90. [line 9] We also recovered Varner's horse.
91. I. e., Williams first and Eccles next.—Editor Quarterly.
92. [line 27] See note 2, end of this paper.
93. See note, p. 47. If the reminiscences were ever continued in a third book, it is not now among the Austin Papers.—Editor Quarterly.
94. See note one at end of this paper.
95. See note 2 at end of paper.
96. While Capt. B. was delivering this speech, Genl. Houston sat near on his horse and listened attentively.
97. The reminiscences were written out by the collector, Mr. Kuykendall, in two small blank books. This letter, which was intended for Judge Bell (see The Quarterly, VI 236), introduces the second.—Editor Quarterly.
98. The matter belonging under this title has already appeared in The Quarterly. See Vol. IV, pp. 291-306.—Editor Quarterly.
99. See no. 7 of this series.—Editor Quarterly.
100. Query—Capt. Cheshire?
101. See note 2 at the end of this paper.—Editor Quarterly.
102. See The Quarterly, I 301-302.—Editor Quarterly.
103. This, of course, is Mr. Kuykendall's title. As will be seen from the matter, the caption is too comprehensive.—Editor Quarterly.
104. This is Mr. Kuykendall's bracket.—Editor Quarterly.
105. The italics are Mr. Kuykendall's. Several other departures from the text—not very important, perhaps, but still worth noting—have been made in this quotation.—Editor Quarterly.
106. Killed in the Dawson fight.
107. San Jacinto soldier.
108. Killed in the Dawson fight.
109. One of the Old Three Hundred. [He himself spelled his name Burnam. See The Quarterly, V 12, note.—Editor Quarterly.]
110. Shot in the decimation at the hacienda del Salado.
111. Taken prisoner in the Dawson fight. He was thoughtful enough to leave a record of his comrades left alive after the fight on the wall of a house in San Antonio.
112. Properly spelled Robison. See The Quarterly, VI 258.—Editor Quarterly.
113. San Jacinto soldier. [The name is spelled “Winner” in the published lists. The names of Wm. Crisswell, James S. Lester, and Joel W. Robison of this list also appear in the roll of those taking part in the battle of San Jacinto, though Crisswell is spelled there with one s.—Editor Quarterly.]
114. Killed in the Dawson fight.
115. Died in Perote Prison.
116. Killed in the Dawson fight. Father of Montville Woods. [Brown says (History of Texas, II 227) what seems to mean that Zadok Woods was father of Norman B. Woods and of Gonzalvo Woods, who escaped from the Dawson massacre.—Editor Quarterly.]
117. Still another Fayette County man who was among those not recaptured after the affair at the hacienda del Salado was Rufus Alexander. He escaped in company with William Oldham. A full account of their adventures would have made an interesting page in history, but with frequent promises I was defeated in getting the proper memoranda for it.
How to cite:
"Issue View", Volume 007, Number 1, Southwestern Historical Quarterly Online. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/publications/journals/shq/online/v007/n1/issue.html
[Accessed Sun Nov 22 21:41:09 CST 2009]
