Vol. VII. JANUARY, 1904. No. 3.
The publication committee and the editor disclaim responsibility for views expressed by contributors to the Quarterly.
After the adoption of the Missouri compromise, there remained to the South only the limits of Florida and Arkansas and the territory extending west from the latter to the Spanish possessions for the expansion of her “peculiar institution.” From the northern side of the compromise line stretched an imperial domain to the furthermost boundary of the United States, dedicated to freedom by that famous bill. The North found an outlet for its restless population in this immense sweep of territory, acquired by the purchase of Louisiana; but the creation of new political centers by this tide threatened to disturb again the equilibrium between the North and the South. The coils of free-soilism seemed at that time to be gradually closing around the area appropriated to the slave-holding States. Even throughout Mexico, which stood in the way of any possible future expansion toward the west, that form of servitude permitted by the Southern States was abolished in 1829. Only in the department of Texas, then being settled by colonists from the South, had this decree been left inoperative. 1
After the Fredonian revolt (1826-1827), the Mexicans regarded with serious apprehension the settlement of Texas by the Anglo-Americans, a race differing from them in origin, habits, religion, and political training. To frustrate any further attempt to separate the department from the Southern republic and annex it to the United States, the Mexican congress passed a law prohibiting the colonization of her border States by citizens of countries adjacent and forbidding the further importation of slaves, a measure evidently intended to exclude settlers from the Anglo-American States. 2 Subsequently Santa Anna abrogated this law and gave conciliatory assurances to deceive and quiet the enraged colonists; but, at the same time, with characteristic craftiness, he was forging, by political intrigue, the fetters of an intolerable despotism. It required no deep penetration to foresee the effect of severe repressive measures on the sturdy, liberty loving colonists, and the revolution which culminated on the field of San Jacinto in the accomplishment of Texan independence.
The States of the South, circumscribed both by the ordinance of 1787 and the Missouri compromise, looked to the acquisition of Texas as a way of relief from the impending constriction with the resulting loss of influence in national legislation. Senator John Bell, of Tennessee, in 1850, affirmed that “the general, though by no means universal, sentiment of the slave States, was in favor of the policy of annexation, as a means of preserving the equilibrium of power between the free and the slave States.” 3 Daniel Webster, in his memorable speech of March 7, 1850, said that the profitable cultivation of cotton gave a new desire to promote slavery, to spread it, and to use its labor. The cotton age became a golden age for the South, and the desire for improvement and accumulation which it gratified soon became “an eagerness for other territory—a new area or new areas for the cultivation of the cotton crop”; and new measures were brought forward rapidly, one after another, to accomplish the end desired. 4 Unquestionably, at that time, cotton was found to be more profitable than any other agricultural product, and hence its cultivation confirmed or created a sentiment in favor of slavery; yet there were still vast areas in the Gulf States of fertile, virgin soil, suited for its cultivation. The economic consideration for acquiring “other territory” for its cultivation was certainly less urgent and intense than the desire for sectional aggrandizement in order to maintain the political power and thereby preserve the rights of the South. 5 Texas possessed interests and ties that bound her to the South. The men who colonized Texas, followed Houston to San Jacinto, filled the offices and shaped the destiny of the young republic, and engrafted in the constitution an article recognizing slavery and permitting the importation of negroes only from the United States, 6 were mostly immigrants from the slave-holding States. 7 Annexation to the United States was a natural sequence to such intimate affinities.
The treaty for the annexation of Texas, negotiated during Tyler's administration by Mr. Calhoun, secretary of state, was signed by the Texan commissioners, but was rejected in the senate of the United States by the vote of Northern senators, who contended that it favored the extension and perpetuation of slavery, and would be accepted by Mexico as cause for a declaration of war. The rejection of the treaty, however, was but a temporary defeat of the measure. The project became the cardinal policy in the next presidential election, controlled the nomination, and elected Mr. Polk to the presidency. The fear of foreign interference in the affairs of Texas, 8 the glorification of the nation's manifest destiny, 9 and the promise offered by annexation of preserving the equilibrium of the sections, succeeded in coalescing opposing political factions and won such increased support, that joint resolutions providing for annexation passed congress, and were signed among the last official acts of Tyler's administration.
Pending this overture to Texas of annexation, the United States was warned through Mr. Donelson, chargé to Texas, that the ministers of France and England had preceded him to the Texan seat of government, bearing a joint note from the embassies of these powers, conveying the consent of Mexico to acknowledge the independence of Texas on condition that she would not annex herself, or become subject to any other country. 10 But the Texan congress, by a unanimous vote, acceded to the proposals for annexation, and rejected those offered by Mexico. The two European powers no doubt wished to see Texas under an English or joint protectorate, without slavery, but “the United States courted Texas as an ardent lover wooes his mistress,” and at last won the suit. In accordance with the terms of annexation, the United States was charged with the duty of effecting a settlement of the western boundary of the State.
The eastern boundary of the Republic of Texas conformed to the limits established by the treaty of 1821 between the United States and Mexico, extending northward to the forty-second degree of latitude, a line beyond the northern boundary of Colorado. On the west, as a part of the Mexican Republic, Texas was bounded near the Gulf by the Nueces River and further inland by the Medina, 11 but as a republic, by an act of her congress, passed in 1836, she asserted a claim to all the territory southwestward and westward to the Rio Grande and to a line running from its source northward to the forty-second parallel.
At the time of annexation, as before mentioned, a state of war existed between Texas and Mexico, each asserting sovereignty over territory claimed by the other, though the independence of the former had been acknowledged by the United States and some of the European powers, and her autonomy had been maintained without serious invasion for the period of ten years. But Texas was admitted into the Union with her well-known and declared, though disputed, western boundary. This boundary the government, according to the terms of annexation, attempted to adjust through its envoy to Mexico, who, with other instructions, was empowered to purchase at least the territory of New Mexico east of the Rio Grande, evidently for the purpose of affirming the right of Texas and to acquire it in a way least offensive to Mexico. 12 Having succeeded to the claim set up by the Texan Republic, and having failed to fix the boundary through diplomatic channels, the United States was “functus officio as to the power she had reserved” in annexing Texas, and her obligation under the constitution “to protect Texas to the full extent of her asserted boundary, became single and absolute.”
The invasion of the disputed territory by armed forces from beyond the Rio Grande precipitated the war with Mexico. In a message invoking the action of Congress to recognize a state of war and to grant means for prosecuting it, President Polk declared that Mexico had invaded our territory, and “shed American blood upon American soil.” Authoritative action immediately prevailed in congress over the opposition of the Whigs, led by Clay, Corwin, and Webster, who protested that the war was wantonly started to despoil a weaker nation and to obtain by conquest, under the plea of indemnity, territory for the expansion of Southern interest. The “Spot Resolutions” introduced by Abraham Lincoln, then a member of the house of representatives, requiring the president to locate the spot where American blood had been shed, and to inform the house whether the “citizens” referred to in his message had not been armed soldiers, were but a covert insinuation that a collision had been designedly provoked for the purpose of commencing a war. The earnest and eloquent protest of Senator Corwin against the policy and continuance of the war added a classic to American oratory, but it did not prevent Congress from voting supplies. In 1846, a bill being before Congress on the recommendation of the president for an appropriation of three millions of dollars to conclude a treaty of peace, Wilmot of Pennsylvania threatened the further expansion of slavery by introducing as an amendment to the bill his famous proviso. The amended bill passed the house, but the proviso was stricken out in the senate, and the original bill passed both branches of congress.
The treaty of peace, signed at Guadalupe Hidalgo, making the Rio Grande from near El Paso to the Gulf the boundary, and ceding New Mexico and California to the United States, again brought to the front the question involved in the Wilmot proviso. Its agitation excited sectional apprehension and feeling so intensely, that nearly every subject of congressional action was drawn into the “great and dangerous maelstrom of African slavery.” The annexation of Texas had restored the equilibrium between the two sections of the Union, but the new acquisitions again opened the contest for sectional supremacy in the national legislature. California had received a sudden and rapid immigration, attracted by the discovery of gold, which forced the consideration of her admission into the Union, while the demands of Utah and New Mexico for territorial governments revived the exciting question of the right to introduce slavery into the public domain of the United States.
The first session of the Thirty-first Congress faced these issues and addressed itself to the difficult task of restoring quiet to the disturbed country by means of pacific measures. This congress, commencing its first session December 1, 1849, and closing it September 30, 1850, became memorable in the political history of the government. It was especially noted for its array of talent, the melancholy incidents that attended it, the important issues that demanded settlement, the fervency of the debates, and the unusual length of the session.
In the deliberations of this session the great American triumverate participated for the last time. The strenuous, uncompromising defender of the rights reserved by the constitution to the States, Mr. Calhoun, in his last argument, delivered March 4, 1850, said: “Looking back to the long course of forty years' service here, I have the consolation to believe, that I have never done one act which would weaken it [the Union]—that I have done full justice to all sections. And if I have ever been exposed to the imputation of a contrary motive, it is because I have been willing to defend my section from unconstitutional encroachments.” 13 Enfeebled by long, wasting disease, he made his last defense of the South, and less than one month afterwards, his death was announced to the senate. Responding to the resolutions introduced by Calhoun's colleague, from South Carolina, Clay and Webster, with whom he had so often crossed swords in political contest, paid eloquent tributes to the purity of his exalted patriotism, his commanding talents, and the eminent virtues of his “unimpeached honor and character.” In July, the illustrious expounder of the constitution, Daniel Webster, resigned his seat to become secretary of state under Fillmore, never to return to the arena of his brilliant triumphs. Clay, whose name had been associated with so many pacific measures, remained to champion his last compromise, but that session virtually closed his long, distinguished career. There were other eminent statesmen in both chambers, many of whom lived to see the apprehended dissolution of the Union become an accomplished fact and to participate in the legislation of the Reconstruction period.
As before observed, upon this congress devolved the duty of considering measures affecting the status of the new acquisition, the most serious of which was the adjustment of the boundary between Texas and New Mexico. As the Democrats had a majority of only eight in the senate, while thirteen Free Soliers held the balance of power in the house between 112 Democrats and 105 Whigs, 14 it was obvious that a fierce and protracted struggle would ensue in the effort to secure a fair scheme of pacification.
To settle the disputed boundary, Mr. Benton introduced a bill early in the session to retire the western limit of Texas to the parallel of 102 degrees of west longitude, and the northern boundary “from the frozen region of 42 to the genial clime of 34,” two and one-half degrees south of the Missouri compromise line, ceding to the United State all the territory exterior to these limits. The senator said that the territory which Texas claimed at the time of her admission into the Union was too large. “She covers sixteen degrees of latitude, and fourteen degrees of longitude. She extends from 26 to 42 degrees of north latitude, and from 96 to 110 west longitude; that is to say, from four degree south of New Orleans to near four degrees north of St. Louis, and from the longitude of Western Missouri to the summit of the Rocky Mountains. Her southeast corner is in the mouth of the Rio Grande—region of perpetual flowers; her northwest corner is near the South Pass in the Rocky Mountains—region of eternal snow.” 15 By the line Benton proposed, the boundary commenced about three hundred miles, on a straight line, below El Paso, near the mouth of the Pecos, and extended northward to the 34th degree of north latitude, which he said conformed to the civil and geographical divisions of both countries. 16
On the same day, Senator Foote, of Mississippi, who entertained a bitter resentment against the Missouri senator, 17 introduced an omnibus bill providing territorial governments for the newly acquired possessions, and enabling the citizens of Texas east of the Brazos river to be organized into a state by the consent of Texas, to be designated as the State of Jacinto. The bill made the Rio Grande the boundary between New Mexico and Texas. In explaining his bill Foote uttered a scathing denunciation of Benton for unsettling the slavery question in attempting to surrender to free soilism conceded slave territory, applying to him the language used by Cicero in delineating the character of the degenerate Roman senator. 18 The 53rd section of the bill embraced a provision that the constitution and the laws of the United States were to be extended over the territories and to be in full force, intending that the constitution should follow the flag and prevent the recognition of the lex loci.
To quiet all agitation arising from the institution of slavery, the great pacificator, Henry Clay, introduced a series of resolutions, January 29, one of which fixed the western boundary of Texas along the Rio Grande northward to the southern line of New Mexico, conceded to be at or near El Paso, thence eastwardly to the line as established between the United States and Spain—excluding all the territory of New Mexico east of the river from the jurisdiction of the State. The senator denied the validity of the Texan title to any portion of New Mexico, but added that certain facts made her claim plausible, and for the sake of general quiet and harmony he was willing to tender a reasonable sum for its relinquishment. 19 In reply, Senator Rusk maintained that the title of Texas to all of New Mexico east of the Rio Grande was incontrovertible, and protested against any attempt to dismember Texas “to make a peace offering to a spirit of encroachment on the constitutional rights of one-half of this Union.” 20
Another compromise was embraced in the resolutions offered. February 28, by Senator Bell, proposing, with the assent of Texas, to restrict her limits within the territory lying east of the Trinity and south of Red River, to provide for a new state on the west, and extending north to the 34th degree of north latitude, and to accept a cession from the State of all the unappropriated domain west of the Colorado, and extending north to the 42d parallel. Provision was made for the prospective admission of another state to be carved out of the unappropriated domain west of the Colorado and south of the 34th parallel, which would embrace a part of the present limits of New Mexico, while the territory north of the line, containing all of the Panhandle, was to be incorporated with the territory of New Mexico. 21 The bill surrendered more than two and one-half degrees of slave territory for which the author claimed compensation was made by including an equivalent of free territory in the limits of the prospective state west of the Colorado. The senator, whose bill was regarded as a modified form of the executive policy, 22 sought to recognize by its terms the conditions and guarantees of the joint resolutions of annexation by the creation of two new states, one to offset the admission of California into the Union and the other of New Mexico.
Resolutions of a similar nature to the foregoing were introduced in the house of representatives, but no particular measure seemed to warrant exclusive consideration. It became evident that the discussion of abstract resolutions was delaying a speedy, deliberate, and final settlement of the distracting questions, and to avert further agitation, the senate, April 19, raised by ballot a committee of thirteen to mature a scheme of compromise for the adjustment of the pending questions growing out of the subject of slavery. The crisis certainly had become intense and exigent to justify an expedient so unusual in so conservative a body. The chairman of the committee, Mr. Clay, on May 18, presented its report and the bill which it had framed, known as the Compromise bill. This was a composite measure, providing for the admission of California without slavery, the establishment of territorial governments in Utah and New Mexico, without the Wilmot proviso, and the settlement of the disputed boundary between New Mexico and Texas. “This garment of compromise, thus quilted of various fabrics with artistic skill,” was pieced out with two other bills concerning slavery in the District of Columbia and the recovery of fugitive slaves.
The first subject to command the attention of the committee had been the resolutions of Senator Bell providing for additional states within the limits of Texas. It decided that in the execution of the compact with Texas, the initiative in constituting a new state should not originate in congress, but should be taken by the people themselves within the territorial limits of the proposed new state with the consent of Texas, and the majority declined to recommend any new state or states to be carved out of Texan territory. The boundary proposed for Texas in the bill recognized the Rio Grande to a point twenty miles in a straight line above El Paso and thence eastwardly to a point where the 100th degree of west longitude crosses Red River, excluding from the present limits of Texas all the territory north of a line running from near El Paso to a point on the western line of Childress county. Mr. Clay stated that the beginning of the line that distance above, instead of at El Paso, on the true line of New Mexico, was due to the desire of Texas to bring within her limits some settlements above El Paso, and also a desire on their part to be attached to the State. 23 He thought the true boundary of New Mexico east of the river would be a line beginning at El Paso, thence running to the head of Red River, and from there northward to the 42d parallel of north latitude. 24 In Clay's opinion, the divisional line of the compromise bill would detach a small triangle from the limits of New Mexico, but the loss would be compensated by the area added to the territory north of the line.
The boundary of New Mexico, as well as the boundaries of other territory taken from Mexico, seemed to be an uncertain quantity, with such values as political considerations assigned. Senator Benton contended that the proposed line would “cut New Mexico in two just below the hips,” and alienate 70,000 square miles of her territory. To avoid dismembering New Mexico, he proposed to commence the line at a point on the Rio Grande, where it is crossed by the 102d meridian west from Greenwich, thence running north along that meridian to the 34th parallel, and thence eastwardly to the intersection of the 100th meridian with Red River, 25 which would have alienated a vast area of the present domain of Texas. It is true that this country west of the Pecos, embraced in Benton's amendment, was not unknown to the early Spanish explorers. Coronado traversed the northern part, and in the country of the Teguas, in the valley of the Rio Grande, made his winter quarters in 1540. 26 In 1581, Father Rodriguez, accompanied by two other Franciscans and a few soldiers, went down the Conchos, and up the Rio Grande, naming the country San Felipe—“perhaps San Felipe de Nuevo Mexico,” says Bancroft. The following year, Espejo went by the same route, and after an extended exploration returned down the Pecos to the Rio Grande, calling the country Nueva Andalucia, but the name soon changed to New Mexico. 27 In 1589, Juan de Oñate, as governor and captain-general, took possession of the region around El Paso. Benton claimed to have based his contention on ancient authorities.
Senator Underwood found according to Humboldt's work and map that the line of New Mexico crossed the Norte at the 32d parallel and then ran almost north to the 38th, including a very small margin of the east side of the river, so by this delineation the committee's line would take no part of the territory of New Mexico. 28 Senator Bradbury quoted Wislizenus, who says: “New Mexico has generally been applied only to the settled country within the 32nd and 38th degrees of north latitude, and from about 104 to 108 degrees of longitude west of Greenwich.” No serious efforts, however, were made, except by Benton, to conform the line to any supposed boundary assigned to New Mexico.
An amendment to restore the limits along the line claimed by Texas opened up the question of the validity of the State's title, and made the disputed boundary the leading issue of the compromise. The Texan delegation and their supporters believed that the treaty signed by Santa Anna and Filisola, after the defeat of the Mexican army at San Jacinto, was binding on Mexico, especially as she had participated in its benefits; that the act of the Texas congress, in 1836, defining the boundary of the Republic, was a formal notice to the powers of her claims; that the joint resolutions of annexation recognized her right to the territory lying north of 36° 30’, and authorized the United States to adjust any boundary dispute that might arise with other governments; and that this provision for adjustment constituted the United States a trustee to act in behalf of Texas, which precluded the government from assuming at any time the place of adversary litigant and setting up title in itself to the territory claimed by Texas. They asserted that President Polk conceded the claim in announcing the invasion of American territory by armed forces; that congress affirmed it in the declaration that war existed by act of Mexico in sending her troops across the Rio Grande; and that the instructions of the secretary of war to the commander at Santa Fé admitted the right of possession to belong to Texas. Senator Hunter said, “Our ministers to Mexico were instructed to maintain this claim. Our President, Mr. Polk, in reply to a letter from the Governor of Texas, acknowledged the right of Texas to the country, and excused his military possession of Santa Fé on account of the necessities of war. A map was made a part of the treaty of peace with Mexico, which marked the Rio Grande as the western limit of Texas. In every way in which it could be done, the title of Texas had been recognized by our Government.”
On the other hand, the opposition to the claim of Texas was no less earnest. It was argued that the boundary of New Mexico was well defined, and no part was fairly included within the limits of Texas, or had ever been subject to her sovereignty by conquest or otherwise; that the treaty made in 1836 was invalid, because it was made with a captive, under duress, and had never been ratified by Mexico; that Texas had never extended civil or military jurisdiction over the disputed territory; that the resolution of annexation only imposed an obligation on the United States to secure the area limited by the Nueces on the west and the Red river on the north; that New Mexico had never revolted and allied herself to Texas; and that the United States had acquired title and possession to the territory by purchase and conquest. Such, in brief, were some of the arguments advanced during the discussion on the compromise bill, and the amendment recognizing the boundary claimed by Texas.
Any question relating to slavery in the territories involved the area Texas was asked to cede, 29 for its status, as free or slave, would be determined by the bill itself or by territorial legislation. The first amendment to the bill, offered by Senator Davis, of Mississippi, was in effect to prevent the territorial legislature from legislating against the right of property growing out of the institution of slavery. He said it was introduced to test the sense of the senate, whether the right of property as it existed in the slave holding states of the Union should receive the protection given to any other property in the territories of the United States. 30 Senator Seward immediately proposed to strike out the amendment and insert the Wilmot proviso. The amendments offered by these distinguished ultraists, entertaining antagonistic policies, early forecast the character of the opposition to the compromise measures.
The question of the extension or restriction of slavery provoked the bitterest discussion, and delayed the vote on the proposed measures. The Free Soilers maintained that the right delegated to congress to organize governments for the territories included the power of legislation for the inhibition of slavery; that equal rights could only be claimed by the citizens of the States; that the institution existed only by virtue of local law; and that it “required for its validity and legality previous express legislative enactment.”
On the other hand, the opinions of the South as to our system of government and the equal rights of the states to the territories, were clearly expressed in Mr. Calhoun's resolutions, introduced in the senate in 1847, 31 and in the very earnest and cogent argument of Chief Justice Sharkey, of Mississippi, as quoted by Senator Foote. 32
Ancillary to the theory of the restrictionists was the contention that as slavery was prohibited by the laws of Mexico throughout her domain, including the portion Texas claimed, the lex loci, as a municipal regulation, still prevailed and interdicted slavery, without the intervention of congress. 33 Senator Baldwin, of Connecticut, for the purpose of defining especially the condition of the territory claimed by Texas, offered an amendment declaring that this law of Mexico should remain in force in the acquired territory until altered or repealed by congress. This line of attack had been met as early as 1848, by Mr. Calhoun, who said, “To extend them [the humane provisions of the laws of nations] further and give them the force of excluding emigrants from the United States, because their property or religion are such as are prohibited from being introduced by the laws of Mexico, would not only exclude a great majority of the people of the United States from emigrating into the acquired territory, but would be to give a higher authority to the extinct authority of Mexico over the territory than to out actual authority over it. I say the great majority, for the laws of Mexico not only prohibit the introduction of slaves, but of many other descriptions of property, and also the Protestant religion, which Congress itself can not prohibit. To such absurdity would the supposition lead.” 34
It was maintained that the constitution followed the flag into the ceded territories, not as “a mere cripple,” but proprio vigore to secure and protect every right guaranteed to the citizens. 35 International usage did not warrant the conclusion that the lex loci, opposed to provisions of the constitution assertive of inalienable rights of liberty, property, and the religion which they professed, should prevail until abrogated by congress. The page of history is yet fresh which records the renewal of the question of the supreme authority of the constitution over the islands acquired by the Spanish American war. History repeats itself in the contention that the constitution follows the flag only so far as congress enacts that it shall.
Many senators and representatives who opposed the extension of slave territory declined to apply the principle of the Wilmot proviso to the compromise bill, as such an amendment would be considered a taunt and a designed indignity, and unnecessarily intensify the resentment existing between the sections. With Mr. Webster, they believed that the soil, climate and physical conditions had already consecrated the new domain to freedom by an irrepealable law, and that it was not necessary “to reaffirm an ordinance of nature, nor to reenact the will of God.”
A speedy and satisfactory adjustment of the boundary dispute was urged to avoid a threatened conflict between the troops of Texas and the United States. The governor of Texas had dispatched a commissioner with full powers to extend civil jurisdiction over four unorganized counties within the disputed district; but the United States officer, serving at Santa Fé as military governor of New Mexico, interposed adversely by an effort to establish a separate government for the territory, which would extend over the part claimed by Texas. Governor Bell promptly addressed a letter to the president, inquiring if the military governor, Colonel Monroe, had transcended his instructions, and if his proclamation for the assembling of a convention had the president's approval.
Fillmore made the letter the subject of a special message to congress, in which he adverted to the convoking of the legislature of Texas by the governor for the purpose of establishing by force the laws and the jurisdiction of the State over the unorganized counties, and charged that such proceedings were of so grave a character as to threaten a dangerous crisis, and of so great importance as to demand a speedy and amicable adjustment. He maintained the proposition that the constitution, as well as the acts of 1795 and 1807, concerning the power and duty of the president where the laws were obstructed, would compel him to interpose the strength of the United States to resist any force that Texas might send to establish her authority over the territory, as long as the controversy remained undetermined. He opposed a joint commission to formulate an acceptable adjustment, and urged congress to establish a divisional line with the assent of Texas, and allow a fair and liberal indemnity for the surrender of the State's claim. 36 The friends of the administration considered the message mild, dignified, and conciliatory, while Alexander Stephens and others declared the doctrine announced to be a menace and a dangerous assumption of power, revolutionary in its tendencies, and not warranted by a true construction of the acts cited or by the constitution. 37
The debate indicated that serious apprehensions were entertained that a conflict on the Rio Grande, fateful in results to the government, was imminent. In the speech of Mr. Stephens, just cited, he said, “The first Federal gun that shall be fired against the people of Texas without the authority of law will be a signal for the freemen from the Delaware to the Rio Grande to rally to the rescue.” Henry Clay, who was never considered an alarmist, said, “If a war breaks out between her [Texas] and the troops of the United States on the upper Rio Grande, there are ardent, enthusiastic spirits of Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama, that will flock to the standard of Texas, contending, as they believe they will be contending, for slave territory. And they will be drawn on, State by State, in all human probability, from the banks of the Rio Grande to the banks of that river which flows by the tomb of Washington.” 38 Winthrop, who succeeded Webster in the senate, preferred to have the boundary run by gold rather than by steel; by money than by blood. 39 The menacing doctrine of the president's message and the reputation of the Texans for vigorous and determined action in support of their rights warned the more conservative element in Congress that it would be better “to purchase a peace” than risk the result of further agitation and angry controversy.
The opposition to the proposed adjustment, to the boundary which it defined, and the indemnity offered Texas for the relinquishment of her claim, finally defeated the entire compromise bill, and by an unexpected procedure. Senator Bradbury, of Maine, offered an amendment to strike out all relating to the plan of settlement with Texas, and insert in lieu a provision for the appointment of three commissioners to act with a like number to be appointed by Texas to define the true and legitimate boundary of the State, and agree on considerations and conditions for its establishment, but to be binding only when approved by both governments. 40 To guard the interest of Texas, Senator Dawson presented an amendment to the effect that no territorial government authorized by the act, nor any state established for New Mexico, should become effective east of the Rio Grande, until the boundary line should be agreed to by Texas and the United States, 41 which was adopted by a vote of 30 to 28, three Southern Senators, Benton, Underwood, and Pearce, voting nay. Then to exclude the implication of title and the jurisdiction of Texas, guarded by Dawson's amendment, Pearce moved to strike from the compromise bill all that related to New Mexico and Texas, which was adopted by a vote of 33 to 22, the extremists of both sections voting yea to kill the bill. 42 This was the entering wedge to disrupt the compromise as a composite measure and cause its defeat.
Senator Pearce thought that the disputed boundary of Texas was the final difficulty of the compromise bill, and would be the principal cause of its defeat. He, therefore, presented a bill, unconnected with any other subject, for the establishment of the northern and western boundary of the State, and the relinquishment of the territory claimed by her, exterior to the defined limits. It provided that the boundary on the north should begin where the meridian of 100° west is intersected by the parallel of 36° 30’ north latitude, and run thence west to he 103d meridian; thence south to the 32d degree of north latitude; thence on that parallel to the Rio Bravo; and thence down the channel of that river to the Gulf of Mexico. In consideration of the reduction of boundaries, the cession of territory, and the relinquishment of claim, Texas was to receive ten millions of dollars. 43
The limits prescribed in this bill more exactly than any other proposed boundary accorded with what Senator Ewing supposed to be the two most important considerations involved in the adjustment of the boundary question. The first was that justice should be done between Texas and the United States, which was subserved by making a liberal allowance to Texas for the territory ceded, and avoiding to some extent the dismemberment of New Mexico, by preserving her domain so far as the territorial authority had practically been extended. The second was that no injury should arise to the political interests of the South by an unwarranted cession of territory south of 36° 30’, which had already been conceded to the South and to Southern institutions by the joint resolutions of annexation, framed in the intent of the Missouri compromise. The author of the bill said that he placed the western boundary one degree farther west than Benton's line to conciliate the senators from Texas. 44
After the adoption of some amendments, none, however, changing the boundary, the bill passed the Senate, August 9, by a vote of 30 to 20. The Pearce bill was more liberal in its allotment of territory to Texas than the omnibus bill, as it granted 16,200 more square miles, and it conceded to the State nearly 90,000 square miles more than the Benton bill. 45
Senator Houston said that a higher object than pecuniary consideration, a higher interest than sectional feeling animated him in supporting the bill. He would vote for it in order to conciliate and reconcile the great interests of the country. Senator Rusk, whom Webster considered as first among the young statesmen of the South, 46 said that if the bill passed, receiving his vote, it would result in the forfeiture of his seat in the senate, but he would vote for it cheerfully, looking “beyond it to a peace and quiet; to a time when affection and good feeling will exist between Texas and the balance of the United States and this Government.” Senator Hale, of New Hampshire, said that he accepted in part the senator's declaration as one of the things he believed on faith, discarding reason altogether. It was inexplicable that he should become unpopular with his constituents, unless it might be that the people of Texas might say, the United States is such a good cow, and so easily milked, that he ought not to have been content with ten million; he ought to have gone up to fifteen or twenty. Senator Benton paid tribute to the courage, fidelity, and skill shown by the Texas senators in the interest of their State. The representatives, Howard and Kaufman, both vigilant in guarding and defending the interest of Texas through the long session, also supported the bill. The former made a firm and successful stand against the ruling of the speaker, for a reconsideration of the vote refusing to engross the Texas bill for a third reading, which saved the bill in the house.
The bill passed the house September 6, with an amendment of seventeen sections for erecting a territorial government for New Mexico and providing for its admission into the Union, with or without slavery as its constitution at the time might prescribe, which the senate accepted. The vote in the house was 108 ayes and 97 noes, the North by a majority of 11 voting against the bill, and the South by a majority of 22 sustaining it. 47
The votes in both chambers on this bill, as well as on the omnibus bill, disclosed an extraordinary juncture of extremes. The ultra pro-slavery members, Barnwell, Butler, Soulé, Davis of Mississippi, and others of their political creed, who contended for the protection of slavery in the territories, and against the alienation of any of the domain claimed by Texas to become free soil, voted against the bill with such extremists of the North as Seward, Hale, Giddings, and Thaddeus Stevens, who wished to fasten the Wilmot proviso upon every acre of the national domain, and opposed purchasing territory which they claimed undoubtedly belonged to the United States. Thus it was that these uncompromising factionists, acting on principles so antagonistic, conjoined without a prearranged concert to defeat both bills. The conservative representatives of both sections succeeded in passing the Pearce bill as a pacific measure, but the rancor engendered in that long and excited session grew more furious as the years passed, and found its most fearful expression in the Civil War.
Texas, the last of the slave states admitted into the Union, with privileges and conditions variant from any other, which her previous independent autonomy required, had her boundary at last adjusted and precisely defined by consenting to the terms offered in the bill, but New Mexico, after a territorial pupilage of more than half a century, is still seeking admission into the sisterhood of States.
In the first article of this series I described some manuscript materials bearing on the Southwest encountered in an examination of thirty volumes 49 of Sección de Historia of the Archivo General de Mexico. During the past summer I continued the examination, incidentally to another task, through the remainder of the section, with the exception of two groups, one entitled Viages, comprising volumes 63-6, 50 inclusive, and the other entitled Tropa, made up of some twenty volumes. A general examination was also made of the sections relating to Misiones and Provincias Internas, and a description of the materials in the latter section was begun. The attention given to these two sections was sufficient to ascertain the facts that the one on Provincias Internas is very rich in Southwestern history material, while that on Misiones contains less than one would naturally expect to find in it.
My search this time was primarily for materials on Texas rather than on the Southwest in general, and only documents of this class will be mentioned here. The examination was detailed enough only to note the documents dealing specifically and largely with Texas. Therefore it is not improbable that there is in the volumes examined a considerable amount of material on the subject not here noted, included in papers of a general nature, those, for example, relating to all the Provincias Internas, or to a whole group of missions. The materials that I found are indicated here with the hope that the information may facilitate the work of other students in finding desired sources in this vast collection—a task enhanced by the marked lack of a systematic and intelligent arrangement of the manuscripts it contains.
In Sección de Historia fifteen of the additional volumes examined contain extensive materials on Texas, most of these fifteen being devoted largely or entirely to this subject. 51 Sección de Provincias Internas contains some two hundred and forty volumes in all, and a very cursory examination shows that about one-tenth of them are devoted largely to Texas. 52 In Sección de Misiones only one volume, No. 21, seems to contain extensive material on this subject.
Before proceeding with a detailed description of these Texas materials, a comment on two points of more general interest may be in order. The questions have arisen, Where are the originals of such historical documents as are found in the Archivo General only in the form of copies, and, What proportion of the materials preserved there are of this character? To each of these queries a partial answer may be ventured.
What is probably the richest portion of the historical material in the Archivo General, the Colección de Memorias de Nueva España, forming the nucleus of the history section, is entirely made up of copies. The circumstances under which these documents were compiled were such as to establish a probability that the originals, if they exist anywhere, are in Mexico, and have not, as has been suggested (by way of inquiry rather than as the expression of an opinion), been sent to Spain. In 1780 the Spanish government planned to have written in Madrid a general history of its colonial possessions, and, pursuant to that plan, began making efforts to collect in Mexico materials for the purpose. In 1783 the manuscripts of Veytia were sent to Spain. 53 The next year came an order for more documents, and in 1788 one box of papers was sent, but it contained only a small number of important papers. Others were not sent for different reasons—many, because their possessors, private individuals, would not part with them, while to make copies, without special orders to do so, was too expensive; others, as in the case of the larger portion of the Boturini collection, because they needed classification before being sent. In 1790 order was given that a large number of documents, some specified by title, the rest designated by a general provision, 54 should be copied in Mexico, and a set of the compilation be sent to Spain. In obedience to this order the thirty-two volumes known as Colección de Memorias de Nueva España were compiled. A set was sent to Spain in 1792; another was retained in Mexico and is now in the Archivo General.
Plainly, there would have been no occasion to have this compilation made in Mexico if the originals had existed in Spain in 1790. And that they have since that date been sent there on any large scale seems improbable. Many of the documents, being private possessions, could not easily be secured by the government. The disturbed conditions, first in Spain and then in Mexico, subsequent to 1792 were, to say the least, unfavorable to the collection of materials for the literary work that had been planned. No record seems to be known of any important shipment of such papers. And there is evidence that as late as 1805 no considerable portion of the important materials on a large part of Mexican history were in Spain, for when, in that year, the government wished to investigate the history of Texas and Louisiana, and incidentally of all the Provincias Internas, as a means of securing light on the question of the Texas-Louisiana boundary, the inquiry was made in the New World and not in the Old, avowedly because the necessary materials were not to be had in Spain. 55 Finally, it is certain that some of the originals of this portion of Sección de Historia are in the Archivo General itself, for they have been found there. As examples of some that I, personally, while working in only a restricted field, have encountered, I may mention the Derrotero of Domingo Ramón, one of the documents copied in Memorias, volume 27. The original of this, signed by Ramón himself, is in volume 181 of the Sección de Provincias Internas. Bound with this is the original of Espinosa's Diario of the same expedition, and a number of letters signed by the hand of St. Denis. In another volume of this section are contained the originals of a part, at least, of Demeziéres's well-known Cartas, which are copied in Memorias, volume 28. Though it would be vain to guess where any large portion of the originals of the Memorias are, it may safely be said that very probably numbers of them are to be found in the various branches of the Archivo General, while many others are scattered about the Republic in private and public collections.
As bearing upon the second question, I may say that of the Texas materials thus far examined, outside of Memorias, those in volumes 84, 100, 153, 161, 162, 287, and 320 of Sección de Historia are mainly original, while this is true of parts of 72 and 93. And the Texas material in Sección de Provincias Internas is more largely original than that in Historia. This is the character of the major portion of the volumes of this section that I have examined in detail.
A brief description will now be given of the principal materials on Texas found in the fifteen volumes of Sección de Historia. Further consideration of Sección de Provincias Internas will be reserved for another paper. Full titles of individual documents and other data that might be of interest for purposes of reference are given in the list which constitues the second part of this paper. 56
It is difficult to make a comprehensive and helpful classification of the materials these volumes contain, either on the basis of subject-matter or of chronology; hence in the main it will be necessary to describe them volume by volume. A rough grouping, however, may be made as follows: materials on San Antonio de Béjar or on Texas as a whole, in volumes 82, 84, 93, 153, 287; on Pilar de Bucareli, in 93 and 100; on San Saba, in 84; on invasions of Texas (1809-1819), in 161 and 162; on the Texas-Louisiana boundary, in 298, 299, 301, 302, 325; and on Espíritu Santo or Goliad (1821-1835), in 320.
In volume 72 two documents relate to Texas. The first 57 is an extract from the writings of Fray Antonio Pichardo, of the oratorio of the convent of San Felipe Neri, Mexico, treating of the limits of Texas and Louisiana. The other 58 is an interesting historical summary of Texas affairs from the administration of Casafuerte to 1760, written by Don Domingo Valcarcel.
The greater portion of volumes 82, 84, 93, 100, 153, and 287 deal with affairs of Texas as a whole or with those of San Antonio de Béjar. Owing to the importance of San Antonio, for the earlier dates documents relating primarily to this place often touch the interests of the whole province. The materials in these volumes cover a wide range of subjects and dates. Many of the documents are important, while others are apparently of little value.
With a slight exception volume 82, entitled Causa formada al Gobernador de Texas, etc., relates entirely to Texas during the period 1790-1793. The documents contained in it can be put into two groups. One of these, comprising six papers (Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12), deals with affairs of the province as a whole. Five of them relate to the appointment of, charges against, inquiry into the conduct of, removal of, and restitution of governor Dn. Manuel Muñoz. The sixth relates to assessing tithes on the province. The other group (Nos. 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, and 11) relates to local and personal matters at San Fernando. They are mainly complaints against the cura, Father Moreno. The documents in volume 82 were all copied in the Secretaría in Mexico, and most of the copies are signed by Bonilla. The one Texas document in volume 153 bears on the same subject. These papers are supplemented also by volume 100 which covers the same period.
Eight of the twelve documents in volume 84 deal with Texas. They occupy some three hundred and twenty folios, cover a wide variety of subjects, and range in date from 1730 to 1774. All except the two earliest are mainly original. Numbers 2 and 4 of this volume, dated in 1730, relate to the journey of the Canary Island colonists from Cuatitlan to Béjar. 59 Number 7 is made up of materials, almost entirely original, relative to the establishment of missions in the neighborhood of the presidio of San Saba. Much of the correspondence is directed from Béjar, Nachitoches. Querétaro, and Mexico to Phelipe de Rabago y Terán, captain of the San Saba presidio. The dates fall mainly within the years 1760-1763. Among the papers are to be found detailed statements of the condition of the San Saba presidio in 1762. 60 Number 8, bearing the date of 1768, deals with the flight of certain Indians from Misión del Rosario. Number 9 contains the request made in 1770 by Barón de Ripperdá and others of the viceroy for an increase of the Texas garrisons for protection against the Indians. Number 10 contains the petition of the former inhabitants of the deserted presidio of Adaes to be allowed to found a settlement at Ais. This document is the original of No. 2 in Volume 51. Number 11 is an expediente made up of Spanish, French, and English papers relative to the English schooner, “Britain,” which became stranded in 1770 near Bahía del Espíritu Santo, where its equipment was confiscated by the Spanish officials.
Volume 93 contains twelve documents relating to Texas, comprising nearly the whole volume. Numbers 1, 2, and 4 seem to be largely duplicates of materials in volume 51, and number 15 supplements that volume. Number 5 supplements the Louisiana-Texas boundary material in volume 43. Numbers 3, 10, and 12 relate to Béjar (1775-1797). The remaining documents are mainly of a private nature.
Twelve documents in volume 100 concern Texas. They deal with a variety of subjects, mainly within the period of 1792-1796. Perhaps the most important papers are numbers 6 and 11, which contain considerable material on affairs at Nacogdoches just before 1794, and number 16, which gives a large amount of information on the administration of Dn. Rafael Martinez Pacheco. The material in this volume is related to that in volume 51.
Volumes 161 and 162 deal with invasions of Texas. The first is made up in general of Mexican relations with the United States and France during the years 1809-1811. One document (number 2) is composed of original correspondence relative to a French invasion of Texas and Florida during this period. The nature of volume 162 is well indicated by its title: Providencias tomadas sobre invasion proyectada por los Anglo-Americanos y faccios. del Norte, contra la Provincia de Texas, Año de 1819. The correspondence mentions Americans on the Rio Grande and an American fortification on the Sabine. It contains original papers concerning the Champ d' Asile affair, and others on Long's expedition. Among the latter are letters signed by Long himself.
In volume 287 there is a document of more than one hundred folios of original material on the removal of the mission Santa Dorothea to San Antonio. The papers are dated from 1751 to 1756.
The largest single group of documents encountered is that forming the Talamantes Papers. Some of the documents of this collection—those contained in volume 43—were described before. 61 Further examination shows that this volume comprises only a small portion of Talamantes's papers on the boundaries of Texas and Louisiana, for at least four, and, apparently five, other volumes belong to it. 62
A word here explaining the circumstances of the collection of these papers seems to be in point. By a royal order of May 20, 1805, the king requested of the viceroy of New Spain documents relative to the province of Texas, with the purpose of determining, through history, the true western boundary of Louisiana. 63 The order refers to the fact that, in the first Vias Reservadas in Spain, documents of this sort could not be found for the period anterior to 1734, when those archives were burned. It required that the archives of New Spain be searched and that authentic copies of documents found be sent to the Primera Secretaría del Estado, to the Marqués de Casa-Calvo, for use by the commissioners on the Louisiana boundary question, and to the comandante general of the Provincias Internas, whose headquarters were then at Chihuahua. Pursuant to this order the viceroy, Yturrigaray, appointed on January 27, 1807, Padre Dr. Fr. Melchor Talamantes, of the military order of Merced, as chief commissioner to undertake the task. 64 All the important archives of New Spain were ordered freely opened to him.
To fulfill his commission, Talamantes planned an elaborate work which he described in a paper entitled Plan de limites de la Provincia de Texas, y demas Dominios de S. Magestad en la America Septentrional Española. This work was to consist of five parts, as follows: 1. A collection of the most authentic original documents relative to the general history of Texas from 1630 to 1770. 2. A collection of original documents concerning special points in the history of Texas and Louisiana of interest in the discussion in hand. 3. A collection of documents relative to past disputes concerning the boundary line between these provinces. 4. A collection of royal cédulas and orders, and of reports made by the viceroys of New Spain to the court containing evidence of the rights of Spain to Texas and to points further west and north. 5. A philosophical discussion of the rights of Spain to different points in North America, setting forth the principles that should be observed in drawing the boundary line between Texas and Louisiana, and, incidentally, that between Texas and New Mexico. 65
Talamantes's notes show that he planned a far-reaching search for material. He leaves extensive bibliographies and a long list of public and private libraries to be consulted. So far as I have been able to ascertain, however, this elaborately planned work was never completed, but was left in the condition in which it is now to be found in the Archivo General. I have found no evidence that Talamantes ever made a report to the government. As some of the papers here described are in his own hand, as others bear his annotations, and as still others bear the signatures of the persons called upon to assist him, it seems probable that this collection comprises the papers left by Talamantes, rather than copies made from them. The essays in volume 43 seem to embody such organized results as he reached, while the remaining volumes contain the materials that he used. They are poorly arranged, and the five divisions planned were not kept distinct. 66 Many of the documents are copies of well-known papers found in volumes 27 and 28 of Historia. The most important parts of the collection are the lists of materials, the collection of royal cédulas, and that of vice-regal reports.
Volume 320 relates entirely to the presidio of Bahía del Espírítu Santo, or, as it was called after 1829, the villa of Goliad. The first three hundred folios give a continuous, original record of the proceedings of the ayuntamiento of this place for the period between 1821 and 1835, except that records for 1829 are missing. For the first six years the minutes occupy an average of about twelve folios per year. During the later years the meetings of the ayuntamiento were more frequent and the reports fuller, making the average about thirty-five folios per year. The minutes for 1831 cover fifty-six closely written folios. 67
More detailed bibliographical data concerning the materials here described in general are given below:
In this list copies of documents contained in Historia 27 and 28, or of documents described in my former article, are not named unless there is some special reason for calling attention to them. In case the original or a better copy of a document previously noted is found, it is mentioned here. In some volumes the documents are numbered. In these cases the numbering is reproduced here. In other cases where no number is given to documents in the volumes it has been possible to assign numbers to them. Such numbers as I have assigned myself are put in brackets [ ]. In other cases, where the make-up of a volume is fragmentary, it has been impossible to give numbers to the documents.
Volume 72.
18.Extracto laconico y substancial de la Prima. parte de la obra del Pe. Dr. Dn. José Antonio Pichardo sre. averiguár los verdaderos limites Occidentales de las Provincias de Luisiana y Texas. Contiene las pruevas del unico y absoluto dominio de la España de todo el territorio en que fundaron los Franceses la Luisiana. Folios 33. The indice of the volume calls this the second part of Pichardo's work. Another extract from Pichardo is found in Historia, 311.
19.Expediente formado sobre las variaciones, y mutaciones qe han tenido los Presidios internos, esquadras, y demas Tropas, desde qe. los arregló el Exmo. Sor Marques de Casafuerte. Signed by Domingo Valcarcel, and dated August 7, 1760. Folios 20-28 are on Texas. Original.
Volume 82.
1.Provision interina de los Goviernos de Texas y Colonia del Nuevo Santandér en el tente. Coronel Dn. Manl. Muñoz, y en el Conde de Sierra Gorda. Se dio esta á S. M. con Carta reservda. No. 531 de 1° de Mayo. Dated April 21, 1790. Folios 9.
4.Denuncias contra el Gobernador Dn. Manuel Muñoz [governor of Texas] y comision conferida al de la Colonia del Nuevo Santander, Conde Sierra gorda para averiguarlas. Dated 1791. Folios 88. This is a copy made by Bonilla in Mexico, in 1793, taken from the original representation sent by Dn. Ramón de Castro to the comandante general of the Provincias de Oriente in Nov., 1790.
5.Copia integra del Expedte. formado á representacion del cabildo, Justicia, y regimiento de la villa de S. Fernando sobre discordias introducidas en ella por su Parroco D. Franco. Gomez Moreno, 1792. Folios 40. Copied in 1793 at Mexico by Bonilla.
6.Copia Integra del Expediente sobre la pesquiza á cerca de la conducta del Tente. Coronel Don Manl. Muñoz Govor. de la Prova. de Texas, y á nombre de aql. vecindario, 1792. Folios 150. Copied in 1793 at Mexico by Bonilla.
7.Expediente promovido por D. Franco. Xavier Galan Vecino de la Villa de Sn. Fernando contra D. Gabriel Gutierrez sobre concubinato, 1792. Folios 69. Copy.
8.Copia integra de la Carta del Padre Cura Br. D. Franco. Gomes Moreno, sobre malos tratam[i]entos que dá á los Comanches el Tente. Coronl. D. Manuel Muñoz. March 20, 1793. Folios 2.
9.Copia integra del expediente promovido por el Vecindario de Sn. Antonio de Bejar, sobre agravios hechos por el Cura D. Franco. Gomes Moreno, 1792. Folios 17. Copied in 1793 at Mexico by Bonilla.
10.Copia del Expediente promovido por Dn. Gabriel Gutierrez, contra Dn. Franco Xavier Galan. Concluido por el Tente. Coronel conde de Sierra gorda, 1793. Folios 11.
11.Copia integra, sobre haver recebido Ynformacion á Dn. Ygnacio de los Santos Coy vecino de la Villa de San Fernando, 1792-1793. Folios 48. Copied in 1793 at Mexico by Bonilla. This contains complaints about financial matters at San Antonio.
12.Copia de Cartas escritas de la Corte y de la Rl. orn. de Contextasn. The indice contains the following summary of the document: Restitucion al Gobierno de Texas del Teniente Coronel D. Manuel Muñoz. El Exmo. Señor Virey, da cuenta al Señor Ministro de la Guerra en España, con la secuela que se ha seguido, en la sumaria que se formó al Teniente Coronel Don Manuel Muñoz, Gobernador de la Provincia de Texas, y las formadas por incidencia al Cura Br. Don Francisco Gomez Moreno y al Capitan Rafael Martinez Pacheco, ex-Gobernador de la misma Provincia, 1793. Folios 7. Copied in 1794 at Mexico by Bonilla.
Volume 84.
2.[Title in the indice.] Colonos para Texas. Expediente formado, conlas disposiciones dadas por el Exmo. Señor Virey, para que sean trasportados al Saltillo, y de alli á Bexar, las diez familias, procedentes de las Yslas Canarias, que se hallan en Cuatitlan, 1730. Folios 8. Original.
4.[Title in the indice.] Colonos para Texas. Expediente que forma las providencias dictadas, por el Exmo. Señor Virey, para el trasporte y establecimiento, de las quinze familias, procedentes de las Yslas Canarias, que marchan á poblar la Provincia de Texas, 1730. Folios 10. Original.
7.Sn. Sabá. Govor. Dn. Phe. Ravago. No. 2. Dup[lica]do. Expediente, sobre establecimiento de Misiones en la inmediacion del Presidio de Sn. Savas, 1763 [with documents of earlier dates]. Folios 122. The indice gives the following description of the document: Establecimiento de Misiones. Expediente formado con los documentos relativos al establecimiento de Misiones, en las inmediaciones del Presidio de San Sabas y otros puntos, con otros incidentes relativos á las mismas Misiones. There is a large amount of material on the San Saba mission in Sección de Misiones, volume 21.
8.Diligencias secretas sobre varios asumptos echas por Dn. Melchor Afan de Rivera, Capitan Ynterino del Rl. Presidio del Orcoquizá apeticion de Dn. Franco. de Thovar. que lo es en propriedad de la Bahia del Espiritu Santo Emviadas por el mismo Thovár en 17 de Abril [1768]. Contextado en 9 de Mayo. Folios 50. This document deals with the flight of certain Indians from the mission Rosario to Bahia del Espiritu Santo.
9.Consulta del Varon de Rippardá, sobre aumento de Tropa. para contener los Enemigos, 1770. Folios 23. Duplicate. The indice describes this document thus: Provincia de Texas. El Gobernador de la Provincia de Texas, Baron de Riperda, solicita del Exmo. Señor Virey, aumento de tropa, para poder contener la invasion que hacen los Bárvaros, en aquella demarcacion, uniendo otras solicitudes de varias otras personas, con el mismo objeto.
10.Testimonio del expediente formado á representacion de los vecinos del real Precidio de los Adaes, sobre qe. se les deve avecindar en la Micion que era de los Yndios Aix, 1774. Principal. Srio. Dn. Josef de Gorraez. Folios 15. This is the original of No. 2 in Historia, volume 51.
11.Documentos sobre recursos de Guerra acerca de la Goleta Ynglesa que baxó en la Bahia del Espiritu Sto., 1770. Folios 69. Part original. The indice gives the following description of the document: Buques de Guerra Yngleses en el Puerto de Vera Cruz. Expediente formado con los documentos en Yngles, frances y español, relativos á la reclamacion que hace, el sobre cargo y pasageros á borde de una Goleta Ynglesa, que arribó á la Bahia del Espiritu Santo, por perdidas y ultrages personales, que les hizo el Comandante de la Fortaleza de dicha Bahia, Don Francisco Dovár.
12.Expediente sobre la quexa que diò el Baron de Riperdá de que los vecinos de la Colonia del Nuevo-Santander quitaban á los Indios sus hijos para venderlos por esclavos, 1773. Folios 25.
Volume 93.
3.Sobre desavenencs. y disputs. del ayuntamto. de Vexar con el Baron de Riperdá cuio expedte. gral. se pasó al comte. Ynsptor. Dn. Hugo Oconor, segn. la nota puesta al qe. se acompa. No. 45 de los entregado al Comte. gl. Cavro. de Croix, 1775. Folios 24. Copy. This is a representation of the ayuntamiento of San Fernando to the inspector general describing Indian depredations.
4.Otro sobre que al vecindario del Nuevo Pueblo de N. S. de [l] Pilar de Bucareli se les destine Parroco pr. cuenta de la Rl. Hazda., 1775. Folios 8. Mainly original letters signed by Ripperdá, Bucareli, and O'Conor. This supplements the material in Historia, volume 51.
5.Expediente formado á fin de conseguir del virrey la habilitacion de un puerto en la Bahia de San Fernando [Bernardo ?] á fin de abrir un comercio reciproco y ampl[i]ar los limites de la Provincia de Texas hasta el Rio Sabinas. Dated 1794, but containing documents of earlier dates. Folios 41. Partly original. These papers seem to belong with No. 8, vol. 43. They contain a list of papers on the subject treated, among them being a map of the province of Texas made in 1788 by Don Mariano Angel Anglino, and plans of Bahía de San Bernardo and other coast places.
7.Expediente Formado á consecuencia de Rl. orn. de 7. Febo. de 1784 sobre qe. se soliciten en la Prova. de Texas los Officiales Deudores del Baron Dauterribe, 1787. Folios 9. Mainly originals signed by Cordova, Renzel, and Mendinueta.
8.Sueldos de Capitan de Ynfanteria del Sor. Coronel graduado Dn. Bernardo Bonavia. definado por commision al Govierno de Texas, 1787-1792. Folios 15. Mainly original.
9.Ynstancia de Dn. Nicolas Lamathe natl. de la Luisiana, para que en atencion a sus atrasos y buenos servicios contraidos en el Presido. de Bejar, se le permita regresar á su Patria con los auxilios y gracias que refiere, 1787. Folios 5. Original.
10.Representacion del Comandante Gral. Dn. Juan Anto. de Ugalde sobre la necessidad de Poblar la Villa de Sn. Antonio de Bejar, 1788. Folios 3.
12.Expediente promovido á representazon. del Ayuntamto. de la villa de Sn. Ferdando, acusando al Coronel Dn. Domo. Cavello, Governador qe. fude la Prova. de texas de malversacion con el fondo de Me[s]teñas, 1793, 1797. Mainly copies.
14.Expediente formado del Coronel Varon de Riperda, provisto Govr. de Comayagua, sobre qe. se declare el sueldo que debe gozar qdo. lo fué de Texas Srio. Dn. José Gorraez, 1787. Mainly original.
15.Consulta del Sor. Comandante Gral. de las Provas. de Oriente sobre solicitud que han hecho los Yndios Orcoquisac, Atacapazes, Vidais y Cocos pidiendo se establesca la Mision del Orcoquisac; sobre que se separe del Ingles de tene de Governador á Don Antonio Gil Ybarbo, subsista Dn Rafael Martinez Pacheco de Governador de texas, y tomen varias providencias á beneficio de la Provincia, 1788-1792. Largely original. This material is supplemented by that in Historia, 100, No. 6.
Volume 100.
The descriptions here given of documents in this volume are those of the indice.
3.Cartas de las que se deduce, que con anterioridad, habia remitido informe el Gobernador de Tejas, manifestando lo perjudicial que era, dar á la tropa que estaba de guarnicion en los precidios, los dos reales en plata, los que invertian en vicios solamente, 1788. Folios 2.
6.Registro formado con motivo de los transites que signio la acusacion que se le hizo á Dn Antonio Gil Ybarbo, Teniente de Gobernador en Nacogdoches. Hay en este espediente varios ordenes, con el fin de que se practicara una averiguacion sobre los hechos que se habian denunciado y habia cometido Ybarbo. Informan al Virrey que este individuo, era de un caracter feroz y obligaba á los vecinos del punto, á que le hicieran regalos, teniendo ya de estos varios manadas de yeguas, que tambien tenia muchas reces, pero que debia á un Comerciante de Orleans, mas de ps. 20,000; que convenia quitar lo de Nacogdoches, por ser sumamente perjudial en su gobierno. El Virrey comisiona á Dn Ramon de Castro, para que forme la su maria respectiva y de esta resulta, que Ybarbo, tenia grandes relaciones con las contrabandistas y que tenia parte con ellos en todas las introducciones que hacian clandestinamente, y que ámas se manejaba mal con todos los vecinos. En virtud de este informe se decretó el arresto de Ybarbo, 1794. Folios 55.
7.Registro sobre las providencias que se tomaron en la representacion que hizo el Capitan de la Bahia del Espiritu-Santo, manifestando que no habia ornamentos en aquella Mision, los cuales fueron remitidos. 1792. Folios 1.
8.Comunicacion del Gobernador de Tejas, manifestando al Virrey, que habia hecho construir dos baluartes, con el fin de encerrar ahi la polvora, pues estaba espuesta á incendiarse, 1792. Folios 1.
9.Registro seguido con motivo de los medidos que se pusieron en practica á fin de restituir á la Mision del Rosario en la Provincia de Tejas, á los indios Carancaguaces, 1792. Folios 15.
10.Registro de un espediente que se formó, con motivo de una queja, que interpusieron unos esclavos de Dn Macario Sambrano ante el Virrey, por los malos tratamientos que recibian. El Virrey remite el espediente al Gobernador de Tejas, para que proceda á lo que haya lugár, 1792. Folios 3.
11.Registro que se formó con motivo de las diligencias que se siguieron en el espediente relativo á los efectos que condujo de Nacogdoches á Tejas, Dn Toribio Duran con licencia del Teniente Gobernador de aquel punto, 1793. Folios 6.
13.Registro formado con motivo de las diligencias que se practicaron contra el Cura de Sn Antonio de Bejar, acusado de infinidad de excesos, hasta haber sido separado dicho eclesiastico (separado) del Curato, 1792. Folios 10.
14.Ynforme. El Gobernador de Tejas manifiesta al Virrey que ya habia hecho volver á la Micion del Espiritu Santo á los indios taranguaces, dando al Padre Garza una escolta, para lográr este fin, asi como de los medios que habia puesto en planta para lográr la buena armonia en dicho punto, 1793. Folios 7.
15.Registro de varias acusaciones, asi como de representaciones hechas por algunas corporaciones y autoridades, contra el Gobernador de Tejas Dn Manuel Muñoz, el Cura del mismo lugar y contra algunos otros vecinos, 1794. Folios 4.
16.Noticia sobre los exesos y asesinatos que habia cometido el Gobernador de Tejas Dn Rafael Martinez Pacheco, el cual fue relevado del cargo y sumariado. El Sr. Muños nombrado Gobernador de aquella provincia y encargado de instruir la sumaria, informa al Virrey, que Pacheco habia sido arrestado y que de la averiguacion resultaba, que este era un hombre perjudicial, pues no solo habia cometido asesinatos, sino Ara [?] infinidad de delitos, entre ellos el de haber malversado los fundos del Rey, 1796. Folios 121.
17.Representacion que hace ante el Virrey el Sr Dn Juan Barrera, manifestandole, que el Gobernador de Tejas, no le quiere permitir, paso á vivir á Coahuila. Este funcionario informa: no ser cierto esto, pues que ni licencia tenia pedida para ello, 1793. Folios 1.
Volume 153.
[7] Acusacion que se hace al Cura de San Antonic de Bejar Dn. Franco. Gomez Moreno, de inducir á los Comanches á robár y matár. Manda el Virrey al Obispo del nuevo Reino de Leon, lo haga comparecer á su presencia y le mande instruir causa; este no tiene efecto porque estando tan distante Bejar del lugar del Obispado. etc., 1794. Folios 34. Original.
Volume 161.
2. Correspondencia con el Mtro. Plenipotencia de S. M. C. cerca de los Estados Unidos de America, D. Luis de Oniz, 1810. Folios 62. In this the minister informs the viceroy that an expedition of 1200 men is about to embark from Aix with the intention of seizing Florida and creating disturbances in Texas. Original.
Volume 162.
[Title of the volume.] Providencias tomadas sobre invasion proyectada por los Anglo-Americanos y faccios. del Norte, contra la Provincia de Texas. Año de 1819. Folios 243. The volume is not divided into distinct groups of documents. Original.
Volume 287.
Autos fhos. apedimentto .... Frai Benitto de Santa An[na] ... que se le manden restitu[ir] ... de Sn Antonio que es á cargo de la Sta. Cruz de Querettaro, los [con] bersos Yndios de la nacion [Cujanes] que se hallan agregados á [la mision] de Santa Dorothea, 1751-1758. Folios 108. This material is all original and covers many subjects.
Volume 298.
Reales Cédulas y Ordenes. These are a continuation of the collection begun in the back of volume 299. In this volume they cover the period from 1692 to 1799. Folios 239, in eight cuadernos.
Traduccion del mensage del Precedente de los Estados Unidos al Congreso, 2 de Deziembre, 1806.
Real Cedula Del Señor Don Carlos II. Dirigida al Virrey de Nueva España para que informe sobre las conveniencias que traen é este Reyno y al Nuevo Mexico la poblacion proyectada desde el año de 1630 en la Bahia nombrada del Espiritu Santo. Taken from Reales Cédulas y Ordenes, volume 16, of the Archivo de la Secretaria de Cámara y Guerra. Folios 3.
Expediciones Maritimas Hechas a la Costa del Seno Mexicano Desde el Año de 1684 hasta el de 1689 Para embarazar las poblaciones qe. intentan en ella los Franceses. From the relation made by D. Gabriel de Cardenas in his Ensayo Cronologico de la Florida. Folios 6. Found also in Historia, Vol. 302.
Viage Que A solicitud de los Naturales de la Prova. de Texas y Otras Naciones circunvecinas, y de orden del Gobernador del Nuevo-Mexico D. Domingo Gironza Petris de Cruzate Hizo el Maestro de Campo Juan Dominguez de Mendoza, en fines del año de 1683, y principios de 1684. Copiado Del Original que existe en el oficio mas antiguo del Virreynato de Nuevo-España, en los Autos sobre la sublevacion del Nuevo-Mexico. Quaderno 1°. . Folios 59. This contains Mendoza's Derrotero.
Beside the above there are in this volume bibliographical notes and copies of several documents that are found in Historia 27, 28, and 43.
Volume 299.
Adaes, Año de 1755. Diligencias practicadas por el Govr. de la Prova. de Texas, en cumplimiento de lo que se le previno por el Excmo. Sor. Virey Conde de Revilla Gigedo á cerca de que examinase si su antecesor, D. Pedro del Barrio, tenia ó no comercio ilicito con los Franceses de aquella Colonia, y juntamte. el destino que han traido quarenta Embarcaciones Franceses. This is related to, and in part the same as, document No. 2. Vol. 181. Provincias Internas.
Constancias sobre la traslacion del Presidio Frances, y diligs, hechas en ello. Año de 1737.
Diario y Derrotero que hizo el Sargto. Mayor Juan de Ulibari de la Jornada que ejecutó de orden del S. Govr....y descubrimiento de la Nueva Prova. de San Luis, 1706. Folios 12. This mentions the Thaos Indians.
Residencia de Sandoval, 1733-1736. Copy.
Autos hechos por el Brigadier D. Pedro de Rivera en razon de la Pesquiza contra D. Antonio de Valverde, 1726. Folios 3.
Representaciones á la corte por el Virreynato de Mexico. About 250 folios. Copied from original correspondence. This gives notices of Texas from 1756 to 1789. It is evidently a part of the fourth division of the work planned by Talamantes.
Reales Cédulas y Ordenes, 1638 to 1692. Folios 77. This is the beginning of the collection continued in volume 298. See above.
Volume 301.
Volume 301 is made up largely of Talamantes's notes and of lists and copies of documents made for him in Chihuahua and other places. These lists prove that at various times a vast number of documents relating to Texas were sent to Chihuahua from different places in Mexico. Among the documents contained in this volume, other than notes and lists and papers mentioned elsewhere, are:
2. Noticias Sacadas de los expedientes que en ellas mismas [Documentos que á consequencia de oficio de 8 de Abril de 1777 se pasan al Señor Don Theodoro de Croix, Comandante General de Provincias Ynternas] se citan. Folios 5. Extracts made by Rojas at Chihuahua in 1807.
6. Extracto de las noticias qe. se han podido adquirir en el proligo examen que se há echo del Archivo del Govierno de la Provincia de Coahuila, á el que se han añadido las Hestoricas [sic] y Geograficas que se me ministrado por un buen Patriota Español, conducentes á la fixacion de limites entre la Provincia de la Luiciana y la de Texas, unas y Otros, con citacion y referencia á sus originales, etc. Signed by Juan Ygnacio de Arispe, Monclova, 1806. Folios 5.
Copia de la Junta de Guerra, y Hacienda [of Jan. 21-22, 1754] remitida á esta Comandancia del Govierno de Coahuila. Copied in San Antonio de Béjar, August 10, 1806.
Copia de Real Cédula dirigida al Governador de Texas para que Ynforme sobre la construccion de un Fuerte de la Naccion Francesa en el Lugar de Nachitoches. July 24, 1774.
Extractos de los Expedientes y demas documentos que se hán registrado, relativos á la Provincia de Texas Ministrados por la Secretaria de Camara del Virreynato. Signed by Talamantes.
Quadernos trabajados por el Pe. Dn. José Antonio Pichardo de la Congregacion de Sn. Felipe Neri; sobre la linea Divisoria entre las Provincias de los Texas, y Luisiana. Folios 58. Another extract from Pichardo is found in Historia, volume 72.
Memoria Acerca de los limites de la Luisiana, sacada de varias Autores y Mapas, y Cartas Geograficas por el Padre Doctor Don José Peredo, Presvitero del Oratorio de San Felipe Neri de Mexico, 1770. Folios 5.
Certificacion de los Secretarios del Secreto del Sto. Oficio de la Inq[uisici]on. These folios contain a list of the cases in which the holy office exercised jurisdiction over individuals within the territory in dispute, from 1661 to 1807. The collection was made by Dn. Mathias Lopez Torrecilla and Mathias José de Nagera. Original.
The volume closes with a long extract made by Pichardo from Abbé Raynal.
Volume 302.
1.Real Cédula Del Señor Don Carlos II de 2 de Agosto de 1685, Dirigida al Virey de Nueva España Ynformandole Haber concedido S. M. al Capitan D. Martin de Echagaray el permiso de reconocer of demarcar el terreno que corre desde la Bahia del Espiritu Santo hasta el interior del Nuevo-Mexico. Copied from Reales Cédulas y Ordenes, Vol. 20, folio 274ff.
3.Carta de Damian Manzanet. Copied “del Original que existe en la Coleccion de Cartas que formó el referido Don Carlos de Sigüenza, y se halla en la Biblioteca del R. P. D. José Pichardo, del Oratorio de San Felipe Neri Segun acreditan los Documentos ministrados por el Santo Tribunal de la Inquisicion de Mexico.” Other copies are contained in Historia, volumes 299 and 301.
6.Derrotero De la Expedicion En la Provincia de los Texas Nuevo Reyno de Philipinas que de orden del Excmo. Sor. Marques de Valero, Vi-Rey y Capitan General de esta Nueva-España pasa á executar él Muy Yllustre Señor D. Joseph De Azlor, caballero Mesnadero del Reyno de Aragon, Marques de S. Miguel de Aguayo, Governador, y Capitan General de dichas Provincias de Texas, Nuevas Philipinas, y de esta de Coaguila, Nuevo Reyno de Estramaduro ... Que escribi El Br. Dn. Juan Antonio de la Peña. Copied from a Mexican print of 1722. This copy contains plans of the presidios of Nuestra Señora de Loreto en la Bahia del Espiritu Santto, San Antonio de Bejar, Nuestra Señora del Pilar de los Adaes, and Nuestra Señora de los Dolores. Copies of the document are also found in Historia 28 and 299, but neither of these contains the diagrams.
Evia Papers:
11.Explicacion para el reconocimiento de la Costa de Sotavento desde la pasa del S. O. del Rio Misisipi hasta la Bahia de San Bernardo. Folios 4.
12.Diario de la Navegacion executada por Dn. Joseph de Evia desde la pasa del S. O. hasta la Bahia de San Bernardo. Folios 11. Apparently signed by Evia himself.
13.A communication from Evia, Mar. 17, 1786. Folios 7.
14.Expliacion de los Rios Borras y Lagunas que hay en la Costa del Nuevo Reyno de Leon ... desde el Rio de Tampico hasta la Bahia de San Bernardo. Folios 12.
15.Diario de la Navegacion hecha por el Alferez de Fragata de la Rl. Armada, Don José de Evia ... desde el Rio de Tampico hasta la de Bahia de San Bernardo. Folios 37.
Part of these papers are found in Historia, volume 43.
In addition to the above named documents this volume contains about two hundred folios of lists of documents on Provincias Internas. The lists were signed by Maria Rojas in Chihuahua. There are in this volume also copies of several documents found in Historia, 27 and 28. Among these is a copy of Bonilla's Breve Compendio.
Volume 320.
The title page of volume 320 reads: Libro formado por el Capitan de Milicias y primera Alcalde Constitucional de la Bahia del Espiritu Santo en que Constan las Actas que Semanalmente Celebra este Ayuntamiento Comensando desde el 22 de Marzo del presente año [1821]. The record continues to 1835, but there is no record for 1829. About 300 folios.
Volume 325.
This volume, which has no title, is made up of a continuous set of papers' also unlabeled, on Provincias Internas, with special reference to Texas. Most of them seem to be royal orders and viceregal reports. They are apparently a portion of the Talamantes collection, although this can not be affirmed with certainty.
Well, the fourth of July has come again and I am still here to celebrate the day, aged seventy-four. Looking back, I remember many a fourth of July, some with pleasure, others with sorrow. I was born in St. Louis, Missouri, in the year 1825. My first remembrance of July the fourth was the year 1831. It was a gala day—the militia marching, drums beating, flags flying, public speaking and dining. I was kissed by Thomas H. Benton. I remember the great senator well. He was afterwards at the house of my father, Dr. P. W. Rose. One of my brothers was named Thomas H. Benton; in after years I understood what it meant.
The United States government was organizing an army to fight the Indians. The next fourth of July was in a year of death and sorrow to both old and young. The army that was sent against the Indians under General Scott met with stubborn resistance from the great Indian chief, Black Hawk, from April 26 to September 21, in the year '32. There was talk that cholera had broken out in the army. In June five hundred German immigrants were landed in St. Louis. The cholera that was brought in by the soldiers and Indians spread among the immigrants, and by the first of August it was scattered through the town. The people began to leave, and as everybody had visited the soldiers and Indians at Jefferson Barracks, the cholera spread to the country, and finally all over the United States. The deaths were awful. More than half the Germans died. All business was suspended; steamboats ceased coming; burying the dead and getting away from St. Louis was all the people thought of doing. It was almost impossible to get vehicles for the burials.
My father, Dr. P. W. Rose, had gone to the State of Mississippi to a place near Vicksburg to practice medicine among the cotton planters. He did not get home till the first of November. Mother, after burying two of her children, went to her father in the country. He lived in the Grains settlement near Mr. Dent, the father of Mrs. Julia Dent Grant. I played with her all one Sunday. I heard in the year 1850 that she was married to a Lieutenant Grant. Father returned to Mississippi on the first steamboat by the tenth of the month, spent the winter there, and then came to Texas.
We enjoyed our new home very much, for we could attend church, a blessing we had been deprived of since the year 1833. Houston had improved considerably for a town not two years old. A steamboat had arrived. The captain's name was Grayson. Everybody was highly elated, as the farmers were going to plant cotton. The planters from Mississippi with their slaves were locating on the Brazos. A Mr. Jonathan Waters was going to build a cotton gin on the Brazos.
The 22nd of February, 1838, was the first time I met General Houston, the hero of San Jacinto. It was at a ball—my first ball in Houston. Sam Houston, then in his second year as president, Mosely Baker and wife, A. C. Allen and wife, a Mr. Coffee and wife, he a member of congress from Red River County, Dr. Gazley and wife, three Misses Stockbridge and others too numerous to mention were present.
I attended school during the summer. At this time there was no church building in Houston, nor any preacher stationed there. The first sermon I heard preached in Houston was delivered by a Presbyterian minister by the name of Sullivan. He preached in the Hall of Representatives in the old Capitol. There had been built a court house and jail, both of them of logs. Two men were in jail to be hanged for murder. The influx of men from the United States was not without its evils. There had been three terms of court held in Houston, but these men, Jones and Quick, were the first to be sentenced to capital punishment. With other evils, a great many gamblers had been put out of the State of Mississippi and, as it was believed that a large amount of money had been captured from the Mexicans at San Jacinto, Houston was considered the El Dorado of the West. There had been several good houses built in Houston. Mr. Andrew Briscoe, the hero of Anahuac, was living in Houston, and was judge of the probate court of Harris county. He married Miss Mary Jane Harris in the year 1831 at Harrisburg. Mr. Woodruff's step-daughter, Miss Mary Smith, and Mr. Hugh McCrory were the first couple to marry in Houston. They married early in the year 1831, and he died a few months after.
There was to be an election this year for president, vice-president, and members of congress. The change of affairs under the Lone Star Republic may have added to the glory of statesmen and politicians, but it was a sad disappointment to the boys that were too young to vote. They never could forget the election barbecue and ball of the past. The women and girls seemed to enjoy the change.
Mr. Ben Fort Smith built a large two story house to be used for a hotel. It was opened with a grand ball on the 21st of April, the second anniversary of the battle of San Jacinto. Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, and I were at the ball. The second story of the house had not been partitioned off for bedrooms, and it made a fine hall for dancing. There were three hundred people present, but not more than sixty ladies, including little girls and married women. There were but few unmarried young ladies at that time in Texas, and as Miss Mary Jane Harris, the belle of Buffalo Bayou, was married, I, as the Rose of Bray's Bayou, came in for considerable attention. Politics ran high. General Mirabeau B. Lamar, vice-president, and a candidate for president, and Gen. Sam Houston and staff did not dance, but promenaded. One half of the men were candidates. Old Mr. Robert Wilson, “Honest Bob,” was a candidate for congress. General Houston was talking with Mother and some other ladies, when Father presented Sister and me to the president. He kissed both of us and said “Dr. Rose, you have two pretty little girls.” I felt rather crestfallen, as I considered myself a young lady. It had been the height of my ambition to dance with the president. At the Washington's birthday ball, Mrs. Dr. Gazley was dancing with the president. She, not feeling well, asked me to take her place, but a pretty young widow, Mrs. Archer Boyd, asked her partner to excuse her. She changed places with me, but I had the honor to dance in the same set. But as there was to be a wedding in June and I was to be first bridesmaid and General Houston best man, I didn't care. More of that wedding anon.
The second anniversary of the battle of San Jacinto had come and gone and Mother said she hoped there would be nothing else to distract us from our studies, as the school would close in June. But there was another sensation. One Monday morning in May on our arrival at the school-house, we found the town covered with play bills. A theatrical company had arrived and would give the first performance Friday night, June 11. This was the first theatrical company to come to Texas. It not only ran the young people wild, but the old people were not much better. The manager's name was Carlos, stage-manager, Curry, company, Mr. Hubert and family, Mr. Newton, Miss Hoke, Mr. and Mrs. Barker and several children. More of the Barkers anon.
The wedding came off the 15th of June. The groom was Mr. Flournoy Hunt, the bride, Miss Mary Henry. The wedding was at the mansion house, the home of Mrs. Man, mother of the groom. It was a grand affair, but I was snubbed again by a pretty widow. General Houston and I were to be the first attendants, Dr. Ashbel Smith and Miss Voate, second, and Dr. Ewing and Mrs. Holliday, third. At the last moment the program was changed. Mrs. Holliday suggested that I was too young and timid, and that she would take my place. General Houston offered her his arm. They took the lead, and Dr. Ewing escorted me. Everything passed off very pleasantly. As soon as congratulations were over, General Houston, who was the personification of elegance and kindness, excused himself and retired. Mrs. Holliday took possession of Doctor Ewing and left me without an escort till Mr. Hunt introduced Mr. Ira A. Harris. He was young, handsome, and had been but a few weeks in Houston; and, as I did not have the president for a partner, I was well pleased. As there was no pretty widow to interfere, we were subsequently married. Houston was at that time overrun with widows. They came from New Orleans. But it was a blessing in disguise, as all the old widowers and bachelors were thus enabled to get wives. The wedding ended with a supper and ball. The names of a few who were present and who married widows are: Thomas Earl, William Vince, owner of the Vince Bridge, and his brother Allen Vince, owner of the fine horse on which General Santa Anna made his escape from the battle field of San Jacinto.
There were no fourth of July celebrations that year. The election came off the first of September. Lamar was elected president;—[David G. Burnet], vice-president; Robert Wilson, senator. The condemned men, Jones and Quick, were hanged. School opened with Mrs. Robertson as teacher. President Houston had been absent in October visiting Nacogdoches. On his return the citizens arranged to give him a grand reception and banquet. The Milam Guards were to meet the president at Green's Bayou. As they marched out they came by the school house. The soldiers were a fine body of men; their uniforms were white with blue trimming. Captain Shea was in command. There were but a few girls in school. None of us was over fifteen years old, but we all had sweethearts among the Milam Guards. Soon after they left town rain began falling, and when they returned in the evening they were a sorry sight, wet and muddy, their uniforms ruined, and the president's clothing not much better. The reception was a failure, there being no ladies at the banquet. The school teacher, Mrs. Robertson, and pupils had received complimentary tickets to the theater that evening, as had also the president, his staff and the Milam Guards. Rain and mud did not deter us. We were all at the school house before dark. From there we marched to the theater, where the First National Bank now stands. The front seats were reserved for ladies and the school children, the next seats for the president, his staff, and the Milam Guards. The school arrived early, found the reserved seats occupied, and was accordingly seated in the second seats. There was considerable confusion, as the house was crowded. As the president and escort entered the orchestra played “Hail to the Chief,” but there were no seats vacant to accommodate them. The stage manager, Mr. Curry, came out and requested the men in front, who were gamblers and their friends, to give up the seats. This they refused to do. Then the manager called for the police to put them out. They became enraged, and drawing weapons, threatened to shoot. The sheriff called upon the soldiers to arrest and disarm them. It looked as if there would be bloodshed, gamblers on one side, soldiers on the other, women and children between, everybody talking, women and children crying. The president got on a seat, commanded the peace, asked those in front to be seated, ordered the soldiers to stack arms, and said that he and the ladies and children would take back seats. This appeared to shame the gamblers. One man acted as spokesman and said that if their money was returned they would leave the house, as they had no desire to discommode the ladies. He said that they would have left the house at first if the police had not been called. After the gamblers left, the evening passed very pleasantly. The president addressed the audience, particularly the children, as the term for which he was elected president would close soon. He admonished them to be obedient and diligent in their studies. 69
The first theatrical company to perform in Houston closed its engagement the next day. Mrs. Barker went home sick, Mrs. Hubbard refused to act again, and Mr. Barker took an overdose of laudanum and died, leaving his family destitute, the mother sick, with three small children, in an open house without a fireplace or stove. As soon as the people buried the corpse, there was a meeting to find means to help Mrs. Barker. The gamblers gave money freely, but it was impossible to get a good house. Gen. Sam Houston came to the rescue, and said that the destitute family could have the president's mansion and that he would board. The family was moved into the mansion till Mrs. B. was able to travel to her friends. The company returned to the United States. A few years after, Mr. Newton returned with a new company. He had married a Miss Hope.
This winter, 1839, was the first cold weather I had seen in Texas. There was sleet and snow. The new congress met in December, 1838, in Houston. General M. Lamar was president; the vice-president's name I do not remember. There was as much dissension in this congress as in the Consultation of 1835. The land speculators wanted to move the seat of government from Houston. No two members could agree. Some wanted to locate it at San Antonio, others at the head of the Colorado, or at Brazoria, Nacogdoches, or San Saba—every man was for himself. Finally there was a secret session of the senate that gave some offense to Senator Robert Wilson. He exposed some transaction of the session, and this caused his expulsion. An election was ordered to fill the vacancy. “Uncle Bob Wilson,” as everybody called him, was nominated and elected. As soon as he received his certificate of election the boys decided to celebrate the event. They built a throne in a wagon, seated their senator, manned the wagon, marched around town, then to the Capitol while congress was in session, hurrahing for “Uncle Bob,” a