On September 28, 1785, in Christ Church, Philadelphia, Moses Austin of Durham, Connecticut, was married to Miss Maria Brown of Morris county, New Jersey, a descendant of Robert Turner, one of the distinguished founders of Pennsylvania. Moses Austin became a prosperous merchant, being at one time a member of the importing firm of Stephen Austin and Company of Philadelphia. Later a branch concern was established at Richmond, Virginia. From Richmond the father emigrated to Wythe county, in south-western Virginia. Here on November 3, 1793, was born Stephen F. Austin, the greatest of Texas empresarios. The son of the Connecticut Yankee and of the descendant of Pennsylvania Quakers was, in later years, to lead a colony of Anglo-Americans into one of the provinces of Mexico which, in the course of time, was to throw off the control of the Spaniard and, as an independent republic, seek admission into the family of states of the American Union. But the Austin family did not long remain in their new home. The father was a man of keen business instincts and of bold enterprise. Bitten with the spirit of the pioneer, his eyes turned to the West and his thoughts traveled across the great Appalachian mountain system to the plains beyond the Father of Waters, where rumor said great lead mines lay buried, ready to yield their treasures to him who would risk the dangers of a western wilderness in their exploitation. So turning his back upon his Virginia home, the father, accompanied by wife and son, made the perilous and tiresome trip to what is now Missouri. Moses Austin's Journal remains, a vivid narrative of this journey. 104 This was in 1798 when the young Stephen was but five years of age. Here in what is now Washington county, the father began to develop “Mine-a-Burton.” Business reverses came and Moses Austin soon found himself a ruined man financially. A man of less courage and perseverance would have given up the struggle, and either settled down as a colonist in what was then a portion of “Upper Louisiana,” or else in all probability have returned to the scene of his former enterprises. “Mine-a-Burton” would have been remembered only for the same reason as are remembered the stories of those hidden treasures which in more fantastic guise, had centuries before lured the Spaniard across the trackless wastes of arid plains, only to melt away at his approach. But disappointment and disaster only served to bring out in fuller measure the zeal and fortitude of the man. Nothing daunted by the difficulties which beset him, and sustained ever by the devotion of his faithful wife, Austin now conceived the idea of planting a colony in Texas. Far to the southwest lay the land of the Tejas,—a land of historic memories.
The region watered by the Brazos, the Colorado, and the Guadalupe, had been traversed by some of the greatest explorers that ever set foot upon the western continent. Across the plains that stretched between the Sabine and the Rio Grande del Norte wandered Cabeza de Vaca and his companions on one of the most marvelous expeditions that history has ever recorded. In his quest of the Seven Cities of Cibola, Coronado penetrated the northern portion of the province, braving the dangers of famine, of wild beasts, and of hostile Indians on his fruitless errand. The group of ruins of the missions established in and near San Antonio and at San Saba are a silent though none the less impressive tribute to the courage and devotion of the missionaries of the cross. Among the wild Indian tribes of the east and the west labored the gray friars, teaching, preaching, and catechising, striving to win from the powers of darkness the rude denizens of the wilderness. The hearts of these devoted monks must often have sunk within them as they realized the scant success which attended their efforts to instil the holy mysteries of the Catholic faith into the minds of the fierce Apaches and Comanches. Yet they would have been recreant to their trust and unworthy of the best traditions of their order had their spirits quailed at the dark prospects which confronted them. Had not disciples of the true faith planted the cross among the savage tribes which roamed over the frozen regions of the north? Members of their own great order had celebrated mass and chanted the Te Deum on the shores of Lake Huron in the presence of the astonished savages and of the greatest of French explorers. The dearest ambition of his heart had been to erect a spiritual kingdom within the bounds of New France and to rescue from perdition a people living, as he tells us, “like brute beasts, without faith, without law, without religion, without God.” 105 To snatch from perdition the souls of those benighted creatures who inhabited the southwestern fringe of the North American continent would only be adding one more achievement to the splendid role of victories which had marked the progress of their order's growth. Already Franciscan convents by the hundred had been planted in Spanish America. Providence had bestowed its choicest gifts upon the region which invited them to come and undertake the conversion of its heathen dwellers. In the same spirit in which the Recollets had labored among the Hurons and the Montagnais of New France, would the Querétarans and Zacatecans strive to reclaim from paganism and savagery the roving tribes that dwelt to the east of the Rio Grande. The country which made up the provincias internas of Spain's possessions beyond the Rio Grande stood out in striking contrast to the land of ice and snow, of lakes and forests, amid which toiled the missionaries who had followed the routes of Champlain. This land of mesquite and cactus had been traversed by Hernando de Soto, who in all probability, penetrated the region south of the Red River. Not far from the coast on the banks of the Lavaca, La Salle had built Fort St. Louis, while in the neighborhood of the Trinity, the great explorer met his tragic end. These intrepid explorers were the embodiment of the romantic spirit of adventure. But the Spanish priests were as eager for the conversion of the natives as were the explorers for the discovery of gold or the South Sea. The land had witnessed the intrigues of Louis Juchereau de Saint-Denis. It had been the objective of the filibustering expeditions of Nolan, Magee, and Long, and had no doubt figured in the dark schemes of Wilkinson and the conspiracy of Aaron Burr.
This was the region in which Moses Austin determined to plant a colony of Anglo-Americans. The time seemed ripe for such an enterprise. But the hardships incurred in the inception of the undertaking cost him his life. Upon his son Stephen fell the responsibility of carrying out the wishes of the father. How well the son accomplished the task is a matter of history. The first steps were taken in 1821. Years passed by. In 1835 the settlers of the province found themselves driven to take up arms against the despotic measures of Santa Anna. The news of the rebellion then going on in Texas traveled far and wide, and from every section of the United States volunteers rushed to Texas, eager to have a hand in the defense of the province. 106
It is hardly a matter of surprise that the citizens of the great state whose beginnings were undertaken so largely on account of a belief in the principles of religious liberty should have had their hearts stirred at the news of the dangers threatening their fellow-countrymen at the hands of those aliens in race and religion.
In April, 1836, letters appeared in the leading papers of Philadelphia calling upon the citizens of that city to send the Texans such aid as they might be inclined and to bear the expenses of a company of fifty men which, it was said, was then forming for the purpose of going to Texas. 107 The call did not fall upon deaf ears. Public meetings were held, resolutions offering sympathy and aid were drawn up, money was subscribed, and volunteers were enrolled. All this it little short of remarkable when one recalls how great the distances were which, at this time, separated the people of Pennsylvania from the settlers in Texas. The only hypothesis upon which their interest can be explained is that in the eyes of the citizens of the northern state, the colonists who had emigrated beyond the Sabine were justified in taking up arms to redress the wrongs with which they saw themselves threatened.
Among those who took part in the ill-fated Tampico expedition and who were shot at Tampico on Monday, December 14, 1835, were three Pennsylvanians: Arthur H. Clement, aged forty; Thomas Whitaker, aged thirty; Charles Gross, aged twenty-three. A young man of twenty-five from Pittsburgh by the name of Fleming died in the hospital. 108 The Philadelphia papers of April 11, 1836, contained the news of the fall of the Alamo. Several Pennsylvanians perished at that time. The roll of honor is as follows: Capt. F. J. Desauque of Philadelphia, who had been the bearer of an express from General Houston and who, with Capt. Benj. H. Holland and an ensign, bore a flag of truce to General Urrea; John Thurston, who is said to have been a clerk in Desauque's store; William Cummings; William Johnson, of Philadelphia; Williamson, a serjeant major from the same city; and Browne, Holloway, Smith and Voluntine. 109
One of the most noted companies that saw service in the Texan cause was the New Orleans Greys, which embarked from that city in October of 1835 on the schooner Columbus. The members reported for duty November 22, having landed at Velasco and Quintana, and marched some two hundred and fifty miles to San Antonio. Many of those comprising this company were murdered with Colonel Fannin four months later. Among the Pennsylvanians who, as members of the above company, comprised a part of Colonel Fannin's command occur the names of George W. Gilland, Joseph P. Riddle, and James West. 110 On that fatal Palm Sunday, March 19, 1836, when so many of the volunteers from the United States fell victims to Mexican treachery, more than one native of Pennsylvania were among the slain.
Among these were Gilland, Riddle, and West, already mentioned. George Dedrick was a private in the cavalry corps of which Mirabeau B. Lamar was commander. He had emigrated from Philadelphia in 1835, taking part in the Tampico expedition. His object in going to Texas, he writes his wife, was “to Volenteer in ade of the Caus of Libertey” and again, “My object of Goin on this Exposishen was for you my Self and Son and all my famaley hearafter.” After giving an account of what he expected to receive in the way of land, he concludes,
My Love one word to you and my Son. You must do the best you posable Can. wen I Receve my half yearley pay from the Goverment I will Send You Som Money. Should eney thing befal me you can Sell your Clame to Reckoley but, I shall Live I trust to injoy the frutes of my Labor with my beloved famaley bring up Charles in obedance to your Comands. I Shall be home in time to See him go to chool [school] and Lurn [learn] him to Repeate what his father has done for him. My Respects to all— To you and my Son Receve my Lasting affection. Right wen you receve this letter. Right to me Direct Goliad Texes in the care of Leftenant Thornton. 111
Three weeks had barely passed when husband and father met a fate similar to that of many another brave man who had left home and loved ones and gone to Texas in the hope of bettering his worldly fortunes. Other Pennsylvanians who fell at the time of Fannin's massacre were Lieutenant Evan M. Thomas, of Philadelphia, a member of the Texas Rifle Brigade; Captain T. K. Pearson of the artillery, from the same city; and Stephen D. Hurst, likewise from Philadelphia, who was aid to Colonel Fannin, and held a colonel's command. He was formerly a clerk in the postoffice of his native city and is described as a young man of amiable disposition, courteous deportment, and warm attachments, and withal a gallant soldier. 112
On April 14, 1836, R. Jenks Markham of Philadelphia, and George Copeland, aged sixteen, of the same place, were shot at Matamoras. Of these the latter had served with Grant and Johnson in the campaign of 1836. Lewis H. Kerr, aged thirty-three, and P. S. Mahan, aged twenty-two, are said to have been confined at this same place. 113 The following Pennsylvanians are said to have rendered service in behalf of the Texan cause: Lyman W. Alexander and William Langerheirmer, in connection with the storming of San Antonio; George H. Bringhurst, who was captured at Cópano; George Ewing, who took part in the Grass Fight; J. Barnhart, who served in Captain Burrow's company; P. H. McBride, who was a member of Captain Stephenson's company; John Duncan, William P. Kerr, John Leman, and Thomas Martin, all of whom took part in the campaign of 1836. Giles A. Gidding is said to have been mortally wounded at San Jacinto. 114
From the Muster Rolls we learn that these Pennsylvanians were enrolled for service in Texas: Robert Musselman, John Scott, Robert Crasson, Samuel Sprague, W. J. Lewis, John B. Westbrook, John T. Smith, and one McNally. 115 In Captain Laurence's company were enrolled at Louisville David Sample, Francis A. Whiaker (Whitaker?), George W. Hensal; at New Orleans, Jacob Elliott and Robert Hutchisson; at Portland, Solomon Barrows and Charles N. Cranes: all for the duration of the war. In Captain Allen's company for a similar perior there were enrolled at Louisville, John Moyer, Robert Neil, and J. D. Schooll; at Cincinnati, Foster Servers, William Peters, and Michael Myres; at New Orleans, W. D. Brown; at Portland, R. D. Ramsay. The Zanesville Volunteer Rifle Company contained three Pennsylvanians. 116
On Monday afternoon, May 30, a meeting of Texan sympathizers was held at Military Hall, on Library Street. At the meeting it was resolved to form a company to emigrate to Texas under Colonel Britton Evans and join the army of Houston. 117 In the United States Gazette for June 3 appeared a notice signed by J. D. Wood and Adolphus A. Rutter for the Texas Emigration Company of Philadelphia inviting prospective emigrants to assemble at the Jefferson House Dock between Front and Second Streets. On Saturday the 16th of July, a vessel left New Castle with between fifty and sixty volunteers bound for Texas. 118 Some of these were no doubt Pennsylvanians. A dispatch from Bermuda, dated August 2, 1836, stated that the American schooner, General De Kalb, one Matthews, master, had put into port for food and water. The vessel had been out ten days from Philadelphia and was bound for New Orleans. She carried between forty and fifty volunteers comprising privates and officers under the command of Captain Ramsay for the Texan army. These were described as being somewhat “pugnacious in disposition.” 119 A company of volunteers from Washington, Pennsylvania, is said to have arrived at New Orleans under Colonel A. Thruston about the middle of November. 120 It was not only upon the field of battle that Pennsylvanians rendered the republic of Texas service. S. Rhoads Fisher, first secretary of the Texan navy, was a Pennsylvanian and one of the first two members of Congress from Texas. 121
The numerous meetings which were held in Philadelphia by Texan sympathizers during the spring and summer of 1836 are an indication of the deep interest felt by the citizens of that city in the stirring events that were happening in the region beyond the Sabine. Two days before the battle of San Jacinto a meeting in favor of Texas was advertised in the city papers. This meeting was held at the Tontine and was attended by such a crowd that many could not gain admittance. A committee of arrangements was announced, the committee being composed of thirty-nine citizens. 122 On Monday afteronon, May 2, a large and enthusiastic meeting of Texan sympathizers was held at the District Court House. Major Peter Fritz presided, the meeting being addressed by the three Texan commissioners to the United States, Austin, Archer, and Wharton. Addresses were also made by D. P. Brown, Robert Conrad, C. Naylor, and Willis Hall, a member of the Texas committee in New York City. Resolutions were drawn up and adopted. These resolutions declared that the usurpations of Santa Anna were full justification for resistance; abhorrence was expressed for the manner in which the Mexicans had conducted the war; admiration was evinced for the patriots of Texas; it was the duty of every lover of liberty to contribute as much as he could to sustain Texas; Congress should be memorialized as to the affairs of Texas; the meeting called upon the President to intervene, if possible, and finally a committee was appointed to solicit funds. 123 The papers which published accounts of this meeting contained the following notice: “Texas Committee—The Committee will meet at the Bolivar House this evening at 7½ o'clock, on special business. Punctual attendance is respectfully requested.” Daily meetings of this committee continued to be held at the Independence Hotel on Chestnut Street, opposite the State House. Stuart Newell, the secretary, further manifested his concern in the Texan cause by advertising for sale eight hundred acres of land in Luzerne county, one-half of the proceeds of the sale of the said land to be appropriated to the aid of the Texans. 124 He found it necessary to warn Philadelphians against paying money to unauthorized persons, who had collected some thirty or forty dollars from Texas sympathizers. 125 This executive committee continued to meet frequently until the close of the summer. Its membership was increased in numbers to forty-five. At a meeting held on Thursday, May 19, Major Peter Fritz was elected treasurer. Persons were appointed by the committee as legal collectors in the city districts. It was resolved that the funds so raised should not go toward the expenses of any self-appointed command of volunteers that was being formed at the time. 126 The United States Gazette of June 9 contains reference to an “Original Texas Committee” which was scheduled to meet at David Paul Brown's office at the southwest corner of Chestnut and Seventeenth Streets on that evening. 127 Later in the month we find the Texas executive committee meeting on Tuesday and Friday evenings. The name of William White, Jr., occurs as secretary. 128 A meeting held on Thursday evening, August 18, appointed collectors to solicit contributions and recommended that the residents of towns and villages hold meetings for the purpose of arousing interest in the cause of Texas. 129
A public meeting of citizens of Philadelphia was scheduled for the evening of May 17 at the house of D. Newman, who lived on Eighth Street above Willow. 130 No account of this meeting was published. Shortly afterward a large meeting of Texan sympathizers was held at the same place. The meeting is said to have been eloquently addressed by Charles Naylor and others. Resolutions were adopted declaring the intention of those present to unite with their fellow citizens in aid of Texas; abhorrence was expressed for the practices of Santa Anna; the citizens of the city and county were earnestly recommended to adopt speedy measures relative to the oppressed Texans; the independence of Texas should be recognized at once by the United States; the claims of Mexico for neutrality had been forfeited by the outrages of Santa Anna. 131 For the purpose of securing emigrants for Texas a general meeting was held at Military Hall on the evening of May 30. The assemblage is said to have been feelingly addressed by Colonel Britton Evans. A committee of five was designated for the purpose of conferring with the general executive committee of the city. As usual, a series of resolutions were adopted. These expressed the determination of those present to embark under Colonel Evans and offer their services to Houston; to wear the badge of mourning on their left arm for the Texan martyrs of liberty; to appeal for help for the general Texas committee; and finally as friends of religious and civil liberty the members declared their readiness to sacrifice all for the Texan cause. 132 In the following July a call was issued for another public meeting to be held on the evening of the 18th for the purpose of devising means for helping the suffering women and children of Texas. The funds collected were not to be used for furthering the action of the Texan government nor to aid in establishing the political independence of the colonists. The meeting was well attended. The mayor acted as president, assisted by David Paul Brown and N. C. Foster as vice-presidents. The meeting was eloquently addressed by Samuel Brashears and Mr. Brown. A set of resolutions for carrying into effect the object of the meeting was unanimously adopted. 133 A few days later a call was issued for another Texas meeting. The call was signed by John Swift, president, George M. Dallas, Joseph R. Chandler, David Paul Brown, and N. C. Foster, vice-presidents, and Francis H. Stout, Stewart Newell, secretaries. Suitable accommodations, it was said, would be provided for ladies. In consequence “a very numerous and highly respectable meeting” was held at Masonic Hall on Tuesday evening, July 26. A series of resolutions introduced by D. P. Brown expressed deep sympathy for those engaged in a glorious struggle for Texan liberty; the members exulted in the triumphs, and suffered in the sufferings of their brethren in Texas; an urgent call was mode for money for the aid of the suffering women and children of that community. A committee of twenty-five was designated to secure contributions from citizens generally for this cause. 134 Another meeting of the friends of Texas was held in the County Court room on the evening of August 8. Colonel Charles K. Servoss was chosen president, Captain Theodore Gillies, John Jordan, Miles N. Carpenter, vice-presidents, and Stewart Newell and James Henry Carr, secretaries. The preamble and resolutions adopted by the meeting dealt with the Texan struggle in no equivocal fashion. Sympathy was expressed for the Texans, who were declared to be struggling for that freedom for which the fathers of '76 had died. The members pledged themselves to use every possible means to assist the Texans to obtain religious and political liberty. This was declared to be no violation of the law of nations nor of the treaty with Mexico. “We highly approve of the votes given in Congress in favor of the recognition of the independence of Texas, and, in our opinion, [it] should be a cause of great satisfaction [to Congressmen] in their good old age, that they had shown their approbation of the cause of Texas.” “That we highly approve of the recognition of Texas, and the President would gild his latter days' declining sun with additional lustre by using speedily the authority vested in him by the Congress of 1835-6.” The exertions making in various parts of the country to raise men and money for Texas were endorsed. Finally, it was resolved to appoint a committee of two persons from each block and a suitable number in the county to solicit subscriptions to aid “our brethren in Texas. 135
A “numerous and highly respectable adjourned meeting” of the friends of Texas followed on Thursday evening, August 11. As was the case in former meetings a preamble and resolutions drawn up by Newell, one of the secretaries, were adopted. One of these resolutions declared the occupation of a part of Texas by the troops of General Gaines a wise and just policy, savoring much more of humanity than of war. The President and Secretary of War would receive the approbation of all friends of liberty and good order by ordering such a possession of Texas. A brief and eloquent address was made by Mr. Moffatt. He was followed by Dr. A. C. Draper, who, “in a bold and glowing manner depicted the sufferings of the Texans in a strain of sublime and touching pathos.” Then Mr. William Maurese of New York craved the indulgence of the meeting; his first attempt at public speaking called forth repeated bursts of applause. An executive committee was empowered to appoint ward committees to solicit funds. 136 From the number and enthusiasm of the meetings held by citizens of Philadelphia, it is seen that interest in the Texan cause was much greater than that manifested in some other states, such as Virginia, for instance,— a fact which shows how completely non-sectional was the Texan question at this time. The people of New York and of Philadelphia were just as eager for the independence of Texas as were those of Louisville or of New Orleans. A memorial from sundry individuals of Philadelphia praying the interposition of the United States in the cause of Texas was read in the Senate May 9. 137 Mr. Buchanan, on May 16, presented thirteen memorials from citizens of Philadelphia, praying for the acknowledgment of the independence of Texas. 138 On May 30, James Harper, of Pennsylvania, moved to suspend the rules of the House in order that he might present a petition from the citizens of Philadelphia for the recognition of the independence of Texas. 139 It is a significant fact that from the legislature of Connecticut, and from the citizens of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia came memorials urging Congress to recognize the independence of Texas; while citizens of Mississippi, Louisiana, and South Carolina protested against such a course. But formal meetings, resolutions of sympathy, and the soliciting of funds were not the only means resorted to by the friends of Texas for aiding that community.
On May 17, 1836, the following notice appeared in the National Gazette: “Managers of the Texian Ball will hold an adjourned Meeting at the Marshall House, on Wednesday evening, 18th inst. at 8 o'clock. Punctual attendance is particularly requested.” At the instance of the Texas Committee, which has been alluded to above, Mr. Francis C. Wemyss tendered the use of his theatre on Walnut Street for a Texas benefit on the evening of May 25. On this occasion Othello was presented by local talent. Mr. William Watson followed with a comic song entitled the “Comforts of Man.” The performance was concluded with a farce entitled “Perfection, or the Maid of Munster.” 140 An evening or two later at the Arch Street theatre “The Fall of the Alamo, or Texas and Her Oppressors,” was produced with considerable effect. 141 On June 8 Othello was again presented by an attractive cast at the Arch Street theatre for the benefit of Texas. Mr. Burton sung for the first time a new comic song entitled “All for Texas, or Volunteers for Glory.” The entertainment was concluded with a farce, “The Chimney Piece, or Natural Magic.” 142
Of the two leading newspapers of Philadelphia which have been cited above, the United States Gazette was consistently friendly to Texas. This journal referred early in the year to the untiring efforts of Colonel Austin for the past fifteen years to populate Texas; to his exertions in the present crisis to resist oppression, and to his ambition to promote the cause of constitutional freedom and the prosperity of his adopted country. 143 An editorial in the issue of April 9 expressed the opinion, which was by no means generally held at that date, that Mexico could not hope for much success against Texas. The United States should offer to mediate between Texas and Mexico. The former country might even lend Texas the money that was needed to satisfy Mexico in return for acknowledging the independence of Texas. This last suggestion was purely chimerical of course. Numerous articles upon the Texas question were contributed to the press of the United States during the revolution in Texas. Some of these took the form of elaborate essays in which the entire history of the Texan struggle was reviewed. The question of slavery and the bearing of the possible independence of Texas upon the further extension of slavery came in for a considerable amount of treatment. One writer contended that the question of Texas being slave or free should be determined by a majority of her citizens after freedom had been obtained. 144 A series of articles was contributed to the Gazette by a writer signing himself “Washington.” The second article of the series pronounced the slave population of the United States vastly better situated than the black population of Africa. The proper solution of the slavery question was to indemnify their masters, educate the negro and return him to Africa. The chief injury resulting from slavery was the harm it did the white population, a statement which few would be prone to deny. The independence of Texas would result in a fine country being opened up to emigrants and an added desideratum would be the paving of the way for the abolition of slavery in the border slave states of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri. 145
Far different was the attitude of the Philadelphia National Gazette to the events then happening in Texas. While the editor avowed his intention to manifest perfect impartiality and not to withhold his sympathy from any who were battling for their rights, yet it was only at intervals that the story of the exciting events happening beyond the Sabine stirred the enthusiasm of the editor of the Gazette and caused him to forget his pose of lofty impartiality. It was some consolation to the friends of Texas to know that this journal subscribed to the sentiments of the National Intelligencer to the effect that it was a very laudable thing to apply the money raised by popular subscription to the sufferers in Texas,—that is, to the widows and orphans of those who had fallen while resisting the Mexicans. The Intelligencer even proposed that Congress should appropriate funds for the personal relief of the sufferers. 146 Column after column in the Gazette was taken up with a series of essays entitled “Texas Insurrection,” signed by one styling himself “Columbus.” 147 To the writer the struggle going on in Texas was nothing but a grand scheme of iniquity concocted for the purpose of re-establishing slavery in the Texas country. In a succeeding article the writer essayed to “Trace the subject of the Texian revolt through the whole concatenation of its primary causes and objects,” and to set forth the “motives of personal aggrandizement, avaricious adventure, and unlimited, enduring oppression” actuating the vast combination of interests that was behind the Texas revolt. 148 But such articles did not reflect the sentiment of a majority of the citizens of Philadelphia, and in consequence the editor of the Gazette found himself denounced as a “bloody papist” on account of the attitude of his paper and his conduct severely criticised for publishing such articles in reply in which the Gazette defended its position on the Texas question. Though disavowing any friendly feeling for the Abolitionists, the editor was convinced the chief cause for commencing the struggle was in order to carry on the slave trade; no justification existed for rebellion on the part of the Texans; their cause was destitute of all claim upon the friends of genuine liberty and right. 149 From afar the editor of the Boston Atlas scented the true cause of the rebellion in Texas,—it had been set on by Austin who wanted to introduce slavery. The New York American of April 29 was bitter in its condemnation of American raisers of slave stock. 150 A writer signing himself “M” addressed several open letters to Colonel Austin in Poulson's Advertiser. One of these contained the query: “Is, or is it not the intention of the leaders of the Texians to make Texas a slave country?” The apprehension of this, it was asserted, was causing a deep feeling against Colonel Austin and his friends to pervade the minds of the community. 151 To the editor of the Gazette Burnet's proclamation prohibiting slavery was proof positive that the Texans were fighting “Freedom's battle” for the purpose of riveting slavery's chain. 152 It is more surprising to find a voice from Mississippi protesting in a similar vein against the independence of Texas. In speculating upon the effect on the South of the independence of Texas this writer is of the opinion that the only thing that can render the independence of Texas desirable or its annexation to the United States worth while is the hope that she would become the slave market of the whole South. The acknowledgment of Texas independence will prove a dark day for the South,—our territory being already of sufficient extent and our frontier enlarged enough. 153 This reminds one of a similar fear expressed by Webster: “We want no extension of territory. We want no accession of new states. The country is already large enough.” 154 “Shall the free states yield to southern threats and annex Texas?” asks Poulson's Advertiser. According to this journal the Union if further extended to Mexico would fall in ruins. 155
Having thus demonstrated the Texas question to be a “monstrous scheme of iniquity,” and shown how doubtful even to the South was the economic gain of acquiring the region between the Sabine and the Rio Grande, those who took an impartial view of the situation proceeded further to point out the danger of a clash between United States troops and those of Mexico, and the hazards of hostilities with that country. 156 Not only was a war waged for absolute independence impolitic and quite premature, but what was more to the point, the contest was a hopeless one for the “Texians,” their only salvation being in the interference of our government. 157 As confirmatory of this view, the Philadelphia Gazette printed the week following the battle of San Jacinto a letter from a faint-hearted member of the Washington Convention stating that everything was lost unless speedy assistance was received from the United States.
Another reason why there was not a greater general sympathy in favor of the colonists, according to this journal, was that enthusiasm was subdued by statements respecting the dubious character of the leaders, such as Houston, for instance. The character of the emigrants was in keeping with that of such unscrupulous men as Austin, Archer, Wharton, Burnett, and the rest; for “all the murderers, swindlers, horse-thieves who have fled the Southern states for the last ten years” have gone to Texas. Those who did not find it safe to live at home had found an asylum in Texas. 158 Moreover it was a notorious fact that the standard of independence in that country had been raised for the benefit of land speculators; these were the ones who were eager for the immediate recognition of Texas and who sent back home the stories about the Mexicans running away from Texas. 159
The story of the massacre of Fannin and his men was received with incredulity by the papers unfriendly to Texas nearly two months after that event. The Philadelphia Gazette expressed pity for the “unsophisticated philanthropy and tender-hearted compassion” of those who mourned the fate of the victims of Mexican atrocity; it endorsed the opinion of the National Intelligencer that “the citizens of the United States who have entered the Mexican territory in hostile array, with arms in their hands, have done so at their own peril, and have only themselves to blame for the consequences.” 160 On the other hand when rumors of the victory at San Jacinto began to be circulated in the east, the editor of the Gazette admitted his desire to see the minions of Santa Anna thoroughly scourged for their cruel barbarities. How completely the true nature of the situation was misunderstood by those at a distance, is shown by his expressing the hope that friendly relations between Texas and Mexico might be restored. 161 At the parade of the National Greys and the German Washington Guards for target firing, the mark adopted was an effigy of Santa Anna. This incident was made the occasion of a facetious editorial in the Gazette of May 10.
The report of Houston's victory at San Jacinto drew forth three hearty cheers from the members of the Philadelphia Exchange. 162 Major Theodore Gillies, of the artillery corps, took charge of a salute of 100 guns fired in celebration of Santa Anna's defeat on the afternoon of May 31. The firing took place on Broad Street after which the company marched to the Broad Street hotel, where they refreshed themselves. 163 The editor of the Philadelphia National Gazette had made merry over the contradictory reports which came back from Texas. “And nothing is, but what is not,” had been his paper's comment on the subject of Texas news. Now he was puzzled no little at the first intimation of the victory of Houston and his men. In his issue of May 17 the very idea of victory was ridiculed. 164 The editor was greatly afraid the brilliant news was premature, and admonished his readers to take it “cum grano salis.” At the same time he ventured the prediction that if the war continued, emigrants would pour into Texas determined to avenge their countrymen. Two days later his paper announced the “glorious news” was all a myth,—it was merely one of those stories hatched in the South for the purpose of producing an effect. 165 But the good news persisted in coming, backed up by official proofs; so in his paper of May 28, the truth of the “glorious news” was at last acknowledged. But the old settlers were robbed of the glory of the victory by a fiction copied from the Mobile papers: “It is said there were not fifty Texians in the battle; that the Texian army was composed almost entirely of volunteers.” The editor now went far towards atoning for his unsympathetic attitude on the Texas question in the following manner: “In contemplating the brilliant results of such a conflict, the blood flows quicker; we almost lose sight of the original grounds of controversy, and scarcely stop to enquire which party was right or wrong. Human hearts, properly tuned, will revolt at cruelty and barbarity; and a feeling of sympathy will always be experienced in free bosoms at the success of a leader like Houston.” The Gazette of June 11 contained Houston's official account “of his extraordinary victory.” 166
It only remains to glance at the attitude of the Philadelphia papers on the question of the neutrality of the United States government during the months following Houston's victory. The National Gazette of May 18, in commenting upon certain official communications which passed between our government and the Mexican, used the following language: “The above correspondence shows on the part of the Executive a sense of our neutral duties and obligations, and a disposition to act up to them, honorable to the national character, and greater than from incidental disclosures we were disposed to give the Administration credit for.” The United States Gazette agreed with the National Intelligencer that President Jackson's letter to Governor Cannon of Tennessee was as important as the proclamation of neutrality made by President Washington in 1793. 167 The National Gazette found the conduct of General Gaines upon the border decidedly reprehensible, 168 though it is difficult to see just wherein this reprehensibility lay, inasmuch as Gaines did not occupy Nacogdoches till the following July. This advance on the part of Gaines was due to his fear of the Comanches and other Indian tribes making common cause with the Mexicans against the exposed settlements on the southwestern frontier. Hence his resolve to punish whoever employed Indians against the people of either side of the imaginary line which confined the disputed territory. 169 The Gazette prophesied disaster and bloody consequences as the result of General Gaines's action, and in a lengthy editorial set forth the consequences of a war with Mexico. 170 It is now admitted that while Gaines's advance was technically not in accordance with international law, the step he took was “dictated by humanity and justified by the emergency.” 171
The sober verdict of history has recorded that the Texas revolution was “a legitimate measure of self-defense” against the despotism of Santa Anna. 172 That the revolution succeeded was due in part to the moral and material assistance rendered the struggling Texans by the citizens of Pennsylvania.
105. Parkman, Pioncers of France in the New World, 384.
106. A company of Germans is said to have been embodied at Pittsburgh in November for the purpose of proceeding to Texas. New York Evening Post, November 25, 1835; Albany Argus, November 23, 1835. In this same month John J. Schuler, W. Carothers, Alfred Creigh, W. B. Parkinson, and John H. Noble, a committee, write to tell Austin that from fifty to seventy young men of Carlisle, Pa., are anxious to help Texas, provided they are needed, and can make their way to that country. MS. Austin Papers.
Of similar interest in this same connection is a letter from one S. H. Steedman to Smith. It was written from `Chillisquaque near Milton,' Northumberland county, and is dated Dec. 30, 1835. In this he writes “as an individual selected from among my comrades” to find out whether Texas has an agency at New York or Philadelphia to defray the expenses “of those who desire to render you relief. If you furnish the means—to bear the expenses and equipage, there can be a company of young men from thirty to fifty and probably amounting to one hundred raised—of the old Susquehanna River—whose fathers fought and bled in the country's cause.” MS. Texas State Library.
107. Philadelphia National Gazette, April 12, 1836. An enquiry was addressed on the same date to the editor of the United States Gazette for the purpose of learning whether Colonel Austin would favor a number of young men with an interview. Colonel Austin was in New York but seems to have returned to Philadelphia the next day. Austin was in the latter city on the 9th. I am indebted to the Pennsylvania Historical Society for permission to examine the file of this journal.
108. United States Gazette, January 11, 1836. For an account of the Tampico expedition, see Barker, “The Tampico Expedition,” in The Quarterly, VI, 169-186.
109. Muster Rolls, General Land Office of Texas, 238. United States Gazette, April 28, 1836; Poulson's American Daily Advertiser, May 4, 1836; Newell, History of the Revolution in Texas, App., 211.
110. Muster Rolls, 238; United States Gazette, July 16, 1836, quoting the New Orleans Bulletin, June 29, 1836. According to Brown, History of Texas, I, 404, the following names should be included: William Boyle, Charles W. Conner, John Connell, Martin K. Snell, Mandred Wood. Of these Conner was killed by the Mexicans near San Antonio, leaving a mother and sister in Philadelphia. Poulson's Advertiser, January 8, 1836.
111. The letter is printed in The Quarterly, XI, 157-161.
112. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 5, 6, 19, 1836; United States Gazette, May 11, 1836.
113. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 17, 20, 1836. This P. S. Mahan is no doubt the P. Jenks Mahan who is said to have served with Grant and Johnson in the campaign of 1835.
114. Cf. Baker's Texas Scrap Book, 585; Thrall, A Pictorial History of Texas, 541. Gidding was a member of Company A, Third Regiment, Texas Volunteers.
115. Muster Rolls, 238.
116. Ibid., 230, 238, 239.
117. United States Gazette, May 30, 31, 1836. L. S. Haighler was chosen chairman of the meeting, and L. S. Briest, secretary.
118. Ibid., July 21, 1836.
119. Ibid., August 23, 1836.
120. New York Courier and Enquirer, December 1, 1836.
121. The Quarterly, V, 33.
122. The names of those composing the committee were Gen. Robert Patterson, Col. John Swift, L. A. Godey, Major Peter Fritz, Marshall Sprogell, Geo. W. Jones. Col. W. P. Smith, Jos. Aiken, Wm. English, B. Duke, Stuart Newell, E. D. Tarr, Daniel Felter, Andrew Nanderson, Jno. K. Walker, Wm. Davis. S. P. Rudolph, Jno. Jordan, Jno. Manderson, Gen. Jno. D. Goodwin, Jno. Naglee, Chas. Naylor, Jno. Conrad, Jno. G. Wolf, Martin McMichael, Thos. D. Grover, Robt. Morris, Jno. F. Stump, Col. Jno. Thompson, Wm. F. Hughes, Col. Geo. Roshler, N. C. Foster, Wm. C. Johnson, W. G. Alexander, Wm. Wood, Augustus D. Tarr. Thos. S. Smith was chairman of the meeting, and Robert T. Conrad, secretary. United States Gazette, April 19, 1836.
123. Ibid., May 3, 1836; Philadelphia National Gazette, May 3, 1836. The vice-presidents of the meeting were Cols. Jno. Thompson, W. P. Smith, S. H. Perkins, J. S. Riley, and private S. Newman. The secretaries were Geo. Norton, Robt. Morris, and C. D. Lybrand. It may be noted that memorials from citizens of Philadelphia were presented in the Senate May 9.
124. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 5, 7, 1836. This journal of May 4 and 6 contained Austin's Louisville address.
125. United States Gazette, May 19, 1836.
126. Ibid., June 4, 1836. John Conrad was the chairman of this meeting. The new members were: Robt. C. Martin, Geo. W. South, Thos. Koehler, Wm. Stephens, Wm. Vogdes, Chas. Hinkle, Erastus M. Glathery, Thos. C. Clark, Jos. C. Neal, Thos. B. Florence, Napoleon B. Evans, Chas. K. Servoss, Capt. Theo. Gillies, D. P. Brown, Dr. Thos. C. Bunting, Jno. Leadbetter, Jr., Nathan Levering, Chas. D. Lybrand, Wm. White, Jr., Robt. C. Conrad, Thos. Boyd, Henry Derringer, A. J. Pleasanton, Henry Remmey, Wm. Linkey, Dr. Alex. Ramsey, Thos. B. Town, Jas. Sloan.
127. It is not clear just what relation existed between this committee and the executive committee.
128. United States Gazette, June 17, 1836.
129. Ibid., August 25, 1836. Theodore Gillies was appointed chairman of this meeting. The following were added to the membership of the committee: Jno. H. Frick, Robt. Morris, Jos. C. Neal, Peter Hay, Jos. Wood, Jos. S. Serosse, Jas. Reed, Henry Derringer, L. A. Godey, Jno. Thompson, T. R. Moffatt.
130. Ibid., May 7, 1836.
131. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 16, 1836. Thos. W. Dukes was chosen president of this meeting; Daniel Newman and David R. Graham, vice-presidents, and Jesse Williamson, secretary.
132. United States Gazette, May 31, 1836. L. S. Haighler was chairman of the meeting, and L. S. Briest, secretary. Dr. J. H. Carr, Briest, Haighler, Dr. Burks and B. Grant were appointed to confer with the general city committee. The committee on resolutions consisted of Carr, Briest, Lockwood, Steele, and Zantzinger.
133. United States Gazette, July 16, 18, 1836; Philadelphia National Gazette, July 19, 1836. The call for the meeting was signed by Jno. Swift, Geo. M. Dallas, Jos. R. Chandler, Samuel Brashears, David P. Brown.
134. United States Gazette, July 29, 1836. The members of the committee to collect funds were Jno. Hemphill, D. P. Brown, N. C. Foster, Samuel Brashears, Jno. C. Montgomery, Geo. M. Dallas, Jno. L. Hodges, Jas. Ronaldson, Jos. R. Chandler, Daniel Fitler, Col. Jno. Thompson, Peter Hay, Jas. Hanna, Benj.Duncan, Chas. Naylor, Thos. D. Grover, Gabriel Kerr, Samuel F. Reed, Jno. Swift, Francis H. Stout, Benj. Mifflin, Jno. R. Walker, Norris Stanley, Jno. M. Kennedy, Jno. Naglee.
135. United States Gazette, August 11, 1836. A general committee appointed by this meeting consisted of Gen. Jno. D. Goodwin, Col. Chas. K. Servoss. Capt. Theo. Gillies, D. P. Brown, Dr. Thos. C. Bunting, Jno. Jarden, Daniel Fitler, Wm. Davis, Daniel Green, Wm. Eppelsheimer, Jacob Jarden, Dr. Thos. Badaraque, Miles N. Carpenter, Wm. H. McCrea, Samuel Brick, Jno. Barclay, Stewart Nevell, Dr. M. M. Reeve, Col. Jas. Woodman, Thos. B. Town.
136. United States Gazette, August 13, 1836. Capt. Theodore Gillies presided at this meeting, Jarden and Carpenter were chosen vice-presidents, and Newell and Carr secretaries. The executive committee was made up of those appointed at the previous meeting with the addition of Jas. Henry Carr.
137. Senate Docs., 1st Session, 24th Congress, V, No. 365.
138. Cong. Globe, 1st Session, 24th Congress, III, 380.
139. Ibid., III, 410. J. M. Wolfe had visited Pennsylvania among other states, in the spring of 1836, for the purpose of getting memorials sent to Congress.
140. United States Gazette, May 25, 1836.
141. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 27, 1836.
142. United States Gazette, June 8, 1836.
143. Ibid., January 25, 1836.
144. Ibid., April 20, 1836. In the issue of this paper for May 13, 1836, appeared an article on the “Cause of the War”—a vindication of the Texans.
145. United States Gazette, May 2, 1836. Cf also Ibid., May 26, June 7, 16, 1836.
146. Philadelphia National Gazette, April 13, May 3, 1836.
147. These articles were republished in a pamphlet entitled. The Origin and True Causes of the Texas Insurrection, Commenced in the Year 1835. Cf. Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 159, note.
148. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 17, 21, 1836. The main object of the writer was to prove that the revolt was not so much the deed of the actual settlers as of the land speculators and slaveholders in the United States.
149. Ibid., April 30, May 12, 1836.
150. Quoted in Philadelphia National Gazette, April 29, 1836.
151. Poulson's Advertiser, April 12, 15, 20, 1836.
152. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 13, 1836.
153. Ibid., June 25, 1836.
154. Rhodes, History of the United States, I, 91.
155. Poulson's Advertiser, June 29, 1836.
156. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 6, 1836.
157. Philadelphia National Gazette, April 28, 1836, quoting the New Orleans True American of April 13. According to the Nashville Banner of April 27 there was small hope of checking the enemy. On the other hand the Evening Star of Philadelphia asserted that “Texas sooner or later from its position must become the property of the United States.” Quoted by the Commonwealth, Frankfort, Ky., Nov. 14, 1835.
158. Philadelphia National Gazette, April 20, 27, 29, 1836.
159. Poulson's Advertiser, April 27, 1836, quoting the Charleston Southern Patriot; Philadelphia National Gazette, June 22, 1836. The inducements held out by the Texas authorities to prospective volunteers occupy much less space in the Philadelphia papers than in those of some other communities, such as Kentucky for instance. Cf. United States Gazette, January 18, 1836; Philadelphia National Gazette, April 21, 26, 1836.
160. Philadelphia National Gazette, April 28, 1836.
161. Ibid., May 9, 1836. One writer expressed the opinion that public sympathy in the United States had been excited just in proportion as the butcheries of Santa Anna had become known. Ibid., June 28, 1836.
162. United States Gazette, May 23, 1836.
163. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 30, June 2, 1836.
164. The New Orleans Bee of May 3 contained Secretary of War Rusk's account of the battle, dated April 23.
165. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 19, 1836. The issue of May 23 still discredited the victory.
166. The day before the editor had referred to the “Massacre of the 21st of April.”
167. United States Gazette, August 19, 1836.
168. Philadelphia National Gazette, May 6, 1836. The hope is expressed that nothing will be done by an American officer to tarnish the high character of the United States for national probity and good faith.
169. Cf. United States Gazette, August 2, 1836, which contained Gen. Gaines' letter of July 28 to Gen. Bradford.
170. Philadelphia National Gazette, August 2, 1836.
171. Garrison, Westward Extension (Amer. Nation, XVII), 88.
172. Smith, The Annexation of Texas, ch. I.
How to cite:
Winston, James E., "PENNSYLVANIA AND THE INDEPENDENCE OF TEXAS ", Volume 017, Number 3, Southwestern Historical Quarterly Online, Page 262 - 282. http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/publications/journals/shq/online/v017/n3/article_2.html
[Accessed Mon Nov 23 18:08:23 CST 2009]
