THE
SOUTHWESTERN HISTORICAL
QUARTERLY

XXIV

Vol. XXIV

JULY, 1920

No. 1

The publication committee and the editors disclaim responsibility for views expressed by
contributors to The Quarterly

THE QUESTION OF TEXAN JURISDICTION IN NEW
MEXICO UNDER THE UNITED STATES, 1848-1850

WILLIAM CAMPBELL BINKLEY

Practically every student of American history has heard of the
boundary controversy between Texas and New Mexico because of
its connection with the famous Compromise of 1850. Most of
the general histories of the United States mention the question
and its final adjustment,
¹ and it has even been intimated that had
not President Taylor died at the time he did a civil war would
have been precipitated in 1850 as a result of this issue alone. These
accounts, however, emphasize only the national phase of the sub-
ject, while the local activities of the parties interested in the con-
troversy have been left in the background. This is unfortunate,
inasmuch as these local activities played a part in shaping the
national phase of the question.

During her short life as an independent republic, Texas claimed
the Rio Grande from mouth to source as her western boundary,
and even seriously considered the possibility of extending her
jurisdiction to include the valuable bay of San Francisco. But the
boundary actually claimed meant a direct encroachment upon the
territory of the neighboring Mexican states. Since the northern
part of the territory thus claimed had long been under the juris-
diction of New Mexico, and even included the capital of that prov-
ince, the people of the region naturally resented any attempted
encroachments. As a result, the first Texan efforts at occupation
ended in failure. But the sting of failure was soon alleviated
through the annexation of Texas to the United States, and while
that government was planning to adjust the claims it had thus
inherited, the question changed from the status of a revolutionary
movement under the Mexican government to an international .sit-
uation. The climax of this transitory stage was reached in the
Mexican War, as a result of which New Mexico also became a part
of the United States. Thus the question was once more an in-
ternal problem, but under a different government, and here it took
the form of a three cornered quarrel between Texas, New Mexico,
and the central government, in which Texas assumed the aggressive.

The Problems Involved Under the United States. --The first
problem which presented itself was that of ascertaining the atti-
tude of the united States government, and in this both Texas and
New Mexico were naturally interested. Before the American occu-
pation of New Mexico in 1846, the boundary question had not
seriously troubled the people of that department. The Santa Fé
expedition had, of course, brought an awakening to the possibilities
of an encroachment from the east, and its outcome left them op-
posed to a division of their province by Texas. But they had con-
sidered the issue to be between Texas and Mexico rather than be-
tween themselves and Texas, and therefore had looked to the su-
preme government of Mexico to keep their domain intact. Conse-
quently, for them the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo meant that the
Mexican government was no longer responsible for their territory,
and in spite of the declaration of General Kearny that he would
hold the department with its original boundaries, ² they feared that
the attitude of the new government under which they found them-
selves was favorable to Texas. These apprehensions were increased
as a result of statements made by President Polk, and they began
to feel that unless they took active steps to assert their rights, they
were facing territorial disintegration.

For the Texans also, the trend of events in connection with the
military occupation of New Mexico and the maintenance of the
military government had brought uneasiness. Even before the
establishment of peace, President Polk had been compelled to face
a question from Texas concerning the jurisdiction of the military
government in New Mexico. Information concerning the nature
of Kearny's occupation had reached the state officials of Texas
through the newspapers, and after looking in vain for a contra-
diction of the statement that the general government claimed the
right of jurisdiction over the region as a conquered country, the
authorities began to feel apprehensive over their claims. Accord-
ingly, Governor J. Pinckney Henderson wrote to Secretary
Buchanan, asking to be informed concerning the accuracy of the
newspaper accounts, especially in regard to any claims of the gen-
eral government to any portion of the territory lying within the
limits of Texas as named in her boundary act of December 19, 1836.
He solemnly protested against any action on the part of the United
States which might interfere with the rights of Texas, but con-
cluded by saying:

Inasmuch as it is not convenient for the State at this time to
exercise jurisdiction over Santa Fe, I presume no objection will
be made on the part of the government of the State of Texas to
the establishment of a territorial government over that country by
the United States, provided it is done with the express admission
on their part that the State of Texas is entitled to the soil and
jurisdiction over the same, and may exercise her right whenever
she regards it expedient. ³

This letter reached Washington early in February, and in the
meantime information was also arriving concerning the attitude
in Texas which had impelled the sending of the protest. Through
their press the Texans denounced the establishment of a separate
territorial government over Santa Fé and the surrounding country
as a violation of the "compact of annexation," and they professed
inability to understand how Polk could reconcile his military move-
ments with his assumption of the Rio Grande as the boundary.
They argued that "Santa Fe is equally a part of our annexed ter-
ritory [on this assumption] as that opposite Matamoros," and yet
General Taylor was sent to occupy and defend the latter as United
States soil, while General Kearny was sent to conquer and estab-
lish a government over the former. ⁴ A spirit of this nature had
to be placated, and in reply to Governor Henderson's letter Polk
assured him that the military government in New Mexico was only
such as must necessarily exist under the laws of nations and of war
to preserve order and protect the rights of the inhabitants, and
that it would automatically cease upon the conclusion of a treaty
of peace with Mexico.

But he was now forced to take a stand upon the boundary claims,
and he appeased the Texans by stating that nothing could be more
certain than that the temporary government would never injuri-
ously affect the right which he believed to be justly asserted by
Texas to the whole territory east of the Rio Grande, whenever the
Mexican claim to it should be extinguished by treaty. He now
absolved himself from any further responsibility on the question
by adding that the solution of the problem belonged more properly
to the legislative than to the executive branch of the government. ⁵
This assurance had the desired effect in Texas, with the result
that so far as the local boundary question was concerned, all moves
toward securing a settlement were suspended until it could be de-
termined what effect the war would have upon the international
line of demarcation.

Polk later explained to Congress that under the circumstances
a postponement of the settlement was the most plausible solution.
It would obviously be impracticable, if not impossible, to deter-
mine a boundary line between two nations while they were at war
with each other. Therefore, in spite of the fact that New Mexico
was under the control of the United States army, since it had
never actually been occupied by Texas, and was still claimed by
Mexico, it was not yet an undisputed portion of the United States;
and even were the Texas claim admitted, no part of the disputed
territory could be delivered to it until the international question
of ownership was settled. ⁶ This point of view, as well as the
promise in the President's statement to Governor Henderson that
the military government legally ceased to exist as soon as peace
should be established, led to the expectation in Texas that the ter-
ritory east of the Rio Grande would immediately be turned over
to the jurisdiction of the Texas government. But the practical
conditions required the maintenance of some definite form of gov-
ernment over the newly acquired territory, until a legalized civil
government could be set up: and lor this reason the existing mili-
tary control was allowed to continue, with no provisions for a
change in the extent of its territorial jurisdiction.

In the establishment of a civil government for the acquisition,
the problems which had to be met were numerous. In the first
place, it was not expedient to attempt to establish a civil govern-
ment in territory which was claimed by one of the states, while
that claim was still unsettled. Moreover, while the territory east
of the Rio Grande was conceded in executive circles to rightfully
belong to Texas, the fact remained that no constituted authorities
from the government of that state were on the ground to establish
and maintain her jurisdiction. And since the Mexican population
of the region was openly hostile, there was no alternative left for
the United States army but to maintain control until either Texas
or the central government acted, or else to withdraw, and thereby
leave New Mexico in a state of .anarchy and without control. ⁷
From the standpoint of the central government, the power to or-
ganize the civil government of the territories of the United States
rested solely in Congress. In addition, the President had placed
upon the legislative branch of the government the responsibility
for settling the question between the United States and the state
of Texas. Congress, therefore, had become the potent force
which was to determine the nature of the development of the vast
southwestern area which had just been acquired, and at this par-
ticular period in the history of the United States, no question
which came before Congress was able to remain free from an en-
tanglement with the all-pervading issue of slavery extension.

This one was to be no exception, for almost as soon as it became
evident that the Mexican War would bring the accession of new
territory, the slavery question was introduced by means of the
Wilmot Proviso, attempting to prohibit the extension of slavery
to any territory which might be acquired with the funds then being
granted to the President. The Proviso failed to pass, but it had
the effect of bringing the Southern congressmen to openly demand
definite legislation establishing the right to carry slaves into any
territory which was to be added or organized. The continual
recurrence of the sentiment of the Proviso, not only during the war,
but also after peace was established, brought a fear that it might
ultimately succeed, and consequently limit all possibility of fur-
ther extension westward by the slavery interests. This led to tac-
tics for delay on the part of the slaveholders, and as a result it
was impossible to agree upon the organization of the civil govern-
ment for New Mexico and California. The military government
established by General Keamy continued, therefore, to hold control.

The Texan Movement to Establish Jurisdiction in 1848. --As
long as this state of affairs existed, the New Mexicans were appar-
ently upheld in their boundary desires, and there was no incentive
for immediate action on their part. But since Texas had expected
to receive jurisdiction over the territory east of the Rio Grande,
she was not inclined to acquiesce in the arrangement. Under the
circumstances, therefore, it seemed necessary that she should take,
the first step toward securing a settlement of the boundary ques-
tion. No immediate action had followed the activities of Governor
Henderson in January, 1847, because of the conciliatory attitude
of the administration at Washington. But during its next session
the legislature of Texas began to act concerning western juris-
diction.

Early in the session, and even before the status of the territory
between the Nueces and the Rio Grande was settled by the treaty
of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the new counties of Nueces, Webb, Starr,
and Cameron, all of them within this region, were created. ⁸ The
actual work of organizing these counties had already been begun
under the supervision of Mirabeau B. Lamar, a former president
of the republic, who was now a captain of Texan troops stationed
in the region, and considerable opposition had been encountered. ⁹
The terms of the treaty confirmed the legality of this, action, but
the legislation soon advanced another step. In a special message
to the legislature, on March 3, 1848, Governor George T. Wood,
who had succeeded Henderson, called attention to rumors of efforts
to establish a state government in New Mexico, and asserted that
had the United States government assigned Texan troops to that
region, such a move would never have occurred. He warned the
legislators that silent acquiescence might be construed into a sub-
mission to unauthorized encroachments, and, therefore, he recom-
mended that the legislature take some action so that the Texan
representatives in Congress might feel authorized to protest against
an infringement of Texan rights or a usurpation of any portion
of her territory. In addition, he suggested that suitable action
be taken for the immediate enforcement of the civil and political
jurisdiction of the state over the Santa Fé region. ¹⁰

As a result, on March 15, the county of Santa Fé was created,
with boundaries

beginning at the junction of Rio Puerco, with the Rio Grande,
and running up the principal stream of the Rio Grande to its
source; thence due north to the forty-second degree of north lati-
tude; thence along the boundary line as defined in the treaty be-
tween the United States and Spain to the point where the one
hundredth degree of longitude west from Greenwich, intersects Red
river; thence up the principal stream of Red river to its source;
thence in a direct line to the source of the principal stream of
the Rio Puerco, and down said Rio Puerco to the place of be-
ginning. ¹¹

This included practically the entire region of New Mexico to which
Texas had laid claim by the boundary act of 1836, and was the
first actual legislation since that act that directly affected the ter-
ritory. Two weeks previously, an act had been passed providing
for the control of the militia of the Santa Fé district, ¹² and other
acts were speedily passed, allowing it one representative in the
Texas house of representives, and establishing the eleventh judicial
district of the state, to be composed of the new county. ¹³ It was
provided that court should be held twice a year at Santa Fé, and
Spruce M. Baird was sent there to serve as judge for the newly
created district, with additional instructions that part of his duty
was to be the organization of the new county, and the formal
establishment there of the Texan jurisdiction. ¹⁴

In addition to this legislation a resolution was adopted on March
20, which stated that since the people of Santa Fé, which was an
integral part of Texas, were believed to have attempted to estab-
lish a separate government in direct violation of the rights of
Texas, the government of the United States was to be requested to
issue orders to the military officers at Santa Fe to aid the officers
of Texas in organizing the region, and in enforcing the laws of
Texas in case resistance should be offered. ¹⁵ Governor Wood at
once asked that this be done, "to the end that the State of Texas
may in no wise be embarrassed in the exercise of her rightful
jurisdiction over that territory." ¹⁶ After waiting for what he con-
sidered a reasonable time for a reply, Wood wrote again in October,
expressing the surprise of the people of Texas at the efforts of
the United States government to deprive them of territory which
had previously been conceded to them. He claimed that the sole
reason for leaving the question of boundaries open at the time of
annexation was that the United States "might not have to ap-
proach the settlement of her actual or prospective difficulties with
Mexico, clothed with only a qualified and imperfect power of ad-
justment." In his opinion, the United States government was
simply an agent and trustee for Texas, and as such she could
not acquire a right to any territory within limits even claimed by
Texas. He pointed out that for Texas the question was one of
honor, since she was forced to look to her public domain as her
only source of revenue for the payment of the debt she had con-
tracted in the course of her revolution, and for this reason no
measure to obtain any portion of her territory south of forty-two
degrees or east of the Rio Grande, without ample compensation,
would be considered. ¹⁷

When it was learned in Santa Fé that Texas had begun a new
movement to extend her jurisdiction over the territory, steps were
taken by the authorities to arouse opposition among the people.
The principal newspaper of the region, the Santa Fé Republican,
was controlled by the officers of the military government, ¹⁸ and
through its columns an effort was made to secure an exciting re-
ception for Judge Baird. It says:

We would now inform our Texas friends that it is not necessary
to send us a judge, nor a district attorney, to settle our affairs

. . . for there is not a citizen, either American or Mexican,
that will ever acknowledge themselves as citizens of Texas, until
it comes from higher authorities. New Mexico does not belong,
nor has Texas even a right to claim her as a part of Texas. We
would so advise Texas to send with her civil officers for this coun-
try, a large force, in order that they may have a sufficient body-
guard to escort them back safe. . . . Texas should show some
little sense, and drop this question, and not have it publicly an-
nounced that Texas' smartest men were tarred and feathered by
attempting to fill the offices assigned them. ¹⁹

Baird started from Texas, on May 24, 1848, ²⁰ going by way of
St. Louis, ²¹ and arrived in Santa Fé on November 10. ²² After
investigating the situation, he wrote to Colonel John M. Wash-
ington, the commanding officer at Santa Fé, and ex-officio civil
and military governor of New Mexico, expressing his surprise at
finding the military authorities still in control there. He inquired
if the government established by General Kearny had not come
to an end with the ratification of the treaty with Mexico, thereby
giving Texas the right to assume civil jurisdiction over the re-
gion. At the same time he presented his commission from Gov-
ernor Wood, together with the laws upon which his authority was
based, and added that for the future "the State of Texas must
regard all judicial proceedings, and the exercise of all civil func-
tions inconsistent with her laws and constitution, null and void." ²³
Washington at once replied that the government established by
General Kearny had been declared by the President to continue
to exist after the ratification of the peace terms, and added that
it was his intention to maintain its existence "at every peril" until
ordered by either the executive or the legislative power of the
United States to desist. ²⁴

On the following day he returned the documents which had
been submitted by Baird, with an accompanying statement that
when they appeared at the proper time before the proper tribunal
they would undoubtedly receive consideration in the way of estab-
lishing the Texan claims. Then in reply to a suggestion from
Baird that he would publish a- proclamation announcing the pur-
pose of his mission, Washington stated that the press of Santa Fé
"belongs to the General Government and must of course be under
its control." ²⁵ Baird now felt that further progress was blocked,
and reported to the officials in Texas that he could do nothing
until the question of jurisdiction could be settled in Congress,
unless he received further instructions from the governor, or Wash-
ington received new orders from the President. ²⁶ Consequently
he turned his attention to the natural resources of the region, and
in company with seven other Texans and Americans, applied to
the governor of Texas for authority to operate certain valuable
saline deposits lying in the territory between the Rio Grande and
the Pecos, below Santa Fé. ²⁷ To Governor Wood he explained
that this was for the purpose of recovering the financial loss he
had suffered in going to Santa Fé. At the same time he submitted
a report upon the conditions in the region, together with a sug-
gestion for opening a direct route from San Antonio to Santa Fé
in order to facilitate communications between the two portions of
the state. ²⁸

He then began to make plans to leave Santa Fé early in the
spring of 1849, ²⁹ but in March the preparation by some of the
army officers stationed in New Mexico, of newspaper articles which
he considered to be derogatory to the claims of Texas, led him to
reopen a correspondence with Colonel Washington. He warned
Washington that if these were published, he would hesitate no
longer to assert the Texan claims, and would inform the people
of New Mexico as to the correct situation. ³⁰ His subsequent re-
ports indicate that the information which he planned to divulge
to the people was the fact that they were being received concern-
ing the real aims of the Texans, simply because the men who had
"grown into officials in the breath of a moment" as a result of the
establishment of the Kearny government were reluctant to give
up the influence of the patronage which they now possessed. ³¹ In
order to prevent this. Washington attempted to persuade Baird
that the articles in question could not be considered as having
any effect upon the Texan claims, and expressed a wish that the
matter should rest until they could act jointly, "when the thing
can be arranged without difficulty." ³² Baird proceeded, however,
to print proclamations claiming exclusive jurisdiction for Texas, ³³
but in the end allowed himself to be persuaded by the military
governor to suspend their circulation until Congress could be heard
from. ³⁴ The absence of new instructions from his own govern-
ment was also a factor in bringing about his decision to wait. His
activities at this time, however, did have the effect of causing the
suppression by Washington of the articles in question. ³⁵

The receipt of this information in Texas led Governor Wood
to appeal once more to the chief executive of the nation. He re-
viewed the situation once more, complaining at the failure of Polk
to answer his earlier letters urging President Taylor to offer to
Baird such assistance as might seem consistent with the obliga-
tions of the federal government and the rights of Texas; and con-
cluding with a request for an early reply in order that the views
of the general government might be submitted to the Texas legis-
lature in the following November. ³⁶

During the first week in April, Baird received indirect informa-
tion which led him to believe that Congress had agreed to Texan
jurisdiction over New Mexico, and immediately notified Washing-
ton that all judicial proceedings under the military authorities
would be void if continued under these circumstances. ³⁷ He was
once more prepared to proceed to accomplish the organization, of
the region, but once more Washington was equal to the occasion,
and succeeded in persuading him to postpone action until the
arrival of official information. ³⁸ This left the advantage on the
side of the military authorities when authentic reports disclosed
the fact that Congress had failed to reach a decision, and once

more Baird found himself waiting for a new opportunity to move.

In the meantime his communications of the previous fall were
beginning to reach the officials in Texas, and on April 14, Wash-
ington D. Miller., secretary of state in Texas, informed him that
it was expected that the obstacles presented as a result of the mili-
tary occupation would soon be removed. He was therefore told to
"labor to conciliate the people of that remote frontier," in order
that they would be ready to consent to the organization of the
region as soon as the military officials were out of the way. ³⁹ A
new proclamation for calling an election in Santa Fé county was
then forwarded to him, and on June 18, he prepared this for cir-
culation. In it the people were informed of the legislative act
creating the county, and were told that "henceforward, the civil
and criminal jurisdiction over said county, legitimately, will be
assumed and exercised by the authorities of the State of Texas
only, and the citizens will be required to yield obedience thereto." ⁴⁰
Before circulating the proclamation, however, he notified Colonel
Washington of its receipt, and of his plans to issue writs of elec-
tion immediately. In the personal conference which followed,
Washington convinced him that he could not possibly make the
returns of an election in time to prevent all except the votes for
county officers from being null, and that this fact would have a
bad effect upon those who voted. ⁴¹ He agreed, therefore, to sus-
pend operations until he could be further advised, ⁴² and in return,
Washington assured him that nothing should be authorized by the
military governor "which would wrongly prejudice the claims of
Texas." ⁴³

Feeling that he had accomplished all that was possible under
the circumstances, and relying upon Washington's assurances,
Baird now decided to leave Santa Fé for a time. To his own
government he reported that the men who were opposed to the
claims of Texas in the region were "actuated solely from a desire
to figure as public functionaries themselves," and therefore, that
he entertained no doubt as to his ability to organize under the
jurisdiction of Texas when the military government established by
Kearny should be removed. ⁴⁴ In support of his opinion he stated
that General Armijo, whom he considered as the leading man of
the region, "espouses our cause with great zeal."

The Struggle for Civil Government in New Mexico. --During
this same period the people of New Mexico had likewise become
active. When it was found that the legislature which had been
provided for in the Kearny Code was powerless if any of its meas-
ures did not meet the approval of the military commander, no
effort was made to hold a second meeting, and dissatisfaction be-
gan to develop. ⁴⁵ It was felt that the stipulations of the code and
of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo had given them the right to a
civil government, and a movement was begun to have the military
control replaced by a territorial form of government. The Presi-
dent had advised that they should live peaceably and quietlv under
the military government until Congress could act deliberately and
wisely. ⁴⁶ Senator Thomas H. Benton assumed a different point
of view, however, and in August, 1848, he addressed a letter to
the people of both California and New Mexico, suggesting to them
that since they had no civil government, the best move to make
would be to provide for themselves a simple form of government
until Congress should provide one for them. He believed that
they would need only a governor, judges, and peace and militia
officers, and very little in the way of laws. ⁴⁷

Following this suggestion, a convention met at Santa Fé on
October 10, 1848, and formulated a petition to Congress, asking
for the establishment of a civil government of a territorial nature,
and stating, among other subjects, that they were opposed to
slavery, and that they firmly protested against the dismemberment
of their territory in favor of Texas, or for any other cause. ⁴⁸ It
was exactly one month later that Baird arrived in Santa Fé, and
he reported that even then "the convention excitement was still
alive, and there was much dissatisfaction as to the manner in which
it had been gotten up and conducted, both among the Mexicans
and Americans." ⁴⁹ According to the accounts given to him by
the people, the movement was planned in secret by those holding,
or desiring to hold office under the military government. Only
five days notice was given for the election of delegates, and "poll
books were made out and distributed to the various precincts
headed with the names of those whose election was desired by the
conclave." It was to this cause that Baird attributed the protest
against the Texan claims, lie accounted for the anti-slavery state-
ment on the grounds that discord in the convention caused the
withdrawal of enough delegates to reduce the number below a
quorum, and thus disappointment caused those remaining to draw
up this resolution in the hope of enlisting the abolitionist sympa-
thies on their side. ⁵⁰

But at the same time that these New Mexicans were engaged in
formulating this petition, opposing the division of their territory,
Secretary of War Marcy, following instructions from President
Polk, was writing to the commanding officer of the United States
forces at Santa Fé, to inform him that the national government
had not contested the claim of Texas to all the territory east of
the Rio Grande. He also stated that any civil authority which
Texas had established, or might establish in the region, was to be
respected, and in no manner interfered with by the military forces
in that department, unless their aid might be needed to sustain
it. ⁵¹ In giving these instructions, Polk stated that he deemed
them necessary because of the danger that the military officers at
Santa Fé might come into collision with the authorities of Texas.
He added also that he had not changed his opinion as expressed
in his message of July 24, to Congress, concerning the right of
Texas to jurisdiction over all that part of New Mexico east of the
Rio Grande. ⁵² Two months later these same instructions were
sent to General William J. Worth, who was in command of the
eighth and ninth military departments, composed of Texas and
New Mexico, respectively. ⁵³

But on March 4, 1849, a new administration came into power,
and among the early acts of the new Secretary of War, George W.
Crawford, was the writing of a letter to the commanding officer at
Santa Fé, reproving him for failure to report to the department
concerning the management of affairs in New Mexico. He then
repeated the instructions sent out by Secretary Marcy, concerning
the boundary question, but added that it was not expected that
Texas would undertake to extend her civil jurisdiction over the
remote region designated. ⁵⁴ This letter indicates that the new
secretary was not informed as to the actual situation which had
already developed in connection with the Texan activities of the
previous year. A warning was added, however, that in case Texas
should make a move to occupy the region, the commanding officer
should be careful not to come into conflict with her authorities,
and should likewise refrain from expressing an opinion upon the
validity of her claims, This meant a slight change from the policy
of the preceding administration. Marcy's instructions had indi-
cated that if it seemed necessary, the military authorities were to
aid in sustaining Texan jurisdiction, or in other words, they were
to remain neutral only so long as the Texan interests seemed to
be safe.

While the Marcy instructions were still the order to follow,
Colonel Washington had written to the adjutant general that "To
avoid embarrassment in regard to recognizing the jurisdiction of
the authorities of Texas over a large portion of this territory, it
is very desirable that Congress should act in the matter before
the demand is made" ⁵⁵ He was already facing the problem as a
result of the presence of Baird, and was divided between his in-
terest in maintaining his position with the office holders of the
region, and the possible necessity of assisting Baird in accordance
with the Marcy orders. His own inclinations apparently led more
strongly toward the former, so for this reason Crawford's letter
absolving him from the responsibility of rendering sustenance to
Texas, was a relief for him, even though he was to maintain a
neutral position.

During the summer of 1849 the movement to secure a civil gov-
ernment in New Mexico was renewed, and in September, in answer
to a call issued by Lieutenant-Colonel Benjamin L. Beall, who was
acting governor in the absence of Colonel Washington, a convention
met at Santa Fé to draw up a new petition to Congress. Beall
made this call as a result of a series of resolutions drawn up on
August 22, and presented to him by a group of Americans, ⁵⁶ and
on September 10, each of the seven counties of New Mexico ⁵⁷
named delegates who were to meet on September 24. A consid-
erable faction of the population, led by the military officers, was
in favor of establishing a state government, but to this the civil
officials were opposed, and here the influence of the instructions
from the War Department was felt. The advocates of state gov-
ernment feared that the raising of the question at this time might
bring a recognition of the Texan claims, and in order to decrease
the probability of a forced connection with that state they were
willing to postpone action. ⁵⁸

This convention, therefore, declared itself in favor of a terri-
torial, rather than a state form of government, drew up a terri-
torial code of laws, and elected Hugh N. Smith, a Texan, as dele-
gate to Congress, with instructions to secure some sort of Congres-
sional action. The members voted that the division of counties
should not be changed except by action of their own legislature.
But their definition of the boundaries of the territory is signifi-
cant, A resolution was passed instructing the delegate to Con-
gress to define the territory as bounded on the north by the Indian
territory, on the west by California, on the south by the boundary
line between the United States and Mexico, and on the east by
the state of Texas. ⁵⁹ When it is recalled that to the leaders in
New Mexico the question of how far to the west the state of
Texas extended, was one of the important issues, this failure to
specify a definite boundary on that side would indicate that the
inhabitants were now ready to follow the suggestion which had
been made by President Polk, and to turn the question of the dis-
puted jurisdiction over to Congress to be settled.

But before any results could be obtained from this movement,
President Taylor had announced himself as favoring the granting
of statehood to both California and New Mexico. Acting upon
this policy, Secretary Crawford wrote to Lieutenant-Colonel George
A. McCall, who was leaving Washington to join his regiment in
New Mexico, informing him that if the people of New Mexico de-
sired to take any steps toward securing admission as a state, it
would be his duty, and the duty of others with whom he would be
associated, "Not to thwart but advance their wishes," since it was
their right to ask for admission. ⁶⁰

Two months later, in complying with a request from the House
of Representatives for information on the subject of California and
New Mexico, President Taylor took advantage of the opportunity
to state his views officially, and here he expressed regret that New
Mexico had not already been admitted as a state, in order that the
boundary question with Texas might be settled by a judicial de-
cision. Since that had not been done, however, he agreed with
his predecessor that Congress alone possessed the power of adjust-
ment, and he questioned the expediency of attempting to estab-
lish a territorial government there before making such an adjust-
ment, ⁶¹ But Congress was already deeply involved in debate over
the question, and this message had little effect, other than to fur-
nish new fuel for discussion.

The Question of Control in the El Paso District. --In spite of
the attitude which was being manifested in New Mexico, however,
new troubles over the jurisdiction were close at hand: for almost
it the same time that the convention of September, 1849, was in
session at Santa Fé, Major Jeff Van Horne, a new officer, stationed
opposite El Paso, was writing for information as to whether the
laws of New Mexico should be enforced at his post. This region
was included in the ninth military department, which had its head-
quarters at Santa Fé, but under Mexican control it had been in
Chihuahua, and was now in territory which was included in the
Texas boundary act of 1836. It was now a part of the county of
Santa Fé, as organized by the Texas legislature, and a group of
Texans under the leadership of R. Howard, who claimed to be a
legally appointed surveyor for the Texas government, was busy
locating Texas claims in. the salt deposits of the region. These
men claimed the exclusive right to use the salt, or to levy a tax
on any others who used it, while at the same time the New Mexican
prefect for this district was asking Van Home to aid him in en-
forcing the collection of taxes there for New Mexico. ⁶² Being
new to the district, Van Home was not familiar with the facts
of the controversy between Texas and New Mexico, nor with the
instructions which had been issued, and he therefore refused to
pass judgment until he could receive instructions from the com-
mander of the department.

By the time his inquiry reached Santa Fé, Colonel Washington
had been superseded as commander and ex-officio governor of New
Mexico, by Colonel John Munroe, ⁶³ and the new commander seems
to have been as thoroughly ignorant of the situation, and of the
attitude of the government, as was Van Horne himself. He sent
the data to the adjutant general of the army, that they might be
submitted to "the proper department of the government at Wash-
ington, with the view of having the question of jurisdiction de-
termined" ⁶⁴ Instead of waiting for a reply from the government,
however, he wrote to Van Horne that since there was a portion of
the territory in question over which no civil authority had been
established by either Texas or New Mexico, he deemed it advis-
able, in order that the people might have the protection of civil
laws and magistrates, that the military authority should sustain
the civil jurisdiction of the territory of New Mexico, and aid her
officials in the execution of their duties until such time as Texas
should assume civil jurisdiction, or until the boundary between
Texas and New Mexico should be finally settled. ⁶⁵

It seems incredible that Munroe could not have had access to Sec-
retary Crawford's letter enjoining strict neutrality, but this letter
to Van Horne indicates a complete lack of knowledge that such
instructions had ever been issued to the department under his com-
mand. In answer to his letter to the adjutant general, he was
curtly informed that "The jurisdiction over the soil east of the
Rio Grande, claimed by Texas and New Mexico, cannot be settled
by this department. The commanding officer must refer to and
abide by instructions previously given on this subject" ⁶⁶ This
letter and one from Munroe to the War Department, enclosing a
copy of his instructions to Van Horne, ⁶⁷ seem to have passed each
other somewhere between Santa Fé and Washington, and the re-
ceipt of the latter by the department officials brought prompt
action in the form of a caustic letter to Munroe, which virtually
amounted to a reprimand for "manifestly assuming to decide the
question of the territorial jurisdiction of Texas," and informing
him that "it is deemed necessary distinctly to repeat, for your
guidance on this occasion, what the department has often stated,
that the executive ha« no power to adjust and settle the question
of territorial limits involved in this case." ⁶⁸

A glance at the dates of the letters in this set of correspondence
will reveal the lack of promptness on the part of the government
agents of this period, as well as some of the handicaps to which
the officers in the remote outposts were subjected. Van Horne's
letter to Munroe, asking for instructions, was written from the
El Paso district, September 23, 1849. It was not forwarded from
Santa Fé to the War Department until November 21, while it was
not until December 28 that Munroe wrote his answer to Van
Home, and still another week passed before he sent a copy of this
letter to Washington. In the meantime, until the arrival of Mun-
roe's second letter, action was equally slow in Washington, for the
answer to the letter of November 21 is dated February 15, 1850,
and in all probability it did not reach Van Home for at least six
months after his request for instructions. Much could take place
in that period of time; and as a matter of fact, much had happened
before the correspondence was ended.

The Renewal of Activities by Texas. --During the fall of 1849,
while these developments were in progress in New Mexico, Texas
had no official agent in the region. Baird was now in Missouri,
and from there was sending reports to the officials in Texas con-
cerning the results of his mission, together with such information
as he could secure upon the course of events after his departure
from New Mexico in July. ⁶⁹ Earlier information which had come
from him aroused considerable resentment in Texas, and in the
campaign of 1849 for the election of a governor, Wood was op-
posed for re-election by P. Hansborough Bell, who advocated action
by Texas. Bell was elected, and almost immediately he began to
receive applications for permission to raise companies of soldiers
for the purpose of occupying New Mexico. ⁷⁰

In his final annual message to the Texas legislature, on Novem-
ber 6, 1849, Governor Wood referred to the opposition which Baird
had received in New Mexico, but stated that no official report had
been received from him at that time, nor had he received a reply
for his letters to either Polk or Taylor. ⁷¹ This situation, he told
the legislators, "imposes upon you the necessity of adopting ener-
getic and efficient measures to protect the rights of your State
and acquit herself of what is due to her honor and dignity."
Since a previous effort to legislate Texas into possession had ap-
parently failed, he felt that the question had now become one
"with which there should be no temporizing, for the sooner the
issue is made the sooner will the question be adjusted." He there-
fore recommended that the governor be given ample power and
means to raise the proper issue and contest it, "not by demon-
strating in argument the justice of our claims, nor by reference
to our statutes, but with the whole power and resources of the
State." ⁷² In addition to this, he suggested that a commissioner
be sent to Washington as soon as some plan should be adopted,
in order to show the federal government that Texas was in earnest.

This portion of the message was submitted by the lower house
of the legislature to its committee on federal relations, and this
group, on November 13, reported a resolution giving the governor
the power and means to send a special commissioner to Washing-
ton, to "ascertain the exact views of the Federal Government, in
relation to the county of Santa Fe, in time to lay the same before
the Legislature during their present session." Further action upon
the subject was to be suspended until this report could be re-
ceived. ⁷³ Before action could be taken upon this resolution, the
senate, on November 14, began the consideration of a resolution
providing for a special joint committee of the two houses to pre-
pare a protest against the further continuance of the military
government at Santa Fe, to be laid before Congress, ⁷⁴ This reso-
lution was adopted, and was agreed to by the lower house on
November 23. ⁷⁵ Wood's plans for action were thus checkmated,
in spite of the fact that newspaper comment upon his attitude was
favorable at this time. Hopes were expressed that the legislature
would comply with his recommendation, ⁷⁶ while one editor went
so far as to say that the "banner of the Lone Star shall be again
unfurled; not for offence, but for defence, and those who were
foremost to cry aloud for annexation, will be foremost to sever
the country from a Union that embraces but to crush and de-
stroy." ⁷⁷

Just at this juncture a letter from Major P. J. Pillans, whom
Baird had left in charge of his affairs in Santa Fé, was made
public in Texas. In it Pillans stated that the opposition to Texas
in Santa Fé could never be overcome. ⁷⁸ At the same time Baird's
reports had begun to arrive, and in one of them he stated that
one of the secrets of opposition on the part of the people in New-
Mexico was a fear that grants of land which had been made pre-
viously would become void under Texan jurisdiction. ⁷⁹ In order
to counteract this feeling, the lower house of the legislature, on
December 3, adopted a resolution looking toward the passage of a
law under which the citizens of Santa Fé might be granted land
within the limits of Santa Fé county as it then existed. ⁸⁰ During
this same week, however, news reached Texas concerning the New
Mexican convention which had been called by Colonel Beall. In-
tense excitement was manifested, and an immediate forcible occu-
pation of the region was advocated. ⁸¹ But Governor Wood's ad-
ministration was too near its close for any definite steps to be
taken, and his final act in the matter was the submitting of Baird's
correspondence, to the legislature, on December 11. ⁸² Baird, him-
self, had by this time become disheartened because of criticism of
his work by the newspapers, and expressed his determination to
resign as soon as possible. ⁸³

In his first message to the legislature, Bell referred to the re-
peated disregard by the federal authorities for the Texan rights
in New Mexico, and agreed with Wood that the question should
be brought to an issue at once. The failure of the legislature to
support Wood's recommendations, however, led him to suggest that
it was not necessary that the whole power and resources of the
state should be placed at the disposal of the governor, but that he
should be authorized "to send to Santa Fé, if the necessity for
doing so shall continue to exist, a military force sufficient to enable
the civil authorities to execute the laws of the State in that part
of the territory, without reference to any anticipated action of the
Federal Government, or regard to the military power of the United
States stationed at Santa Fe." In his opinion this force should
be used only in case the citizens of Santa Fé continued reluctant
to submit to the civil jurisdiction of Texas, after the military
forces of the United States ceased to exercise such functions. He
also concurred with Wood on the question of sending a commis-
sioner to Washington, but felt that Texas should first decide upon
the course to be pursued in case the mission proved futile, in order
that the commissioner might at once make known the position of
his state. ⁸⁴ This same message also included a suggestion that
the territory lying north of the parallel of thirty-six degrees, thirty
minutes, be sold to the United States government for the purpose
of liquidating the public debt of the state. ⁸⁵

The legislature now became active once more, and on December
31, 1849, new boundaries were designated for Santa Fé county,
decreasing its size, and from the remainder of the original county,
as organized in 1848, the three new counties of Presidio, El Paso,
and Worth were created. ⁸⁶ Presidio county was to include all the
territory between the Rio Pecos and the Rio Grande, from the
junction of the two rivers north to a line running straight north-
east to the Pecos from a point on the Rio Grande where the Ford
and Neighbors trail first touches that stream, "as defined by a
map compiled by Robert Creuzbaur, date of 1849." This map
shows the trail as striking the Rio Grande about one hundred
miles south of El Paso. ⁸⁷

El Paso county included the territory between the two rivers
from the northern boundary of Presidio county to a line extending
from a point on the Rio Grande, twenty miles above the town of
San Diego, due eastward to the Pecos. This line was also to form
the southern boundary of Worth county, which was to cover the
region northward to a line running directly east to the Pecos from
a point on the Rio Grande twenty miles above the town of Sabine.
The remainder of the region which had formerly been allotted to
Santa Fé county was now designated as the new county of Santa
Fe. ⁸⁸ The four counties were specified as the eleventh judicial
district, ⁸⁹ and in the reapportionment of representatives in the
Texas legislature, the four were combined into one senatorial dis-
trict, while Santa Fé county was allowed a representative in the
lower house, and the other three counties together were given a
representative. ⁹⁰

On January 4, 1850, an act was passed providing for the ap-
pointment of a commissioner to organize each county., by laying
it off into convenient districts, or precincts, and by holding elec-
tions for county officers, and notifying the proper state official of
the result of these elections. ⁹¹ On the following day Governor
Bell drew up an address to the citizens of these four counties, in
which he explained that their territory had long been included in
the limits of Texas, but that the necessity of centering her atten-
tion upon the struggle for independence had rendered it imprac-
ticable to organize the region earlier. They were now informed
that organization had been provided for, and that Robert S. Neigh-
bors had been selected by the governor to accomplish this organi-
zation, the principal motive being to extend to them the advan-
tages which other Texans held; and they were therefore invited
to "hold the most free and unrestricted intercourse with him and
. . . to lend him such assistance and protection" as his pres-
ence among them might require. ⁹²

Neighbors was instructed to proceed as quickly as possible to
the counties which were to be organized, and to circulate this
address, which, it was thought, should prepare the people for
ready acquiescence. His method of procedure upon arrival was
explained, and he was especially warned that while he should act
with firmness and decision, he should also "observe that mildness
and courtesy of manner which is so well calculated to inspire con-
fidence and esteem, and remove all prejudices which may hereto-
fore have existed in respect to the government, and our people as
a race," ⁹³ He was already familiar with the country which he
was to organize, having been a special Indian agent for the United
States government in the El Paso region, and he set out at once
to begin his work. ⁹⁴ His salary as commissioner was voted to him
in advance, ⁹⁵ and at the same time the legislature resolved that all
the territory east of the Rio Grande was included in the rightful
civil and political jurisdiction of the state, and that she was de-
termined to maintain the integrity of this territory. ⁹⁶

Baird at once began to make preparations for returning to
Santa Fé in order to be on hand to hold court as soon as Neigh-
bors succeeded in organizing the region. Before leaving Austin,
however, he submitted to Governor Bell a series of suggestions,
covering numerous points which had been omitted in the plans for
organization, and which he deemed to be necessary, in order to
gain the confidence of the people of that region. Among other
things, he felt that the territory should have been divided into
seven counties, corresponding with the ones then existing under
the Mexican law; that the Pueblo Indians should be induced to
settle on the frontiers; that the Mexican laws with regard to irri-
gation, mining, and herding cattle should be perpetuated: that
the wood and the salt deposits should be reserved from private
appropriation and declared to be the common property of the
people for their free use; and that English schools should be estab-
lished there to the full extent of the means that could be raised
by Texas. ⁹⁷ During his previous stay in the region, he had ap-
parently been studying the situation, but the officials in Texas
failed to recognize the soundness of his suggestions, and therefore
no changes were made in the plans for organization.

El Paso was reached by Neighbors about the middle of Feb-
ruary, and he began his work of organization there. On February
23, Major Van Horne reported to the authorities at Santa Fe that
the Texas commissioner was busy holding elections and circulating
messages from the governor of Texas. ⁹⁸ Van Horne felt that ac-
cording to Munroe's instructions of December 28, which were, the
last he had received, one of the two conditions had come upon
win en the civil jurisdiction of his command could be surrendered
to Texas, and therefore, he offered no opposition. On the same
date, Neighbors himself wrote to Munroe, stating that since he
had found no opposition to the extension of the Texan jurisdic-
tion in the El Paso region, he had issued writs of election, and
expected to accomplish the organization there in a short time. He
added that as soon as was possible he would proceed to Santa Fa,
and upon his arrival there he would submit to Munroe his in-
structions from the governor of Texas, and ask for his "friendly
co-operation in organizing all the territory belonging to this state,
into counties, and to extend over the inhabitants, the civil laws of
the state." ⁹⁹

One month later, he reported to Governor Bell that El Paso
county was fully organized, and that the officers who had been
elected had entered upon the discharge of their duties. ¹⁰⁰ Accord-
ing to other reports which reached Austin, the people of El Paso
were highly gratified at being organized under the laws of Texas,
and 765 votes were cast in the election for county officers. ¹⁰¹
Neighbors now reported that it was impossible to go to Presidio
county without an armed escort, because of the enmity between
the Indians and the few white inhabitants of the region, and
also that the organization of Worth county would depend upon
that of Santa Fé, since both were under the same influence. In
the accomplishment of the latter, he felt that he faced two handi-
caps: first, a lack of necessary funds, and, second, the absence of
proper pledges to the people in regard to their lands. He com-
plained that Howard and his party, concerning whom Van Home
had been inquiring, were already located on land belonging to
others, thus causing prejudice against Texas. ¹⁰²

At the time that Neighbors' letter of February 23 reached Santa
Fé, no answer for Colonel Munroe's letter of the previous Novem-
ber had as yet come from Washington, but he had at least found
the earlier instructions. He at once issued orders to all officers
commanding posts in and near the territory claimed by the state
of Texas, to "observe a rigid non-interference" with Neighbors
"in the exercise of his Functions and equally avoid coming in
conflict with the Judicial authorities created by that State." ¹⁰³
When the reports began to reach Santa Fé that a Texas commis-
sioner was on his way to organize New Mexico, there was talk of
resistance, ¹⁰⁴ and this spirit was encouraged by a proclamation
published on the next day after Munroe issued his orders for strict
neutrality, by Joab Houghton, one of the judges of the superior
court in New Mexico under the military government. In this
proclamation, Houghton advised the people not to go to the polls
which the Texas commissioner would open, for they should be
neither loyal nor obedient to Texas, but on the contrary, were in
duty bound to resist any attempt on her part "for the unjust
usurpation of our land and boundaries," He proposed that each
county hold meetings on the following Monday for the purpose
of drawing up resolutions upon the Texan claims, and felt that
if the people would observe his directions, "the present mission
of the Commissioner of Texas will be as useless as that of Judge
Baird." ¹⁰⁵

Thus when Neighbors arrived in Santa Fé on April 8, he not
only found that he would be forced to work without the assistance
of the military officers, but also that he would receive little en-
couragement from the people themselves. He reported, however,
that he was courteously received by the inhabitants, but that he
found Munroe favorable to the existing state of affairs, while
Houghton expressed a determination to imprison any person who
should attempt to enforce the laws of Texas. He was told by
members of the original state party that they were now willing
to aid him in the organization, but that they believed that it would
be necessary for Texas to send a military force to New Mexico
before she could exercise jurisdiction. ¹⁰⁶ Feeling, however, that
those inhabitants who were favorable to Texas were in the minor-
ity under the existing state of affairs, Neighbors now decided to
defer the calling of an election, for Santa Fé county as organized
by the legislature of Texas. ¹⁰⁷

But at about the same time that Neighbors reached Santa Fé,
Colonel McCall also arrived with information concerning the atti-
tude of the President toward statehood, and in the new possibili-
ties, Neighbors was ignored. As a result of McCall's message
notices were posted, on April 13, calling the citizens of Santa Fé
county, New Mexico, to a meeting to be held a week later for the
purpose of passing resolutions in favor of a state form of govern-
ment, and of requesting the governor of the territory to call a
convention to form a state constitution. ¹⁰⁸ As soon as Neighbors
had seen these notices, he protested to Colonel Munroe against
such an action, on the basis of the constitutional provision that
no state should be formed within the jurisdiction of another state,
without the consent of the legislature of the state concerned. He
held that since the government of Texas had expressed its deter-
mination to maintain inviolate all the territory within her boun-
daries, which had been guaranteed to her by the annexation reso-
lution, the move for a state government in New Mexico would be
a violation of that provision. ¹⁰⁹

Munroe was now confronted with a dilemma. He had not only
received instructions to maintain neutrality in the boundary dis-
pute, but he had also been told through Colonel McCall to give
assistance to any steps which the people of New Mexico might
desire to take toward securing a state government. Under ordi-
nary circumstances, these instructions would have caused no
trouble, but owing to the fact that the Texas government was at
the time attempting to organize the region, the move for a state
government in New Mexico meant a direct conflict with the Texan
claims. But he did not hesitate long. Just three days after the
meeting was held to formulate the petition to him, he issued a
proclamation naming May 15 as the date for the desired consti-
tutional convention. ¹¹⁰

None of his actions in connection with the question seemed
destined to receive the full approval of the various departments of
the government, however, for before the summer was over his
coarse was questioned from three different causes, by as many
different parties. His order of March 12, enjoining non-inter-
ference on the part of the commanders under him, brought a reso-
lution from the House of Representatives, asking the President
for an explanation. In reply, the Secretary of War referred the
members to the letters of instructions written by both himself and
his predecessor to the commanding officer at Santa Fé. ¹¹¹ A short
time afterward, the Senate took up the matter from another angle,
and demanded of the President, information concerning the orders
which had authorized Colonel Munroe to oppose or prevent the
exercise of Texan jurisdiction over the Santa Fé region. Aside
from Munroe's mistake of December 28, which had by this time
been corrected by the order of March 12, this was a deliberate dis-
regard for the actual happenings. President Taylor answered that
no such orders had been given, and submitted to the Senate the
correspondence in connection with Van Home's inquiry of Sep-
tember 23. He then brought up the question of the activity of
Neighbors in the New Mexico region, and stated that although
he had "no power to decide the question of boundary, and no
desire to interfere with it," he believed that the territory in ques-
tion was actually acquired by the United States from Mexico, and
had since been held by the United States. For this reason, it
was his opinion that it "ought so to remain until the question of
boundary shall have been determined by some competent author-
ity." ¹¹² And he had stated earlier what he deemed this compe-
tent authority to be. This meant another step in the adminis-
tration's attitude on the question. The policy had developed from
the instructions under Polk, that neutrality was to be broken only
in case of need from Texas, through the early policy of the Taylor
administration, of non-interference with the Texan efforts; and
now non-interference was made to apply the other way. Texas
should not attempt to interfere with the possession of the terri-
tory by the United States.

The question which caused the greatest excitement, however,
came from the governor of Texas. As soon as Munroe issued his
proclamation calling a constitutional convention, Neighbors with-
drew from Santa Fé, and immediately upon his arrival at the
Texas capital he submitted to Governor Bell a detailed report upon
his- mission. ¹¹³ When the contents of this report became public,
the anger of the Texans was at once aroused. It was held that
the fiction of Munroe was an insult of the grossest character, and
committed upon the rights and dignity of the people of Texas "an
outrage beyond which it was not possible to go." They felt that
the matter had now been brought to a definite issue, and sugges-
tions were made that the claim should be enforced by military
power, ¹¹⁴ while it was also claimed that when Texas was admitted
into the Union as a state, her people believed that the limits as
defined by the government of the republic would be respected. If
they had been in error when they voted for annexation, it was but
just, according to their belief, that the whole question should be
reconsidered, and in that case they were represented as being as
willing to leave the Union as they had been to join it. A mass
meeting which was held at Austin on June 8 gave voice to these
sentiments, ¹¹⁵ and during the months of June, July, and August,
similar meetings were held throughout the state, all of them ex-
pressing the same sentiments. ¹¹⁶

Governor Bell at once took steps to meet the situation. On
June 12, he wrote to Baird, who had returned to Santa Fé, urg-
ing him to leave that place immediately, and proceed to El Paso
in order to cheek any attempts which might be made to shake the
allegiance of that region to Texas, At the same time he was tc
keep the governor advised concerning the developments at Santa
Fé. ¹¹⁷ On June 13, he wrote to the Texan delegation in Congress,
stating, the situation, and voicing his intention to act, ¹¹⁸ while on
the following day he wrote to President Taylor, demanding an
explanation of the steps taken by Munroe, especially as to whethei
he had acted under orders from his government, and whether his
proclamation met the approval of the President. ¹¹⁹ In addition
to this, a special session of the legislature was called for August 12,
in order that the methods for meeting the situation might be prop-
erly determined upon. ¹²⁰

The letter to the President did not reach Washington until after
Taylor's death, and therefore went to his successor, who placed it
in the hands of Daniel Webster, the new Secretary of State, to be
answered. Webster answered the first of the two questions asked
by Governor Bell, by quoting from the instructions of November
19, to Colonel McCall, thus upholding Munroe's action. In answer
to the second question, he stated that if the call for a convention
intended to settle the boundary question, it was not approved by
President Fillmore, for the oft repeated reason that the power of
making that settlement belonged solely to Congress. But he held
that such was not the intention of the convention, and pointed out
that it could not make such a settlement because its acts were in-
effectual until they were ratified by Congress. And he added that
since "it is the right of all to petition Congress for any law which
it may constitutionally pass, this people were in the exercise of
a common right when they formed their constitution with a view
to applying to Congress for admission as a state," and for this
reason the President felt bound to approve the conduct of Colonel
Munroe in issuing the proclamation. ¹²¹ Throughout the letter
there can be seen a veiled suggestion that Texas had as little au-
thority to interfere in the boundary question, as had the Presi-
dent; and there is also a carefully worded hint that unless she
refrained from interfering, it would be the duty of the President
to see that the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, as a part of the su-
preme law of the land, was sustained in every particular, down
to the maintaining of the inhabitants of the territory in the free
enjoyment of their liberty and property.

In submitting this correspondence to Congress, however, Presi-
dent Fillmore was less guarded than Webster had been in his lan-
guage. He reiterated the claim, on the New Mexican side, that
the territory had always been regarded as an integral and essential
part of New Mexico, and after stating that the Texas legislature
had been called into session for the purpose of establishing her own
jurisdiction, and her own laws over the region by force, he added:

These proceedings of Texas may well arrest the attention of
all branches of the government of the United States; and I re-
joice that they occur while the Congress is yet in session. It is,
I fear far from being impossible, that in consequence of these
proceedings of Texas, a crisis may be brought on which shall sum-
mon the two houses of Congress—and still more emphatically the
executive government—to an immediate readiness for the perform-
ance of their respective duties.... The constitutional duty
of the President is plain and peremptory, and the authority vested
in him by law for its performance, clear and simple. . . . If
Texas militia, therefore, march into any one of the other states,
or into any territory of the United States, there to execute or en-
force any law of Texas, they . . . are to be regarded merely
as intruders; and if, within such state or territory, they obstruct
any law of the United States, either by power of arms, or mere
power of numbers, constituting such a combination as is too power-
ful to be suppressed by the civil authority, the President of the
United States has no option left to him, but is bound to obey the
solemn injunction of the Constitution, and exercise the high powers
vested in him by that instrument and by the acts of Congress.

In sending this message to Congress, the President submitted no
other evidence than Governor Bell's letter and Webster's reply
and the meagerness of the information furnished concerning the
probability of forceful measures in Texas made the tone of the
message decidedly alarmist. That government officials had more
information concerning the actual developments in Texas than
they cared to divulge, however, is shown in the work of General
Winfield Scott, who was at the time acting Secretary of War. On
the same day that Fillmore's message was written,. General Scott
notified Colonel Munroe that about 750 additional troops were
being sent to Santa Fé, for the double purpose of protecting
against Indians, and against "another and more painful contin-
gency" which might be apprehended. This new contingency, he
explained, was the probability that unless the disputed boundary
between Texas and New Mexico was soon established by Congress,
a large body of troops would be raised by Texas and sent to New
Mexico to effect by force of arms the extension of the Texan civil
and political jurisdiction over that part east of the Rio Grande.
In order that Munroe might be able to meet the demands in event
this should happen, Scott proceeded to give him full instructions
as to the necessary course of action under the various probable
methods of procedure which might be used by the Texan invaders.
Munroe was told, however, to profit by all opportunities to avoid
a resort to violence; but a warning was also added, not to lose any
advantage by delaying, and to resist the encroachment vigorously
when it became necessary to protect the people of New Mexico
against violence and the destruction of their property. ¹²³

During the same time that this official correspondence was being
carried on, developments were also under way in the region which
was being discussed. The convention for the formation of a state
constitution, which had met on May 15, in accordance with Mun-
roe's call, completed its work on May 25, and within a month the
constitution had been adopted by practicallv a unanimous vote. ¹²⁴
The limits prescribed for the state were to begin at the Rio Grande
just north of El Paso, and extend from there east to the one hun-
dredth meridian; thence north along the one hundredth meridian
to the Arkansas river; thence up that stream to its source; thence
in a direct line to the Colorado river of the West at its intersection
with the one hundred and eleventh meridian; thence south on that
meridian to the boundary between the United States and Mexico,
and along that boundary back to the Rio Grande, down which it
was to run to the point of beginning. ¹²⁵ The notable feature in
this boundary is the fact that just as the Texas boundary act of
1836 had included territory which by right of occupation belonged
to New Mexico, so did this constitutional provision reciprocate by
laying claim to territory which Spanish decrees unquestionably in-
cluded in Texas. But it was at last a definite boundary claim on
the part of New Mexico--the first tangible limits which had ever
been named for a province established 250 years previously.

The adoption of a state constitution did not, however, bring an
end for the complications in New Mexico. In the election of state
officers, Henry Connelly was chosen governor, and Manuel Alvarez,
lieutenant-governor. ¹²⁶ In the absence of Connelly, Alvarez as-
sumed charge of the government and proceeded to nominate such
officers as the constitution required. Here Colonel Munroe inter-
posed with the declaration that the military authority remained
in force until Congress agreed to the admission of New Mexico as
a state, or substituted some other form of government, and that
he would consider any move to appoint officers "as an act, on the
part of all concerned, in direct violation of their duties as citizens
of the United States." ¹²⁷ Alvarez proved obstinate, however, and
refused to concede that the military government could continue to
exist without the consent of the people, and on July 20, he issued
a proclamation, in accordance with an act of the legislature estab-
lished by the constitution, ordering elections to be held on the sec-
ond Monday in August for the purpose of choosing county officers
in each of the eight counties ¹²⁸ of the state. ¹²⁹

On the same day, Baird, who, not having received Governor
Bell's letter of June 12, was still in Santa Fé, issued a proclama-
tion for the holding of an election in Santa Fé county, Texas, for
the purpose of choosing both state and county officers under the
Texas rule. This election was to be held on the first Monday in
August, in accordance with a proclamation of the governor of
Texas, calling for a general election throughout the state. ¹³⁰ This
situation seemed to forebode trouble for Colonel Munroe, and as
a result, three days later, on July 23, he issued a proclamation
announcing his purpose of maintaining the military organization
in New Mexico until he was otherwise instructed from Washing-
ton. ¹³¹ Not much excitement seems to have been aroused over
these three conflicting efforts, ¹³² and Munroe's disposition of his
troops effectively prevented either of the two elections from being
held. ¹³³ Thus with the military government once more firmly in
control of affairs in New Mexico, there was nothing to be done in
that region but to await the decision of Congress upon the ques-
tion of organization and of territorial jurisdiction. Baird moved
on to El Paso, therefore, and announced his intention of holding
court in that place on the first Monday in October. ¹³⁴

In Texas, however, during this same period, developments of a
different nature were in progress. The legislature met on August
12, in accordance with the call of the governor, and on the fol-
lowing day he submitted his message. In it he reviewed the most
prominent facts and circumstances connected with the Texan rela-
tions with Santa Fé, and described the development of opposition,
both local and national, stating at the same time his belief that
the state had no choice but to meet the situation. He said:

It must be met boldly and fearlessly and determinedly. Not by
further supplication or discussion with the Federal authorities.
Not by renewed appeals to their generosity and sympathy. Not
by a longer reliance on the delusive hope that justice will yet be
extended to us; but by action, manly and determined action on
our part, by a prompt assertion of our rights, and a practical main-
tainance of them with all the means we can command 'at all haz -
ards and to the last extremity.'

He repeated, therefore, his request of the previous December that
he be authorized to raise a force sufficient to occupy Santa Fé, and
made suggestions as to the methods of securing the necessary funds
for financing such a move. ¹³⁵ As a preparatory measure, Bell
made plans to issue commissions for the raising of such a force,
in order that it might be ready in case the legislature granted the
authority, and it was estimated that at least five thousand men
were ready to volunteer for the undertaking. ¹³⁶

The legislature spent the first two weeks of the session in a gen-
eral discussion, but on August 26, Webster's letter of August 5 to
Governor Bell arrived in Austin, and was immediately submitted
to both houses. ¹³⁷ Action began at once. On the same day the
senate took up a bill to provide for organizing the militia of Texas,
and requiring the governor to call into the service of the state
three thousand mounted volunteers, for the purpose of suppress-

ing the insurrection in the counties of Worth and Santa Fé. ¹³⁸
Other bills were also introduced, providing the necessary funds,
by setting aside special amounts from the school fund of the state;
by levying a special tax upon the assessments of that year; and
by allowing the use of the proceeds which might arise from the
sale of lots to be placed at the disposal of the government in the
city of Austin. ¹³⁹ News was also received at the same time that
Congress seemed likely to reach a decision soon, ¹⁴⁰ and on the
following day an effort was made to add to the bill authorizing
the raising of a military force, a clause providng that if the United
States government should make a proposition to Texas, before
January 1, 1851, for the purchase of any portion of the territory
of the state, including the whole, or any part, of the counties of
Worth and Santa Fé, the governor should submit this proposition
to the voters of the state for their rejection or acceptance. In case
of their acceptance, the legislature was to be convened to confirm
the sale; in case of their rejection, the governor was to proceed to
call together the troops. ¹⁴¹ This was finally passed as a separate
bill, and was vetoed by Bell for technical reasons. The legislature
then adjourned on September 6, without taking any other defi-
nite action upon the question, much to the disappointment of a
large proportion of the people of the state. ¹⁴² This left nothing
for the Texans, themselves, but to follow the example of the New
Mexicans in waiting for news of Congressional action upon their
boundary claims.

Congressional Action upon the Question. --Throughout the en-
tire period of two years in which these local developments were
taking place, Congress was also deeply involved in discussing ex-
actly the same problem. ¹⁴³ Even before the close of the war, in
1848, the question of boundaries had been brought up in that body,
and the discussion had gradually changed from a partisan to a
sectional character as a result of the slavery question. By the
early months of 1850 the situation had become sufficiently acute
to alarm such a leader as Henry Clay, with the result that he
included the question of the western boundary of Texas in his
series of resolutions which he hoped would bring about "an amicable
arrangement of all questions in controversy between the free and
the slave states, growing out of the subject of slavery." ¹⁴⁴ Two
months of discussion failed to bring about a settlement, and on April
19 the Senate selected a committee of thirteen members, with Clay
as chairman, to work out a scheme of compromise which would ad-
just all the questions with which slavery was connected. ¹⁴⁵ On
May 8, this committee submitted the series of measures which
came to be known as.the Compromise Bill of 1850, and included
in the proposals was a new provision for the settlement of the
Texas boundary. ¹⁴⁶

The suggestions naturally brought further discussion, and it
was while this debate was in progress in Congress that Neighbors
reported to the governor of Texas concerning his failure in or-
ganizing the New Mexican region for his state. Governor Bell's
protest reached Washington in July, and President Fillmore's mes-
sage of August 6 found the discussion at fever heat. The danger
which this message implied, of a conflict in the southwest, together
with reports which were reaching the capital concerning the atti-
tude of Texas, brought an awakening to the absolute necessity of
a speedy settlement of the issues involved, in order to prevent a
general rebellion. ¹⁴⁷ In order to hasten the settlement of the
slavery question, James A. Pearce, of Maryland, had already moved
in the Senate to strike out of the compromise measure all that re-
lated to Texas and New Mexico. ¹⁴⁸ This motion was adopted,
thus bringing the first step in the break up of the compromise,
and Pearee then introduced a bill providing for the establishment
of the northern and western boundary of the state of Texas, and
for the relinquishment of the territory claimed by her outside of
the limits which he defined. The lines suggested by him form
the present boundary of Texas, and in consideration of the reduc-
tion of her boundaries from those previously claimed, Texas was
to receive ten million dollars. ¹⁴⁹

The new dangers which had arisen brought about the immediate
consideration of this bill, and it was passed by Congress, after an
amendment was added, providing for the organization of New
Mexico as a territory, and was signed by President Fillmore on
September 9. In November the legislature of Texas voted to ac-
cept its provisions, thus bringing to a close a controversy which
had brought grave dangers for the national government. The
boundary thus agreed upon was far enough west to conciliate the
Texans; far enough north to please various interests in the United
States; and far enough east to satisfy the advocates of the New
Mexican rights; while the sum offered to Texas was almost the
exact amount needed to cancel her public debt. Each of the three
interested parties had been forced to make concessions, and yet
each had gained its fundamental aims, and therefore the settle-
ment made would seem to present the nearest possible approach to
the establishment of justice for all.

---

FOOTNOTES:

¹The fullest accounts are McMaster, History of the People of the United
States, VIII, 40-41, and Schouler, History of the United Stoles of Amer-
ica, V, 180-184.
²Kearny's proclamation of August 22, 1846, in House Ex. Doc. 60, 30th
Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 520), p. 170.
³Henderson to Buchanan, January 4, 1847, in Sen. Ex. Doc. ,24, 31st
Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 554), p. 2.
⁴Niles' Register, LXXI, 305.
⁵Buchanan to Henderson, February 12, 1847, in Sen. Ex. Doc. 24, 31st
Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 554), p. 3.
⁶Polk's message to Congress, July 24, 1848, in House Ex. Doc. 70, 30th
Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 521), p. 4.
⁷Idem, 4.
⁸Gammel, Laws of Texas, 111, 18, 24, 26, 27, 484
⁹Lamar to Bliss, July 10, 1847, in Lamar Papers, Texas State Library
The election returns from Nueces county showed a total of forty votes
and the list discloses the fact that thirty-seven of the voters possessed
Spanish names.
¹⁰Senate Journal, 2nd Texas Legislature, 465-468.
¹¹Gammel, Laws of Texas, 111, 95; see also Batts, Defunct Counties of
Texas, in The Quarterly, I, 91.
¹²Ibid., III, 50
¹³Ibid.,III, 96; see also Niles' Register, LXXIV, 224
¹⁴Davis, El G-ringo, 110; Niles' Register, LXXIV, 211. Bancroft, His
tory of Arizona and New Mexico, 455, follows the Register by giving this
name as Beard, but his own correspondence shows that Baird is correct.
¹⁵Gammel, Laws of Texas, III, 218-219.
¹⁶Wood to Polk, March 23, 1848, in Austin State Gazette, November 10,
1849.
¹⁷Wood to Polk, October 6, 1848, in Idem.
¹⁸Washington to Baird, November 23, 1848, in Santa Fé Papers, Texas
State Library.
¹⁹Niles' Register, LXXIV, 224.
²⁰Nacogdoches Times, May 27, 1848.
²¹Baird to Miller, September 22, 1848, in Santa Fé Papers, Texas State
Library.
²²Baird to Miller, November 10, 1848, in Ibid.
²³Baird to Washington, November 22, 1848; Baird to Miller, Septem-
ber 21, 1849, in Ibid.
²⁴Washington to Baird, November 22, 1848, in Ibid.
²⁵Washington to Baird, November 23, 1848, in Ibid
²⁶Baird to Miller, December 10, 1848, in Ibid.
²⁷McNees, Baird, and others to Miller, December 7, 1848, in Ibid
²⁸Baird to Wood, December 18, 1848, in Ibid
²⁹Boyers to Miller, February 6, 1849, in Ibid
³⁰Baird to Washington, March 21, 1849, in Ibid
³lBaird to Miller, September 23, and October 20, 1849, in Ibid
³²Washington to Baird, March 21, 1849, in Ibid.
³³Baird to Miller, November 6, 1849, in Ibid.
³⁴Baird to Wood, March 30, 1849, in Ibid. Also Nacogdoches Times,
June 23, 1849.
³⁵Baird to Miller, November 6, 1849, in Ibid.
³⁶Wood to Taylor, June 30, 1849, in Austin State Gazette, November
10, 1849.
³⁷Baird to Washington, April 5, 1849, in Santa Fé Papers, Texas State
Library.
³⁸Washington to Baird, April 5, 1849, in Ibid.
³⁹Miller to Baird, April 14, 1849, in Ibid.
⁴⁰ A copy of this proclamation is in the Santa Fé Papers.
⁴¹Baird to Miller, September 21, 1849, in Ibid.
⁴²Baird to Washington, July 4, 1849, in Ibid
⁴³Washington to Baird, July 4, 1849, in Ibid. In reporting this answer
to Miller, Baird says, "I felicitate myself that I am advanced in the
Colonel's estimation since my first communication, from an Esquire to a
Judge, and from that you may form perhaps a correct estimate of the
rise of Texas stock during the winter." Baird to Miller, September 21,
1849, in Ibid.
⁴⁴Baird to Miller, September 21, 1849, in Ibid.
⁴⁵Baird to Miller, September 23, 1849, in Ibid.
⁴⁶Prince, New Mexico's Struggle for Statehood, 6.
⁴⁷Niles' Register, LXXIV, 244.
⁴⁸Congressional Globe, 30th Cong., 2nd sess., 33.
⁴⁹Baird to Miller, September 30, 1849, in Santa Fé Papers, Texas State
Library.
⁵⁰Baird to Miller, September 23, 1849, in Ibid.
⁵¹Marcy to Commanding officer at Santa Fé, October 12, 1848, in
House Ex. Doc. 17, 31st Cong., Ist sess. (Ser. no. 573), p. 261.
⁵²Quaife (editor), Diary of James E. Polk, IV, 150-151.
⁵³Marcy to Worth, December 10, 1848, in House Ex. Doc. 17, op. cit.,
p. 271. The general orders to the War Department had made the division
between the two departments, a line running from the Rio Grande near
El Paso, directly to the Red river at the mouth of Choctaw creek, in
the vicinity of the one hundredth meridian, thus dividing the territory
claimed by Texas. See House Has. Doc. 1, 30th Cong., 2nd sess (Ser
no. 537), p. 178.
⁵⁴Crawford to Commanding officer at Santa Fé, March 26, 1849, in
Ibid., 272.
⁵⁵Washington to Jones, February 3, 1849, in House Ex. Doc. 5, 31st
Cong., Ist sess. (Ser. no. 569), p. 105.
⁵⁶Accounts of these proceedings were copied from the Santa Fé Repub-
lican by Baird, and enclosed with Baird to Miller, October 20, 1849;
in Santa Fé Papers, Texas State Library.
⁵⁷By a decree issued July 17, 1844, the department of New Mexico had
been divided into the counties of Bernalillo, Rio Arriba, San Miguel.
Santa Ana, Santa Fé, Taos, and Valencia, all of which included territory
on both sides of the Rio Grande. Sen. Ex. Doc. 41, 30th Cong, Ist sess
(Ser no 505), p. 478; also Bancroft, History of Arizona and New
Mexico, 311-312. In the Bancroft Collection, University of California,
is a "Map of New Mexico with Pueblos as noted by Calhoun, 1850,
which shows the boundaries of these counties as conceived by James S.
Calhoun, the United States Indian agent in New Mexico.
⁵⁸Calhoun to Brown, November 2, 1849, in Abel (editor), Official tor
respondence of James S. Calhoun, 70.
⁵⁹The proceedings of the convention are in House Ex. Doc. 17, 31st
Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 573), pp. 93-104; available also in Historical
Society of New Mexico, Publications, No. 10.
⁶⁰Crawford to McCall, November 19, 1849, in Ibid., 280-281.
⁶¹Taylor's message to Congress, January 21, 1850, in Ibid., 3.
⁶²Van Home to Munroe, September 23, 1849, in Sen. Ex. Doc. 56, dial
Cons., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 581), p. 3.
⁶³General Order No. 3, War Department, May 26, 1849, an Sen. Ex
Doc. 60, 31st Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 561), p. 2.
⁶⁴Munroe to Jones, November 21, 1849, in Sen. Ex. Doc. 56, op. cit.,
pp. 2-3.
⁶⁵Munroe to Van Home, December 28, 1849, in Ibid., 4-5
⁶⁶Jones to Munroe, February 15, 1850, in Ibid., 3-4
⁶⁷Munroe to Jones, January 3, 1850, in Ibid., 4
⁶⁸Jones to Munroe, March 8, 1850, in Ibid., 5-6
⁶⁹These reports were made in seven letters to Washington D. Miller,
Texan secretary of state, written at irregular intervals from September
21 to November 6, 1849, and are now in the Santa Fé Papers, Texas
State Library.
⁷⁰Copies of these letters are in the Santa Fé Papers. By the fall of
1850, Bell had received dozens of such letters, many of them from other
southern states. Most of them are checked as having been answered
October 18, 1850, by C. A. Harrison, private secretary to the governor.
⁷¹This would indicate that Bancroft, History of the North Mexican
States and Texas, II, 398, is in error in stating that Wood was noti-
fied by the authorities at Washington that any attempt at forcible occu-
pation of New Mexico would be considered as an intrusion.
⁷²Austin State Gazette, November 10, 1849.
⁷³Ibid., November 17, 1849. No bound voume of the House Journals
for the third legislature is available, but the Gazette printed the jour-
nals of both houses, in full.
⁷⁴Ibid., November 24, 1849; also Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature, 117.
⁷⁵Ibid., December 1, 1849.
⁷⁶See Houston Telegraph and Texas Register, Austin State Gazette,
Nacogdoches Times, and Marshall Texas Republican, for this period.
⁷⁷Austin State Gazette, December 1, 1849.
⁷⁸Ibid., December 29, 1849, quoting from the Bonham Advertiser.
⁷⁹Baird to Miller, September 23, 1849, in Santa Fé Papers, Texas State
Library.
⁸⁰Austin State Gazette, December 22, 1849.
⁸¹Ibid., December 8, 1849.
⁸²Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature, 223.
⁸³Baird to Evans, December 11, 1849, in Marshall Texas Republican,
January 24, 1850.
⁸⁴Bell's message to the legislature, December 26, 1849, in Senate Jour -
nal, 3rd Legislature, 285-287; also in Austin State Gazette, December
29, 1849.
⁸⁵Similar suggestions had been made previously by both Henderson and
Wood, but these seem to have been for an indiscriminate sale of any
unoccupied lands within the state. See Miller, Financial History of
Texas, 118. Memucan Hunt, attorney for a number of the creditors,
in 1849, published a pamphlet entitled The Public Debt and Lands of
Texas, and in this he seems to have originated the idea of selling a
definite portion of the territory claimed by the state. For a reference to
the pamphlet and a brief sketch of its contents, see De Bow's Commercial
Review, VII, 273. A copy of the pamphlet itself, is in the Bancroft
Collection, University of California.
⁸⁶Gammel, Laws of Texas, III, 462-463.
⁸⁷The map is in Creuzbaur, Guide to California and the Pacific Coast.
See also a letter from James S. Ford to the editor of the Texas Democrat,
written June 18, 1849, in Ibid., 4-5.
⁸⁸Gammel, Laws of Texas, III, 459-460.
⁸⁹Ibid., III, 462.
⁹⁰Ibid., III, 479, 481.
⁹¹Ibid., III, 464-465.
⁹²Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature, 2nd sess., appendix, 69-71; also Hous-
ton Telegraph and Texas Register, March 7, 1850.
⁹³Webb to Neighbors, January 8, 1850, in Senate Journal, 3rd Legisla-
ture, 2nd sess., appendix, 72-74.
⁹⁴Bancroft, History of Arizona and New Mexico, 455, purports to give
the personnel of the Neighbors party, but the party named was one
which accompanied him in the spring of 1849, on one of his trips as
Indian agent. See Ford to the editor of the Texas Democrat, June 18,
1849, in Creuzbaur, Guide to California and the Pacific Coast, 4.
⁹⁵Gammel, Laws of Texas, III, 773. Neighbors was later granted the
sum of $1256.51 to reimburse him for expenditures made while on this
mission. Ibid., III, 786.
⁹⁶Ibid., III, 645-646; also Bancroft, History of the North Mexican States
and Texas, II, 399.
⁹⁷Baird to Bell, February 27, 1850, in Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature,
2nd sess., appendix, 74-81.
⁹⁸Van Horne to McLaws, February 23, 1850, in Abel (editor), Official
Correspondence of James S. Calhoun, 163.
⁹⁹Neighbors to Munroe, February 23, 1850, in House Ex. Doc. 66, 31st
Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 577), p. 2.
¹⁰⁰Neighbors to Bell, March 23, 1850, in Senate Journal, 3rd Legisla-
ture, 2nd sess., appendix, 1-6.
¹⁰¹Austin State Gazette, April 27, and May 4, 1850. William Cockburn
arrived from El Paso, April 26, and brought this information.
¹⁰²Neighbors to Bell, March 23, 1850, op. cit.
¹⁰³Munroe to Beall and others, March 12, 1850, in House Ex. Doc. 66.
31st Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 577), p. 2; also in Abel (editor), Cor -
respondence of James S. Calhoun, 164.
¹⁰⁴Calhoun to Brown, March 16, 1850, in Abel, op. cit., 163. A similar
report was carried to St. Louis by traders from Santa Fé. See Austin
State Gazette, May 25, 1850.
¹⁰⁵Houghton's proclamation, March 13, 1850, in Senate Journal, 3rd Leg-
islature, 2nd sess., appendix, 11-12; also in Austin State Gazette, June
8, 1850.
¹⁰⁶Neighbors to Bell, June 4, 1850, in Ibid., 7-10.
¹⁰⁷ Idem; Davis, El Gringo, 110-111, states that he issued a proclama-
tion calling an election, but no evidence of this is to be found in Neigh-
bors' own reports.
¹⁰⁸Sen. Ex. Dog. 56, 31st Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 561), p. 14.
¹⁰⁹Neighbors to Munroe, April 14, 1850, in Ibid., 15; also Senate Jour -
nal, 3rd Legislature, 2nd sess., appendix, 12.
¹¹⁰Sen. Ex. Doc. 60, Part II, 31st Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 561), p. 2.
¹¹¹House Ex. Doc. 65, 31st Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 577), p. 1.
¹¹²Sen. Ex. Doc. 56, 31st Cong., 1st sess. (Ser. no. 561), p. 1.
¹¹³Neighbors to Bell, June 4, 1850, Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature,
2nd sess., appendix, 7-10.
¹¹⁴Austin State Gazette, June 8, and 15, 1850.
¹¹⁵Ibid., June 15, 1850; also Niles' Register, LXXV, 156-157.
¹¹⁶Ibid., passim. On August 14, the La Grange Texas Monument states:
"There has been but one solitary meeting in the State, we believe, which
has passed a resolution declaring the opinion that the time has not ar-
rived for action."
¹¹⁷Bell to Baird, June 12, 1850, in Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature 2nd
less., appendix, 81-83.
¹¹⁸Austin State Gazette, July 13, 1850.
¹¹⁹Bell to Taylor, June 14, 1850, in House Ex. Doc. 82, 31st Cong., 1st
sess. (Ser. no. 579), pp. 6-7.
¹²⁰Austin State Gazette, July 6, 1850.
¹²¹Webster to Bell, August 5, 1850, in House Ex. Doc. 82, op. cit., 7-12.
¹²²Fillmore's message to Congress, August 6, 1850, in Ibid., 1-6.
¹²³Scott to Munroe, August 5, 1850, in Abel (editor), Official Corre -
spondence of James S. Galhoun, 164-165.
¹²⁴The vote was 6,771 for the constitution; 39 against it. Sen. Ex. Doc.
74, 31st Cong., Ist sess. (Ser. no. 562), p. 2.
¹²⁵ Ibid., 2-3.
¹²⁶Bancroft, History of Arizona and New Mexico, 448.
¹²⁷Munroe to Alvarez, July 12, 1850, in Austin State Gazette, Septem-
ber 14, 1850.
¹²⁸Socorro county had been created from a part of the territory of
Valencia county, by a legislative act, approved July 5, 1850.
¹²⁹This proclamation appears in Abel (editor), Official Correspondence
of James S. Galhoun, 234.
¹³⁰Ibid., 233,
¹³¹Ibid., 234-235.
¹³²Calhoun to Brown, July 31, 1850, in Ibid., 232.
¹³³Calhoun to Brown, August 13, 1850, in Ibid., 252-253.
¹³⁴ La Grange Texas Monument, September 25, 1850.
¹³⁵ Bell's message to the legislature, August 13, 1850, in Senate Journal,
3rd Legislature, 2nd sess., 1 ff. In commenting upon this message the
La Grange Texas Monument, August 21, 1850, states that at least two
regiments should be raised.
¹³⁶Austin State Gazette, August 24, and 31, 1850.
¹³⁷Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature, 2nd sess., 36.
¹³⁸Ibid., 44-45.
¹³⁹Ibid., 48-50. These bills followed the suggestions made by Bell in his
message of August 13.
¹⁴⁰Austin State Gazette, August 31, 1850.
¹⁴¹Senate Journal, 3rd Legislature, 2nd sess., 56.
¹⁴²Austin State Gazette, September 7, 1850.
¹⁴³This phase of the question is better known, and therefore a brief sum-
mary is sufficient for the purpose of the present paper. The fullest state-
ment of the activities of Congress during 1850 in connection with the
subject, is Spillman, Adjustment of the Texas Boundary, 1850, in The
Quarterly, VII, 177-195.
¹⁴⁴Congressional Globe, 31st Cong., 1st sess., 244-245.
¹⁴⁵ Ibid., 774, 780.
¹⁴⁶Ibid., 944-948.
¹⁴⁷Alexander H. Stephens, of Georgia, declared in the House that "The
first Federal gun that shall be fired against the people of Texas with-
out the authority of the law will be a signal for the freemen from the
Delaware to the Rio Grande to rally to the rescue." Ibid., appendix,
1083. Clay expressed a similar fear. Ibid., appendix, 1412.
¹⁴⁸Ibid., appendix, 1473, 1479, 1487.
¹⁴⁹Ibid., 1555.

MIRABEAU BUONAPARTE LAMAR
Chapter IV
FRONTIER DEFENCE

I. Relations with Miscellaneous Indian Tribes

A. K. CHRISTIAN

In order to make clear the policy of Lamar in dealing with the
Indians, it will be necessary to discuss in some detail the methods
used by his predecessors in attempting to keep the peace. It will
not be necessary, however, to give a detailed history of the various
tribes which occupied Texas. It will suffice at this point to say
that the usual classification used during the days of the Eepublic
depended upon the degree of civilization adopted, and the terms
"Wild Indians" and "Civilized Indians" were considered as suffi-
ciently descriptive. Another grouping that was made was the in-
digenous and immigrant, the latter term meaning the more civil-
ized tribes which had come from the United States, and including
the Cherokee and associated bands. ¹

There was an Indian question in Texas from the time that the
first Anglo-Americans began to arrive. For a dozen years after
Austin brought his first colonists to Texas, the chronicles are full
of Indian atrocities. The year 1832, Yoakum tells us, was the
first in which the settlers had not been attacked often by the
Indians, and their failure to attack that year was due to the fact
that the Comanches and Shawnees had had a great battle in which
so many were killed that they were unable to undertake a war
against the whites. ² In April, 1833, a convention met at San
Felipe to petition for a separation of Texas and Coahuila. It was
asserted that Texas was such a great distance from the center of
government that no adequate means of protection against the In-
dians presented themselves, and this was considered a sufficient
reason for the establishment of a separate state government for

Texas. The memorial forwarded to Congress by the Convention,
which closed April 13, 1838, is a gloomy one. It was written
by David G. Burnet. After enumerating many evils from which
the people were suffering, due to the lack of a strong local gov-
ernment, it declared:

We do not mean to attribute these specific disasters to the union
with Coahuila, for we know they transpired long anterior to the
consummation of that union. But we do maintain that the same
political causes, the same want of protection and encouragement,
the same mal-organization and impotency of the local and minor
faculties of the government, the same improvident indifference
to the peculiar and vital interests of Texas, exists now that oper-
ated then. Bexar is still exposed to the depredations of her
ancient enemies, the insolent, vindictive, and faithless Comanches.
Her citizens are still massacred, their cattle destroyed or driven
away, and their very habitations threatened, by a tribe of erratic
and undisciplined Indians, whose audacity has derived confidence
from success, and whose long-continued aggressions have invested
them with a fictitious and excessive terror. Her schools are neg-
lected, her churches desolate, the sounds of human industry are
almost hushed, and the voice of gladness and festivity is converted
into wailing and lamentation, by the disheartening and multiplied
evils which surround her defenceless population. Goliad is still
kept in trepidation; is paralyzed in all her efforts for improve-
ment; and is harassed in all her borders by the predatory incur-
sions of the Wacoes, and other insignificant bands of savages,
whom a well-organized local government would soon subdue and
exterminate. ³

Santa Anna, who was, in effect, dictator in Mexico when Stephen
F. Austin presented this memorial, refused the request, imprisoned
Austin, and in October, 1834, announced his purpose to send four
thousand troops to San Antonio, "for the protection of the coast
and frontier." ⁴ In March, 1835, Congress decreed the reduction
of the militia throughout the Eepublic to one man for every five
hundred inhabitants, and the disarming of the remainder.

Troops dispatched to Texas began to arrive early in 1835, and
conflicts with the settlers soon began. At Anahuac a collector,
backed by a small body of troops, attempted to collect tariff duties,
which the Texans resented. ⁵ This situation, together with the

hostility of the Indians throughout the year, led to the creation of
committees of safety and correspondence, which led to the calling
of the Permanent Council in October. The Columbia committee
wrote to J. B. Miller, the political chief of the Brazos Department
suggesting that each municipality be required to furnish twenty-
five men for use in an Indian campaign, to which Miller replied
that he was already taking steps to punish the Indians. ⁶ The
committee of San Felipe issued a circular on September 13, in
which it was stated that the committee considered it important
that the just and legal rights of the civilized Indians should be
protected, "but not having any certain information on the subject,
they can only recommend it to your consideration." ⁷

The spirit exhibited in the letter of the San Felipe committee
of safety became the spirit of the Permanent Council, and was
adopted by each of the revolutionary bodies that governed Texas
until March, 1836. The Permanent Council on October 18
adopted the report of a committee for appointing three commis-
sioners to the civilized Indians. The commissioners appointed
were Peter J. Menard, Jacob Garrett, and Joseph L. Hood. Sev-
eral of the Indian chiefs had been invited to convene with the
whites in their Consultation for the purpose of having their claims
to lands properly adjusted by that body, but they failed to attend,
and the three commissioners were therefore instructed to proceed
to their villages and ascertain the cause of their grievances, and
to assure them that their case would receive prompt attention as
soon as the Consultation should reconvene. "This committee are
of the opinion," said the report,

that there have been unwarrantable encroachments made upon the
lands occupied by the said Indians; therefore be it resolved by the
permanent council of Texas now in session, that Peter J. Menard,
Jacob Garrett, and Joseph L. Hood, be appointed commissioners
for the purpose of holding consultations with the different tribes
of Indians, and giving them such assurances as may be necessary
for the advancement of their rights and privileges as citizens of
Texas, and for the purpose of transacting such other business as
may be necessary to promote the cause of the people of Texas,

It was made the duty of the commissioners to co-operate at all
times with the local committees of safety. ⁸

At the same time, however, the Permanent Council provided a
system of ranger service to keep' the Indians in check. On Octo-
ber 17 a resolution was adopted authorizing Silas M. Parker to
employ and superintend twenty-five rangers to guard the fron-
tiers between the Brazos and Trinity rivers; Garrison Greenwood
was authorized and required to employ and superintend ten rangers
on the east side of the Trinity; and D. B. Fryar to employ twenty-
five rangers for service between the Brazos and Colorado rivers.
A committee of five men was appointed to report on the details
of this scheme. The committee reported on the same day, and
their report was adopted by the Council. The superintendents
of the rangers from the Colorado to the Brazos and from the
Brazos to the Trinity were to make their place of rendezvous at
the Waco village, on the Brazos; those on the east of the Trinity
were to rendezvous at Houston. The superintendents were to be
vigilant in carrying the provisions of the resolution into effect, and
were to have the authority to contract for ammunition, and to
draw on the general council for payment. The companies were to
select officers, whose duty it was to make reports to the super-
intendents every fifteen days, and the superintendent was to report
to the General Council every thirty days. The companies ranging
from the Colorado to the Brazos and from the Brazos to the Trinity
were to rendezvous at the Waco village every fifteen days unless
engaged in pursuing Indians, and the companies were to unite
whenever their officers considered it necessary. Finally, the of-
ficers were to be "particular not to interfere with friendly tribes
of Indians on our borders." ⁹

The Consultation, which succeeded the Permanent Council on
November 3, took further steps to secure the good will of the
Indians. On the day before it adjourned a resolution was adopted
in which the claims of the Indians to the lands they occupied in
East Texas was recognized, and the Governor and General Council
were advised to send commissioners to form a treaty with them.
On November 15, Henry Smith, who had been elected provisional
governor, advised the carrying into effect of the recommendation

of the Consultation. On the 22d Smith was empowered by the
General Council to appoint Sam Houston, John Forbes, and John
Cameron as commissioners to the Indians. The commissioners
proceeded to the village of Bowl, military chief of the Cherokees,
and on February 23, 1836, a treaty was drawn up agreeable to
the wishes of the Cherokees. ¹⁰

During the progress of the War of Independence the western
frontier was evacuated by the people before the advancing Mexi-
can army, hence there is no record of Indian wars in the West.
In the East the civilized tribes were kept quiet partly through the
promises held out to them by the Permanent Council and the
Consultation for a definite settlement of their claims. At the
same time, however, the Texans deliberately attempted to create
the impression in the minds of officers of the United States that
there was danger of an Indian uprising in the East, and it was
their success in this propaganda that caused General Games to
send some United States troops to Nacogdoches in the summer of
1836. By the treaty between the United States and Mexico both
nations were to undertake to keep their Indians quiet, and it was
this treaty that made possible the intervention of the United States
in the affairs of Texas. It is interesting to notice that the col-
onists had attempted to form an alliance with the Indians in the
spring of 1836. ¹¹

With the defeat of the Mexicans in the battle of San Jacinto,
April 21, 1836, and the subsequent withdrawal of all enemy
forces from Texas, those who had fled before the invaders returned
to their homes. Besides, the settlers in search of new lands pushed
out into territory regarded by the Indians as their hunting
grounds, and the surveying parties early became an object of sus-
picion, the surveyor's compasses being known by the Indians as
"land stealers." ¹² The Indians were very troublesome and threat-

erring in the latter part of 1836 and throughout 1837. President
Burnet had placed Captain Robert M. Coleman in charge of a
ranging force divided into three or four detachments. One de-
tachment was on the Trinity, one at the Falls of the Brazos, one
at the Three Forks of Little River, and one near the mouth of
Walnut Creek on the Colorado. These detachments fought nu-
merous battles with the Indians.

On January 7, 1837, a detachment of fourteen men and boys
under Lieutenant George B. Erath fought one hundred Indians
eight miles west of Cameron, killing fifteen. A short time later
a battle was fought near where Austin now stands, in which the
Indians were defeated. Several men were murdered at different
times in Lavaca County. In Fayette County John G. Bobison, a
member of Congress, and his brother, who was visiting him from
the United States, were killed. On the Trinity, west of Palestine,
David Faulkenberry, his son Evan, and Columbus Anderson, were
killed. Massacres occurred during this year at various places in
East Texas. ¹³

The attitude of President Houston, in spite of the evident an-
popularity of that policy, was one of conciliation throughout his
administration; and in the early part of his administration he
had the sympathy and support of Congress. In a message to the
Senate, November 6, 1836, shortly after his inauguration as Pres-
ident, he said,

The friendship and alliance of many of our border Tribes of
Indians will be of the utmost importance to this Government, keep-
ing them tranquil and pacific, and if need shall require it, afford-
ing us useful auxiliaries.

He suggested the advisability of entering into commercial treaties
with them, and announced the appointment of commissioners to
conclude articles of peace, friendship, and intercourse. ¹⁴

In an act to protect the frontier, approved on December 5,
1836, the Congress took a middle ground between the advocates
of extermination and conciliation. The President was required
to raise, with as little delay as possible, a battalion of mounted
riflemen, to consist of two hundred and eighty men for the pro-

tection of the frontier. The term of service was to be twelve
months. The President was also authorized to order out such
number of the militia as the exigencies of the case might require.
He was further directed to have such block houses, forts, and trad-
ing houses erected, as, in his judgment, might be necessary to
prevent Indian depredations. And finally, it was to be the duty
of the President to enter into such negotiations and treaties as
might secure peace to the frontiers; he was to have power to ap-
point agents to live among the Indians, and to distribute presents
as he deemed necessary, not to.exceed in amount twenty thousand
dollars. ¹⁵ That no steps had been taken for the organization of
the mounted battalion before the middle of the following year, is
indicated by a resolution, approved June 7, 1837, authorizing the
President to absent himself from the seat of government for thirty
days "to organize and set on foot the corps of mounted gun men,
authorized to be raised by the act passed the present session of
congress for the protection of our northern frontier." ¹⁶ On De-
cember 10, 1836, a joint resolution was approved authorizing and
requiring the President to take such measures "as in his judgment
will effect the release or redemption of our unfortunate prisoners,
captured by and in the possession of hostile Indians, said to be
on the waters of Red River, either by calling for and sending vol-
unteers against said Indians, or by purchase, treaty or otherwise." ¹⁷

In the spring of 1837 some Mexican agents visited the various
Indians on the frontier, promising them arms, ammunition, all
the booty taken, and peaceful possession of the frontier after the
Americans were driven out, and by these promises many Indians
were induced to join the Mexicans. Houston attempted in June
to organize a mounted force for the punishment of the Indians.
He ordered Lieutenant A. C. Horton, of San Augustine, to raise
a force of one hundred and twenty men and as many more vol-
unteers as were necessary to proceed against the Indians. Nothing
seems to have come of this, however. ¹⁸ On November 10, a body
of eighteen rangers fell in with a band of one hundred and fifty
hostile Indians, and after a long battle the Indians were defeated,
leaving fifty dead, while the loss of the Texans was only Lieu-

tenant Miles and eight men. ¹⁹ That was the most serious attempt
to chastise the Indians during the year.

In spite of the constant reports of Indian attacks o a defence-
less settlers, Houston showed by his message to Congress, November
21, 1837, that he still considered conciliation the best policy to pur-
sue. It was of interest to the country, he said, that the relations
with the Indians be placed upon a basis of lasting peace and
friendship. Convinced of that truth, it had been his policy to seek
every possible means to accomplish that object, and give security
to the frontier; and he considered the indications more favorable
than they had been at any time before Texas assumed that atti-
tude. "Measures are in progress with the several tribes," he con-
tinued,

which with the aid of suitable appropriations by Congress, may
enable us to attain the objects of peace and friendly intercourse.
Apprised of these facts, it is desirable that the citizens of Texas
should so deport themselves, as to become the aggressors in no
case, but to evince a conciliatory disposition whenever it can be
done consistently with justice and humanity. . . . The un-
deviating opinion of the Executive has been, that from the estab-
lishment of trading houses on the frontier (under prudent regu-
lations), and the appointment of capable and honest agents, the
happiest results might be anticipated for the country. The in-
tercourse between the citizens and Indians should be regulated by
acts of Congress which experience will readily suggest. ²⁰

In carrying out this policy he insisted on the ratification by the
Senate of the treaty drawn, up with the Cherokees in 1836, and
the running of the boundary line under that treaty. ²¹ He advised
the settlers to stay at home and not tempt the Indians to hostile
attacks; and it was charged by a newspaper in the heat of a polit-
ical campaign in 1841, that when a committee of men from Eob-
ertson and Milam Counties asked for protection for the frontier,
he answered that "he hoped every man, woman and child that
settled North of the San Antonio Eoad would be tomahawked." ²²

The year 1838 was not different from the preceding year. A
committee on October 12, 1837, had reported that several of the
tribes of Indians were at peace, and advised the President to at-

tempt to make a treaty with the Comanches, At the same time
they denied the right of the Cherokees to the land which they
occupied. ²³ This was not done, however, and the Comanches con-
tinued to harass the western frontier. A few instances are here
given to illustrate the conditions. On August 10 Captain Henry
W. Karnes with twenty-five men was attacked by 200 Comanches,
and after a furious fight drove them off with a loss of twenty.of
the assailants. On the Rio Frio, about the same time, a surveying
party was attacked, and several of the party wounded. On Octo-
ber 19 a surveying party seven miles west of San Antonio was
attacked and the surveyors killed. In October also occurred the
surveyors' fight in Navarro County, when twenty-three men fought
several hundred Indians from 9 o'clock in the morning till 12
o'clock at night. ²⁴

In the summer of 1838 the Indians of the East became restless,
due partly to the efforts of Mexican agents, and partly to the
failure of the Senate to ratify the treaty with the Cherokees. In
August took place the curious Nacogdoches rebellion. On August
4 a party of citizens who went in search of some horses that had
been stolen found the trail of a large number of Mexicans. On
the 7th it was reported that there were a hundred or more Mexi-
cans encamped about the Angelina under the command of Na-
thaniel Norris, Vicente Cordova, and Cruz. On the 10th it was
reported that the Mexicans had been joined by 300 Indians, and
that their force then amounted to 600. The same day they sent a
letter to President Houston disclaiming allegiance to Texas, and
set out for the Cherokee nation. Major Augustin was detached
with 150 men to follow the rebels, while General Rusk marched
with the main force of the Texans to the village of Bowl, mili-
tary chief of the Cherokees. Before reaching there he found that
the insurgents had dispersed. ²⁵

No satisfactory explanation has ever been made of the purposes
that the Mexicans had in mind in this rebellion. On August 20,
a Mexican by the name of Pedro Julian Miracle was killed on the
Red River, and on his body were found instructions from General
Vicente Filisola directed to the Mexicans and friendly Indians in

Texas, together with, a diary which Miracle had kept during his
Journey into Texas. The instructions and the diarv taken together
would indicate that Miracle was visiting the Mexicans and Indians
n the region of Nacogdoches for the purpose of fomenting a con-
spiracy, and it was probably due to his activities that the Mexicans
decided to revolt. One of the documents found on the body of
Miracle was entitled "Private instructions for the captains of
friendly Indians of Texas, by his Excellency the General-in-chief
Vicente Filisola," and it was apparently aimed to control his activi-
ties with the Indians. He was to invite the principal chiefs to a
meeting and propose to them that they and their friends should
take up arms in defence of the Mexican territory in Texas. After-
wards, he was to meet several from each tribe, and distribute
among them powder, lead, and tobacco, "in the usual manner"

You will make them understand that as soon as they have agreed
in taking up arms, they will be rewarded according to their
merits: and that so soon as they have taken possession of the
places that I have mentioned to you, you will advise me by an
extraordinary courier, giving me a detailed account of the strength
of the Mexican force, and of the Indian tribes, with the plan of
attack, that I may be enabled to direct the forces that are to leave
from this place to the assistance of those who are to operate in
that quarter. Make them understand that as soon as the cam-
paign is over, they will be able to proceed to Mexico to pay their
respects to the Supreme Government, who will send a commis-
sioner to give to each possession of the land they are entitled to.

A second document, apparently written by Miracle himself, was
addressed, "Companions and friends." In it he called upon the
Indians to give their service to their country during the campaign
which was about to take place, and declare that he had been in-
structed by the general-in-chief to pay particular attention tc
their behavior during the campaign and report it to him. "As
soon as the news of our operations are made known in Matamoras,"
he ended, "his excellency the general-in-chief will make a forced
march towards the point where our troops may be, so that in the
event of any sudden reverse, you will be aided, and a central posi-
tion fixed upon for your reunion, to be headquarters during the
remainder of the campaign."

According to the memorandum book which was found on the
body of Miracle, he left Matamoras on May 29, and after a lei-
surely journey, accompanied by Mexican and Indian followers, he

arrived on the Trinity and made camp on July 2. An extract
from his diary will explain to some extent his activity.

July 4. Started for "Plazeta creek." Soon after we discov-
ered the farms of the Choctaw Indians; we directed our course
towards the rancho of Buenavista.

July 5.- --Don Vicente Cordova presented himself and read the
communication of his excellency the general-in-chief, Don Vicente
Filisola.

July 7.--We expect to meet the Indian chiefs or captains.

July 8.--About three o'clock in the afternoon Guimon, Boll, and
their interpreters, made their appearance; but, on account of the
rain, nothing was done.

July 9.--At seven o'clock we started to a rancho to hold a con-
sultation with the Indians. We read the communication of his
excellency the general-in-chief; the interpreters being inefficient,
nothing was done. They left us without any understanding, but
are to meet them in ten days, when they will determine. They left
an Indian to conduct me to Boll's house; which was done, and we
reached that place drenched with rain. I am to take the first
opportunity to speak to Boll, to show him by private instructions;
but I can do nothing as yet. He has sent me to another of his
houses where I could conceal myself; for he said that some Amer-
icans were coming with a communication from Houston, the con-
tents of which I have not learned. Nothing can be done without
trouble. [From the ninth until the seventeenth Miracle remained
concealed.]

July 17 and 18.--In the afternoon of these days several Indians
made their appearance for the meeting.

July 19.--Boll, Dillmoor, and several other captains, came in;
but the non-arrival of the Kickapoos delayed our meeting.

July 20.--The meeting took place. War was agreed upon as
soon as circumstances would permit, and as speedily as possible;
the amount of our force to be taken immediately; including
Nacogdoches we have 540 men. At five o'clock p. m. Capt. Sa-
guano began to raise objections to the making of any movement
until the arrival of the army in the country when war could be
carried on with energy; but finally it was resolved that our force
should be in readiness at a moment's warning. At five o'clock
Boll left us, and all went away, including Cordova and the people
of Nacogdoches, about eight o'clock in the morning.

The remainder of the diary records visits to the other tribes,
and comes to an end with an entry for August 8. ²⁶

Lamar was aware of the conditions on the frontier, and of the
unpopularity of Houston's Indian policy, being informed both by
his own interest as a presidential candidate and by the reports of
his friends. On June 26, 1838, he received a letter from Reuben
H. Roberts of Aransas, supporting his candidacy for the presi-
dency, saying that the cry of the people was for a President who
would protect the frontier. ²⁷ On July 29, William McCraven
wrote from San Antonio, telling of the dangers from Mexicans and
Indian marauders, and expressing the popular hope that Lamar's
administration would defend the frontier. ²⁸

On August 24, General Busk wrote to Lamar from Nacogdoches
concerning the Cordova rebellion, as follows:

Dear Genl

I have received your letter by Col Bee for which please accept
my thanks You must excuse me for not having written you
before but recent events have crowded on me so fast that I have
had very little time. I will in a few days give you a full account
of the recent rebellion here it was a deep and well laid scheme
to involve the country in a general Indian war I have had great
difficulty in preventing it His Excellency has acted strangely
indeed had I been governed by his peremptory orders I have not
the least doubt that an Indian war would have been now raging
here but a timely demonstration of force by marching six hundred
horsemen through their Country excited strongly that which can
only be depended upon in Indians their fear. ²⁹

Two days later Hugh McLeod, adjutant to General Rusk, wrote,
saying that the Mexicans had plotted for a general uprising of
Indians, and but for Rusk's promptness they might have brought
it about. He criticised President Houston severely for his con-
duct during the rebellion. "He cramped Genl Rusk in ever way,"
he said, "with his orders, written here, where one could not judge
what was the true state of affairs at HdQrs." ³⁰ Besides these,
there were other letters strongly criticising the policy of Houston
and hoping that Lamar would adopt a different policy with re-
gard to the Indians.

On October 22 McLeod reported a renewal of Mexican hostili-

ties, giving an account of the battle of Kickapoo on the 16th, and
on the 25th he wrote that Rusk had become convinced that the
time had come for a campaign of extermination against all Indians
except the friendly ones. ³¹ On November 17, General Rusk wrote,
suggesting the creation of a permanent force of five hundred men
to operate against the Indians. At the same time he suggested
that Lamar demand the removal of all United States Indians under
the treaty of 1831 between the United States and Mexico. ³²

The inauguration of Lamar was to take place on December 10,
and the stage was set for a declaration of policy different from that
of Houston, who continued to insist that his policy was the only
one that promised success. Houston delivered his valedictory mes-
sage on November 19, and to illustrate the contrast of the attitude
of the outgoing to that of the incoming President, I shall give
his policy as he expressed it. Criticising the whites for their ag-
gression on the Indian lands, Houston said:

The great anxiety of our citizens to acquire land induced them
to adventure into the Indian hunting grounds in numbers not
sufficient for self-protection, and inasmuch as they met with no
serious opposition in the commencement of their surveying, they
were thrown off their guard, which afforded the Indians an oppor-
tunity of taking them by surprise, and hence they became victims
to their own indiscretion and temerity.

The executive anticipated the consequences that would result from
penetrating into the Indian hunting grounds, he said, and had
done everything in his power to prevent such a course. His per-
sonal remonstrances were insufficient to control the determination
of those whose opinions set at naught admonitions that could not
be legally enforced. The Indians, by gaining partial advantages,
were induced to form more numerous associations, that had ren-
dered them formidable; and occasionally acquiring spoil, they had
been induced to advance upon the settlements in marauding par-
ties, while the continued surveys within their hunting grounds
had so much exasperated their feelings that their invasions had
become formidable to the frontier. He went on to say that the
system of surveying lands had involved the country in all the
calamities that had visited the frontier, and suggested that for

some time to come restrictions should be placed on surveying be-
yond the settlements. He concluded by censuring General Rusk
for alleged encroachments on the Presidential power during the
Cordova rebellion, and claimed that that revolt was brought about
by violation of the rights of the Mexicans and Indians. ³³

Lamar did not leave the country long in doubt as to his policy
in dealing with the Indians. "It is a cardinal principle in all
political associations," he said in his first message to Congress,
December 21, 1838, "that protection is commensurate with alle -
giance, and the poorest citizen, whose sequestered cabin is reared
on our remotest frontier, holds as sacred a claim upon the govern-
ment for safety and security, as does the man who lives in ease
and wealth in the heart of our most populous city." He was not
anxious to aggravate the ordinary calamities of war by inculcating
the harsh doctrines of lex talionis toward debased and ignorant
savages. War was an evil which all good people ought to strive
to avoid, but when it could not be avoided, it ought to be so met
and pursued as would best secure a speedy and lasting peace. The
moderation hitherto extended to the Indians on the border had
been answered by all the atrocious cruelties that characterize their
mode of warfare. His solicitude for the due protection of the
frontier had partially overruled his habitual repugnance to stand-
ing armies; and in the disturbed state of their foreign and Indian
relations, the proper security of the country at large, especially
the peace and safety of the border settlements, seemed to require
the organization of a regular, permanent, and effective force.

He showed himself in harmony with the popular sentiment in
his remarks concerning the Indians in the East. He referred to
the trouble around Nacogdoches in August, and said that it was
not all clear to him, but that he was far from conceding that the
Indians, either native or immigrant, had any just cause of com-
plaint. He proceeded to discuss the nature of their claims to
lands in East Texas, showing to his satisfaction that they were
worthless. He was particularly severe on the Cherokees and
clearly foreshadowed stern measures with them. He suggested
the establishment of a line of military forts, announced that agents
were to be appointed to live in the Indian settlements, and that
Indians were to be required to submit to Texan criminal laws. ³⁴

On the day that he sent this message to Congress he received
from Congress, and approved, an act "to provide for the protection
of the Northern and Western Frontier." It created a regiment
comprising 840 men, rank and file, divided into fifteen companies
of fifty-six men each. The term of service was to be three years,
at a compensation of sixteen dollars a month, and with a bounty
of thirty dollars. The regiment was to be divided into eight de-
tachments, stationed as follows: at or near Red River; at or near
the Three Forks of the Trinity; at or near the Brazos; at or near
the Colorado River; at or near St. Marks River; at the head-
waters of Cibolo; at or near Rio Frio; and at or near the Nueces
Eiver. At each of these posts fortifications were to be constructed.
These posts were to become the center of frontier settlement. As
soon as the positions were selected, three leagues of land were to
be laid off and surveyed into lots of 160 acres each. Two of the
lots were to be reserved for the government for the purpose of
constructing fortifications, one lot was to be given to the soldiers
obeying the term of enlistment, and the remainder was to be given
in lots of 160 acres to bona fide settlers in fee simple who would
live there two years. The act further provided for the establish-
ment of sixteen trading posts. ³⁵

On January 1, 1839, two other acts for the further protection
of the frontier were approved. The first authorized the Presi-
dent to accept eight companies of mounted volunteers for a period
of six months, and appropriated $75,000 to maintain that force.
The second appropriated the sum of $5,000 for a company of fifty-
six rangers for a three months period. ³⁶ A little later another
act was approved providing for three companies of militia for the
protection of the frontier; ³⁷ and an January 24, the sum of
$1,000,000 was appropriated for the protection of the frontier. ³⁸

In October conditions had become unsettled in the East again,
and on the 16th the army under Rusk fought a battle with a
mixed force of Mexicans and Indians at Kickapoo. Shortly after-
wards the Caddos in the Red River valley became threatening,
and just before Lamar's inauguration, Rusk had followed them
into the United States and disarmed them, thereby incurring a

protest from the government of the United States. ³⁹ These ac-
tivities made necessary the use of the whole army in the East, and
the West was left unprotected. On January 2, 1839, Joseph
Baker, Indian agent at San Antonio, reported that the Comanches,
Lipans, and Tonkawas were active, and that several children had
been captured at Gonzales; on the 16th, several citizens sent a
circular announcing Indian attacks in Robertson County, and ap-
pealing for aid. ⁴⁰

It is not worth while to enumerate all the Indian attacks during
this period. It is sufficient to say that a lack of interest in fron-
tier protection had caused the depletion of the army, and a lack
of funds at the outset of Lamar's term made impossible the carry-
ing into effect of the ambitious program that he had announced.
His response to the appeals for help coming from the western
counties was that the lack of funds made him unable to do any-
thing effective in defending the frontier, but that an agent was
then in New Orleans attempting to sell bonds, and that he would
apply all the proceeds from the sale to the purchase of ammunition,
and the payment of soldiers. ⁴¹ On February 28 he called for vol-
unteers from eight counties in western Texas for an Indian war.
Edward Burleson had been appointed a colonel in the regular
army and stationed at Bastrop, but recruiting' was very slow, and
practically the only defence for the western frontier during the
year was by volunteer bodies, supported by what there was of a
regular army. It is likely, however, that the endorsement of an
aggressive policy by Lamar gave encouragement to the citizens in
their local warfare with the Indians.

By far the most troublesome Indians to the Texans were the
Comanches, who had established themselves on the headwaters of
the Colorado before the American occupation. Throughout the
period of the Republic, and even after annexation, they made fre-
quent attacks on the western settlements. President Houston was
authorized by the Senate to make a treaty with them in 1837, and
he invited a number of their chiefs to Houston where he had a
conference with them, giving them presents, and accepting their

promise to keep the peace. In 1838, during the closing year of
Houston's administration, no effort was made by the government
to protect the frontier from the Comanches, and the President
went so far as to criticise the whites for provoking attacks from
the Indians by their imprudence. Lamar gave to the local move-
ments the moral support of the administration, and as far as pos-
sible the actual physical support. I shall follow out, as far as
possible, the relations with the western tribes, particularly the
Comanches, reserving a discussion for the relations with the immi-
grant tribes of East Texas until later.

In the latter part of January, 1839, three companies of volun-
teers were organized and placed under the command of Captain
John H. Moore, and ordered to move against the Comanches.
They marched up the Colorado. On the 14th of February they
came to within ten miles of the Indian village, and after dark
attacked a vastly superior force. After killing about thirty of the
Indians and losing one killed and six wounded, the Texans drew
off and did not renew the fight. In the latter part of February,
a party of Indians committed several murders in the vicinity of
Bastrop, and were attacked by about fifty Texans. The Texans
were forced to fall back, but were reinforced by General Burleson
with thirty men, and after a sharp battle the Indians fled. In
May, a force of thirty-five men under Captain John Bird discov-
ered a party of twenty-seven Indians on Little River. They pur-
sued them until the Indians came up with the main body of from
two hundred and fifty to three hundred. The Texans managed to
secure an advantageous position, and beat the Indians off with
severe losses. ⁴²

The punishment that the Indians received in these engagements
caused them to be more wary in their attacks, and early in the
following year an effort was made to enter into a treaty with the
Texans. In February, 1840, some of the Indians came to San
Antonio for the purpose of making peace with Texas, and were
told by the commissioners to bring in the captives they had taken.
The Indians promised to do this, and on March 19, appeared with
only one captive. Twelve of the chiefs met the commissioners, and
when called upon to produce their captives produced only one
little girl. The Texans knew that the Comanches had other cap-

tives and. demanded that they be brought before any treaty would
be signed. When the chiefs claimed that they had no other cap-
tives, General McLeod, who was in command of the Texans, or-
dered a company of soldiers into the house and told the Indians
they were under arrest, and that they would be detained until
they sent the rest of their company for the prisoners and brought
them in. This statement immediately precipitated a fight in the
council room, which spread to the warriors outside. All the chiefs
and warriors were killed, and twenty-seven women and children
were taken prisoner, the Texans losing seven killed and eight
wounded. The women were kept prisoners while one of their
number was sent to inform the Comanches what had taken place
and to say that the Texans were willing to exchange prisoners.
A few-days later she returned with two white captives and four
or five Mexicans, and proposed to exchange them for her people
and pay the difference in horses. She was informed that all the
white prisoners must be brought in. ⁴³

In revenge for this battle at San Antonio, the Indians planned
an extensive campaign. Aided by the Mexicans and some Kiowas,
a band estimated at from four hundred to a thousand Indians
suddenly attacked Victoria on the evening of August 6. The
citizens had had no notice of their coining, but they managed to
take refuge in the center of the town, and put up an effectual
resistance, losing only a few persons and a considerable number
of horses. They made another attack the next day, which also
failed, and then they crossed the Guadalupe River and attacked
Linnville on the coast. The inhabitants took refuge in a lighter
on the Gulf, but the Indians burned the town and carried away
most of the goods and cattle that they could find. In the mean-
time volunteers had been collecting, who, joined by regulars and
rangers, intercepted the Indians at Plum Creek. Here under
General Felix Huston, the Texans fought and defeated the In-
dians, killing from fifty to eighty, and recovered all horses and
prisoners. The Indians were pursued for some distance, but the
main body made its escape.

Not content with the defeat of the Indians at Plum Creek, the
Texans determined to send an expedition into the Comanche coun-

try, and chastise them so that they would make no more attacks
on the frontiers. Colonel John PI. Moore, who had followed the
Comanches up the Colorado to their village in February, 1839,
was chosen to lead the expedition. Setting out about the first of
October with ninety men, besides twelve friendly Lipans, he went
up the Colorado about three hundred miles to where Colorado City
now stands. Here the Lipans found the Comanche village in the
bend of the river, with a bluff to cut off their retreat. McLeod
sent thirty men to occupy the bluff, and with his main force made
a surprise attack, which proved fully successful. Only two war-
riors escaped, and a hundred and thirty-four were found dead on
the field. Thirty-four squaws and children were captured. The
Texans had a few wounded but none killed. This ended the or-
ganized attacks of the Comanches during Lamar's administration,
though they continued to annoy outlying settlements. ⁴⁴

II. Relations with the Cherokees

A group of Indians that furnished a special problem to the
Texans from their first immigration, consisted of the semi-civilized
tribes which had emigrated from the United States, consisting of
the Cherokees, the Coshattoes, the Kickapoos, the Choctaws, the
Shawnees, the Biloxis, and the Caddoes. Most of these had no
claim to the soil on which they had settled, and contemporaries
and historians have agreed on the justice of their removal from
Texas. The Cherokees did have some claim, however, or thought
they did, to the occupancy and government of the region where
they were settled. The refusal of Lamar to recognize their claims
as valid, and his determination to treat them as other immigrant
tribes, make necessary a full discussion of their claims, both under
the Mexican regime and after the Texans had won their inde-
pendence.

In the winter of 1819-20, the first party of Cherokees, consist-
ing of sixty warriors, left their settlements among the Caddoes
north of Red River, and came into Texas, settling somewhere along
the boundary between the Caddoes and the Prairie Indians. ⁴⁵ By
the latter part of 1824 they were claiming the region lying be-
tween the Sabine and Trinity Rivers north of the San Antonio
Road, which continued to be their claim until driven from Texas
in the summer of 1839. Whether or not they had permission from
the Spanish authorities to settle in Texas it is impossible to say.
A letter from Richard Fields, their chief., to James Dill, alcalde
at Nacogdoches, just after the revolution which freed Mexico from
Spanish rule in 1823, indicates that probably some Spanish gov-
ernor had given them the right to locate there for hunting pur-
poses. The letter, addressed to the "subsprem Governor of the
Provunce of Spain," February 1, 1822, asked what was to be done
with the poor Indians. They had some grants, it said, which were
given them when they lived under the government of Spain, and
they wanted to know whether or not the grants would be recog-
nized by the new government. This letter was forwarded to the
governor by Dill, but it elicited no response. ⁴⁶

Early in November, 1822, Fields with twenty-two more Indians,
visited Don José Felix Trespalacios, the governor of the province
of Texas, and asked permission for all belonging to his tribe to
settle upon the lands of the province. Trespalacios entered into a
temporary agreement with Fields, and sent him to the commandant
general of the Eastern Interior Provinces at Monterey, Don Gas-
par Lopez, who, if agreeable was to send him on to the court of
the Empire, for the purpose of securing a confirmation of the
grant given by Trespalacios. This agreement constitutes the main
documentary evidence of the claims of the Cherokees in Texas
prior to the declaration of the Consultation in 1835, and I shall
quote it in full.

Article 1st. That the said chief Richard [Fields] with five
others of his tribe, accompanied by Mr. Antonio Mexia and An-
tonio Walk, who act as Interpreters, may proceed to Mexico, to
treat with his Imperial Majesty, relative to the settlement which
said chief wishes to make for those of his tribe who are already
in the territory of Texas, and also for those who are still in the
United States.

Article 2d. That the other Indians in the city, and who do not
accompany the beforementioned, will return to their village in the
vicinity of Nacogdoches, and communicate to those who are at
said village, the terms of this agreement.

Article 3d. That a party of the warriors of said village must
be constantly kept on the road leading from this province to the
United States, to prevent stolen animals from being carried thither,
and to apprehend and punish those evil disposed foreigners, who
form assemblages, and abound on the banks of the river Sabine
within the Territory of Texas.

Article 4th. That the Indians who return to their Town, will
appoint as their chief the Indian Captain called Kunetand, alias
Tong Turqui, to whom a copy of this agreement will be given,
for the satisfaction of those of his tribe, and in order that they
may fulfill its stipulations.

Article 5th. That meanwhile, and until the approval of the
Supreme Government is obtained, they may cultivate their lands
and sow their crops, in free and peaceful possession.

Article 6th. That the said Cherokee Indians, will become im-
mediately subject to the laws of the Empire, as well as all others
who may tread her soil, and they will also take up arms in defense
of the nation if called upon so to do.

Article 7th. That they shall be considered Hispano-Americans,
and entitled to all the rights and privileges granted to such; and
to the same protection should it become necessary.

Article 8th. That they can immediately commence trade with
the other inhabitants of the Province, and with the exception of
arms and munitions of war, with the tribes of Savages who may
not be friendly to us. ⁴⁷

Fields and his party arrived in Saltillo, the headquarters of the
commandant general, early in December, and after being enter-
tained by him for a few days were sent on to Mexico City, arriving
there early in 1823, at the time when the revolution against the
power of Iturbide was taking place. During the progress of the
revolution Fields and his companions remained in Mexico, await-
ing a settlement of their claims. On April 27, 1823, the min-
ister of relations in the provisional government, announced the
decision of the government to recognize the agreement between
Fields and Trespalacios until a general colonization law could be
passed. "The Supreme Executive Power," wrote Alaman to Don
Felipe de la Garza, who had succeeded Lopez as commandant gen-
eral of the Eastern Interior Provinces,

has been pleased to resolve that Richard Fields chief of the Cher-
okee Tribe of Indians, and his companions now in this Capital,
may return to their country, and that they be supplied with what-
ever may be necessary for that purpose. Therefore, Their Supreme
Highnesses have directed me to inform you, that although the
agreement made on the 8th November 1822 between Richard Fields
and Colonel Felix Trespalacios Governor of Texas, remains pro-
visionally in force, you are nevertheless, required to be very careful
and vigilant, in regard to their settlements, endeavoring to bring
them towards the interior, and at places least dangerous, not per-
mitting for the present the entrance of any new families of the
Cherokee tribe, until the publication of the General Colonization
law, which will establish the rules and regulations to be observed,
although the benefits to arise from it, can not be extended to them,
in relation to all of which, Their Highnesses intend to consult íhe
Sovereign Congress. That while this is effecting, the families
already settled, should be well treated, and the other chiefs also,
treated with suitable consideration, provided that those already
within our territory respect our laws, and are submissive to our
Authorities; and finally, Their Highnesses order, that in future
neither these Indians, nor any others be permitted to come to the
City of Mexico, but only send their petitions in ample form, for
journeys similar to the present, are of no benefit, and only create
unnecessary expense to the State. All of which I communicate
to you, for your information and fulfillment. ⁴⁸

With this understanding Fields seemed fully satisfied and returned
to Texas.

It is apparent from these documents that Fields received no
more than a temporary concession, and that a permanent grant
was left in abeyance. Besides, he was conceded no more than
the right to sow his crops, and till his fields without interference
from the authorities. A year later we find Fields claiming con-
siderably more than this. In calling a council of all the Indian
tribes for the purpose of forming a treaty with them, he said:

The superior government has granted to me in this province
a territory sufficient for me and that part of the tribe of Indians
dependent on me to settle on, and also a commission to command
all the Indian tribes and nations that are in the four eastern
provinces.

In the council he was to propose treaties with all Indians who
would agree to submit themselves to the orders of the government,
and if there were any who would not agree, he was to use force to
subdue them, ⁴⁹ This letter of Fields's was transmitted to the
government at Mexico City, and Alaman responded immediately
that no such commission and no such grants had been made, stat-
ing that the only agreement was for an extension of the provisional
treaty between Trespalacios and Fields of November 8, 1822. ⁵⁰

On August 18, 1824, the general colonization law was passed,
giving to the States the right to make regulations for the dis-
tribution of lands within their boundaries. The State of Coahuila
and Texas passed their colonization law on March 24, 1825. Less
than a month later, April 15, 1825, the State granted three con-
tracts for the settlement of two thousand families in the region
claimed by the Indians. Robert Leftwich was to settle eight hun-
dred west of the Cherokee claim, Frost Thorn four hundred north
of their villages, and Edwards eight hundred on the lands claimed
and occupied by the Cherokees. These grants do not, of course,
prove that the Indians had no claim to the lands. It is more
likely that the authorities of the State of Coahuila and Texas
knew nothing of the temporary grant by Trespalacios and con-
firmed by the authorities in Mexico. The granting of their lands
to others, however, led to a threatened revolt, which was prevented
only by earnest efforts on the part of friends of Texas. ⁵¹ At the
same time Fields was assured that he would get suitable lands,
and he continued to assert all the powers he had claimed before.

On March 20, 1826, when a general Indian war was threatening,
Fields wrote to the political chief at San Antonio promising help
against those Indians, the Comanches and others, who were refus-
ing to come to terms with the Mexicans. A little later Stephen F.
Austin was ordered by the commandante at San Antonio to attack
the Wacoes, Tehuacanos, and other tribes, and he called upon
Fields for assistance, stating that it would be the means of secur-
ing the lands which the Cherokees desired. Fields asserted his
willingness to assist the whites, but said the waters of the Neches
were too high for them to get across. The attack was postponed
at that time, but in the autumn Fields asked permission to make
war on the same Indians, which was granted. Before it could
take place, however, other matters entirely changed the aspect of
affairs, and the Cherokees were ready to attack the Mexicans. ⁵²

In the summer of 1835, about the time that Fields was pre-
paring to secure his lands by force, John Dunn Hunter, a white
man who had spent several years of his youth in captivity with
the Indians, and who had wonderful schemes for civilizing the
Indians, made his appearance among the Cherokees of Texas.
Hunter counselled friendship with the Mexicans, and proceeded to
Mexico City to petition for lands for the Indians, arriving there
on March 19, 1826. It seems to have been the purpose of Hunter
to secure from the government a grant of land in the vacant parts
of Texas and Coahuila for the settlement of nearly 20,000 war-
riors, who were to adopt the Catholic religion, take the oath of
allegiance to the Mexican Government, devote themselves to agri-
cultural labor, and defend the frontiers. ⁵³ Hunter returned about
September and announced the failure of his mission, and the
Cherokees immediately began preparations to gain by force what
they had not been able to get peaceably.

A council was called, and addressed by Hunter and Fields. The
speech of Fields, as reported to Stephen F. Austin by P. E. Bean,
indicates that he was willing to demand perhaps more than he
believed had been granted. In the language of Bean, it was as
follows:

In my old Days I travilid 2000 Miles to the City of Mexico to
Beg some lands to setel a Poor orfan tribe of Bed Peopel that
looked up to me for Protasion I was Promised lands for them
after staying one year in Mexico and spending all I had I then
came to my Peopel and waited two years and then sent Mr. hunter
again after selling my stock to Provide him money for his ex-
penses when he got there he Staited his mision to Government
they said they New nothing of this Richard fields and treated
him with contampt I am a Red man and a man of onor and
Cant be emposid on this way we will lift up our tomahawks and
fight for land with all those friendly tribes that wishes land also
if I am Beaten I will Resign to fait and if not I will hold lands
By the forse of my Red Warriors. ⁵⁴ . . .

It was at first the purpose of the Cherokees to attack the Amer-
icans in Texas, and they were to begin with Edwards's colony,
which included the lands occupied by them. At about that time,
however, Edwards had become involved in a controversy with the
authorities and in the end this resulted in the revocation of his
grant. Rather than submit to the loss which this would entail,
Edwards and some of his followers raised a rebellion against the
authority of Mexico, declaring the colony independent under the
name of Fredonia. Hunter thought it best to consult with the
colonists under these circumstances, and he went to Nacogdoches
for the purpose. Hunter's visit resulted in a treaty of alliance
between the Cherokees and the rebels under Edwards.

The treaty of alliance as drawn up by Hunter and Fields on
the part of the Indians and Harmon B. Mayo and Benjamin W.
Edwards as Agents of the Committee of Independence provided
that the contracting parties bound themselves into a solemn Union,
League and Confederation, in peace and war, to establish and de-
fend their independence against the Mexican United States. The
boundary between the whites and the Indians was outlined, and it
was agreed that the territory apportioned to the Indians was in-
tended as well for the benefit of those tribes living in the terri-
tory apportioned to the whites as for those living in the former
territory, and that it was encumbent upon the contracting parties
for the Indians to offer those tribes a participation in the terri-
tory. ⁵⁵

It is not my purpose to follow the events connected with this
rebellion. The other American settlers in Texas not only refused
to give any assistance to the rebels, but joined the authorities in
putting them down. The Cherokee chiefs were unable to form a
league of the Indians in Texas, or even to secure the united sup-
port of their own people. Mexican agents went among the In-
dians and promised them land if they would refuse to join in the
movement for independence. Among these agents P. E. Bean was
the most active. Through his influence the political chief wrote
a letter to Fields attempting to explain the failure of the govern-
ment to grant the lands desired, and promising that the grants
would be made as soon as possible. He failed, however, to detach
Fields and Hunter from the alliance; but the activity of the agents
among the Indians themselves was more successful, and the greater
part of them under the leadership of Bowl and Big Mush went
over to the Mexicans and killed Fields and Hunter in January,
1827.56

In spite of the promise of lands to Bowl and Big Mush, in order
to secure their co-operation against the rebels during the Fredonian
rebellion, no steps were taken to put them in possession of the
lands selected until 1831, though there was no effort to interfere
with their peaceful possession. Instead of putting them in pos-
session of the Edwards grant, the legislature divided that territory
between David G. Burnet and Joseph Vehlein. ⁵⁷

On April 6, 1830, a Federal act prohibiting the further immi-
gration of Americans into Texas was passed. As an alternative
to American settlement of Texas, the law proposed the settlement
of Mexican families around the Americans already there, thus over-
coming the isolation of the Americans. General Teran, who had
become commandant general of the Eastern Interior States, ap-
pealed to the governor of each State to furnish a certain number
of Mexican families to settle upon the Texas frontier. The gov-
ernors failed to respond to this request, and no Mexican families
were sent. This determined Teran to attempt to settle Indians
to keep the Americans in check. He decided to begin this by
settling firmly the Cherokees on the land which they claimed and
had occupied for several years, hoping thus to stop the American
advance in this manner. On August 15, 1831, he wrote to Letona,
the governor of Coahuila and Texas, as follows:

In compliance with the promises made by the Supreme Govern-
ment, to the Cherokee Indians, and with a view to the preserva-
tion of peace, with the rude tribes, I caused them to determine
upon some fixed spot for their Settlement, and having selected it
on the head waters of the Trinity, and the banks of the Sabme, I
pray your Excellency may be pleased, to order that possession be
given to them, with the corresponding Titles, with the understand-
ing that it will be expedient, that the commissioners appointed
for this purpose, should act in conjunction with Colonel Jose de
las Piedras, commanding the military force on the frontier of
Nacogdoches. ⁵⁸

The local officials fell in with the suggestions of the commandant
general, and on March 22, 1832, the governor instructed the polit-
ical chief to cause the commissioner, Piedras, to be furnished with
such stamped paper as he might require for that purpose. ⁵⁹ Before
Piedras could carry out his instructions he had been expelled from
Nacogdoches by an uprising of the American settlers, and this
ended the efforts of the government to put the Indians in possession
of their lands. Shortly after this Teran committed suicide and
was succeeded as commandant general by General Vicente Filisola,
the holder of an empresario grant himself. Governor Letona, bit-
terly hostile to the Americans, fell a victim of yellow fever and
was succeeded by Beramendi, a warm friend of Texas. ⁶⁰

In 1833 the Cherokees with the assistance of the Americans took
steps to secure the titles to their lands. A number of the Indians
proceeded to San Antonio to lay before the political chief a peti-
tion expressing their desires, and giving the boundary of the lands
that they wanted. On July 20, he gave them a pass to visit the
governor at Monclova. On August 21, Governor Beramendi gave
them a document which promised that they would not be disturbed
until the supreme government could investigate; but because the
time limit for the settlement of David G. Burnet's grant had not
expired he could not put them in full possession. ⁶¹

The matter was still unsettled in 1835. On March 10, the polit-
ical chief wrote that the supreme government of the State would
not let the Cherokees, Coshattoes, and other Indians be disturbed
until the supreme government could pass on the subject. On May
12, the congress of Ooahuila and Texas passed a resolution de-
claring :

Art. 1. In order to secure the peace and tranquility of the
State, the Government is authorized to select, out of the vacant
lands of Texas, that land which may appear most appropriate, for
the location of the peaceable and civilized Indians which may have
been introduced into Texas.

Art. 2. It shall establish with them a line of defense along the
frontier to secure the State against the incursions of the barbarious
tribes. ⁶²

This was the last act of the Mexican government with regard to
Indian claims. On November 11 the Consultation adopted articles
for a provisional government, and declared all land offices closed
until a government could be formed and a land office established
under that government capable of issuing valid land grants. The
Indian claims were left as they had been throughout the decade.
Fields had obtained a shadowy temporary right to land. He had
claimed much more for this grant than can be allowed. When the
Mexican authorities failed to put him in possession of the land,
denying knowledge of him in 1825, he joined with the Fredonian
rebels against Mexican authority. In order to overthrow this re-
bellion, the Mexicans promised land to Bowl and Big Mush, with-
out specifying what lands. The Indians insisted on receiving title
to the lands lying between the Trinity and Sabine Rivers north
of the San Antonio Road, though it had been officially granted to
Burnet, Filisola, and others. During 1831-1832 the authorities
contemplated putting the Cherokees in actual possession of that
territory, but failed, as we have seen. When Bowl appealed to the
governor of Coahuila and Texas in 1833, he was given the same
evasive assurances as had been received before, but Beramendi threw
some doubt on his right to the lands occupied, Finally, the con-
gress of Coahuila and Texas proposed to remove them from their
homes and establish them on the frontiers for defense against the
hostile Indians.

The Mexican control of Texas passed with the question in this
situation. The Indians had been promised land on numerous occa-
sions, but not the land on which they were located. That land
had been granted to others, so that the Mexican government could
not legally grant it to the Indians. The period closed with the
Indians having no legal claim, and knowing that they had no legal
claim, to lands anywhere in Texas.

The Americans in the beginning of their revolt in 1835 recog-
nized the importance of keeping the Indians quiet. The committees
of safety had suggested the desirability of coming to some agree-
ment with the Indians, and the Permanent Council had appointed
three commissioners to proceed to the Indian villages and discover
the cause of their grievances and attempt to settle them. The
Consultation, which succeeded the Permanent Council, went fur-
ther and recognized the rights of the Indians to the lands they
had occupied and claimed. "We solemnly declare," said the decla-
ration passed by the Consultation the day before adjournment,

that the boundaries of the claims of the said Indians are as fol-
lows, to wit, being north of the San Antonio road and the Neches,
and west of the Angelina and Sabine rivers, We solemnly declare
that the Governor and General Council immediately on its organi-
zation shall appoint commissioners to treat with the said Indians
to establish definite boundaries of their territory and secure their
confidence and friendship. We solemnly declare that we will guar-
antee to them the peaceable enjoyment of their rights and their
lands as we do our own. We solemnly declare that all grants, sur-
veys and locations within the bounds hereinbefore maintained, made
after the settlement of the said Indians, are and of right ought to
be utterly null and void, and the commissioners issuing the same
be and are hereby ordered immediately to recall and cancel the
same, as having been made upon lands already appropriated by the
Mexican government. We solemnly declare that it is our sincere
desire that the Cherokee Indians and their associate bands should
remain our friends in peace and war, and if they do so we pledge
the public faith to the support of the foregoing declaration. We
solemnly declare that they are entitled to our commiseration and
protection, as the first owners of the soil, as an unfortunate race
of people, that we wish to hold as friends and treat with justice. ⁶³

On December 22, 1835, the Council, as we have seen, acting upon
the recommendation of Governor Henry Smith, appointed Sam
Houston, John Forbes, and John Cameron commissioners to treat
with the Indians under the instructions to be drawn up by the
governor, which was done on the 30th. The commissioners were
to proceed to Nacogdoches as soon as possible and enter upon the
discharge of their duties, in which they were in nowise to transcend
the instructions of the Declaration of the Consultation. "You will
in all things pursue a course of justice and equity towards the In-
dians," Governor Smith said,

and protect all honest claims of the Whites, agreeably to such Laws
compacts or treaties, as the said Indians may have heretofore made
with the Mexican Republic.

You will provide in said treaty with the Indians, that they shall
never alienate their Lands, either separately or collectively, except
to the Government of Texas, and to agree that the said Govern-
ment, will at any time hereafter purchase all their claims at a fair
and reasonable valuation. You will endeavor, if possible, to secure
their effective co-operation at all times when it may be necessary to
call the effective forces of Texas into the field and agreeing for their
services in a body for a specific time. If found expedient and con-
sistent, you are authorized and empowered to exchange other Lands
within the limits of Texas not otherwise appropriated in the room
of the Lands claimed by Said Indians and as soon as practicable,
you will report your proceedings to the Governor and Council for
their ratification and approval: ⁶⁴

On February 23, 1836, the commissioners entered into a treaty
with the Cherokees. By this treaty the Indians were to receive
title to the land they claimed, and which under the declaration of
the Consultation was adjudged to be theirs. The rights of those
who settled before the Cherokees were to be respected, but all who
had been once removed and had later returned were to be con-
sidered intruders. All bands or tribes mentioned in the treaty
were to be required to remove within the boundary fixed. The lands
were not to be sold or alienated to anyone except the government
of Texas, and the Cherokees agreed that no other tribes should be
allowed to settle there. No individual Indian was permitted to sell
land, and no Texan to buy from an Indian. The Indians were to
be governed bv their own laws. The government of Texas had
power to regulate trade and intercourse between the Indians and
others, but should levy no tax on the trade of the Indians. Prop-
erty stolen from citizens or from the Indians was to be restored to
the persons from whom stolen, and the offender or offenders were
to be punished by the tribe to which he or they belonged ⁶⁵

A ratification of this treaty would have resulted in the establish-
ment of a separate Indian state with practical independence. It
would have been a nation living within definitely fixed boundaries,
under their own laws, punishing their own citizens for theft of
horses from the whites, exempt from taxation by the Texan gov-
ernment, and under no more restriction than would be involved in
a control over foreign affairs and the appointment by Texas of an
agent to live among the Indians. The Convention which met in
March, however, refused to ratify the treaty, though Houston and
the Indians considered the government morally bound to do so.

Acting upon the theory that the declaration of the Consultation
was sufficient authority for his action in drawing up the treaty
with the Indians, Houston, while he was attempting to secure a
ratification of the treaty by the Senate of the Republic after he
became President, deliberately gave the Indians to understand that
ratification was not necessary, and that they would get their lands.
Writing to Bowl on April 18, 1836, during the retreat from Gon-
zales, and after the refusal of the Convention to ratify the treaty,
Houston said:

My friend Col Bowl.

I am busy, and will only say, how da do, to you! You will get
your land as it was promised in our Treaty, and you, and all my
Red brothers, may rest satisfied that I will always hold you by
the hand, and look at you as Brothers and treat you as such!

You must give my best compliments to my sister, and tell her
that I have not wore out the mockasins which she made me; and
I hope to see her and you, and all my relations, before they are
wore out. Our army are all well, and in good spirits. In a little
fight the other day several of the Mexicans were killed, and none of
our men hurt. There are not many of the enemy now in the
Country, and one of our ships took one of the enemy's and took
300 Barrels of flour, 250 Kegs of powder, and much property---
and sunk a big warship of the enemy, which had many Guns. ⁶⁶

The purpose of this letter was probably to keep the Indians quiet
by promising them their lands under the treaty and by making
it appear that the Mexicans were making only a slight effort to
subdue the Texans. In December, however, when there was no
danger of the return of the Mexicans, he sent a message to the
Senate urging its ratification. "You will find upon examining this
treaty," he said,

that it is just and equitable, and perhaps the best which could
be made at the present time. It only secures to the said Indians
the usufructuary right to the country included within the boundary
described in the treaty, and does not part with the right of soil,
which is in this Government; neither are the rights of any citizen
of the Republic impaired by the views of the treaty, but are all care-
fully secured by the third article of the same. In considering
this treaty, you will doubtless bear in mind the very great necessity
of conciliating the different tribes of Indians who inhabit portions
of country almost in the center of our settlements as, well as those
who extend along our frontier. ⁶⁷

The Senate took no action at that time; but at the next session
appointed a committee to consider the treaty and the general In-
dian question, and this committee reported on October 12, 1837.
It declared the opinion that the rights with which Indians might
have been invested by the Mexican government previous to the
declaration of independence should be respected, but was not able
to find that any such right had been acquired. The premises as-
sumed by the Consultation were false, and acknowledged rights
based on false premises "are of no effect and void, which your
committee conceive to be the case in this instance." The territory
mentioned in the treaty formed part of the grant to David G.
Burnet for the purpose of colonization, the colony was filled, or
nearly so, prior to the declaration of the Consultation, and the com-
mittee was satisfied that the grant of the territory to Burnet for
colonization many years after the settlement of the Indians on
the soil, was sufficient evidence that no obligation was created
which could be considered binding in favor of the Cherokees, or
any other Indians, Finally, the committee reported the following
resolution:

Resolved by the Senate of the Republic of Texas that they dis-
approve and utterly refuse to ratify the Treaty or any artickles
thereof concluded by Sam Houston and Jno. Forbes on the 23rd
day of February 1836, between the provisional Gov[ernmen]t of
Texas of the one part, and the "Head Chiefs" Head men and war-
riors of the Cherokees on the other part. Inasmuch as that said
treaty was based on premises that did not exist and that the oper-
ation of it would not only be detrimental to the interests of the
Republic but would also be a violation of the vested right of many
citizens.

Resolved that the President of this Republic be authorized and
advised to appoint commissioners and furnish them with instruc-
tions such as he may deem most expedient to bring about friendly
relations between the Comanches and this Republic; Provided that
no fee simple right of soil be acknowledged by this Gov[emmen]t in
favor of those Indians. ⁶⁸

On December 16 a resolution was adopted declaring null and
void the treaty with the Cherokees, and no further attempt was
made by Houston to secure ratification. ⁶⁹

There was considerable unrest among the Indians in the East in
the summer of 1838 at the time of the Cordova rebellion. There
is an indication from the diary of Miracle referred to above that
Bowl had foreknowledge of the plans of the Mexicans. He man-
aged to hide his knowledge, however, and received assurances from
Houston that the treaty was being observed by the Texans, and
calling upon him to keep the treaty. Houston promised the im-
mediate appointment of some one to run the boundary line between
the white and Indian possessions, and on August 16, sent Bowl
another letter promising that the white warriors would not hurt
the Indians. ⁷⁰ On August 18, after the dispersal of the rebels,
Houston issued an order for mustering out the army, in which he
urged the soldiers in falling back to respect the Indians and their
property, avoiding injury to every species of property. ⁷¹

The promises of Houston that the treaty would be observed and
the boundary line run kept the Cherokees from taking active part
with the Mexicans. Later, in the month of August, Rusk asked
Bowl to influence the Shawnees, Kickapoos, Delawares, Kaosatis,
and other friendly tribes to keep the peace. After the battle with
the Kickapoos on October 16, Rusk complained to Bowl that a
Cherokee had been found among the dead Kickapoos, which Bowl
explained by saying he was a renegade Indian. ⁷²

In the latter part of the slimmer of 1838 Houston appointed
Alexander Horton to run the line between the Indian territory and
that of the whites. On account of the opposition of the whites,
and the quarrels among Horton's men, nothing was accomplished
before the end of Houston's administration. A letter from Bowl
to Horton on October 37, is interesting and enlightening as re-
gards the relations of the whites and Indians at that time. He
wrote: ⁷³

Mr Horton Dear Sir I have accomplished my Desir in rasing
my men for to guard and aid you while you are running the Line
in so much I understand that some of the white people are against
it which I am sorry to hear that, for we wish to do write ourselves,
and we hoped thai white people wanted to do the same as for
your disputes among yourselves I have ordered my men to have
nothing to do with it. My express orders is to my men is to guard
you and your property from the enemy I hope that you will be
particular with us in consequence of us not understanding your
tongue and also we will pay that respect to you I hope you will
let us know when you need us and where and I will be at your
service I will detain Gayen till I get a line from you so as he
may read our writing I have twenty-five volunteers to send to
you so nothing more only your Friend Bole.

Bole.

Early in December, just before his inauguration as President,
Lamar received a long letter from Archibald Hotchkiss of Nacog-
doches. It cannot be shown to have influenced Lamar in deter-
mining his course toward the Cherokees, but it was not calculated
to change his belief that they had no real right to the soil which
they occupied. After tracing in a general way the history of the
Cherokees in Texas, Hotchkiss said:

In the year 1833 I became the agent of Burnet for the purpose
of carrying out the terms set forth in his contract; to wit: to settle
the land ... a short time subsequent to my receiving this it
became necessary for me to repair to the seat of Government for
the purpose of transacting business for my [principal,] the prin-
ciple object of which was to induce them to remove the Indians
who had settled within [the bounds] of our grant, and by so doing
had to a very great extent impeded the settling of the lands. [I
received] assurances from the Government that they [would be
removed] immediately; but that promise was not realized [on ac-
count] of the increased internal difficulties of the country.

In the early part of 1835 I entered into a correspondence with
the Gov[ernmen]t of the State of Coalhuila and Texas upon the
subject of removing the Indians representing the extreme difficulty
we had in obtaining colonists, who were willing to settle in the
vicinity of such dangerous neighbors as the Cherokees had allways
proved themselves to be in the United States; In answer to which
the Governor informed me that he was very sensible of the diffi-
culties under which I was laboring, but that the finances of the
State were at such a state of exhaustion that it was extremely
doubtful whether they would be able to do anything until the en-
sueing year, whereupon I offered upon behalf of my principals to
advance the means necessary for removing if the Government would
afford its countenance and authority for the undertaking, and the
corresponding order was sent to the political chief of Nacogdoches
for their removal forthwith sometime in the Spring of 1835 which
order was never executed but suppressed at the instigation of de-
signing men, the war of Independence which succeeded shortly
after put an end to all further action upon this subject. ⁷⁴ . . .

Lamar's message of December 21, 1838, with regard to the In-
dian, has been mentioned. Further notice at this point is neces-
sary for an explanation of the attitude he assumed concerning the
rights of the Cherokees to the lands they occupied. He said that
the immigrant tribes had no legal or equitable claim to any por-
tion of the territory of Texas; that their immigration to Texas
had been unsolicited and unauthorized, and had always been a
source of regret to the more enlightened population; that the Fed-
eral Government of Mexico neither conceded nor promised them
lands or civil rights; that they came as intruders, and were posi-
tively forbidden to make any permanent abidance, and had con-
tinued in the country up to that time against the public wish and
at the sacrifice of public tranquility. The offer made to bordering
tribes in the colonization law of Coahuila and Texas contained
precedent conditions which had in no wise been carried out. The
pledge of the Consultation and the treaty drawn up under it had
never been ratified, and, if it had been, the Indians had violated it
time and again. ⁷⁵

In the latter part of 1838 and early part of 1839 the Indians
in the West were active, and the government made preparations
to punish them. To keep the Indians in the East quiet, Lamar
appointed Martin Lacy agent to the Cherokees, Shawnees, and
other tribes. The special object of the appointment, said the in-
structions, was to cultivate and preserve the friendly relations exist-
ing between the frontier inhabitants of Texas and the "Cherokees,
Shawnees, etc., which have emigrated from the United States to
Texas, but whose claim to territory or even its occupancy has not
yet been recognized, and is now a subject of grave deliberation on
the part of the Texian Government." The Cherokees could not
better evince their friendly intentions, he suggested, than by pro-
hibiting intercourse with the hostile Indians. ⁷⁶

On March 10, 1839, the Texan minister in Washington informed
the government of the United States that the President of Texas
was determined to act with great energy towards those Indians of
the East who had been consistently hostile, and suggested that the
United States take steps to restrain their Indians from assisting
the kindred tribes in Texas. Before entering on a general war,
however, Bowl, chief of the Cherokees, was allowed to visit the
various chiefs and attempt to bring about an adjustment of the
differences with them. Bowl reported that there was a sincere
desire on the part of the Indians to resume peaceful relations with
the Texans. ⁷⁷

This change in the attitude of the Indians was probably pro-
duced by the destruction of the party of Cordova, March 26, 1839.
Cordova had been active in the rebellion at Nacogdoches in 1838,
and was at the time of his defeat by Burleson probably on his way
to Matamoras to get supplies for another outbreak similar to that
of 1838. On March 26, 1839, he was discovered with a party of
sixty or seventy Mexicans, Indians, and negroes, encamped at the
foot of the Colorado Mountains. Colonel Burleson collected eighty
men and started on his trail, overtaking him on the Guadalupe,
where a battle was fought resulting in the defeat of the Cordova
party with the loss of about thirty men. Cordova himself escaped,
but this ended his efforts to stir up revolution in Texas. ⁷⁸

Albert Sidney Johnston, Secretary of War, writing to Bowl on
April 10, referred to this action, and said that the recent develop-
ments went to show incontestably that the Cherokees, or a part of
them, the Delawares, Shawnees, Kickapoos, Caddoes, Wacoes,
Bedies, and Kechies, about the time he was with
them had entered into a compact with Cordova to carry on the
war as soon as he should return from Matamoras. The assertion
that Cordova had been driven off when he attempted to agitate a
revolt, he said, was probably to gain time and to conceal the object
of the journey to Matamoras.

The President grants peace to them but is not deceived. They
will be permitted to cultivate undisturbed as long as they manifest
by their forbearance from all aggressive acts and their friendly
conduct the sincerity of their professions or until Congress shall
adopt such measures in reference to them as in their wisdom they
may deem proper. With a clear view of all matters connected
with their feeling and interests It should not surprise the Chero-
kees to learn that such measures are in progress under the orders
of the President as will render abortive any attempt to again dis-
turb the quiet of the frontier nor need it be any cause of alarm,
to those who intend to act in good faith. All intercourse between
the friendly indians & those at war with Texas must cease. The
President directs that you will cause the contents of this commu-
nication to be made known to all the chiefs who were present at
the council. ⁷⁹

Some time in April or early in May Major B. C. Waters was
ordered, to construct a military station on the Great Saline, which
was in territory claimed by the Cherokees. Bowl mobilized his
warriors and ordered Waters to leave, which he did, since he was
not supported by a military force of his own large enough to re-
sist the Indians. This naturally aroused the whites, particularly
of the East. The San Augustine Red Lander called on the citizens
to respond to the call of Major Waters for aid in carrying out the
orders of the Secretary of War. ⁸⁰ The Telegraph and Texas Reg -
ister stated that there were constant complaints of Indian aggres-
sions; that the Cherokees had been a source of trouble since 1836,
and that they could not be tolerated longer in Texas. ⁸¹

The action of Bowl called forth a stern letter from Lamar. He
had learned with surprise, he said, that Bowl had compelled Major
Waters to leave his post on the Great Saline. That officer was
acting under the authority and orders of the government, and any
attempt to interfere with him or to impede the execution of his
duty could be regarded in no other light than as an outrage upon
the sovereignty of Texas. "You assume to be acting under a
Treaty negotiated at your village on the twenty-third day of Feb-
ruary 1836 with commissioners appointed by the Provisional Gov-
ernment of Texas." No doubt there were those who would im-
press him with the belief that by virtue of that treaty the Chero-
kees had a right to maintain within the limits of the Republic an
independent government bearing no responsibility to the whites as
though they were a foreign nation. But the Texans had acquired
their sovereignty by many rightful and glorious achievements, and
would exercise it without division or community with other people.
The Indians could never be permitted to exercise a sovereignty
which would conflict with the rights of the Texans. He charged
that Bowl was at the center of all conspiracies, and concluded with
this ultimatum:

I therefore feel it my duty as the Chief Magistrate of this Re-
public to tell you in plain language of sincerity, that the Cherokees
will never be permitted to establish a permanent and independent
jurisdiction in the limits of this government--that the political
and fee simple claims which they set up to our territory now occu-
pied by them will never be allowed--and that they are permitted
at present to remain where they are only because this government
is looking forward to the time when some peaceable arrangement
can be made for their removal without the necessity of shedding
blood; but that their final removal is contemplated is certain and
that it will be effected is equally so. Whether it will be done by
friendly negotiating, or by the violence of war, must depend on
the Cherokes themselves. ⁸²

Shortly before this, May 14, 1839, Manuel Flores, who had been
active the year before in the Cordova rebellion, with a party of
twenty-five marauders committed some murders between Seguin
and Bexar. They were pursued by several Texans under Lieuten-
ant James 0. Bice, and were overtaken on the San Gabriel fifteen
miles from Austin. In the battle which followed Flores and two
others were killed and the others put to flight. On the body of
Flores were found papers which, convinced Lamar and his cabinet
that the Cherokees were again in treasonable correspondence with
the Mexicans. These documents were sent to the Secretary of War
by Colonel Burleson on May 22, reaching him about the time of
Lamar's letter to Bowl. ⁸³

These papers consisted of letters addressed to Manuel Flores,
Vicente Cordova, and to the friendly tribes of Texas, by the com-
mandant general for the Eastern Interior States, Canalizo, who
had succeeded Filisola. The letter to Flores, February 27, 1839,
stated that it was impossible for the Federal Government to take
any steps for the recovery of Texas on account of the war with
France. It was possible, however, he said, that the Indians and
loyal Mexicans could defend their homes by joining together against
the Americans. They ought not to depend on flying invasions, but
on operations of a more continuous character, causing perpetual
alarm and inquietude to the enemy. To obtain these objects it
was necessary "to burn their habitations, to lay waste their fields,
and to prevent them from assembling in great numbers, by rapid
and well-concerted movements, so as to draw their attention in
every direction, and not offer to them any determinate object at
which to strike."

Another letter was addressed by Canalizo to the chiefs of the
tribes. As it was the principal basis for the claim that the Chero-
kees and other tribes were plotting with the Mexicans for the ex-
termination of the whites, it is given in full:

Don Manuel Flores, and the chiefs of the friendly tribes accom-
panying him, will make known to you my sentiments towards your-
self and my friends, the Indians of your tribe; and also what you
have to expect as regards your remaining in quiet possession of the
land selected by you within the Mexican territory for settlement.
And these individuals are informed in relation to what has to be
done.

Have an understanding with said Flores in order that you may
act in such a manner as to be secured in the peaceable possession
of your lands, and to prevent any adventurer again destroying the
repose of your families, or again treading the soil where repose the
bones of your forefathers, and be careful not to deviate from his
instructions.

Act under the full assurance of our generosity, of which we have
given so many proofs, and that nothing can be expected of the
greedy adventurers for land, who wish to deprive you even of the
sun which warms and vivifies you, and who will not cease to envy
you while the grass grows and the water flows. ⁸⁴

This letter was addressed to Captain Ignacio of the Guapanagues;
Captain Coloxe of the Caddoes; The Chief of the Seminoles; Big
Mush, civil chief of the Cherokees; Captain Benito of the Kicka-
poos; Fama Sargento de los Brazos; Lieutenant-Colonel Bowl of
the Cherokees.

On receipt of these papers Lamar decided to arrange for the
immediate removal of the Cherokees from Texas, and sent the Vice-
President, David G. Burnet, and the Secretary of War, A. S. John-
ston, to negotiate with them. The commissioners were to offer to
buy their produce and pay for their removal to the United States.
At the same time he announced in a letter to the Shawnees the
intention to expel the Cherokees, in a friendly manner if possible,
but by force if they resisted, and warned the Shawnees to have
nothing to do with the Cherokees or the Mexicans. ⁸⁵

The commissioners reached the Cherokee village about the first
of July and entered into negotiations with Bowl and Big Mush.
Bowl acknowledged that they were intruders and had no legal
for even if the people could be brought to take the line of the
"Nueces" for the present, he thought there was reason to ap-
prehend further troubles at no remote period arising out of these
claims to the line of the Rio Grande which they had so long
been accustomed to consider was their frontier.

I told Mr Smith I would of course communicate his views
to Your Lordship by the earliest opportunity, but whilst I was
without the means of forming any opinion upon the willingness
of Her Majesty's Government to press these territorial preten-
sions upon Mexico, for the subject never had been adverted to
in any Communication of Your Lordship to me, I could not but
state my own impression that there was very little reason to sup-
pose that they would ever be admitted by Mexico.

I may take the liberty however, in this place to state my own
opinion to Your Lordship that whilst it would certainly be for
the safety of Mexico to adhere to the line of the Nueces as the
Western frontier of Texas, by reason of the desert nature of
the Country between that river and the Rio Grande, it would
no doubt be a matter of general and considerable convenience
to the foreign trade with Texas, to endeavor to secure from Mex-
ico the cession of the Keys or Islands facing the Coast, as far
down as the Harbour of Brassos. Santiago, at the Mouth of
the Rio Grande. This despatch affords me a convenient occasion
to. mention to Your Lordship that recent communications have
taken place between General Arista Commanding in the North
of Mexico, and by them no doubt made known to this Govern-
ment.

I am disposed to think from what I have learnt of that
Officer's character and opinions, and the general temper of the
Provinces contiguous to Texas, as well as from other Circum-
stances in Your Lordship's knowledge, that it is quite probable
there may be some reports of considerable importance in con-
templation, the further development of which may depend in
a great degree upon the course of the new Governments in Mex-
ico and the United States.

It seems to me forming my opinion partly from information
and partly from reflection that General Arista's schemes pro-
pose the junction of Texas with the Provinces contiguous to
this Country for the purpose of securing from the Central Gov-
ernment some such relaxation as was recently wrung from Santa
Anna at Yucatan, and it may be that failing in that object there
may be some renewed attempt to form what Your Lordship will
remember to have heard of as the "Republic of Rio Grande."
Her Majesty's Government will probably have better informa-
tion upon these points from Mexico than I can furnish from
here, but I make no doubt that some project of the kind, is in
contemplation, though it may be that circumstances will con-
spire to defeat it for the present. It should be mentioned in
connexion with this subject that the trade between Texas and
Mexico has been steadily improving since the Armistice of June
1843, and if nothing should occur to interrupt, it (which is less
likely, since the mended finance of this Country has enabled the
Government to Station a small force on the frontier for the
maintainence of order, and the protection of the traders) I be-
lieve it will soon be of considerable political importance, as
well as Commercial.

Mr Smith observed, to me in the course of conversation a
day or two since, that if Mexico should require guarantees for
the faithful execution of the treaty respecting the abandonment
of any further Annexation projects, he thought it was possible
that the Governments of Her Majesty and The King of the
French might not be averse to offer them. I said I was with-
out any information upon that subject, and could form no opin-
ion upon it. But I venture here to state to Your Lordship my
own belief that the best guarantee for Mexico in that particu-
lar would be in the suitableness of the Scheme itself to the in-
terests of this people, and the certainty that the Country upon
an independent footing would rapidly fill up with a population
not at all disposed to connect themselves in that way with the
United States.

I think that it might be pressed with force, and I am sure
with great truth upon Mexico, that nothing could tend more to
keep alive the feeling of hostile eagerness in the United States
or here, in favour of Annexation, than the knowledge of the ex-
istence of any guarantees against it by the European Govern-
ments. The sounder policy in my humble judgment would be
that all parties should be left free to act according to circum-
proposed war, could be taken by Lamar in the light of the earlier
documents as at least indicating some connection, especially as
they came at a time when Bowl was ordering the military agent
of the government out of his territory and mobilizing his warriors
to prevent the building of a fort.

The whole problem comes back to whether or not the Indians
should have been permitted to establish in Texas a government of
their own, independent of the Texan government. A ratification
of the treaty drawn up on February 23, 1836, under the Provisional
Government would have guaranteed the perpetuation of such a
government. It was inevitable that the whites should encroach
on the Indians, and it was unlikely that a white population would
have tolerated an independent Indian state within their borders.
Lamar, therefore, acted legally and justly, and what is perhaps
more important, logically, in forcing the withdrawal of the Cher-
okee Indians from Texas.

This story ends with the passage on February 1, 1840, of an act
for sectionizing and selling the lands which had been occupied
by the Cherokees. ⁸⁹ The act made no provision for the settlers
who had come into the territory since 1822, and because of this and
the desire of many to locate claims in that region, there was bitter
opposition to the passage of the bill. Houston, who was now a
member of Congress, led the advocates of the bill, while the oppo-
sition was led by David S. Kaufman, Speaker of the House. The
advocates of the measure claimed that the Cherokee lands did not
come under the general land act, as they had been won from the
Indians only in the preceding July, and that they actually belonged
to the government for disposal as it saw fit. The opponents of the
measure claimed that the lands had always belonged to the Re-
public, hence they should come under the terms of the general land
act and be disposed of as other lands of the Republic. The argu-
ment that the sale of the lands would bring much needed revenue
into the treasury overcame the objections of many who held that
the Indians had no legal right to the land or of occupancy, and the
measure became a law.

(To be continued.)

---

FOOTNOTES:

¹H. E. Bolton, Athanase de Méziéres and the Louisiana-Texas Frontier,
1768-1780, pp. 17-122, has an extensive discussion of the indigenous In-
dians of Texas. T. M. Marshall, A History of the Western Boundary of
the Louisiana Purchase, 124-140, is a convenient brief account of the
location and history of the tribes.
²Yoakum, History of Texas, I, 310.
³Yoakum, History of Texas, I, 475.
⁴E. C. Barker, in Texas Historical Association Quarterly, VII, 250;
Brown, History of Texas, I, 275.
⁵Barker, op. cit., 250.
⁶Texas Revolutionary Documents," in Southern Historical Association
Publications, VII, 89, 90.
⁷ Ibid.; VIII, 20.
⁸Texas Historical Association Quarterly, IX, 288.
⁹"Journal of the Permanent Council," in Texas Historical Association
Quarterly, VII, 260-262.
¹⁰Marshall, A History of the Western Boundary of the Louisiana Pur-
chase, 139.
The relations with the Cherokees, their claims to lands in East Texas,
and their final expulsion from Texas, is so different from the relations
with the other Indian tribes that I shall treat it in a separate section,
contenting myself here with a reference to that tribe only when they
come into the natural development of the subject.
¹¹E. C. Barker, "The United States and Mexico, 1835-1837," in The
Mississippi Valley Historical Review, I, 20, 21.
¹²W. D. Wood, "History of Leon County," in Texas Historical Associa-
tion Quarterly, IV. 204.
¹³Brown, History of Texas, II, 129.
¹⁴Secret Journals of the Senate of the Republic of Texas (First Bien-
nial Report of the Texas Library and Historical Commission), 19. Here-
after this is referred to as Secret Journals.
¹⁵Laws of the Republic of Texas, I, 53-54
¹⁶Ibid., 244.
¹⁷Ibid., 74.
¹⁸Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 228.
¹⁹Telegraph and Texas Register, December 23, 1837.
²⁰Crane, Life and Select Literary Remains of Sam Houston, 292.
²¹Secret Journals, 35, 36, 37.
²²Telegraph and Texas Register, August 25, 1841.
²³Secret Journals, 75-79.
²⁴Brown, History of Texas, II, 143.
²⁵Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 245-246; Bancroft, North Mexican
States and Texas, II, 320; Brown, History of Texas, II, 143.
²⁶Copies of these documents found upon Miracle were sent to the Amer-
ican State Department by the Texan Minister, Anson Jones, on December
31, 1838, with a claim that the conditions were made worse on the border
by the failure of the two governments to run the boundary line, They
appear printed in 32 Cong., 2 session, Senate Documents, No. 14, pp. 11-17.
²⁷Lamar Papers, No. 753.
²⁸Lamar Papers, No. 772.
²⁹Rusk to Lamar, August 24, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 797.
³⁰McLeod to Lamar. August 26, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 800.
³¹McLeod to Lamar, October 22 and 25, 1838, Lamar Papers, Nos. 846,
852.
³²Rusk to Lamar, November 17, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 876.
³³Kennedy, Texas, II, 316.
³⁴Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838; Lamar Papers, No.
361.
³⁵Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 15.
³⁶Ibid., II, 30, 31.
³⁷Ibid., II, 74.
³⁸Ibid., II, 84.
³⁹Indian Affairs, 1831-1841; McLeod to Lamar, November 21, 1838.
Lamar Papers, No. 882; 32d Cong., 2d sess., Senate Document, No. 14,
p. 17.
⁴⁰Lamar Papers, Nos. 982, 1016.
⁴¹Lamar to Inhabitants of Robertson's Colony, February 22, 1839, Lamar
Papers, No. 1084.
⁴²Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 261-263; Report of Secretary of War:
November. 1839.
⁴³Report of McLeod to Secretary of War, March 20, 1840; Telegraph
and Texas Register, April 15, 1840; Bancroft, North Mexican States and
Texas, II, 324; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 298; Brown, History of
Texas, II, 175.
⁴⁴Accounts of this campaign can be found in Yoakum, History of Texas,
II, 302-305; Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 325-326;
Brown, History of Texas, II, 178-183. Brown as a young man was present
as a volunteer in the battle of Plum Creek, and writes an interesting ac-
count of the battle.
⁴⁶Winkler, in Ibid., 99. The original of this letter is in Bexar Archives.
It is printed in full in Mr. Winkler's article, as cited.
⁴⁷Record of Translations of Empresario Contracts, 85. General Land
Office of Texas.
⁴⁸Alaman to De la Garza, April 27, 1823, Record of Translations of Em -
presario Contracts, 85, 86; Winkler, as cited, 105, 106.
⁴⁹Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. tit., 108.
⁵⁰Ibid., 110.
⁵¹Ibid., 117-120.
⁵²Ibid., 126.
⁵³Ibid., 123.
⁵⁴P. E. Bean to S. F. Austin, December 30, 1826, in Austin Papers.
Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 133.
⁵⁵Foote, Texas and the Texans, I, 253-256; Winkler, "The Cherokee In-
dians in Texas," op. cit., 142.
⁵⁶Winkler "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 146-150.
⁵⁷Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 110.
⁵⁸Record of Translations of Empresario Contracts, 89. Translation by}
Thomas G. Western. Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit.
154.
⁵⁹Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 155; Record of
Translations of Empresario Contracts, 90.
⁶⁰Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. tit., 156, 157.
⁶¹Ibid.. 163.
⁶²Laws of Coahuila and Texas, 300.
⁶³Journal of the Consultation, 51-52.
⁶⁴MS. Indian Affairs, 1831-1841. Texas State Library.
⁶⁵Secret Journals, 35, 36, 37, 38.
⁶⁶Lamar Papers, No. 352.
⁶⁷Secret Journals, 35.
^{6 8}Secret Journals, 75-79.
⁶⁹Ibid., 100.
⁷⁰Originals in Lamar Papers, Nos. 781, 782, 783, 784, 785, 786
⁷¹Ibid., 792.
⁷²Lamar Papers, Nos. 801, 839.
⁷³Lamar Papers, No. 855.
⁷⁴Hotchkiss to Lamar, December 5, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 905.
⁷⁵Lamar Papers, No. 361; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26,
1838.
⁷⁶Lamar to Martin Lacy, February 14, 1839, Indian Affairs, 1831-1841,
Texas State Library.
⁷⁷Thirty-second Cong., 2nd. sess., Senate Documents, No. 14, p. 20. A. S.
Johnston to Bowl, April 10, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1188.
⁷⁸Yoakum, History of Texas, 11, 261.
⁷⁹A. S. Johnston to Bowl, April 10, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1188.
⁸⁰Quoted in Telegraph and Texas Register, June 19, 1839.
⁸¹Telegraph and Texas Register, June 19, 1839.
⁸²Lamar to Bowl, May 26, 1839, Indian Affairs, 1831-1841, Texas State
Library.
⁸³Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 259.
⁸⁴This correspondence was sent by the Texas State Department to the
Texan minister at Washington, and presented by him to the American
Secretary of State, June 29, 1839. It is published in 32 Congress, 2d
session, Senate Document, No. 14, pp. 29-35.
⁸⁵Lamar to Linnee and other chiefs and headmen of the Shawnees, June
3, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1321.
⁸⁹Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 358.

MINUTES OF THE AYUNTAMIENTO OF SAN FELIPE
DE AUSTIN, 1828-1832
XI

EDITED BY EUGENE C. BARKER

[p. 18] In the Town of San Felipe de Austin on the 6th day
of June 1831. At a regular meeting of the Ayuntamto. of this
Jurisdiction present Francis W. Johnson Prest. Walter C. White
1st Regidor Randall Jones 2d Regidor and Pleasant D. McNeil
3rd Regidor Absent Wm Robinson 4th Regidor and Robt M. Wil-
liamson sindico procurador. The meeting was opened by the
acts of the last meeting being read which were approved.

The following resolutions were then adopted first--that F. W.
Johnson prest. W. C. White first regidor and Citizen Wm. H. Jack
be appointed a committee to draw up and report to the body at the
next regular session., a system for the regulation of Municipal
surveying, to regulate the fees and emoluments which the Munici-
pal surveyors shall receive and collect and also to propose a division
of the jurisdiction into surveying districts.

second--The return of the election held on the Colorado being in-
formal ordered that a new election be held at the house of Wm.
Robertson and Wm. Bartons on the 25th of this month for the
election of Militia officers for that company.

third--That the Alcalde of the jurisdiction and the Comisarios of
the various precincts be recommended to call on or send for the
Chiefs of the various rambling and other tribes of Northern In-
dians and represent to them the great injury and inconvenience
experienced by the inhabitants of the Colony by their destroying
the game and burning or firing the prairies, and request them to
remove with their tribes beyond the limits of the Colony.

fourth--That in conformity with the provisions of [p. 19] the
8th Chapter of the Municipal ordinance and the authority vested
in the Ayunto. by decree No. 180 of the State Legislature. All
storekeepers, retailers or venders of goods wares and merchandise
be required to come forward on or before the first day of July
next, and take out the licence necessary for them to exercise their
professions agreeably to the provisions of said chapter of the ordi-
nance. Lawyers or those persons who exercise the profession of
public agents for individuals before the Alcaldes will also prior to
the sd. 1st July apply for Licence. As all those who fail to comply
with this order will be fined agreeably to the provissions of said
law. Tavern keepers must also under the provissions of said law
take out a licence on or before first July next.

fifth-That the Comisarios of precincts and Sindicos be ordered
to take the census of their respective precincts and report the same
to the Ayuntamto. of this jurisdiction at their next regular session
and that they be also furnished with instructions how to proceed
to take a list of the taxable property of each resident of the juris-
diction, and that blank forms be furnished them.

sixth That it shall be the duty of every ferryman or owner of
a ferry boat to post up in some conspicuous place the rates of
ferriage as established by this body, and every ferryman who exacts
more than the said rates shall be liable to a fine of five dollars
recoverable before the Comisario of any precinct or before the
Alcalde of the jurisdiction.

seventh That the Alcalde be authorized to have some blank
licences printed for the purpose of issuing [p. 20] to those per-
sons who may apply for them agreeably to the provisions of the
-- chapter of the municipal ordinance, for which a sum equivalent
to the printing and paper shall be exacted.

That S. M. Williams agent of the Empresario Austin be re-
quested to furnish the body with a list of the land granted to in-
dividuals in this Colony.

It having come to the knowledge of the Ayuntamto. that C. G.
Cox and J. B. Walls are exercising the profession and practice of
medicine without having previously complied with the ordinance
regulating the practice of medicine within this jurisdiction. Or-
dered, that they be notified to attend at the next regular meeting
of the Ayunto. on the first Monday in July next. And show cause
why they should not be fined agreeably to the provissions of said
ordinance.

The report of the Committee to whom was referred the forma-
tion of a fee bill to regulate the charges of licenced Physicians was
read and approved, and the fee bill ordered to be engrossed in the
book of Ordinances (for which see sd book pages --)

A petition from Gail Borden, jr praying to be appointed Munici-
pal Surveyor was read and the appointment made subject to such
special regulations as may hereafter be adopted.

A petition from Laughlin McLaughlin praying that the title for
Town Lot No. -- be made to John M. Allen, for the reasons set
forth in the petition--prayer granted.

[p. 21] A petition from S. A. Brown was presented read, and
rejected by the unanimous vote of the body.

BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES

Kino's Historical Memoir of Pimería Alta: A Contemporary Ac-
count of the Beginnings of California, Sonora, and Arizona, by
Father Eusebio Francisco Kino, S. J., Pioneer Missionary Ex-
plorer, Cartographer, and Ranchman, 1683-1711. By Herbert
Eugene Bolton, Ph. D. (Cleveland, The Arthur H. Clark Co.,
1919. 2 vols. Pp. 379, 329.)

The history and bibliography of the Spanish Southwest has
been notably enriched by the publication of Professor Bolton's two
volumes on Father Kino. The author and editor has rescued from
oblivion what may be justly characterized as one of the most val-
uable sources in the field of which he is the acknowledged pioneer
and master, and has given to the scholarly world a final and au-
thoritative picture of the great missionary whose name will always
be intimately associated with the northward expansion of New
Spain. "Bolton's 'Kino'" will doubtless become as well known a
phrase as is "Parkman's 'La Salle'," "Fiske's 'Las Casas'" and
other similar works.

The major portion of this work consists of a carefully edited
translation of Father Kino's lost history known as "Favores Celes-
tiales." The original manuscript was discovered by Professor
Bolton during his researches in the Mexican archives. There had
been a few vague references made and much speculation indulged
in by earlier writers as to the existence of a formal history by
Father Kino, but Professor Bolton was the first to locate and defi-
nitely identify such a work. The text of the translated manu-
script comprises a total of 567 pages in the two volumes, and
contains Kino's personal account of his labors in the region of
Pimería Alta, roughly corresponding to present northern Sonora
and southern Arizona.

In the sixty-page introductory essay that precedes the text Pro-
fessor Bolton has made an important contribution to the early
history of North. America. It is not only an interpretation of
Kino's manuscript, but also an excellent biographical sketch of
that interesting personage. Kino's labors and personality may
best be described in the words of Professor Bolton:

He was great not only as a missionary and church builder,
but also as an explorer and ranchman. By him or directly under
his supervision missions were founded on both sides of the Sonora-
Arizona boundary, on the Magdalena, Altar, Sonóita, and Santa
Cruz Rivers. The occupation of California by the Jesuits was
the direct result of Kino's former residence there and of his per-
sistent efforts in its behalf, for it was from Kino that Salvatierra,
founded of the permanent California missions, got his inspiration
for that work. To Kino is due the credit for first traversing
in detail and accurately mapping the whole of Pimería Alta.

. . . During his twenty-four years of residence at the mis-
sion of Dolores, between 1687 and 1711, he made more than fifty
journeys inland, an average of more than two per year. . .
In the course of them he crossed and recrossed repeatedly all of
the two hundred miles of country between the Magdalena and the
Gila and the two hundred and fifty miles between the San Pedro
and the Colorado. When he first opened them nearly all his trails
were either absolutely untrod by civilized man or had been alto-
gether forgotten. . . . One of his routes was over a forbid-
ding, waterless waste, which has since become the graveyard of
scores of travelers who have died of thirst because they lacked
Father Kino's pioneering skill. . . . In the prosecution of
these journeys Kino's energy and hardihood were almost beyond
belief.

In addition to all of this, as Professor Bolton points out, Kino
was very active in his literary work and map-making. The editor
has also given us the personal, subjective side of the great mis-
sionary, and draws a picture that constitutes a new tribute to the
sincerity and value of Spain's civilizing work in America. Kino's
perseverance, piety, resourcefulness, business ability, personal cour-
age, and medieval asceticism bespeak an unusual character worthy
of close study. The sympathetic enthusiasm of the editor adds
charm and interest to the entire work.

The translation is unusually accurate and painstaking. The
volumes abound in helpful footnotes indicative of Professor Bol-
ton's marvelous familiarity with his field. A number of contem-
porary maps are reproduced for the first time, and the editor has
compiled a detailed map of the scene of Father Kino's labors
which locates accurately for the first time all of the principal
frontier settlements of northwestern New Spain. The typograph-
ical excellence of the work is worthy of mention, and the modern
scholarly aids in the way of bibliography and index are unusually
complete. The work may well be considered a masterpiece in the
historical literature relating to the Spanish regime in the Americas,

W. E. Dunn.

NEWS ITEMS

John F. Simpson, prominent business man of Dallas, died in
that city June 26, 1920.

Mr. H. W. McGee of Marshall presented to the Association a
copy of a National Register extra, published at Washington, April
16, 1845, and containing the proclamation of President Anson
Jones, convening the congress of the Republic in extra session.

Rev. Johannes Mgebroff, author of Geschichte der ersten
deutschen evangelisch-Lutherischen Synode in Texas, died at his
home near Brenham, May 22, 1920.

Edgar Rye, author of The Quirt and the Spur: Vanishing Shad -
ows of the Texas Frontier, died at Los Angeles, California, June
7, 1920.

John W. Sansom, author of a pamphlet entitled Battle of
Nueces River, died at his home in San Antonio, June 19, 1920.

Who Was "Democrat"?-—During an investigation by the State
Printing Board, at Austin, September 5, 1882, of certain charges
filed against the State Printer, the following facts were brought
out concerning a pamphlet addressed "To the people of Texas"
and signed "Democrat." It was written by Adjutant-General
W. H. King, and printed by the State Printer during August,
1882. The pamphlet embraces twelve octavo pages, and presents
m interesting, though partisan, resume of the political history of
Fexas from 1870 to 1882.

Authorship of a Pamphlet by Curtius.—The library of the Uni-
versity of Texas recently acquired a pamphlet entitled: "Texas.
A brief account of the origin, progress and present state of the
colonial settlements of Texas.; together with an exposition of the
causes which have induced the existing war with Mexico. Ex-
tracted from a work entitled, 'A geographical, statistical and his-
torical account of Texas,' now nearly ready for the press. Some of
these numbers have appeared in the New Orleans Bee and Bulletin.
Nashville: Printed by S. Nye & Co, 1836." 8vo., 16 pp. The
preface' is signed "Curtius"; this pseudonym also appears at the
end of the text. The text is addressed "to an impartial world,"
and is divided into numbers I-IV.

A comparison of the text of this pamphlet with the text ot the
first twelve pages of an "Address of the Honorable Wm. H. Whar-
ton, delivered in New York, on Tuesday, April 26, 1836," shows
that entire paragraphs in the two publications are substantially
identical in language. Without, further proof one would conclude
that Wm. H. Wharton and "Curtius" are the same. In a letter
from Wm. H. Wharton to Henry Smith, dated Nashville, February
7, 1836, he says, "I have also published and sent on my Curtius
pamphlet."

The "Curtius" pamphlet was written in December, 1835, and
was published at Nashville about February 1, 1836. Several
errors in the pamphlet are corrected in the address, and in one
instance a misprint in the address is cleared up by the pamphlet,

In a note to the statement, quoted from Wharton s letter to
Smith, Dr. Garrison says, "For what was doubtless the matter
of this pamphlet, see" Telegraph and Texas Register for February
27 1836." The number of the Telegraph referred to had trans-
ferred to its columns from those of the New Orleans Bee Number
1. only of the four numbers constituting the complete pamphlet.

What became of the "work entitled 'A geographical, statistical
and historical account of Texas,' now nearly ready for the press,"
cited in the title of the Curtius pamphlet?

E. W. WINKLER.

E. W. WINKLER

How to cite:
Volume 24, Number 1, Southwestern Historical Quarterly Online, http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/publications/journals/shq/online/v024/n1/issue.html
[Accessed Sun Mar 21 11:03:11 CDT 2010]