THE QUARTERLY
OF THE
ASSOCIATION
VOLUME X.
JULY, 1906, TO APRIL, 1907.
v PUBLICATION COMMITTEE.
DAVID F. HOUSTON,
W. J. BATTLK, GEORGE P. GARRISON,
Z. T. FULMORE, MRS. BRIDE NEILL TAYLOR.
EDITOR. GEORGE P. GARRISON.
ASSOCIATE EDITORS. HERBERT EUGENE BOLTON. EUGENE C. BARKER.
AUSTIN, TEXAS:
PUBLISHED BY THE ASSOCIATION.
1907.
K
The Texas State Historical Association,
Organized March 2, 1897.
PRESIDENT, DAVID F. HOUSTON.
VICE-PRESIDENTS:
A. W. TERRELL, BEAUREGARD BRYAN,
R. L. BATTS, MILTON J. BLIEM.
RECORDING SECRETARY AND LIBRARIAN, GEORGE P. GARRISON.
CORRESPONDING SECRETARY AND TREASURER, CHARLES W. RAMSDELL.
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL:
MRS. DORA FOWLER ARTHUR, GEORGE P. GARRISON,
W. J. BATTLE, D. F. HOUSTON,
R. L. BATTS, T. S. MILLER,
HERBERT E. BOLTON, S. H. MOORE,
S. P. BROOKS, MRS. BRIDE NEILL TAYLOR,
BEAUREGARD BRYAN, JOHN C. TOWNES,
Z. T. FULMORE, E. W. WlNKLER,
DUDLEY G. WOOTEN.
CONTENTS.
NUMBER 1; JULY, 1906.
THE LOUISIANA-TEXAS FRONTIER Isaac Joslin Cox .. 1
LAND SPECULATION AS A CAUSE OF THE TEXAS REVOLUTION.
Eugene C. Barker.. 76
DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE ORGANIZATION OP THE MUNI- CIPALITY OF WASHINGTON, TEXAS 96
NOTES AND FRAGMENTS 101
AFFAIRS OF THE ASSOCIATION 103
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES 110
NUMBER 2; OCTOBER, 1906.
THE FOUNDING OF MISSION ROSARIO: A CHAPTER IN THE HIS- TORY OF THE GULF COAST Herbert E. Bolton . . 113
THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT OF TEXAS Ernest William Winkler.. 140
SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF OLIVER JONES, AND OF His WIFE,
REBECCA JONES Adele B. Looscan.. 172
NOTES AND FRAGMENTS 181
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES ; 183
NUMBER 3; JANUARY, 1907.
THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT OF TEias Ernest W illiam Winkler . . 185
A STUDY OF THE ROUTE OF CABEZA DE VAC A James Newton Baskett .. 246
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES 280
NUMBER 4; APRIL, 1907.
A GLIMPSE OF ALBERT SIDNEY JOHNSTON THROUGH THE
SMOKE OF SHILOH J. B. Ulmer . . 285
SPANISH MISSION RECORDS AT SAN ANTONIO Herbert E. Bolton.. 297
A STUDY OF THE ROUTE OF CABEZA DE VACA James Newton Baskett.. 308
MARTIN MCHENRY KENNEY Charles W. Ramsdell . . 341
A LETTER FROM MARY (MRS. MOSES) AUSTIN 345
A LETTER FROM THE ARMY OF THE EARLY REPUBLIC 347
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES 349
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 353
AFFAIRS OF THE ASSOCIATION 354
^
FELLOWS AND LIFE MEMBERS
OF THE
The constitution of the Association provides that "Members who show, by published work, special aptitude for historical investigation, may become Fellows. Thirteen Fellows shall be elected by the Association when first organized, and the body thus created may thereafter elect additional Fellows on the nomination of the Executive- Council. The number of Fellows shall never exceed fifty."
The present list of Fellows is as follows:
BARKER. MR. EUGENE C. KENNEY, CAPT. M. M.
BATTS, JUDGE R. L. KLEBERG, RUDOLPH, JR. BOLTON, PROF. HERBERT EUGENE LEMMON, PROF. LEONARD
CASIS, PROF. LILIA M. LOOSCAN, MRS. ADELE B.
CLARK, PROF. ROBERT CARLTON McCALEB, DR. W. F.
COOPER, PRESIDENT O. H. MILLER, MR. E. T.
COOPWOOD, JUDGE BETHKL PENNYBACKER, MRS. PERCY V.
Cox, DR. I. J. . * RATHER, ETHEL ZIVLEY
ESTILL, PROF. H. L. SHEPARD, JUDGE SETH
FULMORE, JUDGE Z. T. SMITH, DR. W. ROY
GAINES, JUDGE R. R. TOWNES, PROF. JOHN C.
GARRISON, PROF. GEORGE P. WILLIAMS, JUDGE O. W.
GRAY, MR. A. C. WINKLER, MR. ERNEST WILLIAM
HOUSTON, PROF. D. F. WOOTEN, HON. DUDLEY G.
The constitution provides also that "Such benefactors of the Association as shall pay into its treasury at any one time the sum of thirty dollars, or shall present to the Association an equivalent in books, MSS., or other acceptable matter, shall be classed as Life Members."
The Life Members at present are: BRACKENRIDGE, HON. GEO. W. Cox, MRS. NELLIE STEDMAN
OF THE
TEXAS STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION VOL. X. JULY, 1900. No. 1.
The publication committee and the editors disclaim responsibility for views expressed by contributors to THE QUARTEBLY.
THE LOUISIANA-TEXAS FRONTIER.
ISAAC JOSLIN COX.
PART I. THE FRANCO-SPANISH REGIME.
THE SPANISH INTRODUCTION.
To the average American citizen of a century ago Texas was practically unknown, while Louisiana meant little more than a vague geographical expression to designate a shadowy region ren- dered marvelous by three centuries of Latin-American exploration ' and occupancy. He knew only that within the unknown limits of the Southwest conquistador and coreur-de-bois, Franciscan and Jesuit had played uncertain parts in an ineffectual struggle to stem the westward course of the Anglo-Saxon. In this struggle Spaniard and Frenchman had fought each other for the sake of colonial empires that they barely grasped before they were obliged to com- bine against the Anglo-American invader, who threatened to dis- possess both of their uncertain tenure. Under these circum- stances, when Louisiana was ceded to the United States the ques- tion of metes and bounds for the new acquisition was a puzzling one upon which past events could throw but little light, and that greatly distorted.
Louisiana, under French domination, had been an intrusive colony effectually separating two portions of the Spanish empire in North America, and because of its important strategic position it
2 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
was destined to contribute materially to the ultimate overthrow of this empire. The fact that the final blow was delayed until a new nation could administer it was due not to any lack of strength in the situation of the colony, but to the peculiar social and political ties that under Le Grand Monarque and his immediate successor bound France to Spain. For this reason certain phases of Louis- iana's territorial history under the Bourbon kings of France and Spain are of importance,, even if resulting in no definite limits for the province, since they indicate in a general way what the ultimate determination of those limits must be.
From their position at the mouth of the Mississippi the intrusive French faced a double competition in their attempt to control the surrounding Indians. Within less than a century the anvil of Spanish conservatism, ineffectual but dogged, and the hammer of English expansion crushed French control of the Mississippi, and that great river became the unavailing barrier between the Power of the Past and the Power of the Future. When the latter changed its national designation, but not its stock characteristics, European diplomacy offered the new nation an opportunity to make the vast interior of the continent a political as well as a geographical unit. Then the thin line of fortifications and settlements that imper- fectly marked the western limit of France's colonial empire again sprang into international importance. For this reason a compre- hensive view of the early history of the Louisiana-Texas frontier is necessary to a proper appreciation of the events following 1803.
By the middle of the sixteenth century Cabeza de Vaca had per- formed his wonderful journey across the continent; while De Soto and Moscoso in the east and Coronado in the west, unconsciously carrying their explorations nearly to the same point, had pen- etrated far into the interior and formed the basis for future claims to the region away from the coast.1 By the end of the century Spanish power was strongly established in New Mexico, but to the east it was still far south of the Rio Grande Valley. Spanish writers believed, however, even at this period, that by means of inter-tribal communication Spanish influence penetrated from New
'Bandelier, The Journey of Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca; Bourne, Nar- ratives of the Career of Hernando de Soto; both in the Trail Maker's Scries, 1904-1905.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 3
Mexico, Florida, and Coahuila to the Mississippi region.1 This necessarily slight influence, if it existed, may have been somewhat strengthened by the explorations of Espejo, Sosa, (Mate, and Mar- tin and Castillo, who before the middle of the seventeenth century crossed the Eio Grande and penetrated as far as the Pecos or pos- sibly to the Tejas Indians.2
This gradual extension of communication from the westward toward the east might have been met by a counter-current had the Spanish government acted favorably upon a report made in 1630 by Friar Alonso Benavides, the custodian of the missions of New Mexico. In the course of his missionary journeys in the vicinity of Santa Fe, the worthy father heard of the Indians of Quivira and of the Aijaos, located some one hundred and fifty leagues to the eastward. He proposed3 the conversion of these Indians and the opening of communication with them, and ulti- mately with New Mexico, from the Gulf coast in the vicinity of Espiritu Santo Bay. Although his proposal naively disregards certain important geographical factors revealed by later explora- tion, had it been acted upon it might have led to an effective oc- cupation of the Gulf coast at some point west of Florida. For nearly half a century, however, the report remained undisturbed in the Spanish archives, until the proposals of La Salle and of Penalosa suggested the danger of French encroachment from this same direction.
Later Spanish writers were wont to exaggerate the Spanish in- fluence during the period before the French came into the Missis- sippi Valley. They even claimed that the province of Texas then extended from the San Antonio to the Mississippi, notwithstand- ing the fact that within this space there had been no Spanish set- tlement, and at most only an occasional visit by some explorer or
lHistoria XLI1I, Opusculo VI, p. 6, Archive General, City of Mexico.
2Garrison, Texas, 18, 19; Clark, in THE QUARTERLY, V 172.
3Benavides MS8-, in the N. Y. Public Library, Lenox Branch. A sum- mary appears in the royal cfidula of December 10, 1678, Historic XLJII, Opusulo VII. Friar Melchor Talamantes, who compiled the documents for the Spanish authorities during the border controversy with the United States, believed that the Aijaos were the later "Texas" Indiana, that the country of Quivira bordered on the Red, Arkansas, and Missouri, and that Espiritu Santo Bay was that later known as Matagorda. His testimony is too partisan to be trustworthy (see Historia XLIII, Opusculo VII). The best interpretation of modern scholarship is in favor of the identity of Espiritu Santo with Mobile Bay.
4 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
enthusiastic missionary. The only evidences of Spanish proximity, to say nothing of possession, according to the testimony of later French and Spanish writers, was the presence among the Indians of certain articles of Spanish commerce, obtained through inter- tribal communication, and a knowledge of a few simple church rites, doubtless conveyed in the same way or by very infrequent visits from representative friars laboring among distant tribes. For all practical purposes the Mississippi Valley, in the days of Benavides, was still an open field for European colonization. The only result of another half century of exploration and missionary effort beyond the Pecos, seconded by an appeal over the head of an indifferent viceroy to the Council of the Indies, was a royal or- der, issued in 1685 to Friar Alonzo Posadas, to make an exhaustive report upon explorations east of the Rio Grande.1 In this very year, however, the Spanish policy of documents was threatened by a French policy of deeds, for La Salle's abortive colony on the «oast of Texas opened a new phase of the Louisiana question.
I. THE GENESIS OF THE TEXAS FRONTIER.
Although LaSalle's landing upon the coast of Texas, in 1685, was wholly unintentional, he at the time was engaged in a project which was the result of a policy definitely pursued by the French government since the rediscovery of the Mississippi by Hennepin. An important motive in this policy was the desire to open up a way to Mexico for the purpose of carrying on an illicit trade in time of peace, or of seizing the rich silver mines of the outlying provinces in time of war. This desire was hinted at in the patent issued to La Salle in 1678,2 was the burden of the proposals of the adventurer Penalosa in 1682 and 1684,3 and was even an im- portant motive of the projects of LaSalle.4 In pursuit of this motive LaSalle proposed to utilize the mouth of the Mississippi, discovered by him in 1682, as a base of operations against New Biscay; while Penalosa wished to direct an expedition against the
Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, I 387.
"French, Historical Collections of Louisiana, New Series, II 2, 3; Cox, The Journeys of La Salle, II 24, in the Trail Maker's Series.
8Margry, Decouvertes et etablissements des Frangais, etc., HI 44-48; 56-60.
4Margry, II 357 ; Cox, The Journeys of La Salle, I 171 et seq.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 5
same province from the mouth of the Eio Grande1 or of the Panuco. Additional important motives were the desire for a commercial colony at the mouth of the Mississippi and the conversion of the natives2, but the attraction of the Mexican mines long remained to fire the imaginations of French explorers.3
The attempts of Penalosa and the grant to LaSalle roused the Spanish Council of the Indies to make an inquiry concerning the possibility of an invasion from the Gulf of Mexico.4 When the certainty .of LaSalle's attempt became apparent, the viceroy of New Spain authorized no less than six expeditions by land and sea, between 1686 and 1689, to find and break up his infant colony,5 but these discovered only the wreck of one of LaSalle's ships to reward their search. Finally in April, 1689, another land expedi- iion, under Alonso de Leon, known in Texas history as the first entrada, succeeded in reaching the site of LaSalle's feeble settle- ment some two months after the destruction of its surviving mem- bers by the Indians.6 The expedition of the following year burned this fort and removed all other vestiges of the temporary sojourn of the French upon the Lavaca Eiver.
That LaSalle's settlement upon the coast of Texas was wholly unintentional is shown by the fact that he continued long after his arrival to regard the Bay of St. Louis as one of the mouths of the Mississippi; and that when he learned his mistake he made three desperate but unavailing attempts to find "the fatal river."7 The strategic point both for commerce and for warfare, accord- ing to his various memoirs, was the mouth of the Mississippi, and Matagorda Bay (his Bay of St. Louis) was too far away to give him the desired control of this point. His various expeditions into the interior of Texas, extending as far as the country of the
*That this proposal is largely devoid of geographical significance is shown by the fact that he confounded the Rio Grande with the Missis- sippi. Margry, Decouvertes, III 56-60.
2Margry, III 17-28.
'It appears in the proposal of Tonty in 1694 (Margry, IV 45) to con- tinue the enterprise of La Salle, and in that of Louvigny in 1697 (Mar- gry, IV 9-18), who proposes a plan, almost identical with that of Pena- losa, to utilize the Panuco or the Madelaine (his name for the Bravo).
'Historia XLIII, Opusculo VII, Par. I.
*Cavo, Tres Siglos de Meanco, II 65-72.
*Carta of Damian Manzanet (Massanet). Translated by Professor Lflia M. Casis, in THE QUARTERLY, II 281 et seq.
TCf. Joutel, in French, Hist. Coll. La., Pt. I (1846)- 85-193: Cox, Jour- neys of La Salle, II 57-132.
6 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Cenis Indians, revealed to him many traces of communication be- tween the natives and the neighboring Spaniards of New Mexico, and also evidences of hostility on the part of the Indians toward these same Spaniards, due, as later writers explained, to the recent rising of the New Mexican Indians.1 LaSalle, however, was un- able to take advantage of this hostility to further the ends of France; and his explorations were equally futile, since they de- pended for a base of operations upon a settlement that was unable even to maintain itself while its leader sought to transfer it to the Mississippi. Had the colony, despite the mistake in its location, succeeded in establishing itself upon the coast of Texas, it would still have been more difficult to maintain it there than at the mouth of the Mississippi, owing to its separation from Canada by an addi- tional hundred leagues of fairly dangerous seacoast. It must in- evitably have remained a thing apart, constantly menaced by savage and Spanish foes. In view of this fact and of its early ex- tinction it affords, therefore, only a slender basis for French and American claims to Texas.
The entradas of 1689 and 1690 established Spanish missions in northeast Texas among the Indians of that name, while that of 1691-92 penetrated, under Don Domingo Teran, to the Elver of the Cadodachos (Red River), of which it made a perfunctory exam- ination.2 This last expedition, however, was a failure so far as its main purpose, — the permanent establishment of the Spanish in Texas, — was concerned; and in 1693 the missions among the Texas Indians were abandoned, so that the entire province reverted to the undisturbed possession of its savage inhabitants.
For a time the exigencies of European war prevented Louis XIV from continuing the exploration and settlement of the Missis- sippi Valley. When, in 1697, the return of peace permitted him to turn his attention again to these projects, there was an addi- tional motive for haste in the prospect that the English would soon become the bitter rivals of the French for the possession of the
lHistoria XLIII, Opusculo VI, Pars. 15, 16.
*Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII 95. This is volume XXVII, Sec- ci6n de Historia, Archive General, Mexico. Volumes XXVII and XXVIII of this series relate almost wholly to Texas. The writer has examined copies of these volumes in the Archive General of the City of Mexico; in the library of Mr. E. E. Ayers, of Chicago; and in the Lenox Library. His references are to the last mentioned copy.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 7
Mississippi Valley.1 The prospect of this vigorous opposition in the east determined that the location of the new French settlement should be to the eastward of the Mississippi. The Sieur d'Iberville, the leader of the new expedition, proposed Pensacola Bay as the most likely place for his colony, although he decided also to explore the Bay of St. Louis to learn its feasibility for a settlement.2 When, however, early in 1699 he reached the vicinity of Pensacola, he found that the Spaniards had preceded him some four months and had already erected a small fort there.3 As Iberville was under strict orders not to molest the Spaniards, he continued his explora- tions farther to the westward, sent his brother Bienville to explore the Mississippi as far as the Natchez, and left a garrison of eighty men in a fort at Old Biloxi, not far from Mobile Bay.
On his return to France Iberville submitted to the Minister of the Marine a plan of exploration in which he proposed to send his brother Bienville up the Mississippi and the Eed rivers as far as the country of the Cadodachos. From these villages expeditions should explore each of the forks of the Red River, to determine how far each was navigable. Upon their return the expedition should proceed overland to the country of the Cenis (Texas) and thence to the habitation erected by LaSalle. Meanwhile, he him- self should explore the coast as far as the Panuco and then return to the above rendezvous on St. Louis Bay. If necessary, Iberville would then pass to the country of the Cadodachos and return by river to Biloxi.4
Had the leader been able to carry out this far-reaching plan of exploration, it is probable that the French would have made good their claim westward as far as St. Louis Bay, or even to the Rio Grande. But when in the spring of 1700 Bienville and Saint Denis ascended the Red to the Natchitoches, they found it im- possible to penetrate higher up by water. The Indians, too, were unwilling to attempt the journey overland. Consequently they were forced to descend by the same route without farther explora- tion.5
^argry, IV 19-43; 58-59; Espinosa, Chronica Apostdlica y Serdphica, I 413
2IUd., IV 54, 55. *IMd., IV 429. 4IUd., IV 328-329. ., IV 409, 432ff.
;g Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Aside from an uncertain trading expedition by Saint Denis in 1705,1 which may have extended as far west as the Rio Grande, .the French for a time made no attempt to operate beyond the Valley of the Red River. But from this stream they evidently icamed on an extensive trade with the Cenis and the Natchitoches Indians. By the year 1700, then, the French sphere of influence, if we may use the term, extended up the Red River as far as modern Natchitoches, while that of the Spaniards barely reached the Rio Grande at the Presidio of San Juan Bautista.
The grant by Louis XIV to Antoine Crozat, in 1712, marks a Tilde attempt to give Louisiana some sort of delimitation. By its terms the colony extended from the country of the Illinois (with trading privileges on the Missouri) to the Gulf, and from the -Carolinas to New Mexico.2 While this document should be given no more weight than is accorded to the "sea to sea" charters of the early English colonies, and while it was founded upon no more accurate geographical knowledge than they, yet as the first at- tempt to define Louisiana it has had considerable importance in .succeeding diplomatic history. Apparently it was as definite as the French government wished to make it.3 The grant was also of especial importance in that it ushered in a new era for the French colony — an era in which commercialism prevailed to the ^detriment of political and territorial interest.
In pursuance of this policy the new governor of Louisiana, M. <Le la Mothe de Cadillac, in 1713, sent a vessel to Vera Cruz to open up a commerce, with that port, but in this he was unsuccess- ful.4 The next year, however, Cadillac made a second attempt that •was destined to have important effects upon the Frinch territorial •claims to the west. In this he engaged M. Louis de Saint Denis, & French captain of Canadian extraction who had long been em-
lMemorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII 159-161. Another account relates that Saint Denis visited the Spanish presidio on the Rio Grande in 1708. «ee Historia XL] II, Doc. 67, Par. 14.
-Historia XLIII, Opuscule I, Par. 6.
"Two years later a French writer, basing his opinion upon La Salle's -settlement, suggested as the western boundary of Louisiana, the Guada- lupe, which he describes as the Madeline, a sinall river falling into the "bay called by the Spaniards St. Bernard, and St. Louis by the French and which consequently is neither the Panuco nor the Del Norte. There is no evidence that this proposition received any official consideration. Cf. Mar- -gry, VI 185.
*Margry, V 494.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 9
ployed in the service of the colony, to open up an overland trade with Mexico.
To accomplish his task Saint Denis passed in September, 1713, up the Red River as far as the Natchitoches and there built two houses, one for his goods and one for the guard to watch them. For several months Saint Denis curried on a vigorous trade in live stock with the Cenis and other Indian tribes. We learn from a letter addressed in 1711 to the governor of Louisiana, that he had expected to find among these Indians a certain Spanish friar, Father Hidalgo, whom he was to assist in establishing a mission — a project that seemed to promise the opportunity to open up the desired trade. In this, however, he was disappointed, and after a return to Xatchez for more .goods, he pushed on through Texas with a few French and Indian companions, and early in 1715 reached the Rio Grande at the Presidio of San Juan Bautista.
From this point, after a few weeks' delay, he was taken to the City of Mexico, where his coming, though expected, caused great official activity. His presence in the country and his plans for internal trade revealed to the astonished Mexican officials the ease with which the French traders could enter their outlying provinces and endanger their hold upon the country beyond the Rio Grande, if not on the hither side of the river. Under the circumstances the aroused officials speedily planned the reoccupation of Texas. For personal reasons, and doubtless to help on the general scheme for the introduction of trade, Saint Denis readily agreed to enter the Spanish service and to guide the proposed expedition to the coun- try of the Texas Indians, where his influence would assure the Spaniards a welcome reception.1 While accepting Spanish service and urging upon his new employers the advantages of the Missis- sippi as the eastward boundary of their possessions, he told them that the French claimed to Rio Grande, as a result of La Salle's luckless voyage. At the same time, although the above action rendered his recommendation useless, he wrote the governor of Louisiana, on September 7, apprising him of the proposed expedition to Texas and advising that the king of France should
*The best account of the Saint Denis Expedition is by Clark in THE QUARTERLY, VI 1-26. The documentary sources for this article are found in Margry V and VI, and in Hemorias de Nueva Espana XXVII; Cf. also Le Page du Pratz. Histoire de la, Louisiane, I 10-24.
10 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
demand the Eio Grande as the western boundary of Louisiana. The governor should also make an establishment on the Madelaine (Guadalupe) for the purpose of controlling the mines in the in- terior of Mexico.1
The result of the entrada of 1716, under the double leadership of Captain Domingo Ramon and Saint Denis was the reoccupation of the eastern frontier of Texas by the Spaniards. By means of mission station and presidial guard, aided by native converts, they hoped to impede future French encroachments. During 1716 and 1717 six missions were established in the country to the eastward of the Trinity Eiver, the last of which, among the Adaes Indians, was only eight leagues from Natchitoches, a fort erected by the French in 1716.2 The first step in the Spanish reoccupation of Texas was thus accomplished. Frontier outposts — religious in character it is true, but effective if well supported — were placed so as to cut off French aggression by the land route through the Texas In- dians, and orders were given to prevent these missions themselves from forming the channel of French contraband trade.3
These remote missions, far from the base of supplies, and gar- risoned by few soldiers, were insufficient to hold the province com- pletely, even if the missionaries were equally zealous in national and religious propaganda. Consequently the recommendation was made to advance missions to the San Antonio River, as a sort of half-way point, and to occupy the bay of Espiritu Santo (Mata- gorda) in order to open a communication by sea from Vera Cruz. This would prevent its use for the purpose of carrying on contra- band trade, and forestall the French claim to the Rio Grande.4
In accordance with the first of these suggestions the mission of San Antonio de Valero was founded near the site of mod- ern San Antonio, in 1718, to keep open communication between the Rio Grande and the eastern missions. The suggestion with re- gard to the bay of Espiritu Santo was not followed out till 1722.
1THE QUARTERLY, VI 19, note; Margry, VI 198-213; Bancroft, North Mexican States and, Texas, I 610, 613. It will be observed that the Mex- ican mines still appeal to the French adventurers.
2Bonilla, Breve Compendia, in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII 9; Historia XLIII, Opusculo III, Par. II.
"Dictamen Fiscal, November 30, 1716, in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXII 226-235.
'Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII 226-235; Margry, V 212, 213.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. H
With these measures Spain may be said to have acquired a more certain hold upon Texas, and to have extended her frontier to the Adaes mission, a few leagues west of the Eed River.
The years following 1716 served to limit more definitely the Spanish and French frontiers. In 1717 Antoine Crozat gave up his commercial privileges in Louisiana and was succeeded by the Western Company. The change was beneficial in introducing more settlers among the French. Among those who obtained concessions was Bernard de la Harpe, whose land was located among the Cado- dachos, on the Eed River beyond the post of Natchitoches, where in 1717 the Spanish friars had made an unsuccessful attempt to found a mission.1 In the latter part of 1718 La Harpe started out to take possession of his grant. Having established a post about a hundred leagues above Natchitoches in the country of the Nassonites, and mindful of the ever present commercial motive of his immediate employers — the Western Company — he attempted to open up a clandestine trade with Father Margil, a Franciscan friar connected with the Texas missions, by promising him a liberal commission on all sales made through his instrumentality.2
Instead of indignantly rejecting this underhand method of ad- vancing the spiritual interests of his missions, the priest promised to aid him by such secret means as were possible for one of his profession.3 Meanwhile La Harpe reported his arrival to Don Martin de Alarcon, the commander of the Spanish troops in Texas, and thus provoked with that officer a warm correspondence which led each to a declaration of national limits.4 Alarcon in his letter of May 20, 1719, expressed his surprise at the presence of French- men in the country of the Nassonites, which they must know be- longed to the Spanish king as an appurtenance of New Mexico. He advised him to retire from his position, before he should fore 3 him to do so. In reply La Harpe not only claimed that the Nas- sonite post belonged to the French, because situated upon one of the tributaries of the Mississippi, but also asserted that the whole of the province of Texas formed part of Louisiana, by virtue of the
^Historia XLIII, Opusculo III, Par. 17.
"French, Historical Collections of Louisiana, Part III, 70: Margrv, VI 268.
"French, III 71; Margrv, VI 273-276.
12 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
settlement made by LaSalle in 1685, and subsequent acts of posses- sion, which, however, he did not specify. He closed his letter with a challenge for Alarcon to come and dispossess him, but the latter did not see fit to make the attempt.
During the remainder of the year La Harpe occupied himself in explorations to the west and northwest of his position, with the design of opening up a route to New Mexico, but reached no far- ther than a branch of the Arkansas in latitude 37° 45', where he erected a cross upon which were carved the royal arms.1
This year, 1719, is celebrated in the history of the Louisiana frontier because of the precipitate retreat of the Spanish mission- aries and presidial troops from eastern Texas to the San Antonio Biver. War had broken out in Europe between France and Spain, and news of this event first reached the French colonial author- ities. To Blondel, the French commandant at Natchitoches, the oc- casion seemed to aiford a chance to extend the opportune protection of his garrison over the neighboring Spanish missions grouped about Adaes. Such a move might be necessary in view of the fact that most of the surrounding Indians were of French predilection. Unfortunately the missionaries and the small pres- idial guard did not understand his motive for advancing, and by a precipitate retreat to the San Antonio they threatened to destroy the future of French contraband trade on the Texas border. Kather than lose so important a trading center as Adaes — a post estab- lished with great expenditure of French and Spanish effort — La Harpe, when his attention was called to the matter, forced Blondel to write a most humble letter supplicating the friars to return and re-establish their missions.2
In obedience to orders from France, Bienville, in August, 1720, despatched a certain M. Beranger to reconnoitre St. Bernard's Bay to determine its feasibility for a settlement. Three months later Beranger returned, leaving a guard of five men, four of whom afterwards perished. As a result of his report, Bienville made La Harpe the commander of a formal expedition to plant a colony near the scene of LaSalle's disastrous settlement. He bore with him the survivor of Beranger's guards and was expressly ordered
French, Hist. Coll. La., Ill 73., 74; Margry, VI 297.
2/6id., Ill 72; Garrison, Texas, 76, 77; Margry, VI, 300, 305, 306.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. U
to use force to dispossess the Spaniards should he find them in the vicinity. As these orders were in conformity with royal instruc- tions of November 16, 1718, they may be regarded as the definite- assumption, by the French government, of a claim based upon LaSalle's unfortunate mistake. La Harpe immediately discovered that the neighboring Indians were utterly opposed to his settle- ment, and in view of his slender resources retreated to Mobile- This ended the last formal attempt of the French to take posses- sion of the Texas coasts.1
Following the events of 1719, the speedy restoration of peace pro- duced the counter movement of the Spaniards which resulted in a permanent occupation of eastern Texas by their presidials and missionaries. A patriotic resident of the province of Coahuila, the Marques de San Miguel de Aguayo, was the leader of this fifth and last of the entradas which marked the establishment of the Spaniards in Texas. Some years before, the Marques had be- sought the privilege of subduing and settling the province of Texas at his expense, but his plan had not then been judged expedient.. Now the Mexican authorities, spurred on by Espinosa, president of the east Texas missions, gladly accepted the renewal of Aguayofe offer, which insured the peaceful reoccupation of the positions abandoned in 1719.2
Aguayo's imposing force of more than 500 men would have- been sufficient to deter French opposition, had the latter cherished any such thought. Far from this, however, Saint Denis met the* Spaniards at the Neches, reported the retirement of the French to Xatchitoches, and, by means of his influence among the Indians, smoothed the way for the re-establishment of the Spaniards at Adaes. The Spanish diario of the journey, however, is filled with suspicious references to the supposed desire of the French to pen-- etrate to New Mexico of to the interior of Texas — a desire that would be precluded by Spanish possession of the frontier beyond the Sabine.
The double-dealing Saint Denis passed to Mobile to report to
Tench, Hist. Coll. La., Ill 77, 95, 98; Margry, V 582; VI 347-354; Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, I 616.
2The Diario of Aguayo's. entrada is found in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII, 1-62. For a brief account, see Garrison, Texas, 77-80.. For Espinosa's representation to the viceroy, cf. Historia XLIII, Optis-- culo III, Par. 25.
14 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Bienville the arrival of the Spaniards. Despite Bienville's protest, the latter proceeded to reoccupy the various missions and posts formerly belonging to them, although the French commandant at Natchitoches wished them to await the return of Saint Denis. Some little exchange of courtesies for the purpose of spying out each other's strength resulted in the decision of each, in accordance with definite instructions from the home governments, to commit no overt act of hostility, but to restore the status quo of 1719. Thus the French did not hinder Aguayo in rebuilding the pres- idio of Adaes within seven leagues of Natchitoches, and at the same time they remained equally undisturbed within their post. It is true that Bienville, then acting as governor of Louisiana, op- posed this movement, but Saint Denis on the frontier and the Western Company at home were equally concerned to re-establish the Spaniards in their vicinity, so the protests of the governor counted for naught.
The reoccupation of Adaes in 1721, and the resulting establish- ment during the following year of a post on Espiritu Santo Bay, emphasized the permanency which the authorities of New Spain wished to impart to the organization of Texas. The attempt to preserve as an aboriginal wilderness the country be- tween themselves and the nearest European colonists had failed; so, then, there was no recourse but to carve out a buffer province from the territory of the Indians. The danger that threatened from LaSalle became a serious menace in the person of Saint Denis with his double-dealing policy, and, therefore, withia less than a decade the outposts of Spanish civilization must advance from the Kio Grande to Adaes, in order to confront on the re- motest confines of the viceroyalty the invasion that seemed to en- danger the mines far within the interior. Neither France nor Spain effectively occupied the country to which each laid claim; but the reoccupation of Adaes by the Spaniards and the unmo- lested continuance of the French at Natchitoches — both as the re- sult of direct orders from the home governments — constituted a sort of informal acknowledgment that these posts were for the future to mark the respective limits of Texas and of Louisiana.
Meanwhile, farther within the interior, the French and Span- jards were marking out lines of colonial expansion which though
The Louisiana^Texas Frontier. 15
ineffectual to control this portion of the continent, served to define more clearly their tentative frontier limits nearer the coast. At the mouth of the Arkansas, at a point where Tonty had in 1686 established a small post, the Western Company maintained a storehouse which served as a way station for voyageurs passing up and down the river.1 During the winter and spring of 1722, La Harpe pushed his explorations, by water and by land, some hundred leagues up this river, till the mutinous temper of his party warned him to avoid the fate of LaSalle.2 In 1719, M. Du Tissenet passed from the country of the Illinois up the Missouri and Osage, to visit the Indians bearing the latter name and the Pawnees and the Padoucas (Comanches). Among these, on September 27, he took possession of the country and erected a column with the royal arms.3 Somewhat later De Bourgemont established Fort Orleans on the Missouri, near the mouth of the Grand River, to serve as a center for the Indian fur trade and as an entrepot for trade with New Mexico, or as defense to Illinois against possible Spanish hos- tilities. From this point, in 1724, he made an important journey to the country of the Padoucas and neighboring nations.4
The Spaniards in New Mexico were not unmindful of the fact that their province was the ultimate goal of these explorations. Influenced by their vigorous representations, the viceroy ordered Don Antonio Valverde Cossio, then governor of that province, to send an expedition to the Pawnees, where he had heard that there were French establishments, and also to examine the "Quartelejo" with a view to locate a military post there. This latter place was probably somewhere in northwestern Kansas, and had been visited by Valverde on an expedition of the preceding year against some predatory savages. It was while on this expedition that the governor had heard of the nearby presence of the French.5
Trench, Hist. Coll. La., Ill 126; V 34.
*Ibid., Ill 99, 100; V 35, 36; Margry, VI 378.
'French, Hist. Coll. La., New Series, 151, 152; Margry, VI 313-315.
4Thwaite's Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, I 49, note; Margry, VI 388 et seq., 398-452; Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane, IV 141-241.
5Bandelier, A. F., The Expedition of Pedro de Villazur in Papers of the ArchcBlogical Institute of America, V 179-206. See also French, Hist. Coll. La., Ill 87; Historia XLIII, Opusculo I, Par. 55, where the number of survivors is mentioned as thirteen. Some of the documents quoted by Bandelier are still in the New Mexico Archives, in the Library of Con- gress.
16 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
The ill-fated expedition of fifty New Mexican troops with In- dian auxiliaries left Santa Fe June 14, 1720, under the com- mand of Lieutenant-Governor Don Pedro de Villazur. The task before the latter was to make a reconnaissance of the country and to attempt by diplomatic means to win the Pawnees from the French. On August 15th the expedition arrived near the Platte, in the vicinity of their villages, and early the following morning all of the Spaniards except six or seven were massacred by a party of Pawnees, probably under French direction. Among the slain was Captain Juan de Archibeque, doubtless one of the survivors of LaSalle's expedition. After a comparatively successful career in New Mexico he was to expiate his share in the murder of LaSalle by falling at the hands of savages instigated by his former fellow- countrymen.
The destruction of this force so seriously crippled Spanish strength in New Mexico that the attempt to fortify so distant a post as the "Quartelejo" was abandoned, as were all similar ex- peditions. On the other hand, the defeat of Villazur proved for the French the first step in opening the trail to Santa Fe. In 1739 came the visit to New Mexico of a group of French Canadian mer- chants under the Mallet Brothers,1 who entered from the direc- tion of the Platte and returned by way of the Arkansas. As a result of their report Bienville proposed to open up commerce with New Mexico by way of the Arkansas and its tributaries, and, in 1741, commissioned Fabry de la Bruyere, in company with four of the previous party, to undertake the task. In this, however, they were unsuccessful. If we may judge from other sources, there was a continuous infiltration of French adventurers during the succeeding years of the century.2
II. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF SPANISH TEXAS.
The imposing entrada of Aguayo determined that the occupa- tion of Texas by the Spaniards should include the site of LaSalle's unfortunate settlement and likewise Adaes, the farthermost point
'Margry, VI 455-464, 472-492; Bandelier, loc. cit., 205.
2 Annals of Congress, 9 Cong., 2 Sess., 1097; New Mexico Archives, 1804- 1806, passim; Stoddard, Sketches of Louisiana, 147; Cox, "Early Explora- tion of Louisiana," 116-119, in University of Cincinnati Studies Series II, Vol. II. No. 1.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 17
occupied by the Ramon-Saint Denis expedition. To this situation, which involved not merely overthrowing the former French preten- sions to the country as far as the Kio Grande and New Mexico, but even presenting a Spanish outpost under the very eyes of the garrison at Natchitoches, the Frer.ch court tacitly consented by issuing orders to maintain the status quo. This in a measure may be regarded as a negative acceptance of the territorial claims of each, so far as supported by actual settlement.1 The Spanish of- ficers from the force of Aguayo who had visited the French gar- rison at Natchitoches had been received with greatest courtesy.2 Although then without definite instructions, the French local com- mander had promised to observe the peace, while the Spaniards claimed that the reoccupation of Adaes would not involve a breach of national faith. Thus the frontier situation rested for a decade and a half.
The predominant motive for acquiescence in this Spanish occu- pation was a commercial one. This motive was frankly avowed in a memoir upon Louisiana prepared by La Harpe, probably about 1723. 3 The greatest value of the provinces, in his estimation, was the opportunity they offered for clandestine trade with the neigh- boring Spanish provinces of "Lastekas," New Mexico, and Nuevo Leon. It is worthy of note that this frontier officer, who four years previously had made so vigorous a defense of the uncertain claim of his nation to the Rio Grande and to New Mexico, now recog- nized the new province of Spanish Texas as reaching to the vicinity of the Red River, near the point established by himself.
Unfortunately, we have no Spanish documents that afford with equal clearness contemporary reasons for the acquiescence in French occupation of Louisiana. From writers of a later period4 we may summarize the following statements. After the War of the Spanish Succession Spain abandoned its previous hostile attitude toward France. This was especially apparent in the policy of Philip V, who adopted a course little in keeping with national honor. It was this
lHistoria XLIII, Opusculo I, Par. 65.
2Morfi, Memorias para la Historia de Tejas, Lib. VI 69. MS., Lenox Library.
"French, Hist. Coll. La., Ill 112-115.
*Historia XLIII, Opusculo I, par. 63-67 ; Documentos para la Historia de Mexico, First Series, Vol. XII, Correspondencia entre la Legation Ex- traordinaria de Mexico, etc., p. vi.
18 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
epirit which was responsible for French pretensions, such as those displayed in the grant to Crozat, and for encroachments in which France was always the aggressor. But even during this period there was a limit to Spanish tolerance, and it is claimed that the Grand Monarch himself assured the Spanish king that if France continued to hold any points on the Gulf of Mexico, it would not be as possessor of the soil, but for the purpose of aiding the Span- iards to retard the advance of the English.1 The presence of the French in Louisiana, then, was due simply to Spanish toleration, consequent upon the peculiar dynastic conditions of France and Spain, although there was some recognition of the influence of Spain's decadent position upon this result.
This spirit of toleration likewise characterized Spanish policy alter 1721. The fact of French occupation was recognized, but not the right. This recognition, however, extended only to existing settlements, and prohibited any extension beyond a certain definite area. It was this permissive occupation, however, which affected the Spanish colonial dominions so unfavorably that Spain later gladly accepted the gift of Louisiana when the exigencies of the Family Pact rendered it advisable for France to offer it.2 Such, according to Spanish interpretation, was the official position of the French and Spanish governments before the transfer of Louis- iana to the latter. It was a policy of negation rather than of ex- press official sanction, although every governor of Texas had ex- plicit orders to prevent further French encroachment.
With the question neglected by the home governments, all suc- ceeding attempts at more accurate delimitation of the uncertain Louisiana-Texas frontier were the result of local initiative, and, as such, interesting from the standpoint of personal opinion rather than important in a national view. They are of some value, how- ever, as indicating a trend towards greater definiteness in designat- ing national areas.
In 1727 Don Pedro de Kivera made an inspection of the pres- idios and missions of Texas. As a result of his visit, and despite the protests of the friars, the presidial garrisons were considerably reduced. This move indicated lessened fear of French invasion,
1Historla XLIII, Opusculo I, Par. 31. Cf. Margry, IV 543 et seq. "Historia XLIII, Opusculo I, Par. 38, 39, 57; Ibid., Document LXVII, Par. 18.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 19
but led those friars belonging to the Convent of San Francisco at Queretaro to withdraw to the San Antonio Kiver.1
Some years later occurred the event which emphasized the tenta- tive frontier line for the remaining years of French occupancy. In 1735 the French moved their fort at Natchitoches about a gun-shot farther to the westward and away from the river, in order to escape occasional floods. As the French exercised jurisdiction over some ranches extending to the Arroyo Hondo, a small stream flowing into the Eed Eiver, and to an elevation known as Gran Mon- tana, Saint Denis, who cammanded the fort, unquestioningly obeyed when Bienville instructed him to make this move. Don Jose Gon- zales, then guarding the Spanish frontier in the absence of Gov- ernor Sandoval, promptly entered his protest and informed his superior of the occurrence.2 The governor ordered his subordinate to give notice three times of the formal protest against this in- fringement upon Spanish territory, and if this action should be in vain, to compel the French to return to their former position. The action of Gonzales, however, simply resulted in a desultory corre- spondence continued until August, 1736.
Between hostile Apaches who drew him away from the frontier to Western Texas, and smuggling French whose encroachments de- manded his presence at the border post of Adaes, Sandoval was in a hard place. Moreover, he had nothing beyond vague tradition of the early entradas to guide him in a diplomatic dispute, while his opponent was the crafty Saint Denis. He believed that his country could rightfully claim prior occupation of all the territory as far as the Eed Eiver, but his mere belief furnished an uncertain basis upon which to meet the arguments of the double-dealing Frenchman who had personally conducted the Spaniards into Texas. Sandoval had no positive orders to meet the particular situation. In a general way he was to harass and annoy the French as much as possible, and to drive them out of the limits of Texas; but he did not know what those limits were. When Saint Denis, from his personal experience, assured him that neither nation could rightfully claim all of the land intervening between Natchitoches and Adaes, and that even Aguayo had not objected to the presence
1Bonilla, Breve Compendia in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII 13, 15. See also Historic, XLIII, Opusculo III, Par. 29; Margry, VI, 237, 238. "Morff, Memorias, 222-225.
20 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
of French ranches within that area, he hesitated to assume the re- sponsibility for beginning hostilities, and referred the whole mat- ter to the viceroy.
One result of this correspondence was a proclamation by San- doval flatly prohibiting any commerce with the French, thus shut- ting Natchitoches off from what seems to have been its granary. A more important result was the subsequent observance by both sets of local officers of the Arroyo Hondo, mentioned above, as the limit of their respective colonial jurisdictions.1 As the French and Spanish touched each other nowhere else in the west, a more extended delimitation was regarded as unnecessary. Sandoval, however, fared badly because of his share in the controversy. His successor brought suit against him on the charge of betraying the royal interests, and the resulting protracted litigation almost ruined the innocent and powerless governor.2
In 1738 there was published in Paris a history of Louisiana by Du Pratz.3 This French officer, who had resided in the province from 1718 to 1734 naturally favored the pretensions of his gov- ernment and repeated the earlier statement that Louisiana ex- tended to New Mexico. Upon his map he represented the Rio Grande as the western boundary of Louisiana, as far as 29° 25' north latitude. Thence the boundary left the river and ran paraPel with the Pecos about forty miles distant. There following a mountain chain, it finally ended in latitude 42° north. His claim, however, may be matched by that of Mota-Padilla,4 who, in 1742, spoke of the province of Texas as extending to the Eed River; or by the Franciscan Espinosa5 who stated that the prov- ince reached to the Missouri; or by the auditor Altamira6 and the cosmographer of New Spain, Villa-Sefior y Sanchez,7 who claimed Adaes as its outpost. In general it is possible to disregard
Memorias, 222-225 ; Historia LXIII, Document 73, Par. 23 ; Stod- dard, Sketches of Louisiana, 144.
2Bonilla, loo. tit., 18.
3Le Page du Pratz, Historic de la Louisiane. Cf. Historia XLIII, Opus- culo I, Pars. 19, 20, 72.
*Matias de la Mota-Padilla, Conquista de la Nueva Galicia, 248. Guad- alajara, 1742.
"Chronica Apostolica, 419.
"Altaraira, Testimonio de un Parecer, in Yoakum, History of Texas, I 386, 388.
7Don Joseph Antonio de Villa-Senor y Sanchez, Theatro Americano II, 326. Mexico, 1746.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 21
the testimony both of contemporary historians and of geographers, for they commonly follow national interpretation, and their state- ments balance each other. If, occasionally, one seems to favor the opposing nation, his apparent generosity is matched by like con- duct from the other side, as is shown by the maps of the Spaniard Lopez, and the Frenchman Vaugondy.1
While Prudencio de Orobio y Basterra held the office of governor ad interim (from 1737 to 1740), he recommended the establish- ment of a new presidio upon the Trinity River, in order to break up the commerce of the Indians in that vicinity jwith the French.2 This representation, however, seems to have attracted little or no attention from the viceroy, and the inattention may have encour- aged later governors to permit this illegal traffic. There are, how- ever, some indications that in 1744 Governor Vaudreuil of Louis- iana attempted to break up the trade of his subjects with the Span- iards.3
This trade with the French, openly countenanced and even par- ticipated in by succeeding Texas governors, became especially pro- nounced during the rule of Lieut.-Col. Don Jacinto de Barrios y Jauregui. Unfortunately, as one of the historians of the period writes, "it is hard to relate the events that occurred in his term in such a way as not to fall into the error of telling them too early or too late";4 yet certain of these events were important, for they led directly to the only attempt by a Spanish official to define the boundary between the French and Spanish colonies west of the Mississippi.
Barrios took possession of his government late in 1751. Morfi and those who follow him report that afterward he permitted the settlement, upon the Trinity, of a Frenchman named Blancpain (or Lampen), with two compatriots and two negro slaves. These new settlers, so the report goes, assumed the character of Spanish subjects for the purpose of carrying on trade with the Indians; and because of their influence over the latter, rendered the prov- ince an important service. According to the authorities already
1See summary by Prof. John R. Ficklen in Publications of the South- ern Historical Association, V 351-387. 2Morff, Memorias, 232.
*The Present State . . . of Louisiana. London, 1744. 4Bonilla, Breve Compendia, translated in THE QUARTERLY, VIII 48.
22 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
mentioned, they supplemented this service by acting as the direct agents of the Spanish governor, who shared the profits of their trade. Even if this latter statement were true, and there certainly it reason to doubt it, their reported complicity with the governor availed them but little. After remaining upon the Trinity two months and ten days, Blancpain and his companions were arrested in October, 1754, and sent to Mexico City, where they were ex- amined on the 19th of the following February. Their succeeding fate is uncertain. One writer reports that he met Blancpain in Spain, whither he was transported, and another that he died in prison in Mexico City.1
Barrios's term of office was to close in 1756. As the time drew near he may have feared some unpleasant complications from the above affair in his inevitable residencia, or official inquiry into his administration. Accordingly, he represented to the viceroy the danger that menaced the province from French clandestine trade on the Trinity. Moved by the actual instance as well as by his vigorous representations, a junta of war held in 1755 decided to erect a new presidio upon that river and to settle some fifty Tlas- calan families in its vicinity. Barrios then effected an arrange- ment with his destined successor, Lieutenant Don Angel de Mar- tos y Navarrete, by which Barrios remained in Texas a year longer to assist in the erection of this new post, known as San Agustin de Ahumada.2
Notwithstanding his vigorous action in the case of Blancpain, Barrios found that he had not frightened away all French intrud- ers. Below Adaes, on the little river Flores, a certain M. Mass6 established himself with his slaves; while a short distance away lived a M. Cortablan, likewise "without any other authority than
1BoniIla, loc.cit.; Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII; Morff, Memorias, 316, 317; Historic, XLIII, Doc. LXX, Pars. 3, 5; Ibid., XLI, Par. 383. The details of this incident, as given by the ordinary authorities, includ- ing Morff, seem greatly distorted. Fortunately, my friend Prof. H. E. Bolton, has helped straighten the story by calling my attention to the fact that Blancpain's own statement, dated February 19, 1755, is to be found in the Bexar Archives. This document not only serves to fix the date of the incident, but also throws doubt upon the charge of Governor Barrios's complicity in the illicit trade carried on by the Frenchmen.
"Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, I 643; Cf. also the authori- ties cited in the previous note. Later this post was more familiarly known as Orcoquisac.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 23
his own effrontery."1 The establishment of the new presidio on the Trinity promised to relieve the situation very little; and even the viceroy, Amarillas, anxious as he was to keep out the French, recommended forbearance towards these intruders, in order to avoid hostilities. If we may credit later testimony there were also at this time extensive French trading settlements along the course of 'the Red River at the ancient Caddo village and Bayou Pierre; at Dout and among the ISTandaco Indians in the valley of the Sabine; and even some distance west of that river.2
One result of this unauthorized intrusion appeared during the unfortunate campaign of 1758 against the Apaches.3 It was found that these savages were supplied -with firearms, evidently from French traders, and what was worse, that they were flying a French ilag. Its presence did not necessarily imply that Frenchmen formed part of the allied host, but flag and firearms were the signs of unscrupulous measures employed in stirring up the border In- dians against the Spaniards. In this campaign the dismayed Span- iards ingloriously retreated, leaving a large portion of their camp equipage and all of their artillery in possession of the exultant savages. Four 3»ears later the Spanish missionaries complained of this illegal French trade, which not only prevented their own attempts at converting the Indians, but also threatened the intro- duction of French and even of English commerce far within the province.
Meanwhile the report that the Spaniards were about to estab- lish a new presidio on the Trinity stirred up the French governor of Louisiana to revive well nigh forgotten claims to the whole of Texas. In 1756 a certain M. Livendais braved Spanish ex- clusiveness by presenting himself on board of a vessel in the harbor of Vera Cruz.4 His mission was to purchase certain provisions and munitions . of war — in which he was only partially successful — and to protest against the erection of the new fortification. Liv- endais had desired to present his communication in person to the viceroy, but was denied the privilege, so he contented himself with
Memorias, 318.
'American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II 692-694; Annals of Con- gress, 9 Cong., 2 Sess., 1076 et seq.; Stoddard, Sketches of Louisiana, 145; John Sibley to (Maj. Amos Stoddard?) Sibley Papers, Mo. His. Soc.
•Bonilla, in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII 30.
*Historia, XLIII, Document LXX, Pars. 1, 2, 4; Morfl, Memorias, 318.
24 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
sending from Vera Cruz the French governor's protest, which was based upon alleged "fantastic claims" to the whole province of Texas.
To this communication the viceroy attempted no direct answer, but the possibilities suggested by continued French incursions backed by extensive territorial claims led him or his subordinate, Lieutenant Don Angel de Martos y Navarrete, who about this time succeeded Barrios in Texas, to make the most definite sug- gestion yet offered upon the subject of a boundary between the Spanish and French colonial possessions. This proposal, ap- parently the work of Governor Martos, may have been prepared by him some time between 1757 and 1759, and sent to the viceroy, Amarillas. Before the death of the latter, early in 1760, he in- corporated the proposal of his subordinate in a communication which was forwarded to Spain for royal consideration. The ex- igencies of the closing years of the Seven Years' War prevented any definite action by the Council of the Indies. When peace was finally restored, New Orleans and all of French Louisiana west of the Mississippi was ceded to Spain, so there was no necessity for prompt action in the matter. When the subject of Louisiana limits again acquired an international importance, the memoir was dis- covered in the archives of the Convent of San Francisco, in the City of Mexico, by Friar Melchor de Talamantes, while searching for material upon the subject of the limits of Louisiana and Texas. Although the document was anonymous and undated, it was iden- tified by an associate, probably Friar Jose Pichardo, as the work of Governor Martos, at the time above mentioned.1
1Historia XLIII, Doc. LXX, Par. 14. The question of the date and authorship of the document is not so simple as its ecclesiastical editor •would imply. Both Bonilla (QUARTERLY, VIII 67) and Morff (Memorias Bk. X., Par. 31), give 1757 as the date when Martos assumed command in Texas. Bancroft (North Mexican States and Texas, I 643) gives 1760, but without a clear reference to this authority for the date. Pro- fessor Bolton informs me that a report by Governor Martos, dated at the capital, Adaes, December 6, 1759, is in the Bexar Archives. This seems conclusive, so far as the date of the governor's presence in Texas is con- cerned, and strengthens the belief that he may have been the author of the representation. The document itself contains a reference (Par. 3) to a cedula of May 4, 1760, and likewise mentions the strict union be- tween the crowns of France and of Spain. As will be pointed out, these statements do not necessarily affect the question of date or of authorship.
The internal evidence of the document does not militate against the au- thorship of Martos. Certain expressions occur which show an intimate
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 25
The Representation1 begins by reviewing the mission of M. Livendais to Vera Cruz and the cases of Blancpain <and the other intruding Frenchmen, and utters a warning against permitting similar encroachments beyond the River of the Adaes or Mex- icano.2 The author mentions the "strict union of the two crowns" and the desire of the Spanish sovereign to preserve peace through- out his dominions, although unforeseen accidents might prevent this. The possibility that France might emerge successfully from its present conflict with England3 suggested the danger that when freed from menace in the north and east, France might not content itself with Louisiana alone, but might look with longing upon a province (Texas) whose natural wealth more than equalled the French Canadian possessions. This possibility led the author to suggest a plan for definitely fixing the limits while the relations between the two governments were still those of close friendship.
The writer believed that on the Mexican frontier the Mississippi, at least as far as the Red River, would constitute the best boundary between the colonial possessions of the two nations. From the mouth of the Red, that river, as far as its main fork in the country of the Caddoes,4 should continue the boundary, separating the French Indians from the Spanish Apaches, and also leaving under
knowledge of local conditions in Texas. It is true that the general dis- cussion, as well as the two references just mentioned, seem to imply a broad international outlook, hardly to be expected in a mere provincial governor. This character may have been added to the original report by way of vice-regal comment. It is perfectly permissible, then, to assume that Martos was the author of the original representation, which was in- corporated in a later report of the viceroy, Amarillas, or his immediate successor. It is in this form only that the document is known to us.
The suggestion might naturally arise that this document was possibly fabricated after 1803, in order to support Spain's territorial pretentions. Neither external facts nor internal evidence lend any color whatever to this suggestion. We may reasonably conclude that the memoir was for- warded by Governor Martos from Texas previous to 1760, and that shortly after that date it was incorporated in a vice-regal report to the council of the Indies.
irThe Representation proper comprises some nineteen paragraphs of Document LXX, Historia XL/Ill.
2The name Mexicano was later uniformly applied to the Sabine. Adaes was situated some distance to the east of the river, but notwithstanding this position, the name might easily be applied to the Sabine as well as that of Natchitoches to the Red. Each was the most important post in the vicinity of its nearest river. Cf. Stoddard, Sketches of Louisiana, 145.
'This expression tends to support the view that the Representation was composed before 1760.
*The Caddodachos or Caddodaquious. The point indicated is the de- flection of the Red from the easterly course to one almost south.
26 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Spanish influence the Chitimachas, Opelousas, and Attakapas. From the forks of the Bed River, following the most northern branch, the line should run in a northerly direction to the Ar- kansas, and thence to the Missouri. Although the French had penetrated about a thousand leagues up this river, they afterward had abandoned their settlement 'and ceased further exploration. The various divisions of the proposed line could be run so as to separate the Indians that were natural enemies, thus emphasizing its definiteness.
Possibly the French would be loath to abandon their long estab- lished post at Natchitoches, and the various scattered ranches ex- tending equally far to the westward. In that event it would be advisable to move the first portion of the proposed line over to the Adaes Eiver (Sabine) and to extend it in a northerly direction to the Red. This would be preferable to leaving the question open any longer, especially if the Spaniards strengthened themselves by new establishments on the Texas coast.
The proposed line, following the Sabine, Red, Arkansas, and Missouri rivers, was definitely to mark out the sphere of influence of each nation among the Indians, and likewise its area for explor- ation and development. The great mineral wealth of the interior of New Spain, separated by vast distances from the French fron- tier, would no longer present the temptation to encroachment which had previously threatened the peace of the two nations. Freed from this danger, and with adequate instructions, the colon- ial government would be able to enforce all laws of the home gov- ernment and to insist upon the most inviolable observance of its treaty privileges and obligations. These were the reasons that led the writer to recommend the abandonment of the untenable policy of regarding the French as intruders upon the Gulf coast and the acknowledgment of their right to a certain well-defined area in order to preserve intact the vast regions still claimed by the Spanish crown.
With the customary disregard that characterized the Spanish home government during this period, the document was unheeded for more than four decades. Its main features were then revived to meet the menace of a more dreaded encroachment, but unfortu- nately for Spain, too late to 'achieve the desired result.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 27
III. THE NEW NEIGHBORS OF SPANISH TEXAS.
Although suggestions from the viceregal court concerning a boundary with the French remained unheeded, the same indiffer- ence did not display itself when an opportunity arose to obtain the whole of Louisiana. The exigencies of the Family Compact made it desirable to reward Spain for her unfortunate share in the Seveu Years' War. Although the government of Louis XV may also have desired to get rid of an unprofitable colony, yet the Spanish government apparently considered no alternative but to accept the proffered possession. In fact the manner in which the colonial officials of Louisiana, from a Spanish point of view, had disre- garded their obligations of good neighborhood, rendered no other course possible.1
From November 3, 1762, the date of the secret transfer of Louisiana to Spain, until May 2, 1803, when Napoleon and the American commissioners signed the formal deed of cession to the United States, the final disposition of Louisiana was a matter of doubt; while the various questions arising from its possession re- mained to perplex American diplomacy and policies until 1853. Thus it may be truly said that the forty years preceding 1803 were, so far as Louisiana was concerned, years of preliminary preparation for the great transfer which exerted so important an influence on American political events during the next half cen- tury.
The tender of Louisiana to the Spanish sovereign was made on November 3, 1762, and his acceptance was received ten days later.2 But it was not until 1769 that Don Alexander O'Keilly took posses-
•/ JL
sion of the colony, after suppressing in New Orleans an incipient re- bellion of Spain's new subjects. The acceptance of the province did not in any way mark its full reception into the number of Span- ish colonies. By the terms of the cession Louisiana was to enjoy cer- tain trading privileges that were denied to the other dependencies of Spain. Bather than break down the system of commercial monopoly that had characterized Spain's colonial policy up to this
1Historia XLIII, Opusculo I, Par. 69; Political Science Quarterly, XIX 439-458.
'French, Hist. Coll. La., V 128, 143, 235-239.
28 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
point, Louisiana was to be administered as a possession quite dis- tinct from its neighboring provinces. The barrier that separated Louisiana from Texas — largely an uncertain paper one — must be emphasized, in order that the former colony might not prove a breach in Spain's wall of commercial exclusion.
A change that marked a step in advance along the Louisiana border occurred almost contemporaneously with the official trans- fer. During the early months of 1764 some 650 Acadians ar- rived at New Orleans.1 A portion of these were settled on the banks of the Mississippi, but the greater number at Attakapas and Opelousas. As Natchitoches was previously the only formal French settlement west of the Eed River, this migration emphasizes a movement of French speaking people towards the Sabine. The event, however, occurred after the official transfer of the province to Spain, and although that power had not yet taken possession, the movement can not be regarded as strengthening the claims of France to the region between the Mississippi and the Sabine.2
The transfer of the colony did not promise an immediate con- version of illegal French traders into law-abiding Spanish sub- jects. The presidio upon the Trinity, designed to break up this trade, became the scene of a quarrel between Governor Martos and Captain Rafael Martin Pacheco, during which the Captain was arrested and the presidio burned. Later the governor was removed from office.3 This quarrel may have arisen on account of contraband trade. The frontier missionaries of the period em- phasize the lamentable effect of such irresponsible trading upon their neophites.4 These complaints continued even after the Span- iard, O'Reilly, assumed command at New Orleans. The Indians were supplied with firearms and munitions by which they became more dreaded on the frontier. The Spaniards blamed the French and the latter the English; but it was a matter of common knowl- edge along the border that many French fortunes owed their origin to this trade. This, of course, could not be prevented while Louis- iana belonged to France, and after the transfer only the lawless per- sisted in the traffic. One unfortunate result was the opportunity
French, Hist. Coll. La., V 146, note.
"Robin, Voyages dans I'Interior de la Louisiane, III 153, 154. "Bonilla, Breve Compendia, Translation by West, QUARTERLY, VIII 58. 4Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII, 170.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 29
for expansion which this illegal practice opened to the English after they became established at Natchez. With the Missouri af- fording a highway into the interior they could not be wholly ex- cluded, and O'Reilly in self-defense was forced to use Natchitoches as a center from which to supply munitions to certain of the tribes.1
An attempted retrograde movement on the part of the Spanish home government followed the visita of the Marques de Rubi in 1767, and threatened still further to complicate the border situa- tion. Some five years after the report of Rubi the Spanish king issued, September 10, 1772, an order known as the "New Regula- tion of Presidios,"2 which practically embodied Rubi's proposals. In effect his "New Regulation" marked an attempt at temporary relinquishment of Spain's uncertain hold on a large part of the territory between the Rio Grande and the Mississippi, in favor of a greater concentration near the valley of the former. With Spain in control of both Texas and Louisiana, the latter colony became the rampart against English aggression, thus removing the neces- sity for missionary and presidial outposts in eastern Texas. At the same time the peril from the Apaches and other hostile Indians far within the interior provinces measurably increased. Conse- quently prudence demanded the abandonment of useless stations on the Texas-Louisiana frontier with a concentration of forces upon the San Antonio and Rio Grande rivers, whence an exterminating war might be waged against hostile natives.
To carry into effect this proposed defense of the more populated portions of the viceroyalty, a line of fifteen frontier forts, forty leagues apart, was to extend from Bahia del Espiritu Santo, near the mouth of the San Antonio River, to the head of the Gulf of California. Beyond this cordon of forts two outposts, San Antonio de Bexar, in Texas, and Santa Fe, in New Mexico, were to repre- sent the extreme garrisons of New Spain. The forces at Bexar and at Bahia were to be increased by the abandonment of Adaes and Orcoquisac, while the military efficiency of all the presidios was to be increased by the appointment of a new general officer, the inspector comandante of the interior provinces. To this office
'Bonilla. in THE QUARTERLY, VIII 66, 68, 69.
2The essential features of the "Regulation" are summarized by Bolton in THE QUARTERLY, IX 79-81.
30 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the viceroy appointed Don Hugo Oconor, who had recently served as governor ad interim of Texas.
At first thought it would seem that the issue of this royal decree marks the definite abandonment by the Spanish government of all the province of Texas beyond the San Antonio Eiver. It so chances that this presidial line roughly corresponds to what the French had formerly claimed as the western boundary of Louisiana, but ap- parently long since abandoned. But this proposed relinquishment of the greater part of Texas was to the Indians and not to the French. Louisiana, west of the Mississippi, was now a Spanish province, so there was no necessity for a garrison in east Texas to prevent the extension of its western frontier. The proposed relinquishment of the greater part of Texas was only the result of a temporary policy, which in turn would be reversed when New Spain again felt the necessity for expansion. Meanwhile the ac- quisition of Louisiana denoted the fact that the Spanish frontier now extended to the Mississippi, where possible encroachment must be restrained by her newly acquired citizens. As a matter of fact, east Texas was never wholly abandoned, and those settlers who re- moved to San Antonio shortly afterward returned, despite the express royal order to the contrary.
A prominent figure upon the Texas-Louisiana frontier in the years following 1770 was Athanase de Mezieres, a Frenchman in Spanish service as commandant of the post at Natchitoches. He was well-known and influential among the various Indian tribes of the border, particularly along the Eed Eiver, and had personally visited most of them. Mezieres was perfectly willing to turn his influence over the Indians to Spanish account. His plan,1 in- dorsed by Eipperda, differed from that of Eubi in that while he favored abandoning the useless missions and presidios in eastern Texas, it was for the purpose of erecting a new presidio among the northern Indians of Texas rather than removing the soldiers and settlers to the San Antonio. The command of this presidio should be given to Luis de Saint Denis, son of the famous trader and frontier commander of the preceding generation. For the successful prosecution of warfare against the hostile Indians, espe-
^UAKTEBLY, VIII 63-68; IX 91.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 31
cially the Apaches, some three hundred French chasseurs should be recruited in Louisiana.
The purpose of Mezieres, as stated by him in these various recommendations, was to present a serious obstacle to the threat- ened advance of the English, although his trading interests among the northern Indians may have furnished an equally strong motive. His letters and journals of the y ears 1778 and 1779,1 however, as well as his earlier letters, are full of the danger threatening from the English, owing to their secure position upon the east bank of the Mississippi, the easy ingress afforded by the Missouri and the hostile Osages, and the unscrupulousness with which they intro- duced firearms among the Texas Indians, in order to incite them against the Spaniards. They likewise appeared to be tampering with the Pawnees, through whom they were attempting to influence the Taovayases. It is interesting to note that he mentions the internecine struggle then dividing the English, but he states that the colonies, if successful, will prove no better neighbors than Eng- land herself. His proposals embody the plan of protecting the country- west of the Mississippi by a line of presidios from that river to New Mexico, garrisoned by the combined forces of the French and Spaniards in Louisiana and Texas. The two essentials to its complete success are perfect reciprocity in trade between the two colonies, by way of the Trinity Eiver and Opelousas, and the good will of the Indians. His plans seem to promise measurable success, but the jealousy and sloth of the viceregal and home gov- ernments rendered them nugatory.
Meanwhile in March, 1773, the viceroy ordered Oconor to carry out the policy of abandoning the presidios and missions of eastern Texas. The settlers from Adaes were first transferred to San Antonio, but upon petition to the viceroy, Governor Ripperda permitted them, in 1774, to erect a temporary establishment, known as Bucareli, upon the banks of the Trinity.2 A secondary reason
1Historia XLIII, Opusculo IV; Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII 243, 278; THE QUARTERLY, IX 91-93.
*Historia LI, Petition of Antonio Gil y Barbo. For the details, of this whole movement, cf. Bolton, "The Spanish Abandonment and Reoccupation of East Texas," in THE QUARTERLY, IX 67ff. A few of the Adaes settlers apparently never quit the vicinity of their homes. These, with the neigh- boring French, upon the withdrawal of the Spanish garrison, took the opportunity to engage still more extensively in trade with the Texas In- dians (Hid., 88).
32 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
that had influenced the authorities in abandoning the eastern part of the province had been the desire to break up the illicit trade with the English, French, and Indians, carried on principally by the leading resident of Adaes, Antonio Gil Ybarbo, and a French merchant, Nicolas de la Mathe, of Point Coupee, Louisiana. It was supposed by some of the officials that the reason Ybarbo and his fellow settlers wished to return to the Trinity was to resume this trade. Nevertheless, the removal from eastern Texas had caused so much suffering that the petition of those involved was granted ; and with many instructions designed to check contraband trade, Bucareli was duly established.
The petition of the settlers to return to eastern Texas had ap- pealed .to the Governor,' who desired to guard that section against English intrusion and to keep the Indians attached to the Span- iards. The situation upon the Trinity was, however, very un- favorable, as alternate experiences of flood and drought, added to attacks by the Comanches, soon taught its inhabitants. Under the leadership of Gil Ybarbo they made another removal in 1779, to Nacogdoches, which henceforth received a sort of official endorse- ment and became the center of Spanish influence in eastern Texas. This community, together with the establishment on the San An- tonio River, constituted the only formal settlements in the prov- ince.
While the new settlement had been located upon the Trinity charges were freely made against its inhabitants for engaging in clandestine trade, not merely with the French, but also with the English, although they had been especially ordered to break up this intercourse. Ybarbo, their commandant, the French merchant Nicholas de la Mathe, and even Governor Ripperda, were charged with participating in this traffic, and thus indirectly terrorizing the settlements upon the San Antonio River and farther within Mexico through Indian raids stirred up by foreign traders intro- duced along the Trinity.1 Trade with the Louisiana French or with the English was alike illegal, but this practice characterized the new settlers at Nacogdoches, and resulted in a moderate degree of prosperity. In 1779 the community was officially recog-
^Historia LI, Correspondence of Viceroy Bucareli regarding the Trinity settlers; also THE QUARTERLY, IX 102-105,, 119-122.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 33
nized, and nine years later had a population of between two hun- dred and two hundred and fifty French and Spaniards, housed in some eighty or ninety wooden buildings. In 1801 two travelers report the fighting rtrength of its population at four hundred and speak of an extensive commerce with Louis- iana.1 From other sources we know that by this time the original French and Spanish elements had been joined by an American con- tingent that speedily monopolized the fur trade.2 The jurisdiction of Nacogdoches, about 1785, was extended to the little settlement of Bayou Pierre, on the Eed River, thus including what had been a former French establishment,3 and in a measure counteracting the spread of that people in Attakapas and Opelousas. Contra- band trade seems still to have been the main interest of the popula- tion, including officials.4
Beyond the attempted abandonment of the settlements of east- ern Texas, none of the measures proposed by the local authorities for the development of Texas were considered by the viceregal of- ficials or by the home government. In addition to the above un- fruitful suggestion of Mezieres, it was proposed to open free trade between Louisiana and Texas, establish one or more ports upon the Gulf coast of the latter, and adopt the Sabine as the boundary between the two provinces. Governor Ripperda of Texas, Oabellero De Croix, the chief executive officer of the newly-created eastern Internal Provinces, and Mezieres, the local commandant at ISTatchitoches, all3 united in recommending this policy either wholly or in part, but in vain. The jealousy of a possible rival port led the Sola de Consulado of Vera Cruz, some eight years after the proposal, to suggest a solution of the Question that would "unite the interests of the State with the well-being of the two provinces, and without prejudice to that of New Spain." Such a course sim- ply meant no action upon the proposal. At this same time (1785- 86) an expedition under Castro and Evia explored the coast of
Historia LXII, Document VII; Ibid., Doc. LXIX.
-Jefferson Papers, Series 2, Vol. 76, No. 7; House Doc. No. 50, 19 Cong., 1 Sess.
3Annals of Congress, 9 Cong., 2 Sess., 1097.
'Historic, C, Doc. 6; see THE QUARTERLY, VII 208; Perrin du Lac, Voyages dans les Deux Louisianes, 375 (Paris, 1805).
"The correspondence upon this topic is found in Historia XLIII, Doc. XLI. For complete title, cf. Bolton, in THE QUARTERLY, VI 108. See also Historia XLIII, Opusculo, IV. Par. 6.
34 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
New Santander and Texas and recommended the mouth of the Itio Grande as the proper place for a port. Their recommendation seemed to favor a location which would turn Texas trade towards Mexico rather than towards Louisiana. In 1788 or 1789 the vice- roy, after a representation from a certain De Blanc, commander at Natchitoches, reinforced by a letter from Governor Miro of Louis- iana, reported the whole affair to Soain; ana on March 1st, 1790, orders were received to suspend all action. Thus an opportunity was lost to develop the internal resources of the colony and to fix the limits definitely at the Sabine.
Aside from this ineffectual attempt to fix the limits of Texas, the boundary notices of this period among Spanish records are few and very vague. Friar Augustin de Morfi visited the prov- ince in 1778, and one portion1 of his Memorias mentions the east- ern limit of the province as "the Adaes" and in another2 as the "Rio vermejo 6 de Natchitoches." He likewise mentions its colon- ial neighbors on the east as "Louisiana" and "English colonies." Six years before Governor Ripperda had spoken of the Mississippi as the western limit of Louisiana;3 but his co-laborers, the cdbildo of San Fernando (San Antonio) stated it more correctly as "the Adaes."4 Bonilla likewise places the limit at this point.5 Me- zieres6 probably gave Morfi his idea that both Louisiana and the English colonies bordered Texas on the east. While these notices tend to emphasize the previous tacit observance of the line between Adaes and Natchitoches, they are too vague for a more satisfactory generalization. There is nothing from the Louisiana side to sup- ply this deficiency. The possession by Spain of both provinces did not, so far as reciprocal commerce was concerned, render the sub- ject unimportant, but the practice of the Spanish government in other respects conveys the opposite idea.
In 1785 Stephen Miro, the governor-general of Louisiana, in- formed the viceroy of New Spain that the French had left no
^Bk. I, Par. 2.
"Ibid.
3Historia XLIII, Doc. LXXIII, Par. 28.
Representation to Ripperda, July 7, 1770. Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII. The name "Adaes" refers to the Indians and not to the Sabine Hiver.
"THE QUARTERLY, VIII 9, 11.
*Hemorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII 278.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 35
documents at New Orleans relating to the limits of Louisiana.1 In March, 1788, Don Angel Angelino prepared a map of the prov- ince of Texas, evidently from data furnished by Evia's expedition, but our authority contains no description of it.2 Later Miro urged the adoption of the Sabine as the boundary and the establishment of reciprocal commerce between his province and Texas. The Eng- lish, meaning the people of the newly established United States, would now be kept away from the Mississippi, so there would be no danger in establishing free trade between the two provinces. This suggestion is in keeping with the 'determination of the Spaniards to deprive the United States of the use of the Mississippi, or of any establishment upon its banks below the Ohio. Miro's advocacy of the Sabine as the boundary did not appear to make that sugges- tion any more acceptable to the Spanish home government.3 In 1799 the map of Don Juan de Langara4 was published, and upon this the Sabine was given as- the boundary. This map was later criticised by a Spanish writer as purely maritime and prepared when the question of limits was of little importance, and there- fore a map that could not be cited upon that point.5 An American criticises it as being on too small a scale, and like all others extant, as failing to give an adequate idea of the coast between the Missis- sippi and the Sabine.6
Comparatively little was added to the store of geographical knowledge concerning the Louisiana-Texas frontier by travelers and explorers during this period. Important visitas of the Texas establishments occurred in 1762 and 1767.7 The inspection of Marques de Eubi in 1767 has already been mentioned, but this, as in the case of the preceding, only incidentally touched upon geographical details. The map of the engineer la Fora, who ac- companied Eubi, is interesting as showing the position of Texas with reference to its neighbors on the south and west, but it gives no ac- curate information regarding the eastern boundary of that prov-
^Historia XLIII, Doc. LXXIII, Par. 16. 2Ibid, Pars. 8, 18.
3Historia XLIII, Doc. LXXIII, Par. 19. 4Historia XLIII, Opuscule I, Pars. 18, 71.
"Claiborne Correspondence IV, D. Clark to Jefferson. 'Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII 170, XXVII 374.
36 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
ince.1 The same may be said of the famous inspection of 1778 under Cabellero de Croix, who was accompanied by Padre Morfi.2 A record of one of the numerous journeys of Mezieres among the Indians of northeastern Texas has been preserved to us ;3 and while this contains some geographical data concerning the rivers of east Texas, like his letters, it is especially important for its description of the Indians. The same is true of the really remarkable journey of Pedro Vial,4 from San Antonio to Santa Fe, by way of Colo- rado, Brazos, Red, and Pecos rivers. The following year Vial re- turned by way of the Red River and Nacogdoches to San Antonio.5 In 1801, two residents of Louisiana made the journey from Vera Cruz to New Orleans,6 recording many interesting observations upon the country traversed. These various journals, however, added more to the wealth of Spanish archives than to the general knowledge of the period.
We have already noted that after 1763 the English settlements upon the eastern bank of the Mississippi threatened to interfere materially with the attempted policy of exclusion on the Texas frontier. The danger became more menacing when, in 1772, Eng- lishmen were reported to be among the Indians near Natchitoches and later on the Trinity. An investigation from Bahia was or- dered, in the course of which Captain Cazorla discovered among the natives what he thought to be English arms, but no English- men. The natives said that they obtained the arms through French traders, who would not permit the English to approach the Indian villages. Two years later an English vessel remained in the Neches long enough to raise a crop. In 1777 an English vessel loaded with brick was reported as wrecked in the same river. Ybarbo, who was sent from Bucareli to investigate the wreck, found it on Sabine Lake, where it had been plundered by the Attakapas. He also ex- plored the coast as far west as the Trinity in search of another English vessel reported to be in the vicinity, but achieved nothing beyond finding an English sailor, marooned from a passing
'THE QUARTERLY, IX 74, note 2.
2Morfl, Viaje de Indios y Diario del Nuevo Mexico, in Documentos para la Historia de Mexico, Second Series, Vol. I. "Historia XLIII, Opusculo IV. *IUd., XLIII, Doc. L. *IUd., LXII, Doc. VII. "Tbid., LXII, Doc. LXIX.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 37
Jamaica vessel. He made a sketch map of the region traversed, and later, in the summer of 1777, departed upon another tour of exploration from the Trinity to the Brazos, but with what result we are not informed.1
These incidents may indicate either a simple exploration of the coast by the English or an attempt to settle, defeated by Indian hostility. At any rate, rumors of their presence at various points stirred Governor Bipperda to unwonted activity in patrolling the coast. The greatest fear of governor and viceroy arose from the fact that these dreaded energetic pioneers were more able than the French to destroy the uncertain hold of the Spanish upon the Texas Indians, and less scrupulous in the methods they employed. The conquest of the Floridas by Governor-General Galvez, in 1779- 3781, promised for a time to remove this peril, provided the new American Kepublic could be restricted to the eastward of the Ap- palachians. When the attempt of French and Spanish diplomacy to accomplish this result was foiled, the energies of the Spanish court were bent to the task of keeping the new power from the lower Mississippi, and for a decade and a half with success. Yet during this very period there appeared upon the Louisiana-Texas frontier the pioneer representatives of the very migration that Spain so greatly dreaded. A typical class of these border repre- sentatives is well illustrated by their most prominent prototype, Philip Nolan, whose career will be treated in a later chapter.
IV. DIPLOMATIC INTRIGUES FOR THE POSSESSION OF LOUISIANA.
Negotiations for the retrocession of Louisiana to France began almost as soon as those frontier movements which determined its ultimate possession by an English-speaking people. For a time it seemed that the final ownership of this vast province was a ques- tion to be determined by European diplomacy, and diplomacy cer- tainly hastened its final solution. For this reason it is necessary to review diplomatic manoeuvres, as forces supplementing frontier ex- pansion, in order fully to comprehend all the influences which af- fected the Louisiana-Texas frontier after 1803. One must, however, remember that aside from hastening certain frontier complications,
lHistoria XLIII, Opusculo IV, Par. IV; Correspondence of Viceroys, Vol. 33, No. 703; Vol. 67, No. 1827; Carta of Ripperda, Hemorias de Niieva Espana, XXVIII; Bancroft, North Mexican States. I 631; Bolton in THE QUABTEBLY, IX 102, 117, 118.
38 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
diplomacy hardly affected the final result. Louisiana and Texas were destined to belong to the population that could best cope with the primitive conditions of the Mississippi Valley, and that popula- tion was composed of Anglo- American pioneers. It is true that,, for certain purposes, individuals of this class temporarily acknowl- edged foreign allegiance, but ultimately they found themselves under the flag of the United States. This was the history of the successive waves of American migration to the Southwest, and was as true of the decade preceding the nineteenth century as of that approaching its middle course.
The intriguing period of Louisiana diplomacy was ushered in by a proposal usually attributed to the Comte de Vergennes looking to a retrocession of Louisiana to Prance. The French minister is credited with a memoir1 written sometime before the American al- liance outlining the course which France should pursue in the event of American independence. Vergennes believed that if the Amer- icans were successful in the conflict they would covet Florida,, Louisiana, and Mexico — countries that were useless to them as colonials, but which as an independent people would render them masters of all the important straits of the Gulf. By entering into- the conflict he believed that France could compel her hated rival England to cede the territory west of the Appalachians, together with a portion of Canada. To complete her possessions on the American continent, Spain should yield Louisiana to its former possessor. Thus the liberated colonies, hemmed in bv the moun- tains, would remain in perpetual dependence upon the mistress of the Mississippi Valley, now restored to a position far stronger than that preceding the Seven Years' War. Whether or not Vergennes- was the author of this memoir, it is in keeping with his later policy in favoring Spain at the expense of the United States. This policy was dictated not so much by a desire to please Spain as to advance France in her aspirations to regain control of the Missis- sippi Valley. An additional motive may be found in the secret
1Cf. American Historical Review, X 250-252. The significant pages of the printed memoir are 27-30; 100-114. I have used the copy in the King collection of the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio. In em- phasizing the usefulness of Louisiana to Spain and the necessity of a union of that power with France in order to check the spread of the Eng- lish or Americans, Vergennes seems to revert to many of the ideas ex- pressed in the early memoirs of Iberville (cf. Margry, IV 30).
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 39
overtures of certain inhabitants of Louisiana to the French min- ister in Philadelphia, looking to their deliverance from Spanish control.1
By 1779 the prospect of being able to profit by the humiliation of Great Britain led Spain into the conflict in which France and the United States were already allied. Campaigns waged during the next two years successively brought the Natchez district, Mo- bile, and Pensacola under the control of the energetic young Gov- ernor-General of Louisiana, Don Bernardo de Galvez.2 These suc- cesses promised to return to Spain the territory ceded to England in 1763, with possible additions that would rivet still more strongly her control of the Mississippi. Under the circumstances the posi- tion of Spain towards the new republic became of the utmost im- portance.
It may be stated as a general truth that if the Spaniard dis- trusted the Englishman, he mingled detestation with the distrust with which he regarded the American. For more than a year Spain persistently refused to join France in a war waged in behalf of American independence ; and when she finally entered the strug- gle, it was as the ally of France and not of the United States, and to secure more completely her colonial possessions against any ambitious projects of the latter. Just as in 1762 the Spanish government was willing to accept the unprofitable colony of Louis- iana in order to get rid of troublesome French neighbors west of the Mississippi, so now she was induced to enter a conflict that was distasteful to her, for the purpose of restricting far more unde- sirable neighbors to the country east of the Appalachians. Wash- ington believed that Galvez personally was a true friend of the Americans,3 but the case was far different with the home officials who immediately took measures to profit by his conquests. The Spaniards believed that free navigation of the Mississippi was a necessary corollary to settlement upon its banks, and their jealous fears led them to refuse the former, in order to render the latter unsuccessful. This was doubtless the strongest motive that had led them into a conflict where they hoped to gain the Floridas and
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1896, I, 947. 2For an account of these conquests, cf. GayarrS, Hist, of La., III. 'Sparks, Works of Washington, VIII 176.
40 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the Illinois country; that dictated the policy of refusing to receive an American envoy; and that directed the mission of Rayneval to. England in a futile attempt to enclose the United States between the Atlantic and the Appalachians.1 When, despite these efforts, covertly aided by Vergennes, the American commissioners cleverly succeeded in making favorable terms with England, the Spanish minister, Count d'Aranda, could but sadly utter his notable prophecy, "This federal republic is born a pigmy. A day will come when it will be a giant, even a colossus, formidable in these countries."2
The marked friendliness of France for Spain was in keeping with its general policy to obtain Louisiana and to make that prov- ince as valuable as possible. That France did not succeed in 1783 in gaining actual possession of the coveted territory was due to her financial weakness.3 This financial inability, however, did not in- terfere with the preparation of memoirs reciting the advantages that Louisiana would bring to France. One of these, written about 1787 and designed for De Moustier, the French minister to the United States, came into possession of the Canadian authorities.4 In one of his most important dispatches De Moustier likewise showed his own interest in the subject, and in such a way as to justify Jefferson's suspicions of 'his motives and of those of his government.5
The position of the West towards Louisiana, particularly with regard to the navigation of the Mississippi, early became impor- tant. Spain appealed to this sentiment through Wilkinson and other leaders of the famous conspiracy of 1788, in an endeavor to detach that section from the Union. On the other hand, the Can- adian authorities later attempted to make use of this feeling to organize an attack upon Louisiana with the aid of Kentucky volun-
1For a review of the attitude of Spain and France towards the U. S., cf. Foster, Century of American Diplomacy, Chapter II; Ogg, Opening of the Mississippi, Chapter VIII; Turner, in American Historical Review, X, 249-255 ; McLaughlin, The Confederation and the Constitution, Chap. II.
"Quoted in Ogg, 399.
*0gg, Opening of the Mississippi, 462 ; American Historical Review, X 255.
4Report on Canadian Archives, 1890, 108-119.
^American Historical Review, X 257, note 3.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 41
teers.1 This latter movement was frustrated, partly through the opposition fo Wilkinson, but more largely through western prej- udice against England. In his letters to the Spanish governor, however, Wilkinson made use of this visit of the British emissary to threaten an invasion of Louisiana and New Mexico by a com- bined force of British and frontiersmen, unless the latter were well treated by the Spanish authorities in the matter of navigating the Mississippi. There is a suggestion of possible separation from the Union in this threat. The scheme of the Spanish representative, Gardoqui, in connection with a New Jersey trader, George Morgan, to establish an elaborate colony on the west bank of the Mississippi in order to restrain American migration, likewise resulted in fail- ure.2 Yet Morgan was not the only American willing to lend him- self to the schemes of Spain. George Eogers Clark, despairing of adequate recognition of his really meritorious services by the Amer- ican government or by the State of Virginia, offered to further the aims of Spain in return for a land grant.3 The general temper of the West towards Spain was, however, that reported by Brissot,4 — a feeling of intense resentment, ready to express itself in actual hostilities. The Frenchman believed that if the Americans once began the march to New Orleans, that city and the whole con- tiguous country would fall into their hands.
The position of Great Britain towards Louisiana as well as the Floridas was clearly defined in the so-called Nootka Sound Epi- sode.5 This position was determined not merely by the capture of certain English vessels on the Pacific coast, but also by the agitation of the Spanish-American revolutionist Francisco de Mi- randa. His Grand Plan, in which Pitt for a time displayed inter- est, contemplated the bestowal of constitutional rights upon all Spanish America west of the Mississippi and south of the forty-
10gg, Opening of the Mississippi, 443 ; Green, The Spanish Conspiracy, 250-253, 292-317. In view of the later plans of Wilkinson, this early coupling of New Mexico with a projected Louisiana invasion is signifi- cant. Cf. Cox, "The Early Exploration of Louisiana," 91, University of Cincinnati Studies, Series, II, Vol. II, No. 1.
*IUd., 449, note 2; Green, 294.
3Report of the American Historical Association, 1896, I, 932.
^American Historical Review, V 257, 258.
5A monograph upon the subject by William Ray Manning is published in Report of the American Historical Association, 1904-
42 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
fifth parallel.1 Under Miranda's influence military preparations were making in England, with New Orleans an immediate ob- jective point, but with a view to the ultimate conquest of Merico and South America. Before the end of the year 1790, however, Pitt received a memoir demonstrating the impracticability of marching troops from New Orleans to Mexico.2 Other reports3 pointed out the greater desirability of possessing merely New Or- leans and the Floridas (Pitt's "Southern Farms") and of utilizing western volunteers for this purpose. Later the trader and ad- venturer W. A. Bowles proposed4 to use the Cherokees and Creeks, with some Tennessee recruits, in conquering the Foridas and south- ern Louisiana. If then threatened by Spanish forces from Havana, he proposed to draw these off by a feint upon Mexico, which from personal knowledge 'he represented as accessible and ready to re- volt upon the first approach of an invader.
These various memoirs seem to indicate that although the Brit- ish government was somewhat influenced by Miranda's comprehen- sive sceheme, it merely intended to take advantage of the probable hostilities to seize the Floridas and New Orleans, and possibly the greater part of Louisiana, and then make use of its position to bring Mexico into a condition of partial dependence. Probably a certain amount of the territory whose seizure was contemplated would be returned to Spain upon the latter's yielding more ex- tensive commercial privileges in her remaining colonies. It is hardly likely that Pitt or those associated with him placed much confidence in Miranda's elaborate plan for revolutionizing all Span- ish America, or that they were willing to embark in a mere quixotic scheme for bearing independence to Spain's oppressed colonists. The English leaders simply intended to utilize the practical part of Miranda's plan, especially from a commercial standpoint. But whatever their motives, the opportunity to realize them passed away when Spain accepted England's terms in the Nootka Sound Convention.
While the prospect of hostile operations was still threatening,
1 American Historical Review, VII 711, note 4. '/bid., VII 716.
'Particularly those of the British agent signing himself "R. D." Ameri- can Historical Review, VII 718, 724, 725. 'American Historical Review, VII 728-33.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 43
Lord Dorchester, the governor-general of Canada, sent a special agent named Beckwith to ascertain the position of the American authorities towards Great Britain and to learn what inducements were necessary to enlist the United States on her side.1 His mis- sion afforded an opportunity for public leaders of the period to express their opinions regarding Louisiana; and this fact, rather than the position of Great Britain, constitutes the most important feature of the whole controversy.
In his interviews with Beckwith, Hamilton expressed himself as opposed to British possession of New Orleans. In case of actual hostilities that point should pass under American control ; but with this proviso, he apparently was inclined to favor the cause of Great Britain against Spain.2 In contrast with his opinion may be men- tioned that of Scott, a member of the House of Representatives from Pennsylvania, who believed it would be to the advantage of the United States for Great Britain to possess New Orleans, and even to gain it by American aid. Then the city could be used as a point of advantage in the possible dismemberment of Spanish America.3
The opinion of Jefferson with regard to England and Spain was typical in that he attempted to square himself with both nations, although he expressed the greater hostility towards the former. Early in July he prepared a paper4 upon the subject, in which, he mentioned the danger from English control of New Orleans, and favored a joint guarantee by Spain and the United States of the in- dependence of the threatened territory. Notwithstanding this, he later wrote Monroe,5 that either "war or indissoluble confederacy" with England was necessary, and in the latter event he hoped that •Great Britain would content herself with Louisiana, and allow the United States to retain New Orleans and the Floridas. This view suggests his later position regarding France at the mouth of the Mississippi.
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1904, 415, 416.
2 American Historical Review, VII 709; Report of the American Histori- cal Association., 1904, 416.
3Ibid., VII 716, note 1; Report of the American Historical Association, 1904, 416.
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1904, 415.
*American Historical Review, VII 710; Report of the American His- torical Association, 1904, 418.
44 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Yet Jefferson felt strongly opposed to Great Britain as a neigh- bor in Louisiana, even under the most favorable conditions, and this feeling appears in his instructions to Gouverneur Morris,1 then in London. He was to inform the British ministry that the United States could not regard with indifference their acquisition of neigh- boring territory. He instructed Carmichael2 at Madrid to repre- sent to the Spanish government the desirability of a cession of New Orleans and the Floridas to the United States, in return for a guaranty of Spanish possessions upon the west bank of the Missis- sippi. This suggestion reached Carmichael too late for effective use, but it was in keeping with the later policy of Jefferson just before the Louisiana purchase.
As a question of policy the possible march of British troops across our territory from Detroit to St. Louis gave Washington and his cabinet some concern,3 but added nothing to their views respect- ing Louisiana. Early in the next year the British consul at Phila- delphia suggested to his home government the advisability of con- sidering the mouth of the Ohio as a point for collecting a force to be conveyed against the Spanish settlements on the lower Misis- sippi. This movement could hardly be undertaken without the concurrence of the United States and upon a basis or reciprocal advantages, but he believed that the cooperation of the western settlers might be secured in any movement that promised to open the Mississippi.4 Fortunately for the future peaceful growth of the United States, the threatening war clouds were already dissi- pated and Spain remained in undisturbed possession of Louisiana. It was the temper of the West, uncertain in its allegiance to ex- ternal sovereignty, but with its whole economic development cen- tered in the free navigation of the Mississippi, that proved such an element of danger during the first critical decade of the new na- tional government. In August, 1790, Jefferson wrote Carmichael5 that it was impossible to answer for the further forebearance of our western citizens. At that very time the Yazoo Land Company of South Carolina, through Dr. James O'Fallon, was offering to locate
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1904, 420, 421.
'•Ibid., 1904, 421, 422.
8/6td., 1904, 418-420.
'Ibid., 1897, 471.
"American State Papers, Foreign Relations, I 247.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 45 •
a colony on the site of rrodern Vicksburg.1 The agent attempted to allay the fears of Governor Miro by representing the colony as a migration from the United States of disaffected western ele- ments, with the design of effecting an alliance with adjoining Spanish colonies and of serving as a rampart to protect them against similar future invasions. It was rumored that George Eogers Clark was to command the battalion O'Fallon was organiz- ing. Spanish opposition and the proclamation of Washington against occupying Indian lands served to break up this particular movement, but not the design of its leaders to expatriate them- selves, if that were necessary to gain the freedom of the Missis- sippi.
In the midst of the crisis threatening from the Nootka Sound affair Jefferson had attempted to gain the aid of France in secur- ing New Orleans, or at least a port near the mouth of the Missis- sippi.2 France, however, had plans of her own, and while Spain was threatened by England, offered to form a new alliance in lieu of the former family compact.3 The new tie was to be strength- ened by the retrocession of Louisiana. Spain preferred peace with England rather than alliance with revolutionary France, especially upon such terms. The latter power, then, must employ some other method to gain the coveted Louisiana.
With the adoption of the Girondist revolutionary propaganda of 1792, France opened the second period of Louisiana intrigue with some prospect of realizing her dream of colonial dominion. Under the dominating influence of Brissot de Warville, the former American traveler who had correctly interpreted the situation in the Mississippi Valley, the attention of the French leaders was largely directed to the Spanish colonies upon this continent. To strengthen this tendency, the tireless Miranda soon spread before- Lebrun, the minister of foreign affairs, and his associates, his scheme of widespread Spanish- American revolution, now to be undertaken under French auspices. Wiser measures, however, soon moderated this spirit of universal revolutionary propaganda. The projected attack upon all Spanish America was regarded as too- chimerical, for although the country would not forever remain.
^American Historical Review, III 652, 653. -Ibid., X 258. 3Ibid., X 258, 259.
46 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
under Spanish domination, it was not then the duty of France to liberate it. An attempt to revolutionize and take possession of Louisiana alone, offered a prospect of immediate success and a safe point of departure for future incursions into Mexico and neighboring Spanish territory.1
To influence the Brissot faction in behalf of revolutionizing Louisiana, there appeared in Paris in 1792 and early in the fol- lowing year, a series of memoirs describing that province and its population, and its possible future relations both to France and the United States. Prominent among these papers was a proposal by George Kogers Clark,2 doubly resentful because of the rejection by the State of Virginia of his last application in behalf of his just claims. He represented the spirit of the West as aroused to fury against Spain because of the closure of the Mississippi, and scarcely less hostile towards the Union because of fancied indiffer- ence or actual neglect. Clark's proposal was backed by his son- in-law, James O'Fallon, through whose instrumentality it reached Thomas Paine at Paris. The latter was then a recently naturalized French citizen, enjoying the confidence of Brissot, Lebrun, and others of their associates. With these the offer of Clark, in view of his former reputation and supposed popularity, was evidently of weight in strengthening their determination to confine their pres- ent effort to Louisiana.
Both before and after Clark many others3 presented papers of similar tenor. Among these authors we may mention Gilbert Im- lay, Revolutionary soldier, traveler, and writer; Stephen Sayre, a Princeton graduate who successively became banker and sheriff in London, and, after his failure in that city, an attache of Franklin and of Arthur Lee; Pierre Lyonnet, a French Creole, formerly a resident of New Orleans; Beaupoils, a French officer who had for- merly served in Poland ; and Joel Barlow, American poet and diplo- mat, who, like Paine, had recently become a French citizen.
Most of these proposals have in view the immediate revolution- izing of Louisiana alone, although Sayre and Beaupoils4 include
^American Historical Review, III 653-656; Report of the American His- torical Association, 1896, I, 945-946
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1903, II, 199, note. "For these plans, cf. American Historical Review, HI, 491-510; 659, 660. 'Ibid., Ill 661, 662.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 47
the more extensive plan of Miranda. All of them anticipate ready aid from the American and French settlers along the Ohio, Ten- nessee, and Cumberland, as well as from the Creole population of Louisiana. As leader of these volunteers they suggest such oppo- site characters as Clark and Wilkinson. The memorialists point out the commercial advantages to the French West Indies of Louis- iana freed from Spanish control, whatever the final disposition of its territory. One leaves this question open, another is opposed to its possession by the United States, while the French Creole would bestow it upon that power in return for certain commercial advan- tages for France. They prefer to work out their purpose without openly involving the United States, although they know the im- portance that that republic attaches to the free navigation of the Mississippi, and wish to employ that factor in drawing- the western settlers into their scheme. One anonymous writer refers to this same motive to bring about a separation of the West from the East and its ultimate incorporation with Louisiana. The later proposal of Barlow and Leavenworth1 is in the nature of an offer to liberate Louisiana at their own expense, and to use it as an example for all Spanish America. They were to pay themselves and followers from the public lands and property, and, in case of a retrocession of the province to Spain, to receive back their financial outlay.
Doubtless Genet's instructions and his own later actions were greatly influenced by these proposals, most of which must have been known before he left France. Four of the memorialists were suggested as a committee to act under Genefs direction in organiz- ing the western volunteers and in fomenting the Louisiana revolu- tion. Later they were to extend their propaganda to all Spanish America, but to omit for the present this greater task.2 These emissaries were to pass to the Ohio ostensibly in search for suit- able land for a colony, and to assemble their volunteers under the pretext of a campaign against the Indians. These precautions would serve to avoid compromising the United States, and whether that power should ultimately control Louisiana, time and its peo- ple should decide.
Genet's high-handed course toward the American government
American Historical Review, III 508-510.
2Ibid., Ill 495-496; 662, 663; Report of the American Historical Asso- ciation, 1S96, 945ff.
48 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
soon made necessary a policy of intrigue, in order to put into opera- tion the proposed expedition against Louisiana. In keeping with his policy was an offer from Clark,1 penned in February, 1793, to take Louisiana with 1,500 men, and with additional assistance, Pensacola and Santa Fe. With the approaches to the latter Clark claimed to be perfectly familiar.2 In addition, the botanist Andre Michaux, already contemplating an exploration of the Missouri un- der Jefferson's guidance,3 was ready to turn from the uncertain field of exploration to what appeared to be the more sure conquest of Louisiana, He was immediately employed as Genet's agent to his proposed Kentucky coadjutors, among whom must now be reck- oned Congressman John Brown and the merchant Charles De Pauw.4 The personal testimony of these men established the facts already surmised that the population of Louisiana was on the verge of rebellion, the Spanish defenses of the Mississippi lament- ably weak, while the Ohio Valley settlers were eager to take ad- vantage of these circumstances.
With this combination of affairs playing directly into Genef s hands and threatening to counterbalance the reserved opposition of Washington, it is important to consider the position of the lat- ter's Secretary of State. As early as February 20, 1793, through Col. W. S. Smith, the son-in-law of John Adams, Jefferson may have known of the earlier plans of the Brissot ministry regarding Spanish America.5 From Smith he seemed to gain the idea that the French would not object to our incorporating the Floridas. A month later this led him, with Washington's approval, to direct Carmichael at Madrid not to guarantee the Spanish colonies west of the Mississippi, in return for the Floridas, as we might receive them from France, and in that event must be free to accept.*
In July Genet partially informed Jefferson of his plan. The Secretary protested that American citizens would engage in the
^American Historical Review, III 665; Report of the American Histori- cal Association, 1896, 969.
2This claim suggests the possibility that Clark may have obtained in- formation from Nolan, who was a resident of Kentucky and occasionally conveyed his droves of Texas horses thither.
"Thwaites, Original Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, I , In- troduction.
'Americal Historical Review, II 666-668.
'/bid., Ill 655.
"Ford, Writings of Jefferson, VI 206.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 49
undertaking with halters about their necks, but he later claimed to infer from Genet's explanation that the rendezvous would be outside the limits of the United States. At any rate he gave Mi- chaux, Genet's agent, what the French minister regarded as a satisfactory letter of introduction to Governor Shelby of Ken- tucky,1 although the letter designedly antedates the last interview of the two principals.
Notwithstanding careful planning abroad 'and shrewd intrigue in the United States, Genet's Louisiana expedition lacked the necessary financial element because of Washington's refusal to pre- pay any portion of the French debt. Few influential men of nieana in Kentucky favored the scheme, although many joined the democratic societies organized by Michaux, La Chaise, and other French agents.2 Clark may have been measurably justified in his claim that many were ready to follow his lead. There was certainly sentiment enough against Spain, but respect for the Washington administration was likewise increasing. The very rumor of Genet's and Clark's plans was enough to cause the Spanish governor, Car- ondelet, great uneasiness, and to lead him to deplore the miserable state of his defenses and the uncertain loyalty of his people.3 But the uncertainties and fears of both American and Spanish author- ities were removed by the disavowal of Genet by his government, the arrival of his successor, Fauchet, and the proclamation by the latter, March 6, 1794, that all hostile preparations against Spanish dominions should cease. The invasion of Florida, Louisiana, or Mexico, from the Georgia frontier or the Ohio Valley became im- possible, and another interesting project in Louisiana history re- mained unrealized.
That Genet's plan caused Governor Carondelet some uneasiness has already been mentioned. Late during the next year, in an- swer to a request for information concerning Louisiana, he ad- dressed to Godoy a long report,4 during which he emphasized the serious dangers then threatening Spanish interests in his province.
*Report of the American Historical Association, 1896, 933; American Historical Review, III 667-670.
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1896, 934; American Historical Review, III 511-515.
"Carondelet to Alcfidia, 1793, Report of the American Historical Asso- ciation, 1896, 975.
4The report, edited by Prof. F. J. Turner, is published in the American Historical Review, II 475, ff.
50 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Carondelet stated that the province extended above the fiftieth degree of north latitude and that Spain should protest against the Indian commerce carried on by the English and Americans between that line and the forty-fourth parallel. For the present, however, Spain should concentrate her efforts upon the country south of the St. Peters (Minnesota) so as to keep the Americans from pressing westward to the Missouri or beyond. This policy should be adopted at once, and !as a first step he had already authorized the explora- tion of the Missouri1 in order to determine if the report that it rose near the western ocean was true. In case it did, it would be doubly advisable to shield it from American aggression.
Carondelet showed that at the time of the cession of the province by France it was almost valueless. Both the French and English as neighbors had been more interested in petty contraband trade than in important territorial acquisitions, but the case was far dif- ferent with the restless pioneer population then demanding the free navigation of the Mississippi. That privilege once granted, they could no longer be restricted to their side of the Mississippi, but would inevitably press on to seize the rich fur trade of the Missouri or the mines of the interior of Mexico. After mentioning the rapid growth of the American settlements and the danger to Spain's population from their proximity, he proposed a definite plan for the defense of his province, in accordance with which he later reported an expenditure of nearly $300,000.2 He likewise attempted, but without success, to revive among the Kentucky conspirators of 1788 the prospect of separating Kentucky from the Union.3
V. NOLAN AND THE AMERICAN PIONEERS.
By the close of 1794 experience had shown that diplomatic in- trigues in London or Paris, although aided by Canadian officials and by Creole or American adventurers, were powerless to revolu-
JThe expedition under James Mackay. See map accompanying Perrin Du Lac's Voyage dans les Deux Louisianes. Paris, 1805. The Mis- souri Historical Society possesses some transcripts of the documents in the Spanish archives relating to the explorations of Mackay, but I have been unable to make use of them in preparing this article.
^American Historical Review, III 514, note 3.
"Green, The Spanish Conspiracy, 324.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 51
tionize Louisiana without the open or tacit consent of the new American government and the earnest support of its western set- tlers. Hitherto the former factor had been lacking and the evi- dent good will of the latter was ineffectual because unorganized. It was to this fact rather than to expenditures for fortifications that Governor Carondelet owed his escape from invasion by Giron- dist propagandists and their American sympathizers. Yet during this very period there was beginning another movement that repre- sented the strength of the western element per se, uninfluenced by any motive of foreign or domestic policy, except the ever-pres- ent Anglo-American hunger for land, and the natural desire to lead in the search for new and easily-obtained pastures. The rank and file of this movement were seen in the American hunt- ers, horse-traders, ranchmen, and general men of affairs who streamed into Louisiana both 'before and after the administration of Carondelet. The self-appointed leader appeared in the person of James Wilkinson, the Spanish pensioner, afterwards promoted to the command of the American army. The most typical repre- sentative of this pioneer crusade, however, is his agent, the horse- trader, explorer, and filibuster — Philip Nolan.
"Philip Nolan had been engaged in trade between San Antonio and Natchez since the year 1785." So states the Texas historian, Yoakum,1 but he gives no authority for the date. In 1789, when General James Wilkinson returned from his second journey to New Orleans, Nolan accompanied him as a confidential agent.2 In a letter written several years later Nolan styles the General "the friend and protector of my youth";3 and in another, written in 1791, he writes, "/ am wholly yours, until I do the business of the season, and then I shall visit San Antonio."4 The unaffected lan- guage of the writer serves to reveal him as a true product of exist- ing border conditions in the Mississippi Valley. Underhand rela- tions with prominent Americans and Spaniards temporarily gained him the confidence of the latter, which he utilized to advance his private fortune by means of illicit trading.
^History of Texas, I 111.
"Clark, Proofs of the Corruption of General James Wilkinson, 15, App. 21.
'Nolan to Wilkinson, June 10, 1796, in Wilkinson, Memoirs of My Own Times, ll, App. II.
'Nolan to Wilkinson, April, 6, 1791. lUd.
52 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
On the expedition hinted at in his letter of April 6, 1791, Nolan does not seem to have met with his customary degree of success. In a later letter to Wilkinson1 he wrote that he had been "ungen- erously suspected for a spy by the Mexicans, and even by your old friend Gayoso."2 The papers furnished him by Governor Miro evidently secured him from imprisonment but not from des- poliation, for he was "cheated out of all his goods." This treat- ment caused him to wander among the Indians for some two years, after which he returned among the Spaniards, conducting two minor ventures. In this way he partially succeeded in recouping his loss. But his experience rendered him doubly cautious, so he forbore to communicate with Wilkinson until his return to Ken- tucky in 1796 gave him an opportunity to do so without danger. "A letter from a trader in horses," he wrote, "to a General of the federal armies, would have confirmed suspicions that were nearly fatal to me."
By the next year Nolan's fortunes promised to mend when, early in February, he presented to Gayoso at Natchez the follow- ing letter from Wilkinson:3
"This will be delivered to you by Nolan, who you know, is a child of my own raising, true to his profession, and firm in his attachments to Spain. I consider him a powerful instrument in our hand should occasion offer. I will answer for his conduct. I am deeply interested in whatever concerns him, and I confidently recommend him to your warmest protection."
This letter coupled with some shrewd diplomatic work in the quarrel between Gayoso and Andrew Ellicott, the American boun- dary commissioner, then at Natchez, evidently won for Nolan the favor of the Spaniards, for he wrote Wilkinson :4
"I have got such a passport, that I apprehend neither risk nor detention: I have instruments to enable me to make a more cor- rect map than the one you saw : Ellicott assisted me in acquiring a more perfect knowledge of astronomy and glasses; and Gayoso himself has made me a present of a portable sextant. My time-
Mune 10, 1796. Ibid.
2 At this time serving as Spanish governor of the Natchez district.
"Yoakum, History of Texas, I 113; Clark, Proofs, 42.
*Nolan to Wilkinson, New Orleans, April 24, 1797, in Wilkinson, Memoirs, II, App. II. For Ellicott's reports, cf. American State Papers, Foreign Relations, II 20-27; 78-87.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 53
piece is good. I shall pay every attention, and take an assistant with me, who is a tolerable mathematician. ... I will write to you again from Natchez by land. Minor's brother sets out next month. I shall take ten good riflemen with me to St. Antonio. The Indian Camanches and Appaches are at war with the Spaniards, and I calculate on a little fight."
This letter of Nolan's is of double interest in view of a statement of Wilkinson's,1 in 1806, "that I have been reconnoitering and exploring the route [i. e. to Santa Fe] for more than sixteen years ; that I know not only the way, but all the difficulties and how to surmount them." The close relations between the general and his protege, and the mention by the latter of maps and sextants, strengthen the suspicion that something more than horse-trading was to characterize Nolan's new venture into Texas. Yet at a later period Ellicott wrote of Nolan:2
"I do not recollect to have ever received a hint, that the late Mr. P. Nolan was concerned in any plans or intrigues injurious to the United States. On the contrary, in all our private and confidential conversations, he appeared strongly attached to the interest and welfare of our country."
At this period Ellicott had evidence deeply incriminating Wil- kinson's loyalty to the Union, so his testimony may be indicative either of the fact that Nolan, for whom he professed great friend- ship,3 was not cognizant of his principal's entire duplicity, or that lie was especially adroit in concealing his true relation to Wilkin- son. The latter supposition is the more likely. At this time the Baron de Carondelet, writing to Thomas Power, another of Wilkin- son's agents, praises Nolan as "a charming young man whom I re- gard very highly," and proposes to use him as a means of confiden- tial communication to the general.4 Power likewise mentions Nolan in a letter to Carondelet,5 while the claim is later made that
, The Aaron Burr Conspiracy, 128. While Humboldt in Wash- ington, during the summer of 1804, Wilkinson through Jefferson, at- tempted to obtain from the famous traveler information concerning the Internal Provinces and routes to Santa F6 and Mexico City. Cf. Cox, "Early Exploration of Louisiana," 91; also Jefferson Papers, Series 2, Vol. 85, No. 78.
"Clark, Proofs, 69.
'Nolan to Wilkinson, July 21, 1797, in Wilkinson, Memoirs, II, App. II.
'Clark, Proofs, 59.
'Ibid., App. 74.
54 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
instructions from Wilkinson to Power are in Nolan's handwriting.1 One is apparently justified, then, in the supposition that Nolan knew more of Wilkinson's purposes than he chose to reveal to Ellicott.
Although Wilkinson and his agents were working with the Louis- iana authorities in schemes detrimental to the United States, the principal did not hesitate to use his advantage to gain knowledge that might in the future be used against the Spanish possessions. This may have been the side of Nolan's mission which he empha- sized to Ellicott, and by means of which he gained the fast friend- ship of the latter. Nolan's motives and those of his principal, so far as Spanish territory is concerned, appear in his conversation with Samuel P. Moore, as reported by the latter in 1810.2 Nolan offered Moore a share in the privilege he had obtained from Caron- delet, of trading in horses with the province of Texas. In addition to the permission from the Governor, Nolan said that he bore let- ters of recommendation from New Orleans priests to those in Texas. These letters had been obtained through Wilkinson's in- fluence, and Oarondelet expected Nolan to furnish him with plans and information concerning the country explored. "But," said Nolan, "I shall take care to give him no information, unless such as may be calculated to mislead him. Whatever discoveries I can make shall be carefully preserved for General Wilkinson, for the benefit of our government." Nolan also spoke of his own influence among the Indians, of the prospect of the conquest of Mexico by the United States, and of his hope of a "conspicuous command" in that movement, through the influence of- his patron.
In one respect Nolan's plans did not promise the entire success that he had hoped. Difficulties between Gayoso and Ellicott threatened to become serious during May, 1797, and the prospect of war caused him to defer his departure. At this time Gayoso showed that the letters of Wilkinson had not wholly secured his agent. Gayoso did, indeed, shower many attentions upon Nolan and even presented him with a sextant, but he wrote Carondelet not to permit the American to leave New Orleans. "He will take an active part against us; he is popular and enterprising; secure
Vbid., App. 71.
zWilkinson, Memoirs, App. III.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 55
him." In this same letter he represented himself as Nolan's friend, so it is no wonder that that individual regarded him as "a vile man, and my implacable enemy."
The Baron de Carondelet had, however, in July, 1797, provided Nolan with strong credentials stating his importance to the royal service, and in addition took measures to secure him from any consequences of Gayoso's enmity. His influence could not extend beyond his term of office, and Gayoso had already been appointed to the governorship of Louisiana — an event full of significance for Nolan's future career. Matters had become more pacific around Natchez, so the latter wrote Wilkinson; and he determined, despite the uncertain tone of the last presidential speech, to set out on the following day. Twelve persons constituted his company, and he carried some seven thousand dollars' worth of merchandise.1 Pro- ceeding to San Antonio, he sent a request to Captain General Pedro de Nava at Chihuahua for permission to buy -horses. Re- ceiving a favorable response he conveyed some thirteen hundred back to Louisiana and beyond, arriving at the Mississippi early in 1799.2
It was while absent upon this excursion that Nolan gained a new friend, more influential even than his patron, the general. Upon recommendation of Senator Brown of Kentucky, in possible con- junction with an earlier hint from Wilkinson,3 Jefferson, then vice- president-elect directed to Nolan a letter asking for information concerning the wild horses to be found west of the Mississippi.4
JNolan to Wilkinson, July 21, 1797, in Wilkinson, Memoirs II, App. II.
2Garrison, Texas, 112; THE QUARTERLY, VII 311, 312.
3THE QUARTERLY, VII 314; Jefferson's motives in interesting himself in Nolan's work, while uncertain, are strongly suspicious. In the letter re- ferred to above, Wilkinson writes: "In the Bearer of this Letter — Mr. P. Nolan, you will behold the Mexican traveler, a specimen of whose discov- eries I had the honor to submit to you in the Winter 1797." Early in this same year, 1797, according .to the testimony of John D. Chisholm (American Historical Review, X 602), the latter on one occasion, while visiting Senator Blount, of Tenessee, found at table with him Jefferson and Wilkinson. Chisholm believed that Blount expected him to disclose to his visitors the plan for the conquest of Louisiana, the Floridas, and New Mexico, but evaded doing so. A conference between these three men, during the incubation of the so-called Blount conspiracy, is highly significant, especially in view of Wilkinson's desire for the conquest of New Mexico — one of the objective points of the conspiracy. In view of this fact, and of the above quotation from Wilkinson's letter, we are led to believe that Jefferson's interest in Nolan extended farther than to the latter's description of the wild horses of Texas.
*THE QUARTERLY, VII 308.
56 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
The information was to be presented to the Philosophical Society of Philadelphia, of which body Jefferson was then serving as pres- ident. This society was the most important scientific organization in America, and the gathering of interesting and curious data was a very important branch of its work. Jefferson certainly could have appealed to no one better qualified to supply the information he sought. Wild horses, then, probably constituted one of the sub- jects which afford evidence of the many-sided genius of Jefferson. We may surmise, however, that in the succeeding interview the statesman 'acquired from the horse-trader information other than that he openly requested, but his preserved correspondence does not show it.
Jefferson's letter to Nolan fell into the hands of Daniel Clark of New Orleans, who had charge of the trader's correspondence. Clark immediately informed Jefferson1 of Nolan's whereabouts and of his expected return early in the spring, when the trader would take pleasure in complying with his request.
Meanwhile Clark directed him to Andrew Ellicott, then stop- ping at his house in New Orleans, who could from previous ac- quaintance with Nolan give the vice-president much interesting information upon the subject in question. Clark, however, warned Jefferson to keep to himself any information of the sort, for the present publication would disclose its source, with fatal conse- quences to a man "who will at all times have it in his Power to render important Services to the U. S., and whom Nature seems to have formed for Enterprizes of which the rest of Mankind are incapable." Nolan's papers, Clark continued, were confided to himself and a friend in Spanish service, and if anything should happen to "this extraordinary Character" they should be exam- ined and everything relating to "that Country" forwarded to Jef- ferson. Clark closed his missive by calling to Jefferson's atten- tion "Mr. William Dunbar a citizen of Natchez," who "for Science, Probity, and general information is the first Character in this part of the World."
Clark's mention of Dunbar proved the beginning of a most in- teresting correspondence, shortly to be turned into the channel of Louisiana exploration. In his next letter2 Clark mentioned the
irTHE QUARTERLY, VII 309-311. 2Ibid., VII 311-312.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 57
arrival of Nolan while he was visiting at Dunbar's. Nolan had un- consciously escaped a grave danger. Before Gayoso's death that official had written the governor of Texas, advising the arrest of Nolan as a person who from his knowledge of the interior of Mex- ico "might one day be of injury to the Spanish Monarchy." Fortu- nately for Nolan the governor of Texas died shortly before the letter arrived, and the officer temporarily in charge forbore to open the correspondence, pending the arrival of the regular appointee. Nolan was thus treated with the utmost deference, and never learned of his peril until informed by Clark upon his return to Louisiana.
Clark added that the 'hostile attitude of the Spaniards now re- moved the necessity for secrecy on Nolan's part, and that the latter was ready to communicate to Jefferson the information he desired. Indeed Clark wrote that he had "proposed to Nolan to send him on to the IT. S. that you might have an opportunity of learning from him many curious particulars respecting his Country." It will be noted that this offier of information covered a wider field than that merely concerning wild horses. Furthermore, Clark was so anxious in regard to the matter that he offered to pay all of Nolan's expenses and to compensate him for his time — rather ex- traordinary efforts simply to obtain some curious scientific infor- mation of certain equine species. Taken in connection with the opinion expressed by Ellicott1 that it was the general belief of the inhabitants of New Orleans that their country would shortly be an- nexed to the United States, the letters of Clark seem to indicate a desire on the part of the American contingent to aid this move- ment and to make it as extensive as possible. Wilkinson, at Fort Adams, on the 22nd of the following May added the finishing touches to the scheme by giving Nolan a letter2 of introduction to Jefferson. In this letter he states that he had previously men- tioned Nolan's discoveries, and spoke of Nolan's detailed knowl- edge and high character, which led him highly to recommend the trader to Jefferson. After such an introduction one would relish the details of the succeeding interview between the horse-trader
Ellicott to Secretary of State, January 13, 1799, in Ellicott, Southern Boundary, MSS., Bureau of Rolls and Library, Department of State. THE QUARTERLY, VII 314.
58 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
of Louisiana and the future president whose administration was to be marked by the acquisition of that province.
Gaydso's letters to de Nava had suggested the advisability of arresting all foreigners in order to prevent Americans from form- ing intimate relations with the Indians, and especially singled out Nolan as a "dangerous man and a sacreligious hypocrite who had deceived the previous governor to get a passport."1 Nolan's almost miraculous escape on his preceding journey should have rendered him cautious about venturing again into Texas, especially in view of de Nava's probable orders to arrest him, should he attempt to do so. Nevertheless his interview with Jefferson seems to have deter- mined him to penetrate again into the forbidden country, for whose officials his previous experiences may have given him a hearty con- tempt. In this expedition he seems to have planned deliberately to arouse the hospitality of both Spaniards and Indians, for his party numbered twenty-one — too many for a peaceful excursion, though not enough for defense against an aroused antagonist. The result, as might be readily foreseen, is expressed in a later letter from Dunbar,2 who at the same time aptly describes the adventur- er's character :
"But lately we have been cut off from our usual communication with that Country by the imprudence of Mr. Nolan who persisted in hunting wild horses without a regular permission; the conse- quence of which has been, that a party being sent against him, he was the only man of his company who was killed by a random shot. — I am much concerned for the loss of this man. Altho his eccentricities were many and great, yet he was not destitute of romantic principles of honor united to the highest personal cour- age, with energy ,of mind not sufficiently cultivated by education, but which under the guidance of a little more prudence might have conducted him to enterprises of the first magnitude."
It was in October, 1800, after his return from Philadelphia, that Nolan set out on what was to prove his final excursion into Texas.3
Garrison, Texas, 113.
"Dunbar to Jefferson, August 22, 1901, in THE QUARTERLY, VII 315.
8For the details of Nolan's last expedition, cf. Yoakum, History of Texas, I 111-116; Garrison, Texas, 111-116. The Memoirs of Ellis P. Bean ( properly P. E. Bean ) , one of his companions, are found in the Appendix of Yoakum, I 403-452; Cavo, Tres Siglos de Mexico. Appendix, 660 (Jalapa, 1870).
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 59
The Spanish consul at Natchez, Vidal, entered a complaint against him, but his passport was in regular form, and after a preliminary hearing he was discharged for want of jurisdiction. Vidal sent word to the Texas authorities, and likewise to the Spanish com- mandant at Fort Miro, who sent a force of fifty men to intercept Nolan; but the latter was not to be deterred from his course, and the Spaniard did not attempt to use force. Making a detour to avoid unnecessary trouble at the fort, the little company, now re- duced by desertions to eighteen, crossed the Red River, visited a vil- lage of Oaddo Indians, and finally pressed on to the Brazos. In the course of a few months they had collected several hundred head of horses and had visited the Comanche Indians on the Red River, as well as several other important tribee near the Brazos. Finally on the 21st of March, 1801, they were attacked by a force of a hun- dred Spaniards, and in the ensuing fight Nolan was killed, three others wounded, and eleven of the number captured. This fight probably took place near the site of the city of Waco, Texas.
Three of those engaged in the fighting escaped, one died, and one was hanged by the Spaniards at Chihuahua, in 1807. When Pike visited this town early in that year, he met with a member of the party and from him learned of most the others. In their behalf he made an ineffectual appeal to the captain-general, Salcedo, and upon his return to the United States, published in the Natchez Herald an account of their condition.1 Of their number P. E. Bean, popularly known as Ellis P. Bean, is the only one Who be- comes of importance in Southwestern history.
From the correspondence already noted one is disposed to give a great deal of weight to the deposition of Mordecai Richards, one of the early deserters from Nolan's party. Richards stated that Nolan's plan was to build a fort near the Caddo Indians, explore the country for mines, gather horses, and then return to Kentucky. Here he expected to be joined by volunteers in a scheme for the conquest of Texas.2 Probably one should substitute New Mexico for Texas, but with this change one is prepared to accept Rich- ards' statement as affording a tangible explanation for Nolan's er- ratic but adventurous career.
H^oues, Expeditions of Zebulon Montgomery Pike, I, LII. 'Garrison, Texas, 113.
60 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
It is as the first in a long line of Southwestern filibusterers that Nolan merits this extended notice. His importance is likewise in- creased by the fact that with his adventurous exploits on the Texas- Louisiana frontier are linked the names of Wilkinson, Dunbar, Clark, 'and Jefferson — all leading actors upon the stage afforded b}' the Louisiana Purchase.
Nolan, the pioneer filibusterer, was typical of but one class of the frontier population pushing in from the United States. As early as 1791 Edward Murphy received a grant of land upon the Arroyo Hondo.1 Seven years later Samuel Davenport took up his resi- dence within the Spanish jurisdiction of Nacogdoehes. In Novem- ber of this same year, 1798, Murphy conveyed his estate — La Nana — to a company of which he, Davenport, a Smith of New York, and William Barr of Pennsylvania were members.2 The following year Murphy acquired additional land between the Arroyo Hondo and the Sabine, and his buildings upon this property were burned by the American troops in 1806.8 These men were evidently as- sociated for the purpose of carrying on ranching in connection with horse-trading between Texas and Louisiana; and in 1801 their privileges were extended to include trade with the friendly Indians to the north. Three years later Dr. John Sibley describes them as a company of "Indian traders who have all been citizens of the United States and some are now," whose activities were prejudicial to American interests.4 The French traveler Eobin evidently refers to Murphy and his associates as the "English Com- pany called Morphil," which monopolized the fur trade of Natch- itoches, and whose goods penetrated as far as San Antonio.5
It was evidently the trade of this company that caused passing travelers to remark upon the brisk traffic between Nacogdoehes and Louisiana.6 These traders evidently were secure in their monopoly because of their connection with a Spanish officer at Nacogdoches, but this very connection rendered them suspected by the Americans when Louisiana passed into the possession of the latter. By this
1House Document, No. 50, 19 Cong., 1 Sess., page 67. z 81.
'Ibid., 68.
'Jefferson Papers, Series 2, Vol. 76, No. 7. Cf. Salcedo to Governor of Texas, December 9, 1806, MSS. Bgxar Archives. "Robin, Voyages, II 123-125. 'Diario of St. Maxent and Fortier, 1801, Historic/; LXII, Doc. LXIX.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 61
time they also became- objects of suspicion to the Spanish officials in Texas/ but their close connection with the latter saved them from the fate of Nolan.
That they were not the only Americans in this region before the transfer of Louisiana is shown by the presence of others, in 1803, on the Washita, on the Red, where one pioneer reports thirty years' residence, and even west of the Sabine on Ayish Bayou. In all of these districts they seemed already to occupy the best industrial situations.2 The success of these early pioneers largely influ- enced Governor Carondelet to support the explorations of James Mackay along the Missouri and Platte,3 in order to forestall the Americans in this region and to drive out the British. It may also have influenced Watkins, Sebastian, Bastrop. and their asso- ciates, in 1799 or 1800, in their proposal to obtain a grant of land along one of the rivers of upper Louisiana.4
The policy that permitted the irruption of an element generally regarded with apprehension was the mistaken one of hoping that the American pioneers might be used to develop a portion of the country as a bulwark against further encroachment of their coun- trymen. This was the gist of a report by Pontalba to Talleyrand,5 who believed that after one generation the country could be held permanently for France. By 1794 the Texas border authorities were warned to keep a sharp lookout for copies of El Desengano del H ombre (The Undeceiving of Man), a book condemned by the Inquisition.6 In this same year Carondelet believed that a revo- lution was impending in all Spanish America, unless the Ameri- cans could be kept away from the Mississippi, and was setting on foot preparations to explore the upper waters of the Missouri and a possible route to the Pacific.7 This latter measure resulted in Mackay's expedition.
The danger threatening Spanish dominion was mentioned at
'Valle to Elguezabal, February 1, 1805, Bexar Archives. Cf. Sibley, supra.
"Robin, loc. cit., 332, Annals of Congress, 9 Con., 2 Sess., 1078, 1901.
'See map in Perrin Da Lac,, Voyages dans des Deux Louisianes, etc., Paris, 1805.
*See Gayarre, IV; also the Spanish transcripts in the possession of Mr. Luis M. Perez of the Library of Congress.
'Gayarre, IV 418ff.
"Order of de Nava, November 21, 1794, Bexar Archives.
'Report of Carondelet, November 24, 1794. in American Historical Re- view, II 47«, 478.
62 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
length in a report to Bishop Penalvert of Louisiana, written in 1799. * The character of the original inhabitants of Louisiana had greatly deteriorated through the free admission of America pion- eers. These adventureres were scattered over the region bordering upon Texas, were employing the Indians upon their farms, and im- pressing upon their minds "maxims in harmony with their own ambitions." What was worse, they were in the habit of saying to each of their robust boys, "You will be the man to go to Mexico." They threatened not only Texas, but New Mexico from the coun- try of the Illinois. His remedy was to prevent their settlement at any of the dangerous points. In 1802, after the innovations of these and other Louisiana settlers gave Governor Salcedo a great deal of annoyance, that official received instructions to make no more grants to Americans. But the damage was already done ; the navigation of the Mississippi, naturally leading to the fur trade of its western waters, had attracted a frontier population that would be satisfied only with the supposedly fabulous mineral wealth of the interior of Mexico.
VI. THE DIPLOMACY OP THE LOUISIANA CESSION.
Fauchet, the successor of Genet, was as keenly alive as the latter with regard to the importance of possessing Louisiana, but he pre- ferred to have France obtain it by diplomacy. When he learned the full significance of the Jay treaty, he believed it to be unfavor- able to his country and clearly against the treaty of 1778; but France had no way to force from the United States a greater re- spect for her interests. The true remedy he believed to be the acquisition of a continental colony (Louisiana, of course) which would give France a needed entrepot for the West India trade, a market for her manufactures, and a monopoly of the produce of the Mississippi Valley. From this secure position France would have the means of bringing pressure to bear upon the United States and thus keep her subordinate to her own policy.2
The French minister knew from Knox that the United States preferred Spain to France as a colonial neighbor, because the for- mer was less to be feared. He likewise knew that if Spain per-
H^ayarrg, IV 407, 408.
"American Historical Review, X 265.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 63
sisted in her policy of closing the Mississippi, all of Louisiana must soon pass into the possession of the enraged Americans. This, he believed, would result in the formation of a new confederacy com- posed of the western States and Louisiana, an'd that, too, within fifteen years. The only remedy, in his estimation, was for France, or some other country stronger than Spain, to gain the country bordering on the Mississippi, and then at will to assist or retard the development of the western settlements.1
Fauchet believed that it would be easy to obtain Louisiana by negotiation before France made peace with Spain, and that this acquisition would cause a radical change in American policy to- words the former. If his country should not obtain Louisiana at this time, and if war with Spain continued, he believed it to be in accordance with the interests of France to impede the special mis- sion of Pinckney to Madrid in behalf of navigation of the Missis- sippi; otherwise, by acquiring this boon, the West would be less zealous in aiding France to conquer Louisiana, This last means was less desirable than diplomacy, but would be reasonably success- ful in lieu of a better way, and would receive western support, if reciprocal advantages were offered.
He was certain that the victories of France over Spain fully justified great concessions, and that these should be obtained, de- spite the opposition of the United States to the retrocession of I/ouisiana. His suggestions were forestalled in the instructions of the Directory to Barthelemy, the French representative in the Treaty of Bale, to insist upon the retrocession of Louisiana as one of the conditions of peace. In order to make this condition more palatable that diplomat was to represent the advantage of having a strong French colony between Mexico and the United States. Godoy, however, preferred to yield Santo Domingo rather than Louisiana, and the finances of France did not permit a treaty on any other basis.2 A few months later, to prevent an undue alliance of American and British interests, the Spaniard likewise made a favorable treaty with Pinckney.
Adet, who in 1795 succeeded Fauchet, believed that it was not to the interest of France to go to war with the United States.
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1903, Vol. II, 567, 568. ^American Historical Review, X 266, 267; Ogg, Opening of the Missis- sippi, 462.
64 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Such an event would cause that power to unite with Great Britain in the conquest of Louisiana and the Floridas. The Americans would overrun New Mexico and thence extend far into Mexico it- self.1 Adet, believed, however, that France should acquire Louis- iana, and in furtherance of his opinion sent Gen. Victor Collot, then in America, on a military reconnaissance of the Mississippi Valley. Collot made a thorough examination of such of its im- portant topographical features as could be determined from a jour- ney down the Ohio and the Mississippi, and his conclusions were published some three decades later.2
The French officer reported that the Spaniards had attempted to close lower Louisiana to the Americans and had opened the upper portion, in the mistaken belief that they would thus shut them off from Santa Fe. He suggested what Pike afterward demonstrated, that the way of approach to New Mexico by the Missouri and its tributaries, or by the Arkansas, was comparatively easy.3 Collot likewise believed that the Mississippi would prove of no avail as a barrier, if different nations possessed its opposite banks. One nation only must dominate the whole valley. This opinion he after- ward modified, when Louisiana passed into the control of the United States.4 The French general emphasized the friendship which France now professed for Spain by suggesting to the Span- ish minister a plan of defense for the entire Mississippi Valley.5
While Collot was on this tour his attention was attracted by events in the West and in Canada, which abundantly justified the preparation of his plan. In October, 1795, the Duke of Port- land sent to Lieutenant-Governor Simcoe of Canada a proposal for the invasion of Louisiana in case of hostilities with Spain, and advised him to sound western opinion upon this subject, but with- out compromising either his government or that of the United States.6 Simcoe apparently set to work to carry out his secret in- structions, for while Collot was on his way down the Ohio, he
^American Historical Review, X 268; Report of the American Histori- cal Association, 1903, Vol. II 988.
"Victor Collot, A Journey in North America, etc. (Paris, 1826).
3Collott, Journey, II 35, 36, 230-245.
*IUd., 257.
^American Historical Review, X 272, 577-582; Report of the American Historical Association, 1903, II 1015.
'American Historical Review, X 273, 274, 575, 576.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 65
learned something of the Governor's preparations in Canada and told Zenon Trudeau, the Spanish commandant at St. Louis, that he thought the proposed armament was destined to attack upper Louis- iana. Accordingly he gave Trudeau a plan for defending St. Louis, which he regarded as the key for the defense of the Upper Mississippi and the Missouri and the connecting link for com- munication between the Gulf of Mexico and the Southern Ocean.1 As he passed down the Mississippi Collot learned that in addition to the expedition against Upper Louisiana, British emissaries in the Southwest were attempting to organize the frontiersmen and Indians for a foray into lower Louisiana and New Mexico, by way of Red River. Collot took pains to inform the Spanish command- ers of this threatening danger, although he was suspected by Carondelet of designs upon the Spanish government of the colony ; and he later claimed that while at Natchez he told Gayoso the name of the prime mover, John D. Chisholm.2
The intrigues of this individual finally involved Senator William Blount of Tennessee. The latter, an extensive speculator in lands along the lower Mississippi, became alarmed at the prospect of France's acquiring Louisiana; and in order to preserve his inter- ests planned the seizure of that province and the Floridas for Eng- land. His frontier levies were to be joined by an English fleet and a military force from Canada, but owing to a premature revela- tion of plans, the English government disclaimed any responsibil- ity for the action of its subordinates. The most important diplo- matic result following the incident was the retention by Spain until 1798 of certain posts east of the Mississippi — posts which she should have yielded to the United States upon ratification of the Treaty of 1795.3 Early in 1797 Chisholm visited England, but failed to enlist the support of British officials, while the premature disclosures of Blount's part in the affair led to his impeachment and the loss of his seat in the Senate.
"Collet, A Journey in North America, I 251; II 5.
*Ibid., II 5, 12, 64, 65-68; American Historical Review, X 600, 601; Robin. Voyages, II 1198.
"American Historical Review, X 273-275. Cf. also Ibid., 574 et seq , and Life and, Correspondence of Rufus King, II 253-258. The surrender of these posts was looked upon by certain French statesmen and travelers as a great blow to the ambitious colonial policy of France. Cf. Baudry des Lozifcres, Voyages a la Louisiane, 202 ; Adams, History of the United States, II 61, 62.
66 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
While the plot of Chisholm and Blount was in the process of incubation, there were not lacking shrewd observers to point out the fallacy of expecting any true cooperation between Canadian levies and American frontiersman.1 The sympathies of the latter could readily be turned into a French channel, but hardly into the current of British expansion. Shortly before the Blount incident Col. Samuel Fulton, an agent of the Directory, visited George liogers Clark and the Creek Indians, where Chisholm met him. Upon his return to France he reported that the people of the West were ready to act for France, if only furnished with arms.2 As an indication of their desire to arouse a favorable sentiment among their former friends, the Directory sent a brigadier-general's com- mission to Clark.3 That their confidence was not misplaced was shown by a later letter of Clark to Fulton,4 in which he reports his refusal to head a British expedition against upper Louisiana and New Mexico, and his determination to defeat its object. The boundary commissioner, Andrew Ellicott, reported from the Natchez district a somewhat different sentiment. There a plan was early formed to overrun the Floridas and New Orleans if Spain com- mitted any hostilities against the United States or joined France in the threatened contest.5 Although Ellicott believed that this movement would have been successful, it would not have been a movement against France as much as against Spain. Even this plan might have been checked by that of the French adventurer, Milfort, to enlist the Creeks in a campaign to drive the Americans from the Southwest and acquire Louisiana;6 or of Dupont de Nemours and other French scientists to establish a settlement on the upper Mississippi within Spanish limits.7
Following closely upon the Blount incident come the various diplomatic complications arising from the so-called X. Y. Z. Affair. The prospect of immediate war rendered probable an alliance be- tween Great Britain and the United States against France and her
American Historical Review, X 576.
znid., 270-271; Report of the American Historical Association, 190S, II 1097. "Ibid., 271.
'Report of the American Historical Association, 1903, II 1098. "Ellicott, Journal, 175. 6 American Historical Review, X 271. 7/6id., 275, note 3; Adams, Life and Works of John Adams, VIII 596.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 67
half-hearted ally Spain, to be followed by the immediate occupa- tion of the Floridas and Louisiana and the possible uprising of all Spanish America. In October, 1797, the French consul Letombe reported that Hamilton and the ex-tieme Federalists favored such a policy, and that the- South Carolina representatives already traced the route for such a campaign from Pittsburg to Mexico City by way of "Rionorte et Sartila."1 The prospect of hostilities in America again brought Miranda into England for the pur- pose of enlisting that nation and the United States in a campaign for the independence of all Spanish America west of the Missis- sippi. In this campaign he expected a British fleet to land ten thousand men at Darien, a small British squad- ron to threaten Peru, and five thousand American fron- tiersmen to cooperate with them. For a time the Brit- ish officials encouraged his 'plan, while awaiting the ex- pected overthrow of Spanish independence by France. When that event did not materialize, largely because of the opposition of Godoy, they allowed Miranda's scheme to lapse. Rufus King, our minister to Great Britain, eagerly seconded the plan as affording a positive program in place of the mere defensive position which England assumed in Europe towards French aggression. Hamil- ton, as the active commander of the American forces, regarded with favor such an extensive campaign in behalf of American in- dependence, and even consulted with Wilkinson regarding its main features, but was willing to engage in it only under the auspices of his government. The policy of President Adams in adjusting our differences with France rendered the wider campaign impos- sible and permitted Spain still to retain Louisiana and the Flor- idas.2
Upon France the effect of the Blount Conspiracy was to increase her determination to secure Louisiana. In 1796 General Perignon went to Madrid to arrange a formal alliance between Spain and France. Although he represented the danger to both countries from an alliance between Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of dividing North America, and pointed out that the
^Report of the American Historical Association, 1903, Vol. II, 1076; cf. also Adams, Life and Works of John Adams, I 252, 679-684.
"King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, II 649-666; III 556-565. Cf. also the introduction of Hale, Philip Nolan's Friends, XII, XIII, XV.
68 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
cession of Louisiana to France was the only possible check to this movement, he did not succeed in gaining the coveted province.1 The offer to conquer and divide Portugal or else to exchange Louisiana for the papal legations were likewise without result.2
When in July, 1797, Tallyrand assumed the position of minister of foreign affairs under the Directory, he ushered in a new and more successful era in Louisiana diplomacy. The ex-bishop of Autun believed that the commercial and political interests of the United States and Great Britain were naturally allied, and that in opposition to them France must build up a colonial system of her own.3 The following year he was in a position to reveal some of the details necessary to inaugurate this system. By this time Godoy had been driven from power and Urquijo, a minister more complaisant to the French Directory, now managed the foreign af- fairs of Spain. Accordingly Tallyrand instructed Guillemardet4 at Madrid, to show to the Spanish government the evil effects fol- lowing the delivery to the Americans of the posts on the Missis- sippi. He was then to represent vividly the danger to Spanis'h in- terests because of the ambition and cupidity of the Americans, their determination to dominate the western continent and perhaps Europe, and the possibility of their union with Great Britain in order to realize this program. The only way to curb their ambi- tion was to shut them up "within the limits which Nature seems to have traced for them" (i. e. the Appalachians). Spain could not do this, so she must hasten to appeal for aid to a "preponderat- ing Power," whose recompense should be "a small part of her im- mense dominions" (Louisiana and the Floridas). As mistress of these two provinces the French Eepublic would be "a wall of brass forever impenetrable to the combined efforts of England and America."
Certain mistakes of domestic and of foreign policy interfered with the immediate success of Tallyrand's plans and forced his retirement from office until after the coup d'etat of the 18th Bru-
1 American Historical Review, X 268, 269.
*IUd., 269.
"Henry Adams, History of the United States, I 352.
*Ibid., 355ff. One French traveler of the period, however, emphasizes the fact that his nation would make Louisiana something more than an unproductive barrier colony. Perrin Du Lac, Voyages dans les Deux Louisianes, 236.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier^ 69
maire; but he had prepared the way for the early acquisition of the coveted province and had shown that this acquisition would be full of danger to the United States. His restoration to office in 1800 and the battle of Marengo enabled him to resume the negotiation with every prospect of success. A special courier was sent to Al- quier, the French representative at Madrid, to empower the latter to offer an increase in territory and power to the prospective Duke of Parma, the son-in-law of the Spanish king, in return for Louis- iana.1 Alquier accompanied his proposal by threatening Urquijo with the fate of Godoy, and brought the influence of the Queen to bear upon the wavering King. Thus the point of retrocession was gained.
Meanwhile Napoleon determined upon a special agent to super- sede Alquier and to demand the Floridas in addition to Louisiana.2 In this latter demand the agent, General Berthier, was unsuccess- ful and was forced to content himself with signing at San Ilde- fonso, October 1, 1800, a treaty for the retrocession of Louisiana alone. During the following March Napoleon's brother Lucien signed at Madrid a new treaty carrying into effect the provision^ of the former one,3 but in some respects more unfavorable to the sinister designs of the First Consul. For more than a year Godoy, who again dominated the counsels of the King of Spain, delayed the transfer of the ceded province to Napoleon until he had re ceived the formal promise of the latter never to alienate it.4 Then -disease and insurrection in Santo Domingo saved Louisiana from the presence of the French troops and destroyed Napoleon's dream of a new colonial empire in the Mississippi Valley.
The retrocession of Louisiana had not been accomplished with- out the knowledge of American authorities. Early in 1797 Pick- ering, the secretary of state, had warned Kufus King5 that France contemplated the acquisition of Louisiana and that he should find out as much as possible about the matter and endeavor to thwart it by such means as lay within his power. In September of the following year, during a conference with Lord Hawkesbury, the
''Adams, History of the United States, I 363, 364.
"Ibid., 366.
"IUd., 372.
4Ibid., 400.
5King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, II 147.
70 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
latter told King1 that there was no doubt that France had ob- tained possession of Louisiana, He also assured him that Eng- land had no desire to extend her colonial empire to include the Mississippi Valley. These early rumors of French possession were later found to be premature, and merely suggested the possibility of a combination of England and America to arrest French aggres- sion and liberate Spanish America.2
Within a few months after the signing of the Treaty of San Ildefonso, King reported to the secretary of state8 rumors then current in London concerning the cession of Louisiana to France. This act implied not merely undesirable neighbors in the persons of emigres or superannuated soldiers from France, but likewise a serious design to entice the western settlers or arouse the slaves in the South. By November King was able to send home a copy of the Treaty of Madrid,4 although each of the principals still con- tinued to deny its existence. Later King attempted to persuade the British government to take some action at Amiens looking to the destoration of Louisiana to Spain. Although both Hawkes- bury and Landsdowne were opposed to the transfer to France and were ready to join the United States in defending the common right to navigate the Mississippi, they believed it inadvisable to suggest the subject in the Treaty of Amiens.5 American dip- lomacy, then, must depend upon its own efforts to neutralize the effect of the retrocession.
The most obvious policy for the United States to pursue was that of acquiring New Orleans and the Floridas. As soon as Mr. King's warnings had had time to produce their natural effect, Jef- ferson and his advisers took measures to meet the new issue raised by the transfer. To Charles Pinckney, our minister at Madrid, Madison penned a caution to watch the general interests of his country,* while three months later he instructed Robert R. Livings- ton at Paris to make direct approaches to the French government for the acquisition of the Floridas, or at least West Florida.7 For
Ill 572. "See page 67.
'King, Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, III 414, 415, 447-449. 4/6id., IV 15.
*IUd., IV 17-19, 56, 57, 58, 86, 108, 109, 123.
"State Papers and Correspondence Bearing upon the Purchase of the Territory of Louisiana, 5, House Document No. 431, 57 Cong., 2 Sess. Void.,' 6-8.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 71
several months, however, the correspondence of our ministers abroad was filled with unofficial confirmations of the proposed transfer, coupled with official denials of the act or evasions of the proposal to sell the Floridas to the United States; while the pros- pective French expedition to Santo Domingo caused all great un- easiness because of its possible diversion to Louisiana. Jefferson at home suggested a possible alliance with the British naval power ; King at London proposed united action to preserve the navigation of the Mississippi. From Paris Livingston tried to arouse Spain by intimating the danger to Mexico from French vicinage and to alarm England by referring to the unsettled boundary between Louisiana and Canada, while he attempted to demonstrate to the French government the futility of their new acquisition. At Mad- rid Pinckney endeavored to make sure of the Floridas and Newt Orleans by a guaranty of Spanish possessions west of the Missis- sippi.1 Yet nearly the whole year, 1802, passed with the question of the disposal of Louisiana still uncertain.
An element of definiteness was imparted to the question when, on. October 16, 1802, the intendant, Morales, at New Orleans sus- pended the right of deposit which American citizens, since 1798, had enjoyed at that port. It is usually supposed that the impulse that led to this action followed the treaty of cession, even if it did not emanate directly from Napoleon.2 This act aroused the West as none other could, and emphasized the necessity of securing con- trol of the mouth of the Mississippi in order to avoid possible future embroilment through the action of local officials. Accord- ingly Jefferson appointed Monroe as special envoy to cooperate with Livingston at Paris and with Pinckney at Madrid to purchase New Orleans -and the Floridas. In case of failure to secure East Florida and New Orleans, the next best thing was the possession of West Florida, including the whole of the channel of the Iberville. By artificial means this could be rendered navigable at all seasons, and with a port on Lake Pontchatrain the settlers of the Mississippi Valley would become wholly independent of New Orleans.3
20-50 passim; also manuscript volume in Bureau of Indexes and Archives, "Letters of C. Pinckney and R. Livingston, Spanish Dis- patches."
"Adams, History of the United States, I 418, 419.
"Gallatin to Madison, February 7, 1803, in Works of Madison, II 179.
72 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Before this time the restoration of peace in Europe had led King Charles, on October 15, 1802, to sign the order for the delivery of the province to Napoleon, and nothing stood in the way of the colonial empire of the latter but the insurrection of the blacks in Santo Domingo. Despite this interruption to his plans he pro- ceeded, through his Minister of the Marine, to give instructions to Victor, the designated captain-general of Louisiana. In these instructions he makes the significant claim that the western bound- ary of Louisiana was the Eio Bravo as far as the 30th parallel, and that beyond that point the boundary was wholly undecided.1
After the Santo Domingo revolt had delayed the moment of taking possession of Louisiana, the prospect of a speedy rupture with England, coupled with the necessities of his ever needy mili- tary chest, turned the dream of an American dependency stretch- ing to the Pacific and opening a new pathway to the Orient,2 into a bargain and sale. To the surprise of the American commission- ers, Napoleon suddenly proffered them the whole of Louisiana. After a few weeks of hesitation and bargaining, the Corsican's hardly acquired possession, with its uncertain limits, passed into the keeping of the young Eepublic of the West.
Diplomatic struggles, growing directly or indirectly out of the Louisiana Purchase, were to affect our foreign relations for the next half century, and our government was not even to enter into possession of its disputed limits without a serious diplomatic dis- pute between Madison and Casa Yrujo, the Spanish minister at Washington. In considering the consequences to Spain of the un- toward transfer, the latter did not apprehend any worse result than clandestine trading by the Americans within the Mexican prov- inces. This practice could be checked, if not absolutely controlled, by Spain, as long as she possessed the power of making reprisals from the Floridas. Louisiana in the hands of Spain had been a constant bill of expense, with no military advantage to offset, for it was too extended and too weakly garrisoned to prove an effective bulwark to New Mexico and the interior provinces. On the other
^Axlams, History of the United States, II 6. For a full discussion of the real significance of these instructions upon the territorial status of Texas, cf. article by Prof. J. R. Ficklen, in Publications of the Southern Historical Association, V 383.
2Cf. Baudry des Lozieres, Voyages a la Louisiana, 227.
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 73
hand, aside from the control of the mouth of the Mississippi, he believed that its possession by the United States would be a dis- tinct detriment to the latter, for in his judgment two centuries would pass before the country could be effectively populated, and in the meantime centrifugal tendencies would destroy the present form of the American government. While Spain continued to pos- sess the Floridas and Havana, it would be comparatively easy to blockade the mouth of the Mississippi and thus check any am- bitious attempts of the western States upon Mexico. On the whole, he preferred the Americans as neighbors to Victor's troops with appetites whetted for further conquests.1
Although Casa Yrujo fully believed the cession detrimental to the United States, he lost no time in following Cevallos' instruc- tions to protest against the act on account of Napoleon's bad faith in alienating Louisiana. The protest was expressed in two vigor- ous notes of September 12th and 27th, and merely elicited from Madison the verbal response that Cevallos had referred to France the American desire to acquire the Floridas, that the Spanish ?overeign had consented to transfer the province to the same power, and that any questions of good or bad faith arising outside the lan- guage of the treaty must be settled between that power and Spain. This controversy was later settled by Napoleon's inducing the Span- ish government to withdraw its protest against his sale of Louis- iana, while he agreed to assist that government to retain the Flor- idas.2 Before instructions based upon this agreement reached Casa Yiujo, he had already done what he could, in a small way, to delay the transfer, by refusing to legalize certain papers in con- nection with that act.3 The only effect of his natural but mistaken zeal was to alarm the American authorities and to exasperate the French minister. Measures were immediately taken to gain pos- session of Louisiana by force, should the Spanish troops therein offer any resistance. Fortunately these precautions were unneces- sary, and on December 20, 1803, the American commissioners re- ceived from the French prefect the province that for a score of
*Casa Yrujo to Cevallos, August 3, November 5, 1803, in Henry Adams, "Spanish State Papers." These papers of Mr. Adams are deposited in the Bureau of Rolls and Library, State Department.
'Consult Adams, History of the United States, II, passim.
sCasa Yrujo to Cevallos, September 30 and October 16, 1803, in Adams, "Spanish State Papers."
74 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
years had been the center of the most important diplomatic in- trigues of our history.
The most important single feature of the early history of this section is that of the limits of Louisiana. This is shown by the almost interminable diplomatic correspondence of the three de- cades following its acquisition. We have noticed the French claims to the westward, uncertainly marked by the Guadalupe, the Rio Grande, or still more indefinitely by the province of New Mexico. These claims had no more secure basis than LaSalle's unfortunate settlement, and after 1730 there is no serious attempt or even claim to penetrate beyond the Arroyo Hondo in the south, or the middle course of the Missouri farther to the northward. There is acquiescence in the Spanish occupation of Texas as far as Adaes, even if this occupation is of the slightest character. The French hold on Louisiana is equally ineffective.
It is noteworthy that the French writers of the period before 1762 almost uniformly ignore the province of Texas and speak of Louisiana as extending to New Mexico. This view is revived in a book of travels published as late as 1803.1 In fact we may say th t the years from 1803 to 1806 form the period when the American officials first discovered Texas as an entity to be reckoned with in diplomatic correspondence and frontier relations. Spanish diplomats and governors, in calling their attention to this fact (by no means an agreeable one at first), were merely emphasizing their own documentary history. Nor did they do this to the fullest pos- sible extent.
The instructions of Decres to Victor, in 1802, have been em- ployed to justify a later American claim to Texas. These instruc- tions, however, appear to have originated with Talleyrand or Na- poleon, and merely revive a claim that had lain dormant since the publication of Du Pratz's Histoire. They -utterly ignore French acquiescence in the Spanish occupation of Texas. Moreover, they seem to show a revival of that earlier desire to reach the Mexican mines — a desire that haunted every adventurer and explorer from LaSalle and Penalosa to Nolan and Pike. What is more natural to suppose than that the greatest adventurer of his age, the future
^erquin-Duvallon, Vue de la Colonie Espagnole du Mississippi, 5 (Paris, 1803).
The Louisiana-Texas Frontier. 75
despoiler of the mother country, Spain, should desire to obtain as large a portion as possible of her most desirable colony? When this policy would place his troops near the supposed seat of fabulous mineral wealth, we may well imagine that Napoleon would not hesitate to assert the greatest possible claim. A people professing a higher standard of public morals might well hesitate to follow this claim to its uttermost limiis, and even to push beyond it, yet later history reveals a contrary coiinie.
76 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
LAND SPECULATION AS A CAUSE OF THE TEXAS REVOLUTION.
EUGENE C. BARKER.
1. Introduction: the Colonization Laws.
In 1834 and 1835 some large grants of land were made to spec- ulators by the legislature of Coahuila and Texas. The sale of four hundred leagues by an act of March 14, 1835, to replenish the empty treasury of the State was especially resented by the Texans as an exploitation of their own resources for the benefit of Coa- huila. To understand all the circumstances, it will first be neces- sary to review some features of the Mexican colonization laws.
The colonization law of Coahuila and Texas was promulgated on the 24th of March, 1825, in accordance with the national de- cree of August 18, 1824. Foreigners were invited to settle freely in the country, and live for ten years exempt from taxation, pro- vided they took the oath of allegiance. To each married man who desired to farm a labor, or 177 acres, of land was given; if he wished also to raise cattle, he received an additional twenty-four labors of grazing land, making a sitio, or league, of 4428 acres in all. Settlers were required to pay for this amount of land a nom- inal sum — $30 for a sitio of grazing land, and $2.50 for a labor ot' unirrigable and $3.50 for a labor of irrigable farming land. Payments might be made in three instalments, beginning the fourth year after settlement. The empresario system was recog- nized, and contractors were allowed for each hundred families that they introduced a premium of five leagues and five labors, provided that they should not receive a premium for more than eight hundred families — which would enable them to acquire forty- one leagues and fifteen labors.1 Of this amount, however, they could keep only eleven leagues, being required to alienate the excess within twelve years. For the purpose of this paper it is important to note that the government reserved the right to sell to Mexicans,
JForty leagues of grazing land and forty labors, or a league and fifteen labors, of farming land. — EDITOR QUARTERLY.
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 77
only, such land as they desired, not exceeding eleven leagues to one person; that no grant was to be made within twenty leagues of a foreign state without the approval of the supreme government; and that no one who did not reside in the Kepublic could retain a title to any land therein. These last two conditions and the eleven league limit were imposed by the national colonization law, and were simply incorporated in the state law.1
» 2. The Speculations.
Eleven-league grants. — The speculation in Texas lands seems to have grown out of this right of the government to sell to Mexicans. The law fixed the price to them at $100, $150, and $250 per league respectively of pasture, unirrigable, and irrigable farming land. The. first sale by the government was made to Juan Antonio Padilla, in 1828. During the next two years only a few sales were made, but in 1830 James Bowie went to Saltillo, at that time the capital of Coa'huila and Texas, and returned with fifteen or sixteen eleven- league grants, which he had induced Mexican citizens to apply for and had then purchased from them.2 Other Mexicans, some of them as far away as the City of Mexico— perceiving a chance of profit, also applied for eleven-league grants, and received them.3 Doubtless from this time dated a considerable traffic. This may be inferred from a letter written by Dr. Asa Hoxey to R. M. Wil- liamson in December, 1832. Writing from Montgomery, Alabama, whither he had gone on business from Texas, Dr. Hoxey said: "You mentioned in your last letter that you believed Mexican grants of eleven leagues could be procured for a reasonable sum, if so you will perceive by the enclosed proposition that Mr. Edward Hanrick, George Whitman and myself are disposed to procure some of them."4 Later testimony shows that the traffic became very ex- tensive. In February, 1835, B. R. Milam petitioned the political
Colonization Law of Coahuila and Texas, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, 99-106; National Colonization Law. articles 4, 12, 15, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 97-98.
"Statement of Samuel M. Williams, in 1840, to Robert Potter, Chair- man of Committee on Public Lands, supplement to House Journal of Fifth. Congress (of Texas), p. 369.
4THE QUARTERLY, IX 285.
78 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
chief to ask the governor to appoint special commissioners to assign lands and titles to isolated families in Texas, and gave as the rea- son for his request that many people who had come to Texas eight cr ten years before under the terms of the colonization law and had settled on vacant lands and taken the oath of allegiance to Mexico had during the last year "been surveyed in and attempted to be dispossessed by foreigners and others under pretended eleven- league grants." His efforts as empresario and those of the state "to colonize designated portions of the lands of Texas/' were, he said, "in great danger of being defeated by the claimants of eleven- league grants." And Thomas F. McKinney, writing in October, 1835, said that the government had been in the habit of issuing great numbers of these eleven-league grants at from $100 to $150 a league. There had never been any "hue and cry" raised against it, many of the best citizens had engaged in the business, and some of them held grants in their name for friends residing in the United States.1
But in 1834 and 1835 a bewildering series of laws was passed which opened wide the gates to speculation on a wholesale scale.
The law of March 26, 1 884. — The first law (March 26, 1834) decreed that the vacant lands of the state should be surveyed in lots of 177 acres each, and sold at public auction to the highest bidder at a minimum in Texas of ten dollars a lot. Payments were to be made in three instalments, one-third down and the balance in one and two years. Nobody was to be permitted to buy more than eleven leagues, but the law was particularly liberal in that it allowed foreigners to purchase and gave them a year in which to move their families to the state and become naturalized — which was necessary for the perfection of their titles. Another liberal feature provided that no one should be molested for religious or political opinions so long as he kept the peace. And, finally, it was decreed that no further coloniza- tion contracts should be entered into, which meant, of course, that the profits formerly accruing to the empresarios in premiums would now go to the government.2 By a supplementary law of
*The Texas Republican, March 28, and October 24, 1835.
"The law also provided that settlers who were already in Texas and mot attached to any empresario' 's colony — especially those of Nacogdoches .and the eastern frontier — should receive titles to the lands due them, and
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 79
April 23, 1834, it was decreed that after the lands had been "once exposed at public sale with all the formalities," if no offer were received as high as the minimum, they might later be sold to any person offering the minimum price "without the necessity of again opening the auction/'1
That advantage was taken of this law for speculative purposes does not positively appear — perhaps the eleven-league limit made it unattractive, — but the supplementary decree certainly does sug- gest a clearing of the decks for rapid action. And Judge T. J. Chambers, writing in 1837, declared that only by his efforts was defeated the proposal of- a "foreign millionaire company," whose agent was Gen. John T. Mason, to purchase for a "pittance" some twenty million acres of land on the eastern frontier. "He was in- formed by several means," he said, "that members of the legis- lature and the governor were offered large bribes to pass the meas- ure; the governor was pledged to him to veto the bill if it passed, but fortunately a majority of the members were honest and killed it."2 Mason did, however, secure a large grant during this session of the legislature, and after reviewing all the eviednce it is not altogether clear that he did not get it under some extension of this law.
The law of April 19, 1834. — The second law affecting the public lands was passed April 19, 1834. "With the intention," runs the preamble, "of protecting the lives and property of the citizens, constantly sacrificed to the per- fidy, rage, and barbarity of the hostile Indians, and desirous that so important and sacred an object may be accomplished without giving additional care to the general government, . . . the congress of the state . . . has thought proper to decree :
"Art. 1. The executive, availing himself of the resources of the state, shall repress the ferocity of the savages. . . .
"Art. 2. For said object the executive may dispose of such num-
333 persons took advantage of the opportunity to obtain titles to an ag- gregate of 325 leagues of land. — John P. Borden, Land Commissioner, to Robert Potter, Chairman of the Committee on Public Lands, in Supple- ment to House Journal, Fifth Congress (of Texas), p. 347.
'Decrees of Coahuila and Texas, Nos. 272 and 280, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 357-62 and 382.
^Sketch of the Life of Gen. T. J. Chambers of Texas, by his nephew, Wm. N. Chambers, of Liberty county (Galveston, 1853), p. 36, quoting from a pamphlet published by T. J. Chambers in 1837.
80 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
her as he shall consider necessary of the militia which the state has in the departments wherein hostilities are committed, and for paying or remunerating the militiamen, he may take of the vacant lands to the amount of four hundred sitios, distributing them agreeably to the rules and conditions he shall establish.
"Art. 3. For the present twenty thousand dollars are hereby appropriated, of the first receipts of the state treasury for sales of lands made by virtue of the law on the subject."1 Just a year later, April 14, 1835, another law declared that the executive could not dispose of the four hundred sitios of land mentioned in article 2nd of this law, "except solely for the object which said law deter- mines"; but ^agreeably to the aforementioned law the executive has been, and is, authorized to contract the aforementioned lands, or to distribute them, as he shall think most proper, among the militia men, who prosecute the war against the savages."2
It was under this law of April 19, 1834, that S. M. Williams, Eobert Peebles, and F. W. Johnson obtained their grant for four hundred leagues, as will later appear. But Chambers declares that Mason also manipulated it to accomplish on a comparatively small scale what Chambers had previously prevented his doing on a very large one. Chambers's statement, in brief, is, that the Indians really were troubling the frontiers and that the law was passed in good faith to provide a means of suppressing them. It was the intention of the law that the land should be distributed to the militia, and not sold, but by a trick in the enrolment of the bill it was so changed as to authorize the governor to sell it to anybody,*
^Decree No. 278, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 270-71. Articles 2 and 3 are important, therefore it may be advisable to give the Spanish:
"Art. 2. A este fin dispondra en el numero que concid6re necesario de la milicia que el Estado tiene en los departamentos hostilizados, y para pagar 6 premiar a los milicianos podra hechar mano de las tierras valdfas hasta en cuantidad de cua trocientos sitios, repartiendolos bajo las reglas y condiciones que establesca.
"Art. 3. Por ahora se designan viente mil pesos de lo primero que ingrese al tesoro del Estado, por las ventas de tierras que se hagan en virtud de la ley de la materia."— Laws of Coahuila and Texas.
2Decree No. 299, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 397.
'Pamphlet of Wm. N. Chambers, 37 ; Yoakum, History of Texas, I 321, note. Chamber's own explanation of the trick is as follows: "The article of the decree relating to the subject . . . provided that the troops should be paid, or rewarded, with vacant lands, in the following terms: "Y para pagar 6 premiar a los milicianos podra hechar mano de las tierras valdias hasta in cantidad de cuatro cientos sitios, repartiendoselos bajo las reglas y condiciones que establesca." These were the terms
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 81
and he implies that Mason took it all. Mason did get hold of some land — how much is uncertain — in 1834, under a contract dated June 19,1 but that it was granted by authority of this law is not clear. Chambers's story of the trick of enrolment, though it is clever and may be true, is, in view of the evidence, somewhat im- probable. If the land was to be distributed only to the soldiers, and not sold, what is the meaning of article 3 (see above, page 80), which appropriates $20,000 "of the first receipts of the state treas- ury for sales of lands made by virtue of the law on the subject" ? And does not the supplementary law of April 14, 1835, declaring that the governor shall only dispose of the lands for the purpose designated in the original law, suggest the inference that the four hundred leagues had not up to that time been sold at all? The whole matter is extremely confused and the only positive statement that one feels warranted in making, until further evidence de- velops, is that Mason got a grant in June, 1834, for ninety-five leagues, certainly, probably for three hundred leagues, and possibly for more. He may have obtained it by a manipulation of the law of March 26, or by the law of April 19 — though the latter is im-
in which it received the sanction of Congress, and, if it had remained thus expressed, the executive could never had sold the land to speculators. For repartiendoselos is a compound word, composed of the participle of the verb repartir (to divide among), and the two pronouns se and los, one of which refers to the land and the other to the troops; making it obliga- tory upon the executive to divide the land among the troops. But the ingenious member caused the pronoun se, referring to the troops, to be omitted in engrossing the decree; and it received the sanction of the ex- ecutive, and was published as a law, with the compound word changed into repartiendolos, leaving the executive free to dispose of the four hun- dred leagues of land, by dividing them out, without determining among whom."
*The statement of Land Commissioner John P. Borden, in the Supple- ment to the House Journal of the Fifth Congress (1840), p. 347, shows that under Mason's contract, dated June 19, 1834, there were issued by his agent, James Bowie, nine titles for an aggregate of ninety-five leagues. I have been unable to find these titles in the Land Office, though it is pos- sible they are still there. Samuel M. Williams, in an address to the peo- ple of Texas, July, 1835, declared that Mason,'s grant was for 300 leagues. (See The Texas Republican, July 25, 1835, in the Austin Papers. Brown {History of Texas, I 261) says that the Legislature of 1834 squandered "to dishonest speculators eleven hundred leagues of land in one transac- tion and four hundred leagues in another." He implies that it was done after July, 1834, but goes on to say that "the Constitution mentions by name John T. Mason, of New York, as chief beneficiary in this wholesale squandering of the public domain." He gives no authority for his figures. Kennedy (Texas, II 83) simply says, "An immense extent of the domain of Texas had been granted in 1834 to John T. Mason, of New York."
82 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
probable — or, finally, he may have gotten it by some private ar- rangement of which we know nothing.
The law of March 14, 1835. — The next law in the series, passed March 14, 1835, authorized the governor, in order to meet "the present exigencies of the state," to dispose of the public land to the amount of four hundred leagues. Article 2 allowed him to regulate the colonization of this land on such conditions as he thought proper, "without subjection to the provision of the law of the 26th of March of the year last past." As an afterthought, it occurred to the legislature that this might be interpreted too liberally, and two weeks later (March 30) another decree explained that the governor was, of course, to con- sider himself "subject to the general laws of the union."1
Under this act S. M. Williams and John Durst obtained a hun- dred and twenty-four leagues,2 and we have it on the authority of the legislature that other contracts were made for the remainder of the four hundred leagues,3 but by whom we do not know, since the grants appear never to have been located. Williams and Durst immediately re-sold a hundred and twenty-one leagues of their grant to fourteen persons, mainly in blocks of ten leagues each, Which were located principally in the present counties of Harrison, Nacogdoches, and Red River.
The national congress hearing of this law of March 14, annulled it by a decree of April 25. The reason assigned was that the law was contrary in articles 1 and 2 to the national colonization law of August 18, 1824. The decree declared moreover, that "by virtue of the authority reserved to the general congress in article 7 of the law of August 18, 1824,4 frontier and coast states were for- bidden to alienate their vacant lands for colonization until rules could be established to govern the same. In the meantime, if any state wished to sell a part of its vacant domain, it must first secure the approval of the general government, which should in every case
"Decrees Nos. 293 and 295, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 391-92, 393.
2Land Titles, Vol. 34, in the General Land Office.
3Laws and Decrees of Coahuila and Texas, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 412.
*This article is as follows: "Until the year 1840 the general Congress shall not prohibit the admission of foreigners to colonize, excepting, in- deed, circumstances should imperiously oblige it so to do, with regard to the individuals of any nation." Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 97. It is not easy to see the bearing of this article upon the point in question.
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 83
have the right to take the land for itself and pay the state a suit- able indemnity for it. Therefore, in conformity with articles 3 and 4 of the law of April 6, 1830,1 the general government might buy from the state of Coahuila and Texas the four hundred leagues of land which it was said to be necessary to sell."2 Eeplying, May 13, the legislature expressed its "extreme regret" at the "impos- sibility of fulfilling the decree of the general congress." Not an article, it declared, in the Whole law of August 18, 1824, applied to article 1 of the law in question, and, as regards article 2, the gov- ernor had been expressly instructed to guide himself in his rules for the settlement of the lands by the national law. Continuing, the memorial said: "This legislature has read and deliberately weighed the literal text of article 7th of the general law [referred to by the law] of the 25th of April last, and does not find, either in the letter or the spirit of the former, the reasons of the latter for prohibiting the border and literal [littoral] states from alienat- ing their vacant lands for colonizing thereon." The land was al- ready sold and part of the purchase price had been received, the contracts were made in good faith and were not opposed to the gen- eral law; therefore the legislature prayed congress to repeal its de- cree of April 25.3 Here the matter rested until the approach of federal troops put the legislature to flight.
In an opinion of some four thousand words David G. Burnet, late in 1835, upheld the right of the general government to annul these sales.4
The law of April 7, 1835. — The next and final law of which advantage was taken to sell Texas land was passed
*"Art. 3. The government may name one or more commissioners to visit the colonies of the frontier States, and regulate with their Legisla- tures the purchase of those lands which they consider suitable for the establishment of colonies of Mexicans, or any other nation in favor of the federation. . . .
"Art. 4. The executive may take possession of the lands which he deems necessary for the purpose of constructing thereon fortifications and arsenals and for new colonies, indemnifying the States by subtracting the value of said lands from duties due to the federation." Dublan y Lozano, Legislation Mexicana, II 238.
2Arrillaga, Recopilacion de Leyes y Decretos, X 145. Newell, History of the Revolution in Texas (New York, 1838), p. 40, says, erroneously, that the law was annulled because the State was in arrears for its share of the national debt.
""Laws and Decrees of Coahuila and Texas," in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 301-3.
4Pamphlet in the Austin Papers.
84 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
April 7, 1835. News had been received that General Cos had ordered troops to march on Monclova and suppress the legis- lature, and that body forthwith authorized the governor "to take of himself whatever measures he might think proper for secur- ing the public tranquillity and sustaining the authorities in the free exercise of their functions." Article 4 declared that "The executive is hereby competently authorized to contract loans upon the state rents for the purpose of discharging the expense incurred in the execution of this decree."1 It is somewhat surprising to find that the governor considered this as sufficient authority to dispose of more Texas land. Perhaps he thought that at all times a "proper measure." At any rate, on May 2d, Dr. James Grant was allowed to contract for a quantity of certificates for one league each. One hundred of these he sold in Nacogdoches through his agent, Alexander Newlands, and the titles were issued by John Cameron after the closing of .the land offices. Besides these, James Ogilvy, an attorney of New Orleans, wrote in 1839 that Grant's heirs had in their possession three hundred similar certifi- cates, and that he had been interested in five hundred altogether. The face of the certificates shows that the price was paid in full but does not specify what it was. Ogilvy intimates, however, that Grant paid $100 a league.2 It is possible that some of the certifi- cates referred to by Ogilvy were purchased under the law of March 14.
The grant to Williams, Peebles, and Johnson. — Enough has been said, perhaps to show that the transgression of Williams, Peebles, and Johnson in the final speculation was by no means unique. It was not even novel in its magnitude, though ii. may have been somewhat original in method. On the llth of May, 1835, they addressed a note to the governor, saying that they had "informed themselves of the tenor of the law of April 19, 1834. empowering him to dispose of four hundred leagues of land and restrain the arrogance of the wild Indians. We "have con- ceived the idea," they continued, "of blending the object of this be- nevolent design with the augmentation of the population by means
1Decree No. 297, Laws and Decrees of Coahuila and Texas, in Gammel, Laws of Texas, I 394.
2Volume 34 of Titles in the General Land Office; Supplement to the House Journal of the Fifth Congress, p. 347; Ogilvy to Packenham, August 20, 1839, Diplomatic Correspondence in the Texas State Library.
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 85
of a contract, which we offer your Excellency, strictly and literally to fulfill. We obligate ourselves to place, subject to the orders of your Excellency, ono thousand able-bodied men, with all their equip- ments of war for the term of one year, and we will cause them to rendezvous at the place which may be designated to us within the term of four months at most, on the condition that, in compensa- tion for our labors, the four hundred leagues of land be granted to us." The governor approved the proposal, and two days later a for- mal contract was signed. The petitioners were required to raise by voluntary enlistment within two months five hundred men, and within four months the whole number of one thousand. They were to be provided by the contractors with good arms and an abundance of ammunition at all times; but the government would furnish them food and horses. Article 12 declared that failure to fulfil any of the stipulations would render the whole contract void.1 No pecuniary consideration is mentioned in the contract, but it is not certain that the contractors were not also required to pay a nominal sum for their grant. For D. B. Edward declares that "A committee [headed by S. M. Williams] from a company of Land speculators, whose plans were well laid and whose funds were completely organized, presented themselves before this . . . Legislature; who immediately passed a decree to sell the vacant lands of Texas, and otherwise arranged it to be done as soon as bidders should present themselves. Of course they were there — and purchased this already surveyed land, of 411 leagues, for 30,000 dollars in hand, to the Government."2 This statement, with slight variations, appears in most of the subsequent histories of Texas3 It may refer to this contract by Williams, Peebles, and Johnson, or to some of the other purchases that were made in 1835. Johnson himself, in a review (MS.) of Ed- ward's History of Texas, replied to this charge with an emphatic denial that either he or his associates "bought
Supplement to the House Journal of the Fifth Congress, 329-32.
'Edward, History of Texas, 236.
"See Newell, History of the Revolution of Texas, etc., New York, 1838, pp. 40-41; Leclerc, Le Texas et Sa Revolution, Paris, 1840, pp. 68-69; Kennedy, Texas, etc., London. 1841, Vol. II, pp. 83-84; Foote, Texas and the Texans, Philadelphia, 1841, Vol. II, pp. 57-58; Maillard, The History of the Republic of Texas, etc., London, 1842, p. 77; Yoakum, History of Texas, I 320-21, 331-32; Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II 149; Brown, History of Texas, I 261-62.
86 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
one acre of land or were in any way interested in the pur- chase of said land," A natural inference to be drawn from this statement would be that they got no land at all, which, of course, is untrue. To save Johnson's veracity, therefore, the possible ex- planation presents itself that no money passed in this deal, and that the contractors viewed themselves merely as empresarios, who were to get their premium by selling the lands to militia men.
Johnson's own account of his presence at Monclova upon this oc- casion is interesting, but throws little additional light on the land speculations. He says: "Desiring to be present and witness the proceedings of the State Congress, Johnson, with Samuel M Wil- liams, Doctor Robert Peebles, Major Benjamin F. Smith, Colonel Green DeWitt, together with some Mexican scouts, left in the latter part of 1834 for the seat of government, Monclova, where they ar- rived in the early part of 1835. . . . [Here] we found Col- onel Benjamin R. Milam, Thomas J. Chambers, W. H. Steel, Haden Edwards, Jr., James Carter, and many other colonists. Here Johnson first made the acquaintance of Doctor James Grant, of Parras, Coahuila, who was a delegate, Doctor John Cameron, Messrs. Alney and Newlands; also that of David J. Toler, a most estimable gentleman. . . . General John T. Mason, of the United States, arrived about this time for the purpose of having confirmed a sale made by the Legislature or executive the year previous.
"Among the most important acts of this Congress was a decree authorizing the appointment of commissioners for Texas. . . . Under the decree George A. Nixon, George W. Smyth, and Charles S. Taylor, were appointed for Eastern Texas; Colonel Talbot Chambers, for Milam's Colony; Doctor Robert Peebles, for Austin and Williams' upper Colony ; and Johnson for Austin and DeWitt's colony. Bowie was appointed commissioner for General Mason's purchase. The State Treasury then being empty, the executive was authorized to sell a large quantity of the public lands of the State tc meet the current wants of the government; and another decree [was passed] placing at the disposal of the governor four hundred leagues for frontier defense and protection. These acts gave great offence to the Federal authorities, and the Congress declared them null and void. To this, the state authorities simply protested, and
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. g7
left the matter to take its course, pursuing, however, the policy in- augurated/'1
News now arrived that troops were marching toward Mon- clova, and there was a hasty exodus of the Texans and other lobby- ists. Williams arrived at Bexar June 32 and Peebles and Johnson reached San Felipe a few days behind him. Williams, as we have already seen, had acquired with John Durst a hundred and twenty- four leagues under the law of March 14, 1835, and apparently de- voted himself principally to the sale of that grant, while Peebles and Johnson assumed the task of disposing of the four hundred leagues in which all three were interested. A hundred and twenty- one leagues of the Williams and Durst grant, as has already been shown, were soon sold, and Peebles and Johnson worked with equal celerity. By August 20, certificates had been issued to forty-one persons for the full four hundred leagues. Fifteen of the certifi- cates were issued by 'Johnson and the remaining twenty-six by Peebles. They merely state that Citizen So and So 'has volun- tarily entered the service of the state of Coahuila and Texas as a soldier for the term of one year, and Williams, Peebles, and John- son are by their contract authorized to receive his enlistment and designate a portion of the vacant land as a reward for the services which he will render, therefore they give their consent for him to select for himself such land as he likes — usually ten leagues of it/3 Their contract to place a thousand men in the field was entirely ignored.
3. The Effect of the Speculations Upon the Texans.
The large grants of 1834 appear not to have attracted particular attention in Texas, but the deals of 1835 — especially under the law of March 14 — aroused great indignation. Little authority ap- pears, however, for the statement frequently met with in the his- tories of Texas, that the legislature thought the separation of Coa- huila and Texas imminent and determined to plunder the latter while there was yet time. The earliest expression of this theory is
'Johnson's autobiography ( MS. ) .
"Angel Navarro to Juan Zenteno, June 4, 1835, Bexar Archives; John- son's Autobiography (MS.). 'Volume 34 of Titles in the General Land Office.
88 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
in a pamphlet printed by T. J. Chambers in 1837, but in all the discussions aroused by the act of March 14, 1835, this explanation is absent. Austin, indeed, writing to D. C. Bar- rett, December 3, 1835,1 declared the acts of 1834 and 1835 all of a piece with general Mexican policy, both National and State. The Mexicans, he said, considered the lands valueless — this was evi- denced by the whole history of the colonization period, — the treas- ury was empty, and the sale of the land promised the only relief. He blamed neither the legislators nor the speculators for the sale itself, but the sale certainly did illustrate the defectiveness of the government from the Texan point of view.
The earliest expression of disgust with the wasteful policy of the government is found in The Texas Republican of May 9, 1835. An address from Governor Viesca, calling upon the people of Texas to rally to his assistance against Santa Anna, was printed in this issue, and the editor introduces it with the remark that he prints it as a news item solely, and not with the view of endorsing the governor's call for troops "to sustain him and a vile congress that have bartered our public lands for a mere song." In the same paper is also the answer of the political chief of the Brazos Depart- ment to the governor's appeal. He says: "The people view with equal horror and indignation the acts of the present State Congress who have manifested a determined disposition to alienate all the most valuable lands of Texas at a shameful sacrifice, and thereby utterly ruin her future prospects. The law of the 14th of March past is looked upon as the death-blow to this rising country. In violation of the General Constitution and laws of the Nation — in violation of good faith and the most sacred guarantees — Congress has trampled upon the rights of the people and the Government, in selling FOUR HUNDRED LEAGUES of land at private sale, at a price far below its value ; thereby creating a monopoly contrary to law and the true interests of the country."2 Accompanying the governor's proclamation was a rather alarmist postscript signed by Coahuiltexanus, and Henry Austin, in referring to it, suggested that "this firebrand has been thrown among us to promote the views of designing speculators."
'•Archives of Texas, Records, Vol. 1, pp. 54-58, in the State Department. 20ne hundred and twenty-four leagues of this amount was sold to Wil- liams and Durst. Who bought the rest is unknown. See page 82 above.
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 89
After the dispersion of the legislature and the arrest of the governor by the federal troops, the political chief, J. B. Miller, called for volunteers to march to the latter' s relief. His proclomation was received in Columbia June 23, and the citizens immediately met to consider it. A writer in The Texas Republican of June 27, said concerning this meeting that however much the citizens might differ on some points they all agreed upon the necessity for union and organization. "One act of the late governor and congress," he continues, "is highly obnoxious, . . the selling of the public land. This shameful bartering . . . calls ... for the indignation of every patriotic citizen. If the purchasers could be induced to abrogate that sale, it would be like 'pouring oil upon the troubled waters;' it would secure union, organization, and success. But perhaps- this would be asking too much of poor, blind human nature, and perhaps they are yet des- tined to experience the fate of the boy, who in attempting to take preserves from the jar grasped so many that he could not extract his hand. After all, I fear (if dissension is to rise amongst us) that this will be the rock upon which we will split." The writer, however, was of the opinion that the measures of the general gov- ernment had been rather rigorous and were probably actuated by some motive other than the simple desire to quash the speculations. In any event, he thought that nothing could be lost by "union and organization."
This extract suggests the attitude of most Texans who were not entirely indifferent. General Cos had explained that the march of troops to Monclova was for the purpose of settling the quarrel be- tween that place and Saltillo concerning the location of the govern- ment, and of stopping the squandering of the public lands. The law of March 14, he said, was passed by the Federalists — without, he erroneously declared, subjecting the sale of the four hundred leagues to the general laws — with the object of pleasing the col- onists of Texas and securing their support against the Centralists.1 The comparatively small war party saw in this avowal merely a pretext to cover the real object of furthering Santa Anna's plan of Centralism, but most of the colonists took it in good faith and
^Written by Cos from Matamoras in May, 1835. A clipping with no date from The Texas Republican, in the Austin Papers.
90 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
were inclined to suspect that those who did not were implicated in the speculation. Against this disposition R. M. Williamson pleads earnestly in an address issued the 4th of July. He says, I have been your fellow-citizen for years, and you can not believe that I am influenced by speculation. On the honor of a man I assure you that I have all to lose and nothing to gain by the disturbances of our country; and I am in no way connected with the speculation or the speculators. . . . You are in the midst of a revolution that threatens your destruction. . . . You are lulled to sleep in the belief that speculation alone has created the present excite- ment. But . . . examine for yourselves the late movements of the general government, . . . and you will perceive that so far from speculation having anything to do with the present sub- ject,, that the troops of the general government are on their march to Texas, for the purpose of compelling you either to leave the country or submit to an imperial government with strong military stations in your country to awe and keep you in subjection. . . . The sale of the four hundred leagues of land has nothing to do with the subject. You are justly indignant at that sale . . . but that can and ought to have no weight with the public mind at this time. . . . General Cos writes to the command- ant at Anahuac that the two companies of New Leon and the Morales [Morelos] Battalion would sail immediately for Texas and that they would be followed by another strong force. . . . Colonel Ugartechea says that the business of Texas will be soon regulated, as the government has ordered a large division ... to Texas which are now at Saltillo; that force is three thousand four hun- dred men.
For what, Fellow-Citizens, are they coming? In the name of God say not speculation; they are coming to compell you into obedience to the new form of Government; to compell you to give up your arms; to compell you to have your country garrisoned; to compell you to liberate your slaves; to compell you to swear to support and sustain the government of the Dictator; to compell you to submit to the imperial rule of the aristocracy, to pay tithes and adoration to the clergy."1
The other side is illustrated by a letter from T. J. Chambers of
HDircular, printed by T. C. Gray.
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 91
the same date. He said, "The simple facts are these : The admin- istration of the government of the state during the present year has been of the most shameful character. ... A law was obtained for the sale of four hundred leagues of vacant land and the most shameless acts of speculation were committed against the state and the interests of Texas. . . . The purchasers and those inter- ested in them and a few others who have been deceived by them are [responsible for] the reports which you have heard, and which I trust the colonists will pay no further attention to than to treat with contempt and indignation, etc. The movement of troops to- wards Texas has in my opinion no other object than to meet and counteract the revolution which the general government had grounds to believe would be attempted by those individuals/'1 James Kerr, writing the next day to Chambers states the situation more forc- ibly. "At San Felipe," he says, "Williams, Johnson, Carbajal, Bowie, and others cry, 'wolf, wolf, condemnation, destruction, war, to arms, to arms !' Williams says, 'I have bought a few leagues of land from the government; but if they don't bring the governor to Bexar, I shall not be able to get my titles.' What a pity; and with his terrible tales I am astonished to see that they have had the cleverness to excite some persons of that colony to a high de- gree. . . . There is not in my opinion, in all the country one single person, with the exception of the interested ones, who would wittingly seek his own ruin in order to save thousands like Wil- liams and the others. But they have been able to deceive many persons and make them believe that an army is coming to destroy their property and annihilate their rights in Texas. . . . The inhabitants of La Vaca and Navidad are inclined to attend to their ranches and estates."2 July 11, Edward Gritten wrote to General Cos that "All the inhabitants of Texas protest against the conduct of the land speculators, but they will unite themselves unanimously
'Chambers to James H. C. Miller, July 4, 1835, in The Texas Republi- can, July 18, 1835. This is wholly inconsistent with a statement made by Chambers in 1837 to the effect that he came post haste from Monclova to warn the Texans of their danger and was unable to arouse them be- cause of the pacific influence exerted by the speculators, who had con- cluded that revolution would not be to their interest. — Sketch of the life of Gen. T. J. Chambers, of Texas, p., 34 (described above).
2 James Kerr to T. J. Chambers, July 5, 1835. Bexar Archives. Copy, translated into Spanish by Chambers.
92 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
against the Mexicans."1 This is in agreement with a letter from Travis to Andrew Briscoe, July 6. He says: "The 400 League Purchase and the authors of it will, I think, sink into insignif- icance. Public indignation is properly kindled against them.'*1
Stung by the direct attacks upon himself, Williams published a statement, July 20, explaining his attitude in the matter of the speculation. He had no agency, he declared, in the passage of the law of March 14, which seemed to arouse the greatest indignation ; there was no trickery about it, anyway. The treasury had not a dollar in it, and a speedy sale of some of the vacant land prom- ised the quickest relief; "precedent had been given by the previous legislature in decreeing the alienation of 400 leagues of public lands, and as the land had been disposed of and no opposition made to it by the General Government or by those most interested, the people of Texas," the expedient was resorted to again, 'though "it was generally esteemed to be impolitic." "General John T. Ma- son," he continued, "purchased last year, in the month of May or June 300 leagues, and no excitement was, or even has been created by that sale. As an individual I could not conceive that what was tolerated by the people of Texas in General Mason could in me be criminal, . . . and although I anticipated realizing a good profit on my investment, I never did intend that the holding of it should ever interfere with the improvement and advancement of the country."3
By the middle of August most of the Texans who thought about the matter at all had concluded that Santa Anna had other designs than the punishment of the land speculators in Texas, and greater unanimity was soon manifested in their call for a consultation.* And with the actual invasion of Texas and the meeting of the consultation the question passed into a new stage.
4. The Abrogation of the Questionable Grants.
A central executive committee called the "permanent council" was organized at San Felipe October 11, and on Sunday, the 18th,
H3ritten to Cos, July 11. 1835. Bexar Archives.
*Brown, Life of Henry Smith, 60.
The Texas Republican, July 25. 1835.
4Resolutions of the jurisdiction of San Jacinto, August 8, 1830, in the Texas Republican, September 19, 1835; address to the committee of Co- lumbia, August 15, in The Texas Republican, August 22 and 29, 1835.
Land Speculation ax a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 93
General Sam Houston, a member of it, proposed a resolution rec- ommending that the consultation, when it met, should investigate and declare null all extensive grants of land made by the legis- lature under suspicious circumstances since 1833.1 The resolution was adopted, and a thousand copies in handbill form were distrib- uted through the country. It was probably needed to convince many of the citizens that the war just beginning was not a •''spec- ulators' war,"2 but it naturally drew a protest from the interested persons. Thomas F. McKinney, especially, wrote that he thought the consultation would not have adequate judicial authority to do any such thing. There was nothing "crooked" about the grants, anyway, he said; "If you will inform yourself as to the manner and condition of those grants you will see it is nothing more or less than a colonizing contract, differing from those heretofore made because the empresarios have to pay a certain price for the priv- ilege of selling the lands to settlers. ... So far as I am in- terested I have said and again say I am willing to yield up my interest in that speculation if the least good to this community can be done by it. I have eight leagues of land in addition in this colony and the upper colony which I will cheerfully resign to the country's cause at what I have paid for it, which is nearly nothing. But to have a foot of land to which I conceive I have any claim trespassed upon and wrested from me without my own consent is what I oppose and protest against and will resist so far as I have the means of resisting."8
Before the protest was received the council had already, on the 27th, passed a resolution closing the land offices and stopping all surveying until the meeting of the consultation, and, despite Mc- Kinney's -view of the matter, the consultation "solemnly declared null, void, and of no effect all grants, sales, and conveyances of land, illegally and fraudulently made by tile legislature of the state of Coahuila and Texas, located or to be located within the limits of Texas."4 This, too, of course, raised a storm of disap-
aTHE QUARTERLY, VH 265, IX 287; Telegraph and Tew* Register, Octo- ber 26, 1835.
*Royall to Austin, October 16, 1835, Austin Papers, K27.
•McKinney to Koyall, October 28, 1835, Archives of Texas, in the State Library.
*' Journal of the Permanent Council," in THE QUARTERLT, VH 273; Journals of the Consultation, 47.
94 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
proval in interested quarters, but no attention was paid to it and it gradually subsided. The final snarl in the tangle, so far as this paper will follow the subject, was the declaration in the first con- stitution of Texas annulling the act of the legislature passed in 1834 "in behalf of General John T. Mason, of New York, and that of March 14, 1835, "under which the enormous amount of eleven hundred leagues of land has been claimed by sundry individuals, some of whom reside in foreign countries, and are not citizens of the Kepublic."
5. The Place of the Land Speculation in the Revolution.
As to the part played by the speculators in the beginning of the revolution, contemporary opinion differs. By one we are told that the speculators for interested reasons prevented him from stirring the people up to their own defence. From another we have the contrary ; that the speculators stirred up all the agitation in Texas, iii order to shield themselves and save their grants. The truth seems to be that the speculators, who had spent some time in Mex- ico, had a keener sense of the danger from Santa Anna's plan of Centralism than their neighbors who stayed at home. When, there- fore, upon their return, they lost no time in sounding the alarm, their motives were easily misunderstood. And the indifference manifested by many Texans throughout the revolution was due, it seems probable, to this misunderstanding. It played some part, ao we have already seen, in the cool reception of Governor Viesca's appeal for assistance in May ; it probably delayed the calling of the general consultation, which began to be agitated in the latter part of June; and finally it caused many to hesitate in their support of the Texan volunteers in the fall of 1835. They believed that it was a speculators' war.
The effect of the speculations was cumulative. A pretty brisk business of five years' duration raised scarcely a protest against the eleven-league grants, and Mason's large grant in 1834 attracted surprisingly little attention, but the laws of 1835, especially that of March 14, coming as the culmination of a wasteful agrarian policy disgusted and alienated many of the best citizens. One may, however, venture the opinion that neither the speculators nor
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution. 95
the speculations had much to do directly with causing the revolu- tion.
It has been charged that interest in these speculations was the motive which drew many of the volunteers who came from the United States to the assistance of Texas. The writer has found no evidence to support such a charge. But in 1836 the Texans con- tracted several loans on the public land, and there is material to warrant the belief that those who advanced the money were ready,, if the revolution had continued long enough, to enlist volunteers for the cause.
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF WASHINGTON, TEXAS.
[According to a statement made by Asa Hoxey, president of the Washington Company, in a communication addressed to the com- missioners to locate the seat of government and dated November 15, 1837, Washington "was laid out as a Town in the spring of 1835."1 The following documents, taken from the Texas Archives, give an account of the organization of the municipality, in July, 1835. The jurisdiction of Washington was erected into a count} by the constitution adopted in March, 1836. — E. W. WINKLER.]
I.
Petition of the Citizens of Washington Addressed to the Political Chief of the Department of Brazos, James B. Miller.
To his Excellency
James B Miller
Your petitioners respectfully represent — that during the last year they did Petition the Auyto of the Jurisdiction of Austin to be Sepperated from said Jurisdiction and to be organised, and to form a New Jurisdiction to be called the Jurisdiction of Washing- ton Said Petitioners set forth the limits of the said Jurisdiction and the place of holding the Corts, &c. All of which was ap- proved of and acted upon by said Ayuto and recommended through the proper channells to the Congress of the State for its action (as the Constitution and Laws provide) but owing to some cause un- known to your petitioners the application (documents) &c was not reed by the Congress in time to be acted upon
Your petitioners being aware of the disorganised condition of the Government of the State and of the disorder with which it is surrounded 'and thereby of the uncertainty of its reorganiseation, deem it expedient to organise the said New Jurisdiction without any further delay. Your Petitioners being also aware of the ex-
1Seat of Government Papers. (MSS.) Texas State Library.
Documents Relating to Municipality of Washington. 97
traordinary powers confered upon your Excellency pray that you order an organiseation of said Jurisdiction immediately and thereby preserve order and union amongst the Inhabitants 2nd- day of July 1835
Francis G Clampitt ( ?)
Jno P Coles James Whiteside Shubael Marsh John J. Wyche Epps-D. Payne Asa Hoxey John Newell ( ?) James Clark Baldon Eobinson M. Cummins J. G. Wilkinson William W Hawkins Jesse B. Atkinson John H. Allcorn John P. Tompson James G. Swisher John Grahams Jacob Gross Isaac Thomas Isaac H ( ?) Hawkins Joshua Graham Thos G ( ?) Allen William H. Miller
II.
John W. Conner
W A Hall
J J Allcorn ( ?)
E. D Jackson
F. (?) Soop Win. W. Hill Wm Lewis ( ?) Ashby R Stevens ( ?) T G Evitt ( ?) James Moore
J. B. Chanie ( ?) Elijah Allcorn G W Barnett John F Guthrie W. E. Allcorn T Chambers D T A Thomson Alfred M. Cooper Horatio Chriesman Stephen R Roberts Hiram Beales Thomas Dillard
Another Copy of the Petition Addressed by the Citizens of Wash- ington to the Political Chief of the Department of Brazos, James B. Miller.
[This document is a copy. It corresponds almost word for word *dth the forgoing petition, and bears the same date. The follow- ing signatures are attached to it :]
98
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
J M Splan David Trast. S Moris J H Wood Robt. J. Clow. H J Williamson M. T. Martin James Lynch Saml R Miller Bethel Morris John Lott Thos. S. Saul Moses Evans
III.
J. W. Simpson.
Wm Copenhavn.
Ches. J. Young
J F Q Walkertson ( ?)
Lewis Jones
Samuel Henrey [or Kerney]
James Gray
Noah T ( ?) Byars
James Balantine
Peter M. Mercer
Isaac Connelly
Wm C Jones
Memorandum Transmitted by the Political Chief of the Depart- ment- of Brazos, James B. Miller, to His Successor in Office, Wyly Martin.
San Felipe July 19 1835
I have permitted the jurisdiction of Washington to organize pro- visional}7 every man in the jurisdiction has signed a petition re- questing said organization as their territory is extensive & this point too far, their petition passed through this Ayuntamiento to Govt and was not acted upon by the Govt last session, which caused great dissatisfaction, as soon as the Govt was again organ- ized I intended to report them in an organised condition and pray the Govt to legalize their proceedings as every man has signed the petition for this provisional organization no man can plead to
the jurisdiction of the Courts —
***********
J B Miller '
Documents Relating to Municipality of Washington 99
IV.
Recapitulation of Votes taken for Municipal Officers, and Sheriff of the Jurisdiction of Washington, on Saturday 18 July, 1835.
|
Al- calde |
Regldors— |
Synd: Procurer |
Sheriff. |
|||||||||||||
|
H. J. William- son. |
Josa. Hadley. |
H.Ghriesman. |
Jesse Grymes. |
u >-» * = en OS 11 '"it ""44 |
A. Mitchell. |
JOSH. Hadley. |
M. OummiDgs. |
•- n .= 3 s: s < |
A.O.Reynolds. |
ff o = >i »J i.' H» |
J* •s -3 5 59 |
h >-! "5 a •s. s N |
ti t> •c ^ S yi 0 -: |
"3 S Be o c H» |
A. D. Klnnard. |
T. Dlllard. D. Balrd. |
|
At the town of Washington At house of Shub. Marsh... At house of Jas. Walker.... At house of Fitzgibbons.... At house of Chas. Garrett. |
22 47 5J 2 3 |
37 ...... 23 44 fW |
46 36 13 |
58 47 14 ] W |
7 16 44 '"44 <W |
51 |
4Q |
9 |
||||||||
|
u |
34 13 |
44 |
31 20 5 25 2 19 |
14 20 17 27 2 |
IH 4 24... 4 ... g 12 ".' |
|||||||||||
|
24 |
24 |
23 |
i |
|||||||||||||
|
30 |
||||||||||||||||
|
At house of Asa Mitchell... Total |
22 147 |
11 160 |
23 118 |
19 |
9 108 |
15 165 |
16 |
8 |
1 |
|||||||
|
1 |
||||||||||||||||
|
178 |
11 |
24 |
W |
116 |
52 |
23 |
30 |
, |
151 |
» |
71 4 |
|||||
Thos. S. Saul, Secy
I, John P. Coles, do hereby certify, that having compared the within list of votes, from the returns from the several elections,, held on Saturday 18th July 1835 for the municipal officers — and sheriff of the Jurisdiction of Washington, find that
Josa. Hadley had 160 votes as Alcalde
Jesse Grymes had 178 votes as Eegidor
Asa Mitchell had 165 votes as Regidor
A. C. Reynolds had 116 votes as Syndico procurator
Jno. W. Hall had 151 votes as Sheriff
and being the highest number voted for the several offices are duly
elected
Washington 21 July 1835
Jno P Coles
by order of his Excellency
J B Miller
100 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
V.
The Ayuntamiento of Washington to the Political Chief of the Department of Brazos.
Ayuntamiento of the Jurisdiction of Washington 28th July 1835
To his Excellency Jas. B. Miller
Actg. Govr. of the Province of Texas
Sir
I have the honor respectfully to inform you, that this body have, by an unanimous resolution passed this day, nominated the following persons to fill the Offices of Judge & supernumeraries of this municipality — Viz
Moses Cummings Jas Hall Senr Shub: Marsh S. K. Roberts
and respectfully refer the same to your dceisior.
God & Liberty Joshua Hadley (Prst) Thos. S. Saul
Secy
Notes and Fragments. 101
NOTES AND FRAGMENTS.
MASSANET OR MANZANET. — The name of the father of the Texas missions has always been given in the QUARTERLY the form "Man- zanet" as the equivalent of'"Manc.anet." This is on the authority of the Carta de Don Damian Manzanet a Don Carlos de Siguenza sobre el Descubrimiento de la Bahia del Espiritu Santo, published in facsimile in Vol. II, No. 4, the signature to which has been till recently the only example available for the editors. Without going into the history of the forms of writing the name, I will cite some further evidence that has a bearing on the question.
In volume 182 of Seccion de Provincias Internas of the Archivo General y Piiblico, in the city of Mexico, there is a large collection of original materials — many of them never yet used, even in the form of copies, I believe — relative to the entrada of Domingo "Theran" into Texas in 1691-2. Among these are five letters written o.ver the name of the venerable missionary while he was in the wilds of Texas. Besides these signed papers there are two or three unsigned fragments in the same hand. In each of the five cases the signature is clearly "Damian Massanet." I have applied to the documents all the practicable tests to determine whether they are original or copies, and reach the conclusion that they are in all probability original, signed by the father himself. In this I have been assisted by my friend, Senor Tomas Alarcon, Paleogra- pher of the Archivo General, who shares my opinion. If we are correct, the question of the missionary's real name seems solved.
I may note that the handwriting of text and signature of the documents in Mexico are the same, and unlike either the text or the signature of the "Manzanet" document cited above.
HERBERT E. BOLTON.
THE FIRST FREE PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING ERECTED IN TEXAS. — In the south side of the Washington building, which is used by the city of Denison for a high school, is a simple white marble tablet bearing an inscription that notes a fact of which Denison should feel proud. The inscription reads :
102 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
"The First Public Free School Building Erected in Texas."
When one considers the youth of this bustling "Gate City" of North Texas, he is grateful for the foresight of those pioneers who in the midst of building the town found time and money to erect a free school building. Denison was begun in September, 1872, and ii) the following year plans were made for this school.
Denison herself has been somewhat slow in appreciating the dis- tinction that is hers, but thanks to the members of the school board of 1905-6 she has come into her own, and through them this build- ing has been marked by the tablet.
The tablet was unveiled April 20, 1906, by the class of '06, and on that occasion one of their members, Miss Pauline Everitt, gave a history of the -Washington School. It was printed in the Denison Daily Herald, April 21, 1906. OLLIE BIRD.
Affairs of the Association. 103
AFFAIRS OF THE ASSOCIATION.
GIFTS.
Exchanges and Historical Material.
American Antiquarian Society, Worcester, Mass. — Index to Pro- ceedings from 1812 to 1880 ; Salisbury Memorial ; Catalogue of Library; Proceedings, I-XVI; XVII, 2.
American Catholic Historical Researches, I. J. Griffen, ed., Phil. -V, 4; VI, 1, 2, 4; VII, 1, 3; VIII, 1, 2; IX, 2, 4; X, 1, 2, 4; XVII, 1, 2, 3 ; XVIII, 2, 3 ; XIX, 2 ; XXI, 2, 3 ; New Series, I, 3 ; II, 1, 2 ; Records, XVI, 4.
American Catholic Historical Society. — Records, XVI, 4; XVII, 1. Antiquary, London, II, 3.
Bangor Public Library, Bangor, Maine. — Rare numbers of THE QUARTERLY.
Bliem, Dr. M. J., San Antonio. — Rare numbers of THE QUAR- TERLY.
Boston Athenaeum, Boston, Mass. — Index to Catalogue ; History of Boston Athenaeum; Aspinwall Notorial Records; Forestier Rela- tion.
Boston Public Library, Boston, Mass. — Bulletin, XI, 4, 6.
Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Me. — "History of Maine," by J. S. C. "Abbott ; Report of Boston Record Commission, II ; Smithsonian Contribution to Knowledge, I, II (1848 and 1851) ; Maine His- torical Society, I, II, IV, V, VI; Collections and Proceedings, I, 1-4; II, 1; VIII, 1-4; IX, 2-4; X, 1; Reports of Boston Rec- ord Commission in 30 volumes.
Brown, Miss Lizzie C., Dallas. — Rare numbers of THE QUAR- TERLY.
Cleveland Public Library, Cleveland, 0. — Historical Sketches of 25 Churches, ed. by A. B. Cristy.
Chicago Historical Society. — Vols. I-IV of THE QUARTERLY.
Columbia Historical Society, Washington, D. C. — Records, IX (1905).
104 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Columbia University, New York, N. Y. — Political Science Quar- terly, XXI, 1; THE QUARTERLY,, VIII, 2; Records, I, II, pp. 1-13.
Connecticut Historical Association, Hartford. — Collections, II- VII.
Cooper, Wm., Brookshire. — Vols. I and II of THE QUARTERLY.
Coopwood, Judge Bethel, San Antonio. — "The Real Lincoln," by Chas. L. C. Minor.
Dedham Historical Society, Dedham, Mass. — Publications, as is- sued, and back numbers.
Daughters of the American Revolution, Washington, D. C. — Line- age Book, XVII; XVIII.
Donaldson, Mrs. N. S., Georgetown. — Rare number of THE QUAR- TERLY.
Dubose, J. C., ed., Birmingham, Ala. — Several numbers of Gulf States Historical Magazine.
Durrett, Reuben T., Louisville, Ky. — Rare numbers of THE QUAR- TERLY.
' Edwards, Judge P. F., El Paso.— Vols. I and II of THE QUAR- TERLY, and Vol. I, No. 1.
Essex Institute, Salem, Mass. — Historical Collections, XXXIII, 1-12; XXXIV, 1-12; XLII.
Filson Club, R. T. Durrett, pres., Louisville, Ky. — Publications, XII-XIV; XXI.
Garcia, Senor Doctor don Genaro, Mexico, D. F. — His "Docu- mentos para la Historia de Mexico."
German Historical Society, Washington, D. C. — Unbound publi- cations, I, 3; II, 1.
Gocher, W. H., Hartford, Conn.— His "Wadsworth."
Hanrick, R. A., Waco. — Rare documents.
Harvard Universit}', Cambridge, Mass. — Bound, Peabody Museum Report, I, II; Unbound, Arch, and Ethnol. Papers, I, 1, 3-7; III, 1-3; IV, 1; Quarterly Journal of Economics, XVI-XIX; XX, 2.
Hildebrand, Hans, Stockholm. — Antikvarisk Tidskrift, IX, 4; XI, 6; XIII, 4; XV, 3; XVII, 4; XVIII, 1.
Illinois Historical Society, Springfield, 111. — Bound Publications, IX ; 20 volumes of State Department Reports ; unbound, 21 Re- ports of State Institutions.
Affairs of the Association. 105
Iowa Historical Department, Des Moines, Iowa. — Bound, "Remin- iscences," by John Todd ; unbound, Annals of Iowa, 1, 1-8 ; IE, 1-8; IV, 4; V, 8; VII, 3,5.
Iowa Historical Society, Iowa City, Iowa. — Iowa Journal of His- tory and Politics.
Irving, Prof. Peyton, Cleburne. — Rare numbers of THE QUAR- TERLY.
Johns Hopkins University Library, Baltimore, Md. — Circular, new series, I, 1-3.
Kansas State Historical Society, Topeka, Kansas. — Bound Publi- cations, I ; Transactions, IV- VIII ; Biennial Report of Board of Directors, IX-XIV; unbound, "The Fighting Twenty," by Elihu Root; "A Kansas Souvenir"; Biennial Reports, I, III, V-VIII.
Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. — Introduction to Records of Virginia county of London, by S. M. Kingsbury; Want list of American historical serials.
Littlejohn, E. G., Galveston. — Rare numbers of THE QUARTERLY.
Long Island Historical Society, Brooklyn, N. Y. — Bound, Me- moirs, I-III; Catalogue of Library (1893), unbound, Officers, etc. ; Manuscripts and early printed books.
Louisiana Historical Society, New Orleans. — Publications, III, 4.
Lowber, Dr. J. W., Austin. — Rare numbers of THE QUARTERLY.
Lummis, C. F., Los Angeles, Cal. — "Land of Sunshine," X, 5; XI, 1-4; XII, 3, 6; XIII, 2; XIV, 1; XV, 1-3. Out West, XVI, 1-6; XVIII, 3-6; XIX, 1-6; XX, 1-6; XXI, 1-6; XXII, 1-6; XXIII, 1-6; XXIV, 1-4, 6.
McLean Co. Historical Association, Bloomington, 111. — Rare num- bers of THE QUARTERLY.
Madrid Real Academy de la Historia, Madrid. — Bolotin, XLVIII, 2-4, 5.
Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Md. — Bound, Archives of Maryland, ed. by W. H. Browne, I-V; VII; VIII; XII-XXV; five volumes, issued, 1885, 1891, 1884, 1887, 1892; unbound, Fund publications, I-XIV; XVI-XXIV; XXVI-XXXVII; Magazine, I, 1.
Massachusetts State Library, Boston. — Vols. I and II of THE QUARTERLY.
Mexico Museo Nacional, Mexico. — Anales, II, 11, 12; III, 1-4, 5.
106 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Michigan University Library, Ann Arbor, Mich. — Michigan Po- litical Science Association, Publications, I, 1, 2, 4, 5 ; II, 8 ; III, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; V, 1, 2, 3, 4; VI, 1.
Missouri Gazette. — Copy from October 11, 1817.
Missouri Historical Society. — Collections, I, 5.
Michigan State Library, Lansing, Mich. — Bound volumes Mich. Pioneer and Historical Collections, I-XXIX, XXXI, XXXII; Index to I-XV.
Mississippi Historical Society, Oxford, Miss. — Bound Publications, VIII; unbound, I.
New England Historic Genealogical Society, Boston, Mass. — Reg- ister, LVIII-LX; LX, supplement.
New Hampshire Historical Society, Concord, N. H. — Proceedings. I ; II, 1-3 ; IV, 2, 4.
New Jersey Historical Society, Newark, N. J. — Proceedings,. Series 3, III, 2.
New York Historical Society, New York, N. Y. — "Treachery in Texas," by J. T. Sprague; "Uses of History," by John Hall; "N. Y. in 1850 and 1890," by Seth Low; "Life, Characters, and Writings of Verplanck," by W. C. Bryant; Charter, By-Laws, Officers; 8 pamphlets.
New York State Library, Albany, N. Y. — Ecclesiastical Records, V; VI (1905).
New York State Historical Association, Albany, N. Y. — Constitu- tion, By-Laws, and Proceedings, I-V.
Nebraska State Historical Society, Lincoln, Neb. — Special publi- cations; Transactions and Reports, I-V; Proceedings and Collec- tions, series 2, I-V.
New York Public Library, New York, N. Y.— Bulletin, X, 1, 3r 4,5.
Northwestern Mining Journal, Seattle, Wash. — Unbound Publi- cations, I, 1.
Ohio Historical and Philosophical Society, Cincinnati, 0. — Cata- logue of Torrence Papers ; Journal ; Catalogue of books relating to Ohio; Annual Report, 1905.
Ohio Historical Society, Cincinnati, 0. — Progress on the North- west, by W. D. Gallagher.
Affairs of the Association. 107
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society, Columbus, Ohio.
—Bound Volumes, III, IV ; unbound, Quarterly, VII, 1 ; XIV,
2, 4; XV, 1,2. Old Northwest Genealogical Society, Columbus, 0. — Quarterly,
IX, 1, 2; VI, 3; VIII, 3. Ontario Historical Society, Toronto, Canada. — Papers and Rec-
ords, III, VI. Oregon Historical Society, Eugene, Oregon. Quarterly, I, II,
III, IV, V, VI.
Peterson, C. A., St. Louis. — Capture of James Wilson. Pilgrim Society, Plymouth, Mass. — Proceedings. Pilot Knob Memorial Association, St. Louis, Mo. — Annual Meet- ing, II.
Pinckney, Miss Sue, Dallas. — Rare numbers of THE QUARTERLY. Providence Public Library, Providence, R. I. — Quarterly Bulletin,
IV, 1.
Quebec Literary and Historical Society, Quebec, Canada. — Bound. "La Vie de J. F. Perrault"; unbound, Bulletins, T-II; Catalogue of Books; Transactions in 11 volumes; Historical Documents, VII.
Rhode Island Historical Society, Providence, R. I. — Publications, III, 1-4; IV, 1-4; V, 1-4; 1902-03; 1903-04.
Royal Historical Society, London. — Transactions, New Series, XIV-XVII.
St. Louis Mercantile Library, St. Louis, Mo. — Reference lists.
South Dakota Historical Society, Pierre, S. D. — "Early Empire Builders," by M. K. Armstrong; Collections, II.
Southern Historical Association, Washington, D. C. — Publica- tions, VIII, 6 ; X, 1, 2, 3.
State Library, Austin. — Rare numbers of THE QUARTERLY.
Statsoekonomish Tidskdrift, Kristiana. — Two unbound volumes.
Stone, Cornelia Branch, G-alveston. — Old numbers of THE QUAR- TERLY.
Sumpter, Jesse, Eagle Pass. — "Reminiscences," dedicated to Harry Warren, Esq.
Texas Library, Department of State, Austin, Texas. — List of books received from July to December, 1905.
Texas School Journal, Dallas, Texas.— XXI, 10; XXIII, 5-9.
Thomas, Miss Kate, Austin. — Ra^e numbers of THE QUARTERLY.
108 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Toronto Public Library, Toronto, Canada. — Bound, "Canada and the Empire," by J. Van Sommer; "Protection and Prices," by Watson Griffin; unbound, "Anglo-Saxon Amity," by J. S. Willi- son; "First Bishop of Toronto," by Henry Scadding; "St. Paul's Chapel," by C. F. Wingate.
Townes, Judge J. C., Austin. — Rare numbers of THE QUARTERLY.
Trinity College Historical Society, Durham, N. C. — Annual Pub- lication, V, 1-4.
Trinity College Library, Durham, N. C. — South Atlantic Quar- terly, IV, 3 ; V, 2.
United States Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. — Bulletin, 224.
United States Department of State, Washington, D. C. — Bulletin of the Bureau of Eolls and Library.
United States War Department, Washington, D. C. — Bound vol- umes, I-XIV, containing Annual Reports for 1904; I-IV, con- taining Annual Reports for 1905 ; unbound, Bulletins, 1-5, Bul- letins A. G. 0., 2 ; 21-23 ; 26 ; 35 ; 38.
University College of Medicine, Richmond, Va. — Bulletin, 2 :11.
University of California, Berkeley, Cal. — University chronicle, I, 1-6; II, 1-6; III, 3; IV, 3; VI, 4; VII, 1-4; VIII, 1-3; VIII, supplement. Arch, and Ethnol. Publications, 4; Preliminary Report of State Earthquake Commission.
University of Chicago, Chicago, 111. — Decennial Publications, I, 3-9; X.
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, 0. — Record, II, 9, 11, 12, 14; Studies, Second Series, II, 1.
University of Colorado, Boulder, Colo. — Studies, III, 2.
University of Nebraska Library, Lincoln, Neb. — Three pamphlets ; Studies, II, 1, 2, 3 ; VI, 1, 2.
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn. — Record, IX, 2.
University of Texas, Austin, Texas. — Literary Magazine, XVIII, 3; Bulletin, 71; 72.
University of Vermont Library, Burlington, Vermont. — General catalogue, 1791-1900; Bulletin No. 32, 3:2; Vols. I and II of THE QUARTERLY.
University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. — Studies relating to his- tory of Canada, 1898; 1898; 1900; 1901; 1903; 1904; 1905. Studies in History and Economics, 2:1.
Affairs of the Association. 109
Virginia Historical Society, Richmond, Va. — Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XIII, 4.
William and Mary College, Williamsburg, Va. — Quarterly, XIV, 3,4.
Wisconsin. State Historical Society, Madison, Wis. — Bound, Collec- tions, II, III, XI, XII, XVI, XVII; Proceedings, 1903; Memorial (1901), ed. by R. G. Thwaites. Unbound, Annual Reports, XXIV-XXXII, XXXIV, XXXVI-XXXVIII, XL; Index to Proceedings, 1874-1901; Bulletin, 1874-1901; Bulletin, 18; Extract from a report of Executive Committee.
Money.
Bliem, Dr. Milton J., San Antonio. — Five dollars.
Blythe, W. H., Mt. Pleasant.— Five dollars.
Bryan, Guy M., Houston. — Ten dollars.
Bryan, Lewis R., Houston. — Five dollars.
Courchesne, Alfred, El Paso. — Twenty-five dollars.
Crane, R. C., Sweetwater. — Ten dollars.
Dealey, G. B., Dallas. — Ten dollars.
Davidson, W. S., Beaumont. — Twenty-five dollars.
Evans, Ira H., Austin, Texas. — Ten dollars.
Gillette, Daniel G., Dallas. — Twenty-five dollars.
Groos, F., San Antonio. — Five dollars.
Huston, Gerard, Paint Rock. — Five dollars.
Kelly, G. G., Wharton.— Five dollars.
Key, E., Marshal. — Five dollars.
Morehead, C. R., El Paso.— Ten dollars.
Newby, W. G., Fort Worth.— Five dollars.
Rhea, W. A., Jr., Dallas.— Ten dollars.
Richter, August C., Laredo, Texas. — Twenty-five dollars.
Sullivan, J. C., San Antonio. — Five dollars.
Taulman, Joseph Ev Hubbard. — Five Dollars.
Wood, Judge W. D., San Marcos. — Ten dollars.
Smaller amounts have been received from Mr. B. J. Benton, Mr. J. C. Carpenter, Dr. M. Duggan, Mr. J. F. Etter, Mr. J. M. Fox, a friend in San Antonio, Mr. Yale Hicks, Mr. Jno. T. Me- Carty, Mr. Jno. S. McCampbell, and Miss Laura Reese.
110 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
BOOK EEVIEWS AND NOTICES.
THE QUARTERLY has received a pamphlet containing an account by John W. Sansom of the "Battle of Nueces River" of August 10, 1862. Mr. Sansom was one of a band of Texas refugee Unionists, sixty-five in number, mostly Germans, who, while endeavoring to escape into Mexico, were overtaken at the Nueces River in Kinney County by a superior band of Confederates and almost annihilated.
The author maintains that the attack was wholly unexpected and a piece of treachery on the part of the Confederate authorities, but he does not sustain the charges of wholesale butchery so frequently made by the Unionists. Altogether it is a very clear and satis- factory account of a much-beclouded affair.
.CHAS. W. R.
Breaking of the' Wilderness; The Story of the Conquest of the Far West, from the Wanderings of Cabeza de Vaca, to the First Descent of the Colorado by Powell, and the Completion of the Union Pacific Railway, with Particular Account of the Exploits of Trappers and Traders. By Frederick S. Dellenbaugh, Member of the Powell Colorado River Expedition; author of "The Romance of the Colorado River," "The North American Indians of Yester- day," etc. (New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1905. Pp. xxiii, 360.)
What is probably the best thing about this book is the rather vivid impression it gives of the Far West and of the difficulties that had to be overcome by the explorers who first penetrated it. The impression is greatly aided by the excellent series of illustra- tions, most of which are made from photographs, and a consider- able part of the rest from sketches by the author and by others. Mr. Dellenbaugh has traveled extensively, as he says, along all "the principal historical trails" in the country with which his narrative deals, and he seems quite familiar with it. His descrip- tions have no small degree of the actuality that attaches to the view of an eye-witness, as, e. g., that of the mouth of the Columbia :as seen from seaward (p. 142).
Boole Revieivs and Notices. Ill
The author is also fairly familiar with the work of the principal explorers, and he gives the reader a good general impression of the process of wilderness breaking described in his book. It is, how- ever, apparent that he is not as familiar with the sources of West- ern history as with the physical aspects of the West. His failure to use the proper Spanish accents for such names as Cibola, Panuco, etc., suggests a lack of intimate acquaintance with the only language in which many of those sources are yet to be found. He holds to the discredited theory that the Espiritu Santo of Pineda was the mouth of the Mississippi (p. 104) ; he thinks that the Malhado of Cabeza de Vaca was Galveston Island, or some other island on the Gulf coast between that and the mouth of the Mississippi (p. 104), and, while he refers to THE QUARTEELY, he seems not to have read the articles by Judge Coopwood; in spite of the work of Frank Hamilton Gushing — with which, by the way, he doesn't seem to trouble himself — he refuses to believe that Cibola is to be identified with Zuni (p. 113) ; although he cites H. H. Bancroft, who gives good reasons for rejecting the story of Juan de Fuca, he doesn't question the story itself (p. 119) ; he repeats the baseless legend that the Spaniards made a settlement at San Antonio in 1692 (p. 134) ; he refers to Natchitoches as "a Span- ish post in Texas" (p. 182) ; and his entirely 'inadequate and mis- leading explanation of the Texas Eevolution is that "the Texans desired to have Texas a sovereign Mexican State, but a military government was proposed by the Mexicans" (p. 298). Such errors make it unsafe to depend on the book as an authority, but it will nevertheless xremain useful to the reader who is on his guard against them. G. P. G.
THAT SUMMER TRIP
HAVE) YOU DECIDED ON
THIS YEAR'S VACATION?
IT'S ABOUT THE TIME TO FIGURE ON IT
ALSO CONSIDER THE TRAIN SERVICE.
THE
FRISCO
SYSTEM
REACHES MANY DELIGHTFUL RESORTS IN
THE OZARK MOUNTAINS AND OFFERS
THE QUICKEST SERVICE TO ALL
NORTHERN RESORTS.
THROUGH SLEEPERS. HARVEY DINING SERVICE.
Write for information.
C. W. STRAIN, G. P. A.,
FORT WORTH, TEXAS.
FELLOWS AND LIFE MEMBERS
OF THE
ASSOCIATION
The constitution of the Association provides that "Members who show, by published work, special aptitude for historical investigation, may become Fellows. Thirteen Fellows shall be elected by the Association when first organized, and the body thus created may thereafter elect additional Fellows on the nomination of the Executive Council. The number of Fellows shall never exceed fifty."
The present list of Fellows is as follows:
BARKER. MR. EUGENE C. KENNEY, CAPT. M. M.
BATTS, JUDGE R. L. KLEBERG, RUDOLPH, JR. BOLTON, PROF. HERBERT EUGENE LEMMON, PROF. LEONARD
CASIS, PROF. LILIA M. LOOSCAN, MRS. ADELE B.
CLARK, PROF. ROBERT CARLTON McCALEB, DR. W. F.
COOPER, PRESIDENT O. H. MILLER, MR. E. T.
COOPWOOD, JUDGE BETHEL PENNYBACKER, MRS. PERCY V.
Cox, DR. I. J. RATHER, ETHEL ZIVLEY
ESTILL, PROF. H. L. SHEPARD, JUDGE SETH
FULMORE, JUDGE Z. T. SMITH, DR. W. ROY
GAINES, JUDGE R. R. TOWNES, PROF. JOHN C.
GARRISON, PROF. GEORGE P. WILLIAMS, JUDGE O. W.
GRAY, MR. A. C. WINKLER, MR. ERNEST WILLIAM
HOUSTON, PROF. D. F. WOOTEN, HON. DUDLEY G.
The constitution provides also that "Such benefactors of the Association as shall pay into its treasury at any one time the sum of thirty dollars, or shall present to the Association an equivalent in books, MSS., or other acceptable matter, shall be classed as Life Members."
The Life Members at present are: BRACKENRIDGE, HON. GEO. W. Cox, MRS. NELLIE STEDMAN
THE QUARTERLY
OF THE
TEXAS STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION
VOL. X. OCTOBER, 1906. No. 2.
The publication committee and the editors disclaim responsibility for views expressed by contributors to THE QUAKTERLT.
THE FOUNDING OF MISSION EOSAEIO : A CHAPTEK IN THE HISTORY OF THE GULF COAST.1
HERBERT E. BOLTON.
This sketch of the founding of Mission Nuestra Senora del Rosario for the Karankawan Indian tribes of the Texas coast coun- try was written as a by-product, so-to-speak, of a more extended task. It aims -merely to set forth the general conditions in northern New Spain that led to a renewed attempt, after one failure, to sub- due these tribes, and to a plan to colonize their territory and that along the coast to the southwest; to tell the story of the struggles, delays, and difficulties that attended the foundation of the mis- sion that was established as one of the agencies in their reduction; and to convey an idea of the kind and degree of success that at- tended the first few years of its existence. If the historical im- portance of the founding of this mission were measured by the magnitude of the establishment or its success as a spiritual under-
the main subject of this paper there is nothing known to the writer in print, consequently he has had no guide for even the barest out- lines of the narrative. The materials used in its preparation are almost entirely manuscript records in the Archive General de Mexico and in the B6xar Archives. Unless otherwise indicated, the correspondence cited is contained in a collection of manuscripts in the Archive General (Secci6n de Historia, volume 287) entitled Autos fhos. apedimento. . . . \_de] Frai Benitto de Santa An [a] . . . que se le manden restitu [ir a la Mision de] Sn. Antonio que es a cargo de la Sta. Cruz de Querettaro los [con] bersos Indios de la Nation [Cujan] que se kalian agregados a [la mision] de Santa Dorothea. 1751-1758. Original. Folios 108.
114 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
taking, it would, indeed, be small. But such is not the case, for the project of a Karankawan mission was an index of plans affecting an entire geographical region, and the story of its foundation reveals the motives underlying these plans and the conditions attending their execution. It is but fair to state that the circumstances of the preparation of the sketch have made necessarily brief the treat- ment of these broader considerations, and have determined its em- phasis upon the Spanish relations with the coast tribes and the inner history of the mission.
1. The Karankawan Tribes About Matagorda Bay.
When at the close of the seventeeth century the French and the Spaniards first attempted to occupy the Gulf coast in the neighbor- hood of Matagorda Bay, that region was the home of a group of native tribes now called Karankawan from their best known divi- sion. The principal tribes of this group, using the most common Spanish forms of the names, were the Cujanes, Carancaguases, G-uapites (or Coapites), Cocos, and Copanes. They were closely interrelated, and all apparently spoke dialects of the same language, which was different from that of their neighbors farther inland.1 Though the Carancaguas tribe has finally given its name to the group, it was not always the one best known to the Europeans or regarded by them as the leading one, for in the middle of the 18th century four of the tribes, at least, including the Carancaguas, were frequently considered collectively under the name Cujanes.2
As these Indians did not occupy fixed localities, and as they mingled freely with each other, it is difficult to assign definite territorial limits to the different tribes; and yet in a general way
JThe relation above asserted between these four tribes has not hitherto been established by ethnologists, nor do the scope and purpose of this article justify inserting here the evidence to prove it. Such evidence is not lacking, however, and will be published, it is hoped, in another place. The only essay in print on the Karankawan Indians is that by Dr. Gatschet, The Kararikawa Indians, in Archcelogical and Ethnological Papers of the Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Vol. I, No. 2, 1891.) Recent work in the Mexican and the Texas archives has made accessible a great deal of material unused by him.
"Captain Manuel Ramirez de la Piszina, of Bahia del Esplritu Santo, calls them "the four nations, who, under the name of Coxanes, have been reduced. They are the Co janes, Guapittes, Carancaguases, and Copanes" (Letter to the viceroy, Dec. 26, 1751). This is only one of several in- stances of this usage of the word Cujanes that might be cited.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 115
the characteristic habitat of each can be designated with some cer- tainty. The Carancaguases dwelt most commonly on the narrow fringe of islands extending along the coast to the east and the west of Matagorda Bay; the Cocos on the mainland east of Matagorda Bay about the lower Colorado River; the Cujanes and Gua- pites on either side of the bay, particularly to the west of it; and the Copanes west of the mouth of the San Antonio River about Copano Bay, to which the tribe has given its name.
Numerically the group was not large. A French writer of the seventeeth century estimates the "Quelancouchis", probably mean- ing the whole Karankawan group, at four hundred fighting men, and the Spaniards, upon the basis of a closer acquaintance, in 1751 put the number, excluding the Cocos, at five hundred fighting men.1
These tribes represented perhaps the lowest grade of native so- ciety in all Texas. Their tribal organization was loose, and their habits were extremely crude. With respect to clothing, they ordi- narily went about in a state of nature. Being almost or entirely without agriculture, they lived largely on fish, eggs of sea-fowls, and sylvan roots and fruits, although they hunted buffalo and other game to some extent in the interior. They led a roving life, and therefore built only temporary habitations, consisting usually of poles covered or partly covered with reeds or skins. The Caran- caguases, in particular, as has been said, dwelt on the islands; but during the hunting season and the cold winter months they mi- grated to the mainland. For these migrations they used canoes, which they managed with skill. Physically, the men were large and powerful, and they were correspondingly warlike. They were fre- quently at war with the interior tribes, and from their first contact with the whites they were regarded as particularly dangerous. Al- though their only weapons were the bow and the spear,2 their island asylum and their skill with canoes made them unassailable in re- treat, while horses, early secured from the Spaniards, increased their offensive strength. From very early times they were regarded as cannibals, and their religious superstitions were commensurate
*A m6moire of 1699, in Margry, Decouvertes et Etablissements, IV, 316; Captain Piszina, of Bahla, letter to the viceroy, Dec. 26, 1751.
The "dardo" which they also used for catching fish (MeziSres to Croix, Oct 7, 1779, in Memories de Nueva Espana, XXVIII, 258).
116 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
with their barbarity. Such Indians as these could hardly be called inviting material for the missionary.
2. Failure of Early Spanish Efforts Among the Karankawan
Tribes.
Although the Karankawan tribes were among the very earliest of the Texas natives to come to the notice of the Spaniards, and were visited by them again during the first attempts at actual occupa- tion of the country, efforts to control them were for some time delayed. The Caoques, or Capoques, met by Cabeza de Vaca on the Texas coast (1528-1534) are thought to have been identical with the Cocos of later times.1 After this adventurer, their next white visitors were the French. La Salle's unfortunate colony (1685-9) on the Lavaca River had some of these tribes for neigh- bors, and was destroyed by them. It was among the Caocosi, the Cocos, very probably, that De Leon in 1690 rescued some captive survivors of this French colony.2 Again, in 1721, the hostility of apparently the same tribes caused La Harpe to abandon his project of occupying the Bay of St. Bernard for France, and thus put an end to French attempts to control this coast.3
Up to this time the Spaniards had seen but little of the Karan- kawan Indians since the first entradas from Mexico more than a quarter of a century before, and had made no attempt to subdue them. But in 1722 the Marques de Aguayo established on the very site of La Salle's fort the presidio of Nuestra Senora de Loreto, more commonly called Bahia, and founded near by for the Cu janes, Guapites,- and Carancaguases the mission of Espiritu Santo de Zuniga. The presidio was left in charge of Captain Domingo Ramon, perhaps the same Ramon who had founded the second group of East Texas missions in 1716. Father Pena,1 a member
^andelier, The Journey of Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca (Barnes and Co. 1905), 72; Gatschet, The Karankawa Indians, 34; Hand-book of the Indians (Bureau of American Ethnology), I, 315.
2Velasco, Dlctamen Fiscal, Nov. 30, 1716, in Memorias de Vueva Espana, XXVII, 182. This statement is made by Velasco on the basis of De Le6n's own report. See Carta de Damian Manzanet (THE QUARTERLY, II, 301), and De Leon, Derrotero, 1690.
*Margry, Decouvertes et Etablissements, VI, 354.
4Pefia's diary of the Aguayo expedition calls him Jos6 Ram6n, but au- thentic documents written at Loreto at the time of Ram6n's death call him Domingo Ram6n (Autos fechos en la Bahia de el espiritu Santo sobre. . . . muertes, 1723-1724. Original MS. Archive General.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 117
of Aguayo's expedition, recorded at the time in his diary that "it was seen that they *[ these three tribes] were very docile and would enter readily upon the work of cultivating the earth and their own souls, the more because they live in greater misery than the other tribes, since they subsist altogether upon fish and go entirely without clothing."1 By this utterance Pena proved himself either ignorant or defiant of history, a bad sociologist, and a worse prophet.
In a short time forty or more families of Cujanes, Caranca- guases, and Guapites established their rancheria near the presidio, and others may have entered the mission; but scarcely had they done so before trouble began. In the fall of 1723 a personal quarrel arose between them and the soldiers. An attempt to punish an of- fending Indian resulted in a fight, the death of Captain Ramon, and the flight of the natives.2 In a few weeks the Indians returned to make reprisals upon the lives and the goods of the soldiery — a practice which they kept up more or less continuously for the next twenty-five yeans.3 Whether or not the garrison was to blame for the origin of the ill feeling, as it was claimed they were, can not be stated, but at any rate they showed little skill in dealing with this warlike people.4
Discouraged by the hostility between the Indians and the sol- diery, the missionary at Espiritu Santo removed his mission some ten leagues northwestward to the Guadalupe River, and labored among the Jaranames and the Tamiques,5 non-coast tribes, of a different language, hostile to, and having a somewhat higher civil- ization than the Karankawans.6 Shortly afterward the presidio was
*Diary, in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIIII, 57-58.
*A.utos sobre muertes, etc., 1723-1724.
"Ibid. In 1728 Rivera reported that the Cujanes, Cocos, Guapites, and Carancaguases were hostile to Bahla (Proyecto, Tercero Estado, Par. 42). In 1730 Governor Bustillo y Zevallos wrote to the viceroy that a treaty had been made with Cujanes, Guapites, and Carancaguases, and that he hoped that the Copanes and Cocos would soon join them (Letter of Nov. 29, 1730). Testimony given at Bahla Nov. 20, 1749, states that Captain Orobio y Basterra had succeeded for some time in keeping the Cocos Cujanes, and Orcoquizas quiet (B6xar Archives, Bahla, 1743-1778).
*Bancroft (North Mexican States and Texas, edition of 1886, I, 631), on the authority of Morfi, lays the blame upon the soldiers. So did Governor Almazan, who investigated the trouble in 1723 (Autos sobre muertes, 1723-1724).
'Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, edition of 1886, I, 631.
"Father Juan de Dios Maria Camberos, missionary at Bahla, wrote to the viceroy May 30, 1754, that "these Indians already mentioned [the Cujanes, Guapites, and Carancaguases] do not wish >.to leave the neigh-
118 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
removed to the same site by Captain Ramon's successor.1 The new location is apparently marked by modern Mission Valley, west of the Guadalupe and near the northwestern line of Victoria county.2
Though the presidio and the mission had retreated from their midst, the Karankawan tribes remained hostile, and after Rivera's inspection, in 1727, there was little prospect of subduing them. Rivera's reports between 1728 and 1738 show that he regarded the Cujanes, Cocos, Guapites, Carancaguases, and Copanes all incapable of being reduced to mission life,3 and that it was for this reason, mainly, that he considered projects for removing the presidio and the mission of Bahia now to the San Marcos, now to the San Antonio, and now to the Medina. A missionary at San Antonio wrote in 1751 that "the Cujanes were for some thirty years con- sidered irreducible, and (according to various reports to be found in the Secretaria de Govierno), because irreducible, they were the principal obstacle to the presidio of la Bahia." A little earlier he had written, "In truth, since the year 1733, when I came to this province, I have never heard that one of these Indians has attached himself to that mission (Espiritu Santo)."*
borhood of la Bahia del Espiritu Santo, where their lands are, nor is it proper that they should be put with the Jaranames and Tamiques, who are in the mission called Espiritu Santo at said Bahia, since they are of different languages, incompatible dispositions, and do not like to be in their company." Soils, in his Diario (1768), reports that the Jaranames and their associates are "en mas politica" than the Karankawans (Me- mories de Nueva Espana, XXVII, 265 ) .
Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, I, 631, on the authority of Morn, Mem. Hist. Tex., 195. The presidio was removed after Apr. 8, 1724, and apparently before the close of Governor Almazan's term in 1726, but I have been unable to determine the exact date.
This new site was later reported as fourteen leagues northwest from Bahia del Espiritu Santo (Report of Captain Orobio y Basterra, of Bahia, 1747) and about ten leagues northwest of the later site of Bahia, or mod- ern Goliad (Capt. Manuel Ramirez de la Piszina to the viceroy, Feb. 18, 1750). Mr. H. J. Passmore, of Goliad, informs me that at the lower end of Mission Valley, and close to the Guadalupe River, "near some slight falls, or what some think was an old dam in the River, and near what was known as the 'De Leon Crossing,'" there were, within the memory of the old settlers, some fairly well preserved ruins of a mission, whose name none in his locality can tell him. The distances of this point from the original site of Bahia and from Goliad correspond very well with those given above.
8Santa Ana, president of the Quergtaran Missions at San Antonio, to the viceroy, about May 22, 1752.
'Letters to the viceroy, June 17 and Dec. 20, 1751.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 119
Thus, with the exception of a few families of Cu janes and a few of Cocos who had found their way into the San Antonio missions, by 1750 no progress had been made toward converting or even sub- duing these Karankawan tribes. But now conditions in the prov- inces and the plans of the government led to a renewed and more successful attempt.
3. New Plans for the Coast Country.
For some time the missionary field in Texas had tended rather to contract than to expand : but toward the middle of the eighteenth century a new wave of missionary activity made itself felt not only in this province, but in the whole coast country north of Panuco. It was in a way a response to increased Indian troubles on the north Mexican frontier and to increasingly bold intrusions of the French among the northeastern tribes; and, although we must not underrate the zeal that still burned in the breast of the Franciscan friar, it is but truth to say that the dominant force behind this new missionary movement was mainly political — the desire to subdue unoccupied territory, protect the settlements, and to keep a con- trolling hand upon the frontier tribes to prevent them and their country from falling to a rival power. In Texas this activity showed itself in the plans for the coast country about to be described, and in the foundation of a number of new missions elsewhere for tribes hitherto neglected but now demanding attention. Among these missions were the three founded (about 1747) on San Xavier River1 northeast of Austin, for tribes mainly of the Tonkawan group; Nuestra Seiiora de la Luz, (about 1756), on the lower Trinity River, for the Vidais and Orcoquizas; the mission at San Saba (1757) for the Lipan Apaches; San Lorenzo and Candelaria2 (1762), south of San Saba, likewise for the Apaches; and possibly others. During this period, also, plans were considered, though unrealized, for missionizing the Towakana tribes of the Brazos, and the Yscanes farther to the northeast.3 It has been customary
1San Xavier, Candelaria, San Ildefonso.
"Founded in January and February, 1762. Expediente, sobre estableci- mento de Misiones en la immediacion del Presidio de Sn. Savas (Archive General), 94, 103, 112.
aTestimonio de los Diligencios practicados ... sobre la reduction de los Tndios Tehuacanas e Tscanis a Mision, 1761-1763 (Bexar Archives).
120 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
to suppose that these missions were all failures, compared even with the standard of success attained by the earlier ones; but until the facts of their history are better known judgment may well be suspended. Certain it is that, the more we know about the regime of the Spaniards in these northern provinces, the more we discover that they had and did here, and the more charitable we become in judging their ultimate failure.
The founding of mission Kosario, as well as those enumerated above, was also part of this revived missionary movement, but more specifically, part of a plan to colonize and missionize the whole gulf coast country from Panuco to the San Antonio Eiver. This region had been the longest neglected stretch of coast country round the entire Gulf of Mexico. It had become a retreat for Indians who troubled the interior provinces of Nuevo Leon and Coahuila, and the southern portion of it was suspected of having valuable mines. The government at Mexico decided, therefore, to subdue it by conquest, colonization, and missions. The person ap- pointed to undertake this work was Jose de Escandon, one of the ablest men in Mexican history, who, some time before, had been made Count of Sierra Gorda for his notable pacification of that region. His appointment to the new commission dated from Sep- tember 3, 1746. The territory assigned for him to subdue and colonize was called Colonia del Nuevo Santander, and extended from Panuco to the San Antonio River.1
Had the colonization of all New Spain been left to the care of men with Escandon's views and ability, the results of Spain's ef- forts would doubtless have been much greater than they actually proved to be. He was a firm believer in the superiority of civil pueblos over military garrisons or even missions as a means of sub- duing natives and securing new territory; and an essential feature of his plan for Nuevo Santander was to have the settlements of Mexican colonists sufficiently numerous and prosperous to make possible within a few years the withdrawal of the garrisons.2
In 1746 and 1747 Escandon personally inspected the country to
Bancroft, Mexico, III, 332- 342; Reconocimiento del Seno Mearicano hecho por el Theniente de Capn. Oral. Dn. Joseph de EscandGn, 1746-1747 (MS.), in the Archive General.
"Escant^n's report to the viceroy of Oct. 26, 1747, and of July 27, 1758. MSS. in the Archive General.
The Founding of Mission Eosario. 121
and along the Rio Grande, while under his instructions Captain Joaquin de Orobio y Basterra, commander at Bahia, in Texas, ex- amined the region from the Guadalupe to the Rio Grande. Their reports contain the first detailed information that we have concern- ing the natives and the topography of many parts of this extended area. As an illustration, it may be noted that hitherto it was sup- posed that the Nueces River emptied into the Rio Grande. In conse- quence of these inspections Escandon recommended moving the mis- sion and presidio from Bahia to a site on the lower San Antonio called Santa Dorotea (near modern Goliad), and projected the foundation of fourteen Spanish villas in the territory under his charge. One of these was to be villa de Vedoya, composed of fifty families, and situated at the mouth of the Nueces near the site of modern Corpus Christi. Adjacent to the town was to be the mis- sion of Nuestra Senora de el Soto, to minister to the Zuncal, Pajase- queis (or Carrizos) Apatines, Napuapes, Pantapareis, and other tribes of the vicinity. Another of the fourteen towns was to be villa de Balmaceda, established with twenty-five families at Santa Dorotea.1 The successful establishment of this villa would, he believed, make possible the suppression of the presidio of Bahia in three or four years, and thus remove the chief ground for hostility on the part of the coast Indians.2
The plans for the southern half of the territory met with a large measure of permanent success. It was at this time that Laredo, Camargo, Reynosa, and several other settlements were founded along and south of the Rio Grande. That the outcome in the north- ern half was different was not the fault of Escandon. In accordance with his plan, the presidio of Bahia and the mission of Espiritu Santo were in 1749 moved some ten leagues southwest to Santa Dorotea ; but the families sent to settle on the Nueces, fearing harm from the Indians, backed out, and were allowed to return and found instead the present town of Soto la Marina ; while the plan to estab- lish villa de Balmaceda failed because at the fiscal's instance Escan-
lReconocimiento del Seno Mexicano, folios 40-44, 85, 88, 110, 216; also Valcarcel to the viceroy, Feb. 1, 1758. The tribal names here given are those reported by Orobio y Basterra for the vicinity of the Nueces. I have not thus far attempted to identify the tribes with those of the region going under better-known names.
'Report of Escand6n, Oct. 26, 1747; Valcarcel to the viceroy, Feb. 1, 1758.'
122 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
don was refused the requisite funds. Had the government sup- ported Escandon in this and his subsequent efforts to plant colonies between the San Antonio and the Rio Grande, there seems no good reason why the Spanish hold might not have been made as secure in this region as it was beyond the Rio Grande.1 But this it failed to do.
Nevertheless, the removal of Bahia to Santa Dorotea was fol- lowed by an effort to revive missionary work among the Karan- kawan tribes which resulted in the successful establishment of mis- sion Rosario.
4. The Quarrel Between Queretarans and Zacatecans Over the
Cujanes.
On April 14, 1750, the viceroy exhorted the missionaries at the new site to do all in their power to reduce,. congregate, and convert the Cujanes, Carancaguases, and Guapites. They were to be treated with the utmost kindness, given presents, and promised, on behalf of the government, that if they would settle in a pueblo they would be given new missions, protected, and supplied with all neces- saries.1 Similar instructions were written to Captain Manuel Ramirez de la Piszina, the new commander of the presidio of Bahia.
If we may trust the reports of the missionaries and the cap- tain, they went zealously to work among these three tribes in response to the viceroy's order. But little or nothing seems to have been accomplished until their rivals, the Queretaran friars at San Antonio, entered the same field.3
At this time the Queretaran missions at San Antonio were short of neophytes, partly because of an epidemic that had made ravages among the mission Indians.4 On the other hand these missions were just now under the direction of Father Fr. Juan Mariano de los Dolores, one of the leaders of the missionary revival which we have mentioned. For these reasons, and since the Karankawans had
*Cf. Escand6n's report, July 27, 1758, again urging the colonization of this whole strip of country.
"Summary by Camberos, missionary at this time in Bahia.
3Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 26, 1751 ; Camberos to the viceroy, May 30, 1754.
'Father Dolores, missionary at San Antonio, to Father Gonzales, mis- sionary at Espfritu Santo, June 17, 1751.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 123
long been without mission influence, the Queretarans entertained the plan of gathering them, especially the Cu janes,1 into their par- ticular fold. Whether the idea originated with Father Santa Ana, former president of the San Antonio missions, but now in Mexico, or with Father Dolores, his successor now on the ground, does not appear ; but it is through Santa Ana that we first learn of the pro- ject, while it was the latter who put it into execution. Early in
1750, in a private communication to Altamira, the auditor general of the viceregal government, Santa Ana made known the plan, in- timating that he feared objections from the Zacatecan friars at Espiritu Santo, on the ground that the Karankawan tribes had once been assigned to that mission.2 He doubtless knew, too, that the Zacatecans had recently been ordered to renew efforts on the coast. Altamira approved the project, saying that so long as these Indians remained in the forest they belonged only to the Devil, and that any one who wished was free to try his hand at winning them to the Lord.3
The actual work from San Antonio was undertaken by Father Dolores with the aid of Fray Diego Martin Garcia. Before entering the field he first asked the consent of the principal missionary at Espiritu Santo, Fray Juan Joseph Gonzales.4 Gonzales replied that such a procedure would be satisfactory to him, and that he would waive whatever right his mission possessed to these Indians.5
The way was made easier for Dolores by the presence of the few Cujanes and Cocos previously mentioned as being at one of his missions.6 Knowing by experience, as he said, "that presents were the most effective texts with which to open the conversion of sav- ages," he began the revival by sending to the Cujanes, early in
1751, a Coco mission Indian bearing gifts,7 and a promise that a missionary would be sent to them.8
lThe plan evidently had in view the "Puxanes and others clear to the Rio Grande del Norte" (Santa Ana to the viceroy, Jan. 31, 1752).
"Santa Ana to the viceroy, Dec. 20, 1751.
*IUd.
*His request was apparently made in 1750. Santa Ana to the viceroy, undated, but about March 22, 1752.
"Santa Ana to the viceroy, Dec. 2, 1751; Gonzales to Dolores, Apr. 13, 1751; Dolores to Santa Ana, Oct. 26, 1751.
6Santa Ana to the viceroy, Dec. 20, 1751.
TDolores to Gonzales, June 17, 1751.
"This pomise is inferred from Santa Ana's letter of Dec. 20, 1751.
124 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
In spite of the assurance that had been given to Dolores by Gon- zales, this move of the former led very speedily to a politely worded but none the less spirited dispute between the two. In the competi- tion that attended the dispute Espiritu Santo had decidedly the advantage of geographical position. The .Cu janes were pleased with the evidence of good will — or better, perhaps, with the pros- pect of more gifts — and, without awaiting the arrival of the prom- ised minister, fifty-four adults1 set out for San Antonio to confer with Dolores. When on April 8 they reached the neighborhood of Santa Dorotea, or New Bahia, they were seen by some mission In- dians. These warned Captain Piszina that hostile Cujanes were near by killing mission cattle. A squadron of soldiers and Indians was accordingly sent out, and the Cujanes, after a slight show of fight, were taken to the presidio, and here they remained, notwith- standing their previous intention to go to San Antonio.2 Gon- zales and Piszina claimed that the Cujanes were told that they might continue their journey, that no force was used to keep them at Bahia, and that it was only with misgivings and after delibera- tion that their request to be allowed to remain at the mission was granted.3 But Dolores believed that if not force, then persuasion, had been used to rob him of the fruits of his efforts.
With a forbearance that might be called commendable, however, he held his peace, and made another attempt, which likewise re- sulted more to the advantage of the rival mission than of his own. Some of the Cujanes had returned from Bahia to their country and gathered ninety-five more Indians "of the Cujan, Copanes, Gua- pites, and Talancagues tribes." On their way they stopped at Bahia, left their women and children, and went back to gather a
1In his letter to the viceroy Dec. 26, 1751, Captain Piszina calls them "fifty- four Indians of the Coxan nation"; but in the same letter he says that the four recently reduced tribes going under the name of Coxan are the "Cojanes, Guapittes, Carancguases, and Copanes." Hence we may in- fer that these fifty-four were not exclusively Cujanes, although they were called by this name.
2Gonzales to Dolores, Apr. 3, 1751; Dolores to Santa Ana, Oct. 26, 1751; Santa Ana to the viceroy, Dec. 20, 1756; Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 26, 1751. Piszina said that they were taken to Bahia at the end of March, but Gonzales's letter of Apr. 13 is more reliable for the date, because nearer the event and more explicit.
3Gonzales to Dolores, Apr. 13, 1751; Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 26, 1751. This last assertion casts doubt upon any claim the Bahia authori- ties might make to have previously tried to take these Indians there.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 125
larger number of their people, with the intention, Dolores under- stood, of going on with them to San Antonio. He thereupon sent a number of mules laden with such supplies as might be needed by the Indians on their way.1 Shortly afterward a Coco arrived re- porting that one hundred and five families were already collected near Old Bahia and that more were gathering, but that, unless horses were sent at once to transport them, they would be diverted to Bahia, just as the first band had been, there to remain. Dolores now lost no time in despatching Fray Diego Martin with horses and a Coco guide to assist in bringing in the Cujanes and their friends.2
In a note written soon after this, Gonzales claimed that these Indians desired to remain at Bahia.3 Thereupon Dolores entered a vigorous protest. He reminded Gonzales that he had once waived his right to the coast Indians, but was now enticing them to Espiritn Santo; that but for him (Dolores) the Cujanes and the rest would still be in the woods and at war with the Spaniards, as they had always been ; that if after many years the Espiritu Santo mission had failed to subdue the Jaranames, whom they still claimed the right to monopolize, they could hardly expect to succeed with the additional task of subduing the Cujanes. Disclaiming a wish to quarrel, he requested Gonzales to find out for certain, by whatever means he chose, whether these Indians preferred to be at Bahia or at San Antonio, and promised to abide by the result, with these conditions, that in case they wished to come to San Antonio they must not be hindered, and that if they remained at Bahia he would send in a bill for the supplies he had given them.4
Dolores was now called to the missions at San Xavier, and when he got back he found new cause for displeasure with the author- ities at Bahia. In his absence Fray Diego Martin had returned with twenty-four Indians of the four tribes and the rather flimsy report that he might have brought five hundred had it not been for their fear that they would be prevented by the soldiers and mission- aries at Bahia from going to San Antonio. Meanwhile none of the families who had stopped at Bahia had appeared in San Antonio;
Dolores to Gonzales, June 17, 1751.
'Gonzales to Dolores, May 22, 1751, referred to in Ibid. '/bid.
126 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
consequently, again conceding the point backed by the better argu- ment of possession, Dolores advised the twenty-four to go to their friends at Bahia. But, by no means giving up his claim, he ap- pealed both to the discretorio of his college and to Santa Ana for authority to bring the Cu janes to his missions.1
Santa Ana took up the matter vigorously with the viceroy, with Andreu, the fiscal, and with Altamira, the auditor. He wrote let- ters, furnished documents, and sought personal interviews in de- fense of the rights of his college. He argued that until Dolores had pacified them the Karankawan Indians had always been hostile; that the Queretarans friars had been robbed of the fruits of their efforts by the Zacatecans, who had done nothing except to spoil a good work well begun; that by thirty years of idleness the latter had forfeited all the rights they ever had to the Karankawan field ; and that nothing could be expected of them in the future.2 In view of these considerations, he earnestly recommended that the work of converting these tribes might be entrusted to the Queretarans.3
On the other hand, appeal was made to law 32, title 15, book I, of the Recopilacion de Indias, which provided that when one re- ligious order had begun the conversion of a tribe it should not be disturbed by another. And thus the dispute went on until the end of 1752, when it was closed in effect by the fiscal's compromise de- cision that under the peculiar circumstances joint work among the tribes in question would be lawful and equitable, and by the vice- roy's exhortation of all parties to cooperate in the work of saving Karankawan souls for the glory of 'both majesties/4
5. Progress With the Cujanes at Espiritu Santo.
Meanwhile, the possession of the Cujanes and the others had proved a very temporary advantage to the Espiritu Santo mission, and even during that short time these "first fruits and hostages of all that Gentile race" had added little to the mission's glory. While the Indians were there the missionaries succeeded in baptizing fifteen in articulo mortis; the rest deserted within a few weeks,
1Dolores to the discretorio, undated; to Santa Ana, Oct. 26, 1751. 2Santa Ana to the viceroy, Dec. 20, 1751; Jan. 31, 1752; March 22.
'Dictamen fiscal, Oct. 2, 1752; Auditor's opinion, Oct. 9, 1752; Viceroy's decree, Oct. 10, 1752.
The Founding of Mission Eosario. 127
so that at the end of 1751 none appear to have remained. To make matters worse, relations between the tribes and the Span- iards again became strained through the unexplained killing of five Cujanes by their hosts.1
Altamira had at first favored Santa Ana's proposal to take the Cujanes to San Antonio. But when conflicting reports and news of the desertion of the Indians reached him he lost his patience and delivered himself of a generous amount of ill-natured truth about mission history, at the same time showing his hearty sympathy with Escandon's policy of settlement as a complement to the mis- sion and as a substitute for the garrison. "All the foregoing," he said, "but illustrates how, in this as in all like affairs of places at such long and unpeopled distances, come inopportune and irregular letters, proposals, representations, and petitions, that only leave the questions unintelligible. Thus in his report the captain [Pis- zina] begins by saying 'In obedience to Your Excellency's superior order,' without saying what order, or without specifying what he considers necessary for the conversion of the Indians in question. This conversion he assumes as assured simply because a few of them have submitted, when he can not be ignorant of their notorious in- constancy. And Kev. Padre Santa Anna, who had experienced this inconstancy, on Dec. 20 plead the cause of these same Cu- janes, only to report forty days after (on Jan. 31, of this year) that the occasion had passed because all of the Indians had deserted. This is what happens daily on those and all the other unsettled frontiers.
"The same will be true two hundred years hence unless there be established there settlements of Spaniards and civilized people to protect, restrain, and make respectable the barbarous Indians who may be newly congregated, assuring them before their eyes a living example of civilized life, application to labor, and to the faith. Without this they will always remain in the bonds of their native brutality, inherited for many centuries, as happens in the missions of the Rio Grande, of [East] Texas, and all the rest where there are no Spanish settlements, for the Indians there, after having
^Dolores to Santa Ana, Oct. 26, 1751; Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 26, 1751 (Piszina, referring to the fifty-four, said they remained two and one- half months) ; Santa Ana to the viceroy, Jan. 31, 1752.
128 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
been congregated fifty years or more, return to the woods at will."1
Notwithstanding the unflattering outcome of the enterprise thus far, the missionaries and the captain at Bahia, roused into activity by their rivals, continued their efforts to cultivate friendship with their traditional enemies, and, although conversions were few, they were otherwise comparatively successful.2 During the next two years they spent considerable sums from their own pockets for pres- ents and supplies, and Piszina made the occasion an excuse for asking the government for more soldiers, more money, and more missionaries. Writing in Dec., 1751, he said that the recent friendly attitude of the coast Indians, though favorable to mis- sionary work, also increased the expenses and made more workers necessary, for the four tribes included under the name Coxanes would comprise five hundred warriors besides their families. More- over, their conversion would make more soldiers necessary, since they were really more dangerous at peace than at war; for besides being treacherous themselves, the unfriendly Indians on the coast would visit their relatives at the mission and thus learn the weak- ness of the garrison. While, therefore, more missionaries and more supplies would be necessary before these tribes could be converted, their reduction would require an increase of soldiers to guard the Spaniards against the treachery of the neophytes and against their friends still upon the coast. Within two years Piszina made three such appeals to the viceroy.3
' 6. The Plan to Transfer the Ais Mission to Bahia.
By the end of this time the local authorities conceived the idea of founding a separate mission especially for the Cu janes and their friends, as a substitute for trying to reduce them at mission Espi- ritu Santo with -Indians of another race. To effect this plan the best informed person, and probably the father of the project, Fray Juan de Dios Camberos, missionary at Espiritu Santo went to Zacatecas, and was sent thence by the college to Mexico.4 His ap-
to the viceroy, Feb. 29, 1752.
2Andreu to the viceroy.
3Dec. 26, 1751; Dec. 31, 1753, and another mentioned in this last.
4Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 30, 1753; Camberos to the viceroy, May 30, 1754. It is inferred from the context that Piszina's letter here recited was sent by Camberos to the viceroy.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 129
pointment was dated Feb. 26, 1754, and was signed by Fray Gas- par Joseph de Solis, guardian of the college, and later known in Texas by his tour of inspection among the missions.1
In his communications to the viceroy of April 29, May 6, 7, and 30, Camberos set forth the situation and his plan. The Cujanes and their kindred, he said, were eagerly asking for a mission; so eager, indeed, that six of the chiefs of the Cujanes, Carancaguases, and Guapites were clamoring to be allowed to come to see the vice- roy himself in reference to the matter. But it was inadvisable to put them into mission Espiritu Santo together with the Jaranames and Tamiques already there, for they were tribes of different lan- guages, of different habits, and unfriendly. But to send them to San Antonio was equally impracticable, for they did not wish to leave the neighborhood of Bahia del Espiritu Santo, their native country. Even if the Indians were willing to be transplanted, ex- perience had shown that this was bad policy, for the Pamaques and other tribes, removed to San Antonio from their native soil on the Nueces, had speedily become almost extinguished. This very con- sideration had caused General Escandon to order Captain Piszina not to allow the Indians of his district to be taken from their coun- try. Moreover, if the mission were near the home of the Indians, fugitive neophytes could be easily recovered, whereas, if they were taken to San Antonio, the soldiers and missionaries would have to spend most of their time pursuing them.
Camberos advised, therefore, the establishment of a separate mis- sion. But to save the expense of equipping a new one he recom- mended removing mission Nuestra Senora de los Ais from near the Sabine to the neighborhood of Bahia, and re-establishing it for the Cujanes. His arguments in favor of his plan are an interesting commentary, coming as they do from a zealous Zacatecan, upon the comparative failure of the East Texas missions. The three Zaca- tecan foundations in East Texas, San Miguel de los Adaes, Nuestra Senora de los Dolores de los Ais, and Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe de los Nacogdoches had been existing for more than thirty years, and yet, according to him, notwithstanding the untiring efforts of the missionaries to reduce the Indians to mission life, it was notor- ious that they had succeeded in little more than the baptizing of
1The original commission, with seal, is in the Archive General de Mexico.
130 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
a few children and fewer adults upon the deathbed; and there was no hope that these tribes could ever be reduced to pueblos and in- duced to give up their tribal life. Under these circumstances four missionaries instead of five would suffice on that frontier. Since the Ais Indians consisted of only some forty families — perhaps two hundred persons — living within about fourteen leagues of mission Nacogdoches,1 their mission could be suppressed, one missionary going to Nacogdoches to reside and from there ministering to the Ais, the other going to Bahia with the mission equipment, to work among the Karankawan tribes in question.2
At first Andreu, the fiscal, disapproved the plan on the ground that with the padre so far away, travel so difficult, and the Ais In- dians so indifferent, they would lose not only the wholesome ex- ample of the missionary in their daily life, but even the slight re- ligious benefits which they now received.3 But Camberos sug- gested that the minister might incorporate the Ais with their kin- dred, the Little Ais (Aixittos),4 living two leagues from the Nacog- doches mission. He concluded by reminding the fiscal that it was after all a question of relative service. On the one hand, here were scarce forty families of Ais, who for thirty years had shown them- selves irreducible; on the other hand, there were five hundred or more families of Cujanes, Guapites, and Carancaguases, "as ready to be instructed in the mysteries of our faith as the Ayx are repug- nant to living in Christian society"; for two years they had been and still were firm in their anxious desire to be reduced to a pueblo and instructed. Was it not a matter of duty to save the willing many rather than to struggle hopelessly with the unwilling few?5
These arguments convinced the fiscal and the auditor, whereupon the viceroy, on June 17 and June 21, issued to the governor and the college the necessary decrees for effecting the transfer. The order to the college provided "that the mission of Nuestra Senora de los Dolores de los Ais, situated in the province of los Texas, should be
Tather Vallejo, of Adaes, maintained that the distance was nearly twenty leagues. Letter to the discretorio of his college, Dec. 1, 1754.
''Camberos to the viceroy, Apr. 29, May 6, May 7, and May 31.
"Andreu to the viceroy, May 2, 1754.
'This name was sometimes written Aijitos, but it was intended for the diminutive of Ais, and when spelled with an x was pronounced, no doubt, "Aisitos."
5Camberos to the viceroy, May 30, 1754.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 131
totally abandoned; that of the two ministers there, one should re- main at mission Nacogdoches, it being the nearest at hand, in order that he might assist with the waters of holy baptism all the children and adults who might wish this benefit; and that the other should go to found the new mission of the Guapittes, Cu janes, and Caran- caguases in the territory of la Bahia del Espiritu Santo, for which purpose all the ornaments, furniture, and other goods of the mission of los Aix should be given to this minister and transferred to the new mission."1
But now a protest was heard from East Texas. Upon receiving the viceroy's order to extinguish the Ais mission, Father Vallejo, president of the Zacatecan establishments on the eastern frontier, and a veteran of thirty years' service, first sought the opinion of the governor. His opinion was hostile to the change.2 Vallejo, with this backing, wrote to the guardian of his college that the Ais mission was by no means useless, and that until he should get further instructions he would defer the execution of the order. True, he said, the Ais Indians had not yet adopted mission life, in spite of the efforts of the fathers; yet they were being baptized in articulo mortis — the records showed 158 such baptisms in 36 years — ; the padre was useful as physician and nurse among them ; and the friendly relations with the Indians, who assisted will- ingly in the domestic and agricultural duties about the mission, offered still a hope that they would settle down to pueblo life. In- deed, when Father Cyprian had been missionary he had had them congregated for a space of four years, and Father Garcia had like- wise kept them content about the mission till, because of a recent scarcity of mission supplies, one of the chiefs had persuaded them to return to their rancherias. But if the missionary were to retire to Nacogdoches, the distance and the difficulties of travel were so great that the Indians would be without aid, and would likely abandon their country, just as the Nazones had done when the mis- sionaries had deserted them (1729). The good father could not close his argument without appealing to the fear of the French,
1Summary contained in the communication of the discretorio to the viceroy, Jan. 6, 1755.
2Vallejo to Governor Barrios y Jauregui, Nov. 20, 1754; the governor to Vallejo, Nov. 30, 1754. The president's name was sometimes spelled with a B and sometimes with a V.
132 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
tactics which had stood many a special pleader in good stead within the last half century. So he added that, aside from the importance of the Ais mission to the Indians, it was necessary as a half-way station between Nacogdoches and Adaes to give succor in case of hostile invasion. He maintained therefore that the mission should be continued at all hazards, even if with only one minister.1 This letter put an end to the effort to suppress the Ais mission, and set in motion a new plan. The discretorio, whence the idea of extinguishing los Ais had come, reported to the viceroy and sus- tained Vallejo's objections, and suggested, instead, a new mission for the Cujanes, maintaining, perhaps with truth, but with little regard for its former argument based on economy, that to equip a new mission would be little more expensive than to transfer the old one.2 So the matter again went to the fiscal, and he, on March 6, 1755, without other discussion than a review of the question, em- braced the new plan, and recommended that the Ais mission ba al- lowed to remain and that a new one be established for the coast tribes.3 On March 22 the auditor approved the project, and on April 7, the viceroy issued the corresponding decree.4
7. Founding Mission Nuestra Senora del Eosario de los Cujanes. •
But matters at Bahia had not waited for the viceroy to change his mind. Some time before this steps had already been taken, in conse- quence of the previous order — that looking to the transfer of the old establishment to a new site — toward the actual foundation of the mission for the Cujanes and their friends.
The government was slower to supply means than to sanction projects, and the funds with which to begin the work were raised by private gifts to the college or advanced by Piszina and the mis- sionaries at Bahia, while part of the mission furniture was bor- rowed from mission Espiritu Santo.5 Camberos was sent to super- Fray Francisco Vallejo to the guardian and the discretorio of the col-
e, Dec. 1, 1754.
The discretorio of the college to the viceroy, January 6, 1755.
8Andreu to the viceroy, March 6, 1755.
*Valcarcel to the viceroy, March 22; viceroy decree, Apr. 7.
8Letter of Camberos, May 26, 1758.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 133
vise the foundation,1 which was begun in November, 1754. Piszina spared nine soldiers to act as a guard, to assist with their hands, and to direct the Indians, some of whom were induced to help in the building and in preparing the field. On Jan. 15 Piszina thus wrote of the mission site and of progress in the work : "The place assigned for the congregation of these Indians, Excellent Sir, is four leagues from this presidio.2 It has all the advantages known to be useful and necessary for the foundation of a large settlement, and, in my estimation, the country is the best yet discovered in these parts. It has spacious plains, and very fine meadows skirted by the River San Antonio, which appears to offer facilities for a canal to irrigate the crops. In the short time of two months since the building of the material part of the mission was begun, a decent [wooden] church for divine worship has been finished. It is better made than that of this presidio and the mission of Espiritu Santo. There have been completed also the dwellings for the minister and the other necessary houses and offices, all surrounded by a field large enough to plant ten fanegas of maize."3 Two years later it was reported that irrigation facilities were about to be completed; that a dam of lime and stone forty varas long and four varas high had been built across an arroyo carrying enough water to fill it in four months, and that all that was lacking was the canal, which would soon be finished.4 But this work seems not to have been com- pleted. Within a few years — how soon does not appear — a strong wooden stockade was built around the mission.5
The name by which Camberos called the mission in his reports was "Jsuestra Senora del Rosario de los Co janes."6 Contemporary government documents sometimes call it by this name, and some- times simply "Xuestra Senora del Rosario"; while Solis, official
*It is not clear when the missionary from Los Ais went to Rosario to assist Camberos. But that he did go before May 27, 1757, appears from a letter of that date. Strangely, however, the correspondence in several instances speaks of the missionary in the singular, and while Camberoa commends Captain Piszia for his co-operatin, he mentions no ecclesiasti- cal associate. (The discretorio to the viceroy, May 27, 1757; opinion of Valcareel, Feb. 1, 1758; report to the junta de guerra, Apr. 17,. 1758; Juan Martin de Astfz to the viceroy, on or before June 21, 1758.)
2See page 134.
*Piszina to the viceroy, Jan. 15.
*The discretorio of the college to the viceroy, May 27, 1757.
"Soils, Diario, 1767-1763. Memorias, XXVII, 258*. See page 137.
'Camberos to the viceroy, May 26, 1758.
134 Texas Historical Association Quarterly. -
inspector for the college, in his diary of 1768 calls it "Mision del Santissimo Rosario," and "Mision del Kosario."1 The last is the more usual and popular form of the name. The addition of "de los Co janes" indicates in part the prominence of the Cujan tribe in the mission, and also the prevalent usage of their name as a generic term for the Karankawan tribes. The location of Rosario was given by Piszina as four leagues from the presidio of Bahia2 — in which direction he does not say, but it was clearly up stream. As will be seen, Piszina's estimate of the distance from Bahia was too great, unless the location of Rosario was subsequently changed. We learn from Solis's diary of 1768 that mission Espiritu Santo was "in sight of the Royal Presidio [apparently almost on the site of modern Goliad], with nothing between them but the river, which is crossed by a canoe" ;3 and in 1793 Revilla Gigedo reported mission Rosario as two leagues nearer than Espiritu Santo to Bexar.4 I am informed by Mr. J. H. Passmore, of Goliad, that the ruins today identified as those of Espiritu Santo are across the river from Goliad, and that four miles west of these, one-half a mile south of the San Antonio River, are the ruins identified, correctly, no doubt, as those of mission Rosario.5
Lack of funds for current expenses and to properly establish agriculture and grazing greatly handicapped the missionaries and Captain Piszina, while, on the other hand, the Indians did not prove as eager to embrace the blessings of Christianity as the un- initiated might have been led to expect from the former reports of their anxiety to do so. They came to the mission from time to time, and helped more or less with the work, but when provisions gave out they were perforce allowed, or even advised, to return to the coast.*
The number who frequented the mission and availed themselves of these periodical supplies must have been considerable, for within less than a year of the founding of the mission, Piszina reported
Wemorias, XXVII, 256, 266; Aranda to the viceroy, July 19, 1758.
2See ante, page 133.
"Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII, 264.
*Carta dirigida d la carte de Espana, Dec. 27, 1793.
"From what I can learn, it seems probable that the buildings at Goliad whose remains are now called "Mission Aranama" were connected with the presidio of Bahia rather than with a mission.
"Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 22, 1756; Camberos, May 26, 1758.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 135
that one thousand pesos in private funds had been spent for maize, meat, cotton cloth, tobacco, etc. ; a year later he said that the num- ber of Indians at mission Espiritu Santo — a number large enough to consume five or six bulls a week— was smaller than the number at Kosario,1 and that in all six thousand pesos had been spent in supporting the latter.
But conversions were slow, and the total harvest after four years' work was twenty-one souls baptized in articulo mortis — twelve adults and nine children. In May, 1758, only one of the Indians living at the mission was baptized. Camberos claimed that this small showing of baptisms was partly due to his conservatism. "If I had been over-ready in baptizing Indians," he said, "at the end of these four years you would have found this coast nearly covered with the holy baptism ; but experience has taught me that baptisms performed hastily make of Indians Christians who are so only in name, and who live in the woods undistinguishable from the in- fidel."2
The Indians were hard to manage, gave the soldiers much diffi- culty,3 and sustained their old reputation for being inconstant, unfaithful, and dissatisfied. The example of San Xavier, where a padre had recently been murdered, was fresh in the minds of the missionaries, and even when the Indians at Eosario were best dis- posed it was feared that they might revolt and harm their benefac- tors. The Cu janes in particular were feared, for, besides being the most numerous, they were regarded as especially bold and un- manageable.4 This fear, together with danger from the Apaches, was ground for some of the numerous appeals made for an increase of soldiers at the presidio, and for the building of the stockade.
As soon as Piszina had finished the mission buildings he had re- newed his former request for ten additional soldiers,5 and had asked the government to assist the new mission with the usual one year's supplies, in addition to the ornaments and furniture. Thereafter his appeal was frequently repeated,6 and was seconded by the col-
'Piszina to the viceroy, Nov. 10, 1755, and Dee. 22, 1756.
"Letter dated May 23, 1758.
'Piszina to the viceroy, Dec. 22, 1756.
*The discretorio to the viceroy, May 27, 1757.
5See page 128.
"Letters to the viceroy, Jan. 15, 1755, Nov. 10, 1755; Dec. 22, 1756.
136 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
lege, by Camberos, and by Governor Barrios y Jauregui.1 But for three years the government only discussed, procrastinated, and called for reports, until finally in a junta de guerra y hacienda held Apr. 17, 1758, the various items asked for were granted.2
8. Ten Years After.
With this belated aid the mission became more prosperous — as prosperous, indeed, as could be expected under the circumstances. In 1768 it was able to report a total of two hundred baptisms, which, so far as mere numbers go, was relatively as good a showing as had been made by its neighbor among tribes somewhat more docile, and nearly as good as that made by San Jose, the finest mission in all New Spain. At this time there must have been from one hundred to two hundred Indians, at least, living intermittently in the mission. But residence or baptism did not of necessity signify any great change in the savage nature of the Indians. They were hard to control, and were with difficulty kept at the mission, made to work, and induced to give up their crude ways. If corporal pun- ishment was used, which was sometimes the case,3 the neophytes ran away; and if they complained of harsh treatment by the padres., they were likely to find willing listeners among the soldiers.
It is not the purpose of this paper to follow out the history of the mission after its foundation. But it may vivify the reader's impression, and help him to secure a more correct idea of a frontier mission of the less substantial sort and of the conditions surround- ing it to reproduce here some parts of the diary account of Kosario made in 1768 by Father Solis, the official inspector of the Texas missions for his college. I therefore quote the following:
"[Feb.] 26. I passed through an opening called the Guardian,
1The discretorio to the viceroy, May 27, 1757 (At the end of 1755 the college sent an agent to the viceroy in person to urge haste in the matter) ; Barrios y Jauregui to the viceroy, Aug. 26, 1757; Letter to Camberos, May 26, 1756.
"Report of the junta, in the Archive General, original MS. The discus- sion of the question by the government may be found in communications of Aranda to the viceroy, Jan. 24, 1758; Aranda to the viceroy, March 10, 1757; Valcarcel to the viceroy, Apr. 5, 1757; Valcarcel to the viceroy, Feb. 1, 1758; report of the junta de guerra, Apr. 17, 1758.
8In 1768 an investigation was made at this mission as a result of the| flight of some of the Carancaguases, with the result that charges of harsh dealing with the neophytes were reported to the government at Mexico.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 137
then through others, and arrived at Mission del Santissimo Rosario, where I was received by the minister with much attention. The Indians who had remained at the mission — for many were fugitive in the woods and on the shore — came out in gala array as an em- bassy to meet me on the way. . . . The captain of la Bahia re- mained and posted a picket of soldiers to keep guard by day and by night. This mission is extremely well kept in all respects. It secures good water from Eio San Antonio de Vejar. The country is pleasant and luxurious. . . . The climate is very bad and unhealthful, hot, and humid, with southerly winds. Everything, including one's clothing, becomes damp, even within the houses, as if it were put in water. Even the inner walls wreak with water as if it were raining.
"28. I went to dine at the royal presidio of La Bahia del Espi- ritu Santo, at the invitation of the captain. I was accompanied by Fathers Ganuza1 and Lopez, and Brothers Francisco Sedano and Antonio Casas. . . . The captain received us with great respect and ceremony, welcoming us with a volley by the company and four cannon shots, . . . serving us a very free, rich, and abundant table, and comporting himself in everything with the magnificence and opulence of a prince. . .
"29. I said the mass of the inspection (visita) and inspected the church, sacristy, and the entire mission. . . .
"[March] 3. ... At night there returned thirty -three fam- ilies of the Indians of this mission who had wandered, fugitives. I received them with suavity and affection. . . .
"4. . . . The opinion which I have formed of this mission of Nuestra Senora del Rosario is as follows : As to material wealth it is in good condition. It has two droves of burros, about forty gentle horses, thirty gentle mules, twelve of them with harness, five thousand cattle, two hundred milch cows, and seven hundred sheep and goats. The buildings and the dwellings, both for the minis- ters and for the soldiers and the Indians, are good and sufficient. The stockade of thick and strong stakes which protects the mission from its enemies is very well made. The church is very decent. It is substantially built of wood, plastered inside with mud, and
lln the MS. this man's name is spelled Ganuza, Lamuza and Lanuza. His name is not given in Schmidt's Catalogue of Franciscan Missions.
138 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
whitewashed with lime; and its roof of good beams and shingles (taxamanil) looks like a dome (parece arteson). Its decoration is very bright and clean. It has sacred vessels, a bench for ornaments and utensils, a pulpit with confessional, altars, and all the things pertaining to the divine cult. Everything is properly arranged and kept in its place. There is a baptismal font, with a silver concha and silver cruets for the holy oils. The mission has fields of crops, which depend upon the rainfall, for water can not be got from the river, since it has very high and steep banks, nor from any where else since there is no other place to get it.
"This mission was founded in 1754. Its minister, who, 'as I have already said, is Fr. Joseph Escovar, labors hard for its welfare, growth, and improvement. He treats the Indians with much love, charity, and gentleness, employing methods soft, bland, and alluring. He makes them work, teaches them to pray, tries to teach them the catechism and to instruct them in the rudiments of our Holy Faith and in good manners. He aids and succors them as best he may in all their needs, corporal and spiritual, giving them food to eat and clothing to wear. In the afternoon before evening prayers, with a stroke of the bell, he assembles them, big and little, in the cemetery, has them say the prayers and the Chris- tian doctrine, explains and tries to teach them the mysteries of our Holy Faith, exhorting them to keep the commandments of God and of Our Holy Mother Church, and setting forth what is neces- sary for salvation. On Saturdays he collects them and has them repeat the rosary with its mysteries, and the alavado cantado. On Sundays and holidays before mass, he has them repeat the prayers and the doctrine and afterward preaches to them, explaining the doctrine and whatever else they ought to understand. If he orders punishment given to those who neer! it, it is with due moderation, and not exceeding the limits of charity and paternal correction; looking only to the punishment of wrong and excess, it does not lean toward cruelty or tyranny.1
"The Indians with which this mission was founded are the Co- xanes, Guapites, Carancaguases, and Coopanes, but of this last na- tion there are at present only a few, for most of them are in the woods or on the banks of some of the many rivers in these parts;
JSee note ante, p. 136.
The Founding of Mission Rosario. 139
or with another (otra) nation, their friends and confederates, on the shore of the sea, which is some thirteen or fourteen leagues dis- tant to the east of the mission. They are all barbarous, idle, and lazy; and although they were so greedy and gluttonous that they eat meat almost raw, parboiled, or half roasted and dripping with blood, yet, rather than stay in the mission where the padre pro- vides them everything needed to eat and wear, they prefer to suffer hunger, nakedness, and other necessities, in order to be at liberty and idle in the woods or on the beach, giving themselves up to all kinds of vice, especially lust, theft, and dancing."1
Such were the difficulties usually attending the labors of the fron- tier missionaries, exaggerated somewhat in this instance, no doubt, by the exceptional crudeness of the tribes they were trying to subdue. And such were the meager first fruits of Escandon's well considered plan to occupy the coast country this side of the Rio Grande. In after years the wooden church of the mission was re- placed by one of stone, and the mission experienced varying de- grees of prosperity. Escandon's project of establishing a Spanish pueblo near by was also realized, and other weak settlements were founded toward the Rio Grande. But these are matters outside the scope of this paper.
, Diario, in Hemorias de Nueva Espana, XXVII, 256-259.
140 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT OF TEXAS.
EKNEST WILLIAM WINKLEB.
I. TEMPORARY LOCATION OF THE SEAT OF GOV- ERNMENT.
1. SAN FELIPE.
(1) Seat of Austin's Colony.
On his way home from the City of Mexico, after having secured a final confirmation of the colonization grant made to his father, Stephen F. Austin called on Governor Don Luciano Garcia at Bexar and informed him of his success. The governor thereupon gave the name of San Felipe de Austin to the town which was to be laid off for the capital of the new colony (July 26, 1823 ).1 Baron de Bas- trop, commissioner on the part of the government, accompanied Austin from Bexar to survey lands and in union with Austin to issue titles to the settlers. The settlement was found in such dis- organized condition, owing to the long absence of Austin, that Bas- trop thought it advisable to postpone his work until the next year, when he revisited the colony. San Felipe was founded in 1824, and thenceforth figured as the capital of Austin's colony.2
Located most charmingly on a high prairie bluff on the west bank of the Brazos river, at the head of navigation, it was never- theless in the very heart of the wilderness and could lay claim to none of the advantages, comforts, or other amenities of civilization associated today with the name of even the smallest village. For many years there was no post office, no school, no church, and the stores, shops and taverns were small and their supplies scanty. What gave importance to the place was the fact that here the public business of the colony was transacted — the laws promulgated, jus- tice administered, land titles issued, and the public safety main- tained.
l, Laics of Texas, I 13, 34. "Holley, Texas, 109.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 141
(2) Seat of the Convention of 1832.
The disturbances that occurred in Texas during the summer of 1832 made it desirable that a convention of the delegates of all Texas be called. The alcaldes of the municipality of Austin, on August 22, 1832, "therefore recommended, that the people of each Town, Precinct, and Civil District in Texas, elect Five Delegates, to meet at the Town of San Felipe de Austin, on the 1st Monday in October next." The suggestion was adopted and the delegates to the first convention of all Texas assembled in San Felipe, and not at Bexar, which was San Felipe's senior by almost a century, or at Goliad or Nacogdoches, both very much older. .
(3) Seat of the Central Committee, and the Convention of 1833.
The convention of 1832 before adjourning had made provision for a central and sub-committees. The location of the central com- mittee is not fixed, but from the personnel of that body it is clear that no other place than San Felipe was intended. The central committee was empowered "to call a Convention of Delegates from all Texas, at such time and place as they think proper." In January, 1833, this committee called a new convention to meet at San Felipe on April 1. This convention met at the time and place indicated, and one of its acts was to continue the central com- mittee. A state constitution, too, was drafted, but it did not fix the location of the seat of government.
(4) Seat of the Department of Brazos.
It is shown above how San Felipe received its name, how the place was laid out, and how this site received the popular approval by making it the place of assembly for the conventions of October, 1832, and April, 1833. Decree No. 270, of the congress of Coa- huila and Texas, dated Monclova, March 18, 1834, finally set the seal of official approval upon the location by designating San Fe- lipe as the capital of the department of Brazos, created by this decree. The chief of the new department was appointed July 8, but, perhaps, a month or two elapsed before he qualified.
142 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
(5) Seat of the General Council.
From April, 1833, until the appointment of the political chief of the department of Brazos, about the middle of 1834, the central committee at San Felipe appears to have had little to do. This appointment promised to make its services entirely superfluous. However, with the growing importance of the events that were paving the way for a rupture with Mexico, and in view of the in- ability of the political chief of the Department of Brazos to in- augurate any satisfactory policy, the need of a unifying directory of the affairs of all Texas became so great that the old central com- mittee finally shouldered the responsibility of this office and, after a hasty reorganization, under the title of general council, it con- trolled affairs from the middle of September, 1835, until the meet- ing of its successor the consultation. The strength of the general council rested on the high character of its membership; its ef- ficiency, on the fact that it represented all Texas. Its headquarters were at San Felipe.
(6) Seat of the Consultation.
The need for a general consultation of all Texas had been felt since the middle of June, 1835 ; various efforts were made to bring it about; but for want of unanimity nothing was accomplished until the middle of August. By the end of July the plans of Santa Anna with regard to Texas were sufficiently well known to unite the people of Texas at least to the extent of being willing to hold a general consultation. A call for the election of delegates was issued from Velasco, August 20th. This plan received the hearty approval of S. F. Austin, when he arrived home from Mexico; and, while he was chairman of the central committee at San Felipe, this committee united in the call referred to above. There was a diversity of opinion, however, touching the place where the con- sultation should assemble. The people of Columbia,, without as- signing any reasons, appointed Washington; the people of San Felipe designated San Felipe, and submitted, in a circular ad- dressed to the committee of safety of the various municipalities, the following reasons in support of their selection :
The Seat of Government of Texas. 143
Some diversity of opinion has existed as to the place where the proposed consultation should meet. This place and Washington have been proposed. The meeting of yesterday have preferred this place for the reason that there is a printing press here. The most important public records are here, and the principal political au- thority of the department resides here. This question will of course be decided by the wishes of the majority, for which reason it is important that you [the committees of safety] will communi- cate to this Committee what are the wishes of the people of that section on this point.1
The question of the place of meeting of the consultation was thus referred for determination to the local committees of safety, a step that bears the evidence of fairness and of a willingness to make all concessions, consistent with the general good, for the sake of harmony. This circular was issued from San Felipe on September 13th; the consultation was to assemble on October 15th. Want of promptness on the part of the local committees, however, made it impossible for the central committee to fix beforehand the place of meeting of the consultation. So the question of place virtually resolved itself to this — At what place would a majority of the dele- gates to the consultation assemble ?
The battle of G-onzales, October 2, 1835, interfered with both the election and the assembling of the delegates to the consulta- tion. Many who had been, or who subsequently were chosen dele- gates had hastened to the defence of their country; and when the time for the meeting of this body approached, they were loath to quit the army for the council chamber. They, therefore, on Oc- tober 10th, held a meeting in camp at Gonzales and adopted the following resolutions:
Resolved, That the chairman of this meeting [S. F. Austin] be instructed to address the members of the Consultation, requesting all who can, to repair to the camp of the volunteers, armed and equipped for battle, and when so assembled, if a war is necessary, to aid in fighting the battles of the country ; but, if their services can be spared from the field, to determine on holding the Consultation at such time and place as a majority of the members may agree upon.
Resolved, That, if any portion of the members of the Convention meet at the time and place appointed, and find it impracticable to
^Publications of the Southern History Association, VIII 20, 21.
144 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
repair to the camp, as invited in the foregoing resolution, that they be requested, if they amount to a quorum, to adjourn from day to day, and suspend all action until the 1st of November.1
Austin's letter of next day, transmitting the above resolutions, is addressed "To the members of the General Consultation who may meet on the 15th Instant," but no place is indicated where they are expected to meet.2 It was unquestionably sent to San Felipe.3 Was it also sent to Washington ?
A small number of delegates gathered at Washington about the time fixed for the meeting of the consultation, and the following letter was written by those from Mina on their way thither :
At Coke's Octr 17th 1835 To the members of The "Genl consultation" &c.
At San Felipe —
The delegates from the Municipality of Mina have positive in- structions from their constituents to meet in "consultation," at Washington on Brazos — we expect to be at that place this evening, where we shall remain until we hear further from San Felipe and from Mina — They are persuaded that the citizens of Mina will never approve of holding the "consultation" at San Felipe for many rea- sons— but more especially as Washington was first named & recom- mended as the place of meeting — The people of Columbia took the lead & I presume will expect to meet there — The citizens of Washington, we are informed, have made very ample preparations, at a large expense, for accommodating the delegates — The confi- dence, which has produced such results — in our minds, should be respected —
We shall expect to hear soon from you — that we may determine whether to remain, or to return to our homes —
Very respectfully &c
D. C. Barrett B. Manlove
P. S. The other delegates from Mina now in the colonial army have been notified of their election & place of Meeting4
The following document, which unfortunately bears no date, will
telegraph, October 17, 1835.
Consultations Papers MS. All MSS. to which reference are made are on file in the Texas State Library, unless otherwise stated.
"Address of General Council to People of Texas, October 18, 1835, in Telegraph, October 26, 1835.
Consultation Papers MS.
The Svat of Government of Texas. 145
exhibit what was done by the delegates that assembled at Wash- ington :
We the undersigned delegates elected to the General Consulta- tion of all Texas to be holden in the Town of Washington on the loth day of October 1835. met according to appointment.
Having received the resolutions adopted by the members elect of the General Consultation, the officers of the Army, and People of Gonzales at their meeting held at Gonzales on the llth Inst. recom- mending an adjournment of the said Consultation to some future and convenient time. We concur therein ; and recommend that the said Consultation be adjourned until the first day of November next.
We further recommend that the said General Consultation be holden in the Town of Washington as first proposed by the meet- ing of the Citizens of Columbia and generally approved by the sev- eral meetings of the Citizens of Texas.
Jesse Grimes E. M. Millican Asa Mitchell E. Collard
We the Undersigned members of the Genl consultation were not present at the above meeting but concur with those who were there in agreeing to hold the same at Washington on the first of Nov next
A. G. Perry
A. E. C. Johnson
J. L. Hood
J. G. W. Pierson1
A larger number of delegates, but not a sufficient number to form a quorum, assembled at San Felipe on October 16th. On the following day they adopted the resolutions below and adjourned :
Resolved, That the members present adjourn until the first day of next month, or as soon as a quorum can meet at this place, so as to afford an opportunity to those who may desire it to join the army in the defense of their country.
Resolved, That those who cannot join the army may remain here, with the permission to unite with the Council of Texas,2 . . .
From October 17th till the first of November the question of place of meeting remained in statu quo. 'Tis true that a number
HUonsultation Papers MS. ^Journals of the Consultation, 5.
146 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
of the delegates availed themselves of the permission contained in the second resolution above, and joined the general council.1 On October 19th the general council thus strengthened took the fol- lowing action:
On Motion of Mr. Perry for the determined place of the meet- ing of the Genl Consultation on the first of November 1835 of all Texas as follows
Eesolved by the Genl Council of Texas that the Genl Consulta- tion be held at Washington on the first of Nov, 1835 — first pro- posed by the Committee of Columbia.
Adopted with one .Dissenting voice — 2
This gratuitous piece of assumption on the part of the general council, however, appears to have been entirely ignored by all. Those delegates who had assembled at Washington about the middle of October again assembled there on the first of November; those who had met at San Felipe again assembled at San Felipe ; the de- cision of place lay with the delegates in the army. These, at the suggestion of the commander-in-chief and with the approbation of the troops, returned in time to be present at the opening on the first, at San Felipe "the place appointed for the Consultation."3 In spite of this practical decision of the matter, the question was placed before the consultation on November 3d by one of the delegates from Mina, as is shown by the following extract from the minutes for that day :
The House met persuant to adjournment — and on Motion of K. N. Williamson that the convention adjourn fourth with from this place to meet at the Town of Washington The Motion being put to the House
Votes in favor of the adjournment 1 " against 40
Resolved unanimously that an express be sent fourth with to Wash- ington requesting the members at that place to repair immediately to this.4
The arrival of the members, who had met at Washington, at San Felipe on November 5th marks the termination of dissent upon the question of the place of meeting of the consultation; and no fur-
ljournal of the General Council, in the QUARTERLY, VII 260.
*IUd., VII 265.
^Comprehensive History of Texas, I 546, 549.
4MS Journal of the Consultation.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 147
ther action was taken during the deliberations of this body. How- ever, when it adjourned, it was to meet at Washington on March 1, 1836.1
(7) Seat of the Provisional Government.
The consultation was succeeded by the governor and general council in the management of the affairs of Texas. This body was left free to "hold their sessions at such times and places as in their opinion will give the most energy and effect to the objects of the people, and to the performance of the duties , assigned them/'2 Those who were dissatisfied with the location of the seat of gov- ernment at San Felipe early made preparations to select some other place. R. R. Roy all, in a letter to J. W. Fannin, dated November 15, 1835, writes from San Felipe that, "Where the council will hold its sessions is yet undetermined. I believe it will be in Washington or Matagorda, probably at the latter."3 And Governor Henry Smith took occasion to call the attention of the council to this subject in his first official communication to that body as follows:
It will also become your duty to select some place as the seat of government, at which to hold your regular sittings during the con- tinuance of the present form of government. In doing this you will throw aside all local partialities and prejudices, and fix on that point possessing most advantages, and the best calculated to forward our views by giving promptness and energy to our united actions. I therefore deem it unnecessary to make further sugges- tions on that subject, and will only add, that a Council Hall, to- gether with other offices for the different departments of govern- ment, is indispensable.*
The committee on the affairs of state and judiciary, to whom this paragraph of the governor's message was referred, reported on November 17:
Your committee is concerned to see the want of unanimity in this body, upon the proper location of a place where to establish the sittings and offices of the "Provisional Government." Several
'Article XVII of Plan of the Provisional Government, in Journal of the Consultation, 47.
2Art. XIII of the Plan of the Provisional Government, in Journal of the Consultation, 46.
"Baker, Texas Scrap-Book, 656.
4 Journal of the Proceedings of the General Council, 14, 15.
148 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
places have been mentioned as suited to this object, and your com- mittee being unprepared to determine the matter, will briefly sub- mit the representations made to them by different persons.
By some it is contended that the location should be in Wash- ington on the Brazos; this place is said to be situated in a thickly populated country, and most central to the inhabited parts of Texas. It is known that the town is of very recent origin,1 having few if any suitable buildings or rooms for public business, and no printing establishment. Convenience and retirement are necessary for public officers, in the dispatch of business of the character in which we are now engaged. These objects cannot be expected at present in Washington, hereafter this place will no doubt be fixed upon as the seat of Government.
The inconveniencies and discomforts of our present location are too sensibly felt by every member of the Provisional Government to require any remarks; an excellent and well conducted Press is the only present inducement for continuing in San Felipe : — Mata- gorda and Yelasco, destitute of the latter advantage, possess no superiority of convenience for business over San Felipe, and al- though strongly recommended by some, will scarcely produce any difference of opinion in this body.
Brazoria, with the advantages of a good and well conducted Press, is represented as having a suitable Council-Hall, well adapted rooms, and other conveniences for the dispatch of public business. Its location upon the navigable waters of the Brazos, affords almost hourly communication with the coast, and the distance from the army will make but about a day's difference in travel more than to San Felipe, and about the same to Washington ; but the badness of the roads at this season of the year, is said to be a serious disad- vantage, if not an insuperable objection.
With these statements your committee submits to the wisdom of the Council to determine the place of its sittings, and the location of the Provisional Government.
Concluding with urging the necessity of prompt decision.2
The Council gave its immediate attention to this subject:
Mr. Houston moved that the Council adjourn, when it leaves this place, to the town of Washington.
The question being taken on the above, and the Ayes and Noes were demanded, the vote stood thus:
Ayes— Messrs. Wharton, Grimes, Barrett, Perry, Parker, Hous- ton, Parmer and Padilla — 8.
irTHE QUARTERLY, X 96.
2 Journal of the Proceedings of the General Council, 20, 21.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 149
Noes — Messrs. Clements, Millard, Hanks, Harris, Wilson and West — 6 : so the question was decided in the affirmative.
Mr. Houston moved that the Council adjourn to meet at Wash- ington on the 23rd inst., but withdrew his motion, at the suggestion of Mr. Barrett, who offered the following, which was adopted :
Kesolved, that an express be immediately sent to Washington to inform the citizens of the removal of the Provisional Government to that place, and requesting them to be in readiness to receive its officers; and also that the fact of its removal be communicated to the army, and to all parts of Texas.1
Governor Smith stopped the move to Washington with his exec- utive veto, for the reasons that
There is no printing press at Washington, which I deem essen- tial to our business ; the public printing has not been yet completed as contracted for, which should be superintended by your body, nor has there been any Legislative action known to me, prescribing or defining the duties of our agents to be sent abroad; their com- missions with authority to hypothecate the public lands and pledge the faith of the country, to answer our present emergencies, have not been made out. Commissions granting letters of Marque and Reprisal, have been earnestly solicited, both by our own citizens and foreigners, and as yet, have not been acted on. These are things I deem of the most urgent and vital importance, and should receive prompt attention.
Journal of the Proceedings of the General Council, 21.
An interesting sidelight is thrown upon this subject of removal in the following extract from a communication to the Telegraph of November 21, 1835: "Again there are others who say, 'Let the seat of government be established at any other place than San Felipe. But what has poor San Felipe done to merit the displeasure of these members? Why, in good sooth, there happens to be no corn, at present, to feed the horses of the members, and other accommodations not good, the want of offices, etc. As to the first objection, it is easily answered, as you, Messrs. Editors, can testify. A want of corn and other necessaries, at this time, is occasioned entirely by the absence of men and teams from the vicinity of San Felipe. Perhaps the people, in no section of the country, have furbished more men and teams, in proportion to the inhabitants, than has the settlement nearest to San Felipe. It is well known that within a day's ride of the place, there is an abundance of corn, and potatoes, and everything requisite to furnish a good table; but they are not available, because the owners have gone where duty called them. In short, no help is to be had. The same argument might be offered for the scarcity of servants at the taverns at San Felipe. And would not the same difficulties be felt at other places? Flour and other luxuries brought from abroad might be more readily pro- cured at Velasco or Matagorda, but they would be proportionally more difficult to obtain at Washington. As to offices, I presume they might be obtained at San Felipe, as readily as at any other place. It is true, the Convention hall is not sufficiently large for the number of delegates elect; but the citizens, it is thought, will accommodate the different departments with suitable rooms for our different officers."
150 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Furthermore, I am not apprized that your body has made the necessary arrangements for our comfortable location at Washing- ton. It appears to me probable that more might be lost than gained by the move; be that as it may, the move as contemplated and incorporated in the 6th decree I deem premature, and calcu- lated to produce delay and great injury, as such, I feel bound to ob- ject to it. I would beg leave to suggest to your honorable body that, notwithstanding our situations here may be uncomfortable, and none can be more so than my own, still a sense of public duty urges me to earnestly solicit your body to submit themselves to all inconveniences for the present, until the grand and important busi- ness of necessity can be accomplished, and they will find me willing to co-operate with them in the selection of any point which they may deem best calculated to promote our own convenience, and ad- vance the public good.1
An effort was made to pass this measure over the governor's veto, but it failed by a vote of 4 to 8.2 In consequence the seat of gov- ernment remained at San Felipe until about the 22nd of February, 1836.
San Felipe had been the seat of all the important councils of Anglo-American Texas since the founding of Austin's colony. However, with the passing of the provisional government and the advance of the Mexican hordes, its material glory passed away, and it was sacrificed in the defense of the country. No town in Texas counted among its citizenship abler champions of civil liberty, no town had done more to promote the cause of independence ; yet in- dependence was proclaimed at Washington. San Felipe was the home of Austin, the Father of Texas, and Travis, the defender of Texan liberty, but neither of them is buried there.
2. WASHINGTON.
(1) Seat of the Convention of March, 1886.
Washington is located near the Brazos where this river is crossed by the San Antonio road. It was laid out as a town in the spring of 1835; it was erected into a municipality in July of the same year; and by the spring of 1836 it contained, perhaps, fifty houses.3
^Journal of the Proceedings of the General Council, 37, 38.
2Ibid., 43.
"Holley, History of Texas, 118.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 151
Washington was proposed in August, 1835, as the place of meeting for the consultation; a portion of the delegates assembled there about the middle of October and again on the first of November; the general council voted that the consultation should meet there, and the consultation adjourned to reassemble at that point; how- ever, as the consultation never reassembled, this act passed for naught, as did all the preceding acts enumerated above. The pro- visional government, after failing to agree upon a removal of its sessions to that place, fixed Washington as the place of meeting for the convention which it called to meet in March, 1836. * But the course pursued by Henry Smith, after he was deposed by the general council, made it desirable for the provisional government to transfer its offices to some other point. The near approach of the time for the meeting of the convention, induced the general council to choose Washingtin. The following resolution was adopted to this end on February 16, 1836 ;
Eesolved, That the Council adjourn to meet at the town of Wash- ington on the twenty-second day of this month, and that the acting Governor and other officers connected with the Provisional Gov- ernment be notified of the fact and requested to remove their offices to that place.2
The general council accordingly assembled at Washington on February 22, but failed to obtain a quorum; the other officers of the provisional government, with perhaps one or two exceptions, had also removed by March 1, 1836.
The convention assembled at Washington and organized on March 1, 1836. For various reasons the convention considered it expedient to terminate the provisional government at once. Be- fore it could organize a government under the constitution, the extreme emergency of the case and the critical situation of Texas made the establishment of a government ad interim necessary.
(2) Temporary Seat of the Government ad interim.
The constitution adopted by the convention did not designate any place as the seat of government; the only reference to the subject in that document being Section 3 of the General Provisions :
^Ordinances and Decrees of the Consultation, Provisional Government of Texas and the Convention which assembled at Washington March 1, 1836, p. 76; Journal of the Proceedings of the General Council, 106.
"Journal of the Proceedings of the General Council, 356, 357.
152 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
The presidents and heads of departments shall keep their offices at the seat of government, unless removed by the permission of congress, or unless in case of emergency in time of war, the public interest may require their removal.
The inauguration of the new government is best described in the words of President Burnet:
On the evening of the 16th March, a messenger arrived from the west, bearing the melancholy intelligence that the Alamo had fallen, and all within it been massacred. The Convention assem- bled forthwith, and with some few symptoms of undue excitement, proceeded to the institution of an executive government for the embryo republic. David G. Burnet was elected President; Lorenzo de Zavala, a distinguished Mexican, was elected Vice-President ; Col. Samuel P. Carson, formerly of North-Carolina, Secretary of State; Bailey Hardiman, Secretary of the Treasury; Col. Thomas J. Kusk, Secretary of War; Kobert Potter, Secretary of the Navy; and David Thomas, Attorney-General.
The inauguration of the new government was completed about two o'clock in the morning of 17th March, the Convention having been in session all night. Mr. Burnet delivered a pertinent ad- dress of some length, and on the ensuing day issued a proclamation from which we extract the following: "The government will re- move to Harrisburg ; but that removal is not the result of any ap- prehension that the enemy is near us. It was resolved upon as a measure conducive to the common good, before any such report was in circulation, and it has not been expedited by such report. . . . Let us acquit ourselves like men ; gird up the loins of our minds, and by one united, prompt, and energetic exertion, turn back this impotent invader; and planting our standard on the bank of the Rio Grande, dictate to him the terms of mutual recog- nition." Both these documents were published at San Felipe, in fugitive handbills, a very few of which are now extant.
The same express that gave intelligence of the fall of the Alamo, told, also, that Gen. Houston and his little army were in rapid retreat from Gonzales. This was calculated and did contribute to the general excitement. As soon as the ceremonies of the installa- tion were finished, the Convention adjourned sine die; to meet no more. The next day the little town of Washington was evacuated, not only by the members, whose services were no longer required, but by every family, excepting one, Mr. Lott's, who kept the hotel. The entire population west of the Brazos was also broken up and fugitive, and panic seemed to rule the day. The President and the Secretaries of War and Navy, remained at Washington three
The Seat of Government of Texas. 153
days longer, occupied in such matters as required immediate atten- tion, when they also, in the afternoon, repaired calmly to the resi- dence of the late Col. Groce, on the route to Harrisburg.1
3. HARRISBURG.
The considerations that led to the selection of Harrisburg as the seat of government are stated by President Burnet, in his first mes- sage to congress, in ihese terms:
The administration which had been organized at the town of Washington deemed it expedient to change its location to Harris- burg, from which point it could possess an easier access to foreign countries, from whence our supplies of munitions were to be ob- tained, and a more direct supervision of its naval and other mari- time concerns. Such removal was accordingly effected within a few days after the government was created.2
In an address to the people of Texas, published a few months after these events occurred, President Burnet says :
Soon after the retreat of the Army from the Colorado, and its encampment in the dense 'forests of the Brazos, . . . the Government, then located at Harrisburg, directed the Secretary of War, . . . Thomas J. Rusk, to repair to the Army, for the purpose of conferring with the Commander-in-Chief.3 That officer remained with the army until after the battle of 21st April.4 . . .
4. GALVESTOST ISLAND.
The narrative of President Burnet continues thus:
The rapid approaches of the enemy had compelled the govern- ment to abandon Harrisburg,5 but after a transient dispersion6
1Texas Almanac for I860, p. 51.
2 Home Jouranl, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 8 ess., 13.
'•Rusk joined the army April 6. — Brown, History of Texas, II 8.
'Telegraph, September 6, 1836.
"April 14 or 15. See: Delgado, Battle of San Jacinto, 32.
""Sometimes, when Texas was a moving mass of fugitives, they [the gov- ernment] have been without a "local habitation" and scattered to the cardi- nal points: again they have been on Galveston Island, without shelter, and almost without subsistence," . . . (Burnet's first message to con- gress, House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 18.)
It was, perhaps, about this time that President Burnet received the let- ter from the Nacogdoches Committee of Vigilance, dated April 6, 1836, stating "that under the present exigencies of the Country the most eligi-
154 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
they reassembled at Galveston Island, which was then considered the last hope of the defense to Texas. The arrival of the army on Buffalo bayou was made known to us about the 19th of April, two days after the enemy were known to have captured New Washing- ton. On the 17th I had made a very narrow escape, with my family and some others, from the advance guard of the Mexican forces at that point.1 As soon as we heard at the Island, of the arrival of Gen. Houston and his forces on Buffalo bayou, the steam- boat Cayuga was despatched, with a number of volunteers and some provisions for the relief and succor of our brave troops. The Secretary of the Navy was on board this boat. On the 2 3d or 23d, the steamboat Laura was also despatched with further sup- plies, and an additional number of volunteers. Mr. Hardiman the Secretary of the Treasury was one of those volunteers. This boat sustained some injury to her boiler and was detained some 24 or 30 hours at Eed fish bar, after which she proceeded to the Texian camp. The news of the great battle did not reach me at the Island until the 26th, owing to the inclemency of the weather and the miserable quality of the boat in which the messengers made the trip. A special request was made to me by the Secretary of War, that I would repair to the Camp and as soon as the steamer Yellow Stone could procure a supply of wood, which required four or five days, I set out in that boat, with more provisions, and arrived at the Camp on Buffalo Bayou about the 1st of May.2
5. CAMP SAN JACINTO.
President Burnet continues :
On my arrival at Camp, which had been recently removed fur- ther up the bayou to escape the offensive odors of the battle ground, I found the President Santa Anna and his suite occupying the only building in the vicinity. . . .
ble place for the Seat of Government is Nacogdoches, and [that the com- mittee has been appointed] to invite You and all the Officers of the Gov- ernment to make this Your temporary residence." They set forth the healthfulnesg of the place, the good accommodations, the ample supplies, and above all the certain, safe and speedy communication with the United States. "Besides it appears to us that in the progress of the war You may be cut off from communication with the army. That they must rally in the woodlands is obvious, and in so doing they approach us and become more remote from your present position" [Harrisburg]. (Seat of Govern- ment Papers MS.)
"There was then but one small house on the island." ( See : Brown, His- tory of Texas, II 55).
*For the details of this episode, see Geo. M. Patrick to D. G. Burnet, in Telegraph, April 7, 1838.
2David G. Burnet to the People of Texas, in Telegraph, September 6, 1836.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 155
After the usual ceremonies were passed, I was informed that an Armistice had been entered into between General Houston and General Santa Anna.1 . . .
Such was the condition of things when I arrived at the camp on Buffalo Bayou. The members of the Cabinet were principally there. The worthy Vice President, Lorenzo de Zavala had pre- ceded me some days. The Secretary of State elect, the Hon. Samuel P. Carson, had been compelled by the infirmities of a delicate con- stitution, to relinquish the duties and fatigues of office, and he ob- tained permission to visit the United States. The vacancy was not filled until after the battle of the 21st April, when James Collins- worth who had raised his chivalry conspicuous amidst a crowd of heroes, was inducted to that office. Mr. Hardiman, the Secretary of the Treasury, reached the camp before me. The Secretary of the Navy was also there. The Secretary of War, Mr. Rusk, had been in camp for some weeks. Peter W. Grayson, Esq., was in- vited to and accepted the office of Attorney General, which had become vacant by the premature and accidental death of the Honor- able David Thomas, after I arrived at camp.2 . . .
Several days Bad been employed in this negotiation [the treaty with Santa Anna] and it became necessary for the army to move its quarters. A multitude of other concerns required the atten- tion of the Civil Government, and a general dispersion from Buffalo bayou ensued. The members of the administration, with General Santa Anna and most of the Mexican Officers taken in the battle, embarked in the steamboat Yellow Stone, for Galveston Island. The army on the same day took up its march for Harrisburg.3 The Mexican Commissioner, General Wall, was furnished with a safe-conduct from my hand, and with an escort by General Busk, and set out for the Mexican camp. The steamboat came to anchor at Galveston about sun down of the same day, and Santa Anna with his suite, was placed on board of the armed schooner Inde- pendence, under the command of Commodore Hawkins then lying at anchor in the harbor.4
lDavid G. Burnet to the People of Texas, in Telegraph, September 6, 1836.
before the President and Cabinet left Camp San Jacinto, when it be- came apparent that General Houston would have to visit New Orleans to receive proper medical attention, Rusk was appointed to Houston's place and M. B. Lamar appointed to Rusk's place. . . .
8"0n the 4th or 5th of May, our army took up a line of march to the west." — Telegraph, January 27, 1837; "May 5th, 1836, the President and cabinet, General Houston and Santa Anna and Suite, proceeded on the steamboat Yellowstone to Galveston." — Brown, History of Texas, II 55.
4David G. Burnet to the People of Texas, in Telegraph, September 6 and 13, 1836.
156 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
6. VELASCO.
President Bui-net says further:
The entire want of accommodation at the Island rendered it necessary for the government to seek some place where the ordinary office business could be transacted, and Velasco was selected for that purpose. Accordingly, in a few days we repaired1 to Velasco, with the President Santa Anna and his retinue in company. The Vice President had been compelled to leave us at Buffalo bayou, to at- tend to his domestic affairs, which had been seriously interrupted by the appropriation of his homestead, to the purposes of a hos- pital for the wounded in the late battle. The Secretary of the Navy had obtained leave of absence — consequently there were pres- ent at Velasco, the Secretary of State, James Collinsworth ; the Secretary of the Treasury, Baily Hardiman; the Sec of War, M. B. Lamar; the Attorney General, P. W. Grayson, and myself.2
Velasco enjoyed the distinction of being the summer resort "of great numbers of visitors from the north of the colony [Austin's], who came to enjoy the delightful sea-breezes, sea-bathing, and the comforts with which they are everywhere surrounded. Excellent accommodations . . . [could] always be obtained at boarding houses."3 Here the seat of government of the new Eepublic, too, was fixed long enough to attain a degree of permanency it had not hitherto known: it remained there till the end of September, 1836. Yet it may be readily shown that even this place was ill provided with the necessary requisites for the seat of government ; President Burnet stated in his first message to congress that "never have they [the government] been in circumstances of comfort and con- venience suitable to the orderly conducting of the grave and mo- mentous business committed to their charge."4
7. COLUMBIA.
After looking over the various places that might best serve the needs of a seat of government, President Burnet selected the town of Columbia. By proclamation, dated July 23, he called the first-
xMay 8, 1836. — Brown, History of Texas, II 55.
2David G. Burnet to the People of Texas, in Telegraph, September 6 and 13, 1836.
"Holley, History of Texas, 121, 122. 'House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 18.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 157
congress to meet at this place on the first Monday in October, 1836. Columbia, because of its more central location, had for a time been the seat of justice of the municipality of Columbia, but at this time Brazoria enjoyed that distinction. It contained a large hotel building, "besides a building or two constructed while it was the seat of the courts, for a court house, and offices, &c. and a few dwelling houses."1 More important still was the fact that Colum- bia had been selected as their place of business by the publishers of the Telegraph and Texas Register. We have already had occa- sion to observe how potent was the influence of this paper in re- taining the seat of the provisional government at San Felipe. When San Felipe was about to fall into the hands of the enemy, the Telegraph at the invitation of the government followed the latter to Harrisburg. At this place, however, it was overtaken and destroyed by the Mexican troops. No doubt there was some under- standing between President Burnet and the publishers when it was determined to re-establish this paper. No one knew better and felt more the great need of a press for conducting the government than President Burnet.1 The first number of the Telegraph to be issued at Columbia appeared on August 2, 1836.
A committee of the business men of Columbia promised Presi- dent Burnet the following accommodations for the use of the gov- ernment :
Volley, History of Texas, 113.
''The experience of Texas during the first year of its existence as an in- dependent power bears abundant testimony to the fact that popular gov- ernment can not be carried on without the aid of the press. A means of regular communication between the government and the governed is essen- tial to the comfort and welfare of both. "The fact," says President Bur- net, "that we have heretofore been deprived of the benefits of a Press, the great vehicle of truth and error, is a prominent feature among the many difficulties and embarrassments that have compassed our path from the beginning, and I am persuaded it has contributed much to the censures that have been so liberally bestowed on the present Executive Govern- ment." (Telegraph, September 6, 1836.) "The situation of our country from the 15th of May till the 1st of August, for the want of a medium for disseminating information is well known, and was by many seriously felt. The operations of government not known by the army and people — re- ports magnified — want of confidence in the government, which perhaps was in a great measure, attributable to the want of information." (Edi- torial in Telegraph, January 27, 1837.)
158 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Store house formerly occupied by Mr W C White
with five rooms 5V
House formerly occupied by J C Cole — Rooms 2 Old Alcaldes office with fire place IV
Mrs. Sledges 1 Room & Stove 1
Saml. Peebles — 2 Rooms with Stoves 2
House of Mr. Beards 20 feet square with stove 1 Mr. Sampson with 2 Rooms and 1 fire place 2
Hendricks Rooms with 2 fire places 2
Mrs. Carson room with stove 1
Col. Eberlys 2 Rooms 2V
All the Chairs and Tables necessary for Both Houses of Congress.
Sepr. 16, 1836.
W. C. White & Co. Fitchell & Gill Jacob Eberly Geo Brown G. & T. H. Borden.1
The Telegraph of September 28, 1836, reports:
Yesterday the citizens of this place appointed a committee to prepare the necessary buildings for the accommodation of Con- gress; and we believe that suitable and convenient rooms will be furnished.
We understand that the citizens of Brazoria are also making ar- rangements ; and all we have to say on the subject is, that we would recommend congress to do its business where the best accommoda- tion is afforded.
The first congress assembled Monday, October 3, 1836. Soon it became manifest that the committee of arrangements referred to above had either failed to procure a sufficient number of houses or else they had not contemplated the increase of offices accom- panying the organization of the constitutional government.2 On October 22, the constitutional president and vice-president were inaugurated; November 7th President Houston sent the following message to congress on the subject of the proper accommodations for the government:
1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess. State Department. ^Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., October 11, p. 15; Telegraph^ November 9, 1836.
The Seat of Government of Texas.
Gentlemen :
The important trusts committed to our charge as the representa- tives of a Nation and the guardians of her free institutions, de- mand at our hands, the arduous and incessant toils which responsi- bility and moral consciousness always impose, when they flow in their natural and appropriate channels.
Industry and application, put in requisition by mature judgment, must still be conducted by system, organization and method; for these are necessary, and cannot be attained or exercised without the convenience of houses.
The present position of our Government is one of great incon- venience and absolute embarrassment. We have accommodations for no branch of the public trusts. Congress is itself scarcely pro- vided as a body, with sufficient buildings.1 No rooms are set apart for the Committees of your body.1 No Offices for the Chief De- partments of the Executive branch of Government,3 and the per- sonal accommodations of all are very deficient.
The Head of no Department can now transact with convenience the functions devolving upon him. The Secretary of the Treasury, and all his Subordinate Officers, are without rooms and without
'"The accommodations were meager in every respect, but there was available a commodious house (for that day), with large rooms on the ground floor, separated by a wide hallway, with other rooms for commit- tee and clerical purposes. Each house occupied one of the large rooms. This house at first accommodated the government only in part, other houses being also utilized." — Brown, History of Texas, II 99, 100.
"The different governmental bodies of Texas, as the Consultation, the Provisional Government, and the Government ad interim, had met at various points in small frame buildings or shanties, and when the first congress of the Constitutional Government assembled at Columbia, each house had to occupy a small frame building." — Lubbock, Memoirs, 48.
20n October llth, the senate appointed a committee to confer with the committee of arrangements for the purpose of procuring the rooms con- tiguous to the senate chamber for the use of the different senate commit- tees. When cold weather set in, the senate despatched their door-keeper to Brazoria for a stove. The house of representatives, on November 4th, ordered the "two rooms occupied by the auditor and comptroller, which had been appropriated by the committee of arrangements for the use of this house to be cleared for the special use of the officers and members of this house." They also suffered from cold. — Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 8ess., 15, 65; House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 121, 180.
sOctober 27th, Mr. Wharton moved to allow the president and his pri- vate secretaries to retain possession of their rooms during the secret ses- sions of the senate; . . . which motion was lost. — Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 33.
The State Department occupiBd a small clapboard shedroom, without fire, which in addition served as Austin's bedroom and office. It was the exposure to which he was subjected while working here that brought on the illness that terminated his life. — Comprehensive History of Texas, I 590.
160 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
any place to perform his highly important business.1 The dis- charged soldiers of our Army, are now waiting on great expense for their honest dues at the hands of that Officer. The financial concerns of Government, will be deranged and our credit at home and abroad will be depreciated.
I would call your particular and immediate attention to this subject; and am compelled by my station to suggest that business cannot profitably proceed, unless Congress will adjourn to some point, where better accommodations and greater conveniences can be speedily obtained or buildings furnished at this place.
To induce the meeting of Congress at this point, nineteen rooms for offices had been promised but the pledges remain unredeemed. The pledge given is herewith enclosed.12
Sam Houston.3
It is not surprising that, under circumstances such as are de- scribed above, the location of the seat of government at some con- venient point early engaged the attention of the first congress. As early as November 2d, the senate adopted a joint resolution pro- viding,
That each house of congress appoint a committee of three, whose duty it shall be to report the most eligible point at which to locate the seat of government of this republic, from and after the ad- journment of the present congress, up to the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and .4
"'Agreeably to a resolution adopted this morning by the house of rep- resentatives," writes a correspondent of the Telegraph for November 9, 1836, "a notification has been given to the secretary of the navy, auditor, and controller of public accounts, to vacate the rooms occupied by them, for the accommodation of the clerks of the house; consequently these offi- cers are compelled to suspend business until other rooms can be procured. The rapidly increasing number of certificates of discharged soldiers, and the constant presentation of claims to be audited, imperiously require that the business of the officers of auditor and controller should not be sus- pended. The number of persons in the service of the government, and the representatives of both houses, besides the influx of strangers visiting the place, is considerable, and affords a handsome revenue to the citizens of this place. I would then, Mr. Editor, suggest to the citizens of Columbia, the propriety of endeavoring to procure nouses or rooms for the public business, with as little delay as possible; otherwise, the government will be necessarily compelled to remove to Brazoria, or elsewhere, to meet ac- commodations to suit their exigencies."
2See page 158 above for a list of the rooms promised. Perhaps only those marked (V) had been placed at the service of the government at this time. The whole expense of providing accommodations appears to have fallen upon the citizens, as congress made no offer to rent buildings. See Telegraph, November 9, 1836., and December 13, 1836.
SMS. Messages of 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess. State Department.
'Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 39.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 161
No record is made of the adoption of this resolution by the house of representatives, hut on November 8th, it selected its committee in accordance with the terms of said resolution, and referred to it the president's message quoted above.1 Both committees reported November llth that they had failed to agree; the senate committee favored Groce's Retreat, now called San Jacinto; the house committee recommended Nacogdoches. Both suggested that a joint committee be sent to Brazoria "there to enquire into, and learn what description of houses for the accommodation of con- gress, for offices, committee rooms, and other accommodations, can be obtained, and upon what terms."2 Instead of adopting the course suggested, which was in all probability merely another temporary makeshift, the house referred the report "to the stand- ing committee on the state of the Eepublic, with instructions to report a bill locating the seat of government, by joint vote of both houses."3 In pursuance of these instructions the committee re- ported, on November 14th, "an act locating temporarily the seat of government," which was passed.4
This act of congress made the selection of a temporary site for the seat of government a subject of competition among the various aspirants to that honor. Unfortunately the promises or bids of some of the more important places have not been preserved; the following, however, will serve to indicate their general trend:
(1) From Columbia.
To •the Hon. the Senate and House of Representatives of the Re- public of Texas in Congress assembled : —
The Undersigned most respectfully represents to Your Honle. Body that, in their opinion, no place, for the Seat of Government of this Republic, until the year 1840, is more eligibly situated to subserve the people generally than theirs at Hidalgo — they, there- fore, make to your Honourable Body the following Proposal, Viz — The Undersigned will set off 640 English acres of land from their sitio, such as commissioners appointed by Your Hon. Body shall
*House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 131.
^Senate Journal,! Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 49; House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 146.
3House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 147; Flavel, Report of the Pro- ceedings of the House of Representatives, 134.
*House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 150, 168; Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 58, 62.
162 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
select, as nearly in the form of a square as may be done; that the said 640 acres shall be well surveyed and platted, by the Under- signed, at their own expense; that the sd. Commissioners may then select one or two square Blocks on which to erect the Government Buildings — that -the whole of the rest shall be laid off into town lots of the most convenient size, as directed by your Commissioners — and that, when so done, the Undersigned agree to convey to the Government a Title for the said two Blocks above-mentioned — and that the proceeds of the sales of all the lots laid off in sd. Town shall be equally divided between the Undersigned and the Govern- ment.
Monday, Nov. 28, 1836 Town of Columbia
Very respectfully the Undersigned
Martin Clow & others1
(2) From Washington on the Brazos.
To The Honorable Congress of the Eepublic of Texas, the under- signed citizen of the County of Washington respectfully represents That he is one of the Proprietors of the Town of Washington, and learning that various places are proposed for the temporary loca- tion of the Seat of Government for this Eepublic until the year (1840) begs leave to represent to your Honorable body that he will give and Grant and Hereby does give and Grant to the Government of the Eepublic of Texas in fee simple a sufficiency of the freehold within the limits of said Town to be selected (by a commissioner appointed by your Honorable body for that purpose) in the most eligible part thereof, for the erection of such public buildings as may be necessary and deemed expedient on condition that said Town shall at any time within one year from this date become the Seat of Government for this Eepublic. Your orator would further say, That he is aware that propositions seemingly more liberal have been made by other individuals similarly circumstanced in other Towns; but your orator believing that public convenience rather than individual interest to be, the Great end of your de- liberations; thus submits, this his proposition to the consideration of your Honorable body. The Town of Washington is situated on the west bank of the Brazos river and is rapidly improving, sur- rounded by an extensive agricultural population, well watered with springs of healthy and pure water, and in point of locality, more central than any other inhabited Town now proposed to your
1MS. 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sesa. State Department.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 163
Honorable body as the temporary Seat of Government for this Eepublic. Your orator with respect begs audience &c &c &c
Thos Gay November 21st 18361
(3) From Fort Bend.
The memorial of Thomas H. Borden and others, to the honor- able the House of Representatives, respectfully presents proposals for the selection of PORT BEND as the future Seat of Government.
Fort Bend is situated on a high, healthy prairie, bluffing to the Brazos river; bounded on the north, east and west by the Brazos, and lying open to the refreshing breezes of the south.
Your memorialist begs to call attention to the fact that a steam navigation is regularly established from the mouth of the river, and not obstructed at any season of the year by any ordinary event. This advantage of navigation is not prospective,2 but in actual operation; nor is there any bar (such as Ked Fish Bar,) with occa- sionally not more than three feet of water, or a reef, (such as that from New Washington to Shaw's at the mouth of the Jacinto river to impede the import of New Orleans produce.
The influx of commerce already established at Velasco from the United States, not equalled in any inlet or harbor of Texas, must always secure, independent of regular freight for Fort Bend, a constant supply of provisions, an advantage not possessed by any proposed location before your honorable house; and in the absence of all supplies from the States, there is no part of Texas, where a town has not been -already located, possessing greater internal sup- plies than Fort Bend, a resident neighborhood of farmers, whose supplies of provisions, butter, poultry, eggs, &c. &c., cannot fail to render the advantages of Fort Bend unrivalled.
Your memorialist further refers to the testimony of of the last fourteen years, for the salubrity and healthiness of the location; no fatal malady having ever prevailed there, and the water is proverbial for its superiority. Your memorialist offers to build suitable houses for the congress and officers of government, and not to be let at a rental nor assessed at a price, but to be DONATED to the government, as long as they are pleased to use them: and your memorialist will grant lots to persons competent to superin- tend houses of public entertainment, to be erected under the di- rection of your memorialist and others. In all of which, he binds himself in dollars; if required, to comply
JMS. 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess. State Department.
2]Sro boat had as yet ascended Buffalo Bayou to the prospective site of the city of Houston.
164 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
with his proposals by the first of April, 1837. Your memorialist has adopted the mode of comparison as that best calculated to narrow the subject of inquiry and facilitate the conclusions of your honorable body on the respective advantages of a suitable location.
I am, gentlemen,
Your obedient servant,
THOS. H. BORDEN, For self and others.1
A correspondent of the Telegraph (November 23, 1836) makes the following interesting comments on the situation. He makes the earliest suggestion of the plan that was adopted in 1839 for defraying the cost of erecting the government buildings. He might also well be credited with planting the idea that matured when in 1875 three million acres of public land were set aside for the erec- tion of the present granite capitol.
Messrs. Editors : — The question is agitated to a considerable ex- tent, what particular point in the Eepublic is to be fixed upon for the seat of government, and as a natural concomitant, much sec- tional jealousy has arisen on the subject.
Petitions have been presented to Congress I believe from some half dozen cities, viz. Houston, Matagorda, Fort Bend, Columbia, Washington, Groces Ketreat, &c. and, some of those very important cities whose peculiar advantages are so handsomely portrayed upon paper, like paddy's house which wanted nothing but building to make it complete, require nothing but houses to make them what they are represented to be. In these petitions very lib- eral proposals are made to the government as it regards the erec- tion of public buildings. Indeed the different contending parties interested in the matter all seem determined not to be outdone in their liberal offers. Now believing myself that we could not be better accommodated at present at any of the places spoken of than at Columbia, I would enquire whether it would not be as well to remain where we are during the present session of congress, and for that body to select and set apart a certain portion of the public domain, in an eligible situation for the capital, lay off the ground in town lots and sell them at auction, reserving such as may be necessary for all the public departments. And whether we would not by this means raise a sufficient fund to erect all the houses re- quired and by so doing put a stop to all petitions on the subject
1Seat of Government Papers. Broadside.
The Seat of Government of Texas.
165
and let the attention of congress be directed to matters of more importance to the country.
The contest closed on November 30th, when the two houses of congress met in joint session for the purpose of fixing the location of the seat of government until the year 1840.
The speaker informed the house that it would be expected the members of both houses of Congress would make such nomina- tions as they might think proper. — Whereupon Mr. Branch nomi- nated the town of Houston, on Buffalo Bayou; Mr. Archer nomi- nated the town of Matagorda; Mr. Hill nominated the town of Washington ; Mr. Green nominated the towns of Velasco and Quin- tana ; Mr. Rowe nominated the town of Nacogdoches ; Mr. Senator Kobertson nominated the town of Hidalgo ; Mr. senator Moorhouse nominated the town of Refugio; Mr. Billingsly nominated the place called Fort Bend; Mr. Chenoweth nominated the town of Goliad; Mr. Archer nominated Groce's Retreat, or San Jacinto;1 Mr. Senator Ruis nominated the town of Bexar; Mr. Geraghty nominated the town of San Patricio; Mr. senator Everette nomi- nated the town of Brazoria; Mr. Senator Grimes nominated the town of Orozimbo.2
The vote, which was taken viva voce, may be tabulated as fol- lows.3
|
Name of Place. |
1st Ballot. |
2d Ballot. |
3d Ballot. |
4th Ballot. |
|
Houston |
11 |
17 |
19 |
21 |
|
Matagorda |
8 |
7 |
7 |
4 |
|
Washington |
7 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
|
Velasco and Quintana |
3 |
|||
|
Nacogdoches |
4 |
1 |
||
|
Hidalgo |
1 |
|||
|
Refugio |
1 |
1 |
||
|
Fort Bend |
1 |
|||
|
Goliad , |
1 |
1 |
||
|
Groce's Retreat or San Jacinto |
||||
|
Bexar |
3 |
|||
|
Columbia |
1 |
|||
|
San Patricio |
] |
|||
|
Brazoria |
||||
|
Orozimbo |
||||
'San Jacinto was the name proposed for the seat of government should it be located at Groce's Retreat.
2£Touse Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 8ess., 211.
The House Journal, 211-213, gives the names of the persons voting for each place at each ballot.
166 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Twenty-one votes being a majority of the vote cast, the speaker proclaimed the town of Houston as duly selected. This decision was embodied in an act, approved by President Houston on De- cember 15, 1836, which declared that "from and after the first day of April next, the seat of government for the republic of Texas shall be established at the town of Houston, on Buffalo Bayou, until the end of the session of congress which shall assemble in the year one thousand eight hundred and forty"; and the president was authorized "to cause to be erected a building for the temporary accommodation of the congress of the republic, and such other buildings as may be necessary for the accommodation of the differ- ent departments of the government, at the said seat of government : provided, the sum or sums so expended shall not exceed fifteen thousand dollars."
The location having been made by a bare majority, much dis- satisfaction existed with regard to the choice of Houston. Presi- dent Houston, although he approved the bill, claimed to have dis- approved of the location; Anson Jones characterized this act as one of the three that "constituted a perfect 'selling out' of Texas to a few individuals, or, at least, of everything that was available in 1836."1
Congress adjourned on December 22, 1836, and one would be inclined to suppose that this subject would have been permitted to rest for the time. However, the Telegraph of January 3, 1837, finds occasion to make the following editorial remarks:
We have just understood that it is proposed the heads of the departments of our government should remove to Grocers Retreat, upwards of ninety miles above this place. To this remove many objections might be urged. Want of houses and accommodations for the different departments, as well as for persons having busi- ness with them. The great distance it would be from the army, the inconvenience which would necessarily attend the navy, aud- itor's and pay-master's departments, whose several duties are more connected with persons in the lower part of the country.
Intelligence, as well as supplies of provisions, munitions of war, &c. are much easier of attainment near the coast, than at so great
'Jones, Republic of Texas, 18, 19; cf. statement of Thomas J. Rusk, in Weeks, Debates of the Texas Convention [1845], 206, and Thos. J. Green, Reply to the Speech of Sam Houston, delivered in U. 8. Senate, Aug. 1, 1854, p. 60.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 167
a distance from water communication. The objections which have formerly been urged against this place, viz. Want of houses, health and accommodation in a great measure now cease to exist. The breaking up of congress has given us more room. Most of the departments are now accommodated with suitable offices. The health of Columbia during the winter is good, and we can see no possible motive for the contemplated remove, and especially when another to Hoiiston must necessarily take place before the govern- ment could get settled at Groce's retreat.
8. HOUSTON.
The first notice in print of the town of Houston — perhaps, the first notice of any sort — appeared in the Telegraph of August 30, 1836, in the form of an advertisement:
The Town of Houston,
Situated at the head of navigation, on the West bank of Buffalo Bayou, is now for the first time brought to public notice because, until now, the proprietors were not ready to offer it to the public, with the advantages of capital and improvements.
The town of Houston is located at a point on the river which must ever command the trade of the largest and richest portion of Texas. By reference to the map, it will be seen that the trade of San Jacinto, Spring Creek, New Kentucky and the Brazos, above and below Fort Bend, must necessarily come to this place, and will at this time warrant the employment of at least One Million Dol- lars of capital, and when the rich lands of this country shall be settled, a trade will flow to it, making it, beyond all doubt, the great interior commercial emporium of Texas.
The town of Houston is distant 15 miles from the Brazos river, 30 miles, a little North of East, from San Felipe, 60 miles from Washington, 40 miles from Lake Creek, 30 miles South West from New Kentucky, and 15 miles by water from and 8 or 10 by land above Harrisburg. Tide water runs to this place and the lowest depth of water is about six feet. Vessels from New Orleans or New York can sail without obstacles to this place, and steamboats of the largest class can run down to Galveston Island in 8 or 10 hours, in all seasons of the year. . . . Galveston harbor being the only one in which vessel 5 drawing a large draft of water can navigate, must necessarily render the Island the great naval and commercial depot of the country.
The town of Houston must be the place where arms, ammunition and provisions for the government will be stored, because, situated
168 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
in the very heart of the country, it combines security and the means of easy distribution, and a national armory will no doubt very soon be established at this point.
There is no place in Texas more healthy, having an abundance of excellent spring water, and enjoying the sea breeze in all its fresh- ness. No place in Texas possesses so many advantages for build- ing, having Pine, Ash, Cedar, and Oak in inexhaustible quantities ; also the tall and beautiful Magnolia grows in abundance. In the vicinity are fine quarries of stone.
Nature appears to have designated this place for the future seat of Government. It is handsome and beautifully elevated, salu- brious and well watered, and now in the very heart or centre of population, and will be so for a length of time to come. It com- bines two important advantages: a communication with the coast and foreign countries, and with the different portions of the re- public. As the country shall improve, rail roads will become in use, and will be extended from this point to the Brazos, and up the same, also from this up to the headwaters of San Jacinto, em- bracing that rich country, and in a few years the whole trade of the upper Brazos will make its way into Galveston Bay through this channel.
Preparations are now making to erect a water Saw Mill, and a large Public House for accommodation, will soon be opened. Steamboats now run in this river, and will in a short time com- mence running regularly to the Island.
The proprietors offer the lots for sale on moderate terms to those who desire to improve them, and invite the public to examine for themselves.
A. C. Allen, for A. C. & J. K. Allen.1 August 30, 1836.
The town of Houston had not been selected by either half of the joint committee appointed to select a site for the seat of govern- ment. Houston appeared, however, among the competitors, when it was determined to locate the seat of government by joint vote of the two houses of congress. The proposals of A. C. & J. K. Allen are represented to have been "replete with most cogent reasons for the selection of the town of Houston."2 John K. Allen was a mem- ber of the house of representatives from Nacogdoches. The selec- tion of the site, the naming of the place, the presentation of the advantages of Houston, and the success in securing the temporary
lFor a brief sketch of A. C. & J. K. Allen, see Lubbock, Memoirs, 45. 2Falvel, Report of the Proceedings of the House of Representatives, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 157.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 169
location of the seat of government constitute a high testimonial to the shrewdness, sagacity and enterprise of the promoters of the city of Houston. It marks the beginning of one of the few suc- cessful speculations of this kind, so numerous in that day. The meagreness of information in regard to the new city appears from the care with which the proprietors define its location.1 Not a building marked the town site when the seat of government was located there.2 The first lot was sold on January 19, 1837.3 These facts may have proved an advantage rather than a disadvantage. The town certainly had no old enemies; no tangible objections in the form of insufficient accommodations were present; and the possibilities of the future were no doubt duly magnified.
The government was to have removed to Houston by April 1, 1837; but for want of the necessary buildings the executive de- partments were not transferred from Columbia until April 16th.4 No mention of the removal is made in the Telegraph, for the rea- son, perhaps, that the Telegraph and the government made the trip to Houston in the same vessel. If so, they did not arrive at their destination until April 27th — only a few days before the meeting of the adjourned session of the first congress, May 1st. In consequence of the late removal the reports of the several de- partments were not ready for presentation to congress until May 19th.5
Prior to its removal, the Telegraph stated : "We are highly grat- ified in stating that the process of building is rapidly advancing at Houston; the offices intended for the reception of the several departments of government, will soon be completed; the building also intended for our press is nearly finished."6 However, on reaching Houston a month after, it had this to say of its new office and of the government building : 'like others who have confided in speculative things, we have been deceived : no building had ever been nearly finished at Houston intended for the press ; fortunately,
1See paragraph three of the advertisement above. "Lubbock, Memoirs, 46.
3Statement of James S. Holman, agent for the proprietors of the town site, in Telegraph, August 12, 1837. ^Telegraph, March 17, 1838.
'President's Message, in House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 44, 47. "Telegraph, March 21, 1837.
170 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
however, we have succeeded in renting a shanty, which, although like the capital in this place,
'Without a roof, and without a floor, Without -windows and without a door/
is the only convenient building obtainable,"1 . . .
It will be remembered 'that $15,000 had nominally been placed at the command of the president with which "to cause to be erected a building suitable for the temporary accommodations of the con- gress of the republic, and such other buildings as may be necessary for the accommodation of the different departments of the govern- ment." This sum, even had it been available, which it was not,2 was entirely inadequate to meet the purposes apparently contem- plated, in view of the high prices of labor as well as building ma- terials.3 However, it is probable that it was never the intention that the president should have the buildings referred to erected. The Messrs. Allen certainly offered to construct them;4 and Mr. Borden, in his proposal of Fort Bend, suggests that the build- ings so erected were to be rented or else "assessed at a price" at which they should be purchased by the government.5 So, too, Mr. Lubbock in his Memoirs states that
The Aliens had undertaken to provide a capitol building at Houston, but fearing they might not have it ready for the meeting of Congress on the 1st of May, erected on Main Street a one-story building covering the front of an entire block. At one corner of the block a large room was constructed for the Senate, and at the other corner a larger one for the House of Representatives, and the space between partitioned off into rooms for the department of- fices. Col. Thos. W. Ward was the capitol contractor under the Aliens. The work was not begun till the 16th of April, but it was pushed with such energy that the eapitol, though not finished,
telegraph, May 2, 1837.
2"The demands on our Treasury, since the adjournment of Congress, have been great, without the, means of meeting them," . . . — President's Message, May 5, 1837.
"Lubbock, Memoirs, 47, 54; Telegraph, May 2, 1837.
*"Mr. Branch read further proposals from Mr. Allen binding himself in ^the sum of ten thousand dollars, or such bond as Government may re- quire, that all necessary buildings for congress, and the clerks shall be erected by the first of April, 1837." — Falvel, Report of the Proceedings of the House of Representatives, Nov. 21, 1836, p. 161.
BPage 163 above.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 171
was far enough, advanced to accommodate Congress and the heads of departments. Accordingly, on May 1st, the adjourned session of the First Congress met in the respective chambers,1 "fitted up and furnished for business."
The last statement — "fitted up and furnished for business" — must be considerably qualified, else the reader will be misled. For instance, J. J. Audubon notes in his diary on May 4, 1837 :
Meanwhile, we amused ourselves by walking in the capitol, which was yet without a roof, and the floors, benches, and tables of both houses of congress were as well saturated with water as our clothes had been in the morning.2
Again, the official record of the proceedings of the house of rep- resentatives for May 10, 1837, says: "The members assembled ac- cording to adjournment, but owing to the storm of the preceding night, and the insufficiency of the building, the floor being flooded with watei, and the hall unfit for the transaction of business, on motion, adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock."3 May 15, an effort was made in the senate to have a special committee ap- pointed "to obtain a room for the senate to meet in the present session."4 And on May 20, a motion was made in the house to have Major Ward, the contractor, discontinue "such labor on this house as disturbs the deliberations of congress during the hours of its session."5
Nor was congress worse situated than the various departments of the executive. Neither was the want of accommodation expe- rienced alone in the transaction of official business. The new city did not possess the conveniences required by the members of con- gress and the visitors who had business with the government. The discomforts that resulted from this situation, together with the dissatisfaction over the original choice of Houston that still lurked in many minds, presented a source of discontent and a fruitful soil for all sorts of plans in regard to the future location of the seat of government. The consideration of these plans will form the subject of a subsequent paper.
1 House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 2 Sess., 1; Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 2 Sess., 1.
"Quoted by Lubbock, in his Memoirs, 53. 'House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 2 Sess., 20. *Senate Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 2 Sess., 10. 'House Journal, 1 Tex. Cong., 2 Sess., 51.
172 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF OLIVEE JONES, AND OF HIS WIFE, REBECCA JONES.
ADELE B. LOOSCAN.
The following facts regarding the birthplace and kindred of Cap- tain Oliver Jones were obtained from his grand-nephew, David N. Harris, a respected citizen of Wallis, Texas. The other statements are matters of historical record together with treasured recollec- tions of friends of Oliver Jones.
Captain Oliver Jones was born in the city of New York. He had one brother, Benjamin, and two sisters, Mary and Phoebe. The brother, Benjamin, married and had a large family, of which one son, John, continued to live in New York City, and the others all moved to the West and settled in Illinois. Some years before the war between the States, Benjamin Jones made a visit to his brother Oliver at his home in Texas, and upon his return trip to New York, which was to have been made by water from Galveston, he reached the latter place while cholera was prevailing in the city, and is supposed to have died there of that disease, since he was never heard of afterward.
Oliver Jones's sister Mary married David Smith, and their de- scendants all eventually came to Texas. They had one son and three daughters. Their son, David, moved to New Orleans, mar- ried, and had four children ; during the war between the States he was lost at sea between New Orleans and New York. One of the daughters, Sarah Smith, married and died without issue; another, Kate, married Dorsey Mason and bore him three sons, all of them dying unmarried except Thomas, who is still living at Galveston. After the death of Mr. Mason, she married Frank Fabj, by whom she had four sons; of these, but two are living, Eobert, in Wyo- ming, and Lee, in Galveston, Texas. The third daughter, Mary, married David Harris, and they had six children, three daughters and three sons, viz. : Phoebe, Mary, and Emma, Joseph, David N., and Oliver Jones. Joseph was among the first to enlist as a Con-
Sketch of Oliver Jones and His Wife, Rebecca Jones. 173
federate soldier at the beginning of the war; he was stationed at Dickinson's Bayou near Galveston, and died six months after his enlistment. There are now but two of this family living, David N. Harris, a merchant at Wallis, Texas, and Oliver Jones Harris, who lives on part of the old Oliver Jones homestead tract in Waller County, Texas.
Phoebe, the other sister of Oliver Jones, was married to Joseph Watts, and their descendants settled in Mississippi and Louisiana, but eventually they all came to Texas to live. One of their daugh- ters, Phoebe, died unmarried, the other, Maggie, made her home for a number of years with her uncle, Oliver, and married Captain T. S. Hammitt; after his death she was married to Jesse O'Brian, of Bellville. She died without issue. After the death of Joseph Watts, his widow contracted a second marriage with a Mr. Fro- yard. They had two children, sons, William and Hiram. William went to California, and has been lost trace of; Hiram moved to Mississippi and married a Mrs. Newell. Their only son, Oliver Jones Froyard, served with Lee in Virginia during the war be- tween the States, and is now living at Wallis, Texas, with his son Oliver Jones Froyard, Jr.
By this it will be seen that the name Oliver Jones, is treasured by the family, it having been transmitted through three generations as a token of regard for one who might well serve as an exemplar of all that goes to make true manhood.
No record has been preserved by tlae family of the early life of Oliver Jones, but it is probable that he was in the service of the United States during the war with Great Britain, 1812-14; for in his youth he was made prisoner, and was so disgusted at the indif- ference of his government in not taking active measures to bring about the release of himself and others that finally, when he was once more at liberty, he vowed never again to live under such a government. He made his way to Mexico, and there met with Stephen F. Austin while the latter was in the City of Mexico work- ing to secure the grant needed to authorize the establishment of his colony in Texas. Jones immediately determined to become one of his colonists; and the records show that on August 10th, 1824, he received title to a sitio and labor of land, in what are now Brazoria and Austin Counties, receiving his title from Commissioner Baron
174 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
de Bastrop. From 1829 to 1830 he was Alguacil, or sheriff, of the Colony. In 1829, as chosen captain of fifty men, he led them from San Felipe de Austin in pursuit of hostile Indians. Captain Bart- lett Simms was in command of another company organized for the same purpose, and the two companies under the command of Cap- tain Abner Kuykendall scoured the country from the Brazos to the mouth of the San Saba river.
In 1833 he was a member of the second convention of the people of Texas, which assembled at San Felipe de Austin, on April 1st of that year. Through the memoranda of one of its members, Major James Kerr, a full list of the delegates has been obtained, and among them Oliver Jones is recorded as having been appointed one of a committee to draft a Constitution for the State of Texas, to be forwarded to the Mexican Congress for approval. The futil- ity of this effort to obtain separate statehood for Texas is well known.
The following year, Austin, Oliver Jones, and J. A. Vasquez were elected from Texas to serve in the Legislature of Coahuila and Texas, Texas being allowed three representatives. But, as Austin was then in prison in Mexico, Jones and Vasquez were the only representatives. They were powerless to stem the tide of spoliation and corruption ; the revolution in other portions 'of Mexico spread to Coahuila, and before the end of the session the first steps towards the participation of Texas in the struggle against the arbitrary power of Santa Anna had been taken.
As to the part taken by Oliver Jones, it is well known that he was a warm supporter of the measures advocated by Henry Smith, William B. Travis and others, for creating a local government in Texas, and was a prominent participator in the revolution. In 1837 we find his name among the representatives in the .Congress of the Independent Republic of Texas, he having succeeded Mosely Baker, who had removed from Austin County to Harris County. In 1838 when Congress assembled at Houston, his name was regis- tered as Senator from Austin County, succeeding Alexander Somer- vell. As member of the Senate in this Congress, he had the honor of being appointed chairman of a committee to recommend the de- sign of a flag for the Republic of Texas, and on January 4th, 1839,
Sketch of Oliver Jones and His Wife, Rebecca Jones. 175
he presented the design adopted- by the committee accompanying the presentation with the following words:
"The committee beg leave to make some remarks on the ground upon which their conclusion is formed. The President ad interim devised the National flag and seal, as it were, in the case of emer- gency, adopting the flag of the United States of America with little variation, which act was subsequently ratified by the law of De- cember 10th, 1836. The then adopted flag was expedient for the time being, and has been specially beneficial to the navy and mer- chantmen, on account of being so much blended with the flag of the United States. But the emergency has passed, and the future prospects of Texas are of such a flattering nature that her inde- pendence requires that her arms, seal and standard should assume an independent character, by a form which will not blend them with those of any other nation. Besides these considerations, the committee would beg to state that, inasmuch as the proposition made by this republic in her incipient stage of national existence to the United States of America for an annexation to the Amer- ican Confederacy has been withdrawn by the minister plenipotenti- ary of the government at the court of Washington, and as the wish of the majority of the people of Texas, so far as is publicly known, is in favor of sustaining an independent station among the nations of the earth, we regard the transaction of the single star into the American constellation and the merging of the single Texan stripes with the thirteen stripes of the United States of America inex- pedient.
"The Committee are convinced of the necessity of adopting a separate and distinct standard and arms for the Eepublic. . . . Therefore, your Committee beg leave to offer a substitute amend- ing the original bill referred to them, accompanying the same with a specimen of the arms, the seal, and the standard."
The National Standard, Seal and Arms, then recommended, which were adopted and finally approved on January 25th, 1839, were used by the Kepublic of Texas until its annexation to the United States, when slight changes in the lettering were made in the seal and coat of arms, the word "State" being substituted for "Republic." "The State flag is the same as that of the Republic recommended by the Senate committee of which Oliver Jones was
176 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
chairman. On February 19th, 1846, it protected the commerce and floated over the capitol of the Republic ; on that day it was lowered to give place to the Stars and Stripes.
The presentation of the design for this flag by Oliver Jones was the consummation of the dearest wish of his life, viz. : to see Texas represented among nations by her own symbols of independence. He continued to take a lively interest in the service of the Re- public, and in 1845 was enrolled as a member of the Annexation Convention which made Texas a State of the Union. Long after his term of active service had expired, his counsel was valued and sought by those who shaped the policy of the new State.
In person Oliver Jones was pleasing, being tall and erect in figure, of fair complexion, and with regular features. His broad, high fore- head betokened intellectuality, while the kindly expression of his eyes tempered the firmness of his lines about the lower part of his face. His character was that of a very kind nature, but of in- flexible integrity; all the records or recollections of his life prove his stern determination in the discharge of duty. When running for office he was independent and outspoken as to his opinions; and upon one occasion, when told that his attitude concerning cer- tain questions would not be acceptable to some voters of his dis- trict, he sent them word that he would rather not be elected than to go into office by the votes of men who held views so opposed to his own. Mrs. Anson Jones, an old friend of his, tells some touching incidents in illustration of his kindness of heart and generosity of nature. His friendship was of the kind that is not content with spoken proofs, but, wherever possible, resolved itself into action which bore speedy results. On one occasion, at a period of great sorrow and distress in Mrs. Jones's family, when he could not reach them directly on account of swollen streams, he rode on horseback fifty miles around, in order to tender his sympathy and financial help, should she stand in need of such assistance.
Oliver Jones first met his wife at Austin, then the seat of gov- ernment, in 1840. Her maiden name was Rebecca Greenleaf. She was born at Dorchester, Massachusetts, December, 1798, of a family of seafaring people. She came to Texas in 1834 in com- pany with her first husband, Ira Westover, and their adopted son. Starting from Jeffersonville, Kentucky, they journeyed down the
Sketch of Oliver Jones and His Wife, Rebecca Jones. 177
river to New Orleans on a flat bottomed boat, at that time the only means of river transportation in common use; and from New Or- leans they took passage on board a schooner bound for Texas, and settled in the San Patricio Colony. Among the many warm friends of Rebecca Westover, afterwards Mrs. Jones, were David Ayers and his family, who were fellow passengers on the schooner. By reason of storms and adverse winds they were delayed many days beyond the time usually required, and for five days were without the reg- ular supply of provisions and water. The Ayers children received a liberal portion due to Mrs. Westover's family, she, with char- acteristic kindness, depriving herself that the children might not suffer the pangs of hunger and thirst. The devoted friendship formed during this dangerous voyage lasted through life.
When the Texas Revolution began Captain Ira Westover cast his fortunes with the Texas forces, and he and his adopted son were among Fannin's men at Goliad on that ever memorable bloody Palm Sunday, 1836. Alone, unprotected, terrified at the news of the merci- less slaughter, the widow of Captain Westover fled towards the east- ern part of the State. Mounted on a faithful horse, with a small bundle of clothing attached to the horn of her saddle, and attended by a single Mexican man-servant, she made her hurried ride across the trackless prairies, from her desolate home at San Patrico to Harrisburg, almost without halting. When she arrived and stopped at the doorway of Mrs. Jane Harris, she was lifted from her horse in a deathlike swoon. It was many hours before she was restored to consciousness, and her first words expressed the joy she felt of being able once more to look upon the face of a white woman. She remained with Mrs. Harris until after the Runaway Scrape, going with her and Mrs. Isaac Batterson's family to Anahuac and after- wards to Galveston.
While her life was beset with many trials, the most trying period was passed in the companionship of Mrs. Harris. When the in- formation reached them at Galveston that the captured Santa Anna, whom she regarded as the murderer of her husband, would not be required to give up his life as the penalty of his crimes, a desire for revenge, for a time, overmastered every other feeling. Even many years afterward when these times were recalled, her strong efforts to speak calmly of them was betrayed by trembling voice and
178 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
clenched fingers, as she would exclaim : "If the women whose hus- bands and sons he murdered could have reached him, he would not have lived long !"
High courage, born of hardships, sustained her ; kind friends as- sisted her; and, returning to San Patricio, she set about gathering together what was left of her former possessions. In time she be- came the wife of Judge Mclntyre, but a tragic fate soon deprived her of his companionship, and she was again left to fight life's battles alone. While engaged in getting out timbers to make im- provements on their place, he attempted to cross a swollen stream. The weather was extremely cold, the heavy cloak he wore combined with the force of the current to sweep him off his horse, and he was drowned within a short distance of their home.
In 1840 Mrs. Mclntyre went to Austin, then the seat of Gov- ernment of the Republic of Texas, to present some claims for prop- erty destroyed and goods and provisions furnished during the revolution. She boarded with Mrs. Eberle, at whose popular board- ing-house most of the members of the Congress were entertained. She there met Captain Oliver Jones, Senator from the Austin Dis- trict. He immediately became earnestly interested, not only in her claim against the government, but in her own fine personality. With his usual decision of character, he determined at the moment of introduction that he would try to win her, and soon after re- marked to a friend: "There is a woman that I would marry!" Aided by his good friend, Anson Jones, and others, in advocating her claim against the government, he was soon equally successful in urging his own individual claim to her favor. They were married at Austin, and after the session of Congress was over, they went to live at his plantation, "Burleigh," in what is now Austin County, a few miles from the town of Bellville. There they passed a long season of contented domestic life, surrounded by such luxuries as were obtainable at the time.
Oliver Jones' experience as a cotton planter dated back to early colonial days; some old accounts of John R. Harris, a merchant at Harrisburg, show the following interesting entry: "Capt. 0. Jones to John R. Harris Dr. 1829, March 18. To storage on 2 bales cotton, $1.00." He was known as a very successful planter, and the hospitality for which Texans were noted was well main-
Sketch of Oliver Jones and His Wife, Rebecca Jones. 179
tained at his home, where he and his wife gladly shared their pros- perity with friends and with the stranger within their gates. While they never parted with this home, yet about 1859 they moved to Galveston and purchased a handsome residence, where they lived until the breaking out of the war between the States obliged them, together with most of the residents of Galveston, to refugee to the interior of the State, Thereafter, appreciating in their old age more and more the companionship of dear friends, they spent much of their time in Houston, and Mrs. Jones died in that city, at the residence of Colonel Cornelius Ennis on December 24th, 1865. She and her husband were greatly beloved by all this family, whose younger members, in common with a few others of old friends, showed their love by endearing titles of make-believe kinship ; ad- dressing them always as "Uncle," and "Aunty Jones." Their de- votion to each other was of a type seldom equalled — never sur- passed. Each lived for the other, and both for their friends. This excellent pair, without children, by the charm of their friendli- ness, were made members of a family circle limited only by the number of children of their friends.
Mrs. Jones was well educated; she was gentle and dignified in manner, tall and well formed, attractive in person, and gifted with fine conversational powers. The courage and fortitude displayed during the perilous period of her first years in Texas flashed through her black eyes and were traced in the firm lines which marked the features of an unusually pleasing face. Those who knew her well had only words of praise and love for this worthy com- patriot, a woman cast in heroic mould. She was a member of the Prodestant Episcopal Church, and at her death was buried in the cemetery of that church, now known as the old Episcopal and Masonic cemetery.
Oliver Jones survived his devoted wife less than one year. On September 17th, 1866, at the residence of Mrs. Sarah Merri- weather, on Congress Street, Houston, Texas, he breathed his last, and was laid by the side of his wife. A graceful, Italian monolith, tall and stately, bearing a simple inscription, the name of Oliver Jones, place of birth, date of death, and a partial record of his noble service for Texas, and the name Bebecca Jones, with the date
180 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
of her death, marks the place of their sepulture.1 Honeysuckle clusters in wild profusion round the tombstones of this old-time cemetery, which lies close to the Sam Houston Park; the merry sounds of music and laughter from the latter contrasting strangely with the peaceful quiet of this resting place of the dead.
1When, a few years ago, the Historian of the Daughters of the Republic of Texas informed Mr. David N. Harris of Wallis, that the memorial erected to his grand-uncle in the old Episcopal and Masonic Cemetery was falling to decay, he immediately authorized its restoration at his expense. At that time, at the instance of the Historian of the Society mentioned above, a brief record of Oliver Jones' service to Texas was added to the inscription already existing. An error in the inscription gives the place of his birth as Connecticut, when, according to the most reliable informa- tion, it should have been New York City.
Notes and Fragments. 181
NOTES AND FRAGMENTS.
THE STORMING or SAN ANTONIO, DECEMBER 6-9, 1835. — The following letter gives another brief, but contemporary account of the Texan assault on San Antonio in 1835. It was written to the editor of the Southern Whig, published at Athens, Georgia, and was copied from that paper by the (Columbus) Ohio Monitor, February 18, 1836 :
Near Cahawba, Ala., 15th Jan. 1836.
Dear Brother : — I have just arrived at this place, direct from San Antonio, Texas, and some few particulars in relation to the storm- ing and capture of that place may not be altogether uninteresting to you. History does not record a circumstance of the same nature, and perhaps never will another.
The Texian troops had been encamped before San Antonio near two months without effecting any thing of importance, save daily skirmishing in which nothing was lost and little gained. (I must however make an exception of the battle of Conception in which Col. James W. Fannin commanded 92 men when surprised by 400 Mexicans, who lost as has since been ascertained 104 killed, and since died of wounds, while the Texian loss was one man killed only.)
The Mexicans had 24 pieces of mounted artillery and 6 unmounted when the attack was made, which was brought on in the following manner : After giving them two months to fortify the Texian officers decided that it was impracticable and impossible to carry the fort by storm, and had issued orders for the whole army to march at sundown, with the intention of taking up winter quarters at La Bahia 100 miles to the Southward and near the coast. It was then about four o'clock, and from the noise in the camp it was apparent that a mutiny was on hand. At the time appointed to move, 300 men marched out and declared their in- tention of storming the fort that night. Many of the officers made speeches against the project, friends begged and entreated others not to throw away their lives foolishly, &c &c. — All was in vain ; no persuasion had any weight ; a great many mounted their horses and left the Camp, expecting a total defeat. — Next morning j ust at daylight the three hundred firm to their purpose marched to the attack headed by Col. Benjamin R. Milan who had been the prin- cipal in bringing about this manoevre. The action was severe unti1
182 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
about ten o'clock; the Texians succeeded in getting possession of some large stone nouses in which they remained four days keeping up a steady fire day and night. On the fifth night an assault was made on the fort itself, and they succeeded in driving the enemy therefrom and from the whole town with a very considerable loss, while the Texian loss was 4 killed and 15 wounded. — Among the killed was Col. Milam whose loss is severely felt throughout Texas. The Mexicans surrendered all their arms and munitions of war, amounting to 30 pieces of artillery and a large number of small arms with a large amount of ammunition for both. The Mexicans were about 1200 strong while the conquerors were not exceeding 300. The main body of Texians were lying within three quarters of a mile, and refused to assist, as they expected defeat to the last minute. There is not now an armed Mexican in the country. The above statement is strictly correct; I have a personal knowledge of all the particulars as I have the honor of being known as one of the 300. I have been in two other engagements, in one was shot through the boot, &c. in both successful. Mexicans can't stand the rifle.
I am now in this place on business, and shall return to Texas in four days.
Your Brother, &c.
A. H. Jones. To Wm. E. Jones.
Boole Reviews and Notices. 183
BOOK EEVIEWS AXD NOTICES.
Early Days of Fort Worth (Fort Worth, Texas Printing Com- pany, 1906, pp. 101), by Captain J. C. Terrell, is an interesting collection of stories and character sketches, largely in the gossipy vein, which will afford the reader most pleasant entertainment for a leisure hour.
The Beginnings of the True Railway Mail Service and the Work of George B. Armstrong in Founding it (The Lakeside Press, 1906, pp. 84, printed for private circulation), compiled by Geo. B. Arm- strong, Jr., seeks to establish the claims of Mr. Armstrong to- the credit for the organization of the American railway mail service. For this purpose an effort is made to disprove the claims that have been set up on behalf of W. A. Davis of St. Joseph, Missouri.
Indian Fights on Texas Frontier: A History of Exciting En- counters Had with Indians in Hamilton, Comanche, Brown, Erath and Adjoining Counties. By E. L. Deaton, a Texan of Pioneer Days. (C. M. Boynton, Hamilton, Texas. 1894. 8vo., paper, p. 200.)
This is made up of very readable reminiscences of little known encounters in the district mentioned, which throw some light on the struggle with the Redskins, which was a part of the life of the pioneer settlers. F. W. H.
Under Palmetto and Pine. By J. W. Carhart, M. D. (Cin- cinnati: 1899.) This is a small volume of stories purporting to depict negro life and character in Texas. The author wishes, it seems, to show that the negro is capable of taking on the highest degree of culture and refinement, and that social equality is the logical outcome. The book is of indifferent literary merit; the style is weak; the characters are generally too highly idealized to be convincing or to find patient readers among those who are familiar with the negro in the South. CHAS. W. R.
The National Lines of Mexico
Mexico's Greatest Railway System
OPERATING THE ONLY THROUGH LINE OF SLEEPERS BETWEEN MEXICO AND THE UNITED STATES. THROUGH DAILY PULL- MAN SERVICE BETWEEN MEXICO CITY AND ST. LOUIS VIA THE NATIONAL LINES OF MEXICO, I. & G. N. AND IRON MOUNTAIN ROUTE. :::::::::
GEO. W. HIBBARD, Qen'l Passenger Agent, Mexico City.
G. R. HACKLBY, Gen'l Western Agent, Chicago, 111.
Follow the Flag
Wabash Route
To New York, Boston, Buffalo, Niagara Falls, Detroit, Chicago and all Eastern Cities. The shortest, quickest and only line from Kansas City or St. Louis running over its own tracks to Niagara Falls or Buffalo. PASSENGERS ON THE WABASH HAVE ALL THE COMFORTS OF A FIRST CLASS HOTEL. See the schedule:
Leave St, Louis— 8:30 a. m., 8:30 p. m., 11:47 p. m. Arrive Detroit— 8:20 p. m., 9:30 a. m., 12:01 p. m. Arrive Buffalo— 4:20 a. m., 7:00 p. m., 7:50 p. m. Arrive New York— 3:30 p. m., 8:00 a. m., 7:35 a. m. Arrive Boston— 5:20 p. m., 9:50 a. m., 10:30 a. m. UNEQUALLED ST. LOUIS AND CHICAGO SERVICE Leave St. Louis— 9:01 a. m., 9:17 p. m., 11:47 p. m. Arrive Chicago— 5:00 p. m., 7:00 a. m., 8.00 a. m.
THE NEW PITTSBURG ROUTE.
Leave St. Louis— 8:30 a. m., 8:30 p. m. Arrive Toledo— 9:30 p. m. 8:30 a. m. Arrive Pittsburg — 6:30 a. m., 6:00 p. m. Stop-over allowed on through tickets at Niagara Falls. Meals served in Wabash Palace Dining Cars. Consult Coupon Ticket Agents of connecting lines, or address
S. W. Conner, S. W. P. A., 395 Main Street.
Room 202. Dallas, Texas.
FELLOWS AND LIFE MEMBERS
OF THE
ASSOCIATION
The constitution of the Association provides that "Members who show, by published work, special aptitude for historical investigation, may become Fellows. Thirteen Fellows shall be elected by the Association when first organized, and the body thus created may thereafter elect additional Fellows on the nomination of the Executive Council. The number of Fellows shall never exceed fifty."
The present list of Fellows is as follows:
BARKER, MR. EUGENE C. KLEBERG, RUDOLPH, JR.
BATTS, JUDGE R. L. LEMMON, PROF. LEONARD BOLTON, PROF. HERBERT EUGENE LOOSCAN, MRS. ADELE B.
CASIS, PROF. LILIA M. MCCALEB, DR. W. F.
CLARK, PROF. ROBERT CARLTON MILLER, MR. E. T.
COOPER, PRESIDENT O. H. PENNYBACKER, MRS. PERCY V.
COOPWOOD, JUDGE BETHEL RATHER, ETHEL ZIVLEY
Cox, DR. I. J. SHEPARD, JUDGE SETH
ESTILL, PROF. H. L. SMITH, PROF. W. ROY
FULMORE, JUDGE Z. T. TOWNES, PROF. JOHN C.
GAINES, JUDGE R. R. WILLIAMS, JUDGE O. W.
GARRISON, PROF. GEORGE P. WINKLER, MR. ERNEST WILLIAM
GRAY, MR. A. C. WOOTEN, HON. DUDLEY G. HOUSTON, PRESIDENT D. F.
The constitution provides also that "Such benefactors of the Association as shall pay into its treasury at any one time the sum of thirty dollars, or shall present to the Association an equivalent in books, MSS., or other acceptable matter, shall be classed as Life Members."
The Life Members at present are: BRACKENRIDGE, HON. GEO. W. Cox, MRS. NELLIE STEDMAN
THE QUARTERLY
OF THE
TEXAS STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION
VOL. X. JANUARY, 1907. No. 3.
The publication committee and the editors disclaim responsibility for views expressed by contributors to THE QUARTERLY.
THE SEAT OF GOVEENMENT OF TEXAS.
ERNEST WILLIAM WINKLER.
II. THE PERMANENT LOCATION OF THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT.
1. CHOOSING THE SITE.
(1) Probable Reasons for Dissatisfaction with the Location at the City of Houston.
The inconvenience and discomforts suffered by the members of the first congress at the adjourned session in the city of Houston, were, perhaps, inevitable, springing as they did from the newness of the location and the recent removal of the government to that place. That these circumstances, however, did not allay but rather foment the discontent occasioned by the selection of the city of Houston is apparent. This dissatisfaction found expression in the progress of the campaign for congressional office during the summer of 1837. In the Telegraph for August 9, 1837, appeared a contribution, signed "Many Voters" and dated "Houston, August 9, 1837," in which the candidates of that district for seats in congress were called upon to define their positions upon the "most prominent measures upon which they . . . [would] probably be called to act — the opening of the land office ; the division of the county ; the location of the seat of government; and the policy of carrying on an offensive war with Mexico."
136 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
By the time fixed for the assembling of the second congress, one might reasonably have expected to find removed many of the causes for complaint that had existed during the adjourned session of the first congress. As a matter of fact, however, it seems that those who had undertaken to provide buildings for the accommodation of congress and the executive departments did little or nothing to carry out their promise during the intervening months. Take, for instance, the facts as stated by Secretary of the Treasury Henry Smith, in his letter of October 1, 1837, addressed to the speaker of the house of representatives :
When the Government officers were removed to this point, the proprietors of the Town induced me to believe that I would be fur- nished with a good office. On my arrival however, I found that none had been provided and I was compelled to occupy a temporary shed, as entirely unfit for an office, as it was unsafe for the security of books and papers. This great inconvenience I submitted to without a murmur, under a promise however, that the evil should be remedied in a few weeks. — Months have elapsed, and instead of being furnished with the anticipated office I am now deprived of the temporary shed. I have called on his Excellency the President who informed me that I should have a room in the purlieus of the Capitol, that the upper rooms were finished and that I was entitled to my privilege in choice. On examination however I found the rooms all occupied and was informed that the President had no control over them as they were intended for the use of the two houses of Congress, and that the rooms composing the wings of the Capitol were intended for the heads of Department. These rooms seem to be yet unfinished and in all probability cannot be occupied for Home time to come. Information on various subjects will be ex- pected from this Department by your hon[ora]ble body, which I am anxious to lay before you at as early a period as circumstances will possibly permit, which however cannot be done until I am pro- vided with a suitable office. I therefore ask the favor of your hon[ora]ble body to co-operate with the other house and, if con- sistent, to assign to my Department some suitable room to occupy where the business of the office can be properly conducted, and the books and papers securely kept.1
1Letter filed with Papers of 2 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., MS., State Depart- ment.
The petition of the Secretary of the Treasury was granted by inviting him "to take possession of one of the three rooms, in the second story of the Capitol (occupied for committee rooms), and appropriate the same to the use of the Treasury Department." (House Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 1 and 2 Sens., 32.)
The Seat of Government of Texas. 187
Even that part of the Capitol building occupied by congress wa^ incomplete in its appointments. Information upon this point is supplied by the House Journal.1 For instance, seats were ordered to be placed in the lobby of the house of representatives, Septem- ber 30, 1837 ; a sufficient quantity of chairs for the use of the mem- bers of the house was ordered October 25 ; the plastering overhead in the Hall of Representatives being considered unsafe was ordered removed October 19; and a stove was ordered October 24.
Another cause of dissatisfaction may be suggested by the follow- ing item from the Telegraph for October 11, 1837 :
The attention of the mayor and aldermen ... is respect- fully called to the muddy condition of the streets on the level, about the capitol, and the president's house. The comfort and health of the inhabitants and visitors demand that those streets be well drained. . . .
Many Voters.
A third consideration was that of the healthfulness of the place. The Matagorda Bulletin for October 25, 1837, published this para- graph :
Persons recently from Houston state that the city presents rather a gloomy appearance and worse in prospect. At the time our in- formant left there was much sickness, principally fevers — of which there had been cases of yellow conjestive and billious. Every place was said to be crowded, and little or nothing to eat.
Referring to this same period, a writer in the Telegraph for July 31, 1839, says :
It will be recollected by the early citizens of this place that in- stances have been known when three or four dead bodies have been picked up of a morning in the street, and that sickness and death visited almost every family. This, as the general healthiness of the place since has proved, was more owing to the exposed situation of the inhabitants than the unhealthiness of the climate.
Whether the foregoing were all the reasons, or even the chief ones, for dissatisfaction with the city of Houston the evidence available does not permit me to affirm. That dissatisfaction did exist is plain; and it resulted in efforts to fix the location of the seat of government elsewhere and to remove it from Houston before
'Pp. 20-60. passim.
188 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the expiration of the time designated in the act locating temporarily the seat of government at that place.
(2} The First Commission to Select a Site, October 24 — Novem- ber 20, 1837.
a. Origin of the Commission Idea. The second congress would have assembled in regular session on the first Monday in November, 1837, but President Houston considered a special session necessary, and, accordingly, convened that body to meet September 25, to consider the land law and the eastern boundary line questions. Congress was in no wise restricted to the consideration of these subjects. It was but a few days, therefore, till the seat of gov- ernment question was raised. On September 28, Mr. Rusk offered a resolution in the house providing,
That a committee of three be appointed by the House, to join such committee, as may be appointed on the part of the Senate. to enquire into the propriety of selecting a site, upon which to locate permanently the seat of government of the Republic.1
The Senate concurred in the foregoing resolution, and the joint committee reported, October 11, through its chairman, Mr. Rusk:
that such site should be selected forthwith, and five commissioners should be chosen by a vote of both Houses, whose duties it shall be to select said site, and that they should receive such propositions for the sale of land as may be made to them; and to make condi- toinal contracts, subject to the ratification or rejection by this Con- gress, and that they report by the 15th of November; and that in making selections they be confined to the section of country be- tween the Trinity and Guadalupe rivers; and that they select no place over twenty miles north of the upper San Antonio road, nor south of a direct line, running from the Trinity to the Guadalupe River, crossing the Brazos at Fort Bend.2
On the same day that the foregoing report was made the follow- ing contribution, under the caption "Removal of the Seat of Gov- ernment," appeared in the Telegraph, a newspaper subscribed for by both houses of congress :3
1House Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 1 and 2 Seas., 10.
-lUd., 38, 39.
"Ibid., 13; Senate Journal, ibid., 9.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 189
To the members of Congress: —
From recent indications, there can be no
doubt that there is a settled purpose among you to act upon this matter at the present session of congress. As it is a measure of the deepest importance, and of no less interest to every citizen of the republic, a few suggestions even from a private source may not be without some beneficial effect upon your legislative action upon the subject. If a proper regard be had in the selection of a beau- tiful and eligible site in the upper country, as the permanent seat of government, it can doubtless be made the source of bringing a large revenue into the treasury, as it may be safely assumed that the capital of a large empire territory like that of Texas, soon destined to be settled with a dense and enterprising population, will give importance and interest to any place, and at all times make the property valuable; and if early steps are taken in fixing upon the location, a sufficient amount may be very soon realized from the sale of lots to erect the necessary government buildings, and in some sort, even to supply the wants of our suffering navy, a subject which at this time so imperiously demands the attention of Con- gress. It will be a very easy matter, as the geographical situation of the country is well known to you all, to settle upon the most fit and eligible site nearest the centre of the republic as the perma- nent seat of government of the republic. Bastrop is represented as having high claims upon the attention of the government, and per- haps a better location could not be made, provided there is an entire relinquishment of all private interest in the four leagues of land which belong to that town. But whatever place may be fixed upon, the government should by all means, make a reservation of at least four or five leagues of land, which could not fail in a few years to be rendered immensely valuable. Perhaps the most suitable plan that could be adopted for the disposition of the property, would be the appointment of five commissioners, well known for their intelli- gence, honor and integrity, to be vested with discretionary power to lay off the town in blocks of lots of small dimensions, to be de- termined among themselves, showing due regard to the situation of the capitol, so as to make the property as valuable as possible : and after laying off as many of those small lots as could possibly be made saleable in three years, by public auction at stated periods, they might then be authorized to lay off lots of ten, twenty, thirty, forty and fifty acres, so as to embrace even a half league of land, and the remainder of the land reserved might be laid off into farms and plantations, and disposed of as congress might at a future time determine. If commissioners could be appointed at the present session of congress, the first sale might take place as early as the 1st of March next, and necessary public buildings might be erected so as to be in readiness for the reception of congress at its next
190 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
session, should they determine not to hold another session here. And should they authorize the reception of treasury drafts at the sale, it would be the means of taking in a large quantity of that paper, which together with the enactment of laws making it receiv- able in all government dues, would immediately give an enhanced value to the paper, and in a short time make it good dollar for dollar, and made to answer all the purposes of a regular circulat- ing medium. So seriously impressed am I, with the conviction that if a judicious selection of a site for the permanent seat of govern- ment is now made, it cannot fail to attract the attention of capital- ists and men of all descriptions of business, and thus be made tbe means of realizing a handsome income to the government, that I hope and trust [the subject] will receive the early and considerate attention of congress.
A Citizen.
&. The Duties of the Commissioners. What the duties of the commissioners were to be was suggested in the report of the joint committee and in the article that appeared in the Telegraph cited above. A joint resolution, embodying the essentials of these recom- mendations, passed the senate on October 14, was concurred in by the house of representatives on the 16th,1 and approved by the president on the 19th. It read as follows :
Eesolved by the senate and house of representatives of the re- public of Texas, in Congress assembled, That there shall be elected by joint vote of both houses of congress, five commissioners (any three of whom shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business) whose duty it shall be forthwith to proceed to select a site for the permanent location of the seat of government of this re- public ; and that they be required to give public notice of their ap- pointment, and receive such propositions for the sale of lands as may be made to them, not less than one, nor more than six leagues of land; and also examine such places as they may think proper on vacant lands; and that they be authorized to enter into condi- tional contracts for the purchase of such locations as they may think proper, subject to ratification or rejection by this congress, and that they be required to report to congress, by the 15th Novem- ber, the different selections, with an accurate and full description of the same, to congress, and that in making the selections, they be confined to the section of country between the Trinity and Guad- alupe rivers, and that they select no place over one hundred miles north of the upper San Antonio road, nor south of a direct line
^Senate Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 1 and 2 Sess., 20, 22.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 191
running from the Trinity to the Guadalupe river, crossing the Brasses at Fort Bend.1
The five commissioners provided for by the above resolution were elected by joint vote of the two houses on October 24th. Messrs. J. A. Greer, John G. McGehee, Horatio Chriesman, J. W. Bunton, and William Scurlock were chosen.2 None of them was a member of congress.
Would "a direct line running from the Trinity to the Guadalupe river, crossing the Brasses at Fort Bend" exclude the city of Hous- ton? The writer of the article that appeared in the Telegraph. October 11, which was quoted above, as well as the editor of the Telegraph in the article that is quoted below treat the subject as if the city of Houston was barred from consideration; nor does the city of Houston appear as a candidate for the permanent seat of government. The editor of the Telegraph, October 14, 1837.
Many of the members of congress seem determined to remove the seat of government from this place immediately. We believe the people of Texas have too high a regard for justice, to sanction this measure. The public faith we think is in some degree pledged to retain the seat of government at Houston until the year 1840. Most of the citizens who have purchased lots in this city and erected buildings have considered the act 'locating temporarily the seat of government" a secure guarantee that their property here would con- tinue valuable at least three years. The stability of the contracts they have made was wholly based upon that law. We trust there- fore that this congress will not be so unjust as rashly to deprive these citizens of what they may properly consider — vested rights.
c. The Report of the Commissioners. The commissioners elected to select a site for the permanent seat of government made their report November 20, 1837.3
To the honorable Senate and House of Eepresentatives :
Your Commissioners, to select a site for the permanent location of the Seat of Government, beg leave, after the time re- quired, to report to your honorable bodies the result of their exam- inations.
of the Republic of Texas [Passed the First and Second Sessions of Second Congress], 4, 5.
*Hou»e Journal, 2 Tex. Cong.. 1 and 2 Sess.. 63: Senate Journal, ibid., 33.
'House Journal, ibid., 147. 148.
192 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
In doing this your commissioners deem it best to lay before con- gress as a part of their report all the propositions which have been made, and unnecessary and too tedious [to] go in to a full descrip- tion of the different situations contained in said propositions; but will only offer a few remarks upon those which in their opinion have the highest claims for a suitable site.
We will first present Bastrop as a site possessing some advantages over any other, such as the best of pine and cedar timber, and other advantages not surpassed having as good water as any other, being located on a navigable stream not more than 110 miles from schooner navigation, surrounded by a fine beautiful country, pos- sessing a location high, dry, and healthy, and having a tract of four leagues appropriated for the town and may be considered pub- lic property having a front on the river of one mile and a half, but most of tillable land of the first class is claimed by private indi- viduals on the front league tho there is some good land on the re- mainder. But this town tract is joined by a fine league fronting on the river above the town which contains a good portion of first rate land and is claimed under an improvement which was made by a person who had drawn his headright, but claims it as the head- right of another, with public lands joining the town tract. Could the government secure this league it would be very valuable and add much to the claim's of this place.
The site at Washington has certainly some claims being situate on a navigable stream, about 80 miles from -schooner navigation and surrounded b}7 a rich and fertile country susceptible of a dense population having an abundance of good water possessing a high •dry, and healthy location, with a league of land offered on the terms proposed in the proposition for that place together with a 25 acres for a site for the capitol etc. with some lots.
The situation on the Mound leagues presents itself very forcibly having good water, with an abundance of cedar oak and ash timber at a convenient distance from the sight which is on a high and beautiful prairie with a fine rich country of lands, situate 20 miles West of Washington, 22 from the Colorado, and about 130 from the coast and 90 from schooner navigation. Those three leagues in the proposition of J F Perry with 700 acres of H. Chriesman will make about 15 000 acres and is of the first class of farming lands, joined by 10 or 12 thousand acres of vacant lands, the great- est portion of which is only valuable for its timber, tho there is some good farming lands on it, making in all about 25 000 acres, and will in the opinion of a majority of your commissioners pro- duce a greater revenue than any other situation before your honor- able bodies.
There is a site on the East bank of the Colorado river about 35
The Seat of Government of Texas. 193
or 40 miles below Bastrop at the Labahia crossing having a fine quantity of pine and cedar timber at a moderately convenient dis- tance surrounded by a fine healthy rich country, which ought not to be over looked, and your commissioners expected to have re- ceived and handed in a proposition, which will probably be handed in by the persons interested in the site. There is in a short dis- tance of the last mentioned place a large quantity of vacant lands.
The sites of San Felipe and Gonzales each having originally four leagues appropriated which may be considered public property have not been over looked, but neither of them being central and in want of good timber do not come under the class having the strongest claims.
Nashville, Tenoxticlan, the falls of the Brazos, and the situation [represented by Henry Austin on the West bank of the Colorado possessing some advantages, do not come under the first class.
A proposition pointing out a site in the neighborhood of the Sulphur Springs, North East of Washington, having good water and timber with a large quantity of vacant lands in its vicinity is expected and may be handed in.
The difficulty of seeing and hearing from persons owning land's in the vicinity of the different situations has rendered it impos- sible in the time given, to place any proposition fairly before the honorable congress; and your commissioners have no doubt that much more advantageous certain and liberal propositions could have been had if a longer time had been given and this important matter would have been in a much better condition for the action of con- gress.
J. A. Greer John G. McGehee Horatio Chriesman J. W. Bunton William Scurlock
Commissioners
Houston, Nov. 20, 1837.1
of Government Papers, MS, in State Library. Following is a sum- mary of the propositions accompanying the report:
Bastrop. — October 21, 1837, the people of Bastrop instructed their sen- ator and representatives in congress to relinquish to the government the unappropriated part of the town tract containing about three leagues and three quarters, and to transfer all moneys due on the sale of the town lots heretofore made, amounting to about $7000. November 20, 1837, the citizens of Mina county authorized John G. McGehee to pledge in addi- tion to the foregoing two and one-fourth leagues of land, or five thousand dollars.
Washington. — November 15, 1837, the Washington Town company made the following offer, which because of its importance is here given in full:
"At a meeting of the proprietors of the Town of Washington held on the 15th of November A I) 1837 on motion of John W Hall it was unani-
194 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
This report was referred to a select joint committee,, composed of five members from each house.1
The preference manifested for central, and even western Texas, as the proper place for the permanent location of the seat of gov- ernment is noteworthy. It is, therefore, the more remarkable to find the following protest against the contemplated action of con- gress :
I have just reached this place from the far west where -I reside and where it is difficult for myself and neighbors to acquire infor- mation in relation to the political operations of this government. It would be useless for me here to state that the citizens of the west have been the greatest sufferers in the war betwen Texas and Mex- ico. . . . Our only hope was in the protection of a munificent and just government, ... I find instead of an eye to the in- terest of all, that local feelings and prejudices prevail, and at a time when the whole west is to a considerable extent depopulated,
mously resolved that Asa Hoxey president of the board of proprietors be fully authorized to make to the commissioners (appointed by Congress for the purpose of locating the Seat of Government) such propositions as he in his judgment may think best bo secure the Seat of Government in said Town
"To Capt Criesman, Col Buntin, Capt Skerlock. John McGee and J. A. Greer Esqrs.
"Gentlemen
"Under and by virtue of the resolution of the proprietors of the Town of Washington and above set forth, I would beg leave to make the following /proposition with the view of getting the Seat of Government located in the Town of Washington viz I feel myself fully authorized by virtue of the resolution of the proprietors of the Town aforesaid and hereunto ap- pended and do hereby propose to the Government through you to execute to the Government good and sufficient titles to one League of Land con- tiguous to the Town of Washington, for which you or the Government or any person or persons authorized by said Government may affix the price or value and the terms on which the payments shall be made, One-half of the Land thus offered is situated on the East side of the Brazos river and separated from said Town only by said river and is as is well known to you of the most valuable description both for its timber and for farm- ing purposes, the other half is immediately adjoining said Town and from that circumstance renders it equally if not more valuable than the other half. It is further proposed to allow the Government (and the proprie- tors will execute good and sufficient titles to the same) any number of lots requisite for the purpose of erecting the capitol and a sufficient num- ber of buildings for the officers of Government to be selected from any of the undisposed lots in said Town to be entirely gratuitous and without charge to the Government. It will be recollected that you were pleased with what you supposed to be an eligible site on John W Halls Land ( ad- joining the Town tract) for the Capitol and the necessary buildings for the officers of Government, I am fully authorized by Capt Hall to say
lHouse Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 1 and 2 Sess., 147, 149.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 195
we find members of congress attempting to entail the west a seat of government forever. Would it not be well for the gentlemen to reflect upon the probable result of such a measure ? Would not the west in after days deny the right to thus bind them, and if the seat of government should be located and individuals invest in purchas- ing property, and a subsequent congress choose to remove the seat of government, would it not have a tendency to destroy faith? I trust that members of congress will consider maturely before they legislate to the prejudice of every part of this community. I do not object to moving the seat of government, but I do most sin- cerely object to any pledge on the part of this government that the seat of government shall remain at any place forever. First, be- cause it is unjust in its operation — secondly, because I do not think that congress has the right to do so.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
A Western Citizen. Houston, November 23rd, 1837.1
that if you or the Government prefer that situation to any other within the corporate limits of said Town that it is at the disposal of Government free from all charge and that Capt Hall is ready to execute to the Gov- ernment [a deed] to a sufficient quantity of Land to meet the wants of Government as above set forth, I wish it to be distinctly understood that this proposition ia made expressly with the view to the capitol being erected either within the corporate limits of said Town or on the land of the said John W Hall above referred to and which if not acceded to by the Government then this proposition is to be regarded as not having been made and is to be withdrawn In making this proposition permit me most respectfully to suggest to the Government through you the many advan- tages that would accrue to the Government should this proposition be ac- ceded to and the Seat of Government be located in the Town of Washing- ton. I take it for granted that in selecting a suitable situation, due re- gard is to be had to the health of the location, the capabiliy of the con- tiguous country supporting the Town by its own product, so that in case of exigency it may be independent of foreign supplys, the geographical centre of the dountry, the means of communication with the coast and the fron- tier settlements, the safety from invasion by the enemy and of a conse- quence the safety of the public documents, its contiguity to a navigable stream, the facilities of building and a variety of other considerations which will naturally suggest themselves to you.
"I would with proper deference to your judgment suggest that the Town of Washington presents all the advantages herein enumerated In the first place, it affords an abundance of good well and spring water and contains a population of about Four hundred inhabitants, it was laid out as a town in the Spring of 1835 and there have been but fifteen persons buried in the Town during all that time not one of whom died with fever, and for the truth of this assertion I refer you to the statement of Dr. William S. [the actual signature shows P.* instead of S.] Smith here- unto appended In the second place, you must be perfectly satisfied from your own observation that there is no County in the Republic that will admit of more close farming than Washington and that
^Telegraph, December 6, 1837.
196 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
(S) The Second Commission to Select a Site, December 14, 1837, to April 14, 1838.
a. Creation and Personnel of the New Commission. The joint select committee, to which had been referred the report of the first commission, reported on November 28, 1837, that
they had had the subject under consideration, and had come to the determination to recommend that a joint committee of both houses be appointed to visit, in the recess of Congress, the different places proposed for the seat of government, and other places, as may be proposed, and report fully thereon in the early part of the first meeting of Congress after the adjournment.1
Accordingly, the following joint resolution was passed by con- - gress and approved by President Houston :
there is no section of the Republic populating so fast or yielding more rapidly to the industry of the farmer which is abundantly shewn not only by your own observation but by the vote taken at the last elec- tion for members of Congress, which I think was the largest taken in any County of the Republic, In the third place you will be easily convinced by reference to the Map of the Country that Washington is the most cen- tral point of the now inhabited part of the Republic or that will be popu- lated for a long time to come In the fourth place, communications can be received at Washington in Twenty-four hours from the 'coast, and in Forty- eight hours from the remotest frontier settlements, The fifth proposition [as to safety from invasion; see latter part of preceding paragraph] I pass over as self-evident. In the sixth place, Washington is beautifully situated on the right bank of the Brazos river opposite to the mouth of the Navisota and is evidently at the head of navigation (there being a series of obstacles in the river beginning a few miles above the Town). It is true that no Steam Boat has as yet ascended the river as far as Wash- ington, but I am induced to believe from what information I have been able to collect and from what has come under my own immediate obser- vation that it has been owing more to the perturbed situation of the Coun- try than from any obstacle to [be] met with in the river and think that 1 may with safety and confidence state that when the Country becomes more tranquil the enterprise of her citizens will overcome the difficulties (if there be any) in navigating the river and that the day is near at hand when the communication by Steam Boat navigation between the Town of Washington and the mouth of the river will be certain and direct. In the seventh place, there is now being erected in the Town two good Saw Mills and the adjacent country affords an abundance of suitable building tim- ber and there is now in full operation a large brick yard and I am in- formed that stone lime in any quantity can be procured a few miles up the river, and in the immediate vicinity of the Town may be had a vast quantity of fine sand stone suitable either for chimneys or buildings, thus affording all the facilities of building.
"With these few observations I respectfully submit this proposition for your consideration, with the full assurance that you will do that which
1 House Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 1 and 2 Sess., 192.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 197
Sec. I. Resolved, By the senate and house of representatives of the republic of Texas, in congress assembled, , That they will elect a joint committee of five,' two from the senate and three from the house of representatives, to be elected by their different houses, to whom shall be referred all propositions for the location of a per- manent seat of government, that the said committee be instructed forthwith after the adjournment of congress, to repair to that sec- tion of country in which it is proposed to locate the seat of gov- ernment, and examine, and make plots of the different places pro- posed as proper for the seat of government, and to visit and examine such other places as may be proposed for the seat of government, and prepare plots and descriptions of all such place [s] with the conditions on which they can be had by the government, and report thereon on the first Monday of the next meeting of congress.
in your best judgment will bring about the end for which you were ap- pointed
"Respectfully, "Your obt. Servt
"Asa Hoxey "President Washington Company
"Washington 15 Nov 1837"
Mound League. — November 14, 1837, James F Perry offered to sell to the government the Mound league and adjoining leagues at $1.50 cash per acre. November 20, 1837, Horatio Chriesman offered to donate four labors of land adjoining the Mound league. (Old Gay Hill in Washington county was located on the Mound League.)
Nashville. — November 20, 1837, T. J. Chambers offered to relinquish three-quarters of a league and half the town lots of Nashville, on condi- tion that he be permitted to locate an equal quantity of land elsewhere. S. C. Robertson offered to relinquish one-half league just below Chambers' land on similar terms. Mr. Thompson offered to relinquish one-half of the league just below Robertson's on similar terms. Mr. Chambers suggested the name of "Texia" for the seat of government.
Tenoxtitlan. — R. Barr offered to relinquish one-half of the league on which Tenoxtitlan is situated, — also two leagues of land lying on the west side of the Brazos at the mouth of Cow Bayou.
Falls of the Brazos. — T. J. Chambers offered to relinquish one league of land adjoining the town tract.
Henry Austin offered to place at the disposal of the government five leagues of land fronting on the west bank of the Colorado River, 8 miles above Columbus, on condition that the seat of government remain there from 1840 till 1850 and that he receive about forty-five per cent of the proceeds of the sales of all lots.
Sulphur Springs.— Situate 15 miles N. E. of Washington, 32 miles S. W. of Cincinnati, and 62 miles N. W. of Houston. J. S. Black and others offered 5500 acres of land.
J. H. Money offered to donate 1666 acres of land situate on the head waters of the New Years creek, on condtion that the seat of government be located on the said 1666 acres.
F. Niebling and — Gregg (the name not clearly written) offered to relinquish certain portions of their land fronting 001 the Colorado river, provided they were permitted to select like quantities elsewhere.
198 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Sec. 2. And be- it further resolved, That said committee, shall receive the same pay as if in actual session of congress, for the time they are serving on said committee,1 and they are hereby instructed to make contracts on the most favorable terms they can, subject in all cases to the ratification or rejection of congress.
Sec. 3. And be it further resolved, That the 'said committee shall have power to make reservation of all vacant lands which may be situated within nine miles of any point which the committee may think proper to designate as suitable locations for the seat of gov- ernment, and due notice or said reservation shall be forthwith given in at least three public newspapers, and no county surveyor shall survey any land in the said reservation, until after said reservation shall be relinquished by congress; Provided, that it shall not be lawful for said committee, to make such reservations in more than five different places.2
The recommendation of the joint select committee and the action of congress in adopting this recommendation harmonize with the opinion of the members of the first commission. They stated in the concluding paragraph of their report that they were confident that "much more advantageous certain and liberal propositions could have been had if a longer time had been given." The joint resolution, in a certain sense, therefore, is simply an extension of time granted the commissioners. However, a new commission com- posed of five members of congress was selected to continue the work ; more explicit directions were given to guide them in the per- formance of their task ; and greater precautions were taken to safe- guard the public interest. There was no change in the limits of the territory to which the commissioners were restricted.
Patrick C. Jack of Brazoria, George Sutherland of Jackson, and P. 0. Lumpkin of Houston county, were selected by the house of rep- resentatives ; and G. W. Barnett of Washington and Emory Raines of Shelby and Sabine were chosen by the senate3 as members of the joint committee of five. Congress adjourned December 19, 1837, to meet on the second Monday in April following.
congress also passed a joint resolution, granting the members of the first commission five dollars per day while in the discharge of that duty. — Laws of the Republic of Texas [Passed at First and Second Sessions of Second Congress], 41.
2 Laws of the Republic of Teams [Passed at First and Second Sessions of Second Congress], 60, 61.
3Hov$e Journal, 2 Tex. Cong.. 1 and 2 Seas., 285.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 199
b. Report of the Commissioners. The act of congress creating the second commission provides that "said committee be instructed forthwith after the adjournment of congress, to repair to that sec- tion of country in which it is proposed to locate the seat of govern- ment, and examine, and make plots of the different places proposed as proper for the seat of government." The commissioners may have proceeded forthwith, but the following notice suggests that a much more leisurely mode of procedure was adopted:
The commissioners appointed by congress to examine and report to the next extra session a suitable place for the permanent loca- tion of the seat of government in pursuance of their duties, will meet at John H. Moore's on the Colorado, on the first Monday in March next, whence they will proceed to examine such sites as may be deemed eligible, and receive proposals for the same. In the meantime, either of the commissioners is authorized to receive writ- ten proposals, and submit the same to the board upon their meet- ing.
By order of the board,
Pat. C. Jack, Chairman.
January 31, 1838.1
Assuming that the commissioners met at J. H. Moore's, La Grange, on the first Monday in March, which was the 5th of the month, they spent comparatively little time in further investigation before coming to a final decision, for on the 8th of March they concluded a tentative contract with John Eblin for the purchase of his league of land, which bordered John H. Moore's on the south. On the same day the commissioners reserved to the govern- ment all the vacant lands lying within a radius of nine miles of a point near the western boundary of Eblin's League. Whether they visited any other points after this, the records at hand do not show.
The adjourned session of the second congress convened at Hous- ton, April 9, 1838. On the 14th, Mr. Sutherland of the joint com- mittee made a report, accompanying the same with sundry docu- ments.2 Only those parts of the report relating to Groce's Ee- treat, Colorado City, and Eblin's League have been found. The last, which is very much the longest, is as follows :
^Telegraph, February 10, 1838.
*House Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 3 Sess., 14.
200 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Aprile 15th 1838
The Commissioners to whome by Congress was assigned the duty of examining and repoarting on the various plac[e]s proposed for the permane[n]t location of the site of Government of the Repub- lic of Texas.
beg leave to represent that after much labour being bestowed, the[y] make the following exhibit in the order of their review. Viz. Bough [t]1 of John Eblin one League of land situate on the east side of Colerado River, fronting one and a half miles on said River, below the tract on which the Town of Legrange is situate. This League has a high commanding bluff Bank for a mile and a quarter, far above high watter marks, running back with a rich dry, smothe pierara, one mile to the poastoak lands gradually rising throughout, through this survey runs diagonally a Creek of pure and never failing watter. on the Survey are four permane[n]t Springs, with a fare stand of timber oak cedar etc. the whole of this Tract will do for building purposes. Also one other League of land fronting one and a half miles on the west bank of said River and di- rectly opposite the front of the Eblin League from Judge Evins and Majr Brookfield the front of this Survey is perhaps eighty
feet above the level of the high lands on the east side, about the center of this survey rises an interesting spring running down a decent, or arm of the bluff to the river, forming a passway to and from without difficulty, thus affording perhaps the best place for a bridge on the River, taking into view the banks timbers and in- exhaustable stock of building Rock, three quarters of a mile back commences a high smoth timbered plane running back six miles in all. the extreme west end has some small groves and small prairies interspersed, on this -survey there are three other springs said to be permanent, all of which rise seventy or perhaps eighty feet above the lands alluded to thus affording by the construction of a bridge great facilities for water privileges, this Survey has a great stand of timber oak cedar etc. etc. both of which tracts are obtained on the terms contained in the accom- panying documents, here submitted, contiguous to this survey is a donation from Thomas H. Boarden for one quarter of a League of land, connected with the two last mentioned Surveys West and Southwest and within nine miles of the center of the Eblin Tract, are three Leagues or perhaps more of excellent vacant soil but
'The purchase contract bears date of March 8, 1838. Seat of Govern- ment Papers, MS.
The Seat of Government of Texas.
201
COMMISSIONERS' PLAT OF EBLIN'S LEAGUE AND THE LANDS ADJOINING.
The circle has a radius of nine miles. The original is in manuscript, and about nine inches in diameter. The above reprodiiction is from a tracing, except the lettering which in the original is script.
202 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
scarce of timber all of which we have reserved for the Government1 agreeable to the Resolution in that case made and provided, on the East side of the Colerado River and in Rabs pinery the three Rabs donate to the Government one half of a League of land, with a valuable stand of pine oak .Cedar etc. East and South of this survey and adjoining we have reserved perhaps a League of land with good timbers, connected with the north end of Eblins Survey.
Jesse H. Cartwright donates to the Government one fourth of a League of land good soil and poastoak timber. John H. Moore do- nates to the Government 2on the north boundaryline of the Eblin tract with good timber, the connexion of which surveys will be seen by refference to the accompanying platt.3 in Sigh[t] of this place is a chalk bluff said to be of excellent quality, near this is a fine coal pitt, the facility of getting supplies from above by means of the River need no comment. East and South of this place between the Brazos and Colerado Rivers embracing their tributaries, is a country in point of soil grandeur of situations, supply of never failing springs and many farms in a high state of cultivation with tolerable timbers, that but few countryes on Earth can compare with. West so far as San Antonio and farther, the soil and watter are not to be surpassed, the timber tolerable, through all this country the prospect for health appears verry good.
G. W. Barnett P. 0. Lumpkin George Sutherland4
c. Report of the Joint Committee. This report, together with the accompanying documents, was referred to a joint committee. This joint committee was authorized to receive further propositions relative to the permanent location of the seat of government, and was instructed to report by bill or otherwise.5 The committee made the following report : —
The Select Joint Committee, to whom were referred all the docu- ments in the nature of propositions from different sections of the country, relating to the removal and location of the Seat of Govern- ment, have had the same under consideration; and after compar- ing all the documents which have come to their hands, your Com- mittee, deeming it to be improper for them to express any opinion to the advantage or disadvantage of any proposition which has
v
^See order of the commissioners to the county surveyor of Fayette county, dated March 8, 1838. Seat of Government Papers, MS. "Blank left for amount of land. "See plat, p. 201. 4Seat of Government Papers, MS. "House Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 3 Sess., 16, 35; Senate Journal, ibid., 15.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 203
come before them, have, in consequence, thought proper to condense as much as practicable the different propositions, which are as fol- lows:
Then come several propositions which are here summarized:
A donation of land aggregating 18,015 acres and lying within a radius of thirty miles was offered to the government by those rep- resenting the site of Comanche, on the Colorado, eighteen miles above Bastrop.
A donation of 9,510 acres of land was offered the government by those advocating the selection of Groce's Retreat.
In addition to the 8,888 acres embraced in Eblin's and in Brook- field and Evans's leagues, which had been purchased by the com- missioners, 28,475 acres, lying within a radius of nine miles of the west end of Eblin's league, were offered to the government as a donation.1
Henry Austin offered the government a donation of nearly 11,- 110 acres as an inducement to locate the seat of government on his lands on the Colorado.2
Certain proprietors of lands at Nashville offered to exchange the greater portion of three leagues lying at that place for lands located elsewhere in case Nashville should be selected as the seat of govern- ment.
A donation of 8,800 acres of land near the site of Sulphur Springs was offered the government for seat of government pur- poses.3
The promoters of Colorado City, located two miles above La Grange, offered the government a half interest in the lots and town tract, which contained upwards of 4,000 acres.
Those interested in the site of Richmond offered the government half the town tract, which contained 600 acres, and two leagues of land in the immediate vicinity.
A total of 44,621 acres of land, including four leagues vacant land and the town tract, was offered the government by those favor- ing the site at Bastrop.4
'Four leagues of this were vacant land, belonging to the Republic. "For location of Austin's lands, see p. 197, note. "For location of Sulphur Springs, see ibid. *Seat of Government Papers, Printed Report.
204
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Several propositions were made too late to be included in the above report; they were as follows:
1. Henry Austin offered to donate one-half of the proceeds of the in and out lots of Central City, situated on the left bank of the Navasota River, five miles above its confluence with the Brazos.
2. Briscoe and Hall offered to donate one league of land as a site for the seat of government out of the six leagues lying midway between the San Jacinto and Trinity Rivers and immediately west of the Long King's crossing over the Trinity.
. 3. James F. Perry offered to sell 3 leagues and 8 labors, including the Mound league, at $2 per acre; also one-half league of land on the Colo- rado just below Bastrop at $5 per acre.
A comparison of the foregoing report with that of November 20, 1837, exhibits a remarkable growth in the number and strength of the applications for the seat of government from places located on the Colorado River over those from places situated on or near the Brazos River. In 1837 seven places on or near the Brazos River were mentioned in the report of the commissioners, while only three on the Colorado received notice. In the above report only four places on or near the Brazos receive mention, while five located on the Colorado are named. Most remarkable is the fact that Wash- ington, the strongest candidate on the Brazos, drops out entirely.
d. Ellin's League Selected by Congress as the Site for the Loca- tion of the Seat of Government. Two days after the receipt of the report the two houses of congress met in joint session for the pur- pose of selecting "a site for the permanent location of the seat of government."1
The vote was taken viva voce, and may be tabulated as follows :*
|
Name of place. |
First ballot. |
Second ballot. |
||||
|
House. |
Senate. |
1 9 o P |
House. |
Senate. |
"3 0 EH |
|
|
Nashville |
2 14 4 4 |
1 5 1 |
3 19 5 4 2 5 2 2 |
20 7 1 |
1 7 3 |
1 27 10 2 |
|
Eblin's League .». |
||||||
|
Black's Place |
||||||
|
Bastrop |
||||||
|
San Felipe |
1 2 1 1 |
i 3 1 1 |
||||
|
Nacogdoches |
||||||
|
Oomanche |
||||||
|
Mound League ... |
||||||
|
Richmond |
||||||
|
Washington |
'i |
1 |
1 |
1 |
||
|
Groce's Retreat |
||||||
|
San Antonio |
1 |
1 |
||||
Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 3 Sess., May 9, 1838, pp. 97, 98; Senate Journal, ibid., 52, 53. 2The House Journal gives the name of each voter for the several places.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 205
Eblin's League received a majority of the votes; the speaker of the house of representatives, therefore, announced that it was duly chosen as the site for the future location of the seat of government. It will be noted that the majority for Eblin's League was much larger than that by which the city of Houston was selected for the temporary capital.1
Very little has been found that would indicate the feeling with which the selection of Eblin's League was received by the people; the President's veto perhaps killed the bill too soon to leave much time for comment. Some expressions that have been discovered are as follows :
On Monday last, both houses of Congress met for the purpose of selecting a site for the permanent location of the Seat of Govern- ment, and on the second ballot, decided in favor of Eblin's League, on the Colorado river, near La Grange, in the county of Fayette. This is the site selected and recommended by the commissioners appointed by Congress. — National Banner, [Houston.]
Our readers will perceive by the above extract that the Seat of Government has been located upon the Colorado Eiver. We com- mend the wisdom of Congress in approving the site selected by the commissioners. The Colorado is one of the finest streams in Texas, and navigable almost to the mountains. In addition to the superior quality of its lands, it runs through the very heart and centre of the Republic.2
The result of the vote above was embodied in a bill for the per- manent location of the seat of government. The bill has not been found. The following are some of the facts in regard to it gathered from the journals:3 the name of the site selected was to be Austin; of the twelve squares reserved for the government, one was in- tended for the University; and the seat of government was not to be removed from Houston until 1840. An unsuccessful effort was made to add a section to the bill providing
that this act shall not go into operation in any of its parts until after the same shall have been submitted to the people of Texas, at the next general election, for their ratification or approval.
e. President Houston Vetoes the Bill Selecting Eblin's League.
THE QUARTEBLT. X 165. *Matagorda Bulletin, May 17, 1838.
'House Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 3 Sess., 105, 108, 109, 113, 133 and 137; Senate Journal, ibid., 64, 68, 69, 72, and 73.
206 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
On May 22, the president vetoed 'the bill, stating his objections in the following message :
The act locating the seat of government has been submitted to the Executive, who has taken a calm and dispassionate view of the subject. It will be perceived by the law fixing temporarily the seat of government, that it shall be established at the town of Hous- ton, on Buffalo Bayou, until the end of the session of congress, which shall assemble in the year one thousand eight hundred and forty: This would clearly require that at least two elections must take place for members of the house of representatives, and two thirds of the senators will be renewed previous to that time. If these are truths, then it would seem that the law had contemplated the action of the members who, at that time representing Texas as the persons who were to act for the emergency of the time. Many changes must take place in the population and condition of Texas previous to the year 1840, and by that time the people would have an opportunity to give some expression of their wishes and opin- ions on the subject, if it were submitted to them. Were the pres- ent congress to pass a law fixing the seat of government at any one point, the Executive believes that either of the two next suc- ceeding congresses would have it in their power to repeal the law and commence anew. This act of the honorable congress contem- plates the expenditure of a larger portion of the public treasure than the Executive would be willing to see subtracted from the treasury at this time: our resources do not seem to justify any course but that of the strictest economy in the government, and this bill would doubtless consume at least one eighth part of the revenue for the current year, while it would leave the subject liable to the action of a subsequent congress; and should the subject be presented to the people, and then their expression ratified by an act of the government, it would be permanently established beyond all ground of doubt or cavil.
Being satisfied of the inexpediency of the measure at this time, the Executive feels himself constrained to return the bill with his reason for not giving his signature to the same.1
The house of representatives sustained the veto.2 The veto mes- sage was received so late in the session of congress that, according to the rules of this body, no new business could be introduced with- out the consent of two-thirds of the members present. Two efforts were made to suspend this rule; both failed, but the measures which it was attempted to bring before the house were spread upon
lHouse Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 3 Sess., 162, 163. 168.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 207
the journals. Mr. Jones, of Brazoria, proposed a bill providing that the president issue his proclamation "to cause the sense of the peo- ple to be taken on the subject of locating the seat of government at the city of Austin, the place selected by the committee appointed by congress for that purpose" so that the next congress might act definitely and finally on the subject of the permanent location of the seat of government, and that "all the contracts or reservations made by the said committee be, and they are hereby confirmed, and the sum of $6,000 appropriated for that purpose, and placed at the disposal of said committee/'1 The bill proposed by Mr. Rusk pro- vided for the appointment by congress of three commissioners who were to select not less than two nor more than four places for the permanent location of the seat of government; one of said places to be east, the other west of the Brazos river ; each place to contain not less than four miles square of land, and more if convenient. Said commissioners were to begin work on July 15th next, make provisional contracts, and publish in the newspapers a description of each place selected. The president was to issue his proclamation, directing the voters to designate the place of their choice at the next election. The returns were to be sent in triplicate to the secretary of state, speaker of the house, and president of the senate, and congress was to open and count the vote and declare the place having the highest number the permanent seat of government of the Republic of Texas.2
(4) The Third Commission to Select a Site, January 14 — April
13, 1839.
a. The Question of Locating the Seat of Government an Issue in the Campaign of 1888. The interest centering around the ques- tion of the location of the seat of government during the closing days of the session of congress was by the adjournment of that body on May 24, 1838, transferred to the newspapers and the stump; for an election of all the representatives, of one-third the
e Journal, 2 Tex. Cong., 3 Sess., 170. 2Ibid., 167, 168. For a denunciation of the president's veto of the bill designating Eblin's League as the site of the location of the seat of gov- ernment, see the presentment of the grand jury of Fayette county, dated October 25, 1839. (Lotto, Fayetle County, 176.)
208 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
senators, and of a president and vice-president was to be held on the first Monday in September. It was the first full fledged national campaign witnessed in Texas. In it there was much that did noi rise above mere personalities ; yet the best interests of the Republic were not overlooked ; a rough platform was constructed which pro- vided remedies for such measures as had proved unpopular and outlined a policy for the upbuilding of Texas in the future. The location of the seat of government west of the Brazos was one of the planks of this platform.1
It will have been noted that thus far the financial phase of the seat of government question has been most prominent. At Houston the government was obliged to pay a rental of $5,000 a year for the building occupied. By a judicious selection of some point in the interior, it was anticipated that the government would not only realize sufficient sums from the sale of lots to erect buildings for its own use, but also that at the same time other and more important benefits would accrue to the Republic. For example, T. Jefferson Chambers, in his proposition of Nashville or the Falls of the Brazos, represented that such point should be chosen as was "most convenient to the whole Republic on account of its centrality, both with regard to its population and territorial limits, and which will also extend and protect our frontier by the population that will be naturally attributed to the capital and its neighborhood."2
It was up the valleys of the Brazos and of the Colorado that popu- lation was now beginning to spread rapidly. The Telegraph for January 13, 1838, reports that
A gentleman who lately arrived from Bastrop, states that im- mense numbers of emigrants are constantly arriving in that sec- tion. He believes that three quarters of the present settlers of the county have arrived since August last.
And the editor of the Matagorda Bulletin states in his paper for March 7, 1838, that
Several of our citizens have just returned from the up-country and the far West, where they have been engaged since the opening of the land office, in locating their lands. They bring the most flat- tering accounts of the emigration which is now pouring into the
*Matagcrda Bulletin, August 9, 1838. "Seat of Government Papers, MS.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 209
interior, with a rapidity altogether unparalleled in the settlement of the country. The new comers we understand are nearly all farm- ers, and are now making extensive preparations to cultivate the soil. The Colorado, up to the base of the mountains, is alive with the opening of new plantations, and towns and villages seem to be springing up spontaneously along its banks.
Surely this intelligence must be gladdening to the heart of every true and patriotic Texian. To accelerate our already unexampled progress in the high road to prosperity, we desire nothing more than a hardy, industrious and agricultural population: . . . they are the very backbone of a nation. . . .
Fear that the current of immigration might be checked had its origin in part in the hostile attitude of Mexico and to a greater extent in the hostility of the Indians along the frontier. "Houston had pursued with the Indians a policy of con- ciliation, but toward the end of his term, when settlers began to push westward, conflicts became frequent, and cow- ardly massacres were of common occurrence. As a resut, popula- tion was still practically restricted to the territory east of the San Antonio road, and while as yet this section was in no danger of strangulation from over-crowding, measures looking toward expan- sion do not appear to have been unwise. Lamar's aggressiveness was but the natural reaction against Houston's long-suffering for- bearance."1 Eather Lamar's so-called aggressiveness was an at- tempt to extend to the frontier that degree of protection which would render those regions safe and make them attractive to the immigrant.
The strength of candidates in the West depended upon their favorable attitude toward the subjects of immigration and frontier protection. In advocating the election of M. B. Lamar, the Mata- gorda Bulletin for March 28, 1838, says
But above all, the character and qualifications of the next chief magistrate of the Eepublic of Texas, should be extensively and favourably known, to the people of the United States. Emigration, which is so earnestly and ardently desired by every good and pa- triotic citizen, and which alone can hasten the rising greatness of this flourishing republic, will be checked or promoted by the char- acter of the man whom we shall elevate to that distinguished office.
University of Texas Record, V 153, 154.
210 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
And a correspondent of the same paper, writes, in the issue for August 24, 1838, of George Sutherland, candidate from Matagorda for the senate :
He is truly Western in his feelings as well as interest, and there- fore, when brought to the test in any great measure, in which the West would be concerned, we would know where to find him and what to depend upon — for instance, the location of the seat of gov- ernment, and we know that this great question will come up, and be finally disposed of during the next three years. He has no inter- est in the » East, to paralize his influence and to cool his zeal; his entire interest is West of the Colorado — he was not barely "de- sirous" to locate the seat of government on the Colorado ; and did not manifest a simple anxiety for that location, as has been said of others. But he was most zealous and active during the last session of Congress in obtaining the location of the seat of government at La Grange. To no one member, more than to George Sutherland could be attributed the success which the Western members had in that measure. . . . The Seat of Government will be perma- nently located during the next two years; and no measure can be so big with consequences to the West, and particularly to the citi- zens of this Senatorial District as its location on the Colorado. It will promote emigration to the West, thereby giving protection to the frontier settlements, and enhancing the value of our lands. It will also increase most rapidly the settlement of the lands of the Colorado, and of the country west of it, thereby increasing the cap- ital and interest of that section of the country, which will result in important public improvements, increasing the facilities of com- merce and trade. . . .
&. The Act Creating the Third Commission. The third con- gress assembled at Houston in regular session on November 5, 1838. On the 15th of the same month Mr. Cullen, of San Augustine, in- troduced a bill "entitled an act for the permanent location of the seat of government."1 Nothing, however, was done till after the inauguration of the new administration on December 10th. The subject was then taken up and a lengthy parliamentary contest fol- lowed.2 As will be seen by referring to the act, it was proposed to take the matter entirely out of the hands of congress after the passage of this bill and to vest commissioners with the powers necessary to make a final selection of the site. The points most
*House Journal, 3 Tex. Cong., 53.
Wid., 145, 196, 200-3, 204-6, 210, 211, 214, 215, 218, 220-229, 232, 292, 297, 331 ; Senate Journal, ibid., 75, 78-80, 82-84.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 211
hotly contested were (1) the limits of the territory within which to locate the seat of government;1 (2) the right of the commissioners to make a final selection of the site — the majority favoring this method, while the minority contended for a selection of two sites within the proposed limits, leaving the final selection to the peo- ple;2 and (3) the time of removing from Houston. A decision of this last point was reserved until a later time. The final passage of the act determining the first and second questions was hailed as a distinct victory by the people of the West. .On receipt of the news, the Matagorda Bulletin said, in its issue of January 19:
We are glad, very glad to hear, at least, that something positive has been done in this matter, as it will no doubt be the means of doing away with the many harassing hopes, doubts and fears, which have constantly been kept afloat since the first agitation of this matter.
President Lamar approved the bill January 14, 1839. That part of the act relating to the creation of a commission and the selection of a site is as follows :
Sec. 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- tives of the Republic of Texas in Congress assembled, That there shall be and are hereby created five Commissioners, to be elected, two by the Senate and three by the House of Eepresentatives, whose duty it shall be to select a site for the location of the Seat of Gov- ernment, and that said site shall be selected at some point between the rivers Trinidad and Colorado, and above the old San Antonio Road.
1\Ve believe a majority of the members [of congress] are in favor of re- moving it [the seat of government] from Houston, but great diversity of opinion exists relative to the point at which it shall hereafter be located. Many of the eastern members are desirous that it should be located upon or near the Brazos, and many of the western members prefer the Colorado for the site. The few who desire to retain the seat of government at Housi- ton, thus far appear to hold the balance of power. — Telegraph, quoted by the Matagorda Bulletin, January 10, 1839.
2And from what quarter, Mr. Speaker, does this cry about the People come? Does it come from the East, where much the larest portion of the People reside? Does it come from the West? Where does it come from, but from Houston itself. If, Mr. Speaker, the People havo cried out at all, and they have in a voice which has been heard throughout the whole land, it has been to remove the seat of Government from Houston. — From the speech of Mr. Holmes, delivered December 27, 1838, quoted in the Matagorda Bulletin, January 17, 1839.
212 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That the name of said site shall be the city of Austin.1
Sec. 3. Be it further enacted, That said commissioners or a majority of them be, and they are hereby required to select, not less than one nor more than four leagues of land for said site, and if the same cannot be obtained upon the public domain, or by in- dividual donation, then and in that case the said commissioners shall purchase the aforesaid quantity of land from any person or persons owning the same : Provided, That the price of the land so purchased, shall not exceed three dollars per acre: And further provided, That not more than one league shall be purchased at so high a price as three dollars per acre.
Sec. 4. Be it further enacted, That if the site selected by said commissioners shall be on individual property, and said commis- sioners shall not be able to purchase the same as herein before pro- vided, then and in that case they shall be and are hereby authorized aLd required to make application to the Chief Justice of the county court of the county in which said land may be situated; setting forth by petition the name or names of the owner or owners, where the land lies, giving a full description of the same, and the cause of their application; whereupon it shall be the duty of said Chief Justice to cause the sheriff or other officer of said county to summon six disinterested jurors, living within the county, to be and appear at the court house, on a day to be named by said Chief Justice, within not less than five nor more than fifteen days after said ap- plication is made, whose duty it shall be, after taking the requisite oath, to be administered by the Chief Justice, to hear testimony and determine upon the value of said lands; a majority of two thirds of said jurors shall be requisite to a verdict, which verdict shall be returned to the Chief Justice, and shall be final between the parties, and upon which the Chief Justice shall make his de- cree: Provided, always, That the owner or owners of said land shall have at least five days' notice, in the same manner and form as the law provides for defendants in other cases ; all of which pro- ceedings shall be recorded in the clerk's office of the county court, and an exemplification of the same given to said commissioners.
Sec. 5. Be it further enacted, That the fees of said Chief Jus- tice and sheriff, and that the pay of said jurors shall be the same that the law provides for in other cases for similar services, and that the same shall be paid by the owner or owners of said prop- erty, to be collected as in other cases; and that the sheriff of said county shall be and he is hereby authorized and required to make
'The name City of Austin -was adopted by the senate in lieu of that of "City of Texas" which had been adopted by the house of representatives. Austin was the name that had been given to the site on Eblin's League.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 213
to the Republic of Teaxs a deed or title to said land, which shall be recorded as in other cases, and delivered by said sheriff over to eaid commissioners.
Sec. 6. Be it further enacted, That said commissioners shall be notified of their election by the President, that they shall enter into bond with good security of one hundred thousand dollars each, to be approved by the President, payable to him and his successors in office, conditioned for the faithful performance of the duties of their office; that they shall take and subscribe the following oath, which the President shall cause to be administered by an officer authorized to administer the same : that "I, A B, do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be,) that I will faithfully and honestly perform the duties of commissioner for the location of the Seat of Government: That I will keep secret from all and every person whatsoever, all the proceedings, actings, doings, deliberations and intentions of myself and associates, so far as relates to our proceed- ings as commissioners : That I will, neither directly nor indirectly, neither in my own name nor in the name of another person, neither by myself or agent, nor in connection with any other person, pur- chase, bargain or contract for any lands, tenements or heredita- ments, within this Republic, from this time until my duties as com- missioner shall have terminated." That said bond shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State ; that said commissioners shall be authorized to draw a draft or drafts on the Treasurer of the Re- public for such sum or sums of money as may be necessary for the payment of the land purchased by them, payable at such time as may be agreed on by the contracting parties ; which drafts shall be signed by the commissioners and countersigned by the President; and that said commissioners shall commence their duties from and immediately after the close of the present session of Congress ; that they shall discharge all the duties herein required of them; that they shall make a full and complete return and report of all their actings and doings as commissioners, to the President of the Re- public, within three months from and after which time they shall be and are hereby forever discharged.
Sec. 7. Be it further enacted, That the said commissioners shall be, and are hereby allowed eight dollars per diem, durmg their term of service, one half of which shall be paid when they commence, and the other half when they close their duties; and that a draft or drafts drawn by the Secretary of State in favor of said commissioners, on the Treasurer, shall be sufficient vouchers and authority for his paying the same.
Sec. 8. Be it further enacted, That from and immediately after the election of said commissioners, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall furnish the President the names of said commissioners.
214 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
The foregoing act is remarkable ; it vested a few individuals with extraordinary powers and confided to their judgment the settlement of a most perplexing public question. It proved very effectual in the accomplishment of the end for which it was designed. The number of commissioners and the manner of their choice was the same as in the case of the second commission. There is room for doubt whether it was intended that members of congress should serve on the third commission. The expression "that said commis- sioners shall commence their duties from and immediately after the close of the present session of congress/* being similar to the lan- guage in the act creating the second commission, together with the precedent set by constituting the second commission exclusively of members of congress, lend some color to the view that members of congress should serve or ai least be eligible to serve on this com- mission. Notwithstanding all this, others contended that members of congress were barred from serving on the commission by con- stitutional provision. The restriction of the commissioners to that section of country lying between the rivers Trinity and Colorado and above the old San Antonio road can not fail to excite the sur- prise of every one at all familiar with its primeval condition. The old San Antonio road crossed the Trinity at Robbins Ferry, the Brazos near Tenoxtitlan, and the Colorado at Bastrop; it formed the northern boundary of Austin's colony, the settled portion of central Texas. In January, 1839, there were but a few villages lo- cated north of this road; none of them possessed a population of one hundred inhabitants, except perhaps Bastrop ; 'the whole section was exposed to Indian depredations. The measures adopted to secure the public interest were practical and adequate. No other officer of the Republic of Texas was required to give bond in the amount fixed for each commissioner, and it is difficult to see how an oath more explicit and yet more comprehensive could have been de- vised.
That this act should escape criticism was not to be expected. To follow popular opinion in regard to it fully, one should have perused a file of each of the dozen newspapers published in Texas at that time. The collection available for this work includes only three for the early part of 1839. Until the founding of the Morn- ing Star, at Houston, on April 8, 1839, the first daily published
The Seat of Government of Texas. 215
in Texas, the opposition appears to have had no suitable organ to voice their dissatisfaction. This paper contended (1) that the idea of locating the seat of government by commissioners, ap- pointed by congress, "seems to us entirely absurd — the only satis- factory way is to leave it exclusively to the people;"1 and (2) that the act under which the seat of government was located was uncon- stitutional, inasmuch as it interfered with a contract previously made — the act locating the seat of government at Houston until 1840.2
c. Election of the Commissioners. The commissioners to select the site for the location of the seat of government were chosen by their respective houses of congress on January 15th3 and 16th.4 A. C. Horton, of Matagorda, and I. W. Burton, of Nacogdoches, were chosen by the senate, and William Menifee, of Colorado, Isaac Campbell, of San Augustine, and Louis P. Cooke, of Brazoria, were selected by the house of representatives — two from western, two from eastern, and one from central Texas. These men were all members of congress at the time of their election. The question of eligibility of members of congress to this commission was raised in the senate; a motion was made to the effect that no member of the senate be selected, but the motion was lost by a vote of 3 to 9.5 Furthermore, of the nine men nominated in the senate five were non-members, but the election resulted in favor of those being mem- bers. In the house of representatives only members were placed in nomination.
On January 18 — two days after the election of the commission- ers— the reporter of the house of representatives wrote to the editor of the Matagorda Bulletin: "It appears to be the general impres- sion here, at present, that the Colorado will be the favored river
^Morning Star, April 12, 1839. This objection might have been answered by pointing to the fact that in May, 1838, congress had voted down a proposition to submit this question to the people ( p. — above ) , and that the people gave no instructions to the representatives elected in September following, although they were aware that this subject would again be con- sidered.
^Morning Star, April 30, June 30, and July 27, 1839.
'Senate Journal, 3 Tex. Cong., 108-110.
'House Journal, ibid., 358.
*Wm. H. Wharton filed a written protest against the action taken by this vote. — Senate Journal, 3 Tex. Cong., 109, 110.
216 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
whose banks will be honored by the metropolis of Texas."1 The next day — .January 19th — an anonymous writer at Houston stated
I am confidently of the opinion that the commissioners will select some point on the Colorado, ... If the seat of Government should be on the Colorado or near it, the improvement of W. Texas will be unprecedented in the annals of the world. . . . It i& certainly a new idea in the history- of the world that the seat of Gov- ernment should be situated on the frontier, that we should invade the country of the enemies of the white man with the archives of the nation, but any man who is acquainted with the situation of that beautiful country to which the commissioners are confined, will be satisfied that the prosperity of Texas will be rapidly ad- vanced by a location in that section of the country. It will cause- the immediate settlement of one of the most desirable countries on the continent of America. I have no doubt that the new city will contain one or two thousand inhabitants by the first of October next. There will be citizens enough around the spot to defend it from the attacks of all the forces which can be brought against it.2
d. Report of the Commissioners. Congress adjourned January 24, 1839. It was made the duty of the commissioners to take up their work immediately thereafter. The. anonymous writer of the letter, quoted above, states that the commissioners had agreed to start on the 10th of February next to select a site for the seat of government. Fully two months elapsed before anything was learned in regard to their proceedings. The Morning Star of April 15th printed the following account of their final meeting at Houston:
City of Houston, April 13, 1839.
We the commissioners appointed for locating permanently the seat of government of the republic of Texas, having met this day by appointment at the Capital, the question was put by the chairman, A. C. Horton, as to which river, the Brazos or Colorado with the respective selections on each had the highest claims to our consideration in the discharge of the duty assigned us. The vote stood as follows: for the Colorado, Messrs. A. C. Horton, William Menifee, and L. P. Cooke; for the Brazos, Messrs. I. W. Burton and Isaac Campbell.
The question was then put by the chair, as to which of the selec- tions on the Colorado river, viz: Bastrop or Waterloo was entitled
*Matagorda Bulletin, January 24, 1839.
2Letter dated Houston, Texas, January 19, 1839, reprinted by the Texas Monument, October 16, 1850, from the Alabama Observer.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 217
to their preference. It was unanimously determined that Waterloo, and the lands condemned and relinquished around it, was the proper site and was therefore their choice.
A. C. Horton, Chairman. I. W. Burton, L. P. Cooke, Wm. Menifee, Isaac Campbell.
Of even date with the above is the "full and complete return and report of all their actings and doings as commissioners" required by law to be made to the president :
City of Houston April 13th A. D. 1839 To,
His Excellency,
Mirabeau B Lamar,
President of the Republic of Texas,
The Commissioners appointed under an act of Congress dated January 1839, for locating the permanent site of the Seat of Gov- ernment for the Republic, have the honor to report to your Excel- lency.
That they have selected the site of the Town of Waterloo on the East Bank of the Colorado River with the lands adjoining as per the Deed of the Sheriff of Bastrop County bearing date March 1839, and per the relinquishments of Logan Vandever, James Rogers, G. D. Hancock, J. W. Herrall, and Aaron Burleson by Edward Burleson all under date of 7th March 1839, as the site combining the greatest number of, and the most important advan- tages to the Republic by the location of the Seat of Government thereon, than any other situation which came under their observa- tion within the limits assigned them, and as being therefore their choice for the location aforesaid.
We have the honor to represent to your Excellency that we have traversed and critically examined the country on both sides of the Colorado and Brazos Rivers from the Upper San Antonio road to, and about the falls, on both those rivers and that we have not neg- lected the intermediate country between them, but have examined it more particularly than a due regard to our personal safety did perfectly warrant. We found the Brasses River more central per- haps in reference to actual existing population, and found in it and its tributaries perhaps a greater quantity of fertile lands than are to be found on the Colorado, but on the other hand we were of the opinion that the Colorado was more central in respect to Ter- ritory, and this in connection with the great desideratums of health,
218 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
fine water, stone, stone coal, water power &c, being more abundant and convenient on the Colorado than on the Brassos river, did more than counterbalance the supposed superiority of the lands as well as the centrality of position in reference to population, possessed by the Brassos river.
In reference to the protection to be afforded to the frontier by the location of the Seat of Government, a majority of the Com- missioners are of the opinion that that object will be as well at- tained by the location upon the one river as upon the other, being also of the opinion that within a very short period of time follow- ing the location of the Seat of Government on the Frontier, the extension of the Settlements produced thereby, will engender other theories of defence, on lands now the homes of the Comanche and the Bisson.
The site selected by the Commissioners is composed of nve t of leagues of lands and two labors, all adjoining and having a front upon the Colorado river somewhat exceeding three miles in breadth It contains seven thousand seven hundred and thirty five acres land and will cost the Eepublic the sum of Twenty one thousand dollars or thereabouts, one tract not being surveyed. Nearly the whole front is a Bluff of from thirty to forty feet elevation, being the termination of a Prairie containing perhaps two thousand acres, composed of chocolate colored sandy loam, intersected by two beau- tiful streams of permanent pure water, one of which forms at debouche into the river a timbered rye bottom of about thirty acres These rivulets rise at an elevation of from sixty to one hundred feet on the back part of the site of the tract, by means of which the contemplated city might at comparatively small expense be wel watered, in addition to which are several fine bluff springs of pure water on the river at convenient distances from each other.
The site is about two miles distant from and in full view of the Mountains or breaks of the Table Lands which, judging by the eye, are of about three hundred feet elevation. They are of Limestone formation and are covered with Live Oak and DwarJ Cedar to their summits. On the site and its immediate vicinity, stone in inexhaustable quantities and great varieties is found al- most fashioned by nature for the builders hands; Lime and 8t coal abound in the vicinity, timber for firewood and ordinary build- ing purposes abound on the tract, though the timber for building in the immediate neighborhood is not of so fine a character as might be wished, being mostly Cotton wood, Ash, Burr Oak Hack- berry, Post Oak and Cedar, the last suitable for shingles and small
TVfl TYlfifi
At the distance of eighteen miles west by south from the site, on Onion Creek, "a stream affording fine water power" is a large body of very fine Cyprus, which is also found at intervals up the 1
The Seat of Government of Texas. 219
for a distance of forty miles, and together with immense quantities of fine Cedar might readily be floated down the stream, as the falls two miles above the site present no obstruction to floats or rafts, being only a descent of about five feet in one hundred and fifty yards over a smooth bed of limestone formation very nearly re- sembling colored marble. By this route also immense quantities of stone coal, building materials, and in a few years Agricultural and Mineral products for the contemplated city, as no rapids save ihose mentioned occur in the River below the San Saba, nor are they known to exist for a great distance above the junction of that stream with the Colorado.
Opposite the site, at the distance of a mile, Spring Creek and its tributaries afford perhaps the greatest and most convenient water- power to be found in the Republic. Walnut Creek distance six miles, and Brushy Creek distant sixteen miles both on the east side of the river, afford very considerable water power. Extensive de- posits of Iron ore adjudged to be of very superior quality is found within eight miles of the location.
This section of the Country is generally well watered, fertile in a high degree and has every appearance of health and salubrity of climate. The site occupies and will effectually close the pass by which the Indians and outlawed Mexicans have for ages past trav- eled east and west to and from the Rio Grande to Eastern Texas, and will now force them to pass by the way of Pecan Bayou and San Saba above the Mountains and the sources of the Guadalupe river.
The Commissioners confidently anticipate the time when a great thoroughfare shall be established from Santa Fe to our Sea ports, and another from Red River to Matamoras, which two routs must almost of necessity intersect each other at this point. They look forward to the time when this city shall be the emporium of not only the productions of the rich soil of the San Saba, Puertenalis Hono1 and Pecan Bayo, but of all the Colorado and Brassos, as also of the Produce of the rich mining country known to exist on those streams. They are satisfied that a truly National City could at no other point within the limits assigned them be reared up, not that other sections of the Country are not equally fertile, but that no other combined so many and such varied advantages and beauties as the one in question. The imagination of even the romantic will not be disappointed on viewing the Valley of the Colorado, and the fortile and gracefully undulating woodlands and luxuriant Prairies at a distance from it. The most sceptical will not doubt its healthi- ness, and the citizens bosom must swell with honest pride when standing in the Portico of the Capitol of his Country he looks abroad upon a region worthy only of being the home of the brave
'Probably intended for Llano.
220 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
and free. Standing on the juncture of the routs of Santa Fe and the Sea coast, of Red Kiver and Matamoras, looking with the same glance upon the green romantic Mountains, and the fertile and widely extended plains of his country, can a feeling of Nationality fail to arise in his bosom or could the fire of patriotism lie dormant under such circumstances.
Fondly hoping that we may not have disappointed the expecta- tions of either our Countrymen or your Excellency, we subscribe ourselves Your Excellency's Most obedient Servants.
A. .0. Horton, Chairman I. W. Burton William Menefee Isaac Campbell Louis P. Cooke1
2. THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
(1) The Site,
"They have selected the site of the Town of Waterloo on the East Bank of the Colorado River with the lands adjoining."2 This sentence summarizes the result of the examination and delibera- tion of the commissioners, chosen to select a site for the permanent location of the seat of government of the infant Republic of Texas. Many considered these the magic words that would call into ex- istence a new and thriving metropolis, situated at the head of navigation of the Colorado, an entrepot that would soon divert the commerce of the prairies from its established route, and the seat of a "splendid national college filled with able and distinguished pro- fessors."
The town of Waterloo, to quote the words of the editor of the Morning Star, "is situated in Bastrop county, about 35 miles above the city of Bastrop on the Colorado river, and nearly at the foot of the mountains. . . . There are in the town itself but four families at present, and in another settlement a few miles from it, about twenty. Such in brief is the description of the location given us by one of the commissioners."3
The name of the town of Waterloo had never appeared among those of the candidates for the location of the seat of government. Perhaps, the only mention of its name heard in congress was at the
'Seat of Government Papers, MS.
2See statement of commissioners, p. 217 above.
"Morning Star, April 15, 1839.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 221
time of the passage of "An Act to Incorporate the Towns of Co- manche and Waterloo," approved January 15, 1839. l Various rea- sons have been surmised why the commissioners should have se- lected this site.2 To the student who has carefully scruti- nized the facts, the reasons stated by the commissioners in their report to President Lamar will appear both straight- forward and sufficient. The commissioners do not claim to have found the ideal location nor that "nature appears to have designated this place for the future seat of government;" they simply state that their selection is the best location within the limits assigned them. There was room for difference of opinion in regard to the fitness of the site for the purposes to which it was to be dedicated, without necessarily condemning the action of the commissioners. This fact, however, was not always kept in mind by the opponents of the city of Austin.
Opposition to the site developed as soon as its location was ascer- tained. The Morning Star charged, first, that the commissioners had not performed their duties conscientiously; "we believe that as many as three sites have been examined/'1 Secondly, it stated that the only reason it was able to discover for selecting Austin was, that the commissioners there found "vacant lands to locate."4 It further objected to the site of Austin on the ground that
it possesses none of the advantages of a city — timber being scarce, water not too abundant, the situation remote from the Gulf, and there being no navigable stream near it, at least at present, the immediate surrounding country not being fertile, and the town being at the end of the road, beyond which there is nothing to see/'6
These objections were effectually disposed of by a correspondent of the Telegraph, July 31, 1839, who was familiar with Austin ani its vicinity.
'Lou's of the Republic of Texas. Passed the First Session of Third Con- gress, 1839, p. 48.
THE QUABTEBLY, II 119.
1Morning Star, April 12, 1839.
*fbid., July 18, 1839. A. C. Horton replied to these or similar charges in the convention of 1845; see: Weeks, Debates of the Texas Convention 11845], p. 563.
"/bid., July 27, 1839.
222 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Another objection to Austin was raised by the Morning Star which perhaps has never presented itself to the minds of many,, and that is the remoteness of the new location from the coast, and the delay which must thereby result in the transmission of im- portant information to the Executive department of the Republic. . . . Ours is almost entirely a country of foreign relations, and such being the case, it seems indispensable that the seat of govern- ment should be located near the coast, in order that all information may be received at headquarters as soon as possible. This objection to the new location may not always exist, it is true; but until we shall have become rich enough to have rail-roads, by means of which to transport news, it certainly must be regarded as a great one.1
No doubt there was much truth in this statement. But the truth- fulness was not the sole criterion by which to determine the part it should play in the discussion of this new question. It must be shown that the location of the seat of government near the coast would contribute more to the peace, security, settlement, progress and prestige of the country than its location at Austin. Texas pos- sessed a navy capable of protecting its seacoast. "The propriety of placing the seat of government on the frontier was largely dis- cussed during the last session of congress. The reasons urged in favor of it were such as met the approbation of a large majority of' the members, and of the nation."2
Again the Morning Star said :
It seems not a little singular that it should have been thought advisable to locate the seat of government at a point where the- public archives will be in an unsafe condition from its proximity to both of our enemies, the Indians and Mexicans. It cannot be supposed that in case of an invasion, the settlers on the lower Colo- rado, on the Brazos, or in any part of the lower country, will leave their families, and their homes defenceless, and rally around the seat of government; and that city, both from its situation and ac- cessibility, is probably the first to which the enemy would march, after having taken Bexar. ... Do not, then, good sense and sound policy combine, in urging the propriety of permitting the seat of government to remain where it is, at least till the war is- over ?3
^Morning Star, June 12. 1839. ^Telegraph, July 31, 1839. 'Morning Star, July 1, 1839.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 223
The admission made by the Morning Star in the preceding para- graph, if true, was certainly most undiplomatic and well suited to create a very unfavorable impression of the strength of the Republic of Texas. If true, all Texan diplomacy would have proved fruit- less, whether the seat of government had been located on the coast or elsewhere. The mere suspicion in Europe that Texas could not protect her archives and the government at a point near the geographical center of her imperial domain would have paralyzed all the negotiations of our ministers. Austin is at least two hundred miles from the nearest point on the Eio Grande. News of an in- vasion would outtravel any enemy sufficiently strong to endanger the seat of government. What portion of the frontier would be better prepared to meet an invasion than the seat of government with the executive, the secretary of war, and the postmaster general at hand to direct affairs ? And what of immigration ? Would new settlers risk their lives on the Texas frontier, after the facts alleged above were placed before them? And what did the infant Re- public of Texas need more than immigrants ?
Now let the reader's attention be turned from what the oppo- nents had to say to the comments of friends of the West. On re- ceipt of the decision of the commissioners, the Matagorda Bulletin, May 2, 1839, said :
We are almost every day seeing and conversing with persons who have visited Waterloo, the site selected for the recent location, and thus far, without a dissenting voice, all agree that it is a most judicious selection, and all speak in favorable terms of the beau- tiful country which surrounds it. ...
In a national point of view it will benefit us much, as it will be the immediate means of condensing population at a very important point of the frontier, and in such numbers as will put an end to the predatory incursions of small parties of Indians, whose numerical or physical force in the field is in reality nothing, but still whose inroads keep the frontier in constant alarm.
Notwithstanding all the inquiries which we have made relative to the dangers which some persons think might be expected by the citizens of Austin from Indian warfare, we have been unable to discover that any cause of consequence for such fears exist, except in the imaginations of those parties who put such emphasis on them from purposes which the people can easily imagine.
We espouse the course of active vigilance and the taking prudent means to prevent any cause of fear existing, by keeping an armed
224 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
force sufficient to ward off any dangers that might occur, but we cannot, from any circumstance within our knowledge, see any justifi- cation for ourselves in becoming unnecessary alarmists.
Other notices along this line appeared in various papers. Below are given a few of the more comprehensive. The Morning Star, May 9, 1839, stated:
The population between Washington and Lagrange has increased fourfold [in eighteen months], and Lagrange which at [the beginning of] that time had never been thought of for a town, now contains a population of four or five hun- dred inhabitants, and Rutersville, only five miles from La- grange, which was laid off only six months ago, now con- tains about three hundred souls. On the Colorado river, between Lagrange and Bastrop there was about a dozen houses ; now there is between two and three hundred. Bastrop at that time contained about twenty houses; it has now about two hundred, and many of them equal to the best houses in Houston. The settlements above Bastrop on the Colorado river, then consisted of about eight or ten families. It is now one of the thickest settlements in Texas.
The Telegraph of June 12, 1839, said :
Until the permanent location of the seat of government in that quarter of the frontier, many of the citizens were undetermined about remaining; but the final settlement of that point, together with the assurance that a number of regular forces will be kept up in the country, have removed any remaining doubts upon the sub- ject.
The Matagorda Bulletin of August 1, 1839, reported :
The most cheering accounts are daily received of the immense emigration to the Upper Colorado and western country. We have always been satisfied that it was only necessary that the beautiful country situated there should be known to render it very shortly the most densely populated part of the Eepublic. The location of the seat of government at its present site has had the effect to bring it into notice.
Austin proved its efficiency as a frontier defence before the gov- ernment was transferred thither. The commissioners in their re- port called attention to the fact that "the site occupies and will effectually close the pass by which the Indians and outlawed Mex- icans have for ages past traveled east and west to and from the Kio Grande to Eastern Texas." In May, 1839, while the seat of
The Seat of Government of Texas. 225
government was being surveyed, Manuel Flores and his band of Mexicans and Cherokees, who were on their way from Matamoras to Eastern Texas, were discovered while attempting to pass the Colorado by this old ford, pursuit was made, and they were over- taken a short distance from Austin. Flores was killed in the fray that ensued. The captured baggage of the party included several hundred pounds of powder and lead and documents that revealed or rather confirmed the fact that the Cherokees had entered into a plot with certain Mexican officials for the extermination of the whites in Texas.1 The discovery of these documents was the direct occasion for the steps leading to the expulsion of the Cherokees from Texas and in this manner frustrating their designs upon the lives of the white population of this Eepublic.
From the time of the removal of the government to Austin until the abandonment of that place, information of every large Indian foray and of the Mexican invasions in 1842 reached Austin at least a week earlier than it did those points situated near the Gulf coast.
(2) Laying Out of the New City and the- First Sale of Lots.
The act for the permanent location of the seat of government also provided for the laying out of the site to be selected and for the sale of the lots. The sections relating to these subjects are as follows :
Sec. 9. Be it further enacted, That immediately after the Presi- dent receives the report of the commissioners, it shall be his duty to appoint an agent, whose duty it shall be to employ a surveyor at the expense of the Government, and have surveyed six hundred and forty acres of land on the site chosen by the commissioners into town lots, under the direction of the President, which shall be, by said agent, advertised for sale for ninety days in all the public gazettes in the Republic, and also in the New Orleans Bulletin and Picayune, and said lots shall be sold at auction, to the highest bid- der, between the hours of ten A. M. and four P. M., and said sales may continue from day to day at the discretion of the agent; Pro- vided, however, That not more than one half of said lots shall be sold at the first sale; and that said agent shall cause to be made ten plots of said city, one of which shall be deposited with the President, one with the Commissioner of the General Land Office, one with the Texas Consul in New Orleans, one with the Texas Consul at Mobile, and the remainder of which shall be retained by
horning Star, May 25, 27, and 28, 1839.
226 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the agent at said city; and the said agent shall receive a salary of eight dollars per diem, and a reasonable sum for purchasing sta- tionery, paying for printing, and a suitable office for the transac- tion of his business.
Sec. 10. Be it further enacted, That said agent shall take and subscribe the following oath, (to be administered by any one au- thorized to administer the same,) that "I, A B, do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be,) that I will truly, honestly and faithfully discharge my duties as agent; that I will neither directly nor indirectly, by myself or agent, in my own name, or in the name of another or others, either publicly or privately, purchase, bargain or contract for more than six lots, or be in any way interested in the purchasing, bargaining or contracting for any other lot or lots, lands, tenements, hereditaments included in or appertaining to that tract or parcel of country purchased or obtained by this government for the location of the seat of government, either to take effect dur- ing my agency, or at any time thereafter, so long as my agency shall continue, so help me God." And that said agent shall give bond and security, to be approved by the President, in the just and full sum of one hundred thousand dollars, which bond shall be de- posited in the office of the Secretary of State, payable to the Presi- dent or his successors in office, conditioned for the faithful perform- ance of his duties.
Sec. 11. Be it further enacted, That said lots shall be sold for one-fourth payable at the time of sale, and the balance in three equal instalments of six, twelve and eighteen months; that upon failure of any purchaser or purchasers to pay said instalments, within ten -days after they become due, the property so purchased shall revert to the Eepublic, and such person or persons shall for- feit the sum or sums of money paid on said property ; and the said agent shall issue his proclamation making known said reversion and forfeiture, and the same shall thereafter be subject to sale, as though it had never been sold; and that said agent shall receive nothing but gold and silver, or the promissory notes of the govern- ment, or any and all audited drafts against this government, for said lots; all of which said agent shall make known in his adver- tisements, and on the day or days of sale.
Sec. 12. Be it further enacted, That the said agent, before the sale of said lots, shall set apart a sufficient number of the most eligible for a Capitol, Arsenal, Magazine, University, Academy, Churches, Common Schools, Hospital, Penitentiary, and for all other necessary public buildings and purposes.
Sec. 13. Be it further enacted, That said agent shall immedi- ately after each and every sale, report to the secretary of the treas- ury, and pay over to him all the proceeds of the same, and take his receipt therefor; and said agent shall be subject to the orders of
The Seat of Government of Texas. 227
the President from time to time, and shall dispose of no other prop- erty belonging to the government except that laid off into town lots, until authorized by Congress.1
In compliance with section 9 the President promptly selected the man to act as agent. Even before the commissioners made their report, we find the following letter from the President's private secretary addressed to Edwin Waller and dated March 2, 1839 :
His Excellency the President has instructed me to inform you that he will confer on you the appointment of Government Agent, for the new City of Austin, the future Capital of the Kepublic, and that he solicits an interview with you upon the subject as soon as practicable, preparatory to the necessary arrangements, etc.2
Mr. Waller's bond is dated April 12, 1839.3 Before proceeding to the site of his labors, he placed the requisite advertisement in the newspapers, stating that the first sale of lots would take place about ninety days from that date, on August 1st next.4 Mr. Waller set out for Austin in the early part of May.
The Morning 8 tar of April 22, 1839, noted the fact that "Busi- ness in this city [Houston] is rapidly reviving. The roads are filled with teams from La Grange, Bastrop, and all the towns in the neighborhood of the newly located seat of government, coming down io obtain supplies."
Writing from Austin on May 20, Mr. Waller stated that he had concluded a contract for surveying and laying off the lots with Pilie & Schoolfield, that the surveyors were to commence surveying the next day, and that he would urge on the work with all possible despatch.5
The plan of the city of Austin as laid out and surveyed under Mr. Waller's direction is shown by the accompanying reproduction of the first map. It will show at once the accuracy of the work, and the lofty conception held by the agent of what the future capital of Texas should be. Of prime importance was the selection of the most eligible site within the 7,735 acres constituting the govern-
lLaws of the Republic of Texas, Passed the First Session of Third Con- gress, 1839, pp. 163-165.
2Seat of Government Papers, MS.
THE QUABTEBLY, IV 44, 45.
*A copy of the advertisement, dated April 22, appeared in tlieMorning Star, April 23, 1839.
"Seat of Government Papers, MS.
228 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
meat's reservation. Here was an opportunity of making or marring a naturally beautiful location. Mr. Waller possessed the good taste as well as sound judgment to make the best of it; he selected the land lying between the "two beautiful streams" referred to by the commissioners. The broad streets, the excellent location of the capitol space, the names of the streets extending north and south — who would change them now?
As the time for the first sale of lots (August 1) approached, the Morning Star attempted to defeat it entirely by republishing every argument that had hitherto been put forward against the new site. For instance, it stated that
there is no reason to believe that the location will be a permanent one; but as this was made by management, combined with self- interest, and as these components will exist in the next legislature, there is not the slightest guarantee that that body may not find it to its interest to move again. There can be but two reasons why congress should have stricken out the word 'permanent,'1 each equally affecting the investment of money in lots in the new seat of government; and these are, either they Tcnew they were incompetent, or that if they had the right they could by leaving out the word, move the Capitol at pleasure, and thus make a series of specula- tions. The latter none would attribute to them :2 the former, then, must be the true one. Whatever was the cause, the location is not permanent, and the investment of money in lots in the city is not a safe one.3
Contrasted with the foregoing is the following from the Mata- gorda Bulletin for July 18, 1839:
The time is fast approaching when the public sale of Lots at the City of Austin . . . is to take place. . . . We under- stand that already numbers of persons are flocking to that point,
'It is generally supposed that the act provides for its" permanent" loca- tion which is an error. That word was stricken out in the passage of the bill through the Senate, and can not be found in the body of it. Through an error of the clerk, it still remains in the caption. — Morning Star, April 20, 1839.
'•The legislature has shown on so many occasions such a vascillating spirit, and too often a disregard of the plighted faith of the nation, that the confidence of many persons in our integrity is much impaired, and as the location of the seat of government is only a matter of speculation, the ensuing congress having equal power with the preceding one, may take it into their hands to cancel the act of that body, and make still another location. — Morning Star, June 26, 1839.
"Morning Star, July 27, 1839; cf, ibid., April 20. June 20, 26, 27, July 5, 8, 77, and 30.
£§" P S' '
# 5 a
CD gj- l— *
I.*' a
M- C!
II I
^ f°
?•& | 111
3 >*
P-&
3*p H
TO „ ^4
QD C^
^i' L
I'6 «
B-g. - go oo
S..a
fl
The Seat of Government of Texas. 229
most of them with the intention of purchasing property on which to establish themselves as permanent settlers, others for the pur- pose of investing capital in the enterprise. . . .
Many private individuals have their buildings already finished, with the purpose of immediately erecting them on their making a purchase, and we can scarcely imagine a more heart-stirring and cheering sight than will be presented at Austin during the time of the sale and after. . . .
Although the Cherokee War diverted attention from Austin and centered it upon the eastern portion of the Republic at the very time when the first sale of lots was to occur, an eager throng of purchasers gathered on the day fixed, August 1st. Sheriff Charles King of Bastrop county was the auctioneer. * The sale continued for one day. Two hundred and seventeen lots, one-third of the whole number, were sold at prices ranging from $120 for the lowest to $2,700 for the highest. The total sales amounted to $300,000. The formal launching of the new city was regarded as satisfactory- and auspicious.
3. Erection of the Public Buildings.
Section 14 of the act for the permanent location of the seat of government provided for the erection of the public buildings at the site selected by the commissioners. It reads thus :
Be it further enacted, That the President be, and he is hereby duly authorized and empowered to contract for all necessary public buildings, offices, &c., and draw on the treasurer for all such sums of money as may be necessary for the completion of the same.2
Section 1 of a supplementary act is as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Republic of Texas in Congress assembled. That the President be, and he is hereby required to have erected at the point which may be selected for the location of the Seat of Government, agreeable to the provisions of the act to which this is a supplement, such buildings as he may deem necessary for the accommodation of the fourth an- nual Congress of this Republic, together with the President and cabinet and other officers of the Government : Provided. Such loca-
^frs. Julia Tips Goeth, The First Sale of Town iMts in Austin, in The Austin Daily Statesman, March 19, 1905.
*Laws of the Republic of Texas, Passed the First Session of Third Con- gress, 1839, p. 165.
230 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
tion should not be made at a point where such buildings can be ob- tained.1
Mr. Edwin Waller, who had been appointed by the President agent to lay out the new site and conduct the first sale of lots, was also charged with the erection of the public buildings.
The opponents of the removal from the city of Houston raised a hue and cry against the expenditure of the vast sums of money that would be required for these buildings. They alleged that this additional expense would prove very burdensome at this particular time.2 To these objections the supporters of the city of Austin replied :
We can see no reason or necessity why our Government should cause the immediate erection of public buildings of a splendid or costly nature, for the mere purpose of congressional or state depart- ments for the approaching session. Buildings of plain, simple, and least expensive kind will answer all the purposes required at pres- ent, and in the course of the next year, when the requisite con- veniences will be more easily obtained, or at such suitable time here- after as the Government may choose, buildings for the permanent use of the state can be more cheaply and substantially constructed.3
This, in fact, was the course pursued. The buildings were avow- edly of a temporary character and did not even occupy the sites reserved by the government for those to be erected for permanency in the future. The amount realized from the first sale of lots must have almost sufficed to pay the cost of the buildings con- structed by Waller.
Mr. Waller displayed great energy and resourcefulness in over- coming the obstacles encountered in this new task, which certainly was not an ordinary one. Its very magnitude encouraged the op- position to hope for the defeat of the removal. For instance, the Morning Star of April 17, 1839, said:
We consider the removal among the possibilities, but most cer- tainly not among the probabilities. It appears to us absurd to sup- pose that the indispensable accommodations can be prepared for the President and other officers of Government, within the time speci- fied by law. . . . The remoteness of the place selected from
lLaws of the Republic of Texas, Passed the First Session of Third Congress, 1839, p. 90.
'Morning Star, April 17 and 20, and June 20, 1839. "Matagorda Bulletin, May 2, 1839.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 231
any city at which the absolute necessities for building can be ob- tained, together with the scarcity of provisions throughout the country, would seem to render every idea of an immediate removal preposterous in the extreme.
Having satisfied their own minds that the incompleteness of the buildings would delay the removal of the government to Austin, the opponents saw a necessity for a called session of congress at Houston in the early fall. This congress, of course, they said would not ratify the site of the city of Austin.1 In this manner the re- moval would in all probability be delayed for years. But the en- ergy of Waller in overcoming all obstacles dashed the plans of the opposition to the ground. A correspondent of the Telegraph, July 31, 1839, stated that "twenty or thirty buildings have already been completed, and that they are better buildings than were built during the first year in Houston. . . . The buildings will be ready, and be ready previous to the time prescribed by the law/'
A list of the public buildings erected by Mr. Waller as well as a description of their location is contained in the documents below:
State Department - December 3rd 1840 Sir
In accordance with the resolution of the Honorable the House of Representatives of the 2nd Inst. the undersigned Secretary of State has the honor to submit the enclosed document, marked A, as pre- senting a schedule of all the public buildings known as such by the undersigned, and were all of them erected under a contract with E. Waller Esqr. before the removal of the Government from the City of Houston, . . .
Your Obt Servant
Abner S. Lipscomb Hon. David S. Kaufman
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
A
Memorandum of Lots on which Public Buildings have been erected. Block Lot 124 1 L. P. Cooks residence
6 Kitchen adjoining L. P. Cook's residence —
in the rear of alley between.
110 6 [Judge Wallers residence]2 Occupied by
Committee on finance.
1 Morning Star, April 12, 1839.
'Words enclosed in brackets are lined through in the original schedule.
232
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Block 110 98
83
55 43 19 40
41 56 84
97
111
85
4 7 6 1
9
10 1 3 6 1 3 4 5 8 9 10
[Kitchen in the rear of No. 6] unoccupied [Jno. D. McLeod's] Now occupied by State Dept. store room for Laws, Jourls. &c
Capitol
State Department
Judge Burnets
Navy Department
Judge Webbs. (This is separated from 11-83 by a line drawn between the Exec- utive office and Judge Webbs)
Treasury Building
Land Office
Post Master General
[Johnson & Starr] occupied by Comt. of Revenue
Pay Master Genl. & Stock Commissioner.
Commissary General
1st Auditors office
War Department
Adjutant General's Office
Quartermaster Generals-
Mason's Residence
Presidents House.
Treasury Nov.
The within list is correct
Wm. Sevey
Department Actg Sec. Treasury.
28th 18401
3. REMOVAL OF THE GOVERNMENT TO AUSTIN ; THE SITE CON- FIRMED BY CONGRESS.
(1) The Act Fixing the Time of Removal.
It will be remembered that the "act for the permanent location of the seat of government" provided for the selection of the site and, in a general way, for the construction of the public buildings.
'Seat of Government Papers, MS.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 233
But this act said nothing ahout the all important subject of re- moval from Houston, nor did it fix the time within which the new site should be surveyed, the lots sold, and the public buildings pro- vided. Here was a manifest defect. Whether the act was purposely cast in this form to facilitate its passage can scarcely be determined in the absence of the manuscript records of the act itself, which ap- pear to have been lost. It does seem that, after the passage of the abovementioned act, the passage of a supplementary act became a necessity in order to prevent much confusion. Before the lapse of ten days after the passage of the first act, President Lamar ap- proved "An Act Supplementary to an act entitled an act for the permanent location of the Seat of Government."
Although this supplementary act determined one of the most sensitive points of the whole subject of removal — the time of re- moval— very little is to be gathered from the record of the pro- ceedings of congress in regard to it.1 The Morning Star of June 8, 1839, alleged that the law requiring the president and his cab- inet to resirl'1 at the new seat of government after the first of the succeeding October "was passed at a time of great excitement, and consequently, when the members were not in the full exercise of their reasoning facilities."
That part of the act relating to the time of removal is contained in section 2, and is as follows:
Be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the President, together with his cabinet officers, to proceed to the point selected for the location of the Seat of Government as aforesaid, together with the archives of this Government, previous to the first day of October next, at which place the fourth annual Congress of this Eepublic shall assemble on the second Monday in November next.2
(2) The Removal of the- Government to Austin.
The removal of the archives, etc., preceded that of the chief offi- cials. No incident worthy of note appears to have attended the
^House Journal, 3 Tex. Cong., 340, 341, 362, 371, 378, 384, 386; Senate Journal, ibid., 114, 116, 119.
*Laws of the Republic of Texas, Passed the First Session of Third Con- gress, 1839, p. 90.
234 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
same. The following brief paragraphs contain all the information the writer has found touching the transfer :
In about twenty days, that is about the first of September, says common report, the officers of the government and the public archives will be on their "winding way" to the new city of Austin. Well, we have one consolation left, and that is, that we have done everything we could to prevent it, but it was of no avail.1
Between forty and fifty wagons freighted with the archives of the government, and books, papers, and furniture of the different Departments, have left here for the City of Austin, the new Seat of Government.2
By a gentleman from Austin we learn all government archives arrived at that city in safety, and that at the time of his leaving, all the offices of government were open for the transaction of busi- ness.3
President Lamar and a part of his cabinet followed later, reach- ing Austin October 17th. Their arrival was made the occasion for a grand celebration. An account of this interesting event is ex- tracted from the first number of the first newspaper published at the new seat of government, the Austin City Gazette for October 30, 1839:
In accordance with previous arrangements, such of the citizens as were- able to procure horses assembled at 11 o'clock, on the morn- ing of the seventeenth, for the purpose of escorting his Excellency the President into town. The Honorable E. Waller was appointed Orator, and Captain Lynch and Mr. Alex. Russell were appointed Marshalls for the day. Col. E. Burleson, at the special request of his fellow-citizens, took command of the whole. All arrangements being completed, the cavalcade moved forward in the following order : —
Col. E. Burleson — General A. S. Johnston.
The Marshalls.
Citizen, Standard Citizen,
bearing the motto on one side,
"Hail to our Chief;"
On the reverse,
"With this we live—" [STAE] "Or die defending." Orator of the day.
Trumpeter. Citizens, — two and two.
lMorning Star, August 13, 1839.
"Colorado Gazette, September 28, 1839, quoting from the [Houston] In- telligencer. "Telegraph, October 9, 1839.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 235
After proceeding about two miles beyond the city boundary they met his Excellency, accompanied by the Hon. L. P. Cook, Major Sturges, J. Moreland, Esq., Private Secretary and others. By a military movement, Col. Burleson reversed the order of march so as to place the Marshalls, Standard Bearer, and Orator, in the rear of the company. He then halted his command and drew them up in two parallel lines. As General Lamar passed down between the lines, the Orator of the day, supported by the Marshalls, and fol- lowed by the Standard Bearer, moved up and met his Excellency about the center. The Hon. E. Waller, having introduced the President to the citizens there present, addressed him in the follow- ing language:
"Having been called upon, by my fellow-citizens, to welcome your Excellency on your arrival at the permanent seat of government for the Republic, I should have declined doing so on account of con- scious inability, wholly unused as I am to public speaking, had I not felt that holding the situation here that I do, it was my duty to obey their call. With pleasure I introduce you to the Citizens of Austin; and, at their request, give you cordial welcome to a place which owes its existence, as a city, to the policy of your ad- ministration.
'Hinder your appointment, and in accordance with your direc- tion, I came here in the month of May last, for the purpose of pre- paring proper accommodations for the transaction of the business of the Government. I found a situation naturally most beautiful, but requiring much exertion to render it available for the purposes intended by its location. Building materials and provisions were to be procured when both were scarce; a large number of workmen were to be engaged in the low country, and brought up in the heat of summer, during the season when fever is rife, and when here, our labors were liable every moment to be interrupted by the hos- tile Indians, for whom we were obliged to be constantly on the watch ; "many-tongued Rumor" was busy with tales of Indian depredations, which seemed to increase, in geometrical progression, to her progress through the country. Many who were on the eve of emigrating, were deterred by these rumors from doing so. In- terested and malicious persons were busy in detracting from the natural merits of the place ; and every engine of falsehood has been called into requisition to prevent its occupation for governmental purposes. Beauty of scenery, centrality of location, and purity of atmosphere, have been nothing in the vision of those whose views were governed by their purses ; and whose ideas of fitness were en- tirely subservient to their desire for profit.
'Tinder all these disadvantageous circumstances, and more which I can not now -detail, a capitol, a house for the chief magistrate of
236 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the republic, and a large number of public offices, were to be erected and in readiness for use in the short space of four months.
"Not discouraged at the unpromising aspect of affairs, I cheer- fully undertook to obey your behests. Numbers of the present citizens of Austin soon emigrated hither; and with an alacrity and spirit of accommodation for which they have my grateful remem- brance, rendered us every assistance in their power.
"To the utmost extent of my abilities I have exerted myself, and have succeeded in preparing such accommodations as, I sincerely hope, will prove satisfactory to your Excellency, and my fellow- citizens of Texas.
"In the name of the citizens of Austin, I cordially welcome you and your cabinet to the new metropolis ; under your fostering care may it flourish ; and aided by its salubrity of climate, and its beauty of situation, become famous among the cities of the new world."
His Excellency the President replied in a short but pithy and appropriate speech; and, after the cheering had somewhat sub- sided, the company was again put in motion, the march being di- rected homeward. As soon as his Excellency crossed the city line, a salute of twenty-one guns was fired from a six-pounder, under the superintendence of Major T. W. Ward. On reaching Mr. Bul- lock's hotel, where a sumptuous dinner was prepared for the occa- sion, a large concourse of citizens who had been unable, from want of horses or harness, to join in the cavalcade, stood ready to tender every mark of respect in their power, to the chief magistrate of the Republic.
THE DINNER.
James Burke, Esq., President; Dr. R. F. Brenham, Vice-Presi- dent.
Among the guests who were present, we observed His Excellency the President, Col. E. Burleson, Hon. L. P. Cook, Secretary of the Navy; Gen. A. S. Johnston, Secretary of War; Hon. J. H. Starr, Secretary of the Treasury; A. Brigham, Esq., Treasurer; Col. W. G. Cook, Col. J. Snively, Major Sturges, J. Moreland, Esq.; C. Mason, Esq. ; M. Evans, Esq. ; Col. Johnson, Col. T. W. Ward, and others.
The company took their seats at table, at 3 o'clock. The dinner provided under the immediate superintendance of Mrs. Bullock, re- flected great credit on that lady's taste and superior judgment, dis- played in the arrangement of the table, and in the delicacies which graced the festive board. After the cloth was removed, the Presi- dent of the day requested the attention of the company to a toast "which, he felt assured, would meet with the cordial approbation of every person whom he had the honor of addressing," he then gave, as the
The Seat of Government of Texas. 237
IST REGULAR TOAST. Our Guest, Mirabeau B. Lamar, Presi- dent of the Eepublic of Texas: — His valor in the field of battle signally contributed to the achievement of Texian independence — his wisdom as a statesman has given vigor and firmness to our gov- ernment, and elevated its character abroad; — his lofty patriotism and distinguished public services command the admiration and gratitude of his fellow-citizens.
Which was drank with the utmost enthusiasm. As soon as the cheering had somewhat subsided, His Excellency made a truly elo- quent reply, which, we are sorry, it is not in our power to give en- tire, or even in part. He concluded by requesting the company to join in the folloging toast, which was heartily responded to by all present : —
The worthy founder of our new seat of government, Judge Waller: — By the touch of his industry there has sprung up, like the work of magic, a beautiful city, whose glory is destined, in a few years, to overshadow the ancient magnificence of Mexico.
The presiding officers then gave the remainder of the regular toasts in the order as follows:
2. Our country: — The star of her destiny has emerged from the clouds that obscured it, and is now fixed in the political firma- ment; may its luster continue undimmed by foreign aggression or domestic dissension.
3. The Constitution and the Laws — the vital spirit of the body politic: — Whilst they are maintained pure and uncontaminatei by political corruption, Liberty and Justice have here an abiding place.
4. The United States: — Their history for the last sixty-three years has disproved the false doctrine of tyrants, and show[n] to the world that man is capable of self-government.
5. The Hon. David G. Burnet, Vice-President of Texas : — The history of his country is his best eulogy; he has "done the state Borne service and they know it:" we can say to him in the spirit of truth and justice, and in the voice of the whole people of Texas, "Well done thou good and faithful servant."
6. The memory of Stephen F. Austin : — Whatever may be the pretensions of others to the paternity of Texas, we recognize him alone as the "Father of this Eepublic."
7. Education — the safeguard of republican institutions: — It ehould be sustained and cherished by every friend of civil liberty.
8. The Press: — May it be conducted in the spirit of disinter- ested patriotism, as the honest echo of the public sentiment, and never be polluted by the poisonous influence of party.
9. Col. E. Burleson: — His valor in the field is only equalled by his virtues in private life. In the history of his country, he will rank as the Sumter of the West.
238 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
10. The Federalists of Mexico: — May they speedily triumph over the despotic party which now keeps their country in civil war, and give the tree of Constitutional Liberty a firm foundation in the city of the Montezumas.
11. Agriculture: — The surest foundation of our permanent prosperity ; — may it share largely in the industry and energy of our citizens, and be an object of paramount importance with our legis- lators.
12. Trial by Jury and Eight of Suffrage — the main pillars of free government : — Whilst they stand upright, firmly based on pub- lic virtue, the malign influence of despotic governments cannot reach the glorious edifice they sustain.
13. The memory of Col. Benjamin Milam — the bayard of Texas: — A more gallant spirit never sprung from the "dark and bloody ground" of Kentucky, to battle in the cause of human liberty; as long as honor, patriotism and valor are appreciated by his countrymen, he will be gratefully remembered as the Hero of the West.
The regular Toasts having been drunk, the following was then given by the Chair: —
David G. Burnet — In private life, the obliging neighbor, the public spirited citizen, the devoted husband, the affectionate father, — In public service, the sagacious statesman, the wise and disin- terested politician, the able Cabinet officer — the bold and courag- eous soldier — his country's voice loudly and almost unanimously calls upon him to fill the Presidential Chair during the next term.
After which Dr. Brenham, Vice-President gave:
The Government of Texas: — May it always be administered by honest and capable men for the interests of the whole people, and never be used as an instrument in the hands of unprincipled and designing politicians for personal aggrandizements and the advance- ment of party purposes.
Different members of the Company assembled then offered a number of Volunteers' Toasts and Sentiments from which the fol- lowing have been selected : —
By Dr. M. Johnson — The Single Star of Texas: — It is small but bright, and may it one day be the sun around which the Spanish Provinces will revolve.
By E. Waller — The Hon. Louis P. Cook: — In the Legislature he always defended the rights of the people watchfully and with elo- quence, at the head of the Navy Department, his course has been distinguished by energy, impartiality, modesty and talent; may he find his country grateful.
By Mr. Bontreat — The Lone Star: — Now on its ascent, may it soon reach the zenith and there shine the brightest in the firma- ment.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 239
By M. H. Nicholson — Col. E. Burleson — The North-western Champion of Texas: — He has stood like a dyke on our frontier nobly repelling the tide of savage depredation.
By Dr. Johnson — The President and his Cabinets: — We can have no greater evidence of the wisdom and honesty of our Chief Magistrate than the selection of his Cabinets.
By Maj. W. J. Jones— The Star of Texas —Like the Star of Bethlehem, it will guide the wise men of all nations to the cradle of Liberty.
By John Jarmon — To the Heroes of Texas: — Honour to those noble spirits, who fought, bled and suffered for the cause of free- dom in the revolution of Texas.
By E. Waller — Hon. James Webb: — His adopted countrymen are proud of him. He has filled and still fills a high office with abil- ities, dignity and rectitude. May he one day be called to the high- est office.
By J. Jarmon — President Lamar: — As chief servant of the peo- ple, he has thus far discharged his duties with honor to himself and justice to the whole Eepublic. His name shall be handed down as one of the great western stars.
By J. McLeod — Our Treasurer, Maj. A. Brigham: — An honest man is the noblest work of God.
By G. W. Bonnell — The People of Texas: — They know their rights, and knowing, dare maintain them.
By G. W. Moore — Our Infant Republic: — She will soon be recognized and well known throughout the world.
By a Citizen — Judge E. Waller: — He has wisely improved the talent entrusted to him, may he one day be entrusted by the people with the greatest in their gift.
By Charles Schoolfield — The City of Austin: — The Commission- ers who were appointed by Congress to select a site for the seat of government: justice to their selection and honor to their judgment.
By T. G. Forster — The President of Texas: — Our skillful ME- CHANIC.— may we never have a worse CABINET-MAKER.
By a Citizen — The Press of Texas: — May it ever continue ele- vated in its moral tone — pure and disinterested in its patriotism — the unwavering advocate of the true interests of the country, with- out regard to party.
By a Citizen — Education — the safeguard of our republican in- stitutions:— It deserves to be fostered and promoted, by every friend of liberty.
By a Citizen — Female Education — the only security for the per- manence of female charms: — May all the true friends of the fair sex be ever found zealous in its promotion.
By M. H. Beaty — E. Moore, Commander of the Texian Navy — 'Texas expects him to do his duty."
240 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
By Dr. S. Booker — Wm. G. Cook: — His services will be remem- bered as long as Texas shall appreciate chivalry and patriotism.
By T. G. Forster — Maj. Wm. J. Jones: — Brave among the brav- est, wise among the wisest, and a man among men.
By a Citizen — Sam Houston and San Jacinto — They will be re- membered as long as Texas possesses a single freeman.
By a Citizen — General A. Sidney Johnston: — A scholar, a sol- dier, and a gentleman ; the highest qualities a man can possess.
His Excellency rose from the table about 8 p. m., and the com- pany, soon after, dispersed; all, apparently, highly pleased with the entertainment of the day.
(3) The Site Confirmed by the Fourth Congress.
A feeble and unsuccessful effort was made to involve the new seat of government in the September elections.1 It was also pre- dicted that congress would not hold its session at this place. For instance, the Morning Star of June 20, 1839, said :
Not one of the most sanguine friends of the 'new location has ever expressed, in our hearing, his belief that the next congress would hold its session there. The prevailing opinion is, that the mem- bers will assemble there and adjourn to this place.
If the thought of adjourning to Houston was entertained by any of the members of congress, their plans were completely frustrated by the breaking out of yellow fever in that city some time prior to the assembling of congress.2
The fourth congress assembled at Austin on the second Monday in November; a quorum was had in both houses on the first day. On assuming the chair in the senate, Vice-President Burnet said:
I cannot on this interesting occasion omit congratulating you on the new scenes which surround us.
The selection of an appropriate site for the permanent location of the Govt has long been a subject of general concernment, in- volving deep and various solicitudes throughout the community. To those who consulted only the common good, it was replete with interest and anxiety, because of the inherent difficulty of choosing among so great a multitude of seemingly eligible positions as our country affords. That the selection of this beautiful and pictur-
lMorning Star, April 15 and August 1, 1839.
^Colorado Gazette, November 9, 1839; Anson Jones, Republio of Texas, 22; Statement of Francis Moore, Jr., in Weeks, Debates of the Texas Con- vention [1845], p. 208.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 241
esque spot, fit residence of the fabled Hygeie, will quiet all appre- hensions, and satisfy all persons, is more than the most enthusiastic advocates can expect. That it will fulfill, in an eminent degree, the great purposes of its selection can scarcely be questioned; provided the government itself will exert the necessary means to render it, as it ought and may be easy of access to all sections of the Republic. Having no private interest to subserve, either by changing or con- tinuing the present location I feel a freedom in remarking, that frequent removals of the seat of government are not only costly, and otherwise injurious in our domestic concerns, but are apt to excite suspicions abroad of instability in the government itself. . . ,l
President Lamar also referred to the subject in his message, read next day, November 12th. After recounting the difficulties at- tending the removal, he said :
I have great pleasure in meeting the Representatives of the peo- ple for the first time assembled at the permanent Seat of Govt. The act of the last Congress directing the removal of the Public Ar- chives from the City of Houston was an expression of legislative will too decisive to permit me one moment to falter in carrying it out. Arrangements were accordingly made immediately after the adjournment for the survey of the City of Austin and the erection of the necessary offices and public buildings, to be commenced so soon as the commissioners chosen to aelect the site should have made their report. The time allowed for the work was so exceed- ingly limited as to render its accomplishment apparently imprac- ticable; yet I am happy in having it in my power to announce to you, that the agent appointed to superintend the undertaking, did succeed, by extraordinary energy, in preparing such accommoda- tions as have enabled the officers of Govt. to resume their duties at the new city on the first of October as directed by law, with very little inconvenience to themselves, and no derangement of the pub- lic business beyond its temporary suspension. . . .
I congratulate you, gentlemen, and the country in general, that a question which has so deeply excited our National Legislature has thus been put at rest; and sincerely hope that no similar sub- ject will arise in future to abstract your attention from the har- monious consideration of such matters of general & local policy as may be regarded essential to the prosperity of the nation. That the selection of the site now occupied will command universal appro- bation, is not to be expected. A diversity of opinion upon such sub- jects is the unavoidable result of the diversity of interests and local
^Senate Journal, MS., November 11, 1839. State Department.
242 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
prejudices which must necessarily exist in a country so widely ex- tended as ours; but its geographical position, the apparent health- fulness of its climate, the beauty of its scenery, the abundance and convenience of its material for constructing the most permanent edifices, its easy access to our maritime frontier, and its adaptation to protection against Indian depredation, thereby inviting settle- ments to one of the finest portions of our country, [afford] ample proofs of the judgment and fidelity of the commissioners, and abundant reason to approve their choice. That you and others will experience some privations which might have been spared if the location had been made in a section of the country of greater popu- lation and improvement is certainly true ; but I cannot believe that a people who have voluntarily exchanged the ease & luxuries of plentiful houses, for the toils & privations of a wilderness will re- pine at the sacrifice of a few personal comforts which the good of the nation may require of them.1
The opponents to the new site, however, were not to be placated with fair words ; they must have their say, and it took the form of the following bill, which was introduced in the house of representa- tives by Mr. Lawrence, of Harrisburg,2 who had in the January preceding at Houston thoroughly identified himself with the op- position :
A Bill to be entitled An Act for the temporary location of the Seat of Government.
Whereas much clamor, and excitement prevails [throughout] the body politic, in relation to the location of the Seat of Government, and
Whereas believing it to be a duty encumbent upon us, as the Eepresentatives of the people, to consult their views and subserve their interests with a due regard to those principles of economy, which should ever characterize the Legislation of a free people, and
Whereas being impressed with a solemn conviction of the evils which have arisen, and which must inevitably arise from the pres- ent unsettled state of this perplexing and all-absorbing question, for remedy whereof
Section 1st Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre- sentatives of the Eepublic of Texas in Congress assembled, That on the fourth Monday in May in the year of our Lord one thousand, eight hundred and forty, it shall be the duty of the qualified voters
1Lamar's Message, in Senate Journal, MS., State Department.
2House Journal as printed in the Austin City Gazette, January 1, 1840. The Journals of the Fourth Congress were never printed. The Senate Journal has been preserved in manuscript in the Department of State, but the Journal of the House of Representatives appears to have been lost.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 243
for members of congress in the several counties of the Republic, to assemble at their respective places of holding elections for mem- bers of congress, for the purpose of temporarily locating the seat of Government, for the term of twenty five years, from and after the close of the first session of the fifth annual congress of this Eepublic — when and where it shall be their duty to select by ballot, as between the City of Austin and the site at the great falls of the Brazos River, which was condemned by the commissioners elected by the third annual congress of this Republic for the location of the seat of government, to be known and voted for as the City of Texas.
[Sections 2 and 3 provided for the manner of holding the elec- tion and publishing the result of the vote.]
[Sections 4 to 13 are very nearly a verbatim copy of the act un- der whose provisions Austin had been selected. See pages 50 and 51 above.]1
The bill was called up November 28, made the order of the day for December 2, and then debated for three days.2 Sam Houston was a member of the house, and the journal notes the fact that he "strenuously advocated the bill."3 General Houston's opponents, or rather the supporters of the city of Austin, stated that it was "his declared determination to effect the removal of the Seat of Government from Austin, — even should it cause a division of the Republic." . . . His supporters took exception to this state- ment of his position, and declared that he used the following lan- guage : "If some respect is not paid to the east, if the present loca- tion of the Seat of Government is persisted in, it [will ca]*use much evil — even a division of the Republic — it should be [ . . . ]4 forever set at rest — it should be referred to the peo- ple, for them to decide at the ballot box."5
Mr. Muse, of Nacogdoches, spoke along similar lines; he said:
He had heard something of the doctrine of nullification in the United States; and why the excitement produced there upon the subject? Because a portion of the States considered their rights trampled under foot by national legislation, though not by the in- triguery of a small minority, but an almost unanimous voice; yet . . . they rose in all their majesty of state pride, with a de- cile 1217, Papers of 4 Tex. Congress, MS., State Department. *House Journal, in Austin City Gazette, January 15 and 22, 1840. 'Ibid., January 22, 1840. 'Words torn off. "Austin City Gazette, April 8, 1840.
244 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
termined resolution, stood forth so as to bring about a modification of their injuries. Suppose the injury complained of had affected two-thirds or three-fourths of the people of that nation, what must have been the consequences ? None will deny but that the national authorities would have been overturned. . . . Though South Carolina was but one State, she asserted her rights against the other twenty-three. Will not eastern and central Texas do the same, when they are composed of more than two-thirds of the population of Texas, all of whom are enraged at the outrage committed upon their rights, and upon the general interest of their adopted coun- try, to serve the interest of the few, and of a particular section? Will they quietly and calmly submit, or will they assert their rights? . . -1
The debate was finally terminated, when Mr. Menifee, one of the commissioners that located the seat of government, moved to strike out the enacting clause. This motion was carried by a vote of 21 'to 16 ;2 it was cast on strictly sectional lines.
The handsome vote with which the bill for reopening the question of the location of the seat of government was disposed of, after the thorough discussion it had received, created the impression that the subject would now be permitted to rest. "It is to be hoped," writes Mr. Holmes, representative from Matagorda, "that this vexatious and exciting question will now be considered settled, and that it will not be revived or agitated for many years to come. Judging from the opinions expressed by the members from the East at the opening of congress, I am fully convinced that a large majority of the citizens of Eastern Texas are satisfied if not pleased with the present location, and that they will suffer the question to rest in peace."3 This idea of permanency was reinforced by the passage of "An Act to authorize the erection of Government Buildings"; viz., a building intended for the use of the State Department and General Land Office which was to be of stone and as nearly fire- proof as possible.4 A traveler writes at Austin on January 12, 1840, "Should the seat of government remain permanently fixed in this place, which is now highly probable, this whole region must
1 Austin City Gazette, April 8, 1840.
'For the "Yeas" and "Nays," see Austin City Gazette, January 22, 1840. *E. L. Holmes to Editor of the Colorado Gazette, December 19, 1839, printed in the Colorado Gazette, January 11, 1840. *Act approved January 28, 1840.
The Seat of Government of Texas. 245
soon smile . . . with plenty/'1 Anson Jones, senator from Brazoria, after congress adjourned, remained in Austin, married, built a house on Pecan -street, "and spent the summer principally in making improvements on [his] place."2
^Texas in 1840, or the Emigrant's Guide to the New Republic, 65; Ed- ward Stiff, The Texas Emigrant, 33. 2Aneon Jones3 Republic of Texas, 22.
246 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
A STUDY OF THE ROUTE OF CABEZA DE VACA.
I.
JAMES NEWTON BASKETT.
1. Introduction.
It may seem superfluous to attempt a new discussion of the route of Cabeza de Vaca from Texas to Sonora; but to the writer there seems to be so much omitted from previous examinations which bears directly on the location of the route, that he has ven- tured to submit yet another study of the journey.
It will be presumed that the reader is familiar with at least the narrative of Cabeza's wanderings as told by himself in what is usually called his Naufragios; but it will be probably better to out- line briefly here the more evident stages of the journey, for im- mediate reference.
Besides the account written by Cabeza alone, after he had re- turned to Spain, he and his three companions (being, with the negro Steven, all that were left of the army of De Narvaez, which was stranded on the west coast of the Gulf of Mexico) wrote, while in the city of Mexico, a joint letter to the Royal Audiencia at Santo Domingo; and this letter has been incorporated by Oviedo in his Historia de las Indias, with a little additional comment. As Cabeza and Castillo went home in 1537,1 they left this account at Santo Domingo; and that of Cabeza alone was not published till 1542. Besides these there is a relation of Cabeza's which Mr. Bandelier thinks is a mere condensation of the Naufragios, and of small im- port. This I have not examined.
I can not agree with Bandelier in his low estimate of the accuracy of the joint letter in comparison with Cabeza's narrative; and I agree with Oviedo in believing that the testimony of three, fresh from the scenes, is better than that of one, recorded some years later, when, by his own confession, his memory fails him at certain points. The Naufragios is longer, and much more detailed generally, especially on incidents of topography and customs of the
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 247
natives; but the letter brings out certain matters that are obscure in the Naufragios, and supplies many omissions. The joint study reveals the route in a fuller light, and it must be a matter of regret that when Mr. Bandelier presented the new translation of the one ill the "Trailmakers Series" he did not incorporate a translation of the other also. Since Oviedo knew Cabeza personally, and could inquire into the matter for himself, we must respect his opinion — an opinion which I think an examination of the two accounts will sustain. There are some striking discrepancies that are interest- ing. That account which is the more detailed at certain points, however, should command our credence the more — all things else being equal. In this paper all citations from Cabeza's single ac- count are to be referred to the Bandelier translation, because it is more accessible than that of Buckingham Smith, and in some re- spects better; and the reference will, for brevity, be made under the word "Cabeza." The reference to the joint letter will be made under the word "Oviedo" — the original Spanish being found in that author's Historia General y Natural de las Indias" in Tomo III, at pages 582 to 618, of the usual edition found in our libraries.
With the exception of a certain Ortiz whom De Soto found on the coast of Florida, Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca, Andres Dorantes, Alonso del Castillo Maldonado, and Estevanico, a Moor and servant of Dorantes, were all that finally survived from the army of Pamfilo de Narvaez, which entered Florida in 1527. Five barges of this expedition were wrecked on the Gulf coast of Texas in November of that year. Two of these, containing the Cabeza party were stranded on an island from which they began their remarkable journey by land ; and the other barges were lost further westward — that of the governor having landed its men before being swept out to sea. From this island where Cabeza was, two different parties went on westward, by land only, before Cabeza made the attempt six years later, which time he spent in slavery and in wandering inland and along the coast in trading and exploring ventures. When he starts, he meets with the other three survivors mentioned, and after a year and a half of delay they all escape from their Indian masters, go a short way and spend the winter, and then pass far inland northward, and spend almost the whole of another winter before they reach, west of this, a great river, with perma-
248 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
nent houses. Here they hear of the coast of the western ocean, to- ward which they go in search of food, and which they finally ap- proach in upper Sonora. The province of this paper is confined to a study of the part of the journey thus indicated, and the various stages of it will appear in the discussion.
As the five harges built on the Florida coast, after the disastrous inland expedition and the loss of the ships, were meandering west, they passed a great river, which, without cavil, was the Mississippi ; and here they were blown out to sea so that for about eight days they were unable to approach land. Their course in the mean time was westward, however, and finally the two barges containing Ca- beza and his companions struck on an island, which Cabeza named Mal-Hado, i. e., Ill-Fate or Bad-Luck, only two leagues from the coast at most. He says that this island was five leagues long and a league wide, with a rocky seaward beach.
We can form no idea of the speed of the barges in the storm, for there was much meandering. The narratives do not imply much speed or progress westward; so that in the eight or nine days of going we should not expect them to make the distance from the Delta to Galveston. When they were fresh on the coast of Florida they were seven days rowing about one hundred miles. Naturally, therefore, we should look for Mal-Hado on the coast of Louisiana ; and since Isle Dernier — Last Island — would seem both in size and position to fill the conditions, we should not pass it idly, especially if we confine our knowledge to Cabeza's account only. But when he says that he traded for more than fifty leagues inland from this island — a statement which we shall see that we may readily believe — we know that this distance would have brought him so near the Mississippi that he would not have omitted mention of so great a stream.
In the narrative of the Inca concerning the expedition of De Soto, it is stated that before the Spaniards reached the place where De Soto died they found houses with crosses on them, which were placed there, the narrator thinks, from the influence of Cabeza, by means of his religious instruction having passed from one tribe to another. Zarate-Salmeron notes the same thing, perhaps from the Inca's account, but he adds that it occurred thirty leagues northerly
A Study of the Route cf Cabeza De Vaca. 249
from the mouth of the river at which De Soto died.1 Cabeza notes that he traded in red ochre, bringing it from the inland to the coast tribes. Dr. Herbert E. Bolton, of the University of Texas, writes me that there was a supply of this paint in the neighborhood of the present town of Nagodoches, Texas, to which the Indians from great distances formerly resorted. It was doubtless to this, or to tribes near it, that Cabeza went trading; and east of this, not a hundred miles, the crosses were found by the men of De Soto.2 The point is almost directly north of Galveston, and nearly within the reach of the "more than fifty leagues" for which distance in- land Cabeza gives the customs of the tribes in a manner implying personal knowledge. It is considerably farther than this from Isle Dernier.
While there is now on this coast no island which fits the size of Mal-Hado as given by Cabeza, there are features of topography mentioned by Oviedo as being near it which cut Isle Dernier out; and in spite of its present size being doubly too great, these bring Galveston Island into consideration. We can not say now what the terrible storms of this coast may have done in nearly three cen- turies, when we know what they have done in a day; and this island may be larger now than it then was : but it is not likely that it has changed its relative position to certain rivers, which Oviedo notes in their order westward from Mal-Hado,, and which can be found in such order on the real coast of the Gulf at no other place than west of Galveston Island, as has been admirably set forth by Brownie Ponton and Bates H. McFarland in THE QUARTERLY for January, 1898.
Westward, toward Panuco on the Gulf coast of Mexico, was an ancon, or inlet, which, Oviedo says, Dorantes passed three times in wandering forward in search of food, making progress along the coast proper forty leagues. From certain signs he believed that this was "that which they called Espiritu Sancto." "He twice re-
1Theodore Irving has erred in interpreting the Inca, as having these crosses found far westward on Moscoso's expedition into Texas. The Inca does not say so, and Miss Grace King has been led astray by Irving. I, however, have not seen the Spanish original, only the translation into French by Richelet.
2There is no longer any doubt that De Soto died at the mouth of Red River, not the Arkansas. Proof of this ie involved in this paper, fur- ther on.
250 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
turned those forty leagues/' and beyond this ancon, on his final journey, he went onward twelve leagues, to another ancon. We shall see that this comports with later statements. Finally when Dorantes and his party determined later to leave the island perma- nently, there were two men, an Asturian clergyman and a negro, on an island behind, or westward from Mal-Hado, and Cabeza de Vaca was on the main land — too sick to go. Pelican Island, now seen west of Galveston Island, may answer for this second isle.
Without trying to disentangle the mass of incidents given by Oviedo here, it is sufficient that he says that the Indians brought those two back to Mal-Hado across the ancon ugain, in a canoe, and took the whole party of about twelve— there is some discrepancy — over another ancon "for certain things which they gave them" ; and "from there" they went two leagues to a great river, etc. Cabeza says that this party came by the place where he was sick, and that the twelve gave an Indian a costly robe of marten, which they had taken from a cacique in Florida, to guide them to him. If at the end of their journey with the Indians they were at Cabeza's place on the "mainland," or if the Indians put them well beyond Oyster Bay, as may have been likely (in order that they might not have to go around the northern arm of it), we can see how they might "from there" reach Oyster Creek in two leagues. Otherwise it is further.
2. The Wandering from Mal-Hado to the Land of Tunas.
(1) Summary of the Oviedo narrative. — Oviedo's account of their further journey comports so well with the 'topography of the region that the identification is almost irresistible : —
*And from there they went two leagues to a great river, which was beginning to swell from floods and rains, and there they made rafts on which they crossed with much difficulty, because they had among them few swimmers ; and thence they went three leagues to another river which came with much power and volume, and with such fury that fresh water went out with great moment into the sea. There, likewise, they made some rafts and crossed on them; and the first passed over well, because they were helped, but the second carried them to the sea, * * * and two men were
*0viedo, 593, et seq.
A Study of the Route of Cdbeza De Vaca. 251
drowned, * * * and the raft went out with the current to the sea more than a league * * * [though] the wind was from the sea to the land. * * * From there they went forward three or four leagues and struck another river and there they found a barge of their own five, which they knew to be that in which had gone the book-keeper Alonso Enriquez and the commissary. * * * And they went five or six leagues further to another great river on which were two ranchos of Indians who fled; * * * and from the other side [parte] of the river Indians came to the Chris- tians and knew them [as such] because in that neighborhood they had already seen those of the barge of the governor [De Narvaez] and of the barge of Alonso Enriquez.1
* * * The day following they left there and on the fourth day, reached an ancon, two men having died on the way of hunger and fatigue * * * leaving only nine persons. That ancon was broad, about a league across, and made a point toward the region of Panuco, which went out into the sea about a fourth of a league with some great mounds of white sand, which it might be supposed should be seen from far out at sea, and because of this they suspected that it was the River of the Holy Spirit [Rio del Espiritu Santo.]2 * * * Finally they found a broken canoe * * * and in two days which they were there they passed the ancon; * * * an(j they reached with much difficulty, [from weakness] a little [pequeno] ancon, which was twelve leagues fur- ther on * * * [which] had little width — which was only a river in breadth ; and there they rested the day which they arrived.
Here, the next day, an Indian brought Figueroa with him to see them. He was one of the swimmers who had been sent forward from Mal-Hado, at the time of the wreck, to seek the way — the only one left; and he said that he had seen Esquivel, the only survivor from the barge of the governor. Esquivel said the people had landed from the barge, and had gone along the coast, because the barge was very light, and the governor had helped them over some ancones or rivers ; and at the Espiritu Sanctu ancon, he had passed them over to the other side; but remaining himself in the barge
irThis hints that Dorantes in his search for food for forty leagues for- ward had not gone near these Indians, but they were so nomadic that they may not have been there then.
They were judging from Pineda's description of the river which he dis- covered as he sailed east from Mexico, and they judged, it seems, solely by the sand hills which they say. This anc6n must have impressed them as a rlo where the main bay emptied into the sea, and they must have con- sidered only a small part of it, in order that its peninsula should seem to them only a fourth of a league, or half mile, long.
252 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
that night was swept out to sea, as nothing more was known of him. He furthermore said that all the governor's people had gone inland through certain lakes and submerged places and had died of hunger during the winter. Figueroa was now forced to go back west^ ward with his Indian master, and only the Asturian clergyman and another could go with him, because none of the rest could swim. These went after fish, and one returned; but the Indians on the other shore loaded their houses in their canoes, and left, taking the other two Christians with them. The Christian who came back was the swimmer who had accompanied the Asturian. Later other Indians made a canoe and took the remaining white men to their houses, and then carried them further still ; and they went in such a way that they expected never to see the other two whom the In- dians had taken.
This outline of these details is given that we may see if from the descriptions we can form an idea of the location of this region be- yond the narrow ancon, and to enable us to form a proper defini- tion of the word.
aLater those Indians sent five of the white men to other Indians, who they said were s on another ancon six leagues onward. Three went to the new ancon, among whom was Castillo; and two went down more coastward and died of hunger; and Andres Dorantes, his cousin Diego Dorantes, and the negro remained in the rancho of those who had first taken them — slaves. Still later the Indians sent these three also forward, and they found the dead bodies of some of those five sent before. From there [the most westward ancon six leagues from the narrow one] they went on and encountered other Indians; and there Andres Dorantes saw one of the three (who did not go by the coast and who had gone further forward), and he said that the two swimmers had passed through there, naked, and swearing that they would not stop till they had reached a land of Christians; and Oviedo states that this one, who was Valdivieso, said that he saw 'the clothes, breviary, etc., of the Asturian there (beyond the narrow ancon) • and he found that two days from there they had killed him, and a little beyond still they had killed an- other, Diego de Huelva, "because he passed from one house to an-
JSee Oviedo, 598, et seq.
A. Study of the Route of Cdbeza De Vaca. 253
other/' — a phrase used by Cabeza also in this connection.1 There the Dorantes party were enslaved again.
Further details will now be given, that we may try to determine how far west this last bay was, and thus fix sundry points on the route along here, if possible.
It is stated by Oviedo that this people ate fish only, and thus had much less hunger than those inland; and he adds that they were scarce of drinking water, because they wandered among overflows and salt water, and that which they had to drink was scant and far off. They were a very coastward people, evidently. Here, Andres Dorantes said, they remained fourteen months — in the years 1529 and 1530 — and he was able to do nothing in the way of escape, be- cause he was surrounded by water, filled with little islands, (for he was on a large island, plainly) ; but he finally passed "a great water" (the bay landward), and next day reached some Indians. Three months later the negro followed and found him. After ten months, Dorantes went on to other Indians more than twenty leagues fur- ther back, where was a river near the ancon Espiritu Sancto, and there lived those Indians who had killed Esquivel. Here also Diego Dorantes had been slain. They killed mice which were abundant along between those rivers; but everything was scarce, because in winter they all went by or along that river from above to below and the reverse, seeking food. They took but little fish in that river except in April, when it overflowed.
There were on the banks [en las costas] of that river many nuts, which the Indians ate in their season, coming from twenty or thirty leagues round about. These nuts were much smaller than those of Spain.2 Oviedo continues that at the end of May the Indians began to go to eat tunas, which fruit was very abundant in that country ; and they went more than forty leagues forward toward Panuco to eat them, where the tunas were in astonishing abundance. These were the great food of the year, and they lasted one and a half or 'two months. He says also that as the Indians go along the coast to eat tunas, they kill many deer3 by driving 'them into the sea, and they leave the salt water and go inland, "eating their
^Cabeza, 77.
2Cabeza says these nuts "are of the size of those of Galicia, and the trees are very big and numerous." — Cabeza, 79.
"These were evidently the antelope of the plains, as may be seen from the La Salle narrations.
254 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
tunas," which "last for fifty or sixty days" from their ripening in August. This is inconsistent with the former statement about going to eat them in May, and perhaps has reference to another kind, since Cabeza notes at least three varieties. We shall see later that Oviedo gets matters mixed along here — especially dates. The narrative here appears to be that of Andres Dor- antes, and he seems to have gone back to this land of tunas west- ward; for he says, that there he, Castillo, and the negro agreed to escape some time before Cabeza came, but were separated in such a way that they could not plot further, and each went with his In- dians to eat nuts, and there Cabeza joined them. Oviedo confirms Cabeza in saying that it was nearly two years yet before they could even agree to escape, and finally, after Cabeza came, they plotted to meet at a point where they were accustomed to eat tunas. From there they went inland to a place where they had been before, but to which their Indians had not gone this year, because there were no tunas there then, as they in some way seemed to know.
It was here that Dorantes, arriving first, met some Indians who also had just reached this place that day. The other Spaniards arrived later, and Castillo was already near there; and it was from tbis inland rather deserted region that the start was made that year, according to Oviedo. Cabeza notes the flight as starting from the land of tunas generally. They found it necessary, however, in order to obtain skins for clothing, which they were told they could not find further on, to remain in this region till the next year. Oviedo says it was in October [por Otubre'] when they first left their Indian masters.
(2} Digest of Cabeza's narrative. — For the sake of comparison, a short review of the Cabeza narrative relative 'to those same events may be necessary : —
1 After remaining in the neighborhood of the Island for about six years Cabeza says that he finally persuaded his sole surviving com- panion to go forward ; that since the latter could not swim, he car- ried this friend "across the inlets and four rivers on the coast." Thence he went to "an inlet [ancon~\ one league wide, very deep everywhere," and this he states seemed to him to be that of the Holy Ghost (Espiritu Sancto). The name of the Indians on the
lCabeza, 76, et seg.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 255
west shore of this inlet was Guevenes, or Quevenes, as he has it else- where. These natives said that there were further on three men like him, and that the Indians still further beyond had killed Diego Dorantes, Valdivieso, and Huelva, "because they had gone from one house to another"; that "their neighbors," with whom was now Captain [Andres] Dorantes, had killed Esquivel, on account of some dream, etc. Cabeza inquired about the country further on, and thus showed that in his forty or fifty leagues of trading along the coast1 he had not gone beyond this ancon — a fact that places it, according to this account also about that far westward from Mal- Hado; since Cabeza says that in his coasting he was thus search- ing for a way to escape by.
Cabeza says2 that Dorantes fled from the region where his fellows were slain (by the Guaycones, as we shall see later according to Cabeza's tribal arrangement), and went to the Mariames, who, he adds, had slain Esquivel, and who were the next tribe from those who had come to meet Cabeza and some Indians from further east, at the great inlet. This journey of Dorantes was that first flight backward which he went, according to Oviedo — the one on which he crossed the "great water." Cabeza has no special mention of the later and long journey of 'twenty leagues, except that part of it which refers to the coming of Dorantes to the river of nuts.3 This distinctly showr, however, that Dorantes fled across the "great water" on an eastward, not a westward, journey. After Dorantes' second flight from the Mariames, Cabeza says that "Castillo and Estevanico went inland to the Iguaces"* who, he says in another place, were neighbors of the Mariames. There is confusion here, for Oviedo says that those who killed Esquivel (Mariames, says Cabeza) lived on the river of nuts, a statement which we have reasons to accept, according to Cabeza's arrange- ment of tribes. They extended from about the mouth of the Guad- alupe Eiver to the true coast at the west end of Ma'tagorda Island.
Cabeza notes that the Spaniards went to eat tunas with the In- dians only thirty leagues away from this general nut region,5 but
1Cabeza, 74. *nid., 87. *IUd., 79. *n>id., 89. *rbid., 95.
256 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
he shows by incidents mentioned that this was the same journey around the coast which they made finally, and, from the end of which they went inland to escape and met the Avavares. Cabeza notes no inland going, for the start; and he has different details of assembling the group from those of Oviedo ; but both agree that it was only one day inland from the tuna region till they met these first Indians with whom they spent the winter. These Cabeza names Avavares, or, in his summary of the tribes,1 Chauauares [or Chavavares] ; and he mentions much wandering and suffering with them, before they settle down, or reach their winter quarters, — details omitted by Oviedo.
(3) Discussion of the islands, rivers, and ancones. — We are now prepared to discuss, and, if possible, locate the va- rious topographical features mentioned by the narratives, and thereby approximate the route of the two parties, in this region.
Some reasons have been given why Galveston Island is taken for the Mal-Hado of Cabeza. As noted, the first river west of it is more than the required leagues given by Oviedo; but we may justly be- lieve that the Indians, in setting the Spaniards across the water, which was directly on their way — for pay — would have been re- quired to land them beyond the northern extension of Oyster Bay; and thus landed the Spaniards would find it only about two leagues to Oyster Eiver. This would not ordinarily be called a large river, but it was now at high flood, and answered that description.
The second river was the one with the furious current that car- ried the rafts immediately to the sea; and the Brazos will certainly answer to this. It is about three leagues from Oyster Eiver, and the only powerful stream entering the sea directly on this coast.
The next was three or four leagues from the second — a condition filled by San Bernard River, where they found the deserted barge of Enriquez; and at "other five or six leagues" they found the fourth river, which was "great" [grande~], and had two settlements of Indians on it. Caney River is about the first of these distances from the last stream, but it does not seem so "great," unless again we recall that it was flood time when Dorantes passed. Cabeza says that all four of the rivers were called "great" by Dorantes, when the latter told him of their journey; but Cabeza himself simply says
, 124.
A. Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 257
"four rivers on the coast," when telling of his own trip past them. Naturally here the word "great" suggests the Colorado for this fourth stream; but it is too far from the third, and does not dis- embogue on the true coast. Oviedo shows by what the Indians said that the men of the governor's barge, and those from that of Enri- quez, were walking along the coast, while the governor and a few others rowed or sailed along and near the shore ; and the barge set those walking over the rivers and inlets. The Colorado with its broad mouth would be one over which they would most need the aid of the barge; but it is not at all probable that the governor went twenty miles on to Pass Cavallo, and twenty back, to set them over. The Dorantes party was now passing the same crossing as that passed by the men of the governor, according to the Indians, who had seen the latter; so it is almost demonstrated that none of these three parties went around the east point of Matagorda Bay, and passed inland, or crossed the Colorado or even went along the northern edge of the narrow peninsula. There seems to be no evidence in the narratives that any of these Spaniards ever saw the Colorado, unless it was Cabeza when he made those early trading and explor- ing trips forty or fifty leagues west of Mal-Hado. He doubtless knew too much to try to reach Panuco in that way.1 Dorantes said that he had crossed the ancon several times before this on his pre- liminary trips, as he "went through the length of the coast forty leagues forward."2 Probably all these parties went down the south- ern margin of Matagorda Peninsula, in which case Caney Eiver would be the fourth river Cabeza and Dorantes speak of crossing.
Four days from here, says Oviedo, they came to an ancon, or inlet, which lay so that it formed a point half a mile long toward Panuco. Four days, as they travelled, fatigued and searching the sea coves for crawfish and "rockweed," whatever that was, would not exceed the distance from Caney River to Pass Cavallo, which is certainly the next ancon. So far, I have left this word in the original pur- posely, to show its more specific meaning in these narratives as
llt is plain that none of these— especially the Dorantes party — ever knew the extent of the Matagorda Peninsula, else they would never have described the bay as making a point seaward only half a mile long. For this reason they knew nothing of its northern edge nor of the mouth of the Colorado.
20viedo, 592.
258 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
referring in nearly every case to a narrow strip of water, which was either the inlet from the sea to an expanded bay, or a straft between two islands or an island and the mainland. This is espe- cially so with Oviedo, who uses the word most. The first port on the Florida coast proper was "una bahia que era baxa" — another word for an expanded sheet. A day further the governor goes by land, and at night comes to "una bahia que entra por la tierra" — a bay that goes inland.1 Undeniably these are Charlotte Harbor and Tampa Bay — the only such on this coast; and it may be seen that the ancon idea is not in them, and the word, therefore, is not used about them. Later on he speaks of swampy arms of the sea as "baxas" (bajas), and notes"lagunas" in the same region. He has a word for inundated places (anegados or anegadicos) and another (paludes) for permanent swamps. When the barges started along the Florida coast Oviedo says they went seven days through those "baxas" and entered many "ancones," which last "they struck along that coast," and the (<baxas' went inland. One needs only to examine the bays from that of Santa Rosa to that of Mobile to get a clear conception of what Oviedo means by these words. For any indefinite expansion, of which he seems to know not the name, he uses the phrase, "una agua grande,"2 (a great water). Know- ing, therefore, what the narrators mean, we have no difficulty in seeing that the route lay wholly along the coast of the gulf proper, and was not inland around some broad bay, as has been maintained. Like the rivers, the ancones are there now in proper sequence, and they enable us to form very definite ideas of the end of this stage of the great journey. The first, which Cabeza calls the "great," was Pass Cavallo ; and the crossing of the Dorantes party was evi- dently to Matagorda Island — not to the mainland. Thence Oviedo says they went twelve leagues (30 miles) to the little one, narrow as a river. This was surely Cedar Creek, which is the proper dis- tance from Pass Cavallo, and, according to Cabeza, about that from Mal-Hado; for he says that when the Dorantes party had reached this place, they had lost two men in going sixty leagues, though, from Oviedo, we should infer this to be only about fifty leagues — twelve and forty — which comports with the actual distance. The
I0viedo, 584. "Ibid., 599.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 259
Indians told the Dorantes party that six leagues further on there was another ancon, to which statement Aransas Pass answers with sufficient accuracy.
(4) The River of Nuts. — There is mentioned in both narratives a river, as if it were situated quite near the first great ancon. Cabeza certainly implies that he crosoed this "great" inlet to the mainland — not to Matagorda Island — where he finds Indians, who hrd come to meet those who were vrith him. He says that he remained with these — the Guevenes — while his companion returned across the inlet. He says that after these Indians had given him much information, (and after he had evidently been with them sometime) they told him that in two days the Dorantes party "would come to a place about a league from there on the shore of that river to feed on nuts."1 Oviedo says that Dorantes went (back east) to the river of nuts near the Espiritu Sancto ancon. Let us recall that while he was west of this, he had crossed from the marginal islands and was now in- land, having passed a great water; and, since it may be seen that the Espiritu Sancto is the same in both narratives, we may be sure that the Colorado can not be this river of nuts. It is too far east. As, according to Oviedo, it was a river of length and importance to the tribes, the choice is left between the Lavaca and the Guada- lupe. We shall see later that the relative positions of the tribes and the distance over which Dorantes returned to this river — the twenty leagues — favor the latter.
With regard to Cabeza's statement that the Indians mentioned that this river was "a league from there," i. e., from some point on the mainland, we may see that he was not necessarily at the great ancon at the time of this estimate. He was with the tribe that lived west of it, and they had come to meet the Deaguenes at the ancon. The inference is that their abiding place was then at a distance from the ancon — doubtless on the river of nuts. Again, it must be noted that his "there" (from which the river was only a league) was on the edge of another tribe, since the Indian who told him of the coming of the Dorantes party, and offered to lead him to them, spoke a different language from that of Cabeza's Indians.2
, 78. 'Ibid., 80.
260 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
As this savage was going to visit those with whom Dorantes was, he was likely one of that tribe — the Mariames, the same with whom Dorantes was now, since they were the same that killed Esquivel, as we have already seen. These Mariames were the second tribe beyond the ancon, according to Cabeza, and hence here is evidence, inasmuch as they came from the west with Dorantes to the river of nuts, that this river was west of the great ancon at least the width of a tribe — if not further. Nothing but the Guadalupe will satisfy these conditions.
Considering the one day journey cf Dorantes across the "great water," and the twenty leagues further back to the river of nuts, which he went, and keeping in view also Cabeza's location of the tribes, we shall see that a more eastern position for this river is not indicated, unless Dorantes did not get so far west as Oviedo attests by the itinerary and Cabeza implies by the situation of the tribes. To review Dorantes's limits: — We might infer from the combina- tion of the two accounts, that Dorantes met Figueroa three leagues beyond the narrow ancon — our Cedar Creek; for Oviedo says that it was twelve leagues to this pass, and Cabeza says that they met "another of our parties" (who was Figueroa, of course), when they had gone fifteen leagues from the first ancon. But this twelve and fifteen are two different estimates of the distance between the ancones, made by the two narratives, since Figueroa and his Indian came over water to where the other "nine" were, and he came from the other side [parte] of an ancon, so narrow that the white men could see and call to the Indian there. The only two swimmers of the party went back with him. This starts Figueroa and these swimmers on St. Joseph's island. Turning to Cabeza,1 we note that he makes Figueroa say that some time before that, while with these same Indians here, he learned from them that with the Mari- ames there was a Christian who had come on with the Guevenes; and he adds that with these, this stranger came on over to the other, or western, side of the narrow ancon and met him (Figueroa) there. This was the Esquivel already noted — one of the commis- sary's men, who was still struggling on west, from the great ancon, where the governor was lost, and where lived these Guevenes. Naturally the inference is that Figueroa was then with the tribe
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 261
west of the Mariames. These were the Guaycones, according to Cabeza's enumeration of the tribes,1 and they were on the coast,2 and, it would now seem, occupied at least the east end of St. Joseph's Island, which was just acrocw the narrow ancon. The second day after Figueroa went back two Indians, whom the whites still could call to on the other side of the narrow ancon, took the remaining Christians over the ancon in a canoe to their houses, since they were from a rancho near by. Two days later, still those of this rancho moved, and, taking these Spaniards with them, they must have gone some distance, along this island, since it was done "in a man- ner that they were never more able to see the other two Christian.-; which those Indians had taken/ 3
But these Christians were such a burden to keep that those "In- dians sent five of them on to another ancon, which they said was forward six leagues.4 This was doubtless Aransas Pass. So far, the location of all is clear, with the presumption that the two swim- mers were on ahead along the edge of the bay. Oviedo states that Castillo, Valdivieso, and Huelva stayed at this last ancon "much time," and the other two of the five went "further down to the coast," which means on the southeastern edge of the island.
Oviedo recapitulates here, seeming to give the detailed narrative of Dorantes about the death of the others, how the latter subse- quently had met Valdivieso who was from the other bank or shore [parte], and who there at the furthest ancon, had heard of the passing onward of the swimmers, and of their death further on.
There is no evidence that Dorantes himself ever left the island of St. Joseph on any forward journey, and here he became enslaved ; here the people had fish and fared better than those inland; here they went about through salt swamps, destitute of good water; here he, Castillo, and the negro pulled the canoes of the Indians about in the great heat through those "anegados" or shallow swales on the margin of the island. It was these westward neighbors of the
lCabeza, 124.
2There is much evidence from Cabeza that the territory of the Mariames extended to the coast proper, though he says they were in front of and further inland from the Guevenes. Doubtless their inland village was, but they are mentioned as being at the narrow ancon or Cedar Creek on the true coast.
S0viedo, 395. 598.
262 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Mariames who did all this killing, and were the Guay cones still, according to Cabeza; and here, among small islands, entirely "sur- rounded by water," as Dorantes said, they remained fourteen months, slaves. From the west end of this island it may be seen, therefore, Dorantes crossed the "great water," and fled as far as he could, which would be naturally inland for a while, having thus crossed Aransas Bay east of Harbor Island, then going around C6- pano Bay, he doubtless made a wide detour further inland to avoid the coast Indians, who had treated him badly, and who, Cabeza says, were so much more cruel and dangerous than those of the interior. In this way, twenty leagues, or fifty two miles, would not pass the Guadalupe River, but would stretch about the proper distance to reach it, where everything else comports so well. The Colorado is out of the question, and the Lavaca is eliminated by the inevitable position of the Mariames west of the tribe at the great ancon; for they were the people who killed Esquivel, at the river of nuts, so evidently the Guadalupe — the nearest one to the great ancon in Dorantes's march back or Cabeza's march forward. (5) The point of escape. — Cabeza evidently met these other Christians first among the Mariames, well inland, and he says that for a while he was in the same fam- ily with Dorantes. Later the latter fled from these (but to where is not said), while Castillo and the negro "went inland to the Iguaces."1 There is no evidence that Cabeza changed tribes, before the trip to the tunas, or the final escape. Both Oviedo and Cabeza give the customs of the Mariames,. in great de- tail, and with much unanimity. From them to the very abundant tuna region, Oviedo says they went along the coast toward Panuco "more than forty leagues," while Cabeza says that after six months the "Indians went for tunas at a distance of thirty leagues from there." The two men may have counted from two different places in the tribe, or by different routes ; for they met in the tuna region and did not go there together ; or they may simply have differed in their estimates of the distance, or the extent of country ranged over in the tuna fields. Either of these distances will reach from the
*It will be seen from this that the Iguaces were more inland than the Mariames, and yet touched the coast neighbors of the latter — the Guay- cones. (See Cabeza, 89.)
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 263
Guadalupe Kiver region considerably beyond Corpus Christi Bay, and place the abundant tunas in Nueces County.
There is something, however, in the sequence of the tribes as given in his summary of them1 and in his itinerary of the escaping journey and in his mention of their relative positions at other places,2 which tends to the conviction that Cabeza's distance, meas- ured from the river of nuts region is the more approximate, and which tends to place the tuna region (and hence the tribe known as "those of the figs") just immediately beyond Corpus Christi Bay.
(6) The Tribes. — For ready reference let us place here Ca- btza's summary, and in connection with this and the itinerary fur- nish a map that shall show the situation of the tribes — at least relatively, if not actually. Says Cabeza:3
"I also do wish to tell of the nations and languages met with from the Island of Ill-Fate [Mal-Hado] to the last ones, the Cu- chendados [never further mentioned or otherwise located]. On the Island of Ill-Fate two languages are spoken, the ones they called Capoques, the other Han. On the mainland, facing the island, are others called of Charruco, who take their name from the woods in which they live. Further on, along the seashore, are others, who call themselves Deguenes* and ;n front of them others named those of Mendica. Further on? on the coast, are the Quevenes, [just beyond the great ancon, he says elsewhere], and in front, further inland the Mariames? and following the coast we come to the Guaycones9 and in front of them inland the Yeguaccs.1 After those come the Atayos, and behind them others, called Decubadaos, of whom there are a great many further on in that direction. On the coast live the Quitoles* and in front of them, inland, the Chau-
*Cabeza, 123-124.
27bt<f., 77, 79, 82, 83, 86, 87, 89, 96, 97, 99, IP, 112.
'Pp. 123-124.
*Elsewhere Cabeza refers to these as Deaguanes (p. 79), and speaks of "when I was with the Affuenes" (p. 120), evidently the same people. In the original of the 1555 print, the word above used is Doguenes.
Must beyond the river of nuts.
'Who, he says (p. 77) killed Valdivieso and several others of the Span- iards, which we have seen was on St. Joseph's Island.
'Elsewhere referred to as being more inland and neighbors just west of or onward from, the Mariames. He calls them Iguaces, also.
'Perhaps on the west end of St. Joseph's Island, or at least west of Aransas Bay.
264
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 265
auares.1 These are joined by the Maliacone& and the Cultal- chulches and others called Susolas and Comos.3 Ahead on the coast are the Camolas,4 and further on those whom we called the people of the figs.
All these people have homes and villages and speak different languages."
In connection with the location of these "Fig people" are two interesting statements, one from Oviedo and the other from Cabeza. It will be recalled that Oviedo says5 that Dorantes went westward to another ancon where some others had been sent by the Indians six leagues beyond the narrow ancon. Here he found Valdi- vieso, who was of the other parte, or shore. In all previous places in this connection this phrase "otra parte" is used for the "other shore" of an ancon. So it would seem as if Valdivieso had been on Mustang Island, which is likely, since "he told how the other two Christian swimmers had passed through there/' and he said to Do- rantes that he had seen their clothes and the breviary of the As- turian.
Then Valdivieso returns, and he and his companions are killed more westward, all on Mustang Island, since it was beyond the "otra parte" of the ancon which was six leagues west of the narrow one — Aransas Pass. The Guaycones were, therefore, beyond thia last ancon, for it was they, Cabeza says, who did this killing. Ca- beza says6 that during the winter which they spent with the Ava- vares these "told us they had seen the Asturian and Figueroa with other Indians on the coast, which we had named of the figs. Since, so far, this phrase, "on the coast," has always referred to the strictly seaward edge of the island stretches along the gulf proper, we may conclude that it refers to the same here ; and the two accounts are about the same incident. But Cabeza says also7 that Valdivieso and Huelva were killed by the neighbors of the Mariames — the Guaycones still. This pushes the Fig People well west, since there
1Elsewhere (p. 99) called the Avavares. ^Northwestward, as we may see from the itinerary. "Quite likely the same called by Cabeza (p. 105) Coayos, since these are there placed in the same relationship. 'Elsewhere (p. 97) called the Camones. 5P. 598. «P. 110. T. 77.
266 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
were two tribes between these and the Guay cones. The one just east was the Camones, or Camoles, who killed the men of the barge oi' Tellez. We may infer, therefore, that the stranding of this barge was off of, or at least onward as far as, the west end of Mustang Island, since Valdivieso, who had been over there, makes no men- tion of the event in his report, "from the other side," to Dorantes ; and Dorantes makes no note of having heard of it. As Cabeza, Do- rantes, Castillo, and Estevanico, while with the Anagados, who had Castillo at the time of the start to the Avavares from the tuna re- gion, saw the clothes of the men of Tellez, and heard that "the barge was still there stranded," the matter would seem to have been one of such importance that the savages would have spoken of it to Dorantes, had he got this far west. In like manner Valdivieso would have heard of it. Furthermore, since these Anagados must rTave been just off inland from the Camones — the murderers — and were near to the place where Cabeza and Dorantes were eating tunas then, it would 'seem that Cabeza and Dorantes never reached the Fig People just beyond, on this trip, and hence to escape, went inland, — as Oviedo says they did — from the region just east of Corpus Christi Bay. This very definitely locates the Anagados northwest of the inland tip of Corpus Christi Bay, and the final start, a year later, was from some point just slightly northwest of this, wherever was the village of the Avavares — perhaps on the Aransas River, since the ranchos were usually on streams. But the Fig people were be- yond Corpus Christi Bay; and if the Spaniards ever got that far west, it was on some trip for tunas previous to the one at which they escaped.
I 'submit, also, a copy of Buckingham Smith's map of the tribes in this connection. It will be seen that he makes the Aguenes and Deguenes — Deaguenes in another place — different tribes, and places the Mariames too far inland to be encountered by passing purely along the coast.1 He places, if I understand his topography, the Fig people and the Avavares group around and off inland from Aransas Bay. He does not have the Guaycones and the Mariames neighbors, as the account demands, and he has the Iguaces less, rather than more, inland than the Mariames. Cabeza says they
JHe is led astray by Cabeza's statement that the Mariames were "further inland" from the Quevenes. We may. however, justly infer that at the time they met Figueroa and slew Esquivel they were on the coast.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca.
267
t
268 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
were more. His whole scheme is influenced by a preconceived far inland route for Cabeza, which he subsequently modified.
3. From the Land of the Tunas to the region of the Iron Mountain.
1. The time and the itinerary. — The two accounts, when all things are considered, appear to agree as to the time of going to the Avavares. Cabeza, counting the months by moons solely, says he escaped from his Indians on the 16th of September, or a little past the full moon, when the new moon was on. the first; and Oviedo says that the next day, as they approached the new Indians, it was already the time for the tunas to be gone, "porque era por otubre" — because it was -through or during October, literally — but we find later that he says that it was the first of the month ; for he says that they staid there among these Indians e(dende primero de otubre hasta el mes de agosto" "from the first of October to the month of August." Then they regarded the tunas sufficiently ripe for them to 'start. Not count- ing August, this makes ten months, "according to the reckoning of the moons," while Cabeza states that they remained with the Avavares eight months, and mentions no lingering with any other tribes near them, — the excursion to the Susolas1 seeming to take place in the meantime.2 The "eighteen" months on page 111 of the Bandelier translation is a misprint, since the original has "ocho" (eight). Cabeza notes at least ten days of wandering in an in- definite direction with the Avavares, before they settle for winter. This was immediately before the side visit to the Susolas. All this is omitted by Oviedo.
In August, according to Oviedo's specific statement, or in June, or the last of May, by inference from Cabeza's dates and periods,8 the party set out on its final journey. The mere "time of the tunas" does not help us here, as much as it would appear, for we find this "eating" referred to at all seasons, and it is at times, hard to de- termine whether they were eating fresh or dried fruit, ripe or
Wabeza, 105-107.
2We shall see that Cabeza is the more nearly correct. 'Later, we shall see that this was really about the first of July, Oviedo being evidently in error.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 269
green, or merely the leaves. These latter Cabeza says they baked, and Oviedo says they buried them from one day to the other (to make them "less rough") and some were boiled, [cocidas~\. After they had been on the way thirteen days, Oviedo mentions green tunas that were beginning to ripen, and a day later, good ones.1
In about thirty-one days, according to Oviedo, they came to a large river, which both accounts compare with the Guadalquiver at Seville. The first day they went seven leagues, and this distance may be taken as a day's jour- ney, when nothing hinders them. On one other they went "eight or nine great leagues," another only five. On the second day out they stopped, and for eight days they tarried" to eat of a bitter, milky-juiced small fruit [granillos in Oviedo], noted by both. There were large forests of the bearing trees. At another place they rested fifteen days, which, deducting time lost in other ways, would leave only about eight of actual travel. Cabeza notes2 that they got lost one day, at the end of which they stayed in the woods, and they must have spent much of the next finding the trail again. Oviedo also speaks of their being lost once.
Cabeza is not so definite in this itinerary, but he has only five days of actual travel. He places the region of mesquite east of the large river, and has at least one day spent in a feast there. Oviedo has it that "before sunset" they came to the river, and as it grew dark they came to one hundred ranches beyond. From this, the next morning, they went a league and a half to another pueblo where the Indians gave them mesquite meal.
However this may be, there is evidence that so far more than six days were spent in travel, which would roundly amount to forty leagues, or about 100 miles to the river — a distance which would reach from the center of the Avavares, in central San Patrick) County, to the Frio River in central Frio County, north of the junction with the Lena fork.
As to the character of this stream, Cabeza says :3 "It may have been as wide as the one of Sevilla, and had a swift current." Oviedo notes4 that it -seemed to them to be wider than the Guadal-
'•After the full discussion of the route, this topic will be taken up anew in detail. 2P. 115. =P. 129. 4P. 604.
270 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
quiver in Sevilla; that the water came first to the knee, then to the thigh, and for the length of some two lances, to the breast, "without any danger/' Whether the Frio, along here, will answer to this, I can not say. Mr. Alexander Deussen, of the University of Texas, who has been indefatigably patient in aiding me in these studies, calls attention to the statement of Professor Eobert T. Hill in the Eighteenth Eeport of the United States Geological Survey, page 208, in which occurs the following concerning the Frio Kiver, rather inland : —
"It is almost impossible for the traveler who has seen the con- tinuation of this stream in the dry region of the Eio Grande Plain to recognize in it the beautiful flowing river now before him. For- ests of ash, pecan and elm fill the valley, while gigantic cypresses border the water. If he should chance upon one of those water holes, without having traced the continuity of the stream course, he would believe that he stood upon the banks of a large and con- tinuously flowing river. He would soon find, however, that after flowing a short distance, the water would disappear, either by dis- appearance into the bed of the gravel-filled stream-way or through fissures in the solid underbed. These running water holes are con- stant, and do not depend upon the local rains, but are supplied by perennial springs draining the rocks underlying the plateau."
It seems quite probable that near such holes large villages would be located, and that over one of these the Spaniards passed, feeling very naturally that they had crossed a large stream with a "swift current"; and since the bed is "gravel-filled" we may realize the significance of Oviedo's phrase "without danger," as there was no danger of miring. We can see, therefore, how the Frio might fill all the conditions.
It was at the hundred ranchos just beyond this river that they first found the rattles made of gourds, which latter the Indians said floated down the rivers in time of floods.1 Cabeza is indefinite about the time from here to the place where they first saw moun- tains. Since he says that at the hundred ranchos they brought them the next morning "every living soul of that village to be touched by us and to have the cross made over them," and then adds that "The next day we went on," we may infer a day's rest
Wabeza, 129.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 271
here. Oviedo says1 i,hat the day following they went a league and a half to a village of seventy or eighty ranchos where they stayed two days. Thence Oviedo notes six leagues to the Indians that were blind in one or both eyes (who Cabeza says were whiter than any met yet), and thence "five leagues onward" to a river at the foot of the point [punta] of the mountains. This would make the whole distance between the two rivers, according to Oviedo, twelve and a half leagues, as they went it, or about thirty-two miles. Actu- ally, the distance to the next stream of consequence from the Frio is about fifty in a direct line.
While Cabeza notes no distance along here, he has details which would imply greater time than that given by Oviedo. From the hundred ranchos, he goes "to other Indians," and as these gave "us * * * the deer they had killed during the day" we may infer that a night was spent here; and "So we left there also, going to others" ; and he must have stayed all night there, for he says "they rejoiced and danced so much as not to let us sleep." "After we left those we went to many other lodges, but thence on there pre- vailed a new custom," etc. Oviedo has this "nueva forma" occur immediately at (or after the departure from) the hundred ranchos, and thence has omitted a stage or more noted by Cabeza. This stage, however, can not amount to more than one day, since Cabeza says that it was the "following day" after going to the "many other lodges" that they reached the blind Indians. It was here, Cabeza says, that they began to see mountains, and Oviedo notes that "near there were the mountains." If we may credit Cabeza's more de- tailed account, we shall have added to Oviedo's thirteen leagues another day, which is enough to make the full twenty leagues re- quired between the Frio at the crossing and the Nueces at the foot of the "point" of the Anacho Mountains, beyond which the West Nueces continues in the same direction in which the route has so far come. This point is in the region of, say, twenty miles west of Uvalde.
Concerning these mountains, both call them sierras. Cabeza says,2 "and it seemed as if they swept down from the direction of the North Sea, and so, from what the Indians told us, we believe
'Pp. 604. 605. "P. 133.
272 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
they are fifteen leagues from the ocean." Mr. Bandelier infers from this reference to the "North Sea" that the mountains here mentioned extended, "at least approximately, from east to west."1 This may have seemed so to Cabeza, for he may have glanced along the escarpment leading around eastward. But Oviedo looked north- ward; for he says,2 "Near there were the mountains [sierras} and there seemed [to be] a cordillera of them which crossed the country directly to the north." Evidently this account refers to the second elevation of hills, or the dissected Cambrian escarpment which traverses Texas in a northerly direction, since Oviedo says3 they went inland along its margin [halda] directly northward for a great distance before crossing west into it. Cabeza says also that they followed the skirts of the mountains [haldas\ for more than fifty leagues going at first up a river.
The only drawback to this location of what Oviedo calls "the point where commences the said range" is that Cabeza says that from Indian information, he believed that they were only fifteen leagues, or forty miles, from the sea. This point near Uvalde is, of course, irreconcilably further. It is not at all unlikely that the Spaniards misunderstood the Indians here, and that the latter may have signed something about a "great water," that may have meant the Eio Grande, which is about this distance away. Mr. Bandelier, in his "Contributions," has said that the sea must have been this near, because Oviedo had said that they were near enough for the tribes at the mountains to send to the coast for their friends to come and see the wonderful white men; and the next day they came. But here again the great student has misconstrued his au- thority ; for Oviedo says simply, "And immediately that night they sent to call people below toward the sea [mar]" using hacia [toward] and no word meaning entirely to the sea. Next day they came. These people were likely on or near the Rio Grande. If this party had gone this distance (which they had now come) around the coast so that they should now be only forty miles from the sea, they would, before this, have crossed the Eio Grande — a preposterous conception, as will be convincingly shown before this
p. fSS, footnote. »P. 605. 8P. 606.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 273
paper closes. It may be as well said here, as a guide to the fur- ther tracing of this route, that there can no longer be any doubt in the mind of any fair-minded student that this party went up the Rio Grande for at least seventeen days, and crossed it finally not far from the Texas-New Mexico line. The proof of this will occur in its place. In connection with the sixty to ninety leagues that this journey must yet continue northerly, to satisfy the demands of both narratives, the hypothesis that it went in a southerly curve around the coast is not tenable. There is no record of any turn in it for many leagues yet, and when it did turn away from the coast "inland"1 it was "derecho al Norte"* both of which statements the De Soto chroniclers confirm. This alone would place Judge Bethel Coopwood's claim for an all coast route toward Jalisco out of con- sideration.
(2) The inland turn. — It has been usual for students, when they consider this inland turn at all, to note a great discrepancy just here between the two accounts, be- cause Cabeza speaks of fifty . leagues and Oviedo of eighty leagues as consumed on the northern stage now about to be undertaken ; but a brief study of the two narratives will show that they do not conflict so much as may appear. Oviedo first has the party go from a tribe he has just mentioned — the white Indians of Cabeza — to eight lodges, sleep the next night "on the way," and ar- rive the third night at a village of "many ranchos." Then he states that in "that manner they went along by the skirts of the sierras, eighty leagues, a little more or less, entering through the country inland, directly to the North." It will be observed that he bases his start from the "white" Indians. Cabeza notes that after leaving these they went the first day to "twenty lodges,"3 which we know to be the same as Oviedo's eight ranchos., because the same things are recorded as happening there. Then, without de- tail he says* they traveled with these natives three days "to where there were many Indians,"5 and from there he adds "we turned inland for more than fifty leagues, following the slopes of the
138. *0viedo, 606. *Cabeza, 136. •P. 138. This is again evidently Oviedo's "many ranches."
274 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
mountains, and at the end of them [the fifty leagues] met forty dwellings." Hence, according to Oviedo, Cabeza's fifty leagues be- gan three days later than his eighty; and according to Cabeza they began four days later. Now four days' travel amounts to thirty leagues, and the discrepancy is accounted for, or found not to exist.
At the end of the inland journey they found forty "dwellings," says Cabeza, and Oviedo adds that they were at the foot of the sierra, and the Indians here said that they were from a more inland region, and were on the way to their own land.1 Both accounts mention receiving the copper rattle here, which was from the north. Oviedo says later that at this point they had come "one hundred and fifty leagues, a little more or less, from where they had com- menced to journey." Since we have seen that there were eight or more days of actual travel from the Avavares to the river at the foot of the mountains, or about seventy leagues, and since it is from this point that Oviedo measures his eighty leagues inland, we may see that he is very consistent in his estimates, as the seventy from the total one hundred and fifty leave eighty.
Oviedo says nothing about where this northward journey termi- nates, except that they could still turn west into the mountains at the end of it. Since he makes no mention of a great river, it seems probable that he did not reach the Colorado, though, it must be admitted that his and Cabeza's "beautiful river," on which they found the next village just a day west over a mountain could have been on this stream; and the number of leagues inland will lead forty miles beyond it northward, unless there was great meander- ing on the way.
Beyond this, till he gets to what is evidently the Eio Grande, Oviedo has not a single detail of the way that may aid us topographically, except the mention of a very great abun^ dance of pinons. Cabeza has details2 that are quite definite, but not always consistent with any topography, or sequence of topog- raphy, that can be recognized. He has a large river coming from the north which he crosses in company with the Indians beyond the beautiful stream; then there is a plain of thirty leagues to a
lfThey were likely Caddo stock from the Red River Valley. 3Pp. 144-150.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 275
new people who come to meet them from afar ; then another stretch of fifty leagues "through a desert of very rugged mountains"; thence "finally" [with distance beyond the mountains indefinite] "we . . . forded a very big river, with its water reaching to our chest." This last must have been fairly near the chain, for he immediately notes "a plain beyond the chain of mountains," where again people "came to meet us from a long distance." From this point to the next river which flowed "between [or among] moun- tains"— the Eio Grande, as we shall see — where permanent houses were found, it was about thirty leagues, by his itinerary, as well as by that of Oviedo.
This preview is given that we may return and better discuss the situation of the end of the inland journey to the north.
If we consider that they got beyond the Colorado, and that as they turned west (as is intimated and surely happened), they would recross this stream, which might be "the big river coming from the north," somewhere east of Llano or San Saba Counties, since that is the only place where it can be said to come from the north. Previous to this, however, Cabeza notes going through so many tribes that no one could "recall them all," and speaks of their following him through extensive valleys rich in game, with mountains on the sides. No direction is given. It is doubtful if any country just north of the Colorado in this region will fill the conditions — certainly not if the direction is required to be westward at this stage of the way. But on the west side of this river the valleys of the Llano, the San Saba, and the Concho run west, and lead on in the line of the journey, as does the greater river itself bordering San Saba and McCulloch Counties. How- ever, Cabeza does not say that they were going parallel to the gen- eral course of the rivers, and they may have been intersecting these valleys.
There is one statement in Cabeza's narrative which seems to fix the limit of the inland journey at some point south of the Colorado. At the end of his fifty leagues he says that leaving the place where they received tfre copper rattle, they went next day across a moun- tain seven leagues long the stones of which were scoriae or slags of iron. Whatever may be the east and west limits of the position of this mountain, there is no possibility for it to be north of the
276
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Colorado, since the iron deposits of this region do not extend so far north. I submit a map, furnished me by Mr. Alexander Deus- sen, of the extent of the iron ores of this part of the state, running
Map shoving Iroo Ore district of Central Mineral Region of Texas.
(The itoned line marks the boundary of this district.)
Fr»m Data furnUhtd by
Al«xand«r OWMMH
Instructor In 5lolo«r. Univtraur ot
Tutu
from Blanco County to McCulloch. It could have been possible for this party to have come around the edge of the Balcones escarp- ment from Uvalde, past Hondo and the region west of Boerne and on into the mountainous and ferruginous parts of Blanco county, where possibly some hill with iron stained stones might answer Cabeza's conditions — while the Colorado could be the beautiful river, if they bore well to the northwest. From here they could easily have passed this stream, without further mention, and drift- ing more inland (perhaps with those natives who Oviedo says be- longed in that direction), could have easily reached a place where
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 2,77
they could have crossed the Colorado again as it came from the north. However I do not consider this very probable.
The best that I can do here, with my lack of local knowledge of the topography, is to discuss suggestions. Against this view is Oviedo's statement that they went "directly north," and in favor of it very strongly is the positive statement of both narratives that they refused to go to the mountains or into them, but kept along the edges. But when any direction was last indicated in that great inland journey they were going up a river, and no river here runs at all easterly; however, no mention of this river is made even a few days later, and they may have abandoned it. If they continued up it, their way was almost certainly up one or the other branch of the Nueces, which seems to enter the mountains and violate the conditions. It will be recalled that it was possibly the Eio Grande which they thought to be the sea. If this theory should be correct, the direction inland would be at right angles to the direction toward it, at the point where they first saw the mountains. This would lead them from Uvalde around the edge of the Balcones escarp- ment to the Blanco iron region ; and much of this course would be directly north, after a few leagues were passed — the thirty, say, that Cabeza omits before they turn directly inland. While there are yet too many leagues from the Uvalde region to any iron fields north of it, this last way disposes of more of them than any other. It is actually about fifty leagues by this route, but we can not say how much they may have meandered in and out of the various dis- sections of this escarpment, for they are silent on every detail of this great stretch.
Up the general lead of the Nueces, directly northward, the di- lemma of too much distance is greater; and the limits of the iron region here curtail it. If they went this way, Cabeza's iron moun- tain was probably found near the southeast corner of Mason County, just off the Blue Mountains. Mr. Deussen sends a sketch map of the ferruginous lands of this part, and suggests the possibility of a certain ridge near here being Cabeza's mountain.1 In this case
al submit Mr. Deussen's letter:
AUSTIN, May 7, 1906. Mr. James Newton Baskett, Mexico, Mo.:
DEAB SIR: Referring to your favor of the 18th ult., I beg to say that any portion of the so-called Cambrian escarpment, near the corner of Mason and Kimble counties, might satisfy the condition you mention. A
278 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the Llano would be the beautiful river — a stream which in Cabeza's time would well answer the condition.1 I am inclined to this route, and believe that it was the edge of the second, or Cambrian escarp- ment, along which, almost directly northward, these travelers went. In any case they have overestimated the distance they went inland to these villages of the iron region. But it must be admitted that if the Colorado is regarded as one of Cabeza's big rivers, the dis- tance from that to the Pecos, as the other, is about what the nar- rative requires. However, while the thirty leagues of plains may be found, it is impossible to find "a desert of very rugged moun- tain's" destitute of all game, just beyond these and east of the Pecos immediately, or east of any other river, except the Kio Grande ; but about the location of this latter river there is no doubt.
While I am inclined to believe that Cabeza has erred here, at least in the relative position of his second river and his range, or has considered some usually dry bed, filled with a mountain cloudburst, as a big river, on the west side of the trans-Pecos mountains, I venture the possibility of his having come around southwestward from some point west of the Llano River region, say down Dry Devils' River, and then having crossed the Rio Grande as his big river from the north. Thence he may have gone on across Coahuila and have found there, in proper sequence, the plains and the leagues, and ranges, after which he would cross the Rio Grande again at or near the site of the present Presidio San Vincent, whence he might well go on to the same river again at the mouth of the Conchas, and find the permanent houses.2 I am not suffi- ciently acquainted with the topography of th's route to discuss it.
tongue of this escarpment ten to fifteen miles in length constitutes the divide between James River and Rock Creek. The basal member of the rocks constituting it is ferruginous. It is called Blue Mountain. I think this must be the mountain you desire.
Trusting that you are making satisfactory progress with your study, Very truly yours,
ALEXANDER DEUSSEN.
1See article by Louis Reinhardt on "The Communistic Colony of Bet- tina" in THE QUARTERLY, 111 33-40.
*It could be possible, as all the Indians with him along here had come from afar, that he might not realize that this was the same river at the three different points, since it is so distorted in location and direction. The tribes which did know about the region northward were met only thirty leagues out from the final intersection. To make these three intersections, the direction of the line of march need not have been changed except near the mouth of Devil's River.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca. 279
I find later in one of Cabeza's summaries a hint that he came to these permanent houses on the Kio Grande from the south. He says :x "Where the permanent houses are it is so hot that even in January the air is very warm. From there to the southward the land, which is uninhabited as far as the Sea of the North [the Gulf] is very barren and poor. There we suffered great and almost incredible starvation; and those who roam through that country and dwell in it are very cruel people, of evil inclinations and habits/'
It can be shown that Cabeza struck the Kio Grande near the mouth of the Conchas, from which it may be seen that a line to the southward would lead through Coahuila.
1P. 166.
280 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
BOOK KEVIEWS AND NOTICES.
Sketch of the Early History of Basque County (Meridian, Texas, The Tribune Printing Company, 1904, pp. 14) by H. J. and C. M. Cureton is a readable pamphlet contain- ing many details such as from time to time are disappearing for- ever from the knowledge of men with the death of old Texans who have failed to write their reminiscences. This little work deserves special commendation for the reason that, while it contains few in- dications of the sources from which the narrative comes, it evi- dently has fact rather than tradition for its staple, and is presented in such a way as to win at once the confidence of the reader.
G. P. G.
Analytical Index to the Laws of Texas, 1828-1905. By Cadwell Walton Raines (Austin: Von Boeckmann-Jones Company. 1906. Pp. viii, 559.)
This volume is a long-needed index to the ten-volume reprint of the laws of Texas known as Gammers Laws of Texas, and in- cludes as well the laws passed since that reprint. Though intended primarily for use by attorneys and state officials, it renders much more conveniently accessible to students the considerable body of hsitorical material embodied, since 1823, in the laws of Coahuila and Texas, and in those of the Provisional government and the Republic, as well as those of the 'state. Judge Raines' long expe- rience as state librarian and his reputation as a painstaking student of Texas history are sufficient guaranty of the workmanship of this, his last book.
The entries are usually full enough to constitute brief summaries of the laws, and at their shortest they clearly indicate the subjects. The subject headings are arranged in one alphabet, and are set off by heavy-faced type, making the book, in this respect, easy to con- sult; under each heading the entries are arranged chronologically. One could wish, however, that the chronological arrangement had been abandoned in the entries under such a heading as "Relief
Boole Reviews and Notices. 281
Acts," covering nineteen pages of matter, chiefly proper names, which would be more usefully arranged in alphabetical order.
P. L. W.
Westward Extension, 1841-1850. By George Pierce Garrison, Ph. D., Professor of History, University of Texas. (New York and London: Harper and Brothers. 1906. Pp. xiv, 366).
A few years ago a plan for a general history of the United States was formulated by Professor A. B. Hart, of Harvard University, and others, which contemplated a series of volumes to be prepared under the general editorship of Professor Hart, by specialists upon particular features of our country's history, the idea being to select men with reference to their peculiar fitness for the particular sub- jects and epochs involved.
Dr. Garrison's services were secured for the period above men- tioned, and this volume is the result. What is known as the west- ward movement had been going on in the United States ever since the first frontiersman crossed the Alleghanies. It continued unin- terruptedly notwithstanding strenuous opposition to it in the north- eastern section of the Union. The main historical interest of the movement centered in the region south of the Ohio River and south- westwardly for reasons mentioned by Mr. Roosevelt in his "Win- ning of the West." He says, "The way in which the southern part of our western country, that is, all the land south of the Ohio river, and from thence on to the Rio Grande and Pacific, was won and settled, stands quite alone. The region north of it was filled up in a very different manner. The Southwest, including what was once called, simply, the West, and afterwards the Middle West, was won by the people themselves, acting as individuals and groups of individuals, who hewed out their own fortunes in advance of any governmental action.
On the other hand, the Northwest, speaking broadly, was acquired by the government, the settlers merely taking possession of what the government guaranteed them. * * * North of the Ohio the regular army went first. The settlements grew up behind the Federal troops of Harmar, St. Clair, and Wayne and their suc- cessors, even to our own day.
The wars in which the borderers themselves bore any part, were
282 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
few and trifling compared to the contests waged by the adventurers who won Kentucky, Tennessee and Texas.
In the southwest the early settlers acted as their own army. In- deed, the southwesterners not only won their own soil for them- selves, but were the chief instruments in the original acquisition of the northwest. The warlike borderers who thronged across the Alleghanies, the reckless hunters, the hard, dogged frontier farm- ers, by dint of grim tenacity, overcame and displaced French, In- dian, and Spaniard alike."
In this book, Dr. Garrison briefly traces this movement down to the year 1841, when these same frontiersmen are flying their own flag. Six hundred miles in advance of the furthest outposts of the United States with their laws, customs and institutions transplanted over the fertile area of Texas, from which they had a few years before displaced the Indian and Mexican. He takes the story of their incorporation into the Union from its legitimate beginning, and traces it through the intricate mazes of interna- tional diplomacy, the Mexican war and American politics and car- ries it to its final consummation on the shores of the Pacific — and when this is done, he gives us an elaborate survey of the steps by which this immense territory was adjusted to the political con- ditions of the United States. In doing so he has had to deal with the slavery issue, and many facts and circumstances bearing im- mediately or indirectly on that issue, which perplexed the minds and stirred the passions of people in that day.
Political antagonisms and party strife were at white heat, dur- ing most of that period, and historians and writers of that epoch have, as a rule, not been able to divest themselves of the influence of the political partisanship resulting from the struggle of that day. In dealing with questions that involve passions, and motions of men, the historian has a delicate and difficult task, but Dr. Gar- rison has brought to his aid much that is new to the world, has had the advantage of a fifty-year survey of the results, and im- mense facilities for examining questions from every point of view, and has surveyed the whole subject with a purely historic spirit, and woven together the whole history with the genius of the artist and wisdom of the philosopher.
The chapter on the boundary of Texas is perhaps the most dis-
Book Reviews and Notices. 283
tinctly orignal contribution to United States history in the vol- ume. It is comprehensive, accurate, and valuable, and will put a new phase upon that question. There has long been and still is a notion that the cause of the Mexican war was a boundary dispute, and it will probably never be entirely dissipated until 90 per cent of all the present school histories are destroyed and the present generation is all dead, or the study of Garrison's chapter on the subject is made compulsory in the schools.
The very full accounts of the various diplomatic negotiations of that decade afford opportunities for a much better estimate of the history of annexation than we have hitherto had, while the chap- ters on the Slidell mission and rupture with Mexico give a proper insight into the attitude of the United States and Mexico toward each other in 1845. A proper review in the QUARTERLY would consume more space than could be allowed, and many interesting and instructive references in other chapters, calculated to revise the judgment of many who have gone over the ground in other histories, must be passed unnoticed.
A very instructive and unusually interesting and helpful feature of the book is the series of maps and charts which accompany the text. They not only elucidate, but they supplement the text, show- ing many facts and are full of suggestions that would not occur to the average reader. They are original compilations and are exe- cuted in the best style.
The chapter on the Ashburton treaty will hardly impress one, at first blush, as being germane to westward extension, but when considered in connection with the chapter on the settlement of the Oregon question, its relevancy will be apparent. The same may be said of the chapter on the Isthmian Canal.
The book fills an important gap in United States history, and, therefore, meets a demand that had existed in Texas for some years. Its two-fold value as a part of the history of the whole country, and of the most interesting and important part of the political history of Texas, and its assured rank as standard United States history should give it a place in every library in our State.
Z. T. FTJLMORE.
I. & G. N. R. R.
TRAIN DE LUXE
A Perfectly Appointed Hotel on Wheels, composed of Pullman's
Latest Designs in
Elegance, Luxury and Comfort
Drawing-Room Sleepers, Compartment Sleepers, Observation Library and Buffet Sleepers
Dining Car a la Carte
Time and Service the Fastest and Finest ever presented in the South
Austin to St. Louis, 25 Hours Austin to Mexico City, 34 Hours
Only one night out in either direction.
FOR MEXICO
Leave Austin 10:35 a. m. Wednes- days and Saturdays. Arrive Mexico City 8:30 p. m., Thursdays and Sundays.
FOR ST. LOUIS
Leave Austin 6:40 p. m., Wednes- days and Sundays.
Arrive St. Louis 8:00 p. m., Thurs- days and Mondays.
Only first-class railroad and Pullman tickets accepted on this train. Reservations can be made in advance by notifying Town Office, 522 Congress Avenue, corner Sixth Street.
R J. LAWLESS, Agent.
FELLOWS AND LIFE MEMBERS
OF THE
ASSOCIATION
The constitution of the Association provides that "Members who show, by published work, special aptitude for historical investigation, may become Fellows. Thirteen Fellows shall be elected by the Association when first organized, and the body thus created may thereafter elect additional Fellows on the nomination of the Executive Council. The number of Fellows shall never exceed fifty."
The present list of Fellows is as follows:
BARKER, MR. EUGENE C. KLEBERG, RUDOLPH, JR.
BATTS, JUDGE R. L. LEMMON, PROF. LEONARD BOLTON, PROF. HERBERT EUGENE LOOSCAN, MRS. ADELE B.
CASIS, PROF. LILIA M. MCCALEB, DR. W. F.
CLARK, PROF. ROBERT CARLTON MILLER, MR. E. T.
COOPER, PRESIDENT O. H. PENNYBACKER, MRS. PERCY V.
COOPWOOD, JUDGE BETHEL RATHER, ETHEL ZIVLEY
Cox, DR. I. J. SHEPARD, JUDGE SETH
ESTILL, PROF. H. L. SMITH, PROF. W. ROY
FULMORE, JUDGE Z. T. TOWNES, PROF. JOHN C.
GAINES, JUDGE R. R. WILLIAMS, JUDGE O. W.
GARRISON, PROF. GEORGE P. WINKLER, MR. ERNEST WILLIAM
GRAY, MR. A. C. WOOTEN, HON. DUDLEY G. HOUSTON, PRESIDENT D. F.
The constitution provides also that "Such benefactors of the Association as shall pay into its treasury at any one time the sum of thirty dollars, or shall present to the Association an equivalent in books, MSS., or other acceptable matter, shall be classed as Life Members."
The Life Members at present are:
BRACKENRIDGE, HON. GEO. W. Cox, MRS. NELLIE STEDMAN
HANRICK, R. A. SUMPTER, JESSE
THE QUARTERLY
OF THE
TEXAS STATE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION VOL. X. APRIL, 1907. No. 4.
The publication committee and the editors disclaim responsibility for view expressed by contributors to THE QUARTERLY.
A GLIMPSE OF ALBERT SIDNEY JOHNSTON THROUGH THE SMOKE OF SHILOH.
J. B. ULMER.
Thirty-nine years ago, April 6th, 1862,1 was fought one of the bloodiest battles that ever occurred on this continent, called by the Confederates the Battle of Shiloh, from a large log church somewhat to the left of the centre of our line of battle, which was used by General Beauregard as his headquarters. But to begin this tale of the long ago, I will say I was a member at that time of Company C, Wirt Adams's Cavalry; a regiment composed of companies from Alabama, Mississippi and Louisana. Our Company was raised chiefly in Choctaw County, Alabama, with contingents from both Washington and Clarke Counties. One of the commissioned officers, Lieutenant White, was from Washing- ton County. The Company was raised early in the summer of 1861 and organized at Mt. Sterling, Alabama, with F. Y. Gaines, captain; W. W. Long, W. P. Cheney and White, lieutenants.
Our services had been offered through the governor of the State to the Confederate government. We were fully equipped with Sharp's rifles, sabers, Colt's army revolvers, and the regular U. S. dragoon saddles. Our uniform was a heavy gray cassimere, with the proper trimmings incident to that branch of the service. This equipment, including the uniforms, was presented to the company
is narrative was written in 1&01.
286 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
by Colonel Sam Euffin, of Choctaw County; hence the name by which we were known, "Buffm Dragoons." The ladies of Mt. Sterling and its vicinity — women of blessed memory — met from day to day in the Masonic hall of the village, until every member was furnished with a handsome uniform.
Nearly every man furnished his own horse; some were supplied by the more wealthy citizens of the county; others again were complimented by being presented with finer animals than they possessed, or horses more fitted for the hard service they were destined to endure — notably, as I remember, Captain Gaines was presented by Hon. Frank Lyon, of Demopolis, with a fine sorrel. The equipment furnished by Colonel Euffin, I was informed, coat him about $30,000. How well I remember the day when we left Mt. Sterling for the front, the 25th of September, 1861. Nearly all of us were young men and boys just from school. The officers were older, and Captain Gaines had seen service in Mexico as an officer of U. S. dragoons. This, of course, gave some prestige, and lent us some prominence in the regiment to which we were as- signed. I, myself, was fresh from the class-room, with no experi- ence whatever of any of the ruder sides of life.
We went from Mt. Sterling to Lauderdale, Mississippi, where we were loaded on trains for Memphis, Tennessee. There we were enrolled "for the war in the Confederate service." We went by way of Nashville to Bowling Green, Kentucky, and became a part of General A. S. Johnston's army confronting Buell, the Federal commander in that part of the State. Here we joined other com- panies, and Wirt Adams's Cavalry Eegiment was formed. We were drilled in company and regimental tactics, picketing the front and doing scouting duties.
Early in February, 1862, the Federals, not desiring to force Johnston's position, commenced flanking movements by way of the Cumberland and Tennessee Eivers, pushing their gunboats up those streams, and gaining the battle of Fort Donelson, where the Confederate General Buckner surrendered a considerable force. This made it apparent that the withdrawal of the army from Bowl- ing Green was imperative.
After the Battle of Fort Donelson, General Grant pushed his forces further south to the vicinity of Pittsburg, a small village on the Tennessee Eiver, not more than twenty-five miles from Corinth,
Albert Sidney Johnston Through the Smoke of Shiloh. £87
Mississippi, where the Confederates were rapidly gathering to op- pose his advance. At this particular place, General Johnston came prominently into view before the country and the world. His methods and strategy had been severely criticized by a part of the Southern press. Mile after mile of the country had been given up without a blow, and apparently it was not understood or ap- proved. It was said a delegation even went to Richmond and de- manded the general's removal. But Mr. Davis said to them "if Albert Sidney Johnston is not a general, I have none; so they got back in time to see one of the masterly moves of the war — one by which undoubtedly the conqueror of Lee at Appomattox would have been relegated to the shades had not death overtaken Johnston on the evening of April 6, 1862.
Three days' rations were ordered in the haversacks, and our regiment took the road in the direction of Monterey. I think this was Wednesday, the 3d of April. Other roads leading in that di- rection were choked with moving masses of men, infantry, and artillery, with their necessary trains of ordnance and commissary stores. The weather had been rainy and the roads were bad. Who of us that was there and toiled through that rain and mud can ever forget it?
On the morning of the 5th of April, Company C of Wirt Adams's Regiment was ordered to report to the commanding gen- eral for escort duty. Our uniforms were new and our horses in good condition, and altogether we did not make a bad appearance. Well do I recollect the look of wonder and inquiry that swept over young and beardless faces when we heard the words of the order. We knew of the lonely vigil on the far out picket post, the firing line on the skirmish front, scouting, and so on, but the idea of being escort to the head of the army brought up all sorts of ques- tions, and our officers were plied with inquiries.
Right here let us notice some conditions that always held between the Confederate private and his officers. Off duty, we all were free and easy. Even on duty, except on drill and parade, there ran all through the army an easy tolerance that lent itself so admirably to both rank and file when the individualism of the sol- dier was demanded in hottest battle ; when lines irregularly rushed to the charge, or beaten back, would suddenly nerve themselves to a stand and again rush forward — not shoulder to shoulder, or
288 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
elbows touching, as we often read in fancy sketches, but every man and officer acting, as it were, individually, and each feeling as if the result depended upon himself alone. So in camp the license of the soldier was controlled by the "morale" of the man, and hence the proverbial easy intercourse between officers and men.
However, we soon found out our duties as a general's escort, though our lot together, alas, was too short. The night of the 5th of April, General Johnston bivouacked in a skirt of woods near an old field, an infantry line of battle just in front and extending through the dense woods and thickets to right and left, with bat- teries of field artillery just in the rear and occupying assigned positions given them by the staff.
From early in the day, General Johnston had been anxious for the more prompt arrival of the troops. Delay after delay oc- curred. Staff officers had been sent back to urge haste, but it de- veloped that the two corps of Bragg and Polk had become en- tangled with each other, on account of the narrow muddy roads, and the miring ordnance and artillery teams, and a part of one of these commands had to diverge into the woods and cut a new road before the forward movement could be hastened. It was evident that the attack was to begin on the arrival of the troops in position, and but for this delay the battle would have opened on Saturday. What might have been the result had the plans of the general been caried out can now only be left to conjecture. Certain it is, Buell would not have been in reach, for on that day his army was nearly twenty-five miles away, and the history of the second day would not so have been written, and General Grant would not have been at Appomattox to receive General Lee's surrender.
But I am anticipating. The escort bivouacked near the gen- eral's headquarters. Our slim rations in the haversacks were ex- hausted, and our commissary wagon was far in the rear. Sentinels were detailed under a proper officer and thrown around the gen- eral's tent; night and quiet had settled down immediately around us. Only the distant tramp of detailed detachments as they hur- ried to join their respective brigades, or the peculiar rumble of some battery of artillery, until then delayed in the mud, struck the ear. Silence had been enjoined on the troops, and no one can forget the weird effect and impressions made upon one, silently gazing through the gloom of the woods on the still ranks of men
Albert Sidney Johnston Through the Smoke of Shiloh. 289
lying upon their arms, with the flags and guidons hanging limp on their staffs, and the long lines dimmer to the eye as night fell upon the scene. The night was dark and damp, and the April wind stirring the boughs of the tall trees sang in the hearts of many men that lay beneath, as they thought of home, a dirge of death.
Our sentinels, in regular reliefs, guarded headquarters. All were hungry. Our horses had no corn, and our men no bread. R. M. Hearin, of Bladon Springs, Alabama, was on guard that night, his relief coming on in the early morning, and I have heard him tell how the early breakfast of the staff affected him. They would throw away crusts of bread and bits of crackers as they talked, and as his regular beat caried him near the circle of offi- cers, who sat or stood around the camp chest, he would pick up some of the rejected crusts and munch and listen as he walked. Towards morning, general officers had been gathering at the head- quarters, and daylight revealed 'a historic group. Some had come voluntarily, some had been summoned by courier. Mr. Hearin says, hungry and fagged out as he was, he was exceedingly inter- ested by the tense but subdued manner of the group. The argu- ment even then was for or against a general attack. It seems that all the officers did not agree with General Johnston, notably the second in command, who favored a forced reconnaissance, and then dealing with details as they developed.
About six o'clock, still early for the cloudy April morning, and whilst they still ate crackers and sipped coffee, some talking, Gen- ernal Johnston mainly a listener, the heavy denseness of the air was jarred by an ominous sound apparently not far off. All knew what it meant. General Johnston was standing erect, if I remem- ber rightly, when the roar of the gun broke upon his ear. He im- mediately faced the group and said, "Gentlemen, the ball has opened; no time for argument now," or words to that effect, and asking 'an officer to note the time, he immediately called for his horse. "Boots and saddles" for our company was sounded, and we sprang into the saddle. How well I remember the mien and man- ner of General Hardee, as he quitted the group and made for his horse held a short distance away by an orderly. His form was erect ; his stride long but regular; and as he walked he gathered up his trailing sword, and tucking it under his arm so reached his horse.
290 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
At a gallop he went in the direction of his command, which was mainly to our left, as I now recall these incidents. A portion of the troops that were near us had silently moved forward in the night. Perhaps the whole line moved forward; I do not know, but I remember we had several hundred yards to ride in the di- rection we took before we came in sight of the lines now fully engaged.
Immediately following the opening gun, portions of lines seemed to me to commence firing by volleys. Then the division to which we were advancing became engaged all at once; the file-firing seemed continuous, as if the men were engaged in close and steady duel. The artillery to right and left of us and in front also had now awakened to a continual volume of sound- — no stop, no inter- mission. Now, for the first time, I heard the sound of "dread artillery," for almost immediately the enemy responded with every available gun, and round shot and shell came through or over the ranks in a storm. The mists of the morning were heavy, and the smoke clinging close to the ground made it difficult to see ten paces in front.
I shall remember the first wounded man I saw as we passed in. He was half reclining near the foot of an oak tree with an awful wound in his stomach, made apparently by a fragment of a shell, a portion of his bowels protruding and partly lying on the ground. Evidently he had just been wounded, for as General Johnston stopped to talk to him a moment, his eyes were bright and face animated as he was telling the general how the Yankees broke and fled at the first fire. General Johnston ordered the sur- geon who was along with us to stop and give him some attention.
About this time, or perhaps a few yards further on, the general was notified that part of our line was giving way. Instantly he quickened to a gallop, with the staff and escort following, and right into the melee we plunged. Here was my first sight of the "battle joined." It must have been a part of Hindman's line, for we saw that officer in one of the most dramatic scenes I witnessed during the whole war. Mounted on a fine horse, his uniform covered with an oil poncho which glistened in the light rain that was fall- ing, he was just behind his line, whooping like a Comanche, with his horse in a dead run, and from one end of his brigade to the other he was urging his charging column forward on the enemy,
Albert Sidney Johnston Through the Smoke of Shiloh. 291
who were giving Kolands for Olivers, it 'seemed to me, as fast as they could be swapped. Suddenly a shell tore through General Hindman's horse, throwing him to the ground. The general, not hurt, was on his feet in a moment, still urging his men forward.
General Johnston's presence soon rallied the broken line to the right of where we saw Hindman, and as the smoke for an instant lifted, I saw the men leaping forward to a battery right at us. And right here I saw a Yankee hero. As our men rushed on, I saw a man standing still by one of the guns, while others were flee- ing. All this was but an instant, for the smoke immediately cov- ered the scene, and I do not know what was his fate. The only damage we sustained here was a few horses wounded.
General Johnston, quickly leaving this part of the line, went towards the right. Always at a gallop, we traversed a great part of the field. He seemed cool and collected all the time. Only once did I descry any gleam of enthusiasm. Staff and various other officers were continually galloping up to him and off again. My position in column brought me at times very near him, and I remember that a young officer came up at full speed and -said something to the general, who listened intently, then suddenly throwing out his right arm and bringing it in with a curve sard : "Tell General Breckinridge to sweep them into the river/' The night before, General Breckinridge was in command of the re- serves, and at that time these troops were engaging the enemy on the extreme right and driving them.
About ten o'clock, or perhaps a little earlier, we rode into one of the enemy's encampments, from which our infantry had previously swept them. The tents were pitched in company front and were full of the impediments of a field force. Evidently the men had been interrupted at an early breakfast, for at some of the camp- fires the breakfast was untouched, and sonle of the soldiers, partly undressed, lay dead in the tents. Yet they say no surprise was ever acknowledged by General Grant. I do not know how this was, for they fought stubbornly from position. Some of our after- experiences of surprisals under General Wheeler made us think of occasions when we knew that surprised Yankees could and would fight. I will not notice further this controversy, but I here add my testimony to the gallant stands made hour after hour through this day of rout by that Federal army. The carnage of this field
292 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
was terrible, nearly one man in three being either killed or wounded. Battery after battery was disabled, and their brave •dead lay silently attesting how gallantly they had stuck to their guns. Particularly I remember one Union battery; the wheels of some of the guns were shattered, and dead men and dead and wounded horses lay around. The men seemed to be all young and clad in new uniforms with the red cap and red stripe of the artil- lery branch of the service still fresh and defiant on their lifeless forms. Their wounds were ghastly; and, though they were invad- ers of our Southern homes, as I looked into the pallid young faces, I boyishly felt pity for my dead enemies.
Directly after leaving that part of the field, where the order above mentioned was sent to General Breckinridge, General Johns- ton made other rapid moves, first to one part of the field, then to another. I do not remember our ever coming in contact with General Beauregard; but for a part of the day that general was very active on the left, though sick the most of the time, as re- ported. He had two horses killed or wounded under him during the day.
While passing through one of the encampments, we stopped long enough to snatch a morsel of food, for? remember, we were still fasting. Fortunately a sutler's shop was near and into that I went. Boy-like I looked for cake, and I got it, too. Some of us did not forget our poor horses, and I for one quickly bagged a feed of oats and carried it until my horse could eat it. How strange it is these little things should occur to me now as I write. At one time General Johnston's movement was so rapid and the smoke so thick we did not keep up with him, and I remember how he turned to us his grave face and steady eye as he watched us in column "at attention" close in upon him.
A great many things occurred during the day that I have only an indistinct mental view of now, and I can not recall them. One I will mention. Away off to the right in some fields we were passing through, one of the staff — Colonel Preston, I think — called attention to a body of men who, he was apprehensive, might be part of a Federal column. At any rate, he called for a scout, and Jesse A. Norwood was sent to him. Norwood was promised men- tion, if his work should be satisfactory, in the official report of the
Albert Sidney Johnston Through the Smoke of Shiloh. 293
battle; and our comrade's name and his special service that day were duly placed on record.
I hope the digression will not be condemned if I introduce here an anecdote of this same beloved comrade of the olden days. It was away up in Kentucky and before General Breckinridge had thrown his lot with us. Our regiment had been ordered to meet the general on a certain road and escort him with honors to Bowling Green. However, he did not come then; but a few days afterwards he did come rather unheralded to us, and, as for- tune would have it, passed through our company on his way. We were on the railroad, and those not on duty were taking the warmth of a winter's sun, when some one notified us of the approach of the distinguished ex- vice-president of the United States, who was now coming to join the Confederates. Various comments, pro and con, had been freely passed on his delay, and some thought he had delayed too long his coming, accusing him of temporizing, etc. He was almost upon us before we knew of his presence. We were alert, of course, in a moment, and every man on his feet. Some- how, in those days, apple-jack was mighty good, and had a way of getting into our canteens. Its very odor was exhilarating, and the boys were always happy and exceedingly plain-spoken when it had given the inspiration. That day our comrade was frank and to the point. As the distinguished ex-official was passing near, Norwood was heard to say with some little expressive expletive attached, "As they wouldn't give you what you wanted over there, you have come to us." General Breckinridge, dressed in citizen's clothes, with tall beaver hat, was just stepping over the rails at the time, and with us heard every word that was said. Boy-like, some of us tittered; but a smile lit up the handsome features of Breckinridge, while the boys took the cue and "opened up," giving the noted Kentuckian his first Confederate ovation. Norwood was afterward a lieutenant in our company, and was captured in one of our famous raids through Tennessee under General Wheeler. He and Captain Reid, one of Wheeler's staff, were captured to- gether.
A great part of the battlefield of Shiloh was wooded, and broken up in ravines, through which small streams flowed, either into Owl Creek on our right, or into Snake Creek on our left. Between these two historic streams, and with the Tennessee River in their rear,
294 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
the Federal army was marshaled, and it heroically strove to make a stand for its flag and honor. Thicket and woodland were cut and gashed by ball and shell ; the dead lay thick on slope and shallow, and the wounded of both armies were carried back to field hos- pitals, established as convenience or necessity prompted. The din and roar of battle was incessant, and the "rebel yell" as continuous as the stream of fire. Flag and man, bush and brake, seemed to join in the wild and yet wilder enthusiasm, and it was funny to see the old, staid West Point officers with hat in hand ringing an heroic measure to its music.
It is told of Early in Virginia that at one time General Jackson had severely reproved him for some license a part of his troops had taken on the march. A short time afterward, he, with Jack- son and other officers, stood watching the storming of the enemy's line by the same troops. Again and again they were thrown back, and anxiety was shown on every face; finally, with the well-known yell, they swept the guns. As they disappeared in the smoke, Gen- eral Lee's "bad old man" could stand it no longer. Forgetting the presence of General Jackson, he threw his hat on the ground, and, jumping on it, cried out, "D — n those fellows, they can steal here- after what they want."
And so it was, east and west, the same wild music of our tat- tered ranks always carried consternation to the foe. With the Yankees, it was entirely different. Their slogan seemed to be per- functory. It was "huzza-huzza," and sometimes "hip-hip-huzza," especially in the earlier days of the war. However, toward the close of the war, they too learned to "holler" in some sort of civil- ized way.
The bloody day had turned toward its evening; its sulphurous smoke was getting thicker around our beloved chieftain. Sher- man on the right had commenced forming his last lines; their coign of vantage called the "Hornet's Nest" was being girdled with bayonet and crested with cannon, and their troops were gradually driven in toward it. Later than this, perhaps about four o'clock, Gibson and his Louisianians suffered greatly. General Johnston was closing in rapidly; the lines were narrowing, and the last camps taken. Eight here, we were left by the general, and we did not see him again.
It must have been about half past two in the afternoon that his
Albert Sidney Johnston Through the Smoke of Shiloh. 295
preparations for the final blow were made. A part of a brigade was sweeping forward toward the position we occupied. Some troops in the last camp were fighting with platoon front — an old formation adapted to defile firing. The troops were in column, platoon front, all moving forward; the first platoon would fire, then break in the center, counter-march to the rear, and expose the second platoon, which went through the same movement; then third, then fourth, all the time the whole body of men moving for- ward. It was a beautiful movement, and at school under Gil- man's old tactics I had drilled in the same, and it deeply interested me. During the whole war I never saw it repeated.
General Johnston was near the tents with his back turned, look- ing to the rear and over and beyond us. The smoke was dense, the din cataclysmal. Looking toward us, the general pointed to a nearby depression in the ground — no word was spoken or could be heard. Captain Gaines understood it as an order to uncover the front of a regiment of infantry that was approaching the general in line of battle. I was very near to its right flank as it passed us, and knowing of the fierce grapple that was awaiting it, I looked into the faces of the men, who were trying to keep in regular order as they advanced over the rough uneven ground. They were pale but steady, seemingly intent on every order shouted by regimental or company officers.
General Johnston still sat his horse, calm and immovable, watch- ing them. When they came, say within twenty feet of him, with a slight motion of his hand, as if in salute, he turned his horse and rode slowly in their front, and directly all had disappeared. That was our last glimpse of .Johnston through the smoke of Shiloh.
We waited in the position assigned us, having one man, and perhaps a horse or two, wounded while in this ravine. The storm of battle kept creeping into the distance, the musket balls that had mostly flown above us now and then dropping spent of force. We •dismounted to let our horses eat and munch the oaten luncheon we had captured earlier in the day, while we ourselves finished the cake of the Yankee commissary. Still we waited; no news nor orders. Finally an officer approached and had some talk with Cap- tain Gaines. We noticed there was no hurry; the men were anxious, but no news was vouchsafed to us". Perhaps other orders
296 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
came to the captain; I do not remember, but finally he mounted and started out towards the left of the line.
Then the rumor ran through the company that the general was dead. Some supposed we were going to General Beauregard. But we did not; halt after halt was made, and, as night followed, the volume of rifle fire ceased, and the terrible shells of the Federal gunboats increased. They were shelling their captured camps, for they well knew the hungry Confederates were swarming through the tents. It is now well understood that the halt by General Beauregard about sundown was fatal to our overwhelming their entire army. Bragg held the front and was ready to go under the bluff.
While the lines were waiting and wondering what it meant, Dr. T. J. Savage, now of Mobile, then an officer in one of the Alabama regiments, told me he crept forward to have a look. He said he could see masses of men huddled together and apparently without formation. In fact they were boarding the gunboats as fast as the capacity of the staging would allow. The gallant Prentiss with the larger part of his brigade had been captured some time in the evening; hundreds of other prisoners had been all day streaming to our rear ; the quartermaster and other ordnance officers had been gathering in the captured spoil, and the surgeons were red and busy with their dreadful work.
At night, in our bivouac, we were not without plenty to appease the hunger of the day. Huge tins from the camp stores were pro- cured and filled with coffee; and, as the fiery missiles of the gun- boats cleft the air above us with their awful shrieks, we reveled in the fatness of the enemy's camp.
The morrow has a history of its own.
Mission Records at San Antonio. 297
SPANISH MISSION RECOEDS AT SAN ANTONIO.1
HERBERT E. BOLTON.
Students of Spanish-American history will ever be grateful for the detailed and painstaking way in which most Spanish officials kept the records of their acts. This excellence of the surviving materials left by them serves to increase our regret for the loss of those that have been destroyed or have otherwise disappeared. A case in point is furnished by the records of the Franciscan mis- sions founded and conducted during the Spanish regime in Texas. For, while a small quantity of precious mission records are still available, the larger portion of what we know must have existed at one time has disappeared from present view. To say that they are irrevocably lost is unsafe, except where there is positive proof of destruction, for they may unexpectedly come to light in some out-of-the-way corner or some unexplored repository. There is good reason to hope, indeed, that when the archives of Mexico and Spain have been duly searched, much of the missing material for the history of these interesting institutions will be recovered.
It is not my purpose here to speculate as to what materials exist elsewhere, but rather to describe briefly the small collection that is now the property of the San Antonio diocese of the Catholic Church, and is in the custody of the Eight Eev. Bishop Forest. Though the collection is small, it contains, besides important ma- terial for the history of Texas missions, ethnological data that may in the last resort be our only clue to the classification of a number of native Southwestern tribes, whose racial affiliation would otherwise remain forever unknown. This collection is pri- vate property, is guarded with care by the custodian, and, prop- erly, is made available for use only under the strictest safeguards. It is highly desirable, however, that records such as these, which if once destroyed could never be replaced, should be stored in a fire- proof building, beyond the danger of destruction.
'For the opportunity to study the valuable records which are briefly described in these pages, I am greatly indebted to the generosity and kind- ness of the Right Reverend Bishop J. A. Forest, of San Antonio.
298 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
The whole collection of Spanish papers, which does not aggre- gate more than 3,000 pages, perhaps, falls into two groups. The larger and much completer one consists of records of the parochial church which served the Villa of San Fernando de Bexar and the adjacent Presidio of San Antonio de Bexar. The smaller group is composed of records of the missions located near by. It is with the latter that I shall deal here.
In the immediate neighborhood of San Antonio five Spanish missions were established and operated in the 18th century, while a sixth was projected and nominally founded, but was actually con- ducted as a part of one of the other five. The five actually estab- lished were San Antonio de Valero (1718), which had existed for- merly on the Eio Grande as San Francisco Solano, San Jose de Aguayo (1720), Nuestra Senora de la Purissima Concepci6n (1731), San Juan Capistrano (1731) and San Francisco de la Espada (1731). The sixth, San Xavier de Naxera, was nominally founded in 1722, and the neophytes intended for it, though minis- tered to from San Antonio de Valero, were apparently kept separate till 1726, when they were definitely attached to this mission.
I. KECORDS FOR SAN ANTONIO DE VALERO (INCLUDING THOSE FOR SAN FRANCISCO SOLANO AND SAN XAVIER DE NAXERA).
Of these missions the only one whose records are fairly complete in the collection under view is San Antonio de Valero, considered together with its antecedent mission, San Francisco Solano, and the attached mission, San Xavier de Naxera, both of which can best be treated with San Antonio de Valero. For these missions there are the following records :
A. BAPTISMAL RECORDS.
The baptismal records of these three missions are contained in a leather-bound book whose title is: Bautismos. Libro I. De 1703 a 17 S3.1
This book is made up of two parts, which really are distinct units. In fact, the first part is unbound, and is only laid within the cover of the other; but the title on the outside has been ad-
^ransla/tion : Baptisms. Book I. From 1703 to 1783.
Jn
*nmtucoSo{cino .-
i / 1
* '-' / v
/ -- / (•?•
(ivrt '^d*3tn „
6atyti*c/£
''
/ " "• • "•>•>:/• •V J <.< fli-tlt
Facsimile of the oldest original entry in the baptismal records of mission San Francisco Solano, later San Antonio de Valero (the Alamo).
Mission Records at San Antonio. 299
justed to include them both, and they will, therefore, be treated as Parts I and II, which are my own designations. A typewritten title in English that has been pasted on the outside makes it ap- pear as though the book includes records of Mission San Jose, but this is not true. Both parts of the book are well preserved.
Part I.
The title of this part is: Libro en que se Assientan los Bautis- mos De los Indios de esta Mission de 8. Anto De Valero Sita a la Rivera del Rio de 8. Antonio De la Governacion de esta Provincia de los Texas, y Nuevas Philippinas, perteneciente al Colegio Apos- tolico de propaganda fide De la Santissima Cruz de la Cuidad de Santiago de Queretaro.1
This is an unbound cuaderno2 of 16 folios, and is in a good state of preservation. It contains, under two sub-titles, a beautiful copy of the records of (a) baptisms at Mission San Francisco Solano, the predecessor of San Antonio de Valero, down to 1709, and (b) the baptisms at the Hyerbipiamo District, where the Indians of this tribe3 were kept while awaiting the actual establishment of the nominally founded Mission San Xavier de Naxera. For this record we are indebted to the care of Fray Diego Martin Garcia, who most of the time between 1740 and 1754 was laboring at San Antonio de Valero. In 1745 he undertook the work of copying these rec- ords, because, as he said, the old ones were in different manuscripts and in bad shape. His copy is dated Aug. 12, 1745.
(a) San Francisco Solano. — The first sub-title of this cuaderno
• is Bautismos de Esta Mision En el Tiempo, que se nombro de S.
Francisco Solano. Todos los quotes con los demas, que se Jiicieron
desde el principio, yo F. Diego Martin Garcia, Ministro actual de
esta Mision, translado aqui de dos libros antiguos, por estar estos
translation: Book in which are recorded the Baptisms of the Indians of this mission of San Antonio de Valero, situated on the bank of River San Antonio, in the jurisdiction of this province of Los Texas and Nuevas Philippinas, and belonging to the Apostolic College for the Propagation of the Faith of the Holy Cross of the city of Santiago de QuerStaro.
2A cuaderno is a number of sheets of paper stitched together. There seems to be no exact English equivalent, and the word, because of its defi- nite meaning, deserves to be adopted.
'Another form of this tribal name is Ervipiame. There are still other variants.
300 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
ya maltratados, y haver hallado algunas partidas en quadernos sueltos. Y como se siguen.1
Just preceding this title, on folio 1, Garcia gives a brief state- ment of the founding of Mission San Francisco Solano at La Cienega del Eio Grande, and of its removal to San Ildefonso, thence back to the Rio Grande, and finally, in 1718, to San An- tonio. According to Garcia's statement the mission was founded in 1703, and it is true that the first baptism recorded in this copy of the records was performed Oct. 6, 1703. According to Portillo, however, who seems to be right, the mission was founded in 1700.2 The last baptism recorded in this cuaderno was dated June 17, 1708.
(b) 8 an Xavier de Ndxera. — The second subdivision of this •document, together with one or two notes entered elsewhere in the other mission records, gives us a clue to the history of Mission San Xavier de Naxera, which hitherto has mystified students. The sub-title of this part is: Bautismos de los Hyerbipiamos Que se intentaron poner en Nueva Mision, con la advocacion de Sn. Fran- cisco Xavier, lo que no tuvo efe-cto, por haverse quedado en esta Mision de San Antonio. Ponense aqui, por no poderlos poner en su lugar segun los Anos.3 Garcia tells us at the end of the cuaderno that these baptisms were transferred from two older cuadernos.
A word on the history of this mission, since it has never been written, is in order, as a means of showing the bearings of these records. Some time before Feb., 1721, a chief of the Hyerbipiamos, from near River San Xavier,* whose rancheria Father Espinosa and Capt. Ramon had visited in 1716, brought a number of fam- ilies of followers to San Antonio, and asked that a mission might be founded among his people. This chief was hereafter called by
translation : Baptisms at this mission during the time when it was called San Francisco Solano, all of which, together with the others per- formed from its beginning, I, Fray Diego Martin Garcia, present minister of this mission, transfer to this place from two old books, because these books are now in bad condition, and because some of the entries are found in separate cuadernos. They are as follows:
2Portillo (Esteban L), Apuntes para la Historia Antigua, de Coahuila y Texas (Saltillo, 1888) pp. 271-273.
'Translation: Baptisms of the Hyerbipiamos, whom it was designed to place in a new mission named San Francisco Xavier, but which was not done because they remained in this mission of San Antonio. They are re- corded here because they can not be put in their chronological order.
*There is ground for thinking that this was the modern San Gabriel River.
Mission Records at San Antonio. 301
the Spaniards Juan Rodriguez, an indication that he was bap- tized. When the Marques de Aguayo went to East Texas in 1721 to re-establish the missions there, he took Juan Rodriguez with him as a guide, and when he returned to San Antonio he nominally established (March 10, 1722) the mission asked for, selecting a site between missions San Antonio de Valero and San Jose de Aguayo, and put it in charge of a Queretaran friar, Joseph Gon- zales.1 That the Hyerbipiamos were kept separate for some time seems evident, for Juan Rodriguez was hereafter known as "gov- ernor of the district (barrio) of the Hyperbipiamos," and the bap- tisms while they were waiting for the actual foundation of the new mission, though performed at Valero, were recorded in a separate book, as the above title indicates. This situation apparently con- tinued till 1726, when the project of a separate mission was given up, for thereafter the baptisms of the Indians of this tribe are entered in the Valero book. In 1731 Mission Concepcion was founded on the same site.2
Returning to the record, the entries of the Hyerbipiamo baptisms, only 33 in number, begin March 12, 1721, a year before the mis- sion was nominally founded, and extend to July 20, 1726.
The last paragraph of the document contains the interesting statement, signed by Garcia, that on May 8, 1744, was laid the first stone of a new church at San Antonio de Valero, the minis- ters being Fray Mariano Francisco de los Dolores and Fray Diego Martin Garcia.
Part II.
The title page of this part reads: In Nomine Domini Amen. Libro en que se asientan los Baptismos de los Indios'de esta Mis- sion de San Francisco Solano.s
This title is misleading, for the record continues after Mission San Francisco Solano had become San Antonio de Valero, and ex- tends down to 1783. While Part I is a copy, Part II is an original record in its entirety. It contains 215 pages and 1601 baptismal
irrhese statements are based on Juan Antonio de la Pefia's Diario of the Aguayo expedition found in Memorias de Nueva Espana, XXVIII, 1-61.
zTestimonio de Asiento de Misiones. This document contains the original record of the founding of the mission.
'Translation: In the name of God, Amen. Book in which are recorded the baptisms of the Indians of the mission of San Francisco Solano.
302 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
entries, the first entry being dated March 19, 1710, and the last Nov. 25, 1783.
(a) San Francisco Solano. — Conversions at Solano after 1708 were evidently few, for there are no entries for 1709, and from 1710 to 1718, when the mission was moved, there are only 28, the last one being dated in 1716.
(b) San Antonio de Valero. — The record for San Antonio de Valero begins with a certified statement that on May 1, 1718, D. Martin de Alarcon gave to Fray Antonio de San Buena Ventura de Olivares possession of the mission site at the Indian village on the banks of the San Antonio Eiver. For a period of more than a year there was apparently but one baptism, and that on the day of the foundation of the mission, May 1, 1718. I say apparently, because the dates in the record are confusing, but after some study my conclusion is that the second baptism was not recorded till June 15, 1719. From this time on baptisms were frequent. In the first five entries, the mission is still called "San Francisco Solano, sit- uated at San Antonio de Valero." • Thereafter the name San An- tonio de Valero is used, although for a time not exclusively, I be- lieve.
B. MARRIAGE RECORDS.
One book is devoted to the records of the marriages at Mission San Francisco Solano and San Antonio de Valero. In it are prob- ably recorded also the marriages at the Hyerbipiamo District, al- though these are not distinguished from the others. The title page of the book reads: In Nomine Domini Amen Libro en que se asientan los cassamientos de los Indios de esta mission de S. Fran- cisco Solano.1 This is an unbound cuaderno containing 69 folios, and is in good condition. The records extend from 1709 to 1785. As some of the leaves have been torn off the back, I can not say how much further it originally extended.
(a) San Francisco Solano. — The first nine entries were made at San Francisco Solano, covering the period from 1709 to 1716, inclusive.
(b) San Antonio de Valero. — The records for this mission begin in 1719 and extend to 1785. By the end of 1751 there had
translation: In the name of God, Amen. Book in which are recorded the marriages of the Indians of this mission of San Francisco Solano.
Facsimile of a page from the baptismal records of mission San Antonio de
Valero (the Alamo).
Mission Records at San Antonio. 303
been 231 marriages, and by the end of 1764 the number had reached 330. Thereafter the number was very small. I did not note the exact figures. Folios 40 and 41 of this book, covering the years 1749, 1750, and 1751, are lacking. We learn from the marginal numbers, however, that during these three years only 14 marriages were contracted. Some of the missing data at this point can bfe supplied, perhaps, from the baptismal and burial records for the same period.
C. BURIAL RECORDS.
The book of burial records for this mission is, like the book of baptisms, divided into two parts. Part I (my designation) is a copy of the early and detached records, made by Father Garcia to preserve them, and Part II is the original record from 1710. Both parts are bound together, in leather, and they comprise about 200 folios. They have been badly damaged by water.
Part I.
(a) San Francisco Solano. — Entie[rros\ De Esta Mission} de S. Antonio [de Valero] Desde su Fundac [ion] .* Under this title fall the first six folios, covering the period from 1703 to 1708, and including 120 interments.
(b) San Xavier de Ndxera. — Entierros de los Hyerbipiamos, que se havian de haver puesto en la Mision de 8. Franco, la que no se fundo, por haverse quedado en esta Mission.2 There are 11 entries, all falling in 1722.
Garcia's note, dated Sep. 27, 1745, states that these records in Part I were transferred from two cuadernos.
Part II.
The title page of this part reads : Libro en que se Asientan los
Yndios de esta Mision ya difuntos, de San Franco. Solano.3 . . .
(a) San Francisco Solano. — Ten entries, covering 1710-1713,
translation: Burials at the mission of San Antonio de Valero since its beginning.
Translation : Burials of the Hyerbipiamos, who ought to have been put into mission San Francisco Xavier, which was not founded because they remained in this mission.
translation: Book in which are( recorded the Indians of this mission of San Francisco Solano who are now dead.
304 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
inclusive, were made before the mission was moved to the San An- tonio. They throw valuable light on the change of names for the mission. The entries for 1710 and 1711 give the name "esta mis- sion de San Francisco Solano;" the first for 1712 calls it "mission del Sefior S. Joseph, yglecia de San Francisco Solano;" the first for 1713 reads "esta mission de la advocacion de el Sefior S. Joseph, e yglecia de S. Francisco Solano."
(b) San Antonio de "Valero. — The burial records for this mis- sion begin with 1721, but the marginal entry numbers 11-18 are missing, which indicates that one or more pages have been torn out. The last entries are in 1782, the total number being 1376.
In some years the death rate was extremely high. For instance, a report shows that on March 6, 1762, the total Indian population of the mission was 275 persons,1 and this book shows that in 1763 there were 130 burials, making it appear that nearly half of the population died in one year.
II. BECORDS FOR LA PURISSIMA CONOEPCION.
For this mission the collection contains only the book of mar- riages, entitled : Libro de Casamientos de Esta Mission de la Pu- rissa. Conception. Pueblo de Acuna. Fundado En Cinco de el Mes de Marzo de el Ano de Mill Setecientos Treinta y Uno en la Margen de este Rio de San Antonio.2
This is an unbound cuaderno of thirty-six folios. The first twelve folios are a copy of older records, made in 1746 at the instance of Fray Benito Francisco de Santa Ana, president of the Quereteran missions, and minister at Concepcion. The remainder of the docu- ment is made up of original entries. The whole cuaderno is in good state of preservation.
The record extends from 1733 to 1790, inclusive, while some pages at the back, how many I cannot say, have been torn off. The entries reach a total of 249 in the fifty-seven years. From time to time there is entered the record of a visita, or official inspection, of the mission. While the possession of the baptismal and burial rec-
'"Ynforme de Misiones/' 1762, in Memorias de Nueva, Espana, XXVIII, 164.
Translation: Book of Marriages at this mission of La Purfssima Con- cepci6n, Pueblo de Acuna, founded March 5, 1731, on the bank of this river San Antonio.
J .\ v,'^.y ,,.. /* ; ,%-.W ,yrfytfvr*vfo&fi-»& ? \
• .._•/ ^ t V,..- - '/'.',.Y'- <!,>./•.•'/,-<- ;/.^<-^' /yr .'- ' ' -'x'/' Lf'$t4Zt ~s <•/"/. ^ wSBste^***^ ilft/jytei'iBfi&t'Jr.vt&s'n^ >" - ••'"
;S".C;SU^j-^'^?
,
_Jii. 0^7 /* ,^/^< t^awi^ P^f^
oVjcolas. /7aLtion ;w,'/" -'-*— ^--^ — —*&Z~*\ TJ^c^J. Cpn.
rjUfloriois. nacion
t> »• T" ^TaTn^che
5^7W"
fef^n^^t^^ ^ $f%fa$ " ,
!%™Jx:fa&dtt-*%* ?&*&* /e*f*4v*&* d£<&&* zf*
Facsimile of a page from the marriage records of mission Nuestra Senora de la
Purfssima Concepci6n.
Mission Records at San Antonio. 305
ords would in many points supplement the information given by the marriage record, this book gives us a very valuable guide to the general history of the mission.
III. RECORDS FOR SAN JOSE DE AGUAYO.
For this mission there is one book, in which the records do not begin till Sept., 1777. Hence, if the earlier records can not be found elsewhere, we shall never know the inner history of the most active period of this mission, which at one time had "no equal in all New Spain." The book is entitled: Libro de Bautismos, Ca- samientos, y Entierros, pertenecientes a la Mission de Sr. Sn. Josef.1
On the leather cover has been pasted an analysis, or table of con- tents, which includes the Concepcion marriage book, but the two are entirely distinct records, and are not bound together. Orig- inally the San Jose book contained 247 pages, but numbers of them, blank ones apparently, have been removed. Otherwise the book is well preserved.
A. Baptisms. The first part (folios 2-57) is devoted to bap- tisms, beginning Sept., 1777, and extending to 1824. The entries begin with No. 832, (the "old book," which has disappeared, having contained 831), and extend to 1211. Of these, 1067 had been en- tered before the end of 1803. After this date most of the entries are for Spaniards, mestizos, and mulattoes.
B. Marriages. Folios — to 139, covering the period 1778 to 1822, contain marriage records. The first entry is No. 335,2 and by the end of 1796 No. 395 is reached. Few Indians are men- tioned after this date.
C. Burials.— Folios 178-229, covering the period 1781 to 1824, are devoted to burial records. The first entry is No. 847, and the last one is No. 1837. After 1804 the burials of numerous Span- iards, mestizos, and mulattoes, but few Indians, are recorded.
translation. Book of Baptisms, Marriages, and Burials, at the Mis- sion of SeSor San Joseph.
'The "old book," which has disappeared, contained 334 entries.
306 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
IV. RECORDS FOR SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO AND SAN FRANCISCO DE
LA ESPADA.
A few scattered entries in the San Jose record book, between 1818 and 1824, apply to these two missions rather than to San Jose. No other records for these two missions are in the collec- tion.
The comparative fullness of the records for San Antonio vie Valero indicates what is lacking from the collection for the others. In short, for Concepcion there are no baptismal or burial records; for San Jose, no records at all for the active period of its existence; for San Francisco de la Espada and San Juan Capistrano prac- tically none at all; while for even Valero and Concepcion the rec- ords for the few years preceding secularization are missing.
V. HISTORICAL AND ETHNOLOGICAL VALUE OF THESE EECORDS.
The historical and ethnological value of these records, partic- ularly the latter, is inestimable — a potent cause for regret that the collection is not complete. Their importance can be only briefly indicated here. On the historical side it may be noted first, that they clear up the outlines of the history of mission San Xavier de Naxera, as is indicated above. They also throw considerable light upon the inner history of the San Xavier mission group founded later on San Gabriel River. On the missions in general the signa- tures of the entries — for each entry is signed — give us a continuous story of the personnel of the mission forces for the periods covered ; the dates give us an adequate guide to the chronology; here and there are recorded notable happenings in the history of the mis- sions; while the student of institutions finds light on mission ad- ministration and on the effect of mission life upon the neophytes.
More important still, perhaps, are the ethnological data. The baptismal records, as a rule, indicate the tribe to which the person baptized belongs, generally designating the tribal affiliation of both father and mother. In the baptismal and marriage records it is in many cases definitely shown what marriages were contracted be- fore the parties came to the mission. Where such was the case, we get valuable light on inter-tribal relations independent of mission influence. Finally, for present purposes, the two hundred or more native personal names of Indians scattered through the records and
Mission Records at San Antonio. 307
in some cases translated, may be our only means of assigning a number of tribes to one or another of the great linguistic groups of the Southwest. Hence, in proportion as language is a satisfac- tory basis for ethnological classification and as other data are lack- ing, these will be treasured by ethnologists.1
*It may be noted here that in the County Clerk's office at San Antonio there is a considerable collection of documents dealing with mission land titles, while in the City Clerk's office there are one or two documents of similar nature.
308 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
A STUDY OF THE ROUTE OF CABEZA DE VACA.
JAMES NEWTON BASKBTT. II.
4.. From the Iron Region to the River of Permanent Houses.
Let us go back now and compare the narratives on the hypothesis that the route ran almost directly westward from the iron region to the Eio Grande, as is the more probable, since Cabeza's party say as much to the last Indians encountered before they reached the Rio Grande : "We told these people that our route was toward sunset."1 So it was, then, thirty leagues out from the Rio Grande, but what it had been before this is not directly asserted, though no change is mentioned after their turning west into the mountains toward the "beautiful river."
Immediately after the mention of the tribe on the beautiful river, near Cabeza's iron region, Oviedo says2 they reached a great people of 2,000 souls, in five groups of ranchos, who killed hares, deer, etc., "on the way." These are the same people with whom Cabeza passes through or along the valleys, after he had "traveled among so many different tribes and languages that no- body's memory can recall them all."3 Oviedo does not note how far it was to this new people, but simply says these went on with the white men, and never left them. In these ranches, says Oviedo, they gave the Spaniards an abundant supply of pinons "where the trees are full throughout those sierras* in great quantity." Cabeza implies5 that it was in the country of the beautiful river that the "small trees of the sweet pine" grew. Hereby hangs a little matter worth looking into: after leaving
Cabeza, 146.
'P. 606.
'Cabeza, 142.
*In THE QUARTERLY for January, 1898, Ponton and McFarland quote the original of this passage with the word serranias 'here from Bandolier, where it is rendered "mountain ridges." In the Oviedo to which I have access, it is as above.
'P. 140.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 309
tke beautiful river Oviedo has only two groups of people met with before reaching the river of permanent houses, and his last is evi- dently the last group of Cabeza, also; for both narratives have the women sent forward from these and note here other incidents in common. Cabeza has the group of people just back of this last meet the Spaniards immediately after crossing the first great river and traversing thirty leagues of plains. He says these were the first to whom those of the beautiful river took them, after passing the other unrecallable many. With him both these and the last were from "afar off." But Oviedo says that it was this first people "from afar" who gave them the first pinons, and among whom the trees grew so abundantly. This with him is evidently an inter- mediate people which he has not noted elsewhere, and corresponds to Cabeza's first people "from afar." Hence, if we trust the more detailed account of Oviedo, the pinons were a great way from the beautiful river — not at it — and they were across the first of Cabeza's big rivers ; making, in any case, the Pecos the river.
It now becomes a matter of decision from the known facts whether the scant scattering of these nuts found north of the Pecos, on its banks, in Uvalde and Edwards county, or the abundant growth of them in the trans-Pecos region, shall constitute the abundant groves spoken of by these chroniclers. Believing as I do from Oviedo's statement that it was the latter, the passage of the Colorado River on this journey is cut out of consideration, and the Pecos, on the route directly west, thirty leagues beyond which they met the first pinon people, is the first stream encountered after leaving the region of the Llano River. Oviedo says1 that the last Indians, which were "from afar off," and were met just before reaching the river of permanent houses, also gave them pinons. If after crossing the Trans-Pecos ranges, so arid and fruitless, they encountered a river, before reaching the Rio Grande, it must have been some mountain stream like Cienega Creek or Cibolo • or Alamita Creek, at flood by recent rains. From there Cabeza says,2 "The same Indians [his first that came from afar] led us to a plain beyond the chain of mountains," that is, to the second dis- tant people, which latter were the same that led them finally to the permanent houses.
T. 607. 'P. 145.
310 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
If they went the hypothetical southern route it is probable that pinons may be found after the proper sequence of rivers, in Coahuila, and it is slightly significant that this route should pass so near to the pinon region of Edwards and Uvalde counties; but I can not feel that the trees here justify the abundance indicated in either narrative. The two accounts combined, taken in connec- tion with the distribution of these trees at present, justify us in believing that the Spaniards found them as an abundant food sup- ply west of the Pecos only, and that this stream was Cabeza's first "big river." This again cuts the Colorado out.
From this plain, where the last Indians led Cabeza, Oviedo has a less detailed journey to the great river beyond. Cabeza's more detailed account suggests about thirty leagues, though he is not clear. We need not dwell on this, since the identity of the river is the main thought here. We shall return to the details of the itinerary when we come to consider the time spent on this whole journey. In each narrative it seems to have been about three days' travel, and five leagues more, or about four days in all.
5. From the River of Permanent Houses to the eastern edge of the Maize Region.
The. expressions in both accounts imply permanent houses on this next river, which Cabeza says1 ran between, or among Centre] sierras. Oviedo2 notes Castillo as finding "people and houses and assiento." Cabeza calls them, in the edition of 1555, "casas de gente [people] y de assiento" (which last Buckingham Smith ren- ders "fixed dwellings of civilization") ; and he says that "these were the first abodes we saw that were like unto real houses." He says3 that the houses seen previous to this were made at each camp by women carrying mats. Here were beans, gourds, or squashes,4 and a little maize, which this year at least these Indians had brought from far westward. When it was not too dry, they "sowed" corn here.
^p. 149-150.
2P. 608.
3P. 143.
4Bandelier says (Cabeza, 150, note) that the word he translates "squashes" is melones in the "originals," but in the edition of 1555 it is "calabazas." Espejo notes melones, melons, however, in the Conchas valley just southwest of this, fifty years later; and Castafieda finds them north of Corazones four years after Cabeza passed.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 311
- When the Spaniards were on the plain thirty or more leagues east of the settlements of permanent houses, they sent two Indian women to these settlements, and they returned and said that the people of the settlements had gone north to kill cows,1 and if the white men wanted to meet people they had better go north from there. Cabeza says2 that they called these of the permanent homes the cow people, "because most of the cows [killed] die near there, and for more than fifty leagues up that stream [n'o] they go to kill many of them." I do not know what clearer statement one should need than this, nor what better authority than Cabeza and Oviedo one could find of affairs then, though the statement in the latter is based on what the Indians told the Spaniards. Mr. Ban- delier — perhaps because it conflicts with his idea of the route — has maintained that the bisons never came into the Rio Grande valley, because no early Spanish expeditions note their being there. If there is any earlier expendition than this, I have not heard of it, and there could certainly be none that had better opportunities for observation. When going up this river from this point about ten days, or the required fifty leagues, Oviedo says that on the way the Indians said that many of their people had gone to hunt cows about three days away on a plain among sierras, which came from above toward the sea; and three days away from even the end of this fifty league stretch would not reach east of the Guada- lupe mountains; thus, this plain can be practically identified.
Besides this, Judge Coopwood, in THE QUARTERLY "for April, 1900, has thoroughly demolished this theory, about cows not com- ing south and west of the Pecos Valley, which so many others have adopted to the extent of maintaining with Bandelier that this cow river must, per consequence, be the Pecos. It is true that by going northerly from this region these lower Rio Grande Indians would easily reach the valley of the Pecos, where we know the bison was abundant in the fall; and up the Rio Grande might be construed still to mean into this other valley ; yet there is no need to make the river of permanent houses any but the Bravo del Norte, which Espejo went up later. Bat we will pass this for a moment, by merely saying that it will appear further on that the Cabeza party
J0viedo, 607-608. 2P. 152.
312 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
struck the Kio Grande near the mouth of the Conchas, and went up the former only.1
After reaching the permanent houses, Oviedo notes2 that they had much people and little land to sow in; food was therefore scarce. Hence the travelers went on one day to four groups of pueblos. The denizens of these told them8 that onward there was nothing to eat till they should go "forward thirty or forty days* journey, which was beyond the region where the sun went down, toward the north" — a very significant statement, meaning that the place of maize was not at the end of a line drawn to the west, but north of the end of it — a statement which alone would put the loca- tion of the permanent houses even further south than the Conchas region, if it be eastward from Corazones (or the neighborhood of Ures, Sonora), where the maize was to be found; and to get this "seed" these Indians said that "they had to go along up that river toward the north other nine or ten days' journey to the crossing of the river, which from there they had to cross, [and] all the rest of the way they had to go west to where there was maize."
This shows pretty definitely that a large detour to the north was to be made. Oviedo adds4 that the Indians said that there was also corn toward the right hand, to the north, and lower through all that country — it should be to the coast, as afterward appeared — but that was very distant, and this other was the nearer, and the way was through their friends, who were of one language, etc.5 He also adds that these Eio Grande Indians said that they killed many cows near there. Then he says that the party went along up that river for nine days' journey, traveling from morn till night each day, but always they slept in houses with people in
*I can not recall, nor have I time to investigate, the season of year that these later expeditions passed the Rio Grande valley. If in late spring or summer, the northward migrations of the herds might well make this region seem destitute of bisons. Caheza was here now about the first of January.
SP. 608.
"Oviedo, 609.
4P. 609.
"After I had this in manuscript, it is a significant coincidence that I re- ceived a communication from Dr. W. J. McGee stating that he had become convinced, from ethnological data purely, that a northern route from the upper Rio Grande ran into the eastern edge of the Gila Valley and thence southward down the valley of the Sonora. At the time of writing, Dr. McGee did not recall the above statement of Oviedo. Hence the value of his conclusions. We shall see that the Cabeza party went the shorter route, as Dr. McGee suggests also, from ethnological data.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 313
them. The herb that Cabeza calls chacan, Oviedo speaks of aa masarrones, and he notes that they found on the way few people, the others having gone to eat cows three days' journey from there on a plain among mountains, which latter came from above toward the sea. Note that it does not follow that these people were the full nine days up, since he says that they found them on the way. "And thus they [the Spaniards] went along up that river fifteen days' journey without resting, . . . and they crossed from there to the west, and went more than other twenty [days' jour- ney] to the maize" eating powdered herbs and hares, resting on this stage sometimes, as had been their custom, and coming at length to the first houses where they had maize, which was more than two hundred leagues from Culiacan.
This is Oviedo's interesting and helpful story of this great stage of this journey which we may examine further hereafter.
From the second group of permanent houses on the Rio Grande Cabeza says that they went seventeen days up the river before crossing, instead of the fifteen, which we may understand Oviedo to include as his whole stage here. Cabeza has the same words for "along up that river." Just how Judge Coopwood can insist that there were more than one river here, or translate the expression "aquel rio" in the Naufragios of Cabeza as "that other river,"1 since there is no otro in either Cabeza or Oviedo when speaking of the stream here, I can not see. His rendering is in no sense justi- .ficd by lexicon or location.
But Cabeza mentions another route, from near the mouth of the Conchas, which the Indians here suggested to him as being the bet- ter. He had asked them "to tell us how to go." "They said we should travel up the river toward the north." Literally they said "the way was along up that river toward the north . . . but that ... it seemed to them that we ought not to take that road [cammo]."2 Cabeza does not record the Indians as giving any reason for this suggestion ; but they had just told him that he would find nothing to eat directly up the river but chacan, an abominable food, and in Cabeza's further statement we can see that they had advised him to go out from the river, to the right and to the more direct north, where he would pass through the cow country,.
irTHE QUARTERLY, III., 192.
2Cf. Naufragios, ed. 1555, fol. xliiii.
314 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
and have plenty to eat. Consequently he says : "In doubt as to what should be done, and which was the best and most advantageous road to take, we remained with them for two days [deciding] . . . [after which] we determined to go [directly] in search of maize [not meat] and not to follow the road to the cows, . . . which meant a very great circuit [for us] as we held it always certain that by going toward sunset we should reach the goal of our wishes."1
Mr. Bandelier has a foot note at this point in his wife's transla- tion, in which he hints that they were now at the mouth of the Pecos; that this cow route was up that stream, and the one more westward was up the zigzag of the Rio Grande just beyond. Pon- ton and McFarland have disposed of the possibility for anything but a bird to go over this last way, and the conditions of the nar- ratives do not justify it, if we had never seen Espejo. So taking deer fat against the chacan up the river, Cabeza says, "we went our way ... to the South Sea . . . the first seventeen days of travel . . . along the river . . . which we [then] crossed and marched for seventeen more."
This was directly up the river, and not by the way of the cows. Up this river the Indians had said "we should travel . . . toward the north . . . for seventeen days."2 Since the Rio Grande flows along here almost southeast, going up it is going both north and west. The other route, which is not mentioned as being up any river at all, would have carried them "to the north," too much, or too directly north; but the sunset route lay immedi- ately up stream — especially here in midwinter.
After crossing the Rio Grande at the end of the first seventeen •days, Cabeza has other seventeen toward sunset. The maize region according to Cabeza was found at the end of this second seven- teen days, while Oviedo has it more than twenty from the river.* When they reach the maize region the former notes here houses "d& assiento — with foundation — many of which were made of earth and cane; and both he and Oviedo are confirmed in their descrip- tions of the people and houses all along here by the Coronado chron-
lCabeza, 154. 'Cabeza, 153.
*0viedo says they rested on this journey. Possibly Cabeza gives the days of actual travel only.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 315
iclers, who passed this same way, quite probably, about four years later.
Buckingham Smith first called attention to the importance of Espejo's journey in connection with that of Cabeza, in a note to his second edition of his translation of the Naufragios;1 but it seems to have escaped the notice of many later students, or else not to have impressed them. We shall see that it was in the winter of 1535 that Cabeza passed the houses on the "river that ran be- tween sierras" and it was about fifty years later that Espejo came by the same region.2 He was going with an expedition, from Mexico to the tall pueblos near Santa Fe, on the upper Eio Grande, and he did not go by the route through Sonora and Arizona, up the coast, which Coronado and the earlier missionaries had gone, but he cut across by a nearer way to the valley of the great river. Later we know that this route was established down the Conchas valley; and, though Espejo does not say that he came down this stream, he describes the Conchas Indians which are known to have lived on that river, and he found another stream, which when he gets further up it, he calls the rio del Norte. Where he first struck this river, he found a tribe of Indians called Patarabueyes, or Jumanos, of whom he says "they have . . . fish of many kinds from two swelling rivers" ; and it is one of these he describes as the "del Norte," because of its coming directly from the north.3 Travel- ing up this river, he found the banks peopled with Indians of the same nation for the space of twelve days' journey. They seemed to know something of the Christian religion; and they told Espejo's men that three Christians and a negro had passed through there, which by the signs the Indians made the Spaniards thought must have been Cabeza and his companions. Espejo states that he went on up "the said river" and passed for twenty-two leagues through another nation (about eighty-two leagues in all) whose name he did not learn. Next to this was another province, still "up the said river," which had fish from certain great lakes near.4 Here a Conchas Indian told him that fifteen days from there was a very
'Pp. 162, 163.
Tacheco y Cardenas, Documentos Ineditos, XV, 100-126. Cf. Hakluyt, Voyages of the English Nation to America (Goldsmid ed.), Ill, 84-115.
The translation in Hakluyt of the Ruyz narrative says, "whereof one is as great as Guadalquivir, which falleth into the North Sea or Bay of Mexico."
*Cabeza evidently did not go on to these.
316 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
broad lake, with towns and houses four stories high. No one will fail to recognize the pueblos at the Great Salinas in these. Eventually he reaches the Pueblo region and makes the statement that he had always traveled up the said river called rio del Norte.
What could be more definite than this? For the school chil- dren know that Rio del Norte and Eio Grande are two names for the same river; and this places Judge Coopwood's claim for an around-the-coast route to Jalisco out of consideration. Espejo's rate along here was about five leagues per day, and his twelve days of travel past towns, through which Cabeza had passed, would amount to sixty leagues northwestward beyond the valley of the Conchas; hence Mr. Bandelier's crossing of the Rio Grande at the mouth of that river is equally preposterous, as has been shown from the narratives themselves.
Since Oviedo represents the Cabeza party as going as rapidly as they could up the Rio Grande, but always sleeping in houses, the extent of their travel through an inhabited space here was greater than that of Espejo. Seventeen days, or even Oviedo's fif- teen, would pass about one hundred and twenty leagues, if they went at the rate of seven and a half leagues per day. On the basis of Espejo's rate and Cabeza's days there should be eighty- five leagues of travel. So that they could not possibly have struek the Rio Grande any lower than Espejo did, unless the situation of the towns had changed or their extent diminished in the fifty years. The inference from Espejo is against both hypotheses, though we know that only a little later, stirred up by missionary ministrations, some of these people did move, and later still all abandoned their permanent form of building. There is enough in this to hold the route well to the south, and to destroy, any theory that these men passed from the edge of the Llano Estacado to the Rio Grande above El Paso, as has been maintained by some, because one Coronado chronicler says that this route and that of Coronado had a point in common. We shall see later that this is not confirmed by another of these chroniclers, and is generally improbable. In like manner Espejo's narrative precludes all routes that do not pass at least fifteen days* travel up the Rio Grande above the Conchas Valley.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 317
6. From the eastern edge of the Maize Region to Corazones.
Cabeza and Oviedo differ concerning the extent of country through which they found maize and permanent houses before they reached the village which they called Corazones, or Hearts. The first says "from here we traveled more than a hundred leagues, al- ways meeting permanent houses and a great stock of maize and beans, . . . and they finally gave us all they had; and Do- rantes they presented with five emeralds, shaped as arrow points," etc. Later he says1 that "In the village where they had given us the emeralds, they also gave Dorantes over six hundred hearts of deer. . . . For this reason we gave to their settlement the name of 'village of the hearts' [Corazones]." Oviedo mentions the incident of the deer hearts, and the name of the town. This "finally" of Cabeza indicates that his hundred leagues ends at Cora- zones, and Oviedo implies the same of his eighty leagues, which he says they went from the first maize to a "Villa de los Corazones," and he describes it as consisting of three pueblos small and joined together, at which place they first emerged from the mountains. He gives details of this eighty-league journey2 — saying that "every two or three days they reached villages, and rested a day or two in each." He adds that they reached the three pueblos of Cora- zones consisting of about twenty houses, just after they had passed the sierras, and in another place he says that great crowds followed them, till they went out on the plain near the coast"; and when they reached there, there had been eight months that they had not gone out of the sierras." In another place he implies with cer- tainty, that the place which he regarded as the entrance into the sierras was where they first saw the copper rattle (cascabel) just before reaching the village on the "beautiful river" in Texas, from which, according to Cabeza, they went over the mountain with iron slag for stones. This fixes definitely the time from there to Corazones, since Oviedo elsewhere mentions this whole journey as extending over ten months. But we may see later, when we come to consider the itinerary as a whole, that Oviedo has a month too much in this interval, else he has erred in the time of starting.
Without sufficient facts to demonstrate it, I believe that Cabeza's
'Pp. 156-160. 3Pp. 610-611.
318 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
party came to Corazones (which the Coronado narrators locate near the valley of the Sonora river, not far from the head of the canon in the neighborhood of Ures) down the Sonora river from the north. The hints of it are, first, according to Oviedo, what the Indians said about their seed coming from a region that was north of a due west line from where the white men had struck the Kio Grande; second, because Coronado's men, going up this stream, found the same conditions (extending even over into the San Pedro valley), as the Cabeza party found; third, because we know that then the country directly ' east of Ures was very rough and broken, and perhaps not provided with food and houses, and these men note no rough country along here; fourth, because Cabeza is especially careful about mentioning the rivers he crossed while he was in the strange parts of the land, and he does not note anything of the Yaqui along here, east of Corazones, which, by its peculiar loop, would cut any route running into Corazones directly, from the east, twice — and he, therefore, probably passed north of it; fifth, because Cabeza says1 that he believes that, "near the coast, in a line [via'] with the villages which we passed, there are more than a thousand leagues of inhabited land," and since this country must be beyond these villages, it could not lie in Cabeza's mind in any other direction than parallel with the coast, and hence the villages, also, to be in the way, must lie in a similar line; sixth, because the seventeen days up the Rio Grande would require them to bear considerably southward to reach Ures ; seventh, because they note no change of direction at Corazones, as would occur if they had come to it from the east.
Against this view is the fact that no change of direction is noted after turning west at the Eio Grande crossing, and also that they left the sierras at Corazones; but as to this last there are state- ments in the Coronado narrators, that imply that the phrase, "to- ward the mountains," may mean here "toward the north," since Castaneda says that Arispe was one of the villages which he knew, "toward the mountains." This stands today where it was in Cabeza's time — at the head of the Sonora valley northward from Corazones. Likewise Jaramillo notes that this Sonora valley had mountains on each side (as is well known now) which then were
'P. 160.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 319
"not very fertile"; but all agree that the immediate Sonora valley was rich and well stocked with food. In fact Melchior Diaz says that it was the only region of any account from Culiacan to the Gila river, when he went over it about three years after Cabeza passed. Further on towards Culiacan, the Indians told Cabeza that he had come from sunrise, and the enslaving Christians of Guzman had come from sunset; but this was an error, since the general line of meeting of these two parties was a north and south one, the first coming from Corazones and the second from Culiacan. I have massed this all that the reader may draw his own conclu- sions. I have drawn my route down the Sonora valley, because the early records show no other route as practicable in this region. Mr. Bandelier has stated that a route running northward just east of the very bed of the Sonora river was impossible in that day.1
7. From Corazones to the City of Mexico.
From Corazones, which, according to Oviedo, was on a plain, he says they went directly to the Yaqui, where they waited fifteen days, because the river was too high from rains for them to cross. Cabeza says they waited on account of the flood (one day) at a village half way to the Yaqui. Oviedo rightly says it was thirty leagues to the stream. Cabeza says it was twelve leagues from the second village. At any rate, here they found signs of what proved to be Guzman's men, and in a hundred leagues more they overtook them, after the flood subsided. After this they zigzagged among mountains, and finally reached Culiacan, to which they were taken by the men of Alcaraz under a certain Cebreros, and where they say they were received by Melchior Diaz as mayor. Here Cabeza says they remained till after the fifteenth of May. In another place he says that they were at this place (at least) fifteen days. This would place the arrival there about the first of May, 1536. Thence they went down the coast to Compostela, where they took Guzman to task for allowing the Indians to be enslaved ; and they reached Mexico the day before the vespers of St. James, which date Tello says was the 22d of July. Here the viceroy, Mendoza, and Cortes, the marquis and conqueror, who was there then, received
*In favor of this are Dr. McGee's conclusions from his study of the Pima Indians. This study he has not published yet, but the old routes of travel and migration of these Indians he has kindly outlined to me.
320
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
them ; and a bull fight and tournament was gotten up in honor of their arrival.
ROUTf OF CABESA de VACA
ALTERNATIVE ROUTE TROM YSLETA routes
Map of Route of Cabeza de Vaca from Mal-Hado to City of Mexico. 8. Afterthoughts of the discussion.
Incidental to this running discussion there have been side thoughts which I have deemed best to pass over till the main presentation was completed. We may glance at some of these now.
(1) Coronado and De Soto. — Students have differed greatly in their estimates given to Castafieda's statement that Cabeza had passed through the place where the army of Coronado rested on the plains, somewhere out east and south of the present town of Pecos, New Mexico. For a long time, it was thought that this camp was well up the valley of the Canadian and that Coronado passed no further south than the 35th parallel; but Mr. F. W. Hodge, in Brower's Harahey, has shown conclusively, from the mere topography, that this expedition came well southward over the Llano Estacado to its southern edge at least, and the present writer, by discovering an inadvertent omission in Mr. Winship's
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 321
translation,1 confirms this from the narratives purely. Further study of this route has convinced me that the army proper never crossed the Canadian, or at least left for only the briefest time the gypsum stretches of the Llano Estacado, because it was never able to wear a trail; and that off the eastern edge of that great hard plain, between the forks of the Brazos, in, say, the region of Crosby and Garza Counties, it camped in the ravines. That these men could not have been further south is shown by the fact that after deducting from the time it took them to go back to their camp on the Eio Grande the number of days which it took them to come out from that stream to the crossing of the Pecos, and subtracting also that which it would require for them to go from the point where they struck the Pecos on their return (somewhere in the neighborhood of Fort Sumner) up to the bridge, there are left only eleven or twelve days for them to go from the camp on the plains to the Pecos Valley, on the short cut home. If Cabeza passed through this camp he was somewhere in the sweep of these dozen days' travel southeastward from Fort Sumner.
While, from Oviedo, it may be inferred that there was no possi- bility of the Cabeza party's reaching this far north, we have Jara- millo's statement that, as Coronado's men approached this camp, and were only one day west of it, an old blind Teya Indian told them that he had seen men like them many days before, but that it was further over toward Mexico — a, statement as worthy of credence as that of Castaneda, that they actually passed through the loca- tion of this camp, and much more in keeping with the probabilities. While Cabeza may have had time to wander this far, during the days he spent between the Iron Eegion and the Eio Grande, there is not a thing in his itinerary that hints it, and his omissions sig- nificantly are against this view. That he nowhere mentions wig- wams of skin, but always houses of mats; that he notes no tent poles drawn by dogs, nor, before reaching the Trans-Pecos region, finds nor hears of any people who live solely by following the bison
*In the text of the translation it is said that the Spaniards crossed a river which ran "down toward" Cicuye (the present village of Pecos), but in the original it is "down from toward" (de ha<yia— the de being over- looked by the translator) Cicuye. The omission had long misled students, and, strange to say, the rendering of Ternaux-Campans was too indefinite to correct the error. This puts Coronado's route much further south than it has usually been located, a theory which Mr. Winship, following Hodge, has adopted in his latest book on the subject.
322 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
herds, but only such as exist on the smaller game, is sufficient to show that he never came upon the Teyas when they were on their northern journey after the bison, with their women and dogs hitched tandem to tent poles.
There is a striking parallelism in one item between the experi- ence of Cabeza on the Bio Grande and that of Coronado'-s men fur- ther north. It will be recalled that at the first approach to the permanent houses, Cabeza notes that they found that the natives had piled all their goods in the middle of the floor, and were sit- ting with their faces to the wall — the most abject plea for mercy that a savage could present. As usual, we may presume with Castaneda, that Cabeza blessed their goods and allayed their fear. Such was his habit. Here doubtless were some Teyas — quite likely this old man whom Jaramillo met, left at home this year, while the younger men had gone to hunt up north. The later missionary records show an intimate relation between the Teyas and the Jumanos of the lower Eio Grande.1 So, when these same In- dians, having come north to hunt bisons, saw similar white men (Coronado's men) away up on the edge of the Staked Plains they thought of Cabeza's piety, and, as Castaneda states, brought out their goods to be blessed as before, and had them looted only. The incidents were of the same character on the Eio Grande and on the Llano Estacado — a habit noted at no other point in all the journeys of the two expeditions. The conclusion is obvious: the journey of the Teyas was between the two routes.
It will be recalled that, after the death of De Soto, at the mouth of Red Eiver,2 Moscoso went west and southwest with the army for about one hundred and fifty leagues. After passing through a stretch of timber, so peculiarly and regularly open that the narrators mention it — quite evidently the eastern Cross Tim- bers— they began to see rising ground. All along they saw huts similar to those described by the Cabeza accounts, and beyond still they heard of a river, where the Indians said they went to drive deer;3 and the Spaniards, having found none just east of this went on there and found both venison and bison meat; though, they say, they saw not this latter animal alive. Having crossed
1See note by F. W. Hodge, Land of Sunshine, January, 1901, p. 51.
'There is no longer any doubt of this location.
'Antelopes?
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 323
and gone beyond and up this new river — the Daycao, which was in all probability the Colorado — they saw to the west a series of mountains and forests, but with no inhabitants. Beyond this val- ley they sent three scouting parties, in different directions, and the country grew more and more sterile and thinly populated, till finally there were no houses. Then, according to the Gentleman of Elvas, Moscoso recalled that Cabeza had told the emperor1 of such a country, and he thought he must certainly have struck it, since he had invariably come toward the west; for though, he rea- soned, they were marching "far inland" and Cabeza had always traveled along the coast, yet the latter had "told the emperor" that "he had gone about in a certain region for a long time, and marched north into the interior."
This is certainly confirmation of the Cabeza narratives, but the main point here is that, since neither he nor Moscoso's men saw the live bison in this region, and since the latter was not farther than thirty leagues beyond the Colorado (certainly in that region where it runs almost directly south), the former did not get any further west than the latter; for Biedma (who was of this party) notes that even before this the guides led Moscoso to where, "in seasons, some cows are wont to herd," but the direction from the main route here is not given, and it was likely that it was off northward toward the valley of the Bed; for the Inca has one of his informants say that on the other side of the country reached by the scouts, who went thirty leagues beyond the Daycao, was "a vast extent of level country where cattle fed in multitudes."2
If Cabeza had reached even this, the accounts certainly would have mentioned it. Both he and Oviedo imply a mountainous country all the way of their going along here, as they swung around westward from the Iron Eegion, and hence they never got out of the hills of central Texas directly west or northwest. At the sea- son of the year when both the expeditions were here — in the fall, for it is distinctly said that Moscoso turned back in October — we know that the bisons were in the habit of coming down as far as the New Mexico line; for Alvarado, who was with the Coronado
1Who was it that said that De Soto knew nothing of Cabeza's travels and was not influenced by them?
2One De Soto narrator particularly implies that they saw no skin huts, for he says the houses were miserable, "like those in the melon fields of Spain."
324 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
expedition, came down the Pecos from about the 35th parallel, at this same time of autumn, and found bisons more and more abun- dant every day, and Coronado's army found them on the eastern slopes of the Llano Estacado in June; so that at any season then Cabeza could not have gone very far north or northwest without encountering the herds. But it is true that Cabeza's party had ample time along here for detours, since we shall see that be- tween the beautiful river and the Rio Grande there were about five months spent — from near the 10th of August to the first of Janu- ary, in which month Cabeza implies1 that they reached the first permanent houses.
(2) Natural History Features. — When the writer began this study, he was hopeful of finding some geological, ethnological, or natural history features which might fix definitely certain points on the route. He sought and had the interested and kindly help of Instructor Alexander Deussen, of the department of geology, and Professors William L. Bray, of the department of botany, and Herbert E. Bolton of that of history — all of the University of Texas. The natural history departments of the Bureau of Agri- culture at Washington were also drawn upon, as well as the mem- bers of the Washington Biological Society, including Dr. F. H. Knowlton and other distinguished students. But, except in a few instances, the result was disappointing. The eastern limits of the cacti, determined by Professor Bray, confirmed the location of Mal-Hado, well westward, but not further west than it is given in this paper, and their extent up the Colorado valley as well, makes the indicated route of the inland journey the more probable, and the poison tree in Sonora which Cabeza and the Coronado writers mention as so fearfully fatal was identified by Dr. Knowlton with the aid of Dr. J. N. Eose (and is, so far as I know, here first set forth) as the Sebastiana palmeri. This is of the order of Euphor- biaceae (the Spurgeworts), as Mr. Winship had hinted — a group of plants of varied form, all having a milky sap which is more or less poisonous. Croton oil of the pharmacies is the most virulent poison of those familiar to us, and the action of this arrow poison, as described by the Coronado chroniclers from their actual experi- ence, was similar to that of this drug — though many times more
1P. 166.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 325
intense. It is probable that some septic poison was combined with it. The account of Cabeza is as follows:
They have a poison [in the valley of Sonora at Corazones] from a certain tree the size of an apple. For effect, no more is necessary than to pluck the fruit and moisten the arrow with it, or if there be no fruit, to break a twig and with the milk do the like. The tree is abundant and so deadly that if the leaves be bruised and steeped in some neighboring water, the deer and other animals drinking it soon burst.1
Jaramillo, a chronicler of Coronado's expedition, says:
There was a poison here [at Corazones], the effect of which is, according to what was seen of it, the worst that could possibly be found ; and from what we learned about it, it is the sap of a small tree, like the mastic tree, or lentisk, and grows in gravelly and sterile land.2
Another writer, in the Rudo Ensayo, describing the objects of natural history up the coast from Mexico, speaks of this plant and says that its milk is deadly and used as an arrow poison, and he adds that "it serves also, this same milk, for opening stubborn tumors, although I would not advise it, owing to its poisonous quality."3 This poison extended north well over into the valley of the San Pedro, and at "Suya" fifty leagues north of Corazones it nearly exterminated a garrison. The purpose of detailing this will be seen later.
All other attempts at determining the route by mere natural history features were failures. There were great canebrakes at Mal-Hado, but so there were all around the coast; the women there clothed themselves in a "wool that grew on trees," but the Spanish moss, or tillandsia, has no limit toward Panuco ; the herba pedrera, though Oviedo mentions a few more of its characteristics, could not be identified ; the crawfish and oysters could be found at sundry points ; nuts were everywhere, and the bitter and milky-juiced herbs were too abundant to mean anything, as were the granillos* ground with the nuts at "that river"; the mesquite grew from anywhere west to a line eastward of Galveston, and had no defined limits;
'Buckingham Smith's Translation (Ed. 1871), p. 172. 2Winship, "The Coronado Expedition," in Bureau of Ethnology, Four- teenth Annual Report, Part I, p. 585. "See Ibid., 538. *Naufragios, (Ed. 1555). fol. xxiv.
326 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
maize meal was away out of place "up that river," since it was never known to be grown then west of the Brazos or east of the Kio Grande ; the pifion was too scant on the hither or eastern side of the Pecos ; while quails and hares could be found anywhere, and the gourds nowhere in central Texas, and the chacan (Cabeza) or masserones (Oviedo) up the Rio Grande and the other herb the powder of which was eaten on the high plains beyond were out of the realm of conjecture. Not a crumb of comfort could be found in the stones even, which Cabeza said he believed the Mariames would have eaten, had there been any in that country; for Mr. Deussen wrote me that there were practically none from New Or- leans to Brownsville, on the coast, and especially along the coast under discussion. Only the iron region generally in the Llano River country or eastward was left me ; and both accounts had dis- tance enough to run far beyond that from any point north of the Rio Grande. Because the Inca had said that De Soto was buried in a coffin excavated out of a solid log of live oak (green and heavy that it might sink well) I had already determined that he died at the mouth of Red River, for this tree does not extend to the mouth of the Arkansas, and Brevoort, Bourne, and others are wrong; but I could find nothing on this route so exclusive and excluding, unless it be the already noted Sonora arrow poison. Even in this case Coopwood claims something as bad may be found on his gulf coast route.
Neither have I been able to find any ethnological aid. On the Corona do expedition, this is important. Even the flint hoes of the Quiviras, found in*Kansas, limit the extent of his journey, for the Quiviras planted, and their neighbors eastward did not ; but so far as the local student knows, there are no such tale-telling flints in Texas, else they have not been found and read yet. I have some hopes of this help still; but the tribes here were not so settled as those of Kansas, and they lived less by labor — and less even by the chase, since the bison was not always with them here as there. So I have had itinerary and topography only to depend on — and I have abided with them.
(3) Discussion of the Routes Indicated by other Students. — It may not be out of place, for the sake of completeness, to discuss briefly the main points in such papers as have already appeared in THE QUARTERLY.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 327
The first is that of Ponton and McFarland in the issue of Janu- ary, 1898. They seem to be the pioneers in locating the four rivers west of Mal-Hado, and it is strange that they did not locate, from Oviedo, the ancones beyond. The sand hills of the mouth of the Guadalupe led them astray, and it is remarkable that they have their river of nuts and the dunes and ancon so far apart as the Colorado for the one, the middle of Matagorda Bay for the other, and the head of San Antonio Bay for the third; whereas, according to their own interpretation of Oviedo, they should all be together, as one might wrongly infer from a casual reading.
Their demolishing of Mr. Bandolier's fancies concerning the substitution of cedars for pifions and his impossible location of the route up the zigzag of the Rio Grande is definitive, though they ignore the statements of Espejo; but they err as seriously in not carrying the route inland to the north, and in carrying it up the Pecos. There is no evidence that Cabeza went up any "big river" but one, and that was the Eio Grande. They very properly reject Bandolier's inland turn up the Brazos ; but it should not be for the reason that the cactus is not found there (as it is not), but because the Spaniards went at least one hundred and forty leagues west- ward from Mal-Hado to where they saw mountains, before they made the northward start. In endorsing Bancroft's upper route from the plains near the Llano Estacado, they ignore the fifteen or seventeen days' trip up any river. They claim that the verity of the intersection of the route of these men with that of Coronado as noted by Castaneda, can not be ignored, but they seem to have overlooked the very much modified statement of Jaramillo. Their confidence in the limits of the bison eastward as defining the loca- tion of the first day, as set forth in Winsor's History, is scarcely well placed, since we know that in different seasons the stress of drouth and cold varied these limits greatly. With other students they seem to err in thinking that Cabeza notes a well-defined line here to which bisons came. He simply says1 "All over this coun- try there are a great many deer, fowl and other animals which I have before enumerated. Here also they come up with cows." Now this enumeration to which he refers took place when he was de- scribing things away east of this on the coast of Florida proper. In this last connection he has just been telling of the habits of the
'P. 94.
328 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Mariames when they go to the tuna region thirty leagues west of the nut river, and the phrase, "this country" would seem to apply to that ; so also his "here." There is no doubt, however, that bisons came later to Lavaca River. In noting the food and giving the customs of the people east of this first ancon, there is no mention of even a buffalo robe; and hence Cabeza had never gone to these cows in his trading ventures along the coast. They were, there- fore, pretty well west of the great ancon, and count nothing in de- fining the location of this first ancon and river of nuts.
Judge 0. W. Williams, in THE QUARTEELY for July, 1899, endorses the foregoing students in their location of Mal-Hado and subsequent coastal topography. According to Professor Bray, he errs in saying that more inland the tunas can not be found. Like Ponton and McFarland, he speaks of the bison range as -defi- nitely limited, and he seems to confuse the three times that Cabeza ate of their meat with Dorantes's three journeys as far west as the great ancon. Beyond this he is not definite; but his mention of a great limestone plateau west of Edwards County, full of game, is interesting, since the journey westward from the iron region went very probably over this section — either on the direct route, or on that hypothetical one through Coahuila. He makes a strong cor- roborative point in favor of the Presidio, or Conchas region on the Eio Grande, being the place of the first permanent houses, when he states that in this neighborhood corn has been planted from time immemorial in " 'temporales,' that is, in sandy stretches near the river, . . . [where it] depends upon rain and subirriga- tion from the river to bring it to fruitage." This comports well with what Cabeza says about corn-growing there. The failure for the two years previous to Cabeza's coming had depended on drouth — possibly on one that had made the river-bed dry, and cut off the subirrigation ; for we know from Castaneda, Humboldt, and others that there were places above this where the Rio Grande sank in the sand for miles during great drouths. Judge Williams is correct in saying that it would seem that it is these same corn-planters which Cabeza calls the "Cow nation." How anyone can read otherwise is hard to understand; but he immediately errs in giv- ing credit to Bandelier's statement that this could not possibly be true. As already shown this old hydra has had all its necks am- putated by Judge Coopwood, and by further statements of Cabeza
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 329
and Oviedo — as well as by a critical study of the narratives in con- nection with the migration of the herds and the topography. When we recall to what a great extent the 'bison has changed its range and habitat within the memory of this generation, we should be chary in making broad assertions about where its limits were in Cabeza's time, fifty years before we have any other account of the country. The persecution of certain hunter tribes would change the range then as later. There are notices of bisons passing in dry years to the Eio Grande valley above this from a general habitat much further east; and we know that this was an unusually dry time — even in the winter. It may be, however, that the cows were on the Pecos, as Williams suggests ; but that Cabeza's "cow people" lived on the river that ran among mountains — the Eio Grande — is firmly established, if the narratives can be depended upon.
Judge Bethel Coopwood's long discussion of the route of Cabeza, in THE QUARTEELY for October, 1889, and January, April and July, 1900, is full of interest for its daring originality in so plausibly presenting such a bizarre scheme by means of what seems to have been a sincerely intense study. Whatever we may think of the probability of his theories, we must feel grateful to him for the amount of unique information that he has massed. The paper is too long to follow in detail. We may see that his first presump- tion of a far inland position, around Aransas Bay, for his four rivers; his making St. Joseph's Island his Mal-Hado, and his ig- noring of the strictly coastal journey of these men, as they went beyond it; his continuance of the journey around the coast south (instead of westward with an almost right-angled turn inland, as indicated by the narratives and the De Soto chroniclers) ; his con- tinuance of the journey then westward to Jalisco beyond the City of Mexico through a country whose inhabitants could have in- formed the travelers of the location of the city so practically near them — a country that had been invaded then by white men often — all these show how this student has allowed a preconceived idea to change directions, dwarf distances, and overlook plain statements generally. He also has split on the rock of ignoring Espejo — and much else.
He denies that Cabeza ever passed down through Culiacan, be- cause this would be fatal to his proposed route. He does seem to show from records that Melchior Diaz could not have been mavor
330 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
there when this party passed in the spring of 1536. He quotes from Tello certain statements to show that it was not possible for the two captains, Cebreros and Alcaraz, to have been near the Yaqui in that year, under a certain other Captain Chirinos; but these are all his own deductions, whereas Tello says distinctly that Chirinos did bring these men from Petatlan River to Compostela, passing Culiacan, where Diaz was mayor. Tello's account is that Chirinos had sent Cebreros and Alcaraz forward to make discov- eries. On this trip they heard that Cabeza's men were ahead at the Yaqui, "where they remained fifteen days crying over their long and painful journey, . . . and meeting Cebreros, he took them to where Alcaraz was, and they were taken by him to Captain Chirinos, by whom they were treated kindly, and who recognized them, because they had been his friends before the voyage to Florida/'1 Coopwood claims that all this and the account of Cabeza and the joint letter written at Mexico were fixed up by the viceroy, Mendoza, involving the reports about the cotton and gems and large houses for to the north, so that the authorities of the crown might empower him to make an expedition up that way, thus getting ahead of Guzman and Cortes, who were making sim- ilar attempts. There can be no doubt that "the good" Mendoza was a conscienceless schemer; but, on the face of it, it would seem that he would have had this joint letter made more definite and wonderful in its statements than either it, or the Naufragios, was, which latter was written in Spain, far away from the influence of the viceroy; for they are both very indefinite in their assertions, and each might have said that these men had seen actual wonders, if the object had been to instigate expeditions merely. From what we know of later expeditions, and the report which they obtained from Indian information — we find that the high houses, the tur- quoises, the feather trading and all that — are of a piece with that which Marcos, Diaz, and Coronado's men heard — and, subsequently, to a large extent verified.
As Judge Coopwood is a plausible advocate, it may not be out of the way to look further into the fallacy of his claims, with such side lights as are at hand. We have seen how the arrow poisons of Cabeza and Jaramillo coincide. What other men then had knowledge of this and all the details of this plant's growth and
QUARTERLY, III 251.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 331
effects, so that a modern naturalist can determine the species from their description? It may be easily shown that Guzman's men knew nothing of it, and that it was not used by the tribes about the Yaqui which, the joint letter shows for the first time was the line of division between two civilizations. It was an Opati prod- uct, and the Opati tribe was then north of that river. Nowhere else yet has such a poison been recorded as used. Then, again, that these men saw here what they speak of is apparent from the evident sincerity of the narrative, and from the harmony of their descriptions of the houses, costumes, and customs of the women with those of the Coronado narrators. Oviedo's account1 says that these permanent houses and the peculiar dress of the women pre- vailed then for a good three hundred leagues northward2 from a river discovered by Nuno de Guzman (the Yaqui), and that from this river forward (toward Mexico) the houses were of petates and straw, with the women's skirts coming only half way down. These were the facts. The Petatlan Eiver was named after the style of these houses.
Again, Mendoza writes the emperor, about 1536,3 after the com- ing of Cabeza, telling his Majesty of the journey of Marcos of Niza to the flat-roofed pueblos. He says in this that he had ar- ranged with Dorantes to lead an expedition to these, but that the scheme fell through. However, he adds that he had left yet the negro (i. e., Steven) from him. He says that he supposed that Dorantes would be able to do his Majesty great service, in search- ing out the secrets of those parts. Why should he want these two for exploration, unless they had some experience up north, in the region of which he is evidently speaking? He adds that he had instructed Coronado to pass through Topira (Durango) and meet Marcos in the Valley of Corazones (and he gives its approximate distance from Culiacan) ; but that this commander had to return, on account of impenetrable mountains, to Culiacan, which was then the last province subdued by the Spaniards toward the north. He
1P. 610.
That is from the Gila River to the Yaqui, which shows that he passed near the Gila valley, else he could not have known of the great extent of the Pima stock and architecture.
•Hakluyt, Voyages of the English Nation to America (Goldsmid ed.), Ill, 63-66; Bandelier, The Journey of Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca, 197-202.
332 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
had, however, sent the negro as a guide for Marcos. Who else then could have known anything of Corazones, but some one of this Cabeza party, or those getting information from them ? Lastly and definitely, Castaneda says that, on the journey of Marcos, "the Indians got along with the negro better [than with the friars], because they had seen him before, [and] this was the reason he was sent on ahead ... to pacify the Indians." Further dis- cussion is useless, and if this party did not pass Corazones on its way into Mexico, there is no use in trusting any statements con- cerning the journey — either of their own or those of others.
In opposition to the very far southern position of the route of Coopwood, and even that of Bandelier, it is nearly established that Cabeza crossed the Eio Grande just west of Bincon, New Mexico, where, since the mountains crowd into the river, they would "have to cross" [avian de atmversar}, according to Oviedo.1 Espejo, loitering, made five leagues per day on his journey along here. These men were hurrying, on account of hunger, going from morn till night. They made, doubtless, not less than six leagues, and seventeen days of this would be one hundred and two leagues, or two hundred and sixty-five miles along this stream upward. Lay this distance on any map, and note that it stretches from Presidio to Bincon. Note at this latter place that the river ceases to bear westward — that this is in all respects a place to leave it, to go westward. In view of this and what Espejo says, Mr. Bandelier's crossing at Presidio is out of the question, and there is no occasion for Judge Williams to get tangled up about there probably having been several crossings in this region.
I regret that space will not allow me to quote from Coopwood's citations concerning the bison in Mexico — the really valuable part of his discussion, for which students of these early Spanish ex- peditions should be grateful. He is correct also in showing up some of the inconsistencies of Cabeza's early itinerary, but his holding the poor traveler down to astronomical niceties, after he had been for eight years keeping the time by the moons only, is slightly finical and apparently of little import.
Oviedo here is no more trustworthy, and we shall see that Cabeza's time for starting from the Avavares, say the first of June — as indicated by his eight months spent with them from the first
1P. 609.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 333
of October — is as near right as Oviedo's first of August. Cabeza's hint of being on the Rio Grande in January comports well with the rest of the itinerary, and shows that Oviedo, too, is wrong a month. We shall consider that later.
Judge Coopwood has misunderstood Cabeza as having two dis- tinct towns — a Culiacan and a San Miguel; and he says that the latter town was removed to the site of the former years before. In this he is correct; but he does not seem to note that Cabeza stopped out east of the village and did some baptizing at "a settle- ment of peaceable Indians." There Cebreros left him and went on "three leagues further to a place called Culiacan."1 Diaz came out to where Cabeza was, and, seeing his influence among the sav- ages, begged him to stay and do further missionary work among the Indians. Cabeza did so, and finally went into Culiacan, but this time he calls it San Miguel, as did others at that time. Men- doza, in the letter to the emperor above cited,2 speaks of it at first as "Saint Michael [San Miguel] of Culiacan" and later as simply "Culiacan." It went by either name in the early Mexican chron- iclers. Hence Judge Coopwood's error here. He did not read closely. Mr. Dellenbaugh split on the same rock of not properly distinguishing and locating these towns, and had to be corrected by F. W. Hodge, in Brewer's Harahey, in his discussion of the route of Coronado. This blunder in location carried the route proposed by the former into a watershed that Jaramillo says distinctly Coro- nado never entered. There is no error here on the part of Cabeza. 9. Tabulation of the Time and Distances of the Journey.
Perhaps a retabulation of such parts of the itinerary as we may be able to approximate may be rather convenient here near the end of the discussion — for easy reference.
From Mal-Hado to first ancon, Dorantes says 40 leagues ; Cabeza implies 45 leagues.
To next ancon, Cabeza implies 15 leagues: Oviedo says 12 leagues.
To hither edge of tunas on coast, Cabeza says 30 leagues ; Oviedo says 40 leagues to farther edge.
Thence to Avavares,3 1 day (Oviedo), 7 leagues.
'Cabeza, 175.
2P. 331.
"They delay here eight months — possibly nine.
334 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
To next Indians, 1 day.
Eest among granillos, 8 days.
To forest, 1 day, five leagues.
To fifty ranches, 1 day.
Rest here, 5 or 6 days.
On past spring or little river to one like Guadalquiver and be- yond (Cabeza), 1 day; (Oviedo) 8 or 9 leagues.
Extra days indicated by Cabeza to here, 2 days.
Rest two days here (at mesquite, Oviedo), 2 days.
To the sight of the sierras, 1 day.
On to river at foot of punta, 1 day, 5 leagues.
Another day shown by Cabeza.
Inland from river, according to Oviedo, 80 leagues; according to Cabeza, 4 days plus 50 leagues.
Over iron mountain or west to beautiful river, 1 day, 7 leagues.
A long indefinite stage to the five groups of settlements according to Oviedo; through many tribes and valley, according to Cabeza.
Beyond a big river (Cabeza), to a new people, 30 leagues.
Fifty leagues of arid mountains, across a big river and then over to some plains (Cabeza) to some more people from afar, which are Oviedo's second and only group before the permanent houses, 50 leagues.
One day following the women (Cabeza).
Three more journeys (Cabeza), 3 days (?).
Another day of 1£ plus 6 leagues, 1 day, 7£ leagues.
Next day to permanent houses, 1 day.
According to Oviedo, this stage was first three days and a part of another, and it was at the end of three days that Castillo re- turned. His part of a day corresponds with Cabeza's "next day." Four days and thirty leagues will cover this distance in both nar- ratives, 4 days, 30 (?) leagues.
At the first houses on the Rio Grande, 1 day.
To the next, 1 day.
There at least, 2 days.
Up the stream on east bank, according to Cabeza, 17 days; ac- cording to Oviedo, 15 days, or possibly 24 days.
Across to first maize and fixed houses, 17 days; or, according to Oviedo, more than 20 days.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 335
Through these to Corazones, according to Cabeza more than 100 leagues; or, according to Oviedo, 80 leagues.
Eest here (Cabeza), 3 days.
To another village where it rained (Cabeza), 1 day.
Tarry here, 15 days.
To the Yaqui (Cabeza), 12 days; the whole distance from Cora- zones to the Yaqui being put by Oviedo at 30 leagues.
Thence to Culiacan (Oviedo), 170 leagues.
In this connection may be noticed an interesting inconsistency. Oviedo says that he struck the first permanent houses with maize "more than two hundred leagues from Culiacan." Through the district where these houses were found he says that he traveled "more than eighty leagues," leaving an estimate of one hundred and twenty leagues from Corazones to Culiacan. His itinerary certainly gives thirty to the Yaqui, one hundred thence to the Indian village on the mountain top, and forty on to Culiacan. The consensus of the Coronado narrators gives the whole as one hundred and forty leagues, which it actually is in a direct line.
(4) Conflict in the Two Accounts. — Oviedo says1 that when they reached Corazones they had been eight months in the moun- tains, and earlier he refers2 to this whole journey as being of ten months' duration. Cabeza also speaks of it3 as a ten months' journey "after our rescue from captivity," as if he dated the end of it at Culiacan nearly two months later. When we compare tiie Jates, and note the time intervals at each end of the journey we find that Oviedo's stage of eight months in the mountains shows a consid- erable error. It is the most serious difference that there is between the narratives. Oviedo, by his saying that when they reached Cora- zones they had spent eight months in the mountains, leaves only two months to go both from the Avavares to the mountains at the start and from Corazones., to Culiacan, at the finish — if, as would seem to be the case, he means to treat the whole journey as ending at Culiacan. We shall see that Cabeza was likely correct in ending it there, since it accords with his hint that it was January when he reached the Rio Grande. Near the end of his narrative,4 Oviedo
»P. 610. 2P. 604. "P. 182. 4P. 610.
336 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
shows distinctly that his account regarded the Spaniards as enter- ing the mountains just after (or at least not before), they ended their inland journey north in Texas, where they received the cop- per rattle. In like manner the mountain journey ends at Cora- zones. If they were two months going from Corazones to Culi- acan, there would be no time left to go from the Avavares to the Iron Eegion. They were certainly little less than two months be- tween Corazones and Culiacan. Oviedo accounts for thirty-three days on this stage, and "more than a hundred leagues" of travel be- sides, for which the time is not given. He says that below the Yaqui they ate bark and roots on this stretch for some time and were very weak. Hence their rate was not rapid. It is likely that they were at least twenty days going these one hundred leagues, and that the five to seven days of resting noted at the "peaceful village" just out of Culiacan were not all that were spent there. His summary makes the whole way one hundred and seventy leagues, mostly near the coast; but he shows that they passed to a point — on the high mountain — which was east of Culiacan forty leagues, and this im- plies that they went a longer route than the direct line. This makes 53 days in all — a close approximation to a similar estimate that may be made from Cabeza's account.
Cabeza says that he left Culiacan the 15th of May, and he notes another significant period; for he adds that fifteen days after he arrived there Alcaraz came in. Since he and this Alcade had had some such hot words out in the mountains, it is not very likely that Cabeza stayed longer, and he thus probably reached Culiacan about May the first. As they were at Corazones three days, according to our estimate, they would therefore have arrived at that village fifty-six days earlier, or, say, the fifth of March. Now let us see how long it probably took them to come to Corazones from where they first reached the Rio Grande. First, Cabeza's two seventeens and Oviedo's fifteen plus more than twenty amount to much the same — say, thirty-five days. The next stage is a matter of leagues — Cabeza's more than one hundred, and Oviedo's eighty. Let us say an average of ninety. To go this loiteringly, as Oviedo im- plies, would take fifteen days of actual travel. Since, according to Oviedo, the villages were, on an average, two and a half days apart, there would be five of these (Corazones' making the sixth) ; and, since also he says that they rested at each of these two or
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 337
three days, they would consume another twelve days in that man- ner. Hence here would be sixty-two days in all back of March the 5th, or it would have been January 2nd when they started up the Rio Grande. Three days before this date they struck the lower per- manent houses. Cabeza was right. He was there in January, and four months of his ten lay yet to the westward of that place. His start from the Avavares was, therefore, six months back, or on the first of July. He and Oviedo are each wrong a month in the start, each wrong on a different side of the true date.
It may be seen that if Oviedo's account needs fifty-three days from Corazones to Culiacan, and eight months back from the former place to the Iron Region, there would be left only about five days to go from the Avavares to the "beautiful river." We have seen that about thirty-six were actually traveled — they were at least a month, anyway. This is the month that Oviedo's account is in error. As his time back from the first of January on the Rio Grande must be the same six months of Cabeza, we can easily see that he was only seven, instead of eight, months "in the moun- tains" (from the "beautiful river" to Corazones) — erring here also — and that he started from the Avavares the first of July instead of August.
(5) The Time of the Tunas. — If Cabeza went to the Avavares, the first time, at the middle of September, as he says1 (since he notes that it was at the full of a moon that was new on the first), his subsequent wanderings with them to another tribe before they settled — perhaps a half month at least — and his later visit to the Cultalchulches and Susolas, some distance off, may have brought the first of November before they all went into permanent winter quarters. The Susolas were old acquaintances, whom he had met at the river of nuts, and he may have lingered among them awhile. Oviedo's phrase, "por otubre" — through October — is significant here, and, under the circumstances, is to be heeded before his other phrase for the time of wintering, "from October the first to August the first." It becomes the basis for Cabeza's eight months' stay. Eight months from the first of November would reach to the first of July, which accords well with the date deduced from considering Cabeza's dates at the other stages of the journey.
»P. 96.
338 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
It must be recalled that Cabeza sets no date for the departure. He simply says that when he escaped the first time, and went to the Avavares, "it was late in the season, and the fruits of the tunas were giving out." If they had been abundant for fifty days back (the average of the duration of them, "forty to sixty" days given by Oviedo) they would have begun to ripen this year about the 25th of July. This would tend to confirm Oviedo's statement that they ripen about the first of August; and in this case they would still last six weeks, since Cabeza says they went to these neighbors avares to get more tunas. At the time of starting from lere for the final journey the next year, Cabeza says that at the end of the eight months "the tunas began to ripen"; but there appears to have elapsed at least half a month wherein they went to the Maliacones and ate "a small fruit of some trees," and two dogs were eaten with the Arbadaos until the tunas were fully ripe. In fact, if we except the note of Oviedo about seeing some tunas that were green and some others that were beginning to ripen only a day after the start, there is no evidence from these narratives that they ate ripe tunas — or even heard of any — till they were two days beyond where they first saw mountains. This was about twenty-five days after the start — say July 25th, justifying Oviedo's ripening time and Cabeza's starting date. It is almost convincing local evidence of Oviedo's error, and confirms the first of July as the approximate period for the beginning of this great journey of ten' months.
Based on this, the approximate dates for the more important points on the way would be as follows:
Start to the Avavares, September 15, 1534.
Start on journey next year, July 1, 1535.
At big river, like Guadalquiver (about), July 20, 1535.
First sight of mountains, July 23, 1535.
Cabeza's inland turn, July 27, 1535.
Over Cabeza's iron mountain, August 4, 1535.
Oviedo's entrance into sierras at fifty leagues from the inland turn (say eight days), August 5, 1535.
At the Rio Grande, December 27, 1535.
Crossing of the Rio Grande (about), January 14, 1536.
First maize and good houses in the West, February 6, 1536.
At Corazones, March 5, 1536.
A Study of the Route of Cabeza De Vaca. 339
Departure from Corazones, March 8, 1536.
At the Yaqui, March 12-27, 1536.
At Culiacan, May 1, 1536.
At Mexico [Tello], July 22,1 1536.
The foregoing study does not assume to be definitive, except in the location of Mal-Hado at the start, the region of the coastal journey, and that portion up the Eio Grande. In many respects it does not pretend to originality. It is merely intended to look over the ground somewhat thoroughly and present the case in a sug- gestive manner, in the hope that others, whose advantages may be greater, shall take up special local features and elucidate them. It is to be desired that this may occur, and that any errors of this paper may be eliminated.
My gratitude goes out to my helpers — who have been many — especially to the members of the faculty of the University of Texas and to officers of the Texas Historical Association. Without their aid this paper could not have been what it is. To Mr. Alexander Deussen and Professors William L. Bray and Herbert E. Bolton, I am especially indebted. I have had many favors from Mr. Luther E. Widen, business manager of the Texas Historical Asso- ciation, and Professor George P. Garrison, secretary and librarian of the Association and editor of THE QUARTEBLY. In like man- ner, Dr. Eeuben G. Thwaites, of the Wisconsin Historical Society, Mr. F. M. Crunden, of the Public Library, and Mr. L. K. Gifford, of the Mercantile, both of St. Louis, Mr. George P. Winship, of the Carter-Brown Library at Providence, Mr. John Vance Chey- ney, of the Newberry Library, Chicago, and especially his assistant, Mr. Merrill, Miss Mary Louise Dalton of the Missouri Historical Society, and Miss Grace King of the Howard Library, New Or- leans, Drs. William Trelease and Hermann Von Schrenk, of the Missouri Botanical Gardens, have all rendered valuable aid. I have availed myself of much of the ethnological investigations of Frederic W. Hodge, of the Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, also editor of The American Anthropologist, and have had personal suggestions from this eminent student. As noted, Dr. F. H. Knowlton and Dr. J. N. Bose kindly identified the Sonora poison for me.
^abeza's "the day before the vespers of St. James" (July 25th) would seem to place this date a day or so later.
340 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
It may add a slight interest in the sincerity of this study, if I confess that my investigations have frequently reversed strong im- pressions held hy me before, and some time after, beginning this paper.
Martin McHenry Kenney. 341
MARTIN McHENRY KENNEY.
CHARLES W. RAMSDELL.
The grandfather of Captain Kenney emigrated from Ireland to Pennsylvania about the end of the eighteenth century. One of his sons, John Wesley Kenney, removed to Kentucky and married there. Later he moved to Illinois and settled on the bank of. the Mississippi about fifteen miles above Rock Island, at that time a very thinly settled region. Here was born his son, Martin Mc- Henry Kenney, on December 11, 1831.
When the Black Hawk War broke out the family took refuge in a frontier fort, while the father served in the army until the strug- gle was over. The home having been destroyed in the meantime, they now went back to Kentucky. Here in the late summer of 1833 the cholera broke out. The family fled to the mountains, and in October began the long journey to Texas.
On December 17, 1833, they landed on the west bank of the Brazos where the elder Kenney built the first cabin in what was later the town of Washington. The next year he was granted a headright league as a member of Austin's colony and removed to Austin County, ten miles south of Brenham. Here young Kenney grew to manhood. He attended such schools as the country af- forded,— the earliest being the first public school in Texas, — but received the greater part of his instruction from his mother, who was a well educated woman. In 1848 he attended for a short time the McKenzie College at Clarksville until an attack of typhoid fever forced him to withdraw.
Two years later he began his wanderings with a trip to Mexico "to see the world." For a few months he was county clerk at Laredo, and then in 1851 he set out with a party of adventurous gold-seekers for California. After several years of futile search for a fortune in the mining regions, he returned to Texas in 1856, and settled in Goliad, where he became county surveyor. When the Civil War broke out he volunteered and was made captain of Com- pany K, 21st Texas Cavalry, and served in that capacity until he was honorably discharged at its close. Immediately thereafter he
342 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
went to Mexico and thence to Central America, where he engaged in the shipping of mahogany timber. Moving on again, he went to South America, where he traveled about for a couple of years, chiefly in the Argentine Republic. In 1869 he returned to his mother's home in Texas. Shortly afterwards he joined the force of the Texas Rangers and served with them for some time.
In February, 1877, he married Miss Annie Matthews of Chappell Hill, Texas. They removed to Bellville, where they lived for four- teen years. Here Captain Kenney took up his old business of sur- veyor, and practiced law. In 1892 he was elected to the Legisla- ture from Austin County, and served for two terms.
In July, 1895, he was appointed Spanish translator in the Gen- eral Land Office at Austin. His long acquaintance with the land system of Texas and his proficiency in the Spanish language en- abled him to perform his duties in a highly creditable manner, while his energy, punctuality, and conscientious attention to all details inspired the fullest confidence of the officials of the State. Because of the intricacies and confusion of the Texas land system and the consequent necessity of obtaining accurate translations of the Spanish and Mexican documents, land grants, deeds, etc., Cap- tain Kenney's work here was of the greatest importance to the State. It proved to be his final labor, for with the exception of a little more than a year, 1899-1900, he filled this position until shortly before his death. In 1901 he was stricken with paralysis, losing the use of his right hand. With indomitable will he re- mained at his post, but his strength gradually failed and he died, February 8, 1907.
Throughout his life Captain Kenney exhibited those stalwart qualities of mind and character that enabled his fellow pioneers to conquer the wilderness. He had seen the little band of colonists under Austin grow into a nation and then into a mighty State of the Union ; he had attended the first log-cabin school in the wild fron- tier, and had lived to see his own children attending a University in the same land; and he was interested in all that pertained to the development of the State. One of the earliest members of the Texas State Historical Association, he maintained an active in- terest in its affairs until his death.
A Letter from Mary [Mrs. Moses] Austin. 343
A LETTER FROM MARY [MRS. MOSES] AUSTIN.
The writer of the letter given below, Mary, widow of Moses, and mother of Stephen F. Austin, had a remarkable life and was de- scended from remarkable people. She was born January 1, 1768, at Sharpsborough Upper Forge (one of the iron mines of her grand- father Sharp) in the mountains of New Jersey; married (Septem- ber 28, 1785, in Christ Church, Philadelphia — where her grand- mother and great-grandmother had been married before her) Moses Austin, of Durham, Connecticut, and went with him to Richmond, Virginia, thence to the lead mines in the wilderness of Wythe county, and finally, in 1798, to Missouri, where she lived until her death — January 8, 1824 — with the exception of about eighteen months spent among her relatives in the East while her daughter was in school in New York. The letters she wrote her husband during this time are most interesting.
The father of Mary Austin, Abia Brown, was a prominent man in his community, being justice of the peace of Sussex county (an office at that time — 1772 — corresponding in dignity with justice of the supreme court now) ; member of the council of safety during the war; deputy from Sussex in attendance at the Provincial Congress at Trenton (October, 1775); and deputy in attendance at the Provincial Congress at New Brunswick (Jan- uary-March, 1776). He died in 1785 when only forty-two. His wife, Margaret, was the daughter of Mary Coleman and Joseph Sharp; thus uniting in her veins the blood of those two prime movers of the Quaker migration to America, Anthony Sharp and Robert Turner, both prosperous English merchants of Dublin, Ireland, and, next to William Penn, the richest and most prom- inent men who helped to found the colonies of New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Of them Judge Clement says, in his History of the Settlement of Newton (New Jersey), "Anthony Sharp and Robert Turner, both Quakers, and both men of fortune, were the guides in this, and not only gave their advice as to the details of the movement, but also covered the doubtful points by con- tributions of their means." They both suffered persecution and imprisonment in England and Ireland for conscience's sake; and
344 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
great pecuniary loss through unjust fines and through destruc- tion of property by mobs.
Anthony Sharp never came to America, but sent out, first, his nephew Thomas Sharp (in 1681) to look after his large landed interests in East and West Jersey and be his personal representa- tive in the Council of Proprietors; and (in 1701) his eldest son Isaac (just come of age), who, besides being member of the Coun- cil of Proprietors, served as judge of Salem court (1709-17), surrogate of Salem county (1712), and member of the Assembly (1709-21). Isaac Sharp's son Joseph married (February 12, 1743) Mary Coleman, great-granddaughter of Kobert Turner, the man who, next to William Penn, put most brain, effort and money into the foundation of Pennsylvania.
Eobert Turner arrived at Philadelphia on the Lion of Liver- pool, October 14, 1683, with his two motherless daughters, Martha and Mary, and seventeen indentured servants; filled successively almost every office of importance in the colony; and gave to its upbuilding the best that was in him to the time of his death, in 1700. An intimate friend and counselor of William Penn in the over-sea planning of the colony, Eobert Turner was ever his dependence and often his personal representative in Penn- sylvania; for William Penn spent but four years in America— two from 1682 to 1684 and two more from 1699 to 1701 — and so his representatives had their hands full. In Pennsylvania Eobert Turner held the offices of provincial judge, deputy gov- ernor, commissioner of property, member of governor's council, receiver general for properties, and register general ; and in New Jersey, although a non-resident, he was one of the twenty-four proprietors to whom the Duke of York released East Jersey, and was a member of both the assembly and governor's council of West Jersey and justice of Burlington county — which meant member of the quarter sessions, special, common pleas, and gen- eral courts, court of errors, and — at a later date — the supreme court.
The first brick house in Philadelphia was built by Eobert Turner as a model for others; and, when its place was demanded by trade conditions of this day, in the spring of 1906, it and his second house, built in 1685, withstood all onslaughts of pick and
A Letter from Mary [Mrs. Moses] Austin. 345
sledge, and yielded only to dynamite. The brick and mortar had become one unyielding mass. A description of his second house is given in a letter written by Turner to William Perm in 1685, which was formerly in the possession of the Pennsylvania Historical Society. Fortunately a copy of the letter exists, and also a picture of the houses, in Watson's Annals.1
LAURA BRYAN PARKER.
Herculaneum July the 28 1821. Dear Couzen
I wrote you a long letter in the month of December last, as near as I can recollect, giving you a detaild account of my dear Husband's misfortunes in consequence of the failure of the St. Louis bank together with a number of heavy losses he had sus- taind by being security and unfortunate shipments he had made. Finding his business in a very embarrast situation and the times very hard he gave up all his property to men he thought would do him justice and let no one suffer, and went to the province of Texas in Spain to see if he could do anything to advantage in that country. His encouragement from the government surpast his most sanguine expectations and after an absence of ten months he returned home, but finding his confidence had been abused and he deceived by those in whose hands he had placed his property, he arranged his affairs in haste and intended start- ing to Texas in May, accompanyd by a number of respectable men, who had embarked with him in this great enterprise — but oh my friend marck the uncertainty of everything in this vale of tears — a few days previous to his departure he was attacked with a violent Inflammation of the Lungs and was so severe as to baffel the power of medicine and the skill of the best Physi- cians in this Country and terminated his life on the 10 of June.
My distress and trouble has been greater than my pen can de- scribe. I endeavor to bear this afflicting dispensation of provi- dence with that resignation we owe to the will of heaven and blessed with the dear pledges of affection left behind. I shall for their sake exert myself to bear this inroad upon my happi- ness with the fortitude necessary to sustain it. God still tem-
irrhese facts concerning the genealogy of Mary Austin are gathered from family letters and records, documents in possession of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, Pennsylvania and New Jersey Archives, and from the manuscript volume in the library of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, entitled, "Sharpe, of Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, Kingdom of England: Round-wood in the Queen's County, Kingdom of Ireland: Salem, Province of West New Jersey. 1642-1895."— L. B. P.
346 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
pers the wind to the shorn lamb — it tis the cup of affliction that chastens, and brightens the pearls scattered before us here and sometimes prepares us for that hereafter, where the weary are at rest and the wicked cease from troubling.
I am 'sorry to inform you my family is reduced from a state of affluence to a state of poverty and I cannot in Justice to my- self and children give up what is due from T. E and C.
A At the time they requested me to give up my share
of the back rents my dear Husband was in affluence and I never expected to want a dollar. I am now dependent upon my son in law, my son S. F. Austin is in Texas waiting the arrival of his father and it will be long before he can know the great loss he has met with, my son James B. A. went to Lexington three years ago to finish his education and such has been my distressed situation and the great difficulty of getting money, it was not in my power to make him a remittance during the long absence of his Father. It was on his account I requested you to collect my share of the rent and sent it on in post notes or the U. S. paper — receiving no answer to my letter I concluded it never reached you and his father intended sending him money from New Orleins and I have no recourse left but getting the money
from T. K It tis painful to my feelings to demand it as
I once gave him reason to think I had given it up. Be assured my good friend nothing but necessity has induced me to trouble you again with this business — it will add to the numerous obli- gations I am. already under to you and my much esteemd friend Mrs. Sharp. Present my affectionate regards to her — I know her friendly heart will simpathize with me in my sorrows. Tell her it would give me much pleasure to hear from her and all old friends.
Pardon the incorrectness of this hasty scrall the mail is closing and I must put an end to this ill wrote letter. I left my Daugh- ter well a few days ago. She has three fine sons1 — were she here ehe would join me in best wishes for your health & Happiness. I am your sincere friend
M. Austin.2
1William Joel, Moses Austin, and Guy M. Bryan.
aOn the back of the letter are the following address and endorsements:
"Herculaneum ) 25 July 27 \
! Edward Sharp Esquire Camden State of New Jersey Received Aug. 25th, 1821."
A Letter from the Army of the Early Republic. 347
A LETTER FROM THE ARMY OF THE EARLY REPUBLIC.
Joshua H. Davis, the writer of the letter given below, was born in Poplar Town, Worcester County, Maryland, March 5, 1792. He was the son of John and Mary (Hodge) Davis. In 1812 he emigrated to Kentucky, and in the fall of 1836 he came to Texas ; where, however, he did not finally establish his residence till 1845. He died February 26, 1862.
The facts of this sketch have been furnished by Major Davis's daughter, Miss Texas J. Davis, of Cuero, Texas, in whose posses- sion is the original of the letter.
Camp Bowie May 31 1837 My Dear
I have written you a number of Letters with much pleasure and satisfaction. Hoping at the same time to have the same sentiment reciprocated. But how it is I do not know. The Truth is I have received only one Letter — That from Willis dated the 9th of March. We have a mail once every week from the City of Hous- ton to the Camp. With what anxiety I watch the opening of every mail can be easier guessed than described. However great my anxiety I receive no Letters — I am in hopes you are not so unfor- tunate in the reception of mine —
In the Last I wrote I think I spoke of the murder of Col Teal — Since that time to the present The Army has been quiet — Feeding on Bull beef for so Long a time the Animal will occasionally rise and Bellow out — The officers have then to do their duty and Bring the soldiers back to their duty and all is over.
The Secretary of War is now in Camp. He intends to Fur- lough all Except One Regiment and 4 companies of the Regu- lars— Subject to being called in Camp when it may be thought necessary —
No Enemy is expected in Texas this summer — I have some notion to request the Secretary to give me a Furlow with time enough to go home and return — But I am told by my friends it will be unnecessary — As the officers of our Regiment are situ [a] ted to remain in the Army. Take care of the Public property and dis- cipline the Troops etc — And I may add eat Bull Beef. — Oh what fun we do have eating Beef Boiled — Stewed — Baked and Roasted — Notwithstanding the fare we are fat raged and saucy — and feel as if we could whip our weight in Wild Cats And five times our weight in Mexicans.
We will move our camp Shortly 15 or 20 miles west of this —
348 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Where we will remain 2 or 3 months. I am informed the water is good and the site fine and healthy — I have not seen any more of the Country than when I last wrote having been confined entirely to duty in camp But expect shortly to have it in my power to Travel about more.
Congress is still in Session but what they are doing I know not — We Seldom receive any newspaper from Houston City — But are afraid the Land office under the old Law will not be opened — Consequently no Land can be taken up by Emigrant setlers. But they can purchase the best and Pretiest land in the world from old Setlers and titles good, very Low indeed. I would advise per- sons who have any notion of Living in the most Lovely country in the world to come see and buy Land — What I am going to do I can not with any certainty say. But I do expect to put up a Small House or Shantee on Mo 90 on Broadway Street in the Town of Texana. If I can make things work right — Since I have been writing this I have been informed that the senate of Texas did not confirm the appointment of the Secretary at War conse- quently his Power in the Army ceases. But the Furlowing will progress as that was made when he was in power — He was rejected on constitutional objections — Col Wiggenton is the oldest officer in the Field. Consequently He is at this time Commander of the Texian Armies — So we go There is many ups and downs in this life I am in hopes the ups will hereafter have the Ascendant — With Sentiments of much respect and esteem I conclude by signing etc yours affectionately
J H Davis
Direct your Letters [to] me at the Head Quarters of the Texian Army Care of Toby & Brothers New 0[r] learns Jones is afflicted with the Hyppo. badly.1
sentence is written on the margin of the third page.
Boole Reviews and Notices. 349
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTICES.
Among other documents lately received by the librarian of the Association is a reprint made by A. Turner of Houston's official report of the battle of San Jacinto (pp. 16). Although undated, it seems to have been published at Gonazles in 1874. It is the gift of Mrs. Julia Miller, of Gonzales.
Mr. Lawrence S. Taylor,, of Nacogdoches, sends the Association an interesting pamphlet entitled A History of the Action of the Political and Civil authorities and citizens relating to the land office at Nacogdoches, under the jurisdiction of Charles 8. Taylor, Commissioner appointed by the Government of Coahuila and Texas (Nacogdoches, Carra way's Print, 1901, pp. 14). This pamphlet contains copies of a number of documents the originals of which are in the custody of Mr. Lawrence S. Taylor, son of Charles S. Taylor, and which were published to serve as evidence of Mr. Charles S. Taylor's appointment as land commissioner, and of his official record in that capacity. It is of special interest in that it contains a half-tone engraving of Mr. Charles S. Taylor. Along with other matter, it contains also a list of 176 titles issued by him.
Reconstruction and the Ku Klux Klan, by T. W. Gregory, a paper read before. the Arkansas and Texas Bar Associations, July 10, 1906 (privately printed, pp. 22), is a forceful and suggestive essay in which the raison d'etre of the Klan, the good it accom- plished, its abuses, and its unhappy results are alike set forth in frank and impressive statement. It is based partly upon the author's personal recollections and partly on the historical litera- ture of the subject, especially "The Ku Klux Klan," by D. L. Wil- son, in the Century for July, 1884, and "The Ku Klux Move- ment," by William Garrott Brown, in the Atlantic for May, 1901. This pamphlet is heartily recommended to all readers of THE QUARTERLY who wish to understand the subject with which it deals.
350 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
Lee's Centennial, an address delivered by Charles Francis Adams at Washington and Lee University, January 19, 1907 (Boston and New York, Hough ton, Mifflin and Company, 1907, pp. 76), is an additional bit of the evidence now appearing from time to time that the North and South are at last beginning to understand each other and to appreciate the real difficulties and problems that were created for the honest and conscientious leaders on both sides by sectionalization due to slavery and by the Civil War. Written by a man who served in the Union army throughout the war and who has no apology to offer for having done so, it is at once an unan- swerable vindication of Lee and a most magnificent tribute to his achievements and his character. "As to Robert E. Lee, individ- ually," SP.VS Mr. Adams, "I can only repeat what I have already said, — if in all respects similarly circumstanced, I hope I should have been filial and unselfish enough to have done as Lee did" (p. 21). Further on he uses still stronger words: "Speaking ad- visedly and on full reflection, I say that of all the great characters of the Civil War, and it was productive of many whose names and deeds posterity will long bear in recollection, there was not one who passed away in the serene atmosphere and with the gracious bearing of Lee" (p. 57). More than this, it would be difficult to say.
Margaret Ballentine or the Fall of the Alamo: A Romance of the Texas Revolution. By Frank Templeton. Published by the Author. Houston, Texas. 1907. Pp. 244.
Ramrod Jones, Hunter and Patriot: A Tale of the Texas Revo- lution against Mexico. By Clinton Giddings Brown. The Saal- field Publishing Company. New York and Chicago. Pp. 321.
The avowed purpose of the first book is "to pay a deserved trib- ute to the men who fell at the Alamo." "The many episodes that go to make up the -story are strung upon the golden chord of love," and the author says that he will feel repaid for his labor if the vol- ume serves "to keep alive the spirit of patriotism among our peo- ple, and to lighten the labors of the Daughters of the Texas Repub- lic in perpetuating the glorious deeds of our ancestors." Mr. Templeton shows some evidence of ability to write serious history, and his knowledge of the period of the Texas Revolution is con- siderable, but he has not achieved a very happy result in the field
Boole Reviews and Notices. 351
of romance. The illustrations are poor, but one of them is of great historical interest : it purports to be a sketch of W. B. Travis made by Wyly Martin in December, 1835. If it was really made at that time, it gives us the only pretended likeness of the most heroic man that has figured in Texas history.
Ramrod Jones is a story for boys. It is written with some skill, and is mildly entertaining. It keeps close to the historical facts of the Texas Revolution, but has no didactic object.
The Story of Concord. Told by Concord Writers. Edited by Josephine Latham Swayne. (Boston : The E. F. Worcester Press. 1906. Pp. 314-fviii.)
Every tourist to New England makes a point of visiting Con- cord, Massachusetts, one of the most interesting small towns of America. There was fought one of the first battles of the Ameri- can Revolution. There are still to be found the home and the family of Emerson, whose towering personality dominated for so long the intellectual atmosphere of New England, and whose in- fluence is felt strongly today. To others the vicinity of Concord has been made hallowed ground through the writings of the nat- uralist Thoreau, who, keenly sensitive to the beauties around him, apparently knew every foot of the landscape, and every inhabitant of the land, the water, and the air about his haunts. The Haw- thornes, the Alcotts, and many lesser lights in literature shared the society of Emerson and Thoreau, influencing them and feeling their influence.
In the volume under review Mrs. Swayne has not attempted to form a continuous narrative concerning the town and its many heroes. What she has done shows so much labor and care that one regrets that she did not make a book of that kind and give it a definite literary form. Instead she has culled from the writings of certain citizens or quasi-citizens of Concord, numerous lengthy comments on the town and its famous characters. So in the chap- ter, "Concord in History," we have copious extracts from a cen- tennial address delivered by Ralph Waldo Emerson in 1835. In the following chapter, "Concord in Literature," Emerson's charac- ter is portrayed by F. B. Sanborn, George William Curtis, and Julian Hawthorne. Mr. Sanborn and Dr. W. T. Harris are quoted
352 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
concerning the Alcott family; Emerson and Channing, in the dis- cussion of Thoreau, and so on. Thus the separate chapters even are not unified.
The advantage of Mrs. Swayne's method of compilation is that the book seems a real transcript from life since almost every writer is describing the daily habits of an intimate friend, or some his- torical event of which he was an eye-witness. Thus we read in one of those numerous footnotes which add great value to the book: " 'Henry talks about Nature just as if she'd been born and brought up in Concord/ said Madam Hoar of Thoreau." Again from Louisa Alcotfs journal, dated February, 1861, comes a charming picture of the simple village life at that time, when her father, Amos Bronson Alcott, was superintendent of the Concord public schools : "Father had. his usual school festival, and Emerson asked me to write a song, which I did. On the 16th, the schools all met in the hall (four hundred), — a pretty posy bed, with a border of proud parents and friends. Some of the fogies objected to the names, Phillips and John Brown. But Emerson said: 'Give it up ? No, no ; I will read it.' Which he did, to my great content- ment; for when the great man of the town says 'Do it,' the thing is done. So the choir warbled, and the Alcotts were lifted up in their vain minds."
The typographical work of the volume has not been done so well as the editing. In the copy at hand, pp. vii and viii of the index, with the accompanying advertising page, are duplicated. Mis- prints also, such as, "Cival" for "Civil," p. 26 ; "inhabitants" for "inhabitants," p. 36; "ryhthms" for "rhythms," p. 200, are en- tirely too frequent throughout the book. On the other hand, the numerous illustrations, chiefly half-tone engravings of Concord worthies and scenes in that vicinity are beautiful — those of the typical New England homes and landscapes being particularly rest- ful to the eye. The volume closes with a complete index.
EOBT. A. LAW.
Questions and Answers. 353
QUESTIONS AND ANSWEKS.
The editor has received the following letter, which will explain itself. The work on which Mr. Ldmax is engaged is commended to the readers of THE QUARTERLY, who are urged to give him any help they can in completing the collection he has undertaken.
GEORGE P. GARRISON.
DEAR PROFESSOR GARRISON : J am endeavoring to make a com- plete collection of the native songs and ballads of the West. Many of these ballads have never been in print, but, like the Masonic Ritual, are handed down from one generation to another by "word of mouth." They deal mainly with frontier experiences : the deeds of desperadoes like Jesse James and Sam Bass ; the life of the ran- ger in camp and on the scout ; the story of the cowboy on the range, the round-up and going up the trail ; the trials of the Forty-niners, buffalo hunters, miners, stage drivers, Indian fighters, and freight- ers— in short, they are attempts, often crude and sometimes vulgar, to epitomize and particularize the life of the pioneers who peopled the vast region west of the Mississippi river.
I believe a notice from you in the columns of THE QUARTERLY will result in valuable material for my purpose — which is to pre- serve from extinction this expression of American letters. May I add that ballads, and the like, which because of crudity, incom- pleteness, coarseness, or for any other reason are unavailable for publication, will be as interesting and as useful as others of more merit. It is my desire to collect the songs and ballads now or lately in actual existence and in the precise form which they have popularly assumed.
Yours sincerely,
JOHN A. LOMAX, College Station, Texas.
354 Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
AFFAIES OF THE ASSOCIATION.
The tenth annual meeting of the Texas State Historical Associ- ation was held at the University of Texas on the afternoon of March 2, 1907. At the Council meeting reports of the Recording Secretary and Librarian and of the Treasurer were read, showing substantial increase in books, documents, and funds. A new sys- tem of bookkeeping and auditing was adopted.
At the public session papers were read by Professor H. E. Bolton and Chas. W. Eamsdell, entitled, respectively, "The Hasinai In- dians of East Texas at the Coming of the Spaniards," and "Texas During the Break-Up of the Confederacy." After the reading of these papers, Judge A. W. Terrell favored the audience with some interesting reminiscences, chiefly of General Sam Houston.
At the conclusion of the program the following officers were elected for the ensuing year :
Dr. David F. Houston, President; Judge A. W. Terrell, Aus- tin, First Vice-President ; Beauregard Bryan, El Paso, Second Vice-President ; R. L. Batts, Austin, Third Vice-President; Dr. Milton J. Bliem, San Antonio, Fourth Vice-President; Chas. W. Ramsdell, Corresponding Secretary and Treasurer. Pro- fessor H. E. Bolton was selected as the Fellow to serve on the Ex- ecutive Council for the term ending 1910 ; Mrs. Dora Fowler Arthur was chosen as the Member to serve on the Council for the term ending 1912. Professor H. E. Bolton was continued as business manager, with Luther E. Widen as his assistant.
At a meeting of the Fellows, which was held immediately after the adjournment of the Association, Dr. W. J. Battle was elected to fill the vacancy on the Publication Committee caused by the death of State Librarian C. W. Raines.
The attendance at this meeting of the Association was the largest in its history. Aware of the widespread and growing interest in its affairs, the officers will endeavor to make this annual session more attractive to the public, without in any way surrendering the criti- cal and technical character of the program. Since it is always held on the anniversary of Texas Independence, when there is a cele- bration of that event by the students of the University of Texas, it is believed that the Association meeting may find a place as one of the regular and most instructive features of the day.
INDEX TO VOLUME X.
Adams, Wirt, formation of cavalry regiment 286
Affairs of the Association 103-109, 354
Aguayo, San Miguel de, 13, 116
Aguayo, Mission San Jose de, records of 305
Alarcon, Martin de, defines boundary of Texas 11
Allcorn, Elijah 97
Allcorn, John H 97
Allcorn, J. J 97
Allcorn, W. E 97
Allen, A. C., promoter of Houston, Texas 168
Allen, John K., promoter of Houston, Texas 168
Allen, Thomas G 97
Altamira, on the boundary of Texas, 20
Angelino, Angel, map of Texas 35
Atkinson, Jesse B 97
Arthur, Dora Fowler 354
Austin, Texas, site of the permanent capital, 220; first sale of lots in, 225; plan of the city, 228; public buildings of, 231; removal of
the government to 233
Austin, Henry, offers land for capital site 197, 204
Austin, Mrs. Moses, letter from 343-47
Austin, S. F., expressions on the land speculations 88
Ayers, David 177
Balantine, James > 98
Barker. Eugene C., Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolu- tion 76-95
Barr, R., offers land at Tenoxtitlan for capital site 197
Barnett, G. W 97, 198
Barrett, D. C 144
Barrios y Jauregui, Jacinto de, fosters trade with French in Louis- iana 21
Baskett, James Newton, A. Study of the Route of Cabeza de Vaca,
246-79, 308-40
Bastrop, Baron de 140
Battle, W. J 354
Battle of Nueces, a pamphlet by John W. Sansom 110
Batts, R. L 354
Beales, Hiram 97
Bean, P. E 59
Benavides, Alonso 3
Beranger, exploration of Texas coast 12
ii Index.
Biedma 323
Bird, Ollie, The First Free Public School Building Erected in Texas,
review of 101-102
Black, J. W., offers land at Sulphur Springs for capital site 197
Blancpain, French trader 21, 22
Bliem, Milton J 354
Blount, William, designs on Louisiana 65
Bolton, Herbert E., on the name of Father Massanet, 101; The Found- ing of Mission Rosario: A Chapter in the History of the Gulf Coast, 113-139, 249; Spanish Mission Records at San Antonio
297-307; 324, 339, 350
Book Reviews and Notices 110, 183, 280, 349
Borden, Thomas H., 163; offers land for capital site 200
Bowie, James, land speculations 77, 88
Bray, William L , 324, 339
Bryan, Beauregard 354
Bucareli, founding of 31
Bunton, J. W 191
Burleson, Aaron 217
Burnet, D. G., opinion on land speculations 83
Burton, I. W 215
Byars, Noah T , 98
Casas, Brother Antonio 137
Cadillac, de la Mothe de, attempts to open trade with Mexico 8
Camberos, Father Juan de Dios, plan for conversion of Cu janes In- dians 128
Campbell, Isaac 215
Capital of Texas, choosing a permanent site for, 188; report of first commissioners,, 191; sites proposed, 197; report of second com- missioners, 199-292; report of joint committee thereon, 203-4;
report of third commissioners 216-20
Carondelet, Baron de, commissions Philip Nolan 55
Cartwright, Jesse, offers land for capital site 202
Chambers, Talbot, land commissioner of Robertson's Colony 86, 97
Chambers, Thomas J., prevents land frauds in 1834, 79; offers land for
capital site 197
Chanie, J. B 97
Cheney, John Vance 339
Cheney, W. P 285
Chisholm, John D., designs on Louisiana 65
Chriesman, Horatio, 97, 191; offers land for capital site 197
Clampitt, Francis W 97
Clark, Daniel 56
Clark, James 97
Clow, Robert J 98
Index. iii
Cocos, see Indians.
Collard, E 145
Coles, John P 97, 99
Collot, Victor, reconnaissance of Mississippi Valley 64-65
Concepci6n, Nuestra Senora de la Purlssima, mission of, 298; records
of 304
Concord, the Story of 351
Connelly, Isaac 98
Connor, John W 97
Cooke, L. P 215
Cooper, Alfred M 97
Coopwood, Bethel 329-33
Copanes, see Indians.
Copenhavn, William 98
Cortablan, French trader 22
Cox, I. J., The Louisiana-Texas Frontier 1-75
Croix, Cabellero de, inspection of Texas 33, 36
Crunden, F. M 339
Crozat, Antoine, grant to Louisiana, 8; succeeded by the Western
Company 11
Cujanes, see Indians.
Cummins, M 97
Cureton, C. M. and H. J 280
Dalton, Louise 339
Davenport, Samuel, settles at Nacogdoches 60
Davis, Joshua H. 347
Davis, Miss Texas J 347
De Leon, Alonso, destruction of La Salle's forts, 5; establishment of
missions 6
De Soto, death at mouth of Red River 322
Deussen, Alexander 324, 339
Dillard, Thomas 97
Dolores, Fray Juan Mariano de los 122, 301
Du Pratz, le Page, his boundary of Louisiana 20
Durst, John, land speculation of 82
Eberle.. Mrs 179
Eblin, John 199
Eblin's League, chosen for capital site, but vetoed by President Hous- ton 205
Endicott, Andrew 56
Escand6n, Jos6 de, Count of Sierra Gordo, plans for subduing the
Texas Gulf coast 120-22
Escovar, Father Joseph, pastor of mission Rosario 138
Espada, mission San Francisco de la, 298 ; records of 306
iv Index.
Espejo, his journel helps determine the route of Cabeza de Vaca 315
Espinosa, on boundary of Texas 20
Evans, Moses 98
Evitt, T. G 97
Flores, Manuel . , 225
Forest, Right Rev. Bishop J. 'A 297
Fulmore, Z. T 283
Gaines, F. Y 285
Ganuza ( or Lanuza or Lamuza) , Father 137
Garcia, Fray Diego Martin 123, 299
Garcia, Luciano 140
Garrison, George P., Westward Extension 281
Gifford, L. R 339
Gonzales, Fray Juan Joseph 123, 301
Gonzales, Jos6 19
Graham, Joshua 97
Grahams, John 97
Grant, James, land speculations 85
Gray, James 98
Greer, J. A 191
Gregg, — ., offers land for capital site 197
Gregory, T. W., The Ku Klux Klan 349
Grimes, Jesse 99, 145
Gritten, Edward, on land speculations 92
Groos, Jacob 97
Guapites, see Indians.
Guthrie, John F 97
Hadley, Joshua 99
Hall, John W., 99 ; offers land for capitol site 195
Hall, W. A 97
Hancock, G. D 217
Harpe, Bernard de la 11, 12, 15
Harris, David N 172
Hawkins, Isaac H 97
Hearin, R. M 289
Henrey, Samuel 98
Herrall, J. W. . 217
Hill, William W 97
Hodge, F. W 320, 339
Hood, J. L 145
Horton, A. C 215
Houston, Capital of Texas 167
Houston, David F 354
Houston, Sam, proposes nullification of fraudulent land grants 93
Index. v
Hoxey, Dr. Asa 77, 96, 97, 197
Hyerbipiamo Indians 299, 300
Iberville, plan for exploration of Texas 7
Indians: the Karaiikawa group (Caranguas, Cocoa, Copanes, Cujanes, Guapites), 114, 115, 116, 117, 122-28; the Jaranames, 117; the Tamiques, 117; tribes mentioned by de Vaca 263-4, 267
Jack, Patrick C 198
Jackson, E. D 97
Jefferson, Thomas 144, 55, 56
Johnson, A. E. C ". 145
Johnson, F. W., land speculations 80, 48-86
Johnston, Albert Sidney, A Glimpse of through the Smoke of Shiloh,
by J. B. Ulmer 285-96
Jones, A. H., description of the Texan assault on San Antonio 181-82
Jones, Lewis 98
Jones, Oliver, sketch of, by Adele B. Looscan 172-80
Jones, Rebecca, sketch of, by Ad6le B. Looscan 172-80
Jones, William C 98
Karankawa, see Indians.
Kenney, Martin McHenry, by Chas. W. Ramsdell 341-42
Kervey, Samuel 98
Kerr, James 91
King, Grace 339
Knowlton, F. H 324, 339
Kuykendall, Abner 174
La Fora, map of Texas . . . 35
Langara, Juan de, map of Texas 35
Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution, by Eugene C.
Barker 76-95
La Salle •• 4-5
Law, Robert A 354
Letter from the army of the Early Republic 347-48
Lewis, William 97
Livendais, protest against Spanish port on the Trinity 23
Lomax, John A 353
Long, W. W 285
Looscan, AdSle B., Sketch of the Life of Oliver Jones, etc 172-80
Lopez, Father 137
Lott, John 98
Louisiana, boundary, 8, 11 ; cession to United States 72-74
Lumpkin,' P. O 198
Lynch, James
Lyon, Frank 286
vi Index.
Mal-Hado, identified as Galveston Island 249, 256-58
Manlove, B 144
Margil, Father 11
Marsh, Shubael 97
Martin, M. T 98
Martos y Navarrete, Angel de 24-26
"Massanet" or "Manzanet"? by Herbert E. Bolton 100
Masse1, a French trader 22
Mason, John T 79, 81, 92, 94
Mathe, Nicolas de la 32
Matthews, Annie 342
McFarland, Bates H 249
McGehee, John G 191
McKinney, Thomas F 78, 93
Mendoza 331
Menefee, William 215
Mercer, Peter M , 98
Merrill, — ., 339
Mezi&res, Athanase de 30-31
Milam, B. R 77
Miller, Julia 349
Miller, J. B 96
Miller, Samuel R. 98
Miller, William H 97
Millican, E. M 145
Miranda, Francisco de 42
Mitchell, Asa 99, 145
Missions, 6, 10; Adaes, 129; Ais, 129, 131, 132; Candelaria, 119; Concepci6n, 298; Luz, 119; Nacogdoches, 129; Rosario, the Founding of, 113-39; 132-39; San Antonio de Valero, 298; San Francisco Solano, 298; San Francisco de la Espada, 298; San Ildefonso, 119; San Jose1 de Aguayo, 298; San Juan Capistrano, 298; San Lorenzo, 119; San Saba, 119; San Xavier de Naxera, 119, 298; Espfritu Santo de Zufiiga; Mission Records at San
Antonio, by Herbert E. Bolton 297-307
Money, J. H., offers land for capital site' 197
Moore, James 97
Moore, John H., offers land for capital site 202
Moore, Samuel P 54
Morff, Augustin de 34
Moris, S 98
Morris, Bethel 98
Mosooso 322
Mota-Padilla, Matias de la 20
Murphy, Edward 60
Index. vii
Nava, Pedro de, permits Nolan to buy horses in Texas 55
Newell, John 97
Newlands, Alexander 84
Niebling, F., offers land for capital site 197
Nixon, George A 86
Nolan, Philip 51; 57, 58, 59
Norwood, Jesse A 292
Oconor, Hugo 30
O'Fallon, Dr. James / 44
O'Reilly, Alexander 27
Orobio y Basterra, Prudencio de 21,121
Oviedo, importance of his testimony on the route of de Vaca 246
Pacheco, Rafael Martin 28
Padilla, Juan Antonio 77
Parker, Laura Bryan 343-45
Payne, Epps D 97^
Peebles, Robert 80, 84-86
Perry, A. G 145
Perry, James F., offers land for capital site 197, 204
Pefialosa 4, 5
Pierson, J. G. W 145
Piszina, Manuel Ramirez 122
Ponton, Brownie 249, 327, 328
Posadas, Father Alonzo 4
Questions and Answers 353
Rab, — ., offers land for capital site 202
Raines, C. W 280, 354
Raines, Emory 198
Ram6n, Domingo de 10, 116
Ramsdell, Chas. W., Martin McHenry Kenney 341-42; 354
Reynolds, A. C '. ... 99
Richards, Mordecai 59
Ripperda 39
Rivera, Pedro de 18
Roberts, Stephen R 97
Robertson, Sterling C., offers land for capitol site 197
Robinson, Baldon 97
Rodriguez, Juan, chief of the Hyerbipiamo Indians 301
Rogers, James 217
Rosario, The Founding of, by Herbert E. Bolton 113-39
Rose, Dr. J. N 324, 339
Royall, R. R 147
viii Index.
Rubf, Marque's de 29
Ruffin, Sam 286
Saint Denis 9, 10, 19, 20
San Antonio de Valero, mission of 10, 298
Sandoval 19, 20
San Felipe de Austin 140, 141, 142-47
San Francisco Solano, mission of 298, 300
San Jacinto, reprint of Houston's report of the battle of 348
San Juan Capistrano, mission of 298, 306
Santa Ana, Father Benito Francisco de 123, 304
San Xavier de Naxera, mission of 298
Saul, Thomas S 98, 99
Savage, T. J 296
Schrenk, Herman von 339
Scurlock, William 191
Sedano, Brother Francisco 137
Shiloh, the battle of 290-96
Simms, Bartlett 174
Simpson, J. W, 98
Smyth, George W 86
Soils, Father 136-9
Soop, F 97
Splann, J. M 98
Stevens, Ashby R 97
Sutherland, George 198
Swayne, Josephine Latham 351
Swisher, James G 97
Taylor, Charles S 86
Taylor, Lawrence S 349
Teran, Domingo de 6
Terrell, A. W 354
Texia, name proposed for capital of Texas
The Louisiana- Texas Frontier, by I. J. Cox 1-75
The Seat of Government of Texas, by Ernest William Winkler
'. 140, 171, 185-245
The Storming of San Antonio 181-82
Thomas, Isaac 97
Thompson, John 97
Thomson, D. T. A 97
Thwaites, R. G 339
Trast, David 98
Trelease, William 339
Ulmer, J. B., A Glimpse of Albert Sidney Johnston through the Smoke
of Shiloh 285-96
Index. ix
Vaca, Cabeza de, A Study of the Route of, by James Newton Baskett, 246-79, 308-40; map of the route, 264, 320; discussion of the route proposed by other writers, 327-33; tabulation of time and distance of the itinerary, 333-35; discussion of the conflicts between Oviedo and de Vaca, 335-37; chronology of the jour- ney 338
Vallejo, Father 131
Vandera, Logan 217
Vasquez, J. A 174
Vial, Pedro .' 36
Villa-Senor, Joseph Antonio de 20
Walkerston, J. F. Q 98
Walker, Edwin, agent of the government in sale of lots at Austin .... 227
Ward, Thomas W., builder of Texas capitol at Houston 170
Washington, Texas, Documents relating to the organization of the first
municipality of, 96-100; seat of the convention of 1836. . . .150, 153
Western Company, the, succeeds Crozat in Louisiana 11
Westover, Ira 176
Wharton, William H 215
Whiteside, James 97
Widen, L. E 339, 354
Wilkinson, General James •. 51, 57
Wilkinson, J. G 97
Williams, O. W 328-9
Williams, S. M 80, 82, 84-86, 92
Williamson, H. J 98
Williamson, R. M 90, 91, 146
Winkler, Ernest William, Documents relating to the Organization of the First Municipality of Washington, 96-100; The Seat of
Government of Texas, 140-71, 185-245
Winship, George P 321, 339
Wood, J. H 98
Wyche, John J 97
X. Y. Z. affair 66-68
Ybarbo, Antonio Gil 32
Young, Charles J 98