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
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11