F 
 0.55" 
 
 (Qdtnell Unitieraitg SItbrary 
 
 PenneylvaniaUniv* Library 
 in exchange 
 
when this volume was taken. 
 
 To renew this book oony the call No. and give to 
 the librarian. 
 
 HOME USE RULES 
 
 nmjlii 
 
 •|^ji|^-7-19eS"M; 
 
 IMtSM^^, 
 
 All Books subject to recall 
 
 All borrowers must regis- 
 ter in the library to borrow 
 books for borne use. 
 
 AH books must be re- 
 turned i at end of college 
 year for inspection and 
 repair^. 
 
 Lirnited. books/ must be 
 returned within the four 
 week limit and not renewed. 
 
 Students must return all 
 books before leaving town. 
 OffLcers should arrangfe' for 
 the return of books wanted 
 during their absence from 
 town. 
 
 Volumes . of periodicals 
 ' and o{ pamphlets are held 
 in the libr^y as much as 
 possible. , For special pur- 
 poses they are given, ^ut for 
 
 limited time. 
 
 .C 
 
 ortowers should not use 
 
 their library privileges for 
 
 the .benefit of other -pers6ns. 
 
 Books Of special value 
 
 and gift books, when the 
 
 , : giver' wishes it, are not 
 
 allowed to -circulate. 
 ;^ ■ •■• Readers are asked to re- 
 port all cases of books 
 "'"•' *• marked or mutilated. 
 
 Do not deface books by marks and writings 
 
 Cornell University Library 
 F 390 C55 
 
 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar ,„^v, Asa Kyrus 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 028 799 231 
 
MlftABEAU BOONAFy^RTH tAMAR 
 
 -ASA^«;^S,:|iB^^^N^ 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924028799231 
 
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 MIRABEAU BUONAPARTE LAMAR 
 
 BY 
 
 ASA KYRUS CHRISTIAN 
 
 A THESIS 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN 
 
 PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR 
 
 THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 AUSTIN, TEXAS 
 
 Von Boeckmann-Jones Co., Printers 
 
 1922 
 
A '5^IS^<i-^^ 
 
TO MY WIFE, 
 
 WHOSE CONSTANT ENCOURAGEMENT 
 
 HAS MADE POSSIBLE THIS 
 
 WORK 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This life of Mirabeau B. Lamar was begun while the writer was 
 a graduate student in the University of Texas, and at the sug- 
 gestion of Professor Eugene C. Barker, Professor of American 
 History. It was continued and completed at the University of 
 Pennsylvania, where it was accepted as part of the requirements 
 for the degree of doctor of philosophy. 
 
 The excuse for such a study need hardly be expressed. The his- 
 tory of Texas and the Southwest is just now beginning to be writ- 
 ten as a result of special investigation in different fields of South- 
 western history. And with all the monographs, mostly dealing 
 with pre-revolutionary days, very few have been devoted to a study 
 of the few years when Texas was an independent republic. Stephen 
 F. Austin is known for his sterling character and his masterly 
 work as a colonizer and transplanter of American civilization ; Sam 
 Houston is known for his spectacular military achievements; and 
 that is about as far as the general knowledge extends with regard 
 to the "Critical Period" in Texas history. Many people in the 
 East have no realization of the fact that Texas was one time an 
 independent republic. And the ignorance with regard to Texas 
 even among Texans is enough to justify one more historical study 
 with a view to eliminating that ignorance. 
 
 It seems that Lamar has been allowed to suffer more than others 
 by the general tendency of people to forget their notables. Colonel 
 of Cavalry at San Jacinto, Secretary of War in the provisional 
 cabinet immediately after San Jacinto, appointed by the president 
 and cabinet as commander-in-chief of the army, elected vice-presi- 
 dent in 1836, and president in 1838, Lamar was not less important 
 in establishing Texan independence than other characters who have 
 received more notice. 
 
 It is not intended that this shall be a complete biography. The 
 interest of the writer was more along the lines of the connection 
 of Lamar with public affairs until the close of his administration 
 as president in 1841, though for sake of clearness and complete- 
 ness, the early life and the life of the subject of the paper is 
 sketched briefly. 
 
 In the preparation of a paper of this nature, there are many 
 
sources and many individuals to whom one is indebted. The chief 
 obligation of this writer is to Professor E. C. Barker, at whose 
 suggestion the paper was undertaken, and to whose scholarly 
 example it ow&s whatever historical merit it may possess. He 
 not only advised with the writer, but read the whole in manu- 
 script, and superintended the publication of the paper in the 
 Southwestern Historical Quarterly during a protracted illness of 
 the writer. An acknowledgment of indebtedness is also made to 
 Mrs. . Mattie Austin Hatcher, archivist in the. history department 
 of the University of Texas, for her aid and counsel in the use of 
 material and for reading of the proof. Mr. E. W. Winkler, ref- 
 erence librarian in the University of Texas, was also helpful in 
 his suggestions, and his wide knowledge of the literature of the 
 field. Miss Elizabeth West, at present State Librarian, prepared 
 the excellent calendar of Lamar's papers, which the writer found 
 so helpful. The citations to the Lamar Papers are made in the 
 serial numbers of Miss West's calendar. 
 
 Professors Herman V. Ames, John Bach McMaster, and Albert E. 
 McKinley kindly read the entire manuscript and made valuable 
 suggestions as to plan, and saved the writer from possible errors. 
 Many others I have been indebted to for specific details, and I have 
 tried to indicate that indebtedness in the footnotes. 
 
 Lastly, I am under particular obligations to my wife for assist- 
 ing me in the original writing of the paper, in criticism of form 
 and structure, and for constant aid in preparing it for the printer. 
 
CONTENTS 
 Chapter I. Early Years in Georgia. 
 Chapter II. As a Texas Eevolutionist, 1836-1838. 
 
 Chapter III. Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs. 
 
 1. Education. 
 
 2. Finances. 
 
 3. Army and Navy. 
 
 4. Location of Permanent Seat of Government. 
 
 Chapter IV. Frontier Defense. 
 
 1. Relations vrith Miscellaneous Indian Tribes. 
 
 2. Relations with the Cherokees. 
 
 Chapter V. The Santa Ee Expedition. 
 
 Chapter VI. Foreign Affairs. 
 
 1. Efforts to Negotiate Peace with Mexico. 
 
 2. The Federalifts and the Alliance with 
 
 Yucatan. 
 
 3. Relations with the United States. 
 
 4. Relations with France and England. 
 
 Chapter VII. Closing Years. 
 
MIRABEAU BUONAPARTE LAMAR 
 
 A. K. CHRISTIAN 
 
 Chapter I 
 
 EARLY LIFE IN GEORGIA 
 
 When Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar arrived in Texas just be- 
 fore the battle of San Jacinto to east in his fortunes with the new- 
 republic, he had already achieved some prominence in his native 
 State of Georgia. He was bom at Louisville, Warren County, 
 in that State, on August 16, 1798, the second of a family of nine. 
 The family from which he was descended, tradition says, being 
 Huguenots, left France during the persecution of Protestants 
 under Richelieu and settled in Maryland. On November 17, 
 1663, Lord Baltimore granted certificates of nationality to Thomas 
 and Peter Lamore, and ten years later to John Lamore. Peter 
 Lamar left a will dated in 1693. Thomas Lamar also left a will, 
 dated October 4, 1713, leaving to his wife and two sons, Thomas 
 and John, considerable estates in Prince George's County. The 
 second Thomas also left a will, dated May 11, 1747, in which he 
 distributed a large estate among his six sons and two sons-in-law. 
 Li 1755 three of these sons, Robert, Thomas, and John, and one 
 of the sons-in-law, sold their estates and moved down into South 
 Carolina and Georgia. The father of the subject of this paper 
 was John Lamar, grandson of the John Lamar who settled in 
 Georgia in 1755. He was bom in 1769, and married his first 
 cousin, Rebecca Lamar.^ 
 
 To John and Rebecca Lamar were bom four sons and five daugh- 
 ters. With the family lived Zachariah Lamar, a brother to John, 
 an eccentric, self-taught man, who is supposed to have given to 
 the sons their names. He afterwards married and his daughter 
 became the wife of Howell Cobb, prominent in Georgia history. 
 The eldest son, Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus, became a member of 
 the Superior Court of Georgia in 1830, at the age of thirty-three. 
 He was the father of L. Q. C. Lamar, who was a prominent South- 
 em statesman before and after the Civil War, becoming Secretary 
 of the Interior in President Cleveland's Cabinet, and later an Asso- 
 
 'Edward Mayes, Lucius Q. 0. Lamar, 13, 14. 
 
3 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 oiate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Other sons 
 were JefEerson Jackson and Thomas Eandolph.^ 
 
 It is probable that Mirabeau availed himself of the opportuni- 
 ties offered by the schools in his locality, though he never went 
 to college. "Though not a rich man," wrote Joel Crawford, a 
 contemporary, and the law partner of L. Q. C, the elder, "Mr. 
 John Lamar, by dint of industry and good management, found 
 means to give his children the best education which the schools of 
 the country ailorded. None of them had the beneiit of a college 
 course, nor were they' (it is believed) acquainted with the ancient 
 classics or any other language but English."^ A close application 
 to the rules of good English is indicated in all his writings, though 
 how much of this was due to training in school it is impossible 
 to say. It seems, however, that he was chiefly self-taught, as in 
 all his writings there is evident a lack of system which is likely to 
 come with self-education. That he acquired a great mass of in- 
 formation is certain, and his native ability in expression caused 
 him to be rated by his contemporaries much above his merit. 
 
 In 1819, at the age of twenty-one, he established a general mer- 
 chandise business in Cahawba, Alabama. Being unsuccessful in 
 this business, we find him in March, 1831, announcing his pur- 
 pose to publish a humorous paper, "Village Miscellany to be writ- 
 ten in a series of numbers by Lanthornbalvon."* On January 1, 
 1833, he had printed a broadside in verse entitled, "New Year's 
 Address to the Patrons of the Cahawba Press." When he became 
 editor of this paper, if he did, does not appear. A few days later 
 he sent a copy of this address to his brother in Georgia. In a 
 note on the back of the broadside he wrote: 
 
 Dear Brother 
 
 I am here in Cahaba, without any business, or likelihood to 
 obtain any, shortly — You need not be disappointed if you see me 
 back in Geo. again in few weeks ; in great haste 
 
 Yours &C. 
 
 M. B. Lamar.' 
 
 At the same time he explained that he had written the address 
 
 ^lUd., 218. 
 
 ^Bench and Bar of Georgia. Quoted by Edward Mayes, Lucius Q. C. 
 Lamar, 16. 
 
 *MSS., Lamar Papers, No. 34. 
 'Lamar Papers, No. 44. 
 
Early Life in Georgia 3 
 
 "with a running quill," and apologized for the errors. It seems 
 probable that the verses were contributed by Lamar to the Ca- 
 hawba Press, and that he had no official connection with the paper. 
 
 In 1823 George M. Troup became Governor of Georgia after a 
 four years campaign, and Lamar acted as his private secretary 
 during the stirring times of his administration. He was recom- 
 mended for the appointment by Joel Crawford, law partner of 
 his elder brother, as a "gentleman not more distinguished by the 
 loftiest sentiments of honor, than by mental Superiority & devo- 
 tion to republican politics.^ It was during this period that the 
 struggle between Georgia and the Federal Government over the 
 removal of the Creek and Cherokee Indians took place, axid Lamar 
 is credited with activity in raising the militia to resist the efforts 
 of the Federal Government to coerce Georgia.'^ It was probably 
 at this time that he conceived an enmity towards the Indians that 
 went with him throughout his life. It was during this period, 
 also, that he adopted the principles advoca,ted by the extreme 
 States' Eights party. 
 
 On January 1, 1826, his term as secretary to the governor hav- 
 ing expired, he married Miss Tabitha B. Jordan, of Perry, Ala- 
 bama, and for the next two years lived in retirement on the farm. 
 On January 1, 182-8, he announced his purpose to publish a news- 
 paper in the town of Columbus, "if sufficient patronage can be 
 obtained to warrant the undertaking." The Columbus Enquirer, 
 he announced in the prospectus, was- to be attached to "the Ee- 
 publican creed as exemplified in the administration of Thomas 
 Jefferson; and in State politics, adhering to the principles that 
 characterized the late able administration of Governor Troup, it 
 will defend 'the Union of the States and the sovereignty of the 
 States.'" Its influence in the ensuing presidential election was 
 to be given to the democratic candidate most formidable to the 
 men in office. "But it will not be wholly devoted to these mat- 
 ters," he stated. "A large portion of its columns will be filled 
 with such miscellaneous selections as are calculated to please and 
 to instruct; — to gratify fancy and to increase knowledge — making 
 it a literary as well as a political paper." It was to be printed 
 
 'Lamar Papers, No. 50. 
 
 ■THenry S. Foote, Texas and the Texans, II, 285. 
 
4 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 on a large sheet, with new type, once a week, at three dollars a 
 year.' 
 
 He continued the publication of this paper alone until 1833. 
 During that time he wrote editorials on the questions of the day. 
 A number of them were in defence of the Troup administration. 
 Others defended the Federal Government for the removal of the 
 Indians west of the Mississippi, defended the doctrine of state 
 rights, and discussed in a learned and heavy way various consti- 
 tutional questions. There are also book reviews written by him. 
 At the same time he was getting practice in public speaking by 
 delivering addresses to various boys' and girls' schools.^ 
 
 In the summer of 1833 Lamar became a candidate for Congress. 
 It was the custom for the legislative caucus to nominate the candi- 
 dates for Congress. The caucus met at Milledgeville and nom- 
 inated the nine candidates, passing over Lamar, and appointed a 
 committee of seven to fill any vacancies which might occur. 
 There was a vacancy, but the committee of seven refused to en- 
 dorse the candidacy of Lamar, and nominated another, making 
 ten candidates for the nine seats. Under these conditions Lamar 
 was defeated. During the campaign he came out in an address 
 denouncing the caucus system, and stating that he would submit 
 his candidacy to no seven men. He complained that the Troup 
 party was not represented, and that there was hence inequality. 
 "If my political bark cannot sail upon the sea of correct prin- 
 ciples," he vrrote in his bombastic style, 
 
 let it founder, — it shall never float upon the waves of triumphant 
 error. ... If my pohtical course has been equivocal or 
 treacherous — warm when honors were to be distributed, but cool 
 if not bestowed on me — ^if I have either in pubhe or private life 
 been more cunning than candid, more selfish than serviceable, or 
 more ilHberal than just — if I have made Patriotism subordinate 
 to a love of promotion; demanding mvich, but perforniing little, 
 fattening upon offices, yet with cormorant appetite still asking for 
 more, and threatening desertion if more is not given — in a word, 
 if I have been one of those hollow-hearted politicians, who hold 
 with the hare and run with hound, . . . 
 
 then, he did not deserve the office that he aspired to.^° 
 
 'Lamar Papers, No. 73. 
 
 'Lamar Papers, Nos. 69, 78, 79, 84, 85, 88, 89, 90, 102, 104. 
 
 '"Broadside, Lamar Papers, No. 168. 
 
Early Life in Georgia 5 
 
 After his defeat for Congress in 1833, Lamar became active in 
 the organization and propagation of the States' Eights Party of 
 Georgia. On November 13, 1833, a States' Eights meeting was held 
 at Milledgeville and adopted a preamble and resolutions. It de- 
 nounced Jackson's proclamation in connection -with, nullification 
 in South Carolina: adopted "the Virginia and Kentucky Eesolu- 
 tions as triumphant in 1825, 6, 7," and denounced the Force Bill 
 as a glaring infraction of States' rights. A few days later a pros- 
 pectus announced a new series of the Columbus Enquirer to be 
 edited by Mirabeau B. Lamar and William B. Tinsley in support 
 of the principles of the States' Eights Party." About the same 
 time Lamar delivered an address upon the doctrines of the States' 
 Eights and Union parties in Georgia. He stated that the union 
 was a union of sovereign aaid independent States bound together 
 by a written compact, and the general government was the agent 
 of the States. He defended the right of nullifying an act of 
 Congress as the agent has no power under the Constitution to 
 coerce a State. "But if the agent, feeling might and forgetting 
 right, shall attempt to enforce her mandates by military coercion, 
 then the State thus menaced must determine for herself whether 
 she will submit to the objectionable acts — meet force with force — 
 or retire peacefully from the Union. Such I believe to be funda- 
 mentally the doctrine of the Party with which I have the honor 
 to act."i2 
 
 He continued his connection with this paper until some time in 
 1834. The death of his wife in 1833, together with an impair- 
 ment of his own health, and a naturally restless disposition, led 
 him to sever his connection with the paper in 1834, temporarily, 
 if not permanently. In Januarjr, 1835, we find him in Alabama 
 on his way to Texas. ^' He arrived at Nacogdoches in July, and 
 immediately proceeded to Coles's settlement, where he made knovm 
 his intention to become a citizen of Texas. He paid Captain 
 Horatio Chriesman a fee to run off a headright of land. He 
 also announced in a public address, at Washington his intention 
 to become a citizen of Texas, and said that he desired in the event 
 "of a revolutionary struggle, to made her destiny mine for good 
 
 '^Lamar Papers, No. 178. 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 177. 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 194. 
 
6 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 or ill." It seems that these declarations were the result of a more 
 or less sudden impulse. A biographical sketch, published in the 
 Nacogdoches Chronicle in 1838 states that he came to Texas to 
 collect material for a historyr of Texas.^* This seems a likely 
 reason for his trip as is indicated by the nature of his literary col- 
 lections during that period. 
 
 From Washington he went to San Felipe, but he found the 
 land office closed on account of threatened hostilities, and was 
 unable to get a certificate for his headriglit. He was told by 
 Stephen F. Austin that he could return to the United States to 
 settle up his business there before emigrating, and sailed for 
 Georgia in November, 1835. He arrived m Georgia late in the year, 
 but almost immediately learned that there was danger of a serious 
 war in Texas, and returned to Texas before he could attend to his 
 affairs in Georgia,^^ arriving at Velasco in the latter part -of 
 March. During his brief stay in Georgia he had succeeded in 
 interesting several men there in land speculation, and he brought 
 back with him $6,000 to invest for them in Texas land.^° 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, April 14, 1838; June 23, 1838. 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, June, 23, 1838. 
 
 "M. B. Lamar to J. J. Lamar, April 10, 1838; Lamar Papers, 351. 
 
As a Texas lievolutiowist, 18S6-18S8 7 
 
 Chapter II 
 
 AS A TEXAS REVOLUTIONIST, 1836-1838 
 
 When Lamar arrived in Texas in the latter part of March, 1836, 
 the affairs of the Texas Eevolutionists seemed well nigh hopeless. 
 After a period of successes during November and December, 1835, 
 their fortunes had undergone a change. In January, 1836, Santa 
 Anna had begun the invasion of Texas with a force of six thou- 
 sand men. On March 6, the Alamo fell, while the convention at 
 Washington on the Brazos was declaring Texas independent, and 
 framing a provisional government. The Goliad massacre had 
 taken place on March 27, and the Texan army under General Hous- 
 ton had begun a retreat from Gonzales which took them to the 
 San Jacinto battlefield. And not only the army, but the whole 
 populace was in a panicky flight. The civil government under 
 David G. Burnet had first fled from Washington to Harrisburg, 
 and thence to Galveston Island. It was under these circum- 
 stances that Lamar joined the army just before the battle of San 
 Jacinto. 
 
 On March 25, 1836, Alexander E. Patton of Velasco wrote to 
 a man named Kilgore at Brazoria, asking that his horse, which 
 Kilgore had been keeping, be turned over to "Mr. M. B. Lamar 
 . . . just arrived on the Schooner Plash . . . anxious to 
 visit the army.''^' Whether the horse was turned over to Lamar 
 does not appear. One biographer states that Lamar walked from 
 Velasco to Harrisburg in order to get there in time for the ex- 
 pected battle.^* On April 10, he wrote his brother at Macon, 
 Georgia, stating that he was expecting to go into battle, and giving 
 directions as to the disposal of his effects in case of his death. 
 "I shall reach Houston day after tomorrow, a distance from this 
 place about 50 miles," he wrote. 
 
 In the event of my falling in Battle, you will find my trunks, 
 papers, etc., in the possession of Mrs. Jane Long, who has tem- 
 porarily fled from Brazoria to Boliver point at Galveston Bay. 
 The money brought by me to be laid out in Lands, I have of course, 
 
 "Patton to Kilgore, March 25, 1836, in Lamar Papers, No. 348. 
 "Thrall, Pictorial History of Texas, 581. 
 
8 MWabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 in the present confused state of things, not been able to lay out. 
 Govt, has no authority to sell lands, and from individuals no pur- 
 chase can yet be made with safety. I have therefore been much 
 embarrassed to know what to do with so large a sum of money; 
 it is dangerous to keep it about me, especially as I am going into 
 Battle. After due consideration, I have placed it in the hands of 
 Lorenzo Zavala, the vice-President of the Government, the most 
 responsible and probably the most honest among them. . . . 
 My health at present is good. I feel much solicitude for my 
 mother ; If she was well and cheerful and could bear afBiction vidth 
 more fortitude, I should be happy — Tell Eebecca Ann that she 
 must learn to write read and spell well, and that is the best 
 education. . . .^° 
 
 Some time between the date of this letter and April 20 he 
 joined the army on the Brazos, as a private. On April 20, in a 
 preliminary skirmish at San Jaeiato, he rescued a comrade at the 
 risk of his own life, and for this gallant conduct he was elected 
 to the command of the cavalry.^" On the following day he was 
 in command of the cavalry, and was officially commended by the 
 commander-in-chief, Sam Houston, and the Secretary of War, 
 T. J. Eusk, who was present and took part in the battle. Houston 
 in reporting the battle said: 
 
 Our cavalry, sixty-one in number, commanded by Colonel Mira- 
 beau B. Lamar, whose gallant and daring conduct on the previous 
 day had attracted the admiration of his comrades and called him 
 to that station, placed on our right, completed our line. Our 
 cavalry was first dispatched to the front of the enemy's left, for 
 the purpose of attracting their notice, whilst an extensive island 
 of timber afforded us an opportunity of concentrating our forces 
 and deploying from that point, agreeably to the previous design 
 of the troops. Every evolution was performed with alacrity, the 
 whole advancing rapidly in line and through an open prairie, 
 vrithout any protection whatever for our men.^'^ 
 
 The same sentiments were expressed by Eusk in his report to 
 the President.^^ 
 
 As is well Imown, the battle of San Jacinto resulted in over- 
 
 "M. B. Lamar to J. J. Lamar, April 10, 1836, Lamar Papers, No. 351. 
 
 ™Thrall, Pictorial History of Texas, 581; Texas Almanac, 1858, p. 110. 
 Brown, Sistory of Texas, II, 20. 
 
 ^Brown, History of Texas, II, 20; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 500. 
 Lamar Papers, No. 355. 
 
 ''Brown, History of Texas, 27; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, f<34; 
 Lamar Papers, No. 354. 
 
As a Texas Revolutiomst, 1S86-18S8 9 
 
 whelming victory for the Texans. Practically the whole Mexican 
 army under Santa Anna was captured, including Santa Anna 
 himself. On April 22, General Houston and Santa Anna entered 
 into an armistice until a treaty of peace could be drawn, up, and 
 Santa Anna ordered his subsidiary forces to return to Bexar for 
 further orders.^^ It was thought by General Houston, President 
 Burnet, and a majority of the Cabinet, that an excellent oppor- 
 tunity presented itself while Santa Anna was in their power to 
 form a treaty guaranteeing the independence of Texas. Lamar, 
 who had become Secretary of War on May 5, in place of Eusk, 
 who had assumed command of the army, and Potter, Secretary of 
 the ISTavy, opposed any treaty with Santa Anna, and favored his 
 execution for the crimes he had committed. 
 
 In his letter to the President and Cabinet on May 13, Lamar 
 said that a majority of the Cabinet considered Santa Anna a 
 prisoner of war, but he considered him a murderer. "A chieftain 
 battling for what he conceives to be the rights of his country," 
 he continued, 
 
 however mistaken in his views, may be privileged to make hot 
 and vigorous war upon the foe ; but, when in violation of all prin- 
 ciples of civilized conflict, he avows and acts upon the revolting 
 poUey of extermination and rapine, slaying the surrendering and 
 plundering whom he slays, he forfeits the commisseration of man- 
 kind by sinking the character of the hero into that of an abhorred 
 murderer. 
 
 Some would assent to the justice of the sentence of death, but 
 were willing to waive its execution for certain advantages which 
 might flow to the country from a wise and judicious action. He 
 asked what surety had they that any stipulations would be car- 
 ried out. 
 
 What he assents to while a prisoner, he may reject when a free- 
 man. Indeed, the idea of treating with a man in our power, who 
 views freedom in acquiescence, and death in opposition, seems to 
 me more worthy of ridicule than refutation. 
 
 He said that it was doubtful if Santa Anna would have the 
 power to fulfill his engagements, even if he had the will to do so. 
 He expected that as soon as the news of the defeat should reach 
 
 ^'Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 150. 
 
10 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Mexico, Santa Anna would lose all his authority, and would be 
 powerless for good or ill. 
 
 I am therefore decidedly opposed to all negotiation or arrange- 
 ments Trith him; — first, because he is a prisoner and not free to 
 act; secondly, because he is faithless and therefore unworthy of 
 confidence; and thirdly, because of the great certainty of his in- 
 ability to fulfill his promises even with the desire to do so. 
 
 He stated further that even if negotiations should be entered 
 into and prove successful, he would regret the miscarriage of ven- 
 geance and Justice. Finally, if any negotiations were undertaken, 
 he thought arrangements should be made for transferring the pris- 
 oners in exchange for Texan prisoners in Mexico, holding Santa 
 Anna till the end of the war.^* 
 
 In spite of the opposition of Lamar, and the strong reasons 
 given for retaining Santa Anna, the Cabinet entered into an agree- 
 ment with him on May 14. By the public agreement, which was 
 more in the nature of an armistice, Santa Anna agreed not to 
 take up arms, nor use his influence to cause them to be taken up 
 during the war for independence. He agreed on withdrawal from 
 Texas, and an exchange of prisoners. The Texan authorities, on 
 their part, agreed to send Santa Anna to Vera Cruz as soon as it 
 should be judged proper. By the secret agreement entered into 
 the same day, besides the points mentioned in the public agree- 
 ment, he agreed to prepare the cabinet of Mexico to receive the 
 mission which the government of Texas might send, so that "by 
 negotiations all differences may be settled, and the independence 
 that has been declared by the convention may be acknowledged." 
 He agreed, further, that a treaty of commerce, amity, and limits 
 between Mexico and Texas, should be established, the territory of 
 Texas not to extend beyond the Eio Bravo del Norte. Texas 
 agreed that "the present return of General Santa Anna to Vera 
 Cruz being indispensable for the purpose of effecting his solemn 
 engagements, the government of Texas will provide for his im- 
 mediate embarkation for said port."^' 
 
 The Government was on the point of sending Santa Anna to 
 Vera Cruz in accordance with this agreement, when, on June 3, 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 361; Brown, Bistory of Texas, II, 56-60. 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 526-528; Brown, History of Texas, II, 
 62-64; Lamar Papers, Nos. 365, 366. 
 
As a Texas Bevolutiormt, 18S6-18S8 11 
 
 Thomas Jefferson Green arrived at Velasco with two hundred and 
 thirty volunteers from New Orleans, and on account of their oppo- 
 sition prevented his release. At that time, and after, Lamar sup- 
 ported the civil against the militarj' authorities, and joined with 
 the President in resisting the demands of Green and his coad- 
 jutors for the execution of the prisoner. 
 
 General Houston had been severely wounded in the battle of San 
 Jacinto, and found it necessary to go to New Orleans for treat- 
 ment. Consequently, he surrendered the command of the army, 
 May 5, 1836, to Brigadier-General Rusk, who had resigned as 
 Secretary of War. The army under Eusk followed the retreating 
 Mexicans as far as Goliad, where they collected and buried the 
 bones of Fannin and his men, and then established headquarters 
 at Victoria.-" Here they were joined by volunteers from the 
 United States, increasing the army to about twenty-three hundred 
 by July 1.-" Among these volunteers were Green, who had pre- 
 vented the sending of Santa Anna to Vera Cruz, Felix Huston, 
 and others who felt themselves specially fitted to command the 
 army. The army undoubtedly fell into a state of mutiny. Each 
 of the leaders of volunteers was intriguing for the chief command. 
 Some of the soldiers held that Sam Houston was still in command 
 though absent, and refused to obey the orders of Eusk. It was 
 under these circumstances that Eusk appealed to the President 
 and Cabinet to appoint a commander-in-chief of the army. Act- 
 ing on this request the President and Cabinet, on June 35, ap- 
 pointed Lamar, who had resigned as Secretary of War a few days 
 before, to be Major-General and Commander-in-Chief of the army. 
 
 It was not until July 14 that Lamar arrived at the camp. In 
 the meantime he had been at Brazoria making preparations for 
 supplies for the army, and preparing to resist the invasion which 
 seemed threatening. He had received numerous letters of con- 
 gratulation, and was unprepared to learn when he reached Victoria 
 on the 13th that there was considerable opposition to accepting 
 him as commander-in-chief. When he arrived at the headquarters 
 of the army at Guadalupe the following day, he was met by a com- 
 mittee which had been appointed previously, and requested not to 
 
 ""Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 177. 
 ""Ibid., II, 183. 
 
12 Mi/rabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 assume authority as coimnander-in-chief until the subject could 
 be more fully considered by the ofiBcers. 
 
 Felix Huston, who had arrived in camp on July 4, according to 
 his account, was one of the leaders in the refusal to receive Lamar, 
 though he pretended to be acting only as an agent for the others.^* 
 At a meeting of the officers shortly after he arrived in camp, 
 Huston said, all present were willing to acknowledge the merits 
 of Lamar, but that they denied the power of the Cabinet to super- 
 sede General Houston and they would not consent to the destruc- 
 tion of General Kusk. He suggested the appointment of a com- 
 mittee to meet General Lamar and acquaint him with the desires 
 of the officers. The committee was appointed, and resolutions 
 drawn up as follows: 
 
 Resolved, That this meeting highly appreciate the gallantry and 
 worth of General Lamar, and will be at all times ready to receive 
 him with the cordiality and respect due to his personal and mili- 
 tary acquirements. 
 
 Resolved, That Colonel B. F. Smith and Colonel H. Millard 
 be appointed a committee to wait on General Lamar, and tender 
 him the respects of this meeting, and inform him that, there being 
 some question of the propriety of his appointment by the Presi- 
 dent as major-general of the Texan army, by which he is directed 
 to assume the chief command of the army, he is requested by the 
 officers present not to act in his official capacity of major-general 
 until the subject may be more maturely considered by the meeting 
 of the officers of the army.^' 
 
 Lamar, unwilling to accept the statement of the officers as to 
 the resistance to his assumption of command, determined to ad- 
 dress the army. In his speech he dwelt on his service in the 
 battle of San Jacinto. Since then he had been on the point of 
 returning to the United States when news came that the Mexicans 
 were preparing to invade Texas again, and he immediately made 
 his plans to join the army. He was not anxious to lead the army 
 if they did not want him, but would cheerfully take his place in 
 the ranks. After he had spoken Eusk, Green, and Huston spoke, 
 
 ^Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 185. Yoakum makes the mistake of 
 accepting unquestioningly Huston's version of this event. The main 
 facts related are essentially correct, but it takes no cognizance of -the 
 intrigues of Green and Huston for the chief command, and the desire 
 of Rusk to retain it, largely influenced by them. 
 
 ^"Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 184, note. 
 
As a Texas Revolutionist, 1836-1838 13 
 
 and then the army voted. This resulted in only 179 votes for 
 Lamar, and probably 1500 against him, most of the opponents 
 being in favor of General Sam Houston. Lamar, in his report 
 to President Burnet, July 17, said: 
 
 Everything is in the utmost confusion and rebellion. On my 
 an-ival I was informed that I could not be recognized as Com- 
 mander in Chief. I proposed to speak to the soldiers, and did 
 so, but was answered by Eusk, Green, and Felix Houston, who car- 
 ried the popular current against me. I had an open rupture 
 with Genl Eusk, believing it to be the secret arrangements of his 
 to supplant me. Some hostile correspondence ensued; which in- 
 stead of leading to further difficulty, has resulted in this arrange- 
 ment, viz, that he is to recognize my orders in the future; that 
 the regulars and about 6 or 8 volunteer companies are to march 
 to another encampment under my command; where I shall issue 
 my orders as Commander in Cnief to the balance of the army of 
 Texas, and if Green and Felix Houston still maintain their present 
 attitude of rebellion to my authority, I shall punish them by 
 Court Martial if possible, and if not shall report them to Con- 
 gress. You will perceive from this dreadful state of affairs the 
 high and absolute necessity of convening a Congress. 
 
 Before he had finished his report, however, the plan outlined 
 had become untenable. "Since writing the above," he added in a 
 postscript, 
 
 Genl Eusk has reed a letter from Genl Greene stating his de- 
 termination not to obey any orders issued by virtue of my author- 
 ity denying the validii^ and constitutionality of my appointment. 
 Genl Eusk says he will now stand by me in defense of the Civil 
 authority; he sees his own power departing as well as mine; 
 the whole has been produced by his desire for promotion, and 
 finding that his new allies are not aiming at his support but at 
 their own aggi-andizement, he is willing to cooperate with me; 
 but I fear that nothing that he can now do will be of any service 
 in the cause of restoring that authority which his previous con- 
 duct has prostrated."" 
 
 Eealizing the hopelessness of securing control of the army with 
 Green and Huston intriguing against him, Lamar withdrew. The 
 failure of the Mexicans to make the threatened invasion caused the 
 army to become reduced shortly after, and apparently no ill re- 
 sults followed the mutiny. That the opposition of the army was 
 
 '"Lamar Papers, No. 414. 
 
14 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 not due to any unpopularity of Lamar is evident, for in spite of 
 this seeming reverse he continued to hold the esteem of the people 
 for a number of yeais, receiving in succession election to the Vice- 
 Presidency and the Presidency. 
 
 On July 23, 1836, President Burnet issued a proclamation call- 
 ing for the election of a President, Vice-President, and Congress. 
 At the same time the voters were to vote on the ratification of the 
 Constitution which had been adopted by the Convention in March, 
 and to decide upon the question of annexation to the United States. 
 The election resulted in the choice of Houston as President and 
 Lamar as Vice-President. The Constitution was adopted, and the 
 vote for annexation, if it could be obtained, was almost unanimous. 
 There was only a nominal opposition to Lamar, and his majority 
 over all opponents was 2,699.^^ 
 
 The Constitution j>rovided for the installation of the new gov- 
 ernment on the second Monday in December. The new Congress 
 had assembled on the fourth of October, however, and there was 
 considerable agitation in Congress for the installation of the Presi- 
 dent and Vice-President at an earlier period than that provided 
 by the Constitution. Consequently, on October 22, Burnet an- 
 nounced his readiness to retire, and as Vice-President de Zavala 
 had resigned the preceding day, the Constitutional President and 
 Vice-President were inaugurated. Lamar confided to his diary 
 the current impression that Burnet had been forced out by Hous- 
 ton's activity, and foreshadowed his own failure to get along har- 
 moniously with Houston. He wrote : 
 
 Houston was so anxious to enter upon the duties of his ofBce, 
 that Burnet was forced by the threats of members of Congress 
 that if he did not retire for the new President he would be pushed 
 out. The Constitutional period for the installation of the Presi- 
 dent had not arrived as yet by a month. Houston could not wait. 
 Burnet was forced to retire. Austin advised him to do it for the 
 sake of peace; and insinuated that if he did not Congress would 
 probably push him out. This was the first act of the government, 
 a palpable violation of the Constitution. That little month Hous- 
 ton could not wait; nor could the hungry expectants brook the 
 delay who were looking fonvard to presidential favors."^ 
 
 ''^Brown, History of Texas, II, 
 '^Lamar Papers, Ko. 521. 
 
As a Texas Revolutionist, 1836-1838 15 
 
 Lamar delivered his inaugural address to both houses of Con- 
 gress on October 22, and on the 24th he addressed the Senate on 
 taking his seat as presiding officer. He stated that he was entirely 
 lacking in knowledge of parliamentary procedure, but prom- 
 ised to be impartial. He said that he could not be expected to 
 exercise any influence over legislation, but he wished to call their 
 attention to two evils, defamation of the character of opponents, 
 and "Party." By party he did not mean taking sides on any 
 measure, but organizations for advancing the interests of some 
 favorite, thus recalling his own experience with party organization 
 in his race for Congress in 1833.*^ 
 
 As presiding officer in the Senate Lamar's duties were not oner- 
 ous, and for several months after his inauguration he busied him- 
 self collecting material for a history of Texas. The adjournment 
 of Congress on December 21, had given him all the time needed! 
 for this, and he traveled over the Eepublic collecting material 
 from original settlers.^* 
 
 In May, 1837, Lamar returned to Georgia for a visit. He 
 was received with honor everywhere. Many public dinners were 
 given him, and he found all the opportunities he desired for mak- 
 ing public addresses. He had hardly arrived in Georgia, how- 
 ever, before his friends in Texas began importuning him to re- 
 turn. Eichard E. Eoyall wrote him on May 7, urging him to re- 
 turn to Texas to look after his presidential prospects.^^ Com- 
 plaints were made of Houston's incompetency, his excesses in 
 drinking and gambling, and his evident wish to retire. Finally, 
 the Senate, September 30, 1837, passed in secret session a reso- 
 lution "requesting and enjoining" him to return in view of Hous- 
 ton's illness and a threatened invasion by the Mexicans.^'' He re- 
 turned in the latter part of October and resumed his seat as pre- 
 siding oificer of the Senate on November 8, when he delivered his 
 customary address. 
 
 It seems that almost from the beginning Lamar was looked upon 
 
 ''Lamar Pofpers, No. 469. 
 
 ^Among his collected papers for this period are Reminiscences of 
 Henry Smith, 1788-1836; Reminiscences of Richard R. Royall, 1835- 
 1836; Miscellaneous Notes on the history of Austin and Texas; Peter 
 W. Grayson's visit to Mexico to release Austin. 
 
 '"Lamar Papers, No. 550. 
 
 "Lamar Papers, Nos. 554, 558, 598, 601. 
 
16 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 as the logical successor to Houston in the presidency. The let- 
 ters I have referred to all spoke of the necessity for Ijamar's return 
 in order to look after his presidential prospects. The first formal 
 move toward putting his name before the people- was on December 
 1, 1837, when eleven out of the fourteen members of the Senate 
 sent him a letter asking him to accept the nomination. They 
 wrote: 
 
 In our anxiety to select the most suitable person to fill the office 
 of President of this Eepublic, at the expiration of the term of 
 General Sam Houston, we are satisfied from a knowledge of your 
 character civil and military that you would be his most appropriate 
 successor. 
 
 We respectfully request that you would inform us if you will 
 permit your name to be used as a candidate for that high office. 
 In making this request we are confident and happy in the belief 
 that we express the wishes of a large majority of our fellow 
 citizens.^'' 
 
 Before responding to this letter, Lamar, on December 7, wrote 
 a note to T. J. Eusk, who had also been mentioned as a candidate 
 for the presidency, asking Eusk's intentions with regard to the 
 office, and expressing his intention to decline the nomination 
 should Eusk desire to run. The action of both of these men under 
 these circumstances is so unusual that I feel constrained to quote 
 the correspondence in full. Lamar wrote: 
 
 I have Just received a letter from several distinguished gentle- 
 men, our mutual friends inviting me [to] become a candidate for 
 the next Presidency. As you have been spoken of frequently for 
 the same high office I am anxious to see you before I give a final 
 answer. It is important that harmony at all times should be pre- 
 served in our country and at the present period any violent con- 
 test for the Chief Magistry could not fail to be extremely preju- 
 dicial to the peace and prosperity of the country, but might prove 
 fatal to its best hopes. I know that you as well as myself must 
 deprecate these consequences, and with a view to avoid them, I 
 think it all important that we should have a free and unreserved 
 conference and by comparing our views come to some conclusion 
 which whilst it may be satisfactory to ourselves will be most con- 
 ducive to public interest. I shall be at my room at about 2 o'clock, 
 when I hope it will be convenient for you to call upon me. 
 
 "^Lamar Papers, No. 623. The Senators signing this were S. H. Ever- 
 itt, J. S. Lester, I. W. Burton, Wm. H. Wharton, E. Eaines, A. C. 
 Horton, John Dunn, S. C. Robertson, D. Rowlett, G. W. Barnett and 
 Edward T. Branch. 
 
As a Texas Revolutionist, 18S6-18S8 17 
 
 To this letter Rusk responded on the same day as follows: 
 
 Your note of this morning has been received informing me of a 
 request having been made by several distinguished gentlemen to 
 you to become a candidate for the Presidency of the Eepublic at 
 the next election and desiring a free and unreserved conference 
 between us on that subject before you answer their communication. 
 I fully subscribe to the propriety of the course you suggest and 
 am proud to say that it gives me another proof in addition to the 
 many I have already had of your patriotism and desire to promote 
 the harmony and good of the country. Prom a press of business 
 it will not be in my power to call at your room at 2 o'clock this 
 evening but I hope you will not on my account have any hesitancy 
 in giving your consent to the request alluded to as there is no 
 design or desire on my part to have my name before the people 
 for any ofiBce whatever. As the representative of my country I 
 feel bound to discharge to the best of my abilities the duties of 
 the Station; but beyond this my private affairs and domestic obli- 
 gations so long neglected imperiously demand my attention and 
 will not permit me to think of public life beyond the discharge 
 of those military obligations in the hour of danger which I hold 
 paramount to all other considerations. But I shall be pleased, 
 dear sir, to see your name before the people for the ofBce of Chief 
 Magistrate and shall be happy to sustain you in your labors for 
 the welfare of the country to which we are both under many obli- 
 gations for confidence reposed and honors conferred. 
 
 After the receipt of this letter, Lamar replied to the Senators 
 accepting their suggestion that he stand for the presidency. He 
 expressed his gratitude that the request came from those over 
 whom he had presided in the Senate. "I can only say in answer," 
 he said, "that I came to this country for the sole purpose of sub- 
 serving the great objects of the revolution. Until those objects 
 are fully achieved, I do not feel myself at liberty to decline the 
 duties of any station, however high or humble to which the voice 
 of my fellow citizens may call me."^* 
 
 The nomination of Lamar by the Senate was followed by public 
 meetings which nominated him throughout the Eepublic. The 
 first of these was at Eichmond, his home town, on April 17, 1838, 
 when he and Bumet were nominated. On April 31, a meeting at 
 Columbia took similar action. On April 33, a large public meet- 
 ing in Galveston nominated Lamar. A large gathering met in 
 the Hall of the House of Eepresentatives in Houston on May 19, 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 631 ; Telegraph and Texas Register, June 2, 1838. 
 
18 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 and after much oratory adopted resolutions favoring the election 
 of Lamar to the presidency. These nominations were all from 
 west of the Trinity. On May 10 a public meeting at San Augus- 
 tine, in the extreme east, nominated Lamar and Joseph Eowe.^' 
 The opposition was represented by the candidacy of Peter W. 
 Grayson, who had been Attorney-General in Burnet's cabinet and 
 later commissioner to the United States ; James Collingsworth, the 
 first chief- justice of the Supreme Court, and Robert Wilson. 
 
 The campaign abounded in personalities. Lamar was accused 
 of getting more than his legal share of public land,*" which was 
 denied by his friends. He was accused of being ineligible for the 
 presidency, not having been a citizen for three years. In reply to 
 this, he brought out affidavits from men showing that he had made 
 a public address at "Washington in the summer of 1835 in which 
 he announced his purpose of becoming a citizen of Texas. He 
 stated, also, that it was strange that after the public service he 
 had performed the question of his eligibility should come up.*^ 
 The Galveston Civilian, which was especially bitter against Lamar, 
 claimed that he was afflicted with partial insanity. To this the 
 Telegraph and Texas Register replied that "we sincerely regret 
 that his disorder is not contagious, in order that the country might 
 reap some benefit from it even before election."*^ An effort was 
 made to turn the election along sectional lines, and Lamar, the 
 candidate of the West, was constantly urged by his friends in the 
 Bast to concentrate his campaign in that section. 
 
 The election was to be held on September 3. Before that time 
 both of Lamar's principal opponents had committed suicide, Gray- 
 son by shooting himself at Bean's Station, Tennessee, and Col- 
 lingsworth by drowning in Galveston Bay. It seems evident that 
 Lamar would have been elected by an overwhelming majority had 
 his opponents lived and continued in the race. There was some 
 effort made to turn all the opposition to Collingsworth after the 
 death of Grayson on July 9, but with little success. The death 
 of Collingsworth shortly after that of Grayson made any oppo- 
 sition hopeless. Wilson had never been considered seriously in the 
 
 ^Telegraph and Texas Register, April 25, May 2, June 2, 1838. 
 "Quoted from the Galveston Civilian, in Telegraph and Texas Register, 
 August 4, 1838. 
 
 *^Lamar Pa/pers, No. 746; Telegraph and Texas Register, June 30, 1838. 
 '^Telegraph and Texas Register, June 30, 1838. 
 
As a Texas Revolutionist, 1886-18S8 19 
 
 race, and the election resulted in his receiving only 352 votes, while 
 Lamar received 6,995.*'' The only real contest was for Vice-Presi- 
 dent, and D. G. Burnet, on the Lamar ticket, was elected by a 
 majority of 776 votes over the combined votes of A. C. Horton 
 and Joseph Eowe. 
 
 "Thrall, Piotorial History of Texas, 300; Bancroft, North Mexican 
 States and Tewas, II, 313; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 245. 
 
30 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 Chapter III 
 
 PEESIDENTIAL ADMINISTEATION : DOMESTIC AFFAIRS 
 
 In an address to the Senate, ISTovember 5, 1838, on retiring 
 from that body preparatory to his inauguration as President, 
 Lamar stated that it would be inconsistent with the occasion to 
 call attention to any specific measures which he might desire, but 
 he considered it proper to say that a crisis had arrived when the 
 question of separate national existence was to be settled. 
 
 If we will but maintain our present independent position — diffuse 
 knowledge and virtue by means of public education — establish a 
 sound and wholesome monetary system — remove the temptation 
 and facihties to every species of peculation and unrighteous gain — 
 make truth, virtue and patriotism the basis of all pubKc pol- 
 icy — and secure the confidence of foreign nations by the wisdom 
 of our laws and the integrity of our motives, I cannot perceive 
 why we may not, within a very short period, elevate our young 
 republic into that political importance and proud distinction which 
 will not only command the respect and admiration of the world, 
 but render it the interest of the nations now discarding our 
 friendship, to covet from us those commercial relations which we 
 vainly solicit from them.** 
 
 In his inaugural address on December 10, while refraining from 
 announcing a policy on domestic affairs, he came back to the idea 
 of independence, expressed in his address to the Senate. He said 
 that notwithstanding the overwhelming sentiment in favor of 
 annexation, he had never been able to discover any advantage, 
 either civil, commercial, or political in forming a connection with 
 a country already torn with strife. In his first annual message 
 to Congress, December 21, he did outline his policy with regard 
 to the administration. 
 
 In this message, which was a long one, he recommended the 
 appropriation of land for the establishment of a public school 
 system and a University; a uniform municipal code; the estab- 
 lishment of the Common Law of England by Statute ; the gradual 
 return to free trade, and substitution of direct taxation for import 
 duties ; the establishment of a national bank. He announced that 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 867. 
 
Presidential Adm,inistration : Domestic Affairs 21 
 
 his policy towards the Indians would be directly opposite to that 
 of his predecessor, who was held to have been too lenient. He 
 hoped for recognition of Texan independence by the European 
 governments, and for a favorable commercial treaty with the 
 United States.*^ 
 
 In discussing the action of Congress on these recommendations 
 I shall taJse up the policies of the President in more detail. As 
 there was no further action taken either by the President or Con- 
 gress on the subject of a national bank, I shall give at this place 
 an outline of the plan suggested by Lamar. 
 
 After expressing strong objections to private incorporated banks, 
 and tracing the history of the Second United States Bank, claim- 
 ing that the United States Bank had created a sound currency, 
 he expressed himself as favoring a national bank owned exclusively 
 by the government. It should be incorporated for a suitable num- 
 ber of years, founded on a specific hypothecation of a competent 
 portion of the public domain, with the guarantee of public faith, 
 and an adequate deposit of specie. It was to be the depository of 
 public funds, and was to deal in foreign exchange. He realized 
 that real estate was not readily commutable, and that the daily 
 needs of commerce and trade needed specie itself, or "that active 
 and undoubted credit, of which a known and sufficient deposit of 
 the metals, or something equivalent to them, is the proper basis." 
 He had no plan for securing the specie, but trustfully dismissed 
 the matter by saying, "It is believed the proposed bank would be 
 amply furnished with that equivalent — and to all necessary extent 
 with the actual metallic deposit itself." 
 
 The directors were to be chosen from the best qualified men of 
 the country without reference to their political opinions. The 
 whole number of directors was to be divided into three sections, 
 one section to retire every year without reeligibility until after three 
 years. The Congress was to elect the directors by joint ballot, 
 and the Senate was to appoint the president of the bank on the 
 nomination of the President of the Eepublic. He ended by say- 
 ing that he had spent so much time on it because he felt strongly 
 its importance. I^otwithstanding the time spent in thinking out 
 such a scheme, and the large proportion of the message applied 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838; Lamar Papers, No. 
 948. 
 
33 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 to it, no effort was made to follow it up with legislation. It is 
 only an instance of Lamar^s inability to follow out in practice the 
 schemes he was able to suggest.*^ 
 
 I. Education 
 
 Next to the plan for a national bank, Lamar devoted the greater 
 part of his message to a discussion of the need of public education, 
 and to an outline of a policy. The people of Texas had been too 
 busy to attend to the establishment of an educational system. Un- 
 der the administration of Houston various schools and colleges 
 had been chartered, but this in no sense constituted the establish- 
 ment of a system of public education aided by the State. Hence, 
 Lamar can be credited with initiating and carrying through a 
 school system which was to become permanent, and which is the 
 foundation of the public school system in Texas today. 
 
 He had given a hint of his attitude toward public education 
 in his address to the Senate on November 5. In his message of 
 December 31, he said that if it was desired to establish republican 
 government upon a broad and permanent basis, it would be the 
 duty of Congress to adopt a comprehensive and well regulated 
 system of moral and mental culture. Every person had an inter- 
 est in public education, he said, and the subject was one in which 
 there were no jarring interests involved, and no acrimonious 
 political feelings excited. "It is admitted by all," he continued, 
 "that cultivated mind is the guardian genius of Democracy, and 
 while guided and controlled by virtue, the noblest attribute of 
 man. It is the only dictator that freemen acknowledge, and the 
 only security which freemen desire." His recommendation was 
 that "a Kberal endowment which will be adequate to the general 
 diffusion of a good rudimental education in every district of the 
 Eepublic, and to the establishment of a University where the 
 highest branches of science may be taught, can now be effected 
 without the expenditure of a single dollar — postpone it a few 
 
 *°His advocacy of a national bank is probably an echo of the struggle 
 for a reeharter of the Second United States Bank. During the Nullifi- 
 cation struggle Lamar became definitely estranged from Jackson to the 
 extent of adopting some of the principles of the other party. The train- 
 ing he received in Georgia from 1825 to 1835 is constantly showing itself 
 in his Texas activities. It is interesting to note that Houston, who was 
 an ardent admirer of Jackson throughout, ridiculed Lamar's idea of a 
 national bank. 
 
Presidential Administraiion : Domestic Affai/rs 23 
 
 years, and millions will be necessary to accomplish the great 
 design." His idea was that an appropriation of lands for that 
 purpose would be no hardship, and would constitute the best en- 
 dowment for the school system. 
 
 The part of the message relating to education was submitted to 
 the committee on education in the House, and early in January 
 a bill was presented in harmony with Lamar's suggestions. It 
 speedily passed both Houses of Congress and received the signa- 
 ture of the President on January 26, 1839. It provided that each 
 county should have, in tracts of not less than 160 acres, three 
 leagues of laud for primary schools. If a county did not have 
 within its limits enough good land vacant, it was entitled to sur- 
 vey any unoccupied land in the Eepublic. For two colleges or 
 universities fifty leagues were to be set aside, and not to be dis- 
 posed of except by lease. *^ On the same day an act was passed 
 incorporating the "College of DeKalb." The act named a board 
 of superintendents or trustees, exempted the property from taxa- 
 tion, authorized the board to employ teachers, suppress nuisances, 
 and collect a fine from any liquor dealers within a half mile of 
 the college. Four leagues of land were granted by Congress to 
 this institution for buildings and apparatus, and for the promo- 
 tion of arts, literature and sciences. This was but one of sev- 
 eral acts appropriating land in aid of private institutions. 
 
 The act appropriating lands for the benefit of a general school 
 system, January 26, 1839, like so many acts of the Republic, pro- 
 vided no method of administering its provisions. The next ses- 
 sion of Congress took steps to remedy this defect. On February 
 5, 1840, an act was approved "to provide for securing the lands 
 formerly appropriated for the purposes of Education." The Chief 
 Justice and the two Associate Justices in each county were desig- 
 nated as school commissioners. They were instructed to locate the 
 three leagues provided for under the Act of January 26, 1839, as 
 early as possible, and^to cause to be surveyed and sold an addi- 
 tional league for the purchase of scientific equipment, one-half 
 of the proceeds to be used for the benefit of an academy in each 
 county, and the remainder distributed equally among the common 
 school districts. The commissioners were to establish schools, .and 
 examine applicants for positions as to good moral character and 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 135. 
 
34 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 literary qualifications. They were not to grant certificates to 
 teach in academies unless the candidates gave satisfactory evi- 
 dence of good moral character, and were graduates of some col- 
 lege or university; for common schools the applicants should be 
 of good moral character, and be able to teach reading, writing, 
 English grammar, arithmetic, and geography.** 
 
 It should be said that the generosity indicated by these acts was 
 more apparent than real. The settlers in Texas were few and 
 land was abundant. Besides, the frontiers were surrounded by 
 hostile Indians, who interfered with the survey of the lands. This 
 situation, and the lack of specie, led to a delay in securing the 
 lands appropriated, and it is probable that only a small quantity 
 had been actually taken up by the counties entitled to it when 
 the EepubKc came to an end. The acts are important, however, 
 as furnishing the foundation for the educational system subse- 
 quently established. 
 
 Another interesting suggestion, which seems to have received 
 no attention, is found in Lamar's second annual message, Novem- 
 ber 12, 1839, when he advocates the creation of the "Home De- 
 partment." This was to have supervision of a system of educa- 
 tion suited to the condition and policy of the country. "Congress 
 at its last session," he said, 
 
 in accordance with a wise, liberal, and enlightened policy, made 
 large appropriations of land for the endowment of colleges, 
 academies, and primary schools. But the appropriations, though 
 liberal, will require the utmost care and management and applica- 
 tion, to make them equal to the important work which is to be 
 achieved. In their present condition, they can be regarded only 
 as the foundation of a fund, which, by Judicious measures, and 
 well digested plans of operation, may be husbanded and increased 
 until it shall be amply sufficient for all the purposes intended; 
 but, without such measures, it may be frittered away in useless 
 experiments, or swallowed up in the prosecution of visionary 
 schemes, which can result in no permanent good to the country. 
 It is, therefore, my deliberate opinion that if no other advantage 
 was expected to be derived from the establishment of a bureau of 
 education, than such as would result from a judicious manage- 
 ment of its funds, that advantage alone would be sufficient to 
 justify the expenses required for the support of such a bureau. 
 
 "Ibid., 320-322. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 25 
 
 One advantage of this would be a uniform f-ysteni in the schools 
 and universities, which would maintain "the sacred principles of 
 free institutions." If despotic systems could maintain themselves 
 by a system of national education, he asked, why could not a 
 representative republic ? He would say to the government, "Open 
 wide the doors of knowledge, but keep the key of the temple."*" 
 
 II. Finances 
 
 From the beginning to the end of the existence of Texas as an 
 independent republic, the most serious problems confronted by 
 her statesmen were ini raising revenue and providing for the finan- 
 cial administration. With little money except that contributed 
 by friends in the United States, she became independent in 1836, 
 just before the panic of 1837 swept over the United States and 
 brought about a failure of that source of funds during the trying 
 days when the people of Texas were attempting to establish their 
 government. In the absence of specie, nxany expedients were tried 
 to provide funds for the government and as a circulating medium 
 for trade. A moderate tariff on imports, an. imenforced and un- 
 enforceable direct tax, and a foreign loan were tried, and, these 
 all failing to supply fimds, the printing presses were put to work 
 turning out paper money which depreciated as soon as issued. 
 When Lamar assumed the presidency in December, 1838, he found 
 all these methods of raising money in use. 
 
 By the ordinance creating the provisional government, passed 
 by the Consultation, November 13, 1835, power was granted to 
 the General Council "to impose and regulate imposts and tonnage 
 duties, and provide for their collection under such regulations as 
 may be the most expedient." Under the authority of this pro- 
 vision the General Council in December, 1835, passed an ordinance 
 creating collection districts and providing for the collection of 
 duties on imports at a rate of 85 per cent ad valorem. No duties 
 were collected under this act, however, and on March 13, 1836, 
 the constituent convention declared that the provisional govern- 
 ment had exceeded its authority in levying import duties, and 
 ordered a refund if any duties had been paid.^" 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, November 27, 1839. 
 ""Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," in Southwestern 
 Historical Quarterly, XX, 316. 
 
26 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 The first Congress under the Constitution met early in October, 
 1836, and in his message to Congress President Burnet said: 
 
 Duties on imports, and in some cases on exports, constitute a 
 convenient and economical mode of supplying the public necessi- 
 ties, and are less onerous to individuals than almost any other 
 impost. . . . When the abundant intrinsic resources of our 
 country shall be fully developed, then it may be the glory of Texas 
 to invite kindred nations of the earth to an unembarrassed inter' 
 communication of their diversified products.^' 
 
 Acting in harmony with this suggestion Congress passed a tariff 
 act, to become effective June 1, 1837, virhich was signed by Hous- 
 ton, who had, in the meantime, been inaugurated as the first 
 President under the Constitution. The policy of the government, 
 as indicated by this act, was to place a rather heavy duty on 
 luxuries and a comparatively light one on necessities. For ex- 
 ample, on wines and silks an ad valorem duty of 45 and 50 per 
 cent, respectively, was charged, while on necessities, such as bread- 
 stuffs, coffee, sugar, and other articles, the duties ranged from 1 
 per cent to 10 per cent ad valorem. All unenumerated articles 
 were to pay duty at the rate of 35 per cent ad valorem,, as in the 
 act of December, 1835, under the provisional government. No 
 provision was made for collection districts, and no collectors were 
 appointed before the enactment of another tariff act in June, 
 1837.=2 
 
 On June 12, 1837, a more comprehensive tariff bill was ap- 
 proved by the President. The preamble to the act declares its 
 purpose to be to raise a public revenue by import duties, to aid in 
 defraying the public expenses, sustaining the public credit, and 
 securing to the public creditors a fair annual or semi-annual 
 interest on their stock in the funded debt. Most foodstuffs were 
 admitted free of duty, the list consisting of breadstuffs, including 
 corn, wheat, barley, and oats; pickled beef, salted and smoked 
 pork, neat's tongue ; potatoes, beets, beans, rice, and vinegar. An- 
 other free list included tools of trade, lumber and building ma- 
 terials, firearms and ammunition. Luxuries were required to pay 
 a high duty, as in the earlier act, and on all unenumerated ar- 
 
 "'First Congress, First Session, House Journal, 13. 
 ''^Christian, "TariflF History of the Republic of Texas," in Southwestern 
 Historical Quarterly, XX, 318. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 37 
 
 tides the rate was to be 25 per cent ad valorem. This act was 
 amended in December by an act which materially extended the 
 free list by adding sugar, coifee, tea, salt, iron, steel, household 
 furniture, cotton bagging, bale rope, books, stationery, machinery 
 of all kinds, wagons, carts, harness, and all necessary farming 
 utensils. This act continued unchanged until February, 1840.'^^ 
 
 Two direct tax acts were passed before the beginning of Lamar's 
 administration, the first on June 12, 1837, and the second on 
 May 24, 1838. The first provided for an ad valorem tax of one- 
 half of 1 per cent on all property, and for cattle and horses be- 
 longing to citizens of the United States, one dollar a head.*** In 
 the act of May 24, 1838, the policy of enumerating the property 
 was adopted, and the list subject to direct tax included land, 
 slaves, horses over two in number, cattle over twenty-five in num- 
 ber, watches, clocks, and pleasure carriages. The rate continued 
 as in the first act.^° 
 
 Opposition to the tariff developed before the system got under 
 way. While the act approved December 18, 1837, was under dis- 
 cussion in Congress a resolution was introduced in each House 
 calling for the abolition of all tariff laws. The resolution failed 
 to come to a vote in the House, but in the Senate it was defeated 
 by a vote of seven to three. ''^ In the Third Congress, which met 
 on November 5, 1838, several resolutions similar to the ones in- 
 troduced in the preceding Congress were introduced in both House 
 and Senate and referred to committees. 
 
 While these resolutions were under consideration by the commit- 
 tees the Telegraph and Texas Register, one of the most influential 
 newspapers of Texas during this period, came out in support of 
 them. The editor, Francis Moore, Junior, in discussing the reso- 
 lutions for the abolition of the tariff, said that he had long de- 
 sired to see such a measure carried into effect. He thought that 
 whatever sums were needed to defray the expenses of government 
 were better raised by a direct tax ; that duties were unequal, unjust, 
 and evaded by smugglers. The tariff was not necessary to main- 
 tain the standard of the currency, he said, as that was maintained 
 
 ^'Ihid., 321-324; Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1313, 1314, 1490. 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, 1, 1319. 
 ^niid., I, 1514. 
 
 "Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," in Southwestern 
 Historical Quarterly, XX, 325. 
 
38 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 by the confidence of the people. He thought that free trade would 
 be wise, as the adjoining States of the United States and Mexico 
 would be induced to get their supplies through Texas, since they 
 were suffering under a burdensome tariff system.^' 
 
 This, then, was the situation when Lamar came into office on 
 December 10, 1838. Moderate tariff and direct tax laws were on 
 the statute books, but the campaign for free trade and increase of 
 direct taxes had begun. In his message to Congress on December 
 31, Lamar sympathized with the free trade idea, but advised 
 against any change in the tariff laws until some other system 
 could be devised as a sustitute. "The decided bias of my mind," 
 he said, 
 
 is for the total abolition of all duties on imports, not only be- 
 cause it would comport with that freedom of commerce so closely 
 connected with the fundamental rights of man, but because it 
 would be peculiarly adapted to the future condition and policy 
 of Texas. While I am aware, that by indirect taxation in the 
 nature of a Tariff, the people bear the burden as consumers with- 
 out scarcely perceiving it, . . . yet still I look forward to a 
 period (I hope near at hand") when we shall be able, and will find 
 it to our interest, to invite the commerce of the world to our free 
 and open ports. This, however, from considerations of a high 
 public policy, may not be done until our national independence 
 shall be generally acknowledged. The radical policy of Texas is 
 anti-tariff, . . . yet the immediate adoption of free trade as 
 is proposed by many of our citizens and statesmen, would in the 
 present situation of our country exhibit an apparent recklessness 
 and imprudence, which could not fail to affect our credit abroad.^* 
 
 The House committee to which had been referred the various 
 resolutions and petitions on the tariff agreed with Lamar that no 
 change should be made at that time. The only alternatives to 
 the tariff as a source of revenue were direct taxes and loans, neither 
 of which was advisable or practical at that time — ^besides, all ar- 
 ticles of primfi necessity were admitted free of duty. The Senate 
 committee, on the other hand, after agreeing that it was inex- 
 pedient to abolish the tariff until a loan could be effected or direct 
 taxes .levied on all lands, examined the arguments for and against 
 the tariff, and came to the conclusion that all tariff laws should 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, November 14, 1838. 
 ""Third Congress, Souse Journal, 180, 181; Lamar Papers, No. 361; 
 Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 39 
 
 be blotted from the statute books. The strongest argument for 
 repeal, they thought, was that the Eepublic would receive more 
 favorable notice from England and a recognition of independence 
 if free trade were adopted, and that recognition would expedite 
 the making of a loan. Finally, they thought that a land tax was 
 much more just and equal. Both Houses having adopted the 
 recommendation of the President, all tariff bills were dropped for 
 that session of Congress. °° 
 
 The ministers sent to the United States and the European 
 countries were instructed to hold out a promise of commercial con- 
 cessions in Texas in return for recognition of independence or a 
 favorable commercial treaty. On November 7, 1838, a most fa- 
 vored nation agreement was entered into with Prance, and a year 
 later recognition was extended by that country and a treaty of 
 amity, commerce, and navigation was drawn up. As a result of 
 this treaty, and because negotiations were under way with Eng- 
 land, Holland, and Belgium, which might be aided by a reduction 
 in the tariff, an act was passed in February, 1840, reducing the 
 tariff almost to a free trade basis. The general rate of this tariff 
 was 15 per cent ad valorem, payable in any kind of currency, 
 and, as depreciation was very great, the actual rate was nearer 3 
 per cent. In February, 1841, the rates were increased to 45 per 
 cent ad valorem, in order to provide for the depreciation, but the 
 specie basis continued as in the act of 1840. This free trade 
 policy continued throughout the administration of Lamar. 
 
 To meet the needs of the government under the anticipated re- 
 duction of the tariff duties, a comprehensive direct tax law was 
 passed. Before this direct taxes had played a minor part in the 
 finances of the Eepublic, with the opponents of a tariff advocating 
 a direct tax as more just and equal than an indirect tax. By the 
 act of 1840 only a few articles were subjected to an ad valorem 
 tax, but a large number to a specific tax. Practically all busi- 
 nesses were reached by license taxes. The failure of this measure 
 to supply revenue, together with the depreciation, were responsible 
 for the revision upward in 1841.'° 
 
 Another policy adopted by the preceding administration for se- 
 curing revenue was through a foreign loan. On November 18, 
 
 "Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," as cited, XX, 329. 
 °°IMd., XX, 336-338; XXI, 1. 
 
30 Mvrdbeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 1836, shortly after the constitutional government came into office, 
 the first of the five million dollar loan acts was passed. The 
 bonds were to run from five to thirty years and bear interest at the 
 rate of 10 per cent, and the pubhc faith, the proceeds from land 
 sales, and all land taxes after 1838, were pledged to guarantee the 
 interest and final redemption." This law was modified slightly 
 by an act of May, 1838, in order to make the bonds more salable. 
 Commissioners were sent to the United States to sell the bonds, 
 but at the accession of Lamar no sales had been made. Tn his 
 message to Congress he expressed himself as favoring a further 
 effort to secure a foreign loan, and suggested a modification of the 
 previous acts. 
 
 The law of January 22, 1839, followed out his suggestions. In 
 addition to the public faith, the proceeds from land sales, and the 
 land taxes, this law pledged the revenues from customs to guaran- 
 tee the semi-annual interest, and to create a sinking fund.°^ This 
 was modified further by the act of January, 1840, whereby the 
 sinking fund was to be $300,000 or more, to be provided from the 
 sale of public lands, or if the lands should not be brought on the 
 market, from other revenue.'" 
 
 It would be unprofitable to follow out in detail the various 
 efforts to secure a loan in the United States and Europe.®* On 
 December 34, 1838, James Hamilton of South Carolina, who had 
 interested himself in the affairs of Texas and had assisted the 
 Texan commissioners under the act of May 16, 1838, was ap- 
 pointed as loan commissioner to assist the commissioner appointed 
 by Houston. In the fall of 1839, the commissioners succeeded in 
 securing from the Pennsylvania Bank of the United States the 
 sum of $457,380 in return for the 10 per cent bonds of Texas. 
 With this loan in the United States the commissioners went to 
 Europe, where for two years they were active in France, Belgium, 
 and Holland. At one time in 1841 it seemed that they were about 
 to secure the guarantee of the French government for the bonds, 
 and the banking house of Lafitte and Company were on the point 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1092-1093. 
 
 '^Ihid., I, 1484. 
 
 "/6id., II, 230. 
 
 "An extensive discussion of the loan negotiations is found in H. R. 
 Edwards, "Diplomatic Relations between France and Texas," in South- 
 western Historical Quarterly, XX, 225-241. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 31 
 
 of opening books for their sale, when the unfavorable report of 
 Saligny, the minister to Texas, caused the French government to 
 withhold the guarantee, and the banking company refused to handle 
 them. All efforts to secure a foreign loan failed, and during the 
 succeeding administration the loan acts were repealed."^ 
 
 During the whole of Lamar's administration optimistic and 
 pessimistic reports alternated with regard to the loan negotiations, 
 and the people were kept in a state of excitement. It seems cer- 
 tain that anticipation of success caused extravagance on the part 
 of the government and speculation on the part of the people, while 
 paper money was issued to be retired by the loan. 
 
 Lamar has been criticised by contemporaries and historians for 
 the extensive use of paper money during his administration, but 
 in this he was not the first offender.^" The constitutional gov- 
 ernment inherited from the provisional government a debt repre- 
 sented by audited treasury drafts amounting to more than a mil- 
 lion dollars. The constitutional government passed an act on 
 June 7, 1837, for funding these liabilities. This act provided tha;t 
 all claims against the government, after having been audited, ^vere 
 to be received at par in exchange for ten per cent bonds. Until 
 June 12, 1837, audited drafts were received in payment of all 
 government dues, though they were not made legal tender as be- 
 tween individuals. Before this the depreciation had brought their 
 specie value to fifteen cents on the dollar. The amount of drafts is- 
 sued to the beginning of Lamar's administration was $3,105,893.82,. 
 while during his presidency the amount was $4,881,093.47."^ 
 
 The act of June 9, 1837, started Texas upon her tempestuous, 
 experience with paper money. It authorized and required the- 
 president to issue the promissory notes of the government to the 
 amount of $500,000, in denominations of not less than $1 nor 
 more than $1,000, payable twelve months after date, and drawing 
 interest at 10 per cent. There were pledged for their redemption 
 one-fourth of the proceeds of the sales of Galveston and Mata- 
 gorda islands, 500,000 acres of land, all improved forfeited lands, 
 and the faith and credit of the government. The notes were to 
 be paid out only for the expenses of the civil departments of the 
 
 «°Miller, E. T., A Financial History of Texas, 60, 61. 
 
 "Miller, A Financial History of Texas, 59-82, gives an exhaustive ac- 
 count of the public debt of Texas under the Republic. For statistics and 
 other material I am indebted to this volume. 
 
 "Miller, op. cit., 65. 
 
32 Mirdbeau Buonaparte Lamaa- 
 
 government, except $100,000 for the purchase of horses and muni- 
 tions of war, and they were receivable in all payments to the gov- 
 ernment.*' 
 
 At the beginning of Lamar's administration more than $800,000 
 of these notes had been issued ajid were in circulation. It must 
 be said, however, that Houston disapproved excessive issue of 
 treasury notes, and vetoed a bill to increase the amount to 
 $1,000,000 on the ground that an increase would destroy the value 
 of the notes already issued."' The depreciation of the notes at 
 the beginning of Lamar's administration was from fifteen to fifty 
 per cent. 
 
 The first paper money issues of Texas had served a valuable 
 purpose as a temporary expedient, said Lamar in his first message 
 to Congress, "hut experience admonishes us that to urge it further, 
 •or continue it longer, would be equally injudicious and pre- 
 judicial." In the place of currency issued by the government he 
 favored currency issued by the national bank, which he advocated 
 with so much fervor, and the bank was to issue the currency on 
 ■specie which would be secured through a foreign loan.^" In spite 
 of this apparent turning away from paper money, however, Lamar 
 approved, during his administration, bills providing for almost 
 unlimited issue of money based on nothing more than the faith in 
 the government. 
 
 The contribution of Lamar's administration to the paper mone^ 
 •of the Eepublic was the "red backs" or non-interest bearing prom- 
 issory notes. By the act of January 19, 1839, requiring the 
 :stock books to be opened for funding the government liabilities, it 
 was provided that the notes thereafter issued should not bear inter- 
 est, and should be receivable for all government dues. The only 
 thing that prevented their use as unlimited legal tender, apparent- 
 ly, was the provision in the Constitution against the use of any- 
 thing save gold and silver as legal tender. Further additions 
 were authorized by the act of February 5, 1840, and the act of 
 February 5, 1841, placed no other limit on the issue than the 
 amount of appropriations." From January 1, 1839, to Septem- 
 
 '"Miller, op. cit., 67. 
 "•/ftid., 69. 
 
 '"Lamar Papers, No. 361; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 
 1838. 
 "Miller, op. cit., 69. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 33 
 
 ber, 1839, there were $1,569,010 of notes issued, and from Sep- 
 tember, 1839, to September, 1840, $1,983,790, a total of $3,553,800. 
 The expenditures of the Lamar administration are responsible for 
 this enormous increase in the public liabilities. 
 
 The first issues of the red-backs were valued only at about 
 37.5 cents on the dollar; in November, 1840, they had fallen to 
 16.66 cents; and at the close of Lamar's administration in Novem- 
 ber, 1841, they varied from 12 to 15 cents. The New Orleans 
 quotations were for July 7, 1841, 11 to 13 cents; for September 
 22, 13 to 15 cents; for November 24, 12 to 13 cents; for Decem- 
 ber 15, 10 to 12 cents; and for January 5, 1843, 8 to 11 cents. 
 After 1839 the notes ceased to circulate as a medium of exchange 
 and became merely objects of speculation.''^ 
 
 Various funding schemes were undertaken to relieve the condition 
 of the currency, but none of them was effective, and the adminis- 
 tration came to a close with the country almost bankrupt. 
 
 The explanation for the excessive use of paper money is to be 
 found in the consistent expenditure in excess of receipts. There 
 was not a year in the period of the Eepublic when the expenditures 
 were not greatly in excess of the receipts. During Houston's ad- 
 ministration the receipts from all sources amounted to $260,780 
 while the expenditures amounted to $1,777,362. The receipts dur- 
 ing the three years of Lamar's administration amounted to 
 $1,083,661 and the expenditures for the same time were $4,S85,- 
 213." 
 
 "Miller, op. cit., 70. 
 
 '"The following tables compiled by Professor E. T. Miller of tbe Uni- 
 versity of Texas illustrate the difficulties under which the government 
 was working, and explain the financial conditions in the Republic. (A 
 Financial History of Texas, 391.) 
 
 Revenues of the Republic 
 
 1836-1838 $ 260,780 
 
 1839 187,791 
 
 1840 453,235 
 
 1841 442,635 
 
 1842-1844 457,518 
 
 1844-1846 385,023 
 
 Expenditures 
 
 1836 $ 495,295 
 
 1837 945,961 
 
 1838 831,401 
 
 1839 1,504,173 
 
 1840 2,174,752 
 
34 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 The great increase in expenditures during Lamar's administra- 
 tion is due to the policy of warfare against the Indians, the great 
 increase in the civil list, the payment for the navy contracted for 
 under Houston's administration, the removal of the Capital from 
 Houston to Austin, and for the Santa Fe expedition. The civil 
 list in the first year of Lamar's administration v^as $550,000 as 
 compared with $192,000 for the last year of Houston's adminis- 
 tration. After the first year the civil list declined, being $347,671 
 for 1840 and $'355,100 for 1841. The heaviest appropriations 
 were for the army in both administrations. The first year of 
 Houston's administration $700,000 were appropriated for the 
 army. This increased the following year. The first year of 
 Lamar's administration the appropriation for this purpose 
 amounted to $1,140,000; the second year, $1,056,369; while for 
 the third year it dropped to the lowest figure since the beginning 
 of the Eepublic, $111,050. The explanation for the increase in 
 1839 and 1840 is to be found in the Indian policy pursued. Dur- 
 ing the first two years of his administration Lamar pursued a 
 policy of constant warfare against the Indians, expelling some of 
 the tribes from the country and punishing others so that they 
 removed to the frontier and made only occasional raids against 
 the Whites. A comparative statement as to the expense of the 
 various Indian policies was prepared by the comptroller in 1854. 
 It showed that during Houston's first term $190,000 were, ex- 
 pended on account of the Indians. Lamar's term cost $2,553,319 
 
 1841 1,176,288 
 
 1842 198,051 
 
 1843 147,274 
 
 1844 147,850 
 
 1845 243,538 
 
 Public Debt 
 
 1836 $1,250,000 
 
 1837 1,090,984 
 
 1838 1,886,425 
 
 1839 3,855,900 
 
 1840 6,241.409 
 
 1841 7,446,740 
 
 1846 9,949,007 
 
 Treasury Note Circulation 
 
 1838 $ 684,069 
 
 1839 2,013,762 
 
 1840 3,287,962 
 
 1841 2,920,860 
 
 1846 2,674,447 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affai/rs 35 
 
 on that account. Houston's second term, 1841-1844, called for 
 an expenditure of $94,093, while the term of Jones called for only 
 $45,000.'''' The navy represented the next largest appropriation. 
 For this object there were appropriated in 1839 the sum of 
 $380,455, and in 1840, $525,000." 
 
 The great expenditures and the depreciation of the currency 
 during the first two years of Lamar's administration naturally 
 reacted on public opinion. The Av.stin City Gazette, which was 
 established shortly after Austin became the capital, became the 
 mouthpiece of the opposition to Lamar which centered in Sam 
 Houston. On March 13, 1840, it had this personal criticism of 
 Lamar : 
 
 Apart from poUtics, and as a private citizen, we shall ever re- 
 spect him for his literary acquirements, his amiable disposition, 
 and unassuming manners; but, as President of the Republic, we 
 must, in common with a large portion of our fellow citizens, con- 
 demn many, very many of his acts; not that we blame the heart 
 so much as the easy disposition of the man. It is there that the 
 mischief lies : he allows others to think — to act for him. 
 
 On October 31, 1840, the same newspaper had this to say with 
 regard to the financial condition: 
 
 Texas promissory notes are worth about fifteen cents upon the 
 dollar — there is little prospect of a loan — the taxes are not 
 promptly paid; and if they were, would only return to the treas- 
 ury, at par, that which was issued for less than one-sixth of the 
 amount. The continual issue of this sort of currency can have 
 but one tendency now, and that is, to depreciate it still further. 
 In this exigency, what are we to do? All the officers of govern- 
 ment, from high to low, have been required to receive its issues 
 at par, in payment of their salaries. This has not raised it: 
 but it has impoverished them; and now an ordinary day laborer 
 receives more of it per diem than any civil officer under the es- 
 tablishment. . . . 
 
 We are at the lowest round of the ladder. Congress will soon 
 convene, and the pay of its members will not purchase their food. 
 The members cannot live upon patriotism; and many of them 
 have nothing else but that and their pay to live upon. 
 
 Houston was a candidate for the presidency from the close of 
 
 "Miller, op. cit., 391; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 341 n. 
 "Miller, op. oit., 391. 
 
36 Mvrdbeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 his first term in 1838 until his re-election in 1841. The consti- 
 tutional inhibition of consecutive terms prevented his being a 
 candidate for immediate re-election, and his unpopularity at the 
 close of his first term would have made doubtful his re-election. 
 In order to gain support he put himself at the head of an anti- 
 administration party, and used the faults of the administration 
 with considerable political skill in developing support for his can- 
 didacy. He became a member of Congress in 1839, and his 
 opposition to the President as a congressman led to the nomina- 
 tion of an opposition candidate in his district in 1840, but Hous- 
 ton was returned by a good majority. After his re-election to 
 Congress in 1840 he received an invitation from his constituents 
 in San Augustine to a public dinner. DecUning on account of 
 prevailing sickness, he iised the opportunity to attack the adminis- 
 tration of Lamar and incidentally make political capital for the 
 following year. "The approbation expressed by my fellow coun- 
 trymen," he said, 
 
 touching my military, executive and legislative duties, which have 
 devolved upon me during the important crisis through which 
 Texas has passed, is pecuKarly gratifying to me. Whether I am 
 in private or public station, I must ever feel unceasing devotion 
 to the prosperity of my country. Viewing the condition of the 
 nation, we have much to deplore; but our situation is not such as 
 to induce us to despair of ultimate success and prosperity. The 
 finances of the nation have been destroyed by the excessive issue 
 of treasury notes; the useless and extravagant expenditures of the 
 government! Nothing profitable has been produced to the coun- 
 try! The frontier is unprotected, our citizens have been called 
 from their homes with necessity, when their presence was all im- 
 portant to their crops — the ,only means of subsisting their fam- 
 ilies ! — the regular army inactive, though millions have been ex- 
 pended in its creation; the Indians harassing our citizens, and 
 penetrating our country even to the seaboard ; our credit destroyed ; 
 the citizens oppressed by taxes for the want of a sound currency, 
 and our national debt increased six-fold within the last year. It 
 is vain to attempt concealment of our situation any longer from 
 the public eye, — the depression of every class of the community 
 proclaims that there is rottenness to the core.'^ 
 
 This picture of conditions was essentially correct, though given 
 by a political opponent, who had himself been unable to resist the 
 
 '"Austin City Gazette, October 7, 1840. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affai/rs 37 
 
 tendencies which had caused the downfall of the administration 
 of his successor. This denunciation of the policies of Lamar was 
 possibly called forth by Lamar's attack on the preceding adminis- 
 tration in defense of his own. Characteristic of this method of 
 defense is Lamar's letter in response to an invitation to a public 
 dinner extended by some citizens of G-alveston. "When I came 
 into office," he said, 
 
 the country was in a disorganized condition throughout its various 
 departments, civil and militar3^ The public offices were in a state 
 of chaos and confusion; the military strength of the nation was 
 unknown and unorganized; the army had been reduced to a mere 
 skeleton and the navy annihilated. If either had an existence, it 
 was nominal merely, and they were incapable of any useful pur- 
 poses. Our inland frontier exhibited a melancholy scene of In- 
 dian ravages and massacres whilst our entire coast, exposed and 
 unprotected, might have been harassed at any moment, and our 
 coast blockaded by a single armed vessel. ... To systematize 
 the various departments: to establish a strict accountability in the 
 discharge of the public trust; economize the national resources; 
 extend protection to our bleeding frontier; and to place the coun- 
 try as speedily as practicable in a state of defence against all its 
 enemies, whether savage or civilized, by organizing the militia, — 
 creating a new army, resuscitating the navy, and supplying the 
 general deficiency of arms, ammunition and military stores, were 
 among the early objects of my contemplation. . . ." 
 
 The Fifth Congress assembled on November 2, and the speaker, 
 David S. Kauffman, in his opening remarks said: 
 
 But seven members of the last House have been deputed by the 
 people to join in the labors of this ! The destinies of Texas have 
 been committed to other, and, I earnestly trust, abler hands. 
 What has produced this extraordinary revolution ? We cannot be- 
 lieve that our predecessors were dishonest or incapable; but we 
 hnow that they failed to satisfy the expectations of an anxious and 
 confiding people. What was their error? The voice of a nation 
 answers : They increased, instead of diminishing, the national ex- 
 penditures. Let us, then, gentlemen, with one accord, resolve to 
 avoid the rock on which they split.''* 
 
 Lamar recognized the demand for some reform in the matter 
 of finances. "Amongst the various duties which will claim the 
 
 "Lamar to citizens of Galveston, June 2, 1840, Lamar Papers, No. 1810. 
 "Fifth Texas Congress, Bouse Journal, 5-6. 
 
38 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 attention of Congress during the present session," he said in his 
 annual message, 
 
 there are none more important than those which relate to the 
 fiscal affairs of the government. That a system of finance should 
 be adopted, if practicable, which will, to some extent, relieve the 
 pecuniary embarrassments of the country, is so obviously neces- 
 sary, that it can require no argument from me to enforce it. 
 The entire expenditures of the government, embracing everything 
 that is required, for the successful administration of its civil, mili- 
 tary, and naval departments, would probably not exceed four hun- 
 dred thousand dollars a year, if these expenditures could be met 
 with funds not depreciated in value, and when it is known that 
 the revenues of the nation as provided for by law, if faithfully 
 collected, would amount annually to nearly one million dollars, it 
 would seem that a system might be devised which would not only 
 remove present embarrassments, but which could be gradually ex- 
 tended to the extinguishment of the national debt. . . . 
 
 In considering this important subject, it is possible that Con- 
 gress may find it practicable to lessen the public expenditure with- 
 out materially affecting the eificient transaction of the public busi- 
 ness. An amalgamation of some of the public offices and a dis- 
 continuance of others may possibly be effected, temporarily at least, 
 without producing great detriment to the substantial interests of 
 the nation, and if it can be done in times of so much pecuniary 
 embarrassment, no saving should be considered too small to merit 
 attention.''' 
 
 He had no program to submit, but he recommended retrenchment. 
 On November 19, the spirit of Congress made itself felt. On 
 that date a joint resolution was introduced requiring the President 
 to receive into service a company of volunteers from San Patricio 
 county, and it was received with protests by the members of the 
 House led by Sam Houston.^" On December 2, Lamar announced 
 that Colonel W. Q. Cooke had selected a suitable place on Bed 
 Eiver for a military post, and suggested that his policy of frontier 
 defence awaited an appropriation, or it would have to be aban- 
 doned. This was answered by a resolution which passed the House 
 on the same day providing for a committee of five to be appointed 
 to draft a bill to serve as a basis of retrenchment in all depart- 
 ments.^' 
 
 ^'lUd., 25. 
 
 '"Fiftli Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 127-128. 
 
 ^^IMd., 181, 211. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 39 
 
 The first act in harmony with the program of retrenchment was 
 passed on December 5, when the salary of the chief justice was 
 reduced from $5,000 to $3,-000.^^ On January 18, 1841, an act 
 was passed which reduced the civil list from approximately $550,- 
 000 to $450,000. This was accomplished by abolishing the office 
 of secretary of the navy and placing his duties on the secretary of 
 war; abolishing the office of postmaster general and placing his 
 duties on the secretary of state ; discontinuing various minor offices 
 in the state and war departments.*^ 
 
 The greatest reductions were in the army and navy appropria- 
 tions. In spite of the failure of all peace negotiations and the 
 threat of a Mexican invasion, and the recommendation of Lamar 
 and Burnet, who followed him as Acting President, for prepara- 
 tions for an offensive war against Mexico, the two Houses of Con- 
 gress failed to agree on an army appropriation bill, and there was 
 no appropriation for that year, which resulted in an order by 
 Lamar disbanding the regular army.'* At the same time they re- 
 fused to appropriate money for military aid to a commercial ex- 
 pedition to Santa Fe, an object on which Lamar had set his heart, 
 and which he finally undertook in spite of the failure of Congress 
 to appropriate funds. For the army and navy the appropriation 
 amounted to the sum of $211,060, as against $1,581,369 for the 
 preceding year.^" 
 
 No methods were found at that session of Congress for remedy- 
 ing the condition of the currency, and perhaps nothing would have 
 availed. The preceding Congress had passed an act providing for 
 the_ issue of eight per cent treasury bonds instead of notes, but as 
 these were of no more value in the market than the non-interest 
 bearing notes, and as these created an additional obligation for the 
 government in the payment of interest, an act was passed in Feb- 
 ruary, 1841, providing that no more such bonds should be issued 
 after March 1.*° An effort was made to increase the revenue by 
 raising the rates of tariff duties, but as we have seen, it resulted 
 only in a law raising the nominal rates to accord with their specie 
 value. 
 
 ""Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 553. 
 
 "•Ibid., II, 569. 
 
 '■■Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 720-723. 
 
 '"Miller, op. cit., 23. 
 
 "'Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 639. 
 
40 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Lamar has been criticized more severely for his financial policy 
 than for anything else, and it cannot be claimed that his policies 
 resulted in a sound financial system. He recognized this himself, 
 and in every message called attention to the need for a circulating 
 medium based on something more than faith in the government. 
 It was not his fault that paper money, greatly depreciated, was in 
 circulation when he assumed the presidency, but he might be 
 blamed for continuing after he came into office a practice that had 
 proven itself faulty. It must be remembered, however, that the 
 central idea of his financial policies was the securing of a foreign 
 loan which was to serve as the capital for a government owned and 
 operated bank, and almost till the end of his administration the 
 loan commissioners in Europe held out the hope of securing the 
 loan which Lamar considered necessary. It is likely, it seems to 
 me, that the loan could have been secured if it had not been that 
 the financial stringency in 1837 had caused many of the States 
 of the United States to default on the interest on bonds held by 
 foreign investors, thereby making capital timid in regard to 
 American securities. 
 
 It is claimed by his critics that in view of the condition of the 
 finances the appropriations were exhorbitant. It is admitted that 
 there was an increase in the appropriations, though the nominal 
 increase, on account of the depreciation was greater than the real. 
 He himself Justified the increase in expenditures by saying that 
 the army was disbanded when he came into office and he found it 
 necessary to create a new one. His administration also had to pay 
 for a navy which was contracted for in the preceding administra- 
 tion. In my Judgment the appropriations for the army were en- 
 tirely justified. Undoubtedly the conciliatory policy of Houston 
 with regard to. the Indians had broken down. Many of the west- 
 em counties were entirely depopulated, and there was an over- 
 whelming public sentiment for war with the Indians. Lamar 
 could have done no less than adopt a policy of warfare, and that 
 called for the creation of an army, the establishment of military 
 posts, and the organization of a permanent ranger service. This 
 policy justified itself, aS I shall show later, and after 1840 the 
 Indians retired to the frontier and made only occasional attacks 
 on the settlements. 
 
 The term "visionary schemes" which has so often been applied 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 41 
 
 to the policies of Lamar, the creation of a national bank, the Santa 
 F6 Expedition, the naval war against Mexico in alliance with 
 Yucatan, and other policies, cannot be justified unless it is meant 
 that he did not understand the limitations of the people over whom 
 he was ruling. Some of his policies were practical, even though 
 they failed from accidental causes. A contrast of his administra- 
 tion with that of Houston's first administration results to the 
 advantage of Lamar's; but a comparison with Houston's second 
 results in disadvantage to Lamar's. 
 
 It is not the purpose here to go into the second administration 
 of Houston, further than to call attention to a few factors bearing 
 on the financial history of Lamar's administration which naturally 
 fall into that of his successor. The first thing that Houston's 
 administration did was to cease the issue of treasury notes and 
 take away their legal tender character.*^ At the same time the 
 five million dollar loan acts were repealed.** The repeal of these 
 acts, however, showed no constructive policy on the part of Hous- 
 ton. The treasury notes had ceased to circulate, and all chance of 
 a foreign loan had disappeared, hence it was nothing more than a 
 legal ratification of existing fact. The one constructive policy 
 wa^ the reenactment of a higher tariff on imports, January 27, 
 1843.*' Foreign or domestic loans were impossible, for the credit 
 of Texas was utterly gone, hence it was necessary for the new ad- 
 ministration to adopt a program of economy, which happily re- 
 sulted in the improvement of general conditions, though still no 
 method of funding the notes of the government was arrived at. 
 
 III. Army and Navy 
 
 The War of Independence in Texas was won by a citizen army 
 gathered together hurriedly during the, pressure of the Mexican 
 invasion. The Consultation had passed an ordinance providing 
 for the creation of a regular army, the organization of the militia, 
 a force of rangers, and an auxiliary force of volunteers for the 
 period of the war to be drawn from the United States. The 
 militia had not been organized at the beginning of the invasion of 
 Texas, and remained unorganized until after the battle of San 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 727. 
 '^lUd., II, 954. 
 ^lUd., II, 734-737. 
 
42 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Jacinto. Up to the time of San Jacinto, also, there had been few 
 enKstments among the regulars, and the auxiliary force of volun- 
 teers from the United States arrived too late to participate in the 
 San Jacinto campaign. Shortly after this battle volunteers began 
 to arrive from the United States and in June the army amounted 
 to about twenty-four hundred, and as the "old settlers had gone 
 home when the pressure was relieved, the army consisted almost 
 entirely of volunteers."" 
 
 It was this army which had refused to receive Lamar as com- 
 mander-in-chief in July, partly because of a belief that General 
 Houston was still commander-in-chief, and partly because of the 
 intrigue of Felix Huston, Thomas J. Green, and General Eusk. 
 The withdrawal of Lamar left the army in the same condition that 
 it was in at the time of his appointment, with General Eusk 
 acting as commander-in-chief, but with Sam Houston addressing 
 communications to the army as commander-in-chief. The army, 
 after the threat of a new Mexican invasion had disappeared, began 
 to break up, and this was the situation when General Houston 
 assumed the presidency in October, 1836. 
 
 The appointment of Eusk as secretary of war left the army un- 
 der the command of Felix Huston as senior brigadier-general. In 
 January, 1837, President Houston appointed Albert Sidney Johns- 
 ton to the command of the army, but when he arrived at the head- 
 quarters to take command Huston refused to surrender the com- 
 mand, challenging Johnston to a duel. In the duel Johnston was 
 severely wounded, and Huston continued in command of the army. 
 In May Huston went to the seat of government to secure the 
 support of the Congress for an offensive against Mexico. Unable 
 to pay the soldiers, and unable to control them under a mutinous 
 commander-in-chief, Houston took advantage of the absence of 
 Felix Huston from the army, and on May 18 issued orders for the 
 furlough of all the volunteers except six hundred."^ Practically 
 all that were left in the army at tnat time were volunteers, not 
 many more than seven hvmdred were embodied, and it is certain 
 
 ■"Barker, "The Texan Revolutionary Army," in Texas Historical Asso- 
 ciation Quarterly, IX, 228-261, passim. 
 
 "Williams, Sam Houston, 238; Houston's message to Congress, Novem- 
 ber 21, 1837; Crane, Life of 8am Soustoru, 288; Yoakum, History of 
 Texas, II. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 43 
 
 that almost all of these were furloughed. Houston said he re- 
 tained only enough to maintain certain important posts."^ 
 
 The attitude of Congress towards a military establishment was 
 indicated by the passage of laws early in the first session of the 
 First Congress for the organization of the militia, for a perma- 
 nent force consisting of a battalion of mounted riflemen for fron- 
 tier defence, and for a permanent military establishment. By 
 the act of December 30, 1836, besides the militia, volunteers, and 
 mounted riflemen, the military establishment was to consist of one 
 regiment of cavalry, one regiment of artillery, and four regiments 
 of infantry, with certain engineers and ordnance officers.'^ The 
 whole army was to be commanded by a major-general appointed 
 by the President. It was under this act that Johnston was 
 appointed major-general, but, as we have seen, he was unable to 
 take over the command on account of the opposition of Felix 
 Huston. In spite of this riotous condition of the army, however, 
 Houston, in his message at the beginning of the called session of 
 the First Congress, in May, 1837, said that the army had never 
 been in a better condition. He said that the permanent force in 
 the field was sufficient to meet all the emergencies of invasions, 
 while at the shortest notice the defence of the country could be 
 brought into immediate action. He complimented the general 
 for the discipline which had bee^ established, and said that by a 
 reduction of the supernumerary officers the expense would be only 
 $239,032 per year. Less than two weeks later he issued the order 
 for disbanding the army by means of furloughs, and from that 
 time until the end of his administration there was no organized 
 military establishment for the Eepublic, dependence being placed 
 on the militia in any emergency. 
 
 Throughout the administration of Houston there was complaint 
 as to his Indian policy, which left the frontiers unprotected while 
 he tried to put into effect his principles of conciliation. During 
 the greater part of 1838 there were constant Indian raids, and in 
 July there was a rather ambitious revolt on the part of the Mexi- 
 cans and Indians about N'acogdoches. A hastily collected body 
 of volunteers imder General Eusk averted the threatened rebellion 
 and proceeded to chastise the Indians engaged in the revolt. Un- 
 
 "Measage to Congress, November 21, 1837. 
 •'Gamrnel, Laws of Texas, I, 1223-1226. 
 
44 Mirabeau Buonapa/rte Lamar 
 
 der these eircum^tances there was a popular demand for a dififer- 
 ent policy, and Lamar, in his first message to Congress took this 
 into consideration, recommending the creation of a standing army 
 to be used for frontier defence.'* 
 
 Congress, willing to cooperate with the Executive, and unmind- 
 ful of the fact that there were ample laws on the statute books for 
 the creation of a standing army, passed a law providing for a regi- 
 ment of eight hundred and forty men, divided into fifteen comt- 
 panies, for the protection of the northern and western frontiers.'^ 
 Colonel Edward Burleson was placed in command, and stationed 
 at Bastrop to recruit the proposed army. In spite of the fact that 
 a complete staff was organized, and strenuous efforts made to en- 
 list enough men to bring the army to efficiency, this army of 
 regulars never attained the intended strength, and played a minor 
 part in the Indian campaigns of the first two years of Lamar's 
 administration. The force of rangers which had been first pro- 
 vided for by the General Council proved one of the most effective 
 forces in Indian warfare, though they were aided in any important 
 campaign by the militia and what few regulars could be gotten 
 together. Of the two most important campaigns, the one against 
 the Cherokees in 1839 was carried out chiefly by the militia, though 
 aided by the regulars under Colonel Burleson, while the one 
 against the Comanches in 1840 was carried out by a force which 
 volunteered for that campaign, though it was commanded by a reg- 
 ular army ofiicer.°° 
 
 Fortunately for Texas during the first two years of Lamar's 
 administration, the Mexicans were occupied with their own affairs 
 and could devote no attention to Texas. In 1839 took place the 
 war with Prance, and the Mexican ports were blockaded. In 
 1840 there was civil war between the Federalists and Centralists 
 in Mexico, which served to divert the attention of the Mexicans 
 from their revolting province. This fact is probably responsible 
 for a lack of eagerness in enlisting in the regular army. It was 
 this also which made possible the use of the whole army in war 
 
 °*Lamar Papers, No. 361 ; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 
 1838. 
 
 "'Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 15. 
 
 "The details of these Indian campaigns will be given in another chap- 
 ter, where I shall attempt to make clearer the use of the army in the 
 Indian campaigns. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 45 
 
 against the Indians. Under the circumstances, the administra- 
 tion was unable to depart materially from the practice of the pre- 
 ceding one, and had to depend on the militia hurriedly called to- 
 gether to avert a threatened attack or pimish one that had already 
 taken place. The determination of Lamar to exterminate the 
 Indians made necessary the constant mobilization of parts of the 
 militia and led to heavy ezpenditures for the two years of Indian 
 warfare. 
 
 The regular army was brought to an end by the action of the 
 Congress which sat in 1840-1841. As we have seen, this Congress 
 was elected on the issue of retrenchment. As a part of that pro- 
 gram the House passed a measure on January 38, 1841, providing 
 for the disbanding of the regular army."' The Senate refused to 
 concur in this measure, but the House refused to make any ap- 
 propriations for its support, and thus accomplished the destruc- 
 tion of the regular army. In the absence of an appropriation for 
 its support, Lamar directed the comptroller on March 34 to open 
 an account on his books for the disbanding of the regular army."* 
 This was in the face of a threatened Mexican invasion which 
 materialized a short time later. Thus Lamar's administration 
 closed as it had begun, without an army sufficient for self defense. 
 Just as there was no army to speak of when Lamar assumed the 
 presidency, so there was no navy at all. Congress and the Presi- 
 dent had recognized the necessity of a navy, however, and in 
 November, 1836, passed a law authorizing the purchase of a navy."' 
 The government was unable to find funds for the purchase of the 
 vessels provided for, and no action was taken. When the law was 
 passed there were still a few naval vessels under the flag of the 
 Eepublic of Texas. Before the close of another year three of the 
 four vessels had been lost through capture and wreck, and the 
 Congress passed an act in September, 1837, authorizing the pur- 
 chase of a five hundred ton ship mounting eighteen guns, two three 
 hundred ton brigs of twelve guns each, and three schooners of one 
 hundred and thirty tons, mounting five or seven guns each. They 
 appropriated $280,000 to pay for the ships, and authorized the 
 
 "Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 631. 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 323, note. 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1090. 
 
46 Mvrdbeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 secretary of the treasury to furnish the purchasing agent with a 
 draft on the loan commissioners in the United States.^"" President 
 Houston appointed Samuel M. Williams as an agent to purchase 
 the ships, and Williams at once executed his bond and proceeded to 
 Baltimore.^"- In the meantime the President disbanded the officers 
 and men of the navy until the vessels could be secured. 
 
 Williams succeeded in securing in October, 1838, the Charleston, 
 for which the Congress appropriated $130,000. A short time later 
 he contracted with Frederick Dawson of Baltimore for one ship, 
 two brigs, and three schooners. The cost of these ships was to be 
 $380,000, but as Texas had no money, the bonds of the govern- 
 ment were to be executed by the loan commissioners, and deposited 
 in the Bank of the United States of Pennsylvania for $560,000. 
 Interest was to be paid at the rate of ten per cent, and in case 
 of defaulting on the interest the government of Texas was to for^ 
 feit the extra deposit of $280,000.^°^ Payment was not made at 
 maturity, and the whole amount with interest was claimed and 
 ultimately paid by Texas.^ 
 
 Word that the ships had been contracted for arrived shortly 
 after Lamar's inauguration, and on January 36, 1839, Congress 
 passed and the President approved an act appropriating $350,000 
 for the maintenance of the navy for the year.^ It will be seen 
 that this navy, which was contracted for under the preceding ad- 
 ministration, cost in the neighborhood of $600,000, and with the 
 sum appropriated for its maintenance the expense to the Lamar 
 administration during its first year was more than $800,000. 
 
 The ships began arriving early in 1839. In March the Charles- 
 ton reached Galveston, and her name and flag were changed. She 
 was commissioned as the Zavala. On June 37 the schooner San 
 Jacinto, the first ship under the Dawson contract, was delivered; 
 on August 7, the schooner San Anionic; on August 31, the brig 
 
 ""/Sid;., I, 1355. 
 
 "'Report of Secretary of the Navy in Third Texas Congress, First Ses- 
 sion, House Journal, 15-20. 
 
 "=Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, Appendia;, 202- 
 204; Dienst, "The Navy of the Republic of Texas" in Texas Historical 
 Association Quarterly, XIII, 8. 
 
 'Miller, A Financial History of Texas, 63; Report of the Auditor and 
 Comptroller, December 27, 1849, and November 12, 1851. 
 ^Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 129. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affai/rs 47' 
 
 Colorado. A corvette and a brig were delivered in January ajid 
 April of the following year, making the list complete.^ 
 
 The delivery of the ships of the navy was completed by April, 
 1840, and Commodore Edwin Ward Moore was placed in com- 
 mand with the rank of Post Captain. The greatest difficulty eon- 
 fronting him in his position was the securing of seamen for the 
 ships of the navy. For this purpose some of the vessels proceeded 
 to ports of the United States, and attempted to secure sailors there. 
 Moore himself in the Colorado went to New York where he ran 
 afoul of the United States laws and was prosecuted under the neu- 
 trality law of 1818. The American Secretary of State submitted 
 to the Texan minister a mass of depositions to prove that Moore 
 was violating the neutrality laws of the United States. It was 
 charged that Moore "has for some time past been engaged in hiring 
 and retaining within the Territory and jurisdiction of the United 
 States, citizens of the United States, and other persons to enlist 
 themselves in the service of the Eepublic of Texas as mariners or 
 seamen on board the said Brig of war, the Colorado."* 
 
 While Moore was still in New York recruiting men, but with 
 some of the ships already manned, the Congress passed an act re- 
 quiring the President to retire from the service temporarily all 
 the fleet except such schooners as were necessary for enforcing the- 
 revenue laws, and to retain only enough officers and men to carry 
 out the purposes of the act. It was provided, however, that if 
 Mexico should make any hostile demonstrations on the Gulf, th& 
 President might order into service any number of the vessels he 
 might deem necessary. This act was approved by Lamar on Feb- 
 ruary 5, 1840.° 
 
 President Lamar, however, did not carry out the provisions of 
 this law. Acting on the advice of friends,* he allowed the work 
 of fitting the ships for the sea to go on. By June 34 they were 
 ready for service, and on that date they set sail on a voyage which 
 carried them to Sisal, Campeachy, Vera Cruz, and other points on 
 the Mexican coast. The last of the ships returned on December 9,. 
 
 'Dienst, op. eit., 10. 
 
 *Dunlap to Burnet, January 27, 1840 (enclosure) ; Garrison, Dip. Cor. 
 Tex., I, 436. 
 
 'Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 364. 
 
 'See Francis Moore, Jr., to Lamar, March 9, 1840, Lamar Papers, No. 
 1741. 
 
48 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 bringing the body of Treat, who had been acting as secret agent 
 of the Texan government in MexicoJ 
 
 In his message in November, 1840j Lamar justified himself for 
 disregarding the act of Congress requiring the vessels to be laid 
 up in ordinary. He said that it was confidently stated in the 
 papers of the United States that Mexico had made contracts for 
 the purchase of several vessels of war in Europe, and that she had 
 actually secured a steam vessel in England and was about to de- 
 scend on the Texan coast and cut off commerce; that under those 
 conditions he would have been violating the spirit and intentions 
 of the act of Congress instead of carrying it into effect if he had 
 caused the seamen already in the service to be disbanded and the 
 vessels to be laid in ordinary. Besides, 
 
 Yucatan and Tabasco, lately forming a part of the confederate 
 states of Mexico, wearied of the oppressions that followed 
 the overthrow of the feder&,l system in that republic, se- 
 ceded from the central government, and uniting together pro- 
 nounced their determination to be free. Similarity of cir- 
 ■cumstanees and design naturally creates a sympathy of feel- 
 ing, and would prompt this government to regard with pecu- 
 liar interest the efforts of the citizens of the southern provinces to 
 do precisely what we had so recently accomplished. But consid- 
 erations of a higher character suggested the propriety of making a 
 -demonstration of our naval power on the coast of the new re- 
 public. It was expected to ascertain from the authorities estab- 
 lished there in what relation this government should regard them, 
 and whether their secession from Mexico would terminate their 
 belligerent condition towards Texas. ... It was considered 
 advisable to communicate to the authorities our friendly disposi- 
 tion, and to convey them with such a palpable exhibition of power 
 as would render them efficacious and permanent; and I am grat- 
 ified to remark that these professions were readily and kindly re- 
 ceived and cordially reciprocated by the new government. 
 
 At the same time, he said, he had felt it his duty to refrain from 
 ihe capture of any Mexican ships as long as negotiations were 
 being undertaken for a peaceful settlement of all difficulties. The 
 naval equipments of a country, he asserted, were essentially dif- 
 ferent from the military. Competent officers might be chosen from 
 among the people for the command of an army, but a navy required 
 
 'Dienst, op. cit., 25. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 49 
 
 trained men. "To have disbanded the accomplished and gallant 
 officers who have embarked in our naval service," he concluded, 
 
 at the moment when we had reason to believe our enemy was pre- 
 paring a naval armament for our coast, would, in the opinion of 
 the executive, have not only been indiscreet and impolitic, but 
 would, as he believes, have been contrary to the true intention and 
 meaning of Congress, as expressed in the act of the last session. 
 It is true it might have saved us some expenditure, but it is equally 
 true that it might have involved the country in great disaster and 
 an irreparable loss of reputation.^ 
 
 It seems that the purposes of the cruise were achieved. The 
 rumors that Mexico was preparing to blockade the coast of Texas 
 were probably false, and the cruise was unnecessary from that 
 standpoint. It did serve, however, to establish friendly relations 
 with the federalists of Yucatan, and resulted in an alliance with 
 that province the following year against the Mexican government. 
 After proceeding to Vera Cruz and delivering letters to Treat and 
 receiving others from him to the state department, some of the 
 ships proceeded to the Texas coast, remaining only a short time 
 for orders, and returned to the Yucatan region. In December 
 Moore proceeded up the Tabasco river and captured the town of 
 Tabasco, levying on the people the sum of $25,000, which was used 
 in refitting the vessels for a longer cruise. The town was turned 
 over to the Federalists." The whole fleet was back in Galveston 
 in April, 1841. 
 
 From May to November, 1841, the vessels of the navy were en- 
 gaged in the survey of the coast of Texas.^" In the meantime 
 Lamar had formed a. naval alliance with Yucatan. Under the 
 terms of this alliance the fleet of Texas was to be used to aid the 
 Federalists of Yucatan against the Centralists who were in con- 
 trol of Mexico at that time. On September 18, 1841, Moore re- 
 ceived his orders to prepare for the voyage to Yucatan, and on 
 December 13 the vessels set sail. Two days later the secretary of 
 the navy, George W. Hockley, acting on the orders of -President 
 Houston, who had been inaugurated on the 12th, directed Moore 
 to return to Galveston immediately and await further orders. 
 
 "Fifth Texas Congress, First Session, House Journal, 20-22. 
 'Dienst, op. cit., 26. 
 "/6id., 29. 
 
50 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Moore did not receive these orders until March 10, 1843, and did 
 not comply with them, but proceeded to carry out the terms of the 
 alliance between Texas and Yucatan. ^^ 
 
 IV. Location of the Permanent Seat of Government 
 
 One of the first problems confronting the Lamar Administration 
 was the establishment of a permanent seat of government. During 
 the period of the war and the provisional government the seat of 
 government had been at various places. In his proclamation call- 
 ing the election for officers under the constitution, President Bur- 
 net designated Columbia as the meeting place of the First Congress. 
 The Congress met there, and on October 33 Houston was inau- 
 gurated. Congress and the President were not satisfied with the 
 location, because of poor accommodations, and shortly afterwards 
 an act was passed temporarily locating the seat of government at 
 Houston until the end of the session of Congress which was to 
 assemble in the year 1840.'^ 
 
 There was considerable opposition to the location of the capital 
 at Houston, which was selected by a joint ballot of the two houses 
 by a narrow margin." At the time Houston was selected there 
 was not a single building there, and though ample buildings for 
 the government were promised by the meeting of Congress on May 
 1, 1837, they were not provided. Besides, there were complaints of 
 the bad streets, the unhealthful conditions in the place, and other 
 matters. And as early as August 9, 1837, the question of the 
 permanent location of the seat of government was forecast as an 
 issue of the campaigns for Congress.^* 
 
 Eesponding to this sentiment the second Congress passed a joint 
 resolution, approved by the President on October 19, providing for 
 the election by joint ballot of the two houses of five commissioners 
 to select' a site for the permanent location of the seat of govern- 
 ment. The commissioners were required to give public notice of 
 their appointment, and "receive such propositions for' the sale of 
 
 "Dienst, op. cit., 37. 
 
 "^Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1217. 
 
 ^The vote on the fourth ballot was Houston, 21; Matagorda, 4; Wash- 
 ington, 14; and Columbia, 1, giving Houston a majority of only two. — 
 Winkler, "The Seat of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical Asso- 
 ciation Quarterly, X, 165. 
 
 "Ihid., 185-188, passim; Telegraph and Texas Register, August 9, 1837. 
 
Preddential Administration: Domestic Affairs 51 
 
 lands as may be made 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 
 conditional contracts for the purchase of such locations as they may 
 think proper, subject to ratification or rejection by this congress." 
 They were required to make a report to Congress by November 15, 
 1837; and in making selections they vfere to be confined to the 
 country between the Trinity and Guadalupe rivers, and they were 
 to select no place more than one hundred 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.^" 
 
 The commissioners elected under this act made their report on 
 November 20, recommending various places in order of preference, 
 based largely on material benefits to be derived in the way of 
 bonuses and land. This report was submitted to a select committee 
 of the two houses. The committee reported on the 28th recom- 
 mending the appointment of a joint committee of both houses to 
 visit the various sites suggested during the vacation of Congress 
 and report back at the beginning of the next session. Congress 
 adopted the report of the committee, and provided by joint reso- 
 lution for the election of three members from the House and two 
 from the Senate. '^^ 
 
 The commissioners provided for by this resolution were duly 
 elected, and on March 8, 1838, they made a contract with John 
 Eblin for the purchase of his league of land, and reserved for the 
 government all the vacant lands lying within a radius of nine miles 
 of a point near the western boundary of Bbhn's League. ^^ On 
 April 14 the commissioners reported to Congress that they had 
 bought the Ebhn League lying on the east bank of the Colorado 
 river, just below La Grange. As was the custom, this was sub- 
 mitted to a joint committee of the two houses, and the committee 
 reported on May 7 without making any recommendations. Two 
 days later the houses met in joint session for the purpose of choos- 
 ing a site for the permanent government, and the location of 
 Bblin's League was decided upon on the second ballot.^^ A bill 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1346. 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1402; Winkler, "The Seat of Government 
 of Texas," as cited, 190-196, passim. 
 "Winkler, as cited, 199. 
 "lUd., 204. 
 
53 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 was drawn up embodying this decision, but it was vetoed by Presi- 
 dent Houston on the ground that the act locating the temporary 
 seat of government provided that it should remain at Houston until 
 
 Prom the foregoing it is obvious that sooner or later the loca- 
 tion of a permanent seat of government would become a political 
 issue; and this it did, along with other sectional questions, in the 
 presidential and congressional campaigns of 1838. Houston was 
 from the eastern part of the Eepublic, and it was charged that his 
 veto of the bill for locating the capital on the Colorado was due 
 to his interest in the East, as well as to a personal vanity which in- 
 fluenced him in maintaining the capital at the city of his own 
 name. After the nomination of Lamaj by members of the Senate 
 in December, 1837, and by various meetings over the State in the 
 early months of 1838, those interested in the advancement of the 
 East through the election of a President representing that section 
 petitioned General Eusk to become a candidate for the Presidency. 
 When he declined, the same persons appealed to P. W. Grayson, 
 who consented to make the race. His death during the campaign 
 eliminated the strongest representative of the East, and led to the 
 almost unopposed election of Lamar.^° 
 
 The Matagorda Bulletin took the lead in advancing the claims 
 of the West to the capital. On March 7, 1838, the editor wrote: 
 
 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 
 flattering accounts of the emigration which is now pouring into 
 the interior, with a rapidity altogether unparalleled in the settle- 
 ment of the country. The new comers we understand are nearly 
 all farmers, and are now making extensive preparations to culti- 
 vate 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. 
 
 Ir, advocating the election of Lamar to the presidency, the 
 editor on March 28, wrote as follows: 
 
 But above all, the character and qualifications of the next chief 
 iriagistrate of the Eepublic of Texas, should be extenswely and 
 
 "Second Texas Congress, Third Session, Bouie Journal, 162, 163. 
 '^Telegraph and Texas Register, May 19 and 26, 1838. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 53 
 
 favourably known, to the people of the United States. Emigra- 
 tion, which is so earnestly desired by every good and patriotic 
 citizen, and which alone can hasten the rising greatness of this 
 flourishing republic, will be checked or promoted by the character 
 of the man whom we shall elevate to that distinguished office. 
 
 On August 34, 1838, a correspondent of the Matagorda Bulletin 
 urged the election of George Sutherland as senator from Matagorda, 
 saying that he was a true representative of the West, and that he 
 had supported strongly the location of the seat of government on 
 the Colorado in the preceding Congress. "The Seat of Govern- 
 ment," he continued, 
 
 will be permanently located during the next two years; and no 
 measure can be so big with consequences to the West, and particu- 
 larly to the citizens of this Senatorial District as its location on 
 the Colorado. It wall promote emigration to the West, thereby 
 giving protection to the frontier settlements, and enhancing the 
 value of our lands. It vpill also increase most rapidly the settle- 
 ment of the lands of the Colorado, and of the country west of it, 
 thereby increasing the capital and interest of that section of the 
 country, which will result in important public improvements, in- 
 creasing the, facilities of commerce and trade. 
 
 Early in the session of the Congress which assembled on Novem- 
 ber 5, 1838, efforts began to secure the permanent location of the 
 seat of government. By January 14, 1839, a bill had passed 
 through Congress and been approved by the President embodying 
 the desires of the advocates of a western location. 
 
 This act, as had been the case in the earlier acts, created a com- 
 mission consisting of five men, two to be elected by the Senate and 
 three by the House, and it was their duty to select a site for the 
 location of the capital at some point between the Trinity and Colo- 
 rado rivers, and above the old San Antonio road. The name of 
 the site was to be Austin. The commissioners were to select not 
 less than one nor more than four leagues of land for the site, and 
 if it could not be obtained out of the public domain or by donation, 
 they were empowered to purchase it, being limited to the price of 
 three dollars per acre. They were to enter into a bond with good 
 security of one hundred thousand dollars. ^^ 
 
 The commissioners, A. C. Horton and I. W. Burton for the Sen- 
 ate, and William Menifee, Isaac Campbell and Louis P. Cooke 
 
 ^Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 161. 
 
54 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 from the House, were elected on January 15th and 16th.^^ Im- 
 mediately after the adjournment of Congress on the 24th the com- 
 missioners proceeded to their work, and they reported on April 13 
 their selection of the town of Waterloo on the Colorado at the foot 
 of the mountains. 
 
 It is likely that Lamar exercised a determining influence in the 
 selection of the present Austin as the permanent seat of govern- 
 ment. At the beginning of his administration the Congress was 
 practically unanimous in his favor, and there is no doubting his 
 influence with its members during the early sessions. Being Vice- 
 President during the preceding administration he was well placed 
 to judge of public sentiment as it expressed itself in Congress ; and 
 it had become apparent that a more western location than Houston 
 was desired. It seemed to be the general impression that a position 
 on the Colorado would be chosen, but the exact site was not antici- 
 pated. The following extract from an article by an "old settler," 
 Judge A. W. Terrell, indicates that Lamar first examined and rec- 
 ommended the site chosen. 
 
 General Lamar, in the autumn of 1837 or 1838, weary with 
 official duties, came to the upper Colorado on a buffalo hunt. He 
 procured an escort of six rangers at the old fort that stood in Port 
 Prairie, six miles below where Austin now is. Among them were 
 James 0. Rice and William Avery, both of whom long afterwards 
 became my clients. Prom them and from the Eev. Edward Pon- 
 taine (a great-grandson of Patrick Henry), then the Episcopal 
 minister in Austin, who for years was my friend and neighbor, I 
 learned what I am about to state regarding Lamar's buffalo hunt 
 and other matters. 
 
 Jacob Harrell was then the only white frontier settler where 
 Austin is located, and no white men lived on the waters of the 
 Colorado above him. His cabin, and a stockade made of split 
 logs to protect his horses from the Indians, were built at the mouth 
 of Shoal Creek, near the river ford. There Lamar and Pontaine 
 (who was his private secretary), and their ranger escort camped 
 for the night, and were awakened next morning early by Jake 
 Harrell's little son, who told them that the prairie was full of 
 buffalo. Lamar and his men were soon in the saddle, and after 
 killing all the buffalo they wanted were assembled by a recall 
 sounded by the bugler on the very hill where now stands the State 
 Capitol building. Lamar, while looking from that hill on the 
 valley covered with wild rye, — the mountains up the river, and the 
 
 '"Third Texas Congress, Senate Journal, 108; House Journal, 358. 
 
Presidential AdmmistraUon : Domestic Affairs 55 
 
 charming view to the south, remarked, "This should be the seat 
 of future Empire." . . . 
 
 When afterwards in 1839 Lamar was president he approved the 
 Act of Congress of January 16, 1839, which provided for the com- 
 missioners to select a site for the Capital. He appointed among 
 them A. C. Hcrtonr' whom 1 knew quite well, and instructed 
 them to go to Jake Harrell's cabin and look carefully at that loca- 
 tion. Fontaine was present when the President talked to the Com- 
 missioners, and thought that Lamars admiration of the ground 
 near Harrell's cabin had much to do with the report of the Com- 
 
 Wliether or not this account represents the facts, I am unable 
 to say. It is true, however, that in the report of the commissioners 
 of their choice of a site the defense of their selection was based on 
 two of the most prominent of Lamar's policies, the protection of 
 the frontier and the necessity for securing the Santa Fe trade. It 
 will be remembered that the commissioners were limited to a point 
 between the Trinity and Colorado rivers north of the San Antonio 
 road. Stating that there was no great choice between the two 
 rivers, they said that the town of Waterloo was more favorable in 
 their opinion than a point on the Brazos; and then they showed 
 their attitude to be in harmony with that of Lamar with regard 
 to frontier defense when they said: 
 
 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 one river as upon the other, being also 
 of the opinion that within a short period of time following the loca- 
 tion 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 Bison. 
 
 The commissioners anticipated the time when a great thorough- 
 fare should be established between Santa Fe and the Texas sea- 
 ports, and between Eed Eiver and Matamoras, and the two routes 
 would intersect almost exactly at the seat chosen. It is certain 
 that Lamar had this feature in mind when the commissioners left 
 Houston on their journey of inspection. William Jefferson Jones 
 
 ^This is an error. The Commissioners were elected by the two houses 
 of Congress. 
 
 '*A. W. Terrell, "The City of Austin from 1839 to 1865," in Texas His- 
 torical Association Quarterly, XIV, 113-114. 
 
56 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 was in Houston some time in January, just before going to his 
 station in the army which was being organized at Bastrop. He 
 had discussed with Lamar the importance of the Santa F6 trade, 
 and after leaving Houston had written to the secretary of war 
 along the same lines. On February 8, 1839, he wrote Lamar re- 
 iterating his statements with regard to the Santa Fe trade, and 
 declaring that he had no doubt that the seat of government would 
 be located at the town of "Waterloo.^^ The known interest of Lamar 
 in frontier defense and the Santa Fe trade, together with the re- 
 port by the commissioners favoring the location for those reasons, 
 indicates that there was a close understanding between the Presi- 
 dent and the commissioners.^" 
 
 At the time of its selection Waterloo, which was renamed Austin, 
 was on the very outskirts of settlement. There were in the town 
 itself, according to the Matagorda Bulletin for April 15, 1839, 
 only four families, and in another settlement a few miles distant 
 there were about twenty. According to this same paper, however, 
 immigration was not slow in beginning to flow into that part of 
 the State.^'^ This paper, in again commending the selection of 
 Waterloo, on August 1, 1839, said: 
 
 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 beauti- 
 ful 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. 
 
 The Telegraph and Texas Register, June 13, 1839, found that 
 the location of the capital in that quarter of the frontier had de- 
 terred many citizens who had been doubtful about remaining on the 
 frontier from leaving. 
 
 Not all the newspapers approved the choice, however. The people 
 east of the Trinity would have been glad to have had the capital 
 nearer the center of the State. The Houston Morning Star found 
 it objectionable because it possessed none of the advantages of a 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 1049. 
 
 ^'The full report of the commissioners can be found in Winkler, "Seat 
 of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical Quarterly, X, 217-220. 
 "Matagorda Bulletin, May 2, 1839. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 57 
 
 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.'"* 
 
 The original act providing for the location of the capital had 
 not provided for the time of removal from Houston to Austin. 
 This was remedied a few days later by a supplementary act requir- 
 ing the President to proceed, with his cabinet officers, and the 
 archives of the government, to the point selected, previous to Oc- 
 tober 1, and that the next Congress should convene there on the 
 second Monday of the following November.^* 
 
 The report of the locating commissioners was anticipated by the 
 appointment of Edwin Waller as government agent for the new 
 city of Austin. He was to survey the lots, provide for their sale 
 at auction, and after this was accomplished, he was to superintend 
 the construction of the necessary public buildings. Waller was 
 entirely successful in all these duties. The surveying began on 
 May 21, the sale of lots began on August 1, and by the time the 
 officers of the government arrived in October a sufficient number of 
 buildings were completed to house the various departments com- 
 fortably.'" 
 
 President Lamar and a part of his cabinet arrived in Austin on 
 October 17 and were received with elaborate celebrations.^^ The 
 Congress assembled as provided for on the second Monday in 
 November, and there was a quorum present the first day. Presi- 
 dent Lamar sent in his message on ISTovember 13, and stated that 
 he had great pleasure in meeting the representatives of the people 
 for the first time assembled at the permanent seat of government. 
 He congratulated them and the country in general that a question 
 which had so deeply excited the national legislature had thus been 
 put at rest ; and sincerely hoped that no similar subject would arise 
 in future to abstract their attention from the harmonious consid- 
 eration of such matters of general and local policy as might be 
 regarded essential to the prosperity of the nation. "That the se- 
 
 ^Morning Star, July 27, 1839. 
 ^"Gammel, Laws of Texas, II. 
 
 "Winkler, "The Seat of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical 
 Association Quarterly, X, 227-233, passim. 
 ^Austin City Gazette, October 30, 1839. 
 
58 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 lection of the site now occupied will command universal appro- 
 bation," he said, "is not to be expected. A diversity of opinion 
 upon such subjects is the unavoidable result of the diversity of 
 interests and local prejudices which must necessarily exist in a 
 country so widely extended as ours." He showed his real attitude 
 towards the question when he continued: 
 
 But its geographical position, the apparent healthfulness 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 maratime frontier, and its adaptation to pro- 
 tection against Indian depradations, thereby inviting settlements 
 to one of the finest portions of our couatry, [afford] ample proofs 
 of the judgement and fidelity of the commissioners, an abundant 
 reason to approve their choice. That you and others vnll experi- 
 ence some privations which might have been spared if the location 
 had been made in a section of the country of greater population 
 and improvement is certainly true; but I cannot believe that a 
 people who have voluntarily exchanged the ease and luxuries of 
 plentiful houses, for the toil and privations of a wilderness will 
 repine at the sacrifice of a few personal comforts which the good 
 of the nation may require of them.^^ 
 
 It will be remembered that no provision had been made for the 
 commissioners to report back to the Congress their findings with 
 regard to their location of the capital site ; and before the Congress 
 even met the government had been removed from Houston to 
 Austin. Those opposed to the location selected attempted to se- 
 cure a reconsideration by introducing and supporting a bill pro- 
 viding for a plebiscite on the fourth Monday in May, 1840, to 
 determine whether or not the seat of government should be located, 
 for a period of twenty-five years, at Austin or at the point on the 
 Brazos rejected by the commissioners. This led to an excited de- 
 bate in which Houston, who had just taken his seat as a repre- 
 sentative from San Augustine, was one of the most conspicuous 
 figures. The enacting clause was stricken out by a vote of 21 to 
 16, a strictly sectional vote. To add to the appearance of per- 
 manency the same Congress passed an act for constructing public 
 buildings as nearly fireproof as possible.'^ 
 
 The seat of government continued at Austin until the close of 
 
 '''Lamar Papers, No. 361. 
 
 "'Winkler, "The Seat of Government of Texas," in Texas Historical 
 Association Quarterly, X, 244. 
 
Presidential Administration: Domestic Affairs 59 
 
 Lamar's administration. Shortly after the inauguration of Hous- 
 ton for his second term in December, 1841, he removed the govern- 
 ment to Houston without the consent of Congress, and in spite of 
 the demand of the citizens of Austin for a return of the govern- 
 ment, he exercised his functions elsevfhere. The citizens of Austin 
 resisted successfully the removal of the archives, and after the con- 
 clusion of Houston's second administration the government re- 
 turned permanently to the city of Austin. 
 
60 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Chapter IV 
 
 FEONTIEK DEFENCE 
 
 I. Relations with Miscellaneous Indian Tribes 
 
 In order to make clear the policy of Lamar in dealing with the 
 Indians, it will be necessary to discuss in some detail the methods 
 used by his predecessors in attempting to keep the peace. It will ' 
 not be necessary, however, to give a detailed history of the various 
 tribes which occupied Texas. It will suffice at this point to say 
 that the usual classification used during the days of the Eepublic 
 depended upon the degree of civilization adopted, and the terms 
 ''Wild Indians" and ''Civilized Indians" were considered as suffi- 
 ciently descriptive. Another grouping that was made was the in- 
 digenous and immigrant, the latter term meaning the more civil- 
 ized tribes which had come from the United States, and including 
 the Cherokee and associated bands.^ 
 
 There was an Indian question in Texas from the time that the 
 first Anglo-Americans began to arrive. For a dozen years after 
 Austin brought his first colonists to Texas, the chronicles are full 
 of Indian atrocities. The year 1833, Yoakum tells us, was the 
 first in which the settlers had not been attacked often by the 
 Indians, and their failure to attack that year was due tO' the fact 
 that the Comanches and Shawnees had had a great battle in which 
 so many were killed that they were unable to undertake a war 
 against the whites.^ In April, 1833, a convention met at San 
 Felipe to petition for a separation of Texas and Coahuila. It was 
 asserted that Texas was such a great distance from the center of 
 government that no adequate means of protection against the In- 
 dians presented themselves, and this was considered a sufficient 
 reason for the establishment of a separate state government for 
 Texas. The memorial forwarded to Congress by the Convention, 
 
 'H. E. Bolton, Atfianase de M6zidres and the Louisiana-Texas Frontier, 
 1768-1780, pp. 17-122, has an extensive discussion of the indigenous In- 
 dians of Texas. T. M. Marshall, A History of the Western Boundary of 
 the Louisiana Purchase, 124-140, is a convenient brief account of the 
 location and history of the tribes. 
 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, I, 310. 
 
Frontier Defence 61 
 
 which closed April 13, 1833, is a gloomy one. It was written 
 by David G. Burnet. After enumerating many evils from which 
 the people were suffering, due to the lack of a strong local gov- 
 ernment, it declared: 
 
 We do not mean to attribute these specific disasters to the union 
 with Coahuila, for we know they transpired long anterior to the 
 consummation of that union. But we do maintain that the same 
 political causes, the same want of protection and encouragement, 
 the same mal-organization and impotency of the local and minor 
 faculties of the government, the same improvident indifference 
 to the peculiar and vital interests of Texas, exists now that oper- 
 ated then. Bexar is still exposed to the depredations of her 
 ancient enemies, the insolent, vindictive, and faithless Comanches. 
 Her citizens are still massacred, their cattle destroyed or driven 
 away, and their very habitations threatened, by a tribe of erratic 
 and undisciplined Indians, whose audacity has derived confidence 
 from success, and whose long-continued aggressions have invested 
 them with a fictitious and excessive terror. Her schools are neg- 
 lected, her churches desolate, the sounds of human industry are 
 almost hushed, and the voice of gladness and festivity is converted 
 into wailing and lamentation, by the disheartening and multiplied 
 evils which surround her defenceless population. Goliad is still 
 kept in trepidation; is paralyzed in all her efforts for improve- 
 ment; and is harassed in all her borders by the predatory incur- 
 sions of the Wacoes, and other insignificant bands of savages, 
 whom a weU-organized local government would soon subdue and 
 exterminate.^ 
 
 Santa Anna, who was, in effect, dictator in Mexico when Stephen 
 F. Austin presented this memorial, refused the request, imprisoned 
 Austin, and in October, 1834, announced his purpose to send four 
 thousand troops to San Antonio, "for the protection of the coast 
 and frontier.-"^ In March, 1835, Congress decreed the reduction 
 of the militia throughout the Eepublic to one man for every five 
 hundred inhabitants, and the disarming of the remainder. 
 
 Troops dispatched to Texas began to arrive early in 1835, and 
 conflicts with the settlers soon began. At Anahuac a collector, 
 backed by a small body of troops, attempted to collect tariff duties, 
 which the Texans resented.' This situation, together with the 
 
 'Yoakum, History of Texas, I, 475. 
 
 *E. C. Barker, in Texas Historical Association Quarterly, VII, 250; 
 Brown, History of Texas, I, 275. 
 "Barker, op. cit., 250. 
 
62 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 hostility of the Indians throughout the year, led to the creation of 
 cominittees of safety and correspondence, which led to the calling 
 of the Permanent Council in October. The Columbia committee 
 wrote to J. B. Miller, the political chief of the Brazos Department 
 suggesting that each municipality be required to furnish twenty- 
 five men for use in an Indian campaign, to which Miller replied 
 that he was already taking steps to punish the Indians.® The 
 committee of San Felipe issued a circular on September 13, in 
 which it was stated that the committee considered it important 
 that the just and legal rights of the civilized Indians should be 
 protected, 'Tjiit not having any certain information on the subject, 
 they can only recommend it to your consideration."' 
 
 The spirit exhibited in the letter of the San Felipe committee 
 of safety became the spirit of the Permanent Council, and was 
 adopted by each of the revolutionary bodies that governed Texas 
 until March, 1836. The Permanent Council on October 18 
 adopted the report of a committee for appointing three commis- 
 sioners to the civilized Indians. The commissioners appointed 
 were Peter J. Menard, Jacob Garrett, and Joseph L. Hood. Sev- 
 eral of the Indian chiefs had been invited to convene with the 
 whites in their Consultation for the purpose of having their claims 
 to lands properly adjusted by that body, but they failed to attend, 
 and the three commissioners were therefore instructed to proceed 
 to their villages and ascertain the cause of their grievances, and 
 to assure them that their case would receive prompt attention as 
 soon as the Consultation should reconvene. "This committee are 
 of the opinion," said the report, 
 
 that there have been unwarrantable encroachments made upon the 
 lands occupied by the said Indians; therefore be it resolved by the 
 permanent council of Texas now in session, that Peter J. Menard, 
 Jacob Garrett, and Joseph L. Hood, be appointed commissioners 
 for the purpose of holding' consultations with the different tribes 
 of Indians, and giving them such assurances as may be necessary 
 for the advancement of their rights and privileges as citizens of 
 Texas, and for the purpose of transacting such other business as 
 may be necessary to promote the cause of the people of Texas. 
 
 '"Texas Revolutionary Documents," in Southern Historical Association 
 Publications, VII, 89, 90. 
 'lUd., VIII, 20. 
 
Frontier Defence 63 
 
 It was made the duty of the commissioners to co-operate at all 
 times with the local committees of safety.^ 
 
 At the same time, however, the Permanent Council provided a 
 system of ranger service to keep the Indians in check. On Octo- 
 ber 17 a resolution was adopted authorizing Silas M. Parker to 
 employ and superintend twenty-five rangers to guard the fron- 
 tiers between the Brazos and Trinity rivers; Garrison Greenwood 
 was authorized and required to employ and superintend ten rangers 
 on the east side of the Trinity; and D. B. Fryar to employ twenty- 
 five rangers for service between the Brazos and Colorado rivers. 
 A committee of five men was appointed to report on the details 
 of this scheme. The committee reported on the same day, and 
 their report wa? adopted by the Council. The superintendents 
 of the rangers from the Colorado to the Brazos and from the 
 Brazos to the Trinity were to make their place of rendezvous at 
 the AVaco village, on the Brazos; those on the east of the Trinity 
 were to rendezvous at Houston. The superintendents were to be 
 vigilant in carrying the provisions of the resolution into effect, and 
 were to have the authoritv to contract for ammunition, and to- 
 draw on the general council for pa3'ment. The companies were to 
 select officers, whose duty it was to make reports to the super- 
 intendents every fifteen days, and the superintendent was to report 
 to the General Council every thirty davs. The companies ranging 
 from the Colorado to the Brazos and from the Brazos to the Trinity 
 were to rendezvous at the Waco village every fifteen days unless, 
 engaged in pursuing Indians, and the companies were to unite 
 whenever their ofiicers considered it necessary. Finally, the of- 
 ficers were to be "particular not to interfere with friendly tribes 
 of Indians on our borders."" 
 
 The Consultation, which succeeded the Permanent Council on 
 November 3, took further steps to secure the good will of the 
 Indians. On the day before it adjourned a resolution was adopted 
 in which the claims of the Indians to the lands they occupied in 
 East Texas was recognized, and the Governor and General Council 
 were advised to send commissioners to form a treaty with them. 
 On November 15, Henry Smith, who had been elected provisional 
 governor, advised the carrying into effect of the recommendation 
 
 'Texas Historical Association Quarterly, IX, 288. 
 
 '"Journal of the Permanent Council," in Texas Historical Association 
 Quarterly, VII, 260-262. 
 
64 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 ■of the Consultation. On the 22d Smith was empowered by the 
 General Council to appoint Sam Houston, John Forbes, and John 
 Cameron as commissioners to the Indians. The commissioners 
 proceeded to the village of Bowl, military chief of the Cherokees> 
 and on February 23, 1836, a treaty was drawn up agreeable to 
 the wishes of the Cherokees.^" 
 
 During the progress of the War of Independence the western 
 frontier was evacuated by the people before the advancing Mexi- 
 can army, hence there is no record of Indian wars in the West. 
 In the East the civilized tribes were kept quiet partly through the 
 promises held out to them by the Permanent Council and the 
 Consultation for a defi.nite settlement of their claims. At the 
 same time, however, the Texans deliberately attempted to create 
 the impression in the minds of officers of the United States that 
 there was danger of an Indian uprising in the East, and it was 
 their success in this propaganda that caused General Gaines to 
 send some United States troops to Nacogdoches in the summer of 
 1836. By the treaty between the United States and Mexico both 
 nations were to undertake to keep their Indians quiet, and it was 
 ;this treaty that made possible the intervention of the United States 
 in the affairs of Texas. It is interesting to notice that the col- 
 •onists had attempted to form an alliance with the Indians in the 
 spring of 1836." 
 
 With the defeat of the Mexicans in the battle of San Jacinto, 
 April 21, 1836, and the subsequent withdrawal of all enemy 
 forces from Texas, those who had fled before the invaders returned 
 to their homes. Besides, the settlers in search of new lands pushed 
 -out into territory regarded by the Indians as their hunting 
 grounds, and the surveying parties early became an object of sus- 
 picion, the surveyor's compasses being known by the Indians as 
 "land stealers."^^ The Indians were very troublesome and threat- 
 
 "Marshall, A History of the Western Boundary of the Louisiana Pur- 
 chase, 139. 
 
 The relations with the Cherokees, their claims to lands in East Texas, 
 and their final expulsion from Texas, is so different from the relations 
 with the other Indian tribes that I shall treat it in a separate section, 
 contenting myself here with a reference to that tribe only when they 
 come into the natural development of the subject. 
 
 "E. C. Barker, "The United States and Mexico, 1835-1837," in The 
 Mississippi Valley Bistorioal Review, I, 20, 21. 
 
 "W. D. Wood, "History of Leon County," in Texas Historical Associa- 
 tion Quarterly, IV. 204. 
 
Frontier Defence 65 
 
 ening in the latter part of 1836 and throughout 1837. President 
 Uurnet ]\ad placed Captain Robert M. Coleman in charge of a 
 ranging force divided into three or four detachments. One de- 
 tachment was on the Trinity, one at the Palls of the Brazos, one 
 at the Three Forks of Little Eiver, and one near the mouth of 
 Walnut Creek on the Colorado. These detachments fought nu- 
 merous battles with the Indians. 
 
 On January 7, 1837, a detachment of fourteen men and boys 
 under Lieutenant George B. Erath fought one hundred Indians 
 eight miles west of Cameron, killing fifteen. A short time later 
 a battle was fought near where Austin now stands, in which the 
 Indians were defeated. Several men were murdered at different 
 times in Lavaca County. In Fayette County John Gr. Robison, a 
 member of Congress, and his brother, who was visiting him from 
 the United States, were killed. On the Trinity, west of Palestine, 
 David Faulkenberry, his son Evan, and Columbus Anderson, were 
 kiUed. Massacres occurred during this year at various places in 
 Bast Texas.i= 
 
 The attitude of President Houston, in spite of the evident un- 
 popularity of that policy, was one of conciliation throughout his 
 administration; and in the early part of his administration he 
 had the sympathy and support of Congress. In a message to the 
 Senate, November 6, 1836, shortly after his inauguration as Pres- 
 ident, he said, 
 
 The friendship and alliance of many of our border Tribes of 
 Indians will be of the utmost importance to this G-ovemment, keep- 
 ing them tranquil and pacific, and if need shall require it, afford- 
 ing us useful auxiliaries. 
 
 He suggested the advisability of entering into commercial treaties 
 with them, and announced the appointment of commissioners to 
 conclude articles of peace, friendship, and intercourse.^* 
 
 In an act to protect the frontier, approved on December 5, 
 1836, the Congress took a middle ground between the advocates 
 of extermination and conciliation. The President was required 
 to raise, with as little delay as possible, a battalion of mounted 
 riflemen, to consist of two hundred and eighty men for the pro- 
 
 ^'Brown, History of Texas, II, 129. 
 
 "Secret Journals of the Senate of the Republic of Texas (First Bien- 
 nial Report of the Texas Library and Historical Commission), 19. Here- 
 after this is referred to as Secret Journals. 
 
66 Mirabgau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 tection of the frontier. The term of service was to be twelve 
 months. The President was also authorized to order out such 
 number of the militia as the exigencies of the case might require. 
 He was further directed to have such block houses, forts, and trad- 
 ing houses erected, as, in his judgment, might be necessary to 
 prevent Indian depredations. And finally, it was to be the duty 
 of the President to enter into such negotiations and treaties as 
 might secure peace to the frontiers; he was to have power to ap- 
 point agents to live among the Indians, and to distribute presents 
 as he deemed necessary, not to exceed in amount twenty thousand 
 dollars.^" That no steps had been taken for the organization of 
 the mounted battalion before the middle of the following year, is 
 indicated by a resolution, approved June 7, 1837, authorizing the 
 President to absent himself from the seat of government for thirty 
 days "to organize and set on foot the corps of mounted gun men, 
 authorized to be raised by the act passed the present session of 
 congress for the protection of our northern frontier."^' On De- 
 cember 10, 1836, a joint resolution was approved authorizing and 
 requiring the President to take such measures "as in his judgment 
 vnll effect the release or redemption of our unfortunate prisoners, 
 captured by and in the possession of hostile Indians, said to be 
 on the waters of Eed Kiver, either by calling for and sending vol- 
 unteers against said Indians, or by purchase, treaty or otherwise."^'' 
 In the spring of 1837 some Mexican agents visited the various 
 Indians on the frontier, promising them arms, ammunition, all 
 the booty taken, and peaceful possession of the frontier after the 
 Americans were driven out, and by these promises many Indians 
 were induced to join the Mexicans. Houston attempted in June 
 to organize a mounted force for the punishment of the Indians. 
 He ordered Lieutenant A. C. Horton, of San Augustine, to raise 
 a force of one hundred and twenty men and as many more vol- 
 unteers as were necessary to proceed against the Indians. Nothing 
 seems to have come of this, however.^-"* On November 10, a body 
 of eighteen rangers fell in with a band of one hundred and fifty 
 hostile Indians, and after a long battle the Indians were defeated, 
 leaving fifty dead, while the loss of the Texans was only Lieu- 
 
 "Laws of the Bepuilic of Texas, I, 53-54. 
 
 "Hid., 244. 
 
 "Z6id., 74. 
 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 228. 
 
Frontier Defence 67 
 
 tenant Miles and eight men.^» That was the most serious attempt 
 to chastise the Indians during the year. 
 
 In spite of the constant reports of Indian attacks oa defence- 
 less settlers, Houston showed by his message to Congress, November 
 21, 1837, that he still considered conciliation the best policy to pur- 
 sue. It was of interest to the country, he said, that the relations 
 with the Indians be placed upon a basis of lasting peace and 
 friendship. Convinced of that truth, it had been his policy to seek 
 every possible means to accomplish that object, and give security 
 tx) the frontier; and he considered the indications more favorable 
 than they had been at any time before Texas assumed that atti- 
 tude. "Measures are in progress with the several tribes," he con- 
 tinued, 
 
 which with the aid of suitable appropriations by Congress, may 
 enable us to attain the objects of peace and friendly intercourse. 
 Apprised of these facts, it is desirable that the citizens of Texas 
 should so deport themselves, as to become the aggressors in no 
 case, but to evince a conciliatory disposition whenever it can be 
 done consistently with justice and humanity. . . . The un- 
 deviating opinion of the Executive has been, that from the estab- 
 lishment of trading houses on the frontier (under prudent regu- 
 lations), and the appointment of capable and honest agents, the 
 happiest results might be anticipated for the country. The in- 
 tercourse between the citizens and Indians should be regulated by 
 acts of Congress which experience will readily suggest."" 
 
 In carrying out this policy he insisted on the ratification by the 
 Senate of the treaty dravm up with the Cherokees in 1836, and 
 the running of the boundary line under that treaty."^ He advised 
 the settlers to stay at home and not tempt the Indians to hostile 
 attacks ; and it was charged by a newspaper in the heat of a polit- 
 ical campaign in 1841, that when a committee of men from Eob- 
 ertson and Milam Counties asked for protection for the frontier, 
 he answered that "he hoped every man, woman and child that 
 settled Forth of the San Antonio Eoad would be tomahawked."*^ 
 
 The year 1838 was not different from the preceding year. A 
 committee on October 13, 1837, had reported that several of the 
 tribes of Indians were at peace, and advised the President to at- 
 
 ^'Telegraph and Texas Register, December 23, 1837. 
 
 -"Crane, Life and Select Literary Remains of Sam Houston, 292. 
 
 '^Secret Journals, 35, 36, 37. 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, August 25, 1841. 
 
68 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 tempt to make a treaty with the Comanches. At the same time 
 they denied the right of the Cherokees to the land which they 
 occupied.^" This was not done, however, and the Comanches con- 
 tinued to harass the western frontier. A few instances are here 
 given to illustrate the conditions. On August 10 Captain Henry 
 W. Karnes with twenty-five men was attacked by 200 Comanches, 
 and after a furious fight drove them off with a loss of twenty of 
 the assailants. On the Eio Frio, about the same time, a surveying 
 party was attacked, and several of the party wounded. On Octo- 
 ber 19 a surveying party seven miles west of San Antonio was 
 attacked and the surveyors killed. In October also occurred the 
 surveyors' fight in Navarro County, when twenty-three men fought 
 several hundred Indians from 9 o'clock in the morning till 13 
 o'clock at night.^* 
 
 In the summer of 1838 the Indians of the East became restless, 
 due partly to the efforts of Mexican agents, and partly to the 
 failure of the Senate to ratify the treaty with the Cherokees. In 
 August took place the curious Nacogdoches rebellion. On August 
 4 a party of citizens who went in search of some horses that had 
 been stolen found the trail of a large number of Mexicans. On 
 the Yth it was reported that there were a hundred or more Mexi- 
 cans encamped about the Angelina under the command of Na- 
 thaniel Norris, Vicente Cordova, and Cruz. On the 10th it was 
 reported that the Mexicans had been joined by 300 Indians, and 
 that their force then amounted to 600. The same day they sent a 
 letter to President Houston disclaiming allegiance to Texas, and 
 set out for the Cherokee nation. Major Augustin was detached 
 with 150 men to follow the rebels, while General Eusk marched 
 with the main force of the Texans to the village of Bowl, mili- 
 tary chief of the Cherokees. Before reaching there he found that 
 the insurgents had dispersed.^^ 
 
 No satisfactory explanation has ever been made of the purposes 
 that the Mexicans had in mind in this rebellion. On August 20, 
 a Mexican by the name of Pedro Julian Miracle was killed on the 
 Eed Eiver, and on his body were found instructions from General 
 Vicente Filisola directed to the Mexicans and friendly Indians in 
 
 "Secret Journals, 75-79. 
 '*Brown, History of Texas, II, 143. 
 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 245-246; Bancroft, North Mexican, 
 States a/nd Texas, II, 320; Brown, History of Texas, II, 143. 
 
Frontier Defence 69 
 
 Texas, together witJi a diary which Miracle had kept during his 
 joumey into Texas. The instructions and the diarv taken together 
 would indicate that Miracle was visiting the Mexicans and Indians 
 in the region of Nacogdoches for the purpose of fomenting a con- 
 spiracy, and it was probably due to his activities that the Mexicans 
 decided to revolt. One of the documents found on the body of 
 Miracle was entitled "Private instructions for the captains of 
 friendly Indians of Texas, by his Excellency the General-in-chief 
 Vicente Pilisola," and it was apparently aimed to control his activi- 
 ties with the Indians. He was to invite the principal chiefs to a 
 meeting and propose to them that they and their friends should 
 take up arms in defence of the Mexican territory in Texas. After- 
 wards, he was to meet several from each tribe, and distribute 
 among them powder, lead, and tobacco, "in the usual manner." 
 
 You will make them understand that as soon as they have agreed 
 in taking up arms, they will be rewarded according to their 
 merits; and that so soon as they have taken possession of the 
 places that I have mentioned to you, you will advise me by an 
 extraordinary courier, giving me a detailed account of the strength 
 of the Mexican force, and of the Indian tribes, with the plan of 
 attack, that I may be enabled to direct the forces that are to leave 
 from this place to the assistance of those who are to operate in 
 that quarter. Make them understand that as soon as the cam- 
 paign is over, they will be able to proceed to Mexico, to pay their 
 respects to the Supreme Government, who will send a commis- 
 sioner to give to each possession of the land they are entitled to. 
 
 A second document, apparently written by Miracle himself, was 
 addressed, "Companions and friends." In it he called upon the 
 Indians to give their service to their country during the campaign 
 which was about to take place, and declared that he had been in- 
 structed by the general-in-chief to pay particular attention to 
 their behavior during the campaign and report it to him. "As 
 soon as the news of our operations are made known in Matamoras," 
 he ended, "his excellency the general-in-chief will make a forced 
 march towards the point where our troops may be, so that in the 
 event of any sudden reverse, you will be aided, and a central posi- 
 tion fixed upon for your reunion, to be headquarters during the 
 remainder of the campaign." 
 
 According to the memorandum book which was found on the 
 body of Miracle, he left Matamoras on May 39, and after a lei- 
 surely journey, accompanied by Mexican and Indian followers, he 
 
70 Miraheau Buonaparte La/mar 
 
 arrived on the Trinity and made camp on July 2. An extract 
 from his diary will explain to some extent his activity. 
 
 July 4. Started for "Plazeta creek." Soon after we discov- 
 ered the farms of the Choctaw Indians; we directed our course 
 towards the rancho of Buenavista. 
 
 July 5. — Don Vicente Cordova presented himself and read the 
 communication of his excellency the general-in-chief, Don Vicente 
 Filisola. 
 
 July 7. — We expect to meet the Indian chiefs or captains. 
 
 July 8. — About three o'clock in the afternoon Guimon, Boll, and 
 their interpreters, made their appearance; but, on account of the 
 rain, nothing was done. 
 
 July 9. — At seven o'clock we started to a rancho to hold a con- 
 sultation with the Indians. We read the communication of his 
 excellency the general-in-chief; the interpreters being inefficient, 
 nothing was done. They left us without any imderstanding, but 
 are to meet them in ten days, when they will determine. They left 
 an Indian to conduct me to Boll's house; which was done, and we 
 reached that place drenched with rain. I am to take the first 
 opportunity to speak to Boll, to show him by private instructions; 
 but I can do nothing as yeti He has sent me to another of his 
 houses where I could conceal myself; for he said that some Amer- 
 icans were coming with a communication from Houston, the con- 
 tents of which I have not learned. Nothing can be done without 
 trouble. [Prom the ninth until the seventeenth Miracle remained 
 concealed.] 
 
 July 17 and 18. — In the afternoon of these days several Indians 
 made their appearance for the meeting. 
 
 July 19. — Boll, Dillmoor, and several other captains, came in; 
 but the non-arrival of the Kickapooa delayed our meeting. 
 
 July 30. — The meeting took placA. War was agreed upon as 
 soon as circumstances would permit, and as speedily as possible; 
 the amount of our force to be taken immediately; including 
 Nacogdoches we have 540 men. At five o'clock p. m. Capt. Sa- 
 guano began to raise objections to the making of any movement 
 until the arrival of the army in the country when war could be 
 carried on with energy; but finally it was resolved that our force 
 should be in readiness at a moment's warning. At five o'clock 
 Boll left us, and all went away, including Cordova and the people 
 of Nacogdoches, about eight o'clock in the morning. 
 
 The remainder of the diary records visits to the other tribes, 
 and comes to an end with an entry for August 8.^" 
 
 '"Copies of these documents found upon Miracle were sent to the Amer- 
 ican State Department by the Texan Minister, Anson Jones, on December 
 31, 1838, with a claim that the conditions were made worse on the border 
 
Frontier Defence 71 
 
 Lamar was aware of the conditions on the frontier, and of the 
 unpopularity of Houston's Indian policy, being informed both by 
 his own interest as a presidential candidate and by the reports of 
 his friends. On June 26, 1838, he received a letter from Reuben 
 H. Eoberts of Aransas, supporting his candidacy for the presi- 
 dency, saying that the cry of the people was for a President who 
 would protect the frontier." On July 29, William McCraven 
 wrote from San Antonio, telling of tlie dangers from Mexicans and 
 Indian marauders, and expressing the popular hope that Lamar's 
 administration woiild defend the frontier.^^ 
 
 On August 24, General Eusk wrote to Lamar from Nacogdoches 
 concerning the Cordova rebellion, as follows: 
 
 Dear Genl 
 
 I have received your letter by Col Bee for which please accept 
 my thanks You must excuse me for not having written you 
 before but recent events have crowded on me so fast that I have 
 had very little time. I will in a few days give you a full account 
 of the recent rebellion here it was a deep and well laid scheme 
 to involve the country in a general Indian war I have had great 
 difBculty in preventing it His Excellency has acted strangely 
 indeed had I been governed by his peremptory orders I have not 
 the least doubt that an Indian war would have been now raffing 
 here but a timely demonstration of force by marching six hundred 
 horsemen through their Country excited strongly that which can 
 only be depended upon in Indians their fear."" 
 
 Two days later Hugh McLeod, adjutant to General Rusk, wrote, 
 saying that the Mexicans had plotted for a general uprising of 
 Indians, and but for Rusk's promptness they might have brought 
 it about. He criticised President Houston severely for his con- 
 duet during the rebellion. "He cramped Genl Rusk in ever way," 
 he said, "vrith his orders, written here, where one could not judge 
 what was the true state of affairs at HdQrs."^" Besides these, 
 there were other letters strongly criticising the policy of Houston 
 and hoping that Lamar would adopt a different policy with re- 
 gard to the Indians. 
 
 On October 22 McLeod reported a renewal of Mexican hostili- 
 
 by the failure of the two governments to run the boundary line. They 
 appear printed in 32 Cong., 2 session, Senate Documents, No. 14, pp. 11-17. 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 753. 
 
 ''Lamar Papers, No. 772. 
 
 ""Rusk to Lamar, August 24, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 797. 
 
 ""McLeod to Lamar. August 26, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 800. 
 
72 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 ties, giving an account of the battle of Kickapoo on the 16th, and 
 on the 25th he wrote that Busk had become convinced that the 
 time had come for a campaign of extermination against all Indians 
 except the friendly ones.^'- On November 1 7, General Eusk wrote, 
 suggesting the creation of a permanent force of five hundred men 
 to operate against the Indians. At the same time he suggested 
 that Lamar demand the removal of all United States Indians under 
 the treaty of 1831 between the United States and Mexico.*^ 
 
 The inauguration of Lamar was to take place on December 10, 
 and the stage was set for a declaration of policy different from that 
 of Houston, who continued to insist that his policy was the only 
 one that promised success. Houston delivered his valedictory mes- 
 sage on November 19, and to illustrate the contrast of the attitude 
 of the outgoing to that of the incoming President, I shall give 
 his policy as he expressed it. Criticising the whites for their ag- 
 gression on the Indian lands, Houston said: 
 
 The great anxiety of our citizens to acquire land induced them 
 to adventure into the Indian hunting grounds in numbers not 
 sufficient for self-protection, and inasmuch as they met with no 
 serious opposition in the commencement of their surveying, they 
 were thrown off their guard, which afforded the Indians an oppor- 
 tunity of taking them by surprise, and hence they became victims 
 to their own indiscretion and temerity. 
 
 The executive anticipated the consequences that would result from 
 penetrating into the Indian hunting grounds, he said, and had 
 done everything in his power to prevent such a course. His per- 
 sonal remonstrances were insuificient to control the determination 
 of those whose opinions set at naught admonitions that could not 
 be legally enforced. The Indians, by gaining partial advantages, 
 were induced to form more numerous associations, that had ren- 
 dered them formidable; and occasionally acquiring spoil, they had 
 been induced to advance upon the settlements in marauding par- 
 ties, while the continued surveys within their hunting grounds 
 had so much exasperated their feelings that their invasions had 
 become formidable to the frontier. He went on to say that the 
 system of surveying lands had involved the country in all the 
 calamities that had visited the frontier, and suggested that for 
 some time to come restrictions should be placed on surveying be- 
 
 "'McLeod to Lamar, October 22 and 25, 1838, Lamar Papers, Nos. 846, 
 852. 
 
 "^Rusk to Lamar, November 17, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 876. 
 
Frontier Defence 73 
 
 yond the settlements. He concluded by censuring General Eusk 
 for alleged encroachments on the Presidential power during the 
 Cordova rebellion, and claimed that that revolt was brought about 
 by violation of the rights of the Mexicans and Indians.'^ 
 
 Lamar did not leave the country long in doubt as to his policy 
 in dealing with the Indians. "It is a cardinal principle in all 
 political associations," he said in his first message to Congress, 
 December 31, 1838, "that protection is commensurate with alle- 
 giance, and the poorest citizen, whose sequestered cabin is reared 
 on our remotest frontier, holds as sacred a claim upon the govern- 
 ment for safety and security, as does the man who lives in ease 
 and wealth in the heart of our most populous city." He was not 
 anxious to aggravate the ordinary calamities of war by inculcating 
 the harsh doctrines of lex talionis toward debased and ignorant 
 savages. War was an evil which all good people ought to strive 
 to avoid, but when it could not be avoided, it ought to be so met 
 and pursued as would best secure a speedy and lasting peace. The 
 moderation hitherto extended to the Indians on the border had 
 been answered by all the atrocious cruelties that characterize their 
 mode of warfare. His solicitude for the due protection of the 
 frontier had partially overruled his habitual repugnance to stand- 
 ing armies ; and in the disturbed state of their foreign and Indian 
 relations, the proper security of the country at large, especially 
 the peace and safety of the border settlements, seemed to require 
 the organization of a regular, permanent, and effective force. 
 
 He showed himself in harmony with the popular sentiment in 
 his remarks concerning the Indians in the East. He referred to 
 the trouble around Nacogdoches in August, and said that it was 
 not all clear to him, but that he was far from conceding that the 
 Indians, either native or immigrant, had any just cause of com- 
 plaint. He proceeded to discuss the nature of their claims to 
 lands in East Texas, showing to his satisfaction that they were 
 worthless. He was particularly severe on the Cherokees and 
 clearly foreshadowed stem measures with them. He suggested 
 the establishment of a line of military forts, announced that agents 
 were to be appointed to live in the Indian settlements, and that 
 Indians were to be required to submit to Texan criminal laws.^* 
 
 "Kennedy, Texas, II, 316. 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 1838; Lamar Papers, No. 
 361. 
 
74 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 On the day that he sent this message to Congress he received 
 from Congress, and approved, an act "to provide for the protection 
 of the JSTorthem and Western Frontier." It created a regiment 
 comprising 810 men, rank and file, divided into fifteen companies 
 of fifty-six men each. The term of service was to be three years, 
 at a compensation of sixteen dollars a month, and with a bounty 
 of thirty dollars. The regiment was to be divided into eight de- 
 tachments, stationed as follows: at or near Eed Eiver; at or near 
 the Three Forks of the Trinity ; at or near the Brazos ; at or near 
 the Colorado Biver; at or near St. Marks Eiver; at the head- 
 waters of Cibolo ; at or near Rio Frio ; and at or near the Nueces 
 Eiver. At each of these posts fortifications were to be constructed. 
 These posts were to become the center of frontier settlement. As 
 soon as the positions were selected, three leagues of land were to 
 be laid off and surveyed into lots of 160 acres each. Two of the 
 lots were to be reserved for the government for the purpose of 
 constructing fortifications, one lot was to be given to the soldiers 
 obeying the term of enlistment, and the remainder was to be given 
 in lots of 160 acres to bona fide settlers in fee simple who would 
 live there two years. The act further provided for the establish- 
 ment of sixteen trading posts.'' 
 
 On January 1, 1839, two other acts for the further protection 
 of the frontier were approved. The first authorized the Presi- 
 dent to accept eight companies of mounted volunteers for a period 
 of six months, and appropriated $75,000 to maintain that force. 
 The second appropriated the sum of $5,000 for a company of fifty- 
 six rangers for a three months period.^'' A little later another 
 act was approved providing for three companies of militia for the 
 protection of the frontier;^' and an January 34, the sum of 
 $1,000,000 was appropriated for the protection of the frontier.^' 
 
 In October conditions had become unsettled in the East again, 
 and on the 16th the army under Eusk fought a battle with a 
 mixed force of Mexicans and Indians at Kickapoo. Shortly after- 
 wards the Caddos in the Eed Eiver valley became threatening, 
 and just before Lamar's inauguration, Eusk had followed them 
 into the United States and disarmed them, thereby incurring a 
 
 ^Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 15. 
 "'Hid., 11, 30, 31. 
 ^'lUd., II, 74. 
 ^lUd., II. 84 
 
Frontier Defence 75 
 
 protest, from the government of the United States."" These ac- 
 tivities made necessary the use of the whole army in the East, and 
 the West was left unprotected. On January 2, 1839, Joseph 
 Baker, Indian agent at San Antonio, reported that the Comanehes, 
 Lipans, and Tonkawas were active, and that several children had 
 been captured at Gonzales; on the 16th, several citizens sent a 
 circular announcing Indian attacks in Robertson County, and ap- 
 pealing for aid.*" 
 
 It is not worth while to enumerate all the Indian attacks during 
 this period. It is sufficient to say that a lack of interest in fron- 
 tier protection had caused the depletion of the army, and a lack 
 of funds at the outset of Lamar's term made impossible the carry- 
 ing into effect of the ambitious program that he had announced. 
 His response to the appeals for help coming from the western 
 counties was that the lack of funds made him unable to do any- 
 thing effective in defending the frontier, but that an agent was 
 then in New Orleans attempting to sell bonds, and that he would 
 apply all the proceeds from the sale to the purchase of ammunition 
 and the payment of soldiers.*^ On February 38 he called for vol- 
 unteers from eight counties in western Texas for an Indian war. 
 Edward Burleson had been appointed a colonel in the regular 
 army and stationed at Bastrop, but recruiting was very slow, and 
 practically the only defence for the western frontier during the 
 year was by volimteer bodies, supported by what there was of a 
 regular army. It is likely, however, that the endorsement of an 
 aggressive policy by Lamar gave encouragement to the citizens in 
 their local warfare with the Indians. 
 
 By far the most troublesome Indians to the Texans were the 
 Comanehes, who had established themselves on the headwaters of 
 the Colorado before the American occupation. Throughout the 
 period of the Eepublic, and even after annexation, they made fre- 
 quent attacks on the western settlements. President Houston was 
 authorized by the Senate to make a treaty vri.th them in 1837, and 
 he invited a number of their chiefs to Houston where he had a 
 conference with them, giving them presents, and accepting their 
 
 "Indian Avoirs, 1831-1841; McLeod to Lamar, November 21, 1838, 
 Lamar Papers, No. 882; 32d Cong., 2d sess., Senate Document, No. 14, 
 p. 17. 
 
 "Lamwr Papers, Nos. 982, 1016. 
 
 "Lamar to Inhabitants of Robertson's Colony, February 22, 1839, iomor 
 Papers, No. 1084. 
 
76 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 promise to keep the peace. In 1838, during the closing year of 
 Houston's administration, no- effort was made by the government 
 to protect the frontier from the Comanches, and the President 
 went so far as to criticise the whites for provoking attacks from 
 the Indians by their imprudence. Lamar gave to the local move- 
 ments the moral support of the administration, and as far as pos- 
 sible the actual physical support. I shall follow out, as far as 
 possible, the relations with the western tribes, particularly the 
 Comanches, reserving a discussion for the relations with the immi- 
 grant tribes of East Texas until later. 
 
 In the latter part of January, 1839, three companies of volun- 
 teers were organized and placed under the command of Captain 
 John H. Moore, and ordered to move against the Comanches. 
 They marched up the Colorado. On the 14th of February they 
 came to within ten miles of the Indian village, and after dark 
 attacked a vastly superior force. After killing about thirty of the 
 Indians and losing one killed and six wounded, the Texans drew 
 off and did not renew the fight. In the latter part of February, 
 a party of Indians committed several murders in the vicinity of 
 Bastrop, and were attacked by about fifty Texans. The Texans 
 were forced to fall back, but were reinforced by General Burleson 
 with thirty men, and after a sharp battle the Indians fled. In 
 May, a force of thirty-five men under Captain John Bird discov- 
 ered a party of twenty-seven Indians on Little Eiver. They pur- 
 sued them until the Indians came up with the main body of from 
 two hundred and fifty to three hundred. The Texans managed to 
 secure an advantageous position, and beat the Indians off with 
 severe losses.*^ 
 
 The punishment that the Indians received in these engagements 
 caused them to be more wary in their attacks, and early in the 
 following year an effort was made to enter into a treaty with the 
 Texans. In February, 1840, some of the Indians came to San 
 Antonio for the purpose of making peace with Texas, and were 
 told by the commissioners to bring in the captives they had taken. 
 The Indians promised to do this, and on March 19, appeared with 
 only one captive. Twelve of the chiefs met the commissioners, and 
 when called upon to produce their captives produced only one 
 little girl. The Texans knew that the Comanches had other cap- 
 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 261-263; Report of Secretary of War, 
 November, 1839. 
 
Frontier Defence 77 
 
 tives and demanded that they be brought before any treaty would 
 be signed. "When the chiefs claimed that they had no other cap- 
 tives, General McLeod, who was in command of the Texans, or- 
 dered a company of soldiers into the house and told the Indians 
 they were under an-est, and that they would be detained until 
 they sent the rest of their company for the prisoners ajid brought 
 them in. This statement immediately precipitated a fight in the 
 coimcil room, which spread to the warriors outside. All the chiefs 
 and warriors were killed, and twenty-seven women and children 
 were taken prisoner, the Texans losing seven killed and eight 
 woimded. The women were kept prisoners while one of their 
 number was sent to inform the Comanches what had taken place 
 and to say that the Texans were willing to exchange prisoners. 
 A few days later she returned with two white captives and four 
 or five Mexicans, and proposed to exchange them for her people 
 and pay the difference in horses. She was informed that all the 
 white prisoners must be brought in.*^ 
 
 In revenge for this battle at San Antonio, the Indians planned 
 an extensive campaign. Aided by the Mexicans and some Kiowas, 
 a band estimated at from four hundred to a thousand Indians 
 suddenly attacked Victoria on the evening of August 6. The 
 citizens had had no notice of their coming, but they managed to 
 take refuge in the center of the town, and put up an effectual 
 resistance, losing only a few persons and a considerable number 
 of horses. They made another attack the next day, which also 
 failed, and then they crossed the Guadalupe Eiver arid attacked 
 Liunville on the coast. The inhabitants took refuge in a lisfhter 
 on the Gulf, but the Indians burned the town and carried away 
 most of the goods and cattle that they could find. In the mean- 
 time volunteers had been collecting, who, joined by regulars and 
 rangers, intercepted the Indians at Plum Creek. Here under 
 General Felix Huston, the Texans fought and defeated the In- 
 dians, killing from fifty to eighty, and recovered all horses and 
 prisoners. The Indians were pursued for some distance, but the 
 main body made its escape. 
 
 Not content with the defeat of the Indians at Plum Creek, the 
 Texans determined to send an expedition into the Comanche coun- 
 
 "Report of McLeod to Secretary of War, March 20, 1840; Telegraph 
 and Texas Register, April 15, 1840; Bancroft, North Mexican States and 
 Texas, II, 324; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 298; Brown, History of 
 Texas, II, 175. 
 
78 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 try, and chastise them so that they ■would make no more attacks 
 on the frontiers. Colonel John H. Moore, who had followed the 
 Comanches up the Colorado to their village in February, 1839, 
 was chosen to lead the expedition. Setting out about the first of 
 October with ninety men, besides twelve friendly Lipans, he went 
 up the Colorado about three hundred miles to where Colorado City 
 now stands. Here the Lipans found the Comanche village in the 
 bend of the river, with a bluff to cut off their retreat. McLeod 
 sent thirty men to occupy the bluff, and with his main force made 
 a surprise attack, which proved fully successful. Only two war- 
 riors escaped, and a hundred and thirty-four were found dead on 
 the field. Thirty-four squaws and children were captured. The 
 Texans had a' few wounded but none killed. This ended the or- 
 ganized attacks of the Comanches during Lamar's administration, 
 though they continued to annoy outlying settlements.** 
 
 II. Relations with the Cherolcees 
 
 A group of Indians that furnished a special problem to the 
 Texans from their first immigration, consisted of the semi-civilized 
 tribes which had emigrated from the United States, consisting of 
 the Cherokees, the Coshattoes, the Kickapoos, the Choctaws, the 
 Shawnees, the Biloxis, and the Caddoes. Most of these had no 
 claim to the soil on which they had settled, and contemporaries 
 and historians have agreed on the justice of their removal from 
 Texas. The Cherokees did have some claim, however, or thought 
 they did, to the occupancy and government of the region where 
 they were settled. The refusal of Lamar to recognize their claims 
 as valid, and his determination to treat them as other immigrant 
 tribes, make necessary a full discussion of their claims, both under 
 the Mexican regime and after the Texans had won their inde- 
 pendence. 
 
 In the vfint-er of 1819-20, the first party of Cherokees, consist- 
 ing of sixty warriors, left their settlements among the Caddoes 
 north of Eed Eiver, and came into Texas, settling somewhere along 
 the boundary between the Caddoes and the Prairie Indians.*^ By 
 
 "Accounts of this campaign can be found in Yoakum, History of Texas, 
 II, 302-305; Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 325-326; 
 Brown, History of Texas, II, 178-183; Brown as a young man was present 
 as a volunteer in the battle of Plum Creek, and writes an interesting ac- 
 count of the battle. 
 
 "E. W. Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," in Texas Historical 
 
Frontier Defence 19 
 
 the latter part of 1824 they were claiming the region lying be- 
 tween tlie Sabine and Trinity Eivers north of the San Antonio 
 Eoad, which continued to be their claim until driven from Texas 
 in the summer of 1839. Whether or not they had permission from 
 the Spanish authorities to settle in Texas it is impossible to say. 
 A letter from Eichard Fields, their chief, to James Dill, alcalde 
 at Nacogdoches, just after the revolution which freed Mexico from 
 Spanish rule in 1828, indicates that probably some Spanish gov- 
 ernor had given them the right to locate there for hunting pur- 
 poses. The letter, addressed to the "subsprem Governor of the 
 Provimce of Spain," February 1, 1832, asked what was to be done 
 with the poor Indians. They had some grants, it said, which were 
 given them when they lived under the government of Spain, and 
 they wanted to know whether or not the grants would be recog- 
 nized by tlie new government. This letter was forwarded to the 
 governor by Dill, but it elicited no response.*^ 
 
 Early in November, 1822, Fields with twenty-two more Indians, 
 visited Don Joss Felix Trespalacios, the governor of the province 
 of Texas, and asked permission for all belonging to his tribe to 
 settle upon the lands of the province. Trespalacios entered into a 
 temporary agreement with Fields, and sent him to the commandant 
 general of the Eastern Interior Provinces at Monterey, Don Gas- 
 par Lopez, who, if agreeable was to send him on to the court of 
 the Empire, for the purpose of securing a confirmation of the 
 grant given by Trespalacios. This agreement constitutes the main 
 documentary evidence of the claims of the Cherokees in Texas 
 prior to the declaration of the Consultation in 1835, and I shall 
 quote it in full. 
 
 Article 1st. That the said chief Eichard [Fields] with five 
 others of his tribe, accompanied by Mr. Antonio Mexia and An- 
 tonio Walk, who act as Interpreters, may proceed to Mexico, to 
 treat with his Imperial Majesty, relative to the settlement which 
 said chief wishes to make for those of his tribe who are already 
 in the territory of Texas, and also for those who are still in the 
 United States. 
 
 Article 2d. That the other Indians in the city, and who do not 
 accompany the beforementioned, will return to their village in the 
 
 Association Quarterly, VII, 96; National Intelligencer, September 15, 
 1820. 
 
 "Winkler, in lUd., 99. The original of this letter is in Bexar Archives. 
 It is printed in full in Mr. Winkler's article, as cited. 
 
80 Mwdbeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 vicinity of Nacogdoches, and communicate to those who are at 
 said village, the terms of this agreement. 
 
 Article 3d. That a partv of the warriors of said village must 
 be constantly kept on the road leading from this province to the 
 United States, to prevent stolen animals from being carried thither, 
 and to apprehend and punish those evil disposed foreigners, who 
 form assemblages, and abound on the banks of the river Sabine 
 within the Territory of Texas. 
 
 Article 4th. That the Indians who return to their Town, vdll 
 appoint as their chief the Indian Captain called Kunetand, alias 
 Tong Turqui, to whom a copy of this agreement will be given, 
 for the satisfaction of those of his tribe, and in order that they 
 may fulfill its stipulations. 
 
 Article 5th. That meanwhile, and until the approval of the 
 Supreme Government is obtained, they may cultivate their lands 
 and sow their crops, in free and peaceful possession. 
 
 Article 6th. That the said Cherokee Indians, will become im- 
 mediately subject to the laws of the Empire, as well as all others 
 who may tread her soil, and they will also take up arms in defense 
 of the nation if called upon so to do. 
 
 Article 7th. That they shall be considered Hispano- Americans, 
 and entitled to all the rights and privileges granted to such; and 
 to the same protection should it become necessary. 
 
 Article 8th. That they can immediately commence trade with 
 the other inhabitants of the Province, and with the exception of 
 arms and munitions of war, with the tribes of Savages who may 
 not be friendly to us.*' 
 
 Fields and his party arrived in Saltillo, the headquarters of the 
 commandant general, early in December, and after being enter- 
 tained by him for a few days were sent on to Mexico City, arriving 
 there early in 1833, at the time when the revolution against the 
 power of Iturbide was taking place. During the progress of the 
 revolution Fields and his companions remained in Mexico, await- 
 ing a settlement of their claims. On April 37, 1833, the min- 
 ister of relations in the provisional government, announced the 
 decision of the government to recognize the agreement between 
 Fields and Trespalacios until a general colonization law could be 
 passed. "The Supreme Executive Power," wrote Alaman to Don 
 Felipe de la Garza, who had succeeded Lopez as commandant gen- 
 eral of the Eastern Interior Provinces, 
 
 has been pleased to resolve that Eichard Fields chief of the Cher- 
 
 "Record of Translations of Empresario Contracts, 85. General Land 
 Office of Texas. 
 
Frontier Deferuce 81 
 
 okee Tribe of Indians, and his companions now in this Capital, 
 may return to their country, and thai tlifi-" be supplied with what- 
 ever may be necessary for that purpose. Therefore, Their Supreme 
 Hisjhnesses have directed me to inform you, that although the 
 agreement made on the 8th Noveniber ] 833 between EichardPields 
 and Colonel Felix Trespalacios Governor of Texas, remains pro- 
 visionally in force, you are nevertheless, required to be very careful 
 and vigilant, in regard to their settlements, endeavoring to bring 
 ihem towards the interior, and at places least dangerous, not per- 
 mitting for the present the entrance of any new families of the 
 Cherokee tribe, until the publication of the General Colonization 
 law, which will establish the rules and regulations to be observed, 
 although the benefits to arise from it, can not be extended to them, 
 in relation to all of which. Their Highnesses intend to consult tlie 
 Sovereign Congress. That while this is effecting, the families 
 already settled, should be well treated, and the other chiefs also, 
 treated with suitable consideration, provided that those already 
 within our territory respect our laws, and are submissive to our 
 Authorities; and finally. Their Highnesses order, that in future 
 neither these Indians, nor any others be permitted to come to the 
 City of Mexico, but only send their petitions in ample form, for 
 journeys similar to the present, are of no benefit, and only create 
 unnecessary expense to the State. All of which I communicate 
 to you for your information and fulfillment.*' 
 
 With this understanding Fields seemed fully satisfied and returned 
 to Texas. 
 
 It is apparent from these documents that Fields received no 
 more than a temporary concession, and that a permanent grant 
 was left in abeyance. Besides, he was conceded no more than 
 the right to sow his crops, and till his fields without interference 
 from the authorities. A year later we find Fields claiming con- 
 siderably more than this. In calling a council of all the Indian 
 tribes for the purpose of forming a treaty with them, he said : 
 
 The superior government has granted to me in this province 
 a territory sufficient for me and that part of the tribe of Indians 
 dependent on me to settle on, and also a commission to command 
 all the Indian tribes and nations that are in the four eastern 
 provinces. 
 
 In the council he was to propose treaties with all Indians who 
 would agree to submit themselves to the orders of the government, 
 and if there were any who would not agree, he was to use force to 
 
 "Alaman to De la Garza, April 27, 1823, Record of Translations of Em- 
 presario Contracts, 85, 86; Winkler, as cited, 105, 106. 
 
83 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 subdue them.*' This letter of Fields's was transmitted to the 
 government at Mexico City, and Alaman responded immediately 
 that no such commission and no such grants had been made, stat- 
 ing that the only agreement was for an extension of the provisional 
 treaty between Trespalacios and Fields of ISTovember 8, 1823.^° 
 
 On August 18, 1824, the general colonization law was passed, 
 giving to the States the right to make regulations for the dis- 
 tribution of lands within their boundaries. The State of Coahuila 
 and Texas passed their colonization law on March 24, 1825. Less 
 than a month later, April 15, 1835, the State granted three con- 
 tracts for the settlement of two thousand families in the region 
 claimed by the Indians. Eobert Leftwich was to settle eight hun- 
 dred west of the Cherokee claim. Frost Thorn four hundred north 
 of their villages, and Edwards eight hundred on the lands claimed 
 and occupied by the Cherokees. These grants do not, of course, 
 prove that the Indians had no claim to the lands. It is more 
 likely that the authorities of the State of Coahuila and Texas 
 knew nothing of the temporary grant by Trespalacios and con- 
 firmed by the authorities in Mexico. The granting of their lands 
 to others, however, led to a threatened revolt, which was prevented 
 only by earnest efforts on the part of friends of Texas. ^'^ At the 
 same time Fields was assured that he would get suitable lands, 
 and he continued to assert all the powers he had claimed before. 
 
 On March 30, 1826, when a general Indian war was threatening, 
 Fields wrote to the political chief at San Antonio promising help 
 against those Indians, the Comanches and others, who were refus- 
 ing to come to terms with the Mexicans. A little later Stephen F. 
 Austin was ordered by the commandants at San Antonio to attack 
 the Wacoes, Tehuacanos, and other tribes, and he called upon 
 Fields for assistance, stating that it would be the means of secur- 
 ing the lands which the Cherokees desired. Fields asserted his 
 willingness to assist the whites, but said the waters of the Neches 
 were too high for them to get across. The attack was postponed 
 at that time, but in the autumn Fields asked permission to make 
 war on the same Indians, which was granted. Before it could 
 take place, however, other matters entirely changed the aspect of 
 affairs, and the Cherokees were ready to attack the Mexicans.^* 
 
 '"Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 108. 
 '^lUd., 110. 
 ^Hlid., 117-120. 
 •-UUd., 126. 
 
Frontier Defence 83 
 
 In the summer of ].835, about the time that Fields was pre- 
 paring to secure his lands by force, John Dunn Hunter, a white 
 man who had spent several years of his youth in captivity with 
 the Indians, and who had wonderful schemes for civilizing the 
 Indians, made his appearance among the Cherokees of Texas. 
 Hunter counselled friendship with the Mexicans, and proceeded to 
 Mexico City to petition for lands for the Indians, arriving there 
 on March 19, 1826. It seems to have been the purpose of Hunter 
 to secure from the government a grant of land in the vacant parts 
 of Texas and Coahuila for the settlement of nearly 20,000 war- 
 riors, who were to adopt the Catholic religion, take the oath of 
 allegiance to the Mexican Government, devote themselves to agri- 
 cultural labor, and defend the frontiers.'^ Hunter returned about 
 September and announced the failure of his mission, and the 
 Cherokees immediately began preparations to gain by force what 
 they had not been able to get peaceably. 
 
 A council was called, and addressed by Hunter and Fields. The 
 speech of Fields, as reported to Stephen F. Austin by P. E. Bean, 
 indicates that he was willing to demand perhaps more than he 
 believed had been granted. In the language of Bean, it was as 
 f oUows : 
 
 In my old Days I travilid 2000 Miles to the City of Mexico to 
 Beg some lands to setel a Poor orfan tribe of Red Peopel that 
 looked up to me for Protasion I was Promised lands for them 
 after staying one year in Mexico and spending all I had I then 
 came to my Peopel and waited two years and then sent Mr. hunter 
 again after selling my stock to Provide him money for his ex- 
 penses when he got there he Staited his mision to Government 
 they said they New nothing of this Eichard fields and treated 
 him with contampt T am a Eed man and a man of onor and 
 Cant be emposid on this way we will lift up our tomahawks and 
 fight for land with all those friendly tribes that wishes land also 
 if I am Beaten I will Resign to fait and if not I will hold lands 
 By the forse of my Red Warriors.'* . . . 
 
 It was at first the purpose of the Cherokees to attack the Amer- 
 icans in Texas, and they were to begin with Edwards's colony, 
 which included the lands occupied by them. At about that time, 
 however, Edwards had become involved in a controversy with the 
 
 "Ibid., 123. 
 
 "P. E. Bean to S. F. Austin, December 30, 1826, in Austin Papers. 
 Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 133. 
 
84 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 authorities and in the end this resulted in the revocation of his 
 grant. Eather than submit to the loss which this would entail, 
 Edwards and some of his followers raised a rebellion against the 
 authority of Mexico, declaring the colony independent under the 
 name of Fredonia. Hunter thought it best to consult with the 
 colonists under these circumstances, and he went to Nacogdoches 
 for the purpose. Hunter's visit resulted in a treaty of alliance 
 between the Cherokees and the rebels under Edwards. 
 
 The treaty of alliance as drawn up by Hunter and Fields on 
 the part of the Indians and Harmon B. Mayo and Benjamin W. 
 Edwards as Agents of the Committee of Independence provided 
 that the contracting parties bound themselves into a solemn Union, 
 League and Confederation, in peace and war, to establish and de- 
 fend their independence against the Mexican United States. The 
 boundary between the whites and the Indians was outlined, and it 
 was agreed that the territory apportioned to the Indians was in- 
 tended as well for the benefit of those tribes living in the terri- 
 tory apportioned to the whites as for those living in the fonner 
 territory, and that it was encumbent upon the contracting parties 
 for the Indians to offer those tribes a participation in the terri- 
 tory.^" 
 
 It is not my purpose to follow the events connected with this 
 rebellion. The other American settlers in Texas not only refused 
 to give any assistance to the rebels, but joined the authorities in 
 putting them down. The Cherokee chiefs were unable to form a 
 league of the Indians in Texas, or even to secure the united sup- 
 port of their own people. Mexican agents went among the In- 
 dians and promised them land if they would refuse to join in the 
 movement for independence. Among these agents P. E. Bean was 
 the most active. Through his influence the political chief wrote 
 a letter to Fields attempting to explain the failure of the govern- 
 ment to grant the lands desired, and promising that the grants 
 would be made as soon as possible. He failed, however, to detach 
 Fields and Hunter from the alliance ; but the activity of the agents 
 f^mong the Indians themselves was more successful, and the greater 
 part of them under the leadership of Bowl and Big Mush went 
 
 "Toote, Terns and the Texans, 1, 253-256; Winkler, "The Cherokee In- 
 dians in Texas," op. cit., 142. 
 
Frontier Defence 85 
 
 over to the Mexicans and killed Fields and Hunter in January, 
 1827.=" 
 
 In spite of the promise of lands to Bowl and Big Mush, in order 
 to secure their co-operation against the rebels during the Fredonian 
 rebellion, no steps were taken to put them in possession of the 
 lands selected until 1831, though there was no effort to interfere 
 with their peaceful possession. Instead of putting them in pos- 
 session of the Edwards grant, the legislature divided that territory 
 between David G. Burnet and Joseph Vehlein." 
 
 On April 6, 1830, a Federal act prohibiting the further immi- 
 gration of Americans into Texas was passed. As an alternative 
 to American settlement of Texas, the law proposed the settlement 
 of Mexican families around the Americans already there, thus over- 
 coming the isolation of the Americans. General Teran, who had 
 become commandant general of the Eastern Interior States, ap- 
 pealed to the governor of each State to furnish a certain number 
 of Mexican families to settle upon the Texas frontier. The gov- 
 ernors failed to respond to this request, and no Mexican families 
 were sent. This determined Teran to attempt to settle Indians 
 to keep the Americans in check. He decided to begin this by 
 settling firmly the Cherokees on the land which they claimed and 
 had occupied for several years, hoping thus to stop the American 
 advance in this manner. On August 15, 1831, he wrote to Letona, 
 the governor of Coahuila and Texas, as follows: 
 
 In compliance with the promises made by the Supreme Govern- 
 ment, to the Cherokee Indians, and with a view to the preserva- 
 tion of peace, with the rude tribes, I caused them to determine 
 upon some fixed spot for their Settlement, and having selected it 
 on the head waters of the Trinity, and the banks of the Sabine, I 
 pray your Excellency may be pleased, to order that possession be 
 given to them, with the corresponding Titles, with the understand- 
 ing, that it will be expedient, that the commissioners appointed 
 for this purpose, should act in conjunction with Colonel Jos© de 
 las Piedras, commanding the military force on the frontier of 
 Nacogdoches.'* 
 
 The local officials fell in with the suggestions of the commandant 
 
 ^Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 146-150. 
 
 "Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 110. 
 
 "Record of Translations of Empresario Contracts, 89. Translation by 
 Thomas G. Western. Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 
 154. 
 
86 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 general, and on March 22, 1833, the governor instructed the polit- 
 ical chief to cause the commissioner, Piedras, to be furnished with 
 such stamped paper as he might require for that purpose.^^ Before 
 Piedras could carry out his instructions he had been expelled from 
 Nacogdoches by an uprising of the American settlers, and this 
 ended the efforts of the government to put the Indians in possession 
 of their lands. Shortly after this Teran committed suicide and 
 was succeeded as commandant general by General Vicente Pilisola, 
 the holder of an empresario grant himself. Governor Letona, bit- 
 terly hostile to the Americans, fell a victim of yellow fever and 
 was succeeded by Beramendi, a warm friend of Texas.^" 
 
 In 1833 the Cherokees with the assistance of the Americans took 
 steps to secure the titles to their lands. A number of the Indians 
 proceeded to San Antonio to lay before the political chief a peti- 
 tion expressing their desires, and giving the boundary of the lands 
 that they wanted. On July 20, he gave them a pass to visit the 
 governor at Monclova. On August 21, Governor Beramendi gave 
 them a document which promised that they would not be disturbed 
 until the supreme government could investigate; but because the 
 time limit for the settlement of David G. Burnet's grant had not 
 expired he could not put them in full possession.*^ 
 
 The matter was still unsettled in 1835. On March 10, the polit- 
 ical chief wrote that the supreme government of the State would 
 not let the Cherokees, Coshattoes, and other Indians be disturbed 
 imtil the supreme government could pass on the subject. On May 
 12, the congress of Coahuila and Texas passed a resolution de- 
 claring : 
 
 Art. 1. In order to secure the peace and tranquility of the 
 State, the Government is authorized to select, out of the vacant 
 lands of Texas, that land which may appear most appropriate, for 
 the location of the peaceable and civilized Indians which may have 
 been introduced into Texas. 
 
 Art. 2. It shall establish with them a line of defense along the 
 frontier to secure the State against the incursions of the barbarious 
 tribes.*^ 
 
 This was the last act of the Mexican government with regard to 
 
 "Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 155; Record of 
 Translations of Empresario Contracts, 90. 
 
 ""Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," op. cit., 156, 157. 
 
 '^liid., 163. 
 
 '-Laws of Coahuila and Texas, 300. 
 
Frontier Defence 87 
 
 Indian claims. On November 11 the Consultation adopted articles 
 for a provisional government, and declared all land offices closed 
 until a government could be formed and a land office established 
 under that government capable oi issuing valid land grants. The 
 Indian claims were left as they had been throughout the decade. 
 Fields had obtained a shadowy temporary right to land. He had 
 claimed much more for this grant than can be allowed. When the 
 Mexican authorities failed to put him in possession of the land, 
 denying knowledge of him in 1825, he joined with the Predonian 
 rebels against Mexican authority. In order to overthrow this re- 
 bellion, the Mexicans promised land to Bowl and Big Mush, with- 
 out specifying what lands. The Indians insisted on receiving title 
 to the lands lying between the Trinity and Sabine Elvers north 
 of the San Antonio Eoad, though it had been officially granted to 
 Burnet, Filisola, and others. During 1831-1833 the authorities 
 contemplated putting the Cherokees in actual possession of that 
 territory, but failed, as we have seen. When Bowl appealed to the 
 governor of Coahuila and Texas in 1833, he was given the same 
 evasive assurances as had been received before, but Beramendi threw 
 some doubt on his right to the lands occupied. Finally, the con- 
 gress of Coahuila and Texas proposed to remove them from their 
 homes and establish them on the frontiers for defense against the 
 hostile Indians. 
 
 The Mexican control of Texas passed with the question in this 
 situation. The Indians had been promised land on numerous occa- 
 sions, but not the land on which they were located. That land 
 had been granted to others, so that the Mexican government could 
 not legally grant it to the Indians. The period closed with the 
 Indians having no legal claim, and knowing that they had no legal 
 claim, to lands anywhere in Texas. 
 
 The Americans in the beginning of their revolt in 1835 recog- 
 nized the importance of keeping the Indians quiet. The committees 
 of safety had suggested the desirability of coming to some agree- 
 ment with the Indians, and the Permanent Council had appointed 
 three commissioners to proceed to the Indian villages and discover 
 the cause of their grievances and attempt to settle them. The 
 Consultation, which succeeded the Permanent Council, went fur- 
 ther and recognized the rights of the Indians to the lands they 
 had occiipied and claimed. "We solemnly declare," said the decla- 
 ration passed by the Consultation the day before adjournment. 
 
88 , Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 that the boundaries of the claims of the said Indians are as fol- 
 lows, to wit, being north of the San Antonio road and the Neches, 
 and west of the Angelina and Sabine rivers. We solemnly declare 
 that the Governor and General Council immediately on its organi- 
 zation shall appoint commissioners to treat with the said Indians 
 to establish definite boundaries of their territory and secure their 
 confidence and friendship. We solemnly declare that we will guar- 
 antee to them the peaceable enjoyment of their rights and their 
 lands as we do our own. We solemnly declare that all grants, sur- 
 veys and locations within the bounds hereinbefore maintained, made 
 after the settlement of the said Indians, are and of right ought to 
 be utterly null and void, and the commissioners issuing the same 
 be and are hereby ordered immediately to recall and cancel the 
 same, as having been made upon lands already appropriated by the 
 Mexican government. We solemnly declare that it is our sincere 
 desire that the Cherokee Indians and their associate bands should 
 remain our friends in peace and war, and if they do so we pledge 
 the public faith to the support of the foregoing declaration. We 
 solemnly declare that they are entitled to our commiseration and 
 protection, as the first owners of the soil, as an unfortunate race 
 of people, that we wish to hold as friends and treat with Justice.*' 
 
 On December 22, 1835, the Council, as we have seen, acting upon 
 the recommendation of Governor Henry Smith, appointed Sam 
 Houston, John Forbes, and John Cameron commissioners to treat 
 with the Indians under the instructions to be drawn up by the 
 governor, which was done on the 30th. The commissioners were 
 to proceed to Nacogdoches as soon as possible and enter upon the 
 discharge of their duties, in which they were in nowise to transcend 
 the instructions of the Declaration of the Consultation. "You will 
 in all things pursue a course of Justice and equity towards the In- 
 dians,''" Governor Smith said, 
 
 and protect all honest claims of the Whites, agreeably to such Laws 
 compacts or treaties, as the said Indians may have heretofore made 
 with the Mexican Eepublic. 
 
 You will provide in said treaty with the Indians, that they shall 
 never alienate their Lands, either separately or collectively, except 
 to the Government of Texas, and to agree that the said Govern- 
 ment, will at any time hereafter purchase all their claims at a fair 
 and reasonable valuation. You will endeavor, if possible, to secure 
 their effective co-operation at all times when it may be necessary to 
 call the effective forces of Texas into the field and agreeing for their 
 services in a body for a specific time. If found expedient and con- 
 sistent, you are authorized and empowered to exchange other Lands 
 
 "Journal of the Consultation, 51-52. 
 
Frontier Defence 89 
 
 within the limits of Texas not otherwise appropriated in the room 
 of the Lands claimed by Said Indians and as soon as practicable,, 
 you will report your proceedings to the Governor and Council for 
 their i-atification and approval."* 
 
 On February 23, 1836, the commissioners entered into a treaty 
 with the Cherokees. By this treaty the Indians were to receive 
 title to the land they claimed, and which under the declaration of 
 the Consultation was adjudged to be theirs. The rights of those 
 who settled before the Cherokees were to be respected, but aU who 
 had been once removed and had later returned were tO' be con- 
 sidered intruders. All bands or tribes mentioned in the treaty 
 were to be required to remove within the boundary fixed. The lands 
 were not to be sold or alienated to anyone except the government 
 of Texas, and the Cherokees agreed that no other tribes should be 
 allowed to settle there. No individual Indian was permitted to sell 
 land, and no Texan to buy from an Indian. The Indians were to 
 be governed bv their own laws. The government of Texas had 
 power to regulate trade and intercourse between the Indians and 
 others, but should levy no tax on the trade of the Indians. Prop- 
 erty stolen from citizens or from the Indians was to be restored to 
 the persons from whom stolen, and the offender or offenders were 
 to be punished by the tribe to which he or they belonged." 
 
 A ratiiication of this treaty would have resulted in the establish- 
 ment of a separate Indian state with practical independence. It 
 would have been a nation living within definitely fixed boundaries^ 
 under their own laws, punishing their own citizens for theft of 
 horses from the whites, exempt from taxation by the Texan gov- 
 ernment, and under no more restriction than would be involved in 
 a control over foreign affairs and the appointment by Texas of an 
 agent to live among the Indians. The Convention which met in 
 March, however, refused to ratify the treaty, though Houston and 
 the Indians considered the government morally bound to do so. 
 
 Acting upon the theory that the declaration of the Consultation 
 was sufficient authority for his action in drawing up the treaty 
 with the Indians, Houston, while he was attempting to secure a 
 ratification of the treaty by the Senate of the Eepublic after he 
 became President, deliberately gave the Indians to understand that 
 ratification was not necessary, and that they wotdd get their lands. 
 
 "MS. Indicm Ajfairs, 1831-1841. Texas State Library. 
 """Secret Journals, 35, 36, 37, 38. 
 
20 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Writing to Bowl on April 13, 183G, durinsr the retreat from Gon- 
 zales, and after the refusal of the Convention to ratify the treaty, 
 Houston said: 
 
 My friend Gol Bowl. 
 
 I am busy, and will only saj^, how da do, to you ! You will get 
 your land as it was promised in our Treaty, and you, and all my 
 Eed brothers, may rest satisfied that I will always hold you by 
 the hand, and look at you as Brothers and treat you as such ! 
 
 You must give my best compliments to my sister, and tell her 
 that I have not wore out the mockasins which she made me ; and 
 1 hope to see her and you, and all my relations, before they are 
 wore out. Our army are all well, and in good spirits. In a little 
 fight the other day several of the Mexicans were killed, and none of 
 our men hurt. There are not many of the enemy now in the 
 Country, and one of our ships took one of the enemy's and took 
 300 Barrels of flour, 250 Kegs of powder, and much property — 
 and sunk a big warship of the enemy, which had many Gruns.^° 
 
 The purpose of this letter was probably to keep the Indians quiet 
 by promising them their lands under the treaty and by making 
 it appear that the Mexicans were making only a slight efEort to 
 subdue the Texans. In December, however, when there was no 
 danger of the return of the Mexicans, he sent a message to the 
 Senate urging its ratification. "You will find upon examining this 
 treaty," he said, 
 
 that it is just and equitable, and perhaps the best which could 
 be made at the present time. It only secures to the said Indians 
 the usufructuary right to the country included within the boundary 
 described in the treaty, and does not part with the right of soil, 
 which is in this Government; neither are the rights of any citizen 
 of the Eepublic impaired by the views of the treaty, but are all care- 
 fully secured by the third article of the same. In considering 
 this treaty, you will doubtless bear in mind the very great necessity 
 of conciiiating the different tribes of Indians who inhabit portions 
 of eountr}' almost in the center of our settlements as well as those 
 who extend along our frontier."' 
 
 The Senate took no action at that time ; but at the next session 
 appointed a committ-ee to consider the treaty and the general In- 
 dian question, and this committee reported on October 13, 1837. 
 It declared the opinion that the rights with which Indians might 
 have been invested by the Mexican government previous to the 
 
 "Lamar Papers, 'No. 352. 
 "Secret Journals, 35. 
 
Frontier Defmce 91 
 
 declaration of independence should be respected, but was not able 
 to find that any such right had been acquired. The premises as- 
 sumed by the Consultation were false, and acknowledged rights 
 based on false premises "are of no effect and void, which your 
 committee conceive to be the case in this instance." The territory 
 mentioned in the treaty formed part of the grant to David G. 
 Burnet for the purpose of colonization, the colony was filled, or 
 nearly so, prior to the declaration of the Consultation, and the com- 
 mittee was satisfied that the grant of the territory to Burnet for 
 colonization many years after the settlement of the Indians on 
 the soil, was sufficient evidence that no obligation was created 
 which could be considered binding in favor of the Cherokees, or 
 any other Indians. Finally, the committee reported the following 
 resolution : 
 
 Eesolved by the Senate of the EepubUc of Texas that they dis- 
 approve and utterly refuse to ratify the Treaty or any artickles 
 thereof concluded by Sam Houston and Jno. Forbes on the 33rd 
 day of February, 1836, between the provisional Gov[emmen]t of 
 Texas of the one part, and the "Head Chiefs" Head men and war- 
 riors of the Cherokees on the other part. Inasmuch as that said 
 treaty was based on premises that did not exist and that the oper- 
 ation of it would not only be detrimental to the interests of the 
 Eepublic but would also be a violation of the vested right of many 
 citizens, . . . 
 
 Eesolved that the President of this Eepublic be authorized and 
 advised to appoint commissioners and furnish them with instruc- 
 tions such as he may deem most expedient to bring about friendly 
 relations between the Comanches and this Eepublic; Provided that 
 no fee simple right of soil be acknowledged by this Gov[emmenlt in 
 favor of those Indians."" 
 
 On December 16 a resolution was adopted declaring null and 
 void the treaty with the Cherokees, and no further attempt was 
 made by Houston to secure ratification."" 
 
 There was considerable unrest among the Indians in the East in 
 the summer of 1838 at the time of the Cordova rebellion. There 
 is an indication from the diary of Miracle referred to above that 
 Bowl had foreknowledge of the plans of the Mexicans. He man- 
 aged to hide his knowledge, however, and received assurances from 
 Houston that the treaty was being observed by the Texans, and 
 
 ''Secret Journals, 75-79. 
 "Ihid., 100. 
 
92 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 calling upon him to keep the treaty. Houston promised the im- 
 mediate appointment of some one to run the boundary line between 
 the white and Indian possessions, and on August 16, sent Bowl 
 another letter promising that the white warriors would not hurt 
 the Indians.'" On August 18, after the dispersal of the rebels, 
 Houston issued an order for mustering out the army, in which he 
 urged the soldiers in falling back to respect the Indians and their 
 property, avoiding injury to every species of property.''^ 
 
 The promises of Houston that the treaty would be observed and 
 the boundary line run kept the Cherokees from taking active part 
 with the Mexicans. Later, in the month of August, Eusk asked 
 Bowl to influence the Shawnees, Kickapoos, Delawares, Kaosatis, 
 and other friendly tribes to keep the peace. After .the battle with 
 the Kickapoos on October 16, Eusk complained to Bowl that a 
 Cherokee had been found among the dead Elickapoos, which Bowl 
 explained by saying he was a renegade Indian.''® 
 
 In the latter part of the summer of 1838 Houston appointed 
 Alexander Horton to run the line between the Indian territory and 
 that of the whites. On account of the opposition of the whites, 
 and the quarrels among Horton's men, nothing was accomplished 
 before the end of Houston's administration. A letter from Bowl 
 to Horton on October 27, is interesting and enlightening as re- 
 gards the relations of the whites and Indians at that time. He 
 wrote -J^ 
 
 Mr Horton Dear Sir I have accomplished my Desir in rasing 
 my men for to guard and aid you while you are running the Line 
 in so much I understand that some of the white people are against 
 it which I am sorry to hear that, for we wish to do write ourselves, 
 and we hoped that white people wanted to do the same as for 
 your disputes among yourselves I have ordered my men to have 
 nothing to do with it. My express orders is to my men is to guard 
 you and your property from the enemy I hope that you will be 
 particular with us in consequence of us not understanding your 
 tongue and also we will pay that respect to you I hope you will 
 let us know when you need us and where and I will be at your 
 service I will detain Gayen till I get a line from you so as he 
 may read our writing I have twenty-five volunteers to send to 
 you so nothing more only your Friend Bole. 
 
 "Originals in Lamar Papers, Nos. 781, 782, 783, 784, 785, 786. 
 
 ■^lUd., 792. 
 
 '"Lamar Papers, Nos. 801, 839. 
 
 '"Lamar Papers, No. 855. 
 
Frontier Defence 93 
 
 Early in December, just before his inauguration as President, 
 Lamar received a long letter from Archibald Hotchkiss of Nacog- 
 doches. It cannot be shown to have influenced Lamar in deter- 
 mining his course toward the Cherokees, but it was not calculated 
 to change his belief that they had no real right to the soil which 
 they occupied. After tracing in a general way the history of the 
 Cherokees in Texas, Hotchkiss said: 
 
 In the year 1833 I became the agent of Burnet for the purpose 
 of carrying out the terms set forth in his contract; to wit: to settle 
 the land ... a short time subsequent to my receiving this it 
 became necessary for me to repair to the seat of Government for 
 the purpose of transacting business for my [principal,] the prin- 
 ciple object of which was to induce them to remove the Indians 
 who had settled within [the bounds] of our grant, and by so doing 
 had to a very great extent impeded the settling of the lands. [I 
 received] assurances from the Government that they [would be 
 removed] immediately; but that promise was not realized [on ac- 
 count] of the increased internal difEiculties of the country. 
 
 In the early part of 183.5 I entered into a correspondence with 
 the Gov[emmen]t of the State of Coahuila and Texas upon the 
 subject of removing the Indians representing the extreme dilSculty 
 we had in obtaining colonists, who were willing to settle in the 
 vicinity of such dangerous neighbors as the Cherokees had allways 
 proved themselves to be in the United States ; In answer to which 
 the Governor informed me that he was very sensible of the difS- 
 culties under which I was laboring, but that the finances of the 
 State were at such a state of exhaustion that it was extremely 
 doubtful whether they would be able to do anything until the en- 
 sueing year, whereupon I offered upon behalf of my principals to 
 advance the means necessary for removing if the Government would 
 afford its countenance and authority for the undertaking, and the 
 corresponding order was sent to the political chief of Nacogdoches 
 for their removal forthwith sometime in the Spring of 1835 which 
 order was never executed but suppressed at the instigation of de- 
 signing men, the war of Independence which succeeded shortly 
 after put an end to all further action upon this subject.'* . . . 
 
 Lamar's message of December 31, 1838, with regard to the In- 
 dian, has been mentioned. Further notice at this point is neces- 
 sary for an explanation of the attitude he assumed concerning the 
 rights of the Cherokees to the lands they occupied. He said that 
 the immigrant tribes had no legal or equitable claim to any por- 
 tion of the territory of Texas; that their immigration to Texas 
 
 "Hotchkiss to Lamar, December 5, 1838, Lamar Papers, No. 905. 
 
94 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 had been unsolicited and unauthorized, and had always been a 
 source of regret to the more enlightened population; that the Fed- 
 eral Government of Mexico neither conceded nor promised them 
 lands or civil rights; that they came as intruders, and were posi- 
 tively forbidden to make any permanent abidance, and had con- 
 tinued in the country up to that time against the public wish and 
 at the sacrifice of public tranquility. The offer made to bordering 
 tribes in the colonization law of Coahuila and Texas contained 
 precedent conditions which had in no wise been carried out. The 
 pledge of the Consultation and the treaty drawn up under it had 
 never been ratified, and, if it had been, the Indians had violated it 
 time and again.'^ 
 
 In the latter part of 1838 and early part of 1839 the Indians 
 in the West were active, and the government made preparations 
 to punish them. To keep the Indians in the East quiet, Lamar 
 appointed Martin Lacy agent to the Cherokees, Shawnees, and 
 other tribes. The special object of the appointment, said the in- 
 structions, was to cultivate and preserve the friendly relations exist- 
 ing between the frontier inhabitants of Texas and the "Cherokees, 
 Shawnees, etc., which have emigrated from the United States to 
 Texas, but whose claim to territory or even its occupancy has not 
 yet been recognized, and is now a subject of grave deliberation on 
 the part of the Texian Government." The Cherokees could not 
 better evince their friendly intentions, he suggested, than by pro- 
 hibiting intercourse with the hostile Indians.'"' 
 
 On March 10, 1839, the Texan minister in Washington informed 
 the government of the United States that the President of Texas 
 was determined to act with great energy towards those Indians of 
 the East who had been consistently hostile, and suggested that the 
 United States take steps to restrain their Indians from assisting 
 the kindred tribes in Texas. Before entering on a general war, 
 however. Bowl, chief of the Cherokees, was allowed to visit the 
 various chiefs and attempt to bring about an adjustment of the 
 differences with them. Bowl reported that there was a sincere 
 
 '''•'Lamar Papers, No. 361; Telegraph and Texas Register, December 26, 
 1838. 
 
 ™Lamar to Martin Lacy, February 14, 1839, Indian Affairs, 1831-1841, 
 Texas State Library. 
 
Frontier Defence 95 
 
 desire on the part of the Indians to resume peaceful relations with 
 the Texans.''' 
 
 This change in the attitude of the Indians was probably pro- 
 duced by the destruction of the party of Cordova, March 26, 1839. 
 Cordova had been active in the rebellion at Nacogdoches in 1838, 
 and was at the time of his defeat by Burleson probably on his way 
 to Matamoras to get supplies for another outbreak similar to that 
 of 1838. On March 26, 1839, he was discovered with a party of 
 sixty or seventy Mexicans, Indians, and negroes, encamped at the 
 foot of the Colorado Mountains. Colonel Burleson collected eighty 
 men and started on his trail, overtaking him on the Guadalupe, 
 where a battle was fought resulting in the defeat of the Cordova 
 party with the loss of about thirty men. Cordova himself escaped, 
 but this ended his efforts to stir up revolution in Texas.'* 
 
 Albert Sidney Johnston, Secretary of War, writing to Bowl on 
 April 10, referred to this action, and said that the recent develop^ 
 ments went to show incontestably that the Cherokees, or a part of 
 them, the Delaware?, Shawnees, Kickapoos, Caddoes, Wacoes,, 
 ■'Tewankanees," Bedies, and Kechies, about the time he was with 
 them had entered into a compact with Cordova to carry on the 
 war as soon as he should return from Matamoras. The assertion 
 that Cordova had been driven off when he attempted to agitate a 
 revolt, he said, was probably to gain time and to conceal the object, 
 of the journey to Matamoras. 
 
 The President grants peace to them but is not deceived. They 
 will be permitted to cultivate undisturbed as long as they manifest 
 by their forbearance from all aggressive acts and their friendly 
 conduct the sincerity of their professions or until Congress shall 
 adopt such measures in reference to them as in their wisdom they 
 may deem proper. With a clear view of all matters connected 
 with their feeling and interests It should not surprise the Chero- 
 kees to learn that such measures are in progress under the orders- 
 of the President as will render abortive any attempt to again dis- 
 turb the quiet of the frontier nor need it be any cause of alarm 
 to those who intend to act in good faith. All intercourse between 
 the friendly indians & those at war with Texas must cease. The 
 President directs that you will cause the contents of this commu- 
 nication to be made known to all the chiefs who were present at 
 the council. '^ 
 
 "Thirty-second Cong., 2nd. aess., Senate Documents, No. 14, p. 20. A. S. 
 Johnston to Bowl, April 10, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1188. 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 261. 
 "A. S. Johnston to Bowl, April 10, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1183. 
 
96 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Some time in April or eariy in May ilajor B. C. Waters was 
 ordered to construct a military station on the Great Saline, which 
 was in territory claimed by the Cherokees. Bowl mobilized his 
 warriors and ordered Waters to leave, which he did, since he was 
 not supported by a military force of his own large enough to re- 
 sist the Indians. This naturally aroused the whites, particularly 
 of the East. The San Augustine Red Lander called on the citizens 
 to respond to the call of Major Waters for aid in carrying out the 
 orders of the Secretary of War.'" The Telegraph and Texas Reg- 
 ister stated that there were constant complaints of Indian aggres- 
 sions; that the Cherokees had been a source of trouble since 183G, 
 and that they could not be tolerated longer in Texas.*^ 
 
 The action of Bowl called forth a stern letter from Lamar. He 
 had learned with surprise, he said, that Bowl had compelled Major 
 Waters to leave his post on the Great Saline. That officer was 
 acting under the authority and orders of the government, and any 
 attempt to interfere with him or to impede the execution of his 
 duty could be regarded in no other light than as an outrage upon 
 the sovereignty of Texas. "You assume to be acting under a 
 Treaty negotiated ?it your village on the twenty-third day of Feb- 
 ruary 1836 with commissioners appointed by the Provisional Gov- 
 'crnment of Texas." No doubt there were those who would im- 
 press him with the belief that by virtue of that treaty the Chero- 
 kees had a right to maintain within the limits of the Eepublic an 
 independent government bearing no responsibility to the whites as 
 though they were a foreign nation. But the Texans had acquired 
 their sovereignty by many rightful and glorious achievements, and 
 would exercise it without division or community with other people. 
 The Indians could never be permitted to exercise a sovereignty 
 -which would conflict with the rights of the Texans. He charged 
 that Bowl was at the center of all conspiracies, and concluded with 
 this ultimatum: 
 
 I therefore feel it my duty as the Chief Magistrate of this He- 
 public to tell you in plain language of sincerity, that the Cherokees 
 will never be permitted to establish a permanent and independent 
 jurisdiction in the limits of this government — that the political 
 and fee simple claims which they set up to our territory now oocu- 
 pied by them will never be allowed — and that they are permitted 
 
 '"Quoted in Telegraph and Texas Register, June 19, 1839. 
 '^Telegraph and Texas Register, June 19, 1839. 
 
Frontier Defence 97 
 
 at present to remain where they are only because this government 
 is looking forward to the time when some peaceable arrangement 
 can be made for their removal without the necessity of shedding 
 blood; but that their final removal is contemplated is certain and 
 that it will be effected is equally so. Whether it will be done by 
 friendly negotiating, or by the violence of war, must depend on 
 the Cherokes themselves.^* 
 
 Shortly before this, May 14, 1839, Manuel Mores, who had been 
 active the year before in the Cordova rebellion, with a party of 
 twenty-five marauders committed some murders between Seguin 
 and Bexar. They were pursued by several Texans under Lieuten- 
 ant James 0. Rice, and were overtaken on the San Gabriel fifteen 
 miles from Austin. In the battle which followed Plores and two 
 others were killed and the others put to flight. On the body of 
 Mores were found papers which convinced Lamar and his cabinet 
 that the Cherokees were again in treasonable correspondence with 
 the Mexicans. These documents were sent to the Secretary of War 
 by Colonel Burleson on May 23, reaching him about the time of 
 Lamar's letter to Bowl.^^ 
 
 These papers consisted of letters addressed to Manuel Plores, 
 Vicente Cordova, and to the friendly tribes of Texas, by the com- 
 mandant general for the Eastern Interior States, Canalizo, who 
 had succeeded Filisola. The letter to Mores, February 27, 1839, 
 stated that it was impossible for the Federal Government to take 
 any steps for the recovery of Texas on account of the war with 
 France. It was possible, however, he said, that the Indians and 
 loyal ilexicans could defend their homes by joining together against 
 the Americans. They ought not to depend on flying invasions, but 
 on operations of a more continuous character, causing perpetual 
 alarm and inquietude to the enemy. To obtain these objects it 
 was necessary "to bum their habitations, to lay waste their fields, 
 and to prevent them from assembling in great numbers, by rapid 
 and well-concerted movements, so as to draw their attention in 
 every direction, and not offer to them any determinate object at 
 which to strike." 
 
 Another letter was addressed by Canalizo to the chiefs of the 
 tribes. As it was the principal basis for the claim that the Chero- 
 
 ''Lamar to Bowl, May 26, 1839, Indian Affairs, 1831-1841, Texas State 
 Library. 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 259. 
 
98 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 kees and other tribes were plotting with the Mexicans for the ex- 
 termination of the whites, it is given in full: 
 
 Don Manuel Plores, and the chiefs of the friendly tribes accom- 
 panying him, will make known to you my sentiments towards your- 
 self and my friends, the Indians of your tribe; and also what you 
 have to expect as regards your remaining in quiet possession of the 
 land selected by you within the Mexican territory for settlement. 
 And these individuals are informed in relation to what has to be 
 done. 
 
 Have an understanding with said Flores in order that you may 
 act in such a manner as to be secured in the peaceable possession 
 of your lands, and to prevent any adventurer again destroying the 
 repose of your families, or again treading the soil where repose the 
 bones of your forefathers, and be careful not to deviate from his 
 instructions. 
 
 Act under the full assurance of our generosity, of which we have 
 given so many proofs, and that nothing can be expected of the 
 greedy adventurers for land, who wish to deprive you even of the 
 sun which warms and vivifies you, and who will not cease to envy 
 you while the grass grows and the water flows. ^* 
 
 This letter was addressed to Captain Ignacio of the Guapanagues ; 
 Captain Coloxe of the Caddoes; The Chief of the Seminoles; Big 
 Mush, civil chief of the Cherokees; Captain Benito of the Kicka- 
 poos; Fama Sargento de los Brazos; Lieutenant-Colonel Bowl of 
 the Cherokees. 
 
 On receipt of these papers Lamar decided to arrange for the 
 immediate removal of the Cherokees from Texas, and sent the Vice- 
 President, David G. Burnet, and the Secretary of War, A. S. John- 
 ston, to negotiate with them. The commissioners were to offer to 
 buy their produce and pay for their removal to the United States. 
 At the same time he announced in a letter to the Shawnees the 
 intention to expel the Cherokees, in a friendly manner if possible, 
 but by force if they resisted, and warned the Shawnees to have 
 nothing to do with the Cherokees or the Mexicans.^' 
 
 The commissioners reached the Cherokee village about the first 
 of July and entered into negotiations with Bowl and Big Mush. 
 Bowl acknowledged that they were intruders and had no legal 
 
 ''This eorreapondence was sent by the Texas State Department to the 
 Texan minister at Washington, and presented by him to the American 
 Secretary of State, June 29, 1839. It is published in 32 Congress, 2d 
 session. Senate Document, No. 14, pp. 29-35. 
 
 °°Lamar to Linnee and other chiefs and headmen of the Shawnees, June 
 3, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1321. 
 
Frontier Defence 99 
 
 rights to the soil they occupied. lie agreed to return to Arkansas 
 in return for payment for their improvements and transportation, 
 but he delayed on one pretext after another putting his agreement 
 in the form of a treaty, using the delay, it was supposed, to get 
 his forces together preparatory to resist the Texans. Even up to 
 the morning of July 15, Bowl assured Adjutant General McLeod 
 that he was willing to abide by his agreement, but again asked for 
 delay in signing the treaty. The Texan forces had assembled by 
 that time, and wearying of the procrastination of the Cherokee 
 chief, orders were given for the battl^. 
 
 The council-ground was about five miles below the Indian camp. 
 When the Texans arrived at the camp they found that the Indians 
 had mobilized seven miles above. When the Texans approached 
 their rendezvous they were fired on by the Indians, upon which 
 the Texans attacked and drove the Indians from their position, 
 killing a number. The next day they followed their retreating 
 enemies, and in another battle completely defeated them, killing 
 almost a hundred, among the dead being Bowl. The Indians con- 
 tinued their flight, pursued by the Texans, until the 35th, when the 
 pursuit was given up. The main body of Cherokees reached their 
 friends in Arkansas, and save for occasional marauding parties the 
 Texans were free of them as neighbors permanently.^* 
 
 The Shawnees, to whom Lamar had sent a warning on June 3, 
 decided to accept the offer of the Texan government to pay their 
 transportation and to pay for all improvements, consequently the 
 commissioners were able to sign a treaty with them, and they left 
 peaceably for the United States.^^ The Coshattoes and Alabamas, 
 who had accepted the proposal of the Congress of Coahuila and 
 Texas in 1835, were removed to other lands in the Eepublic. 
 
 In his message to Congress on November 12, 1839, Lamar re- 
 viewed the whole Cherokee question up to their removal from Texas. 
 He gave as his reasons for expelling them from Texas: (1) that 
 they were immigrant tribes, asserting political rights; (2) that 
 they were a most enlightened and most wily foe, and through their 
 superior intelligence were able to control the wild Indians; (3) 
 that they had committed atrocities on the inhabitants of Texas; 
 
 ""Report to Secretary of War, Telegraph and Texas Register, July 24 
 and August 14, 1839; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 270. 
 
 "Indian Affairs, 18S1-18U, Texas State Library. Lamar's message 
 to Congress, November 12, 1839, Telegraph and Texas Register, Novem- 
 ber 27, 1839. 
 
100 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 and (4) that they had been in collusion with the Mexicans. He 
 reviewed the efforts of commissioners to secure their friendly re- 
 moval by agreeing to pay for the transportation of the women and 
 children and for all improvements, but said that in the face of these 
 offers they flew to arms. And finally he expressed it as his opinion 
 that the proper course to pursue with all the barbarian race was 
 expulsion or extermination.** 
 
 The expulsion of the Cherokees was naturally not accomplished 
 without serious criticism of Lamar, and an earnest defense by his 
 contemporaries ; and some historians have seen fit to claim that the 
 action of Lamar was unjustified. It is perhaps not worth while 
 to enter into the discussion of this question. The history of Texas 
 in relation to the Indians is too similar to that of Georgia and 
 other American States to require justification here. Lamar's in- 
 stincts and training naturally led him to sympathize with the set- 
 tlers as against the Indians. He was secretary to Governor Troup 
 of Georgia while that State was attempting to extend her jurisdic- 
 tion over the territory of the Creeks in response to a demand 
 of the would-be settlers. And it may have been that he was too 
 ready to listen to tales of conspiracies between the Mexicans and 
 Indians. But sufficient evidence has been presented to prove that 
 the Cherokees did not have any vested rights in the soil they occu- 
 pied. The Mexican government might have been culpable for 
 promising lands and then not giving them, but the Indians cer- 
 tainly understood that they had not secured title to the lands. The 
 government of the Republic might have been culpable for using 
 the promise of lands in return for a guarantee of neutrality dur- 
 ing the War of Independence, but again the Indians knew that they 
 had not secured title to the lands under the Eepublic. 
 
 The charge that the Cherokees were engaged in a conspiracy 
 with the Mexicans is not important in this connection. The im- 
 portant question is as to whether or not sufficient evidence was pre- 
 sented to Lamar to justify his believing that they were so engaged. 
 And this seems to be answered in the affirmative. The papers 
 taken from the body of Miracle had shown him in consultation 
 \vith Bowl before the Cordova rebellion in 1838, and Bowl must 
 have known beforehand of the proposed rebellion. The papers 
 addressed by Canalizo to the Indian chiefs, including Bowl and Big 
 Mush, while not proving any connection of the Cherokees Avith the 
 
 ^Telegraph and Texas Register, November 27, 1839. 
 
Frontier Defence 101 
 
 . proposed war, could be taken by Lamar in the light of the" earlier 
 documents as at least indicating some connection, especially as 
 they came at a time when Bowl was ordering the military agent 
 of the government out of his territory and mobilizing his warriors 
 to prevent the building of a fort. 
 
 The whole problem comes back to whether or not the Indians 
 should have been permitted to establish in Texas a government of 
 their own, independent of the Texan government. A ratification 
 of the treatj' drawn up on February 23, 1836, under the Provisional 
 Government would have guaranteed the perpetuation of such a 
 government. It was inevitable that the whites should encroach 
 on the Indians, and it was unlikely that a white population would 
 have tolerated an independent Indian state within their borders. 
 Lamar, therefore, acted legally and justly, and what is perhaps 
 more important, logically, in forcing the withdrawal of the Cher- 
 okee Indians from Texas. 
 
 This story ends with the passage on February 1, 1840, of an act 
 for sectionizing and selling the lands which had been occupied 
 by the Cherokees.*' The act made no provision for the settlers 
 who had come into the territory since 1823, and because of this and 
 the desire of many to locate claims in that region, there was bitter 
 opposition to the passage of the bill. Houston, who was now a 
 member of Congress, led the advocates of the bill, while the oppo- 
 sition was led by David S. Kaufman, Speaker of the House. The 
 advocates of the measure claimed that the Cherokee lands did not 
 come under the general land act, as they had been won from the 
 Indians only in the preceding July, and that they actually belonged 
 to the government for disposal as it saw fit. The opponents of the 
 measure claimed that the lands had always belonged to the Eel- 
 public, hence they should come under the terms of the general land 
 act and be disposed of as other lands of the Eepublic. The argu- 
 ment that the sale of the lands would bring much needed revenue 
 into the treasury overcame the objections of many who held that 
 the Indians had no legal right to the land or of 6ccupancy, and the 
 measure became a law. 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 358. 
 
102 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Chaptek V 
 
 THE SANTA FB EXPEDITION 
 
 Perhaps of all the things undertaken or accomplished by Lamar, 
 the project of sending a mercantile expedition to Santa Fe ac- 
 companied by a military aid has caused most adverse criticism. 
 Most historians have followed contemporaries, particularly Hous- 
 ton, and near contemporaries, as Yoakum, and are content to 
 refer to Lamar's scheme as visionary. As it was one of the poli- 
 cies that gripped him throughout his whole administration, and 
 as its failure has led to so much criticism, a full examination of 
 his purposes in sending such an expedition, and the obstacles con- 
 fronted by those who undertook it, is necessary. 
 
 It should be understood, in the beginning, that Texas claimed, 
 whether rightly or wrongly, all the territory to the east of the 
 Rio Grande, and Santa Pe was about twelve miles east of that 
 river in N"ew Mexico. Shortly after the constitutional govern- 
 ment was established in October, 1836, Stephen F. Austin, Texan 
 Secretary of State, in his instructions to WiUiam H. Wharton, 
 the envoy to the United States, said that as regarded boundary, 
 the question could not be settled at that time, but that Wharton 
 might explain to the Government of the United States that Texas 
 claimed possession to the Eio Grande. He traced the boundary 
 as follows: Beginning at the mouth of said river on the Gulf of 
 Mexico, thence up the middle of the river, following its main 
 channel, including the islands, to its most northerly source, then 
 in a straight line to the United States boundary, and along that 
 boundary to the starting point.^ 
 
 The First Congress took early action in proclaiming the bound- 
 aries of the new republic, and on December 19, 1836, the Presi- 
 dent approved an act providing that the civil and political Juris- 
 diction of Texas should extend to include the boundaries as 
 Austin had outliued them to Wharton. At the same time the Presi- 
 dent was directed to open negotiations with the United States to 
 ascertain and determine the boundary between those two coun- 
 
 'Garrison, Diplomatic Correspondence of the Republic of Texas, I, 132. 
 American Historical Association Report, 1907, II. 
 
The Santa FS Expedition 103 
 
 tries.^ And from that time on the Rio Grande to its source was 
 officially considered as the western boundary of Texas. 
 
 Just when Lamar conceived the idea of establishing the author- 
 ity of Texas over the territory included in this claim, it is not 
 possible to say; nor can we determine positively what motive 
 chiefly influenced him in adopting the policy which he ultimately 
 carried out. It is likely that he began his administration as 
 President with some idea of taking possession of the Santa Pe 
 country, though it was not until the last year of his administration 
 that he was able actually to undertake the measure. There is no 
 doubt that he desired to establish control, partly because he was 
 convinced that the people of ISTew Mexico desired to live under 
 Texan sovereignty, and partly because he wished to create a nation 
 reaching ultimately to the Pacific; but chiefly because he under- 
 stood the commercial benefits that would accrue to Texas through 
 a diversion of the trade between St. Louis and Santa Pe to the 
 ports of Texas. 
 
 The importance of this trade to Texas was early recognized. On 
 August 27, 1829, Stephen P. Austin wrote to Henry Austin, stat- 
 ing that he contemplated opening a road to El Paso and to Santa 
 Pe with a view to diverting the Missouri trade to Galveston.* 
 Later, in 1835, Austin recommended to the Mexican government 
 that two companies of riflemen be stationed on the Colorado and 
 Brazos rivers for the purpose of defense and for opening a road 
 to Chihuahua.* One cannot say whether these suggestions in- 
 fluenced Lamar, but he was acquainted with them, and, as will 
 appear, he adopted a policy in keeping with the ideas of Austin. 
 
 At the same time that the commerce with Santa Pe was becoming 
 attractive to the Texans, it seemed that the people of New Mexico 
 were about to throw off their yoke of allegiance to the Mexican 
 government, and there was reason to suppose that Texan rule 
 would not be objectionable. In 1835, when a strong central gov- 
 ernment was established in Mexico, resulting in the secession of 
 Texas from the Mexican government. Colonel Albino Perez was 
 sent to take charge of the province of New Mexico. The people 
 up to that time had been ruled by native governors and resented 
 
 "Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1193-1194. 
 
 'Austin Papers, file of July, 1836. University of Texas. 
 
 •Stephen F. Austin to James F. Perry, Marcli 4, 1835, in Hid. 
 
104 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 the appointment of a stranger as governor. The new governor 
 introduced a system of direct taxation which proved unsatisfactory, 
 but the populace took no active steps in opposition until a native 
 alcalde was imprisoned by the Prefecto of the northern district. 
 The alcalde was. released by a mob, upon which the governor called 
 out the militia to put down the mob. It developed that the 
 militia were in sympathy with the mob, however, and, only a few 
 adhering to the governor, he was easily taken by the mob and 
 put to death. The mob proceeded to elect a governor of their 
 own, and managed to hold out as an independent government 
 until put down by Armijo in January, 1838.° 
 
 The Texan authorities knew of the rebellion, but they were not 
 aware that it had been put down. On January 5, 1838, the sec- 
 retary of state wrote the Texan minister in London, as follows: 
 
 The Californias continue independent of Mexico, and recently 
 a rebellion in Santa Fe resulted in the death of the Governor and 
 a number of the principal officers of the Government, and the 
 appointment on the part of the revolutionists, of commissioners 
 to apply to the TJ. States for admission; not knowing, I suppose, 
 that they are included within the limits claimed by Texas." 
 
 Shortly after the inauguration of Lamar an act was passed for 
 the creation of a regiment of regular soldiers for warfare against 
 the Indians.'' Colonel Edward Burleson, with a full staff of sub- 
 ordinate officers, was stationed at Bastrop, an outlying settlement 
 on the Colorado. On January 14, 1839, an act was passed for 
 the permanent location of the seat of governnaent, and this loca- 
 tion was to be limited to some point between the Trinity and the 
 Colorado, north of the San Antonio Road.* The connection be- 
 tween these two acts will appear presently. 
 
 Among the officers under the above act, William Jefferson Jones 
 was appointed as a lieutenant. He had taken part in the cam- 
 paigns against the Indians in the East in the summer of 1838. 
 He was in Houston in December, 1838, or January, 1839, and 
 it appears that he was the first to outline a program for taking 
 
 "Josiah Gregg, Commerce of the Prairies, I, 130-136. 
 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 838. The secretary of state was wrong 
 in saying that application for annexation to the United States was con- 
 sidered. 
 
 'Gammcl, Laws of Texas, II, 15. 
 
 'Ibid., II, 163. 
 
Tlie Santa Fe Expedition 105 
 
 possession of the Santa F6 country. He had a conversation with 
 Lamar on the subject, but whether he initiated the proposal, there 
 is no present way of knowing. The only record of the conversa- 
 tion is contained in a letter from Jones to Lamar a short time 
 later, and this would indicate that the originator of the scheme 
 was Jones. It is necessary to quote at length from this letter in 
 order to make clear the connection of Jones with the enterprise. 
 
 Genl M. B. Lamar. Bastrop Peby 8th, 1839, 
 
 My dear Sir, 
 
 In a letter, which I addressed to the Secretary at War a few 
 days since relative to the contemplated expedition against the 
 Comanches, I took occasion to refer to the importance of the Santa 
 Fe trade and of the facilities of diverting it to the Colorado Val- 
 ley, the natural outlet for all commerce of the North Western 
 Territory of Texas, at this moment the most productive portion 
 of it. The lowest estimate of the trade of what was formerly 
 Few Mexico has been placed at $20,000,000 (millions), consisting 
 of gold & silver and the rich furs of the mountains, which now 
 pass out by the Eed Eiver valley and the Eio Grande, building 
 up the towns of St. Louis and Matamoras. . . . 
 
 Whilst in the City of Houston and at the time of my appoint- 
 ment to the Eegiment against the Comanches, I suggested to you 
 the importance of a politico-military mission to Santa Fe with a 
 view to the introduction of the trade of New Mexico thro' the 
 natural outlet within the limits of this Eepublic. 
 
 . . . I have every reason to believe the seat of government 
 will be located on the Colorado between this place and the moun- 
 tains, probably at their foot and I have no doubt, the selection 
 will be the most judicious which can be made within the limits 
 assigned the Commissioners by the law. In that event the Cap- 
 ital of the Nation may command the entire trade of New Mex- 
 ico. . . . With a view to the immediate diversion of this trade 
 to the Colorado I would suggest the early establishment of a 
 trading house at the highest point on the river known to be 
 navigable, say at the junction of the Pasigona & Colorado, with 
 a small force to protect it. [He went so far as to suggest con- 
 ciliation with the Prairie Indians, who were the most troublesome 
 of the Indian neighbors, and continued,] 
 
 As the government of Texas claims to extend its territory to 
 the utmost limits of Santa Fe, it is desirable that the people 
 should be brought under our direct political control. The great 
 distance of Santa Fe from the government of Mexico has left that 
 territorv entirely dependent upon itself for protection, and the 
 people only feel the authority of the political power thro the 
 
106 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 ■weight of taxation imposed by the central head. They are pre- 
 pared to unite with us, and this is the favorable moment to 
 cement the friendship they have offered. The revolutionary spirit 
 is warm in ISTew Mexico, and the people are determined to throw 
 off the despotic yoke of the present government. We should at 
 once demonstrate our sympathies with them. 
 
 I hope, if possibly in your power, that you will order an im- 
 mediate military escort for a company of traders to Santa Pe, 
 and that a portion if not the entire adventure may be undertaken 
 by the government itself. Immense profits must result from it, 
 and the introduction of 75 or 100 thousand dollars of specie from 
 Santa Fe thro' the Colorado Valley will give confidence to indi- 
 vidual enterprize and the route will soon be lined with traders 
 able to protect themselves, who will introduce the riches of New 
 Mexico into the lap of Texas. . . ." 
 
 It is a striking fact that the five commissioners charged with the 
 location of the permanent seat of government came to the con- 
 clusion anticipated by Jones. I have found no direct connection 
 between Jones and the commissioners, but it is unlikely that the 
 harmony of his ideas with the report of the commissioners was 
 accidental. Unfortunately there is no record of the instructions 
 given to the commissioners by Lamar other than the statement of 
 his secretary referred to above; hence, it is not possible to indi- 
 cate how far the desirability of the point selected as a way station 
 between Santa Fe and points on the Gulf was a part of the in- 
 structions. The commissioners left while Jones was in Houston, 
 or shortly after, and there seems no doubt that there was a gen- 
 eral understanding among the commissioners and the President 
 that a location was to be selected favorable to the proposed occu- 
 pation of New Mexico. The report of the commissioners, among 
 other things, stated : 
 
 The Commissioners confidently anticipate the time when a great 
 thoroughfare shall be established from Santa Fe to our Sea ports, 
 and another from Eed 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 
 
 °W. J. Jones to Lamar, February 8, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1049. 
 
 This letter is endorsed by Lamar, "Thos J Jones Bastrop 8th Feby 1839. 
 Upon Santa Fee trade &c Received 20th Feby." This indicates a strange 
 lack of knowledge of Jones' real name. The letter was autographed, 
 "Wm. Jefferson Jones." but the iirst abbreviation is difficult of interpre- 
 tation. Certainly Jones must have been little known by Lamar previous 
 to this, though he became better known later. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 107 
 
 only the productions of the rich soil of the San Saba, Puertenalis 
 Hono and Pecan Bayo, but of all the Colorado and Brassos, as also 
 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 Umits assigned them be Teared up, not 
 that no 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 fertile and gracefully undulating woodlands 
 and luxuriant Prairies at a distance from it. The most sceptical 
 will not doubt its healthiness, 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 and free. Standing on the juncture of the 
 routs of Santa Fe and the Sea Coast, of Eed Eiver 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.^" 
 
 For a while Lamar seriously considered the sending of an imme- 
 diate military expedition to Santa Fe. This would have been 
 justified on the grounds that Texas was still technically at war 
 with Mexico, though no actual hostilities had occurred since the 
 Mexican defeat at San Jacinto. In March, 1839, he addressed the 
 Harrisburg Volunteers on the defence of the frontier, and con- 
 gratulated them on their prospects for "honorable station in the 
 select Eegiment which is to be placed under the command of 
 Colonel Karnes in the anticipated expedition to Santa Fee."^^ 
 Letters from correspondents also indicate that there was some ac- 
 tivity looking toward such an expedition.^'^ Lamar was unwilling, 
 however, to adopt the suggestion of Jones that the Prairie Indians 
 be conciliated, especially since he had repeatedly expressed himself 
 as favoring their extermination or expulsion from the republic. 
 And the warfare begun early in his administration continued 
 until the close of 1840, leaving little opportunity to divert any of 
 the forces for an expedition to Santa Fe. 
 
 "Report of Seat of Government Commissioners, April 13, 1839, MS. 
 Seat of Government Papers, Texas State Library. 
 
 ^^Lamar Papers, No. 1162. 
 
 "J. S. Jones to Lamar, April 14, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1198; W. J. 
 Jones to Lamar, April 15, 1839, Ihid., No. 1199. 
 
108 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 It will be noticed that the letter of Jones mentioned a previous 
 letter to the secretary of war on the subject of the Santa Pe trade, 
 and the importance of securing it for Texas. It is interesting to 
 notice that the secretary of war in his report, September 30, 1839, 
 mentioned the fact that the government was constructing a mili- 
 tary road from Eed Eiver to the presidio crossing of the Nueces 
 river, and proposed the construction of a similar road from Austin 
 to Santa Pe. He said that Santa Pe was situated about twelve 
 miles east of the upper Eio Grande, and was included within the 
 statutory limits of Texas. It was settled entirely by Mexicans, 
 and never having been conquered by Texas was still under the 
 Mexican government. The country between Austin and Santa Fe, 
 he said, was wholly unoccupied save by roaming bodies of Indians. 
 For many years the traders of the United States had carried on a 
 successful commerce with Santa Pe, of the annual value of four 
 or five million dollars. Santa Pe was not the consumer of all the 
 goods, but was rather the depot for trade with the interior of 
 Mexico. He thought that the trade might be diverted to Texas 
 if a military road were constructed, since the distance from Santa 
 Pe to Texas ports was much less than to St. Louis; and Texas 
 would be the recipient of the vast profits realized. He sug- 
 gested, also, that a military road would serve to conciliate the 
 western part of the Texan territory, and the two seotions would 
 be bound closely together.^^ 
 
 Lamar, in his message to Congress, November 13, 1839, re- 
 ferred to this subject, and discussed the importance of the Santa 
 Pe trade without recommending any action by Congress at that 
 time." 
 
 Lamar was intensely interested in extending the trade of the 
 republic. In his inaugural address in December, 1838, he had 
 expressed himself in favor of free trade; and in the instructions to 
 the various ministers sent to Europe, he always suggested the 
 policy of offering favorable commercial privileges in return for 
 recognition of independence. In February, 1839, he issued a proc- 
 lamation, after Congress had passed an act to that effect, opening 
 trade between the western settlements of Texas and the Mexicans 
 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 313. 
 ^*Lama/r Papers, No. 1529. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 109 
 
 on the Rio Grande.^" This action was a result of the revolt of 
 Canales against the centralists, and did not carry any recognition 
 of Mexican rights to the east of the Rio Grande. 
 
 A considerable trade had developed between Santa P6 and St. 
 Louis on one side, and between Santa F6 and Matamoras on the 
 other. This had its beginning after the expedition of Pike, 
 though it was not until 1821 or 1833 that any appreciable success 
 attended the efforts of merchants to open trade — at the time that 
 Stephen P. Austin left Missouri with his colonists and settled in 
 Texas. In 1833 and 1834 the government of the United States 
 found it necessary to give military aid to the expeditions on ac- 
 count of the hostility of the Indians.^" In 1839 an effort was 
 made to open direct trade between Van Buren, Arkansas, and 
 Chihuahua, Mexico, an account of which appeared in the Telegraph 
 and Texas Register on July 17, 1839, probably stimulating the 
 interest of the government and people of Texas in trade with 
 Mexico. 
 
 During the fall and winter of 1839-1840, the possibiKty and 
 desirability of getting control of the Santa Pe trade was under 
 discussion by the people and newspapers. The editor of The Sen- 
 tinel, pubhshed at Austin, said that he had frequently been asked 
 as to the feasibility of establishing direct communication with 
 Santa Pe. He estimated that the distance from Austin to Santa 
 Pe was about four hundred and fifty miles. The road, he said, 
 was through a rich, rolling, well-watered country. The distance 
 from Austin to the old San Saba fort was estimated at one hun- 
 dred and twenty-five miles, and the writer said that the old 
 Spanish road could be followed from Gonzales to that place. The 
 Santa Pe road, it was stated, passed through a beautiful country 
 at the headwaters of the Red River, where there was good grazing. 
 A small force would be sufficient, as there were no enemies except 
 the Comanches, and fifty well-armed men would suffice fox pro- 
 tection against them. Pinally, the Texan traders would have 
 every advantage over those from St. Louis.^^ 
 
 About the time this was pubhshed, and just before it appeared 
 in the Telegraph and Texas Register, William G. Dryden, who 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 1079. 
 
 "Gregg, Commerce of the Prairies, T, 24, 31. 
 
 "Telegraph and Texas Register, April 8, 1840. 
 
110 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 had spent a number of years in Santa Fe appeared in Texas. He 
 was sent on April 1, 1840, tO' Lamar with a letter of introduction 
 by William H. Jack of Brazoria.^^ Jack introduced liim as a 
 former officer in the Mexican service who was well acquainted in 
 Santa P6, Dryden's report of the conditions in Santa Pe must 
 have been favorable, as we find Lamar issuing an address to "The 
 Citizens of Santa Pee" two weeks later. 
 
 In this letter, which was probably carried to Santa Pe by Dry- 
 den, he saluted the citzens of Santa Fe as "Friends and Com- 
 patriots." He referred to the revolution which had emancipated 
 Texas from the "thralldom of Mexican domination." The revo- 
 lution was forced upon them by circumstances too imperative to 
 be resisted. The Anglo-American population of Texas had left 
 the comforts and the enlightened liberty of their own country, and 
 had migrated to Texas under the guarantee of the Constitution 
 of 1834. They had witnessed many civil wars, and had hoped 
 that calamities would harmonize the government, and teach the 
 authorities of Mexico that frequent political changes and do- 
 mestic discords were destructive of the prosperity and character 
 of a people. Texas had resolved to be free, when a military- 
 despotism arose with the forcible abrogation of the Constitution 
 of 1824. Impelled by the highest considerations, which a be- 
 nignant providence had sanctified by conferring an unexampled 
 prosperity upon them, they had asserted and achieved their inde- 
 pendence, and had entered the great family of nations. They 
 had been recognized by "the illustrious Government of the United 
 States, and by the ancient Monarchy of France," and other powers 
 of Europe were ready to extend the right hand of fellowship. 
 Their natural resources were in rapid progress of development; 
 the population was increasing by niimerous accessions from Europe 
 and the United States, and their commerce was extending with a 
 power and celerity seldom equalled in the history of nations. 
 
 All this was introductory to what follows. "Under these au- 
 spicous circumstances," he said, 
 
 we tender to you, a full participation in all our blessings. The 
 great River of the North, which you inhabit, is the natural and 
 convenient boundary of our territory, and we shall take great 
 pleasure in hailing you as fellow-citizens, members of our Young 
 
 "Jack to Lamar, April 1, 1840, Lamwr Papers, No. 1757. 
 
The Santa, Fe Expedition 111 
 
 Eepublic, and co-aspirants \vith us for all the glory of establishing 
 a new and happy and free Nation. Our constitution is as liberal 
 as a rational and enlightened regard to human infirmities will 
 safely permit. It confers equal political privileges on all; toler- 
 ates all Eeligions ^\'ithout distinction, and guarantees an even 
 uniform and impartial administration of the laws. 
 
 He hoped the communication would be received by them and 
 the public authorities in the same spirit in which it was dictated. 
 And then he announced that if nothing intervened to change his 
 resolution, he would despatch in time to arrive "in your section 
 of Country about the ninth of September proxima, one or more 
 commissioners, gentlemen of worth and confidence to explain more 
 minutely the condition of our country, of the seaboard and the 
 co-relative interests which so emphatically recommend and ought 
 perpetually to cement the perfect union and identity of Santa Fee 
 and Texas." The commissioners were to be accompanied by a 
 military escort for the purpose of repelling any hostile Indians 
 that might infest the passage, and with the further view of as- 
 certaining the opening of a safe and convenient route of com- 
 munication between the two sections of country, "which being- 
 strongly assimilated in interest, we hope to see united in friend- 
 ship and consolidated under a common Government." Until the 
 arrival of those commissioners he was appointing some of their 
 own citizens, William G. Dryden, John Eowland, and William 
 Workman, to whom the views of the Texan government had been 
 communicated, to confer with them upon the subject matter of 
 the communication.^" 
 
 In spite of this assurance, no action was taken to carry out the 
 purposes expressed in the letter. For the whole of the summer 
 and until October, all the Texan forces were engaged in warfare 
 with the Comanches. Besides, a total lack of funds prevented 
 the carrying out of the policy of Lamar at that time. Under 
 these circumstances, he appealed to Congress, which met in Novem- 
 ber, to supply the funds and take the necessary steps to bring 
 Santa Fe under the political and commercial control of Texas. 
 
 The Congress had been elected on an issue of retrenchment, and 
 was by no means warm to the plans of Lamar from the beginning. 
 Besides, Sam Houston had succeeded in making himself a leader 
 
 ^»Lainar to the Citizens of Santa F6, April 14, 1840, Lamar Papers, 1773. 
 
112 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 of the anti-administration forces in Congress, and, as will be seen, 
 was able to defeat appropriations for the project. 
 
 On November 9, 1840, Representative Usher, a friend of the 
 administration, introduced a resolution requesting the committee 
 on the state of the republic to take into consideration the pro- 
 priety and expediency of passing a law with the view to inform 
 the inhabitants of Santa Pe of their privileges as citizens of the 
 republic of Tezas.^" On the same day Eepresentative Miller of 
 Austin, a friend of Houston's, introduced a resolution instructing 
 the committee on finance to inquire into the expediency of laying 
 off and setting apart so much of the public domain intermediate 
 and equidistant between Austin and Santa Pe, as might be adapted 
 to the establishment of a colony of actual settlers, with a view 
 to opening, facilitating, and securing the trade of Santa Pe.^^ Out 
 of this second resolution grew the notorious "Pranco-Texienne" 
 bill, which was ardently supported by the French minister, Sal- 
 igny, and the opponents of the administration, led by Sam Hous- 
 ton. As this was an alternative measure to the policy of the ad- 
 ministration, a somewhat full examination is necessary. 
 
 This bill proposed to create a corporation headed by two French- 
 men, Jean Pierre Hippolyte Basterreche, and Pierre Francois de 
 Hassauex, which contracted to introduce within the republic eight 
 thousand families by January 1, 1849. For this purpose three 
 million acres of land were granted to the corporation, on the con- 
 dition that all the terms of the contract were carried out. The 
 land was to be divided as follows: 512,000 acres fronting one 
 hundred miles on the Rio Grande, above the Presidio road, and 
 eight miles in depth; 192,000 acres on the Nueces, above the Pre- 
 sidio road, on both sides of the river, six miles in width and twenty- 
 one in length; 194,000 acres on the Rio Frio; 128,000 acres ex- 
 tending from the Arroyo Seeo to the Arroyo Uvalde; 128,000 
 acres on the Guadalupe above the mouth of Sabine Creek; 1,000,000 
 acres, in three tracts between the Colorado and San Saba; 192,000 
 acres from the Colorado to the Pasegona river, three miles and 
 one hundred miles along the old Santa Fe road; 294,000 acres on 
 Red River, next above the Cross Timbers, fronting forty-six miles 
 and two miles in depth; 50,000 acres at the head of the Nueces; 
 
 ^^"5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., House Journal, 45. 
 '^md., 43. 
 
The Santa Fc Expedition 113 
 
 50,000 acres at the head of the Colorado; 50,000 acres on the 
 Aguila river; 50,000 acres near the source of the Little river; 
 50,000 acres on the Brazos, thirty miles above the Palo Pinto 
 creek; 50,000 acres on the Noland river, fifty miles above its 
 mouth; 50,000 acres in the forks of the Trinity, west of the Cross 
 Timbers. The company was also to maintain a line of military 
 posts from a point thirty miles above the town of Presidio, and 
 extending to the Red Eiver, at some point near the Cross Timbers. 
 This line was to consist of twenty posts, which were to be main- 
 tained for a period of twenty years. They were also to keep up 
 lines of communication between the posts, and were to appoint a 
 sufficient number of geologists, mineralogists, and botanists to ex- 
 plore the whole country and report on all mines found. They 
 were to open and work all mines found, and give fifty per cent 
 of the proceeds to the Republic of Texas. 
 
 Practical autonomy was granted to the colonists by the pro- 
 vision that they might make by-laws not in violation of the Texas 
 Constitution. Another attractive feature from the standpoint of 
 the colonists was that the lands were to be exempt from taxation 
 until January 1, 1845.^^ 
 
 This remarkable bill actually passed the House of Representa- 
 tives, and came near to passing the Senate. It is likely that it 
 would have passed the upper House except for the opposition of 
 Lamar. ^^ The defeat of this bill aroused the bitter opposition of 
 Saligny to the Government, and unfortunately, he was abetted by 
 the opponents of the administration in denouncing those who 
 voted against the bill. 
 
 President Lamar had been in poor health during a good part 
 of his administration, and on December 12, he had become so ill 
 that he found it necessary to apply to Congress for a leave of 
 absence so that he could go to New Orleans for treatment. He 
 did not return to his duties until February, 1841, after Congress 
 adjourned. In his absence, however, the Senate passed the admin- 
 istration bill providing for the opening of communications with 
 Santa Pe.^* This bill was received by the House on January 15, 
 whereupon Representative Murchison introduced a substitute bill 
 
 '^Austin City Gazette, July 21, 1841; Brown, History of Texas, II, 187. 
 "See Mayfield to Saligny, March 29, 1841. and Mayfield to Mcintosh, 
 May 12, 1841, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 1315; 1326. 
 "5 Tex. Cong. 1 Sess., House Journal, 509. 
 
114 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 authorizing the President to raise volunteers to make an expedi- 
 tion to Santa Fe. This principle was accepted by the committee 
 on the state of the republic, and five days later was reported to 
 the House as a substitute for the Senate measure. On January 
 26 the House defeated the Senate bill by a vote of sixteen to nine- 
 teen, and passed the substitute measure by a majority of two, 
 Houston working against both bills.^^ The Senate failed to agree 
 to the substitute measure, and the session canje to a close without 
 legislative approval of the expedition to Santa Fe, but apparently 
 the principle was accepted by both Houses, and they were only 
 unable to agree to the particular method to be used in carrying 
 out the project. 
 
 Lamar returned to the Capital in February, 1841, and imme- 
 diately began preparations to despatch an expedition to Santa Fe 
 in spite of the failure of Congress to make provision for it. He 
 issued a long proclamation to the people of Santa Fe, calling upon 
 them peacefully to accept Texan rule, and guaranteeing them the 
 privileges mentioned in his letter of April, 1840.^* He appointed 
 Hugh McLeod military commander of the expedition, and, since 
 Congress had failed to make appropriations for the regular army, 
 authorized him to raise volunteers to accompany the expedition. 
 He took upon himself the authority to order the secretary of the 
 treasury to instruct the comptroller to open on his books an appro- 
 priation for fitting out the Santa Fe expedition,^' and Major 
 George T. Howard was sent to New Orleans to purchase supplies. 
 
 The volunteers for the expedition began to arrive in Austin 
 early in May, and went into camp on Brushy Creek, about twenty 
 miles north of Austin.^' The party was collecting for the next 
 month, the last group leaving Austin on Jime 18, accompanied 
 by President Lamar, and the secretary of the treasury, J. Gr. 
 Chalmers; and on June 21, the whole body set out on the long 
 march to Santa Fe. 
 
 The expedition consisted of a military escort consisting of two 
 hundred and seventy volunteers under the command of General 
 Hugh McLeod, and about fifty other persons, consisting of Gen- 
 
 '"IMd., 518, 555, 610. 
 
 ^'A copy of the proclamation ia in Lamar Papers, No. 1942. 
 "Lamar to Chalmers, Secretary of the Treasury, March 24, 1841, Yoakum, 
 History of Texas, II, 323, note. 
 
 "Austin City Gazette, May 12, 1841. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 115 
 
 eral McLeod's staff, merchants, tourists, servants, and the civil 
 commissioners who were to take over the civil government of the 
 province in case of success.^' 
 
 The commissioners, William G. Cooke, J. Antonio Navarro, 
 Eiehard F. Brenham, and William G. Dryden, being expected to 
 take over the civil affairs, the instructions of the state department 
 were directed to them. According to these instructions, the com- 
 missioners were appointed to accompany the military expedition 
 about to start for Santa Fe, and they were to have the chief direc- 
 tions of the expedition. The expedition had been organized by 
 the President, the acting secretary of state said, for the purpose 
 of opening a communication with that portion of the republic 
 known as Santa Fe, and of closely uniting it with the rest of the 
 republic, "so that the Supremacy of our constitution and laws 
 may be asserted equally over the entire tract of country embraced 
 within our limits; but as that portion is inhabited by a people 
 strangers to our institutions and to our system of Government, 
 speaking a different language, and deriving their origin from an 
 alien source, whose religion, laws, manners and customs, all differ 
 so widely from our ovm, the greatest circumspection will be neces- 
 sary, in making known to that people th,e object of your mission, 
 on your first arrival in Santa fe and subsequently in conducting 
 your intercourse with them." 
 
 The great object of the President, he said, was to attach the 
 people of the district of Santa Fe to the Texas system of govern- 
 ment, and to create in their minds a reverence for the Texan 
 Constitution; and to spread among them a spirit of liberty and 
 independence, which would alone qualify them for good citizens, 
 under a government, the very existence of which, depended upon 
 the will of the people. 
 
 The President had no illusions as to the possible manner of 
 reception of the expedition; and the commissioners were instructed 
 to conduct themselves with caution, and to require the same 
 of the military command entrusted to their charge. It was ex- 
 pected that they would meet with opposition from narrow-minded 
 persons, but the President believed that patience and good judg- 
 ment would accomplish their purpose. 
 
 Their first object upon entering the city of Santa Fe was to 
 
 "Kendall, Texan Santa Fe Expedition, 72. 
 
116 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 attempt to get possession of all the public property; but they were 
 to hesitate to use force if the property were not surrendered peace- 
 ably. "The people of Santa fe are our fellow citizens," said the 
 Secretary of State, 
 
 and it cannot be long before they will be fully incorporated with 
 us, partaking of all the advantages and benefits which we enjoy, 
 under our form of government. ... If they can be brought with . 
 their own free will and consent, to submit quietly and cheerfully 
 to an incorporation with us, acknowledging themselves a con- 
 stituent portion of the Eepublic, and setting into operation our 
 constitution and laws, then may we confidently expect of them, 
 fidelity and patriotism; but if they are awed into submission by 
 threats, or still worse if they are driven to it by the application 
 of Military power, the disasterous consequences that must in- 
 evitably follow, cannot well be foreseen. 
 
 The commissioners were to be left largely to their own resources 
 in accomplishing the purposes of the government, but several 
 arguments were submitted for their guidance. In the first place, 
 they were to assure the people of Santa Fe of the protection of 
 the government in the enjoyment of life, liberty, trial by jury, 
 freedom from forced loans, and from aU taxes levied without their 
 consent; at the same time they were to hold before their eyes the 
 folly of resistance. Emphasis was to be placed on the fact that 
 by coming under the government of Texas they were to have equal 
 representation in Congress as based upon population. 
 
 In case all obstacles were overcome, after taking possession of 
 the custom-houses, books, money, archives, they were to appoint 
 such persons as they might think proper for the government of 
 the city; and were advised to appoint local men as far as pos- 
 sible. After familiarizing themselves with the conditions, they 
 were to propose the sending of three commissioners to Austin, 
 who were to have a seat in the Congress, with the right to dis- 
 cuss any proposition coming before the body, but without a right 
 to vote. 
 
 In view of the fact that some of the Texan politicians of the 
 day, and many people in the United States, understood it to be 
 Lamar's intention to conquer with a force of two hundred and 
 seventy men a province of Mexico lying hundreds of miles from 
 the frontier of his own government, the following quotation from 
 the official instructions is inserted, which indicates that no such 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition ll'? 
 
 purpose was in his mind. After stating that the foregoing in- 
 structions were based on the supposition that no force would be 
 opposed by the citizens of Santa M, and that in case of opposition 
 the commissioners must rely upon their own discretion, the in- 
 structions continued: 
 
 The President anxious as he is to have our National flag ac- 
 knowledged in Santa fe, does not consider it expediant at this time 
 to force it upon that portion of the Eepublic. If the Mexican 
 authorities are prepared to defend the place with arms, and if 
 you can satisfy yourselves that they will be supported by the mass 
 of the people, no good result can come from risking a battle; for 
 if our arms are successful, a strong Military force would be neces- 
 sary to hold possession of the place, the cost of keeping which, to 
 say nothing of other objections equally forcible, would of itself be 
 sufficient; and if they are unfortunate, the evils that would flow 
 from it are sufficiently apparent. In this case therefore, you 
 will not be authorized to risk a battle. 
 
 It was to be expected that much would be made of the com- 
 mercial possibilities of the expedition, yet we find that little atten- 
 tion was paid to that subject. "As valuable as their trade is," 
 said the instructions, 
 
 and solicitous as the President is to open its advantages to the 
 citizens of this country, he yet owes a paramount duty to the 
 constitution, and has directed me to instruct you, that you are 
 to make no arrangement, stipulation or agreement whatever with 
 the inhabitants, for the admission of Texan goods into that Dis- 
 trict of country, by which Texan Citizens will be required to 
 pay any duties to them. We claim the jurisdiction, and con- 
 sequently the right to demand the revenue, and if we cannot en- 
 force our right, we must at least do nothing to impair it. . . . 
 The object of the expedition being to conciliate the people of 
 Santa fe, to incorporate them with us, and to secure to our 
 citizens all the benefits arising from the valuable trade carried 
 on with them. It may be necessary to diminish the tariif to a 
 still lower rate to effect these objects; but nothing short of neces- 
 sity will justify any interference with the rates established by 
 Congress, and of this necessity the collector of customs must be 
 the Judge.^" 
 
 At the same time that the above instructions were given to the 
 four commissioners, a separate list was given to Cooke, who was to 
 
 '"Acting Secretary of State Eoberta to William G. Cooke, etc., June 15, 
 1841. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 737-743. 
 
118 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamm- 
 
 he resident commissioner and have charge of the government after 
 the other commissioners had returned to Texas. These instruc- 
 tions constituted Cooke the ruler of Santa Pe under the laws of 
 the Eepublic of Texas, and of course were to be effective only in 
 case the expedition accomplished its purpose.^^ 
 
 As I have said, the last detachment of volunteers and guests 
 left Austin for the camp on Brushy Creek. Among these was 
 George Wilkins Kendall, editor of the Kew Orleans Picayune, who 
 had decided to join the expedition when he became acquainted 
 with Major George T. Howard, who was purchasing supplies in 
 New Orleans, and who was invited to join the expedition as a 
 guest of the government. Kendall has given us an extensive 
 account of the trip from its beginning to his release from a Mexi- 
 can prison.^^ Also with this last detachment rode the President 
 of the republic. During their ride to Brushy Creek from Austin 
 they stopped for lunch in the middle of the day, and Kendall was 
 very much impressed by the fact that Lamar groomed his own 
 horse and cooked his own dinner. "There was a specimen of 
 Eepubliean simplicity," he said, "the chief magistrate of a nation 
 cooking his own dinner and grooming his own horse." He then 
 paid this tribute to Lamar : "In all my intercourse with General 
 Lamar I ever found him a courteous and honorable gentleman, 
 possessing a brilliant intellect, which has been highly cultivated; 
 and if Texas ever had a warm and untiring friend, it was and is 
 Mirabeau B. Lamar."^' 
 
 Lamar and his party spent the night in camp, reviewed the 
 various companies, and delivered an address to the assembled 
 party, and then returned to Austin. The expedition got under 
 way June 21, a month later than had been originally planned.'* 
 
 In writing a biography of Lamar, we might perhaps leave the 
 expedition here; for the group of men who set out with such con- 
 fidence and so blithely on June 21 were not heard of again until 
 several months after the close of Lamar's administration, and 
 then they were prisoners of the Mexicans, on their way to Mexico 
 City. But the failure of the expedition was made the excuse for 
 
 "Roberts to Cooke, June 1.5, 1S41, in Hid., 743-747. 
 "Narrative of the Texan Santa P6 Expedition. 
 ==Kendall, Narrative, I, 69. 
 "Ihid., I, 71. 
 
The Santa Fi Expedition 119 
 
 bitter attacks on Lamar, and since historians have accepted the 
 more or less superficial judgments of the time, it will be well to 
 give a somewhat complete history of the expedition, and try to 
 arrive at the causes for its failure. 
 
 The first incident after leaving that contributed to the failure 
 of the enterprise occurred only a few days after departure from 
 the camp on Brushy Creek. Anticipating a journey of only six 
 weeks or two montlis, provisions had been prepared for that 
 length of time; but the long delay in getting under way had 
 caused the consumption of the cattle to a large extent, and when 
 the party pitched camp on Little Eiver, June 34, only about sixty 
 miles from Austin, it was found necessary to send back for mere 
 beef cattle. The main body waited five days for these suppUes, 
 and, in the meantime, continued to consume the provisions which 
 were not too plentiful.'^ 
 
 They left the camp on Little Eiver on Jime 29, and traveling 
 almost due northward, were almost a month in traversing the 
 valley of the Brazos. On July 21, they came to the Cross Timbers, 
 about two hundred miles from their starting place. About ten 
 days were consumed in cutting their way through the Cross 
 Timbers, the wagons of the merchants which accompanied the 
 expedition making necessary roads of some description. At this 
 point, it was necessary to cross the Brazos, which was accomplished 
 with much difficulty. 
 
 The purpose of the leaders was to go north to the Red Eiver, 
 and to follow that river to its source, whence only a short distance 
 would remain to Santa P6, and that along the well marked trail 
 from Santa F6 to St. Louis. The distance was much greater than 
 a direct route, but they were unable to secure guides who knew 
 the eoimtry to the northwest. It was to prove that they were no 
 more fortunate in securing a guide for the longer journey. After 
 leaving the Cross Timbers, July 31, their next destination was 
 Eed Eiver. They soon came to the Wichita Eiver which they 
 mistook for the Eed Eiver, and followed it for several days, until 
 they found slightly to the south, the headwaters of the Brazos, 
 the river which they had crossed a month before. When this 
 was discovered, a detachment was sent northward to explore for 
 the Eed Eiver, and it was located about seventy-five miles north 
 
 ^Kendall, Narrative, I, 85. 
 
130 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 of where the main body was encamped.^* Prom this point I shall 
 quote freely from the official report of William G. Cooke, the resi- 
 dent commissioner. 
 
 After many unexpected delays and embarrassments, that re- 
 tarded our march beyond the time anticipated for our arrival in 
 Santa Fe, we at length on the 39th August, reached a point on 
 the Palo Duro a tributary of Red Eiver beyond which there was 
 apparently no further means of progressing with the wagons ac- 
 companying the Command. Previous to this time, on the 11th, 
 Mr. Howland our guide, was sent forward with two men, bearing 
 a communication to Mr. Dryden our colleague in Santa Fe; we 
 being at the time under the impression that we were within one 
 hundred miles of that city — judging from the iaformation of a 
 Mexican whom we had also employed as a guide, who was a native 
 of Taos and appeared to be familiar with the country through 
 which we were passing. A few days after the departure of How- 
 land the Mexican suddenly deserted in company with a private — 
 an Italian named Brignoli. On our arrival at the Palo Duro 
 the Commissary reported but five days ration of beef, other rations 
 exhausted — the country in advance of us appeared impassable for 
 wagons — and Indians in large numbers had made their appear- 
 ance in the vicinity of our camp. Under these embarrassing cir- 
 cumstances, when further progress with the entire command and 
 train seemed impracticable, it was concluded that the undersigned, 
 and a majority of the Commission should proceed forward with 
 one-third of the escort to the nearest settlement to procure sup- 
 plies and guide to furnish and conduct the troops into ISTew 
 Mexico. We left camp accordingly on the 31st August with 75 
 soldiers under the command of Capt Sutton — who with the mer- 
 chants and others formed a body of 97 men. It was our expecta- 
 tion on leaving camp that we should arrive at settlements or 
 strike a road that had been described to us leading to San Miguel, 
 in five days march — but we saw no human being nor any sign of 
 civilization until we reached the Moro a branch of Eed Eiver on 
 the 11th Sept, where we met with some Mexican traders — they 
 informed us that we were about 80 miles distant from San Miguel 
 and that there was a wagon road leading from that place to within 
 a short distance of our camp. We immediately sent back two of 
 them with orders to Genl. McLeod to destroy the baggage wagons 
 and follow us with all despatch. We continued our march and 
 on the 14th Mr. G. Vanness our Secretary was despatched ahead 
 to San Miguel to communicate with Mr. Dryden whom we expected 
 to meet there and to gain some information respecting the condi- 
 tion of the country — ^he was also directed to make arrangements 
 
 "Kendall, Narrative, passim. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 121 
 
 for procuring supplies — he was accompanied by Maj. G. T. How- 
 ard, Capt W. P. Lewis, Mr. Fitzgerald a merchant of San Antonio 
 and Mr. Kendall of New Orleans. 
 
 The main body were forced tO' travel slowly on account of the 
 condition of their horses, and arrived on the Pecos on September 
 15 at a small town named Anton Chico, twenty miles from San 
 Miguel. Here they were visited by a Mexican officer accompanied 
 by seventy arm,ed men, who informed them that the Governor of 
 New Mexico was advancing to meet them with a large force, and 
 ordered them to surrender their arms. "We declined holding any 
 communication with him in regard to the object of our visit, 
 . . . but informed him that we came with no hostile inten- 
 tions toward the citizens of the country and positively refused to 
 lay down our arms." 
 
 They decided to remain at Anton Chico until they had received 
 some intelligence from Van Ness, who was supposed to have pro- 
 ceeded to meet the governor. On the 16th they had another 
 interview with the Mexican officer, and told him that unless they 
 received some news from Van Ness by the following morning, 
 they would proceed to San Miguel. The officer said that he 
 would send a courier to Van Ness and order his return, and said 
 that on the following day he would cross the river with his men 
 and encamp near the Texans in order to prove their friendliness. 
 'Tip to this time," said the report, "no event had occurred that 
 could justly excite feelings of hostility against us among the 
 people we had met who had been treated by our men with the 
 utmost courtesy, the provisions -we had received had been paid 
 for at double their customary value." 
 
 On the following day the officer called on them with an express 
 from the governor requesting them to pause until that function- 
 ary could arrive. He stated that the governor was approaching 
 with five thousand men and would be in Anton Chico the follow- 
 ing day. In the meantime the Mexican forces began to take posi- 
 tions favorable to attack, and the Texans assumed a posture of 
 defence, expecting every moment to be attacked by the forces 
 under Salezar. "There was no longer any doubt as to the inten- 
 tions of the Mexicans," continued the report, 
 
 and we were momentarily expecting a conflict, when Capt Lewis 
 galloped over to us in company with Don Manuel Chavis kinsman 
 
123 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 and confidential agent of the Governor with authority to demand 
 our surrender upon the following terms— That we should imme- 
 diately give up our arms and remain at Anton Chico as prisoners 
 of war on parole, until such time as supplies could be obtained 
 for the subsistence of our troops in returning to Texas — that on 
 no condition could we be allowed to proceed further into Mexican 
 territory, but that as soon as provisions were procured we should 
 be escorted beyond the frontier, where the arms, horses and private 
 property of the officers and men should be restored to them. — 
 These terms were offered by Mr. Chavis, with the most solemn 
 pledges for their fulfillment, seconded by the assurances of Capt 
 Lewis in whom at that time we reposed the utmost confidence. 
 
 And then follows the story of Lewis's treachery. Lewis in- 
 formed the commissioners that he had gone with Van Ness and 
 Howard to execute the orders of the commissioners, when all 
 three were surrounded and taken prisoners by the Mexicans. They 
 were about to be shot when some explanations Lewis made caused 
 the Mexicans to release them; and they were conducted to the 
 governor. The governor, Lewis said, released him and sent him 
 back on parole. He stated that the people of the country were 
 all arrayed in arms against the invaders, and greatly exasperated 
 against them on account of the false reports that had been cir- 
 culated as to the object of the expedition by the deserter BrignoU. 
 He then told them that he had left the governor within twelve 
 miles of Anton Cl^ico with two thousand troops, and that he 
 would shortly be joined by two thousand more, all well armed 
 and disciplined. As a result of this, and on account of his argu- 
 ment that the lives of the whole party depended upon surrendering 
 their arms at once, "Under these circumstances," said Cooke's 
 report, 
 
 without provisions for our men, our horses broken down by long 
 and weary marches, deprived of any hope of aid from our main 
 body by a distance of two hundred miles, with an enemy before 
 us with more than five times our numbers and should we be vic- 
 torious in the present fight of which we had no doubt, the prospect 
 of being attacked by several thousand fresh troops in less than 
 twenty four hours — in this situation and considering that we were 
 specially instructed to avoid hostilities should the people them- 
 selves be opposed to us, we concluded the best and most prudent 
 course we could adopt was an acceptance of the terms proposed, 
 and consequently we surrendered. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 123 
 
 Governor Armijo arrived at Anton Chico on the 18th with less 
 than one thousand men, and immediately distributed the arms of 
 the Texans among the Mexicans, and started the Texans on their 
 long march to Mexico Citj-. At the same time he moved forward 
 to meet the body which had been left behind on August 31 under 
 General McLeod. Efforts had been made to inform McLeod of 
 the fate of the advance party of ninety-seven men, but they failed, 
 and McLeod received the same treatment as the others, being 
 forced to surrender one hundred and eighty-two men, who were 
 sent after the first group to Mexico City.'^ 
 
 It is not my purpose to follow the prisoners on their painful 
 journey on foot to the city of Mexico, nor to follow the negotia- 
 tions for their release. It is sufBeient here to say that in the 
 spring, after seven months in prison, through the iatervention 
 of the foreign ministers in Mexico, all the prisoners who could 
 show themselves to be citizens of the United States or some 
 European country were released. The Texans, with the exception 
 of Ifavarro, who was bitterly hated by Santa Anna, were released 
 in the summer, and by the close of 1843 most of them were again 
 in Texas.^* I shall,, however, examine the various causes given 
 for the failure of the expedition, and consider the criticisms and 
 defence of the administration for undertaking the enterprise. 
 
 For the sake of clearness let me summarize at this point the 
 developments connected with the sending of the expedition. The 
 Texans claimed, partly as a result of the treaty of May 14, 1836, 
 with Santa Anna, and partly on accoxmt of a statute, passed in 
 December, 1836, that the boundary extended along the Eio Grande 
 to its source, which would include Santa Fe. Lamar, on coming 
 into oflBce, was advised by his friends and received favorably their 
 advice to undertake a politico-military expedition to Santa Fe, 
 partly for the purpose of establishing commercial connections, but 
 also for the purpose of establishing political control over that part 
 of New Mexico. Various other interests prevented the under- 
 taking until the summer of 1841. In the meantime, however, 
 
 "W. G. Cooke and E. P. Brenham to Secretary of State, November 9, 
 1841. Santa Fe Papers. This report was sent from Allende, Chihuahua, 
 Mexico, as they were on their way to Mexico City. It did not arrive in 
 Texas until February of the following year, after Lamar's term of oflSce 
 had expired. 
 
 "Garrison, Texas, 246. 
 
124 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 Lamar had been in communication with men who had lived at 
 Santa Fe, and had received assurances that the populace were 
 very much dissatisfied with the rule of Armijo, the governor, and 
 would welcome a Texan force. As a result of this he sent a letter 
 to the citizens of Santa Pe, and appointed three commissioners 
 to prepare the ground for the coming of the Texaais. He at-' 
 tempted to secure some authorization from Congress for the ex- 
 pedition during the session of 1840-1841, but due to an economiz- 
 ing spirit, and on account of the opposition of Houston, and as 
 a result of a difference of opinion as to how military aid should 
 be extended to the merchants, nothing was done by Congress. In 
 spite of this, Lamar called for volunteers, ordered an appropria- 
 tion opened on the books of the comptroller for fitting out the 
 expedition, and on June 21, 1841, it left with his blessing, but 
 to be taken captive in September, before ever they reached 
 Santa Pe. 
 
 Nothing having been heard of the expedition when the next 
 Congress met in November, 1841, a reaction had set in, and the 
 members were free in their criticism of the President's action. 
 The House of Eepresentatives appointed a select committee to 
 investigate the whole subject. This committee reported on De- 
 cember 6, and found that the President had violated the Consti- 
 tution in ordering money paid out of the treasury without an 
 appropriation by Congress, and that his action in enlisting an 
 army of volunteers without the sanction of Congress was in viola- 
 tion of the Constitution. They found that for the expenses of the 
 expedition $89,549.69 had been expended.^* The quarter-master- 
 general, on the other hand, reported the sum of $78,421.51.*° 
 
 The committee did not find that any of the rights of Mexico 
 had been overridden, and there is every evidence that it was con- 
 sidered purely as a matter of domestic concern, and the question 
 was one merely of constitutionality. Houston held the same view, 
 as instanced by his letter to Santa Anna, March 21, 1842. In this 
 letter he defended the claims to the Eio Grande as a western 
 boundary, and insisted that the prisoners should be released, since 
 it was no concern of Santa Anna. At the same time, he said that 
 
 "Austin Oity Gazette, Decemlier 15, 1841. 
 "Army Papers, 1840-1841. Texas State Library. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 135 
 
 Lamar had acted unconstitutionally in sending the expedition 
 without the approval of Congress." 
 
 This criticism was probably justified. It must be remembered, 
 however, that Lamar had considered sending the expedition on 
 his own account ever since the matter first came into his mind, 
 and he did not consider the approval of Congress necessary. Nor- 
 mally the regular army was under his command, and could be 
 sent anywhere in the republic that he wished to send it; and he 
 conceived it to be a legitimate use of the army to protect mer- 
 chants in opening up trade which all public men favored. It was 
 the failure of Congress to make any provision for the regular 
 army in the session of 1840-1841, that made it necessary for 
 Lamar to take the matter into his own hands. He justified him- 
 self in this, however, by saying that the principle had been ac- 
 cepted by both houses, and it was only the details on which they 
 could not agree. 
 
 Assuming that the claims of Texas to the Eio Grande were 
 just, and nobody in Texas denied it at that time, was Lamar 
 justified in his assumption that the people of Santa Fe would 
 accept Texas sovereignty without a struggle? The instructions to 
 the commissioners prove that Lamar had no grandiose schemes of 
 conquest, and that he was not under the illusion that he was able 
 at that distance to maintain control over New Mexico in case there 
 was resistance on the part of the people of New Mexico them- 
 selves. The whole expedition was planned on the assumption that 
 the people of Santa Fe would welcome the Texans. And Lamar 
 was not alone in this assumption. The revolt of 1837-1838 against 
 the central authorities, and the complaints which had come to 
 Texas concerning the rule of Armijo, who had put down the revolt, 
 together with the assurances of Dryden, who was in Texas in 1840, 
 convinced the people of Texas that no difficulty would be en- 
 coimtered in taking possession of Santa Fe. "The universal im- 
 pression in Texas was," says Kendall, 
 
 ihat the inhabitants of Santa Fe were anxious to throw off a yoke, 
 which was not only galling, but did not of right belong to them, 
 and rally under the "lone star" banner; and events which have 
 since transpired, and which I shall refer to hereafter, have con- 
 vinced me that such was the feeling of the population. Should 
 
 "Houston to Santa Anna, March 21, 1842, Niles Register, LXTI, 98. 
 
136 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 any opposition be made to the peaceable entry of the Texan 
 pioneers, it was thought that it would come from the few regular 
 troops always stationed at Santa Fe by the government of Mexico ; 
 and this force would have easily been put down if a large majority 
 of the residents were in favor of such a course. 
 
 William G. Dryden, who had been in Austin in March and 
 April, 1840, returned to Santa Fe on September 17, and imme- 
 diately began holding conferences with the people and governor 
 of Santa Fe. On March 10, 1841, he wrote: 
 
 Ever since I airived on the 17th of last Septr., we have been 
 looking for some news from Texas — Because every American, and 
 more than two thirds of the Mexicans, and all the Pueblo Indians 
 are with us heart and soul; and whenever they have heard of your 
 sending Troops, there has been rejoicing: and indeed I have talked 
 many times with the Governor, and he says he would be glad to 
 see the day of your arrival in this country, as he feels well assured 
 that no aid will be sent from below, as they have no means, and 
 he himself will make no resistance 
 
 I assured all my friends you would send last fall — I now have 
 pledged myself, this summer; and I shall never lose hope as long 
 as life shall last. I trust, if all things are right, before you re- 
 ceive this, the force will be iinder march, and near here. It will 
 but be a trip of pleasure.*^ 
 
 This letter did not reach Lamar until August, after the expedi- 
 tion had left, but indicates that this man who had lived long 
 among them thought the people of Santa Fe would welcome the 
 Texan expedition. 
 
 An interesting testimony to the same effect is contained in a 
 letter of an American Santa Fe trader to the St. Louis Bulletin in 
 the fall of 1841. The writer related some of the incidents of the 
 trip which he had just completed from Santa Fe, and vrith regard 
 to the Texan expedition said : 
 
 No news had been received at the time of the departure of the- 
 Texan expedition. A ready submission on the part of the inhabi- 
 tants is to be anticipated; but the number sent from Texas, with- 
 out reinforcements, is entirely too small to retain possession of 
 the country. Should they arrive at all in Santa Fe it is said 
 they must suffer for want of supplies, as great scarcity of food in 
 that quarter is looked for for the coming winter.*^ 
 
 "Dryden to Lamar, March 10, 1841, Swnta Fc Papers, Texas State- 
 Library; Austin City Gazette, August 25, 1S41. 
 *°Copied from St. Louis Bulletin in ISliles Register, LXI, 100. 
 
The Santa Fa Expedition 137 
 
 Unquestionably the reception accorded to the expedition was 
 not in accordance with the hopes or expectations of the Texans, 
 of Dryden, and of the anonymous American writer. Was this 
 due to the fact that the observers misunderstood the attitude of 
 the people of Santa Fe, and that there was never the willingness 
 to change allegiance that was ascribed to them; or was it due to 
 a change in sentiment before the Texans arrived, and before the 
 agents in 'Santa Fe could communicate to the authorities of Texas ? 
 Both were partly true, it seems. Apparently no secret was made 
 of the plans of the Texans, either in Texas, or by the commission- 
 ers residing in Santa Fe; so ample "opportunity was given for 
 counter-preparations in case the Mexican government opposed 
 Texan occupation of Santa Fe. Dryden had been discussing the 
 subject since September, 1840, and there had been ample time 
 for Armijo to communicate with his home government; but in 
 case the governor were disloyal, the central authorities had ample 
 opportunity to learn of the project from other sources. 
 
 On the day after the Santa Fe party took their departure from 
 the camp on Brushy Creek, Eafael Uribe, an emissary of General 
 Mariano Arista, commander of the Northern Army of Mexico, ar- 
 rived in Austin with a letter from his commander to "Mr. Mirabeau 
 Lamar." The substance of this letter was that Arista was anxious 
 to come to some agreement with the Texan authorities with regard 
 to the border brigandage which was taking place. Lamar refused 
 to receive this emissary because the letter was improperly ad- 
 dressed, but he took the opportunity of sending two commissioners 
 to the camp of Arista empowered to treat on the subject.** The 
 rejected commissioner was able to learn of the departure of the 
 Santa Fe expedition, and to give information to his government 
 regarding it. Governor Armijo and the other authorities had 
 been advised that an invasion from Texas was probable, and after 
 the departure of McLeod and his party, special warnings had been 
 sent from the city of Mexico ordering him to keep a constant look- 
 out for the party. Reinforcements were promised him in case 
 of need.*° 
 
 Twitchell is of the opinion that while some dissatisfaction did 
 exist among the native people owing to the official abuses of 
 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 748. 
 
 '"Twitchell, Leading Facts of New Mexicam, History, II, 74. 
 
128 Mvraheau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 Armijo, still the great majority of 'New Mexicans were not ready 
 to hail the Texans as deliverers; and naturally Armijo, who waj 
 well settled in power himself and left to his own devices by the 
 central authorities, was opposed to any change of government. 
 As a consequence, every precaution was taken, and among the 
 common classes the Texans were represented as being a "choice 
 assortment of reckless and desperate men, from whom nothing 
 other than pillage, murder and outrage could be expected."*" That 
 the governor should be averse to accepting Texan control and 
 giving up his own office is entirely reasonable; but I cannot accept 
 the view of Mr. Twitchell that there was not a large majority of 
 the people of Santa Pe willing if not anxious to change to Texan 
 sovereignty. 
 
 It will be recalled that Dryden wrote to Lamar on March 10, 
 and April 18, 1841, showing with what favor his mission had 
 been received, and with what enthusiasm the people anticipated 
 the coming of the Texans. Kendall, who with the advance guard 
 was taken prisoner before arriving in Santa Pe, was convinced 
 that the great majority of the people were anxious for the success 
 of the Texans, and that the failure was due to fortuitous circum- 
 stances over which the Texan authorities had no control. I feel 
 constrained to quote in full the explanation given by Kendall for 
 the failure of the enterprise. 
 
 In the first place, the expedition began its march too late in the 
 season by at least six weeks. Had it left Austin on the 1st of 
 May, the grass would have been much better, and we should have 
 had little difficulty in finding good water both for ourselves and 
 cattle. In the second place, we were disappointed in obtaining a 
 party of the Lipan Indians as guide, and were consequently obliged 
 to take a route some three hundred miles out of the way, and in 
 many places extremely difficult of travel. Thirdly, the govern- 
 ment of Texas did not furnish wagons and oxen enough to trans- 
 port the goods of the merchants, and this, as a matter of course. 
 caused tedious delays. Fourthly, cattle enough on the lioof were 
 not provided, even with the second supply sent for by the com- 
 missioners from Little Eiver. Again, the distance was vastly 
 greater than we had anticipated in our widest and wildest calcu- 
 lations, owing to which circumstance, and an improvident waste 
 of provisions while in the buffalo range, we found ourselves upon 
 half allowance in the very middle of our long journey — a privation 
 
 "Ihid., II, 74. 
 
The Santa Fe Expedition 139 
 
 which weakened, dispirited, and rendered the men unfit for duty. 
 The Indians also annoyed us much, by their harassing and con- 
 tinual attempts to cut oft' our small parties and steal our horses. 
 Finally, the character of the governor of ISTew Mexico was far 
 from being understood, and his power was underrated by all. 
 General Lamar's estimate of the views and feelings of the people 
 of Santa F6 and the vicinity was perfectly correct; not a doubt 
 can exist that they all were and are anxious to throw off the op- 
 pressive yoke of Armijo, and come under the liberal institutions 
 of Texas; but the governor found us divided into small parties, 
 broken down by long marches and want of food, discovered a 
 traitor among us, too, and taking advantage of these circum- 
 stances, his course was plain and his conquest easy.*' 
 
 Granting that there was sufficient evidence of the friendly feel- 
 ing of the people of Santa Fe, there is still sufficient grounds, 
 even among the causes of failure listed by Kendall, for serious 
 criticism of Lamar for undertaking the enterprise. It would seem 
 that a careful executive would have so planned the expedition that 
 the causes contributing to failure would be reduced to a minimum. 
 Why did the expedition not start by the first of May? It was 
 intended by the President that it should, and the delay was caused 
 by the slowness with which men volunteered for the expedition. 
 Why was not more known as to the distance? The actual dis- 
 tance in an air line from Austin to Santa Fe was only a little less 
 than a thousand miles, and the indirect route taken by the Texans 
 was near thirteen hundred. Nobody in Texas at that time thought 
 it was more than five hundred miles, however, and Lamar can 
 hardly be blamed for adopting the universal view. Jefferson pur- 
 chased Louisiana with less knowledge of that territory than Lamar 
 possessed of the upper Rio Grande. The failure to provide suffi- 
 cient supplies is natural when we consider the mistaken idea as 
 to the distance. It does seem that Lamar should have known 
 enough of the character of the Mexicans not to place loo much 
 confidence on the word of one of their rulers, and for this failure 
 he was justly criticised. 
 
 Lamar seems to have had a single-track mind, and when once 
 he became convinced that an expedition to Santa Fe should be 
 undertaken for the two-fold purpose of bringing that region under 
 subjection to Texas and securing the valuable trade for Texas, 
 
 "Kendall, Texan Santa Fe Expedition, I, 365-366. 
 
130 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 he was unable to consider the effect of success or failure on the 
 relations of Texas with Mexico. In fact, it seems that he con- 
 sidered the question as entirely foreign to the interests of Mexico, 
 and even while he was preparing the expedition, he was sending a 
 minister to Mexico to treat on all questions at issue between 
 Mexico and Texas, and, as we have seen, two days after the ex- 
 pedition left he was sending commissioners to the camp of Gen- 
 eral Arista for the purpose of arrangmg some means of stamping 
 out brigand border warfare, and in order to keep open the com- 
 merce of Texas with the western settlements of Mexico on the 
 Eio Grande.*^ Andrew Jackson, who had continued his interest 
 in Texas, understood the importance of this phase of the question, 
 and on May 25, 1842, wrote to Houston as follows : 
 
 The wild goose campaign to Santa Fe was an ill-judged affair; 
 and their surrender without the fire of a gun has lessened the 
 prowess of the Texans in the minds of the Mexicans, and it will 
 take another San Jacinto affair to restore their charaeter.*^ 
 
 The expedition failed, and it is easy to criticise a venture that 
 has failed. It is easy to see how certain conditions should have 
 been anticipated and guarded against, but none of Lamar's critics 
 pointed out any of these things before the enterprise was under- 
 taken, the only cause of opposition being the expense. Since it 
 failed, however, there were many who were willing to criticise 
 the plans and the policy, and one critic went so far as to demand 
 that Lamar be sent to Mexico and be sacrified for the prisoners 
 who were in Mexico at that time.'*" But if it had succeeded, and 
 there were strong evidences that it would succeed, Lamar would 
 have added to Texas a tremendous territory, and would have se- 
 cured valuable trade for Texas ports. It may be well enough to 
 judge of its expediency from its failure, but to judge rightly the 
 policy, one should take into consideration the plans and purposes 
 of Lamar, and the seeming justification in his own mind at the 
 time for the enterprise. 
 
 ''Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 748. 
 
 "Jackson to Houston, May 25, 1842, Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 329, 
 note. 
 ™Lamar Papers, No. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 131 
 
 Chapter VI 
 
 FOREIGN AFPAIES DTJKING LAMAR's ADMINISTRATION 
 
 When Lamar assumed the presidency the independence of Texas 
 had been recognized only by the United States. This recognition 
 had been extended just before the close of Jackson's administration. 
 The Texan offer of annexation, which had been adopted by an 
 almost unanimous vote in the summer of 1836, had been definitely 
 rejected by the United States in August, 18'37, and in October, 
 1838, the minister of Texas to the United States, acting on in- 
 structions from President Houston, withdrew it. This action was 
 commended by Lamar in his inaugural address. Shortly after this 
 address the Congress adopted resolutions endorsing the withdrawal 
 of the offer, though the preceding Congress had refused to take 
 such action. 
 
 The withdrawal of the offer of annexation immediately gave 
 Texas a better standing among the nations of the world. As long 
 as England and France believed that Texas was only waiting for 
 annexation to the United States, they were not materially inter- 
 ested in its affairs, but now there seemed to be a favorable oppor- 
 tunity for friendly relations or for exploitation, and the European 
 countries became more interested in the development of Texas. 
 Lamar made deliberate use of the changed attitude, advising Con- 
 gress to levy only nominal tariff duties in order to draw the trade 
 of the European countries, and instructing the various represeni>- 
 atives of Texas in Europe to offer favorable commercial conces- 
 sions in return for recognition of Texan independence. Partly as 
 a result of this policy, and partly from other causes which I shall 
 show in the proper place the first year of Lamar's administration 
 saw the recognition of Texan independence by Prance, and during 
 1840 England, Holland, and Belgium extended recognition. 
 
 In the policy of standing aloof from the United States while 
 pursuing friendly relations with England and France, Lamar was 
 following in part the policy suggested by his predecessor though 
 he gave vitality to it because of his well known and strong oppo- 
 sition to annexation. The policy of direct negotiation of peace 
 with Mexico on the basis of the purchase of her territory by Texas 
 
133 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lama/r 
 
 began with Lamar, however, and during his administration he sent 
 three separate agents to Mexico for this purpose, while numerous 
 secret agents kept him informed of the developments. At the 
 same time, while remaining officially neutral, he gave some coun- 
 tenance to the various revolts of the federalists against the cen- 
 tralists in power at that time. I shall follow out with some detail 
 these efforts to negotiate with Mexico, and also discuss the rela- 
 tions between Texas and the United States, Prance, and England. 
 
 1. Efforts to Negotiate Peace mth Mexico 
 
 Just who was responsible for the idea of sending an agent to 
 Mexico for direct negotiations, it is impossible to say. Lamar had 
 nothing to say with regard to this policy in his inaugural address 
 or in his message to Congress a few days later. In fact, the first 
 time that he took Congress into his confidence was in November, 
 1838, when he told the Congress in a secret session the result of 
 the first mission, and announced that he had sent another. On 
 September 12, 1838, James Morgan, an old friend of Lamar, sent 
 him a confidential letter from a friend in New York, and asking 
 his opinion of the project set forth.^ This enclosure has not been 
 found, but a letter of December 37 from Morgan indicates that 
 the friend in New York was James Treat, who afterward became 
 a secret agent of Texas to Mexico, and that his suggestion was 
 that a secret agent be sent from Texas to bring about overtures 
 of peace from Mexico on a basis of the purchase of her own ter- 
 ritory by Texas. Morgan advised the adoption of this policy.^ A 
 short time afterward George L. Hammeken, who was also well 
 acquainted with conditions in Mexico, wrote suggesting a peace 
 commission to Mexico.'^ This was followed by a letter from Samuel 
 Plummer, another man who was acquainted with conditions in 
 Mexico, advising similar action.* 
 
 There was apparently no connection between these men, but all 
 knew intimately the conditions in Mexico, and all advised the 
 sending of a peace commission. All of them had lived in Mexico for 
 some time or had just been there, and spoke with a full knowledge 
 of conditions. It did not take their statements, however, to in- 
 
 ^Lamar Papers, No. 814. 
 
 ^Morgan to Lamar, December 27, 1838, Lama/r Papers, No. 959. 
 'Hammeken to Lamar, January 2, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 984. 
 *Plummer to Lamar, February 16, 1839, LamMr Papers, No. 1068. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 133 
 
 dicate to Lamar and his advisers that if there was ever to be a 
 propitious time for a negotiated peace, that was the time. 
 
 For the greater part of 1838, and until March, 1839, the Mexi- 
 can ports were blockaded by a French squadron. For several years 
 there had been complaints on the part of French subjects in Mex- 
 ico on account of unfair treatment, and the government of France 
 had demanded a settlement of the claims of her citizens against 
 Mexico. Despairing of an amicable settlement, the French min- 
 ister withdrew from Mexico City on January 16, 1838, leaving the 
 legation in charge of a charge d'affaires. Upon leaving Vera Cruz 
 he was met by a French squadron under Bazoche, who had been 
 instructed to support the demands of the minister with force. On 
 March 21 Bazoche sent an ultimatum to the Mexican government 
 demanding the immediate payment of $600,000 to be applied to 
 the claims of French citizens. Four days later the Mexican gov- 
 ernment announced its refusal to accede to the demands, and re- 
 fused to discuss the matter unless the French squadron retired.^ 
 On April 16 Bazoche acted upon his threat and announced that 
 diplomatic relations were suspended and the ports blockaded, not 
 against the nation, as he said, but against the government. This 
 was probably to weaken the government of Bustamante, which was 
 already growing unpopular.^ A French squadron stood off Vera 
 Cruz and effectively prevented the entrance or egress of any ves- 
 sels, thus seriously crippling the finances of the country. This 
 blockade continued throughout the summer with the acquiescence 
 of Great Britain, and to the delight of the Texans. 
 
 While the French were blockading the ports of Mexico, the fed- 
 eralists used the opportunity to break out in revolts in various 
 parts of the country. The adoption of the centralized constitution 
 in 1835, which had resulted in the Texas revolution, and which 
 had caused an outbreak in New Mexico in 1837, had never been 
 universally accepted. In the summer of 1838 the discontent made 
 itself felt in uprisings in Sonora, Sinaloa, California, Taraaulipas, 
 and Yucatan. The most serious of these was in Sonora and Sin- 
 aloa, headed by TJrrea. Urrea seized the custom-house at Guay- 
 mas and restored the federalist system. He was defeated at Ma- 
 zatlan on May 6, 1838, but went to Tampico and stirred up a re- 
 
 "Bancroft, History of Mexico, V, 187, 188; C. M. Bustamante, Gabinete 
 Mexicama, I, 112. 
 
 "Bancroft, History of Mexico, V, 189. 
 
134 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 volt there in October, 1838. The government of Bustamante was 
 very weak, and no effective steps were taken to put down and pun- 
 ish the rebels. The cutting off of imports left the country with- 
 out funds, and Congress took no steps to remedy matters.'^ 
 
 Late in October Admiral Baudin arrived at Vera Cruz with 
 additional ships and took over command of the French squadron. 
 He was authorized by his government to enter into negotiations 
 for the settlement of the difficulties. He at once got into com- 
 munication with Cuevas, the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs, 
 and made the same demands that had been made by Bazoche in 
 March. The failure of Cuevas to give proper guarantees that the 
 demands would be granted or considered led to the sending of an 
 ultimatum by Baudin on November 21, in which he stated that 
 if the demands were not granted by the 37th he would begin hos- 
 tilities by an attack on the castle San Juan de Ulua. No ade- 
 quate response was made, and on the day set San Juan de Ulua 
 was bombarded, and although the Mexicans considered it impreg- 
 nable, it was captured after a few hours bombardment. The 
 French took possession the following day, promising to restore 
 the fortress as soon as all differences were adjusted. The com- 
 mander of the Mexican forces agreed to reduce the garrison of 
 Vera Cruz to one thousand men, and to receive back and indemnify 
 the expelled Frenchmen. The French on their part agreed to 
 lift the blockade for eight months. 
 
 The Mexican cabinet refused to confirm the agreement of the 
 commander of the forces at Vera Cruz and prepared for fighting. 
 This led to a battle at Vera Cruz early in December, when the 
 Mexicans under the command of Santa Anna were severely de- 
 feated. Shortly after this the British minister offered his services 
 to mediate the difficulty, and both sides accepted. This resulted 
 in the signing of a treaty on March 9, 1839, by which the Mexi- 
 cans agreed to everything demanded by the French.* San Juan 
 de Ulua was restored on April 7, and the French fleet retired.* 
 
 These conditions, as I have said, were known to Lamar and in- 
 fluenced him to send a peace commissioner to treat with the Mexi- 
 can authorities. Besides, Lamar and his cabinet had heard that 
 Santa Anna was again at the head of the government in Mexico, 
 
 ^Rives, United States and Mexico, 1821-18^8, I, 435. 
 'Dublan and Lozano, Legislacion Mexicano, III, 617. 
 "Bancroft, History of Mexico, V, 204. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Admiwistration 135 
 
 probably because he was appointed to the command of the army 
 at Vera Cruz» and they considered that as favorable to Texas. It 
 will be recalled that Santa Anna, while a prisoner in Texas after 
 the battle of San Jacinto, entered into a secret treaty with the 
 Texan authorities by which he agreed not to take up arms against 
 Texas during the war for independence; that he would prepare 
 the cabinet in Mexico for the favorable reception of a minister 
 when Texas saw fit to send one; and that a treaty of amity, com- 
 merce, and limits should be agreed to, the limits of Texas not to 
 extend beyond the Eio Grande.^" It is apparent that this belief 
 also influenced Lamar to send the mission. 
 
 The information that several towns in the north had declared 
 for the federalist system was contained in a letter dated December 
 17, 1838, from Canales, a federalist leader, who prophesied that 
 within a short time the whole republic would come over to the 
 Federalist party. 
 
 The information that Santa Anna was at the head of the gov- 
 ernment as a supporter of the Federalist party was contained in 
 the letter of Plummer, referred to above. It was this letter that 
 determined Lam.ar to send immediately an envoy to Mexico, and 
 he considered it of enough importance to send his secretary of 
 state Barnard E. Bee. Bee had been intended for appointment 
 as minister to the United States, and had been instructed to get 
 in touch with the minister from Mexico and attempt to form a 
 treaty of peace through him; at the same time he was to seek the 
 mediation of the United States. When it was decided to send 
 Bee to Mexico, Eichard G. Dunlap was sent as minister to the. 
 United States with the same instructions as were given to Bee. 
 Both were to do everything in their power to come to an agree- 
 ment with Mexico.'^ 
 
 Bee was given two commissions, one as minister plenipotentiary 
 to be used in case he was received by the Mexican government, and 
 one as agent in case he was not received. He was given full pow- 
 ers to negotiate for peace, and sign a treaty securing it, but he 
 wa? to require the unconditional recognition of the independence 
 of Texas, and was to admit no limits less than those prescribed 
 by the act of Congress of December 19, 1836, which provided that 
 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex , II, 434; Nilee Register, LXIX, 98. 
 "Webb to Dunlap, March 13 and 14, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 
 368-378. 
 
136 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 the Eio Grande to its source was the boundary between Texas and 
 Mexico. If Mexico was willing to establish peace and recognize 
 the original boundaries of Texas — ^which included only to the 
 Nueces — he was empowered to propose a compromise by offering 
 to purchase all included between the original boundary and the 
 Eio Grande at a sum not exceeding five million dollars.^^ 
 
 The commission and instructions to Bee were dated February 
 20, 1839, but for some reason he did not get away from Texas 
 until April 1. He then went to Mobile, where he hoped to secure 
 passage to Vera Cruz. Failing there he proceeded to New Orleans, 
 where he got into communication with James Hamilton, Loan Com- 
 missioner of the Republic of Texas, and with a Mr. Gordon of 
 the house of Lizardi and Company, the chief holders of Mexican 
 bonds. It was probably here that the idea was conceived to use 
 the indemnity which Texas offered Mexico for recognition to re- 
 deem the Mexican bonds held by English investors. Bee remained 
 in New Orleans until May 2, when he embarked for Vera Cruz, 
 arriving there on May 8. 
 
 This was the most inauspicious time that could have been chosen 
 to arrive in Mexico with such an object. The difSculties with 
 France, which had been counted upon to expedite negotiations, had 
 been settled and the French fleet had sailed away a month before. 
 Besides, with the withdrawal of the French the authorities had 
 been able to give some attention to the Federalist risings, and one 
 of the most formidable — that of Tampico — had been put down by 
 Santa Anna and Urrea had been captured. Santa Anna was tem- 
 porarily in charge of the executive ofBce while Bustamante was 
 absent in the north on a campaign against the Federalists there, 
 and certainly nothing could be hoped for from him. So, while 
 Bee set forth on his mission with high hopes, he arrived when an 
 entirely new situation had developed, and there was no chance of 
 success. 
 
 While remaining on board the schooner Woodbury at Vera Cruz 
 he communicated with various officials requesting that he be al- 
 lowed to go to Mexico City to lay his case before the Council. 
 This was peremptorily refused, if he had come to treat for inde- 
 pendence. He was informed by General Victoria, the commandant 
 at Vera Cruz, who had acted as the agent of the government in 
 
 ^Webb to Bee, February 20, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 434. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 137 
 
 communicating with Bee, that the French question was settled, the 
 Federalists put down, that reform was about to take place, and 
 that with the great resources at her command Mexico would be 
 forced to wage an efficient war on Texas in order to bring her 
 back into the fold — all this in urging that Texas come back to 
 her allegiance to Mexico. Failing to interest the Mexican authori- 
 ties in his mission, and receiving threatening letters from several 
 of the people of Vera Cruz, Bee took refuge on the French frigate 
 Phaeton on May 38, and wrote letters to several members of the 
 cabinet suggesting that negotiations for peace and recognition be 
 held in Washington.'^ 
 
 While Bee was still waiting at Vera Cruz to hear from Mexico 
 City as to the possibility of his reception, Pakenham, British min- 
 ister in Mexico, received a letter from Gordon in New Orleans, 
 written April 39, 1839, stating the purposes of Bee's mission, and 
 advising that Pakenham give assistance to his project. He stated 
 that Bee was prepared to offer five million dollars for the land 
 between the Nueces and the Eio Grande, and suggested that Mexico 
 should satisfy the claims of English bondholders by locating lands 
 for them within the disputed territory, accepting the five million 
 dollars from Texas, and then agreeing to the line claimed by 
 Texas.^' Pakenham reported this plan to the Mexican authorities, 
 but was informed that Bee had been rejected without hearing what 
 he had to propose. 
 
 Pakenham had been absent on leave in England in 1838, and in 
 October, just before leaving for his return to Mexico, he had been 
 instructed by Pabnerston to urge upon Mexico the importance of 
 a prompt recognition of Texas. He now used the opportunity pre- 
 sented by Gordon's suggestion and insisted upon the acceptance 
 of that policy. He laid stress upon the advantage to Mexico of 
 having a barrier state between her and the United States. Goro- 
 stiza, the foreign minister, replied that he realized the value of 
 such an arrangement, but that the Mexican government dared not 
 risk so unpopular an act, and hinted that as a preliminary to rec- 
 ognition Mexico would welcome from England a suggestion of an 
 armistice. With regard .to the boundary desired by Texas, Goro- 
 stiza said that Mexico would never consent to the claims of Texas. 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 1255. 
 
 "Gordon to Pakenham, April 29, 1839; Adams, British Interests and 
 Activities in Texas, 26. 
 
138 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 "Eeccnquest is admitted to be impossible," said Pakenham in re- 
 porting the eonversation to Palmerston, "and yet a feeling of mis- 
 taken pride, foolishly called regard for the national honor, deters 
 the government from putting an end to a state of things highly 
 prejudicial to the interests of Texas and attended with no sort of 
 advantage to this country."^'' 
 
 Bee had left for his mission not over-sanguine as to its success, 
 believing that Washington was the proper place to treat. After 
 his failure to get in touch with the authorities in Mexico, he was 
 naturally still convinced that he should have gone to Washington. 
 He wrote just before leaving for Vera Cruz : "We made a merry 
 move in coming so suddenly upon these people, the first plan was 
 the true one. It ought to have opened at Washington."^® He 
 continued firm in the belief that with less publicity Mexico would 
 be willing to come to terms. He was further convinced of this 
 when, after his arrival in New Orleans, he received a letter from 
 Almonte, Mexican secretary of war, stating that the President was 
 willing for him to open his views to the government. At this 
 point James Treat enters into the negotiations.^' 
 
 James Treat had lived in Mexico for a number of years, was 
 well acquainted witli Santa Anna, and for some time had been in 
 correspondence with the secret agent of the Mexican government in 
 New Orleans. It was he who had outlined a scheme for pacifica- 
 iion in December, 1838, and who had been recommended by James 
 Morgan for a peace mission to Mexico. In the summer of 1839 
 he became acquainted with James Hamilton,^* and on June 33 
 
 Takenham to Palmerston, June 3, 1839, British Foreign Office, Mexico, 
 125; Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, 27. 
 
 "Bee to Webb, May 28, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 449. 
 
 ''Bee to Webb, July 6, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 456. 
 
 "James Hamilton played such an important part in the history of 
 Texas during this period that some notice of his activities is required. 
 He was a native of South Carolina who had early become interested in 
 Texas. He was a member of Congress from South Carolina from 1822 
 to 1829, and governor of the state from 1829 to 1830, retiring when 
 Hayne Ijecame governor. His first correspondence with Lamar was in 
 June, 1836, when he wrote a letter of introduction for Barnard E. Bee, 
 who was just then coming to Texas. From that time on he was a steady 
 correspondent, and after Lamar was elected president in 1838 he wrote 
 frequent and long letters giving his advice as to public policy, and 
 probably more than anyone else he influenced Lamar's actions. Just before 
 the close of Houston's administration an effort had been made to secure 
 the appointment of Hamilton as loan commissioner. Upon the refusal 
 of Houston to appoint him. Bee had resigned from the cabinet, probably 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 139 
 
 Hamilton wrote to Lamax advising that Treat be appointed to 
 assist Bee in the negotiations in New Orleans. Without waiting 
 for a reply, he took the liberty of sending Treat to New Orleans 
 with instructions to assist Bee by getting into communication with 
 the JFexican secret agent.^' Before anything was done, however, 
 Hamilton, acting on the advice of Poinsett, American secretary of 
 war, advised that Treat be sent direct to Mexico City. This advice 
 was acquiesced in by Bee, and Lamar decided to act upon the advice 
 and send Treat as secret agent with full powers to negotiate a 
 treaty.^" 
 
 The instructions to Treat were in part a duplicate of those to 
 Bee. The unconditional acknowledgment of the independence of 
 Texas within the statutory boundaries was to be demanded as a 
 sine qua non. The Texas authorities were now willing to go fur- 
 ther in territorial claims, however, and Treat was instructed to 
 propose as the boundary, a line commencing at the mouth of the 
 Eio Grande and running midway of its channel to Bl Paso, and 
 from that point due west to the Gulf of California, and along the 
 southern shore of that gulf to the Pacific Ocean. "This boundary 
 will not be strenuously insisted upon," said the instructions, "but 
 may be intimated as a counterpoise to any extravagant expectations 
 on the part of Mexico and as a premonition to that government of 
 the ultimate destination of that remote territory." He was author- 
 ized to offer up to five million dollars for a recognition of the first 
 claimed boundary, any part of which might be in Mexican bonds.'^'- 
 
 Treat left Austin immediately upon receiving his instructions 
 and proceeded to New Orleans, where he arrived on August 13, 
 He left there two days later for New York, arriving on the 39th. 
 Here he was detained for two months while waiting for transpor- 
 tation and attempting to secure funds for the trip. He finally 
 left New York in the latter part of October, and arrived, after a 
 
 determining Lamar to appoint Bee as secretary of State. He visited 
 Texas in March, 1839, and was appointed by Lamar as loan commissioner, 
 and was sent to France and England to assist Henderson in securing 
 recognition while negotiating for a loan. He was sent on various diplo- 
 matic missions after this, which will appear when I discuss the relations 
 of Texas with Europe. 
 
 '•Hamilton to Lamar, June 28, 18.^9, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 453. 
 
 ''"Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 459, 466, 470. 
 
 ^'Burnet to Treat, August 9, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 470. 
 
140 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 long journey, at Vera Cruz on N'ovember 28. He reached Mexico 
 City on December 11 and began his negotiations. 
 
 The internal conditions in Mexico throughout the greater part 
 of 1839 were unsettled. The Federalist movement, which had 
 gained considerable strength in 1838, was still flourishing in Tam- 
 pico and various parts of the north. With the French difiSculties 
 settled, the government decided to proceed with vigor against the 
 insurgents under Urrea at Tampico, and Santa Anna, whose loss 
 of a leg in the battle of Vera Cruz had restored him to favor with 
 the populace, urged the president, Bustamante, to lead the expe- 
 dition against them. Bustamante reluctantly agreed. The exec- 
 utive authority would normally have fallen upon the vice-president, 
 Nicolas Bravo, but the populace demanded Santa Anna, and Bravo 
 gracefully stepped aside, and the Council appointed Santa Anna. 
 Santa Anna assumed the executive power on March 18, 1839, and 
 Bustamante set out for Tampico.*^ 
 
 Bustamante traveled leisurely towards Tampico and allowed the 
 insurgents to get between him and Mexico City. Santa Anna, 
 who was in the capital, raised a force and advanced to meet them, 
 and defeated them at Acajete on May 3, 1839. In June Tampico 
 was taken. In July Bustamante returned to the capital and as- 
 sumed the executive authority. As he had seen no fighting he 
 was discredited and his government was weaker than ever. Santa 
 Anna was the popular hero, but he did not consider that condi- 
 tions were ripe for his return to power, so he retired to his ranch 
 and left the control of afEairs to Bustamante.^^ A complete re- 
 organization of the cabinet took place, however. Juan de Dios 
 Caiiedo succeeded Gorostiza as foreign minister, Luis Gonzales 
 Cuevas became secretary of the interior, Xavier de Echeverria, 
 secretary of the treasury, and J. N". Almonte, secretary of war.^* 
 
 Before proceeding with Treat's negotiations it will be necessary 
 to notice the efforts of the Texan minister in Washington to nego- 
 tiate with the Mexican minister, and also his efforts to secure the 
 mediation of the United States. It will be remembered that Dun- 
 lap had been instructed to treat if possible with the Mexican min- 
 
 ^^Bustamante, Cabinete Mexiowna, I, 176; Eives, United States and Mex- 
 ico, I, 450. 
 
 ^'Ilid., I, 451. 
 
 '"Treat to Burnet, (Enclosure) September 21, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. 
 Tex., II, 488. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 141 
 
 ister in Washington, and if necessary he was to secure the medi- 
 ation of the United States. To Dunlap's suggestion that the United 
 States mediate between Texas and Mexico, Forsyth gave a half- 
 hearted assent, and instructed Ellis, the new minister to Mexico, 
 to be ready, while observing strict neutrality, to interpose his good 
 offices between Mexico and Texas, but not until Mexico should ask 
 for them.*^ The Mexican minister, Martinez, was made aware 
 of the purposes of Dunlap, but it was not until October that the 
 two ministers got together. During the second week of October 
 they held several conferences, and Dunlap submitted to Martinez 
 a formal request that negotiations be undertaken. The Mexican 
 minister responded that he had no authority to enter into a treaty, 
 but that he would send Dunlap's suggestions to his home govern- 
 ment. This was the end of efforts to negotiate a treaty in this 
 manner.^' 
 
 Great Britain had, on her own initiative, taken some steps 
 towards mediation before Treat's arrival in Mexico. As I have 
 already stated, Palmerston had given verbal instructions to Paken- 
 ham in October, 1838, urging the recognition of Texan indepen- 
 dence, which instructions were submitted after Bee's failure. On 
 April 25, 1839, Palmerston sent his first written instructions to 
 Pakenham on the subject of Texas. In this letter Palmerston 
 argued at length as to the impossibility of a reconquest of Texas. 
 In supplementary instructions enclosed in this letter, Palmerston 
 said that it was not likely that Mexico would listen at once to the 
 suggestion for recognition, but he did hope that she would be will- 
 ing to accept the good offices of Great Britain.^^ Canedo had be- 
 come foreign minister when these instructions were received, and 
 to him Pakenham communicated the substance of them. Canedo 
 responded that he realized the importance of the recognition of 
 Texan independence, but that the government could not risk so 
 unpopular an act. He stated that Mexico might welcome from 
 Great Britain a suggestion for suspension of hostilities ; and Paken- 
 
 ^Torsyth to Ellis, May 3, 1839, MS., Archives. See also Reeves, 
 American Diplomacy under Tyler and Polk, 87; Dunlap to Lamar, May 
 16, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 383. 
 
 ^"Dunlap to Burnet, October 12, 1839, (Enclosing Martinez to Dunlap, 
 October 8, 1839) Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 421-424. 
 
 "Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, 28-29. 
 
142 Mi/rabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 ham was convinced in September that such an arrangement could 
 be made preparatory to pacification.^* 
 
 From that time forward Pakenham was active in the interest 
 of the recognition of Texas independence by Mexico. On Decem- 
 ber 12, 1839, he addressed a letter to James Hamilton, who was 
 about to set out on a diplomatic mission to Great Britain, in which 
 he gave an account of his activities. After acknowledging a letter 
 from Hamilton written ISTovember 18, he said: 
 
 It is some time since I received from Viscount Palmerston In- 
 structions to tender the good offices of Her Majesty's Government 
 towards effecting an arrangement between this Country and Texas ; 
 but I regret to say that all my exertions to induce this Government 
 to entertain the question of recognition have hitherto proved un- 
 availing. Not but that the more enlightened Members of the pres- 
 ent Administration appear to understand that to continue the con- 
 test with Texas would be worse than useless, but there is no man 
 among them bold enough to confront the popular opinion, or, I 
 should rather say the popular prejudice upon this point, which is 
 strongly pronounced against any accommodation with Texas. Be- 
 sides which they fear, and not without reason, that, for the sake 
 of Party objects, an attempt would dishonestly be made to crush 
 by the unpopularity which would, very certainly, attend such a 
 measure, any Government which should be bold enough to advocate 
 the policy of alienating what is still talked of as a part of the 
 National Territory. 
 
 Under these circumstances it appeared to me that the next best 
 thing to propose was a mutual suspension of hostilities as a pre- 
 paratory step to the ulterior measure of absolute recognition at a 
 future period. . . . 
 
 Some time ago Senor Caiiedo, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, 
 who, to speak the truth, strongly inclines to the course which wis- 
 dom and sound policy recommend with regard to the question of 
 Texas, informed me that after repeated and arduous discussions 
 with his Colleagues he had succeeded in obtaining their consent to 
 place on the records of their deliberations a minute to the effect 
 that if Commissioners from Texas should present themselves, they 
 would be listened to, with the distinct understanding, however, that 
 no proposition for the alienation of the right of Sovereignty would 
 be entertained. But as he would not take upon himself to put 
 into my hands any written communication to that effect, or even 
 convey to me a more definite understanding of what his Govern- 
 ment might be disposed to accede to in the way of armistice, or 
 otherwise, I did not think myself at liberty to recommend to 
 Colonel Bee, with whom, on the occasion of his late Mission, I 
 
 "Ibid., 32-33. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration US 
 
 had had some communication, to undertake a fresh journey to this, 
 country upon such vague and uncertain grounds. 
 
 On receipt of your letter^" I again entered into communication 
 with the Mexican Government upon the important subject to- 
 which it relates, but I am sorry to say, as far as regards the ques- 
 tion of recognition, with no better success than before. Neverthe- 
 less I have obtained from Senor Canedo a written communication,. 
 . . . stating that this Government are disposed to listen to pro- 
 posals from the Inhabitants of Texas ; but that on no account will 
 they relinquish the right of Sovereignty over that Territory.^" 
 
 Both the Bee mission and the Treat mission were undertaken by- 
 President Lamar without consulting Congress. On December 10,. 
 ]839, however, he sent a special message to a secret session of Con- 
 gress giving a full account of the proceedings so far, including- 
 the reasons for sending Bee, the causes of his failure, and the 
 reasons for his sending a secret agent. He also mentioned the 
 terms on which the agents were instructed to make peace.^^ As- 
 a result of this. Congress passed a joint resolution endorsing his 
 acts, as follows: 
 
 1. Congress views with entire approbation the present policy 
 of the Executive. 
 
 3. [Boundary as in the Act of December 19, 1836.] 
 3. That should such a Treaty be passed between the Commis- 
 sioner on the part of the Government of Texas and Mexico, and 
 
 ^Written November 18 and received December 4, 1839. Hamilton had 
 proposed that Mexico acknowledge the independence of Texas and receive 
 from Texas the sum of five million dollars, with the understanding that 
 the money go directly into the poekcta of the bondholders. The bond- 
 holders were then to release the lands that had already been granted to 
 them by the government of Mexico. He also informed Pakenham that 
 Treat was on his way to Mexico, but suggested that peace negotiations be 
 begun in London, so that the Mexican iDOndholders could be present and 
 look after their interests. — Adams, British Interests and Activities in- 
 Texas, 37. 
 
 ^Pakenham to Hamilton, December 12, 1839, (Copy enclosed in Hamil- 
 ton to Burnet, January 5, 1840) Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 879-880. 
 
 Pakenham enclosed a copy of the written communication by Canedo, the 
 important part of which was as follows: "V. E. se sirve manifestarme 
 su deseo de sai.er si por se ha tornado por este Gobiemo alguna resolucion 
 en virtud de las propueatas amistosas que en cumplimiento de aus citidas 
 instrucciones ha hacho; y en contestacion tengo la honra de decirle que los 
 Commissionados de los habitantes de Texas aeran oydos por el Gobierno 
 Mexicano, bajo la condicion indispensable de que este no ha de desistir 
 de la Soberania nacional sobre aquel Departamento de la Republica." — 
 Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 505. 
 
 ^Winkler, editor, Secret Journals of the Senate of the Republic of 
 Texas, 148. 
 
144 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 after the same may have been ratified and confirmed by the Presi- 
 dent and Senate of this Republic, our Commissioners of loans in 
 Europe are authorized to borrow the amount which may be stip- 
 ulated in said Treaty, at an interest not exceeding six per cent. 
 4. Be it further resolved, That the said Commissioners ap- 
 pointed on the part of Texas shall if practicable procure the Guar- 
 anty of Great Britain for the faithful performance of the Treaty 
 by both parties.^ 
 
 One of the first things that Treat had to report after arriving 
 in Mexico was the promulgation of a proclamation by the Presi- 
 dent announcing the renewal of hostilities with Texas, and the 
 consideration by Congress of ways and means for financing a mili- 
 tary campaign.^' In fact, A. S. Wright, a secret correspondent 
 of the Texan government was convinced that Mexico was making 
 preparations to invade Texas and kept the Texan authorities in- 
 formed for some months before Treat arrived.'* Public or polit- 
 ical sentiment would probably have demanded some effort to sub- 
 due Texas at any rate; but the news that Texans had joined with 
 the insurgent Federalists on the Eio Grande led to the proclama- 
 tion of a renewal of the war, and special efforts to secure action 
 by Congress in support of the campaign."' 
 
 The Texan authorities had shown a marked partiality for the 
 Federalists, partly because they were fighting for the same prin- 
 ciples for which the Texans had fought in 1835 and 1836, but 
 ■chiefly because they felt that the Federalists would regard with 
 more favor the claims of Texas to independence. On December 
 17, 1838, the Licentiate Antonio Canales, commander of the Third 
 Division of the Federal army, wrote a letter to Lamar announcing 
 ihe capture of several towns by the Federalists.^® In this letter he 
 addressed Lamar as "President of the Eepublic of Texas," which 
 was thereafter cited as an indication that the Federalists recog- 
 nized the claims of Texas in advance of their success in the revo- 
 lution. As a result of the friendly feeling engendered by this 
 letter, Congress passed a joint resolution providing for the open- 
 
 ^lUd., 166. 
 
 "Treat to Bumet, November 29, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 501. 
 
 "Wright to Bee, August 29 to November 18, 1839, in lUd., 615-632. 
 
 "^Wright to Bryan, November 21, 1839, in Ibid., II, 496. 
 
 ^Canales to Lamar, December 17, 1838, in Ihid., II, 430. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 145 
 
 ing of trade with the Eio Grande settlements, and the President 
 issued his proclamation to that effect in February, 1839." 
 
 In the spring of 1839 General Anaya, later put to death after 
 the capture of Tampico in June, 1839, who was looked upon as 
 the chief of the Federalist party, visited Texas and promised the 
 Texan authorities that if they would allow him to transport troops 
 across Texas and raise troops m Texas, he would, in case of success, 
 recognize their independence. This permission was refused. Later 
 the Federalists of the northern states sent Francisco Vidaurri, 
 governor of Coahuila, to make overtures for an alliance between 
 Texas and the states of Kuevo Leon, Tamaulipas, Coahuila, Chi- 
 huahua, New Mexico, Durango, and the Califomias.'* In spite 
 of the strong sentiment in favor of such an alliance, the authori- 
 ties refused to entertain the idea. 
 
 After the overthrow of the insurgents in Tampico in June, Gen- 
 eral Canales, Colonels Jose Maria Gonzales, and Antonio' Zapata 
 with a small force fled to Lipantitlan on the Nueces river. Here 
 Canales issued a proclamation inviting the Texans to join him, 
 promising them an equal division of the spoils, twenty-five dollars 
 per month, and a half league of land to those who should serve 
 during the war.^^ Though the government had refused to join 
 Canales, about one hundred and eighty Texans under Colonels 
 Eeuben Eoss and S. W. Jordan joined the Federalists. On Sep- 
 tember 30, 1839, the Federalist forces, consisting now of six hun- 
 dred men, crossed the Eio Grande and marched against Guerrero, 
 which was held by General Pavon with five hundred regulars and 
 four pieces of artillery. Pavon retreated toward Mier and was 
 followed by Canales. On October 3 was fought the battle of 
 Alcantro, in which the Texans distinguished themselves by over- 
 whelmingly defeating the enemy. This was the battle which 
 caused the preparations for an active campaign against Texas.*" 
 
 The Texans continued their operations in connection with Ca- 
 nales and the Federalists, participating in January, 1840, in the 
 creation of the "Eepublie of the Eio Grande." It is not my pur- 
 pose, however, to follow their activities. The President had, while 
 
 '^ Lamar Papers, No. 1079. 
 
 '^Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 327. 
 '^lUd; Yoakum, History of Texas, II. 274. 
 
 "Bancroft, North Mexican States and Texas, II, 328; Yoakum, History 
 of Texas, II, 274. 
 
146 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 treating their envoys with courtesy, refused to join the Federalists 
 in their campaign against the central government. It is likely 
 that he desired their success, as it would have made things better 
 for Texas; but he did not trust the Mexicans. On December 21, 
 1839, he issued a proclamation warning the citizens of Texas not 
 to invade Mexico, and not to take part in any marauding expe- 
 dition or other acts of hostility against Mexico, until a renewal of 
 hostilities should be announced by public notice. He declared that 
 any citizen who should invade Mexico, or by any hostile act molest 
 its inhabitants within their o\m territory, should be considered 
 without the protection of the Texan government, which disclaimed 
 all participation in their conduct, and could afford no countenance 
 to their unauthorized acts.*^ 
 
 In his letter of November 29 from Vera Cruz Treat told of the 
 impression created in Mexico by the Texan participation in the 
 battle of Alcantro, but he dismissed the matter by saying the im- 
 pression would blow over. Later in a letter to James Hamilton, 
 a copy of which was sent to the Texas state department, he con- 
 sidered it more serious than he had at first thought. With regard 
 to this matter and the action of the Mexican government upon it, 
 he wrote: 
 
 . . . You will have seen that the movement of Eoss and his 
 party, with other volunteers, to which they attribute the success of 
 the Federalists, and the surrender of the troops in or near Mier, 
 (some 600 men) have produced much excitement on the part of 
 the Govmt as well as in the public mind. The Govmt. having 
 taken all the measures in their power, have called on Congress for 
 special powers to levy taxes to support the war against Texas, and 
 to reunite that department to the national union, etc. etc. etc. Not 
 satisfied with this measure initiated in Congress, and without wait- 
 ing for the action of that body, another project of Law is sent 
 down by the Secretary of War (Sr. Almonte) declaring it treason 
 against the state for any one "to write act or speak in favour of 
 the views and intentions of the Texans; or in favour of the views 
 of any foreign power having for its object to dismem.ber the terri- 
 tory of Mexico etc.** 
 
 These two proposals were sent to a special committee by the 
 
 '^Austin City Gazette, January 1, 1840. 
 
 "Treat to Hamilton, December 16, 1839, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 
 508-509. Treat had a peculiar habit of underscoring, entirely without 
 meaning, many words in his despatches. I shall ignore his italics, using 
 them only when it seems that emphasis is intended. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 147 
 
 Chamber of Deputies. The committee reported against granting 
 special powers, but recommended proceeding with the expedition 
 under the ordinary powers of the government. Instead of report- 
 ing ways and means promptly, they recommended measures assess- 
 ing taxes which could not be collected for three or four months.** 
 The Deputies refused to accept the report of the committee, and 
 sent it back to them for revision.** On January 1, 1840, the 
 President, in his annual message to Congress, expressed surprise 
 at the recognition of Texan independence by Prance, and urged 
 upon the Congress the necessity of passing the laws asked for the 
 prosecution of the war. After praising the soldiers who were oper- 
 ating against the Federalists in the north, he said : 
 
 The Executive will not fail to use every effort in their power to 
 secure our frontier by the recovery of the territory of Texas, 
 usurped by the ungrateful foreigners, to whom we gave a generous 
 hospitality in that part of the Eepublic. 
 
 On the 18th June of last year, the Government presented to 
 their Council the Bill which, with some modifications, they after- 
 wards laid before the Chambers on the 36th November, demanding 
 powers for making the necessary expenditure, and for carrying 
 iiito effect the political and military measures requisite for reunit- 
 ing the Department of Texas to the National Union, which Bill 
 is now before the Chamber of Deputies, as well as another, having 
 for its object to declare traitors to their country such persons who, 
 by act or writing favour the views of any foreign Power, or of the 
 usurpers of Texas, for the purpose of dismembering or making 
 themselves masters of the Mexican territory. The Executive Gov- 
 ernment have the honor to recommend both these bills once more 
 to your notice, hoping that you will take them into consideration, 
 with the diligence and promptitude which the importance of their 
 object requires of your patriotism.*' 
 
 Apparently this was an unfavorable situation for negotiation, 
 and for the next month Treat did not reveal himself or the objects 
 of his mission to the authorities. Still he did not believe that 
 any serious efforts would be made to subjugate Texas. He thought 
 that by asking for political and military powers, they desired to 
 secure authority to raise an army and at the same time negotiate 
 with the Texans. During the next month, however, he was busily 
 engaged in working secretly against the granting of the extraor- 
 
 "Treat to Lamar, December 20, 1839, in lUd., II, 513. 
 "Treat to Lamar, December 31.. 1839. in Ihid., II, 523. 
 "British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 1084 (Translation). 
 
148 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 dinaiy powers. It was not Tintil February 1, 1840, that he, through 
 the intervention of Pakenham, had an interview with Canedo, 
 minister for foreign affairs. 
 
 Naturally, this first interview was introductory and nothing 
 was accomplished. Canedo explained to Treat the difBculty he 
 had had in persuading the President and other members of the 
 cabinet to receive him at all, explaining that the intervention of 
 Pakenham had been the determining factor. He had been finally 
 authorized by the President to listen to all that Treat might have 
 to say, without committing himself in return. When Canedo asked 
 to see Treat's credentials it developed that he had no formal cre- 
 dentials, but only the letter of instructions signed by Burnet. 
 Canedo was willing to accept the letter as sufficient, but stated 
 that the other members of the Government would not, and that 
 it was necessary to secure proper credentials before proceeding. 
 In the meantime, he was willing to accept the guarantee of Paken- 
 ham that Treat was officially accredited. The proper credentials 
 were dispatched on March 13.*° 
 
 On March 1, 1840, Treat got so far as submitting to Canedo 
 the formal projet of a treaty, in accordance with his instructions.*'' 
 On April 15 he received his credentials. On the 18th he com- 
 municated this fact to Canedo, and was informed that Canedo 
 was in sympathy with his desires. Canedo also informed him as 
 to the procedure he would advocate. The plan as outlined to 
 Treat was as follows: A special cabinet meeting was to be held, 
 when an effort would be made to pass the question along to the 
 Council of the Government. If the Council recommended any 
 action, the cabinet was to pass the matter along to the legislature 
 for their action, where it was hoped that authorization would be 
 given to treat with Texas."** 
 
 This procedure was followed exactly. On May 5 the cabinet 
 ordered that all the papers, documents, and correspondence be 
 submitted to the "Council of Government" for their opinion, with 
 the question: Whether the Council concurred with the cabinet in 
 their resolution to ask Congress for special powers to negotiate an 
 amicable arrangement with the Government of Texas.** The mat- 
 
 "Treat to Lamar, February 1, 1840, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 540. 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 592. 
 
 ''Treat to Lamar, April 21, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 606. 
 ■"Treat to Lamar, May 7, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 634. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 149 
 
 ter went to the Council, which on May 12 voted down by a vote 
 of five to four the unanimous recommendation of a committee of 
 the Council that the views of the cabinet be adopted. This was 
 due to the influence of Gorostiza, Treat thought, who was a friend 
 of Santa Anna and an opponent of the existing government. He 
 announced his purpose of attempting to secure the submission of 
 the whole question to Congress without recommendation. "I think 
 that my efforts," he wrote, 
 
 and those of some friends will prove Successful, as I am assured 
 that whatever may be the range and tenor of the report, it will be 
 such as will Square with the Resolution that will be proposed, viz : 
 To transmit the whole Subject, without expressing an opinion 
 themselves, to the consideration of Congress. "With this, and some 
 other timely measures, I think I can expect the result promised.^" 
 
 The papers were submitted to Congress on July 3 for discussion, 
 but on the night of the 14th one of the periodical revolutions in 
 the Capital broke out and prevented their consideration.^^ 
 
 Lamar was becoming impatient at the delay in accomplishing 
 any definite results. The threatening proclamations of the Cen- 
 tralist commander in Coahuila, General Arista, and the manifest 
 efforts of the Mexicans to stir up the Indians made it difficult for 
 the Government to restrain public sentiment which demanded a 
 coalition with the Federalists. On March 37 Treat had notified 
 the Texan Government that he had formally laid before the Mexi- 
 can Government a proposal for peace. In response to that letter, 
 May 7, 1840, the Texas secretary of state, Abner S. Lipscomb, 
 wrote as follows: 
 
 The President has directed me to instruct you, that if after the 
 reception of your credentials, you can obtain no decisively favor- 
 able answer to your overtures for peace, that you will withdraw 
 from your Agency. Should this be the result, you are instructed 
 to make known to the Minister of Her Britanic Majesty in Mexico, 
 that shoiild this Government be constrained to change its position 
 and commence offensive operations, it will not be vnth a view of 
 extending our territory, beyond the Eio Grande and any occupa- 
 tion or military movement west of that River, will be temporary 
 and solely with the view of forcing the enemy to make peace.°* 
 
 ™76id. to Ibid., May 28, 1840, Ihid., II, 636. 
 
 "/Bid., II, 669; 670. 
 
 "''Lipscomb to Treat, May 7, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 635. 
 
150 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 In June Lamar determined to send the Texas navy on a cruise 
 m the Gulf. This was due to the threat of a blockade of the ports 
 of Texas by the Mexicans, who were supposed to have secured a 
 navy in England, to the desire of Lamar to establish communica- 
 tions with the Federalists of Yucatan and Tabasco, who had seem- 
 ingly made good their secession from Mexico, and to communicate 
 with Treat, who was expected to have completed his mission by 
 that. time. The commander of the navy, E. W. Moore, was in- 
 structed to proceed to some safe anchorage off Vera Cruz and 
 send in the dispatches for Pakenham. He was to cause one of 
 his vessels to stand oif Point Maria-Andrea for thirteen days to 
 receive any communication that might be sent by Treat. If he 
 should receive notice that Treat had failed in his mission, he was 
 instructed to cruise against the Mexican vessels and make prizes 
 of them. He was not to commence hostilities until Treat had 
 notified him of the failure of negotiations, but if attacked, he was 
 to defend himself. Finally, he was to endeavor to ascertain the 
 condition of the state of Yucatan, and the disposition of the func- 
 tionaries administering the Government, "whether friendly or 
 otherwise to us, any manifestation of friendship from them you 
 will reciprocate.'"^ 
 
 With Moore went a letter to Treat from the secretary of state 
 in which he again called attention to the conduct of the Mexicans 
 on the frontier and denounced the conspiracies of the Mexicans 
 with the Indians. Lipscomb instructed Treat to inform the Texan 
 Government as to the length of time necessary to come to some 
 conclusion. He was also to inform the Mexican Government that 
 Texas had about reached a decision to begin hostilities if no treaty 
 were possible. "It would perhaps," he wrote, 
 
 be well for you to urge upon Mexico the moderation of this Gov- 
 ernment in not co-operating (thus far) with the Federalists on 
 the Rio Grande as she has been strongly urged to do, and might 
 have done with great benefit to herself and detriment to Mexico, 
 that it is a forbearance we cannot practice much longer, lest we 
 loose all the advantages which such a co-operation would give us, 
 without gaining on}' thing from the Central Government of Mexico. 
 The Federalists are still sanguine of Success, and unremitting in 
 their overtures to us, to make a Common Cause in making war on 
 
 "'Lamar to Moore, June 20. 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 651-652. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Adrnvnistration 151 
 
 tlie Centralists, and in return, would grant every thing we could 
 reasonably ask of them." 
 
 This letter did not reach Treat until August 13. He had al- 
 ready, after the revolution in the Capital in July, communicated 
 to the foreign minister Lamar's instructions of May 7, stating that 
 he was under the necessity of hastening negotiations, and receiving 
 a promise of immediate consideration from Canedo. On August 
 21 he communicated a long memorandum in which he called at- 
 tention to the various complaints against Mexico, and urged an 
 immediate consideration of his mission. This receiving no con- 
 sideration, on September 5 ho addressed another letter to the sec- 
 retary of foreig-n affairs, stating that if some official or formal 
 assurance of the final determination of the Government with re- 
 gard to his mission by the 18th, "which may satisfy him of the 
 actual intentions of the Government to enter forthwith upon an 
 amicable Negotiation" were not received, he would be compelled 
 to ask for his passports and withdraw from his mission.^^ 
 
 Eeceiving no response of any kind to this memorandum, Treat 
 on September 21 addressed a note to Canedo requesting his pass- 
 ports. While waiting for his passports, Pakenham suggested to 
 Canedo that the only way to avoid a conflict with Texas was to 
 arrange an armistice. Canedo agreed that if Treat had authority 
 to agree to an armistice, his Government would receive his pro- 
 posals and act promptly upon them, or, at least, so Pakenham 
 understood. Treat agreed to receive any proposals the Mexican 
 Government might ofEer. He did, however, draw up a draft of 
 an armistice which he authorized Pakenham to put before the 
 Mexican Government. The plan called for a cessation of hos- 
 tilities for three or four years, and six months notice were to be 
 given before renewing hostilities. The virtual recognition of the 
 Eio Grande as a boundary was contained in an article requiring 
 any Mexican forces to the east of the river to pass to the other 
 side.^" On September 29 Canedo sent Treat's passports by Paken- 
 ham without mentioning the matter of the armistice, and Canedo 
 quit office the following day. Almonte, the strong man of the 
 cabinet, assured Pakenham that he favored an armistice and would 
 
 "Lipscomb to Treat, June 13, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 645. 
 ''Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 67.5: 688; 700. 
 
 "'Treat to Lipscomb, September 29, 1840. Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 
 705, 707, 708. 
 
152 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 use his influence to bring it about, so Treat determined to wait 
 eight days longer before leaving the country. 
 
 On October 15, 1840, Pakenham informed Treat that the Mexi- 
 can Government refused to entertain any proposal for an armistice 
 ■which should not be presented with the previous sanction of the 
 Texan authorities; and that in no case could they consent to a 
 provisional line of demarcation to the south of the San Antonio 
 river. Pakenham stated that he had reluctantly come to the con- 
 elusion that nothing could be gained by further overtures to the 
 Government."^ On account of ill health Treat was forced to re- 
 main in Mexico until some time in November, when he embarked 
 on one of the Texan vessels for Galveston. He had been in bad 
 health at various times during his stay in Mexico, and was handi- 
 capped in his negotiations on that account. He died on his way 
 to Texas on board ship, November 30, 1840, so we do not have 
 the benefit of his official report summing up the results of his 
 mission, or giving suggestions for the future conduct of Texas. 
 His reports to the Texas authorities were full, however, and make 
 plain the chief Mexican traits of double dealing and procrastina- 
 tion. The follovdng letter from Pakenham to Treat on the eve 
 of his departure for Texas gives a summary from an impartial 
 witness of the main facts connected with Treat's mission: 
 
 The Passport issued in conformity with your request accom- 
 panied Senor Canedo's note ; but you will perceive that he declines 
 to enter into the explanation solicited by you respecting the trans- 
 actions connected with your Mission, the fruitless issue of which 
 he attributes to your not having confined your propositions to the 
 basis originally put forth by this Government viz: "That Mexico 
 would not consent to relinquish the sovereignty of the Territory 
 of Texas." 
 
 It is true that in Senor Canedo's letter of the 11th. Deer. 1839, 
 a copy of which I transmitted at the time to Gen. Hamilton, and 
 of the contents of which you are also informed, the non-alienation 
 of sovereignty was stated to be an indispensable condition to any 
 arrangement; but it is no less true that the introductory propo- 
 sitions, presented by you on the 23rd. March last, went directly 
 to solicit the recognition of the independence of Texas, with such 
 boundaries as might hereafter be agreed upon — ^that this propo- 
 sition, so far from having been at once rejected by the Mexican 
 Government as inadmissable, was referred to the Council of State, 
 where the whole question with regard to Texas was made the sub- 
 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., 726. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 153 
 
 ject of more than one anxious discussion— and finally that in 
 conformity with the resolution of the Council the correspondence 
 which had passed between Senor Caiiedo and myself, relative to 
 3'our ]\Iission and the proposition presented by you, were submitted 
 to the consideration of the Congress, where, however, the matter 
 appears to have remained altogether unnoticed. 
 
 It is therefore certain that the propositions submitted by you, 
 although. not confined to the basis originally announced by Senor 
 Caiiedo, were to all intents and purposes entertained by the Execu- 
 tive branch of the Government, and not, as Senor Canedo would 
 wish to have it inferred, rejected in limine because they went be- 
 yond the basis at first propounded by the Mexican Government."* 
 
 The news of the failure of Treat's mission came early in De- 
 cember, and President Lamar recommended to Congress the pro- 
 vision for a force sufficient to compel Mexico to acknowledge the 
 independence of Texas. In the House a resolution was passed 
 instructing the committee on military affairs to inquire into 
 the expediency of authorizing the President to raise and equip 
 five thousand men to invade Mexico and compel her to recogaize 
 independence. The men were to equip themselves and to have the 
 spoils which they might take, and each was to be entitled to a 
 league and labor of land, and further pay in land which might be 
 taken on the west side of the Eio Grande.-'*® On December 5 the. 
 Senate sent word that they had appointed a committee to act with 
 the House committee to consider the expediency of a war with 
 Mexico. 
 
 At this juncture President Lamar became seriously ill, and on 
 December 13 he petitioned Congress for and received leave of 
 absence to go to New Orleans for treatment. David G. Burnet, 
 the Vice-President, became Acting-President, and continued to 
 urge preparations for an offensive against Mexico. On December 
 19 he sent to Congress the information that Treat had died on 
 his way to Texas, and that the mission had failed. In spite of the 
 efforts of Burnet to secure the co-operation of Congress, nothing 
 was done save to authorize the employing of three companies of 
 spies."" On January 12, 1841, a select committee of the House 
 brought in a report pointing out the poverty of the Eepublic, and 
 advising against offensive war against Mexico. At the same time, 
 
 ''Ibid., II, 724. 
 
 ™5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., House Journal, 181-182. 
 
 °°5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., House Journal. 347. 
 
154 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 they advised that Tezas be put in a state of defense against in- 
 vasion.®^ The whole ma,tter ended by the two Houses failing to 
 agree on the appropriation bill for the regular army, so even that 
 instrument of defense was left without means of support, and was 
 shortly after disbanded. 
 
 About the time Treat began his negotiations in Mexico, James 
 Hamilton, who had already been in Europe on a mission for Texas, 
 was appointed a commissioner to secure a loan of five million dol- 
 lars in Europe. He was to miss no opportunity of securing pa- 
 cification with Mexico, and was authorized to enter into any treaty 
 of amity, commerce and boimdaries with Mexico, using money 
 already agreed upon by Congress and the President in settlement 
 of the claims of Mexican bondholders, with whom he was empow- 
 ered to enter into an agreement. After numerous delays Hamilton 
 arrived in London on September 37, 1840. He found no pos- 
 sible chance of treating with Mexico at that place. On November 
 13, 1840, he entered into a treaty of amity, commerce, and navi- 
 gation with Great Britain, which carried with it recognition of 
 Texan independence."'' The following day he signed a convention 
 providing for British mediation with Mexico. By this convention 
 Texas agreed that if by means of the mediation of Great Britain, 
 an unlimited truce should be established between Mexico and Texas 
 within thirty days after notice of the convention was communi- 
 cated to Mexico, and if within six months thereafter Mexico should 
 have concluded a treaty of peace with Texas, then the Eepublic 
 of Texas would take over five million dollars of Mexican bonds.®' 
 
 These two treaties arrived in Texas and were communicated to 
 the Senate on January 25, 1841, and promptlv ratified."* As a 
 result of this, hoping that a recognition of Texan independence by 
 Great Britain and a formal convention providing for mediation 
 would iafluence the attitude of the Mexican government, Lamar 
 determined to send a third mission to Mexico, and this time his 
 choice fell upon James Webb, who had succeeded Bee as secretary 
 of state in February, 1839, and was at that time attorney-general. 
 Lamar was absent from the seat of government when these treaties 
 wore ratified, and while unsuccessful efforts were being made to 
 
 "^liid., 473. 
 
 "'Garnmel, Laws of Texas, II, 880-885. 
 
 "Ibid., II, 886 ; British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 84. 
 
 "Secret Journals of the Senate, 195. 
 
Foreign Affairs Durmg Lamar's Administration 155 
 
 secure the authorization of a force for offensive operations against 
 Mexico. He returned about the middle of February and imme- 
 diately began making preparations for sending the mission. 
 
 Webb's commission was dated March 22, 1841. Webb was ap- 
 pointed a minister plenipotentiary, but in case he should not be 
 received an alternative commission was prepared appointing him 
 an agent for the purpose of entering into negotiations. The in- 
 structions were similar to those of the preceding agents, the only 
 difference being a reference to the convention with Great Britain 
 providing for mediation. A naval vessel was placed at his dis- 
 posal, and he was to proceed at once to Vera Cruz, but if Mexico 
 showed no indications that she wished to begin negotiations he 
 was to terminate his mission at once.^° The usual delay took place, 
 and Webb did not arrive off Vera Cruz until May 31, when he 
 addressed a note to the commandant at Vera Cruz asking permis- 
 sion to land, and that he be furnished with passports to proceed 
 to the city of Mexico. This request was courteously refuseid."* 
 
 Upon the refusal of the commandant to allow him to land, Webb 
 addressed a note to Pakenham requesting his intervention with the 
 Mexican authorities."' Pakenham was so good as to comply with 
 the request, and wrote to the secretary of state urging that an effort 
 be made to come to agreement with the Texan authorities. The 
 secretary of state responded on June 8, declining to consider any 
 proposal which looked to the dismemberment of Mexico. After 
 expressing appreciation for the friendly interest of the British 
 government, Camacho declared that the President could not de- 
 part from the principles of honor and justice which prohibited 
 him from recognizing a dismemberment of the territory.*' Webb 
 returned to Qalveston June 29, and reported his failure to Lamar. 
 Upon receipt of this information, Lamar took immediate steps to 
 enter into an alliance with Yucatan in an offensive war against 
 Mexico. 
 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., 733-736. 
 
 "Webb to Mora and Mora to Webb, May 31, 1841, Garrison, Dip. Oor- 
 Tea;., II, 752-753. 
 
 "W^ebb to Pakenham, June 1, 1841, Hid., II, 755. 
 
 "Camacho to Pakenham, June 8, 1841, (Translation) Dip. Oor. Tex., II, 
 758. 
 
156 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 2. The Federalists and the Alliance with Yucatan 
 
 The relations of the Texans with the Federalists on the Eio 
 Grande, the battle of Alcantro, in which a number of Texans par- 
 ticipated, and the proclamation of Lamar on December 21, 1839, 
 warning Texans against participating with the Federalists against 
 the Central Government have been noted. That the Government 
 of Texas was really neutral, while perhaps sympathizing with the 
 Federalists, there can be no doubt. In order to get the proclama- 
 tion of neutrality to the Texans in the Federalist army, the assist- 
 ant adjutant general, Colonel Benjamin H. Johnson, accompanied 
 by a small body of troops, was sent across the Eio Grande to the 
 Federalist camp, and communicated the sentiments of the Gov- 
 ernment to the Texans assembled there. On his return he was 
 captured by a body of Mexicans, and he and his party were put 
 to death. In spite of this, however, the Texan authorities refused 
 to begin active hostilities. It was used as another count agaiast 
 Mexico, however, and given as an instance of the desire of Texas 
 to avoid war. Writing to Treat in Mexico City regarding this 
 incident, Burnet said: 
 
 This is an event not calculated to assuage the feelings of a 
 people already provoked by unwarranted and unchristian mas- 
 sacres, or to soften the rigors of the war should it be actively re- 
 newed. But inasmuch as this atrocity is reported to have been 
 perpetrated by a desultory band of rufSens without the express 
 authority of the Government, the President will not regard it as 
 an insuperable obstacle to the proposed negotiation. But it may 
 be considered as an infallible assurance, that if hostilities are to 
 continue, they will be conducted with increased animation by an 
 indignant people who fcaow how to avenge a wrong which they 
 would never commit."* 
 
 Notwithstanding the public sentiment in favor of joint action 
 with the Federalists, and the participation of a good number of 
 Texans in their campaigns, the attitude of the Government re- 
 mained perfectly correct. The experiences of the Texans who ig- 
 nored the advice of their Government was ample justification for 
 the Government's position.''" 
 
 "•Burnet to Treat, March 12, 1840, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 582. 
 
 "Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 288-299, and Bancroft, North Mexican 
 States and Texas, II, 326-332, give a full account of the "Republic of the 
 Rio Grande," the Federalist campaigns of 1840, and their final betrayal of 
 the Texans who were aiding them. I shall not follow in detail the cam- 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 157 
 
 The most successful of these liberal movements broke out in 
 Yucatan in May, 1839. The weakness of the Government of Mex- 
 ico, and the remoteness of Yucatan from the capital, made it im- 
 possible to take adequate steps to reduce her to submission. By 
 the beginning of the following year the revolutionists were in com- 
 plete control of Yucatan, and the movement had spread into To- 
 basco and Campeche. Treat kept his Government informed of 
 the developments there as he learned of them, suggesting the pos- 
 sibility of joint action by Texas and Yucatan in case of the failure 
 of his mission. In June, 1840, Commodore Moore was sent with 
 the fleet to carry dispatches to Treat. While he was to be careful 
 to observe strict neutrality and not to attack any Mexican vessel 
 unless he learned that Treat's mission had failed, he was to "en- 
 deavour to ascertain the condition of the State of Yucatan, and 
 the disposition of those functionaries administering their Govern- 
 ment, whether friendly or otherwise to us, any manifestation of 
 friendship from them you will reciprocate."'^ 
 
 Moore left Galveston in June, immediately after receiving his 
 orders, and considering the most important of his instructions the 
 discovery of the attitude of Yucatan, he dispatched the letters for 
 Treat and Pakenham in the schooner San Jacinto, while he con- 
 tinued direct to Yucatan, arriving at Sisal on July 31. He was 
 received with every favor by the authorities. After a short time 
 at Sisal he sailed to Campeche, where he found General Anaya 
 and had a friendly conference with him. He returned to Sisal 
 shortly after, and had an interview with the governor-elect, San 
 tiago Mendez, who informed him that "he was anxious that the 
 most friendly relations should be established at an early period, 
 and assured me that the ports of the State of Yucatan were open 
 to any Texan vessel. . . ."''^ On the same day that he reported 
 these movements to the secretary of the navy, August 28, 1840, 
 Moore addressed a letter to President Lamar in which he urged 
 the policy of active warfare. He wrote in part as follows: 
 
 paigns. The statement of Von Hoist that Lamar recognized the "Republic 
 of the Rio Grande," is absurd. He allowed Canales an asylum in Texas 
 when he was defeated, but he certainly did not recognize any claim of the 
 Mexicans to territory east of the Rio Grande. 
 
 "Lamar to Moore, June 20, 1840, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 652. 
 
 "Moore to Secretary of the Navy, August 28, 1840, 5 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess., 
 Appendix, 232-237, House Journal. 
 
158 Mirabeau Buonapwrte Lamar 
 
 By reference to my report you will see the disposition of the 
 Federalists of Yucatan towards the Government of Texas and 
 their anxiety for the cooperation of our N"aval force; the weight 
 of whichj thrown at this time on their side would, I feel confident, 
 be the means of establishing the Federal Constitution throughout 
 Mexico, when we would be acknowledged at once. 
 
 The Centralists are allmost prostrate, and single handed with 
 the means already at your Command [the Navy] you might, with- 
 out the least prospect of being molested by them on the Frontier, 
 dictate to, and no longer ask at their hands, that which they, can 
 be very soon made to feel is ours already, viz our perfect Inde- 
 pendence of them; and in my humble opinion they will never 
 acknowledge it until they are made to feel it. 
 
 With the Navy manned as indifferently as it is, every Mexican 
 can be captured that dare put to sea, and their whole Sea Coast 
 be kept in a perfect state of fear and trembling; why then should 
 we temporize any longer with them, when, if they had the power 
 they would annihilate every male Inhabitant of Texas and spread 
 devastation and ruin throughout our devoted Country. 
 
 You may keep Treating with them until the expiration of your 
 administration and will, iri all probability leave for your successor, 
 whoever he may be, to reap all the advantages of your efforts ; 
 now is the time to push them for they never were so prostrate.'^* 
 
 The fleet returned to Galveston in April, 1841.'* Before that 
 Lamar had determined to send the third peace mission to Mexico, 
 the details of which I have just related. That the possibility of 
 an alliance with Yucatan in ease of failure was already a part of 
 his policy, is indicated by the alternative instructions to Webb. 
 "If you are not permitted to open negotiations with the Govern- 
 ment of Mexico," said the instructions, 
 
 or having opened them, should find it necessary to discontinue 
 them, without any beneficial results, you will after notifying this 
 Government of the fact be at liberty, to return by the way of 
 Yucatan and ascertain what part the Government of that country 
 would be willing to take in a war which Texas might be compelled 
 to wage against Mexico. In doing this however it is only ex- 
 pected that you will sound the people of Yucatan on the subject 
 as you are not furnished with authority to enter into any treaty 
 stipulations, but you may suggest to the authorities the propriety 
 of sending an agent to this Government with full powers to treat 
 
 "Moore to Lamar, August 28, 1840, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 695. 
 _ "For a full history of the cruise of the fleet in 1840-1841, and the activi- 
 ties under the alliance with Yucatan, see Dienst "The Navy of the Repuhlie 
 of Texas," in The Quarteely, XIII, 18-43. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lam,ar's Administration 159 
 
 and you may give them assurances of our friendship and willing- 
 ness to receive such an agent. . . ." 
 
 In June, 1841, Yucatan, which had so far been fighting for the 
 restoration of the Constitution of 1834, declared her independence 
 froin Mexico. Webb learned of this while waiting to be admitted 
 to Mexico, and although an accident to his vessel prevented him 
 from returning by way of Yacatan, yet he had learned enough to 
 cause him to urge an immediate treaty of alliance and opening of 
 hostilities with Mexico. "Leb Texas enter into arrangements at. 
 once, with Y'lieatan and Tobasco," he wrote, 
 
 and each party mutually recognize the Independence of the other, 
 8Jid then let them conjointly renew and prosecute the War untill 
 the Central Government shall be forced into terms, or put down 
 beyond the hope of resuscitation. In renewing the War conjointly 
 with Yucatan and Tobasco, Texas would only be expected ta 
 furnish her N'avy, — ^the whole of the land operations to be car- 
 ried on by the Federalists, and by which means we would be saved 
 the entire expense of keeping an army in the field. . . . 
 
 The Federalists of Yucatan and Tobasco have now everything- 
 that is necessary to carry on the War successfully, but a Navy, and 
 they want no assistance from us but such as the N"avy would afford- 
 Without a Navj'' they can make no effectual impression upon the- 
 Sea ports, and that is the most essential object to be obtained;, 
 because it is through the sea ports and the revenue derived from 
 their Commerce that the Government is sustained — take away 
 that, and you cut off all their . resources and render them hope- 
 lessly imbecile. Hence the great anxiety of the Federalists to- 
 make terms with us, because they believe with our assistance in 
 taking their ports, they can immediately bring the Central party 
 down. . . .'" 
 
 This letter was received on July 5, and on the seventh Samuel 
 A. Eoberts, acting secretary of state, wrote to Webb as follows : 
 
 Your Communication . . . was received two days ago, and 
 it, together with the accompanying documents, was immediately 
 laid before the President, and he considers the questions involved 
 of such magnitude as to determine him to go at once in person to- 
 Galveston, where he can best determine what will, under all the 
 Circumstances, be most proper to be done. He will accordingly 
 
 ''Mayfield to Webb, March 22, 1841, Garrison, Dip. Ooi'. Tex., II, 735. 
 ^'Webb to Lamar, June 29, 1841, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 764. 
 
160 Mirabeau Buonapwrte Lamar 
 
 leave here in the morning, and wiil probably be not more than 
 one clay behind Mr. Moore on his arrival at Galveston.^' 
 
 On July 2G, 1841, Lamar addressed a letter to the Governor of 
 ihe State of Yucatan, and as there has been some question as to 
 who took the initiative in the alliance, I shall quote the letter in 
 full. It is as follows: 
 
 In reading over the Correspondence of Commodore Moore while 
 commanding the Texan squadron on its late Cruise in the Gulf 
 of Mexico, I have experienced the most sincere and lively Grati- 
 fication in discovering the many evidences it affords of the kind 
 .and friendly sentiments entertained by the Authorities of the 
 State of Yucatan toward the Government and people of Texas; 
 .and I now beg leave to assure you sir, that every expression of 
 friendship and regard which has been uttered in your State towards 
 us is most cordially and sincerely reciprocated on our part. 
 
 It has been my earnest desire to establish with the States of 
 Yucatan, Tobasco and such others as may throw off the Yoke of 
 Central despotism in Mexico, relations of amity and friendship, 
 and to show the disposition of this Government to reciprocate in 
 the fullest manner, every evidence of good will manifested by the 
 Federalists of Mexico towardcs this country, I hereby have the 
 pleasure of declaring to you, and of making known to your Citi- 
 zens, that the Ports of Texas are open to the vessels and Com- 
 merce of Yucatan upon the same terms as we extend to the most 
 favored nations, and that this Govt, will require of its Citizens 
 the faithful performance of all contracts, obligations, or compro- 
 mises which they may enter into with the citizens and subjects 
 ■of Yucatan. 
 
 Should it be the desire of your Excellency and of the Congress 
 -of Yucatan to enter into more permanent and specific relations 
 -of Amity friendship and Commerce with the Government and 
 people of Texas, I have only to assure you that we shall be happy 
 to receive from you, an agent duly accredited for that purpose; 
 and that we will be prepared to enter into such negotiations and 
 arrangements with him, as will be mutually beneficial, and result 
 in securing a full and complete acknowledgment of the respective 
 rights ofNboth Countries from those who are now our enemies.^' 
 
 The Governor of Yucatan, Miguel Barbachano, made a prompt 
 response to this letter, and immediately sent a commissioner, Mar- 
 tin Francisco Peraza, fully authorized to treat with Texas on all 
 
 "Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 766. 
 
 "Lamar to Governor of Yucatan, July 20, 1841, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tew., 
 II, 792. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 161 
 
 points. Peraza with his secretary, Donaciano Eejon, arrived in 
 Austin on September 11. On September 16 he submitted a pro- 
 posal to the Texan Government, which with a slight amendment 
 was the plan adopted. By this agreement Yucatan was to pay 
 eight thousand dollars to the Texan authorities for the purpose 
 of getting the fleet ready for sea, and eight thousand dollars per 
 month so long as the government should deem it necessary for the 
 squadron to remain in active service. All captures made by the 
 Texan vessels were to be taken into Texas ports for adjudication, 
 and all captured by Yucatan vessels were to be taken into the 
 ports of Yucatan. Peraza had suggested that the prizes be divided 
 equally, but as the Texas navy was much stronger, and could be 
 depended upon to do the greater part of the fighting, Latnar re- 
 fused to grant that, and the arrangement was agreed to as stated.'" 
 On September 18, 1841, Commodore Moore was ordered to fit 
 and provision his ships for the sea. This required about two 
 months, and on December 13 he sailed from Galveston under 
 sealed orders. Outside of Galveston Bar he opened his secret or- 
 ders and found that he was to sail direct for Sisal in the State 
 of Yucatan, and to cooperate with the sea and land forces of 
 Yucatan in checking any hostile action of Mexico. He was in- 
 structed to capture Mexican towns and levy contributions; and 
 for the purpose of compelling payment, he was authorized to de- 
 stroy public works and edifices, and seize public property, taking 
 care not to molest private property except in the execution of duty. 
 It was hoped that these acts would "strike terror among the in- 
 habitants,,, which may be very useful to us should it again be 
 thought advisable to enter into negotiations for peace."*" 
 
 Moore arrived in Sisal on January 8, 1842, and found to his 
 disappointment that a convention had been signed between Yuca- 
 tan and Mexico on December 28, 1841, the basis of which was a 
 return of Yucatan to her allegiance to Mexico. He complained 
 of the apparent breach of faith on the part of the Yucatan Gov- 
 ernment, but was informed that no promise had been made by 
 
 ™Por the provisions of the agreement see Moore, To the People of Texas, 
 15-19. This agreement being in the nature of a military convention was 
 not submitted to Congress, hence it is not to be found in a collection of 
 treaties. 
 
 ™Moore, To the People of Texas, 13-15. 
 
162 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Yucatan as to her action in that regard.*^ The Yucatan Govern- 
 ment continued to pay the eight thousand dollars monthly, but 
 on March 29, notice was served on Moore that the Yucatan Gov- 
 ernment was willing for the squadron to retire. After a mild pro- 
 test, Moore departed from the Yucatan coast in the latter part 
 of April, and arrived in Galveston on May 1, 1843.'^ 
 
 Lamar's term of office closed on December 13, the day before 
 Moore sailed from Galveston, and Sam Houston bega,n his second 
 term in the presidency. Condemning without discrimiaation every- 
 thing that Lamar did, Houston repudiated the contract with Yu- 
 catan, and on December 15 issued orders for the return of the 
 fleet to Galveston. From some peculiar cause this order did not 
 reach Moore until March 10, when it was too late to accomplish 
 its purpose. In a speech in the United States Senate, March 15, 
 1854, in denunciation of Moore, Houston said with regard to the 
 convention with Yucatan, "This was done without any authority 
 or sanction of Congress or Senate of the Eepublic of Texas. It 
 was a mere act of grace or will on the part of the President." 
 This might be answered by saying that Texas and Mexico were 
 still technically at war, and it is hard to see how it was necessary 
 for the President to submit a military convention to the consid- 
 eration of Congress.*^ 
 
 -3. Relations with the United States 
 
 It has been seen that Lamar had a definite policy towards Mex- 
 ico; but it cannot be said that he had any specific policy towards 
 the United States differing from that of his predecessor or suc- 
 cessors. The first years of the republic of Texas were taken up 
 with the importunings of the Texan agents for admission to the 
 United States, either as a state or a territory, or almost on any 
 terms that the United States might lay down, all of which the 
 United States declined with little ceremony. While it is prob- 
 able that public sentiment with regard to annexation was not ma- 
 terially changed in Texas when the offer of annexation was with- 
 drawn in October, 1838, it is certain that at the time the new 
 president approved the withdrawal of the offer, which, as he said, 
 
 "^Moore, To the People of Texas, 26-29. See also Eejon to Toxan Secre- 
 tary of State, January 18, 1842, Garrison, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 799-802. 
 »=Moore, To the People of Texas, 53-58. 
 "Oong. Globe, 33 Cong., 1 Sess., App., 1081. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 163 
 
 he had never seen the benefit of. "Notwithstanding the almost 
 undivided voice of my fellow-citizens at one time in favor of the 
 measure," said Lamar in his inaugural address in December, 1838, 
 
 and notwithstanding the decision of the National Congress at its 
 last session, inhibiting the chief magistrate from withdrawing the 
 proposition at the Cabinet of Washington, yet still I have never 
 been able myself to perceive the policy of the desired connection, 
 or discover in it any advantage, either civil, political, or commer- 
 cial, which could possibly result to Texas. But, on the contrary, 
 a long train of consequences of the most appalling character and 
 magnitude have never failed to present themselves whenever I 
 have entertained the subject, and forced upon my mind the un- 
 welcome conviction that the step once taken would produce a last- 
 ing regret, and ultimately prove as disastrous to our liberty and 
 hopes as the triumphant sword of the enemy. And I say this 
 from no irreverence to the character and institutions of my native 
 country — whose welfare I have ever desired, and do still desire 
 above my individual happiness — but a deep and abiding grati- 
 tude to the people of Texas, as well as a fervent devotion to those 
 sacred principles of government whose defence invited me to this 
 country, compel me to say that, however strong may be my at- 
 tachment to the parent land, the land of my adoption must claim 
 my highest allegiance and affection. 
 
 The key to this opposition is found in what follows. Texas 
 would yield up the right of declaring war or making peace, of 
 controlling the Indian tribes within her borders, of appropriating 
 the public domain for the benefit of education, of levying her own 
 taxes, regulating her own commerce, and forming her own alli- 
 ances and treaties. Besides, as an independent republic, Texas 
 would adopt free trade, and not be bovmd by the "thralldom of 
 tariff restrictions" found in the United States. Concluding this 
 phase of his address, he said: 
 
 When I reflect upon these vast and momentous consequences, 
 so fatal to liberty on the one hand, and so fraught with happiness 
 and glory on the other, I cannot regard the annexation of Texas 
 to the American Union in any other light than as the grave of all 
 her hopes of happiness and greatness; and if, contrary to the 
 present aspect of affairs, the amalgamation shall ever hereafter 
 take place, I shall feel that the blood of our martyred heroes had 
 been shed in vain — that we had riven the chains of Mexican des- 
 potism only to fetter our country with indissoluble bonds, and 
 that a young republic just rising into high distinction among the 
 
164 Miraheau Buonapa/rte Lamar 
 
 nations of the earth had been swallowed up and lost, like a proud 
 bark in a devouring vortex."* 
 
 Allowing for his love for high sounding phrases, and for his 
 justifiable objection to the termination of the existence of the re- 
 public over which he had just come to preside as chief executive, 
 it is perfectly obvious that Lamar was at that time strongly op- 
 posed to annexation; and this opposition of the President, to- 
 gether with the lack of interest in the question in the United 
 States, caused the annexation question to lie dormant throughout 
 Lamar's administration. With this out of the way the main 
 things to interest the two countries were the settlement of the 
 boundary, the border Indians, and commercial relations. 
 
 The settlement of the boundary between Texas and the United 
 States has been adequately treated elsewhere,*" and I shall do no 
 more than outline it here. The statutory boundary as claimed 
 by Texas was the line as defined in the treaty of 1819 between 
 the United States and Spain. The line had not been surveyed 
 when Texas made good her independence and adopted this line 
 as her eastern boundary. Naturally there was considerable con- 
 fusion, especially on a.ccount of Indian incursions from the United 
 States. A controversy was precipitated with the United States 
 shortly after the beginning of Houston's administration by the 
 passage of a law creating land offices, and including in their juris- 
 diction a part of the territory claimed by the United States.*' 
 This law was inoperative, because the time when it should go into 
 operation was not fixed. A supplementary act was passed June 
 12 providing that the act should go into effect on October 1.*^ 
 The possible incursions of Texans into land claimed by Arkansas 
 brought a protest from the governor of Arkansas, which was 
 taken up by the secretary of state of the United States, Porsyth, 
 and presented to the charge d'affaires of Texas as a protest from 
 the United States.*'* 
 
 On the same day that the law was passed providing that the 
 land offices should begin work on October 1, another law was 
 passed providing for the appointment of commissioners to run the 
 
 "Lamar Papers, No. 361; Senate Journal, 3 Tex. Cong., 1 Sess. 
 '"Marshall, Western Boundary of the Louisiana Purchase, 206-241. 
 ''December 22, 1836. Gammel, Lwws of Texas, 1, 1276-1284. 
 "76id., 1322-1326. 
 ''Forsyth to Catlett, June 17, 1837, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 230. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamwr's Administration 165 
 
 boundary line."" Before the Texan charg6 had received notice of 
 this act, however, he had already urged the United States authori- 
 ties to appoint a commissioner for running the boundary line."" 
 Without attempting to follow the negotiations in detail, it is suffi- 
 cient to say that after long delay and the presentation of claims 
 and counter claims the Texan miaister, Memucan Hunt, on April 
 28, 1838, signed a convention for running the boundary line."^ 
 Eatifications were not exchanged until October 12, so the carry- 
 ing out the convention devolved on the Lamar administration.^* 
 
 There was delay on both sides in appointing commissioners and 
 providing for their needs, and it was not until August, 1839, that 
 the joint commission met in ISTew Orleans, when, on account of 
 the prevalence of yellow fever, and the hostility of the border In- 
 dians, the commissioners decided to postpone the beginning of the 
 work until October 15. They did not assemble again until Novem- 
 ber 12, when they went into camp at Green's BlufE on the Sabine 
 about thirty-five miles from its mouth. They were joined by the 
 Texan commissioner, Memucan Hunt, on January 20, 1840, but 
 the Texans lacked instruments, so there was another delay in be- 
 ginning. While waiting for instruments for the Texans the com- 
 missioners with much difficulty came to a decision as to the method 
 to be pursued under the Treaty of 1819 and the convention of 
 1838. On May 21, 1840, the survey actually began, the Texans 
 conceding that Sabine gulf should be considered a part of Sabine 
 river, and consenting to the boundary along the western side 
 of that stream."^ Work was interrupted on June 3, and it was 
 not until February 14, 1841, that the commissioners assembled 
 to renew work, and not until June 24, 1841, that the work was 
 completed. 
 
 There was always an Indian question between the two govern- 
 ments. After the recognition of Texan independence by the United 
 States, the treaty of 1831 between the United States and Mexico 
 was considered as binding on Texas and the United States. Period- 
 ically the Texas government sent complaints to the United States 
 that efforts were being made to stir up the United States Indians 
 
 '"Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1331. 
 
 '"Catlett to Anderson, June 17, 1837, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 229. 
 
 "Hunt to Irion, April 28, 1838, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 325-326. 
 
 ■"Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, etc., II, 1779. 
 
 "^Marshall, Western Boundary of the Louisiana Purchase, 230-235. 
 
166 Mi/raheau Buonapa/rte La-mar 
 
 to act with their neighbors in Texas, and as often the authorities 
 of the United States responded, usually courteously, but some- 
 times coolly, saying they would investigate, and always the re- 
 sult of their investigation was to show that the Texan fears 'were 
 without foundation. This procedure had its beginning ia the 
 summer of 1836, when Gaines was urged to send forces into Texas 
 for the purpose of keeping the Indians quiet; and ever after that 
 in case of a threat of Indian war, or after any atrocities committed 
 by the Indians as individuals or in small groups, the customary 
 complaint was registered, and the customary answer returned. 
 
 The administration of Lamar was not different from any other 
 period of the history of the republic in this respect, and an ade- 
 quate discussion would require too full a consideration of the whole 
 Indian question for the purposes of this paper. I shall touch on 
 the Indian question only incidentally as I discuss the efforts on 
 the part of Texas to abrogate the Treaty of 1831 and form a new 
 treaty with the United States. 
 
 On February 17, 1838, the comptroller of the treasury of the 
 United States issued a circular, in part as follows: 
 
 Referring to the circular from this oflBce, of the 2nd. instant, 
 I have to communicate for your Government that, by information 
 received from the Department of State, it appears the fifth and 
 sixth articles of the treaty with Mexico are held obligatory on the 
 Eepublic of Texas. It resiilts, therefore, that the vessels and pro- 
 ductions of the latter, being placed on equal footing in carrying 
 on its commercial intercourse with the United States, are to be 
 treated with reciprocal favour, and enjoy the like privileges and 
 exemptions that are extended to the productions and vessels of 
 Mexico.^* 
 
 This order was communicated to the Texan secretary of state on 
 March 33, and on the 26th was answered by John Birdsall, stating 
 that 
 
 While the undersigned assures Mr. La Branche of the earnest 
 desire of this Eepublic to cultivate the most friendly intercourse 
 with the United States, and especially upon those principles of 
 equality and reciprocal favour which should always characterise 
 the commercial relations of friendly States, he cannot yield his 
 assent to the proposition that the commercial stipulations of the 
 treaty with Mexico are obligatory upon the Government of this 
 Eepublic. 
 
 "Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 313, 314. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 167 
 
 The events of our Eevolution, the great changes in territorial 
 and political organization incident to it, necessarily make the ap- 
 plication ol the treaty, to the new order of things, a question of 
 mere expediancy addressed to the discretion and reciprocal in- 
 terests of the two countries. 
 
 Not doubting however that the measures of this Government 
 will meet the expectations of the United States, in regard to the 
 commercial intercourse between them, The undersigned will lay 
 before the President who is yet absent, the note of Mr La Branche, 
 and the accompanying Circular at the earliest opportunity after 
 his return, in order that this Government may take the necessary 
 action upon the subject."" 
 
 That the arrangement proposed proved satisfactory to the Presi- 
 dent is to be presumed, as there was no further correspondence 
 on the matter. The reservation of Birdsall was natural as the 
 Texan minister was at that time trying to secure a commercial 
 treaty with the United States, and it would have been unwise to 
 prejudice the case by acknowledging without reservation that the 
 Mexican treaty was binding. Besides, the notice of the application 
 of the treaty to Texan vessels came from the treasury department 
 of the United States and did not represent a joint agreement 
 between Texan agents and agents of the United States; and it 
 might have been considered beneath the dignity of Texas to ac- 
 cept this without reservation. This arrangement was put into 
 effect without Texas ever conceding its binding nature, except 
 when the United States was urged to restrain their Indians, and 
 as there was no commercial treaty ever ratified between Texas and 
 the United States, it continued to be the basis of trade between 
 the two countries. 
 
 Notwithstanding the Texan authorities had early attempted to 
 form commercial treaties with European countries, it was not until 
 early in 1841 that steps were taken looking to the establishment 
 of commercial arrangements with the United States. On Feb- 
 ruary 17, the secretary of state wrote to Barnard E. Bee, Texan 
 charge d'affaires in Washington, announcing the receipt of a num- 
 ber of communications from Washington in relation to the con- 
 struction of the treaty between the United States and Mexico, and 
 the obligations of the United States under that treaty to restrain 
 the border Indians from incursions into Texas. "The President 
 instructs me to inform you," he wrote, 
 
 "Hid., 322. 
 
168 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 that in all probability it will be the most advisable t© defer for 
 the present an}' further discussion of that subject: That you will 
 avail yourself of the most favorable opportunity to suggest, to the 
 Secretary of State of the United States the importance, and mu- 
 tual advantages to be derived to the respective Governments by 
 establishing more definitely our relations and intercourse by far- 
 ther Treaty stipulations. Independent of the high commercial ad- 
 vantages consequent upon reciprocal Treaty obligations, the civil 
 and criminal administration of the laws of the respective Govern- 
 ments would be very much facilitated by properly tempered regu- 
 lations relative to fugitives from Justice, and public defaulters."" 
 
 In December Lamar had obtained leave of absence on account of 
 bad health, and at the time this letter was sent he was still away 
 from the seat of government, convalescing at the home of Doctor 
 Hoxie, at Independence, Texas. It seems that Mayfield had in- 
 structions from him before suggesting a general treaty with the 
 United States. Some time about March 1, 1841, Lamar returned 
 to the seat of government and took up his duties, and on March 
 33 Mayfield addressed another letter on the subject of negotiating 
 a treaty."^ In announcing the return of Lamar to Austin and 
 the resumption of his duties, Mayfield wrote: 
 
 His views were known upon the subject of opening a negotia- 
 tion with the Government of the United States: for forming a 
 delJnite treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation; and embrac- 
 ing such other subjects as may mutually interest both Nations. 
 It is the wish of the President that you should, without delay 
 represent in the most respectful and urgent manner to the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States the importance of an early Nego- 
 tiation relative to the several objects contained in my former note, 
 in which the several matters now under consideration and dis- 
 cussion between the two Governments may be embraced, and defi- 
 nitely adjusted upon principles of entire reciprocity. 
 
 No specific plan was proposed for the reason that it was hoped 
 that the negotiations would be held in Texas, and Bee was urged 
 
 »»Mayfleld to Bee, February 17, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 76. 
 
 •T!t is necessary to correct /a false impression that several of the histories 
 of Texas give. Yoakum, Bancroft, Thrall, Crane, Lester, Gouge, and others 
 state that Lamar retired from the presidency, and that throughout the re- 
 mainder of his term the oflBce was administered by Burnet. Gouge is par- 
 ticularly caustic, referring to the financial and other failures, and saying 
 Lamar did not have the courage to remain with his office after failure. 
 Even a slight acquaintance with the newspapers and other records of the 
 period should have made impossible this error. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 169 
 
 to request that they be held there j"^ though some of the argu- 
 ments Bee should advance for the beginning of negotiations were 
 suggested, one of which was the settlement of the right of citizens 
 of each country to carry their body servants with them when travel- 
 ing in the country of the other. Another reason given was the 
 necessity for coming to some agreement as to the meaning of the 
 treaty of 1831 with regard to the control of the Indians. 
 
 By the treaty between Mexico and the United States in 1831, 
 it was agreed that each country should take upon itself the duty 
 of restraining the Indians from crossing the boundary and attack- 
 ing the citizens of the other, even to the point of using force. 
 The term used was the prevention of "incursions." The Texan 
 government and the government of the United States developed 
 diametrically opposite views with regard to the interpretation of 
 this treaty. The Texan authorities interpreted it to mean that 
 the United States government would prevent the peaceful emi- 
 gration of United States Indians into Texas, and even went so 
 far as to demand that the United States prevent the immigrant 
 Indians, such as the Cherokees, Caddoes, and others from taking 
 anv part in Mexican conspiracies, or even to send a force to assist 
 in ejecting them from Texas. The attitude of the United States 
 was that the treaty meant that the United States would prevent 
 any hostile incursions into the territory of Texas, or if imable to 
 prevent the incursion, she would remunerate the Texas citizens 
 for any loss sustained at the hands of Indian marauders. 
 
 The action of the United States government in sending mili- 
 tary forces into Texas in the summer of 1836 with the ostensible 
 purpose of keeping the Indians quiet, created a precedent on which 
 the Texans attempted to act from this time forward. Every time 
 an outbreak appeared imminent, the Texan authorities sent the 
 documents proving the conspiracy, and requested some action. 
 These documents were usually submitted to the secretary of war, 
 who at this time was J. E. Poinsett, for investigation. The atti- 
 tude of the United States government is expressed in a report of 
 Poinsett to the secretary of state on July 18, 1839, after the Texan 
 minister had laid before the secretary of state documents showing 
 that the Mexicans were conspiring with the Cherokees against the 
 Texans."^ Poinsett wrote: 
 
 ■"Mayfield to Bee, March 22, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 77-78. 
 
 °°I have discussed these Indian wars in Chapter IV, and shall not give 
 
170 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Having carefully examined the documents accompanying that 
 communication [Mr. Dunlap's], I do not find any evidence of a 
 disposition on the part of the Indians within the United States 
 to make war upon the citizens of Texas. The letters of the Mex- 
 ican authorities allude clearly to the Indians residing within the 
 Texan territory; and the circular is addressed to chiefs who live 
 without the limits of the United States.^'^" 
 
 This position does not appear to have had a formal answer until 
 December 15, 1840, when Bee ia a letter to Forsyth called atten- 
 tion to additional atrocities, and took issue with the position of 
 Poinsett. He claimed that as the Cherokees, Kickapoos, Dela- 
 wares, Choctaws, Pottawatomies, Shawnees, and Caddoes had come 
 to Texas from the United States without ever securing rights of 
 settlement there, it was the duty of the United States to keep them 
 quiet as well as those which still remained in the United States. 
 Besides, he said, the Indians in the United States mingled in- 
 discriminately with their kindred in Texas, and participated in the 
 atrocities which were complained of. His contention was that the 
 removal of any tribe of Indians into Texas without the permis- 
 sion of the Texan authorities, did not. affect the duties of the 
 United States under the treaty.^"^ 
 
 The response of Forsyth to this communication, January 33, 
 1841, is what precipitated the demand of the Texan government 
 for the abrogation of the treaty of 1831. He wrote that as usual 
 with anything dealing with Indian affairs. Bee's communication 
 had been submitted to the war department, and that as usual, the 
 conclusion arrived at was, "that the Executive of the United States 
 has no legal power to check or restrain by force the voluntary and 
 peaceable migrations of Indians from the United States to any 
 other coimtry whatsoever." The sole object of the article in the 
 treaty referred to, he said, was to make it the duty of the parties 
 to do everything in their power towards preserving peace among 
 the Indians on their frontiers, and preventing them from attack- 
 ing the citi'zens of either party. He claimed that the United 
 States had scrupulously carried out her part of the contract, and 
 
 more here than the international aspect. The documents referred to here 
 were those showing the conspiracy of 1839, resulting in the expulsion of 
 the Cherokees from Texas. 
 
 ^"Senate Documents, 32 Cong., 2 Sess., No. 14, p. 42. 
 
 '°V6ia!., 52. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 1111 
 
 stood ready to continue to do so in case of proof that any United 
 States Indians were making marauding expeditions into Texas.^"" 
 
 The death of President Harrison prevented the Texan legation 
 from submitting the request of its government for a treaty until 
 April 23, 1841. On that date Nathaniel Amory, secretary of lega- 
 tion, expressed verbally to Webster the desire of the Texan govern- 
 ment to enter into a treaty covering the Indian question, com- 
 merce, and other matters at issue between the two governments, 
 and also expressing the desire that negotiations be held in Austin. 
 To the last proposal Webster interposed a negative, though he was 
 non-committal as to the necessity for a treaty .^"^ Before this in- 
 terview took place a letter had gone forward on April 30, signed 
 by the secretary of state, but apparently written by President 
 Lamar, in which the whole Texan contention was defended strongly. 
 
 An interesting phase of the arguments used ia this communica- 
 tion, which was characteristic of Lamar's methods, is the balanc- 
 ing of the benefits to the United States of the fifth and sixth 
 articles against the duties assumed by the United States under 
 the thirty-third article.^"* I shall quote at some length from this 
 document, without pointing out the fallacies, to give some idea of 
 the methods employed by Lamar. After mentioniag the fact that 
 the United States had seen fit in 1838 to adapt the treaty to Texas 
 so far as commerce was concerned, and that Texas had acquiesced 
 in that interpretation of international law, he continued: 
 
 Under the Construction given by Mr. Forsyth to the 33rd article 
 of the Treaty Texas would not -be receiving an equivalent, for the 
 sacrifices she suffers in her revenues; by allowing Vessels belong- 
 ing to the United States to enter out Ports free of Tonnage duty. 
 To arrive at a fair interpretation of that instrument the whole 
 should he construed by its several parts and articles, by which 
 means its true spirit and intention may be more accurately de- 
 fined. It will be found that concessions, and privileges are con- 
 tained in many of its clauses and provisions in many of its articlfes 
 
 "^Ibid., 55. 
 
 ^"'Amory to Mayfield, April 23, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 489. 
 
 ^"Articles 5 and 6 of the treaty provided for complete reciprocal tonnage 
 and other local dues, and that the same duties should be charged whether 
 the goods were brought in Mexican or American vessels. 
 
 Article 33 provided "that the two contracting parties, shall by all means 
 in their power maintain peace and harmony among the several Indian Na- 
 tions who inhabit the land adjacent to the lines and rivers which form 
 the boundaries of the two countries;" and it was stipulated that the nec- 
 essary force would be employed to restrain all incursions on the part of 
 
173 Mirabeau Buonapa/rte Lamar 
 
 of which there cannot be found a sufficient guarantee or equivalent 
 secured in. the same article. This naturally arose from the rela- 
 tive strength, commerce, and political condition of the contracting 
 parties at the time of making the Treaty, as will he seen by refer- 
 ence to the articles cited. 
 
 The United States at the time had an extended commerce, and 
 heavy Shipping. Mexico on the contrary (and with but remote 
 prospects of improvement) was limited in her commerce, and yet 
 more in her shipping. The mutual guarantee then as to tonnage 
 and other charges enumerated in the "5th and 6th" articles of the 
 Treaty cannot be said to secure to Mexico an equivalent, as it was 
 apparent and must for years Continue that the whole trade of 
 Mexico with the United States upon the Gvdi would be carried in 
 American bottoms. 
 
 On the other hand, the United States was well established, with 
 a strong standing army, an organized militia, and an overflowing 
 treasury, and her contribution to this balanced document was a 
 guarantee to protect Mexico from her Indian neighbors. But in- 
 dependent of those considerations, the United States was bound 
 upon principles of Justice aside from any treaty stipulations upon 
 the subject, to guard the government of Mexico, her citizens or 
 territory, from hostilities or incursions from those various tribes 
 of Indians, which by her policy she was establishing on the im- 
 mediate borders of the latter. He did not agree with Forsyth's 
 interpretation of the thirty-third article, and insisted that the 
 United States was obligated to use force to restrain her Indians 
 from making incursions, either peaceful or otherwise, into Texas. 
 Finally, since the United States refused to carry out the plaia 
 obligations of the thirty-third article, the minister was to annoimce 
 to the American secretary of state that Texas had determined to 
 terminate the stipulations of the fifth and sixth articles as pro- 
 vided for by the treaty.^"^ These instructions were complied with 
 on May 19, when the secretary of legation informed the American 
 secretary of state that the treaty would terminate a year from that 
 date."° 
 
 This elicited no response from the United States government, 
 though there continued to be a one-sided correspondence on the 
 subject thereafter. On September 15 Amory submitted a rough 
 draft of a treaty as follows: 
 
 the Indians living within their respective boundaries. Treaties and Con- 
 ventions of the United States (Malloy, ed.), I, 1085-1097. 
 
 ™Mayfield to Bee, April 20, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., II, 82-86. 
 
 ™Amory to Webster, May 19, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 496. 
 
Foreign Affairs Dwing Lamar's Administration 173 
 
 Article 1 : On commerce and navigation. To be nearly the 
 same as that in the Treaty between Texas and Great Britain, or 
 as the 2nd Article of the convention between Texas and the Nether- 
 lands. 
 
 2nd. Arte: As regards what shall be considered Texas vessels 
 to be like the 7th Article of the Treaty between Texafe and the 
 Netherlands. 
 
 3rd. Tonage duties the same on vessels of both countries as in 
 the second Article of the Treaty with Great Britain. Insert pro- 
 visions for calling upon justices of the Peace, Judges and courts 
 for warrants and other process to apprehend deserters from the 
 Commercial and Naval Service. 
 
 4th The flag to protect the ships and goods, and no right of 
 search to be permitted under penalty of damages to be restored by 
 the Government of the officer or officers offending. 
 
 Artie 5th Provide for right and obligation of convoy in case 
 of mutual war with a third power, as provided in the 20th article 
 of the Treaty with the Netherlands, the free navigation by each 
 party of the bordering or coterminous rivers and above and below 
 the boimdaries. 
 
 Artie: 7. The right of each party to land the products of its 
 soil within the territory of the other free of all duty, when the 
 same is intended to be and is actually shipped to any other country. 
 
 Artie: 8. To provide for the Indian relations as in the 23rd 
 [33rd] Article of the Treaty between the United States and Mex- 
 ico, and for removal of Indians from Texas. 
 
 Art : 9. Provisions for consular rights. 
 
 Art : 10. The right of succession and inheritance to the estates 
 of deceased citizens dying intestate to be preserved as in the coun- 
 try of which they were the subjects, tho' temporarily domiciled 
 abroad. 
 
 Art: 11. The Treaty to continue for ten years.^"' 
 
 To this communication Webster replied on September 20, stat- 
 ing that on accoimt of a press of other matters he would not be 
 able at that time to discuss the matter of a treaty with Texas, and 
 that on accoimt of his absence in the North it would not be pos- 
 sible to take the matter up before December,^"* so the administra- 
 tion of Lamar came to a close without any definite action having 
 been taken on the proposals of Texas. 
 
 The succeeding administration took up the same policy, how- 
 ever, and a brief statement is necessary to complete the story of 
 the negotiations. Bee, who had absented himself from Washing- 
 
 ^<"Dip. Cor. Tex. I, 517. 
 ^'^lUd., I, 517-518. 
 
174 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 ton for the greater part of the summer and fall of 1841, was re- 
 called in a sharp letter of censure, and James Keily was sent armed 
 Avith full powers to negotiate a treaty. For a good part of this 
 year Webster was engaged in the Webster-Ashburton negotiations 
 over the Northeast boundary, and it was not until July 30, 1842, 
 that the draft of a treaty was signed by the Texan charge d'affaires 
 and the American secretary of stcite."" The draft of the treaty 
 contained twenty-two articles, and followed generally the subjects 
 suggested by the Texan charge d'affaires in September, 1841. 
 Freedom of commercial intercourse was to be guaranteed, and 
 duties were to be reciprocal; the use of the Eed Eiver, and all 
 rivers having their sources or origin in Texas, and emptying into 
 the Mississippi, and even the Mississippi, were free to the navi- 
 gation of both parties; right of deposit was allowed without duties 
 while reshipment was being made, and raw cotton was to be im- 
 ported into each country for five years free of duty. Other articles 
 dealt with blockade, rights of neutrals, prizes, and transference of 
 property. A consular service was provided for, and a final article 
 provided for extradition of criminals. 
 
 The main cause for demanding a treaty on the part of Texas 
 was the unsatisfactory situation with regard to the border Indians. 
 It will be remembered that the Texans desired that the United 
 States guarantee Texas against the peaceable immigration of 
 United States Indians, and that the United States should remove 
 those which had come into Texas from the United States. Before 
 negotiations got under way, however, Texas had surrendered that 
 point, and the agreement was according to the contention of the 
 United States, with ambiguities removed. It was agreed "that 
 the two contracting parties, by all the means in their power, main- 
 tain peace and harmony among the several Indian tribes who in- 
 habit the lands adjacent to the lines and rivers which form the 
 boundaries of the two countries," and in order to attain that re- 
 sult force was to be used, "so that Texas will not permit the In- 
 dians residing within her territory, to attack the citizens of the 
 United States or the Indians residing within the limits of the 
 United States, nor will the United States suffer their Indians to 
 attack the citizens of Texas nor the Indians inhabiting her terri- 
 
 "*Reiley to Jones, August 3, 1842, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 576. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 175- 
 
 tory, in any manner whatsoever." Captives were to be returned 
 by the two governments."" 
 
 This treaty was never binding on the two governments as rati- 
 fications were never exchanged. The Texas Senate on January 
 16, 1843, ratified it with an amendment to article V, which per- 
 mitted free importation of raw cotton,"^ while in March, 1843, 
 the United States Senate ratified it after striking out articles 
 IV and V, which provided for freedom of navigation of the rivers, 
 inchiding the Mississippi, and right of deposit at New Orleans 
 and other points. No further action was taken by either country,, 
 as by this time the annexation issue was becoming of supreme in- 
 terest again. 
 
 Another topic that requires some discussion here, and which I 
 have already mentioned in a discussion of the relations of Mexico 
 and Texas, is the attitude assumed by the United States during 
 the efforts of Texas to establish peace with Mexico. When Dun- 
 lap was sent to the United States in the place of Bee, who was sent 
 to Mexico, he was instructed to ask for the mediation of the 
 United States between Texas and Mexico.^^® Forsyth gave a lim- 
 ited agreement to this policy, while acting at all times cautiously. 
 The purport of the instructions was that through the mediatiort 
 of the American secretary of state, Dunlap should get into com- 
 munication with the Mexican minister, and by some means agree- 
 on a treaty with him. It appears that Forsyth did speak to the- 
 Spanish minister, without taking any decided stand one way or- 
 another. In a private letter to Lamar, May 16, 1839, Dunlap ' 
 wrote : 
 
 I am requested by Mr. Forsythe to give you a private letter- 
 relative to our interview this day, concerning the mediation of 
 this Govt, with our Mexican difficulties — as the result may not 
 be subject to a call of Congress. He said to the Mexican minister 
 that the Govet. of Texas had asked the mediation of his Govet. 
 with the hope of settling on amicable terms, by a treaty of peace 
 and limits the present difficulties between Texas and Mexico — and 
 that his Govet. would be very happy to interpose, should it be the 
 wish of Mexico.^^^ 
 
 ""The complete text of tlie treaty can be found in Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 622- 
 628. 
 
 '"■Secret Journals of the Senate, 276. 
 "^Z)ip. Cor. Tex., I, 369. 
 "^Z)ip. Cor. Tex., I, 383. 
 
176 Mvrabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 This was certainly non-committal enough; but the instructions 
 to Ellis, who was ]ust beiag sent as minister to Mexico, were less 
 in harmony with the desires of Texas. Ellis was instructed to be 
 ready, while observiug strict neutrality, to interpose his good offices 
 between Mexico and Texas, but not until Mexico should ask for 
 them. There is no evidence that Mexico asked for the mediation 
 •of Ellis, and none that he ever ofEered mediation. But the Texan 
 minister was characteristically optimistic, and read into Forsyth's 
 attitude a solicitude for Texas which was unjustified. "Mr. Ellis 
 will be instructed to say to Prest Santa Anna that should Mexico 
 •desire the mediation of this G-ovnt," he wrote, "that nothing will 
 give her more pleasure than to interpose"; but Ellis was not in- 
 structed to make any such statement. Apparently, from the in- 
 structions, all advances were to come from the Mexicans before 
 Ellis would have been expected to offer the good offices of the 
 United States. 
 
 ISTo further developments came on this liue until April, 1840. 
 Eee, who had succeeded Dunlap as miaister in Washington, com- 
 municated to Forsyth information concerning the killing of Colonel 
 Johnson and his party while returning from the Eio Grande coun- 
 try after promulgating Lamar's proclamation of neutrality as be- 
 tween the Centralists and Federalists, and again asked the United 
 •States to mediate between Mexico and Texas. ^^* In answer, For- 
 syth informed Mr. Bee "that although he is entirely correct in 
 -supposing that the United States desire that the relations between 
 Texas and Mexico may be established upon a friendly footing, 
 nothing has occurred since the communications on that subject 
 from this Department to the Predecessors of Mr. Bee as the Eep- 
 :resentatives of Texas here, to render a change of the determina- 
 tion of this Government expedient."^^° This cool response effec- 
 tively closed the matter, and it did not reappear ujitil after the 
 close of Lamar's administration. 
 
 Another way in which the United States showed a correct con- 
 ■ception of neutrality, was in refusing to allow seamen for the Texas 
 navy to be recruited in American ports. At the beginning of 
 Lamar's administration, as I have vshown in another chapter, the 
 vessels contracted for by his predecessor began to arrive, but they 
 
 "*Bee to Forsyth, April 5, 1840, Dip. Cor. Tex., I, 451. 
 "=Forsyth to Bee (copy). May 4, 1840, Dip. Gor. Tex., I, 453. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration, 177 
 
 were not manned, and it was hoped to secure seamen from the 
 United States. Ijieutenant Moore, commander of the sloop Boston 
 in the United States navy, resigned his commission and was ap- 
 pointed as commander of the Texan navy. In reporting this 
 resignation to the Te,\an authorities, Dunlap wrote, July 21, 1839, 
 suggesting that the best plan to obtain tried seamen was to send 
 the vessels back to New York or some other port, and let the com- 
 manding officer announce the number of men desired. He said 
 that was the method advised by those most skilled in the matter. 
 He stated that no notice would be taken when the ships left, con- 
 cluding, "This is the best port for such an enterprise as conceal- 
 ment is more certain amidst such large and busy masses as con- 
 tinually throng this city."^^' 
 
 The government of Texas accepted the guarantees of Dunlap, 
 and followed his advice, sending the ships to various American 
 ports for recruits, Moore himself proceeding to New York. It 
 seems, however, that the authorities of the United States were not 
 so blind as Dunlap anticipated. A letter from Forsyth to Dunlap 
 on January 15, 1840, enclosing documents showing that Moore had 
 been violating the neutrality law of 1818, and announcing his pur- 
 pose to begin legal proceedings against Moore, said, "As you will 
 without doubt promptly iaform your Government of the grounds 
 and motives for the proceedings against Mr Moore and his con- 
 federates, no erroneous impressions in regard to them can be re- 
 ceived but it will understand that they have originated in the 
 desire and determination of the Executive of the United States 
 to use all legal means to preser\'e our neutrality between Texas 
 and Mexico, and to maintain relations of friendship and good will 
 with both governments." He also announced, the determination 
 of his government to exclude Texan vessels of war from American 
 ports in case of any future violation of the law.^" 
 
 The charge against Moore, substantially supported by docu- 
 ments, was that for some time he had been engaged in hiring and 
 retainiag within the territory of the United States, citizens of 
 the United States and other persons to enlist themselves in the 
 service of the Eeptiblic of Texas as mariners or seamen on board 
 the brig of war, Colorado. In spite of his suggestion that this 
 
 ""Dunlap to Lamar, July 21, 1839, Dip. Cor. Tex., 411. 
 "'Forsyth to Dunlap, January 15, 1840 (copy enolosed in Dunlap to 
 Burnet, January 27, IMO) , Dip. Cor. Tea;., I, 437. 
 
178 Mirabeau Buonapwrte Lamar 
 
 procedure be followed in securing mariners and seamen, Dunlap 
 expressed great surprise that any attempt was being made to 
 evade the laws of the United States. He felt confident, he said, 
 that his government would not do any act inconsistent with that 
 spirit of conciliation and good will which she had so fondly cher- 
 ished towards both the government and citizens of the United 
 States. He protested that the exclusion of Texan vessels from 
 American ports was threatened without giving Moore a fair and 
 complete trial. On January 27, 1840, he sent a note to the sec- 
 retary of state for the United States enclosing a copy of one from 
 Commodore Moore disclaiming having enlisted any seamen in 
 violation of an act of Congress. To this Forsyth replied, calling 
 attention to the discrepancy between Moore's letter and the docu- 
 ments already presented, and stating that since Moore had left 
 the waters of the United States of his own accord, no further 
 action on the part of the United States was necessary. Thus the 
 matter closed."" 
 
 .//. Relations with, France and England 
 
 When William H. Wharton was sent as minister to the United 
 States in November, 1836, he was instructed, if the United States 
 should be indifferent or adverse to the claims of Texas to recog- 
 nition or annexation, to keep in touch with the ministers of Eng- 
 land and Prance, "explaining to them the great commercial ad- 
 vantages that will result to their nations from our cotton, etc., and 
 finding a market here for their merchandise, and an outlet for 
 their surplus population, on the basis of low duties and liberal 
 encouragement which it will be our interest to establish." In a 
 postscript the Texan secretary of state, Stephen P. Austin, re- 
 peated his instructions that in no case was the minister to look 
 for support to other quarters unless the United States should give 
 evidence of a lack of friendly interest.^ In February, 1837, Whar- 
 ton became discouraged at the prospect of recognition by the 
 United States, and wrote that he had put the British and French 
 ministers in possession of documents explanatory of the objects 
 of the contest with Mexico, and that he had requested them to 
 ascertain whether or not their countries would receive a diplomatic 
 
 "'For this correspondence see Dip. Cor. Teas., I, 436-442. 
 
 ^Austin to Wharton^ November 18, 1836, Dip. Oor. Tex., I, 137, 140. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 179 
 
 agent from Texas for the purpose of entering into a treaty of 
 commerce.^ 
 
 Partly as a result of the obvious indifference of the United 
 States to annexation, and to encourage a more favorable attitude 
 by appealing to European countries, and partly from a desire to 
 strengthen tlie financial system by securing recognition abroad, 
 the Congress which assembled in May, 1837, passed a resolution 
 requesting the President to appoint an agent to Great Britain, 
 and later in a secret joint resolution, it authorized the President 
 to instruct the agent to visit France, in order to secure recogni- 
 tion of their independence by those pov^ers, and to form a com- 
 mercial treaty.' J. Pinclmey Henderson, who had acted as secre- 
 tary of state for awhile after the death of Austin, was commis- 
 sioned on June 20 as agent under these resolutions, and he ar- 
 rived in London on October 9, 1837. 
 
 Texan affairs had been under discussion in Parliament in 1836, 
 when the anti-slavery interests expressed concern over the possible 
 effect of Texan independence on slavery and the slave trade. On 
 June 5, 1836, Mr. Barlow Hoy interrogated the foreign minister, 
 Palmerston, as to whether or not he had received any commimi- 
 cation relative to the establishment of slavery in Texas. Palmer- 
 ston responded that he had not, but that Texas was in a state of 
 revolt from Mexico, and that no action could be taken until the 
 outcome of that revolt was known. Two months later, August 5, 
 while the supply bill was under discussion. Hoy moved an address 
 to the crown praying "that such measures may be taken as may 
 seem proper to secure fulfillment of the existing treaty between 
 this country and Mexico ; and to prevent the establishment of slav- 
 ery and traffic in slaves in the province of Texas in the Mexican 
 territory." He supported this motion m a long speech in which 
 he emphasized three points, first, the large amount of money in- 
 vested in Mexican bonds; secondly, the danger of annexation by 
 the United States ; and thirdly, the probability that slavery would 
 be permanently established in Texas. He urged Palmerston to 
 .send a naval force for the purpose of assisting Mexico in regaining 
 control of the revolted province. 
 
 Palmerston in opposing the motion disposed of the fears of Hoy 
 
 Wharton to Rusk, February 12, 1837, Ibid., I, 185. 
 
 ^Gammel, Laws of Texas, I, 1287; Secret Journals of the Senate, 315. 
 
180 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 and the other abolitionists by saying that if there were a prospect 
 of annexation to the United States, it would be time for England 
 to interest herself, but that the message of the President of the 
 United States indicated that annexation was unlikely; that if 
 Mexico reconquered Texas the laws of Mexico would apply, and 
 the treaty would be enforced, so that there was no necessity to in- 
 terfere on that account: and finally, that if Texas should in the 
 future become a part of the United States there might be impor- 
 tation of slaves from other states, but importation from Africa was 
 unlikely.* Palmerston's speech satisfied Hoy, and he withdrew 
 his motion; but, as will be seen, the question of slavery and the 
 slave trade continued to operate against recognition of Texan in- 
 dependence by England. 
 
 Henderson held his first conversation with Palmerston on Octo- 
 ber 13, and urged upon him the desire of Texas for recognition by 
 England. Palmerston promised no more than that the matter 
 would be considered by the cabinet as a whole. The conversation 
 included such topics as the commercial benefits to England from 
 recognition, the question of annexation, slavery and the slave trade, 
 the possibility of reconquest of Texas by Mexico.^ On October 36 
 Henderson addressed a long letter to Palmerston in which he 
 traced the history of Texas for several years past, and again urged 
 recognition by England, receiving only the promise that the mat- 
 ter would be laid before the cabinet. On December 31 Palmerston 
 announced the decision of the cabinet that they were not ready 
 to give a- definite decision at that time, as there seemed still a 
 possibility that Mexico would succeed in reconquering Texas. 
 Henderson attempted to secure a promise that if Mexico had not 
 succeeded in subjugating Texas within a few months England 
 would recognize the independence of Texas, but Palmerston re- 
 fused to make that promise, advising the Texans to look well to 
 slavery conditions if they desired any consideration from England. 
 Henderson regarded this as final and proceeded to Prance, after 
 securing an agreement that Texan vessels would be admitted into 
 British ports under the treaty between Mexico and Great Britain.* 
 
 •Hansard, Parliamentary History of England, 3d Ser., XXXIV HOT- 
 XXXV, 928-942. 
 
 "Henderson to Irion, October 14, 1837, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 812. 
 
 "Henderson to Irion, December 22, 1837, January 5, 30, April 12, 1838, 
 Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 831, 839, 843, 853. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 181 
 
 Before proceeding with a discussion of later efforts on the part 
 of the Texas government to secure recognition, it will be well to 
 notice briefly a few episodes that caused some friction between 
 the new republic and England, and perhaps served in a measure 
 to delay recognition. In the summer of 1837 a British schooner, 
 Little Penn, bound from Liverpool to Tabasco loaded with British 
 goods ran aground on the Yucatan coast. Two Mexican vessels, 
 the Paz and the Aiispa, were sent to salvage the cargo, the Paz 
 returning safely to port, but the Abispa falling in with two Texan 
 vessels and being captured. The owners of the cargo, P. Lizardi 
 and Company, submitted a claim to the British Government for 
 the sum of £3640. On August 3, 1837, a Texan vessel of war 
 took as a prize the British schooner Eliza Russell, commanded by 
 Captain Joseph Russell, and brought her into port at Galveston. 
 The Texan Government immediately ordered her release, but the 
 delay gave Eussell grounds for a claim against the government 
 for £865. The Texas Government immediately acknowledged the 
 justness of the claim for the Eliza Russell, though there was con- 
 siderable delay in making an appropriation for settlement of the 
 claim, which resulted in a threat on the part of Palmerston to send 
 a warship to Texas to collect the claims.' This threat brought 
 about the appropriation of a sum to settle the claim for the Eliza 
 Russell, but the claim for the Little Penn was never recognized 
 by Texas. 
 
 Just before Henderson arrived in London an agreement was 
 reached on September 15, by the British holders of Mexican bonds 
 and agents of the Mexican Government by which it was proposed 
 to pay a part of the bonds by lands to be located in Texas. The 
 Lizardi Company, a Mexican company in London, which was the 
 chief holder of Mexican bonds, advertised a meeting on October 
 16 and from day to day thereafter for the purpose of carrying 
 into effect the agreement. Henderson secured from Palmerston a 
 disclaimer on the part of the British Government of any interest 
 in the matter, and on October 16 wrote a formal protest to Lizardi 
 and Company, stating that Texas was no longer under the sov- 
 ereignty of Mexico, and that the agreement was void.* Pew of 
 
 Talmerston to Henderson, October 23, 1839, 4 Tex. Cong., House Journal, 
 33-34. 
 
 'Henderson to Irion, November 5, 1838, encloaing Henderson to Lizardi 
 and Company, October 16, 1838, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 830. 
 
183 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 the bondholders took advantage of the ofEer at that time. This 
 ilkistrates, however, the difficulties in the way of securing recog- 
 nition. Later, as we have already seen, an effort was made to se- 
 cure the acknowledgment of Texan independence by Mexico in 
 return for an assumption of a part of the Mexican debt by Texas. 
 
 Two other obstacles in the way of recognition were the possi- 
 bility that Texas would encourage the slave trade, if she made 
 good her independence, and the desire of Great Britain to pose 
 as the friend of Mexico. The interest of Great Britain in slavery 
 in Texas I shall refer to later. From commercial reasons Great 
 Britain desired to maintain the friendship of Mexico, and until 
 the independence of Texas was unquestionably established, Palmer- 
 ston felt it inexpedient to recognize it; and it was not until Texas 
 had so proved her independence that failure to acknowledge its 
 independence would have caused greater loss than the straining 
 of Mexican friendship, that recognition was extended. During 
 1838 the British Government secretly connived at the French 
 blockade of the Mexican ports, the British naval commander being 
 instructed to leave Mexican waters before hostilities could take 
 place: and when hostilities did begin the British Government 
 offered to mediate between the French and the Mexicans, and the 
 conduct of the British mediators convinced the Mexicans of the 
 sincere friendship of the British Government. An effort was made 
 to mediate between Mexico and Texas, also, the British Govern- 
 ment, Mobile refusing to recognize the independence of Texas, urg- 
 ing Mexico to acknowledge independence. 
 
 With the withdrawal of Henderson from London in April, 1838, 
 the direct connection between the Texan Government and Great 
 Britain was interrupted until the fall of 1839. In the meantime, 
 however, Palmerston showed himself not indifferent to the claims 
 of Texas, and urged on Mexico the necessity of recognizing Texan 
 independence. As I have already stated, Palmerston instructed 
 Pakenham, the British minister to Mexico, in October, 1838, to 
 urge Mexico to aclmowledge the independence of Texas, laying 
 stress upon the importance of creating a barrier state between 
 Mexico and tlie United States. At that time Gorostiza, the Mex- 
 ican foreign minister, refused to entertain the suggestion because 
 of its unpopularity, but suggested that an armistice might be 
 granted if some European country would undertake to guarantee 
 the boundary. These instructions were verbal, but in April, 1839, 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lama's Administration 183 
 
 Palmerston sent M'ritten instructions to the same effect." The 
 further efforts of the British minister to mediate I have shown 
 adequately in another connection. 
 
 In the summer of 1839, Christopher Hughes, American charg6 
 d'affaires in Sweden, returned from a vacation in the United 
 States by way of London. On June 10, 1839, he addressed a note 
 to Lord Palmerston submitting a memorandum prepared by Anson 
 Jones, as Texan minister to the United States, giving reasons for 
 the recognition of Texan independence. Hughes supported the 
 claims with a brief note on his own account. The action of Hughes 
 was entirely on his own account, and without the knowledge of 
 his government. It is interesting only because it drew from 
 Palmerston a brief reply, in which he said, "Thank you for your 
 letter about Texas, which I have sent to Lord Melbourne. The 
 subject, to which it relates is important, but not without diffi- 
 culties."'" No doubt the chief difficulty referred to was the op- 
 position of the abolition party in parliament led by O'Connell. 
 On July 9, 1839, O'Connell interrogated the foreign minister as 
 to whether anything had been done toward the recognition of 
 Texas. Palmerston replied that application had been made the 
 preceding year by persons from Texas, but that he had stated 
 that the ministry were not yet ready to recognize Texas, but that 
 he had instructed the minister to Mexico to endeavor to bring 
 about some understanding between Texas and Mexico. He did 
 not inform the House that the instructions called for a recognition 
 of Texan independence by Mexico.^^ Henderson was convinced 
 that the opposition of O'Connell was the only obstacle to recog- 
 nition, and wrote to Anson Jones, September 27, 1839, from Paris: 
 
 I shall go to England in a few days and urge that Government 
 to recognize or refuse, and give their reasons for so doing. I 
 scarcely hope they will comply with my main request, inasmuch 
 as Mr. O'Connell has threatened them with his vengeance if they 
 do recognize. That threat he made in a speech in Parliament a 
 few days before it adjourned, and you Imow the present ministry 
 of England dare not run counter to his wishes.^* 
 
 'Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, 28, 29. 
 "Hughes to Jones, June 10, 1839, Jones, Memoranda and Official Corre- 
 spondence Relating to the Repuilio of Texas, 148-152. 
 "Hansard, 3d Series, XLIX, 82. 
 "Jones, Memoranda, etc., 148. 
 
184 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 In Ma3^ 1839, James Hamilton was appointed as a loan com- 
 missioner Tinder the five million dollar loan act, to dispose of the 
 bonds of Texas in the United States and Europe. He was also 
 commissioned as a joint agent with Henderson to secure the rec- 
 ognition of Texas by Great Britain and France, and to enter into 
 a treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation. Hamilton had be- 
 come interested in Texas as early as 1836, and in the fall of 1838 
 he hoped for the appointment by President Houston as loan com- 
 missioner, but his desires were not realized. As soon as it was 
 kno-mi that Lamar was to be the successor of Houston Hamilton 
 wrote numerous letters to him suggesting means of floating a loan, 
 and as soon as practicable after his inauguration Lamar appointed 
 him to the place mentioned. Hamilton proved prolific in schemes 
 for securing financial aid and recognition, and it is likely that 
 his arguments appealed to Palmerston, resulting finally in several 
 treaties between Texas and Great Britain. 
 
 On May 20, 1839, the same day on which his commission was 
 signed, he wrote a letter to H. S. Pox, British minister at Wash- 
 ington, for transmittal to Pakenham, British minister at Mexico, 
 outlining his views as to the advantage to Great Britain of recog- 
 nition of Texas. This letter was not transmitted until some 
 months later, but it, with other information concerning Texas 
 and Mexico, was faithfully transmitted to Palmerston by Paken- 
 ham, and served to prepare the way for the active negotiations 
 undertaken by Hamilton the following vear. The immediate pur- 
 pose of the letter was to secure the good of&ces of Pakenham to 
 mediate betwen Mexico and Texas while Bee was still attempting 
 to get into communication with the Mexican authorities. It Was 
 in this letter that he adopted a policy, already discussed by Bee 
 and Gordon, representative of Lizardi and Company in Kew Or- 
 leans, — oifering the payment by Texas of a sum of money to be 
 applied to the payment of Mexican bonds in return for a recog- 
 nition of her independence within the boundaries demanded. After 
 expressing his desire that Pakenham mediate between Mexico and 
 Texas, he proceeded to give arguments to show the advantage to 
 Great Britain if Texan independence should be accomplished 
 through British mediation. In the first place, he said, the im- 
 pending blockade of Mexican ports by Texan vessels might cause 
 serious difficulty as Great Britain would hesitate to recognize the 
 blockade, and bloodshed might ensue; secondly. Great Britain 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 185 
 
 had an incalculable interest in the trade of Texas; thirdly, Great 
 Britain might feel a delicacy in recognizing Texas until Mexico 
 had recognized: fourthly, as soon as Great Britain recognized 
 Texas she could obtain through the value of her commerce with 
 Texas, the concurrence of Texas in suppressing the slave trade, 
 which Texas had prohibited by her Constitution." 
 
 Hamilton left New York on August 1, arriving in London in 
 September. He had a conference with Palmerston, but nothing 
 definite came of it, and he proceeded to the continent to attempt 
 to secure the loan. Eeceiving little encouragement, he returned 
 to the United States, and in December he was in Texas, where he 
 secured a resolution of Congress pei'mitting him to asume five mil- 
 lion dollars of the Mexican bonds in case recognition by Mexico 
 were secured, and authorizing him to borrow money for the pur- 
 pose. Henderson having been recalled Hamilton was commis- 
 sioned as agent to Great Britain, and authorized to sign a treaty 
 of amity, commerce, and navigation. He was also authorized to 
 enter into an agreement with the holders of Mexican bonds.^* 
 Before returning to Europe Hamilton wrote a letter to Palmer- 
 ston, February 10, 1840, repeating his arguments for British me- 
 diation, and suggested further that Great Britain should threaten 
 to recognize Texas if Mexico refused to agree to British medi- 
 ation .' ^ 
 
 On April 18, 1840, Hamilton was given a commission as diplo- 
 matic commissioner to the Netherlands and Belgium for the pur- 
 pose of negotiating a treaty of recognition, and to conclude com- 
 mercial treaties with those two countries. He proceeded direct to 
 The Hague, where ho concluded a treaty of amity, commerce and 
 navigation with the Netherlands on September 18, 1840. He 
 went from there to Brussels and initiated a treaty with the Bel- 
 gium Government, which was broken ofl-' at that time, and he pro- 
 ceeded to England, arriving in London on September 27, when 
 he found Palmerston so busily engaged on the Eastern question 
 that no attention could then be paid to the claims of Texas." 
 
 "'Hamilton to Fox, May 20, 1839, Dip. Oor. Tex., Ill, 867-871. 
 
 "The commission is dated December 20, 1839. Dip. Cor. Teas., Ill, 877. 
 
 ""Hamilton to Palmerston, February 10, 1840, enclosed in Hamilton to 
 Lipscomb, February 25, 1840, Dip. Gor.~Tex., Ill, 887. 
 
 ""See Hamilton to Jones, February 18, 1842, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 945, for 
 a brief history of Hamilton's procedure. 
 
186 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 It is evident that Palmerston had made up his mind to recognize 
 Texas before the arrival of Hamilton, and when negotiations did 
 begin they proceeded rapidly to a conclusion. On October 1 Ham- 
 ilton addressed a brief formal note to Palmerston laying his cre- 
 dentials before the foreign minister, and askiag for recognition 
 on the grounds that Texas had de facto achieved her independence, 
 and that she had established a government.^'' On the 14th he 
 laid before the British Government the arguments on which he 
 based the claim of Texas to recognition. The reasons for the rec- 
 ognition and the consequences of failure, which Hamilton thought 
 would appeal to Palmerston, were as follows : 
 
 Reasons why Great Britain ought to recognize the Independence 
 of Texas & form a treaty with her. 
 
 1st. The future & rapidly increasing value of the Trade with 
 Texas, under a judicious commercial Convention. 
 
 2nd. By this means she secures a great Cotton producer and 
 important consumer of her Manufactures, as her customer & a 
 friendly neutral in the event of a war with the United States — 
 
 3rd. The Eecognition of Texas by Great Britain inevitably 
 Superinduces peace between Mexico & Texas. 
 
 4th. Peace at this moment between Mexico & Texas will in- 
 evitably insure the payment of a portion of the Mexican debt by 
 Texas. 
 
 5th. It likewise insures under the friendly mediation of Eng- 
 land a permanent Boundary Line between Mexico & Texas, which 
 will be inviolably observed by Texas, & repress the spirit of future 
 conquest on the part of the Anglo-American race — 
 
 In case England does not recognize the following consequences 
 are likely to follow — 
 
 1st. In sixty days from this day Vera Cruz, Tampico & Mata- 
 moras will be blockaded by the Texian Squadron, which consists 
 of one Corvette, two Brigs, three Schooners & one naval Steamer, 
 now off the Coast of Mexico, while Mexico will be destitute of all 
 naval force whatsoever. 
 
 2nd. If Texas is informed that Great Britain will not recog- 
 nize her Independence & that consequently there is no hope of 
 peace with M'exico, she will forthwith join the Federalists, revo- 
 lutionize the northern provinces of Mexico & make such additions 
 to her territory as the laws of war would justify under the usages 
 of civilized nations. 
 
 3rd. Great Britain has an obvious interest in avoiding a dis- 
 criminating duty which will be levied against the productions of 
 
 ^Wip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 925. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 187 
 
 all nations wliicli have not recognized Texas & formed Commer- 
 cial Treaties with her on or before the 1st of Feby. next. 
 
 4th. If Her Majesty's Government should decline recognizing 
 I must avail myself of the present situation of public affairs in 
 Europe & make the most beneficial arrangements I can with some 
 continental nation giving it exclusive commercial advantages for 
 a valuable equivalent. 
 
 5th. Texas greatly prefers a friendly alliance with England 
 from all those considerations which are connected with a common 
 origin — But if Great Britain refuses all international compan- 
 ionship with her, she will be driven to seek friendly & profitable 
 associations elsewhere." 
 
 Eour days later Palmerston responded that Great Britain was 
 willing to enter into negotiation for a treaty of commerce and 
 navigation between Great Britain and Texas, "believing the time 
 to be now come when the independence of Texas may be consid- 
 ered as being, de facto, fully established; and, when the interests 
 of Great Britain require, that the commercial intercourse between 
 Great Britain and Texas shall be placed under the security to be 
 .afforded by a Treaty." Having announced the willingness of his 
 Government to negotiate a treaty, he laid down the condition that 
 Texas at the same time should enter into a treaty to suppress the 
 slave trade. The peciiliar geographical position and internal ar- 
 rangements of Texas, he said, made it incumbent on the British 
 Government to make the conclusion of such a treaty a sine qua nan 
 condition of any other treaty between Great Britain and Texas. 
 He sent with his letter the draft of a convention in which recip- 
 rocal right of search by naval vessels was provided for. The draft 
 of the treaty, which was accepted by Hamilton with only slight 
 modification, provided for the right of search by certain cruisers 
 of merchant vessels, which might on reasonable grounds be sus- 
 pected of being engaged in the slave trade, in order that, if found 
 guilty they might be sent to their own country for adjudication 
 before their own tribunals. The search should take place only 
 on a specific warrant of the government to which the vessel to be 
 searched belonged. 
 
 Hamilton's commission did not authorize him to sign such a 
 convention, but he felt that the importance of recognition and a 
 commercial treaty with Great Britain justified him in going be- 
 yond his instructions, and on the 20th he wrote Palmerston of his 
 
 "Adams, British Interests and Activities in Texas, 53. 
 
188 Mirabeau Buonapwrte Lamar 
 
 willingness to sign the convention mth minor changes, which was 
 not so difficult to do since the Texan merchant vessel could engage 
 in the slave trade and he under no danger of seizure except on 
 warrant of the Texas authorities, and upon seizure it would he 
 tried only in Texas courts.^" Preliminary articles for a treaty of 
 amity, commerce, and navigation were agreed upon on November 
 5, and on the 13th the completed treaty was signed by Palmerston 
 and Hamilton. On the following day a convention was signed 
 which bound Texas to assume a million pounds sterling of the 
 Mexican debt, if within six months Mexico had acknowledged the 
 independence of Texas through British mediation. On the 16th 
 the slave trade treaty was signed.^" 
 
 The commercial treaty and the mediation convention were sent 
 out on December 3 by a special messenger, Arthur Ikin, and ar- 
 rived in Texas early in January. They were laid before the Sen- 
 ate and promptly ratified without opposition. The slave trade 
 treaty was sent by another messenger, A. T. Burnley, who was 
 associated with Hamilton as loan commissioner. Burnley went by 
 another route, and did not arrive in Texas until February 31, 1841, 
 after the adjournment of Congress, and the ratification of that 
 treaty was delayed until the following session. The British Gov- 
 ernment refused to exchange ratifications until all three of the 
 treaties had been ratified by Texas, and it was not until June 28, 
 1843, that ratification was finally exchanged, the Texas Senate 
 having ratified the slave trade treaty in January of that year. 
 
 It has been charged reasonably that Hamilton sent the slave 
 trade treaty by a different messenger and by a different route in 
 order to delay its receipt in Texas, for the reason that he feared 
 the action of the Texas Senate on that convention. In his letter 
 transmitting the commercial treaty and mediation convention he 
 made no mention of the other treaty. It was a month later, Jan- 
 uary 4, 1841, when the slave trade treaty was transmitted. In his 
 letter of transmittal to the secretary of state Hamilton went into 
 considerable detail in explaining the reasons for his exceeding his 
 instructions in the matter of the treaty. The trepidation that he 
 
 "Palmerston to Hamilton, October 18, 1840, and Hamilton to Palmerston, 
 October 20, 1840, British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 617-621; Tele- 
 graph and Texas Register, January 12, 1842. 
 
 ™For the text of these treaties see Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 880-885, 
 886-904; British and Foreign State Papers, XXIX, 80-83, 84-85, 85-96. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 189 
 
 felt is also indicated by the letter he wrote to Lamar on the same 
 date. After giving a history of the negotiations, he wrote : 
 
 I did not apprise you of the slave trade convention which I had 
 to conclude with Tjord Falmerston to ensure recognition, because 
 T was fearful unattended by those explanations Mr Burnley might 
 afford, it would be liable to misconstruction. Eeferring you to my 
 letter to the Secretary of State, and mv correspondence with Lord 
 Palmerston, I have only to add that I am sure you will concur 
 iu the necessity of my acquiescing in such a convention, when Mr 
 Burnley shows you the opinion of the Solicitor of the Bank of 
 England, who advised us that no valid contract could be made in 
 the security of the bonds of an unrecognized Government.^^ 
 
 Why Ikin could not have made the suitable explanations does 
 not appear, though Hamilton informed Aberdeen, who had suc- 
 ceeded Palmerston in the foreign office, that he had sent the docu- 
 ment by a man well qualified to press it on the people of Texas, 
 and that the illness of his messenger in ISTew York had prevented 
 his arrival in time. He proceeded to press upon the British Gov- 
 ernment the negotiation of a new treaty granting extensive com- 
 mercial privileges to Great Britain, but as this was in nowise a 
 policy of the Texan Government, and was rejected out of hand 
 by the British Government, I shall not discuss it here.^ 
 
 The failure of ratification of the treaties left the relations be- 
 tween Texas and Great Britaia in the same situation as from the 
 beginning. Though Hamilton was commissioned as minister 
 plenipotentiary, he was unable to assume that dignity and was 
 forced to continue only as diplomatic agent. The British Gov- 
 ernment did, however, in anticipation of the ratification of the 
 Slave Trade Treaty appoint Charles Elliot, as consul-general to 
 Texas, and toward the close of the year 1841, William Kennedy 
 was sent as an agent to secure the ratification of the Slave Trade 
 Treaty.^^ 
 
 The treaty with the Ketherlands negotiated by Hamilton in 
 September, 1840, was promptly ratified by the Texan Senate. I 
 have noted that Hamilton was negotiating a treaty with Belgium 
 
 "'Hamilton to Lamar, January 4, 1841, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 929. 
 
 ^For the terms offered by Hamilton, see Adams, British Interests and 
 Activities in Texas, 68-69. 
 
 ''Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 942 ; Adams, ed., British Correspondence Concerning 
 Texas, The Quarterly, XV, 251, 252. 
 
190 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 when it became necessary for him to leave for London. No satis- 
 factory basis of agreement was reached between Hamilton and the 
 Belgian Government until the fall of 1841. Under this agree- 
 ment Texas would admit cotton and woolen goods, iron, and linen 
 manufactured in Belgium at one-half the existing duty, while the 
 same articles from other countries should be required to pay at 
 the rate of 50 per cent ad valorem. Arms and ammunition were 
 to be admitted free for the Belgians, while other countries were 
 to pay a duty of 100 per cent ad valorem. The coasting trade 
 was to be free to Belgian ships the same as to Texan. In return 
 for all these concessions, Belgium was to guarantee a loan of 
 37,000,000 francs by a specific endorsement of the bonds of the 
 republic of Texas. This extremely disadvantageous treaty was 
 rejected promptly by the Texan Senate on October 30, 1841.^'* 
 
 The other European country that showed active interest in 
 Texas was R-ance, and it was to Prance that the new republic 
 turned for finances when other sources failed them. The fact 
 that Prance was never able to contribute to the financial needs 
 of Texas by either furnishing or guaranteeing a loan did not for 
 a long time dampen the ardor of the loan commissioners, who 
 were prohfic with schemes for securing a loan. But the first in- 
 terest of Texas was in securing the recognition of independence by 
 France, as well as by the other European powers. 
 
 When Henderson withdrew from London in April, 1838, he 
 went immediately to Paris, where he found a much less indif- 
 ferent attitude than he had found in London. It will be remem- 
 bered that Prance was just entering upon the blockade of Mexican 
 ports, which might be expected to create an interest on the part 
 of Prance in the claims of Texas. On account of the interest of 
 the Government in the Mexican matter, Henderson was not re- 
 ceived until May 31, and at that time he was given no assurance 
 that his request for recognition would be favorably acted upon; 
 but the Government immediately instructed the Prench minister 
 at "Washington to send one of his secretaries to Texas in order to 
 report on the conditions there. Alphonse de Saligny was sent, 
 though he did not make his report until late summer of 1839. 
 On October 1 the foreign minister, Count Mole informed Hen- 
 derson that the Government was disposed to wait until the re- 
 
 '^Secret Journals of the Senate, 222, 224. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 191 
 
 ceipt of the report of their agent before extending recognition. 
 At the same time M0I6 requested Henderson to remain in Paris, 
 as France was desirous of making a commercial arrangement with 
 Texas that would serve to encourage commerce until the time 
 of recognition, to which Henderson readily assented.^" Early in 
 November Henderson signed on the part of his Government an 
 agreement similar to that entered into with Great Britain — "Until 
 the mutual relations of France and Texas are regulated in a com- 
 plete and definitive manner, the Citizens, the vessels and the Mer- 
 chandize of the two Countries shall enjoy in every respect in each 
 of the Countries the treatment accorded, or which may eventually 
 be accorded to the most favored Nation, conformably moreover to 
 the Eespective Usages.'"" 
 
 In April, 1839, Admiral Baudin, minister plenipotentiary to 
 Mexico and commander of the French naval forces in the Gulf 
 of Mexico, who had been blockading the Mexican ports while treat- 
 ing with the Mexican Government, sent the Abbe M. B. Anduze 
 to Texas for the purpose of agreeing to joint action on the part 
 of Texas and France should hostilities between France and Mexico 
 be renewed. This action was in response to an informal expres- 
 sion of Lamar to the French consul at New Orleans before he had 
 determined to send a diplomatic agent to Mexico. "You will per- 
 ceive, Mr. President/' he wrote, 
 
 by the letter of the Admiral, which I have the honor to deliver to 
 your Excellency, that I am authorized to enquire into that matter. 
 With every disposition of the Admiral to meet the Government 
 of Texas in an agreement, which shall be mutually beneficial and 
 satisfactory, permit me therefore to ask. 
 
 First, What would be the nature of the co-operation of Texas 
 in the event of a new war between France and Mexico ? 
 
 Second, What would be the extent of your demands, in money, 
 war ammunitions, means of transportation, etc. ? 
 
 Third, What would be the guarantees offered for the reimburse- 
 ment of the advances thus made? 
 
 Though this Mission of mine, Mr. President does not proceed 
 directly from the French Government, as the propositions will, I 
 hope, be mutually advantageous, both to you and to France, The 
 
 ^'Henderson to Irion (and enclosures), October 5, 1838, Dip. Cor. Tea;., 
 Ill, 1220. 
 
 ^"Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 1233-1234. 
 
192 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Admiral Baudine will feel it his duty to obtain the approbation 
 and sanction of his Government.^'' 
 
 To this communication Lamar responded through the secretary 
 of state that until the result of the peace mission to Mexico should 
 be known no agreement could be made for future hostilities; but 
 ihat in the event of hostilities in the future Texas would gladly 
 ■co-operate with France, and would bring into the field at the 
 shortest notice twenty thousand soldiers and more if required — 
 which, of course, was impossible — provided Prance advance the 
 money necessary to a successful prosecution of the war.^* Admiral 
 Baudin visited Texas in May and was received with much honor 
 :and ceremony, which materially advanced the cordial relations of 
 'Texas and France. 
 
 Saligny, who had been sent as agent to Texas in 1838, made 
 his report in the summer of 1839. This report has not been 
 found, but it must have been favorable as Marshal Soult, who 
 had succeeded Mole as minister of foreign affairs, in July informed 
 Henderson that the French Government had determined to rec- 
 ognize the independence of Texas, but that they preferred to do 
 it in the nature of a commercial treaty. Henderson demurred at 
 ibis, preferring to receive recognition before entering into nego- 
 tiations for a commercial treaty, as it would give him a better 
 ■chance to negotiate as an equal. He was unable to change the 
 French ministry, however, and in September signed a treaty of 
 •commerce which carried with it the recognition of Texan inde- 
 pendence. Thus France was the first European country to recog- 
 nize the independence of Texas. The treaty was promptly rat- 
 ified by the Texas Senate, and Alphonse de Saligny was sent as 
 ■charge d'affaires to the newly recognized republic.^* 
 
 From this time until the close of the Lamar administration 
 there were few striking developments in the relations between 
 France and Texas. Prance did not find it necessary to go to war 
 with Mexico again, and Texas adopted her own policy toward 
 
 "Anduze to Lamar, April 18, 1839, Dip. Cor. Teco., Ill, 1244-1245. 
 
 ^'Webb to Baudin, April 25, 1839, Dip. Cor. Tex., Ill, 1246. 
 
 '"Christian, "Tariff History of the Republic of Texas," The Quakteblt, 
 XX, 336-337 ; Gammel, Laws of Texas, II, 655. This treaty wag signed by 
 the plenipotentiaries on September 25, by the King of France, October 2, 
 and ratified by the Texas Senate on January 14, 1840. Ratification was 
 exchanged on February 14, 1840, the certificate of ratification being signed 
 by Saligny and Abner S. Lipscomb, Texan secretary of state. 
 
Foreign Affairs During Lamar's Administration 193 
 
 Mexico. In the winter of 1840-1841 Saligny made himself ob- 
 noxious to the Government by his strenuous advocacy of the noto- 
 rious Franco-Texienne bill, vrhich the Houston party was attempt- 
 ing to pass over the opposition of the administration. The oppo- 
 sition of the Government to the bill induced a coolness on the 
 part of Saligny, and the assault by a Mr. Bullock on the servant 
 of Saligny led to a disgraceful quarrel between Saligny and the 
 secretary of state, resulting in a request for the recall of the 
 French charge d'affaires. It had no other effect than the pos- 
 sible one of defeating the loan negotiations in France. Saligny 
 calmly waited until the close of Lamar's administration, when he 
 knew the new President would be more friendly to himself and his 
 colonization projects. 
 
 To conclude, in foreign affairs the Lamar administration was 
 notably successful. At its beginning only the United States had 
 acknowledged the independence of Texas, and no commercial 
 rights were recognized by any country; while at its close inde- 
 pendence had been recognized by France, the Netherlands, Great 
 Britain, and Belgium, and favorable commercial treaties had been 
 adopted with France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands. A 
 notable failure was the attempt to conciliate Mexico, but in that 
 case the failure does not prove the policy unwise. The policy was 
 advised and abetted by the United States and Great Britain, and 
 though the Houston party criticised it, Houston found it neces- 
 sary to adopt a similar policy after the beginning of his second 
 administration. 
 
194 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 Chaptbe VII 
 
 CLOSING TEAES 
 
 When President Houston's first administration closed in De- 
 cember, 1838, it was well known that he would be a candidate 
 to succeed Lamar in 1841. He entered Congress in October, 1839, 
 and immediately became the spokesman for those opposed to 
 Lamar, and succeeded fairly well in creating an anti-administra- 
 tion party in Congress. He denounced Lamar on every occasion, 
 but Lamar usually contented himself with defending his admin- 
 istration against attack. He took no active part in the campaign 
 in 1841, though it was generally understood that he favored the 
 election of the vice-president, David G. Burnet, who was running 
 against Houston. It cannot be said that there was anything like 
 definite party lines in the contest, and the election of Houston by 
 an overwhelming majority did not indicate a complete repudia- 
 tion of Lamar. Burnet was unpopular, and his brief tenure of 
 the ofBce of president during Lamar's illness did not make him 
 any more popular. Besides, Houston understood thoroughly the 
 turbulent frontier methods of campaigning, and his status at that 
 time as a military hero was unquestioned. 
 
 That Lamar's popularity had declined, however, particularly 
 with Congress, cannot be denied. At the beginning of his ad- 
 ministration he had an overwhelming majority of both Houses 
 with him, while at its close the House of Eepresentatives was hos- 
 tile, and the Senate showed only a small majority in support of 
 his policies. But Houston had been less popular at the close of 
 his first administration. The unpopularity of both executives was 
 natural in a frontier state where each man was largely an in- 
 dividualist and inclined to resist any measure of governmental 
 control. The main acts and failures of the Lamar administration 
 I have already recorded. His attitude toward annexation, his 
 Indian policy, the Santa Pe expedition, all aroused some oppo- 
 sition ; but the total failure of the financial system during his ad- 
 ministration probably caused more discontent than all the other 
 matters put together. For the better part of his term he was in 
 
Closing Years 195 
 
 bad health, and this contributed to a certain personal unpopu- 
 larity. This led to a certain detachment from or coldness toward 
 his friends. "I am informed," wrote Memucan Hunt, 
 
 that you are cold and repulsive in manners, &c. I plead the con- 
 stant occupancy of your mind on important matters of State and 
 the impossibility of those courtesies which were to be looked for 
 when your mind is thus engrossed &c, &c. It is however very 
 little trouble to ask a man when he reached the city, &c, &c, &c, 
 &e, and I will take the liberty of recommending to you to tax your- 
 self in this respect.^ 
 
 He did not engage in the usual tricks of the politician, and for 
 this he deserves both praise and blame. He is to be praised for 
 depending on the justice of his policies rather than on political 
 movements to bring their success; but if he could have added to 
 that method a little of the political tact applied with success even 
 today, he would have been more successful, and probably would 
 have stood higher among historians. 
 
 His administration came to a close in December, 1841, and he 
 retired to his home in Richmond. In the summer of 1843 he 
 visited Georgia and was received with considerable honor. He 
 was elected to the Phi Gamma Society of Emory College at Cov- 
 ington, Georgia, and made addresses at Columbus, Macon, and 
 other places.^ He returned to Texas in the spring of 1843, and 
 except for a request that James Webb become a candidate for 
 president in 1844, he took no part in politics. The documents 
 included among his papers indicate that he was busy collecting 
 material for his long-planned history of Texas, an occupation 
 which engaged him from this time on, though he never put his 
 material together. In 1844 he became convinced that separate 
 statehood for Texas was impracticable and he advocated annex- 
 ation. When annexation was accomplished some of his friends 
 urged him to become a candidate for the United States Senate,^ 
 but he declined, and Houston and Thomas J. Eusk were elected. 
 
 When the Mexican War began Lamar attached himself to the 
 Texas Mounted Volunteers, and participated in the battle of Mon- 
 
 ^Hunt to Lamar, June 5, 1839, Lamar Papers, No. 1322. 
 'Lamar Papers, No. 2146. 
 'Lamar Papers, No. 2192. 
 
196 Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 terey. The Texas troops were under the command of Governor 
 J. Pinckney Henderson, and Lamar acted as division inspector, 
 and also as adjutant. He was highly commended by General 
 Henderson in his report to General Taylor on the battle. Gen- 
 eral Henderson wrote: 
 
 General Lamar, my division inspector, (acting also as adju- 
 tant,) was mainly instrumental in causing my troops to be called 
 into requisition. He had accompanied General Quitman in the 
 occupancy of a point in the lower part of the city, where the battle 
 commenced; and it was at his suggestion that a messenger was 
 despatched for my command. He was found in active co-oper- 
 ation with the Mississippi and Tennessee troops; but rejoined my 
 regiment on its arrival, and acted, during the balance of the iight, 
 with the Texans.* 
 
 Shortly after the battle of Monterey Lamar was placed in com- 
 mand of an independent company and stationed at Laredo for 
 the purpose of holding that post and restraining the Indians from 
 attacking the Texans. He continued in this position until his 
 command was mustered out at the command of General Taylor 
 in September, 1847, though he frequently urged that he be al- 
 lowed to accompany the main army in case of further fighting. 
 Anticipating General Taylor's order, he requested and obtained 
 of the Texan Government the authority either to re-enlist his 
 company or raise a new company to be stationed at Laredo to 
 continue the work already undertaken, and it was not until June, 
 1848, after the definite treaty of peace had been signed, that he 
 mustered out his command and retired permanently from mili- 
 tary service.^ 
 
 As soon as the Texan authorities had taken possession of the 
 disputed territory between Nueces and Eio Grande, they pro- 
 ceeded to organize it as a part of the State of Texas. Lamar him- 
 self, as commandant at Laredb, on July 3, 1847, called an elec- 
 tion for local ofiicers at that place. The counties of San Patricio 
 and Nueces were organized by the Texas Government, and took 
 part in the election of state and county ofiicers for the year 1847. 
 Lamar became a candidate for the House of Eepresentatives from 
 those two counties, and on November 1 was elected without oppo- 
 
 ^House Executive Document No. 4, 29 Cong., 2 Sess., p. 98. 
 °For this paragraph see Lamar Papers, Nos. 2297-2390. 
 
Closing Years 197 
 
 sition. He served in the session of 1847-1848, while his company 
 was being re-enlisted and reorganized. He was proposed for 
 speaker of the House, but was defeated by J. W. Henderson of 
 Harris county by a vote of 34 to 34. He was chairman of the 
 committee on State Affairs, but took little part in the activities 
 of the House; and as soon as the session was over, he returned 
 to his command in Laredo, where he staid until June, 1848. 
 
 From this time until 1857 the records of his movements are 
 scanty. In the summer of 1849 he went again to Georgia on 
 business connected with the eleven-league grant of land to a 
 Georgia company, the business which had taken him to Texas in 
 1835 and 1836. He remained in Georgia until April, 1851, when 
 he returned to Texas. There he married Miss Henrietta Moffitt 
 of Galveston, after having remained unmarried since the death 
 of his first wife in 1835. While in Georgia he contributed his 
 opinion to the great questions of the time in public addresses and 
 newspaper articles. 
 
 On August 1, 1850, a group of Macon citizens wrote a letter 
 requesting that Lamar address a public mass meeting to be held 
 in Macon on Clay's Compromise. Declining their invitation, 
 August 16, he wrote that he was opposed to the Clay Compromise, 
 but also to the Missouri Compromise; he was for all the rights 
 of the South, and opposed to all compromises save those of the 
 Constitution. Clay's and the Missouri Compromise were only 
 capitulations on the part of the South, for if Congress could pro- 
 hibit slavery north of thirty-six thirty, it could prevent it south 
 of that line. "Naturally connected with these matters," he con- 
 tinued, 
 
 is the present position of the affairs of Texas. It forms the most 
 practical issue of the day. I look upon the Santa Fe country as 
 forming the first battle-field between the assailants and defenders 
 of the institutions of the South. The Free Sellers are deter- 
 mined to seize the territory for the purpose of abolishing slavery 
 upon it. It is now lawfully a part of Texas, and subject to the 
 dominion of her institutions. If it can be severed, and united 
 with New Mexico, Abolition will accomplish its ultimate purpose 
 at once within the legitimate limits of a sovereign state. 
 
 The title of Texas to the territory in question is indisputable. 
 It was within her designated limits while she was an independent 
 government. She held to the Eio Bravo, by the sajne right by 
 
198 Mirabeau Buonapa/rte Lamar 
 
 which she held to the Sabine. When she was admitted into the 
 Union, these boundaries were well defined, and recognized by Con- 
 gress; and it was out of this very Santa Fe country, that the new 
 states were expected to be formed, which are alluded to in the 
 resolutions of annexation. 
 
 He went on to say that it was a violation of that territory by 
 Mexico which had resulted in a declaration of war by the United 
 States, and said that the only remedy for the South was secession. 
 "This is the only course for the South," he said. 
 
 There is no safety in the Union as it now exists. It is not the 
 Union of the Constitution— not the Union established by the 
 Sages of the Eevolution; not the one that 'ensures domestic peace 
 and tranquility;' — but another great dynasty erected on its 
 ruins — a Eussian Empire, which makes a Hungary of the South. 
 
 He advised a convention of the Southern States, fully empow- 
 ered by the State sovereignties, to meet as speedily as possible 
 upon the adjournment of Congress, to organize a Southern Con- 
 federacy in case the measures of the abolitionists were adopted. 
 He doubted whether or not the Union could continue, but thought 
 that if the South should withdraw, the North would come to 
 terms; however, he thought the South was too divided to secede. 
 Thus he placed himself among the extremists of the South, which 
 was not strange when we recall his earlier alignment in the Indian 
 and tariff controversies 'of the Jackson period.* 
 
 He continued to collect historical material, which he began to 
 organize, and even had one chapter of a work on Long's expe- 
 dition printed. No record of public activity remains, however, 
 until January, 1855, when he became president of the Southern 
 Commercial Convention held in New Orleans at that time, retir- 
 ing before the close of the session on account of ill health.' In 
 1857 began his diplomatic career, which I shall discuss in some 
 detail. 
 
 At the outset of the Buchanan administration Lamar became 
 an applicant for a diplomatic post, which he considered as Jus- 
 tified on account of his record as a States' Eights Democrat, and 
 because his nephew, Howell Cobb, was secretary of the treasury. 
 
 'Lamar Papers, No. 2461; Columbus Times, September 10, ]S50. 
 ''Lamar Papers, No. 2489. 
 
Closing Years 199 
 
 It seems that from the beginning Lamar desired an appointment 
 to Nicaragua.' On March 6, 1857, Senator Eusk of Texas and 
 J. A. Quitman of Mississippi sent a joint letter to Henry A. Wise, 
 Governor of Virginia, asking for his influence to secure the ap- 
 pointment of Lamar as "resident minister to some of the European 
 or South American Eepublics," and stating that he would accept 
 a position as governor of a territory. Lamar was recommended 
 as having been devoted to democratic principles throughout a long 
 life, stating that he was induced to make application for such an 
 appointment on account of pecuniary distress." On March 8 
 Lamar applied in person to President Buchanan, and shortly after 
 it was determined to appoint him as minister to the Argentine 
 Confederation. The formal announcement of the appointment 
 came in a letter from Lewis Cass, secretary of state, on July 33, 
 1857.^" Lamar was delayed in setting out on his mission on 
 account of financial difficulties, and when he was about to start, 
 Cass and Buchanan decided to send him to the Central American 
 republics, Nicaragua and Costa Rica as minister plenipotentiary. 
 
 In the absence of documentary evidence I am unable to state 
 the cause for this change, but the cause seems reasonably clear. 
 On November 16, 1857, Cass and Yrissari, the minister of several 
 of the Central American States had signed a treaty which was 
 expected to settle all questions between the Uriited States and 
 Nicaragua, and as Lamar had asked for the Nicaraguan post in 
 the beginning, and had been given another one because Nicaragua 
 was still unrecognized, the natural thing^to do was to change his 
 commission and send him to Nicaragua for the purpose of securing 
 the ratification of the treaty. 
 
 I shall not be able to discuss in this paper the details of the 
 conditions in Nicaragua out of which this treaty developed, nor 
 the connection of Lamar with the negotiations; but I shall briefly 
 outline the conditions as they were in order to show the super- 
 human task undertaken by Lamar. On August 27, 1849, a con- 
 tract was entered into between the Nicaragua Government and the 
 American Atlantic and Pacific Ship Company, by which in return 
 
 'See McLeod to Green, February 25, 1857, Lamar Papers, No. 2510. 
 'Rusk and Quitman to Wise, March 6, 1857, Lamar Papers (draft), 
 No. 2511. 
 
 '"Cass to Lamar, July 2.3, 1857, Lamar Papers, No. 2522. 
 
200 Miraheau Buonaparte Lamar 
 
 for a certain sum of money paid by the company, the company 
 was granted exclusive right to operate the Lake and overland 
 transit from the Atlantic to the Pacific." On August 14, 1851, 
 the contract was amended, the company thereafter styling itself 
 the Accessory Transit Company, though no vital changes were 
 made in the charter. This charter was annulled on February 18, 
 1856, by a decree of the revolutionary government, because, as it 
 was claimed, the company had failed to carry out the terms of 
 the agreement.^^ 
 
 The Walker filibustering expedition, which began in 1855, had 
 come to a close with the expulsion of Walker on May 1, 1857; 
 but the expulsion of Walker did not mean that a stable govern- 
 ment would be established any more than that there had been a 
 stable government before he went to Mcaragua. The United 
 States had refused to recognize the Walker government, and the 
 government set up after Walker's expulsion was unable to secure 
 recognition at once. But as the new government failed to restore 
 the ships of the Accessory Transit Company, or to open the transit 
 for any other company, the United States thought it time to take 
 a hand in the matter. Hence Yrissari, who had been minister 
 for several of the Central American republics for a number of 
 years, and had recently been appointed minister for Nicaragua, 
 was received ofiBcially on November 16, 1857, for the purpose of 
 signing the treaty mentioned above. This treaty, which prob- 
 ably had been discussed by Cass and Yrissari before this date, 
 provided for the guarantee of the transit route by the United 
 States for the benefit of all nations. The provision was that the 
 United States be authorized to employ troops for the purpose of 
 keeping the transit route open in case Nicaragua should fail. 
 Besides this, there was the usual agreements as to commerce. ^^ 
 This was the treaty that Lamar was expected to secure the ratifi- 
 cation of by Nicaragua. 
 
 Lamar arrived in Nicaragua and spent a little more than a year 
 there in fruitless efforts to secure the ratification of the treaty. 
 The contrary interests of three transit companies that claimed ex- 
 clusive rights on the isthmus, the interests of Great Britain and 
 
 ^^Senate Document No. 194, 47 Cong., 1 Sess., p. 49. 
 ^=/6t"d., 88. 
 ^^lUd., 117-125. 
 
Closing Years 201 
 
 France, and the natural unwillingness of the General Americans 
 to deal fairly or openly, prevented the accomplishment of his ob- 
 jects. He arrived less than a year after Walker was driven fx'om 
 Nicaragua, and just a short time after his arrest on his second 
 attempt to revolutionize that republic ; hence, his reception was 
 not cordial, and he was never able to secure the confidence of any 
 of the officials. The President went so far as to accuse Lamar 
 of being involved with the filibusters, and of having made threats 
 that unless the treaty should be ratified a new filibuster expedi- 
 tion under the auspices of the United States Government would 
 take place; but he was afterwards forced to retract this charge.^* 
 In July, 1859, having become hopeless of any result from his 
 efforts Lamar applied for a recall, which was granted, and the 
 latter part of that month he was back in Washington, having 
 drawn up a treaty which he thought might have proved acceptable 
 to the United States Government, but which was never approved. 
 He remained in Washington only a short time, and then returned 
 to his home in Eichmond, Texas. He was there preparing to 
 enjoy the association of his friends, when he died rather suddenly 
 on December 19, 1859. 
 
 "A complete history of Lamar's experiences in Nicaragua does not come 
 within the purposes of this paper. For the sake of unity I have been 
 compelled to omit the story of his connection with that hotbed of revolu- 
 tion and international rivalries, but I shall in the future publish the 
 result of my investigations in this field of his activities." 
 
 "See for this paragraph Senate Documents, 35 Cong., 2 Sess., No. 1, 
 p. 19. 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 
 
 Manuscript Soueces 
 
 Army Papers, 1840-1841. Texas State Library. 
 Austin Papers. University of Texas Archives. 
 Lamar Papers. The use of this material was made easy by using 
 the excellent calendar by Miss Elizabeth West. 
 
 Printed Sources 
 
 Adams, British Interesh and Activities in Texas, in Southwestern 
 
 Historical Quwrterly. 
 Gammel, H. P. N"., Laws of Texas. 
 Garrison, G. P., Diplomatic Correspondence of the Republic of 
 
 Texas. 
 Gregg, Josiah, Commerce of the Prairies. 
 Hansard, Parliamentary History of England, 3rd Series, XXXIV, 
 
 XXXV. 
 Jones, Anson, Memoranda and Official Correspondence Eelating to 
 
 the Kepublic of Texas. 
 Journals of Congress. 
 Kendall, Texan Santa Pe Expedition. 
 Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, Etc., II. 
 Moore, To the People of Texas, Congressional Globe, 33d Cong., 
 
 1 Sess., Ap. 
 Secret Journals of the Senate of the Republic of Texas. 
 
 Secondary Works 
 
 Bancroft, H. H., North Mexican States and Texas. 
 
 Barker, E. C, "The United States and Mexico," 1835-1837, in the 
 
 Mississippi Historical Review, I. 
 Bolton, H. E., Athanase de Mezieres and the Louisiana-Texas 
 
 Frontier. 
 Brown, J. H., History of Texas, 2 volumes. 
 Bustamante, Cahinete Mexicana, I. 
 Christian, A. K., "Tariff History of the Eepublic of Texas," in 
 
 Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XX. 
 Crane, W. C, Life of Sam Houston. 
 
 203 
 
204 Bibliography 
 
 Dublan and Lozano, Legisladon Mexicxma, III. 
 Foote, Henry S., Texas and the Texans, 3 vols. 
 Kennedy, Texas, 2 volumes, 1841. 
 
 Marshall, T. M., A History of the Western Boundary of the Louis- 
 iana Purchase. 
 Mayes, Edward, Lucius Q. C. Lamar. 
 Miller, E. T., A Financial History of Texas. 
 Eeeves, Jesse S., American Diplomacy under Tyler and Polk. 
 Eives, United States and Mexico, 1821-1848, 2 vols. 
 Thrall, Pictorial History of Texas, 
 Twitchell, Leading Facts of New Mexican History. 
 Yoakum, History of Texas, 2 vols. 
 
 Peeiodicals 
 Austin City Gazette. 
 
 Columhus Times. 
 
 Houston Morning Star. 
 
 Matagorda Bulletin. 
 
 Niles Register. 
 
 Southwestern Historical Qiuirterly. 
 
 Telegraph and Texas Register. 
 
 The publications contain articles of value on almost every phase 
 of Southwestern history. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Alcantro, battle of, 145, 146. 
 
 Almonte, J. N., 138, 140, 146, 151. 
 
 Amory, Nathaniel, 172, 173. 
 
 Anahuac, tariff troubles, 61. 
 
 Anaya, General, 145, 158. 
 
 Armijo, Governor of New Mexico, 106, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127. 
 
 Augustin, Major, 68. 
 
 Austin, Henry, 103. 
 
 Austin, Stephen F., 7, 60, 82, 83, 179, 180. 
 
 Secretary of State, 103, 109. 
 Austin, Texas, 34, 35, 55, 58, 59, 65, 109, 128. 
 Avery, William, 54. 
 
 Bazoche, 133, 134. 
 
 Bean, P. E., 83, 84. 
 
 Bee, Barnard E., 135ff. 
 
 Big Mush, 98. 
 
 Bird, Captain John, 76. 
 
 Birdsall, John, 167. 
 
 Boliver, 8. 
 
 Bowl, 64-101. 
 
 Bravo, Nicolas, 140. 
 
 Britain, treaty with, 155. 
 
 Brushy Creek, 114. 
 
 Burleson, Colonel Edward, 44, 45, 75, 95, 97, 104. 
 
 Burnet, David G., 13, 14, 19, 39, 61, 65, 85, 87, 91, 93, 98, 148, 157, 194. 
 
 Bustamante, 133, 134, 136, 140. 
 
 California, 104, 133, 139, 145. 
 
 Cameron, John, 65, 68. 
 
 Canales, Antonio, 135, 144, 145. 
 
 Canalizo, 97. 
 
 Centralists, 45, 50. 
 
 College of DeKalb, 23. 
 
 Collingsworth, James, 19. 
 
 Columbus Enquirer, 5, 6. 
 
 Cooke, Col. W. G., 39, 115, 118, 120, 122. 
 
 Cordova Rebellion, 97ff. 
 
 Dryden, William G., and Santa F6 Expedition, 11 Iff. 
 Dunlap, Richard, 135, 140, 141, 171, 176, 178, 179. 
 
 Echeverria, Xavier de, 140. 
 Education, 22, 24. 
 
 Edwards, Benjamin, and the Cherokees, 82, 83. 
 
 205 
 
206 Index 
 
 Federalists, 45, 49, 50, 144, 145, 150, 157, 158, 160, 161, 177. 
 
 Fields, Richard, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84. 
 
 Filisola, Vincent, 68, 69, 70, 86, 97. 
 
 Flores, Manuel, 97, 98. 
 
 Fontaine, Rev. Edward, 54, 55. 
 
 France, treaty with, 29, 192. 
 
 Franco-Texienne Bill, 112. 
 
 Fredonia, 84, 86. 
 
 Ooliad Massacre, 12. 
 
 Gorostiza, 137, 140, 149, 183. 
 
 Government, 11, 25, 37, 38, 42, 46, 48, 57, 59. 
 
 Central, 104. 
 
 Constitutional, 30, 31, 102. 
 
 Federal, 4, 5. 
 
 Independent, 104. 
 
 Mexican, 49. 
 
 Provisional, 25, 26, 31, 50, 101. 
 
 Supreme, 69. 
 Grayson, Peter W., 18, 19, 52. 
 Green, Thomas Jefferson, 11, 12, 13, 14, 42. 
 
 Hamilton, James, 31, 136, 138, 142, 146, 152, 155, 185, 186, 188, 189, 191. 
 Henderson, J. Pinckney, 180, 181, 182, 183, 197. 
 Horton, A. C, 19, 54, 66, 92. 
 Hotchkiss, Archibald, 93. 
 
 Houston, Sam, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18, 22, 26, 31, 34, 35, 36, 39, 41, 42, 44, 56, 
 64, 66, 67, 68, 70, 72, 75, 88, 90, 101, 102, 112, 124, 165, 185, 194, 196. 
 President, 46, 50, 52, 131. 
 Hunt, Memucan, 166, 196. 
 Hunter, John Dunn, 83, 84, 85. 
 Huston, Felix, 12, 13, 15, 42, 43, 77. 
 
 Indians, 3, 5, 21, 24, 34, 35, 37, 41, 44, 45. 
 Alabamas, 99. 
 Atrocities, 60. 
 Bedies, 95. 
 Biloxies, 78. 
 Bison, 56. 
 
 Caddoes, 74, 78, 95, 170, 171. 
 Cherokees, 4, 44, 60, 64, 67, 68, 78, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 
 
 89, 91, 92, 95, 96, 98, 100, 101, 170, 171. 
 ChoctawB, 70, 78, 171. 
 Civilized, 60. 
 
 Comanches, 45, 56, 60, 61, 68, 75, 76, 77, 78, 82, 105. 
 Coshattoes, 78, 86, 99. 
 Creeks, 4. 
 Delawares, 92, 95, 171. 
 
Index 207 
 
 Indians — Continued. 
 
 Kickapoos, 70, 78, 93, 95, 171. 
 
 Kiowas, 68. 
 
 Lipans, 75, 78, 128. 
 
 Pottawatomies, 171. 
 
 Prairie, 78, 108. 
 
 Pueblo, 126. 
 
 Shawnees, 60, 78, 92, 95, 99, 171. 
 
 Wild, 60. 
 
 Jack, W. H., 110. 
 
 Jackson, Andrew, 140. 
 
 Johnston, A. S., 43, 95, 98. 
 
 Jones, Anson, 184. 
 
 Jones, William Jefferson, 56, 105, 106, 108. 
 
 Karnes, Henry, 68, 107. 
 
 Kaufman, David F., 38, 101. 
 
 Kendall, George Wilkins, 118, 122, 125, 128. 
 
 Kennedy, William, 190. 
 
 Lamar, L. Q. C, 3. 
 
 Lamar, Mirabeau B., birth and ancestry, 1. 
 
 Early life, 3flF. 
 
 Candidate for Congress, 5. 
 
 San Jacinto Battle, 8. 
 
 Secretary of War, 9. 
 
 Commander of army, 11-13. 
 
 Presidential campaign, 15-19. 
 
 Closing years, 196. 
 
 Death, 203. 
 
 Mier Expedition, 145, 146. 
 
 Miracle, Pedro Julian, 68, 69, 100. 
 
 Mole, Count, 191, 192, 193. 
 
 Monterey, Battle of, 79. 
 
 Moore, E. W., 47, 49, 50, 150, 158, 160, 161, 162, 163, 178, 179. 
 
 Navy appropriations, 39, 42, 46, 49. 
 New Mexico, 103, 104, 105, 145. 
 Nueces, 136, 137. 
 
 River, 108, 145. 
 Nueva Leon, 145. 
 
 Pakenham, 137, 138, 141, 142, 148, 150, 151, 156, 158, 183, 185. 
 Palmerston, 137, 138, 141, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 190. 
 Panic of 1837, 25. 
 Party, States' Eights, 4, 15. 
 
 Rebellion, Cordova, 73, 91, 97, 100. 
 Fredonian, 84, 85. 
 
208 Index 
 
 Republic of the Rio Grande, 145. 
 Revolt of 1835, 87; 1837, 1848, 125. 
 Revolutionists, 104. 
 
 Texas, 8. 
 Revolution, 167. 
 Rusk, T. J., 9, 12, 13, 14, 17, 42, 44, 68, 71, 72, 74, 92, 196, 200. 
 
 Saligny, Alphonse de, 31, 191, 193, 194. 
 
 San Antonio Road, 51, 54, 55, 79, 87, 90, lOff. 
 
 San Augustine, 18, 36, 59. 
 
 San Felipe, 7, 60, 62. 
 
 San Jacinto, 1, 8, 9, 12, 13, 42, 64, 107, 130, 135, 158. 
 
 Santa F6, 39, 55, 56, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106ff. 
 
 Tabasco, 48, 49, 150, 158, 161, 182. 
 
 Tamaulipas, 133, 145. 
 
 Tampico, 133, 136, 140, 145, 187. 
 
 Tariff, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 40, 41. 
 
 Taylor, General, 197. 
 
 Treat, James, 132, 138, 139, 141, 144, 146£F. 
 
 Trespalacios, Don Jose Felix, 79, 80, 81, 82. 
 
 Troup, George M., Governor of Georgia, 4, 5, 6. 
 
 United States, 12, 13, 15, 21, 25, 28, 29, 30, 40, 42, 47. 
 University, 21, 22. 
 Uribe, Rafael, 127. 
 Urrea, 133, 136, 140. 
 
 Vera Cruz, 11, 48, 49, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 150, 156, 187. 
 Vidaurri, Francisco, 145. 
 
 Waterloo, 54, 55, 56. 
 
 Webb, James, 155, 156, 159, 160, 196. 
 
 Wharton, W. H., 102, 103, 179. 
 
 Yrissari, 201. 
 
 Yucatan, 48, 49, 50, 158, 160, 161, 163. 
 Alliance of Texas with, 156. 
 
 Zapata, Antonio, 145. 
 Zavala, Lorenzo de, 9, 15. 
 
.y-