The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 13, July 1909 - April, 1910 Page: 159
341 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Recognition of the Republic of Texas by the U. S. 159
they are not) of their fidelity to their obligations as Mexican citi-
zens, this effort to erect Texas into a state affords one which is
conclusive to every man of judgment who knows anything about
this country.
The object of the Texans, therefore, in wishing a separation
from Coahuila, and the erection of their country into a state, was
to avoid a total separation from Mexico by a revolution. .1
Later on, also, in explaining the action taken by the Consultation
of San Felipe, Austin again said:
The majority of Texas, so far as an opinion can be formed from
the acts of the people at their primary meetings, was decidedly in
favor of declaring in positive, clear and unequivocal terms, for the
federal constitution of 1824, and for the organization of a local
government, either as a state of the Mexican confederation, or pro-
visionally, until the authorities of the state of Coahuila and Texas
could be restored. This measure was absolutely necessary to save
the country from anarchy, for it was left without any government
at all, owing to the dispersion and imprisonment of the executive
and legislative authorities, by the unconstitutional intervention of
the military power. Some individuals were also in favor of inde-
pendence, though no public meeting whose proceedings I have
seen, expressed such an idea.2
Even William H. Wharton, one of the most radical advocates for
independence, in speaking of the November declaration, said: "I
do not blame the Consultation for their declaration. They were
not empowered and it was not in the contemplation of those who
elected them to make any other."3 Morfit, the agent sent out in
the summer of 1836 by President Jackson to examine into the con-
dition of affairs in Texas, also reported, August 22: "The Texans
assert that this resistance was not because they even them [that is,
after Cos's invasion] wished to separate from the confederacy, but,
1Woo'ten, A Comprehensive History of Texas, I, 562-563.
2Austin to Barrett, December 3, 1835, ibid., 566.
'Wharton to Archer, November 29, 1835, dn Brown, History of Texas,
I, 428. There is some conflict as to the date of this letter. It was
printed in an undated circular as an enclosure in a letter from Archer
to the editors of the Telegraph and Texas Register and in another circu-
lar, likewise undated, as an enclosure in a letter from Archer to the
editor of the Texas Republican (both in Austin Papers). In the first
ease it is dated November 26, and in the second November 28.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 13, July 1909 - April, 1910, periodical, 1910; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101051/m1/179/: accessed April 27, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.