Ch 3 Mexican Texas

Mexican Texas, 1821-1836

Chapter Three

Problems in independent Mexico◦ Ideological conflicts

Liberals – wanted to form a republic based on liberal ideas of the Enlightenment and on the Spanish Constitution of 1812; essentially, more rights for the lower classes Also permitted mass immigration and tolerated slavery

Conservatives – disliked the egalitarian ideas that gave some worth to the lower classes in Mexico

◦ Economic chaos◦ Desire of military and Catholic Church officials wanting

to maintain the distinct connection between Church and State

◦ Political inexperience of Mexico’s new leaders

The Mexican Government

Non-Aggressive Immigration Concerns◦ Philip Nolan (1801)

American who came into Hill County looking for mustangs to sell in Louisiana; Spanish authorities captured and killed him in fear of a possible conspiracy to acquire Texas

◦ Border disputes with the United States (1803) U.S. President Thomas Jefferson sends a party to

clarify the boundaries of the Louisiana territory; nearly starts a war with Spain over the eastern boundary of Texas


Aggressive Immigration Concerns◦ Dr. James Long (1819)

Attempted to take advance of political issues between Mexico and Spain during the Mexican Revolution

Came to Texas with a party of filibusters to take control of Texas from Mexico

Caused a great uproar and was later captured by Mexican authorities Used the logic that since Texas was “surrendered” to Spain

to gain Florida, U.S. southerners had a right to take back their land since Spain was on its way out of North America

Caused great distrust of Americans by Spanish and Mexican officials


Mexico legalizes immigration to Texas◦ Keeping up the Spanish precedent

Spanish already agreed to allow Moses Austin to start a settlement of Americans to Texas

Moses Austin’s son, Stephen Fuller Austin later assumed his contract

◦ Mexican liberals saw missions as expensive liabilities Added too much power to the Church Encouraged intervention in government affairs Wanted to find another way to bring people into Texas without

the baggage of the Catholic Church◦ Security in Texas depended on steady foreign immigration

6 million people settled on an expanse ranging from California to Central America

Manpower was desperately needed


Moses Austin Stephen Fuller Austin

Austin’s Colony◦ Stephen F. Austin assumed Moses Austin’s contract in 1821◦ Settlers began to arrive in late 1821◦ Political issues caused Austin’s contract to come into question, Austin

traveled to Mexico City in 1822 to argue his claim◦ The weak Mexican government recognized Austin’s claim under the

Imperial Colonization Law (1823) Lasted as long as President Iturbide remained in power (which was not

long)◦ Austin returns to find his colony in a state of uncertainty

Attacks by Karankawa Indians Food shortages Many settlers began to depart

◦ By the end of 1824, most of Austin’s land titles had been approved and Austin’s contract was considered valid

◦ Austin’s principle settlement became San Felipe de Austin (about sixty miles from present-day Houston)


New Immigration Laws◦ National Colonization Law of 1824

Individual states of Mexico had complete control over immigration and the disposal of public lands

Law did not directly prohibit the importation of slaves or outlaw slavery

Very federalist in tone; took similarities from the American Constitution and the Spanish Constitution of 1812 Valentin Gomez Farias and Lorenzo

de Zavala were the principle individuals behind the law

Conservatives who wanted a strong central government despised the law and called for an end to the rise of the Federalists


Lorenzo de Zavala

New Immigration Laws◦ State Colonization Law of 1825

Focused primarily on the immigration of Coahuila and Texas

Attempted to encourage farming and ranching Stimulate commercial activity Families could obtain a sitio (4,428 acres) and a labor

(177 acres) of farming land Immigrants had to become Mexican citizens

Promise to observe the Christian religion (expected Catholicism)

Again, this law was so vague that it did not inhibit the slave trade and/or ownership of slaves


Empresario Contracts◦ Empresario – immigration agent that acted on behalf of

the state government to select colonists, allocate land, and enforce laws within their colony

◦ Between 1821 and 1825, 41 empresario contracts were signed, permitting 13,500 families to come to Texas The majority were Anglo Americans from the United States

◦ Disputes Green DeWitt and Martin de Leon colonies (South Texas) had

ill defined boundaries that caused disputes between settlers DeWitt’s land later became public domain in 1832 De Leon’s colony remained small


Martin de Leon

Native Mexicans of Texas◦ Revival in fortunes

Ranches reestablished between Bexar (San Antonio) and La Bahia

◦ Wealthy ranchos established Martin de Leon of Victoria Erasmo and Juan N. Seguin of Bexar Carlos de la Garza of Goliad

◦ Towns Nacogdoches was experiencing a steady population

growth through the 1820s In the 1830s, the town was surrounded by nearly 50 ranchos.

Trans-Nueces area had roughly 350 rancherias (small family operated ranches) by the 1830s


◦ Entry into Texas Most arrived independently (not under the guidance

of an empresario) Some that came illegally were attempting to flee

debt or the law in the United States◦ Mexican nationality/culture often ignored and

made the government uneasy Squatting on unoccupied lands Smuggling Using American practices in local situations Speculating with their properties Violating other miscellaneous conditions (and oath)

under which they had been allowed to settle

Anglos and the Mexican Government

◦ Haden Edwards and the Fredonia Republic Edwards proclaimed the independence of the region

near Nacogdoches in 1826, calling it the Fredonia Republic

Issues over land titles and Edwards’ brother, Benjamin lead to an armed insurrection.

Stephen F. Austin led his colonial militia along with Mexican officials to put down the rebellion

The episode highlights the growing tensions between the settlers and Mexico Also the possibility that increasing immigration could

dissolve Mexico’s hold over Texas Settlers’ animosity towards Mexico grew as the

government voided Edwards’ empresario contract


Haden Edwards

◦ Mier y Teran’s Mission and Report Mexico dispatched Manuel de Mier y Teran, a military

officer and engineer, to Texas in order to evaluate how the government should deal with problems in Texas

In 1828, Teran reported that Nacogdoches has become an American town, flooded with Anglos

Problems he noticed: Anglo settlements resisted obeying colonization laws Assimilation of the Anglos into Mexican culture was

almost impossible Teran returned to Mexico and convinced the

government to draft the Law of April 6, 1830


Law of April 6, 1830◦ Intended to stop immigration into Texas from the

U.S. Declared uncompleted empresario agreements void Loophole: any empresario who had brought 100

families could retain their contracts◦ Future American immigrants must not settle in

any territory bordering the U.S.◦ New presidios constructed (ran by convicts) to

check illegal immigration◦ Banned further importation of slaves into Texas


Search for economic prosperity◦ Political factions

Viesca faction – belonged to the liberal Federalist party Struggled to maintain influence in Mexican politics

throughout the 1820s Leaders: Guadalupe Victoria, Lorenzo de Zavala, Vincente

Guerrero Wanted to achieve economic prosperity through the

colonization program and other legislation Centralist faction – belonged to the Centralist party

Conservatives who believed in securing the traditional power of the military and the Catholic Church

Sort of a throw-back to traditional Spanish Texas

Mexican and American Capitalists

Liberal Federalist Legislation◦ Exemptions from taxes on cotton, foreign imports,

and domestic items for use by colonists in Texas and Coahuila

◦ Granted citizenship and special concession to numerous Anglo-Americans James Bowie, acquired a textile mill permit

◦ Liberals argued that slave labor was necessary for the economic advancement of Mexico Decree passed on May 5, 1828 validated contracts of

servitude (indentured servitude) by immigrants of Texas Another loophole that allowed Texans to bring in slaves

as “permanently indentured servants”


The End of Slavery in Texas◦ In 1829, Mexican President Vicente Guerrero

issued a directive abolishing slavery throughout the country It would continue until the 1850s though

◦ Political resistance from the rising class of capitalists in Texas and Coahuila persuaded Guerrero to exempt Texas from the directive

The Law of April 6, 1830 affirmed the end of slavery in Texas◦ Anglos in Texas viewed this critically and began to

question the Mexican government


Law of April 6, 1830 in Context◦ Law was passed by Centralists after a coup in 1829◦ Pushed liberals out of step with state and national politics

Centralists were determined to end Anglo immigration and slavery◦ Counter-colonization was their preferred method◦ Reinforced presidios at San Antonio, Goliad, and

Nacogdoches◦ Commissioned numerous garrisons; Velasco and Anahuac

were the most important Velasco was at the mouth of the Brazos River Anahuac was near the Gulf Coast and discouraged illegal

immigration by sea

Conservative Coup

Liberals resisted conservative policies◦ Tejanos committed themselves to liberal, Federalist policies

The “War Party”◦ A radical Federalist faction that emerged from the outrage

of the Law of April 6 Turtle Bayou Resolutions (June 13, 1832)

◦ William Barret Travis was arrested at Anahuac for attempting to release two runaway slaves that Col. Juan D. Bradburn had in custody

◦ Travis was held without a trial by jury or charged◦ Anglos and the War Party labeled Bradburn a despot for not

following the American customs of separating military and civilian law

Liberal Reaction

Turtle Bayou Resolutions (June 13, 1832)◦ An angry Anglo party surrounded Bradburn’s

garrison at Brazoria. A battle seemed imminent.◦ Instead of fighting, the Anglos issued the Turtle

Bayou Resolutions It condemned Bradburn’s actions Explained that the Anglos’ actions were not an

uprising, but a demand for constitutional rights for Mexican citizens

◦ Instead of causing more conflict, military officials replaced Bradburn and released Travis

◦ While some respected the War Party’s actions, most did not support them.

Liberal Reaction

The “Peace Party”◦ Led by Stephen F. Austin◦ Most Texans belonged to this party which preferred to work

for solutions to settle settlers’ issues◦ Used established political channels instead of protests

Attempt for Concession◦ In Oct. 1832, delegates from Anglo settlements appealed to

the Mexican government to repeal the article in the Law of April 6 that limited immigration

◦ The Mexican political chief at Bexar refused to forward the petition Viewed the meeting of Anglos as outside the law Extralegal citizens’ meetings were viewed poorly by Spanish-

Mexican tradition

Liberal Reaction

Attempt for Concession◦ Citizens in Bexar tried to petition a second time in 1832

Complained that the Law of April 6 was threatening useful capitalists

Demanded bilingual administrators Wanted more judges Better militia protection from hostile Indians Tax exemptions for businesses

◦ The petition was forwarded to governor Bexar’s political chief advised the governor that the Anglos

and Tejanos wanted reform, not a new state Also echoed the fear that Anglos would dominate politics if

a new state was created

Liberal Reaction

Division of Coahuila and Texas sought◦ After attempts at concession in 1832, a subsequent

meeting was held at San Felipe de Austin in 1833 to discuss the separation of the division of Coahuila and Texas

◦ New leaders opposed Stephen F. Austin’s caution towards the Mexican government Including David G. Burnet and Sam Houston

◦ Argued that a separate Texas could make decisions affecting its own well-being

◦ The meeting entrusted Erasmo Seguin, Stephen F. Austin, and Dr. James B. Miller to speak with Mexico City

◦ Only Austin made the journey to Mexico City

Liberal Reaction

Alteration to the Law of April 6, 1830◦ Santa Anna elected President as a Federalist◦ Mexican liberals and Austin worked together to

make the Mexican senate revoke the immigration provision in the Law of April 6, effective May 1834

Failure to Separate Coahuila and Texas◦ Austin failed to convince the government to

separate Texas◦ Officials discovered letters from Austin advocating

separation They threw him in jail in early 1834

Liberals Return to Power

Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna

Legislative Concessions◦ Acceptance of the English language as a legal

language of the state◦ Permitted the extension of empresario contracts◦ Expanded local courts◦ Provided for trial by jury

Texas Representation Improved◦ Increased representation in the state congress◦ Increased the number of departments to three

Department of Nacogdoches Department of Brazos Department of Bexar

Liberals Return to Power

Empresario contract issues◦ Anglos continued to come into colonies whose empresarios

had imported at least 100 familes (no immigration control)◦ Irish empresarios were granted after the law was enacted

Mexicans looked favorably on Europeans to people Texas James McGloin and John McMullen founded San Patricio (1831)

◦ Sterling C. Robertson persuaded the government to validate his contract and successfully brought in more settlers to Texas

Land Certificates◦ Galveston Bay and Texas Land Company sold invalid land

certificates to buyers after the law was enacted◦ Several European families came in to Texas; Mexico

accepted them

Ineffectiveness of the Law of April 6

Illegal Immigration◦ By 1834, over 20,700 Anglos and slaves arrived in

Texas Probably went from 10,000 to 20,000 from 1830 to 1834

◦ Many arrived illegally and took occupations as: Merchants, lawyers, land speculators, politicians,

squatters, trappers, miners, artisans, smugglers, and anything else that paid

Overall, the Law of April 6, 1830 was ineffective◦ Immigration increased exponentially while the law

was on the books

Ineffectiveness of the Law of April 6

Education

Ch 3 Mexican Texas