Showing posts with label Republic of Texas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republic of Texas. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 21, 2020
Texians defy government
Today is San Jacinto Day. In 1836 a band of Texians, loosely termed an army, defeated a part of the army of Mexico, led by President General Santa Anna, the Napoleon of the West. The fight lasted 18 minutes. The capture of Santa Anna meant legal independence for the Republic of Texas.
Monday, June 12, 2017
White Rock, Texas: If you don’t intend to go there, you probably won’t
White Rock is not a place you wind up in by accident.
White Rock is in Red River County, eight miles northeast of Clarksville, says the Handbook of Texas Online. It seems farther.
“WHITE ROCK, TEXAS (Red River County). White Rock, at the junction of Farm roads 1158 and 1699, eight miles northeast of Clarksville in northern Red River County, was settled as early as 1823, when John Stiles crossed the Red River to settle at a spot identified by a white rock. The population was twenty-five in 1910. From 1940 through 1986 the estimated population was reported as forty. In 1990 it was eighty-five. The population remained the same in 2000.”
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hnw41
I’m not buying that part about “identified by a white rock.” The Red River is a few miles away, and just because somebody stepped ashore near a white rock does not mean he is anywhere near the community. I’ve been to White Rock, and I think the settlement got its name from the fact that the land just below the grass is chalky white stone. An acquaintance told me there was a stream bed with high banks nearby, containing figures eroded by water and wind. I never did get to see the figures.
John Stiles settled the area, although the Handbook entry says “Red Rock.” Probably what happened was, the writer was thinking “Red River” and wrote in the wrong word.
“STILES, JOHN (1797–1854). John Stiles (Styles), pioneer Red River County settler, was born in Barren County, Kentucky, in March 1797, the son of William Stiles. Around 1818 he moved with his father to Doaksville, Indian Territory, in the Red River valley. In 1823 he crossed the river and settled near the site of present Red Rock in Red River County, Texas. When David Crockett entered Texas he reportedly stayed overnight "with his old friend." In 1836 Stiles joined Capt. William Becknell's company, which arrived at the San Jacinto battlefield a day after the defeat of the Mexican forces. According to tradition, Stiles and others from Becknell's company were assigned by Sam Houston to guard Antonio López de Santa Anna because they would be, in Houston's words, "a less prejudiced group of men than the participants in the battle." Stiles was married to Kentucky native Sarah K. Reed; they had twenty-three children, twelve of whom reached maturity. He died in Red River County in August 1854.”
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fstbh
White Rock Cemetery contains graves of people who lived in the area back when Texas was a country. Several tombstones contain markers identifying the dead as Citizen of the Republic of Texas.
White Rock is in Red River County, eight miles northeast of Clarksville, says the Handbook of Texas Online. It seems farther.
“WHITE ROCK, TEXAS (Red River County). White Rock, at the junction of Farm roads 1158 and 1699, eight miles northeast of Clarksville in northern Red River County, was settled as early as 1823, when John Stiles crossed the Red River to settle at a spot identified by a white rock. The population was twenty-five in 1910. From 1940 through 1986 the estimated population was reported as forty. In 1990 it was eighty-five. The population remained the same in 2000.”
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hnw41
I’m not buying that part about “identified by a white rock.” The Red River is a few miles away, and just because somebody stepped ashore near a white rock does not mean he is anywhere near the community. I’ve been to White Rock, and I think the settlement got its name from the fact that the land just below the grass is chalky white stone. An acquaintance told me there was a stream bed with high banks nearby, containing figures eroded by water and wind. I never did get to see the figures.
John Stiles settled the area, although the Handbook entry says “Red Rock.” Probably what happened was, the writer was thinking “Red River” and wrote in the wrong word.
“STILES, JOHN (1797–1854). John Stiles (Styles), pioneer Red River County settler, was born in Barren County, Kentucky, in March 1797, the son of William Stiles. Around 1818 he moved with his father to Doaksville, Indian Territory, in the Red River valley. In 1823 he crossed the river and settled near the site of present Red Rock in Red River County, Texas. When David Crockett entered Texas he reportedly stayed overnight "with his old friend." In 1836 Stiles joined Capt. William Becknell's company, which arrived at the San Jacinto battlefield a day after the defeat of the Mexican forces. According to tradition, Stiles and others from Becknell's company were assigned by Sam Houston to guard Antonio López de Santa Anna because they would be, in Houston's words, "a less prejudiced group of men than the participants in the battle." Stiles was married to Kentucky native Sarah K. Reed; they had twenty-three children, twelve of whom reached maturity. He died in Red River County in August 1854.”
https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fstbh
White Rock Cemetery contains graves of people who lived in the area back when Texas was a country. Several tombstones contain markers identifying the dead as Citizen of the Republic of Texas.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
This sort of thing never happened …
Or so most writers of history say.
In the spring 1843 session of Sixth District Court in Red River County Texas came the case “The Republic of Texas vs. John, a slave for life – Assault with Intent to Murder.”
There is not much else in the large, thick ledger-size books. The initial entry does not list who owned John, nor is there an account of the crime for which he was accused. We do not know who it was John was accused of assaulting. The case has a document number, but that number is not in the boxes from 1843.
A few weeks after the first listing is another, with the same title, plus a trial date and the entry that a jury found John, a slave for life, not guilty of the charge of assault with intent to murder.
If you search “rights of slaves in America,” you will discover a quick answer. “None.”
Here are facts: John, a slave for life, was arrested by a white law officer. John was charged by a white justice of the peace or judge. John was indicted by a grand jury of white men. John was tried by a white prosecutor before a white judge and defended by a white attorney. And a jury of 12 white men found John not guilty of assault with intent to murder. John was then released from jail, probably returned to the man or woman who owned him, probably to remain a slave for life.
And another thing: Most likely, John was accused of assaulting a white man. Had he assaulted another slave, John’s owner and the owner of the other slave would have settled the matter.
Historians say slaves had no rights. In the main, that is true, if we consider today’s rights. But somewhere in the emotions of the Republic of Texas, lay the idea that the man John deserved a legal trial for his supposed transgressions.
I talked with Jim Clark about the case. Jim’s long ago ancestor James Clark was the founder of Clarksville. Jim said, “There shouldn’t have been a trial in the first place.”
“Why not?” I asked.
“Because,” Jim said, “property cannot commit a crime.”
In the spring 1843 session of Sixth District Court in Red River County Texas came the case “The Republic of Texas vs. John, a slave for life – Assault with Intent to Murder.”
There is not much else in the large, thick ledger-size books. The initial entry does not list who owned John, nor is there an account of the crime for which he was accused. We do not know who it was John was accused of assaulting. The case has a document number, but that number is not in the boxes from 1843.
A few weeks after the first listing is another, with the same title, plus a trial date and the entry that a jury found John, a slave for life, not guilty of the charge of assault with intent to murder.
If you search “rights of slaves in America,” you will discover a quick answer. “None.”
Here are facts: John, a slave for life, was arrested by a white law officer. John was charged by a white justice of the peace or judge. John was indicted by a grand jury of white men. John was tried by a white prosecutor before a white judge and defended by a white attorney. And a jury of 12 white men found John not guilty of assault with intent to murder. John was then released from jail, probably returned to the man or woman who owned him, probably to remain a slave for life.
And another thing: Most likely, John was accused of assaulting a white man. Had he assaulted another slave, John’s owner and the owner of the other slave would have settled the matter.
Historians say slaves had no rights. In the main, that is true, if we consider today’s rights. But somewhere in the emotions of the Republic of Texas, lay the idea that the man John deserved a legal trial for his supposed transgressions.
I talked with Jim Clark about the case. Jim’s long ago ancestor James Clark was the founder of Clarksville. Jim said, “There shouldn’t have been a trial in the first place.”
“Why not?” I asked.
“Because,” Jim said, “property cannot commit a crime.”
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
12-year-old bride learned business lessons early
In 1836, Mary White turned 12, got married and became one-third owner of a league and labor of land, 4,605 acres, given as a headright by the Republic of Texas to her dead father.
In 1837, Mary was a mother, a widow and sole owner of the land.
Three years later, she sold the land to two different men.
No one said anything about Mary’s twice-sold land until the son-in-law of the first buyer discovered the chicanery in the early 1850s in probate court. T.J. Guilford then filed suit against James Fornoe, claiming Fornoe’s purchase of the land illegal. The land, Guilford said, belonged to his wife, the only child of the first purchaser.
Mary might not have arrived naturally to questionable deals, but she did learn from her husband and she observed deals and sales in Red River County. The same kind of deals most likely went on in much of the rest of the Republic of Texas.
In the early days of the Republic, neither the government nor most of its citizens had much money. What the Republic did have was land, lots of land, unsettled prairies and woodlands. Land was what drew early Anglo-American settlers to Texas, and the amount of available land certainly did not decrease when the new Republic gained recognition from the United States as well as European countries.
A man or woman who was head of a household at the beginning of the revolution was eligible for a league and labor, provided he or she had not left Texas during the revolution and had not given aid and comfort to the Mexican government or army. The Spanish league was 4,428 acres and a labor, 177 acres. A head of household applied for headright, and then paid survey cost, a penny per acre, when approved.
As the Star of the Republic Museum says, “This was the amount of a headright (first-class) granted to ‘all persons except Africans and their descendants, and Indians, living in Texas on the day of the Declaration of Independence… if they be heads of families… and if a single man, 17 years or older, one-third league’ (1,476 acres).”
http://www.starmuseum.org/questions.htm
The Republic recognized women as heads of household and granted women the same land rights as men. However, the “single man, 17 years or older …” did not apply to single women.
Whether Mary’s marriage at age 12 to James Morton was approved by the general community, is not known. The only written facts of her life are contained in Sixth District Court records in Clarksville, and those depositions were taken in the 1850s.
What is known is that Mary’s husband filed for headright in the name of Mary’s father. One deposition in case records states Mr. White “was believed to have died in an Arkansas jail.” He was not around to file for himself in 1836. The land commission approved the application, and the grant was split between Mary, her older sister and her older brother.
Sometime in 1837, Mary’s husband died, as did her sister and her brother. Mary then became sole owner of the 4,605 acres. She first sold the land to Benton Truman, then later to Fornoe.
One man deposed in the case knew Mary, Truman and Fornoe. That witness said he asked Truman if the sale was legal, since Mary was 16 at the time. Truman said Mary was able to legally sell the land, since she had been married, and therefore was considered to have gained majority.
The witness also said he knew of Mary’s sale to Fornoe. He asked Mary why she sold the land to two men. She replied that she had not received a fair price in the first sale. She had been cheated, she said.
The case never went to trial. Guilford, representing his wife, and Fornoe, announced their intent to settle out of court.
Mary was not around to be deposed or otherwise questioned. She died in 1846, at age 22.
In 1837, Mary was a mother, a widow and sole owner of the land.
Three years later, she sold the land to two different men.
No one said anything about Mary’s twice-sold land until the son-in-law of the first buyer discovered the chicanery in the early 1850s in probate court. T.J. Guilford then filed suit against James Fornoe, claiming Fornoe’s purchase of the land illegal. The land, Guilford said, belonged to his wife, the only child of the first purchaser.
Mary might not have arrived naturally to questionable deals, but she did learn from her husband and she observed deals and sales in Red River County. The same kind of deals most likely went on in much of the rest of the Republic of Texas.
In the early days of the Republic, neither the government nor most of its citizens had much money. What the Republic did have was land, lots of land, unsettled prairies and woodlands. Land was what drew early Anglo-American settlers to Texas, and the amount of available land certainly did not decrease when the new Republic gained recognition from the United States as well as European countries.
A man or woman who was head of a household at the beginning of the revolution was eligible for a league and labor, provided he or she had not left Texas during the revolution and had not given aid and comfort to the Mexican government or army. The Spanish league was 4,428 acres and a labor, 177 acres. A head of household applied for headright, and then paid survey cost, a penny per acre, when approved.
As the Star of the Republic Museum says, “This was the amount of a headright (first-class) granted to ‘all persons except Africans and their descendants, and Indians, living in Texas on the day of the Declaration of Independence… if they be heads of families… and if a single man, 17 years or older, one-third league’ (1,476 acres).”
http://www.starmuseum.org/questions.htm
The Republic recognized women as heads of household and granted women the same land rights as men. However, the “single man, 17 years or older …” did not apply to single women.
Whether Mary’s marriage at age 12 to James Morton was approved by the general community, is not known. The only written facts of her life are contained in Sixth District Court records in Clarksville, and those depositions were taken in the 1850s.
What is known is that Mary’s husband filed for headright in the name of Mary’s father. One deposition in case records states Mr. White “was believed to have died in an Arkansas jail.” He was not around to file for himself in 1836. The land commission approved the application, and the grant was split between Mary, her older sister and her older brother.
Sometime in 1837, Mary’s husband died, as did her sister and her brother. Mary then became sole owner of the 4,605 acres. She first sold the land to Benton Truman, then later to Fornoe.
One man deposed in the case knew Mary, Truman and Fornoe. That witness said he asked Truman if the sale was legal, since Mary was 16 at the time. Truman said Mary was able to legally sell the land, since she had been married, and therefore was considered to have gained majority.
The witness also said he knew of Mary’s sale to Fornoe. He asked Mary why she sold the land to two men. She replied that she had not received a fair price in the first sale. She had been cheated, she said.
The case never went to trial. Guilford, representing his wife, and Fornoe, announced their intent to settle out of court.
Mary was not around to be deposed or otherwise questioned. She died in 1846, at age 22.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
