The Beginnings of Revolution in Texas, ·r8ro-r812
13
and treasury, imprisoned all Spaniards,· and confiscated their property. A provisional government was set up by Saenz to rule Nacogdoches in the name of the people. Six days after his arrival, Lieutenant Saenz started his return march to Bexar with six prisoners. Among them was Father Fray Francisco Maines, chaplain of the presidia! company, whose property had been seized because of his friendship with Governor Salcedo. He was treated with all the respect due his priesthood both en route and after his arrival in San Antonio. 21 It seems that Chaplain Cavazos in San Antonio had also incurred the displeasure of Casas, and that after being removed from his post, he appealed to Jimenez. The latter had in the meantime sent Father Jose Antonio Valdes to replace Father Angel Cavazos, whose loyalty was in question. Desirous of avoiding the enmity of the clergy, Casas proposed that Cavazos remain as chaplain of the presidio troops until proved guilty of the charge and that Valdes be appointed chaplain of either the auxiliary militia company or the company of veterans stationed in San Antonio. 22 When Father Miguel Martinez, chaplain of La Bahia, strongly remonstrated against the arrest and sequestration of the property of European-born Bernardo Amado, Casas was genuinely vexed. He in- structed the commander at La Bahia to keep the Padre under surveillance, and that if his conduct revealed he was a Royalist, he should, with all due reverence, be taken in custody so that he could do no harm. In a report of the incident to Jimenez, Casas wrote: "It appears to me that we should consider our own safety rather than that of our enemies; more so at present, for it is to our interests to take advantage of all opportunities to maintain the honor and dignity of this government, which rules for the best interests of all." He asked Jimenez for authority to relieve the chaplain of his duties. 23 But Casas was more worried about the military prisoners than he was about the reluctance of the clergy to join his regime wholeheartedly. As early as February 3, 18n, he had tactfully broached the subject in a letter to Jimenez. The following day he wrote that the prisoners in his care could not be tried in San Antonio because there were too many cases to handle and because he feared the probable consequences. He feared-and with good reason-that the continued presence of Governor Salcedo and Commandant Herrera in San Antonio would serve as a
2I Casas to Jimenez, February 28, 1811, Chabot, O'j>. cit., 84. 12 Casas to Pedro de Aranda, February 12, 1811, ibid., 81-82. 13 Casas to Jimenez, March 8, 1811, ibid., 85.
Powered by FlippingBook