Our Catholic Heritage in T exa.s
S. M. Williams and John Durst, among others, shortly thereafter obtained 124 leagues, which were located in the present counties of Harrison, Nacogdoches, and Red River. The National Congress, under the control of Santa Anna, seized the opportunity on April 25 to annul the laws of March 14. The State Legislature, however, persisted in ignoring the national decree, and General Cos was ordered to march to Monclova, thus causing its disbandment early in May. Just before adjourning, the Legislature passed the fourth and last land act. Aware of the approach of Federal troops, it empowered the Governor on April 7 to take such measures as he might deem proper for securing "public tranquility and sustaining the authorities in the free exercise of their functions." The power given him to contract loans, he interpreted as authority to sell more Texas lands. Dr. James Grant obtained several hundred league-certificates under this law on May 2, of which he sold one hundred in Nacogdoches alone. It appears that among the speculators in public land who were in Monclova in the spring of 1835 were F. W. Johnson, Samuel M. Williams, Doctor Robert Peebles, Major Benjamin F. Smith, Colonel Green De Witt, Colonel Benjamin R. Milam, Thomas J. Chambers, W. H. Steel, Haden Edwards, Jr., Doctor James Grant, Doctor John Cameron, and General John T. Mason. 7 The news of the troops roaching on Monclova sent the Texan lobbyists scurrying home. They brought alarming reports of the danger which the exercise of dictatorial power by Santa Anna represented. Their denunciations were not entirely prompted by selfish motives. They had a much better understanding of the true situation in Mexico than had those who had remained in Texas. But most of the people thought that their talk of invasion was merely a smoke screen to protect their interests. The call for help to rescue Governor Augustin Viesca, who was arrested by General Cos after the dissolution of the Legislature in Monclova, went unheeded. Blinded by indignation at the scandalous land deals of 1835-strangely those of 1834 went unnoticed-many Texans lost sight of the grave danger that threatened them. What, then, was the effect of land specuation on the movement for independence? It dulled the perception of the colonists, delayed con- certed action, probably postponed the calling of the General Consultation, and caused many who believed that it was a speculators' war to hesitate in supporting the Texan volunteers in the fall of 1835. 1 1 /bid., 78-86. •Barker, "Land Speculation as a Cause of the Texas Revolution," The Quart_erl,i, X, 91-94.
Powered by FlippingBook