Not Without Honor: The Life of John H. Reagan 9780292763883

Citation preview

NOT WITHOUT HONOR The Life of John H. Reagan

Procter_5127.pdf 1

5/24/2014 7:44:38 AM

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

> ' 11/''" '-

-*«•

Jlill

J o h n H . Reagan w h e n h e was 4 3 years old.

Procter_5127.pdf 4

^

^ H B ^ S S E '

~ '?-*' :'*4M

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mati

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

NOT WITHOUT HONOR The Life of John H. Reagan

BY

B E N

H.

P R O C T E R

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS PRESS • AUSTIN

Procter_5127.pdf 5

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

Copyright © 1962 by the University of Texas Press Copyright © renewed 1990 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Requests for permission to reproduce material from this work should be sent to:  Permissions   University of Texas Press   P.O. Box 7819   Austin, TX 78713-7819  http://utpress.utexas.edu/index.php/rp-form Library of Congress Catalog Number 62-9791 isbn 978-0-292-70099-4, paperback isbn 978-0-292-76388-3, library e-book isbn 978-0-292-76389-0, individual e-book

TO MY FATHER

Procter_5127.pdf 7

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

A Prophet in His O w n Country In January, 1866, the former postmaster general and treasurer of the Confederacy, John H. Reagan, arrived at Galveston after five months of solitary confinement and imprisonment at Fort Warren in Boston harbor. But instead of receiving a hero's welcome as Texas' top-ranking Confederate official, he experienced abusive criticism. For, while at Fort Warren, he had written Texans advising them to renounce the right of secession and to recognize the abolition of slavery—already decided by force of arms—so that they could quickly become a state among equals once again and enjoy all rights and privileges under the Constitution. Otherwise, he predicted, military rule and universal Negro suffrage would surely be their lot. Texans, however, believing that he had weakened in his loyalty to them while in a Yankee prison, rejected his counsel as insincere and condemned him for his defection. But in March, 1867, when Congress ousted all civil government in the South and placed the people under military law and carpetbagNegro rule, Texans remembered Reagan's sage advice and predictions. Quickly they recognized him as a true statesman of the people, even as a prophet. During the next thirty-eight years Reagan helped guide the destiny of Texas—as a leader of the Democratic party, as an outstanding participant in the ousting of carpetbag rule from Texas, as one of the foremost framers of the 1875 state constitution, as coauthor of the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, and as the first chairman of the Texas Railroad Commission. Always, regardless of personal consequences, he spoke out for what he thought was right. And at his death on March 6, 1905, even in his own country he was Not Without Honor.

Procter_5127.pdf 9

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Acknowledgments One day during the fall of 1957 Professor Frederick Merk of Harvard asked me what I knew about John H. Reagan of Texas. To my embarrassment, being a Texan, I only remembered that he was one of Texas' "Greats," that there were numerous Texas schools named in his honor, and that a huge statue of him was on the University of Texas campus. But with just such a question this work began. To Frederick Merk, an outstanding historian, a constructive critic, an understanding friend, I am deeply indebted. The writing of a biography enlists the talents and skills of many individuals. No better proof of this statement can be found than in Not Without Honor. The Reagan descendants—Mrs. Jefferson Davis Reagan, Reagan Ferguson, Mr. and Mrs. John Reagan, and Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes—were most helpful and accommodating. Joe A. Sharp of Sevierville, Tennessee, Arthur Reagan of Alexandria, Virginia, W. M. W. Splawn, former member of the United States Commerce Commission, C. Russell McNamee, Director of Rate Division, Railroad Commission of Texas, and H. Bailey Carroll, editor of the Southwestern Historical Quarterly, added information and gave much needed assistance in regard to specific subjects. And to those archivists and librarians who gave of their time and efforts I am most appreciative, especially Buford Rowland and Harold Hufford of the National Archives, Lorena Baker of the University of Texas Library, Llerena Friend of the Eugene C. Barker Library, Winnie Allen of the University of Texas Archives, Dorman Winfrey, Texas State Librarian, Mary Rice, Director of Public Libraries, City of Austin, and James Day, Mrs. Virginia Taylor, Mrs. Robert Brandt, and Mrs. Fischer Os-

Procter_5127.pdf 11

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

xii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

burn, all of the Texas State Archives. I am also indebted to the staff of Harvard University Library, the Library of Congress, the Virginia State Library, the Alabama State Library, and the Confederate White House Museum at Richmond. I want to express special thanks to Dr. Rupert N. Richardson, an outstanding historian and president of Hardin-Simmons University, and to my father, Dr. L. C. Procter, for the close scrutiny of the manuscript and for their invaluable suggestions. Grants from the Committee on Research at Texas Christian University have aided me significantly in preparing the book for publication. The staff of the University of Texas Press has contributed immeasurably to this work. Mrs. Norris Davis of Austin not only typed and retyped the manuscript, but also checked references and words. And lastly my wife, Phoebe, and my mother, Mrs. L. C. Procter, besides demonstrating almost inexhaustible patience, sustained and encouraged me throughout this undertaking. BEN H.

Procter_5127.pdf 12

PROCTER

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

Contents A Prophet in His Own Country . Acknowledgments . . . . 1. Heritage . . . . 2. Early Life . . . . 3. Arrival in Texas and the Cherokee War 4. Surveying and Survival 5. Turbulent Times and Readjustment 6. New State, New Town, New Profession 7. Politics . . . . . 8. The Peters' Colony Controversy . 9. The Rise of a Leader . 10. Disruption of the Union . 11. Cabinet Member of the Confederacy 12. The Civil War 13. Imprisonment and Release . 14. Return to Power in the Democratic Party 15. Overthrow of Radical Rule in Texas 16. Participation in State and National Affairs 17. The Genesis of Railroad Regulation 18. Struggle and Triumph in Congress 19. United States Senator 20. Railroad Commissioner 21. Last Years Bibliography Index . . . .

Procter_5127.pdf 13

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

Illustrations Frontispiece. John H, Reagan Following page 162: 1. Edwina Nelms Reagan 2. Jefferson Davis Poses with His First Cabinet 3. John H. Reagan 4.

Fort Houston, the Home of John H. Reagan

5. Molly Taylor Reagan 6.

Four Great Texans

7. John H. Reagan in His Library 8.

Procter_5127.pdf 14

"A Statesman of Three Republics"

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

NOT WITHOUT HONOR The Life of John H. Reagan

Procter_5127.pdf 15

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

C H A P T E R

I

Heritage

T

•JL.HE STRUGGLES OF the Revolutionary War were over; the colonists victorious. Again men looked westward. Soldiers returning from campaigns in the western counties of Virginia and North Carolina gave glowing accounts of those areas.1 There lay the opportunities—fertile lands rich with virgin forests, fed by numerous springs, and abounding in game—all for a nominal sum and for the taking. In this new environment a man of perseverance and courage could start anew, provide fully for his family, and possibly become wealthy. Only the Indian stood in his path. Consequently, with peace restored and such inducements apparent, a great migration began. Adventurous Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, thrifty German farmers and mechanics, discharged soldiers, land speculators, merchants, hunters, and fur traders pressed eagerly down the great valley of Virginia or across the Blue Ridge Mountains to the Watauga and Holston settlements, then onward to the unexploited wilderness.2 Some traveled north over the Wilderness Trail through

1 J. G. M. Ramsey, The Annals of Tennessee, pp. 170, 175-176; Theodore Roosevelt, The Winning of the West, III, 4-6. 2 Roosevelt, Winning of the West, III, 4-6; Frederick Jackson Turner, "Western State-Making in the Revolutionary Era," American Historical Review, I (1895), 72-74; Thomas Perkins Abernethy, From Frontier to Plantation in Tennessee, p. 146.

Procter_5127.pdf 17

5/24/2014 7:44:39 AM

4

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Cumberland Gap to the "dark and bloody ground" of Kentucky; others journeyed west to James Robertson's settlement on the Cumberland Plateau; while still others dared settle on Cherokee lands south of the French Broad River which only a few years previous the Indians had boasted "the white man would never cross."3 Among those that chose the rolling valleys of the Cherokee in the shadow of the Great Smokies was an Irishman, Timothy Reagan,4 a wounded veteran of the Battle of Brandywine. Traveling from Pennsylvania, he had slowly made his way to the western settlements, stopping en route in Virginia and North Carolina.5 In 1783, after John Sevier's forays had ravaged Cherokee towns,6 Reagan and a small band of settlers, taking advantage of the temporary lull in hostilities, occupied the fertile lands along the streams south of the French Broad River. There, in future Sevier County, Tennessee, they constructed a stockade, Lawson's Fort,7 the frontiersman's rallying point against Indian attack, and by 1784 had built cabins, and were clearing their fields and raising families.8 Trouble was in the offing, however. The Cherokee did not look kindly on the land-hungry backwoodsman who gobbled up his land, took his hunting grounds, and routed him in battle. The smouldering hatred accumulating from years of conflict was rekindled by any violation against him, and in 1784, after the intruders had killed a high Cherokee emissary who had warned them to leave,9 bloody Indian onslaughts began. During the next decade numerous massacres and retaliations oc3

Ramsey, Annals, p. 166. John H. Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, written at Fort Warren, Boston Harbor, while Reagan was held as a prisoner there; hereafter cited as Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. The letter is in the possession of Reagan Ferguson of Palestine, Texas. John H. Reagan, Memoirs, p. 23; also Reagan to W . M. Sweeny in W. B. Lenoir, History of Sweetwater Valley, pp. 306-307. 5 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. In the Virginia Census of 1790, p. 41, in manuscript material loaned to B. P. by Joe A. Sharp, local historian of Sevier County, Tennessee, the name of Timothy Reagan appears on the Tax Lists of Pittsylvania County, Virginia, in 1782, Five persons were listed in the family. In 1785, his name did not appear on the Lists. 6 Ramsey, Annals, pp. 268-270; John Haywood, The Civil and Political History of the State of Tennessee, p. 119. 7 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 23. Joe Sharp believes that Lawson's Fort was on Middle Creek, approximately four miles from Sevierville, Tennessee. 8 Ramsey, Annals, pp. 280-281; Haywood, History of Tennessee, p. 206. 9 Roosevelt, Winning of the West, III, 39-40. 4

Procter_5127.pdf 18

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

HERITAGE

5

curred. Treaties were signed10 soon to be broken, and even the newlyerected state of Franklin,11 organizing the frontier lands and its inhabitants under the leadership of the indomitable Sevier, could not subdue the Indians. Finally, in 1794, brilliant raids by the Tennesseans devastated the Cherokee nation and the next year the Indians sought and secured a peace treaty.12 But what of the Irishman, Timothy Reagan, and his compatriots? How had they fared during this bloody decade? Of course, being the "cutting edge" of the frontier and the furthermost encroachers on the Cherokee lands, they bore the brunt of the Indian forays.13 But Timothy, remaining unharmed and undaunted, stood his ground, and, while protecting his home and fields, helped offset the depopulating effect of frequent Cherokee incursions by siring ten sons and a daughter.14 In fact, his son, Richard Reagan, and Nancy Rogers, whose births occurred on the same day in 1784, were the first white children born in that area.15 "Of medium stature and appearance,"16 Richard Reagan, having survived the rigors and perils of growing up on the frontier, prospered upon leaving his father's protective care. As early as 1795 Sevier County was no longer a wilderness or even a first line of defense against the Indians. Over 3,500 people had settled within its confines,17 and civilization had moved in with all its accompanying necessities and demands. Consequently, when he reached manhood, having ™Ibid., Ill, 165-166; IV, 121-122; Ramsey, Annals, pp. 336-337; Haywood, History of Tennessee, pp. 164-165. 1 1 Ramsey, Annals, chapter IV, gives documentary material of the rise and fall of the state of Franklin. Also see Turner, "Western State-Making in the Revolutionary Era," loc. tit., I (1895), 257-261. 12 Roosevelt, Winning of the West, IV, 164-165; Haywood, History of Tennessee, pp. 466-468. 13 Haywood, History of Tennessee, pp. 281, 293, 297, 301, 304, 311, 314, 318, 320-321. 14 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 15 Ibid.; Lenoir, Sweetwater Valley, pp. 306-307; Mrs. Penelope J. Allen, Chattanooga, Tennessee, to May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, December 2, 1945. Nancy Rogers married Major James Porter. John H. Reagan could not remember Mrs. Porter's maiden name, but Mrs. Allen located the information in the Rogers' genealogy. 16 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 17 Ramsey, Annals, p. 648. By an act of July 11, 1795, Governor William Blount was authorized to take a census of people within his jurisdiction. On November 28, 1795, he submitted his report. Sevier County listed a total of 3,578 inhabitants including 1,673 free white males, 1,503 free white females, 273 other free persons, and 129 slaves.

Procter_5127.pdf 19

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

6

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

an innate acumen for business, Richard established a mill and blacksmith shop at the base of the Smoky Mountains "where Mill Creek empties into the west fork of Little Pigeon River/'18 He married19 there and built a home and in the years that followed was a vigorous leader in the community. Though engaged in successful monetary ventures, Richard never allowed business to be the dominating force in his life. More and more he devoted his time to civic duties, serving as justice of the peace and operating the neighborhood post office. Since the community lacked a church and minister, he performed religious services at his home,20 and, being a devout member of the Methodist Episcopal Church, he and his pious German wife instilled in their three sons and four daughters the concepts and principles of the Christian way of life.21 This training provided a strong foundation for his descendants, for the Reagans were God-fearing people. Richard's first child was a son, Timothy Richard Reagan.22 Upon growing into manhood, he bore a close resemblance to his father, and also manifested the teachings of his Christian home, but unfortunately Timothy Richard neither inherited nor acquired his father's business ability. Although an accomplished tanner, blacksmith, silversmith, locksmith, and jack-of-all-trades,23 he never seemed to accumulate enough capital to provide sufficiently for the needs of himself and his family.24 In 1817, Timothy Richard married Elizabeth Lusk.25 Her family, of Welch and English origin, had migrated to North Carolina long be18 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. On September 30, 1808, Richard Reagan also received a grant of 21 acres located south of the French Broad River on the east fork of Little Pigeon River. See East Tennessee Land Grants, Vol. I, p. 355. 19 Richard's wife was Barbara Shultz, the daughter of a German surgeon who served in the Revolutionary War. 20 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Francis Asbury, Journal of Rev. Francis Asbury, II, 479- Bishop Asbury first visited Knoxville on November 1, 1800. His visits to Tennessee, as well as those of other itinerant ministers, were most infrequent as the three volumes of his Journals will attest. 21 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 22 Ibid. ™lbid. 2i Ibid. In an I.O.U., dated July 11, 1835, in possession of Joe A. Sharp, Sevierville, Tennessee. "T. R. Reagan promised to pay George McCown," the local merchant, on the following day $3.85 "for value received." In July, 1837, the debt was still partially unpaid even though Reagan had worked two days for McCown at the wage of 75£ a day. 25 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; also unpublished data in possession of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas.

Procter_5127.pdf 20

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

HERITAGE

7

fore the Revolutionary War and they, like the Reagans, had embraced the teachings of Wesley, Whitfield, and Asbury. In this religious environment Timothy Richard and Elizabeth Reagan, although poor and frequently in want, raised five sons and a daughter26 and inculcated in them strength of character and attitudes of integrity. On October 8, 1818, their first son, John Henninger Reagan, was born.27 Such was his heritage. 26 The children were John Henninger, Richard B., William Regin, Morris, Joseph Daniel (or Dickerson), and Sarah. 27 Family Bible in possession of Jefferson Davis Reagan, Jr., Beaumont, Texas; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865.

Procter_5127.pdf 21

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

C H A P T E R

I I

Early Life

N

^ ^ A M E D IN HONOR OF the Holston preacher, John Henninger,1 Reagan grew up in an atmosphere that his appellation suggested. He long remembered "his mother's tenderness and devotion" and his father's "earnest desire to promote th[e]ir welfare/'2 But poverty and toil were their lot, and so the good things of life his parents could give John H. were in the main spiritual. To teach him to "love and serve God . . . to deal uprightly with all mankind"3 was their ultimate goal. While still very young, John H. was allowed his freedom. He roamed the forests and fields, the hills and plains and winding valleys in the shadow of the towering Great Smokies; fished and swam in the crystal clear streams and the lazy rolling rivers; chased the fox and deer; vied with his companions in boyhood games; and lived a primitive and exciting life.4 These were happy and carefree days that all too soon would end, for in a poor family the oldest prematurely shoulders responsibilities and helps carry the burden. Such was the fate of1 John H. Reagan. He worked with his father at the tannery and, at R . N. Price, Holston Methodism, IV, 167. Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. *lbid. *lbid. 2

Procter_5127.pdf 22

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

9

EARLY LIFE

times, on the farm,3 and the lighthearted notions of youth quickly vanished as tasks increased and responsibilities grew. Drudgery and poverty pressed down on young Reagan and he found the results of his hard work singularly unsatisfying. Surely there must be a way to escape. Books and schooling—that was the solution. His father had already exposed him to the rudiments of education by teaching him to spell, read, and write. After learning these essentials, he proceeded to study mathematics, English grammar, and geography at Nancy Academy, where he "made considerable progress."6 But reading fascinated him most. The poetry of Milton and Pollock, the biographies of great men, the histories of the American Revolution and its participants7 were foremost among the subjects that enlivened his interests. With each succeeding Fourth of July, the Revolutionary veterans, celebrating at the local tavern in Sevierville, increased his thirst for knowledge, as he eagerly absorbed the details of their stories, told and retold, of the historic past.8 Although he could not "remember when he did not love books, and desire more knowledge and virtue than he possessed; and . . . hope for an improvement of his condition,"9 one underlying fear goaded his mental inquisitiveness: what if he, by chance, should add "dishonor and disgrace to poverty and toil"?10 That would be an unpardonable sin. His solution to this terrifying question was acquiring education and adhering strictly to the religious instruction given him by his parents. In 1831, disaster befell the Reagan family. Timothy Richard Reagan extended his several businesses beyond their operating means, and unable to cope with the situation, became heavily debt-ridden. Then his wife, Elizabeth, died in childbirth.11 Faced with the responsibilities of 5

Ibid.; Journal and Tribune (Knoxville, Tennessee), August 17, 1900. In East Tennessee Land Grants, Vol. I, p. 355, Richard Reagan received 25 acres in 1808, and in Vol. II, p. 400, on May 22, 1810, Timothy Reagan acquired 50 acres "on the waters of Middle Creek." This 1810 grant must have been the location of the Reagan farm near Sevierville since John H. Reagan continually refers to the area around Sevierville. 6 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Nancy Academy was in Sevierville. See Reagan, Memoirs, p. 23. 7 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 8 Journal and Tribune (Knoxville, Tennessee), August 22, 1900. Sometimes twenty-five or thirty veterans would meet at Catlett's tavern. 9 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865.

™lbid.

Procter_5127.pdf 23

uibid.

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

10

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

helping to care for his sister and younger brothers and of assisting his father to extract himself from embarrassing obligations, young John H. had to give up temporarily all dreams for self-elevation and advancement. Education was now out of the question. During the day he was needed full time at the farm or tannery, and afterward at home. In this role he was cast for the next three years.12 Upon reaching his sixteenth birthday, John H. was incapable of suppressing his latent ambitions longer. The desire for schooling permeated his being. He realized that his father could never give him an education; so only one course lay open. He must leave home "to procure it by his own exertions." 13 Fearing that his boy might "fall into bad company*' when independent of parental discipline and advice, Timothy Reagan strenuously objected to the separation,14 but when a respected farmer, Major John Walker, agreed to hire his son, Timothy acquiesced.15 At the close of 1834, "throbbing with hopes of a destiny apparently so far beyond his reach," 16 John H. Reagan left home never again to enjoy its associations, privi^ges, and protections. The employment at Major Walker's was only a means to an end. At Boyd's Creek Academy, ten or twelve miles distant, resided a fine teacher, Andrew Lanning. 17 Here was an outstanding opportunity for instruction. So, for the next eleven months, John H . labored. The pay was small—only nine dollars a month—but this he saved, except for the purchase of an occasional item of clothing. 18 By the fall term of 1835, Reagan had accumulated sufficient funds for books and tuition, and was preparing for school, but one all-important problem still remained. How would he provide for his board? Willis Franklin, operating a farm and extensive flour mills and sawmills for a wealt'iy planter, John Brabson, quickly solved the dilemma. 12

Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 23, 24. Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 23, 24; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 14 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. John H. Reagan stated that "his father's great solicitude on this subject strengthened his resolve that he [Timothy] s[h]ould not be brought to sorrow by his son's bad conduct." 15 Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24. Major Walker lived three miles from Sevierville and five or six miles from Timothy Reagan. 16 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 13

Ulbid.

18 Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24, states that his salary was payable in corn. Since those were inflationary times, Reagan actually received only 25$ a bushel for his rn. His salary, therefore, was approximately $7 instead of $9.

Procter_5127.pdf 24

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

EARLY LIFE

11

Would John H. work "mornings and evenings and Saturdays for his board"?19 The answer was apparent. Except for a short enlistment in the cavalry for a "summer frolick" against the Indians in southern Georgia, Alabama, and Florida,20 Reagan pursued his studies at Boyd's Creek Academy for almost fifteen months. When not in class, he could be seen "chopping and hauling wood, cutting it up for fires, and working on the farm or about the mills," and, at night, using a pine knot to read by, huddled over his books.21 Time passed quickly; life was pleasant at the Academy and John H. formed many agreeable friendships and made rapid progress in his studies. Even his work indicated success, for now instead of performing physical tasks with the axe and hoe as he had previously done, he was keeping the books and records for the various Brabson mills.22 But this ideal arrangement soon ended. In the late fall of 1836, his friend and employer, Willis Franklin, died and with him perished Reagan's livelihood. Without means of subsistence, he was forced to leave the Academy.23 Now plans for a higher education would have to be reinaugurated— a new job secured and money saved. Fortunately a merchant, William Randals, needed someone to assist his son, Samuel, in taking "a flat boat load of produce and furniture down the Tennessee, to North Alabama and there selling it."24 In young Reagan, he found a ready recruit. Gainful employment and a chance to see another part of the country were ample inducements for him. In the days that followed the boys traveled as far as Decatur, Alabama, and there sold their wares.25 The journey was most revealing as 19 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24; Journal and Tribune (Knoxville, Tennessee), August 22, 1900; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 20 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Volunteers assembled at Athens, Tennessee, in the summer of 1836. Since there were more men than asked for or needed companies drew lots for service. Reagan and his companions were "unlucky" and returned home. 21 Ibid. Pine knots were plentiful; consequently, he saved the expense of buying candles. 22 Ibid. 2 3 Ibid. 24: Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24, states that it was John Brabson who employed him. 25 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. The boys earlier sold a portion of their goods at Gunter's Landing.

Procter_5127.pdf 25

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

12

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

well as remunerative. John H. had never before ventured outside the valley of his birth. He saw for the first time a steamboat slowly plying its way from Decatur to Knoxville, and also a "railroad and locomotive and cars."26 Such inventions were almost incomprehensible and he could hardly foresee the effect that one of these modes of transportation would one day have upon his life. While in Decatur he was approached by a Mr. Bishop concerning a partnership in a liquor and retail grocery business. Bishop would supply the capital; Reagan, the management; and the two would divide the profits equally. Though the financial prospects appeared bright, John H. rejected the proposal; the ideals formed by a Christian home and also those fears27 which had first driven him to strive for an education forbade it. "He declined engaging in it," he later reminisced, "from the conviction that such a connection with a drinking establishment would be demoralizing and debasing."28 Returning home, he found John Brabson waiting for him. No one had run his mills since Franklin's death, and because of Reagan's previous knowledge of the business, Brabson asked him to take the job.29 John H. quickly accepted. This was the chance he had hoped for. The employment was laden with responsibility, but he knew it would provide an opportunity for further education. There was money in the milling business, especially during a good year. So through the winter and spring of 1837 he worked, and then far into the summer. Finally the flour-milling season came to a close and with its demise, Reagan's employment ended.30 But the job had served its purpose. It was September, and only fifteen miles distant, school bells were ringing at Southwestern Seminary in Maryville.31 In school again—how Reagan rejoiced! He hungered for education and the days were never long enough,32 for the curriculum at Mary26 Ibid. See page 9 and footnote 10 of this chapter. 28 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24, referring to this business proposition, states that it occurred on a second trip to Decatur. Since the Memoirs was written after 1900 and edited in 1906, some forty-one years had elapsed since the Reagan Letter. In comparison, Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, is much more informative and more accurate. 29 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 30 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 31 Ibid. The school is now known as Maryville College and is located in Maryville, Blount County, Tennessee. 32 Ibid. His health was undermined from lack of sleep and rest. 27

Procter_5127.pdf 26

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

EARLY LIFE

13

ville stimulated him even beyond his expectations. He studied not only arithmetic, geography, English grammar, and natural philosophy,33 but algebra, Latin grammar, moral philosophy, logic, and rhetoric as well.34 A heavy schedule indeed. But it was not enough to satiate his appetite for knowledge, for he was fascinated by logic and rhetoric. Books on the subjects were not sufficient, and so his joining a literary society "formed for the improvement of its members in writing and speaking"35 was a natural development. Meeting every Friday afternoon, the students read and criticized original compositions and debated selected topics, conforming always "to the rules of logic and rhetoric."36 In this atmosphere, Reagan formulated the basic principles of logic as his future guide, and shaped and polished his writing and oratory, so important in his later endeavors. To this society he was "indebted greatly."37 The months passed all too swiftly. With summer, monetary difficulties again arose to plague him. None knew better than Reagan what this meant, for had he not been faced with this very problem all his life? If he was to continue his education, he must leave school, find a job, and begin the process of work and frugality all over again. Gloomily, he lamented the prospects.38 Seeing Reagan's plight, a number of his classmates suggested that he go out-of-state to "engage in teaching or some other business," where the compensation would be greater.39 This he decided to do, and for this purpose he provided himself with letters of recommendation from the faculty at Maryville and from his fellow students.40 Leaving school, John H. visited his father, brothers, and little sister for a few days and then sought temporary employment with his old 33 Ibid. Reagan "studied with care the grammars of Murray, Kirkhaus, Adams, and Smith." 3 * Ibid. 35 Ibid. 36 Ibid. As to the procedure of these meetings, Reagan recalled that two members were required to read original compositions; two, to criticize; four, to debate a question previously selected; and two, to criticize the compositions and speeches as to language, manner, and style.

*?lbid.

38 Peter L. Thompson to Reagan, August 18, 1838, in John H. Reagan Papers, Microfilm. The Reagan Papers will hereafter be cited as R. P. 3 9 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. *°Ibid.; letter of recommendation by Augustus M. Foute to his father Colonel Jacob F. Foute, in Maryville College vault, Maryville, Tennessee; also in R. P., Microfilm.

Procter_5127.pdf 27

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

14

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

friend, Major Walker, now residing at Fair Garden.41 While working there in a country store, Reagan recovered his health, so greatly neglected while at Maryville, and waited for boats to "begin to run."42 With each succeeding day, the thought of departure became less alluring, for he had fallen in love with Major Walker's young daughter.43 But John Brabson needed men to take flatboats laden with goods to Decatur, and Reagan accepted the job. On November 13, 1838,44 John H. Reagan sailed away from the valley of his birth and sought his fortune in a land where he had no "known friends or relatives."45 He could not realize that he would never see his family and sweetheart again, or that it would be sixty-two years before he would again gaze upon his beloved Smokies. 41

Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24, states that he was bookkeeper and salesman. 42 Thompson to Reagan, August 18, 1838, in R. P., Microfilm. 43 In Reagan to his father, Timothy R. Reagan, January 6, 1842, in R. P., Microfilm, he asked if Malvina Walker was still unmarried. From Timothy R. Reagan to his son, March 27, 1842, in R. P., Microfilm, John H. learned that "Malvina is Single." 44 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 45 Thompson to Reagan, August 18, 1838, in R. P., Microfilm.

Procter_5127.pdf 28

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

C H A P T E R

I I I

Arrival in Texas and the Cherokee War

J L N THE WEST lay opportunity. Like a giant magnet it lured men onward toward the romantic unknown—farmers searching for free lands; miners, trappers, and lumbermen seeking to tap the natural resources of a vast, new country; businessmen and merchants following the rich avenues of trade; Scotch-Irish longing for excitement; land speculators eying rich Indian tracts; young men and old, leaving their wives, sweethearts, and loved ones to gain a fortune. The West beckoned to them all, for on the distant horizon always were new beginnings, untold wealth, fame, and adventure. By the 1830's the frontier had crossed the Mississippi. Already Missouri, Louisiana, and Arkansas were states, and settlers were flocking into adjacent territories. But now new barriers arose to block their progress. The "Great American Desert,'' treeless and waterless, stretched unlimited before them, and its inhabitants, the Plains Indians, were awaiting defiantly any who dared trespass. So along the Mississippi the migrants thronged. The Panic of 1837 increased their numbers and added to their woes. Depression and confusion gripped the country. Grimly the people looked at the bleak future and longed for deliverance. To many this deliverance seemed to lie in a journey westward to South Pass and then along the Oregon

Procter_5127.pdf 29

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

16

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

and California trails, while others turned toward Texas, which their countrymen only a few years previously had wrested from Mexico. Restless, ambitious, proud—men who wore their honor "on their sleeve'' and were "spoiling" for a fight; who feared neither "heathen Indian" nor foreign nation, and who arrogantly reveled in the power of the United States—these were the pioneers that conquered the West and made "Manifest Destiny" a reality. Into this turbulent and violent society along the Mississippi went John H. Reagan. After disposing of John Brabson's produce at Decatur,1 he made his way by train2 and stagecoach to Memphis and then by steamboat to Vicksburg and Natchez. Sick and almost penniless he sought a clerk's position in these depression-ridden towns but found none.3 Two years of economic prostration had placed a blight over the lower Mississippi Valley. Money was scarce and employment at a minimum. With prospects so bleak, what chance did an eighteen-year-old boy have, hundreds of miles from home, friendless, jobless, and in poor health? One possibility remained. A merchant, while refusing him a position, had mentioned that a Mrs. Perkins, who lived five or six miles from Natchez, might hire a private tutor. As Reagan set out on foot to find her, he realized the seriousness of his plight, and in utter dejection, "he sank down by the road side . . . and wept in the bitterness of his despair."4 His despondency soon vanished, however, for by the next day he had two offers of employment. Mrs. Perkins agreed to hire him as a teacher upon approval of her neighbor, Dempsey P. Jackson,5 who, in turn, asked John H. to manage his plantation. The higher salary6 was the deciding factor. Jackson had himself a new overseer. During the next few months Reagan directed Jackson's estate. He 1 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Besides his regular pay, Reagan received $25 from Thomas C. Brabson, John Brabson's son, as a parting gift. 2 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24, he states that from Decatur to Tuscumbia, Alabama, was his first train ride. 3 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Reagan reached Natchez "in the latter part of December [1838] or early in January [1839}." His physical condition prevented him from "earning wages by manual labor." 4 Ibid. The quote is also paraphrased in Reagan, Memoirs, p. 24-25. 6 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 25; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Reagan states that the late Governor Jackson of Missouri was Dempsey P. Jackson's brother. 6 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 26, Reagan's salary was $500 for the remainder of the year.

Procter_5127.pdf 30

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

ARRIVAL IN TEXAS AND CHEROKEE WAR

17

acquired a knowledge of the culture of cotton and the general management of a plantation, but upon differing with his employer over the treatment of slaves,7 he resigned, and in May, 1839, left for Alexandria, Louisiana, to see a wealthy family friend, General Isaac Thomas. But Reagan never reached his proposed destination. The lure of the West swept him up in its movement. As he sailed toward Alexandria, fellow passengers urged him to go with them to a new land of opportunity, and a Nacogdoches merchant offered him a lucrative position.8 Like his fellow countrymen before him, Crockett and Houston, the young Tennessean was beckoned by the vast, untamed plains of Texas. Besides, he had added incentive, for a good job awaited him. So past Alexandria and up the Red River he sailed, thence overland to Natchitoches and finally to Myrick's Ferry on the Sabine River.9 On May 29, 1839, with only "a ten dollar bill, of the union bank of Mississippi, then worth but fifty cents on the dollar,"10 Reagan crossed over into a strange, wild country, sparsely settled, annually plagued by Mexican incursions, and "menaced by the marauding bands of the numerous Indian tribes on its borders."11 Within a few days he would have retraced his steps had not Richard M. Burton,12 a veteran of the Battle of San Jacinto and a state senator, befriended him. Reagan's employer had proved unreliable and consequently the job awaiting him in Nacogdoches failed to materialize. Burton, having experienced similar misfortunes earlier in life, took charge of Reagan and sent him to the home of his father-in-law, Martin Lacy,13 the Indian agent to the Cherokee nation. Thus traveling 7

Ibid. Reagan says "the men complained of not having enough meat." He mentioned this grievance to Jackson who ignored it. 8 Ibid. According to the Memoirs the merchant, Colonel Jeremiah Strode, offered Reagan $800 a year. In Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, the figure is $1,000. 9 In Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, Reagan gives a good account of this trip. Below Alexandria, a tornado partially wrecked the steamboat on which he was traveling. He describes the passengers' actions during this storm and the courage of a young girl named Allen who, with him, calmed the terrified women and children. William S. Speer and John Henry Brown (eds.), The Encyclopedia of the New West, p. 565, gives a personal recollection of the steamboat wreck which states that "the boiler exploded and many were blown into the river." Reagan helped rescue the passengers. 10 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 27. 11 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. ™lbid. 13 Mirabeau B. Lamar to Martin Lacy, February 14, 1839, Indian Papers, 1836-1841; War Department to Lacy, February 14, 1839, in Harriet Smither (ed.), Journals of the Fourth Congress of the Republic of Texas, III, 102-103.

Procter_5127.pdf 31

5/24/2014 7:44:40 AM

18

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

west, the discouraged young Tennessean trudged thirty miles from Nacogdoches into the wilderness to find a haven at Fort Lacy. Almost immediately he became involved in an Indian war. For several years the Cherokees of East Texas had been suspected of "leaguing with other Indians and Mexicans" against the "peace and safety" of the Texans,14 and repeated massacres and pillagings had aggravated the situation.15 Only the power and influence of President Sam Houston had prevented unrestricted warfare, but on December 10, 1838, with his term of office ended and with the inauguration of his archrival, Mirabeau B. Lamar,16 the protective aegis for the Cherokees was removed. Lamar, whose "purpose was to put Sam Houston on the political scrap heap,"17 quickly altered the government's Indian policy. His experiences with the red man had been far different from those of Houston, and so he saw no hope for a peaceful settlement. Expulsion or extermination was the only solution.18 In his first message to Congress, he stated that the Cherokees had no legal or equitable claim to Texas land19 and if they should "persist in their extravagant demands, and resolve on war, then let them feel that there are terrors also in the enmity of the white man, and that the blood of our wives and children cannot be shed without righteous retribution."20 To carry out his program, Lamar needed time, for money had to be 14

Lamar to Colonel Bowl[es] and other Head Men, May 26, 1839, in Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar, The Papers of Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar, II, 591; hereafter cited as Lamar Papers. 15 A. Sidney Johnston, Secretary of War, "Report to the President of the Republic of Texas," in Smither (ed.), Fourth Congress, III, 77; hereafter cited as Johnston Report. Henderson Yoakum, History of Texas from Its First Settlement in 1685 to Its Annexation to the United States in 1846, II, 267; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 30. 16 See Herbert Pickens Gambrell, Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar, and Asa Kyrus Christian, Mirabeau Buonaparte Lamar, concerning Lamar's struggle with Sam Houston. 17 Gambrell, M. B. Lamar, p. x. 18 Lamar to Colonel Bowl[es] and other Head Men, May 26, 1839, in Lamar Papers, II, 590-594; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 280-281. Christian, M. B. Lamar, pp. 72 fT., and Anna Muckleroy, "The Indian Policy of the Republic of Texas," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XXVI (1922), 128-134, give good accounts of Lamar's attitude and action toward the Indians. Lamar had previously been private secretary to Governor George M. Troup of Georgia who had mercilessly driven the Creek Indians from their lands. Houston, on the other hand, had lived with the Indians and was the adopted son of the Cherokee chief, Ooloteka. 19 Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 264. Lamar took this position in his message of December 21, 1838. 20 Gambrell, M. B. Lamar, p. 239.

Procter_5127.pdf 32

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

ARRIVAL IN TEXAS AND CHEROKEE WAR

19

appropriated and troops raised.21 Then, let the Cherokees make one misstep. Possessed with an adequate excuse, Texas would be ready to act forcefully. Lamar desired a peaceful expulsion if possible, but there was little chance of this. The Cherokees had emigrated to East Texas during the winter of 1819-1820,22 several years before white settlers arrived. It was not likely that they would give up their lands without a fight. Therefore, Lamar appointed Martin Lacy as Indian agent "to preserve friendly relations" and, at the same time, to watch for hostile movements.23 In keeping with this project, he also ordered Major B. C. Waters with two companies to proceed to the Grand Saline on the Neches River, where he was to build a fort and prevent all intercourse between the Cherokees and Indian tribes hostile to the Texans.24 In the spring of 1839, his plans completed, Lamar looked for the anticipated blunder. He had not long to wait. The Cherokees intercepted Major Waters as he approached the Neches, and their sachem, Chief Bowles, instructed him to retreat at once or fight. Waters had little choice. Badly outnumbered he withdrew.25 With this incident as an excuse, Lamar could have marched on the Indians, but he desired a stronger case. The Texas treasury showed a deficit,26 and an expensive military campaign would produce violent criticism, especially from Houston. Therefore, biding his time, he awaited further incriminating evidence. Subsequent events rewarded his delay. During 1838 Vicente Cordova had mingled among the Mexicans and Indians of East Texas urging rebellion. Plotting to assist an invading army when it marched across the Rio Grande, he schemed with Mexican authorities to harass the Texans continually.27 His plans proved abortive, because on March 21

Christian, M. B. Lamar, pp. 73-74. E. W. Winkler, "The Cherokee Indians in Texas," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, VII (1903), 96. 23 Lamar to Lacy, February 14, 1839, Indian Papers, 1836-1841. 24 Johnston Report, III, 77; Christian, M. B. Lamar, p. 96; Muckleroy, "The Indian Policy of Texas," loc. cit., XXVI (1922), 135. Waters' name is sometimes written as Walters. 25 Johnston Report, III, 77; Christian, M. B. Lamar, p. 96. This incident took place in April or early in May. 26 Edmund Thornton Miller, A Financial History of Texas, pp. 59-82, 391-393; Christian, M. B. Lamar, pp. 25-41. 27 Christian, M. B. Lamar, p. 95; J. W. Wilbarger, Indian Depredations in Texas, pp. 151-157; Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 257-259. 22

Procter_5127.pdf 33

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

20

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

26, 1839, a Texan expedition routed his motley band and severely wounded him.28 There was no proof that the Cherokees had conspired with Cordova. Yet Lamar was convinced that they had, and was "not deceived," he informed Bowles, as "recent developments went to show that the Cherokees, or a part of them . . . had entered into a compact with Cordova to carry on war/' 29 Lamar needed some concrete evidence, however, on which to base his charges. Then he could act with assurance. Texans might not think it necessary to discipline the Cherokees for their rashness against Waters—after all, the Cherokees were in Texas first—but they would mobilize immediately if the Indians collaborated with the Mexicans to take away their freedom. On May 14, 1839, Lamar obtained confirmation of his suspicions. En route to East Texas, a coconspirator of Cordova, Manuel Flores, ran afoul of a Texas force on the San Gabriel River. In a running fight Flores was killed and on his body papers were found incriminating Bowles and linking him with Cordova.30 With such data before him, Lamar set in motion his expulsion program. Writing Chief Bowles, he enumerated the grievous sins of the Cherokees against the Texans; vowed that the Indians would never have legal title to their lands; and prophesied that they would eventually be forced to sell out and leave the country. "Would it not be wise/' he continued, "to say . . . the red man and the white man cannot dwell together? let us separate, not in wrath, but in friendship." But let there be no doubt that your "final removal... is certain," he concluded, "and that it will be affected [JVV]." Your only choice is "whether it be done by friendly negotiation, or by the violence of war."31 This was the situation as it stood at the end of May, 1839, when 28 Christian, M. B. Lamar, p. 95; Wilbarger, Indian Depredations, pp. 155-157; Johnston to the Bowl[es], April 10, 1839, in Lamar Papers, II, 522-523. 29 Johnston to the Bowl[es], April 10, 1839, in Lamar Papers, II, 522-523. 30 Report of Colonel Edward Burleson to Johnston, Secretary of War, in Smither (ed.), Fourth Congress, III, 113-114; hereafter cited as Burleson Report. Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 257-260. Wilbarger, Indian Depredations, pp. 166-167, in his summation of Flores' defeat and death, says, "the fight on the San Gabriel was second only in importance to the battle of San Jacinto." Walter Prescott Webb, Texas Rangers, p. 53, and Yoakum, History of Texas, II, p. 268, argue that Bowles and the Cherokees were innocent victims of circumstance. Also see Dorman H. Winfrey, "Chief Bowles of the Texas Cherokees," Chronicles of Oklahoma, X X X I I (1954), 36-37. 31 Lamar to Colonel Bowl[es] and other Head Men, May 26, 1839, Lamar Papers, II, 590-594.

Procter_5127.pdf 34

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

ARRIVAL IN TEXAS AND CHEROKEE WAR

21

Reagan entered Texas and journeyed to Fort Lacy. It did not take him long to ascertain the explosive circumstances surrounding him, especially since Chief Bowles lived but four miles distant.32 Already Lamar's thinly-veiled ultimatum to the Cherokees had arrived at the fort and awaited delivery. And, of course, this would be done as soon as Martin Lacy could gain an audience with the Cherokee chief. Reagan welcomed the ominous future.33 An Indian war was surely in the offing. What could be more thrilling to a young man, unemployed and craving adventure, than a military campaign? Besides, only two years before, a similar episode had eluded him,34 and he was determined it would not again. Consequently, when Lacy went to meet Chief Bowles, Reagan was by his side, along with Dr. W. G. W. Jowers and an interpreter, Cordray.35 Entering the Cherokee territory, they proceeded to Bowies' house where before them, "bare headed and bare legged, and . . . much tanned by the sun" appeared the chief of the Cherokees. Much had been said of Bowles. Reagan had heard that he was a white man captured as an infant by Cherokees in Georgia and raised among them. John H. could readily see that the man before him, although in Indian garb and unable to speak English, "was evidently not a full-blooded indian [JVV], if he was an indian at all." Even at the age of eighty, he was well-muscled, and as he stood there tall and straight, his every movement was dignified and commanded respect.36 Bowles led them to a spring a short distance from his home and there, seated on fallen trees, they began the interview. While Cordray read and interpreted Lamar's letter,37 Bowles remained solemn and motionless and with its conclusion sat quietly for a few minutes. Then 32 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 29-36; and John H. Reagan, "The Expulsion of the Cherokees from East Texas," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, I (1897), 38-46, give similar accounts, and the material is obviously derived from the 1865 letter. 33 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 34 In the summer of 1837, Reagan volunteered in Tennessee for service against the Indians. See Chapter II. 35 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 30. In the letter the guide's name was Cordra. 36 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 30. For further information on Bowles see Winfrey, "Chief Bowles of the Texas Cherokees," loc. cit., XXXII (1954), 36-37, and Albert Woldert, "The Last of the Cherokees and the Life and Death of Chief Bowles," Chronicles of Oklahoma, I (1923), 179-226. 37 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Lacy could not read. His writing consisted of mechanically signing his name.

Procter_5127.pdf 35

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

22

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

he spoke. The Cherokees had come to Texas after being driven from their lands. Here they had resided and prospered under Mexican authority, and "the Texas government had given its consent" for them to remain. "It had been his objective to observe good faith both towards the Mexicans and Texians," and violations against the whites, he explained, were committed by other Indians and "attributed to his people." In conclusion, he promised to "call a council of his head men and lay the matter before them, and then give an answer," but he had "little hope of averting war," especially since "his young men and warriors believed they could whip the Texians." Then as if reproaching himself for lack of foresight, he told them of corresponding with John Ross, chief of the Cherokees west of Arkansas, and of their inadequate plans for moving to California.38 On this depressing note, the conference ended, but with an agreement to meet again soon.39 Ten days elapsed before Bowles sent for them, and as the meeting began, "it was apparent that the Chief had not been encouraged to peace by his council."40 Only he and Big Mush were against war,41 he said, and "his people would no[t} except [J;V] the terms proposed." Fatalistically he felt he would soon die either in the ensuing conflict or, if he refused to fight, at the hands of his own warriors. But it was of little consequence, for he "was an old man, and had not much longer to live at best." His chief concern was for his family and tribe, and consequently he asked that "hostilities might be suspended until his people could gather their growing crops; suggesting that by that time some amicable arrangement might be made."42 Lacy, however, could not grant his requests without written authority. Therefore, negotiations ended and preparations for war began.43 Lamar had prepared well. Near the end of June over three hundred 38 Ibid. After the meeting Reagan was so impressed by Chief Bowles that he "could not but feel anxious that war might be avoided." In Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 30-32, he confuses the two interviews and sometimes transfers the conversations of the first session to the second. 39 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 30. However, in Reagan, "Expulsion of the Cherokees," loc. cit., I (1897), 41, they agreed to meet within a week to ten days. 40 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 41 Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 31. 42 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. This conversation is, in the main, reported in Reagan, Memoirs, p. 32, and Reagan, "Expulsion of the Cherokees," loc. cit., I (1897), 41-42. 43 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865.

Procter_5127.pdf 36

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

ARRIVAL IN TEXAS AND CHEROKEE WAR

23

cavalry44 moved to the east of the Neches River and established Camp Johnston.45 Here, the different commanders were ordered to meet. From Nacogdoches went General Thomas J. Rusk with a regiment of volunteers; from the eastern counties46 marched Colonel William H. Landrum and his recruits; and from the west, Colonel Edward Burleson advanced with his Texas regulars.47 On July 1, Lamar made one last feeble gesture for peace. Appointing commissioners48 to treat with the Indians, he instructed them to offer fair compensation for a peaceful removal. But behind this facade of good intent lay his real purpose. The Texans needed time. Burleson and Landrum had not yet arrived and across the Neches a far superior Cherokee force was reported assembling. Finding himself in a similar situation, Bowles quickly agreed to confer. The Texans had moved too swiftly, for he had been unable to contact some of his allies and to make provision for the safety of Cherokee families and possessions.49 So for the next two weeks while both sides awaited reinforcements, negotiations went forward, with proposals and counterproposals used as a means of delay. Finally, by July 15, all preparations had been completed. Now deceit was no longer necessary. At noon, Chief Bowles sent his son, John, to notify the Texans that ' 'further negotiations were broken off, and . . . he should that day retire behind the Neches river with his force."50 With this message the Cherokee War began. John H. Reagan was among the Texans who readied themselves for battle. It had been over a month since his return to Fort Lacy after Bowles* second interview. As the excitement of an Indian war en44: Ibid. Reagan states that the troops were first assembled and organized into companies and regiments at a Kickapoo town in northeast Anderson County. 46 Ibid. Camp Johnston was named in honor of Secretary of War Albert Sidney Johnston. See Walter Prescott Webb and H. Bailey Carroll (eds.), The Handbook of Texas, II, 265, for approximate location. 46 The recruits were from Harrison, Shelby, Sabine, and San Augustine counties. See Johnston Report, III, 78. 4 ? Ibid. 48 Ibid.; Christian, M. B. Lamar, pp. 98-99; William Preston Johnston, The Life of General Albert Sidney Johnston, pp. 108-110. The commissioners appointed by Lamar were Vice President David G. Burnet, Thomas J. Rusk, I. W. Burton, James S. Mayfield, and Secretary of War Albert Sidney Johnston. 49 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 50 Ibid. On July 14, 1839, Burleson and Landrum with their regiments arrived at Camp Johnston. Undoubtedly their arrival had an effect on the actions of the Texas commissioners and possibly hastened the failure of the negotiations.

Procter_5127.pdf 37

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

24

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

gulfed East Texas, he too was caught up in it and when General Rusk issued a call at Nacogdoches for volunteers, he rushed to enlist. Then a rapid march to Camp Johnston and two weeks of monotonous routine—the old army game of "hurry up and wait"—whetted his desire for combat.51 At last, they were moving out. While Landrum circled to the northwest to intercept the Cherokees if they turned in that direction, Burleson and Rusk advanced westward across the Neches River. Swiftly they passed through the encampment Bowles had left that morning and then onward under the blazing July sun. One mile, two miles, and then six they went forward seeking their quarry. Soon it would be dark and the night could conceivably reverse their positions. The hunters might become the hunted. But as they approached a small creek their search ended. There, strongly entrenched, the Cherokees waited. Surveying the Indian position, the Texans could see why Bowles had decided to make his stand there. The Cherokees had fortified themselves behind a high creek bank. In back of them dense woods would afford a second line of defense or a safe retreat while before them lay an open prairie. The only visible protection for the Texans was a thicket of gum bushes to their right which ran parallel to the creek, but there still remained a wide unprotected expanse in front of the Indian forces. But the Texans were undeterred. As Burleson whirled his regiment to the right to outflank the Cherokees, Rusk ordered a frontal assault. Galloping across the prairie in a straight battle line, they rushed forward to meet the enemy. Soon they would be within firing range. Still closer they went and the enemy firing commenced. Suddenly an Indian "rose up some eighty yards off and discharging his gun . . . retreated to the creek." Seeing him run, Reagan and a companion, David S. Kaufman, wheeled their mounts out of line and gave chase. But the Indian reached the safety of the creek just ahead of them, and his comrades "opened fire . . . at short range." The two Texans had to act quickly. Wheeling their horses about, they sought the protection of the thicket just to their right, but found the dense growth impenetrable. Now trapped between this barrier and the Cherokee line of battle, they had no choice but "to run the gauntlet of their fire." So forward they rode not knowing how far ^ibid.

Procter_5127.pdf 38

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

ARRIVAL IN TEXAS AND CHEROKEE WAR

25

the thicket extended. As the "fire of the clear cracking indian [J/V] rifles rose all the way along opposite them," they spurred their mounts to greater efforts. Miraculously they made it to the open prairie unscathed. At this juncture Reagan and Kaufman met part of their regiment 52 advancing on the enemy. The fire was withering and one man 53 fell mortally wounded. Another, Colonel John Crane, reined up his horse a moment and Reagan yelled, "Colonel, don't stop here!" But it was too late. A shot ripped through his body, and as his horse bolted, he slumped and fell to the ground. It was now wise to dismount and proceed on foot. Rushing into the creek bed, the Texans swept the Indians before them. Victory was theirs and with darkness approaching further pursuit was futile.54 The army camped near the battleground that night 55 but there was little sleep. Most of the men were sent out to guard the exposed frontier settlements in the path of the Cherokee retreat, while those remaining behind kept a nervous vigil against a surprise attack. At 10 o'clock the next morning, the Texans broke camp and renewed the chase. By 11 o'clock, upon reaching a Delaware village, they received reports from the scouts that the Cherokees were strongly entrenched in a ravine and thicket just a mile ahead. Already contact had been made with the enemy as the cracking of rifle fire indicated. Bowles had thrown out skirmishers almost to the Delaware town and when Burleson and Rusk moved up to sustain the advance guard, the Indians gradually withdrew. The Texans now formed their plan of battle. Burleson on the left, Rusk in the center, and Captain Robert W. Smith and Lieutenant Colo52 Reagan recalls that in the group meeting him were Martin Lacy, Colonel Forbes of Nacogdoches, David Rusk, brother of General Rusk, Captain Robert W . Smith, Reagan's company commander, Captain Coddell and his two sons, Hulen Craine, a Mr. Stoval, and some friendly Tonkawa Indians. 53 The dead man was Dr. Rogers. He was shot three times. 54 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, gives a detailed description of the preparations for war and the battle on July 15, 1839. Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 32-34, also gives some details while the "Report of Gen. K. H. Douglass of the engagement with Cherokees on the 15th July 1839 to A. Sidney Johnston, Secretary of War," in Smither (ed.), Fourth Congress, III, 115-116, is the official communique; this report, both for July 15 th and July 16th, is hereafter cited as Extract from the Douglass Report. Yoakum, History of Texas, II, 268-269, has a brief account. 55 Extract from the Douglass Report, III, 103.

Procter_5127.pdf 39

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

26

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

nel Woodlief on the right 56 would proceed on foot to engage the enemy immediately, while every sixth man would remain behind to hold and guard the horses. In the counting off by sixes Reagan received this inglorious assignment. It was more than he could bear, for to him "such a position would be discreditable . . . if he survived the battle/' Tying his horse, he "advised his comrades to do likewise," for he would not remain behind. Hearing his refusal to obey orders, Reagan's company commander, Captain Smith, threatened him with a court-martial, to which warning he replied, "Captain, that will be after the battle is over." As he stood there glaring and defiant, the tension mounted, but when another soldier57 volunteered to take his place, it quickly disappeared. Now the battle was on. The Texans burned the Delaware village as they left it. Moving forward under the terrific heat of the noonday sun, Reagan used the sparsely scattered trees for protection as best he could. Behind him arose a swirling black cloud of smoke and flame while before him among the gentle slopes and open woods awaited "the fierce work of death." Finally, passing over the top of a ridge, Reagan saw the enemy entrenched in the ravine below. Suddenly, his companion, David Kaufman, reeled and fell. A rifle ball had struck him in the face. Bleeding profusely, he asked for water but there was none. Reagan tried to make him comfortable and after assuring himself that his comrade was not badly hurt, he left him and continued the advance. For almost two hours the battle raged. Time and again the Texans, trying to draw the Cherokees out from their strong position, charged down the open slope toward the ravine and then retreated. But Bowles, holding his men firmly, thwarted their strategy. At last only one course remained—an all-out assault. So down they charged at the Cherokees, shattering their defenses and forcing them to flee.58 Chief Bowles could do no more. Hoping during the battle to in56 Ibid. 57 In Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, Reagan says the man's name was William Nelson. Reagan remarked while in prison in 1865 that "he had long since recognized his error, to which he was prompted by pride and a keen sense of selfrespect, but these can neaver [sic] justify disobedience of orders . . . especially at such time, and might justly have subjected him to a condemnation and punishment." 58 Ibid., gives a personal account of battle as does Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 34-36. Extract from the Douglass Report, III, 103-105, is the official communique of the battle on July 16, 1839.

Procter_5127.pdf 40

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

ARRIVAL IN TEXAS AND CHEROKEE WAR

27

still in his men greater courage through example, he had remained on horseback, exposed to the Texan fire. His mount was shot seven times and he, once in the hip, and when his braves retreated, he too tried to escape. But it was impossible. Without a horse he was limping slowly in the direction his men had gone when he fell, shot in the back. Rolling over, he forced himself up into a sitting position and faced his pursuers. Seeing Bowles fall, Reagan started toward him to accept his surrender, but he was too late. His company commander, Captain Smith, rushed toward the old chief with gun in hand and as Reagan yelled, "Captain, don't shoot him,,, he fired. Chief Bowles fell dead, shot through the head.59 For over a week after this battle, the Texans relentlessly pursued the Cherokees but were unable to overtake them. With their forces scattered and their brave chief dead, the Indians fled from their fertile lands and prosperous homes toward Oklahoma. The Cherokee War was over.60 69 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 34-35. Gambrell, M. B. Lamar, p. 243, says Chief Bowles died by his own hand by plunging his sword through his heart. 60 Extract from the Douglass Report, III, 105-107.

Procter_5127.pdf 41

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

C H A P T E R

I V

Surveying and Survival

JLIMIITIAND—free and limitless—that was the great attraction of the American frontier, and the hardy men and women who pushed forward to claim it were prepared to endure hardships and surmount every obstacle to secure it. In less than a century they had crossed a continent from the "fall line" of the Atlantic coast to the Pacific shores of California and Oregon. Through a wilderness of mountains and rivers, forests and plains, they went, pitting their stamina and ingenuity against the ruggedness of the topography, the severity of the climate, and the ferocity of the savage inhabitants. Many lost the struggle, for the frontier environment was often too strong, but those who survived transplanted their traditions and institutions and left their own peculiar mark on each new area. In Texas during the late 1830's the public domain was the chief commodity around which the whole frontier revolved. The government was heavily in debt and welcomed any fee from the sale of land. Land speculators voraciously sought to buy huge tracts; army veterans clamored for military bounties; immigrants desired rich farm lands; lawyers reaped the benefits of contested boundary claims; and surveyors found themselves swamped with requests for their services. Lamar's Cherokee War greatly accentuated the situation. Indian expulsion removed another barrier to frontier progress and the Cherokee's Trinity River lands "long . . . celebrated for their fertility"1 1

Procter_5127.pdf 42

Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), December 23, 1840; see also Ex-

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

SURVEYING AND SURVIVAL

29

stimulated the speculative imagination of the frontiersmen. "Land is the cry," wrote William A. Ferris, county surveyor of Nacogdoches. "Speak to one, his answer is Land. Enquire kindly of his family and he answers in Leagues and Labors. The Land mania is great. . . . We have whipped off the Cherokees."2 Men who were first on the scene and could comprehend the potentialities of this situation had opportunities for fortune and success easily within their grasp, but for John H. Reagan such thoughts and dreams, for the moment, were nonexistent. After the battle of July 16, the Texan Army had made camp for the night. Fearful of an Indian assault, they had placed logs and bushes about them before eating the evening meal. As the men sat around the campfires, repeated alarms kept them on edge making sleep impossible. Sometime after midnight, scouts reported that the Cherokees were preparing to attack, but "the morning light revealed . . . that they destroyed much of their property . . . and fled/'3 Quickly the Texans renewed their pursuit but Reagan remained behind. Two sleepless nights and two days of extreme exertion in intense heat had exhausted him, and a "bilious fever" racked his body.4 As the sick and wounded began their painful journey back to the Neches Saline, Reagan accompanied them, but after a day of plodding along behind the wagons and litters, he decided to reach his destination as quickly as possible. The next morning he proceeded alone. Mile after mile he rode.5 The sun was hot and his fever high, and with parched lips and swollen tongue he frantically searched for water.6 Finally he reached the Neches River where only a few nights previously Bowles had first encamped, and quickly dismounting he quenched his thirst. tract from the Douglass Report, III, 106; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 2 Warren A. Ferris to his sister, Sarah Lovejoy, October 8, 1839, in the Letters and Papers of Warren A. Ferris of Nacogdoches and Dallas counties, R. B. Blake Collection; hereafter cited as Blake Collection. 3 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. On July 17, 1839, the day after the second battle, General Johnston sent for Reagan. He offered him "a commission as second lieutenant in the regular army of the Republic," but Reagan refused the appointment. See Reagan, Memoirs, p. 36. 4 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Reagan probably had malaria. 5 Ibid. Reagan estimated the distance he rode that day between twenty and twenty-five miles. *lbid. Reagan reached the Neches River none too soon since he was unable "to clu[t]ch to his horse or speak."

Procter_5127.pdf 43

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

30

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

During the months that followed a "hard shaking ague and fever" continued to haunt Reagan and through many a night he would have "welcomed death at any time as a messenger of mercy and relief."7 For almost two weeks he lay helpless at the DeBard place near the Neches8 before being able to ride to Fort Lacy. But even there the fever held fast. Medicine had no remedial effect and in his weak and emaciated condition, work was impossible for him. Seeing his plight Major Burton again befriended the young man, taking him to his home9 on the edge of the frontier. Although Reagan could perform only menial tasks his presence alone would be beneficial, for this was wild country and every additional person gave needed security. Here, for the remainder of the summer and fall of 1839, Reagan convalesced and prepared for the future. While Mrs. Burton nursed him, the Major counseled. "Qualify . . . for surveying land," he advised, for it was the best "business . . . then open." So, when free from fever, Reagan read Guinivere's Treatises on Surveying and reviewed the trigonometry and geometry necessary for such work.10 Then he practiced laying off lots, calculating their size and shape, and coordinated his studies with field experiences. At last, he was ready. In November, hoping to obtain permission to survey west of the Angelina River,11 Reagan traveled to Nacogdoches. To learn the techniques of his new occupation had been easy enough but to convince Warren A. Ferris,12 the county surveyor, that he was well qualified was a different matter indeed, for Ferris had no intention of allowing an incompetent or inexperienced man to become a deputy surveyor.13 I

Ibid. Reagan remarked that in his hopeless despair he did not remember "as he should have done the necessity of an humble acquiescence in the will of providence." 8 The hospital site was at the "DeBard place, near the neches Saline [JVV], where Mr. John Dubury now lives." Ibid. Remember that this letter was written in 1865. 9 Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 37. Burton's home was in Houston County. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 849, for further facts and bibliography. 10 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. II Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 37. This river in East Texas flows southeast and empties into the Neches River. In the 1840's it was a significant means of transportation to the East Texas area. For further information see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 50. 12 For a short biographical sketch of Ferris see Warren A. Ferris, Life in the Rocky Mountains, pp. xxxi-lxv. 13 Ibid., p. xlviii; Ferris to Joshua Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, in Blake Collection.

Procter_5127.pdf 44

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

SURVEYING AND SURVIVAL

31

Poet, writer, former employee of the American Fur Company in the Rocky Mountains, and then land speculator turned surveyor, Ferris had come to Texas in 1837. Like Reagan, he, too, was befriended by Major Burton and, while sick, had taught himself to survey.14 In a speculative and prosperous area, he had flourished. Then the Panic of 1837 reached Texas with its destructive effect. An enterprising fellow, Ferris did not relish the thought of watching his earnings vanish. There were the rich Cherokee lands from which money was to be made if one had the skill and daring to survey the area.15 But, though the Cherokees had been removed, the Trinity River bottoms were the hunting grounds for many tribes and also the path of raiding parties against the settlers. Besides, the Indians had never looked kindly on the surveyor who used a compass, "the thing that steals the land." 16 When Ferris met Reagan, he had already led three expeditions to the Indian-infested Three Forks of the Trinity that had ended in complete failure. Now he was preparing for a fourth. 17 Because of the danger involved, however, "it became difficult to engage men" but in Reagan, desirous of a commission, he found a ready recruit. What better way for a young surveyor to prove his qualifications? In late November, 18 thirty well-armed frontiersmen moved out from Nacogdoches, their destination the Trinity. For twelve days they marched into hostile territory before discovering signs of Indians. Then, they turned from their surveying, for here was the hated red man who had often preyed on defenseless settlers.19 Skillfully tracking the Indians they surprised them at noon the next day, and when 14 Ferris to Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, in Biake Collection. For his studies, Ferris "got Gibson's surveying and completely mastered it." While instructing his deputies he acquainted himself with works by Gummers, Flint, and Davis. 15 Ibid. The Southern Land Company offered Ferris "five thousand dollars good money" and provisions for twenty-five men to survey ninety leagues of the Trinity River area. 16 Virginia Taylor, "Surveying in Texas," MS. p. 25. 17 Ferris, Rocky Mountains, p. li; Ferris to Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, Blake Collection. 18 Ferris to Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, Blake Collection; Ferris, Rocky Mountains, pp. li-lii. Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, states that the expedition left in December, as does Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 37-38. However, Reagan is incorrect in Memoirs when he says that he led the expedition. 19 The surveyors were apparently considered in the militia. Ferris drew a captain's pay. See Ferris, Rocky Mountains, pp. xlviii-xlix.

Procter_5127.pdf 45

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

32

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Ferris "shot one through the heart at a distance of Eighty Yards . . . the rest fled," leaving their belongings behind.20 In spite of this temporary success, the expedition proceeded only a little farther. During the next two days Indian signs increased, making surveying hazardous. The men became uneasy and finally informed Ferris they were returning home. After all, what purpose would it serve to continue? Already they were at the Neches Saline, each step carrying them farther into Indian country. To remain would be dangerous; to go onward, foolhardy. Their decision made, the men began the march home, but Ferris, only halfway to his destination, would not turn back. Reagan and three others "dared follow . . . and by forced marches in the night. . . succeeded in Exploring the Country/'21 Again in February, 1840, Reagan and Ferris went to the upper Trinity country. This time the weather was their bitter foe rather than the red man. For over a month "it rained every day," and cold, damp winds plagued the small band. Despite their suffering, they surveyed as much of this sought-for land as possible and in the early part of April returned home.22 On April 15, 1840, Ferris appointed his young protege, Reagan, as a deputy surveyor.23 He had been an apt pupil and had learned well how to survive while accomplishing his job in this beautiful but dangerous wilderness. Now, he had learned that his only objectives were "to survey land, and not to fight" unnecessarily, and above all, to stay alive.24 20 Ferris to Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, Blake Collection. Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, gives a similar account. One Texan, John H. Irby, was slightly wounded and two Indians were believed shot. 21 Ferris to Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, Blake Collection, does not mention Reagan as one of the four volunteers, and Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 39-40, describes this same expedition but with himself as leader. However, Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, clearly states that Ferris led the expedition. 22 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Ferris to Lovejoy, May 19, 1840, Blake Collection. Three men, probably chain carriers, accompanied Reagan and Ferris on this expedition. Ferris to brother, Charles, June 2, 1840, Blake Collection, mentions the November and February expeditions briefly. 23 Oath of office as Deputy Surveyor to John H. Reagan by W. A. Ferris, April 15, 1840, in the Frank Caldwell Collection. In Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, Reagan says he was Deputy Surveyor for all that country which embraces what is now Henderson, Van Zan[d]t, Wood, and Kaufman counties, and the north part of Anderson, that part of Upshur west of the old Trowel Face, being about half the county, the south part of Hunt, and that part of Dallas county which lies north of the Trinity River. 24 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865.

Procter_5127.pdf 46

5/24/2014 7:44:41 AM

SURVEYING AND SURVIVAL

33

After forming a partnership with William Y. Lacy to obtain money and supplies,25 Reagan immediately organized a surveying expedition. Time was essential. Already a six-months' apprenticeship had delayed him. Although money was scarce, land was plentiful and his service in demand, and one-fourth of every plot marked off would be his.26 Such inducements spurred him on to greater efforts and feverish haste. Early in May, he set out with a small group27 for the Trinity. Cautiously they moved forward surveying rapidly while evading Indians at all times. By June they had reached King's Prairie28 where Reagan began "to run a line due north . . . some four or five leagues in length." The weather was hot and, as the days passed, the country became parched and baked. The men suffered from heat and sunburn, then from thirst and sickness,29 but still the work went forward. By the morning of July 3, they had reached a small lake on the west side of King's Fork,30 where Reagan initiated the day's surveying. As night approached they hunted for water "but only found a small shallow pool . . . filled with snakes and frogs and so muddy, that . . . [they] could not use it." But surely water was near! Unperturbed, the small band continued the next day to mark off the scorched prairies and dried-up streams while the blazing sun and reflected heat intensified their agony. Still no water. That night their situation was serious indeed. Hunger and fatigue as well as thirst threatened them, for the men feared eating lest food accentuate their dryness. Now they knew that the Trinity River must be reached or this frontier land would claim them. Westward the miserable group trudged looking for relief. Buffalo came into view. Possibly animal blood would relieve their anguishing thirst, so Reagan tried to kill one but failed. Then the men took off their buckskin shirts and dragged them through the grass, hoping to 25 See Typescript of Memoirs, pp. 17-18, in R. P. (This is a typed copy of the Memoirs before the final editing and publication.) 26 If the surveyor paid the government dues for the land warrant, he would receive one-third of the land. If the owner paid, then the fraction was reduced to one-fourth. 27 Reagan employed John H. Irby, R. I. Banks, Jr., William Welch, Archibald McArn, A. Myres, R. D. Pickens, and R. L. Johnson. 28 For a description of the area, see Robert Richard Butler, "A History of Kaufman County, Texas," M.A. Thesis, pp. 2-6. 29 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. The men ate honey "sufficiently impregnated with some poisonous substance to make all who ate it quite sick." 30 King's Creek sometimes called King's Fork rises in northern Kaufman County northeast of Terrell, Texas, and flows south about twenty miles to join Cedar Creek.

Procter_5127.pdf 47

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

34

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

collect enough dew to appease their swollen tongues—but again, no success. Finally near midnight, they reached the swampy edge of the Trinity River. Great was their rejoicing; they were saved. After two days of extreme privation, the weary band drank their fill and "prepared their 4th of July dinner/' 31 During the next two months, the men surveyed rapidly and completed their work. In August they stood before Fort Houston32 on the farthest edge of the frontier, their clothing clearly manifesting the extreme hardships through which they had passed. Reagan "was entirely barefooted, and had no other article of wearing apparel but his leather hunting shirt. . . and a pair of leather leggins [i/V] . . ." and these were tattered and torn.33 Obtaining clothes at Fort Houston, Reagan turned homeward. He had followed well the teachings of Ferris, for in four months the expedition had surveyed thousands of acres of rich land without once encountering hostile Indians. Now he would reap the benefit of his work; his reward would be great. Reagan, however, never enjoyed the fruits of his summer's labor. Some thirty miles from Nacogdoches, his legs and feet began to swell, and when he reached Nacogdoches, the fever and ague which had plagued him for over a year reappeared. In this condition, he recorded with the county surveyor field notes for which certificates had been applied,34 and at the same time requested Murray M. Orton35 to hold the greater part of his work until he "recovered or died." Then the dark nightmare of fever-inspired unconsciousness closed over him and 31

Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, relates this story in detail. Fort Houston was a stockade and blockhouse situated about two miles west of Palestine, Anderson County, Texas. It was completed in 1835 and was an important point of frontier defense from 1836 to 1839, but in 1841 or 1842, it was abandoned. Reagan later bought the site and built there, calling his home Fort Houston. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 627. 33 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. In Texas, House Journal, 29th Legislature, pp. 874-875, A. W. Terrell relates that Reagan was known as "Buckskin Reagan" because "his costume was made from the tanned hide of deer." 34 See Nacogdoches Surveyor's Records, Book A, pp. 381-382, 393-395, 415-416, 445, 459, 461-463; Book B, pp. 97-103, 112-113, 116, 119-121, 123-125, 149151, 172-173, 215-216, 223, 231, 236; Book C, pp. 56-60, 64-68, 71, 76-80, 87-93, 95; Book D, pp. 87-88, 147-148, 207, 208, for the record of Reagan's surveying. This does not include the field notes he gave Orton. 35 Orton was collector of customs at Nacogdoches at the time. See Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; also Reagan, Memoirs, p. 40. 32

Procter_5127.pdf 48

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

SURVEYING AND SURVIVAL

35

for endless days and weeks permeated his body. There seemed little chance of survival, butfinallythe disease lost its hold and Reagan slowly regained his strength. But he had recovered too late. No longer was he a man of means, for as he lay helpless, his partner "got possession of the unreturned field notes . . . applied certificates to them, and returned them on his own account."36 Gone were his lands and partnership, and in their stead arose heavy doctor bills and debts.37 Understanding his predicament, Reagan's creditors38 gave him time to meet his obligations. After all, surveying was a lucrative trade, and one successful expedition would provide more than ample compensation for their extended loans. So they waited until he regained his strength to prepare for another trip. By the end of October, 1840, Reagan had departed again for the Trinity with the same personnel he had employed previously. Experienced and accustomed to one another, they worked well together. But by January, 1841, Reagan still had not surveyed enough to meet his debts. Provisions were running low and the men were worn-out from exposure and fatigue. So, while they planned to return to Nacogdoches to replenish their supplies, he decided to remain on the frontier at King's Fort.39 Near the Sabine River40 they separated—the company heading to 36 Lacy took the notes because of "his own pressing pecuniary embarrassments; and . . . he did so intending a fair settlement with him [Reagan] in the future." Much later Reagan received from him property valued at $1,700, and although this was much less than the original amount, Reagan accepted it and "banished all feelings of unpleasantness in relation to the matter." Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 37 In ibid., Reagan estimates his debts as $1,200 to $1,500 while Reagan, Memoirs, p. 40, claims that he owed $1,600 to $1,800. 38 Reagan owed money to the men on his summer surveying trip. In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 40, Reagan states that to John H. Irby, his largest creditor, he owed $400 to $500. 39 Ibid., p. 40; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), September 1, 1841, states that King's Fort "is situated in the east fork of the Trinity, about 50 miles above Fort Houston. It consists of four log cabins surrounded by pickets enclosing about three quarters of an acre . . . a garrison of only ten or twelve men." Kaufman, Texas, now stands in its place. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 939. 40 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 41, states that Reagan separated from the group near the present town of Wills Point. This corroborates the statements of Reagan to his childrenf June 28, 1865, which was written almost forty years earlier.

Procter_5127.pdf 49

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

36

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

the south, and Reagan to the southwest toward King's Prairie. This was hostile country, and the stockade was forty miles distant, but, by traveling all night, he expected to reach it by early morning. Across the wilderness he rode. It was late fall, the weather mild. Before him stretched the boundless rolling prairies covered with wild flowers of every hue. "Thousands of buffalo and wild horses were every where. . . . Deer and turkeys always in view." 41 How peaceful, how quiet it was. There was "no friendly form to be seen, or expected; no friendly voice to be heard or listened for" and for the first time in his life, he "experienced a full sense and realization of solitude—real, lonely, unbroken solitude." The very silence became oppressive. However, he had no complaints, for his position was his own doing. To him it was much better to endure hardship, danger, and loneliness than to return home before he could pay his creditors. So through the evening Reagan traveled toward his destination. The day was closing fast, and heavy clouds rolled overhead shutting out the first light from the moon and stars. It began raining and the ground became soft and slippery. The swollen waters of Cedar Creek42 were just ahead and he decided to dismount and lead his horse. Darkness enveloped him making the way uncertain, but wet and miserable, he trudged onward. At last Reagan realized he was lost. Now, it would be impossible to find the trail until morning, so quickly he found a place to camp. Then, securing his horse and building a fire, he "rolled up in wet blankets, with his wet clothes on, and using his saddle for a pillow, lay down to sleep." 43 It was still dark when he awoke, and the stars were "sparkling like diamonds set in the heavens." Suddenly he realized what had roused him. The weather had changed. A bitter cold "norther" 44 had descend41 Ferris to Lovejoy, August 20, 1840, in Blake Collection; also Ferris, Rocky Mountains, pp. liii-liv; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 43; and Reagan to his father, March 3, 1841, R. P., Microfilm. 42 Cedar Creek, rising from two main branches, runs through east central Kaufman County, and flows generally south making an eastward curve into western Van Zandt County before returning to southeastern Kaufman County. It continues through western Henderson County to join the Trinity River south of Trinidad, Texas. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 319 (No. 21). 43 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; also see Reagan, Memoirs, p. 41. 44 See Edward Hake Phillips, "The Texas Norther," Rice Institute Pamphlet, XLI (1955).

Procter_5127.pdf 50

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

SURVEYING AND SURVIVAL

37

ed about him. Snow had fallen, and as the temperature shot downward and wintry winds swept over the land, everything turned to ice. Reagan lay there for a moment pondering what he should do. Although his wet blankets were icing up, and his head and feet were growing cold, his body was still warm. Should he remain where he was and chance frostbite, or should he try to reach King's Fort? Neither alternative appeared too promising, but the protection of the fort was more inviting. Breaking out from his frozen blankets, Reagan shuddered as the piercing winds passed through his wet clothes and jabbed at him like "points of innumerable needles." He must get warm. So after gathering wood and building up the fire, he stamped around it, slapping his hands against his body—anything to keep his blood circulating. The cold was unbearable; even Reagan's horse seemed to suffer, as it neighed and pawed at the ground. It seemed as if morning would never come, but at last it did. Reagan managed to saddle his horse and start for his destination. Mile after mile he journeyed over the icebound countryside, alternately riding and walking. At last he reached King's Prairie.45 The sun was high, and in the distance, some twelve or thirteen miles away, appeared King's Fort. Reagan urged his mount forward across the open windswept prairie. The bitter wind, unchallenged by the flat, unbroken sweep of plains, triumphantly swirled about him spewing up flakes of ice in his face. He covered his head but the arctic blasts penetrated his blankets. Now his hands and feet were getting numb. He could no longer walk his horse, for the ice had cut his moccasins and his feet were bleeding. "By shaking himself in his saddle and by all sorts of motions," he desperately tried to keep his blood circulating, but it was a losing battle. He was freezing. Gradually he lost control of his body, then the power to speak, and finally he "ceased to suffer physical pain." Only a dull consciousness told him he was perishing but somehow, even in the sight of relief, it did not seem to matter. Hours later, a frozen horse and rider appeared before King's Fort. The man was quickly taken to the blockhouse and put in a tub of cool water. Then the room was warmed. The skin on his arms, legs, and 45 Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865, states Reagan reached King's Prairie in the vicinity of a high ground, then called College Mound. Reagan in 1865 said that Captain John Beck lived there.

Procter_5127.pdf 51

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

38

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

face turned dark as if it had been scalded. After a time, he showed signs of life; the pain of frostbite had returned. Quickly, he was dressed, rolled in warm blankets, and put to bed.46 There he lay in deep sleep. Reagan was alive. 46 In ibid., Reagan said that Charles Gilmore, for many years a citizen of Anderson Covinty, was one of the men who saved his life. John S. "Rip" Ford, of Texas Ranger, Mexican War, and Civil War fame, helped carry Reagan into the blockhouse.

Procter_5127.pdf 52

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

C H A P T E R

V

Turbulent Times and Readjustment

T

JLmHE FRONTIER had no place for rank or station, for social hierarchy and tradition. Civilization was far away. Here, it was the man that counted. Bereft of all the advantages and implements of an older society, the frontiersman had only his ingenuity, resourcefulness, and courage on which to rely. He was a new man, a free man, in a virgin, free world. Before him lay opportunity and independence; behind him had been discouragement and restriction. Yet, the frontier life was a hard life, filled with drudgery and danger. The law of survival was dominant, and the frontiersman toiled and fought to win a place for himself and his family. To meet the necessities of his environment he modified his customs and institutions, discarded them if unworkable, and when possible invented new ones to fit his needs. He learned the ways of nature, and in many cases, his clothes, food, and actions manifested a reversion to a primitive state. Upon him and him alone rested the safety and well-being of his family. But in spite of his resourcefulness and aggressiveness, he was often unable to protect his wife and children from the frontier. The ceaseless toil and severity of pioneer life battered their resistance and smashed them. Far from medical attention and surrounded by a raw

Procter_5127.pdf 53

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

40

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

wilderness, the infant quickly succumbed to this harsh new world while his mother, exhausted by hardship, weakened by the regularity of childbirth, soon laid down her interminable tasks, left the solitude and loneliness, and at last found rest. Those who survived accomplished their purpose. They drove back the Indian and took for themselves the fertile, abandoned lands. Since the government was far away, they fashioned a new democracy peculiar to the frontier. A return to the old way of life, to the vestiges of a privileged class, to the superiorities of a governmental and social aristocracy, was unthinkable. Here life began anew and there was equality. Exercising the natural rights of a citizen, the frontiersman held his destiny, his future, in his own hands, and only the frontier laws, simple, effective, and swift—their object being to keep the peace —attempted to curb his intense individualism and disregard for authority. 1 Slowly the wilderness gave way to these rugged individuals. By their perseverance and determination, they conquered a vast, untamed frontier, and by their actions and deeds, they shaped a new country. By the early 1840's, "GTT—Gone To Texas" had become a familiar phrase. Manifest Destiny in the United States, fast approaching its zenith, ran rampant over the nation. It was assumed that the colonization of Texas would mean its annexation, and toward this end did the adventurers, expansionists, and settlers labor. Besides, the vast, unclaimed region of the young Republic beckoned the land-hungry farmer. Already many had abandoned the rocky, thin soil of New England and the eroded ground of the South Atlantic states, turned white and sterile from exhaustion. The fertile, black prairies of northern Indiana and Illinois, just now on the verge of being fathomed and settled, had been by-passed while California and Oregon, lying behind the almost impenetrable *'Great American Desert," were inviting but distant realms. To the great mass of migrants Texas offered the best opportunities, and into that sprawling country they thronged. In January, 1841, John H. Reagan lay at King's Fort recuperating from his icy ordeal on the prairie. It had been almost two years since he entered East Texas, and more than once, the frontier environment had almost vanquished him. Yet somehow he had survived. Now because of him and men of like character, the frontier would soon be 1

Procter_5127.pdf 54

See Roscoe Pound, The Spirit of the Common Law, chapters IV and V.

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

TURBULENT TIMES AND READJUSTMENT

41

surveyed, settled, and conquered, and its red inhabitants driven to an undesired or untrammeled area. But such had not been the purposes which motivated Reagan. Prospects of adventure and success had lured him to Texas and after arrival, his objectives had been clear-cut—to survive and then to pursue his fortune. To realize these ambitions, however, he knew that he must help bring civilization to the frontier, and toward this end he daily strove. Recovering rapidly, Reagan resumed his surveying and, after successfully completing his work, returned to Nacogdoches in early March. 2 During the next few months, his services being in great demand, he trekked frequently into the wilderness, evaded the Indians, and then made his way homeward. But in July, 1841, Reagan's business operations were interrupted. The red man had become too brash, too impudent. Two pioneer families had been attacked and murdered, and a punitive expeditionary force under General Edward H. Tarrant repulsed.3 Now the infuriated frontiersmen demanded satisfaction and as the call went out from Nacogdoches for the militia to assemble,4 Reagan hastened to obey. This was no new experience for frontiersmen. Such actions had been initiated centuries before when the colonists first landed on the Atlantic shores. If the Indian committed an outrage, then the settler must make his power felt whenever possible; must let the ' 'heathen'' savage know that for his misdeeds a terrible retribution awaited him. 5 So into Nacogdoches the men flocked, and by the middle of July6 2 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 43, he states that he did not return to the settlements until the latter part of April, but Reagan to his father, March 3, 1841, R. P., Microfilm, describing his successful surveying expeditions, makes it obvious that the Memoirs is incorrect. 3 See John Henry Brown, Indian Wars and Pioneers of Texas, pp. 85-87; Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 707, gives a short sketch on General Tarrant, and in ibid., II, 843, there is an account of the Battle of Village Creek; both Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), June 23, 1841, and "Report to B. T. Archer, Secty. of War, of Brig. Gen. Tarrant's Expedition against the Indians on the Trinity and Brazos—by Wm. N . Porter, Act.'g Brigade Inspector," in Harriet Smither (ed.), Journals of the Sixth Congress of the Republic of Texas, 1841-1842, III, 416-419, give accounts of the success and failure of Tarrant's punitive expedition. 4 Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), February 23, 1842. 5 James H. Starr to Lamar, April 15, 1840, in Lamar Papers, III, 372-374. This pattern of retaliation is apparent throughout the letter. 6 See Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), February 23, 1842; Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88.

Procter_5127.pdf 55

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

42

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

General James Smith, the militia commander, was ready to march. His troops would be one edge of a two-pronged attack, for while he moved northwestward toward the Three Forks of the Trinity, General Tarrant with another militia force, would advance southwestward from the Red River.7 If all went well, the Indians would be caught in a deadly vise. Yet, from the beginning the expedition was handicapped. There was no mutual understanding between commanders, no timetable for a simultaneous convergence on the enemy. Spurred on by the reported capture of two small boys, Tarrant had quickly reached the West Fork of the Trinity, and, finding no sign of the foe, had sent out scouts to discover their whereabouts.8 Meanwhile General Smith and his regiment of militia and volunteers had left Nacogdoches and were marching across the former Cherokee lands. Upon reaching King's Fort, they learned that the Indians had attacked there the previous night. Now the chase was on with the frontiersmen eagerly following in hot pursuit. The trail drew them farther west into the wilderness, past Cedar Creek, the East Fork of the Trinity, White Rock Creek, then to the main branch of the Trinity—; 9 where, a few months later, John Neely Bryan founded Dallas—but still no sign of the enemy. Where had the Indians gone? This was a puzzling question. Smith knew not whether the savages were watching and waiting for a chance to attack, or whether they were even aware of his presence, but he did know that to pursue his evasive adversary with a slow force was futile and to continue further without information foolhardy. So, quickly he halted the march, encamped his regiment in a secluded area,10 and detailed his scouts to locate the enemy. A company of twelve scouts under the command of Captain John L. Hall left that day to carry out Smith's orders. Their mission, although dangerous, was not a difficult one, for these frontiersmen had for the past several years frequently roamed over this country. Such 7

Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88. Ibid. Tarrant was probably camped in Wise County. Ibid. For a short sketch and bibliography of Bryan, see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 233. 10 Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88. The Texans stopped at a small spring where honey was abundant. Honey Springs, Texas, a small community in central Dallas County, was later located there. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 832. 8

9

Procter_5127.pdf 56

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

TURBULENT TIMES AND READJUSTMENT

43

men as Reagan and Ferris, surveyors and explorers of the Three Forks of the Trinity, Isaac T. Bean,11 an accomplished Indian fighter raised on the frontier, and John I. Burton,12 an adventurous soldier of fortune, knew well how the Indian thought and acted. Wise and experienced woodsmen, here in the wilderness they were at home. 13 It was not long before they had uncovered evidence of the red man and began tracking him down. Crossing Mountain Creek,14 the small band marched westward over the prairie until the Eastern Cross Timbers 15 loomed before them. Now new trails were encountered; obviously an Indian village was close by. With the enemy so near, Hall decided it would be less dangerous to hide his company and send two men to reconnoiter the Indian position, and upon Reagan and Isaac Bean the job fell. Cautiously making their way through the dense forest, the two buckskinned frontiersmen made use of all their cunning and resourcefulness. Slowly and quietly they crept toward the Indian village and as they approached Village Creek, their objective lay before them.16 For over half a day they remained concealed, watching the savages, counting their numbers, and "spying out the lay of the land/' 1 7 Then, their mission completed, they returned to their well-hidden companions. Events moved swiftly after this. As soon as it was dark, Hall lost no time in reporting to General Smith. Immediately orders to march mobilized the Texans, and before camping that night the regiment had reached Mountain Creek. Early the next morning they crossed the open prairie and, by noon, had neared the outskirts of the enemy stronghold unnoticed. 11 Isaac T. Bean, born in Arkansas in 1821, came to Nacogdoches in 1823. He grew up on the frontier and participated in many retaliatory raids against the Indians. His father, Peter E. Bean, first came to Texas in 1800 to hunt wild horses with Philip Nolan. For more information see A Memorial and Biographical History of McLennan, Falls, Bell and Coryell Counties, Texas, pp. 985-986, and also "Biographical and Historical Notes," MSS. 12 Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88; see Norman G. Kittrell, Governors Who Have Been, and Other Public Men of Texas, p. 113; and Reagan, Typescript of Memoirs, p. 29, in R. P. 13 Other scouts less well known were Hughes Burton, George Lacey, Samuel Bean, a Creek Indian named Charty. See Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88. 14 Ibid. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 245 (No. 3 ) . 15 Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 537. 16 See ibid., II, 843 (No. 3 ) , as to location; also Reagan, Memoirs, p. 44; Ferris, Rocky Mountains, p. lv; Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88. 17 Brown, Indian Wars, pp. 87-88.

Procter_5127.pdf 57

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

44

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Now the frontiersmen maneuvered for the attack. At the upper and lower ends of the village there were accessible entrances, and through these two approaches the Texans planned to strike. Excitement was high; tension mounting, as they came into position;18 and when all was ready, they burst forth upon their foe. But they were too late. Only empty tepees, camp fixtures, and abandoned supplies greeted them. While they had been furtively moving up to attack, the Indians had discovered Tarrant's force on the West Fork of the Trinity and had fled.19 To pursue them now the frontiersmen knew was useless so, disheartened and dejected, they slowly trudged homeward. 20 By a chance encounter, the savages had eluded a bloody retribution. Returning to Nacogdoches, Reagan immediately resumed his surveying activities, and for the remainder of 1841 maintained a thriving business. For the moment his fortune seemed assured. He had paid his debts and by January, 1842, he had secured *'about ten thousand acres of excellent Land on & about the Trinity River." 21 But the depression which had gripped the country since 1837 gradually became worse. Lamar's administration,22 marked by great expenditures, accentuated the economic distress and left the Republic virtually bankrupt. Paper promises were worth only twelve cents on the dollar23 and the land boom which had briefly restored prosperity 18 Ibid. Reagan led General Smith with half of his regiment to the upper end of the village, while Bean guided the other Texan force to the lower end. 19 Ibid. Although the expedition failed in its immediate ends, such a show of strength had a definite effect on the Indians and prepared the way for a peace treaty between the Texans and ten Indian tribes on September 29, 1843. See Northem Standard (Clarksville), October 14, 1843, for an account of this treaty. 20 In Adolphus Sterne, "Diary of Adolphus Sterne," ed. by Harriet Smither, Southwestern Historical Quarterly, X X X I I (1928), 168, the following is recorded: "Thursday, August 5, 1841 . . . Dr. Allen returned from the great Indian Expedition—saw no Indians—the men under Gel. James Smith are all returning. [T]hose under Gel. Tarrant are gone to Brassos, to try to find them." 21 Reagan to his father, January 6, 1842, R. P., Microfilm. 22 Lamar's term extended from December 10, 1838, to December 13, 1841. 23 See Miller, Financial History, pp. 21-23, 391; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 49-50. In Sam Houston, The Writings of Sam Houston, III, 10, 56, 110-111, 118, 147-148, 207, Houston gives a vivid picture of the financial straits of the Republic of Texas and of its inhabitants. After Lamar's extravagant regime, Houston initiated a program of retrenchment and reform in government expenditure. The Sixth Congress of the Republic of Texas, sometimes called the "Reform Congress," by an act of December 11, 1841, abolished offices, decreased the number of clerks and employees in government departments, and reduced salaries from the President down. See H. P. N . Gammel, The Laws of Texas, 1822-1897, II, 684-686, for this act as

Procter_5127.pdf 58

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

TURBULENT TIMES AND READJUSTMENT

45

to East Texas now vanished. Even the resourceful Ferris lamented that he was unable to ' 'raise funds to pay postage. Surveying is down; land is not worth surveying," he wrote. "Consequently our talent has to be diverted to some other channel/' 24 Economic prostration, however, was not the only difficulty confronting the settler in this turbulent country. Indians still ravaged the land, and the Mexicans, unable to accept the reality of Texas' independence, resorted to annual invasion and violence. Exposing the emotional, mental, and physical make-up of the frontiersman to continual flaying, these forces gave vent to lawless, rebellious, even anarchic tendencies and produced an uncertain, vacillating society constantly troubled and sometimes overwhelmed by the problems facing it. For the next two years Reagan struggled without direction or design through the tempestuous times engulfing Texas. With surveying on the wane, he began farming25 to supplement his dwindling capital. Yet, incessant public turmoil and strife prevented him from diligently pursuing these occupations, for, in 1842, he was elected justice of the peace and captain of a company of militia for his precinct in Nacogdoches.26 Mexican raids27 and Texan retaliatory schemes28 kept the passed. In Miller, Financial History, pp. 18-82, there is a complete account of the finances of the Republic. 24 Ferris to brother, Charles, May 10, 1842, in Blake Collection; also see Ferris, Rocky Mountains, pp. lviii-lix. 25 Houston Post [undated] clipping in R. P., Printed Matter, Letters, and Circulars; also Sidney S. Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-288. 26 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 44; Bonham Weekly Chronicle, October 14, 1897, clipping in R. P., Printed Matter. 27 On January 9, 1842, General Mariano Arista proclaimed from Monterrey that it was useless for the Texans to continue their struggle for independence and promised amnesty and protection to all who remained neutral during the forthcoming invasion. Early in March, the Mexicans seized Goliad, Refugio, and Victoria, and on March 5, Rafael Vasquez, commanding between 500 and 700 men, captured San Antonio without a fight, raised the Mexican flag, declared Mexican laws in force, and then, on March 7, departed. On June 7, General James Davis met a Mexican force under Antonio Canales near Corpus Christi. After a brief skirmish, Canales retreated across the Rio Grande. Then on September 11, 1842, General Adrian Woll with almost 1,200 men captured San Antonio, but by September 20, after meeting opposition, he retired toward Mexico. 28 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 45-47, gives a brief account of the Nacogdoches militia preparing for a review on July 4, 1842, by General Memucan Hunt and General William O. Butler. Both men schemed to invade Mexico, but their plans failed. However, Woll's capture of San Antonio on September 11, 1842, led directly to the punitive Somervell and Mier expeditions in November and December, 1842. For information concerning these raids, see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 189-190, 637.

Procter_5127.pdf 59

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

46

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

militia frequently mobilized as did Indian incursions, and in 1843 the suppression of the Regulator-Moderator War 29 and Houston's expedition to make treaties with several Indian tribes30 drew heavily upon Reagan's time. But in 1843 Reagan reached a "turning point" 31 in his career which ended his wandering and adventurous frontier escapades and gave purpose and meaning to his life. Colonel John Durst, 32 a wealthy and prominent planter, desired a tutor for his children and upon reading a note from Reagan he exclaimed to his wife, "This man is a scholar. . . . I believe Mr. Reagan will do." Conferring with the young surveyor, Colonel Durst offered him a teaching position, and Reagan, deciding to "put away his compass," accepted.33 During the months that followed, Reagan again found in study and learning an exhilarating fascination. His burning desire for knowledge and Durst's fine library made him "a diligent student," 34 and the many prominent men of the state,35 who visited the Colonel and discussed 29 The term Regulator-Moderator War was applied to a feud carried on in present day Shelby, Panola, and Harrison counties. It developed into a small scale war between two opposing forces known as the Regulators and Moderators. In 1843, Reagan, commanding a company of militia, received orders from President Houston to suppress lawlessness, but upon reaching Shelby County he was ordered to return home as Houston had secured a suspension of hostilities. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 458; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 44. 30 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 44. Houston asked Reagan to accompany his party since he was so well acquainted with the country. In Kittrell, Governors Who Have Been, p. 113, and "Memoirs," MSS., p. 29, in R. P., incidents of the trip are related. 31 Houston Post [undated] clipping, R. P., Printed Matter. Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-288. 32 Colonel John Durst was born on February 4, 1797, in the Missouri Territory, and came to Texas in the early 1800's. He moved to Nacogdoches in 1827 and became a prominent citizen. In Monclova at the beginning of the Texas Revolution, he rode to East Texas in twelve and a half days to report the invasion of Santa Anna. Commanding a militia company, he performed his duties well against the Mexicans and later against the Indians. He died at Galveston in 1851. See Frank W . Johnson, A History of Texas and Texans, V, 2433; W . D. Wood, "Sketch of the Early Settlement of Leon County, Its Organization, and Some of the Early Settlers," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, IV (1900), 211-212; Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 527. 33 Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-288; Houston Post [undated] clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter. 34 Houston Post [undated] clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter. Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-288. In an interview of Mrs. Jefferson Davis Reagan, Palestine, Texas, with B. P., January 31, 1956, she said that one of Reagan's most outstanding characteristics was his insatiable quest for knowledge. 35 In Sterne, "Diary," loc. cit., X X X I I (1928), Colonel Durst's association with

Procter_5127.pdf 60

5/24/2014 7:44:42 AM

TURBULENT TIMES AND READJUSTMENT

47

pertinent subjects and events of the day, served to stimulate him to more difficult mental attainment. Gradually, as his aptitude increased, he ' 'became fond of studying the philosophy of government/' and then the law itself.36 For well over a year37 Reagan remained as tutor to the Durst children, but in 1844 he left their pleasant surroundings for a completely new and different adventure. On April 19 he married a widow, Martha Music,38 and took upon himself the responsibilities of raising her four children.39 On his shoulders now rested the welfare of six people rather than of one carefree backwoodsman. So toward the frontier Reagan again turned, for there he possessed fertile lands untouched by the blade of a plow. In the fall of 1844 he moved west onto the prairies and settled at the edge of the wilderness.40 By stock raising and farming, he wrung from the soil a livelihood and provided well for his large family. It was a hard life, a primitive one, that took its toll in strength and endurance. The frontier flayed and beat at them, bending and molding them to its environment, and Martha, less pliant and flexible, quickly succumbed to this harsh existence. Within a year, she died 41 and left her husband to carry on alone. many notables of the state is frequently mentioned. Also see Houston Post [undated] clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter. 36 Houston Post [undated] clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter. Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-288. 37 In Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-289, Mrs. Durst states that Reagan, upon discontinuing his surveying [in 1843], tutored her children for four years. Since Reagan moved to Kaufman County late in 1844, and the Durst family to Leon County in 1845, Mrs. Durst undoubtedly was mistaken. However, in 1844, she had known Reagan for four years. 38 Arthur Reagan, Alexandria, Virginia, stated to B. P., December 11, 1955, that while checking marriage records at the courthouse in Nacogdoches, Texas, he found the following note: "John H. Reagan was married to Martha Music on April 19, 1844, by Wm. Roark, Justice." In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 44, Reagan says he was married in 1842. However, keep in mind that he wrote his autobiography in 1904-1905. 39 The four Music children were Sarah Marshall, William S., Henry J., and Joseph B. See Nacogdoches Land Deeds, MSS., Vol. H, p. 357. 40 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 51; Wentworth Manning, Some History of Van Zandt County, pp. 67-68; Bonham Weekly Chronicle, October 14, 1897, clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter. Reagan's farm was located about where present-day Kemp, Kaufman County, Texas, is situated. 4:1 Nacogdoches Land Deeds, MSS., Vol. H, p. 357, states that Martha Music made a deed of gift to her children on February 25, 1845, "of half a league of land, the property of the estate of Robert Music deceased and adjoining the Bradshaw

Procter_5127.pdf 61

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

48

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Long and difficult were the days now, but Reagan still found time for study. His experience at Colonel Durst's home had rekindled within him the burning ambition of his boyhood days to rise above poverty and "climb up in life/' 4 2 Always his answer to this desire had been education, and here on the lonely Texas prairie he turned once more to his studies. For many years the study of law with its various ramifications had attracted Reagan, and his physical and mental capacities seemed wellsuited to its practice. At Maryville, logic had been his favorite subject, and debate, his greatest forte. Then at Colonel Durst's, prominent men had aroused his interest in government and law, and the participation in law and politics of David S. Kaufman, 43 his old comrade of the Cherokee War, and of General Rusk,44 his former commander, strengthened his convictions. Consequently, "some sixty miles from the nearest lawyer's office,,, Reagan began studying law by reading Blackstone's Commentaries. Words were difficult and some legal phrases almost incomprehensible, but with Webster's Unabridged Dictionary and Bouvier's Law Dictionary by his side, he fathomed the hidden meanings and unraveled the enigmas of his newly-chosen profession.45 Without an instructor, his self-education progressed slowly, but in 1846, he procured a temporary license "to practice law in the district and inferior courts," and in Buffalo on the Trinity River he opened his first office.46 For Reagan, a new life was beginning. The adventurous, speculative youth from Tennessee who had come to the frontier and learned plantation." Reagan, Memoirs, p. 44, says that Martha "survived our marriage only about two years." 42 Houston Post [undated] clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter. Johnson, Texans Who Wore the Gray, pp. 287-288. 43 Kaufman was Speaker of the House of Representatives in the Fourth and Fifth Congresses of the Republic of Texas. He served in various high public offices continually from 1841 until his death in 1851. 44 Rusk formed a law partnership with James Pinckney Henderson at Nacogdoches, but both men neglected their business because of their almost continuous public service. Rusk was Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court from 1838 to 1840, Major General of the Militia in 1843, and United States Senator from 1846 until his death in 1857. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 516-517. 45 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 51. 46 Ibid., p. 52; J. J. Faulk, History of Henderson County, Texas, p. 53.

Procter_5127.pdf 62

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

TURBULENT TIMES AND READJUSTMENT

49

its ways was no more; now, in his stead, was a responsible man with four children to feed,47 a lawyer with clients to protect. Gone forever was the past—the struggle, misfortune, frustration, and ceaseless toil. The frontier was moving westward. He had survived and won. 47

Little is known about the four children, but Mrs. Jefferson Davis Reagan in an interview with B. P., January 31, 1956, stated that Reagan cared for and supported them until adulthood.

Procter_5127.pdf 63

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

C H A P T E R

V I

New State, New Town, New Profession

A jL J L T NOON ON February 19, 1846, President Anson Jones addressed an enthusiastic gathering in front of Representative Hall in Austin. His speech was not long—actually it was just a formality—but as he spoke a deep hush fell over the crowd. For in this hour of annexation to the United States, the President had captured superbly the feeling, the emotion of the occasion. "The lone star of Texas which ten years since arose amid clouds over fields of carnage, and obscurely shone for a while, has culminated,'' he said, "and, following an inscrutable destiny, has passed on and become fixed forever in that glorious constellation . . . the American Union. . . . The final act in this great drama is now performed. The Republic of Texas is no more/' 1 With these words, Anson Jones concluded, and in the silence that followed, he quietly stepped forward and lowered the Texas flag. The cannon boomed, breaking the spell he had woven, and then the crowd cheered. Texas was a new state. 1

President Anson Jones, Executive Record Book No. 47, Herbert Pickens Gambrell, Anson Jones, pp. 417-419. Also "Annals of Travis County and of the City of Austin . . ." MSS., for an eye-witness account of the inauguration; hereafter cited County Annals."

Procter_5127.pdf 64

pp. 50-52, MSS.; see Frank Brown, chapter XII, p. 19, as Brown, "Travis

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

N E W STATE, N E W TOWN, N E W PROFESSION

51

A turbulent age had passed. The Alamo, Goliad, San Jacinto, the fight for independence were but treasured memories now, as were many other heroic endeavors of the Republic. Gone forever were those exciting, eventful times of the formation of a nation, but also gone were the miserable failures, the fears of Mexican invasion and subjugation, the frustrations of an inadequate financial system, and the trial and error methods of an inexperienced government. Now, Texas was on the threshold of a great era of growth and prosperity. What limitless possibilities, what tremendous opportunities there were! A sprawling, wild country, sparsely settled and richly abundant in land, game, and natural resources, lay open, inviting colonization; yet until now unsettled conditions, internal strife, violence, and death had lessened its attractiveness and darkened its name. Annexation, however, would change this, for, under the protective aegis of the United States, stable government and domestic tranquillity would ensue. During the last years of the 1840's, a wave of humanity swept over Texas, occupying the vacant lands and pushing the frontier westward.2 The newly-formed state administration became firmly established, as the United States lightened its tasks by taking over the responsibilities and economic burdens of the postal service, army and navy, Indian affairs, and frontier defense.3 Even the political life of the state exhibited the harmonious effects of American Union as attempts to form a Democratic party to displace the bitter Houston and Lamar factions of Republic days were initiated.4 But annexation had more far-reaching consequences than these local favorable results, for from it emanated war, sectional strife, and a reopening of the slavery controversy. South of the Rio Grande an 2 I n Texas State Gazette (Austin), August 25, 1849, the State Census of 1847 lists the white population as 103,956; slaves, 39,060; and free colored, 304. United States Bureau of the Census, Seventh Census, 1850, p. 505, lists the white population as 154,034; free colored, 397. Barnes F. Lathrop, Migration Into East Texas 1835-1860, gives a detailed account of population movement into Texas. See also Ferdinand Roemer, Texas with Particular Reference to German Immigration and the Physical Appearance of the Country, trans, from the German by Oswald Mueller, pp. 10-12, for a census report and a description of the inhabitants and country from December, 1845, to April, 1847; Viktor Bracht, Texas in 1848, trans, from the German by Charles Frank Schmidt, pp. 61-84, gives an interesting account of Texas through personal observations. 3 Rupert Norval Richardson, Texas, the Lone Star State, p. 171; Francis Richard Lubbock, Six Decades in Texas, pp. 183-184. 4 Ernest William Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties in Texas, pp. 11-21; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 184-186.

Procter_5127.pdf 65

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

52

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

angry, sullen Mexico brooded, threatening war and demanding satisfaction from the United States for the national affront to its honor. 5 To the Mexicans, Texas had never been more than a rebellious province which the United States had encouraged and abetted with money, men, and arms. Now the "gringos" had the arrogance to incorporate territory they could not buy.6 "Since the usurpation of Texas," exclaimed La Reforma, there could be "no arrangement, no friendly settlement." 7 Dictator Paredes had already sworn publicly that he would "defend the integrity of the national territory . . . every foot of Texas to the Sabine . . . " and as the Mexican people and press clamored for war, he realized that failure to keep his word and to act forcibly would insure his downfall. 8 In April, 1846, after General Zachary Taylor had advanced with his small army to the Rio Grande, Paredes issued orders to attack.9 A large Mexican force, crossing the Rio Grande on April 25, surprised an American detachment, killing several and capturing the rest.10 After this initial skirmish, the United States moved swiftly. The country was excited and impatient 11 for war, and news of American victories at Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma on May 8 and 9 stimulated the public ardor and imagination. At last the insults to the United States would be redressed, the debts to her citizens redeemed, the deaths of her soldiers avenged, and a decadent, far-flung empire, reaching to the Pacific, conquered. On May 11, President James K. Polk, having at5 For a thorough description of the history between Mexico and the United States and of events leading up to the Mexican War of 1846-1848, see Justin H. Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 29-137; also see Alfred Hoyt Bill, Rehearsal for Conflict, 3-83. Concerning United States policy and Presidential action see James K. Polk, The Diary of James K. Polk, 1845-1849, ed. by Milo Milton Quaife, and Polk: The Diary of a President, 1845-1849, ed. by Allan Nevins. 6 This is in reference to attempts by United States Ambassadors-to-Mexico Joel R. Poinsett and Anthony Butler to acquire Texas. See William R. Manning, Early Diplomatic Relations Between the United States and Mexico; Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 59-62, 418-419; Bill, Rehearsal for Conflict, p. 62. See also, in Polk's Diary (ed. by Quaife, I, 228-229, 306-307, 319-322; and ed. by Nevins, pp. 52-53, 65-66), Polk's plans for Minister Slidell to acquire the territory. 7 Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 116. 8 Ibid., I, 99-100, 102-116, 189-190; Polk Diary (ed. by Nevins), footnote 70. 9 Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 149-212; Bill, Rehearsal for Conflict, pp. 83, 91-92. Taylor reached the Rio Grande on March 28, 1848. 10 Bill, Rehearsal for Conflict, pp. 92-93; Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 149-151. 11 Polk, Diary (ed. by Quaife), I, 384, 387; Polk, Diary (ed. by Nevins), pp. 81, 84; Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 117-127.

Procter_5127.pdf 66

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

N E W STATE, N E W TOWN, N E W PROFESSION

53

tempted to conciliate Mexico in vain,12 asked Congress to employ expedient methods to destroy the invader who "had shed American blood upon . . . American soil." 13 The response was immediate. On May 13, 1846, the United States was officially at war.14 Yet the strong desire to discipline Mexico and the enthusiasm for war, glory, and vast territories were displeasing to many. The Whigs, being the minority party, naturally opposed the Democratic administration, and within the Democratic party itself there were deep cleavages which the annexation of Texas had initiated and which "Mr. Polk's War" widened. To many northern Democrats, it was a southern conflict—southern inspired and southern provoked—fought not for the correction of grievous wrongs but for the extension of slavery and for the increase of sectional power. From northwestern Democrats, desirous of the whole of Oregon but feeling that they had been betrayed by their southern colleagues,15 this argument also found support, and as the war progressed, these sentiments, these fears, grew and became dominant. 16 On August 8, 1846, the foreboding rumble of sectional strife and disunion, which could no longer be held in check, reverberated through the halls of Congress. President Polk had asked a joint session of Congress for an appropriation which could be used in advance "for the purpose of settling all our difficulties with the Mexican republic" and which would help provide for a satisfactory "adjustment of a boundary 12 Polk, Diary (ed. by Quaife), I, 354; also see Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 127-134, 445-447, for discussion of Polk's attitudes and actions toward Mexico. 13 James D. Richardson (comp.), Messages and Papers of the Presidents, IV, 437-443; Polk, Diary (ed. by Quaife), I, 390-392; Polk, Diary (ed. by Nevins), pp. 86-87. 14 Polk, Diary (ed. by Nevins), pp. 89-93; Polk, Diary (ed. by Quaife), I, 395-399. 15 In 1844, the principal planks of Polk's presidential campaign had been the annexation of Texas and the acquisition of Oregon. The northwestern Democrats held that a definite bargain had been made with the southern Democrats at the Democratic Convention at Baltimore. Texas and the Rio Grande boundary would balance Oregon and 54°40 / boundary. When, in June 1846, Congress ratified the Oregon boundary treaty with Great Britain affixing the northern boundary line at 49 degrees of north latitude, the northwestern Democrats charged the Southerners with bad faith and joined the ranks of the antislavery group. See Clark E. Persinger, "The Bargain of 1844 as the Origin of the Wilmot Proviso," Oregon Historical Quarterly, XV (1914), 137-146; Charles Buxton Going, David Wilmot, Free Soiler, pp. 117-121. 16 Allan Nevins, Ordeal of the Union, I, 5-9; Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 119; Bill, Rehearsal for Conflict, pp. 179-181.

Procter_5127.pdf 67

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

54

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

between the two republics." 17 As the hot summer day wore on and the President's request was debated, a young Pennsylvania Democrat, David Wilmot, arose in the House and offered an amendment "providing against the establishment of slavery, or involuntary servitude, in any territory which may be acquired." 18 From that moment forward, the die was cast, and the alignment of sides and issues became distinct. It was free soil versus slave territory; North versus South—with the West as the flattered and courted arbiter. For almost a decade and a half this fateful struggle would continue; then the final appeal to God and Mars would begin.19 Meanwhile in Texas, there was no division in thought or conduct. War and the defeat of Mexico displayed the spirit of the times, the motivation for action, the common goal, and when General Taylor called for reinforcements, the Texans, welcoming the opportunity to chastise their Mexican tormentors, rushed hundreds of soldiers toward the Rio Grande. 20 Caught up amidst this raging war fever, John H. Reagan hastened to settle his affairs and join a company at Nacogdoches, but when packed and ready to go, he contracted typhoid-pneumonia. For eight weeks he lay helpless until the disease finally lost its hold. 21 In his weakened condition, it would have been impossible for him to endure the ordeals of a military campaign, so during the summer of 1846, as volunteers from the United States—for the most part from the South and the Ohio Valley 22—made their way southward across the hot, 17 United States Congress, Congressional Globe . . . , 29th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1211. 18 Ibid., p. 1214; see Going, David Wilmot, pp. 94-142, for a definitive account of the Wilmot Proviso; also see Richard R. Stenberg, "The Motivation of the Wilmot Proviso," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XVIII (1932), 535-541. 19 Nevins, Ordeal, I, 9-13, gives a graphic picture concerning the furor the Wilmot Proviso produced. Also see Polk, Diary (ed. by Quaife), II, 304 ff., concerning the effects of the Wilmot Proviso. 20 Samuel C. Reid, Jr., The Scouting Expeditions of McCulloch's Texas Rangers, p. 38; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 181-183; Richardson, Texas, p. 172; Smith, The War with Mexico, I, 480. The Texas legislature gave Governor James Pinckney Henderson a leave of absence to command two regiments of cavalry and two of infantry. The total number of Texans participating in the Mexican War is estimated between 5,000 and 8,000 men. 21 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 50; David S. Kaufman to Reagan, March 26, 1846, R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 22 Nevins, Ordeal, I, 193-195. In Reid, McCulloch's Texas Rangers, pp. 11, 16, 58, 123-124, 236, 243-249, a clear picture of the complement of the invading United States Army is given. Also see Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 181.

Procter_5127.pdf 68

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

NEW STATE, NEW TOWN, NEW PROFESSION

55

dusty plains of Texas,23 Reagan, bitterly disappointed, had to be content to watch them go. Soon the legions of soldiers had passed him by and the war was far away. There was no time, however, for Reagan to indulge in regret, for as soon as he recovered, his obligations multiplied and his duties increased. Buffalo, where he had decided to practice law, was a small frontier community needing an influx of settlers to insure permanence, and demanding men of ability and resourcefulness to make prosperity and growth possible. In Reagan the citizens found the qualities of leadership for which they were looking, and they placed their trust in him. In April, 1846, they elected him their first county judge 24 and soon thereafter added the responsibilities of road overseer, deputy sheriff, and lieutenant colonel of a militia battalion.25 But Reagan had greater aspirations than merely to serve as a public official. Like so many men of a frontier community, he wanted to create in the wilderness a beacon for all to see and turn to—a thriving, prosperous city. And toward that end, together with a group of men of kindred spirit, did he strive. A new Buffalo was their goal. It was located on a high bluff overlooking the Trinity River at a point where business and commerce would meet and where farming in the surrounding area would thrive. Henry Jeffreys, a wealthy land owner, donated the land which Reagan carefully surveyed and marked off into blocks and lots, and by March 2, 1847, the work was officially recorded and the deeds for the new town secured.26 N o stone was left unturned by the founders as they planned for the future. In his survey Reagan allowed ample space for a church, a school, public buildings, and a public square on which the future courthouse would be located.27 Advertisements to lure immigrants appeared weekly in the newspapers,28 and promotional schemes to at23 Reid, McCulloch's Texas Rangers, p. 17, and Claude Elliott, Leathercoat: The Life History of a Texas Patriot, p. 9, give vivid descriptions of the hardships that the soldiers faced on reaching the Rio Grande. 24 Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 11-12, 16. 25 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 52; Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 11-12. 26 Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 9-12; A Memorial and Biographical History of Navarro, Henderson, Anderson, Limestone, Freestone, and Leon Counties, Texas, p. 199. 27 Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 11-12. 28 In Northern Standard (Clarksville), an advertisement entitled "Town of

Procter_5127.pdf 69

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

56

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

tract the attention of settlers and opportunists were widely circulated. For businessmen and merchants, hope of Trinity River navigation, prospects of a steamboat enterprise, and promise of a boom created by a sudden increase in population were offered;29 for farmers, the rich soil of the Trinity River bottom and proposed farm-to-market roads were the talking points; 30 for the politically minded, immediate postal service, a representative in the legislature from Henderson County, and the establishment of the county seat at Buffalo were assured; 31 and for the intellectually minded, the Buffalo Lyceum was formed.32 Yet, despite all efforts, the results remained meager. At first, it seemed that their hopes would be fulfilled, for immigrants were daily settling in the county.33 But during the next few years, the grandiose schemes to attract and stimulate trade and business faltered and became ineffective. In 1848, the county seat was changed and, although a delaying action prevented the actual removal of offices for two years, by August, 1850, the fatal blow had been struck.34 After four years of strenuous exertions on the part of its citizens, Buffalo ceased its struggle, buried its dreams, settled back and "grew to only a store and clerk's office."35 Meanwhile Reagan, although seemingly burdened down with civic duties and promotional plans, found time to study and practice law, Buffalo. {sic} County Seat of Henderson County" appeared weekly from November 7, 1846, to October 9, 1847. 29 Ibid.; Adam C. Peck to Reagan, June 22, 1847, R. P., Letters 1846-1849; Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 11-12. 30 Gammel, Laws, III, 402-403; Northern Standard (Clarksville), November 7, 1846, to October 9, 1847. ^Northern Standard (Clarksville), November 7, 1846, to October 9, 1847. Kaufman to Reagan, June 19, 1847, R. P., Letters 1846-1849; Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 9-10. From November 14, 1846, to August, 1848, Buffalo was recognized as the county seat of Henderson County. 32 Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 14-15, 21-29. There are complete minutes of this unique institution from January 28, 1847, to June 12, 1847. See Merle Curti, The Growth of American Thought, Chapter XIV, for the methods by which the average man sought knowledge during the 1840's and 1850's, and what part the lyceum played in his advancement. 33 Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), October 28, 1847; Bracht, Texas in 1848, p. 62. 34 Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 9-14, 18. ^Memorial History of Navarro et al. Counties, p. 199.

Procter_5127.pdf 70

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

N E W STATE, N E W TOWN, N E W PROFESSION

57

and in 1846, after he had successfully defended a client against a murder charge, his services were much in demand. 36 His practice, however, was limited, especially in criminal cases, for this was the frontier where men were a law unto themselves and where oftentimes there was no protection for the accused except that which the people were disposed to grant, and no mercy, save that which they wished to give. Public opinion frequently became both judge and jury, and lynch law often prevailed over the judicial code.37 But whenever the authorities could save the accused for trial and the presiding judge was a forceful, fearless arbiter, the use of mob rule and "popular justice" was challenged. In 1846 the first murder in Henderson County brought these forces into contention. Arrested for the slaying of his wife, Ed Day, a wealthy, rather influential citizen, found himself in a precarious position; if decisive steps were not taken in his defense, he would surely hang. The authorities had thwarted any immediate danger of lynching by secretly transferring him to a near-by jail, 38 but there was still a grand jury and possibly a trial jury to face. For this ordeal, he needed a powerful, persuasive lawyer, and John H. Reagan, fresh from a triumphant murder defense, was his choice. But Reagan, believing Day guilty of that flagrant crime, would not represent him, even for a fee of $2,500, and therefore, Cravens, an able counsellor from Palestine, was hired. 39 As the first session of court approached, Day's chances of survival seemed poor indeed. In fact, there was a strong possibility that he would never appear before a judge. A large mob had gathered, voicing its protest against the tedious delays of judicial procedure, and demanded quick justice which, of course, only it could give. To meet the violence and hysteria of the unruly frontiersmen, strong steps had to be taken immediately, and for this task, Judge Bennett H. Martin 40 was not found wanting. Watching the hang36 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 57. Reagan traveled to Grayson County to defend John Jennings for the murder of Major James Shannon. Shannon's brother, Jeff, was a member of the Texas legislature and a prominent man in Grayson County. 37 Roemer, Texas, p. 12; Bella French Swisher (ed.), The American Sketch Book, V, 41-42. 38 Day was taken to present-day Kaufman County. 39 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 57-58; Faulk, Henderson County, pp. 14-15; Swisher (ed.), Sketch Book, V, 41-45. 40 Born in Alabama, Judge Martin came to Texas in 1842. After holding the judgeship of the 6th Judicial District, he became judge of the 9th Judicial Dis-

Procter_5127.pdf 71

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

58

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

crazy throng rush toward him, he arose from his bench, a menacing figure, brandishing two heavy pistols, and as the mob halted he bellowed forth at them: ''Gentlemen, I am informed that if I attempt to hold court here I will be lynched, consequently I have brought along the lynch code of laws/' Then, for effect, he dramatically slammed his guns on the bench before him and ordered the sheriff to call the jury while he warily surveyed the quiet dispersal of angry yet cowed men. 41 After this, proceedings went smoothly with minor cases on the court docket settled quickly and legally. On the third day, however, the court was temporarily disrupted by the electrifying cry of "Indians!" Judge and jury, sheriff and prisoners, old and young rushed for their horses, but they were too late to engage the swiftly striking marauders. Only a cloud of dust marked the recent foray.42 Returning to his bench after this brief interruption, Judge Martin continued the court business. Now it was time for the Ed Day case. For three days the grand jury43 carefully weighed the state's evidence. But when all deliberations ended, it was Ed Day indicted for murder, and Judge Martin quickly set the trial for Thursday. Men being scarce, many of the grand jurors were again summoned for jury duty, and when the final selection of twelve peers was complete, five of them had "failed to make . . . [their] escape."44 Serving on a jury in a frontier community was no pleasant task, especially in a lengthy case, for the court thought not of comfort but of correct judicial procedure. Of this fact the Day jurors became well aware. On Thursday morning, under some large shade trees, the trial began, and for three days, the jury, perched wearily on a wooden fence rail, listened to a battle of wits between lawyers. At night, the court bailiff, judiciously administering one blanket to each man, herded them into an old smokehouse scarcely ten feet square and then meted out trict in 1848. He held this position until his death in September, 1852. Southwestern American (Austin), September 15, 1852; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 18, 1852. 41 Swisher (ed.), Sketch Book, V, 41-45. 43 Ibid. On the grand jury were Abner Johnson, foreman, J. W . Moore, James Alexander, James Jones, Andy Henry, Jack Daugherty, W . H. Beard, and 5 other men. ^Ibid. The five serving on both the grand jury and trial jury were James Alexander, J. W . Moore, James Jones, Andy Henry, and W . H. Beard.

Procter_5127.pdf 72

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

N E W STATE, N E W TOWN, N E W PROFESSION

59

an indigestible diet of popcorn and sweet potatoes.45 In such cramped, uncomfortable surroundings sleep was impossible, so for two long nights twelve miserable men whiled away the time telling jokes, roasting potatoes, and popping corn. Little wonder they had tried to escape this civic duty. As for the trial itself, the case for the prosecution was going badly indeed, for it was clearly evident that A. J. Fowler, the state's attorney, was no match for the crafty, experienced Cravens. Unless immediate steps were taken to strengthen and bolster Fowler, there was little doubt that Day would go free. So friends of the state, offering a large retainer, desperately sought Reagan for the job. He rejected their monetary overtures, however, by volunteering his services to prosecute Day "without fee or reward/' 46 Thus as the trial proceeded into its final stages, the battle lines became clear cut. It was Reagan versus Cravens. To inject himself into the trial at this late date was easy enough for Reagan, but to win the case was still another matter. After all, during the first two days Cravens had completely overwhelmed Fowler and had run the trial according to his own tastes. All evidence was in, and with only the final arguments remaining, what could Reagan possibly do now to hurt the defendant's case? The next morning the final summations began and after Fowler made a feeble, opening speech, Cravens began his rebuttal. Systematically and skillfully, he "completely annihilated" Fowler's arguments 47 while, at the same time, by emphasizing the strong points of his case and overlooking the damaging flaws, he wove together a convincing story. Then he turned his wrath on Reagan, who had dramatically entered the case in a last-hour attempt to convict his client. Scornfully, Cravens made a blistering attack upon him for using such tactics and then, in conclusion, defied him and the state "to do their worst." 48 All eyes turned toward Reagan now, for upon him—his success or failure in answering this challenge—the case rested. Speaking in a 4:5 Ibid. The state made no provision for meals but fortunately for the jurors Reverend Alvin Beard and James Eagan donated sweet potatoes and popcorn. While two or three jurors kept the bailiff occupied, appointed members escaped their cramped prison to scour the countryside for food. They had little success. 46 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 58. 4 7 Swisher (ed.), Sketch Book, V, 41-45. ±*Ibid.

Procter_5127.pdf 73

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

60

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

strong, far-reaching voice,49 Reagan reviewed the evidence before the jury. Step by step, with forceful, logical reasoning, he exposed the omissions that Craven had purposely made and revealed to the jury a pattern of deception. What telling effects his arguments had! The astonished audience, completely captivated, was unable to contain itself, and as Reagan gathered momentum and struck harder and faster at his adversary, they enthusiastically cheered him on. Blow after blow riddled the defense and when he concluded, the cry of "Reagan! Reagan!" rent the air. It was late in the evening when the weary jurors retired to consider their verdict. Within a few minutes they had agreed, but refused to report their decision until the State showed them some consideration. They had not eaten since the night before, and unless furnished with food and all the hot coffee that twelve hungry and thirsty men could consume, they resolved to withhold their judgment. So, out went runners to acquire provisions and upon returning, they removed this last obstacle. Soon, twelve satisfied men marched two abreast before the court, and when asked their decision, W. H. Beard, the foreman, replied to Judge Martin: "We, the jury, find the defendant, Edward Day, guilty of murder in the first degree." Then, in unison the jurors announced, "He must die." 50 Thus did the trial end. It was a great victory for Reagan who, within two years, had risen to the top of his profession, as well as to the leadership of his community. Yet it was even a greater triumph for basic democratic principles, for despite frontier primitiveness and hardship the people had retained the fundamental beliefs of their forefathers, the right of due process of law and a fair trial by an impartial jury. 49 Speer and Brown (eds.), Encyclopedia, pp. 564-565. Although not a dramatic speaker, Reagan's bearing, earnestness, vigor, and logical reasoning made him a forceful, effective speaker. Kittrell, Governors Who Have Been, pp. 115-116, states: "Reagan as a public speaker never attempted any flights of rhetoric or wove any garlands of fancy, but he was a most forcible and interesting speaker, because he knew what he meant to say, and said it with luminous clearness, and he spoke the words of an honest man prompted by the impulses of an honest heart." 50 Swisher (ed.), Sketch Book, V, 41-45. While awaiting the hangman's noose, Day took poison.

Procter_5127.pdf 74

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

C H A P T E R

V I I

Politics

- ^ F A S C I N A T I N G , unpredictable, hazardous. Yes, politics was all this and more to the American people of the mid-nineteenth century. To many, politics represented deception, intrigue, the embodiment of Machiavellianism; to some it was an evil, but essential to government; and to others, a science and art of governing characterized by first-rate leaders and statesmen. But whatever the definition or opinion, politics did attract men and sometimes women to its colors. It excited their imagination, stimulated their ardor, and motivated them to accomplishment of immense tasks. What there was about politics that inspired such allegiance, that impelled men to campaign long hours, to travel over rough, almost impassable roads during hot summer months, to tax their strength and endurance to the limit, and to subject themselves and possibly their families to public criticism and ridicule, only the participants themselves could answer. Was it the glamor of public life—the speeches, the applause, the newspaper notices—that captivated them, or perhaps the spirit of competition, the good battle well fought, the victory, the congratulations? Was it ambition—ambition fed by the desire for power, thriving on authority and patronage; ambition selfishly coveting an office for prestige and honor; ambition aspiring to escape

Procter_5127.pdf 75

5/24/2014 7:44:43 AM

62

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

humble origins or poverty, eager to better itself, and yearning to rise above the unknown masses—that goaded them? Was it an innate, altruistic desire to serve the people, to carry out their wishes, to guard their interests, to protect them from unscrupulous forces, that controlled their actions? It could have been any one of these reasons, or a combination of them, but here again only the candidate could answer this question. But in this most difficult profession, the character of the participant, his thoughts and motives, his strengths and weaknesses, were difficult to conceal. He was a public figure, under close scrutiny at all times, and his actions betrayed or sustained his declarations and promises. The mortality rate was high; the turnover rapid. Only those who held true to their convictions and kept faith with the people were allowed to continue and sometimes even this was not enough. Yet still they came from all walks of life. Politics caught up old and young alike and swept them along its turbulent course, casting them aside as they lost favor or wearied of the pace. Others eagerly took their place—asking no quarter and giving none, for here was excitement, romance, suspense, a three-ringed circus and public debate all rolled into one. Here was politics. In the summer of 1847, Reagan himself succumbed to the magnetic appeal of politics, for over the vast prairies of the Trinity River Valley, there arose the demand for legislative representation.1 So Reagan announced for the state legislature, and along the frontier, where politics enjoyed tremendous popularity and where frontiersmen, fiercely guarding and cherishing their individual rights, eagerly awaited the opportunity to demonstrate their political equality by voting, he received encouraging support. But even with this backing Reagan had an arduous campaign ahead of him. Nacogdoches, the seat of political power and voting strength in his district2 was over ninety miles to the east, far from the frontier, and from there, he well knew, would come formidable opposition which might well decide his victory or defeat. 1 Kaufman to Reagan, June 19, 1847, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 2 The Nacogdoches district in 1847 included the area now found in "the counties of Nacogdoches, Angelina, Cherokee, Smith, Henderson, Kaufman, Van Zandt, Rockwall, Rains, Wood, the west half of Upshur, the north of Dallas, and eight and one-half miles in width of the south end of Hunt County." Reagan, Memoirs, p. 52. The distance from Dallas to the tip of Angelina County is a little over 200 miles.

Procter_5127.pdf 76

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

POLITICS

63

Reagan, however, was determined to win his first race. After all, there was no thrill and enjoyment in hearing the tirades of an opponent, 3 in traveling wearisome miles, or in suffering from heat and exhaustion, nor was there any happiness in defeat. Only victory— the realization of being the people's choice—made the sacrifices and hardships of a campaign seem worthwhile. Now, for almost two years, he had prepared for his political debut by electioneering for others and by becoming a familiar public figure.4 All he had awaited was the opportune moment, and when his old comrade of the Cherokee War, David S. Kaufman, assured him that the citizens of Nacogdoches were *'willing to give Henderson County" one of its three representatives,5 he quickly stepped into the political arena. Working with feverish intensity, Reagan waged a vigorous campaign. The summer passed quickly, as did the fall, and all too soon it was election day. The polls opened, the people voted, and then anxious waiting began. Within a few days, he would know how effective his efforts had been. Slowly the returns came in. The vote was close, but that was of little consequence. He had won. 6 Thus, early in December, 1847, Reagan journeyed to Austin to assume his duties in the legislature. There, in the oft-disputed capital of Texas 7 situated on the Colorado River, life was at its grimmest, for out of this wilderness a civilization was struggling to emerge. In a valley where only a few years before President Lamar had shot all the 3

Adolphus Sterne of Nacogdoches bitterly attacked Reagan during the campaign. See Samuel Kirk to Reagan, December 26, 1847, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 4 Although an extensive law practice and multiple public duties kept Reagan well occupied, he still found time to campaign for his friend, David S. Kaufman. Whenever an opportunity presented itself, Reagan made and renewed political friendships. See Kaufman to Reagan, March 26, 1846, September 16, 1846, June 19, 1847, and Peck to Reagan, June 22, 1847, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 5 Kaufman to Reagan, June 19, 1847, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849; Kaufman was mistaken in his judgment, as Reagan ran a poor fourth in Nacogdoches. 6 In Northern Standard (Clarksville), November 20, 1847, quoting from Nacogdoches Times, "Sterne, Lott, and Reagan had the advance" in the representative race. Also see Northern Standard (Clarksville), November 27, 1847, for election returns from Nacogdoches and Dallas counties. 7 In 1840, due partly to President Lamar's antipathy for Sam Houston, the capital of Texas was moved from Houston to Austin. In 1842, President Houston returned the capital to Houston, and then moved it to Washington-on-the-Brazos. In 1845, Austin again acquired the government. In 1850, a state election designated Austin the permanent capital. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 85; Gerald Boerner, "Austin 1836-1877," pp. 22-24, MSS.

Procter_5127.pdf 77

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

64

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

buffalo he desired,8 there now extended from the river to the government buildings on Capitol Hill, a broad, dusty avenue teaming with United States soldiers, boisterous Texas Rangers, and industrious, pious Mormons. 9 And where once there had been Indian teepees and camp-fires, there were now "humble log cabins and board dwellings/' a church,10 a newspaper office,11 and jail.12 In this frontier community extending deep into the hunting grounds of the Comanches, Wacos, and Apaches, Reagan found no spirit of optimism or progress, only fear and an inexorable determination to survive and hold firm. Life was severe, and sometimes cruel, for the Indians were relentless in their attempts to drive the white man from this outpost. So day after day, the settlers, ever watchful, mechanically performed their tasks, while often at night they huddled together in dread of the scalping knife and tomahawk.13 But regardless of the condition along the Colorado, the business of government went forward uninterrupted. In fact, for many of the legislators it was by far easier to face the menacing environment at Austin than it was to represent their constituents. After all, living on the frontier and combatting Mexicans and Indians had become almost second nature to these men, but enacting laws was a different problem indeed. 8 Alexander W . Terrell, "The City of Austin from 1839 to 1865," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, XIV (1910), 113-114; O. M. Roberts, "The Capitals of Texas," ibid., pp. 119-120. 9 In 1846, approximately 130 Mormons, recently driven from Nauvoo, Illinois, settled in Austin on the east side of the Colorado River near Mount Bonnell. They built the first mill in Austin and "became public benefactors," but in 1848, when a flood destroyed the mill, they left for Utah. There were, for many years after annexation, at least two or three companies of U.S. troops stationed in Austin, and, because of the numerous Indian raids, several Ranger companies were also in the vicinity. Brown, "Travis County Annals," Chapter XII, pp. 13, 16, 22-23, 36-37; Noah Smithwick, The Evolution of a State, p. 236. 10 In 1841, the Methodists built a church at Fourth Street and Congress Avenue. In 1842, the Presbyterians constructed a small log church at West Seventh Street and Congress Avenue but it "was blown down by a gale and not rebuilt." Brown, "Travis County Annals," Chapter XII, p. 9. 11 This was the Texas Democrat, established in 1846. 12 In 1847, after a murderer escaped from a log cabin, the temporary jail, the citizens of Austin contracted the Mormons to erect a permanent building for $1,800. The jail was located on the old courthouse block at West Fourth Street. See Brown, "Travis County Annals," Chapter XII, p. 21; Chapter XIII, p. 11; Smithwick, Evolution of a State, p. 236. 13 Smithwick, Evolution of a State, pp. 238-240, 269; Brown, "Travis County Annals," Chapter XII, p. 16.

Procter_5127.pdf 78

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

POLITICS

65

Meeting for the first time on December 13, 1847, the legislators immediately began the difficult task of government, and during the next three months grappled with the pressing problems of their new, fast-growing state.14 Besides urging forward their own personal programs, they had broad, perplexing issues—troublesome and explosive —with which to contend. Nationally, the Mexican War, slavery, and the Wilmot Proviso still loomed ominously on the horizon, while locally, the reorganization of the state on a county and district level, the development of the judiciary, the reapportionment of senators and representatives, and the re-evaluation of the land policy and colonization laws dominated their attention. But first and foremost of these questions was the seething, smoldering dispute revolving around the institution of slavery. The crisis which had been foreseen for almost two years was now at hand. The fighting in Mexico was over, the United States victorious,15 and soon the territory from Texas to the Pacific would be open to settlement. There was the difficulty; what status—free or slave—should be given to this newly-acquired land, and how should this problem be resolved? N o one had a solution acceptable to all or even to the majorities in both North and South. From the Rhode Island and Vermont state legislatures, expressive of growing northern sentiment, came resolutions denouncing southern slavery and the acquisition of Mexican territory,16 while from below the Mason-Dixon line arose an increasing resentment of northern criticism and interference "with the rights and institutions of the South/' 17 In Texas, the Rhode Island and Vermont declarations served only to strengthen the southern cause. More and more the people began to realize the close economic, social, and political affinity between their institutions and the South. An enraged Governor Henderson, speaking 14 Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 3-4, 1116. The session lasted from December 13, 1847, to March 20, 1848. 15 General Winfield Scott received the surrender of Mexico City on September 17, 1847. This action ended all organized Mexican resistance. Peace between the United States and Mexico was not consummated until the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo on February 2, 1848. 16 Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 26-28; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 52. The Vermont and Rhode Island legislatures also denounced the annexation of Texas and the Walker Tariff of 1846, which lowered the duties. This was also a cause for conflict between sections since the North favored a high tariff and the South, free trade. 17 Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, p. 28. See Governor James P. Henderson's message to the legislature.

Procter_5127.pdf 79

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

66

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

before a joint session of the legislature, emphasized this relationship by bitterly assailing northern aggressiveness and inflexibility to compromise, and by declaring that it was the duty of Texas "to join with the other states of the South in resisting their efforts."18 Expressing "clearly and correctly" the views of Texans, 19 an indignant legislature, with Reagan as draftsman, adopted resolutions which praised the federal administration's policies toward Mexico and defended the South and slavery on constitutional grounds. 20 Then the legislators turned to issues more local although, at times, no less explosive in nature. Enterprising, yet conciliatory men, they enacted numerous laws and performed outstanding work. 21 Without too much opposition, they reconstructed an inadequate judiciary into a competent, effective system,22 overhauled and perfected the organic laws of the state, and pushed through general and special legislation.23 As for Reagan, he quickly reaped the benefits of this cooperative atmosphere. Concerned primarily with the welfare of his constituents along the Trinity, he introduced bills providing for further organization and improvement of the frontier. The formation of Kaufman and Van Zandt counties,24 a boundary redefinition for Henderson County,25 and the concentration of governmental power on a county level26 as well as better frontier roads and mail service27 were all evidences of his diligence and handiwork. Yet, as the session neared its close, Reagan had not succeeded in 18

Ibid., pp. 26-28. Reagan, Memoirs, p. 53. These were the words of ex-President Lamar in praising Reagan's work. 20 Gammel, Laws, III, 20-21, 132-134. As a member of the Federal Relations Committee, Reagan performed his first legislative task in drawing up the resolutions, and in discussing this report on the floor of the House, he made his maiden address. See Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), December 30, 1847; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 52-53. 21 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 53, Reagan says that "more work was done at this session than at any other since the organization of the state government." 22 Ibid., pp. 53-54; Gammel, Laws, III, 44-45, 106-120, 139, 163-181, 2 3 5 284. Reagan was a member of the Judiciary Committee. See Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, p. 67. 23 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 54. 24: Ibid., p. 51; Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 209-212, 221-227, 350, 1042; Gammel, Laws, III, 40-43, 149. Reagan was a member of the County Boundaries Committee. 25 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 51; Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 221-227, 384, 638-639; Gammel, Laws, III, 86-88, 213. 26 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 54; Gammel, Laws, III, 153-155; Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 83, 602-604. 27 Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 737, 931, 1041; Gammel, Laws, 19

Procter_5127.pdf 80

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

POLITICS

67

achieving the one goal of greatest import to him and the frontiersmen, the reapportionment of representatives and senators. Although the present form of representation was "manifestly unjust," 28 men from the older, more settled areas of the state resisted with unabated vigor any encroachments or inroads upon their privileges. At last what they had fearfully foreseen and unhappily awaited was at hand. The frontier, the western country, was arising to challenge their political predominance. When scores of immigrants had passed them by, they had sensed that change was coming; when the fertile prairies along the upper Colorado and Trinity River valleys became "checquered [sic] over with flourishing settlements,"29 they began to realize it, but when Reagan and other frontiersmen presented the apportionment bill they were assured of it. So, anxious to retain their position and power, these men desperately fortified and bolstered their last hope, political supremacy. This was not just a mere contest for political supremacy, however, but a life-and-death struggle for the prestige and economic well-being of their homes and sections. If their efforts should fail, they knew what to expect, for had not these same problems and issues with the frontier plagued the older established settlements from the beginning of the western movement? Had not the War of the Regulators30 resulted from western demands for fair representation and participation in government? And had not the frontiersmen eventually overwhelmed them? Here again was a conflict between the new and the old. They realized that the possibilities of success were slim. Already the westerners were outstripping them numerically, and it would be only a question of time until the frontier would compete against and surpass them economically. But perhaps this time, in another land and with different participants the results would not be the same. Yet, to defeat the bill would be difficult. Regardless of their miliIII, 33-35, 402-403; Kaufman to Reagan, February 4, 1848, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 28 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 54. In an open letter to the Rusk Pioneer, May 2, 1849, clipping, in R. P., Printed Matter, Reagan stated that the frontier districts of Fannin and Nacogdoches, encompassing 12 counties and having a white population of 19,082, were allowed only five representatives, while in South and Southcentral Texas, Austin, Brazos, Goliad, and Refugio counties with a white population of 2,253 had five representatives. In the older areas of East Texas, San Augustine, Shelby, and Sabine counties with a population of 6,082 had six representatives. 29 Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), October 27, 1847. 30 The War of the Regulators in North Carolina in 1770-1771.

Procter_5127.pdf 81

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

68

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

tancy and organized efforts, they were in the minority, and only subterfuge and devious methods could now prevent passage. So along these lines they proceeded. Delay—pigeonhole—filibuster—these were their weapons. As the bill awaited final presentation before the House, it was stolen, and since there was no extant copy,31 weeks passed before a duplicate could be prepared. 32 But Reagan and his associates were not to be outmaneuvered. With less than three weeks remaining before adjournment, they presented in the House a substitute measure and secured its passage, and, while the Senate was attaching amendments to it, Reagan began mobilizing the westerners. This time there would be no trickery, no filibustering, no delay. Upon the bill's return, Speaker of the House James W. Henderson would recognize Colonel William Borland or Reagan immediately.33 Then, victory or defeat would be in their hands. With their plans well laid, all they awaited was the Senate's judgment. Finally, on March 20, 1848, at the last meeting of the legislature, a message informed them that the apportionment bill had passed.34 Obtaining the floor, Reagan moved the adoption of the Senate's amendments to the measure, and by a close vote, the motion carried.35 In the confusion and turmoil that followed, the opposition furiously attempted to have the bill reconsidered but were decisively beaten. Thus, did the Second Legislature of Texas adjourn.36 This was not the end of the matter, however, for the opposition, as Reagan soon learned, had apparently accepted the unavoidable legislative loss while planning a furtive, technical victory. Kimbell, the clerk assigned to enroll the bill for signature and enactment, failed to do so, and through this obvious neglect, expected to insure its defeat. But Reagan and Benjamin Epperson, while taking "their parting 31 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 54-55. Since the legislature had no public printer, there was only one copy of the bill and it was in manuscript form. 32 Ibid.; Texas House Journal, 2nd Legislature, p. 517, records on February 3, 1848, the second reading of "An Act to apportion the Senators and Representatives of the Legislature among the several counties of the State." In ibid., p. 890, the substitute measure was presented to the House on March 2, 1848. Reagan, William Borland of Lamar County, and James Willie of Washington County, as members of the Apportionment Committee, received instructions to duplicate the stolen bill. 33 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 55. 34: Ibid.; Texas House Journal, 2nd Legislature, p. 1133. 35 Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature. The vote was 24 yeas, 22 nays. SQ Ibid., pp. 1135, 1138; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 55. The opposition lost the motion to reconsider the apportionment bill by a vote of 19 yeas, 25 nays.

Procter_5127.pdf 82

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

POLITICS

69

drinks" and farewells with fellow members, accidentally stumbled across this intrigue. Surely it was not true! But if it were—grimly, they rushed down the avenue toward the Colorado to Kimbell's home, and finding him there, hurriedly escorted him to the capitol. Here, they met with further difficulty, for the House Clerk, Ben Hill, backed by the Attorney General, opposed their actions and refused to give them the bill. So Reagan, along with Epperson and S. F. Mosely—all members of the Enrolling Committee—forced open the door to Representative Hall, took the bill from the clerk's desk, and "put Kimbell to enrolling it." Quickly the frightened clerk performed his task while the representatives guarded and watched over him. By eight that night the job was done. The three men took the measure to Speaker of the House Henderson, Lieutenant Governor John A. Greer, and Governor George T. Wood,37 obtained their signatures, and listened to the instructions for its enactment.38 At last, the apportionment bill was law39 —another frontier grievance remedied—and Reagan could point to this achievement and others as evidence of a job well done, of a duty faithfully performed.40 And yet this was not enough. The voters looked not at his successes, but his one failure. The legislature had avoided, then rejected, every solution concerning the colonization and settlement of the public domain, and for these evasive actions Reagan was held responsible. He had been expected, as chairman of the Committee on Public Lands,41 to alleviate the problems and resolve the dilemmas of his constituents in Peters' Colony42 and to check extensive land specula37 Governor Wood and Lieutenant Governor Greer took charge of their official positions on December 27, 1847. Since the Second Legislature first met on December 13, 1847, it performed its duties under two administrations. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 730; II, 929-930, for biographical sketches and bibliography. 38 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 55-57. 39 Gammel, Laws, III, 311-313. 4 Reagan to Major Samuel Bogart, July 12, 1848, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. ^Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), December 30, 1847; Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, p. 13; Reagan presented bills for the benefit of the settlers of Peters' Colony several times, but all were defeated. See ibid., pp. 12, 336, 489, 914, 1088. 42 See Seymour V. Connor, "The Peters' Colony in North Texas, 1841-1854," Ph.D. Thesis; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp, 15-32; Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 366-367. The Peters' Colony dispute is discussed more fully in chapter VIII.

Procter_5127.pdf 83

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

70

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

tion. But he had not done so. Instead, when the Senate had passed a bill for the "benefit of persons" in Peters' Colony,43 he had denounced it "as a curse insted [J/V] of a blessing . . . a woful calamity insted of a Legislature benefice," and had offered amendments to justify its passage and his support. 44 Unfortunately, the House defeated the measure,45 and Reagan stood before the people as the villain of this deed and the betrayer of their confidence. Charging him with amending the bill out of existence, Senator David Gage openly heaped abuse and criticism upon him for his actions while Representative Samuel Bogart strengthened this assault by accusing him of defeating every measure introduced by him in behalf of the colonists.46 However, for Reagan to endure in silence what he termed "false and malicious representations" 47 was unthinkable. It was not in his make-up to allow imputations or slurs on his reputation and character —to him, man's "most sacred earthly possession"48—to go unchallenged. He had no apology, nor did he wish to make any. The people's welfare had always been his first consideration, and there was "no issue touching" his conduct that he was not "prepared to meet." 49 To Senator Gage's charges, he replied with the same devastating logic that bafHed and routed his foes in the courtroom, and to Sam Bogart, he urged a "face to face" debate in Dallas "to investigate the charges before the people interested." 50 Yet, for over a year the attacks persisted. In the spring of 1849, seeking vindication for his course of conduct, Reagan announced for the state senate.51 Again he "hit the cam43

Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, pp. 1095-1097. Ibid.; Reagan to Bogart, July 12, 1848, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 45 Texas, House Journal, 2nd Legislature, p. 1104. The vote for the bill was 18 yeas, 28 nays. 46 Reagan to Bogart, July 12, 1848, and Kaufman to Reagan, February 12, 1849, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. In his amendments Reagan included the settlers of Mercer's Colony—an empresario grant made on January 29, 1844—in the relief bill for Peters' Colony because, as he later stated, "I neaver [sic] shall discriminate in trying to benefit equally meritorious sufferers." Senator Gage claimed this amendment caused the bill's defeat. For information on Bogart and Gage, see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 181, 658. 47 Reagan to Bogart, July 12, 1848, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 48 Reagan to Judge John Damron, September 7, 1849, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 49 Reagan to Bogart, July 12, 1848, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. 50 Reagan to Bogart, July 12, 1848, in R. P., Letters 1846-1849. The challenge was not accepted. 51 Rusk Pioneer, May 17, 1849, in R. P., Printed Matter; Connor, "The Peters' 44

Procter_5127.pdf 84

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

POLITICS

71

paign trail,'' and the old game of politics repeated itself. He delivered speeches, attended conventions, and promised to work unceasingly for the betterment of the Peters' and Mercer's colonists.52 But this time Reagan did not captivate the public imagination and enthusiasm. His efforts were futile and his words ineffective. Perhaps this public apathy or his unpopularity stemmed from the sharp-tongued Bogart who canvassed four counties verbally excoriating him, 53 and perhaps from his one failure in the legislature, but Reagan blamed it on his unwillingness to compromise his principles for a political victory. When Albert G. Walker, 54 his opponent, presented a popular platform calling for a legislative benefit for Peters' and Mercer's colonists to the detriment of their companies, Reagan rejected the proposal because of the wrong that it would eventually bring to all concerned.55 Thus by a small majority was Reagan defeated. Because of his opposition to the popular will, the people who had so quickly elevated him to public office deserted his standard and cast him down. Relegated to the position of an observer, he resumed his private activities and neglected law practice, while sadly watching the swirl of politics pass him by. For the moment he had joined the list of its victims. Colony," pp. 183-184. Some Peters' and Mercer's colonists, after attending a meeting in Henderson County, endorsed Reagan for senator. ^Northern Standard (Clarksville) June 16, 23, 1849, records a convention held at Dallas on May 21, 1849, and a meeting at McKinney in Collin County on June 12, 1849. Reagan attended both sessions speaking at McKinney and being appointed to a committee at Dallas to express the convention's wishes. He undoubtedly attended another convention at Palestine on July 4, 1849. 53 Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853; Reagan to George W . Smyth, June 15, 1849, in George W . Smyth Papers; hereafter cited as Smyth Papers. Smyth to Reagan, June 22, 1849, in Smyth Papers. 5 * George Jackson, Sixty Years in Texas, p. 208; Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853. 55 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 58-59. Reagan believed that if the bill for the colonists was enacted, the companies would fight the law in the courts, and expensive litigation would be the result. Reagan said, "I deliberately accepted defeat rather than promise the people to do what I felt sure would operate to their injury." This statement seems to be indicative of Reagan's character throughout his life.

Procter_5127.pdf 85

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

C H A P T E R

V I I I

The Peters' Colony Controversy

T

-JL.HE YEAR WAS 1851 and across the United States, instead of the bitter sectional strife of the past five years, a desire for union and peace prevailed. The Compromise of 1850,1 having "effectively hushed up the discussion of slavery,"2 had accomplished this, and now that politics had become more tranquil, men turned their energies to other fields of endeavor. It was a vibrant, progressive America that faced the world in the 1850's, and with passions subsiding and "reason . . . again permitted to resume her just perogatives {V/V},"3 * ne nation entered into an incredible era of prosperity. Gold from California and British investors furnished much-needed capital; thousands upon thousands of Eui T h e Compromise of 1850 forestalled a secession movement and obviated, for the moment, sectional lines. The contents of the compromise were: immediate admission of California as a state; the organization of New Mexico and Utah as territories free to enter the Union with or without slavery when sufficiently populous; a new and stringent fugitive slave law; abolition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia; adjustment of the Texas boundary; assumption of the Texas debt. See Nevins, Ordeal, I, 219-411. 2 Houston, Writings, VI, 212. 3 Inaugural Address of Governor Peter Hansborough Bell, December 21, 1851, in Executive Record Book No. 78, 1849-1853, MSS.; also see Texas, Senate Journal, 4th Legislature, pp. 24-25, 46, for a similar evaluation.

Procter_5127.pdf 86

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

73

ropeans fleeing from famine and revolution4 augmented a previously inadequate labor force; boundless, fertile lands, profusely offered by the state and federal governments,5 supplied the initial incentive; and, endowed with a speculative tradition, the American people, anxious to get their share of wealth, provided vigor, determination, and ingenuity. Strengthened immeasurably by these powerful, stimulating ingredients, a dynamic, youthful United States rushed forward recklessly upon an uncharted course. "The bountiful continent,'' exclaimed Emerson, "is ours, state on state, and territory on territory, to the waves of the Pacific sea."6 Improve and progress, O America, was the cry. Exploit your vast resources; develop your industries; harness your limitless power; rise to the leadership of nations so that all may see the success of this great experiment in democracy.7 These underlying currents enveloped the nation, and this spirit made "the Yankee" indomitable. Thus, across the nation, in 1851, came the euphonious hum of a vigorous and thriving people. Yet, forces capable of reawakening the portentous conflict over slavery, of loosening the unbridled passions of fear, hate, and anger, of aligning section against section, brother against brother, and father against son, of engulfing the nation in the horrors and anguish of bloody civil war, were at work. Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin, leveling a devastating indictment against slavery, would soon be voraciously read;8 the Fugitive Slave Act would increasingly engender northern indignation and antipathy; and vast throngs of humanity, pressing westward across the Mississippi 4 The potato famine in Ireland in 1846 and the numerous political revolts in Europe in 1848 motivated the tremendous migration to the United States. In 1851, the number of foreigners entering the United States was 379,466; during 1852, it was 371,466; and in 1854, it reached 427,833. See Roy M. Robbins, Our Landed Heritage, pp. 119-138; Nevins, Ordeal, II, 272-300. 5 Robbins, Landed Heritage, pp. 144-149, 155-157, 183-200, gives a good account of the benevolent mood of the state and Federal government in disposing of the public domain. 6 Ralph Waldo Emerson, "The Young American," a lecture read before the Mercantile Library Association, Boston, February 7, 1844. The Complete Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson, I, 111. 7 Walt Whitman thought along these lines. His writings foretold the future greatness of America. 8 In 1851, weekly articles by Harriet Beecher Stowe, concerning Uncle Tom, appeared in Gamaliel Bailey's National Era. So great was the public response that Mrs. Stowe incorporated the installments into Uncle Tom's Cabin. In March, 1852, the book was published and by the end of the year, 300,000 copies had been sold. See Nevins, Ordeal, I, 102, 404-411.

Procter_5127.pdf 87

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

74

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

toward the rich soil of eastern Kansas and Nebraska, would within a few years further embitter the inflammatory issue of slavery in the territories. Then the storm clouds of war would gather again and ominously roll across the land, darkening the nation with bitter strife. But for the present, these disruptive powers were unable to succeed. Compromise had produced union; prosperity had bred contentment. A happy populace had put aside its differences. In Texas, the people rejoiced over the Compromise of 18509 and welcomed its ameliorating effects. Immigration was heavy; business optimistic; and the state government, with ten million dollars bulging from its oft vacant coffers, economically solvent.10 And with the return of harmony between sections, Texas "frowned upon . . . most clearly" suggestions of disunion or secession,11 and mufHed the discordant cries of extremists. Yet, within the state there was neither the prosperity nor the tranquillity that other areas of the United States were experiencing. Texas was too young, too undeveloped and immature to profit much from the immense industrialization that swept over the country. Capital, labor, and manufacturing were practically nonexistent; transportation, crude and slow;12 and the people—a fierce, indomitable breed—better equipped to conquer empires than to build them. Land represented the chief commodity, the wealth of the state, and unless railroads and other means of swift transportation linked this vast domain with the rest of the nation, and unless the state government adopted positive land policies, Texans realized that they would not share in this great era of peace and prosperity. Thus it was in 1851, with internal improvements and Peters' Colony 9 During 1850-1851, such newspapers as the Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), Texas State Gazette (Austin), and Northern Standard (Clarksville) recorded the favorable sentiments of Texans for the Compromise of 1850. 10 In the Compromise of 1850, Texas received ten million dollars in payment for land given in the Texas-New Mexico boundary adjustment. ^Northern Standard (Clarksville), April 13, 1850. In Galveston the people were definitely against secession and in Houston, 295 out of 302 citizens demanded "no [Nashville] Convention, no disunion." 12 In S. G. Reed, A History of the Texas Railroads, pp. 38-48, and in Charles S. Potts, Railroad Transportation in Texas, pp. 9-27, there are good descriptions of transportation conditions during the Republic and pre-Civil-War days. Potts begins his work by stating: "The greatest obstacle which had to be overcome by the early Anglo-American settlers in Texas was the almost total lack of means of communication and transportation."

Procter_5127.pdf 88

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

75

focusing as the dominating issues in the state,13 that Reagan again emerged upon the public scene. For almost two years he had stoically endured his banishment to private life, and except for participating in a Democratic nominating convention at Henderson 14 in June, 1851, he had remained in comparative seclusion. But now those years of political ostracism and unpopularity were behind Reagan, and his star was on the rise. Democrats praised him for his work at Henderson; 15 the Peters' colonists, seeing his predictions of costly litigation with the Peters' stockholders come true, 16 hailed him as a man of rare foresight and integrity; and the people throughout East Texas began looking to him for leadership.17 At last, time and events had honored his judgment and vindicated his action. So, anxious to merit the confidence and trust placed in him, Reagan worked to increase the growth of Texas and to improve the lot of his 13 In 1851-1852, Nacogdoches Chronicle, Northern Standard (Clarksville), Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), and Texas State Gazette (Austin), with national politics quiet, had to fill up their pages with whatever news was available. Peters' Colony and internal improvements provoked the most excitement and received extensive coverage. 14 Representatives from eighteen counties met at Henderson from June 9-12, 1851, to nominate a Democratic candidate for the First Congressional District of Texas. With only one Whig candidate, William B. Ochiltree, in the race, Texas Democrats realized that they must present a united opposition in order to win. On the sixth ballot, Richardson A. Scurry received a two-thirds majority over his two opponents. "This, I believe," said Governor Francis R. Lubbock, "was the first nominating Democratic convention ever held in Texas. No business other than the selection of a candidate for Congress was transacted by it." See Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 193-194. For details of the convention, see Northern Standard (Clarksville), June 14, 21, July 5, 1851. 15 Reagan was chairman of a committee assigned to draw up a pamphlet expressing the convention's purposes and outlining the principles of the Democratic party of Texas. See Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 30, 1851. The hotly contested race between Scurry and Ochiltree was followed closely in ibid., June 28, July 19, 26, August 9, 16, 23, 1851. Scurry won easily. 16 Reagan in his campaign for the Senate in 1849 said that a bill advocated by his opponent, Walker, in behalf of the colonists and to the detriment of the Peters' Company, would initiate costly litigation. On January 19, 1850, the Third Legislature of Texas enacted a law along those lines and soon thereafter the Peters' Company instituted a suit against the state. See Gammel, Laws, III, 489; Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 164-173; Northern Standard (Clarksville), December 28, 1849. 17 Nat M. Burford to O. M. Roberts, October 25, 1851, in the Oran Milo Roberts Papers; hereafter cited as Roberts Papers. On January 8 and 9, 1852, Reagan served on the Central Committee at the Democratic State Convention. Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 49-51.

Procter_5127.pdf 89

5/24/2014 7:44:44 AM

76

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

fellow citizens. With "Rail Road fever . . . high" and "exciting much entrist [sic] among the profile . . . of the state" 18 it was easy enough for him to join this crusade, but to provide for its successful conclusion was still another matter. For how could enthusiasm and energy take the place of experience and capital? And how could a militant opposition in the legislature be subdued, divergent interests appeased, and a state government, advocating no railroad policy rather than possibly a wrong one, be aroused from inertia and indecision?19 For over a year Reagan attempted to answer these questions, perplexing as they were, and together with men of kindred spirit devised plans calculated to convert the ardor for railroad building into an effective operating movement. Conventions,20 circulars,21 newspaper articles galore22 served as methods to mold public opinion and to induce private and state support. The vision of "a great national road from the valley of the Mississippi to the Pacific Ocean" provided these men their dream,23 and the "increase of population, wealth, and intelligence that would follow naturally" supplied them their goal.24 18

John E. Cravens to Roberts, October 30, 1851, in Roberts Papers. See Reed, Texas Railroads, pp. 50-52; Potts, Railroad Transportation, pp. 34-35. For an insight into the decisions of the state legislature in 1852, see John M. Crockett to Reagan, February 5, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; W . S. Hardeman to James H. Starr, February 2, 1852, in James H. Starr Papers; hereafter cited as Starr Papers. 20 In 1852, Reagan participated in the larger railroad conventions in the state held at Waco, Austin, and Palestine. But as early as October, 1851, proceedings of railroad conventions and meetings dominated the news. See specifically for Reagan, Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, October 13, 1852; Southwestern American (Austin), September 15, 1852; Nacogdoches Chronicle, October 9, 1852; printed circular from Wm. Alexander, John H. Reagan, A. E. McClure, to people of Texas, July 1, 1852, in Starr Papers. Reagan's principal work at these conventions was the drafting of proposals for the methods necessary to finance and build railroads. 21 Printed circular from Alexander, Reagan, and McClure to people of Texas, July 1, 1852, in Starr Papers; Nacogdoches Chronicle, October 2, 1852; Thomas B. Lincoln to Reagan, October 12, 1852, in R. P., Circulars, Pamphlets, and Speeches. 22 See Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston), Northern Standard (Clarksville), Texas State Gazette (Austin), and Nacogdoches Chronicle during 1852. 23 Texas State Gazette (Austin), November 6, 1852. For the birth of the idea of a transcontinental railroad and for its development in Congress, see Lewis Henry Haney, A Congressional History of Railways in the United States, to 1850, I, 234-263; II, 49-75. Also see Nevins, Ordeal, II, 82-87. In 1853, four routes were proposed for a railroad to the Pacific. These ran roughly along 32°, 35°, 38°, and 42° parallels. Naturally, Texans favored the 32° parallel, and with the acquisition of Mexican land by the Gadsden Purchase in 1853, their case was strengthened for a New Orleans, El Paso to San Diego railway. 24 Texas State Gazette (Austin), November 6, 1852. 19

Procter_5127.pdf 90

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

77

Yet even all this was not enough. Texas was too widespread, still too much a wilderness. Her people were poor; her labor scarce; and capital, so essential to railroad growth, was not to be had.25 Texans loudly professed their desire for railroads, but uncertain, inexperienced, and divided as to methods of connecting "the state with an indissoluble bond," they knew not how to obtain them.26 For the moment railroads in Texas would have to wait.27 Thus it was that in attempting to cope with railway projects and problems, so foreign to him, Reagan had labored in vain.28 But at the same time concerning Peters' Colony where a situation existed no less complicated but more familiar and far more explosive, he acted decisively and wisely in behalf of his former constituents. Peters' Colony! Reagan knew its history intimately and realized well its necessities.29 During the past four years his life had been closely interwoven with the tangled affairs of the settlers and the Peters' Company—first, in the legislature, then by political defeat, and finally through his elevation to leadership by the colonists—and he understood what needed to be done to obtain a just settlement. But the plan Reagan suggested to settle the dispute went unheeded,30 for the Peters' Colony controversy involved a fundamental fron25 Reed, Texas Railroads, pp. 50 ff.; Potts, Railroad Transportation, pp. 50-51. Also see William Z. Ripley, Railroads, pp. 1-4, for a contrast in economic affairs of the United States and European countries and a discussion of the factors necessary for railroad growth. 26 Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 1852. Texans were divided into two opposing camps. One side advocated state construction, ownership, and operation of railroads while the other side urged liberal donations and loans by the state to railroad companies. Reagan fought for private enterprise. 27 Reed, Texas Railroads, p. 145, states that at the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861, railroad mileage in Texas totaled 468 miles for ten railroad companies. The longest line of track extended 106 miles. Potts, Railroad Transportation, p. 42, claims there were only 392 miles of railway in operation. 28 Reagan, in November, 1853, was asked to sell subscriptions of stock for an eastern route. See Texas State Gazette (Austin), November 6, 1852; Lincoln to Reagan, November 13, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Since Reagan was at this time an elected public official and since he no longer received mention in connection with railroads except in passing remarks such as those found in the Southwestern American (Austin), January 5, 1853, he undoubtedly ceased all participation in railroad development before the end of 1852. 2 9 Reagan to W. G. W. Jowers, January 26, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 18, 1852; Northern Standard (Clarksville), October 16, 1852. 30 In Reagan to Jowers, January 26, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859, Reagan, discussing the compromise bill in detail, concluded by saying that he regarded "the report and Bill [j/V] as radically and extensively wrong and unjust both to the

Procter_5127.pdf 91

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

78

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

tier hatred—absentee ownership by land speculators. Although in four contracts, made with the Republic of Texas from August 30, 1841 to January 20, 1843, colonists could receive as much as 640 acres per family and 320 acres per single man, W. S. Peters and nineteen associates were granted for services rendered (surveying the land, furnishing seed, and powder and shot, issuing land titles, and erecting cabins for at least one hundred settlers) one-half of the colonists' grant as well as ten 640-acre sections. But the Peters' Company, the colonists claimed, had never rendered such services. Nonetheless it was demanding a share of the settlers' lands. Where was the justice in such demands? Frontiersmen, not the company, had cleared the land; they had fought the savages to protect it; they had nourished it with their sweat and blood. Despite such accusations, the Fourth Legislature, during January and February, 1852, passed a compromise act antagonistic to the colonists.31 Not only did it give Peters and his associates over a million acres in Texas land but it also required the Peters' settlers to file claims for their lands before August 4, 1852, or give them up. 32 As a result of the compromise measure, the Peters' stockholders instructed their agent, H. O. Hedgcoxe, in the spring of 1852, to estabstate and to the settlers, and as being as injenious [J/V] argume[n]t for the prosecution of the companies claims, though it may not have been so designed by the committee." Reagan offered the following plan for settlement: 1) Allow the company 900 sections of land (576,000 acres). 2) Let the agent file copies of his maps of the "Company's Surveys in the General Land Office and in the District and County Surveyor's Offices." 3) Require each colonist to have the land he claims "properly designated on the map of the proper District" by September or October, 1852. 4) Then allow the company "to designate whatever portion of their own surveys they may wish to take up." 5) Require the company to locate and survey the remainder of their certificates "in accordance with our established land system." 6) Reserve for the company for two and one-half years all the vacant land within the colony or allow the company to locate its claims elsewhere in the state. 7) Do not try to nullify surveys made since the expiration of the last Peters' Colony contract (July 1, 1848). 31 Gammel, Laws, III, 950-957. Governor Bell signed the bill on February 10, 1852. The first attack on the compromise law emanated on April 28, 1852, at a mass meeting at Springfield in Limestone County, outside Peters' Colony. See Northern Standard (Clarksville), July 3, 1852, for resolutions drafted, and see Southwestern American (Austin), May 10, 1852, for comment on this action. Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 182-183, 185-187. 32 The Peters' Company received 1,700 sections of land or 1,088,000 acres. Reagan had suggested that 900 sections or 576,000 acres would be more than ample reward. See Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 173-182, for full details of the compromise act. Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 20—22, also discusses the measure.

Procter_5127.pdf 92

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

79

lish a land office within the colony and receive application claims. From the start there was trouble; London-born Hedgcoxe had "a rare faculty of making himself odious to the people among whom he . . . lived." 33 Nor was his reputation undeserved. Arrogant, overbearing, different from the settlers in accent and mannerisms, he had first come to the colony as agent in 1846. Completely devoted to the stockholders and to his job—which he performed with characteristic English-clerk officiousness and efficiency—he had irritated the rugged frontier farmers to their limit.3* And in 1848, no longer able to endure his personality or his policies, they drove him from the colony.35 Now, after four years of exile and humiliation, Hedgcoxe was returning. This was his day of triumph, and vengeance too, for with memories of a frontier mob forever before him, he had devised a fitting retribution for their lawless inhospitality to him. He would dispossess them of their most priceless treasure—their homes and lands. On May 4, issuing a circular36 explaining the compromise law, he haughtily announced that it would be both time-consuming and useless for many of the settlers to file applications, as he possessed "the means of detecting every certificate frauduiantly [J/V] obtained." Then enumerating the conditions that would disqualify landholders, he maliciously revealed his plan. 37 The Hedgcoxe circular burst like a bombshell upon the Peters' settlers. Infuriated but fearful, they knew not what course to take in combatting this ogre that menaced their existence. The laws were against them, their legislators had betrayed them,38 and Hedgcoxe, bragging not only of complete company support, but of full government backing as well, became increasingly obnoxious.39 33

Northern Standard (Clarksville), July 31, 1852. Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 4, 117-121, 161-162. 35 Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 18-19. Concerning Hedgcoxe's policies in Peters' Colony from 1846-1848, see Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 117-121. 36 There is no extant copy of the circular, but in a letter to the editor of the Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 18, 1852, Reagan quotes frequently from it. 37 Ibid. Reagan stated that Hedgcoxe, if he carried out his plans, would proscribe over three-fourths of those "very colonists whose names had been used by the company to show [to the legislature] compliance with their contract." 38 Ibid. The colonists knew that Hedgcoxe and lawyers of the Peters' Company "hung constantly around the Legislature" during the passage of the compromise bill, and "that some of them were permitted to appear before committees . . . argue the claims of the company, and even furnish data." Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 174-182, also discusses the bill's passage and the role played by the Peters' Company. 39 Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 18, 1852. Hedgcoxe boasted that 34

Procter_5127.pdf 93

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

80

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

So, hopefully, they turned to Reagan for guidance and redress. After all, this was a legal matter, and they had "more confidence in . . . [his] judgment than that of all the lawyers in the District."40 Besides, they knew from past experience that he would give them his honest opinion "without regard to who[m] it might please or displease/'41 On May 15, upon being petitioned to give his views in full,42 Reagan spoke at Dallas. Discussing with the settlers their lawful status as well as Hedgcoxe's bold and unauthorized assumption of power, he cautioned them to refrain from all violence. Indeed, what were Hedgcoxe's motives? Why was he trying to provoke them? Could it be that he wanted them to mob him and drive him out of the colony so that they would be unable to file their claims? "If you drive him out," Reagan explained, "it will be your fault, not his, if you do not get your land," but "if you permit him to remain, and he refuse[s] to do his duty, it will be his fault. So fulfill your obligations," Reagan concluded, "and he cannot affect your rights. This must be done by reason and not by passion."43 The next day Reagan returned to Fort Houston,44 his new home near Palestine, believing that the colonists would endure their tormentor. But he had underestimated Hedgcoxe's talents for goading the the governor and other public officials were supporting him, and when on June 3, 1852, Attorney General Ebenezer Allen upheld the compromise law, he appeared to confirm Hedgcoxe's statements. See Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 58-59; Northern Standard (Clarksville), July 31, 1852; Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 190-191. 40 Burford to Reagan, June 1, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 41 Reagan to Jowers, January 26, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 42 Petition from Samuel T. Bledsoe and 31 citizens of Peters' Colony to Reagan, May 11, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Reagan to Bledsoe and other citizens of Peters' Colony, May 11, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Also see Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 10, 1853. 43 Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 1852; Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853; Trinity Advocate (Palestine), February 26, 1853, clipping in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. At this meeting, the colonists unanimously adopted a resolution "that should the trustees of said colony attempt to deprive any colonist . . . from obtaining a patent for his land . . . or any part of it, that we aid and assist said colonist by all the means in our power to obtain his rights as a colonist—'peacably [sic\ if we can—forcefully if we must.' " Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 7, 1852. 44 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 60, Reagan states that in the summer of 1851 he moved to Palestine because it was the largest town "in our judicial district," and had "the ablest lawyers." Two miles from Palestine he built his home on the same location where old Fort Houston, of Republic days, had stood. Reagan named his home in its memory. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 627.

Procter_5127.pdf 94

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

81

frontiersmen. The Englishman, employing ingenious devices to inflame them, denounced almost 400 certificates of claimants as fraudulent and so listed the names, open to public inspection, in his "Black Book/' 45 Then, as a further irritant, he instituted an "Opinion Book" in which he recorded every conceivable character of objections to the validity of the claims of the colonists.46 Truculently, the frontiersmen viewed these actions, yet they refrained from violence. In June, they frantically sought Reagan's services offering him a fee of $1,000, but because of previous commitments he could not accept.47 Again in July, he refused their pleas48 but upon hearing that the "total destruction of the office of Hedgcoxe and him hung [sic] in the Bargain" might take place at any hour, he discontinued his business and hastened to Dallas 49 Arriving there on July 9, Reagan found the colonists bent upon strong measures and he immediately sought some means of allaying their passions.50 On July 10, arguing moderation and reliance on the decisions of the courts to sustain their rights, he "for an hour and a half enchained the attention" of a mass meeting which soon thereafter appointed a committee empowered to investigate the company's books and to' arrive at an agreement between the agent and the colonists to quiet the existing excitement.51 45 Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 18, 1852. Hedgcoxe often appended his legal opinions to the receipts he gave the colonists for the papers they filed, as to the merits or demerits of their claims. 46 Ibid. Hedgcoxe kept in his "Opinion Book" a variety of objections. He jotted down the names of those colonists who disapproved of his circular and who he thought were unworthy settlers. A colonist that married a second wife with the former wife still living, that had previously committed a crime, or that had fled from another state was condemned for having bad moral character. 4 ?Burford to Reagan, June 1, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; A. Harwood to Reagan, May 10, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 10, 1853; Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853. Besides having many pressing business obligations, Reagan attended in June the bridal party of his sister in Navarro County. Reagan had encouraged all his family to come to Texas in 1841-1842. His father remarried and therefore stayed in Tennessee, but Richard, Morris, and Sarah came. 48 Petition of July 6, 1852, from P. Taylor and 12 other colonists to Bledsoe, asking him to send a runner for Reagan, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 4 » Reagan to Bledsoe, July 6, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 50 Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 1852; Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853; Trinity Advocate (Palestine), February 26, 1853, clipping, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 51 Members of the committee were: A. Harwood, W . M. Cochran, A. G. Walker, Jefferson Weatherford, Warren A. Ferris, A. Bledsoe, S. B. Pryor, J. M. Crockett,

Procter_5127.pdf 95

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

82

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Yet, their efforts were to no avail. On July 15, at another mass meeting, neither the committee's report nor the subsequent conciliatory speeches of Reagan and some of the frontier leaders alleviated the fears and hatreds of the colonists.52 For what had meekness gotten them, other than suppression, and how could appeasement save their lands from the intrigues and machinations of Hedgcoxe and his rich, government-supported employers? So, thanking Reagan for his interest and efforts in their behalf, the frontiersmen who advocated forceful action assumed control of the meeting. To begin with, they organized a committee of correspondence to contact other county groups; then ordered 2,000 copies of the investigating committee's report to be printed; and finally concluded their business by requesting State Senator Sam Bogart, Reagan's former sharp-tongued critic, to resign for having "wilfully misrepresented the interests of the citizens of Peters' Colony in the . . . Legislature."53 Then, with no question concerning what had to be done, they adjourned and with great anticipation awaited the morrow to deal with their bitterest and most implacable foe. The next day, armed with rifles, double-barreled shotguns, bowie knives, and revolvers, over forty frontiersmen led by General John Jay Good54 stormed into Hedgcoxe's office and home, searched for him in vain, seized his books, papers and maps, posted warnings for him never to return to the colony, and then departed.55 Quickly they B. W . Stone, J. W . Smith, and Reagan. Texas State Gazette (Austin), July 31, September 11, 1852. Also see statement by Jefferson Weatherford, July 11, 1854, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 10, 1853. 52 Texas State Gazette (Austin), July 31, 1852. Reagan read the committee report to the mass meeting. Then, Colonel Stone, Crockett, J. J. Good, Weatherford, and Reagan spoke to the frontiersmen. See also statement by citizens of Tarrant County, May 1, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Reagan to the editor of Trinity Advocate (Palestine), June 15, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 10, 1853. 53 Texas State Gazette (Austin), July 31, 1852, gives the details of the meeting. See also Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 7, 1852; Connor, "The Peters' Colony," p. 191; Elliott, Leather coat, pp. 24-25. 54 Born in Marion County, Mississippi, on July 12, 1827, Good moved to Dallas in 1851. He quickly was recognized as a leader and participated in all the colonial meetings. See Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 708. 55 Hedgcoxe estimated that more than one hundred men accompanied Good. Hedgcoxe to Bell, September 3, 1852, in P. H. Bell, Governor's Letters 1849-1853, MSS.; Nacogdoches Chronicle, August 14, 1852. James W. Throckmorton, although believing that colonial difficulties were due to Hedgcoxe's actions, could not condone such violent action. Therefore, he warned Hedgcoxe who hid in a

Procter_5127.pdf 96

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

83

marched back to Dallas, but news of their exploits, sweeping over the colony like wildfire, had preceded them, and upon arrival there at midnight, they were given a hilarious reception. At 3 A.M., "still the excitement . . . [was] up." Everyone was feasting and rejoicing. "Sam Bogart was promenaded around the Square, in effigy, on a rail . . . then . . . burned. William Myres a spy of the company's . . . was seized, rode [J/V] around for some time, on a sharp rail, and other spies" were given one month to leave the county.56 Finally the day's exertions began to have their effects. Soon the reveling ceased; the people sought their beds; and all was quiet. As in most disputes, however, violence was not the answer. It served only to intensify feelings and to make more difficult a just settlement between the antagonists. And as soon as there was time for reflection, calmer heads again prevailed and assumed control in the colony. On July 29, forty-two delegates from seven counties met at McKinney to decide what course the settlers should pursue and how they should go about it.57 Immediately setting the tone for the convention, they condemned Hedgcoxe for his preconcerted schemes of villainy and fraud, asserting that he was the cause of the turbulence. Then after placing B. Warren Stone in charge of the stolen Hedgcoxe papers, issuing pleas to the next legislature for redress, authorizing a committee to collect testimony as to the noncompliance of the Peters' Company with the terms and conditions of their contract, retaining Reagan as counsel for a fee of $10,000, and adopting an address to the people of Texas, relating the history of the Peters' Colony controversy, they adjourned.58 nearby cornfield. See Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 25-28. This episode is known as Hedgcoxe's War. 56 Good to Col. John C Easton, July 17, 1852, in Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 7, 1852; Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 1852. 57 Northern Standard (Clarksville), October 16, 1852, gives full details of the three-day convention in Collin County. The most prominent delegates were: Middleton Tate Johnson, James W . Throckmorton, Sam Bogart, J. W. Latimer, J. M. Crockett, B. Warren Stone, General Edward H. Tarrant, Reverend A. Bone, Burrell P. Smith, Daniel Montague, William H. Hord, and Reagan. See also Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 193-197. There were mass meetings held before July 29, 1852. See Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 7, 1852, for reports of mass meetings held in Collin and Denton counties. ^Northern Standard (Clarksville), October 16, 1852; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 59. Reagan was chairman of the committee appointed to prepare the McKinney Convention's address to the people of Texas. Ironically, the chairman of the selection committee authorized to employ counsel was none other than Reagan's

Procter_5127.pdf 97

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

84

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Within the next few months, the excitement in the colony subsided and both parties became reconciled.59 Anxious to acquire the million acres of land allotted them, the trustees of the company disclaimed any knowledge of Hedgcoxe's activities, deplored the circumstances which gave rise to the existing difficulties, and announced that they would not oppose the settlers but would assist them in obtaining their patents. 60 On February 7, 1853, the legislature enacted an amendment 61 to the compromise bill of 1852, which, at long last, both the colonists and the company approved. Yet the solving of colonial troubles did not mark the end of Reagan's problems. Soon after the McKinney Convention, Sam Bogart, "grumbling at every person" and brooding over the demands for his resignation, blamed "aspiring demogogues [ J / V ] , who traveled from county to county," for the settlers' lawlessness and for his condemnation. 62 And Phineas De Cordova, editor of the Southwestern American at Austin, strengthened these accusations by referring to Reagan as the leading counsel for agitators within the colony.63 Of course, Reagan did not allow these attacks to go unchallenged, for now his reputation, as well as the colonists', was under assault. Replying to Bogart, he asked him why he had made no such charges at McKinney, but, on the contrary, had wholeheartedly approved of the proceedings there. While to De Cordova, after giving a complete narrative of his activities with the settlers and of the events leading up to hostilities, he posed several searching questions. Why had the Southwestern American tried to corroborate Bogart's charges? Could it be that Jacob De Cordova, co-proprietor of the American and one of Texas' richest land locators, feared the loss of between 200,000 and 300,000 surveyed acres within the colony if the company did not resteadfast foe, Sam Bogart. See Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853; Crockett to editors, Texas State Gazette (Austin), August 14, 1852. 5 9 Connor, "The Peters' Colony," pp. 197-204. 60 Willis Stewart and John J. Smith, Trustees of Texas Emigration and Land Company, to Easton, September 18, 1852, in Northern Standard (Clarksville), November 20, 1852. See also Southwestern American (Austin), December 22, 29, 1852, January 5, 12, 1853; Texas State Gazette (Austin), December 25, 1852. 61 Gammel, Laws, III, 1314. 62 Good to Reagan, August 17, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 1852. ^Southwestern American (Austin), September 15, 1852; Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 11, 18, 1852. Fortunately for Reagan, the Gazette and American were bitter rivals. Therefore, he was given complete coverage.

Procter_5127.pdf 98

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

THE PETERS' COLONY CONTROVERSY

85

ceive its claim? If so, Reagan suggested, surely aiding the settlers to acquire patents—thereby fulfilling their part of the contract—rather than denouncing and villifying them, would be the quickest and most feasible method of bringing about a just settlement for all. 64 After striking so near to the truth of the matter, Reagan heard but feeble replies from his critics.65 But during the next few months, he laid himself open to further attacks. In September, 1852, Bennett H. Martin, the tough old frontier judge of the Ninth Judicial District, died,66 and Reagan, wishing to succeed him, resigned as counsellor for the colonists, entered the hastily-called election, and in November defeated Reuben A. Reeves for the office.67 Bogart, goaded to the limit by Reagan's success, looked on jealously. The abuse he had suffered during the past year had been irritating enough, but the sight of Reagan enjoying his greatest popularity was more than he could endure. On January 20, 1853, addressing the Senate concerning Peters' Colony, he informed them that an individual imported into the colony by land locators had made speeches inflaming the public, had denounced the law passed by the last legislature, and then after having roused the people to suit his purposes had won a public office that would pay him $1,750 a year. I wish to be "plainly understood," Bogart concluded. This individual is "the present Judge of the Ninth Judicial District." 68 According to plan, other colleagues of Bogart in the House and Senate, supplied with further information by him, quickly joined in the onslaught, and by the end of the day, Reagan had been expertly 64

Texas State Gazette (Austin), September 18, 1852. ^Southwestern American (Austin), September 22, 1852, admitted that Jacob De Cordova was one of the most extensive land locators in the state and that his anxious wish was "at all times . . . to avoid conflict with old titles or colonial grants" but his interests had nothing to do with the present condemnation. "The reason that the American' had spoken out was because it "deprecated mob law and violence in the Peters' colony matter." After this admission of interests and defense of them, the De Cordova brothers remained silent. ^Ibid., September 15, 1852; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 18, 1852. Martin died of typhoid fever on September 7, 1852. 6 ?Burford to Reagan, November 2, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Nacogdoches Chronicle, October 9, November 16, 1852, January 25, 1853; Texas State Gazette (Austin), October 9, November 27, 1852. See Texas State Gazette (Austin), January 8, 1853, for the official vote of the election. ^Southwestern American (Austin), January 29, 1853, published the Senate debates of January 20, 1853. See also Reagan to editor of Trinity Advocate (Palestine), June 15, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859.

Procter_5127.pdf 99

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

86

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

censured and exhibited as the "valiant unadulterated son of old Demogogus [J/V] himself."69 Again Reagan arose to give battle and to rout his foes with his devastatingly clear logic. But this time his arguments carried not the overwhelming impact as in the past, for intermingled in his replies were harsh invectives.70 The Senate attack had been unexpected, unwarranted, and had hurt him deeply.71 At last the venomous tongue of Bogart had penetrated his protective armor and had found its mark. For almost a year, both men hurled charge and countercharge at each other, the accusations becoming more general, the denunciations more vituperative. The Peters' colonists rallied to Reagan's defense; Bogart's friends supported him; and the newspapers, finding good stories at a premium, devoted full coverage to their feud. Gradually, however, the attacks became less violent and appeared less often, the newspaper coverage became less extensive. Then all was quiet. It had been a bitter but exciting show. The Peters' Colony controversy was over. 69 Reagan to editor of Trinity Advocate (Palestine), June 15, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Southwestern American (Austin), February 5, 1853; Texas State Gazette (Austin), April 2, 1853. James Armstrong of Jasper County followed Bogart in the Senate while Robert H. Taylor of Fannin County and James W . Scott of Harris County berated Reagan in the House. By their own admission, all quoted Bogart frequently. 70 Reagan to editor of Trinity Advocate, June 15, 1853, in R. P., Letters 18521859; Southwestern American (Austin), March 9, 1853; Trinity Advocate (Palestine), February 26, 1853; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 10, 1853. 71 Reagan to Scott, March 3, 1853, and Reagan to Taylor, March 3, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859, illustrate Reagan's sense of being wronged and his determination to seek redress. In Weatherford to Reagan, May 9, 1853, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859, he informed Reagan that upon talking to Bogart and assuring him that Reagan was innocent of the charges brought against him in the Senate, he received this reply: "I understand his [Reagan's] position, but there is great excitement here against the colonists, and to allay that excitement my object was to show up those who were not colonists in order that the responsibility might rest upon them."

Procter_5127.pdf 100

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

C H A P T E R

I X

The Rise of a Leader

T> J L . % ^ A I S E YOUR BLACK FLAG [of abolition]," Stephen A. Douglas dared his adversaries in the Senate in May, 1854. "Call up your forces; preach your war on the Constitution, as you have threatened it here. We will be ready to meet all your allied forces/' 1 Thus did the "Little Giant," the senator from Illinois, cast down the gauntlet of popular sovereignty for the territories and specifically for Kansas, and just as quickly was it taken up. The lull had ended; the uneasy peace between the North and South was broken; and once again the people of the United States were faced with the problem of slavery. By 1855 the shadows of fear, violence, intolerance, and political upheaval had spread across the land. Out of the turmoil of Douglas' Kansas-Nebraska Act had emerged a powerful Republican party dedicated to the prevention of slavery in the territories. From the dust of the disintegrating Whigs had arisen the American or Know-Nothing party,2 gathering strength from prejudice, by advocating the exclusion 1 U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 33rd Congress, 1st Session, Appendix, p. 788. 2 Members of the American party were instructed to reply to all questions concerning the party "I don't know." See W . Darrell Overdyke, The Know-Nothing Party in the South; also Nevins, Ordeal, II, 323-332, 403-404.

Procter_5127.pdf 101

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

88

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

of foreigners and Catholics from political participation. And from the rolling plains west of Missouri, now referred to as "bleeding Kansas," the clashes between free-soil and slavery men resounded, stirring the nation to a feverish pitch. Kansas—freezing cold in winter, blistering hot in summer! Yet, its fertile soils were enticing indeed to land-hungry settlers pushing westward. But now because of slavery, it signified more than just rich land. For here was a test for two widely different and antagonistic cultures, a key to the outcome of the struggle between them, a prophetic insight into the destiny of the country. To Northerners, slavery in Kansas was a threat to free labor; it represented the continued desire of a lustful South to impose upon them further obnoxious legislation such as the Fugitive Slave Law, and to extend an institution abominable to both God and man. To Southerners, however, apprehensive of the growing disparity of wealth and numbers between them and the North, and becoming increasingly sensitive to ' 'Yankee'' opposition and criticism, Kansas presented an opportunity to link themselves economically and politically with a new, fast-growing West. What the end results would be neither North nor South could foresee. But this they did know. In Kansas a great issue was being decided. In Kansas rested the fate of the sections and their people. All this while, the same anxieties, the same hopes and anticipations for Kansas existed in Texas as in other southern states. Heartily did Texans approve of Douglas' Kansas-Nebraska Act,3 fervently did they urge support of slavery and its spread into that territory, and eagerly did they note any recent development there. Yet, they did nothing to further these desires. Kansas seemed remote and far away, its turbulence regrettable but not unexpected, its issues vital but at the moment not any more so than the Know-Nothing threat that now faced them. In fact, strange as it may seem, during these critical years, instead of aiding the cause of slavery in Kansas, they weakened it, and instead of engendering enthusiasm for colonization, they detracted from it. For unintentionally, Texas, with equally fertile lands, a more 3Gammel, Laws, IV, 263-264; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 66-68. Sam Houston voted against the Kansas-Nebraska Act in the United States Senate in 1854. Texans denounced his actions. See Llerena Friend, Sam Houston: The Great Designer, pp. 239-240; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 201-202.

Procter_5127.pdf 102

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

THE RISE OF A LEADER

89

tropical climate, and a calmer atmosphere, was a competitor and a successful one at that. 4 Gradually, Southerners realized their precarious status in Kansas, foresaw the difficulties of maintaining their ascendancy in Congress, and steeled themselves for the inevitable decisions that lay ahead. But for Reagan in 1855 these grim prospects forming on the horizon were of little significance. Like most Americans who were not caught in the immediate jaws of sectional conflict, he lived his life from day to day interested mainly in his present needs and desires or in those of his neighbors and friends. It had been over two years now since he had been elected district judge, over two years of peace and happiness, of growth and development. In a marriage on December 23, 1852, to Edwina Moss Nelms, 5 a petite, dark-haired, blue-eyed belle from Virginia, just recently moved to Texas, he found the love and affection he had long done without. From her he acquired social grace and poise he had never known, and, together with her, he provided a Christian home for their four children.6 In his judicial capacity he increased, by constant study, his knowledge of law, experiencing a tranquillity of mind and spirit he had never before realized.7 And in politics which had always held a magnetic attraction for him, he zealously endeavored to raise a phlegmatic state Democratic party out of its doldrums, and make it an active, powerful machine.8 4 See William O. Lynch, "Popular Sovereignty and the Colonization of Kansas from 1854-1860," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, IX (1919), 380 ff. 5 Family Bible in possession of Jefferson Davis Reagan, Jr., Beaumont, Texas; Malvern Hill Omohundro, The Omohundro Genealogical Record, pp. 71-73. Edwina Moss Nelms, daughter of Colonel Edwin and Diana Nelms, was born at Traveler's Rest, Northumberland County, Virginia, on December 12, 1832. She and Reagan exchanged vows at her home at Eaglewood near Anderson, Grimes County, Texas. See Northern Standard (Clarksville), February 5, 1853. 6 From this marriage there were six children, but one died at birth and one at a very early age. Reagan, Memoirs, p. 60; family Bible in possession of Jefferson Davis Reagan, Jr., Beaumont, Texas; interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, with B. P., February 12, 1956. 7 Interview of Mrs. Jefferson Davis Reagan, Palestine, Texas, with B. P., January 31, 1956. See Northern Standard (Clarksville), May 14, 21, 28, June 4, 1853, for an account of Reagan's first circuit ride as judge and for the impressions he made upon the people. Also see Texas State Gazette (Austin), June 10, 1854, concerning his difficulties as a frontier judge. 8 W. D. Miller to Reagan, September 2, November 8, 1852, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859- At two Democratic conventions in East Texas, in February, 1853,

Procter_5127.pdf 103

5/24/2014 7:44:45 AM

90

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

But now, these years of harmony and peace were passing, and in their stead new forces, violent and intense, were at work. Out of the welter of the Kansas turbulence, the fears and uncertainties of sectional discord, and the general disruption of parties there arose in Texas a portentous new phenomenon, proclaiming the slogan of "America for Americans," preaching religious bigotry and hatred, and appealing "to the bit[t]erest prejudices of race against race, of tongue against tongue, and of class against class."9 The Know-Nothings or Native Americans! What an odious secret organization they were—and yet, how representative of the times was their platform. Against thousands upon thousands of foreigners, many of whom had just recently immigrated to the United States, they demanded political proscription for at least twenty-one years; against Roman Catholics who, they claimed, were mere servants of Papal dictation, they asked for similar prohibitions; for the benefit of Union men, they advocated the preservation of the Constitution and the discontinuances of sectional strife; and for the favor of alarmed slavery men, they supported the Kansas-Nebraska Act by asserting that Congress had no authority to regulate slavery in the territories.10 In Texas in 1855, where Mexicans—Catholic, foreign, hated, and despised by Texans for generations—sympathized with the Negro slave, and where German immigrants espoused abolitionist sentiments and argued for political and social reforms, the Know-Nothing principles swiftly gained favorable acceptance.11 Both slaveholders and unionists flocked to their banner; Whigs, with no party in which to function save that of the Democrats, readily joined them; and great masses of voters affiliated only slightly with a weak, apathetic Democratic party passed over into their ranks.12 Sam Houston closely identiReagan served as president. See Nacogdoches Chronicle, February 15, 1853, and Northern Standard (Clarksville), March 12, 1853. Also see Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 29-36, for an account of the apathetic nature of Texans toward the Democratic party from 1852 to 1855. 9 Reagan to Democratic Committee of Cherokee County, September 25, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 10 Overdyke, Know-Nothing Party, pp. 34-56; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 69-71; Nevins, Ordeal, II, 398-403; Litha Crews, "The Know-Nothing Party in Texas," M.A. Thesis, pp. 5-9. 11 Frederick Law Olmsted, A Journey Through Texas, pp. 126-127, 323-329, 434-437; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 58-61. 12 Crews, "Know-Nothing Party," pp. 11-65. In Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 61-62, and in the Texas State Gazette (Austin), May 5,

Procter_5127.pdf 104

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

91

THE RISE OF A LEADER 13

fied himself with them and supported their cause; Democratic Lieutenant Governor David C. Dickson accepted their nomination for governor; W. G. W. Jowers, Reagan's friend of long standing, agreed to run for lieutenant governor; and popular Lemuel D. Evans canvassed the eastern district for Congress.14 Shocked out of their complacency, Democrats endeavored to meet this rising tide of Americanism, of democracy at its worst. At a hastily called meeting at Austin on June 18, 1855, they renounced Dickson as their candidate, condemned the Know-Nothings as enemies of the government, and clarified the issues between the two parties. Then, they set to work to win the August elections.15 However, with so many party leaders and members disaffected and with no formulated plan of attack, the prospects for victory looked grim indeed to Reagan. For how, he wished to know, could you combat an enemy whose strength you were unable to fathom, whose forces were perfectly organized and doing all they could to defeat you? And who in East Texas, where Evans and Jowers had "the canvass almost entirely'' to themselves and received their most ardent support, would rise to challenge them and expose to the people their abhorrent KnowNothing doctrines?16 At Clarksville near the Red River, there was Major Charles DeMorse, editor of the Northern Standard;11 in the San 1855, are found the proceedings of the Democratic State Convention at Huntsville, Texas, on April 21, 1855. Only twelve counties were represented. Regardless of the small number of delegates they decided to nominate Governor Elisha M. Pease and Lieutenant Governor David C. Dickson for re-election. 13 See Sam Houston, Writings, VI, 192-235, for Houston's speeches on the American or Know-Nothing party. Also see Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 238-241, and Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 197-202, 207-208. 14 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, p. 63. The Know-Nothings met at Washington, Texas, on June 11, 1855, and nominated a slate of candidates for state offices. Stephen Crosby was their choice for commissioner of the General Land Office and John Hancock of Travis County received their approval for congressman of the western district. Other prominent Know-Nothings were John S. Ford, Benjamin Epperson, Roger Q. Mills, Hugh McLeod, E. Sterling, C. Robertson, John Caldwell, and William Stedman. For brief biographical sketches and bibliography of these men, see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas. 15 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 63-64. This meeting was known as the "Bomb Shell" Democratic Convention. See also Texas State Gazette Extra (Austin), June 18, 1855, and Northern Standard (Clarksville), July 7, 1855. 16 Reagan to the Postmaster of Marshall, July 29, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859, and also in Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 18, 1855. 17 See Northern Standard (Clarksville), from November, 1854, to November, 1856, for DeMorse's weekly condemnation of the Know-Nothings. For a short sketch on DeMorse, see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, I, 489.

Procter_5127.pdf 105

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

92

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Augustine and Nacogdoches areas, O. M. Roberts and ex-Governor James Pinckney Henderson; 18 at Dallas, James W. Latimer, editor of the Dallas Herald;™ at Henderson, an ardent young Democrat, Frank W . Bowden;20 and at Marshall, the bitter enemy of Sam Houston, Louis T. Wigfall. 21 But other than these men who was there in the vast area south of the Red River and east of the Trinity—except Reagan? So, even though he had some misgivings about actively engaging in politics while holding a judicial position, Reagan felt compelled to come forward. "The preservation of our government and the great principles on which it rests . . . are threatened," he asserted, and "no citizen, in such a crisis,,, should be excused from raising his voice in its defense. The people must be aroused to this impending danger, the Democratic party saved from defeat.22 Nor were these just idle, euphonious words, spoken for effect and designed to take the place of action. For, in many instances during the East Texas campaign, when Evans made a speech, Reagan was there to answer him; when Jowers attacked the Democratic party, he was there to defend it, and where Know-Nothing sentiments appeared, he hastened to denounce them. 23 "Their proceedings are secret," he exclaimed, "their principles excluding all [people] whose opinions differ from their own, either in religion or politics, from participation in the election of officers and the administration of the government." What do you think of a party that would advocate the violation of the Constitution? What sort of consistency was there in Know-Nothing doctrines that would deny religious and political liber18 Henderson to Reagan, August 8, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), June 2, 1855. 19 Latimer to Reagan, June 16, August 23, October 18, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 20 Bowden to Reagan, August 3, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Also see O. M. Roberts' "Remembrances of Bowden," in Dudley Goodall Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History of Texas, from 1683 to 1897, II, 3921 Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 906-907; Northern Standard (Clarksville), June 2, 1855. 22 Reagan to Democratic Committee of Cherokee County, September 25, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 23 Reagan to the Postmaster of Marshall, July 29, 1855; Democratic Committee for Walker County to Reagan, June 22, 1855; Bowden to Reagan, August 3, 1855; Reagan to Democratic Committee of Cherokee County, September 25, 1855; all in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Texas Republican (Marshall), August 4, 1855; Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 18, 1855.

Procter_5127.pdf 106

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

THE RISE OF A LEADER

93

ty to Catholics because they differed "with them in their articles of faith and mode of worship," and yet would not offer to "impose a like disability upon Jews or Moham[m]edans, he[a]thens, infidels, or atheists . . . or upon Millerites . . . or Mormons[?]" And what kind of people were they that wished to deprive foreign-born citizens, many of whom had fought for this country and were working to build a better, freer nation, of their rights? These questions Reagan hurled at the Know-Nothings, and the people wondered. These questions he answered—to the detriment of the American party—and the people applauded. 24 Thus it was in August, 1855, as the election returns rolled in, that the Democrats had just cause for rejoicing. Not only had they defeated the Know-Nothing ticket—excepting Evans—but for the first time they had crystallized their thoughts and actions into a united movement. Men of promise and ability, assuming responsibilities they had hitherto avoided, had stepped forward to defend the party; and citizens, pledging their support in the next campaign, had formed Democratic organizations. At long last, what ten years of planning and determined effort had failed to achieve, an aggressive opposition had accomplished.25 Meanwhile in East Texas, with the campaign over, with his obligations to the people fulfilled, Reagan quietly resumed his duties as judge. But those citizens who had watched him crusade against the Know-Nothings, who had marveled at his energy and been swayed by the logic of his arguments, did not forget him or what he stood for. Nor were the party leaders oblivious of him, for already they had marked him as the man to oppose Evans at the next congressional election.26 During the months that followed, Reagan's conduct in office and his mounting popularity strengthened their convictions. In October, he received invitations to speak to Democratic gatherings in Rusk, Chero24 Reagan to the Democratic Committee of Cherokee County, September 25, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 64-65. Also see Texas Republican (Marshall), August 4, 1855, for the avid response Reagan received. 25 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 37-40; Crews, "KnowNothing Party," pp. 92-114. On pages 112-114 is found the official vote for all state candidates. 26 Henderson to Reagan, August 8, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Henderson lamented that Reagan was not nominated to run against Evans in the 1855 campaign. See also Latimer to Reagan, December 6, 1855, and Bowden to Reagan, August 3, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859.

Procter_5127.pdf 107

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

94

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

kee, and Ellis counties,27 and in December, Democrats were urging him to become a presidential elector as a "stepping stone" to Congress.28 But because he wished to avoid further criticism for participating in politics while holding a judicial position he asked to be excused from these functions.29 In April, 1856, however, Reagan deliberately ended his self-imposed silence and returned to the political wars. This time his actions stemmed not from his fear of the Know-Nothing threat to individual liberty and good government but from a deep, personal conviction that he, as an elected official, should represent and be subject to the will of his constituents. And since the composition of the Ninth Judicial District had changed considerably following his election in 18 5 2 30 and since the past legislature had increased the salaries of district judges from $1,750 to $2,250, he resigned his seat and announced for re-election.31 But with the tempo of the presidential election increasing, with the Know-Nothings making their second and final bid for state-wide power,32 and with the opposition of Harvard-educated John C. Robertson33 for the judgeship, Reagan found himself in the midst of a bitterly-fought campaign, and, accidental though it was, he became one of the leading spokesmen and defenders of the Democratic party. Again he tirelessly traveled the length and breadth of his district;34 27

Reagan to Democratic Committee of Cherokee County, September 25, 1855; Democratic Committee of Rusk County to Reagan, October 9, 1855; Democrats of Ellis County to Reagan, October 11, 1855; Wiley to Reagan, September 6, 1855; all in R. P., Letters 1852-185928 Latimer to Reagan, December 6, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 29 Reagan to Democratic Committee of Cherokee County, September 25, 1855, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 30 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 60-61. In less than four years the Ninth Judicial District lost jurisdiction over Navarro, Ellis, Tarrant, and Dallas counties, while adding Cherokee and Smith counties. These new areas "contained nearly half the population of the . . . district." 31 Gammel, Laws, IV, 249. See also Governor E. M. Pease to Reagan, April 8, June 25, 1856, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 60-61; Northern Standard (Clarksville), April 26, 1856. 32 Crews, "Know-Nothing Party," pp. 115-161; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 68-71. 33 Robertson was born on March 10, 1824, in Hancock County, Georgia. In 1843, he entered Harvard Law School and in May, 1845, obtained admittance to the bar. He moved to Texas in 1851, living at Jefferson, Henderson, and Tyler. He died at Tyler in 1895. 34 Edwina M. Reagan to her husband, May 11, 1856, in possession of May

Procter_5127.pdf 108

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

THE RISE OF A LEADER

95

again he sought the enemy wherever he might be; again the people listened and were impressed. And when the campaign was over, when the votes had all come in, the Democratic party had crushed the KnowNothings, and Reagan reigned triumphant. 35 Thus, it was not surprising as the nominations for the 1857 election approached that Reagan's name was frequently mentioned. General Henderson and many Democrats urged him to run for governor, especially if Houston should decide to enter the race, because they believed he was the only man who could meet "Old Sam" in debate and beat him. Others clamored for him to contest the popular Evans for Congress and erase the Know-Nothings from the political scene completely, while still others asked him merely to accept either nomination tendered him. 36 For a long time Reagan steadfastly refused to consider their requests. After all, he had just been re-elected to a new six-year term as judge, and he truly loved his work. But as his supporters' pleas became more fervent and the demands for his services more urgent, he finally stated that, if nominated, he would not "feel at liberty to decline the contest."37 On May 13, 1857, soon after the State Democratic Convention had selected Hardin R. Runnels for governor and Francis R. Lubbock for lieutenant governor,38 Democrats of the Eastern District assembled at Tyler and nominated Reagan for Congress.39 Though reluctant to do so, Reagan resigned his judicial position and once again took up the campaign trail. 40 Before him, he well Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas; Bowden to Reagan, June 26, 1856, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. See also Northern Standard (Clarksville), June 21, 1856. 35 In E. M. Pease, Executive Record Book No. 276, 1853-1857, MSS., p. 542, the official election returns for district judge of the Ninth Judicial District were: Reagan, 3,558; Robertson, 2,050. Also see James M. Wiggins to Reagan, August 5, 1856, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. For the Know-Nothing campaign of 1856, see Crews, "Know-Nothing Party," pp. 115-161. For a synopsis of Democratic success over the state, see Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 23, 1856. 36 Henderson to Reagan, March 31, 1857, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Reagan to Roberts, April 15, 1857, in Roberts Papers; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 62; Northern Standard (Clarksville), March 14, 1857. 37 Reagan to Roberts, April 15, 1857, in Roberts Papers; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 62. 38 Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 209-213; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 71—74. The convention met at Waco from May 4-6y 1857. Up to that time it was the largest Democratic meeting ever assembled. 39 Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 212-213; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 62; Texas Republican (Marshall), May 30, 1857. 40 Concerning Reagan's resignation, see Pease to Reagan, May 26, 1857, in R. P.,

Procter_5127.pdf 109

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

96

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

knew, were two months of exhaustive travel, of long, arduous days and short, sometimes sleepless nights, of countless hours of speeches and debates—made all the more formidable by Houston's decision to run for governor.41 Besides, in Evans he was meeting an experienced, popular incumbent; a powerful orator of considerable ability; a man, like himself, of great physical strength and endurance; and a KnowNothing who was aligning himself with Houston as a Jacksonian Democrat.42 More and more he realized just how difficult the race would be, how serious his position was becoming. Across East Texas floated reports that Houston and Evans were touring the northern counties together; from Marshall came warnings that he would have "to manufacture . . . strength" in order to win the county, and from friends and supporters came frantic appeals for him to begin campaigning immediately.43 So Reagan, in mapping out his strategy, planned to place Evans at a disadvantage, to force him onto a battlefield not of his own choosing, and to separate him from illustrious "Old Sam." Proposing a joint campaign, he challenged Evans to meet him in debate across the state and to discuss before the people the issues involved. And when Evans, unable to decline his offer without embarrassing explanations, truculently accepted his invitation, Reagan launched his campaign.44 And what a campaign it was! After making his first speech at Palestine on June 6, Reagan spoke briefly at Crockett before proceeding to Woodville where he encountered Evans for the first time. Then, until the first Monday in August, through thirty-six counties and in forty-eight joint discussions, the two men presented themselves and their views to the people.45 Letters 1852-1859; Texas Republican (Marshall), May 30, 1857; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 62-63. 41 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 63. In his campaign with Evans, Reagan says that Houston's influence and popularity had to be met and overcome. Houston campaigned as an independent, claiming to have always been a Jacksonian Democrat. He announced his candidacy on May 12, 1857. See Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 74-75; Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 248-252. 42 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 63-64; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 48. *3 A. T. Rainey to Reagan, May 18, 1857, and W . R. D. Ward to Reagan, June 3, 1857, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 44 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 63. See also in the Texas State Gazette (Austin), July 11, 1857, an article concerning Evans' irritation at the Reagan challenge. 45 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 63-64.

Procter_5127.pdf 110

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

THE RISE OF A LEADER

97

Their speeches were long, their arguments bitter, and crowds flocked to hear them, as frequently they came dangerously close to open conflict.46 Claiming to be the only Democrat in the race, Reagan pounded continually at Evans for his adherence to Know-Nothing doctrines. Step by step he verbally excoriated him for attempting to make religious bigotry and race hatred a basis for a political campaign. And derisively he laid bare Evans' attempts to hide his past party affiliations. In rebuttal, Evans vigorously asserted that he was a Democrat, but not one such as Reagan or Runnels who favored all extreme southern measures even to the extent of advocating the African slave trade and secession. Houston, an independent Democrat, was his leader, he declared, and the preservation of the Union, his platform.47 So through town after town did the two veteran campaigners proceed, each man fiercely and indefatigably attacking the weakest link in his opponent's armor. Evans had difficulty explaining his KnowNothing associations, but he made it equally hard for Reagan to escape the label of southern extremist. Much to Reagan's chagrin, the oratorical contest in which he had few peers was becoming a standoff. But during the debate at Jefferson, the tide of battle suddenly changed. While Evans was making his usual tirade against secessionists and milliners, a young man went up to Reagan and handed him a letter, saying that Mrs. J. M. Glough of Marshall had authorized him to use it. Swiftly he examined its contents and as soon as Evans had ended his speech he approached the rostrum with the letter in his hand and then began to speak. For the sake of argument, he would admit, he said, that many Democratic leaders were firebrands and secessionists, but there was, however, one among us who had advocated disunion as early as 1850 and had eagerly desired that year to attend the Nashville Convention, composed of southern extremists. Such a man was he who wrote this note. Then quickly Reagan proceeded to read to the audience the communication in which the author obviously had sought to be a delegate to the convention and had identified himself with nullifiers and secessionists. In conclusion, he asked, "Who do you suppose, fellow-citizens, wrote the letter?" Hesitating a moment for the curiosity of the crowd to mount, he turned 46 Ibid., p. 64. Reagan states that the joint discussions never lasted less than five hours. For reports on several of their debates, see Henderson Democrat, June 27, 1857, in R. P., Printed Matter; Texas Republican (Marshall), July 17, 1857. 47 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 64-65; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 217-218.

Procter_5127.pdf 111

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

98

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

toward Evans and said, "As the prophet Nathan said to King David, 'Thou art the man.' " Beside himself with rage, Evans jumped to his feet, drew his sixgun, and denounced Clough for giving up a private letter and Reagan for using it. But Reagan, facing him squarely with gun in hand, replied: "Judge Evans, let's put up our six-shooters; I do not wish to kill you, nor do I wish to be killed. I want to go to Congress, and I am going there." 48 And go to Congress he did. For on August 3, 1857, the people of the Eastern District of Texas gave him an overwhelming majority.49 48

Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 218-219. Reagan defeated Evans by a vote of 15,341 to 9,929. See E. M. Pease, Executive Record Book No. 276, 1853-1857, MSS., pp. 647-649; Northern Standard (Clarksville), October 24, 1857; Texas State Gazette (Austin), October 10, 1857. 49

Procter_5127.pdf 112

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

C H A P T E R

X

Disruption of the Union

• •ASHINGTON, a sprawling, rambling, community along the Potomac, was cold and damp in December, 1857. Its spacious gardens were barren of life, its buildings foreboding and bleak, and objectionable vapors rising from the river's marshes were blanketing the city. Yet, neither the weather nor the atmosphere could discourage the gala mood emanating from the reconvening of Congress. Thousands upon thousands of people had thronged into the city. Perennial office seekers offering their "invaluable" services; lobbyists distributing money and gaining favors; legislators returning to their duties; foreign diplomats representing their respective countries; military men, outfitted in colorful uniforms, awaiting assignment; ambitious society women exhibiting their unmarried daughters; interested spectators viewing the White House, the magnificent government edifices, and the still unfinished capitol; Northerners and Southerners, believing in strength in numbers, determined to give added support to their representatives in the fierce struggle over slavery—all were there, each with an individual purpose and plan, each excited and enthusiastic, each expectant and hopeful.1 1 Ben Perley Poore, Perley's Reminiscences of Sixty Years in the National Metropolis, I, 460-544; Mary J. Windle, Life in Washington, and Life Here and There,

Procter_5127.pdf 113

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

100

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

But other than the opening of a new congressional session and the beginning of a festive social season, there was little cause for rejoicing. The Panic of 1857 had shaken the nation's confidence, had magnified sectional animosities, and had intensified economic and social miseries. The proposed admission of Kansas had widened the chasm between the North and South. The Supreme Court, instead of solving the slavery issue in the territories by the Dred Scott decision,2 had succeeded only in bringing opprobrium and denunciation down upon its own head. And President James Buchanan, already showing the strains of the first trying months in office,3 but determined to bring Kansas into the Union as a slave state, faced the disruption of the Democratic party with Douglas, its most powerful champion, in revolt. What the country cried out for in these critical years was statesmanship of the highest order. It needed fearless, farsighted men, ruled by reason rather than passion and dedicated to compromise rather than to inexorable tenets—patriots, in the true sense of the word, who would place service above self by assiduously devoting themselves to the preservation of the Union. The Kansas question, however, with all of its deep implications, had made such leadership almost impossible, for it had roused the nation as never before. In 1832, and even more so in 1850, there had been bitterness and strife but not on such a large scale. Where once extremists had bellowed to half-empty halls and scant crowds, they now experienced a popularity of unparalleled proportions; where once there had been a common bond among peace-loving people of all sections, there was now a definite cleavage; and where once there had been men in public service capable of compromising for the napp. 85-88, 136-137, 228-271; George W . Smyth to Reagan, September 15, 1857, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Allan Nevins, The Emergence of Lincoln, I, 119-129, and Roy F. Nichols, The Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 140-149, also give illuminating descriptions of Washington. 2 In a majority ruling, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney declared that since Dred Scott was a Negro, he was not a citizen and, therefore, could not appeal to the Supreme Court. Taney reasoned that Scott was still a slave, that slaves were property and under the Fifth Amendment Congress could not deprive people of property without due process of law. Then he concluded by declaring that states could exclude slavery from their territory but Congress could not; consequently, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional. See Carl B. Swisher, Roger B. Taney, pp. 493-524. 3 Windle, Life in Washington, p. 306; Alexander H. Stephens to his brother, Linton, January 20, 1858, in Richard Malcolm Johnston and William Hand Browne, Life of Alexander H. Stephens, p. 329.

Procter_5127.pdf 114

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

101

tional good, there now appeared leaders either desirous of conciliation but not forceful enough to obtain it or bound so strongly by their beliefs and environment and by the demands of their constituents that they were unable to change their views. Thus it was as the Thirty-Fifth Congress assembled that the nation grimly but hopefully awaited its decisions. In the South the beat of the drum and the sound of the fife had already begun its ominous cadence, while in the North the rumblings against slavery increased in tempo. But possibly it was still not too late to find a peaceful solution and to prevent an irrepressible conflict between two civilizations.4 Yet who was there on the national scene capable of averting this disaster? Was it possible that in the approaching crisis the aged, vacillating Buchanan could become the tower of strength that the indomitable Jackson had been? Could Jefferson Davis, William H. Seward, John H. Crittenden, or Douglas duplicate the 1850 feats of Clay and Webster and unify the North and South once again? It was not likely. Meanwhile, in this maelstrom of uncertainty, tension, and turmoil that enveloped Washington, Reagan arrived to take his seat in Congress. Nearing forty, he was no longer the frail, gangling youth who had come to Texas almost twenty years before. Heavy muscled now and powerfully built, he appeared rather stocky and much shorter than he actually was, although well over six-feet tall. His broad, highcheekboned face, bronzed and burned by the sun and partially hidden by a full black beard and long lionlike mane, marked him with a certain fierceness and ruggedness, or perhaps even stubbornness, so symbolic of the frontier. And his most outstanding feature, dark, fathomless eyes, almost piercing at times, gave ample warning to friend and foe alike to think well and long before contesting him.5 But during the first several months in Washington, Reagan allowed no one the least opportunity to disagree with him. Unsure of himself in these impressive foreign surroundings and sensing keenly his lack of experience and knowledge in Federal legislation and affairs, he preferred to remain silent during the fierce congressional debates until 4 Speaking at Rochester, New York, on September 25, 1858, Seward first used the phrase "irrepressible conflict." See Frederick Bancroft, The Life of William H. Seward, I, 458-461. 5 W. D . Wood, Reminiscences of Reconstruction in Texas and Reminiscences of Texas and Texans Fifty Years Ago, pp. 48-49, gives a description of Reagan at least four or five years before he became a congressman. Compare Wood's account with Reagan's picture as a member of the first Confederate cabinet.

Procter_5127.pdf 115

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

102

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

he became acquainted with the rules and procedures of the House as well as with the full details of the subjects involved.6 During the day and much of the night, he, together with his first assistant, Joseph F. Lewis,7 attended to the countless needs and demands of his constituents, gave consideration to the suggestions and requests of state officials, and planned the legislation he proposed to introduce,8 while at night he endured the endless succession of balls and parties provided by the Buchanan administration.9 Then gradually, as he gained confidence and understanding, he began to participate more and more in the difficult problems confronting the Thirty-Fifth Congress. During the first half of 1858 the legislators grappled with such issues as government expenditures, the deficiency appropriation bill, Commodore Hiram Paulding's seizure of the filibustering William Walker, Brigham Young's Utah, army organization, and frontier protection.10 Yet, in hours consumed, in efforts and energy expended, all these problems combined took but a meager fraction of the session's time when compared with the explosive question of Kansas' request 6

Reagan to Roberts, September 18, 1857, in Roberts Papers. On December 23, 1857, Reagan made his first motion in the House of Representatives. He was ruled out of order. On January 15 and 18, 1858, he tried to introduce a bill, but on both occasions he was not allowed to do so. Finally on January 20, 1858, he had a bill concerning the boundary between Texas and the territories of the United States referred to the Committee on Territories. See U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 171, 313, 321, 345. 7 Joseph F. Lewis was a clerk in the United States Post Office Department as well as the private secretary and close friend of General Rusk. Upon Rusk's death in 1857, friends of Lewis asked Reagan to sustain him. There is some question as to who sustained whom when Reagan arrived in Washington, for Lewis proved himself invaluable. Lewis remained with Reagan until the end of the Civil War. John C. Rusk to Reagan, September 1, 1857; Smyth to Postmaster General A. V. Brown, September 7, 1857; and Smyth to Reagan, September 15, 1857, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 8 Robert S. Neighbors to Reagan, December 3, 1857, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Pease to G. M. Bryan and Reagan, November 3, 1857, in E. M. Pease, Governor's Letters, 1853-1857, MSS.; Reagan to John Henry Brown, September 15, 1857, in Good transcripts, loaned to the Texas Centennial Historical Exhibit, University of Texas Archives, Austin, Texas. Reagan had a large mailing list. He sent out congressional documents and different types of seeds and vines to his constituents. See James W . Scott to Reagan, December 30, 1857, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; also Northern Standard (Clarksville), from February 20 to July 17, 1858, acknowledges Reagan's gifts almost weekly. 9 Reagan to his wife, Edwina, December 16, 1857, January 4, 1858, in possession of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas; Poore, Reminiscences, II, 23-24; Windle, Life in Washington, pp. 249-255, 260-264, 268-281, 285-288, 301-309. 10 See Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 117-194, for a splendid account of these problems.

Procter_5127.pdf 116

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

103

for statehood. For Kansas had rekindled the memories of past wrongs, of old antagonisms and fears. It had loosened an unbridled passion and prejudice among the people, dividing them into two hostile camps, and it was upon the verge of breaking a powerful Democratic party into discordant, sectional segments. Thus, in the halls of Congress it was not surprising that men, giving full expression to their feelings, bitterly harangued one another. Kansas had been before the public for over three years now. News of the Lawrence and Pottawatomie massacres, atrocities by Missouri "border ruffians," and reports of corruption and fraudulent elections had permeated the length and breadth of the nation, shocking both North and South with each new outrage. Two governors appointed by Franklin Pierce had received harsh treatment from the Kansans, 11 and Buchanan's nominee, former Secretary of the Treasury Robert J. Walker, declaring that an election adopting a state constitution would be free of fraud and violence, had fared no better. The proslavery frontiersmen had fiercely opposed him, openly flaunting him as "this pigmy" sent to govern them, 12 and despite his protests and objections they ran things to suit themselves. At Lecompton in September, 1857, during a preliminary gathering of the constitutional convention, and again in October at the principal meeting, Walker found himself persona non grata with an organization he had once hoped to control.13 To his chagrin the delegates had drawn up the so-called Lecompton Constitution—a document designed to protect slavery regardless of the desires of the people 14 —and had submitted it to the voters on December 21. So, in December, 1857, this was the issue in contention before 11

For excellent accounts of the turbulent history of Kansas, see Nevins, Ordeal, II; Roy F. Nichols, Franklin Pierce; and George Fort Milton, The Eve of Conflict. 12 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 106-109. 13 Walker had planned to bring Kansas into the Union as a Democratic state with himself at the head of the party. But opposition by the proslavery leaders together with his rejection of the Oxford County and McGee County election returns because of ballot box stuffing, made him extremely unpopular with the constitutional convention. See Nevins, Lincoln, I, 144-175; Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 110-121; Milton, Eve of Conflict, pp. 262-270. 14 The Lecompton Constitution gave the voters a choice of allowing future admission of slaves or not allowing them, but in either case, slave property received protection in the state even if the people wished to ban slavery. Nevins, Lincoln, I, 235-236, describes the choice given as "Heads I win, Tails you lose" or as the opportunity of voting "to take arsenic with bread and butter, or without bread and butter." Also see Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 121-128.

Procter_5127.pdf 117

5/24/2014 7:44:46 AM

104

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Congress—Lecompton or anti-Lecompton. Walker had already arrived in Washington, urging Buchanan to scrap the controversial contrivance and begin anew. Douglas and many northern Democrats, eying the 1858 elections, talked in much the same vein, while Republicans, since 1856 a strong minority party, repudiated the Kansas frauds and chicanery in the strongest terms.15 On the other hand, a fumbling, pliant Buchanan, fearful of growing threats of secession and torn between his pledge to sustain Walker and his hatred of the Black Republicans, believed it best to support Lecompton, thereby putting the Kansas problem to rest. Unfortunately he would have to discard Walker, but a militant South, denouncing the Kansas governor at every turn, would be appeased, and with twenty-five southern senators forming a hard-core majority in the upper house, Buchanan saw no other course to take.16 On December 8, 1857, in his annual message to Congress, he unfurled the administration's banner for Lecompton.17 But what Buchanan did not expect was the grueling struggle in Congress his decision would precipitate. Nor did he anticipate any large defection of northern Democrats from the position he had taken. In the Senate where Douglas viciously assailed him, there was nothing to fear with twenty-five grimfaced Southerners supporting him. And in the House where the balance of power swayed in the administration's favor by a small majority,18 there seemed only slight cause for alarm. Yet, within two months Buchanan was battling strenuously to save Lecompton, using every means in his power—patronage, nightly dinner parties, legislative maneuvering, and either threats or entreaties according to the individual situation—to avert defeat. For the House, the unwieldy, uproarious "little brother" of the Senate, its members elected every two years, and therefore, much more dependent on and responsive to public opinion than the upper chamber, had rebelled. A small bloc of northern Democrats, threatened with political suicide on the one hand and executive wrath on the other, had chosen to follow the dictates of their constituents and of their consciences by join15 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 128-130; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 236-239, 241-242. 16 Nevins, Lincoln, I, 242-243, 258-259. 17 James Buchanan, The Works of James Buchanan, X, 146-151. 18 In the House there were 128 Democrats, 92 Republicans, and 14 Americans. Of the 128 Democrats, 75 were from the South. In the Senate there were 37 Democrats, 20 Republicans, and 5 Americans. Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 150-153.

Procter_5127.pdf 118

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

105

ing Republicans in fighting Lecompton.19 And on February 2, 1858, test votes in the House showed the anti-Lecomptonites in the majority.20 After these significant polls, the administration forces in the House, led by Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia, employed delaying tactics in order to regroup and gain fresh support.21 Buchanan renewed his pressuring efforts; Stephens and southern Democrats tried to whip their northern brethren into line by threats of party discipline;22 then when these methods failed, they sought to compromise with them. 23 For almost, three months, the battle of wits, of maneuvering and countermaneuvering, continued. Flushed by their newly-gained power, the Republicans confidently tried to force the issue, but got nowhere against the filibustering Southerners.24 The long day sessions extended into even longer night meetings lasting sometimes into the wee hours of the morning. Some legislators took stimulants; others had sofas placed nearby.25 The strain of overwork began to show. Harsh words resounded throughout the chamber, tempers flared, and fights between congressmen became frequent,26 as the anti-Lecomptonites attacked the administration's stand with increasing bitterness. Such terms as tyrants and "nigger drivers" liberally besprinkled their speeches, while slavery received special vilification. 19 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 156-157; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 255; Reagan to his wife, December 16, 1857, Januaiy 4, 1858, in possession of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas. 20 The vote was 109 to 105 against the administration. See U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 533-541; Alexander H. Stephens to his brother, Linton, February 3, 1858, in Johnston and Browne, Alexander H . Stephens, p. 329. 21 Johnston and Browne, Alexander H. Stephens, pp. 329-333. Stephens gives a good account of his activities in the House. Also see Nevins, Lincoln, I, 288-291. 22 New York Tribune, February 4, 15, 1858. On Saturday February 14, Stephens called a Democratic caucus. Fifty-four members attended. After John Cochran was elected chairman and Reagan, secretary, Stephens demanded better party organization to put through the Kansas bill. S. S. Cox of Ohio and William Montgomery of Pennsylvania protested against making Lecompton "a test of Democracy." The caucus ended without agreement. Also see Reagan to his wife, April 18, 1858, in possession of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas. 23 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 164-172; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 292-293. 24 U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 596-606. 25 Poore, Reminiscences, I, 532; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 287-288. 26 New York Tribune, February 6, 8, 13, 23, April 13, 1858; Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 159-160, 172; Johnston and Browne, Alexander H. Stephens, pp. 329-330; Windle, Life in Washington, pp. 292-296.

Procter_5127.pdf 119

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

106

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Then on April 30, it all came to an end. The Democrats by means of the English bill 27 reached a compromise, and the Kansas question, the object of so much partisanship and conflict during the past three years, was finally sent back to Kansas. But to Reagan as well as to many other Southerners the real issues emanating from Kansas—extension of slavery, preservation of the Union, and maintaining peace—were far from solved. With growing apprehension, they watched abolitionist sentiments, represented politically by the Black Republicans, increase in volume and virulence. With annoyance they read of northern legislatures criticizing the South, its institutions and way of life. Resentfully they learned of violations of the Fugitive Slave Law and of northern determination to resist the advance of slavery. And with the alarming prospect of a Republican president imminent in I860, they strove to reunite and regroup a badly split Democratic party.28 Returning home in the summer of 1858, Reagan carried the events of the past months in Congress vividly in his mind. To John Marshall, chairman of the State Democratic Committee, he urged the complete surrender of personal differences within the party in order to present a more united front;29 to many of his friends he, although an ardent Union man, intimated that there were far greater evils forming on the 27 U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1880-1906; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 296—301; Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 167-175; Milton, Eve of Conflict, pp. 291-293. The English bill assured the people of Kansas that if they accepted the Lecompton constitution, they would receive the usual grant of land given to each of the states recently admitted, 3,988,868 acres, plus 5 per cent of the net proceeds of 2 million acres sold by the government since July. If they rejected Lecompton and the land grant, Kansas would not enter the Union until the census proved that there were ninety thousand inhabitants in the territory. The New York Tribune from April 22 to May 1, 1858, refers to the English proposal continually as the "Lecompton bribe" and the "English Swindle." 28 In U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1192 ff., Reagan discussed the Kansas question as viewed by many southern Democrats. Reagan also defended a resolution of the Texas Democratic Convention calling for Texan delegates to meet with other southern states to discuss the preservation of their rights. See Congressman Silas M. Burroughs' (Republican from New York) speech referring to this action in ibid., pp. 815-816, and the Texas State Gazette (Austin), January 14, 1858. The New York Tribune, March 20, 1858, after praising William Montgomery's (Democrat from Pennsylvania) talk against Lecompton, stated that Reagan's speech was "a tirade against the Union, to which scarcely anybody listened." See also Reagan to Roberts, February 22, 1858, in Roberts Papers; Quitman to John Marshall, February 1, 1858, in J. F. H. Claiborne, Life and Correspondence of John A. Quitman, II, 250-254. ^Reagan to Marshall, July 31, 1858, in Dallas Herald, August 14, 1858.

Procter_5127.pdf 120

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

107

horizon than dissolution and secession;30 and to his constituents, he attempted to explain what he had experienced in Washington, what grave perils were confronting the nation, and what he, as their congressman, had tried to do to alleviate or remedy them. In speech after speech throughout his district,31 he reiterated these thoughts, warning the people of the troubled years ahead. At the same time, he argued that such forms of southern fanaticism as Colonel William L. Yancey's Southern League, the reopening of the African slave trade, and the support of the filibustering William Walker would not solve their problems but would bring further criticism and denunciation on the South. And as for him, with the Democratic party leading the way, he preferred "to look still to the Union as the sheet anchor of . . . [his] hopes, and remain loyal to the federal constitution."32 To be sure, after assailing these firebrand schemes, Reagan met with strong opposition from various quarters. To many Texans, and Southerners as well, Walker's filibustering represented the possible extension of slavery southward; the reopening of the slave trade meant the continued flourishing of an institution necessary to the South; while Yancey's activities typified the militant counteractive required to combat the abolitionists. J. W. Latimer, editor of the Dallas Herald, although one of Reagan's most ardent supporters, openly disagreed with him over Walker; 33 Governor Hardin R. Runnels, an avowed secessionist, believing that Reagan's speeches were strengthening the position of his political enemy, Sam Houston, plotted with Guy M. Bryan to undermine his popularity and discredit him; 34 and disunionists, infuriated by his remarks, hastened to heap abuse upon him. 30 Dallas Herald, September 8, 1858. 31 Reagan made extensive tours during August, September, and October to visit his constituents. He had many speaking engagements. Requests of citizens of Henderson County to Reagan, August 28, 1858, and citizens of Dallas County to Reagan, August 27, 1858, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Dallas Herald, August 14, 21, September 16, 1858; Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 25, October 16, 1858. 32 Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 18, 1858; Dallas Herald, September 8, 1858, January 12, 1859; Texas Republican (Marshall), August 28, 1858. 33 Dallas Herald, October 6, 1858; Reagan to Latimer, October 7, 1858, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 34 Runnels and Reagan were never close socially or politically, and Reagan's Unionist expressions widened the gap between them. See Reagan to Roberts, February 22, 1858, in Roberts Papers; Roberts to Reagan, January 14, 1858, and Scott to Reagan, September 8, 1858, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; H. R. Runnels to Bryan, September 20, 1859, in Bryan Papers. During the second session of the Thirty-Fifth Congress, Reagan and Bryan were frequent opponents. See U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe,

Procter_5127.pdf 121

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

108

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

Reagan, however, as he prepared to leave for Congress, remained adamant neither retreating from his position nor altering his course. Writing to Latimer concerning their disagreement, he expressed regret that his "right arm . . . was gone" but stated that he would always maintain his convictions of right regardless of the consequences. "I e x p e c t . . . for the time I may have to stand alone," he concluded, "and if the tide ebbs from me now [,] when the great swelling tide of truth and justice comes . . . it will float my barque again." 35 So, in November, 1858, with his political future in doubt, Reagan returned to Washington to resume his duties36—passing from one turbulent scene to another; for in Congress the bitterness, fear, and distrust aroused by sectional passions again pervaded the halls. Grimly, northern Democrats, beaten in the summer elections, sought satisfaction, compensation, or revenge for their defeat; apprehensively, southern Democrats were looking forward to their own congressional contests; while Republicans, haranguing and opposing the administration at every turn, played politics for all it was worth. Day after day northern and southern legislators hurled sharp invectives and caustic retorts at one another. Month after month they wrangled over every issue brought before them, bringing legislation to a virtual standstill. Then on March 10, 1859, with very little accomplished other than exciting the nation to a more feverish pitch, they adjourned.37 Returning home from the Thirty-Fifth Congress, Reagan was appalled by what he had experienced. He had seen enraged men—the leaders of the nation—unable to compromise, motivated by ungovernable passions, and inexorably resolved to uphold their position. Time and again he had heard them argue over questions, no matter how small and insignificant, making them partisan and sectional; irritatedly he had watched his bills requesting frontier protection for Texas, reimbursement of state funds incurred by expeditions against the In35th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 27, 85-89, 98, 1368, 1466-1467; Dallas Herald, March 23, 1859. 35 Dallas Herald, October 6, 1858. The Northern Standard (Clarksville), September 25, 1858, supported Reagan, as did the Dallas Herald, Palestine Advocate, and Austin Intelligencer. See Dallas Herald, December 15, 1858. 36 Dallas Herald, November 24, 1858. Reagan left for Washington on November 9, 1858, in order to arrive in time for the first meeting of Congress on December 6, 1858. 37 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 222-227; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 427-440.

Procter_5127.pdf 122

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

109

dians, 38 settlement of the boundary between Texas and the New Mexico Territory,39 and the impeachment of Federal Judge John C. Watrous 40 consistently ignored or rejected; and with alarm he had witnessed intense bitterness and antipathy engendered by the defeat of such important legislation as the Cuban bill, the homestead bill, the Post Office appropriation, and bills on the tariff, the Pacific Railroad, and internal improvements.41 Gradually, but surely, the deadlocked Thirty-Fifth Congress had moved the nation a step closer to secession and civil war. And unless men believing in moderation and desiring union came forward in the next session, Reagan feared that the end of the great experiment in democracy was near. Thus did Reagan, although previously stating that he would not seek re-election,42 decide to run again. On April 12, soon after his return home, he issued a circular to his constituents clarifying his position. In detail, he reaffirmed his opposition to the African slave trade and filibustering, marking them as sectional and revolutionary doctrines. Assiduously he denounced abolitionists and southern firebrands alike, because both claimed "rights superior to the Constitution and Laws of the land," and believed themselves privileged "to invade other people and despoil them of their property at whatever expense of human life and human suffering." Unequivocally he asserted that the Democratic party, imbued with the Jeffersonian tradition of states' rights and a strict construction of the Constitution as maintained in the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions, held forth the only hope for 38 Reagan was appointed to the Indian Affairs and Post Office Appropriation committees. U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 1st Session, p. 31. Since the Texas frontier was inadequately protected, Reagan asked for four additional United States regiments and one regiment of mounted volunteers to keep peace and order. See in ibid., pp. 725, 1072, 1177, 1475; also in ibid., 35th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 218-219, 1046-1047, 1164-1407. 39 Ibid., 35th Congress, 1st Session, p. 321. 40 Ibid., 35th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 12-44, 56-68, 78-92, 95-102. Watrous became involved in land speculation while a federal judge, and in the litigation which followed, he presided over the case. Texans demanded his impeachment and Reagan vigorously worked to this end. Guy M. Bryan, however, thwarted his efforts. Texas newspapers were especially pleased with Reagan's work in Congress concerning Watrous. See Dallas Herald, December 15, 1858, quoting the Austin Intelligencer; ibid., January 19, 1859, quoting the Texas State Gazette (Austin); ibid., December 29, 1858, February 16, 1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), January 8, 29, 1859. Also see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 869-870, for further information and bibliography on Watrous. 41 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 227-242; Nevins, Lincoln, I, 440-459. 42 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 70, 72-73.

Procter_5127.pdf 123

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

110

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

the Union and for the defense of the South against northern onslaughts. And if the Democrats did not emerge victorious in the forthcoming election, he warned them, these present advantages might easily be lost. "So far we have been protected against these [abolitionist] aggressions by the federal executive and federal judiciary,'' he remarked, but . . . if the time shall come when these departments of the government shall go into the hands of those who would thus disregard and deny us our rights . . . then the compact of union between the states would be broken, . . . the constitution violated, and our rights so affected as to require us to fall back on the reserved rights of the States, and defend them by all the means necessary. Until that time, however, "I am for a policy in the Union." Then, in order that there would be no misunderstanding as to his position, he concluded by saying: "If the principles I have laid down be your principles, then I am willing to be your representative. But if the principles I combat be your principles, then I am not the proper person to carry them out." 43 But Texans did approve of Reagan's platform. Watching the ominous sectional struggle rage about them, they desperately grasped out for this man who would show them the way to the safe, high ground of union, who would lead them out of this dark abyss of turbulence and strife. In county after county, Democrats urged his re-election.44 Without reservation the Dallas Herald endorsed him as did the Northem Standard, the Tyler Reporter, the Trinity Advocate, and the Telegraph and Texas Register.45 When southern firebrands attacked him, such influential citizens as George W. Smyth, J. W. Latimer, Samuel DeMorse, and James W . Scott arose to defend him, 46 and even an old 43

Circular to the voters of the First Congressional District from Reagan, April 12, 1859, in R. P., Circulars, Pamphlets, and Speeches. Several months earlier in Congress, Reagan delivered a similar address for which he received extensive criticism from Texas newspapers. See U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 35th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 1466-1467; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 70-72. 44 Dallas Herald, April 13, 20, 27, May 4, 1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), April 30, 1859. *& Northern Standard (Clarksville), April 16, 23, 30, 1859; Dallas Herald, April 20, 1859, endorsed no other candidates for over a month. 46 DeMorse was editor of the Northern Standard; Latimer, editor of the Dallas Herald; Scott, part owner of the Telegraph and Texas Register (Houston); and Smyth, former Congressman. Other than the evidence found in these newspapers, see clipping from Tyler Reporter, April 20, 1859, clipping from Galveston Civilian,

Procter_5127.pdf 124

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

111

political enemy, Sam Houston, praised him as a man of "genius, integrity, and industry/'47 His popularity becoming immense, his supporters quickly united, and on May 2, delegates to the Henderson Democratic Convention, after a small secessionist faction bolted the meeting, unanimously chose him as their candidate.48 So, in the summer of 1859, Reagan once more "hit the campaign trail," and although virtually assured of victory, he found this race, in many ways, his most difficult. For with Runnels, an inveterate foe and secessionist, renominated for governor by the State Democratic Convention49 and with Sam Houston, an avowed Unionist, as the Independent party nominee,50 he found himself torn between party loyalty on the one hand and the maintenance of his convictions on the other. Already some friends were advising him to support Runnels openly, thereby healing the breach in party ranks,51 while others, reminding him of the governor's hostility and aversion to his ideas, urged him to abandon the Democrats and seek an independent course. Above all, they wished to know how he could reconcile his views with those of his party.52 After many an anxious moment, Reagan gave them his answer. He endorsed the Democratic nominees. Writing to George W. Paschal, who had asked him to unite with Houston, he stated that, dissatisfied though he was with the party's selection, he was completely in accord with its platform, and being also one of its candidates he must sustain its actions. Besides, he reasoned, "I have never been able to underApril 26, 1859, and Smyth to Reagan, May 26, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Also Reagan to Smyth, May 11, 1859, and Smyth to Reagan, May 21, 1859, in Smyth Papers. 47 Dallas Herald, April 17, 1859, quoting the San Augustine Texian; Friend, Sam Houston, p. 322. 48 Dallas Herald, May 11, 18, 1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), May 7, 14, 1859; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 245-246. 49 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 77-80. The convention met at Houston from May 2-5, 1859, to adopt a platform and select its candidates. They chose Runnels for governor, Lubbock for lieutenant governor, and Frank M. White for commissioner of the General Land Office. Because of Reagan the platform did not mention filibustering and the African slave trade. Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 243-245. 50 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, p. 80; Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 323-324. 51 W . B. Stout to Reagan, June 7, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 52 George W . Paschal to Reagan, June 10, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Dallas Herald, April 27, 1859.

Procter_5127.pdf 125

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

112

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

stand how I could maintain . . . its principles if I should separate myself from the organization." 53 Thus, putting an end to this problem, he vigorously pushed forward his campaign. Late in June, Judge William B. Ochiltree,54 an able representative of the disunionists, entered the race against him, and for over a month, through letters, circulars, and joint debates they presented their qualifications to the people. Adroitly, Ochiltree charged him with infidelity to the South and with being inconsistent with the pronouncements in his circular, but Reagan, at his best on the "stump,'' countered these attacks with devastating oratory. Time and again he expounded to the people, listening intently and vociferously approving, the immediate necessity of following a middle road to preserve the Union. 55 From all sides came reports of a Reagan landslide victory, but still he refused to slacken his pace.56 Then on August 1, it was all over. Another campaign was history, and Reagan once more victorious.57 And what a victory it was—not merely one of personal triumph but of principle too. For Texans had voted for union as well as for the man. While Reagan was burying Ochiltree under an avalanche of 20,000 votes, the old campaigner, Sam Houston, was defeating Governor Runnels. 58 Never had the people spoken more clearly. In Houses Dallas Herald, June 22, 1859; Reagan to Paschal, June 26, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. Reagan, however, did not actively advocate Runnels' election. The chasm between the two men was too wide to span. 54 For over two months after the secessionists bolted the Henderson Convention they sought a candidate capable of opposing Reagan. Their choice was Ochiltree, a fluent, dynamic speaker, who conducted a vigorous campaign. Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 346; Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas, II, 300. For efforts on the part of the "Bolters," see The Argus (Crockett, Texas), May 21, 1859, in R. P., Circulars, Pamphlets, and Speeches; Northern Standard (Clarksville) May 21, June 4, 1859; Dallas Herald, June 8, 15, 22, 1859. 55 Ochiltree, seeing the tremendous effect Reagan had on an audience, proposed that they limit their speaking engagements and use letters and circulars unless a third candidate entered the race. Reagan agreed. See "re Ochiltree vs Reagan," in R. P., Microfilm; Northern Standard (Clarksville), July 2, 1859; Civilian and Gazette (Galveston), July 21, 1859; Dallas Herald, June 29, July 20, 1859. 56 Reagan to Starr, June 27, 1859, in Starr Papers; B. H. Epperson to James W. Throckmorton, June 28, 1859, in B. H. Epperson Papers; hereafter cited as Epperson Papers. Northern Standard (Clarksville), June 11, 18, 25, July 2, 23, 1859. 57 Reagan received 23,977 votes to Ochiltree's 3,464. See Hardin R. Runnels, Executive Record Book, No. 277, 1857-1859, MSS., pp. 355, 369; Dallas Herald, August 3, 10, 24, 31, October 12, 1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), August 13, 20, 27, October 15, 1859. 68 Houston defeated Runnels by a vote of 33,375 to 27,500. Lubbock, Six Decades,

Procter_5127.pdf 126

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE U N I O N

113

ton and Reagan, they hoped they had found the pilots to weather the political storms threatening the nation.59 Unfortunately, however, the effects of this resounding victory were short-lived. Already the Southern Rights men had begun to regroup their scattered forces, and Runnels, blaming Reagan for his defeat, pledged his revenge.60 Indeed, with no unity of action between the Houston and Reagan followers,61 the disunionists' task became less formidable, and this fact, coupled with the turbulence and strife permeating the country, assured them of a not-too-distant rise to power. For, whatever patriotic and high-minded motives Texans had in the summer of 1859, one act of violence, one hated name, obliterated their conciliatory spirit and drove them into the camp of the extremists. On the night of October 16, 1859, John Brown attacked and captured the Federal arsenal at Harper's Ferry.62 At last, what Southerners had often feared would one day happen was now a reality. Northerners had invaded their territory menacing their institutions, families, and property by attempting to incite an insidious, bloody, slave-insurrection among them. Gone now was the spirit of union; vanishing were the men of compromise—northern eulogies and orations in behalf of John Brown had seen to that—and in their place appeared outraged, frightened, but determined men, filled with suspicion and distrust.63 And as Reagan returned to Congress in December, 1859, he, too, felt a certain futility, almost hopelessness, in combatting the turbulent sectionalism that lashed the nation and that tossed men helplessly about on its dark, discordant waters. He, too, had experienced a sudden pang of horror and fear at the reports from Harper's Ferry. And pp. 247-254, and Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 323-325, give good accounts of the campaign. 59 Throckmorton to Reagan, August 17, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859. 60 Throckmorton to Reagan, August 17, September 9, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Throckmorton to Epperson, August 18, 1859, in Epperson Papers; Runnels to Bryan, September 20, 1859, in Bryan Papers. 61 Throckmorton hoped to persuade Reagan to head a Union Conservative party in Texas, but Reagan, rejecting all advances by him and by Houston men, reaffirmed his determination to remain a Democrat. See Throckmorton to Epperson, August 18, 1859, in Epperson Papers; Throckmorton to Reagan, August 17, September 9, 1859, in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Reagan to Marshall, August 21, 1859, R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Trinity Advocate (Palestine), September 7, 1859, in R. P., Printed Matter 1855-1892; Dallas Herald, September 21, 28, 1859. 62 Nevins, Lincoln, II, 5-27, 70-84; Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 326-327. 63 Nevins, Lincoln, II, 85-112.

Procter_5127.pdf 127

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

114

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

he too was groping about for a way out of this seemingly insoluble problem.64 Where was the path of union? Had it at last been washed away? It was almost unbelievable that in one swift stroke of violence, everything for which he had worked and, for one fleeting moment, won, had been completely demolished—and yet it had. No longer were he and Houston the directors of Texas democracy; no longer were they looked to as guiding beacons. For Southern Rights men, riding the wave of popular indignation, had rapidily gained control of the state legislature, and in preference to Reagan or some other Union man, had elected the ardent secessionist and archfoe of Houston, Louis T. Wigfall, as United States Senator.65 Nor in Washington did Reagan find solace for his anxieties or solutions to his questions, for here he encountered congressmen, like himself, unable to cope with the awesome sectional problems confronting them. Unhappily for the nation there was no middle ground now for either men or issues. Slavery had driven the cleavage too wide for the people to bridge. Northerners saw only the evil of bondage, the cruel overseer, the degradation, poverty, and filthy existence of human beings longing for freedom. Horrified, they heard proposals for reopening the African slave trade, and fearfully they imagined slavery expanding west into the territories and south into Mexico and Cuba. If this happened, they knew there would be no end to this immorality that the South endorsed and defended. On the other hand, Southerners had no less direful forebodings of the future. For almost a decade they had seen the North outdistancing them in wealth and population; helplessly they had watched the West draw closer to their northern brethren politically and economically; and emphatically they believed that, slowly but surely, their interests and welfare were being obstructed, their territorial expansion and growth contained, their rights 64 Reagan's speech in the House of Representatives several weeks after his arrival demonstrates the effects upon his thinking of Harper's Ferry and of the events in Congress. See U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 343-344. 65 Reagan was a leading candidate for U.S. Senator until the Harper's Ferry raid. He wanted the post, but upon realizing that the opposition was too well organized, he did not allow his name to be presented. For accounts and details of this election, see Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 256-258; Dallas Herald, September 7, 14, 21, October 5, 12, 19, November 9, 23, December 14, 1859; Northern Standard (Clarksville), October 8, 15, November 12, December 3, 17, 1859; Reagan to Alexander, October 3, 1859; Stout to Reagan, October 3, 1859; Scott to Reagan, October 10, 1859; all in R. P., Letters 1852-1859; Joseph F. Lewis to Starr, October 31, 1859, in Starr Papers.

Procter_5127.pdf 128

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

115

under the Constitution subverted. Furthermore, there seemed no hope of changing this trend. Already they were in the minority, the count of states standing at eighteen free to fifteen slave. Each year the Black Republicans, unconstitutionally demanding the restriction of slavery in the territories,66 seemed to gain new followers. Every day appeared reports of violations of the Fugitive Slave Law, of opposition by northern legislatures, of attacks by ministers and influential citizens as well as editorials in countless newspapers maligning the South. And John Brown's raid together with the prevailing belief that the Republicans would win the I860 presidential election magnified their anxieties. But, above all in I860, there was in both North and South an all-consuming fear—fear whether real or imaginary, that bred more fear, that gnawed at the heart of the nation spreading hate and distrust to the remotest areas, that prompted men to utter abusive, vituperative language and to perform violent acts, and that with each passing day would increase in intensity until it plunged the nation into civil war. In the Thirty-Sixth Congress, Reagan felt all this; he saw whither it was leading the nation; yet, he could do nothing. At the opening session in the House, with extremists in command, the chamber reverberated with insults, threats, and angry cries of disunion, as the all-important contest for Speaker began. The Republicans, having a plurality,67 put forward John Sherman of Ohio,68 while the southern Democrats, trying desperately to find a candidate about whom they and antiLecompton Democrats and southern Americans could rally, bitterly opposed him. After all, they declared, Sherman or, for that matter, anyone who had endorsed Hinton Helper's Impending Crisis, a book preaching revolution to the nonslaveholders of the South and insurrection to the slaves, was not "fit to be Speaker of this House."69 66 The Dred Scott decision had made this main plank in the Republican party platform untenable. Yet, the party did not abandon it. 67 The House met on Monday, December 5, 1859. There v/ere 237 members, including 109 Republicans, 101 Democrats, 26 Americans, 1 Whig. 68 U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1-3; John Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years in the House, Senate and Cabinet, I, 167-169; Ollinger Crenshaw, "The Speakership Contest of 1859-1860," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XXIX (1942), 323. 69 John B. Clark of Missouri introduced resolutions condemning Helper's book. Sixty-eight representatives of the previous legislature had endorsed the work, including Sherman, Galusha A. Grow, Justin S. Morril, and Joshua Giddings. Sherman said he did not remember endorsing the book nor did he approve of much of its contents, but since his name appeared therein, he presumed he must have signed it.

Procter_5127.pdf 129

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

116

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

So for two months, as the nation apprehensively watched, the battle for control of the House continued, neither side being able to break the deadlock. Southerners, using John Brown's raid and the endorsement of Helper's book as cudgels, rapped their protagonists at every turn, but the Republicans, anxious to organize the House, doggedly proceeded against these attacks.70 Each day the remarks became more caustic; the speeches more derogatory, as hissing, boos, applause, and laughter from the crowded galleries added to the mounting tension. And with nearly every member armed with at least one pistol and bowie knife, the atmosphere was laden with violence.71 On one occasion, after a sharp exchange between Martin J. Crawford of Georgia and Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, a general melee ensued;72 on another, while John B. Haskins of New York was delivering a bitter tirade upon a colleague, his pistol accidentally fell to the floor, and members, believing he meant to use it, almost fought a pitched battle. One day, William Kellogg and John A. Logan, both from Illinois, clashed in a free-swinging encounter; another day, Lawrence Branch of North Carolina became so enraged that he challenged Galusha A. Grow of Pennsylvania to a duel; and every day, disputes threatened to engulf the House in blood and the country in war.73 Then, on January 30, the Republicans broke through the Democratic defenses. On the fortieth ballot Sherman withdrew his name in favor of William Pennington of New Jersey, and two days later, on the forty-fourth vote, the House elected him Speaker.74 See U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 3-21. Sherman, Recollections, pp. 169-171. 70 U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1-650, relates the story of the fierce battle for Speaker. Also see Sherman, Recollections, pp. 167-179; Crenshaw, "The Speakership Contest of 1859-1860," loc. cit., X X I X (1942), 323-338; James Ford Rhodes, History of the United States, II, 417 ff. Since the Speaker appointed all committees, the contest was especially important. Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 270-271, discusses what added significance it held for the Republicans. 71 Rhodes, History, II, 423-425; Nevins, Lincoln, II, 121-122. 72 James Albert Woodburn, The Life of Thaddeus Stevens, pp. 134-136. 73 New York Tribune, January 2, 4, 13, 1860; Crenshaw, "The Speakership Contest of 1859-1860," loc. cit., X X I X (1942), 332-333; Rhodes, History, II, 423-425. In Kittrell, Governors Who Have Been, p. 112, Reagan, reminiscing over his I860 Congressional experiences, remarked to a close friend: "Doctor, if one shot had been fired, this hall of Representatives would have been a slaughter pen." 74 U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 634-650. Pennington received the exact number of votes needed for a majority. The final count was: Pennington, 117; McClernand of Illinois, 85.

Procter_5127.pdf 130

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

117

At long last, the fierce struggle was over, the nation, at times so near to war, breathing a sigh of relief. But to Reagan, as he reviewed the happenings of the past two months, there seemed little over which to rejoice or to be thankful. Coming to Congress in the hope of finding union, he now despaired of it. For, the Republicans, instead of meeting in a spirit of compromise, were haughty and obdurate; instead of working for the nation's betterment, they seemed bent upon destroying the Democratic party and degrading the South.75 And now that they were victorious in the House, what could he and his colleagues expect other than further humiliation? Well may he have regretted his refusal to run for Speaker, soon after the session began,76 and well did he begin to fear for the fate of Texas and for the people of the South. Nor during the next five months did the Republicans in the House give him cause to revise his opinions. Relentlessly they attacked the administration, embarrassing the Democrats whenever they could.77 To the Southerners' chagrin they passed protective tariff and homestead bills, while slashing Democratic appropriations from the supply bills completely. Ruthlessly they added insult to injury by proposing the organization of five new territories without mention of slavery and by voting to admit Kansas as a free state. On the other hand, administration bills were blocked at every turn,78 and in personal legislation Reagan saw his requests for frontier protection and indemnities for Texans suffering from Mexican and Indian raids again disregarded and rejected.79 And as the session came to its gloomy close on June 25, 75 See in ibid., pp. 225, 327-347, 638, 924-927, Reagan's speeches on Republican attitude and actions. 76 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 76-78; Lewis to Starr, December 14, 1859, in Starr Papers; Dallas Herald, January 18, 1860. 77 In appointing committees Pennington relegated Southerners to minor positions. For example, Reagan was placed on the Committee on Revolutionary Claims, and his colleague, Andrew J. Hamilton, on the Committee on Public Lands. Reagan, as did Hamilton, asked to be excused from these committees. Reagan stated that there were no Revolutionary pensioners in Texas and that, in being on the committee, he would be "perfectly useless to . . . [his] state." Hamilton gave a similar excuse. U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, p. 727; Dallas Herald, February 29, I860. 78 Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 323-333, gives a good summary of the House activities in the Thirty-Sixth Congress. Also see Nevins, Lincoln, II, 175-202. 79 In U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, p. 813, Reagan presented several bills concerning the Texas frontier and its defense. Also in ibid., pp. 998-999, 1194, 1237-1238, 1539-1540, 1741, 1782-1783, 1786-1789, 1806, 1808, 1810, 1933, 2046, 2186, see Reagan's repeated demands for protection and for indemnities paid to Texas. In ibid., p. 1805, a letter from Houston to the

Procter_5127.pdf 131

5/24/2014 7:44:47 AM

118

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

Reagan firmly believed that the Republicans intended to continue their campaign of hatred and discord, that once in the majority, they would attempt to crush the South, regardless of the Constitution, and that, if Lincoln were elected President, there was but one course for the Southerners to take—they must seek security and freedom outside of the Union.80 Nor did Reagan's apprehensions abate upon his return home. On the contrary, they increased in magnitude and scope. For during the summer and fall of I860 Texas experienced a turbulence and terror that was extreme even for the frontier. Besides the usual turmoil emanating from a presidential election and accentuated by the split in the Democratic party at the Charleston and Baltimore conventions,81 a deluge of violent acts besieged the state. On the Rio Grande, Mexican and Indian depredations continued with aggravating frequency;82 on the western frontier, Comanche and Apache raids kept the settlers in constant alarm; while in the vast interior and more settled regions, a wave of destructive fires, poisonings, and abortive slave insurrections— believed to be instigated by members of the Methodist Church North and by abolitionist agents, dedicated to wresting the western outpost of slavery from the South—terrified and infuriated the people. Panic and hysteria swept over the state. In each county, vigilance or citizens' Secretary of War, March 12, 1860, lists outrages in Texas for last four months. There were 51 persons killed, 1,800 horses stolen, and 12 additional murders since completion of the report. The Dallas Herald from December, 1859, to June, 1860, is filled with accounts of Indian atrocities. Also see Throckmorton to Reagan, March 17, 1860, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 80 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 75-76, 83-103; U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 924-929, 1875-1876, 2073; Dallas Herald, January 5, October 31, 1860; William Seldon to Reagan, March 20, I860, in R. P., Letters 18601869; Reagan to Roberts, November 1, I860, in Roberts Papers. 81 At the Democratic National Convention at Charleston in April, I860, the southern Democrats bolted the meeting after being defeated by the northern wing of Douglas Democrats. Soon thereafter the Douglas managers believed it best to recess the convention for six weeks in order to reunite the party. On June 18 they reassembled, elected Douglas, while watching the Southerners again withdraw. The bolting delegates, 105 in all, met at Richmond and nominated John C. Breckenridge of Kentucky and Joseph Lane of Oregon for the Presidency and Vice Presidency respectively. See Nevins, Lincoln, II, 203-228, 261-272; Nichols, Disruption of American Democracy, pp. 288-322; Rhodes, History, II, 440-454, 473-475. Also see Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 267-294. 82 See J. Fred Rippy, "Border Troubles Along the Rio Grande, 1848-1860," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XXIII (1919), 91-111.

Procter_5127.pdf 132

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

119

committees were organized; strangers were questioned, their belongings searched; Negroes suspected of poisonings, incendiarism, or revolt were jailed for trial unless a crowd disposed of them first; and men having abolitionist sentiments were hanged by their neighbors or by the local committee members unless they were fortunate enough to elude them. 83 Swiftly Texas had become an armed camp ravaged by suspicion and fear. Then on November 6, I860, the year of terror and violence, initiated by John Brown's raid, reached its climax. News flashed across the nation that the Republicans had gained control of the government. Lincoln had been elected President.84 At last, the crisis of the Union had arrived. But to Texans, who for two long years had watched a hopelessly deadlocked Congress unable to carry on the business of the nation, who had seen a militant Republican party, supported wholly by a hostile North, finally defeat the Democrats, who had borne the savage brunt of countless Mexican and Indian incursions, and who were now combatting within their midst men whom they believed to be infiltrating, murderous abolitionists, the answer was an obvious one. With the Federal government no longer capable of protecting them, and with their constitutional rights menaced by the victorious Black Republicans, they believed that they must withdraw from the Union or be crushed.85 Already a secession movement was well underway. As early as October, Reagan and O. M. Roberts had discussed the legal steps necessary to calling a convention—even though Sam Houston would oppose it—and with Lincoln's election, they together with other 83

See in U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 393, Reagan's brief account of these terrifying months. Also see Dallas Herald, October 24, 31, 1860; Texas Republican (Marshall), August 11, 18, 25, I860; Texas State Gazette (Austin), July 28, August 11, 18, 25, September 1, 15, 22, October 13, 1860. For different interpretations see William W . White, "The Texas Slave Insurrection of 1860," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, 111 (1949), 259-285; Ollinger Crenshaw, The Slave States in the Presidential Election of I860, pp. 90-99. Also see Clement Eaton, "Mob Violence in the Old South," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, X X I X (1942), 366-368. 8 * The Dallas Herald, November 14, I860, is typical of the feeling in Texas concerning the presidential returns. Headlines read: "Latest Election Returns All Black." 85 See Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 298-303; also see Northern Standard (Clarksville), Texas State Gazette (Austin), and Dallas Herald during November and December, I860, and January, 1861.

Procter_5127.pdf 133

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

120

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Democratic leaders moved swiftly to carry out these plans.86 All that was needed now was for the people to act. But while waiting for popular response to crystallize, Reagan returned to Washington for the opening session of Congress on December 3. Once again he saw northern and southern men bitterly and inexorably opposed to one another; once more he found the Republicans uncompromising and hostile; over and over again he heard threats of secession from one side and vows of coercion and war from the other vibrate throughout the House. And if Reagan, by chance, had held some faint hope of union, he quickly realized that it was no longer possible. On December 6, watching Speaker Pennington appoint in a "bungling manner" a Compromise Committee of Thirty-Three composed of Republicans and for the most part, nonrepresentative Southerners, he wrote Roberts "that the idea of another Congressional compromise was vain and foolish."87 On December 14, he joined twentynine southern congressmen in issuing a manifesto to his constituents which declared that all argument was exhausted, that the Republicans remained absolute in their purpose to concede nothing to the South, and, therefore, "that the primary object of each slave-holding state ought to be its speedy and absolute separation from the Union with hostile states."88 Then, on December 20, came news that South Carolina had seceded. In quick succession, Mississippi, Florida, and Alabama followed suit, and Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas appeared likely to do the same. The break-up of the Union had begun. By January 15 Reagan had decided that it would be futile and useless for him to remain in Washington longer. Therefore, as a parting gesture, he arose in the House to say farewell. Briefly he reviewed such subjects as the South's constitutional position, the history of slavery since the nation's formation, and the results of the Republican party's aggressive partisanship and antislavery agitation. With particular effectiveness he described the economic, social, and political decay of the 86 Reagan to Roberts, November 1, 20, December 7, 1860, in Roberts Papers; Roberts to Reagan, November 25, 1860, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 303-305. 87 Reagan to Roberts, December 7, I860, in Roberts Papers. In the Compromise Committee of Thirty-Three, having one representative from each state, not one northern Democrat was selected, only Republicans. Reagan announced that he would not serve on it. Therefore, his colleague, A. J. Hamilton, was appointed. 88 Texas Republican (Marshall), January 12, 1861; Texas State Gazette (Austin), January 5, 1861; Nevins, Lincoln, II, 385-413.

Procter_5127.pdf 134

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

DISRUPTION OF THE UNION

121

French West Indies and the accompanying horrors that plagued the white inhabitants there after freeing their slaves, while with a trace of bitterness he asked the Republicans how they proposed solving the slavery issue, who would pay the Southerners for the $3,000,000,000 in slave property if freed, and who among them would accept the Negroes as freemen and citizens in their states. Then, emphatically assuring the House that he loved and cherished the Union and stood ready to fight her battles—but not, however, at the expense of his constitutional rights and freedom, he concluded: I have to say in the end, that yet, almost hopeless as it seems, I would be glad to see an effort made toward conciliation. Above all things I stand here to invoke members to look upon this question as one which involves the interest and destiny of States, to warn them that they are making advances against fifteen States, with thirteen million people, and with more than twothirds of the exports of the country; against a people who understand all these questions, and who are not to be misled or deceived by special pleading ; a people who never intended or wished to raise their voice against the Federal Government, and who never would have done so if they had been let alone. Remember that we only ask you to let us alone—nothing else. Give us security in the Union. Respect our rights in the common Territories. So act among yourselves as to let us know that we need no longer live under continual fear of the consequences of your actions.89 Thus did Reagan take leave of Washington and the Federal government. Whatever the future would be, his allegiance was to Texas, his destiny with the South. 89

Procter_5127.pdf 135

U.S. Congress, Congressional Globe, 36th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 389-393.

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

C H A P T E R

X I

Cabinet Member of the Confederacy

D

Ok ^ I R E F U L CONSEQUENCES faced the United States in 1861. Compromise and conciliation had run their course; the inflammatory sparks of sectionalism had at last ignited and were burningfiercely;the South had chosen its path—secession! disunion! "The issue must now be met, or forever abandoned," wrote Secretary of the Treasury Howell Cobb on December 6, I860, the day before his resignation. "Equality and safety in the Union are at end; and it only remains to be seen whether our manhood is equal to the task of asserting and maintaining independence out of it."1 Across the cotton states Southerners quickly flocked to the standard of secession voicing their determination to uphold it. Their fears aroused, their prestige and influence in the Union melting away, they looked upon separation as an inalienable right guaranteed them by the Constitution.2 Caught up in the furor and excitement of the times, they

1 Howell Cobb to the people of Georgia, December 6, 1860, in Ulrich Bonnell Phillips (ed.), The Correspondence of Robert Toombs, Alexander H. Stephens, and Howell Cobb in Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1911, II, 505-506. Cobb was the presiding officer at the secession convention at Montgomery on February 4, 1861. 2 In James D. Richardson (comp.), Messages and Papers of the Confederacy, I, 32-33, Jefferson Davis in his inaugural address to the provisional government de-

Procter_5127.pdf 136

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

123

reasoned that war, if need be, was far preferable to dishonor, injustice, and perpetual insecurity emanating from Republican rule. And the surrender of outnumbered Federal garrisons to southern militia and the ominous tramp of marching men resounding throughout the South graphically illustrated their intentions.3 At Camden, the blue cockade, the red sash, the flashing saber, and military parades were the order of the day;4 at Charleston, the South Carolinians hostilely watched the Union soldiers at Fort Sumter as Governor Francis W. Pickens awaited an opportune moment to attack; at New Orleans, another hotbed of disunion, men trained for war while vociferously demanding a Southern Confederacy;5 and at Montgomery, the citizenry zealously prepared for the arrival of secession delegates and eagerly anticipated the creation of a new nation and government. Yet, beneath this facade of southern militancy and positive action, there lay an endless array of fears and uncertainties concerning the future. To many Southerners, secession meant the severance of cherished ties and traditions, the acquiescence to the principles of such fireeaters as Yancey, Wigfall, A. B. Rhett, and Edmund Ruffin, and the beginning of a bloody civil war—these thoughts they did not like; to some, it represented a possible method of bringing the government to its senses and giving the South an honorable peace; while to others, it signified for individual states a necessary last resort warranted by constitutional, peaceful procedures.6 Particularly during these critical months of the winter of 1860-1861 was the phrase "peaceful transition'' emphasized in the South, for much of the success or failure of secession among the masses seemed to rest on this premise. Journalists believed it improbable that the fines the right of secession. See Johnston and Browne, Alexander H. Stephens, pp. 375-378, for Alexander H. Stephen's reflections on secession; also see Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 92-103. 3 Frank Moore (ed.), The Rebellion Record: A Diary of American Events, with Documents, Narratives, Illustrative Incidents, Poetry, etc., Vol. I, pt. I, pp. 12-14. In DeBow's Review from 1859 to 1861 there are many prosouthern and secessionist articles. See specifically A. Roane, "The South, In the Union or Out of It," DeBow's Review, X X I X (1860), 448-465; "The South's Power of Self-Protection," ibid., 545-561; "Editorial Notes and Miscellany," ibid., X X X (1861), 251-256. 4 Mary Boykin Chesnut, A Diary From Dixie, pp. 3-4. 5 Howell Cobb to his wife, April 7, 1861, in Phillips (ed.), Correspondence, p. 559. 6 Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, I, 227-228; Dwight Lowell Dumond, The Secession Movement 1860-1861, pp. 189 S.; Nevins, Lincoln, II, 328-335.

Procter_5127.pdf 137

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

124

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

North would try to coerce fifteen slave states; politicians proclaimed that they would drink all of the blood shed by disunion; newspapers scoffed at the unwillingness and inability of the Yankees to fight; while poets, songsters, and writers all added their contributions to the mounting volume of propaganda.7 Above all, they agreed that "secession . . . must necessarily be a peaceful one, because England, France, and the rest of Commercial [J/V] Europe . . . [would] require that it should be." Unequivocally they believed that southern cotton was King. It ruled world economy and just as surely it would protect the South from northern invasion and blockade.8 So, forward moved the Southerners toward secession, gathering momentum with each passing day. A new nation, a new empire, a bright, new future lay before them. They were convinced that their arguments were sound, that their cause was just. What more was there left to decide? At the same time west of the Mississippi in trouble-plagued Texas, the furor for disunion also mounted in intensity with each passing day. Newspapers attacked northern abolitionism and Republican principles with increasing virulence; community and county committees bombarded Governor Houston with countless petitions, urging him to call the legislature into special session to deal with the secession problem; and leading Democrats of the state plotted to unite Texas with her southern brethren.9 However, with Houston still for union and wielding considerable influence among the people as well as con7 Roane, "The South, In the Union or Out of It," loc cit., X X I X (1860), 448-465; E. Merton Coulter, The Confederate States of America 1861-1865, pp. 12-15; Moore (ed.), Rebellion Record, Vol. I, pt. 1, pp. iff.; Nevins, Lincoln, II, 334-335. 8 W. H. Chase, "The Secession of the Cotton States," DeBow's Review, X X X (1861), 93-101; Frank Lawrence Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy, pp. 1-24. Of particular interest is Owsley's summation in ibid., pp. 562-578. E. D. Adams, Great Britain and the American Civil War, II, 2-3; T. C. De Leon, Belles, Beaux and Brains of the 60''s, p. 50; William Howard Russell, My Diary North and South, pp. 96, 118, 148. 9 For personal accounts of this period, see Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 300-304; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 86-87. Also see Charles William Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 11-15; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 47-51. A favorite method used by newspapers urging secession was to print letters of prominent Texas leaders. For example, see Reagan to Dr. Joseph Taylor in Texas Republican (Marshall), January 12, 1861, and Reagan to General W. C. Young, in Dallas Herald, February 6, 1861, quoting the Sherman Monitor.

Procter_5127.pdf 138

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

125

trol over state machinery, the separatists had to maneuver discreetly to avoid accusations of illegal procedure.10 On December 3, I860, having carefully laid their plans, O. M. Roberts, Attorney General George M. Flournoy, W. P. Rogers, and John S. Ford made their move. Issuing a call for a convention at Austin on January 28, they placed secession squarely before the people.11 Meanwhile, as Texans awaited this all-important meeting, Reagan had left Washington and was sailing homeward. When he reached New Orleans, word came that he had been elected a delegate to the state convention and, therefore, instead of proceeding to Palestine, he hastened to Austin.12 Arriving at the capital on January 30, 13 he found the secessionists in complete control of the situation. The legislature, which Houston had assembled for a special session on January 21, had disregarded the governor's pleas for union and had given the convention complete authority as well as its residence.14 Already Roberts had been chosen president, the relatively few unionists completely overridden, and Houston relegated to the position of an onlooker.15 In the hall of the House, the crowded galleries bustled with excitement, newsmen scurried about the convention floor seeking interviews as speakers continually gave full sway to their oratorical abilities, and the delegates— the most prominent lawyers, businessmen, soldiers, and politicians in the state—eagerly anticipated the vote on the ordinance of seces10 See Reagan to Roberts, November 1, 20, December 7, 1860, in Roberts Papers; Roberts to Reagan, November 23, 1860, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 330-335; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 86 8. 11 Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 86 ff. 12 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 104; John H. Reagan, "A Conversation with Governor Houston," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, III (1900), 279. See also Dallas Herald, January 9, 16, 1861, and Texas State Gazette (Austin), January 12, 1861, for reports of Reagan's election. 13 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 104, he states that he arrived in Austin on the third day of the Secession Convention which would be January 30. However, in Ernest William Winkler (ed.), Journal of the Secession Convention of Texas, 1861, p. 28, it is recorded that Reagan was admitted on January 29, 1861. The Northern Standard (Clarksville), February 9, 1861, supports Reagan. 14 Texas, House Journal, 8th Legislature, Extraordinary Session, pp. 45, 57-58; Texas, Senate Journal, 8th Legislature, Extraordinary Session, pp. 49-51. In the House the resolution justifying the popular call for the convention and recognizing the convention itself passed by a vote of 56 to 24; in the Senate, 25 to 5. Also see Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 95-99. 15 Winkler (ed.), Secession Convention, pp. 15 ff.; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 51-52.

Procter_5127.pdf 139

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

126

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

sion.16 Soon, very soon indeed, another state would be breaking away from the Union. But to Reagan, viewing these momentous happenings, the most important business seemed to rest no longer with the convention itself, since separation was now assured, but with the lonely, troubled old man on Capitol Hill, Sam Houston. For the governor, unpopular though his stand had been, was a stubborn, fearless fighter—not one to acquiesce meekly to his opponents—and unless he would lend his cooperation and that of the state government to the convention, Reagan realized that difficult times still lay ahead for the secessionists.17 So, on January 30, immediately after breakfast, Reagan sought Houston out, and, after waiting for "Old Sam" to finish some routine matter, he began to explain the purpose of his visit. Abruptly, Houston said, "You know I am a Union man and opposed to secession/' But Reagan, unwavering and unaffected by this disruptive thrust, continued his arguments. Acknowledging the governor's position, he replied that with sectional troubles so fierce and inexorable, it seemed to him that personal opinions and interests might have to yield to those of the state, that the people of Texas and of the South had long recognized Houston as one of their leaders, and that now Texans needed his guidance and cooperation and hoped to acquire them. Houston, in turn, stated that having been "born and reared in the South" and having received all of his honors from that section, he "would not draw his sword against his own people." Upon reaching this understanding, the two veteran campaigners moved on to other subjects, discussing at length the problems of secession and slavery, the possibilities of war, and what the policies of Great Britain and France might be if hostilities occurred. Then, as their talk neared its close, Reagan again renewed the question of cooperation between the state government and the secessionists, asking Houston if he would receive a committee from the convention. And when the governor assured him he would, Reagan departed.18 16

John Salmon Ford, Memoirs, TS., V, 970-973, gives a fine account of the convention; hereafter cited as Ford Memoirs. Also see Winkler (ed.), Secession Convention, pp. 15 fT.; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 53-56; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 99-106. 17 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 104. See Friend, Sam Houston, p. 335, for Houston's attitude and frame of mind. 18 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 104-106; Reagan, "A Conversation with Governor Houston," loc. cit., Ill (1900), 279-281.

Procter_5127.pdf 140

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

127

Events moved swiftly after this. That very day Roberts appointed a delegation headed by Reagan to confer with Houston, 19 and by the next morning the governor, announcing that he would submit to the will of the people, recognized the convention.20 On February 1, the delegates passed the ordinance of secession; on February 2, they enumerated the causes for Texas' withdrawal from the Union; and two days later they elected seven representatives, including Wigfall and Reagan, to the Secession Convention at Montgomery. 21 Then, with their mission completed, they adjourned to await approval of their actions in the forthcoming election.22 Reagan, however, although assigned as a delegate to Montgomery, was beset by obligations to home and family and was unable for the moment to attend the convention. Returning to Fort Houston, he tried to attend to private affairs, so long neglected, but with news of the establishment of the Confederate States of America and with later reports of the election of Jefferson Davis and Alexander H. Stephens to the Presidency and Vice Presidency of the new republic, he could no longer suppress his enthusiasm and curiosity. Hurriedly he prepared to depart and by the latter part of February he was once more on his way.23 Late in the night of March 1, he reached his destination and the next morning he awoke to the sounds of Montgomery.24 What a difference a month had made in Montgomery! Where only a short while before there had been a peaceful, inland village of some 19 Winkler (ed.), Secession Convention, p. 34; Dallas Herald, February 13, 1861. The members of the committee were Reagan, P. W. Gray, John D. Stell, Thomas J. Devine, W . P. Rogers 20 Winkler (ed.), Secession Convention, pp. 37, 46-47; Dallas Herald, February 13, 1861; Texas State Gazette (Austin), February 9, 1861; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 102. Also see Friend, Sam Houston, pp. 336-339, and Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 305-308, for Houston's later repudiation of the convention. 21 Winkler (ed.), Secession Convention, pp. 48-85; Northern Standard (Clarksville), February 23, 1861; Texas State Gazette (Austin), February 9, 16, 1861; Dallas Herald, February 13, 20, 1861; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 103-107. The five delegates to Montgomery besides Reagan and Wigfall were John Hemphill, General T. N . Waul, John Gregg, W. S. Oldham, and William B. Ochiltree. 22 The vote on the ordinance of secession occurred on February 23, 1861. The total poll was 60,826 with 46,129 for secession and 14,697 against secession. See Winkler (ed.), Secession Convention, pp. 87-90, for a complete breakdown of the votes from individual counties. 23 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 106, 109. 24 Reagan to Roberts, March 2, 1861, in Roberts Papers; Montgomery Weekly Post, March 5, 1861. Reagan and Judge W . S. Oldham traveled together to Montgomery. Reagan stayed at the Exchange Hotel.

Procter_5127.pdf 141

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

128

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

12,000 people, there was now a noisy, overcrowded community geared to the tune of martial music and the tramp of marching feet. A new nation had begun the business of government within its confines and already the accompanying benefits and evils were evident. In many ways it resembled Washington in miniature. The southern atmosphere, which had so greatly flavored the Union capital, also permeated the city; perennial lobbyists, persistent office seekers, smartly uniformed officers, pleasure-seeking and husband-hunting women, grave-faced legislators and talkative politicians were everywhere; and even the same unhealthy, malarial climate blanketed the land. Yet, here in this small Alabama town, there was a marked difference from Washington, for conspicuously absent were the Black Republicans and the critical abolitionist journals, while just as obviously present were numerous slave marts and proud, impetuous, southern gentlemen gathered about, declaring "Niggers is cheap."25 Once again Reagan found himself in the midst of the turmoil and confusion of capital life, but this time he experienced no difficulties. Assuming his seat in Congress on the morning of March 2, he immediately took an active part in legislation.26 Then later in the day he called on President Davis to offer his congratulations. Bluntly he told the new executive that if present at the time he would not have voted for him for President. But quickly he added, "not, however, because I distrusted . . . [your] fitness for the high office, but because I wanted . . . [you] at the head of the Army/' Nothing that he might have said could have pleased the Mississippian more. Readily admitting that an army command "would have been more agreeable to him," Davis welcomed the rugged, straightforward frontiersman into his home. Thus, began a friendship which endured the bitterest days of defeat.27 But, for the moment, Davis was not concerned with friendships per se, although he recognized their worth, but rather with individuals, their attributes and failings. Confronting him was a task of almost unbelievable magnitude and scope. Out of demands to escape uncertainty and fear, he had helped create a new nation; out of hatred for Republican rule and desire for the principles of states' rights, he was trying 25 Russell, Diary, pp. 164-169; J. B. Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary, I, 35-36; Chesnut, Diary, pp. 6-20; De Leon, Belles, pp. 46-51. 26 Confederate States of America, journal of the Congress, 1861-1865, I, 97 ff.; hereafter cited as C.S.A., Journal of the Congress. 27 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 109.

Procter_5127.pdf 142

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

129

to establish a new government capable of carrying on the tremendous burden of war as well as withstanding the stresses and strains of everyday living; and out of southern individualism and the petty jealousies and antipathies that beset any nation or people, he was striving to weld unbreakable bonds of unity and strength. What Davis needed, and sought, were men honest and persevering, dedicated to their duty and to the Confederate cause, yet, experienced and self-reliant. Already he had chosen—without regard to friendship but according to ability and geographic representation—Robert Toombs of Georgia as secretary of state; Christopher G. Memminger of South Carolina, secretary of the treasury; Judah P. Benjamin of Louisiana, attorney general; Leroy Pope Walker of Alabama, secretary of war; and Stephen R. Mallory of Florida, secretary of the navy.28 But for postmaster general there was no one. Henry T. Ellett of Mississippi had refused the post and Colonel Wirt Adams of the same state had also declined.29 So on March 6, 1861, Davis asked Reagan to accept this position, but like the two men before him he refused. Steadfastly he declined a second offer; yet still the President was determined to secure his services. Sending a delegation to escort him to a conference, Davis assembled in his office prominent cabinet members and congressmen, and before them he once more tendered the post to the stubborn Texan. Deeply impressed, Reagan explained that with the postal system so newly created, unorganized, and without funds, it would take "considerable time to reestablish such a service" in the South; that undoubtedly through inexperience, lack of facilities, and countless delays, criticism and dissatisfaction would arise; and that the public would harshly brand the postmaster general as incompetent. "I would gladly perform my duty to the Confederacy," he concluded, but " I . . . 28

These men were not, in every case, first selections. For instance, Davis wanted Robert Barnwell of South Carolina for secretary of state, but he declined. On March 5, 1861, however, the cabinet positions had been filled except for the postmaster general. In his excellent work, Jefferson Davis and His Cabinet, pp. 45 ff., Rembert W. Patrick states that Davis selected his secretaries with regard to ability first, and then with regard to representation of the divergent political factions in the seven Confederate states. In Davis, Rise and Fall, I, 241-243, Davis acknowledges his heavy reliance on recommendations by state delegations. Hudson Strode, Jefferson Davis, I, 420-422, says that Davis actually made only three* selections, Mallory, Benjamin, and Reagan, "and these . . . were the better half." See also Coulter, Confederate States, pp. 120-121. 29 C.S.A., Journal of the Congress, I, 85; Richmond Enquirer, December 20, 1861; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 109.

Procter_5127.pdf 143

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

130

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

[do} not desire to become a martyr/' In rebuttal, Davis insisted that they must not concede that there was a department of government which they could not organize, and he, together with the men present, assured Reagan they would aid and sustain him against all unjust criticism. After such promises and entreaties, Reagan reluctantly consented and, at last, the Confederate cabinet was complete.30 Walking alone to his hotel after the meeting, Reagan, rather despondently mulled over his decision. Again and again he asked himself how he could have agreed to such proposals knowing as he did what lay ahead. And now that he had, where should he begin? Then in his path appeared a close friend, H. P. Brewster, and immediately he had his answer. With Brewster agreeing to go to Washington as his personal emissary, Reagan decided to raid the United States Post Office of its southern personnel. Addressing letters to the various department heads, he offered them similar or advanced positions under him, requesting them, if they accepted, to bring reports, maps, personnel books, and copies of every available form in their departments. To each of them he stressed the need of a speedy decision and the importance of their services to the South. And to hasten their departure, he instructed Brewster to take charge of the bundles of material and large books acquired, have them bound in Washington, and shipped to Montgomery. With these arrangements hurriedly made, he put Brewster on the afternoon train.31 During the next few days in his one-room headquarters at the Exchange Hotel in Montgomery, Reagan with his newly-acquired staff of three assistants eagerly anticipated the results of his overtures.32 Fortunately he had not long to wait, for within two weeks much of the United States Post Office had moved southward. Besides minor employees and workers, there came such experienced men as Henry St. George OfFutt, chief clerk in the office of the sixth auditor; Benjamin N. Clements, chief clerk to the postmaster general; Reagan's faithful friend, Joseph F. Lewis, head of the bond division; Captain Gustav 30

Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 109-110; see also by Reagan, "An Account of the Organization and Operations of the Postoffice Department of the Confederate States of America, 1861 to 1865," in R. P., Microfilm; C.S.A., Journal of the Congress, I, 112. 31 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 124-125; Reagan to Bettie B. Brewster, December 23, 1903, in R. P., Letters 1900-1903; Reagan to Roberts, March 6, 1861, in Roberts Papers. 32 Richmond Enquirer, December 24, 1861. Reagan's first assistants were J. L. C. Danner, J. C. Bach, and W . W . Lester.

Procter_5127.pdf 144

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

131

A. Schwartzman, head of the Dead Letter Office; and McNair, of the finance bureau.33 Added to this nucleus, Reagan obtained the services of J. L. Harrell of Alabama, reputedly one of the best financiers in the South, and the capable W . D. Miller of Texas. 34 Quickly the post office department was taking shape. In place of a one-room abode, the government rented a three-story building to house the expanding organization.35 To qualify prospective applicants and to discern their special abilities, as well as to enhance his own knowledge, Reagan devised an evening school of instruction.36 And with records, maps, and reports arriving from Washington, the clerks began preparing contracts, listing the postmasters in the several states, estimating the amount of revenue, and revising the complicated network of mail routes.37 At the same time Reagan advertised for bids on such postal supplies as mailbags, twine, sealing wax, and paper, 38 and negotiated with private engraving firms for stamps and stamped envelopes.39 Then, with these administrative problems being attended to, he turned to the post office's greatest challenge, that of economy. The Constitution of the Confederate States of America required the Post Office Department to be self-sufficient after March 1, 1863. 40 Yet, to accomplish this goal would be extremely difficult. Not since the establishment of the United States postal system in 1789 had the 33 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 124-125; Lewis to Starr, April 9, 1861, in Starr Papers. Of those approached only Hobby, third assistant postmaster general, and a clerk from Florida refused to accept Reagan's offer. 34 Reagan to Miller, March 25, 1861, in the W. D. Miller Papers; Richmond Enquirer, December 24, 1861. 35 The rented building had just been completed. It was on Bibb Street. Montgomery Weekly Post, March 26, 1861; Richmond Dally Examiner, May 3, 1861. 36 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 125. The school sessions were held each evening from eight to ten. 3 ? Ibid. 38 "Report of the postmaster-general to the President, April 29, 1861," pp. 2, 4, in R. P., and also in the Rare Books Room, Library of Congress, hereafter cited as Report, April 29, 1861. All subsequent reports will also be referred to in this manner together with the date. See also L. R. Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, XIX (1915), 117; Dallas Herald, April 17, 1861, quoting the Galveston News. 39 Report, April 29, 1861, p. 4; Report, November 27, 1861, pp. 21-24; Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 118-123; Richmond Enquirer, March 19, 1861, quoting Montgomery Advertiser. See also August Dietz, The Confederate States Post Office Department: Its Stamps and Stationery. 40 James M. Matthews (ed.), The Statutes at Large of the Provisional Government of the Confederate States of America, p. 14. See Article I, Section 8.

Procter_5127.pdf 145

5/24/2014 7:44:48 AM

132

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

mail service ever paid for itself, and in the fiscal year ending on June 30, I860, the annual deficit had been $1,941,425.35. 41 Reagan's task was to erase this sizeable figure. Already the Confederate Congress had aided him immeasurably by abolishing the franking privilege, by requiring postage on newspapers, periodicals, and magazines, and by establishing a high postage rate, 42 but still this was not enough. Other ways must be sought, other remedies found. First of all, Reagan tried to cut expenses to a bare minimum. With a small staff of officers and clerks, he undertook the awesome job of completely overhauling the mail-route system. Costly star routes were eliminated, duplicate services discontinued, and long mail runs shortened to induce competition.43 Furthermore, the expensive overland mail to California was no longer necessary, nor would be the extravagant ocean mail service once the United States naval blockade became effective.44 On the other hand, he greatly increased postal revenue. Working through Congress, he provided ten-cent stamps and stamped envelopes for the public, enlarged mailable matter to include books, and, at the risk of incurring the wrath of the press, doubled the already-high rates on newspapers and other printed materials.45 But of all Reagan's many innovations in streamlining post office economy, none was as important or, for that matter, as rewarding as his transactions with the railroads. In the previous fiscal year much of the United States postal debt was due to transportation costs. In the southern states alone over two-thirds of all revenue received had 41

Report, April 29, 1861, p. 9; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 133. Matthews (ed.), Statutes, C.S.A., pp. 34-35. The abolishing of franking privilege and placing of rates on printed matter reduced the bulk of mail considerably, thereby lowering expenses. Postage rates for a letter weighing not more than one-half ounce within mailing distance of 500 miles was 5#; for a letter over 500 miles, 10£. All letters weighing more than the prescribed amount were charged an additional single postage. 43 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 134-135; Report, April 29, 1861, pp. 9-10; Richmond Daily Examiner, May 23, 1861. Reagan's staff numbered thirty-eight clerks and one watchman. Congress provided for twenty clerks, but Reagan asked for an additional eighteen. The job of overhauling the mail-route system was, indeed, laborious. Reagan stated, in 1905, that only Benjamin Franklin and Postmaster General McLean had accomplished this task. 44 Richmond Daily Examiner, May 23, 1861; Francis B. C. Bradlee, Blockade Running During the Civil War . . . , pp. 282-283; Report, April 29, 1861, p. 12. 45 Matthews (ed.), Statutes, C.S.A., pp. 109-110. Previously, stamps and stamped envelopes were in two-cent, five-cent, and twenty-cent denominations. Reagan's increased rates made the ten-cent denomination necessary. 42

Procter_5127.pdf 146

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

133

gone to reimburse railroads.46 Of course, Reagan realized that these high charges must be lessened or his organization would never become solvent. On April 16, 1861, addressing a circular letter to railroad executives in the Confederacy and to those in adjacent states, he requested them to meet with him at Montgomery on April 26 to consider "means of reducing cost of railway service and . . . [of] having some general and equitable understanding with them/' 4 7 On the designated day, thirty-five railroad representatives assembled, and Reagan, appealing to their patriotism, asked them to help him through the critical times ahead. To eliminate extra costs, he recommended one daily mail service instead of two; to establish a paying basis between the government and the companies, he requested them to accept Confederate bonds in whole or in part payment; and to bolster postal economy, he urged them to allow transportation charges to be cut in half. Then in conclusion, he assured them of his sincerity and willingness "to have a free, full and cordial understanding with all the railroad companies."48 Within a few hours after his address, the railroad men made their decision. Heartily they agreed to accept his proposals, but only so long as a national emergency existed.49 Then, with their business finished, they visited with Reagan, met with President Davis, and, after another day of planning and pleasure intermixed, adjourned.50 Thus it was that on April 29, 1861, less than two months after his appointment, Reagan had fully organized the Confederate Post Office Department and was ready to take charge of the mail service.51 On 46 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 133; Report, April 29, 1861, p. 12. For the fiscal year ending on June 30, 1860, total postal receipts in those states which would compose the Confederacy were $938,105.42. Railroad service costs alone amounted to $635,901. 47 Report, April 29, 1861, pp. 12-13; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 133. 48 Report, April 29, 1861, pp. 13-15; Robert C. Black, The Railroads of the Confederacy, pp. 52-53; Montgomery Daily Mail, April 29, 1861. All leading railroad lines, with the exception of one or two, were present. They represented 4,376 miles of road. 49 Report, April 29, 1861, pp. 15-18; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 133-134; Black, Railroads, pp. 53-54. 50 Montgomery Daily Mail, April 29, 1861; Black, Railroads, p. 54. 51 Davis to Congress, April 29, 1861, in Richardson (comp.), Papers of the Confederacy, I, 79-80; The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, Ser. IV, Vol. I, pp. 267-268; hereafter cited as War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies.

Procter_5127.pdf 147

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

134

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

May 13 he issued a proclamation stating that on June 1 he would assume control over all postal facilities in the Confederacy, thereby relieving the United States Post Office of further responsibility.52 Soon thereafter Postmaster General Montgomery Blair announced that on June 1 he would suspend all federal service to the Confederate states, and, whether by design or accident, the two departments made a peaceful transition.53 Meanwhile for Reagan, serenaded, applauded, and praised, these first months of organizing, although long and laborious, were most gratifying. Riding the crest of patriotic enthusiasm and self-sacrifice, he had easily overcome all obstacles. Every innovation and suggestion had been approved, every plan had succeeded, and repeatedly he was being recognized as a dynamic administrator and leader.54 But within a few short weeks, the "honeymoon" was over. Southerners were happy indeed to have an energetic, aggressive postmaster general, capable of performing arduous tasks, but now they wanted results. In short, they wanted their mail on schedule and on time. But such service they were not receiving. Delays were frequent, unsorted mail was reported stacked up in the post offices, and many letters never reached their destination.55 Besides this, postal rates were high, stamps and stamped envelopes were not to be had—in many cases local postmasters initiated their own designs56—and money sent by letter was 52 "A Proclamation by the Post-Master General of the Confederate States of America," May 13, 1861, in R. P., Circulars, Pamphlets and Speeches; and in Edward Clark, Governor's Letters, May, 1861; Richmond Daily Examiner, May 20, 1861; Montgomery Weekly Post, May 10, 1861. During March and April, 1861, while organizing his department, Reagan urged contractors and postmasters to continue performing their duties to the United States Post Office. See Circular Letters No. 1 and No. 2, in Clark, Governor's Letters, March and April, 1861; Dallas Herald, April 3, 1861; Texas State Gazette (Austin), April 6, 1861; Northern Standard (Clarksville), April 6, 1861. 53 Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion, Ser. I, Vol. IV, p. 356; hereafter cited as War of Rebellion: O. JR. . . . Navies. Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 132-133. ^Montgomery Weekly Post, April 16, 1861; Dallas Herald, April 21, 1861; Richmond Daily Examiner, May 13, 1861; Texas State Gazette (Austin), April 27, 1861. 55 Richmond Enquirer, June 18, 1861; Richmond Daily Examiner, September 18, 19, 21, 1861. The accounts cited are typical of the tirade against the post office. 56 Reagan did not obtain stamps for issuance until October 15, 1861. Many local postmasters issued crude designs during these months, thereby giving added incentive to counterfeiters. See Report, November 27, 1861; Montgomery Weekly Post, June 26, 1861; Richmond Daily Examiner, June 22, September 26, October 16, 1861; Richmond Enquirer, October 17, 1861. For a fine account of Reagan's efforts to

Procter_5127.pdf 148

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

135

oftentimes stolen.57 On one occasion, the Richmond Daily Examiner, a severe critic of the Davis administration, complained that its subscribers did not receive their papers two out of three times, while on another, after discussing the slow postal facilities, it sarcastically commented, "An ox cart could do better/'58 In Alabama, both the Montgomery Mail and the Montgomery Advertiser cited numerous examples of inefficiency;59 in Tennessee, the Fayetteville Observer, the Nashville Patriot, and Nashville Banner lamented the mismanagement of postal affairs, hinting strongly that Reagan was not the man for the job;60 in Georgia, the Augusta Daily Chronicle and the Augusta Sentinel declared that Min point of facility and dispatch'' the mails "had retrograded at least two centuries since the war began/' and the Savannah Republican invited Reagan "to give the place to some man who . . . understood the business";61 and in South Carolina, the Charleston Courier along with the Charleston Mercury added to the mounting volume of criticism and discontent by merely announcing "No Mail from Richmond yesterday."62 Disapproval and condemnation of the post office department and its leader, however, was not limited strictly to certain classes or areas. For the mail, when slow and inadequate, affected everyone. Especially in wartime was it irritating and demoralizing to soldiers and their loved ones to have letters lost or delayed, but it was no less so to others. Regretfully Thomas H. Thomas writing to Vice President Stephens asked him to pay for the postage on delivery since the rule on all paid mail at his post office seemed to be "to receive the money and throw the letters in the fire;"63 again and again, cabinet members and govprocure stamps, see Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 118-125. 57 Richmond Daily Examiner, October 17, 1862, January 20, February 26, 27, 1863. 58 Ibid., September 21, 1861; March 14, 1863. 59 Ibid., September 27, October 4, 1861, quoting the Montgomery Advertiser; ibid., September 30, 1861, quoting the Montgomery Mail. 60 Ibid., September 24, 1861, quoting the Nashville Banner, September 20, 1861; ibid., October 3, quoting the Fayetteville Observer, Nashville Banner, September 26, 1861, and Nashville Patriot, September 26, 1861. 61 Savannah Republican, October 5, December 30, 1861; Coulter, Confederate States, p. 130. 62 Richmond Daily Examiner, September 30, 1861, quoting the Charleston Mercury, September 27, 1861; ibid., October 3, 1861, quoting the Charleston Courier, September 28, 1861. 63 Thomas to Stephens, October 10, 1861, in Phillips (ed.), Correspondence, pp. 580-581.

Procter_5127.pdf 149

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

136

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

ernment officials referred to the dismal postal service;64 and even Reagan could not hope to hear from friends in Texas in less than ten days to two weeks. But the bitterest and most militant opposition to Reagan came from those groups whose business received curtailment or financial loss from postal regulation. Railroad executives, faced with inflation, rising wages, and economic instability on the one hand, and low payments from the post office on the other, quickly lost their patriotic ardor.65 In fact, as time progressed, they actually believed that Reagan had duped them at the Montgomery Convention and so, many refused to enter into contracts for carrying the mails. Nor did Reagan's announcement that the "railroad companies are, as a general thing, doing a better business than they ever did on account of the war while all the other interests are suffering"66 and his reference to them as selfish, powerful monopolies needing "wholesome and necessary reform"67 improve their relationship. While they fought to raise charges and to evade postal regulation, Reagan tried every economic and legal means—he would always be a judge at heart—to coerce them to comply with their agreements.68 Month after month the disputes and haggling continued, Reagan stubbornly refusing to relinquish his position. One by one the railroads, having government payments withheld and threatened with postal boycotting, fell into line, and by the end of 1863 nearly all companies were fulfilling their contracts.69 With those few railroad executives who still obstinately refused to cooperate, Reagan dealt harshly,70 and with those who honored their 6

± Patrick, Davis' Cabinet, pp. 278-280. Thomas C. Perrin, President of the Greenville and Columbia Railroad Company, to Secretary of War Benjamin, January 14, 1862, in War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. IV, Vol. I, pp. 842-843; Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 237. 66 Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 237. 67 Report, November 27, 1861, pp. 13-18; Report, December 7, 1863, p. 11. 68 Report, November 27, 1861, pp. 13-18; Report, February 28, 1862, pp. 3-4; Report, January 12, 1863, p. 11; Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 236-243. In November, 1861, only fifteen of the ninety-one railroads in the Confederacy had entered into contracts. By February, 1862, fifty-five had signed agreements. 69 Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 242; Report, December 7, 1863, pp. 10-11. 70 For over a year the Virginia Central Railroad Company refused to comply with post office regulations. Therefore, Reagan cut off all compensation and sought other means of conveying the mails. See Correspondence between the President of the 65

Procter_5127.pdf 150

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

137

agreements, although at times grudgingly, he worked to perfect a more harmonious relationship.71 With editors and publishers, however, there was no compromise or conciliation. The post office needed money, and newspapers, magazines, circulars, and books provided a necessary source of revenue. As early as March, 1861, after Congress had enacted the first postal laws regarding printed materials passing through the mails, there had been slight rumblings of disapproval.72 But in May, when Reagan persuaded Congress to double the rates,73 the newsmen and publishers unleashed verbal brickbats with unabated fury. The Richmond Daily Examiner claimed that Reagan had converted the Post Office Department "into an engine for the suppression of intelligence." Furthermore—and this by far the more serious accusation—it charged him with compelling soldiers, when not on the battlefield, to pay heavily for the recreation of reading the news.74 Going a step further, the Montgomery Advertiser declared that the government had levied a direct tax on newspapers for the sake of revenue,75 while the editor of the Atlanta Southern Confederacy summed up his opinion of the postal laws as "an outrage on a free people/'76 Against these continuous tirades, Reagan presented no adequate defense. After all, with his opponents having daily means of communication with the public, he realized how futile it would be to debate. Instead, by working long hours, by correcting abuses whenever they came to his attention, and by making his department economically selfsufficient, he answered the criticism of himself and his department as Virginia Central Rail Road Company and the Postmaster General in Relation to Postal Service, in R. P., Circulars, Pamphlets, and Speeches; Richmond Daily Examiner, August 11, 17, 26, 1864. 71 In Report, November 7, 1864, pp. 12-13, Reagan asked Congress for increased compensation to the railroads, since the Confederate dollar had steadily depreciated. 72 Montgomery Weekly Post, March 5, 1861, quoting the Columbus Enquirer. 73 The act doubling the rates was passed May 13, 1861. See Matthews (ed.), Statutes, C.S.A., p. 109. 74 Richmond Daily Examiner, September 16, 1861, August 14, 1863. In ibid., October 7, 1861, the editor, accusing Reagan of appointing his brother, Morris B., as a special mail agent for Texas, summed up his remarks by saying: "Pretty modest thing—brother appointing brother to a fat office!" St. George OfTutt erased this slur by informing the paper that he appointed Reagan's brother when the Postmaster General was absent. He stated further that Morris B. had been highly recommended by influential Texans. Ibid., October 8, 1861. 75 Ibid., October 4, 1861, quoting the Montgomery Advertiser. 76 Coulter, Confederate States, pp. 130-131.

Procter_5127.pdf 151

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

138

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

best he could.77 And gradually, although attacks on the post office never ceased, abuse of the postmaster general lessened considerably, changing in many cases to respect and admiration.78 All this while, however, Reagan had many other problems with which to cope. In controversies with cabinet members, he had a particularly bitter dispute in June, 1863, with Secretary of the Treasury Memminger over the deposit and withdrawal of postal funds from the Treasury, while with Secretaries of War George W. Randolph and, later, James A. Seddon, he conducted a running fight for almost four years over army impressment of transportation facilities used by the mails, and over military conscription of postal clerks, mail carriers, and contractors. After bickering with Memminger for over three months, Reagan, backed by Attorney General Thomas H. Watts and President Davis, won his point,79 but with the War Department, a standoff developed that only the collapse of the Confederacy would end.80 Of no less importance were problems involving economy and administration which Reagan met with varying degrees of success. He undertook to eliminate express companies from postal competition, trying first to bar them from further participation by court action and when unsuccessful, relying on Congress to close up the existing loopholes in the law.81 In his attempts to promote harmony in his depart77 In Reagan, Memoirs, p. 150, he wrote that he tendered his resignation in less than a year after his appointment because he wished a command in the field. See Patrick, Davis' Cabinet, pp. 279-280, for a brief analysis of the cause for his resignation. 78 Richmond Daily Examiner, September 25, 1861; Richmond Enquirer, May 5, November 10, 1863; Richmond Sentinel, November 9, 10, 1863, July 29, 1864. 79 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 158-159; Patrick, Davis3 Cabinet, pp. 286-289; Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., XIX (1915), 232-235; Davis to Treasurer of the Confederate States, October 5, 1863, in Jefferson Davis, Jefferson Davis, Constitutionalist: His Letters, Papers, and Speeches, VI, 56. 80 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 159; Patrick, Davis* Cabinet, pp. 289-292; Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., X I X (1915), 125-141. For source information, see orders, reports, etc., concerning conscription as well as correspondence between Reagan and Seddon in War of Rebellion: O.R Armies, Ser. IV, Vol. II, pp. 363-364, 366-367; Ser. IV, Vol. Ill, pp. 52-53, 70-74, 121-126, 657-659, 660-661, 972-974, 1150. 81 Garrison, "Administrative Problems of the Confederate Post Office Department," loc. cit., X I X (1915), 243-247. The Adams-Southern Express Company was the postal service's chief rival. Neither Reagan nor Congress was able to block the company. See Report, February 28, 1862, p. 16; Report, November 7, 1864,

Procter_5127.pdf 152

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

CABINET MEMBER OF THE CONFEDERACY

139

ment while operating on a low budget, he had considerable difficulty, but eventually, with the post office showing a sizeable surplus revenue, he persuaded Congress to raise postal salaries.82 And finally, in his bid for a more efficient service for Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana, after those states were cut off from the rest of the South by the fall of Vicksburg in July, 1863, he established a Trans-Mississippi Post Office Department under the complete authority of Dr. James H. Starr.83 Yet, even with the conscientious efforts of Reagan and the strenuous exertions of his staff, the postal service of the Confederacy was never satisfactory to the public. To a large extent this failure was due to the emphasis placed on economy by Congress. With the proviso that his department must be self-sufficient by March 1, 1863, and with large deficits looming before him, Reagan felt compelled to lop off all postal routes and benefits not absolutely necessary, to accept lower contract bids, which, in turn, meant inferior service, and to limit the manpower of his department to a bare minimum. Furthermore, the transition from an old, established postal system to a new and hastily-formed organization necessarily produced, for a short time at least, inadequate service. For over five months postage stamps were unavailable, and throughout the war many vital materials essential to postal operations were almost unobtainable at any price. Moreover, contractors, dissatisfied with Reagan's stringent economy, would not, at times, accept his demands for low bids, and these refusals resulted in many inconveniences and delays. But above all, the greatest cause for a slow, inefficient postal system was the war itself. Contractors, mail carriers, and postmasters by the p. 9; Reagan to President of Southern Express Company, July 18, 1861, in Richmond Daily Examiner, July 26, 1861. 82 James M. Matthews (ed.), Public Laws of the Confederate States of America, pp. 269, 276-277. In Report, December 7, 1863, pp. 1-2, Reagan stated that in the fiscal year ending June 30, 1863, post office revenues exceeded expenditures by $675,048.44. Also see Richardson (ed.), Papers of the Confederacy, I, 252. As for dissatisfaction emanating chiefly from low wages for long hours, the Richmond Post Office strike on August 20, 1863, is a good example. See Jones, Clerk's Diary, II, 22-24; Richmond Daily Examiner, August 17, 21, 1863. 83 Davis to Senate and House of Representatives, December 7, 1863, in War of Rebellion: O. R Armies, Ser. IV, Vol. II, pp. 1045-1046; Matthews (ed.), Public Laws, C.S.A., p. 184. See also Reagan to Starr, March 12, June 13, 22, 1864, in Starr Papers. Reagan to Secretary of Treasury G. A. Trenholm, April 20, 1864, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; John Nathan Cravens, James Harper Starr: Financier of the Republic of Texas, pp. 136-143.

Procter_5127.pdf 153

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

140

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

hundreds joined the army, leaving their positions to inexperienced, incompetent replacements; railroads, swamped by an endless array of men, materials, and arms experienced a complete disruption of their schedules; and as the war progressed, Union armies and raiding parties, penetrating deeper into southern territory, disrupted transportation routes, demolished postal facilities, and intercepted mail with increasing frequency. Yet against all opposition, against criticism and abuse, against weariness caused by the never-ending demands of his position during wartime, against the demoralizing realization that the Confederacy was being slowly but ruthlessly devastated, Reagan stood unwaveringly performing his duties as best he could. To the end, he remained loyal to his President, his people and his new country.

Procter_5127.pdf 154

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

C H A P T E R

X I I

The Civil War

S

^ • U N D A Y , April 14, 1861, was a spring day not unlike many others in Charleston. But instead of the serenity and solemnity that usually accompanied the Sabbath, an excitement pervaded the populace. Everywhere, it seemed, Confederate flags were flying, drums beating, and soldiers marching, while in the streets vast crowds of people pressed eagerly toward the harbor, a flush of victory on their faces. In other parts of the city many citizens celebrated the day by attending church, filling the numerous temples of worship to overflowing. At the Catholic cathedral Bishop Lynch performed a Te Deum with great pomp and ceremony; at the Episcopal service an aged bishop proclaimed that "the movement in which the people were engaged was begun by them in the deepest conviction of duty to God; and God had signally blessed their dependence on him"; and at other churches across the city, ministers emphatically expressed similar views.1 What was the occasion for such joy and thanksgiving, this performance of duty to which God had given his blessing? In the harbor, still smoking and burning from thirty-four hours of continuous bombardment, lay the ruins of Fort Sumter. Major Robert Anderson,

lMoore (ed.), Rebellion Record, I, 25; Rhodes, History, III, 242-243; Chesnut, Diary, pp. 39-40; Russell, Diary, pp. 98 ff.

Procter_5127.pdf 155

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

142

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

the Union commander, had surrendered, relinquishing possession of southern soil.2 This was, indeed, a momentous day for the Confederacy. Across the South the news of the fall of Sumter was greeted with wild enthusiasm. In Montgomery, stores were closed and business suspended, as people, gathering in large groups before newspaper and government offices, rejoiced over each news report; 3 in Richmond, where the state convention was debating over secession, rousing demonstrations were the order of the day;* in North Carolina, not yet seceded—although the state had quietly seized federal forts—Confederate flags waved over public buildings, and large quantities of ammunition, referred to as "anti-abolition pills," were being collected;5 and in Tennessee, many prominent citizens, trying desperately to allay the furor and passion emanating from Sumter, found the task too great, and within two weeks they also were assuming as their own the cry of "to arms! to arms! not only to resist the invasion of our own soil but that of any of the Southern States/' 6 Overnight Sumter had become the watchword of the South, the symbol of a complete severance from the Union, the call for all Southerners to unite. Quickly Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee passed ordinances of secession and joined the Confederacy. More rapidly still, troops were rushed to Virginia, munitions and supplies collected and distributed, and plans made to resist invasion. Whatever decision the Yankees made, the South, bristling with arms, was preparing to meet it. In the North where only a few short weeks before men had argued "cooly and philosophically about the right of Secession," Sumter had also had its effects.7 N o longer were Northerners concerned over southern ideology, over their own financial and business status, or 2 See War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. I, pp. 12-24, 28 ff., for reports of siege of Fort Sumter. Also see John G. Nicolay and John Hay, Abraham Lincoln, IV, Chapters II and III; J. G. Randall, Lincoln the President, I, 311 fT.; Davis, Rise and Fall, I, 266-281, 289-295. 3 D e Leon, Belles, pp. 56-57; Montgomery Weekly Post, April 17, 24, 1861; Richmond Enquirer, April 15, 1861. 4 Jones, Clerk's Diary, I, 18-20; Richmond Daily Examiner, April 15, 1861. Virginia seceded on April 17, 1861. 5 Russell, Diary, pp. 95-96; Johnston and Browne, Alexander H. Stephens, p. 398; Speech of A. H. Stephens at Richmond, April 22, 1861, in Moore (ed.), Rebellion Record, I, Docs., p. 134. North Carolina seceded May 20, 1861. 6 Moore (ed.), Rebellion Record, I, Docs., pp. 71-72, 137-138; Rhodes, History, III, 270-271. 7 Russell, Diary, pp. 14, 20, 370-371.

Procter_5127.pdf 156

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

143

over the destructive, grievous results that war would bring. They had been attacked, the Stars and Stripes desecrated, the Constitution violated. And the statement of the New York Times, asserting that "the day for the toleration of treason—treason to the Constitution! defiance to the laws that we have made!—has gone by," was indeed expressive of their feelings.8 At the New York Stock Exchange, amid cheers for Major Anderson, government stocks perceptibly stiffened or gained strength; 9 in Detroit, Pittsburgh, New York, Philadelphia, and Dover, New Hampshire, citizens at mass meetings declared their undying loyalty to the Union, pledging their lives and fortunes to its defense;10 in Boston, school teachers promised to give to the government during the national emergency from 10 to 25 per cent of their salaries;11 in churches from Maine to Iowa, choirs sang repeatedly "The Star Spangled Banner" and at times "The Marseillaise," as ministers asked their congregations for contributions and volunteers to defend and preserve the Union; 12 and in every northern hamlet and village, state militia assembled, local military companies began drilling, and men of peaceful pursuits—preachers, farmers, businessmen—came forward to serve in the army.13 Thus, in both North and South during April and May, 1861, the populace rose up to meet the forthcoming conflict. Old and young alike gave unselfishly of their time and efforts; mothers, wives, and sweethearts patriotically cheered on their men; military and government leaders girded themselves, as best they could, for the troublesome, arduous days ahead; editors and publishers, realizing the importance of their handiwork upon the morale of the people, zealously adopted militant, crusading policies; and ministers, trying to instill spiritual strength and courage among their "flocks," prayed to God to give victory to their "righteous" causes and to destroy their enemies. At last, after years of sectional strife, civil war was now at hand, and the disruption of the Union a fait accompli. All that had been needed was a spark to ignite the powder keg. Sumter had done its work well. But as far as Reagan was concerned, the attack on Sumter, although 8

Moore (ed.), Rebellion Record, I, 24-25. ^ Ibid., I, Docs., p. 61. ™lbid„ I, 25 ff. u Ibid., I, 50-51. M Ibid., I, 38. 13 Russell, Diary, pp. 338-339; Moore (ed.), Rebellion Record, I, 33-35.

Procter_5127.pdf 157

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

144

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

receiving his personal approval,14 had come too soon, for war served merely to increase his already manifold duties. Struggling assiduously just to organize the postal service, he now had the added responsibilities of gearing his department to a wartime tempo as well as, within six weeks, of removing it to the new Confederate capital, Richmond.15 Furthermore, as the war progressed, cabinet meetings became lengthier and more frequent; correspondence from Texas officials, asking him to represent the state in questions involving the Confederacy, grew heavier;16 and matters, both public and private, added further worries to an already overburdened workday. Yet, despite his exhaustive schedule, despite the personal abuse and criticism leveled against him and his department, Reagan experienced during the first two years of the Civil War a deep, abiding happiness. For, from these days of crisis came friendships that endured a lifetime and memories that he cherished forever. Day after day in Congress and in cabinet meetings he associated with the finest statesmen the South had to offer, men who in the past had dominated state and national affairs, and who were now leaders of the Confederacy. Closely and intimately he worked with the South's foremost citizen and his staunch friend, Jefferson Davis, loyally supporting him and following his leadership with unflagging devotion. Time and again on the battlefield before Richmond, as he looked on, Confederate armies beat back the Yankee invaders,17 raising his spirits and renewing his hopes for the future. And on the home front he happily watched the principles of government and way of life for which he and all Southerners were fighting nurtured and maintained. 1* Patrick, Davis* Cabinet, pp. 112-113. 15 On May 21, 1861, the Provisional Congress of the Confederacy provided that the government should remove to Richmond. See Davis, Rise and Fall, I, 339-340; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 136. 16 Governors Edward Clark and Francis R. Lubbock communicated frequently with Reagan, the highest ranking Texan in the Confederacy. Since Reagan was a close friend of Davis, they felt that they could accomplish more through him than by trying to wade through governmental "red tape." See Lubbock to Reagan, December 27, 1861, in War of Rebellion: O. R Armies, Ser. I, Vol. IV, pp. 161-162; also see correspondence between Reagan and Lubbock, January 25, February 5, 1862, in Francis R. Lubbock, Executive Record Book No. 81, 1861-1863, MSS., pp. 111113, 137; and letters of January 15, February 13, March 15, April 4, April 18, May 4, 1862, in Francis R. Lubbock, Governor's Letters, MSS. 17 See in Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 136-145, his personal account of the Battle of Seven Pines and the Seven Days' Battle which occurred between the last of May and July 1, 1862.

Procter_5127.pdf 158

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

145

Yet, without a doubt, the presence of his wife and children during his stay in Richmond18 contributed as much to the pleasurable remembrances of these years as any other single factor, for without them he would have been a lonely, unhappy individual. Still a portrait of his past environment, Reagan seemed to be the personification itself of a frontiersman. Fearless, individualistic, honest and straightforward, at times seemingly blunt ajid tactless—a rugged, huge bear of a man19—he had never had much difficulty in dealing with men, but in the elegance and fashionableness of Richmond society he felt insecure and uneasy. And lacking the polish and refinement of southern gentlemen, he self-consciously believed himself to be an oddity and misfit at these gatherings. Then, too, his wife, Edwina, although of a prominent Virginia family, detested the lavish whirl of Richmond night life, much preferring the quietness and privacy of her home.20 Thus, the Reagans—he, ill at ease at social functions and she, abhorring them—by their own choice and by lack of invitation, remained at home during the evenings except on rare occasions.21 Here, for the first time in over four years, Reagan was able to devote some time to his children after a day of public duties. Here, he became a family man once again. On occasions, he and Edwina invited a cabinet member to dinner, and after the evening was over they would discuss for hours the man's strong points and failings, carefully weighing his character and worth. More often, however, they would while away the evening quietly together, with Edwina reading book after book to him trying to satisfy his voracious desire for knowledge.22 18 Upon leaving Montgomery at the end of the congressional session, Reagan hurriedly journeyed to Fort Houston, helped his family pack their belongings, and arranged passage to Richmond. The Reagans arrived in Richmond on July 6, 1861. See Richmond Daily Examiner, June 1, 18, 1861; Dallas Herald, June 19, July 24, 1861. 19 Well over six-feet tall, Reagan filled out considerably as he grew older. At times, his weight ranged past 250 pounds. 20 Home, family, and husband were Edwina Reagan's whole world and, although frail and in poor health, she devoted all her strength to their well-being. A retiring, silent woman, she had few friends, but this fact evidently did not disturb her. Having the love of her husband and children, she desired nothing more. Interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, with B. P., February 12, 1956; Chesnut, Diary, p. 112. 21 Patrick, Davis' Cabinet, p. 335; Clifford Dowdey, Experiment in Rebellion, pp. 75, 98-99. 22 Interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, with B. P., February 12, 1956. Reagan had great confidence in his wife's judgment and insight. When he

Procter_5127.pdf 159

5/24/2014 7:44:49 AM

146

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

For Reagan, it was a good life, a gratifying one, but how quickly it vanished. For already it was May, 1863, a fateful month of decision in the Confederacy. Across the South for two years now bloody battles had raged, taking their toll of men and supplies. Dead were such leaders as Albert Sidney Johnston and "Stonewall" Jackson.23 Gone forever were many of the hot-blooded young men of 1861. At the present in Tennessee, after suffering heavy losses, both Union and Confederate armies had retired to recuperate and reorganize; in the West along the Mississippi River, Ulysses S. Grant was relentlessly attacking Vicksburg, throwing thousands of men at the outnumbered Confederate forces; across Mississippi, Colonel Benjamin H. Grierson's lightning raid devastated the land between Jackson and Vicksburg, leaving the inhabitants hungry and homeless;24 at New Orleans, the citizenry, although no longer under the tyranny of Benjamin F. "Beast" Butler, were still reeling from the effects of his ruthless subjugation;25 and along the southern coasts, Union men-of-war imposed an effective blockade, preventing outside aid from reaching the South. Only in Virginia where Jackson and Robert E. Lee had commanded were Confederate arms victorious. Slowly but surely now the North was weakening the South. Each battle drained the Confederacy of its precious manpower. Each day of naval blockade prevented the replenishing of food, equipment, and supplies and the exportation of cotton, tobacco, and sugar cane. discussed various issues with his guests, she would usually retire from the room but would remain within hearing distance. In this way was she able to form an opinion. In Reagan's continuous quest for knowledge, she ably assisted. In fact, at times she became hoarse from reading to him. 23 Johnston was killed at the Battle of Shiloh on April 6-7, 1862. Jackson was wounded by his own troops at the Battle of Chancellorsville, May 1-4, 1863. He died on May 10, 1863. Their deaths were a great loss to the Confederate cause. See Richmond Daily Examiner, May 11, 12, 1863. 24 Arthur J. L. Fremantle, Three Months in the Southern States: April-June, 1863, pp. 100-111, 115-116, 212; Jones, Clerk's Diary, I, 298-299, 300; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 399. 25 So outraged were the Southerners by Butler's conduct that President Davis issued a proclamation stating that all commissioned officers serving under Butler should be considered "robbers and criminals deserving death" and if captured they should be "reserved for execution." See Richardson (comp.), Papers of the Confederacy, I, 269-274; Coulter, Confederate States, pp. 95, 189, 368, 370, 479-480; Chesnut, Diary, pp. 164-165, 183-202; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 231-232. Secretary of State Benjamin told Colonel Fremantle that his property in New Orleans was confiscated and that his sisters were turned out into the street. Fremantle, Three Months, p. 209.

Procter_5127.pdf 160

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

147

Because of the uncertainty of the war, gold had become precious, Confederate paper currency almost worthless, and prices had skyrocketed to such heights that a soldier's monthly pay could not buy three pounds of butter.26 Fearful of famine, German and Irish aliens clamored to leave the South;27 hysterically, a hungry, lawless mob of women and boys rioted for bread in Richmond;28 and ominously and with increasing frequency, Davis and his cabinet received reports from the battlefront setting forth the immediate need of more food, clothing, and medical supplies for the soldiers as well as more equipment and reinforcements.29 At last, the crucial moment of decision for the Confederacy had arrived. The South and its leaders had reached a crossroads. One path, representing a continuation of the present policy of defensive warfare and a more vigorous protection of the western Confederacy, led to Vicksburg, the beleaguered Confederate stronghold on the Mississippi. For months now, General John C. Pemberton and his men had withstood all attacks, but incessant fighting had depleted their numbers while disease and starvation had weakened their resistance. They required immediate relief, or defeat and subjugation would surely be their lot.30 The other path, however, led northward from Virginia into Maryland and Pennsylvania, deep into the land of the enemy. To many, it symbolized the end of the Union invasion of Virginia; to others, it was the beginning of a grand southern offensive, the longawaited road to victory and glory; but to all, it meant retaliation and revenge—at last.31 Thus it was, on the weekend of May 15-16, 1863, that Davis, the 26 Jones, Clerk's Diary, I, 328. Butter sold at four dollars a pound on May 20, 1863. For economic conditions in Richmond from March to August, 1863, see in ibid., 265 ff. The Richmond Daily Examiner, May 26, 1863, stated that gold was being hoarded in the South and that there was no confidence in Confederate currency. 27 Jones, Clerk's Diary, I, 268-269. 28 Ibid., 284-286, 290; Sallie A. Putnam, Richmond During the War, pp. 208211. Few men were in this demonstration. 29 Jones, Clerk's Diary, I, 299-309. 30 The siege of Vicksburg began late in 1862 but Grant did not assume command of the Union forces until January 30, 1863. Rhodes, History, IV, 300, states that from a Union point of view Vicksburg was of strategic importance second only to Richmond. The Richmond Daily Examiner and Richmond Enquirer from February to July, 1863, manifested in their editorials and articles the growing concern that Southerners felt over Vicksburg. 31 For example, see Fremantle, Three Months, pp. 245-246; also Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 437-438.

Procter_5127.pdf 161

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

148

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

cabinet, and Lee met in Richmond 32 to decide the strategy of the Confederacy. From the start it was evident what course they favored, but carefully they weighed their decision. Definitely in favor of a grand offensive, especially after two years of successful defensive warfare, Lee forcefully advocated his case. Arguing that if he crossed the Potomac such action might give the mounting peace movement in the North added support, he further stated that he must invade the North, if for no other reason than to acquire provisions, for he could no longer feed his army in its present position. Otherwise, if they did not approve of his plan, he believed that he should retire to Richmond to prepare for a long siege which would ultimately end in surrender. And as for Vicksburg, he urged that General Joseph E. Johnston attack Grant immediately, thereby relieving Pemberton's army.33 Swayed by their great commander's summation, and by his personality as well, the cabinet reacted favorably to his ideas. After all, who knew the southern military position better than Lee? And what more could they hope for than what he had promised? The invaders would be driven from the country and, in turn, their homeland would feel the wrath of Confederate arms. Moreover, a brilliant campaign on northern soil would rejuvenate southern morale and infuse new life into the Confederate war effort, and perhaps, if Lee was overwhelmingly victorious—and of course he would be—such successes might convince an already vacillating Great Britain that the Confederacy could not be subjugated and, therefore, should be officially recognized. Then, no longer would they fear for their independence and endure the sufferings of war.34 So, wholeheartedly they accepted Lee's proposals, that is, all except Reagan. For he, much preferring to give up Richmond to the Yankees if it would save Texas for the Confederacy,35 was not bedazzled by the glittering prospects of Lee's "Grand Offensive." Anxiously during 32

Douglas Southall Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 19; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 121. Reagan, Memoirs, p. 121; Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 19. Lee stressed the need for provisions as the most important reason for moving northward. Reagan, however, believed that Lee thought he had an invincible army which had already won numerous battles and would now win many more. 34 Southerners since 1861 had cherished the hope that Great Britain would recognize their independence. See Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy, and Adams, Great Britain and the American Civil War, about British-Confederate relations and opinions. In Fremantle, Three Months, pp. 211-212, see Davis' views in his discussion with Fremantle. 35 Jones, Clerk's Diary, I, 266. 33

Procter_5127.pdf 162

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

149

the past few months he had looked westward to the grim struggle for Vicksburg, and now fervently before the cabinet he pleaded its case. Emphatically he reminded them that if Vicksburg should fall, the Confederacy would be cut in two and would lose needed reinforcements, munitions, and supplies from Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas. He also called to their attention that a gallant Confederate army would be forfeited and a victorious Union force left free to inflict further damage upon the South. Moreover, the effect of its loss upon the morale of the people would be devastating and upon the prestige of the government irreparable. Instead of crossing the Potomac "I . . . [favor] the plan of allowing General Lee to threaten such a movement, without executing it," Reagan concluded., "and at the proper time for 25,000 or 30,000 of his army to be sent to reinforce General Pemberton at Vicksburg."36 To such proposals, however, Davis, Lee, and the cabinet remained inexorably opposed. Especially so was Lee who considered it pure folly to divide his army.37 Quickly they voted Reagan down, but later in the day, upon receiving letters and dispatches from prominent military men and civilians asking them to send Lee to save Vicksburg, they decided to postpone their decision until the morrow. Early the next morning, Saturday, May 16, a worried, trouble-laden group of men gathered once more to try to foresee and steer wisely their future. All that day and then far into the evening they remained in session. And finally, after exhausting every possibility, they reached a verdict. With the majority confident, out flashed the orders. It was Johnston to Vicksburg and Lee across the Potomac to Washington, Baltimore, and Philadelphia. Dejectedly that night Reagan walked slowly home. Well past midnight he talked with Edwina, discussing the decision he believed was a mistake. Then, restlessly, he sought solace in sleep but it would not come. By early morning he was up writing to Davis of his forebodings and asking him to reconsider the question. But it was to no avail. He was one against many.38 36 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 121-122, 150-152; Dowdey, Experiment in Rebellion, pp. 283-284. 37 Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 19. 38 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 121-122* Dowdey, Experiment in Rebellion, pp. 284-286. Reagan was frequently at odds with other cabinet members concerning what course the government should pursue. At his first cabinet meeting he differed with all members by urging that they send 10,000 troops into Kentucky to help the secession-

Procter_5127.pdf 163

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

150

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Thus late in June, 1863, carrying upon his shoulders the hopes of the Confederacy, Lee led his veterans—confident and ready for a fight—across the Potomac into Maryland and Pennsylvania.39 On July 1, he encountered the main Union army near Gettysburg, and for three days battled furiously to dislodge and rout them from their positions. But on July 5, with his army reeling from a staggering bloody repulse, he ordered a retreat toward the friendly, familiar confines of Virginia, leaving behind thousands of dead comrades. The "Grand Offensive'' was over.40 In the meantime at Vicksburg, Grant had gradually tightened the steel jaws of his trap around Pemberton and his men, while Johnston, with a small, inadequate fighting force, watched helplessly, unable to lift the siege.41 The garrison itself suffered untold hardships. Meat was scarce, bacon almost nonexistent, and rat meat soon became a delectable dish.42 The weather—humid and hot in the summer—together with the incessant job of digging trenches contributed further to the weakening of the men, and by July 1, Pemberton, surveying his pitiful army, firmly believed he could not repel another assault.43 On July 3, raising white flags on the breastworks, he asked for a parley, and on July 4, hoping for better terms because of the date, surrendered to Grant.44 That day was the beginning of the end for the Confederacy. For ists in that state join the Confederacy. He was overruled. Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 146-147. Reagan also stated that he disagreed with the President more often than any other member of the cabinet. Feeling that he might be causing Davis embarrassment, he offered to resign, but Davis replied "that if the Cabinet should accept without question the opinions of the President he did not see what their use could be as advisors to the President." Ibid., p. 162. 39 Maryland is about ten miles in width where Lee crossed the Potomac. Lee was soon in Pennsylvania. 40 For the classic account of the battle at Gettysburg and of Lee's retreat, see Fremantle, three Months, pp. 233 ff.; also see Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 29-134. Lee lost 20,486 infantry and artillery at Gettysburg. War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XXVII, pt. 2, pp. 337, 346, 712 ff. 41 In War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XXIV, pt. 1, pp. 194, 195, 223, 224, Johnston claimed he had only about 24,000 men in his command, although the War Department fixed the estimate at 34,000 men. There are many communications between Johnston and Pemberton in ibid. 42 Rhodes, History, IV, 315-316. 43 War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XXIV, pt. 1, p. 286; ibid., pt. 3, p. 982. 44 In ibid., pt. 1, p. 44, Grant stated that the only condition allowed the prisoners was that they would be paroled. In ibid., pt. 3, p. 461, Sherman wrote Grant: "glory, hallelujah! the best Fourth of July since 1776."

Procter_5127.pdf 164

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

151

after the defeats at Gettysburg and Vicksburg, the fortunes of the South—its armies outnumbered and poorly equipped, its people hungry and demoralized, its prestige at a low ebb—grew steadily worse. Now, with northern manpower asserting itself, with northern industry geared to wartime production, and with Union armies at last in competent hands, it was only a question of time until the Confederacy would be brought to its knees. In Tennessee, by September, 1863, Union forces had captured Knoxville and Chattanooga and by the end of November had driven the Confederates into northern Georgia. Renewing their offensive in the spring of 1864, the Federals commanded by General William T. Sherman set out for Atlanta and after months of bitter fighting captured the city on September 2. Then ruthlessly the destruction of the Old South began. On November 15, ordering Atlanta burned, Sherman pillaged and devastated a sixty-mile-wide path across Georgia in his march to Savannah and the sea. From there he proceeded northward, virtually unopposed, into South Carolina and by mid-February, 1865, captured and burned Columbia. Still onward he marched into North Carolina, spreading terror and desolation everywhere he went, until, at length, Johnston offered him combat. But already the damage had been done. Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina lay in ruins, their people outraged and ravaged. For years to come, the name of Sherman would be associated with the poverty and misery that hovered over the South.45 Nor in Virginia was the situation much better. Upon retiring from Pennsylvania in July, 1863, Lee was unable to initiate a new offensive, and Major General George G.. Meade, Lee's Gettysburg antagonist, although pursuing him closely at times, was unwilling to press his luck further and risk a full-scale assault.46 But in May, 1864, after months of winter preparation, a mighty Federal army now commanded by Grant moved menacingly toward Richmond, and with all the reserves that the Confederates could muster, Lee went forth to oppose him. Day after day of bloody conflict and slaughter ensued, as the Federal troops advanced relentlessly. Grant lost thousands of troops47 but 45 For details of Sherman's devastating march, see William T. Sherman, Memoirs of General William T. Sherman, 2 vols.; Lloyd Lewis, Sherman: Fighting Prophet; Davis P. Conyngham, Sherman's March through the South; George W . Nichols, The Story of the Great March; Charles W. Wills, Army Life of an Illinois Soldier: Including a Day by Day Record of Sherman's March to the Sea. 46 See Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 162-205, for the operations of Lee and Meade after Gettysburg to the end of 1863. 47 From May 4 to June 12, 1864, in Grant's campaign against Lee, he lost 54,929

Procter_5127.pdf 165

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

152

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

gradually, by sheer force of numbers, pushed the battle-worn Southerners back to the outskirts of Richmond and Petersburg where siege operations began. 48 Then, into the beautiful and fertile, but poorlyprotected Shenandoah Valley he dispatched General Philip H. Sheridan, and by two stunning victories in September and October, 1864, Sheridan, pillaging and burning everything in his path, swept the Confederates from the field.49 Meanwhile in Richmond during these months, Reagan, receiving reports of the wanton acts of the invaders, sadly watched his world crumble about him. How bitter now were the fruits of secession and war! Week after week he saw his country desolated and scorched by the enemy, his people humbled and helpless, his government threatened with destruction, and—what was even more distressing—the flower of southern manhood mangled and annihilated. Yet, still he, like so many others, fought on, hoping against hope for some overwhelming victory, for some overtures of peace guaranteeing independence, for some miracle that would never come. Those happy days before Gettysburg had indeed vanished now, and in their stead there resided only gloom and despair. Intermittently, enemy cannonading or a sudden cavalry foray near the city warned him ominously of even more difficult days ahead;50 ragged, dirty soldiers—some wounded, others prisoners, all hungry—tramping through the Richmond streets graphically exhibited the horrors and hardships of war as well as the endless sacrifices that some men were making; 51 while, on the other men, almost equal to the total number of Lee's army, and still the Confederates were outnumbered. Rhodes, History, IV, 497. See Jones, Clerk's Diary, II, 203, 210, 243, 260, for individual accounts. 48 Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 269 S. 49 "Do all the damage to railroads and crops you can," Grant counselled Sheridan. "Carry off stock of all descriptions and negroes, so as to prevent further planting. If the war is to last another year we want the Shenandoah Valley to remain a barren waste." Philip H. Sheridan, Personal Memoirs of P. H. Sheridan, I, 486; II, 52. Sheridan defeated General Jubal A. Early's army at Winchester on September 19, and at Cedar Creek on October 19, 1864. See War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLIII, pt. 1, pp. 24, 46 ff., 552, 558, for Winchester battle reports; ibid., pp. 32, 553; ibid., pt. 2, p. 901, for Cedar Creek reports. As for Lee's strategy and hopes for Early, see Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 494-495, 512-513. 50 Reagan to Starr, June 13, 1864, in Starr Papers; Jones, Clerk's Diary, II, 204, 206-207, 236, 237; T. C. De Leon, Four Years in Rebel Capitals: An Inside View of Life in the Southern Confederacy, from Birth to Death, pp. 319, 320; Richmond Daily Examiner, August 29, 1863, March 2, July 1, 5, 1864. 51 Jones, Clerk's Diary, II, 200, 201, 222, 225, are but a few references that may be found.

Procter_5127.pdf 166

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

153

hand, high prices and widespread speculation glaringly illustrated the greed and selfishness of others;52 and finally, a desolate home in Richmond reminded him sorely of a great loss, the untimely death of Edwina.53 What sad times these were! Yet Reagan realized that even greater misfortunes were in the offing, and therefore he sent his children to their grandparents in Texas54 and prepared himself for an inevitable, hurried retreat.55 Undoubtedly the Confederacy was nearing its end, for Lee—his ablest lieutenants, "Stonewall" Jackson, J. E. B. "Jeb" Stuart, Albert Sidney Johnston, James Longstreet, A. P. Hill, and R. S. Ewell, either dead or incapacitated56—had informed him that his army, exhausted, hungry, and shrinking through death and desertion, had no reserves. One Union break-through would be the end.57 Then too, through his own observations Reagan knew that Richmond could not hold out much longer. One day he and Secretary of the Navy Mallory, riding toward cannon fire northwest of the capital, aided a Colonel Lyons in carrying out a ruse against an attacking cavalry regiment by riding up and down a line of empty entrenchments "as if giving directions to men," until the enemy, completely fooled, withdrew.58 And on other occasions, only a regiment of clerks and citizens from Richmond had prevented seasoned Union troops from entering the city.59 &Ibid., II, 160, 164, 168-169, 173, 185, 203, 209, 212, 217, 242; Putnam, Richmond, pp. 271-272, 303, 340-347. 53 In interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, with B. P., February 12, 1956, she stated that Edwina Reagan, while hanging a picture, was standing upon a chair. She slipped and fell on a protruding edge of the chair. Pregnant at the time, she died, as did the child, on July 21, 1863. She was thirty-one. See Richmond Enquirer, July 23, 1863; Dallas Herald, August 19, 1863. 54 Austin Tribune [undated] in possession of Reagan Ferguson, Palestine, Texas; Lewis to Starr, August 17, 1864, in Starr Papers. Although Reagan wished to send his children to Texas in the fall of 1864, he did not do so until February 1, 1865. With Dr. L. D. Hill as their escort, the four children departed from Richmond, carrying with them nine million dollars in undivided sheets of Confederate money and three million dollars in postage stamps. After a long and hazardous journey, they arrived safely in Texas. The money was delivered to Secretary of the Treasury of the Trans-Mississippi Department Peter W. Gray, and the stamps to Dr. Starr, both residing at Marshall, Texas. 55 Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 554-555. Lubbock, an aide to Jefferson Davis from September 8, 1864, until the end of the war, stayed with Reagan at his home in Richmond. See ibid., p. 551. 56 Freeman, R. E. Lee, III, 327. 57 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 191-194; Freeman, JR. E. Lee, III, 389-390. 58 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 182-183. 59 The most famous episode of this civilian defense was in Dahlgren's raid on

Procter_5127.pdf 167

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

154

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Obstinately, however, the Confederates fought on through the winter of 1864-1865, determined to make the Yankees pay a high price for every foot of Virginia soil. But on Sunday, April 2, 1865, the end finally came. Lee informed Davis that he could no longer hold Richmond and Petersburg.60 At last, the anticipated flight began. Gathering them in his office at two that Sunday afternoon, Davis solemnly informed the cabinet, Governor John Letcher of Virginia, and Richmond's mayor, Joseph Mayo, of their situation. Grimly but calmly they discussed what had to be done and then set their time of departure for that night at eight by train to Danville, Virginia. 61 Hurriedly rushing to the post office, Reagan gave last-minute instructions to his department heads, telling them what materials should be sent ahead, what should be destroyed, and when and where they should meet again. Then, with night already upon him, he hastened to collect his belongings and arrive on time at the depot. But upon emerging from the post office, he found a great change had come over Richmond. The streets, which that morning had been the picture of a peaceful and serene community observing the Sabbath, were now crowded with terrified masses of humanity, striving desperately to leave the city. The booming of Union cannon, heralding the approach of the enemy, re-emphasized their terror and drove them to greater exertions. At the train station where only one locomotive was preparing to go south, there was even greater confusion as people, pushing and shoving their way forward, tried frantically to obtain passage for themselves and their loved ones. But with government leaders and their bulky official files occupying most of the available space, few succeeded. At length, after several hours delay, the train, February 28, 1864. Southerners believed that Colonel Ulric Dahlgren intended to free Union prisoners from nearby Belle Isle, to burn Richmond, and to kill Davis and the cabinet. However, Dahlgren and his men were detected and repulsed, and he was killed. See ibid., pp. 180-182; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 505-507; Putnam, Richmond, pp. 276-284. So strongly did Reagan feel against these cavalry forays that he told Jones, the Confederate war clerk, that "inevitably these raiders must be killed, and not captured." Jones, Clerk's Diary, II, 240. 60 War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLVI, pt. 3, p. 1378; Freeman, R. E. Lee, IV, 49. In Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 196-197, Reagan states that he informed Davis that Lee was abandoning Richmond just before Davis entered church. Davis received Lee's official dispatch during church services. 61 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 197; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 667; Joseph T. Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, Confederate Navy Chief, p. 338; Patrick, Davis' Cabinet, pp. 344-346.

Procter_5127.pdf 168

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

155

filled to overflowing, departed, leaving Richmond and thousands of despairing Southerners to an invader's rule.62 As the train chugged slowly southward across the James, leaving the Confederate capital behind, a dismal silence settled over the occupants, each man lost in his own thoughts. Reagan sat somberly whittling a stick, staring unconsciously out into the night, seeing nothing. 63 For the moment he was back in Richmond reliving the memories of the past four years. Before him flashed the pathetic faces at the depot as they watched their last chance of escape draw away from them. Then quickly turning his thoughts to Lee and his ragged, starving army, he recalled the many glorious battles they had won against superior forces. He feared now for their uncertain future.64 Was all this actually happening? It seemed almost unbelievable that it could be. And yet, here he was, fleeing into the night. What now would become of the Confederacy and its people? By the next afternoon, Danville appeared before them, and for the next week, here they stayed, anxiously awaiting word from Lee. Then on April 10, news of his surrender reached them, falling "upon ears of all like a fire-bell in the night." And by midnight, they were once more fleeing southward.65 On April 11, after narrowly escaping capture, the fugitive government moved into Greensboro, North Carolina, and found its presence there unwanted, for the citizens wished to avoid the possibility of reprisals. Nevertheless, for four days they remained, conferring with Generals Johnston and Pierre G. T. Beauregard over their military situation. Deciding that it would be useless for Johnston's army to fight on or to retreat, the cabinet with Davis* reluctant consent ordered the Confederate commanders to open negotiations with Sherman to end hostilities.66 62 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 197-198; Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, pp. 338-339; Putnam, Richmond, pp. 362-365; Jones, Clerk's Diary, II, 465-467. 63 Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, p. 339. 64 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 198-199. 65 Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, pp. 339-340; Hanna, Flight into Oblivion, pp. 20-24; Patrick, Davis' Cabinet, p. 347. 66 For their flight from Danville to Greensboro and for their reception by the people, see Hanna, Flight, pp. 25-29. Davis and the cabinet met Johnston and Beauregard on April 12 at Colonel John Taylor Wood's mansion. The Confederate commanders stated that they could not defeat Sherman and that, if they retreated, they would weaken their armies further while exposing the country to Yankee pillag-

Procter_5127.pdf 169

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

156

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Then, on the fifteenth, as Greensboro's citizens began raiding government quartermaster and commissary supplies and looting local stores, they departed on horseback for friendlier surroundings.67 Slowly they journeyed across North Carolina toward Charlotte, finding each step of the way more arduous and disheartening. Heavy rains had transformed the roads into quagmires, rendering them almost impassable at times—a condition that exhausted both animals and men as they struggled forward. Hostile or indiflferent, the inhabitants along the way—as in Greensboro fearing Yankee vengeance—watched them pass without offering to aid them. And at night, scavenger bands raided their supplies and stole their horses, while others, believing they had large quantities of gold, lurked greedily nearby awaiting the opportune moment to attack.68 But finally on April 19, they reached Charlotte safely. Here for almost a week they awaited the outcome of the ShermanJohnston peace negotiations.69 Here the cabinet gave written opinions to Davis as to what course should be taken pending the acceptance or ing and burning. They asked permission to open negotiations with Sherman to end hostilities, but Davis, still confident that the Confederacy could resist successfully, was opposed to such requests. However, Reagan, backed by Secretary of War John C. Breckinridge, Attorney General George Davis, and Mallory, urged that negotiations be initiated. Davis reluctantly complied with majority rule. Reagan offered a six-point program for negotiations which was approved. See Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 199-200; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 678-683; Hanna, Flight, pp. 35-37; Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 564. 67 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 200; Hanna, Flight, pp. 38-39. The failroad south of Greensboro had been wrecked by Stoneman's raiders. Due to increasing danger, Davis and the cabinet had a large cavalry escort. 68 Hanna, Flight, pp. 39-41, gives a detailed account of the flight of Davis and the cabinet. 69 When officials of the Confederate government were almost equidistant from Greensboro and Charlotte, Davis received a dispatch from Johnston stating that Sherman was ready to negotiate. Davis sent Secretary of War Breckinridge and Reagan, who had proposed the basis for surrender, to aid Johnston at the conference. After nearly two days of steady riding, the two cabinet members arrived at Johnston's camp. On April 18, Breckinridge entered into the discussions while Reagan worked feverishly to put the Confederate terms for surrender into writing. Although Reagan did not participate in the actual talks since there was an objection made to the recognition of the civil government of the Confederacy, he did see his ideas for an armistice accepted by Sherman and Johnston with but slight variations. See War of Rebellion: O.R Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLVII, pt. 3, pp. 806-807, for Reagan's proposals. With their mission accomplished, Reagan and Breckinridge hastened to Charlotte to rejoin Davis. They arrived there by April 22. See Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 200-202; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 683, 684-689; Hanna, Flight, pp. 42-43, for complete details.

Procter_5127.pdf 170

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

157

refusal of their peace terms by the Federal government. 70 And here they learned with deep regret of Lincoln's assassination.71 Then to their chagrin, they learned from Sherman on April 24 that the United States would not honor the Sherman-Johnston proposals and, therefore, that the brief armistice would end in forty-eight hours. 72 Angrily Davis, who had been skeptical of the negotiations from the start, was now determined to fight on, but most of the cabinet members saw only the futility of further struggle, believing their cause to be lost. Especially were they convinced of this when on April 26, they learned that Johnston, after being offered the same terms of surrender as Lee, had without their knowledge or consent capitulated.73 Quickly now, with their armies defeated and themselves a much sought-after prize, the fugitive group with a cavalry escort of over 2,000 men moved out of Charlotte on the afternoon of April 26, fleeing southward across South Carolina toward Abbeville and Washington, Georgia. It seemed to them that the morale of the southern people had by now completely disintegrated, that instead of the fierce, determined spirit which had so characterized Southerners during four years of struggle and sacrifice, nothing was left except a smoldering hatred and fear of the Yankees and an irrepressible desire to survive, and that for them as "the hunted,'' there remained but two choices, either to try to escape or to return to their homes, protect their families, and await the unknown consequences of capture. Thus on April 26, just before leaving Charlotte, Attorney General George Davis de70 Benjamin to Davis, April 22, 1865, in Davis, Jefferson Davis, Constitutionalist, VI, 571; Mallory to Davis, April 24, 1865, in ibid., p. 575; Breckinridge to Davis, April 23, 1865, in ibid., pp. 572-573; George Davis to Davis, April 22, 1865, in ibid., pp. 577-579. For Reagan's report to Davis on April 22, 1865, see ibid., pp. 579-585; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 202-207; War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLVII, pt. 3, pp. 823-826. 71 Davis and the cabinet regretted Lincoln's death because Vice President Andrew Johnson of Tennessee, an avowed enemy of Davis, would now succeed to the Presidency. Speaking of Lincoln, Davis said: "For an enemy so relentless in war for our subjugation, we could not be expected to mourn; yet, in view of its political consequences, it could not be regarded otherwise than as a great misfortune to the South." See Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 683-684; Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, p. 341; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 208. 72 Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 689; Hanna, Flight, p. 52. 73 Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 692-693; Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 565; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 212. Davis, Reagan, and Lubbock hoped to reach Texas where General E. Kirby Smith had some 60,000 troops. There, they could move out on the plains and resist indefinitely until honorable peace terms were given. However, see Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, pp. 341-342, for Mallory's opinion of the future.

Procter_5127.pdf 171

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

158

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

cided to remain and take care of his children.74 Then on the twenty-seventh, some twenty miles from Charlotte, Secretary of the Treasury George A. Trenholm, seriously ill since leaving Richmond, found the flight too arduous, resigned, and took his leave.75 On May 2, at Abbeville, the faithful Mallory writing that he saw no way to be of further service to Davis or the Confederacy also resigned, and at Washington, Georgia, the next day departed for his home in Florida.76 And on May 3, after crossing the Savannah River and upon hearing that the Union cavalry was just ahead, the brilliant Benjamin bid them farewell. Now the count was down to three—Davis, Breckinridge, and Reagan.77 Meanwhile, the weather, cold and rainy, still plagued them; rapacious, armed bands scouring the countryside continued to steal supplies from them; and Federal troops rushing precipitately to overtake them threatened their freedom and safety at every turn. 78 But what was even more discouraging was the realization that they could no longer trust their escort, for the soldiers, demoralized and discontented, grumbled openly that the treasury should be divided among them, and, if not, forcibly taken. And so serious did the situation become that, soon after their arrival at Washington, Breckinridge ordered Reagan, who had been appointed secretary of the treasury by Davis after Trenholm's resignation,79 to distribute the silver coin among them. 80 Thus, did the dwindling, fugitive group reach Washington on May 3, and there did it disband. Davis, stating that the escort was too large to pass through enemy territory unnoticed and too small to defend them adequately, decided that it should scatter for safety in small 74

Reagan, Memoirs, p. 208. Ibid., p. 209; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 689, 692; Hanna, Flight, p. 58. Durkin, Stephen R. Mallory, pp. 342-343; Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 694-695. 77 See Reagan, Memoirs, p. 211, for Benjamin's decision to leave. Also see Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 566. The cavalry escort believed that of all the fleeing group Davis, Reagan, and Breckinridge had the best chance to escape. They thought that Benjamin would surely be caught. They were mistaken. See Robert Douthat Meade, Judah P. Benjamin: Confederate Statesman, p. 317. 78 See Hanna, Flight, pp. 55-69, 82-84. 79 Davis was determined to have Reagan as his secretary of the treasury, and even though Reagan objected strenuously to holding two cabinet posts at one time, he finally complied to the entreaties of Davis and the cabinet. Reagan, Memoirs, p. 209; Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 565. 80 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 214; War of Rebellion-. O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLIX, pt. 2, p. 1278. Also see Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 695, for his somewhat different account. 75

76

Procter_5127.pdf 172

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

159

bands and, therefore, that all government property should be hidden, transferred to other hands, or destroyed.81 Then on May 4, yielding to the repeated entreaties of Reagan and Breckinridge to escape, he started south once again with only his secretary, three aides, and an escort of ten men.82 Forced to remain in Washington to attend to the last details of their offices, Reagan and Breckinridge feverishly worked to complete their tasks. By midnight Reagan had finished his duties both as postmaster general and as secretary of the treasury83 and, after bidding Breckinridge farewell, hastened to overtake his commander-in-chief. By the first streaks of dawn he had passed through Double Wells, Georgia. Thereafter, with his horse fatigued and himself hungry and thirsty, he was again and again refused hospitality on the way. Finally, at ten that morning a widow took him in, fed him, and supplied him with a map showing how to by-pass the next town supposedly occupied by Union cavalry. And by late that afternoon, he came upon his old friend, Lubbock, and Colonel William Preston Johnston—two of the President's aides—who reunited him with Davis. Once more with his chief, Reagan fled with him and his small party southward across Georgia toward Florida.84 On the afternoon of May 6, they passed through Sandersville and that night camped on the banks of the Oconee River. Then Colonel Johnston brought them the disturbing news that Mrs. Davis and her escort, who had left Richmond several weeks prior to its evacuation, were in danger of being attacked by armed marauders, and Davis, stating that he must protect his family although it "would probably cause . . . his capture/' has81

Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 695. Ibid.; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 212-213. Breckinridge and Reagan agreed to overtake Davis after they completed their duties. 83 Reagan had little to do to close out post office affairs, but concerning the treasury it was a different matter indeed. He paid the salaries of all within the escort; handed over much of the Confederate silver and gold to James A. Semple, a bonded officer of the navy, and Mr. Tidball, his assistant; deposited the funds of the banks of Richmond in a vault at Washington, Georgia; and burned large boxes of Confederate paper money. See Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 213, 216; Davis, Rise and Vail, II, 695; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 568-569. See Hanna, Flight, pp. 90-92, for a detailed account of the disposition of the Confederate Treasury. Also see Otis Ashmore, "The Story of the Virginia Banks Funds," Georgia Historical Quarterly, II (1918), 171-197. 84 Davis states that to escape he intended to go south to a point reported unoccupied by Federal troops, and then turn west, cross the Chattahoochie River, and eventually unite with General E. Kirby Smith and General John B. Magruder in Texas. Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 697. Also see Reagan, Memoirs, p. 212. 82

Procter_5127.pdf 173

5/24/2014 7:44:50 AM

160

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

tened to find her. Unwilling to let him go alone, the devoted band saddled up and followed him through a hectic night of riding over dimly-lit, tortuous trails. By dawn they reached Mrs. Davis* camp and, to their great relief, found her safe and unharmed. All that day they accompanied her, ever watchful for an attack, but when it did not come they again prepared to leave for their far-off destination. Early the next morning, May 8, as a steady rain fell upon them, they departed. All day through heavily forested country and over muddy roads they traveled, losing their way in the unfamiliar surroundings. Toward evening, wet and tired, they unexpectedly came upon Mrs. Davis and her escort near the Ocmulgee River, and thereupon decided to ride with them until dark. After encamping that night near Abbeville, the harassed band broke camp the next morning and sped swiftly together over the muddy Georgia trails. By nightfall they had gone some twenty-eight miles and decided to stop for the night at a small creek, amid level pine woods, a mile or two from Irwinville. Meanwhile Davis informed Reagan, Lubbock, and the rest of his party to be prepared to ride that night. Quickly they readied themselves for the anticipated journey, but hour after hour passed by with no word from their leader. Knowing how dangerous it was for them to stay with Mrs. Davis' slow and noticeable train, they anxiously awaited his presence. Finally, however, as the campfires slowly burned out, they retired for the night, wondering what had happened to him. 85 It was still dark and a slight rain was falling when Reagan awoke. Rifle fire had broken the stillness and jarred him from a deep sleep. Immediately he jumped to his feet, and seeing two Yankee soldiers struggling with Lubbock in an attempt to steal his horse and saddle bags he drew his pistol, ready to fire if there was any gun play. Suddenly a Union major rode up and the soldiers quickly disappeared. Turning to Reagan he demanded his gun, and Reagan, handing it over, asked him if he should not stop the rifle fire since undoubtedly his troops were shooting in the darkness at one another. 85

Davis states that he put off his departure because he heard that marauders intended to attack the camp that night. He decided to wait long enough to see if there was any truth in the rumor. Davis, Rise and Vail, II, 701. However, Patrick, Davis' Cabinet, pp. 356-357, does not believe that Davis wished to escape. It seems to him that the flight was more of a "running wait" for capture.

Procter_5127.pdf 174

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

THE CIVIL WAR

161

The major dashed off. Soon the firing ceased, and Davis, Lubbock, and Reagan were prisoners of war.86 At long last their flight had ended and a dream of four years had passed. The Confederate States of America was no more. 86 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 216-220, and Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 569-572, give vivid, detailed accounts of the flight from the time Reagan found Lubbock on May 5. Davis, Rise and Fall, II, 700-702, gives a brief picture of the last days before capture.

Procter_5127.pdf 175

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

C H A P T E R

X I I I

i

Imprisonment and Release

J L T WAS MAY, 1865, in the United States and for the first time in over four years there was peace. Once again men looked homeward. The Union soldier—the farmer, the shopkeeper, the preacher, the neighborhood boy grown old by what he had experienced and seen, the substitute paid to fulfill another man's military obligations, the immigrant who had wished to fight for his newly-adopted country—laid down his arms, received his mustering-out pay, and glorying in his army blue marched triumphantly back to the pursuits of life he had necessarily abandoned in 1861. Hating the South— many haunted by the degrading, inhuman ordeal of southern prison life; some embittered by the insults and haughtiness of Southerners when they had marched through Confederate territory; all poignantly remembering the loss of comrades dear to them—they welcomed any act that would further punish the "rebels" and that would exact from them a fitting retribution. Yet, in many cases at the end of the war, victory somehow lessened their bitterness, the return to their loved ones and to happy surroundings gradually erased nightmarish experiences; and the wealth of opportunities opening to them directed their thoughts to other more pleasant and profitable fields of endeavor. For how the North and

Procter_5127.pdf 176

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes.

Edwina Nelms Reagan of whom her husband could say forty years after her death, "She was the prettiest, sweetest little thing that God ever made . . . one of the most intelligent people I have ever known . . . She was my inspiration." She is shown here with her first child, John Edwin Reagan, in 1854. Copied from a daguerreotype.

Procter_5127.pdf 177

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Procter_5127.pdf 178

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes.

Jefferson Davis poses with his first cabinet: standing, left, Christopher G. Memminger, Secretary of the Treasury, and right, Leroy Pope Walker, Secretary of War; seated, left to right, Judah P. Benjamin, Attorney General, Stephen R. Mallory, Secretary of the Navy, Alexander H. Stephens, Vice President, Jefferson Davis, John H. Reagan, Postmaster General, and Robert Toombs, Secretary of State.

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes.

Molly Taylor Reagan, the third Mrs. Reagan.

Procter_5127.pdf 179

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Courtesy of the Texas State Archh

Four great Texans: Francis R. Lubbock, Alexander W. Terreii, John H. Reagan, and James S. Hogg.

Procter_5127.pdf 180

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Procter_5127.pdf 181

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

John H. Reagan in his library, with portraits of Davis, Lee, and Jackson over the mantel.

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes.

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes.

"A Statesman of Three Republics" by Bateman. A cartoon that appeared in the Dallas Morning News when John H. Reagan died.

Procter_5127.pdf 182

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Procter_5127.pdf 183

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

Courtesy of the Texas State Archives.

John H. Reagan, (left) A steel engraving made to go on Confederate States money, (right) The statesman and lawmaker.

Courtesy of Mrs. May Reagan Orr Mathes.

^ ' 'y%fs^^^^iX'^^

c

c

O

s

o

G O 3 O

X

o

Procter_5127.pdf 184

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

163

West had changed during their absence. Four years of all-out war effort, of government encouragement and spending, in areas protected from and untouched by the ravages of war had seen to that. Prosperity and wealth emanating from wartime demands, prices, and profits, permeated the country and graced the northern people. Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio had become not only the granary for the nation but also for much of Europe as well. New England, New York, and Pennsylvania had mobilized their wealth, their expanding population, and Yankee know-how to become a young industrial giant just now ready to flex its muscles and to challenge the dominant British manufacturers; and the West, its magnetic appeal heightened by the congressional promise of free land to every settler,1 inspired Horace Greeley and others enthusiastically to counsel "Go West, young man, go West/' Indeed, the Union soldier had much to look forward to in May, 1865. He had escaped from a terrifying ordeal of war and death into a prosperous postwar land bubbling with enthusiasm, confidence, and optimism. He found before him opportunities for wealth, land, and position awaiting those who had the initiative, determination, and foresight to acquire them. For what more could he ask? But meanwhile in May, 1865, the Confederate soldier too was making the long journey home from war. Hungry and penniless, numbed by defeat and the realization that the sacrifices and efforts of four years had gone for naught, he pulled his tattered gray uniform about him and trudged slowly and dejectedly back to the once peaceful, happy surroundings left years before. But how the South had changed since he had marched away amid the waving of flags, the praise and flattery of southern girls, and the beat of martial music. How different now were the country and the people. Gone were the cheering crowds, the bands, the gaiety and exultation for the hero who had left to fight for his country. And gone, too, was the remembered South, its proud spirit, its easy, gracious way of life, its Negroes singing in the cotton fields, the southern colonel welcoming guests into a beautiful, white-columned mansion, the flirtatious southern belles and dashing young cavaliers gathering for an1 The Homestead Act of 1862 was the first of many acts opening the public domain to free settlement and exploitation. See Robbins, Landed Heritage, pp. 203 rT.; Benjamin Horace Hibbard, A History of the Public Land Policies, pp. 347-410; George M. Stephenson, The Political History of the Public Lands from 1840 to 1862.

Procter_5127.pdf 185

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

164

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

other sumptuous party, the meticulous, "bossy" Negro mammy, and the pleasurable, gratifying view of acre upon acre of well-cultivated fields or of herds of cattle and horses grazing peacefully in luxuriant green valleys or on grassy, forested slopes. Yes, all these—the vestiges of an old southern civilization—were gone. Now before him he saw only ruin and desolation, poverty and famine. Day after day he marched through a plundered and ravaged country, almost unrecognizable. On every hand, lone chimneys of charred homes reaching upward toward the sky—Sherman's sentinels —greeted him. Mile after mile, burned cities, destroyed bridges and fences, blackened forests and valleys, ruined crops and fields grown over with weeds and conspicuously empty of livestock, and railroad tracks bent grotesquely around trees reminded him how ruthlessly the invading Union armies under Sherman, Sheridan, Butler, and Grant had inflicted war upon the southern people. And the sight of once valuable Negro slaves roaming aimlessly over the country or standing idly about on the streets; of commerce gone and trade at an absolute standstill; of Confederate bonds and money rendered worthless; of United States Treasury agents avariciously and piratically seizing property, claiming it to be Confederate; and of men, women, and children pathetically searching through the ruins of cities and towns for shelter and clothing made him realize how bitter was defeat, how grim was the future.2 So, the generation which had been unable to cope with the issues of slavery and secession by compromise, which had used war as the means of settling differences, was now faced with an even greater problem, that of re-establishing peace and building a bridge of friendship and trust between peoples parted by memories of war. Could men of both sections work now to achieve by compromise what they had been unable to accomplish in 1861? It was not likely. The hatred between the North and South was too great; the desire for vengeance ran too deep. 2 For splendid accounts on what the South was like at the end of the war, see U.S. Congress, "Condition of the South," Senate Executive Documents, 39th Congress, 1st Session, No. 2, Serial No. 1237 (Schurz's Report, pp. 2-105; Grant's Reports, pp. 106-108); Sidney Andrews, The South Since the War: As Shown by Fourteen Weeks of Travel and Observation in Georgia and the Carolinas; Whitelaw Reid, After the War: A Southern Tour, May 1, 1865, to May 1, 1866; Ramsdell; Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 27-51; E. Merton Coulter, The South During Reconstruction 1865-1811, Chapter 1.

Procter_5127.pdf 186

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

165

But for Reagan on May 10, as he sat quietly in the darkness of his captured camp guarded by Union soldiers, the difficulties that beset the southern people seemed far removed, for indeed he had troubles of his own. Threatening him and other prominent Southerners were grave charges of treason and rebellion, and he expected imprisonment or death to be his lot. Yet, whatever the consequences he was determined to face them as bravely and honorably as he could. But now it was dawn and the camp stirred busily. The soldiers, after attending their wounded, burying their dead,3 and checking what had been captured, started the ill-fated band on a march toward Atlanta. By sunset they had reached Abbeville and, after resting there for the night, resumed their journey. Urging their mounts forward, they arrived on May 13 at Macon,4 where General J. H. Wilson graciously received and fed them before sending them on their way.5 Then riding steadily they entered Atlanta just before daylight on May 14, and although tired and exhausted they traveled on to Augusta, where three or four miles below the city, at nightfall, they boarded a waiting steamer.6 That night as the boat churned slowly toward the sea Reagan wearily stretched himself out upon the ship's deck, threw what covering he could find about him, and forgot his troubles in sleep. The next morning he awoke refreshed, ate "a rough soldier's breakfast," and talked during much of the day with Alexander H. Stephens, Clement C. Clay, and General Joseph Wheeler who had also been put 8 The casualties were caused by Union forces firing upon one another in the darkness. War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLIX, pt. 1, pp. 535-536; Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 572. 4 It was while traveling to Macon that Davis, Reagan, Lubbock, et al., first learned of President Johnson's proclamation announcing $100,000 reward for the arrest of Jefferson Davis. It stated that Davis had plotted the murder of Lincoln and his cabinet. Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 573; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 221. For the full content of the proclamation, see the New York Times, May 4, 1865, and the Boston Herald, May 4, 1865. 5 At Macon, Reagan learned that Davis and Clement C. Clay were to be sent ahead to Washington for trial. Reagan asked General Wilson to include him with Davis since "we had entered the contest together, and . . . I . . . [am] willing to end it with him, whatever that end might be." Two or three hours later, Wilson received orders to send all of the captured party to Hampton Roads, Virginia. Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 221-222. Q War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLIX, pt. 1, p. 537; Alexander H. Stephens, Recollections: His Diary When A Prisoner at Fort Warren, Boston Harbour, 1865. . . . ed. by Myrta Lockett Avary, pp. 110-111; Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 575.

Procter_5127.pdf 187

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

166

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

aboard during the night. 7 Soon after midnight on May 16 they reached Savannah and by that afternoon had transferred to the new steamer, Clyde. Then, with the sloop-of-war, Tus car ora, as an escort they set sail northward for Hampton Roads, Virginia, and Fortress Monroe. 8 During the next two days, Davis, Reagan, Stephens, Clay, and their comrades, being assigned to cabins, kept much to themselves except at mealtime. Reading the New York newspapers, Harper's Weekly, and Frank Leslie's Illustrated News for the first time in many months, they learned to their dismay of the intense bitterness existing in the North against them personally and of the prevailing desire for revenge. Anxiously, they speculated what their final destination would be, all hoping it to be Washington. And although outwardly cheerful and in good spirits each man, praying for the best, feared the worst.9 Finally, on May 19, they arrived at Hampton Roads, and the next day they learned their fate. It was prison for all—Davis and Clay to Fortress Monroe; Wheeler, Johnston, and Lubbock to Fort Delaware on the west side of Delaware Bay; Burton N . Harrison, Davis' private secretary, to Capitol Prison at Washington; and Stephens and Reagan to Fort Warren in Boston Harbor. What's more, it was to be solitary confinement with both oral and written communication expressly prohibited. This was the punishment they had feared most— the prospect of rotting away their lives shut off completely from a world in which they had so vigorously and actively participated.10 7 Stephens, Recollections, pp. 111-114. The women occupied the staterooms available. Davis was also given a berth. Reagan, Stephens, Lubbock, Johnston, Wheeler, and Clay made their beds wherever they could. 8 War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLIX, pt. 1, p. 537, states that they arrived at Savannah at 1:00 A.M., on May 16, and put to sea on the Clyde at 3:00 P.M. Stephens, Recollections, pp. 114-116, except for a slight difference in time, corroborates the official report. See also War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Navies, Ser. I, Vol. XVI, p. 334, for orders concerning Davis, Stephens, Reagan, Clay, et al. 9 Stephens, Recollections, pp. 115-121, gives a detailed account of the voyage from Savannah to Fortress Monroe. Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 576, quotes General Wheeler's account of the voyage. Wheeler says that he devised two plans of escape from the Clyde, but Davis rejected both schemes. Also see Boston Herald, May 24, 1865, New York Times, May 22, 1865, and New York Herald, May 23, 1865, for a description of the prisoners, their ideas and actions. 10 Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 576-577. See Boston Daily Evening Transcript, May 26, 1865, for Stephens' reactions to being sent to Fort Warren. In Stephens, Recollections, pp. 121-122, a more detailed account is given. That night after being told his destination, Stephens wrote: I slept little. Thought of home, sweet home. Saw plainly that I was not to be permitted to communicate with any one [sic] there; this was the most crushing thought. Death, I felt, I could meet with resignation, if such was to be my

Procter_5127.pdf 188

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

167

The following morning, Sunday, May 21, Reagan and Stephens arose early and by ten o'clock were ready to leave. Sadly they bid farewell to Clay, Harrison, Davis and his wife, wondering if ever they would see them again.11 Then after delaying their departure as long as possible they boarded their new prison ship, Tuscarora. For three days they sailed northward along the coast toward Boston. By May 23, groping slowly through heavy fog, they reached Block Island and soon thereafter arrived at Newport. But even with clearing weather it was not until late the next night that they anchored in Boston Harbor, just below the destination, Fort Warren. 12 On Thursday, May 25, soon after breakfast Reagan and Stephens were escorted separately to the fort where for the first time they met Lieutenant William H. Woodman. To this young Union lieutenant the first encounter with his two prisoners must have been a rare experience, for never were there greater contrasts than seen in these two men. Although both were prominent Confederates and had served together in the House of Representatives just prior to the Civil War and for four years in the Confederate government, they were almost complete opposites. Stephens, at fifty-three—affectionately known to his constituents as 'Tittle Ellick"—was of average stature but even in his healthiest days and when "soppin' wet" rarely attained 100 pounds. His shrill voice, sallow complexion, and recurrent illnesses gave further evidence of organic defects. In fact, newspapers stated monthly, sometimes weekly and oftentimes daily that "Little Ellick" was about to expire. They were finally correct some eighteen years later, on March 4, 1883. But mistake not this man. His mind was active and his will indomitable. What a contrast to him was Reagan. Well over six feet in height and ranging between 250 and 275 pounds Reagan stood before Woodman, his black eyes piercing and foreboding, his full black beard half fate, might I communicate with Linton [his brother] and other loved ones while life should last. Lubbock, Johnston, and Wheeler were put on another ship at six o'clock that morning. War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLIX, pt. 2, pp. 837, 857-858. Also see Stephens, Recollections, pp. 112-125, for an account of the separation. 12 Stephens, Recollections, pp. 125-126. Boston Herald, May 25, 1865, Boston Daily Evening Transcript, May 26, 1865, New York Times, May 26, 1865, note the progress of the Tuscarora to Boston. The Boston Evening Transcript, May 23, 1865, preparing the way for Reagan, stated that he "is said to have lived when a boy, in Lowell." 11

Procter_5127.pdf 189

5/24/2014 7:44:51 AM

168

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

covering a square jaw and bulldog countenance. Where Stephens had received an excellent education at the University of Georgia, Reagan had served as a scout on the Texas frontier, learning the habits of his savage enemies while Stephens was enjoying the refinements of Georgia society; where Stephens was quick, incisive, and sometimes brilliant in debate, Reagan was tenacious and overpowering; where Stephens had opposed secession, joining its cause only because Georgia had approved such a course, Reagan had been a leading factor in bringing Texas into the Confederacy; and where Stephens had disliked and openly opposed Jefferson Davis, Reagan remained firmly loyal, believing him to be the greatest man he had ever known. Leading Reagan into a stone building and down a flight of stairs, Woodman showed him his new quarters while informing him that all valuables as well as all objects which might possibly be used as weapons must be surrendered. Furthermore, he explained that rations per day would consist of so many ounces of bread and meat, that exercise per day would be one thirty-minute stroll, and that all correspondence and communication with the outside world would be strictly forbidden. Nor was Reagan to speak to anyone except on matters of business or need. Then upon being asked if he had any questions, Reagan inquired whether vegetables, milk, and coffee would be included in his rations. And when Woodman replied that they would not, Reagan then asked to be allowed to keep his pocket knife for company, as he was a "great whittler," assuring the lieutenant that he "would not attack the garrison." Laughingly Woodman consented and after seeing that there were no further questions departed.13 As the door closed imprisoning him, Reagan surveyed his new home more closely. Obviously he was occupying a cell which had been used years before as officers' quarters. Large, square stone blocks welded together with soil and cement formed a drab, colorless pattern for the floor, walls, and ceiling, and except for two small openings high up on the walls with iron bars across them the design continued uninterrupted. In the center of the room a lone pine table and chair rested stark and bare while in one corner a narrow iron bed with mattress and covering completed the meager furnishings. Since the fort was situated four miles from land and since his cell was below ground level, Reagan watched the walls perceptibly ooze with sweat. Light and ventilation came only from the two oblong holes, and he strained 13

Procter_5127.pdf 190

Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 222-223, 224; Stephens, Recollections, pp. 127-128.

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

169

to penetrate the dimness while feeling the heavy, muggy atmosphere bear down upon him. And with iron bars, stone walls, and a locked door confining him and with the silence and loneliness becoming unbelievably oppressive, he suddenly sensed the hopelessness of his position, entombed in a damp, underground cavern, possibly forever.14 Soon after two o'clock that afternoon an army sergeant added further to his depression by bringing in his day's rations, "a piece of dark-looking bread and a darker-looking piece of meat." Determined not to complain and deciding to see how long he could hold out without eating, Reagan remained silent for two days, never touching his food. Finally on Saturday the post commander, worried about his prisoner's behavior and health, permitted him to buy his own food and granted him additional minor privileges. Reagan, somewhat elated over his victory, began to take heart once again.15 The next day, pity and despair for himself having vanished and his optimistic spirit once more asserting itself, Reagan wrote President Johnson, for now he had hope for the future and possibly a country to work for and a people to serve. Respectfully asking Johnson to read what he had to say although he was a prisoner in solitary confinement, he skillfully restated the South's constitutional argument for states' rights, briefly reviewed events leading up to the Civil War concluding that the conflict "grew out of causes beyond the control of the men of . . . [their] generation," and declared that Federal arms had decided the questions of slavery and secession forever. However, now that the war had ended, a new government policy toward the South obviously had to be adopted, he asserted, and therefore "my object . . . in this paper . . . is to submit a few suggestions as to the present and future." First and foremost he prayed for statesmanship which would be both merciful and lenient to the South and its people. Emphatically he reiterated—for effect as well as from conviction—that the southern people as a whole rather than any single leader or group of men had acted to secure their constitutional rights. "And was this a crime?" he asked. Personally he had not considered it as such in 1861 nor did he now, 14 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 222-223. See Stephens, Recollections, pp. 128, 130-133, for Stephens' reaction to the first days of imprisonment. 15 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 223-224. See Stephens, Recollections, p. 132, for the list of articles together with their cost that Stephens bought on May 27. Reagan had enough money to buy what he needed. Lewis to Starr, August 27, 1865, in the Starr Papers.

Procter_5127.pdf 191

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

170

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

and therefore he saw no reason why he and other prominent Southerners should be imprisoned. But above all, he denounced the ideas of retaliation and military rule upon the South, explaining that such a policy would impoverish and degrade her people, would fill the country with outlaws and keep the populace in a constant state of rebellion. Moreover, it would make an Ireland, a Poland, or a Hungary of the South. "Would this be restoring the Union? Would it be securing the affections and cheerful loyalty of those who would be expected to form a part of the Union?" he asked. Would not new calamities, additional suffering and sorrows, impress the living with a feeling of hopeless despair of ever securing the friendly and paternal care and protection of their government, and cause them to feel that they were the objects of hate, persecution and wrong? And would any people so feeling be likely to become happy and contented, and to make good and faithful citizens ? No; military rule was not the answer but rather "amnesty for the past, the repeal of . . . confiscation laws, a burial of the bitter memories of the past, and . . . the same constitutional and legal protection'' for Southerners as for Northerners. "And in so doing," Reagan concluded, you will "achieve . . . [President Johnson} a victory greater than was ever won by arms, by securing the triumph of reason over passion, substituting peace for war, restoring to the country friendship instead of hatred . . . [and] repose and happiness for the strife and sorrow which now covers the land." 16 Thus did Reagan pour out his hopes and fears for the future to Johnson, confident that his remarks, if heeded, would help the South rise up from the depths of misery and despair. Furthermore, on June 3, hoping to aid the southern people even more, he wrote Secretary of State William H. Seward a short note, summarizing the ideas he had presented to the President.17 Then having done all that he could under the circumstances, he settled down to a grim day-to-day battle for mental and physical survival against solitary confinement. Throughout the summer Reagan struggled to discipline and condition himself to the ordeal through which he was going. But it was not easy. For always confronting him were the loneliness and seem16 Reagan to President Andrew Johnson, May 28, 1865, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 225-226, 271-285. 17 Reagan to Secretary of State William H. Seward, June 3, 1865, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869.

Procter_5127.pdf 192

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

171

ingly endless silence of his cell. Always creeping into his thoughts were doubts and fears that he might remain caged for years within Fort Warren's dank walls, forced to suffer the humid Boston summers and icy winters. And always lurking in his mind was the despairing idea that he would never again be free. In spite of these premonitions, he compelled himself day after day to adopt a cheerful, confident attitude toward the future, ever expecting to receive his parole and to return to his home, family, and friends. Diligently, he strove to stay physically fit despite a limited diet and close confinement.18 But above all else, hefiercelyresolved to keep his mind occupied as much as possible. As the days passed slowly by, Reagan carefully regulated his time. During the hours when his cell was brightest he read the New York and Boston newspapers, books purchased from Boston stores, and his Bible. Sometimes he wrote letters19—though realizing he would receive no reply—while frequently to break the monotony he paced back and forth across his cell or used little mauls as dumb-bells to exercise his arms and chest muscles. Eagerly each day he anticipated Stephens' morning walk—through his one high window he could hear the voices and see the feet of those who walked by—the guard's bringing him rations, and, most of all, his stroll with Lieutenant Woodman in the afternoon. But when night closed in about him, halting all activity, he was no longer able to control his suppressed thoughts and forebodings, and there in the darkness of his room he wrestled with his fears, wearily seeking relief through sleep.20 18 Reagan said that the wife of the commandant slipped him food by hiding it in her dress pockets. He believed the commandant probably knew of her actions. He said that he would not have survived without her help. Interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, with B. P., February 12, 1956; Stephens, Recollections, p. 458. 19 On June 23, 1865, Reagan wrote Provisional Governor A. J. Hamilton of Texas asking him to urge Johnson to grant amnesty. It was of much the same tenor as Reagan's letters to Johnson and Seward. See Reagan to Johnson, June 23, 1865, in R. P., Microfilm. Reagan also began writing his memoirs so that his children would know something about him, his ancestry and early life, and the principles which motivated his life. See Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865. 20 For a full picture of the effect of prison life upon Reagan, a combination of sources was necessary. Interview of Mrs. Jefferson Davis Reagan, with B. P., January 31, 1956; interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes with B. P., February 12, 1956; Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 224-225; Reagan to his children, June 28, 1865; Stephens, Recollections, pp. 149, 210-211, 319-348, 378, 389, 400, 443, 447, 457-458. Stephens' account of his prison ordeal is especially vivid. Because

Procter_5127.pdf 193

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

172

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Yet even in such distress Reagan never lost sight of or forgot the people whom he had served so long. Closely he followed in the newspapers what was happening in Texas while even more closely he noted the vehement reactions of the North to southern conduct. Clearly, almost prophetically, he saw that if Texans continued upon their present course—embittered, hostile, and directly opposed to the Yankees— military government and universal Negro suffrage would soon follow. And therefore, on August 11, he drafted for general publication a letter to the people of Texas:21 "This is new language to employ in addressing you, and will be as unwelcome to you as it is sorrowful to me," he informed them. "But it would be more than folly, it would be a great crime, for you, and me, and those who may be charged with the duty of reorganizing and restoring the State to the Union, to refuse to recognize the facts of . . . our situation, however disagreeable, and . . . not speak of and deal with them with candor and directness." Therefore he warned them of impending danger, advising them, as conquered people, to do what was necessary to avert the "twin disasters" of military despotism and universal Negro suffrage. Unhesitatingly he declared that they should recognize the authority of the United States, renounce immediately secession and slavery, already decided by force of arms, and, if demanded by the Federal government, extend "the elective franchise" to former slaves. Then by complying with these terms he felt confident that they could reorganize the state government according to their own dictates, have all Union military forces withdrawn from their boundaries, elect congressmen to represent them at Washington, achieve equality in the Union, and secure for themselves the protection of the Constitution once again. What's more, in regard to Negro voting he assured them that a plan could be adopted which would "fully meet the demands of justice and fairness, and satisfy the northern mind and the requirements of the Government, without endangering good government and repose of of his frailty and poor health, Stephens fared much better than Reagan did at Fort Warren, receiving better food and lodging. 21 This letter is popularly known as Reagan's Fort Warren letter. See Reagan to Major General Hooker, August 11, 1865, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Reagan to the People of Texas, August 11, 1865, in Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 286-295; Dallas Herald, October 14, 1865; Texas Republican (Marshall), October 20, 1865; New York Times, October 18, 1865. Hamilton tells what happened to the Fort Warren letter and gives his evaluation of it in Hamilton to Reagan, September 25, 1865, in Andrew J. Hamilton, Executive Record Book No. 281, 1865-1866 (111/46), p. 83.

Procter_5127.pdf 194

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

173

society." For while extending the privileges and protection of the Constitution to the Negro, they could impose literacy, moral, and— if deemed advisable—property tests as prerequisites for voting, thereby excluding those who were not yet ready for the responsibility of citizenship. And if these safeguards were not sufficient, more stringent state laws could easily be passed. But, Reagan concluded, . . . to secure these desirable ends we must bury past animosities with those of our fellow-citizens with whom we have been at war, and cultivate with them feelings of mutual charity and fraternal good will. . . . I know the painful struggles against education, and habit, and tradition, and prejudice, which such a course will require you to encounter, and how hard it is for human nature to overcome such difficulties. But my sincere prayer is that God, in His goodness and mercy, may enable you to exhibit this last crowning evidence, in the midst of your calamities and sorrows, of your greatness and wisdom as a people. Thus did Reagan speak out from his distant exile, hoping that his people might somehow hear his voice and heed his suggestions. And anxiously he awaited the effect of his letter upon Texans, even though realizing that it might never reach its destination. But now, his moment of inspiration having passed and his ideas transcribed, he quickly returned to his own wearisome battle for existence and much to his surprise found it immeasurably improved. For late in the afternoon of August 14, as he sat in his room sewing on a button, his cell door swung open and before him appeared a friend whom he had not seen for what seemed an eternity. There in the doorway, thin and gaunt, stood Alexander H. Stephens.22 It was too much for him to bear. Tears blurred his vision and his voice choked as he rushed forward to greet him. From that day forward, prison life became progressively better for Reagan. And it was none too soon. After three months of suffering alone, he was almost at his breaking point, the pathetic shadow of the man who had in May so resolutely entered Fort Warren. Now, however, with Stephens being permitted to visit him an hour daily and with food and supplies, previously denied him, made available,23 the 22

Stephens, Recollections, pp. 457-458. Ibid. Although allowed to buy his own food, Reagan had difficulty in purchasing sufficient amounts. Not until Stephens informed him "that he could board, as I do, with the sutler [one who follows an army and sells to the troops]" did Reagan receive ample nourishment. 23

Procter_5127.pdf 195

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

174

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

mental and physical strain caused by solitary confinement gradually disappeared. Moreover, with each passing day prison regulations became less restrictive upon them. First, they were permitted to take their evening stroll together; then Reagan was allowed to leave his cell; and eventually both were granted permission to receive mail and entertain visitors. Surely the next step for them would be release from prison on parole. Yet August slipped slowly by, as did September, and now it was early October. And still no orders from Washington had arrived concerning them. The days grew crisp and bright; the nights cold and damp; and Reagan and Stephens, realizing that winter was fast approaching, shuddered at the thought. Then on Thursday, October 12, orders to discharge them reached Fort Warren and, at last, after twenty-two weeks of imprisonment they were free.24 Leaving Fort Warren late Friday afternoon, Reagan and Stephens began their long journey homeward. Arriving at Revere House in Boston soon after dark, they received friends and curious well-wishers far into the night. On Saturday, seeking the peace and quiet of the New England countryside, they traveled some twenty-five miles to Topsfield to spend a few days as guests of Thomas W . Pierce, a close relative of ex-President Franklin Pierce, and after a restful, pleasant weekend, they returned to Boston where once again they were overrun by visitors.25 Early the following morning, October 17, they left for New York City and that night, pushing their way through throngs of sight-seers and friends, they finally reached their rooms in the Astor House. Then, the next day, after visiting the Mayor of New York and other city dignitaries, they bid each other farewell and sadly went their separate ways.26 24 Ibid., pp. 457-531, gives an excellent account of Stephens' and Reagan's daily activities from August 14 to October 12, 1865. Also see Reagan to Mrs. A. W . Solter, August 29, 1865, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Robert A. Matthews to Reagan, September 16, 1865, in R. P., Microfilm; George W . Paschall to Editor of the Herald, October 6, 1865, in New York Herald, October 9, 1865; Dallas Herald, November 11, 1865; The World (New York), October 11, 12, 14, 1865; Boston Daily Evening Transcript, October 10, 12, 1865; Boston Herald, October 10, 12, 1865. 25 Stephens, Recollections, pp. 532-534. Linton, Stephens' brother, accompanied Reagan and Stephens from Fort Warren. See also Boston Daily Evening Transcript, October 14, 17, 1865; Boston Herald, October 14, 1865; New York Times, October 16, 1865. 26 Stephens and his brother left for Washington by train at seven that night.

Procter_5127.pdf 196

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

IMPRISONMENT AND RELEASE

175

For almost a week Reagan remained in New York welcoming old acquaintances and conferring with Charles O'Connor, Jefferson Davis* defense attorney, while awaiting permission to see Mallory who was in prison at Fort Hamilton. Eventually he obtained authority to do so, and after a reunion with his old comrade-in-arms, he left for Washington.27 Entering the capital during the last days of October, he met first with President Johnson and later with Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton. Cordially received by them, he first of all asked for an enlargement of the terms of his parole—which was quickly granted— that he might, without hindrance, hunt for personal papers and family valuables hidden or lost during the Confederate cabinet's flight from Richmond. Next, he urgently requested that Lubbock be released from prison, strongly protesting his friend's innocence of a murder charge lodged against him. And lastly, he made a futile appeal to visit his beloved ex-commander-in-chief, Jefferson Davis. Then, reminiscing over the eventful years just gone by, he discussed at length with each of them many aspects of the war.28 But soon it was time to go, and Reagan renewed his journey homeward. Once again he visited Richmond, Greensboro, Columbia, and Augusta, reuniting with old friends and companions while tracking down his valuables. Over and over he saw the destructive evidences of war, the South ravished and burned and her people plagued by misery and poverty, famine, and disease. And once more, as during the last days of the war he looked on, helpless to be of service.29 Finally, however, on November 29, after almost a month of being honored

Writing an appraisal of Reagan, he said: "I became much attached to Reagan. I think him a clever, upright, honest man. . . . The real foundations of his character are truth, integrity and energy." Stephens, Recollections, pp. 534-535; The World (New York), October 18, 19, 1865; New York Times, October 19, 1865; Daily National Intelligencer (Washington), October 20, 1865. 27 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 228. 28 Reagan arrived in Washington late in the night of October 25. He talked with Johnson on October 27 and with Stanton the next day. See The World (New York), October 25, 1865; New York Herald, October 28, 1865. Also see Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 228-230; Lubbock, Six Decades, p. 289; Order for extension of parole, October 28, 1865, in R. P., Letters 1860-186929 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 230-234. Reagan talked with such men as Trenholm, former Confederate secretary of the treasury, at Columbia; General Pemberton, the ill-fated commander of Vicksburg, on a train at Greensboro; and Stephens at Augusta. Reagan was unable to recover his wartime correspondence. Many of his valuables were stolen.

Procter_5127.pdf 197

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

176

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

and feted throughout the South he reached New Orleans, and five days later on the steamship, Austin, he arrived at Galveston.30 But almost immediately Reagan felt a change in atmosphere. Texans, his own people, seemed strangely cool and aloof, if not outright hostile toward him. What was wrong? What had he done to deserve such treatment? Hurrying to Houston in hopes of experiencing a different reception, he found the attitude of the people there much the same, and therefore he set forth to unravel this mystery.31 Nor was the solution long in coming. For upon meeting ex-Governor J. W. Henderson, Reagan had the answer. It was his Fort Warren letter to the people of Texas. "My friend," Henderson explained, "you had as well understand its meaning, for, so far as I know, every man in Texas who expects to be a candidate for anything from governor to constable seems to regard it as his duty to denounce you morning, noon and night, under the supposition that while in prison you weakened in your devotion to the South and had come out for negro suffrage."32 What Henderson said was true. Reagan realized that to explain his position by "stumping" the state would only produce greater antagonism and bitterness.33 So, homeward to Palestine Reagan went, to his wrecked house, his barren jfields, his motherless children. After four years of arduous toil and self-sacrifice in behalf of the South and five months' imprisonment, he found himself an exile among his own people. 30 Order of extension of parole, October 28, 1865, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Flake's Daily Bulletin (Galveston), December 5, 1865. S1 lbid., December 6, 1865; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 234. 32 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 234. 33 Ibid.

Procter_5127.pdf 198

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

C H A P T E R

X I V

Return to Power in the Democratic Party

J L T IS RATHER for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us," declared Abraham Lincoln on November 19, 1863, before a vast throng at the Gettysburg National Cemetery, "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Yet, after the Civil War these inspiring words were but empty and meaningless phrases to most southern people. On April 14, 1865, Lincoln died by an assassin's bullet, and soon thereafter the government which he had so eloquently described also vanished. For the Black Republicans—many desiring revenge, others power, or both— made a mockery of the democratic processes of government in the United States. Having had their own way in Congress for over four years, they were determined to have no opposition. So, in 1865 and 1866, when the former Confederate states began returning their representatives—naturally Democratic—to Congress, they immediately met this threat to their position. They ran roughshod over President Andrew Johnson when he opposed them, plotting eventually to destroy him through impeachment, while methodically they browbeat

Procter_5127.pdf 199

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

178

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

the Supreme Court into submission. Then they fortified and solidified themselves by the one means that would insure success to their plans. And that was the subjugation and domination of the South. Thus by March, 1867, Southerners found themselves once again under the heel of a vindictive, victorious foe, inexorably resolved to secure political supremacy.1 Without power or control over their own destinies, the ex-Confederates saw their states divided up into five military districts commanded by Union officers and, at times, terrorized by Yankee troops and Negro state militia. With helpless indignation they watched their courts replaced by military tribunals; southern representatives to Congress scorned and denied their seats; state officials and leading citizens turned out of office; and all outward manifestations of the "Lost Cause"—veterans' organizations, historical societies, parades—suppressed, whether harmless or not. And in desperation, they conducted a stubborn but visibly losing struggle against thousands of northern carpetbaggers, southern "scalawags," and Negroes who banded together to control the political machinery of the states, and who, like hordes of locusts, plundered and ravaged the South. What could Southerners do to combat successfully this evil that plagued them? How could they rid themselves of those who set aside or modified the state constitutions to fit their own unscrupulous purposes, who taxed property beyond the capacity of payment, who systematically looted the state treasuries, and who exploited and abused a conquered people? These were perplexing questions indeed to Southerners and ones for which they were groping to find answers.2 In Texas the conditions after the Civil War were not much different from those in other southern areas. In April and May, 1865, the state government crumbled from sheer exhaustion and decay; the populace seized and distributed Confederate property; soldiers mutinied and began to desert; money was worthless and commerce at a standstill; and bands of cutthroats stalked the highways while Indians raided and massacred along the frontier. Everywhere were chaos and 1 On March 2, 1867, Congress passed the First Reconstruction Act over President Andrew Johnson's veto. See Walter Lynwood Fleming (ed.), Documentary History of Reconstruction, I, 401. 2 See Coulter, South During Reconstruction; J. G. Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction; Rhodes, History, VI. For a different point of view see Hodding Carter, The Angry Scar.

Procter_5127.pdf 200

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

179

ruin and fear—fear of military occupation, of Union reprisals, and of possible Negro domination, but above all, fear of the unknown. 3 But in Texas the people had not experienced the ravages of invasion and war. And although they were ready to embrace the Constitution once again and to reject the idea of secession, they did so, not from choice, but from necessity. They wished to be restored to the Union swiftly in order to enjoy its privileges; yet they were unwilling to humble themselves before Union authorities or to acknowledge northern demands, so essential to restoration.4 In June, 1865, Texans experienced military occupation and rule for the first time, and to their surprise it was not vindictive. But it was harsh and regulatory, and this they did not like. In fact, there was nothing about the Yankees, Union sympathizers, military occupation, and freed Negroes that did appeal to them, and therefore they tried to rid Texas of these irritants as quickly as possible. By fear and violence they forced many Negroes to remain as slaves and Union men to flee to safer areas; by insults and open disdain for Federal troops, they informed the conqueror of his unpopularity;5 and then by a state constitutional convention in February, 1866, they attempted to replace military rule with representative civil government. 6 This was the situation as it stood when Reagan returned to Texas in 1866. Hobbled by military parole and criticized on every hand, he was unable to do or say anything that would save his people from the impending doom for which he knew they were heading. So, sadly he buried himself in hard manual labor, repairing Fort Houston and farming its neglected fields7 while helplessly watching his prophecies *War of the Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLVIII, pt. 1, pp. 1381-1382, 1383-1384; ibid., pt. 2, pp. 675-676, 1271, 1288-1291, 13121313; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 27-51, 58; Flake's Daily Bulletin (Galveston), September 6, 1865; Sheridan, Memoirs, II, 230-233; U.S. Congress, "Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction," 39th Congress, 1st Session, Report No. 30, pt. 4, pp. 38, 40, 137; hereafter cited as Committee Report No. 30. 4 Committee Report No. 30, pp. 37, 39-40, 46-49, 74; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 68 ff.; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 101-102. 5 Committee Report No. 30, pp. 35-50, 72-75, 152-154; War of Rebellion: O. R. . . . Armies, Ser. I, Vol. XLVIII, pt. 2, p. 841; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 55-84; Sheridan, Memoirs, II, 261. 6 Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 85-107; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 94-95; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 152-154. 7 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 234-235; W . L. Thomas to Reagan, March 3, 1866, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869.

Procter_5127.pdf 201

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

180

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

come true. In April, 1866, however, one of his letters written to a friend appeared in the Dallas Herald urging acceptance of the Fort Warren letter's principles in order to avoid universal Negro suffrage and military occupation.8 But it was to no avail. Texans would not listen to him or anyone else who advocated such ideas. They lived for the present, not the future, and their sole purpose was to regain control of their state immediately. And this goal they did attain. For in the Constitutional Convention of 1866 the delegates scheduled for the fourth Monday in June the election of state officials,9 and in the ensuing contest for governor the Conservative candidate, James W. Throckmorton, backed by former Confederates and prosecessionists, won easily over the Radical nominee and prounionist, ex-governor E. M. Pease.10 Then with Throckmorton's inauguration, together with that of a Conservative state legislature in August, 1866, Texans were well on their way to hanging themselves politically. Not only did the legislators elect two uncompromising secessionists—Oran M. Roberts and David G. Burnet —as United States senators, but they also fervently denounced and rejected the Fourteenth Amendment11 while refusing to consider the Thirteenth Amendment altogether.12 Thus they tightened the noose upon their political futures and upon the people they represented. Hoping to stay this self-fashioned execution, Reagan issued on October 12, 1866, a public letter to Throckmorton warning the governor and his fellow citizens against the disaster that was approaching. Again 8 Dallas Herald, April 14, 1866. 9 Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 154-156; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 105-116; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 106-107. 10 Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 108-112; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 119129; Burford to Reagan, May 22, 1866, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. Throckmorton received 49,277 votes and Pease 12,168 votes. 11 Texas, House Journal, 11th Legislature, pp. 577-583; Texas, Senate Journal, 11th Legislature, p. 417; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 164-168; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 114-120. Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment was particularly offensive to southern leaders. It stated: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." 12 Texas, House Journal, 11th Legislature, pp. 219, 493; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 118-119.

Procter_5127.pdf 202

5/24/2014 7:44:52 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

181

he reiterated that Texans must grant the Negro full citizenship rights —which could be limited easily by literacy, moral, or even property tests—or they would never achieve the security and protection of the Constitution; again he urged them to meet all northern demands or Texas would surely suflfer permanent military occupation; but above all, he begged them to swallow their pride and *'traditional aversion to anything which . . . [seemed] to tend to political equality with an ignorant and degraded people/' or those former slaves might well become their masters through congressional action. "On my account I would gladly have shrunk from the responsibility of sending you this paper/' Reagan concluded, "but duty to my family, friends and fellow-citizens would not allow me to longer remain silent when everything dear to us is at stake, and when . . . no voice is being raised in this direction to save us. I do not forget that. . . fourteen months ago I addressed similar opinions to the people, . . . [and] they not only rejected them, but. . . impugned the motives. B u t . . . in the light of events which have transpired . . . and in view of the prospects before us, they will hardly question its wisdom, or the purity of the motives which . . . have induced me to write/' 13 But Texans did question his wisdom and his intentions. In fact, to his surprise and chagrin, more abuse and ridicule were leveled against him than after the Fort Warren letter.14 Never would he have believed the people to be so blind. The only bright spot in this bleak picture had been his marriage to Molly Ford Taylor on May 31, 1866. Now again he had a mother for his children, someone in whom he could confide and with whom he could share his life.15 But other than this, as the year 1866 came to a close, Reagan had little to be thankful for, and even less to look forward to. Since his return home he had been forced to labor strenuously on his farm rather than practice law, 13 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 301-316. For an excellent view of Reagan's attitude just prior to his public letter to Throckmorton, see Reagan to Thomas J. Ward, September 25, 1866, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 14 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 240-241; Dallas Herald, November 10, 1866; Texas Republican (Marshall), November 17, 1866; T. M. Duval to Reagan, November 29, 1866, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 15 Dallas Herald, June 30, 1866; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 235; Reagan to Jeff Davis, May 21, 1867, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. Molly Ford Taylor was the daughter of John F. and Rebecca Walker Taylor. She was much younger than Reagan, being only nineteen at the time. Molly Ford Taylor later said: "My marriage to Mr. Reagan was the first thing that ever happened to me." Elizabeth Brooks, 'Prominent Women of Texas, pp. 163-164.

Procter_5127.pdf 203

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

182

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

because Texans were too poor to pay for legal advice.16 In July and August, hoping to stimulate the economy in the impoverished East Texas area, he had attended and taken an active part in railroad conventions at Palestine, Rusk, and Tyler, but the results were meager and discouraging.17 Then during the fall he saw a petition by Throckmorton and prominent state leaders, asking for his pardon, rejected, and the possibility of amnesty and restoration of citizenship fade out of sight.18 And lastly, he could foresee what would soon happen to Texas and what he and his fellow citizens would have to suffer and endure. Nor were his predictions long in coming true. At Washington in December, 1866, Texas congressmen found themselves persona non grata. Not only were their seats refused them and their credentials ignored but they became outcasts even in the lobbies.19 Back in Texas— as well as across the South—state leaders, despairing their fate and seeing "nothing ahead but misery and ruin," watched the activities of northern Radicals in Congress mount in intensity.20 Then on March 2, 1867, Congress passed the First Reconstruction Act, thereby confirming southern fears and Reagan's predictions. After this, no longer was Reagan jeered or derided; no longer did Texans doubt his patriotism and his motives. But this renewed trust and confidence gave him little satisfaction. His warnings had not been heeded in time. "Too late! Too late!" he lamented to a friend. Now all he and his fellow citizens could do was to be patient, obey the law, and hope for leniency which would not likely come until thefloodof northern passion and vindictiveness subsided. Perhaps then, as Radical fanaticism abated, through exemplary conduct Southerners might regain their constitutional rights.21 At first, during 1867, Reagan tried to follow this manner of living, 16 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 234-235; Reagan to Davis, May 21, 1867, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 17 Texas Republican (Marshall), July 21, 1866; Memorial History of Navarro, et al. Counties, pp. 262-268. 18 Throckmorton et al. to President Johnson, undated, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 19 O. M. Roberts, "The Experience of an Unrecognized Senator," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, XII (1908), 87 fT.; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 160. 20 Throckmorton to Governor Humphrey of Mississippi, February 10, 1867, in J. W. Throckmorton Papers; hereafter cited as the Throckmorton Papers. John B. S. Dimitry to Reagan, December 12, 1866, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 21 Reagan to A. G. Cantley, March 14, 1867, in R. P., Microfilm.

Procter_5127.pdf 204

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

183

while urging others to do the same. At Palestine in March, although ?till engaged in farming, he opened a business office and began practicing law once again. Hard work, frugality, avoidance of politics— that was the solution to Southerners' problems now, he reasoned; that was how Texans should act until wiser leadership prevailed upon the national scene; and that was how he would conduct himself.22 But gradually as 1867 wore on, Reagan began to alter his beliefs and his course of action. Day after day the military grew more tyrannical, not only replacing Throckmorton as governor but also denying people the right of trial by jury and the writ of habeas corpus.23 Brazenly northern and southern Radicals together with Negroes took control of state and local government. And alarmingly, violence and lawlessness increased as Texans rebelled against arbitrary rule and as they attempted to curb Negro and Radical participation in politics.24 The situation was critical, and it was becoming more and more obvious to Reagan that passive resistance and faith in the inevitable goodness of the Northerner to triumph over vengeance and power were not the answers. Nor were the Ku Klux Klan and the Knights of the White Camelia, for violence bred lawlessness, retaliation, and more violence. But what was the solution? To Reagan the answer was more apparent each passing day. Eventually Union troops would retire from Texas, once northern Radicals believed that their southern counterparts controlled the state. When that day arrived the people would be under Republican and Negro authority. Then Texans would have the choice either of submitting to this tyranny or of working to rid themselves of it. Of course, nearly all loyal Southerners were determined to fight. But how? What methods should they employ? To these questions Reagan gave answer in terms of the Democratic party—its policies and candidates. For by party organization Texans could present a solid, unified front, thereby legally deterring Radical power; by exposing 22 Dallas Herald, April 13, 1867; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 241; Reagan to Cantley, March 14, 1867, in R. P., Microfilm. 23 U.S. Congress, "Report of the Secretary of War," House Executive Documents, 40th Congress, 3rd Session, Vol. I, pp. 264-267, 268-270. Hereafter cited as Report of the Secretary of War. Sheridan, Memoirs, II, 250 fT.; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 149, 167-170, 180; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 168-178; Reagan to George E. Burney, September 9, 1868, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 24 Report of the Secretary of War, I, xvi, 254-256, 264-267, 269-270; Throckmorton to Epperson, September 5, December 30, 1867, in Epperson Papers; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 171-176.

Procter_5127.pdf 205

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

184

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

malfeasance in office and by combatting political injustice, they could safeguard the liberties of the oppressed majority; and by actively participating in politics, they would inevitably restore constitutional government to the people. In these ways we will not only be helping ourselves, Reagan argued, but we "will show the people of other states, not subject to the oppressions we endure . . . [that we are] worthy of their effort for our deliverance."25 With his ideas clearly formulated, Reagan proceeded to apply them. Now he was not a man alone crying out vainly in the wilderness. Now he was a leader of his people, gaining in popularity with each passing day. Before Texans he stood as a prophet who had braved public criticism and censure in the hope of saving them. Here was, they asserted, a modern-day Cincinnatus,26 manfully tilling the soil after his return from war, who had refused the governorship offered him by General Charles Griffin, the military commander of Texas, because he would not accept the office "except as the choice of the people."27 Moreover, he was the highest Confederate official that Texas had produced, a man who had suffered imprisonment and humiliation, yet who was unafraid to speak in defense of the "lost cause" and its leaders.28 But above all, he was a man they could trust and whom they would now gladly follow. Within a short time the Democratic party of Texas began to take on new life as Reagan and men of his stamp devoted their energies to its advancement. Quickly through voluminous correspondence, through hastily-called meetings and feverish activity, they fashioned a vigorous, spirited organization. And it was none too soon, for the Radicals, believing themselves strong enough to maintain their supremacy in Texas without military support and thirsting for unlimited power, prepared to take over the government. However, to accomplish this goal they first had to formulate and adopt a state constitution acceptable to Congress as 25

See Reagan to Burney, September 9, 1868; Reagan to John C. Robertson, October 5, 1868, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 26 Reagan was often called "The Old Roman" as well as being directly compared with Cincinnatus. In R. P., there are many references to him in this manner. Also see James S. Hogg, Addresses and State Papers of James 5. Hogg, p. 530. 27 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 240. This proposal must have been in the period from Throckmorton's removal from office on July 30, 1867, to General Griffin's death on September 15, 1867. 2 « Reagan to William W. Wallace, October 21, 1867, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; Dallas Herald, November 9, 16, 1867.

Procter_5127.pdf 206

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

185

well as to their own following. And this could not be done until Texans voted to have a constitutional convention. Accordingly, on December 18, 1867, in keeping with their plans, they persuaded General Winfield S. Hancock, the new military commander of Texas, to order an election for February, 1868, to determine whether the people desired such an assemblage.29 At first Radical strategy worked smoothly because many southern whites were apathetic or divided in opinion. Some cynically asserted that the carpetbaggers and Negroes would win out no matter how much they opposed them; others solemnly warned that participation in any Congressional Reconstruction was equivalent to consent; while still others, embracing the sentiments expressed by ex-Governor Throckmorton that the indignities of military occupation were far preferable to Negro-Radical rule, hopefully thought they might defeat reorganization simply by staying away from the polls. 30 But Reagan, Ashbel Smith, Samuel Maverick, and other Conservative leaders, fearful that indifference, nonparticipation in politics, and lack of opposition might give their opponents complete control of the state, hurriedly issued an appeal for a state convention to meet at Houston on January 20, so that all Conservatives might agree upon some definite program. 31 Although the convention proved successful32 despite the fact that it was called together on such short notice, Democratic efforts proved futile. The Radicals had outmaneuvered them, and on election day, having militantly mustered Negroes and their other supporters, they won a landslide victory,33 thereby paving the way for a constitu29

Report of the Secretary of War, I, 215-218; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 180-181, 195-196. 30 Throckmorton to Epperson, September 5, December 19, 1867, in Epperson Papers; Throckmorton to Ashbel Smith, September 21, 1867, in Texas State Gazette (Austin), October 26, 1867; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 193194; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 184-185. 31 Flake's Daily Bulletin (Galveston), January 5, 1868. 32 At the Houston Convention Reagan played a prominent part. He was selected as one of the vice presidents, appointed to the Resolutions Committee, and then chosen as chairman of the committee to prepare an address to the people of Texas setting forth the principles of Texas Conservatives. Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 104-107; Dallas Herald, February 1, 8, 1868; Texas Republican (Marshall), February 1, 8, 1868; Flake's Daily Bulletin (Galveston), January 25, 1868. 33 There were 44,689 for a convention—7,757 whites; 36,932 Negroes. Against the convention there were 11,440—10,622 whites; 818 Negroes. Those who regis-

Procter_5127.pdf 207

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

186

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

tional convention, the restoration of Texas to the Union, and their political dominance. After this crushing setback many Texans, their world seemingly disintegrating around them, lapsed into sullen inactivity, gloomily lamenting their fate. But not so Reagan, nor, for that matter, other leading Democrats. Now was the time to organize and fight, not to despair. For what could self-pity do other than aid the enemy? So, during the difficult months of 1868, this handful of conservative Democratic leaders obstinately held firm against the mounting waves of radicalism that swept triumphantly over Texas and that threatened to devour representative government. Day after day these few men instructed their political adherents what policies were best to pursue. Whenever the opportunity arose they spoke at barbecues and rallies, encouraging Texans to organize on a local level while they worked on a state-wide basis. And confident of success they planned for the day when through the Democratic party they would throw off the oppressive yoke besetting Texas and her people.34 Nor did it appear that the opportunity they were awaiting would be long in coming. When the Constitutional Convention met at Austin on June 1, almost immediately its controlling Republican forces split into two hostile camps. On one side were the ultra-Radicals led by Morgan C. Hamilton and convention president E. J. Davis, unequivocally demanding that all acts of secession be nullified, that the Negro upon whom they counted heavily for support be adequately protected by law, and that the disfranchisement of ex-Confederates be continued.35 tered but failed to vote numbered 52,964—41,234 whites; 11,730 Negroes. U.S. Congress, Senate Executive Documents, 40th Congress, 2nd Session, No. 53. 34 George F. Moore to Reagan, February 29, 1868; Reagan to Burney, September 9, 1868; Reagan to John C. Robertson, October 5, 1868; all in R. P., Letters 18601869; J. Earl Preston to Reagan, June 28, 1868; Democratic Club of Crockett to Reagan, August 11, 1868; J. D. Giddings to Reagan, August 1, 1868, in R. P., Microfilm. Also see Reagan to Democratic Executive Committee, in Trinity Advocate (Palestine) May 6, 1868, in R. P., Printed Matter; Dallas Herald, February 8, March 28, 1868. 35 Other problems such as payment of debts incurred during the war and by the Confederate government and the division of Texas into two or three states caused friction between the factions. See Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 200 ff., for a full discussion of the convention. But for a complete record of the proceedings from June 1 to August 31, 1868, see Journal of the [Texas] Reconstruction Convention, 1st Session. Also see Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 107-108.

Procter_5127.pdf 208

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

187

On the other side the Moderates headed by ex-Governor A. J. Hamilton—the brother of Morgan—and backed by the few Democrats elected to the convention wished the restoration of Texas to be as painless as possible. Therefore, with their ambitions and viewpoints miles apart the two factions, despite several efforts at reconciliation, fought bitterly to construct the state constitution as they saw fit; and when on August 31, 1868, the Moderates agreed to adjourn until the first Monday in December, not only had little legal work been accomplished but the Republicans were irreconcilably divided.36 Reagan and his fellow Conservatives took heart. Now possibly there was a chance to regain control of the state since the Republicans by their public bickering, lack of achievement, and needless expenditure of state funds had discredited themselves before Texans even more. If only the national Democratic party could win the presidential election in November, Texans would again have complete protection under the Constitution.37 With these goals in mind, the Conservatives worked strenuously. Already party representatives had met at Bryan early in July to map out their state-wide strategy for the forthcoming national campaign as well as to prepare for their hoped-for ascent to power.38 Yet as the election neared, many Texans decided that other means were necessary to break the Republican and military hold upon the state. In local areas, Democratic clubs announced that they would not employ or assist any man, white or black, who sided with the Radicals. In numerous towns and counties, Negro Democratic-Conservative clubs, formed in the hope of weaning away the Negro—the bedrock of carpetbag strength—from Radical influence, offered employment and protection to the freedmen.39 And when these projects foundered, Texans resorted to devious and occasionally violent methods as evidenced by 36

Journal of the Reconstruction Convention, 1st Session, pp. 851-853. Reagan to Burney, September 9, 1868, and Reagan to Robertson, October 5, 1868, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 38 Reagan, Memoirs, p. 241; Weekly Telegraph (Houston), July 18, 1868; Flake's Daily Bulletin (Galveston), July 12, 1868; Texas Republican (Marshall), July 17, 1868; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 108-112. The Democrats met at Bryan from July 7-9, 1868. Reagan was elected to one of the vice presidencies of the convention and then appointed to the state executive committee. 39 Texas Republican (Marshall), August 21, September 18, October 30, 1868; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 233-234. 37

Procter_5127.pdf 209

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

188

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

giant, white-robed horsemen—sometimes headless, other times displaying skulls—visiting Negro communities at midnight, threatening and scaring the superstitious blacks into submission.40 For the moment, however, these exertions proved futile. On July 20, 1868, the Radical Republicans in Congress by joint resolution declared that no state still unorganized and outside the Union would have electoral college ballots. And when Reagan and other members of the State Democratic Executive Committee continued urging Texans to vote for party electors thereby indicating the wishes of the people, Union troops stepped in just before election day to prevent such proceedings. Then on November 3, a final blow befell Democratic aspirations. General Ulysses S. Grant, the Radical Republicans' choice for president, won an overwhelming victory.41 To Texans and Southerners alike, Grants election signified four more miserable years of Republican domination on a state and national level. Texas Conservatives despaired as they helplessly watched radicalism reign supreme in their land. Gone now were their chances for amnesty and protection, their hopes for gaining political control of the state. What was to become of them—a victimized and beaten people!42 Yet, even as Texans bemoaned their fate the Republicans, meeting at Austin in December, 1868, to form a new state constitution, rejuvenated flagging Democratic spirits through the uncompromising controversy between the party's two factions. More than ever, Radicals such as Morgan Hamilton and E. J. Davis strove to solidify their political positions by disfranchising ex-Confederates and all men opposed to their "loyal" party, while A. J. Hamilton's Moderates steadfastly maintained that broad disfranchisement would not only bring about almost certain rejection of the new constitution and a lasting hatred of the Republican party in Texas, but would also endanger the welfare of the state by giving exorbitant governmental powers to in40 W. H. Wood, "The Ku Klux Klan," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, pp. 262-268; Report of Major General J. J. Reynolds on affairs in Texas for 1868, in Texas Republican (Marshall), January 8, 1869, in Journal of the Reconstruction Convention, 2nd Session, pp. 110-112, and in Austin Republican, December 19, 1868. For further Klan activities, see Texas Republican (Marshall), October 23, December 4, 1868. 41 In R. P. during the fall of 1869, there is much evidence of Reagan's exhortations. Also see Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 234-238. 42 Giddings to Reagan, February 20, 1869, in R. P., Microfilm; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 238-239.

Procter_5127.pdf 210

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

189

experienced Negro citizens and a few white politicos.43 Continuously for three months the two groups fought bitterly, until the Moderates aided by the handful of Democratic delegates enacted, over fierce Radical opposition, a most liberal constitution and submitted it to the people for approval.44 Reagan enthusiastically endorsed the work of the convention. How quickly Democratic fortunes had changed! Scarcely a year had gone by since he and his fellow Conservatives had opposed the making of this document while only a few months before a Radical victory had left them humiliated and demoralized. Now, many of their afflictions were vanishing and once again they were able to look hopefully to the morrow. But now was the critical moment, for if Texans wished to benefit from this unexpected windfall, they must act wisely and in unity to consolidate their gains. And realizing this, Reagan, day after day, urged Democrats to adopt the new constitution, arguing that not only was it the best possible document they could expect to obtain under the present circumstances, but that it would end the misrule and oppression of Reconstruction and at the same time demonstrate to the Federal government the state's loyalty and desire to return to the Union. Moreover, he endorsed A. J. Hamilton for governor because of his fine work in protecting them against the Radicals in the Constitutional Convention, and especially because by his election the Republican party would remain severely split, the Radicals suppressed, and good government secured. And as for the Democrats, Reagan emphatically contended that Texas Conservatives could serve their fellow citizens and party best by electing Hamilton and other Moderates who were capable of taking the "test oath/' 45 and whom Congress would accept; by stifling the desire for a Democratic state convention 43

Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 239-241. Journal of the Reconstruction Convention, 2nd Session, gives complete coverage of the Radical-Moderate fight. Also see Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 242-260, and Austin Republican, December 2, 1868, to February 10, 1869. 45 By an act of Congress, July 2, 1862, all United States officials were required to take the "test oath" or "iron-clad oath." It stated that the person had never voluntarily borne arms against the United States, had never given aid or counsel to any armed hostility, had neither sought nor accepted a position under an authority or pretended authority hostile to the United States, and would support the Constitution to the best of his knowledge and ability. For the law itself, see U.S. Congress, Statutes at Large, XII, 502. 44

Procter_5127.pdf 211

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

190

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

whose only effect would be either to embarrass Hamilton and lose him votes or unite the Republican party; and by organizing on a local level, whereby Democrats would attain county and legislative offices.46 Then through such actions we would, Reagan deduced, "permanently divide and . . . break up the Republican Party in this state, and . . . [it] would be the means of enabling us, in the next four years, at most, to secure the political controll [J*/V] of this state, and the power to make any changes in the constitution and laws . . . which the public good might require." 47 Nor was Reagan content to sit idly by and let Texans dally about deciding what to do. Unlike the year when he had returned from imprisonment at Fort Warren, he now had influence—and he intended to use it. Time and again he wrote to his colleagues and friends all over Texas, asking them to consider seriously his views and to act with him in doing what was best, not specifically for the Democratic party, but for the people as a whole. 48 Frequently his ideas appeared in newspapers across the state.49 And then during the hot summer and fall months of 1869 he appeared whenever possible at county fairs, party rallies and local gatherings, speaking persuasively in behalf of his convictions.50 At last on November 30, 1869, the election opened. It was Hamilton versus Davis, and although the Democrats were supporting the Moderate Republicans, Hamilton was not able to win enough votes. Many Texans refused to vote for a Republican no matter what the reasons were; others feared that the Grant administration would not 46 Reagan's arguments are found in a number of letters in R. P., Letters 18601869. The most lucid are: Reagan to W . G. Webb, March 9, 1869; Reagan to W . M. Walton, March 13, 1869; Reagan to Smith, et al., February 23, 1869. Also see Texas State Gazette (Austin), April 19, June 7, 18, 25, 1869. 4 7 Reagan to Walton, March 13, 1869, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 48 Reagan to Smith, et al, February 23, 1869; Webb to Reagan, March 3, 1869; Reagan to Webb, March 9, 1869; Reagan to Walton, March 13, May 12, 1869; Reagan to G. L. Haynes, May 20, 1869; Reagan to William Stedman and M. O. Ector, August 14, 1869; all in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 49 Texas Republican (Marshall), March 26, 1869. In Daily Telegraph (Houston) there are many statements made by Reagan in 1869. Reagan and William G. Webb, editor of the Telegraph, were close personal friends. For evidence of this see ibid., March 21, 1869. Also see E. W . Eave to Reagan, October 15, 1869, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869. 50 See Burford to Reagan, July 14, 18, 1869; John Moseley, et al., to Reagan, November 13, 1869, and Thomas H. Jennings to Reagan, November 19, 20, 1869, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869; also see Charles R. Gibson, et al., to Reagan, September 12, 1869, in R. P., Microfilm.

Procter_5127.pdf 212

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

RETURN TO POWER IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

191

return Texas to the Union if Hamilton won; but many people did not support Hamilton because they were not allowed to vote—E. J. Davis in collusion with General J. J. Reynolds, the military commander of Texas, had seen to that.51 So ultra-Radical Davis became the new governor, to the horror of most Democrats and Moderate Republicans. But at least with the state constitution overwhelmingly approved, Texas would again be in the Union and her people under the aegis of the Constitution.52 During the past four years there had been many a dark hour for Reagan. But now, he wrote, "there is a future for me, for my wife and children, for my country/'53 51 Reynolds revised the registration lists for the election. He had ambitions of being Texas' U.S. Senator in 1870. Hamilton rebuffed him and he turned to Davis. And although they made an alliance, Reynolds was defeated in the senate race. See Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 274-283. 52 Ibid., pp. 261-287, gives a fine account of the 1869 campaign and election. The final count for governor was: Davis, 39,901; Hamilton, 39,092. Also see Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 188-190; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 117-123. 53 Reagan to Haynes, May 20, 1869, in R. P., Letters 1860-1869.

Procter_5127.pdf 213

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

C H A P T E R

X V

Overthrow of Radical Rule in Texas

m BUSINESS BOOMING, industries flourishing, young enterprises expanding and preparing for better days ahead! What fabulous opportunities awaited the United States and her people in 1870. And why shouldn't there have been opportunities with all the necessary ingredients for an extraordinary economic boom present? Already railroads were branching out in all directions, unifying the country, contributing and collecting new wealth from hitherto inaccessible areas. Domestic and foreign markets demanding more American farm produce and manufactured articles were keeping prices high and prospects promising. Giant corporations were rapidly forming, with their leaders—men who understood this accelerated economy and who moved confidently within its framework—planning to extend their vast empires even farther. And with thousands of immigrants from Europe flooding into Boston, New York, and other east-coast cities, providing an abundant, cheap labor supply; with new inventions augmenting and stimulating the farming, business, and industrial worlds; with the government encouraging private enterprise by indirect subsidies and high protective tariffs; and with discoveries of gold and silver, of oil, coal, natural gas, iron ore, and other natural resources furnishing new reservoirs of wealth and raw materials to the

Procter_5127.pdf 214

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

OVERTHROW OF RADICAL RULE

193

young captains of industry, it was little wonder that people all over the world pictured the United States not only as a thriving, youthful democracy but also as an incredible land of plenty. Even in the South where Civil War and Reconstruction had wrought frightful devastation there were definite signs of economic recovery. Although money was scarce and credit unstable, the people were slowly but surely pulling themselves out of the misery and poverty surrounding them. Everywhere it seemed businesses were beginning anew. All along the Atlantic coastal states large tobacco, fertilizer, and lumber industries were developing; in Virginia, Tennessee, and Alabama, iron and steel works were becoming significant; in Texas cattle dominated the scene; while all over the former Confederacy, with cotton still king and flour so essential, agriculture was thriving. At the same time, the building of railroads over once desolate lands and across regions previously untouched by human endeavor gave new life to the South and West. For instance, in Texas, inland cities such as Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio experienced immense growth with the advent of the railroad. Business prospered, new enterprises began, and farmers received an outlet for their produce. Closer contact with the outside world relieved the loneliness of the frontier and farming communities, bringing gaiety to an ofttimes monotonous existence. And perceptibly these regions gained politically as their population and wealth increased. Even the scarcity of capital did not deter Southerners from this economic progress, nor in some cases did the depression years beginning with the Panic of 1873 discourage them, for a mania for railroads gripped the country, magnifying the advantages accompanying the development of transportation to almost unbelievable proportions. And when Federal or state aid was lacking, the local citizenry rose to the situation, offering bonds or other benefits to attract and subsidize railway construction.1 So, gradually the South was rebuilding. But before it could rise again to a position of prominence and power, Southerners first had to solve their political problems—they had to shake off and destroy the rottenness and corruption of carpetbag rule. Step by step they were doing just that. In many states the Republicans weakened themselves by fighting over the ill-gotten spoils of Reconstruction; in some, the 1 Coulter, South During Reconstruction, pp. 184-251, and Paul H. Buck, The Road to Reunion, 1863-1900, pp. 144-195, have good accounts of the South's economic condition. See also John S. Spratt, The Road to Spindletop.

Procter_5127.pdf 215

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

194

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

freedmen, refusing to be used further as political pawns, deserted the Radicals; in still others, the Federal government undermined carpetbag power by withdrawing the protective sanction of Union troops;2 while in all, the Amnesty Act of 1872, reinstating to citizenship nearly all southern whites previously disfranchised, sounded the death knell to Radical supremacy by strengthening the Democratic party. Yet none of these consequences was quite so devastating to carpetbag rule as the desire, by white and black alike, for business recovery and peace in the South, and the growing certainty that the Democratic party—never the Republican—could obtain this security and tranquillity so necessary to prosperity. At last, diverse trends and events were taking shape to rid the South of its oppressions. Now it was up to the loyal leaders in the individual states to act wisely for the people who followed and trusted them. In their hands lay the difficult business of welding again ties of union which had been severed; in their hands was the fate of the South. And so it was that in Texas during 1870 and thereafter, Reagan found himself being called upon, and at times compelled by his fellow citizens, to help solve the economic and political problems of his state. After the return of Texas to the Union, he like many others rejoiced over their newly-won status. But their exultation was shortlived—Radical Governor E. J. Davis saw to that—for Union-troop occupation and military rule of the past five years were mild compared to the despotism he fastened upon Texans. From the beginning Davis intended to entrench himself and his party in office. To that end he rushed through the legislature in 1870 bills that would guarantee Republican supremacy. To supplant Union troop support he established militia and state police organizations, completely subject to his direction; to insure Radical control during the forthcoming years he supervised the state registration of voters and assumed broad powers of appointment in town, county, and state offices; to curtail and discourage newspaper criticism he conferred government printing upon those who favored him while denying public notices and advertisements to those in opposition; and to perpetuate 2 S . H. Russell to E. J. Davis, December 18, 1871, in E. J. Davis, Governor's Letters, 1870-1874. Davis asked Grant for Union troops at the next election "because in their presence we will have something substantial, that will do more to encourage the colored people that they will have protection at the polls, than 50 policemen could do. There is something in the federal uniform that inspires Republicans with sacred reverence, more particularly the colored people."

Procter_5127.pdf 216

5/24/2014 7:44:53 AM

OVERTHROW OF RADICAL RULE

195

his one-man rule over the people he arbitrarily dismissed and arrested state and local officials who obstructed him in any way or he intimidated whole districts by inflicting martial law upon the inhabitants. 3 What's more, with an expensive new government to operate, a Davisdominated legislature harassed the people with heavy taxes.4 Texans had escaped one tyranny only to be bound by another. Yet, even as Davis fortified himself he was losing power. Unable to stomach his program, moderate Republicans openly warred against him. People from all walks of life, fearing for their liberties and weighed down by taxes, denounced him. And Democratic party leaders like Reagan, speaking often at state fairs and local gatherings, vigorously mobilized Texans to oppose him. 5 By November, 1870, Davis and the Radicals were encountering political reverses, and in the months that followed a Democratic tide gained momentum. It was, as Reagan believed, only a question of time.6 But for the moment Reagan, though actively fighting the Radicals, had equally pressing matters at home with which to contend. Gradually Palestine had become a dead town, her citizens economically prostrated, her commerce stagnant. The principal officials being Radicals and Davis appointees, city and county government had a demoralizing effect upon the populace.7 Despite strenuous efforts by Reagan there was no school nor, for that matter, a teacher.8 And with Governor Davis putting economic pressure on opposition journals, Palestine's 3 These acts of the Twelfth Legislature are in Gammel, Laws, VI, 185-190, 191192, 193-195, 198-205, 244. Also see William Curtis Nunn, "Texas during the Administration of E. J. Davis," Ph.D. Thesis, pp. 19-117; Seth Shepard McKay, "Texas under the Regime of E. J. Davis," M.A. Thesis, pp. 105-129; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 295-299. 4 Reagan to Colonel , June 10, 1870, in R. P., Microfilm; Miller, Financial History, pp. 156 ff. Exorbitant taxes, extravagant state spending, and the prospect of a continuation of these policies eventually led to the taxpayers' convention at Austin on September 22, 1871. See John Henry Brown, History of Texas from 1685 to 1892, II, 456-473; Frank Brown, "Travis County Annals," MSS., Chapter X X X , pp. 47-49; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 192-199; Ramsdell, Reconstruction of Texas, pp. 308-309. 5 Reagan to J. T. Brady, February 19, 1870, and Reagan to G. W. Flanigan, March 22, 1870, in R. P., Microfilm; Dallas Herald, May 21, June 4, August 18, September 10, 1870; Texas Almanac for 1872 and Emigrants Guide to Texas, p. 157; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 301-306. 6 Reagan to Colonel , June 10, 1870, in R. P., Microfilm. 7 Reagan et al. to Davis, April 22, 1870; John G. Scott et al. to Davis, May 24, 1872, in E. J. Davis, Governor's Letters, 1870-1874. 8 Reagan to William P. Hudgins, February 19, 1870, Reagan to John G. McBride, March 12, 1870, and Reagan to Charles Estell, March 29, 1870, in R. P., Microfilm.

Procter_5127.pdf 217

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

196

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Trinity Advocate, one of the leading Democratic newspapers in East Texas, was unable to meet expenses.9 Even Reagan was in financial straits, finding it necessary to sell much of his property so that he could support adequately his growing family.10 Nor by 1871 did the situation improve, but rather became worse. Some new stimulant for business, some powerful tonic to revitalize the people was needed. But what? In all probability Democratic control of the state and Federal governments would effect the necessary change, but elections were well over a year away, and that would be too late. So what was the solution? Were Palestine and other inland East Texas towns—once prosperous because of near-by farms and plantations worked by numerous Negro slaves—now destined to die away, to become ghost towns? With these questions Reagan and his fellow citizens concerned themselves. Day after day they grappled with the problems confronting them until at last they hit upon what they believed to be the correct solution. A railroad! That was the answer. They must have a railroad. Then Palestine would have an outlet to the outside world, property values would rise, jobs would be plentiful, capital would be invested, and people would flock to this new center of transportation and business enterprise. It had happened elsewhere. Surely it could happen here. Already by 1871 the International Railroad, having secured on August 5, 1870, the most liberal charter ever granted by a Texas legislature, was rapidly laying its tracks across East Texas.11 Palestine could easily be reached, but it could just as easily be by-passed. So, determined to steer the road to their town, the residents, after meeting to decide upon the most prudent course, appointed Reagan as chairman of a committee to confer with the International president, 9

Daily State Journal (Austin), February 4, 1870. Reagan to mother-in-law, June 17, 1870; Robert E. Lee to Reagan, July 30, 1870; Reagan to E. R. Boas, August 30, 1870; Reagan to J. W. Linn, September 13, 1870; Reagan to John W. Sherwood, October 3, 1870; Reagan to W. H. and B. H. Morrison, November 9, 1870; all in R. P., Microfilm. By 1870 Reagan's family had grown to six children. The two new additions were Mollie Walker Reagan, June 20, 1867, and Jefferson Davis Reagan, January 28, 1870. See family Bible in possession of Jefferson Davis Reagan, Jr., Beaumont, Texas. 11 The International Railroad received from the state a subsidy of $10,000 per mile, exemption from state taxes for five years, and a guarantee of continued state support if the International completed at least fifty miles of track during the first eighteen months and, after that, seventy-five miles annually. Gammel, Laws, VI, 606-612; Texas Almanac for 1872 and Emigrants Guide to Texas, pp. 141-142; Potts, Railroad Transportation, pp. 55, 92-95; Reed, Texas Railroads, pp. 318-319. 10

Procter_5127.pdf 218

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

OVERTHROW OF RADICAL RULE

197

J. Stanford Barnes. In February and March, 1871, acting in the committee's behalf, Reagan discussed with Barnes and his brother, James, the possibilities of routing the International Railway to Palestine. He described his town's attractions for a railroad, its central location, its natural resources, its abundant and cheap labor supply. He mentioned the fervent desire of the people to have the railroad ofHces there. But above all, he emphasized the lengths to which they would go to achieve connection with the International. If Barnes would build a depot within one-fourth mile of the Anderson County courthouse, they in turn would give liberally in lands and money.12 In this way Reagan and Barnes reached an agreement. Palestine was promised a railroad. On July 12, 1872, this promise became a reality.13 The citizens of Palestine, in the meantime, undertook to expand the boom they were now enjoying.14 The Houston and Great Northern Railroad, which was building to the south of them, must be persuaded to connect with the city. Reagan together with George A. Wright was appointed to accomplish this task. Accordingly, in March, 1872, Reagan and Wright began negotiating with Galusha A. Grow, the newly-elected president of the Houston and Great Northern. At first, the East Texans made little progress, but by May they achieved their goal, after offering a bonus of $150,000 in bonds to the H. and G. N. if it would effect a juncture with the International at Palestine by July, 1873, and establish there permanently within one-half mile of the courthouse its general offices, machine shops, and roundhouse.15 12

Reagan et al. to J. S. Barnes, February 20, 1871, Reagan to Barnes, March 24, 1871, and Reagan to James W. Barnes, March 24, 1871, in R. P., Microfilm. 13 Reed, Texas Railroads, p. 319. On January 31, 1873, the International completed the track from Longview to Palestine. This line linked Palestine with other states. 14 Mayor Morrison stated in March, 1872, that the city's population increased from 1,500 to 3,000 inhabitants in a few months. John H. Morrison to Davis, in E. J. Davis, Governor's Letters, 1870-1874. Also see Kate Efnor, "Historical Sketch of Anderson County, Texas." in Swisher (ed.), Sketch Book, V, 82. ^International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Anderson County et al., 174 SW 305; The County of Anderson v. Houston and Great Northern Railroad Company, 52 Texas 228; Reagan to Trinity Advocate (Palestine), May 15, 20, 1899, in R. P., Letters 1895-1899; Reed, Texas Railroads, p. 316; Reagan to James W. Truitt, July 24, 1874, in James W. Truitt Papers; hereafter cited as Truitt Papers. Since Reagan had known Grow in Congress in 1857, he was the principal negotiator. With $150,000 in bonds needed, Anderson County held an election from May 1-4, 1872, to determine if its citizens would support the bond issue. Reagan campaigned

Procter_5127.pdf 219

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

198

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Thus it was that Palestine became a railroad town—and a thriving one. Its future was assured when the H. and G. N . having reached Palestine,16 thereby linking East Texas with Houston and the sea, merged with the International and became the International and Great Northern. 17 By 1875, the Trinity Advocate was reveling in the tremendous changes that had taken place in the town during the past few years, and was predicting unprecedented growth and prosperity.18 As the next two decades revealed, it prophesied correctly. Yet, even as Reagan and his fellow townsmen wrestled with these economic problems, they had to fend off the political threat to their freedom which Governor Davis presented. In 1871 Democratic leaders began to make progress in wresting control of the state from him. Noting the restlessness of the people as manifested in frequent disorders, they pressed with increasing energy charges of extravagance and corruption against him and his regime. They made clear that only with Republican defeat would excessive taxation and injustice end. They pointed out that even the Radicals were divided over the policies and programs of Davis. 19 And in the congressional canvass of October, 1871, this continual barrage brought victory for all four Democratic nominees.20 Jubilantly now the Democrats looked forward to 1872 and especially to the forthcoming presidential election. At last after twelve years they could again participate in their nation's political destiny and, if they could outvote the Radicals in the state, share in guiding it. But could they triumph over the Republicans in a state-wide contest with vigorously from March 15 to election day, and on April 28, 1872, Grow spoke to hundreds of people at Palestine. The bond issue passed. 16 The H. and G. N. reached Palestine in March, 1873, although Reed, Texas Railroads, p. 315, states that it was not until May, 1873. See Galusha A. Grow to Governor Davis, March 24, 1873, in E. J. Davis, Governor's Letters, 1870-1874; Texas Almanac for 1873 and Emigrant's Guide to Texas, pp. 194-196. 17 International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Anderson County et al., 174 SW 305; Reed, Texas Railroads, p. 319; Potts, Railroad Transportation, p. 54. On February 19, 1872, the two railroad companies agreed to merge and become the International and Great Northern Railroad. It was not, however, until September 23, 1873, that the stockholders of both companies ratified this agreement. 18 Memorial History of Navarro et al. Counties, pp. 262-263. 19 Nunn, "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 126-128; McKay, "Texas under E. J. Davis," pp. 134-135; Austin Democratic Statesman, September 5, 1871. 20 Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 309-310; Nunn, "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 129-131; McKay, "Texas under E. J. Davis," pp. 135-138.

Procter_5127.pdf 220

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

OVERTHROW OF RADICAL RULE

199

Davis controlling the registration of qualified voters? That was, indeed, the question. In 1872 the political tide of battle swung sharply in their favor. In February a grand jury at Austin indicted Davis and Attorney General William Alexander for fraudulent activities in the previous October election, and Davis, though acquitted, suffered heavily. Moreover, in May and June, Davis and his state treasurer, George W. Honey, had a scandalous quarrel, further demoralizing the Radicals while supplying the Democrats with damaging campaign ammunition.21 But the deathblow to Republican supremacy came in May when the Amnesty Act of 1872 returned thousands of Texans to citizenship and to the Democratic party.22 Strengthened by these developments the Democrats, confident but "running scared,'' held their state convention at Corsicana on June 17. They knew that they must organize thoroughly and campaign well if Texas was to go Democratic in November. And as president of the convention they elected the one Texan who, by the Amnesty Act of 1872, was still denied his rights of citizenship and that man—"honored be his name for his isolation," proclaimed the Dallas Herald23— was Reagan. Delivering the keynote address, Reagan set the tone for the campaign ahead. Dramatically he, who was disfranchised, upbraided the Republican party and the Grant administration for their despotism and wrongs inflicted upon the people. He implored the delegates to employ a spirit of compromise and conciliation rather than malice and bitterness "so as to give a proper direction to the force of . . . their majority in Texas." He urged Democrats to unite with the Liberal Republicans24 in the North, who had clearly broken with Grant, and 21 Nunn, "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 131-143, treats these incidents fully. 22 On May 22, 1872, Congress passed a general amnesty which re-enfranchised all ex-rebels except some 500 to 750 who had been high officials of the Confederacy. 23 Dallas Herald, June 1, 1872. 24 The Liberal Republican party was a revolt of the reform element in the Republican party. In May 1872, the new movement, headed by Carl Schurz, George William Curtis, Charles Sumner, and Charles Francis Adams, met in Cincinnati to organize their campaign for the 1872 presidential election. They nominated Horace Greeley of New York for President and Benjamin Gratz Brown of Missouri for Vice President. The main planks of their platform were civil service reform, a conciliatory southern policy, and condemnation of political corruption. With Gree-

Procter_5127.pdf 221

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

200

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

extend to them "the hand of friendship across the bloody chasm which has separated us." Then, Reagan concluded, "this broad principle of charity will drive back the vicious elements which now control American politics, and prepare us for that peace and good will which shall render this a government in which it is desirable to live/' 25 For two days after his speech the delegates labored to define their position. Nor did Reagan's words go unheeded. For when they had completed their task, the state platform expressed its approval of the Liberal Republican actions, condemned Republican administration on both the state and national level, and reaffirmed faith in Democratic party principles while agreeing to support the Democratic nominee for President. What's more, the convention elected a strong Texas delegation to the national convention at Baltimore and chose Reagan to lead it.26 So on June 19 when the delegates had finished their work, Reagan's was just beginning. Feeling obliged to sustain the views he had expressed at Corsicana and entrusted with the leadership of the Texas delegation at Baltimore, he prepared as best he could to carry out the party's objectives. For almost two weeks before his journey to Maryland, Reagan spoke to Texans whenever possible, asking them to lay aside their grievances and unite with Liberal Republicans in their support of Horace Greeley for President. Upon arriving at Baltimore he addressed the national convention, urging the delegates to forgive and forget the past27 in order to rescue their nation from the tyranny and corruption of the Grant administration. Then, after the Democrats acley's nomination and then defeat by Grant in November 1872, the party quickly disintegrated. ^Northern Standard (Clarksville), July 6, 1872; Dallas Herald, June 22, 1872. See also Reagan to Epperson, April 23, 1872, in Epperson Papers, for Reagan's views concerning the Liberal Republicans and the Democratic convention. 26 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 143-147; Daily Telegraph (Houston), June 18-20, 22, 25, 1872; Dallas Herald, June 22, July 6, 1872. The Herald was most critical of Reagan. The editors did not like his stand for Greeley and the Liberal Republicans nor did they think he should go to Baltimore. An exConfederate cabinet member at the Democratic convention, they believed, would allow the Republicans the opportunity to "wave the bloody flag"—to charge the Democrats as the party of treason and rebellion. 27 Reagan and the Texas delegation, much to the horror of the Dallas Herald and other papers, sought an interview with Charles Sumner of Massachusetts, attempting to show that the wounds of the Civil War were healed. The Herald asked, "If John Brown were alive would they honor him with a call?" See ibid., July 27, August 3, 1872.

Procter_5127.pdf 222

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

OVERTHROW OF RADICAL RULE

201

cepted Greeley as their candidate, he campaigned for him on his way home. During the fall of 1872 he made speech after speech over the state, rallying Texans to Democratic state and national standards.28 On November 5 the long-awaited day arrived. After four days of balloting, Reagan and his fellow campaigners were partially rewarded, for Texas went Democratic not only for Greeley but also in the congressional and state legislative contests. But on the national level Grant won a landslide victory.29 Returning to private life after six months of strenuous campaigning, Reagan forgot politics for the moment and devoted time to his family and law practice. Even his correspondence with other Democratic leaders suffered and except for an occasional report in newspapers he remained quietly in the background.30 But in July, 1873, when politics again waxed hot in Texas and candidates once more prepared to hit the campaign trail, Reagan also "got the fever." The Democratic-dominated Thirteenth Legislature which had met in January, 1873, had repealed the most objectionable acts passed earlier by the Radicals, thereby stripping Davis of much of his extraordinary powers. 31 Still he was governor, representing Radical Reconstruction and Republican supremacy in the state. Now the all-important contest for his re-election approached, and Reagan could not sit idly by. So, out of seclusion he went onto the political scene, bent upon the overthrow of Davis and the removal of radicalism from the state.32 On September 3, after careful planning and preparation, Demo28 Ibid., August 3, 1872, coined the phrase "The Great Speechist" in describing Reagan. Also see Galveston Daily News, July 26, 1872; Benjamin Harvey Good, "John Henninger Reagan," Ph.D. Thesis, p. 321, quoting the Cincinnati Commercial July 11, 1872. Reagan after the Baltimore Convention visited Greeley at his farm. 29 Texas Almanac for 1873 and Emigrant's Guide to Texas, preface; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 312-313; Nunn, "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 146-148. In Texas Greeley received a majority of 19,020 over Grant. 30 Other than Reagan to W. S. Herndon, May 1, 1873, in R. P., Letters 18701879, there is no important correspondence after the November election of 1872. There is brief mention of Reagan in A. W. Terrell to Roberts, January 5, 1873, in Roberts Papers; Dallas Herald, December 14, 1872, January 11, 1873. 31 Gammel, Laws, VII, 4, 456, 468, 493; Nunn "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 149-153; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 313-314. 32 Galveston Daily News, July 23, 1873, interviewed Reagan concerning the political situation in Texas. He was obviously contemplating at this time returning to politics. In D. M. Short to Roberts, July 29, 1873, in Roberts Papers, and in the Dallas Herald, August 2, 1873, Reagan was being seriously considered for governor if his political disabilities were removed before the state convention.

Procter_5127.pdf 223

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

202

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

crats from all over Texas converged upon Austin for their state convention. Everyone of importance was there it seemed—state supreme court and district judges, ex-governors and congressmen, former Confederate officers of high rank, youthful leaders too young in the 1860's for war but aged quickly by Reconstruction—filling the hall of the House of Representatives to overflowing. Enthusiastically they nominated Richard Coke for governor, R. H. Hubbard for lieutenant governor, and a complete slate of state officers, while electing Reagan as chairman of a committee of thirty to draft the Democratic platform. Then on September 5 when the furor over candidates had subsided, the delegates endorsed the lengthy resolutions of Reagan's committee. And after much fanfare they adjourned, resolved that come December Texans would once again be free to control their own destinies.83 During the fall of 1873 both Democrats and Republicans stumped the state, seeking to commit the people to their causes. On December 2, both parties, fearful of the outcome and desperately bent upon winning, not only intimidated Negroes by ordering them to vote correctly or stay away from the polls but also engaged in fraudulent voting practices. The election returns, however, ran according to predictions. In all state races and in nearly every local one the Democrats scored overwhelming victories.34 But Davis and the Radicals were not disposed to give in without a fight. Immediately after the election was over they brought before the Texas Supreme Court a case to test the legality of the 1873 election, and on January 5, 1874, according to plan, the court declared that all those chosen by the people on December 2, 1873, were illegally elected and therefore not qualified to hold office.35 A week later, on the eve of the inauguration of Coke, Hubbard, and the new legislature, Davis shocked the Democrats by proclaiming that he would not 33 Governor Davis said of the Democratic state convention: "I have taken the trouble to count up the titled gentlemen who figured there. . . . There were 30 captains, 62 majors, 110 colonels, 300 generals, and the rest were judges, about 300. A splendid array of notables." McKay, "Texas under E. J. Davis," pp. 156-157. Also see Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 157-163; Dallas Herald, September 13, 1873. 34r Coke defeated Davis by a vote of 85,549 to 42,663. Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 314-315. Except for a brief illness in October, Reagan campaigned vigorously. See Dallas Herald, October 4, 25, 1873; W . B. Henderson to Reagan, October 27, 1873, in R. P., Microfilm. 35 Ex parte Rodriquez, 39 Texas 709. Also see Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, pp. 315-316; Nunn, "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 157-160; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 198-201.

Procter_5127.pdf 224

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

OVERTHROW OF RADICAL RULE

203

relinquish the governorship until April 28, 1874—exactly four years after taking office—or until Texans selected duly qualified representatives. And in anticipation of violence and his forceful removal, he gathered his Negro militia and state guards about him while wiring President Grant for Federal troop support.36 Meanwhile, the Democrats endeavored to find a way to counteract the Radical offensive. In December and early January reports of large groups of Negroes moving clandestinely toward Austin had caused consternation. They asked themselves what was Davis up to. Did he intend perpetuating his power with Negro support? And if so, what were the Democratic leaders going to do? Before leaving for Austin, Coke and Hubbard telegraphed Reagan to meet with them at the capital so that together they might work out the wisest course of action.37 Arriving in Austin a few days before inauguration time, Reagan found the capital in an uproar. Excitement over the crucial days ahead pervaded the air, as the city, swelled to overflowing by hundreds of visitors, rapidly became two armed camps. What was going to happen no one knew, but bands of grim-faced, determined men roaming the streets gave warning that some peaceful solution must be reached quickly or bloodshed would occur.38 Consequently Reagan, upon talking with Coke, Hubbard, and other Democratic leaders, sought an audience with Davis. And as the spokesman for the Democratic administration-elect he discussed with the Governor over a period of several days the grave problems before them. Finding Davis adamant in his views, Reagan, to whom Grant had restored citizenship on December 27, 1873,39 spoke with the confidence and authority of a citizen just recently reinstated as he told Davis that "the inhabitants of Texas held him responsible for the condition affairs had assumed in the State [sic] . . . and that in the event fighting should unfortunately ensue he would be sure to be 36 Grant sent a dispatch to Davis stating that he would not send troops. Davis kept the message a secret from the Democrats. Nunn, "Administration of E. J. Davis," pp. 160-163; Brown, "Annals," Chapter XXXIII, pp. 4-6; Ramsdell, Reconstruction in Texas, p. 316; Daily Democratic Statesman (Austin), January 13, 1874. 37 Ford, Memoirs, VII, 1248-1249. 38 Brown, "Annals," Chapter XXXIII, pp. 4fL; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 201-202. 3 9 U.S. Congress, Statutes at Large, Vol. XVIII, pt. 3, p. 529; Dallas Herald, January 3, 1874.

Procter_5127.pdf 225

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

204

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

killed." To these statements Davis solemnly agreed but still refused to give in, and the mediation talks abruptly came to an end.40 Since Reagan had tried and failed, the Democrats had to employ new strategy. Especially was this evident since Davis on January 12 fortified himself on the first floor of the capitol, ordering his Negro militia and trusted guards to stop anyone from entering or leaving the building without his consent. Obviously he intended to prevent the newly-elected legislature from being inaugurated the next day. And his plan might have succeeded had the Democrats not found during the night a direct entrance to the second floor. As the morning of January 13 appeared, the capitol was bristling with arms, both sides ready to do battle. At noon the Fourteenth Legislature assembled and quickly organized. After two tension-filled days and nights both Coke and Hubbard took office. Davis still refused to submit, hoping against hope that Grant would support him. On the night of January 15 he paraded his Negro militia around the capitol grounds attempting to precipitate an armed conflict, but due to the foresight of the Democratic leaders, this maneuver and other similar ones failed. Then he again wired the President asking for Federal troop support. But Grant, having already denied this request, would not alter his decision. Besieged and outnumbered by the Democrats and abandoned by the Republican administration, Davis had to decide, as Reagan had previously stated, between surrender and death. On January 19, 1874, he made his choice. He silently departed from the capitol. At last after nine years, Reconstruction in Texas was over.41 40 Ford, Memoirs, VII, 1249-1250. Reagan sent a telegram to President Grant informing him of the condition of affairs in Texas, and explaining to him what had taken place between him and Davis. Grant, it was said, agreed with the sentiments expressed by Reagan. 41 Accounts of the last-gasp stand of Radicalism in Texas may be found in Brown, "Annals," Chapter XXXIII, 4-45; Ford, Memoirs, VII, 1250 ff.; T. B. Wheeler, "Reminiscences of Reconstruction in Texas," Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, XI (1908), 56-65; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 201-207.

Procter_5127.pdf 226

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

C H A P T E R

c

X V I

Participation in State and National Affairs

^ ^ • ^ E L E B R A T I O N S AND PARADES were nothing new to the American people in 1877. Since 1875 there had been a succession of centennial festivities beginning with the commemoration of the "shot heard round the world" at Lexington and Concord. For almost two years now Americans had honored their forefathers, had praised their wisdom and eulogized their deeds while spending thousands of dollars in publicizing to the world how wonderful was the United States and how fortunate were her people. But in 1877 that noble experiment of democracy to which the patriots of '76 had given birth seemed to be not quite so noble to many Americans. Although the United States was experiencing tremendous physical growth and industrial development and a gradual elevation to world leadership and responsibility, what had become of that more perfect union of, by, and for the people they asked, and where were its manifest blessings? Indeed, unrest in the United States was widespread and in many instances deep-seated. In 1873 a severe depression, which was to last six years, gripped the land causing untold suffering and hardship; farmers and merchants already hard-pressed by high railroad freight rates, low prices, and outrageous interest charges, had formed Granges

Procter_5127.pdf 227

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

206

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

in nearly every state in the Union, thereby hoping to secure their rights through unified action; laboring men—more than three million of them thrown out of employment due to the economic collapse— finding it almost impossible to obtain reasonable wages, good hours, and favorable working conditions from big business, had organized labor unions only to discover the courts, public opinion, and the government opposed to them; silver miners, frontiersmen, small businessmen, and debtors, believing that a reasonable expansion of currency would alleviate, if not solve, their economic distress, unhappily saw greenbacks reduced in circulation and silver coinage discontinued altogether; and those who sought to escape from their failures or to begin life anew in the West soon realized that the rich, free lands of the frontier were becoming scarce. Moreover, eight years of the Grant administration, instead of lessening discontent, had served only to intensify it. In the West and Southwest, Indian wars, to a great extent brought on by malfeasance and maladministration in the Interior and War departments, had caused unnecessary destruction and bloodshed. In the South, Reconstruction, with its accompanying evils, still hovered over the people. In all sections of the nation the effects of an endless array of scandals and corruption in government, the defeat by Grant of needed civil service reform, the perpetuation of a high protective tariff for the benefit of the manufacturing and moneyed interests, and the control of the legislative and judicial branches of state and Federal governments by giant monopolies and corporations demoralized the people and made them cynical of the democratic processes under which they were living. And the disputed presidential election of 1876 in which the Republicans surreptitiously thwarted majority rule—so the Democrats claimed—gave final proof to many that the present system of government was indeed a failure. Thus, in the 1870's, great was the need for leaders who would work to eliminate the evils that beset the United States and her people. For most, however, the task proved to be too awesome, too strenuous and time-consuming, and far too unwise a course for a public career; but to a few who were unafraid, who doggedly withstood powerful pressure groups, who used as a guiding beacon their constituents and their country's well-being, such work became a solemn duty no matter what the personal sacrifices and consequences. With good reason John H. Reagan became identified as one of these stubborn few.

Procter_5127.pdf 228

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

STATE AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS

207

Yet in 1874 it appeared as though Reagan might never again be in a position of public trust. Late in January, soon after E. J. Davis* ouster, he and ex-Governor Throckmorton resolutely vied for the United States senatorship only to see Samuel Bell Maxey, a dark-horse candidate, win the nomination from the state legislature.1 Time and again in the months that followed, his enemies attempted to smear him, because of his activities in bringing the International and Great Northern to Palestine, by referring to him as a prominent lobbyist and lawyer for railroad rings.2 And for the moment his political obituary seemed to have been written. But Texans and the state Democratic party were unwilling to let Reagan retire to private life. He was too well-known, his experience too valuable to lose, his capacity for work second to none.3 Late in the summer of 1874 his friends urged him to run for Congress and to their fervent appeals Reagan yielded, stating, however, that business and family affairs would not allow him to seek the office actively.4 But when the Democrats met at Nacogdoches on September 2, there he was on the convention floor mingling and conversing with the delegates. Four days later Democrats of the First Congressional District of Texas chose their nominee—John H. Reagan.5 Now this nomination, Reagan knew, was equivalent to election. Yet, during the next three months he campaigned against his Republi1

J. S. Camp to Roberts, January 21, 1874, in Roberts Papers; Dallas Herald, January 3, 24, 31, February 7, 1874; Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 214-217. 2 Elliott, Leather coat, pp. 214; Reagan to Truitt, July 24, 1874, in Truitt Papers; D. M. Short to Roberts, July 29, 1873, in Roberts Papers. 3 In 1874 Reagan was a district chairman of the Texas Veterans Association, a member of the Board of Visitors of Texas Military Institute, a director-at-large for the Houston State Fair, and one of the most prominent men in Texas. See John G. James to Reagan, May 14, 1874, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879; Dallas Herald, April 18, June 6, July 11, 1874; Chilton to Reagan, January 10, 1875, in R. P., Microfilm. 4 With the birth of a son, Robert Lee, on December 22, 1873, Reagan now had seven children to support. Two were in school at Palestine, one at Austin, and two in Virginia. Expenses were heavy and if he went to Congress, he believed it would be necessary to sell some of his property. See Family Bible in possession of Jefferson Davis Reagan, Jr., Beaumont, Texas; Reagan to Truitt, July 24, 1874, in Truitt Papers. 5 Galveston Daily News, September 3, 5, 6, 1874; Dallas Herald, August 29, September 12, 1874. For comments of Reagan's nomination see Galveston Daily News, September 9, 1874, quoting the Pittsburg (Texas) Magnet; ibid., September 12, 1874, quoting the East Texas Herald; ibid., September 15, 1874, quoting the Lavaca Herald and St. Louis Times.

Procter_5127.pdf 229

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

208

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

can opponent, Judge William M. Chambers, as though on his every action victory was hanging in the balance. Throughout his district he spoke, explaining to the people his platform while answering all charges of the opposition.6 "I shall endeavor to do everything to promote the interests of my great State," he proclaimed, "but, while I shall resist undemocratic rules of policy, it will be my duty to fight against the contest of war, . . . to heal the deep wounds of the past, and restore fraternal relations/'7 To these promises Texans responded, and on November 3, 1874, they once more voted to send him to Washington.8 Since the Forty-Fourth Congress did not convene until December 6, 1875, Reagan had to wait a full year before taking office. Remaining in Texas he attended to his personal affairs at first, and then devoted most of his time to an urgent state matter. Texans havingfinallybroken Radical power were demanding that the last grim reminder of Reconstruction—the Constitution of 1869—be repealed;9 moreover, farmers and merchants, hurriedly joining Granges in the hope of obtaining relief from hard times and railroad oppression, were agitating for immediate retrenchment and reform in state government;10 and important state leaders and officials, watching railroad lobbyists apply tremendous pressure to all branches of government in an attempt to control legislative acts, were advocating positive constitutional checks and the elimination of loopholes in the law.11 Due to the insistence of these diverse forces the state legislature called for a convention to meet at Austin in September, 1875, to frame a new state constitution.12 And with the issues involved so complex, with the people and their various leaders striving for so many different goals, there was a definite need 6 Dallas Herald, September 22, 24, 26, 29, 30, October 14, 18, November 1, 1874, covers the Reagan-Chambers campaign. Also see Reagan to Truitt, September 16, 1874, in Truitt Papers. 7 Galveston Daily News, September 24, 1874, quoting his speech at Jacksonville, Texas. s Ibid., November 4, 6, 1874. 9 Seth Shepard McKay, Making the Texas Constitution of 1876, pp. 50-58. 10 Ibid., pp. 68-69. See Solon J. Buck, The Agrarian Crusade, pp. 17-29, for plight of farmers. Also see Ralph Adam Smith, "A. J. Rose, Agrarian Crusader of Texas," Ph.D. Thesis, pp. 22 ff. 11 F. L. Johnson to Truitt, February 26, 1875, in Truitt Papers; Governor Coke to Roberts, January 24, 1875, and William N. Ramey to Roberts, July 31, 1874, in Roberts Papers. 12 Gammel, Laws, VIII, 573; McKay, Texas Constitution, p. 66.

Procter_5127.pdf 230

5/24/2014 7:44:54 AM

STATE AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS

209

for statesmanship, experience, and wisdom, and, as many Texas newspapers expressed it, for men like Reagan.13 Never one to evade a difficult problem Reagan hoped to solve this one. During June and July, 1875, he made an extensive speaking tour throughout the state, not to win a delegated seat at the convention —that was already assured him 14 —but rather to inform all Texans of the issues and to find out what their reactions were to them. Then, after days of study and investigation, he assimilated their ideas with his, and when convention time drew near, he was ready to present specific proposals. "We want a constitution," he declared, "with reference to the character of the people . . . [for] whom the laws are to be made." And this meant, among other things, bienniel sessions of the legislature, reduction in state expenditure, a governorship much more limited in power, and an economical, efficient judicial system.15 It was an ill-assorted array of delegates who met in Representative Hall at Austin on September 6, 1875, to decide upon a new state constitution. Some were men who had served Texas almost all their lives —Reagan, Charles DeMorse, John S. "Rip" Ford, John Henry Brown, Sterling C. Robertson, and William P. Ballinger; a few were there who had risen to power during Reconstruction and were the last remnants of that tragic era; but most were a new breed just recently arrived on the political scene, men of good intentions but inexperienced and without over-all understanding of the difficult task before them. These delegates were the Grangers, whose cry was "retrenchment and reform." 16 Reagan, too, was a Granger, 17 and in the main he agreed with their slogan. In fact, during the first days of the convention he sounded the keynote for the work ahead by proposing a curtailment of expenses.18 13 McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 49-72; Galveston Daily News, March 15, 1873, September 2, 1874; Dallas Herald, April 17, 1875. 14 Dallas Herald, June 19, July 3, 1875; Georgia P. Wilson, "John Henninger Reagan and the Texas Constitution of 1876," M.A. Thesis, p. 43. 15 Dallas Herald, July 3, 10, 31, 1875. 16 McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 74—75, says that there were forty-one farmers, twenty-nine lawyers, and a few merchants, editors, stockmen, and physicians at the convention, and that about half of the delegates were Grangers. See also "Pen Picture of the Constitutional Convention" in Dallas Herald, October 2, 1875; S. D. Myers, "Mysticism, Realism, and the Texas Constitution of 1876," Southwestern Political and Social Science Quarterly, III (1926), 178-179. 17 A. W. Terrell to Roberts, October 28, 1875, in Roberts Papers. Solon J. Buck, The Granger Movement, p. 227 n; McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 132-133. 18 Texas, Journal of the Constitutional Convention, 187$, pp. 5, 37; McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 76-77.

Procter_5127.pdf 231

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

210

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

But he did not believe in cutting expenditures and salaries to such an extent that efficiency and morale in government might be destroyed nor did he countenance class legislation to the detriment of the body politic. Yet this seemed to be what the young Grangers were bent upon doing. And this Reagan hoped to prevent. So, during the fall of 1875, Reagan, the best-known and possibly the most powerful figure at the convention, tried to steer a conservative course, adopting Granger policies that Texans wanted but offering compromise resolutions whenever their measures became extreme. Many times he suffered defeat,19 but in the main, because of his knowledge and experience in legislative matters, his ideas prevailed. Without a doubt the new state constitution was, as Reagan had hoped it would be, a product of the people's character and experiences. With Reconstruction still vividly in their memories the delegates enacted provisions that would safeguard Texans against another reign of radicalism. The writ of habeas corpus, they declared, was "a writ of right" never again to be suspended;20 the governorship, which under Davis had oppressed them, lost many of its powers;21 and the judiciary, cumbersome and outmoded, was reorganized and strengthened.22 Furthermore, the Granger men, in carrying out their constituents' mandates, provided for biennial rather than annual sessions of the legislature, and despite Reagan's efforts, reduced salaries to a bare minimum.23 Then, by endowing the state legislature with ample powers to regulate railroads, they accomplished their most fervent desire.24 At last, on November 24, 1875, with "an address to the people 19 Texas, Journal of the Constitutional Convention, 1875, pp. 237 ff., 275, 296, 402, 406£F., 616; McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 79-146; State Gazette (Austin), September 15, 17, 29, 30, October 3, 6, 7, 10, 1875; Dallas Herald, September 18, November 13, 1875; Terrell to Roberts, September 10, 15, 1875, in Roberts Papers; Wilson, "John Henninger Reagan," p. 89. 20 Texas, Journal of the Constitutional Convention, 1875, p. 436. Also see Texas, Constitution of 1876, Art. I, Sec. 12. 21 Texas, Constitution of 1876, Art. IV; McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 83-88, 122-123. 22 McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 88-94, 123-124; Texas, Constitution of 1876, Art. V. Because of the Negroes' support of the Republican party during the past decade, many delegates tried to impose economic restrictions through a poll tax. See McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 96-98, 101-102, 103, 105, 124-125. 23 Texas, Constitution of 1876, Art. Ill; McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 83-86, 90-92, 122-124. 24 Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 110-115, 129, 143; Roscoe C. Martin, "The Grange as a Political Factor in Texas," Southwestern Political and Social Science Quarterly,

Procter_5127.pdf 232

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

STATE AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS

211

of Texas" already prepared, explaining the constitution's different features and asking for their acceptance, the delegates approved their creation section by section and adjourned.25 In February, 1876, despite bitter opposition from railroads and *'other speculating and monopoly interests," the new constitution went into effect.26 In the meantime, early in December, 1875, while Texans were resolving this issue, Reagan arrived in Washington for the opening of the Forty-Fourth Congress.27 In many ways the city had changed since he visited it after his release from Fort Warren in 1865. Instead of the rather drab wartime atmosphere that permeated the capital ten years before, a lavishness and exuberance—so typical of new industrial America—manifested itself throughout the city. Everywhere were impressive monuments, expansive and beautiful white-columned buildings, and spacious well-kept gardens and parks. Yet in some ways the Washington Reagan had known in days gone by was still recognizable. The political and social whirl was as hectic and intriguing—and sometimes as wearisome—as ever; the climate was still malarial; and the jealousies and hatreds between national parties and sections still rancorous and bitter. As Reagan was about to take his oath of office, one Republican loudly asserted, "bring Jefferson Davis and swear him in, here comes a portion of his cabinet." And frequently as he passed by, people remarked, "Its [j/V] a damn shame to let these damn Rebels come here." 28 But Reagan was here, and soon he would make his presence felt. Having been swept into office upon the crest of a huge Democratic VI (1929), 373-377; George Clark to Roberts, September 15, 1875, in Roberts Papers. 25 Reagan was a member of the committee that drafted "An Address to the people of Texas." Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 164-172; McKay, Texas Constitution, p. 139; Wilson, ''John Henninger Reagan," p. 86-88. 26 Ramey to Roberts, January 20, 1876, in Roberts Papers; McKay, Texas Constitution, pp. 147 ff.; Myers, "Mysticism, Realism, and the Texas Constitution of 1876," loc. cit., Ill (1926), 182. The final vote may be found in the Austin Democratic Statesman, March 23, 1876. It was 136,606 for ratification; 56,652 against. 27 Reagan left the convention at Austin on November 22, 1875. He arrived at Washington in time for the first meeting of the Forty-Fourth Congress on December 6, 1875. Texas, Journal of the Constitutional Convention, 1875, p. 818; Dallas Herald, November 27, 1875; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 166. 28 Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), December 30, 1875.

Procter_5127.pdf 233

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

212

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

vote, he and his colleagues, with a majority in the House for the first time in fifteen years, were determined to expose all scandals of the Republican administration in order not only to cleanse the government but also to obtain campaign ammunition for the forthcoming presidential election. Also, they were bent upon finding a way to streamline governmental functions, thereby eliminating waste and excessive expenditure. But most of all, they hoped to enact legislation that would bring the country out of the depths of depression and hard times.29 Into this over-all Democratic plan Reagan fitted well, and on being appointed to the committees on Commerce and on Expenditure in the Post Office Department, he became a frequent participant in party activities.30 From the veryfirsthe supported investigations of the Grant administration and the ferreting out and punishment of all wrongdoers. Day after day he concerned himself with government economy, on the one hand advising administrative efficiency through civil service reform while on the other opposing in committee and on the House floor appropriations for foreign aid and especially for exorbitant mailcarrying fees charged by the railroads.31 And in an effort to help end the depression, he supported the Democratic bills for the remonetization of silver, lower tariffs, and the restitution of the South to an equal status.32 Indeed, in Reagan, Texas and the South found a real champion. Whenever Republicans "waved the bloody flag of rebellion" by casting slurring remarks at Jefferson Davis or other participants of the "Lost Cause," he quickly rose to their defense.33 Whenever appropri29 Allan Nevins, Hamilton Fish, pp. 747 ff., gives a full picture of the Grant administration. 30 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 250-251; New York Daily Tribune, December 21, 22, 1875. 31 J. H. Broocks to Reagan, June, 1876, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), December 30, 1875; Reagan to the voters of the First Congressional District of Texas, summer 1876, in R. P., Microfilm; hereafter cited as Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter. U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1461-1463, 1600-1601, 2803-2805, 2923-2930, 29932994, 3045-3046, 3051-3053, 3057-3058, 3122-3124, 3130, 4027-4029, 41004101; 2nd Session, pp. 577-579, 1215-1222, 1234-1251. Reagan was chairman when the House resolved into Committee of the Whole. 32 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 296, 17721773, 2084-2085, 2088, 2130, 3749-3751; Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter. 33 Galveston Daily News, January 17, 1877; Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), June 15, 1876; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 389-390, 4035.

Procter_5127.pdf 234

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

STATE AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS

213

ations for river and harbor improvements were studied, he recommended and obtained liberal federal grants for southern areas hitherto ignored.34 For Confederate postmasters, for veterans of the War of 1812 who had fought in the Civil War, for Texas congressmen denied their seats during Reconstruction, and for Texas itself, he presented bills in the House—though in vain—for pensions or reimbursement.35 And for all southern states he sought the transfer of Union troops from their confines to Texas' poorly-protected western frontier and Mexican boundary.36 Then in the hope of restoring "fraternal good-will {V/f} between the States, and the breaking down of sectional animosities and . . . prejudices engendered by war," he voted to appropriate funds to celebrate the one hundredth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. 37 Thus it was that, with so much Democratic investigation and legislation, Congress continued in session through the spring and far into the summer of 1876. And when the House adjourned on August 15, Reagan had just time enough to get home to run for his congressional seat.38 But actually he had no cause for concern, for during the past year he had more than satisfied his constituents, and so at Nacogdoches on September 1 the First Congressional District Democrats nominated him by acclamation.39 Then on November 7, after two months of vigorous campaigning against his Republican opponent, Judge F. W . Cooper, he once again emerged victorious.40 34 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 295, 332, 2746-2747, 3217-3218, 3267-3268, 5173-5174, 5628, 5633; 2nd Session, pp. 298-299, 425-426, 432, 610-613, 1947; Reagan to Bryan, March 13, 1876, in Bryan Papers; Ashbel Smith to Reagan, March 20, April 8, 18, 1876, Bryan to Reagan, April 9, 1876, and J. H. Hutchings to Reagan, April 4, 1876, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879; Galveston Daily News, May 2, 3, 1876; Dallas Daily Herald, May 4, 1876; Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter. 35 Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 295-296, 1374-1375, 2166-2169; 2nd Session, pp. 431-432. 36 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 295, 296-297, 2186, 3848, 4530-4533, 4639-4641; Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 242. 37 Dallas Herald, January 22, 1876; Reagan, 1876 Campaign Letter; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 507-508; Truitt to W . W . Spiwy, July 15, 1876, in Truitt Papers; Reagan, Memoirs, p. 242. 38 Reagan was home by August 28, 1876. See Galveston Daily News, August 29, 1876. I 39 Ibid., September 7, 8, 1876; Dallas Daily Herald, September 9, 1876. 4 Dallas Daily Herald, September 28, 1876; O. C. Kirven et al. to Reagan, September 6, 1876, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879; Weekly Democratic Statesman

Procter_5127.pdf 235

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

214

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

Early in December, 1876, Reagan returned to Washington and found a grave crisis facing the nation. In the November presidential election the Democratic nominee, Samuel J. Tilden of New York, had seemingly won a comfortable victory over his Republican adversary, Rutherford B. Hayes of Ohio. But Hayes* campaign managers, seeing an opportunity to maneuver him into the White House, questioned the Tilden electoral vote in four states—South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, and Oregon—and Congress, upon convening on December 4, was overwhelmed by the enormity of the decision it must make. During these hectic days in Washington the excitement became intense, the confusion widespread. Rumors, multiplying quickly and then falling indiscriminately upon all groups, added to the growing turmoil. House and Senate investigating committees, party caucuses, and frequent cabinet meetings served only to magnify the situation. And both parties, unsure of the strength of their positions but loudly claiming victory, leveled charges of fraud at each other.41 Yet, with a Republican Senate declaring for Hayes and a Democratic House for Tilden, a deadlock seemed assured; that is, unless the nation's leaders could compromise or unless some other action altered present events. To many Southerners and Democrats who were still reeling from the procedures of Reconstruction the thought of "some other action" sent terror through their ranks. They, like many Republicans and administrative "hangers-on"—not knowing that the President had decided to keep Federal troops out of southern elections42—envisioned Grant using his executive influence and military power in Hayes' behalf. Therefore, late in January, 1877, they agreed with Senate Republicans to establish an Electoral Commission com(Austin), September 28, 1876; Galveston Daily News, September 20, 26, November 5, December 19, 1876; F. P. Martin to Reagan, January 23, 1877, in Richard B. Hubbard, Executive Record Book No. 314, p. 37. The official vote was: Reagan, 13,687; Cooper, 6,414; scattering, 41. 41 Nevins, Hamilton Fish, pp. 843 ff.; Rhodes, History, VII, 291-307; New York Daily Tribune, November and December, 1876, and January, 1877; Galveston Daily News, December 5-20, 1876. See especially in U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 702-703, Reagan's speech of January 17, 1877, concerning the Hayes-Tilden affair. 42 Nevins, Hamilton Fish, pp. 848-849; James Lyons to Reagan, December 29, 1876, January 5, 15, 1877; Bryan to Reagan, January 29, 1877, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879.

Procter_5127.pdf 236

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

STATE AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS

215

posed of fifteen men to determine the validity of the four states' returns. 43 For the next two weeks the nation anxiously awaited the decision of this compromise group. In Congress especially were the Democrats uneasy. Had the Republicans tricked them into this compromise by playing upon their fears? Would Hayes now be elected? Surely not! But as reports of the Commission's judgments began filtering in, their worst fears were realized. They had been out-generaled, the will of the majority defeated. By a straight 8 to 7 party vote the Electoral Commission had given all four states to Hayes.44 Infuriated, congressional Democrats met in party caucus on February 17 to decide what course of action they would take. At first they proposed to denounce the commission and refuse to count the electoral vote, thereby "defeating the inauguration of a usurper." But Reagan, believing that it would be far more harmful to the Democratic party to reject a measure they had helped create than to accept a Republican President, moved to adopt the commission's verdict, despite "gross and shameless violations of law, justice, and truth." Government by Hayes would be far better than anarchy, Reagan argued, and such obvious Republican machinations would surely sound the party's death knell. So Reagan won his point. The Democrats passed his resolution45 and on March 4, 1877, Hayes by a majority of one electoral vote became the new chief executive.46 Departing for home after this, Reagan, along with four other Texas congressmen who had voted to accept Hayes as President, found himself under heavy fire. Newspapers throughout the state declared that he had "sold out . . . bowed the cringing knee, betrayed a confiding people." 47 The Comanche Chief proclaimed that for "five Texas Con4 3Nevins, Hamilton Fish, pp. 853 ff.; Rhodes, History, VII, 312-328; New York Daily Tribune, January 19, 1877. 44 For full account see, U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 2nd Session, Vol. 5, pt. IV, and C. Van Woodward, Reunion and Reaction. Also see Nevins, Hamilton Fish, pp. 849-856; Abram S. Hewitt, Selected Writings of Abram S. Hewitt, pp. 172-173; Rhodes, History, VII, 329-341. John W . Burgess, The Administration of President Hayes, pp. 37 fr"., argues for the complete legality and correctness of the Electoral Commission's decisions. 45 New York Daily Tribune, February 19, 1877; Dallas Daily Herald, February 18, 1877; Galveston Daily News, March 9, 1877; Rhodes, History, VII, 341-342. 46 The electoral vote was: Hayes, 185; Tilden, 184. 47 Galveston Daily News, March 16, 1877.

Procter_5127.pdf 237

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

216

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

gressmen . . . the people would have no further use . . ," 48 and the Panola Watchman was already trying to decide what man would succeed him. 49 As quickly as possible Reagan answered these attacks. What would the people of Texas have had their representatives do? he asked, speaking at Palestine on March 24. True, "they might have prevented . . . the counting in and installation of Hayes, but they could not have seated the President of their choice." And if they had succeeded for the moment against the Republicans, they "would have exposed the South to the ravages of another political and military crusade . . . [because this action] would have afforded fresh pretexts for charging them and their constituencies with disloyalty and sedition . . . the evident desire of aggressive and reckless leaders of the Republican party." Therefore, Reagan concluded, "We could neither be goaded nor beguiled into . . . [such] a course/' 50 With these arguments Reagan won over his audience and, in the main, silenced his critics. N o longer did the press ridicule him, no longer did people impugn his motives, but rather now they referred to him as a statesman who had helped save them from Republican reprisals. Indeed, his popularity seemed to increase daily, and after President Hayes, late in April, 1877, declared that the policy of Reconstruction in the South was at an end, it was boundless.51 So, in the late spring and summer of 1877 Reagan rode the crest of his constituents' approval and praise. Having some spare time during these months, he devoted himself to correcting historical mistakes concerning the flight of Jefferson Davis and his cabinet after the fall of Richmond,52 to studying the school situation in Texas, 53 and to understanding better the problems that were uppermost in the people's 48

Ibid., March 28, 1877, quoting the Comanche Chief. The five congressmen named were Culberson, Giddings, Hancock, Throckmorton, and Reagan. *®lbid., March 29, 1877, quoting the Panola Watchman (Carthage). ™Ibid., March 27, 1877; New York Daily Tribune, April 3, 1877; Reagan to Truitt, May 14, 1877, in Truitt Papers. 51 Ashbel Smith to Reagan, April 2, 1877; John Y. Brown to Reagan, April 5, 1877; Broocks to Reagan, April 10, 1877; E. B. Grayson to Reagan, April 23, 1877; all in R. P., Letters 1870-1879. Also see Truitt to Reagan, April 21, 1877, in Truitt Papers; Dallas Daily Herald, March 31, 1877; Galveston Daily News, April 1, May 2, 1877; Rhodes, History, VII, 350-355. 52 Governor James D . Porter to Reagan, July 13, August 25, 1877, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879; Jefferson Davis to Reagan, August 9, 21, 1877, in R. P., Microfilm. 53 Galveston Daily News, July 17, 1877.

Procter_5127.pdf 238

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

STATE AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS

217

minds. But as he examined the national picture and took stock of the government, its policies and operation, it became more and more apparent to him that the nation was not now developing as the founding fathers had intended. Instead of a country of widely distributed wealth, the United States was becoming one of gigantic corporations and monopolies, of multimillionaires. "Avaricious, ambitious gatherers of gold" had used their money and power to buy votes and control Congress, to keep themselves protected from the law, and at the same time to enrich themselves even more through state and national legislation. "The time was when none were poor and none rich [none in the multimillion-dollar class]," Reagan observed. "There were no beggars till Vanderbilts and Stewarts and Goulds and Scotts and Huntingtons and Fisks shaped the action of Congress and moulded the purposes of government. Then the few became fabulously rich, the many wretchedly poor . . . and the poorer we are the poorer they would make us." How did it all happen? And what could be done to combat successfully the abuses and ills that plagued the United States? The answer was obvious he believed. The elimination of high protective tariffs would not only lower consumer prices but would also stop the aggrandizement of a few individuals; the remonetization of silver and the expansion in circulation of currency would decrease the dependency of the people upon the moneyed interests; and careful selection of congressmen by the people through their power at the polls would make it difficult for huge monopolies and corporations to control legislative bodies.54 With these problems foremost in his mind, Reagan returned to Washington in October, 1877, 55 and for the next ten years he struggled unceasingly and against great odds to find their solutions. On October 29, the day he was appointed chairman of the Committee on Commerce in the House, 56 he initiated the battle in full. On that day he proposed the regulation of some of the United States' most powerful corporations and monopolies—the railroads.57 54 Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), September 27, 1877; Dallas Daily Herald, August 29, 1877; Galveston Daily News, October 2, 1877. 55 Reagan answered roll call in the House on October 15, 1877. U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 1st Session, p. 51. 56 ibid., p. 197. 57 Ibid., p. 193.

Procter_5127.pdf 239

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

C H A P T E R

X V I I

The Genesis of Railroad Regulation

M

JL» • J L R . SPEAKER, the bill now presented by the Committee on Commerce 'to regulate interstate commerce and to prohibit unjust discriminations by common carriers' . . . is one of much more than ordinary importance," John H. Reagan declared to the House on May 8, 1878. It touches the interests of the whole country in every department of its business. It has a direct bearing on the cost of transportation of the twenty-five or thirty billions of dollars' worth of the internal commerce of the United States. It is designed to control the powers for evil of the seventy-five thousand miles of railroad in this country . . . without abridging any of their necessary and legitimate rights or privileges.1 With this statement, Reagan began the arduous struggle for railroad regulation. And yet, in reviewing the Texan's career, was this not a strange action for him to take—this man who had sought railroads for frontier Texas as early as 1852, who had worked closely with southern railroad executives through four years of civil war, who had used every means in his power just a few years before to bring two roads to Palestine? What had wrought this change in him? For years 1

Procter_5127.pdf 240

U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3275.

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

219

these questions puzzled his opponents, railroad men, and writers who tried to decipher his actions. But to Reagan, who considered himself a man of the people, a man dedicated to their welfare and interests, the answer was simple enough. It could be found in United States business history; it resided in the relationship of railroads with "his people and his country/' As early as the 1830's in the United States, after George Stephenson had proved to the English people in 1829 the value of his locomotive, railroads began to make inroads on the canal system of transportation. Gradually, as the public became better informed about the decided advantages of railways over water routes, the demand for them increased. For the next twenty years a railroad mania swept over the country spreading rapidly westward from the Atlantic. Hundreds upon hundreds of miles of iron tentacles reached out toward the Mississippi and by I860 had found their way to the west of that great river. The Civil War, by its wartime demands and its urgent necessities for swift and efficient transportation, greatly accentuated the importance of railroads; while the postwar boom, stimulated by men's desire for wealth and by their belief that railway competition would benefit the public,2 pushed tracklaying to unprecedented lengths. Then, came the Panic of 1873, and for a time the fervor for railroad construction ended. 3 During those years of tremendous railroad growth in the United States, men who had promoted and engineered railway building reveled in the genial atmosphere in which they found themselves. Too much could not be done for them. They were cast as leading citizens and public benefactors; indeed they approached the stature of prophets 2 Arthur T. Hadley, Railroad Transportation: Its History and Its Laws, pp. 63 ff., maintains that railroad competition led to ruinous rate wars, and although the public did not realize it, the results of competition were detrimental to all concerned. Also see Walter Chadwick Noyes, American Railroad Rates, pp. 124 S.; Charles Francis Adams, Jr., Railroads: Their Origins and Problems, pp. 116—122. However, James F. Hudson, The Railways and the Republic, pp. 287-315, and Joseph Nimmo, Jr., "First Annual Report on the Internal Commerce of the United States," House Executive Documents, 44th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 88-91, (hereafter cited as Nimmo, First Annual Report) take issue with Hadley, Noyes, et at., concerning effects of railroad competition. 3 For accounts of railroad growth in the United States, see Henry V. Poor, Manual of the Railroads of the United States for 1869-1870, pp. xvii-xlix; Emory R. Johnson, American Railway Transportation, pp. 20-28; Edward Chase Kirkland, Men, Cities, and Transportation, I, 92 ff.; Charles Lee Raper, Railway Transportation, pp. 178 ff.; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 24 ff.

Procter_5127.pdf 241

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

220

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

and sages. At times the Federal government subsidized them and their projects; at other times state legislatures supplied their demands; and whenever such aid was insufficient or lacking, local communities and private citizens readily sold bonds, levied taxes, and offered glowing inducements in land, money, and property to curry their favor. Truly, the "iron horse*' was essential to growing, industrial America. It was the symbol of advancement, of achievement, of prosperity and success.4 But soon after railroads became well established, public attitude toward them began to change. Wherever there was no competition, railway companies oftentimes set passenger and freight rates outrageously high, following Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt's policy for the New York Central of "charging all that the traffic will bear."5 In all^ parts of the country, businessmen, merchants, and farmers noticed that some towns and cities received more favorable service and cheaper rates than others; that large companies and shippers obtained better contracts than smaller ones; that charges on a "long haul" of goods were sometimes less than on a "short haul." In Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York small oil refiners watched John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company use rebates to squeeze them out by setting freight costs of the Pennsylvania Railroad at 10^! a barrel for Standard Oil and 35£ for them. Then, in dismay, they learned that Rockefeller received a "drawback," the 25^ difference per barrel they had paid.6 In Delaware high freight rates forced some oyster growers out of business while allowing others more centrally located to acquire their trade.7 In the South there were many cases of flagrant discrimination. For example, cotton, hauled 450 miles from Memphis to New Orleans, cost the shipper one dollar per bale while it cost a Winona merchant 275 miles from 4 Charles Francis Adams, Jr., "The Granger Movement," North American Review, CXX (1875), 396-398; Frederick Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin During the Civil War Decade, pp. 239-240, 271-288; Reed, Texas Railroads, pp. 129-186; Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 9-12. 5 Wheaton J. Lane, Commodore Vanderbilt, pp. 300-301; Adams, "The Granger Movement," loc. cit., CXX (1875), 400; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 110-111; Noyes, Railroad Rates, pp. 54-56. 6 Ida M. Tarbell, The History of the Standard Oil Company, I, 100, describes one of the best known examples of rebates and drawbacks. Also see William Z. Ripley, Railway Problems, pp. 92-107; Rolland Harper Maybee, Railroad Competition and the Oil Trade, 1855-1873, pp. 370 ff. In Allan Nevins, John D. Rockefeller, I, 323 ff., is another excellent example of rebates and drawbacks. 7 Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 116-118; Noyes, Railroad Rates, pp. 96-98.

Procter_5127.pdf 242

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

221

New Orleans $3.75.8 And throughout Wisconsin, Illinois, and other midwestern states rebates, drawbacks, and other forms of discrimination were common practice and sources of constant complaint.9 High prices and favoritism in various guises were not, however, the only grievances against the railroads if, indeed, they were the main ones. Town, state and Federal legislatures in their headlong rush to have adequate transportation had given away land indiscriminately while allowing themselves and the public to accept responsibility for high-interest railroad bonds and farm mortgages.10 Out of such favorable circumstances huge railroad corporations and monopolies arose. So powerful did they become that the people had no control over them. They became a law unto themselves, doing as they pleased. And if anyone protested, the reply was, "Damn the public, if you don't like the railroad, use a wheelbarrow."11 And damned, it seemed, the people were. Such railway executives as Commodore Vanderbilt, Daniel Drew, Jim Fisk, Jay Gould, Leland Stanford, and Collis P. Huntington manipulated and ' 'watered'' railroad stock to suit their own desires, completely disregarding the effects such machinations might have upon the public and, possibly, upon national economy;12 others, such as the Union Pacific directors, by establishing the Credit Mobilier construction company, defrauded the government and private investors of millions of dollars;13 while still others, concerned only with receiving large annual dividends from railway stocks and bonds, would not spend money to repair railroad equipment and rolling stock, and thereby paved the way for frequent and sometimes horrible accidents.14 Arrogantly, railway executives, 8 Hudson, The Railways, pp. 51, 158-162. Memphis had the benefit of water route competition. 9 Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin, pp. 308 fif.; Hudson, The Railways, pp. 25-66; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 130-136; Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 123-205. 10 Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin, pp. 238-307; Emerson David Fite, Social and Industrial Conditions in the North during the Civil War, pp. 60-67. 11 See William H. Vanderbilt in Christopher Morley (ed.), Familiar Quotations, p. 1055, for a similar statement. 12 Ripley, Railroads, pp. 1-52, 227-280; Ripley, Railway Problems, pp. 1-61; Lane, Commodore Vanderbilt, pp. 227-260; Hudson, The Railways, pp. 251-286. 13 Nevins, Hamilton Fish, pp. 124, 611 ff., 640; Rhodes, History, VII, 65-82. 14 Stewart H. Holbrook, The Age of the Moguls, pp. 34-35; Fite, Conditions in the North, pp. 73-75; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 407; Kirkland, Men, Cities, I, 263-264; II, 352-361; Adams, Railroads, p. 126.

Procter_5127.pdf 243

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

222

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

disregarding public criticism, refused to publish their traffic rates.15 Wherever possible they formed "pools" in order to eliminate competition and "rate wars," oftentimes raising carrying charges and angering the helpless consumer.16 On every hand they flaunted legislative enactments and judicial decrees. To protect their interests they financed powerful lobbies, bribed legislators, governors, and judges, extended free railroad passes to those public officials who would reciprocate, and whenever necessary, employed the best lawyers in the country to exhaust the opposition in the courts.17 So, by the 1870's railroad men were no longer praised as "pioneers of a dawning civilization or harbingers of an increased prosperity." Instead they were denounced as tools of the "robber barons," marauders preying upon defenseless people, usurers, greedy money changers from the East, public enemies of small businessmen, merchants, and farmers everywhere.18 Against such men and corporations people all over the country cried out for relief. But who had the power to regulate transportation? Could the individual states? Of course not, the railroads vociferously asserted. Adhering to the famous Dartmouth College decision of 1819, they stated that they were private businesses with charters granted by state legislatures, and, therefore, no state could impair their contracts. Nor could a state fix railway rates, they argued, for low prices might eliminate all profit, thereby violating the Fourteenth Amendment by depriving a person of his property "without due process of law." But definitely they opposed a law of maximum and minimum rates because state regulation would interfere with and obstruct interstate commerce.19 15 Simon Sterne, Railways in the United States, pp. 118-119; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 100-124. i 6 Railroad experts like Albert Fink, A. T. Hadley, William Z. Ripley, and Charles Francis Adams, Jr., argued that pools were inevitable and beneficial, if controlled. See Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 74-76, 81, 91-97; Ripley, Railway Problems, pp. xiv-xvii, 128-152; Adams, Railroads, pp. 120-121, 148-187; Julius Grodinsky, The Iowa Pool. Hudson, The Railways, pp. 195-250, and Reagan vigorously denounced pooling as an evil and unnecessary. 17 Lane, Commodore Vanderbilt, pp. 250-253, 301-302; Nevins, Rockefeller, I, 300-304; II, 94-117; Ripley, Railway Problems, pp. 1-61; Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin, pp. 339-341. 18 Adams, "The Granger Movement," loc. cit., CXX (1875), 405-406; Nimmo, First Annual Report, pp. 159-201, presents a fine discussion of railroad conditions in 1876. 19 Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 206 if.; Adams, Railroads, pp. 126-129; Johnson, Railway Transportation, p. 359. See Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin, pp. 331-338, for additional railroad arguments.

Procter_5127.pdf 244

5/24/2014 7:44:55 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

223

To these arguments and subterfuges the American public refused to listen. With railroad outrages frequent and widespread, they deemed state control a necessity. In the Midwest and the Upper Mississippi River Valley during the Civil War, militant discontent against the railroads manifested itself in the unsuccessful "anti-monopoly revolt"20 while in the Central Atlantic states scores of petitions and bills, demanding the elimination of railway abuses, flooded state legislatures.21 Then, after the war, the South and Midwest saw the fantastic growth of the railroad-hating Grangers; Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York upon experiencing Rockefellers "Oil War" of 1870-1872 witnessed the inception of influential groups clamoring for justice and reform;22 Massachusetts in 1869 appointed Charles Francis Adams, Jr., to direct its newly-formed state railroad commission; Georgia and other southern states were in the process of following Massachusetts' lead; while California was unsuccessfully struggling against the powerful Central Pacific.23 And although by the early 1870's many states had instituted regulatory legislation and commissions, and would receive Supreme Court backing in the "Granger cases" of 1876, actually the railroads, through bribery, extensive lobbying, endless litigation, and claims that state regulation was causing bankruptcy and depression, were winning out over all opposition.24 Therefore, gradually the belief that national supervision was the ultimate answer to the railroad problem gained strength. In the 1860's railway bills in Congress had received little support or recognition because the individual states held the initiative. But by 1870 this trend began to change, and with increasing frequency resolutions for Federal rate regulation appeared.25 Late in 1872 Senator William Windom's 20 Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin, pp. 308-328; Frank L. Klement, "Middle Western Copperheadism and the Genesis of the Granger Movement," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XXXVIII (1952), 679-694. 21 Frederick Merk, "Eastern Antecedents of the Grangers," Agricultural History, XXIII (1949), 1-8; Fite, Conditions in the North, pp. 42-77, 168-182. 22 Lee Benson, Merchants, Farmers and Railroads, pp. 57 ff. See also Gerald Nash, "A Chapter from an Active Life: John H. Reagan and Railroad Regulation," M.A. Thesis, p. 16. 23 Johnson, Railway Transportation, pp. 353-357; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, pp. 134-137; Adams, Railroads, pp. 131-138; Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 199-205. 24 Adams, Railroads, pp. 138-147; Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 100-102, 231-232; Merk, Economic History of Wisconsin, pp. 338-342. 25 Lewis Henry Haney, A Congressional History of Railways in the United States, 1850-1887, pp. 156-161, 255-264, 281-286; Nash, "Reagan and Regula-

Procter_5127.pdf 245

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

224

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

committee, investigating the possibilities of cheap transportation in the United States, furthered the cause of national enforcement by uncovering sensational evidence of railroad malpractice.26 And in 1874, with the Windom Report, the Panic of 1873, and the Credit Mobilier scandals uppermost in the public mind, the House passed a proposal, the McCrary bill, to regulate railroads. But in the months thereafter the Senate conveniently forgot about it.27 This was the situation when Reagan went to Congress in December 1875. Being placed on the committees on Commerce and on Post Office Expenditure, he had a chance to observe firsthand the railroads and their operations. And what he saw he did not like. Everywhere it seemed were railway lobbyists, lavish in their praise and hospitality, extravagant with their money—and always with one aim in mind, to perpetuate themselves and their own interests. In the spring of 1876 a government mail-contract appropriation providing for exorbitant railway fees sped rapidly through the House until Reagan and some of his allies challenged its wisdom and, after a difficult struggle, reduced its rates.28 Time and again he watched his colleague, James H. Hopkins of Pennsylvania, ask the House to appoint a committee to examine railroads and their practices, only to see Representative Henry B. Payne—whose father was secretary-treasurer of Standard Oil—and his cohorts defeat the motion. And on May 24, 1876, when Hopkins' persistence finally paid off and the House granted the Commerce Committee authority to investigate,29 railroad and big corporation tactics further aggravated and angered Reagan. Obstacle after obstacle delayed the hearings. Railway managers and presidents—those few who even bothered to appear—provoked lengthy discussions while giving little or no information; their attorneys prolonged the meetings, hoping to confuse and exhaust; Standard Oil, wishing to continue undisturbed its profitable rebate practices, sent its representative, J. N. Camden, to aid and "advise correctly'' his good friend, Commerce Committee Chairman Frank tion," p. 22; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, p. 140; Adams, Railroads, pp. 147-148. 26 I. Leo Sharfman, The American Railroad Problem, p. 40; Haney, Congressional History, pp. 247, 283; Benson, Merchants, p. 29. 27 Haney, Congressional History, pp. 255, 283-285. 28 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 29232930, 2993-2994, 3045-3046, 3051-3058, 3122-3124, 3130, 4860, 4863. 29 Ibid., pp. 3104, 3264, 3309, 3402, Appendix 111-114.

Procter_5127.pdf 246

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

225

Hereford; 30 and then, after the hearings ended, the clerk announced that he had mislaid and lost all testimony given during the last few months. But Reagan, believing this not to be the case, indignantly asserted that the records had been stolen.31 Gradually in the latter half of 1876 and throughout 1877 railroad methods and machinations forced Reagan to focus more of his attention upon them, to become more aware of their tremendous and ill-used power. Knowing little about the technical aspects of transportation he did not seem equipped for the difficult task ahead of him. But when he saw Hopkins' bill for regulation of interstate carriers buried forever in the House Commerce Committee,32 when he learned in November, 1876, that Hopkins' powerful enemies had defeated him in Pennsylvania for re-election,33 when he watched railroads and other multimillion-dollar corporations grow larger at the expense of and to the detriment of the American people, and when he listened to Hopkins' plea to carry forward the cause they had together espoused,34 he knew what he must do, no matter how great the odds against him. After satisfying himself of the legality of Federal supervision over railroads, Reagan took up the banner Hopkins had been forced to lay down. In December, 1877, he informed the House of its power over interstate commerce35 announcing that the Committee on Commerce would soon offer a bill for its consideration. For five months, however, he and his colleagues delayed the presentation of their measure because of the many complex problems involved. But early in May, 1878, Reagan, goaded by editorials calling him ' 'traitor"36 and by memorials 30 Camden and Hereford were both from West Virginia. Harry Thurston Peck, Twenty Years of the Republic, pp. 139-140; Nevins, Rockefeller, II, 95-96; Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 22-24; New York Times, June 28, July 11, 1876. 31 Nevins, Rockefeller, II, 96; Peck, Twenty Years, p. 140. 32 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, 5029; Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," p. 25. 33 Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," p. 26. 34 "Arguments and Statements before the Committee on Commerce in Relation to Certain bills Referred to that Committee Proposing Congressional Regulation of Interstate Commerce," U.S. Congress, House Miscellaneous Document No. 55, 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 265; hereafter cited as U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882. Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," p. 26. 35 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 19-23. SQ Ibid., p. 3093. At Reagan's request, the clerk of the House read two editorials from the Commercial Gazette (Pittsburgh), April 27, 29, 1878. Also see Reagan's discussion of his bill before the House Commerce Committee on February 26, 1878, U.S. Congress, House Committee Reports, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, Report No. 245.

Procter_5127.pdf 247

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

226

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

and hundreds of petitions asking for protection from railroads and monopolies,37 plunged into the labyrinth of railroad regulation. Outwardly confident on May 8, he outlined his proposal to the House stating that the objects of the Reagan bill 38 were "few and easily understood." To correct past wrongs freight rates and facilities would be made equal for all shippers, rebates and drawbacks would be prohibited, "pools" or combinations formed to eliminate competition and to pool earnings would be forbidden, and charges for a short haul of goods (if as large as a carload) would not be greater than for a long haul. Furthermore, railroads would have to post freight rates and schedules while being careful not to charge more for interstate than for state cargoes. And to prevent future discrimination, if the railway corporations violated these provisions, circuit or district courts would require them to pay the injured party triple the amount of damages sustained and a fine of not less than $1,000 for each violation.39 In support of the bill's constitutionality Reagan offered case after case of judicial findings and to show that the country demanded its passage he presented resolutions and petitions from the Pennsylvania and New York legislatures, from the Chambers of Commerce of New York, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee, and from the New York Board of Trade and Transportation. 40 Finally he declared, In conclusion I . . . s a y . . . that the power of Congress cannot be successfully questioned; that the public opinion of the country, as well as the public welfare, requires that it should be passed; that both public opinion and the best interests of the country appeal to Congress to perform the great public duty of passing such a law. . . . This bill is unlike any bill upon the subject ever before presented to Congress. It . . . defines . . . interstate commerce; it leaves nothing to be guessed at. It then prescribes the necessary regula37 See U.S. Congress, Petitions to the House Commerce Committee, HR 45AF6.2; hereafter cited as Commerce Committee Petitions. 38 Nash, "Reagan and Regulations," pp. 26-30, states that the Reagan bill was similar to the Hopkins bill and was identical with a bill presented to the Committee on Commerce by Lewis F. Watson of Pennsylvania. The author of the bill was undoubtedly George B. Hibbard of Buffalo. See Tarbell, Standard Oil Company, I, 214-215; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3393, 3404. 39 On May 2, 1878, Reagan read the Reagan bill to Congress. On May 8, he read and discussed it in full. U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 3096-3097, 3275-3280. 40 Ibid., pp. 3275-3276.

Procter_5127.pdf 248

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

227

tions of that commerce, and so prescribes them as to protect the interests of the people without injuring the rights of transportation companies.41 At the end of his presentation Reagan, having only a few questions to answer was indeed optimistic. But three days later, as he prepared to bring his bill to a vote,42 his elation vanished. From all sides the opposition pounded and slashed at him. General Joseph E. Bragg of Wisconsin opened the onslaught by questioning the bill's constitutionality, by denouncing a measure designed to perpetuate the power of the Federal government at the expense of the states, and by intimating that railroads and huge corporations would profit most from the act.43 In close support Benjamin Dean of Massachusetts and William A. Phillips of Kansas attacked the long- and short-haul clause, arguing that it was definitely hostile to the West since railroads would raise their through rates. "This bill . . . {would] not remedy," Phillips lamented. "[Instead it] would cripple the interests of the country and would directly interfere with the commerce of the country." 44 Then came Joseph Cannon and Richard W. Townshend of Illinois along with Clarkson Potter of New York denouncing the antipooling section.45 And when they had finished, James A. Garfield of Ohio and Omar D. Conger of Michigan, amid roars of laughter, stated that the bill was a bit wordy and perplexing. " [ W e ] have become entangled and lost in its mazes beyond recovery until we rushed away from this bill," Conger joked, "and then . . . [we] come in here to hear some one [sic] else talk and become again confused."46 With ridicule ringing in his ears, Reagan, even with his supporters rallying around him, was in full retreat. When Conger asked him why his bill did not include supervision over water transportation, he—not having considered this aspect—unthinkingly supported such an amendment. 47 After Jacob D. Cox of Ohio had retorted to Garfield's barb, "Nobody can read it [the bill] without reading it much," by stating 41

Ibid., pp. 3279-3280. **lbid., pp. 3324-3327, 3392. On May 9, 1878, Reagan obtained the floor for Saturday, May 11, with the provision that the previous question would be called for on the bill. *&lbid., pp. 3392-3394. 44 Ibid., pp. 3394-3395. « I b i d . , pp. 3395-3396, 3397-3398. 46 Ibid., pp. 3406, 3408. 47 Ibid., pp. 3408-3409.

Procter_5127.pdf 249

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

228

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

that technical language was necessary and essential, Reagan undermined his colleague's position by amending various words and phrases.48 And then at the close of the day's session he abandoned his previous plans, announcing that he would submit the Reagan bill to a vote at a later date.49 But in this session of Congress the Reagan bill would not again appear. Although Reagan made numerous efforts to present a revised version during the last of May, parliamentary tactics of the opposition won out.50 Early in June, 1878, Congress adjourned, and Reagan returned to his home in Palestine. If, however, after such rigorous months at Washington he had hoped to devote more time to his much neglected family and to leisurely experiment with different farm products—his favorite pastime51—or to study railroad regulation, he was disappointed. Texas politics that summer became chaotic, and Reagan was much in demand. The newly-formed Greenback party,52 crossing party lines and thus making election predictions uncertain, was increasing its activities while the Democratic party was strife-torn by the bickerings and vicious campaigns of its three gubernatorial contenders, Governor Hubbard, ex-Governor and now Congressman Throckmorton, and Master of the State Grange W. W. Lang.53 For state Democrats and for the 1,300 delegates meeting at the state convention54 in Austin on July 17, party harmony was paramount. Some compromises must be reached; someone must show the way. And who was better qualified to carry out this assignment than the "Old 48

Ibid., pp. 3409, 3412. See change in Reagan's plans in ibid., pp. 3408-3413. ™lbid., pp. 3532, 3609, 3793, 3873, 3879, 3881, 3913, 3919, 3999, 4002, 4094-4095, 4099. 51 Interview of Reagan Ferguson, Palestine, Texas, with B. P., January 31, 1956. 52 In 1875-1876, Greenbackers in Texas took over the Granger movement. Their primary objective was to have the Federal government issue greenbacks, or paper money, and redeem treasury notes and bonds with such money. See Roscoe C. Martin, "The Greenback Party in Texas," Southwestern Historical Quarterly, X X X (1937), 161-177; Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 180-181, 187-190; Ada Margaret Smith, "The Life and Times of William Harrison Hamman," M.A. Thesis, pp. 135 ff. 53 For bibliographies and short biographies of these men see Webb and Carroll (eds.), Handbook of Texas. Also see Elliott, Leathercoat, pp. 253-270. 54 S. S. McKay, "The Texas State Democratic Convention of 1878," West Texas Historical Association Year Book, pp. 3-10, Galveston Daily News, July 19, 1878. 49

Procter_5127.pdf 250

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

229

Roman/'55 Reagan, who had grown up with the Democratic party in Texas and who had repeatedly stated that he would not seek the governorship?56 Consequently, after the delegates assembled the next day, July 18, cries rang out through the meeting hall for Reagan to speak, and in response to these requests he came forward. At first he put the convention at ease by telling anecdotes concerning his thirty years among Texas Democrats. Then, turning to the three candidates vying for favor, he skillfully praised "each one . . . [as being] as honest and faithful as the other. But you cannot/' he emphasized, "nominate them all." Thereupon, he reminded the delegates that the Democratic party and its principles were far more important than the success of any one individual, that they should accept and support the will of the majority; but, above all, they must remain united, for the dangers to the party, he warned, would be far greater from within than from without. Amidst thunderous applause Reagan left the rostrum, apparently having accomplished his purpose.57 Yet, five days and twenty-seven ballots later the most important result of his speech seemed to be that of gaining supporters for his own nomination. With none of the three candidates able to obtain a necessary two-thirds majority, the convention had deadlocked; and when the Hubbard and Throckmorton leaders authorized a committee of thirty-two to select an acceptable candidate, Reagan was their man. But, although highly appreciative, he declined the nomination, explaining that the Reagan bill would appear at the next session of Congress, and because of its importance "to the interests of the whole country," he said, " . . . I would rather succeed in securing its passage than to have any office in the gift of the people." Thus, to Oran M. Roberts, his friend of many years, the committee turned.68 55

As Reagan grew older, people marvelled at his vitality and stamina. Remembering that after his release from Fort Warren and return to Texas he labored for over a year on his farm, they began comparing him to Cincinnatus, a Roman hero of the 6th and 5th centuries B.C. See Hogg, Addresses and State Papers, pp. 530-531. 56 Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), February 28, 1878; Galveston Daily News, February 19, June 26, 1878. 57 Galveston Daily News, July 19, 1878. 58 For slightly conflicting accounts of the Democratic convention at Austin, see Reagan, Memoirs, pp. 245-246; Lubbock, Six Decades, pp. 614-615; Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 226; McKay, "The Texas State Democratic

Procter_5127.pdf 251

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

230

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

During the months after the July convention at Austin, Reagan campaigned over Texas almost constantly.59 Especially was he active after the First Congressional District Democrats meeting at Nacogdoches on September 4 again chose him by acclamation.60 On September 18 he announced he would canvass the state against the Greenbackers and Republicans, and for three weeks he discussed in speeches at Austin, San Antonio, Houston, Galveston, and Orange what he called the Republican's "class legislation"—high tariff, tight fiscal policy, demonetization of silver, and aid to big business and monopolies—advocated since 1861; he explained why new national parties had organized; and he showed how the Democratic party was rendering the Greenbackers' position untenable.61 Finally on November 5, 1878, his long campaign was over. The Democrats won a sweeping victory.62 With the Greenback menace in Texas subdued for the moment, Reagan focused his attention once more on Congress and railroad regulation. Leaving for Washington several weeks early, he together with the House Commerce Committee and especially with John E. Kenna of West Virginia prepared a new Reagan bill for immediate presentation.63 On December 3 and 4, soon after the House convened, he sought to receive recognition for his measure,64 but not until December 11 did his persistence pay off. Offering a substitute for the original bill, Reagan quickly read the new measure and explained it. To meet previous criticisms he stated that the technical language and verbose phrases, so objected to earlier, Convention of 1878," loc. cit., pp. 3-10; Galveston Daily News, July 19, 24, 1878; Robert C. Cotner, James Stephen Hogg, pp. 78-79. 59 Reagan to W . T. Walthal, November 13, 1878, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879. 60 Galveston Daily News, September 7, 1878. **• Ibid., September 22, 25, 26, 29, October 4, 5, 1878; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), September 19, 26, October 3, 1878; Texas Capital (Austin), September 22, 1878. 62 In the First Congressional District race, Reagan received 18,038 votes; S. S. Newton, 199. Galveston Daily News, December 21, 1878. Also see Wooten (ed.), Comprehensive History, II, 227-233, and Smith, " W . H. Hamman," pp. 140-167, for good accounts of the campaign between Roberts and Hamman. Roberts won handily, receiving 158,933 votes while Hamman received 55,002 votes and Republican A. B. Norton, 23,402 votes. 63 Galveston Daily News, November 19, 1878; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 3rd Session, p. 95. 64 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 19, 32.

Procter_5127.pdf 252

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

231

had been eliminated; that the long- and short-haul clause had been clarified and the antipooling section strengthened, while the water transportation amendment to which he had assented in May had been eliminated. Nor was the bill's objective, as previously claimed, that of aiding and fostering monopoly, Reagan concluded. Instead "we look[ed] to the grievances complained of; we ascertained] the remedies . . . for these grievances; [and] . . . submitted] the plan of remedy to the House."65 These explanations, however, in no way softened the thrust of the opposition's attacks upon him. But this time Reagan, having read, studied, and discussed railroads and their intricate activities much more thoroughly, was ready for them.66 To Phillips of Kansas, William Lathrop of Illinois, and Abram S. Hewitt of New York who claimed that the long- and short-haul clause was unfair to the West and detrimental to the commerce of the country, he gave examples of railroad discrimination dealing irreparable damage to the channels of trade; to John A. McMahon of Ohio and Potter of New York who questioned Congress' right to interfere with private enterprise, he acknowledged their position in respect to state commerce, but not so to interstate; and to those who protested the antipooling clause, he explained that competition was necessary to a healthy economy and to the checking of powerful monopolies. Then, when Hewitt raised the ticklish question of having a commission of competent experts rule over interstate commerce rather than the courts, and when Townshend and Cannon of Illinois again broached the controversial antipooling clause, Reagan, outmaneuvering them, ignored their questions and attacks by calling for the previous question. When the voting ended, the House had passed the Reagan bill, 139 to 104,67 and Reagan had won his first victory—though a short-lived one—for railroad regula65

Ibid., pp. 93-95; Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 37-38. In the summer of 1878, Charles Francis Adams, Jr., published his classic, Railroads, Their Origin and Problems. This book was widely read and was of value to Reagan. For example, see U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 4026-4027, and Throckmorton to Roberts, July 13, 1879, in Roberts Papers. 67 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 93-102, gives the full debate. Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 16, 22, 32^12, states that the East, specifically Pennsylvania, and not the West, was responsible for the passage of the Reagan bill and for Federal railroad regulation. This thesis is decidedly different from Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 227-228. 66

Procter_5127.pdf 253

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

232

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

tion. The next day the Senate Commerce Committee received his measure and began dissecting it.68 During the remainder of the short third session of the Forty-Fifth Congress Reagan, while helplessly watching railroad executives and other opponents of Federal regulation in the Senate criticize, maul, and delay the Reagan bill out of existence,69 devoted most of his time to a national rivers and harbors bill. For the South and for Texas this was an all-important matter, because Federal expenditure on internal improvements meant employment and at least limited prosperity. In the previously Republican-dominated congresses, appropriations to the ex-Confederate states had suffered, but on March 3, 1879, with Reagan and his Democratic colleagues at the helm, a measure guaranteeing substantial improvements for southern rivers and harbors received Presidential approval.70 Two weeks later, March 18, the new Forty-Sixth Congress assembled, and the legislative processes of the nation began all over again. On April 11, Reagan again became chairman of the Committee on Commerce71 and on April 21 he introduced a new bill to regulate interstate commerce.72 Throughout the spring of 1879 he conducted, in committee, inquiries and testimony concerning railroad regulation, while in the House he participated in time-consuming debates over various issues. At times the House went into night session, and members sought the comfort of lounges in the rear; at other times tempers flared and threats ensued until calmer minds prevailed.73 But, in the 68 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 117-531, 1045. See also the New York Daily Tribune, December 12, 1878; Chicago Daily Tribune, December 12, 1878. 69 Albert Fink, Argument before the Committee on Commerce of the Senate of the United States on the Reagan Bill, February 11, 1879; G. R. Blanchard [of the Erie Railroad], Argument before the Committee on Commerce of the Senate of the United States in opposition to the Reagan Bill, for the Regulation of Inter-State Commerce by Railway, February 11, 1879; New York Daily Tribune, January 3, 1880; Chicago Daily Tribune, December 12, 1878; Galveston Daily News, December 15, 20, 1878. 70 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 1163, 1215, 1452, 1488-1490, 1512, 1571, 1575, 1622, 1625, 1639, 2285, 2303, 2335, 2365-2368, 2388, 2409; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), March 28, May 2, 1878. 71 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 1st Session, p. 397. Reagan also was appointed to the Committee on Expenditure in the Treasury. 72 ibid., p. 636. 73 Ibid., pp. 1394-1395, 1558-1587, give good examples of House activity and

Procter_5127.pdf 254

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

233

main, this session, being one of the introduction and preparation of bills, was merely long and tiring. Finally, on July 1, Congress adjourned, and Reagan returned home to Fort Houston. And for a time he lived, according to his custom, the life of the "Old Roman," attending to the needs of his family, testing various seeds and plants, daily writing numerous letters, or studying and reading about railroads in preparation for the future.74 With Greenbackers still organizing in Texas in preparation for the 1880 elections, Democratic incumbents and hopefuls summoned him to bolster them by speaking before their constituents. So, with increasing frequency he journeyed across the state.75 But, all in all, the summer and fall of 1879 were happy, restful, and peaceful for Reagan—actually deceptively peaceful, since throughout the nation forces for and against railroad regulation were already mounting their attack. In New York, the Hepburn Committee under the guidance of Simon Sterne shocked the nation with new and startling disclosures of railroad injustice, corruption, arrogance, and deceit.76 In New York City the Chamber of Commerce, the New York Board of Trade and Transportation, and F. B. Thurber, aiding Sterne in every possible way, forced state politicians and even the powerful William H. Vanderbilt of the New York Central and Hugh Jewett of the Erie to admit that some type of railroad regulation was necessary.77 In Pennsylvania the Grand Jury of Clarion County indicted Rockefeller and other Standard Oil officials for injuring trade and fostering monopoly by extorting unreasonable rebates from railroad corndebate. Also see New York Daily Tribune, May 26, 1879; Galveston Daily News, June 6, 1879. 74 Interview of Mrs. Jefferson Davis Reagan, Palestine, Texas, with B. P., January 31, 1956; interview of May Reagan Orr Mathes, Beaumont, Texas, with B. P., February 12, 1956; Walter S. Steele to Reagan, July 17, 1879, in R. P., Microfilm. 75 Horace Chilton et al. to Reagan, August 11, 1879, and D. B. Culberson to Reagan, September 25, 1879, in R. P., Letters 1870-1879; Galveston Daily News, August 28, 30, 1879; Texas Capital (Austin), October 12, 1879; Good, "Reagan," Ph.D. Thesis, pp. 363-364. 76 Benson, Merchants, pp. 115 ff.; John Foord, The Life and Public Service of Simon Sterne, pp. 20-22, 186-188; Sterne, Diary, pp. 123-131; Nevins, Rockefeller, I, 568; II, 38-45. 77 Benson, Merchants, pp. 133-143. Lane, Commodore Vanderbilt, p. 302, draws a different conclusion.

Procter_5127.pdf 255

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

234

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

panies.78 In Texas the legislature provided that state railway charges must be uniform, that rate discrimination was illegal, and that transportation companies assessing extortionate prices would be prosecuted.79 At its annual session at Canandaigua, New York, the National Grange in preparation for an all-out attack on railroads urged Congress to enact laws to control interstate commerce.80 And from all over the nation scores of petitions and memorials, especially from the Ohio and Upper Mississippi River valleys, swamped congressmen in the hope of making public pressure effective.81 Yet, the railroads and their leaders were easily a match for their opposition. They had the money, the power, the organization, and what they lacked in sound arguments and popularity they more than made up for in talent. Not only did they have an array of the best legal minds in the country and the most outstanding railroad and financial experts representing them—men such as Albert Fink, David A. Wells, and Chauncey DePew—but now they had Charles Francis Adams, Jr., as an ally. Therefore, by the time Reagan returned to Congress on December 1, 1879, the sides were drawn and the battlegrounds—first, the Commerce Committee chambers and then the floor of the House—chosen. Caught up in the midst of these diverse, fast-moving events, Reagan tried as best he could to achieve his goal. During December he called before his committee such individuals as Thurber and members of the National Board of Trade who were friendly to the Reagan bill.82 But even before Christmas he saw his plans going awry. At first railway representatives failed to appear at the appointed time, causing undue delay.83 Then, after the holidays Vanderbilt, Jewett, and Colonel Tom Scott of the Pennsylvania Railroad, upon learning that he was ready to report his bill to the House, asked that they be allowed, in all fairness, to present their side of the question. And when Reagan consented, they sent the renowned Adams, Fink, and Wells to attack 78 Nevins, Rockefeller, I, 568-569; Tarbell, Standard Oil Company, I, 238-240. There were eight counts in the indictment. 79 Gammel, Laws, VIII, 1417-1418; IX, 75-76. 80 Petition of the National Grange to Congress, Commerce Committee Petitions, HR 46A-H6.6; Buck, The Granger Movement, pp. 228-229. 81 See Commerce Committee Petitions, HR 46A-H6.6. 82 New York Daily Tribune, December 6, 10, 13, 1879. 83 Ibid., December 17, 1879.

Procter_5127.pdf 256

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

235

the Reagan bill and to propose a plan more favorable to their interests.84 Gradually, during January and February, 1880, Reagan saw his committee, impressed by the testimony of these experts, turn against him—and he could do nothing to stop it. By February 10 there were three plans before them, and upon considering the Reagan bill, the committee decided by an 8 to 7 vote not to report it to the House. Instead they endorsed the Henderson bill, designed by Adams and William W. Rich of Massachusetts, while to Reagan's every argument and plea for the introduction of his bill also, they remained unmoved.85 But Reagan was not to be denied. Due to his persistence the Commerce Committee finally consented to the presentation of all three measures,86 and on February 24, after learning that the New York Sun had misquoted him and had intimated that his committee contemplated censuring him for his language, he aired before the House what had been happening. In so doing, he cleared himself of the false charges and brought railroad regulation up for consideration.87 Two days later, pushing his advantage, he attempted to discuss the three measures before the House. But now the opposition, countering his moves, resorted to delaying tactics, and during the weeks and months that followed, Reagan tried unsuccessfully time and again to obtain the floor 84 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1081; New York Daily Tribune, January 3, 7, 1880; Albert Fink, Argument before the Committee of Commerce of the House of Representatives of the United States on the Reagan Bill, for the Regulation of Inter-State Commerce, January 14, 15, 16, 1880; Galveston Daily News, January 7, 16, 28, 1880; Chicago Daily Tribune, January 23, 26, 28, 1880. Further pressure was put on Reagan during January and February when certain members of Congress tried to strip the Commerce Committee of its power over river and harbor appropriations. Reagan opposed and defeated all such attempts. That this was in any way a railroaddirected plot there is no proof, but such attacks on the Commerce Committee served to occupy and divert much of Reagan's attention at a crucial time for his bill. U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 227 ff., 458, 663, 1208; Galveston Daily News, January 7, February 3, 1880. 85 The Henderson bill was often referred to as the Adams bill. It was approved by a vote of 9 to 6. Galveston Daily News, January 8, February 7, 1880; Dallas Daily Herald, February 11, 1880; New York Daily Tribune, February 14, 1880. 86 Galveston Daily News, February 20, 1880; Darwin R. James to , February 24, 1880, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. James was the secretary of the New York Board of Trade and Transportation. 87 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 10791081; New York Daily Tribune, February 25, 1880; Galveston Daily News, February 25, 1880; Dallas Daily Herald, February 25, 1880.

Procter_5127.pdf 257

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

236

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

in behalf of interstate commerce.88 At last, on June 1, 1880, he succeeded, and before the House he arose to plead his cause. Outlining the reasons for this all-important legislation, he stated that the legislatures of New York, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and Nevada as well as a number of political conventions and thousands of people all across the United States had petitioned the Commerce Committee demanding railroad regulation. That they were justified in their demands, he argued, was manifest in the Constitution and by a long succession of judicial cases and statutes, and therefore the pressing question for the House to decide was not the constitutionality of this legislation but how they should attain it. Then, turning to the three measures before the House, he first discussed in detail his own bill, explaining that it was essentially the same as the one passed by the House in the Forty-Fifth Congress. As for the Henderson bill—the Commerce Committee's choice—it established a board of three commissioners who would be appointed by the President for six-year terms and who would hear complaints, suggest remedies, and, if need be, recommend to the Attorney General of the United States necessary legal action; it included water as well as land transportation under its jurisdiction; it guaranteed equal carriage facilities for all, while forbidding drawbacks, rebates, and other discriminations; it provided for each violation a penalty of not less than $1,000; and it required that the commissioners should inquire into the method of pooling and then report "whether . . . any . . . legislation is expedient thereto.'' But in setting up a commission, this bill, Reagan pointed out, gives "no relief to the citizen; no remedy for the wrong . . . [for] this bill . . . nowhere makes a violation of its provisions an indictable offense." And even though the commissioners . . . can summon witnesses, acquire books . . . [etc.] railroad corporations can easily, and would certainly, concentrate their influence and efforts, covertly if necessary, to secure the appointment of men who would subserve their interests . . . while they could concentrate their power and influence, millions of people having different and adverse interests would be a scattered, unorganized, and powerless mass, and could not expect to exert a combined effort or influence to secure the appointment of proper persons. And the probabilities are that these three commissioners would be the salaried apologists of the railroads, and that the people and the commerce of 88 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 11541155, 2987, 3377, 3409, 3536, 3576, 3715, 3986-3987.

Procter_5127.pdf 258

5/24/2014 7:44:56 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

237

the country would still be subject to their arbitrary and uncontrolled exactions. And as to the third measure, the McLane bill, Reagan concluded since it was similar to the Henderson bill "little need be said/' 89 So Reagan together with Thomas J. Henderson of Illinois, who immediately thereafter spoke in defense of his own work, 90 laid the problem of interstate commerce squarely before the House and bid them grapple. But since adjournment was close at hand, Reagan, realizing that he would not regain the House floor for railroad regulation in this session, devoted his efforts during the few remaining days to the passage of a new rivers and harbors appropriation bill. 91 Then on June 16, homeward he went to Texas and the campaign trail. During the summer and fall of 1880 Reagan participated vigorously in Democratic activities, writing letters, speaking at the State Democratic Convention at Dallas, 92 and thereafter touring the state against the Greenbackers and Republicans.93 In September his followers again nominated him for Congress by acclamation, and although there was no doubt as to his election, he continued to campaign, working for a Democratic sweep.94 Then, after victory was assured his thoughts turned once more toward Washington and the passage of the Reagan bill. But upon returning to Congress in December, 1880, he learned to his chagrin that even though the National Grange, the New York Board of Trade and Transportation, and prominent organizations and men all across the country were militantly supporting him, 95 nothing ®>lbid., pp. 4018-4025; Dallas Daily Herald, June 2, 1880. 90 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 40274032. Q1 Ibid., pp. 3399, 3434-3441, 3722, 4119, 4170, 4314-4315, 4338-4343, 43464347, 4349, 4379-4380. 92 Winkler (ed.), Platforms of Political Parties, pp. 201-206; Broocks to Reagan, May 18, 1880, Seth Shepard to Reagan, August 8, 1880, and S. W . T. Lanham to Reagan, August 14, 1880, in R. P., Microfilm; Dallas Weekly Herald, August 11, 1880. 93 Reagan to Galveston Daily News, December 28, 1880, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884; Shepard to Reagan, August 31, 1880, in R. P., Microfilm; Galveston Daily News, August 15, 19, 21, 22, 1880; Smith, "W. H. Hamman," pp. 172-173. 94 Dallas Daily Herald, September 2, October 15, 1880; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), September 28, 1880. 95 James to , February 24, 1880, and A. B. Miller to Reagan, March 2, 18, 1880, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884; Benson, Merchants, pp. 143-148; Buck, The Granger Movement, p. 229. In Galveston Daily News, December 10, 1880, see Judge Jeremiah S. Black's letter. Also see Winkler (ed.), Platforms of

Procter_5127.pdf 259

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

238

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

had changed. A majority of his committee still remained adamant against him, while throughout December certain members in the House blocked his every move.96 But on January 5, 1881, surprising his opposition by breaking through their parliamentary defense, he obtained recognition from the Chair to discuss interstate commerce, and particularly his own bill. And when Henderson and others objected, he leveled one last blast at the Henderson-Adams proposal. First of all he asked the House how the long- and short-haul clause could be omitted from an interstate commerce bill when there was sworn testimony showing that freight from Pittsburgh could be sent cheaper 540 miles down the Ohio River to Cincinnati and then overland to Philadelphia than it could directly from Pittsburgh, and also when there was conclusive proof that New York and Philadelphia merchants could ship goods via Boston to the West at lower rates than directly from their respective cities. How could the Henderson bill be accepted, he argued, when there was no requirement for railroads to print and post their scheduled rates, especially since the Hepburn Committee had revealed that in New York alone the presidents of the New York Central and Erie railroads had made 6,000 special contracts in 1878, many of which were cases of rate discrimination? And how, he demanded, could pooling be permitted to exist, thereby encouraging "the organization of corporations with corporations, rings with rings, to control particular branches of commerce in their own interests and then to exercise the power of discrimination as between men and places, to secure a monopoly in . . . trade[?]" And as to the provision for a commission to supervise interstate commerce rather than the courts, he concluded, I looked to the action of the various States to see why it was that State legislation of a somewhat similar character had been influential. I found that suits often failed for want of evidence. . . . To overcome this difficulty, . . . [in the Reagan bill} we provide for opening the mouths . . . £of railroad executives who know what they are doing], for opening the books, papers, and documents of these corporations, so as to prevent the concealPolitical Parties, pp. 194, 202-203, for endorsement of Reagan bill by Texas State Grange and for approval of regulation of interstate commerce in the Texas Democratic Platform. 96 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 17, 48, 111, 132-134; Dallas Daily Herald, December 9, 1880; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), December 15, 1880; Galveston Daily News, December 15, 1880.

Procter_5127.pdf 260

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

THE GENESIS OF RAILROAD REGULATION

239

ment of facts necessary to the ends of justice and to prevent evasions of the law which would defeat the purpose of the bill.97 These were the amendments which Reagan proposed for the Henderson bill, and these points he was determined to incorporate in interstate commerce legislation. Inasmuch as the three measures were slated for debate within the next few days he hurried to New York City to consult with the New York Chamber of Commerce,98 and when he returned, he mobilized his colleagues for debate and was ready to see who was the more powerful, "the people or the railroads."99 And soon he learned, for during the next four weeks he tried in vain to gain recognition for railroad regulation.100 By February, realizing that his bill was doomed, he decided to devote his energies exclusively to the national rivers and harbors bill, and with bulldog determination he used his great parliamentary experience and physical stamina to push the appropriation through.101 But as for the regulation of railroads it would have to wait. When on March 1 the railway men finally allowed the Henderson bill to be brought up, Reagan, believing that no legislation would be better than a measure that would give Congressional approval to railroad abuses, fought against it. In the ensuing ballot, the House voted 67 for, 144 against.102 For five years, now, Reagan had fought the railroads, their money, their influence, their talent. And again he had lost. But there was always tomorrow. 97 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 3 6 1 365; New York Daily Tribune, December 27, 1880; Galveston Daily News, January 6, 1881; Dallas Daily Herald, January 6, 1881. 9 » Dallas Daily Herald, January 8, 1881. 99 Galveston Daily News, January 6, 27, 1881. 100 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 383, 400, 789, 866, 885-886; Dallas Daily Herald, January 15, 1881; Galveston Daily News, January 15, 22, 27, 1881. 101 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, pp. 1183, 1353, 1356-1358, 1391, 1422-1441, 1520, 1522-1538, 1609, 1612-1633, 16351663, 1665-1687, 1755-1757, 2232-2233, 2241, 2287-2290, 2467; Dallas D*/7/ Herald, February 19, 1881, quoting the Philadelphia Times. In the rivers and harbors bill, Texas received an appropriation of $750,000. U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, p. 1530. 102 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, p. 2294.

Procter_5127.pdf 261

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

C H A P T E R

X V I I I

Struggle and Triumph in Congress

JLmOR ALMOST FORTY YEARS now Reagan had engaged in the fascinating game of politics and had played it successfully. But 1881 was different from the 1840's when he had first campaigned on the Texas frontier. Changed were the demands of the times and the stature of the men who occupied positions of public trust. Instead of able, ambitious men, prompted by desires to serve their sections as well as to better themselves, eager to do battle over states' rights, slavery, or secession, instead of legislators with an ear tuned to their constituents' needs and desires because of the people's keen interest in the problems of the day, and instead of statesmen like Clay, Webster, Calhoun, Benton, Douglas, and Lincoln, a different breed of public officials had arisen. Now at Washington were more congressmen who sought politics merely for the honor and for the economic gain that the office would bring to them and their families. In the Senate, where popular sentiments were not directly felt,1 appeared Standard Oil senators, American Tobacco senators, railroad senators, iron and steel senators—men known primarily for their business con1 State legislatures elected United States senators until the passage of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913. Corporations found it much easier to control a state legislature than an election open to the public.

Procter_5127.pdf 262

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

241

nections rather than for their beliefs, ideas, and other qualifications. Then, there were legislators who were ruled by the "spoils system," who received rewards for pleasing and doing the bidding of state or national party bosses. And last there were those in Congress who had entered politics to serve their country and represent their fellowmen as wisely and as well as they could, but in 1881 these men were in the minority. For so much apathy and immorality in politics probably no one was to blame. Perhaps it was the climate of the times. After all, such volatile issues as slavery, secession, and states' rights were dead—the Civil War had seen to that—while in 1877 President Hayes had laid Reconstruction to rest. Now, national parties, fighting over the unspectacular problems of high tariff, civil service reform, and money and banking, found it most difficult to generate among their followers a crusading, militant fervor. But again, perhaps there was reason for the apathy of citizens and lawmakers alike, because the last time that Republicans and Democrats had "squared off" against each other over an explosive issue, a bloody civil war had resulted, and no one who had lived through those terrible years ever wanted to experience such horrors again. Thus, in 1881 in young, industrial America—cognizant of money, power, the nouveaux riche—young men of promise, of ability and enterprise no longer entered politics but turned toward the business world instead. Through their energies and dynamic personalities small businesses grew large, and large corporations became huge monopolies, ruling men's minds and shaping the policies of the state and Federal governments. And Reagan, who saw all this happening, who had experienced the power, the wrath, the machinations, the all-out assault of railroads and other large corporations, who believed that these young lords of industry were subverting the Constitution for their own personal gain and to the detriment of the United States, cried a warning of the dangers he perceived. Soon other men joined in chorus, and with each passing day the crescendo—voices of farmers, merchants, laborers, small businessmen, and people from all walks of life—gained momentum. " [ W h o ] is the most \sic\ powerful, the people or the railroad[s]" 2 Reagan asked. Although at the end of the Forty-Sixth Congress his bill had not passed the House, Reagan had received widespread encouragement. 2

Procter_5127.pdf 263

Galveston Daily News, January 6, 1881.

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

242

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

Oil producers from Pennsylvania and West Virginia had thanked him for his efforts in their behalf; the Patterson (New Jersey) Board of Trade and the chambers of commerce of New York City and Milwaukee pledged their continued assistance to him while the Illinois and Iowa legislatures had urged their representatives to vote for an interstate commerce act proposed by Congress; petitions from thousands of people, especially from the Midwest, had flooded the House Commerce Committee, expressing a growing fear of railroads and monopoly and asking restraint of them.3 In New York City during January and February, 1881, the National Anti-Monopoly League, led by F. B. Thurber and Peter Cooper, was molding an organization of farmers, merchants, laborers, politicians, and other adherents into a unified force; was publicizing extensively throughout the nation the evils of uncontrolled corporate power; and was promising all-out support to Reagan in his congressional activities.4 What's more, when he returned home in March, the Texas legislature, which was trying to establish a railroad commission and state legislation patterned after his bill, asked his advice.5 If Reagan was optimistic about this apparent support and success, his elation was short-lived. In Texas at that moment Jay Gould, accompanied by a distinguished party of railway executives, was traveling and speaking, organizing his forces—lobbyists, newspaper editors, influential citizens—to defeat the pending state railway legislation.6 Already Gould was buying out other lines and consolidating his railroad holdings.7 Almost daily throughout 1881 newspapers reported the merging of—and therefore the elimination of competition between —the Gould and Huntington railway systems into a gigantic pool which would be concentrated in Texas. Despite growing public complaints railroad discrimination continued unabated.8 On the national 3

Commerce Committee Petitions, HR 46A-H6.6. President L. E. Chittenden of the National Anti-Monopoly League to Reagan, February 28, 1881, in R. P., Microfilm; Dallas Daily Herald, March 4, 1881; New York Times, February 22, 1881. In Benson, Merchants, pp. 150 ff"., there is a good account of the National Anti-Monopoly League. 5 Texas, House Journal, 17th Legislature, 1st Session, pp. 19, 34, 260; Dallas Daily Herald, March 17, 1881; Reed, Texas Railroads, pp. 572-575; Potts, Railroad Transportation, pp. 116—117. 6 Dallas Daily Herald, March 4, 8, 1881; Reed, Texas Railroads, pp. 575-576; Potts, Railroad Transportation, pp. 117-118. 7 Dallas Daily Herald, March 12, 22, April 14, May 20, August 18, September 8, 1881. 8 Potts, Railroad Transportation, pp. 73-78; Galveston Daily News, November 4

Procter_5127.pdf 264

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

243

scene the Republicans had won a complete victory in 1880, and Reagan realized that in the upcoming Forty-Seventh Congress he would lose his prominent position in the House, that his power would be weakened and the Reagan bill undermined. Still, 1881 was, except for a serious illness in late September,9 a comparatively happy and active year for Reagan. At times, speaking at party rallies or other festive occasions, he would explain his actions in Congress before taking to task the Republicans, Greenbackers, and men of monopoly. At other times, he traveled across his district visiting with his constituents and listening to their problems and suggestions. But in the main he attended to the needs of his family and prepared himself for the next ordeal at Washington.10 Late in November, 1881, he returned to Congress, and when the House convened on December 5, he was ready to begin his fight for an interstate commerce act all over again. But with the Republicans having a clear majority in this new session, he found himself relegated to a minor role, being appointed merely as a member of the Committee on Commerce.11 And although Commerce Committee Chairman Horace F. Page of California assured him that he would do all in his power to get an interstate commerce bill before the House,12 its success was doubtful. There were too many new men on the committee who knew too little or nothing about railroads, and there were too many bills,13 ranging from innocuous to stringent Federal regulation, which 22, 1881, quoting the New York World, November 17, 1881. The activities of Gould and items concerning railroads occupied most of the space in Texas newspapers in 1881. For example, see the Dallas Daily Herald, Galveston Daily News, and the Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin). 9 Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), October 6, 1881. 10 Dallas Daily Herald, April 22, October 20, 1882; Galveston Daily News, September 1, 6, 21, November 16, 1881. Two of Reagan's daughters married in 1881. Anna Reagan eloped with W . S. Donley at Athens, Texas, on March 16. Bessie May Reagan married Alexander Ferguson, "a well-known railroad employee of the International and Great Northern," on October 19 in Palestine. See Galveston Daily News, October 18, 1881; Dallas Daily Herald, March 20, 1881. 11 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 238. In ibid., p. 197, Reagan introduced the Reagan bill again. Also see New York Daily Tribune, December 22, 1881; Galveston Daily News, November 25, December 20, 21, 1881. 12 Galveston Daily News, December 23, 1881. See U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 121, for Reagan's feeling about the committee appointments. 13 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 1st Session, Index, for interstate commerce bills.

Procter_5127.pdf 265

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

244

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

would require extra time and study, and which would probably add dissension to growing confusion. In January 1882, however, the committee members began examining the different measures, and immediately Reagan sought to educate them by explaining his bill. 14 But, as in the past five years, the railroads mobilized their powers to block his efforts. Employing their customary delaying tactics, they asked that they be given an equal opportunity to present their side. And when their request was granted, for two months they sent their highly-paid "siege guns"—Fink, Depew, Vice President George B. Blanchard of the Erie, General E. P. Alexander of the Louisville and Nashville, Wayne MacVeigh of the Pennsylvania, just recently United States Attorney General under Garfield, and ex-Governor and ex-Confederate John C. Brown of Tennessee, now representing Gould as president of the Texas and Pacific—to impress the new congressmen, to create confusion and uncertainty, and to criticize and to defeat their greatest antagonist, Reagan.15 Attacking the Reagan bill in every section and, when possible in every phrase, they defended their employer's interests with consummate skill and ability. The measure was not * 'tenable,'' MacVeigh began. "It is . . . worse than useless," said Fink. It would "certainly . . . work injury not only on the railroads, but . . . injury to the shipper," argued Brown.16 And was it constitutional? The paid experts doubted it. Yet, even if the bill was legal, wouldn't it infringe upon states' rights? 17 Day after day they solemnly warned the committee that the antipooling clause would bring disaster to the railroads by reviving competition; that the long- and short-haul section would cause rates to be raised, thereby discriminating against the West and virtually destroying interstate commerce;18 that the posting of rates and schedules would create undue railway expense and hardship; 19 that the high penalties to be assessed for violation of the bill were not only unreasonable but would produce swarms of informers and blackmail14

Galveston Daily News, January 12, 13, 1882. U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882; Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 52 if.; Reagan to G. P. Roberts, January 10, 1884, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. Roberts was president of the Pennsylvania Railroad. 16 U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882, pp. 4, 170, 232. 17 Ibid., pp. 8, 47-48, 83, 121, 202, 211-212, 218-219. 18 Much of the testimony attacked the antipooling and the long- and short-haul clauses. For some of the better examples, see ibid., pp. 118, 182-189, 195, 210-213. 19 Ibid., pp. 74-75, 135-137, 206-207, 227, 232. 15

Procter_5127.pdf 266

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

245

ers; 20 and that failure to include the regulation of water transportation would result in unfair competition.21 Time and again they predicted that railroads would resort to carrying freight just within the borders of one state, thereby eluding Federal jurisdiction.22 And sadly they lamented that the Reagan bill by its strict regulation would encourage and promote the growth of foreign commerce—especially Canadian railroads—to the detriment of United States lines.23 Nor was there actually a need for congressional interference, they asserted. There was nothing wrong with charging more for a short haul than for a long haul or in giving secret rebates and drawbacks to shippers. Such procedures were established business practices in the United States.24 And as for pooling—the leading railway experts of the nation advocated it as a necessity to prevent ruinous rate wars. 25 If, however, the House persisted in adopting a bill, they believed that Charles Francis Adams' plan of "a commission of inquiry only" was by far the best.26 "But it is hardly reasonable that your committee, during this session of Congress, and occupied . . . with so much other important work, can accomplish that which the United [J/V] labors of the best minds of many nations have been unable to accomplish in the last thirty years," Fink imperiously informed them. And it "is not to be expected that . . . without any previous knowledge of the subject . . . [you] would be prepared, upon so short an investigation, to recommend effective legislation upon a problem that is as intricate as it is important, and which certainly should not be dealt with lightly and superficially."27 Having heard these arguments repeatedly over the past years, Reagan for two months awaited his turn for rebuttal. But in the meantime he made life just as uncomfortable as possible for Fink, Depew, Brown, and company as he—an expert himself now— fired question ^Ibid., pp. 51, 107, 179, 226. 21 Ibid., pp. 51, 83-84, 92-94, 130, 223. 22 Ibid., pp. 85, 125, 172, 219. 23 Ibid., pp. 51, 87, 93, 98, 101-103, 130-131, 172-173. 24 Ibid., pp. 20, 59-61, 75, 77, 175, 214. 25 Ibid., pp. 118, 182-189, 203-206. 26 In ibid., pp. 115, 158-159, Blanchard presented a weak advisory commission bill suggested by Adams. In ibid., pp. 192-194, Fink also bolstered the Adams plan. On February 24, 1882, Adams said that he could not appear before the committee. At Boston on February 25, he outlined his plan before the Boston Merchants' Association. Ibid., p. 80; New York Daily Tribune, February 26, 1882. 27 U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882, pp. 162-163.

Procter_5127.pdf 267

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

246

N O T WITHOUT HONOR

after question at them, doggedly pounding away at their testimony.28 Yet, with each passing day it became more and more apparent that these men had raised doubts and that their prestige and arguments had had considerable effect upon the committee;29 so on March 28, 1882, Reagan arose, as the Houston Post reported, "to stand almost alone . . . [in committee] in his advocacy of this great popular measure of security."30 Recognizing that the object of such lengthy testimony was "to mislead, befog, and deceive the committee into non-action," he told his fellow members that these highly-paid men had defended their clients well but that they should not "be especially proud" of expressing views which were not necessarily their own. Some of the Reagan bill might need amending, he conceded, but not its theory and purposes; for it was written so that everyone would understand its provisions, it was designed "to protect the people in their rights by law . . . to give them direct remedies in the courts . . . for the wrongs done them . . . and . . . to prevent . . . [railway managers and corporations] from doing things which all men know to be wrong." For three days Reagan held the floor explaining to the committee every aspect of his bill while answering one by one the charges leveled against it. For the benefit of the new members he gave his lengthy legal argument concerning the constitutionality of Federal regulation of interstate commerce. Then, using the activities of Standard Oil as an example, he showed why the bill prohibited rebates, drawbacks, and other discriminations; he explained how the long- and short-haul section would not, as the experts had claimed, dictate to the railroads 28 Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 54-55, holds that Reagan did not understand the complexities of railroads and was made to "look somewhat ludicrous" when arguing with Fink. Nash uses the New York Daily Tribune, April 25, 1882, and U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882, p. 175, as his sources. The Tribune was antiReagan and prorailroad during all these years, and as for the debate between Reagan and Fink, which Nash relies heavily upon, the two men raised a complex hypothetical situation, each setting up in the same example different situations. At one point where Fink had imposed a new hypothesis, Reagan replied, "I must confess I do not understand you." But Fink then proceeded to illustrate what he meant and then Reagan said, "I do not understand it the way you do." Later on, in ibid., p. 194, Fink acknowledged that Reagan knew what he was talking about, but he thought him to be wrong. That Reagan was recognized as a railroad authority, see Joseph Nimmo, Jr., to Reagan, April 3, 1882, in R. P. Microfilm. 29 Chicago Daily Tribune, February 22, 1882; Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 52 ff.; Galveston Daily News, March 28, 1882. 30 Clipping from Houston Post, March 31, 1882, in R. P., Scrapbook.

Procter_5127.pdf 268

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

247

what they should charge, but would prevent rate inequalities; he declared that the posting of schedules and rates would safeguard the people against "unjust exactions'' from secret railway agreements; and he made clear to them that the reasons for the antipooling-of-freight clause was not to cripple railway management—as was charged—but was to protect the public against the evils of monopoly. Nor would large railway corporations be able to escape Federal jurisdiction by operating entirely within the limits of one state, he asserted, for the Reagan bill would regulate freight—not railroads per se—and therefore nearly all commodities would fall within the realm of interstate commerce. And as for waterways, there was no need to place them under federal authority since they were public highways and open to all. But the greatest criticism hurled at his bill by the railroad experts, Reagan pointed out to his colleagues, was the fear of competition from Canadian roads. "Such fears . . . ought to excite our sympathy—the fears, I mean, not the facts," he exclaimed, since northern U.S. trunklines had fine equipment and passed through densely populated and wealthy areas, and especially since the Canadian Southern, one of the foreign competitors so feared by the testifying experts, had William H. Vanderbilt as its president and Cornelius Vanderbilt as its vice president and treasurer.31 "And yet we are left to understand from the speeches of Messrs. Fink, Blanchard, Depew, and the balance," Reagan pounded home his point, "that these Vanderbilts are dreadfully afraid of the competition of these Canadian roads if the Reagan bill shall become a law." And lastly concerning the Adams commission plan Reagan, reversing his earlier stand, stated that he would not oppose a measure establishing a well-qualified commission and "supported by a proper law of Congress." However, he remarked, "my fear . . . is that it would be more likely to represent the interests of the railroad companies than those of the general public." But, he warned the committee, . . . the real question before us, is not whether we shall attempt to control and provide for the management of the complicated details of the railroad problem . . . but whether we shall abridge the monopoly powers of these corporations for the benefit of the people. It is whether the people, through 31

Procter_5127.pdf 269

The Vanderbilts owned and operated the powerful New York Central.

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

248

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

the machinery of their own government, are to be the masters of their rights and liberties, or the railroad corporations to be the masters of the people and subvert our free constitutional form of government.32 With this forceful argument Reagan temporarily won the committee over to his side. But during April and May, as the members prolonged their investigations of the various bills, he saw his support vanish and by June, 1882, he again stood almost alone.33 Still the members wrangled over the different measures before them, unable to come to a decision, until on June 5 he shocked them out of their vacillation and delay by asking the House to consider his bill at the first of the next session of Congress. Infuriated by his motion, certain committee members together with railroad representatives fought down his proposal.34 But Reagan accomplished his purpose. A week later, June 12, Townsend of Ohio presented an Adams-type bill to the House. 35 Having, for the moment, done all that was possible for an interstate commerce act, Reagan devoted most of his time during the remainder of the first session to the passage of another national rivers and harbors appropriation. Supported by Commerce Chairman Page, he fought the bill through the House and was preparing to work out certain amendments with Senate conferees when on July 17 sickness struck him down, forcing him to discontinue all activities.36 It was not until after Congress adjourned that he recovered. Late in August Reagan returned to Texas37 and to the acclaim of his fellow citizens. All across the state, Texans praised his gallant fight against the railroads and moneyed interests; they marveled at his wisdom and statesmanship; and they asked him to run for governor or for senator.38 But with interstate commerce regulation still hanging 32

U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882, pp. 235-269. Reagan repeated some of these arguments before the House on April 17, 1882. U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 1st Session, Appendix, pp. 130-142. Also see Nash, "Reagan and Regulation," pp. 50 ff., for a different interpretation. 33 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 45414543; Galveston Daily News, April 1, May 25, 30, 1882; Palestine Advocate, April 6, 1882, in R. P., Scrapbook. 34 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 45414543. Reagan needed a two-thirds majority. The vote was 121 for, 78 against. »5 Ibid., p. 4797. 36 Ibid., pp. 4959-4961, 5009, 5018, 5058, 5065, 6145, 6176. The rivers and harbors bill passed both houses of Congress but was vetoed by President Chester A. Arthur. Congress passed the bill over his veto. Ibid., pp. 6525, 6800, 6802-6803. 37 Newspaper clipping in R. P., Scrapbook. Reagan arrived at Palestine on August 22, 1882. 3 8 Paris Tribune, April 6, 27, June 19, 1882; Crockett Patron, April 6, 1882;

Procter_5127.pdf 270

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

249

in the balance, he informed his many supporters that the floor of the House was where he could do the most good for them and for the nation; and accordingly, at the Democratic convention at Palestine in late August, they renominated him by acclamation.39 Having had two serious illnesses in the past year and with no political opponent of consequence to contest him, Reagan remained relatively inactive during the fall of 1882. Yet at times he responded to his constituents' calls to speak before them, 40 and when the FortySeventh Congress reconvened in December he had not regained his health. Thus, hindered by a Republican majority and by the loss of his seemingly boundless energy, Reagan was unable to accomplish anything during the short second session. The few times that he did obtain the floor he protested against excessive post-office appropriations to the railroads or he denounced the Republicans' high protective tariff, emphasizing that it raised consumer prices while fostering what he considered to be the greatest threat to the people and government of the United States—huge monopolies and trusts. 41 And as for railroad regulation, without Reagan's constant attention and promotion, the House laid it quietly to rest for another year. In fact, late in February and March, 1883, it appeared as though both Reagan and his bill might perish. Once again poor health developed into serious illness, and not until mid-April did the crisis pass and Reagan start homeward from Washington. 42 Stopping over at Hot Springs, Arkansas, for treatment and rest, he recuperated rapidly. By May he was tending to the needs of his family and farm, and by June he was speaking before his constituents again.43 But during the summer and fall of 1883, realizing now his physical limitations, he rested all that he could, trying to conserve his strength The Sentinel (Cameron), April 28, 1882; Henderson Times, May 25, 1882, in R. P., Scrapbook; James H. Jones to Reagan, May 1, 1882, in R. P., Microfilm; Galveston Daily News, May 14, 17, 18, 19, 23, 27, 1882. 39 Galveston Daily News, May 31, 1882; Henderson Times, August 31, 1882, in R. P., Scrapbook. 40 Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), October 12, 19, 1882. 41 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 306, 348, 381, 971-974, 1118-1119, 1743, 2235, 2585, 2642, 2825. 42 Ibid., 2255; Dallas Weekly Herald, April 19, 1883; Weekly Democratic Statesman (Austin), April 19, 1883. 43 Dallas Weekly Herald, June 14, 28, 1883; S. S. Cox to Reagan, April 29, 1883, and J. K. Jones to Reagan, June 4, 1883, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884.

Procter_5127.pdf 271

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

250

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

in preparation for the day when he would begin the final assault for railroad regulation. Nor by the end of 1883 did that day seem to be too far away. The Texas legislature, after being stymied for several years by Jay Goulds powerful forces, had enacted in April, 1883, stringent state laws regulating railroads;44 Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and other midwestern states were becoming more militant in their demands for congressional legislation;45 even President Chester A. Arthur in his annual message to Congress recognized the growing sentiments of the people for interstate commerce regulation;46 and with the National Anti-Monopoly League having publicized extensively for two years the railroad and monopoly evils plaguing the nation, now Greenbackers, Grangers and Farmers' Alliance men, merchants, and people from all walks of life wrote Reagan urging him to accomplish his important national work.47 But the most encouraging sign to him was the return of a Democratic House to the Forty-Eighth Congress.48 With great anticipation Reagan returned to Washington in November, 1883. And when Congress convened and the House elected as its Speaker, John G. Carlisle of Kentucky—a tariff-for-revenue-only man and Reagan's choice—his hopes soared.49 On December 11, he introduced his interstate commerce bill and two weeks later Carlisle appointed him chairman of the Commerce Committee.50 So, early in January, 1884, Reagan met with his committee, determined to present an interstate commerce bill to the House as quickly 44 Gammel, Laws, IX, 373-376. During the summer of 1884 the Galveston Daily News was bitter in its denunciation of Gould. 45 Commerce Committee Petitions, HR 47A-H5.7 and HR 48A-H6.8; U.S. Congress, Hearings, 1882, p. 43; Benson, Merchants, pp. 195-197. 46 Richardson (comp.), Messages and Papers of the Presidents, VIII, 185. 47 Benson, Merchants, pp. 219 #.; John Diamond to Reagan, January 29, 1884; E. Stover to Reagan, December 10, 1883; Charles A. Stone to Reagan, December 27, 1883; Andrew Young to Reagan, December 10, 1883; all in R. P., Letters 1880-1884; Commerce Committee Petitions, HR 48A-H6.8. There are many more letters to Reagan asking for railroad regulation in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. 48 Reagan said that he would "now have a fair committee, not one packed against him as was the case under the administration of Keifer." Austin Weekly Statesman, December 6, 1883; also see New York Daily Tribune, December 7, 1883. J. Warren Keifer of Ohio was Speaker of the House during the Forty-Seventh Congress. 49 J. G. Carlisle to Reagan, August 23, 1883; William J. Fowler to Reagan, November 29, 1883; and clipping of Palestine Advocate, October 18, 1883, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884; Dallas Weekly Herald, November 29, 1883. 50 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 117, 223.

Procter_5127.pdf 272

5/24/2014 7:44:57 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

251

as possible. Knowing well the Fabian tactics of his opponents, he had ready for the new members printed copies of the 1882 House Commerce hearings; then he informed the railroad men that he would brook no delay; and he announced that by January 30 all testimony before the committee would end.51 Despite these intentions railroad executives thwarted his plans. Time and again they lengthened proceedings, sending their highly-paid experts before the committee to create confusion and uncertainty. Day after day Fink, Depew, Blanchard, Brown, and other distinguished men testified as to the evils of railroad regulation—especially the Reagan bill. Again they protested against the abysmal ignorance of men of good intentions who were leading the country and its transportation system to the brink of destruction. And once more Reagan watched them accomplish what they had been paid to do. By the end of February he could not muster a majority vote for his bill, nor did it seem that the committee would come to an agreement on any measure.52 But on March 1, upon effecting a compromise among his colleagues, Reagan arose before the House to set a discussion date for interstate commerce. To his chagrin the opposition beat down his request and although throughout March, 1884, he tried to break through their defenses, he did so in vain.53 Then, as the battle was reaching its climax, Reagan, worn and weary from this exhausting fight, was struck down again by illness. And with no one willing to take up the banner of interstate commerce in his absence, the House conveniently forgot about railroad regulation for the remainder of the first session.54 That such pressing legislation could be put aside so easily at this 51 Reagan to Roberts, January 10, 1884; Reagan to L. M. Schwan, January 23, 1884, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. The National Anti-Monopoly League offered Reagan its full assistance and cooperation in advancing his bill. Henry Nichols to Reagan, January 16, 1884, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. 52 Austin Weekly Statesman, February 7, 21, 1884; Dallas Weekly Herald, February 14, 28, 1884; New York Daily Tribune, January 26, 1884; telegram from Simon Sterne to Reagan, January 28, 1884; T. R. Bonner to Reagan [with newspaper clipping attached], January 28, 1884; Cater to Reagan, January 28, 30, 1884; Reagan to the Courier Journal (Louisville), February 1, 1884; J. K. Herbert to Reagan, January 18, 1884; M. A. Fulton to Reagan, January 18, 1884; all in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. 53 U.S. Congress, House Reports, 48th Congress, 1st Session, No. 596; U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1527, 1546, 23502352. ^Newspaper clippings, April 2, 22, 1884, in R. P., Scrapbook; Burford to Reagan, April 26, 1884, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884; Austin Weekly Statesman, May 1, 1884.

Procter_5127.pdf 273

5/24/2014 7:44:58 AM

252

NOT WITHOUT HONOR

time was not surprising. After all, 1884 was a presidential election year, and already the nation was beginning to focus its attention upon prospective candidates, conventions, and campaigns. No one had been more conscious of these forthcoming events than Reagan, for having achieved national prominence as a man of the people and as a staunch defender of their rights both the National Anti-Monopoly party and the Greenback party sought him as the running mate for their Presidential nominee, General Benjamin F. Butler. But Reagan, who had always been a loyal Democrat, who believed that he should correct the evils within his party rather than abandon it for some new organization, and who, like most Southerners, disliked Butler intensely for his actions during the Civil War and Reconstruction, refused their overtures. 55 In fact, as early as February, 1884, he had planned to lead the Texas delegation to the July Democratic Convention at Chicago, and he would have done so had not illness incapacitated him. 56 Now, however, while Democrats were nominating the reform governor of New York, Grover Cleveland, and the Republicans the magnetic but somewhat tainted "plumed knight," James G. Blaine of Maine, 57 he had to rest and conserve his strength. By the end of August, having responded well to his wife's care and his doctor's orders for peace and quiet, Reagan was recovering his health. But with the Democrats having an excellent opportunity to win the national election, he could no longer remain quiet, and so for two months he campaigned for Cleveland throughout his district. Huge crowds listened to him with admiration as he lambasted the Republican party, high protective tariffs, and "the degeneracy of the political morality of this country" caused by monopoly. And when anyone was foolhardy enough to oppose the "Old Roman" in public debate, he did so at the risk of incurring the wrath of the crowd. Without a doubt, 55 Reagan to Henry Nichols, March 28, 1884; James B. Weaver to Reagan, April 26, 1884; E. H. March to Reagan, May 5, 1884; Reagan to Andrew Young, May 24, 1884; Reagan to Weaver, May 26, 1884; all in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. For activities of the Greenback and National Anti-Monopoly parties, see Fred E. Haynes, Third Party Movements Since the Civil War with Special Reference to Iowa, pp. 148-152; Edward Stanwood, A History of the Presidency from 1788 to 1897, pp. 421-427. Also see Hans Louis Trefousse, Ben Butler: The South Called Him Beast. 56 Dallas Weekly Herald, February 28, April 3, June 12, 1884; James H. Smythen [ ? ] to Reagan, March 1, 1884, and Shepard to Reagan, January 31, 1884, in R. P., Letters 1880-1884. 57 Allan Nevins, Grover Cleveland: A Study in Courage, pp. 144 S.

Procter_5127.pdf 274

5/24/2014 7:44:58 AM

STRUGGLE AND TRIUMPH IN CONGRESS

253

while Cleveland and the Democrats were winning the presidency and the lower house of Congress in November elections, Reagan was reaching the peak of his popularity.58 Late in November, 1884, Reagan, again rugged in health and rejuvenated in spirit, returned to Congress—and there was no stopping him. On December 2, taking the opposition by surprise, he succeeded in bringing interstate commerce before the House. Pushing his advantage he presented the committees' rather weak commission bill and offered as its substitute his more forceful measure, carefully pointing out the differences between the two and the advantages of his bill.59 The next day came the rebuttal. But how different now from previous years was the opposition's attack. No longer were doubts raised concerning congressional power or the need for interstate commerce regulation, but rather concerning the correct solution to the railroad problem. In criticizing the substitute measure—the Reagan bill—the opposition, as Reagan quickly sensed, was merely reflecting the ideas of Adams, Fink, Blanchard, and Depew. Edward W. Seymour of Connecticut said that the Reagan bill was "too strict and too minute in all its particulars to be a practical measure";60 Charles O'Neill of Pennsylvania, predicting an end to railroad construction in the United States, called it "extreme";61 while George R. Davis of Illinois and ex-Governor John D. Long of Massachusetts believed it to be "theoretically correct" but impractical "when applied to the workings of a railroad and the rights of the people geographically considered."62 Favoring the committees' measure, ex-Governor Long, together with two of Reagan's most resolute adversaries in previous sessions, Roswell G. Horr of Michigan and William W. Rice of Massachusetts, denounced the Reagan bill in every particular. In advocating a Federal commission to regulate interstate commerce instead of courts, they argued that expensive litigation and delay in the country's court sys58 John G. McCoy to Reagan, June 23, July 29, 1884, in R. P., Letters 18801884; Dallas Weekly Herald, September 11, October 23, 30, November 13, 1884. Reagan was strongly mentioned for a cabinet post after Cleveland's victory. See ibid., November 20, 1884; Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer, A History of the United States, IV, 317-318. 59 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 8, 25-32; New York Daily Tribune, December 3, 1884; Dallas Weekly Herald, December 4, 1884. 60 U.S. Congress, Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 42.