|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 20, 2010 4:59:55 GMT -5
Does anyone know anything about Texas Revolutionary veteran Isaac R. Henry (1810- ?) or his family in Burnet County, Texas. I'm especially interested in his date of death and his wife's name because various people on some genealogy sites are claiming him as an ancestor, but things are not jiving with the facts I have come across. Here's a little biographical info on Isaac Henry.
Henry stated that he joined 14 companions in Winchester, Tenn. in the fall of 1835 and they traveled to San Antonio by way of Nacodoches, Bastrop and Gonzales, arriving in early Jan. 1836. Once in San Antonio Henry says he was made a bearer of dispatches from Alamo commander Col. Travis to General Houston, commander of the army at Gonzales. On Jan. 16th, he was sent to Gonzales where he joined the company of Capt. Robert W. Smith. He stated that he was wounded at San Jacinto and served in Smith's company until his discharge in May '36. After Henry's service to the Republic, he departed and didn't return to Texas for 11 years. Henry lived in Bexar County for a period of time, then around 1880 he settled in Burnet County. Henry was awarded a Bexar County donation grant in 1881 for 1280 acres of land for his service, although the grant document is a little ambiguous.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Feb 21, 2010 13:13:07 GMT -5
That's kind of interesting. If what you say is correct, doesn't it place him on the road tp Bexar from Tennessee almost at the same time as Crockett? I'm not saying he was with Crockett, but you'd think their paths must have crossed somewhere on their respective travels to Texas.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Feb 21, 2010 14:04:59 GMT -5
The information on Henry in relation to San Jac doesn't make sense to me personally. Robert W. Smith was a Lt. in A Company, 2nd Regiment, under Capt. Hayden Arnold. Arnold was promoted to that rank after Lysander Wells was promoted to major.
A Company were known as the "Nacogdoches Volunteers", and made first contact with the soldados at San Jac, hitting them on the Mexicans' right flank. Henry is not listed AT ALL in the Index to Military Rolls in any company at any time. Smells fishy to me.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 22, 2010 10:48:09 GMT -5
I didn't think of that Paul and you're very astute Hiram. There's obviously a few inconsistencies with Henry's claims when compared to known facts of the Alamo and San Jacinto battles. I was wondering when those that had read this thread would pick up on these little details.
* Spelling correction
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Feb 22, 2010 12:05:16 GMT -5
I think we all understand that it is possible for a veteran of the Tex Rev to "fall through the crack" so to speak, i.e., not be listed on a roll for a particular battle. Henry appears to have fallen through every crack. The Index to Military Rolls is not complete, far from it. It just seems a little odd that Henry is not listed at all, and as RangerRod first brought up, there are some inconsistencies in the story.
I have an ancestor who fought @ Bexar and San Jac, but is listed in the military rolls as a veteran of only San Jac. Part of the answer is veterans could claim only one military engagement per donation grant and it was easier for most to confirm being a San Jac participant than a Bexar participant.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Feb 22, 2010 13:03:27 GMT -5
I think we all understand that it is possible for a veteran of the Tex Rev to "fall through the crack" so to speak, i.e., not be listed on a roll for a particular battle. Henry appears to have fallen through every crack. The Index to Military Rolls is not complete, far from it. It just seems a little odd that Henry is not listed at all, and as RangerRod first brought up, there are some inconsistencies in the story.
I have an ancestor who fought @ Bexar and San Jac, but is listed in the military rolls as a veteran of only San Jac. Part of the answer is veterans could claim only one military engagement per donation grant and it was easier for most to confirm being a San Jac participant than a Bexar participant. Tracking a simular story about a guy who says he was with Horton in the Goliad Campaign but does not show up on the usual sources.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 22, 2010 18:45:44 GMT -5
Well, Hiram I don't believe Isaac Henry is one of the soldiers that fell through the cracks. It appears to me that it's more likely that he tried to fill in the cracks with a mortar of bad lies about his supposed service to Texas. Henry's lofty claims of being a Alamo courier and wounded San Jacinto veteran are not based on a single contemporary document, which has me suspicious of his veracity. Shortly after the Pension Law for Indigent Revolutionary Veterans was approved on July 28, 1876, Isaac R. Henry went to the Bexar County Clerk's Office and applied for the money. At this point, Henry stated that he arrived in San Antonio in Jan.'36, served as a messenger for Col. Travis, then was later wounded at San Jacinto, while serving with Capt. Robert W. Smith's company. San Jacinto veteran Y. P. Alsbury and Jack Hays ranger James W. Nichols vouched for his service at this time even though they didn't serve in the same units. The Republic Claim below illustrates Henry's first attempt to get some kind of compensation that he probably didn't deserve. PE Claims 220-103-105 www.tsl.state.tx.us/arc/repclaims/viewdetails.php?id=70881&set=1#viewSet
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Feb 22, 2010 19:35:16 GMT -5
RangerRod,
It's an unfortunate side of our nature as human beings that we sometimes attempt to artificially attach "glory" where it should not be attached. Isaac Henry appears to be one those who fell into that trap.
I'm not sure who I pity most...those like Henry, or those who literally profited from the physical sacrifice of others. I don't want to rock anyone's boat, but I know of at least one officer during the Tex Rev who after the war, managed to become the executor for the estates for more than one fallen veteran. Simply put, that turns my stomach.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 23, 2010 13:34:17 GMT -5
Beyond there being no contemporary evidence that Isaac Henry served in the Texas Revolution, I think it is very telling that there's so many holes in his tale. When Henry states that he was one of Travis' couriers at the Alamo in Jan. 1836, Travis wasn't even in San Antonio. And when Henry says he delivered dispatches to Texas army commander Houston at Gonzales, Houston was on vacation at Goliad. Henry also doesn't appear on the list of San Jacinto vets or wounded soldiers for the battle. Henry should probably be the postchild for fraudulent land grants in Texas. While he was probably lying about his service for decades, age and poverty certainly drove him to seek compensation. It's an old story that continues today.
|
|
|
Post by jesswald on Feb 23, 2010 15:31:31 GMT -5
If old Isaac Henry ever runs for president, I bet he gets Swiftboated. Jesse
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 25, 2010 3:34:21 GMT -5
Let's not get into that whole Bush and Kerry thing. I think they both served their country to the best of their abilities in those difficult times. It's more of an honor to have served in any capacity than to never have served at all. Old soldiers sometimes stretch the truth about their glory days, but usually not to the extent of Isaac R. Henry. An honorable discharge is the greatest reward in my opinion.
In 1879 Henry's 1st compensation attempt ('76 pension claim) was denied due to no proof of service even though his pals James Johnston and James Sandford vouched for his honesty. In the document Henry said that he was physically unable to work and the only things he owns are a horse, a saddle, and a bridle. I guess this would be the equivalent of a veteran of the Vietnam era only owning a car, a bucket leather seat and a steering wheel. Well, maybe not, but Henry was definitely in dire straits.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Feb 27, 2010 13:24:47 GMT -5
I don't want to rock anyone's boat, but I know of at least one officer during the Tex Rev who after the war, managed to become the executor for the estates for more than one fallen veteran. Simply put, that turns my stomach. To clarify my remarks, let me replace the word "executor", with that of "administrator." You can find in the audited claims of the military rolls, officers who are collecting the pay of dead soldiers. Whether legal or not, at the very least it leaves one with a sense of impropriety.
|
|