Secret War for Texas

[stuart]

Just a bit of advance news on this one...

I'm going to miss the High Holy Days in '08 by about 6 weeks as I've accepted an invitation to speak about James Grant at the San Jacinto Symposium at the University of Houston on April 19.

At this stage I don't know what the full programme is going to be looking like, but I'm told that Miguel Gonzalez Quiroga of the University of Nuevo Leon, who knows quite a bit about what was going on in north Mexico during the Texas Revolution has also accepted. The two of us will be speaking on the Saturday afternoon, each for about 40 minutes, and then after a break there'll be about an hour for questions and answers -- something which I felt was badly lacking at the Alamo symposium.

Either way, between the two of us it looks as though there could be quite a good discussion of the revolution from a Mexican federalist perspective

[Herb]

Oh, how I hate to drive in Houston! Keep us informed, a few of us might try and make it.

[Jim Boylston]

I might be up for a change too, if my work schedule permits. Just please, no 18 hour bus trip to San Jacinto this time! ;D
Keep us in the loop Stuart!
Jim

[dimbo33]

The other speakers (besides Stuart and Miguel Quiroga) at the conference will be Stephen Harrigan who will examine the truths and myths of early Texas through the eyes of a novelist; Betsy Davis, and award winning Texas History teacher and Dreanna Beldon who will talk on Lorenzo de Zavala based on the material at North Texas posted on the portal of Texas History site.

Jim Crisp from North Carolina State will be the MC. There is a chance that Roger Moore or I will do an update on the archeology that we are doing at San Jacinto

The Conference is at the Hilton Hotel on the University of Houston campus and it is April 19th at 9AM to 5PM and includes lunch.

You can call 281 496 1488 to leave a message and they will return your call or you can send your contact information and a check to the Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground for $45 to P.O Box 940536, Houston TX 77094-7536

Any of you that are there make sure to find Stuart and me and introduce yourselves. Gregg Dimmick

[dimbo33]

I am informed that the website for the Friends of the San Jacinto Battlefield is now functioning. If you want more information on the San Jacinto Conference (Stuart Reid is a featured speaker) or want to register on line you can go to www.friendsofsanjacinto.org

[dimbo33]

Stuart, I was reading "Texas and Texans" by Frank Johnson and edited by Barker. Johnson, defending Grant, wrote the following:

"No man entered the service of Texas more heartily, zealously, or from purer motives than did Doctor Grant. He not only risked his life, but offered it a sacrifice on the altar of his country. To say that he was actuated in what he did by any other than the purest motives, and for the best interests of his country, is to falsify his record. Such charges find no place, except in the minds of such as are lost to all the finer feelings--to every sense of truth, right, and justice. To say that "Several members of that body" (the council) "were aware that the interests and feelings of Dr. Grant were opposed to the independence and true interests of the people of Texas," is simply absurd, a distortion of truth."

Did Houston know of Grant's ulterior motives?

Are you aware of any members of the council that knew of Grant's working for England?

Have you proved Houston correct and Johnson wrong?

I enjoyed your book. I will get back with you on a few more items. Gregg

[stuart]

Ah... a whole bookful of questions, which will no doubt come up in April; but in the meantime what I believe Johnson is referring to is Houston's slanders - which have still largely stuck - that Grant was only out to secure his "corruptly obtained" land grants and his rich estates which he'd left behind in Mexico.

Another example is that silly charge that he and Johnson were aimlessly wasting their time "mustanging" when Urrea caught up with them - if you've read my book you'll know the surprising truth of what was really going on.

I doubt very much that the Council knew of his involvement with the British government, otherwise I'm sure its something else that would have been flung against him.

As for Houston, I've never been able to decide. He never explicitly charged Grant with being a British agent but in at least one of his pre-revolution letters to Andrew Jackson (don't have a reference to hand) he warned that we were getting involved and that if the US didn't move soon on Texas we'd get in first, and I've got this lurking feeling in the back of my mind that he, personally, suspected Grant was an agent. Just a suspicion though...

[scroggwe]

Stuart, I bought your book this past weekend at Barnes & Noble. I started it last night and am into the second chapter. I am really enjoying it! Thanks for your hard work on this book.

[stuart]

As today is the anniversary of the fight at Agua Dulce I thought you might be interested in De La Pena’s account of the affair, which I didn't have when writing my book. It is of course second hand and apparently largely derived from Urrea himself:

“On the first day of this month General Urrea had news that Dr. James Grant was returning from Rio Bravo where he had marched with a party of select riflemen in an exploratory excursion to round up horses, and during the night General Urrea started moving with eighty dragoons to encounter him, but since the weather was harsh and so excessively cold, it was necessary to await him at a point called Los Cuates de Agua Dulce. The next morning he dealt Grant a decisive blow; forty-two men were killed, including Grant and Major Morris; some prisoners, firearms, and horses in their possession were the fruit of the day’s labor. Dr. Grant was a landowner in Coahuila, a person well known and prominent. His capture would have been more valuable than his death because many advantages could have been derived from it; so GeneralUrrea thought, and he recommended that no attempt should be made against his life and every effort exerted to make him a prisoner, but the bait of his silver saddle, of his flashy firearms and other valuable jewels, provoked one of the “Cossack” officers shamefully to murder him, thus bringing ignominy upon himself. Eyewitnesses assert that Grant defended himself courageously, and on many occasions have we heard General Urrea lament his death.” (DLP 68-69)

I’m a little wary of Urrea’s protestations that he wanted to take Grant alive. Both were federalists of course and for that reason I have a suspicion that Grant may have known too much to be safely captured. I know that Urrea may have been contemplating a federalist uprising of his own shortly afterwards, but that was only after San Jacinto and Santa Anna’s capture. At that point, with hindsight, he might have found Grant useful, but not necessarily on March 2.

I’ll be interested in Filisola’s take on this.

[Jim Boylston]

Interesting, Stuart. Thanks for posting that.
Good to see you around again too!
Jim