Talk:Tom Blue

Myth of Houston freeing his slaves

Move to Talk:Sam Houston and slavery

@CaroleHenson: I noted this on the Margaret Lea Houston article. Footnote 2, Margaret was an executor of his 1863 estate and specifically named each slave in the estate's inventory. Texas was still part of the Confederacy when Houston died. He could not have freed his slaves even if he wanted to: the Texas constitution in effect under the Confederacy, Section III, Article 2, prohibited manumission (a slave owner freeing his slaves). The sources are all there for you in Margaret's article. — Maile (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Hi, I decided to not include the part about the constitutional amendment because it's tangental to Blue's biography. It is in Joshua Houston's article, too. I am thinking that it might be good to add a link rather than copying the content. See what you think here. If you think that it should be stated out-right, though, I am ok with that.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Well, let's see how it goes. I'm guessing you will put this through DYK (maybe), in which case we could just see how that goes. Either direction, Houston couldn't have freed his slaves. Don't suppose you ever read the Texas constitution under the Confederacy. Texas was so bad-ass about slavery, that they even specified in the constitution that slave owners were not allowed to take their slaves into a Union/non-slavery state and free them there. — Maile (talk) 01:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC) DYK sounds like a good plan. Yep, that's a great way to get eyes on the article. I have been working on Underground Railroad#South to Mexico. (That's were I learned about Blue.) It is still a work in progress but it would be great to get your input if you don't mind. I did not know about the law that slaveholders could not even go to another state and free their slaves. Badass is right! Wow!–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC) I'll have a look at that tomorrow. I assume you know that the Confederacy fired Houston as Governor of Texas, because he refused to swear an oath of allegiance to the Confederacy. He had worked so hard to get Texas admitted to the Union, and the Confederacy undid his hard work. — Maile (talk) 01:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC) I am going to look up the info about that. Interesting and sad.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC) " ... when he refused to take the oath of loyalty to the newly-formed Confederate States of America, the Texas convention removed him from office on March 16 and replaced him with Lieutenant Governor Edward Clark two days later. " Kreneck, Thomas H. "Houston, Sam". Handbook of Texas Online. Texas State Historical Asslciation. Retrieved 10 July 2021. — Maile (talk) 10:08, 10 July 2021 (UTC) I've been reading your contributions on the Underground Railroad. Pretty good. Mexico tended to be wishy-washy on the issue, in the fact that they outlawed slavery, but allowed the colonizers to bring in slaves from the American south. Mexico's colonization contracts were the contradiction. The Old Three Hundred, for instance, were allowed to bring in 443 slaves.(Slavery in Texas, Prairie View A&M University; "TSHA | Mexican Colonization Laws". Texas Handbook Online. Texas State Historrical Association.) One wonders with all the US removing statues of Confederate heroes, what do they do with all the towns and counties named after slave holders? In Texas alone, there would have to be a massive renaming across the state. — Maile (talk) 14:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Maile66, Great point about the names of towns. I hadn't thought that far ahead. It seems like taking down statues and renaming military bases might keep folks busy for awhile. It sure would be a lot of effort and map-changing to change the names of towns. I am thinking about writing and article about Houston and slavery. I am actually surprised that there isn't one already, given the tactics that he and Juan Seguin engaged in. I think it would also provide insight to discuss the relationships with his enslaved people up to and through the Emancipation Proclamation. Thanks for taking a look at Underground Railroad#South to Mexico. If you saw any holes in the article that would be helpful!–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: re the potential article on Houston and slavery - yeah, it should be done. His last wife Margaret Lea Houston also had her own personal slaves that she inherited from her father in Alabama. Supposedly, he gave a Feb 1855 speech on the subject at Tremont Temple in Boston. I have not seen the speech. I edited a lot of Margaret Lea's article, and slavery to them was as natural as the air they breathed. Wonder how the various Native Americans he called friends felt about the issue. Native Americans also kept slaves, but I don't know if the Cherokees did. — Maile (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Maile66, I started it at Sam Houston and slavery, both look like great additions! Thanks! Right now I am just getting the most well-known points and intend to delve deeper into biographies of Houston. If you have any recommended sources, that would be great! Feel free to jump in if you like.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Here you go, from his own lips. Houston, Sam (February 22, 1855). Excepts from a Speech on Slavery, Tremont Temple, Boston. The writings of Sam Houston, 1813-1863: Hathi Trust. pp. 167–177. Retrieved 10 July 2021.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link) — Maile (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Great timing! I will work on this next. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:06, 10 July 2021 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: Ta! Da! I knew that somewhere in the past, I had found Houston's entire speech in Boston, in its entirety - not just the excerpts. I hope you can read this, because it might be as close as we get as to what was going on In Houston's mind re the subject of slavery. Do you by any chance have a subscription to Newspaper.com via the Wikipedia Library? This is the entire speech: "Lecture on Slavery by the Honorable Sam Houston". The Liberator. 2 Mar 1855. p. 4.. Somebody also clipped it, but that's teeny - I can click on it and enlarge the clipping a lot - hope you can also. Clip of Houston speech on slavery. — Maile (talk) 01:01, 11 July 2021 (UTC) FYI, I think Houston loved to hear himself talk. At San Pedro Springs Park in San Antonio, history says he talked for a full 2HRS against secession. I can't imagine staying awake to listen to a 2-hour speech. — Maile (talk) 21:11, 10 July 2021 (UTC) Okay, cool, thanks! Two hours - he must have really been stalwart about secession! He had so much to lose, but still gave it all he had. I wonder how many people were left after the first 15 minutes.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:14, 11 July 2021 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: I wonder if it might be a good idea to move this entire conversation to Talk:Sam Houston and slavery. Also, maybe we could determine how Houston acquired his slaves. According to: Seale, William (1992) [1970]. Sam Houston's Wife: A Biography of Margaret Lea Houston. University of Oklahoma Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-0-8061-2436-0., when Margaret joined Houston in Texas, she was accompanied by her servants (Seale never says "slave"): "the young Negro woman Viannah, the Negro girls Eliza and Charlotte and the boy Jackson". Joshua figures later in the Seale narrative, after Margaret is already living in Texas. — Maile (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC) Eliza was so close to Margaret that the Houston children called her "Aunt Eliza", and at Eliza's request, is buried next to Margaret. — Maile (talk) 10:40, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Houston as Commander of the forces

@CaroleHenson: the military structure during the Texas Revolution, and Houston's role in it, is complicated. Texas at that time was full of small volunteer civilian militias who operated on their own. See Runaway Scrape#Temporary governments in Texas: November 1835 – March 1836. Volunteer militias from all over the US were going down to Texas to help overthrow the Mexican government. Stephen F. Austin was in charge of all those little militias. The Consultation of 1835 convened in San Felipe de Austin on November 3 of that year created of a provisional government and its constitution. The Consultation approved the creation of the Provisional Army of Texas, a paid force of 2,500 troops. Houston was named commander-in-chief of the new army and had to train those who enlisted. Houston was not at the Alamo, Goliad, or any of the smaller skirmishes. Houston began forming his army, and based himself at Gonzales, Texas, which was where everyone started gathering who wanted to participate. The Alamo fell while he was in Gonzales.

What Houston did, is take all those volunteers from Gonzales on the run, looking for a place to train them. Santa Anna was trying to find Houston and his army, and they literally played hide and seek all the way south. Houston finally got a few days to train his paid army at Groce's Landing on the Brazos River. It all culminated at San Jacinto, where Santa Anna made a really idiotic mistake. The Mexican army was on one side of a bridge, and pissed-off Texans were on the other side. Santa Anna told his forces to stand down, and Santa Anna went to take a nap. On the Texan side, there were yells of "Remember the Alamo", "Remember Goliad". The Texans ran pell-mell across the bridge and beat the living crap out of the Mexican army. Those who didn't have ammunition were literally using anything they had to whack the Mexican soldiers. The entire battle took 18 minutes. Santa Anna deserted his forces, and was later captured by accident, by a scout looking food. — Maile (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Maile66 That's interesting. I didn't realize that Santa Anna was caught by someone looking for food. It's an interesting battle.

Are you thinking that this article should have this info in it?–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

That's up to you. I was just clarifying the general info for you. — Maile (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

• FYI James Austin Sylvester is the guy who caught Santa Anna hiding in the grass. — Maile (talk) 21:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for that! So smart / devious for Santa Anna to don a private's uniform. It makes me wonder: are there norms (like that a captain should not leave a sinking ship until all people are off the ship) for behavior of infantry leaders when they are defeated?–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

If you look at his infobox on Antonio López de Santa Anna, if governments have norms, if Mexico had any, they did not apply to him. Because of his bungling, Mexico lost Texas, and then lost what became the entire American southwest. And, yet, he stayed in office. Before him, Mexico had a federalist political ideology, similar to current democracies - a central government, but every state had its own local government. When Santa Anna came to power, he revoked the country's constitution and made every area under the direct control of the top government. He put all his cronies in place, and did what he wanted. He must have bribed a lot of cronies. After San Jacinto, he signed the Treaties of Velasco, and the US kept him imprisoned for about a year. Then he was released, and continued as he wished. — Maile (talk) 00:26, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh my! You cannot make this stuff up.–CaroleHenson (talk) 14:54, 20 July 2021 (UTC)