Burning Bridges: An Analysis of the Media Frenzy of the 1860 North Texas Fires

by Stefanie Hustoft

Leading up to 1861, many throughout the United States heavily discussed disunion and secession. Southerners felt that the North was politically attacking them, especially in instances of Kansas and California’s ratification for statehood. However, indignant frustration turned into fear and rage after John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry. What was once an anxiety over the federal government limiting the geographic expansion of slavery, turned into panic over a potential abolitionist-led slaughter of the entire South. Prior to 1860, many Texans were either neutral or against secession. However, this paper will argue that newspaper editors successfully primed the public to become more accepting of secession, using the North Texas fires as a catalyst. This paper will examine published opinions on disunion prior to the North Texas fires. These articles demonstrate that, before the fires, Texans were indecisive regarding both secession and the politicians who advocated for it. Following that, this paper will examine the North Texas fires and how editorial narratives changed over the summer of 1860. The paper argues that newspaper editors used the fires to manipulate the public into fearing the North. Newspaper editors framed the North Texas fires as the Texan Harper’s Ferry. The paper will then show how the public became frenzied over possible abolitionist attacks. Many Texan communities formed vigilance committees and organized hangings to keep themselves safe from abolitionist incendiaries. Finally, this paper will discuss the Secession Convention of Texas. The paper argues that the North Texas fires created a political environment conducive for Texas’ choice to secede from the Union in 1861.

The North Texas fires, and other instances like the raid on Harper’s Ferry, made Texans more open to the idea of secession. Prior to the fires, some newspapers published articles stating that they wanted to avoid secession at all costs.^[1] They stated that if any state were to secede, the United States would crumble to a ruin of its former glory.^[2] Other publications predicted that secession would lead to a catastrophic war, resulting in the destruction of both sides. After all, Texans saw the bloodshed and destruction that resulted from the Mexican Civil War.^[3] These viewpoints were in line with the 1860 presidential candidate John C. Breckinridge, the candidate many of these publications supported.^[4]  Wary of secession, these editors nevertheless blamed the North for creating a political environment that caused the South to consider leaving the United States. Through their rhetoric, they claimed that they did not want the United States to dissolve.^[5] The violent frenzy that consumed Texas during the summer of 1860 turned many North Texan editors into secessionists. Other states had already threatened secession before, thus the concept remained in the peoples’ minds.^[6]

Texan newspaper editors were major contributors in spreading conspiracy theories about the fires. In Editors Make War: Southern Newspapers in the Secession Crisis, Donald Reynolds argues that the editor of the Dallas Herald, Charles R. Pryor, was responsible for most of the narratives regarding the North Texas fires.^[7] The basis for Reynolds’ claim lies with the many letters Pryor wrote to other Texas newspapers. These letters describe the events and damage regarding the 1860 fires across North Texas. Pryor aimed to scare Texans into thinking Northern abolitionists were an immediate threat and to convince them that secession was the only way to save themselves. Pryor’s letters to newspapers across the state claim that the North Texas fires were evidence of a “‘regular invasion, and a real war.’”^[8]

Pryor depended on these letters to spread his narrative of the North Texas fires because the offices of his newspaper, the Dallas Herald, had been destroyed in the fires.  The destruction forced the newspaper to cease production until the office could be repaired. However, this did not stop the editor from telling people about the North Texas fires and framing his conspiracy theories as fact.

Pryor wrote to editors who shared his political beliefs.  Most of them were conservative, strong proponents of Southern rights, and promoters of Breckinridge’s 1860 presidential campaign. Breckinridge was one of two Southern Democratic presidential nominees.^[9] Ardent supporters of Southern rights nominated the Kentucky politician to combat the more moderate Democratic nominee, Stephen Douglas. Breckinridge was a firm supporter of slavery and Southern rights. The South hoped that his election would force the North to acquiesce to Southern demands about the western expansion of slavery. Breckinridge supporters felt that if they could force the rest of the United States to submit to pro-slavery policies as they had with the Annexation of Texas, the Fugitive Slave Act, or the Dread-Scott decision, then it would stave off talk of disunion.^[10] 

Pryor was especially close to Major John Marshall, owner and editor of Austin’s The State Gazette. Marshall bought the newspaper in January 1854 and assumed the editorial position that July. Under his ownership, The State Gazette saw major growth in its popularity and subscription numbers. Marshall used his new platform to promote political platforms he agreed with. These policies included the continuation of slavery, states rights, and, later, secession. Marshall used The State Gazette to hinder Sam Houston’s 1858 gubernatorial campaign. He feared that Houston was not a strong defender of Southern rights. Marshall also used his platform to promote Breckinridge’s presidential campaign. He hoped that a president with the South’s interests as the basis of his platform would save the Union and force Northern abolitionists into submission.^[11]

Pryor also sent details of the North Texas fires to Edward H. Cushings, owner and editor of Houston’s The Weekly Telegraph. Although he integrated himself into Houston society, Cushings was born in Vermont and obtained a degree from Dartmouth College. In October 1856, the Northerner bought The Weekly Telegraph and took on the position of its editor. Although he was raised in the North, Cushings was sympathetic to the South and appreciated its institutions. These beliefs evolved into outright Southern nationalism during his ownership of The Weekly Telegraph. Cushings’ son, Edward B. Cushings, described his father’s life in his article, “Edward Hopkins Cushing: An Appreciation by His Son.” The younger Cushings claimed that upon purchasing the paper, his father practically became its essence. In an 1857 editorial note celebrating the first anniversary of his ownership of The Weekly Telegraph Cushings claimed that the paper would be used to promote many platforms that he felt were important.^[12]

Prior to the Civil War, the Houston newspaper used its platform to promote Southern self-sufficiency. Cushings’ Northern upbringing brought with it a different, Whiggish, perspective than the standard Southern views on infrastructure, education, and economics.^[13] However, he was staunchly pro-slavery to the point that he called for the reopening of the international slave trade. Like his views on Southern economics and infrastructure, his views on slavery were similarly tinged with Whiggish ideas. Cushings viewed slavery as the economic backbone of the South and an inherent part of the region’s culture. Like Pryor, Cushings used his platform to sway others to the cause of secession. Much of this propaganda described the North, and the Union in general, as an oppressive force under which Texas could not thrive. As threats of Civil War loomed, The Weekly Telegraph began to include rumors of abolitionist plots.

Pryor’s early accounts of the North Texas fires were more truthful than his later, highly propagandized, descriptions.^[14] He sent the first known, published letter detailing the events of the Dallas fire to John Marshall, the editor of the Austin State Gazette.^[15] In the editor’s foreword to the letter, Marshall expresses his sympathies to Pryor and the residents of Dallas. He also refrained from inserting his own opinions or any conspiracy theories about the fires. Pryor’s brief letter was dated July 9. He claims that every hotel, business, law office, and physicians’ office was destroyed in the fire. Only the Dallas courthouse and the southeast corner of the square were left standing. Pryor states that the fire originated “two doors above the Herald office,” and because of this, he was only able to save their accounting books and subscription list. At this point in Pryor’s narrative, there are no defined arsonists, but he does not completely rule out the possibility. He states that “it is not known whether it was the work of an incendiary or not.” This showed that the people of Dallas did not know if there was an arsonist responsible for the destruction.^[16]

Pryor also wrote to Cushings in Houston with details on the Dallas fire. This letter was also dated July 9, which implies that Pryor initially wrote these letters en masse, hoping to spread Dallas’ plight to as many readers as possible. Similarly to the letter sent to Marshall, Cushings’ letter limited itself to describing the known events regarding the Dallas fire and the extent of the damages. On July 17, 1860, The Weekly Telegraph published Pryor’s letter. Cushings wrote a foreword, stating that the fire was a tragedy for those whose homes and businesses were affected by the fire. Following that, he offered his sympathies and assurances that the residents of Dallas were “plucky” enough to rebuild and that the Dallas Herald would soon resume operations. Pryor’s letter states that on the afternoon of July 8, 1860, a fire started in front of Peak’s drugstore and spread to the neighboring buildings in the Dallas square. The destroyed buildings included Smith’s warehouse, the Dallas Herald office, the St. Nicolas Hotel, Smith and Murphy’s brick store, Shirek’s store and warehouse, the Crutchfield House and the post office within it, Westen’s Corner, Simon’s new building, the old tavern, Saddler’s shop, Hirsh’s storehouse, Carr’s frame building, Simon’s store, Nicholson and Ferris’ exchange office, Thomas’ drug store, Ellett’s storehouse, McCoy’s law office, Lynch’s establishment, Carruth’s storehouse, Fletcher’s mercantile, Birtle’s establishment and residence, Mrs. Bingham’s residence, and all the material goods within those buildings. Pryor estimates that the damages at over $300,000.00 accounting for the material and emotional damages. Pryor notes that the fire caught many Dallas residents off guard because they were enjoying afternoon “siestas” from the 105-degree heat. Pryor makes an appeal to his readers’ emotions, stating that all of his clothes were lost in the fire.  He even requests that Cushings send him an old coat, shirt, or pair of shoes if he could spare them.^[17]

It is unclear if Pryor exaggerated the fires’ destruction of the Dallas square. However, this version of events contains no conspiracies of abolitionist threats or slave revolts. In the letter sent to Marshall, he stated that the courthouse and the southeastern corner of the square were left standing.^[18] The version printed in Cushings’ Weekly Telegraph fails to mention that the fire spared any buildings in the Dallas square.^[19] This could be seen as Pryor’s first exaggeration, or purposeful omission, for the sake of gaining Texan readers’ sympathies.

An article from The Matagorda Gazette similarly retells Pryor’s earliest account of the fire. This article seems to be a brief account of the Dallas fire and the cost of its damages.^[20] The Matagorda Gazette did not receive a letter from Pryor, so the article is most likely an abridged version of his letter to The Weekly Telegraph.^[21] Looking at some of the other articles in the Matagorda based newspaper, the writers and editor also seem to be politically conservative. This paper includes articles that support John Breckinridge’s presidential campaign.^[22] Based on the contents of this issue, it is not unreasonable to believe that this publication would have also believed the later versions of Pryor’s story that included abolitionist conspiracy theories.

Around this time, other papers in the region reported on fires happening closer to home. These smaller North Texan towns were either close to the events of Dallas or they experienced their own fires. The writers of these articles detail the events and damages as they were known. On July 14, Clarksville’s The Standard published a letter from John W. Swindles, the Dallas Herald’s publisher. In the letter, he describes events similar to Pryor’s early letters, though not as detailed as the one published in The Weekly Telegraph. However, Swindles updated Pryor’s account of events and changed the damage estimate to $400,000. Swindles also specified that the Dallas fire started around two in the afternoon on July 8. He also stated that another fire occurred a mile and a half north of Dallas on July 9. This fire destroyed the homes of J. J. Eakins and Silas Leonard. In an editorial note under Swindles’ letter, The Standard’s editor, Major C. DeMorse, noted that on July 13, fires also destroyed two stores in the towns of Ladonia and Milford. No one was reported dead or hurt in any of the fires.^[23]

The Standard states that the self-combustion of prairie matches caused the fires on July 9 and 13. Swindles’ letter also implies that they could have caused the Dallas fire, as the fire started amongst a pile of “rubbish” in front of Peak’s drugstore.^[24] This is one of the first public claims that faulty prairie matches caused the fires in North Texas. Other smaller newspapers in the region also made similar claims regarding the inferno. 

Corsicana’s The Navarro Express stated that a fire destroyed the entirety of Dallas’ square other than two groceries and a law office. However, this article also describes a similar situation in Waxahachie. In the smaller town, an anonymous merchant discovered an ignited box of prairie matches and was able to stop the fire before it could spread. The paper argues that prairie matches were dangerous to have around, as rats and mice were attracted to something in their composition. The paper further explains the hazards these matches posed, stating that “the slightest friction during the warm weather is sufficient to ignite them.”^[25]

Importantly, under its initial report on the fires, the Navarro Express appended a postscript, to include information received from Ellis Merrill Stackpole (only identified as Mr. Stackpole in the text) from Dallas. This postscript was one of the first claims that the fires in Dallas were an abolitionist plot. In this update, the newspaper claims that the damages amounted to $500,000 (an amount larger than any estimate made before or after this issue).  The postscript also noted that an additional thirty-three houses were destroyed in the fire and that two unnamed abolitionist arsonists were responsible for the blaze. The paper also states that “a number of persons” (which was most likely a mob) were in the process of pursuing the two abolitionists.^[26]

The Navarro Express’ postscript serves as a contrast to the editorial forewords often included in reports on the Dallas fire. Other editors introduced the disaster with a brief summary of events and then expressed their sympathies to those affected and especially to Pryor.^[27] However, The Navarro Express chose to include their opinions regarding the claim of abolitionist arson. Once they state that two abolitionists were being chased by a mob, the writers express their hope that “these satanic fanatics be caught, hung and quartered.” This comment gave the public insight towards the possibility that the employees of The Navarro Express, if not the wider public, were in favor of extreme mob justice in the form of violence.

The author of the Navarro Express postscript partially blames Southerners for allowing the Dallas fires to happen. They argue that Southerners had been too lenient towards Northern abolitionists and had indulged their fanaticism for too long.^[28] They blame those with moderate or forgiving opinions towards Northerners for emboldening abolitionist violence.

Stackpole was the first individual to spread the rumor that the fires were caused by abolitionist arsonists. He resided in Dallas and dealt in dry goods, tin, hardware, wool, and clothing. His store was located on “the railroad corner of the Dallas square.”^[29] Stackpole was relatively well-known in the community and seemed to have a decent reputation as a businessman. For a period in 1860, he even served as a city alderman.^[30] Stackpole was also a slave owner. It is unclear how many slaves he owned, but around November 1858, he advertised that he was looking for a young slave girl to be a house servant.^[31] In 1861, the merchant looked to sell his slave “for no fault” of her own.^[32] Stackpole’s store and warehouse were one of the many buildings destroyed in the Dallas fire.^[33] An indicator that Stackpole might have experienced financial difficulties following the fire was a June 1861 advertisement offering to sell or trade “a house and three lots” in Dallas. The advertisement further explains that the lots would be inexpensive and that he accepted cows, calves, or mares in exchange for the property.^[34]

Based on his actions after the Dallas fire, Stackpole’s letters could be seen as a plot to advance his ideological interests. During the Civil War, the merchant posted multiple wanted advertisements in the Dallas Herald asking to be sold $20,000.00 worth of Confederate bonds.^[35] This financial support of the Confederacy combined with his status as either a current or previous slaveowner displayed a political motive for Stackpole to spread fear through Texas that the “abolitionist North” was a threat to Southern culture. However, he was able to use these events for more than just political outcomes. Later in 1860, he used the events of the fire to help advertise Herring’s patent champion safes in The Texas Almanac for 1861. The review claimed that the safe was the only thing in his store that survived the Dallas fire. Even though it sat in the smoldering remains of Stackpole’s store for three days the contents within stayed intact. The only damage done to the books, papers, and the safe itself was a bit of melted glue and some of the safe’s varnish melting off.^[36] He later sold Herring’s patent champion safes in his store once it was rebuilt.^[37]

Stackpole wrote another letter that was published in the July 24, 1860 edition of Houston’s The Weekly Telegraph to further spread a conspiracy against abolitionist arsonists. This article updated the previous narrative published on July 17. This new version of events included the various other fires in surrounding North Texan towns. However, Stackpole also claims that the entirety of Dallas and the surrounding area were all set ablaze by two “abolitionist emissaries” from Kansas. According to this article, they had been arrested at the point of the letter being written. The author further blames the fires on two abolitionists exiled from Dallas in 1859.^[38] He assumed these men were responsible because the buildings targeted in the fire belonged to those who had forced the two accused abolitionists out of the city in 1859. The Weekly Telegraph then reported that North Texan communities formed safety committees and large special police forces to watch for abolitionist incendiaries.^[39] Stackpole’s conspiracy-driven narrative of the North Texas fires spread through the state. After Stackpole injected the element of abolitionist arson, readers throughout the state considered these events as proof that the Northern threat of violence had descended into the South.

On July 23, 1860, San Antonio’s The Daily Ledger and Texan reported on the fires in Dallas and Waxahachie. Most of the newspaper’s information regarding the events in North Texas came from The State Gazette’s initial article on July 12.  The San Antonio article’s summary of events is mostly in line with what had been presented thus far. However, The Daily Ledger and Texan claims that “the facts above specified, together with those mentioned by Dr. Pryor, into consideration there would seem to be no doubt that regularly organized bands of assassins have secretly plotted a wholesale destruction of life and property.” The article continues to insinuate the dangers posed to the entire state. The author states that even though San Antonio was not in the region of the fires they should still remain vigilant and increase surveillance on those assumed suspicious.^[40]

Although The Daily Ledger and Texan article did not specifically name abolitionists as the suspected arsonists, many of the readers could easily come to that conclusion on their own. This can be attributed to the established mistrust of abolitionists and the Northern United States as a whole. There were multiple instances where Texan communities ran Northerners out of town on the suspicion that they were abolitionists.^[41] In addition to mistrusting individual Northerners, Southern newspapers assumed that Northern political institutions were controlled by radicals. For example, many Texan newspapers referred to the newly established Republican Party as “Black Republicans” or “Black abolitionist republicans” prior to the fires of 1860.  Most of these discussions pertained to the political incompetence of Republicans or the assumed bad character of these politicians.^[42] Southerners in general stereotyped all Northerners as abolitionists regardless of individual Northerners’ attitudes towards slavery or freed Black people. This assumption regarding an entire region was a way to justify their increasing calls for disunion.^[43] This fear of the North, abolitionists, and slave rebellion colored Texan publications’ narratives regarding the North Texan fires.

The San Antonio Ledger and Texan later republished the first known letter in which Pryor directly blamed abolitionists for the fire. In a letter originally addressed to The State Gazette’s Marshall, Pryor claims that “all of these [fires] were so plainly the work of an incendiary, that suspicions were excited, and several white men and n****s were arrested and underwent examination.” Like Stackpole, he accused two suspected abolitionists, who were exiled from Dallas in 1859, of being the masterminds. Their supposed plan was to burn all of North Texas, targeting ammunition, artillery, clothing, and grain. Their goal was to leave the residents helpless. Once this was accomplished, white abolitionists were going to lead Native Americans and slaves in a revolt to ensure that Texans could not vote on election day. Pryor also suspected that their secondary motive was to start a civil war.^[44]

Pryor’s letter in the San Antonio Ledger differs greatly from his first letter to The State Gazette. His first letter states that he did not know whether arsonists were involved in the fires or not.^[45] His second more detailed letter to Cushings neglects to include any suspicion of foul play.^[46] Pryor’s narrative only changed after Stackpole sent out letters that stated abolitionists burned Dallas to ashes. After Stackpole sent out his letters, to share his own version of events, Pryor also started to take advantage of Southerners’ anxieties over abolition. This is evident with his fearmongering starting with his letter published in The San Antonio Ledger and Texan on July 24, 1860.^[47]

On July 24, The Weekly Telegraph published letters from Dallas Herald publisher, Swindles and from the merchant Stackpole. Both were printed on the newspaper’s front page. Swindles’ letter stated that the Dallas Herald had ordered a new office and that the town had begun rebuilding from the calamity. He seemed hopeful that his newspaper would resume printing within two to three months. In a postscript he stated that Denton and two households north of Dallas experienced fires on July 9. However, despite the fact that fires were only discussed in the postscript, Stackpole’s letter influenced The Weekly Telegraph’s decision to base the article’s title, “Further from Dallas—Another Fire in Dallas County—Serious Fire in Denton,” solely on the postscript’s contents.^[48]

Unlike Swindles’ correspondence, The Weekly Telegraph did not print their correspondence with Stackpole. Instead, the newspaper chose to use the information he provided in their articles. Stackpole gave an estimate of the various material losses that the fires caused. He also stated that the fires burned E.P. Nicholson and Crill Miller’s homes. Although the damages to Nicholson’s property were minimal, the blaze destroyed Miller’s buildings and wheat stacks. This same article states that The Weekly Telegraph was contacted by the McKinney Messager’s office. The McKinney newspaper claims that residents often saw two men in the same areas of the fires. Because of this suspicion, the town of McKinney arrested them.^[49]

The narrative of the North Texas fires spiraled further into a frenzy of terror. The original narrative grew and changed each time newspapers published the events. On August 4, 1860, Corpus Christi’s The Ranchero printed new information that Pryor relayed to them. In this new version of events, the citizens of Fort Worth found two abolitionists who distributed one hundred weapons to slaves and then descended upon the region to burn the communities to the ground.^[50] This same page of this newspaper also republished Pryor’s letter dated July 16, 1860 to The State Gazette with his early statement that claimed that there were only two abolitionist incendiaries causing the fires in North Texas. This version of Pryor’s narrative also accuses Northerners of attempting to start a civil war.^[51] At this point, newspapers were actively trying to make their readers believe a narrative that pitted them against the Northern United States.

At this point, Southerners had a lengthy history of instigating disunion, either by threatening session or accusing Northern states of attempting to destroy the union. Elizabeth R. Varon discusses this at length in her book Disunion! The Coming of the American Civil War. She states that there were occasions when the South accused the North of trying to destroy the tenuous coalition between the states.

The North and South’s threats of disunion contextualize Pryor’s claim that the North Texas fires were abolitionists’ attempt to start a civil war. The South accused the North of disunion as a result of William Lloyd Garrison’s American Anti-Slavery Society (AASS) and its mail pamphlet campaign.^[52] In 1835, the AASS published abolitionist literature that relied on moral arguments. This was an attempt to sway slaveholders to their cause. Their plan was to mail these pamphlets to the South. However, opponents of abolition quickly discovered these pieces of propaganda and pleaded with multiple postmaster generals to cease their distribution. Southerners accused the AASS and the North in general of trying to incite their slaves to escape and rebel. The South used this postal campaign to accuse abolitionists of sowing disunion. Many Southern communities, most notably in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi, responded to this attempt to spread anti-slavery propaganda by forming mobs. These groups sought out alleged abolitionists to lynch and murder them.^[53]

While the AASS did not intend for their postal campaign to break apart the United States, Southerners’ accusations towards the organization were not completely unfounded.  Both Garrison and the AASS had advocated for disunion before. Garrison claimed that the Constitution, and the union it created, was an empty promise of what the founding fathers intended for the United States.^[54] Many Garrisonian abolitionists also promoted disunion during the annexation of Texas. They reasoned that if the United States allowed Texas to join the country, it would be as a slave state. This meant that slavery would spread, and slave power would gain more political influence.^[55] This sect of abolitionists argued that the United States had an obligation to prevent the spread of slavery. If slavery was allowed to spread, some abolitionists stated that disunion might be the only moral option for them. This Northern argument reemerged during the debate over the annexation of Kansas and Nebraska.^[56] The South threatened disunion far more often than the North or abolitionists did. Based on a shared past rooted in distrust, Southerners accused the North of attempting to destroy the union for their own gain.

By the end of July, North Texas had been whipped into a frenzy over the possibility of abolitionist incendiaries. Articles on the fires often changed who was the mastermind and how many incendiaries were involved.^[57] The narratives became bigger and the conspiracies more insidious. A letter to The Weekly Telegraph claimed that an abolitionist was hiding in each North Texas county plotting to destroy its communities. According to the article, these abolitionists dispatched nearly one hundred enslaved people to burn down various towns and households in the region.^[58] In the same newspaper, a different letter from a Waxahachie merchant claims that two white abolitionists and around twenty slaves were responsible for the fires.^[59]

Most of the testimonies published by newspapers describe suspected arsonists as slaves. Occasionally the authors state that there were numerous unnamed witnesses. However, these claims are vague regarding the number of witnesses, their backgrounds, and how these people found themselves in situations to witness arson. Many articles discuss hundreds of slaves being brought in for questioning to reveal if they saw anyone suspicious who could have been involved or if anyone forced them to start fires.^[60] It is possible that the unnamed witnesses in some of these articles were enslaved people, but there is no evidence to back this claim. Slaveowners often forced their slaves to confess to their involvement in crimes. Southerners knew that slaves could be easily intimidated and exploited to perpetuate any narrative that benefitted Southern whites’ political goals.^[61]

Around the end of July, Pryor sent reports out to other newspapers stating that Dallas and the other towns of North Texas had formed vigilance committees. The purpose of these groups was to watch for, and apprehend, any suspicious people who intended to harm the region’s communities.^[62] However, these groups were often overzealous in their watchfulness. These vigilantes closely watched any newcomers suspected of having Northern origins. The suspected abolitionists were questioned and watched until they were deemed no longer a threat. Vigilance committees did not discriminate in their watchfulness. Southerners from other towns or states were similarly watched and questioned. This was because newspapers published conspiracy theories of abolitionists coming into their communities with disguises and false identities to commit their crimes.^[63]

The vigilance committees’ reign over North Texas quickly became violent. Many communities assembled to discuss the fate of abolitionists or rebellious slaves.^[64] On October 10, Austin’s The Southern Intelligencer reported on Judge R.L. Waddill’s ruling regarding the incendiaries of the fires and any other possible abolitionists in the region. Waddill decreed that anyone who attempted “the preaching of abolition doctrines, tampering with slaves and circulating abolition books &c., for the purpose of insurrection” should be chased after and “brought to justice.”^[65] The verbiage of the decision was vague. The vigilance committees of North Texas could have interpreted the “justice” Waddill spoke of in many different ways, which, more than likely, included mob justice and lynching.

On August 11, The Navarro Express reported on a public meeting held on July 26 in Chatfield. The primary purpose of the gathering was to discuss slavery, abolition, and the recent fires in North Texas. The meeting began with a justification of slavery that countered Northern “Black Republicans’” claims that it was immoral as well as a political and social evil. Those involved in the meeting then argued that the arsonists who destroyed the communities of North Texas were connected to abolition, and, by extension, the Republican Party. They argued that Republicans celebrated the perpetrators of Bleeding Kansas and the raid on Harper’s Ferry. Acting for the safety of their community and as a warning to potential criminals, the meeting resolved that all abolitionists committing crimes in Chatford, and any rebellious slaves assisting them, would be immediately executed.^[66]

The period after the fires saw multiple reports of hangings, or other general violence towards alleged abolitionists and the slaves that supposedly helped them. These articles claim that executed individuals were accused of some sort of violence towards the area in which they were found. Most of the accusations were related to the various fires across North Texas. However, occasionally the executioners claimed that the accused individuals were involved in additional violent conspiracies. One such instance was when two white men were hanged on July 21. Those in Waxahachie suspected they were abolitionists and had a sinister plot. The article claimed that the two men planned to burn the town of Waxahachie in a similar manner to how many Texans believed abolitionists destroyed Dallas. In addition to this, the plan also intended to free slaves and force them to murder their masters. A local merchant found a letter written in German, which vigilance committees believed supported their suspicions.^[67]

There were many other instances of similarly sanctioned violence against those suspected of abolition and potential destruction. On July 31, 1860, The Weekly Telegraph reported that around eighty slaves were whipped for their failure to report the arsonists of the Dallas fires and their conspirators. The article also stated that ten slaves accused of leading the insurrectionists were likely to be hung.^[68] Austin’s State Gazette republished an article from the Hempstead Courier. On July 28, 1860, the newspaper expressed their sympathies to the people in North Texas. The article then describes an event that took place in Chapel Hill earlier in July. The community saw three men often conversing with slaves and chased them off. Two of the men were hung in Navarro County, and the article suspected that the third man was in Fort Worth. The author states that the people of Chapel Hill did not request for the men to leave. Instead, the residents chose to hang them as soon as they gathered enough evidence to justify their decision.^[69] There were many other instances in which North Texas towns chose immediate violence against all who could disrupt their communities.^[70] These frenzied anxieties over abolition and the North made Texas more susceptible to arguments in favor of secession.

In the months after the North Texas fires, newspaper publishers increased the rate that they included pro-secession articles. Most of them referenced the upcoming election of 1860 and their hope that the general voting public would not elect the Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln.^[71] Many of the discussions surrounding secession also reexamined previous Southern threats of nullification and secession in the previous decade.^[72] During the summer of 1860, more newspapers also discussed Texan state politicians and candidates that advocated for secession.^[73] One of these politicians was Alexis T. Rainey, a former Texas senator from Anderson County who resigned his seat in February.^[74] Some rejected Rainey’s beliefs in Texas secession.^[75] However, the Southern states who seceded following Lincoln’s election attempted to further persuade the public into accepting disunion.

Charles B. Dew’s Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War argues that various states’ committees sent speakers to influence other Southern states to leave the United States. South Carolina followed through with its threat and was the first to secede from the United States after Lincoln was elected.^[76] The first commissioners were sent from Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana to explain why these states seceded and persuade other states to join them.^[77] As more states seceded from the Union, these newly independent entities sent out more commissioners to further convince the rest of the south.^[78] In early 1861, Alabama, Louisiana, and South Carolina sent James Martin Calhoun, George Williamson, and John McQueen to persuade Texas to leave the Union.

Alabama’s commissioner, Calhoun, was the first of the three that attempted to influence Texas’ politics. His tactic was more focused on Governor Sam Houston than on the general public. This is most likely because the Texan politician was one of the few figures in the state who continued to oppose disunion. Calhoun wrote to the governor in an attempt to convince him that secession was the best way to preserve the white Southern way of life. Calhoun said that his home state of Alabama wanted what was best for its sister state, as their destinies as slaveholding institutions were the same. Calhoun’s goal was to convince Houston to speak in favor of leaving the United States during the Secession Convention of Texas. He argued that secession was the only way to save the South’s white population from “the utter ruin and degradation” guaranteed by Lincoln’s administration. This attempt to sway the governor failed, due to Houston’s firm loyalty to the union.^[79] However, despite this major political disagreement, the governor welcomed Calhoun to stay with him for the month of February.^[80]

John McQueen was the last commissioner South Carolina sent to spread their message of disunion.^[81] The South Carolinian representative spoke at the convention in favor of a Southern confederacy. Austin’s State Gazette reported on McQueen’s statement that the combined resources and military force of the Southern slave states was the only way to stave off the Black Republican threat. He also accused the federal government of being incompetent and unable to protect the South.^[82] On April 8, McQueen wrote the president and convention assembled in in Charleston, South Carolina. In his letter, he claims that his time in Texas was incredibly successful and that the people welcomed him warmly. He then states that his points on Lincoln, the Black Republicans, and abolitionist attacks were well received. He concludes his letter, stating that he successfully persuaded the Texas convention to unanimously vote in favor of secession.^[83]

Williamson was the only commissioner Louisiana sent out and he was the last to arrive in Texas after the convention had ended. On March 23, the State Gazette reported the Secession Convention of Texas met after adjournment. Those involved with the meeting submitted Williamson’s correspondence with the president of the convention, Oran M. Roberts, as well as other letters from other Confederate states’ representatives.^[84] According to Dew, most of the Louisiana commissioner’s arguments were based on the close economic relationship between the two states. Thus, it was in Texas’ best interests to secede, Williamson argues, as the Southern states assumed that the United States would become more hostile to slave states under Lincoln’s presidency.^[85] 

On February 1, 1861, the members in the Secession Convention of Texas voted to secede from the United States with a vote of one hundred and sixty-six to eight.^[86] The Texan and outside forces in favor of disunion had finally convinced the wider masses that disunion was the only way to save their culture, their economy, and their wellbeing. Importantly, Texans found secession attractive because they had been taught to fear the North and abolitionists.  For years prior to the state’s vote for secession, newspapers bombarded their readers with stories about diabolical abolitionists, like Brown or Garrison, as well as treacherous Republicans who wanted to destroy Southern culture and rip away their political power. The North Texas fires and the accusations of an abolitionist plot brought the fear of John Brown closer to Texans’ homes, which made the threat of abolition more real to them. The newspaper editors successfully primed their readers into a state of panic that made secession a desirable option.

[1] Reynolds, Texas Terror, 118, 168.

[2] “Our Modern Civilization,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), January 20, 1858; “For Our Hobby Men,” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), April 7, 1858; “Political Self-Deceit,” Civilian and Gazette (Galveston, TX), April 20, 1858; “Douglas’ Southern Supporters,” Galveston Weekly News (Galveston, TX), October 26, 1858; “‘When I Can Read My Title Clear,’” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), October 27, 1858; “Washington Correspondent,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), December 29, 1858.

[3] The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), January 5, 1858; State Gazette (Austin, TX), February 20, 1858; “Message of Gov. H.R. Runnells in Relation to Kansas Affairs,” The Texas Republican (Marshall, TX), February 20, 1858; “The State Convention and a Southern Convention,” Civilian and Gazette (Galveston, TX), February 23, 1858; “The Debate,” The Colorado Citizen (Columbus, TX), February 27, 1858; Gawkins Roaming, “Ed. Telegraph,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), April 7, 1858; “A Terrible Civil War,” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), April 28, 1858; “Letter to Latimer,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), July 17, 1858.

[4] Michael F. Holt, The Election of 1860: “A Campaign Fraught with Consequences” (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2017); Varon, Disunion!, 339; Larry Jay Gage, “The Texas Road to Secession and War: John Marshall and the Texas State Gazette 1860-1861,” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 62, no. 2 (1958), 193-195, 197-210.

[5] “Guy M. Bryan,” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), March 24, 1858; “Washington D.C., March 8, 1858,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), March 24, 1858; Edmund Ruffin, “Consequences of Abolition Agitation,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), March 27, 1858; Galveston Weekly News (Galveston, TX), August 31, 1858.

[6] Gallagher, The Confederate War, 100-104; Manisha Sinha, The Slave’s Cause: A History of Abolition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2016), 77, 227, 473-491; Varon, Disunion!, 57-58, 223-231, 324-340.

[7] Charles R. Pryor was the editor of the Dallas Herald from 1859 to 1861. He was born in Virginia in 1832 and moved to Dallas, Texas in 1850. During this decade, he was a contributor to the newspaper while James W. Latimer was the editor. After Latimer’s death in 1859, the editor position was given to Pryor. Although he had a major part in the Texas Troubles, his role as editor was short lived. He later stepped down in 1861. For more information on Pryor, see Reynolds’ Editors Make War; Reynolds, Texas Terror; Reynolds, "Vigilante Law.”

[8] Reynolds’ Editors Make War, 97-117.

[9] The four presidential nominees for the election of 1860 were Abraham Lincoln who represented the Republicans, John Breckinridge who specifically represented Southern Democrats, John Bell who represented the Constitutional Unionists, and Stephen Douglas who was the official Democrat nominee. Although both the North and South each had two nominees competing in their political sphere, the North was more aligned with the Republican Party. However, the Democratic Party benefitted from solid support from Southern voters. Because of this, they were able to draw a decent percent of Northern voters to their cause. The major voter division caused both Democratic nominees to lose the 1860 election. It should be noted that prior to this election there had only been five presidents not belonging to the Democratic-Republican Party or the later Democratic Party. For more information on this, see Holt, The Election of 1860; Varon, Disunion!

[10] William Archibald Dunning, Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction and Related Topics, (London: MacMillan & Co., 1898), 1, 8-9; Anna Irene Sandbo, “Beginnings of the Secession Movement in Texas,” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 18, no. 1 (1914), 42-43, 48-49; Holt, The Election of 1860, 2-8, 13-29, 36-49, 57, 212; Varon, Disunion!, 12, 153-159, 212-219, 222-229, 235-237, 241-242, 264, 295-306, 317, 325, 339, 391.

[11] Gage, “Secession and War,” 193-195, 197-210.

[12] Emory M. Thomas, “Rebel Nationalism: E. H. Cushing and the Confederate Experience,” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 73, no. 3 (1970), 343-345; E.B. Cushing, “Edward Hopkins Cushing: An Appreciation by His Son,” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 25, no. 4 (1922), 261-264.

[13] Because Edward H. Cushings was raised in the North, he had some Whiggish beliefs combined with the experience living within their economics and infrastructure. One of the things he advocated for was to move away from the South’s cotton monoculture. Cushings also believed that Texas needed to improve its education system so that the state’s youth could become productive members of society, thus improving the South’s infrastructure. Another major change that Cushings pushed for was for the development of a railroad system throughout Texas for the mass transportation of goods. The editor’s belief in a strong railroad system was enthusiastic enough that he suggested that the state fund the construction of the system. Although these beliefs were more progressive than most of the South’s political leanings, there was a more nationalistic purpose behind them. The reason why he advocated for these changes in Southern culture was he wished for the South to be able to gain complete independence from the Union. Cushings believed that although the South was able to profit from its current economic systems, it would never be able to survive without Northern support. In addition to this, the South did not have the infrastructure to sustain itself if it were to secede. Because Cushings was ardently in favor of Southern independence and rights, he used his platform to push for these changes. However, looking at the South’s infrastructure and economic systems, it seems that this advocation was largely unsuccessful. For more information on Edward H. Cushings see Thomas, “Rebel Nationalism” and Donald E. Reynolds, “Cushing, Edward Hopkins,” TSHA, Texas State Historical Association, last modified September 9, 2020,  https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/cushing-edward-hopkins.

[14] Reynolds, Texas Terror, 33.

[15] The State Gazette states that this letter was dated June 9, 1860. This is most likely a typo, as the Dallas Herald was still publishing during the month of June. More than likely, The State Gazette meant to date the letter for July, because the letter Cushings received was dated July 9.

[16] Charles R. Pryor and John Marshall, “Terrible Conflagration! The Town of Dallas Destroyed,” The State Gazette (Austin, TX), July 12, 1860.

[17] Charles R. Pryor and Edward H. Cushings, “Terrible Conflagration!! The Town in Dallas in Ashes! Every Store & Hotel Burned! Loss $300,00!!!,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 17, 1860.

[18] Pryor, “Terrible Conflagration.”

[19] Pryor, “The Town in Dallas in Ashes.”

[20] The archive in which I read this newspaper was partially destroyed. There was a section of this article that was missing. However, I was able to discern most of what the article said through context.

[21] The Matagorda Gazette (Matagorda, TX), July 18, 1860.

[22] “Political News,” The Matagorda Gazette (Matagorda, TX), July 18, 1860; “Woman’s Marriage,” The Matagorda Gazette (Matagorda, TX), July 18, 1860.

[23] Swindles, “Serious Calamity.”

[24] Ibid.

[25] “Dallas Herald,” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), July 14, 1860.

 

[26] Ibid.

[27] Ibid; Swindles, “Serious Calamity;”; The Matagorda Gazette (Matagorda, TX), July 18, 1860; Pryor, “Terrible Conflagration;” Pryor, “Terrible Conflagration.”

[28] “Dallas Herald,” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), July 14, 1860.

[29] “Fall and Winter Supply of New Goods Just Received By E.M. Stackpole,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), March 9, 1859; “Tin Shop,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), March 9, 1859; “‘Pro Bono Publico,’” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), November 23, 1859; Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), November 30, 1859.

[30] John M. Crockett, “Corporation of the Town of Dallas,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), March 7, 1860; Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), March 7, 1860; John M. Crockett, “Corporation Ordinances,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), May 9, 1860; “First Annual Fair of the Navarro County Agricultural and Mechanical Association,” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), June 2, 1860.

[31] E.M. Stackpole, “Advertisements,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), November 17, 1858.

[32] E.M. Stackpole, “For Sale,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), June 26, 1861.

[33] Vicki Betts, “Marshall Texas Republican, 1860,” Scholar Works at UT Tyler (2016). By Title, Paper 66, http://hdl.handle.net/10950/720, 33.

[34] E.M. Stackpole, “For Sale or Trade,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), June 12, 1861.

[35] E.M. Stackpole, “Wanted,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), August 28, 1861.

[36] E.M. Stackpole, “Great Fire in Dallas, July 8, 1860,” in The Texas Almanac for 1861, (Galveston: Richardson & Co., 1861), 265.

[37] E.M. Stackpole, “Herring’s Patent Fire Proof and Burglar Proof Safes,” Dallas Herald (Dallas, TX), February 6, 1861; February 27, 1861; March 27, 1861; April 17, 1861; April 21, 1861; June 26, 1861.

[38] The two men that Stackpole referenced in this correspondence were most likely Solomon McKinney and William Blount from Kentucky and Wisconsin respectively. The previous chapter of this work states that these two men were preachers invited to speak in Dallas. They were accused of telling Dallas slaves to rebel against their masters which the two men denied. They were exiled via committee decision on August 17, 1859. For more information, see Stanford, The Tragedy of the Negro in America, 87-89; Crocket, “Public Meeting;” Campbell, An Empire for Slavery, 223.

[39] “The Northern Texas Fires.”

[40] “Incendiary Fires,” The Daily Ledger and Texan (San Antonio, TX), July 23, 1860.

[41] “Excitement in Collin County!;” Galveston News (Galveston, TX), June 28, 1860; Crocket, “Public Meeting;” Campbell, An Empire for Slavery, 223; Reynolds, Editors Make War, 98-100; Stanford, The Tragedy of the Negro in America, 87-89.

[42] “Senator Douglas, the President and the Territories,” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), January 6. 1858; “The People of Goliad and the Cart War Again,” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), January 6, 1858; “Meeting at the Capitol,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), February 4, 1860; “Municipal Elections North,” The San Antonio Ledger and Texan (San Antonio, TX), April 21, 1860; “Black Republicans Abolitionized,” The San Antonio Ledger and Texan (San Antonio, TX), April 21, 1860; “Unparalleled Impudence or Ignorance;” “Squatter Sovereignty,” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), April 28, 1860.

[43] “The Northern Texas Fires;” Foner, Free Soil, 44-58, 73-81, 105-148, 150-164, 180-220; Varon, Disunion!, 7-15, 102-108, 181, 216-238.

[44] Pryor, “Incendiary Fires;” Carrigan, Lynching Culture, 49, 58-59.

[45] Pryor, “Terrible Conflagration.”

[46] Pryor, “The Town in Dallas in Ashes.”

[47] Pryor, “Incendiary Fires.”

[48] Swindles, “Further from Dallas.”

[49] “The Dallas Conflagration,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 24, 1860; “The Northern Texas Fires.”

[50] “Abolition Incendiaries in Texas,” The Ranchero (Corpus Christi, TX), August 4, 1860.

[51] Charles R. Pryor, “Conflagrations in Northern Texas--- Startling News,” The Ranchero (Corpus Christi, TX), August 4, 1860.

[52] William Lloyd Garrison was a nineteenth century abolitionist and journalist who was active in promoting Black voices and for the immediate dissolution of slavery. In 1831 he founded The Liberator, an antislavery newspaper that published articles written by white women, freed Black people of both genders, and abolitionist men. Garrison founded the AASS as an extension of his early organization, the New England Anti-Slavery Society (later reorganized as the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. Although he was praised for his fervent support of abolition, his politics- or lack thereof- were more controversial among activists. He felt that getting involved with politics contributed to the institutions that oppressed women and freed Blacks as well as upheld slavery. This was an aspect of his beliefs that many freed Black activists, most notably Frederick Douglass, and the abolitionists who formed the Republican Party. Garrison’s support of John Brown’s actions at Harper’s Ferry further made him a controversial figure. For more information on Garrison, see: Sinha, The Slave’s Cause; Henry Mayer, All on Fire: William Lloyd Garrison and the Abolition of Slavery (New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 1998); Varon, Disunion.

[53] Frank Otto Gatell, “Postmaster Huger and the Incendiary Publications,” The South Carolina Historical Magazine 64, no. 4 (1963): 194-195; Varon, Disunion!, 102-105.

[54] Varon, Disunion!, 152-154.

[55] Slave power was a theory that the South controlled political power in the United States. One element of this is attributed to the population boost they obtained through the Three-Fifths Compromise. Because slaves counted as three-fifths of a person in censuses, slaveholding states had more power in the House of Representatives. Another part of this theory concerned the South and their threats of disunion. Because the United States was still relatively young and one of the first countries to attempt a representative democracy, they needed to keep the states from leaving to prove themselves to the world stage. Southern states exploited this political anxiety to further amass power and force through policies that only benefitted them. For more information see David Brion Davis, The Slave Power Conspiracy and the Paranoid Style (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1970); Varon, Disunion.

[56] Varon, Disunion!, 121-124, 165-169, 181, 255; Sinha, The Slave’s Cause, 416, 470-474.

[57] Reynolds, Texas Terror, 34-68.

[58] Charles R. Pryor, “Letter from Dallas. A Most Diabolical Plot! Unheard of Scoundrelism!! Fire! Murder! Destruction!!! Startling Developments!!!! Full Particulars,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 31, 1860.

[59] “Later from Northern Texas. Conspiracy Discovered in Waxahachie. Two White Men Hung,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 31, 1860.

[60] “The Late Conflagrations,” The San Antonio Ledger and Texan (San Antonio, TX), July 28, 1860; “Further Particulars,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 31, 1860; “Abolition Incendiaries in Texas;”  “Incendiary Attempts,” The San Antonio Ledger and Texan (San Antonio, TX), August 4, 1860; “The Late Fires,” The Civilian and Gazette Weekly (Galveston, TX), August 7, 1860; “More of the Up-Country Excitement- The Vigilance Committee Doing Their Work,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), August 7, 1860; “Incendiarism—Meeting in Matagorda,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), August 11,1860; “Public Meeting at Gay Hill, Washington County,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), August 14, 1860.

[61] Ray, “The Excitement in Collin County;” Reynolds, Editors Make War, 104-106; “The Herald and Late Improvements;” Reynolds, Texas Terror, 54-77.

[62] “Further Particulars;” “More of the Up-County Excitement- The Vigilance Committee Doing Their Work,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), August 7, 1860; “The Late Fires,” The Civilian and Gazette (Galveston, TX), August 7, 1860; Reynolds, Texas Terror, 55-77.

[63] Reynolds, Editors Make War, 100-104; “More Incendiarism in This County,” Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), August 25, 1860; “Another Upright Judge,” The Southern Intelligencer (Austin, TX), October 10, 1860.

[64] “Public Meeting at Chatfield,” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), August 11, 1860; “Public Meeting at Gay Hill;” “Another Upright Judge.”

[65] “Another Upright Judge.”

[66] “Public Meeting at Chatfield.”

[67] “Later From Northern Texas.”

[68] “Further Particulars.”

[69] “From Hempstead Courier,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), August 4, 1860.

[70] “Later From Dallas,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), August 4, 1860; “Incendiary Attempts &c.,” The San Antonio Ledger and Texan (San Antonio, TX), August 4, 1860; “The Late Fires;” “Vigilance Committee Doing Their Work;” “Incendiarism—Meeting in Matagorda;” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), August 11, 1860; “Incendiarism,” The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), August 11, 1860; Reynolds, Editors Make War, 104-117; Reynolds, Texas Terror, 54-77; Gallagher, The Confederate War, 148-149.

[71] “Democratic Ratification Meeting!,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 24, 1860; “Ratification Meeting in Houston,” The Democrat and Planter (Columbia, TX), July 24, 1860; “Speech of Gen. Waul,” The Weekly Telegraph (Houston, TX), July 31, 1860; “Return of Col. M. Flourney,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), August 4, 1860.

[72] George W. Smyth, “Speech of Hon. Geo. W. Smyth,” The East-Texas Clarion (Jasper, TX), July 21, 1860; “Voters! Remember the First Monday in August, 1860!!,” The Colorado Citizen (Columbus, TX), July 28, 1860.

[73] Smyth, “Speech;” “Ratification Meeting in Houston;” “Harris,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), July 28, 1860; “Speech of Gen. Waul.”

[74] William DeRyee and R.E. Moore, Texas Album of the Eighth Legislature, 1860, (Austin: Miner, Lambert, & Perry, 1860); “Hon. A.T. Rainey on The Stump,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), July 28, 1860.

[75] The Navarro Express (Corsicana, TX), August 31, 1860.

[76] Charles B. Dew, Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2016), 4-5, 11.

[77] Ibid, 18-21.

[78] Ibid, 18, 20.

[79] Ibid, 58; James Martin Calhoun, Sam Houston, “Correspondence Between Hon. J.M. Calhoun, Commissioner from Alabama, and Gen. Sam Houston, Governor of Texas,” The Civilian and Gazette (Galveston, TX), January 22, 1861.

[80] Sam Houston, “Extracts from the Governor’s Message,” The Standard (Clarksville, TX), February 9, 1861.

[81] Dew, Apostles of Disunion, 47.

[82] State Gazette (Austin, TX), February 9, 1861.

[83] John McQueen, “Letter to the President and Convention of South Carolina assembled at Charleston, April 8, 1861” in the Journal of the Convention of the People of South Carolina Held in 1860, 1861, and 1862 (Columbia: R.W. Gibbes, 1862), 176-178; Dew, Apostles of Disunion, 47-49.

[84] “Sixteenth Day,” State Gazette (Austin, TX), March 23, 1861.

[85] Dew, Apostles of Disunion, 98-101, Sandbo, “Secession Movement,” 42.

[86] Walter L. Buenger, Secession and the Union in Texas (Austin: University of Texas Press), 147-149.