/19 THE TEXAS PRESS AND THE FILIBUSTERS OF THE 1850s: LOPEZ, CARVAJAL, AND WALKER THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By Jeffrey A. Zemler, B.A. Denton, Texas May, 1983 Zemler, Jeffrey A., The Texas Press and the Filibusters of the 1850s: Lopez, Carvajal, and Walker. Master of Arts, May, 1983, 179 pp., bibliography, 67 titles. The decade of the 1850s saw the Texas press separate into two opposing groups on th-e issue of filibustering. The basis for this division was the personal beliefs of the editors regarding the role filibustering should have in society. Although a lust for wealth drove most filibusters., the press justified territorial expansion along altruistic lines. By 1858, however, a few newspapers discarded this argument and condemned filibusters as lawless bands of ruffians plundering peaceful neighbors. Throughout the decade, the papers gradually drifted from a consensus in 1850 to discord by the date of William Walker's third attempt on Nicaragua in 1858. Copyright by Jeffrey A. Zemler 1983 PREFACE Many scholars have described the South as a united body in favor of filibustering expeditions. Others have argued that a majority of the newspapers approved, while a small minority disapproved. The purpose of this research is to determine which pattern, if either, describes the actual situation in Texas. From this examination, a clear picture emerges which shows Texas not to be a united body, but a state containing a small,"silent" minority. Two of the expeditions examined, the Narciso Lopez and William Walker expeditions, are major filibustering ex- cursions. Lopez's attempts to free Cuba lasted from 1849 to 1851, while Walker's invasions of Nicaragua covered a five year period, 1855 to 1860. Since the national newspapers covered these two enterprises, they were nationalistic in their scope. Although support for the filibusters centered in the South, northerners were aware of the actions of these men. Jose Maria J. Carvajal led the third expedition from the Texas side of the Rio Grande. Small in comparison to Lopez's and Walker's, this expedition attracted considerable attention in the Texas press, warranting its inclusion in the paper. i During the 1850s many newspapers were founded and abandoned in Texas. Most newspapers had a life span of between one and two years. The weeklies used in this paper are exceptions to this pattern. All were founded prior to or in 1850, and all lasted into the 1860s or longer. By examining these newspapers, one can monitor opinion growth and detect any trend. Despite the limited number of newspapers from which to choose, it has been possible to obtain a broad geographic representation of the state of Texas in selecting the newspapers. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. FILIBUSTERING IN THE UNITED STATES TO 1830 0.. 1 II. FILIBUSTERING IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1830 TO 1860.........................22 III. CUBA AND NARCISO LOPEZ. .... .0.........56 IV. CONFLICTS ALONG THE RIO GRANDE ............. 108 V. CONFLICT AND DISCORD: WILLIAM WALKER IN NICARAGUA..............a.............134 VI. THE SILENT MINORITY. ... .... .. ...... 170 BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................175 CHAPTER I FILIBUSTERING IN THE UNITED STATES TO 1830 The history of filibustering movements emanating from the United States is one of intrigue, heroism, and death. The actors included Americans and foreigners who acted as both patriots and spies. Over the years the United States served as the base of operations for expeditions launched against Texas, Cuba, Venezuela, Mexico, and Nicaragua. The filibustering movements began nationally on a small scale in the first decade of the 1800s and emerged into a sectional movement by the decade of the 1850s. Over a span of fifty years, the attitude and philosophy of American expansion evolved from a concept of mission to an all encompassing destiny which justified armed intervention in a foreign country. Over the course of these years Spain became the primary villain whom Americans regarded as a suppressor of rights and a prohibiter of freedom. Freedom of the oppressed became the watchword of the filibustering movement. When the United States acquired Louisiana in 1803, American expansion became synonymous with American security. The acquisition of this territory from France was through diplomatic means; thus, the philosophy that was to invade 1. 2 the American expansionists had its roots in this peaceful transaction. This belief in America's natural right to security created within the American expansionist doctrine a willingness to postpone or omit the philosophy that all people were entitled to liberty and equality. Americans began to rationalize interference with the liberty and equality of foreign peoples if such interference was seen as a protection of American security.2 The filibuster, who in essence was an expansionist, was imbued with the American idea of mission. The expansionist saw himself as the propagator of democracy. This mission, bestowed on the American people by the Creator, formed the basis of the expansionist doctrine. As the years progressed, the American saw himself as being among the elect who was to confer, if deemed propitious, the natural rights upon the people of the world. The final element in the American philosophy of mission was to regenerate the backward people of the world. This idea, however, was late in arriving and did not become a part of the doctrine until the 1850s. The filibuster proclaimed himself America's ambassador of free- dom; the person to strike the first blow for democracy.3 The earliest filibustering expeditions were directed against Spanish possessions in the New World. In 1806 a Venezuelan exile launched an expedition from the United States to free his homeland from Spanish tyranny. Francisco 3 de Miranda arrived in New York on 9 November 1805 from England with the idea of liberating Venezuela. While in England, Miranda had tried to interest the British in a similar venture, but they hesitated. The news of diffi- culties between the United States and Spain over the Louisiana boundary and commercial rights at the port of New Orleans seemed to Miranda to create the ideal situation for acquiring supporters for his movement. Miranda, therefore, was determined to invade South America with North American support.4 In New York Miranda enlisted the aid of a former tra- veling companion, Colonel William Stephens Smith, surveyor of the port of New York and son-in-law of John Adams, who introduced Miranda to Commodore Thomas Lewis and merchant Samuel Ogden. Ogden supplied the money for the provisioning of the ship called the Leander, which Ogden had sold to Miranda. This business transaction hinged on the require- ment that Miranda acquire the approval of the United States government.5 Miranda received this tacit approval on 11 December 1805 when he called on Secretary of State James Madison. Madison refused to approve of the venture officially, but he did agree "to look the other way while Miranda's merchant friends put up the money and recruited an expeditionary force in the port of New York." By 29 December Miranda had 4 informed his fellow adventurers of the approval, and the recruitment and outfitting of the expedition began.6 Smith's duty was recruitment. Through his efforts, about 200 men enlisted. Since the need of secrecy was important, the men did not know the actual purpose of the expedition. Some men joined because of their financial needs, while other men enlisted in the hope of acquiring gold or silver. The supplies placed on board the Leander included 582 muskets, 19 nine pounders, 8 six pounders, and an assorted quantity of cartridges and musket flints.7 The Leander, with its crew of filibusters, left New York on 2 February 1806. The Spanish minister to the United States, the Marquis of Casa Yrujo, informed his government and the United States government of the intent of Miranda. Spanish authorities in Venezuela prepared for the antici- pated invasion, while American authorities arrested Smith and Ogden for being accomplices of Miranda. Both men argued that since New York officials had not moved to suppress the expedition and the administration had given its approval, they were innocent of any crime. Smith and Ogden were acquitted in a subsequent trial.8 On the twelfth day at sea, a British frigate, the Cleopatra, commanded by John Wright, hailed the Leander. After a brief discussion, Miranda obtained the release of several impressed American seamen and also permission to 5 find protection in any British station in the West Indies. Miranda proceeded to Santo Domingo where Captain Jacob Lewis, the brother of Commodore Thomas Lewis, was to provide two ships. Unfortunately for the expedition, Lewis refused to cooperate. After a month's delay, the filibusters left the island aboard three vessels, the Leander, the Bacchus, and the Bee.9 On the night of 27 April, Miranda attempted to land near Puerto Cabello. The Spanish officials, having been alerted, repelled the invasion. Miranda ordered the three vessels to retreat, but two Spanish schooners overtook the smaller vessels, the Bacchus and the Bee. The sixty fili- busters on board were arrested and placed in the dungeons of Puerto Cabello. The Spanish instituted a trial and on 12 July 1806 passed judgment. Ten men received the death sentence, and the remaining prisoners consigned to various Spanish prisons. The Leander, meanwhile, headed for Trinidad but enroute was stopped by the British sloop of war, the Lily. Miranda obtained protection for his expedition from the captain and sailed under the watchful eye of the British to the island of Granada and then to Barbados. Miranda quickly won the support of Admiral Alexander Cochrane, who agreed to supply naval escort for the expedition in return for trade agree- ments in the newly independent country.