The Hidden History of Texas

Hank Wilson
  • 4.9 (10)
  • COURSES

Here is where you will find The Hidden History Of Texas podcast. The episodes cover Texas history from the earliest days of Indigenous peoples to Spanish exploration, control by Mexico, the Anglo’s take over, Texas becomes part of the U.S., the confederates move in, and back to the U.S. The audio files are accurate and try to tell the story as best as they can from all sides of the issues. The hidden history of Texas is a history replete with heroes and villains of all sorts. There were good and bad people throughout Texas history, just as there were throughout world history.

Episodes

  1. 6D AGO

    Episode 89 After Sundown: The Hidden Geography of Fear in Texas

    Welcome to Episode 89 of The Hidden History of Texas. After Sundown: The Hidden Geography of Fear in Texas Tonight, we’re stepping onto a highway most history books barely mention. A road traveled in silence…A road traveled with caution…And sometimes, a road traveled in fear. This episode is called: “After Sundown: The Hidden Geography of Fear in Texas.” We’re going to talk about Sundown Towns…The Green Book…And the hidden map Black Texans and Black travelers carried in their minds during the Jim Crow era. Now imagine this with me. The year is 1952. You’ve just crossed the Sabine River leaving Louisiana and entering Texas. The sun is beginning to sink low across the horizon. Your children are asleep in the back seat. Your gas gauge is dropping toward empty. And suddenly… you’re nervous. Not because of bandits.Not because of weather.Not because of the road itself. You’re afraid of where you might accidentally stop. Because there are towns ahead where being Black after dark could get you threatened… beaten… arrested… or worse. So before you ever left home, you packed something almost as important as gasoline. A small green book. Texas has always carried a larger-than-life image in the American imagination. Cowboys.Oil wells.Cattle drives.Wide-open skies.Frontier independence. But hidden beneath that mythology is another Texas. A Texas many people never experienced firsthand…and many others could never escape. For decades, scattered across this state and across America, were places known as Sundown Towns. Some had signs posted right at the city limits. Others didn’t need signs at all. Everybody knew the rules. “Don’t let the sun set on you here.” Now before we go further, let’s talk about that little green book. The Negro Motorist Green Book was first published in 1936 by a Harlem postal worker named Victor H. Green. At first, it covered only New York City. But over time, it expanded across the United States, Canada, Mexico, and even Bermuda. Inside were lists of hotels, restaurants, tourist homes, gas stations, barber shops, beauty parlors, and businesses where Black travelers were welcome or at least safe. Safe. Think about that word. Today, most Americans choose a hotel based on price or reviews. Back then, Black families often chose places based on one simple question: “Will we survive the night?” The Green Book became known as “the bible of Black travel.” And it wasn’t paranoia. It was necessity. Because across America, including Texas, there were towns where Black travelers knew not to stop after dark. So what exactly was a Sundown Town? A Sundown Town was a community that either formally or informally excluded minorities from remaining there after sunset. Most commonly, these policies targeted African Americans. But in some places, the hostility extended to Mexican Americans, Chinese Americans, Native Americans, Jews, Catholics, Mormons, almost anyone considered “outside” the community’s idea of whiteness. Some towns passed ordinances. Others used intimidation. Violence.Threats.Economic pressure.Police harassment. And often, unwritten rules enforced the system more effectively than laws ever could. Maybe businesses mysteriously closed at sunset. Maybe hotels “had no vacancies.” Maybe gas stations refused service. Maybe local law enforcement simply escorted Black travelers to the city limits. The message was always understood. “You don’t belong here.” Now many people think this was mostly a Deep South phenomenon. But Texas had its own long and painful history with Sundown Towns. Some communities openly embraced exclusion. Others quietly practiced it for generations. And some of those legacies still linger today. Take Alba. Small East Texas town.Population under five hundred. On the surface, it looks peaceful. But historically, Alba was founded as an all-white community. In the year 2000, it was still reported to be over 98 percent white. One local theory even claimed the town’s name came from the Latin word for “white.” (note: the Latin word is album) Whether that story is fully true or not almost doesn’t matter. Because the reputation itself tells us something important about how communities wanted to define themselves. Then there’s Alvin. In 1933, a brutal axe murder shocked the community. When suspicion briefly turned toward a Black suspect, local newspapers reportedly noted that this seemed unlikely because “practically no negroes are allowed to live in Alvin.” Imagine reading that sentence in a newspaper today. Not whispered privately. Printed openly. As if exclusion itself were ordinary. Because at the time, in many places, it was. And perhaps one of the starkest examples comes from De Leon in Comanche County. In the late 1800s, Black residents were driven out after racial violence and lynchings. According to historical accounts, signs reportedly warned Black people not to let the sun set on them in town. And over time, the absence of Black residents became normalized. One Black resident interviewed decades later described growing up isolated… excluded from parties… unable to find anyone who understood her experience. That’s one of the hidden costs of segregation people often forget. Not just physical danger. Isolation. Loneliness. The quiet message that you are permanently outside the community around you. But history is complicated. And not every Texas town stayed frozen in that past. Consider Killeen. In 1950, Killeen reportedly had no Black residents. But the growth of nearby Fort Hood, now known as Fort Cavazos and now back to Fort Hood, slowly changed the city’s demographics. Black soldiers stationed there challenged old barriers simply by existing in large numbers. And by the 1960s, those barriers began to crack. Today, Killeen is one of the most diverse cities in Texas. That transformation reminds us something important: History is not destiny. Communities can change. But only when people are willing to confront the truth about where they’ve been. And then there’s perhaps the most infamous modern example in Texas: Vidor. For decades, Vidor became nationally known for Ku Klux Klan activity and racial intimidation. Cross burnings.Marches.Threats. Even in the 1990s, not the 1890s but the 1990s, Black families moving into public housing faced bomb threats and harassment so severe some fled for their safety. Now it’s important to say this carefully. A town is not permanently defined by its worst history. And many residents today reject those beliefs entirely. But understanding that this happened within living memory matters. Because sometimes Americans talk about segregation and racial terror as though it belongs to some ancient, distant era. It doesn’t. Some of this history is only a generation or two behind us. Now there’s another piece of this story we have to understand. The Green Book wasn’t just about avoiding danger. It was also about building community. Inside its pages were Black-owned businesses…restaurants…tourist homes…beauty shops…service stations. It represented an entire parallel economy created because segregation left Black Americans excluded from so much of mainstream society. And in many ways, those businesses became lifelines. Places where travelers could finally exhale. Places where they didn’t have to wonder whether they’d be humiliated… denied service… or attacked. The Green Book stopped publication in 1966, two years after the Civil Rights Act outlawed segregation in public accommodations. Legally, the world had changed. But culturally… well, culture often changes slower than laws. And some roads remained dangerous long after the signs came down. One of the challenges of studying this history is that many Sundown Towns never officially documented their policies. No ordinance.No paperwork.No public declaration. Just memory. Warnings passed from parent to child. Stories told quietly at kitchen tables. “Don’t stop there.”“Keep driving.”“Make sure you have enough gas.” That hidden geography shaped how people traveled through Texas for generations. And unless you experienced it yourself, you may never have realized it existed. History often remembers the grand moments. The battles.The presidents.The famous speeches. But sometimes the most revealing truths are found in ordinary things. Like a family trying to find a motel before dark. Or a child asking why they can’t stop in a certain town. Or a worn little green book folded into a glove compartment. Those quiet details tell us just as much about America as monuments and battlefields ever could. And maybe that’s the real purpose of hidden history. Not to make people ashamed of the past. But to understand it honestly. Because history that remains buried has a strange way of repeating itself. But history that is remembered…examined…and understood… can become something else entirely. A warning. A lesson. And hopefully… a path forward. I’m Hank Wilson, and this has been Episode 89 of The Hidden History of Texas. Until next time…keep asking questions…keep digging deeper…and never stop looking beneath the surface of the stories we think we already know.

    13 min

  2. APR 29

    Episode 88 – From Reconstruction to DEI: The Long Arc of Race Relations in Texas

    Episode 88 – From Reconstruction to DEI: The Long Arc of Race Relations in Texas Hello folks, I’m Hank Wilson and welcome to Episode 88 of the Hidden History of Texas. This is Episode 88 - From Reconstruction to DEI: The Long Arc of Race Relations in Texas In this episode I’m going to talk about a subject that a lot of folks like to avoid. That is the subject of race and race relations in Texas History. The story of the struggle that both African Americans and Mexican Americans faced in achieving their civil rights might be something you were unaware of.  While our image travels from reconstruction to today, and that is the title of this episode, the reality is also that our Mexican American citizens have fought to improve their political circumstances ever since the Anglos began showing up in the 1820s and especially after the revolution of 1836.  The struggle African Americans faced started after their emancipation from slavery in 1865. For the most part though organized campaigns for both groups really weren’t launched until the early twentieth century. In the years following the Texas Revolution Tejanos were often the focal point of Anglo hatred and mistrust.  In the 1850s, Anglos accused Tejanos in Central Texas of helping slaves escape to Mexico and many of the Tejano families were forced to leave their homes. During the Cart War of 1857 (which I covered in a previous episode) Tejanos around Goliad and San Antonio were attacked by Anglos. Two years later in 1859, Tejano’s in South Texas were attacked after Juan N. Cortina's captured Brownsville. And he issued a proclamation demanding the protection of Mexican-American land rights. Needless to say, this caused panic among Anglo residents who thought of him a nothing more than a bandit. This instigated the "First Cortina War" which grew in intensity and eventually required the U.S. Army, including troops under Robert E. Lee and local Texas Rangers, to eventually force him to retreat into Mexico by December 1859.  It was called the First Cortina War because Cortina returned during the Civil War (hence, the Second Cortina War), initially assisting the Union army this time, (after all he recognized that the Confederacy wanted to maintain slavery and continue to take the land held by Tejanos) and he succeed in taking control of steamboats, before being defeated in 1861 by Confederate forces under Santos Benavides. After the Civil War, both the newly freed slaves and Tejanos faced further atrocities. In the 1880s, White men in East Texas used lynching as their preferred method of maintaining political control. It became very common as a method of retaliation for alleged rapes of White women or for other insults or injuries that white people felt had been perpetrated. Mexican Americans of South Texas faced the same problems. The Ku Klux Klan, the White Caps, law officials, and the Texas Rangers, all served as official and unofficial enforcers of White authority, and they regularly terrorized both Mexican and Black Texans. For blacks emancipation eventually proved to be more of a symbolic action than anything else, because while slaves were freed from official bondage, they were still mostly blocked from fully participating in society.  Freedmen often found themselves barred from most public places and schools and often were  forced to live only in certain residential areas of towns. As the calendar changed to the twentieth century and reconstruction was abandoned, white politicians insured that such practices were written into the law. Even though Tejanos were not specifically targeted by these statutes they were still often subjected to them through unwritten social customs.  Through the 1880s and 1890s, both African Americans and Mexican Americans faced organized legal efforts to disfranchise them and if those didn’t work, Anglos turned to a variety of informal means to weaken their political strength. The most common method they faced were terrorist tactics, literacy tests, the stuffing of ballot boxes, and accusations of incompetence when they won office. White political bosses in South Texas and other areas with large Mexican-American population such as the El Paso or Rio Grande valley, meantime, dominated their areas by controlling the votes of the poor. Two of the more odorous methods used by the white politicians was the poll-tax law and the other was the white primary passed by Texas Democrats. The poll tax law  was passed in 1902 the legislature passed the poll-tax law which required every person who wanted to vote to “pay from $1.50 to $1.75’ for that privilege, which effectively disenfranchised those who were poor. (Poll Taxes for federal elections weren’t eliminated until 1964 when the 24th amendment was passed and then in 1966 for state election.) These mechanisms disfranchised Blacks, and Mexican Americans for that matter, for White society did not regard Tejanos as belonging to the "White" race. Progressive reformers of the age viewed both minority groups as having a corrupting influence on politics. By the late 1920s, Texas politicians had effectively immobilized African-Texan voters through court cases that defined political parties as private organizations that could exclude members. Some scholars have estimated that no more than 40,000 of the estimated 160,000 eligible Black voters retained their franchise in the 1920s.  Racial animosity in Texas (and indeed throughout the south) was rampant. White controlled legislatures passed what are known as Jim Crow laws.  These laws greatly increased the segregation of the races, and in the cities, Black migrants from the rural areas were shunted into ghettoes where black citizens were already relegated. Ordinarily the Jim Crow laws did not target Mexicans but, there was an understanding among white people that the laws were to be enforced on the premise that Mexicans were an inferior people.   This meant that Tejanos were, much like black Texans, relegated to separate residential areas or designated public facilities. While the Tejano population was primarily Catholic, remember Texas was originally settled through the use of Missions, they were often made to worship at segregated churches. When it came to education both Blacks and Hispanics attended segregated and inferior "colored" and "Mexican" schools. In the mid-1950s, the state legislature passed segregationist laws directed at Blacks (and by implication to Tejanos), some dealing with education, others with residential areas and public accommodations. Texas governor R. Allan Shivers, who was opposed to integration especially in education and vehemently opposed the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, went so far as to call out the Texas Rangers at Mansfield in 1956 to prevent Black students from entering the public school His successor Marion Price Daniel, Sr., was a little more tolerant, the integration process in Texas was slow and painful. Supreme Court decisions in 1969 and 1971 ordered school districts to increase the number of Black students in White schools through the extremely controversial practice of busing.  As the 1960s started African Americans and Mexican Americans began to participate in both State and national movements that were designed to help bring down racial barriers. Black Texans held demonstrations within the state to protest the long lasting and well entrenched conditions created by segregation. Understanding the power of the dollar individuals began to boycott racist merchants. When the National March on Washington took place  in 1963, approximately 900 protesters marched on the state Capitol in Austin. This was a very diverse group and included Hispanics, Blacks, and Whites, and they directly called out the slow pace of desegregation in the state and Governor John Connally's opposition to the pending civil-rights bill in Washington.  After the passing of the contentious Civil Rights act of 1964, more and more people, especially those people of color began to demand the equality promised in the Constitution. By the latter half of the sixties, some segments of the Black community began to embrace the concept of "Black power" and a minority of them believed violence was the best avenue to achieve social redress. While throughout America riots did take place in major urban areas, the destruction of property and life in Texas in no way compared to that in other states. Likewise,  Tejanos took part in the Chicano movement of the era, and some, especially youths, supported militancy, and denounced "gringos," and spoke of voluntary separatism from American society. The Raza Unida party spearheaded the movement during the 1970s. A political party, Raza Unida offered solutions to inequalities previously addressed by reformist groups such as LULAC and the G.I. Forum. Members used demonstrations and boycotts and confrontational approaches, but violence of significant magnitude seldom materialized. The movement declined by the mid-1970s. During the same period, the federal government tried to implement an agenda designed to achieve racial equality, and Texas Mexicans and Black Texans both profited from this initiative. The Twenty-fourth Amendment, ratified in 1964, barred the poll tax in federal elections. In 1969 Texas repealed its own separatist statutes. The federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated local restrictions to voting and required that federal marshals monitor election proceedings. Ten years later, another voting-rights act demanded modification or elimination of at-large elections. Much of the activity in civil rights during the last quarter of the twentieth century and the opening decade of the new millennium focused on consolidating the gains of previous decades. For example, African Americans and Mexican Americans registered to vote in unprecedented numbers, and members of both ethnic groups won election to major local

    13 min

  3. APR 4

    Episode 87 – The Towns the Company Owned

    Episode 87 of the Hidden History of Texas - The Towns the Company Owned There was a time in East Texas…when you could live your entire life…without ever leaving the reach of a single company. They built your house. They paid your wages. They sold you your food. They taught your children…and sometimes… they buried your dead. These were the company towns of East Texas places that don’t always show up in the history books…but helped build the state as we know it. The Piney Woods System Long before oil changed Texas…the wealth of East Texas came from the forest. Endless stretches of longleaf pine straight, tall, and valuable. But the forests weren’t near cities. They were deep in the Piney Woods…isolated… difficult… and expensive to reach. So the lumber companies did something remarkable. They didn’t just build mills. They built entire towns. Places like Diboll, Manning, and Camden weren’t accidents of settlement they were designed systems. Efficient. Controlled. Purpose-built. A Life Inside the System In these towns…you didn’t just work for the company. You lived inside it. Your house? Owned by the company. Your groceries? Bought at the company store. Your paycheck? Sometimes paid in cash…sometimes in scrip, currency only good inside that same system. And if you stepped back and looked at it what you saw wasn’t just a town. It was a closed loop. A complete economic ecosystem…decades before anyone used words like “platform” or “vertical integration.” Diboll: The Model Town Take Diboll, for example. Built around the Southern Pine Lumber Company, it became one of the most structured company towns in Texas. Neighborhoods were organized. Workers were grouped, sometimes by job, sometimes by race. Life had a rhythm… defined by the mill whistle. Diboll lasted longer than most. Not because the system changed…but because the company adapted just enough to survive. Many others weren’t so fortunate. When the Forest Was Gone The thing about timber towns…is that they were built on something that could disappear. Tree by tree. Rail line by rail line. And when the forest was gone…the reason for the town disappeared with it. Places like Manning faded quietly. No dramatic collapse. No headlines. Just… empty houses. Silent tracks. And the slow return of the forest. Then Came Oil Then, in 1930, everything changed. The East Texas Oil Boom didn’t just create wealth, it created chaos. Where timber towns were planned…oil towns exploded. Kilgore. Joinerville and dozens more. Overnight, forests filled with derricks. Fields turned into tent cities, shacks were thrown up, and hurried streets. The companies were still there, but control was looser. Faster. Rougher. Temporary. If timber towns were systems…oil towns were surges. Control vs. Freedom And that’s the contrast that defines this hidden chapter. Timber towns offered stability, but at the cost of control. Oil towns offered opportunity but at the cost of order. Two different models of the same idea: What happens when an entire community…is built around a single industry? Closing Today, if you drive through East Texas…you’ll pass through places like Diboll without thinking twice. You might not notice what used to be there. The rows of company houses. The store where everyone shopped. The mill that set the rhythm of life. But the pattern hasn’t disappeared. It’s just changed form. Because the idea of a “company town”…never really went away. It evolved. From the forests of the Piney Woods…to the oil fields beneath them…this is another chapter in the Hidden History of Texas. But in reality, History isn’t over yet, because “The Company Town Never Left” There’s a phrase we don’t use much anymore. “Company town.” It sounds like something from another century; something tied to sawmills… rail lines… and oil derricks. But if you look a little closer…the idea didn’t disappear. It just changed form. In those East Texas towns, the company controlled the essentials. Where you lived.  Where you worked. Where you shopped. Your economic life…was contained within a single system. And today? We don’t always live in physical company towns…but many of us live in digital ones. Think about it. The platforms we depend on, for communication, business, even identity They provide the marketplace. They set the rules. They take a percentage of every transaction. And if you step outside that system…you often lose access to the very audience you built. Now, Washington doesn’t call them company towns. It calls them markets. Platforms. Ecosystems. But the questions feel familiar. How much control is too much? What happens when one system becomes unavoidable?And who really owns the value created inside it? In East Texas, when the timber ran out…the towns disappeared. When oil slowed down…people moved on. But today’s systems aren’t tied to a forest…or a field. They’re tied to infrastructure…policy…and increasingly… data. And that’s what makes this moment different. Because for the first time, the “company town” isn’t in one place. It’s everywhere. Something to think about…as we look at where we’ve been, and where we might be going. This is the Hidden History of Texas

    8 min

  4. MAR 21

    Episode 86 – Ma Ferguson the first woman governor of Texas

    Episode 86 - Ma Ferguson the first woman governor of Texas Hello everybody and welcome once again to the Hidden History of Texas. I’m Hank Wilson and this is Episode 86 – were I continue telling y’all about some of the “notorious” governors we’ve had. This episode is devoted to Miriam Amanda (Ma) Ferguson, the first woman governor of Texas. Born in Bell County on June13, 1875, to Joseph L. and Eliza (Garrison) Wallace, she attended Salado College and Baylor Female College at Belton. In 1899 at the age of 24 she married James Edward Ferguson in a ceremony in Bell County. She served as the first lady of Texas during the gubernatorial terms of her husband, who managed to get himself impeached during his second administration. I talked about his administration in a previous episode, which I’m sure is still available. Even though he had been impeached and forced out of office in 1924 Old Pa Ferguson tried to once again run for Governor. Now even in Texas we sometimes draw line as to who or what we want in the governor’s office, and the court’s said he was not eligible. In order to keep power in the family Miriam or Ma as she was known entered the race for the Texas governorship. Why was she called Ma? Prior to this entrance into politics, she had devoted her energies almost exclusively to her husband and two daughters and because of this and the combination of her first and middle initials, her supporters called her "Ma" Ferguson. While, in theory it was her campaign, she made it clear that if she were elected, she would follow the advice of her husband. This meant then, as she proudly said, that Texas thus would gain "two governors for the price of one."  One goal of her campaign was to have her husband’s name vindicated. She promised to make extensive cuts in state appropriations. She condemned the Ku Klux Klan, and opposed passing new liquor legislation, (this was during the years leading up to prohibition). Initially, in the primary, she trailed the Klan-supported prohibitionist candidate, Felix D. Robertson; however, she was able to easily defeat him in an August run-off to become the Democratic gubernatorial candidate. Then in November of 1924 she handily defeated the Republican nominee, George C. Butte, a former dean of the University of Texas law school. Many folks are unaware that in those days, the Republicans where the more liberal of the parties and the democrats were in favor of segregation and generally supported the Klan. She was inaugurated fifteen days after Wyoming's Nellie Ross, thus becoming the second woman governor in United States history. Her first administration is remember by historians as being dominated by political strife and controversy. What did she do or didn’t do? She did fulfilled a campaign promise to secure an antimask law against the Ku Klux Klan, (for those who are truly unaware of the KKK, they, much like today when people wear masks or hoods to cover their faces, the Klan wore hoods because they don’t want people to know who they are) however the courts overturned it. In her administration a series of events took place that many current voters can recognize due to how they seem to occur in today’s politics. For example, she had pledged to reduce state expenditures and the budget by $15 million, but in fact they increased. She and her husband, remember Pa, were accused of irregularities both in the granting of pardons and paroles and in the letting of road contracts by the state highway department. It seems that Ma Ferguson pardoned an average of 100 convicts a month, and she and "Pa" both were accused by critics of accepting bribes of land and cash payments.  An attempt to impeach Ma failed, but in 1926 those controversies helped Attorney General Daniel James Moody defeat her and win the governorship. Two years later, in 1928, she decided not to run for office, but in 1930 the Texas Supreme Court once again rejected her husband's petition to place his name on the ballot for governor, so she decided to run. In the May primary she led Ross Sterling, but then Sterling defeated her in an August runoff. This loss turned out to be fairly good for her reputation because Sterling was blamed by the voters when Texans began to feel the full impact of the Great Depression. In February 1932 she again ran for governor under a platform of lowering taxes and once again reducing state expenditures. In what many see as ironic, she also condemned alleged waste, graft, and political favoritism by the Sterling-controlled highway commission. Because of the effect of the depression on Texans, she easily beat Sterling in the May primary by over 100,000 votes, she then narrowly won in the August runoff to secure the democratic nomination. Defeating Orville Bullington, the Republican nominee thus securing her second term as governor. This time her administration did not generate nearly as much controversy as the first. The fiscally conservative governor held the line on state expenditures and even advocated a state sales tax and corporate income tax, although the state legislature did not act on these proposals. She did however continue her liberal pardoning and parole policies, but since this was during the depression, those helped to ease some of the strain on the state budget, and so they weren’t seen as controversial as the first terms ones were. 1934 the Fergusons decided to retire from direct involvement in politics, and she refused to seek office in 1936 and 1938. But like many politician retirements, this turned out to be temporary.  Ma Ferguson declared for governor in 1940. Now sixty-five years old, she claimed there was a "popular draft" for her to seek the nomination. She joined a field of prominent Democrats that included incumbent governor W. Lee O'Daniel. Ma's platform advocated a 25 percent cut in state appropriations, a gross-receipts tax of .5 percent to raise social security funds for the elderly, support for organized labor, and liberal funding for secondary and higher education. Even though the Ferguson name sill held strong approval from some, Governor O'Daniel proved to be too popular to unseat. Pa Ferguson passed away in 1944, and Miriam then retired to private life in Austin. She died of heart failure on June 25, 1961, and was buried alongside her husband in the State Cemetery in Austin.  Rest in Peace Ma and Pa Ferguson two of our more notable and some say notorious governors of Texas. I’m Hank Wilson and this has been the Hidden History of Texas and another in our series on “notorious” Texas governors, see you next time, thanks for listening.

    8 min

  5. MAR 1

    Notorious Governors of Texas – James “PA” Ferguson

    Welcome to episode 85 of the Hidden History of Texas, today I'm talking about one of the most Notorious Governors of Texas - James "PA" Ferguson. James Edward (Pa) Ferguson, Texas governor, was born in 1871 near Salado, which is in Bell County and is fairly close to where I am, to James Edward and Fannie (Fitzpatrick) Ferguson. Sadly, his father passed away when Pa was only four, and his mother, being a true strong Texas woman stayed on working the farm and he began working in the fields as a young boy. When he was 12, he entered Salado College, which was a local preparatory school, but in a sign of things to come, was expelled for disobedience. At age 16 he left home for a life on the road and wandered throughout the Western states, where he did any type of job he could find. Eventually he returned home to Bell County, where he tried farming and working on a  railroad-bridge gang. He did use this time to begin to study law and in 1897 he was admitted to the bar. He opened up a practice in Belton and then in 1899 he married Miriam A. Wallace. The couple had two children and since in those days lawyers weren’t as busy as they are today, he expanded his personal interests to real estate and insurance. He then turned his attention to banking and for several years was not only a member of the Texas Bankers Association but also associated with the Farmers State Bank of Belton. In 1907 he moved his family to the larger town of Temple where he joined in the formation and establishment of the Temple State Bank. Needless to say, it was during this time period when he was involved with banking that he also took an active interest in county and local politics. In spite of the fact that he never held a local office he was very aware of how local politics worked. He was a staunch opponent of prohibition and had fought against allowing what was known as the local-option out of Bell County.  He served as a campaign manager for Robert V. Davidson in 1910 and worked with Oscar B. Colquitt in his successful gubernatorial campaign in 1912. Prohibition had been a major issue in the 1914 campaign, and there were candidates for the governor’s race on both sides of the issue. The prohibitionists held an elimination convention and pledged their support to Thomas H. Ball of Houston. The anti-prohibitionists tried to have their own convention, but Ferguson, even though he had been identified as an anti-prohibitionist, refused to publicly support it. As a result, the leaders at the convention was not able to eliminate him from receiving their endorsement and while they did not endorse him the other anti-prohibition candidates withdrew from the race. Due to his popularity Ferguson easily won the nomination by a majority of about 40,000 votes. Ferguson proved to be one of the more captivating speakers and had a native ability to persuade people. He was a masterful public speaker. His most popular and talked about proposition was a law that would actually limit how much rent a landlord could charge. For the folks who were known as “tenant farmers” this proved to be very popular. It was not popular among landowners, and he tried to assure landowners that the law would prove to be beneficial to everyone. After his election he was successful in getting the law passed, but it was soon declared unconstitutional. During his term the state began to provide aid to rural schools and there was enacted a relatively minor law that required compulsory school attendance. He was in favor of helping schools, and colleges were permitted to begin building programs. In order to pay for everything, educational appropriation bills were more generous than usual. Needless to say, these changes increased the ad valorem tax rate for state purposes advanced from 12½ to 30 cents. The prison system increased its landownership and since Texas had many ‘prison farms’ the system benefited from the rising price of farm commodities. During World War I the system became self-sustaining and profitable. In 1916 Ferguson's reelection seemed almost a certainty. The prohibitionists decided to support a relatively unknown Charles H. Morris of Winnsboro. The major issues of the campaign were prohibition, the tax rate, and certain  rumors concerning the Ferguson administration. Regardless of the rumors, Ferguson was reelected by a majority of about 60,000 votes, but there was enough opposition to show that many Texans were not completely pleased with his administration. His second administration did little of consequence, except pass enough appropriation bills to force the tax rate to rise to the constitutional maximum of 35 cents. This is when old Pa made a serious mistake. He got involved in a quarrel with the University of Texas.  Turns out the board of regents refused to fire some faculty members that the governor didn’t like. Well, he threw a Texas sized temper tantrum and vetoed almost the entire appropriation for the university. Needless to say, this generated a lot of news and interest, but it also sparked a desire from some members of the legislature to conduct an impeachment trial. Remember how, I said that during the campaign there had been rumors about some issues with his administration? Well while preliminary investigations failed to uncover any charge that would merit impeachment, once he became embroiled in his dispute with the university, those old charges bubbled back to the surface. Coincidently at about the same time a number of new charges were made and on July 21, 1917, Ferguson was called before the Travis County grand jury. To the surprise of no one the grand jury announced that he had been indicted on nine charges. Seven of the charges related to misapplication of public funds, one to embezzlement, and one to the diversion of a special fund. He posted a $13,000 bond and announced his candidacy for a third term as governor. The speaker of the House decided to call a special session of the legislature, (remember the legislature in Texas only meets every 2 years) to consider charges of impeachment against the governor. While the speaker’s call was most likely not legal (only the governor can call a special session) Ferguson removed any doubt by himself calling the legislature to meet for the purpose of making appropriations for the University of Texas. This backfired-on Ferguson because the House immediately turned its attention to the numerous charges against him and ended up preparing twenty-one articles of impeachment. After a three-week trial in the senate, he was convicted on ten of the charges. On five of them he was convicted of misapplication of public funds, of course 3 of those were related to his quarrel with the University. One of them stated that he had failed to properly respect and enforce the banking laws. And the third charged that he had received $156,500 in currency from a source that he refused to reveal. Nine of the charges can be described as violations of the law, while the obtaining of $156,500 from a secret source while not legal was absolutely not good policy for a governor. He was removed from office by a vote of twenty-five to three and declared him ineligible to hold any office of honor, trust, or profit under the state of Texas. Fighting to the end Ferguson declared that the legislature constituted little more than a "kangaroo court," except that just a couple of months before the House and the Senate had refused to sustain charges against him. He believed that his  removal from office was far from certain when the legislature convened in special session. However, he underestimated the seriousness of his quarrel with the University of Texas. He resigned his office the day before the judgment was announced and contended that it did not apply to him. The question was eventually carried into the courts, where the judgment of the Court of Impeachment was sustained. While in many cases, being impeached and made ineligible to hold any office of trust or profit in the state would spell an end to a person’s political life; this was not the case for PA. In 1918 he sought the Democratic party nomination for the governorship but was defeated by William P. Hobby. In 1920 he was an unsuccessful candidate for President on his own American party ticket. In 1922 he was an unsuccessful candidate for the United States Senate. Finally In 1924, unable to run under his own name, he ran his wife's campaign for the governorship against Judge Felix Robertson, the candidate endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan. The Fergusons beat Robertson and went to the Governor's Mansion for a third time. Two years later they lost a reelection bid amid new scandals concerning excessive pardons and political patronage abuses.   James Ferguson died on September 21, 1944, and was buried in the State Cemetery in Austin. Next time I’ll take a look at Ma Ferguson as our look at some of the most notorious governors of Texas. This is the Hidden History Of Texas

    12 min

  6. FEB 15

    Episode 84 – Notorious Governors of Texas, Up First Edmund J. Davis

    This is Episode 84 - Notorious Governors of Texas Edmund J. Davis and the first of our series of Notorious Governors of Texas. With all the politics in the news today, I’ve naturally been thinking about politics and politicians. One group that has always intrigued me are governors. Not presidents, or senators, or members of the house, but governors. They’re the ones who really give a state its identity, well at least in a way, because they’re most often the ‘face’ of the state. Here in Texas, our current governor seems to love making pronouncements about how his administration is going to fight this or that evil that might be encroaching on Texan’s freedoms. More often than not, it’s usually just a bunch of fluff that his advisors know will make his hard-core supporters emotional and get him on the evening news. After all he’s running for re-election and needs to make sure people don’t forget about him. Naturally this got me to thinking about Texas governors in the past, so I started researching what I thought of the most notorious governors in the history of the state. These governors often gained notoriety due to the turbulent, defining political eras in which they served, such as the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the Progressive era scandals.  So, today I’m going to start a series on these leaders from the past. First is Edmund J. Davis: Union Army Officer and Reconstruction Governor of Texas. Davis was governor in the reconstruction period 1870 and 1874. He was a Republican, (not the type of Republican we have today, these were the anti-slavery, pro-union republicans). Since he was a Republican during Reconstruction, needless to say he was very unpopular with a large percentage of white Texans. They thought of him as a tyrant, because he believed in using the state police and he was adamant in enforcing what many considered to be radical Republican policies. Who was he, and how did he become governor? As were many Texans at the time, he wasn’t originally from Texas. He was born at St. Augustine, Florida, on October 2, 1827, to William Godwin and Mary Ann (Channer) Davis. His lineage traced back to a Grandfather Godwin Davis, who had immigrated from England to Virginia and had fought and perished during the Revolutionary War. His father, who lived in South Carolina, was a land developer and attorney in St. Augustine. As a young man Davis was educated in Florida, and at age 19 moved, with the family to Galveston, Texas, in January 1848. In Galveston he started a career working in the post office while he undertook the study of law. In 1849 he relocated to Corpus Christi, where he worked in a store and continued to read and study law and in the fall of 1849, he was admitted to the bar. Between 1849 and 1853 he was an inspector and deputy collector of customs at Laredo. In 1853 he became district attorney of the Twelfth Judicial District at Brownsville. About 1856 Governor Elisha M. Pease named him judge of the same district, and Davis continued to serve as a state judge until 1861. As judge he accompanied the ranger unit of Capt. William G. Tobin, who was involved in the Cortina affair at Brownsville in 1859 On April 6, 1858, Davis married Elizabeth Anne Britton, daughter of Forbes Britton, a state senator and friend of Sam Houston. Now we have his personal story, but this is Texas and in Texas nothing is simple, particularly politics. Davis was a Whig until the mid-1850s. OK, who were the Whigs? They were a major political party that was very active from 1834 to 1854. They were originally formed in order to oppose President Andrew Jackson's policies and his desire to expand executive power. (see power hungry president’s isn’t exactly anything new in American history). They supported Henry Clay’s "American System," and they believed in modernization, industrialization, protective tariffs, and a national bank. The fell apart by infighting over the expansion of slavery into new territories. This caused Northern "Conscience" Whigs to join the Republican Party and Southern "Cotton" Whigs to join other factions, such as the fledgling democratic party and some joined the “Know-Nothing” party.   In 1855 after the Whigs fell apart, Davis joined the Democratic party. In 1861 even though the Texas democratic party was a strong advocate for secession and were pro-slavery, Davis supported Sam Houston and opposed secession.  He ran unsuccessfully to become a delegate to the Secession Convention. Once Texas voted to leave and announced it was seceding from the union, Davis refused to take the oath of loyalty to the Confederacy, and the state vacated his judgeship on April 24. Unable to support the Confederacy in May of 1862 Davis fled Texas and travelled to New Orleans. From New Orleans along with John L. Haynes and William Alexander, he went to Washington. The men met with President Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln recommended that the three would be given help so they could provide weapons to troops that they wanted to raise.  On October 26, 1862, Davis received a colonel's commission and authorization to recruit the cavalry regiment that became the First Texas Cavalry (U.S.). The First Texas saw extensive service during the war. In January of 1863 they barely escaped capture when Galveston fell to Confederates. While in Matamoros in March of 1863 Davis was captured by Confederates. He had been there attempting to take his family out of Texas and also recruit men for his unit. Needless to say, his capture caused diplomatic trouble between the Confederacy and Mexico. Finally Confederate Gen. Hamilton P. Bee in order to appease the Mexican governor Albino López released Davis. Davis crossed back into Texas and from November to December 1863 he took part in Gen. Nathaniel P. Banks's unsuccessful Rio Grande campaign. in an effort to disrupt the border trade Davis’s unit marched to Rio Grande City and seized cotton and slaves. On November 4, 1864, Davis was promoted to brigadier general and for the remainder of the war commanded Gen. Joseph J. Reynolds's cavalry in the Division of Western Mississippi. On June 2, 1865, he was among those who represented Gen. Edward R. S. Canby at Gen. Edmund Kirby Smith's surrender of Confederate forces in Texas. After the war Davis participated in state politics as a Unionist and Republican. He served in the Constitutional Convention of 1866 and ran in the 1866 general election he ran unsuccessfully for the state Senate from his old district. He represented the border district and served as president of the Constitutional Convention of 1868–69. During this time, he made enemies among the white population by consistently supporting political programs that would have restricted the political rights of secessionists, expanded rights for Blacks, and divided the state. He also favored the ab initio theory, which held that all laws passed since secession were null and void. He ran for governor in the election of 1869 against Andrew J. Hamilton, another Republican, and won in a closely disputed race. His administration was a controversial one. Its program called for law and order backed by a State Police and restored militia, public schools, internal improvements, bureaus of immigration and geology, and protection of the frontier. (Sounds vaguely familiar doesn’t it) All of these were the subject of strong attacks from both Democratic and Republican opponents. They added to the controversy surrounding Reconstruction in Texas. Davis ran for reelection in December 1873 and was defeated by Richard Coke by a vote of two to one. Davis did not gracefully accept defeat, and he believed that the Republican national administration was partly responsible for his loss. He refused to vacate office after losing a what he considered a fraudulent-ridden 1873 election to Democrat Richard Coke. Here’s what happened. Democrat Richard Coke defeated Republican incumbent Edmund J. Davis with 100,415 votes to 52,141, a margin of over two to one. Davis, a Republican, refused to leave, citing a Texas Supreme Court ruling (the "Semicolon Court" in Ex parte Rodriguez) that declared the election unconstitutional. Davis occupied the lower floor of the Capitol with state troops, while Democratic supporters of Coke took the second floor. He asked President Ulysses S. Grant to send in federal troops to help him stay in office. Grant refused and finally on January 19, 1874, Davis resigned, allowing Coke to take office and restoring Democratic control to Texas. This signaled the official end of Radical Reconstruction in Texas and initiated a long period of Democratic dominance. From 1875 until his death Davis, contemporarily described as a "tall, gaunt, cold-eyed, rather commanding figure," headed the Republican party in Texas as chairman of the state executive committee. In 1880 he ran again for governor but was badly defeated by Oran M. Roberts. In 1882 he ran for Congress in the Tenth District against John Hancock, again unsuccessfully. He was nominated as collector of customs at Galveston in 1880 but refused the job because of his opposition to the administration of President Rutherford B. Hayes. Supporters recommended him for a cabinet position under President Chester A. Arthur, but he received no appointment. Davis died in Austin on February 7, 1883, and is buried there in the State Cemetery. This has been the Hidden History of Texas and the first in our stories of “notorious” Texas governors, Edmund J. Davis – see you next time, thanks for listening

    11 min

  7. JAN 20

    Episode 83 – The Quiet History of Book Censorship in Texas

    There’s a phrase we use and hear a lot in Texas. “Don’t mess with Texas.” It’s supposed to refer to us having a feeling of independence, grit, and self-reliance.But when it comes to books, and who gets to read them, we Texans have a long, complicated history of messing with what our fellow Texans do. Today, when we hear about book bans or library purges, it can feel like something new. Like a sudden crisis. But the truth is far less comfortable. Book censorship in Texas isn’t an anomaly.It’s a tradition. And like most traditions, it tells us a lot about who has power… and who’s afraid of losing it. Not a complete transcript.....

    10 min

  8. JAN 9

    The Quiet Texan Behind the Oval Office: Colonel Edward Mandell House

    “The Quiet Texan Behind the Oval Office: Colonel Edward Mandell House” Welcome to Episode 82 of the Hidden History of Texas, Yes, I took the holidays off and feel refreshed and ready to go here in 2026. I hope each and all of you had a wonderful holiday season. Now it’s time to get back into it.   If you pay attention to the world of political news, then you’ve probably heard the name Steven Miller. If you haven’t, he’s a primary advisor to President Trump. There are some who think that Mr. Miller is the most powerful person in Washington. That he wields more power and influence inside the administration than anyone else. He is what some call the power behind the throne, and they are surprised that someone like this exists. However, it’s not rare at all, throughout history there have been men who were incredibly powerful but whom most people can’t name. The question becomes, how on earth does a person rule a nation, a country without actually being the ruler? How does someone rule without ruling? It’s important to understand that real power doesn’t always sit at the top. Many times, the real power is held by a person that many people are unaware even exists. Real power operates quietly, seemingly in the shadows, through trust and access. One such person’s name was  Edward Mandell House, and of course, he came from Texas.”  And at one point during World War I, he was one of the most influential men in Washington. He either shaped or helped shape American foreign policy. He was never elected to office. He held no cabinet position, and he most certainly did not have a public mandate to do what he did. Who was Edward Mandell House? He was born in Houston on July 26, 1858, to Mary Elizabeth (Shearn) and Thomas William House. He was the youngest of seven children. Thomas, his father, was one of the leading citizens of Texas. He was a wealthy merchant, a banker, and a landowner.  As did many wealthy children in that time period, Edward had a privileged youth. Growing up he met many prominent people who visited his family’s large homes in Galveston and Houston. He also spent time enjoying life at his father's sugar plantation near Arcola Junction.  And like many Texas boys, he rode, hunted, and admired the gunfighters of the era.  He would often roam the flat, vast coastal plain near Houston. After his mother passed away on January 28, 1870, his father sent him away to boarding school. First a school in Virginia and then to one in New Haven, Connecticut. He was not a serious student, but he made several connections that would serve him well in life. It was also there that he became intrigued with politics. He and his closest friend, Oliver T. Morton (the son of Senator Oliver Perry Morton of Indiana), became fascinated by the Hayes-Tilden election of 1876 and the crisis that followed it. (If you think there are allegations of election fraud now, you should really look into how crooked elections have often been in our nation’s past) The two young men traveled to New York and Washington studying the events that were taking place. This might have been one of those moments in time when seeds of a person’s destiny are planted. This election and the intrigue that surrounded it and how political power is really wielded seems to have left a lasting impression on the young House. In the autumn of 1877 while attending Cornell University, his father became ill and he returned to Texas to attend to him. In 1880 after the death of his father, he decided to remain in Texas and help manage the estate. In 1881 he married Loulie Hunter of Hunter, Texas. The young couple honeymooned and spent a year in Europe after which they returned to Houston. A Return to Texas It was during this time that House began to supervise his family's extensive landholdings which were spread throughout Texas. He moved his family to Austin in the fall of 1885 for two reasons. First, he wanted to escape the heat and humidity of Houston, (I can attest to that, I left Houston for the same reason) and he wanted to be closer to his cotton plantations. During the period of the late 1880s and early 1890s, he rose to a position of prominence in Austin society and expanded his business activities to include farming and land speculation. With Austin being the state’s capital and House having extensive business holdings throughout the state he was drawn into state politics due to his friendship with then Texas Governor Hogg. In 1892 the governor was facing a formidable challenge for renomination and then reelection due to opposition from conservative Democrats and Populists. House stepped in and took control of and directed Hogg's campaign. Using his business acumen, he established a network of contacts with influential local Democratic leaders, then managed to manipulate the electoral machinery, and finally bargained for the often-overlooked votes of African and Mexican Americans. His skills helped Hogg triumph in what was a bitter, three-way race. On July 20, 1893, Hogg rewarded House with the honorary title of "lieutenant colonel." The press soon shortened the title to "colonel." This campaign seemed to wet House’s appetite; however, he was more fascinated with the process of politics than with the substance. He went on to build his own faction-"our crowd," he called it, which became a powerful force in Texas politics. He was an ambitious political operator, not politician, and he was skilled in organizing and inspiring others. He preferred to work mostly behind the scenes. By doing so, it helped him develop ties of loyalty and affection with his close associates. This also enabled him to use patronage (favors) to rally party workers behind his candidates. From 1894 to 1906 House's protégés served as governors of Texas. He and his associates managed the gubernatorial campaigns of Charles Allen Culberson, Joseph D. Sayers, and Samuel W. T. Lanham. He was particularly close to Culberson, and House directed the 1898 campaign that sent Culberson to the United States Senate. Over the years he served as a political counselor, often dispensing advice and controlling patronage for all three governors. “House learned early that true power doesn’t need a podium, it simply needs proximity. It needs access” Life in Washington Remember how as a youth, House had become intrigued by the Hayes-Tilden election of 1876 and that intrigue instilled in him some grand dreams. Tiring of being involved with state politics, he began to crave a place on the national level. (One thing to remember is that in those days the Democrats were the conservatives, and the Republicans were the moderate and liberals.) House was a fiscal or financial conservative, and he was irritated and discouraged when in 1904, the democratic nominee Alton B. Parker was defeated by Theodore Roosevelt. In the 1908 presidential election, he was further discouraged when Republican candidate William Howard Taft defeated democratic party candidate William Jennings Bryan. Rather than stay, House travelled to Europe where he tried to find peace of mind and dabbled in spiritualism. After returning to the United States in time for the lead up to the 1912 Presidential election, House was living in New York. It was then that several of Woodrow Wilson’s allies, including William McAdoo, who knew of House’s political organization, met with him to gauge his support. House agreed to meet with Wilson and hosted him for a visit in late November 1911. The two men felt an immediate rapport, bonding over shared views and backgrounds, with House noting how pleasant Wilson was. As a result, a close friendship was formed that lasted for decades. House used his network to help Wilson win the democratic nomination for president in the 1912 election. His influence secured the forty votes of the Texas delegation and the approval of William Jennings Bryan for Wilson's candidacy. The election of 1912 was one of chaos and if you read most history books about that race you will see it described as a bitter contest between Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Williams Howard Taft, and Eugene Debs. Roosevelt ran on what was called a "New Nationalism" platform that called for social insurance programs, reduction to an eight-hour workday, and robust federal regulation of the economy. Wilson's platform was labeled the  "New Freedom" platform, and it called for tariff reduction, banking reform, and new antitrust regulations. Incumbent President Taft ran an almost quiet campaign that emphasized his idea of "progressive conservatism". Eugene Debs was a proud socialist and he spent most of his time denouncing the other three by claiming that Wilson, Roosevelt and Taft were all financed by different factions within what were called the capitalist trusts. He also maintained that Roosevelt in particular was a demagogue who only used socialistic language because he wanted to insure that the capitalist establishment had control. Wilson won a close election, and this is when House as a person who is interested in real power, not flash, not headlines, but real power showed what he was capable of. He refused any official appointment but was responsible for the appointment of several Texans to cabinet positions. Thus, he was able to quickly and firmly establish himself as the president's trusted adviser and confidant. Since he had travelled extensively in Europe Wilson leaned heavily on House for advice on foreign affairs. House was establishing the fact that real power grows where trust replaces accountability. Wilson trusted House and that was all that mattered But what is that kind of power? What was the nature of House’s power? House had what we refer to as Power Without Portfolio. He had no official department; he wasn’t and didn’t need to be confirmed by the Senate. One important difference between then and today, he w

    17 min

  9. 12/13/2025

    Episode 81 – Texas Economy in the 1850s, Cotton, Tariffs, and Boomtowns

    Welcome to Episode 81 - Texas Economy in the 1850s, Cotton, Tariffs, and Boomtowns. Today's show is a little shorter than most. I was really afraid I'd start to get political and lose my focus. TBH, I'm tremendously opposed to tariffs, especially when they affect agriculture and working folks. Anyway....Here's a partial transcript Today, we’re traveling back to the 1850s—a decade of cotton, cattle, and booming ports, but also one of economic tension and national panic. Imagine standing on the docks of Galveston in 1855. Sailors unload heavy bales of cotton destined for England, while merchants hustle to get imported tools, fine fabrics, and wine onto wagons bound for Houston and beyond. This bustling port was Texas’s economic lifeline, connecting rural plantations to global markets. Cotton was king in East Texas, and thanks to low federal tariffs, planters could buy imported goods without breaking the bank. Meanwhile, settlers and ranchers across the state were doing the same, relying on affordable tools and supplies to carve out farms on the frontier. During this decade, the United States had some of the lowest tariffs in its history. The Walker Tariff of 1846 and the Tariff of 1857 brought import taxes down to roughly 17–25%, depending on the product. For Texas, that meant cheap imports and profitable exports. Unlike the industrial North, which wanted protective tariffs to shield factories from British competition, Texans had little industry to protect. Low tariffs suited the state’s agricultural economy perfectly. But 1857 also brought the Panic of 1857, a nationwide financial crisis. In New York and Philadelphia, banks failed, factories closed, and workers were laid off by the thousands. Across the Midwest, farmers watched wheat prices collapse. Now, here’s the fascinating part: Texas largely escaped the worst of it. Cotton prices stayed steady, and the state’s rural economy—while affected by some credit shortages—remained stable. Newspapers at the time proudly reported that Texas’s soil and cotton shielded its citizens from Northern calamities, reinforcing the belief that the Southern economic system was stronger than the North’s industrial model.

    6 min

  10. 11/23/2025

    Episode 80 – Texas Politics as the 1850s Begin

    Welcome to the Hidden History of Texas. This is Episode 80 – Texas Politics as the 1850s Begin.   I’m your host and guide Hank Wilson. Texas politics is a contact sport, and actually today’s Texas politics and politicians often seem like they still are set in 200 years ago. In fact, if you think about some of the laws that are being passed today, if you didn’t know better, you’d think that you had somehow traveled back in time to the 1850s. Currently there are portions of the political world that are trying to roll back civil rights. Racial animosity is at an all-time high. There is little tolerance for those who don’t think like the party in power wants you to think. Texas politics today are a mess and as they were in 1850. What was Texas and America like in 1850? Frankly, as I mentioned, it was a mess, the country was mired in controversy after controversy, especially when it came to the issue of slavery. Texas itself, after lowering the flag of the Republic in 1846 struggled to find its footing. After the war with Mexico in 1848 the state government was bound and determined to make the Rio Grande river, especially the far western part, the state’s boundary. Well, this meant that most of Eastern New Mexico, including an area that reached all the way to Santa Fe would become a part of Texas. In fact, in 1848 the state legislature declared that part of Eastern New Mexico to be named Santa Fe County and the governor, George T. Wood, sent Spruce Baird there to set up a county government.  Needless to say, the proud people of Santa Fe, refused to accept the Texans and with the help of federal troops forced Baird and the other Texans with him to depart. Baird was only able to stay until July 1849 at which time he left the region Meanwhile, in Washington D.C. a major controversy was brewing between legislators from the North and those from  the South. Of course, this was over the issue of slavery and especially if it was to be allowed in the newly acquired territories that had recently been acquired from Mexico in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo which ended the Mexican-American war. This necessarily drew Texas into the dispute on the side of the South, remember the early Anglo settlers of Texas were mostly southerners and their allegiance was to the south and to the slave owners.... This is not the entire transcript so for the entire transcript about Texas Politics as the 1850s Begin - contact me for a free PDF

    11 min
  • 10 Episodes

Ratings & Reviews

4.9
out of 5
10 Ratings

About

Here is where you will find The Hidden History Of Texas podcast. The episodes cover Texas history from the earliest days of Indigenous peoples to Spanish exploration, control by Mexico, the Anglo’s take over, Texas becomes part of the U.S., the confederates move in, and back to the U.S. The audio files are accurate and try to tell the story as best as they can from all sides of the issues. The hidden history of Texas is a history replete with heroes and villains of all sorts. There were good and bad people throughout Texas history, just as there were throughout world history.

Information

You Might Also Like