To say that the history of Texas in the middle decades of the 19th century was a turbulent one is to say nothing. In fewer than thirty years, Texas won a war of independence against Mexico, was admitted into Union as a state, and then seceded from the Union to join the Confederacy. As such, Texans had effectively rebelled against their governments two times in a row with merely a quarter of a century separating the Texas Revolution of 1835-36 and Texan secession of 1861. Interestingly enough, the causes that provoked Texas to secede were similar in both cases, and there are at least two notable parallels. A strong common identity with the neighboring population, as opposed to the central government, and Texan commitment to slavery were crucial causes of both rebellions, even though their relative importance varied depending on the case.
The Texas Revolution of 1835-36 did not have a single overwhelming cause that would dwarf all others, but the fact that many Texan settlers came from the USA was a notable influence. The Colonization Act of 1825 invited colonists to Texas promising generous terms, and the vast majority of those came across the US border (Barker and Pohl). As a result, in a matter of years, a large Anglo population came to live on Mexican territory in close proximity to their brethren in the United States. The fact that the colonists had closer cultural ties to a foreign state than to the central government worried Mexican administration, as evidenced by Manuel de Mier y Terán’s inspection in 1828 (Barker and Pohl). Moreover, Anglo colonists also wanted to settle adjacent to the USA and actively rejected The Law of April 6, 1830, the provision of which forbade to do so (Barker and Pohl). Thus, the common identity that Anglo Texans settlers shared with Americans across the border rather than Mexicans was a combustible issue and one of the prominent causes of the Texas Revolution.
Slavery, on the other hand, did not play as decisive a role in causing the Revolution of 1835-36 as did the conflicts between Anglo and Mexican identities and resulting immigration restrictions. Rather than an immediate cause, the peculiar institution was an underlying influence that contributed to the mistrust between Anglo settlers and the Mexican government. The history of slavery in Mexican Texas was short but convoluted. The 1827 Constitution of the State of Coahuila and Texas forbade the further introduction of slaves to the state, but was but soon amended to allow indentured servitude that was slavery in all but name (Campbell). Two years later, President Vincente Guerrero “issued a decree abolishing slavery in all of Mexico” and exempted Texas from it within several months (Campbell). While the Mexican government always stopped short of decisive action against slavery, it was still enough to irritate Anglo settlers who perceived owning slaves as their fundamental right. Hence, slavery was also a cause of the Texas revolution, although not the most prominent one.
A quarter of a century later, the situation was the direct opposite of 1835-36 – this time, the peculiar institution was the primary reason why Texans rebelled against their government. Texans believed that slavery was “necessary for the continued economic growth of the state” and watched the ascension of Abraham Lincoln, the leader of the Republican Party, to the presidency with unease (Wooster). When Texas seceded in 1861, after secessionists outmaneuvered pro-Union Governor Houston, it seceded “over the issue of slavery and white supremacy” (“Texas in the Civil War” 00:00:29 – 00:00:31). Unlike in 1835-36, slavery was not an indirect influence contributing to the overall uneasiness among the Texans, but the immediate cause of secession.
The common identity that Texans shared with those across the state border played a role once again, although, this time, it was secondary to slavery in importance. Texas did not secede from the Union to stand alone– as a quintessentially Southern state, it intended to fight for the common Southern cause. Texans perceived the advances against slavery not in isolated terms, but as the encroachments “upon Southern institutions by Northern political leaders” (Campbell). After both the Secession Convention and the popular vote turned out in favor of secession in early 1861, the state wasted no time in joining the Confederacy (Campbell). The common identity with the immediate neighbors, as opposed to the central government, played its role once more in prompting Texans to take up arms.
As one can see, there are clear parallels between the causes of the Texas Revolution of 1835-36 and the Texan secession of 1861. The strong common identity with the neighboring Anglo population rather than the central government was one of these and, while it played a decisive role in 1835-36, it was not the primary influence in 1861. On the other hand, the commitment to slavery was only an underlying cause in 1835-36, when it merely contributed to the overall tension, but became the single most important cause of secession in 1861. Thus, the two rebellions separated by a quarter of a century had much in common in causal terms, even if the importance of a given cause varied between the cases.
Works Cited
Barker, Eugene C., and James W. Pohl. “Texas Revolution.” The Handbook of Texas Online, 2020. Web.
Campbell, Randolph N. “Slavery.” The Handbook of Texas Online, Web. 2020.
“Texas in the Civil War.” YouTube, 2020. Web.
Wooster, Ralph A. “Civil War.” The Handbook of Texas Online, 2020. Web.