As much as we hate to admit it, history has shown us that war between countries with conflicting ideas will always occur. When you have multiple countries inhabiting certain lands together, there will always be some sort of differences between them. Whether the differences be in the languages spoken, religious practices, or forms of government, it will continuously pose conflicts and often end in war. Because of the inability to compromise and the continuous disregard for Mexican laws and customs, I genuinely believe the Texas rebellion was inevitable. Whether the Anglos came into these lands with the intent to start a war, it is true that the two groups had major differences and the Anglos would soon become tired of living under the conditions put forth by the Mexicans causing what we know as the rebellion or war for Texas. When the original settlement agreements were set forth by Mexican government, freedom of religion, plots of land to be bought at a fair price, safety to be provided on the frontier, and to be treated as free Mexican citizens, began to deteriorate and turn into a totalitarian government they felt it was their duty to establish a new government free of Mexican reign.
The conflict spoken about most in Texas was said to be simply the conflict between two incompatible cultures (Major Problems in Texas History, 136). Mexicans spoke Spanish and practiced Catholicism, while the Anglos spoke English and practiced the Protestant faith. When the Anglos were given the opportunity to settle on these lands, it was upon agreement that these settlers would take on the language and religious practices of those they shared the lands with. Of course, this was not the case for the Anglos. Mexico did little to enforce these rules, as there were no investigations to conclude whether or not the Catholic faith was practiced in the private homes of Anglos (Major Problems in Texas History, 138). Although the Mexicans did little to enforce these stipulations, the Anglos were very strong believers that the two cultures in fact would never be compatible. Because of their stubborn ways and inability to adapt to this culture, the Anglos favored Texas independence and ultimately statehood.
Another great difference between Anglos and the Mexicans was the fact that slavery was illegal in Mexico. Coming primarily from the southern states, these Anglos were typically slave holders and fully intended to continue slavery as they settled in these new lands. Not only did the Anglo-Americans feel strongly about this topic, but Tejanos also joined in on this stating that “slavery was a necessary evil for Texas if the underpopulated and beleaguered province was going to prosper” (Major Problems in Texas History, 139). Mexico did in fact fall into the ideas of slavery but very hesitantly with use of the 1829 Emancipation Act. As Mexico grew weary of the Anglo settlers, Manuel de Mier y Teran was sent into these areas to study the conditions of Texas in 1829, where he later came to the conclusion that the settlers were not loyal. According to the text, Anglo Americans were viewed as aggressive and expansionistic, and as a clear and present danger to Texas (Major Problems in Texas History, 140). Because of this, the Law of April 6, 1830 was set into place. With this law, further immigration from the US was prohibited, empresario contracts that had not yet been completed were revoked, the introduction of new slaves into Texas was strictly prohibited (current slaves were excluded) and ordered the building of forts. With this new law in effect, the Anglos favored their independence even more.
Whereas some may say the rebellion was due to cultural indifferences, some also argue that it was the government and changes within Mexico that caused outrage by not only Anglo-Americans, but Tejanos as well. The Anglo Americans detested the lack of a jury system and the Mexican systems in place to define merits of a case as well as the lack of local autonomy. As a result of the conjunction between Coahuila and Texas, the control of the government laid in the hands of representatives from Coahuila, which further swayed the Anglos from the Mexican governments creating a desire for total independence. The abolishment of the 1824 Constitution was a serious issue, causing the government in Mexico to shift from a federalist standing to a more centralized government. It was said that in order to consolidate his power, Santa Anna abolished state legislatures and replaced them with military districts which increased resistance from the Anglos and Tejanos (Major Problems in Texas History, 121). As Santa Anna made the transition into sole power, the ultimate goal of Anglos and Tejanos from the regions was to bring back the Constitution of 1824, but quickly realized that independence was the only solution to this problem. Due to this, the Consultation took place in November of 1835. Within this meeting, the plans for the future were discussed and ultimately led to the declaration of independence three months later. With this, three men (Stephen Austin, Branch T. Archer, William H Wharton) were sent to the US to call for assistance. Because of this cry for help, there was the involvement of thousands of American men joining forces to fight for the independence of Texas. In conclusion, the war was in fact a combined effort of both the Anglos and Tejanos and seen as a war having to do more with the culture of politics than the politics of culture (Major Problems in Texas History, 139).
Another side of this story, is simply the fact that the goal of America was to grow. Following their victory, it came to no surprise that the United States would in fact want Texas. With recent attempts to purchase Texas, Mexico went into a state of fear. As our text states, Alaman wrote in 1830, “Where others send invading armies… [the North Americans] send their colonists” (Major Problems in Texas History, 140). With this came the introduction of the “peace” and “war” parties. The ultimate goal of these parties was to create a more attractive version of Texas for immigrants. The peace party, led ultimately by Stephen F. Austin wished for Texas to be separated from Coahuila, whereas the war party led by William B. Travis wished for independence from Mexico completely. Because of these joint efforts, it further led turmoil in the fight against Mexico. As time continued and the differences between Anglos and Texans became more apparent, Anglo Americans within Texas were all able to reach the final conclusion in unity: Texas Independence.
In concluding this essay, it’s true that the fight for Independence was not simply a conflict of race, culture or democracy but “issues were so clearly drawn that men of good will united readily to fight for principles greater than themselves” (Major Problems in Texas History, 141). Haynes states within his essay, “I have no reason to doubt, but it should be remembered that many Anglo Americans who came to Texas had more interest in fleeing the law than in changing the law; that they came to Texas for personal gain…and the unbridled pursuit of self-interest on the part of some Anglo Americans, rather than the quest for liberty, may have helped to bring on the Texas rebellion” (Major Problems in Texas History, 141). Because of the afore mentioned differences in culture, politics, religion, and the military pressure, the Texas revolution was an unavoidable situation primed with tension and had the beginning embers of rebellion that spread like wildfire until the word was revolution.