Histories
James Walker Fannin, Jr.
The personal history of my cousin, a hero of the struggle for independence in Texas.
James Walker Fannin, Jr. was probably born on January 1, 1804,
in Georgia, the illegitimate son of a Morgan County plantation owner, Dr.
Isham Fannin, and the daughter of an employee on his brother’s
plantation. While among the landed Southern gentry in the early 1800s such
an event was certainly not unheard of, it did create problems socially. The
child was sent away. The Fannin family, although prominent and financially
secure in Georgia, had a touch of scandal in its past and just enough skeletons
in the family closet to make this illegitimate birth more than embarrassing to
Isham Fannin.
The
family name had originally been Fanning and Isham’s father, James W., had
dropped the “g” to disassociate himself from the clan’s severely tarnished role
in pre-revolutionary America. The first Fannings arrived in the colonies
in the mid-1600s. By the time of the revolution, the family was well
established in colonial society and immediately took a prominent role in the
Revolutionary War — although on the British side.
In
North Carolina, a lawyer named Edmund Fanning married the daughter of the Tory
Governor Tyron, who was particularly hated by the colonists. After the
Revolutionary War, Edmund Fanning moved to Canada and for nineteen years was
governor of Prince Edward Island and a lieutenant general in the British army.
Edmund’s
brother, James W. Fanning, adopted the independence cause and fought on the
colonists’ side of the revolution. After the war, he immigrated to Georgia and
became a successful and wealthy planter. To disassociate himself from his
despised Tory brother, James dropped the “g” from the family name and for the
rest of his life identified himself as “Fannin.” In Georgia, he continued
to prosper and grow. James Fannin died in 1803, leaving a successful plantation
and several children including one son named Isham, who continued using
the abbreviated family name “Fannin.” In 1809 he married Margarett Potter and
they later had a daughter whom they named Eliza. He would later serve as a
major of militia in the War of 1812. But before all of that, in January of
1804, he was the source of scandal for the Fannin family. The woman whom he had
an affair with is still unknown. It seems that her name has been expunged from
history, which records that her Dad became the solution for
Isham's illegitimate child.
The
child was adopted by his maternal grandfather, James W. Walker, and brought up
on a plantation near Marion, GA, in what later became Twiggs
County. Little is known of his early years. Eliza’s mother appears to have
encouraged the siblings to maintain contact with each other. In later years,
James referred to her in favorable terms. One of his cousins was Samuel F.
B. Morse, the inventor of the telegraph. It is also apparent that Isham
Fannin maintained at least some relationship with his son, for in later years,
James would write favorably of his father, “. . . what he done for me, (which
but few fathers would have done).”
At
the age of 14, he entered the United States Military Academy at West Point in New
York on July 1, 1819, under the name of James F. Walker. The service
records of his father in the War of 1812 and his grandfather in the
Revolutionary War may have been a factor in his selection. At the time of
his admission, his guardian was listed as Abraham B. Fleming of Savannah,
Georgia. A female cousin and contemporary of James during this time,
described him as "gallant, handsome, and sensitive." Documents
from West Point indicate that Fannin, under the name “Walker,” completed his
Fourth Class Year (freshman) ending June 1820. Of eighty-six classmates, he
finished sixty-second in mathematics, fifty-seventh in French, and sixtieth in
“Order of General Merit.” It was obvious from the beginning of his military
career that academics would not be a strength.
By
January 21, 1821, he was failing French and had been remanded back to the
Fourth Class. By June of 1821 his grades had improved, but he was still
struggling. Of seventy-four class members, he ranked twenty-third in
mathematics; twenty-eighth in French, and twenty-seventh in Order of
General Merit.
By
October 29 of that year he was listed as “absent with leave,” and on November
1, 1821, the superintendent of West Point wrote, “I have the honor to enclose
the resignation of Cadets James F. Walker of Georgia and Cyrus Canon and
recommend that they be accepted to take effect on the 30th of November.” In
addition to having an academic problem in French, his conduct record was not
the best. He was liberally punished or assigned extra duty for absences or
tardiness from roll calls, classes, and formations.
One
of the reasons for these unexcused absences may have been to visit his cousin
Martha Fannin, who was attending a girls’ school in Philadelphia. Martha Fannin
would later marry Dr. Tomlinson Fort after, as she allegedly claimed, being
courted by Mirabeau B. Lamar in Columbus. But she was also the same age as her
cousin James, and the two appear to have felt close enough to have shared their
thoughts during this period.
Exactly
what happened to James Fannin between October 29 and November 20 of 1821 will
probably never be known, but it effectively put an end to his preparations to
become a military officer. The story has been reported in several history books
that he got into a fight with another cadet — supposedly over a comment
derogatory toward the South. He is listed simply as “Resigned to take effect 20
November 1821,” which was actually ten days before the superintendent’s
recommendation.
There
are no records to substantiate the theory that he resigned after a fight, or
perhaps even a duel, rather than accept punishment by army authorities. In
fact, West Point archives contain a document that suggests his departure from
the academy was the result of an entirely different personal situation.
That
document is a letter from Fannin’s cousin addressed to him at the academy and
dated October 3, 1821:
Greenboro,
Greens County, Georgia
Oct
3rd, 1821
Dear
Cousin,
By
the request of your Grandmother & Mother I forward you this & hope you
will not delay in returning home for they are very low indeed & are not
expected to survive many months & if you do not come shortly it is probable
you will never see them again for your Grandmother has entirely lost the use of
one side by the dead Palsey & the old Gentleman as you know has the shaking
Palsey & so very bad that he cannot carry anything to his mouth. I presume
I need not say anything more at present as you are not ignorant of their
extreme old age So be in haste & gratify your relations for they are all very
anxious for your return & do not delay as you observed in your last letter
until June go immediately on the reception of this to the Superintendent and
inform him of these things & I have no doubt but what he will permit you to
return. Your Uncle Fannin passed by here a few weeks since on his way to
[unintelligible] for his health & he will return to Savannah as soon as the
sickly season is over & he recovers his health
With
Respect & Great Esteem
I
am your relative,
(DWalker)
For
whatever reason he resigned his position at West Point — duel or family
emergency — James Fannin Walker wrote the superintendent three weeks after his
cousin’s letter:
West
Point
Oct
25th, 1821
Sir,
Circumstances
not admitting my longer stay at the Milty Acdy I hereby offer this as my resignation
of the Appointment of Cadet in the U.S. Army.
I
remain Sir
Your
Obs.,
James
F. Walker
After
dropping out of the academy, Fannin returned to Georgia, residing successively
in Twiggs and Troup Counties but removed, in 1828, to Columbus, in Muskogee
County, where he became a merchant. There he was a master of the local
Masonic lodge and began developing an interest in politics. He was
reported in a 1988 article by The Victoria Advocate to have been elected as
judge of the Muscogee County Court in 1830 only to be disqualified for having
fought in a duel. He also later served as a representative to the state
convention in 1833 from Troup County, Georgia.
With
regards to the disqualification for dueling, there appear to be no records in
Georgia of such a legal action taken, and the article did not elaborate on the
circumstances of the duel. While in Columbus he also served as secretary
of a temperance society and was division inspector for the Georgia militia. On
July 17, 1829, he married Minerva Fort, with whom he had two daughters, Missouri Pinckney (1830)
and Minerva J. (1832).
He
also appears to have maintained some contact with his stepmother and
half-sister. After Isham’s death, Margarett married J.H. King, who became
Eliza’s stepfather. After Eliza had gone to finishing school in Salem,
Margarett wrote her in 1829 that James had sent news of his baby daughter.
During
this period it was customary for established and wealthy plantation owners to
send daughters to northern “finishing” schools since there were few public
education facilities available for girls. After two years of boarding school at
Salem, it was determined that Eliza should go to finishing school in
Connecticut.
On
October 27,1830, James Fannin wrote his half-sister a long and very personal
letter. She had at that time returned home from Salem and was preparing for her
trip to Connecticut.
He
was then twenty-five years of age and eleven years Eliza’s senior, and his
letter was filled with brotherly advice. Eliza kept the letters, which were
handed down among family members over the years and in 1931 made available to
Clarence Wharton, who published excerpts:
James
tells Eliza reproachfully that he has heard from others that she is now with
her mother and among her former friends, and that he would like to consider
himself her “dearest relative.” “We have always been separated from each other,
but you will not suspect me of selfishness or the want of that fraternal
feeling incident to our relationship.
Little
is known about James Fannin during this period of his life, and this letter is
significant because, in it, James Fannin reveals a great deal about himself.
But even here, historians are robbed of information about a crucial facet of
Fannin’s background and thinking during this period.
Wharton
continues:
After
this passage he begins the discussion of some personal family matter and tells
her “you are now of an age to know,” but some careful hand has with knife or
scissors neatly cut from the letter what she is now “old enough to know.” After
the blank left by the censor’s scissors, the letter continues for four pages
and refers to his “long silence and peculiar situation.” “If you can not see
this in all its true bearings, ask mother or Mr. King [her stepfather].”
Like
Wharton, we can only speculate what matter of importance, or secret, he felt he
needed to share with Eliza. Some have speculated the censored passage had to do
with the illegitimate circumstances of his birth while others have suggested he
may have used the suffering he had endured because of those circumstances to
encourage his young sister to not make the same mistake his own mother had.
He
may have suggested unknown family circumstances that had resulted in the two of
them being separated all their lives. Or he may have confessed personal
feelings about being sent away from his father and adopted. It was the first
but not the only time he wrote Eliza of his “peculiar situation.” It was
something that very obviously weighed heavily upon his mind.
We
do not know who the censor was: if Eliza decided to remove it before she saved
the letter, or if Margarett intercepted the correspondence and clipped the
passage to prevent her daughter from reading it.
At
the conclusion of the letter, according to Wharton, Fannin:
“.
. . grows eloquent in the description of his baby daughter, whom Eliza has
never seen. “To praise our little daughter would be useless. If you wish to see
or know anything of her, come and see her. I can not visit my friends until
after the next year, when I hope to save enough money to buy a carriage, as we
will then have too many to go any other way, and tho’ we do live down near the
Indian border, we still have some pride.”
This
passage also reveals something about James Fannin in 1830: He is struggling
with finances and self-image problems. In 1830s Georgia plantation society,
finances and personal pride no doubt were closely intertwined. While Eliza was
living with her mother and a stepfather, who could afford the considerable
expense of sending her to a northern finishing school, he was struggling to
purchase a carriage for his wife and daughter.
Throughout
his life, James Fannin would exhibit love and affection for his immediate
family. Later, in a Texas society that included men and leaders whose pasts
were certainly suspect with regards to marital relationships and parental
responsibilities, James Walker Fannin Jr. would never once be accused of
anything but complete devotion to Minerva and his two daughters.
About
this time, he writes of his daughter again:
“She
is a real Fannin and I do not say too much when I assert that she is one of the
finest children in Georgia. She is all life, never cries, is always laughing.”
Shortly
after this letter, Eliza moved to New Haven, Connecticut, and began school. In
1832, while Eliza was still enrolled, James Fannin applied for, and received,
lottery lands from the former Cherokee Territory located in northwest
Georgia. He was beginning to obtain land in his name, but his quest for
financial security continued to elude him. In response, he began to consider
alternative, and more risky, business endeavors.
Early
in 1832 his second daughter, Minerva, whom he may have nicknamed Eliza, was
born — a fact he mentioned in a letter to his sister in April of that year. At
the time he wrote the letter, he was in Charleston, South Carolina, preparing
to sail for Havana, Cuba, purportedly for a cargo of sugar.
Clarence
Wharton again affords us a glimpse into Fannin’s thinking and feelings in this
letter to his sister:
He
chides her for two pages for not having written often and then such brief
letters. “Writing, my own dear but truant sister, is not only a relaxation from
severe studies, but an amusement to the tired, worn-out mind—like a mile walk
after a day’s ride. It supplies the joints and sinews, makes many things
vigorous and elastic. But my dear Eliza will not think that her only paternal
brother is one of those crusty, crabbed old crones who wishes to monopolize the
whole of her time, etc.”
Wharton
records that he then tells her he “left her sister, Minerva, and her nieces,
Missouri Pinkney and Eliza [Minerva], quite well, but does not pause to comment
on the personality of the little daughters, though we hope he still regarded
them the finest in Georgia.”
The
reason for this lack of comment may have been by painful design: Baby Minerva
had been born severely retarded.
A
month later he writes his sister again, this time from Havana where he is
lonely and homesick:
“Feelings
which seemed quite dormant yesterday are today in their zenith—Nay, as warm as
the tropic of Cancer will admit. I love my old friends with a holy love. No
wonder then that I love my only sister a little.”
Wharton
then reports that Fannin again refers to his “peculiar situation” and describes
his final moments with his father:
"Can
I (remember my peculiar situation) ever recur to the never to be forgotten
April 26, 1817, and see our common parent in the last death struggle, and hear
him calling for both of us, and you a helpless infant, unconscious of your
loss, held in his dying arms; can I, who known a father’s anxieties and
witnessed this scene, remember this and what he done for me (which but few
fathers would have done), not feel some solicitude for the object nearest his
heart? The full overflowing heart of a true Fannin responds in feelings of
deepest gratitude—in love the most lasting and indelible."
He
is again vague about the nature of his business—mentioning that he is going for
a cargo of sugar and will keep a vessel in the trade. The “cargo of sugar” was,
in reality, a cargo of slaves. By mid-1832 James Fannin had become a slave
trader. Although U.S. law allowed the practice of slavery, it did ban the
importation of new slaves from Africa.
Because
of the nature of the business and the penalties for conviction, little is known
about his activities during the next two years. By 1834, however, the so-called
“no man’s land” on the Sabine Lake between Louisiana and the Mexican province
of Texas was quickly becoming an importation point for illegal slaves introduced
into the United States.
Texas
was also becoming a promising land for American immigrants who wanted free or
cheap land and a new start in life. Stephen F. Austin’s small colony near the
mouth of the Brazos River was quickly growing, and stories reached the American
South of unlimited crop and stock-raising potential there. Although illegal in
Mexico too, slaves would be in great demand by the American planters there.
It
is not known when Fannin first visited Texas, but on May 26 of 1834 he was back
in Havana. There he made a contract with Harvey Kendrick for the purchase, from
a man named Thompson, of the schooner Crawford for five thousand dollars, for
which he drew a draft on E.W. Gregory of New Orleans.
The
manifest of the ship indicated that it was sailing from Havana on June 12 for
the Brazos River in Texas with a cargo of sixteen free Negroes. This Fannin
swore before the United States consul in Havana and to the fact that the ship
would be continuing on to New Orleans where payment for the boat would be made.
Because of Mexican laws banning the import of slaves, this oath was necessary
for permission to sail to Texas.
In
the autumn of 1834, Fannin settled at Velasco in the Mexican state of Coahuila
y Tejas (now Texas), where he owned a plantation and was a managing partner in
a slave-trading business, affirmed by his letters. Founded in 1831, Velasco is
situated on the east side of the Brazos River in southeast Texas. It is sixteen
miles south of Angleton, Texas, and four miles from the Gulf of Mexico,
currently annexed by the city of Freeport.
By 1835, Fannin was becoming part of the growing Anglo-American
resistance to the Mexican government in Texas. Fannin became an agitator for
the Texas Revolution on August 20, 1835, when he was appointed by the Committee
of Safety and Correspondence of Columbia to use his influence for the calling
of the Consultation. On August 27 he wrote to a United States Army officer in
Georgia requesting financial aid for the Texas cause and West Point officers to
command the Texas army. In September, Fannin became active in the volunteer
army and subscribed money to an expedition to capture the Veracruzana, a
Mexican ship at Copano; but the expedition did not materialize, and Fannin went
to Gonzales, where, as captain of the Brazos Guards, he participated in the
battle of Gonzales on October 2, 1835. On October 6th, he was one of a
committee urging Stephen F. Austin to bring all possible aid to Gonzales, and
when Austin brought up the whole Texas army and moved toward Bexar, James Bowie
and Fannin were sent as scouts to determine conditions between Gonzales and
Bexar and to secure supplies. On October 27th, Bowie and Fannin selected a
campsite near Nuestra Señora de la Purísima Concepción de Acuña Mission and on
October 28th, under the command of Bowie, led the Texas forces in the battle of
Concepción.
In
November 1835, Austin ordered Fannin and William B. Travis and about 150 men to
cut off any Mexican supply party. On November 10th, Fannin was ordered to cut a
Mexican supply route between Laredo and San Antonio but returned to
headquarters when he was not joined by a supporting force. On November 13th,
Sam Houston, commander in chief of the regular army, offered Fannin the post of
inspector general to the regular army. Fannin wrote back requesting a field
appointment of Brigadier General and a "post of danger". On November
22, 1835, Fannin was honorably discharged from the volunteer army by Austin and
began campaigning for a larger regular army for Texas. He also went home to spend
time with his family.
On
December 5th, the General Council, acting on Fannin's advice, established an
auxiliary volunteer corps. Sam Houston, supported by Governor Henry Smith,
commissioned Fannin as a Colonel in the regular army on December 7th, 1835, and
on December 10th, the council ordered him to enlist reinforcements for the army
and to contract for war supplies in the campaign against Bexar. Bexar had
surrendered on December 9th, so the accumulated supplies were used in the 1836
campaign.
Fannin's
appeal for aid drew strong attention. In Macon, Georgia, about thirty men
stepped forward to assist "our fellow countrymen of Texas," and more
than $3,000 was raised to defray the cost of the trip to Texas. On November 18
the Macon volunteers left for Texas, traveling by way of Columbus, where they
were joined by another group of volunteers. Fannin welcomed the Georgia
Battalion to Texas on December 20, 1835. He was later elected to command a
regiment consisting of the Georgia Battalion and the Lafayette Battalion
(composed of men from Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Tennessee).
By
January 7, 1836, the provisional government had appointed Fannin 'military
agent', to answer only to the council and not Houston. Continuing as an agent
of the provisional government, Fannin, on January 9, 1836, began recruiting
forces and supplies for the forthcoming and confusing Matamoros campaign
against the Mexican city of Matamoros, Tamaulipas. Fannin had difficulty
leading the volunteers in his charge. He tried to institute regular army
discipline, but his irregular volunteers would not accept it. Many of his men
thought he was aloof, and several historians believe that he was an ineffective
commander because of it. The majority of the men serving under Fannin had only
been in Texas a short time; he was frustrated by this, writing to Lt. Governor
James W. Robinson "..among the rise of 400 men at, and near this post, I
doubt if 25 citizens of Texas can be mustered in the ranks...".
After
Houston withdrew from the expedition, Fannin was elected colonel of the
Provisional Regiment of Volunteers at Goliad on February 7th and from February
12th to March 12th acted as commander in chief of the army. He sailed from
Velasco and landed at Copano with four companies of the Georgia Battalion,
moving to join a small band of Texans at Refugio. When he learned that the
Mexicans under José de Urrea had occupied Matamoros, Fannin went no further
with plans for the expedition and withdrew 25 miles north to Goliad and
quartered his troops at Presidio La Bahia. Made Lt. Colonel of the First
Artillery, Fannin began strengthening defenses at Goliad, and sent out his
captains to recruit more men for the army. "Enlist all you can.."
..." fill up your companies, and be ready for the field soon".[In
early February, Fannin sailed from Velasco and landed at Copano with four
companies of the Georgia Battalion, moving to join a small band of Texans at
Refugio. Mexican reinforcements, under General Jose Urrea, arrived at
Matamoros, complicating the Texan's plans to attack that city. Fannin withdrew
25 miles north to Goliad and quartered his troops at Presidio La Bahia. Made
Lt. Colonel of the First Artillery, Fannin began strengthening defenses at
Goliad, and sent out his captains to recruit more men for the army.
"Enlist all you can.." ..." fill up your companies, and be ready
for the field soon".
Appeals
from Travis at the Alamo (via James Bonham) prompted Fannin to launch a relief
march of over 300 men and four pieces of artillery on 25 February, 1836. After
some delay, Fannin and his men moved out on the 28th for the more than 90 miles
to San Antonio. The relief mission was a failure. The troops barely had crossed
the San Antonio River when wagons broke down, prompting the men to camp within
sight of Goliad. They had little or no food, some men were barefooted, and the
oxen teams wandered off during the night. On March 6th, 1836, the Battle of the
Alamo was fought, with all of the Alamo's defenders (about 187 men) being
killed by Mexican forces.
After
the Alamo, Santa Anna devised a three-pronged strategy designed to overwhelm
what remained of the Texas forces. General José Urrea would drive up from the
south with 1400 men; General Antonio Gaona would sweep across the north with a
column of 700 men; and Santa Anna and General Joaquín Ramírez y Sesma would
lead 1200 men through the center of Texas.
Santa
Anna sent General José Urrea marching into Texas from Matamoros, to make his
way north along the coast of Texas. The Mexican forces under Urrea were now rapidly
approaching the Texian stronghold in Goliad. On February 27, 1836, Urrea's
advance patrol surprised Frank W. Johnson and about 34 men, initiating the
Battle of San Patricio, where they killed about 10 and took 18 prisoners.
Johnson and five others had also been captured but escaped and rejoined James
Fannin's command at Goliad.
The
Battle of Agua Dulce was fought on March 2nd. Dr. James Grant, Robert C. Morris
and twelve others were killed, with prisoners taken. Plácido Benavides and six
others escaped to notify Fannin of the situation.
On
the 12th March, Fannin sent Captain Amon Butler King and about twenty-eight men
to take wagons to Refugio to help evacuate the remaining families. King and his
men confronted an advance party of General Urrea's cavalry in the Battle of
Refugio; his defense failed and he withdrew to the old mission. A local boy
managed to get away and alerted Fannin of the skirmish. Fannin sent Lieutenant
Colonel William Ward and about 120 men to King's aid. Ward managed to drive the
small Mexican forces away and decided to stay the night to rest his men. On
March 14th, 1836, Ward and King were attacked by Urrea and over 200 Mexican
soldiers as they were about to leave. This detachment was part of Urrea's
larger force of nearly 1200 men. The same day, General Houston ordered Fannin
to retreat to Victoria. Fannin then sent word to the men at Refugio to
rendezvous with his command at Victoria. Other dispatches were intercepted by
the Mexican forces, thus informing them of Fannin's plans.
Fannin
needed means of transport and had sent Albert C. Horton and his men to
Victoria, to bring carts and twenty yokes of oxen from army quartermaster John
J. Linn, who did return around March 16th. Horton's men would later form
Fannin's advance guard when the retreating to Victoria.
Fannin
finally received the alert of King and Ward's defeat from, Hugh McDonald
Frazer, on March 17th.
By
9:00AM on March 19th, they began their retreat from Goliad, during a period of
heavy fog. The Texan force included the San Antonio Greys, the Red Rovers, the
Mustangs commanded by Burr H. Duval, a militia from Refugio commanded by Hugh
McDonald Frazer, Texan regular soldiers commanded by Ira Westover, and the
Mobile Greys. Nine heavy artillery pieces with different calibers were ordered
by Fannin to be taken by the Texans, along with 1000 muskets, but he neglected
to ensure that a good amount of food and water was transported. Carts loaded
with heavy equipment were being pulled by hungry and tired oxen. Urrea did not
realize the Texians had left until 11:00AM. The two hour lead was removed, when
a Texan cart crossing the San Antonio River broke, a cannon had to be brought
out of the river, and Fannin ordered that the oxen be allowed to graze for a
period of time after the Texans had proceeded about a mile past Manahuilla
Creek, resulting in the retreat being stopped. John Shackelford, Burr H. Duval,
and Ira Westover opposed Fannin's decision to allow the oxen to graze, arguing
that they should continue their retreat until they reached the protection of
the Coleto Creek timber. Shackelford would state that Fannin argued that the
Mexican army against them was poor, and that Urrea would not follow them.
In
an effort to catch Fannin's troops Urrea left his artillery, and some of his men,
in Goliad. He began his pursuit with, according to Mexican sources, 80
cavalrymen and 360 infantrymen. Mexican mounted scouts determined the location
of the Texans, and reported the size of the force, which Urrea concluded was
smaller than he originally thought. As a result, he ordered 100 of his soldiers
to go back to Goliad to help secure Presidio La Bahía. He also ordered the
artillery he left in Goliad to be brought to him, and that the artillery would
be escorted by some of the soldiers he was sending back. Meanwhile, Albert C.
Horton's 30 cavalrymen were serving as advance guards, and were positioned to
cover all sides of the Texan force. The rear guard was not alert, and did not
detect the Mexican cavalry that was approaching. Shortly after they resumed
their march another Texan cart broke down, and its cargo had to be transferred
to another one, delaying the retreat again. Fannin had sent Horton to scout the
Coleto Creek timber that was in sight, and while he and his men were
away, the Mexican cavalry overtook Fannin's Texians. As the Texans tried
to get to high ground - 400 to 500 yards away from the position they were in
when the cavalry overtook them - the ammunition cart broke.
The
Texan soldiers formed a square against the Mexicans. The high grass of the
prairie meant the Texan view of the Mexicans was impaired. The Texians had
little water. Each Texian soldier received three to four muskets. The square
was three ranks deep. The front line contained the San Antonio Greys and Red
Rovers, whilst Duval's Mustangs and Frazer's Refugio militia formed part of the
rear line. The left flank was covered by Westover's regulars, whilst the right
was protected by the Mobile Greys. In the corners of the square, the artillery
had been positioned. Fannin stood in the rear of the right flank. In addition,
a number of sharpshooters were deployed around Abel Morgan's hospital wagon,
which could no longer be moved after the ox that was moving it was killed by
Mexican fire.
The
Mexican soldiers then attacked the square. The left of the Texian square was
confronted by the rifle companies under Morales, and the right was assaulted by
the grenadiers and part of the San Luis Battalion. The Mexican formation
involved in this attack on the right of the square was under the personal
supervision of Urrea. The Jiménez Battalion under Col. Mariano Salas fought the
front, and Col. Gabriel Núñez's cavalry was ordered against the rear of the
square. By sunset, when Urrea ordered the Mexicans to cease any more major
attacks against the square due to a lack of Mexican ammunition, the majority of
the action of 19 March was over. The Mexicans had assaulted the square three
times. Making effective use of their bayonets, multiple muskets, and nine
cannons, the Texians had prevented the Mexicans each time from breaking the
square. Urrea said that he was impressed with the fact that the Texians had
managed to maintain the square against the three charges, and he was also
impressed with the Texian weapon fire. Dr. Joseph H. Barnard, a Texian,
recorded that by sunset seven Texians had been killed. He also recorded that
sixty Texians, including Fannin, had been wounded. Forty of the sixty had been
wounded several times.
After
sunset, Urrea ordered Mexican sharpshooters to be positioned in the tall grass
around the square, and that they fire at the Texians. Before Texian
sharpshooters were able to remove the threat posed by the Mexican
sharpshooters, by firing at the flash caused by the Mexican guns, the Mexican
sharpshooters were able to inflict more Texian casualties. As a result of all
the fighting that occurred on 19 March, the Texians had suffered at least ten
dead and sixty wounded, whilst the Mexicans suffered an unspecified high amount
of casualties (estimated at 100-200 killed and wounded). The fighting of 19
March had not demoralized the Texian soldiers. They were encouraged by the
thought that Horton would succeed in getting Texian reinforcements from
Guadalupe Victoria to Fannin. However, Horton had not been able to break
through the Mexican defenses. During the day's fighting the Texian soldiers
that were retreating to Guadalupe Victoria after the earlier battle of Refugio
were close enough to Fannin to hear gunfire. However, they were exhausted and
hungry, and did not move to the square. Urrea stationed three detachments of
Mexican troops around the square, to prevent the Texians in the square from
escaping, and during the night Mexican false bugle calls were sounded to keep
the Texians alert.
The
Texians' lack of water, and the inability to light fires in the square, meant
the wounded Texians could not be treated. The pain being experienced by the
wounded resulted in the general decrease in morale amongst the Texian soldiers
during the night. The poor weather during the night further lessened the morale
of the soldiers. The lack of water also meant that the artillery could not be
used effectively the next day, because water was needed to cool and clean the
cannons. The fighting of 19 March had also left many Texian artillerists casualties,
and ammunition for the cannons was low. All these factors contributed to the
conclusion by Fannin and other officers during the night that they could not
sustain another day of fighting. An idea for the Texians to escape to a more
defendable position under cover of darkness, before Urrea received
reinforcements, was rejected because it was decided that those who were too
injured to escape, which included friends and relatives of unwounded Texians,
should not be left behind. It was therefore decided that the Texians should
attempt to make another stand from their current position the next day. As a
result, during the night, the Texians dug trenches and erected barricades of
carts and dead animals. Urrea, meanwhile, had been reinforced with munitions, fresh
troops, and two or three artillery pieces from Goliad. He positioned the
Mexican artillery on the slopes overlooking the Texian square.
At
6:15AM on March 20th, the Mexicans were grouped for battle. After one or two
rounds were fired by Mexican artillery, Fannin and his officers re-iterated
their conclusion that the Texians could not take another day's fighting, and
decided to seek honorable terms for surrender. They drafted terms of surrender,
which included statements that the Texian wounded would be treated, that they
would gain all the protection expected as prisoners of war, and that they would
be paroled to the United States of America. However, Santa Anna had stated
earlier that any Texian can only be allowed to surrender unconditionally. As a
result, Urrea could not guarantee that all the terms would be followed by Santa
Anna. He stated that he would talk to Santa Anna on behalf of the terms of
surrender presented by the Texians. The document of surrender was signed by
Benjamin C. Wallace, Joseph M. Chadwick, and Fannin. As a result of the
signing, the battle of Coleto ended.
Albert
Clinton Horton and his company, who had been acting as the advance and rear
guards for Fannin's company were surprised by an overwhelming Mexican force,
and chased off. However 18 of the group were captured.
The
Mexicans took the Texians back to Goliad, where they were held as prisoners at
Fort Defiance (Presidio La Bahia). The Texans thought they would likely be set
free in a few weeks. General Urrea departed Goliad, leaving command to Colonel
José Nicolás de la Portilla. Urrea wrote to Santa Anna to ask for clemency for
the Texians. Under a decree passed by the Mexican Congress on December 30th of
the previous year, armed foreigners taken in combat were to be treated as
pirates and executed. Urrea wrote in his diary that he "...wished to elude
these orders as far as possible without compromising my personal
responsibility." Santa Anna responded to this entreaty by repeatedly
ordering Urrea to comply with the law and execute the prisoners. He also had a
similar order sent directly to the "Officer Commanding the Post of
Goliad". This order was received by Portilla on March 26th, who decided it
was his duty to comply despite receiving a countermanding order from Urrea
later that same day.
The
next day, Palm Sunday, March 27th, 1836, Colonel Portilla had the 303 Texians
marched out of Fort Defiance into three columns on the Bexar Road, San Patricio
Road, and the Victoria Road, between two rows of Mexican soldiers; they were
shot point-blank, and any survivors were clubbed and knifed to death.
Forty Texians were unable to walk. Thirty nine were killed
inside the fort, under the direction of Captain Carolino Huerta of the Tres
Villas battalion, with Colonel Garay saving one. Colonel Fannin was the last to
be executed, after seeing his men executed. At age 32, he was taken by Mexican
soldiers to the courtyard in front of the chapel, blindfolded, and seated in a
chair (due to his leg wound from the battle). He made three requests: (1) he
asked for his personal possessions to be sent to his family, (2) to be shot in
his heart and not his face, and (3) to be given a Christian burial. The
soldiers took his belongings, shot him in the face, and burned Fannin's body
along with the other Texians who died that day.
The
entire Texian force was killed except for twenty-eight men who feigned death
and escaped. Among these was Herman Ehrenberg, who later wrote an account of
the massacre.
After
the executions, the Texians' bodies were piled and burned. Their charred
remains were left in the open, unburied, and exposed to vultures and coyotes.
Nearly one month later, word reached La Bahia (Goliad) that General Lopez de
Santa Anna had been defeated and surrendered. The Mexican soldiers at La Bahia
returned to the funeral pyres and gathered up any visible remains of the
Texians and re-burned any evidence of the bodies.
The
massive number of Texian prisoner-of-war casualties throughout the Goliad
Campaign led to Goliad being called a "Massacre" by Texas-American forces
and, along with the cry “Remember the Alamo”, fueled the frenzy that defeated
Santa Anna.
The
site of the massacre is now topped by a large monument containing the names of
the victims.
In
the months leading up to the Goliad Massacre, Fannin had shown defects as a
commander. Accustomed to the discipline of a regular army, he adapted poorly to
his situation as head of volunteers. He scorned the idea of electing officers
and was disturbed by the lack of a clearly established hierarchy among his forces.
His arrogance and ambition earned him the contempt of many of the men under his
command. One private, J. G. Ferguson, wrote in a letter to his brother: "I
am sorry to say that the majority of the soldiers don't like [Fannin]. For what
cause I don't know whether it is because they think he has not the interest of
the country at heart or that he wishes to become great without taking the
proper steps to attain greatness." In his final weeks, Fannin wrote
repeatedly asking to be relieved of his command. Most historians now agree that
Fannin made many serious mistakes as a commander. But despite his reluctance to
carry on and his sometimes poor military judgment, he held out bravely until
the end.
Fannin
County was named in his honor, as were the town of Fannin in Goliad County and
Camp Fannin, a United States Army installation. In 1854, Fannin County in north
Georgia was named in his honor.
During
the Battle of San Jacinto, Fannin's watch was discovered in the possession of a
Mexican officer. The officials who found it assumed the Mexican was responsible
for Fannin's murder; he thus met death in a like manner as Fannin.
The
Battle of San Jacinto, fought on April 21, 1836, in present-day Harris County,
Texas, was the decisive battle of the Texas Revolution. Led by General Sam
Houston, the Texian Army engaged and defeated General Antonio López de Santa
Anna's Mexican army in a fight that lasted just 18 minutes. About 630 of the
Mexican soldiers were killed and 730 captured, while only nine Texans died.
Santa
Anna disappeared during the battle and evaded discovery by shedding his ornate
uniform for that of a common soldier. A search party was sent out the next
morning. When surrounded in high grass and compelled to surrender, Santa Anna
was initially thought to be a common soldier. However, when saluted as "El
Presidente" by other prisoners, his true identity was discovered by the
Texans.
“That
man may consider himself born to no common destiny who has conquered the
Napoleon of the West.” said Santa Anna grandiloquently. “And now it remains for
him to be generous to the vanquished.”
“You
should have remembered that at the Alamo,” Houston replied.
When
Santa Anna offered the excuse that “The usages of war” justified what he had
done at the Alamo because the defenders had refused to surrender, Houston grew
angry. “You have not the same excuse for the massacre of Colonel Fannin’s
command,” he roared. “They had capitulated on terms offered by your General.
And yet, after the capitulation, they were all perfidiously massacred!”
Santa
Anna, obviously concluding that Houston would exact a like revenge, began to
shake with fear. But Houston needed him alive and was already formulating plans
around his captive. “My motive in sparing the life of Santa Anna,” he later
explained, “was to relieve the country of all hostile enemies without further
bloodshed, and secure his acknowledgement of our Independence, which I
considered of vastly more importance than the mere gratification of revenge.”
Houston
impressed upon the Mexican dictator that, if he wished to live, he must order
all his remaining forces out of the country forthwith. Santa Anna prepared the
necessary dispatch, ending with the note: “I have agreed with General Houston
upon an armistice, which may put an end to the war forever.”
The message was carried to Santa Anna’s men at Fort Bend. On its receipt, 4,000 troops packed up and marched out of Texas, leaving their President a prisoner in Texan hands. To make certain that Mexico did not soon mount another assault, the Texans kept Santa Anna captive until November of that year.
Owner/Source | Preston M. Caudle, Jr. |
Date | 3 Dec 2013 |
Linked to | JAMES WALKER FANNIN |