Matamoros and the Texas Revolution

7. Triumphant Matamoros: The Mexican Expedition

68 7. Triumphant Matamoros: The Mexican Expedition BEFORE FANNIN ABANDONED the Matamoros expedition,Antonio López de Santa Anna already had ordered his own expedition to Matamoros under the command of Gen. José de Urrea. By January 15, Urrea set out for the river city and thence to begin the campaign into Texas to secure the coast and squash the approaching attackers.By month’s end,the general would effectively occupy Matamoros, placate the agitated citizens of theVillas del Norte, recruit soldados, neutralize armed federalist rebels, and secure the vital support of other federalist forces as allies, including crucial rancheros in Texas. In the end, he would amass an army large enough to make Fannin’s recruiting efforts and Johnson and Grant’s volunteers altogether insufficient to attack Matamoros successfully, let alone occupy the city.Ultimately,Urrea would defeat the rebel forces inTexas at every encounter and would occupy the coastal prairie of Texas from San Patricio all the way to Brazoria—an achievement unrivaled by anyone else in the Mexican army.1 SantaAnna was well aware of U.S.intent to aidTexas rebels and of the federalists ’“general plan of revolutionizing all over Mexico,”as George Fisher had phrased his appeal to the Texas General Council when he urged it to authorize an expedition to Matamoros. Both Johnson and Fannin had emphasized that Lieutenant Governor Robinson keep silent on the question of independence for Texas until Mexican federalists had risen against the centralists, a maneuver which could readily be construed as duplicitous and manipulative toward their intended federalist allies.2 Nevertheless , both Johnson and Fannin relied far too greatly and dangerously on promised federalist support, especially considering that such cooperation depended on Texas colonists remaining loyal to the Constitution of 1824 and that Mexican federalist commanders awaitedTexas forces to make the initial move,essentially to prove their loyalty.This was grossly complicated because adventurers, mercenaries, and filibusters (rather than colonists) from the United States increasingly made up the bulk ofTexas forces. But 69 matamoros and the texas revolution these volunteers professed no loyalty to Mexico or federalism and, amid a variety of personal motivations, sought the ultimate goal of “liberating” Texas for annexation to the United States. Moreover, Grant, Johnson, and Fannin, who were leading these volunteers in an expedition to attack Matamoros, fatally underestimated the ability of Santa Anna’s talented brigadier general, José de Urrea, whom historian Edwin R. Sweeney calls “an officer of exceptional intelligence, undaunted courage, [and] unquestioned integrity.”3 In the Texas Revolution story, Urrea is second only to Santa Anna as the most well-known Mexican general, but ironically he is perhaps the least fully appreciated. In most histories written in the United States in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Urrea was predictably condemned, as exemplified in David G. Burnet’s public proclamation in 1836 branding Urrea as “the cold blooded murderer of the gallant Fannin and his noble band.” Mexican histories, by contrast, offered praise, as when the state government of Sonora proclaimed in 1838 that their beloved federalist government “has been [made] possible by the patriotic efforts of our illustrious son, General José Urrea.”4 Likewise, in 1837 Mexican secretary of war José María Tornel praised “the brave General José Urrea,” who “fulfilled the high hopes placed in his well-known courage and activity” through his “uninterrupted victories,” which “well deserve the gratitude of [his] country.” Despite his infamous association with the Goliad Massacre, Urrea’s reputation has risen dramatically over the decades; recent historians praise him as talented, keen, capable, aggressive, skilled, energetic—one of Mexico’s most able generals. Santa Anna himself praised Urrea’s “well-earned reputation . . . in the Texas campaign” as “brilliant and fortune crowned in all his efforts.”5 Nevertheless, most of Urrea’s long and distinguished, if controversial ,career and his illustrious family heritage remain unfamiliar;even his name is given inaccurately or foreshortened in most English-language histories. Born in 1797 into a distinguished Basque family in Tucson, Sonora (now Arizona), José Cosme de Urrea y Elías González was the greatgrandson of pioneer rancher Bernardo de Urrea, who served as deputy justicia mayor (chief justice) to founder and explorer Juan Bautista de Anza. Bernardo de Urrea named his ranching headquarters “artiz ona,” a Basque phrase meaning “good oak”—a possible origin of Arizona’s name. In the years to come, several men of the Urrea family would be stationed at the royal presidio in Tucson, including Mariano de Urrea and his...