Matamoros and the Texas Revolution

4. Patriótica Matamoros: Revolution in Texas

38 4. Patriótica Matamoros: Revolution in Texas “Nothing will aidTexas so much as an expedition from N. Orleans against Matamoros under Gen’l Mexia. It is all important.” —Stephen F.Austin to president of the consultation, November 5, 18351 HURACANWASTHE ANCIENT CARIBBEAN GOD of wind and storm, who visited judgment upon the earth. Spaniards transliterated the indigenous word, likely of Taíno or Carib origin, into huracán to describe the terribly violent storms that seasonally plagued the Gulf, the Caribbean , and the Atlantic.2 Hurricanes were well known to peoples dwelling in the Bajo Bravo; the city of Matamoros prospered in spite of them. Perhaps it is just coincidence that the turbulent Texas Revolution was bracketed by two devastating hurricanes, each hitting Matamoros, one in 1835 and another in 1837. However much the first was prophetic, as insurrection brewed inTexas and northeastern Mexico, the second, called the “Racer’s Storm,” could be taken as an ominous sign that Mexico had lostTexas.It pummeled Matamoros for three days,October 2,3,and 4,and reportedly “drove the vessels on shore and prostrated all the buildings.”3 Historians have solidly established that the Texas Revolution started as part of a civil war between centralists and federalists within Mexico and developed into a war of independence inTexas even as the civil war continued in Mexico. This dramatic shift in Mexico occurred in 1834–35 when President Santa Anna,“El Presidente,”ousted his own federalist vice president,Valentín Gómez Farías. Then Santa Anna assumed dictatorial powers—although historian Will Fowler reminds us that El Presidente’s apparent pursuit of personal autocratic power is more complex and less triumphant than the traditional Texas story contends.4 Even so, Santa Anna dissolved the “radical” Congress, installed a new centralist government and a new conservative Congress, which by “the will of the nation,” rewrote the liberal Constitution of 1824 and allowed El Presidente to dis- 39 matamoros and the texas revolution solve state legislatures,decrease the size of state militias,and put governors directly under his control. Reactions to Santa Anna’s agenda and the erosion of state autonomy were most pronounced in the far regions; revolts occurred in Zacatecas,Yucatán, Nuevo León, San Luis Potosí, Coahuila y Tejas, New Mexico, and California.To send a clear signal to all, in April 1835 Santa Anna himself, as general-in-chief, led three infantry divisions, one of cavalry, plus eighteen artillery pieces—an army of some 3,300 soldiers —to Zacatecas, where he quickly and brutally crushed the rebellion. As Fowler notes,“Santa Anna did not forgive disloyalty”and“expected his allies to remain faithful even if he changed sides.”5 Antonio López de Santa Anna, wearing around his neck the Order of Guadalupe awarded to him by Emperor Augustín de Inturbide. Brantz Mayer, Mexico;Aztec, Spanish and Republican ,Vol. II (1853), frontispiece. From author’s collection. matamoros and the texas revolution 40 Federalists continued to organize but with limited success. For one significant example, General José Antonio Mexía, who was very popular among federalists in northern Mexico and Texas and enjoyed support from the United States,organized an expedition of some 160 men in New Orleans to take Tampico, a scheme that he hoped would draw upon the cooperation of federalist supporters in the city’s garrison and surrounding area.6 Ironically, in 1832, Mexía had helped Santa Anna (then a proclaimed federalist) to gain power over centralist President Bustamante by sailing with an expeditionary force from Tampico to capture Matamoros for Santa Anna.Mexía entered Matamoros without meeting resistance,the garrison having proclaimed loyalty to Santa Anna and federalism. Mexía then took his force to Brazoria in Texas, to contend with rebellions at Anahuac and Velasco.There he was satisfied with Texan claims that they had acted not as rebels for independence but as federalist sympathizers resisting local centralist commanders—though historian Josefina Zoraida Vázquez asserts that Mexía “confused Texan ambitions with the federalist struggle” and so was duped.7 But in 1834, when Mexía opposed Santa Anna’s about-face to centralism , he was soon captured and then exiled. In New Orleans, Mexía plotted the expedition against Tampico mainly with American filibusters and with the financial backing of what historian Edward L.Miller called“confederations of merchants.” These investors utilized land investments in Mexico to finance...