Isaac Van Zandt to Anson Jones, November 4, 1843

Summary: Van Zandt described recent issues and diplomatic events. First, he told Jones that prospects for annexation were looking more favorable, especially since men like John Quincy Adams were alarmed. Second, he updated Jones on the upcoming council with Native Americans and said U.S. officials were going along with it, albeit reluctantly. Third, he commented on his instructions to demand reparations on behalf of a Texas collector on the Red River. He said he would do so but the case looked very weak and urged both the collector and the Texas government to secure more testimony. Finally, he told Jones that the U.S. was dragging its feet on returning Dr. Robertson's slaves because of the reluctance of some members of the Cabinet. All in all, Van Zandt felt confident that Texas would see brighter days ahead.

[Despatch No. 110.]

LEGATION OF TEXAS

Washington D C Nov 4th 1843

DEAR SIR

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt on yesterday of your communication of the 29th September last, together with a copy of a certain correspondence with Capt Elliott British Charge d'Affaires, also the demand of the President for the delivery of Hiram Kenley a refugee from justice and a copy of the order of the Department of War and Marine directed to Col Jacob Snively with the report of that officer giving information of the manner of the termination of his campaign

The several matters embraced in your communication and accompanying papers shall receive my prompt attention. But as it will require some little time to execute all your instructions, I deem it proper first to submit for your consideration some reflections of mine upon some of the points to which my attention has been directed, together with a succinct statement of the condition of some of the various questions heretofore pending. The last I notice first.

Annexed you will find a copy of my reply to Mr Upshurs note upon the subject of annexation. I thought it best as my instructions stood to make no intimation of Opinion upon the subject but simply to inform the Secretary that a copy of his note was submited for the determination of the Government. This question appears to receive daily, increased interest here, not only with the Government but the people also. It is the leading matter of inquiry by almost every prominent man I meet. The opinion of those friendly to the measure is that should such a treaty be in contemplation, at no time since the subject was first agitated, has there been so many circumstances combining to facilitate its ratification. Mr Adams manifests great alarm. In a speech of more than two hours length to his constituents lately, he occupied the principal portion of the time in discussing the subject and the matters connected therewith. I hope that before this, you have received my despatches in regard to it and have given it a favorable consideration

The instructions final have been sent to Gov Butler who is Commissioner to meet the Indians. I found it impossible to obtain the sanction of this Government to conclude such a treaty as would make the United States a guarantee for the faithful performance of the conditions The present Secretary of War and Commissioner of Indian Affairs as well as Mr Spencer late Secretary of War and now of the Treasury, were uncompromising in their opposition. The commissioner is however directed to use all his powers to affect [sic] a treaty of peace between Texas and the Indians. The commissioner of Indian affairs has likewise addressed letters to the principal chiefs of the Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw and Creek Nations to persuade them not to oppose but to use their influence with the wild Indians to induce them to conclude a peace with Texas. From the tenor of your communication I fear that the time agreed upon will not be entirely convenient for our Government. In regard to this I can only say that I have acted with the best lights upon me and hope the Department may be able to carry out the arrangements

Since the date of my last dispatch to your department I have frequently called on the Secretary of State and urged upon him the necessity of taking up the case of the outrage upon Col Bourland the collector of Red River. He has universally replied to me that he had not yet been able to procure all the testimony upon the subject but that he hoped soon to receive it when he would at once take it up In your communication now before me I am instructed to make a demand for indemnity for the supposed amount of goods taken from the collector. I entertain some doubt whether the claim if now made can be held as well founded, since in making the demand for reperation for the wrongs done the collector we presented the fact that the goods had been ordered to be released and communicated

at the same time a copy of those orders. I take this to be the rule in civil cases that if an officer has taken possession of property and an order is afterwards issued from the proper authority for its release and in the mean time before the Officer is advised of the order of release the property is wrested from his possession and returned to its original possessor, though the party would be liable to a prosecution for the trespass or violence if used, yet it would in no degree affect his title to the property or make him liable for its value at the suit of any other person not even the officer himself. If in this I am correct I apprehend that the principle is no less true in a national point of view. I merely submit these reflections for your consideration, not as controlling my action for as your instructions are unequivocal I shall seize the earliest opportunity to make the demand and will urge it by every means in my power. There is one other point in this case to which I call your attention. Col Bourland states that it can be established that the offenders were aided or countenanced by a United States officer, Col Loomis. I have had some conversation with Col Armstrong Indian Agent on this subject and from his statement I think it will be difficult to identify the officer in any manner with the outrage. I would therefore suggest to your Department the propriety of calling on Col Bourland to procure such testimony as he may be able to obtain touching this particular point and communicate the same to me as early as possible Since the date of my letter to Mr Upshur Secretary of State upon the subject of Dr Robertsons negroes, I have given the matter my frequent attention but up to the present time I regret to have to say that no deffinite[sic] action has yet been taken upon it by the Government of the United States. The Secretary of State in our early discussions upon the matter presented and urged many objections to delivering up the negroes, all of which I think I have met successfully not only to my satisfaction but that of the Secretary of State. In our last interview on the subject Mr Upshur said that he would confess to me candidly that he was convinced that the United States ought to deliver up the negroes and that he was anxious himself to do so but that the opposition of some of the cabinet was so great that as yet he had been unable to procure the sanction of the President to that course. I told him that the great delay which had occurred in this case was well nigh tantamount in its effects to a rejection and a longer procrastination of the question could not fail to be viewed by the President of Texas as manifesting a disposition on the part of the Government of the United States to avoid the performance of an act manifestly called for by the plainest treaty stipulations. Mr Upshur said he would do all he could to accord to Texas her rights but in the mean time hoped that neither this question nor those connected with the border difficulties, should be permitted to interpose obstacles to the

accomplishment of the important object of annexation. I replied that I was sure that it was the most ardent desire of the President of Texas to cultivate the most friendly relations with the United States, but at the same time I thought nothing could so much contribute to the mantainance of a good understanding between the two countries as a prompt and ready accordance of right

I am gratified to receive your instructions upon the subject of the disarming of Col Snivelys command. This was a great outrage and demands reperation. I was strongly inclined to act on this matter at an earlier day, knowing the delay necessarily attendant upon the circuitous route by which Col Snively's report would be sent, but as I would have had to rely upon newspaper statements which were uncertain and contradictory I finally concluded to await the receipt of intelligence from your Department in regard to it. I shall immediately make the communication to this Government upon the subject as directed in your instructions,

I will see the President on Monday, (to day being Saturday and the usual day for the meeting of the Cabinet,) upon the subject of the delivery of the refugee Henley and will write to Genl Henderson the result.

I am exceedingly gratified to find that amidst all our difficulties our prospects are brightning. I think that there is much grounds to indulge the hope that ere long Texas will surmount the obstacles which have retarded her progress and by the successful prosecution of a proper policy find herself again restored to peace and prosperity.

With Sentiments of high regard I am

most respectfully

your obt Sert.

ISAAC VAN ZANDT

To

Hon ANSON JONES

Secretary of State

of Texas

P.S. Please remember me to the President and Gent of the Cabinet thine

I.V.Z.

Source Copy Consulted: Isaac Van Zandt to Anson Jones, November 4, 1843, in George Garrison, ed., Diplomatic Correspondence of the Republic of Texas, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1908, (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1911), 3 vols., 2: 224-227