The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 62, July 1958 - April, 1959 Page: 143
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
The Reconstruction Courts of Texas, r867-1873
who fled to the North following secession and received a commis-
sion as a general officer in the Federal Army. Hamilton was rep-
resentative of the strong Union sentiment that had existed in
Texas before the war." Many Union sympathizers who had
served in public office before the war were available for gov-
ernmental duty thereafter. Others in the group included
Edmund J. Davis, a native of Florida who had resided in Texas
many years before the outbreak of hostilities, and E. M. Pease,
who had been governor of the state before the war and strongly
opposed to secession.
Governor Hamilton arrived in Texas in July, 1865, and imme-
diately made arrangements for the calling of a convention for the
adoption of a constitution in order that the state might be reor-
ganized and assume relations with the general government in
Washington.9 Under presidential Reconstruction, a new state
constitution was adopted and an election was held for governor
and other state officers. James W. Throckmorton, who had voted
against secession but thereafter served as a general officer in the
Confederate Army, was elected governor over former Governor
E. M. Pease. George F. Moore, Richard Coke, S. P. Donley, Asa
H. Willie, and George W. Smith were elected to the Supreme
Court. Judge Moore served as chief justice. Oran M. Roberts
and David G. Burnet were selected by the legislature to serve as
United States senators.
Presidential Reconstruction, however, was short lived. The
radical Republicans under Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens
in effect seized upon the Calhoun theory of state sovereignty and
turned the "War between the States" into a vicious, disastrous
theory upon which to base their particular program of so-called
Reconstruction or rehabilitation. If it be accepted that the war
was a conflict between sovereignties, then what was the status of
the defeated sovereignties whose territory was occupied by the
troops of the victorious power? The radicals had an answer to this
question which accorded with a certain conception of interna-
tional law. This was the so-called "conquered province" theory;
8Claude Elliott, "Union Sentiment in Texas, 1861-1865," Southwestern Historical
Quarterly, L, 449.
9Wortham, History of Texas, V, 1.
Here’s what’s next.
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 62, July 1958 - April, 1959, periodical, 1959; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101173/m1/185/: accessed August 20, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.