The Junior Historian, Volume 26, Number 2, November 1965 Page: 2
This periodical is part of the collection entitled: Texas Historian and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Texas State Historical Association.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE JUNIOR HISTORIAN
purely Austinian code incorporated an
important and unusual feature-jury trial
in the alcalde's court. This provision was
important to the Anglo-Americans, who
had lived under that type of justice in
the United States, and unusual in that
there were no jury trials under Spanish
law at that time.
Perhaps the most unparalleled feature
of Austin's code was Article V of the
Criminal Code. This article pertaining to
the treatment of Indians might be fa-
cetiously called the "Civil Rights Law
of 1824," and provided that:
No person in the colony shall ill-treat or
abuse any Indian without just cause, under
penalty of $100, but shall treat them at all
times in a friendly manner, so long as they
deserve it.
Austin's twenty-six-article code was
superseded in 1827 by the Constitution
of the State of Coahuila y Texas. Under
this constitution, Coahuila was allowed
75 per cent of the representatives to the
Mexican Legislature, leaving Texas with
only partial, ineffective representation. As
a result, Texas justice suffered severe
blows: the right to trial by jury and to
bail, which the Texans considered in-
alienable, were still denied; the laws were
still written in Spanish; and appeals for
all important civil and criminal cases
had to go to Saltillo, 700 miles away.
Every important criminal case involved
at least two trips to Saltillo, whose 2,800-
mile round-trip distance was made more
dangerous by marauding Indians and
bandits.
To correct these injustices, a conven-
tion of Texas delegates met for a second
time in San Felipe de Austin in 1833.
The delegates petitioned the Mexican
Congress for: (1) the right to use Eng-
lish in their public business and in their
laws, (2) the right to trial by jury and
to bail, and (3) separate statehood from
Coahuila. The convention actually formu-
lated a constitution for the proposed
state. Stephen F. Austin carried the pro-
posed constitution and petitions for re-
form to Mexico City for approval by theauthorities.
Unknown to Austin, these conventions
at San Felipe had only served to further
the distrust of Texans by the Mexicans.
It was a normal thing for the Anglo-
Americans to participate in a peaceful
assembly. The United States Constitution
had guaranteed them that privilege for
years. True, Mexico had its assemblies,
but Mexican assemblies were far from
being orderly and peaceful. To the Mexi-
can mind of 1833, such a thing as "law-
ful assembly" or "peaceful convention"
seemed as paradoxical as a "lawful riot"
or a "peaceful fight." Hence, the Mexi-
cans suspected that the Texans were plot-
ting revolution instead of loyalty. When
Austin arrived in Mexico City the dis-
trustful officials imprisoned him for al-
most two years.
The Revolution which followed soon
after Austin's release from prison gradu-
ally introduced the English Common Law
into Texas. In view of the chaotic judi-
cial conditions existing under Spanish
law, it was not surprising that the colo-
nists wanted to change to the more com-
patible English law, guaranteeing them
their cherished rights to trial by jury
and to bail. Indeed, the failure of the
Mexican government to establish trial by
jury is listed in the Texas Declaration of
Independence as one of the major
grievances.
Upon his return from prison, Austin
called a meeting of the delegates at San
Felipe for November 3-14, 1835. Their
"Consultation" decided not to declare
independence, but did adopt a document
called the "Plan and Powers for a Pro-
visional Government." One gets an ex-
cellent idea of the eagerness of these del-
egates to renounce the existing judicial
confusion when one reflects that in the
midst of the war and revolution that had
begun some months before, the Texans
took the precious time to adopt trial by
jury and the English Common Law of
crimes.
A year later, the Constitution of 1836
was ratified, specifically making the com-
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
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 Junior Historian, Volume 26, Number 2, November 1965, periodical, November 1965; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth391328/m1/4/?q=%22mex-tex%22: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.