Text 30255, 108 rader
Skriven 2009-03-24 23:30:12 av Lee Lofaso (3:800/432.0)
Ärende: Cotton/Slavery in TX
============================
Hello Everybody,

>LL>Slavery was the one and only issue in Texas. That was their reason
>LL>for being, and want for an independent country. Period.

>RB>Lee, that's just bullshit. Just consider one thing: why were slaves
>RB>held in the first place?

RW>Havn't you learned by now that everything Lee writes can be classified as
RW>what you just called it?

What was the population of Texas?

According to census and census records -

In 1744 the population of Texas was about 1,500, centered around
San Antonio.
An official Spanish census of December 31, 1792, gives a population
total of 1,617 males and 1,375 females.
The estimated population of Texas in 1806 was 7,000.
The 1826 Austin colony showed 1,800 persons, 443 of wom were slaves.
In 1831 the population of Texas was estimated at 20,000.
In 1834 the population of Texas was estimated at 24,700, including
slaves.
The 1836 poplation estimat was at 5,000 blacks, 30,000 Anglo-Americans,
3,470 Hispanics, and 14,200 Indians.
A population of about 50,000 is indicated by the vote for the first
president of the republic in 1836.
The vote in 1845 showed a population of 125,000.
In 1847 a partial enumeration showed a population of 135,000, of whom
39,000 were slaves.
The 1848 census total population was given as 158,356, of whom 42,455
were slaves.
The first U.S. Census was taken in 1850, when Texas population comprised
154,034 whites, 397 free Negroes, and 58,161 slaves.
The second U.S. Census in 1860 gave Texas a population of 604,215.

http://tinyurl.com/dcaln7

>RB>Answer: cheap labor for labor-intensive agriculture, mainly stuff
>RB>like cotton (where the seeds were originally hand-picked out of the
>RB>cotton before the invention of the cotton gin).

>RB>Texas was not then, nor is it now, cotton country.

RW>Not in the sense that the other states you mention here later, were cotton
RW>country at the time. Although it seems that Texas has surpassed their
RW>output to become the number one cotton producer in the states now.

"Cotton was first grown in Texas by Spanish missionaries.  A report of
the missions at San Antonio in 1745 indicates that several thousand
pounds of cotton were produced annually, then spun and woven by mission
craftsmen.  Cotton cultivation was begun by Anglo-American colonists in
1821.  In 1849 a census of the cotton production of the state reported
58,073 bales (500 pounds each).  In 1852 Texas was in eighth place among
the top ten cotton-producing states of the nation.  The 1859 census
credited Texas with a yield of 431,645 bales.  This sharp rise in
production in the late 1850s and early 1860s was due at least in part to
the removal of Indians, which opened up new areas for cotton production.
The Civil War caused a decrease in production, but by 1869 the cotton
crop was reported as 350,628 bales. ... In 1879 some 2,178,435 acres
produced 805,284 bales.  The 1889 census reported 3,934,525 acres
producing 1.5 million bales.  The cotton crop in 1900 was more than 3.5
million bales from 7,178,915 acres."

http://tinyurl.com/dk8p9r

>RB>In the north, they mainly grow wheat, in the south there's a lot of
>RB>citrus fruit cultivation - but not in 1836 or in 1845.

RW>There is cotton grown in Texas, I know that it was being grown here in the
RW>50s. Brownsville, etc..

Cotton is King in Texas.

RW>That is a more recent development and like you say, not in the early
RW>history of the Republic.

Cotton has been grown in Texas since 1745.  Cotton was a major crop
in Texas early on, as Texas was ranked eighth place amont the top ten
cotton-producing states of the nation - in 1852.

>RB>Although there were definitely slaves in Texas, it was never as much
>RB>of a "slave economy" as, for example, Georgia, Alabama and
>RB>Mississippi.

>RB>Slaves were sometimes handy, but they weren't really a necessity in
>RB>Texas.

>RB>The fact that Jim Bowie was in the slave trade in Louisiana has
>RB>nothing to do with his life in Texas, where he was a well-integrated
>RB>Mexican citizen.

>RB>To call slavery the "one and only issue" in Texas independence is
>RB>just plain crap, refuted by every logic you can bring to bear.

RW>Not to mention every history account of Texas as well.

Roy's history of Texas does not match up very well with what
historians have written about the history of Texas.

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.

--- Maximus 3.01
 * Origin: Xaragmata / Adelaide SA telnet://xaragmata.thebbs.org (3:800/432)