The Houston Chronicle announced that a group of Texas history buffs has purchased a vacant, partially submerged 19-acre tract near the San Jacinto Monument from the estate of the late Houston lawyer John M. O’Quinn with plans to restore it to its 1836 appearance and open it to the public as an extension of the battleground complex.

The $625,000 sale was announced this week by O’Quinn’s estate and the Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground.
The group announced it’s intention to raise the $625,000 last January and said they had until June 1, 2010 to come up with the $625,000. It appears they were close enough that the Estate of O’Quinn held the property until the purchase was complete earlier this month.

The San Jacinto battlefield is a monument to the battle that secured Texas as it’s own republic from Mexico. It is not as well known throughout the U. S as the Alamo is but it is sacred ground to Texans.

The Friends of San Jacinto president Jan DeVault said work at the site likely will begin next year as an archaeological team surveys 11 acres of the site covered with shallow water in search of a Civil War-era naval compound.

The Houston Chronicle goes on to say that although the hardest fighting in the April 21, 1826, clash between Sam Houston’s 900 Texan troops and Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna’s 1,400 soldiers occurred near the San Jacinto Monument, the newly acquired property still holds historical significance, DeVault said. “We consider it sacred ground,” she said.

In 1836, the property was transected by the Harrisburg-Lynchburg Road, and in the days leading to the final battle of the Texas Revolution, was crossed by both Mexican and Texan troops. In the weeks before the battle about 5,000 Texas settlers fleeing the Mexican advance crossed the property.

After the battle, the site was occupied by a sawmill and a small community called San Jacinto. During the Civil War, the site was home to a Confederate armory, barracks and shipyard.

The Confederate complex was covered by water as the land subsided. DeVault said archaeologists will survey the area with side-scan sonar and “make efforts to retrieve whatever we find.”

DeVault said it is significant that work at the site will begin in 2011, the battle’s 175th anniversary. “We are giving the site to the people of the state of Texas as a birthday present,” she said.

Gerald Treece, executor of the O’Quinn estate, said he was “overjoyed that we could see that this historically significant property went to the Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground, who will not only preserve it, but work to recapture the way the land looked and felt when Sam Houston marched the Texas army across it to go to battle for the state’s independence.”

If you visit us here in Texas I would say this monument is a must see and that most visitors to vist the Alamo in San Antonia Texas are disappointed. The Alamo is in downtown San Antonia and only a chapel is left with some history and a souvenir store within it’s walls. The San Jacinto sacred ground, will give more of a feel for the true history of Texas.

We will have an article up later today that recaps the testimony in California. There is not testimony or court today or tomorrow. Testimony will resume on Monday with more of the Thompson and Shelley family testifying.

Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.

©Rose Turner
August 26, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: 175th anniversary, April 1836, archaeologists, Civil War, Civil War-era, Confederate armory, Estate of John O'Quinn, Executor Gerald Treece, final battle of the Texas Revolution, Friends of the San Jacinto Battleground., Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna', Gerald Treece, Harrisburg-Lynchburg Road, Houston, Jan DeVault, John M. O'Quinn, John O'Quinn, John O'Quinn's Executor Gerald Treece, Mexico, Republic of Texas, sacred ground, Sam Houston, San Antonia, San Antonia Texas, San Jacinto, San Jacinto battlefield is a monument, South West Law School, South West School of Law, souvenir store, Texas, Texas Revolution, The Alamo, The Houston Chronicle, The O'Quinn Law Firm

My high school history teacher use to say that history can not be taught in a moral vacuum. The value system of a text book’s authors plays a part in what events are recorded and in what light. The same can be said of the teacher. Being born in North Carolina in the early 1950’s gave me a good example of this. The text books in the South never used the term Civil War: It was always referred to as the War between the States.

Recently, there has been a lot in news about the Texas Board of education’s curriculum changes. Apparently, the Board felt that the current text had a leftist bias and needed to move to the right. They have come under much criticism. Although I do not agree with all their changes, I do believe that the Tenth Amendment gives them the right to teach Texas children as Texans see fit. However, the value system through which we view history does not empower us to replace fact with fiction.

One report stated that teachers will refer to America as a Constitutional Republic instead of a Democratic Republic. Perhaps this was done to keep children from associating the term, Democratic Republic, with the Democratic and Republican Parties and thereby inferring that the Constitution is equal based on both liberal and conservative values. I do not know their reasoning behind this change; I only know it might lead to a dangerous misconception of our constitution.

Let us explore the meanings of each word and the implications of the two phrases. My 1967 edition of Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language defines a Republic as a state or nation in which the supreme power rest in all the citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives elected by them. There are much more recent definitions but this one seemed the most straight-forward to me. I encourage readers to research for themselves and reach their own conclusions. Constitutional means of or in accordance with the constitution of a government, society, etc. A constitution is the system of fundamental laws and principles of a government, state, society, etc or the document in which these are written down. Democratic is defined as of or for all the people. A democracy is a government by the people, either directly or through representatives. Also, it is defined as the acceptance and practice of the principle of equality of rights, opportunity and treatment.

So all that is required for a government to be considered a Constitution Republic is that it’s based on a system of laws that set forth who is entitled to vote and how the representative government is to be structured. Single party systems, in which only official party members are entitled to vote, qualify as Constitution Republics. Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s U.S.S.R., Communist China and Vietnam are examples of how far a government can be from that which our fore Fathers intended and still technically be Constitutional Republics.

By added a Bill of Rights and the additions of the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth and nineteenth amendments, the founding fathers and millions of Americans who followed have made the government set forth in the Constitution a Democratic-Republic. Though the term is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, it does appear in the writings of many of the delegates to the Philadelphia Convention (the Constitution Convention) when referring to our government.

Though no official title is given in the constitution to the type of government it has empowered, one can easily infer from the Constitution and its amendments that it is a Democratic-Republic. Like they saying goes, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it’s probably a duck.

@Thomas A Salley
June 14, 2010
Used with the permission of Thomas Salley – Political Op Ed Writer for Rose Speaks.com
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Thomas A. Salley, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: America, American Language, Bill of Rights, Civil War, Communist China, Constitution, Constitution fundamental laws, Constitution fundamental principles, constitution of a government, Constitutional, Constitutional amendments, Constitutional Democratic-Republic, Constitutional meaning, Constitutional Republic, curriculum changes, dangerous misconception constitution, delegates, Democratic and Republican Parties, Democratic Republic, elected representatives, entitled to vote, epresentatives elected by them, equality of opportunity, equality of rights, equality of treatment, fifteenth admenment, founding fathers, fourteenth admendment, fundamental laws, fundamental principles, government, government by the people, high school history, History, history teacher, Hitler’s Germany, it’s probably a duck, Jefferson Davis, liberal and conservative values, moral vacuum, nineteenth amendment, North Carolina, our fore Fathers, our government, Out Going School Board give a gift, Philadelphia Convention, Political Editorial, Political Op Ed, Political Opinion, quacks like a duck, replace fact with fiction, representative government, Rewriting History, Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Senator Joe McCarthy, Southern Text Books, Stalin’s U.S.S.R., system of laws, teachers, Tenth Amendment, Texas, Texas Board of education, Texas children, Texas school text books, Texas Text Books, text book’s authors, the Constitution Convention, thirteenth amendment, Thomas A Salley, Thomas Jefferson, U. S. Constitution, U. S. Constitutional Republic, U. S. Democratic Republic, United States, Vietnam, walks like a duck, War between the States, Webster’s New World Dictionary