Slavery in the Republic of Texas

Slavery

The remnant of slavery in America has caused a great deal of stigma and represents a lasting stain on our nation's history. The issue slavery is a difficult one to explore because of the sensitivities involved and the shame associated with the practice of slavery. There are many issues that can be discussed when delving into this particular topic. Although the institution of slavery was prevalent in many states a great deal of the research that exists concerning slavery concentrates on just a few of the states. The purpose of this discussion is to focus on slavery in the Republic of Texas. More specifically the research will focus on slavery in Austin, Texas in the decade between 1836 and 1846. The research will focus on Public opinion on Slavery, the relationship between slaves and their masters, the economic value of a slave in this region,

History of Slavery in Texas, how slaves were acquired and advertisement, how slaves were transported, Class structure that existed among the slaves, who owned the largest number of slaves, How often did ownership of slaves change hands, the living conditions of slaves and slavery in Texas beyond the 1940's. Let us begin the discussion with a brief overview of the history of slavery in Texas.

The History of Slavery in Texas

According to Bugbee (1898) the history of slavery in Texas, began in I821, when Moses Austin[footnoteRef:1]became the first person to receive permission to create an Anglo-American colony on the banks of the Colorado River and the Brazos. At the time of Austin's venture into this region of the country there were some Black people living in the small towns of Bexar and La Bahia, however the amount of blacks in the area was likely insignificant and restricted to personal servants of wealthy families. As such the introduction of Moses Austin and other pioneers in the area to develop the e rich bottom lands of Texas meant the start of a new way of functioning in texas and across the country. As such the issue of slavery was soon to become a major point of contention in the region including the neighboring nation of Mexico. [1: Moses Austin was the founder of the American lead industry and the father of Stephen F. Austin]

Bugbee (1898) explains that in Mexico the slavery of Blcak people was both tolerated and protected by the government. However the conditions in Mexico were so adverse that the practice of slavery in that country never became as prevalent as it became in the United States. In fact the concept of slavery in Mexico at this time was limited to the areas known a Vera Cruz and some of the hot lands of Mexico. In fact even when Mexico began to grow sugar cane there were y few slaves in Mexico. In fact in the early 1800 there were believed to be about nine or ten thousand slave in the entire region known as New Spain. Others such as the British agent in Mexico, H.G. Ward, argued that there were no more than six thousand in 1793, and that a decline in the number of slaves persisted until 1827.

The absence of the presence of slaves in the region was due to many receiving their freedom in return for service in the patriot army[footnoteRef:2]. With this understood Ward was recorded as saying that "there is now hardly a single slave in the central portion of the republic (Bugbee 1898, quoting H.G. Ward) ." In fact the author also points out that there were no slaves to be found in Orizaba or the valley of Cuernavaca which were both the most substantial regions for the growth and harvesting of sugar and coffee in all of Mexico. With these things understood Moses Austin believed that one of the ways the new colon would thrive would be through slave labor. Such labor for him meant that the colonist would be able to produce more and thereby accumulate wealth quicker which would assists In the rapid growth of the colony. In January of 1821 Moses Austin's petition to settle a colony is Texas was granted; however, neither the petition nor the grant made mention of slavery. [2: The partriot Army was ]

It was the intention of Austin that most of the colonists would come from, the southern United States. As such he was in favor of the ability of the new colonists to bring their slaves with them to Texas so that the city could be built quickly. However Moses Austin fell ill from the long trip and he died. As such the issue of establishing the colony in Texas became te responsibility of his son Stephen Fuller Austin. At the time Stephen was only 28 years old and determined to fill his father's shoes he toured Texas and was recognized as the successor to his father's grant. As such he was able to receive the approval of the plan from the governor which contained the distribution of lands. The author further explains that

"This plan, after making provision for the head of the family and allowing a liberal portion for the wife and each child, further provided for a grant of eighty acres of land for each slave belonging to the family. In approving this plan, the government of Mexico, through its representative in Texas, acquiesced in and substantially encouraged the introduction of slaves into the new settlement. A great many immigrants found their way into Texas before the summer of 1822, most of them bearing contracts signed by Austin or his agents, in which they were promised land in accordance with the plan already mentioned. They were nearly all from the southern portion of the United States, and many of them were the owners of at least a small number of slaves. Thus it was that the institu- tion was introduced into Texas. But difficulties arose: for some reason the governor of Texas declined to put the settlers in possession of the promised lands, and Austin felt that the situation demanded his presence in the City of Mexico, where Congress was in session (Bugbee 1898)."

Bugbee (1898) further asserts that the consequences of Austin's trip to Mexico were not fully understood at the time. Austin stayed in Mexico for over a year. During this time in the country he worked to familiarize himself with the Spanish language and the culture of the people of Mexico (Bugbee, 1898). Austin also became friendly with many Mexican leader and attempted to gain the trust of the government by showing them his determination in the establishment of an Anglo settlement in the Texas wilderness (Bugbee, 1898).

According to Lack (1981) only a month after receiving corporate status the local newspaper described the area as "the infant City, just throwing off the last vestiges [sic] of savage barbarianism (Lack,1981)." For many years following incorporation there were worries that the paper had been optimistic with its description because of the number of challenges that the city faced and the isolation associated with its location (Lack,1981). Although the city was able to endure it did so with a population of 854 people after ten years of existing as a city (Lack,1981). In addition most of the early residents in the region did not demand or receive much in the way of municipal services, as such formal law enforcement was primitive at best (Lack, 1981).

Indeed there was a great deal of tension present between the Anglo settlers and the Mexican government. The government continuously attempted to outlaw slavery in Texas. However in 1836, settlers in the region rebelled from Mexico the Republic of Texas was established ("The Texas Slavery Project"). As a result "from 1836 to 1845, slaveholders from the American South poured into this new nation between the borders of the United States and Mexico ("The Texas Slavery Project")."

Public opinion on Slavery

Although there were always people in America who opposed slavery and wanted it abolished, the general consensus was that slavery was a needed and necessary institution. It was in fact, a mean to an end. For the most part the people who supported slavery had some vested interest in the ownership or slave and many were also convinced that people with Black skin were not human and as such there treatment was of no consequence. Those who had a vested interest in slavery were so inclined because slave ownership meant that profit margins were larger. Therefore the ownership of slaves made people wealthy. Those who were opposed to slavery were fewer in number and as such their voices often went unheard. In addition, the type of work that needed to be done in an effort to colonize this region of the country required many people. Those who were pro-slavery believed that slaves were therefore a necessity.

Although slavery was generally accepted in the American south, slavery was not as accepted in the Republic of Texas at the time because of the influence of Mexico. However, many of the people who colonized what later became known as Austin were from various parts of the south where slavery was already practiced. Therefore the colonists did not view slavery as an immoral or wrong practice. Slavery was considered a way of life and they believed that there was a hierarchy and that slaves were at the bottom of this hierarchy. Nonetheless, the issue of slavery in Austin did indeed create a bit of a quandary as it pertained to passing laws that would allow slavery. Bugbee (1898) reports that

"The question of slavery presented the greatest obstacle to the passage of the law. Austin believed that at least temporary toleration of slavery was necessary to the success of his colony. It was the slaveholding population of Missouri, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Mississippi that had shown the greatest interest in his settlement, and it was from the slave states of the American Union that he expected future support in his enterprise. On the other hand, the Mexican people were at that time passing through a period of fervent advocacy of liberty. Had they not just been freed from Spain ? Should they not extend this great boon, liberty, to all people within the authority of their laws? Then, too, -and this was more important than all their theories of liberty and natural equality, it was merely an abstract question with them, for they had few slaves to lose by a general emancipation (Bugbee, 1898)."

Indeed there were some important differences between the way that southern states viewed slavery and the manner in which slavery was viewed in the Republic of Texas. Because the Mexican people had experienced their own type of bondage and were less tolerant of slavery, the institution was viewed with some contempt. Additionally Mexican people, for the most part, were able to grow and harvest their own crops without the use of slaves. Therefore they understood full well that the use of slaves was not a necessity. Indeed the public opinion of slavery in the republic assisted in the development of social contingencies that Black people in other regions of the United States did not have. These contingencies will be explored in a later section of the discussion.

Relationships between slaves and their masters

All slaves lived in deplorable conditions. Anytime a human being viewed as a piece of property, their treatment is not humane or good. With this said the types of relationship that existed between slave and master depended upon the mindset of the master. Some masters saw their slaves as nothing more than commodities that could bought, sold or replaced at any time. As such many slaves were beaten when they did not or could not perform the tasks expected of them. Quite often masters would make an example out of one slave to teach the other slaves a lesson and prevent them from revolting or rebelling. Revolt was a constant threat for masters who wanted to maintain control of their slaves.

There were also masters that believed that "good slaves" were extremely valuable and therefore they treated slaves in less stringent ways. These masters recognized that slaves that beating slaves or depriving of food and sleep hurt productivity. As such some masters were less brutal than others. In the end, this behavior was not about treating the slave kindly but about protecting their investments and potential profitability. Some masters in the region also had slaves that they trusted more than other slaves. They believed that these slaves were less likely to runaway. Such slaves were allowed to move around more freely out of sight of the master.

In addition to the aforementioned treatment of some slaves, there were also some other ways that slaves were treated in Texas that was quite different from the manner in which they were treated in the American south. This difference in treatment was due in part to the manner in which slavery was viewed in the west and also because there were already many free Blacks in the region. According to Quintard (2005),

"The hopes of free blacks and their supporters who settled in Mexican Texas during the 1820s and 1830s for a free, racially tolerant Texas soon clashed with Southern white planters' ambitions to convert the Mexican province into an empire for slavery. The victory of the Texas revolutionaries over the Mexican army set in motion the decline in status of the free blacks who had sought refuge in Texas and established African slavery as the state's prevailing labor system. However, even in the era of Texas slavery, the manifestations of African-American bondage were not identical to that seen in Virginia or Mississippi. The fact that slaves worked in the emerging cattle industry suggests cultural and economic links with the West. Moreover, the phenomenon of urban slavery in Texas diverges from the Old South model of bondage (Quintard, 2005, 44)."

Indeed the difference in treatment was noticeable and something that was recorded at the time. Some of the difference in treatment had to do with the type of industries that were prevalent in the west when compared to the south. That, is the west was more concerned with the raising of cattle, than crops.

The economic value of a slave in this region

During this particular time in Austin Texas, the development of the Republic was a major issue. Moses Austin and later his son Stephen Austin understood the region to have many untapped resources. In order to fully exploit these resources,, human resources, slaves, also had to be brought to the region and exploited. Slavery in general was an economic enterprise this region of the country was no different in that respect. The colonists wanted to be able to live a comfortable life and they saw that this region of the country could perhaps offer them the comfort that they were seeking.

During this time in history there was a great deal of value placed on the owning of slaves and the financial benefits associated with what slaves could produce or yield for their owners. In many ways the owning of slaves was a status symbol during all time periods that slavery was legal throughout the country.

Did the value of a slave in this region change during the time of the Republic?

By the time the republic was established there were already some settlers in the region. As the development of the colony continued and the independence of the region from Mexico was established the value of slaves increased. Although some opposition to slavery remained, those already present in Texas were joined by others from the American South.

In addition there were many efforts to undermine the beliefs of the abolitionists and to assert that Blacks were inherently evil. There were also assertions that the slaves in Texas had a better quality of life than any Mexicans had. One proponent of slavery wrote

"We understand that the abolitionists of the north are renewing their efforts with increased fervor and daring. Their societies and emissaries [sic] augment, and apprehensions are seriously entertained for the result of their proceedings…We seriously wish that the abolitionists could impartially compare the relative evils of negro and white slavery. It is a fact well-known to all persons who have travelled through Mexico, that half of the population are in a state of slavery intolerable compared with that of most of the southern negroes: this is also proved by depravity seen among the Mexican soldiery, who appear to be entirely destitute of all moral character, and whose sense of honor will not compare with that of our slaves: and we will venture to say, that there is more intelligence to be found among the negroes of the south than is among one half of the Mexican population ("Untitled").

This passage seems to indicate a great deal of desperation on the part of those who supported the institution of slavery. Such an individual is clearly a stakeholder whose livelihood could be greatly affected by the absence of slavery. It is also interesting that the individual is asserting that the Black slaves have it better than some Mexicans in an effort to justify slavery. This illustrates the idea that people who were not opposed to slavery believed that the way they were treating the slaves was acceptable because the conditions in Mexico were poor in comparison. These assertions do not take into consideration the emotional and psychological abuse that slaves had to endure so that other people could acquire wealth, land and all the privileges that go along with have said possessions.

How slaves were acquired and advertisement

According to an article entitled "Slavery" most of the slaves in Texas were brought to the region by their owners who were from the American South. There were also many slaves who were brought through America's domestic slave trade. The city that specialized in the selling of slaves was New Orleans and it was the main player such trade in the Deep South. The article also points out that slaves were also purchased Galveston and Houston. Still yet it is estimated that as many as 2,000 slaves arrived via the illegal African trade between the years1835 and 1865 ("Slavery"). The article further explains that slave prices increased quickly as slavery grew in Texas. The author confirms that

"The average price of a bondsman, regardless of age, sex, or condition, rose from approximately $400 in 1850 to nearly $800 by 1860. During the late 1850s, prime male field hands aged eighteen to thirty cost on the average $1,200, and skilled slaves such as blacksmiths often were valued at more than $2,000. In comparison, good Texas cotton land could be bought for as little as six dollars an acre. Slavery spread over the eastern two-fifths of Texas by 1860 but flourished most vigorously along the rivers that provided rich soil and relatively inexpensive transportation ("Slavery") ."

Indeed slaves were valuable because of what they provided their owners with, free labor. Free labor was crucial in the building of America in general and in Texas in particular. Austin had so much land that was prime for the growing of cotton and the raising of cattle. Te settlers understood this and as such they were will to pay a great deal for slaves because the amount they had to pay to purchase slaves was very when compared to what could be made from their labor. In addition the cheap cost of land meant that land owners could purchase a great deal of acreage and then purchase slaves to tend the land which made a great deal of money.

Slaves that were for sale were also advertised in a newspaper called the Telegraph and Texas Register. For instance of September 27, 1936 the following advertisements appeared in the paper: "A LIKELY negro fellow, twenty years of age, of unquestionable good character, warranted perfectly sound and free from blemish of any kind. Any person wishing to see the boy can do so by calling on…("For Sale"). Again slaves were viewed as property and as such their sale was treated like the sale of any other type of property.

There were also advertisements that offered rewards for runaway slaves such as the following: "From the subscriber at different times since last winter, a number of African negroes, that are wandering about the country. -- We have heard of several being up on the Colorado and in Robinson's colony, which we have no doubt are ours. Any person who will stop said negroes, and have them sent to the subscribers, in Brazoria, will be liberally rewarded, if they prove to be ours on delivery. McNEELS, R. MILLS & Co ("Ranaway")." Indeed advertisements for the sale of slaves and the capture of runaway slaves were constantly placed in the newspaper. This illustrates the value placed on slaves and the type of relationship that exist between slaves and masters. This also confirms that the slave owners believed that readers held the same beliefs that they had concerning the idea that people could be property and should be returned to owners. Apparently many readers did not agree with this sentiment because there were many runaway slaves in Texas and they were protected by abolitionists who believed that they ought to be free.

How were slaves transported from place to place?

The slaves that came to Texas with their owners and the slaves that were purchased quite often travelled by boat. This is known because of the letters of James F. Perry where various correspondence refers to sea sickness and the presence of negroes on boats. This is also apparent because of the geographic location of Texas and the fact that slaves were sold from New Orleans and Gavelston which are both located near ports and large bodies of water. It is also likely that some slaves arrived via horse and buggy.

Class structure that existed among the slaves

Class structure amongst slaves is an issue that has been examined by historians. For the most part class structures were associated with how long the slave had been with the master. Class structure of slaves was also dependent upon skin color. Quite often masters or the children of master would have offspring with slaves. These offspring were referred to as mullatos or quadroons. Mullato is a term that describes an individual who is half white and half black. Quadroons are individuals who are a quarter Black and three quarters White. In some cases the offspring were born free but in most cases they were also slaves.

Those slaves that were of mixed heritage normally had lighter skin and finer hair. They were often treated better by both the master and by other slaves. In some cases these slaves lived and worked closely with the masters. Some slaves that were not of mixed heritage also had some hierarchy amongst the slaves particularly if they had been with the same master for many years and proven themselves to be loyal. Slaves had specific jobs. Some slaves cooked while others worked as maids and still others worked in the fields harvesting crops.

As it relates to class structure amongst slaves it is also important to remember that the separating of families was a major part of slavery. Children were often sold and did not grow up with their mothers. Likewise fathers were often sold to different families also. This created an atmosphere amongst the slaves that forced them to forge their own families in captivity amongst other slaves who were not necessarily related to them. This meant that slaves played certain roles in one another's lives and the interaction of the slaves with one another was different than the interaction that they had with their masters or white people in general.

Who owned the largest number of slaves

Slave ownership was in and of itself concerned with class and social structure. Indeed the wealthier people were the more likely they were to have slaves. The republic of Texas is no exception in this regard. As it pertained to who has the most slaves, one article explains that

"The greatest concentration of large slave plantations was along the lower Brazos and Colorado rivers in Brazoria, Matagorda, Fort Bend, and Wharton counties. Truly giant slaveholders such as Robert and D.G. Mills, who owned more than 300 bondsmen in 1860 (the largest holding in Texas), had plantations in this area, and the population resembled that of the Old South's famed Black Belt. Brazoria County, for example, was 72% slave in 1860, while north central Texas, the area from Hunt County west to Jack and Palo Pinto counties and south to McLennan County, had fewer slaves than any other settled part of the state, except for Hispanic areas such as Cameron County. However, the north central region held much excellent cotton land, and slavery would probably have developed rapidly there once rail transportation was built. The last frontier of slavery was by no means closed on the eve of the Civil War ("Untitled")."

After the 1840's when slavery became more acceptable in Texas, it is obvious that there was an increase in the number of slaves held in the state. In addition as time passed the number of slaves and the way in which slaves were treated began to resemble that of the south. In that respect the southern influence of slavery started to have a profound effect on the region and those held in captivity.

How often did ownership of slaves change hands

The rate at which slaves were sold in Austin and the Republic of Texas is unclear. However primary sources including the James F. Perry letters indicate that slaves were sold for a few hundred dollars to various masters. These letters also make it clear that the selling and buying of slaves was a discussion that was had often. One of the earliest letters was sent to Perry from William Hunter.

"There was 30 Negroes on board the principle part of them owned by a Mr. Matthews from Alabama who is going to settle in this Colony I will enquire of him of what way he brought them in I write you by the Maria Ser. when I will be able to let you know something about what is going on at St. Felip ("William Hunter to James F. Perry, January 2, 1830")."

The trading and selling of slaves was very much a business and it was viewed in this manner. For the most part it appears that slaves were traded or purchased in accordance with the harvest cycles. In addition slaves were often sold if they were no longer needed or the master had to pay a debt. The sale and purchase of slaves was also dependent upon the condition of the slave. The advertisements provided illustrate this point because the seller provides a description of both the physical and emotional attributes of the slave. Such descriptions were used to assist buyers in choosing the type of slave that they needed to carry out certain duties.

What were their living conditions

Although there was slavery in Austin, because slavery was less tolerated in Austin the manner in which slaves lived was quite different that in other regions of the country. For instance Lack (1981) explains that

"Accounts of slave life in early Austin read like a catalogue of activi-ties forbidden by the slave code. According to the State Gazette in 1850, some local residents (placing personal profit and convenience above social order) completely disregarded the restrictions on the hire of slaves, which resulted in a class of "quasi free people of color scat-tered about in every nook and corner." The paper believed that this situation had dire consequences not only for these indulgent owners but for society as a whole: "a large portion of slaves now industrious and honest will inevitably be converted into thieves and idlers by the vagabonds who are permitted to hire their own time." The next year the Gazette reiterated this theme that a slave "permitted to have his own way and be his own master" almost always became "addicted to vice and dissipation, and the worst possible example to others." With alarm it asserted that one-half of the local slaves both hired their own time and also kept their own houses, "where no surveillance is over them," and where the "worst disposed" slaves "assemble at night and discuss, if they do not organize, plans of mischief (Lack 1981, 2-3)."

Lack (1981) further asserts that the paper speaks of a substantial number of "absconding negroes" who when left to their own devices and given too much freedom would end up controlling their masters. The author also explains that the issue of runaway slaves started right after the founding of Austin and lasted for many years even though there were many reports of runaways who were diseased or recaptured on their way to Mexico (Lack 1981, 2-3).

According to the Texas Slavery project the material conditions under which slaves lived under was sufficient only in the sense that slaves had clothing, food and shelter. However their accommodations were not luxurious by any means. For the most part slaves at corn and pork. Although these foods provide some nourishments they are not sufficient sources of minerals and vitamins. That is, these foods gave the slave just enough energy to work, They were not sufficient enough to encourage the development of sustaining of a healthy body. However some slaves were able supplement their basic diet with garden vegetables, sweet potatoes and fish. The domiciles of slaves Slave consisted of small log cabins that normally had fireplaces for cooking. These cabins usually had Dirt floors and beds that were attached to the walls. Slaves usually wore clothes that consisted of cheap hard material. In addition the medical care for slaves was not adequate and they were prone to injury because of the manner in which they were expected to work.

The slaves in this region of the country possessed strong family-centered social life and a culture that grew substantially when the slaves were in the slave quarters ("Slavery"). This growth in family ties and culture occurred because the slave quarters served as a kind of enclave for the slaves where they had some measure of freedom. Even though there was no legal way for slaves to marry they did live in family settings ("Slavery"). The author explains that this arrangement was actually good for the slave owner because such union encouraged the slaves to have children. These children were valuable for the slave owner because they slave owner would not have to purchase that particular slave and the slave child could be sold for considerable profit ("Slavery"). The author also concedes that slaves that had a family were easier to control because they did not want to sold to another plantation where they might not ever see their families again ("Slavery").

Although family ties were beneficial to slave masters, slaves also desired family ties. To this end the slaves would connect with members of the opposite sex from neighboring farms and spend as much time as was possible for them. This practice was true even if the owners of the farms could not be convinced to allow a husband and wife to live together ("Slavery"). In fact the Texas slave Project points out that slaves would fight so that their families would not be disrupted and in some cases they were able to persuade their masters not to sell their family members. With this said slaves lived in constant fear that their families would be broken up and sold, but the desire for family never ceased to exist ("Slavery"). In fact connections to family became a source of strength for slaves.

The article further explains that music and faith were also vitally important to the life of slaves ("Slavery"). In fact in some ways music and faith were the only freedoms that slaves had and masters often encourage Christian worship because they believed that such worship would make slaves more submissive ("Slavery"). This strategy backfired as slaves began to understand that the God of the Bible was no respecter of persons and salvation and liberty was for everyone. Furthermore, "The promise of ultimate deliverance helped many to resist the psychological assault of bondage. Music and song served to set a pace for work and to express sorrow and hope ("Slavery")."

The article further explains that the slaves adjusted their conduct to accommodate the conditions of enslavement in many different ways. For instance many slaves felt that their owners treated them well and as such they were submissive to their owners. Still there were many who believed that the actions of their masters were wrong and as such they ran away or became violent. In fact the republic of Texas had many runaway slaves and some of the runaways fled to Mexico for sanctuary. Even a major revolt did not occur in Texas there were some individual acts of violence that occurred against owners. For the most part, however, slaves were not submissive servants or rebels. They were aware, however of all the mechanisms that society had created to ensure that they could not escape. They also saw that those who ran away often paid a significant price if they were found. As such they chose to deal with their circumstances in the best way they could to ensure their survival. The article explains that

"This did not mean that the majority of slaves were content with their status. They were not, and even the best-treated bondsmen dreamed of freedom. Slavery in Texas was not a matter of content, well-cared for servants as idealized in some views of the Old South. On the other hand, the institution was not absolutely brutal or degrading. Slaves were not reduced to the level of animals, and they did not live every day in sullen rage. Instead, bondsmen had enough "room"-time of their own and control of their own lives-within the slave system to maintain physical, psychological, and spiritual strength. In part this limited autonomy was given by the masters, who generally wanted loyal and cheerful servants. Slaves increased their minimal self-determination by taking what they could get from their owners and then pressing for additional latitude. For example, slaves worked hard, but they tried to work at their own pace and offered many forms of nonviolent resistance if pushed too hard. Slaves in general were not revolutionaries who overcame all the limits placed on them, but they did not surrender totally to the system, either. One way or another they had enough room to endure. This fact is not a tribute to the benevolence of slavery, but a testimony to the human spirit of the enslaved blacks ("Slavery")."

Obviously enslavement was difficult and complicated for those that had to endure such treatment. The life of a slave was full of anxiety and uncertainty about the future. Those who were enslaved, however, did their best to maintain some type of normalcy and to cling to their families and their faith. Although slavery in the Republic in Texas is viewed as being less harsh than other parts of the country, enslavement is never an easy way to live.