[Col. Waite, of the United States Army, San Antonio, Texas]
Austin, Texas, March 29, 1861.
Dear Sir ; - I have received intelligence that you have received, or will soon receive, orders to concentrate United States troops under your command at Indianola, in this State, to sustain me in the exercise of my official functions. Allow me most respectfully to decline any such assistance from the United States Government, and to most earnestly protest against the concentration of troops or fortifications in Texas, and request that you remove all such troops out of this State at the earliest day practicable, or, at any rate, by all means take no action toward a hostile movement till further ordered by the Government at Washington city, or particularly of Texas.
Thine, Sam Houston.
------------------
And on Lincoln....
[Private letter to Gen. George Washington Crawford, of Washington, Texas]
Austin, 7th September, 1860.
My Dear General: - Your favor has this moment been received, and I as frankly reply as you wrote to me. Personally, I like Breckinridge more than either of the candidates in the field, and 'tis because he is an amiable gentleman, as well as a man of fine intelligence, and I think him quite as honest as either of the other candidates. My wish and object is to beat Lincoln with any man in the field. The question is, how is this to be done ? If Breckinridge alone were in the field opposed to Lincoln, could he do it? I think not. Now! why not? Because, if he were to get all the Southern States, as he would do, could that elect him ? No ! Could he certainly get any free State ? I think not, brought forward as he was by Yancey Rhett-Keitt and the disunion influence, and supported by these men and others equally odious to the national feeling. His friends, too, of the N. Y. Herald, Col. Orr, and others, concede that he stands no chance of election. If a Union ticket is supported North and South, it can be elected, I think, and let the electors only be pledged to cast their votes for the strongest man against Lincoln, and in this way he may be defeated, otherwise I think Lincoln will be elected by the electoral colleges. By voting for a Union ticket it will not exclude Mr. Breckinridge if he stands on the Union principle, and, if he does not, no one ought to vote for him, or any other man who can not stand there. By voting for men, as electors, who are pledged to principle, and not to this or that individual, the design of the Constitution will be answered. It is certainly as safe for the country to rely on the discretion and judgment of electors, acting under the responsibility of a Constitutional obligation, as it is to rely on the members of a Convention to nominate a candidate, and, therefore, I am willing to rely on the honesty and discretion of the electors, if any should be elected on the Union ticket, so to act and vote, if they can, to defeat Lincoln. This is what I go for, and any man before him that may be elected. I have sworn that I would never vote for any man, directly, who voted for or supported the Nebraska Bill. Douglas and Breckinridge are in the same category on this subject ; and I might, by voting the Union ticket, indirectly vote for either. As for Mr. Bell, I regard him as a slim chance for a President, and would not directly vote for him, although he voted against the Nebraska Bill. There is a tale to that I So you see I do not go for man or men, but for principle, and if Mr. Bell should stand on any platform, after filching it, I can not help it, or for any consideration come out in favor of a man who has no chance of success, and who has allowed himself to be used by odious men, and for no good purpose that I can perceive. So far as men are concerned I will look on with folded arms. So far as principle is concerned I will always be ready to speak out. Give our love to the ladies.
Thine truly, Houston.
P. S. - The mail is closing. . . . How can a Jackson Democrat vote for Rhett or Yancey, or their representative?
________________________
David Upton