ustxtxb_obs_1960_01_22_50_00007-00000_000.pdf

who, included the Earl of Southampton, his dear friend. There was manhood suffrage for freeholders, and the governors were controlled, to a considerable extent, by the people. The owners of great landed estates steadily grew in power and wealth, thanks to the systtm of indentured servants, who did the work of slaves for a term of years \(there was no other way for a poor man to get across the ocean; he had to bind him Charles Ramsdell until near the end of the Seventeenth Century, and somebody had to do the dirty work. Not until the restoration of the Stuarts, or after 1660, was the social order of Virginia brought into tight feudal alignment. Then voting was restricted to property ownersa restriction that endured for two hundred years. The ruling class in Virginia has changed its ideas very little since then; Senator Harry Byrd would seem conservative even to Shakespeare’s friends. As for education, it is not now and never has been, in Virginia, looked upon as a thing to be shared with the rabble. Hear the governor, Sir William Berkeley, in 1676: “I thank God there are no free schools nor printing, and I hope we shall not have these for a hundred years; for learning has brought disobedience, heresy, and sects into the world, and printing has divulged them, and libels against the best government” \(he meant his own and that of James “God keep us from both!” As for those Presidents of the United States, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, they have never been accepted as Virginians of the noble tradition, as have Washington and Lee, whose genealogies are in proper order and who were not so obviously tainted with abominable heresy. South Carolina was an aristocracy from the first. Declared its founder, the Earl of Shaftesbury families must make the plantation which will stock the country with Negroes, cattle, and other necessities.” An elaborate social order, with ranking barons, landgraves, and the like, was worked out on paper by the English philosopher John Locke, whose intention was “to avoid a numerous democracy.” This plan had to be junked, but the city of Charleston produced an aristocracy, especially after it was discovered that Indians enticed into the plantations could be sold as slaves to the West Indies, where they were traded for Negroes, who did not seem to need any clothes, but could work all day in the miasmic marshes, under the hot sun, and live on nothing but yams. In North Carolina, however, only small areas near the coast were suited to the plantation system. Most of the country was a stretch of sandy, pine-covered hills, and here, as in the mountains and valleys of western Virginia, was a refuge for bondservants who attained their freedom, or who simply ran away from their masters, for malcontents weary of paying rents to wealthy landlords and fees to their minions, for dissenters seeking religious freedom. “The persons that at present designe thither \(says a conscience, and without that will not goe.” AND SO, as happened in the later development of the West all the way to Texas, restless backwoodsmen and p o v e r t ystricken farmers, without the help of government or its hindrance, contrary to law and at the risk of murder by Indians, squatted on land to which they held no title, built themselves a cabin, opened up a few acres in the wilderness, THE WESTERN SOUTH IN TEXAS AUSTIN The question whether Texas belongs mainly to the South or to the West may seem academic, even inane. But the best minds contradict each other, and themselves, on this point. It may, therefore, be permissible for one of the worst to speculate, however idly, on the meaning of the designations “West” and “South.” Almost any Texan will draw a line for you, starting on the Red River and dividing the state; everyone agrees that Fort Worth belongs on the left of this line, Dallas on the right; after that no two lines will coincide. Walter Webb, perhaps the most westward-looking of the major historians, has recently, for some reason, turned into a spokesman for the New South. Erna Fergusson of New Mexico, who has been revising her book Our Southwest, published in 1940, which covers Texas as far east as San Antonio and Fort Worth, came away from San An-‘ tonio twenty years ago with the strong impression \(puzzling to me, who lived there for seventeen magnolias and mint fillips, was in fact the outer bastion of the Deep South. A keen observer like Miss Fergusson could not be entirely deceived, so the conclusion is inescapable that, to a real Westerner, San Antonio does smell of the South. It is true that Seguin, only 35 miles to the east, was, until the Civil War depleted it of men and money, a typical Southern planter’s town, with costly mansions that, in various stages of repair or desecration, stand, or sag, today. An amusing contrast to Miss Fergusson’s impression is the report of a friend of mine, born and marinated in the Deep South \(a native of Mississippi and a graduate of the University of VirUniversity of Texas, and who finds absolutely no trace of Southern tradition either in the city of Austin or in his students from every part of the state. They are interested, he says, in no tradition whatsoever, and Austin is a typical American college town, with a most un-Southern bustle about it. There can be no disputing that Texas has, each day, less and less in common with the Old South. Or the New. WHEN WE SPEAK of the South ” and the West we are not really talking about geography, but about two distinct and utterly incompatible patterns of thought. Both of_ these patterns proceed, like most of the people who settled in Texas during the past century, from the states south of the Ohio River and of Mason’s and Dixon’s Line and east of the Mississippi. One of these patterns is aristocratic, feudal, repressive. This, strictly speaking, is the Old South. It is the pattern of a society built on huge estates and supported by slavery, black or white. It was, and is, confined to Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina, and to those regions of the other Southern states along the river bottoms, where planters from Virginia and Carolina could establish themselves with their slaves. In Texas it was largely confined to the Brazos and Colorado bottoms and to the eastern towns. The opposing pattern is fiercely democratic. It is based on equal manhood suffrage, political and religious freedom. This could very well be called the pattern of the Old West. It started in Virginia; the seeds of the revolt against a rigid feudal order were there from the first. Virginia was founded, while Shakespeare was still alive, by a set of eggheads, or visionaries, LEGALS CITATION BY PUBLICATION THE STATE OF TEXAS To Thomas Melvin Ricketson, Defendant, in the hereinafter styled and numbered cause: You are hereby commanded to appear before the 126th District Court of Travis County, Texas, to be held at the courthouse of said county in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, at or before 10 o’clock A.M. of the first Monday after the expiration of 42 days from the date of issuance hereof; that is to say, at or before, 10 o’clock A.M. of Monday the 8th day of February, 1960, and answer the petition of plaintiff in Cause Number 115,277, in which Ruby Green Ricketson is Plaintiff and Thomas Melvin Ricketson is defendant, filed in said Court on the 31 day of August, 1959, and the nature of which said suit is as follows: Being an action and prayer for judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for decree of divorce dissolving the bonds of matrimony heretofore and now existing between said parties; Plaintiff alleges cruel treatment on the part of Defendant towards her of such nature as to render their further living together as husband and wile altogether insupportable; Plaintiff further alleges that no children were born of said union and that no necessity exists for the partitioning of any community property; Plaintiff further prays for costs of suit and for general relief; All of which more fully appears from Plaintiff’s Original Petition on file in this office and to which reference is here made for all intents and purposes; If this citation is not served within 90 days after date of its issuance, it shall be returned unserved. WITNESS, 0. T. MARTIN, JR., Clerk of the District Courts of Travis County, Texas. Issued and given under my hand and the seal of said Court at office in the City of Austin, this the 28th day of December, 1959. 0. T. MARTIN, JR. Clerk of the District Courts, Travis County, Texas. By GEO. W. BICKLER, Deputy CITATION BY PUBLICATION THE STATE OF TEXAS TO Oscar Leon Rawlings Defendant, in the hereinafter styled and numbered cause: You are hereby commanded to appear before the 126th District Court of Travis County, Texas, to be held at the courthouse of said county in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, at or before 10 o’clock A. M. of the first Monday after the expiration of 42 days from the date of issuance hereof; that is to say, at or before, 10 o’clock A. M. of Monday the 8th day of February, 1960, and answer the. petition of plaintiff in Cause Number 116,396, in which Muriel Virginia Rawlings is Plaintiff and Oscar Leon Rawlings is defendant, filed in said Court on the 21st day of December, 1959, and the nature of which said suit is as follows: Being an action and prayer for judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant for decree of divorce dissolving the bonds of matrimony heretofore and now existing between said parties, ‘ plaintiff alleged that defendant commenced a course of unkind, harsh a n d tyrannical conduct toward plaintiff and continued with slight intermissions until plaintiff and defendant separated; plaintiff further alleges that defendant was guilty of excesses, cruel treatment a n d outrages toward plaintiff as to render their living t o g e t h e r insupportable; plaintiff further alleges that no community property was acquired as a result of their marriage. but that three minor children were adopted by defendant and plaintiff, namely, Michael Douglas, age 12 years, Oscar Leon, Jr., age 9 years, Guy Dennis, age 4 years, and that said children are now with and in custody of defendant, and plaintiff prays that custody of said children be awarded to the defendant; plaintiff further prays for relief, general and special; All of which more fully appears from Plaintiff’s Original Petition on file in this office, and which reference is here made for all intents and purposes; If this citation is not served within 90 days after date of its issuance, it shall be returned unserved. WITNESS, 0. T. Martin, Jr., Clerk of the District Courts of Travis County, Texas. Issued and given under my hand and the seal of said Court at office in the City of Austin, this the 21st day df December, 1959. 0. T. MARTIN, JR. Clerk of the District Courts, Travis County, Texas By A. E. JONES, Deputy CITATION BY PUBLICATION THE STATE OF TEXAS To D. L. Graham, Ada White, Eddie Johnson, sometimes known as Edgar Johnson, Jasper Phillips, R. Parr, Guy L. Graham, Arnette C. Smith and wife Gladys Smith, Billy Graham, Clyde S. Graham, Carol Graham, Nettie Graham, Pearl M. Graham, Lilly Graham, Ada White Howell, Aaron Howell, Anderson Washington and wife, Birdie Washington and Chas. Wendlandt, Jr.; if living, whose places of residence are unknown to Plaintiff and the legal representatives of each of said named defendants and the unknown heirs of each of said named defendants; the legal representatives of the unknown heirs of each of said named Defendants, if the unknown heirs of said defendants are dead; the unknown heirs of the unknown heirs of said named Defendants, if the unknown heirs of the unknown heirs of said named Defendants are dead; party Defendants in the hereinafter numbered and styled cause; You and each of you are hereby commanded to appear before the 126th District Court of Travis Count’ -, Texas, to be held at the Courthouse of said county in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, at or before 10 o’clock A.M. of the first Monday after the expiration of 42 days from the date of issuance hereof; that is to say, at or before 10:00 o’clock A.M. of Monday the 22nd of February, 1960, and answer the Second Amended Original Petition of Plaintiff in Cause Number 114,379, in which Nelson Puett is Plaintiff and each of the above named parties and William A. Brown, who resides in Houston, Harris County, to an iron pipe for corner; Texas, Marjorie Jones and Walter George Wendlandt, who both reside in Austin, Travis County, Texas, and Charles William Wendlandt who resides in Dallas, Dallas County, Texas, are Defendants; filed in said Court on the 6th day of January, 1960, and the nature of which said suit is as follows: Being an action and prayer for judgment in ‘favor Plaintiff and against Defendants for title to and possession of the following described property and premises, towit: FIRST TRACT: acre tract of land out of the George W. Spear Headright Survey, in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, said 2/9ths of an acre being described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the South boundary line of West 12th Street, which beginning point is N. 60 deg. W. 2008.33 from the intersection of the South line of West 12th Street and the West line of Winstead Lane; THENCE with the South line of West 12th Street N. 60 deg. W. 46.6 feet to a point in the South line of West 12th Street for the Northwest corner of this tract. THENCE S. 30 deg. W. 209.72 feet to the North boundary line of West 11th Street for the Southwest corner of this tract; THENCE with the North line of West 11th Street S. 60 deg: E. 46.6 feet to a point in the North line of West 11th Street for the Southeast corner of this tract; THENCE N. 30 deg. E. 209.72 feet to the Northeast corner of this tract, in the South line of West 12th Street, and the point of beginning. SECOND TRACT: A portion of the Geo. W. Spear League, in the City of Austin, Travis County, Texas, described by metes and bounds as follows, to -wit: BEGINNING for reference at an iron pipe at the intersection of the North line of West 11th Street with the West line of Winsted