# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between and . Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Mdcaron, Lindsey2478, Lhorne2024, ZionMoore, Zac.israel.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Just started this but I need a little more time.-- Rockero 04:17, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Is there anyway you would agree to remove the word bandit from the article? Also is there really a need to put this under the American outlaw category? Gregorio Cortez's contributions to civil rights and American society can always be argued, and far too much of his story is mere legend, but I really doubt he was ever a criminal. The word "bandit" just seems to be brought up far too many times in articles concerning "bad" mexican americans. Great job on everything else though.Mosquito-001 00:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I think a preferable option would be to write the social bandit article, which would explain how conquered people are marginalized legally, basically making any action on their part in their favor an illegal act, and that many social bandits become folk heroes as symbols of resistance. Then we could link to that article instead of Outlaw#bandit. How are you Mosquito?--Rockero 08:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

This article should mention the Bob Marley song.

Am I missing something? I have read the "incident" section several times in two days and for the life of me I can not see why the sheriff needed to open fire. Could not figure it out in the movie either. Is it me, or is that section very unclear? Jm546 ( talk) 02:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

In this section, I'm confused. It says "in which Cortez was supposedly asked if he had recently acquired a caballo, or a stallion, and Cortez answered he had acquired a yegua, or a mare, a word which the deputy did not understand." However, both Romaldo and Gregorio were there. Whom did the deputy ask? We should clarify.( Kirin-rex ( talk) 00:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC))

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gregorio Cortez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot . No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.-InternetArchiveBot 03:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedia, I'm working on revamping this page for a Chicano Literature course at UBC.

Gregorio Cortez Information Box: Add more detail in general. Me and my group have found a supposed picture of Cortez, we will add it if it is legal.

Background Ideas: Give names to parents, family, and any other key characters. Reference Valeriano, Gregorio's son, from "With His Pistol in His Hand" as he gives detail insight to the background of Cortez. More information needed on Gregorio rather than Tómas.

Create another subheading: Background of Political and Social climate of the Border. With this section, we could discuss the landscape, both physically and societally, of life on the border. Could be very important to give readers insight of society that created Gregorio Cortez. Negative beliefs about both groups (Texas Rangers and Mexicans).

The Incident details: Need more description of the event. Take ideas from "With His Pistol in His Hand" and do further research. Also include newspaper reports at the time. ALSO DO NOT AMALGAMATE THE TWO INCIDENTS

Create Subheading: The Battle of Belmont. Include this important battle. Give information from newspapers, reporters, courts, and the officers themselves to give all point of views.

BREAK UP FLIGHT AND CAPTURE into 2 separate subheadings.

Cortez's Flight: Talk about tactics used by Cortez, the number of horses used by him, and the area that he covered.

The Capture Of Gregorio Cortez: Talk about El Teco, the man who told the police of his whereabouts. Talk about different opinions and point of views about the capture.

Add Subheading: Court Proceedings: Talk of money raised by people. Support of both Mexican and American citizens. Give examples of court reports, newspapers, and the problem of translation by the officers.

Prison and Pardon: Talk about Cortez's time in prison; how long he spent there, where they moved him, and his experience/behaviour in the prison system. Also, discuss his pardoning. Give information about the Governer and the beliefs surrounding him.

Post-prison life and Death: Give more information about his efforts in the Mexican Revolution. Also, clarify the cause of death. Talk about how long it supposedly killed him, and do not say that he definitely DID die from poisoning.

Add Subheading: Legacy and Inspiration amongst the Border Mexican community: Talk of how his life inspired Mexicans and what important parts of his life transformed into El Corrido de Gregorio Cortez.

The Legend: Use "With His Pistol in His Hand" and information from the many verses of the border ballad to give insight into how the legend was created and transformed over time. Talk about him representing the average Mexican man, speak of the importance of the sorrel mare, and address the significance of him defending his right with his pistol in his hand.

In Song, Literature, and Film: Describe the songs, literature, and films in more detail. Talk about what they got right and what they got wrong. Talk about the important points each piece of art highlights and discuss how and why these works changed even in the slightest.

Add more references as we go. Pechodor13 and maymolina contributed to this revision plan.

OVERALL CLEAN UP THE PAGE, CLARIFY ERRORS, AND ADD MORE DETAIL TO THE STORY AND LEGEND OF GREGORIO CORTEZ. - Preceding unsigned comment added by Chr66 (talk * contribs) 23:59, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey, this is our conversation area for any questions or concerns regarding the article. Looking forward to fixing this article up!

History of the region

Valerio-Jiménez, O. S., & e-Duke Books Scholarly Collection 2012. (2013;2012;). River of hope: Forging identity and nation in the rio grande borderlands. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. (Chapter 4 and 6)

Alonzo, A. C. (1998). Tejano legacy: Rancheros and settlers in south texas, 1734-1900 (1st ed.). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.(Chapter 4).

Levario, M. A., & Project Muse University Press eBooks. (2012). Militarizing the border: When mexicans became the enemy (1st ed.). College Station: Texas A&M University Press. (Chapter 1)

History of the Cortez's family

Alvear, C. L. (2006). Crossing country and county borders: The cortez family's movement north from northern mexico to south and central texas, 1851-1901

About the Movie

Sunness, S., & YOUNG, R. (1984). The ballad of gregorio cortez: AN INTERVIEW WITH ROBERT YOUNG. Cinéaste, 13(4), 39-40.

Sunness, S. (1984). the ballad of gregorio cortez. Cinéaste, 13(4), 39.

Elitzik, P. (1984). The ballad of gregorio cortez. New York: Cineaste Publishers, Inc.

- Preceding unsigned comment added by Pechodor13 (talk * contribs) 08:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

I reverted this large-scale deletion by User:Bhockey10, as it seems to me rather brusque to say simply that it is "fluff." Please discuss such drastic changes here. Thanks! -- jbmurray ( talk * contribs) 00:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi , Thanks for reaching out, as stated on my talk page, the RV was part of WP:BRD and not done in bad spirit. with large sections lacking citations/ref also per WP:VER Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. My edit summary of rving "fluff" is a shortform reference to WP:OFFTOPIC and WP:UNDUE. It also include more than suffiecient context stating "removed extensive fluff and info outside of the biographical subject of the article." The Background section was devoid of any mention of the biographical subject and also covered in separate articles such as History of the Texas Ranger Division, History of Texas, Texas-American relations, and others. The background section could be briefly recapped in a properly cited sentence or short paragraph with proper Wikilinks in the "Early Life" section to help establish the era, but a full historical review of geo-political climate in the 50 years before the life Gregorio Cortez is entirely outside the scope of this particular article. WP:BIOGRAPHY, WP:MOSBIO and WP:BIODD are clear on the issue and how biographical articles should be structured. Essentially it breaks down to a chronologically organized article on the biographical subject. For more influential people, a legacy, in pop culture, or other similar section postmortem impact is appropriate. In addition this article suffers from multiple issues related to WP:NOTESSAY- the current version of the article is largely structured in academic essay format with poor sourcing, WP:NPOV issues, poor inline cites/WP:VER, possible WP:OR, etc...--Bhockey10 (talk) 00:53, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, this is helpful. I also think there are parts later that have too much detail. But I do think a bit of background is useful, if perhaps integrated differently into the article. As I say, however, this is a work in progress. Your comments are very helpful: the more specific and concrete, the better, as students continue to revise the article. --jbmurray (talk * contribs) 18:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi All, as of the current revision (945253803), The background section looks much better than it did 24 hours ago. Thank you all for the hard work on the adjustments! I still think that to better follow the Biography format (WP:BIOGRAPHY, WP:MOSBIO and WP:BIODD); it could be reduced further and better incorporated into the Early Life section. Something like: "Gregorio Cortez was born during a dynamic time in which... [then get into a brief recap of the regional geopolitical issues during the years of his birth and early life.]" In particular, the first paragraph going over Texas-Mexico history back into the 1820s is still a bit WP:Undue and also Essay-like (WP:NOTESSAY), a common issue noted in WP:STUDENTS: "Wikipedia has its own core content policies, style, and editing structure. The traditional writing assignment of the essay (with its necessary point of view) is not suited for publication here because our encyclopedic style requires a neutral point of view."
Many thanks for these helpful comments. --jbmurray (talk * contribs) 20:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Just a note to say that per a request from jbmurray I'll be posting some review comments in this section. I'll review the article with an eye to what a GA reviewer would say, and if I go beyond what is needed for GA I'll try to make that clear in the comments. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 21:03, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I'll start with the body, and do the lead last. This will be in fragments as I am likely to be interrupted this evening. The requirement for prose quality at GA is "the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct", which means that if I think the way you've written something could be improved, I won't say so unless there's something definitely wrong or I think I reader could misunderstand it.

Section title "Background of the Region": a minor point: Wikipedia uses sentence case for section headings so this should be "Background of the region". You might consider just making it "Background".

The second paragraph of that section is a bit repetitive and I'm not clear exactly what points it's making. Does the first sentence, about land loss and political access, refer only to Tejanos? (And is Tejano a modern term, by the way, or was it current then?) I think it would help to organize this paragraph a bit more linearly. Currently it reads as though your audience is someone who already knows many of the facts, and you're referring to the facts. For example, you say Despite the promise of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo; Jon will know what the promise is that you refer to, but I don't, unless I click through to the link, which I shouldn't have to do to understand your point. Make it more directly factual: "The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo promised American citizenship to residents who wanted to stay in Texas, but Tejanos in the lower Rio Grande Valley were relegated to second-class status". I think perhaps some simple reordering of sentences would help -- it sounds like the information to be conveyed here is that the annexation's consequences were generally negative for Tejanos; they faced racism and were treated as second-class citizens: here are some examples of problems they faced, and here are some of the causes. And how deeply do we need to go into causes? Does a reader who wants to learn about Gregorio Cortez care that manifest destiny is behind racism in the region?

I'd cut the name of Paredes' book -- it's in the citation. What the reader needs to know is just that Paredes is a scholar of the subject, so I would say that.

Américo Paredes pointed out the role of the Texas Rangers division...: verbs like "point out" and "note" imply to the reader that Wikipedia agrees with the sentiment expressed; we should rarely support anything in Wikipedia's voice, so I would use a verb like "argued that" or use "According to Paredes", as you do in the next sentence.

Is the third paragraph neutral enough? You cite Utley to say that there was no systematic evidence of persecution, he still calls the Rangers ruthless and brutal. Are there no scholarly positions more favourable to the Rangers?

However, they embodied Anglo-American values: what point is this making?

Gregorio Cortez Lira, cowboy, and Mexican-American folk hero was born in the state of Tamaulipas, Mexico...: no need for the descriptives -- the reader has some of this from the lead and we can just say "Gregorio Cortez Lira was born in the state of Tamaulipas, Mexico...". I'd give his birthdate at this point.

You need a citation for the sentences about his birth and wives.

A misunderstanding of semantics, and the violence which ensues, lies at the core of the true story of Gregorio Cortez and constitutes the principal incident: I think you could cut this -- I wouldn't fail GA for this, but it strays from a simple account of the facts. I think "true story" is unnecessary, and "core" and "principal incident" are repetitive.

Isn't that paragraph told partly backwards? First we get a summary sentence, then we're told what the killings were about, then we find out what the trade was about. Then it starts to move forward in time with Morris's visit. I think the reader would find it easier to follow if you simply gave the facts in chronological order. And do we need to add "According to Paredes"? We should give names inline when there are controversies or when it's an opinion, but if Paredes' research is uncontroversial we can let the reader check the citation if they want the details.

who was allegedly an expert on the Mexican language: surely just "who could speak Spanish"?

Missing a couple of citations at the eend of paragraphs in this section.

Reading through the rest of the "Incident" section, I see more repetition and out-of-sequence narration -- the second paragraph, for example, starts by saying what had happened before the visit to Cortez. I'd put all of this in plain chronological order.

Whose narration is it that we're reading? Choate's? Cortez's own story? It's told as if it were true but for a story like this the reader should be very clear on whose authority it rests.

In one or two places the language veers to the dramatic: "For, in truth,..."; "it was in this way"; "stood at the door, where his brother had stood". I'd remove this and leave the drama to the facts.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gregorio Cortez/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie ( talk · contribs) 11:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 11:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll add notes as I go through the article; it might take me a couple of days to finish. Note that the tag at the top indicating that the article is being expanded will have to be gone before I can pass the article.

The Jastrzembski references is listed as 1999 in the citations, but 2000 in the sources list -- which is correct?

In the "See also" section, you can cut anything that's already linked from the body of the article. You don't currently link the Texas Rangers, but it would be good to do so and then cut that from "See also". I'd also cut Mexican-American.

a cycle of revenge involving Bandit Gang, Texas Rangers and innocent Mexican-Americans collaterals victims: why is "Bandit Gang" capitalized? Is it a reference to something in one of the sources cited? Given that "bandit gangs" are something of a cliche in Texas/Mexican history, do we need to clarify whether this was a perception or a reality or somewhere in between?

historian Robert M. Utley exposes the complex nature of the relationship: I'd use a more neutral verb than "exposes", which implies Wikipedia agrees with Utley's analysis. Perhaps "argues that the relationship between... was complex", or "discusses the complexities of the relationship"?

A misunderstanding of semantics, and the violence which ensues, lies at the core of the true story of Gregorio Cortez and constitutes the principal incident. Why do we need this sentence?

There's a citation needed tag on the next sentence which needs to be addressed. And do we even need this sentence? The following sentences give us the names, and explain that it was related to a horse trade, so does this really add anything other than that the source is court records? If that's important it could be mentioned much more concisely.

allegedly an expert on the Mexican language: why not just "could allegedly speak Spanish"? Not necessary for GA, I'm just curious as to why this is phrased this way. Do the sources refer to the language as Spanish or Mexican?

The sheriff was the first to draw a pistol despite the suspicion on his part the both Cortezes were probably unarmed. Two things: "the both" looks like a typo of some kind, and if the sheriff is killed shortly after this, how do we know he suspected the Cortezes were unarmed?

The Sheriff shot Romaldo as he stood there with his head thrown back. The Sheriff shot him in the face, right in the open mouth, and Romaldo fell away from the door, at the Major Sheriff's feet. And then Gregorio Cortez stood at the door, where his brother had stood, with his pistol in his hand. The Major Sheriff fell dead at the feet of Gregorio Cortez, and it was in this way that Gregorio Cortez killed the first sheriff of many that he was to kill. Too dramatic; needs to be toned down. Why is it encyclopedic to say how Romaldo was holding his head? And the language in this paragraph reads more like a fictionalization than a simple narration of events.

Why is the date of the killing given in the next section? Seems like it would make more sense to mention it right at the start of the "Incident" section, where it would help set the scene.

After escaping: we haven't said he escaped yet; did he have to run from Boone Choate, or was Choate not armed?

In the Battle of Belmont section, the paragraph starting "According to the Texas Court..." seems to be recounting the historical version, but then the last paragraph gives a few different details. Wouldn't it make more sense to combine these two paragraphs so the reader reads the account of the battle once? If there are significant differences between Paredes' version and what can be gleaned from court records, then say so, but I don't see any as it stands so it would seem kinder to the reader to combine the two.

Also, "fell dead before to run into the brush" makes no sense; an editing error of some kind?

The "Flight" section partly precedes the "Battle of Belmont" section which makes it very confusing for the reader. Could we just make this chronological? "Incident" could include the flight to the Robledo ranch, and then "Flight" could continue with events after the Battle of Belmont.

It's also apparent at this point that Romaldo is still alive, but he's referred to above as having been killed. We should include a reference to his death somewhere in the article.

he decided to head north instead to confuse his persecutors: "persecutors" is not the right word. They weren't persecuting him; they were searching for him.

He traveled 55 miles from Kenedy to Belmont in hopes of hiding at the house of his friend, Martín Robledo. At the Robledo residence, a couple of days past, authorities had found Cortez and thus begun the Battle of Belmont (see above). This doesn't seem to make sense -- he gets there, but the authorities had already found him? And this is uncited too; it needs a citation, whether you keep it here or move it up as suggested above.

the Corpus Christi-to-Laredo railroad made it evident that he was moving toward Laredo: I don't follow this -- how does the railroad make this evident? Do you mean it became apparent that he was following the course of the railroad? If so, say that.

Again it looks as if things might be out of sequence in this paragraph -- the mare drops dead, but then jumps over wire fences. And does he leave the mare because it "could not continue" or because it "dropped dead"?

but would be betrayed and captured shortly: why do we need this?

This was one of the largest manhunts in history: looking at the source you're using for this, I suspect this needs qualification -- largest in Texas? In the US?

Gregorio becomes a fugitive, faithful to that part of his sung legend which celebrates him as a "good shot and superb rider, a man of nerve, ingenuity, and endurance." We already know he's a fugitive, and the rest of this is out of place here -- it belongs in the section at the end where you discuss his legend.

The "Capture" section seems to cover the Battle of Belmont again, but now it talks about the Thulemeyer ranch. I thought this was the Robledo ranch? And this account doesn't seem to match the one above; Glover dies in both accounts, but now there's a sheriff of Atascosa County as well, who is not mentioned in the earlier account.

Is there no information about his actual capture except the date? Where was he captured, and who by, and how?

More, starting with the Trials section:

The article by José Antonio López for the San Antonio Express-News isn't a very good source; he's an author but has no academic credentials. I don't think it's good enough to support the claim that many Anglos admired Cortez, and the other use, in the "Flight" section, provides a lot of detail that would be best sourced somewhere else.

Do we know how much money was raised by the fund?

local "rancheros" (ranchers): is the implication that those who donated were Mexican-American? Or doesn't the source make it clear? Either way I think "rancheros (ranchers)" is unnecessary; either "rancheros" is obvious, in which case it doesn't need glossing, or it's not, in which case we shouldn't use it unless there's a clear reason to.

The battle of the courts began on July 24, 1901: again, too dramatic. Just say the court case began on that date.

The comment about lawmen waiting for Cortez to be sentenced to death is certainly plausible, but unless Jastrzembski (the source here) has unimpeachable evidence I'd say this needs to be attributed to Jastrzembski inline, to avoid the article appearing to be non-neutral.

Again the sequencing seems a little off. We give the opening date, then describe some of those attending the case, then go back to say what Cortez is being tried for. Wouldn't that more logically be first?

Though they originally claimed the murder to have been done by a Mrs. Robledo during the fight, Robledo was coaxed into testifying that she had seen Cortez shoot and kill both Schnabel and Sheriff of Gonzales County, Robert M. Glover: I don't really follow this. Who is "they"; the prosecution? That would make no sense. And who did the coaxing? The prosecution? And "coax" is not a neutral way to describe this, it implies that she lied. And why would anyone have to coax an accused woman to claim someone else did it? As a side note, we already know who Glover is from the earlier part of the article, so we can make this just "kill both Schnabel and Glover".

What story did Sanders tell? That he was pressured to change his vote? That's not clear from the way it's worded now.

I'd like to be convinced that this source is reliable for the purposes you're using it for; it seems a bit melodramatic for a law library, and in any case as far as I can see it actually doesn't support some of what you're using it for. For example, it's used to cite The trial swayed all jurors, besides an A.L Sanders who believed Cortez to be innocent. However, as a family member of Sanders's soon developed a serious illness and the juror needed to return home, Sanders succumbed to the jury's pressure, ultimately sentencing Cortez to 50 years in prison for second-degree murder but it doesn't even mention Sanders. It's used to cite Many local officers were enraged about the verdict as they wanted to see Cortez face the death penalty. A few months later, as Cortez was in a Gonzales jail, over 300 men arranged a lynching of the recently sentenced prisoner but the bit about local officers isn't mentioned, and all it says about the lynching is that a mob tried when he was in the Gonzales jail, not what the date was or how many men there were; and it says they failed, which your text doesn't make clear. It doesn't say tensions grew after the reversal in 1902.

There are several more unsourced sentences; at the end of the "Gonzales Trial" section, and at the end of "Further Legal Battles".

A minor style note: you don't need "The" in section titles, generally, and they should be in sentence case, not title case, so "Gonzales trial", not "The Gonzales trial", and "Further legal battles", not "Further Legal Battles".

In the "Further Legal Battles" section, why do we hear about the 1901 Karnes City trial only after talking about 1902 events?

More non-neutral language: "rushed decision"; the "criminalization" of Cortez; "understood he acted in self-defense".

I'm surprised by so many trials -- what was the legal basis for trying him so many times? I assume it's because until Corpus Christi he was never found innocent; it was just hung juries and reversed decisions? It would help to make that clear.

as the Columbus trial sentenced Cortez for Glover's murder assuming he had already killed Morris: I'm not sure what this means.

his alleged murder of Sheriff Robert M. Glover, who was killed during the pursuit: I thought he was killed during the initial confrontation?

The last two sentences of the "Prison and pardon" section say the same thing; I'd combine them. What were the conditions on the pardon?

There are a couple more unsourced sentences in the "In popular culture" section, at the end of some paragraphs.

The particularity of the work is that it constitutes a hybrid of genres: I'm not sure what is meant here, but I think it could just be dropped, or at least cut to "The book is a hybrid of genres".

Are there more details from Paredes that could be used to expand the earlier part of the article about Cortez's life? At the moment we just have a handful of details.

Hi -- I see y'all are working on the article; let me know when you want me to take another look. If you want, you can post a note under each point above when you think it's dealt with, so I can follow along and strike out the issues as you go; or you can wait till you think everything is done and let me know then. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:05, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

-- Hi Mike Christie. We believe we have made all the necessary edits for the GA nomination. Thank you for all your hard work and helping us understand how to improve this article. We appreciate it. Take care. Chr66 ( talk) 23:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Second pass

I've struck out everything above that was obviously fixed, but since it's changed so much, rather than go through the above points line-by-line I'm just going to read it again and make notes below, so you can ignore the unstruck points above. It's definitely much improved. Incidentally, if I ask a question like "What does Bandit Gang" refer to?", you don't have to just edit the article to fix what you feel the problem is, you can also reply here to explain what the intention was. If you're in any doubt about what I'm driving at that might be the most productive thing to do. Usually I'll reply within 24 hours.

What does "Bandit Gang" refer to?

To move beyond this dichotomy, historian Robert M. Utley exposes the complex nature of the relationship between the Mexican Americans and the Texas Rangers. The problem with this phrasing is it makes it sounds like we (that is, Wikipedia editors) agree with Utley. We can't do that because this is Utley's opinion -- it's not a clear statement of fact. How about: "Historian Robert Utley considers the relationship between Mexican Americans and the Texas Rangers to be more complex than this dichotomy suggests; while some rangers may have been..."

Put the events of "Early life" in chronological order -- I can't tell if Leonor Diaz is his third wife, or his first, since that paragraph jumps back to 1887.

Explain who Villareal is when he is first mentioned.

In the "Incident" section, put things in chronological order -- the order is confusing right now. The sequence, if I have it correctly is: Villareal is accused of horse theft and reveals that he had traded a horse to Cortez; Morris and Choate visit Cortez on June 14, 1901, Cortez says no because of the language issue, Morris decides to arrest him, gun battle follows, Morris shoots Romaldo, Cortez shoots Morris. The current sequence is hard to understand.

There is an uncited sentence at the end of the "Escape to the Robledo ranch" section

You have both "Roblero" and "Robledo"; which is correct?

The actual story, according to the scholar Américo Paredes, was less heroic. We can't imply that Paredes is right and the others are wrong. I suggest "According to Paredes, the story was less heroic." We don't need to introduce Paredes again -- we mentioned him in the background section.

The first sentence of "Capture" repeats some of the information in the last sentence of "Flight".

Why does the "Capture" section repeat the Robledo ranch story?

Though the defense was optimistic about their appeal being upheld, Cortez's lawyers had built a case saying that Cortez had not fired shots anywhere near Glover in the Battle of Belmont which many witnesses denied. I don't understand this sentence -- why do you say the lawyers built a case, though they were optimistic? And what was it that the witnesses denied -- that he had fired shots, or that he had not fired shots?

There is an uncited sentence at the end of the section "El Corrido de Gregorio Cortez", and another at the end of the first paragraph of the section "With His Pistol in His Hand".

the film's authenticity is a profound departure from this genre: this is opinion, so either cut "profound", or attribute this inline to the source. Since the next two sentences make the same point with attributed opinions, I would just cut "profound".

the movie has been considered the most authentic Westerns in the history of American cinema: presumably should be "one of the most authentic Westerns", since it's ungrammatical as it stands. Or does the source support "the most authentic Western"?

the choice made by Villasenor: who is Villasenor? Sounds like he was the scriptwriter, or one of them, but if so, say so.

I don't think the article by Lopez in the San Antonio Express-News is a reliable source for what you're using it for; I think you need to replace it with something more reliable, or cut that material.

Jon, do you know if your students plan to make another pass at this? Or is the semester over? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:16, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the semester will be over now, so I'm going to fail this; I'll start another review if any of the students want to continue working on it. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 17:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between and . Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Mdcaron, Lindsey2478, Lhorne2024, ZionMoore, Zac.israel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Congreso Mexicanista, sometimes referred to as El Primer Congreso Mexicanista, met in Laredo from September 14 to 22, 1911. Clemente Idar, whose family owned and published , proposed the meeting to organize the Gran Liga Mexicanista de Beneficencia y Protección (Great Mexican League for Benefit and Protection) to advance education, culture, and civil rights for Mexican Americans. The Idars invited the OCH (Orden Caballeros de Honor), members of lodges and sociedades mutualistas, all Mexican consuls in the state, and Texas-Mexican journalists. They also issued a special invitation to women from the region, including Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas. La Crónica furnished free advertising for the conference and, in a series of articles, called on all Texas Mexicans to send representatives. The Congreso was scheduled to coincide with the celebration of el Diez y Seis de Septiembre, Mexican independence day, and an OCH convention. Workshops focused on social oppression and the Texas-Mexican economic situation. Soledad de la Peña spoke on the need to educate women. The congreso established the Gran Liga Mexicanista de Beneficencia y Protección and the Liga Femenil Mexicanista to promote cultural and moral values among Texas Mexicans, provide protection from abuse by public authorities, and combat segregation of Texas Mexican students. Nicasio Idar was chosen the leader of the Gran Liga, and Jovita Idar, his daughter, was elected president of the Liga Femenil, which emphasized free education for poor Texas Mexican children. Both organizations took the motto "Por la Raza y Para la Raza."

Visit Website

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Congreso Mexicanista, sometimes referred to as El Primer Congreso Mexicanista, met in Laredo from September 14 to 22, 1911. Clemente Idar, whose family owned and published , proposed the meeting to organize the Gran Liga Mexicanista de Beneficencia y Protección (Great Mexican League for Benefit and Protection) to advance education, culture, and civil rights for Mexican Americans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sale 2404 - Lot 250

Show Hammer Price?Final Price Realized includes Buyer's Premium added to Hammer Price

Estimate: $ 1,000 - $ 1,500

(TEXAS.) Letter from the Agrupación Protectora Mexicana, a pioneering Latino civil rights group. Typed Letter Signed by president Donaciano R. Dávila and secretary Emilio Flores with manuscript docketing note in unknown hand, addressed to the governor of Baja California, accompanied by a typed carbon response and a docketing sheet. 3 sheets total, 14 x 8 1/2 inches; moderate edge wear, folds. San Antonio, TX, 7 and 15 July 1911

Additional Details

Often lost in the bitter history of American lynch mobs are the many Mexican-Americans lynched in the border states. Mexican-Americans also faced illegal seizures of their property. The Agrupación Protectora Mexicana was founded in San Antonio, TX in 1911 to address these and other injustices, working with the Mexican government for greater leverage. This letter tells of the 3 November 1910 lynching of Antonio Rodriguez in Rock Springs, TX and the more recent 20 June 1911 lynching of a boy named Antonio Gómez in Thorndale, TX--the incident which sparked the foundation of the group on 25 June. It also pleads for an end to cowardice, disunity, and apathy from their "nuestros primos" in Mexico to help end "los linchamientos."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
(TEXAS) Letter from the Agrupación Protectora Mexicana a pio

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Show Hammer Price?Final Price Realized includes Buyer's Premium added to Hammer Price Estimate: $ 1,000 - $ 1,500 (TEXAS.) Letter from the Agrupación Protectora Mexicana, a pioneering Latino civil rights group. Typed Letter Signed by president Donaciano R.

# data[].attributes.headline
league of united latin american citizens 1929

# data[].attributes.subject
league of united latin american citizens 1929

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the oldest and largest Latino organizations in the United States. Since its founding in 1929, it has focused on education, employment, and civil rights for Hispanics.

The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) was formally established in Corpus Christi, Texas, in February 1929. It was created through the merger of several community groups, and many of its leaders were middle-class Mexican Americans. At the time, Hispanics faced various forms of discrimination in the United States, which the organization sought to end. Often considered one of the more conservative Latino civil rights groups, LULAC initially restricted membership to U.S. citizens, made English its official language, and promoted assimilation. Its efforts included English-language instruction, assistance with citizenship requirements and exams, and scholarships for education. In addition, LULAC fought for equal treatment of Hispanics through negotiation with state and local leaders when possible but through the legal system when necessary. It was involved in such prominent cases as (1946), which ended the segregation of Mexican Americans in California schools. One of LULAC's most notable initiatives was the preschool program known as the Little School of the 400, which was designed to teach children 400 basic English words. Although its presence was traditionally strongest in Texas, LULAC grew to have operations throughout the United States and in Puerto Rico.

The rise of more-radical groups in the 1960s brought changes to LULAC. It came to reject assimilation and adopted more confrontational strategies, such as public protests. The organization also sought funding from government and corporate grants. LULAC played a significant role in the creation of Operation SER (1964; Operation Service, Employment, and Redevelopment [later renamed SER-Jobs for Progress National]) and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (1968; MALDEF). LULAC's efforts against discrimination continued over the next four decades, and it remained active into the early 21st century.

Craig A. Kaplowitz The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
league of united latin american citizens

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LULAC | Organization, Purpose, History, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LULAC, one of the oldest and largest Latino organizations in the United States. Since its founding in 1929, it has focused on education, employment, and civil rights for Hispanics. One of its notable initiatives was the preschool program Little School of the 400, which sought to teach children 400 basic English words.

# data[].attributes.headline
la liga pro defensa escolar in san antonio 1934

# data[].attributes.subject
la liga pro defensa escolar in san antonio 1934

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A pioneering political and intellectual history of the Chicano leaders who emerged from the barrios of the Southwest between 1930 and 1960--Ignacio L. López, George I. Sanchez, Josefina Fierro de Bright, and others--and of their effort to capture first-class citizenship for Mexican Americans. Drawing extensively on archival material and oral history, Mario T. García discusses the key figures, organizations, and issues of the movement; in so doing he casts new light not only on Chicano history but also on the histories of American ethnicity and civil rights movements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A pioneering political and intellectual history of the Chicano leaders who emerged from the barrios of the Southwest between 1930 and 1960--Ignacio L. López, George I. Sanchez, Josefina Fierro de Bright, and others--and of their effort to capture first-class citizenship for Mexican Americans. Drawing extensively on archival material and oral history, Mario T.

# data[].attributes.headline
confederation de organizaciones mexicanas y lationo americans 1938

# data[].attributes.subject
confederation de organizaciones mexicanas y lationo americans 1938

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Confederación de Organizaciones Mexicanas y Latino Americanas del Estado de Texas was founded at a state convocation of Texas-Mexican self-help organizations in Port Arthur on November 27, 1938. Its attempt to coordinate efforts of various groups in the state to improve the "moral, economic, and cultural betterment" of Mexicans place it as a historical bridge between the earlier mutual-aid societies (sociedades mutualistas) and the later civil-rights groups. Its original name was Confederación de Organizaciones Mexicanas, but it soon assumed a broader title to include state residents of Mexican descent born in either the United States or Mexico. The Mexican consuls in Houston and Galveston issued a call in July 1938 to Texas-Mexican organizations to a meeting called the Convención Regional de Organizaciones Mexicanas de las Jurisdicciones Consulares de Galveston, Beaumont, y Houston. Efforts were made to establish El Congreso del Pueblo de Habla Española (Spanish-speaking Congress) to ensure basic rights for all Spanish-speaking people in the United States.

The Galveston convention participants set up a coordinating committee, which spent the remainder of the summer forming regional alliances that led to COMLA the following November. The committee contacted social, recreational, and other civic groups in all the consular districts around the state, including the Cruz Azul Mexicana, a women's charitable organization, hoping to bring all these groups under COMLA's banner. COMLA worked to improve the cultural life of Mexican children by organizing libraries and cultural enrichment programs. In Houston the organization took a slightly different name, La Federación de Sociedades Mexicanas y Latino Americanas. Under consul Luis L. Duplán it worked to improve its constituents' health, educational, and social conditions, in some cases cooperating with the Rusk Center ( see SETTLEMENT HOUSES), a settlement school that provided social services to the Mexican immigrant community in the city. At one time FSMLA joined COMLA in temporarily removing signs posted in public places in Wharton that declared, "Mexicans not Allowed." COMLA held at least four annual conventions, beginning in 1938 and was considered somewhat successful for a time in addressing the Mexican community's major concerns. At what may have been its last annual convention in Galveston in 1941 it focused on the specific issue of segregation. FSMLA apparently lasted through World War II.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Confederación de Organizaciones Mexicanas y Latino Americanas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Confederación de Organizaciones Mexicanas y Latino Americanas del Estado de Texas was founded at a state convocation of Texas-Mexican self-help organizations in Port Arthur on November 27, 1938. Its attempt to coordinate efforts of various groups in the state to improve the "moral, economic, and cultural betterment" of Mexicans place it as a historical bridge between the earlier mutual-aid societies (sociedades mutualistas ) and the later civil-rights groups.

# data[].attributes.headline
american gi foum and felix longoria affair 1945

# data[].attributes.subject
american gi foum and felix longoria affair 1945

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
V. Carl Allsup General Entry

The controversy surrounding the burial of Felix Longoria provided a successful case for the American G. I. Forum, a civil rights organization for Mexican Americans, to fight racial discrimination with political pressure. In 1948 the remains of Private Felix Longoria of Three Rivers, Texas, were recovered from the Philippines, where he had been killed on a volunteer mission during the last days of World War II. His body was shipped home for burial in the Three Rivers cemetery, where the "Mexican" section was separated by barbed wire. The director of the funeral home would not allow the use of the chapel because of alleged disturbances at previous Mexican American services and because "the Whites would not like it." Longoria's widow and her sister discussed the refusal with Dr. Hector Garcia, the founder of the American G. I. Forum. He, in turn, contacted the funeral director and received the same refusal and rationale. On January 11, 1949, Garcia called a meeting of the Corpus Christi Forum, which he had organized as the first G. I. Forum chapter in March 1948; he also sent many telegrams and letters to Texas congressmen. Senator Lyndon B. Johnson responded immediately with support and an offer to arrange the burial at Arlington National Cemetery. The funeral took place on February 16, 1949, at the Arlington National Cemetery; with the Longoria family were Senator Johnson and a personal representative of the president of the United States.

After the funeral, the Texas House of Representatives authorized a five-member committee to investigate the Felix Longoria incident. The committee held open hearings at the Three Rivers Chamber of Commerce and, after recriminations and exculpatory arguments, concluded that there was no discrimination on the part of the funeral director and that he had acted in anger but had apologized. Four of the committeemen signed the report. Frank Oltorf, the fifth member, stated that the funeral director's words "appear to be discriminatory." Another member withdrew his name from the majority report and filed his own account, which stated that the actions of the director were on "the fine line of discrimination." The report was never filed. The Felix Longoria Affair provided Mexican Americans an example to unify and expand their struggle for civil rights in the coming decades.

Carl Allsup, The American G.I. Forum: Origins and Evolution (University of Texas Center for Mexican American Studies Monograph 6, Austin, 1982).

Categories:

Peoples

Mexican Americans

Activism and Social Reform

Time Periods:

World War II

Texas Post World War II

The following, adapted from the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, is the preferred citation for this entry.

V. Carl Allsup, "Felix Longoria Affair," Handbook of Texas Online, accessed February 03, 2021, https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/felix-longoria-affair.

Published by the Texas State Historical Association.

All copyrighted materials included within the Handbook of Texas Online are in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 related to Copyright and "Fair Use" for Non-Profit educational institutions, which permits the Texas State Historical Association (TSHA), to utilize copyrighted materials to further scholarship, education, and inform the public. The TSHA makes every effort to conform to the principles of fair use and to comply with copyright law.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

This entry belongs to the following Handbook Special Projects:

Signup for our free newsletter, Especially Texan

Mailing Address:

Texas State Historical Association
PO Box 5428
Austin, TX 78763

Physical Address:

3001 Lake Austin Blvd.
Austin, TX 78703

Trending Now:

Registration for our 2021 Annual Meeting is now open!

Our 125th Annual Meeting will be held online this year, and it will include informative sessions featuring the research of Texas history scholars, a presentation of awards and fellowships, a silent auction, and special events.

Mailing Address:

Texas State Historical Association
PO Box 5428
Austin, TX 78763

Physical Address:

3001 Lake Austin Blvd.
Austin, TX 78703

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
V. Carl Allsup General Entry The controversy surrounding the burial of Felix Longoria provided a successful case for the American G. I. Forum, a civil rights organization for Mexican Americans, to fight racial discrimination with political pressure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A case in which the Court found that intentionally excluding Mexicans from a jury in a trial where the defendant was a Mexican was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1948 a federal suit brought by Mexican-American civil-rights organizations against the Bastrop schools resulted in a decision that prohibited segregation of Mexican-American children on separate campuses on the basis of race. The Delgado decree permitted separate classes on the same campus and in the first grade, but only to correct deficiencies determined by tests given to all students. For the next ten years the American G.I. Forum and the League of United Latin American Citizens sought compliance with this ruling.

The Texas legislature established the office of Commissioner of Education in 1949 to supervise public instruction. The position took responsibilities from the control of the state superintendent of public instruction, who had been cooperating with the court and Mexican Americans. The commissioner issued a new policy by which local school boards were designated the primary source of initiative within their school districts; the commissioner's judgment was to be used for final appeal. The struggles of Mexican-American organizations that followed indicated that most school districts had ignored the Delgado decree. After a series of challenges and rejections by the commissioner, Mexican-American strategists turned to the federal courts; some districts ended segregation rather than risk a court finding.

In 1957 the American G.I. Forum filed suit against the Driscoll Consolidated Independent School District for segregation. The case charged that the Driscoll CISD had developed and utilized a system of "beginners' classes" for the first scholastic year, then for the next three years-"low first," "high first," and a segregated second grade-without testing all students. Proof of the intent of this structure was the placement of Linda Pérez in the "Mexican" first grade to learn English; in fact, she spoke no other language besides English. The court found the Driscoll grouping of separate classes arbitrary and unreasonable, as it was directed against all children of Mexican origin as a class, and ordered the practice halted. Although the decision prohibited segregation of Mexican-American students in public schools, however, the system did not change radically, and in fact subsequent challenges became necessary. By the late 1960s LULAC and the G.I. Forum, supported by the changing political and economic climate, filed more lawsuits challenging the lack of equal educational opportunity for Mexican Americans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1948 a federal suit brought by Mexican-American civil-rights organizations against the Bastrop schools resulted in a decision that prohibited segregation of Mexican-American children on separate campuses on the basis of race. The Delgado decree permitted separate classes on the same campus and in the first grade, but only to correct deficiencies determined by tests given to all students.

# data[].attributes.headline
political association of spanish speaking organizations 1960

# data[].attributes.subject
political association of spanish speaking organizations 1960

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TSHA | Political Association of Spanish-Speaking Organizations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Font size: A / A reset Translate / Traducir / Traduire

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Melon Strike of 1966 · UTRGV Digital Exhibits

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The digital exhibits of the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, hosted by the University Library.

# data[].attributes.headline
formation of the mexican american youth organization mayo in san antonio 1967 

# data[].attributes.subject
formation of the mexican american youth organization mayo in san antonio 1967 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
MAYO, founded in San Antonio in 1967, was for a decade the major political organization of Mexican-American youth in Texas; it also led to the founding of the Raza Unida party in 1970. Like many other Mexican-American organizations in the state, MAYO sought social justice. But unlike older and more established groups, such as the League of United Latin American Citizens, the American G.I. Forum, or the Political Association of Spanish Speaking Organizations, it stressed Chicano cultural nationalism and preferred the techniques of direct political confrontation and mass demonstration to accomplish its goals. Activism among Mexican-American university students in the mid-1960s grew out of such events as the 1965 Crusade for Justice in Denver, Colorado, and the June 1967 takeover of the Tierra Amarilla County Courthouse in New Mexico. In Texas, MAYO became one of the anchors of the Chicano movement. Besides MAYO originator José Ángel Gutiérrez, the organization's other four founders were Willie (William) C. Velásquez, Mario Compean, Ignacio Pérez, and Juan Patlán. Later, Ernesto Cortez was invited to join the group. All were greatly influenced by the political dissent sweeping the country in the mid-1960s. They were particularly intrigued by the grassroots strategies employed by the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee throughout the South and by Reies López Tijerina's New Mexico movement, the Alianza Federal de Pueblos Libres (Federal Alliance of Free Communities).

In San Antonio, MAYO members set up a political study group and consulted with civil-rights leaders Eleuterio Escobar, Jr., and María L. de Hernández. True to their activist vision, Gutiérrez, Compean, and Pérez staged MAYO's first demonstration in front of the Alamo on July 4, 1967. They continued to bring other young people into their growing circle-mainly disaffected youths from the West Side of San Antonio and urban and farm-labor activists from around the state. They called their new group the Mexican American Youth Organization for the term's "boy-scoutish" ring, hoping that the name would mollify the public criticism they expected to receive. The five founders incorporated MAYO into a nonprofit organization consisting of local chapters and a state-level board of directors. They selected as a logo an Aztec warrior inside a circle, a symbol they borrowed from the Mexican national airline, Aeronaves de México. Membership in MAYO was drawn from among Mexican-American teenagers and university students who were committed to " la raza." The concept of " la raza" was part of MAYO ideology from the start. For a time the organization was known informally as La Raza Unida because of a series of conferences that Velásquez organized under that heading. From its office on the West Side, with Gutiérrez as its head, MAYO spread to Kingsville, Uvalde, and other areas in South Texas and the Rio Grande valley. Thirty chapters were reportedly established by Chicano students around the state in 1967-68, and after MAYO spread to other parts of the country by 1970 its total membership reached 1,000. University students also became a part of the MAYO network. A chapter was established in 1968 at the University of Texas at Austin as an outgrowth of the Mexican American Student Association, an organization formed at the university in 1967. There, as in many MAYO chapters, men often held the top leadership roles. But scores of women joined MAYO around the state, and several headed the University of Texas chapter in the 1970s. When the Mexican American Unity Council, an economic development corporation in San Antonio, received a $110,000 Ford Foundation grant, it allocated $10,000 to MAYO, a move that was denounced at the time by United States representative Henry B. Gonzalez, a Democrat and a vocal foe of MAYO ethnocentricity.

MAYO identified and addressed three needs of Mexican Americans-economic independence, local control of education, and political strength and unity through the formation of a third party. The organization publicly protested the poverty and injustice faced by some Hispanics, denouncing incidents of exclusive employment policies and police brutality. It also organized walkouts in the public schools of Edcouch, Elsa, Weslaco, Crystal City, and other towns. Estimates of the total number of MAYO-organized walkouts varied from a low of seventeen to a high of thirty-eight. With MAYO's assistance, students protested the school authorities' treatment of Mexican Americans and usually presented them with a list of demands such as the employment of more Mexican-American teachers and staff and the addition of Mexican-American history to the curriculum. Starting a third party occurred to Gutiérrez and other leaders early in MAYO's history, but the idea did not gain wide support until late 1969. During the first (and only) national MAYO conference, held in Mission from December 26 to 30, 1969, conference participants endorsed the idea of forming the Raza Unida party. MAYO had recently proved its political mettle in the 1969 San Antonio city election, when Mario Compean had come within 300 votes of forcing a runoff in the mayor's race against the incumbent, Walter W. McAllister, Sr. In the San Antonio race, MAYO, working on the West Side, had increased voter registration among Mexican Americans by 14 percent and voter turnout by 11 percent over the previous year. MAYO leaders were therefore eager to take the next step in uniting Mexican Americans in politics across the state.

The mainstream press sometimes gave a " bandido" image to MAYO by characterizing its members as "wearers of brown berets, combat boots, serapes, and rolled blankets slung over [their] shoulder[s]." Nevertheless, though MAYO rejected the diplomatic tactics of established Mexican-American civil-rights organizations, the San Antonio chapters of the American G.I. Forum and the League of United Latin American Citizens originally admired MAYO's "aggressive style" and offered assistance. In addition, local Mexican-American businessmen made nominal contributions to the group. At the University of Texas at Austin, MAYO garnered the support of both the eminent anthropologist Américo Paredes and the well-regarded teacher George I. Sánchez. Though the general public usually became aware of MAYO only through the mainstream press, the organization had its own newspapers, in which it reported on its activities in English, standard Spanish, and the Spanish argot known as caló ( see PACHUCOS). The newspapers, with such titles as El Despertador, Hoy, El Azteca, and La Revolución, often brought a decidedly different-some would say militant-slant to their articles. But they also published stories not seen in the general press, as well as poetry, and at least one newspaper occasionally carried "el güiri, güiri," a witty gossip column written in caló.

By the late 1970s, MAYO was losing momentum as the Chicano movement weakened throughout the Southwest, like many activist organizations across the country. The Raza Unida party was in ruins after the state election of 1978. Its gubernatorial candidate, Mario Compean, had received only 15,000 votes, a poor showing that caused the party's originating organization to lose its political clout statewide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
MAYO, founded in San Antonio in 1967, was for a decade the major political organization of Mexican-American youth in Texas; it also led to the founding of the Raza Unida party in 1970. Like many other Mexican-American organizations in the state, MAYO sought social justice.

# data[].attributes.headline
mexican americans legal defense and education fund 1968

# data[].attributes.subject
mexican americans legal defense and education fund 1968

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Database Narrative

During the Civil Rights Movement, Mexican-Americans struggled for equal
rights all across the Southwest in America. In Texas, campaigns for
racial equality were led primarily by organizations like La Raza (the
Resistance), MAYO (Mexican-American Youth Organization), PASSO
(Political Association of Spanish-Speaking Organizations), and the Brown
Berets. These organizations struggled for equal rights and privileges
for Mexican-Americans in all facets of society.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, young MAYO activists, as a part of
the Chicano Movement, enacted numerous school walk-outs for better, more
racially inclusive education policies. On 28 February 1969, Chicano
students at Kingsville, Texas' A&I University staged a walk-out for
improved conditions in the Mexican-American parts of town. Twenty
students participated, demanding "development of a park at The Plaza for
public use, paved streets in the Mexican American barrios and
maintenance of a drainage ditch on the city's northside." Although these
demands were not even considered by public officials, students at
Kingsville's Gillett Junior High School took up the strike in April of
the same year with a new list of demands. They wanted bilingual and
bicultural education programs, the right to speak Spanish at school
without harassment, more Mexican-American books in the school library,
more Mexican American teachers, and a ban on teachers preaching their
own political views in the classroom.

A&I students provided Gillett Junior High School students with the
research they needed to present their case as viable, and helped to
organize the junior high school students. First, the students presented
their case to school officials. When this did not garner the results
they sought, they began organizing a walk-out. Seventy-five organizers
from MAYO and A&I organized 200 students in preparation for a
walk-out.

On 14 April 1969, about 75 students gathered across the street from
Gillett Junior High School and boycotted class. On the second day,
between 70 and 80 students convened at a hamburger stand near school and
marched to the school district's administrative offices, where they
picketed. They shouted phrases like "Viva la Raza!" and "Viva MAYO!" and
carried signs with statements such as "We Dare to Care about Education"
in both English and Spanish. On the third day, between 50 and 60
protesters stood across the street from the school and shouted to
students to cross the street and join them during passing period. Around
12 students did so. School administrators threatened all protesting
students with suspension. Additionally, twelve Latina women gathered and
stood silently outside of the school that day to demonstrate their
dissent.

MAYO and A&I organizers then planned a combined walk-out with local
schools. They began at Gillett Junior High School and planned to march
to Memorial Junior High School. As they walked, they grew in number,
reaching 110 marchers, comprising 56 minors and 54 legal adults, before
police intervened. Sixteen policemen took every marcher into custody on
charges of disrupting the peace and unlawful assembly.

By 5:00 p.m., almost all of the students had been released either to
parents or "to their own person," but several students were kept
overnight in the jail. Four hundred supporters held silent vigil outside
of the jail that night for the students being held overnight. The
minors were set to be released without bond, but several of the students
who were over 17 years old payed $50 bail. This campaign in Kingsville,
Texas ended then, with the Gillett Junior High principal stating that
things were "back to normal," solidifying the failure of the campaign.

However, MAYO and other Chicano organizations carried out several other
walk-outs through the end of 1969 and the early 1970s, with varying
degrees of success. Walk-outs began on 22 April 1969 in the South Texas
city of Edcouch-Elsa, and later in Crystal City
( http://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/chicano-students-strike-equali...).
The walk-outs in Kingsville influenced later walk-outs in neighboring
Robstown, Texas, where students walked out in protests of staff and
curriculum insufficiencies very similar to those in Kingsville.
Additionally, on September 16, 1970, Kingsville A&I students joined
the National Chicano Walkout, marching from their Student Union to the
Kleberg County Courthouse.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Chicano Students Walk Out for Racial Equality in Kingsville, Texas 1969

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Database Narrative During the Civil Rights Movement, Mexican-Americans struggled for equal rights all across the Southwest in America. In Texas, campaigns for racial equality were led primarily by organizations like La Raza (the Resistance), MAYO (Mexican-American Youth Organization), PASSO (Political Association of Spanish-Speaking Organizations), and the Brown Berets.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
V. Carl Allsup General Entry

The Mexican-American struggle for access to the Texas public school system pursued a different strategy than that used by African Americans. As legal doctrine evolved after the Civil War, racial categories included only two groups, Caucasian and Negro. Segregation of Blacks occurred by overt, legal definition-it was the law of the land-whereas segregation of persons of Mexican origin was done by covert shifts within the law, as they were classified as White. In Texas, school officials separated Mexican-origin children by "pedagogical analysis" or language deficiency. This practice was developed in 1930 to reinstate the system temporarily suspended by Del Rio ISD v. Salvatierra, a suit against separation by national origin. In the post-World War II era, Mexican-American organizations and strategists re-established the "other White" concept; they also stressed the absence-of-law tactic, whereby segregation was unconstitutional where no law existed permitting such action. Several successful suits between 1948 and 1957 established Mexican Americans as "a class apart"; in succeeding years only one court finding failed to support that designation, but others did not always find discrimination. State officials began using the "other White" and absence-of-law arguments to justify grouping Black and Hispanic children to fulfill integration laws and to deny the existence of discrimination.

Cisneros v. Corpus Christi Independent School District (1970) was the first case to extend the U.S. Supreme Court's Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas decision (1954) to Mexican Americans. It recognized them as a minority group that could be and was frequently discriminated against. Such segregation and discrimination was ruled unconstitutional. The decision replaced the "other White" argument based on Hernández v. State of Texas, which had provided constitutional rights based on class discrimination where Mexican Americans had not been identified as a separate race. In 1968 José Cisneros and twenty-five other Mexican-American parents filed suit against the Corpus Christi Independent School District, charging operation of a dual school system at all levels on a de facto basis. The attorney for Cisneros was James de Anda, an experienced Mexican-American civil-rights lawyer who participated in the 1954 Hernández case before the Supreme Court and won the Hernández v. Driscoll ISD case in 1957. De Anda had begun that experience as an attorney for the American G.I. Forum. He argued that Mexican Americans were an identifiable minority group that had been illegally segregated by state action, whereas the school district maintained that since there was no history of state law requiring segregation, a dual school system could not exist. Judge Woodrow Seals found that the school board consciously fostered a system that perpetuated traditional segregation. This included a system that bused Anglo students to schools out of their neighborhoods, renovated old schools in Black and Mexican-American neighborhoods rather than building new ones, assigned Black and Hispanic teachers to segregated schools, and limited hiring of such teachers at other schools; the school board also lacked a majority-to-minority busing system. Judge Seals cited the "other White" argument as adjacent proof of segregation, but relied primarily on the application of unconstitutional segregation of Mexican Americans as an identifiable minority group based on physical, cultural, religious, and linguistic distinctions. The United States Department of Justice required further proof of historical evidence of segregation, and the school procrastinated on implementation of a plan to satisfy constitutional requirements. However, in 1975 the Cisneros case produced a new school system for Mexican-American and Black children in Corpus Christi.

Carlos M. Alcala and Jorge C. Rangel, "Project Report: De Jure Segregation of Chicanos in Texas Schools," Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 7 (March 1972). Carl Allsup, The American G.I. Forum: Origins and Evolution (University of Texas Center for Mexican American Studies Monograph 6, Austin, 1982). Carl Allsup, "Education Is Our Freedom: The American G.I. Forum and Mexican American School Segregation in Texas, 1948-1957," Aztlán 8 (Spring-Summer-Fall 1977). Guadalupe San Miguel, Jr., "Mexican American Organizations and the Changing Politics of School Desegregation in Texas, 1945-1980," Social Science Quarterly 63 (December 1982). Guadalupe San Miguel, Jr., "The Struggle Against Separate and Unequal Schools: Middle Class Mexican Americans and the Desegregation Campaign in Texas, 1929-1957," History of Education Quarterly 23 (Fall 1983).

Categories:

Education

Court Cases

Law, Law Enforcement, and Outlaws

Politics and Government

Court Cases, Controversies, and Scandals

Peoples

Mexican Americans

Activism and Social Reform

The following, adapted from the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, is the preferred citation for this entry.

V. Carl Allsup, "Cisneros v. Corpus Christi ISD," Handbook of Texas Online, accessed October 19, 2020, https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/cisneros-v-corpus-christi-isd.

Published by the Texas State Historical Association.

This entry belongs to the following Handbook Special Projects:

Signup for our free newsletter, Especially Texan

Mailing Address:

Texas State Historical Association
PO Box 5428
Austin, TX 78763

Physical Address:

3001 Lake Austin Blvd.
Austin, TX 78703

Trending Now:

There's some spooky history here in Texas.

We created this eBook for you, and it was made possible through the contributions of our members and supporters.

Mailing Address:

Texas State Historical Association
PO Box 5428
Austin, TX 78763

Physical Address:

3001 Lake Austin Blvd.
Austin, TX 78703

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
V. Carl Allsup General Entry The Mexican-American struggle for access to the Texas public school system pursued a different strategy than that used by African Americans. As legal doctrine evolved after the Civil War, racial categories included only two groups, Caucasian and Negro.