Personal Commentaries

Were Fighting Against: - I wrote what I wrote, because I want Becerra family and friends to know what it is we're fighting for. We're fighting against injustice, were fighting against discrimination, were fighting against the whitewashing of history. I want to honor this man, who near death, whispered to his daughter that all his land was taken without his consent. That's who I'm doing it for. I want him to know that I gave it my all, that his grandson wasn't afraid to speak up. Mark

The God Honest Truth We all know Becerra owned a large tract of land in Refugio County. In 1849, he had the land resurveyed by Refugio County surveyor David Snively and the results showed that it contained 8,856 acres! We know that much is a fact, it can’t be disputed. The land had been granted to Becerra by Coahuila y Tejas in 1832, but the gringo establishment refused to legitimize his ownership. For all purposes, they shuffled paper and made-up excuses to delay his legitimate transfer to the Texas General Land Office, never really giving Becerra the rightful title to his land. There were several reasons why the gringo establishment refused to legitimize Becerra's land ownership. First, they were racist. They didn't believe that a Mexican should legitimately own land. Second, they were greedy. They wanted the land for themselves. Third, they had to have known that Becerra had clout within the local colonies and townships. He was well known, and they knew that he would fight f...

SEEDS OF DISCONTENT (We Have to Look Deep into the Past) How was Antonia de la Garza able to hold on to her land for nearly  30 years  before leasing it? When you really think about it, she was gifted that land in 1853 by  Manuel Becerra's  daughter  Maria Josefa.  Yet, why was her land undisturbed for  30 years ? She didn't lease the land, which was adjacent to  Antonio's,  until  1884 ? Now if you do the math, Antonio ran into O'Connor's goons in  1875 . Her land was adjacent to his. Why was she untouched? Why did she go free when the parcels of land were adjacent to each other.  I have a pretty good hunch. This is simply because she was married to  Don Carlos de la Garza,  that's why. Is it fair? Let's discuss the particulars, the why. Simply, if you helped the gringo out back then, you were good, you were solid. Lord only knows how much the gringos of Refugio and Goliad loved Carlos de la Garza. All you have to do...

Generational Wealth Generational wealth, robbed from the de la Garza families. Not sure how long ago it sold, but my math says Antonio's 1/2 League (2,214 acres), would have fetched just north of $14,000,000... Mark

Multiplier Effect I guess when I'm getting at in regard to that last post is that the loss of the land has a sort of multiplier effect. There's no way to forecast or use what we'd call, using a crystal ball, that would tell us what revenue streams would have come in. The fact that the land in all likelihood cost $14,000,000 + at this point is true. It doesn't include any oil or mineral rights underneath the ground. It doesn't include cattle and horse ranching operations. I mean if memory serves me right, you would have to extrapolate nearly 150 years back to generate an accurate picture. It ain't going to happen, but just goes to show you that had it continued and had he prospered with his cattle and horses, even branched out into other activities, the total value lost easily would exceed $14,000,000. Again, this is another reason why it's worth fighting for, and to let those gringos know they economically hurt many of the original vaqueros who were supposed...

Generational Wealth I took average unit ($) per acre for 10 Refugio ranches. Antonio's land would have more or less fetched:  $14,357,790.00 . So, I'd say yes, it matters...