First of I would like to say that microfilm is not my friend. Finding and chronicling the article from “list A” was a chore I wish not to repeat. I had a much easier time looking up the second article as it was in book form. For what its worth I think we should keep all articles in book form. But I digress.
The first article that I dealt with was “Hero of Sabine Pass buried, forgotten here in hometown” by Bob Tutt published in the Houston Chronicle on Tuesday September 2, 1997. The article addressed how we view Dick Dowling today. The article had a tone of trying to remember Dick Dowling, but I feel that this was overshadowed by current events in 2007. Just three days before Princess Diana was killed in a car crash, the entire world was memorializing and trying to remember the Princess. The Chronicle was filled with articles about the Princess; it was near impossible to find a page that didn’t have an article about Diana. I feel that the title of the Dowling article was ironic, “Hero of Sabine Pass buried, forgotten here in hometown.” The article was meant to address why Houston’s hero had fallen from the public sphere, on this day Dowling’s legacy was overshadowed because of the news of Princess Diana’s death.
It is a sad fact that we do not memorialize and give our heroes the credit that they deserve. The article addresses the often-ignored aspect of Dowling’s Irish heritage. Dowling was forced to leave Ireland with his sister to escape the plights of the Irish Potato Famine. He soon Settled in Houston and adopted it as his home. Dowling was largely invested in the city Texas gave him the opportunity to make something of himself. The article notes his many business ventures in Houston and his impact on the city as a business leader. I believe that the article helps to answer the question: “Why did Dowling, a non-slave owning Irish immigrant, enlist to serve in the Confederate army?” The answer is because he was fighting to protect his home. In her book Manning argued that all Southerners fought to preserve slavery in one form or the other, but we get the impression from this article that this was not so with Dowling. Dowling was a well to do businessman, an immigrant, and as an Irishman someone who had see the evils of the oppression of a people. The article mentions how Dowling treated blacks fairly, even empowering them with leases on property where no rent was collected. This article leads me to believe that the “Hero of Sabine Pass” was fighting because he felt a moral obligation to defend the people and place that had given him so much. It is truly a shame that Dowling’s memory is beginning to fade and be stymied by false accusations of racism. As Houstonian we should make an effort to honor Dowling once again as one of our city’s greatest heroes, and as a man who went to war for honorable reasons.
The second article that I researched was an article from “Confederate Veteran” magazine this article, “Presentation of Dick Dowling Sword,” was very different from the Houston Chronicle article. In 1901, when this article was written, Dick Dowling’s memory was at its strongest. The article goes as far as to describe Dowling as “the sainted hero of Sabine Pass.” The article detailed the ceremony at which Dick Dowling’s sword was presented to the Dick Dowling Camp of Veterans. This called me to question the statements made when researching the Dowling monument that Dowling did not have a sword. It makes me believe that the Statue of Dowling depicts him with his sword because this “relic” of the Civil War hero had been recently given to the Dick Dowling Camp in the years just prior to the monument’s erection. The article goes on to list the men who fought with Dowling at Sabine Pass, and gives a summary of the battle. On a related note the article states: “the names of every one of whom should be raised in golden letters upon the monument to be erected to the memory of [Dowling].” This makes me wonder: “What was the reason that the names are not ‘raised in gold’ on the monument as it stands today?” The officers of the Dick Dowling Camp are all noted in the article and intensive biographies are provided for the two surviving members of the Davis Guards. The article gives us perspective about what men made up the Dick Dowling Camp, and what they valued in 1901. It should be noted that Dowling was not depicted as a Houstonian, businessman or Irishman. But that the Irish heritage of the two surviving members of the Davis Guards is noted, also we should take not of the histories of these two men, both had similar backgrounds to Dowling. Neither of these men had any reason to fight to preserve the institution of slavery. It is important that we remember Dowling and these men for that, and not allow the issue of slavery to tarnish their memories in any way. The portrayal of Dowling is as a heroic savior, a “saint,” a “honorable, charitable, and just man. It appears that the perception of Dowling at this time was that of greater than man. The depiction of Dick Dowling as a fearless and venerated leader in the statue, that now sits in Hermann Park resonates thorough this article.
Both articles contribute to the memory of Dick Dowling. I think that it is important to remember Dowling as the man of both articles. It is important that we not forget who Dick Dowling was or what he did for out city. We must work to strengthen and preserve Dowling’s memory so that he is not lost to time.
While the 1997 article does give Dowling’s descendant’s viewpoint on his ideas about race and the reasons why he is fighting, it’s important to take into account the source and the point of view of the speaker. Ivins clearly wants to absolve Dowling of having fought to defend slavery, and she speculates that accusations of racism are the primary reasons he has been forgotten. But she doesn’t provide firm evidence about Dowling’s motives from before the war (which historians always must do), relying instead on evidence from after the war. And she doesn’t provide evidence to back up her suspicion that Dowling is being unfairly dismissed because he wore gray.
The larger question raised in your post is one that I attempted to address in this post. If a person’s intentions were all that mattered when determining whether to memorialize them, then maybe Dowling’s actual motives would be the most important consideration when determining whether we should remember a hero. But shouldn’t we also take into account the implications of his victory in a larger sense? Whatever Dowling believed individually, he fought for secession, which in practice meant he fought to defend the continuation of slaveholding. And his victory in battle in 1863 had the practical effect of slowing emancipation in Texas. Does this bear on the question of whether Dowling was a “hero”?