Feuds of Harlan County Kentucky
Harlan Co. Courthouse around 1880
Skecth of Wilse Howard
Jonathon K. Bailey & family around 1884
The Howards who had cousins in Clay Co. Ky. Had a feud of their own in Harlan Co. It is an adjoining county to Clay and is where my family migrated to around 1846 but did not get involved within the feud clans, if you read about the feuds associated with Clay Co. Then you will remember an individual by the name of Chad HALL who was involved within both counties.
Chad Hall was born April 15, 1859, the son of Alfred Hall and Sarah Hall of Lee County Virginia, his father was a rather prosperous mill owner, but Chad had choose to move to Harlan, he married Susan Nolan and bought a house on "Martins Fork". While Susan stayed home Chad traveled through the counties of Harlan, Leslie, Clay and Bell counties dehorning cattle, trimming holves, shoeing horses, and doing general blacksmith work. His sister Jane married Jim Shackleford, who was with the Howards when the Bakers killed Wilson Howard and Burch Stores and wounded Bal. Chad was a friend to the Howards in both Clay and Harlan counties, a lot of folks thought he was something like a hired gun for them.(after the confession of killing Tom Baker they could have been right),General Garrard had as many as a dozen men who acted as gaurds around his home in Clay County.( I will interject something on Chad Hall in my records I have Chadwell (Chad) Hall b, 16 May 1859 to Alford S. Hall and Sarah Hall of Harlan Co.? So says the record)
The TURNERS of Harlan Co.,Wiliam Turner had a large farm on "Clover Fork" and he also opened a general store in Harlan, his son William-2 was born in 1812 and married Elizabeth Brittain, they had one son George Brittain Turner who stood about 6.3 and weighed around 350 pounds. William and his second wife Susannah also had James, Sarah and Lucy. James married Elizabeth Clay in 1833, and they had nine children; sons William and James (Devil Jim) seemed to be the worst of the lot. Some considered the Turners community leaders that helped out the less fortunate, but the author of A Cumberland Vendetta C. A. Ballou called them "demons of greed and ambition." The Turners were in trouble long before their feud with the HOWARDS, in the spring of 1852 a storm had blown down a fence and a neighbors cows (J.T. Ward) were wondering in their pasture, William and Devil Jim solved the problem by shooting the cows. John Skidmore opened a hotel and a general store, but when his store became to much competition, he was in turn threatened with death. Cambell Hurst who owned a hardware business was elected court clerk, he defeated the Turners choice and shortly afterward he was killed by a man named Jones, a Turner relative, no one was indicted.
The Howards had no such vile reputation when they began to clash with the Turners after the Civil War, Ben Howard a veteran of the Revolution had come through Cumberlin Gap from Virginia around 1800, settled near Cumberland Ford (Pineville). They moved up the Cumberland River and settled in what would become Harlan County, Samuel and Chloe Howard built a home there around 1796, when Harlan County was created in 1819 the county court bought 12 acres from them for $5, located where Martins Fork, Poor Fork and Clover Fork join to form the Cumberland River. Samuel Howard built the first courthouse and jail, in 1833 William Turner owned a tavern and two stores, in 1853 Devil Jim Turner married Sarah Jones, but did not settle down too much, him and his brother William, John, and Hezekiah Clem and Nolan alledgedly killed John Clay and robbed him of $95, David Lyttle their attorney got them aquitted,(the LYTTLES of Clay were aligned with the Bakers). By 1860 Jim was in trouble with his cousins, the Middletons, and Narcissa Middleton accused him of trying to kill her husband, William. During the Civil War Jim enlisted in the Union Army, but deserted before his time was up. At the end of the war William Middleton was killed, alledgely by Devil Jim and his gang, in 1869 Williams widow, Narcissa, testified that Jim,(Turner) his brother William (Turner) and Francis PACE killed David Middleton, Williams brother. But before they could be tried for murder Campbell HURST who was to testify against them, was stabbed and killed on the main street of Harlan, in what Narcissa said was a set-up to keep him from testifying against them. On December 5, 1874, Jim, William and Francis Pace were convicted and sentenced to life in prison. William died in prison in 1877, Francis Pace was pardoned in 1891, Devil Jim got out on parole and went with his son Hiram to Washington, where he suffered a stroke fell into a fireplace and died of burns. (Tom Walters says that Devil Jim was shot by Wood Lyttle, in any event he died).
It is of note also that the Howards like their cousins in Clay Co. Were Whigs and fought for the Union and had come back home to take up a job of making a living.
In 1884 George Turner built a handsome home not far from the courthouse, it became known as the Turner mansion, Wix Howard opened a store in Harlan but quit the business, he claimed the Turners were harrasing his customers, the Howards with their friends the GILBERTS had angered the Turners as early as 1855, they had insisted Devil Jim be arrested for theft, assault, and rape. Will Turner met Bill Gilbert on the street and killed him dead, he was arrested but freed on bond and never tried,,,but the Turners had poked a hornet's nest.
One crucial thing happened when Wix Howard got into a disagreement with Little Bob Turner over a poker game when each blamed the other for cheating, the next day they met on the street and Little Bob shot Wix in the arm, however Wix raised his shotgun and shot Little Bob in the chest who died later that night in the Turner mansion, a few weeks went by and Little George Turner and one of the Bailey boys went down to the Howard store which also sold whiskey, they ordered Alice who was alone in the store not to sell whiskey to George Sr. And little George apparently talked rough to her, that also proved to be a mistake, Alice Howard was the daughter of Hezekiah JENNINGS who would be in the thick of the feud with the Turners, this feud more or less rose out of the whiskey business. When Wilse heard of the encounter with his mother, the following week on the road to Hagan Va. Wilse ran into Will Turner and a man named Bob Maupin, shots were fired but noone had gotten killed, that night the Howard home was attacked by a group led by Will Turner, will was wounded.
George Turner apparently issued a challenge to meet the Howards at the courthouse, the Howards however figured they would be waiting for them in the courthouse and fire on them from there, so, the Howards rode into town early and quietly took up positions, Berry, Hiram and James Howard were in the courthouse along with Hezekiah Jennings, Wilse, Alex and Elijah Howard were across the street, it is possible Chad Hall and Bud SPURLOCK were with them. A dozen or so Turners, unaware the Howards were waiting for them walked casually out of the Turner mansion and toward the courthouse.But before they could reach it someone spotted the Howards on the second floor and gave alarm. Everyone started shooting, Will Turner attempted to rush the door but was hit a second time, he was helped to the front porch of the mansion screaming in pain (gut shot), "Stop that his mother snapped, Die like a man, like your brother (Little Bob) did." Will stopped screaming and died, no one else was killed that day four had got hit but none seriously.
Finally Mrs. Hezekiah Jennings Will's mother called on Mrs. Turner to end the violence, walking to the front porch Mrs. Turner pointed at the blood where Will had died,"You can't wipe out that blood,.Either the Turners will rule or the Howards but not both." Strong words from a woman who in Judge Lewis's letters to the governer only wanted peace.
A few weeks later near Sulphur Springs on August 4, 1889, Little George Turner was traveling up Catrons Creek when him and Wilson Howard met up and a gun battle ensued, Wilson was wounded badly in the thigh but Little Bob was hit 4 times and killed. According to J.K. BAILEY in an endless stream of letters to the governer apparently Wilse was tracking George and blantly murdered him. Any deal of a truce died with Little George and in September of 1889 anyone who could lay pen to paper was begging governer Simon Buckner to send troops to the area to restain order.
September 7, 1889 governer Buckner sent troops to the area but only to protect the courthouse, not to intervene in the Howard-Turner trouble or relieve the elected officials of their duty to enforce the law and maintain the peace, this did not please Judge LEWIS, who continued to beg the governer to clean out the Howards. No sooner had the troops left when on October 11, 1889 John CAWOOD was shot and killed and Hezakiah HALL who was walking with him was also killed. A few miles up the road Hiram CAWOOD was shot and died the next day, soon after Stephen CAWOOD was fired on below John Cawood's farm but escaped. No one was arrested for the murders but Wilson Lewis finally had a bloody shirt to wave, Lewis wrote that after the Cawood and Hall murders, the remaining Cawood's and others fled to the Harlan Couthouse, Wilson Howard and Will Jennings organized 25 men and sent word to the good citizens of Harlan to leave town because they intended to burn it, all Wilse had to do was to threaten to burn the town and Lewis went into a panic, governer Buckner refused and told Lewis if the people wanted the Howards out, then the people would do it. He did empower Lewis to raise a posse of a hundred men to get the job done, if he felt he did not have enough men to do it. Lewis raised about 9 men 3 were killed and 3 wounded in their going after the Howards, in history Wilse mentions no losses but said a young boy named Bird Spurlock was wounded when they fired on us.
Finally Wilse and Hezekiah Jennings decided to attack the Turner mansion itself (the Hall boys were probably with them) were 16 members were having breakfast among the wounded or they thought they had killed were John & Alexander BAILEY, so Wilse, Will and the two Hall boys headed to turn themselves in for people they thought were dead, when they were fired on from ambush Pearl Bailey stood up to get a better shot and was killed, shot through the head. So the four rode on toward Middleton's to confess to murder of John & Alexander Bailey who were not dead and Pearl who was actually dead, but on the way the Hall boys decided against it, the average killer in the state of Kentucky at the turn of the century only served about 7 years and was pardoned by the governer, Wilse and Will figured it was a good time to see the west, they rode down to Pineville and caught a train going in the direction, they went to St.Louis and from there Traveled to Kansas, Colorado and on to New Mexico, Wilse got into real trouble when he was arrested for killing a deaf mute in Missouri. he jumped bail and headed for home arriving in March of 1890.
He had not been in town a week before judge Lewis organized a posse and set out to capture him, the posse surrounded the Howard home and tried to set fire to it, a gunfight ensued, Wilse charged out of the house and drove three of them into the river, George Hall was killed, Bob Craig shot Bud Spurlock but saw Wilse approaching and ran. General Hill was sent to the area he met with Wilse and Jennings and told them he only wanted peace, he had talked to many people of Harlan who had spoke well of the Howards they informed Hill that if he got the Turners and Lewis to put down their guns then they would do the same not before, he agreed to talk to Lewis. Will and Wilse sensed their luck was running out that night they said goodbye to their mother and headed west again, but this time went their seperate ways Will went to Missouri and Wilse headed for California, Wilse was arrested in June 1893 for robbing a Wells Fargo stagecoach and was tried and sent to prison, he was going under the name Brown but someone spotted him in prison and recognized him from an old wanted poster, Imboden the one tracking him for the killing of the deaf mute came and idenified him and he was taken back to Missouri. As he surrendered to the Sheriff who was to take him back he said,"I am Wilse Howard of Kentucky, the man you are looking for."
On the stand he named the men who he had killed during the feud, Bob Craig, Will Turner, George Turner, George Hall, and John Bailey, he made no mention of killing the Cawoods or Hezekiah Hall and maintained his innocense of killing the deaf-mute. Wilse was led to the gallows on August 4, 1894 and was asked if he had anything to say, and he said, "Only the hope to meet you all in heaven." The hatred that fueled the feud in Harlan finally cooled down and in the 1910 business directery, four doctors were listed in town, a HOWARD, a CAWOOD a Martin and G. PEARL BAILEY. One, HALL and two Howards were listed as engineers, and there were two Turners, three Howards and a Hall listed as attorneys.
Thursday, June 22, 2023
Harlan County Turner Feud
Friday, June 9, 2023
Sterling Family Love Letter to Scotland
 |
| Cadder House |
June 10, 2023
On a recent trip to Scotland, my sons Jimmy and Brian, Brian’s wife Frances, and I homed in on Cadder, Scotland because it can be considered the original ancestral home of the Sterling tribe. Jimmy's wife Shenda and Granddaughter Kynwyn did not accompany us to Cadder. Apparently, every "Sterling" in the world can trace their ancestry back to one man — a fellow named Thoraldus Stirling (1). But, please understand that he was not born with the surname Stirling. He was given the title of Vicecomes de Stirling when he was made Sheriff of Stirlingshire, and the name “Stirling” apparently just stuck. From then on, all his offspring inherited this Stirling surname.
 |
| Cadder House with Jimmy, Win, and Brian |
So, it is important to know that there was a place in Scotland named Stirling, long before Thoraldus was sent there by King David I of England to tame those “wild” Highland Scottish folks — about 940 years ago. The town of Stirling and Stirling Castle derive their name from the word “Stirling” which means “Place of Strife” in the old Gaelic language. Since the time of Thoraldus, Stirlings spread out across the world, intermarried with many other tribes, and changed the spelling of their name to Sterling, Starling, Strivelyn, and 81 others (2).
Finding Cadder
Using smartphone maps, there was some confusion, but Jimmy, Brian, Frances and I finally found the historic, old, Cadder house — the multiple-century home of Stirling Family members and later of the Cadder Stirling Clan headquarters. The house and lands have now been named the Cawder Golf Club and the old house serves as golf headquarters. The names Cadder and Cawder are just different spellings of the name.
It is an imposing structure, and when we arrived, we were a little intimidated. After all, we were on the lands of a private golf club, in a strange land, and we had no idea of how we might be received.
 |
| Imaginary Laird |
This is when my imagination began to run wild. Maybe when I knock on this formidable door, a butler will appear and will request the reason for my visit. After I explain my purpose, he might say, “One moment while I check with the laird.” Then the laird (lord) would appear and might say “Well, I’m a little busy, can you come back next month?" — or something.
But, then I remembered that this was just a golf club, not a Laird’s lair. I summoned up a little courage and entered the imposing front entrance. No butler appeared and neither did anyone else. So, I continued boldly upstairs to a large room filled with tables and a bar on one end. Some senior ladies were having lunch.
I approached the bar to verify whether this building was indeed the real Cadder House. The young barman was unsure, so he whipped out his smartphone, did some searching, and replied that Cadder was located several miles away. He gave directions that made no sense to me. I replied that we would check it out.
I met with Jimmy, Brian, and Frances back in the parking lot and explained what I had found. Brian had also searched and found that the old Cadder House is definitely in the Cawder Golf Club. We were in the correct place.
By now, it was lunch-time, so we marched back upstairs to the restaurant and ordered lunch — as if we were the new Lairds of Cadder. While we waited to be served, I noticed a painting on the wall of a young lady that might be one of my ancestors.
 |
| Ancestor? |
One of the ladies eating lunch at a nearby table noticed that I was taking a photo of the girl’s portrait, and offered to take my photo with the portrait. “It would be very kind of you,” I said. Then she asked why I was interested in this portrait. I explained that “she might be one of my great, great, great, great, etc. grandmothers or something. And that since my name is Sterling, I am descended from old Thoraldus Stirling, who was the sheriff in these parts long ago, and once owned the lands of Cadder.
 |
| Golf Club Ladies |
By now, we had the attention of all the ladies having tea and scones — or whatever. They asked a few questions such as where I was from and the purpose of my visit. By then, our lunch had been served, so I excused myself and returned to our table.
As I was leaving, one of the ladies explained that the girl in the portrait was not a Stirling, just a chambermaid. Oh well! Of course, maybe she was just “putting me on.”
After lunch, we explored parts of the old house but felt somewhat like we were trespassing. Out in the parking lot again, I noticed a small “Office” sign over a door. Emboldened by recent successes, I opened the door and introduced myself to two fellows inside. After explaining my mission, both of these guys proved to be very friendly and helpful. “Feel free to explore any part of this old building or grounds,” the club master said.
“Please wait while I find something that might interest you,” he said. He left the office and soon returned with a book in his hand. He handed me a copy of a book titled: “The Cawder Story: The Story of Cawder Golf Club” by John Cubbage. “You may have it” he said.
'Wow! Many thanks” I replied.
 |
| Clubmaster |
Antonine Wall
Then, he showed me their prized, historic, Roman stone framed behind him on the wall — apparently found on the estate. It became obvious that on our Sterling ancestral home -- the Estate of Cadder -- stands remnants of the Antonine wall that was built in about 142 AD. The wall continued across the lowlands of Scotland and formed the frontier of the Roman Empire to exclude those dangerous "Scottish" Highlanders. The writing on the stone translates to: “The Second Legion Augustus Built This.”
 |
| Antonine Wall |
After we left the old Cadder Estate, I regretted that we did not actually see any evidence of the Antonine wall while we were there. The greenskeeper would likely have been happy to show us the Wall site if we had asked.
Dovecot
 |
| Dovecot Pigeon House |
Another old historic structure that remains on the Cadder Estate, is the old Pigeon House (Dovecot) that was built in 1753. According to the
 |
| Cawder Greenkeeper |
Forth and Clyde Canal
Back door to the Cadder Estate, is the Forth and Clyde Canal which connects the west coast of Scotland to the east — like a kind of Panama Canal. It was opened for use in 1790, is 35 miles long, and likely served the Sterlings of Cadder very well for shipping their grain and other produce to markets. It fell into disuse when ships became too large to use it anymore. It is now used primarily for recreation and roughly follows the course of the Antonine Wall.
Cawder Golf Club
The Cawder Golf Club was opened in 1933. And, as you might expect, there are certain formalities that must be observed while playing golf there. You may dress informally, but you must keep your shirt on. No exceptions! The same applies to your pants or dress. In summer, the fee for a round of golf is from 40 to 55 pounds, depending on whether it is midweek or weekend.
We visited this golf course for a particular reason. It’s land has a long history and was owned by the Stirling family for hundreds of years. The main building was named “Cadder House” until it was taken over to be renamed “Cawder Golf Club.”
Sad Story of Janet Stirling of Cadder
Janet somehow lost her parents in 1522, when she was only nine, and inherited the Cadder lands. Sir John Stirling, a distant relative from the lands of the Keir Stirlings, coveted the lands of Cadder. He somehow obtained Janet’s wardship and a crown grant on her marriage, so he had her married to his son James. After a turbulent eight years, Sir John had the marriage legally declared null and void. Janet then married a fellow named Thomas Bishop, a lawyer who just happened to have conveyed Janet’s lands and heritage to Sir John. Thomas later fled the country when Queen Mary declared him a “rebel and traitor.” Apparently, Thomas had been accused of “lying” with Janet before she was divorced from James. Sir John then owned both the Cadder and Keir lands and poor Janet lost all of her possessions.
Janet’s matrimonial achievements were poetically recorded as:
“First she was Lady Cawder,
Syne she was Lady Keir,
And syne she was Tom Bishop’s wife,
Who clippit with a shear.” Translation: sheared of her wealth.
Janet Stirling was the last of the old line of Stirlings of Cadder.
Many
other photos from this trip to Scotland were published in the Sterling
Family group on Facebook — primarily of adventures near the Duchray
Castle which we rented for several days and Stirling Castle which we
explored. While double-checking some of the claims in this story, I
found that there were also Stirlings that lived at the Duchray Castle.
Other Stirling Homes
When exploring our heritage in Scotland, we planned to visit some of the historic Stirling clan sites — such as Dumbarton Castle, Glorat House, Keir House, Drumpeillier House, Cadder House, and Stirling Castle. We only had six days to find out as much as possible about the Stirling Clan — while also doing the tourist stuff like exploring castles, and trails and learning about the history, ghosts, and such.
We ran out of time to visit the Keir and Drumpeillier Houses but found the Glorat House, Dumbarton Castle, and Cadder House and explored Stirling Castle.
Glorat House
 |
| Glorat House |
We drove in the winding driveway and beautiful gardens of Glorat House. We saw several pheasants and the handsome house but felt like we were invading private property. There were no posted signs of any kind and a single car was in the driveway. So we left.
 |
| Ring-necked Pheasant |
The manicured lawn and gardens were very impressive.
 | ||
| Drive and Gardens |
Dumbarton Castle (The Rock)
 |
| Dumbarton Castle |
Dumbarton Castle has been another home to many Stirlings, but it is now a museum open to all visitors — and well worth the entry price. The Castle was built on an ancient volcanic plug where the surrounding land has eroded over time, leaving this rock plug elevated and forming a perfect place for defending against enemies such as the Vikings. But, the Vikings laid siege and waited till the water well ran dry, so the locals surrendered and became Viking slaves.
 |
| Frances, Brian, and Jimmy on top of the Rock |
 |
| Win Resting on Steps of the Rock |
Keir and Drumpellier Houses
The Keir estate was acquired by the Stirling family in 1448, and a house was built on it in the 16th century. The Stirlings supported the Jacobites during the 18th-century rebellions, and the estate was forfeited. However, they continued to live at Keir, and built the present house in around 1760. Some Saudi prince bought it in recent years.
 |
| Drumpeller House |
One man's opinion is that the Sterling family “is, beyond dispute, the oldest in Glasgow; indeed, except the High Kirk, it is the oldest thing in Glasgow. They found this a little country town, and they have remained to see it grown by the help of them and of others like them, a hundredfold. Through near three centuries, through eight generations from father to son, they have been merchants here of good standing, and gentlemen. With such a pedigree, unequalled in, or perhaps out of Scotland, and with a hereditary character for straightforwardness and honour, the Stirlings of Glasgow can afford to be content.”(3)
AcknowledgementsCoat of Arms
Many other photos from this trip to Scotland were taken by several of our members and were published in the Sterling Family group on Facebook — primarily of adventures near the Duchray Castle that we rented for several days and Stirling Castle that we explored. While double-checking some of the claims in my story, I found that there were also Stirlings that lived at the Duchray Castle. The evidence can be found in the coat of arms on page 20 of the Sterling Genealogy vol. 1 (2). So, we might have slept in a Castle where some Stirling relative lived. This structure was built as a hunting lodge for the kings of Scotland.
Conclusion
Anyway, it was a wonderful adventure that was made possible by Shenda’s choice of the Duchray Castle as the home base. She and Frances cooked some scrumptious meals. Shenda and Brian were the primary chauffeurs and navigators through some very narrow, winding, country roads. Jimmy helped me navigate through customs and airline connections from College Station to Scotland and back. Kynwyn brought a smile. Thanks to all!
 |
| Cawder Story Book and Lunch Wraps |
I don’t remember ever meeting a grumpy Scotlander and the folks at the Cadder Golf Club were especially helpful.
Scotland is a beautiful country with an incredible history and friendly people. Love you, Scotland.
References:
(1) William Playfair. 1811. British Family Antiquity. Published in London.
(2) Albert Mack Sterling. 1904. The Sterling Genealogy. The Grafton Press, New York.
 |
| Kynwyn, Win, Jim, Brian, Frances, and Shenda |
Thursday, June 1, 2023
Mr. Texas -- Coke Stevenson
 |
| Coke Stevenson |
Forward by Winfield Sterling
Coke Stevenson is fundamentally a forgotten folk hero of Texas. I might even tentatively claim that he was the last honest politician in Texas, if not the USA. He ran for the US Senate against one of the worst scumbags ever — in Lyndon Johnson. Read the following story by Robert Caro and other sources at the end of this paper, and see if you might agree.
—————————————————
My Search for Coke Stevenson
By Robert A. Caro
Feb. 3, 1991
Credit…
The New York Times Archives
See the article in its original context from
February 3, 1991, Section 7, Page 1
About the Archive
This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996. To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them.
Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems; we are continuing to work to improve these archived versions.
After "Means of Ascent" was published in March 1990, a number of the articles about it that appeared in magazines and newspapers made statements about Coke Stevenson, Lyndon Johnson's opponent in the 1948 United States Senate campaign, for which I believe there is no factual basis. Some of these articles, no doubt inadvertently, repeated allegations and rumors circulated in 1948 by Johnson and his followers in their effort to undermine Stevenson's reputation -- allegations and rumors I also believe to be without factual basis. This note is intended to expand and clarify the record in these areas and to explain the process by which I learned about Coke Stevenson.
A particularly serious and dramatic allegation concerned Stevenson's personal integrity. An article in the June 4, 1990, issue of The New Republic revived the rumors circulated in 1948 that Stevenson, in exchange for his political influence, had accepted large payoffs from oil companies, which camouflaged the payments by taking leases on Stevenson's ranch although they never had any intention of drilling there. According to a source quoted approvingly by The New Republic -- a one-time Stevenson secretary who says he recalls in detail a conversation he overheard during the 1930's that may have been about an oil lease -- these leases were patently phony because "the notion that an oil company might actually drill on Stevenson's ranch was ludicrous. 'That was the poorest oil prospecting land in the world.' “
I heard such allegations while I was doing research on my book, and attempted to determine if they were true. On June 21, 1977, I drove to the Coke Stevenson Ranch (which after his death in 1975 had been divided between his widow and his son) in Kimble County. I am certain that anyone who had been with me on that day would not not believe that "the notion that an oil company might actually drill on Stevenson's ranch was ludicrous." For as I drove down a dirt road on the ranch, I passed trucks and equipment of the Great Western Petroleum Company -- which was drilling for oil on Stevenson's ranch.
On that trip, and on others that I made to Kimble County over the next few years, I interviewed ranchers and studied records and maps in the Kimble County Courthouse in Junction. The records showed that oil companies had been leasing the Coke Stevenson Ranch for exploratory drilling for over six decades, including times when Stevenson had no political office or influence. (One lease was made in December 1927 when Stevenson was not in public life; others were made -- by two new companies -- in 1950 and '54 after Stevenson had left public life forever; another, made in 1972 by still another company, was renewed annually after Stevenson was dead.) In fact, had anyone taken the trouble to telephone Stevenson's widow, Marguerite King Stevenson, at the time my book was published, he would have learned that oil companies were still leasing the Stevenson ranch -- 15 years after his death; Mrs. Stevenson received her latest annual rental check (for $4,483) last May.
Much of the hearsay and gossip about Stevenson's "phony" oil leases focused on alleged deals with the Magnolia Petroleum Company. According to the rumors, these deals involved large sums of money -- figures as high as $75,000 or $100,000 were mentioned to me. The deed records of Kimble County, in the County Courthouse, show that Magnolia took one lease on the Stevenson ranch, a 10-year lease registered on May 10, 1939. It wasn't for $75,000. Stevenson received from it a total of $19,571. His income from the lease therefore averaged $1,957 per year. This lease was one of 16 leases signed by various oil companies with 16 ranches that lay in a line running north-south through the county; all 16 leases were made in that year because a promising geological fault had been discovered along that line (and because in that year a small well came in in Kimble County).
By 1939, in fact, scores of Kimble ranchers -- none except Stevenson with a political position -- had signed leases with various oil companies, including Magnolia. The $1,957-per-year rental that Stevenson received was consistent with that paid to ranchers without political influence; in fact the Kimble deed records show that a few months before the Stevenson lease was signed, the Humble Oil and Refining Company leased the Lottie Bolt Ranch some 10 miles away -- at terms considerably higher than Magnolia gave Stevenson. Ramsey Randolph, KimbleCounty Clerk in 1939 and '40, said: "The Humble lease certainly indicates that the Stevenson lease was legitimate." ("Actually," Mr. Randolph said, compared with the amounts given other ranchers, Stevenson received a "pretty low" rental for his lease.)
Every aspect of the Magnolia lease is consistent with other oil company leases in Kimble County. There is not the slightest reason to believe it was given to buy Stevenson's political influence; in fact, every piece of documentary evidence that I could find suggests it was not. (Exploratory wells have been drilled on the Stevenson ranch for decades; although, as is the case with Kimble County as a whole, little oil has been discovered on it, enough -- together with natural gas deposits -- has been discovered to encourage oil companies to continue drilling and paying rent.)
I had been told that "everyone knew" about the "phony oil leases." But over and over again during years of research, I have been taught that things that "everyone knew" often turn out, when investigated, to be without factual basis. Investigating the oil lease rumors, I found this to be the case. Not only could I find no evidence to substantiate these rumors, all the evidence I could find contradicted the rumors, and suggested that they were false.
I did further research into Stevenson's financial situation, studying as many of his personal financial records -- including his bank statements and income tax returns -- as I could obtain, and interviewing members of his family and the few elderly Kimble County neighbors who remembered him. From every one of these sources I received a picture of a man who, despite the great power that he held for years in Texas, never had much money. One fact remembered by several people was that when during the late 1930's Stevenson wanted to pay a local man to make wrought-iron railings for the balconies in his house, he had to have the work done piecemeal because he didn't have enough money to pay for all of it at once. His income tax returns for the 1930's and 1940's, the years during which he was Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, Lieutenant Governor and Governor, show that in the 1930's his reported net income, including the income from the Magnolia lease, averaged about $5,200 per year. During the 1940's it averaged about $8,000 per year -- and most of this income consisted of his salary from the state; during this decade, in which, according to his opponents, Coke Stevenson's acceptance of huge payoffs was "so well known," the largest income he ever reported in one year was $13,804. (Stevenson's family has given me copies of the personal income tax returns of Stevenson and his first wife for every year between 1927 and 1950.)
Finally, I read the probate records of Stevenson's will and the tax records of his estate. These show that when he died in 1975, Stevenson left an estate totaling $708,000. But the bulk of this amount -- $639,000 -- consisted of the value the Internal Revenue Service placed on the land of his ranch. Most of this land was purchased before Stevenson entered state government, piece by piece as he earned fees as an attorney. Beginning in 1914, he bought it for prices as low as $6 or $8 an acre -- and the increase in its value over the 60 years he owned it accounts for most of the estate's total value. Despite his lifelong frugality -- so rigid it was a joke among his friends -- and despite the fact that his legal expertise made his services as an attorney eagerly sought, Coke Stevenson, for a decade one of the most powerful men in Texas, died with only $59,000 in the bank. That amount, and the land, together with a few minor items, constituted his total estate.
The record of Stevenson's life so far as I could determine it is of a man who never had much money; of a man who, so far as his personal honesty was concerned, is as different as can be conceived from the image of a corrupt politician so vividly pictured in 1948 by the Johnson men -- and, after publication of "Means of Ascent," resurrected in some magazine and newspaper articles. (And, indeed, when, over the years I was doing the research on the book, I got to know these Johnson men better, some of them drew a different picture themselves. I will never forget Paul Bolton, one of Johnson's speechwriters and the author of some of the harshest attacks on Stevenson during the campaign, saying to me, in connection with another specific charge but in words describing Stevenson generally: "We knew it wasn't true, and I almost felt ashamed of what I was writing sometimes; Coke was so honest, you know.”)
No writer can be certain that he knows all the facts about private financial affairs dating back 50 years and more. But I tried to ascertain as many of those facts as possible, and after doing so I was convinced -- and am convinced -- that Coke Robert Stevenson was a public official of extraordinary personal integrity.
Stevenson has also recently been portrayed anew in a number of articles as merely a "typical" ("typical" was a word I heard a lot), totally unexceptional Texas right-winger, just another in the long line of the state's extremely conservative public officials -- unintelligent, narrow-minded, bigoted, a segregationist and an isolationist.
This, as it happened, was the impression of Stevenson I myself received when I began research on my book in 1975, and for some years thereafter I had no reason to doubt it. By 1975 Stevenson was a forgotten figure, a man all but lost to history. Two biographies -- one by an aide, the other by two of Stevenson's Kimble County neighbors -- were both so slight, not only in length but in research, as to provide little insight into the man or his career. The literature on Texas history during the era in which Stevenson served in the state government is, as one writer puts it, "notoriously spotty"; moreover, most of it is written from a point of view antithetical to his. In the few books on the era, he was generally given scanty treatment, and even that concentrated on his gubernatorial record, not on his pre-gubernatorial record in government or on the story of his life as a whole.
Apart from these sources, Coke Stevenson had been described -- briefly and harshly -- primarily in biographies of Lyndon Johnson. Interviews would normally be helpful in learning about a man, but Stevenson was 87 years old when he died. He was almost the last survivor of his generation in Texas politics; only a very few of his friends and political allies -- indeed, only a few handfuls of Texas politicians who knew him more than passingly well -- were still alive.
When, almost 30 years after the 1948 campaign, I began hearing about it in interviews, the description of Stevenson available to history was very largely a description furnished by a younger generation in Texas politics -- the Johnson generation, the bright young Johnson campaign aides who helped him defeat Stevenson in 1948 and thereby rose to power in Texas -- as well as by Johnson supporters and allies and by one-time Texas "Loyalists" (Democrats loyal to Franklin D. Roosevelt, the New Deal and the national party) and their spiritual descendants in the Texas political, academic, intellectual and journalistic community, a group to whom Stevenson had been a symbol of much of what they hated. It was they who, in interviews with me, in oral history interviews given to representatives of the Lyndon Johnson Library and in opinions repeated in Johnson biographies and other books, described Stevenson as typical, and it was during my interviews with them that I was told that like so many other Texas public officials, Stevenson was just another officeholder on the take (witness those "phony oil leases").
There was, in fact, nothing unusual or significant about the 1948 campaign as a whole, I was told; Johnson had simply made use of the "issues" in the race -- these were identified to me as Stevenson's isolationism, his racism, his alleged identification with the ultra-right Texas Regulars -- to persuade a majority of the voters to vote for him. That was the accepted image of Coke Stevenson and of his last campaign, and for a long time I had no reason to think the image incomplete or inaccurate.
I was planning to make the 1948 campaign only a single long chapter in "Means of Ascent" (as I did with Johnson's 1941 campaign in "The Path to Power"), and I wasn't doing extensive research on it or on Johnson's opponent in it. I was learning about Stevenson only incidentally, during the course of interviews about other aspects of Johnson's life. Moreover, since these interviews were almost entirely with people who ridiculed and despised Stevenson, they only reinforced the picture of the man that I had obtained from the history texts. (I never interviewed Stevenson. He died in June 1975, just about the time I was making my first trips to Texas; at the time I had no idea that he would be a figure of any particular significance in my work, and I had never tried to contact him.)
After a while, however, my circle of interviews about Johnson's life began expanding so that I was talking to political figures from the 1930's and 1940's who had been outside Johnson's orbit. At the time, I wasn't interviewing these people about Stevenson or the 1948 campaign; the necessity of learning about that campaign in detail had still not sunk in on me. But although my interviews were primarily concerned with other subjects, sometimes the person I was interviewing would bring up Stevenson's name -- and slowly (very slowly, I must admit) I was beginning to realize that from these new sources the picture I was being given was quite different from the picture I had been given before.
If there was a single decisive moment in this process -- a moment in which I finally understood that there might be much more to Stevenson than I had previously believed -- that moment occurred during an interview I conducted in 1977 in Bristol, Tenn., with Wingate H. Lucas, Congressman from Fort Worth in the 1940's.
I wasn't interviewing Lucas about the 1948 campaign; at that point, I had no idea that he had had any connection with the 1948 campaign. I had located Lucas in Bristol (he had left Texas almost 20 years before) and had gone there to interview him because I was trying to talk to as many as possible of the surviving members of the Texas delegation in the House of Representatives who had served with Johnson when he was a member, from 1937 to 1948. At one point during two long days of interviews, however, Lucas began attempting to explain the sources of Johnson's unusual power within the Texas delegation. He said that part of that power was based on Johnson's entree to Roosevelt's White House, which enabled Johnson to obtain favors for influential Texans outside his own constituency.
In his own Fort Worth, for example, Lucas said, Johnson had through such favors cemented an alliance with several of Lucas's most influential constituents, notably the publisher Amon Carter and the oil man Sid Richardson. He himself, Lucas said, was therefore afraid of Johnson's power, although he personally detested him. And then Lucas said, "Why, I even had to support him in 1948. And that was really hard for me. I was a Stevenson man. Coke Stevenson lived by the code of honesty.”
During those two days of talking to Lucas, I had found him to be an extremely pragmatic and cynical politician -- as pragmatic and cynical, I think, as any I have ever encountered -- and rather bitter about politics and politicians as well. His use of such a phrase about another politician was therefore striking to me. The moment was decisive, moreover, not merely because Lucas used such a phrase but because when he used it I realized that I had heard similar phrases before. At that moment it dawned on me that I had been hearing testimony to Stevenson's honesty and personal and political integrity for months -- ever since I had begun interviewing outside the Johnson-Loyalist circle. The Johnson people said Stevenson was dishonest, a typical venal Texas pol. Others -- almost all the others outside that circle, I suddenly realized -- had been telling me that Stevenson was a singularly incorruptible public official. It was at this point that I began to do more intensive research into the campaign and into Johnson's opponent in it.
As for other assertions repeated after the publication of "Means of Ascent" -- for example, that Stevenson had often stolen votes in elections, just as so many other Texas politicians had (and indeed stolen the 1948 election as well) -- my education about these matters followed the pattern of my education about the oil lease "deals." The vote-stealing allegations were repeated to me by Johnson aides and by members of the Loyalist circle and their intellectual and journalistic heirs. I feel that most of these people were not deliberately misleading me, that they had been repeating these stories for so long that they themselves believed them. Listening to them, one hears a convincing case for Stevenson's transgressions in this area, and I was at first convinced.
But I subsequently found that while most of the younger members of the Johnson circle claimed that Stevenson had frequently stolen votes in those elections, most of the politicians outside that circle who were old enough to be Stevenson's contemporaries said he had never stolen votes, and considerable research showed that the allegations about Stevenson's political integrity were, like the allegations about his personal integrity, merely gossip and rumors that supposedly "everyone knew" -- but for which I was not able to find any factual support. Stevenson certainly received the bloc vote from the Rio Grande Valley several times, but not by purchase. Rather, he received it in most instances because his immense popularity made victory a foregone conclusion, and the border bosses preferred being on the winning side. Perhaps a single statement from Edward A. Clark, for 50 years one of the most powerful political figures in Texas and for 20 years not only a key Johnson strategist but also his lawyer, says it all. Mr. Clark is definitely not a Stevenson fan. But when I asked him about allegations that Stevenson's aides stole votes in 1948, he said flatly, "They didn't know how, and Governor Stevenson didn't know how."
The dissimilarities between the Coke Stevenson vividly described by Loyalists and Johnson men and the Coke Stevenson I discovered in my research extended to other areas besides his personal and political integrity. There was, for example, the larger question of his place in Texas history. The Johnson-Loyalist circles said he was "typical" -- nothing unusual about his career. But I found this description did not take into account Stevenson's popularity -- or the reason for that popularity. When, belatedly beginning to research the Coke Stevenson story more thoroughly, I finally looked up the vote totals in Stevenson's previous statewide elections, not only those for governor but for lieutenant governor, I found that he had achieved the triumphs detailed in "Means of Ascent": for example, that in both his campaigns for governor he received a higher percentage of the vote in the crucial Democratic primary than any gubernatorial candidate before him in the history of Texas, and once carried every one of the state's 254 counties, the only gubernatorial candidate in the state's history who had ever done so in a contested Democratic primary.
Even in his earlier campaigns, his record was striking. In 1940, for example, he ran for lieutenant governor. Liberal journalists assailed his conservative views, and journalists of all political persuasions ridiculed his old-fashioned style of campaigning. He had two opponents. One received 113,000 votes, the other 160,000. Stevenson polled 797,000, carrying all 254 counties. Whatever one's opinion of his record as a public official, obviously a man who in running for office had done, and repeated, what no other candidate had ever done could hardly be described with fairness as merely "typical." Even beyond the election victories, his entire career -- the fact that he held the governorship longer than anyone before him in the history of Texas, the fact that he was the only Speaker in the state's history ever to succeed himself, the fact that he was the first man in the state's history ever to hold all three of its highest offices -- Speaker, Lieutenant Governor and Governor -- was not only not typical but was, in fact, unique.
His popularity was based on the facts of his life, which held a deep emotional appeal for Texans. By the time I was researching the 1948 election in depth, knowing now that there was far more to it than I had been aware of, I had begun reading weekly and daily newspapers and magazines from the 1930's and 40's, many of which chronicled the life that seemed like a Western epic and made him seem the archetypal Texan. I couldn't find many individuals personally familiar with his life story (or, indeed, with him as a younger man), but I found a few, and their oral description confirmed the written. Looking through smaller, more obscure publications -- Sheep and Goat Raiser, Frontier Times and West Texas Today, for example -- I found several long articles written by contemporaries, and they too contained the same facts as the newspaper profiles.
The "Story of Coke Stevenson," as I call it, was a very dramatic one. But the story -- of the young boy who was a great rider, of the teen-ager starting up the freight line, of the self-education by campfire light, of the founding of the almost mythical ranch, of the reluctance to enter politics, of the refusal to campaign as other politicians campaigned, of the refusal to trim political philosophy to prevailing political winds and of the great political triumphs -- was beyond dispute. The drama was rooted in the facts I found.
More important, in reading not later accounts but those newspapers and magazines contemporaneous with Stevenson's tenure in public life, I found that the Stevenson story had already been transmuted into legend, the legend that I summarize in "Means of Ascent" by quoting excerpts from some of these articles. In discussions about Stevenson, there was a tone -- not in the liberal Texas Spectator or The Austin American-Statesman, of course, but in many other publications -- of a near-reverence quite unusual in descriptions of a public official. The man Lyndon Johnson had to defeat in 1948 was not merely a public official but a folk hero, not just a typical governor but one of the most beloved public figures in Texas history. I considered it essential to show why he was a folk hero.
The image of Coke Stevenson that had come down to history (to the very limited extent that any image of Stevenson had come down to history) was the image the Johnson people painted during the campaign, and that, today, more than 40 years later, the Johnson-Loyalist group still paints for biographers and historians. They were able to paint this image during the campaign for many reasons, one of which was that their target disdained to fight back. They have been able in recent years to paint this image virtually without refutation, for there is almost no one left to dispute them. But the image the Johnson people painted and paint is a strikingly incomplete image. They describe Coke Stevenson as a figure scorned and despised. That is certainly what he was to them. To the overwhelming majority of Texans, he was something quite different. No one could hear old men talk -- as I have heard many old men talk -- about Coke Stevenson, the Cowboy Governor, " our Cowboy Governor," riding at the head of a rodeo parade; no one could hear them talk, decades later, about "Mr. Texas" riding by as a memorable moment in their lives, and not know he was something quite different.
This is not to say that I approve of Coke Stevenson's record as governor. Indeed, aspects of that record -- his refusal to intervene in race riots in Beaumont or to investigate a 1942 lynching in Texarkana (his segregationist views in general, in fact) and his support of the University of Texas Board of Regents despite the blow they gave to academic freedom by their dismissal of Homer Rainey, the university president -- are indefensible. These episodes -- and the uncompromising conservative philosophy that ran through his administration as a whole -- made him a symbol of all that Austin's liberal academics, intellectuals and journalists opposed, and if I had been in Texas in the 1940's I would have been on their side.
In the era about which I am writing, however, Texas was not a liberal state but an extremely conservative state. The views of the Austin liberals were not the views of the majority of the Texas electorate, and it is important to realize that the 1948 election was not, as several articles published in 1990 would have it, a campaign between a liberal and a conservative.
Race is an example. Texas was a segregationist state in 1948. In that year, President Harry S. Truman submitted a civil rights program -- including a proposal for a Federal law against lynching -- to Congress, and a poll conducted in March showed that only 14 percent of white Texans favored that program. Certainly Stevenson expressed himself on more than one occasion in decidedly racist terms, but those who claim that his segregationist attitude was an issue in the campaign choose not to remember that both candidates -- not just Stevenson -- opposed Truman's program. Lyndon Johnson used the opening speech of his 1948 campaign to make an all-out attack on that program. "The Civil Rights program is a farce and a sham -- an effort to set up a police state," he said.
"I am opposed to that program," Johnson continued. "I have voted AGAINST the so-called poll tax repeal bill; the poll tax should be repealed by those states which enacted them. I have voted against the so-called anti-lynching bill; the state can, and DOES, enforce the law against murder. I have voted against the FEPC [ Fair Employment Practices Commission ] ; if a man can tell you whom you must hire, he can tell you whom you can't hire.”
And of course for 11 years in Congress Johnson had voted against every civil rights bill, including an antilynching bill (as he would, following the 1948 campaign, vote against every civil rights bill for the next nine years). This is not to say that Johnson was a segregationist, just as I do not say that Stevenson was not a segregationist. Stevenson was one. Nor, of course, is it to condone Stevenson's views. What I am saying is that since Texas was a segregationist state and the public positions of both candidates were the same, civil rights was not an important issue in the campaign. Nor, sadly, did Stevenson's deplorable record and views ever affect his overwhelming popularity. To have given significant emphasis to race in my book would have been to wrench the campaign out of its historical context, to have looked at a 1948 event through a lens ground in 1990.
The Rainey affair, too, despite all the anguish it caused (and still causes) those who love liberty of thought and discussion, was not an important campaign issue in 1948. Stevenson's administration as a whole was not an important issue in the campaign; Johnson did not make it an issue, for he was well aware of the popularity of that administration -- and of the political philosophy on which it was based -- with the great majority of Texans. As even Stevenson's critics conceded, "He was as liberal as the people." And since I was writing about Stevenson primarily because of his relationship to Lyndon Johnson and the '48 campaign, I dealt only in a summary fashion with aspects of Stevenson's life that had little to do with the campaign. (As I do with aspects of Johnson's life that had little to do with the campaign, such as his stated position on civil rights issues. The evolution of Johnson's views on segregation from his early days in government to the civil rights acts he championed as Senate majority leader and President will be examined in detail in my next volume, the point at which civil rights becomes a major theme in his career.) Moreover, I was trying to make the reader see events as they unfolded, to make him feel as if he were present when the events described were taking place. If the reader had been in Texas during that hot summer of 1948, watching Lyndon Johnson and Coke Stevenson campaign, he would have heard very little about race or Rainey.
Rather, Stevenson's relation to Johnson and the campaign was that of the folk hero Johnson had to run against, and that is how I portrayed him. The voter's respect for Stevenson was the main obstacle between Johnson and his goal; it was in effect the main "issue" of the campaign. So the reputation (and the life story that was its basis) is presented in detail to show its strength -- and to show, as well, the difficulty Johnson faced in wrecking it.
"Issues," in the conventional sense of the word, had little to do with the campaign, I found.
This is not at all what I once believed. The Loyalists are an issue-oriented group, and they describe the 1948 campaign as one oriented to issues. In their opinion, Stevenson's views on race were a significant factor in the campaign, as was the question of United States involvement in the postwar world. In the Loyalists' opinion, also, Johnson needed them badly, courted them fervently, and entered into a close alliance with them -- an alliance that they contend was crucial to his victory; they feel that only through understanding the fight between Loyalists and Regulars in the 1944 Presidential campaign can one understand the Texas senatorial election of 1948. The Johnson adherents in Austin -- a group to some degree synonymous with the old Loyalists -- feel, in short, that the 1948 campaign was a campaign in which their participation was vital, a campaign that hinged on the issues that were important to them. In oral histories, books and interviews they convey this view quite persuasively -- and for some time I shared this view.
Eventually, however, it became impossible for me to continue to share it -- or even to remain convinced of any substantial part of it. For one thing, by this time I was reading the approximately 56,000 pages of documents in the Johnson Library relating to the campaign, as well as the coverage of the campaign in daily and weekly newspapers. The more research I did, the more obvious it became that the Loyalists' view of their significance in the campaign was drastically exaggerated. To the extent that the Johnson campaign had a consistent philosophical thrust at all, it was a drive to obtain not the liberal vote but, as "Means of Ascent" shows in detail, the conservative vote; the alliance between Johnson's men and the Loyalists became significant to the election's outcome only at the convention in Fort Worth after the election. And while considerations of space prevent me from assessing here the significance of the Loyalists' favorite issues, that proved exaggerated as well.
(As a matter of fact, while some Johnson men and their Loyalist allies say flatly that Stevenson was a fervent isolationist, that matter becomes somewhat more complicated when one starts reading Stevenson's speeches. In one, for example, Stevenson said: "As I have said before, the time is gone when the United States can isolate itself from the rest of the world. We must be strong enough to face the world without fear. We must be courageous enough to live up fully to our responsibilities to the rest of the world. Our own salvation cannot be separated from theirs." During the campaign, he announced his support for the Marshall Plan and for President Truman's foreign policy in general. "I know of no changes that I could suggest in our policy. That policy is going to keep us out of war, and I support it.”)
What the evidence does show is that the issue that worked for Johnson was the issue emphasized in "Means of Ascent": the assault on Stevenson's reputation -- including Johnson's campaign to persuade the voters of Texas that this Governor who was an adamant foe of organized labor had entered into a "secret deal" with "big city labor racketeers"; and Johnson's campaign to stand the truth on its head yet again by persuading the voters that this extremely conservative Governor might well be a front man for a Communist conspiracy.
In sum, there was really only one issue in the campaign that played a significant role in its outcome (unless, of course, one includes as an "issue" Johnson's unsuccessful attempt to buy an election, and, when that attempt fell short, his successful attempt to steal it). That issue was Coke Stevenson's reputation -- the basis of that reputation, the strength of that reputation, the destruction of that reputation. Lyndon Johnson did not pioneer the techniques by which that destruction was effected -- what we would today call "attack politics" or "negative campaigning" -- complete with the constant scientific polling, the use of advertising, public relations and media experts, and the use of electronic media. But his instinctive genius in the art of politics enabled him to raise these techniques to a new, revolutionary level of effectiveness in Texas. Lyndon Johnson's 1948 campaign for junior United States Senator was, in that sense, the first mature flowering of the new politics in Texas. Since Stevenson was the very embodiment of the old politics, and because Stevenson's campaign was the last campaign of its type ever waged by a major candidate for statewide office in Texas, the 1948 campaign marked the end of an era in politics -- as the collision of old and new marked a significant transformation in American politics. By showing the collision between old and new, by exploring in detail the strength of Stevenson's reputation and the means by which, despite that strength, the reputation was wrecked, I have tried to illustrate the full destructiveness of these techniques on the fundamental concept of free choice by an informed electorate. This essay is adapted from the afterword to the paperback edition of "Means of Ascent.”
Robert A. Caro is the author of "The Path to Power" and "Means of Ascent," the first two volumes of a projected four-volume biography of Lyndon Johnson.
——————————————
Reading List
Coke R. Stevenson on Wikipedia
Coke R. Stevenson: a Texas Legend. Compilers Wyatt, Frederica and Shelton, Hooper.
Youtube interview with Jane Chandler, Coke Stevenson’s daughter, about her father.