The attitude of the papers of that day toward his project ranged from the position of vigorous opposition to that of active support. The _Texas State Times_ and the _Austin State Gazette_ were the ones most actively engaged against the colony. The proximity of these papers to the capitol, where those interested in land speculation, railroad grants, and other forms of private privileges came to press their application, perhaps accounts for some of the opposition, but both papers had on their editorial staffs men favorable to the Know-Nothing Party, and furthermore, the highly intellectual reputation of the French colonists excited the prejudice of the writers. The _Dallas Herald_ and the _Northern Standard_ were the two papers most favorable toward the colonists; also the _Galveston News_ took a favorable attitude. Outside of Texas the _New York Tribune_ became one of the prime movers in support of the colony, while the _Washington Sentinel_ (Washington, D.C.) was hostile to the socialists. The opposition based its objections to the colony upon the following four points: first, socialism, as such; second, the alleged opposition to slavery on the part of the colonists; third, dislike of foreigners; and, fourth, Considerant's high intellectual training, and his request for a subsidy of land in Texas for his colonists.
In regard to socialism, the _Texas State Gazette_ in its issue of February 17, 1855, says:
We are always pleased to have industrious immigrants come among us. Plenty of work can be found by mechanics and laborers, and there is room in all our towns for more enterprising merchants and business men. There is one class, however, that we are opposed to, and have no disposition to hold out to them inducements to settle among us. This class is of that Propagandist school which in France and in parts of the United States, has and is seeking to sap the foundations of society. The socialist desires to destroy individual rights in property; and, if he is not a very intelligent and moral man--a rare thing,--we may have in him a neighbor who will rob and plunder us whenever he can get the chance; for he holds it as a primary principle in his creed, that no individual has a right to accumulate property for himself, and all above what is necessary to sustain him belongs to the rest of society.... Again, the socialist is an _abolitionist_ everywhere. He would not be less opposed to slavery by living in Texas than in France or in Ohio. It is part of his creed. Now, we are told that John Allen, of Ohio, and Mons. Victor Considerant, propose bringing out from France to western Texas a colony of socialists. This move, for the purpose of building up a sect opposed to our political institutions, may well be regarded with jealousy, and the founders may rely upon it that they will not be suffered to tamper with our institutions. The whole principle of colonization, where men of a peculiar caste in religion or politics seek to array themselves together in particular sections of the country, both as landholders and factionists, is at war with all the elements of society, and cannot be carried on without creating bitter and unrelenting prejudices and animosities among our native citizens. We note this advent of socialism in Texas as foreboding us no good; and we wish them to have a fair understanding before they reach our soil, that as a political sect, our whole people are against them.[5]