The third group of residents believed that the convention, like its predecessor, was illegal. Under their interpretation of the laws, only the state legislature could petition the Mexican Congress for such a drastic change. Austin argued that the laws meant that no one could petition on behalf of the people unless the people had been consulted, and the convention served as that consultation. The meetings ended with no agreement on how to proceed.Barker (Jan 1943), p. 332. Astin wrote that "the people here agree in substance with the rest of Texas, but differ as to the manner, and will express no opinion for, nor against."quoted in Davis (2006), p. 100.
