USA > California > History of California, Volume I > Part 47
USA > California > History of California, Volume I > Part 47
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81
From the documents just mentioned we learn the foundation of the controversy. Fages' first charge was that the presidio of San Francisco had been de- prived of mass for three years notwithstanding the obligation of the friars to serve as chaplains. Palou's reply was a denial that the friars were required to serve gratuitously as chaplains; a claim that such service if rendered was to be voluntary; and that the article treating this point, also reducing the number .
ished. Id., iii. 67. Fages has seen P. Peña draw blood by pulling a boy's ear, and the natives accuse him of having killed one of their number. Prov. St. Pap., MS., x. 167. An unsigned scrap of 1785 speaks of irregular con- duct of a padre and objects to mode of chastisement. Id., v. 256.
20 Fages, Representacion contra los Frailes, 26 de Set. 1785, MS .; alluded to with general statement of its purport in Prov. Rec., MS., ii. 95.
21 Palou, Informe sobre Quejas del Gobernador, 1786, MS.
22 Expediente sobre recíprocas quejas del Gobernador de Californias y Relig- iosos misioneros, 1787, MS. Addressed to Gen. Ugarte on Jan. 12, 1787, by José Antonio de Urizar and other oidores.
23 Lasuen, Informe y satisfaccion al Sr. Comandante General sobre quejas del Gobernador, 25 de Oct. 1787, MS.
HIST. CAL., VOL. I. 26
402
RULE OF FAGES-GENERAL RECORD.
of priests, had been annulled by royal order. Lasuen states that the padres have never refused or hesitated to attend to the spiritual welfare of the soldiers; that he personally served the presidio of San Diego when a minister of that mission, though six miles distant; that at Santa Bárbara the missionaries of San Buena- ventura served though eight leagues distant; and that the lack of service at San Francisco was because there was until recently no decent place for it, and the mission was so near that the soldiers could easily go there for spiritual care. The friars, however, were offended because the soldiers insolently claimed their service as regular chaplains, when it was really a mat- ter of voluntary charity. The viceroy's order on this subject was that a proper allowance be made to the friars for their services at presidios.24
The governor's second charge was that the padres refused to recognize the government in matters per- taining to property and the patronato. Lasuen states that the friars manage the mission temporalities by order of the king, though the management was at first reluctantly assumed; that the rice regio patronato has little or no application in a country like California, but that they will gladly observe any rules that may be prescribed. Palou charged the governor with a disposition to interfere illegally and despotically in the management of temporalities, and declared that
24 In a correspondence between Gen. Ugarte and Lasuen in March 1786, the latter makes the same reply on the San Francisco matter as in his informe. Arch. Santa Bárbara, MS., i. 285-7. March 5, 1783, the padres of San Francisco to Fages excuse themselves for failure to say mass on the plea that the place is unhealthy, there are no proper implements, the soldiers have no regard for the missionaries, and stigmatize their friends as fraileros. The corporal had even ordered that no soldier must approach the padres' house. Fages directs the commandant to he indifferent uutil orders come from the general. Prov. Rec., MS., iii. 91-2. Several communications respecting fail- ure to say mass at San Francisco in Prov. Rec., MS., i. 192; iii. 24, 166, 209, all written by Fages. Orders from commandant that the reglamento must be enforced. Prov. St. Pap., MS., vi. 115; Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., viii. 132; xi. 375-6. In these orders it is charged that fees are being collected by the friars; and Fages makes the same statement. Prov. Rec., MS., iii. 87. The governor also complains on several occasions that the other presidios are neglected, and the pueblo of San José, where P. Peña has refused confession. Id., ii. 109; iii. 171; St. Pap. Sac., MS., ix. 83-4.
403
CHARGES AND COUNTERCHARGES.
he had no proper understanding of the patronato, claiming the right to require or permit work on days of festival.
Thirdly the padres were accused of refusing to sell mission produce at the prices fixed by the govern- ment. Palou claims that there is no proof that the tariff rates have ever been approved by the king ; that those prices ought to be regulated by scarcity or abundance; and that the president should have a voice in the matter. Lasuen, however, knows of no instance where the missionaries have refused to sell at the prescribed prices when they had grain to sell at all; though during several years of scarcity the prices have been kept down to a figure barely endur- able in years ,of plentiful harvests.25 The next cause of complaint was the refusal of the friars to furnish inventories of property, yearly increase, and the dis- position made of mission products. Lasuen in reply says that the reports furnished to the governor are exactly the same as those rendered by the padres to the president, and by the latter to the college; that until now these reports have been satisfactory to all; and finally that there are no laws requiring the mis- sionaries, who are not mere treasury officials, to render itemized accounts of what has been done with each bushel of maize.26
25 Lasuen admits that P. Peña suggested an increase in price, for which he was duly reproved; and he says that the governor himself increased the price of corn, which is shown to be true by a letter of Fages in Prov. St. Pap., MS., vi. 160-1, in which Sal is ordered to pay two reales extra for maize from S. Carlos, Sta. Clara, and San José. Also Jan. 2, 1787, Fages modifies the tariff prices. Id., vii. 168-9; and July 20, 1787, he asks Lasuen for harvest returns that he may regulate prices. Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., vi. 19. Fages con- plains of Peña's refusal to furnish grain on November 8, 1785, and March 27, 1786. Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., x. 25-39. Lasuen's replies being that he is sorry and has reproved P. Peña or will write to him. Fages also says on Sept. 26, 1785, that a mule train was sent back from San Carlos without maize, Prov. Rec., MS., ii. 128-9.
26 May 2, 1786, Fages complains to the general that the padres are reluc- tant to show their inventories, do not make them out according to rule, and omit the register of inhabitants. Prov. Rec., MS., ii. 136. Feb. 7th he com- plains to the president that P. Peña refused his aid and the mission books for a census. The president explains that the commandant had not asked in a proper manner. He has requested all padres to give the required aid. Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., xi.
404
RULE OF FAGES-GENERAL RECORD.
Finally it was alleged that in defiance of the law the Franciscans insisted on retiring to their college without obtaining permission from the governor. Palou replies that by an order of the viceroy dated March 29, 1780, a friar had only to show the governor a license from his prelate. Lasuen goes more fully into the subject. In Neve's time, he says, a priest retired with his prelate's license and the viceroy de- cided that there was no law to prevent it. Palou departed in the presence of Fages, who is responsible for any irregularity in the proceeding. The next year Fages on being consulted made no objection to the departure of Rioboo; but finally there came a decree of Viceroy Galvez, forbidding the entry or departure of any friar without his license. This order has been obeyed in the case of Noriega, and it will be obeyed; but the president goes on to argue earnestly against the justice and policy of such a requirement, sub- jected to which the friars will serve only with reluc- tance.27.
Fages had also found fault, though apparently not in his formal complaint, because neophytes were allowed to ride too much, the policy of the government being opposed to this, in fear that like the Apaches the Cal- ifornians might become skilful warriors. The friars admitted the danger, declared that their interest was identical with that of the government, but claimed
27 The viceroy's communications of Mar. 29, 1780, which are given in Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., vi. 272-6, xi. 25-6, are not correctly cited by Palon. The viceroy, while approving the claims of the college, turns the matter over to the commandant general, who he says may have had good reasons for his orders. The decree requiring the viceroy's permission for any padre to come or go was dated Dec. 7, 1786. Prov. St. Pap., MS., vi. 202-3. In April 1787 the fiscal of the royal treasury explained that as the movements of the padres were paid from the missionary fund, their going to California if not needed or retiring for a mere whim would cause useless expense; therefore, the govern- ment had a right to know the reasons. April 23d the andiencia decreed in conformity to the fiscal's opinion; May 21st the archbishop communicated the decision to Palon ; and June 22d and 23d Fages gave corresponding orders, though the president of Baja California protested that this was contrary to royal orders. Arch. Arzobispado, MS., i. 8, 9; Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., xi. 53. July 9, 1788, the viceroy informs the governor that the viceregal anthorities and not the general will determine the sending and recalling of friars even if the command becomes independent of Mexico. Prov. St. Pap., MS., viii. 1-3.
405
VIEWS OF FATHER LASUEN.
that there were none but natives to serve as vaqueros, and that the work could only be done on horseback.
Having replied to the governor's specific charges, Lasuen proceeds to lay before the government certain complaints on the part of the missionaries, namely: that the soldiers, being occupied largely with matters outside of their proper duty-that of affording pro- tection to the friars in their work of christianizing the natives-neglected that duty; that in consequence of a long peace they were becoming careless and neg- lecting precautions against disaster; that an insuffi- cient guard was given to the missions, the most useless and the worst equipped soldiers being detailed for that duty, and only one soldier being allowed to escort the friars on long journeys;28 that the soldiers of the guards kept much live-stock to the prejudice of mission interests; that Indians were condemned to work as
28 This subject of mission guards and their duties was really one of the most serious in the whole controversy. The padres wished entire control of the soldiers to use as they deemed best, and particularly in pursuing runaway converts. Neve had opposed the employment of soldiers to hunt fugitives in ordinary cases, because he deemed other means better fitted for the purpose, and because men enough could not be spared for effective and safe service. Prov. St. Pap., MS., iii. 123-4. The French voyager La Pérouse praises Neve highly for his position on this point. La Pérouse, Voy., ii. 297-8. In his instructions to Fages, Sept. 7, 1782, Neve advised that not more than two soldiers should accompany a padre to confess, etc., at a ranchería, and that they should not be absent overnight. The Indians must not learn to fight with aud kill soldiers. Prov. St. Pap., MS., iii. 138-9. Yet Fages did not rely entirely on persuasion to bring back fugitives, but favored a resort to arms only after all other means had failed, such as persuasions by padres, sending of neophytes, appeal to chiefs, offer of presents to gentiles, etc. See Fages' instructions to soldiers sent after runaways in Prov. Rec., MS., iii. 151-2. In 1784 Fages repeats the order forbidding an escort of more than two soldiers, who must not be absent over night. The safety of the mission demands the presence of all, and the king has confirmed orders to that effect. Prov. Rec., MS., iii. 47-8. The latest orders do not permit him to let the troops pursue cimarrones except in extreme cases. Fagcs to Dumetz, Jan. 5, 1785, in Pron. Rec., MS., ii. 103-4. Oct. 17, 1785, Fages to Sal. No escort to be given to padres except when they go to say mass at presidios, or to confess or baptize. St. Pap., Sac., MS., ii. 51. Escoltas refused, except as above, at San Antonio and Santa Bárbara. Prov. St. Pap., MS., v. 142, 167. P. Dumetz at San Buenaventura being refused an escort to go to San Gabriel says, Feb. 4, 1786, in substance: 'Very well, since we are to be thus restricted to our missions we can no longer visit the presidio, which is beyond our jurisdiction.' Prov. St. Pap., MS., vi. 45-6. March 3, 1786, however, Fages orders an escort to be furnished when the padres of San Buenaventura wish to visit San Gabriel and Santa Bárbara. Id., vi. 72. Aug. 16, 1788, in a long letter to Lasuen Fages explains the policy of the government respecting escorts, and the forcible cap- ture of cimarrones. Arch. Sta. Bárbara, MS., i. 167-73.
.
406
RULE OF FAGES-GENERAL RECORD.
peons at the presidios for stealing cattle and for other offences, the punishment of which should rest exclu- sively with the friars, the sole object being to get free laborers;29 that the settlers of San José employed pagans to do their work, demoralized them by bad example, and even persuaded them to avoid Chris- tianity and its attendant slavery; that the disposition to make mission alcaldes independent of the friars in punishing offences greatly impaired their usefulness, the law having been intended only for curates and not for missionaries; that illegal and unequal measures were used for mission produce; that the raising of cattle by the presidios and the preference given to the pueblos in buying supplies would soon deprive the missions of all means to procure needed articles for the neophytes, especially as the articles most needed were often refused by the habilitados, or prices made too high in proportion to those of mission products, and yet the padres would submit humbly to the deci- sions of the commandant general.
Palou in addition to the preceding charges, declares that the regulation was never proclaimed in California until September 1784, and was not really in force, that of Echeveste being much better adapted to the needs of the country. He says that the regulation was not carried out, the articles on the inspection of presidios and on pueblo management being notably disregarded, and that not only were the pueblos in a sad state of decadence, but that San José, on the rapid road to ruin, was by its aggressions under the gov- ernor's policy dragging the mission of Santa Clara to ruin with it. Finally, the governor, instead of obey- ing the law, had not given the missions the slightest
29 The secular authorities, in the light of past experience in other provinces, seem to have regarded the stealing of cattle as a much more serious offence, and one much more dangerous to Spanish domination in California, than did the padres. It was by no means one of the trivial faults in which the friars had exclusive jurisdiction. Fages has something to say on this subject in the letter last alluded to. Still there is no doubt the military authorities did abuse their power in this direction with a view to get workmen free of cost.
407
GENERAL REPORTS.
encouragement or aid either in spiritual or temporal affairs.
The reader who has followed this and preceding quarrels between the political and missionary author-
Ptiud Rays
& M.Sta.Clara
p.M.d.S.Franco. Pr.
-Pu. JAnonvo.
Can Monate Rey.
D M.S.Anto.
OPr.
Pia.T. Pines) º M.d.S.Carlos.d Monte Rey
· M.S.Luis
R.Gila
Ptr.d.la Concepu.
Preso.d.Sja.Barba. o M.S.Buenavents.
Ptaki Pedernice2 Canal d.Stu Gurbara
0
OM.S.Gabl.
M.S.JusQ. Capistrano
o (M.S.Pedroy S.Pabo
ofit.La. Purina.Conon.
Presido.d.S.Diego
M.S. Viote FELEce
M.S.DonEs
M.N.S.d Bharo.o
0
M.S. Lemde Vellicata .
M.s Franco.Borja o
PROVA.DE SONORA
MESS.Gertruds o
PALOU'S MAP, 1787.
ities in California, will have noted that they were often petty in all their phases, and such as might easily have been avoided by slight mutual concessions and efforts to promote harmony. It is not necessary to decide on the merits of the respective parties in each dispute, even if it were possible; yet it is appar- ent that the friars were determined not to yield a single point of their claimed prerogatives until forced to do so, and then to yield only to the highest author- ities, to the king if possible, or to the viceroy, but
R.Colorado
408
RULE OF FAGES-GENERAL RECORD.
never to so insignificant an official as the governor, whose presence they regarded as an outrage if he had a will of his own, and whose authority they practically disregarded in a way very hard to bear. Yet in his general report on missions rendered in 1787,30 Gov- ernor Fages speaks in the highest terms of the zeal and efficiency of the missionaries, and his personal re- lations with them were for the most part pleasant. It was only as governor and president, as representa- tives of Carlos III. and St Francis, that they quar- relled, save in the case of a few individuals or in the ruler's irritable moods. One of the friars, however, in an interesting report on the missions in 1789 could not deny himself the satisfaction of stating that while the king's provisions had been all that they could desire, there had been great and even culpable remiss- ness on the part of the royal representatives, or agents, in California.31
30 Fages, Informe General de Misiones, 1787, MS. This is an excellent résumé of the past progress and present condition of the Californian establish- ments, containing a separate notice of each mission and some general sug- gestions of needs, but with no reference to current controversies. A statistical presentation of the subject seems to have accompanied the original, which was made in answer to an order of the general of December 1, 1786. The date in 1787 is not given, and it may have been after the receipt of the king's order of March 21, requiring governors to render such reports every two or three years. Of this cédula I have an original in print with autograph signatures in Doc. Hist. Cal., MS., iv. 31-3.
31 Informe de lo mas peculiar de la Nueva California, 1789, MS. This report was probably directed to the bishop or archbishop, but there is noth- ing, in my copy at least, to indicate the author. The document contains general information about the Indians and the mission system, without much of chronological annals.
CHAPTER XX.
RULE OF FAGES, DEATH OF SERRA, AND MISSION PROGRESS. 1783-1790.
PRESIDENT SERRA'S LAST TOURS-ILLNESS AND DEATH-BURIAL AND FUNERAL HONORS-HIS LIFE AND CHARACTER-SUCCESSION OF PALOU AND LASUEN -MUGÁRTEGUI AS VICE-PRESIDENT-CONFIRMATION-NOTICE OF PALOU'S HISTORICAL WORKS-VIDA DE JUNÍPERO-NOTICIAS DE CALIFORNIA- MAP-PROPOSED ERECTION OF THE MISSIONS INTO A CUSTODIA-NEW MISSIONS-FOUNDING OF SANTA BÁRBARA-INNOVATIONS DEFEATED- FIVE YEARS' PROGRESS-MISSION OF LA PURÍSIMA CONCEPCION FOUNDED -EARLY ANNALS.
IN 1784 the Californian missionaries were called upon to lose their well beloved master. President Junípero Serra died at San Cárlos on the 28th of August. In January he had returned from his last tour of confirmation in the south, during which he visited every mission from San Diego to San Antonio. In June he came home from a last visit to the northern missions of San Francisco and Santa Clara. He left Monterey by sea for the south so ill that all, including himself, deemed his return doubtful. He was near death at San Gabriel, and when he left Santa Clara it was with the avowed intention to pre- pare for the final change. He had long been a suf- ferer from an affection of the chest and ulcers on the legs, both aggravated if not caused by self-inflicted hardship and a pious neglect of his body. The death of his old companion Crespí had been a heavy blow; his sorrow had been deep at partial failure in his efforts to place California exclusively under mission- ary control, and to revive under better auspices the Jesuit epoch of the peninsula. The return of Fages
( 409 )
410
DEATH OF SERRA; MISSION PROGRESS.
to power was not encouraging to his plans and hopes. His license to confirm, under which he had adminis- tered the sacrament to over five thousand persons, expired in July, and discouraging news came at the same time from Mexico about the prospect of obtain- ing new friars. The death of Father Murguía broke another link that bound him to this world, and the venerable apostle felt that his work was done, his reward was near at hand. To all the Franciscans was despatched a letter of eternal farewell, in every word of which seemed distilled, drop by drop, the very soul of the dying man, while from each of the nearer mis- sions a padre was summoned to take leave in person. Palou from San Francisco, the only one who arrived before Father Junípero's death, was obliged to say on August 19th the regular monthly mass in honor of St Joseph, California's great patron, but in other religious services the saintly sufferer insisted on taking his usual part. Irritants were applied to his chest by the presidial surgeon on the 23d without any bene- ficial effeet. On the 26th he made a general confes- sion, and next day walked to church to receive the last sacrament in the presence of friars, officers, troops, and natives, having ordered the carpenter to make his coffin. The night was passed by the dying man on his knees, or a part of the time reclining in the arms of his neophytes. Having been anointed, and recited with the others the litany, toward morning he re- ceived absolution and the plenary indulgence of his order. In the morning of the 28th he was visited by Captain Cañizares and other officers of the vessel in port, and he asked that the bells might be tolled in honor of their visit. Then he conversed with his old friend Palou, requested to be buried in the church near Crespí, and promised to pray for California when he should come into the presence of the trinity. At one moment a fear seemed to oppress his mind, but soon all was calm, and he went out of doors to gaze for the last time upon the face of nature. Returning
411
BURIAL OF FATHER JUNÍPERO.
at one P. M. he lay down after prayers to rest, and was thought to be sleeping, but within an hour Palou found that he was dead. The bells announced the mournful intelligence. Clad in the friar's simple robe in which he died and which was the only garment he ever wore, save when travelling, the body was placed in the coffin, with six candles beside it, and the weep- ing neophytes came to cover the remains of their beloved master with flowers, and touch with their medals and rosaries the lifeless form. Every article of clothing save the one that served as a shroud was distributed in small fragments as precious relics among the people, and notwithstanding all vigilance a part of the robe was taken also. On Sunday, the 29th, the body was buried in the mission church by Palou in the presence of all the inhabitants of Monterey, and with all possible ceremonial display, including military honors and the booming of guns from the fort and Cañizares' vessel at anchor in the bay.1
The life of Father Junipero Serra is so closely
I A full account of Serra's sickness, death, and burial, much longer and more detailed than I have space to reproduce, is given in Palou, Vida, 261- 305. Another good authority, including a sketch of Serra's life is Palou, Defuncion del R. P. Fr. Junipero Serra, MS .; translation in Arch. Misiones, i. 73-6. There are some slight differences in the two accounts not worth noticing here, except perhaps the statement in the latter that Serra died just before 4 P. M. Gov. Fages was not present at the funeral, being absent from Mon- terey. Capt. Soler was the highest official who took part in the ceremonies. Palou was aided by PP. Sitjar and Noriega, and by Diaz the chaplain of the San Carlos. On Sept. 4th there was a renewal of funeral honors with the same crowded attendance as before, and with the additional assistance of P. Paterna of San Luis. Now the relics were blessed. The crew of the paquebot secured Serra's tunic which was made into scapularies; the small clothes were distributed by lot among the troops and others; and the surgeon obtained a handkerchief, which cured a sailor of a headache, as did a girdle cure P. Paterna of the colic. P. Serra's body was buried in the presbytery of the church on the epistle side before the altar of our lady of Dolores. When the new church was built the remains of both Serra and Crespi were probably transferred, but so far as I know there is no record of such transfer or of the place where they finally remained. Taylor, in Hutchings' Mag., May 1860, and in Cal. Farmer, Nov. 28, 1862, says that the body lies near the altar covered by the débris of the roof, which fell in 1832. The parish priest mado an unsuccessful search for it in 1855. Vischer, Missions of Cal., pp. i .- ii., says the remains are supposed to have been taken to Spain, shortly after 1784; and that the priest in his 'antiquarian mania' found the remains of another friar which believers seized upon as precious relics. There is no doubt the bodies still rest at San Carlos, and in 1882 they were identified to the satis- faction of the parish curate.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.