History of California, Volume II, Part 69

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 826

USA > California > History of California, Volume II > Part 69

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).

7 Arch. Sta B., MS., vi. 132-4; xi. 169; xii. 323-4; S. José, Patentes, MS., 181-4; Arch. Misiones, MS., i, 272, 277; ii. 341; St. Pap. Sac., MS., xiv. 20; Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 234; Dept. St. Pap., S. José, MS., iv. S5; Sta Cruz, Arch., MS., 55.

8 In the mission report for 1825-6 Duran suggests the necessity of a curia episcopal for California. Arch. Sta B., MS., x. 310.

9 Sarria and Tapis to Duran, in Arch. Sta B., MS., xii. 322.

659

CHURCH MATTERS.

be burned when a new lot came. In quantity it might be eked out with common olive oil.1º There was no longer any officer of the holy inquisition, since that institution had ceased to exist; but orders con- tinued to come from the bishop and to be circulated by his vicar that all immoral and irreligious, that is anti-Catholic, books or pictures must be collected and destroyed. Many of the objectionable publications were named; but it does not appear that any of the number was ever found in California, where few books of any kind were read. Prefect Sarria, however, was once greatly alarmed at a report that one of Voltaire's works was to be found in Hartnell's house, and he called upon Governor Argüello to aid in carrying out the decree of the church before any one should read that pernicious book.11

Several copies of the Bible were seen in California printed "in common language," a fact which caused Prefect Sarria to make zealous efforts in 1826 to pre- vent the reading of that book. 12 There also came in 1821 from the bishop a decree prohibiting that "escan- dalosísimo dance called the waltz" under pain of ex- comunion mayor incurred by dancing it; but we are told that the ediet was disregarded, and that the waltz was a popular feature at a ball given by the governor eight days after the prohibition arrived.13 Compliance with church duties seem to have been as strictly en- forced, in theory at least, under republican as under royal rule; and no series of regulations for pueblo or presidio was complete without the most stringent rules

10 Arch. Sta B., MS., xii. 283-7, 299, 439-40; Arch. Misiones, MS., i. 277, 279. Arrival of holy oil is noted in 1822 and 1825 from Sonora, and in 1826 from Puebla.

11 Feb. 11, 1824, Sarría to Argüello, in Arch. Arzob., MS., iv. pt. ii. 86. Oct. 23, 1826, comisario general to Herrera, impious articles and obscene pictures attacking the church must not be allowed to pass the custom house. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., MS., i. 61. Orders of different dates for destruction of prohibited books, in Arch. Arzob., MIS., iv. pt. i. 46; S. Jose, Patentes, MS., 171-2; Arch. Sta B., MS., vi. 127-9; Arch. Misiones, MS., i. 260, 266, 276.

12 Arch. Sta B., MS., xii. 363.

13 March 15, 1821, Sarria to PP. in Arch. Arzob., MS., iv. pt. i. 47; Al- varado, Ilist. Cal., MIS., ii. 324.

660

INSTITUTIONARY AND STATISTICAL.

for such compliance. One Espinosa, for entering a church in woman's clothes and trying on another occa- sion to enter on horseback, was sentenced to ten years of presidio work for sacrilege.14 Duhaut-Cilly found the Californians under the friars' teachings disposed to attend somewhat closely to outward forms of re- ligion, but neither knowing anything about nor caring for matters of faith. He notes that the only restric- tions imposed in respect of fasting, lent, etc., are that on certain days meat and fish, lean and fat, must not be mixed, though either might be eaten and was found on the padres' tables.15 It would seem, however, from certain not very intelligible episcopal orders that the Californians were authoritatively freed from many of the usual requirements in the matter of food.

For criminals of every class to take advantage of the privileges of church asylum was still common. Many cases are mentioned in the archives; but in most the details, including the final settlement, are wanting. Soldiers, civilians, and Indians on the com- mission of any crime hastened to take refuge in the church, leaving it to be settled later whether they were entitled to the asylum or whether they needed it. As a rule the only advantage gained was exemp- tion from floggings; but in a few instances the asylum caused imprisonment to be substituted as a penalty instead of death as required by military law. Mur- derers, homicides, highway robbers who caused muti- lation of limb, and those who assaulted others in church or cemetery were not entitled to the immunity. In 1830 Ignacio Herrera took church asylum after stabbing the sentinel, Miguel Castro, and was taken out of church by the arresting officer under the usual bond, or caucion juratoria. When the case came to Asesor Gomez, he insisted on nullifying the bond, and a long discussion ensued with the padres respect-

14 Vallejo, Doc. Hist. Cal., MS., xxviii. 413; Dept. Rec., MS., i. 91.

15 Duhaut-Cilly, Viaggio, ii. 126-7. Various orders on indulgences in respect to eating meat, eggs, milk, etc., in Arch. Sta B., MS., vi. 312-19, 130-2; S. José, Patentes, MS., 159-65, 172-8.

PUEBLOS AND RANCHOS.

ing the prisoner's right to the immunity, and respect- ing the president's right to decide in the matter as the bishop's vicar. The question was referred to the bishop, and the culprit was condemned to eight years in the chain-gang.16

The California pueblos and ranchos gained in popu- lation during this decade from 930 to 1,690, the gain of 760 being nearly 80 per cent of the whole gain in the territory. The only colonists who came from abroad were the 150 convicts, and about the same number of foreigners; but probably not half of the 300 are to be included in the 760. Of pueblo man- agement and system all that is known has been pre- sented in connection with local history. There were no radical changes under the republican régime; but ayuntamientos, or town councils, were somewhat per- fected at Los Angeles and San Jose, military author- ity was withdrawn to some extent when the office of comisionado was abolished, and the non-military resi- dents of Monterey and Santa Bárbara were organized into a kind of presidial pueblos, each with a full ayun- tamiento.

Respecting colonization and the distribution of lands it may be well to glance briefly at various official acts in chronological order, though few of those acts had any practical effect in California at this time. The canónigo, Fernandez, as representative of the imperial regency, in November 1822 ordered that no further distribution of lands be made until new regulations were issued;17 and it seems that under date of April 11, 1823, such a series of regulations was enacted by the imperial government, which never had any effect

16 Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., Ixxi. 35-58; Arch. Sta. B., MS., xii. 144. Other cases in Id., liv. 7; Dept. St. Pap., Angeles, MS., i. 93-4; St. Pap. Sac., MS., xi. 57; Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 201; Arch. Arzob., MIS., iv. pt. ii. 116-17.

17 S. José, Arch., MS., i. 49. This order is addressed to the municipal authorities and I have not found it elsewhere, but it does not seem to apply exclusively to pueblo lands proper.

652

INSTITUTIONARY AND STATISTICAL.

in California, and perhaps not anywhere.18 The sub- ject of secularizing the missions was deemed a most important one in these years by all secular authorities, and it derived most of its importance from the extent and value of the mission lands. On the distribution and occupation of territorial lands by actual settlers the future prosperity of the country was understood to depend; and while the rights of the Indians to their native soil were always conceded, in theory at least, by Mexico, the continued retention by Francis- can communities of all the best lands under the shallow pretence that the Indians were being fitted to enjoy their rights at some period in the distant future, was with much reason regarded as an absurd proposition. Argüello and others expressed these views very clearly in 1823;19 and in September of that year the matter of land distribution was discussed by the dipu- tacion, before which body Sarría appeared as defender of the natives' rights. The prevailing opinion of the legislators was in favor of reducing the ranchos, not only of individuals but of missions, to an extent cor- responding with the real needs of the occupants. Even in these early times the prevalent tendency to a monopoly of land was recognized as an evil; but it was decided to leave the matter to the decision of the national government.20

On August 18, 1824, a colonization law was passed by the Mexican congress. It was most liberal in its provisions, favoring the entry of foreign colonists, while giving the preference to Mexican citizens; but was very general in its terms, leaving regulations in detail for subsequent legislation. The required com- plementary regulations were issued November 21, 1828, and, like the law of 1824, are given very nearly in full elsewhere.21 Mission lands were not to be dis-

18 Halleck's Report, 120. I have not seen the law referred to.

19 See chap. xxii. this vol .; Dept. Rec., MS., i. 36-8.

20 See chap. xxiii. this vol .; Leg. Rec., MS., i. 31-2.

21 See chap. xxiii. this vol., and chap. ii. of vol. iii. for the laws of 1824, and 1828 in substance. It seems to have been nearly a year before the last

6G3

PRIVATE RANCHOS.

tributed to either settlers or colonists at present, since the difficulties involved were understood to be great, and there was no disposition to do injustice to either friars or neophytes.22 The method of granting lands to individuals-and the colonial schemes so prominent in the regulations never had any practical application in California-prescribed by the law was that some- what carelessly followed down to 1846; it included a petition with descriptive explanations by the applicant, an investigation of circumstances and consultation of local authorities, an approval by the diputacion, a for- mal documentary title from the governor, and a record of the whole expediente in a book kept for the pur- pose.23

There were in 1830 nearly fifty ranchos which had been granted to private individuals by the successive governors since the time of Fages; and more than half the number had been granted during this decade, though only one or two under the provisions of the regulations of 1828, and only one, so as far as clearly appears, with the direct approval of the diputacion."

regulations were published in California. In Jan. 1827 notice was given that the governor would not in the future grant any lands to foreigners (not- withstanding the laws of 1824, or until the appearance of the necessary regu- lations?). Dept. St. Pap., S. José, MS., v. 12.

22 Tuthill's remark, Ilist. Cal., 127, that 'congress was nibbling at the mission property but was not quite bold enough to seize it;' that the coloniza- tion scheme was probably a plan to make the eivil outgrow the religious set- tlements and thus render the work of plunder easier, is evidently founded on a misconception of the legal title to mission lands.

23 April 6, 1830, a law of this date modified those of 1824-8 somewhat by authorizing the national government to take such lands as were required for fortifications, etc., and by prohibiting frontier colonization by foreign citizens of adjacent nations. Halleck's Report, 121-2.

24 The following is a list of the different ranchos granted before 1830. Re- speeting several marked with a (?) there is some doubt, but such details as are extant have been given in previous chapters, especially in chap. xxiv .- xxvii. of this volume.

San Diego District :- San Antonio Abad (?), to - before 1828: Sta María de Peñasquitos, to Ruiz and Alvarado 1823; Rosario, or Las Barra- cas(?), to -before 1828; San Isidro, to - before 1828; Otay, to Estudillo (re-grant 1846) 1829; Otay, to Estudillo 1829; Temascal, to Serrano before IS28.

Santa Bárbara District :- San Rafael, to Verdugo 1784; Los Nietos (Sta Gertrudis), to Nieto (re-grant 1834) 1784; San Pedro, to Dominguez (re-grant 1822) before 1800; Portezuelo, to Verdugo about 1795; Refugio, to Ortega about 1797; Simí, to Pico (re-grant 1821, 1842) 1795; Félix, to - (re-grant to Verdugo 1843) about 1810; Vírgenes, to Ortega (re-grant 1837, 1834) about

664

INSTITUTIONARY AND STATISTICAL.

Not much is known about the documentary title to any of these early grants; but the governor's right to grant unoccupied lands seems to have been as well understood before as after the colonization laws were issued. There was always a petition, more or less investigation, and a written permission to occupy; and in some cases a formal act of possession, the methods being very much the same as later. Sixteen of these grants were subsequently confirmed by the land com- mission on the strength of the original concession and proof of occupation; twenty-three were presented to that board strengthened by new and more formal titles made before 1846; while seven or eight never re-appeared, or at least not under the same names and original titles. Governor Echeandía refused in 1829 to give written titles for lands granted by his pre- decessors; but in July 1830 all owners were sum- moned to appear and give information respecting their lands and titles,25 with results that are not

1810; Conejo, or Altagracia, to Polanco and Rodriguez (Guerra in 1822) 1803; Santiago de Sta Ana, to Yorba 1809; Ciénegas, to Ávila (?) 1823; La Brea, to Rocha 1828; San Antonio, to Lugo (re-grant 1838) 1810-23-27; Sauzal Redondo, to Ávila (re-grant 1837) 1822.

Monterey District :- Alisal, to Butron (?) (re-grant 1834) about 1828; Bue- navista, to Estrada (1795 to Soberanes) 1822; Llano de Buenavista, to Estrada 1823; Escarpin (or S. Miguel?), to Espinosa (re-grant 1837) before 1828; Moro Cojo, to Castro (re-grant 1844) 1825; Potrero (or Familia Sagrada), to Torre 1822; Bolsa Nueva, to Soto (re-grant 1836) before 1829; Natividad, to Butron and Alviso (re-grant 1837) before 1830; Pájaro, to Castro 1820; Pilarcitos, to Miramontes (?) (re-grant 1841) before 1830; Salinas (before 1795 to Aceves, re-grant 1836), before 1830; San Cayetano, to Vallejo (re-grant 1835) 1824; Sauzal, to Soberanes (re-grant 1834) 1823; Tucho, to - - (re-grant 1841-4) before 1830; San Antonio, to Solis (re-grant 1835?) 1829; Corralitos, to Ame- sti (?) (re-grant 1844) before 1827.

San Francisco District :- Pulgas, to Argüello (re-grant 1835) before 1824; San Antonio, to Peralta 1820; San Pablo, to Castro 1823; Pinole, to Martinez (re-grant 1842) before 1829; San Isidro, to Ortega before 1810; Las Animas, or La Brea, to Castro (re-grant 1835) 1802; San Ignacio (?), to -- before 1S2S; Tularcitos, to Higuera 1821; Buri-buri, to Sanchez (re-grant 1835) 1827; Llano del Abrevadero, to Higuera (?) 1822.

Abel Stearns obtained a grant on the San Joaquin in 1830, but not the necessary confirmation by the diputacion, nor did he occupy the lands. Ley. Rec., MS., i. 323-7.

25 Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 121; Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., 1xxi. 3. In Oct. 1827 owners of lands had been also called upon for similar information. Olvera, Doc. Hist. Cal., MS., i. The right of a presidial commandant to grant lands was denied in the case of Willis' application for Bolbones in 1828. chap. xxvi. Duhaut-Cilly in 1827, Viaggio, ii. 99, 120-1, noted the evils resulting from the uncertain titles to property. While two men were engaged in liti-

665

MANUFACTURES AND LABOR.

known, except that they probably caused the new petitions and re-granting of old ranchos already al- luded to. Nothing like absolute ownership of land by individuals was yet recognized by the govern- ment; and even under the new regulations very few persons took steps in later years to acquire perfect titles. I find nothing in the records of this decade which throws any light on the granting of pueblo lands or house-lots, except some indications that at San Diego lots were given without written titles. 26

Manufacturing industry received no fresh impulse but rather suffered a decline. As before, coarse woollen fabries were woven at the missions; hides were tanned for shoes, sacks, and rude saddles; soap was made in considerable quantities; and a variety of necessary articles of wood, iron, or leather were produced by native or foreign workmen. San Gabriel, Santa Bar- bara, San Luis Rey, and in the earlier years of the decade San Luis Obispo were most noted for their various industries; but there is no information extant respecting what was accomplished at any of the estab- lishments; and we only know from an occasional refer- ence in an official report, or the notes of a traveller, or in accounts of supplies furnished, that the work of earlier periods was still continued in the mission work- shops. Laborers of all kinds were still for the most part Indians hired from the missions or from the gentile rancherías. Doubtless in some instances the Indians were compelled to work for nothing, but the authorities made some efforts to prevent such abuses.27

gation about a piece of land it was granted by the governor to a third party. Beechey, Voyage, ii. 11, says that retired soldiers were no longer given land in the pueblos as formerly, but only allowed the use of it. July 5, 1825, the guardian of S. Fernando to Minister Alaman, says 'the settlers unfortunately are so indolent and slack in their labors that generally they do not eat unless the Indians do the work.' Arch. Arzob., MS., iv. pt. ii. 146. May 19, 1829, Echeandía reports that there is no apparent hope of the settlers doing more than to earn a bare living. Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 15.

26 Applications of Bandini, Estudillo, and Argüello in 1849-50 for titles to lots on which they had lived since the 'old times' before 1830, when 'grants of that class were made verbally.' S. Diego, Arch., MS., S.

27 There are no items or references of value on manufactures; but the fol-

666

INSTITUTIONARY AND STATISTICAL.

Missionary reports in 1822 were to the effect that no mines had been found in California, except the Ortega silver mine on the rancho San Isidro, which had been several times worked with unknown results; though there were rumors and 'dreams' of metallic veins in a rock on the coast, five leagues from Purí- sima; the miner, Pedro Posadas, had been prospect- ing about San Luis Rey without success so far as could be known; and travellers had declared there must be metals in the mountains around San Luis Obispo.23 Padre Amorós in 1822, like the rest, said there were no mines near his mission of San Rafael; but the next year he expressed to Argüello his opinion that the Russians in a recent expedition from Bodega inland had discovered a silver mine, urging this as a reason why the Spaniards should make every exertion

lowing on labor may be worth preserving: In 1828, only one slave in the territory, a woman who came with her mistress in 1825. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 35. Circular sent out asking the number of slaves. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Pref. y Juzg., MS., i. 41. Ott. 23, 1829, Echeandía blames the comandante of Monterey because Indians captured by the troops have been distributed among the people as servants. Such Indians must be sent to the missions. Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 179, 241. White men do no work but to care for cattle or sheep; for tilling the ground they pay the padres for Indians whom they use as slaves. Duhaut-Cilly, Viaggio, ii. 124. In 1821, neophytes supplied by missions for rebuilding Monterey were charged at the rate of from 1.5 to 4 reals per day, including the use of tools. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt. i. 51. In 1826 Zalvidea tells the governor he will make no charge for four Indians of his mission, since it appears they are expected to work on the presidio for patriotism; but he complains that for workmen who get no pay they are very scantily fed. Id., v. pt. i. 25-6. A neophyte carpenter applies to the governor for permission to leave S. Diego mission and go elsewhere to ply his trade. The padres were ordered to report on his civil and religious conduct. Id., v. pt. i. 3. In 1823, Tapis tells Mulligan that neophytes are much opposed to work- ing away from their missions. Vallejo, Doc. Hist. Cal., MS., xxviii. 297. In 1826 David Spence says to Hartnell 'everybody has Indians at his command,' and he wants some. Id., xxix. 30. 1828, McIntosh says to Cooper that Indian wages are $4 per month. Id., 242. June 15, 1826, Echeandía permits the settlers of San José to go and 'induce' the gentiles of the Tulares to come in and work; but their morals and conduct must be looked after. Dept. St. Pap., MS., i. 146.

28 Arch. Sta B., MS., iii. 279, 317; vi. 198; ix. 116-17. December 23, 1820, the governor writes to García Conde that mines are lying unworked for want of speculators, referring chiefly to Lower California. St. Pap., Sac., MS., vi. 26. The first expedition to explore the Sonoma region in July 1823 found what they deemed lime between Sonoma and Napa. Arch. Arzob., MS., iv. pt. ii. 40. Mexican law of October 7, 1823, allowing foreigners to own mines. Schmidt's Civil Laws of Spain and Mex., 337-9. Brief mention of gold dust washed out at S. Isidro, S. Diego Co., in 1828. Hayes' Scraps Mining, v. 3.

667

MINING AND AGRICULTURE.

to explore and hold that country. The fact, however, that the padre wanted some men at the time for an expedition after converts and runaways, may have had much influence on his opinion.2? Near Monterey an event occurred which at the least seems to have served as the foundation of a mining tradition in later years. About 1825 one Romero and his wife found rich silver-bearing rock near a warm spring in the mountains back of Carmelo Valley, to which they had been directed by Indians as a cure for the woman's rheumatism. The man died while on his way south to obtain miners; but María Romero, with the aid of her children, worked the mine secretly on a small scale, and occasionally sold small bars of silver mixed with lead to Captain Cooper and others. David Spence is cited as authority for this story, which was mentioned as early as 1860, and was published in the newspapers of 1872 in connection with the alleged re- discovery of the mine. 30

Agricultural statistics are attainable only for the missions, and with general deductions have been given earlier in this chapter. The average crops and the average percentage of yield had largely decreased since the last decade. The crop of 1821 had been the largest, and that of 1829 the smallest ever har- vested, though in the latter year there are no special complaints of drought, and in the former rains were reported as scanty. The amount of agricultural prod- ucts raised-chiefly for home consumption-at pueblos and ranchos must have been large in the aggregate, but we have no statistics on the subject. In the way of pests not much is heard at this time of the cha- huistli, or rust; but locusts and squirrels were trouble- some almost everywhere, and mustard in many places. There are no indications that irrigating works had

29 Arch. Arzob., MS., iv. pt. ii. 84-5.

80 S. Francisco Herald, May 4, 1860; Castroville Argus, Aug. 17, 31, 1872; Monterey Democrat; Sta Cruz Sentinel.

INSTITUTIONARY AND STATISTICAL.

been extended, but rather the contrary. The terri- torial government did nothing for agricultural devel- opment beyond issuing now and then a law against kindling fires in the fields. For crops other than of grain we have no figures; but vines and olives are constantly referred to as yielding abundantly from San Diego to San Buenaventura, and the vines also, only a little less abundantly, up to San José. A small quantity of oil was pressed from the olives, while the grapes yielded large quantities of wine and brandy.31

Stock-raising was by far the most prosperous in- dustry of the country, being the one which almost exclusively supported the territorial commerce. As in the case of agriculture figures are confined to the missions, and have already been presented; but the rancheros also depended chiefly for a living on their sales of hides and tallow, and approximated more nearly in this than any other branch of industry to mission enterprise and success. 32 Sheep-raising was not prosperous except at two or three of the larger missions; since there was no exportation of wool, mutton was but rarely used for food, and the number of neophytes to be clothed was constantly diminish- ing. 33 Horses were still kept limited by slaughter to the numbers deemed necessary for the various uses of the inhabitants, because when allowed to become wild they interfered seriously with the more profit- able raising of cattle. 34 The importance of the trade

31 Tithes on grapes in one year amounted to 430,000 (?) lbs of brandy, of which half went to Avila for manufacture according to his contract. St. Pap., Sac., MS., vi. 27. The raising of hemp had long been abandoned, though in 1825 there were inquiries from Mexico for that article. Dept. Rec., MS., i. 264; St. Pap., Miss., MS., v. 27-8; Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., liv. 9.

32 Duhaut-Cilly, Viaggio, ii. 145, states that private individuals owned 28,000 head of cattle in 1827; but there is no data for an accurate estimate, even the tithe and tax accounts being exceedingly fragmentary. Beechey, Voyage, ii. 15, tells us that a Monterey merchant paid $36,000 in one year to a mission for its hides, tallow, and Indian labor.

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.

History of California, Volume II, Part 69

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe Publication date: 1885 Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers Number of Pages: 826

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 826