History of California, Volume III, Part 12

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885-1890
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 824

USA > California > History of California, Volume III > Part 12

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).

The law of 1827 on the expulsion of Spaniards from Mexican territory," reaching California in 1828, had no other effect on the status of the missionaries than to give them another safe opportunity to demand their passports, as many of them did, some perhaps really desiring to depart. There was no disposition to enforce the decree, for reasons known to the reader.19 Meanwhile the Spanish friars had been actually ex- pelled from Mexico, and a most disheartening report came respecting the state of affairs at the college of San Fernando. 20

There would seem to have been some complaint against Echeandía for not having enforced the law of 1827, for in June 1829, apparently before the arrival of the law of March 20th, he sent to Mexico a list of

17 June 3, 1828, Lawlor to Sanchez. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt i. 63-1. June 8th, Sanchez to E. Id., 65-6. Aug. 21st, 29th, E. to S. and to the alcalde. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 84-5, 90.

18 Sce chap. ii. of this volume.

19 Oct. 20, 1828, Echeandia to min. of war. The padres are violent at the law for their expulsion, and are elamoring for passports and complaining of detention by force. St. Pap., Sac., MS., x. 39-40. Dee. 6th, E. says that most of the 27 padres have agreed long before the date of the law to tako the oath as was reported to Mexico on Dec. 6, 1826. (This report is not ex- tant, but it is certainly not true that most had made such a promise.) If passports Were issued as several have asked, the missions would be left with- out government and the territory without spiritual care. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 50. Duhaut-Cilly says he offered to carry the padres over to Manila; but he got a letter from Sarria, in which he said he was resolved not to abandon the flock intrusted to him by heaven until forced to do so, and he advised his companions to the same effect. The same writer notes the arrival of 3 Fran- ciscans-they could not have been from California-at the Sandwich Islands on the French ship Comete. Viaggio, ii. 200-1, 219-20.

2.) March 26, 1828, P. Arreguin to Sarria. It had been at first proposed to dissolve the college; but finally the guardian and discretorio had decided to choose a vicario de casa, and had chosen the writer. He asks for Sarria's views about the policy of keeping up the college, where there were now Ar- reguin and 3 other priests, 2 sick Spaniards unable to depart, and 6 or 10 servants of different grades. Arch. Sia B., MIS., ix. 90-4.

ECHEANDÍA AND THE PADRES.

the padres, with notes on the circumstances of each,21 and a defence of his action, or failure to act, on the ground that all the padres except three were Spaniards, and it would have been absurdly impossible to expel them with nobody to take their place. He also urged that many of them be allowed to remain permanently in the territory. Only a few days later there came the law of March 20th, much more strict than the other, and it was circulated on the 6th of July. The announcement was that to all padres who had refused to take the oath passports would be given forthwith, while all the rest must show within a month the physical impediments preventing their departure as required by the law.22 As before, no friar was ex- pelled, and Echeandía had no idea of granting pass- ports, though several, including Peyri, Sanchez, and Boscana, now demanded them, and though the gov- ernor really desired to get rid of certain unmanageable ones as soon as he could obtain others to take their places.23 Not only did he send to Mexico a defence of his policy of inaction, showing the impossibility of the expulsion so far as California was concerned; but

21 Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 26-33. The following friars had taken the oath: Fernando Martin, GO years old; Antonio Peyri, 70 years; Francisco Suñer, 71 years; and Márcos Antonio de Vitoria, 69 years, who however had subse- quently retracted, though faithful and obedient to the government, of blame- less life, and probably influenced by his excessive respect for his prelate. The following had taken the oath with some conditions: Gonzalez de Ibarra, Antonio Jaime, and Arroyo de la Cuesta; Boscana was ready to take the oath, and Barona, Zalvidea, and Jose Sanchez also with the conditions. This left 14 who would not take the oath, of whom Catala, Viader, and Abella were over 60 years old; several were in bad health, and several were highly recom- mendable for their faithfulness. Should new padres come, E. proposed to grant passports to Arroyo, Ordaz, P. Cabot, Sancho, J. Cabot, Ibarra, Oliva, Duran, Esténega, Abella, and Uría, in that order. There were recommended to re- main, Amorós, Catalá, Vitoria, Viader, Fortuni, Martin, Boscana, Sanchez, Zalvidea, and especially Peyri, Jaime, Barona, and Suñer. Martinez was the only one who had asked for a passport on the ground of not wishing to con- form. Duhant-Cilly, Viaggio, ii. 187-S, mentions the coming of the Domin- icans President Luna and P. Caballero to S. Gabriel in June, to consult about the expulsion.

22 July 6, 1829, E. to various officials. Dept. St. Pap., MS., ii. 92-3, 97; Id., S. José, ii. 16-17; Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 190-1.

23 July-September, applicationsof the padres for passports. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt i. 54-7. Aug. 11th, Echeandia to min. of rel. . St. Pap., Sac., MS., x. 43-6. In this document the gov. gives a very clear and complete statement of the whole matter.

THE MISSIONARIES AS SPANIARDS.

the ayuntamientos of San José, Monterey, and per- haps other places, sent strong petitions on the evils that must result from such expulsion, expressing for the missionaries the deepest love and veneration, and pleading eloquently that the people might not be de- prived of their spiritual guardians.24 I find no re- sponses to these petitions, nor are there any definite orders of later date on the subject, which, except in certain particulars to be noted in the next paragraph, seems to have been now allowed to rest. One of the Spanish friars, however, received before the end of 1829 a passport to a land where it is to be hoped his political troubles were at an end. This was the aged and infirm Padre Jaime, who died at Santa Barbara.

I have said that Echeandía deemed it desirable to get rid of certain padres. Personal feeling was his motive in part; moreover, it was important to remove certain obstacles likely to interfere with his policy of secularization, of which more hereafter. Prejudice against all that was Spanish was the strongest feeling in Mexico, and there was no better way for the gov- ernor to keep himself in good standing with the power that appointed him than to go with the current. It also favored Echeandía's plans respecting his enemy Herrera, while increasing the importance of his own services, to show the existence of a strong revolution- ary spirit in favor of Spain. There was, however, but a slight foundation on which to build. The padres were Spaniards, and as a rule disapproved the new form of government; but it is not likely that any of them had a definite hope of overthrowing the repub- lic, or of restoring California to the old system, and the most serious charge that could be justly brought against them was an occasional injudicious use of the

21 Aug. 25th, S. José, Peticion del Ayuntamiento en favor de los Frailes Es- pañoles, 1829, MS .; Monterey, Peticion al Presidente y l'ongreso en favor de los Frailes Españoles, 1829, MS. Oct. 22d, gov. approves the petitions. Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 239. Oct. 12th, Virmond writes from Mexico that the presi- dent had not the slightest idea of expelling the friars. Guerra, Doc., MS., vi. 143-8.

HIST. CAL., VOL. III. 7

ECHEANDIA AND THE PADRES.

tongue. Generally the prevalent rumors of treason could be traced to nothing reliable. 25

Of all the padres, Martinez of San Luis Obispo was the most outspoken and independent in political mat- ters, besides being well known for his smuggling pro- pensities. Echeandía deemed his absence desirable for the quiet of the territory, and had issued a pass- port which had not been used. It was thought best on general principles to make an example; it was par- ticularly desirable to give a political significance to the Solis revolt, and Padre Martinez was banished on a charge of complicity in that revolt in the interest of Spain. The evidence against him was not very strong;26 but there was little risk, since as a Spaniard the accused might at any time be legally exiled. He was arrested early in February 1830, and confined in a room of the comandancia at Santa Bárbara. In his testimony he denied all the allegations against him, except that of giving food to the soldiers, as others had also done and as it was customary for the missionaries to do, whoever their guests might be. He claimed to have tried to dissuade Solis from his foolish scheme of raising the Spanish flag. In a long and eloquent communication addressed to Echeandía,

25 Sept. 9, 1829, gov. to comandantes. Has heard that some padre burns daily two tapers before a portrait of Fernando VII .; and that another pre- dicts from his pulpit the coming of the Spanish king. Find out secretly who do these things, and forward the result. St. Pap., Sac., MS., x. 25, 48; Dept. Rec., MS., vii. 44. The guilty parties were not found.

26 The evidence, some of the items resting on the statement of a single soldier, was, so far as it is on record, as follows: That he had freely supplied the rebels with food, had been very intimate with Solis and his leaders at San Luis, had shown anger at certain soldiers when they said 'viva la república,' had spoken mysteriously of his 'amo Francisquito,' in Spain or Mexico, had shown a paper with 'viva Fernando VII.' written on it, had derided inde- pendence and liberty, and had lodged Alf. Fernandez del Campo in a room which bore the inscription ' V. F. 7' on the ceiling. Solis, Proceso, etc., MS .; Fernandez to Echeandia in St. Pap., Suc., MS., x. 26-7. Vallejo, Ilist. Cal., MS., ii. 93-105, tells us that there were documents proving conclusively that Martinez was plotting against the republic and carrying on a secret corre- spondence with the rebels in Mexico; but nothing of this kind was shown in the recorded evidence, and the same may be said of a letter of encouragement from Martinez found on the person of Solis at his capture, mentioned by Al- varado. ITist. Col., MS., ii. 153.

EXILE OF FATHER MARTINEZ.

protesting against the manner of his treatment, Mar- tinez, while not attempting to deny his well known political sentiments, claimed that he was not such a fool as to suppose that Spain could be benefited by petty revolts in California, that he desired the wel- fare of the territory, and that in his opinion it could not be advantageously separated from Mexico. The two padres Cabot testified to having seen letters in which Martinez declined to take part in the political schemes of Solis, declaring that if the king wished to conquistar any part of America, he might do it him- self, in his own way. Prefect Sarria also presented an argument to prove Martinez innocent.27

The 9th of March a junta de guerra, composed of six officers, besides the governor, met at Santa Barba- ra to decide on the friar's fate. Echeandía explained, at considerable length, the difficulties in the way of administering a suitable penalty, and he seems to have counselled leniency, fearing or pretending to fear the action of the other padres; but after full discus- sion, it was decided by a vote of five to one to send him out of Mexican territory by the first available vessel.28 Stephen Anderson, owner of the English brig Thomas Nowlan, was called in immediately, and gave bonds to carry the prisoner to Callao, and put him on board a vessel bound for Europe. Padre Martinez, on the same day, promised in verbo sacer- dotis not to land at Manila or the Sandwich Islands, and on March 20th the Nowlan sailed." The friar

27 Martinez admitted to Lieut Romualdo Pacheco that he had received letters from Solis, urging him to arm his neophytes in defence of the Spanish flag soon to be raised. St. Pap., Miss, and Col., MS., ii. 30-1. Testimony of Martinez and the PP. Cabot in Solis, Proceso, MIS., 100-1, 98-9. March 4th, Martinez, Defensa dirigida al Comandante General, 1830, MS., in Id., 93-8. Feb. 9th, Sarria, Defensa del Padre Luis Martinez, 1830, MS. Mrs Ord, Ocurrencias, MS., 31 -- 6, gives some details of the padre's confinement in her father's house, and the efforts of members of the family to relieve the pris- oner's wants in spite of the severity of Lieut Lobato. This writer and many other Californians think there was no foundation for the special charges against Martinez at this time.

28 Record of the junta of March 9th, in Solis, Proceso, MS., 102-5. The officers were J. J. Rocha, M. G. Vallejo, Domingo Carrillo, M. G. Lobato, J. M. Ibarra, and A. V. Zamorano. A previous junta of Feb. 26th is alluded to. 29 Carrillo (José), Doc., MIS., 21. The Spaniards A. J. Cot and family,

100

ECHEANDÍA AND THE PADRES.

reached Callao in June, and subsequently arrived safely in Madrid, whence he wrote to his friends in California. There were those who believed that he carried away a large amount of money, an exploit which, if actually accomplished, considering the cir- cumstances of his departure, surpassed in brilliancy all his previous deeds as a contrabandista. 30 Even if, as I suppose, he carried little or no gold at his depart- ure, it is not probable that so shrewd a man of busi- ness had neglected in past years to make some provision for future comfort.

The most important problem affecting the missions was that of secularization; but it hardly assumed a controversial aspect during this period. The missions, as the reader is well aware, had never been intended as permanent institutions, but only as temporary schools to fit savage gentiles for Christian citizenship. Themissionaries themselves never denied thisin theory, but practically nullified the principle, and claimed per- petuity for their establishments by always affirming, no matter whether the spiritual conquest dated back five or fifty years, that the Indians were not yet fitted to become citizens. This was, moreover, always true, even if it was a virtual confession that the mission system was a failure, and it presented serious difficul- ties in the way of secularization. The cortes of Spain had decreed, however, in 1813, that all missions ten years after foundation must be changed into pueblos, subject to secular authority both in civil and religious affairs,31 and the success of independence made the

and J. I. Mancisidor sailed in the same vessel. Feb. 6th, Echeandia's order to arrest Martinez. Dept. Rec., MS., viii. 16. March 9th, E. announces the sentence to Prefect Sarría. Id., viii. 27.

30 Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 96-100, says that he was the officer who took Martinez on board. He walked very slowly, but as he was old and corpulent, was not hurried. When they were alone in the cabin the padre said : 'Perhaps you thought me drunk. Not so, my son, but see here'-pro- ceeding to show that his clothing was heavily lined with gold ! The young alférez was glad to know that the friar had made provision for a rainy day, and promised to keep his secret.

31 Sec chap. xviii., vol. ii., for the decree of Sept. 13, 1813, and subsequent developments in Cal.

101

POLICY OF SECULARIZATION.

change inevitable. The spirit of Mexican republican- ism was not favorable to the longer existence of the old missions under a system of land monopoly strongly tinged with some phases of human slavery. If the Indians were not fit for citizenship, neither were they being fitted therefor.

Echeandía and the administration that appointed him desired to secularize the missions, but understood that it was a problem requiring careful study. Neither party was disposed to act hastily in the matter: the Mexican authorities largely perhaps because of indif- ference to the interests of a territory so far away; and the governor by reason not only of his natural tendency to inaction, but of the difficulties with which on arrival he found himself surrounded. These diffi- culties, as the reader has learned, were insurmountable. Had the territorial finances been in a sound condition, had the military force been thoroughly organized and promptly paid, had there been fifty curates at hand to take charge of new parishes, had the territory been to some extent independent of the missions-even with these favorable conditions, none of which existed, sec- ularization would have been a difficult task if not a risky experiment, requiring for success at least the hearty cooperation of the friars. Under existing circumstances, however, which need not be recapitu- lated here, against the will of the padres, who, with their influence over the neophytes and their threats to retire en masse, were largely masters of the situa- tion, any radical change in the mission status would bring ruin to the territory.

The governor recognized the impossibility of imme- diate action; but in accordance with the policy of his government,32 with his own republican theories, with

32 Jan. 31, 1825, min. of war to gov. A statement of grievances suffered by the Indians of Cal. States that it is the president's desire to do away with so vicious a system, but suggests that the reform should perhaps be one of policy rather than of authority. It is not expedient to break up openly the system of tho padres, who if offended might by their influence cause great evils. Still it was essential to check the arbitrary measures that oppre. sed the Indians, and afford the latter the advantages of the liberal system-but

102

ECHEANDÍA AND THE PADRES.

the spirit rapidly evolved from controversies with the friars on other points, and with the urgings of some prominent Californians who already had their eyes on the mission lands, he had to keep the matter alive by certain experiments intended to test the feelings and capabilities of the neophytes.33 On April 28, 1826, Echeandía and his secretary, Zamorano, held a con- sultation with padres Sanchez, Zalvidea, Peyri, and Martin at San Diego, at which after the padres had expressed their willingness to surrender the temporal management, the governor made a speech on the im- portance of providing for the Indians of San Diego and Santa Barbara who desired to leave the neofia and manage for themselves. After discussion, it was agreed that those of good conduct and long service might be released, to form a pueblo at San Fernando or San Luis, under regulations to be fixed by the gov- ernor.34

After later consultations not definitely recorded, at which the plan was considerably modified, Echeandía issued, July 25th, a decree, or proclamation, of partial emancipation in favor of the neophytes. By its terms those desiring to leave the missions might do so, pro- vided they had been Christians from childhood, or for fifteen years, were married, or at least not minors, and had some means of gaining a livelihood. The Indians must apply to the presidial comandante, who after obtaining a report from the padre was to issue through the latter a written permit entitling the neophyte and his family to go wherever they pleased,

guardedly and slowly to avoid the license that might result from unwise measures. All is intrusted to E.'s experience and good judgment. St. Pap., Miss. and Colon., MS., ii. 42, quoted by E. in 1833 in a letter to Figueroa.

33 According to Alvarado, Ilist. Cal., MS., ii. 109-10; Vallejo, Ilist. Cal., MS., ii. 51-3; Vallejo, Reminis., MS., 89-90, Echeaudía, immediately after taking his office, sent Licut Pacheco to make a tour of inspection in the southern missions. The padres were not pleased; but Pacheco having some trouble with P. Boscana at S. Juan Capistrano, went so far as to assemble the neophytes and to make a political speech, in which he told the Indians of a new chief who had come to the country to be their friend, and give them equal rights with Spaniards.

31 Dept. St. Pap., MS., i. 129-30.

103

EXPERIMENTAL SECULARIZATION.

like other Mexican citizens, their names being erased from the mission registers. The cases of absentces were to be investigated by the comandantes at once, and those not entitled to the license were to be re- stored to their respective missions. At the same time the padres were to be restricted in the matter of pun- ishments to the 'mere correction' allowed to natural fathers in the case of their children; unmarried males of minor age only could be flogged, with a limit of fifteen blows per week; and faults requiring more severe penalties must be referred to the military authorities.35 The provisions of this order applied only to the districts of San Diego, Santa Bárbara, and Monterey; though in 1828 it was extended to that of San Francisco, excepting the frontier missions of San Rafael and San Francisco Solano.36

This order of 1826 was the only secularization measure which Echeandía attempted to put in actual operation before the end of 1830. It does not appear that the missionaries made any special opposition, and the reasons of their concurrence are obvious. First, very few neophytes could comply with the conditions, especially that requiring visible means of support. Second, the decree required fugitives not entitled to license to be returned to their missions by the mili- tary, a duty that of late years had been much neglected. And third, and chiefly, experimental or partial secularization was deemed by the friars to be in their own interest, since they had no fears that the neophytes would prove themselves capable of self-

35 July 25, 1826, Echeandia, Decreto de Emancipacion á favor de Neófitos, 13.26, MS. Received at S. Rafael Ang. 23d. Arch. Misiones, MS., i. 297. Forwarded by Licut Estudillo to padre of S. Antonio. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 114-17. Sergt Anastasio Carrillo sent by C'apt. Guerra to proclaim the new order in the missions of the Sta Bárbara district, as he did at S. Fernando on Sept. 26th and at S. Buenaventura on Sept. 29th. Doc. Hist. Cal., MS., iv. 789-92. Here the Indian was authorized, should the cabo de escolta and padre refuse to act in presenting his application for license, to leave the mission without permission and apply in person to the comandante. Vallejo, Ilist. C'al., MS., iv. 22, quotes the order of July 25th.

$6 June 20, 1828, gov. to comandantes and prefect. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 57.

104

ECHEANDÍA AND THE PADRES.

government. Respecting the result, we have no sat- isfactory information. I find no record of the number of neophytes who under the order obtained their free- dom, nor of the manner in which they used their lib- erty. Beechey, the English navigator, tells us that the governor was induced by the padres to modify his plans, and to try experiments with a few neo- phytes, who, as might have been expected, fell soon into excesses, gambled away all their property, and were compelled to beg or steal.37

While the governor doubtless used his influence to imbue the neophytes with ideas of independence and civil liberty, not conducive to contentment with mission life,33 no definite progress was made, except in the preparation of plans, in the years 1827-9. In July 1827 the prefect was ordered to see to it that a primary school was supported at each mission, and compliance was promised. 39 In October of the same year, Eche- andía called for a detailed report on the lands held by each mission to be rendered before the end of the year. I find no such report in the records, though the local reports for the next year did, in several instances, contain a list of the mission ranchos.40

37 Beechey's Voyage, ii. 12-13, 320. A few doc. bearing on individual cases of application for license. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., Ivii. 23-4; Dept. Rec., MS., v. 65; viii. 34. April 27, 1827, gov. says to com. of S. Diego that as the Indians of S. Juan neglect their work and make a wrong application of their privileges, they are to be admonished seriously that those who behave themselves properly will obtain their full freedom when his plans are per- fected, while others will be punished. Dept. Rec., MS., v. 44. May 20, 1827, Martinez is to inform the Indians that in a few days E. will issue an order for them to be treated the same as gente de razon. Id., v. 46. Dec. 6, 1826, E. to sup. govt. Speaks of the monopoly by the friars of all the land, labor, and products of the territory; of their hatred for the present system of gov- ernment; and of the desirability of making at least a partial distribution of mission property among the best of the neophytes. Id., v. 132-3. Oet. 20, 1828, E. to min. of war, says the Ind. at most missions are clamoring to be formed into pueblos. St. Pap., Sac., MS., x. 39-40.

38 Mrs Ord, Ocurrencias, MS., 52-4, says that the ideas instilled into the minds of the neophytes by the gefe politico made a great change in them. They were not as contented nor as obedient as before. Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 119-20, takes the same view of the matter.

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 III, Part 12

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe Publication date: 1885-1890 Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers Number of Pages: 824

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885-1890
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 824