History of California, Volume III, Part 30

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 30

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).

44 Antonio Coronel, Cosas de Cal., MS., 13, says he has never been able to trace the rumors of political plots to any reliable source; though Florencio Serrano, Apuntes, MS., 24-5, thinks there were circumstances that indicated an intention to declare Cal. independent of Mexico in certain contingencies.

265

MERITS OF THE SCHEME.

methods lawful, and the good fortune of Padrés in se- curing the aid of the government was not in itself an evidence of corruption. As a matter of course, the empresarios intended to make money; it was certainly not wise to intrust to them such unlimited powers, and it is quite likely that such powers would have been abused by them had they been able to carry out their plans. It is perhaps well for their reputation that they were not submitted to the temptation; but they are entitled to the benefit of the doubt; and in view of subsequent developments charges of contem- plated robbery do not altogether become the party which largely controlled the final disposition of the mission estates. 45

The rendezvous of the colonists at the capital was at the abandoned convent of San Camilo, where a grand ball was given just before the departure, in April 1834. Among the lower classes of the Mexican population-the léperos-there seems to have pre- vailed an idea that California was a land inhabited exclusively by savage Indians and Mexican convicts, and that families from the capital were being in some way deceived or exiled to that dangerous country against their will. Janssens, Coronel, Abrego, Híjar, and others agree that hostile demonstrations were made by the mob, which attempted to prevent the departure of the colonists. I think this action was one not likely to have originated with the léperos, but that it must have been prompted by persons, possibly the friars,

45 Alvarado, Ilist. Cal., MS., ii. 223-30, is particularly violent in his de- nunciation and ridicule, giving full credence to every rumored accusation against Híjar and Padrés of deception towards the colonists, of schemes of plunder, and of political plots. Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 224-30; and Vallejo, Ilist. Cal., MS., ii. 309-10, 349-50, take substantially the same view. The animus of these writers on the subject will be more apparent later. By writers generally who have mentioned the colony the scheme has been moro or less emphatically condemned, by most on account of the supposed worthless char- acter of the colonists, by some on account of its connection with seculariza- tion, and by others because of the personal and political aims of the promoters. Naturally Juan Bandini, Hist. Cal., MS., 59-66, is an carnest defender of the project. Valle, Lo Pasado de Cal., MIS., 40-1; and Machado, Tiempos Pasa- dos, MS., 31, state that Bandini was commonly regarded in southern Cali- fornia as the author of the scheme.

206

FIGUEROA'S RULE-HÍJAR AND PADRÉS COLONY.

who were interested in opposing the enterprise. A company of mounted policemen was furnished by the government to restrain the hostile element, and the emigrants started in April 1834 on their long journey- the men on horseback and the women and children in large covered carts drawn by mules-and proceeded the first day to Tecpantla. 46

The march to the sea, as remembered by members of the expedition, was attended by no special hard- ships or incidents requiring mention, the travellers being hospitably received everywhere along the route, at some towns even with public demonstrations of wel- come and good-will. There was a delay of some weeks at Guadalajara, and a still longer stay at Tepic. It is said that on account of difficulties in obtaining prompt payment of government funds, Híjar was compelled to raise money by mortgaging his estates in Jalisco;47 but there is a notable lack in the archives of all information respecting the finances of the colony. On July 20th the company left Tepic for San Blas, where two or three days later a part went on board the Natalia, to avoid the mosquitoes, as Janssens says. Nine days later the Morelos arrived and the rest of the colonists embarked. There had been some deser- tions, as well as a few enlistments, en route, and at their first sight of the ocean still others lost heart and turned back; but some 250 proceeded on the voyage.

On the 1st of August, probably, the two vessels set sail. The Cosmopolitan Company's brig Natalia had on board Híjar, Bandini, and the naval officer Buena- ventura Araujo, and her commander was Juan Gomez.

40 Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, MS., ix. 4-6, says they started, 400 in number, April 14th, after committing many excesses. Híjar's instructions, to be noticed later, were dated April 23d, which was probably very nearly the date of departure.

# The salaries of Hijar and Padres had been paid in Mexico down to the time of departure. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., Ixxix. 64, 77. July 20, 1833 (4?), an estimate of expenses for surveying instruments and travelling ex- penses for two commissioners and six teachers, with their families, to amount of $6,983, was approved and sent to sub-comisario of California. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., ii. 47-50.

ARRIVAL OF THE COLONISTS.

On the national corvette-of-war Morelos, Captain Lúcas Manso, were Padrés, Judge Castillo Negrete, the new asesor, Cosme Peña, and Sub-comisario Her- rera. A day or two out of port the vessels were separated. The Natalia, the faster sailer of the two, was struck by a squall off Cape San Lucas and had a somewhat narrow escape. There was also much sickness, resulting in several deaths." The brig was bound for Monterey, but in view of the sickness on board the commander was induced by Bandini, and by Híjar who was himself very sea-sick, to put in at San Diego, where she anchored the 1st of September.+ The new-comers were hospitably received at San Diego, the officers and prominent individuals being the guests of Bandini and his friends, while the rest were distributed at various private houses or lodged in tents and warehouses. In a few days a vessel in port took about half the number up to San Pedro, whence they went inland to San Gabriel. Most of the rest soon went up to San Luis Rey. At these two missions they remained for a month and more, and then-ex- cept those who established themselves permanently in different parts of the south-started toward the north- ern frontier, passing in small detachments from mis- sion to mission, and receiving nothing but kind treat- ment from padres, administrators, settlers, and neo- phytes.50 The Natalia, after having perhaps been

48 Híjar, nephew of José María, California en 1836, MS., p. 110-12, speaks of troubles between Gomez and Araujo on the voyage, in connection with which the latter at one time forcibly assumed the command. Janssens gives some details of the gale.

49 Dept. St. Pap., MS., iii. 172-3; iv. 72-5. One record makes the num- ber of passengers 129 and another 140. Martin Cabello came on the Natalia, to be receptor of customs at S. Diego. Hijar speaks of a banquet at the house of Bandini. Serrano says that for two days the families were sheltered in the hide-houses on the beach and fed by the foreign owners of those houses. Machado thinks that they were detained in quarantine for fear of the measles, at a spot called Huisache, for a time. Several died and were buried at the mission. Janssens notes the kindness of the San Diegans, who would take no pay from the colonists for entertainment.

30 Janssens is the only one who mentions the sea-trip to S. Pedro. Ilijar notes a long stay at Sta Bárbara; a division at S. Luis Obispo, one party being bound for Monterey and the other to Sonoma, and the fact that many remained at the different missions, including himself and seven companions at

26S

FIGUEROA'S RULE-HÍJAR AND PADRÉS COLONY.

aground for a time at San Diego, sailed north with the effects of the colony. Lying at anchor in Monte- rey, she broke her cables in a gale on the afternoon of December 21st, and was driven on the beach about two miles above the town, where she soon went to pieces. Three men lost their lives.51

There is a popular tradition that the Natalia was the same vessel on which Napoleon had escaped from Elba, in 1815. This statement is repeated by almost every writer who has mentioned the colony. No one presents any evidence in its support, but I am not able to prove its inaccuracy.52

The Morelos, with Padres and the rest of the colo- nists, 120 in number, also had a narrow escape from shipwreck in a gale off Point Concepcion, according to the statement of Antonio Coronel; but she arrived safely at Monterey on September 25th, and the new- comers were as warmly welcomed at the capital as

S. Juan Bautista. Serrano says some of the colonists endured great hard- ships on the way north, and that he and others determined to quit the colony and look out for themselves. Hijar also tells us that the colonists made firm friends of the neophytes as they passed along, by kind treatment and by sympathy for their sufferings under missionary tyranny. Moreover, Aranjo, in a letter of Sept. 18th to Hijar, the director, says: 'I have already predisposed them [the neophytes] in our favor, explaining to them as well as I could how philosophically we are armed,' etc. Guerra, Doc., MS., vi. 154. Pico, Acontecimientos, MS., 25, recalls the arrival at Purísima, whence he helped convey them to S. Luis. Oct. 20th, Lieut-col. Gutierrez informs Figueroa that some of the colonists had done good service in quelling Indian disturbances. They were thanked in the name of the govt. St. Pup., Miss. and Colon., MS., ii. 281.

51 Record of day, hour, and place in Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., Ixxix. 73-4. Janssens, Vida, MS., 41-4, gives a vivid description of the disaster and the efforts of the Montereyans to rescue the officers and crew. In these efforts a negro servant of Joaquin Gomez particularly distinguished himself, saving several lives by his own exertions. A part of the cargo was washed ashore, and much of it was stolen despite the efforts of a guard. The cook and two sailors were drowned, and the mate Cuevas was badly hurt. Hijar, Cal. en 1836, MS., 123-S, also gives some details. Many newspaper writers, perhaps following Taylor in Pacific Monthly, xi. 648-9, have stated since 1860 that parts of the wreck were still visible, having furnished building- material for over 30 years to the people of Monterey. One piece of news- paper cloquence, in 1878, when the timbers were still visible, merits quota- tion. 'The company, like the brig Natalia which brought them here, was wrecked, and the ribs of its records, like those of the old brig, can only be seen in the ebb of the tide of the present back to the beginning of the history of Sonoma County.' Suc. Record- Union, June 25, 1878.

52 Ilijar says that a French captain who visited the coast in 1846 declared the identity, and I think it likely that the tradition has no better foundation.

269

RECEPTION OF THE MEXICANS.

their companions had been at San Diego. 53 They also started northward before the end of the year, their destination being San Francisco Solano, though we have but little information respecting their exact movements at this time. Of the reception accorded to the directors, of the obstacles encountered by Híjar and Padrés, and of some rather interesting political complications, I shall speak in the following chapter.5+

53 The date of arrival is given in Figueroa, Manifiesto, S. Sept. 26th, Padrés announced his arrival with 120 colonists, who intended to settle north of S. Francisco Bay. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., MS., iii. 43-4. On Sept. 12th, a demand for grain had been sent to Sta Cruz in expectation that the vessels would arrive in a few days. Sta Cruz Rec., MS., 22. Coro- nel, Cosas, MS., 9-10, says that the inhabitants vied with each other in their kindness and hospitality to the strangers. Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 230-2, tells us that Padrés, 'factotum, monopolizador general, y consejero supremo,' was at first warmly welcomed by his old friends and partisans, of whom the writer was one. He tells also an absurd story of a mortifying incident that occurred. Two ladies came off in the boat with Padres, expect- ing to see nobody in Cal. except soldiers, friars, convicts closely guarded, and Indians ready to become their servants. As they drew near the shore, they beheld two beautiful and well-clad ladies of Monterey in the crowd awaiting them, and said, 'Sr Padres, how is it possible that these girls can be our ser- vants? We look as much like servants as they.' Padres bit his lip, and the ladies insisted on returning to the ship to 'dress up' before landing. Nov. Ist, a ball was given, partly in honor of the colonists, and partly of the diputacion. Earliest Printing in Cal. Dec. 13th the Morelos was still in port. Manso in command; Lieutenants Valle, Anaya, and Azcona; 2 'aspirantes,' 3 mates, 2 mechanics, 7 gunners, and 7 boys. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., lxxix. Số.

54 My statements of Californians on the Híjar and Padres colony, in addi- tion to documentary authorities, are the following, the same being cited on particular phases of the subject only for special reasons: Janssens, Vida, MS., 7-59; Coronel, Cosas, MS., 1-17; Hijar, Cal. en 1836, MS., 2-11, 59-62, 108- 12; Serrano, Apuntes, MS., 1-12, 24-7; Abrego, in Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxi. 132, and in García, Apunte, append., MS .; Vega, Vida, MS., 8-17; Bandini, Ilist., MS., 59-66, 76. The preceding were all written by men who came with the colony; the following by men who with a few exceptions had per- sonal knowledge of the subject: Osio, Ilist. Cal., MS., 225-40; Alvarado, Ilist. Cal., MS., ii. 223-45; iii. 1-5, 27-33; Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 222-3, 272-4, 306, 309-10, 349-51: Vallejo, Reminis., MS., 43-56; Fernandez, Cosas, MS., 71-86; Pinto, Apunt., MS., 3-6; Pico, Acont., MS., 23-6; Machado, Tiempos Pasados, MS., 30-1; Galindo, Apuntes, MS., 28-31; Botello, Anales, MS., 15-17, 176; Ord, Ocurrencias, MS., 63-8; Gomez, Lo que Sabe, MS., 375-9; Larios, Convulsiones, MS., 13-14; Avila, Notas, MS., 10-11; Pico, Ilist. Cal., MS., 49-55; Espinosa, Apuntes, MS., 1-2; Torre, Remin., MS., 48; Amador, Mem., MS., 138-42; Gonzalez, Revol., MS., 4-6; Valle, Lo Pasado, MS., 11-14; Castro, Rel., MS., 31-5; Arce, Mem., MS., 3-5: Marsh's Letter, MS., 5-6; Brown's Statement, MS., 9-10; Green's Life and Adren., MS., 29.

The printed mentions of the subject are found in Figueroa, Manifiesto; Forbes, Hist., 142-5; Wilkes' Narr., v. 174; Petit- Thouars, Voy., ii. 89; Mo- fras, Explor., i. 293-6; San Miguel, La Repub. Mex., Parte Ecles., 18-21; Rosa, Ensayo, 30-1; Randolph's Oration; Payno in Revista Científica, i. 83; Robinson's Life in Cal., 161-7; Tuthill's Ilist. Cal., 136-9; Ferry, Californie, 18-19; Mora, Otras Sueltas, i. celviii .- ix.

CHAPTER X.

FIGUEROA, CASTRO, AND GUTIERREZ-THE COLONY.

1834-1835.

SANTA ANNA ORDERS FIGUEROA NOT TO GIVE UP THE COMMAND TO HÍJAR- QUICK TIME FROM MEXICO-HÍJAR DEMANDS THE MISSION PROPERTY- HIS INSTRUCTIONS-ACTION OF THE DIPUTACION-LOST PRESTIGE OF PADRÉS-BANDO-CONTROVERSY -- BRIBERY-SUBMISSION OF THE DIRECT- ORS-AID TO THE COLONISTS-AT SOLANO-NEW QUARREL-RUMORED PLOTS-REVOLT OF APALÁTEGUI AND TORRES-PRONUNCIAMIENTO OF THE SONORANS-SURRENDER-LEGAL PROCEEDINGS-FIGUEROA'S ORDERS- SEIZURE OF ARMS AT SONOMA-ARREST OF VERDUZCO AND LARA-EXILE OF HÍJAR AND PADRES-FIGUEROA'S MANIFIESTO-SESSIONS OF THE DIPUTACIÓN -CARRILLO IN CONGRESS-LOS ANGELES MADE CAPITAL- FOUNDATION OF SONOMA-DEATH OF FIGUEROA-LIFE AND CHARACTER- CASTRO GEFE POLÍTICO -- GUTIERREZ COMANDANTE GENERAL-ESTU- DILLO'S CLAIMS.

THUS far all had gone well with the empresarios, but obstacles were now encountered that were destined to prove insurmountable. The first and most serious had its origin in Mexico. On the 25th of July, 1834, some six days before the colony sailed, President Santa Anna, having taken the reins of government into his own hands in place of Vice-president Gomez Farías, issued an order to Figueroa not to give up the office of gefe político to Hijar on his arrival in Cali- fornia, as he had been ordered, and had promised to do.1 We have no official information respecting the motive that prompted this countermand; but there can be no doubt that Santa Anna regarded as excess-

1 Figueroa, Manifiesto, 7-8. Order transcribed to com. of S. Francisco on Oct. 21st. Vallejo, Doc., MS., ii. 314. The order is: In answer to yours of May 18th, 'ha dispuesto S. E. conteste á V. S. que no entregue el citado mando y continue desempeñando la Gefatura.' Lombardo.

(270)

271

COUNTERMAND FROM MEXICO.

ive the powers conceded to the empresarios, and that he was actuated by a suspicion, not so well founded but perhaps even more potent than the former motive, that political and revolutionary plans in the interest of Gomez Farias were involved in the scheme. There was no lack of persons in Mexico whose policy it was to foment this suspicion, without regard to its accu- racy. Ábrego and Osio affirm that the directors sailed from San Blas in defiance of orders from Mexico to delay the departure of the colony; but I believe this to be an error.2

The countermand of July 25th was sent to Califor- nia in all haste overland by a special courier, who placed it in Figueroa's hands near Monterey the 11th of September, and with it another despatch from Híjar at San Diego, announcing his arrival at that port on the 1st. The trip was much the quickest on record between the national and territorial capitals, and the fame of that courier who braved the terrors of Indians, deserts, and starvation, coming alone by way of the Colorado, has never ceased to be talked of in Californian families.3 Governor Figueroa had re-

2 Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 229-30; Abrego, Cartas, MS. Bandini, Hist. Cal., MS., 61-4, denounces it as a strange and arbitrary act to annul the appoint- ment without giving reasons, and thus to create confusion in the important matter of colonization. Vallejo (J. J.), Remin., MS., 46-8, understands that Santa Anna's order was prompted by the friars. After the order was issued, on Sept. 30th, the com. gen. of Jalisco sent to Mexico the statement of the sur- veyor Lobato left at Tepic, that Padrés had repeatedly threatened in case of any change in Mexico to make Cal. independent or annex it to the U. S. Sup. Govt St. Pap., MS., x. 4-5.

3 Figueroa, Manifiesto, 7-8, mentions the receipt of the despatches on Sept. 11th. Most state that the time made was 40 instead of 48 days. Osio says the man was detained by the Indians at the Colorado, who threatened to kill him, but at last built him a balsa to cross the river in exchange for his horse, equipments, and most of his clothing. He nearly perished on the way to S. Luis Rey, being 3 days without water. His reward was $3,000. Serrano relates that Lieut Araujo by an ambush captured the courier near S. Gabriel, and took him to Hijar, who was urged to hurry to Monterey and secure his office; but he refused to resort to such expedients, and released the captive. Amador says the man was Rafael Amador, his cousin. Torre states that the courier arrived about 11 P. M. at Monterey, and was welcomed by the firing of cannon. Espinosa was one of the escort furnished by Lieut Valle to guard the man northward from Monterey to meet Figueroa. He describes his dress, notes the feasts given in his honor, and says Figueroa gave him 4 mules on his departure. Valle also mentions having furnished the escort for the trip towards Sta Rosa. Vega was told the man had at first mistaken his des-

272 FIGUEROA, CASTRO, AND GUTIERREZ-THE COLONY.

ceived no official notice respecting the colonists, but he had deemed it best to make preparations for their ar- rival, and with that object in view had visited the Santa Rosa Valley, as already related, and there selected a site for the new town. It was on his return, one day's journey before reaching the capital, that he received the countermand from Mexico. He sent to Santa Cruz and other places for such supplies as could be furnished, and awaited the arrival of the colonists. It may be here stated that secularization had been already begun in accordance with the law of 1833 and regulations of 1834; and several of the missions were in charge of administrators.

The Morelos entered the harbor on September 25th, and the immigrants, as we have seen, were made as comfortable as possible. Padrés at first claimed the position of comandante general, but of course in vain, since his claim was conditional on Figueroa's illness; 4 then he presented his appointment as sub-director of colonization and officially demanded aid for his colo- nists. The situation was embarrassing. In the ab- sence of instructions to the contrary from the war department, Padrés as ayudante inspector was Figue- roa's subordinate officer, notwithstanding his appoint- ment of sub-director from the minister of relations; and there was no legal authority for expending public funds for the support of the colony. So confident had been the directors in the success of their plan in every detail, that they had made no provision for the slightest contretemps. There was, however, as yet no controversy.

The 14th of October Híjar arrived by land from San Diego, and after the customary courtesies of re-

tination and gone to Monterey in N. Leon. Gonzalez recalls the meeting of the courier and Figueroa at the writer's rancho of Leñadero. Galindo thinks the man was to receive $1 per hour, if successful. Hijar affirms that the man was sick and had to stop at S. Juan Bautista, where the writer was, another man being sent on in his place. J. J. Vallejo calls him Hidalgo. I may per- haps safely suggest that some of the items cited are not quite accurate.

4 St. Pap., Miss. and Colon., MS., ii. 285-6, 290-1. An order of Dec. 7th (1833 ?) is alluded to as countermanding that of July 12th.

273

HÍJAR AND FIGUEROA.

ception, was shown by Figueroa the order forbidding a transfer of the civil authority. Though bitterly disappointed, Híjar could make no objection, and fell back on his commission as director of colonization, which Figueroa consented to recognize. At an inter- view on the 15th Híjar presented the instructions addressed to him in his double capacity as gefe político and director, instructions to which Figueroa assented, and which I append in a note.5 Next morning the latter received a demand from the director to be put in possession of the mission property according to article 1 of the instructions, the governor being asked to issue the necessary orders to administrators and coman- dantes. Figueroa, rather strangely as it would seem, promised compliance, but proposed to consult the diputacion. The reply on the 17th was simply a plea for haste on account of disorders at the missions, the approach of planting-time, the neglect of the friars, the sufferings of the neophytes, and the needs of the colony. The comandante general was to be held re- sponsible for damages caused.by delay. Accordingly the diputacion was convened the same day, and before that body was laid a full statement. Figueroa had, he said, no desire to retain the gefatura. He would

5 Ilíjar, Instrucciones á que Deberá Arreglar su Conducta D. José María Ilijar, Gefe Político de la alta California y Director de Colonizacion de est i y de la baja, in Figueroa, Manifiesto, 11-14; St. Pap., Miss. and Colon., MS., ii. 270-3; Jones' Report, 110. 12. Art. 1. Ile will begin by occupying all the property belonging to the missions; the military comandante to furnish all necessary aid required. 2. For a year from arrival each colonist is to receive 50 cents per day, or 25 cents if under 4 years of age. 3. Travelling expenses to be paid by govt, and the colonists to receive the monturas bought for their trans- portation. 4. Selection of favorable sites for settlements. 5. The frontiers to be settled as soon as possible. G. Plan of the new towns. 7. Native set- tlers to be mixed with the Mexicans, but no town to be inhabited exclusively by Indians. S. House lots. 9-10. Farming lands to be granted in full own- ership. 11. The movable property of the missions having been distributed (according to law of secularization?) one half of what is left is to be sold to the best advantage. 12. Not over 200 head of stock of the same kind to be sold to one family. 13. The remaining half of movable property to be kept on govt account and to be devoted to expenses of worship, support of mis- sionaries, education, and purchase of implements for the colonists. 14. The gefe pol. and dircetor to report in detail at first and annually on the disposi- tion and condition of the property after the distribution as above. 15. Ile is also to reportat least once a year on the condition and needs of the colonises. Dated April 23, 1834, and signed Lombardo.

HIST. CAL., VOL. III. 18

274 FIGUEROA, CASTRO, AND GUTIERREZ-THE COLONY.

gladly give it up to the senior vocal, or to any person who might legally receive it. He had no desire to oppose the colonization project, but had some doubt whether it was as director or as gefe político that Híjar was to receive the mission property, and he desired advice as to the proper course for him to pur- sue. Of course this humble tone was all assumed, yet it was rather neatly done.6

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 30

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