History of California, Volume III, Part 8

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 8

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).

2 On the $22,000, see chap. i., this vol. At the same time $12,000 was or- dered paid in favor of California through the comisario general at Arizpe; but I find no evidence that any part of the sum was ever paid. July 1826, record that $3,000 was sent to Cal. by the Sirena from the sup. govt. Sup. Govt St. Pap., MS., iii. 6. In Jan. 1820, Enrique Virmond seems to have accepted drafts from the presidial comandantes to the amount of about $5,000 for goods supplied from the Maria Ester; and again in Dec. he supplied the same amount in goods and silver coin. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 1, 153, 168, 176. Virmond had exceptional facilities for getting his claims allowed by Mexican officials, and he probably lost nothing. Nov. 11, 1828, M. G. Vallejo author- ized to borrow $500 payable on sight, or 15 days after sight of draft ! Vallejo, Doc., MS., i. 160. According to Mexico, Mem. Hacienda, 1830, annex. 33, the govt of Cal. had borrowed $7,262, of which sum $1,564 had been repaid down to June 29th. Hartnell also lent the govt $7,100 in 1827; the draft signed by Herrera was not accepted in Mexico, on account of some alleged ir- regularity; and on Nov. 20, 1830, Hartnell petitions the gov. on the subject. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxx. 154.

3 Feb. 19, 1830, gov. informs the comisario general that commerce, car- ried on by a peculiar system, 'authorized by force of circumstances' in Cal., yielded barely two fifths of the expenses; while mission contributions, by dint of constant requisitions and annoyances, yielded not more than one fifth of the deficit. Dept. Rec., MS., viii. 72. The revenue obtained from vessels is insuffi- cient for garrison expenses; therefore, the missions advance grain and cattle, and the nation assumes the debt. Bandini's letter of 1828 in Bandini, Doc., MS .. 8.

SUB-COMISARIO AND HABILITADOS.

tain presidios, and certain classes of troops, being fa- vored or slighted.

During the Spanish rule, and the interregnum that followed, the provincial finances had been managed- for the most part honestly, if not always with great skill, so far as accounts were concerned-by the habil- itados of the respective companies, one of whom in the later days had been named administrator, with very little authority over the others. On the estab- lishment of the republic, Herrera had been sent, as we have seen, in 1825, as comisario to take charge of the territorial finances as a subordinate of the comis- ario general of the western states Sonora and Sin- aloa. The instructions to Herrera are not extant; but it is evident from subsequent communications of himself and his superiors that he had exclusive con- trol of the treasury department, and was indepen- dent of the gefe politico, except that like any other citizen he was within the civil and criminal jurisdic- tion of that officer. The habilitados, the only per- sons in the territory qualified for the task, served as Herrera's subordinates for the collection of revenue at the presidios, so that locally there was no change. Whether the comisario appointed them voluntarily or in obedience to his instructions does not appear; but their duty was simply to collect the revenues and pay them over to Herrera, their duty as company paymasters in disbursing funds subsequently re-ob- tained from the comisaría being a distinct matter.

Naturally the habilitados were jealous from the first of the authority exercised by their new master, and were displeased at every innovation on the old method under Estrada's administration. Moreover, Herrera was a stranger, and worse yet a Mexican, being therefore liable to distrust as not properly appreciative of Californian ways. He was also a friend and relative of Captain Gonzalez, and involved to some extent in the quarrel between that officer and Estrada, which circumstance contributed not a

ECHEANDÍA AND HERRERA-THE SOLIS REVOLT.

little to his unpopularity. A quarrel resulted, the details of which it is neither desirable nor possible to follow closely. What were the relations between Herrera and Echeandía before they left Mexico, I do not know; but after their arrival in California there could hardly fail to be jealousy, especially on Eche- andía's part; and at any rate, the latter soon became leader in the opposition to the comisario. I append some items from the correspondence of the times.4

Herrera was an intelligent and able man; his acts were approved by his superior officer; and I find in contemporary documents no proof of irregularities or unfaithfulness in his official conduct; though it would perhaps be presumptuous to found on the im- perfect record an opinion that he acted wisely or

4 March 3, 1826, com. gen. to Herrera. Reproves him for not sending accounts so that the great necessity of the troops might be known and re- lieved. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., MS., i. 22. March 25th, Id. to Id., announces that all claims of Cal. may be presented at the comisaría. Id., ii. 17. April 7th, H. to Echeandia. Charges that Lient. Estudillo for a just rep- rimand becomes abusive. Id., i. 41-2. May 11th, E. orders that all amounts due the treasury be paid at the comisario's office. Dept. Rec., MS., iv. 37. June 27th, H. to E. Wishes to know why he is not recognized as gefe de hacienda; measures have been ordered without his consent or knowledge. He wishes E. to define his own position, so that he, H., may be freed from his burdens and report to the supreme government. Dept. St. Pap., MS., i. 136. July 11th, H. to E. Defence of the practice of allowing vessels to touch at way points. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., i. 42-7. Sept. 11th, com. gen. to E. Asks him to order habilitados to send in their accounts to Herrera in two months, or he will appeal to Mexico. Reprimands him for exceeding his powers, using funds without Herrera's permission, treating H. as a subordinate and not as the gefe of all treasury branches, and not obeying the laws. Threatens to withdraw the comisario altogether if E. does not mend his ways. Accuses him of prevent- ing the execution of Herrera's decree on the payment of duties, withont au- thority to do so. H. was under no obligation to submit his orders or those of his superior to the gefe politico. 'Watch also over those friars with their Spanish ideas.' The comisario must be supported, not opposed. In the ap- pointment of a sub-comisario at Loreto, E. had also usurped authority. can not permit you thus to interfere. The power of appointment rests exclu- sively with H. as my subordinate.' H. was not to be blamed for reporting these things, since he had positive orders to do so. Id., i. 23-34. Oct. 16th, H. to E. on the details of business, explaining his efforts to get along with an insufficient revenne. Complains of habilitados for not rendering accounts, and for drawing drafts on him when they knew he had no money. Protests against paying one company more than another; and claims that in case of urgent need the soldiers should be preferred to officials. Id., i. 56-60. Dec. 1st, H. com- plains that his orders are disregarded, and that Estrada refuses to render ac- counts. Repeats the complaint a little later, with threats to report to Mex- ico. Dec. 27th, 30th, orders from Mexico requiring half the revenues to be remitted to the national treasury! and that regular accounts be sent for pub- lication in the Gazeta of Guadalajara. Id., i. 72-3, 89-91, 14.

CHARGES AND INVESTIGATIONS.

honestly throughout the quarrel, especially in opposi- tion to the statements of several Californians who remember the controversy.5 It is my opinion, how- ever, that the class of Californians represented by Alvarado, Osio, and Vallejo look at Herrera's acts through the colored glasses of political prejudice; and that among other classes the comisario was by no means unpopular.

In April 1827 Echeandía ordered a secret investi- gation of Herrera's administration, to be conducted by Zamorano. The proceedings were begun at San Diego the 30th of April, and afterwards continued at Mon- terey and Los Angeles in May and June. The main charge was that the comisario had, on his way to California, invested a portion of the $22,000 of terri- torial funds intrusted to his care in effects to be sold for his own account and profit, though it was not claimed apparently that there was any deficit in his accounts, or that the money thus improperly used had not been refunded.6 Zamorano as fiscal reported the

5 No one has anything to say in Herrera's favor. Alvarado, ITist. Cal., MS., ii. 111-17, 132-46, is especially bitter in his criticism, charging H. with dishonesty, embezzlement, conspiracy, usurpation, insolence, and pretty much everything that was bad. Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 122-3, is hardly less severe. Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 62-3, tells us that H. 'did nothing but conspire and make trouble.' J. J. Vallejo, Reminis., MS., 91-2, represents II. as intriguing with the support of the padres to unseat Echeandia and put himself in power. Duhaut-Cilly, Viaggio, i. 282-6, describes the quarrel withont attaching much blame to Herrera; and it is to be noted that Mrs. Ord, one of the clearest-headed Californian writers, personally friendly to Echcandia, cx- presses no opinion on the merits of the parties to this quarrel. Ocurrencias, MS., 20-1.

G Herrera, Causa contra el Comisario Sub-Principal de Californias, José Maria Herrera, 1827, MS .; also an abridged record in the archives. Capt. Guerra testified that of the $22,000 the Sta B. Co. had got only $3,600; know not what had become of the rest; had heard that the money was landed at S. Blas, and only a part reshipped with goods supposed to have been purchased with that money. Maitorena had heard of the investment of public funds, and had seen in the possession of Luis Bringas certain bales of goods, which he judged to be the ones bought by H. In a letter of later date, Maitorena attempts to show some irregularities in the collection of duties from the Nile, in 1825. Juan Bandini reserved his formal testimony until the matter should come before the diputacion; but declared it to be a matter of public notoriety that H. had misapplied the public funds. Alf. Romualdo Pacheco noticed at S. Blas that only $6,500 of the $22,000 was reshipped, and was told by J. M. Padres that H. had invested the balance in goods, having admitted as much to him, Padres. It was a notorious fact that Bringas had sold the goods at the presidios, towns, and missions of Cal. Alf. Juan Jose Rocha confirmed

ECHEANDÍA AND HERRERA-THE SOLIS REVOLT.

charge well founded; and it must be admitted that the testimony against the comisario, though for the most part weak, furnished some grounds for suspicion -and nothing stronger under the circumstances-that certain packages of goods had been purchased with public money. When we consider that these proceed- ings were conducted in secret, mainly by Herrera's enemies, that they were never carried further in public, that Herrera was never called upon for a defence upon any criminal charge, and that Echeandía was smarting under the rebukes of the comisario general, it seems wisest at the least to attach little importance to the accusations.

The matter was discussed by the diputacion in the sessions of July, Bandini and the president making all the speeches. Bandini's deferred revelations proved to be the reading of a treasury report on the sums of

the statement as to what was seen in S. Blas. Lieut. Estrada testified that the Morelos brought some 20 packages, including cigars and brandy, more than were on the manifest; and these goods were opened at Herrera's house, where and elsewhere they were sold by Bringas. Deponent believed the goods belonged to H. Luis Mariano Bringas, after much difficulty, was found and induced to testify at Angeles before the alcalde and Capt. Portilla. His testimony was clear enough, and to the effect that of the $4,500 in goods which he had brought to California and sold, $3,000 belonged to his friend Tejada, a trader of Saltillo, and $1,500 had been committed to him by H. as belonging to his (H.'s) cousin. Full particulars were given of his dealings. But by the testimony of Ignacio M. Alvarado it was shown that Bringas, while refusing to testify on various pretences, had sent a messenger post-haste to Monterey and had received a message from H. Capt. Portilla's opinion was, therefore, that Bringas had testified falsely under instructions from H., whose accomplice he was. One of the documents exhibited by Bringas, in support of his testimony, was a draft bearing the name of Wm. A. Gale, written Galle, and pronounced a forgery by Gale himself, who denied that he had ever had any transaction with Bringas. Moreover, Rodrigo del Pliego testified that H. had openly boasted of furnishing Bringas with papers that would serve his purpose, implying that the signatures were forged by him. Za- morano's final opinion, rendered to Echeandia at the end of July, was that H. had invested a part of the public funds for his own account at Tepic, since of the 822,000 only about $8,500 in coin could be proved to have arrived in Cal .; and it was very likely that the bales of goods referred to represented the bal- ance; though it was hard to prove, because H. had had plenty of time to replace the deficit in coin. June 16th, Echeandia in a circular orders the ap- prehension of Bringas, who is to be compelled to testify. Dept. Rec., MS., v. 53. April 26th, E. to com. gen., says that II. has not acted properly, and that proceedings have been instituted to prove his misbehavior. Id., v. 136. July 10th, H. to gov., with renewed complaints on the disregard of his orders by Martincz, Estrada, and Arguello. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., MS., i. 76-9.

ACTION OF THE DIPUTACION.

money intrusted to Herrera, and his own statement that he was positive of Herrera's misuse of the funds. The record of the previous secret investigations seems also to have been read. Ternas, or trios, of candidates for contador and treasurer were proposed in due form. Bandini then advocated the suspension of Herrera; but Echeandía opposed so radical a measure, arguing that the comisario would be so closely watched by the new officials that he could do no harm, and meanwhile the charges against him could be investigated by the supreme government. It is not easy to determine whether the governor's opposition was a mere pre- tence, or whether, while wishing to humble his rival, he doubted the expediency of suspending him on so slight evidence. On the first vote, four members were for suspension, one against it, and one besides the pres- ident did not vote. Subsequently another member was called in, the arguments were repeated, and Ban- dini obtained a secret vote in favor of suspension. It is not unlikely that this result had been prearranged, and that the arguments of Bandini and Echeandia were made merely for effect.7

Herrera was not suspended, because the candidates for treasurer declined to serve, and no suitable person for the place could be found; but Pablo Gonzalez was installed as contador from July 23d, and matters went on much as before, save that Herrera, offended at the charges of interfering with other officials, now declined to perform some duties thought to belong to him.8 He neglected certain details of gathering sup-

7 Leg. Rec., MS., i. 91-101. For contador the terna was, 1. Pablo Gonzalez, 2. Joaquin Estudillo, 3. Mannel Dominguez. For treasurer, 1. José Antonio Carrillo, 2. José Antonio Estudillo, 3. Antonio María Osio. In the first vote Ortega, Bandini, Carrillo, and Buelna voted for suspension; Estrada ngainst, and Tapia reserved his vote. Romualdo Pacheco was the suplente called in, but the final vote was secret, no names being given.

8 Appointment of Gonzalez, who spoke English, as contador, July 23d. L. y. Rec., MS., i. 64, 91; Dept. Rec., MIS., v. 71. Aug. 7th, Echeandia to com. gen. Says he has forwarded to the secretary of the treasury the secret in- vestigations against H., whom the diputacion does not suspend for want of a suitable man to take his place. Id., v. 138. Sept. 19th. H. to com. gen. complaining that the ministro de hacienda fails to answer his important ques- tions. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Con .. and Treas., MIS., i. 91.

ECHEANDÍA AND HERRERA-THE SOLIS REVOLT.

plies and serving out rations to prisoners, was sum- moned before the diputacion on September 19th, denied the right of that body to question him, but indulged in a wordy warfare with Echeandía in the legislative hall. Next day the governor evolved from his inner consciousness, and caused to be approved by the dipu- tacion, the theory that the duty of a comisario sub- principal de hacienda was confined to 'systematizing the financial administration,' by reporting on needed reforms, and keeping accounts of net products of rev- enue.9 Accordingly he notified Herrera of the result of his legal studies prompted by the comisario's mis- deeds, and ordered him to restore to the habilitados all their former powers, and to confine his own author- ity to the narrow limits indicated above. Herrera thereupon, in obedience as he said to previous instruc- tions from his superior, resigned his position, leaving the financial administration wholly in the hands of the gefe político, and asking for a passport to go to Mazatlan, which Echeandía refused. Thus the matter stood during the rest of 1827.10

9 Leg. Rec., MS., i. 86-90, 101-4. Sessions of Sept. 19th-20th. Echeandía supported his new theory with an elaborate argument. A new terna for treas- urer was proposed, consisting of Santiago Argüello, Maitorena, and Ignacio Martinez; but military duties prevented their acceptance.

10 Sept. 25, 1827, gov. to H. Dept. Rec., MS., v. 91-2, repeated Sept. 27th. Sept. 20th, H. to Estrada, announcing his resignation. Vallejo, Doc., MS., i. 110. Sept. 26th, gov. to Estrada, announcing and explaining the change. The complaint was in the matter of furnishing supplies and rations, and the theory was that Gov. Arguello had given up to H. at first powers to which he was not entitled. Id .. i. 109. Same date, Echeandía notifies Prefect Sarria of the change. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt i. 38-9. Echeandía's argument quoted in Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 172-4. E. says in 1829 that H. 'se suspendió y tenazmento se negó en el ejercicio de todas sus funciones desde el dia 20 de Sep- tiembre de 1827, dejandolas al cargo de este gobierno.' Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MS., Ixx. 19. Sept. 29th, E. to H. Chides him for his refusal to perform duties belonging to his office, and refuses a passport. Dept. Rec., MS., v. 93. October, E. asks minister of the treasury that the trial or investigation of him- self and H. may take place in Cal. Id., v. 130-1. Oct. Ist, E. to comandantes and prefect on his orders to H. Id., v. 93-4; Dept. St. Pop., MS., ii. 41. Oct. 3d, E. to H. Never told him not to manage the funds entering his office; and if he persists in resigning the place, the treasury will be injured even more than it was by his assumption of the habilitados' duties and rights. Dept. Rec., v. 95. Oct. 11th, H. to E., protesting against the orders which detain him in Cal. If the treasury interests were injured, it was because he was not allowed to go to report to his superior in order that the latter might put another man in his place; and the governor, to whom he was in no way responsible, was the only one to blame. If charged with criminal acts, he was ready for trial; if

FINANCIAL AFFAIRS IN 1328.

Nor did 1828 bring any notable change in the sit- uation. The habilitados attended to the revenues as of old, Estrada and afterward Vallejo of Monterey exercising a kind of supervision, until in November Manuel Jimeno Casarin, a young man brought to California by his brothers, the friars Jimeno, was appointed by Echeandía as acting comisario, or admin- istrator of the revenues, his position being similar to that held by Estrada before the coming of Herrera; 11 and Juan Bandini was appointed at about the same time as subordinate comisario at San Diego. Mean- while Herrera continued his protests against being kept in California; could obtain neither a trial nor a passport; but made some efforts to obtain material for a later prosecution of his adversary. Echeandía was greatly blamed by both the comisario general and the minister of the treasury for his course towards his foe; but he defended himself as well as he could in writing, and insisted on keeping Herrera in the terri- tory and holding him responsible for all financial ilis, present and prospective.12

not, there was no right to detain him. He wished to enjoy the wise laws of his country where they were respected and obeyed, and not remain where they were shamefully transgressed, as he was ready to prove. He also claimed his arrears of salary, he having received only $126 in a year, and having to sell his furniture to keep alive. Dept. St. Pup., MS., ii. 51. Oct. 16th, E. to comandantes, alcaldes, etc., announcing his action towards If., urging habili- tados to attend carefully to their duties, and explaining why H. was not allowed to depart-that is because at a distance it would be hard to prove H.'s frauds or justify his own action or that of the diputacion. Dept. Rec., MIS., 101, 103; Dept. St. Pap., S. José, MS., iv. 49-50; Dept. St. Pap., Ang., MS., xi. 1. Oct. 28th, E. to com. gen. Thinks the administration of the revenue by the habilitados is injurious. With an administrator, vista, and guard at each port, the revenue might amount to $30,000 or $40,000 annually. Dept. Rec., MS., v. 139. Nov. 27th, E. tells the comandante that the company officers had never been free from responsibility in the matter of finances. Id., v. 105.

11 Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 13, 133; Leg. Rec., MIS., i. 286. Oct. 6th, P. Antonio Jimeno writes to P'. Peyri about getting for his brother the position of eol- lector of customs. Peyri replies that he should obtain a certificato of fitness, and security for $4,000. Perhaps Jimeno did not take possession until Jan. 1, 1829. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxx. 308.

12 Jan. 11, 1828, gov. to min. of war. Defends himself against charges of usurpation by the min. of the treasury. Some of the charges had apparently been printed, for which satisfaction is demanded. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 18- 19. Feb. 22d, H. asks for a passport to go and render his accounts at Maza- tlan. St. Pap., Sac., MS., x. 101. March Ist and April 26th, com. gen. to E., blaming him and the diputacion for exceeding their powers, even on the sup- position that HI. was guilty as charged, in which case a report should have HIST. CAL., VOL. III. 5

ECHEANDÍA AND HERRERA-THE SOLIS REVOLT.

A kind of revolt occurred in the north in October 1828, with which Herrera's name is connected as instigator by Alvarado, Osio, and Vallejo, without the slightest foundation so far as can be known. There is indeed very little information extant respect- ing the movement, although I have the statements of several old Californians on the subject, including two of the leaders, José de Jesus Pico and Pablo Véjar. It appears that on the 8th of October, a large part of the cavalry soldiers at Monterey, joined by those of the escoltas who left their missions, refused to serve longer unless they were paid, thereupon marching out of the presidio with their weapons. Touching sub- sequent events, there is no agreement among the nar- rators, beyond the fact that Lieutenant Romualdo Pacheco persuaded the rebels to return to their duties, several of the number being put in prison to await the decision of the supreme government on their fate.13 All agree that want of clothing and food was

been sent to his superior officer. H. is also reprimanded on the same date for failing to report properly on E.'s misdeeds and other matters. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., MS., i. 96-103. June 13th, H. to E. Protests against what is virtually his arrest, since he is not allowed to leave Monterey for Sta Bárbara and S. Diego to attend to business. Dept. St. Pap., MS., ii. 58. July Ist, H. required by the pres. of Mexico to form a regular accusation against E .; nothing to be kept back. Id., Ben. Com. and Treas., i. 92-3. Ang. 7th, E. says he did not intend to prevent H. from travelling by land within the territory. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 79. Sept. 15th, E. to com. gen. Says H.'s charge that he and the diputacion deprived him of his office is false. Id., vi. 12-13. Nov. 7th, E. orders that H.'s salary be paid punctually. Id., vi. 131. Same date, will not allow him to leave the territory till ordered to do co by the sup. govt. Id., vi. 129. Dec. 4th, 9th, 17th, further correspond- ence, showing that H. went to S. Diego, apparently to make secret investiga- tions against his foe, which caused additional complications not very clearly recorded. Id., vi. 148, 150, 154-6, 158.

13 Oct. 1828, escoltas from S. Luis Obispo to S. Juan Bautista have aban- doned their posts. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Pref. y Juzg., MS., i. 6, 8-9. Oct. ISth, Echeandía orders comandante of Monterey to bring the rebels to trial by court-martial; but if he cannot master them, to offer a pardon. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 113. Oct. 20th, E. to min. of war. Says the escoltas left their posts, and with the other troops came with arms in their hands to demand their pay. Hopes by the aid of the artillery lately arrived to pre- vent such disorder; but needs officers. St. Pap., Sac., MS., x. 36-8. Oct. 31st, Id. to Id. Mentions the revolt, and asks that the guilty ones be par- doned. Dept. Rec., MS., vi. 36. Nov. 7th, comandante of Monterey has made known to the troops the governor's pleasure at their loyalty in reject- ing the proposals by some degenerate militares. Vallejo, Doc., MS., i. 159. Jan. 1829, fiscal's opinion in case of Francisco Soto for the revolt of Oct. Sth, and other insubordination, then in prison. Thinks the death penalty

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 8

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