USA > California > History of California, Volume IV > Part 19
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89
Spalding, accompanied by several persons from San Francisco who were travelling without passports, called at Sonoma on his return to Bodega. His com- panions were not allowed to proceed; and the captain was called upon by Vallejo to pay his tonnage dues. He declined to do so, on the ground that Bodega was a free port, belonging to Russia; but after discussion he agreed to pay the demand if it should be decided by the proper authorities to be a lawful one. He was then allowed to depart, with an order to Piña to re- turn to Sonoma as soon as the vessel had sailed. As Spalding had cited the manager at Ross in confirma- tion of his claim that Bodega was a Russian port,
36 July 19, 1840, the original instructions to Piña. Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 183. One clauso of this document will receive special notice later. July 10th, V. to Spalding, warning him that Bodega is not a port of entry, and holding him responsible for illegal trade, according to the treaty between the U. S. and Mexico. Id., ix. 184. July 23d, V. orders Piña to collect tonnage dues. Id., ix. 191.
173
ROTCHEF AND VALLEJO.
Vallejo instructed Piña to state clearly to Rotchef that Bodega belonged to Mexico, and in no sense to Russia, though the use of it by Russian vessels had been tolerated; that the commander of Ross had no control over it except by permission from the Cal- ifornian government; and that he had no right to find it strange that Californian troops were stationed there, especially when he was in the habit of travelling in the country without asking permission and in disre- spect of the frontier authorities, of representing to visitors that Bodega was a free port, and of taking the liberty of permitting foreigners to enter the coun- try in defiance of law.87
Meanwhile Rotchef came back from Monterey, and was filled with wrath when he found the soldiers on guard, and read a copy, made by a subordinate in his absence, of Vallejo's instructions to Piña. He was violent and insulting in his anger. He raised the Russian flag, defying the Californians to pull it down, and offered his protection to some of the foreign pas- sengers, who went with him to Ross.33 Piña made no resistance, but reported to Vallejo. The latter sent a communication on the matter to Rotchef, and another to be forwarded to the governor at Sitka. Rotchef refused to receive the documents, declaring that he would have no intercourse with a man who had so grievously insulted him. Vallejo subsequently issued an order forbidding Rotchef or any of his men to travel in the country without licenses.32 The Lausanne sailed away about July 26th, leaving five or six foreigners, who were aided by the Russians to reach the Sacra- mento. Piña, by Vallejo's orders, did not attempt to
37 July 24-5, 1840, Spalding's statement; and Vallejo's orders to Piña. Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 193-7.
38 Wiggins, one of these men. says-and the statement has been widely eir- culated-that Rotchef ordered the soldiers to depart or be shot. This is in itself improbable, and any such occurrence would of certainty have been men- tioned in the later correspondence.
39 The refusal of Rotchef to receive the official communications rests on Vallejo's statements later in the year; and the order forbidding travel seems not to have been issued until Nov. 4th, according to a blotter copy in Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 303.
174
THE RUSSIANS IN CALIFORNIA.
interfere beyond warning Rotchef that he would be held responsible for the entrance of the men.4º
In reporting the affair to his superior at Sitka, Rot- chef stated that Vallejo had sent an armed force with impertinent instructions, including one to arrest the manager himself and send him to Sonoma, which in- sult to the national honor caused him to send away the Californian force at once.41 It was the order for his own arrest that particularly angered the Russian commander. Otherwise he himself had been the one at fault, and Vallejo had in no respect transcended his powers or failed in courtesy. But at an order of ar- rest, Rotchef had reason to be angry; for though Vallejo had perhaps the legal right to arrest him for proper cause, yet to have done so under the circum- stances would have been a most impolitic, discour- teous, and unjustifiable act. But Vallejo certainly never intended to send, and probably never did send, such an order, as we shall see.
At the end of October, Ex-governor Kuprianof, re- tiring from his office and homeward bound on the Nikolai, arrived at San Francisco, 42 where he remained a month, giving his attention chiefly to an investiga- tion of the Lausanne affair. Presumably his object was to reconcile Vallejo and Rotchef, since, under ex- isting circumstances, when the abandonment of Ross had been decided on, it is hard to understand why he should have desired a quarrel. He first stated his business through a letter from Kostromitinof, and Va- llejo replied with a concise statement of his acts, and those of Rotchef, in July. Kuprianof next wrote himself, in courteous terms, inviting Vallejo to come to San Francisco for a personal conference, hinting mysteriously at certain grave measures to be taken
" July 24th-25th, Vallejo to Piña. Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 195, 198-9.
41 Etholin's letter of Sept. 9, 1840, in Russ. Amer. Mat., MS., vol. i. Etholin, who succeeded Kuprianof, says he has sent a small reinforcement to the garrison, and apprehends no further trouble from Vallejo.
42 Pinto, Doc., MIS., i. 249-50; Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 296; xxxiii. 145; Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Mil., MIS., lv. 14.
175
A CONTROVERSY.
unless the matter should be cleared up. The general's answer, equally courteous and much more frank, was an invitation to come or send an agent to Sonoma, which place his duties would not permit him to leave. He also defended his course at some length, calling attention particularly to the general state of alarm in which the country had been, early in the year, on ac- count of the Graham affair. He could not see how any serious results could follow a mere performance of duty. He expressed clearly the position that no nation but Mexico had any authority at Bodega, offered every facility for arriving at the exact truth, and hoped that Rotchef would be duly reprimanded for his misdeeds. He declared, however, that the copy of his instructions made at Ross did not agree with the original; and suggested that the alterations, per- haps made designedly, might be to some extent the cause of the controversy.43
Kuprianof now sent Kostromitinof to confer with Vallejo, declaring, however, his perfect confidence in the man who made the copy, and rather impolitely refusing to believe in any error. An examination re- vealed the fact that the copy was inaccurate in the very point that had chiefly excited the controversy, the order for Rotchef's arrest, the original not contain- ing any such instruction. Vallejo now wrote some- what sarcastically, and expressed his confidence that the Russians would hasten to make amends for their unjust criticism of his conduct. Kuprianof, however, chose to continue the controversy, still maintaining that the copyist had not erred designedly, even doubt- ing that he had erred at all, and insolently asking that the original be sent to him. He regarded the confer- ence as unsatisfactory on account of Kostromitinof's want of familiarity with the Spanish language, ques- tioned Vallejo's veracity on several points, and even
48 Nov. 2, 1840, Kostromitinof to Vallejo. Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 300. V.'s reply of Nov. 4th. Id., ix. 304. Nov. 6th, 10th, Kuprianof to V. and reply. Id., ix. 303, 308. Some of the Russian official's letters are the originals in French, and others translations into Spanish by a clerk.
176
THE RUSSIANS IN CALIFORNIA.
asserted that Bodega was a Russian port, over which the general had no authority. This brought out a forcible but dignified reply, dated November 25th, which terminated the correspondence, so far as it has been preserved.44
It is to be presumed that Rotchef's anger was ap- peased to a great extent, as he and Vallejo were on tolerably good terms during the next year. The man- ager at Ross had been originally in the wrong, though justified in deeming himself insulted by the general's instructions as he understood them. Vallejo's course from the first was remarkably judicious and free from error; and in the war of words he won a signal vic- tory by his strong positions, and his uniformly frank and dignified utterances. Kuprianof, though always protesting his desire to avoid discord, and though he had no apparent advantage to gain from a quarrel, was insolent from the first, and especially at the close of the correspondence. It is fair to say, however, that his suspicions, though it would have been more expedient and in better taste for him to conceal rather than express them, had a possible foundation in the very instructions that had caused the trouble, as is shown by the original of that document in my possession, and is more fully explained in the appended note. 45
++ Nov. 13th, 21st, Kuprianof to Vallejo; Nov. 16th, 25th, V. to K .; Nov. 22d, 25th, K. to V. and reply. Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 313, 316, 321-2, 328. 43 A clause of the instructions reads, 'Si como es factible el comandante de la factoría Rusa volviese con algunos comerciantes del puerto de San Fran- cisco (los crossed out) regresará (á estos interlined) á este punto sino trajesen los pasaportes legales; pero de ninguna manera se los permitirá embarcarse;' or 'If, as is likely, the Russian commandant should return with some traders from S. Francisco, you will cause (them erased and the latter interlined) to turn back to this place unless they have legal passports; but by no means will you permit them to embark.' Now the exact changes made in the Ross copy are not known; but Kuprianof may have had his suspicions aroused when on questioning Kostromitinof he heard of interlineatious in the original. It is certain, both from internal evidence in the instructions and from the circumstances under which they were written, that it was not Rotchef but his companions who were to be sent to Sonoma; and there is no good reason to doubt that the verbal changes were introduced at the time of writing to make the meaning clear, and not later; especially as at a later date it would have been equally casy and honorable, and much more effective, to rewrite the whole document. Moreover, the document in my possession may have
177
NEGOTIATIONS FOR SALE.
The intention of the Russians to abandon Ross and their wish to sell their property there had, as we have seen, been announced to Alvarado, and by him to the Mexican government, before the end of 1840. In January 1841, Vallejo, in reporting to the minister of war his controversy with Rotchef and Kuprianof, mentioned the proposed abandonment, taking more credit to himself than the facts could justify, as a re- sult of that controversy. The Russians had consulted him as to their power to sell the buildings as well as live-stock to a private person, and had been told that "the nation had the first right," and would have to be consulted. The fear that impelled him at that time to answer thus cautiously was that some foreigner from the Columbia or elsewhere might outbid any citizen of California, and thus raise a question of sov- ereignty, which might prove troublesome in the future to Mexican interests. Vallejo also urged the govern- ment to furnish a garrison, and authorize the planting of a colony at the abandoned post.46 In February, however, Kostromitinof, representing the company, proposed to sell the property to Vallejo himself for $30,000, payable half in money or bills of the Hud- son's Bay Company, and half in produce delivered at Yerba Buena. The general expressed a willingness to make the purchase, but could not promise a defi- nite decision on the subject before July or August. 47 Pending the decision, the Russian agent seems to have entered, perhaps secretly, into negotiations with John
been kept as a blotter, and a clean copy have been given to Piña; which would not only remove all grounds for suspicion, but all the raison d'être of this notc.
45 Jan. 1, 1841, V. to min. of war. Two communications. Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 2-3. Jan. 14th, V. to Virmond, a letter in which he openly claims, as he clearly implied in that to the govt, that the abandonment had resulted from his victory over Kuprianof. Id., x. 42.
47 Feb. 16, 1841, Kostromitinof to V., and reply of Feb. 19th. Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 60, 62. The property named included houses, mills, tannery, live-stock, and implements; but there is nothing said of land. Vallejo rc- quires a delay in order to arrange about the H. B. Co. drafts; also wants to know when the produce must be delivered. He doubtless also hoped to hear from Mexico, and wished to learn whether the Russians had any right to sell the buildings.
HIST. CAL., VOL. IV. 12
178
THE RUSSIANS IN CALIFORNIA.
A. Sutter, who at that time was not disposed to buy anything but the movable property.43 Meanwhile a reply came from Mexico, though by no means a satis- factory one; since the government-evidently with some kind of an idea that the Russian officials had been frightened away, leaving a flourishing settle- ment to be taken possession of by the Californians- simply sent useless instructions about the details of occupation and form of government to be established. 49 In July Kostromitinof returned from Sitka, and nego- tiations were recommenced. Alvarado was urged to come to Sonoma, but declined; though he advised Va- llejo that in the absence of instructions from Mexico the Russians had no right to dispose of the real es- tate. An elaborate inventory of the property offered for sale at $30,000 was made out, but Vallejo's best offer seems to have been $9,000 for the live-stock alone.53
Kostromitinof was greatly disappointed at his fail- ure to close a bargain with Vallejo, a failure which he attributed, doubtless with much reason, to Alvarado's
48 July 26, 1841, Rotchef to Sutter. Says Kostromitinof has decided that his offer cannot be accepted, since he wishes to buy only the cattle, and not the real estate, the agent having found purchasers for houses, ranchos, and cattle. Translation, from what source not stated, in Veritas, Examination of the Russ. Claim, p. 9. Aug. 10th, Sutter to Sunol. 'The Russians have found purchasers for their houses and farms. This shows the character of the Rus- sians. They said very haughtily that they would rather burn their houses than turn them over to a native, and-above all to Vallejo, who had insulted the Russian flag, etc .; and now for some $1,000 more they are not ashamed to make just such an arrangement. Only Russians could act like that.' Sutter- Suñol Corresp., MS., 8.
49 March 11, 1841, sup. govt order, received in Cal. June 21st, and sent to Vallejo July 2d. Sup. Govt St. Pap., MS., xvi. 16-18; Dept. St. Pap., MS., iv. 137; Dept. Rec., MS., xii. 35, 41; Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 193; xxxiii. 215. 50 July 17, 1841, Kostromitinof at Bodega. Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 205. July 27th, Vallejo to Alvarado. Says some of the Russians' terms are im- pertinent, some absurd, and most of them inadmissible. Id., x. 227, 230; Dept. St. Pap., MS., v. 62. July 29th, A. to V. Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 236. It was while the negotiations were pending that V. received A.'s letter com- manicating the despatch from Mexico. The inventory, Ross, Propuesta de J'enta, MS., has been given so far as the real estate is concerned in chap. xxviii. of vol. ii. There was besides a lot of implements; and of live-stock there were 1,700 cattle, 940 horses, and 900 sheep. The inventory contains also the terms of the proposed sale. In Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 228, is what scems to be Vallejo's offer of $9,000 for the live-stock. It is an unsigned and undated form of agreement.
179
THE SALE TO SUTTER.
influence, and he went to Monterey to try and change the governor's mind, but in vain. Alvarado declared that the buildings being erected on Mexican soil with material produced on that soil could not be sold by a foreign company, and insisted that the Russians ought to leave the structures gratis for the use of Mexico. Indeed, he had formed the idea, which Vallejo shared, that no other customer could be found; and his only fear was, as he stated in a private letter, that the improvements would be burned to keep them from falling into Californian hands. But Kostromitinof, ironically asking if the comandante general had authority to receive a gift without obtaining the consent of congress, simply re- newed his negotiations with Sutter.51
Sutter, like Vallejo, had at first wished to purchase the live-stock only; but he would perhaps have bought anything at any price if it could be obtained on credit; at any rate, after a brief hesitation a bar- gain was made in September.52 The formal contract was signed by Kostromitinof and Sutter in the office of the sub-prefect at San Francisco, with Vioget and Leese as witnesses, December 13th. By its terms Sutter was put in possession of all the property at Ross and Bodega, except the land, as specified in the annexed inventory, and was to pay for it in four
51 Aug. 11, 1841, Vallejo to Alvarado; replies of Aug. 14th, 18th. Va- llejo, Doc., MS., ix. 249; x. 246-8; xxxiii. 228. Aug. 27th, 28th, Kostromiti- nof to V. and reply, terminating the negotiations. Id., x. 231-2; Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., iv. 212-27.
52 Hittell, Ilist. S. Fran., 89, states that Jacob P. Leese offered $20,000 for the property: $5,000 in cash, and $5,000 annually for 3 years; but Sutter's offer for $30,000 was preferred. Sept. Ist, Sutter to Suñol. 'The Russians have not been able to make any arrangement with Vallejo for the sale of their property. They have recommenced negotiations with me; but I intend to hold off for the present.' Sutter-Sunol Corresp., MS., 10. In his Diary, 3, Sutter says that Rotchef arrived at his fort Sept. 4th, with whom he went by water to Ross and concluded the bargain for 830,000, 'which has been paid,' thus proving the so-called diary to have been written after 1850. Sept. 28th, he sent men to Ross to drive the live-stock, 100 animals out of 2,000 being lost in crossing the river. Wilkes, Narr., v. 204, notes the arrival of the Rus- sians on or just before Sept. 4th. Sept. 19th, Sutter to Vallejo. Has bought all the property, and asks permission for the passage of his men across the frontier to transfer the movable part of the purchase. Vallejo, Doc., MS., x. 282.
180
THE RUSSIANS IN CALIFORNIA.
yearly instalments, beginning September 1, 1842. The first and second payments were to be of $5,000 each, and the others of $10,000; the first three were to be in produce, chiefly wheat, delivered at San Francisco free of duties and tonnage; and the fourth was to be in money. The establishment at New Helvetia and the property at Bodega and the two ranchos of Khlébnikof and Tschernich, which property was to be left intact in possession of the company's agents, were pledged as guaranties for the payment.53 It would seem that Alvarado, while insisting that the land did not belong to the company and could not be sold, had yielded his point about the buildings, per- haps in the belief that no purchaser could be found; for the Russians say that the contract was approved by the Californian government, and it is certain that there was no official disapproval of its terms.54
Alvarado and Vallejo in later years are inclined to accuse Sutter of having acted dishonorably toward them in making the purchase; but there is no evi- dence that they were offended at the time.55 The land itself had of course no special value at a time when much better land was to be had for the asking;
53 Ross, Contrat de Vente, 1841, MS. The document is in French, and is a copy of a copy certified by S. F. Popoff. It contains 11 articles. Spanish translation, in Dept. St. Pap., MS., vi. 108-9. Rossi, Souvenirs d'un Voyage, 212-13, writing in 1864, speaks of this document, which he says was obtained by the American minister from the Russian archives, and which he, Rossi, translated at Sta Rosa. The inventory does not appear.
54 Dec. 19, 1841, Kostromitinof writes to Alvarado that he has sold the property as before proposed and not objected to by the gov., the contract be- ing legally ratified in the S. F. juzgado; and he quotes in full art. 9, by which New Helvetia and other property are mortgaged. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxiii. 251. Tikhménef, Istor. Obos., i. 366, says the payment of the $30,000 was guaranteed by the Mexican govt, which was of course not literally true. In his report to the sup. govt, dated Jan. 11, 1842, Alvarado said in substance: ' When I learned that Ross was to be abandoned and the property sold, I notified the govt, and was directed merely to occupy the place when evacu- ated. The Russian agent proposed to sell the property to the nation, which proposition I was not authorized to accept; or to sell it to a private individ- utal, which I could not prevent, though always insisting that the land be- longed to the nation. I have received the contract of sale to Sntter.' Dept. Rec., MS., xiii. 8-10.
53 Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., iv. 229 -35. He says Sutter did an ungentle- manly, contemptible trick, buying property which the Russians were about to give to, parties to whom they were greatly indebted.
THE RUSSIAN TITLE.
but the wily Sutter, perhaps thinking it might be of value in the future, sought some pretext for a title. He obtained from Manager Rotchef a certificate of transfer dated one day earlier than the contract, ill which document the commander, having no responsi- bility, and feeling not very kindly toward the Cali- fornian rulers, was easily induced to include the lands as well as other property, which he solemnly certified to have been ceded by the company that had held them for twenty-nine years, for the sum of $30,000 to M. le Capitaine Sutter, and delivered into his in- disputable possession. This document in later years was paraded as Sutter's deed, and, in the absence of other documents to throw light on the Russian tenure, was made the basis of a somewhat plausible claim for possession of the land.56
The general question of what has been called the Russian title or right to possessions in California, of some interest in the past from prevailing ignorance respecting the facts, has little importance in the eyes of my readers familiar with those facts. It has been claimed-and some Russians in early times urged their government to take that position, and since the dis-
66 Rotchef's certificate in a letter of Etholin to the directors of the co., in Russ. Amer. Mat., MS., v. Also in ' Veritas,' Examin., etc., 9-10. Sutter, Pers. Remin., MS., 54-9, 82-4, gives a very inaccurate version of the whole transaction, saying among other things that he was to make annual payments of such produce as he could raise until the debt was paid, no time being speci- fied. He says when he asked for a title to his land, it was refused, as he had no money to spend. 'Money made the Mexican authorities sec anything.' He regrets that he did not leave New Helvetia and move to Ross. Bidwell, Remin., MS., 82-3, understood that Sutter acquired a right to the land, con- sisting in an almost expired eharter from Spain! Mention of the sale to Sut- ter in Mofras, Explor., ii. 8-9; Wilkes' Narr., v. 191; Tuthill's Hist. Cal., 120; Randolph's Oration; Bidwell's Jour. to Cal., 20-1; Streefer's Recoll., MS., 53; Sutter's Diary, 3; Torres, Peripecias, MS., 90-1; Schmölder, Neuer Wegreiser, 76. Simpson, Narrative, 269-70, after speaking of the Russian occupation and final laek of success, says: 'They have accordingly within these few weeks transferred their stock to a Swiss adventurer by the name of Sutter, and are now engaged in withdrawing all their people from the coun- try.' Capt. Guerra, writing on June 14, 1841, to Mofras, Doc. Ilist. Cal., MS., iv. 1100-1, says: 'It cannot indeed be satisfactory to people of foresight, that the Russians abandon their post; for they have always been good neigh- bors to us; and it is much to be feared, as you say, that, such a check being removed, the Indians will begin their lamentable raids.'
182
THE RUSSIANS IN CALIFORNIA.
covery of gold have still defended the right to have taken that position-that the Spaniards, notwithstand- ing their prior discoveries and formal acts of posses- sion on the Pacific coast, had no rights beyond their actual occupation; and, San Francisco being the northern limit of such occupation in 1812, the Rus- sians, or any other nation, could acquire by settlement a perfect title from any point north of the bay. It has been claimed that the Russians did thus occupy Ross and Bodega; and that any objection on the part of Spain, Mexico, or California was as absurd in the eyes of the nations as would have been the claim of Spain to the whole of America by virtue of Colum- bus' discovery. Moreover, it has been sought to prove, from detached portions of the slight correspondence extant, that Spain either expressly or taeitly approved the act of the Russians; that their title was aeknowl- edged virtually by Mexico and California for many years; and that in any event Russian sovereignty was confirmed by twenty-nine years of actual possession.
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.