History of California, Volume IV, Part 6

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 820

USA > California > History of California, Volume IV > Part 6

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).

CHAPTER II. MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS. 1836-1840.

CONDITION OF MISSIONS IN 1836-SECULARIZATION-ACTS OF AUTHORITIES 1836-8-CHICO'S POLICY-SECULARIZATION OF FIVE MISSIONS-NEW MISSIONS PROPOSED -- THE REVOLUTION AND ITS EFFECT-SPOLIATION --- ALVARADO'S EFFORTS FOR REFORM-REGLAMENTO OF 1839-HARTNELL AS VISITADOR GENERAL-REGLAMENTO OF IS40-DURAN'S VIEWS-HART- NELL'S SECOND VISITA-RESIGNATION-MISSION STATISTICS-PRESIDENT AND PREFECT-ECCLESIASTICAL-GARCÍA DIEGO AS BISHOP-STIPENDS OF FRIARS-PIOUS FUND-INDIAN AFFAIRS-TROUBLES ON THE SAN DIEGO FRONTIER-RANCHOS PLUNDERED-SONOMA FRONTIER-VALLEJO'S POLICY-FIGHTS AND TREATIES-SMALL-POX-SOUTH OF THE BAY- HORSE-THIEVES-THE CHAGUANOSOS-SEASONS AND EARTHQUAKES.

BEFORE the beginning of 1836 sixteen of the twenty- one missions had been secularized under the Mexican law of 1833, Figueroa's reglamento of 1834, and sup- plementary regulations of the diputacion.1 For each of these missions the governor had appointed a comi- sionado, whose duty it was to re-organize them in ac- cordance with the new system. In most instances the comisionados had completed their labors; lands had been assigned to the ex-neophytes, who had also re- ceived a portion of other mission property ; majordo- mos were in charge of all property not distributed, for which they were responsible to the territorial govern- ment; the friars were serving as curates, being re- lieved of the temporal management, but cooperating with the majordomos in supervising the labors and

1 On mission annals for 1831-5, see chap. xi .- xii. of vol. iii.

(42 )

SECULARIZATION.

conduct of the Indians, who were not yet altogether free from control.

Several of these missions, however, seem still to have been in charge of the comisionados; and in others the new system had been only partially introduced. In few, if any, was the secularization provided by the reglamento complete, and indeed, it was not designed to be immediately complete. Even of those supposed to be in the same stage of development so far as the appointment of majordomos, making of inventories, assignment of lands, distribution of property, etc., were concerned, no two establishments were in exactly the same condition. The differences resulted from the dispositions of friars, majordomos, and Indians, and the resulting mutual relations. In some places, where the Indians were most docile and industrious, the pa- dre energetic and popular, and the majordomo not too much of a politician and speculator, there was practi- cally little change from the old system; but in other places, where the three elements were continually at war, the old methods were completely revolutionized. Five missions were still under the friars' control as of old. All were declining in prosperity, as the reader knows. The enforcement of the reglamento had in some instances slightly checked the decline, and in others hastened it; but on the whole, secularization in its latest phases had done little or no harm at the beginning of 1836.

The general policy of secularizing the missions was a wise one, entirely in accordance with the spirit of Spanish institutions under which they were founded, and rendered an absolute necessity by the growth of republican ideas in America. The change by which the monastic monopoly was to be broken up involved no wrong to the church, the Franciscan order, or to the Indians. Figueroa's regulations, by which the policy and the law were to be carried into effect, were also wisely conceived in theory. To enforce them wisely, in such a manner as to wrong no interest and

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

avoid the evils existing as well as those likely to at- tend a change, required certain favorable conditions. Such were the employment of able and honest admin- istrators, a degree of intelligence and civilization on the part of the neophytes, the hearty cooperation of the missionaries, a strong and watchful territorial gov- ernment, a healthful, intelligent, and liberal public spirit, and freedom from sectional strife. All these conditions being more or less wanting, success was im- possible. Failure was a foregone conclusion; and it is the annals of that failure that I have to present in this chapter. I begin with a record of what was done by the authorities in 1836-8.

We have seen that no action had been taken in Mexico on Figueroa's reglamento; but that by the decree of November 7, 1835, it had been ordered that the missions be kept in the same condition as before the law of 1833, until the curates mentioned in that law should take possession. This virtually nullified the reglamento, and if enforced must have created much confusion without leading to any good results; but though known in California on the coming of Chico, and unofficially somewhat earlier,2 no attempt was ever made to carry out its provisions. Chico in his discourse before the diputacion alluded to the or- der as one issued by congress, of which he had been a member, with the best intentions, but without prac- tical knowledge on the subject; as one which it was impossible to carry out in every respect; but yet one

2 April 7, 1836, Carlos Carrillo to Vallejo. Mentions the decree of Nov. 7th as having been sent to Pres. Duran by the bishop of Sonora. Vallejo, Doc., MS., iii. 183. There is no evidence that the decree was ever officially pub- lished in Cal. It seems, however, that the friars expected a compliance with the decree, since on May 7, 1831, Vice-prefect Moreno to the Zacatecanos proposes that for charity's sake they should make the sacrifice of taking charge of the temporalities so as to prevent the utter ruin of the missions under the mismanagement of the comisionados and majordomos. Arch. Obispado, MS., 58-9. Ang. 13, 1837, Duran to dip. Says he had in July called for the en- forcement of the decree of Nov. 7, 1835, but he hears the dip. has resolved to treat other matters first. Cannot understand that anything can be more im- portant than enforcing the laws, or why thousands of Indians should suffer to please ' four interested persons ' (?). Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 17.

THE GOVERNOR'S ACTS.

which, coming from the government, must be obeyed.3 He asked advice, but if any was given it is not of record. Perhaps it occurred to governor and diputa- cion as a plausible plea that the friars were serving practically as curates, and might be regarded as the curates provided for by the law. At any rate, the decree was not obeyed; and not only was the regla- mento continued in force in the sixteen missions, but its provisions were soon extended, as we shall see, to the other five establishments.

On May 25th Chico issued an edict intended to pre- vent the frequent desertions of mission Indians.4 In his speech of the 27th he devoted more attention to the missions than to any other topic, and in their condition he found nothing to encourage a hope of their escape from utter ruin. His predictions, found- ed on the character and actions of Indians, majordo- mos, and padres, were accurate enough; though his views of the actual condition were exaggerated.5 Be- fore he had occasion to develop further his views and policy, he was called to the south; and there occurred a controversy with the friars in June with which the reader is already familiar. Chico deemed himself neglected and insulted by the padres Jimeno at Santa Inés, and was subsequently much offended at Duran's refusal to cooperate with religious service in the swear- ing of the constitutional bases at Santa Bárbara.

One of Chico's grounds of complaint being that the padres at Santa Inés had refused to aid him on his journey with animals and other supplies, he called upon Duran to state clearly whether he recognized the obligation of unsecularized missions to furnish such supplies. Duran's reply, dated June 15th, was an elaborate and able argument, to the effect that no

3 Chico, Discurso ... 27 de Mayo, 1836.

4 May 25, 1836, Chico's edict. Circulated in south in June and July. Dept. St. Pap., Ang., MS., ii. 52-4; xi. 54; Id., S. José, iv. 111-12; Ilayes' Miss. Book, i, 297.

5 Chico, Discurso. See also chap. xv. of vol. iii.

6 See chap. xv. of vol. iii.

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

such obligation existed; that all the aid rendered by the missions for sixteen years past had been lent as a matter of voluntary courtesy; that the government had no right whatever to the mission property, which belonged to the neophytes, and could be taken for pub- lic uses in cases of extreme necessity only as, and even less easily than, other private property. In the future as in the past the padres would render voluntarily such aid as they could consistently with the needs of their neophytes; but they would recognize no sueh duty legally. They would not resume the manage- ment on any such terms; and if it were proposed to enforce such an obligation, it would be best to secu- larize the remaining establishments at once.7

In reply, Chico declined to discuss the rights of un- secularized missions; but announced that he had or- dered the padres of Santa Inés and San Buenaventura to surrender the property of their respective missions to J. M. Ramirez and Cárlos Carrillo as comisionados. This he made known June 23d to the junta, explain- ing his reasons, and declaring it impolitic to leave the control of such property to subjects of a hostile na- tion.8 The junta on June 29th-30th, having as yet no quarrel with Chico, or rather not unwilling to pro- voke one between Chico and the friars, approved his action;9 and the secularization of the two southern missions went into effect immediately. Chico had an- nounced his intention of seeularizing San Miguel as soon as he could find a suitable person to take charge; and accordingly, on July 14th, Ignacio Coronel was named as the comisionado.10

7 Duran, Carta al Gobr Chico, en que niega la obligacion de las Misiones de auxiliar al Gobierno, 15 de Junio, 1836, MS.

8 June 23, 1836, Chico to junta. St. Pap., Miss. and Colon.,. MS., ii. 368- 73; Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxii. 24.

9 Leg. Rec., MS., iii. 23; St. Pap., Miss, and Colon., MS., ii. 384-6; Va- llejo, Doc., MS., xxxii. 30.

10 Coronel, Doc., MS., 189. Sept. 30th, P. Moreno to Capt. Guerra. Says that all the property had been distributed to the Indians, except a little grain. Guerra, Doc., MS., vii. 4. There were troubles with P. Abella about rendering accounts. Carrillo (J.), Doc., MS., 37.

SAN JOSÉ AND SANTA CLARA.

Two missions only were now left in their original condition. Chico, by reason of political troubles, was unable to proceed with the work of secularization, but that work was undertaken before the end of the year. In November the diputacion, or congress of Califor- nia, ordered the padre at San José to turn over the property to Jesus Vallejo as comisionado, and the transfer was effected in December.11 The order in the case of Santa Clara, the last mission secularized, was issued by Vallejo as comandante general December 27th, and the comisionado, José Ramon Estrada, did not take possession probably until the beginning of 1837.12 It would appear that most of the men put in charge of missions in 1836, after performing their duties as comisionados, became majordomos, and thus retained their places. The term 'administrator' is often used in speaking of them and the others; but no such office existed before 1839.

During the years 1837-8, the attention of the au- thorities being fully occupied with political affairs, and with the struggle to keep themselves in power, there was no change introduced or attempted in the mission regulations.13 Cárlos Carrillo had no distinctive mis- sion policy so far as can be known; but though repre- senting southern interests, Don Cárlos was supported by the Zacatecanos of the north-or at any rate, their prelate recognized him as governor;14 while the Fer- nandinos of the south, as represented by President Duran, favored Alvarado's cause.15 They also con-

11 Nov. 29, 1836, order of dip. Arch., Sta B., MS., ix. 143-4; xi. 114. Dec. 10th, possession taken. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxii. 89. Jan. 15, 1837, in- ventory. Id., xxxii. 64; St. Pap., Miss., MS., vii. 49-51.

12 Dec. 27, 1836, V. to Estrada. Vallejo, Doc., MS., iv. 45. There had perhaps been some previous action by the dip.

13 Feb. 15, 1837, Alvarado, in a circular to those in charge of missions, calls for careful balance-sheets and inventories for a general settlement. Vallejo, Doc., MS., iv. 37.

1+ Dec. 14, 1837, P. Moreno to the padres. He also says there is a prospect of their return to the college, since the question of ceding Cal. to a foreign power, 'which God forbid,' is being considered in Mexico. Arch. Obispado, MS., 59.

15 Alvarado and Vallejo, in their histories, claim that Duran made an ear- nest but unsuccessful effort to obtain from the governor, in reward for the

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

sented to take the long-delayed oath in support of the constitution, now that Spain had recognized Mexican independence; and the Zacatecans were also willing to take the oath, being Mexicans.16 There is some evi- dence that in 1838-9, Vallejo agitated the project of founding a new line of four or five frontier missions in the east and north, particularly one at Santa Rosa; but the Zacatecan friars, who were requested to un- dertake the work, declined.17

I have remarked that the essential conditions for carrying into effect wisely the reglamento of seculari- zation did not exist in California, and that failure was inevitable. If otherwise there had been a possibility of partial success, it disappeared with the outbreak of Alvarado's revolution in 1836, or rather with the sec- tional opposition to Alvarado's rule in the following years. A wise and honest administration of the mis- sion interests, difficult under the most favorable cir- cumstances, became impossible during the struggles of rival political factions. Since 1810 the missions had been obliged to make up in one way or another the large deficiency of revenue for expenses of the gov- ernment, civil and military; and of course they had to do this still, now that a large portion of the mission property had by secularization been set apart as a pub- lic fund. That any ruler struggling to maintain his power should not have drawn on that fund without limit would be too much to expect of political human nature in any country or any age. The government had rights as had the Indians; but as usual in earlier and later times, the rights of the natives were practi-

friars' support, an agreement to suspend secularization, and restore the mis- sions to their former condition.

16 July 8, 1837, Duran to Alvarado. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxii. 96. July 25th, Moreno to A. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 18.

17 Mar. 19, 1839, P. Quijas to V. Will undertake a mission at Sta Rosa if P. Gouzalez consents. Vallejo, Doc., MS., vi. 325. May 14th, V. to Alva- rado, urging importance of the Sta Rosa mission. Id., vi. 65; Dept. St. Pap., MS., iv. 235. General account of the proposition to found missions in the Tulares, San Joaquin, etc. Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., iv. 62-70; Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., iv. 151-3.

PLUNDER OF THE MISSIONS.

cally disregarded. The demands for supplies were more frequent and larger than ever before; and the produc- tiveness of the mission estates was largely diminished. In ordinary times of public tranquillity, it would have been difficult to select twenty-one men qualified to ad- minister honestly and judiciously the estates under the careful supervision of higher authorities. Now not only there could be no such supervision, and the majordomos and administrators were, like other classes, affected by the prevalent controversies; but, worse still, these positions, the only ones of value at the gov- ernor's disposal, had to be bestowed as rewards for political support, with slight regard for the fitness of applicants or acts of incumbents. Add to these diffi- culties the prevalent demoralization of the Indians for several preceding years, old age and peculiar tempera- ment of the friars of San Fernando, and the character of the Zacatecanos, and the reader might easily pre- dict the result.

All happened exactly as might have been antici- pated. All writers and witnesses, both Californian and foreign, who mention the subject, are unanimous in describing Alvarado's rule, from 1836 to 1842, as a period of plunder and ruin in mission history. So uniform is their testimony, that there is no need to cite individual expressions of opinion, though of course there is no lack of exaggeration for and against per- sonal friends and foes of the writers who chanced to take some part in secularization.18 The methods of

18 Of my statements in manuscript on the condition of the missions, I cite the following: Bandini, Hist. Cal., MS., 54-9, 84-5; Alvarado, HFist. Cal., MS., iii. 103-4, 214; iv. 5-7, 35, 54-61, 166-7, 191-3, 219-20; Vallejo, IFist. Cal., MS., iii. 360-93; iv. 14-25, 83-5; Coronel, Cosas de Cal., MS., 34-5, 216, 224-5; Torre, Remin., MS., 80-3; Serrano, Apuntes, MS., 59-61, 170-6; Amador, Mem., MS., 9-13, 147-8; Vallejo (J. J.), Remin., MS., 40-1, 62-3; Garcia, Hechos, MS., 57-73; Ord, Ocurrencias, MIS., 102-3, 118-20; Botello, Apuntes, MS., 42; Avila, Cosas de Cal., MS., 23-5; Gonzalez, Experiencias, MS., 36; Julio César, Cosas de Indios, MS., 1-8; Pico, Acont., MS., 24-25; Janssens, Vida, MS., 164-8; Marsh's Letter, MS., 8-9; Robinson's Statement, MS., 6-7. The following foreigners have also given attention to the deca- dence of the missions at this time, in printed works: Mofras, Exploration, i. 272, 297, 303, 321-2, 343, 347, 360, 390, 410-11, 420-1; Petit-Thouars, Voy- age, ii. 86-108; Wilkes' Narrative, v. 179-93; Belcher's Voy., i. 117-18, 320; HIST. CAL., VOL. IV. 4

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

mission spoliation at this period were substantially as follows: The governor, and subordinate officials by his authority, used the cattle and grain of the mis- sions as freely as they used the revenues from other sources. If the government contracted a debt to a trader, the governor gave in payment an order on any mission for wheat, tallow, or hides, just as he would draw a check on the treasury. The majordomo, be- ing an employé of the government, obeyed the or- der as a rule whenever the articles called for existed at his mission. There were occasional refusals and pleas in behalf of the Indians, but of course these pleas were much less frequent and zealous than those of the friars in earlier times. How far, if at all, be- yond the limits of strictly public expenses the depart- mental authorities went in their drafts upon mission property, it is hard to say. The most extravagant and sweeping charges are made of a deliberate plun- der and distribution of the spoils by Alvarado among his friends; but no proofs are presented, the charges have always been denied by Alvarado and urged mainly by his enemies, and they are probably false. One charge, however, is supported by evidence in the archives and by the governor's own admission, namely, that of having authorized loans of mission cattle to private individuals, on the condition that a like num- ber of animals should be returned later. Alvarado had certainly no right to make these loans; but he de- fends his action on the ground that he had no other means of rewarding men for patriotic services to the

La Place, Voyage, vi. 193-4; Robinson's Life in Cal., 167-8; Capron's Ilist. Cal., 32-6; and others. I may also cite here as appropriately as elsewhere the following works, which touch in a general way the subject of seculariza- tion, giving sketches more or less complete of the successive measures adopted, with something of results and theories. Some of the works are quoted else- where as authorities on certain points; the rest require no more than this wien- tion. Hall's Hist. S. José, 430; Hawes' Missions of Cal., passim; Gleeson's Hist. Cath. Church, i. 113-14; ii. 117-33; Hayes' Legal Ilist. S. Diego, MS., i. no. 56, 60; Randolph's Oration; Forbes' Hist. Cal., 137-S; Tuthill's Hist. Cal., 126; Farnham's Life in Cal., 281-6; Ilesperian, x. 57-8; Frignet, La Cal., 54-6; Cronise's Nat. Wealth, 16-17; Marshall's Christ. Missions, ii. 250- 62; California, Past, Present, etc., 60-1; Ryan's Judges and Crim., 36-41; Magliano's St Francis, 583-5; Holinski, La Cal., 178-80.

RASCALITY OF ADMINISTRATORS.

country, often involving the loss of their own property and neglect of all their private interests. The worst feature of these transactions was that in nine cases out of ten the loans were never repaid to the mis- sions.

As to the comisionados, majordomos, and adminis- trators who successively managed the missions, many were simply incompetent and stupid, exhausting their little energy and ability in the task of collecting their salary, filling the governor's orders so long as the granaries and herds held out, exercising no restraint or influence on the ex-neophytes, and allowing the affairs of their respective establishments to drift- not, as may be imagined, in the direction of general prosperity. Others were vieious as well as ineompe- tent, always ready to sell any article of mission prop- erty, not only live-stock, but kitchen utensils, farm implements, tools from the shops, and tiles from the roofs, for money with which to gratify their propen- sity for gambling. Still others were dishonest 'and able, devoting their energies to laying the founda- tions of future wealth for themselves and friends, op- pressing the Indians, quarrelling with such padres, officials, and assistants as they could not control or deceive, and disposing of the mission wealth without scruple, for their own interests. Finally, there were, I suppose, some honest, faithful, and tolerably effi- eient managers, who did as well as was possible under difficult circumstances. Every narrator names a few of his relations or friends as exceptions to the general rule of raseality and incompetence; and thus it would be easy to find authority of this kind for elassing nearly all the administrators at will with the good or bad. It is wisest not to attempt any classification, and to eite no individual accusations here; though I may find it necessary to make some slight use of suel material in the preparation of biographieal sketeles.

Of the padres, a few accepted the new situation and made the best of it, striving to reconcile discord-

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

ant elements, retaining a degree of influence over the Indians, for their spiritual and temporal welfare, and ever ready to aid with their counsel any person high or low in station who would listen. Friars of another temperament, soured and disappointed, retired sullenly to the habitations assigned them by law, avoided all controversy and intercourse with the world, and mechanically performed the duties of par- ish priests for all who made application. Others assumed a belligerent attitude, quarrelled with every- body, and protested against everything on every pos- sible occasion-too often with ample cause. And there were doubtless several of the Zacatecanos who looked only to their own comfort, and made them- selves heard only in opposition to such rascalities as tended to interfere with their selfish pleasures. Rarely was a padre insulted or subjected to any hardship, and as a rule they were as comfortably situated as any in California, being highly respected and most kindly treated by all classes. Secularization had been no wrong to them, or to their order, or to their church.

Finally, I come to the Indians-the real victims, as they always have been in their contact with civilized peoples, and as they always will be, until religion, philanthropy, common sense, justice, honesty, power, social science, and a variety of other ingredients more or less unknown shall in some community have been blended in proportions and conditions hitherto unheard of, and respecting which I have no recipe to offer. In some instances the ex-neophytes, or a majority of their number-from force of habit, inherent stupidity, or influence of the padres-were kept together and at work much as in former years. Let us hope that the souls of the living and of those that were dead had been saved in large numbers; but in no respect had the mission system left them better qualified to per- form the duties of citizenship than in 1769. Those to whom property was distributed, as a rule made no good use of it. The cattle required care; the tools

CONDITION OF THE NEOPHYTES.

implied work; and it was generally deemed best to convert all as rapidly as possible into liquor, stcal cat- tle and various articles as needed, and when all was gone, and the vigilance of local alcaldes interfered with the pleasures of a vagabond life about the towns, to decide between a return to mission labor or flight to join the gentiles. Pilfering and drunkenness increased rapidly, as did the ravages of syphilitic disease. and relapse to barbarism .. At the missions but little at- tention was paid to the welfare of the ex-neophytes, who were practically regarded as slaves, and often most cruelly treated. The large numbers hired out to rancheros and town people as servants were per- haps more comfortably situated than any of the rest. Yet such was the inherent stupidity of the native Californian character that no great revolts or outrages have to be chronicled. Thousands toiled patiently on year after year, and the evidence is but slight that any great number realized that their lot was a hard one.

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 IV, Part 6

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe Publication date: 1885 Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers Number of Pages: 820

Author: Bancroft, Hubert Howe
Publication date: 1885
Publisher: San Francisco, Calif. : The History Company, publishers
Number of Pages: 820