History of California, Volume IV, Part 8

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 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).

BU March 18, 1840, order to admin. to surrender missions. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxiii. 36. Alvarado, Instrucciones que debe observar el Sr Visitador en su visita á las misiones del norte, 18 de Marzo, 1840, MS. These instructions in 8 articles agree with the reglamento, except that at S. José some property was to be distributed to the oldest neophytes, and a clerk was to be put in temporary charge of the property. Hartnell's instructions to this clerk and to the majordomo at S. José are dated April 23d. St. Pap., Miss., MS., vii. 43-7.

31 The missions from S. Antonio to Sta Ines were put under the new regu- lations at this time if at all by Hartnell, for on his return later from the south he passed rapidly through these establishments. Hartnell, Diario y Borra- dores, MS., unfortunately contains nothing of earlier date than July. June 20th, J. M. Villavicencio directs Moraga not to give up the mission of S. An- tonio to H. (who came about that time?), and to pay no attention to the gov- ernor's order. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxiii, S1.

32 Sce chap. xx. of vol. iii.

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

the government, since there was no longer any visita- dor. 33

No successor to Hartnell was ever appointed, and there is nothing of importance to be noted respecting mission management for the rest of the year; or at least very little is known of it. I regret to say that I am unable from material extant to form any definite idea about the general condition of the missions at the end of 1840 as compared with that of a year or two years earlier. Californians generally extend the period of ruin and plunder several years later, and attach very little importance practically to Alvarado's reforms of 1839-40, as carried out by Hartnell. I am inclined to think, however, that many abuses were really checked at this time, though the visitador's last tour had done little if any good, the aggregate loss since 1836 had been large, and the outlook for the immedi- ate future was not encouraging.

In a former chapter I gave some general mission statistics for the period of 1830-4, the last period for which the padres furnished data, remarking that the figures were much less accurate than those of former years.84 From scattered items in the reports and ac- counts of administrators and of the visitador in 1839- 40, I am able to present for the present half-decade some general figures which are, perhaps, as reliable as those of the preceding period referred to. Of baptisms and burials I can make no statement, though the nuin- ber might be obtained by a tedious counting from the mission-books of each establishment, most of which are still preserved. The neophyte population de- creased from 15,000 in 1834 to 6,000 in 1840; though the latter number would probably be reduced to 5,000 if restricted to the Indians absolutely living in com- munity, and increased to 8,000 or 9,000 if extended

33 Hartnell, Diario, MS .; Sept. 7th, H. to gov. St. Pap., Miss., MS., xi, 1S. Oct. 6th, Alvarado's circular. Id., x. 34.

34 See chap. xii. of vol. iii.

STATISTICAL VIEW.

to all on the registers whose whereabouts as vagrants or servants was somewhat definitely known. Many of the missions had less than 100 Indians, San Luis Rey with about 1,000, and San Carlos with less than 30, being the extremes. In the same years cattle had decreased approximately from 140,000 to 50,000; horses from 12,000 to 10,000; and sheep from 130,000 to 50,000. Of crops no general estimate can be made, but they were very greatly diminished. Inventories of property, made in connection with secularization, vary from $10,000 to $200,000; but there is no uni- formity in the classes of property which they include, church property and live-stock being often omitted, and the lists often including only assets in a commer- cial sense. The aggregate of debts was about $60,000, offset by claims against private parties and other mis- sions of equal or greater amount, but rarely paid in full.

The number of friars serving in California was re- duced during this half-decade from 26 to 20. Five padres died-Vitoria, Martin, Fortuni, and Arroyo, of the college of San Fernando, and Moreno of the Zacatecanos-while one, García Diego, left the coun- try in 1836, to return later. One or two attempted, unsuccessfully, to obtain licenses for departure. No new-comers made their appearance. As a rule, at this time, no padre was much heard of beyond the limits of his own establishment; though a few became somewhat prominent in controversies which will be noticed in connection with local annals.

Padre Narciso Duran continued to be president of the southern missions until 1838, when he was suc- ceeded by Joaquin Jimeno; but in 1837 Duran had been made prefect, which position he held until after 1840. Duran also held the office of vicar under the bishop of Sonora, except for a short period in 1838-9, when it was attached to that of president, and held by Jimeno.35 Of the Zacatecanos in the north Padre

85 Various communications in Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 19-24; Dept. Rec., MS., x. 36; Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxiii. 14. The exact dates of the appoint-

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

Rafael Moreno was president and vice-prefect-the prefect being absent from early in 1836-until No- vember, 1838, at which date Padre José María de Jesus Gonzalez assumed the office, his appointment, or election, at the college of Guadalupe bearing date of June 19, 1837. On July 22, 1840, he was re- elected.36 The authority of these officials as president and prefect over the friars was but nominal, though there is no evidence that their wishes were not as fully obeyed as in earlier times. As vicars they had ecclesiastical authority over the friars as acting parish priests;37 and some legal powers were accorded them by the regulations of secularization; but they rarely attempted any exercise of authority in any capacity.

Hitherto California had been ecclesiastically sub- ject to the bishop of Sonora, the missionary prelate holding the vicarship. And so it continued during this period; but Fray Francisco García Diego y Moreno went to Mexico at the beginning of 1836 for the express purpose of effecting a change for the good of the people and the church, and also doubtless with a view to his own advancement. So successful was he that on September 19th of the same year the government issued a decree providing that the necessary steps should be taken for the formation of the Californias into a separate diocese. 38 Troubles

ments are not known; but Jimeno announced his election as president on Nov. 26th, 1838; and Duran his assumption of the prefecture on Dee. 17, 1838, and of the vicarship on Sept. 17, 1839.

36 Appointment of Gonzalez. Arch. Obispado, MS., 60, 63; Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 18; Arch. Miss., MS., ii. 865; Corresp. de Miss., MS., 67-9; Sta Clara, Parroquia, MS., 26, 28.

37 Oct. IS, 1839, P. Gonzalez to his friars. Has concluded to accept the vicarship of the northern missions from the bishop, to prevent their coming under the power of Duran; though he hesitated about taking such a step without authority from his college. Arch. Obispado, MS., 60-1.

38 Sept. 19, 1836, law in 6 articles, published in a bando of Sept. 22d. Arrillaga, Recop., Jul .- Dic. 1836, p. 107; Sup. Gort St. Pap., MS., xii. 1-2; Hayes' Miss. Book, i. no. 13, p. 111; San Miguel, Repub. Mex., 8. The new bishop, to be chosen by the govt from a trio suggested by the cabildo metro- politano and proposed to the pope, was to have $6,000 a ycar from the treas- ury as salary and $3,000 for first expenses. He was also to have the admin- istration of the pious fund. See also, on appointment of bishop, Dublan

A BISHOP FOR CALIFORNIA.

both in Mexico and California prevented further progress until June 22, 1839, when the metropolitan chapter chose a trio, with García Diego at its head, and his name ivas duly forwarded to Rome, where on April 27, 1840, the necessary bulls were issued.39 In August the approval of Pope Gregory was known in Mexico, and the Zacatecan friars were notified that such of them as might voluntarily subject them- selves to the bishop, no longer missionaries but doc- trineros, could expect no aid from their college.40 On September 19th Bishop García Diego took the con- stitutional oath before the president;41 on October 4th he was consecrated by three bishops at the cole- giata de Guadalupe in Mexico. He announced his consecration, with the fact that he could not come immediately to California, in a letter of November 30th, and in a pastoral letter which was put in print.42 He did not reach his diocese until late in 1841; and it is not therefore necessary to notice here a decree of the government which he brought respecting mis- sion affairs.

Occasional complaints scattered in the archives. show that the friars had some difficulty in obtaining the sums allowed them under the various reglamentos for subsistence and expenses of worship.43 As to their and Lozano, Leg. Mex., iii. 194; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, MS., xi. 48; Id., Gob. Mex., i. 36.

89 Mofras, Explor., i. 274-5; García Diego, Carta Pastoral, 1840. June 23, 1839, min. of int. to gov. of Cal. Sup. Govt St. Pap., MS., xv. 6. Aug. 7th, Castillero to Alvarado. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxii. 282.

40 Ang. 4, 1840, P. Rafael de Jesus Soria, prefect of the college of Guad- alupe, to the Zacatecan friars. Arch. Obispado, MS., 62; Sta Clara, Par- roquia, MS., 27.

41 Dept. St. Pap., Ang., MS., xii. 51.

42 Garcia Diego, Carta Pastoral que el Ilmo y Rmo Sr D. Fr. Francisco García Diego, primer Obispo de Californias dirige a los RR. PP. misioneros y a sus Diocesanos, antes de su ingreso al obispado. Mex. 1840. 12mo, 12 p. Dated at the college of S. Fernando Oet. 28, IS40. This letter is a lamen- tation for the ecclesiastical misfortunes of Cal. in the past; a narrative of the writer's appointment, including the bulls; and a protestation of his affec- tion for all in the country and the great benefits that are to result from this new favor of God. It was to be read from the pulpits. Oct. 4th, Virmond to Munras. l'allejo, Doc., MS., xxxiii. 184. Nov. 30th, bishop to gov., dip., Gen. Vallejo, and Padre Duran. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 29-30; Vallejo, Doc., MS., ix. 330; Arch. Sta B., MS., xi. 106; Mont. Arch., MS., ix. 28.

43 Jan. 30, 1836, Pres. Moreno complains to gov. that the allowance of $500 HIST. CAL., VOL. IV. 5

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

stipends from the pious fund in Mexico, it is difficult to learn what amounts were received, though the fri- ars continued to draw on the fund and the traders to negotiate their drafts. The payments were not only irregular and subject to heavy discounts, but they were often made by the traders in articles for which the padres had little use." From 1834 to 1837 the amount paid from the fund to missionaries in Alta California is given as $33,464.25; and that from No- vember 1840 to February 1842 as $22,000; but I find no intermediate accounts. 45 Meanwhile the fund- from which the government in 1837 decided to bor- row $60,000 to be devoted to the work of 'quieting the Californias'46-remained as before in charge of a special junta. Andrés Castillero went to congress in 1839, with urgent instructions to have the fund placed at the disposal of the Californian government. Under no circumstances would Mexico have consented to such a step; but the refusal was based on the decree of September 19, 1836, by which the new bishop was to be intrusted with the administration of the estates, and to use the revenues in accordance with the aims of the founders.47 Under this decree it does not ap-

for church expenses has been stopped by orders to the administrators. St. Pap., Miss., MS., x. 8-9. April 6th, Moreno to the padres. The allowance as administered by the majordomos is opposed to canonical law and usage. If they can support themselves and public worship without that allowance they may do so, 'dando este golpe antes que nos lo den.' Arch. Obispado, MS., 58. July 9th, Duran to Gov. Chico. Complains of non-payment of the sums allotted. Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt ii. 16-17. Jan. 26, March 12, 1839, PP. Duran, Jimeno, and Real make like complaints; and ask that certain gardens, buildings, and stills be assigned instead of a fixed sum. Id., v. ptii. 21-3. March 5, 1840, Duran argues against any cession of estates for the support of padres or church. Arch. Miss., MS., ii. 993.

4 Arch. Miss., MS., ii. 997-1000. March 14, 1840, P. Fortuni draws for $2,200 due him. Guerra, Doc., MS., vi. 88.

43 Mexico, Mem. Interior, 1838, p. 82-6. Statement of Ramirez from Siglo, xix. Mar. 2, 1842, in Hayes' Mission Book, i. 191.

46 April 1, 1837, decree, in Arrillaga, Recop., 1837, p. 265-6.

47 Art. 6 of the decree: 'The property belonging to the pious fund of Cali- fornias will be put at the disposition of the new bishop and of his successors, that they may administer it and invest it in its objects or others analogous, always respecting the will of the founders.' Arrillaga, Recop., 1836, p. 107. Aug. 7, 1839, govt decides that the deputy must not interfere in the fund. Dept. St. Pap., MS., iv. 131. Same date, Castillero writes to same effect. Vallejo, Doc., MS., xxxii. 196, 282.

THE PIOUS FUND.

pear that anything was done until the end of 1840, when the bishop appointed Pedro Ramirez to care for the city estates and Miguel Belaunzaran for those in the country. García Diego also received from the fund money to pay the expenses of his journey to California. 48

I have to conclude this chapter with Indian affairs, that is, the dealings of the Californians with gentile tribes. Minor items on this subject are, however, as usual left for local annals. The subject may be most conveniently treated in three divisions; the first in- cludes the hostilities of gentiles and fugitive neophytes on the southern or San Diego frontier; the second, Vallejo's operations against gentile tribes north of San Francisco Bay, from Sonoma as a centre; and the third, the ravages of Indian horse-thieves in all the region between the two frontiers, and the expeditions sent out against the marauders, chiefly from the re- gions of San José and Los Angeles. The material is bulky enough in each division, but when duly sifted and digested, it results, as usual with Californian Ind- ian annals at all periods, in but a meagre and unsat- isfactory record.

In the spring of 1836 complaints were frequent and loud that the Indians were committing ravages, and that the soldiers of San Diego, for lack of arms, sup- plies, and pay, could afford no protection. In January, J. M. Marron was attacked at the rancho of Cueros de Venado, but several of the attacking party were killed by Christian Indians. An effort to have a garrison es- tablished at Santa Isabel was unsuccessful. The citi- zens made several expeditions, in one of which seven Indians were killed; but it was charged that in their absence the soldiers committed various thefts and out- rages in town. Early in March, Captain Portilla

48 Statement of Ramirez, in Siglo, xix. March 2, 1842, suppl. 146. The sums paid on account of stipends for Cal. at this time were paid to J. A. Aguirre. Ramirez says he took charge on Nov. 2, 1840.

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

made a fruitless raid, and on his return, his brother, Don Silvestre, proposed to conquer the Indians at his own expense, if allowed to keep prisoners as ser- vants. This was approved by the ayuntamiento, on the ground that the Indians were outlaws; but the result is not known, the record failing just when San Diego was supposed to be in the greatest peril.40

A year later, in April or May 1837, the Indians made a raid on the frontier ranchos, burning buildings and driving off live-stock. At the Jamul rancho the majordomo Leiva and three others-servants on the place, and perhaps Indians, though spoken of as white men by several-were killed, and Leiva's two grown-up daughters were carried away into captivity, from which they were never recovered. A force from the frontera, under Alférez Macedonio Gonzalez, pursued the foe into the sierra, but was defeated at a place called the Matadero, and forced to retire with many wounded. The inhabitants of San Diego were in great terror, but were comforted by the protection of Captain Pen- hallow and his men of the Alert, and by the presence of their so-called gefe político and general, Zamorano, some of whose men had accompanied Gonzalez. Juan Bandini, whose rancho of Tecate was one of those plundered, was recalled from his political and military achievements at Los Angeles; and the revolutionary army, raised to operate against Alvarado, marched against the savage foe. In a campaign of ten days, they are said to have killed several Indians, all they could find. Contemporary communications on this disaster are not numerous or complete; while versions from memory are voluminous and contradictory in detail.50

49 Many documents of Jan .- March, 1836, in S. Diego, Arch., MS., 74- 92, 115; Hayes' Mission Book, i. 288-95, 311. There were some complaints in July. Bandini wrote in March that much of his stock at the Tecate rancho had been stolen. Vallejo, Doc., MS., iii. 182.

50 Communications of local officials, April to Sept. 183 ;. S. Diego, Arch., MS., 171, 180-2, 185, 187. May 29th, 31st, Zamorano's letter to ayunt. of Angeles, and resulting deliberations of that body. Dept. St. Pap., MS., xi. 86-9; Los Angeles, Arch., MS., iv. 316-18. June 26th, captain and crew of the

PERILS AT SAN DIEGO.

It was probably in 1837, during the general alarm arising from the massacre at Jamul, though there is no agreement among narrators respecting dates, that a plot was revealed to attack the town and kill the inhabitants. Indian servants were to cooperate with the attacking party by opening the houses of their employers on a given night; but one of thein divulged the plot, and three or four of the dozen servants arrested were immediately shot by order of Alférez Gonzalez.51 The year 1838 was marked by no hos- tilities that are either remembered or recorded. In 1839 there were alarms and active preparations, on paper at least, for defensive movements in May, July, and November; but I have nothing definite about these troubles, except that in October the mission of Guadalupe across the frontier was sacked, and three soldiers were killed.52 In 1840 no disturbances are

Alert credited with valuable service. Dept. St. Pap., Ang., MS., ii. 103-4; Honolulu S. I. Gazette, Dec. 2, 1837. June 27th, Com. Argüello says he will retain the command ' unless there should be a fight!' S. Diego, Arch., MS., IS1. July 5th, Ind. attacked S. Diego mission and killed 3 men. Hayes' Miss. Book, i. 322. July 11th, alcalde of Angeles, in a circular to rancheros, says the Ind. attacked S. Bernardo and killed 4 men (the Jamul affair?). Valle, Doc., MS., 45. Aug. 4th, Bandini says he killed and captured only a few Ind. S. Diego, Arch., MS., 185. Sept. 16th, B. says he has lost abso- lutely everything, has come to Sta Bárbara to sell a few jewels to get food for his family, and must eschew politics. Vallejo, Doc., MS., iv. 309. Jans- sens, Vida y Avent., MS., 92-7, was with Gonzalez, and gives many particu- lars. Lorenzana, Memorias, MS., 31-42; Machado, Tiempos Pasados, MS., 11- 17; and Estudillo, Datos, MS., 19-20, 27-32, give many details of the affair at Jamul, obtained from the wife of Leiva, who with a young child was allowed to escape. Alvarado, Ilist. Cal., MS., iv. 1-3, unjustly accuses Bandini of claiming the honor of having killed a large number of Indians. B. makes no such claim, and, Hist. Cal., MS., 90, he says that in a second campaign the soldiers were defeated and several wounded. Romero, Memorias, MS., 3-4; and in Hayes' Emig. Notes, 494; and Id., Scraps, Indians, i. 174, gives an account of Gonzalez's campaign, in which he served. See also mention of the affair with incorrect dates in Mofras, Explor., i. 336; La Place, Voy., vi. 194. See also Davis' Glimpses, MS., 175-83.

51 Marron, Recuerdos, MS., 20-3, says that she overheard a conversation between her own and two of Fitch's servants which revealed the plot. Estu- dillo, Datos, MS., 8-15, confirms this, and says that the cook of his own fam- ily was one of those shot, his father, then alcalde, opposing the summary proceeding. Janssens, Vida, MS., 153-8, tells us it was Bandini's servant who divulged the plot. Machado, Tiempos Pasados, MS., 17-19, says it was Mrs Fitch's Indian girl that gave the alarm. Osio, Ilist., MS., 365-7, speaks of Alf. Macedonio's hasty proceedings. Pico, Hist. Cal., MS., 182-4, seems to imply that this affair was of later date by 5 or 6 years.

62 May, 1839, preparations for a grand expedition. Castro was to aid with 120 men. Noresults known. Hayes' Miss. Book, i. 330; Id., Doc. Ilist. Cal.,

MISSION ANNALS AND INDIAN AFFAIRS.

reported. Notwithstanding the fragmentary nature of the records, it is evident that in all these years the frontier ranchos were continually ravaged by Indians, and that there was no security for either life or prop- erty. The condition of this more than any other part of California resembled that of the Apache frontier in Sonora and Chihuahua, though the loss of life was much less. The marauders were the gentile tribes of the mountains, reënforced by renegade neophytes, al- lied with more distant Colorado tribes, and having al- ways a secret understanding with Indian servants on the ranchos. Fortunately, of the five or six chieftains who commanded the tribes of that region, one or two were generally allied with the gente de razon and ren- dered valuable aid.

Turning now to the northern frontier, we find a dif- ferent state of things. Here there was no semblance of Apache raids, no sacking of ranchos, no loss of civilized life, and little collusion between gentile and Christian natives. The northern Indians were more numerous than in the San Diego region, and many of the tribes were brave, warlike, and often hos- tile; but there was a comparatively strong force at Sonoma to keep them in check, and General Vallejo's Indian policy must be regarded as excellent and effect- ive when compared with any other policy ever followed in California. True, his wealth, his untrammelled power, and other circumstances contributed much to his success; and he could by no means have done as well if placed in command at San Diego; yet he must be ac- credited besides with having managed wisely. Closely

MS., 97; Dept. St. Pap., Angeles, MS., v. 15. Troubles of July-August. Fa- llejo, Doc., MS., vii. 393, 405; Hayes' Miss. Book, i. 336. Troubles of Oct .- Nov. apparently quite serious, and involving much loss of property. Valejo, Doc., MS., viii. 222, 230; Hayes, Doc. Hist. Cal., 96, 99-101; Dept. St. Pap., Ang., MS., v. 77, 102; xii. 17. In Nov. a renegade S. Diego neophyte named Chiva appeared under the name of Paiba with an appointment as captain-gen- eral of the S. Felipe rancherias on the California side of the Colorado, issued by the gov. of Sonora. Dept. St. Pap., MS., v. 17-20; Id., Ang., v. 94-6; Jans- sens, Vida, MS., 143-54, gives many particulars of life on the frontier ranchos in these years.

VALLEJO'S INDIAN POLICY.

allied with Solano, the Suisun chieftain, having always -except whenasked to render some distasteful military service to his political associates in the south-at his disposal a goodly number of soldiers and citizens, he made treaties with the gentile tribes, insisted on their being liberally and justly treated when at peace, and punished them severely for any manifestation of hos- tility. Doubtless the Indians were wronged often enough in individual cases by Vallejo's subordinates ; some of whom, and notably his brother Salvador, were with difficulty controlled; but such reports have been greatly exaggerated, and acts of glaring injustice were comparatively rare.

The Cainameros, or the Indians of Cainama in the region toward Santa Rosa, had been for some years friendly; but for their services in returning stolen horses they got into trouble with the Satiyomis, or Sotoyomes, generally known as Guapos, or 'braves,' who in the spring of 1836, in a sudden attack, killed twenty-two of their number and wounded fifty. Va- llejo, on appeal of the chiefs, promised to avenge their wrongs, and started April 1st with fifty soldiers and one hundred Indians besides the Cainamero force. A battle was fought the 4th of April, and the Guapos, who had taken a strong position in the hills of the Geyser region, were routed and driven back to their rancherías, where most of them were killed. The ex- pedition was back at Sonoma on the 7th, without hav- ing lost a man killed or wounded.58

On June 7th Vallejo concluded a treaty of peace and alliance with the chiefs of seven tribes-the Indians of Yoloytoy, Guilitoy, Ansactoy, Liguaytoy, Aclutoy,

53 March 28, 1836, Vallejo's orders for assembling troops. Vallejo, Doc., MS., iii. 104. April 8th, report of the campaign. Id., iii. 105. Salvador Va- llejo commanded one divisions of the force. April 21st, Com. Gen. Gutierrez thanks Lieut. Vallejo and his men for their gallantry. Id., iii. 193. April 24th, Lieut Vallejo to com. gen. Announces that Antonio and Victor Castro had gone to Sta Rosa in defiance of orders to get Indians for work on their rancho of S. Pablo, taking besides some property, and buying some children from the chiefs. The Indians complained; the Castros were arrested at S. Rafael, and the children released. Such outrages must be prevented. Id., iii. 112.

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 8

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