in on July 7th, were to the effect that the friars could not take the oath, and were ready to endure the penalty, though some of them promised fidelity and respect to the constituted authorities. The response from San Francisco and Santa Bárbara is not so far as I know extant.[1]
There was no further agitation of this matter during the year, though a warning was received from the comisario general against the disaffected friars, and especially against the president, who, as the writer had heard, talked of nothing but his religion and his king, protesting his willingness to die for either. "If this be true, it would be well to grant him a passport to go and kiss his king's hand, but to go with only bag and staff, as required by the rules of his order." I am not certain whether this referred to Duran or Sarría.[2]
During 1827 politico-missionary matters remained nearly in statu quo. No disposition was shown to disturb the padres further on account of their opposition to the republic, though there were rumors afloat that some of them were preparing to run away. Martinez, Ripoll, and Juan Cabot were those named in June as having such intentions, and Vicente Cané
- ↑ The position taken by the other padres will, however, be learned from a subsequent document. Answers of the S. Diego and Monterey friars in Arch. Arzob., MS., v. pt i. 5-9, 17-20. Among the latter Sarría was not included, not being regarded as the minister of any particular mission. Abella 'came to this country for God, and for God will go away, if they expel him;' Fortuni 'no se anima á hacer tal juramento, pero sí guardar fidelidad;' Arroyo de la Cuesta 'was born in the Peninsula, and is a Spaniard; swore to the independence only in good faith to the king of Spain; has meditated upon the oath demanded, and swears not;' Uría 'finds it not in his conscience to take the oath;' Pedro Cabot 'has sworn allegiance to Fernando VII.;' Sancho, the same, and 'cannot go back on his word;' Juan Cabot 'cannot accommodate his conscience to such a pledge;' and Luis Martinez says 'his spirit is not strong enough to bear any additional burden.' Aug. 7th, Sarría addresses to the padres a circular argument on the subject, similar to that addressed in former years to Gov. Argüello, and called out by an argument of P. Ripoll, who it seems had wished to accommodate his conscience to the oath by bringing up anew the allegiance sworn to independence and Iturbide. Id., v. pt i. 10-13.
- ↑ Aug. 16, 1826, com. gen. to Echeandía. Dept. St. Pap., Ben. Com. and Treas., MS., i. 36-8. Beechey, Voyage, ii. 12, speaks of the dissatisfaction caused by the exacting of the oath, and says many padres prepared to depart rather than violate their allegiance to Spain.
