Page:History of California, Volume 3 (Bancroft).djvu/125

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

PLAN APPROVED BY THE DIPUTACION.

107

the decree by which it was attempted to carry the plan into effect.^[1] It was not intended to enforce this measure without the approval of the supreme government, to which the plan was forwarded the 7th of September.^[2] There were also sent at the same time six supplementary articles, approved by the diputacion August 13th, providing for the establishment of two Franciscan convents at Santa Clara and San Gabriel, for which twenty or more friars were to be sent from Mexico at the expense of the pious fund, and to which the Spanish padres allowed to remain might also attach themselves. These convents were intended to supply in the future missionaries, curates, and chaplains.^[3]

Thus it is seen that the governor in his policy toward the padres, down to the end of 1830, was by no means arbitrary, unjust, or even hasty;^[4] neither was there so bitter a controversy between him and the friars as would be inferred from the general tone of what has been written on the subject.^[5] In these last years of the decade we have from the padres no spe-

↑ Echeandía, Plan para convertir en pueblos las misiones de la Alta California, 1829-30, MS. Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 105-9, and Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 159-60, mention the action of the diputacion, and give the substance of an introductory message or argument presented by Echeandía on the advantages of secularization.
↑ Sept. 7, 1830, E. to min. of rel. Dept. Rec., MS., viii. 79.
↑ Leg. Rec., MS., i. 163-6; Guerra, Doc., MS., i. 15-17; Dept. Rec., MS., viii. 79.
↑ Duhaut-Cilly, Viaggio, i. 283-5, notes that E. used gentle measures, as he was obliged to do, while the padres were less careful about the prosperity of the missions than they had formerly been. Shea, Catholic Missions, 109-12, represents E.'s rule as a succession of arbitrary and oppressive acts against the friars. Fernandez, Cosas de Cal., MS., 45, says that E. had few scruples and aimed only to enrich himself by despoiling the missions. Spence, according to Taylor's Discov. and Founders, ii. 24, says that E. had taken some rash steps toward the padres, and they retaliated by subjecting him to every inconvenience. Dr Marsh, Letter to Com. Jones, MS., 2, tells us that E. 'released some of the Indians from the missions that his own particular friends might appropriate their services to their own use.'
↑ Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 53-4, and Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 89-90, tell us that about 1826 the padres not only refused to furnish any more supplies for the troops, but had a large part of the mission cattle slaughtered for their hides and tallow, with a view to run away with as much as possible of the mission wealth. I think, however, that these writers, like others, exaggerate the quarrel, and that there was no such slaughter of cattle until several years later.

[1] Echeandía, Plan para convertir en pueblos las misiones de la Alta California, 1829-30, MS. Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 105-9, and Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 159-60, mention the action of the diputacion, and give the substance of an introductory message or argument presented by Echeandía on the advantages of secularization.

[2] Sept. 7, 1830, E. to min. of rel. Dept. Rec., MS., viii. 79.

[3] Leg. Rec., MS., i. 163-6; Guerra, Doc., MS., i. 15-17; Dept. Rec., MS., viii. 79.

[4] Duhaut-Cilly, Viaggio, i. 283-5, notes that E. used gentle measures, as he was obliged to do, while the padres were less careful about the prosperity of the missions than they had formerly been. Shea, Catholic Missions, 109-12, represents E.'s rule as a succession of arbitrary and oppressive acts against the friars. Fernandez, Cosas de Cal., MS., 45, says that E. had few scruples and aimed only to enrich himself by despoiling the missions. Spence, according to Taylor's Discov. and Founders, ii. 24, says that E. had taken some rash steps toward the padres, and they retaliated by subjecting him to every inconvenience. Dr Marsh, Letter to Com. Jones, MS., 2, tells us that E. 'released some of the Indians from the missions that his own particular friends might appropriate their services to their own use.'

[5] Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 53-4, and Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 89-90, tell us that about 1826 the padres not only refused to furnish any more supplies for the troops, but had a large part of the mission cattle slaughtered for their hides and tallow, with a view to run away with as much as possible of the mission wealth. I think, however, that these writers, like others, exaggerate the quarrel, and that there was no such slaughter of cattle until several years later.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]