to a certain amount with which to found new missions. There are extant the replies of only three friars, two of whom opposed and one approved the proposition.[1]
At the end of December Duran prepared — probably for use in Mexico, with a view to prevent a renewal of Echeandía's original scheme, now that Victoria had fallen — a series of commentaries on the decree of January. It was one of the ablest documents that was ever written by a friar in California, but one which cannot be presented en résumé, and much too long for literal reproduction. On the decree, article by article, Padre Narciso expends the full force of his talent and learning, with not infrequent volleys of wit, sarcasm, ridicule, and bitter denunciation. Not a weak spot, and there were many, is overlooked, and not a weapon is neglected. In the paper there is much of sound argument, shrewd special pleading, evasion of real issues, and Franciscan prejudice, but little misrepresentation of facts. The standard position of all missionaries, that the Indians were absolute owners of the soil and all the mission property, but that they were still children requiring parental control, and that the friars alone were qualified to exercise that control, was presented over and over in a great variety of ingenious forms. Echeandía's lack of authority to make the changes was insisted on, as were many legal discrep-
- ↑ The circular was dated Aug. 13th, and is not extant, its contents being known only from the three replies. P. Juan Cabot writes from S. Miguel Aug. 24th, that while he would be glad to be freed from his cares, he can see no way of distributing the estates without producing ruin. The Indians of his mission would have to be scattered at long distances in order to get a living, and he could not be responsible for their spiritual care. P. José Sanchez deemed the execution of the project probably inevitable, but sure to result, as it was intendled to, in total destruction to the missions. Taking into consideration what had happened in Baja California and Sonora, he could see no possibility of good results here. 'So far as it concerns me personally,' he writes, 'would that it might be to-morrow, that I might retire between the four walls of a cell to weep over the time I have wasted in behalf of these miserables!' P. José Joaquin Jimenez of Sta Cruz wrote in October that in view of the reasons urged by the government, and of the fact that the burden was becoming insupportable to the friars, it would be wisest to free the Indians and distribute the property on the basis proposed; but also that the Indians should be obliged to keep their share and to work. Arch. Sta B., MS., viii. 13-19.
