The rule of Gutierrez lasted four months, and I find no indication of opposition, discontent, or controversy during that period. Like his predecessor, he confined his efforts to the performance of routine duties, giving little or no offence to either people or politicians, though there must have been a constantly growing feeling against Mexican rulers, fomented to a certain extent by those who chose to style themselves federalists. The establishment of centralism in Mexico was not yet officially proclaimed in this far north, but the tendency was known and discussed. A communication from the minister of relations, dated June 5, 1835, and circulated by the governor on January 10th, called attention to the possibility of future changes in the form of government, and to various petitions on the subject already made public in the newspapers, at the same time urging upon territorial authorities the necessity of the strictest precautions against such disorders as might arise from popular feeling founded on vague rumors and utilized by revolutionary leaders.[1] National affairs received no further public attention during this brief rule; but two or three topics of a local nature merit brief notice here, both on account of their importance and of their results.
By a national decree of May 23, 1835, Los Angeles was made a city and capital of California. I have noticed this fact elsewhere, and also the burst of indignation with which the news was received at Monterey.[2] Two days after his accession, Gutierrez gave
- ↑ Jan. 10, 1836, Gutierrez to alcaldes, forwarding communication of June 5, 1835. S. Diego, Arch., MS., 72.
- ↑ See chap. x. of this volume.
north in Castro's favor, and in the south for Estudillo; but in March there came an earthquake that led people to forget politics in favor of prayer. Several Californians, as Pinto, Apunt., MS., 14-15; Estudillo, Datos, MS., 7-8; and Castro, Relacion, MS., 36-7, imply that while there was dissatisfaction, Castro yielded to Gutierrez's demand to prevent disorders and promote peace. Robinson, Life in Cal., 173, followed by Tuthill, Hist. Cal., 141, states that Gutierrez succeeded in accordance with the will of Figueroa, implying that Castro's temporary rule was simply in consequence of Gutierrez's absence in the south; but this is an error.
