Antonio Carrillo in ability for intrigue. He had somewhat less education from books than some members of the Guerra and Estudillo families, but in practical efficiency, as in personal popularity, he was above them all. He was backed by the foreign residents and traders, who doubtless expected to control his policy for their own private and commercial interests, and some of whom very likely hoped in the end to gain political advantages for their respective nations. On the other hand, Alvarado was incited by a few Mexicans, notably by the lawyer Cosme Peña and the ex-friar Angel Ramirez, administrator of customs and the young vista's superior officer. Both were influenced by personal motives, and had no doubt of their ability to control the new administration. There is much reason to believe that Ramirez had special need of a governor who would look with friendly charity on the state of his official accounts.
I come now to the final outbreak against Gutierrez, respecting which no original documentary evidence exists.[1] The ordinary version in narratives that have
- ↑ The earliest account of the revolution extant is one sent by a resident, whose name is not given, and printed in the Honolulu, S. I. Gazette of Dec. 2, 1837. The author does not credit the report that the foreigners were largely instrumental in causing the movement. The Frenchmen, Petit-Thouars, Voyage, ii. 92-100, Mofras, Exploration, i. 298-300, and Lafond, Voyages, i. 210, attribute the revolt mainly to the instigations and promises of the Americans; and Mofras thinks the presence of the U. S. man-of-war Peacock a few days before had an influence. Wilkes, Narrative, v. 175-9, tells us that Alvarado was acting under the direction of foreigners who intended to hoist a new flag, to banish all Mexicans, to declare Cal. an independent state, and to have themselves all declared citizens. These declarations were supposed to emanate from Ramirez and 'Penné,' who wished to make use of the foreigners for their own ends. Greenhow, Hist. Or., 367, attributes the movement to strong popular opposition to centralism. Gleeson, Hist. Cath. Church, 141-9, says the conspirators acted ostensibly with a view of gaining their independence, but really for purposes of plunder. Some general printed accounts of the revolution of 1836, to most of which I shall have no occasion to refer again, being mostly brief and more or less unimportant: Cal. Star, Feb. 26, 1848; Honolulu Polynesian, i. 6; ii. 86; Farnham's Life in Cal., 60-6, the same being printed in the Sta Cruz Sentinel, Feb. etc. 1869; Tuthill's Hist. Cal., 143-4; Randolph's Oration; Dwinelle's Address before Pioneers, 20; Niles' Register, lii. 85; Robinson's Cal. Gold Region, 59-61; Pickett, in Shuck's Rep. Men, 227-8; Holinski, La Californie, 196-7; Hartmann, Geog. Stat. Cal., i. 37; Ferry, Californie, 19-20; Ryan's Judges and Crim., 42-3, 51; Nouv. An. Voy., lxxxv. 251; Yolo Co. Hist., 10-12, and other county histories; also many newspaper
