been published, is to the effect that Gutierrez, in consequence of a quarrel with Ramirez and Alvarado about some details of revenue precautions, such as the stationing of guards on a newly arrived vessel, ordered the arrest of Alvarado, who escaped by flight, and at once proceeded to incite a revolution. This was the version sent at the time to the Sandwich Islands by a resident foreigner, confirmed by Alfred Robinson, from whose narrative it has been taken by Tuthill and other writers. It is also partially confirmed by several Californians, and has, I think, a slight foundation in fact. At any rate, Alvarado and José Castro left the capital in October, and making San Juan their headquarters, began active preparations for a rising of the settlers, native and foreign.[1]
- ↑ In the Honolulu, S. I. Gazette, Dec. 2, 1837, it is stated that Ramirez sent Alvarado to ask for a guard to prevent smuggling. Gutierrez assented, but suggested that the guard must be stationed on board the vessels, and not on shore. A. replied that R. simply wanted a guard, and could station it to suit himself. The gov. was angry and threatened to arrest A. as a revolutionist, and A. thought it best to leave town the same night. Robinson, Life in Cal., 173-4, affirms that the quarrel was one of etiquette in the matter of placing guards. Tuthill, Mofras, Petit-Thouars, Wilkes, and Farnham give the same version in substance, though the latter adds some fanciful embellishments, as is his custom when no absolute lies suggest themselves. Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 304-6, says that Ramirez was negotiating future customs dues to raise money for gambling, balls, etc. Gutierrez interfered to prevent the abuse, Ramirez became insolent and talked of revolt, Alvarado joined in the quarrel, and both were threatened with arrest. G. changed his mind and wished to conciliate A., but could not find him. Ávila, Cosas de Cal.,
accounts. Some of the preceding mentions and narratives are accurate so far as they go; and in others the errors are so petty and apparent as to merit no pointing-out. Castañares, Col. Doc., 19, is the only Mexican who has done more than mention the affair. He says the revolt was instigated and supported by the Americans. Foreigners who mention the revolution more or less fully in unpublished statements are Marsh, Letter, MS., 7-8; Bee, Recollections, MS., 6-21; Janssens, Vida, MS., 71-9; Brown, Statement, MS., 10-11; Weeks, Remin., MS., 99; Davis, Glimpses, MS., 120 et seq., and the U. S. consul at Honolulu in a despatch of March 12, 1837, to the secretary of state, in Savage, Doc., MS., ii. 174-6. Spence and Munras published a card in the Honolulu Polynesian, i. 163, denying the truth of an article attributed to them in the S. Luis Potosí Gaceta. Manuscript narratives by Californians are: Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 303-18; Alvarado, Hist. Cal., MS., ii. 202-3; iii. 125-85; Vallejo, Hist. Cal., MS , iii. 154-207; Bandini, Hist. Cal., MS., 83-6; Castro, Rel., MS., 39-42; Torre, Remin., MS., 62-70; Gomez, Lo que Sabe, MS., 13-18, 44-5; Vallejo (J.J.), Remin., MS., 122-3; Serrano, Apuntes, MS., 27-41; Arce, Mem., MS., 8-10; Ávila, Cosas de Cal., MS., 8-13; Fernandes, Cosas de Cal., MS, 99-106; Pinto, Apunt., MS., 21-31; Valle, Lo Pasado, MS., 17; Ord, Ocurrcencias, MS., 99; Pico, Acont., MS., 32-40; García, Hechos, MS., 50-7; Coronel, Cosas de Cal., MS., 21; Galindo, Apuntes, 34-5 – and following pages of each narrative for succeeding events in 1836-7.
