Page:History of California, Volume 3 (Bancroft).djvu/499

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

NEWS OF THE REVOLUTION.

481

heart, as represented by the ayuntamientos of Los Angeles and San Diego. I proceed with the chronological narrative.

In his letter of November 7th, before cited, Alvarado stated that commissioners would start next day to submit the new plan for approval in the south.^[1] There are indications that such agents were despatched about that time, but we have no record of their negotiations, and they do not appear to have gone beyond Santa Bárbara. So far as I can learn, the first news of events at Monterey came on the Leonidas, which touched at Santa Bárbara about the 15th. The tidings spread to Los Angeles, where, on the 17th, Alcalde Requena called an extra session of the ayuntamiento. The rumor was that Gutierrez was prisoner, Mexican officials had been banished, and an armed force was en route for this city, to compel adhesion to a plan of unknown purport, but believed to involve a change in the existing order of things. The people were called in, and it was resolved not to recognize any authority not legally established, and to send a committee, headed by Síndico A. M. Osio, to meet the approaching force and learn the objects of its coming.^[2] Next San Diego heard the news, from Rocha at San Gabriel, and assembled its ayuntamiento on the 22d. In the discussions great importance was attached to the part taken

↑ Alvarado, Carta Confidencial, MS. Buelna and Villavicencio are named. It would seem that the former at least could not have gone, yet some statements indicate that he did.
↑ Los Angeles, Arch., MS., iv. 197-200. The arrival of the Leonidas with the district judge and Capt. Muñoz (?) on board was mentioned. Regidores Valdés and Herrera were the other members of the committee. Nov. 19th, an account of the meeting was sent to J. J. Rocha, administrator of San Gabriel, who acknowledged receipt on Nov. 20th. Dept. St. Pap., Angeles, MS., ii. 66. Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 318-20, mentions the prominent part taken by the síndico, not naming himself, now and later. Osio says the opposition of Los Angeles was, 1st, because it was ridiculous to form a state with only 9,000 inhabitants, 300 of them educated; 2d, because of foreign and American coöperation, savoring too much of annexation; 3d, because greater powers than those of the national congress had been assumed in granting religious tolerance. These and 'other reasons' caused Angeles to hesitate in recognizing a govt whose elevated principles might very likely prove top-heavy.

[1] Alvarado, Carta Confidencial, MS. Buelna and Villavicencio are named. It would seem that the former at least could not have gone, yet some statements indicate that he did.

[2] Los Angeles, Arch., MS., iv. 197-200. The arrival of the Leonidas with the district judge and Capt. Muñoz (?) on board was mentioned. Regidores Valdés and Herrera were the other members of the committee. Nov. 19th, an account of the meeting was sent to J. J. Rocha, administrator of San Gabriel, who acknowledged receipt on Nov. 20th. Dept. St. Pap., Angeles, MS., ii. 66. Osio, Hist. Cal., MS., 318-20, mentions the prominent part taken by the síndico, not naming himself, now and later. Osio says the opposition of Los Angeles was, 1st, because it was ridiculous to form a state with only 9,000 inhabitants, 300 of them educated; 2d, because of foreign and American coöperation, savoring too much of annexation; 3d, because greater powers than those of the national congress had been assumed in granting religious tolerance. These and 'other reasons' caused Angeles to hesitate in recognizing a govt whose elevated principles might very likely prove top-heavy.

[1]

[2]