in regard to these plates: "They write from London, of April 21,
thus. 'There were found at the Manilas, among many other curiosities,
and brought here by Col. Draper, eight copper-plates, on which are
engraved a most particular map of the Philippine islands, adorned
with the customs and habits of the inhabitants of those parts,
which was done by order of the governor, in 1734, and dedicated
to his Catholic Majesty.'--By an advertisement since inserted in
the papers, some few impressions are proposed to be taken of these
original copper-plates." What is probably one of these impressions was
sold recently by the firm of Henry Stevens, Son and Stiles, London,
to the Library of Congress. This is the celebrated Murillo Velarde
map. The map is printed in four sheets, as are also the pictures
(three to a sheet) of the "customs and habits of the inhabitants,"
and are so arranged that the map is in the middle with the pictures
grouped on its right and left sides. The map as sold by the above
firm was arranged in two large sheets, with a margin left so that
the sheets could be easily joined. The whole map if pasted on one
single sheet with the pictures would measure about 1170 mm. wide,
and 1082-1087 mm. high. The difference in height between the two
halves seems to be due to the lines not being drawn quite true on
the plates, although shrinkage of paper may affect it slightly. This
map is described by Pardo de Tavera in his El mapa de Filipinas del
P. Murillo Velarde (Manila, 1894); and La carte des Philippines du
Pere Murillo Velarde (Paris, 1898), the latter being a separate or
"Extrait du Bulletin de geographie," No. 1, 1897. Marcel reproduces
several of the pictures. The map contained in the Ayer Murillo Velarde
is unaccompanied by the pictures, and was engraved in 1744. We are
indebted for much of this note to the courtesy of the above-named firm.
[26] Lord Egremont was a man of small ability who succeeded Pitt as
secretary of state. See Hunt's Political History of England (New York
and London, 1905), x, p. 32.
[27] Le Gentil (ii, pp. 264, 265), says that the British made many
mistakes in the expedition against Manila. They should, he says, have
first seized the posts about Manila, and the city would have fallen
of its own accord because of its weakness, without the necessity of
a siege; and in addition the "Filipino" would not have been able to
escape. Another mistake was made in allowing Anda to form his army.
The following communications are interesting as showing the diplomatic
side of the British expedition against Manila. These letters all bear
the same pressmark as the present document (all being contemporary
government copies of the real originals), and are to be found at
folios 15-16 verso, 23, 23 verso, 33 verso, 34, and 45.
21 Janry 1763
To Gover. Crommelin
Sir
As it is my duty to acquaint his majesty's principal Secretary of
State with all important Transactions in which his majesty's Troops in
this part of the World are concerned. I beg leave to request you will
send me the Paragraph of the Letter relative to the Capture of Manila
that I may transmit it to England by this opportunity. I also request
you will order the Packet to be kept open until you have received my
Letter which shall be sent as soon as possible. Had I been acquainted
with this sooner, I should not have troubled you to detain the Packet.
I am
&ca. S. L. M.
From the Goverr. 21 Janry 1763
Sir
I am favoured with yours of this date and agreeable to your Request
our Secretary is directed to send you a Copy of the advise we received
yesterday relative to the Capture of manila and to keep the Packet
open till he receives your letter.
I am &ca.
Signed Cha Crommelin
From Mr. Ramsay 21 Janry 1763
Sir
I am directed by the Hoñble the Presedt, and Council to tend you
the accompanying copy of a Paragraph of a Letter from the Chief and
Factors at Tellicherry containing the agreeable news of the surrender
of manila to his majesty's arms on which important acquisition,
I beg leave, Sir, to congratulate and am respectfully Sir &ca
Signed Andw. Ramsay Secry
Copy of a Paragraph of a Letter from the Chief & Factors at Tellicherry
to the President and Council at Bombay dated 10 January 1763 it
received 20th following LB Express Boat, "We addressed you under
the 28th. & 29th. ultimo LB ship Royal Admiral and the Chief
having received by a Private Letter from the Resident at Calicutt,
the agreeable news of a Macao ship arrived at Cochin, bringing
advice of the surrender of manila in four days to Admiral Cornish
we dispatch this Boat, tho unacquainted with any other particulars,
Chiefly to advise your Honour &ca, of it, and Request your acceptance
of our Congratulations on so Considerable an acquisition. Immediately
on our learning any further accounts we shall send away another Boat
with them,
A True Copy.
signed Andw. Ramsay Secry.
To the Earl of Bute 21 Janry 1763
My Lord
Having the Honour to Command his Majesty's Troops here, I esteem it
my duty to send your Lordship the enclosed Paragraph of a Letter of
the Governour & Council here received yesterday from the Chief and
Factors at Tellicherry of which we hourly expect confirmation. I
have the Honour to congratulate your Lordship on the success of his
Majesties arms & of being with the highest respect
My Lord
2 Duplicates Your Lordp. &ca. LB Express over Land
S. L. M.
From Mr. Ramsay Secretary 2d February (sic) 1763
Sir
I am directed by the Hoñble the President and Council to send you the
enclosed attested Copy of a Paragraph of a Letter received yesterday
from the Chief and Factors at Tellicherry and to acquaint you that
the Tartar snow, which has hither to been detained at Surat Bar,
in Expectation of receiving a more Certain and particular accot. of
the Capture of Manilha will shortly be dispatched from thence, if
therefore you have any further advices to transmit to Europe you will
be pleased to prepare them, as soon as possible that they may be duly
forwarded by Sir &ca.
signed Adw. Ramsay Secry
follows the Paragraph
"We have received no further particulars regarding Manilha except
that the day of it's surrender was the 6th october.
To Mr. Ramsay 2d February 1763
Sir
I have just now received your Letter enclosing a Paragraph from
Tellicherry, and I here with send you a Letter for the secrety. of
state, which I desire you will forward by the Tartar snow,
I am &ca.
S. L. M.
To the Earl of Bute 2d February 1763
My Lord
Having just now had the enclosed Paragraph sent me by the Governour &
Council here I do myself the Honour of immediately transmitting it
to your Lordship
I am &ca.
S. L. M.
A letter from "Captain Duff of the 89th Regimt.," dated "Fort
St. George 24 Jañry 1763" contains the following:
"In my letter sent by Captn Morrison I mentioned the news of this
place at that time, in particular the arrival of Captain Wood of the
Company's Troops from Manilha with the account of the surrender of
that place to General Draper the 6th of last October he says that
the Field officers have all made their fortunes and that General
Draper with Colonel Scott and two or three more officers were to go
home in November on board the seahorse man of War. It is said each
of the field officers have Cleared £ 12,000 and in the event of the
acapulco ship being taken, of which they seemed to be pretty certain
they should share very near as much more. The General and admirals
shares are prodigious."
The above paragraph was sent by S. L. M. to the "Governour & Council,
4 march 1763"
A letter from "General Lawrence, Fort, St. George 9 February 1763"
says:
"The Expedition to Manila has deprived us of so many men & we are not
likely to have them again, that we are in great want here. I beg you
will remind the Governour of sending the remainder of Monsons whenever
opportunity's offer."
[28] A correspondent writes to the editor of Scots Magazine under
date of June 21, 1767 (see Scots Magazine for 1767, pp. 305, 306)
the following: "By an advertisement in the Daily Advertiser of
the 13th instant, notice is given to the officers and soldiers who
are intitled to share in the capture of Manilla, that they will,
on the 3d of July next, be paid their respective shares of the sum
of 8053 l. 17 s. 8d. arising from sales of stores taken at Manilla,
and other prizes; 'one third part of the sum being first deducted,
as the proportion allotted to the East-India company.' And as many
disputes have arisen concerning the right of the East-India company
to share in those conquests, permit me to state the matter in its
true light. In the years 1757 and 1758, the East-India company's
principal settlements in that part of the world, were in the utmost
danger of being totally ruined, and their trade destroyed, by the
superior forces of the French; and on a proper representation to
government, a fleet was fitted out at a very considerable national
expence, to save them from the then impending ruin. The forces sent
out in the year 1758 for this purpose, met with the desired success:
Calcutta was retaken; Pondecherry, Vellure, Arney, and several other
principal forts, cities, and garrisons, were taken from the French,
with money, stores, ammunition, and other effects, to the amount of
some millions, which the East-India company, or their servants, took
the entire possession of, and have appropriated to their own use,
though by the laws of conquest, as well as by his Majesty's gracious
declaration, the whole of the booty belongs to those brave officers,
soldiers, and seamen, who were at the reduction of those important
conquests. After the uncommon fatigues and hardships of his Majesty's
troops in the reduction of those places, they were ordered to the siege
of Manilla; which they took by storm: and that city being afterwards
ransomed by the Spaniards for one million Sterling, this powerful and
generous ally, the East-India company, was modest enough to demand
only one-third part of the entire ransom; and one-fourth part of
the said million Sterling being paid shortly after the conquest,
and hostages delivered to his Majesty's commanders, as sureties for
payment of the remainder, the East-India company were accordingly
paid one third part of 250,000 l. and the hostages delivered over
to their governor there; but, for reasons best known to themselves,
their governor thought proper to deliver up the said hostages to the
Spaniards, without taking any further security for the payment of
the remainder of the ransom, being 750,000 l. and therefore not one
shilling thereof has been since paid. This, Sir, is the true state
of this shameful and scandalous transaction, which I have no doubt
but you will speedily communicate to the public."
[29] Published with the first two of the following "Proposals" and
"Conditions" in London Gazette, April 16-19, 1763; London Chronicle,
1763, pp. 369-370; London Magazine, 1763, pp. 212-214; Dublin Magazine,
1763, pp. 245-248; Universal Magazine, 1763, pp. 199-201.
[30] This date is given as the 7th in Colonel Draper's Answer, and in
Draper's Plain Narrative; but all other sources available give the 6th.
[31] These signatures are omitted by Scots Magazine; we take them
from The Universal Magazine.
[32] These signatures are taken from The Universal Magazine.
[33] Possibly for Orden tercera, referring to the tertiary branch of
one of the religious orders.
[34] Draper's Journal should be compared throughout with Rojo's. The
Spanish figures for the English force are as follows: 13 warships,
which the blind authorities believed to be a Chinese trading fleet
(Malo de Luque's Establecimientos ultramarinos, Madrid, 1790, v,
p. 238); 1,500 European soldiers; two companies of artillerymen;
3,000 European seamen armed with muskets; 800 Sepoy musketeers,
and 1,400 for work--a total of 6,830 men. See Montero y Vidal, ii,
p. 13; and Rojo's Journal, post.
[35] Some Armenian merchants from Madras told the archbishop that
a squadron was being prepared there for the capture of Manila. A
certain secular priest had a letter which contained the same news;
while Father Cuadrado, O.S.A., received another letter which mentioned
the declaration of war between England and Spain. On September 14, word
was received in Manila from the outposts on the island of Corregidor
of the appearance of a vessel there the preceding day. A small boat
sent ashore from this vessel inquired how many vessels were in the
bay, and whether the "Filipino" had entered. This vessel left on the
17th without any salute. This produced no other sensation in Manila
than some slight suspicions, and no preparations were taken. Word was,
however, despatched to the "Filipino" to make some other port than at
Manila. See Le Gentil's Voyage, ii, pp. 236, 237; Montero y Vidal,
ii, pp. 12, 13; and Sitio y conquista de Manila (Zaragoza, 1897),
by Marquis de Ayerbe, pp. 33, 34.
[36] While the Spaniards were deliberating on the defense of this
place, the British captured it. Two companies of fifty men each
who had been sent for its defense fled on seeing the British before
them, with the exception of twenty-five men, under Captain Baltasar
Cosar. See Sitio y conquista de Manila, p. 38.
[37] Called César Fallet in the Spanish accounts, but Le Gentil
gives his name as Fayette. He was a French officer then in the Spanish
service, and was later at Pondicherry. See post, Rojo's Journal. Rojo's
account makes the Spanish force larger.
[38] The council of war called on the twenty-fifth of September
(the twenty-sixth, English date) because of the English summons for
surrender, was attended by the following, under the presidency of
the archbishop: Auditors Villacorta, Galbán, and Anda; the fiscal
Francisco Leandro de Viana; the marquis de Villamediana, master-of-camp
and commandant of the garrison; Martin de Goicocoa, sargento-mayor
of the city; the marquis de Monte-Castro y Llana Hermosa, Leandro
Rodríguez Varela, alcalde-in-ordinary; José Antonio Memije y Quirós,
alguacil-mayor; Antonio Díaz Conde, provincial alcalde of the
Hermandad; Alberto Jacinto Reyes, accountant; and Fernando Carabeo,
royal official. After Draper's letter was read, all voted unanimously:
"That inasmuch as this place was in condition to continue its defense,
as no especial harm had been seen to have been done by the enemy,
notwithstanding the continual and lively firing from the 23d when
the siege commenced until the present, therefore they are unanimous
and in harmony in their opinion that this place should be defended
until the last extremity; and the enemy should be informed to the
effect that the Spanish arms did not surrender to any power, for
they alone venerated their sovereign, whose royal sovereignty never
deserted his faithful vassals, not even in the most remote part of
this dominion, as were these islands, in which the love and loyalty
of their inhabitants was great, and obliged them to the defense of
this place." See Montero y Vidal, ii, pp. 16, 17.
[39] Cf. Rojo's description of the fortifications of Manila, post.
[40] Various boats were overturned during the wind, and some of those
who escaped to land, among them some Malabar deserters, begged shelter
from the Spaniards, but it was refused them with volleys, whereupon
they fled. See Sitio y conquista, pp. 50, 51.
[41] "In Manila was a Beata who lived on the alms sent her from
Mexico, or those which she collected in Manila. She maintained and
supported a certain number of girls, who consented to retire with
her and to lead the same manner of life--that is to say, a life of
retreat and repentance. They followed the rules of no particular
order. That community did not have the approbation of the court of
Rome, but that did not prevent it from being tolerated, and even
from being in excellent odour. She was called Mother Paula. The
fiscal had much confidence in her, and sent the greatest part of
his possessions to the house of this woman. This Beata assured
him that Manila would not fall; that the English were all going to
become Catholics; and that the fulfilment of her prediction would
speedily be seen. The fiscal believed her. Completely enthused,
he went to find the archbishop. 'Sir,' said he, on saluting him,
'we have nothing to fear; I have just left Mother Paula; the English
are all going to be converted to the faith; we shall drink excellent
wine at their expense.'" See Le Gentil, ii, pp. 240, 241.
[42] Accompanying the map shown on p. 95, is the following:
"Notice:
"Although yellow is generally used to designate works projected, it
has been necessary to employ it here in the stone buildings existing,
for the lack of carmen. For lack of verdigris, emery has been employed
in the wash for the seashores, rivers, etc.
"That part washed with Chinese ink represents the islands that have at
present houses of wood, bamboo, and nipa. Those which are designated
by lines without washing were burned during the siege.
"The squares or islands with houses are represented by dots. Those
unwashed are of stone, which were also burned.
"The part washed in verditer shows the gardens and rice fields.
"In the delineation and washing of this plan, several defects are
noted, which are to be excused as it was made at sea, under the
necessary discomfort of the balancing of the boat, and lack of what
was needful for its perfection. The explanation is sent separately,
as there is no room on this sheet [marco]." Scale 200 Castilian varas
to 4 1/4 cm. The size of the original MS. map is 59 x 48 cm.
[43] The Marquis de Ayerbe says (Sitio y conquista, p. 60) that
forty of these men were killed, among them being several wounded men,
one of whom was the sargento-mayor, Martin de Goycoa (sic).
[44] Many of the inhabitants of Manila fled to the Pasig after the
assault, and when attempting to swim across, were fired upon by the
British, with horrible carnage. See Montero y Vidal, ii, pp. 27, 28.
[45] The captors imposed several contributions on the conquered. They
seized a champan and its money and effects that was despatched without
a passport by Fernando Calderón to the provinces for purposes of
trade. See Sitio y conquista, p. 70.
[46] At the assault of the royal gate, the enemy lost but four men, one
of whom was a major, who received an arrow in the face. The commander
of the regiment, Miguel Valdés and some men basely fled. See Sitio
y conquista, pp. 60, 61.
[47] Published with the following appendices in London Gazette, 1763;
London Chronicle, 1763, pp. 377-379; Gentleman's Magazine, 1763,
pp. 171-176; London Magazine, 1763, pp. 214-219; Dublin Magazine,
1763, pp. 248-255; Universal Magazine, 1763, pp. 202-206; and vol. ii
of The Field of Mars, 1781.
[48] A number of maps by this man exist in the archives of the Indies,
at Seville.
[49] See Report of the War Department for 1903 (Washington, 1903),
iii, pp. 434-446: "Historical Sketch of the Walls of Manila."
[50] "The English knew as much of the weakness of that city as
the Spaniards themselves, because of the voyages that they made
there annually. There was (and the same was true in 1766 and 1767)
the greatest freedom of going everywhere, of seeing and visiting
everything. When I left that city, I could easily have given an
idea of the plan of the fortifications of that place. The Spaniards
were without distrust in this regard. The English knew besides that
the garrison was very weak, and composed of Mexican soldiers, good
enough indeed, but of little skill in the military art, as they had
never fired a gun; and composed, in a word, of soldiers, sufficient to
impose on Negroes, but incapable of opposing well disciplined troops,
accustomed for some years to fighting in India." See Le Gentil, ii,
p. 236.
[51] Cf. with this statement the letter by Baltasar Vela, S.J., post,
pp. 288-295.
[52] This was Lieutenant Fernando Arcaya. See Sitio y conquista de
Manila, p. 36.
[53] Ferrando (Historia de los PP. dominicos, Madrid, 1871, iv,
p. 621), says that the first summons for surrender from Cornish and
Draper demanded the immediate delivery of eight million escudos,
the equivalent of four million pesos.
[54] "After consulting the royal assembly of these islands the governor
replied: 'Gran Bretaña must know already that fear and threats are not
the securest method nor the most fitting means to celebrate treaties
with the noble servants of the Spanish sovereign. History has shown the
world that Spaniards know how to die like good men for their God, for
their king, and for their fatherland, but never to yield in the face
of danger, much less to be intimidated by arrogant threats. Go, then,
and bear this message to your chiefs; and tell them that we here are
ready in any event to sell our lives dear.'" See Ferrando, iv, p. 621.
[55] After the taking of the Augustinian convent at Malate, the
archbishop issued a circular to all the religious orders, telling them
"that it was now time for them to leave their cloisters and aid in
the defense of the city," which they did gladly. Later, he ordered
all the orders to furnish soldiers, and many of the religious entered
the ranks. See Sitio y conquista, pp. 39, 50.
[56] "These were the two churches that Arandía desired to have
demolished one year before his death, and for which the friars tried
to excommunicate him. It is quite certain that these two citadels
which were only eighty toises from the body of the city, hastened and
furthered the capture of the city. By favor of these churches, the
English raised and formed their batteries of cannons and mortars with
the greatest ease.... I have seen the ruins of one of these churches,
whose walls were yet high enough to make excellent retrenchments with
very little labor." See Le Gentil, ii, pp. 239, 240.
[57] In this boat were captured money amounting to 30,000 pesos,
and other objects of value. See Sitio y conquista, p. 42.
[58] The Marquis de Ayerbe (Sitio y conquista) gives this force
as consisting of two companies of fifty Spaniards, and more than
two hundred Indians and mestizos with spears, muskets, and two
eight-pounders. He was seconded by José del Busto.
[59] Of this sortie, Le Gentil says (ii, p. 243): "This sortie was only
a kind of boast and bravado, for how could one flatter himself, with at
the most sixty men (for I do not take any account of the eight hundred
Indians and two small cannons) that he could give any trouble to six
thousand men of good troops, withdrawn into two or three citadels,
which it would really have been necessary to have besieged in order
to try to dislodge them; for the walls of all these churches are made
of cut stone, and are as thick as the walls of the royal observatory,
namely, five or six feet thick, and are octagonal." The reënforcements
sent to Fayette consisted of two Spanish companies and 1,500 Indians,
commanded by Pedro Iriarte; and later one other company commanded by
Fernando de Araya.
Opinions are divided as to the conduct of Fayette (Fallet), some
accusing him of treason and others exonerating him. Ferrando (iv,
p. 623) says, when speaking of his night sortie, that he retired only
because of superior numbers, and adds: "Without reason and justice,
the suspicion of treason against the French official (Sr. Fallet) who
directed that sortie according to good principles of [military] science
(which do not always triumph over tenfold the number of legions),
would lie then on the conscience of the country." At the assault,
however (ut supra, p. 628), Fayette, who was ordered to guard the
breach in the wall, was with some reason accused of treason because
of the lukewarmness which he displayed in its defense; and because he
finally went over to the British lines, being received there gladly. In
fact when the British were forming for the assault Fayette had ordered
the Indian archers to retire from the breach under pretext of taking
some refreshment and rest before the assault--which was well calculated
to aggravate suspicions. The English, seeing this move, were quick
to take advantage of it. Monterory Vidal says (ii, p. 27) that he
played the traitor at the assault by not offering any resistance. The
Marquis de Ayerbe (Sitio y conquista, p. 44) calls him a Swiss.