THE SECULARIZATION OF THE MISSIONS
It was not the policy or intention of the Government of Spain to found
Missions in the New World solely for the benefit of the natives.
Philanthropic motives doubtless influenced the rulers to a certain
degree; but to civilize barbarous peoples and convert them to the
Catholic faith meant not only the rescue of savages from future
perdition, but the enlargement of the borders of the Church, the
preparation for future colonization, and, consequently, the extension of
Spanish power and territory.
At the very inception of the Missions this was the complex end in view;
but the padres who were commissioned to initiate these enterprises were,
almost without exception, consecrated to one work only,--the
salvation of souls.
In the course of time this inevitably led to differences of opinion
between the missionaries and the secular authorities in regard to the
wisest methods of procedure. In spite of the arguments of the padres,
these conflicts resulted in the secularization of some of the Missions
prior to the founding of those in California; but the condition of the
Indians on the Pacific Coast led the padres to believe that
secularization was a result possible only in a remote future. They fully
understood that the Missions were not intended to become permanent
institutions, yet faced the problem of converting a savage race into
christianized self-supporting civilians loyal to the Spanish Crown,--a
problem which presented perplexities and difficulties neither understood
nor appreciated at the time by the government authorities in Spain or
Mexico, nor by the mass of critics of the padres in our own day.
Whatever may have been the mental capacity, ability, and moral status of
the Indians from one point of view, it is certain that the padres
regarded them as ignorant, vile, incapable, and totally lost without the
restraining and educating influences of the Church. As year after year
opened up the complexities of the situation, the padres became more and
more convinced that it would require an indefinite period of time to
develop these untamed children into law-abiding citizens, according to
the standard of the white aggressors upon their territory.
On the other hand, aside from envy, jealousy, and greed, there were
reasons why some of the men in authority honestly believed a change in
the Mission system of administration would be advantageous to the
natives, the Church, and the State.
There is a good as well as an evil side to the great subject of
"secularization." In England the word used is "disestablishment." In the
United States, to-day, for our own government, the general sentiment of
most of its inhabitants is in favor of what is meant by
"secularization," though of course in many particulars the cases are
quite different. In other words, it means the freedom of the Church from
the control or help of the State. In such an important matter there is
bound to be great diversity of opinion. Naturally, the church that is
"disestablished" will be a most bitter opponent of the plan, as was the
Church in Ireland, in Scotland, and in Wales. In England the
"dissenters"--as all the members of the nonconformist churches are
entitled--are practically unanimous for the disestablishment of the
State or Episcopal Church, while the Episcopalians believe that such an
act would "provoke the wrath of God upon the country wicked enough to
perpetrate it." The same conflict--in a slightly different field--is
that being waged in the United States to-day against giving aid to any
church in its work of educating either white children or Indians in its
own sectarian institutions. All the leading churches of the country
have, I believe, at some time or other in their history, been willing to
receive, and actually have received, government aid in the caring for
and education of Indians. To-day it is a generally accepted policy that
no such help shall be given. But the question at issue is: Was the
secularization of the Missions by Mexico a wise, just, and humane
measure at the time of its adoption? Let the following history tell.
From the founding of the San Diego Mission in 1769, until about sixty
years later, the padres were practically in undisturbed possession,
administering affairs in accordance with the instructions issued by the
viceroys and the mother house of Mexico.
In 1787 Inspector Sola claimed that the Indians were then ready for
secularization; and if there be any honor connected with the plan
eventually followed, it practically belongs to him. For, though none of
his recommendations were accepted, he suggested the overthrow of the old
methods for others which were somewhat of the same character as those
carried out many years later.
In 1793 Viceroy Gigedo referred to the secularization of certain
Missions which had taken place in Mexico, and expressed his
dissatisfaction with the results. Three years later, Governor Borica,
writing on the same subject, expressed his opinion with force and
emphasis, as to the length of time it would take to prepare the
California Indians for citizenship. He said: "Those of New California,
at the rate they are advancing, will not reach the goal in ten
centuries; the reason God knows, and men know something about it."
In 1813 came the first direct attack upon the Mission system from the
Cortes in Spain. Prior to this time a bishop had been appointed to have
charge over church affairs in California, but there were too few parish
churches, and he had too few clergy to send to such a far-away field to
think of disturbing the present system for the Indians. But on September
13, 1813, the Cortes passed a decree that all the Missions in America
that had been founded ten years should at once be given up to the bishop
"without excuse or pretext whatever, in accordance with the laws." The
Mission Fathers in charge might be appointed as temporary curates, but,
of course, under the control of the bishop instead of the Mission
president as hitherto. This decree, for some reason, was not officially
published or known in California for seven or eight years; but when, on
January 20, 1821, Viceroy Venadito did publish the royal confirmation of
the decree, the guardian of the college in Mexico ordered the president
of the California Missions to comply at once with its requirements. He
was to surrender all property, but to exact a full inventoried receipt,
and he was to notify the bishop that the missionaries were ready to
surrender their charges to their successors. In accordance with this
order, President Payeras notified Governor Sola of his readiness to give
up the Missions, and rejoiced in the opportunity it afforded his
co-workers to engage in new spiritual conquests among the heathen. But
this was a false alarm. The bishop responded that the decree had not
been enforced elsewhere, and as for him the California padres might
remain at their posts. Governor Sola said he had received no official
news of so important a change, but that when he did he "would act with
the circumspection and prudence which so delicate a subject demands."
With Iturbide's imperial regency came a new trouble to California,
largely provoked by thoughts of the great wealth of the Missions. The
imperial decree creating the regency was not announced until the end of
1821, and practically all California acquiesced in it. But in the
meantime Agustin Fernandez de San Vicente had been sent as a special
commissioner to "learn the feelings of the Californians, to foment a
spirit of independence, to obtain an oath of allegiance, to raise the
new national flag," and in general to superintend the change of
government. He arrived in Monterey September 26, but found nothing to
alarm him, as nobody seemed to care much which way things went. Then
followed the "election" of a new governor, and the wire-pullers
announced that Luis Argüello was the "choice of the convention."
In 1825 the Mexican republic may be said to have become fairly well
established. Iturbide was out of the way, and the politicians were
beginning to rule. A new "political chief" was now sent to California in
the person of José Maria Echeandía, who arrived in San Diego late in
October, 1825. While he and his superiors in Mexico were desirous of
bringing about secularization, the difficulties in the way seemed
insurmountable. The Missions were practically the backbone of the
country; without them all would crumble to pieces, and the most
fanatical opponent of the system could not fail to see that without the
padres it would immediately fall. As Clinch well puts it: "The converts
raised seven eighths of the farm produce;--the Missions had gathered two
hundred thousand bushels in a single harvest. All manufacturing in the
province--weaving, tanning, leather-work, flour-mills, soap-making--was
carried on exclusively by the pupils of the Franciscans. It was more
than doubtful whether they could be got to work under any other
management, and a sudden cessation of labor might ruin the whole
territory."
Something must be done, so, after consultation with some of the more
advanced of the padres, the governor issued a proclamation July 25,
1826, announcing to the Indians that those who desired to leave the
Missions might do so, provided they had been Christians from childhood,
or for fifteen years, were married, or at least not minors, and had some
means of gaining a livelihood. The Indians must apply to the commandant
at the presidio, who, after obtaining from the padre a report, was to
issue a written permit entitling the neophyte and his family to go where
they chose, their names being erased from the Mission register. The
result of this might readily be foreseen. Few could take advantage of
it, and those that did soon came in contact with vultures of the
"superior race," who proceeded to devour them and their substance.
Between July 29 and August 3, 1830, Echeandía had the California
_diputacion_ discuss his fuller plans, which they finally approved.
These provided for the gradual transformation of the Missions into
pueblos, beginning with those nearest the presidios and pueblos, of
which one or two were to be secularized within a year, and the rest as
rapidly as experience proved practicable. Each neophyte was to have a
share in the Mission lands and other property. The padres might remain
as curates, or establish a new line of Missions among the hitherto
unreached Indians as they should choose. Though this plan was passed, it
was not intended that it should be carried out until approved by the
general government of Mexico.
All this seems singular to us now, reading three quarters of a century
later, for, March 8, 1830, Manuel Victoria was appointed political chief
in Echeandía's stead; but as he did not reach San Diego until November
or December, and in the meantime a new element had been introduced into
the secularization question in the person of José María Padrés,
Echeandía resolved upon a bold stroke. He delayed meeting Victoria,
lured him up to Santa Barbara, and kept him there under various
pretexts until he had had time to prepare and issue a decree. This was
dated January 6, 1831. It was a political trick, "wholly illegal,
uncalled for, and unwise." He decreed immediate secularization of all
the Missions, and the turning into towns of Carmel and San Gabriel. The
ayuntamiento of Monterey, in accordance with the decree, chose a
commissioner for each of the seven Missions of the district. These were
Juan B. Alvarado for San Luis Obispo, José Castro for San Miguel,
Antonio Castro for San Antonio, Tiburcio Castro for Soledad, Juan
Higuera for San Juan Bautista, Sebastian Rodriguez for Santa Cruz, and
Manuel Crespo for San Carlos. Castro and Alvarado were sent to San
Miguel and San Luis Obispo respectively, where they read the decree and
made speeches to the Indians; at San Miguel, Alvarado made a
spread-eagle speech from a cart and used all his eloquence to persuade
the Indians to adopt the plan of freemen. "Henceforth their trials were
to be over. No tyrannical priest could compel them to work. They were to
be citizens in a free and glorious republic, with none to molest or make
them afraid." Then he called for those who wished to enjoy these
blessings of freedom to come to the right, while those who were content
to remain under the hideous bondage of the Missions could go to the
left. Imagine his surprise and the chill his oratory received when all
but a small handful quickly went to the left, and those who at first
went to the right speedily joined the majority. At San Luis and San
Antonio the Indians also preferred "slavery."
By this time Victoria began to see that he was being played with, so he
hurried to Monterey and demanded the immediate surrender of the office
to which he was entitled. One of his first acts was to nullify
Echeandía's decree, and to write to Mexico and explain fully that it was
undoubtedly owing to the influence of Padrés, whom he well knew. But
before the end of the year Echeandía and his friends rose in rebellion,
deposed, and exiled Victoria. Owing to the struggles then going on in
Mexico, which culminated in Santa Anna's dictatorship, the revolt of
Echeandía was overlooked and Figueroa appointed governor in his stead.
For a time Figueroa held back the tide of secularization, while Carlos
Carrillo, the Californian delegate to the Mexican Congress, was doing
all he could to keep the Missions and the Pious Fund intact. Figueroa
then issued a series of provisional regulations on gradual emancipation,
hoping to be relieved from further responsibility by the Mexican
government.
This only came in the passage of an Act, August 17, 1833, decreeing full
secularization. The Act also provided for the colonization of both the
Californias, the expenses of this latter move to be borne by the
proceeds gained from the distribution of the Mission property. A shrewd
politician named Hijars was to be made governor of Upper California for
the purpose of carrying this law into effect.
But now Figueroa seemed to regret his first action. Perhaps it was
jealousy that Hijars should have been appointed to his stead. He
bitterly opposed Hijars, refused to give up the governorship, and after
considerable "pulling and hauling," issued secularization orders of his
own, greatly at variance with those promulgated by the Mexican Cortes,
and proceeded to set them in operation.
Ten Missions were fully secularized in 1834, and six others in the
following year. And now came the general scramble for Mission property.
Each succeeding governor, freed from too close supervision by the
general government in Mexico, which was passing through trials and
tribulations of its own, helped himself to as much as he could get.
Alvarado, from 1836 to 1842, plundered on every hand, and Pio Pico was
not much better. When he became governor, there were few funds with
which to carry on the affairs of the country, and he prevailed upon the
assembly to pass a decree authorizing the renting or the sale of the
Mission property, reserving only the church, a curate's house, and a
building for a court-house. From the proceeds the expenses of conducting
the services of the church were to be provided, but there was no
disposition made as to what should be done to secure the funds for that
purpose. Under this decree the final acts of spoliation were
consummated.
The padres took the matter in accordance with their individual
temperaments. Some were hopefully cheerful, and did the best they could
for their Indian charges; others were sulky and sullen, and retired to
the chambers allotted to them, coming forth only when necessary duty
called; still others were belligerent, and fought everything and
everybody, and, it must be confessed, generally with just cause.
As for the Indians, the effect was exactly as all thoughtful men had
foreseen. Those who received property seldom made good use of it, and
soon lost it. Cattle were neglected, tools unused, for there were none
to compel their care or use. Consequently it was easy to convert them
into money, which was soon gambled or drunk away. Rapidly they sank from
worse to worse, until now only a few scattered settlements remain of the
once vast number, thirty thousand or more, that were reasonably happy
and prosperous under the rule of the padres.