University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Naval Department Of San Blas: 1767-1797

(USC Thesis Other)

The Naval Department Of San Blas: 1767-1797

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content T h is d is s e r t a t io n h a s b e e n 64— 3114 m ic r o film e d e x a c tly a s r e c e iv e d T H URM AN , M ic h a e l E d w ard , 1933— THE N A V A L D E P A R T M E N T O F SAN BLAS: 1 7 6 7 -1 7 9 7 . U n iv e r sity o f Sou th ern C a lifo r n ia , P h .D ., 1963 H isto r y , m o d ern University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, M ichigan Copyright by Michael Edward Thurman 1964 THE NAVAL DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS: 1767-1797 by Michael Edward Thurman A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (History) August 1963 UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N CALIFORNIA GRA DUATE S C H O O L UNIV ER SITY PARK LOS A N G E L E S 7, C A L IFO R N IA This dissertation, written by ....... Miohae-1-.iidwarxi-.Th,uriiaan....... under the direction of .Dissertation C o m mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y Dean .. DISSERTATION COM*>lITTEE j&fr*. . . (.6 Chairman X PLEASE NOTE: Plates are not original copy. These pages tend to "curl". Filmed in the best possible way. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS, INC. PREFACE The important role of the MNaval Department of San Bias’ 1 came to my attention during a seminar under Professor Donald C. Cutter in 1958. Professor Cutter urged me to do some research at the Bancroft Library and to read two scholarly articles written by Charles E. Chapman on the San Bias Supply Depot. From this beginning, I have con tinued my research and have made San Bias the subject of this dissertation. From the Bancroft Library I used the newly-acquired Revilla Gigedo Collection, and the Library*s comprehensive microfilm collection, particularly the "Californias1 1 and "Provincias Intemas” sections of Archivo General y Pub lie a de la Nacion and the transcripts of manuscripts from the Archivo General de Indias. The Jose de Galvez Manuscripts, purchased by Huntington Library in 1927, provided an excellent record ii of the visitador’s efforts in founding the Naval Department of San Bias. Specific diaries and journals in this classic library include those of Estevan Jose Martinez and Gonzalo Lopez de Haro. The Coe Collection of Hispanic materials at Yale University Library contained contemporary letters and diaries of Spanish explorations to the Northwest Coasts from the Port of San Bias in 1774, 1775, and 1779. Of par ticular significance is Viceroy Bucareli's correspondence, seeking new chaplains for the foundering naval department and the diary of Ignacio de Arteaga, expedition commander from San Bias in 1779. In the summer of 1960, I did research in Mexico City's Archivo General y Publiea de la Nacion. With assistance from Professor Cutter, as lecturer, teacher, and co-researcher, I found a vast amount of material pertaining to San Bias. Final research for the dissertation was undertaken in Spain during the year 1961-62. Of the many Spanish archives and libraries, the Museo Naval of Madrid and the Archivo General de Indias in Sevilla offered excellent original diaries, journals, naval records, maps, and iii drawings which make up the substance of this study. The Museo Naval contains the vast Navarette Collection and innumerable documents pertaining to Spanish naval activi ties while the Archivo General de Indias is rich in material relating to the foundation and organization of the Naval Department of San Bias. In addition to these major collections in archival sources, I completed addi tional research in the Biblioteca Nacional and the Archivo Historico Nacional in Madrid. I gratefully acknowledge the grant by the Del Amo Foundation of Los Angeles of a Research Fellowship for his torical study in Spain during the year 1961-62. This study still would be in a formative stage without such generous assistance. I am particularly indebted to Professor Donald C. Cutter, dissertation chairman, for his friend liness, patience, and scholarly guidance during my under graduate and graduate work at the University and in Spain. Professor Donald W. Rowland has shown me and many other graduate students the processes of historical research. To Professor Bruce R. McElderry, Jr. I owe much for en livening my appreciation of literature and for giving me iv a proper sense of historical perspective. It is heartening indeed to the student to receive kindly and wise counsel from such scholarly men. Michael Edward Thurman Los Angeles, California March, 1963 v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE............................................. ii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION.................................... 1 Purpose of the Study......................... 3 Scope and Relationship of Earlier Historical Works ........................... 4 Organization of the Study..................... 8 II. THE NAVAL DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS: A SUMMARY OF ITS FOUNDATION AND ORGANIZATION, 1768 TO 1773 ................................. 10 Jose de Galvez and the Establishment of the Naval Department of San Bias............... 28 Organization and Personnel of the Department of San B i a s ............................... 59 Departmental Activities at San Bias, 1768 to 1773 ............................... 91 \d Chapter Page III. THE REORGANIZATION AND FIRST PERIOD OF NAVAL EXPLORATIONS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS, 1774 TO 1780 .................................. 104 The Juan Perez Expedition of 1774 125 The Hezeta-Bodega y Quadra Expedition of 1775 139 The Arteaga-Bodega y Quadra Expedition of 1779 159 IV. A DETAILED RECORD OF SAN BLAS* GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, 1774 TO 1786 180 Military and Civil Leadership ............... 181 Expansion and Development in San Bias: Military and Civilian Construction Projects...................................... 211 Maintenance and Repair of Naval Vessels and Harbor Facilities and the Resulting Transfer Controversy ....................... 239 Transition in the Department of San Bias During the Anglo-Spanish Conflict, 1779 to 1785 ................................ 262 viJ Chapter Page V. THE ZENITH AND DECLINE OF THE NAVAL DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS, 1787 TO 1797 281 The Martinez and Lopez de Haro Expedition of 1788 283 The Martinez and Lopez de Haro Expedition of 1789 307 Leadership of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo and Captain Bodega y Quadra.................335 The Francisco de Eliza Expedition of 1790 . . 345 Additional Spanish Exploration: Manuel Quimper and Alejandro Malaspina............ 356 Departmental Activities from 1789 to 1794 . . 373 The Aftermath of Nootka....................... 395 BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................409 APPENDIX................................. 421 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Spanish epic o£ founding a provincial settle** ment along the shores of Alta California has captivated historians and scholars of the twentieth century since Herbert E. Bolton and Charles E. Chapman first introduced this subject as a result of their research in the archives of Spain and Mexico. In addition to this theme, many authorities have concentrated their efforts upon naval activities on the Pacific Coast in connection with com mercial trading ventures, smuggling activities, piratical incidents, and international warfare. The topic of my study, the Naval Department of San Bias, is closely related to the story of Spanish settlement of Alta California and, moreover, it is a complete episode within itself. The Naval Department of San Bias was the most impor tant military installation on the west coast of Mexico from 1768 to 1800; it was the vital base which ultimately provided Alta California with logistics. San Bias' harbor 1 was conveniently located along the Gulf of California on the mainland. It was situated almost directly east of the tip of Lower California (Cabo de San Lucas) and 130 miles south of the Port of Mazatlan. Today, San Bias is a sleepy seaport almost equidistant between the northern and south* era boundaries of Nayarit. As a definite outgrowth of the Bourbon Reforms which Visitador General Jose de Galvez implemented, the Spanish Naval Base of San Bias stood as a solid bastion from 1775 until it was neglected in the 1790's following the un favorable Nootka settlement of 1794. With only slight modifications, the Department of San Bias provided the one, positive link between Mexico City and the provincial capital, Monterey, in Alta California during the last half of the eighteenth century. It was not only an administra tive center for maintaining the presidios and missions of California, but also served as the "jumping-off place" for Spanish voyages of exploration to the Northwest Coast. As new voyages of exploration were completed, prominent San Bias personnel directed these achievements. Purpose of the Study 3 The purpose of this research is to present new material upon a significant theme of Spanish Pacific Coast exploration. In perspective, I have attempted to present a chronological record of the Department of San Bias and to describe both the civilian and military achievements of this period--1768 to 1797. Among several important topics which pertain to my study of west coast naval activities (including size of fleets and the number of personnel), I have concentrated my attention upon the following: 1. The importance of the Naval Department of San Bias in fulfilling Spanish plans for the occupa tion, settlement, and exploration of the Pacific Coast from San Diego to the Gulf of Alaska; 2. The historical development of Alta California as it was effected by maritime supply; 3. The early problems which frustrated Spanish pro jects to establish a major supply depot north of Acapulco; and 4. The requirements which were assigned to the naval base during periods of peace and pros perity and also during wartime. Scope and Relationship of Earlier Historical Worka Several prominent historians have been indirectly concerned with the study of the Naval Department of San Bias. The eminent California historians, Professors Bolton and Chapman, have enriched our knowledge of eighteenth cen tury Mexico and California while succeeding scholars have continued to provide new information regarding Spanish exploration and naval activities. Since 1930, Hispanic scholars, including Robert Seldon Rose, William L. Schurz, Engel Sluiter, Woodrow Borah, and Henry R. Wagner have pub lished a number of excellent works about Spanish explora tion and colonization. Their contributions consist primarily of translations of diaries, journals, and related documents plus interpretative works on seventeenth and eighteenth century Mexico. Each of the previously men tioned historians have included an occasional "comment" about San Bias in their major works, but three— Bolton, Chapman, and Wagner— have stressed portions of the San Bias episode and these authors merit some elaboration. First, concerning Charles E. Chapman, the story of San Bias was briefly presented in his full-length work, 5 The Founding of Spanish California (1916). Three years later, he published two periodical articles about San Bias supply vessels. Professor Chapman's first treatment of San Bias (1916) was incidental; he described the gradual but ineffective attempts of the Jesuits to colonize Lower Cali fornia, with some mention of plans to develop a seaport near the Rfo Santiago, fifteen miles from San Bias. The second series which Chapman published on San Bias is a valuable account of maritime supply activities from San Bias to Alta California during the department's first years of operation, from 1773 to 1777. In both periodical articles (1915 and 1916), Professor Chapman has merely re corded the operation of San Bias supply vessels with a cursory description about the internal problems which hin dered maritime supply to California. Professor Bolton and the topic of San Bias are fused and developed in brief episodes within several of the author's major works, especially his translations of the Palou documents— Historical Memoirs of New California. There are also brief accounts of San Bias personalities and even military figures in his Explorations of Juan Bautista de Anza and Frav Juan Crespi. In each of Bolton's three works, the role of the Department of San Bias Is well defined and there Is probably more detailed Information about San Bias (although fragmentary) than In any of Chap* man1s accounts. Henry R. Wagner, the third author who has been con* cemed with San Bias, is strictly interested in Hispanic exploration on the Pacific Coast. Wagnerfs most important publication is Cartography of the Northwest Coast of America to the Year 1800 (1937), a two-volume collection containing a vast array of Spanish manuscripts and charts. Among other things, this publication describes three sepa rate voyages of exploration from San Bias to the Northwest Coast in the years 1774, 1775, and 1779; the author also gives special attention to outstanding San Bias military officials. Marcial Gutierrez Camarena, a popular Mexican his torian, completed an interesting and historic survey on the Port of San Bias, entitled San Bias v las Califomias*-one of the latest and most comprehensive works about this topic. As a representative publication of the Mexican Society of Geography and Statistics, San Bias v las Cali- fomias stands forth as one of the few modem works which 7 attempts a complete study of San Bias* from the time of Conquistador Guzman until the movement for independence in 1810. The foregoing discussion of prominent authors who have been indirectly concerned with the Naval Department of San Bias suggests both the importance of this topic and also the necessity for a thorough, comprehensive work. Previous accounts contain a smattering of published ma terial concerning San Bias personnel but unfortunately, these biographical sketches usually lack an historical reference to the Department of San Bias. Furthermore, a host of prominent San Bias personnel are usually over looked; for example, Ignacio de Arteaga, Francisco Segurola, Juan Pantoja y Arriaga, Jose Canizares, Jose Tovar, Fran cisco Eliza, Manuel Quimper, Jacinto Caamafto, and Ramon Saavedra. In summary, previous studies and publications regarding the port are inadequate because of two faulty approaches: (1) the authors have concentrated upon ex tremely small portions of San Bias' history; and (2) they have failed to indicate broad relationships between New Spain and Alta California and hence, with the role of San Bias. 8 It is my intent to present a comprehensive and mean ingful narrative which contains both the details of supply voyages and also the broad implications of Spanish Pacific Coast explorations. Stated in simple terms, my approach is to utilize the earlier contributions (which have been previously discussed) and to fill in some of the more obvious gaps of the San Bias story, 1768 to 1797. Organization of the Study The framework for this paper is a chronological- historic development wherever possible; occasionally, there are some episodes--the explorations to the northwest and supply activities to California, for example— which have been organized along geographical or regional patterns. The disadvantages of the chronological survey are recog nized and one of them, the repetition of earlier or pre viously cited material, is not uncommon. For best results, however, I have elected to employ the chronological method because of flexibility in presenting both "events and important characters." Essentially, the organization of this study is represented by the following significant periods and in clusive dates: Foundation of the naval department and the era of temporary operations--1768 to 1773; Reorganization of the naval department and first period of explorations--1774 to 1780; Transition period, San Bias' growth and development--1774 to 1786; and Final explorations, occupation of Nootka Sound, and the decline of San Blas--1787 to 1797. CHAPTER II THE NAVAL DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS: A SUMMARY OF ITS FOUNDATION AND ORGANIZATION, 1768 TO 1773 According Co naval and maritime standards of acces sibility, strategic location and accommodating surroundings, the Port of San Bias should never have been selected as the primary naval station for Spanish forces on the Pacific Coast. Even stranger Is the existence of the Naval Depart ment of San Bias from 1768 to 1810 despite repeated plans for transferring the naval functions to new locations. While there was royal determination and religious fervor ostentatiously supporting Spain's project for occupying and settling Alta California, these factors proved only par tially successful in meeting the challenge of administering a new supply depot at the Port of San Bias. The record of San Bias* forty-two years service is mute testimony of the department's over-all success, while in the background are numerous administrators and naval heroes who merit a more 10 11 adequate historical presentation. The paradox of San Bias' continued service even in the face of detailed evidence supporting more appropriate locations is difficult to explain. From a military point of view there were several disadvantages; namely an in hospitable climate, a shallow harbor, and isolation from Mexico City. Throughout Nueva Galicia's coastal strip-- extending approximately seventy-eight miles north of San Bias to the Bay of Jaltemba distant twenty-seven miles to the south— the climate and geography closely resembles that of Vera Cruz on the Atlantic Coast.^ Being located within this coastal plain or "Hot Country" as it was called, San Bias experienced heavy winter rains and excessive humidity and high temperatures during the summer months. Because of the lack of prevailing sea breezes from the gulf directly inland and the unhealthful vapors or odors which originated from decaying leaves, fruit, and vegetable matter along the courses of the r£o Santiago, the Port of San Bias was strictly a liability for sanitary and health ^Source materials for San Bias geography include Alonso de la Mota Escobar, Pescripcion Geografica de los revnos de Nueva Galicia. Nueva Vizcava v Nueva Leon (Mexico: Editorial Robredo, 1940), and Jose L. Tamayo, Geoeraffa General de Mexico (Mexico: 1949). 12 reasons. At the village of Tepic, located some forty-two miles distant in the interior highlands, the officers of the Naval Department of San Bias were permitted to maintain temporary quarters; also, there were numerous military and civilian officials who retired to Tepic for rest and recuperation. The geographic peculiarities, more than any other natural phenomena, shaped the development of San Bias and molded its destiny until the forces of revolution shook Mexico in 1810. A recent authority on San Bias' history, Marcial Gutierrez Camarena, indicates the following: The history of San Bias cannot be separated from the countryside surrounding it. The port's birth, development, and extinction are closely bound up with the men who inhabited the plateau and to their conduct. The events which occurred in the highlands were going to effect in greater or lesser degree the port's life which in every case depended upon the action of its center. This life represents an historic phenomena that cannot be explained in a totality outside of or separated from the study of its events and this latter example is one of the richest and most important explanations of our country.2 The geographic characteristics of the Port of San Bias are unique because they both aided and hindered progress. O t San Bias v las Califomias: Estudio Historico del Puerto (Mexico: Editorial Jus., 1956), p. xvii. 13 Among the positive assets one can enumerate a sheltered harbor, a strategic location, and finally, an abundant supply of natural resources. The Port of San Bias possessed a small, but shel tered harbor located on the west coast of Mexico thirty-one miles south of the Rfo Santiago and 195 miles from Guadala jara. The seaport included both an inner basin and outer harbor. San Bias1 inner harbor was afforded natural pro tection by means of a short channel— a small branch of the r£o Santiago--and there was space for approximately four vessels within the shipyard basin. The outer harbor ex tended both north and south of the main channel and pro ' s vided a wide, substantial anchorage for larger vessels. The strategic location of San Bias was ideal for controlling commercial traffic throughout the extensive coastal regions of Nueva Galicia. Moreover, San Bias was closer, via sea lanes, to Alta California than any other major port on the west coast of New Spain.^ Commercial ^Consult Plate no. I, in the Appendix. ^Both of the previously-cited ports lie south of San Bias in the following latitudes: Mantanchel at 105°-16,N. (or some two miles away) and Chacala at 105°-151N. (ten miles distant). Historically the Fort of Chacala was used by Spanish mariners and later the Port of Mantanchel was developed by Jesuit missionaries of the early 1700*s. See: Gutierrez Camarena, op. cit.. pp. 54-71. 14 traffic had always been an important characteristic of New Spain's western seaports; by the late 1700's the Spanish Crown was once again interested in the age-old prospects of trading with and colonizing Alta California. After 1767, the Jesuits were expelled from the New World and their commercial activities which emanated from Sonora and Sinaloa were absorbed by the Spanish government."* Spanish occupation of Alta California was eventu ally accomplished, and San Bias' supply vessels deserved a considerable amount of credit for this feat. By 1777, officials of New Spain were able to boast permanent settle ments at San Diego, Monterey, and San Francisco in Alta California. Notwithstanding mild criticism about the possibilities of using San Bias as a major supply base (at one time, the project received the appellation of "Galvez Folly," a derisive term pointing to its original ^The commercial aspects of San Bias were recognized by Jose de Galvez in 1767. A complete discussion of the port's possibilities for commercial development is found in Viceroy Francisco Croix's "Ynstruccion que ha de observar el Comandante Comisionado Don Manuel Rivero para la Pobla- cion de San Bias y havilitacion del Puerto de este nombre en la Costa del Mar del Sur," Mexico, Jan. 11, 1768, in Archivo General de la Nacion, Marina, 44. Hereinafter cited as AGN. 15 founder**), the Naval Department of San Bias was a permanent, military Installation by the year 1773. The third important asset connected with the Fort of San Bias involves natural resources of Nueva Galicia. These resources included many agricultural products normally associated with a tropical climate and, in addi tion, there were abundant mineral deposits from which the Port of San Bias derived yearly revenue sources. Staple crops of this territory included com and tobacco, while there was Intensive use of banana and coconut trees for both nutritional supplements and building materials. There was some livestock production around San Bias, including cattle and mules, but most of the herds which were main tained by the naval department grazed farther inland near Tepic. Even the original plan of Viceroy Francisco Croix to recruit one hundred families for settlement at San Bias, strictly on the basis of agricultural subsistence, was **A great deal of the criticism which was directed against the inspector's project for occupying Alta Cali fornia emerged after Galvez left Mexico in May 1772, for his return to Spain. Compare: Omer Englebert, Juninero Serra: The Last of the Conquistadors, translated by Katherine Woods (New York: Hareourt, Brace and Co., 1956), pp. 126-27, and Herbert I. Priestley, The Mexican Nation: A History (New York: Macmillan Co., 1917), p. 186. 16 a very unprofitable endeavor owing to the humid climate and low yield. Consequently, the Port of San Bias was almost entirely dependent upon the Interior highlands— even rely ing upon Guadalajara for some products— except those materials for marine construction derived from timber.^ Several of the local industries within the territory of Nueva Galicia included production of beverages (namely, tequila and aguardiente) and the extraction of salt and semi-precious metals. Concerning the first industry, there soon proved to be a new market for wine products at the naval department and the civilian Villa de San Bias. By the close of the first twelve years of operation, some 750 officers, clerks, and employees were stationed at San Bias and their consumption of local beverages amounted to a liberal contract for the merchants of Tepic. There were also considerable quantities of wine and aguardiente used on board San Bias naval vessels, both in normal supply Q voyages and for voyages of exploration, from 1770 to 1790. 7 Charles E. Chapman, "Difficulties of Maintaining the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777,” Southwestern His torical Quarterly. XIX (April, 1916), 261-62. Q The production of aguardiente and associated bever ages in Nueva Espafia was a government monopoly controlled by the Real Hacienda. Contemporary records for contracts for wine products and the selling prices are found in 17 The most lucrative, abundant natural product of Nueva Galicia was Its rich deposits of salt. During the course of Spanish northern expansion from the highlands of Mexico, the use and development of saline products In creased proportionately with the production of silver and gold plus normal subsistence requirements. Later, In 1768, Jose de Galvez became interested in establishing a west coast seaport in Nueva Galicia and the basis for the naval department's support was eventually vested in salt production. During formal military and civil ceremonies in the Port of San Bias, Visitador Galvez announced the official reglamento for this base and he decreed that eleven active salt mines be placed under the administration of the comisario of San Bias. The genius of Jose de Galvez* action was readily apparent since the department recorded abundant yields from several active salt mines in 1769: from the northern mines of Acaponeta through the interior Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme Que En Virtud de la R1 Orden de 24 de Mayo de este ano hizo el Yllmo. Sr. Visitador Gral. Dn. Jose de Galvez, al Exroo. Sr. Virrey Dn. Antonio Maria Bucareli del estado de los graves asuntos que tubo a su cargo, dividida en quatro partes," Mexico, Dec. 31, 1771 (3119), MS in Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. Hereinafter cited as Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. 18 mines of Guarlstempa and down to Valle de Banderas, San o Bias collected an annual yield of 25,000 to 50,000 pesos. Another advantage for San Bias* operations concerned the proximity of the salt deposits. Three-fourths of all the major sal In as were located within a radius of twenty miles, and the mines were active and In relatively satis factory operating condition at the time of the Galvez decree.The only requirement for San Bias officials was to administer the affairs of the sallnas and even this was not a taxing job because the products were stored In and sold from local warehouses to miners and fishermen. Of all the fortunate windfalls for the department's early success, the monetary support from the salt mines proved the most Important and reliable. A final discussion of San Bias' outstanding supply of timber and wood products merits a more extensive treat ment. Historically, the extent and quality of San Bias o , Francisco Trlllo y Bermudez, San Bias, June 12, 1772, Archlvo General de Indlas (Sevilla), Audlencla de Guadalajara. Legajo 104. Hereinafter cited as AGI. 10The geographic distribution of San Bias* salt mines favored the southern district, including the mines of Zapotlllo, Chametla, Chila and Valle de Banderas. See Plate no. II. 19 maderag were the first important advantage broadcast by the early mariners who crossed the Gulf of California or coasted along the shores of Nueva Galicia and Sonora.^ Even Jesuit missionaries were acquainted with these impres sive forests located close to the ports of Mantanchel and San Bias. In 1767, Viceroy Marques de Croix dispatched a veteran naval officer to the r£o Santiago for the purpose of building new vessels in support of the Elizondo Campaign in Sonora. From this time until the capture of the Fort of San Bias by revolutionary forces in 1810, the distinct advantage of abundant timber of first grade quality im- 12 measurably aided the development of San Bias. Throughout the Province of Nueva Galicia there were numerous varieties of timber, ranging from the common comprehensive work summarizing 16th and 17th century "pre-San Bias" activities is Alvaro del Portillo y Dfez de Sollano, Descubrimientos v Explorac iones En las Costas de California (Madrid, 1947), p. 152 ff. ^^Without exception, every civil and military leader who visited San Bias during the era of 1768-1800 was en thusiastic about the timber supply. See the following: [Antonio de Pineda,] "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias,1 ' [1791], Pacffico America, Tomo II (127), ^MS, origi nal in Museo Naval; and Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, San Bias, May 20, 1768, in Jose de Galvez Manuscripts, Huntington Library, San Marino, California. Hereinafter Museo Naval will be cited as MN and Jose de Galvez Manu scripts cited as Galvez MSS, HL. 20 coconut palm and the banana tree to varieties of Brasil trees and majestic Mimosa. Many of the trees adjacent to the naval station were used for construction purposes and occasionally for medicinal needs. By 1790, the timber 13 supply had been greatly diminished. The primary utiliza* tion of San Bias timber between 1769 and 1790 was for buildings and ships. The extent of the department's naval construction is revealed by the testimony of one of the naval officers who remained at San Bias during the early phases of European war in 1782; he said that there was enough wood in the naval arsenal for the construction of two hundred medium-size frigates.^ The continuous use and development of the timber Industry at San Bias was also responsible for employment of a large number of civilian employees. Initially, a small crew of skilled workers was employed on the northern border 13 One of the best contemporary documents concerning the classification and identification of San Bias* trees is [Antonio Pineda,] "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MM. See the author's comment concerning Pineda and his contemporary in scientific work, Jose Longinos Martinez, infra, pp. 23*25. ^Diego Choquet de Islas, "Expediente sobre constru- ir Buques en Manila para Sn Bias y proyecto propuesto por Dn Diego Choquet de establecer 2 correos anuales de Sn Bias a las Yslas Filipinas, 1780-81," in AGN, Marina, 61. 21 of the Rio Santiago during construction of the department *s first naval vessels. One year later there were permanent facilities at this site— called the "corte de maderas"— and the number of employees had increased twofold. One inter esting aspect of the timber industry was the different phases which were maintained: there was an official "cutting site," where the department kept a small workhouse and where the workers felled trees of the proper size. Officials then delivered the logs to the naval arsenal of San Bias by means of large rafts along the branches of the Rio Santiago. Finally, there was extensive manufacture of by-products including tar, pitch, varnish, and paint--each rendered from the resin or bark of a number of different varieties of trees.^ By 1783, the Naval Department of San Bias employed some 375 civilian workers in the arsenal, including forty-five day laborers employed in the manual operation of cutting logs and ferrying them to the port. As a further indication of the department's vast oper ations, the government of New Spain maintained a contract with the Indians of two nearby villages for the collection ^[Antonio de Pineda], "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 22 of pitch and tar.*'*’ The most important single species of timber for marine construction proved to be cedar, owing to its quali ties of lightness and durability. San Bias carpenters fashioned true, even lengths of cedar for planking and they also shaped spars and masts from this versatile wood. One contemporary author asserts that all the new vessels constructed at the shipyard of San Bias from 1768 to 1774 were entirely made of cedar, from the keel to the mast head, but there was some construction from varieties of pine and hardwoods. Even at a later date, cedar continued to dominate timber requirements in the naval department and in the present era it is amusing to study the serious con troversy which flared up between officials of New Spain and those of Guatemala or even those in the Philippine Islands about the relative excellence of their own varieties ^Lesley Byrd Simpson (ed. and transl.), Journal of Jose Longinos Martinez. 1791-1792 (San Francisco: John Howell-Books, 1961), p. 8. Hereinafter cited as Simpson, Journal of Jose Longinos. Jose Longinos indicates that the Indians of Tequepespan held this type of contract with San Bias' comiaario. 17[Antonio Pineda,] "Origen de la Construeion de Buques" (1791), San Bias, in Pacffico America, Tomo II (127), MS in MN. 23 of timber.^® For construction projects in the Villa de San Bias and at the naval station, Spanish officials utilized cedar and pine and during the earliest period (until 1783) they used palm thatching. These palms were known locally as "palapa" species and throughout thirty-five years of San Bias' building program, "palapa" materials proved to be inexpensive, although they were also a constant source of trouble due to incendiary outbreaks.^ Permanent struc tures at the villa included a church, administrative build ing, counting-house, and private residences— an Impressive array at the height of San Bias' development in 1791. As a rough measure of comparison, some 75 per cent of all structures at San Bias in this period were of wooden Ciriaco Gonzalez Carvajal to Jose de Galvez, Manila, Feb. 3, 1786 in AG1, Mexico. 104. See also: Pilar Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias En La Edad Moderna" (unpublished thesis in University of Sevilla, 1960), pp. 43-50. Hereinafter cited as Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias. ..." [Pineda,] "Notlcias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN, and Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. p. 91* According to Pilar Delgado Miranda, the palana species of palm trees supplied a long, wide branch which was universally adopted for roofing materials on private residences and buildings of the arsenal. See: "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... ," pp. 19-20. 24 materials; only the church and counting-house were con structed o£ stone and cement. During the era o£ 1769 to 1790, officials in the Department of San Bias had adapted many native uses for timber and they employed wood products in a number of dif ferent ways. San Bias woods were utilized as medicines and others yielded nutritional values as Indicated in the fol lowing tabulations: Trees Utilized for Nutritional or Medicinal Purposes 1 J k • Chicle sanote refreshment (gum), plus nutritional 2. Lemon nutritional 3. Orange nutritional 4. Tamarindo refreshment 5. Cacao nutritional 6. Margarita medicinal 7. Guarima medicinal 8. Pochote medicinal 9. Giote medicinal 10. Guavabo medicinal (for treatment of scurvy) 25 Trees Utilized for Construction Projects and Associated Applications 1. Mesquite (Mimosa) 2. Hule (rubber) 3. Teoeeuale (Mimosa) 4. Guapinole 5. Brasil 6. Mangle bianco 7. Guayacan firewood fabrication and construe- tion projects fabrication of machinery components manufacture of resin and varnish manufacture of dyes and paints preferred for exclusive use on San Bias supply vessels; firewood fabrication of ships' block and tackle^O Beginning in 1790, Mexico became a focal point of attention when scientific explorers concentrated their efforts on classification of flora and fauna. For the Naval Department of San Bias, the appearance of two outside exploring expeditions meant that the natural products (especially timber, whose value was at a premium) would be identified and classified for later study. The Mexican Botanical Expedition (1789 to 1792) and the Malaspina ^ Simpson, Journal of Jose Longinos. pp. 63-66. 26 Expedition (1789 to 1794) applied their efforts with skill and precision in collecting scientific information and, except for their thoroughness, much of the naturalist's 21 details would probably have been unrecorded. One of the first "modern" scientists who explored Nueva Galicia and classified its trees was Antonio Pineda of the Malaspina Exploring Expedition. Pineda, who was bom in Guatemala, accompanied the scientific expedition of Alejandro Malaspina and Jose Bustamante y Guerra from Spain to the west coast of Mexico, via South American ports of call, during the period 1789 to 1791.^ As the official scientist charged with responsibility for all phases of natural history, Antonio Pineda's compilations indicate the work of an astute man of science. His sojourn in New Spain during Malaspina's excursion to the Pacific Coast of North America and to California was a distinct asset to Viceroy Revllla Gigedo. The latter official permitted Pineda and several other members of Malaspina's party to examine A < j Simpson, Journal of Jose Longinos chronicles some aspects of the first expedition mentioned above; Donald C. Cutter describes the second in Malaspina In California (San Francisco: John Howell-Books, 1960). 22 Cutter, Malaspina In California, pp. 4-6. 27 the royal archives of Mexico in search of scientific material and in this capacity, Pineda's name became a hall" mark among viceregal reports and records. The naturalist Pineda was also busy traveling through much of Nueva Espafta, and during his visits to the coasts of 'Tueva Galicia he 23 classified and identified the trees of this territory. J Jose Longinos Martinez, a contemporary of Antonio Pineda, accompanied the Mexican Botanical Expedition from Madrid to Mexico. The Journal of Jose Longinos Martinez; 1791-1792 recalls the naturalist's visits to Baja Cali fornia, Alta California and, of special interest in this study, are his notes and records pertaining to scientific investigations on the ''Coasts of San Bias" where he resided from November 1792 until December 1793.^ ^Cutter, Malaspina In California, pp. 4, 16-17. Pineda's original compilation of San Bias trees is found in "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. ^Simpson, Journal of Jose Longinos. pp. 1-17 and 63-66. Longinos' identification of trees along the South Coast is listed as "Trees of the Hot Country of the Depart ment of San Bias." Since Pineda's survey was completed in 1791 and Longinos' work took place twelve months later, there is reason to believe that the former scientist merits greater recognition. Compare: Iris H. Wilson, "Scientific Aspects of Spanish Exploration in New Spain During the late Eighteenth Century" (unpublished dissertation, University of Southern California, 1962), pp. 111-12. 28 Jose de Galvez and the Establishment of the Naval Department of San Bias In 1767, Viceroy Francisco de Croix conferred with the Inspector-General of New Spain, Jose de Galvez, about plans for exerting Spanish authority along the Pacific Coast and also throughout the Interior Provinces. One of the first positive steps which Viceroy Croix initiated was to dispatch Jose de Galvez through the northern portions of the kingdom enforcing the edict of Carlos III for the ex pulsion of all Jesuits. In December of 1767, Galvez re ported that the situation in the provinces was unstable and in the inspector's opinion, new regulations and a more centralized administration were needed for this area. During the early part of 1768, both Francisco de Croix and Jose de Galvez formulated plans for reorganizing the Pro- vincias Internas and for initiation of new explorations 25 along the Pacific Coast. These plans were formally 95 Plans for reorganizing the northern provinces are found in Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771” (3119), MS in BN. Another Galvez report is entitled "Informe Sobre la Nueva Espana dado por el Visitador Don Jose de Galvez al Virrey Don Antonio Bucareli ... ," Mexico, Dec. 31, 1771 (570), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Jose de Galvez, "Informe Sobre la Nueva Espana ... , 1771" (570), MS in MN. 29 presented to the Audiencia of Mexico and approved In Febru ary 1768. The viceroy's final action regarding these plans was to send Jose de Galvez on a second inspection tour of Sonora and Lower California in 1768. In addition to the normal requirements of the visita and the responsibility for consolidating the government's authority in the northern provinces, Jose de Galvez was also charged with two other important functions. Viceroy Croix sent Galvez out from the capital with specific instructions for increasing royal revenues and for develop ing maritime trade along the coasts of Sonora and Nueva Galicia.^ Regarding both of these responsibilities, Jose de Galvez received unprecedented royal authority--in appointment of officials and in the formulation of new ordinances, laws, and decrees— plus the co-operation of 26 "Testimonios de los autos fechos en ordinanza a el Viaje que ha de hacer el Senor Dn. Joseph de Galvez del Supremo Consejo de Indies, Yntendente de los Exercitos y Visitador Gral. de todos los tribunales y Rl Hacienda de este Reyno a la Peninsula de California y sucesivamente a las Provincias de Sonora y de Nueva Vizcaya,” Mexico, Feb. 29, 1768, Archivo General de Indies (Sevilla), Audiencia de Guadalalara. Legajo 416. Hereinafter cited as "Testimonios de los autos fechos ... que ha de hacer el Sr. Dn. Joseph de Galvez ... AGI, Guadalalara. 416. 30 the military commander in Sonora, Colonel Domingo Eli- 27 zondo. On April 9, 1768, Jose de Galvez* inspection party left the capital and headed for Guadalajara and eventually for Sonora and Lower California. In the provincial capital of Guadalajara, the inspector began his second visita and he conferred with members of that audiencia concerning the need for reorganizing the northern territories. The ad ministrative burden for ruling such a vast geographical area was too great, according to Galvez, and he proposed a distinct organization of the northern provinces separate oo from Guadalajara's jurisdiction. In addition, the visi tador proclaimed a series of new regulations for increasing royal revenues and for establishing stricter management by the Real Hacienda. Specifically, the new regulations were 27 "Testimonios de los autos fechos ... que ha de hacer el Sr. Dn. Joseph de Galvez ... ," AGI, Guadalalara. 416. 28 In 1768, the Audiencia de Guadalajara included the Provinces of Nueva Galicia, Nayarit, Sinaloa, Sonora, Cali- fomias, Nueva Vizcaya, Nueva Mexico, Nuevo Leon, Texas and Coahulla. One year previous, Jose de Galvez and Vice roy Croix formulated a plan for reducing the civil and military administration of Guadalajara by creation of a Comandancia General composed of Nueva Vizcaya, Sonora, Sinaloa and Californias. See: Jose de Galvez, "Informe Sobre la Nueva Espana ... , 1771" (570), MS in MN. 31 designed to improve the department or Ramos de Tabaco and Sal, which had previously accounted for vast revenues in the audiencia; however, in 1768 Spanish officials seemed 20 greatly displeased with these income sources. 7 Inspector Galvez was uniquely qualified for his reorganizing efforts of the Ramo de Tabacos. During the earliest period after his arrival in Nueva Espana, Galvez devoted almost two years of study to improving tobacco income. His recommendations and interest in this phase of royal revenues were carried over to his second visita in Guadalajara in 1768. And concerning the audiencia's salt production, he was well informed from the previous inspec tion tour of 1767 and eager to restore this branch of the 30 Real Hacienda to its former prestige and importance. complete report on both the Ramo de Salinas and Tabaco is found in Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. During his two visitas to the Sonoran frontier in 1767 and 1768, Galvez devoted unusual attention to the salines of Nueva Espana, noting their vital role in both civilian and military occupations. At Guadalajara, Galvez planned to increase the audiencia*s membership but after conferring with President Francisco Galindo, he agreed to leave it unchanged. 30 / Inspector Galvez reported to Viceroy Bucareli in 1771 of his personal efforts for streamlining the Estancos de Tabaco. From the time of his arrival in New Spain in July 1765, until May of 1767, Galvez worked exclusively improving the revenues from the tobacco industry. See: "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. 32 During the inspection and visitation in Guadalajara, Jose de Galvez imposed new regulations in regard to offi cial weights used in the province for rendering the loads or cargos of salt. Moreover, he informed the five-man junta that salt income must be increased by means of better administration. Throughout the provincial towns and vil lages, including Tepic and San Bias, new officials were appointed in accordance with Jose de Galvez' edicts for economy and increased revenues. One of the most signifi cant measures which the inspector imposed during this visita was the adoption of a special price for fishermen, miners, and ranchers, who consumed large quantities of salt. By this method, Jose de Galvez attempted to stimu late consumption of the saline products and also to regu late the economy. Somewhat later, on May 24 at the Port of San Bias, Inspector Jose de Galvez codified these new regulations for the Audiencia of Guadalajara's salt ramo: he ordained that all revenues from the local salines of the 31 San Bias area should accrue to the new naval station. ^Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, San Bias, May 24, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. At Guadalajara Galvez promulgated two final regulations which indirectly effected the course of events at San Bias. The first edict provided that all sales of aguardiente and "Vino de Castilla" would 33 After less than a month's endeavors in Guadalajara, Jose de Galvez left the city on May 4 and travelled to the west coast. Between his departure from Guadalajara and his arrival at San Bias, the visitador received a special dispatch from Viceroy Croix urging him to take immediate steps to organize a maritime expedition for the occupation 9 9 of Alta California. ^ The viceroy's message (prompted by his own receipt of a memorandum from the Spanish court) was serious and urgent in presenting the threat of "foreign encroachment" to Inspector Galvez. Notwithstanding the thorough preparations which Francisco de Croix and Galvez had completed during the period from 1767 to 1768, the recent dispatch from Mexico took precedence over all other activities which Galvez contemplated. This incident was the actual "propelling force" in launching the Sacred be taxed 4 pesos a barrel, with the proceeds used for con struction of a new provincial palace in Guadalajara. The second regulation specified that a proposed decrease in salary of the five companies of militia troops of Nueva Galicia be abrogated. See: Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, Guadalajara, May 2, 1768 and Galvez to Croix, May 3, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. Viceroy Croix's message reached Galvez at Pueblo de Santa Marfa de Magdalena on May 6, 1768. By return correspondence, Galvez informed his superior that he would draft a formal response upon his arrival at Tepic. Galvez to Croix, May 6, 1768 in Galvez MSS, HL. 34 Expedition from San Bias and subsequently from Baja Cali- fomia to effect the long awaited occupation of Alta California. In deference to Jose de Galvez* experience, the viceroy entrusted the execution of maritime exploration to "the Inspector's own wise judgment" but, he suggested immediate utilization of two new packetboats, San Carlos and Pr£ncit>e. Galvez' personal report to Bucareli in 1773 contained the following summary: Actually I left this capital on the ninth of April but before arriving at the Port of San Bias and going to California, I received a letter from His Excellency in which was enclosed a copy of another order communicated by His Honor, the Marques de Grimaldi, first Secretary of State, in which His Majesty ordered me to take the necessary steps for safeguarding that peninsula [California] from the repeated probings of the Russians, \rtio arrive from the Tartar Sea to re- connoiter the coast of northern California. The first assignment which the vis itador-general completed on the west coast was a thorough inspection of the previous government shipping center, Mantanchel, located three miles southeast of San Bias. At the Rada de Mantanchel, there were docks and wharves which the Jesuits ^"Ynforme Sobre la Nueva Espana ... , 1771" (570), MS in MN. 35 had built, and during the decade of 1760-1770, the govern ment had operated transportation services from this site to Lower California and the ports of Guaymas and Mazatlan. The broad sweep of Mantanchel'8 open, accessible beach was inviting, and coupled with permanent maritime facilities, there was a good possibility that Inspector Galvez would choose this location for Spain's new supply depot and naval 34 station. Jose de Galvez devoted two weeks for inspecting the coastal ports of Nueva Galicia including San Bias and Man tanchel, and he eventually chose the former port to serve as an administrative center approximately equidistant between the Califomias and Mexico City. The choice of San Bias was partially a predetermined course of action. During official conferences in Mexico City from 1767 to 1768, Viceroy Francisco de Croix had selected the Port of San Bias for a new maritime center and he directed one of the local officials from Mantanchel to take charge of 34 The Ensenada or Rada de Mantanchel was much more accessible than San Bias* inner harbor but it lacked any amount of security. Since the two harbors were adjacent and separated by only one fresh-water stream, it was natural to think of both harbors as co-equals. See Plate no. II. 36 this project.^ Consequently, at the time of Jose de Galvez* arrival on the west coast, there were diligent efforts at San Bias in connection with erecting a new villa 36 and establishing repair facilities for naval vessels. On the basis of his inspections and in accordance with the viceroy*s dispatch, Jose de Galvez confirmed the Port of San Bias for the site of a major naval station and supply depot. On May 16, before a junta of San Bias offi cials and his own personal retinue, the visitador announced 37 royal plans for the occupation of Alta California. ^^Marques de Croix, "Ynstruccion que ha de observar el Comandante Comisionado Don Manuel Rivero para la Pobla- cion de San Bias ... ," AGN, Marina. 44. 36 Consult the following MSS in the Museo Naval con cerning construction projects at San Bias in May 1768: a. Juan Manuel de Viniegra, "Noticias del Cabo de San lucas, Ultimo Termino de la California Meridional, * * Cabo San Lucas, Feb. 16, 1769, in Costa NO de America, Tomo I (331); b. Miguel Costanso, "Diario historico de las Viajes hechos por Mar y Tierra a la Nueva California, 1770," Mexico, Oct. 24, 1770, in Califomias: Historia y Viajes, Tomo I (575); and c. [Antonio de Pineda,] "Noticias del Departa- mento de San Bias," 127. 37 "En el Puerto y nueva Poblacion de Sn Bias, Reyno de Nueva Galicia a la costa del Mar Sur, el dia diez y seis de Mayo de mil setecientos sesenta y ocho, el Yllmo. Sr. Dn. Joseph de Galvez del Consejo y Camara de S.M. en el Supremo de Indies, Xntendte. del Exercito, Visitador Gral. de Tribunales, y Rl Hacienda de estas Reynos; y Comisionado Galvez also proclaimed the establishment of the Naval Department of San Bias at the junta of May 16; the depart* ment which would henceforth organize and support Spain's new explorations to Alta California and the Northwest Coasts. Inspector Galvez was ably assisted In his organiza- tlonal work at San Bias by several subordinates, including his scribe, Juan Manuel de Vinlegra, an engineer, Miguel Costanso, and a pilot and mathematician, Antonio Faveau y Quesada. There were also a number of additional officials from the Port of San Bias who assisted Jose de Galvez in this new operation; civil and military officials included Manuel Rivero y Cordero, Piloto Vicente Vila, Miguel del Pino, and Juan Perez— all destined for important roles with con todas las amplisimas facultades del Exmo. Sr. Marques de Croix, Virrey, Governor, y Capltan Gral. de esta Nueva Espana, hlzo combocar a su alojamiento de las casas Rs. al ingeniero Dn Miguel Costanso, al Comandante de la Marina, y de este Puerto Dn Manuel Rivero Cordero, a Dn. Antonio Faveau de Quesada, Profesor de matematicas, y Practico en la navegaclon de estas Mares, y los de las Filipinas, y a Dn Vicente Vila, Piloto de la Rl. Armada de S. M. del Mar del Norte, y destinado como piloto mayor de las Embarca- ciones que navegan en estas del Sur," Galvez MSS, HL. A classic published work which chronicles Galvez' activities in New Spain is Herbert I. Priestley, Jose de Galvez. Visitador-General of New Spain. University of Cali fomia Publications in History, V (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1916); pp. 238-40 describe the junta of San Bias. 38 I Q the Naval Department of San Bias. The formal organization of the Naval Department of San Bl’ S was explained by Jose de Galvez to the military and civil officials at the junta of May 1768. One of the most important facets of San Bias' organization was the distinct and separate entity it enjoyed as an independent unit of the Kingdom of Nueva Espana. According to this organization, the Naval Department of San Bias derived authority directly from the viceroy and ultimately from the King of Spain. Owing to its exclusive military organiza tion (that is, because of the department's organization as a unit of the Royal Armada under the jurisdiction of the Ministerio de Marina^. the Naval Department of San Bias was not subject to the civil ordinances or regulations of the Audiencia of Guadalajara in whose jurisdiction it operated. And finally, Jose de Galvez ruled that the department would be organized and regulated according to the Royal Ordinances for Arsenals and Naval Stations which guided 38 / # f Jose de Galvez to Marques de Crois, San Bias, May 16, in Galvez MSS, HL. 39 *1Q all major naval bases throughout the Spanish Bnpire. 7 In addition to his formal proclamation and outline for the departmental regulations, Jose de Galvez also made a number of permanent appointments. He named the following major officials for directing San Bias' activities: Manuel Rivero Comandante de Marina Francisco Hijosa Coomissary Officer Juan de Urrengoechea y Arrinda Accountant Miguel del Pino First-Class Pilot Antonio Faveau y Quesada Captain of the Principe Vicente Vila Captain of the San Carlos^0 Among the entire group of new officials, the Coman- dante. Manuel Rivero, was the most efficient and experi enced administrator. As Cotnnissary Officer at the Port of Mantanchel, he managed shipments from the mainland to 39 Josef de Rada, "Ynstruceion para que el Departa- mento de San Bias se observe los Articulos de las Reales Ordinanzas de la Armada y Arcenales en todo lo accequible ... ," Mexico, Nov. 23, 1782, in AGN, Marina. 34. The first portion of this expediente describes the efforts of Jose de Galvez in establishing the Department of San Bias. ^Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, May 16, May 20, and May 24, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. 40 Lower California and Sonora from 1760 to 1765. During the expulsion of the Jesuits, Rivero was entrusted with re ceiving and accounting for the personal effects of the deposed missionaries. His efficiency in this assignment brought praise from the visitador and probably established him as the outstanding candidate for leadership at the Port of San Bias. Early in January 1768, Manuel Rivero was i i appointed Comandante de Marina at San Bias. One year prior to organizing the Department of San Bias in 1768, Jose de Galvez had formulated plans for constructing several new vessels on the coasts of Nueva Galicia. The origin of this shipbuilding project is attributable to Galvez1 first inspection of Sonora in 1766, when he conferred with Colonel Domingo Elizondo on plans for the Sonoran Expedition. The original motive for developing San Bias as a seaport and shipping center is closely linked to Jose de Galvez and the Sonoran Campaign of 1767-1768. In 1766, ^Rivero1 s experience as commissary of Mantanchel is described by Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Cali- fomiaa. pp. 74, 80. Viceroy Croix1 s appointing order to Manuel Rivero is "Ynstruceion que ha de observar el Coman dante Comisionado Don Manuel Rivero para la Poblacion de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 44. 41 Inspector Galvez completed an official "Inspection" of the northwestern and central provinces of New Spain where he encountered a number of hostile Indian tribes; his final report of 1766 to the viceroy stressed the desirability of maintaining order in these interior regions by "punitive methods." Consequently, an official Spanish military expedition was planned and executed by Galvez. Viceroy Cruillas (the predecessor of Marques de Croix), and Colonel Domingo Elizondo (the military comoander of the Sonoran Expedition). They recognized the need for a more direct supply line from Mexico City to the northern provinces and. specifically, sought to expedite troop movements along this route by eliminating the long, hot marches through Sonora and Sinaloa. Galvez proposed that the government construct several new vessels in Nueva Galicia for transporting Spanish troops from Mantanchel to Sonora, by way of the Gulf of California. In June 1766, Inspector Galvez' plans were approved by the viceroy and initial preparations were launched for # t y the shipbuilding project. In accordance with Jose de 42 * Galvez to Croix, Mexico, June 17, 1766, and Croix to Julian Arriaga, June 23, 1766, in AGI, Guadalajara. 416. 42 Galvez' recommendations for the new project, an experienced naval carpenter from Vera Cruz, lieutenant Alonso Francisco Pacheco, was appointed as supervisor. The outline which Galvez formulated for Lieutenant Pacheco included the fol lowing instructions: 1. To outfit a small company of experienced workers amounting to one master-builder and five marine carpenters plus the neces sary materials; 2. To select an appropriate site at Puerto de Mantanchel or any other location which would be well-suited for shipbuilding and to establish a construction area adjacent to a plentiful timber supply ("close to a 'corte de Maderas'"); and finally, 3. To construct two vessels, either schooners or brigantines, whose approximate dimen sions were 28 feet overall length, 10 feet extreme beam and with facilities for 15 oars. ^ The government of New Spain quickly outfitted Lieu tenant Pacheco and by early spring of 1767, he had estab lished a new astillero. or shipyard, on the banks of the / ^ I Rio Santiago. Notwithstanding Pacheco's energetic 43 Galvez to Croix, June 17, 1766, AGI, Guadalajara. 416. ^The site of Lieutenant Pacheco's astillero on the r£o Santiago was commonly known as "el Corte de Maderas." In 1768, all of the equipment and supplies from the tempo rary shipyard were hauled to San Bias for support and development of the government's new shipyard. Galvez to Croix, May 24, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. 43 endeavors, there were several delays In the construction project on account of the severity of heavy rains. After more than a year of preparation and some ten months' work, Francisco Pacheco completed four new ships; two packet- boats and two schooners.^ In the fall of 1767, Lieutenant Pacheco launched the vessels (having previously christened the packetboats San Carlos and Principe) and prepared to deliver the ships to San Blas.^ The delivery of the four vessels to San Bias in volved a difficult transit along the Rio Santiago during the rainy season. In all seasons the river was unpre dictable and tricky to navigate; it was a tortuous passage 4S * The major difference between the two types was one of size. A packetboat of this period was a large, two- masted sailing vessel much like a brigantine, displacing up to 200 tons. The goleta or schooner of this era was a small, two-masted vessel (30 T. to 70 T. displacement) whose light draft made it ideal for coastal exploration. Measuring up to 100 feet in length, the goleta was very popular in the Department of San Bias where a total of seven schooners were completed from 1767 to 1792 compared with only three packetboats. See: Diccionario Maritime Espafiol (Madrid, 1864), pp. 284, 397. ^"Resumen General Sac ado de los Extract os que tra- tan en Particular de los servicios que han hechos los Baxeles del Departamento de San Bias," Sept. 9, 1791, in Pacffico America, II (127), MS in MN. On Oct. 25, 1767, Jose de Galvez informed Minister of the Indies Julian Arriaga of the vessels* completion and launching on the r£o Santiago; cf. AGI, Guadalajara. 416. 44 characterized by a strong current and sandbars plus numer ous logs and floating debris. Notwithstanding these dangers, Francisco Pacheco began floating the vessels in October, and by moving them through a series of channels connecting with the river, he was able to by-pass the normal water route via the mouth of the r£o Santiago. Apparently the transfer was completed in two phases, which Pacheco described as follows: "All of the difficulties were conquered and the naves arrived there [San Bias] in the months of October and November 1767, while the river was abundant with water. The construction and delivery of the vessels was an exceptional feat considering the primitive working condi tions and the problems of shipping and receiving all finished ironwork and special instruments from Mexico City via mule train. The Department of San Bias acquired a fortunate windfall, in view of the fact that there were very few facilities at San Bias for new construction and department officials gained imnediate access to a competent ^[Antonio Pineda,] "Origin de la Construeion de Buques" (127), MN. The vessels' transfer from "el Corte de Maderas" to the Port of San Bias is accurately described by Juan Pantoja in "Plano del Puerto de San Bias," 1785. 45 and sturdy fleet of naval vessels. Consequently, at the time of Jose de Galvez* arrival at San Bias In May 1768, the department boasted the following ships: 1. The new packets San Carlos and Pr£ncipe (also called 'El Toison1 and 'San Antonio* respectively), displacing 193 tons each; 2. The new schooners Sonora and Sinaloa, from the r£o Santiago construction center, both of 30 tons burden; and, 3. Two older vessels, confiscated from the Jesuits in 1767, the packetboats Concepcion (62 tons) and Lauretana (54 tons).48 After presiding at the San Bias junta in May 1768, Jose de Galvez remained on the coasts of Nueva Galicia for approximately ten days working on preparations for the proposed maritime expedition and perfecting the organiza tion of the new Naval Department of San Bias. In order to support Comandante Rivero as much as possible, Galvez formally provided for the financial support of San Bias in the following manner: first, he directed that revenue from Nueva Galicia's salt mines be placed on deposit with "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MN. Gutierrez Camarena in San Bias v las Califomias attributes the entire construction project to Manuel Rivero, who worked in Mantanchel [sic,] (p. 80), while Priestley in Jose de Galvez indicates that the total amount expended for the two packetboats was 70,000 pesos (p. 236). 46 the treasury of San Bias; and second, he organized a ramo menor (minor division) of the tobacco monopoly whose revenues were also used in supporting the new naval station. The official proclamation of May 24, 1768, authorized the commissary officer to administer eleven salt mines for the financial support of San Blas.^ The second important regulation concerning tobacco revenues was especially sig nificant because Galvez had previously supported a program of restricting tobacco cultivation to government planta tions. By virtue of the reglamento of May 24, Jose de Galvez authorized the cultivation and production of tobacco products in the surrounding territory of San Bias. The control and supervision for the royal tobacco monopoly at the port was vested in Francisco Urbieta, another Galvez appointee.^ ^Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, San Bias (no. 309), May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. See below, pp. 86-87. ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 306), May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. The visitador's authorization for the Department of San Bias to produce tobacco was based upon the large consumption noted in this area— some 8,000 to 10,000 pesos-worth per month. The new administrator, Francisco Urbieta, was recommended by Manuel Rivero and he posted a fianza (bond) with the factor in Guadalajara. 47 Galvez also cooperated with Manuel Rivero In formal*' lzlng plans for the permanent location of the Villa de San Bias. The Inspector, noting that Rivero had completed a detailed sketch and drawing of the Port of San Bias, assigned his own engineer, Miguel Costanso, to complete a finished drawing for submission to the viceroy. Apparently both Rivero and Colonel Domingo Elizondo worked on plans and drawings of San Bias, but Galvez preferred a more skillful representation.^ After a thorough Inspection in May 1768, Jose de Galvez was extremely enthusiastic over the prospects of the site. He welcomed the opportunity of participating in the establishment of San Bias1 Villa and he stressed the following points in his correspondence with Viceroy Croix: there were two new roads leading out of San Bias, one to the Pueblo de Tepic located in the high** lands and the other to the royal salinas warehouse at Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 314), May 17, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. The official Costanso map is entitled "Plano del Puerto y Nuevo Poblacion de San Bias Sobre la Costa de la Mar del Sur,* * San Bias, May 23, 1768, in Servicio Geo- grafico del Exercito, Archivo de Cartas y Pianos, Mexico (J-3a 2a no. 48), Madrid. See Plate no. I. It is interesting to note that during the visita of Lower California, Miguel Costanso also made scale drawings of Bahia de La Paz and Cerralvo; cf. AGI, Guadalajara. 416, no. 35. 48 Guaristempa; the site of the new villa was remarkably clean on account of Rivero's careful preparations in clearing away the timber and underbrush; and finally, the new houses which were made of solid wood with thatched roofs were very inexpensive and would serve the settlers for some time. In addition to these progressive indications, Galvez pro fessed great satisfaction in noting that the village had a crude chapel whose ornaments and altar were beautiful spectacles.^ According to Galvez, the site was growing rapidly notwithstanding crowded living conditions: With respect to the population, there is al ready congregated and registered in San Bias 140 families; and since these notices are communicated throughout the surrounding countryside it will soon be abundant with settlers. In connection with this activity, there are some houses where two and three families live together, while these same groups help each other to construct dwell ings which each one ought to inhabit; and in re gard to this inconvenience--done on a voluntary basis--there is no outburst and it is tolerated without any quarrel. ” ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 311), May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 308), May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. On May 17, there was a fire in the San Bias chapel which is quickly extinguished. Galvez promulgated two civil ordinances to prevent this occur rence; one outlined the procedures for using lighted candles or tapers in buildings with "palapa" or thatch roofs and the other regulation required the Villa de San Bias to maintain a night watchman whose duty was to make inspection rounds in the villa, arsenal, and shipyard. 49 One of the most encouraging aspects of Jose de Galvez* inspection concerned the new packetboat San Jose in the shipyard. In May 1768, the new vessel was under* going final outfitting and both the comandante and the master-builder of San Bias assured Galvez that it would be completed by the middle of July. Vicente Vila, who was the senior pilot at San Bias, remarked that the San Jose would be much swifter than the two previous packetboats and in her sail capacity would surpass both the San Carlos and Principe. According to both the pilots and the master- builder, the San Jose possessed excellent handling charac teristics and great seaworthiness; her superior maderas outranked those of Havana and Campeche for durability.^ In summary, the prospects of using the San Jose for support of the Sacred Expedition were favorable and Jose de Galvez terminated his visitation with this proposal. The plans which the inspector completed in the Port of San Bias for launching the "Sacred Expedition" are in dicative of Galvez* thoroughness and efficiency. First, ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 308), May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. One year later during his visitation on the Sonoran Coasts, Jose de Galvez sailed from Loreto to Santa Cruz de Mayo (Sonora) on the San Jose; see AGI, Guadalajara. 416, no. 49. 50 in connection with the order from the Marques de Grimaldi for securing the Califomias and especially the Port of Monterey, Jose de Galvez formulated a secondary plan to support the naval expedition. He proposed that Spanish officials of Baja California dispatch a company of soldiers overland, from Loreto to Monterey, thus eliminating the possibility of complete failure if the ships were lost at sea. The pilots and military officials of San Bias accepted this suggestion wholeheartedly and relishing their approval, Galvez concluded as follows: Considering that the maritime voyages are of an uncertain nature and very conditional since they are made at the mercy of the sea and the winds, and that the short expeditions of the two preceding centuries had no other effect than to scout some of the Ports, I determined, with the advice of those Officials and Pilots who had been in San Bias, to assist In the accomplishment of the Port of Monterey with an expedition by land which was actually carried out by the packet boats. . . . 5 In preparing the new vessels San Carlos and Principe for the long voyage, Galvez declared that it was indis pensable to provide for the material and subsistence Jose de Galvez, ’ 'Ynforme ... , 1771” (3119), MS in BN. Viceroy Croix's original order to Galvez suggested the possibility of dispatching a military expedition by land or sea. Croix to Galvez, Mexico, April 30, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. 51 requirements of their crews. He cited the lack of provi sions and water which the members of the Vizcaino Expedi tion experienced, and in San Bias Galvez took immediate steps to avoid the same mistakes.^ In accordance with Jose de Galvez' final plans for outfitting the packetboats, officials at San Bias were required to dispatch the San Carlos and Principe as soon as possible for Cabo de San Lucas. At this location, Galvez planned to issue final instructions to the captains of the vessels, and with a "topping-off load of fresh provisions," the visitador envisioned a successful expedition. Two of the original portions of Jose de Galvez' plan in launching the Sacred Expedition were modified by January 1769. Both changes involved the assignment of new members to the maritime force and both new appointments were successful if one judges by accomplishment of the original mission. While Inspector Galvez was still at San Bias during May 1768, he issued orders for the assignment of a small detachment of troops to accompany the naval vessels ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 311), May 16, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. 52 57 to Alta California. These troops were from the militia body of Guanajuato-*"a strong, robust body of some twenty- five soldiers"--but the orders were evidently modified by the fall of 1768. In lieu of the Guanajuato militia, Galvez appointed Lieutenant Pedro Pages to escort the mari time expedition accompanied by twenty-five members of the 58 Catalonian Volunteers of Spain. The second modification of Galvez* original orders concerned the appointment of conmanding officer on the packetboat Principe: Antonio Faveau y Que8ada, professor of mathematics and a skilled pilot in navigation along the CQ / Pacific Coast and to the Philippine Islands. 7 Galvez declared that both Faveau y Quesada and Vicente Vila of the San Carlos would be assisted by one second pilot during ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 311), Hay 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. Hie visitador planned to draft recruits from the Legion of San Luis and from the militia of Guana juato. ^^Higuel Costanso, "Diario historico de los Viajes hechos por Mar y Tierra a la Nueva California, 1770," Mexico, Oct. 24, 1770, in California: Historia y Viajes, Tamo I (575), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Miguel Costanso, "Diario historico ... , 1770" (575), MN. ^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 311),^ May 16, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. See also: Priestley, Jose de Galvez. p. 238. 53 their northern voyage. In October 1768, the Principe returned from Guaymas and was outfitted in the Port of San Bias at which time Inspector Galvez dismissed Faveau y Que- sada and named Pilot Juan Perez as captain of the Principe. Antonio Faveau was later assigned to the Southern Depart ment of California at Loreto, but there is apparently no explanation for his removal as captain of the Principe.^ Jose de Galvez continued his inspection of Sonora and California at a grueling pace: on May 24, 1768, he embarked from San Bias on the schooner Sinaloa and after a whirlwind of activities--including formal ceremonies of possession-taking in Las Islas Marlas and a short sojourn in Mazatlan— he landed in Bahia de Cerralvo, Lower Cali fornia on July 5.^ In the fall of 1768, the visitador began full-scale preparations for receiving the packetboats San Carlos and Principe from San Bias. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MN. For details on Juan Perez, see infra, p. 70. Faveau y Quesada is treated again below, pp. 76-77. ^^Miguel Costanso, "Diario historico ... , 1770” (575), MN. ^Galvez* specific instructions for lower California consist of 32 articles entitled "Ynstruccion para el go- biemo militar y economico del Departamento del Sur," Real de Santa Ana, Oct. 1, 1768. Cf. AGI, Guadalajara. 416, no. 40-7. 54 The voyage of the San Carlos and Principe across the Gulf of California to La Paz clearly demonstrated what Jose de Galvez had feared: the vessels were delayed in San Bias and such a late start in the winter season forced them to buck heavy winds and rough seas. Normally, a voyage of this nature required some fifteen or twenty days, but both packetboats required twice this amount of time. The San Carlos departed San Bias on September 26 but her arrival in 63 La Paz was unreported for almost three months. Jose de Galvez was evidently chafing in La Paz over the delays in launching the naval expedition and when the San Carlos finally hauled into port, the inspector and other officials were amazed. The pride of San Bias' Naval Department, the newest and largest of Spain's maritime units for exploring new territory, came limping into La Paz in poor material condition. The arrival of the San Carlos is keenly portrayed in the following summary by Juan Manuel de Viniegra, a member of the Galvez Inspection party: ^Galvez to Croix, Sept. 2, 1768, AGI, Guadalalara. 416, no. 35-4. During May and June of 1768, Jose de Galvez required forty days to cross from San Bias to Lower Cali fornia— although he stopped twice enroute. Later, Galvez described the problems of intra-Gulf navigation in his report to Viceroy Bucareli; cf. "Informe Sobre la Nueva Espana ... ," Dec. 31, 1771 (570), MS in MN. 55 We first witnessed the entrance of the San Carlos into the Port of La Paz on the twenty-fifth of December taking aboard more than six inches of water per hour, short of crew, her tackle and rig ging in shreds, with two broken anchors; the cargo was damaged except for some barrels of flour and without any fresh provisions whatsoever.^ Once again Jose de Galvez met the challenge and con quered tremendous obstacles in order to launch the expedi tion. By personal encouragement and unfaltering determina tion, Galvez supervised a complete overhaul of the San Carlos. including the difficult task of careening the vessel on the beach. Jose de Galvez anticipated this type of emergency and he gathered together a skilled group of workmen, including a master-builder, six naval carpenters, three blacksmiths, two caulkers, and two rope-makers, plus an innumerable quantity of tools and equipment. In order to complete the arrangements for fresh provisions, Jose '"Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas," Cabo San Lucas, Feb. 16, 1769, in Costa NO de America, Totno I (331), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Viniegra, "Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas" (331), MS in MN. The account of Juan Manuel de Viniegra must be tempered somewhat in its severity. Galvez* personal engineering authority, Miguel Costanso, explained the vessel's condition as follows: "Since it [the San Carlos 1 had struggled such a great deal in the sea being forced by the winds, it was weakened and some of the oakum was cast off from its seams through which it began taking aboard water." "Diario historico ... , 1770" (575), MS in MN. 56 de Galvez ordered com and other produce shipped front the mainland and then organized a great matanza (a great live stock slaughter), providing the packetboat with both dried and salted meat plus lard and tallow. Galvez* final preparation was a fishing expedition which netted a large catch of fresh fish. During a record-breaking span of fifteen days, the workers careened the San Carlos, repaired the seams and then refitted the vessel.^ Viniegra noted these prepara tions as follows: They labored at the same time and installed all new tackle and rigging on the vessel, and they fabricated ropes and hawsers with respect to what the ship carried, quickly delivering the staples in abundance and an exquisite mess supply for eight months, with dry provisions enough for one year. There was constructed six storerooms on board in which everything was accommodated with proper order, and a living compartment for the troops and seamen, and finally, the vessel was assigned crewmen which His Excellency had pre viously enrolled. Galvez to Croix, Puerto de La Paz, Dec. 26, in AGI, Guadalajara. 416, no. 40-8. Galvez kept the packetboat Concepcion at La Paz during the careening San Carlos "to serve as the chata" (auxiliary vessel tender). ^"Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas" (331), MS in MN. 1768, older of the or 57 By early January 1769, the San Carlos was ready for sea; the vlsitador ordered a solemn communion and benedic tion to be recited aboard by Franciscan Father'President Serra and the occasion was duly concluded by Jose de Galvez. He addressed the crew personally and as his scribe recalls the ceremony: "He gave us with his natural eloquence the most fervent exhortation which filled us with faith and firm intentions to give up our lives before failing in this noble enterprise.On January 11, Vicente Vila commanded the San Carlos out of La Paz escorted by Jose de Galvez in the Concepcion. Both vessels reached Bahia de San Bernabe on the fourteenth but since the Principe still had not arrived from San Bias, the visitador dispatched the San 68 Carlos for San Diego the next day. ^ Viniegra, "Noticias del Cabo San Lucas" (331), MS in MN. In AGI, Guadfllaiar^. 416, there are two long in structions from Jose de Galvez concerning the preparation and dispatch of the new packetboats. For the San Carlos see: "Estado, Ynventario, Reglamento de Rancho y Memorias de la que conduce el Paquebot de S.M. San Carlos a los Puertos de Sn Diego y Monterey," Puerto de la Paz, Jan. 9, 1769. Galvez' personal instructions to members of both vessels are entitled "Patentee e Ynstrucciones Dadas a los Bmpleades de la Expedicion Maritime de Monterey," n.d., AGI, Guadalalara. 416, no. 42. 68 Vicente Vila, "Sucinta Relacion de lo acaecido en la Navegacion del Paquebot San Carlos desde el dia 11 de enero que salio del Puerto de la Paz hasta el 29 de Abril 58 The Prfncipe was much more fortunate in making the transit of the Gulf since she sustained less structural damage. After making a landfall in Bahia de Pulmo, south of La Paz, Captain Juan Perez informed Galvez of his condi tion and then turned south because of contrary winds which forced him away from La Paz. Finally on January 25, Perez anchored in San Bemabe and although there was little permanent damage, the Principe required the same amount of provisioning as the San Carlos plus an overhaul for safe measure. Again the visitadorts skilled caulkers and car penters fell to work and within eighteen days the job of careening and compartment at ion was completed. ^ On Febru ary 15, 1769, the Principe sailed from San Bemabe, preceded que anclo en el Puerto de Sn Diego, como tambien de lo sucedido hasta el dia de la fecha," San Diego, July 6, 1769, in Costa N. 0. de America, Tomo I (331), MS in MN. 69 , The ever-efficient Inspector Galvez compiled a summary report covering the damages and deficiencies of both vessels. See: "Resumen de los defectos mas Capi- tales ... en los Paquebotes de S.M. Sn. Carlos y Sn. Antonio," Cabo de San Lucas, Feb. 16, 1769, in AGI, Guada lajara. 416, no. 42-6. 7<Vinie§ra, "Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas" (331), MS in MN. Jose de Galvez personally dispatched Captain Perez to San Bemabe and then he left La Paz in the Con cepcion. Using two launches plus his own vessel, the Inspector was able to transfer 62 men plus their equipment to the Cape in preparation for outfitting the Principe. 59 by the same religious ceremonies and salvos. ^ The expedi- tion was launched and with the accomplishment of his mis sion, Jose de Galvez retired to Loreto for a brief rest and 72 further planning. Organization and Personnel of the Department of San Bias In carrying out its assigned role as the primary naval station for the west coast of Mexico, the Naval Department of San Bias was identical to other military organizations in Spain's colonial empire. At Vera Cruz and Havana, for example, the Spanish operated major naval bases which were subject to the same regulations initiated at San Bias in 1768. On the Pacific Coast, the Port of Aca pulco served Nueva Espana as a major commercial depot, operating in accordance with the same maritime regulations Supra, note no. 67 citing Jose de Galvez* personal instructions to members of both packetboats and the sailing list for the Pr£ncipe. "Estado, Ynventario, Reglamento de Rancho y Memories de la que conduce el Paquebot de S. M. el Principe a los Puertos de Sn Diego y Monterey," AGI, Guadalalara. 416. ^Viniegra, "Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas" (331), MS in MN. See also individual sailing extracts of the Principe in "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 60 as San Bias. As a matter of over-all comparison, during the last forty years of Spanish rule In North and South America, the Naval Department of San Bias was comparable to all of the older naval bases and supply ports with the single exception of salary and wage allowances.^ The organization of the Naval Department of San Bias during Its first five years of operation remained essen tially the way Inspector Galvez had outlined it— a mili tary establishment supported by civilian agencies of the Real Hacienda. From 1768 to 1774, department officials operated supply vessels to Upper and Lower California and attempted to regulate the various duties, both civil and military, which were required at the new port. During five years of continuous operation, the Department of San Bias fulfilled the "supply" mission (for which Jose de Galvez 73 For an early compilation of New Spain's naval facilities consult Ordenanza de S. M. para el Goviemo Militar. v Economico de 8us Reales Arcenales de Marina (Madrid, 1776). Two of the later naval codes which specifically regulated the Naval Department of San Bias are: (1) Conde de Revilla Gigedo, "Reglamento provisional para el Departa mento de San Bias," Mexico, Dec. 7, 1789, in MS 1211, Coleccion Guillen, MN; and (2) Antonio Valdes, "Instrue- cion para el Mejor Regimen de los establecimientos fix os de Marina en Cartegena de Indias, Montevideo, y San Bias de Califomias," March 1793, in Varios— Siglo XVIII (834), MS in MN. 61 and Viceroy Croix could share the credit), but the effec tiveness of the departments operations was vastly limited by lack of personnel and by administrative weaknesses inherent in such an unproven organization. Hence, the period of 1768 to 1773 is appropriately entitled the "Temporary Era of San Bias." The most eminent of the two divisions which formed the working units of the naval department was the military rmao. The superior officer and administrative head of San Bias1 organization was the "port commander" or "naval station commandant," Comandante de Marina: directly below this official were the captains of the naval vessels who later ranked up to Canitan de Navlo. And finally, the military division included various leaders of the shore- based and shipboard infantry soldiers who guarded the naval station or maintained discipline at sea. The influence of this latter group of officers was insignificant concerning policy decisions or administrative positions of San Bias and they seldom dominated the portfs naval and maritime 74 development. ^Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias y las Califomias. pp. 104-108. 62 In the period immediately after the first major reorganization of the Naval Department of San Bias (1774- 1780), military leaders contributed purpose and direction to sustain the department, but during the temporary period military leadership was woefully inadequate. Perhaps the most consistent performance among military personnel was shown by the naval pilots who completed annual voyages to Alta California under extremely difficult circumstances. Among the entire range of officers or major offi cials within the Department of San Bias, the military ramo was the most numerous and also the most important. In addition to the comandante and the vessel commanders, the members of this group included the chaplains, surgeons, and pilots. The latter officials were classified as "major officials" entitled to distinct salary benefits, while the comandante controlled the destiny of the naval station including dispatching supply vessels and appointing 7 S officers in the maestranza (shipyard) and arsenal. ^During this era, the designation "oficiales mayores" referred to the following personnel: The command ing officer, second officer (if authorized), all pilots, and the chaplains and surgeons. A representative sample of this organization is found in "Estado en que Sale a navegar la Fragata del Rey la Favorita ... , en 11 de Febrero de 1779," Costa NO de America, I (331), MS in MN. 63 The subordinate military group, composed of the chaplains, surgeons and pilots, was a curious mixture of essential and nonessential officials. The pilots of the department, owing to the tenor of the founding reglamento. were the backbone of the Department of San Bias throughout forty years of continuous operation. On every supply vessel which sailed from San Bias to Alta California there was an experienced pilot, and at times the department assigned two navigational pilots to its vessels. Concern” ing royal surgeons at San Bias, Jose de Galvez initially assigned Pedro Prat as official "medical officer" to serve on board the San Carlos in 1769; this assignment was later adopted as standard practice on San Bias vessels. The medical facilities of early San Bias vessels were scarcely adequate to prevent or control scurvy and other maladies resulting from poor diet and exposure. On numerous occa sions San Bias supply vessels were undermanned on account of sickness among the crew. The ravages of scurvy were particularly debilitating during the early voyages between San Bias and San Diego in 1769 and there was heavy reliance upon the surgeon*s skills. Considerable planning and preparation was devoted to outfitting surgeons for the 64 voyage to Alta California; their chests contained herbs, 76 medicines, and compounds for ministering to the crewmen. The final members of this subordinate group, the chaplains, were supporters of the faith both on board ship and at the new establishments of San Diego and Monterey. Their functions during voyages of exploration to the Northwest Coasts were much more dynamic and colorful than the normal duties on board the supply ships to California. In the beginning, Franciscans of the College of San Fernando de Mexico were used but apparently their places were soon taken by secular clergymen.^ Available records which chronicle the early period of the Department of San Bias seldom enumerate the military 76 The scourge of maritime crews -~mal de loanda or scurvy— continued to take a significant toll during longer Spanish expeditions to the Northwest Coasts. Not until the Martinez Expedition of 1788 was a specific preventive for scurvy included among shipTs rations; i.e., a mixture of lemon juice and water. According to Father Antonine Tibesar, the derivation of "Loanda" comes from the Portuguese colony of Angola, whose principal port was San Pablo de Loanda. Loanda or Luanda is still the chief port of Angola. See: Writings of Junipero Serra (Washington: Academy of American History, 1955), I, 123. ^The chaplain’s role during formal acts of possession"taking are treated in Manuel P. Servfn, "Reli gious Aspects of Symbolic Acts of Sovereignty," The Americas. XIII (1957), 260-61. 65 membership and, furthermore, only a weak liaison between 78 civil and military departments prevailed. The explana tion for this quasi-military relationship is twofold; first, owing to the viceroy*s commission of January 11, 1768, all matters of military and civil responsibility were entrusted to Comandante Manuel Rivero who was essentially a civilian administrator; and second, not a single naval line officer was appointed for service in the Department of San Bias until the year 1774. Military leadership in the department was practically non-existent from 1768 to 1774; the position of San Bias Commandant passed from Manuel Rivero to a civilian in 1769 and then to a garrison officer of the "Spanish Regiment of America" in 1770 and finally, back to another civilian official in 1773. The garrison officer previously mentioned was Alferez de Dragones (2nd Lieutenant of Dragoons), Jose Marfa Lasso. Lieutenant Lasso had previously served with the Galvez party and, with the assistance of the interim governor of lower California, Juan Gutierrez, both 7ft Junfpero Serra’s Memoranda of 1773 and those of Juan Jose Echeveste, known as the Reglamento de 1773 finally provided a firm basis for separation of military and civilian responsibility in the Department of San Bias. Compare infra, pp. 108-116. 66 officials aided the visitador in organizing militia com panies in Lower California. After various assignments In the peninsula, Lieutenant Lasso was appointed Comandante Comi8ionado of the Department of San Bias in 1770 upon the death of Manuel Rivero and Francisco Ley.^ A further adjunct of San Bias* military organization during the temporary period was a permanent detachment of militia troops assigned to the port in 1768. The authority for this order is once again traced to Jose de Galvez who approved the creation of a new body of militia troops for O n the provinces of Guadalajara and Nueva Galicia. After the Sonoran Campaign was launched in 1767, some regular troops who had been stationed at Tepic awaiting maritime transportation to Guaymas remained in the vicinity of ^Galvez to Croix, Puerto de La Paz, Dec. 1, 1768, in AGX, Guadalajara. 416, and Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771” (3119), MS in BN. ^Inspector Galvez was particularly concerned with Nueva Espafla*s militia, having received direct orders to establish new organizations in 1767. Two of the militia groups which Galvez organized in 1767 include: (1) the ”Legion of San Carlos” in the territory of San Luis Potosf, San Luis de Paz, Charcas and Venado, and (2) the "Legion del Principe” in the territory of Guanajuato, Villas de San Miguel, San Felipe, Leon, Irapuato, Silao and Penjamo. See Antonio Bonilla, "Pronturario para conocimiento del Estado en que se hallen las Milicias del Reyno de Nuevo Espana,” Mexico, Jan. 2, 1772, in MS 18745, BN. 67 San Bias. By 1768, a permanent detachment of infantry and cavalry troops (totaling one hundred men) was stationed in Colima under Sergeant Diego Garavito. During the next five years, Sergeant Garavito and his troops stood duty in the 81 Villa de San Bias and also at the Pueblo de Tepic. Unfortunately, the early military leaders at San Bias were unable to develop a secure and we11-organized department for the Spanish Crown. This departmental weak ness is partly explained by: (1) the untimely death of the department's first comandante, Manuel Rivero; and (2) the miserable living conditions which persisted at San Bias plus its remote location from the capital. In March 1768, Rivero arrived at the Port of San Bias and began laying the foundation for the new villa. During the spring he labored unceasingly in clearing land for the new town, arranging facilities for shipping and receiving goods at the port and opening a new road to the village of Tepic. Inspector Galvez was greatly impressed with Commander Rivero's prog ress in establishing the Villa de San Bias and when the visitador departed in May 1768, the situation seemed ^Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... ," pp. 87-89; and Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomlas. pp. 105-106. 68 very promising. In accordance with Jose de Galvez* instructions for outfitting the San Carlos and Principe. Manuel Rivero stocked food and manufactured goods at San Bias and waited for the two vessels to return from Guaymas. During the fall of 1768, Rivero completed preparations on the San Carlos, dispatching the vessel on September 26. However, before he completed loading the second ship (the Principe). winter rains had begun and a general disaster occurred as a result of unusual winds and heavy flooding. Comandante Rivero contracted dysentery and a severe fever during October 1768; he died in the province of Jalisco in Novem ber 1769. Another royal appointee at the naval department, Francisco Ley, who served as an administrative assistant to Manuel Rivero, also died of dysentery in the fall of 1769. Within the span of eighteen months the department lost two of its top administrators and certainly the best organizers 82 of the "temporary era." ^^Manuel Rivero died in October or November since Francisco Trillo y Bermudez was appointed to fill his vacancy by official order dated Mexico, November 11, 1769; AGI, Guadalajara. 104. Juan Manuel de Viniegra noted Rivero's sickness in his "Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas," Feb. 16, 1769, MS 331 in MN. 69 One of the most colorful military groups of San Bias was the pilot corps. The position of the pilots was truly a paradox: rated on a par with career officers in matters of navigation and seamanship, they proved competent and sound, but within the Departamento de Marina of San Bias they were relegated to the customary lowly status at the bottom of the precedence ladder. In European naval circles, Spanish pilots were eventually expected to attain the rank of Alferez de Fragata or Alferez de Navio--which included privileges of the commissioned officer--in addi tion to their status as graduate pilots from a formal pilot*s school. But anything above these levels was un heard of for the "common" pilot and the entire cuerpo de QO pilotos lacked prestige and precedence. Members of the pilot corps at San Bias were seldom formally trained, like the European pilots, but they knew the coastal waters of the Gulf of California and the nuances of navigational piloting along the Pacific Coast. The earliest pilots assigned to San Bias had completed 83 Francisco de las Barraa y de Aragon, "Dn. Esteban Jose Martinez, alumno del Colegio de San Telmo de Sevilla" (Madrid, 1953), p. 4. See also, Ordenanza de S. M. para el Govierao Militar. y Economico de Sus Reales Arcenales de Marina (Madrid: 1776), pp. 72-86. 70 numerous trips from Acapulco to South America or to the Philippines and their professional background was almost entirely founded upon practical experience. It is a matter of verified statistics that from 1768 to 1774 all of the supply vessels from the Port of San Bias were under the command of one of the department's pilots; only in 1774 were naval officers given command of San Bias supply ships to Alta California.®^ The oldest and most experienced pilot of the original members of the department was Juan Perez, the g c Filipinas-mariner who came to the port in 1767. During the sunmer of 1768, Jose de Galvez named Juan Perez com mander of the packet Principe (or San Antonio as it was sometimes called), for the expedition to Alta California. During succeeding years, Captain Perez commanded the Principe on two additional round trips to Monterey and San Diego and then in 1773 he took the San Carlos on a single voyage to Loreto before his most significant voyage of ®^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MN. The "new" naval officers are discussed below, pp. 139"42. O e Jose de Galvez, "Patentes e Ynstrucciones Dadas a los Bmpleadas de la Expedicion Maritima de Monterey,” n.d., AGI, Guadalajara. 416. 71 8 6 exploration with the new frigate Santiago in 1774. Juan Perez rose no higher than primer niloto graduado de Alferez de Fragata— Pilot first class with rank of Ensign— in his years of service at San Bias, but his knowledge and ex perience helped to span the gap from the temporary period of San Bias' history until the time of reorganization and solid administration in 1774. When the new Viceroy of Mexico, Antonio Bucareli, began considering the list of prospective naval personnel for nominating a commander to take the first exploratory voyage to the northwest, there was never much question on the selection. Juan Perez won the appointment with immediate acclaim as the only quali fied pilot and sea captain: the "only man with sufficient experience and service in the Department of San Bias to 87 undertake the commission." In addition to Juan Perez, there were other pilots in the Department of San Bias who commanded the new 86 / A chronicle of Juan Perez* voyages is contained in "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MN. O * 1 Antonio Bucareli to Julian Arriaga, Mexico, July 27, 1773, in California: Historia y Viajes, Tomo I (575), MS in MN. 72 packetboats to Monterey and San Diego: Vicente Vila, Miguel del Pino, and George Storace. The oldest member of this group was Vicente Vila, an experienced pilot who served in the Spanish Navy ten years before commencing duty in the Department of San Bias. During the period of 1758-1767, Vila completed at least six major assignments, operating in both the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean. Without exception, all of Vicente Vila's assignments in the previous period were aboard capital ships (ships of the line) where he served as pilot and sometimes as second pilot.88 After his last assignment in the Mediterranean in February 1766, Vicente Vila sailed to Mexico and was ulti mately appointed first pilot in the Department of San Bias the same year. During the Junta de Guerra of May 1768, Jose de Galvez placed Vila in command of the packetboat San Carlos destined for the naval expedition to Alta Cali- QQ fomia. As piloto mayor. Vila outranked many of the 88"Asuntos de los 1° Pilotos, 1749*1790," in Libro 8 en el que se anotan los asuntos de los Primeros Pilotos, y de los Meritos que contrahen (1190), MS in MN. 8^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 311), May 16, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. 73 younger pilots, and this important voyage in the San Carlos earned him respect and honor among his contemporaries. Vicente Vila experienced great strain during the San Carlos* voyage to San Diego, fighting the ravages of scurvy and lack of water. In San Diego Bay, where the vessel anchored on May 1, 1769, Vila found the Prfncipe under Juan Perez and the two naval captains had an opportunity to discuss losses and to weigh their chances for continuing to the 90 Port of Monterey. Vila had lost a total of sixteen sailors— all able-bodied seamen--and after the arrival of the overland expedition from Loreto, Captain Vila decided to remain in San Diego. Finally, after a series of frus trations and delays in getting the San Carlos underway, Vicente Vila sailed from San Diego Bay in July 1770, using four soldiers from Portola's group to assist the crewmen in rigging sails. The San Carlos arrived at San Bias late ^In the Museo Naval MSS there are two brief but comprehensive reports by Vicente Vila on his voyage to San Diego. These include: (1) "Sucinta Relacion de lo acaecido en la Navegacion del Paquebot San Carlos ... ," July 6, 1769, and (2) "Relacion diaria de los sucesos mas parti culars de la Navegacion que execute desde el 11 de enero que sail del Puerto de la Paz, a la £xpedicion de San Diego y Monterey hasta el 1° de Mayo, que di fondo en dicho Puerto hasta el 6 de Julio ... ," Puerto de San Diego, July 6, 1769, in Costa NO de America, Tomo I (331). 74 in 1770 and Vicente Vila retired to Tepic for rest and recovery. At the close of 1770, Captain Vila died after four years of distinguished service with the Naval Depart- ment of San Blas.^ Both Miguel del Pino and George Storace were given command of the new packetboats of San Bias; Pino took the Pr£ncipe and Storace was on the San Jose. Primer Piloto Miguel del Pino made two major voyages along the interior coast, but he was never permitted to command any of the supply vessels which sailed to Alta California. In 1768, he conmanded the Principe from San Bias to Guaymas, carry ing a detachment of Catalonian Volunteers, and in 1771 he piloted the San Carlos to Loreto conveying food, provi- 92 sions, and a group of Franciscan missionaries. The last member of this pilot-body was George Storace or Jorge Estorace according to the Hispanic version of his name. Storace first commenced service at San Bias Q1 Cited by Richard F. Pourade, The History of San Diego--Time of the Bells (San Diego: The Union Publishing Co., 1961), p. 8. Publisher Richard F. Pourade indicates that Vicente Vila attained the rank of teniente de nav£o. or full Lieutenant but no authority for this statement has been located by the present writer and it seems incorrect. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 75 as a second pilot, serving under Vicente Vila during the Q3 voyage of the San Carlos to San Diego.* After the return of the San Carlos in 1769, pilot Storace received command of the department's newest packetboat, the San Jose. During the spring of 1770, the San Jose was provisioned at San Bias for support of the new establishments in Alta QA California and on July 6, Storace sailed for San Diego. ^ The remaining San Bias pilots were not experienced enough to command the new packetboats to Alta California. Joaquin Robles, Pablo Regalado, Vicente Otayza, and Jose de la Cruz were all classified as practicos. or coastal pilots 95 of San Bias and they operated exclusively within the Gulf of California. These pilots commanded the ex-Jesuit ships, Concepcion and Lauretana. and only one pilot was appointed on the newer vessels. This exception was Jose de la Cruz 93 , , Jose de Galvez, "Estado, Ynventario, Reglamento de Rancho y Memories de la que conduce el Paquebot de S. M. San Carlos a los Puertos de Sn Diego y Monterey," in AGI, fimdalaUra. 416. Miguel Costanso, who sailed on the San Carlos coranented frequently on the capabilities of Jorge Estorace; cf. "Diario historico ... , 1770” (575), MS in MN. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 76 who took the goleta Sinaloa from San Bias to Loreto in 1768 and then operated this vessel on similar voyages throughout the interior gulf.^^ Joaquin Robles was the most active of all San Bias pilots during the early period until 1774. As captain of the Concepcion in 1767, when the vessel arrived at the Port of San Bias with a detachment of Jesuit missionaries, Robles was immediately retained in the maritime service and he stayed on board the same vessel for eight years. The record of Joaquin Robles' service to the Department of San Bias amounted to ten round trips during the period 1767 to 1774, which was by far the largest number of individual operations completed by any pilot in the Naval Department of San Blas.^ The second confiscated vessel, the Lauretana. was commanded by Pedro Regalado from 1768 to 1769. As a second pilot for the Port of San Bias, Regalado completed only two round trips in the Lauretana: in 1769 the command was transferred to Antonio Faveau y Quesada. Faveau y Quesada, ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 77 who accompanied Jose de Galvez to San Bias in 1768, was one of the most obscure members of the practicos. He was assigned naval duty in Loreto with the Departamento del Sur os and piloted launches along the coast of Lower California. As a second pilot in the maritime service of Lower Cali fornia, Faveau y Quesada commanded the Lauretana to Loreto in 1769; however, this solo voyage was a mild diversion for the skilled navigator and cartographer who continued to serve as a coastal pilot in the "Southern Department" of 99 Lower California. In 1771 the Lauretana was commanded by another practico of the naval department, Vicente Otayza, ^ Juan Gutierrez, "Renta de Cargo y Data de los efectos que han estado Cuidado de Don Juan Gutierrez, Govemador Interino, e Yntendente de Real Hacienda de la Peninsula de Califomias desde el Dia 19 de Abril de 1769 hasta 23 de octubre Del mismo ano," Real de Loreto, Oct. 31, 1769, in AGN, Marina. 32-A. Gutierrez listed the following launches in operation between Loreto and the Mainland: Guadalupana. s^cranwnfo. Santa Rita. San Ignacio. San Francisco Xavier, and Pison. The above report herein after cited as Gutierrez, "Renta de Cargo y Data ... de Real Hacienda de la Peninsula de Califomias," AGN, Marina. 32-A. ^Gutierrez, "Renta de Cargo y Data ... de Real Hacienda de la Peninsula de Califomias," AGN, Marina. 32-A. The cartographic work of Antonio Faveau y Quesada is referred to in Jose de Galvez to Croix, San Bias, May 16, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. A representative work of Faveau y Quesada appears in Museo Naval as: "La peninsula de Cali fornia y las Costas de Sonora ... ," dedicated to Jose de Galvez (no. 12035), "Cartas y Pianos." 78 who completed one voyage to Loreto. The civil ramo or Commissary Department of San Bias represented a significant contrast to the military division both In numerical size and scope of responsibility. Serving as the logistic unit for New Spain's naval forces, the Commissary Department of San Bias played a vital role in the history of Alta California and for the naval depart ment as well. The new project of 1768 for occupying and settling a virgin territory lying some 1200 statute miles from the west coast of Mexico was a perilous venture, and the final maintenance for the new settlements of Alta Cali fornia reverted to San Bias* supply organization. Between 1769 and 1778, the problems of operating a supply line from Mexico City across 350 miles to the Port of San Bias in volved numerous problems of access routes and efficient methods of transfer. All of the necessary tools, equip ment, and manufactured goods for the presidios and missions of San Diego and Monterey were destined to pass from the capital to San Bias, where the supply department trans shipped most of the goods and gradually built up a stock pile of many others. For a period of ten years, the operations of the San Bias Commissary were indispensable to Alta California's existence. 79 Under the leadership of Jose de Galvez, the military functions of the naval department had been adequately pro vided for, but the organization of supply functions was another problem entirely. The legal aspects of San Bias* supply organization were under the auspices of the Minis - terio de Real Hacienda at Mexico, but minor responsibility for the port*8 supply activities was assumed by officials in Guadalajara. Such matters as formal appointments and policy decisions were promulgated from Mexico, while much of the customary business of handling taxes, tributes, and some of the local commercial contracts was regulated by an Intendente Real (Royal Intendent) residing at Guadalajara or Tepic. The original commission which Viceroy Croix issued to Manuel Rivero included both military and civilian responsibilities. At the founding junta in May 1768, the functions of the supply department were never clearly dis tinguished from military activities and therefore the supply department began operations as a confused and un organized unit. Eventually the Royal Hacienda of Mexico determined the following duties and responsibilities for this department: 80 1. Supervision of all personnel in the civilian division; 2. The maintenance of necessary civilian and military records pertaining to both salaries and rations; 3. The operation and maintenance of warehouses and storage facilities to accommodate finished products of iron, cloth and wood; and 4. The efficient operation of the naval depart ment's income sources, consisting of the salt mines, tobacco plantations, and the pearl fisheries. From 1768 to 1773, the commissary branch of the Naval Department of San Bias was supervised by a Commissary Officer and three assistants. The comparative size of the civil ramo was perhaps one-third as large as the military department in San Bias' first five-year period. In addi tion to the comisario and his three subordinates, the civilian organization included employees of the warehouse, counting-house, and the muleteers. Considering that there were one hundred original settlers in 1768, and apportion ing the number of major appointments at four, there could not have been more than forty employees of the civil Fray Francisco Palou, Historical Memoirs of New California, ed. by Herbert E. Bolton (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1926), III, 68-115. Hereinafter cited as Palou, Historical Memoirs. 81 department from 1768 to 1773.^^ During the first year of this period, the supply functions of the Department of San Bias were entrusted to Francisco Hijosa. Hijosa*s appointment as comisario was issued by Jose de Galvez in May 1768; however, the first assignment which Hijosa actually completed in connection with San Bias supply was serving as Treasurer of the Eli zondo Expedition to Sonora. In April 1768, Francisco Hijosa embarked from the Port of San Bias aboard the packet' '•vmt Concepcion carrying treasury records and some 70,000 102 pesos. After a six months* term in Sonora, during which time he supported the military expedition of Colonel Eli zondo, Francisco Hijosa returned to San Bias and assumed 103 regular duties as comisario. In 1769 the supply department was completely re organized with the appointment of new officers including ^^Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalajara. 104. See below for the titles of salaried officials in the commissary department, pp. 83-85. ^^Marques de Croix to Julian de Arriaga, Mexico, April 25, 1767, and Croix to Arriaga, Mexico, May 30, 1767, in AGI, Guadalajara. 416. 103 "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias'* (127), MS in MN. 82 a comisario. The new supply officer for San Bias was Francisco Trillo y Bermudez and with his tenure of office, supply functions were formalized without significant change until 1773. His appointment as commissary officer was endorsed by Jose de Galvez, and it is certain that royal officials in Mexico were aware of his capabilities. An example of Trillo y Bermudez1 reputation at the time of his new assignment is evident from the following portion of the appointing order: In keeping with the exactness and economy which is required in that position [comisario de San Blasl I am naming Francisco Bermudez. In this new position he will exemplify the same honor, fidelity and vigilance which was apparent from the previous endeavors which he completed. The minor officials who served under Francisco Trillo y Bermudez were astute employees, many of them serv ing in important posts before coming to San Bias. A ma jority of these officials had worked in government positions in New Spain, while some had served with Jose de Galvez during his inspection tour of Sonora and Lower California. The minor supply personnel at San Bias from 1769 to 1773 included the following: ^^Jose Antonio Areche to Jose de Galvez, Mexico, November 11, 1769, in AGI, Guadalalara. 104. 83 Josef Faustino Ruiz Juan Manuel de Vlnlegra Juan de Urrengoechea y Arrinda Benito Linares Arenal y Vageles Contador intemo (internal or domestic bookkeeper) Contadurla (paymaster of the counting-house) Contador (bookkeeper) Contadurfa (paymaster) Contramaestra del Almacen (Boatswain mate of the ware house)^^ Josef Faustino Ruiz was appointed Internal paymaster in 1769 while the remaining appointments were all made in the same year. Ruiz was a favorite with Jose de Galvez and at a later date he succeeded in getting the position of Grand Administrator of the department's Salt Works. Juan Manuel de Viniegra served as Galvez' personal secretary during the military junta of February 1768, in Mexico and also during the inspector's tour of Guadalajara and the coastal sites of Nueva Galicia. Throughout Lower California and particularly at Cabo de San Lucas, Manuel de Viniegra aided Galvez while the visitador was directing ^^Areche to Galvez, Mexico, November 11, 1769, in AGI, Guadalalara. 104. See also Palou, Historical Memoirs. Ill, 118-54. 84 the "Sacred Expedition." In February 1769, Manuel de Viniegra compiled an interesting and informative record of these preparations in Lower California entitled "Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas, Ultimo Termino de la California Meridional. After all the preparations were completed and the second vessel had been dispatched from San Lucas, Viniegra accompanied Jose de Galvez to Loreto via the sloop Sinaloa. During the months of April, May, and June 1769, Manuel de Viniegra remained with the visitador. first at Loreto and then at the Sonoran settlements of Santa Cruz de Mayo and Real de los Alamos. Finally in the fall of 1769, Jose de Galvez1 scribe received an appointment as accountant under Francisco Trillo y Bermudez in the Department of San Bias.107 The earliest record of salaries for supply personnel at San Bias was definitely conservative in comparison with SlS 331 in MN. Viniegrafs report concerns the outfitting of the two packets San Carlos and Principe in Lower California, from December to February, 1768 to 1769. ^^Areche to Galvez, Mexico, Nov. 11, 1769, in AGI, Guadalalara. 104. Viniegra1a activities with the visitador between 1768 and 1769 are chronicled in Galvez1 correspon dence to Viceroy Croix, AGI, Guadalajara. 416. 85 the same figures eight years later. The position of Com missary was unique since he served as supply officer with out salary, but he was given full pay and allowances from the Royal Hacienda because of his title as Administrator of the Salt Hines. Between 1768 and 1773, the comisario received a yearly salary of 3,000 pesos, a generous amount compared with allowances given to other personnel. In 1772 the minor civilian employees received the following yearly salaries: Priest 669 pesos Contador 800 pesos Two officials of the department (at 450 pesos each) 900 pesos One Clerk 360 pesos Sacristan 150 pesos Inspector of the Naval Arsenal 300 pesos Inspector of the Warehouse 450 pesos Inspector of Construction 1,200 pesos Foreman of the Arsenal 420 pesos Mayordomo and Muleteer 636 pesos^® ^®Report of Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalajara. 104. 86 The financial affairs of the Department of San Bias were always a matter of critical importance, especially in the first five-year period. During two financial confer ences at Guadalajara and San Bias, Jose de Galvez outlined the new department's requirements and proclaimed that henceforth a permanent revenue source would be allotted to the department from the salinas of Nueva Galicia. Galvez calculated that the government would need to supply some 35,000 pesos for annual support of the new Naval Department of San Bias and, judging from the yearly income of the salt mines, he estimated that San Bias would be self-sufficient in a matter of two years. Initially, however, there was a large investment for starting the Port of San Bias, in cluding the cost of new packetboats and other construction 109 projects in the naval shipyard. Jose de Galvez' regulation of May 24, 1768, at San Bias proved to be a sound proposition for launching the ^■^Galvez to Croix, San Bias (no. 309), May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. On May 24, 1768, the Tribunal de Cuentas of the Real Hacienda granted Jose de Galvez 50,000 pesos for his expenses in organizing the new government branches in Lower California and Sonora and for payment of the crew members of the naval vessels of San Bias. Compare Priestley, Jose de Galvez for details of the original in vestments in organizing the Department of San Bias; pp. 236, 251. 87 port with financial stability; indeed, the whole concept of San Bias' outside revenues rested upon salinas produc tion.^® During the first year of operations (1769-70), the salt mines of Nueva Galicia yielded a total revenue of 56,000 pesos, while the next year's production showed an increase of 2,235 pesos. The original calculation which Galvez made for the department's independent operations was clearly borne out by the fiscal report of June 12, 1772, from the Department of San Bias. According to this report, a total of 52,672 pesos were expended in support of San Bias' operations in 1771-72 including the salaries of the officials (that is, the employees of the villa, the arsenal, the soldiers, and the crewmen of the vessels plus their rations), expenses for powder and payment of herdsmen for the department's recua. Francisco Trillo y Bermudez signed the report as comisario while Josef Faustino Rufz 111 approved the document as comandante comisionado. In addition to the revenues from salt production, the Department of San Bias was supported from two minor ^®Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771” (3119), MS in BN. ^^■Report of Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalajara. 104. 88 sources: pearl fisheries and tobacco plantations. Pearl fishing was historically linked to activities in the Gulf of California, and at the time of San Bias* foundation there were still a few commercial agents working in this 112 industry. In recognition of the previous tributes and income of the ramo de perlas. Jose de Galvez proposed that the officials of New Spain attempt to recover the "past glory" of the pearl industry with a portion of the income applied to the support of San Bias. In 1768, on the occasion of establishing the naval department, Visitador Galvez noted the heavy consumption of salt by the miners and fishermen of Nueva Galicia and ruled that this body of artisans should enjoy a one-third reduction in the price of salt. At San Bias, Jose de Galvez authorized the coman dante to issue licenses for the legal registration of pearl agents and this activity continued over a period of three 113 years. Income sources and fiscal reports from the naval ^■^Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. In section no. 2 of this report, entitled *Los Nuevos y antiguos Ramos del Real Erario,* Jose de Galvez outlined the ramo de perlas in detail. Gutierrez Camarena cites the contemporary activities of pearl fisheries in the 1760*s; San Bias v las Califoxmias. p. 108. ■^^Jose de Galvez, "Yhforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. 89 department show a conspicuous absence of pearl revenues and it is uncertain whether or not the revitalized ramo de per las contributed any support to San Blas.^^ The tobacco industry was also a government monopoly, yielding an income comparable to that of the salt mines. Throughout Nueva Galicia the cultivation of tobacco was carried out on a large-scale basis; unfortunately for the government, a majority of this production was through illicit methods. During an inspection tour at Guadalajara in April 1768, Jose de Galvez had been confronted with the seriousness of the illegal aspects of tobacco production. A petition from militia Lieutenant Luis Duen, of the Guada lajara roving patrol, reported to the visitador the extent of the clandestine tobacco products; in less than one month's time he had toured the coastal sites of Valle de Banderas, Chila, Chilpa, and along the Rio Santiago and because of the lack of men assigned to his patrol, he was unable to weed out and destroy the contraband crop. According to Lieutenant Duen, the job of scouting these coastal sites required a total force of twelve guardias. 11/ See Fiscal Report, Trillo y Bermudez, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalajara. 104. 90 two corporals, and one lieutenant; his force of four mounted lie guards was indeed insufficient to patrol the area. On May 13, 1768, Jose de Galvez forwarded Luis Duen's petition for a larger body of men and he recommended that the viceroy give it a favorable consideration.^^ A short time later in the new Villa de San Bias, Galvez announced the establishment of a minor tobacco ramo in the province of Nueva Galicia. The appointment of supervisor went to Francisco Urbieta and Galvez enjoined both Comandante Rivero and the latter official to work together in the matter of cultivating tobacco close to the Port of San Bias. In the final analysis, the royal director of tobacco sales and production, Joseph de Trigo in Guadalajara, possessed ultimate authority in San Bias* new revenue crop but local administration was given to Urbieta. ^-*Luis Duen to Jose de Galvez, Tepic, May 13, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. Lieutenant Duen reported that during his first month's service his men rooted out some 600 careas of tobacco or 3,090 bushels; equivalents from J. ViHasana Haggard, Handbook For Translators of Spanish Historical Documents (Oklahoma City: Semco Press, 1941), p. 73. ^^Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, May 20, 1768, in AGI, Guadalajara. 416, no. 29“2. ^^Galvez to Croix, May 20, 1768, in AGI, Guadala- 1ara. 416, no. 29-2. Original letter found in Galvez MSS, HL. 91 From 1770 to 1773, the Department of San Bias received moderate support from production of tobacco. Comisario Trillo reported in 1772 that the department had expended 16,012 pesos in sowing tobacco while the next year's report shows at least one and a half times this amount. Periodic shipments of San Bias tobacco were sent to Monterey during the "Temporary Era," and even Father- President Serra commented on the rich quality of this prod- uct.118 Departmental Activities at San Bias 1768 to 1773 The range of maritime and civil activities at the Port of San Bias from 1768 to 1773 included numerous con struction projects, scores of improvements along the harbor front and at the new villa and continued development of the salt mines of Nueva Galicia. From the military point of view, the department's program of naval construction and the dispatching of supply vessels constituted the most ^^Francisco Trillo y Bermudez cites tobacco plant ing at the Port of San Bias in his Fiscal Report, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalajara, 104. Shipments of tobacco from San Bias to Monterey were sent on board the San Carlos and Pr£ncipe in 1772. See: Tibesar, Writings of Junipero Serra. I, 243. 92 vital missions during this five-year period. This era was also a time of rapid expansion for the supply department and civilian agencies located at the Villa de San Bias. One of the most significant accomplishments of this period was the construction of three new vessels— a packet- boat, schooner, and frigate--between 1768 and 1773. The first marine construction project completed at the arsenal of San Bias involved the packetboat San Jose. The San Jose. alias "el Descubridor," was the first vessel completely built and outfitted at the naval shipyard of San Bias after 1 1 Q / its founding in 1768.17 Displacing 180 tons, the San Jose was slightly smaller than the departments first packet- boats, San Carlos and Pr£ncine. After an initial voyage to Loreto and then to the Sonoran coast with Visitador Galvez in 1770, the San Jose was lost at sea.*20 **^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 1 0 /1 Visitador Galvez apparently supervised loading operations on the packet San Jose and the sloop Sinaloa at the Port of Loreto during the spring of 1769. Sailing^in the Sinaloa and accompanied by the San Jose. Jose de Galvez crossed the Gulf of California and disembarked on May 4 at Santa Cruz de Mayo, Sonora. Both vessels sailed from the Sonoran coasts on May 11, 1769; cited in Galvez to Marques de Croix, Santa Cruz de Mayo, May 12, 1769, 93 The second marine construction project was begun in 1769 and completed during the same year. This new vessel, the schooner Sonora alias "Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe/' was considerably smaller than either the San Jose or the twin packetboats. The Sonora displaced fifty-nine tons and was immediately commissioned for voyages from the mainland 121 to Loreto carrying provisions, troops, and supplies. The sturdiness and dependability of this vessel is verified by the "Report on the Department of San Bias" and also by Inspector Jose de Galvez. Writing to Viceroy Bucareli in 1772, Galvez made the following evaluation concerning the department's maritime assets: We also have the service and substitution of two small packetboats named Concepcion and Laure- tana which the Jesuits used for voyages to Loreto and Mantanchel. ... But already the Lauretana is almost unserviceable, and this circumstance, com bined with its poor construction, which advice is made by naval officials, leave us with only one in AGI, Guadalajara. 416. The San Jose sailed from Cabo de San Lucas on June 6, 1770, with supplies and provisions valued at 11,950 pesos. Months later, missionaries and officials in San Bias reported no trace of the ship and it was presumed to have been lost at sea; see: Bucareli to Julian Arriaga, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1774, in AGI, Guadalajara. 513. 191 "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 94 other vessel named the Concepcion. There Is also the large goleta. La Sonora which Is a vessel of great sail and a secure one for making the naviga tion through the interior gulf and to serve in the continuation of the mainland with Old California. *2 The last new vessel completed from 1768 to 1774 was the largest ever built by the Department of San Bias: the 193 frigate Santiago alias "Nueva Galicia.'* Unlike the San Jose and Sonora, the Santiago required more than three years* time for completion; however, administrative set backs were responsible for the extended period of construc tion rather than lack of materials. The Santiago exceeded all of the earlier San Bias vessels in displacement and not until 1788, when the department purchased the frigate Coneepcion, was there a larger vessel at the Port of San Bias.124 122Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. A comparison of the Lauretana and Concepcion indi cates that the former vessel displaced 54 tons and the latter ship 62 tons. 123 "Resumen General sacado de los Extractos que tratan en Particular de los servicios que han hecho los Baxeles del Departamento de San Bias desde el ano de 1767 hasta el de 1791" (127), MS in MN. 1^4The new frigate Santiago is listed among Naval Department records as a 225 1/2 ton fragata: see: "Resumen General sacado ... de los Baxeles del San Bias ... " (127), MS in MN. The Concepcion was built and outfitted in Realejo, Nicaragua, during 1787 and 1788; see below, p. 312 The story of the Santiago's prolonged construction conveys much of the romantic tradition of the "Jun£pero Serra Legend." After observing this vessel In the naval shipyard of San Bias In 1772, Jose de Galvez was extremely 125 enthusiastic about prospects for immediate launching. However, as details of Alta California's precarious situ* ation began flowing into Viceroy Bucareli1s office, and with the return of Galvez to Spain in 1772, the likelihood of the Santiago's completion was significantly decreased. Apparently the matter of economy overshadowed the neces sity for finishing the frigate and officials of the Real Hacienda began heckling Bucareli for cancellation of the new construction contract. The vessel was finally com pleted and launched in 1773 owing to the efforts of Father Serra and Viceroy Bucareli. ^■\jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. 126 Details of the completion of the Santiago are closely associated with the re-organization of the Naval Department of San Bias. Fundamentally, officials of New Spain were faced with the alternative of keeping the new naval department and improving its organization or scrap ping the San Bias Port--along with their new flagship, Santiago--in favor of an overland supply system to Alta California. See below, pp. 123-25. 96 In addition to marine construction projects, the primary activities at the Port of San Bias concerned build ing new facilities for servicing and repairing vessels. By early spring of 1768, a series of construction projects characterized the inner harbor and the Villa de San Bias. Comandante Rivero arrived at the port in February 1768, and immediately commenced the task of erecting a naval shipyard and arsenal together with the associated facilities for 127 storing supplies and maintaining naval vessels. One of the earliest projects which Rivero commenced was the construction of new docks and wharves fronting on the inner basin--the Estero de Pozo--formed by a tributary of the Rfo Santiago. Over an extended breadth of the inner basin Rivero’s workmen built several piers and wharves, while two hundred yards farther up the estero they laid out an area called the careening docks for overhaul of the department's vessels. In historical perspective, from 1768 until 1792 when the members of the Malaspina Expedition visited the Port of San Bias, there were continuous prob lems concerning the discharge of debris during the rainy 127 / Marques de Croix, "Ynstruccion que ha de observar el Comandante Comisionado Don Manuel Rivero para la Pobla- cion de San Bias ... ," AGN, Marina. 44. 97 season. Some of the difficulties were resolved in 1776 when the harbor was sounded and cleared by an experienced team of naval engineers; however, during Manuel Rivero's era at San Bias there were no adequate solutions to the 128 danger of high water and floating logs. The most elaborate structures which Manuel Rivero completed upon the lower level of San Bias' new establish ment were the shipyard and arsenal. Making use of the available space directly inland from the harbor, Rivero and his workmen fabricated a number of repair shops and an arsenal, complete with a large storage area for the maderas. These original units were constructed of heavy, durable lumber and thatched with the palm leaves or "palapa" ma terials which were also employed in the first Villa de San Blas.'*'^ For these projects, the comandante awarded a con tract to a local resident named Jose Angel de Rivas, who cut timber and roofing materials for the buildings of the "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. Also cited by Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v Las Califomias, p. 90. [Antonio Pineda,] "Se da alguna idea del Puerto del San Bias," in Pacffico America, II (127), MS in MN. 98 130 naval shipyard and arsenal. Manuel Rivero*s original conmission from Viceroy Croix also included responsibility for founding a civilian settlement and for developing the necessary accoutrements for its support--viz., housing facilities, roads, and sub sistence crops. The original site which Rivero cleared and designated for the Villa de San Bias was located on a small elevated mesa approximately one mile inland from the inner harbor. This location was the site of a storehouse which had been constructed by a shepherd named Basilio Arciniega; later the name Basilio was applied to the permanent villa, Cerro de Basilio. By the fall of 1768, Rivero’s workmen had con structed eighty dwellings on the site of "Villa Viejo” or "Villa de San Carlos” as Rivero named the original settle ment. Because of the impermanence of these original struc tures --they were only thatched huts--the entire population of San Bias experienced a catastrophe in 1768 upon the Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... ,” pp. 17-20, and Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. p. 91. 1 'il Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, San Bias, May 20, 1768, in Galvez MSS, HL. 99 arrival of heavy rains and hurricane winds. Commencing in October, raging waters flooded the village and disinte- grated homes; serious epidemics and lack of housing facili- ties reduced the population to a fraction of its original number. By the end of the first winter the Villa de San Bias was nearly abandoned since many of the inhabitants had 132 migrated to Tepic and some as far as the capital. A final resume of activities pertaining to the Naval Department of San Bias should include a notation regarding the Chappe Scientific Expedition of 1769. By means of a diplomatic arrangement with the respective courts of France and Spain, a party of scientists was sent to New Spain in 133 1769 to record the transit of Venus. A French scientist 132 There are several MSS which describe the destruc tive events of 1768 at San Bias. See the following: (1) Croix to Arriaga, Mexico, May 22, 1768, in AGI, Guadalalara. 416. (2) [Pineda,] "Se da alguna idea del Puerto del San Bias" (127), MS in MN; and (3) Juan Manuel de Viniegra, "Noticias del Cabo de San Lucas" (331), MS in MN. 133 "Extracto de las Observaciones de Don Vicente Doz en California" (314), in Papeles Varios, I, MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Observaciones de Vicente Doz" (314), MS in MN. A popular account of the scientific Expedition is Charles N. Rudkin (translator), The First French Expedition to California. Early California Travel Series, XLVI (Los Angeles: Glen Dawson, 1959). 100 named Abbot Jean-Baptiste Chappe D'Auteroche was given nominal leadership of the expedition, but Spain furnished two naval officers to aid and assist in travel arrangements to Lower California. The Spanish officers, Vicente Doz and Salvador de Medina, were of equal rank— Teniente de Navfo— and they sailed together from Spain to Mexico in 1768. The officers left Cadiz in December 1768, and disembarked at Vera Cruz where they received new orders for reporting to • I A J the Pepartamento de San Bias. Among the members of the scientific expedition, the final accomplishment seemed insignificant on account of their personal losses. Two of the officials of the expedi tion died, and it is certain that one or more fatalities occurred among subordinates in the same party. After arriving at San Bias, the Chappe Party was provisioned and 135 outfitted at royal expenses (totaling some 512 pesos). Before their departure for the pre-arranged observation ^^"Observaciones de Vicente Doz" (314), MS in MN. ^■^Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, Fiscal Report, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalalara. 104. Another contemporary MS, "Renta de Cargo, y Data de Los efectos que han estado al Cuidado de Dn Juan Gutierrez ... Loreto, Oct. 31, 1769, lists an amount of 314 pesos which was expended in support of the scientists. See: AGN, Marina. 32-A. 101 point, Cabo de San Lucas, Salvador de Medina was stricken 136 by fever and died at the Port of San Bias. On the nine teenth of April, Abbott Chappe and Vicente Doz (plus crew members) embarked on the packetboat Concepcion and were safely ferried to the Ensenada de San Jose del Cabo. Another misfortune occurred soon after the arrival of the scientists in Lower California: Abbott Chappe fell mortally ill and died on August 1, 1769, a victim of a disastrous epidemic. Lieutenant Vicente Doz assumed leadership of the Spanish-French Expedition in August after the death of Abbot Chappe and he immediately submitted all the French scientist's tools, books, and scientific data to Joaqu£n Velasquez de Leon, one of Jose de Galvez1 administrators barques de Croix to Joaqu£n Velasquez de Leon, Mexico, Nov. 11, 1768, in Califomias y Costas NO de America, I (330), MS in MN. 137 Voyage of the French and Spanish Scientists from San Bias to Cabo de San Lucas is related in the following MSS: (1) Galvez to Croix, Los Alamos, Sonora, June 10, 1769, in AGI, Guadalajara. 416; and (2) Velasquez de Leon to Marques de Croix, Real de Santa Ana, July 28, 1769 (330), MS in MN. The death of Abbot Chappe is described in Velasquez de Leon to Marques de Croix, Real de Santa Ana, Sept. 28, 1769 (330), MS in MN. According to the report of Velasquez de Leon, the French scientist died of a pulmonary disease. 102 In lower California. A portion of the membership was delayed during the Gulf of California transit; however, by September 1769, they established an observation post ad jacent to the new settlement and mining camp of Real de 138 Santa Ana. Despite the discouragements which beset this scientific project in the way of disease and disorganiza tion, Lieutenant Doz completed a portion of his assign ment --observing the Transit of Venus and calculating terrestrial co-ordinates. By means of two observation posts, Cabo de San Lucas and Real de Santa Ana, Vicente Doz completed accurate calculations for prominent locations 139 throughout the peninsula. Approximately one year later the expedition returned to San Bias by means of the packet- boat Lauretana. At a later date, Vicente Doz was again active in scientific observations, serving as a naval officer in the Port of Vera Cruz. He finally achieved flag-officer rank, Chief of Squadron, during the closing 138 "Observaciones de Vicente Doz" (314), MS in MN; and Velasquez de Leon to Marques de Croix, Sept. 28, 1769 (330), MS in MN. 13Q "Observaciones de Vicente Doz" (314), MS in MN. years of his career. 103 Francisco de Paula Pavia, Galeria Bioarafica de los Generales de Marina, iefes v personales notables que fjguraron en la misma corporacion desde 1700 a 1868 (Madrid: 1873-74), I, 268. Hereinafter cited as Paula Pavia, Galerfa Bioerafica. During his early naval career, Vicente Doz studied as a midshipman at Cadiz, and finally received appointment as Alferez de Fraeata in 1754. See: Compan£as de Guardias Marinas de Cadiz, ano 1751 (1118), MS in MN. CHAPTER III THE REORGANIZATION AND FIRST PERIOD OF NAVAL EXPLORATIONS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS, 1774 TO 1780 The first major reorganization of the Department of San Bias occurred in 1773 through the combined efforts of Viceroy Antonio Bucareli and Father Jun£pero Serra. During the winter of 1772 and 1773, Serra travelled from San Diego to San Bias aboard the San Carlos and then on to Mexico City for conferences with the Father Guardian of San Fer nando College. After serious consideration, Father Serra completed his last journey to the capital and Franciscan headquarters for defining religious and civil authority in Alta California. It is generally conceded that this visit to the capital in 1773 was motivated by Serra's two-year feud with the gruff Comandante of Monterey, Pedro Fages, but there were other factors which impelled him to make the journey. 104 105 Aside from the Fages controversy, Father Serra was highly displeased about the operation of the San Bias supply system which shuttled provisions and material from Mexico to the new establishments at Monterey and San Diego. The Fat her “President's grievances were mainly two: first, the food and provisions which were sent from Mexico arrived in a miserable condition, usually spoiled and frequently in short quantities; and second, military personnel appro** priated the best shares of all provisions and they even managed to confiscate some of the donations and alms sent for missionary support in California.^ Junlpero Serra was methodical in preparing for his visit to the capital, making notes and finally drafting a lengthy report to his superior during the fifteen-day 2 voyage from San Diego to San Bias on the San Carlos. Antonine Tibesar, Writings of Junfnero Serra (Wash ington: Academy of American Franciscan History, 1955), I, 295 ff. Hereinafter cited as Tibesar, Writings of Junfpero Serra. Father Serra*s complaints were codified in an offi cial Memorandum, dated March 13, 1773, at Mexico. See below, pp. 109-110. a Fray Francisco Palou, Historical Memoirs of Hew California, edited by Herbert E. Bolton (Berkeley: Univer sity of California Press, 1926), II, 365-66. Hereinafter Upon arrival in San Bias early in November 1772, Father Serra was obliged to confer with the civil and military leaders of the port in an effort to probe into some of the grievances which he conveyed from California. During this era of the department's organization, Francisco Trillo served as Commissary and Jose Marfa Lasso was comandante. Trillo*s position was the masterkey for revealing some of the supply problems and based upon previous correspondence, the two officials compared and discussed current methods which were in effect. By coincidence, Serra learned from one of the shipbuilders that officials in Mexico City had sent word that supply operations from San Bias were in jeopardy of being cancelled in favor of mule-train supply columns operating from Loreto to San Diego. The new frigate, Santiago, still in grado— on the shipways at the cited as Palou, Historical Memoirs. Father Serra arrived at San Bias on Nov. 4 and four days later, reached the Pueblo de Tepic. See also: Junfpero Serra to Fray Francisco Palou, Santa Cruz de Tepic, Nov. 10, 1772, in Tibesar, Writings of Junfpero Serra. I. a Palou*s Life of Frav Juninero Serra. ed. and transl. by Maynard J. Geiger (Washington: Academy of Ameri can Franciscan History, 1955), pp. 138-40. Hereinafter cited as Palou*s Life of Serra. 107 4 naval station--was destined to be scrapped and abandoned. At the time of Serra*s arrival at the capital in February 1773, Viceroy Antonio Bucareli had been in office almost one year.^ There was still an air of uncertainty about domestic problems "the situation of the missions and presidios in California plus the recent arrival of Domini can ministers for new assignments— and both of Bucareli*s predecessors, Marques de Croix and Jose de Galvez, had returned to Spain. The problem of the Dominican mission aries hinged on the probability of competition with the Franciscans who had originally been assigned sole jurisdic tion of the northern frontier after the Jesuit expulsion. 4 Omer Englebert, Juninero Serra— Last of the Con quistadors . translated from the French by Katherine Hoods (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1957), p. 127. Herein after cited as Englebert, Juninero Serra. Father Serra spent a period of two weeks at San Bias and Tepic conferring with officials and inspecting the department's facilities. On November 18, 1772, he drafted a complete report to Father-Superlor Rafael Verger of San Fernando, Mexico, concerning his voyage from San Diego plus the needs of Alta California and the problems of carrying supplies. 5 Antonio Bucareli served the following term as Viceroy of New Spain: September 1771, to April 1779. See: Cayetano Alcazar Molina, Historia de America v de los Pueblos Americanos— Los Virreinatos en el Siglo XVIII. XIII, ed. by Antonio Ballesteros y Beretta (Barcelona: Salvat Editores, 1945), 65. 108 However, upon the arrival of Father Juan Pedro de Iriarte with official orders permitting the Dominicans to establish their activities in Nueva Espana, the viceroy was per plexed. The entire affair was originally entrusted to Jose de Galvez, but upon that official's departure for Madrid in May 1772, the viceroy's composure was slightly ruffled and he hastily urged Father Guardian Rafael Verger of San Fernando to reach a compromise with the Dominicans about their new assignment.^ Upon his arrival in Mexico, Junfpero Serra conferred with Father Verger on cumulative problems of Alta Cali fornia. The latter official urged the doughty Serra to formalize his ideas into a recomnendation for the viceroy's consideration. During the next four months, Jun£pero Serra completed a total of five Memoranda for the regulation of both Califomias and San Bias. Serra's original Memorandum. dated March 13, 1772, was the most thorough and comprehen sive of all his outlines for streamlining the supply system of Alta California. The Father-President's recommendations 6These problems are discussed in Charles E. Chapman, A History of California— The Spanish Period (New York: Macmillan Co., 1921), pp. 114-19. See also: Englebert, Juninero Serra. pp. 119-23. 109 were penned and submitted to Viceroy Bucareli In the form of thirty-two articles encompassing everything which Serra thought would define his position In Monterey and Improve maritime supply.^ Serra*s articles to the viceroy Included the following criticisms of San Bias supply: 1. (Article no. 1) The shortage of pilots in the Department of San Bias Imposes a hardship on Monterey. 2. (Article no. 4) The alms collected at Tepic and Compostela are shipped from San Bias to the Franciscans; Serra requests they be marked separately and not shipped to the presidio. 3. (Article no. 23) Serra requests that measuring devices at San Bias be regulated and standardized to pre vent fraud. Also, he recomnends that a standard measuring unit be forwarded to Monterey and all other missions. 4. (Article no. 25) The provisions— especially com, meat and flour— are received damaged and spoiled from the Commissary of San Bias. Serra requests a careful inspection to assure good quality. 5. (Article no. 32) Serra requests a duplicate copy of all orders Issued to the Commissary of San Bias Palou, Historical Memoirs. Ill, 4 ff. Junipero Serra*s formal presentation is listed as: Serra to Bucareli, Mexico, March 13, 1773, In Tibesar, writings of Juninero Serra. I. 110 for the purpose of good accounting and for holding the Conmissary responsible; by means of this method, the missionaries will not violate regulations. After personal conferences with the viceroy on the urgency of reorganizing California supply, Serra posted a singular triumph by winning Bucareli to his side. The viceroy considered this matter to be of great Importance and on May 6 the audlencla convened a formal junta for con sideration of Serra's First Memorandum. While the concise ness of Father Serra*s arguments determined the viceroy's favorable consideration about reorganization measures, other members of the junta were known to be decidedly nega tive toward the "Galvez folly" (that Is, his entire pro posal for settling Alta California and maintaining missions and presidios in that distant location), and many were absolutely Implacable toward continuing the Naval Depart ment of San Bias. On the basis of the early calamities which befell the maritime voyages to California--coupled with the failure of harmonious operations between the mis sionaries and soldiers--many of the ministers recommended a new system for maintaining Alta California. As an 8 , Palou, Historical Memoirs. Ill, 4-34. Ill alternative to the hazardous naval expeditions, they offered the following suggestions: 1. The Naval Department of San Bias should suspend all maritime operations to Cali fornia plus the immediate cancellation of the Santiago*s contract; and 2. A new supply system should be introduced between Loreto and San Diego using mule- trains for hauling the necessary goods and provisions.^ During the junta of May 6 the expected opposition failed to develop and twenty-six of the original thirty-two articles contained in Serra*s First Memorandum were given tentative approval. Immediately afterward in the Royal Council of War and Exchequer, a provisional code of regula tions was drafted by one of Viceroy Bucareli*s most promi nent ministers, Juan Jose de Echeveste. The appointment of Echeveste as special arbitrator for organizing Cali fornia's supply system seems entirely justified. Echeveste 9 Englebert, Junipero Serra. pp. 126-27; and Serra to Bucareli, Mexico, April 22, 1773, in Tibesar, Writings of Junipero Serra. I. Father Serra had learned of the Minister's opposi tion during his short visitation in San Bias and his letter of April 22 was a lengthy and thorough defense for retain ing the Naval Department of San Bias. The Father-President emphasized the futility of using the overland mule-train system and he pointed out measures for reducing San Bias operating expenses. 112 had served the crown In various positions commencing in 1765 when he was appointed Treasurer of New Spain's Tobacco Guild.In 1770, both Jose de Galvez and Marques de Croix appointed Echeveste Treasurer of the Baker's Guild; how ever, his most significant work regarding California and San Bias supply vessels was in connection with his appoint ment as Purchasing Administrator for the Californias. Juan Jose de Echeveste's new position was authorized by Viceroy Croix in 1770 and following the appointment he traveled to Alta California. ^Herbert I. Priestley, Jose de Galvez--Visitador General of New Spain. University of California Publications in History, V (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1916), pp. 147-51. Hereinafter cited as Priestley, Jose de Galvez. A detailed summary of Juan Jose de Echeveste's career as an official of the Real Hacienda's Tobacco Guild is contained in Jose de Galvez, MYnforme Que en Virtud de la Rl Orden de 24 de Mayo de este ano hizo el Yllmo. Sor. Visitador Gral. Dn. Jose de Galvez al fimno. Sor. Virrey Dn. Antonio Maria Bucareli del estado de los graves asuntos que tubo a su cargo, dividida en quatro partes," Mexico, Dec. 31, 1771 (3119), MS in BN. Hereinafter cited as Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in BN. ^Charles E. Chapman, "Difficulties of Maintaining the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777," Southwestern His torical Quarterly. XIX (April, 1916), 262. Hereinafter cited as Chapman, "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. Minister Echeveste first served as Purchasing Agent for the Californias in 1770, journeying to Monterey and back that same year. In 1772, San Bias officials paid 9,329 pesos on account of this voyage* Cited in Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, Fiscal Report, San Bias, June 12, 1772, in AGI, Guadalajara. 104. 113 On May 19, 1773, Juan Jose de Echeveste Issued an entirely new amento (code) for both Calif ornias and the Naval Station at San Blas.^ The purpose of Eche veste* s code was to re-establish San Bias as an autonomous organ— a new, separate division was granted to the indi vidual units of the department plus strict rules for accounting, issuing supplies, and rendering goods to Cali fornia. The unique feature of the was that it authorized three separate divisions at San Bias: the fleet, the Navy Yard and Arsenal, and the Department (administra tion) . ^ According to the new Echeveste Code, each division of the Naval Department of San Bias was authorized spe cific expenditures; the Fleet received the highest budget, followed by the Navy Yard and Arsenal and finally, 12 There are several published sources concerning the Echeveste Code— Reglamento Provisional. See the fol lowing: (1) Palou, Historical Memoirs. Ill, 57 ff; (2) Chapman, "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. pp. 262-65; and (3) Tibesar, Writings of Junfnero Serra. I, 295-329. 13 Discussed thoroughly in Chapman, "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. pp. 263-64. 114 the Department.^ Using the previous financial statements from the Port of San Bias (1768-1772), Echeveste drafted his new salary schedule and regulations. The following summary represents the new budget for the Department of San Bias: Fleet— Proposed Annual Budget: 34.037 pesos 1 Captain 1 Boatswain mate 1 Pilot 2 Cabin Boys 1 Pilot, second class 6 Helmsmen 1 Caulker 27 Ships Boys 1 Carpenter 30 Sailors 1 Steward (One Frigate with 72 members) 1 Captain 1 Boatswain mate 1 Pilot 2 Cabin Boys 1 Pilot, second class 6 Helmsmen 1 Caulker 10 Ships Boys 1 Carpenter 16 Sailors 1 Steward (Two Packetboats with total crew of 82) Naw Yard and Arsenal— Proposed Annual Budget: 12,355 pesos 1 Master-workman 1 Boatswain mate 1 Ropemaker 1 Cooper (Total of 4 members) Junfpero Serra to Antonio Bucareli, Mexico, June 11, 1773, in Tibesar, Writings of Junfpero Serra, I, With the exception of Jose de Galvez and possibly Juan Jose de Echeveste, Father Serra was the most experi enced and qualified official in Mexico who drafted the «B*ato for more economical administration of the Department of San Bias. 115 Department— Proposed Annual Budget: 8.691 pesos 1 Commissary 1 Paymaster 1 Accountant 1 Chaplain 1 Secretary 1 Sacristan 1 Storekeeper 3 Sentries (Total of 10 members) TOTAL PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET: 55,083 pesos15 The disposition of Echeveste*s Reglamento Involved many of the key officials In Bucareli*s audlencia and furthermore, they approved the new code and offered sig nificant amendments for its Improvement. One of the first additions came from the Fiscal. Jose Antonio Areche, who dated his report on June 14, 1773; this action was closely followed by the report of Fernando Jose Mangino, Auditor General of the Royal Tributes, dated June 19.^ By this time the recomnendations for the Reglamento were again submitted to the viceroy for study and approval. On June 22, Viceroy Bucareli convened the Royal Council of Exchequer and War to consider the Echeveste document and 15Antonio Maria Bucareli, Reglamento y Instruceion para el gobierno de los establecimientos en California y para el Departamento de San Bias, Mexico, April (?), 1773, in AGN, Marina. 34. ^Palou, Historical Memoirs. Ill, 78-99. 116 the new amendments* According to two separate decisions from the Royal Council, both issued on July 8, the new organization £or the Califomias and the Department of San Bias was approved and the new Reglamento became effec tive on January 1, 1774. In their first ruling, the Royal Council specified that the "held-over" articles from Father Serra1s original Memorandum (consisting of some six articles) were to be made into a separate ordinance; the Council's second ruling advised complete adoption of the new code on January 1, 1774. On July 23, 1773, Viceroy Bucareli approved the Council's resolutions and the Eche veste Reglamento was henceforth a valid code for the Department of San Bias and for the California establlsh- 17 ments. After Junfpero Serra had successfully achieved his objectives for a stricter organization of missionary and secular activities in Alta California, the task of strength ening and promulgating the new regulations fell to Viceroy ^7Chapman, "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. p. 263. Junfpero Serra discussed the significance of the six articles (i.e., nos. 10, 11, 13, 14, 26 and 30 of the Memoranda of Mar. 13) in the following correspondence: Serra to Bucareli, Mexico, June 11, 1773, in Writings of Junfpero Serra. I. 117 Antonio Bucareli. Consequently, while Serra was exhorting his fellow Franciscans and soliciting private support for the new missions, Bucareli was seriously Involved with broader Issues for maintaining Alta California. On April 11, 1773, Minister of the Indies Julian Arriaga wrote to Bucareli warning him of Russian explorations along the 18 Northwest Coasts of "California." Arriaga strongly hinted that Bucareli should take immediate steps to off-set Russian advances and to verify the extent of their activi ties. Just for good measure, Minister Arriaga included a copy of Conde de Lacy's warning dispatched to Madrid from St. Petersburg in February of 1773. The warnings and sup plication from Julian Arriaga were the first official Spanish recognition of foreign encroachments into northern IQ Pacific waters. 18 Francisco Antonio Mourelle, "Viajes a las Costas de California y parte NO de la America en 1774," Febru ary 15, 1791, In Historia y Viajes, Tomo I (575), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Mourelle, "Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774” (575), MS in MN. IQ Correspondence of Conde de Lacy to Minister Grimaldi, Feb. 7, 1773, cited in Mourelle, "Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. The Spanish plenipotentiary included a chronology of Russian activities in the Pacific Northwest from 1740 to 1765 with his report of February 7. Cited by Mourelle in MS 575. 118 In Mexico City, Antonio Bucareli began his own preparations for complying with royal orders to safeguard the Califoraias. The most logical action was to ascertain how much truth there was in the recent warnings and Bucareli devoted his full attention to sending an expedi tion to the Northwest Coasts. Bucareli planned to dispatch one of San Bias' new vessels for an exploratory voyage, to be supported in every manner by the Naval Department of San Bias. Since the Echeveste Reglamento had passed all barriers in June 1773, Viceroy Bucareli was extremely con fident about the permanent disposition of the naval station. His initial correspondence with officials of that depart ment was directed to the veteran piloto. Juan Perez, and by date of July 18, 1773, he informed Perez of the crown's recent warnings involving foreign encroachments along the Pacific Coast. Bucareli explained the forthcoming proposi tion for an expedition out of San Bias and requested Juan Perez to outline a formal plan for this endeavor.^® The viceroy*8 knowledge of Juan Perez apparently spanned a short period of time before 1773 when Arriaga ^Mourelle, "Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. 119 Informed Bucareli of the Russian threat. Viceroy Bucareli chose Juan Perez from the Acapulco-Manila galeones to lead the San Bias pilot corps at a time when the destiny of the Naval Station of San Bias was extremely feeble. Sometime in 1772, Perez received an appointment from the viceroy which ordered him to serve in the Port of San Bias as first pilot. As early as 1773, Perez was accustomed to the 21 services and requirements of that port. In reply to Bucareli*s request for a formal outline, Pilot Juan Perez completed a sailing plan for his superior and forwarded it to Mexico in September 1773. The depth of Perez* experience along the Pacific Coasts was evident in the plan and he included several important details for Bucareli*8 perusal: 21 "Extracto de las noticias mas esenciales que com- prehende la recopilacion de los Diarios de las Expediciones hechos sobre la Costa NO de America por nuestros Pilotos y Oficiales de Sn Bias," n.d. in California: Historia y Viajes, Tomo II (575 bis), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Extracto de las noticias ... de los Diarios sobre la Costa NO de America ... " (575 bis), MS in MN. Juan Perez told of his own experience in the Manila galleons in "Primera exploration de la costa Septentrional de California hecha por el Alferez de Fgta graduado Dn. Juan Perez con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora [sic.], 1774," in Costa NO de America, Tomo I (331), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Prlmera exploration de Juan Perez ... , 1774" (331), MS in MN. 120 1. The voyage to the Northwest Coasts would best be undertaken In the fragata Santiago; 2. The months of January, February or even December were most appropriate to start the expedition; 3. The expedition would require a year's sup- ply of provisions which could be requisi tioned from the Presidios, plus the necessary amount of clothing; 4. Crew members for the expedition might be drawn in part, from the personnel of the California Presidios; and 3. The logistic support for the expedition should be provided by the Department of San Bias, which was capable of handling this new assignment.*2 On July 27, Antonio Bucareli issued a concurrent report to Minister Arriaga in Madrid informing him of his plans and preparations for securing the California^. The viceroy's report contained a lengthy statement regarding contemporary knowledge of Russian activities including the following information: 1. Concerning the approach of foreign vessels along the west coast, there have been no reports of any sightings nor were there any 22 Francisco Mourelle, "Causes que movieron a forma- lizar el Departamento de Sn Bias y a despachar embarca- ciones para reconocer la Costa NO de America," n.d. in California: Historla y Viajes, I (575), MS in MN. Here inafter cited as Mourelle, "Causas que movieron a formalizar el Departamento de Sn Bias ... ” (575), MS in MN. 121 discoveries of vessels moored or anchored in the bays or harbors of that area; 2. There were no foreign establishments along the coastal strip from Cabo San Lucas to Monterey and no sign of Russian activity; 3. Only the vessels from San Bias, which supply the missions and presidios of Monterey and San Diego plus the galeones from Manila operate in the waters adjacent to the Cali- fomias; and finally, 4. The shipyard at San Bias, appointed to the assistance of the old and new establish ments of the Califomias, is not capable of any large enterprises since it appears to require more solid foundation: i.e., capable naval officials and experienced pilots and supplies and exact measures with extensive designs to accomplish all of this. It seems to be convenient to launch out from Monterey on voyages of discovery from November to January, this being the best time of the year for such voyages; that Alferez graduado Juan Perez has been directed to draw up a project about the new discoveries, since he is the pilot with the most experience in completing these voyages.** The importance of Bucareli's report and his request for full support of the Naval Station at San Bias was quickly understood among Spanish officials. Having openly supported Junfpero Serra*s remonstrances and recommenda tions for a Reglamento. the viceroy could do no less than ^Bucareli to Arriaga, in "Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. 122 forward to Madrid a strong, positive statement in behalf of the Naval Department of San Bias. During the latter part of 1773, Carlos III ruled in favor of continuing the Naval Department of San Bias with lmnediate support from Spain. After having seriously con sidered Viceroy Bucareli's report of July 27, the king formally approved the transfer of six naval officers for permanent duty at San Bias. In addition to this necessary infusion of strength, the Departamento de San Bias was given formal recognition of the basis of the organizational code formed in Mexico during the spring of 1773.^ The favorable edict of Carlos III reached Nueva Espana late in 1773 while preparations for the new expedition were well underway, and doubtless was a great psychological factor for supporting the expedition. Viceroy Bucareli*s plans for the expedition of 1774 were thorough and precise. He conferred with an eminent contemporary naval officer at Vera Cruz, General-of-the- Armada, Luis de Cordova, and introduced his scheme for ^Arriaga to Bucareli, Madrid, December 23, 1773, cited in "Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. The new officers who were assigned for naval service with the Department of San Bias are discussed below, pp. 139-45. 123 dispatching the new fragata Santiago to the Northwest Coasts. In addition, Bucareli included an idea of his attempts to reconnoiter the coastal waters above the Port 25 of Monterey to determine the extent of Russian activity. Unfortunately, Luis de Cordova was unable to judge Buca- reli's plan, since the former official had served entirely on the Atlantic Coast. Undaunted by the previous reply, the viceroy approved the plans which Juan Perez had sub mitted on September 1, 1773; then he drafted his final orders to Ensign Perez for the accomplishment of this mission.^ Meanwhile, it was necessary to complete the new and controversial frigate Santiago: the first major vessel ^-*"Borradores de varios apuntes para la historia de las expediciones maritimas hechos por ordenes de los Virreyes de Nueva Espana desde el ano de 1768 hasta 1796 en reconoclmiento de las costas NO de la America Septen trional," in California: Historia y Viajes, II (575 bis), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Borradores de las expedi- clones maritimas ... " (575 bis), MS in MN. See also: Mourelle, "Causas que movieron a formali- zar el Departamento de Sn Bias ... " (575), MS in MN. 0 £ Bucareli to Perez, "Ynstruceiones que El Exmo. Sor. Virey dio a los Comandantes de los Buques de Explora- ciones," Mexico, Dec. 24, 1773, cited in "Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. The details of these instructions are discussed below, pp. 127-29. 124 constructed In the department In four years. This was the ship which Father Serra had inspected in November 1772, and he was informed about plans for scrapping the Santiago. along with naval operations at that port. The 225 ton Santiago (destined to be the pride of San Bias for almost ten years) was ordered in 1771 by Viceroy Francisco Croix before he retired to a government position in Peru. During three years' time there were delays and actual suspensions on the vessel's construction in San Bias. Between the time of laying the keel in 1771 and the vessel's launching in 1773, a great many suggestions for initiating new supply routes to California had circulated throughout the capital. During his tenure as Inspector- General, Jose de Galvez urged the continuation of the Naval Department of San Bias and its supply voyages to Baja and Alta California. He spoke highly of the department's prospects in 1771 (even though they were limited in vessels and crews) and Galvez was aware of the crown's new fragata 27 at the San Bias shipyard. ^Jose de Galvez, "Ynforme ... , 1771" (3119), MS in MN. See also: Galvez, "Ynforme Sobre la Nueva Espana ... , 1771" (570), MS in MN. At the time of Galvez' Report to Bucareli (Dec. 31, 1771), the visltador stated that the new frigate Santiago was scheduled for launching within a matter of days. 125 Two more years were required to complete construc tion details on the Santiago. The new Bucareli administra tion was assuming responsibility for the project at a time when several members of the audiencla expressed only quali fied approval of the funds required to launch and outfit the Santiago. The hostility of several audiencla members grew even more forceful in 1772 after the departure of both Jose de Galvez and the Marques de Croix in May of that year. However, the vessel was finally completed and floated in 1773. The Juan Perez Expedition of 1774 During the first six years of the naval department's operations after undergoing reorganization in 1773, mari time activities accelerated at a rapid rate. The scope of San Bias supply functions to California increased greatly; new artisans, workmen, and naval officers arrived at the station, and finally, the department assumed a new responsi bility upon the initiation of the voyages of exploration from San Bias to the Northwest Coasts. The role of the naval department as supplier of Alta California's military and religious establishments was solidified by the 126 Rg^lamgnto of 1773, and In addition, both material assets and physical additions to the port*s complement combined to mould a permanent and formidable organization by 1780. San Bias* greatest accomplishment during this period was the construction of vessels and maintenance of regular supply voyages to the Californlas. The six-year period was also the era of Nueva Espana's expansion along the northern coasts; an era when new territory was claimed for the Spanish Crown. The initial expedition from San Bias to the North west Coasts was the Juan Perez voyage of 1774, planned and directed by Viceroy Antonio Bucareli. Appropriately enough, this voyage turned out to be one of the most thoroughly planned explorations of the six-year period. With new assurances from the Court of Carlos III, and after receiving notification of the Santiago*s completion in 1773, Bucareli labored from July to December in preparation for Spain*s first major exploration of the "coasts of northern California." With such high stakes involved In this expedition— including the possibility of acquiring new territory north of Monterey and the necessity of probing these shores and 127 locating foreign establishments— Viceroy Bucareli spared no detail In Issuing formal Instructions to his naval commander, Juan Perez. On December 24, 1773, Bucareli completed a thorough set of Instructions including sail' ing directions and precautions in dealing with foreign vessels or leaders encountered ashore, and he forwarded these to Ensign Perez at San Bias. The viceroy's instruc tions which he drafted in 1773 for the Perez Expedition were actually designed for regulating all future explora tions from the Naval Department of San Bias to the north- west. Bucareli issued thirty-two articles, entitled "YnstruceIones que El Exmo Sor. Virey dio a los Comandantes de los Buques de Exploraciones," in which he stressed the following: 1. The necessity of keeping accurate and com plete logs; 2. The proper method to follow in approaching the coasts in order to make a landfall at approximately 60° latitude; 3. A set of regulations for their conduct with native inhabitants along these coasts Including the best possible means to win their friendship and esteem; and finally, 128 4. Instructions for dealing with foreign naval vessels or establishments wherever they might be f o u n d .2® The viceroy'8 instructions for the fragata Santiago included the mandate that Captain Perez should stop in Monterey for delivery of a normal supply of provisions and supplies. In addition, the Santiago was outfitted with a complete supply of rations sufficient for a twelve months' period, a medicine chest, a shipment of ammunition and some small arms for protection and defense. Also included in the ship's cargo were 468 bundles of beads and cloth for trade with Indians.^ The new Spanish frigate received 'Viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. Additional MSS which chronicle Viceroy Bucareli'8 instructions include the following: (1) "Primera exploracion de Juan Perez ... , 1774" (331), MS in MN, and (2) Archivo General de la Nacion, Historia. Tomo 68. A scholarly treatment of Bucareli*s preparations and his orders to Perez is found in Manuel P. Serv£n, "Buca reli 's Instructions to Juan Perez," California Historical Society Quarterly (Sept., 1961). Hereinafter cited as Servin, "Bucareli's Instructions to Juan Perez," CHSQ. ^Servin, "Bucareli's Instructions to Juan Perez," CHSQ. p. 239. Trading between 51 and 55 N. latitude indicates that the Spanish carried axes in addition to the previously- mentioned articles* See: "Extracto de las noticias ... de los Diarios sobre la Costa NO de America ... " (575 bis), MS in MN. 129 a liberal amount of water and with Bucareli'8 detailed "Ynstruceiones” plus the complementary document for guid ance in formal ceremonies of possess ion-taking, Juan Perez was duly outfitted for his quest of the northern coasts of California.^ On January 25, 1774, the new 120-foot frigate heaved anchor from the harbor of San Bias and launched out on the first modern Spanish expedition to the northwest. As originally designed and built, the Santiago carried sixty- four crewmen, but since Bucareli considered this expedition a special one, the vessel's complement included eighty-six regular crewmen plus Junfpero Serra and a small company of 31 his followers who were returning to California. 30»viajes a las Costas de California ... en 1774" (575), MS in MN. The viceroy's second major instruction sheet to Perez was typical of the Spanish concept of territorial acquisition by means of the Symbolic Act of Sovereignty. This legal instrument--called "Formularlo que ha de ser- vir de Patua para extender las Escritas de posecion en los descubrimientos de que esta encargado el Alferez Don Juan Perez"--was used during successive expeditions in 1775, 1779, and 1788. See: Manuel P. Servfn, "Religious Aspects of Symbolic Acts of Sovereignty," The Americas. XIII (Jan., 1957), 255 ff. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. The original complement of the Santiago is listed in Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, Fiscal Report, San Bias, 130 The vessel experienced no difficulties until February 28 when a small casualty occurred. In the Santa Barbara Channel the vessel sprung one of its main body joints and Captain Perez ordered the ship back to San Diego Bay. On March tenth, the Santiago anchored in San Diego, where Father Junfpero Serra and ten associates (including carpenters and artisans) disembarked for assign ment in Alta California. After a prolonged rest of twenty- five days, the Santiago sailed out of San Diego on April 5, 1774, arriving in Monterey Bay on the eighth of May.^ During a twenty-six day stopover in Monterey, Cap tain Perez supervised the unloading of supplies for the presidio and mission and arranged for the assignment of two of the mission prelates to accompany his vessel to the northwest. On June 6, 1774, Father Tomas de la Petia and Juan Crespi departed from Mission San Carlos and boarded the Santiago as the vessel's official chaplains Sept. 18, 1772, in AGI, Guadalalara. 104. Father Serra*8 preparations for the sea voyage are described by Maynard J. Geiger, ed., Palou's Life of Serra. pp. 142-44. 32»tpriniera exploracion de Juan Perez ... , 1774” (331), MS in MN. 131 33 and religious supporters. There were several solemn masses recited on board Perez' vessel by Father-President Serra who journeyed to Monterey for this occasion and on June 6, catching sight of the Principe which had just arrived at Monterey, Perez headed the Santiago out to sea. The sojourn in Monterey had delayed the expedition by several weeks, and departure from the coastal waters of California was further frustrated by a series of trouble some calms. During the interim, Captain Perez entertained the Principe's conmander, Jose Canizares, and Fathers Francisco Dumetz and Jose Antonio Murgula aboard the Santiago. It is also noteworthy that the expedition's first casualty occurred during this period: boatswain's mate Manuel Lopez died on June 12, and his body was sent Fray Tomas de la Pefia, "Diario del Viaje que por mandado del R.P. Fr. Junipero Serra Predicador Appco. y Presldente de estos misiones de Monterey del cargo de mio santo Colegio de Propaganda Fe de Sn. Fernando ... desde este Puerto de Sn. Carlos de Monterey ... al norte en la Fragata de S.M. nombrada Santiago, alias la Nueva Galicia mandada por Dn Juan Perez Alferez graduado de Fragata y Primer Piloto ... comenzado dla 6 de Junio de 1774 en que me embarque en companla del R. P. Fr. Juan Crespi Predica dor Appco de dieho Colegio y Ultimo de la Mision de San Carlos de Monterey, bulgo del Carmelo," Mission San Carlos, Aug. 28, 1774, in Costa NO de America (331), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Tomas de la Petia, "Diario en la Fragata Santiago ... " (331), MS in MN. 132 back to Mission San Carlos for burial.^ On June 17, the Santiago was able to make continued 35 headway toward the north and the vessel was underway. During the next month Captain Perez and his crew experi enced heavy fog and intermittent spells of rain and cold temperatures. Most of their northerly navigation was without celestial aid and the early portions of the voyage were greatly hampered by fog-shrouded weather. One of the most accurate observations on this first segment was ^Tomas de la Peiia, "Diario en la Fragata Santiago ... " (331), MS in MN. 3 5 , JIn addition to Fray Tomas de la Pena's MS, Father Juan Crespi kept a diary entitled: "Ano de 1774. Diario que yo, Fr. Juan Crespi, Misionero del Apostolico colegio de Propaganda Fe de Sn. Fernando, de Mexico, formo del viage de la fragata de S.M. llamada Santiago, alias la Nueva Galicia, mandada por su capltan y alferez de Fragata Dn. Juan Perez, que por orden del Excmo Sr. Fr. Dn. Antonio Maria Bucarely y Ursua, Virrey de la Nueva Espana, va a hacer de las costas del Norte de Monte Rey que se halla en la altura de 36 grados y medio del Norte hasta los 60 grados a lo menos," in AGI, Guadalalara. 1. Published by George Butler Griffin in the Historical Society of Southern California Publications, Vol. II (1891). A second MS of the Crespi journal appears as "Diario de la Expedicion de Mar que hizo la Fragata Santiago en la que fueron los Padres Predic8 Fr. Juan Crespi y Fr. Tomas de la Pena," College of San Fernando, Mexico. Published by George Butler Griffin in the Historical Society of Southern California Publications, Vol. II (1891). See also: Herbert E. Bolton, Juan Crespi. Missionary Explorer on the Pacific Coast, 1769-1774 (Berkeley: Univer sity of California Press, 1927), pp. 307-66. Hereinafter cited as Bolton, Juan Crespi. 133 completed on July 13, when the pilots recorded a latitude of 48° 55* N. The next day they observed 50° 24' N. and Ensign Perez ordered an inventory of their water supply to determine whether they should go ashore in the near future. On July 13, a junta of officers declared that the vessel carried enough water for six more weeks of continued sail* ing.^ At this point, Perez queried the ship's officials asking them if the ship should continue northward or head toward land to resupply the water barrels. By unanimous decision the officials voted to go ashore and accordingly 37 the Santiago changed course. Captain Perez caught his first glimpse of the north ern coasts on July 18 at a distance of twenty leagues; the pilots clearly discerned snow-covered peaks and rolling 36 The question of the unusual consumption of water aboard the Santiago is hard to explain. At the conclusion of one of the official diaries of this expedition, the scribe penned a lengthy commentary on this problem, noting that the vessel should have carried sufficient water for a six-months voyage. This author contends that lack of water was the chief reason for Juan Perez* incomplete fulfillment of his mission. See: "Primera exploracion de Juan Perez ... , 1774" (331), MS in MN. ^Tomas de la Pena, "Diario en la Fragata Santiago ..." (331), MS in MN. 134 foothills. The next day the Santiago arrived at 53° 41* N. latitude and the pilots observed three islands which Cap** tain Perez named "Las Yslas de Santa Margarita." The location of this landfall was Queen Charlotte's Island and during a two days* reconnaissance, Perez discovered the strait between the former island and Prince of Wales Archi pelago. Between July 20 and July 22, Captain Perez noted numerous Indians who approached the Santiago in canoes to engage in friendly commercial exchanges. The highest latitude which Perez attained in the Rjmtiapn was 55° N., recorded on July 21, and thereupon the Captain resolved to turn southward to look for an appropri- 39 ate location to resupply wood and water. 7 Still plagued 3**Tomas de la Petia, "Diario en la Fragata Santiago ... " (331), MS in MN. On July 21, the crew members counted approximately 200 natives who paddled out to the ship to exchange dried fish and furs with the Spaniards. Henry R. Wagner points out the errors in Juan Perez* geographical observations along the Northwest Coast. Wagner states that between July 18 and July 22 the Santiago was off Queen Charlotte's Island sailing through Dixon Entrance but "his latitude was much too high; even the middle of the entrance is hardly as much as 54 1/2°.” See: The Cartography of the Northwest Coast of America to the Year 1800 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1937), I, 172. Hereinafter cited as Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest. See also: "Primera exploracion de Juan Perez ... , 1774" (331), MS in MN. 135 by dense fogs and a strong current which swept them in a southerly direction, the Santiago crew members caught an occasional glimpse of headlands and snowy peaks from July 23 until August 5. On August 6, 1774, the Spaniards sighted an important landfall which Captain Perez recorded as 48° 52* N. latitude. The Santiago was approaching the entrance to Nootka Sound on present-day Vancouver Island and on August 9 Perez finally dropped anchor for the expedition's most significant exploration.^ In the harbor or Rada de San Lorenzo, the Santiago put out a small anchor and Perez made preparations for sending a launch ashore for a supply of water. August 9 was a busy time for the Spaniards since they were engaged in trading with a great crowd of Indians who drifted about ^^Wagner suggests that Juan Perez may not have reached Nootka Sound owing to a consistent northerly error in his calculations. The proposition is supported by nega tive evidence in that no map of the harbor or entrance of Nootka was drawn or submitted to Mexico. The best evidence which proves that Juan Perez was at Nootka Sound in 1774 is the assertion of Chief Maquina of the Nootka Indians: he testified that Perez gave him some silver spoons and some Monterey conchas at that time and place. See: Cartography of the Northwest. I, 173. Herbert E. Bolton accepts the description of Captain Perez and pilot Martinez as corresponding to the entrance of Nootka Sound, on Vancouver Island. Cited in Juan Crespi. lvi-lvii. 136 the frigate in their canoes. A moderate amount of exchange and barter was completed and Perez named two prominent 41 points surrounding the harbor. Soon after the launch had been dispatched on its water-run, a marked increase in the velocity of wind was noted and Captain Perez immediately ordered the launch back and prepared to haul it aboard. The Santiago1s situation was very critical (Perez noted that they were in danger of beaching on a rocky shoal) and finally they had to slip their anchor and put to sea.^ Consequently this reconnaissance was only a brief intro duction to San Lorenzo: Juan p£rez accomplished no formal act of possession and the only proof of a Spanish visit in 1774 were Monterey sea shells (abalone) and silver spoons, The points which Juan Perez named were "Punta de Santa Clara" to the north (Cape Cook), and "Punta de San Esteban" to the south (Point Esteban). After getting underway from the anchorage close to Nootka, Perez dis covered a tall mountain which he named "Sierra Nevada de Santa Rosalia" (Mount Olympus). Tomas de la Peiia, "Diario del Viaje en la Fragata Santiago ... " (331), MS in MN. See also: Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest. I, 173. ^Father de la Pefla explains that the difficulty of bringing the launch back aboard was due to the shortage of able-bodied seamen to accomplish the work. At one point they almost lost it altogether but finally brought the launch aboard and manned the ship's sails. "Diario del Viaje en la Fragata Santiago ... " (331), MS in MN. 137 figuring later In the accounts of Captain James Cook. For such an Important expedition, and one upon which the major officials of New Spain were counting, Perez' voyage to the northwest seemed a rather dismal fulfillment of his Instructions. Unfortunately the Spanish officer made only two Inner-coastal Inspections, that Is, at the Entrada de Bucareli (later named by Bodega y Quadra In 1775) and in the Puerto de San Lorenzo, henceforth known as Nootka Sound. Perez' single reconnaissance of the Northwest Coast was completed at the latter spot, although he never did touch shore. While It Is true that the disadvantages of Inclement weather seemed to hover around the Santiago (thus blocking a view of coastal sites and putting the Spaniards In constant jeopardy of shipwreck), there were seemingly valid complaints of the manner In which Commander Perez carried out his orders. After nine weeks of actual exploration on the northern coasts, the Santiago finally returned to the warmer climes of Monterey; almost two-thirds of the crew were ill with scurvy and 43 their water supply was nearly gone. ^Compare editor's notation for these criticisms, "Primera exploracton de Juan Perez ... 1774" (331), MS In MN. Aside from the expenses of outfitting the Perez 138 The Importance of the Perez Expedition was apparent In 1790 when claims to the Northwest Coast were disputed with the English, and although Spanish rights for original entry and possession of Nootka Sound were admitted, Juan Perez' previous territorial claims were denied. Spanish Pacific Coast power had already reached its zenith and began its decline In 1792. If any single point in justify ing the expedition of 1774 can be emphasized, it should be the experience and knowledge gained by the members of the Naval Department of San Bias of northwest voyages of ex ploration. Both Captain Perez and his second officer, Estevan Jose MartInez, participated in the following voyage of exploration in 1775 and Martinez continued to serve the department for another sixteen years.^ Expedition and the death of several seamen, the harshest criticism from this authority centered upon the lack of initiative displayed by Captain Perez. It was hoped that Perez would scout the bays and rivers of these coasts, taking possession in various sites and laying claim to the area in the name of the Spanish Crown. ^The captain of the schooner Sonora. Juan de la Bodega y Quadra, noted the death of Juan Perez in Monterey just before the two vessels returned to San Bias in Novem ber 1775. See below, p. 207. Martinez was an active member of the pilot corps of San Bias from 1776-86 and was finally nominated for leader ship of the expedition of 1788 to the Northwest Coasts. Infra, p. 291. 139 The Hezeta-Bodega v Quadra Expedition of 1775 There were two additional voyages of exploration during the next five years, both under the supervision of Viceroy Antonio Bucareli. The first expedition was launched within a matter of months after Juan Perez re turned in November 1774, while the second was delayed until the early part of 1779. After Ensign Perez* return to San Bias in the Santiago. the viceroy revealed his plans for continuing Spanish exploration of the Northwest Coasts. The enthusiasm of Bucareli for these projects may have been whetted by the arrival of Spanish officers from Madrid, but rumors indicate that the viceroy was compensated by an additional 20,000 pesos in salary which probably stimulated him even more.^ The expedition of 1775 was ccramanded by Tentente de Navfo Bruno de Hezeta and supported by Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra, both of whom had arrived in Mexico in October 1774. Spain's new detachment of naval officers helped the viceroy prepare the second major exploration 4*5 Cited by Omer Englebert in Juninero Serra. p. 127. 140 of the northwest and then they fulfilled Bucareli Ts orders for duty at the Naval Department of San Bias. Originally, the Court of Madrid dispatched six naval officers to New Spain in 1774, including Manuel Manrique, Fernando Quiros, Juan Manuel de Ayala, Diego Choquet de Yslas, Bodega y Quadra, and Hezeta; but there were actually two additional pilots and one other naval officer who received orders to 46 the new naval station at San Bias. The two pilots who came to San Bias from Europe were Estevan Jose Martinez and the young piloto. Francisco Antonio Mourelle de la Rua. Both of these appointments were distinct assets for the naval station and it is noteworthy that both Martinez and Mourelle were graduates of the eminent pilotage school 46 Bodega y Quadra, "Navegacion hecha por don Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra, Teniente de Fragata de la Real Armada y Comandante de la Goleta Sonora, a los descubrimientos de los Mares y Costa Septentrional de California," in Diarios— Navegaciones a California (622), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (622), MS in MN. Another MS concerning the naval officers from Spain is "Extracto del Diario del teniente de Fragata Dn Juan de la Bodega y Quadra, Comandante de la Goleta Sonora para los descubrimientos de la Costa N. de la California," in Paclfico America, I (126), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Extracto del Diario de Bodega y Quadra ... " (126), MS in MN. 141 in Sevilla, the Coleeio de San Telmo.^7 One of the first of the "new arrivals" to the western coasts of Nueva Galicia was Estevan Jose Martinez, who was dispatched by Viceroy Bucareli in 1773 to the Department of San Bias. Martinez had completed various assignments as piloto segundo (second-class pilot) between Mexico and South America prior to his appointment at San Bias and was an experienced navigator on the Pacific Coast. The viceroy appointed Martinez as second pilot for the Naval Department of San Bias in the same year as the new Ttefrl ampnto. Immediately upon his assumption of regular duties at San Bias, Martinez was included in the Perez Expedition of 1774, which provided him with further experi- 48 ence. Francisco Mourelle (his name is often misspelled Maurelle) was the Galician-born mariner who, more than any other officer with the exception of Bodega y Quadra, best ^Francisco de las Barras y de Aragon, "Dn. Esteban Jose Martinez, alumno del Colegio de San Telmo de Sevilla," no. 312, series B, Publicaciones de la Real Sociedad Ceografica (Madrid, 1953). ^^Meritos y servicios del Alferez de Fragata D. Estevan Joseph Martinez, Mexico, Dec. 16, 1787, in AGI, Mexico. 1514. 142 exemplified the resourceful and practical naval officer of the Department of San Bias. Mourelle's career at San Bias spanned some twenty years, and moreover, he attained a high degree of proficiency as piloto. It was Mourelle*s good fortune to be closely associated with Teniente de Navfo Bruno de Hezeta for almost thirty years. After his appointment in 1776 to Alferez de Fragata graduado. the resourceful Mourelle was promoted to a lofty position in naval service--Comandante de la Marina in the Naval Depart ment of San Bias. During his later years in European service he climaxed an outstanding naval career by attain ing the rank of Jefe de Escuadra (Chief of Squadron) in the Departamento de Marina.^ The disposition of the new officers and pilots from Spain was a curious paradox since only three officers and one of the pilots were given permanent assignments within the jurisdiction of the new department which urgently needed key personnel. During a special conference held in the capital in October 1774, Viceroy Bucareli announced 49 Relacion de los Meritos y Servicios Del Capitan de Navio Dn. Francisco Mourelle Natural de Cosme, en Galicia Caballero del Orden de Santiago (999), MS in MN. Herein after cited as Relacion de ... Francisco Mourelle (999), MS in MN. 143 his selection £or the new assignments. The command of the Santiago was given to Bruno de Hezeta who was senior officer among the original six mariners; Manuel Manrique was named Captain of the San Carlos and Fernando Quiros took the Principe. The three remaining officers--Juan de Ayala, Juan de la Bodega y Quadra, and Diego Choquet- -were dis patched to Tepic where they waited for appropriate assign ments from the Naval Department of San Bias. As a final guarantee against poor administration in the new depart ment, Bucareli appointed Ignacio de Arteaga as Comandante de Marina, commander of the Naval Department and of the Port of San Blas.^® Between November and February (1774 to 1775), Vice roy Bucareli formulated his preparations for launching the second expedition from San Bias. In this new endeavor it was anticipated that the vigilance and energy of the more experienced officers would be sufficient to penetrate even farther north than the previous voyage and moreover, that ^"Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (622), MS in MN. The position of Naval Commandant at San Bias was reserved for commissioned officers during the era of 1775 to 1782. Ignacio de Arteaga relinquished his post to Bruno de Hezeta in 1777 and four years later, Juan de la Bodega y Quadra assumed leadership at the Port of San Bias. 144 they would fulfill the letter of their conmlssion by per severing in the reconnaissance of the coastal shores north of Monterey. Bucareli delayed for some months about dis patching a second vessel to accompany the Santiago but finally appointed Lieutenant Ayala as Captain of the small schooner Felicidad. alias "Sonora." A succession of new appointments was soon revealed by the viceroy, including Bodega y Quadra as second officer for the schooner and niloto Mourelle for the same vessel. The remaining organization of the Hezeta Expedition was completed in the early part of 1775. Hezeta*s flag ship, the Santiago, was outfitted and provisioned for a year*8 operation much like the previous voyage under 51 "Extracto del Diario de Bodega y Quadra ... " (126), MS in MN. Viceroy Bucareli*s appointment of Juan de Ayala was issued in December 1774. On February 26, 1775, Francisco Mourelle arrived in San Bias— much later than any of the other new officers. After inspecting the Santiago and Sonora, pilot Mourelle petitioned Hezeta to transfer him from the frigate (where he was first assigned duty) to the schooner where his services would best serve the interests of the expedition. This request was granted and Mourelle cherished the idea of embarking on the Sonora. See also: Francisco Mourelle, "Navegacion hecho a los descubrimientos de la Costa Septentrional de Cali fornia con la Goleta Sonora, por el segundo Piloto de la Armada, y primero del Departamento de San Bias" (575), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Mourelle, "Navegacion con la Goleta Sonora ... " (575), MS in MN. 145 Juan Perez. In addition to provisions and water, the Santiago carried ammunition, extra tackle, and rigging. On board the flagship with Bruno Hezeta was the seasoned pilot, Juan Perez (who completed the voyage back to Monte rey, but fell sick and died just after leaving Monterey, bound for San Bias), and a total complement of ninety men. In addition to a copy of Perez* log from the voyage of 1774, Hezeta carried the same "Formularies for Possession- Taking" and the "Instructions for Commanders of Naval Expeditions to the Northwest. Juan de Ayala1s smaller escort vessel, the schooner Sonora, required more material preparation than the frigate, and consequently employees of the San Bias shipyard started their endeavors in December 1774. Both Captain Ayala and his second officer Bodega y Quadra scrutinized the thorough overhaul and careening which the employees of the astillero '"‘ ■"1775, Segunda Bxploracion de la Costa Septen trional de la California en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora, mandado por el Teniente de Navio D. Bruno de Heceta, y de Fragata D. Juan de la Quadra desde el Puerto de Sn. Bias hasta los 58 grados de latitud," in Paclfico America, I (331), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Segunda Exploracion en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... " (331), MS in MN. 146 C O completed on the Sonora. By February, the vessel was ready for loading and final preparations for Its launching were taken at San Bias. Crew members for the Sonora Included Captain Ayala, Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra, and Pilot Francisco Mourelle, plus the following complement: ten seamen, a boatswain's mate, a steward, a storekeeper, and a page.^ One of the most significant aspects of the schooner Sonora was Its diminutive size for such a hazardous under taking. Built In San Bias In 1769, the Sonora was origi nally designed to make coastal voyages from the mainland "Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (622), MS In MN. Juan de Ayala and Bodega y Quadra left Mexico on Dec. 15, 1774, and travelled to San Bias stopping a short time in Tepic. Both naval officers Inspected the Sonora which was in San Bias and Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra subsequently petitioned the viceroy for an assignment on the small schooner. ■^Bodega y Quadra, "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. en una Goleta de 18 codos de Quilla y 6 de Manga, Tripulada con un Piloto, un Contramaestra, un Guardian, dlez marineros, un Page y un Crlado, Ano de 1775," cited in Comento de la Navegacion y descubrimtos hechos en dos Viajes de Orden de SM en la Costa Septentrional de Cali fornia, desde la latltud de 21 grdos 30 mlnos. en oue se halla el Departamto de Sn Bias, por Dn. Juan Fran de la Bodega y Quadra de Orden de Santiago, y Capitan de Navio de R1 Armada (618), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Bodega y Quadra, "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... " (618), MS in MN. 147 to Loreto and was hardly suited for open-sea navigation. ^5 Mounting two sails, the schooner measured thirty-six feet in length and twelve feet in beam, or the equivalent of a warship*8 launch. For the expedition of 1775, the Sonora had been altered and fitted with a deck-house or covered cabin for the protection of her crew members, and their accommodations Included one small table, bunks for sleeping and one large chest for clothing and personal effects. The cabin was so small that the men were obliged to stoop down upon entering and all activities inside were hampered by the reduced height of the overhead. ^ As for the Sonora's complement, it has been recorded that of the twelve men who served as ordinary seamen (ex cluding the captain and pilot), only four had completed any practical navigation, while the rest were recruited from “ ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. The Sonora displaced 59 tons and had never sailed beyond Cabo San Lucas before 1775. 56 Bodega y Quadra, ’ ’Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... " (618), MS in MN. The cramped space on board the schooner was one handicap while their storage area for meat and water (capacity for 72 arrobas or about 1,830 lbs.) was the cause of further hardships in the northern latitudes. See: "Segunda Exploracion en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... " (331), MS in MN. 148 the haciendas of Nueva Galicia. The "vaqueros of the cattle ranches" were soon put to a grueling test of seaman ship and as a further indication of utilitarian methods on board the Sonora, it is noteworthy that both the captain and pilot worked alongside the able-seamen in rigging the sails.^ The presence of a third vessel during the first por tion of the expedition was authorized by Viceroy Bucareli. Since the San Carlos was ordered to complete an annual supply voyage to Alta California during the early part of 1775, Bucareli thought it safer for all three vessels to travel in convoy to Monterey. At the latter port, the Santiago and Sonora would continue to the Northwest Coasts while the San Carlos, under Captain Manuel Manrique, would deliver its cargo to the governor and then undertake a thorough reconnaissance of San Francisco Bay. By March 1775, Captain Manrique had completed preparations on the San Carlos: his crew included pilot Jose Caflizares plus a total complement of forty-eight men, which was more than ^"Borradores de las expediciones Maritimas ... " (575 bis), MS in MN. 149 co adequate for this vessel. Hezeta*8 vessel departed San Bias on March 16, 1775, but a radical change of command was immediately called for in light of an unfortunate occurrence on board the San Carlos. Captain Manrique had left San Bias on March 16, apparently in good health, but on March 19 he displayed a distress signal and the expedition was temporarily delayed. The difficulty proved to be a case of mental relapse for Manuel Manrique of the San Carlos (quite evident to the officers who saw and spoke to the captain), and after a brief junta on the Santiago. Hezeta ruled that Manrique must return to San Bias. The command of the San Carlos was given to Juan de Ayala, while Juan de la Bodega y Quadra was elevated to the Captaincy of the Sonora. This incident shaped the early career of Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra, placing him in a position of responsibility in which he responded admirably 58 "Segunda Exploraclon en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... " (331), MS in MN. Details of Juan de Ayala's Exploration of San Francisco Bay are given in Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest. I, 179, and Charles E. Chapman, The Founding of Spanish California (New York: Macmillan Co., 1916), p. 243. 150 59 and courageously. The Hezeta-Bodega y Quadra vessels were more mobile than Juan Perez had been In 1774 and by use of their smaller ship, the explorers of 1775 achieved an Impressive record. The lessons of the past were profitably applied in numerous instances during the voyage of 1775. For example, Juan Perez was continually comparing his previous year*8 observations with sightings and latitudes made with Bruno de Hezeta in 1775. The Spaniards apparently relied heavily upon Perez1 first diary and also upon the letters and charts of M. Beilin, a French cartographer. As a pre cautionary measure, Viceroy Bucareli warned both vessels to remain in sight of each other throughout the voyage. During night-sailing the lead-ship displayed a stem light, and in inclement weather fog signals were exchanged.^ ^9The expedition had sailed about eight leagues between 10 p.m. on March 16 before they anchored again on March 19, west of San Bias. Each of the MSS which describe the Hezeta Expedition recall this event and Bodega y Quadra's new assignment on board the Sonora. See: MSS no. 126, 331, 332, 575, 618, and 622, in MN. ^®Bodega y Quadra, "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... " (618), MS in MN. Henry R. Wagner indicates that Bodega y Quadra and Mourelle carried a French map— the inaccurate Jacques Nicolas Beilin cartographic drawing of 1766 entitled: "Carte reduite de 1*Ocean Septentrionale. ...” See: Cartography of the Northwest. I, 178, and map description in II, 339. 151 From San Bias to the California Coast the Spanish ships made good time and in early June sighted land, finally anchoring in Trinidad Bay (41°-03* N.) on June 9. For the next ten days the Spaniards scouted this impressive harbor and mapped the entire area. They determined lati tude and longitude using accurate observation; they pro visioned their vessels with fruit and water, and finally cut extra masts for future requirements. During formal ceremonies on June 11, 1775, Commander Hezeta took posses sion of this strategic port in the name of the Spanish Crown; the officers were deeply impressed with the ensenada for defensive purposes and thought there were unlimited possibilities for outfitting naval vessels at Trinidad.^ Moving northward from Trinidad Bay, the vessels sailed along the coastal headlands of Washington from July 9 to July 13. On the latter date they discovered 61 "Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (662), MS in MN. This MS account contains a thorough description of the natives and their customs, dress, etc. and a short discussion about the favorable aspects of this port. Possession-taking ceremonies were commemorated by planting a large wooden cross on "Trinidad Head"; years later, George Vancouver explored the same bay and commented on the presence of the Spanish cross. See: Robert F. Heizer and John E. Mills, The Four Ages of Tsurai: A Docu mentary History of the Indian Village on Trinidad Bay (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1952), p. 65. 152 an ensenada which they named "Rada de Bucareli," In 47° 24* N- latitude. It was Intended that In the Rada de Bucareli the goleta would be able to cut a new mast, replacing a mainmast lost during previous navigation, and consequently Bodega y Quadra anchored close to the beach. On July 14, six crewmen of the Sonora took a small canoe and headed for the beach, each being heavily armed. During the process of cutting the mast and looking for water ashore, the crewmen of the Sonora were attacked and imme diately killed by a host of three hundred Indians who £0 swarmed down from the hills. The indomitable Captain Bodega y Quadra was firmly disposed to avenge this loss and planned to consult Com mander Hezeta. He approached the Santiago in his small ship, but before the rendezvous took place, Bodega y Quadra was overtaken by nine canoes loaded with hostile Indians. "Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (622), MS in MN. This sudden attack was a great surprise to the Spaniards since they had encountered many friendly Indians on July 13, trading mirrors, rings, and beads in exchange for native products of dried fish, sweet onions, and pitchers of water. The Spanish explorers commemorated this site as "Ensenada de los Martires" (47°-24* N.). See: No. (10096) "Cartas y Pianos" in MN, and Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest. I, 176. 153 The Sonora was greatly undermanned at this time and the only crew members who were able to repulse the attackers were the captain, pilot Mourelle and a page; the remaining members were manning the sails and the rudder. The alter cation was quickly broken off when the Spaniards killed CO nine Indians with their first volley. During the same day (July 14), Commander Hezeta held a junta to decide the fate of the expedition, since the crew members of the Santiago were averse to continuing and the crew of the Sonora had been reduced by the loss of six seamen. According to the meeting of July 14, the Sonora was authorized to continue the expedition after receiving a canoe, some arms and five men from the Santiayo. Bruno de Hezeta ordered Bodega y Quadra to continue inner- coastal explorations, thereby taking advantage of the Sonora * s light draft and mobility. As one final conclu sive act, on July 14, Bruno de Hezeta took possession of the bay--Rada de Bucareli--and he subsequently claimed territorial rights to the entire coast for the Spanish 63 Bodega y Quadra, "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... " (618), MS in MN. 154 Crown.^ Sailing from the Rada de Bucareli on July 14. the two vessels were frequently separated from each other and during this Interval, the Sonora operated some distance off“shore. Commander Hezeta sent a launch to the Sonora on July 19 and asked Bodega y Quadra to Indicate the best method for continuing the expedition. In addition, the senior conmander forwarded a petition to Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra entitled "Notation from Alferez de Fragata Juan Perez and certification from Surgeon Juan Gonzalez." According to the two junior officers in Hezeta's vessel, no more time should be spent in coastal exploration and the two vessels should ascend to their highest latitude as soon as possible. Both Perez and Gonzalez were motivated by prevailing weather conditions and the grave physical in capabilities of the Santiago's crew. Captain Bodega y Quadra replied with an affirmative answer about continuing northward. He believed they should seek more favorable 64 "Segunda Exploracion en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... " (331). MS in MN. Hezeta*s act of possession, completed early on the morning of July 14, was a very brief ceremony. Two chap lains from the Santiago. Juan Perez, and a group of five soldiers accompanied Captain Hezeta ashore. 155 sailing winds and hoped for improvement among the ailing crew members of both vessels. Reluctantly, Commander Bruno de Hezeta gave orders to continue the expedition, but it was a well-known fact that his own crew opposed this order 65 and desired to return to California. Between July 19 and July 31, the Santiago continued offshore operations pushing northward. Once again on August 1, the pilots and surgeons petitioned the commander of the Santiago for permission to turn back; this time they pleaded that the ship was so short-handed that it was im possible to complete all of the necessary rigging and furling of sails. Finally, on August 11, the same peti tion brought results and Bruno de Hezeta turned southward in quest of a warmer climate. During their last month's exploration, the Santiago eventually reached 49° 30' N. latitude along the shores of modern-day Vancouver Island.^ ^"Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (622), MS in MN. July 19 marked the first formal protest from the Santiago's surgeons and pilots in continuing northward. Segunda Exploracion en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... ” (331), MS in MN. According to MS 331, Bruno de Hezeta reached his highest latitude (49°-42T N.) on August 11, 1775, recorded in "Tabla diaria que manifiesta el Lugar de la Fragata 156 In the Sonora. Juan de la Bodega y Quadra and Fran cisco Mourelle carried out their commission of coastal explorations with amazing diligence. After Captain Bodega y Quadra's stem reply to Hezeta on the matter of con tinuing the expedition, both the captain and pilot Mourelle carried out a daring plan to continue northward in the Sonora despite the opposition of Bruno de Hezeta. The former officers feinted being swept away in the fog and kept drifting farther and farther away from the Santiago. By means of this maneuver, Juan de la Bodega y Quadra and Francisco Mourelle managed to move northward, losing sight of the flagship permanently on July 31.^^ The officers of the Sonora accomplished two Impor tant feats during their solo operations in 1775. They made Santiago en el viaje de descubrimientos que hlzo el ano de 1775 desde San Bias a las Costas Septentrionales de Call- f omias." See also: Capitan de Corbeta Luis Cebreiro Blanco, "Bodega y Quadra, 1775, Costas Occidentales de America del Norte," in Coleccion de Diarios v Relaciones para la Historia de los Viales v Descufrfiml«»ntn« (Madrid: Insti- tuto Historlco de Marina, 1944), II, 101. 67 "Extracto de las noticias ... de los Diarios sobre la Costa NO de America ... " (575 bis), MS in MN. According to the above MS, this plan was Initiated on July 29, from 7 to 10 p.m. during a rainstorm. The same intentions are recorded by Donald C. Cutter, "California, Training Ground for Spanish Naval Heroes," California His torical Society Quarterly. XXXX (June, 1961), 110. 157 Initial Spanish discoveries along the Alaskan Coasts, and completed possession^taking ceremonies in Puerto de los Remedios (57° 20' N. latitude) and Puerto de Bucareli (55° 18* N. latitude). By means of these new discoveries, the Spaniards established an important foundation for later sovereignty over the territory from Monterey to the Gulf of Alaska, and they temporarily satisfied Spanish fears about Russian maritime activities in this region. Captain Bodega y Quadra was finally forced to acquiesce in termi nating the expedition since he was faced with shortages of food and water plus the crippling effects of scurvy among C.Q the crew. On September 1, the Sonora headed south, but Bodega y Quadra was still anxious to scout the coastal waters which lay between their vessel and the Port of Monterey. His final efforts included a reconnaissance of £8 Bodega y Quadra, "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... " (618), MS in MM. Prominent geographical points which Bodega y Quadra sighted between July 31 and August 17 Include: (1) "San Jacinto" (Mt. Edgecumbe) - - 57° N. (2) "Cabo del Engano" - - 57°-59' N. (3) "Ensenada de Gusto" (Sitka Sound) - - 57°-02t N. (4) "Puerto de los Remedios" (Sea Lion Bay) - - 57°-20* N. Compare: Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest. I, 176. 158 the Pacific Coast from the mouth of Juan de Fuca Strait down to Cabo Mendocino; Bodega y Quadra's last major recon naissance inside Bah£a de Bodega (actually, Tomales Bay, California) was an enviable accomplishment for both the captain and his crew. Finally, on October 7, 1775, the Sonora approached Monterey Bay and the small schooner anchored within sight of the flagship Santiago.^ The San Bias-sponsored expedition of 1775 ascended to a higher latitude than the Perez Expedition, and more over, its leaders were indomitable in searching out the coastal headlands, bays, and inlets of prominence along their northerly route. The most notable achievements of the Hezeta Expedition were the reconnaissance of Trinidad Bay (on the California Coast) and the partial entry and recognition of the Columbia River--called Entrada de Hezeta in subsequent Spanish documents— coupled with Bodega y Quadra's two northern discoveries along the ^"Segunda Exploration en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... ' * (331), MS in MN. Bruno de Hezeta dropped anchor in Monterey Bay on August 29, 1775, and then travelled overland to San Fran cisco Bay for exploration and charting details. He re turned on board the Santiago October 1. 159 Alaskan Coast.70 The Arteaga-Bodega v Quadra Expedition of 1779 Between 1775, when Bruno de Hezeta and Juan de la Bodega y Quadra returned to San Bias, and 1780, when England and Spain engaged in a brief military clash, there was one final maritime expedition to the Northwest Coast. The Arteaga“Bodega y Quadra Expedition of 1779 marked the close of Spain's first era of northern explorations, and it was also the last voyage under Viceroy Bucareli's direction. One of the major differences between this voyage and the previous two was the interval required for its prepara- tion and also its size.Bucareli*s response to the 7^"Hezeta Diario, 1775" in Costa NO de America, Tomo II (332), MS in MN. The mouth of the Columbia River was sighted by Bruno de Hezeta on August 17, 1775, as recorded in the above MS and also by Bodega y Quadra, MSS 618 and 622. The Spanish name for this inlet after 1775 was Bahfa de la Asuncion or Entrada de Ezeta. 7Viceroy Bucareli worked on the preparations for this voyage between 1776 and 1779, but died in office before the two vessels returned from the Gulf of Alaska. For details of the expedition, see below, pp. 169“79. 160 successful return of Bruno de Hezeta and Juan de la Bodega y Quadra was an enthusiastic display of praise and con gratulation. On December 27, 1775, the viceroy wrote Comandante Arteaga at San Bias bestowing gratitude and praise upon these fearless leaders and their crewmen. Bucareli personally extolled their accomplishments in attaining the upper latitudes and conquering great obstacles; he also mentioned the professional work of both naval coraoanders as represented in their drawings, charts, 70 and diaries of the expedition. Also during the month of December 1775, the viceroy forwarded all of the expedition's reports and graphic materials to the Spanish Court in Madrid. In this cor respondence, Bucareli expressed his own personal satis faction with the first two voyages and hoped that the king would be favorably disposed in permitting another expedi tion for the same purpose. Jose de Galvez, the new Minister of the Indies, responded to the viceroy's request for another expedition on May 20, 1776. He informed Viceroy Bucareli that 72 '*Segunda Exploracion en 1775 con la Fragata Santiago y Goleta Sonora ... " (331), MS in MN. 161 Carlos III had authorized a third expedition from the west coast of Mexico, further directing Bucareli to complete his preparations as soon as possible. Galvez indicated that officials in Madrid were entirely satisfied with the results of the Hezeta Expedition and that all of the pre vious officers from the Naval Department of San Bias and the same vessels should be utilized for the next voyage. Minister Galvez concluded this correspondence with the encouraging news that there were two new promotions for the Department of San Bias: Hezeta was elevated to Canitan de Fraeata (naval comnander or three-stripes) and Bodega y Quadra was promoted to Teniente de Navfo (or full Lieu- 73 tenant). The immediate obstacle which prevented the viceroy's compliance with the royal order of May 1776, was a critical 73 "Tercera exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de Califomias con los dos Fragatas Princes a y Faborita, mandadas por el Teniente de Navio D. Ygnacio Arteaga, y por el de la misma clase D. Juan de la Quadra en el ano de 79 desde el Puerto de Sn Bias hasta los 61 grados de Latltud," n.d. in Costa NO de America, I (331), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Tercera exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de Californias con la Princesa y Faborita ... " (331), MS in MN. According to correspondence in Archivo General de la Nacion, Marina. 34, Juan Manuel de Ayala was also promoted to Teniente de Navfo. 162 shortage of men and vessels within the Department of San Bias. The department had been Improved to a considerable extent with the completion of the new frigate Santiago In 1773, but the ever-increasing demands for supplying Alta California by maritime shipments weakened this advantage. Since the Santiago's return from the explorations of 1774 and 1775, it was necessary to use this vessel for the annual supply voyages from San Bias to Monterey because of the larger requirements of Spain's new province.^ In terms of total strength, the Department of San Bias was using only three vessels between Mexico and Alta California: two packets, the San Carlos and the Principe. plus the frigate Santiago. For meeting the supply require ments of Lower California (still among the department's many commitments), the comandante relied upon the smaller vessels including the Sonora and Concepcion plus an assort ment of launches from the "Department of the South." Viceroy Bucareli noted these developments in one of his letters to Jose de Galvez in August 1776, and he also stressed that New Spain was sending Jose Antonio Areche 74 Chapman, "The Alta California Supply Ships, 1773-76," SHQ, XIX (Oct., 1915), 192. 163 to Peru for completion of his appointment as visitador.75 Because of these numerous assignments with major vessels, the viceroy said that his plans for launching a new expedi tion would have to be postponed until late in 1777. The second handicap in launching the expedition to the northwest was the shortage of personnel at the naval station and on the department's vessels. Actually, the background of this problem precedes the reorganization of the Department of San Bias in 1773 and it was only par tially alleviated in 1 7 7 4 . At the heart of the matter were the unbearable living conditions which still persisted at the Port of San Bias. Throughout Nueva Espana the notices of slave-like working conditions at San Bias were common knowledge; both civilian and military personnel 75 Cited in "Tercera exploracion de la Costa Septen trional de Califomias con la Princesa y Faborita ... " (331), MS in MN. Chapman indicates that Bruno de Hezeta and Bodega y Quadra were extremely anxious to commence the new expedi tion, but at a later date Hezeta was dropped in favor of Ignacio de Arteaga. See: "The Alta California Supply Ships, 1773-76," p. 192. 7^With the exception of the naval officers who came to San Bias late in 1774, there were no civilian replace ments for the naval station until 1776. See: Chapman, "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. pp. 267-70. 164 were aware of the port's high mortality rate and the meager pay-scale. Even on board the supply vessels there were noticeable shortages among noncommissioned officers. From pilot first class all the way to surgeons or boatswain's mates, commanding officers were rarely able to count a normal complement of officers and many times the second pilot on board was little more than a novice.^ This scarcity of trained personnel was partially fostered by the pilot corps of the Atlantic seaports; members of this prominent group spoke of San Bias pilotage duty as the worst possible naval service and, whenever possible, they 78 refused to accept an assignment in the Port of San Bias. With these twin problems blocking the success of his new expedition, Viceroy Bucareli ordered an official junta "Ynstancia del Cuerpo de Pilotos del Departamento de Sn Bias sobre que se les permita residir en el pueblo de Tepic," AGN, Marina. 34. This expediente contains various letters from San Bias pilots concerning their desire to live in Tepic; they also relate shortages among the pilot corps and the poor living conditions at the Villa de San Bias. 78 , x Barras de Aragon, "D. Esteban Jose Martinez, alumno del Colegio de San Telmo de Sevilla," p. 4. In 1777, Viceroy Bucareli was finally successful in obtaining a group of four new pilots for the Port of San Bias. The new transfers included Josef Tovar and Juan Pantoja y Arriaga from Callao. 165 7Q at the Naval Department of San Bias late In 1776. The Issues at hand were somewhat broader than personnel and material shortages: the essence of the matter was whether the Naval Department of San Bias would continue to supply the military and missionary needs of Alta California while at the same time launching explorations to the north. At San Bias a majority of the naval officers spoke in favor of continuing their regular supply voyages to Monterey and San Diego but they were opposed to another northern ex ploration at that time. Viceroy Bucareli informed Minister Galvez of this dilemma on September 17, 1776. The viceroy reported that he was in favor of launching one more voyage of exploration, but under the existing conditions, Bucareli thought the best solution was to obtain two more vessels for San Bias as soon as possible. Viceroy Bucareli suggested that there were adequate facilities for naval construction at Guaya quil, Presidencia of Quito, and if the crown could order two new ships from this shipyard, the problem at San Bias would be settled. 79 ft Bucareli to Jose de Galvez, AGI, Guadalajara. 104. ^Bucareli to Galvez, AGI, Guadalajara. 104. 166 After further correspondence on the matter, the Court of Madrid supported Bucareli's suggestion. On Decem ber 24, 1776, Galvez Informed the viceroy that two new vessels had been ordered from Peru for exclusive use In voyages of exploration. Meanwhile In Mexico, a turn of events had changed the viceroy's original plans about obtaining two vessels for San Bias. The merchant ship Fenlx had docked at Acapulco and Viceroy Bucareli quickly appropriated this vessel for dispatching Vlsltador Areche to Peru--thus eliminating the need for diverting one of the 81 San Bias supply vessels from Its important mission. x As a safety factor in the plans for obtaining new tonnage for the Department of San Bias, Bucareli also sent one of the naval department's own officers on the Fenlx to Peru. The viceroy gave Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra a special commis sion to travel to Callao for the purpose of purchasing a new vessel for use in the Port of San Bias. On Decem ber 27, 1776, Bucareli wrote to Jose de Galvez and informed 8lThe schooner Guadalupe. alias Sonora, was diverted from the Port of San Bias in March 1777, for transporting "two carriages and four servants" to Acapulco. The Sonora*8 cargo was In support of Vlsltador Areche and the San Bias vessel returned to port in July of the same year. "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MM. 167 82 him of the change in plans. If Bodega y Quadra completed his mission in Callao, according to Viceroy Bucareli, then the Department of San Bias would require only one addi tional vessel from Peru. In the winter of 1777 and 1778 final plans for the new expedition were completed. The two new vessels which were subsequently used for this voyage came from Callao de Lima and San Bias, respectively, and the Callao episode presents an interesting sidelight to the expedition of 1779. It seems highly probable that the commission given to Juan de la Bodega y Quadra for sailing to Callao to purchase a new ship was offered in accordance with that officer's own petition. It was natural that Bodega y Quadra wanted to return to Peru to see his family and the "theory" of his volunteering for this duty is even more plausible. The young naval officer had recently returned from his famous voyage of 1775, received a military pro motion and a distinguished award, and was eager to visit 82 AGI, Guadalalara. 104. The viceroy's commission to Bodega y Quadra in 1776 gave the Spanish explorer an opportunity to return to his homeland in Peru. Cf. Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias ▼ las Californias. pp. 133-34. 168 83 with friends and family during his peak of popularity. In completing the mission to Peru in 1777 and 1778, Bodega y Quadra managed to purchase a well-built vessel, the Favorita of 193 tons burden. In accordance with the viceroy's instructions, Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra manned the vessel with capable crewmen, and then equipped his ship with vital arms and munitions which were lacking at San Bias. The Favorita was outfitted in Callao de Lima in 1777, carrying the aforesaid munitions plus a few spare cannon, anchors, and deck equipment for other vessels at San Bias. Departing from Peru in 1777, Bodega y Quadra charted a new sailing route for the return voyage and on Febru ary 27, 1778, brought the Favorita safely to anchor in the 85 harbor of San Bias. The vessel's seaworthiness and Gutierrez Camarena, p. 127. Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra's return to Callao is noted by one of his contemporary officers, Fernando Quiros, writing to Manuel Antonio Florez, Tepic, Jan. 23, 1777, in Costa NO de America, II (332), MS in MN. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 85 Bodega y Quadra, "Segunda Salida hta. los 61 gros en la Fragta Ntra Sra. de los Remedios, alias la Favorita de 39 codos de Quilla y 13 de Manga, calada de Popa en 14 ps. y de Proa en 13, ano de 1779," San Bias, n.d. in 169 her speed greatly impressed Bodega y Quadra and he esti mated that the Favorita would be one of the most dependable ships for San Bias voyages of exploration. At the shipyard of San Bias there was a "sister-ship" to the Favorita which Bodega y Quadra had never seen— the frigate Princesa. con structed during his absence over the preceding fifteen months. Final preparations for the voyage of 1779 involved the selection of crewmen, careening both vessels, and packing them with supplies, food, and special instruments. During the nine months from April to December, 1778, both Ignacio de Arteaga and Juan de la Bodega y Quadra worked on the details of packing and preparing the Favorita Comento de la Navegacion y descubrimientos hechos en dos Viajes de Orden de S.M. en la Costa Septentrional de California ... (618), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as Bodega y Quadra, "Segunda Salida hta los 61 gros en la Fragta Favorita ... " (618), MS in MN. 86 Bodega y Quadra, "Segunda Salida hta los 61 gros en la Fragta Favorita ... " (618), MS in MN. Ignacio de Arteaga directed the construction of the Princesa at San Bias from 1777 to 1778; details of the vessel's construction are discussed below, pp. 212-15. 170 87 and Princesa. Arteaga*s position during the final phases of preparation was the result of an appointment which he secured from Carlos III. Apparently Lieutenant Arteaga was anxious for sea duty, and early in 1777 he petitioned for the right to lead the new expedition of 1779. Before the official reply was received at San Bias, Comandante Arteaga sailed to Monterey on the frigate Santiago (his first 88 active sailing assignment) and then in August 1777, 8 7 An inventory of both vessels' cargo is contained in MS 331 in the Museo Naval as follows: (1) "Estado en que Sale a navegar la Fragata del Rey la Faborita mandada por el Tente de Navio D. Juan Franco de la Bodega y Quadra para los descubrimientos de la Costa Septentrional de California en 11 de Febrero de 1779," and (2) "Estado en que salio a navegar la Fragata del Rey la Princesa desde el Puerto de San Bias que esta en 21°-30' de latitud N. y en 5 grados al e. de San Lucas o 107°-06' al oeste de Paris para la exploration de la Costa Septentrional de California, en el ano de 1779, mandada por el Tente de Navio D. Ygnacio de Arteaga." Hereinafter cited as "Estado ... de la Faborita ... " and "Estado ... de la Princesa ... " (331), MSS in MN. Careening of the Princesa and Favorita is described in "Tercera exploration de la Costa Septentrional de Cali- fomias con la Princesa y Faborita ... " (331), MS in MN. ®®"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 171 his appointment as commander of the expedition was con- 89 firmed by the Spanish Crown. On November 14, 1778, the viceroy appointed the remaining officials for Arteaga's vessel, the Princesa. and that of Bodega y Quadra, the Favorita. For the former vessel, Bucareli named Fernando Quiros as second officer, Fathers Juan Riobo and Matfas Noriega as chaplains, Juan Garcia as surgeon and Jose Camacho and Juan Pantoja as pilots. Juan de la Bodega y Quadra's ship was manned by the following officers: Francisco Mourelle as second officer, Jose Canizares and Juan Bautista Aguirre as nilotos. Cristoval Diaz as chaplain, and Mariano Nunez Esquivel for surgeon. Each vessel was provisioned with over a year's supply of food and seven months' supply of water, plus an extra allowance of sails, anchors, cables, 90 line, small arms, and powder. The viceroy's final instructions to both commanders carried the mandate that they must ascend to 70° N. latitude 89 Lieutenant Arteaga was granted this authorization by Royal Order of August 10, 1777, no. 423 cited in "Ter- cera exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de Califomias con la Princesa y Faborita ... " (331), MS in MN. 90 "Estado ... de la Faborita ... " and "Estado ... de la Princesa ... " (331), MSS in MN. 172 and carry out extensive acts of possession throughout their explorations of these limits. At San Bias, on January 19, 1779, Commander Arteaga called a junta to out line the "Sailing Orders" and to perfect last-minute plans. He authorized Bodega y Quadra to formalize these direc tions for sailing from San Bias to the northwest since Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra was the most experienced mariner along with Francisco Mourelle. On the basis of the viceroy's order to ascend to such a high latitude on the coast, the naval officers of San Bias concluded that it would be best to sail directly north for Puerto de Q1 Bucareli, not stopping enroute. The "Derrota" for this expedition was completed by Bodega y Quadra and Francisco Mourelle while Commander Ignacio de Arteaga gave his approval to the new sailing orders and all preparations were completed. The Arteaga-Bodega y Quadra Expedition of 1779 was the most formidable of the three expeditions launched 91 "Derrota que deveran seguir los Qribaraciones destinadas a la exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de California ... " n.d. in Costa NO de America, II (332), MS in MN. 173 QO under Viceroy Bucareli*s direction. Once again Spanish officers were exploring uncharted waters of the upper 60° latitudes and the same challenges and hardships which confronted Juan Perez and Bruno de Hezeta caused anxiety and wonder among the crew members of the Princesa and 92MSS which chronicle this expedition include the following: (1) Juan de la Bodega y Quadra, "Segunda Salida hta los 61 gros en la Fragta la FAborita ... " (618), and "Navegacion y descubrimientos hechos de orden de S.M. en la Costa Septentrional de Califomias ... por el Teniente de Navio de la Rl Armada Don Juan Franco de la Bodega y Quadra del Orden de Santiago y Comandante de la Fragta de S.M. Ntra Sra. de los Remedios alias la Favorita, ano de 1779" (332), in MN; (2) Francisco Mourelle, "Navegacion Hecha por el Alferez de Fragata de la Rl Armada Don Francisco Antonio Mourelle destinado de segundo Capitan de la Fragta Favo rita ... a los descubrimientos de la Costa Septentrional de Califomias que se extendieron hasta la altura de 61 grados 00 minutos" (622), with a duplicate record existing in (332), both in MN; and (3) Ignacio de Arteaga, "Relacion del Viaje echo a la altura por las Fragatas de Su Magd. la princesa y la faborita mandada aquella pr. el comandante de la expedicion y teniente de navio de la Real Armada Dn. Ygnacio Arteaga, siendo su segundo de la mistna clase el Sr. Dn. Fernando Quiros y Miranda, y capitan de la faborita el oficial del mismo grado, el Dn. Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra," in Coe Collection, no. 12, Yale University Library, New Haven, Conn. Also by Arteaga: "Diario de la Navegacion ... espera Hacer el Teniente de Navio Dn Ygnacio de Arteaga mandada la Fragata S.M. nombrada Ntra Sra. de Rosario, alias la Princesa ... a exploraciones de las Costas Sep- tentrionales de la California, llevando a sus ordenes a la Fragata Favorita, mandada por el de la misma clase, Dn. Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra" (622), in MN. 174 Favorita. The new sailing vessels withstood the long voyage extremely well and returned to San Bias without any major casualties. For the officers and seamen of the new frigates, this voyage offered one more opportunity for maritime experience and untold practical knowledge concern-* ing the Pacific Northwest. During ten months of open sailing and coastal pilot ing, the Spaniards charted numerous bays and inlets from 55° N. latitude to 61° N. latitude. They reached their original rendezvous in Puerto de Bucareli on May 3, and during the next six weeks of operations with their launches, the Spanish officers perfected numerous charts of this port 93 and much of the coastal terrain to the north. The expedition departed from Puerto de Bucareli on July 1 and then Arteaga and Bodega y Quadra attained their highest 93 A point of controversy between Arteaga and his second officer, Bodega y Quadra, involved the formal act of possession for this location--Puerto de Bucareli. Lieuten ant Bodega y Quadra had completed a ceremony of possession- taking in this port during his first voyage of 1775, but Comnander Arteaga insisted upon repeating the entire ceremony. The latter officer claimed that since Bodega y Quadra did not have a chaplain on board the Sonora (1775), the earlier ceremony was invalid. Cf. "Diario de la Navegacion ... espera Hacer Ygnacio de Arteaga — " (622), MS in MN. 175 northern latitude at the Entrada de Santiago: 60° 30' N. latitude. Commander Arteaga was somewhat reluctant to continue the voyage after they arrived at Puerto de San- q A tiago, but finally agreed. The Spaniards remained at Port Santiago only three days after their arrival on July 21 and then they sailed along the outer or western shores of the Gulf of Alaska, finally reaching Isla de Regia on August 2. The location of Isla de Regia was determined to be 59° 08' N. latitude (close to the Aleutian Islands) and in their log, the Spaniards recorded the name of the original discoverer of this site--the Danish-born explorer, Vitus Bering. J By formal acts of possession, Bodega y Quadra estab lished Spanish claim to this cluster of islands. In addi tion, he sailed close to the mainland where he saw the 94 Arteaga, "Relacion del Viaje echo a la altura por los Fragatas de Su Magd. la princesa y la faborita ... Coe Collection, no. 12. Puerto de Santiago is identifiable as present-day Port Etches on Hinchinbrook Island, according to Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest. I, 194. ^Bodega y Quadra, "Segunda Salida hta los 61 gros en la Fragta Faborita ... " (618), MS in MN. Henry R. Wagner has established Puerto de Regia as a prominent bay on Kenai Peninsula, Alaska; Cartography of the Northwest. I, 194. 176 "Volcan de Miranda."^ On board the Princesa, Commander Arteaga was seriously ill from the effects of scurvy and climatic inversions and he was completely indisposed during their stay in Onalaska and the adjacent territory. The fearless Bodega y Quadra was anxious to continue the search for new discoveries toward the southwest, since it seemed logical to follow this natural conformation of the island chains; moreover, he was unwilling to give up the expedi tion so soon. Comnander Arteaga of the Princesa was still directing the expedition’s movements, however, and by August 8 he was ready to sail for the California coasts. Broken and tortured in his physical disposition and faced with an epidemic on board his own vessel, Ignacio de Arteaga gave the order to man the sails and head directly Since Arteaga was too sick to disembark at Isla de Regia, Bodega y Quadra performed an official act of possession while the pilots of both vessels charted numerous harbors. During one of their excursions, the pilots caught sight of a fiery volcano, the "Volcan de Miranda," probably named after the scribe of the expedi tion, Antonio Miranda. Bancroft, History of Alaska: 1730- 1885 (XXXIII:220), identifies "Volcan de Miranda" as Iliamna Volcano, on the west shore of Cook Inlet. See: "Estado del Plan de desembarto por el teniente de Navio y Comandante de la Fragata Favorita, Dn Juan de la Bodega y Quadra para las tiempos de nuestros arribos a Puertos y Costas en que el numero de habitadores diere ocasion a executarlo" (332), MS in MN. 177 9 7 for the presidios of California. Strangely enough, this command was Issued without any junta or formal consultation with the second officer of the expedition, Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra. During the return voyage from the Gulf of Alaska to the California coasts, the two vessels became separated and lost sight of each other for a period of five weeks. Bodega y Quadra in the Favorita spied the Fort of Trinidad on September 4, 1779, and on the fourteenth he anchored in San Francisco Bay. The next day, Commander Arteaga appeared in the Princesa and anchored close to the consort vessel Favorita. For both commanders and their crews, the abundance of green vegetables and fresh meat sent from the presidio and mission was a most welcome gift. Through the goodness of Father Francisco Palou of Monterey, both frigates received the kindest of treatment and ample supplies of fresh provisions during their visit in San 98 Francisco Bay. 97 Arteaga, "Diario de la Navegacion ... espera Hacer Ygnacio de Arteaga ... " (622), MS in MN, and “Relacion del Viaje echo a la altura por los Fragatas de Su Magd. la princesa y la faborita ... ," Coe Collection, no. 12. 98 Cited by Arteaga and Bodega y Quadra in Coe Col lection. no. 12, and (622) MS in MN, respectively. 178 The Spanish officials of the expedition of 1779 remained in the harbor for almost six weeks, perfecting their charts and providing their crews with a deserving rest. Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra took a special interest in the sick crewmen, and vender his direction, the port officials and naval officers constructed a temporary hospital adjacent to the Presidio of San Francisco. Using sailcloth and rigging, they provided the hospital with adequate protection and transferred the sick for a month’s rest ashore. Both Francisco Mourelle and Bodega y Quadra remained at the temporary hospital during their stay in San Francisco Bay. Apparently most of their efforts were devoted to perfecting maps, charts, and diaries which they qq would later submit to the viceroy. Additional activities at San Francisco included another inner-bay reconnaissance using the ships' launches Q Q Bodega y Quadra, "Segunda Salida hta los 61 gros en la Fragta Faborita ... " (618), MS in MN. Captain Bodega y Quadra apparently remained at the "temporary hospital" during their sojourn in San Francisco Bay and did not participate in the exploration of this harbor. A recent historian, Marcial Gutierrez Camarena, mentions that there was a small fire at the hospital and the officers lost a few papers, but managed to save their maps and charts plus the diaries. See: San Bias v las Califomia8 . p. 140. 179 and, just before their departure, Commander Arteaga re ceived word of Spain's declaration of war against England. The Arteaga-Bodega y Quadra Expedition left San Francisco on October 30 (having taken aboard their revitalized per sonnel), and after a routine voyage along the coasts of California, the Favorita and Princesa anchored at San Bias on November 21 and 25 respectively. The death of Antonio Bucareli was announced to the explorers after their arrival in San Bias and the new Viceroy, Martin de Mayorga, congratulated them on a successful expedition. Notice of the expedition's return was forwarded to the Court of Madrid in 1779, and hence forth, according to Spanish officials, voyages to the Northwest Coast were suspended in view of wartime condi tions between Spain and England. Mourelle, "Navegacion Hecha por Francisco Antonio Mourelle destinado de segundo Capitan de la Fragata Favo rita ..." (622), MS in MN. CHAPTER IV A DETAILED RECORD OF SAN BLAS’ GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, 1774 TO 1786 During the period from 1774 to 1786, which encom passes the department's first period of northern explora tions and also the period Involving Spain and England In a brief war, the naval department experienced unique changes both In the role which was assigned to the base and in the external development of its facilities and personnel. In the first instance, the Department of San Bias was called upon to outfit and support naval expeditions to Alaskan waters while still maintaining regular supply voyages to Alta California. After the declaration of war between the Courts of London and Madrid in 1779, the Port of San Bias was forced into an entirely different role; that is, it was given responsibility for transporting large quantities of troops, supplies, and bullion from Mexico to the age-old port of Manila. In connection with this latter assignment, 180 181 Viceroy Martin de Mayorga formulated a number of new regulations for streamlining the Department of San Bias between 1781 and 1783 which reduced the department's oper ational strength in both personnel and active naval vessels. Consequently, in the latter half of this era— from 1781 to 1786— the department registered fewer internal Improvements and operated at the beck and call of the viceroy. From 1774 to 1781 the Naval Department of San Bias is characterized by aggressive leadership and rapid expan sion; the second half of this era--1781 to 1786— is sig nificant for external activities which effected the port's development. In the presentation of these two themes, emphasis will be placed upon the idea of rapid expansion in all matters affecting the Port of San Bias until 1781, while the final period of 1781 to 1786 is given more general treatment. Military and Civil Leadership The first six years of this period have a distinc tive quality of advancement and accomplishment while at the same time, the leadership of the naval department was probably more prominent than any other subsequent era of 182 the port's history.1 . During this phase of San Bias* development the regulations which were suggested by Juan Jose de Echeveste were executed, and at the same time, Viceroy Bucareli implemented the regulations with salary adjustments for personnel at the Department of San Bias. The material gains of the department in this period in cluded completion of the well-known frigate Princesa. the last major maritime construction completed in San Bias' shipyard, while at the villa and the naval arsenal, there were numerous improvements and additions. Active adminis trators and ship commanders at the port were Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra, Bruno de Hezeta, Juan Manuel de Ayala, Fernando Quiros y Miranda, Francisco Mourelle, Ignacio de Arteaga, Jose Camacho, Estevan Jose Martfnez and Juan Pantoja. From 1774 to 1781, the naval department (1) continued to supply Alta California in subsistence items and manufactured goods and (2) as related in Chap ter III, its officers completed a relentless exploration *The only comparable era in San Bias* history is the period from 1789 to 1794 when Juan de la Bodega y Quadra commanded the Naval Department of San Bias. Under his guidance, several voyages of discovery and scientific research were completed before the settlement of the Nootka question effectively closed Spanish progress on the Pacific Coast. 183 of the Pacific Coast from Monterey to the Gulf of Alaska. San Bias* leadership in this era was dominated by the presence of Bruno de Hezeta and Juan de la Bodega y Quadra* The elder commander, Bruno de Hezeta, was much more methodical and calculating than his junior officer, Bodega y Quadra, but his record both as administrator and active naval explorer in the department is a credit to Spanish developments in this period. Hezeta served as comandante of the expedition of 1775 and then he was appointed to direct the affairs of San Bias as military conxnandant from 1778 to 1780.^ During his service in the Department of San Bias and particularly on voyages of exploration, Hezeta remained a strict disciplinarian. After returning from the voyage of 1775, Comandante Hezeta was promoted to comnander, but during the next eight years he complained continually about 2 In April 1777, Hezeta received an appointment from Viceroy Bucareli as "interim commandant" of San Bias, and served until June 1780. Bucareli to Galvez, Mexico, April 26, 1777, in AGI, Guadalalara. 497. Ignacio de Arteaga was originally appointed com mandant in 1775 serving in this position until March 1777; he comnanded the Santiago to Alta California from March to July and returned to San Bias in time to command the ex pedition of 1779. "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 184 primitive living conditions at the Port of San Bias. He loathed the scanty pay allowances and lack of promotional opportunities. After distinguished service in the Depart ment of San Bias, Bruno de Hezeta asked for a transfer to Europe in 1789. He maintained a distinguished naval record by winning impressive laurels for Spain--that is, Chief of Squadron in 1795, Lieutenant General in 1802, and Command ing Officer at Algeciras and Cadiz during the French War.^ Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra was the Peruvian-bom "boy-wonder*' of the Naval Department of San Bias. During an active career there which spanned the years 1775 to 1783 and 1789 to 1794, Bodega y Quadra far outdistanced any other officer in his record of voyages of exploration plus solid departmental administration in the twilight era of San Bias* history. Bodega y Quadra was Bruno de Hezeta*s junior officer during the expedition 3 Bruno de Hezeta's disposition concerning naval service in the Department of San Bias was no secret; he disliked the primitive accommodations and disorganization of that group Immensely. His first request for a transfer was dated Dec. 17, 1779, to Martin de Mayorga, cited in AGI, Guadalalara. 497. A second transfer request was sub mitted in 1782 and he finally left San Bias in 1789 report ing to Havana. See also: Donald C. Cutter, "California, Training Ground for Spanish Naval Heroes," California Historical Society Quarterly. XXX (June, 1961), 114-15. 185 of 1775 and he immediately distinguished himself— as did Francisco Mourelle, the pilot of Bodega y Quadra's vessel— ‘in his skill and daring. In 1776, the young officer from Callao was promoted to full Lieutenant and, of even greater significance, was awarded the military title of Knight of the Order of Santiago.^ Toward the close of the first period of Bodega y Quadra's service in San Bias, he was elevated to the post of Port Commander, serving for a single year before receiving another active sailing assign ment. Juan de la Bodega y Quadra was much younger than Bruno de Hezeta and was able to cope with the rigors of naval life in the Department of San Bias. With the excep tion of one European tour of service from 1783 to 1788, Bodega y Quadra remained in the Naval Department of San Bias and enjoyed the opportunity of Pacific Coast duty.^ The extent of Bodega y Quadra's service to the department ^Bodega y Quadra, "Navegacion de Bodega y Quadra ... " (622), MS in MN. ^Bodega y Quadra's enthusiasm for San Bias naval service is evident in "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... " (618), MS In MN. See also: Bodega y Quadra to Jose de Galvez, Mexico, Jan. 17, 1781, AGI, Guadalalara. 497. 186 is particularly broad and comprehensive. During the year 1775. Bodega y Quadra commanded the Sonora to the Northwest Coasts and in 1777. after receiving Viceroy Bucareli's commission for purchasing a new vessel, he made the round trip to Callao, returning to San Bias with the Favorita in 1778. One year after his return from Peru he partici pated in the northern expedition of 1779. leading the Favorita in consort with Comandante Ignacio de Arteaga who commanded the Princesa. Back In San Bias in 1780. Com mander Bodega y Quadra was selected to make another voyage to his native Peru; in 1781 he commanded the Santiago from San Bias to Callao in search of war material and supplies, finally returning in 1783.^ It is noteworthy that during an interval of seven years' service in the Department of San Bias. Bodega y Quadra received two major promotions and one distinctive honorary title of knighthood. The accounts of Juan de la Bodega y Quadra concerning Pacific Coast exploration were preserved with the skill and accuracy of an expert. The mariner's devotion to reproduction of the rough notes and ^This voyage is discussed in detail below; cf. p. 277. 187 sketches completed at sea was almost unmatched among the department's other explorers and pilots. This legacy alone Is a rich blessing, for during his final years as Coman dante de la Marina in the Port of San Bias, Bodega y Quadra carried out vigorous reforms and managed large numbers of personnel.^ If there were ever an opportunity to nominate the outstanding figure in San Bias' history, Juan de la Bodega y Quadra would rank at the top by nearly every standard. There is one other officer who deserves mention in this period of San Bias history: Ignacio de Arteaga. It is accurate to state that during a period of eight years, Lieutenant Arteaga completed only one active voyage of exploration (1779) and only one routine supply voyage to Alta California (1777). By all apparent standards, Arteaga was not the aggressive type of leader which Bodega y Quadra and Francisco Mourelle represented. Lieutenant Arteaga seemed to approach his forte in administration. Ignacio de Arteaga was Viceroy Bucareli's choice for Port Commander in 1775 when the court dispatched five ^Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. pp. 141-43. 188 officers and two pilots from Spain. During two successive terms as comandante. 1775 to 1777 and 1781 to 1783, Lieu tenant Arteaga provided the Department of San Bias with g sound leadership and balanced economy. This was one of the finest organizers of the department— a man who con tributed precision and discipline to departmental welfare. Arteaga is known as San Bias' most dependable comandante. and, even though he was physically broken and maimed after the expedition of 1779, he recuperated and returned to the q department in 1782 for continued service. Arteaga was well acquainted with the internal prob lems of San Bias, including income and expenditures. His recommendations of 1782 were the most thorough and compre hensive of any of three projects submitted for streamlining San Bias' economy; this officer's knowledge and understand ing are reflected in the new regulations of the following Materials concerning Arteaga's term as San Bias comandante during this period are found in AGN, Marina. 34 and 44. Arteaga'8 petition for a temporary retirement is cited in Ignacio de Arteaga to Mart£n de Mayorga, Tepic, March 17, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 45. The viceroy approved this request on April 4, 1780. 189 year.^ More obscure than his contemporaries, especially Hezeta, Bodega y Quadra and even than pilot Martinez, Ignacio de Arteaga made notable contributions— both administrative reforms and material Improvements*-to the Department of San Bias. In addition to the more famous naval officers from Spain, the Department of San Bias was supported by minor administrators of some prominence. Among civil personnel, Francisco Hijosa served as comisario during a portion of this period while another early employee, Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, returned to San Bias in 1778 after being suspended in 1773.^ Francisco Hijosa's term at San Bias spans the years from 1768 to 1782 during which time he distinguished himself in fiscal administration and economy. Several of Hijosa*s projects merit presentation in this section on account of the range of his activities and his ^Arteaga* s activities are reflected in a later summary. See below, pp. 213-26. ^ Comisario Trillo indicated to the viceroy that the charges which resulted in his suspension were trumped up against him unjustly. See: Francisco Trillo to Martfn de Mayorga, San Bias, March 28, 1782, in AGN, Marina. 34. 190 capability in handling diverse assignments. * In 1775 the inner harbor of San Bias was noted as filling in with sand and debris, resulting in extreme danger for the vessels which sailed in for loading and unloading cargo at the docks. Francisco Hijosa was one of several San Bias officials who served on an investigating team to recommend corrections for this problem. The comi- sario's thorough knowledge of supply procedures and oper ating expenses of the department enabled him to offer expert opinion in the "transfer controversy" which subse- 13 quently erupted at San Bias. During the close of this period in 1778 and the following two years, Hijosa worked doggedly to build up the Villa de San Bias and to regulate the activities of its inhabitants. This project was something of a lost cause since there had always been a stigma against permanent residence at the small seaport. Early in 1779 a heated argument broke out in connection with the commissary's ^Francisco Hijosa served in the civil branch of the Department of San Bias longer than any other employee, from 1768 to 1782 and from 1786 to 1794. See: AGN, Marina. 34, 44, and 62. *^See below, pp. 239-47. 191 regulations for populating the villa--especially his requirement for year-round residence at San Bias. There were a number of naval officials and also some of the civilian officers at the naval arsenal who had been resid ing In Teplc and In December of 1778, the pilots of San Bias asked permission from the viceroy to maintain perma nent residence at Teplc.^ This episode of the pilots' petition and the re action of Comlsarlo Hijosa and Viceroy Bucarell presents several Interesting aspects about living conditions and the operation of naval affairs at San Bias. Originally, the pilot corps addressed their petition to the viceroy on December 22, 1778, but an earlier letter from Bucarell to Francisco Hijosa (December 18, 1778) clearly indicates the motive for the pilots' action.^ Bucarell's letter from the capital pointed out that several classes of San Bias officials— including surgeons, pilots, carpenters, and workers of the arsenal— were living outside the Villa de 14 "Yhstancla del Cuerpo de Pilotos del Departamento de Sn Bias sobre que se lea permits resldir en el pueblo de Teplc," AGN, Marina. 34. 15 AGN* Marina. 34; copy of the original letter from Viceroy Bucarell to Francisco Hijosa. 192 San Bias and were failing to accomplish their assigned jobs at the naval station. For future guidance, Bucareli ordered that only a very few of the personnel were to be authorized this privilege and, in this case, they were to obtain an official license. The only legal excuse for seeking the "permiso,” according to the viceroy, was to obtain relief from sickness.^ In this manner, Bucareli planned to increase the population of San Bias and to regulate civilian and military employment as well. The San Bias pilots who signed the document of December 22, 1778, were prominent navigators of the naval department including Estevan Jose Martinez, Juan Pantoja, Jose Camacho, Josef Tovar, and Juan Agustln de Eche varria.^ Their petition was a serious indictment against the administration and some of the San Bias officials ^Bucareli1 s order of Dec. 18 specified that only in very urgent circumstances, or for reasons of sickness, were personnel of San Bias— other than the officers plus one surgeon, on permanent duty in Tepic--to receive per mission for outside residence. In no case was the privi lege to be granted to pilots, surgeons, and workers of the arsenal. AGN, Marina. 34. ^The petition was drafted and formulated by Estevan Martinez, a pilot who was well acquainted with San Bias conditions and the background of the port. 193 who were partially responsible for the living conditions at the seaport. The pilots pointed out to the viceroy that their organization was noticeably short-handed due to numerous supply voyages and expeditions to the Northwest Coasts. Unlike other personnel In the Naval Department of San Bias, the pilots could not rely upon additional re-: placements or substitutes when one of their members fell sick. The assignments for which they were responsible had to be carried out and their petition urged that scarcity of members would more than be recompensed If they were permitted to live In the Pueblo de Teplc where the air was fresh and they could enjoy clean lodgings. The body of the pilots* petition contained the fol lowing important points: 1. That the climate of San Bias was unbearable, and only a very few persons could stand these conditions for a long period of time; 2. As proof of the mal sano of San Bias the pilots pointed out the fact that the crew members of the Favorita--recently from Peru-- had brought flowers and green plants to San Bias but they had all died or were sickly- looklng within a few days; 3. Teplc enjoyed great popularity on account of its clean air and high altitude. Officials at San Bias regularly sent sick and weak per sonnel from the seacoast to Teplc for their healthful recovery; 194 4. The shortages within the pilot corps forced them to employ several of their members in duty for which they were not qualified; 5. The extreme heat of San Bias was in direct contrast to the bitter climate which they experienced during northern explorations. This resulted in a further tendency to pro duce critical illness; 6. In order to comply with the standard of living which His Majesty ordained in the Royal Ordinances, it was necessary that their organization be permitted to live in the Pueblo de Tepic and not in the Villa de San Bias; 7. There were adequate officials in San Bias to supervise working conditions; 8. The distance from Tepic to San Bias was relatively short and would not interfere with pilot assignments after they were announced.18 Francisco Hijosa was strongly opposed to this request; he forwarded the document to Viceroy Bucareli on February 20, 1779. Hijosa reminded the viceroy that all of the previous efforts in building up the Port of San Bias would be sacrificed if department officials were allowed to maintain an outside residence. Also he expressed the opinion that the living conditions at San Bias were much better than the pilots' petition had described them. *®AGN, Marina. 34 195 In the past, not one single person had asked for permission to live outside the villa, according to Hijosa, and When the new officers arrived from Spain in 1774, the viceroy had made a special exception for their residence at Tepic. The major argument which Francisco Hijosa stressed was that if the carpenters, builders, and pilots were permitted to live in Tepic, they would not be able to complete their work and the department's organization would melt away. In conclusion, the comisario told Bucareli that his origi nal order of December 18, 1778, was exactly what was neces sary for regulating the population of San Bias and these 1 Q measures should be enforced. On April 17, 1779, an official of the Real Hacienda decreed that since the pilots' petition was not appropriate 20 for the harmony of San Bias, their request was denied. v The order of April 17 advised the comandante and the ^Francisco Hijosa to Bucareli, AGN, Marina. 34. ^°AGN, Marina. 34. Bucareli directed Hijosa to ful fill the order of December 18, 1778, after receiving the comi8ario's letter of February 20, 1779 (he noted this in the margin of Hijosa*s letter). Bucareli*s death, on April 9, 1779, occurred before the final ruling in this case. See: Cayetano Alcazar Molina, Los Virreinatos en el Siclo XVIII. XIII, 65. 196 comisario to enforce the regulations of December 18, 1778. For the time being, the problem of San Bias' population was settled, but the topic of outside residence in the Pueblo de Tepic was again debated under the regime of Commissary Francisco Trillo in 1780.^ One of the last important reports which Francisco Hijosa completed before he retired to Spain for four years, 22 was the Fiscal Report of June 1779* According to the accounting of departmental expenses and receipts for the first six months of 1779, the Port of San Bias was in arrears some 55,523 pesos. Hijosa's report indicates that a total of 113,800 pesos was collected in favor of the naval department while expenses amounted to 114,763 pesos. A more detailed study of the report indicates that, for this half-year period, the department was overexpending on almost every one of its standard purchases; on the other side of the ledger, it was necessary for Viceroy Bucareli 21 Infra, pp. 201-202 and footnote no. 30. 22 "Estado que manifiesta el ingreso y gasto que ha tenido esta Real Caja de San Bias desde 1° de Enero de 1779 hasta fin de Junio del mismo, June 19, 1779," in AGN, Marina. 34. Hereinafter cited as Hijosa, "Estado que manifiesta el ingreso y gasto ... de San Bias ... ," AGN, Marina. 34. 197 to authorize the naval department a special remittance In order to balance accounts. Expenditures in this report indicate that there were at least seven entries which exceeded the authorized pur" chase price while only one of the entries is equal to or below the authorized expenditure. This trend points out the mounting cost for common items of food and provisions. For example, in purchasing provisions and perishable goods for the storehouses, the department was allowed some 10,000 pesos, but ended up paying 35,500 pesos.^ Income sources of this report reveal that after out fitting three expeditions to the Northwest Coasts and managing regular supply activities, the Naval Department of San Bias was financially unsound. Viceroy Bucareli had authorized two important remittances in favor of San Bias in 1778 and he managed to redeem the naval department from 23 Hijosa, "Estado que manifiesta el ingreso y gasto ... de San Bias ... ," AGN, Marina. 34. The seven over-expended items of this report were salary obligations plus purchases for provisions. The trend toward inflationary prices for foodstuffs and fresh provisions is discussed in the following contemporary expediente: “Testimonio del Expediente formado sobre Fletes de Viveres, efeetos y utiles para San Bias,” 1779, in AGI, Guadalalara. 497. 198 embarrassing circumstances. The largest remittance to the Port of San Bias was from tobacco revenues in the sum of 50,000 pesos; this amount, according to Bucarell, had not been credited to the royal tobacco factory In Guadalajara and San Bias was entitled to it since their tobacco prod ucts were processed through that office.^ Another remittance in favor of the Department of San Bias was 2,342 pesos turned back to royal accounts after the completion of the expedition of 1779. In this incident, the Favorita--which had been manned and outfitted in Callao before her departure for San Bias in 1777— required fewer seamen than San Bias officials had calculated and a portion of the department's money was returned at the close of the 25 fiscal year. The total amount of these remittances (that is, from tobacco products and from the Favorita) was ^Bucareli to Real Audlencla de Cuentas, Mexico, Dec. 18, 1778, in AGN, Marina. 44. The viceroy's decision included the authorization for San Bias to receive 50,000 pesos from the Factorfa of Guadalajara, but he also denied the salt workers a sum of 18,718 pesos which was requested by the Salt Administrator of Zapotillo. See: Josef Faustino Rufz to Bucareli, San Bias, June 20, 1788, in AGN, Marina. 44. 25 Hijosa, "Estado que manifiesta el ingreso y gasto ... de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 34. 199 a fairly large sum, Indicating that there was still a 26 tendency to augment income sources at San Bias. Francisco Hijosa also received a petition from a previous naval pilot residing In the capital, Diego de Berrio. This petition and the special circumstances which surrounded Its disposition were unique in the Department of San Bias. Pilot Diego de Berrio was asking for appointment in the Port of San Bias on the basis of his previous Atlantic and Pacific service, plus the fact that he had heard about shortages in that department.^ During the The cost of outfitting the expeditions of 1774 (15,455 pesos) and 1775 (36,740 pesos) was far more than San Bias' normal income during any given year. In 1775, Bucareli liquidated the first amount and part of the second with his "contribution" of 20,000 pesos for the Naval Department of San Bias. See: Bucareli to Julian de Arriaga, Mexico, May 27, 1775, in AGI, Guadalalara, 104. Also cited by Irving B. Richman, California Under Spain and Mexico. 1535-1847 (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1911), p. 427, and Charles E. Chapman, The Founding of Spanish California (New York: Macmillan Co., 1916), p. 242. ^Diego de Berrio to Francisco Hijosa, Mexico, Jan. 14, 1760, in AGN, Marina. 44. Berrio*s petition was based upon a thorough preparation of pilot training; he first graduated from the pilot's academy of Cadiz as a third class pilot and then sailed to Vera Cruz and remained in Mexico City. In 1768, he sailed to Manila as a galleon pilot, serving five years in the Department of Manila and then returned to Mexico in the late 1770*s* \ 200 period of 1768 to 1776, pilot Berrio had operated on the galeones between Manila and Mexico, and after a short assignment in the capital, he wished to return to active pilot duty. According to Hijosa'8 response, the department's pilot corps was unusually strong and furthermore, he was not allowed to hire any new pilots. For the first time in several years, San Bias could boast a full allowance of pilots. With regrets (since the applicant seemed extremely well qualified), Francisco Hijosa reported that he would be unable to hire Diego de Berrio. In addition he outlined the department's existing strength as follows: 4 first-class pilots 1 second-class pilot 2 coastal pilots who actually serve as second- class pilots 4 second-class pilots not in San Bias, but operating with the San Carlos and Prfncipe en route to Manila. The number of personnel serving the Department of San Bias in the period of 1774 to 1781 was highly sig nificant of the new position which Viceroy Bucareli had oo Francisco Hijosa to Diego de Berrio, San Bias, Feb. 3, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44. 201 outlined for the naval station. During this era, employees of the naval shipyard and arsenal were doubled while the number of pilots, surgeons, and chaplains (oficiales mavores) more than tripled the previous strength of 1773.^ An average count for the department is representative for years 1780 and 1781 since this period includes employees at San Bias before drastic reductions were effected. The normal total of San Bias* employees in this year (1780*81) was figured by Comisario Francisco Trillo at 378--not counting the civilian residents who lived in San Bias as "settlers.” Included in this figure were all crew members of San Bias' vessels; the workers of the shipyard and the arsenal; the naval officers and the civilian adminis trators, plus their subordinates; and finally, the hired employees in menial positions such as sweepers and 29 Francisco Hijosa, "Noticlas circumstancias del estado de la poblacion y astillero de San Bias," July 20, 1774, in AGI, Guadalajara. 513. Comisario Hijosa listed a grand total of 752 per sons at San Bias for the year 1774, but this number in cluded all the civilians and the original settlers in the villa who did not work in the naval department. This report included 16 major officials— both military and civilian— as follows: six members of the Real Hacienda: six pilots; two chaplains; one director of the arsenal (arsenal captain) and his assistant. 202 herdsmen. The story of this personnel build-up until the year 1781 is interesting because it shows a definite trend at San Bias. Before the suspension of naval explorations north of California, department officials eagerly sought skilled and artisan classes for service in the shipyard. Between 1776 and 1777, Viceroy Bucareli*s efforts and correspondence were rewarded: a group of skilled artisans-- including carpenters, caulkers, and master-builders plus a 31 number of seamen--arrived at San Bias. On one occasion the viceroy took advantage of local conditions and 30 "Relacion Jurado que Yo, Don Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, Comisario del Departamento de San Bias, presento al Exmo Senor Virrey de Nueva Espana Don Martin de Mayorga de todos los individuos empleados en el Real Servicio de dieho Puerto assist1 por lo toeante a la Dlrrecion, Goviemo de Buques, cotno por de relativo al Ministerio de Hacienda, Arcenal, y Real Armada ... Conforme a Orde- nanza y a las disposiclones del Superior Goviemo, a cuya practica, y exec tic ion porcedo en virtud de lo resuelta por su Exmo. orden de primero de Octubre ultimo," San Bias, Dec. 6, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 34. Hereinafter cited as "Relacion de Don Francisco Trillo y Bermudez ... ," Dec. 6, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 34. 31 The viceroy's correspondence relative to obtaining the necessary personnel for San Bias is contained in AGI, Guadalajara. 104, and Guadalaiara. 514. Charles E. Chapman cites the delays of lengthy com munication and the necessity of working through bureau cratic agencies; see: "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. pp. 267-68. 203 transferred a group of fifty sailors and a boatswain's mate to San Bias from Vera Cruz. The new transfers were par* ticularly gratifying to the commissary officer, but of the original ntxober only forty men and the boatswain's mate managed to report to the Department of San Blas.^ The shortages of master-builders and carpenters at San Bias were apparently quite serious between 1776 and 1780. Despite the efforts of Jose de Galvez in locating and dispatching skilled craftsmen from Spain, there seemed to be a continuous shortage. Late in 1776, Bucareli wrote to Galvez regarding a new builder for San Bias, noting that he had corresponded with the comandante in Havana regarding the same problem. During the next year, the commandant at Havana replied to Minister Galvez Indicating that there were no master-builders in his territory for transfer to 33 Mexico. Finally, officials in Spain located a craftsman by the name of Francisco Segurola and transfer procedures began. 22 Francisco Hijosa to Bucareli, San Bias, Feb. 20, 1777, in AGN, Provincias Internas. 10. The loss of ten men during the transfer to San Bias was attributed to sickness and desertion. ^ A Juan Bautista Bonet to Jose de Galvez, Jan. 31, 1777, in AGI, Guadalajara. 104. 204 Segurola did not wish to leave his family in Spain; however, by the latter part of November the craftsman from Ferrol— in company with his son, Ramon— had arrived at the Department of San Bias. On November 22, 1777, Minister Galvez appointed Francisco Segurola as master-builder in the naval department.^ During a period of ten years, Segurola served the department with distinction. The major projects which Segurola completed include: (1) construction of the frigate Princesa: (2) completion of a stockade for the naval department's arsenal; plus (3) participation in routine repairs and overhauls for the vessels.^ The second category of important officials who were in demand at the naval department were pilots, surgeons, and chaplains. When the original detachment of officers arrived at San Bias in 1774, Juan de la Bodega y Quadra noted that the rigors of that climate demanded a surgeon, ^Galvez to Bucareli, in AGI, Guadalajara, 104. ''Expediente formado sobre aumento de sueldo que sollcita Dn. Francisco Segurola, Constructor en Sn. Bias, 1781," in AGN, Marina. 53. Francisco Segurola was probably the most prominent of all San Bias master-shipbuilders. Before his service in New Spain at the Port of San Bias, Segurola worked in at least two major naval departments in Spain including Ferrol and Guamlzo (adjacent to Santander). 205 while the problem of shipboard discipline called his atten- tion to the requirement for a chaplain. ° In December of 1774, Viceroy Bucareli penned an urgent request to the Father Guardian of San Fernando College requesting him to appoint two chaplains for the 1775 expedition and to dis patch at least one more chaplain for regular service with the department's vessels. Approximately one year later the viceroy renewed his request: apparently chaplain assignments were difficult to fill in the Port of San Bias.^7 Among major officials of the naval department, the pilots jrere the most colorful group and the most unconven tional. Throughout the era of 1774 to 1786, pilots of San Bias were involved in normal pilotage duty to and from Alta California, and along the Pacific northwest. They even participated in such interesting assignments as Miguel del 36 Bodega y Quadra to Antonio Reggio, San Bias, Feb. 13, 1775, as cited by Chapman, "Difficulties of San Bias," SHQ. pp. 267-68. 37 Cited in two letters as follows: (1) Bucareli to Father-President of San Fernando College, Mexico, Nov. 19, 1774, and (2) Bucareli to Father-President of San Fernando College, Mexico, Dec. 4, 1775, Coe Collection. no. 52 and 53. 206 Corral's project for transfer of west coast naval oper ations (the so-called "transfer controversy" beginning in 38 1776) and mapping the local ports and coast of New Spain. The unconventional aspects of pilot duty appear in infre quent correspondence such as the long expediente concerning Diego de Choquet's alleged loss of sanity or the same official'8 controversies with his pilots while sailing to Manila on the Principe in 1779.^ Beginning with the pilots which Francisco Hijosa listed in a report of the Villa de San Bias in 1774— including Juan Perez, Estevan Jose Martinez, Jose Cafii- zares, Francisco Alvares de Castro, Cristoval de Revilla, and Juan Bautista de Aguirre--the naval department gradu ally built up its pilot corps until there were some twelve members in 1780.^® A majority of the new pilots came from Infra, pp. 239-47. 3Q ’The first circumstance is found in "Expediente sobre los escandalosos procedimlentos del Teniente de Navio Dn Diego Choquet, 1779," in AGN, Marina. 44. ^Hijosa* s report is "Noticias circumstancias del estado de la poblacion y astillero de San Bias," July 20, 1774, AGI, Guadalaiara. 513. Details of San Bias in 1780 are cited in "Relacion de Don Francisco Trillo y Bermudez ... ," Dec. 6, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 34. Trillo's report includes the meaibership of the Department of San Bias, listed by name and position. 207 service in the Atlantic Ocean. San Bias pilots who served between 1774 and 1786 were a combination of coastal pilots (referred to as oilo- tines and also practices’ ). and full-fledged navigators. From the earlier period of the 1770's, the department employed Francisco Alvares de Castro, Antonio Verdugo, Santiago de Castro, and Joaqu£n Robles in commanding the smaller vessels from San Bias to the peninsula.4^ By 1777, a number of changes had occurred including the addition of Juan Pantoja and Josef Tovar from Lima. Ensign Perez had died in Monterey Bay in 1775, but veterans Martfnez, Cafii- zares, and Aguirre continued to serve until the close of this era.42 4*"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. Antonine Tibesar, The Writings of Jun£pero Serra. Ill, 73-157, describes routine supply voyages to both Alta and Baja California during the period from 1774 to 1778. 42The death of Ensign Perez is noted by his contem porary, Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra. The careers of Cafiizares and Aguirre are summarized in Francisco Mourelle, "Nomina de los Pi lotos que ac tua linen te sirven en el Departamento de Sn Bias: su creacion, Arcensos, Dicta- menes, dada por el Comandante de dicho Departamento con- forme a la superior orden que con feeha de 8 de el mes de Abril de 1785 comunlco el Senor Regente gobemador y Capitan general de el Reyno de Nuevo Espana," San Bias, May 18, 1785, in AGN, Marina. 62. Hereinafter cited as Mourelle, "Nomina de los Pllotos que actualmente sirven en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 62. One of the most successful pilots and one who Is scarcely known in San Bias history Is Juan Pantoja, who completed his professional preparation In the Coleglo de San Telmo--the Pilot's School In Sevilla. After success* fully completing this course In 1770, Pantoja was assigned permanent duty In the Naval Department of Callao de Lima where he had completed six years duty by 1777. At that time, Juan Pantoja was examined and awarded the title of pilot£n. During the same year he was transferred to the Naval Department of San Bias, along with a contemporary, Josef Tovar.^ It seems highly probable that both of these young pilots accompanied Bodega y Quadra from Callao to San Bias in the new frigate Favorita. At the Port of San Bias, Juan Pantoja received another promotion in February 1779, just before he sailed with Commander Bodega y Quadra on the northern expedition; Antonio Bucarell appointed him second"class pilot.^ 43 Mourelle, "Nomina de los Pilotos que actualmente sirven en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 62. ^Mourelle, "Nomina de los Pilotos que actualmente sirven en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 62. 209 The remaining service which pilot Pantoja completed for the Department of San Bias involved mapping coastal areas and serving on several of the supply vessels to Alta Cali fornia. Jose Canizares was another dependable veteran in the San Bias pilot corps, having served with the department since 1769.^ He received command of the Principe in 1774 and sailed from San Bias to Monterey returning home with Pedro Pages and fourteen soldiers— the Catalonian Volun teers . In 1777, Jose Canizares received a promotion to piloto first-class, and two years later he accompanied Bodega y Quadra in the Favor it a to the Northwest Coasts.^ The ranking pilots who manned the department's vessels on extended voyages to California and the Philip pines were usually graduate pilots (that is, they were certified graduates of a Spanish pilotage school), and many 45 Mourelle, "Nomina de los Pilotos que actualmente sirven en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina, 62. ^CaSizares* arrival in Monterey with the Principe in 1774 was noted by Captain Perez on the Santiago: it is also cited in "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. The promotion of Jose Caftizares to first-class pilot is found in Antonio Bucareli to Fran cisco Hijosa, Mexico, Feb. 20, 1777, in AGN, Provineias Intemas. 10. 210 of them had been commissioned as officers. In addition to Perez, Canizares, and Martinez, there were a number of ranking pilots at San Bias including the first**class pilots Jose Camacho and Francisco Mourelle, and the second-class pilots Juan Bautista Aguirre and Cristoval Espinola. Pilots Camacho and Mourelle had been dispatched from Spain with special orders for service with the Department of San Bias; their leadership in departmental affairs from 1775 until the beginning of new explorations in 1786 was a dis tinctive asset for the Port. Jose Camacho studied in the Academia de Cadiz between 1753 and 1758 and then received several years of practical experience in the Naval Department of Havana during the early sixties.^ On January 4, 1768, Jose Camacho was awarded the rank of pilot second class by Capi- tan General de la Real Armada Juan Joseph Navarro. Camacho was assigned to the Department of Ferrol for duty and served there and in other Spanish naval organizations on the peninsula for eight years. In 1778, Piloto Camacho Mourelle, "Nomina de los Pilotos que actualmente sirven en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 62. 211 arrived in Mexico and received an assignment with the Naval Department of San Bias. In this same year, he was given comnand of the packet San Carlos, and completed a round trip from San Bias to Alta California during a routine supply voyage.During the expedition of 1779, Camacho sailed on the Princesa as second officer to Commandant Arteaga, thus providing him with further practical experi ence in Pacific Coast navigation. Camacho was commissioned ensign in the Spanish Royal Navy in 1780 and continued to serve as interim comandante in the Department of San Bias during the war years, 1783 to 1786.^ Expansion and Development in San Bias: Military and Civilian Construction Projects Construction activities in the Port of San Bias during the middle period included both military and ^®"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. ^Mourelle cites Jose Camacho's promotion to Alferez de Fragata in 1780, "Nomina de los Pilotos que actualmente sirven en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina, 62. See also: Juan Pantoja, "Plano del Pto de San Bias y Ensenada de Mantanchel, 1785," Cartas y Pianos, no. VIII, "C" in Museo Naval for statement about Camacho's term as comandante. 212 civilian projects. Maritime construction at San Bias was limited to the first five years of this era while in the last portion there were military improvements at the port. In addition to these major projects, there were improve* ments in the transportation routes leading out of San Bias and a number of schemes were devised for improving the inner harbor and loading facilities. Ship-building projects during this period were quickly recognized as an Important adjunct of military preparations at San Bias. The major contribution of the naval shipyard consisted of only one new vessel, the Prlncesa. but this record proved satisfactory in the light of subsequent events. The new frigate, officially named "Nuestra Sehora del Rosario,'1 but commonly called the Prlncesa, was one of the last major vessels built in the shipyard of San Bias.50 The Prlncesa was alleged to be "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. The Naval Department of San Bias used the following vessels for voyages of discovery and supply transportation from 1775 to 1796: (1) San Bias-built vessels: Prlncesa. 1778 (189 T.); Activo. 1792 (213 1/2 T.); Sutil. 1791 (46 T.); Mexicana. 1791 (46 T.); (2) Vessels acquired from other ports: Favorita. 1777 (193 T.); Aranzazu. 1781 (205 T.); San Carlos. "El Filipino," 1781 (196 T.); Concep cion, 1788 (305 T.); Santa Gertrudis (from Spain 213 equal to the FavorIta of Callao In respect to design characteristics, but the former vessel actually served the department for a much longer period after both vessels were put into service in 1779.^* The proposition for constructing a new frigate in the naval shipyard of San Bias was first introduced to 52 Spanish officials in Madrid by Antonio Bucareli in 1776. His project was given royal approval and by the next year construction was well under way in San Bias. The Prlncesa was completed in the Port of San Bias between 1777 and 1778 under the direction of Comandante Ignacio de Arteaga, with to S.B.), 1792 (?>; Santa Satumina. alias "Horcasitas,” 1791 (34 T.); *Felicidad. 1785 (139 T.); *Valdes. 1791 (139 T.). *Both vessels were transferred from San Bias: the Felicidad to Manila in 1785 and the Valdes to Manila in 1791. ^Department officials of San Bias completed a thorough overhaul on the Prlncesa as late as 1796. See: Ignacio de Arteaga, "Razon o presupuesto de los materiales que se consumeran y costos a que as send era las manifacturas de las Maestranzas, y demas Peones en la carena que se propone para Fragata Prlncesa arreglandonos a lo desligada que se halla se necesita lo siguiente," San Bias, Nov. 23, 1795, in AGN, Marina. 109. ■^Bucarell to Julian de Arriaga, Mexico, Mar. 25, 1776, in AGI, Guadalajara. 515. 214 Cl technical supervision by Francisco Segurola. Details of the Princesa*s construction Included the following: (1) the vessel was laid out and completed In the typical Spanish fashion of using graduated steps as In drydock procedures; (2) the finest woods were chosen to produce a durable and sturdy vessel; and (3) the vessel*s accommodations were designed to facilitate storage require* ments during extended periods of operation away from home port. The new vessel displaced 189 tons which was slightly smaller than the Favorita (193 tons), and considerably smaller than the Santiago (225 1/2 tons).^ The Princesa was designed with qualities of durability first and speed second (which was completely verified during the vessel's initial expedition of 1779), but the new frigate did carry a formidable amount of armament in the form of ten cannon** six four-caliber and four three-caliber.^ ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MM. See also: Mourelle, "Plano del Pto y Departamento de San Bias en 1777," in Cartas y Pianos, no. VIII, "C" in Museo Naval for details on the construction of the Princesa. ^Arteaga, "Re lac ion del Viaje echo a la altura por las Fragatas de Su Magd la princesa y la faborita ... ," Coe Collection, no. 12. 215 The "sailing list" or inventory of the Princesa for the expedition of 1779 indicates that the vessel drew slightly less water than the Favorite and carried nine fewer crewmen. Commander Arteaga's vessel carried more soldiers and noneomulssloned officers than the Princesa. an equal number of able-seamen and officers, but less cabin-boys and pages. The provisions on board the Princesa were calculated for a period of thirteen months while those of the Favorita were designed for a fourteen-month p e r i o d . 5 6 Throughout the expedition of 1779, the Princesa lagged behind her sister-ship, the Favorita. given equal condi tions of wind and sea; however, the San Bias-built vessel weathered storm conditions as well as or better than the Peruvian-built frigate. During twenty-four years of active service with the Naval Department of San Bias, the Princesa clearly out lasted her consort, the Favorita. in voyages to the north west and in supply trips to the Port of Manila. From 1788 ^Arteaga, "Re lac ion del Viaje echo a la altura por las Fragatas de Su Magd la princesa y la faborita ... ," Coe Collection, no. 12. ^7Bodega y Quadra, "Primer Viaje hasta la altura de 58 gs. ... ano de 1775" (618), MS in MN. See also: Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. p. 135. 216 to 1790, the San Bias frigate completed three successive voyages from her home port to the Spanish outpost of Nootka Sound on Vancouver Island. Pilot Estevan Jose Martinez actually preferred the Princesa over the Favorita. direct* Ing the Spanish expeditions of 1788 and 1789 In the former vessel. After the Nootka Sound Controversy of 1790*1794, the Princesa remained In active service for the Department of San Bias, and It was noted as one of the naval vessels which participated In the siege of San Bias during the War of Independence In 1810.^® The second phase of military Improvements and con* structIon projects at San Bias Included new buildings and repair units at the shipyard and arsenal. In contrast to earlier administrators, who were primarily concerned with external aspects of shipping and receiving goods from Mexico, the post-Reglamento officials In the middle period (1774 to 1782) were able to devote more time and energy to improvement of the port and addition of new facilities for its support. The originator of these Improvements was the new comandante. Ignacio de Arteaga, who was somewhat ^ Q Gutierrez Camarena, p. 165. 217 overshadowed In his activities by the more colorful Bruno de Hezeta and Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra. Arteaga remained in the background of San Bias naval activities until his nomination for leading the expedition of 1779. At the naval station, however, the hard -working comandante compiled a noteworthy record of reform and improvements: (1) he completed new structures for careening naval vessels; (2) he established new workshops for repair and service of the department's vessels; (3) he improved and enlarged the rope-manufacturing plant; and finally, (4) he modernized the arsenal and enlarged the entire area of the shipyard.^ A majority of the structural changes and improve ments which were completed under Ignacio de Arteaga*s term occurred along the lower level of the Port of San Bias.**® 59 AGN, Marina. 53. Specific references concerning Arteaga's Improvements are found throughout the Marina tomos in AGN, while some account of his work is cited by Francisco Mourelle and Juan Pantoja in Cartas y Pianos, no. VIII, *'C" in the Museo Naval. **®The lower level of San Bias' naval station in cluded all the military installments while on the elevated Cerro de Basilio were located the civilian storage facili ties, the contadurfa and the church. See: Plate no. IV. 218 This site was the most rapidly expanding area of the Department of San Bias and the one which housed the mili tary functions. Between 1774 and 1781, the arsenal and shipyard assumed a vital role and their facilities for servicing naval vessels mushroomed in comparison with civilian construction on the Cerro de Basilio. Under Ignacio de Arteaga1s direction, workshops were enlarged to include a blacksmith shop, carpenter shop, cooper's shops, and a number of assorted workshops including sites for shaping masts, for caulking and repair of deck equipment.^ Another major construction project which was com pleted under Ignacio de Arteaga's direction was the high stockade which enclosed the arsenal and shipyard. Origi nally, the comandante devoted his full energy to improving repair offices and workshops along the inner basin, but in 1780 Viceroy Mayorga informed him that a special ^Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. pp. 94-96. A contemporary map of San Bias, submitted to Viceroy Martin de Mayorga in 1780 by the master-builder Segurola, indicates each of the previously-mentioned shops. See: AGN, Marina. 44, and Plate no. IV. ^^Material concerning this project is found in "Expediente formado sobre construceion de un Dique en San Bias," in AGN, Marina. 53. storehouse or building was necessary at San Bias to protect the department's wood supply. When the viceroy received word from comisario Francisco Trillo that both wood and tools were disappearing from the shipyard, Mayorga ordered Ignacio de Arteaga to correct this deficiency as soon as possible. On December 6, 1780, Arteaga wrote to Francisco Segurola and assigned him the task of directing this pro ject. The commandant was especially anxious to know what type of permanent structure Segurola would recommend and the costs involved for completion.^ Francisco Segurola responded to the comandante's request on December 7, in forming him that it seemed best to build a separate wharf or storage platform for the maderas. since they arrived from the r£o Santiago by raft and it would be a simple task to load and store them in a separate warehouse at the docks. The master-builder was definitely opposed to the ^Francisco Trillo to Martin de Mayorga, Sept. 14, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 53. The viceroy's correspondence to Comandante Arteaga is not included in "Expediente formado sobre construccion de un Dique en San Bias," but the Commandant mentions it in his letter of Dec. 7, 1780, to Viceroy Mayorga, AGN, Marina. 53. ^Arteaga to Segurola, in AGN, Marina. 53. 220 construction of a stockade, as Ignacio de Arteaga had sug gested, and he replied that the warehouse would be cheaper than the previously-mentioned structure.^ After receiving Francisco Segurola*8 recomnendation for the new unit at San Bias, Ignacio de Arteaga wrote to Viceroy Martin de Mayorga on the same day (December 7), and outlined a plan for protecting the wood and tools at San Bias. The comandante proposed that since the arsenal was located in a favorable position to take advantage of the periodic rise and fall of the tide along one side of the naval station, it seemed best to construct a high stockade around two sides of the area and allow the natural barrier of sand and water to provide protection on the remaining sides. Arteaga estimated that the new stockade would be completed for about 1,000 pesos--a figure which Francisco Segurola quoted on December 6.^ In January 1781, Mayorga gave his consent for the project and on February 15, 1781, the Royal Tribunal of ^Segurola to Arteaga, in AGN, Marina. 53. The major opposition from the master-builder regard ing a stockade was the expense involved and the require ments for using guards, once the stockade was erected. Arteaga to Viceroy Mayorga, in AGN, Marina. 53. 221 Accounts In Mexico approved the expenditure of 1,000 pesos for the construction of a digue at San Blas.^ The entire project involved no more than four months time from begin ning to completion, but the details of construction and the expenditures on this stockade are illustrative of the solid administrative ability of Arteaga and the technical skill of his master-builder, Segurola. On March 16, 1781, Ignacio de Arteaga announced his intentions of commencing the project of a stockade around the arsenal. Addressing Francisco Segurola, the comandante repeated Viceroy Mayorga*s request for building a stockade at an expense of 1,000 pesos instead of a more elaborate 68 warehouse at a cost of 3,000 pesos. Previously, on February 22, 1781, Ignacio de Arteaga had received Fran cisco Segurola's estimate on the project, a total cost of only 600 pesos. The commandant also noted in this letter that Francisco Segurola was unable to continue with plans for construction of a new vessel in the shipyard of ^Mexico, January 20, and February 15, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 53. 68 Arteaga to Segurola, AGN, Marina. 53. 222 60 San Bias due to shortages of wood. The commandant directed Segurola to commence con struction of the stockade as soon as possible and Arteaga noted that the commissary department still authorized 1,000 pesos for total expenses. The master-builder was requested to obtain peones for the stockade project by addressing Francisco Trillo in the contadurfa; all other expenses had to be approved by the conmandant since Arteaga was making a special effort to stay within his budget. On the same day (March 16), Francisco Segurola acknowledged the letter from his superior and agreed to commence construction as soon as the workers arrived.^ In connection with the peones. Segurola indicated that he would need "tres mandamientos de Yndios" (fifteen) for starting the project. He also suggested to Arteaga that all of the workers be present on or before April 25. In accordance with Arteaga's orders, the master-builder agreed go This project--construction of a new fragata in the arsenal of San Bias— was later revoked by the Royal Tribunal of Accounts in Mexico due to requirements for economy during the war. ^Francisco Segurola to Ignacio Arteaga, Mar. 16, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 53. 223 to submit a listing of all expenses in connection with the stockade, including the cost of labor.^ Exactly ten days later, Ignacio de Arteaga addressed Francisco Trillo indicating that the viceroy had approved plans for construction of the stockade and consequently it was necessary to contract for the fifteen Indians which Segurola had requested earlier.^ Continued correspondence between Arteaga and his two subordinates, Francisco Trillo and Francisco Segurola, indicates that the laborers were hired and that Commandant Arteaga was somewhat apprehensive about waiting until April 25 to start the project. Segurola responded to Arteaga*s inquiry of April 10, 1791, indicating that the only external circumstance which caused 73 delay at San Bias was the arrival of the Indian workers. Segurola to Arteaga, Mar. 16, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 53. The "tres mandamientos de indios" which he asked for was eventually increased to forty-five Indians for this project. See: Francisco Segurola, "Razon de los Jomales y Herr ages Bnpleados en la Cons truce ion del Dique o Estacada el este Arsenal, desde el dia 20 de Abril, hasta 15 de Maio, ambos inclussivas de 1781," in AGN, Marina. 53. Hereinafter cited as Segurola, "Razon de los Jomales ... ," in AGN, Marina. 53. 72 Arteaga to Francisco Trillo, San Bias, in AGN, Marina. 53. ^Segurola to Arteaga, April 10, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 53. According to Francisco Segurola*s final report, the project was started on April 20. 224 On May 14, Ignacio de Arteaga forwarded a letter of congratulations to Francisco Segurola, expressing his approval on the rapid and efficient completion of the stockade. 74 The comandante praised Segurola for his com pliance with the original plans and asked his subordinate If he had any final suggestions or recommendations. In conclusion, Arteaga requested Segurola to forward a list of his expenses for verification and payment. Two days later, Francisco Segurola wrote to the commandant as follows: the project was completed to his perfect satisfaction and he was Including a list of the expenses as Arteaga had re quested. Apparently there was some discrepancy in the original outline of expenses for the stockade. Commissary Trillo wrote to Arteaga and requested a complete accounting for all expenses, including cost of labor and number of men employed. Finally, on May 30, the correct expense sheet had been received in the comisario1s office and the records were duly closed at the Port of San Blas.7^ 74AGN, Marina. 53. 7^Segurola to Arteaga, May 16, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 53. From the text of this letter it is apparent that Francisco Segurola submitted a different "Expense Sheet" than the one approved and accepted by Francisco Trillo. Final expenses are listed in Segurola, "Razon de los Jomales ... ," in AGN, Marina. 53. 225 Segurola's Itemized expenses for the project Indi cate that the government spent no money whatsoever on wood while It allotted almost one-third of the total sum for nails. The cost for four qulntales of nails (an equivalent of about 405 pounds) was 200 pesos while total labor costs amounted to 470 pesos. The remaining Items on the expense sheet give a complete description of the labor costs Including the names and salaries paid for lomales. or day wages. Segurola listed the following specific work men In this sheet: skilled carpenters, sawyers, workmen, cooks and finally, Indian workmen (the hired mandamientos de Yndlos).77 The comandante drafted a formal report on the com pletion of the stockade at San Bias and sent all of the correspondence and financial transactions to Viceroy Martfn 78 de Mayorga on June 6, 1781. Concerning the viceroy's ^Segurola, "Razon de los Jornales ... ," in AGN, Marina. 53. The cost of nails, cited in this Razon as 50 pesos per quintal (approximately a hundredweight), was almost the same price quoted during the Favorita's overhaul in 1781. See: Infra, p. 261. 7^A breakdown of the workmen in Segurola's report Included the following: 12 carpenters, 16 sawyers, 16 work men (Spaniards), 46 Indians, and 4 cooks. 78AGN, Marina. 53. 226 original recommendation for protecting San Bias maderas (i.e., to post four sentries and two soldiers around the arsenal for patrol duty), Ignacio de Arteaga replied that the shortage of personnel at San Bias prevented his com pliance with this suggestion. The commandant announced that he was planning to use two soldiers and one seaman for an outside patrol and in the future this number could be 79 increased if he received additional personnel. 7 In con clusion, Arteaga praised the work of his master-builder, Francisco Segurola, and the efficient and rapid manner in which he had completed this assignment. Arteaga assured Viceroy Mayorga that the new stockade would provide maximum protection for the wood stored in the San Bias arsenal. One of the later military projects which was com pleted at San Bias during this period was a small fortress or castle close to the mouth of the harbor. The location of this fortification— known as the Castillo and also called the fortIn--was adjacent to the entrance of the 79 By the year 1796, the outside patrol at the stockade was increased to a total of 14 men; 2 sergeants and 12 guards. See: "Presupuestos de los Caudales que se regulan necessarios para las atenciones del Departamento de San Bias en el ano proximo de 1797," Nov. 23, 1796, in AGN, Marina. 90. in main harbor or estero and It commanded a view of the outer beach In both a northerly and southerly direction. Heavy artillery and numerous garrison troops at the Castillo offered the Port of San Bias excellent defense from the 80 date of its completion, 1780. The construction of the castle was undertaken between July and December of 1780 and was closely connected with Comisario Trillo*s recommendation for placing artil- 81 lery at the Port of San Bias for protection. From various descriptions of the Castillo, it is evident that the fortification was well-built and heavily fortified. The form of the castle was a perfect square with outer walls fashioned from heavy slabs or "curtains" of stone. The esplanade of the inner fortress was encircled by thick, stone-covered walls and there were loopholes distributed along the extension of the walls. Three of the fort's walls faced outward--one fronting toward the mouth of the Oa Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. p. 97. 81 Letter of Francisco Trillo to Viceroy Mayorga, Aug. 16, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44. Comisario Trillo explained their work on the Castillo in this letter and he petitioned for permission to cast bronze cannon in San Bias for mounting in the new fortress. 228 harbor, and two others facing seaward— and the remaining wall, which was unfortified, fronted toward the rising 82 hillsides of the mainland. Within the fortress there was some means for supporting the troops stationed there; there were separate storehouses for munitions and powder, plus a provisions* warehouse and a barracks for housing troops. The major batteries of the Castillo were the largest practicable size, measuring between eight and ten caliber while rifle support and small-arms were provided by gar* rison soldiers. J According to the testimony of several military officers who were associated with San Bias late in the eighteenth century, the site of the Castillo was an elevated battery with heavy cannon defending three sides of the fort. There were no platforms or parapet and hence the cannon were fired through embrasures. Spanish engi neers and military officials who constructed the fortress 82 , Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. p. 97. ^Francisco Trillo informed the viceroy that he had in San Bias six bronze cannon (4 caliber) and six iron cannon (1 caliber, but very old and in poor shape) plus two more small cannon; Aug. 16, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44. Camarena seems to indicate that additional artillery was acquired for the defense of the port, pp. 97*98. 229 calculated that a potential enemy would most likely attack San Bias from seaward and consequently, they placed the major batteries in position to fire both north and south and also, to seaward.^ The two most serious weaknesses of the fortress Involved Its Isolated position and Its exclusively defen sive batteries guarding only against naval attack while neglecting the possibility of a land attack. Since the Castillo was located cm the opposite side of the slough or estero from the naval station, all munitions, supplies, and food had to be ferried across this body of water and then hauled up to the fortress in a difficult and lengthy oper ation. Even to secure fresh water, which was brought in from a near-by well, required laborious effort.And finally, the strategic location of the castle proved to be of no avail; the fortress was eventually captured in 1810 ^In 1806 Alferez de Fraeata Agustin Bocal an and Comandante Jose Joaquin Lavayen testified about the details of the Castillo and its cannon. Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias y las Califomias. pp. 98-99. Q C See Plate no. IV, Francisco Segurola, "Plan del Puerto de San Bias," 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44. The geo graphic relationship between the fortress and the remaining military units along the inner basin are clearly visible in this map. 230 by a small band of soldiers who overwhelmed the troops on the unprotected side (that is, the side without cannon) and scaled the walls for a sudden victory. ° Civilian construction projects from 1774 to 1781 represent a smaller accomplishment than the military efforts of this same period. The old "Villa de San Carlos"--which was first established on the lower level, close to the inner harbor--was practically washed away during Manuel Rivero's term as commandant, and by 1773 the settlers had begun a new village located on the Cerro de Basilio. This elevated plateau or cerro continued to serve as the permanent location of the Villa de San Bias through out the remainder of the colonial period. Normal construc tion work at this site consisted of building private homes, laying out streets and access routes down to the naval shipyard, and finally, the government's interest in shipping and storing all types of subsistence items and 87 supplies demanded permanent storage facilities. After ®^Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias ▼ las Califomias. p. 98. ®^Francisco Hljosa, "Noticias circunstancias del estado de la poblacion y astillero de San Bias," July 20, 1774, in AGI, Guadalajara. 513. See also: "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 231 the new naval officers arrived from Spain In 1774, offi cials at the villa were occupied with two Important civilian projects In connection with supply department functions and the general welfare: building a new warehouse on the hilltop, and the construction of a permanent church. During a year's time, from 1778 to 1779, San Bias officials completed a permanent and functional building for storing their supplies and one which also served as an administrative headquarters. This building, known as the contaduria or counting-house, was one of two permanent structures completed on the plateau during the port's existence from 1768 to 1810. The second permanent struc ture consisted of the church, located somewhat lower on the elevated hilltop (due to the natural slope of the terrain). Both were constructed of natural materials including stone and wood, but unfortunately, the church experienced one calamity after another and was never a very serviceable QQ unit for the Villa de San Bias. Filar Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... M (unpublished thesis, University of Sevilla, 1960), pp. 19-21; Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomiaa. pp. 90-91, 171-72. 232 The contadmria was located on the highest elevation gq of the cerro. close to the vertical walls of the plateau. 7 By using natural stone, which was fashioned into rectangu lar building blocks, San Bias officials saved the govern ment a substantial amount of money in the construction of this building; furthermore, it served the Port of San Bias for some thirty years in the dual requirements of adminis trative center and warehouse. The broken and open shell of this building remains visible today, facing seaward, as a reminder of the dedicated efforts of civilian officials who guided the affairs of San Blas.^ Early in 1778, Francisco Hijosa had commenced con struction of the storehouse and enlisted a laboring force from the settlers in the Villa de San Bias. From the very beginning, Hijosa determined that this new structure must be durable and also functional; the massive size of the building stones and the final endeavor of erecting a heavy, [Antonio Pineda,] "Se da alguna idea del Puerto del San Bias" (127), MS in MN. Geographical location of the contadurla is shown in Francisco Segurola*s "Plan del Puerto de San Bias," in AGN, Marina. 44; Plate no. IV. on See Plate no. V. 233 timber"hewn roof, attest to this plan. The contadurfa measured forty-five yards along each side, while along the two inner sides (which faced toward the plaza), there was 91 a spacious corridor, or covered breezeway. According to the poetic imagination of the modem historian, Gutierrez Camarena, the grey-black hue of the building stones and the dark aspect of the roof gave the building an aspect of 92 death— somber and cold. ^ The available space of the contadurfa was equally divided in two parts: the administrative offices and con ference rooms of the Real Hacienda were situated on one side; the storage area for goods received from the capital was located on the second. Office space in the counting- house was situated in the western half, where small rooms-- measuring six yards square--were used by port officials ^Francisco Javier de Viana, Diario del Viaie Rgplorador de las Corbetas Esoanolas Descubierta v Atre- vida en los Aflos 1789 a 1791 (Cerrito de la Victoria, Ejercito, Madrid: 1849), pp. 178-80; and Pedro de Novo y Colson, ed., La Vuelta al Mundo las Corbetas DESCUBIERTA v ATREVIDA al Mando del Caoitan de Navio D. Alejandro Malasplna desde 1789 a 1794 (Madrid: 1885), pp. 129-30. Hereinafter cited as Viana, Diario ... . and Malaspina, Vuelta al Mundo. ^ San Bias v las Califomias. p. 100. 234 and royal ministers. In the second half of the structure there was one open enclosure, thirteen yards in width, extending along the entire length of the building, where the storeroom was located. This almacen was divided into smaller units for more efficient storage of the provisions, while spaced throughout the inner area of the storeroom were pillars for supporting the wooden roof. Floor sur faces throughout the contadurfa were covered with permanent paving stones. According to Francisco Hijosa*s fiscal report for 1779, the Royal Treasury paid a total of 9,600 pesos (during the period from December 30, 1778, to June 30, 1779), in meeting the expenses of San Bias' new storehouse and office building. Evidently, however, there were numer ous expenses which did not appear in this report. It seems certain that local supplies of wood were utilized to reduce government expenses, stone materials were free, and only cement, nails, and the interior furnishings were liabili- 94 ties to be paid by the Royal Treasury.7 ^[Pineda, ] "Se da alguna idea del Puerto de San Bias" (127), MS in MN; and Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomlas, p. 100. ^Francisco Hijosa, "Estado que manifiesta el in- greso ... y gasto ... de San Bias ... ," in AGN, Marina. 34. 235 In later years, members of the Malasplna Expedition commented upon the permanence of the contaduria and Its convenient accommodations for the comisario and other mem bers of the Real Hacienda. A customary entry in naviga tional logs of supply ships returning from the Northwest Coasts into the roadstead of San Bias cites the inspira tional qualities of spying the Spanish flag atop the thin spire of the counting-house. This familiar symbol became a landmark for mariners of the 1780's and 1790's.^ San Bias' church was also located on the cerro adjacent to the counting-house and it was finally com pleted, in permanent fashion, after many failures and set backs. Major details of the church's construction, from 1773 to 1787, have been chronicled by Gutierrez Camarena and hence only a brief presentation is presented in this ^Libro de Guardias de la Corbeta Descubierta (729) and Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta de SM la Atrevida (755), MSS in MN. See also: Viana, Diario ... , and Malaspina, Vuelta al Mundo. ^ A portion of San Bias v las Californias by Gutierrez Camarena pertains to the Chapel of San Bias; cf. pp. 100-102, 171-87. 236 Francisco Trillo y Bermudez wrote to Viceroy Bucarell In 1772 about plans for completing a permanent church, however the viceroy Indicated that the Royal Treasury could not support such a project at that time. Trillo*s alternative was to build another temporary church (this was the second impermanent building owing to the fact that the original structure had been destroyed by rains and floods), and he pointed out to Bucarell that the Naval Department of San Bias had authorized 150 pesos for the second iglesia. The new structure was placed along the lower level of the port’s terrain and not until 1774 was official approval obtained for constructing a permanent church on the plateau.^ Francisco Hijosa resumed the duties of commissary officer in 1774, and he also sought permission to construct a permanent church for San Bias. Officials in Mexico pointed out to Hijosa that it was not possible for the Real Hacienda to support the clerical project, making it very difficult for the commissary to complete the construction. ^7Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... ," pp. 20-21, and Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. p. 173. 237 During the next six years, Francisco Hijosa attempted to obtain money for San Bias' chapel, but his efforts proved futile. Apparently operating expenses for the naval station were carefully reserved for supporting "major pro* jects and Improvements" and in 1779 the comisario reported that the San Bias church amounted to no more than one wall, in the same style as the contaduria. and there was 98 clearly not enough money for its completion. From 1775 to 1781, there were several minor civilian projects at San Bias, including construction of two wooden buildings and the completion of a number of access routes from the top of the plateau. The first project was a new hospital, which was completed in the year 1776. Immediate requirements for the village hospital were manifest at the time of Juan Perez' return from the coasts of Alaska (1774), carrying his weakened, scurvy-marked crew. Lieu tenant Bodega y Quadra also reported that the villa required some means for caring for the naval department 99 officials and civilian personnel. Between 1775 and 1776, 98 Francisco Hijosa to Bucarell, San Bias, Sept. 10, 1779, in AGN, Marina. 44. ^Letter to Antonio Reggio, San Bias, Feb. 13, 1775, in AGI, Mexico. 104. 238 San Bias officials constructed a substantial hospital and finally, they erected a military barracks for quartering the local detachment of troops. Both of these structures were located on the hilltop, constructed of sturdy wood which was plentiful in the surrounding territory.The hospital was constructed close to the counting-house and was approximately one-half its size. The problem of transportation routes leading from the Villa de San Bias to other government centers and towns had been solved by Manuel Rivero Cordero during his term of comandante, 1768 to 1769, but after the establishment of the "new" village on the hilltop, there was no direct access to the naval shipyard or to the inner basin. In order to transport supplies and provisions, civilian and military officials completed a total of eight small trails. According to San Bias financial records, very little money was expended in developing these access routes and conse quently, they were scarcely more than "dusty trails" from the plateau down to the shipyard. Salaried employees ^^Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias pp. 101-102. ^^Francisco Segurola to Ignacio de Arteaga, San Bias, Sept. 14, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44; and "Flan del Puerto de San Bias" which was an enclosure with the previously-cited letter. 239 of the department--mule skinners end Indians— hauled subsistence goods and finished products over these trails. It is regrettable that more money was not expended for improving the local routes since the laborers were required to complete their jobs even during extremes of torrential rains and oppressive heat. Maintenance and Repair of Naval Vessels and Harbor Facilities and the Resulting Transfer Controversy Two Important military aspects of San Bias1 develop ment remain to be covered in this presentation: improvement of the inner basin and repairs for naval vessels. The first project was completed between 1774 and 1776 at a time when flooding and "silting'* occurred during the rainy seasons. Jose de Galvez, the original founder of the Port of San Bias in the modern age, pointed out the liability of San Bias' shallow harbor in 1768, but he calculated that the major utilization of the port would be in connection 102 with shallow-draft vessels and not large warships. ^^Jose de Galvez to Marques de Croix, San Bias, May 20, 1768, in Galvez MS, HL. 240 Seven years later, the situation had degenerated consider ably, and officials of the naval department resolved to Improve this matter of Inadequate harbor space and shallow depth. A local junta convened at San Bias In 1774, and appointed a number of officers to Investigate the problem and make recommendations to comandante Arteaga. San Bias officers included Francisco Hijosa, Pedro Yzaguirre (cap- tain of the arsenal), Diego Choquet, and Arteaga. J The commission first travelled to Puerto de Chacala, some twenty-nine miles south of San Bias and remained there duritig the month of December. Chacala* s roadstead was much more exposed to wind and sea than San Bias, but it possessed many more natural advantages including "perfect climate, good water, and absence of mosquitos." The terrestrial advantages were promising since there were many groves of fruit trees and a good supply of pine along the hillsides. Commissary Hijosa and the comandante. however, were 103 "Te8timonio de Autos Formados Sobre la nueva construccion del Puerto de San Bias," Dec. 11, 1774, in AGI, Guadalalara. 497. The arsenal captain, Pedro Yzaguirre, first noticed the problem of sand deposits in the harbor. 241 strongly opposed to any future relocation to the Port of Chacala and therefore the commission moved back to the 104 adjacent Port of Mantanchel. The roadstead of Mantanchel was just south of San Bias and offered practically all of the advantages of timber and natural products, plus freedom from insects. The two naval officers, Arteaga and Choquet, were favorably inclined to moving to Mantanchel from San Bias (especially since the expenses would be nominal in comparison to the same move to Chacala), but once again Francisco Hijosa opposed them. Comisario Hijosa cited the loss of the perma nent buildings at San Bias and the difficulty of relocating the civilian population in the Port of Mantanchel. He estimated that such a move would cost 8,000 pesos, not counting the private losses involved in moving families and 105 the loss of some local commerce. Between April and May 1775, a heated dispute concerning the "San Bias transfer 104 "Testimonio de Autos Formados Sobre la nueva construecion del Puerto de San Bias," in AG1, Guadalajara. 497. ^^Informe de Francisco Hijosa, in "Testimonio de Autos Formados Sobre la nueva construccion del Puerto de San Bias," in AGI, Guadalajara. 497. 242 controversy" raged at the naval station when the previously cited officers opposed the cotanissary officer.10^ A promi nent military engineer and member of the Galvez Expedition to Lower California took part In the episode as follows: Miguel Costanso recalled the detailed study he had made of the Port of San Bias and Immediately recommended that Acapulco be chosen for Spain's west coast naval head quarters rather than San Bias. The viceroy was finally called upon to resolve the dilemma of a proper location for a west coast base. Actually, the viceroy's knowledge concerning the Port of San Bias originated with the grounding of the San Carlos on January 31, 1775, Inside the harbor, fully loaded for a 108 supply voyage to Alta California. Ignacio de Arteaga reported this event to Viceroy Bucareli emphasizing the necessity of locating a substitute port for naval ^^Informe de Ignacio de Arteaga, In "Testimonio de Autos Formados Sobre la nueva construccion del Puerto de San Bias," in AGI, Guadalajara. 497. ^^The Costanso Map is listed in Chapter II, note no. 51. *^®Charles E. Chapman, "The Alta California Supply Ships, 1773-1776," SHQ, p. 191. See also: Antonine Tibesar, The Writings of Junfnero Serra, II, 289. 243 operations. Viceroy Bucareli took immediate action in 1775 and commissioned a military engineer, Miguel del Corral, to investigate the Port of San Bias and other ports adjacent to it.*®^ The appointment of tentente coronel Miguel del Corral seems to suggest an earlier association between the viceroy and this eminent royal engineer. In Spain, during a routine assignment in the Kingdom of Murcia, Miguel del Corral had worked directly for the mariscal del campo, Antonio Bucareli, and it was this friendship which prompted the viceroy to seek Corral in 1775 for the San Bias assign ment. Bucareli issued a commission to Miguel del Corral in June 1775, and ordered the royal engineer to investigate all proposed sites and to recommend the best location for ^Jose Antonio Calderon Quijano, "Ingenieros Mili- tares En Nueva Espana, Siglo XVIII," Anuario de Estudios ^mgriganoa. VI (Sevilla, 1949), 25-27. A native of Aragon, Miguel del Corral first entered military service in a cavalry regiment in 1746 and then received an appointment as Subteniente e Ingeniero Dellnea- dor in 1750. In 1760 he was promoted to Capitan e Inge niero en Segundo and just before his voyage to Mexico with General Juan de Villalba, he was promoted to Teniente Coronel (1763). ■'■^Calderon Quijano, "Ingenleros Militares En Nueva Espafla, Siglo XVIII," p. 27. 244 continued naval activities. Arriving on the west coast in July 1775, Miguel del Corral conferred with the comandante of San Bias and then worked on his objective until April 1776.^* Francisco Hijosa, Pedro de Yzaguirre, Estevan Jose Martinez, and Francisco Mourelle were chosen by Commandant Arteaga to work with Miguel del Corral to determine the best location for Spain's west coast naval facility. The investigation team moved from the roadstead of Mantanchel to the Port of Chacala and then concluded their findings in a long report to Ignacio de Arteaga and Viceroy Bucareli in December 1775. At each location, counting San Bias as a solid pos sibility, there were positive factors in favor of develop ing a new port. The captain of the arsenal, Pedro Yza guirre, testified that Mantanchel was more desirable than San Bias in connection with accommodations for naval vessels. The maderas which would be required at the Port of Mantanchel could easily be ferried, but the cost of ^^"Ano de 1776, Testimonio de Los Autos Formados Sobre la Nueva Construecion del Puerto de Sn Bias, en el de Chacala o Mantanchel como dentro express,” in AGI, Guadalalara. 497. Hereinafter cited as "Ano de 1776— Testimonio ... ," in AGI, Guadalajara. 497. 245 rebuilding some of the structures which San Bias offered would be very high. Francisco Mourelle was adamant in his refusal to endorse any of the new locations; he stressed the expense factor in moving. Pilot Mourelle was probably the most enthusiastic supporter of San Bias during the entire range of the port's history. The astute Hijosa was still asserting his claim of great losses both private and governmental if any new locations were approved and ill he opposed the transfer of the naval department. The "transfer controversy" of 1774-1776 was the first of several recurring suggestions for relocating the Port of San Bias and, like all of the subsequent projects, the work of Miguel del Corral and his assistants at San Bias was a lost cause. in May 1776, Spanish officials Pedro Yzaguirre, in "Ano de 1776— Testimonio ... , " in AGI, Guadalalara. 497. 1^3»»Ano de 1776— Testimonio ... in AGI, Guadala jara. 497. See also: Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... ," pp. 37-39. 114,^6 limitations of the Port of San Bias were discussed seriously in 1788-89 by Viceroy Manuel Antonio Florez and Conde de Revilla Gigedo. See below, pp. 340-43. Lieutenant Coronel Miguel del Corral remained active in the Kingdom of New Spain, working on a project for trans-isthmian shipments by way of Tehuantepec to the 246 endorsed the Port of San Bias as the best possible location for west coast naval operations, and furthermore, they reconmended that numerous improvements be completed In the harbor. In July, Viceroy Bucareli informed the new Minister of the Indies, Jose de Galvez, that further studies were being completed at San Bias and that a certain amount of dredging was necessary to permit continued naval operations. The viceroy cited the possibility of using some of the excellent ports of Alta California if it were necessary to close the Port of San Bias. The transfer con troversy still remained unsettled. A royal order from Spain, dated January 9, 1777, specified that if future requirements for a large military build-up were necessary, the port was to be cancelled in favor of a larger and more adequate location. In the mean time, west coast naval operations were to continue at "South Sea" in 1776 and 1777. Later, he was employed in the Naval Shipyard of Vera Cruz; in AGN, Marina. 87, and Calderon Quijano, "Ingenieros Militares En Nueva Espafia, Siglo XVIII," pp. 27-29. ^^Bucareli to Jose de Galvez, Mexico, July 27, 1776, in AGI, Guadalalara. 104. 247 San Blas.1^ Viceroy Bucareli complied with the royal order by naming Bruno de Hezeta temporary conmandant (while Lieutenant Arteaga completed a supply voyage to California) and he enjoined both Hezeta and Hijosa to proceed with all haste in making the port a permanent base of naval oper ations.1^ As a result of Viceroy Bucareli's decree, the controversy for abandoning San Blr„ was deferred until a later date and the west coast naval station subsequently prospered during the next five years. Repair services at the naval station were more frequent and thorough dtiring the middle period of develop ment (1774-1780) than at any previous time. Two types of repair were conmon in this era of San Bias support: (1) complete overhaul of vessels including careening and replacing worn and damaged parts throughout the ship; and (2) minor repairs which could be completed by workmen ^^Royal Order of Jan. 9, 1777, El Pardo, to Buca reli in AGI, Guadalajara. 497. Officials of Madrid also pointed out to the viceroy that if Russian establishments were discovered along the Pacific Coast--close to "Cali fornia"— then there would be good reason for transferring naval activities to a better port. ^^Bucareli to Galvez, Mexico, April 26, 1777, in AGI, Guadalajara. 497. 248 on board the ship. The smaller jobs or minor repairs were often completed by removing component parts--such as deck machinery— and taking these to the repair shops for main tenance. For complete overhauls, workmen from the base were sent to the ship (still at the docks and not on dry ground) and they completed such work as refitting new masts and spars, painting or replacing small portions of the ship's hull. This latter type of repair activity brought the naval department officers in close cooperation with civilian personnel from the Real Hacienda: mast-repair materials not manufactured at San Bias came from Mexico and were ordered by Francisco Hijosa*s commissary department for use in the arsenal and shipyard. The two units, naval department and supply department, apparently worked smoothly and efficiently in the process of ordering, stock- 118 ing, and issuing necessary repair components. For a complete overhaul and repair, more time and personnel were required, plus the additional factor of 118 The shipment of material from Mexico to the Port of San Bias is beyond the scope of this thesis; however, as late as 1797, the naval department received goods from Mexico and Guadalajara via pack train. See: "Presupuestos de los Caudales que se regulan necesarios para las aten- ciones del Departamento de Sn Bias en el ano proximo de 1797,*’ San Bias, Nov. 23, 1796, in AGN, Marina. 90. 249 expenses. Ordinarily, naval officials completed this oper ation by heeling the vessel over on its side in a small, protected cove or inlet. At the harbor of San Bias, how ever, the basic requirements for careening naval vessels were met by the use of a careening dock and the advantages of still water. This method of side-careening was simpli fied at San Bias by the use of hydraulic machines and winches. The repairs for the department1s vessels were listed in one of the fiscal reports turned in by Comisario Hijosa in 1779. During the fiscal year of 1777-78, the shipyard completed three major overhauls on the departments vessels 120 for a total cost of 5,126 pesos. The most expensive repairs of this period were for the packet San Carlos (1,442 pesos), the Principe (1,444 pesos), and the Santiago (1,442 pesos). The Santiago’s overhaul amounted to her second major repair and the smaller vessels required servicing as a result of their continuous voyages along [Antonio de Pineda,] "Origen de la Construccion de Buques," 1791, San Bias, in Pacifico Americo, III (127), MS in MN. 120 Hijosa, "Estado que manifiesta el ingreso y gasto ... de San Bias ... in AGN, Marina. 34. 250 the California coasts. Three years later, the frigate Favorita was overhauled in the Port of San Bias at a much higher cost--which made fiscal officials extremely angry— but there were extenuating circumstances involved with the 121 Favorita. San Bias' requirements for repair of naval vessels were not difficult to maintain up until 1774, providing the naval department had materials and workmen. Between 1775 and 1781, two new vessels were added to the depart ment's fleet while all of the older ships were retained. In 1778, the Favorita and Princesa joined the Santiago as San Bias frigates, and there were the packetboats San Carlos and Principe plus the smaller vessels Sonora and Concepcion. One other ship, the lavaque Dichoso. was listed in San Bias naval records after 1780, bringing the 122 total to five large ships and three small ones. 121Infra, pp. 257-62. 122 Francisco Trillo, "Relacion de Don Francisco Trillo y Bermudez ... Dec. 6, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 34. By 1781, the vessels of San Bias had been reassigned as follows: the Principe and San Carlos were used in the Naval Department of Manila and, in their place, the Depart ment of San Bias received the new vessels San Carlos "El Filipino" and Aranzazu. The remaining ships listed were 251 Voyages of exploration were unusually hard on the San Bias vessels and all of the department ships were re quired to maintain a rigid schedule of San Bias -Calif omia voyages. The two new vessels helped relieve the problem of quantity, but repairs and overhauls were still neces sary. Repairs lagged in 1777 when Pedro Yzaguirre retired to Spain and a shortage of carpenters, master-builders, and craftsmen occurred. Captain of the Arsenal Yzaguirre had worked diligently on the Santiago and also had served as a member of the San Bias comnission to locate a new port for naval activities in 1776. His retirement from San Bias 123 was marked by a desperate search to find a replacement. still assigned to San Bias for duty. See: Ignacio de Arteaga, "Razcm que yo, D. Ygnacio Arteaga y Basam, Teniente de Navio de la Real Armada y Comandante de Marina de Departamento de San Bias doy al Exmo Senor Virrey de estos Reynos Sobre el Nuevo Regla ment o ... Tepic, April 10, 1782, in AGN, Marina, 34. Hereinafter cited as "Razon que yo D. Ygnacio Arteaga y Basam ... doy al Exmo Senor Virrey ... ," in AGN, Marina. 34. 123 Ynstancia del Capitan del Puerto y Maestranza del Departamento de San Bias, Dn. Pedro Yzaguirre, sobre que se le concede licencia para retlrarse a Espana ... 1777, in AGN, Marina, 34. Ralph S. Kuykendall presents interesting background material on the appointment of Francisco Segurola to the position of San Bias shipbuilder in "An American Ship builder for Spanish California," Hispanic American His torical Review. V (1922), 90-92. 252 A new arrival from Spain, whose skill has been noted, Francisco Segurola, filled this vacancy with adeptness; however, certain problems concerning repairs continued to exist. One of the most controversial aspects of San Bias repair and support functions was the production of iron and steel materials. In the early history of San Bias, all of the finished iron products necessary for naval construction were shipped from the capital; but later, in the decade of 1775 to 1785, local casting and smelting was done at San Bias. Notwithstanding local production of agricultural tools and implements from crude iron shipped from Mexico, the Port of San Bias seemed perpetually lacking in supplies 124 of iron and steel. Between 1778 and 1783 there were a number of reports and documents which indicate a profound interest in the 124,rhe department experienced critical shortages during the period of conflict with England (1779 to 1784), while later on, the conmandant of the naval station testi fied that he was unable to provide his vessels with appro priate artillery, “since there exists in this department no foundry for their manufacture. ..." See: Ramon Saavedra y Guyraldes, "Estado General de la Armadilla del Puerto de San Bias hecho en Junio del ano de 1792," San Bias, June 26, 1792, in AGN, Marina. 87. 253 establishment of a permanent facility or factory for pro duction of large Iron tools and cannon. These plans were never fully realized, and after 1785 the department became dependent upon outside sources--Manila, Lima, Acapulco, and Mexico Itself. The story of this project Involves many of the major officials of the port and stresses their con tinued efforts for developing the naval station. Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra mentioned the shortages of iron in the Port of San Bias during his voyage to Callao in 1777 with the pilot Jose Cafiizares. According to Bodega y Quadra*s diary, Viceroy Bucareli had sent him to Peru to purchase a new frigate, and also, Bodega y Quadra had been ordered to obtain a large supply of iron plus naval cannon 125 and sea anchors for use in the Department of San Bias. The new frigate Favorita sailed from Peru bearing a full allowance of crewmen and the previously-mentioned articles. In 1780, the Favorita was scheduled for a routine overhaul at San Bias, but the final completion of this task was not achieved until 1781— some of the final ^"Segunda Salida hta los 61 gros en la Fragta Ntra Sra. de los Remedios, alias, la Favorita ... " (618), MS in MM. 254 126 delays being attributable to scarcity of iron and steel. Expenditures on the Peruvian-built frigate and on other vessels in the department usually indicated the purchase of iron and steel for nails, plus binding plates and stiffen- ers which were employed in hull repairs. San Bias officials, including Arteaga and Mourelle, were cognizant of the presence of minerals and ores in the surrounding territory and the possibility of actually manu facturing finished products at the Port of San Bias was 1 A T suggested by comisario Trillo y Bermudez in 1780. The comisario^ suggestion came at a time when the department was just completing the small fortress at the mouth of the harbor, and officials faced the problem of fortifying the castle with cannon.^® By date of August 16, 1780, Fran cisco Trillo reconmended to Viceroy Mayorga that the Department of San Bias commence mining copper and zinc 126 The purchase of steel and the delays involved with the Favorita are discussed below, pp. 258-61. 1^7Francisco Trillo to Viceroy Martin de Mayorga, San Bias, Aug. 16, 1780, in AGN, Marina, 44. 128 Construction of the Castillo has already been treated. Supra, pp. 226-29. 255 from the surrounding countryside, while in the arsenal it could cast bronze cannon. Trillo*8 suggestions also included the prospects of supplying the presidios of Alta California with similar pieces of artillery. The expenses of this project would involve only the employment of skilled metal workers, plus a contract with the natives of Santa Clara (where the copper and zinc deposits were located). According to Francisco Trillo's petition, the project could be expanded, after once organizing the original unit in the Port of San Bias, in the following manner: additional forges or shops could be established on the Rio Santiago, or at Zapotillo and Mantanchel, since production would be centered upon bronze artillery and not iron.129 The recommendation of Francisco Trillo was never adopted due to the extra expenses of the European conflict and also because of the unusual requirements in hiring specialized personnel. Instead of local manufacture of iron materials, San Bias officials continued their earlier system of importing iron, and probably forged a small 12^Trillo to Mayorga, Aug. 16, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44. 256 number of smaller implements and tools. This system of local smelting is verified by the presence of several blacksmith shops at the naval shipyard and also by the record of materials received in Alta California. Some of the mission bells and probably limited amounts of small arms were shaped and cast in the blacksmith shops of San 130 Bias. In any event, it seems very unlikely that large equipment, such as sea anchors and large caliber cannon, 131 were ever smelted or cast in the workshops of San Bias. A summary of one of the department's complete repair jobs will illustrate some of the details and problems 130 These shops are discussed in some detail by Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Californias. pp. 95-96. The actual production (and not Importation) of these large iron products is difficult to verify. Camarena states that San Bias workshops turned out major pieces of iron including large caliber cannon. See: p. 96. Pilar Delgado Miranda, "Historia del Puerto de San Bias ... " (unpublished thesis, University of Sevilla, 1960), concludes that most of the iron which was used in San Bias' arsenal was delivered from the capital. See: pp. 45-46. Since Francisco Trillo*s plan for casting artillery in San Bias was rejected and Ramon Saavedra testified in 1792 about the lack of facilities for smelting or casting cannon, the conclusion seems to be valid that there was no operation of this type in San Bias. Cf. Saavedra, "Estado General de la Armadilla del Puerto de San Bias hecho en Junio del ano de 1792," in AGN, Marina. 87. 257 involved in maritime maintenance. After arriving at San Bias from Callao in 1778, the new frigate Favorita was deployed to the Northwest Coasts under Lieutenant Bodega y Quadra. When the vessel returned to San Bias in November 1779, Bodega y Quadra was assigned to direct that vessel's 132 repair and overhaul in the Port of San Bias. The unusual expenses and excessive time lapse for this oper ation were not typical, but the problems which blocked this project serve to illustrate the disadvantages in San Bias' maintenance program. The Favorita was docked at the Port of San Bias from April 1780 to May 1781.^3 September 1780, Bodega y 2 * The Mexican historian, Gutierrez Camarena, states that Bodega y Quadra returned from the Expedition of 1779 (Nov., 1779) and was transferred to the Naval Department of Havana for duty; San Bias ▼ las Califomias. p. 142. There was evidently a change of plans, since Bodega y Quadra learned of his promotion to commander during a visit to the capital in January 1781, but he returned to San Bias, finished the overhaul on the Favorita. and then conmanded the Santiago to Callao in 1781-83 before transferring to Cuba. See; Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra to Galvez, Mexico, Jan. 17, 1781, in AGI, Guadalajara. 497 (for his promotion), and "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN (for the voyage to Peru). 133 The overhaul of the Favorita is described in AGN, Marina. 44 and 47. Bodega y Quadra's efforts in this project are found in the following expediente: "Consults de Quadra sobre los motlvos que han retardado la carena de la Fragata Faborita, 1780," in Marina. 44. 258 Quadra first Indicated the problems which had delayed the vessel*8 completion. In a letter to Viceroy Martfn de Mayorga, the naval officer pointed out that San Bias offi cials had missed their completion date of September on account of numerous absences from the laboring force which was in turn attributable to a serious epidemic of dysentery and fever. Bodega y Quadra also mentioned another diffi culty: Spanish officials were not able to requisition the necessary supplies from the shipyard, since the department was out of a number of materials and another two months would be required to finish the vessel if they were able 134 to get the proper supplies and a normal working crew. In addition to the letter of explanation about the delays on the Favorita. Bodega y Quadra also forwarded to Viceroy Mayorga a certified statement from his master- builder, Francisco Segurola, concerning the unfinished work 135 on the frigate. Segurola's statement, dated Royal *"^Bodega y Quadra to Martfn de Mayorga, Tepic, Sept. 16, 1780, in AGN, Marina. 44. 155 "Noticias de las obras que faltan en la Fragata de SM nombrada la Faborlta para la conclusion de la carena que se le dio principlo el dia 16 de Abril de este presente ano y no se podran finalizar hasta Noviembre por la en- fermedad de la Maestranza y falta de caudales," in AGN, Marina. 44. Hereinafter cited as "Obras que faltan en la Faborlta ... ," in AGN, Marina. 44. 259 Arsenal of San Bias, September 9, 1780, Indicated the un finished assignments, including the following interior work: painting the storerooms, adding planks or strakes to several weakened areas in the lower hold of the ship, removing the mainmast and examining it for wear, and con structing a new launch and boat for the fraaata, using the same design as the old ones. For the outside work, Segurola's list indicated that most of the unfinished work consisted of replacing planks along the keel and on the gunwale plus installation of iron plating or shoes for the ship's rudder. From the master-builder's statement and the letter of Bodega y Quadra, it is evident that the delay in completing the Favorita was a combination of scarcity of manpower and lack of certain building materials. In connection with the Favorita's repair, it is interesting to point out that Bodega y Quadra's letter of September 16 also contained the statement that officials in the arsenal would not be able to comply with the viceroy's order for construction of a new vessel. ^36"obras que faltan en la Faborlta ... ," in AGN, Marina. 44. There were several instances when Francisco Segurola indicated the scarcity of iron. See below, pp. 260-61. concerning a purchase of supplies for the Favorita. 260 According to Bodega y Quadra, this assignment was impos sible to fulfill due to the requirement of finishing the Favorita. and it was very likely that the job would have 137 to be postponed indefinitely. Such was the state of affairs in the naval arsenal in September when the frigate was originally scheduled for completion. Six months after the correspondence of September 1780, the Favorita was still in the Port of San Bias. In March 1781, Francisco Trillo wrote to the viceroy informing him that there was still a considerable amount of work to be completed on the vessel, and in addition, the terminal 138 date for completion was set for May of that year. The comisario^ correspondence with his superior indicated that officials of the naval shipyard were awaiting a special shipment of goods with which to complete the Favorita. Unfortunately, the department did not stock some of these items, while the completion of the vessel could not be 137 The new vessel--noted by Commander Bodega y Quadra as the "new keel"— was originally ordered by Viceroy Martin de Mayorga on August 6, 1780, as cited by Bodega y Quadra, letter of Sept. 16, 1780, to the viceroy, in AGN, Marina. 44. 138 Francisco Trillo to Mayorga, San Bias, March 29, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 53. 261 accomplished without the entire shipment. This shipment, which was actually a purchase-contract with one of Guadala jara's merchants, included the following vital items: pesos 140 quintales 25 libras of assorted nails 5,750 25 quintales of steel 1,025 92 quintales 60 libras of the same item, above 3,241 1 chest with 309 glass panes (small) 231 1 chest with 178 of the same 178 2 chests of 118 glass panes (large) 177 10, 603139 The Favorita was eventually finished in May 1781, complete with new instruments and the assignments which Francisco Segurola had noted eight months earlier. 139 Francisco Trillo, enclosure with letter of March 29, 1781, to Viceroy Mayorga, entitled "Nota de los efectos comprados a Don Fernando Sorondo para las aten- ciones del servicio de este Departamento," in AGN, Marina. 53. English equivalents of these weights are: quintal-- 102 lbs, and libra--0.7 lbs; from J. Villasana Haggard, Handbook For Translators of Spanish Historical Documents. pp. 79, 83. ^^Francisco Trillo was partially responsible for completing the fraeata and, by letter of March 16, 1781, he ordered and later received the following instruments: 6 hour glasses (1/2 hour size) 10 hour glasses (1/2 minute size) 2 hour glasses (1/4 minute size) 2 brass binnacle stands. AGI, Marina, 52. 262 Juan de la Bodega y Quadra was actually busily engaged with another assignment by the time the Favorita was completely re-supplied and inventoried for her new voyage to Loreto, and consequently he was not available to sign the inventory and provision papers in May. Pilot Juan Pantoja was awarded command of the newly-outfitted frigate and took charge of the final arrangements for this voyage. Transition in the Department of San Bias During the Anglo-Spanish Conflict. 1779 to 1785 In 1779, the Spanish Court announced suspension of explorations from Mexico to the Northwest Coast and during the next six years, Spain engaged England in military com bat. Spanish military officers realized that ultimate victory in the Pacific area required a system of new defenses plus numerous augmentations of vessels in the Department of the Philippines— the most logical striking point from the English viewpoint. Historically, the com mercial aspects of Manila had been one of Spain's greatest ^^Conxnander Bodega y Quadra received orders to conxnand the older frigate Santiago from San Bias to Lima on an emergency run to obtain critical materials. 263 assets over a period of 150 years, but the Islands* mili tary facilities were inadequate for the proposed war. In order to strengthen their Pacific garrison, Spanish offi cials planned to reinforce Cavite and Manila and they proposed the following war measures: (1) to outfit and deploy supply vessels from San Bias to Manila, and (2) to support Pacific-area operations by dispatching troops, I/O supplies, and bullion from Mexico. The Naval Department of San Bias played an important role by fulfilling both of these missions. During the period 1779 to 1785, San Bias supply vessels completed four major voyages to Manila and in addition, two of the depart ment's vessels— the San Carlos and Principe— remained in the Philippines. Viceroy Martin de Mayorga appointed two of San Bias' leading naval officers to serve in Manila during the era of conflict: Bruno de Hezeta and Francisco Mourelle. ^^In 1762 Spain had suffered humiliation when English naval forces captured Manila during the Seven Years War (1754 to 1763). Spanish preparations of 1779 were designed to prevent this calamity from being repeated and to take advantage of the naval facilities of San Bias, Spain's largest base on the Pacific Coast. *^The appointment of Bruno Hezeta and Mourelle to deliver military provisions and bullion to Manila is 264 Viceroy Mayorga's preparations in Mexico were completed between 1780 and 1782. During this time, a completely new role for the Department of San Bias was formulated. In accordance with instructions from Madrid, the new viceroy decreed that annual supply deliveries from Mexico to Alta California had to be maintained, while at the same time, fiscal economy and personnel transfers in the naval department were authorized.Final recommenda tions for these changes were reported by capable civil and military officers in Mexico and also San Bias, with the result that the Naval Department of San Bias was reduced to a fraction of its previous strength. The first reaction to the declaration of war in the Naval Department of San Bias was to dispatch three major expeditions to Manila. In each of the subsequent voyages, the San Bias vessels ferried munitions, supplies, and bullion to Cavite--Spain*s major fortress--plus correspon dence for Spanish officials in Manila. Juan Manuel de cited in "Tercera exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de Califomias con la Princesa y Faborita ... M (331), MS in MN. ^^Order of Viceroy Mart£n Mayorga, dated Mexico, Jan. 14, 1780, in Hezeta and Hijosa, "Reglamento de Sueldos ... de este Departamento de San Bias," San Bias, Feb. 13, 1780, in AGN, Marina, 34. 265 Ayala commanded the department's first vessel to the Philippines; the San Carlos left San Bias on October 10, 145 1779. The voyage was a success and during the next year, Lieutenant Ayala received command of the Aranzazu in Manila and sailed back to San Bias in 1780.^^ This new vessel had been designated as the official replacement for the San Carlos, and the latter ship was never again used in the Naval Department of San Bias. Lieutenant of the Navy Diego Choquet was nominated as the second officer from San Bias to operate between Mexico and Manila in support of the supply reinforcements for the Pacific campaign. Choquet took command of the Principe which was also destined to remain in the naval department at Manila. The Principe sailed from San Bias on December 18, 1779, carrying dispatches, troops, and ^■*"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias” (127), MS in MN. The San Carlos and her sister ship, Principe, each carried 150,000 pesos in bullion for support of the war effort in Manila. 146,*Lista de los oficiales, Tripulacion y Guami- cion del Paquebot de S. M. nombrada Nuestra Senora del Aranzazu desde 1° de Julio de 1780," in Francisco Trillo to Martin Mayorga, Jan. 11, 1781, AGN, Marina. 52. The new vessel Aranzazu (205 T.) remained at San Bias and proved to be a dependable transport-exploring ship. 266 bullion.Throughout the voyage to Cavite, Diego Choquet had a continual argument with his two pilots-’ -Juan Agustln Echevarria and Cristoval Espinola-"concerning the best sailing route and the accuracy of their charts. Both pilots were of the opinion that Choquet was not a skilled navigator and that his sailing directions were causing them unnecessary delay.In connection with the requirement to transport troops and supplies to Manila, it is interest ing to note that at periodic intervals Diego Choquet exercised the troops in military evolutions, conducting Diego Choquet y Islas, "Viaje desde el Puerto de San Bias en el paquebot San Antonio alias El Principe mandaba por Teniente de Fragata Diego Choquet a las Islas Filipinas, 1779-1780," in Diario de Navegacion Entre America y Filipinas (577), MS in MN. The commanding officer certified that the Principe manned six cannon, carried a crew of fifty-two men and some 150,000 pesos in "hard coin," plus mail and official instructions. ^^Diego Choquet, "Viaje a las Is las Filipinas, 1779-1780," in Diario de Navegacion (577), MS in MN. The commanding officer, Choquet, had forgotten to obtain a complete set of charts and maps for the Trans pacific voyage and consequently was relying upon Cabrera Bueno (Pilot major with Sebastian Vizcaino) and very early navigational tracks. The pilot*s critical remarks are found in the following: Pilot Espinola to Captain Don Diego Choquet de Ysla, Feb. 11, 1780, in Diario de Navegacion (577), MS in MN. 267 149 frequent drills with cannon and small arms. The Princlpe arrived safely In the Philippines In March of 1780, and during the next year another replacement vessel was dispatched to the Naval Department of San Bias for permanent service.*-*® The final vessel sent from San Bias during the early phases of the war was the Prlncesa. commanded by Bruno de Hezeta, with pilot Francisco Mourelle as second officer. The viceroy had ordered the Prlncesa to transport a load of supplies to Manila in convoy with the filipinas "Viaje a las Islas Filipinas, 1779“1780," in Diario de Navegacion (577), MS in MN. Evidently the mili tary drills involved "all hands" and several times the crew "filled cartridges." ^^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS In MN. The new vessel, San Carlos--El Filipino (196 T.), sailed from Manila to San Diego and then to San Bias arriving in her new port Jan. 2, 1782, under com mand of the first class pilot, Juan Gonzalez. Diego Choquet finally returned to the Naval Depart ment of San Bias in 1785, remaining for a short time. By means of an official transfer, Choquet managed to return to Spain and by the year 1802 he had achieved flag officer rank in the Royal Navy--comnanding officer and Captain of the Naval Station at Ferrol. See: Almanak Nautico v Eatado General de Marina para el afio de 1786 (Madrid: Imprenta Royal, 1787), p. 9, and Estado General de la Real Armada. 1803. p. 9. 268 warship, the San Jose, but the plan was never completed.^ 1 On February 21, 1780, the two San Bias officers directed the three-year old frigate out of the harbor and southward to Acapulco for a prearranged rendezvous with the San Jose. The Manila galleon was never detached and on March 15 the Princesa sailed from Acapulco, bound for Manila, with a similar cargo as previous ships. Her journey to the Philippines was completed in August 1780. Since Captain Hezeta had become ill, Francisco Mourelle was nominated to conmand the Princesa during the return voyage to San 1S2 Bias. Mourelle employed a new pilot, a man who was eminently qualified to direct the frigate's course across the Pacific. This was the first-class pilot, Josef Antonio Vasques, who had directed the Consolacion or , f Buen Fin" 151 "Diario de la Navegacion de la Fragata Princesa al mando del Alferez de Fragata Francisco Maurelle ... en 1780 y 1781," in Diario de Navegacion (577), MS in MN. Francisco Mourelle was technically second in command (listed as First Pilot) while Bruno Hezeta was commanding officer of the Princesa. ^^Mourelle, "Diario de la Navegacion de la Prin cesa ... " (577), MS in MN and Navegacion hecha por el Alferez de Navio de la Real Armada y Comandante de la del Rey nombrada la Princesa ... afios 1780 y 1781 in AGI, Guadalajara. 521. across the Pacific Ocean in 1773.^^ 269 During the period of active military operations from San Bias to Manila (1779-1782), significant administrative changes were effected at the port. On January 14, 1780, Viceroy Martin de Mayorga issued the first major decree for curtailment of expenses in Mew Spain, especially at the Naval Department of San Bias. The viceroy's new regulation authorized numerous military transfers and, in addition, he revised salary schedules with over-all reduc tions, but with some individual increases. Assisting Mourelle and Pilot Vasquez brought the Princesa safely to anchor in San Bias on Sept. 27, 1781, after com pleting a thorough but difficult reconnaissance of several Important Pacific island groups. A recent authority on Spanish explorations, Dr. Donald C. Cutter, indicates the significance of the Mourelle explorations, namely: "His journals and maps of this expedition should rank him along with Captains Cook, Bougainville, Malaspina, and La Perouse in Pacific explorations," in California Historical Society Quarterly. XXXX:111. The Mourelle-Vasquez journal of the Princesa is "Diario de la navegacion hecha por Jose Vasquez, Primer Piloto desde Manila a Acapulco por la costa de Nueva Calicia y BretazSa en la Fragata 'Nuestra Senora del Rosario* (alias la Princesa) mandada por el Alferez de Fragata Don Francisco Antonio Maurelle, 1780," in (577), MS in MN. ^^Cited in Revilla Gigedo, Reg 1 amento provisional para el Departamento de San Bias, Mexico, Dec. 7, 1789, in Coleccion Guillen, VIII (1211), MS in MN. See also: Bruno Hezeta and Francisco de Hljosa, Reglamento de Sueldos ... de este Departamento de San Bias ... , San Bias, Feb. 13, 1780 in AGN, Marina. 34. 270 the viceroy in the latter project were capable ministers and officials at San Bias, including the following: Fran cisco Trillo and his military superior, Ignacio de Arteaga. From the Royal Hacienda in Mexico, Josef de Rada, Manuel Savinon, and Pedro de Cosio counseled Viceroy Mayorga on the reorganization of the Naval Department at San Blas.^'* Francisco Trillo was the first local administrator to comply with the viceroy1s order for economy. Trillo*s first recommendation was a lengthy report which indicated that certain measures for reducing operational expenses could profitably be enacted, while a small in crease in the number of minor officials at the contadur£a seemed appropriate. According to Comisario Trillo, depart mental expenditures could be reduced by a total of 34,000 pesos, especially at the expense of the "oficiales mayores" Apparently, Viceroy Mayorga appointed Pedro de Cosio to supervise the new project while other members previously cited were required to submit recommendations to the Real Hacienda. The MSS which describe this compre hensive scheme for reorganizing the Department of San Bias are in AGN, Marina. 34 and 44. ^■■^Francisco Trillo y Bermudez was first to carry out the viceroy’s reform program at San Bias; compare Trillo y Bermudez to Mayorga (two letters), Sept. 14, 1780, in AGN, Marina, 34. 271 and the employees of the shipyard. He reduced the former group, from a total of eighteen, to six members and further more, he diminished naval officers* salaries from coman- dante to lieutenant junior grade. In the naval shipyard, Comlsarlo Trillo suggested they decrease the operating force by seven members, but he increased the salary of the 157 remaining members. On December 6 , 1781, Francisco Trillo submitted a final resolution to the Royal Hacienda: (1) he reduced the number of employees, both military and civilian, at San Bias from 376 to 357, and (2) he authorized the Department of San Bias an annual budget of 127,687 pesos in contrast to a previous allowance of 161,726 pesos. A majority of the recommendations which Francisco Trillo presented in 1781 were viewed favorably by members of the Royal 158 Hacienda. Nevertheless, Viceroy Mayorga appointed 157TriHo y Bermudez to Mayorga, San Bias, Dec. 6, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 34. A majority of the comisario*s new appointments were augmentations for the administrative departments— especially noteworthy were his recommendations for new scribes and a bonded treasury official. 158 , Essentially, Trillo y Bermudez submitted three vital documents to Viceroy Mayorga concerning economy at San Bias: first, "Estado que manifiesta el total Importe de pagas de los Yndividuos que actualmente sirven S.M. en el Departamento de San Bias ... ," second, "Manifiesto del 272 the Royal Intendent of the Army at Mexico City, Pedro Antonio de Cosio, to formulate a similar reorganization plan. Pedro Antonio de Cosio drafted a "New Regulation for 159 the Department of San Bias" in 1782. This report recom mended consistent reductions in salaries for naval officers, pilots, and surgeons of San Bias, from the rank of coman- dante all the way to the bottom of the scale to teniente de navfo. Further, Cosio figured that the department would be able to operate with twenty-one major officials (in contrast to Trillo*s estimate of six), with a total salary decrease of 9,831 pesos. The Cosio reglamento in con clusive form indicated a savings of 23,000 pesos in favor gasto que erogaria la Real Hacienda en Pagar sueldos y gratificaciones a los individuos que se consideran in- dispensablemente necesarios ... ," and finally, "Relacion Jurado que Yo Don Francisco Trillo y Bermudez ... presento al Exmo. Senor Virrey de Nueva Espana Don Martin de Mayorga de todos los individuos empleados en el Real Servicio de dicho Puerto. ..." These documents are en closures to Trillo y Bermudez' letter to Mayorga, San Bias, March 28, 1782, in AGN, Marina, 34. ^^Nuevo Reglamento para el Departamento de Sn Bias formado de Orden de Su Magistad por el real Yntendente de ejercito, Dn. Pedro Antonio de Cossio, Mexico, Feb. 8, 1782, in AGN, Marina. 34. 273 160 of the Royal Treasury. In accordance with the efforts for economy, Viceroy Martin de Mayorga selected a portion of each recommendation and by 1783, the Naval Department of San Bias was operating with fewer personnel at reduced salaries.And, during the next three years, the enactment of these recommenda tions (1) constrained the department's previous six-year buildup in personnel and military activities, (2) pro hibited new maritime constructions, and (3) inevitably cost the Spanish empire a dear price in the race for Pacific 162 Coast supremacy. The military functions of the Naval Department of San Bias were greatly altered by the changes of 1783. 160 Among several specific allotments from the Royal Treasury, Pedro de Cosio recommended severe reductions for the Major Officials of the Royal Armada and for the three frigates (Santiago. Favorita. and Princesa), Nuevo Regla mento ... , Marina. 34. ■^Hlanuel Savinon to Pedro de Cossio, Mexico, April 26, 1782 and Josef de Rada, Real Ordenanzas para el Departamento de San Bias, Nov. 23, 1782, in AGN, Marina. 34. ^^Measures effecting savings to the Royal Treasury were valid from 1783 until 1787 while the salary regula tions of Hezeta and Hijosa were applicable for a period of six years; compare Revilla Gigedo, Reglamento provisional para el Departamento de San Bias, Mexico, Dec. 7, 1789, in Coleccion Guillen (1211), MS in MN. 274 One example Involved the assignment of a commandant in the absence of regular naval officers. Between 1778 and 1782, the Port of San Bias received a total of four commandants, including Ignacio de Arteaga, Bruno de Hezeta, Bodega y Quadra, and Francisco Mourelle. The most important candi date was Camacho, who served as "interim comandante" from 1 £1 1782 to 1785. For Camacho the problems of Philippine trade and transportation were small in comparison with the Alta California requirements. The demand for local, skilled vessel commanders and pilots had been thoroughly discussed in military circles, but the resulting cutbacks and losses in the Port of San Bias left Jose Camacho barely enough personnel to man two vessels a year, one each to 164 California and the Philippines. In the case of transferring naval personnel from the Department of San Bias, it is interesting that most of ■^^Jose Camacho to Conde Jose de Galvez, Tepic, July 26, 1786 and Camacho to Manuel Antonio Florez, San Bias, October 19, 1787, in AGN, Marina, 34. 164,rhe shortage of competent military personnel is a common theme among San Bias' outstanding naval leaders-- Estevan Jose Martfnez, Bodega y Quadra, Francisco Mourelle, and Commandant Jose Camacho; see AGN, Marina. 62. 275 the officers of the port remained until the final regla mento had been approved and issued by Martin de Mayorga in 1782. Bruno de Hezeta remained at San Bias until February 1782^ when he received command of the Philippine galleon, the San Jose, bound for Cavite with a cargo of munitions, 16S recruits, and soldiers. Ignacio de Arteaga had twice requested military retirement on account of his health-- being almost a broken man after the voyage of 1779--but he was still at San Bias in 1782.^^ Of the remaining officers, Fernando Quiros had been listed to accompany Bruno de Hezeta on the Princesa from Acapulco in 1780, but did not make the voyage, and was soon assigned duty in Havana. Diego Choquet and Juan Manuel de Ayala had gone to the Philippines and therefore remained away from San Bias during several of the war years. ^^Hezeta, "Estado del Nao San Jose ... " and "Diario de la Nao San Jose ... ," in AGN, Marina. 60. Bruno de Hezeta was finally transferred from San Bias to Havana in 1792. After some fifty-two battles in the naval service, he retired as Chief of Squadron but returned to active duty at Malaga, Spain serving until his death in 1807. See: Francisco de Paula Pavia, Galer£a Biografica. II, 478-81. Supra, p. 188, note no. 9. 167 Specific data on the transfers of Fernando Quiros and Diego Choquet are lacking by the author; biographical information and promotion of these officers and many other 276 Juan de la Bodega y Quadra was no exception to the rule of major personnel being transferred away from San Bias, but his compliance with the transfer orders is unique. After receiving notification of a promotion to Canitan de Frflpflta (full commander) on May 10, 1780, Bodega y Quadra 168 concurrently heard about his transfer to Havana. Fortu nately for the naval department, the viceroy issued special orders to Captain Bodega y Quadra for completing a major overhaul on the Favorita. Between 1780 and 1781, the experienced naval officer remained at San Bias in the capacity of director of repairs on the Favorita and by August of 1781, the vessel was completely overhauled for 169 service in the naval department. San Bias officers is found in Galer£a Bioerafica and in Estado General de la Real Armada. 1796 to 1808. 168 This promotion is cited in Bodega y Quadra to Jose de Galvez, Mexico, Jan. 17, 1781, in AGI, Guadalajara. 497. In this letter, Bodega y Quadra graciously thanked Minister Galvez for the recent promotion and he indicated receipt of new orders which directed him to Havana for naval service. ^^Bodega y Quadra to Mart£n de Mayorga, Tepic, April 9, 1780, AGN, Marina. 45; and to Mayorga, San Bias, Sept. 16, 1780, Marina. 44. The official inventory and packing list for the Favorita is Antonio Medina, Francisco Trillo y Bermudez, and Bodega y Quadra, '"ttnbentario del casco de la Fragata de S.M. Nombrado ... La Favorita que se ha carenado en Este Puerto y Rl. Arzenal de San Bias ... May 7, 1781, San Bias, AGN, Marina. 52. 277 Bodega y Quadra was called upon to complete a voyage from San Bias to Callao and thus he departed on June 5, 1781, on board the Santiago. In Peru, Bodega y Quadra learned that his required cargo of quicksilver for the return voyage was not available and in lieu of the original cargo, he loaded the Santiago with a shipment of cannon, artillery, and some iron which could be utilized in San Bias. On June 20, 1782, Bodega y Quadra anchored in the Port of San Bias, completing his last active commission for the department until 1789. It was also the last assignment for the frigate Santiago; naval officials at the port declared the vessel too unstable and it lay at the depart ment from 1782 until 1786 without completing another 171 voyage. Despite personnel transfers, wage reductions, and the departmental changes imposed by Viceroy Mayorga, ■^^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias” (127), MS in MN. See also: Mariano Nuflez de Esquivel and Bodega y Quadra, "Ymbentario de la Fragata de S.M. nombrado Santiago ... que sale despachada de este puerto con destino al de el Calleo de Lima," San Bias, June 4, 1781, in AGN, Marina. 47. 171 "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 278 Jose Camacho's most consistent activity at San Bias con cerned the outfitting of supply vessels to Alta California. In accordance with royal orders from Mexico, the department continued to dispatch the supply vessels and maintained a steady record of two vessels per year from San Bias to 172 California. The flow of goods to the upper province was changing in favor of manufactured articles which were always welcomed at the presidios and missions. More impor tant for the long-term development of San Bias were the experience and training acquired by the officers and pilots during the years 1781-1786. A tabulation of voyages from the Port of San Bias to Alta California for this half decade is included below. This list indicates the frequency of voyages and the vessels used. 172 Original authorization for the "two yearly vessels" was the Echeveste Reglamento. 1773, but Junipero Serra was probably most active in recommending and sup porting this policy. San Bias' "New Regulations" of 1783 indicate royal approval of Alta California supply voyages a continuation of the department's ten-year program. Com pare Josef de Rada, Real Ordenanzas para el Departamento de San Bias, Marina. 34, and Nuevo Reglamento para el Departamento de San Bias formado de Orden de Su Magistad por el Real Yntendente de ejercito, Dn. Pedro Antonio de Cossio, Marina. 34. 279 YEAR VESSEL 1781 Favorita 1782 Princesa Favorita Favorita Favorita Aranzazu 1785 Favorita Aranzazu 1786 Princesa Favorita Aranzazu COMMANDER Juan Pantoja Martinez Agustin de Echevarria 1783 San Carlos Martinez Juan B. Aguirre 1784 San Carlos Canizares Martinez Josef Tovar Jose Camacho Martinez Martinez Josef Tovar Pantoj a DESTINATION Loreto Alta California presidios Alta California presidios Port of San Francisco and Monterey Presidios of Santa Barbara Channel and San Diego Presidios of Santa Barbara Channel and San Diego San Francisco and Monterey Loreto Presidio of Santa Barbara and San Diego San Francisco and Monterey Port of Monterey and San Diego Port of Monterey and San Francisco Santa Barbara and San Diego173 Estevan Jose Martinez was the most active San Bias Commander in this era, while Juan Pantoja and Jose Canizares 173 Author*s tabulation from "Noticias del Departa mento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN and from MSS in AGN, Marina. 45, 47, and 52. 280 remained closely associated with supply operations along the Pacific Coast. During this era of Alta California voyages, Ensign Martfnez established himself as the most resourceful navigator of San Bias* pilotage corps and it seems very likely that his nomination for leadership during the expedition of 1788--the department's first major northern voyage in eight years--was partly attributable to this extensive service for the Naval Department of San Bias.174 Estevan Jose Martinez emerged from the period of wartime activities and transition to the forefront of northern explorations--1786 to 1792. The pilots listed on the previous page were successful and many of them eventu ally outranked Martinez, but the latter pilot had a per sonal connection and association with the new Viceroy, Manuel Antonio Florez. CHAPTER V THE ZENITH AND DECLINE OF THE NAVAL DEPARTMENT OF SAN BLAS, 1787 TO 1797 The Peace of 1785 between England and Spain marked the opening of a new era in Pacific Coast development for Spain: from 1786 to 1792 the Spaniards struggled desper ately to develop and maintain their coastal possessions (acquired during twenty-four years of exploration and possession-taking activities) and to establish claim to their newest possession at Nootka Sound. Beginning in 1788, Spain sent three major expeditions from San Bias to the Northwest Coasts. Estevan Jose Martinez initiated these new voyages of exploration for the Spanish Crown, the first in 1788, immediately followed by an identical expedition in 1789, in which Spanish forces garrisoned San Lorenzo de Nootka. Unfortunately, Captain Martinez* seizure of two English vessels in Nootka Sound brought about an international dispute and in 1792, Commandant 281 282 Juan de la Bodega y Quadra took charge of one final ex pedition to the northwest called the "Expedition of the Limits." After lengthy arbitration and discussion of the Nootka problem between England's George Vancouver and Spain's Bodega y Quadra, Spain conceded Great Britain equal rights at the Port of Nootka and along the Northwest Coasts. New Spain's preparations for the era of exploration in the second half of the 1780*s were marked by early frustrations and delay. In November 1786, Viceroy Bernardo de Galvez died in Mexico and immediate plans for launching a new expedition were postponed. Three years later, with the arrival of the new Viceroy, Conde de Revilla Gigedo, Spain managed to salvage the former prestige and organiza tion of the Naval Department of San Bias. Among the sig nificant accomplishments of this era (1789 to 1792) were the completion of new naval vessels; the successful occupa tion and fortification of San Lorenzo de Nootka; and the reorganization of the naval department after ten years of inadequate regulations and salary allowances. 283 The Martinez and Lopez de Haro Expedition of 1788 The single deciding factor which impelled the Spanish Crown to renew explorations in the Gulf of Alaska after seven years of inactivity was a French report con cerning Russian occupation and settlement of several islands along the Northwest Coasts. On February 24, 1786, the famous French explorer, Jean Francois de La Perouse, anchored in Bahfa de Concepcion de Chile and the French captain reported to his Spanish hosts about new Russian establishments along the Alaskan mainland and in the Gulf of Alaska.^ According to La Perouse's information, there were four permanent Russian settlements along the Northwest Coast in the following locations: first, at Nootka or Rey Guillermo, in 49°-30' N.; second, at Prfncipe de Guillermo, in 60° N.; third, at Isla de Trinidad, in 56°-30' N.; and finally, at Isla de Onalaska, in 54° N. latitude. The French report was based upon recent scientific reconnais sance and upon co-ordinated reports from London, all of ^"Viceroy Theodoro de Croix to Manuel Antonio Florez, Lima, Peru, May 5, 1786, in Archivo Historico Nacional, Estado, no. 4289, Madrid. Hereinafter this archive will be cited as AHN. 284 which left the Spaniards rather shocked. Previous to the arrival of La Perouse, the Spanish Court had relied upon the details supplied by Ignacio de Arteaga and Juan de la Bodega y Quadra during their expedition of 1779; according to their report, Spain had nothing to fear from the Russians since the explorers of 1779 had investigated the northern coasts all the way up to the Gulf of Alaska. While more recent information on Russian movements had been announced by Captain Cook's third expedition, Spanish officials in Mexico were not greatly distressed. The catalytic effect of the La Perouse announcement in Chile motivated both the viceroy of New Spain and the Spanish King to take inme- diate action. On January 25, 1787, Carlos III issued formal orders to the viceroy of Mexico for exploration of the Pacific r \ Viceroy Manuel Antonio Florez maintained that the "Russian establishments were sufficiently distant from those of ours," and that English reports from the third expedition of Captain Cook had verified this knowledge in 1780. "Extracto de los noticias ... de los Diarios de las Expediciones hechos sobre la Costa NO de America ... " (575 bis), MS in MN. 285 3 Coast north of Monterey. The King’s order to Bernardo de Galvez, the new viceroy, required him to explore the specific sites listed by Comte de La Perouse. He was authorized to use the finest vessels of his kingdom and the most experienced personnel. Unfortunately for Spanish success, these orders were not immediately executed in Mexico because of the viceroy’s death,^ but in August 1787, Viceroy Manuel Antonio Florez took office and preparations were initiated for the new expedition.^ Meanwhile, a Spanish naval officer who had just completed a reconnaissance of the Northwest Coast chanced to be in Monterey Bay during the brief visit of Comte de La Perouse in 1786. During the month of September, Ensign 3 / Copy, Letter of Manuel Antonio Florez, El Pardo, Jan. 25, 1787, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. See also: extracts concerning the new explorations, "1788— Quarto Exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de Califomias ... ” (331), MS in MN. ^Cayetano Alcazar Molina, Los Virreinatos En el Siglo XVIII. tomo XIII of Histori'a de America v de los Pueblos Americanos. 126. Bernardo de Galvez died in November 1786 and during the interim term of six months the Archbishop of Mexico administered affairs for New Spain. ^Manuel Antonio Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Oct. 27, 1787, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1514. 286 Estevan Jose Martinez was anchored at Monterey— acting as commanding officer of the two regular supply vessels from San Bias, Favorita and Princes a ~-when Captain La Perouse put into that California port for supplies and a short rest.** The visit of the French Expedition to Alta Cali fornia provided Spanish officials of Mexico with more specific details about the Russians (that is, their loca tion and strength, and future plans), and for Martinez, it was an opportunity to receive first-hand news on this topic. The San Bias supply ships returned to their home port on separate tracks and Estevan Martinez reported the Monterey incident directly to the viceroy and to the Minister of the Indies, Jose de Galvez. Stirred to action, Viceroy Manuel Antonio Florez commenced preparations for the Spanish Expedition during ^Pedro Fages to Conde de Galvez, Monterey, Sept. 28, 1786, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. According to "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), Martinez commanded the Princesa and Jose Tovar was captain of the Favorita. ^Martinez to Marques de Sonora, aboard the Princesa. San Bias Harbor, Dec. 28, 1786, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The Spanish commander reported a cordial visit with La Perouse and recalled helping the French load water, wood, and grass. 287 the simmer of 1787, but there were delays and shortages both in the capital and at San Bias. The scarcity of vessels and a lack of sufficient officers at the naval department was a serious disadvantage. Among the regular members of the naval department— including Francisco Mourelle, Jose Canizares, Estevan Jose Mart£nez, and Juan Pantoja— the viceroy finally selected Jose Camacho, the Q senior officer, as commander of the expedition. On October 20, 1787, Viceroy Florez drafted official instructions to Lieutenant Camacho and to his second officer, Francisco Mourelle. The comandante was directed to lead the expedition with the new frigate Concepcion (expected from its home port and construction site of Realejo, Nicaragua) while Ensign Mourelle was given com mand of the Peruvian frigate, Favorita. Enclosing a host of instructions and precautions, the viceroy issued ^tanuel Antonio Florez, "Ynstruccion que deben observer el Teniente de Fragata, Dn. Josef Camacho, Comandante de la Fragata la Concepcion y de la explora- cion de descubrimentos, y el Alferez de Navio, Dn. Fran cisco Antonio Mourelle, Comandante de la Fragata Fabo- rita," Mexico, Oct. 20, 1787 (331), MS in MN. Hereinafter cited as "Ynstruccion que deben observer Dn. Josef Camacho ... " (331), MS in MN. 288 g twenty-three articles for the officer*s guidance. In addition to the usual exhortations toward winning the friendship of the native inhabitants and honoring note worthy chieftains, Viceroy Florez offered an alternate plan for ship assignments as follows: Lieutenant Camacho was first ordered to use the Concepcion, but if that vessel did not arrive in time for normal preparations, then he would be obliged to take the Princesa. Ensign Mourelle was directed to command the San Carlos if the Favorita was not back in time from its normal supply voyage to Alta Cali fornia. In sumnary, the viceroy ordered both captains to supply their vessels for a fifteen months* voyage and they were especially warned about carrying adequate quantities of fresh provisions, medicine, and water. Manuel Antonio Florez* Instruction of October 20 was carefully worded to provide the officers with contingent information about numerous circumstances which might be encountered. Florez ordered Commandant Camacho to follow ^Francisco Mourelle was actually unavailable for service, being in Manila, and Estevan Jose Martfnez was supposed to return to Spain. Jose de Galvez had received letters from Martfnez* wife on this matter. 289 the traditional Spanish method of reconnoitering the northern coasts--i.e., to ascend to the highest northern latitude (61° N. latitude), and then to turn south--and finally, he directed the two officers to search out sus pected locations of Russian settlements. Additional in formation sent to the San Bias officers included numerous graphic materials from previous Spanish expeditions and formularies for possession-taking. The viceroy was con cerned about preserving the crewmen's health and ordered both Camacho and Mourelle to carry warm clothing for use in the northern climes and to observe special instructions for preventing scurvy. For these latter preparations, Viceroy Florez ranks as a more modem and thorough planner than former administrators, owing perhaps to his earlier career as an active naval officer. Final preparations for the expedition were completed by the viceroy on November 27, 1787, when he sent official passports to Jose Camacho and Francisco Mourelle, plus the remaining documents, charts, and maps.^ Surprisingly ^Florez, "Ynstruccion que deben observer l>n. Josef Camacho ... , f (331), MS in MN. ^"^Manuel Antonio Florez to Jose Camacho, Nov. 27, 1787, Mexico, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. The Spanish were evidently trying new methods for 290 enough, Jose Camacho wrote to his superior and indicated that he was indisposed and could not command the new 12 expedition. After his last sea-duty assignment in 1785, from San Bias to San Diego in the Favorita. Camacho com plained of frequent sickness; his formal letter dated November 29 was the petition of a broken officer. Alternative choices for using personnel and vessels in the Expedition of 1788 were radically changed in Decem ber 1787. Francisco Mourelle, who had commanded the goleta Felicidad on a normal supply run to Manila in 1785, remained absent from the Department of San Bias until 13 January 1790. The viceroy had suggested earlier, on the prevention of scurvy and the viceroy told about Captain Cook's successes during his third voyage. Precautions listed for Camacho included: (a) To air periodically all the crews' bedding, blankets, clothes, and trunks whenever there was an opportunity for good exposure to the sun; (b) To clean thoroughly the 'tween decks with soap, vinegar, and water; (c) To open the hatches and allow clean, fresh air to circulate below decks after the cleaning process; and (d) To conserve vinegar as much as possible since it was more expensive and was also used for preservation of meats. ^^Manuel Antonio Florez to Jose Camacho, Mexico, Nov. 27, 1787, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. ^Cited in Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 22, 1787, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1514. 291 November 14, 1787, that the first-class pilot, Estevan Jose Martinez, substitute for Mourelle in the event of the latter officer's absence. Finally, after the receipt of Jose Camacho's letter, Manuel Florez appointed Ensign Martinez as Commander of the expedition. On December 18, 1787, Viceroy Florez directed Martinez to take the frigate Princesa while the new captain for the second ship, Gonzalo Lopez de Haro, would serve as second officer in the packet T / San Carlos. These plans remained firm since the Con cepcion failed to arrive in time and it was necessary to rely upon the older Philippine vessel, the San Carlos. The change of events was even more advantageous for Estevan Jose Martinez because he received the promotion for which he had petitioned— Alferez de Navio. or the equivalent of 15 Lieutenant, junior grade. ^Relacion de los Meritos y Servicios del Capitan de Navio Dn. Francisco Mourelle ... , MN, MS 999. It is quite possible that there was mild collusion between Viceroy Florez and Estevan Jose Martinez, which, in this case worked to the advantage of Martinez, since he was destined to receive command of the Princesa. Professor Donald C. Cutter has held this view and likewise Lieutenant Roberto Barreiro-Meiro of the Museum Staff, Museo Naval. Manuel Florez held a commission in the Departamento de Marina and retired Capitan de Fragata. December 1800. See: Oficiales Ferrol, 1790-1808, MN, no. 1250. ^Meritos y Servicios del Alferez de Fragata Dn. Estevan Joseph Martinez, Mexico, Dec. 22, 1787, in letter of Manuel Florez to Antonio Valdes, AGI, Mexico. no. 1514. 292 Between June and December 1787, preparations for the new expedition were undertaken in the Department of San Blas.^ At the department, Francisco Hijosa and Jose Camacho worked together in arranging the necessary sup plies, while in Mexico officials of the Real Hacienda extended the department letters of credit for purchasing food and supplies. The comisario and comandante had first requested 100,000 pesos for this expedition, but one of the officers of the Real Hacienda. Jose Fernando Mangino, pointed out that the Naval Department of San Bias had spent 200,000 pesos in the period from December 1786 until June 1787, and there was not enough money to cover their origi nal request. The Real Hacienda finally granted the naval station 30,000 pesos, at which time both Francisco Hijosa and Jose Camacho started ordering supplies from neighboring 17 towns. By date of June 25, 1787, Hijosa and Camacho Ano de 1781--Testimonio de las Nuevas Explora- ciones por San Bias a la California para aberiguer si hay Establicimentos Rusos, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. Herein after cited as Nuevas Exploraciones ... a California ... , AHN, Estado. no. 4289. ^Letter of Joseph Fernando Mangino to Junta Superior de Real Hacienda. Mexico, July 30, 1781, in Nuevas Exploraciones ... a California ... , AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 293 reported the department’s requirements for fresh provisions and other foodstuffs based upon the packing lists of 1778. 18 This "shipment request" contains precise detail regarding the allotment of fresh provisions and rations-- including daily allowances for meat, beans, rice, fish, cheese, vegetables, lard, bacon, and bread, plus liquid refreshment consisting of water and wine-“and there is an important distinction noted for the dinner meal in contrast to allowances for daily consumption. The problems of preservation and storage can be deduced from informative packing lists like the Hijosa-Camacho request of June 1787, while Spanish administration of the Naval Department of San Bias appears more efficient in the light of this docu ment. Additional supplies which were collected from Valla dolid (present-day Morelia), Guadalajara, and Toluca in cluded medicines, clothing, and sailcloth. The comisario 18 The original packing list of 1778 is cited as follows: Estado y Reg1amento de Rancho que por la Comi- saria de San Bias se ha formado a lo dispuesto por el Superior Goviemo en orden de diez y siete de Septiembre de mil setecientos setenta y ocho para la navegacion que se deve executar al norte de California ... in Nuevas Exploraciones ... a California ... , AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 294 even requested an additional shipment of copper (used for casting sea-anchors and kedge-anchors), since the first allotment "was already used up in the manufacture of 19 anchors for the new expedition." Remarkably enough, the new request from Francisco Hijosa established the naval department * s need for copper at 200 quintales in comparison to the original allowance of 100 quintales. The list of medicines included mineral water, herbs, powdered com pounds, tinctures, balsams, roots, and assorted pills, plus a well-stocked surgeon's chest. The final loading report for the expedition indi cates that the Princesa carried a crew of eighty-nine, including the following officials: Josef Lopez and Josef Diaz, chaplains; Antonio Serrantes and Estevan Mondoffa, pilots; Antonio Palacios, pilot's mate; and Diego Muhiz, ^Francisco Hijosa and Joseph Camacho to Don Alonzo Nunez de Haro y Peralta, San Bias, June 26, 1787, in Nuevas Exploraciones ... a California ... , in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. Comisario Hijosa pointed out that beneficial ser vices at San Bias were extended to other ships, especially the Manila vessels (the San Andres had been only recently repaired in San Bias) and those from Realejo. ^Hijosa and Camacho to NufLez de Haro y Peralta, San Bias, June 25, 1787, in Nuevas Exploraciones ... a California ... , in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 295 21 surgeon. On board the consort vessel, San Carlos, Captain Lopez de Haro carried eighty-three crewmen plus the following ship's officers: Nicolas Loera, chaplain; Josef Marfa Narvaez and Juan Zayas, pilots, and Josef Verdia, 22 pilot's mate. Both ships carried a good supply of water--117 pjpas de agua for the San Carlos and 135 for the Princesa--while it is noteworthy that the flagship (and probably the consort, too) was loaded with four barrels of lime juice and water for the prevention of scurvy. The two vessels sailed from San Bias on March 8, 1788, and launched Spain's first major expedition dur- 23 ing the closing era of Pacific Coast exploration. 21 Estado en que sale a navegar la Fragata del Rey la Princesa del Puerto de San Bias a los descubrimientos de la Costa Septentrional de California, 1788, MN, MS 331. Hereinafter cited as Estado en que sale a navegar ... La Princesa ... , 1788, MN, MS 331. 22 Estado en que sale a navegar el Paquebot San Carlos, mandada por el Primer Piloto Don Gonzalo de Aro del Puerto de San Bias a los descubrimientos de la Costa Septentrional de California, 1788, MN, MS 331. Hereinafter cited as Estado en que sale a navegar el Paquebot San Carlos ... 1788, MN, MS 331. 23 Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa mandada por el Alferez de Navio D. Estevan Martinez y el Paquebot San Carlos, mandada por el primer piloto D. Gonzalo Lopez de Aro ... , 1788, in MN, MS 331. Hereinafter cited as Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa ... y el Paquebot San Carlos ... , 1788, in MN, MS 331. 296 On April 24, 1788, Viceroy Florez informed Minister Valdes of the expedition’s departure, noting that the Naval Department of San Bias was still in need of a Capitan de Fragata as commandant plus new surgeons and chaplains. The viceroy's request for new personnel was actually a familiar one for the failing Department of San Bias and his letter of April 1788 was just as urgent as the earlier supplica- 24 tions. Estevan Jose Martinez and Gonzalo Lopez de Haro completed their assignments to the Northwest Coast in excellent fashion, finally returning to the naval depart ment in December and October of 1788. During their eight months' voyage, the Spanish officers encountered the same hardships as previous naval mariners from San Bias, but they were better equipped to maintain their crews' health and they were not plagued by scurvy and sickness. In accordance with the viceroy's instructions, the officers carefully examined the locations where Russian settlements ^Manuel Antonio Florez to Antonio Valdes, cited in ”1788--Quarto Exploracion de la Costa Septentrional de Califomias ... ," MN, MS 331. Earlier requests by Viceroy Florez were dated Mexico, Oct. 27 and Dec. 22, 1787; in AGI, Mexico, no. 1514. 297 had been suspected. The Spanish officers made their first landfall in Ensenada de Principe Guillermo and even though they found evidence of a European-built storehouse (in unfinished form), there were no signs of Russian traders 25 or settlers. The second major reconnaissance occurred at Isla de Trinidad during late June and early July of 1788. On June 30, the Princesa anchored at Isla de Trinidad (56°-44' N.) and the officers performed an official act of 26 possession. At this location, the Spaniards encountered a number of natives who were much poorer and more shabbily dressed than the Indians of Principe Guillermo. During 25 Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa ... y el Paquebot San Carlos ... , 1788 in MN, MS 331. The launch of the San Carlos discovered the foreign built shelter on June 10. 26 Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa ... y el Paquebot San Carlos ... , 1788 in MN, MS 331. These acts of possession and associated explora tions are typical of Spanish thoroughness in making known the coastal territory from Juan de Fuca Straits to the Gulf of Alaska. Among the most permanent and significant contributions of the Naval Department of San Bias are geographical nomenclature and nautical charts. These contributions involve an entirely separate theme and con sequently, in this study, the author will only indicate several notable examples of Spanish cartography and place- naming along the Northwest Coasts. 298 their coastal explorations of the first two major areas, the Spanish officers followed the traditional custom of naming prominent geographic locations after naval leaders or important administrators, and consequently, the follow ing titles appeared on their maps: Ensenada de Florez (60°-7' N.), Puerto de Florez (approximately the same lati tude), Isla de Hijosa (59°-30' N.), and Punta Florida Blanca (61°-N. latitude).^ The formal acts of possession were compiled in a separate report by Alferez de Navio Estevan Jose Martinez. He submitted to Viceroy Florez a list of six major geo graphical locations which the expedition of 1788 claimed for the Spanish Crown, including the following: 1. Isla de Montague— May 25; 2. Puerto de Florez— June 1; 3. Isla de San Juan Crisostomo--June 30; 4. Cabo de Florida Blanca--July 3; 5. Ensenada de Bodquin--July 21; and 6. Puerto de la Princesa de Asturias--August 5. 27 Henry R. Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest Coasts, 11:87. See also: "Cartas y Pianos" in the Museo Naval for specific charts made by Martinez and Gonzalo Lopez de Haro. 28 Seis Escritas de Posesion tornado por el primer Piloto y Alferez de Navio graduado Don Estevan Jose Martinez, Comandante de la Fragata Princesa en las nuevas descubrimientos hechos en el affo de 1788, AHN, Estado. no. 4289. Hereinafter cited as Escritas de Posesion por ... Estevan Jose Martinez ... , AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 299 These locations turned out to be of minor importance to the Spaniards in comparison with the Port of Nootka; neverthe less it was essential that they investigate Russian strength in the northwest and once again they increased Spanish knowledge of the continental coasts and the Gulf of Alaska. During the months of July and August, Captain Martfnez discovered proof of Russian settlements on Trini dad Island, Alaska. Spanish officers and crew members of the Princesa had anchored at Isla de Trinidad for a pro longed visit; they soon encountered a permanent Russian settlement on the island and, in addition, Martfnez described in his log numerous Russian houses, buildings, and warehouses which were intended to facilitate fur 29 trading. Much to the surprise of the officers and crew of the Princesa. a Russian pilot was one of the first to greet the Spanish explorers at the settlement of Trinidad, and, after verbal exchanges, they learned that the Russians 29 ^Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa ... y el Paquebot San Carlos ... , 1788 in MN, MS 331. 300 30 had been in that area for nine years. According to the Russian Pilot, many of the Indians had been baptized as Christians and they were employed to hunt fur-bearing animals, bringing in skins to the Russians. Captain Lopez de Haro also discovered evidence of Russian traders while he was engaged in independent operations with the San Carlos. During June 28 and June 29, he sailed in a southeasterly direction and finally anchored two miles south of Cabo de Dos Puntos. At Cabo de Dos Puntos, the Russian headquarters on Kodiak Island, Captain Lopez de Haro anchored and remained for several weeks. The crew members of the San Carlos first encoun tered signs of Russian occupation south of Dos Puntos and the Indians supplied specific details and further proof of Russian establishments ashore. Captain Lopez de Haro noted further Russian influence in the native dress: the Indians wore blue shirts and shoes and stockings of A Martinez to Antonio Valdes, Port of San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The second pilot of the Commandant’s vessel, Estevan Mondofla, spoke and understood some Russian and thus the Spaniards were able to converse with the Europeans. 301 European manufacture.^*" During the month of July there were lively trading sessions between the Indians and the Spaniards, and it was at Cabo de Dos Puntos that Captain Lopez de Haro met his 32 Greek namesake, the Russian Commander, "Captain Aro." Verbal exchanges, abundant goodwill, and numerous gifts accompanied the encounter of the Spanish and Russian coia- manders. The correspondence and reports of Lopez de Haro and Martinez indicate that the Russians were extremely cordial--tendering Captain Martinez a personal gift of 1,500 barreled salmon plus abundant supplies of fish for 33 the crews of both vessels. Hispanic-Russian relations Letter of Gonzalo Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Oct. 28, 1788, in AHJL Estado. no. 4289. During the period when Lopez de Haro operated inde pendently, he sailed southward from Montague Island, close to the eastern coast of Kodiak Island, and finally he brought the San Carlos to anchor at Cabo de Dos Puntos— the site of the Russian colony of Three Rivers. A modem place-name for Dos Puntos and Three Rivers seems to be Two-Headed Island, on the southern extremity of Kodiak Island, ca. 56° 40* N. latitude. ^Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa ... y el Paquebot San Carlos ... , 1788 in MN, MS 331. The Russian Commander "Aro” was better known as Eustrate Delarof-- factor of the trading post. "^Estevan Jose Martinez to Viceroy Florez, Port of San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 302 were further improved when the two commandants exchanged dining courtesies, both at the Russian establishment and aboard the San Carlos between June 29 and July 1. Spanish prestige was improved when Captain Lopez de Haro sent his launch ashore with chocolate, fine wine, and aguardiente as a present to the Russian Commandant. And finally, the Russian invitation and goodwill offer for removing the sick crew members of the Princesa and the San Carlos to the encampment at Dos Puntos was warmly accepted by Spanish officials.^ Perhaps the most significant information which Spanish officers received during the expedition of 1788 concerned the "race to Nootka." For the first time, the Spaniards heard of Russian plans to occupy the historic Port of Nootka and there were additional reports concerning Russian settlements, inhabitants, and military strength. Captain Aro seemed unconcerned about the disclosure of * \ / Both Spanish commanders described the generous treatment they received from the Russians at Kodiak Island including exchanges of gifts and treatment for sick per sonnel. Commander Martinez wrote Viceroy Florez about this cordiality, indicating: "It was assured among all that Spain and Russia were one and the same thing." See: Report of Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez and Estevan Jose Martinez to Florez in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 303 Russian plans for the settlement and garrison of Nootka, indicating that this site along the southern fringes of the continent would probably give Russia a lucrative commercial headquarters on the mainland. The Russian Commandant out lined his proposed plans to Captain Lopez de Haro as fol- 35 lows: the Russians at Cabo de Dos Puntos were awaiting the arrival of two medium-sized frigates from Kamchatka (due to arrive in 1789 with personnel reinforcements), and with this new force, they proposed to establish a new settlement at Nootka Sound. Russian supply ships sailed periodically from Kamchatka to the Alaskan Gulf every three or four years, but the next arrival, scheduled to be one of the largest, was for the purpose of placing Russian commercial interests in the heart of English territory. ° The captain of the San Carlos learned from Captain Aro about Russia's earliest entry and settlement at Cabo de Dos Puntos, commencing January 1, 1784. Lopez de Haro also reported that some 462 Russians occupied the Alaskan Gulf ■^Report of Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 304 according to the following distribution: 1. Isla de Montague 60 Russians and 2 galeotas: 2. Cabo Glizabet 40 Russians; 3. Cabo de Rada 37 Russians; 4. Canal de Florez 40 Russians and a large galeota with 70 crewmen; 5. Cabo Olavide 55 Russians and 1 galeota; and 6. Isla de Trinidad 120 Russians and 2 galeotas3' Martfnez reported that there were a total of 500 Russians throughout Isla de Onalaska. However, the former report concerning Russian strength in the Alaskan Gulf is pre ferred to this, on the basis of Gonzalo Lopez de Haro's more intimate contact with the Russians at Cabo de Dos n. . 38 Puntos. During the return trip from the Gulf of Alaska to Alta California, the San Carlos became separated from Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. MartInez to Viceroy Florez, Port of San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. Commander Martfnez also reported the presence of Russian schooners (he indicated 6 small galeotas, measuring 53 to 58 feet length over-all) which carried small cannon and scatterguns. 305 the Princesa between August 21 and 23, and after fruitless searching, Captain Lopez de Haro decided to head directly 3Q for California. This course of action was in strict obedience of Martinez' orders (issued at Trinidad Island), and the San Carlos first sighted land (Vancouver Island) at 50° N. latitude. During an official junta of Septem ber 9, the San Carlos' officers unanimously concurred with Lopez de Haro's decision to return to Monterey and the plan was executed without mishap. When the San Carlos finally reached the latitude of San Francisco Bay--obscured by rain and fog--Captain Lopez de Haro was unwilling to risk the 40 vessel and crew members by attempting to anchor. The San Carlos pursued a southern track and on October 22, 1787, anchored in San Bias harbor. Martinez also searched for his Spanish comrades, cruising close to Onalaska until August 23. Like Captain 3Q , / Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Oct. 28, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. The original difficulty which caused Lopez de Haro to lose sight of the flagship Princesa was a severe storm on the night of August 21-22 at Trinidad Island. ^Lopez de Haro reported to Viceroy Florez that his approach to San Francisco Bay was obscured by rain and fog and, in view of the dangers involved, he said that it was much safer to avoid this port and sail directly for San Bias. 306 Lopez de Haro, Mart£nez became apprehensive over the "hastening" season and he headed south for Monterey where he expected to unite with the San Carlos. The Princesa made good time in its track to Alta California, finally anchoring on September 17, 1788.^ In Monterey, Martfnez planned to await the arrival of the consort ship while giving his own crew a rest; the commanding officer's work included completion of the diaries and charts. After a month of leisurely activity, Estevan Jose Mart£nez agreed to fulfill a special mission for Governor Pedro Fages and on October 16, the Spanish naval officer sailed for Santa Barbara to transport a load of lumber back to Monterey.^ Just two days out of port, the Princesa encountered a heavy storm, but managed to reach the roadstead of Santa Barbara on October 21 without damage. Between October 21 and October 30, Mart£nez remained anchored and took on board the lumber which Fages had requested and then returned ^Hlart£nez to Viceroy Florez, Port of San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. ^^Mart£nez to Florez, San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788. Commander Mart£nez explained that Governor Fages was plan ning to utilize the lumber for "necessary fortifications for the Presidio of Monterey." 307 to Monterey in early November. The San Carlos had been unreported during the captain's absence and after a final two-days provisioning at Monterey, Martinez sailed for San Bias on the fourteenth of November. The conclusion of the MartInez-Lopez de Haro Expedition occurred when the Princesa cast anchor in the Port of San Bias on Decem- / 1 ber 5-~a month and one-half after the San Carlos' arrival. The Martinez and Lopez de Haro Expedition of 1789 After receiving the report of Captain Gonzalo Lopez de Haro, dated October 28, 1788, Viceroy Florez immediately planned to send another expedition to occupy and defend the Port of Nootka. Since time was an important factor in the scheme of Spanish plans, Viceroy Florez decided not to await the arrival of Captain Estevan Jose Martinez and on November 26 he announced his proposition for the new expedition to Minister of Marine Valdes.^ The viceroy's letter to Antonio Valdes outlined the internal problems ^Diario que llevaran la Fragata Princesa ... y el Paquebot San Carlos ... , 1788 in MN, MS 331. ^Letter of Nov. 26, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 308 which were hindering Spanish occupation of Nootka and Florez strongly proposed an expansion of the Naval Depart ment of San Bias. According to the viceroy's reasoning, large expenditures for outfitting new expeditions to the northwest would be wasted if the Spanish Naval Base at San Bias were captured or if it were unable to operate effec tively through lack of personnel. One of the perennial problems at the naval base was the shortage of skilled pilots and line officers for command at sea, and it was a sad commentary that Comandante de Marina Jose Camacho was too feeble to serve on board naval vessels. Among the remaining experienced officers, only Lieutenant Estevan Jose Martinez and pilots Jose Canizares and Gonzalo Lopez de Haro were available for immediate service. According to Viceroy Florez* letter of November 24, the expedition of 1788 was a complete success and Spanish ^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Nov. 26, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The viceroy pointed out that "Jose Camacho is a graduate pilot official of the Royal Navy but because of his age and his sickness he is unable to complete a single voyage." Manuel Florez lauded Estevan Jose Martinez as "the only person residing in San Bias whom it seemed was forceful enough to be entrusted with the command of the last voyage of exploration." 309 officials in Mexico prided themselves on the nearly-perfect health of both vessels' crews. Captain Lopez de Haro reported only one death during the nine-month voyage and 46 there was no sign of scurvy. The conquest of scurvy was a singular triumph since the Spaniards had long considered this disease a "bad omen" among mariners, judging it to be the result of long exposure to foggy, rainy weather.^ The last significant item which the viceroy reported to the Naval Minister concerned his displeasure regarding Captain Lopez de Haro's lack of compliance with orders. Viceroy Florez pointed out to his superior that Captain Lopez de Haro had violated two superior regulations; viz., he failed to sail along the coast during the return trip to Monterey and thus neglected the mandate to explore these coastal sites and, especially, the Entrada de Nootka; and second, he disobeyed Martinez' instructions for reuniting in Monterey Bay after their separation.There was also ^Letter of Manuel Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. ^The careful preparations, including special clothing and vise of the preventative of lime juice were apparently successful in combating scurvy. ^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Nov. 26, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The viceroy was cynical about the so-called danger of "grounding a vessel whose draft was only 14 feet." 310 an indication from Viceroy Florez that Martinez had proba bly overstepped the boundary of his office by inflicting unwarranted punishment on several crew members. According to Viceroy Florez, this incident was destined for further investigation by the Commandant of San Bias and the viceroy dismissed Captain Lopez de Haro's report of the affair as 49 improbable. Viceroy Florez announced plans for a new expedition to Minister Valdes on December 23, 1788, and Florez re ported his intentions of using identical ships and cap tains. The viceroy's long-range plans required the Port of San Bias to outfit the San Carlos and Princesa for a new expedition and then he ordered naval officials to prepare the Philippine vessel, Aranzazu, for a special supply run to Monterey. The Aranzazu was expected to carry enough Official report on the case of two pilots, Antonio Serrantes and Josef Marla Narvaez, was included in letter of Lopez de Haro to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Oct. 28, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. The petition of Narvaez was particularly poignant in attacking Commander Martinez' conduct; one accusation stated that Martinez sat on Pilot Narvaez. The present writer believes that Viceroy Florez' hasty dismissal of these charges--the "investigation" was held for official reasons entirely--again supports the theory that Martinez and Manuel Florez were more than casual acquaintances; rather, blood relatives. 311 extra provisions to continue to Nootka in order to sustain the new Spanish garrison in the northwest. One of San Bias' most veteran officers received command of the Aranzazu--Alferez de Navio Jose Canizares ~-and the viceroy specifically left Comandante Jose Camacho at San Bias for administration of these efforts.^ One of the more difficult problems which Viceroy Florez was unable to solve was the shortage of vessels in the Department of San Bias. The viceroy's earlier requests of 1787 and 1788 for a larger fleet had been largely ig nored (with the exception of the Concepcion built in Realejo), but in view of the urgency of new operations for occupying Nootka and the requirement for supplying Alta California, Manuel Florez reiterated the scarcity of ships to the Spanish Court. ^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 23, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. ^^Much of the incentive for rebuilding San Bias and for sending another expedition to occupy Nootka Sound should be credited to Estevan Jose Martinez; his Report to Viceroy Florez was very forceful. See: Martinez to Florez, San Bias, Dec. 5, 1788, In AHN, Estado, no. 4289. Request for new vessels Is: Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 23, 1788, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 312 Active vessels In the Department of San Bias in cluded the Princesa and Favorita plus the foreign-built ships from Manila, San Carlos and Aranzazu. The Santiago had been in continuous service from the date of its com missioning in 1773 and the vessel's last voyage was regis- 52 tered in 1783. Perhaps, among some of the small craft used in the 1770's, there were still several launches operating from San Bias to Loreto, but no other ships-of- the-line were available in Nueva Espana's western fleet. Another remarkable episode during the term of Viceroy Manuel Florez was the arrival of the Concepcion in January 1788. After a normal period of construction in Realejo, Nicaragua, this new frigate was turned over to Pilot Juan Pantoja who delivered the ship to San Bias. The "excellence of the woods" which Matfas de Galvez had boasted about proved to be an exaggeration and immediately after its delivery to San Bias, the Concepcion required an 53 overhaul and careening. These additional expenses and ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 53 Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Nov. 26, 1790, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The viceroy's letter indicates that the "new" frigate Concepcion arrived at San Bias without a complete 313 the noticeable deterioration of the Favorita deprived the naval department of useful vessels which had been counted on for service.^ On December 23, 1788, Viceroy Manuel Florez for warded a second report on the expedition of 1788 to Antonio Valdes in Madrid. A copy of six major acts of possession recorded by Martinez was forwarded in this letter and the viceroy was exceptionally pleased with Captain Martinez1 diaries and charts because they were "much clearer" than those of Gonzalo Lopez de Haro.^ Viceroy Florez also reported to Valdes that he was well aware of American frigates approaching the California coast and at the same time, the settlements of Alta California were warned to deal cautiously with the Americans. The presence of the allotment of anchors, sails, and deck equipment. Also, the hull was in poor shape and the vessel was given an overhaul which cost nearly 20,000 pesos. ^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 23, 1788, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. Manuel Florez indicated that the Favorita was not economically repairable; the officials at San Bias reported that an overhaul and repair on the ship would cost more than 42,000 pesos. ■^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 314 Columbia and its consort vessel, Lady Washington, indicated to Viceroy Florez that the new and vigorous American "Colonies” were seriously interested in establishing a secure port along the shores of the "Mar del Sur." Mar tinez was warned of the foreigners, and in accordance with the viceroy's orders, a new Spanish settlement was to be established at Nootka to avoid the harmful effect of these intrusions.^ Mexico's Viceroy Florez also reported the success of preparations for a new maritime expedition to the northwest. In view of Martinez' recommendations, the viceroy insisted that San Bias officials outfit and load the two vessels in the briefest possible time: they must be ready to sail in late January or early February 1789, thus permitting the formation of a permanent garrison at San Lorenzo de Nootka by April. Estevan Jose Martinez and Gonzalo Lopez de Haro were commissioned to take the same vessels as used on the previous expedition, while the Aranzazu was also prepared -^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. Viceroy Florez was highly motivated to complete the occupation of Nootka Sound after he learned of the presence of these foreign vessels. His orders to Estevan Jose Martinez are cited below, note 57. 315 to deliver supplies, first to Monterey Bay, and then to Nootka. Official instructions for the second expedition were drafted by Manuel Florez on December 23, 1788, and passed 5 7 to Martinez. A list of twenty-three articles formed the basis of the viceroy*s instructions to the captains of the Princesa and San Carlos. Specifically, Viceroy Florez urged Martinez and Lopez de Haro to carry out the occupa tion of Nootka, using the embarked troops and the crewmen for erecting a battery and for building storage facilities. Martinez was promised full support in this project from military personnel on the Princesa and the San Carlos and he was also assured reinforcements from the remaining Copia de la orden instructiva communicada al Alferez graduado de Navio Estevan Jose Martinez para su gobiemo y observancia en la Occupacion del Puerto de Sn Lorenzo o Nooka, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. Hereinafter cited as Orden instructiva conmunicada a Estevan Jose Martinez, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. Martinez also cites this order and lists the vice roy* s instructions in his Diario de la Navegacion que Yo el Alferez de Navio de la Real Armada Dn. Esteban Josef Martinez boy a executar al Puerto de Sn Lorenzo de Nuca mandando la Fragata Princesa y Paquebot Sn Carlos de Orden de el Exmo Sor. Dn. Manuel Antonio Florez ... ano de 1789, in MN, MS 732. Hereinafter cited as Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. 316 vessels at San Bias. For further guidance, Viceroy Florez enclosed two charts of San Lorenzo de Nootka (both drawn according to information from Captain Cook’s Journals of 1778) and he enjoined both captains to verify the charts in every detail. The viceroy’s commission to Estevan Jose Martinez also included the requirement of scouting the adjacent bays, harbors, and inlets northward from the Entrada de Nootka up to 55° N. latitude. This territory was never seen by Captain Cook--according to Viceroy Florez’ instructions--and even the Spanish explorers of 1775 and 1779 missed much of this northern coastline during their reconnaissances. The new expedition was required to map these coasts and to take possession wherever possible. Concerning instructions for dealing with foreign powers, Viceroy Florez stressed the need for harmonious relations with the Russians (located at various points on the mainland and in the Gulf of Alaska), while he demanded strict and limited communication with the English and Ameri cans. According to recent reports from the Court of Madrid, the previous harmony between Russian and Spanish forces co , Orden instructiva communicada a Estevan Jose Martfnez, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 317 in the Gulf of Alaska had prompted both nations to draft an alliance; consequently, the viceroy urged Captain Mar tinez and Lopez de Haro to preserve this relationship. Friendship of the natives was considered an important aspect of the new expedition and Florez directed the com manding officers and also the chaplains to seek native friends and to instruct them in the religion of the sover eign. Shortly after Estevan Jose Martinez* arrival at San Bias (December 1788), he learned of Viceroy Flores' plan for occupying and fortifying Nootka Sound during the early months of 1789. The orders for using the same vessels for the new expedition permitted only the shortest period of preparation and the Princesa and San Carlos were actually in need of longer and more thorough repairs. The Princesa was noticeably ageing but unlike her sister-ship, the Favorita. the San Bias-built frigate endured the hardships of Pacific voyages for another ten years. Dur ing a sixty-days* outfitting, the Princesa received minor repairs and new materials including provisions and medi cines. Early in February, the flagship was fully loaded, 318 59 carrying a crew of 106 men. Captain Lopez de Haro's vessel was slightly larger than the flagship but for this second expedition, the San Carlos carried only eighty-nine men and sufficient rations for fourteen months.^ The consort vessel carried sixteen soldiers who were assigned garrison duty at the Port of Nootka, compared with fifteen soldiers on the Princesa; however, the major difference between the crew members of these vessels was the nineteen additional pages and ser vants embarked on the Princesa. The second Martinez Expedition got underway from San Bias on February 17, 1789. Because of the limited "^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. The Martinez Diary of 1789 lists assignments by number only; however, the following officers served on board the Princesa: Captain Jose Martinez First Pilot Jose Tovar Second Pilot Estevan Mondofia Master's Mate Juan Carrasco Chaplain Jose Lopez de Nava Interpreter Gabriel del Castillo Missionaries Father Severo Patero Father Francisco Sanchez ^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. Officers on board the San Carlos included: Captain Gonzalo Lopez de Haro First Pilot Jose Marla Narvaez Master's Mate Jose Verdia 319 preparations there was some chance for irregularities and casualties (Martinez noted these delays in his diary) and on March 12 several crewmen were reported ill on the Princesa. Again on April 11, Martinez noted the results of hasty preparation lamenting as follows: Because of the careening which was completed on this frigate for the present expedition, there was only time for a quick overhaul and even this was quite superficial. During the last storm which we encountered some of the seams were opened with slight leakage in the provisions storeroom and throughout the entire morning it was necessary for the carpenters and caulkers to repair the deck above the stateroom cabins and to patch up the seams. On April 26, Martinez noted in his log that the deck force on board the Princesa had decreased noticeably. An explanation for this difficulty was given as follows: Cap tain Martinez indicated that a majority of the able seamen were enlisted from the "Hot Country" of San Bias and, being creoles, the frigid temperatures of the north decimated their strength,^ One of the vessel's minor officials (i.e., a sangrador) died on April 28 as a result of ^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. ^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. 320 a "prolonged cold" and during the next afternoon, the Spanish apothecary was buried at sea. Between April 30 and May 2, Martinez noted signs of coastal headlands at 49°-57* N. latitude. After one more day of vigilance and careful sounding, Martinez reached Bahia de la Esperanza and on the fifth of May, the Princesa entered San Lorenzo de Nootka. Strangely enough, the arrival of the flagship at the historic Port of Nootka was heralded by two American vessels-“the Columbia and the Lady A ' I Washington from Boston. Captain Gonzalo Lopez de Haro in the San Carlos had been separated from Estevan Martinez on April 8 and somewhat later, on May 12, he, too, anchored in Nootka Sound. In compliance with Viceroy Florez* instructions, Captain Martinez initiated two projects of high priority at Nootka: (1) he sent all of his carpenters and wood cutters to the near-by mountains for cutting a supply of 63 Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. On May 4, Martinez reported the sighting of an armed sloop with American colors and by means of their inter preter, Gabriel del Castillo, the Spaniards learned of the arrival of John Kendrick and Robert Gray in their respec tive vessels, Columbia and Lady Washington. 321 timber; and (2) he outlined plans for the defense of Nootka using the embarked artillery. Remaining Spanish activities during the first two months at Nootka were devoted to the dispute regarding original discovery and possession of Nootka Sound. These phases and the seizure of two English vessels plus a Portuguese ship are beyond the scope of this study except for the development and elaboration of Martinez* internal improvements and his plans for dispatch ing the prize-vessels to San Bias. Coastal reconnaissance at Nootka Sound was quickly initiated by Estevan Martinez after his arrival. On June 9, 1789, a small schooner commanded by the Americans, Robert Funter and Thomas Barnett, sailed into the harbor and after heated discussions, Captain Martinez finally took custody of the schooner North-West America, since the Americans had left it on the beach in abandonment.^ Martinez ordered his caulkers and carpenters to overhaul the small ship with a quantity of supplies recently pur chased from John Kendrick--Captain of the American vessel, ^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. Henry R. Wagner, Cartography of the Northwest Coast. 1:242, describes this incident of the North-West America. 322 Columbia, and a trusted friend to the Spaniards. Spanish workmen completed the project within a week and then the schooner was loaded for its voyage of exploration. The destination of the schooner, later christened the Santa Gertrudis la Magna,^ was the entrance of Juan de Fuca Strait, which Martfnez had glimpsed during his first northwest voyage on the Santiago in 1774. According to Martinez1 notes, the distinct opening or boca of Juan de Fuca was close to 48°-20' N. latitude, but he explained his sighting of the strait as only a theory and it was never recorded in the log of the Santiago. Fifteen years later, Estevan Jose Martinez was in a position to verify this theory and he assigned second-class pilot Jose Maria Narvaez to command the Santa Gertrudis for an official 66 exploration. This reconnaissance (completed between 6 S Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. Martinez noted that the sloop was built in Nootka; however, it was in poor condition due to several trips to the coast of China. Spanish workmen overhauled the small craft between June 15 and June 19. Father-President Severo Patero commissioned the vessel on the latter date and finally in October this ship sailed to San Bias. A second Santa Gertrudis. the warship sent from Callao, helped sup port naval activities on the Pacific Coast for some time. 66 Entry for June 14: Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. 323 June 21 and July 5) was one of the most important geographi cal achievements of the expedition of 1789 and served to acquaint the Spaniards with the nature of Vancouver Island, although it was only an introduction. After the return of the Santa Gertrudis. Captain Mart£nez revealed a plan for disposing of the English prisoners they were holding--i.e., the crewmen of the cap tured English packet Areonaut (Argonauta) and her captain, James Colnett. The uncertainty and suspicion which sur rounded the presence of this vessel in the Spanish- pre-empted Port of Nootka prompted Estevan Jose Martinez to seize the ship, and he announced that he would send the Argonauta and all prisoners to San Bias for disposition by fi 7 the viceroy. By means of a division of his forces, Martinez was able to employ half the carpenters and caulkers of his command on altering the Argonauta, includ ing special "storerooms" for carrying the prisoners. f i 7 Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. The entry for July 7 indicates that alterations on board the Argonauta included a special enclosed space for crewmen and one for the officers. Commander MartInez required his workers to make the enclosures "decent and secure." 324 On July 9, Martinez announced that pilot first-class Jose Tovar would serve as commanding officer of the English packetboat and he counseled the San Bias pilot about special precautions to be observed in this assignment. During the next day, Spanish carpenters and woodcutters completed work on the Argonauta and Martinez drafted a lengthy report to Viceroy Florez concerning his visit in Nootka. During one week previous to the departure of the Argonauta. there were steady preparations, including the loading of wood and water. At 5 P.M. on July 15, the English packetboat was pronounced ready to sail and early next morning, Jose Tovar sailed from San Lorenzo de Nootka in his prize-ship, Argonauta. The international difficulties in Nootka were further complicated by the arrival of another English 68 / Francisco de las Barras y de Aragon, "D. Esteban Jose Martinez ... ," Publicaciones de la Real Sociedad Geografica, pp. 10-11. See also: Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. Commander Martinez appointed Jose Tovar and Juan Carrasco as captain and pilot of the prize-ship Argonauta. His report to the viceroy was delivered to San Bias offi cials on August 27, 1789. 325 commercial ship, the Princess Roval under Thomas Hudson. Captain Martinez sighted the foreign vessel (entitled Princesa Real1 ) outside Nootka Sound and his speedy seizure of the ship only added to the Spanish dilemma. After a short period of questioning, Martinez reasoned that Captain Hudson*s re-entry in Nootka was a violation of his original promise to remain clear of the Spanish port and thus / 69 Martinez ordered the Princesa Real sent to San Bias. Captain Hudson and his crewmen were made prisoners of the Spaniards and in forming his plans for the second prize- ship, Martinez ordered the San Carlos to escort the Princesa Real as far as Monterey and then the prize- schooner would complete the voyage to San Bias alone. Captain Lopez de Haro remained in comnand of the San Carlos while his own second pilot, Jose Maria Narvaez, received command of the English vessel. On July 27, 1789, the Spanish packetboat and the English prize-schooner sailed for Monterey and San Bias, respectively.^ 69 Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. ^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. 326 Internal improvements at Nootka included Martinez' project for construction of a permanent lodging house plus a workshop and a bakery. The Spaniards started the lodging house or casa grande early in July, making daily additions 71 and cutting large quantities of timber in the mountains. On July 17, Martinez ordered all hands to pool their re sources for constructing a road from the beach to the corte de maderas. Three full days of work were devoted to this task and the achievement was worthy of the effort; the new road from the beach to the cutting site served the Span iards well during a period of two years. During the most difficult portion of the construction, Captain Martinez praised the efforts of twenty-nine Chinese workers who were laboring alongside the Spaniards. Ironically, the Spanish commandant appropriated the Chinese from the Englishman, James Colnett, who had tricked them on board his vessel 79 under false pretense. ^In addition to the requirements for using wood in the construction of winter quarters, the Spaniards needed large quantities of wood for the Fortress of San Miguel and for construction of a new schooner. Spanish efforts in developing the wood-cutting site (corte de maderas) was one of their most important projects. 72 This accusation, of James Colnett tricking the Chinese workers, is expressed by Viceroy Revilla Gigedo in a letter to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, 327 Eventually, Captain Martinez escorted the Orientals from Nootka to San Bias on board the Princesa. but the benevolent plans which Estevan Martinez offered for their employment in the California Missions were disapproved by the viceroy. Furthermore, both James Colnett and John Meares belittled Martinez for his alleged "mistreatment" of the twenty-nine Chinese, thereby giving rise to additional 73 Anglo-Spanish disagreements. One final activity in Nootka Sound which Martinez supervised was the preparation of adequate defenses. On May 15, 1789, Captain Martinez chose the location for the new Spanish fort: he designated a prominent island at Estado. no. 4289. According to this letter, Martinez reported that James Colnett hired the twenty-nine Chinese workers, first telling them he would sail to Bengal but later betraying them, he sailed to Nootka in order to establish fortifications and to occupy that site. 73 Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. The anti-Spanish version of Martinez' treatment of the Chinese was broadcast by John Meares and James Colnett; their rumors indicate that Martinez worked the Chinese on Vancouver Island as gold miners. Commander Martinez recalled how he employed the Chinese workmen for his pro ject of roadbuilding--but said they were provided with food and shelter--and finally they were taken to San Bias on board the Princesa. arriving in November 1789. See: Thomas Hudson to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Sept. 18, 1789, and Captain Dolnet [sic 1 to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Oct. 1, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 328 the entrance of Friendly Cove (present-day Hog Island) as the ’ ’Fortress of San Miguel." Between May 15 and June 1, Spanish workmen labored at the task of clearing land on the site of San Miguel and snaking the heavy artillery pieces up to the new fortress. Their progress was slow, for only a fraction of the total personnel in Nootka was available for this job. Martfnez noted that the hilltop was actually hard rock with very little sand or earth, plus the fact that there were holes and slopes which had to be filled with dirt. This initial labor on the fortress was a diffi cult occupation.^ With various interruptions due to inclement weather and religious celebrations, the Spaniards finally began the placement of their artillery on May 26; on June 17, they commenced construction of a barracks and powder storeroom at the "Fortress of San Miguel." The project required another fourteen days' work before all preparations were completed, but on June 24, salvos from the Spanish ships and from the new fortress announced ^Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS in 732. 329 7 5 Martinez' official act of possession. During the Ameri can Independence celebration of July 4, cannons from the Fortress of San Miguel boomed a thundering accompaniment to those on board Spanish and American vessels. Spanish plans for permanent residence at Nootka during the first winter were abruptly terminated when the San Bias packetboat Aranzazu arrived in Friendly Cove on July 29, 1789, with news from Viceroy Florez.^ The cap tain of the vessel, Jose Canizares, reported to Martinez that plans for wintering in San Lorenzo de Nootka had been cancelled. A new set of instructions from Viceroy Florez, dated February 25, 1789, directed Martinez to return to San Bias with his ships before the winter season began. Florez’ new orders included the following: The permanence of Spanish projects and efforts at Nootka Sound are evident in such reports as Estevan Martinez and Bodega y Quadra (a later visitor and official Spanish Commissioner for working out a "settlement" with the British). During the suniner of 1789, Commander Martinez had completed the Fortress of San Miguel together with cannon, parapet, and a storeroom-barracks plus the permanent houses built along the beach. ^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. Also cited by Martinez in Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. 330 1. The time required for these movements and for that of the pretended establishment of Nootka will without doubt require up to next winter and as it is not to be expected that in that season of the year either the Russians or other vessels of foreign powers would attempt any enterprise in those seas you must then consider your mission con cluded; and 2. Since to carry out these plans you do not need any other supply of food than the quantity of supplies which will last eight or nine months, and because you took with you the greater part of such provisions, the packetboat Aranzazu carries only what may be lacking to enable you to comply with your orders and to return without delay to the Port of San Blas.^ At this point, it seems appropriate to suggest that the orders for retirement which Jose Canizares delivered to Estevan Martinez in Nootka may have been a convenient option for the blustering Spanish officer. One historian, Henry Raup Wagner, has intimated that Martinez wanted to justify his brash conduct in connection with the seizure of the English vessels: he believes that Estevan Martinez took advantage of "special instructions" which were issued secretly by Viceroy Florez before the expedition left ^Henry R. Wagner, Spanish Exploration in the Strait of Juan de Fuca (Santa Ana, California: Fine Arts Press, 1933), p. 217. 331 San Bias-"instructions which provided Martinez with various "openings" in relation to contingent activities, especially with the English'. According to Mr. Wagner, Commander Martinez applied these "special instructions" after learn ing about the presence of English vessels at Nootka and Colnett*s scheme to occupy and fortify the Port of 7 f t Nootka. Certainly the date of Viceroy Florez* second instructions to MartInez--February 25, 1789— suggests a very unusual procedure; that is, first ordering Martinez to occupy Nootka and then, eight days after that officer*s departure, recalling him to San Bias with orders to abandon 79 Nootka. ^^Wagner, Spanish Exploration in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. pp. 217-19. ^Viceroy Florez issued his instructions for occupy ing Nootka on Dec. 23, 1788, and Estevan Martinez sailed from San Bias in the Princesa on Feb. 17, 1789; supra. pp. 318-20. Wagner supports the theory that Estevan Martinez was working under "special" instructions and was in collusion with Viceroy Florez. See: Cartography of the Northwest Coast, 1:243 and Spanish Exploration in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, p. 217. Manuel P. Servln, an expert on Spanish acts of Possession, summarized that "Martinez was an incompetent, egotistical leader who mistreated his men, failed to follow his instructions and even falsified his log book." Cited in "The Act of Sovereignty in the Age of Discovery" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1959), p. 155. 332 As further proof that Estevan Martinez may have been issued "secret instructions'* there is a great deal to be said about the reaction of Spanish officials in Mexico at the time of Martinez* arrival at the Port of San Bias in December 1789. Viceroy Revllla Gigedo was truly amazed when Martinez appeared on the west coast of New Spain and Commandant Bodega y Quadra had already Issued instructions to Francisco Eliza— the captain of the "Relief Expedition" to Nootka— about proper conduct and procedures for reliev ing Estevan Jose Martinez.®® After receiving official retirement orders at Nootka in July 1789, Captain Martinez prepared for the withdrawal of his personnel during August and September. Artillery at the fortress was carefully dismounted and taken back on board the Princesa. while the project of permanent quarters was left in its state of incompletion. Noting the valuable supplies of timber still on hand, the Spanish conmander ordered all these materials handed over to Chief Maquina-- a trusted friend of the Spaniards--and Martinez promised that they would return for them the following year. Q a Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 333 A short time before the Spanish fleet sailed from Nootka to Mexico, Martinez determined to complete one final exploration close to Friendly Cove, Nootka. He ordered John Kendrick, Jr., a new pilot who had signed aboard the Princesa from the Columbia, to command one of the launches and to reconnoiter Bahia de Buena Esperanza.Pilot Kendrick, Jr. completed preparations for this assignment early in October 1789 and took a crew of seven: Sergeant Gabriel del Castillo, an interpreter, plus six seamen. On October 20, the small naval exploring party returned to Nootka after a two weeks voyage. Two days after the return of Kendrick, Jr. and the exploring party the Spaniards were alarmed by the presence of a foreign vessel outside the bay and Martinez post** poned his plans for leaving Nootka. A strong force was 81 Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. Martinez clearly Indicates in his log that there were two foreign seamen who deserted their ship at Nootka in favor of the Royal Spanish Navy: Robert Cant, formerly of the Princesa Real, signed on board the Princesa. and John Kendrick, Jr., originally on board the Columbia, who agreed to serve as pilot on the Princesa. John Kendrick, Jr. proved to be an incompetent pilot and after six years' service with the Department of San Bias he was dismissed. 334 made ready to greet the foreigners, and Martinez imme diately sent out one longboat plus an armed launch. The Spanish naval force returned on the same day, October 22, with an American schooner, the Fair American or Hermosa 82 Americana. The story of the American captain seemed likely enough (he was out of food and had no supplies after sailing from Macao to the Northwest Coast) and Martinez felt compelled to provision him from his ship. Some time later, however, the Spanish captain discovered a number of pelts in the schooner1s hold and after further questioning, Martinez learned that Captain Thomas Humphrey Metcalfe was acting as escort to his father who sailed in the brig Elinora and that both vessels were seeking valuable furs along the coast. Martinez ordered the Hermosa Americana seized and he remanned it with a Spanish crew of seven sailors, under command of John Kendrick, Jr. Departing Nootka on October 30, 1789, Estevan Jose Martinez led his g o The Hermosa Americana was a twenty-six ton schooner from New York. This ship was one of two American vessels sailing together— the larger ship being the Elinora--and it was the Hermosa Americana which the Spanish launches captured. See: James Stirrat and Carrie Marshall, Pacific Voyage— Selections from Scot's Magazine. 1771-1808 (Port land, Oregon: Binfords and Mort, 1960), p. 97. 335 small flotilla to San Bias in accordance with superior orders: he commanded the flagship Princesa followed by the consort vessel Santa Gertrudis and the third Spanish prize- 83 ship, the Hermosa Americana. Leadership of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo and Captain Bodega v Quadra After Estevan Jose Martinez returned to San Bias on December 6, 1789, Spanish activities along the Pacific Coast were centered around development at Nootka Sound. Knowledge of the presence of foreign vessels in the Port of San Lorenzo de Nootka had been transmitted to Viceroy Florez via Spanish officials on board the Argonauta and Princesa Real. In accordance with Martinez1 pleas for reinforcements, the viceroy began preparations for a relief 83 Diario de Esteban Josef Martinez ... , in MN, MS 732. Commander Martinez reported that the Hermosa Ameri cana was in poor material condition with a broken mast and in need of repairs. The Elinora was not apprehended by Martinez but later, both father and son were reunited in the Hawaiian Islands after Spanish officials freed the Hermosa Americana at San Bias. The official report concerning Martinez* capture of the American ship is found in Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 336 expedition to Nootka.^ During the next three years, Spain launched a frantic but futile program for holding and occupying her northern outpost of Nootka. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo dispatched a major naval expedition in 1790 and between this date and 1793, there were numerous minor voyages to the Strait of Juan de Fuca and along the coast of present-day Washington for the purpose of perfecting the Spanish settlement at Nootka Sound. San Bias* record during this critical period of Pacific Coast operations included outfitting of supply ships to Monterey and Nootka, preparation of the Eliza Expedition of 1790, and completion of maritime construction in the naval department's arsenal. Further, the reforms of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo in 1789 provided an efficient system of administration for the Naval Department of San Bias. This accomplishment, com bined with new personnel sent from Spain, enabled the naval department to pursue new responsibilities for supporting Nootka while still maintaining former liabilities in 84 The Relief Expedition to Nootka was postponed until 1790 when Francisco Eliza comnanded three ships from San Bias. Martinez* request was drafted at Nootka (July 1789) and dispatched before the news of abandonment arrived at Nootka with pilot Jose Canizares in the Aranzazu. 337 the Califomias. The two most important leaders during the reorgani zation of San Bias* Naval Department were Viceroy Conde de Revilla Gigedo and Naval Commandant Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra. Recognized by many authorities as the most progressive and advanced viceregal leader in Mexico's final half-century of colonial rule, the younger Revilla Gigedo was an earnest and diligent administrator who took charge of the viceroyalty and achieved remarkable results in both domestic affairs and international relations. Revilla Gigedo*s appointment was announced in the Court of Madrid in April 1789, and the new viceroy seemed worthy of gc the assignment from the very beginning. Before his departure from Spain, the younger Revilla Gigedo studied official reports and documents submitted by his predeces sor, Manuel Florez, noting carefully Mart£nez* report of 1788, including the maps, charts, and diaries. On April 28, 1789, Revilla Gigedo wrote to Minister Valdes indicating that he had received the Martfnez report. 85 , Conde de Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Madrid, April 28, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The younger Revilla Gigedo served as Viceroy of New Spain from 1789 to 1794. See: Cayetano Alcazar Molina, Los Virreinatos En el Siglo XVIII. 338 The new viceroy also displayed special interest in strength ening the defenses of New Spain and during this phase of his studies, Revilla Gigedo came in contact with San Bias* role. According to Revilla Gigedo*s knowledge, one of the major problems in organizing Mexico's west coast defenses was the scarcity of artillery and the expenses incurred in transportation from eastern seaports to the Pacific Ocean. The defensive position of San Bias was particularly weak since its artillery was inadequate and outdated, and even the regular naval vessels suffered from a shortage of 86 cannon. After noting the scientific study of Lieutenant Colonel Miguel del Corral in 1777 for using the Tehuantepec route, Revilla Gigedo made the following recommendations: 1. Transportation of artillery and munitions to San Bias and Alta California could best be accomplished by utilization of sea con voy from Cuba to the San Juan River, and from thence up this river and across Nicaragua to the Port of Realejo; and, 2. Additional details included the use of pirogues on the San Juan River during the summer season with administrative check points along the waterway to insure delivery. ^Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Madrid, April 28, 1789, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. The new viceroy was certain that his system for transport ing cannon and munitions from Havana would be more economi cal than current methods and he offered to initiate the 87 plan pending the King's approval. In the sunnier of 1789, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo sailed from Spain and docked at Vera Cruz in August. The viceroy completed an administrative inspection at Vera Cruz and on August 30 he wrote to Manuel Florez regarding military 88 defenses and organization of the Department of San Bias. According to this correspondence, Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra had been appointed commandant at San Bias, while a number of subordinate officers were accompanying the new commandant from Spain to Mexico. Revilla Gigedo reported that the first group of San Bias personnel had already arrived with Captain Bodega y Quadra and another f t 7 Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Madrid, April 28, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The acceptable method for artillery transfer was by means of the following route: Spain to Cuba and from Havana via Cape Horn to the western seaport of Callao. Munitions and artillery were often transshipped from Callao to San Bias, but the original expenses from Havana were exces sive. 88 / Revilla Gigedo to Viceroy Florez, Vera Cruz, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 340 detachment was expected in September. On September 2, Manuel Florez answered Viceroy Revilla Gigedo*s correspondence and provided his successor with specific details regarding Spanish activities at Nootka plus plans for strengthening the Naval Department at San Bias. The retiring viceroy traced recent developments concerning aggression on the Pacific Coast and it is evi dent that Florez still considered the English, and not the 89 Russians, as the important Spanish enemy. 7 A final cofmmmication from Revilla Gigedo to Manual Florez reported the status of naval officers from Spain; the new administrator informed his predecessor that Captain Bodega y Quadra had arrived in Vera Cruz with seven assist- 90 ants plus a number of artisans and craftsmen. With elo quent praise and high recommendation for Bodega y Quadra, Revilla Gigedo informed Manuel Florez that the new coman - dante was an ideal appointee for directing naval activities on the Pacific Coast and for rebuilding the Department 89 s Viceroy Florez to Revilla Gigedo, Mexico, Sept. 2, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. ^Revilla Gigedo to Viceroy Florez, Vera Cruz, Sept. 9, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 341 of San Bias. Revilla Gigedo strongly hinted that the new Comjmdante de Marina was not entirely satisfied with the location of New Spain's major naval station, but in view of new exploration and requirements for maintaining Cali- fomia, Captain Bodega y Quadra favored a program for expansion for San Bias. This admission of San Bias' limitations was revived during later years of Revilla Gigedo*s term when plans for moving naval activities from San Bias to Acapulco were presented in 1792, 1793, and 1794. Viceroy Florez and his successor met in the town of Guadalupe, Mexico, for formal conferences and the cere- 91 monial exchange of viceregal authority. The new viceroy had arrived during an extremely tumultuous period: reports from Nootka had been received on August 27, 1789, and it was evident that a major supply expedition to Nootka Sound would be necessary. Also, Viceroy Florez had apparently, Viceroy Florez discussed the proposed viceregal ceremonies in his letter of Sept. 2 to Revilla Gigedo. Formal conferences were held at Guadalupe, Mexico, in October, 1789. See: Francisco de las Barras y de Aragon, ”Dn. Esteban Jose Martinez, alumno del Colegio de San Telmo de Sevilla,” no. 312, Fublicaciones de la Real Sociedad Geografica, pp. 17-18. 342 by his own admission, postponed action during the previous six months on several vital issues, including disposition of the prize‘‘ vessels at San Bias and settlement of the Martinez incident. Both officials agreed that Estevan Martinez had acted in accordance with the prerogatives of royal orders, but they also believed that Martinez* seizure of the two English vessels required considerable restitu tion. The conferences at Guadalupe were highlighted by a discussion of these problems. The military counterpart of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo was his senior naval officer and new Commandant of San Bias, Captain Bodega y Quadra. A summary of Bodega y Quadra's first term at San Bias indicates that after eight years experience (1775-1783), the spirited San Bias veteran 92 finally returned to Spain in 1785. Completing an assign- ment at the Naval Department of Cadiz between 1785 and 1788, Bodega y Quadra remained closely associated with events in Mexico. During his last year at Cadiz, Bodega y Quadra requested permission to undertake a voyage to the Pacific Coast and after lengthy discussions with official 92 Oficiales Asuntos Particulares, in MN, MS 1163. 343 ministers at Aranjuez, Spain, the request was granted. On the basis of Captain Bodega y Quadra's interview, plus his immediate assignment to "the Califomias," there is sufficient evidence to indicate that he may have counseled the new viceroy, Revilla Gigedo, concerning San Bias' qo reorganization.7J Conmandant Bodega y Quadra took passage from Spain on the Nav£o San Ramon on Hay 26, 1789““along with seven junior officers including Jacinto Caamano, Manuel Quimper, Salvador Fidalgo, Ramon Saavedra, Francisco de Eliza, and Salvador Melendez Valdes--and reached Mexico in late 94 August. At the Port of Vera Cruz, Captain Bodega y Quadra and Viceroy Revilla Gigedo exchanged views on the expansion of San Bias and Pacific Coast defenses. On Sep tember 8, the new commandant left Vera Cruz, accompanied by 95 his subordinate officers and personnel of the maestranza. ^Oficiales Asuntos Particulares, in MN, MS 1163. 94 Oficiales Asuntos Particulares, in MN, MS 1163. Service record entries for Francisco Eliza, Ramon Saavedra, and Salvador Fidalgo indicate that these officers sailed from Spain to Vera Cruz in the San Ramon with Cap tain Bodega y Quadra. Cited in: Antiglledades de los Oficiales de Guerra de la Armada, in MN, MS 1161. ^Revilla Gigedo to Viceroy Florez, Vera Cruz, Sept. 1, 1789, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 344 The subsequent efforts of Juan de la Bodega y Quadra at San Bias during the year 1789 were directed toward reorganiza tion of the naval station— an achievement which was finally accomplished in December by means of the Reglamento de San Bias,96 Captain Bodega y Quadra’s four-year term as Coman- dante de la Marina de San Bias was punctuated by one major expedition which he directed to Nootka Sound in 1792 (called the "Expedition of the Limits" in connection with the Anglo-Spanish dispute over San Lorenzo de Nootka), and he is also credited with shipbuilding and defensive pro jects during this period of service. Among numerous offi cials who commanded naval activities in San Bias from 1790 to 1810, Captain Bodega y Quadra ranks as the most thoroughly experienced officer. Bodega y Quadra’s success in building a formidable military organization at San Bias is attributed to his devotion to duty and his skill in handling personnel: his intimate association with Viceroy Revilla Gigedo greatly aided him in directing Spanish affairs at the Conference of Nootka and his administration 96Infra, pp. 376-79. 345 of the Reel amento de San Bias was productive of increased morale and new prestige for noncommissioned officers serving aboard the departments vessels and at the arsenal 97 and shipyard. The Francisco de Eliza Expedition of 1790 During October 1789, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo and Captain Bodega y Quadra began preparing for a full-scale occupation of Nootka. Ship assignments were discussed and on the basis of current supply requirements in Alta Cali fornia plus the impossibility of using the frigate Favorita. there was evident a critical shortage of vessels. A large flotilla was needed for the expedition of 1790 and conse quently, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo ordered the Concepcion to serve as flagship escorting the two prize-vessels, 98 Argonauta and Princesa Real. According to the viceroy, 97 Oficiales Asuntos Particulares, in MN, MS 1163. See also: Gutierrez Camarena, San Bias v las Califomias. pp. 142-43. The relative position of Bodega y Quadra among several San Bias administrators--including Bruno de Hezeta, Ignacio de Arteaga, Francisco de Eliza, and Francisco Montes— is superior on account of his years of continuous service and because of his success in all major operations. ^^Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Oct. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 346 this maneuver was completely within the best interests of the Spanish Crown and restitution to the English would have to take place at a later time. James Colnett's ship, the Argonaut a. was overhauled in the Naval Department of San Bias during the fall of 1789 and then was assigned to QQ transport new cannon from Acapulco to San Bias. 7 After the return of the Argonauta. final plans for the expedition were announced by Revilla Gigedo; he estimated that the ships would leave from San Bias in January or early Febru ary of 1790. On October 27, 1789, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo reported the progress of San Bias* preparations to Minister Antonio Valdes. First, he indicated that San Bias officials had purchased artillery and cannon in the Port of Acapulco (destined for Nootka with the 1790 expedition), and second, he reported on the status of garrison troops for guarding the Port of Nootka.The colorful presidial troops of QQ y Letter of James Colnett to Viceroy Florez, San Bias, Sept. 12, 1789, and letter of Viceroy Florez to Revilla Gigedo, Mexico, Sept. 2, 1789, both in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. lOOviceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 347 the First Regiment of Catalonian Volunteers, under the leadership of Lieutenant Colonel Pedro de Albemi, had been quartered in Tepic but with the first indications of a new expedition to Nootka, Revilla Gigedo ordered the 1 n? mobilization of this body. The viceroy reported the final condition of readi ness for the new expedition to Minister Valdes on Decem ber 27, telling him that preparations were almost in order and the expected occupation of Nootka would take place within six months* time. Contrary to his letter of October 27, 1789, Revilla Gigedo reported that the Argo naut a had been delayed in her assignment for picking up The military record of Pedro de Albemi is found in AGI, Mexico, no. 1446. Lieutenant Colonel Albemi first served as cadet — from 1762 to 1767--winning a commission as "subteniente" in 1767. Approximately ten years later he came to Nueva Espana, served three years in Cerro Prieto and seven years in the position of Commandant of Nayarit before being named as "Commandant of Arms of Nutka." ^^Pedro de Albemi *s command of la Primer a Companfa Franca de Voluntarios de Cataluna lasted from December 1789 until September 1792. The original company consisted of eighty men, including the commanding officer, but Colonel Albemi took seventy-six men to Nootka in 1790. Compare: Pedro de Albemi, Re lac ion de la Fureza con que se halla dieho Campania hoy dia de la Fecha, Puerto de San Lorenzo de Nootka, Aug. 23, 1790, in MN, MS 330. 348 artillery at Acapulco but that on December 7, the English 103 packetboat had sailed from San Bias. The viceroy re ported that purchases of food and supplies for the expedi tion had been completed and he submitted the following list of naval officers for Antonio Valdes' approval: Francisco de Eliza was named for comandante of the expedition, destined to sail on the new frigate Concepcion: Ensign Manuel Quimper received command of the Princesa Real and Salvador Fidalgo was ordered to command the San Bias packet, San Carlos. Spanish officials in Mexico had ob jected to the use of both the English prize-vessels for this expedition (Argonauta and Princesa Real) and the San Carlos was chosen for the third consecutive year to sail to the Northwest Coast. One final appointment was awarded to Estevan Jose Martfnez: he was named as first-class pilot on the flagship, Concepcion. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The delay of the Argonauta in sailing from San Bias to Acapulco was probably due to the overhaul which was completed on the vessel in October 1789. ^^Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado.^no. 4289. The use of the Concepcion was reasonable since this vessel had never been to Nootka, but the assignment for taking the San Carlos remains unexplainable. Perhaps the 349 Final instructions from Comandante Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra to Captain Eliza were issued from San Bias on January 28, 1 7 9 0 . These formal orders from the experienced San Bias explorer of two northern voyages contain the customary precautionary measures while accom panying documents provided Francisco de Eliza with an ideal sailing track from the home port of San Bias to San Lorenzo de Nootka. Bodega y Quadra explained the purpose of this expedition and he pointed out that all San Bias vessels were armed for any emergency enroute to or at the Port of Nootka. The junior officers had been chosen with care, according to Bodega y Quadra, and their support of Fran cisco de Eliza would enable the Spaniards to achieve a successful mission. The sailing instructions contained the most direct navigational information and the San Bias comandante conferences between Viceroy Revilla Gigedo and Captain Colnett persuaded the latter official that it would be much better for Spain if the English received one of the cap tured vessels, hence the need for replacing the Argonauta (originally scheduled for the voyage to Nootka). 1 AC Yhstrucciones secretas para el Teniente de Navio Don Francisco de Eliza, Comandante de la Fragata Concep cion, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 350 carefully outlined precautions of which the naval officers should have cognizance in order to make their landfall in Nootka without delay.These instructions contained the following: prominent navigational points and coastal pro files; color of water and type of marine life and birds expected enroute to Nootka. Capitan de Nav£o Bodega y Quadra was as thorough as his superior in Mexico City and his "Secret Instructions to Francisco de Eliza" were significant. Major aspects for the new commander included the following: 1. The expedition must depart San Bias on January 31, sailing to Nootka in the least amount of time; 2. Commander Eliza must unload the artillery on board (consisting of twenty cannon) and mount them in the best possible location; 3. Francisco Eliza was ordered to appoint one of his officers for a further reconnais sance of the northern coasts, starting at the Isla de Regia and working up to Rivera de Cook, then southward along the shores of Alaska, mapping, taking possession and trading with the natives; 4. The commander of the lesser reconnaissance was authorized to barter with the Indians for the collection of skins whenever pos sible; *^Derrota desde el Puerto de San Bias al de San Lorenzo de Nuca, San Bias, Jan. 28, 1790, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289 and MN, MS 330. 351 5. Commander Eliza was warned that all cor poral punishment which was necessary must be carefully mitigated and judged in accord ance with the offender. Many crewmen had never served on naval vessels before; and 6. The commander was further ordered to remain at Nootka until he was properly relieved, continuing the assignment of drawing charts and scouting the harbors and coasts.107 Captain Bodega y Quadra proudly announced the de parture of the Eliza Expedition (February 3, 1790) to Minister Valdes. He explained that there had been the usual obstacles in preparing the vessels plus loading of artillery and embarkation of the Catalonian Volunteers. All these preparations, according to the comandante. were completed within a record-breaking thirty-six day period.108 The three ships of the Eliza Expedition sailed from San Bias to Nootka in good time, except for the smaller 109 craft, Princesa Real. Commander Eliza decided early in lO^ynstruceiones secret as para ... Francisco de Eliza, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 108San Bias, Feb. 4, 1790, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. lO^viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Feb. 26, 1790, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The viceroy noted in this letter that he was sending Estevan Jose Martinez back to Spain on account of previous requests from Martinez* wife. It seems likely that Martinez completed this "dutiful journey" and attended to his marital affairs in Spain. The eminent pilot returned 352 the voyage that the sloop Princesa Real should be permitted to sail at her own speed since she was unable to keep up with the other two vessels. On April 1, the Concepcion and San Carlos experienced a northeasterly storm while anchored close to the Entrada de Nootka. Lieutenant Salvador Fidalgo sent out a small boat from the San Carlos to assist in getting underway from the anchorage (located in 49°-47I N. latitude), but due to the force of the storm the boat capsized and two seamen died in the surf. The Concepcion ended up losing two anchors, but finally, on the fifth of April, both the flagship and the San Carlos anchored inside Nootka Sound.Two days later the Princesa Real hove in sight with reports of smooth sailing and not a single to the Naval Department of San Bias where he served until his death at the Port of Loreto, California, on October 27, 1798; cited in Oficiales Ferrol, 1790-1808, MN, MS 1250. ^■^Two excellent diary accounts of the expedition of 1790 include: (1) Salida de Los Tres Buques Fragata Princesa [sic], Paquebot Filipina y Balandra Princesa Real del Puerto de San Bias ... para la obligacion de Nutka ... , in MN, MS 331 and (2) Extracto de los mas esenciales Del Diario del Teniente de Navio de la Rl. Armada Salvador Fidalgo, Comandante del Paquebot de SM nombrada San Carlos con el que tuvo la Comision de pasar a Nutka en conserva de la Fragata Concepcion y Balandra Ynglesa, Princesa Real ... , in Diarios, I, in MN, MS 271. Hereinafter cited as: Salida para Nutka ... , in MN, MS 331 and Extracto del Diario de Fidalgo ... , in MN, MS 271. 353 glimpse of foreign vessels. During the long voyage from San Bias to the Northwest Coast, none of the Spanish ships had sighted any foreign vessels and the situation was identical inside Friendly Cove, Nootka. Salvador Fidalgo indicated in his sea diary that the Spanish officers attended to their orders in strict fashion, unloading the artillery on April 5 and 6 and then mounting the cannon at the Fortress of San Miguel.On July 3, 1790, Francisco de Eliza reported to Captain Bodega y Quadra concerning their first two months* activities in the Port of Nootka. The commandant described in specific detail the procedure of unloading cannon and, within the first month, reported a total of eight cannon in permanent position. Spanish love for ceremonial activities was mani fest in Eliza*s report of the occupation ceremony; during the second formal occupation of Nootka, the Spanish officers raised the colors in regal fashion and then Extracto del Diario de Fidalgo ... , in MN, MS 271. The second placement of Spanish cannon in San Lorenzo de Nootka was at the original site chosen by Estevan Jose Martinez in 1789: The Fortress of San Miguel (present-day Hog Island). 354 112 proclaimed a formal act of possession by cannon salutes. Remaining activities In the Port of Nootka were reported by Eliza to Captain Bodega y Quadra as follows: 1. Preparation and placement of the remaining artillery which amounted to 6 cannon of 24 caliber; 2. Detachment of the San Carlos tinder Lieuten ant Fidalgo (May 4, 1790) for reconnaissance of the Gulf of Alaska and Rivera de Cook; 3. Completion of a regular overhaul on the Princesa Real which required twenty days* work from May 5 to May 25; 4. Initiation of the second reconnaissance expedition from Nootka on May 31. Francisco Eliza sent the sloop Princesa Real under Manuel Quimper to explore the entrance and Strait of Juan de Fuca. Assistants included pilot Gonzalo Lopez de Haro plus nine armed soldiers; and 5. Construction of a new schooner, Santa Satur nine. alias "Horcasitas" (32 tons burden), between May 26 and July 3.^3 Francisco de Eliza to Canitan Bodega y Quadra, El Comandante de la Expedicion da parte al Senor Comandante del Departamento de San Bias de todo lo ocurrido en su navegacion y estado en este Puerto, Puerto de Nootka, July 5, 1790, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. The first formal act of possession occurred on June 24, 1789, under Martinez* supervision. Comandante de la Expedicion da parte al Coman dante de San Bias ... , in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 355 Viceroy Revilla Gigedo learned of Spanish progress at Nootka during the latter part of the year when the packet Aranzazu anchored in San Bias, having recently 114 returned from Nootka and Monterey. Francisco Eliza reported that his workmen had launched the new schooner Santa Satumina and the commandant also indicated that quarters for the first winter's residence were progressing satisfactorily. All of the artillery had been placed in position, according to Eliza, and the defenses of Nootka were formidable to behold. The conclusion of the Eliza Expedition was marked by successful operations in the packet San Carlos and the English prize, the Princesa Real. Both San Bias vessels had returned from their respective assignments in the northwest and anchored in Monterey for a temporary visit. Finally, on November 13, 1790, the San Carlos and Prin cesa Real anchored safely in the outer roadstead of ^^"Noticias del Departamento de San Bias'* (127), MS in MN. Ensign Juan Bautista Matute commanded the Aranzazu during this supply voyage which lasted from April 15, 1790, until October 23, 1790, when the vessel docked at San Bias. See also: Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Nov. 26, 1790, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. 356 115 San Bias. Additional Spanish Exploration: Manuel Quimper and Ale1andro Malaspina Between 1791 and 1792, there were two important exploring assignments which further increased Spanish geo graphic and scientific knowledge. First, the Princesa Real was commissioned to explore the "Islas de Sanwich" during a voyage to Canton where the ship was destined to be turned over to the English, and second, the Descubierta and Atrevida of the Malaspina Expedition arrived in Acapulco for the initiation of detailed scientific explorations along the Pacific Coast. The former assignment served several noteworthy purposes for the Spaniards in addition to the alleged return of the English prize-vessel to its rightful owners. First of all, the Pacific voyage from San Bias to Manila suggested to Captain Bodega y Quadra that a reconnaissance of the Hawaiian Islands would enhance lie Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Jan. 12, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289, and Extracto del Diario de Fidalgo ... , in MN, MS 271. The smaller schooner, Santa Satumina. had partici pated in summer explorations with the packetboat San Carlos (through the Inland Passage, Carrasco, Fuca and the Entrada de Hezeta), but was separated from the leading vessel and finally had to make a last-minute run for Monterey, anchor ing at that port on September 15, 1791. 357 Spanish geographical background o£ Pacific landfalls. Another motive was proposed by Viceroy Revilla Gigedo: he planned to use the captured sloop for transporting a load of furs from New Spain to the Far East, thus initiating commercial contact between the Pacific Coast and Asia. Estevan Jose Martinez had originally suggested the idea of Spanish exploration of the Hawaiian Islands during his term as Commandant at Nootka in 1789.^*^ A portion of the plan may have been discussed with the American officers, Captains Kendrick and Grey, but specific details of the exploration project were exchanged between Martinez and the giant Hawaiian leader**'Chief Matutaray. Residing in the Port of Nootka at the time of Martinez* visit in 1789, Chief Matutaray or Joseph Mariano as he preferred to be called, was very friendly with the Spaniards and he told them of his background of Spanish heritage and training. 1X6 Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Nov. 26, 1790, and Comandante Bodega y Quadra to Manuel Quimper, San Bias, Feb. 14, 1791, both in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. ^■^Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Pedro Lerena, Mexico, Mar. 31, 1791, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1540 and Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Dec. 30, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 358 According to the chief’s story, he had been instructed in the Catholic faith by Spanish missionaries and over a period of nine years, he learned European habits and 118 dressed like his benefactors. This encounter between Martinez and Chief Mariano provided the energetic Spaniard with sufficient details about the Pacific Islands; the Hawaiian chief was apprecia tive of his former training and during his conferences with Martinez, he suggested that the Spaniards send vessels to his island homeland and develop a permanent base for supplying fresh provisions to the outpost of Nootka. There was also a suggestion for sending more natives to Nootka in order to populate this port for the Spanish King. On December 27, 1789, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo intro duced the "Martinez Plan" to Minister Valdes.There were certain advantages in attempting to organize a Spanish base at Hawaii including the availability of fresh provi sions and supplies but, in general, the viceroy did not 118 / Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 11Q Viceroy’s letter (no. 197), in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 359 £avor this new scheme. Martinez reported that he had visited with another Hawaiian chief (the "Indio Tayana Rey") who offered to help the Spaniards settle Nootka but Revilla Gigedo cited the excessive distances and the state 120 of underdevelopment as prohibitive of success. In 1791, Ensign Manuel Quimper of San Bias was com* missioned to lead a voyage of exploration to Hawaii and to deliver the Princesa Real to English merchants in Canton. Late in 1790, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo approved the transfer of the Princesa Real to the English and after the vesselTs return to San Bias from Nootka in November of 1790, Quimper was authorized to remain in command for this final assign* 121 ment. Captain Bodega y Quadra inspected the sloop in 1791 and then he issued instructions for Ensign Quimper's guidance: 1. First, Ensign Quimper was ordered to com plete the voyage in three segments: from San Bias to Hawaii, Hawaii to the Philippines, and finally, from Manila to Canton; 120viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes (no. 199), Mexico, Dec. 27, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 121 Revilla Gigedo to Conde de Arande, Mexico, Oct. 26, 1790, in Revilla Gigedo Coll., Vol. XIII, doc. 6 8. 360 2. Second, the San Bias officer was ordered to outfit the Princesa Real in Manila, in cluding repairs or overhaul, at the expense of the Royal Philippine Company; and 3. Third, the sloop was required to carry furs collected from the California missions and from locations along the Pacific Coast for delivery to merchants in C a n t o n . ^^2 Preparations for the voyage were completed at San Bias early in 1791 and the vessel put to sea on Febru- 123 ary 18. After a smooth voyage of thirty-seven days, Ensign Quimper anchored at the Island of Hawaii and com menced a thorough investigation. The Spanish sloop took on fresh provisions during a three-week stay in the Islands and during a portion of this exploration, Manuel Quimper and his crew encountered the English Captain from Nootka, James Colnett in the Argonauta. In April Quimper got underway for Cavite, Philippine Islands, reaching his 122 Juan de la Bodega y Quadra to Manuel Quimper, San Bias, Feb. 14, 1791, and enclosure: Ynstrucciones que deve observar el Alferez de Navio D. Manuel Quimper, Comandante de la Balandra Princesa Real con arreglo a las ordenes comunicadas por el Exmo. Sor. Conde de Revilla Gigedo, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 123 Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Mar. 27, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 361 destination after fifty-three days at sea.^^ Once at the Port of Cavite, Quimper turned his ship over to the Gover nor, Felix Berenguer de Marquina, and then the young naval officer outlined Revilla Gigedo'a plans for disposing of the ship in Canton. The governor noted the poor physical condition of the Princesa Real and Immediately ordered the vessel to be overhauled. The cost of repairs was charged to the Royal Treasury of the Philippine Company, but both Governor Berenguer and Ensign Quimper expected to liquidate 125 some of this obligation through sale of furs in Canton. A series of changes was immediately invoked after the arrival of the Princesa Real at Cavite, which probably adversely affected the success of this commercial and diplo matic mission. Governor Berenguer was very dissatisfied 10/ Diario de reconocimiento hecho por Dn. Manuel Quimper en las Yslas de San Wich, Manila, July 15, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. See also: Governor Felix Berenguer de Marquina to Florida Blanca, Manila, Jan. 4, 1792, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258. There was a noticeable air of "coldness" on the part of arrogant James Colnett, while Manuel Quimper attempted to avoid any conflict or incident. 125 Governor Berenguer de Marquina to Florida Blanca, Manila, Jan. 4, 1792, and Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Dec. 30, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258 and 4289 respectively. 362 over the additional expenses for overhauling the vessel and he subsequently demanded that one of the officials of Manila deliver the ship to the proper authorities in 126 Canton. And finally, the remaining episodes of this transaction were a succession of failures. The original captain of the Princesa Real, Thomas Hudson, was murdered 1 27 by Nootka Indians, thus leaving James Colnett respon sible for receiving the ship from Spanish officials. Colnett*s participation in the transfer of the Princesa Real is interesting because the former Spanish prisoner returned to Nootka after his release from San Bias, picked up a load of pelts along the Northwest Coast, and then sailed to Canton via Hawaii. The Spanish government in Mexico informed Captain Colnett of its share of the expenses in overhauling the English sloop, but when the 126Infra, pp. 363-65. 127 Francisco Eliza reported the incident concerning Hudson's death to Viceroy Revilla Gigedo and the viceroy in turn noted this In his letter to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, June 1, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. There was some dispute as to the actual cause of death: Francisco Eliza claimed that Thomas Hudson together with six sailors was lost at sea in a launch, while Jacinto Caamaiio said that Hudson and his party were killed by Indians at Point San Estevan, Nootka. 363 Spanish factor in Canton finally requested Colnett to accept the vessel, the wily English trader refused on the 128 grounds of extreme deterioration and abuse. The major Spanish official in Canton at the time of James Colnett1s visit was Vicente de Llano y Valdez-- commanding officer of the Princesa Real during the voyage from Manila to the China coasts. Captain Llano y Valdez finally ordered the Princesa Real sold at public auction, 129 since Colnett turned down all offers for negotiation. 7 The ship's cargo of fifty-four boxes of pelts (totaling 3,333 nutria skins) was finally cleared for sale in the Province of Macao and the technical details of the case 128 Declaration and Protest of James Colnett, Aboard the Argonauta. Macao, July 25, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258. This document was certified by Captain Colnett and the Spanish factor. Manuel Agote, and it contains an inventory of the vessel's cargo (a total of 3,333 nutria pelts) plus a history on the numerous transfers of the Argonauta. 129 * Vicente de Llano y Valdez, Manuel Agote, and Julian Fuentes, Testimonio del Ymbentario de la Balandra Ynglesa Princesa Real, Casco, Palo mayor y su Aparejo, Macao, Oct. 4, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258* 364 130 were concluded. The final disposition of the Princesa Real seems appropriate for the unfortunate English vessel. On October 18, 1791, one of the Spanish factors, Julian Fuentes, was aboard the Princesa Real during a devastating hurricane which virtually wrecked the vessel. From his report, it is apparent that the vessel was sold for The ruse of Captain Colnett in refusing to accept the Princesa Real in Canton was obvious to the Spaniards who were trying to recover their investments in repairs and 132 pelts. One possible explanation for Colnett's action-- 130 Cited in Spanish Archives as: Mandate of the Mandarin of Kuan Chiuefu and President of the Province, Canton, Aug. 15, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258. This Mandate specifically mentions that the cargo of the Areonauta was contraband material; the Spanish were finally able to circumvent this legal ruling and managed to sell the skins in Macao. 131 Julian Fuentes to Manuel Agote, Canton, Nov. 18, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258. Governor Felfx Berenguer de Marquina to Florida Blanca, Manila, Jan. 4, 1792, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258. A contemporary letter, Revilla Gigedo to James Colnett, Mexico, Sept. 2, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289 indicates that the first overhaul and careening of the English ship had cost the Royal Treasury 1,062 pesos. The viceroy was willing to settle this amount in favor of the Spanish Crown because he had finally reached a settlement for damages to James Colnett and his personnel and ship-- 9,175 pesos. 365 other than natural enmity for the Spanish--is explained by the treatment he received at the hands of Chinese officials after he returned to the Asian coast from Nootka in the spring of 1791. The log of the Argonauta indicates that Colnett arrived in Macao on May 31, 1791, carrying 1,200 pelts, but the feudal officials in the province refused to let the luxurious skins enter Canton, thus leaving the English Captain stranded with a contraband cargo. In final despair, Colnett sailed from Macao on July 26 and attempted 133 to exchange his furs in Japan. Ensign Manuel Quimper was more fortunate in the aftermath of the voyage of the Princesa Real than James Colnett or even the vessel's original owner. Returning to Nueva Espaiia in 1792, Quimper received notification of his promotion to Lieutenant and he was congratulated by both 134 the viceroy and Comandante Bodega y Quadra. 1 33 Julian Fuentes and Manuel Agote to Governor Berenguer de Marquina, Canton, Oct. 4, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258 and Declaration and Protest of James Colnett, Macao, July 25, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4258. ^^Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Dec. 30, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. See also: Manuel Quimper, Oficiales Asuntos Par- ticulares, MN, MS 1163. 366 Spain's second trans-Pacific voyage of exploration during 1791— the Malaspina Expedition--reached Acapulco on 135 February 2, 1791. Uniquely organized and prepared in Cadiz, Malaspina*s expedition was ordered to verify Spanish claims to Vancouver Island and also to investigate the value of extending California's boundary northward to Nootka. Moreover, the geographical sites and coasts which had been charted by competent Spanish naval officers-- including Francisco de Eliza, Jacinto Caamano, Salvador Fidalgo, and Manuel Quimper - -were still viewed with un certainty. From Madrid, Minister Valdes ordered Malaspina to complete one final reconnaissance in search of the fabled Straits of Ferrer Maldonado, i.e., the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Malaspina*s sojourn on the Pacific Coast during 136 the spring of 1791 was a period of diverse activities. 135 A recent publication on the Malaspina Expedition is Donald C. Cutter's scholarly Malaspina In California (San Francisco: John Howell-Books, 1960). 136MSS which pertain to the Malaspina Expedition are the following: (1) Viaje en Limpio de los Corvetas Descu- bierta y Atrevida, 181, MN; and (2) Diario del Viaje Explorador de las Corbetas Espanoles Descubierta y Atrevida en los Anos 1789 a 1791, 898, MN. Other notable sources include the two guard books of the corvettes, Libro de Guardias de la Corbeta Descubierta, 367 Official reports and correspondence were passed to the viceroy at Mexico; supplies were loaded and water replen ished at the Port of Acapulco; a certain "reshuffling" of crews was arranged to provide for more perfect exploration of New Spain and to allow the expedition better illus trators and artists; and finally, the Atrevida passed from Acapulco to San Bias for the purpose of taking scientific 137 observations and loading supplies. The presence of Malaspina*s vessels in the Ports of Acapulco and San Bias during 1791 demonstrated the possibility of utilizing west coast ports for maintaining extended voyages of explora tion. The arrival of Malaspina*s vessels at Acapulco was thoroughly announced beforehand. Alejandro Malaspina wrote to the viceroy of Mexico from Lima, Peru, during the visitation of his Descubierta and requested that a list of supplies be available for the expedition at both Realejo MS 729 and Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta Atrevida, MS 755 both in MN, plus the published work, Viaie Politico- Cient£fico Alrededor Del Mundo por las Corbetas Descubierta v Atrevida (Madrid, 1885). 137Infra, p. 369. 368 138 and San Bias. In addition to his request for ten barrels of tar and a working force amounting to "fifteen good men, half of whom are carpenters and the other half caulkers/' Malaspina was particularly anxious to pick up a quantity of wood for special use on board the two ships. The captain*s request was based upon the wide latitude of support which the expedition had been granted, and in case Malaspina did not stop in San Bias for supplies, it was suggested that these would be consumed by normal require- 139 ments. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo acted in liaison for the Malaspina Expedition after receiving the announcement of their proposed stay at west coast ports of Nueva Espaha. On January 15, 1791, the viceroy reported to Pedro de Lerena about the progress of his preparations to receive ^^Viceroy Revilla Gigedo to Pedro de Lerena, Mexico, Dec. 4, 1790, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1535. The viceroy noted in this letter that Malaspina had written from Lima; Revilla Gigedo had immediately informed the president of Guatemala to prepare for Malaspina in case the round-the-world-expedition should stop at Realejo. 139 Revilla Gigedo to Lerena, Mexico, Dec. 4, 1790, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1535. According to Revilla Gigedo, the supplies at San Bias would be consumed in normal voyages and communication with Alta California if Malaspina did not stop at this port and pick them up. 369 Malaspina, noting that there was an allowance of 10,000 pesos available for outfitting the explorer in both Aca pulco and San Blas.^® Jose Bustamante y Guerra, captain of the Atrevida, arrived at the Port of Acapulco a full month after the flagship Descubierta and remained with Malaspina only three weeks. After preliminary outfitting— including re supplies of water and wood— the Atrevida got underway for San Bias on March 25. The passage from the southern sea port to San Bias required only six days and on March 31, 1791, the vessel cast anchor in the roadstead of San Bias.142 The chronicle of the Atrevida*s stay at San Bias reflects the thoroughness of this expedition's scientific 1 / * 5 observations plus the ability of her officers and crew. l^Oyiceroy's letter in AGI, Mexico, no. 1540. ^^Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta Atrevida, MN, MS 755. ^^Felipe Bauza, Viaje alrededor del Mundo, 1789-96, MN, MS 749. ^^The "official” logbook is the Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta Atrevida, MN, MS 755. From this record and several others (cited below), one is certainly impressed by the amount of work accomplished at San Bias during a very short visit. 370 According to Malaspina*s original instructions issued on January 7, 1791, Captain Bustamante was required to adhere to the following: 1. To complete an accurate observation of the Port of San Bias in both latitude and longi tude and to observe the emergence of the planet Jupiter during the month of April; 2. To comply with the orders of the viceroy and any other superior orders; 3. To resupply the Atrevida in all require ments and to request construction of a new launch from the arsenal of San Bias; and 4. To comply with the recommendations of the Comandante. Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra; Malaspina ordered his second officer "to give special consideration to the wisdom and experience of Captain Bodega y Quadra concerning the dimensions of the masts and spars and the sail rigging for the new launch, The immediate tempo of nautical and scientific activities at San Bias was a well-regulated marvel during the Atrevida*s visit. From the royal arsenal, fourteen caulkers and ten splicers met the corvette on March 31, immediately after Bustamante anchored Additional repairs were arranged and initiated on board t * vessel during Letter of Malaspina cited in Apuntes, Noticias y Correspondencia pertenecientes a la expedicion de Malaspina, MN, MS 427. 371 the next day: the caulkers and rope-workers continued their activities on April 1, while repairs to the Atrevida* s hull required generous supplies of white lead, lampblack, 1 / r pigment, dye, and pitch. During the next two days, the coopers from the Atrevida received a shipment of hoop-poles and other materials from the shipyard. The repairs to the vessel’s rigging and deck gear continued and the log of Bustamante's vessel indicates that on April 2 the Atrevida received new signal lanterns and boatswain supplies from San Bias. Captain Bustamante assigned one of his officers, the pilotin Jeronimo Delgado, to sound and mark the harbor of San Bias during their visit. The pilot conmenced his worthwhile project at the mouth of the harbor and continued his soundings up to the desembarcadero. ■^•^Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta Atrevida. See also: Bauza, Viaje alrededor del Mundo, 1789-96. ^^Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta Atrevida. Actually, the corvette itself was given a hasty repair job and the details of this episode and for con structing a new launch are a separate story. San Bias' master-builder Manuel Bastarrachea supervised both these projects, finally reporting the total expenses as 1,693 pesos. See: Dn. Manuel Bastarrachea, Resumen del Xmporte de toda la madera que se ha consumido la recorida de la Corveta Atrevida y en el remplazo de sus cargos en el puerto de San Bias, Royal Arsenal, April 12, 1791, in Corbetas, II, MN, MS 92 bis. 372 The scientific observations which were accomplished in San Bias during this first Malaspina visit included the following: accurate determination of the port’s geographic location; temperature recordings for the duration of their visit; graphic drawings of the harbor and the coast of Nueva Galicia; and finally, the calculation of a "base 147 measurement" at San Bias for geographical reference. Because of their brief visit in the Port of San Bias, it might be expected that the Atrevida and her crew would omit some of the detailed instructions from Captain Malaspina; but on the contrary, the results of this stopover were at least equal to those during Malaspina*s personal visit in October 1791.^^ Specific details concerning the scientific aspects of the Atrevida's visit are found in Diario Astro- noraica de Expedicion de Malaspina, MS 263; Expedicion de Malaspina, MS 264; and R. 0. Gs. Ms. 1784-1838, Coleccion Guillen, MS 1233, all in Museo Naval. The base measurement was a complicated survey and triangulation for the purpose of obtaining accurate ranges and points for subsequent charts. This activity is described in Costa Oriental de la America Meridional en 1790, Tomo IV, in MN, MS 288. ^^The visit of the Atrevida lasted from March 31 until April 9, 1791. Compare: Libro de Guardias para la Corbeta Atrevida. 373 Departmental Activities from 1789 to 1794 During the last decade of the eighteenth century, the Naval Department of San Bias was once again revitalized and reorganized for the purpose of supporting Spanish exploration of the Pacific Northwest, and also for occupy ing and defending the strategic outpost of Nootka Sound on Vancouver Island. Immediately after the conclusion of the Anglo-Spanish conflict in 1785, the Department of San Bias was plagued by serious problems including a shortage of officers, pilots, and other naval personnel plus a lack of good, sturdy vessels. Manuel Antonio Florez, Viceroy of Mexico during the years 1787 to 1789, recognized these limitations and beginning in the fall of 1787, he pleaded for reinforcements in order to rebuild the Naval Department of San Bias. Postwar activities on the Pacific Coast involved Spain in the rivalry for control and occupation of Nootka Sound--the "race to Nootka.'’ For the first time in years, Spanish territory north of Alta California seemed in jeopardy of falling in the hands of the English; another rival power, Russia, had signalled its intentions of estab lishing trading posts as far south as Nootka Sound, but 374 149 fortunately Spanish and English forces arrived first. For Spain, Nootka Sound represented a strategic position— something like an outer bastion halfway between the Russians on the Kenai Peninsula and the new California presidios and missions farther south. Viceroy Florez was the first major official to understand the importance of occupying Nootka and holding it at all costs against other nations. He finally organized and dispatched two expedi tions to Nootka Sound for this purpose and by doing so, the viceroy also fortified Spanish claims to the entire North west Coast. At the conclusion of the second expedition (December 1789), Spanish naval officers reported that England and Russia had gained notable territorial acquisi- 150 tions on the fringes of the "Spanish Lake." Viceroy Florez, writing to Madrid, reiterated this ixixnediate danger 149 ^James Cook, the celebrated English explorer, had previously entered the northern Pacific realm (the terri tory and adjacent waters which Spain claimed) and his two expeditions of 1774 and 1778 motivated Viceroy Bucareli to send the Arteaga Expedition to the Northwest Coasts in 1779. ^~^The Russians were firmly entrenched along the Kenai Peninsula and at the head of the Gulf of Alaska; the English had been active in sending out private "trading expeditions" which are best represented by the naval leaders, George Dixon, Nathaniel Portlock, John Meares, and James Colnett. 375 and, beginning in 1789, the Spanish Crown formulated specific plans for the occupation of Nootka which signified a new role for the Department of San Bias. The reorganization of the Department of San Bias was formally achieved during the reign of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo, 1789 to 1794. Since the previous Viceroy, Manuel Florez, had already recognized the problem of an inadequate supply of vessels and naval personnel, Revilla Gigedo was well informed about this situation. Even before his departure from Spain in 1789, the new viceroy sought re placements for San Bias and when he sailed for Mexico in the sunmer of 1789, a detachment of naval officers and marine carpenters accompanied him. The military and civilian build-up at San Bias was underway and, during the next four years, the naval department assumed dual responsi bility for Alta California and for the northern outpost of Nootka Sound. The new organizational code for rebuilding San Bias, entitled "Reglamento de San Bias, 1789," was drafted by 15^Revilla Gigedo to Viceroy Florez, Vera Cruz, Aug. 30, 1789, in AHN, Estado, no. 4289. See also: Ofi- ciales Asuntos Particular, MN, MS 1163 under the names of Francisco Eliza, Jacinto Caamario, Manuel Quimper, and other San Bias officers. 376 Viceroy Revilla Gigedo--one of the most energetic officials 152 of eighteenth century Mexico. During official confer ences for exchanging viceregal authority, both Manuel Florez and Revilla Gigedo discussed local conditions at San Bias. Florez indicated the desperate military situ ation and also expressed hope that Captain Bodega y Quadra, the newly-appointed commandant, would be able to take charge of the Department of San Bias and mould it into an effective force. On the basis of this conference and in line with previous discussions with Bodega y Quadra at Vera Cruz, Revilla Gigedo formulated a specific military 153 code for the department. The new Reglamento provided for substantial salary increases for both naval officers and enlisted personnel. By common consensus, civil and military authorities agreed 152 Reglamento provisional para el Departamento de San Bias, Mexico, Dec. 7, 1789, Coleccion Guillen, Tomo VIII, in MN, MS 1211. 153 The conferences of Guadalupe are discussed above, pp. 341-42. It seems likely to this writer that Revilla Gigedo had formulated basic plans for the reorganization of San Bias during his residence in Spain, during the spring of 1789* See: Revilla Gigedo to Antonio Valdes, Madrid, April 28, 1789, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 377 that the older salary schedules— the Bucareli recommenda tions for ’ ’double salaries" -should be re-established, thus authorizing San Bias personnel to receive pay and allowances equal to their European contemporaries. It is interesting to note that the new regulations specifically enumerated those who were eligible to receive the double salary: military officers, naval officers, chaplains, surgeons, pilots, master's mates, paymasters aboard naval ships, and first and second-class boatswain mates. All other officials, with the exception of Coast Guard per sonnel and artillery and battalion troops, received wages which were in accordance with working conditions along the Pacific Coast.Other provisions of the Reglamento authorized personnel to receive double salaries upon dis embarking at Vera Cruz if qualified in all respects. And finally, there were special provisions which authorized "incentive pay" for personnel who took part in voyages of ^■^Bucareli authorized the double salaries for a number of San Bias officials in 1776. *^The lesser salaries were specifically listed for some twenty-nine different occupations and positions; per sonnel in this category were stationed at the major divi sions, i.e., department proper, shipyard, and on naval vessels. 378 exploration or extended overseas voyages, i.e., San Bias to Manila.Judging from specific articles which defined the responsibilities of both shore-based and shipboard officers, the Reglamento was an exceptionally thorough document. Official procedures for commanding officers and members of the Royal Hacienda were outlined, for example. The former group was especially cautioned in meting out punishment. Before the arrival in Mexico of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo and Captain Bodega y Quadra in 1789, personnel at San Bias had declined from the pre-war high of 372 (1782), to almost one-half that number. The new Reglamento acted partially as an incentive for increasing the working force at San Bias: first, it offered higher salaries, and second, more jobs were available. New personnel who arrived in 1789 included naval officers and skilled workmen who accompanied the viceroy 156 Reglamento Provisional de San Bias. There are at least twelve separate articles which deal with special situations including incentive pay and special rations. ^^Viceroy Florez to Antonio Valdes, Mexico, Oct. 27, 1787, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1514. Comisario Bermudez y Trillo recorded the pre-war figure of 372 in 1781, supra. p. 201. 379 and Captain Bodega y Quadra. During two successive years, pilots, chaplains, and even surgeons (a naval rating which was heretofore impossible to secure for employment in the "Califomias”) arrived in Mexico and they served both at the naval station and on board San Bias ships. Prominent among the new officer"complement of San Bias were Manuel Quimper, Jacinto CaamaHo, Ramon Saavedra, Salvador Fidalgo, 1S8 and Francisco de Eliza. Lieutenant Francisco de Eliza received the appointment as comandante of the naval expedi tion to occupy Nootka Sound in 1790; his subordinate officers included Fidalgo and Quimper while Estevan Jose Martinez sailed on the flagship Concepcion as piloto de derrotas. One of New Spain's most outstanding naval veterans — Francisco Mourelie--returned to the Department of San Bias in 1790 and subsequently was appointed to assist Viceroy Revilla Gigedo in Mexico. Between 1785 and 1790, 158 Individual records for these officers are in Antigttedades de los Oficiales de Guerra de la Armada, Tomo II, MS 1161 and Oficiales Asuntos Particulares, MS 1163 both in MN. ^■^Relacion de Los Meritos y Servicios de Dn. Fran cisco Mourelle, MN, MS 999. 380 Lieutenant Mourelle served in the Department of the Philip pines, conveying supplies and products from Manila to Canton but these five years were apparently detrimental to Mourelle* s health and he was relieved of active sea duties shortly after returning to San Bias. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo had eagerly sought a knowledgeable officer in the capital to compile a chronological record of Spanish titles and discoveries along the Pacific Coast; the San Bias veteran Mourelle was selected to supervise this pro- ject.160 On September 9, 1791, Francisco Mourelle received orders which placed him in command of the new Spanish schooner Mexicans destined for an official exploration of Juan de Fuca Strait.The purpose of the exploration was to investigate the area adjacent to Nootka Sound and Revilla Gigedo to Lerena, Mexico, Feb. 7, 1791, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1553. See also: Donald C. Cutter, "California, Training Ground for Spanish Naval Heroes," California Historical Society Quarterly. XIX (June, 1961), 112. ^^Revilla Gigedo to Francisco Mourelle, Ynstruccion reservada que ha de observar el Teniente de Fragata de la Real Armada Dn. Francisco Antonio Mourelle en el viaje a que esta destinado a la costa de Califomias en la Goleta Mexicans, Mexico, Sept. 9, 1791, in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. 381 to provide Spanish officers with complete nautical informa” tion to support their claims for the entire northwest against the English. Prior to September 1791, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo had intended to send the schooner Mexicans from San Bias to the Gulf of Tehuantepec for an assignment of exploration (requested earlier by the Spanish explorer Alejandro Malaspina), and consequently, the viceroy ordered the Naval Department of San Bias to construct a similar vessel for use in the expedition to Juan de Fuca Straits. Apparently, official plans from Mexico were to send two distinct and separate expeditions, under command of Malaspina and Mourelle respectively, to the Gulf of Tehuan- 162 tepee and to Juan de Fuca Straits. After the arrival of Capitan de Navfo Malaspina in the fall of 1791 (he had just returned from a northern reconnaissance of Alaska and California), Viceroy Revilla Gigedo changed his mind about the assignments for the Sutil and Mexicans. Instead of separating the two vessels, the viceroy planned to send both ships to Juan de Fuca Straits in charge of two of Malaspina's officers— Cayetano Valdes ^■^Revilla Gigedo to Pedro Lerena, Mexico, Nov. 30, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1545. 382 and Dionisio Alcala Galiano.^^ The situation was fraught with irony since Lieutenant Mourelle had actually started on the expedition to the northwest, sailing from San Bias to Acapulco but at the latter port, Valdes and Alcala Galiano took over the two schooners, Sutil and Mexicana, while Mourelle returned to the capital and continued work ing for Revilla Gigedo. Months afterwards, on March 1, 1793, Francisco Antonio Mourelle sailed to Spain and never again did this eminent mariner return to Mexico or the Department of San Blas.^^ The appointment of Francisco Mourelle for the ex pedition to Juan de Fuca Straits and then his sudden replacement are doubtless attributable to Alejandro Malas pina. In any case, the round-the-world-explorer was highly partial to his own officers since Cayetano Valdes and ^■^Revilla Gigedo to lerena, Mexico, Nov. 30, 1791, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1545. See also: Cutter, Malaspina In Califomia. pp. 7-8. ^^Relacion de Los Meritos y Servicios de Dn. Fran cisco Mourelle, MN, MS 999. The "official" reason for giving Francisco Mourelle another assignment, instead of command of the Mexicana. was ill health and sickness; Malaspina and his influence in the episode are discussed below in the text. 383 Alcala Galiano were more closely connected with scientific aspects of exploration which, after all, was one of the watchwords of Malaspina1s commission. Mourelle^ service record indicates that the change of command orders were made on account of sickness but contemporary information from Viceroy Revilla Gigedo reveals that Malaspina had been actively supporting his own men.^ If there remains any consolation for Francisco Mourelle, it might be that he was promoted to the rank of full Lieutenant effective Febru ary 28, 1792. Thus, with this unique incident Mourelle 166 closed out his active career in the New World. The reorganization of the Naval Department of San Bias was immediately followed by a vigorous shipbuilding program. During the period 1790 to 1792, four vessels were built at the arsenal of San Bias: the schooner Valdes; the brigantine Activo; and the twin schooners Sutil and Mexi cana. This new tonnage represents final naval construction ^■^Revilla Gigedo to Lerena, Dec. 5, 1791, in Revilla Gigedo Collection, MS, 37 vols., Bancroft Library, University of California, Vol. VI, doc. 642. ^■^Relacion de Los Meritos y Servicios de Dn. Fran cisco Mourelle, MN, MS 999. Mourelle passed through Havana enroute to Spain (April 1793) and arrived at La Coruna on July 1, 1793. 384 for the Port of San Bias and in general, all of the new vessels served the department well. The one exception was the schooner Valdes of 139 tons burden, which was finished under Captain Bodega y Quadra*s direction and then out-* 167 fitted for a trans-Pacific voyage. Ensign Cosine Berto- dano received command of the Valdes on August 13, 1790, and the new schooner sailed for Manila where it remained as a 168 permanent vessel of the Philippine Company. The next two vessels completed at the naval station were the twin schooners Sutil and Mexicana. Unlike the larger ship, Valdes, these other ships were designed primarily for coastal exploration and not for transporting supplies or troops. Captain Malaspina first suggested the construction of a light-craft vessel for exploring the "Lower Coasts" from Realejo to the Gulf of Tehuantepec. In 1791, after Malaspina*s arrival in Acapulco, Viceroy 169 Revilla Gigedo approved this project. ^■^Noticia de los buques que han Pertenicido al Departamento de San Bias en los anos pasados desde 1767 hasta el de 91, MN, MS 127. 168 "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. ^^Revilla Gigedo to Lerena, Mexico, Feb. 7, 1791, in AGI, Mexico, no. 1542. 385 Construction of the first schooner, Nuestra Senora de la Asuncion, alias Mexicana, began on March 17, 1791.*^ The Department of San Bias had recently acquired a new master-builder from Spain--Manuel Bastarrachea--and the new project was awarded high priority among San Bias activi ties. Bastarrachea complied with Captain Bodega y Quadra's orders for laying down a small, shallow-draft vessel and by the middle of May, the work was finished. The Mexicana was floated on the twenty-first of May and shortly afterwards the new vessel was outfitted at San Bias. The vessel received a large allowance of cables and anchors (judged to be indispensable for her assignment in the Pacific Northwest) and even the rigging was of the finest quality canamo and pita materials. On June 11, 1791, ^iSS for details of the construction of Mexicana are: (1) Estado de la Goleta de S.M. la Mexicana del mando del Capitan de Fragata Dn. Cayetano Valdes, in AGN, Historia. 558; (2) Expediente on la Goleta Mexicana. AGN, Cali- fomias, 42; and (3) "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN. 171^he Royal Treasury of Spain paid 1,032 pesos to bring Bastarrachea and family from Ferro1 to Vera Cruz. See: Revilla Gigedo to Lerena, Jan. 13, 1791* in AGI, Mexico, no. 1540. 386 Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra declared the Mexicana acceptable for naval service; he forwarded an official listing of expenses (some 10,513 pesos) and also the fol lowing dimensions: Length 50 ft. 3 in. Beam 13 ft. 3 in. Depth of Hold to Main Deck 8 ft. 7 in. Length of Keel 46 ft. 10 in. Draft Forward 5 ft. 8 in. Draft Aft 6 ft. 2 in. 172 Burden 46 tons Following the construction of the Mexicana. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo ordered San Bias officials to complete an identical vessel for support of Alejandro Malaspina*s coastal reconnaissance of Juan de Fuca Straits. Captain Bodega y Quadra was absent from San Bias from September to November (1791) and the temporary commandant, Salvador Fidalgo, supervised construction of the third schooner, 172 Bodega y Quadra to Revilla Gigedo, Tepic, June 11, 1791, in AGN, Califomias. 42. A complete estado or listing of the vessel and all tackle, cargo, etc., is found in Estado de la Goleta de S. M. la Mexicana, in AGN, Historia, 558. 387 the Sutil. On September 23, 1791, Salvador Fidalgo wrote the viceroy and informed him that San Bias officials were making preparations for laying the keel and that the new builder, Bastarrachea, was satisfied with plans for the Sutil, On October 8 the temporary commandant reported satisfactory progress on the vessel and he also requested a name for this ship. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo replied-- October 24, 1791— that the new vessel would be Nuestra Senora del Carmen, alias the Sutil. The new schooner was launched on November 9 and Salvador Fidalgo1s official report indicated that the entire construction period lasted from September 26 until November 15, while the total expenses for the Sutil amounted to 9,867 pesos. A report from San Bias Commis sary Francisco Hijosa indicates that the two schooners 176 Sutil and Mexicana were of identical dimensions. Letter of Fidalgo to Revilla Gigedo in AGN, Historia. 42. ^■^Letter of Fidalgo to Revilla Gigedo in AGN, Historia. 42. ^^Revilla Gigedo to Salvador Fidalgo in AGN, Historia. 42. ^^Fidalgo to Revilla Gigedo, Tepic, Nov. 12, 1791, and Francisco Hijosa to Revilla Gigedo, San Bias, Jan. 5, 1792, in AGN, Historia. 42. 388 One final ship was required at San Bias in connec tion with the Spanish surrender and negotiations at Nootka Sound in 1792: the bergantine Activo. In 1791, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo chose Captain Bodega y Quadra to lead the famous "Expedition of the Limits" from San Bias to Nootka Sound. The demand for one final San Bias-built vessel was apparent during the planning stages of the new expedition; both the viceroy and the San Bias cotnnandant agreed that the Princesa and a warship from Europe, the Santa Ger trud is , could be employed in 1792 to go to Nootka but another ship was necessary for ceremonial and military requirement s.^ ^ Captain Bodega y Quadra was given the responsibility of directing construction of the new vessel; he arrived at 178 San Bias in December 1791. In accordance with Revilla Gigedofs instructions, the commandant employed a double 177 The Santa Gertrudis was a man-of-war which was sent to Mexico from Peru by request of Viceroy Revilla Gigedo. The vessel made the journey in 56 days and docked at Acapulco on October 30, 1791, under command of Captain Alonso de Torres. Cited in Revilla Gigedo to Valdes, Mexico, Nov. 17, 1791, in Revilla Gigedo Coll., Vol. XIV, doc. 8 8. 178 The viceroy and Bodega y Quadra wrote two letters each on Nov. 22 and Nov. 23 concerning the need for a new ship; see AGN, Historia. 42. 389 work force in the shipyard. On December 9, Bodega y Quadra and master-builder Bastarrachea laid the keel of the schooner Activo, striving for a January deadline. On February 25, 1792 (somewhat behind their schedule for the Activo). San Bias officials floated the new ship and then 179 completed final preparations on the hull. Unfortunately, the Activo sustained a serious acci dent which delayed the "Expedition of the Limits" for some time. The original departure of the Spanish flotilla occurred on March 3, 1792, with the Princesa and Santa Gertrxidis in the lead followed by the Activo. Two days later in the vicinity of the Islas Marfas the schooner Activo split a fore-topmast and there were additional com plications involving damage to the ship's rigging. The captain of the Activo. Salvador Melendez, informed Bodega y Quadra of the accident and finally limped back to San Josef Marfa Monterde to Revilla Gigedo, Conta- durfa de San Bias, July 5, 1792, in AGN, Historia. 42. According to the official report cited abcve, the Activo was 92 ft. over-all length, 12 ft. beam, with a burden of 213 1/2 tons. Expenses for the vessel were 29,854 pesos. 1 ftfl Letter of Melendez to Bodega y Quadra, On board Santa Gertrudis. west of the Islas Marfas, March 5, 1792, in AGN, Historia. 42. 390 Lieutenant Salvador Melendez of the Activo reported the accident to Viceroy Revilla Gigedo in March 1792. The captain of the schooner reported that the masts of the Activo and other timber as well were not aged correctly, thus causing the loss of one mast during the first heavy 181 wind at sea. This notification prompted the viceroy to investigate the matter, an undertaking which was not con** eluded until long after the departure of the Spanish Expedition to Nootka. According to official findings in the case of the Activo. the workman Bastarrachea was negli gent in his construction of the ship, especially in the methods for curing timber. As a result of this incident, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo issued a series of stem letters; San Bias officials were warned about the aging process and 1 •i? the builder Bastarrachea was fined for his negligence. In addition to the successful shipbuilding program of 1790-1792, the Department of San Bias also continued its traditional role as repair facility and supply depot. l ^ H l e l e n d e z to Revilla Gigedo, San Bias, in AGN, Historia. 42. 182 Revilla Gigedo to Salvador Fidalgo, Mexico, April 18, 1792, and July 10, 1792, in AGN, Historia. 42. 391 The former job consisted primarily of an overhaul and repair of the department’s major vessels--Concepcion. Princesa. San Carlos. Favorita. Activo. and Aranzazu-- while some attention was given to the minor ships. One of the first repair projects at San Bias was a thorough overhaul of the Favorita, completed by Manuel Bastarrachea in 1790. After several voyages to Alta Cali fornia, the Favorita was finally retired and scrapped in 1791.^^ The sister-ship of the Favorita and the pride of Ignacio de Arteaga, the San Bias frigate Princesa. remained in service until the era of Mexican Independence. This vessel’s first overhaul was accomplished in 1791, but there was a set time limitation and not all repairs were satis factory according to Captain Juan de la Bodega y Quadra. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo noted one year later that expenses for repairing the Princesa in 1791 were high and the quality of work seemed shoddy; consequently a final repair ^^Letter of Revilla Gigedo to Valdes, Mexico, Feb. 26, 1790, in Revilla Gigedo Coll., Vol. II, doc, 370. See also: "Noticias del Departamento de San Bias" (127), MS in MN for the scrapping of the Favorita. In his letter of Feb. 26, the viceroy indicated that the Favorita was taking on a great deal of water even during short voyages. During a normal supply voyage from San Bias to Loreto in 1788, the vessel was flooding at the rate of 8 inches of water every 24 hours. 392 job was required to keep the frigate in operating condi- tion.184 The original builder and first naval commander of the Princesa. Ignacio de Arteaga, was finally called upon for supervising a thorough careening and repair of the frigate. On November 25, 1795, Arteaga submitted an esti mate for the repair of the Princesa to a Royal Board of Naval Officers including the Commandant Francisco de Eliza, Captain Jacinto Caamano, and the Treasurer and Commissary Officer, Francisco Hijosa. Arteaga’s repair bill amounted to 27,009 pesos (which was eventually reduced by some 1,000 pesos); however, in the final analysis, the Princesa 185 received one of the best overhauls in San Bias history. Between 1794 and 1797 there was a pattern of regu larity for repairing other San Bias vessels. During this 184 Revilla Gigedo to Salvador Fidalgo, Mexico, July 10, 1792, in AGN, Historia. 42. 1 oc Ignacio Arteaga, Carena de la Fragata Princesa en 1796, Royal Arsenal of San Bias, Nov. 25, 1795, in AGN, Marina. 109. This was one of most thorough repair operations ever completed on the San Bias-built Princesa since its chris tening in 1778. Estevan Jose Martinez complained of the scanty repairs which were finished in 1788 on the Princesa and during his Expedition of 1789 to the Northwest Coasts, he had some problems because of this. 393 three-year period, the schooner Activo received repairs and an overhaul before departing for an extended exploration of "la Costa Baja” (the Gulf of Tehuantepec and the Nica raguan coast) in 1794; the frigate Concepcion received an outfitting and overhaul in 1795 just before accompanying the Manila galleon to the Philippines; and the smaller schooners Mexicans and Sutil were careened and repaired in 186 1794 after a reconnaissance to Juan de Fuca Straits. The Aranzazu was active in supplying Alta California and Nootka in 1792-1793 and finally in 1795, Juan Bautista Matute supervised an overhaul on this ship in the naval arsenal of San Bias. Once again there was some dispute regarding the cost for repairs; Lieutenant Matutefs origi nal estimate seemed high to Commandant Salvador Fidalgo. However, Lieutenant Matute completed the overhaul on the Aranzazu and on December 24, 1795, turned in his expense 186 Estado del Bergantin de Guerra el Activo, San Bias, Feb. 13, 1794, in Pac£fico America, Tomo I, MN, MS 126. The Concepcion was escort vessel for the Philippine galleon San Fernando de Magallanes during a trans-Pacific voyage from Acapulco to Manila. Comandante Francisco de Montes noted the repairs in his letter to Exmo. Sr. Director General de la Armada, Acapulco, May 30, 1796, in Papeles Varios, Tomo I, MN, MS 314. 394 187 sheet amounting to 10,958 pesos. The Nootka-built schooner Santa Satumina served the Department of San Bias well but in 1796 the vessel required an extensive overhaul. Lieutenant Manuel Murgia and marine-builder Fernando de los r£os took charge of the overhaul and after a month’s labor, they finished the careening and repair. Total expenses for the Santa Satur- 188 nina were 2,268 pesos. In addition to regular repairs for San Bias vessels, there were at least two vessels of the Manila fleet which were overhauled in the Port of San Bias during these later years. The Manila galleon San Jose y las Animas which sailed from San Bias in 1793 (coomanded by Lieutenant Jacinto Caamano) was first outfitted and repaired at San Bias. Another vessel, San Fernando de Magallanes. also 189 received minor repairs at San Bias in 1795. From various 187 Comandante de la Marina Francisco de Montes to Viceroy Branciforte, San Bias, Jan. 9, 1796, plus report of Juan Bautista Matute, Sobre Carena de Fragata Aranzazu en el ano de 1796, in AGN, Marina. 109. ^^Manuel Murgia and Fernando de los Rios, Carena de la Balandra Horcasitas, Arsenal of San Bias, Mar. 17, 1796, in AGN, Marina. 109. ^^Francisco de Montes to Director General de la Armada, Acapulco, May 30, 1796, in Papeles Varios, Tomo I, 395 reports concerning these Manila vessels and others too, it seems certain that the Department of San Bias furnished support for Manila vessels in the decade of 1790 to 1800.190 The Aftermath of Nootka One of the most singularly decisive events which altered the role of San Bias was the Nootka Convention of 1790. Specific details of this episode have been thor- 191 oughly examined by historians but, concerning the results, one can scarcely question the fact that Spain had retreated from her previous position of eminence on the MN, MS 314. Details on the San Jose v las Animas are found in Viaje en Limpio de los Corvetas Descubierta y Atrevida, MN, MS 181. % 190 That San Bias was able to supply the Califomias and to build new vessels as well as repairing their own and an occasional ship from Manila is attributable to the trained personnel, both military and civilian, at the Naval Department. According to an official report--Plan de Gastos del Departamento de San Bias— there was a total of 772 men at San Bias with an annual budget of 361,490 pesos. See: Josef Marla Monterde, Contadurfa de Real Hacienda del Departamento de San Bias, April 21, 1791, in Pacffico America, Tomo II, MN, MS 127. ^^■The most complete study on this topic is William R. Manning, The Nootka Sound Controversy (Washing ton: Government Printing Office, 1905). 396 Northwest Coast and henceforth the Department of San Bias would be maintained strictly as a defensive base. From the Spanish point of view, the Nootka Sound Controversy changed everything on the Pacific Coast. The intensity of Anglo'Spanish rivalry at Nootka was unexpected by Spain, even though these world powers had clashed as recently as the 1780*s. England had adopted a policy of commercial expansion during the period immediately before the controversy occurred (this endeavor was strictly private, not government-supported), and English traders began moving northward into the North Pacific. Along with this development was the question of sovereignty--the foreign challenge which Spain had dreaded for centuries and which had first been introduced by the Russians. During the closing years of the eighteenth century three eminent European powers coveted Nootka Sound--Russia, England, and Spain. Russia was seriously interested in Nootka because if she could control this site then she would dominate fur trading along the coast of Alaska and, in addition, a base at Nootka Sound would help to checkmate British commercial interests in North America. England regarded Nootka as a perfect northern headquarters for 397 maintaining Pacific trade with the Orient; and of secondary value, English occupation of Nootka Sound would stimulate further territorial expansion on the Pacific Coast. For Spain, Nootka Sound in the year 1789 represented the northern limits of its Pacific Coast Eknpire. Although its occupation was costly in material and personnel-“there was no special intrinsic value to be gained unless the Spanish Crown organized a fur trading monopoly--Nootka Sound was defensively a strategic site and for this reason alone, the IQ 2 Spanish government was determined to hold Nootka. Nootka Sound was important to Spain as long as the following special governing characteristics prevailed: 1. It was a Spanish tradition that special limitations or territorial boundaries be undefined and based upon the symbolic act of sovereignty, Spain managed to control a vast stretch of territory from Alta Cali fornia to the Gulf of Alaska; 1Q2 7 Pedro de Albemi, military commandant at Nootka, experimented with various fruit trees and maintained a flourishing orchard. These products were not grown for subsistence and there are frequent comments about the scarcity of fresh meat and vegetables for Spanish soldiers at Nootka. See: Felipe Bauza, Viaje alrededor del Mundo, 1789-96, MN, MS 749. 2. It was necessary for Spain to occupy and garrison Nootka Sound by means of a token force, thus giving the illusion that Nootka was a Spanish military stronghold; and finally, 3. Spain believed that sovereignty over these vast areas was necessary, if for no other reason, to keep rival powers from encroach ing. Spanish activities at Nootka Sound before 1790 con form to this traditional pattern in many ways. As long as Spain controlled the Port of Nootka, other powers were at a disadvantage in pursuing fur-trading activities. In connection with the Spanish meaning of "sovereignty," Nootka Sound was first intended to be a convenient base for launching explorations to the Northwest Coasts and not a strong, populous, military site. And finally, Spain still held to the corollary that only a "token force" was neces sary for holding Nootka; this was quite different from the Anglo-Saxon meaning of sovereignty founded upon the prin ciple that a valid territorial claim consisted of dis covery, occupation, and full-scale development including 399 civilian settlements. Beginning with the voyage of Captain Cook in 1778, Spain gradually bestirred herself from an earlier false sense of security. Somewhat later in the 1780's, John Meares, James Hanna, and James Colnett seriously challenged Spain's sovereignty over Nootka Sound. The die was cast. Spain realized that she would no longer be able to retain control over Nootka in the face of British mercantile operations and naval sea power; she realized that a change in policy was inevitable. Viceroy Revilla Gigedo acted promptly in drafting a series of new measures after the Nootka Sound Contro- 1Q4 versy. By formal decree, the viceroy warned military commanders in Alta California about the increasing danger from foreign vessels; he urged them to improve their defenses and to train their soldiers for any emergency ^^Manuel Servfn, "The Act of Sovereignty in the Age of Discovery" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1959), p. 162. ^■^Technically, Revilla Gigedo was responsible for the re-occupation of Nootka in 1790 (the Eliza Expedition from San Bias) and he succeeded in stalling the English for some two years on this question of prior rights to Nootka. 400 195 which might occur. Revilla Gigedo sent Lieutenant Juan Bautista Matute from the Naval Department of San Bias to occupy Bodega Bay in 1793, a move which was planned to forestall English boundary claims and to buffer Spanish territory north of San Francisco. Matute*8 effort to settle Bodega Bay was not successful, but it did represent specific action and also the idea of generating military forces seemed to increase Spanish morale and to prolong the 19 7 life of the Naval Department of San Bias. 7' An interesting side light which explains Spain's motive for occupying Bodega Bay was the visit of George ^^Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Aug. 27, 1791, and another letter to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Sept. 1, 1791, both in AHN, Estado. no. 4289. ^^Revilla Gigedo to Juan de la Bodega y Quadra, Mexico, Feb. 17, 1793, in AHN, Estado. no. 4290. Details of the exploration are in the following: Reconocimiento del Puerto de la Bodega por el Teniente de Fragata Dn. Juan Bautista Matute, in Costa NO de America, Tomo II, MN, MS 332. 197 Lieutenant Matute left San Bias on March 23, 1793, in conmand of the Sutil and arrived at Bodega Bay on May 26. After a reconnaissance of the bay he concluded that the port offered few advantages; the perils of a strong prevailing wind, lack of any shelter or lee and the scarcity of firewood prompted Matute to send the Aranzazu to the Presidio of San Francisco, where it was planned to transfer supplies and tools back to Bodega in a shallow launch. Reconocimiento del Puerto de la Bodega, in Costa NO de America, MN, MS 332. 401 Vancouver to San Francisco Bay in 1792 and 1793. After the Expedition of the Limits (1792), Captain Bodega y Quadra retired to Monterey Bay, closely followed by George Van couver, the English commissioner and representative at 198 Nootka. It was evident that Vancouver was over- extending his diplomatic mission and the Spaniards sus pected that he was spying on their military defenses on 199 . the Pacific Coast. Captain George Vancouver made two "official" visits to San Diego and Monterey, and it was clear that he was acting more as a military agent than a peace commissioner.200 198 Bodega y Quadra to Revilla Gigedo, Monterey, Oct. 24, 1792 and two separate letters, Bodega y Quadra to Revilla Gigedo, both Monterey, Dec. 30, 1792, in AHN, Estado, no. 4290. ^^Revilla Gigedo to Duque de la Alcudia, Mexico, Feb. 13, 1793, in AHN, Estado, no. 4290. The viceroy indicated that George Vancouver arrived in San Francisco Bay but passed on south to Monterey where he anchored on Nov. 25, 1792, remaining until Jan. 13, 1793. A contemporary letter, George Vancouver to Viceroy Revilla Gigedo, Monterey, Jan. 13, 1793, tells of polite treatment and generous hospitality in Monterey. Commis sioner Vancouver had special praise for Bodega y Quadra's kind treatment. 200Salvador Fidalgo to Revilla Gigedo, Puerto de San Francisco, July 20, 1793, in AHN, Estado. no. 4290. Lieu tenant Fidalgo had just been relieved in Nootka by Ramon Saavedra but the former officer did chance to meet Captain 402 The Department of San Bias also assisted In pre paring for military defense of Alta California. From 1792 to 1794, vessels from the naval department carried standard provision items and also military equipment and personnel. In 1794, the new Viceroy, Marques de Branciforte, sent Lieutenant Colonel Pedro de Albemi to San Francisco where he served as military comnandant of the Presidio and two 201 fortresses of San Francisco. Military preparations were also evident in official acts which permitted all San Bias vessels to arm themselves for wartime engagements. The San Bias schooner Activo was converted to a man-of-war in 1794, mounting some fourteen George Vancouver before he left the Northwest Coast. Fidalgo, in this letter to the viceroy, warns about the large arsenal on board Vancouver's ship, Discovery, and the rumors about the Englishman's plans to attack San Diego or Monterey. Jose Joaquin de Arrillaga warned Vancouver about illegal trading activities in Monterey and demanded to know his mission. See: Letter to George Vancouver, Monterey, Oct. 31, 1793, in AHN, Estado. no. 4290. ^Hliguel Joseph de Aranza to Juan Manuel Alavaner, Mexico, Oct. 24, 1798, with enclosure Pedro de Alberni to Aranza, San Francisco, Aug. 1, 1798, in AG I, Mexico. no. 1446. The orders for Albemi to go to Monterey included his Volunteer Company of Catalonian soldiers, some seventy- eight men. 403 cannons. The warship Santa Gertrudis was transferred to San Bias— rather than to Callao de Lima--for permanent duty. Also in 1794, Salvador Melendez made a hasty voyage In the Activo to Realejo for naval cannon and 203 artillery to be used on San Bias vessels. The Naval Department of San Bias had shown remark** able growth after the new Reglamento was put in effect in 1789. Bodega y Quadra*s leadership was superb, both in managing the naval department and in representing Spain at Nootka in 1792 while younger San Bias officers were gaining experience on vcyages of expedition and in command posi tions. Although new personnel had been added and the position of San Bias seemed stronger than ever in 1792, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo proposed that the naval base be transferred to Acapulco.Consequently, the "transfer question" was again revived and from 1792 to 1794, main tenance of San Bias was supported by Bodega y Quadra and 9 f } 9 Revilla Gigedo to Alcudia, Mexico, April 30, 1794, in AHN, Estado. no. 4290. Salvador Melendez, Estado de Salida del Bergantin de Guerra el Activo, in Paclfico America, Tomo I, in MN, MS 126. 204 Revilla Gigedo to Florida Blanca, Mexico, Sept. 1, 1792, in AHN, Estado. no. 4290. 404 attacked by Malaspina, Bustamante, and even Viceroy Revilla Gigedo. Basically, the question involved the following: could San Bias best serve Spain's new interest in defending the Califomias— including military and logistics support-- or should the naval shipyard and supply base be moved to a more healthful location; a site where naval vessels were afforded easy access and where there were adequate facili ties for large numbers of ships? The debate on this issue seems quite heated, Viceroy Revilla Gigedo indicating that Bruno Hezeta and a number of previous San Bias veterans 205 would gladly testify in favor of the transfer. Finally, Documentation on the transfer controversy is found in practically all major archives: i.e., (1) Revilla Gigedo to Alcudia, Mexico, April 30, 1793, in AHN, Estado. no. 4290; (2) Revilla Gigedo to Gardoqui, Mexico, Aug. 30, 1792, in Revilla Gigedo Coll., Vol. VII, doc. 18S; (3) Revilla Gigedo to Pedro de Lerena, Mexico, Jan. 15, 1791, In AGI, Mexico, no. 1540; (4) Malaspina, Reflexiones Sobre la Eleccion de un Puerto en la Costa Occidental de Nueva Espana para Reunion y deposito de las Fuerzas Navales en el Mar, in MN, Reyno de Mexico, Tomo IV, MS 336; and (5) Francisco Javier de Viana, Diario del Viaie Explored or de las Corbetas Espafjoles Descu- bierta v Atrevida en los Anos 1789 a 1791 (Madrid: Exercito, 1849), pp. 178-83 for a personal judgment on the superiority of Acapulco over San Bias. 405 in 1793, it was decided that San Bias be retained; appar ently questions about healthful living and adequate facili ties were subordinant to the port's advantage in being closer to Alta California than Acapulco. The scientific visit of Alejandro Malaspina to San Bias in the fall of 1791 produced a whole series of geo graphic descriptions and scientific information about the port and, in addition, San Bias immedlately became the center of new expeditions. The dynamic personality of Malaspina seemed catching and with authorization from Revilla Gigedo, San Bias officers took up the flair for scientific investigation. The Sutil and Mexicans Expedi tion to Juan de Fuca Straits was notable for Spanish chart-work while the Matute Expedition for occupation of Bodega Bay was partially in the guise of scientific exploring. Later explorations included the voyage of Salvador Melendez and Juan Pantoja in the Activo to the lower coasts of Nicaragua and the expedition of Francisco 206 de Eliza to Tactemua Bay, New Spain. ^Ofcprancisco to Marques de Branciforte, San Bias, May 18, 1797, in Noticias Hidrograficas de la America Meridional, Tomo I, MN, MS 327. See Plate no. Ill for Francisco de Eliza's piano. 406 Finally, the position of Alta California in the last decade of the eighteenth century explains a great deal about the decline of San Bias. Historically, San Bias and Upper California were linked by a rigid political-economic- religious bond. The Viceroyalty of New Spain supplied food, implements, tools, church vestments, and even Fran ciscan Friars for the new missions and settlements in Alta California. San Bias vessels were a dependable means for maintaining this early province; but, gradually, California prospered and assumed a leadership all its own, especially in economic and military affairs. California in the decade of the 1790*8 was keenly aware of military weaknesses but a distinctive era began when Governor Diego Borica assumed office in 1794. The new chief executive was, in the words of one historian, "a master of urbanity and a connoisseur of vintages” or in essence, the mirror image of Viceroy 207 Bucareli. The problem of subsistence, which had restricted the development of Alta California, seemed greatly tinder control during Borica*s term and the governor 207 Irving Berdine Richman, California Under Spain and Mexico: 1535-1847 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1911), p. 168. 407 himself contributed two notable plans for future expansion of trade and development.^® California missions were not exceptionally prosper ous nor had they reached the period of greatest produc tivity in the closing years of the period 1790 to 1800. But, concerning the potential of the mission system there was evidence of new and vigorous growth. Governor Borica had established a sympathetic but stem regime and during his term new missions were established and the vital foundation for new expansion in the mission system— coastal trade--was recognized. There is no simple explanation which perfectly describes the rapid decline of San Bias and west coast shipments to Alta California (1798 to 1810), but as the Province of Upper California became more independent in economic affairs, San Bias counted for less and less. One of the traditional bonds between Mexico (and in almost every instance ’ ’ Mexico" signifies "San Bias activities") and Alta California had been undermined and was, in the 208 The official plans were (1) to separate the two Califomias into separate political entities for efficient organization, and (2) to open and prosecute trading activi ties between California and Santa Fe. Richman, California Under Spain and Mexico: 1535-1847. p. 184. 408 closing years of the eighteenth century, finally breaking asunder. Beginning in 1798 and Increasing with dramatic intensity, the Pacific Coast became the scene of smuggling activities with the attendant swarm of American and English commercial vessels. This situation, to a marked degree, explains the acceleration of Alta California's independence from subsistence requirements and the multitudinous support activities which the Naval Department had offered for forty years. Other factors must not be completely overlooked in seeking an explanation for decline at San Bias. There was, for example, a serious loss of key naval personnel in 1795 to 1800 and the rapidly changing, shifting sequence of viceroys in Mexico was of no advantage to San Bias, espe cially after the retirement of Revilla Gigedo--the tireless and comprehensive "reformer” of New Spain. The shortage of vessels and a lack of new repair projects or even marine construction at San Bias in the last years presaged serious decline. The entire range of San Bias activities had been affected by the Nootka Sound Controversy and from 1798 until 1810, these changes were definitely characteristic of a decadent and outmoded organization. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Manuscripts Archivo General de Indies, Sevilla, Spain: MSS, Audiencia de Guadalajara. Legajo 416. MSS, Audiencia de Guadalajara. Legajo 497. MSS, Audiencia de Guadalajara. Legajo 513. MS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1464. MSS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1514. MS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1515. MSS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1535. MSS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1537. MSS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1540. MS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1542. MS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1545. MS, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 1553. Archivo General de la Nacion, Mexico, D. F., Mexico: MSS, Califomiaa. Vol. 42. MSS, Californias. Vol. 46. 410 411 MSS, Caminos v Calzados, Vol. 10. MSS, Historia. Vol. 63. MSS, Historia. Vol. 558. MSS, Marina. Vols. 32-109. Archivo Historlco Naclonal, Madrid, Spain: MSS, Estado. Legajo 4258. MSS, Estado. Legajo 4289. MSS, Estado. Legajo 4290. Bancroft Library, Berkeley, California: Archivo General de Indlas, Audiencia de Mexico. Legajo 104 (transl.). Archivo General de la Nacion, Provincias Internas and Califomias (microfilm copies). Revilla Gigedo Collection, 37 vols. Bib Hot ec a Naclonal, Madrid, Spain: MS, Ynforme de Jose de Galvez, 3119. MS, Razon General de Real Hacienda, XV, 10366. MSS, Milicias de Nueva Espafia, nos. 28, 40, 18745. MSS, Papeles Varios referentes a Mexico (Ultramar), 19266. Huntington Library, San Marino, California: MSS, Jose de Galvez, 1768-1769. 412 Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain: MS, Corbetas, Tomo II (92). MS, Corbetas (92 bis). MS, Pacffico America, Tomo I (126). MS, Pacffico America, Tomo II (127). MS, Viaje En Limpio de las Corvetas Descubierta y Atrevlda ... (181). MS, Diario Astronomica de Expedicion de Malaspina, Tomo I (263). MS, Expedicion de Malaspina (264). MS, Diarios, Tomo I (271). MS, Malaspina Corespondencia, Tomo II (279). MS, Malaspina Corespondencia, Tomo III (280). MS, Corespondencia de Malaspina (281). MS, Costa Oriente de la America Meridional en 1790, Tomo IV (288). MS, Pilipinas, Tomo III (313). MS, Papeles Varios, Tomo I (314). MS, Noticias Hidrograficas de la America Meridional, Tomo I (327). MS, Califomias y Costas NO de America, Tomo I (330). MS, Costa NO de America, Tomo I (331). MS, Costa NO de America, Tomo II (332). MS, Reyno de Mexico, Tomo I (333). 413 MS, Reyno de Mexico, Tomo II (334). MS, Reyno de Mexico, Tomo III (335). MS, Reyno de Mexico, Tomo IV (336). MS, Apuntas, Noticlas y Corespondencia Pertenientes a la Expedicion de Malaspina (427). MS, Malaspina Cuademo, no. 1 (428). MS, Miscelanea, Tomo II (485). MS, Virreinato de Mexico, Tomo II (568). MS, California: Historia y Viajes, Tomo I (575). MS, California: Historia y Viajes, Tomo II (575 bis). MS, Virreinato de Mexico, Tomo IV (570). MS, Mares Atlantico y de Asia (576). MS, Diario de Navegacion Entre America y Filipinas (577). MS, Varios, Tomo I (578). MS, Consento de la Navegacion y descubrimientos hechos en dos Viajes ... (618). MS, Descripcion de California (621). MS, Diarios: Navegaciones a California (622). MS, Libro de Guardias, Descublerta (729). MS, Viaje Al Rededor del Mundo 1789“1796 (749). MS, Libro de Guardias, Atrevida (755). MS, Varios, Siglo XVIII (834). 414 MS, RelacIon De Los Meritos y Servicios Del Capltan De Navio Dn Francisco Mourelle ... (999). MS, Vargas Ponce (1060). MS, Compafi£a de Guardias Marinas de Cadiz (1073). MS, Compa&£a de Guardias Marinas de Cadiz (1103). MS, Companfa de Guardias Marinas Ano de 1751 (1118). MS, Compan£a de Guardias Marinas (119). MS, Compafi£a de Guardias Marinas (1121). MS, Antigiledades de los Of ic I ales de Guerra de la Armada, Tomo II (1161). MS, Oficiales Asuntos Particulares (1163). MS, Asuntos de los 1° Pilotos, 1749-1790 (1190). MS, Oficiales de Guerra, 1799-1812 (1191). MS, Coleccion Gullien, Tomo VIII (1211). MS, R.O. Gs. Ms. 1784-1838, Coleccion Gullien (1233). MS, Oficiales Ferrol, 1790-1808 (1250). MS, Coleccion Guillen: Informes Reservados (1533). MS [Cartas de la Costa NO de America], (10096). Yale University Library, New Haven, Connecticut: MSS, Coe Collection, nos. 12, 52, 53. 415 Unpublished Materials Cook, Warren L. ' ‘Spain In the Pacific Northwest.” Unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1960. Delgado Miranda, Pilar. "Historia del Puerto de San Bias en la Edad Moderna." Unpublished thesis, University of Sevilla, 1960. Servln, Manuel. “The Act of Sovereignty in the Age of Discovery." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Univer sity of Southern California, 1959. Wilson, Iris H. “Scientific Aspects of Spanish Exploration in New Spain During the late Eighteenth Century." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1962. Diaries. Journals. Contemporary Documents Almanak Nautico v Estado General de Marina para el ano de 1786. Madrid: La Imprenta Real, 1787. Bodega y Quadra, Juan Francisco de la. “1775, Costas Occidentales de America del Norte," edited by Capitan de Corbeta Cebreiro Blanco. Coleccion de Diarios v Relaciones para la Historia de los Viales v Descubri- mientos, II. Madrid: Instituto Historico de Marina, 1944. Estado General de la Real Armada. Ano de 1796-1808. Madrid. Longinos Martinez, Jose. Journal of Jose Longinos Martinez. 1791-1792. Ed. and trans. by Leslie Byrd Simpson. San Francisco: John Howell-Books, 1961. Marshall, James Stirrat, and Carrie. Pacific Voyages: Selections from "Scots Magazine, 1771-1808." Portland, Oregon: Binfords and Mort, 1960. 416 Noticlas v Documentoa Ac ere a de las Calif omias 1764-1795* Coleccion Chlmallstac de Libros y Documentos Ac erea de la Nueva Espans, no. 5. Jose Porrua Turanzas, ed. Madrid: 1959. Novo y Colson, Pedro de (ed.). La Vuelta al Mundo por las corbetas DESCUBIERTA v ATREVIDA al Mando del Capltan de Navlo D. Alejandro Malasplna desde 1789 a 1794. Madrid: 1885. Ordenanza de S. M. para el Govemo Mill tar, v Economic o de Sus Reales Arcenales de Marina. Madrid: La Imprenta Real, 1776. Relacion Del Viaie Hecho Por las Goletas Sutil v Mexicana en el Ano de 1792 para reconocer el Estrecho de Fuca. Coleccion Chlmallstac. Madrid: Jose Porrua Turanzas, 1958. Viana, Francisco Javier de. Dlario del Via^e Explorador de las Corbetas Espanolas Descubierta v AtrevIda en los Anos 1789 a 1791. Madrid: 1849. Vila, Vicente de. ’ ’ The Portola Expedition of 1769“1770: Diary of Vicente Vila,*' edited by Robert Selden Rose. Publications of the Academy of Pacific Coast History. II (1911), 2-119. Books Alcazar Molina, Cayetano. Historia de America v de los Pueblos Americanos--Los Virreinatos en el Siglo XVIII. Edited by Antonio Ballesteros y Beretta. Barcelona: Editores Salvat, 1945. Alegre, Francisco Javier. Historia de la Provincia De La Compafiia de Jesus de Nueva Esoafia. New ed. by Ernest J. Burrus and Felix Zubillaga. Rome: Insti tution Historicum, S.J., 1960. 4 vols. Bancroft, Hubert Howe. History of Alaska: 1730-1885. San Francisco: A. L. Bancroft and Company, 1886. 417 Bolton, Herbert E. Fray Juan Crespl: Missionary Explorer on the Pacific Coast. 1769"1774. Berkeley: Univer sity of California Press, 1927. Cartografia de i,ntramar: Mexico. Madrid: Servicios Geograflco e Historico del Ejercito, 1958. Vol. III. Chapman, Charles E. A History of California: The Spanish Period. New York: Macmillan Co., 1936. The Founding of Spanish California. New York: Macmillan Co., 1916. Cutter, Donald C. Malasnlna In California. San Francisco: John Howell-Books, 1960. Diccionario Maritime Esnafiol. Jose de Lorenzo, Gonzalo de Murga, and Martin Ferreiro, eds. Madrid: 1864. Englebert, Oner. Junipero Serra: Last of the Conquista dors [translated by Katherine Woods]. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1957. Guillen, Julio F. Indice de los Expedientes v Paneles de la Seccion de Indiferente del Archivo Central de Marina. 1730-94^ Madrid: Instituto Historico de Marina, 1951. Repertorio de los M.SS.. cartas, pianos y dibulos relativos a las Californias, existentes en este museo [Naval]. Madrid: 1932. Gutierrez Camarena, Marcial. San Bias v las Californias. Mexico: Editorial Jus., 1956. Haggard, J. Villasana. Handbook for Translators of Spanish Historical Documents. Oklahoma City: Semco Press, 1941. Heizer, Robert F., and John E. Mills. The Four Ages of Tsurai: A Documentary History of the Indians on Trinidad Bay. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1952. 418 Lynch, John. Spanish Colonial Administration. 1782-1810: The Intendent System in the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata. London: The Athlone Press, 1958. Ormsby, Margaret A. British Columbia: A History. New York: Macmillan Co., 1958. Palou, Fray Francisco. Historical Memoirs of New Cali fornia. Edited by Herbert Eugene Bolton. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1926. 4 vols. Life of Frav Jun£pero Serra. Edited and translated by Maynard J. Geiger. Washington: Academy of American Franciscan History, 1955. Pavia, Francisco de Paula. Galerfa Bioerafica de los Generales de Marina. 1efes v personales notables cue fjfliiTfl-ron en la tnisma corporacion desde 1700 a 1868. Madrid: 1873-74. 4 vols. Portillo y Diez de Sollano, Alvaro del. Descubrimentos v Exploraciones en las Costas de California. Madrid: 1947. Pourade, Richard F. The History of San Diego--Time of the Bells. San Diego: The Union Publishing Co., 1961. Priestley, Herbert I. Jose de Galvez--Visitador General of New Spain. University of California Publications in History, V. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1916. The Mexican Nation--A History. New York: Macmillan Co., 1924. Richman, Irving Berdine. California Under Spain and Mexico. 1535-1847. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1911. Rudkln, Charles N. (trans.) The First French Expedition to California. Early California Travel Series, XLVI. Los Angeles: Glen Dawson, 1959. 419 Tibesar, Antonine. Writings of Junipero Serra. Washing ton: Academy of American Franciscan History, 1955. 3 vols. Wagner, Henry R. The Cartography of the Northwest Coast of America to the Year 1800. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1937. 2 vols. Spanish Explorations in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Santa Ana: Fine Arts Press, 1933. Periodical Articles Barras y de Aragon, Francisco de las. "D. Esteban Jose Martinez, Alumno del Colegio de San Telmo de Sevilla," Publicaciones de la Real Sociedad Geografica. Serie B, no. 312 (1953), 2-20. "Notas Para una Historia de la Expedicion Botanica de Nueva EspaHa," Anuario de Estudios Americanos. VII (1950), 411-69. Bethencourt Massieu, Antonio. "El Real Astillero de Coatzacoalcos, 1720-1735," Anuario de Estudios Americanos. XV (1958), 371-428. Calderon Quijano, Jose Antonio. "Ingenieros Militares en Nueva Espana," Anuario de Estudios Americanos. VI (1949), 1-72. Chapman, Charles E. "The Alta California Supply Ships, 1773-76," The Southwestern Historical Quarterly. XIX (Oct., 1915), 184-94. — -- "Difficulties of Maintaining the Department of San Bias, 1775-1777," The Southwestern Historical Quarterly. XIX (April, 1916), 261-70. Cutter, Donald C. "California, Training Ground for Spanish Naval Heroes," California Historical Society Quarterly. XXXX (June, 1961), 109-22. 420 Diaz-Treehuelo, Maria Lourdes. ’ ’ Dos Nuevos Derroteros del Galeon de Manila (1730 y 1773)," Anuario de Estudios Americanos. XIII (1956), 1-83. Gerhard, Peter. "Pearl Diving in Lower California, 1533- 1830," Pacific Historical Review. XXV (1956), 239-49. "Indice Del Ramo de Provincias Intemas," Boletin Del Archivo General de la Macion. 2nd Series, II (1961). Kuykendall, Ralph S. "An American Shipbuilder for Spanish California," Hispanic American Historical Review. V (1922), 90-92. Schurz, William L. "Acapulco and the Manila Galleon," Southwestern Historical Quarterly. XXII (1919), 18-37. Servfn, Manuel P. "Religious Aspects of Symbolic Acts of Sovereignty," The Americas. XIII (Jan., 1957), 255-67. "Viceroy Bucareli's Instructions to Juan Perez," California Historical Society Quarterly. XL (Septem ber, 1961), 237-48. APPENDIX PLATE I PUERTO DE SAN BLAS, 1768, BY MIGUEL COSTANSO. ORIGINAL IN SERVICIO GEOGRAFICO DEL EJERCITO, MADRID. PHOTOGRAPHY BY MICHAEL MATHES. 423 I PLATE II TOPOGRAFIA DE SAN BLAS, TEPIC Y NUEVA GALICIA, ANONYMOUS. ORIGINAL IN ARCHIVO GENERAL DE LA NACION, MEXICO, D.F. 425 PLATE III SURGIDER0 DE CHACALA T BAHIA DE TACTEMDA, 1797, BT FRANCISCO DE ELIZA. ORIGINAL IN ARCHIVO GENERAL DE LA NACION, MEXICO, D.F. 427 PLATE IV VILLA DE SAN BLAS, 1780, BY FRANCISCO SEGUR0LA. ORIGINAL IN ARCHIVO GENERAL DE LA NACION, MEXICO, D.F. PLATE V CASA DE CONTADURIA, SAN BLAS, i960 * PLATE VI JUAN FRANCISCO DE LA BODEGA Y QUADRA, ORIGINAL PORTRAIT IN MUSEO NAVAL, MADRID 433 PLATE VII ESTEVAN JOSE MARTINEZ, ORIGINAL PORTRAIT IN MUSEO NAVAL, MADRID PLATE VIII PERMANENT CHAPEL OF SAN BLAS, 1960 437 PLATE IX PLANO DEL PUERTO DE SAN BLAS, 1777, BY FRANCISCO MOURELLE. ORIGINAL IN SERVICIO HISTORICO MILITAR, MADRID. PHOTOGRAPHY BY MICHAEL MATHES. *40 439 PLATE X PLANO DE LA ENSENADA DE NUESTRA SENORA DE REGLA, 1779, BY JOAN DE LA BODEGA Y QUADRA. ORIGINAL IN SERVICIO HISTORICO MILITAR. PHOTOGRAPHY BY MICHAEL MATHES. PLATE XII PLANO DE LA ENTRADA DE BUGARELI, 1779, BY SAN BLAS PILOTS. ORIGINAL IN MUSEO NAVAL. PHOTOGRAPHY BY MICHAEL MATHES. 445 PLATE XIII CABO CORRIENTES A SAH FRANCISCO: ANTIGUA T NUEVA CALIFORNIA. 1777, BY FRANCISCO MOORELLE. ORIGINAL IN MXJSEO NAVAL. PHOTOGRAPHY BY MICHAEL MATHES. 447

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

John William De Forest: A Study Of Realism And Romance In Selected Works

PDF

William Faulkner: From Past To Self-Discovery; A Study Of His Life And Work Through 'Sartoris' (1929)

PDF

An Analysis Of Contemporary Poetic Structure, 1930-1955

PDF

Structure And Imagery Patterns In The Poetry Of Emily Dickinson

PDF

An Index And Encyclopedia Of The Characters In The Fictional Works Of William Faulkner

PDF

Symbolism And The Rhetoric Of Fiction In Hemingway'S Novels

PDF

Time And Identity In The Novels Of William Faulkner

PDF

The Paganism Of Nathaniel Hawthorne

PDF

Theodore Dreiser'S 'An American Tragedy': A Study

PDF

The Significance Of Point Of View In Katherine Ann Porter'S 'Ship Of Fools'

PDF

The Critical Reception Of The Major Plays Of G. Bernard Shaw Performed Innew York: 1894-1950

PDF

The Major Plays Of Tennessee Williams, 1940 To 1960

PDF

A Critical Study Of The Apprenticeship Plays Of Thornton Wilder And Theirrelationship To His Major Dramatic Works

PDF

The Origin Of The War With Mexico: The Polk - Stockton Intrigue

PDF

Henry James'S 'The American Scene'

PDF

Variant Forms Of English And Scottish Popular Ballads In America

PDF

A Consideration Of The Criticism Of Swift'S 'Gulliver'S Travels,' 1890 To1960

PDF

American novelists' treatment of the secularization of the California missions

PDF

Scientific Aspects Of Spanish Exploration In New Spain During The Late Eighteenth Century

PDF

A History Of Music Education In The San Francisco Public Schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Thurman, Michael Edward (author)

Core Title The Naval Department Of San Blas: 1767-1797

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program History

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag History, modern,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Cutter, Donald C. (committee chair), McElderry, Bruce R. (committee member), Rowland, Donald W. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-323860

Unique identifier UC11358696

Identifier 6403114.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-323860 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6403114.pdf

Dmrecord 323860

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Thurman, Michael Edward

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA