Our Catholic Heritage in Texas
104
Refugio. From Rosario had come forty-seven Karankawas and fifty-two Cocos. The total number at Refugio now was one hundred seventy-five. 93 The arrangement proved to be decidedly unsatisfactory. In February, 1798, Father Garavito remonstrated that he could not continue to care for the Indians of Rosario indefinitely. It was unfair to expect him to keep up the neophytes of the two missions, particularly since one mis- sionary had been removed, and the annual allowance, consequently, reduced to four hundred fifty pesos. Refugio Mission could and would supply meat for the maintenance of the Rosario Indians, but it could not supply com and other farm products, because it did not have them. The crops had been lost on account of the drought. The Rosario Indians knew how to plant, but they refused to help or harvest at Refugio. This attitude set a bad example to the others. In spite of the fact that they were of the same nations and spoke a common tongue, they did not get along together. If the present arrangement was continued it would inevitably result in the ruin of both missions. At about the same time Elguezabal wrote the governor that the continual failure of the crops at Espiritu Santo and Rosario was the reason for the prolonged stay of the Rosario Indians at Refugio. There was only one solution: the construction of irrigation canals to insure the successful cultivation of their farms. While such a project was expensive, nevertheless the money could be secured either by a collection taken up by the missionaries in the more prosperous Reales de Minas (mining towns) or, as a last resort, by a grant from the royal treasury. The benefits would more than offset the initial expense. Elguezabal pointed out that an advantageous source of revenue for these impov- erished missions might result from permitting them to exchange their surplus cattle for the wild horses of Nuevo Santander at a convenient place. He suggested Laredo as a possible center of exchange. If a date was designated on which the mission could, each year, send the cattle to the appointed place, this trade might prove an important source of revenue. He concluded by declaring that the three missions in the vicinity of the pr.esidio of La Bahia were important for the control of the coastal tribes and merited more consideration. The funds at their disposal were inadequate." "Fray Jose Antonio de Jesus Garavlto to Juan Bautista Elguezabal, June 30, I 797 ; Juan Bautista Elguezabal to Manuel Munoz, July 3, 1 797. Bexar A rchives. "Jose Antonio de Jesus Garavito, February 3, 1798; Juan Bautista Elguezabal to Manuel Munoz, February 4, 1798. Bexar Arcl,ives.
Powered by FlippingBook