Our Catholic Heritage, Volume V

61

The Secularization of the /Wissions

a percentage on the net proceeds from the crops harvested and marketed through their efforts. 3 ' This matter was carefully considered by the officials of the Internal Provinces. Navarro declared that, in his opinion, the decree of April 10, 1794, clearly defined the duties of the justices and that the acceptance of the office carried with it the obligation to look after the interests of the Indians, to supervise their work, and to induce them to increase their temporalities without expecting any emolument. Under the circum- stances there was no reason for granting a salary or a percentage from the sale of the products raised by the secularized Indians. 35 Nava took the matter under consideration. He decided that although there was no provision for a salary or a commission for the faithful performance of duty by the new justices, nevertheless their zeal should be rewarded and encouraged. He instructed Munoz, therefore, to give the justices one or even two additional plats as a reward for diligently fulfilling their duties. These grants should be made judiciously in order that they might stimulate the pride of the new officers in their honest administration of the temporalities of the secularized pueblos. 36 The settlement of mission debts. When San Jose was secularized, Fray Jose Manuel Pedrajo stated that there were certain sums which private individuals owed the mission, as well as other moneys owed by the mission to its creditors. He promised at that time to render a complete and detailed account of the assets and liabilities. On August 4, 1794, Governor Munoz reported that this matter was still pending, and on the 17th of the same month he again informed Nava of this unfinished business and asked for instructions. 37 Nava had written Governor Munoz on July 29 about the collection of a bill for goods advanced to San Jose Mission by the commissary of the Presidio of San Antonio, and asked for details about this trans- action, of which he evidently disapproved. Munoz replied on October 24 that the bill amounted to four hundred fifty-eight pesos, that it was 34 Manuel Munoz to Pedro Nava, August 4, 1794. Saltillo Arcliives, Vol. VI, pp. 179-181. 35 Galindo Navarro to Pedro Nava, May 10, 1797. Saltillo Arcnives, Vol. VI, pp. 220-225. 36 Pedro Nava to Manuel Munoz, May 24, 1797; Navarro to Pedro Nava, May 10, 1797. Saltillo Arc/,ives, Vol. VI, pp. 228-229; 220-225. 37 Muiioz to Nava, August 4, 1794; same to same, August 17, 1794. Saltillo Arcnives, Vol. VI, pp. 179-181; 188-189.

Powered by