Tlte Beginuings of Present Nacogdoches
335
days, because they had had time to hear of the flood of February 14 and its devastation. Father Garza had taken with him, at Ibarbo's request, the church ornaments and sacred vessels very likely intended to be used in the old mission. It is unlikely to assume that Ibarbo did not know that the mission was standing until he stumbled upon it. Now lbarbo and the twenty men who remained in Bucareli with a few families did not leave until after the flood, perhaps eight or ten days later. It is to them that Ibarbo refers in his letter of May 13, when he says: "And going on with all of them in the direction of the Pueblo of the Tejas, distant two days' march, more than one hundred days were spent on the road to get the people together on account of the floods which were general throughout the country." \Ve cannot take the "one hundred days" literally, for we know that lbarbo himself was in Nacogdoches and wrote from there on May 9, and again on May 13. From February 14 to either of these dates it is much less than one hundred days. It is logical to assume, therefore, that present Nacogdoches was reoccupied by the majority of the settlers of Bucareli before the middle of February, that those who stayed in Bucareli, and some of those who went back before February 14 to bring their belongings continued to stray in until May 13, by which time they were all in Nacogdoches. But if an exact date must be fixed for the formal beginnings, it is safe to agree on April 30, when Father Garza made his formal report. 69 From this time the permanent occupation of present Nacogdoches may be said to date. , _Efforts to secu,.e recognition of Nacogdocltes. The precipitate course of events that forced the settlers of Bucareli to seek refuge among the Tejas and which resulted in the unofficial reoccupation of Nacogdoches had pre,·ented Governor Cabello from replying to the request of the Com- mand,mte General for an opinion on the advantages and disadvantages of the original location of the unauthorized settlement at Pa.so Tom:is and the advisability of permitting it to remain there. Ibarbo and his companions were aware that the confirmation of the settlement at Bucareli had never received the stamp of official appro,·al. They knew also that officers in Mexico were inclined to recall the settlers to San Antonio in accord with the Nr.v Regulations of 1772. When they boldly decided to move further still from San Antonio and closer to the abandoned 69 The conclusion reached is based on a c:ireful examination of the following docu• ments. Father Botello to Governor Cabello, December 23, 1778; Father Garzo to Croix, April 30, 1779; lbarbo to Cabello, May 9, 1779; lbarbo to Croix, l\Iay 13, 1779. A. G. Al., Historia, Vol. 51, pp. 478-482, 521-524, 539-541, 517-521.
Powered by FlippingBook