NOTES AND FRAGMENTS.

Don Carlos de Siguenza.—I have read with pleasure the translation of the “Letter of Don Damian Manzanet to Don Carlos de Siguenza Relative to the Discovery of the Bay of Espiritu Santo,” by Miss Lilia M. Casis, in the April number of The Quarterly. It is a step in the right direction to develop the real facts, by exciting a spirit of investigation, and it may finally lead to a collection of all the official reports on the subject. Of course the reverend writer manifests that same disposition seen in most of the writings of the early fathers, that is, exaggeration of their own doings and depreciation and even misrepresentation of all done by the military. One of the chief excellences of Miss Lilia M. Casis' translation is her faithful rendition of the original.

In this connection some facts relative to Don Carlos de Siguenza may be of interest to the readers of the Quarterly.

The Marqués de la Laguna was succeeded by Don Melchor Portocarrero Laso de la Vega, Conde de la Manclova, who reached the City of Mexico November 30, 1686. He it was who sent the two frigates to examine the Gulf coast as far as Apalaches for French settlements, on account of notices just previously brought in by the Spanish flotilla called Armada de Barlovento, that had been sent out by the Marqués de Laguna, and had captured a French ship, and learned from one of the prisoners that La Salle had gone to settle the coast of the Mexican Gulf. The two frigates executed the orders of the Conde de Monclova, going even beyond the forest of Apalaches, without finding any Frenchmen, but finding several wreeks of French ships. This viceroy, Conde de Monclova, held the reins of government until November, 1688, when he delivered them to Don Gaspar de Sandoval, Silva y Mendoza, Conde de Galve, said to be thirtieth viceroy of New Spain.

This Conde de Galve it was who sent the expedition to settle and garrison Pensacola, under command of the able mariner Don Andrez Pez, and appointed the celebrated Mexican mathematician and poet, Don Carlos de Siguenza, to accompany the expedition, which honorable charge the illustrious Mexican accepted with pleasure. The work lasted until the arrival of the forces to garrison, and the families to settle, the place in 1696; and it may be inferred that Siguenza returned in the Armada de Barlovento, which carried the troops and families over. But it is not to be affirmed with certainty just when this famous character did go back to Mexico, without consulting the archives containing the report of the armada on its return in 1696.

The fact of the letters being addressed to Don Carlos de Siguenza is not a conclusive evidence of its genuineness, or of its being written by one who accompanied Don Alonso de Leon to where the mission of San Francisco was founded. But by comparing the letter with the military reports of the expeditions, a fair conclusion may be reached.

Of course the original discovery of Espiritu Santo Bay must have been before Fra Francisco Gomara wrote his history, which came out in 1553, about 133 years before the Conde de Galve arrived in Mexico, and the title, “Discovery of Bay Espiritu Santo,” is scarcely appropriate without the addition of, “by Land.”

All the peculiar prejudices of the French, English, and Americans against the Spanish records made as the events occurred can be answered and brushed away, by stripping their accounts of what has been written by those whose minds were bent upon establishing that La Salle was the first who discovered the Bay of Espiritu Santo, and called it St. Bernard.

That portion of Mexican history covering the years from 1680 to 1720 is so interwoven with the history of Texas during the same period that its careful examination from an unbiased standpoint would develop much truth yet concealed from the average reader, and such a work is worthy of the consideration of the Association as well as that of the State of Texas.

Bethel Coopwood.

The Name Alamo.—In the last number of The Quarterly, Lester G. Bugbee ¹² makes a suggestion regarding the origin of the name Alamo as applied to the Mission Church of San Antonio de Valero, the “Cradle of Texas Liberty.” As far as the writer's own investigations have carried him, it is the only hypothesis, if so it can be called, worthy the consideration of the historian. The result of some researches made in the old records of the Mission and those of the Company of San Carlos there stationed will throw additional light on the subject.

The mission of San Francisco Solano, known later as the “Mission del Alamo,” was founded, so state the records, ¹³ on the Rio Grande in the year 1703. In 1712 it was transferred to a place called San Ildephonso holding that invocation. Thence it was retransferred in 1713 to the Rio Grande and called San José. In the year 1718 on the first day of May “this mission on account of the scarcity of water at the pueblo of San Joseph, was transferred to San Antonio de Valero by order of his excellency the Marquis of Valero, Vice-Roy of New Spain, the mission being under the direction of Fray Antonio de San Buenaventura y Olivarez, and the officer Don Martin de Alarcon, Governor of these provinces of the Kingdom of the New Philippines.”

Shea states ¹⁴ that “the Mission of San Antonio was founded on the San Pedro, but was subsequently transferred to the Alamo, and its name has prevailed over that of the city subsequently founded.”

By order of the Rt. Rev. Andres de Llanos y Valdés, the Bishop of the Diocese, given on the 20th of January, 1793, the Pueblo of San Antonio de Valero was aggregated to the Parish of San Fernando and Presidio of San Antonio de Bexar. The records of the Mission were transferred to the Parish priest, Fr. Th. Francesco Lopez on the 22d of the same month; and the Mission of San Antonio de Valero had ceased to exist.

The records waver in the appellations given to the Mission. On the 10th of March, 1710, Fray Juan Joseph de Soto calls it “esta mission de la advocacion de San Francisco Solano;” May 12th, 1712, “esta mission de la advocacion del Sr. Sn. Joseph;” but on the 20th of June, 1712, de Soto again calls it Sn. Francisco Solano. On February 7, 1713, he says: “Yo el Fr. Joseph de Soto ministro actual de esta mission del Sr. S. Joseph é Yglesia del S. S. Francisco Solano.” However, in 1718 Fr. Miguel Nuñez calls it by the old appellation “esta Mission de San Francisco Solano Sita en San Antto de Valero.” At last on the 5th of July of the same year we find it “Mission de San Antonio de Valero,” a name it retained as long as the mission existed; not once is it called “Alamo” in the records.

From the registers ¹⁵ of the “Segunda Compania de Sn. Carlos de Parras” we glean the following facts: the first entry is on the 6th of February, 1788. It took place in the “Sta. Yglesia, Parroquial del Pueblo del Sr. Sn. Joseph y Santiago del Pueblo del Alamo,” showing that the appellation Alamo pertained to the Company from its inception many years before it was located in San Antonio. Beginning with the 17th of June, 1793, the additional title de Parras is added. On the 21st of March, 1797, we read “en esta Sta. Yglesia Parroquial Pueblo del Sr. Sn. Josef y Santiago al Alamo Ramo perteneciente al Pueblo de Sta. Maria de las Parras.”

In January, 1798, the company is stated as being “en el Precidio Reformado del Sr. Sn. Miguel de Serro Gordo Ramo perteneciente al Re. de Nra. Sra. de las Mercedes del Oro.” During the same year a baptism took place (No. 105) at Cañala Seca; then the company seems to have taken up its station at Chihuahua. The location is termed “Parroquia Castrense a Sn. Carlos; Villa Sn. Gerónimo;” “la Villa de San Gerónimo Ayuda de Parroquia de la Villa Chihuahua.” This appellation is retained until February, 1805.

On the 23d of September of that year baptisms are performed “en la Yglesia Parroquial de San Fernando Real Precidio de San Antonio de Bejar.” It seems the Sacrament of baptism was administered only in the church of San Fernando, the parish church of the town; never in the old Mission church.

The company, however, was located “en la Mission de Balero, jurisdiccion de Sn. Antonio de Bexar.” The Record closes in 1825. Since the company migrated from place to place it was natural that its secondary appellation should change with its location. It is equally evident that the company took its first name, as given in the entry of June 17th, 1793, from the town of Alamos ¹⁶ de Parras near the Lade de Parras in the southern part of the State of Coahuila, Mexico.

Edmond J. P. Schmitt.

Errata in Translation of Manzanet MS.—Through the kindness of Mr. Eugene A. Giraud, of Austin, my attention has been called to some mistakes and oversights in the Translation of the Manzanet MS. in the April number, which I wish to correct as follows:

P. 292, l. 3, for “Guasteza” read Guasteca.

P. 294, l. 13, read one hundred and fifty loads of flour, two hundred cows, four hunderd horses, fifty long guns ......

Mr. Giraud suggests that the word “morillos” in the original document, p. 272 of the April Quarterly, should be translated rafters instead of pebbles. He claims that the word “morillos,” with one r has the meaning rafters in Mexico, while “morrillos,” with two r's, is used for pebbles. A careful examination of the usage of the scribe will show that spelling alone will not give conclusive evidence here. I am not acquainted with the Mexican use of the word mentioned by Mr. Giraud, though I know that morillos is used to mean andirons in Spain. However, the translation “a small superstructure of rafters, very skillfully arranged” makes better sense than that which I gave, p. 303, l. 24, 25, and is acceptable on the supposition that the word morillos has the local signification rafters in addition to the meanings given in the standard dictionaries.

Lilia M. Casis.