July 2004, 
Editor: Mimi Lozano ©2000-4

Dedicated to Hispanic Heritage and Diversity Issues
 Society of Hispanic Historical and Ancestral Research

"50 Years Under God".

U.S. Senator Sam Brownback admires the "50 Years Under God" banner with Rev. Rob Schenck and other clergy. The new banner hangs across the street from the US Supreme Court, and was unfurled the very day the Supreme Court dismissed the suit against the Pledge. Coincidently, it was also the date of the 50th anniversary of the insertion of "Under God."  Sent by Odell Harwell hiridr@sbcglobal.net  

"A nation may lose its liberties in a day, 
and not miss them 
for a century."

Baron de Montesquieu

" I am so happy with "SOMOS PRIMOS." My husband and I moved from Puerto Rico to Michigan ten years ago, and it is kind of hard, starting with some USPS employees. When we start sending mail they were sure that Puerto Rico was part of Mexico (nothing against Mexicans) and it took us a while to let them know that puertorricans are American citizens and that Puerto Rico is in the Caribbean.  

May you keep getting strong and able to show that we as Latinos are together and ready to get the respect that as honest hardworking human being we deserve.  May you have a blessed weekend,  Magda Solano"  Zeugir@aol.com  6/4/2004 

"I always enjoy everything you send me, even if it does not refer to Castaneda.
Thank you, Alice"  DmcAlic@aol.com  6/4/2004 

"Thank you for the work you do to instill in us the urge to find out more about ourselves.
My Full Name is Maria Dolores Armenta Acosta de Martinez.  I like to sign my name this way because I do not want my children to loose track of our last names!!
Maria "    michigander46@go.com  6/5/2004 

UNITED STATES

Flag of Flowers
Sent by Tom Pollino Sfmemories@aol.com
Aerial photo courtesy of Bill Morson 

Free Calendar 
http://www.homeofheroes.com/calendar/index.html
Sent by Johanna De Soto

Each year HomeOfHeroes.com remembers Veterans' Day with the release of a special calendar for the following year.  Our FREE, DOWNLOADABLE 2004 Medal of Honor Calendar will be available on November 11, 2003, and will remain available throughout the year. This year's calendar is designed to serve as a tribute not only to our Medal of Honor heroes of past generations, but to the heroes of a new generation who serve around the world to defend our nation and our world from acts of terrorism. The Torch is Passed.... ....To a New Generation!

The 2004 Heritage is a unique, full-color, patriotic calendar you and your friends can enjoy all year long.  Every month displays not only holidays and important dates from history, but something new in this, our fourth year of calendar production. 

In each month's calendar from the 2004 edition, you will see the faces and learn the names of some of the heroes of this new generation. 
 

      Though there are far too many for us to highlight them all, we have attempted to find photos and information reflecting a cross-section of those brave men and women of all branches of military service who have received awards for their heroism and sacrifice in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world.  The October page alone (pictured above) will introduce you to eight American soldiers who have received the Silver Star, including two Army captains who are identical twins.

http://www.homeofheroes.com/gravesites/states/california.html
Sent by Johanna De Soto

HISPANIC AMERICANS IN CONGRESS, 1822-1995
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 1995
136 Hispanics served in both House/Senate
Analysis and table prepared by Mimi Lozano
(John P. Schmal is preparing an update of this information for August)

FLORIDA, 1845
1822-1823     Joseph Marion Hernández (W)
1989-             Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R)
1993-             Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R)

TEXAS, 1845
1961-            Henry B. Gonzalez (D)
1965-            Eligio "Kika" de la Garza II (D)
1983-            Solomon P. Ortiz (D)
1985-1993    Albert G. Bustamante (D)
1993-            Henry Bonilla (R)
1993-            Frank M. Tejada (D)

CALIFORNIA, 1850
1877-1878     Romualdo Pacheco (R)
1879-1883     Romualdo Pacheco (R)
1963-1993     Edward Roybal (D)
1979-1989     Antonio Lee Coelho (D)
1982-             Matthew G. Martinez (D)
1983-             Esteban Torres (D)
1993-             Xavier Becerra (D)
1993              Lucille Roybal-Allard (D) 

NEW MEXICO, 1912
1853-1857       Jose Manuel Gallegos (D)
1871-1873       Jose Manuel Gallegos (D)
1856-1861       Antonio Otero (D)
1863-1865       Francisco Perea (R)
1865-1867       Jose Francisco Chaves (R)
1877-1879       Trinidad Romero (R)
1879-1881       Mariano Sabino Otero (R)
1881-1884       Tranquilino Luna (R)
1884-1885       Francisco Antonio Manzanares (D)
1899-1901       Pedro Perea (R)
1915-1917       Benigno Cardemas Hernandez (R)
1919-1921       Nestor Montoya (R)
1921-1923       Nestor Montoya (R)
1931-1935       Dennis Chavez (D)
1943-1956       Antonio Manuel Fernandez (D)
1957-1964       Joseph Manuel Montoya (D)
1969--1989      Manuel Lujan, Jr. (R)
1983-            William B. Richardson (D)

ARIZONA, 1912
1991-               Ed Lopez Pastor (D)

Populations Shifts in Southwest Population, 1850-2000
by Mimi Lozano

These figures are those of the United States census which 
determine the allocated number of representatives.    

Source: US Census Bureau Resident Population and Appointment of US House of Representative
To view the state of your interest, use the link below and type in the targeted state. 
http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/resapport/states/arizona.pdf

Louisiana was an extremely important state in the affairs of the United States. In 1850 the population of all the Spanish Southwest territories and Florida together did not equal the population of Louisiana.
The westward movement contributed to population shifts. Louisiana went from first (1^st) in population, to second (2^nd) in 1870, to third (3^rd) in 1900, and to fifth (5^th) in 2000.

Texas has remained consistently in the top two positions in population size, first (1^st) in 1870 and 1900 and now in second (2^nd) place behind California.

California was third (3^rd) in population size in 1850 and 1870, but by 1900 had moved to second (2^nd) position and in 2000, first (1^st) position by a huge margin.

Florida was fourth (4^th) in 1850 and 1870, fifth (5^th) in 1900 and moved up to third (3^nd) in the 2000 data, experiencing, like California a huge population increase, much of the growth Spanish speaking residents.

Colorado and Arizona have each experienced major growth periods, Colorado between 1870 and 2000 and Arizona between 1950 and 2000.

New Mexico remained the least populated of these Southwest states.

Percentage of population increase 1850-2000 
(Arizona and Colorado, figures from 1860)

 53,160
36,578
18,370

10,780
9,810
2,958

Anglos are likely to be the minority in Texas by spring, about two years earlier than originally expected.  The Anglo population is growing more slowly because the flood of newcomers that Texas saw in the 1990s has slowed to a trickle, Texas' state demographer said Monday.

Meanwhile, births, primarily for Hispanics, kept a fast pace from 2000 to 2002.  The more rapid shift in Texas' racial and ethnic diversity means that the state must find ways to improve education, access to health care and job training to remain competitive economically, researchers said.

"A company doesn't want to put itself in a place where it has to hire from a population with more health and education problems," said Mitchell Rice, director of the Race and Ethnic Studies Institute at Texas A&M University. "This affects how we compete not only with the other 49 states but within
the global arena," he said.

Undocumented immigrants are not specifically accounted for, but some of them are part of the Census 2000 head counts that serve as a starting point for the estimates, said Steve Murdock, the state demographer. If the official counts could estimate undocumented immigrants, he said, Anglos would probably already be in the minority in Texas.

The future of Texas' racial and ethnic makeup was just one part of a report on population trends released Monday by Murdock. The report also notes:

Texas is expected to have 36 million residents in 2040, increasing 62 percent from today's 22
million. The United States is expected to grow more slowly, by 49 percent, over a longer time
frame, 2000 to 2050.

Ads and stores aimed at Hispanic customers would be more numerous, and Hispanic politicians would play a much larger role in state government, Rice said. The state will need many more bilingual workers and may need to reassess its move to a smaller government that provides fewer services, he said.

"The state will need more social services than are being provided now," Rice said. "Cutting back on various programs may have a devastating impact on how well the state will fare in taking care of its residents and in how it competes in the global market."

First on the agenda should be improving the education of Texas' Hispanic children, said Terry Clower, associate director of the Center for Economic Development and Research at the University of North Texas in Denton.

"We sometimes get overly focused on getting people with advanced degrees," Clower said. "It's also important to have people doing assembly and other basic jobs who have a good education so they can be trained."

ONLINE: Texas State Data Center, www.txsdc.tamu.edu
Jeff Claassen, (817) 390-7710 jclaassen@star-telegram.com
Knight Ridder | Copyright 2004

Fernando Oaxaca – Legacy of an American Statesman
HispanicVista.Com Editorial, May 29, 2004

    Dare to Dream 
    Robert Andres Olivares
    http://www.freewebz.com/mydreams/

    A 27 year-old past gang member expresses his perspective.

The Poster's Place in Wartime
http://www.americanhistory.si.edu/victory

During the First World War, posters were the primary form of public communication; but by 1940 posters had been supplanted by radio, movies, and billboards. Why then did government and private industry turn to posters to rally the public in World War II?

First, people would encounter posters in places that other media couldn't reach--schools, factories, offices, store windows, and other places outside the scope of paid advertising. Second, posters had democratic appeal--they could be made by anyone; they could be seen by all. Both medium and message spoke of democracy, which made posters ideal for expressing American war aims: why we fight, what we fight for. For example, artist John C. Atherton's first-prize poster for Defense Bonds was painted on a 48-foot billboard at one of New York's busiest street corners, 42nd Street and Fifth Avenue, July 1941.

To tap the creative energies of American artists, the Museum of Modern Art organized a National Defense Poster Competition in 1941. The contest was sponsored by the museum and two of the government's largest users of posters, the Army Air Corps and the Treasury Department. First prize in the Defense Bond category was won by John C. Atherton, a prominent commercial artist. Atherton's winning design--showing the factory as the front line of decisive action -- was echoed in other posters as America entered the war after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941.

The 1930s had been an era of violent labor disputes. Now the war emergency demanded a change in American industry--not only a switch from consumer goods to war material, but also a change in workers' and managers' attitudes from antagonism to cooperation. The government launched a campaign urging workers to make personal sacrifices to win the war, and individual businesses and labor unions quickly followed suit. Eventually, privately produced posters vastly outnumbered official government-issued posters.

For manufacturers, the war was an opportunity to gain greater control over their work force. In the push for increased productivity, factory managers called for employees to suspend union rules, abandon traditional work patterns, and make sacrifices in the name of patriotism.

Government agencies offered tips on the design and placement of posters in the factory, urging employers to "use enough" -- at least one poster per 100 workers. Plant managers, company artists, paper manufacturers, and others needed little encouragement to carry out this advice; private industry produced vast numbers of production-incentive posters during the war.

Status-conscious Mexicans are starting to turn their backs on what has been the chief staple of the diet since before there was even a country called Mexico: the corn tortilla. While Americans wrap
tortillas around grilled meats at a record pace, the increasingly urbanized and globalized Mexican consumer is moving on to sliced bread, processed foods and a little more protein, nutrition experts
and industry officials said. "This is partially a status issue," said Salvador Villalpando, a researcher at the National Institute of Public Health. "The tortilla is considered a rural foodstuff."  Advertising for bread, chips, cookies and cakes is driving consumer tastes, he added.

Average tortilla consumption has fallen 15 percent in four years, according to new figures from the Mexican Chamber of Corn Processors. The average urban Mexican consumes 185 pounds of tortillas a year, or about 1,700 tortillas. The figure four years ago was 215 pounds, or nearly 2,000 tortillas. Rural consumption has fallen as well. And while the drop amounts to less than one tortilla per day per person, industry officials say the trend is alarming for the 4,000-year-old maize disc. The tortilla is still Mexicans' No. 1 source of calories. But Jose Enrique Tron, the corn chamber director, said rising incomes have made meat a bigger part of diets. Another factor is the
government's lifting of tortilla price controls five years ago. Sales have fallen as prices have doubled and quality has suffered. "The tortillas in the United States . . . are better than those in Mexico
City," Tron said.  Source: Dallas Morning News: 06/08

SURNAME  Padilla

1033 aparece don Diego Núñez Padilla (sic) como confirmador en un privilegio dado a la Iglesia de Oña, Burgos, por el Rey don Sancho. Después, en 1166, figuran en documentos de esa fecha los hermanos don Nuño Gutiérrez de Padilla y don Gonzalo Gutiérrez, quienes dotaron y fundaron el Monasterio de San Miguel de Villamayor de la Orden Premonstratense fundada en San Norberto, siendo originarios aquellos del lugar de Padilla de Yuso, en la Merindad de Castrogeriz, Burgos, donde esta casa solar tuvo tantas preeminencias, que el “pecho” de la Martiniega se cobraba por mitad entre el soberano y los de este linaje.

En las crónicas de su época, se relatan las batallas que sostuvo el Conde Soberano de Castilla contra el Rey Almanzor, en los principios de la segunda mitad del siglo X, señalándose en ellas que por su Alférez Mayor don Godomiro de Padiella o Padilla, poblador de las villas de Padilla de Suso y de Padilla de Yuso en tierras de Treviño en la repetida provincia de Burgos, de las que tomó su nombre, diciéndose que de don Alvaro de Padilla, hijo de aquél, procedió este esclarecido apellido.

En el repartimiento de Sevilla realizado por el Rey don Alfonso X “el Sabio” en 1253, se hace memoria de don Gutiérrez González de Padilla, caballero de mesnada, el que fue heredado con importantes tierras.

En una vieja historia de la Orden de Calatrava se habla de don Garci Gutiérrez hijo de don Gutierre Gómez y de su mujer doña María Suárez, quien fundó y dotó el Monasterio de Monjas de San Felices, en Burgos, por el año de 1219, indicándose en esa narración que entroncaron después con la casa de Lara y los Castro en la mitad de ese siglo, procediendo estos caballeros del linaje de Padilla.

Por el libro Becerro, resulta que don Pero López de Padilla “el Viejo”, fue padre de don Juan Fernández de Padilla y de otros hermanos que florecieron en el tiempo de Alfonso XI, por cuyo mandato se escribió dicho libro donde se asentaron las Behetrias de las Merindades de Castilla, a mediados del siglo XIV, donde se acredita que don Pero López de Padilla “el nieto”, fue casado con doña María González de Leyva, por lo que heredó parte del lugar de Coruña en Santo Domingo de Silos, comprando lo que le toco de él a los demás herederos y fundando allí su casa y mayorazgo. De esta persona se hace memoria, entre otros Caballeros que fueron testigos el año 1304, en la sentencia arbitraria del Rey Fernando IV de Castilla y el Infante don Alonso de la Cerda, sobre los Reinos de Castilla y León, según lo refiere Jerónimo de Zurita en su “Crónica o Anales del Reino de Aragón”, 1621.

Son multitud los Padillas notables de la antigüedad pudiendo citarse entre ellos a: Don Diego García de Padilla, Maestre de Calatrava; doña María Díaz de Padilla, en quién el Rey Don Pedro I “el Cruel” tuvo un hijo y tres hijas de las cuales una se llamo doña Constanza y casó en Inglaterra con el Duque de Alencastre, que la hizo madre de la Reina doña Catalina de Castilla, como esposa de don Enrique III, ambos padres de don Juan II de Castilla, 1405-1454; don Juan Fernández de Padilla, Señor de la Casa de Padilla, Coruña y Calatañazor, Camarero Mayor de la casa de Castilla, quién se desposó en 1339 con doña Mencía Manrique, Señora de Santa Gadea y de otros lugares, más tarde Adelantado Mayor de Castilla del Consejo de Juan II y Ayo del Príncipe Don Alonso, fundador de San Felices de Amaya y de la Asunción de Almagro, Ciudad Real, en la Orden de Calatrava; don Martín de Padilla natural de la ciudad de Valladolid, primer Conde de Santa Gadea por Merced de Felipe II, en 1586, Adelantado Mayor y Perpetuo de Castilla, Señor de Valdecaray. Comendador del Corral de Caracuel y de la Orden de Calatrava; don Pedro López de Padilla, que en su esposa doña Isabel Pacheco tuvo a don García de Padilla, Comendador de Lopera y de Malagón en la Orden de Calatrava, Clavero, Comendador Mayor y Tesorero de ella, primer refrendario de la Cámara del Emperador Carlos V, de sus Consejos de Estado y de Justicia, Letrado de las Cortes, Presidente de las Ordenes de Calatrava y Alcántara y del Consejo de Indias, así como gran bienhechor del Monasterio de Frex del Val.

Don Antonio de Padilla y Bobadilla, Alcaide de las Fortalezas de la villa y Peña de Martos, Jaén, Señor de Noves y Mascaraque, en Toledo, Mayordomo de Felipe IV, su Gentilhombre de Boca, creado Conde de la Mejorada por Felipe III en 1617; don Juan de Padilla nacido en Toledo hacia 1490, uno de los Jefes de las famosas Comunidades de Castilla nombrado Capitán general del ejército comunero, quién después de varios combates con los realistas que dirigía el Conde de Haro, cayó prisionero de estos en Villalar, Valladolid, siendo decapitado junto con sus compañeros de armas don Francisco Maldonado y don Juan Bravo, en 1521,por orden del Emperador Carlos V; doña Rosa de Padilla y Chaves, viuda de don Cristóbal Ximénez-Herradura y Hurtado de Mendoza, Regidor Perpetuo de Antequera, Málaga, premiada por Felipe V el 12 de marzo de 1739,con el Condado de Colchado, y don Francisco de Borja Fernández de Padilla y Arias de Saavedra, que recibió de Isabel II el Condado de Casa Padilla, por Real Despacho de 27 de mayo de 1856,como recompensa a sus servicios en el desempeño de los cargos de Corregidor de Puente Geníl, Córdoba y de Alférez Mayor de su ayuntamiento.

Aunque hay autores que señalan origen gallego a esta estirpe, lo cierto es que desde hace varios siglos aparece ya en ambas Castillas, antes de que los principales nobiliarios hablen de asentamientos galaicos, e inclusive los genealogistas portugueses dicen que en su país hubo ramas de los Padilla desde muy antiguo, todas procedentes de Castilla, afirmando que su solar estaba en un lugar próximo a Castrogeriz, en Burgos, añadiendo también que tenían vinculación con la Casa Real española y de otras naciones europeas.

En 30 de abril de 1530 y en 23 de agosto de 1532,respectivamente, don Juan III de Portugal expidió sendas certificaciones de blasones a caballeros de este apellido, en cuyos documentos está señalado el origen castellano.

Ante la Sala de los Hijosdalgo dela Real Chancillería de Valladolid, acreditaron su noble origen, don Antonio de Padilla, vecino de Atienza, Guadalajara, en 1565; don Cristóbal de Padilla, morador de Miranda de Ebro, Burgos, en 1534,y don Juan de Padilla, estante en Valdorros, en dicha provincia, el año 1557.

Los Padilla están presentes en Andalucía desde los principios de su reconquista, con importantes afincamientos en las provincias de Córdoba, Jaén, Sevilla y Cádiz. Tuvieron un destacado papel en la toma de la ciudad de Baeza, Jaén, en 1227,donde el año 1467 era Clavero de la Orden de Alcántara don García de Padilla que tenía a su cargo la custodia y defensa del convento de la misma.

Son innumerables los miembros de este linaje que probaron su nobleza de sangre en las diferentes instituciones nobiliarias españolas, Reales Maestranzas de Caballería y Real Chancillería de Granada, en el transcurso de varios siglos así como en el Santo Oficio y los diferentes ayuntamientos de las villas y ciudades de donde fueron residentes, cuya enumeración sería interminable.

Las armas mas generalizadas de los Padilla, que incluso han venido utilizando los de este linaje en México desde la época de su conquista, se describen así:

EN CAMPO DE AZUR TRES PADILLAS DE PLATA, Y EN TORNO A ELLAS NUEVE MEDIAS LUNAS DEL MISMO METAL.

Así se confirman por los diferentes tratadistas que al principio de este trabajo se citan.

Corominas, en su “Diccionario Crítico (1954),dice que esta palabra procede de Padiella, del latín “patella”, diminutivo de “patina”, fuente, cacerola, denominación del castellano que se aplicaba a una especie de horno donde se cocía el pan.

El primer Padilla que pisó territorio americano, fue don Gregorio Don José Gregorio de Padilla Villalobos, natural de la ciudad de Sevilla, el año de 1512, quien al parecer se asentó en Santo Domingo.

Don José Gregorio de Padilla y Estrada, Gómez de Arratia y Niño de Castro, natural de la ciudad de México, ingresó en la Orden Militar de Calatrava el año 1741, siendo el cuarto poseedor del título de Santa Fe de Guardiola, por su propio derecho, y fue cónyuge de doña Juana María de Cervantes y Gorráez, hija legítima de don Juan Leonel Gómez de Cervantes, mayorazgo de su casa, y de doña Francisca de Gorráz.

Don Juan Ildefonso de Padilla y Gómez de Arratia, Guardiola y Guzmán, padre del anterior, nació en la isla de Santo Domingo y también fue calatravo en 1691.Había contraído nupcias con doña Micaela Gregoria de Estrada y Niño de Castro, segunda titular de la citada dignidad nobiliaria. Este, a su vez, hijo de don Juan de Padilla y Guardiola, Castrejón y Guzmán, que vio la luz en Sevilla el año 1643, quien igualmente fue admitido en la expresada Orden, en 1682; desempeñó los cargos de Alcalde de Lima, Oidor de la Audiencia de Caracas y de la de México, recibiendo en premio a su servicios, el título de Marqués de Santa Fe de Guardiola, otorgado por Carlos II, el 6 de marzo de 1689.

Este linaje es uno de los más ilustres que se avecindó en la Nueva España, donde emparentó con las familias mas prominentes del pais en todas sus épocas. Merecen atención las ramas establecidas en Guadalajara y Tepatitlán, en hoy Estado de Jalisco. Del primero de estas lugares procede el Capitán don Diego de Avila y Padilla, que en su enlace con una Señora de apellido Dávila tuvo, entre otros hijos, a don Diego de Padilla y Mota, Corregidor de Ixcatlán en 1663, y a don Lorenzo de Padilla y Mota, con igual cargo en la capital tapatía el año 1647. También hubo otros asentamientos, de los que se hará detallada mención al final de este trabajo.

Don Gaspar de Padilla y Guzmán, desempeñó el cargo de Alcalde Mayor de San Juan de Teotihuacan, en 1709; don José Padilla y Estrada, el de Corregidor de la ciudad de México, en 1729; don Ignacio de Padilla, Obispo de Mérida, Yucatán, en 1753,y don Pedro Padilla, Oidor de la Real Audiencia de México, según consta en el padrón dela capital efectuado en 1753,en el que se dice residía en la calle de San Francisco.

El Bachiller don Nicolás de Padilla y Maldonado, de Pátzcuaro, hizo información de su “limpieza de sangre, ante el Santo Oficio dela Inquisición de México, 1717, con la finalidad de obtener el cargo de Comisario del mismo. En 1800, don Antonio de Padilla, tenía el cargo de Ayudante Mayor del Regimiento de Infantería de Toluca, y en la misma fecha don Vicente de Padilla era Teniente de Dragones Provinciales de la Nueva Galicia.

Una línea de los Padilla procedente de Jerez de la Frontera, sentó sus reales en la región de la Nueva Galicia, posiblemente en la primera mitad del siglo XV, cuya continuada genealogía es como sigue:

Don Bartolomé Martínez Dávila, natural de la expresada ciudad, poseedor allí de la casa de San Salvador, quien se distinguió en la derrota del príncipe musulmán Abdelmelic, descendiente de los Ávila o Dávila afincados en Jerez después de su conquista por don Alfonso X “el Sabio”, en 1255, que también concurrió al cerco y toma de Algeciras en 1342, y al sitio de la plaza de Gibraltar, casado con doña Leonor de Padilla, conforme aparece en las ejecutorias ganadas por don Jerónimo y por don Martín Dávila, sus descendientes, de 1562 a 1564 y 1679, de quienes procedió como su legítimo hijo don Juan Bernalte Dávila, Señor de esta casa en la collación o parroquia de San Salvador, quien sirvió a don Juan I en la batalla de Aljubarrota, librada el 15 de agosto de 1385, y a don Enrique II en las guerras de Portugal, de 1396 a 1398. Otorgó su última voluntad el 15 de octubre de 1439, mencionando a su cónyuge doña Leonor García de Sigüenza, por cuya alianza entró en la casa de Dávila el donadio de Villamarta.

De los anteriores consortes fue vástago don García Dávila “el de la Jura”, vecino de la collación de San Lucas, Regidor de Jerez por merced de Juan II, personaje de gran representación de su tiempo, jefe del bando del Marqués de Cádiz, en 1469. Cuando los Reyes Católicos entraron en aquella población el 7 de octubre de 1547, llevando la población, pidió a los monarcas jurasen y confirmasen los privilegios de la repetida ciudad, a lo que estos accedieron, quedándole de ahí el sobrenombre referido. Con sus ocho hijos concurrió a las guerras de Granada y dispuso su testamento el 6 de octubre de 1486. Casó en primeras nupcias con doña Leonor Gutiérrez de Padilla, Alcaide de Arcos de la Frontera y Mayordomo de Jerez, desposándose en segundas con doña Francisca de Hinojosa, en la que no dejó descendencia.

Don Lorenzo de Padilla Dávila, hijo de los mencionados don García Dávila “el de la Jura”, y de doña Leonor Gutiérrez Padilla, se dio las manos el 30 de julio de 1492 con doña María de Vera, hija de don Gonzalo Pérez de Gallegos y de doña Beatriz de Vera, y siguiendo una costumbre muy usual en su época, adoptó Padilla como apellido de varonía.

Fue su hijo primogénito, don Fernando o Hernando de Padilla Dávila, Caballero y Comendador de la Orden de Santiago, Continuo de la Real Casa del Emperador Carlos V, Veinticuatro de Jerez y Alcalde de Tempul, quien armó a su costa una armada para combatir a los infieles en Berbería. Después, sirvió como Capitán de Caballos en la guerra de Túnez, y más tarde se trasladó a las Islas Canarias, donde efectuó su enlace con doña Leonor de Machicao por 1515, la que testó en 1566, hija de don Fernando de Machicao y de doña Constanza de Rivas. Tuvieron, que se sepa, cuatro hijos, siendo el mayor de ellos don Lorenzo de Padilla Dávila o Padilla Machicao, nacido en la cuna de sus mayores, que después de estar como Capitán en Flandes, pasó a la Nueva Galicia, siendo el fundador de la hoy ciudad de Lagos de Moreno, en 1563, celebrando su himeneo con doña Mariana de Temiño y Velasco, en la que engendró, en Guadalajara, a don Diego de Padilla y Velasco, Alcalde Mayor de Lagos, fallecido en su lugar de origen y cónyuge de doña Ana de la Mota y Vera, ambos progenitores de don Lorenzo de Padilla y Mota, de la misma naturaleza que su progenitor, también Alcalde en 1647 y Regidor, que en su mujer doña Josefa Arias de Orozco y Valdés, engendró al Capitán don Cristóbal de Padilla y Arias, igualmente jalisciense, el cual se trasladó a la región alteña, en Xalostotitlán, siendo con su esposa, en aquella parte del país, genearcas de dilatada e importante descendencia, que al correr del tiempo y después de vivir varias generaciones de esta rama en el rancho denominado “El Águila”, se diseminaron profusamente por la zona, especialmente con motivo de los movimientos insurgentes y otras situaciones políticas y militares .En León, principalmente, y en otras poblaciones del Estado de Guanajuato, existen numerosa descendencia procedente del tronco estudiado.


Extract from BLASONES Y APELLIDOS, 828-page book by Fernando Muñoz Altea
In its second edition, the book can be ordered from blasones@mail.com or at
P.O. Box 11232, El Paso, Texas 79995  or by contacting Armando Montes AMontes@Mail.com

Bernardo de Galvez

Source:  The Cajuns  http://www.thecajuns.com/lahist.htm
Sent by Joan Harmon juanday@charter.net

A Descendant of Moctezuma at the Battle of Mobile,  1780

http://book-smith.tripod.com/montezuma.html

Sent by Paul Newfield  pcn01@webdsi.com

Generation One

1. Motecuhzoma¹; married Miaxochitl, daughter of Ixtlicuechahuamátzin; born 1467; died between 29 
June and 1 July 1520 (details of his murder by Cortez are obscure).  He was also known as Montezuma II and was called "emperor" by European historians. He eventually succeeded his father, Axayácatl, 6th lord of Tenochtitlan, who died in 1481.
Children of Motecuhzoma¹ and Miaxochitl included:

• + 2 i. Tlacahuepantzin², married Quanxochitl.
  
  

• + 3 i. Ihuitemotzin³, married Francisca de la Cueva de Valenzuela.

• + 5 i. Diego Luís⁵ de Moctezuma y Porres

Generation Five

5. Diego Luís⁵ de Moctezuma y Porres (Pedro⁴Tesifón de Moctezuma, Ihuitemotzin³, Tlacahuepantzin², Motecuhzoma¹); died after 14 Jan 1680 Granada, Spain.  He was 2nd Count of Moctezuma de Tultengo  (the title passed to his legitimate daughter by his wife). He left a will on 14 January 1680 Granada, Spain.
Child (illegitimate) of Diego Luís⁵ de Moctezuma y Porres and Gregoria de Torres was:

• + 6 i. Pedro Manuel⁶ Moctezuma, baptized 28 February 1654 Lapeza de Monterrocana, Spain; married Isabel de Loaysa y Ovalle.

6. Pedro Manuel6 Moctezuma (Diego5de Moctezuma y Porres, Pedro4Tesifón de Moctezuma, Ihuitemotzin3, Tlacahuepantzin2, Motecuhzoma1); baptized 28 February 1654 Lapeza Monterrocana, Spain; married Isabel de Loaysa y Ovalle 5 February 1679 Cadiz, Spain; died after 19 September 1717 Ronda, Spain. Children of Pedro Manuel6 Moctezuma and Isabel de Loaysa y Ovalle, all born in Ronda, Spain, were as follows: 

• + 7 i. Jerónimo Miguel⁷ Moctezuma y Loaysa, born 6 October 1681; married Teresa Micaela Salcedo y Ahumada.
• 8 ii.Tomasa Antonia Moctezuma y Loaysa; born after 1682.
• 9 iii.María Moctezuma y Loaysa; born after 1682.
• 10 iv.Diego Luís Moctezuma y Loaysa; born after 1682.
• 11 v.Vicenta Moctezuma y Loaysa; born after 1682.
• 12 vi.Gregoria Moctezuma y Loaysa; born after 1682.
• 13 vii.Francisco Moctezuma y Loaysa; born after 1682. He became a friar.

Generation Nine

15. Jerónimo⁹ Girón y Moctezuma (Bernarda⁸Moctezuma, Jerónimo⁷Moctezuma y Loaysa, Pedro⁶Moctezuma, Diego⁵de Moctezuma y Porres, Pedro⁴Tesifón de Moctezuma, Ihuitemotzin³, Tlacahuepantzin², Motecuhzoma¹); baptized 8 June 1741 Ronda, Spain; married Isabel de las Casas, daughter of Manuel de las Casas and María de Aragorri, 22 October 1770 Barcelona, Spain; died 17 October 1819 Seville, Spain, at age 78.

He served as a page to King Ferdinand VI in 1751. He began military service circa 1757, entering the army at the outbreak of the Seven years War. He was promoted to 2nd lieutenant in the Royal Guards circa 1761. He was in the vanguard of the infantry that stormed across the Portuguese border under Count de Maceda in 1762, and was promoted to 1st lieutenant in 1763, and to captain in July 1770. About 1775, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel in the Príncipe Infantry Regiment.

In December 1778, his regiment embarked for Cuba, and in April 1779, he took command as colonel of Príncipe Infantry Regiment. In July of that year, he was promoted to general and was ordered to New Orleans as deputy to Gov. Bernardo Gálvez. On 14 Jan 1780, he embarked with Gálvez from New Orleans with his troops on an expedition against the British at Mobile Bay. On March 10th, he served as actual battle commander (Gálvez was involved with the plans for the further expedition against Pensacola) and laid seige to Ft. Charlotte at Mobile. The Biritish surrendered on March 13th.

On 29 March 1780, he returned to Havana to prepare for the expedition against Pensacola. In October, the expedition was driven back to Cuba by a hurricane outside Havana Bay, but was reorganized and embarked again on 28 February 1781; Girón was again appointed battle commander. On May 8th, he laid seige to Ft. George at Pensacola, which quickly capitulated. The next month he was named field marshal.

In October 1781, the planned expedition by the French and Spanish to capture Jamaica was halted with calling of peace negotiations, and Girón returned to Spain in 1783, where he was created a knight of the Military Order of Santiago.

In 1778, he was appointed Judge for Life of his home town of Ronda. In 1786, he became civil and military governor of Pamplona; in 1790, he took over the same duties in Barcelona. In February 1791, he was promoted to lieutenant general. Between 1793 and 1795 , he acted as commander of Spanish forces in Catalonia during the French invasion. In August 1795, he was named a member of the Junta de América. Between 1798 and 1807, he served as Viceroy of Navarre. In 1807, he was named Counselor of the Supreme War Council, but was abruptly relieved of that position by Napoleon. On the death of his aunt in December 1791, he became 3rd Marqués de las Amarillas.
Children of Jerónimo9 Girón y Moctezuma and Isabel de las Casas included:

• + 18 i. General Francisco Javier¹¹ Girón y Ezpeleta, born 1803 Pamplona, Spain; married Nicolasa de Aragón y Arias de Saavedra.

18. General Francisco Javier11 Girón y Ezpeleta (Pedro10Girón de las Casas, Jerónimo9Girón y Moctezuma, Bernarda8Moctezuma, Jerónimo7Moctezuma y Loaysa, Pedro6Moctezuma, Diego5de Moctezuma y Porres, Pedro4Tesifón de Moctezuma, Ihuitemotzin3, Tlacahuepantzin2, Motecuhzoma1); born 1803 Pamplona, Spain; married Nicolasa de Aragón y Arias de Saavedra 29 January 1834 at the Royal Palace of Aranjuez, Spain; died 18 December 1869 Madrid, Spain.In the family tradition, he reached the rank of lieutenant general. He also founded the Guardia Civil of Spain. He was Gentleman of the Chamber to King Ferdinand VII. He held the titles of 2nd Duke of Ahumada and 5th Marqués de las Amarillas, and was also made a Grandee of Spain.

Children of General Francisco Javier11 Girón y Ezpeleta and Nicolasa de Aragón y Arias de Saavedra were as follows:

• 19 i.Pedro Agustín¹² Girón y Aragón; married Isabel Mesía 1866 Spain; died without progeny. He held the titles of 3rd Duke of Ahumada and 6th Marqués de las Amarillas.
• 20 ii.Agustín Girón y Aragón; born 30 Sep 1843 Madrid, Spain; married María de los Dolores Armero y Peñalver 15 Oct 1870 Spain. He succeeded his brother as 4th Duke of Ahumada and 7th Marqués de las Amarillas.

Another brief pedigree:  
Sent by Roberto José Pérez Guadarrama perezfru@telcel.net.ve

1 Monctezuma

2 Ignacia_Maria Navarro_Monctezuma
+ Juan_Francisco de_Unda_y_Garriz


3 Jose_Francisco de_Unda_Navarro
+ Francisca Garcia_Viera

4 Francisca de_Unda_y_Garcia
+ Juan_Jose Marquez_Vargas

5 Victorino Marquez_Unda
+ Virginia Febres_Cordero Goicoechea

The Los Islenos Heritage and Cultural Society
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:cooAEXE2M-UJ:www.canaryislands-
usa.com/cifec/losislenos.html+Spanish+Regiment+of+Louisiana&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Sent by Bill Carmena JCarm1724@aol.com

Los Isleños Heritage and Cultural Society was organized in 1976 in an effort to preserve the culture and history of the Canary Islanders who settled in Louisiana between the years 1778 and 1783. The Isleños, or Islanders, were a hearty group of pioneers who braved the crossing of the Atlantic Ocean and the marshes of Louisiana to mold St. Bernard Parish and other areas of the state into livable and productive communities.

[[Editor:  A few paragraphs from the site which helps explain the presence of the Spanish in Louisiana, usually associated with just a French presence.   

France ceded Louisiana to Spain and Great Britain in 1766 following the French and Indian War. Spain acquired that part of Louisiana lying west of the Mississippi River and the Island of Orleans, an area east of the Mississippi including New Orleans. Early in the 1770's Spanish officials learned that the British were planning to invade and occupy the Province of Louisiana, using the province as a base from which to attack Mexico and deprive Spain of the vast deposits of Mexican silver and gold. The British attempted to realize their plans almost fifty years later during the Battle of New Orleans.

Consequently, Spanish administrators started developing Louisiana as a barrier between Mexico and the British colonies east of the Mississippi River. Reacting to successful British colonization efforts along the Gulf Coast in British West Florida, Spain settled thousands of immigrants from Malaga and the Canaries, as well as Acadian refugees, in Louisiana. The settlers came to Louisiana to increase production of food, populate the province and defend it against the projected British invasion.

The first Isleños arrived in Louisiana during 1778 and continued to arrive in the province until 1783. They were settled in four locations, strategically placed around New Orleans to guard approaches to the city.

The Louisiana Territory: Dec. 20, 1803 - April 30, 1812

In 1800, Spain officially returned the Louisiana territory West of the Mississippi to France by the secret Treaty of San Ildefonso to avoid the continued deficits the colony caused and the growing possibility that Spain might have to fight the restless Americans to retain control of the lands. On May 2, 1803, the U.S. representatives Livingston and Monroe agreed to purchase the Louisiana territory for $15M and the size of the U.S. doubled overnight! Louisiana was officially transferred from Spain to France on November 30, 1803, and on December 20, 1803, France transferred Louisiana to the United tates. 

Upon concluding the purchase agreement, Robert Livingston, America's Minister to France, said of the transfer, "We have lived long, but this is the noblest work of our whole lives ... From this day the United States will take their place among the powers of the first rank ... The instruments which we have just signed will cause no tears to be shed; they prepare ages of happiness for innumerable generations of human creatures."

Over 900,000 square miles - nearly 600 million acres - were purchased for 15 million dollars (an average of only four cents an acre!).  Thirteen states or parts of states have been carved from The Louisiana Purchase Territory. They are as follows: Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Wyoming, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Colorado and Montana.

1804 - Louisiana is divided into the Territory of Orleans (south of 33 degrees latitude) and the District of Louisiana (north of 33 degrees latitude). W. C. C. Claiborne is appointed governor of the Territory of Orleans

1805 - The Territory of Orleans is divided into counties (see map).

Jan. 10, 1812 - The first steamboat to navigate the Mississippi River, the "The New Orleans," arrives at New Orleans from Pittsburgh.

The State of Louisiana: April 30,1812 (the 18th State)

Evidence in the following website: American Revolution, 1775-1783, The complete History of the American Revolution. .  http://www.americanrevolution.com  Webmaster: jim@americans.net 

Statement concerning Foreign aid,  text reads . . " . . . . . Spain entered the war against Great Britain in 1779, but Spanish help did little for the United States, while French soldiers and sailors and especially French supplies and money were of crucial importance."

Go to the website for more statistics: http://www.magweb.com/sample/amr/ed82loui.htm
Sent by Bill Carmena JCarm1724@aol.com|

Trust Board member Jim Mills and Richard Ogelsby with Felipe Neve and Diario Arguello. 

Consul General of Spain in Los Angeles, Jose Luis Dicenta Ballester and his wife

Neve with Quintro descendant, Elizabeth Hvoboll

ORANGE COUNTY, CA

SHHAR's May Meeting was an Opportunity for a Visual sharing of History

Henry Godines (left) shows Jose Prieto a postcard of one of his many historical oils, Texas hero Juan N. Seguin

Photos by Pat Lozano

The 13th Annual Awards Banquet was attended by over 900 persons who packed the Arena at the Anaheim Convention Center for the biggest Dinner and Celebration of the year. The evening included entertainment, speakers, awards and dinner.  

The Community Leadership Award was given to Sandra Membrila-Robbie, the Emmy award-winning writer/producer of the KOCE-PBS documentary "Mendez vs. Westminster: For All the Children / Para Todos Los Ninos."  "Mendez" tells the story of the historic California school desegregation case that  began in Orange County and ended segregation in California seven years before Brown v. Broad of Education.  Among many surprises, both cases shared two key players: NAACP lawyer Thurgood Marshall who oversaw the amicus brief the NAACP contributed to the Mendez case; Earl Warren who as Governor of California ended school segregation throughout the state soon after the Mendez case was won, and later as the Chief Justice on the Supreme court, wrote the decision for Brown v. Board of Education.

Others receiving Awards: 
Howie Phanstiel, PacifiCare, Corporation of the Year
Bob Menzies- Westminster GMC, Business Person of the Year
Olympic Heritage Presentations to:
Wille Banks, Rafer Johnson, Evelyn Furtsch Ojeda, Mel Whitfield
Master of Ceremonies Dorian Harewood, Star of the Jessie Owens Story

Monterey Park Hispanic/Latino Family History Fall Conference 

CALIFORNIA

Paul Edgar Trejo, Part II Early Years
Early California Wills
Migrant Worker Aims for the Moon 

The Anza Letters

As with any article large or small, it requires the work of many, therefore, it is with pleasure to acknowledge Jose Pantoja, Don Garate, and Dr. Greg Bernal Smestad for their contributions.

Puerto de San Carlos

The flat, Puerto de San Carlos where the Juan Bautista de Anza Colonizing Expedition of 1775/76 camped on December 26, 1775. 
Note path on the ridge, top right hand corner.

2

As mentioned earlier, the first carta, written upon Anza’s arrival at Puerto de San Carlos, informs Captain Rivera y Moncada of the troops he is conducting (que condujo para) to the Presidio of Monterey and which he has furnished with clothing, arms, and other necessities granted by the most Excellent Lord, the
Viceroy.

Anza continues to describe how the settlers were provided with a little more than three months wages at the onset, and that because they have been in service for eight months, their wages were all used up as well as their clothing.

However, this statement does not agree with what the Gran Capitan tells the Viceroy on his letter dated November 17, 1774, when he says, "I think best to send them the articles of clothing, for to send their pay in cash will serve no purpose except to afford the opportunity for prodigality and gambling."

He continues that because of

Among the families he is bringing is included the wife and children of a soldier named Duarte of that (esse) presidio [Monterey], who had asked at the [Royal Mining] Camp of Los Alamos, which he, as a favor, is transporting her to the side of her husband, who, as Anza puts it, serves Your Honor. "Entre las familias que llevo va agregada la mujer y hijos del soldado Duarte de esse Presidio quien me pidio des de el Real de los Alamos le hiciese el bien de conducirla a

3

Interestingly enough, this piece of historical information was not known to readers of the Anza and Font diaries until this finding. However, we do know that on Anza’s roster, ff75,75v,76,76v Archivo General de la Nacion, he says "that included among them is a woman and three children who has just arrived and is going to Monterey to be with her husband." We now know her husband’s name is Duarte.

He closes the first carta by stating that he is sending this notice so relief might be sent (if possible) in the form of cattle and whatever else is deemed appropriate, " darle esta noticia para que le embie, (si puede ser), socorro de bestias y lo demas que le paresca".

Captain Rivera y Moncada sadly recalled how he felt when he was handed Anza’s carta upon his arrival at Mission San Gabriel, when he states in his diary dated January 02, 1776,

It can be inferred that Rivera did not feel up to it because of the conditions at San Diego, with the killing of Father Jaime, a blacksmith (un herrero), a carpenter (un carpintero), and the burning of the Mission on November 07, 1775, word of which he received on December 13, 1775, and the reason why he was on his way to San Diego.

Perhaps not being up to reading Anza’s letter can be explained for fear of more bad news.

Here, is perhaps the greatest mistake Rivera ever makes in avoiding Anza’s letter. By not reacting with precision timing, it appears Rivera alienated the only man that could possibly help him at that juncture in time.

Anza’s letter two, written at Puerto de San Carlos as well, tells of how the Viceroy for the second time put in his charge the task of conducting thirty soldiers with their respective

4

That since the departure of the expedition from the Presidio of Horcasitas at the end of September, sickness and other occurrences had plagued them. Anza does not mention the maladies. However, that his Excellency having foreseen these problems had left it up to him to arbitrarily stop at any of the establishments when necessary to secure help, "las que previstas por su excelencia, dejo a mi arbitrio el salir a cualquiera de los establecimientos para poderme reparar en ellos".

Anza says that what he had stated previously was reason

Anza continues to say that at mission [San Gabriel], he will leave the rest of the cattle after having taken the precise number for the maintenance of the troops and twenty destined for support of the new establish-
ments, which could be reduced to a little more than 100 head even though there should be 200 or more. He says to the Commander and Father [Paterna] of this mission, "I am asking that they send to the
rendezvous those horses which
can be sent with the necessary

"A este comandante y Padre Ministro de ella [Mision de San Gabriel], pido me envien al encuentro las caballerias que puedan remitirme, y los viveres necesarios".

And finally, Anza ends letter two by inserting a postscript informing Rivera that he has forgotten to tell him that the troops were also lacking in soap and footwear, and that first thing at the missions [misions del Ejercito], he will ask for and distribute the same.

Posdata "Se me paso expresar a Vuestra Merced que tambien de lo que faltaba la Tropa es de jabon y calzado. Ahi el primero, en las misiones del Ejercito, lo pedire para socorrer les".

Anza’s letter three is written after his arrival at Mission San Gabriel and dated February 20, 1776.

Here, the Gran Capitan writes

5

They had stolen tobacco, pinole, beads, chocolate, a musket of the guard, and other things of little value, belonging to the soldiers. Also taken, which was more sensible (es mas sensible), were twenty five saddle animals of the mission and guard.

He says that even though the incident had been known since midnight, Lt. Moraga did not take pursuit until 10 o’clock of the next day. " y es el caso que el dia 14 del presente en que arribe a esta Mision, halle en el[ella] la ocurrencia de que la noche anterior se deserto el soldado Yepis de esta escolta (a quien tocaba estar de caballada) y tres marranos de mi expedicion y un serviente del Sargento de ella, los effectos que estavan

Here we have always known that Juan Pablo Grijalva was the only sergeant of the expedition. However, what was not known is that his servant was traveling with him. This servant could very well be the Claudio that Anza lists as being 21 years of age with Sergeant Grijalva and wife listed as being 33 and 31 respectively. Therefore, it is impossible for Claudio to be their son, as some historians claim. This statement has been corroborated by Edward Grijalva descendant of the famed Sergeant.

Here Rivera in his diary dated February 25, 1776 concurs with Anza’s report when his says "a

Anza continues, "I will advise Your Honor of all I have decided to do, so you will not be ignorant of anything, and you are able to take the appropriate measures"

"Y a Vuestra Merced comunicarle aviso de todo lo que me ha parecido resolver para que de nada este ignorante, y segun ellos, tome por ahi las providencias que le convenga".

Anza’s says he will leave the next day for Monterey with most of his individuals of the expedition, leaving twelve soldiers there with their families under the command of the sergeant [Grijalva]. The mission will remain guarded by the sergeant and five soldiers, and beyond that he is leaving three more to accompany Lieutenant Moraga as soon as he returns. He is leaving provisions of corn and beans for all of them to last

6

Here, we get a glimpse of the expedition’s daily fare.

"El dia de manana salgo para Monterey con los mas individuos de mi expedicion dejando en esta, dose soldados con sus familias a cargo del Sargento. Esta Mision queda resguardada con el sargento y cinco soldados, a mas de esos, tres para que acompanen al Teniente Moraga asi que se regrese. A cuyo total quedan comestibles de maiz y frijol para vienti tres dias cuya especie para el mismo tiempo llevo yo".

Anza says that the expedition has been thrown off course because of the chase the lieutenant is making in pursuit of the deserters. That because of this reason, he is not sending any horses to Your Honor, as they had planned. However, in

That he will be able to put in place, at said presidio [Monterey], all of the requests that are contained in the letter of Your Honor [Rivera]. " Con el motivo de la seguida que hace el Teniente de los desertores nos emos desairado todos, y es el que causa el no remitir a Vuestra Merced (como aviamos quedado) algunos caballos. Pero en consideracion al desasio en graduo quedara esta escolta. En el mencionado presidio pondre en practica todos los encargos de Vuestra Merced contenidos en su ultima carta".

He continues, "the cattle has recuperated such that they will be able to continue to our destination, with the exception of a few, which he is leaving with the sergeant so that the calves will not suffer". " El Ganado bacuno se ha establecido de

Anza closes letter three stating that it has also occurred to him to advise Your Honor [Rivera], that the corn furnished by the Reverend Father Paterna amounts to more than forty-nine fanegas and six almudes, stating " tambien me ha parecido avisar a Vuestra Merced, que el maiz que has suministrado el Reverendo Padre Paterna hacien de a cuarenta i nueve fanegas y seis almudes".

Clearly, Anza’s first three letters not only shed light on the needs of the expedition up to that point such as: clothing, soap, footwear, and horses, but the need to continue and accomplish the task of establishing the presidio and mission of San Francisco.

However, in Rivera we can

7

With the difficult tasks of pacifying the Indians, keeping the padres in check, and establishing the presidio and mission of San Francisco, it appears Rivera was facing tasks far too difficult to handle.

This has lead historians to believe that he was inept and unable to cope with the situation.

Look for more to come with cartas four, five, and six.

               ###
These copies of pages from the letters are examples of the detail recorded. 

The letter at the top identifies some of the items that they have with them, such as Tabaco and  Pinol . . .   

This letter to the right requests clothing.. . "alguna provision de Ropa" . . .

For Information on the
Juan Bautista De Anza route through the Anza Valley, contact: Margaret Jaenke hmrf@pe.net
 Hamilton Museum 
http://www.anzaca.com/museum
39991 Contreras Road
 P.O. Box 391141, 
Anza, Ca  92539
 Phone: 1 909 763-1350

Juan Bautista de Anza, early Spanish Explorer, founder of the land route to California and founder of San Francisco, California, will be celebrated in Salida, Colorado on August 26 – 29, 2004. Those dates will mark the 225^th anniversary of Anza and his soldiers crossing Poncha Pass to challenge the Comanches. Come celebrate this heroic Spanish explorer and his soldiers and join us as we learn more about the Spanish history of the southwestern United States.

We will be departing Albuquerque on August 26 at 8:00 am and driving in vans with Anza historians to Santa Fe to tour the Palace of the Governors. From Santa Fe we will drive to Ojo Caliente for lunch and the on to Salida. Our tour leaders will bring this historic journey alive at we travel north along Anza’s trail. After our check in to our motels, pizza and a panel discussion on Thursday night will provide lively entertainment as five Anza history experts debate the various routes Anza is alleged to have taken in the area. The Conference itself will be held on Friday, August 27 and papers will be presented by members of both the Anza Society US and the Anza Society Mexico. Saturday, August 28 will see us on the road following those Anza Trails through the beautiful Colorado landscape. Our banquet will be after the road trip. We will be departing for Albuquerque on Sunday morning.

Please check out our website – www.touraz4fun.com or e-mail your questions to touraz4fun@cox.net. We look forward to having you join us for this annual celebration.

The Anza Society, Linda J. Rushton, Event Planner

AUTO BIOGRAPHY OF PAUL EDGAR TREJO

PART II, THE LATER GENERATIONS

THE EARLY YEARS

My Mother’s People

I was born October 31^st, 1926 in San Jose California. My Mother was Eldana Shelton, and my father was Ernest Ambrose Trejo. All the people on my Mother’s side of the family were of German extraction except her father, who was Scotch-Irish. My Grandmother’s maiden name was Carrie Blanch Yoakam, and she was born June 20, 1883 in Lacona, Iowa.of Candace Ann Oxenreider and Abraham Lincoln Yoakam.

The Oxenreiders and Yoakams had come to this  country from Germany about 1776. Both of these families migrated over the years to Virginia, Ohio, and Iowa, and their main occupation was farming. Abraham Lincoln Yoakham was born in 1862 in Iowa.  

He was the son of Lewis Yoakam and Rachel B. Fletcher. Lewis Yoakum was born March 30^th, 1826, in Ohio, and Rachel B. Fletcher was born November 18^th, 1827 in Ohio They were married about 1845. They had one son, Abraham Lincoln Yoakam, born in 1862 in Iowa. His mother, Rachel, died February 4^th, 1911, in Iowa. Lewis died in the early 1900s.

Abraham Lincoln Yoakum married Candace Ann Oxenreider on February 12, 1882, in Lacona, Iowa. Candace’s parents were John Oxenreider and Sophia McAdams. Candace was born October 14^th, 1859, in Lacona, Iowa. Candace died in San Jose July 27^th, 1942, in San Jose, California, at age 82.

Candace was my great grandmother. About 1893, Candace and Abraham decided to "Come West". They came by covered wagon over the Old Oregon Trail, arriving in Pendelton Oregon in 1894, where they settled for a short time. There were seven children that made the trip, the oldest being my Grandmother, Carrie Blanch age 10. the others were John age 8, Albert age 7, Clara age 5, Harold age 3, and Robert age 1. Another child, Clara, was born April 28, 1894, probably in Oregon. After a short time the family moved to San Jose, California, where their last child (my namesake) Paul Yoakum was born on October 10, 1896.

Maternal Grandmother
Carrie Blanch Yoakum Brien 
1919, Age 36

My Grandmother told me some stories about this  trip. She told me that distance along the trail was measured by "Wagon Greasings". Evidently, every 20 miles they stop and grease the wheels of the wagon. Therefore, a distance of 100 miles was 5 "Wagon Greasings".

She also said that only six people could fit in the wagon, and that since there were seven altogether, some one had to walk. The three older children, Blanch, John, and Albert took turns walking behind the wagon all the way across the country. 

My Grandmother Carrie Blanch Yoakum-Shelton- Brien witnessed a world of changes during her lifetime. She died May 29, 1973, in Pacific Grove, California, at the age of 90. During her lifetime she saw the invention of the automobile, the airplane, and man’s landing on the moon, all in two generations.

My mother, Eldana Shelton was born March 20, 1908, in San Jose California. Her parents were Sylvester Shelton and Carrie Blanch Yoakum, and she grew up in San Jose. On February 10, 1924, at age 16, she married my father Ernest Ambrose Trejo in Stockton, California. My father was from an old Mexican-Spanish family, with early roots in San Luis Obispo, California. He was born in San Luis          Obispo on December 7^th, 1904. Ernest Ambrose’s Father, Tibo "Santos" Trejo, was born in San Luis   Obispo, January 4^th, 1878, and his mother was Maria Clotilda Garner, born February 22, 1877, in          Castoville, California. Clotilda was the granddaughter of William Robert of Monterey and Antonia           Francisca Emigdia Butron. Francisca’s grandfather was the soldado Manuel Butron.

My father’s grandfather was Julian Trejo. Julian was born in Arispe. Senora, Mexico in 1838. Julian’s father was Jacinto Trejo, and his mother Maria Josefa Lopez. Julian came to California about 1847, and settled in San Luis Obispo. He married Catalina Bielmas, at the old Mission San Luis Obispo on October 23^rd, 1867. She was 16, and he was 29 years of age.

Catalina’s parents were Francisco Bielmas, and Roberta Garcia and they were in San Luis Obispo in the 1840's. Julian Trejo and Catalina Bielmas had 9 children, one of which was my grandfather Santos Trejo.

Mother, Eldana Shelton, 16 years old.
Richmond Chase cannery in San Jose, 1924

Then, my mother’s sister Violet, her husband Edward Silva, and their daughter Gloria Ann moved into the Caladonia house. Ed was a skilled glass cutter, who worked for the Del Monte Glass company in Monterey. He was laid off as the company was forced to cut it’s staff for lack of business. There was no bedroom space left in the house, so the Silvas moved into the double garage where some beds a few pieces of furniture were installed. Gloria Ann was my brother’s age, and I considered her somewhat of a brat. For one thing, she refused to sleep in the garage. Consequently, my brother and I alternated sleeping in the garage while Gloria Ann took our beds and slept in the house every night. There are many memories from those early years, but they have no place in a short biography. Suffice to say, we were as poor as church mice, but everyone else was in the same boat, so as kids we didn’t know we were poor. I can still remember walking along the railroad tracks with my grandmother, picking up wild mustard green. She would put them in a great iron pot on and old wood stove, throw in a ham hock, and we ate them with lots of vinegar! On Sundays we would visit the lettuce fields in Salinas. The farmers would plant four or five rows of lettuce next to the road. Then there was a 10 foot space where the main field was planted. People were allowed to take all the lettuce they wanted from the rows along the road, but were to stay out of the main field. I never recall anyone violating that trust.

The next major milestone in my life was when my mother met Glen David Berwick. They were both clerks in the grocery department in Holman’s Department Store. They were married September 6, 1930, when I was four years old. My stepfather bought a house at 218 Alder in Pacific Grove for $2800.00 dollars. A few years ago that same house sold for $250,000 !

My stepfather was one of the most talented men I ever knew. He only had a high school education, but he was a semi professional photographer and extremely good in the shop. In those days, people couldn’t afford to buy things so they made them. He was and avid amateur radio operator who built all his own equipment. During the WW-2 he was commissioned a radio officer in the Merchant Marine, and served in the Pacific on various ships until 1947.

In 1932 I was enrolled in Kindergarten at Robert down Elementary School in Pacific Grove.I was there through grade eight, graduating in June 1940. My teachers were strict but fair. An there was no such thing as "social promotion". If you did not pass, you were held back a year, which was considered by your classmates as a real stigma. There were no computers, so you learned your multiplication tables backwards and forwards. Our high school population reflected the makeup of the town, Pacific Grove had a population then of only 2300 people. and the total number of students was around 250. I will always attribute what successes I have had in life to my foundation schooling in the Pacific Grove school system. I was active in sports, lettering in track all four years and in Football three years.

I had just commenced my Sophomore year of high school when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Overnight the whole world changed. We became paranoid. Japanese submarines shelled areas along the Pacific Coast of California and Oregon, which contributed to this paranoia. Because the Fleet had been so heavily damaged at Pearl Harbor there was a general feeling that the Japanese might attempt a landing on the west coast. The location of large military installations at Fort Ord and the Presidio of Monterey caused precautions to become doubly tight. Fifteen inch batteries were installed along the coast between Monterey and Santa Cruz, and manned by Army Field Artillery troops. The bunkers for these old batteries are still in place today. Monterey Bay is a large crescent shaped bay, that is really and open roadstead. It stretches from Point Pinos in Pacific Grove in the south, to Santa Cruz on the north, a distance of 20 miles across the mouth. There are miles and miles of ideal beaches to make and amphibious landing.

All the roads along the beaches were patrolled by heavily armed soldiers in jeeps. The waterfront at Monterey was closed to the general public, and only fisherman with special passes were permitted on the wharfs.

Due to processing problems of  having used my step father's surname (Berwick) all my life, I was not sworn in until February 28, 1944 as and Aviation Cadet.  I was sworn in at the Office of Naval Officer Procurement in San Francisco. I reported for active duty July 1, 1944, to the Navy V5/V12 unit at the University of Redland, Redlands, CA.  

Enlistment Card

The United States Navy:

I turned 17 on October 31^st, 1943 and was determined to enlist in the Navy. If I waited until I graduated from high school in June of 1944, I would only have four months until I turned 18, and then I would be drafted. There was and old peacetime law still in effect from the depression years that would allow a young man to enlist at 17 for a period until he reached his majority of 21 years, provided he could get his parents or guardian to sign the papers. This was known in the Navy as a "Kiddie Cruise." This was essentially a four year enlistment, and your ID Card which always had on it your discharge date would list it as your 21^st birthday. However in this space was the letters DOW, which meant duration of war.

The first week in November I persuaded a high school classmate, John Hamilton, that we should both make the 120 miles trip to San Francisco to enlist. We both had written parental permission in hand. Besides that, John had the transportation, and old Indian motorcycle with the "suicide shift". So, up we traveled to the Office Of Naval Officer Procurement at 707 South Market Street in San Francisco. We were given a packet of documents to comply with, namely letters of recommendation to obtain, and told to report back when we had the proper paperwork, for a physical, and to be sworn in. I had a another problem, my birth certificate said my name was Paul Trejo, but all my other paperwork said my name was Paul Berwick, my stepfather’s surname. The Navy requires either legal adoption papers or a legal change of name. I had to return to Pacific Grove to get affidavits from everyone who had written a recommendation that Berwick and Trejo were one and the same person. On February 28, 1944, I was sworn in as and Aviation Cadet, Class V-5. Under the terms of enlistment, I had to complete high school.

I graduated June 6^th, 1944 from high school, and reported July 1^st to the Naval V-5/V-12 unit at the University of Redlands, California. The unit comprised 500 navy seamen cadets, and 200 marine privates. The marines would go on to Quantico, Virginia, after their Redlands training to be commissioned second lieutenants. From there they would become cannon fodder for the next landing in the Pacific. The V-5 seaman would be commissioned midshipmen, and be sent to preflight training. From there they would be sent to flight school, and on completion earn their wings. The next step was off to type training in the aircraft they would be flying. Their final stop was the fleet. The V-12 seaman would be sent to midshipman school and commissioned midshipman. On completion of that training, they were commissioned ensigns and shipped of to the fleet. The program was one of intense physical training, and academics leading to a four year college engineering degree. The discipline was extremely ridged, the physical training rugged, and the academics demanding. It was easy to wash out for almost any reason, and many did. When I was in grade school my mother insisted I learn to play some musical instrument. In grade school the instruments were assigned by drawing lots. I ended drawing a B-Flat Clarinet. I had hoped fore a trombone! In high school I played in the band except during football season. At any rate, at Redlands I joined the Navy Unit Marching Band, that played every Saturday when the Battalion stood inspection, and then marched in review. The band did not have to stand inspection! Those Saturday inspections were a bear. The average July temperature was from 100 degrees Fahrenheit

to 110 degrees on a summer’s day. It took an hour for the Commanding Officer, LtCdr. Jennings Courts to inspect the entire unit. Even at parade rest people would pass out in the heat. There was and ambulance and medical corpsmen on hand to take the fallen to sick bay.

Commissioned Ensign, USN,
 June 6, 1947, from the Naval ROTC Unit, University of Southern California. 

USS McCook 

(c) 2004 The Washington Post Company

THE STRUGGLE FOR CHICANO REPRESENTATION 

(1847-1974)

By John P. Schmal

The struggle for Chicano representation in the state of California began as soon as the United States took over California in 1847. This struggle has been a long-fought battle to assert one ethnic group’s rights as American citizens. However, the outcome of this confrontation remained in question for the better part of 130 years. This is the story of that struggle.

On May 13, 1846, the United States Congress, at the request of President James Knox Polk, declared war on the Mexican Republic. And thus began the Mexican-American War. The war in California ended less than a year later with the Treaty of Cahuenga, signed on January 13, 1847. Another year later, on February 2, 1848, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo forced Mexico to hand over to the United States 525,000 square miles of landing, including California.

Of the treaty’s twenty-three articles, four defined the rights of Mexican citizens and Indian people in the territories. Californians were given the freedom to live in ceded territories as either American or Mexican citizens. The new American citizens would be entitled to "the enjoyment of all the rights of citizens of the United States according to the principles of the constitutions."

The California Constitution

A year later, forty-eight delegates met in Monterey to put together the first California Constitution. For six weeks from September to November 1849 the Constitutional Convention created a constitution that would guarantee rights to all citizens living within California’s borders. The final Constitution – written in both English and Spanish – provided that all major legislation in the future would be written in both English and Spanish.

Article XI, Section 21 of California’s 1849 Constitution reflected the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo’s guarantee, declaring, "All laws, decrees, regulations, and provisions, which from their nature require publication, shall be published in English and Spanish." Article II, "Right of Suffrage," Section 1, stated that "Every white male citizen of the United States, and every white male citizen of Mexico, who shall have elected to become a citizen of the United States, under the treaty of peace exchanged and ratified at Queretaro, on the 30th day of May, 1848 of the age of twenty-one years, who shall have been a resident of the State six months next preceding the election, and the county or district in which he claims his vote thirty days, shall be entitled to vote at all elections which are now or hereafter may authorized by law."

Section 5 decreed: "Every citizen of California, declared a legal voter by this Constitution, and every citizen of the United States, a resident of this State on the day of election, shall be entitled to vote at the first general election under this Constitution, and on the question of the adoption thereof." Eight Californios – six of them Mexican Californians – represented Hispanic interests at the Convention. They were as follows:

1. Antonio M. Pico from San Jose
2. Jacinto Rodriguez from Monterey
3. Pablo de la Guerra from Santa Barbara
4. M.G. Vallejo from Sonora
5. José Antonio Carrillo from Los Angeles
6. Manuel Dominguez from Los Angeles
7. Miguel de Pedrorena – a native of Spain – from San Diego.
8. José M. Covarrubias – a native of France – representing Santa Barbara.

The sad reality of this bilingual convention is that – even before the ink was dry on the official paper – certain Anglo-American interests were taking steps that would lead to a gradual and continuous appropriation of Chicano suffrage. This action, to some people, may have been regarded as the logical prerogative of a conquering people over a conquered people. But the conquerors – once Mexico had requested peace – signed a treaty and wrote a constitution that guaranteed citizenship and voting rights to the Californios who had well-established roots in this region. This had been a promise but – by 1893 – most of these guarantees would be eliminated through legislation and plebiscites.

During the first couple of decades, several prominent Californio families of Spanish and Mexican origin who held large tracts of land called ranchos, shared the reigns of power with the Anglos who were arriving in their territory in ever-greater numbers. But, in the First California Constitutional Legislature, which commenced on December 15, 1849 in San Jose, was attended by a nineteen delegates from the northern states of the U.S. Another ten hailed from the southern states, but no natives of California were represented in the Assembly. Jose M. Covarrubias, a Californio landowner in the Santa Barbara area, but a native of France, was one of the few Assemblypersons with any strong California ties going back more than a decade.

Early Chicano Representation

The first California Senate in 1849 was composed of nine members from northern states, five members from southern states, and only two members who were native Californians. The session last four months and adjourned on April 22, 1850. Less than half a year later, on September 9, 1850, California would be admitted as the thirty-first American state.

The first session of the California Legislation after statehood commenced on January 6, 1851 and lasted until May 1, 1851. One of the delegates representing Los Angeles for the Whig Party was a well-known Californian named Andres Pico. Andres – the brother of the last Mexican Governor, Pio Pico – was the Mexican military officer who had fought the American forces under his commander, General Jose Maria Flores.

In the early days of 1847, General Flores, recognizing that he was losing control of the situation, turned over command of his forces to his deputy, Andres Pico, and fled south to unoccupied Mexican territory. On January 13, 1847, Andres, seeing his own situation as untenable, met with Lieutenant-Colonel John C. Fremont, the commander of the American forces who was occupying the San Fernando Mission. On this date, Fremont and Andres Pico, Commander-in-Chief of the remaining Mexican forces in California, signed the Treaty of Cahuenga in the San Fernando Valley. Article 5 of the capitulation declared, "equal rights and privileges are vouchsafed to every citizen of California as are enjoyed by the citizens of the United States."

Andres Pico became the first Californio to be elected to the Assembly as the representative of District 2 in the 2nd (1851) and 3rd (1853) legislative sessions. He changed his party affiliation to Democrat and was elected to the Assembly from District 2 once again for the 9th (1858) and 10th (1859) legislative sessions. Another Californian landowner, Jose M. Covarrubias, served on the California state assembly off and on from 1849 to 1862, representing Santa Barbara district.

For the first three decades after statehood, some Chicanos were able to find the occasional support of their constituency and represent their home districts. Pedro C. Carrillo of Santa Barbara served as a delegate from the 2nd District in 1854-55. Manuel A. Castro of San Luis Obispo served as a delegate from the 2nd District in 1856-57 and from the 6th District in 1863. Esteban Castro from Monterey served in the State Assembly as a delegate to the 3rd District (1857-58) and the 6th District (1863-65).

Ygnacio Sepulveda of Los Angeles became a member of the California State Assembly in 1863-65 as the representative of the 2nd District. Ygnacio went on to become a Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial District, one of the first two Superior Court Justices in Los Angeles County. Another Californio, Mariano G. Pacheco served as a representative of California’s 3rd District from 1852 to 1854.

Romualdo Pacheco

It was Mariano’s brother who stands as the most spectacular Chicano legislator during California’s Nineteenth Century. Born in Santa Barbara in 1831, Romualdo Pacheco was a proud Californian who also had roots in the Mexican state of Guanajuato. Señor Pacheco originally served as superior court judge in San Luis Obispo from 1853-1857. Romualdo moved on to serve in the State Assembly in 1853-55 and 1868-70. In 1857, he first started serving in the California State Senate and he continued to serve intermittently, also in 1861-63 and 1869-70.

But Romualdo Pacheco’s best days were ahead of him. Governor Leland Stanford appointed him as a brigadier general in command of the First Brigade of California’s Native Cavalry during the American Civil War. During the Republican State Convention of 1863, Governor Stanford nominated Pacheco for the position of state treasurer. Fluent in both Spanish and English, Romualdo Pacheco was a popular politician who got along well with both Californians and Anglos-Americans.

In June 1871 Pacheco received the Republican Party nomination for Lieutenant Governor of California. In 1875, when Governor Newton Booth was elected to the U.S. Senate, Pacheco became the Governor of California. His stay in the Governor’s office was relatively short and, in November 1876, Romualdo ran for and was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives to serve in the Forty-fifth Congress (1877-1878), winning by a margin of one vote. He later served in the Forty-sixth and Forty-seventh Congresses (March 4, 1879 to March 3, 1883).

Even when Pacheco’s career as a representative drew to a close, her served in his later years as a minister to several Central American countries before his death in 1899. Loren Nicholson is one of several authors who has written about Romualdo Pacheco’s extraordinary career as a Chicano politician in his 1990 publication, "Romualdo Pacheco’s California!: The Mexican-American Who Won," a California Heritage Series (San Luis Obispo: California Heritage Pub. Associates, 1990).

However, as the Nineteenth Century wore on, a gradual erosion of Mexican-American’s rights as citizens took place. The Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, ratified in 1870, had promised "the rights of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." In theory this amendment gave all Californian Mexican-Americans and other minorities a voice in both local and national politics.

In practice, however, the Fifteenth Amendment was flagrantly violated in the years to follow by the California Legislature. One of the most blatant examples of this was the adoption of the 1879 California Constitution. The revised Constitution officially rescinded the linguistic protective provisions of the 1849 Constitution, providing that "no person who shall not be able to read the Constitution in the English language and write his or her name, shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in this State." With one fell swoop, the guarantee of bilingual publication of laws was revoked and no documents relating to elections were thereafter published in Spanish.

The Literacy Requirement (1894)

Then, in 1891, Assemblyman A. J. Bledsoe introduced an English literacy requirement as a proposed constitutional amendment in the State Assembly. Bledsoe had earlier belonged to the vigilante Committee of Fifteen that had expelled every person of Chinese ancestry from Humboldt. In his introduction, he lamented the "the increased immigration of the illiterate and unassimilated elements of Europe, and believe that every agency should be invoked to preserve our public lands from alien grasp, to shield American labor from this destructive competition, and to protect the purity of the ballot-box from the corrupting influences of the disturbing elements ... from abroad."

Although the Assembly voted down the proposal on January 21, 1891, a flood of petitions from the public favoring the literacy requirement flooded Sacramento. With such overwhelming support from their constituents, the Legislature hastily adopted Bledsoe’s proposal as a constitutional amendment subject to ratification at the next general election. In 1894, the people of California voted to approve the English literacy requirement, which henceforth before part of Article II, Section 1.

The anti-immigrant attitude – directed at Asians, Mexicans and Eastern Europeans – prevailed into the first half of the Twentieth Century to the point that it was even written into the California election laws. Section 5567 of the California Elections Code, as adopted in 1941, required that elections be conducted in the English language and prohibited election officials from speaking any language other than English while on duty at the polling stations.

Such actions violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and, therefore, were unconstitutional. But the literacy law remained on the books in California until it was challenged in the California courts many decades later. In the landmark court case, Genoveva Castro et al. versus the State of California, the constitutionality of the English literacy requirement was challenged [CASTRO v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, March 24, 1970. L.A. No. 29693. 2 Cal. 3d 223].

In analyzing the causes of the literacy legislation, the Court found that "fear and hatred played a significant role" in promoting California’s lawmakers to pass the voting requirement. Although it may have appeared to be "a genuine desire to create an intelligent and responsible electorate," the court concluded "the English literacy requirement was a direct product of the narrow and fearful nativism rampant in California politics at the end of the nineteenth century."

For the first half of the Twentieth Century, anti-immigrant legislation and sentiment did, in fact, prevent fair political representation of Chicanos and other minorities groups in California. One of the most devious means of limiting minority representation was a practice known as gerrymandering. In California, legislatures were able to divide a county or city into oddly shaped representational districts to give political advantage to Anglos in elections. Gerrymandering resulted in voter dilution, in which the political representation of a political unified minority was obstructed or diminished so severely that political representation of Latinos was nonexistent.

The year was 1947 and the place was California. World War II had ended two years earlier and millions of American GI’s had returned home to their families and jobs. The Great Depression had ended with the coming of World War II and California – like the rest of the country – was experiencing a newly found economic prosperity.

As a result of this prosperity, Los Angeles was drawing large numbers of people from all around the United States and from Mexico. Between 1940 and 1950, the population of California increased from over 6 million people to 10 ½ million. During the same period, the population of Los Angeles County jumped from 3 million to 4.7 million people.

During World War II, hundreds of thousands of Hispanic Americans had served in the U.S. military, many receiving decorations for their service to their country. These proud veterans returned to their native land, but still experienced many forms of discrimination and prejudice in the job market.

However, as the war drew to an end, an important piece of legislation presented Chicano veterans with an opportunity for advancement in California. The G.I. Bill Act of June 22, 1944 – or the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act [Public Law 346, 78th Congress, Title III, §§500-503, 58 Stat. 284, 291-293 (1944)] – put higher education within the reach of thousands of Mexican-American veterans. The Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1952 [Public Law 550, 82nd Congress, July 16, 1952, Ch. 875, 66 Stat. 663, 38 U.S.C. 997] provided similar privileges to Korean War veterans.

Over the next decade, Mexican-American veterans attended local and nationwide colleges and universities to obtain college degrees. In many cases, these vets were the first members of their families to receive a higher education. Armed with the weapon of education, many of these Chicano veterans became the politicians of the 1960s and 1970s.

In California’s expanding wartime economy, some Mexican Americans had become skilled workers, putting them into a new economic bracket. But, the new prosperity had not translated into political representation yet. Not a single Hispanic person from California had served in Congress since the end of Romualdo Pacheco’s tenure as representative in 1883. Additionally, not a single Mexican American had served in the California Legislature since the end of Miguel Estudillo’s tenure in the California Senate (1911). The last Latino to serve as mayor of the City of Los Angeles, Cristobal Aguilar, had been voted out of office in 1872 and the last Mexican-American member of the Los Angeles City Council had stepped down in 1881.

It was in this vacuum of non-representation that a unique individual came onto the scene. More than any other person, Edward Roybal would pave the way for two generations of Mexican-American Californians, who would achieve representation in the Los Angeles City Council, the U.S. Congress, or the California Legislature.

Born in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Roybal had come to Boyle Heights in 1922 with his parents, when his unemployed father sought new employment. Roybal graduated from Roosevelt High School and attended UCLA before going to World War II. After the war had ended, he returned to Los Angeles and became the Director of Health Education for the Los Angeles County Tuberculosis and Health Association.

In 1947, 30-year-old Edward R. Roybal decided to run for councilman of the 9^th Council District, which included Boyle Heights, Bunker Hill, Civic Center, Chinatown, Little Tokyo, and the Central Avenue District. The racial makeup of the district’s 185,033 residents was: 45% White, 34% Latino, 15% African American, and 6% "other." Even Roybal’s political base, Boyle Heights, was just 43% Hispanic at the time, while 34% of the inhabitants were native-born Whites.

Professor Katherine Underwood has analyzed Roybal’s run for office and noted that Roybal’s first campaign lacked endorsements and neglected voter outreach. In the primary election on April 1, 1947, Edward Roybal and three other candidates ran against the incumbent councilman, Parley Parker Christensen. On Election Day, Christensen won 8,948 votes, while Roybal came in third with 3,350 votes (15% of the total ballots cast). Seventy-five percent of Roybal’s support had come from Boyle Heights. (Katherine Underwood, "Pioneering Minority Representation: Edward Roybal and the Los Angeles City Council, 1949-1962," Pacific Historical Review – 1997).

Following this loss, Roybal became involved with several of his campaign supporters to create the CPO (Community Political Organization) in September 1947. The organization, which was later renamed CSO (Community Service Organization), became the first broad-based organization within the Mexican-American community, representing veterans, businessmen, and workers.

The primary goal of the CSO was to register Mexican Americans to vote. For this purpose, the organization recruited 1,000 members and registered 15,000 new voters in the Latino sections of Boyle Heights, Belvedere, and East Los Angeles. By 1949, Roybal believed that he had enough support to run for the Ninth District seat once again.

In the April 5, 1949 primary election, Roybal knocked Daniel Sullivan and Julia Sheehan out of the council race by capturing 37% of the total votes cast. This forced a runoff with Christensen in the May general election. In the general election held on May 31, 1949, Edward Roybal soundly defeated six-term Councilman Christensen by a vote of 20,472 to 11,956, winning by a 2-to-1 margin. With this victory, Ed Roybal became the first Mexican American since 1881 to win a seat on the Los Angeles City Council. He would serve as Council member of the 9^th District from July 1, 1949 to Dec. 31, 1962, before moving on to the U.S. Congress in 1963.

Even with Roybal’s victory, CSO continued its registration efforts. By 1950, some 32,000 Mexican Americans had been added to registration rolls, contributing to the election of businessman Albert G. Padilla to the San Fernando City Council. Mr. Padilla was made Council member on April 18, 1950 and served for four years. (Source: Elena Sanchez, San Fernando City Clerk). A year later, Roybal was reelected to the Council seat for the 9^th District in the primaries on April 3, 1951 when he defeated Irving Rael by 17,941 votes to 5,762 votes (almost a 3-to-1 margin).

In the meantime, a second Hispanic, Charles Navarro, ran for the City Council. In the April 3 election, five candidates ran for the Council seat, representing District 10. In this primary election, left-wing Assemblyman Vernon Kilpatrick received 5,301 votes, while Navarro received the second largest number of votes with 5,077. Navarro and Kilpatrick thus advanced to a showdown in the general election, to be held in June.

The Los Angeles Times reported that this election represented "one of the bitterest Council fights in years," pitting the Conservative income property owner and "champion of free enterprise" Charles Navarro "on a strong anti-Communist platform" against the left-wing Kilpatrick. Kilpatrick had already served for twelve years as an Assemblyman but, according to the Times, "had a long record of left-wing activities and associations."

Once the complete returns had been tallied, Navarro had defeated Kilpatrick 9,075 votes to 7,382 on June 29, 1951 at the general election. Navarro took office as Councilman on July 1, 1951.

In the 1953 contest for the 9^th District, Roybal ran unopposed, winning his seat in the April 7, 1953 primary election. Charles Navarro was also reelected at the same time. Very little changed in the political representation of Latinos for the rest of the 1950s. Edward Roybal sought the nomination for Lieutenant Governor in 1954, but failed.

Then in 1958, Ed Roybal announced that he would run for the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors. The outgoing Supervisor John Anson Ford endorsed Roybal. He and Councilman Ernest Debs opposed each other. The Eastside supported Roybal, but last minute defections hurt Roybal as several prominent Chicano leaders defected to Debs. Because Roybal had openly opposed the Chávez Ravine and Boyle Heights issues, the Los Angeles Times opposed him and endorsed Debs. On the first ballot, Roybal led by 393 votes, 139,800 to 139,407. But the County Voter Registrar reported that a 12,000-vote error had been made. After four recounts, Debs won 141,011 to 128,994.

In the 1950s, large numbers of Mexican Americans moved from Texas to the Midwest and California. By 1959, the Mexican-American population of Los Angeles County had increased to 600,000. However, aside from the two Latinos on the Los Angeles City Council, representation was nil. No Mexican American represented East Los Angeles or other Hispanic communities in Sacramento, nor did any Hispanic represent California in the U.S. Congress.

To address the issue of representation in California, the Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) was organized by 150 volunteer delegates at Fresno. Meeting for the first time in April 1959, MAPA

Delegates drew up a plan for direct electoral politics. From the beginning MAPA declared that its main goal was to become the political voice of the Mexican American community. Ed Roybal was elected first MAPA president.

In 1961, Los Angeles City Councilman Charles Navarro decided to run for the office of City Controller, challenging the incumbent City Controller, Don O. Hoye, who had served in that capacity since 1957. In the May 31, 1961 General Election, Navarro coasted to an easy victory of the incumbent Hoye, taking a 2-to-1 lead over Hoye in the early returns and maintaining his lead throughout the night. The final tally from June 2, 1961 gave Charles Navarro 331,340 votes, well above Hoye’s 161,690 votes.

Charles Navarro took office on July 1^st as City Controller, thus vacating his council position. Upon his victory, he stated, "I’ll miss the debates and personality clashes of the City Council, but I’m looking forward to my new responsibilities as controller." An Anglo, Joe E. Hollingsworth, was appointed on August 25, 1961 to Charles Navarro’s unexpired term on the 10^th District seat. Hollingsworth would be succeeded by Thomas Bradley, who was elected at the April 2, 1963 primaries to replace Hollingsworth on June 30, 1963. Bradley served the 10^th District until July 1, 1973, when he became Mayor of Los Angeles.

In 1960, California had a total population of 15,717,204 persons. This new figure increased California’s representation in the U.S. Congress from 30 seats in 1950 to 38 seats. Roughly 1.5 million Hispanics made up more than 9% of the California population, but 20% of these Hispanics were foreign-born, many of whom were not naturalized and, as a result, were not eligible to vote. In Los Angeles, Latinos only made up 9.6% of the population in 1960, slightly above the African-American population of 7.6%.

As the new decade commenced, there were still no Chicanos in the State Senate, the Assembly or in the California Congressional delegation. There was no representation of the Mexican-American population in any part of California, primarily because of political fracturing. "Fracturing" is the drawing of district lines so that a minority population is broken up. Members of the minority are spread among as many districts as possible, keeping them a minority in all the districts.

Because of fracturing, the Latino community of Los Angeles was unable to concentrate its strength so that it might elect representatives in some of its districts. And so it was that the East Los Angeles Barrio, with its large population of Hispanics, was split up into nine different Assembly districts, seven State Senate districts, and six different Congressional Districts. 

Most of these districts were combined with neighboring Anglo communities so that Hispanics rarely made up more than 20% of any one district's population.  This district manipulation was effective in depriving the Latino community of legislative power and influence.

In 1961, with the 1960 census statistics as a guide, the California Legislature reapportioned the Senate and Assembly pursuant to section 6 of article IV of the California Constitution. Testifying before the Reapportionment and Elections Committees of the Senate and Assembly, Los Angeles City Councilperson Edward Roybal, complained about the fragmentation of the Chicano communities in L.A. He stressed the importance of creating Hispanic districts.

After the 1961 reapportionment, Mexican Americans represented significant populations in the following Assembly Districts: the 40^th, 45^th, 48^th, 50^th and 51^st Assembly Districts. All of these districts fragmented the Chicano community and attached the districts to surrounding Anglo districts.

The California Supreme Court later ruled that California's congressional districts, as drawn in 1961, were unconstitutional and ordered reapportionment of the districts (Silver v. Reagan, 67 Cal. 2^nd 452). Similarly, the Supreme Court also ruled that the Assembly and Senate would have to reapportion their districts (Silver v. Brown, 63 Cal. 2^nd 270).

Although most of the redistricting that took place in 1961 resulted in obvious and continued gerrymandering of the Latino community in the Los Angeles area, the increasing Latino population in the Los Angeles area finally led to the election of Mexican-American representatives. Most significant was the creation of a congressional district, which would pave a way for Edward Roybal to run for Congress.

In the June 5, 1962 California Primary Election, thirteen Chicano candidates ran for office. City Councilman Edward Roybal had announced that he would run for the 30^th Congressional District. Around the same time, Henry Mendoza, a Republican, announced that he would run for the 21^st District.

Altogether, eleven Chicanos were on the ballot for the 40^th, 45^th, 48^th, 50^th, 51^st and 77^th Assembly Districts. In East L.A.’s 48^th District, Frank Lopez and Frank Paz had run against each other in the primaries. Political analysts believed that Frank Paz might have won that election if he had not faced another Latino in the primary.

Of the thirteen candidates, only three men would take office following the November 6, 1962 General Election. In the primaries, John Moreno had faced three other Chicano Democratic candidates in the contest for East Los Angeles’ 51^st Assembly District seat. A native of Los Angeles, Moreno had attended USC and served in the U.S. Navy from 1945 to 1947. Before running for his Assembly seat, John Moreno served as the Mayor of the City of Santa Fe Springs. Once elected, Assemblyperson Moreno would serve as the representative of the 51^st District for only two years: 1963 and 1964.

Philip Soto, a Democrat from La Puente, was a veteran of the U.S. Air Force and was a member of the La Puente City Council prior to his service in Sacramento. He became the state representative for the 50^th Assembly District.

With their November 6 elections, Philip Soto and John Moreno became the first two Latinos from Los Angeles County to be elected to the California State Legislature in the Twentieth Century. They were also the first Latinos to be elected to serve in the State Assembly since the election of Miguel Estudillo of Riverside County in 1907. The election of these two men set a precedent for a long line of Latino legislators committed to the service of their communities.

While Soto and Moreno celebrated their Assembly districts, Ed Roybal also savored his own victory. On November 6, 1962, after defeating Loyola University Professor William Fitzgerald, the City Councilman became the first Hispanic from California to be elected to Congress since the 1879 election of Romualdo Pacheco.

Edward Roybal took his seat in the House of Representatives on January 3, 1963 at the start of the 88th U.S. Congress. He would serve for twenty years from the 88th Congress to the 102nd Congress, retiring on January 3, 1993. At the start of his Congressional career, Representative Roybal represented the 30th District from 1963 to 1975. From 1975 to 1993, he served in the 25th District. In 1976, Roybal became one of the founding members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

As Ed Roybal prepared to run for Representative of the 30^th Congressional District, he resigned from his City Council seat on July 31, 1962. An African-American, Gilbert W. Lindsay, was appointed to replace him on January 28, 1963, even though the 9^th District had a large concentration of Latinos. Lindsay would serve in this capacity to Dec. 28, 1990, when he died in office. In three years, African Americans went from having no representation on the Los Angeles City Council in 1960 to having three representatives in 1963. At the same time, Latino representation went from two council members to zero.

The City Council apportionment of 1962 split East Los Angeles among seven councilmanic districts. Because of this fragmentation, Chicanos could not be a majority in any one of the city’s fifteen districts, even though they represented a large portion of seven of the council’s fifteen districts.

In the June 2, 1964 California Primary Election, Ed Roybal received 49,151 votes in the 30^th Congressional District, easily winning reelection to his Congressional seat. His closest opponents received only 15,153 and 13,228 votes.

In the elections for the California Assembly, many Chicano candidates stepped forward to seek a mandate for representing their communities. A total of eleven Chicanos ran for the 10^th, 38^th, 40^th, 45^th, 48^th, 50^th 51^st, and 75^th Assembly District seats. However, by the time the elections had ended, only one Hispanic Assemblymember would take office.

In the 50^th Assembly District, Philip Soto won reelection by 2,178 votes in the general election. Two years later in 1966, however, facing the same opponent in 1966, Soto would lose his seat by 4,309 votes, most likely because of boundary changes to his district after the 1966 reapportionment.

When Assemblyman Moreno tried to get reelected to his 51^st District seat, he found himself up against another Chicano candidate, Dionisio Morales. This contest split the Chicano vote and led to victory in the Democratic Primary by Jack Fenton. Jack Fenton received 16,278 votes to John Moreno’s 12,850 votes.

In 1965, the California Legislature was forced to reapportion itself under order of the California Supreme Court. Governor Edmund "Pat" Brown called a special session of the Legislature to consider reapportionment, and, in October, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill No. 1, which fashioned new Assembly and Senate districts.

However, the 1965 redistricting continued the fracturing and dilution of the East Los Angeles Chicano community. Five Assembly Districts – the 40^th, 45^th, 48^th, 50^th, and 51^st – all dipped into East Los Angeles for 20-30 percent of their registered voters, while five other Assembly Districts – the 52^nd, 53^rd, 56^th, 65^th and 66^th – all dipped in for smaller percentages. (Richard Santillan, "California Reapportionment and the Chicano Community: An Historical Overview 1960-1980," in The Chicano Community and California Redistricting, Vol. I (Rose Institute of State and Local Government, Claremont Men’s College, 1981).

In the 1966 California Primary Election on June 7, 1966, four Hispanics ran for the 14^th, 19^th, and 29^th Congressional Districts, and all of them lost. Fifteen Chicanos also ran for positions on the Assembly. All of these candidates, some of whom opposed one another in the primaries, lost their elections. The one Latino incumbent, Philip Soto, lost by 4,309 votes,.

In addition, nine Latinos also ran for State Senate seats, the 9^th, 10^th, 27^th and 28^th and 30^th. Richard Calderón received the CDC and MAPA endorsements for his bid for the 27^th Senatorial District but lost by 311 votes. Cecilia Pedroza and Raúl Morín had splintered the Mexican-American vote, preventing Calderón from winning.

In his reelection bid for the 30^th Congressional District, Ed Roybal received 48,117 votes against the 22,347 votes of his Republican opponent, Henry O’Bryant, Jr. This represented the only bright spot for the cause of Chicano representation in the 1966 election year.

The election of Professor Julian Nava in 1967 to the Los Angeles Unified School District Board was significant in many respects. He was the first Latino elected to the school board and he was able to defeat an incumbent in an at-large election. His vote total, over two million, was actually the largest ever received by a victorious Latino candidate in the United States up to that time. In an interview with the author, Julian stated that his election "lit fires in many places" and "inspired the famous ‘Walk Outs’ of the Los Angeles high schools in February of 1968, just seven months after I took office." Julian explains that these walkouts took place because "the students (and their leaders) believed that for the first time their demands for reform might be met with one of their own on the school board."

But Julian Nava’s surprise victory was one of the few events that gave representation to Latinos during this period. The author, Richard Santillan, in "Chicano Politics: La Raza Unida" explains that:

"After 1968, the Mexican-American… looked at the American political system and found that the Mexican-American after almost 120 years of being an American citizen did not have any real political voice. The Mexican-American tried to work in the two-party system, but the system failed him. In 1968, the California Legislature did not have one Mexican-American in the Assembly nor the Senate." (Richard Santillan, Chicano Politics: La Raza Unida (Los Angeles: Tlaquilo Publications, 1973), p. 11).

By 1968, the California Legislature was once again without Latino representatives. In the June 4, 1968 primary elections, 13 Latinos ran for Assembly seats. Philip L. Soto once again ran for the 50^th Assembly seat again but lost one more time. By the time the elections had ended, only one Chicano was given a ticket to enter the Assembly.

In the primary election for the 40^th Assembly District, the Democratic candidate Alex Garcia had faced twelve other candidates in the primary election, including four Hispanics. For Mr. Garcia, this election would begin a political career, as he served in the Assembly from 1968 to 1974 and in the State Senate from 1974 to 1982. Assemblyman Garcia was a veteran of the U.S. Army and a graduate of East Los Angeles Junior College, the University of California, Los Angeles and the Southern California Business School. Before his election to the State Legislature, Garcia was a field Representative for Congressman Ed Roybal for five years.

The 1970s represented new opportunities for Chicano candidates. The beginning of true Hispanic representation would be established during these years. In 1970, California had a total population of 19,971,069 persons. Of this total, 2,369,292 were Hispanics, who made up 10.8% of the state’s total population. However, in this year, out of 15,650 elected and appointed officials at the municipal, county, state, and federal levels, only 310 (1.98%) were Chicanos ("Political Participation of Mexican Americans in California," Report of the California Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Sacramento, Calif., August 1971, p. 15).

Of the 2.4 million Hispanics living in California, 490,892 were foreign-born, making up 22.9% of the total Hispanic population. Many of these people were not citizens and ineligible for American voting privileges. This represented a significant stumbling block in electing Chicanos to public office.

Assemblyman García was the lone Latino in the California Legislature at the beginning of 1970. However, in the June 2, 1970 primary election, three Republican Latinos ran for Congressional seats in the 9^th, 16^th and 22^nd Congressional Districts. In addition, fourteen Chicanos also ran for Assembly seats in the primaries, but only two men won.

In the primaries, Alex P. Garcia won reelection to the 40^th Assembly District by a wide margin, getting 15,151 votes out a total of 22,953. The Democrat Peter Chacón was elected as the representative for the 69^th Assembly District in San Diego County. After receiving a bachelor’s degree, teaching credential and M.A. from San Diego State University, Mr. Chacon worked as an educator and administrator for the San Diego Unified School District.

The Elections of 1972 represented another step forward for the Hispanic community of California. Richard Alatorre and Joseph Montoya were elected from their respective districts in Los Angeles to the California Assembly, while Ray Gonzales was elected to represent his Bakersfield District.

Ray Gonzales, a Democrat, won a stunning victory against a veteran Republic legislator in a bid for the 33^rd Assembly District, which took up most of Kern County, including Bakersfield, one of the most conservative areas of the state. Gonzáles had graduated from Mount San Antonio College and UCLA, and spent four years in the U.S. Air Force. His career in elective politics began at the age of 28 with a one-vote victory to the La Puente City Council in 1968. He later served as Mayor of La Puente before his election to the State Legislature.

Richard Alatorre, a Democrat from Los Angeles, was elected to serve as the representative of the 55^th District to the California Assembly. A native of East Los Angles, Alatorre served in the Assembly from 1972 to 1985. In 1985, he took a seat on the Los Angeles City Council representing the 14^th District. Alatorre would be elected as the first Chair of the Chicano Legislative Caucus.

Aware of their unified strength, the five Latinos now serving in the State Legislature officially formed the Chicano Legislative Caucus. The establishment of the Caucus marked a significant turning point in the political empowerment of the Latino community. For the first time in California's legislative history, an agenda was established and legislative priorities were put forward to protect and preserve the rights of Latinos throughout California.

The Chicano Assemblymen and Congressional delegates of the 1960s and early 1970s forged an important path for other people to follow, and Latino representation slowly, but steadily, increased.

As the 1970s progressed into the 1980s, more Chicano legislators stepped forward. But, in the eyes of many, their progress remained painfully slow. By 1985, seven Latinos were in the state legislature, making up only 6% of the total legislative branch. Three Latinos also served as representatives to the U.S. Congress from California (Ed Roybal, Marty Martinez, and Esteban Torres). In this year, Richard Alatorre left the Assembly to join the Los Angeles city Council, once again bringing Latino representation to that political body.

By the end of the 1980s, the Latino community of California had elected ten people to represent their districts: Three were members of the U.S. Congress. Three were State Senators and four were serving in the State Assembly. The Hispanics in the State Legislators represented only 5% of the total seats in the Assembly and Senate.

In many ways, the Latino community of California remained disenfranchised, when one considers that by 1990, they represented 26% of the California population. However, because many Latinos were foreign-born non-citizens or below the age of 18, they only made up about 5% of the California electorate at this time, effectively reducing their influence in electing their choices for political representation. The Latino share of the electorate, however, would increase dramatically to 14% by 1998 (Alvarez and Nagler, 1999: 19).

A decade later in the November 2000 elections, the first major elections of the new millennium, Latino candidates recorded a net gain of eight state house seats. In California, the number of Latinos in the 80-member State Assembly increased from 16 to 20, giving them 25% of the seats.

After the November 2002 elections, Latinos representatives to Congress numbered seven. In the State Senate, the elections brought the number of Latino Senators to nine, while Hispanic membership in the Assembly reached 18. The struggle has been long and hard-fought. But, with the Latino population increasing at a significant rate, Chicano political analysts see that time is on their side.

© 2004, John P. Schmal. All Rights Reserved.

Fernando J. Guerra and Dwaine Marvick, "Ethnic Officeholders and Party Activists in Los Angeles County" in Institute for Social Science Research, Vol. II (1986-87).

Malcolm E. Jewell, The Politics of Reapportionment," (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1962).

Lawrence (or Larry) Kestenbaum, "The Political Graveyard: California: State Assembly, 1850s." http://politicalgraveyard.com/geo/CA/ofc/asmbly1850s.html [Last full revision: September 1, 2003].

Library of Congress: "Hispanic Americans in Congress, 1822-1995: List in Chronological Order." http://lcweb.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/congress/chron.html

Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and William C. Velasquez Institute, "California Congressional Redistricting Plan" (Submitted July 17, 2001, Los Angeles). http://www.maldef.org/publications/pdf/Congressional_Plan_Supplement.pdf

"Political Participation of Mexican Americans in California," Report of the California Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Sacramento, Calif., August 1971.

Richard Santillan, "California Reapportionment and the Chicano Community: An Historical Overview 1960-1980," in The Chicano Community and California Redistricting, Vol. I (Rose Institute of State and Local Government, Claremont Men’s College, 1981).

Richard Santillan, Chicano Politics: La Raza Unida (Los Angeles: Tlaquilo Publications, 1973).

Katherine Underwood, "Pioneering Minority Representation: Edward Roybal and the Los Angeles City Council, 1949-1962," Pacific Historical Review – 1997

NORTHWESTERN UNITED STATES

SALT LAKE CITY, UT (PRWEB) June 21, 2004 -- Award winning cross-cultural Peruvian artist, Ernesto Apomayta, announced today the “Unveiling of Ancient Knowledge” art exhibition on Saturday, June 26, 2004 in Bountiful, Utah. Displaying many of his works with influences from around the world, Mr. Apomayta will show pieces that express his spirit through watercolors, oils, natural inks, acrylics and charcoal applied to textured paper, rice paper, silk and the walls of structures.

Having lived for extended periods in China and studied art among the Chinese masters such as Li Keren, Zhang Ping and Jiao Youfu at the renowned Central Institute of Fine Arts in Beijing. Mr. Apomayta has a unique ability to bridge cultures through his art and community outreach. With influences from around the globe and to complete the circle of Apomayta’s quest for a model of expression, he pursued his advanced art studies at the distinguished Autonomous National University of Mexico in Mexico City. The experience elevated his ability to blend many different cultural influences into his paintings. His admirers say he has done this in a way so complementary to each culture that the compilation is seamless, even in the creation of large-scale frescos he mastered while in Mexico. In a country famous for timeless murals, it is no small achievement that Apomayta has been honored again and again by the Mexican people for his skill as a muralist.

Mr. Apomayta will be honored by the attendance of la Consul General of Peru in Denver, Marita Landaveri at the art exhibit. The consul general of Peru in Denver will be providing consular services in Orem, Utah, on Saturday June 26th. She will then be participating in the special event and exhibition in the Mr. Apomayta’s Art Work.

To enhance the beauty of Mr. Apomayta’s art, music will be provided by pianist, Elly Savage. To learn more about this unique cultural event which takes place on Saturday, June 26 from 5 p.m. – 9 p.m. visit www.apomaytaart.com or call Sophia at 801. 637-6452.

About Ernesto Apomayta
Born and raised in Puno, Peru, Ernesto Apomayta-Chambi was identified as an artistic prodigy at the tender age of five. As a boy, Apomayta was first influenced and inspired by the natural marvels surrounding the humble home he shared with his family. In close proximity to shimmering Lake Titicaca, the striking beauty of the Andes and the awe-inspiring Incan ruins of his ancestors, Apomayta was spiritually compelled to express his wonder visually through his paintbrush. A direct ancestor of the legendary photographer, Martin Chambi, Apomayta derived inspiration from the same native influences and his legacy that encouraged Apomayta to fulfill his own artistic destiny.

For a complete media package or to interview Mr. Ernesto Apoymayta contact Kathleen Gage at 801.619.1514 or email    Sophia at 801. 637-6452.
kathleen@turningpointpresents.com

SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES

Jose Teofilo Sanchez

80-Year Old Receives High School Diploma

Written by daughter
Virgina Sanchez

On May 29, 2004, 80-year old Jose Teofilo Sanchez became the first World War II veteran to receive his high school diploma under rules recently approved by the New Mexico State Secretary of Education. Sanchez participated in the Class of 2004 Mora High School commencement ceremony in Mora, New Mexico. He was escorted by an honor guard and he received a standing ovation when he was presented his diploma.

Sanchez said, "I was surprised and happy to receive my high school diploma 60 years after leaving high school to serve in the United States Navy in the Pacific Theater during World War II. Like so many other New Mexicans who left school to serve in the war, we did so as our duty and honor and proudly served our country. The impact World War II had on us is that of patriotism, change, and personal growth."

"I was self-taught in the art of laying tile, roofing, and house framing," said Sanchez. By the time he was 52, he became a self-employed contractor who built nine custom brick homes, remodeled several other homes, and developed the Sanchez subdivision in Cheyenne, Wyoming. "I attribute my fondness for learning to my family upbringing and to my New Mexico ancestral roots. I will always consider New Mexico my home," said Sanchez.

In a letter to the graduating students of Mora High School, Sanchez wrote, "I wish you happiness in your future endeavors. I advise you to find a way to continue your higher education, study hard, widen your horizons, and follow your dreams. I encourage you to take part in the political process and exercise your right to vote. I ask that you to reach out to other World War II veterans and encourage them to apply for their high school diplomas. Help instill a commitment to education, community, and family."

For a State’s school board to issue a high school diploma to a World War II veteran, the veteran must be an honorably discharged member of the armed forces of the U.S. who left high school before graduation to serve in World War II. Veterans who hold a high school equivalency diploma may also apply, and high school diplomas may be issued posthumously. Similar laws have been enacted in at least 18 states, whose legislatures have approved the program in cooperation with their Veterans Affairs and Departments of Education.

Just thought I'd add to what I submitted on my father's WWII diploma.  His diploma actually reads, "Given this month of May 1944."  Although he went through commencement with the 2004 class, the school district backdated the year on his diploma. I found this interesting and thought you'd like to add this tidbit.   Virginia

Is this the world's oldest surviving inscription of the Ten Commandments?
http://www.webcom.com/mhc/archaeology/decalogue-introduction.html
Sent by Armando Montes  AMontes@mail.com

     There is a fascinating old site some few miles west of a little town called Los Lunas in New Mexico. The site has been known as "Mystery Mountain" by the locals for many years. At the foot of this hill there is an ancient rock inscription. Many scholars now believe that it contains the Ten Commandments, including 3 instances of the Tetragrammaton, inscribed in old Hebrew letters.

Photo 1997 J.Neuhoff

Keystone Heritage Park, Inc.
Sent by Armando Montes  AMontes@mail.com
Visiten ésta dirección: http://www.keystonepark.com 
 

BLACK

Nevada City, Calif., artist Judith Lowry

Over the years, I have met many Americans who have proudly stated that they had a Yaqui grandmother or Yaqui great-grandfather or are in some way descended from the Yaqui Indians of Mexico's northwest coastal region.  Many Mexican Americans have indigenous roots from various parts of Mexico, but the assimilation and mestizaje that took place in many northern and central states of Mexico has obscured any cultural or linguistic identity with specific tribes.  However, the Yaqui Indians - and their cousins, the Mayo Indians - have held tightly to their ethnic and linguistic identity in a way that many other indigenous groups have not.

Although many cultural, spiritual and linguistic traits of Mexico's Amerindians have been preserved in the southern states. It is difficult to find indigenous tribes in northern Mexico who have continued to practice at least some of their ancient practices.  The Tarahumara, Tepehuanes, Huicholes, Yaquis and Mayos stand in that rare breed of Native Americans that has held onto many aspects of their original culture.  The story of the Yaquis and their resistance is a truly dynamic story that reminds that the spirit of a people cannot be conquered if a people truly believe in their unique destiny.

The story of the Yaquis and their Mayo cousins takes us to the Mexican states of Sinaloa and Sonora. The State of Sinaloa, with a surface area of 58,487 square kilometers (22,582 square miles), is basically a narrow strip of land running along the Pacific Ocean. The state of Sonora, which lay north of Sinaloa, consists of 182,554 square kilometers (70,484 square miles) and has a common border with Arizona and New Mexico. The following paragraphs analyze the various confrontations and wars that the Yaquis and Mayos waged to protect their native lands and customs from imperialism.

First Contact: 1531.
In December 1529, Nuño Beltrán de Guzmán left Mexico City with an expedition of 300 Spaniards and 10,000 Indian allies (Tlaxcalans, Aztecs and Tarascans).  Guzmán, a lawyer by profession, had already gained a reputation as a ruthless and cruel administrator when he served as Governor of Panuco on the Gulf Coast.  Traveling through Michoacán, Guanajuato, Jalisco, and Sinaloa, Guzmán left a trail of devastation and terror wherever he went. 

In March 1531, Guzmán's army reached the site of present-day Culiacán (now in Sinaloa), where his force engaged an army of 30,000 warriors in a pitched battle. The indigenous forces were decisively defeated and, as Mr. Gerhard notes, the victors "proceeded to enslave as many people as they could catch."

However, before long, however, reports of Guzmán's brutal treatment of the Indians reached the authorities in Mexico City.  In 1536, the Viceroy of Nueva España Antonio de Mendoza arrested Guzmán and imprisoned him.  He was returned to Spain in chains where he was put on trial and died in obscurity and disgrace.

The indigenous people confronted by Guzmán in his 1531 battle belonged to the Cáhita language group, and were most likely the Yaqui Indians. Speaking eighteen closely related dialects, the Cáhita peoples of Sinaloa and Sonora numbered about 115,000 and were the most numerous of any single language group in northern Mexico. These Indians inhabited the coastal area of northwestern Mexico along the lower courses of the Sinaloa, Fuerte, Mayo, and Yaqui Rivers.
        
During his stay in Sinaloa, Guzmán's army was ravaged by an epidemic that killed many of his Amerindian auxiliaries. Finally, in October 1531, after establishing San Miguel de Culiacán on the San Lorenzo River, Guzmán returned to the south, his mostly indigenous army decimated by hunger and disease. But the Spanish post at Culiacán remained, Mr. Gerhard writes, as "a small outpost of Spaniards surrounded on all sides by the sea by hostile Indians kept in a state of agitation" by the slave-hunting activities of the Guzmán's forces. 

Epidemic Disease - Sinaloa and Sonora (1530-1536). 
Daniel T. Reff, the author of "Disease, Depopulation, and Culture Change in Northwestern New Spain, 1518-1764," explains that "viruses and other microorganisms undergo significant genetic changes when exposed to a new host environment, changes often resulting in new and more virulent strains of microorganisms." The Indians of the coastal region, never having been exposed to Spaniards and their diseases previously, provided fertile ground for the proliferation of smallpox and measles. It is believed that as many as 130,000 people died in the Valley of Culiacán during the Measles Pandemic of 1530-1534 and the Smallpox Plague of 1535-1536. 

As the Spaniards moved northward they found an amazing diversity of indigenous groups. Unlike the more concentrated Amerindian groups of central Mexico, the Indians of the north were referred to as "ranchería people" by the Spaniards. Their fixed points of settlements (rancherías) were usually scattered over an area of several miles and one dwelling may be separated from the next by up to half a mile. The renowned anthropologist, Professor Edward H. Spicer (1906-1983), writing in "Cycles of Conquest: The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States on the Indians of the Southwest, 1533-1960," stated that most ranchería people were agriculturalists and farming was their primary activity. 

Hurdaide's Offensive in Sinaloa (1599-1600). 
In 1599, Captain Diego de Hurdaide established San Felipe y Santiago on the site of the modern city of Sinaloa. From here, Captain Hurdaide waged a vigorous military campaign that subjugated the Cáhita-speaking Indians of the Fuerte River - the Sinaloas, Tehuecos, Zuaques, and Ahomes. These indigenous groups, numbering approximately 20,000 people, resisted strongly.

Initial Contact with the Mayo Indians (1609-1610). 
The Mayo Indians were an important Cáhita-speaking tribe occupying some fifteen towns along the Mayo and Fuerte rivers of southern Sonora and northern Sinaloa. As early as 1601, they had developed a curious interest in the Jesuit-run missions of their neighbors. The Mayos sent delegations to inspect the Catholic churches and, as Professor Spicer observes, "were so favorably impressed that large groups of Mayos numbering a hundred or more also made visits and became acquainted with Jesuit activities." As the Jesuits began their spiritual conquest of the Mayos, Captain Hurdaide, in 1609, signed a peace treaty with the military leaders of the Mayos.

Spanish Contact with the Yaqui Indians (1610). 
At contact, the Yaqui Indians occupied the coastal region of Sinaloa along the Yaqui River. Divided into eighty autonomous communities, their primary activity was agriculture. Although the Yaqui Indians had resisted Guzmán's advance in 1531, they had welcomed Francisco de Ibarra who came in peace in 1565, apparently in the hopes of winning the Spaniards as allies in the war against their traditional enemies, the Mayos.

In 1609, as Captain Hurdaide became engaged with the pacification of the Ocoronis (another Cahita-speaking group of northern Sinaloa), he reached the Yaqui River, where he was confronted by a group of Yaquis. Then, in 1610, with the Mayo and Lower Pima Indians as his allies, Captain Hurdaide returned to Yaqui territory with a force of 2,000 Indians and forty Spanish soldiers. He was soundly defeated. When he returned with another force of 4,000 Indian foot soldiers and fifty mounted Spanish cavalry, he was again defeated in a bloody daylong battle. 

Conversion of the Mayo Indians (1613-1620). 
In 1613, at their own request, the Mayos accepted Jesuit missionaries. Soon after, the Jesuit Father Pedro Mendez established the first mission in Mayo territory. In the first fifteen days, more than 3,000 persons received baptism. By 1620, with 30,000 persons baptized, the Mayos had been concentrated in seven mission towns.

Conversion of the Yaqui Indians (1617-1620). 
In 1617, the Yaquis, utilizing the services of Mayo intermediaries, invited the Jesuit missionaries to begin their work among them. Professor Spicer noted that after observing the Mayo-Jesuit interactions that started in 1613, the Yaquis seemed to be impressed with the Jesuits. Bringing a message of everlasting life, the Jesuits impressed the Yaquis with their good intentions and their spirituality. Their concern for the well being of the Indians won the confidence of the Yaqui people. In seeking to protect the Yaqui from exploitation by mine owners and encomenderos, the Jesuits came into direct conflict with the Spanish political authorities. From 1617 to 1619, nearly 30,000 Yaquis were baptized. By 1623, the Jesuits had reorganized the Yaquis from about eighty rancherías into eight mission villages.

Detachment of the Province of Sinaloa and Sonora (1733). 
In 1733, Sinaloa and Sonora were detached from Nueva Vizcaya and given recognition as the province of Sonora y Sinaloa. Ms. Deeds commented that this detachment represented a recognition of "the growth of a mining and ranching secular society in this northwestern region." 

Rebellion of the Yaqui, Pima, and Mayo Indians - Sinaloa and Sonora (1740). 
The Yaqui and Mayo Indians had lived in peaceful coexistence with the Spaniards since the early part of the Seventeenth Century. Ms. Deeds, in describing the causes of this rebellion, observes that the Jesuits had ignored "growing Yaqui resentment over lack of control of productive resources." During the last half of the Seventeenth Century, so much agricultural surplus was produced that storehouses needed to be built. These surpluses were used by the missionaries to extend their activities northward into the California and Pima missions. The immediate cause of the rebellion is believed to have been a poor harvest in late 1739, followed in 1740 by severe flooding which exacerbated food shortages. 

Ms. Deeds also points out that the "increasingly bureaucratic and inflexible Jesuit organization obdurately disregarded Yaqui demands for autonomy in the selection of their own village officials." Thus, this rebellion, writes Ms. Deeds, was "a more limited endeavor to restore the colonial pact of village autonomy and territorial integrity." At the beginning of the revolt, an articulate leader named El Muni emerged in the Yaqui community. El Muni and another Yaqui leader, Bernabé, took the Yaquis' grievances to local civil authorities. Resenting this undermining of their authority, the Jesuits had Muni and Bernabé arrested. 

The arrests triggered a spontaneous outcry, with two thousand armed indigenous men gathering to demand the release of the two leaders. The Governor, having heard the complaints of both sides, recommended that the Yaqui leaders go to Mexico City to testify personally before the Viceroy and Archbishop Vizrón. In February 1740, the Archbishop approved all of the Yaqui demands for free elections, respect for land boundaries, that Yaquis be paid for work, and that they not be forced to work in mines. 

The initial stages of the 1740 revolt saw sporadic and uncoordinated activity in Sinaloa and Sonora, primarily taking place in the Mayo territory and in the Lower Pima Country. Catholic churches were burned to the ground while priests and settlers were driven out, fleeing to the silver mining town at Alamos. Eventually, Juan Calixto raised an army of 6,000 men, composed of Pima, Yaqui and Mayo Indians. With this large force, Calixto gained control of all the towns along the Mayo and Yaqui Rivers. 

However, in August 1740, Captain Agustín de Vildósola defeated the insurgents. The rebellion, however, had cost the lives of a thousand Spaniards and more than 5,000 Indians. After the 1740 rebellion, the new Governor of Sonora and Sinaloa began a program of secularization by posting garrisons in the Yaqui Valley and encouraging Spanish residents to return to the area of rebellion. The Viceroy ordered the partition of Yaqui land in a "prudent manner." The Yaquis had obtained a reputation for being courageous warriors during the rebellion of 1740 and the Spanish handled them quite gingerly during the late 1700s. As a result, the government acquisition of Yaqui lands did not begin began until 1768.

Mexico Wins Independence - 1822. 
Mexico won independence from Spain. Following independence, Nueva Vizcaya in 1824 was divided into the states of Chihuahua and Durango.

Yaqui, Mayo and Opata Rebellions of 1825-1833. 
After Mexico gained independence in 1822, the Yaquis became citizens of a new nation. During this time, there appeared a new Yaqui leader. Ms. Linda Zoontjens, the author of A Brief History of the Yaqui and Their Land, referred to Juan de la Cruz Banderas as a "revolutionary visionary" whose mission was to establish an Indian military confederation. Once again, the Mayo Indians joined their Yaqui neighbors in opposing the central authorities. With a following of 2,000 warriors, Banderas carried out several raids. But eventually, Banderas made an arrangement with the Government of Sonora. In exchange for his "surrender," Banderas was made the Captain-General of the Yaqui Militia. 

By early 1832, Banderas had formed an alliance with the Opatas. Together, the Opatas and Yaquis were able to field an army of almost 2,500 warriors, staging repeated raids against haciendas, mines and towns in Sonora. However, the Mexican army continued to meet the indigenous forces in battle, gradually reducing their numbers. Finally, in December 1832, volunteers tracked down and captured Banderas. The captive was turned over to the authorities and put on trial. A month later, in January 1833, Banderas was executed, along with eleven other Yaqui, Mayo and Opata leaders who had helped foment rebellion in Sonora.

The Yaqui people, after the capture and execution of Banderas, subsided into a tense, uneasy existence. Some, during periods of food shortage, would take up "peaceful" residence outside the presidios, to ask for rations. Others undertook low-level raiding. 

The Resistance of the Yaqui Indians (1838-1868). 
After the death of Banderas, the Yaqui Indians attempted to forge alliances with anyone who promised them land and autonomy. They would align themselves with the Centralists or Conservatives as long as those groups protected their lands from being encroached upon. But when General José Urrea took power in 1841, he oversaw the division of Yaqui lands from communal plots into private plots. 

Governor Ignacio Pesqueira of Sonora drew up a list of preventative measures to be used against the Yaquis, Opatas and their allies. These orders called for the execution of rebel leaders. In addition, hacienda owners were required to make up lists of all employees, including a notation for those who were suspected of taking part in rebellious activity against the civil government. These measures were ineffective in dealing with the growing unrest among the Yaqui and Opatas.

In 1867 Governor Pesqueira of Sonora organized two military expeditions against the Yaquis under the command of General Jesus Garcia Morales. The expeditions marched on Guaymas and Cócorit, both of which lay in the heart of Yaqui territory. These expeditions met at Medano on the Gulf Coast near the Jesuit-founded Yaqui town of Potam. The two expeditions, totaling about 900 men, did not meet with any organized resistance. Instead, small parties of Yaquis resisted their advance. By the end of the year, the Mexican forces had killed many Yaquis. The troops confiscated much livestock, destroyed food supplies, and shot most of the prisoners captured. 

Yaqui Insurgencies - Sonora (1868-1875). 
During these years, the Yaquis regained their strength and periodically attacked Mexican garrisons in their territory. In March 1868, six hundred Yaquis arrived near the town of Bacum in the eastern Yaqui country to ask the local field commander for peace terms. However, the Mexican officer, Colonel Bustamante, arrested the whole group, including women and children. When the Yaquis gave up forty-eight weapons, Bustamante released 150 people but continued to hold the other 450 people. Taking his captives to a Yaqui church in Bacum as prisoners of war, he was able to identify ten of the captives as leaders. All ten of these men were shot without a trial.

Four hundred and forty people were left languishing in the church overnight, with Bustamante's artillery trained on the church door to discourage an escape attempt. However, during the night a fire was started in the church. The situation inside the church turned to chaos and confusion, as some captives desperately tried to break down the door. As the Yaquis fled the church, several salvos fired from the field pieces killed up to 120 people.

In 1875, the Mexican government suspected that a Yaqui insurrection was brewing. In an attempt to pacify the Yaquis, Governor Jose J. Pesqueira ordered a new campaign, sending five hundred troops from the west into the Yaqui country. A force of 1,500 Yaquis met the Mexican troops at Pitahaya. In the subsequent battle, the Yaquis are believed to have lost some sixty men. 

Cajeme and the Yaqui Rebellions During the Porfiriato (1876-1887). 
During the reign of Porfirio Díaz, the ongoing struggle for autonomy and land rights dominated Yaqui-Mexican relations. An extraordinary leader named Cajeme now took center stage in the Yaquis' struggle for autonomy. Cajeme, whose name meant "He who does not drink," was born José María Leyva. He learned Spanish and served in the Mexican army. Although Cajeme's parents were Yaqui Indians, he had become very Mexicanized. 

Cajeme's military service with the Mexican army was so exemplary that he was given the post of Alcalde Mayor of the Yaqui River area. Soon after receiving this promotion, however, Cajeme announced his intention to withdraw recognition of the Mexican Government if they did not grant the Yaquis self-government. Cajeme galvanized a new generation of Yaquis and Mayos and led his forces against selected towns in Yaqui Country. 

Mexican Offensives Against the Yaquis (1885-1901). 
Dr. Hatfield, in studying the struggle over Indian lands, wrote, "Rich Yaqui and Mayo valley lands possessed a soil and climate capable of growing almost any crop. Therefore, it was considered in the best national interest to open these lands to commercial development and foreign investors." During the 1880s, the Governor of Sonora, Carlos Ortiz, became concerned about his state's sovereignty over Indian lands. In the hopes of seizing Indian Territory, Ortiz withdrew his state troopers from the border region where they had been fighting the Apache Indians. In the meantime, Cajeme's forces began attacking haciendas, ranches and stations of the Sonora Railroad in the Guaymas and Alamos districts.

With rebel forces causing so much trouble, General Luis Torres, the Governor of Sonora, petitioned the Federal Government for military aid. Recognizing the seriousness of this rebellion, Mexican President Porfirio Díaz authorized his Secretary of War to begin a campaign against the Sonoran rebels. In 1885, 1,400 federal troops arrived in Sonora to help the Sonoran government put down the insurrection. Together with 800 state troops, the federal forces were organized into an expedition, with the intention of meeting the Yaquis in battle. 

During 1886, the Yaquis continued to fortify more of their positions. Once again, Mexican federal and state forces collaborated by making forays into Yaqui country. This expedition confiscated more than 20,000 head of livestock and, in April 1886, occupied the Yaqui town of Cócorit. On May 5, the fortified site of Anil was captured after a pitched battle. After suffering several serious military reverses, the Yaqui forces fell back to another fortified site at Buatachive, high in the Sierra de Bacatet, to make a last stand against the Mexican forces.

Putting together a fighting force of 4,000 Yaquis, along with thousands of Yaqui civilians, Cajeme prepared to resist. On May 12, after a four-day siege, Mexican troops under General Angel Martinez, attacked Buatachive. In a three-hour battle, the Mexican forces killed 200 Yaqui soldiers, while capturing hundreds of women and children. Cajeme and a couple thousand Yaquis managed to escape the siege.

After this staggering blow, Cajeme divided his forces into small bands of armed men. From this point on, the smaller units tried to engage government troops in small skirmishes. Although Cajeme asked the Federal authorities for a truce, the military leaders indicated that all Yaqui territory was part of the nation of Mexico. After a few months, expeditions into the war zone led to the capture of four thousand people. With the end of the rebellion in sight, General Luis Torres commenced with the military occupation of the entire Yaqui Nation.

With the end of hostilities, Mexican citizens began filtering into Yaqui territory to establish permanent colonies. On April 12, 1887, nearly a year after the Battle of Buatachive, Cajeme was apprehended near Guaymas and taken to Cócorit where he was to be executed before a firing squad in 1887. After being interviewed and photographed by Ramon Corral, he was taken by steamboat to Medano but was shot while trying to escape from the soldiers. 

Government forces, searching for and confronting armed Yaquis, killed 356 Yaqui men and women over a period of two years. A comprehensive search for the Yaqui holdouts in their hiding places forced the rebels into the Guaymas Valley where they mingled with Yaqui laborers on haciendas and in railroad companies. As a result, the Mexican Government accused owners of haciendas, mining and railroad companies of shielding criminal Yaqui fugitives. Circulars were issued which forbade the owners from giving money, provisions, or arms to the rebels. During this time, some Yaquis were able to slip across the border into Arizona to work in mines and purchase guns and ammunition. The Mexican border guards were unable to stop the steady supply of arms and provisions coming across the border from Arizona. Eventually, Mexico's Secretary of War ordered the recruitment of Opatas and Pimas to hunt down the Yaqui guerillas. 

In 1894-95, Luis Torres instituted a secret police system and carried out a meticulous survey of the entire Sierra de Bacatete, noting locations of wells supplying fresh water as well as all possible entrances and exits to the region. Renegade bands of Yaquis, familiar with the terrain of their own territory, were able to avoid capture by the government forces. During the campaign of 1895-97, captured rebels were deported to southern Mexico to be drafted into the army. 

In 1897, the commander of the campaign forces, General Torres initiated negotiations with the Yaqui leader Tetabiate, offering the Yaquis repatriation into their homeland. After a number of months of correspondence between the guerilla leader and a colonel in one of the regiments, a place was set for a peace agreement to be signed. On May 15, 1897, Sonora state officials and the Tetabiate signed the Peace of Ortiz. The Yaqui leader, Juan Maldonado, with 390 Yaquis, consisting of 74 families, arrived from the mountains for the signing of the peace treaty. 

In the six years following the signing of peace, Lorenzo Torres, the Governor of Sonora, made efforts to complete the Mexican occupation of Yaqui territory. Ignoring the terms of the peace treaty, four hundred Yaquis and their families defied the government and assembled in the Bacatete Mountains. Under the command of their leader Tetabiate, the Yaquis sustained themselves by making nighttime raids on the haciendas near Guaymas. 

In the meantime, Federal troops and army engineers, trying to survey the Yaqui lands for distribution, found the terrain to be very difficult and were constantly harassed by defiant rebel forces. The government could not understand the Yaqui refusal to divide their land and become individual property owners. Their insistence of communal ownership based on traditional indigenous values also supported their objection to having soldiers in their territory. However, resentful of the continuing military occupation of their territory, the Yaqui colonies of Bácum and Vícam took up arms in 1899. Large detachments of rebel Yaqui forces confronted troops on the Yaqui River and suffered large casualties. Afterwards, a force of three thousand fled to the sierras and barricaded themselves on a plateau called Mazocoba where they were defeated by government troops.

When Tetabiate and the rebel forces fled to the Sierras, the government sent out its largest contingent to date with almost five thousand federal and state troops to crush this latest rebellion. Laws restricting the sale of firearms were reenacted and captured rebels were deported from the state. On January 18,1900, three columns of his Government forces encountered a party of Yaquis at Mazocoba in the heart of the Bacatete Mountains. The Yaquis, mostly on foot, were pursued into a box canyon in a rugged portion of the mountains. 

After a daylong battle, the Yaquis ceased fighting. The soldiers had killed 397 men, women, and some children, while many others had committed suicide by jumping off the cliffs. Roughly a thousand women and children were taken prisoner. By the end of 1900, there were only an estimated 300 rebels holding out in the Bacatete Mountains. Six months later, Tetabiate was betrayed and murdered by one of his lieutenants and the Secretary of War called off the campaign in August 1901.

Deportation of Yaqui Indians (1902-1910). 
After the turn of the century, the Mexican federal government decided on a course of action for clearing Yaquis out of the state of Sonora. Colonel Emilio Kosterlitzky was placed in charge of Federal Rural Police in the state with orders to round up all Yaquis and arrange to deport them southward. Between 1902 -1908, between eight and possibly as many as fifteen thousand of the estimated population of thirty thousand Yaquis were deported. 

The years 1904 through 1907 witnessed an intensification of guerilla activities and corresponding government persecution. The state government issued passports to Yaquis and those not having them were arrested and jailed. The Sonoran Governor Rafael Izábel was so intent on pacifying the Yaquis that he conducted his own arrests. These arrests included women, children as well as sympathizers. "When Yaqui rebellion threatened Sonora's mining interests," writes Dr. Hatfield, "Governor Rafael Izábel deported Yaquis, considered superior workers by all accounts, to work 
on Yacatán's henequen plantations." 

In analyzing the Mexican Government's policy of deportation, Dr. Hatfield observed that deportation of the Yaquis resulted from "the Yaquis' determination to keep their lands. Yaqui refusal to submit to government laws conflicted with the Mexican government's attempts to end all regional hegemony. The regime hoped to take Yaqui lands peacefully, but this the Yaquis prevented." 

The bulk of the Yaquis were sent to work on hennequen plantations in the Yucatán and some were sent to work in the sugar cane fields in Oaxaca. Sonoran hacendados protested the persecution and deportation of the Yaquis because without their labor, their crops could not be cultivated or harvested. In the early Nineteenth Century, many Yaqui men emigrated to Arizona in order to escape subjugation and deportation to southern Mexico. Today, some 10,000 Yaqui Indians live in the United States, many of them descended from the refugees of a century ago. 

The Yaquis Indians Today. 
Dr. Hatfield, in looking back on the long struggle of the Yaqui against the federal government, writes "A government study published in 1905 cited 270 instances of Yaqui and Mayo warfare between 1529 and 1902, excluding eighty-five years of relative peace between 1740 and 1825." But from 1825 to 1902, the Yaqui Nation was waging war on the government almost continuously.

By 1910, the Yaquis had been almost entirely eliminated from their homeland.  In the 1910 census, 5,175 persons classified as speakers of the Yaqui language five years of age and older lived within the Mexican Republic.   However, by 1930,  the Yaqui population had dropped to 2,134.  It is very likely that many persons of Yaqui heritage may have denied that they spoke the language or belonged to the ethnic group.

The Yaquis fought their last major battle with Mexican forces in 1927.  However, in 1939, Mexican President Cardenas granted the Yaqui tribe official recognition and title to roughly one-third of their traditional tribal lands.  

Even today, the Yaquis have managed to maintain a form of autonomy within the Mexican nation.  In the 2000 Mexican census, Sonora had a total of 55,694 persons who were classified as speakers of indigenous languages five years of age and over.  This group represented only 2.85% of the entire population of Sonora.  The population of persons speaking the Yaqui language, however, was only 12,467.  

The Yaqui identity endures in the present day, but is in danger of extinction.  "They are threatened continually by the  expansion of the Mexican population, as landless Mexicans invade their territory or intermarry with Yaquis and  start to take over some of the lands,"  said Joe Wilder, Director of the University of  Arizona's Southwest Center.  "The Yaquis are at once deeply admired  by Sonorans and deeply despised," said Wilder, noting that the Yaqui deer dancer is the official state symbol.

To many Americans, the Yaqui Indians represent an enduring legacy of the pre-Hispanic era.  Because the mestizaje and assimilation of many Mexican states was so complete and widespread, the Yaqui Indians are seen as a rare vestige of the old Mexico.

© 2004, John P. Schmal.

Sources:

Susan M. Deeds, "Indigenous Rebellions on the Northern Mexican Mission Frontier: From First-Generation to Later Colonial Responses," in Susan Schroeder, Native Resistance and the Pax Colonial in New Spain. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1998, pp. 1-29.

Shelley Bowen Hatfield, "Chasing Shadows: Indians Along the United States-Mexico Border 1876-1911." Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1998.

Oscar J. Martínez, "Troublesome Border." Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1988. 

Cynthia Radding, "The Colonial Pact and Changing Ethnic Frontiers in Highland Sonora, 1740-1840," in Donna J. Guy and Thomas E. Sheridan (eds.), "Contested Ground: Comparative Frontiers on the Northern and Southern Edges of the Spanish Empire," pp. 52-66. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1998.

Daniel T. Reff, "Disease, Depopulation and Culture Change in Northwestern New Spain, 1518-1764." Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1991.

Robert Mario Salmon, "Indian Revolts in Northern New Spain: A Synthesis of Resistance (1680-1786)." Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1991.

Edward H. Spicer, "Cycles of Conquest: The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States on the Indians of the Southwest, 1533-1960." Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona Press, 1997.

Edward H. Spicer, "The Military History Of The Yaquis From 1867 To 1910: Three Points Of View." <Online: http://usaic.hua.army.mil/History/Html/spicer.html . September 12, 2001.

Linda Zoontjens, "Brief History of the Yaqui and their Land." Online: http://sustainedaction.org/Explorations/history_of_the_yaqui.htm .  July 8, 2001

John Schmal is the author of "Indigenous Mexico: A State-by-State Analysis" (a manuscript in progress).  With Donna Morales, he has written "The Indigenous Roots of a Mexican-American Family," about the assimilation and mestizaje of the Mexican Indians and their incorporation into the Mexican nation.  The book is available from Heritage Books (Item M2469) at:  
http://marketplacesolutions.net/secure/heritagebooks/merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen
=PROD&Store_Code=HBI&Product_Code=M2469

INDIGENOUS IDENTITY IN THE MEXICAN CENSUS
By 
John P. Schmal

The Mexican Republic of the Twenty-First Century, boasting more than a 100 million inhabitants, has evolved from many indigenous nations five centuries ago into a single national entity, with Spanish as its primary language.  But beneath the Spanish culture and language, the indigenous identity of the Mexican people is unmistakable.  It is manifested in their appearance, their culture and spirituality and, to some extent, in their language and traditions.  Few of the original Indian cultures still exist in their pure and untainted forms, but most are present in some form in various traditions, customs and religious practices.

In the twelve censuses between 1895 and 2000, the Mexican government has asked its citizens to answer a wide variety of questions.  In many ways, the Mexican census has been much more detailed than the United States census, asking questions about age, disability, nativity, literacy, language, and economic status. 

However, for the most part, the census has not been able to gauge the level of indigenous identity beyond the criteria of those who actually speak indigenous languages.  In 1895, 26.09% of persons five years of age and older in the Mexican Republic spoke indigenous languages.  By 1940, this figure had dropped to 14.8%.  It dropped farther to 11.2% in 1950, 7.5% in 1990 and 7.1% in 2000.  The linguistic status, however, does not necessarily explain if a Mexican citizen feels that he or she is an Indian by blood, by culture, or tradition.  However, the 1921 and 2000 Mexican Federal Censuses stand out as exceptions.  In these two censuses, performed 79 years apart, we get a unique view into the ethnic identity of the Mexican people.

In the 1921 census, Mexican natives were asked if they fell into one of the following categories:

1. "Indígena pura" (of pure indigenous heritage).
2. "Indígena mezclada con blanca" (of mixed indigenous and white background)
3. "Blanca" (of White or Spanish heritage).
4. "Extranjeros sin distinción de razas" (Foreigners without racial distinction).

The five states with the largest populations of "indígena pura" were:

1. Oaxaca - 675,119 persons
2. Puebla - 560,971 persons
3. Veracruz - 406,648 persons
4. México - 372,703 persons
5. Guerrero - 248,526 persons

Because the populations of the various states vary widely, the percentage of pure indigenous persons in a given state may provide us with a different set of results.  The five states with the largest percentages of "indígena pura" people are:

1. Oaxaca - 69.17%
2. Puebla - 54.73%
3. Tlaxcala - 54.70%
4. Chiapas - 47.64%
5. Yucatán - 43.31%

In the 1921 census, the status "Indígena Mezclada con Blanca" implied that a person was of mestizo origin.  Persons classified by this identity usually did not speak Indian languages, but still felt an attachment to their indigenous roots. The five Mexican states with the largest populations of "Indígena Mezclada con Blanca" were:

1. Jalisco - 903,830
2. Guanajuato - 828,724
3. Michoacán - 663,391
4. Veracruz - 556,472
5. Distrito Federal - 496,359

The states with the largest percentages of "Indígena Mezclada con Blanca" were:

1. Sinaloa - 98.30%
2. Guanajuato - 96.32%
3. Durango - 89.10%
4. Zacatecas - 86.10%
5. Querétaro - 80.15%

The states with the largest populations of "Blanca" or White persons were:

1. Distrito Federal - 206,514
2. Chihuahua - 145,926
3. Sonora - 115,151
4. Veracruz - 114,150
5. México - 88,660

In percentage terms, the "blanca" classification was most prominent in these states:

1. Sonora - 41.85%
2. Chihuahua - 36.33%
3. Baja California Sur - 33.40%
4. Tabasco - 27.56%
5. District Federal - 22.79%

Seventy-nine years later, the 2000 census attempted to determine the number of Mexican people who considered themselves to being indigenous, without reference to language.  In order to calculate the indigenous people, the census used three criteria:

1. Persons who speak indigenous languages (aged 5 and over)
2. Persons aged 0 through 4 who live in indigenous households
3. Persons who consider themselves Indian but do not speak an indigenous language.

The five states with the largest numbers of persons classified as "Indígena" in the 2000 census were:

1. Oaxaca - 1,648,426 persons
2. Chiapas - 1,117,597
3. Veracruz - 1,057,806
4. Yucatán - 981,064
5. Puebla - 957,650

The five states with the largest percentages of Indigenous people were:

1. Yucatán - 59.2%
2. Oaxaca - 47.9%
3. Quintana Roo - 39.3%
4. Chiapas - 28.5%
5. Campeche - 26.9%

In contrast, the five states with the largest numbers of persons who spoke indigenous languages and were five years of age or more were:

1. Oaxaca - 1,120,312 speakers of indigenous languages
2. Chiapas - 809,592
3. Veracruz - 633,372
4. Puebla - 565,509
5. Yucatán - 549,532

Of great interest to some people would be the states with the least populations of indigenous persons in the 2000 census:

1. Aguascalientes - 3,472 persons 
2. Zacatecas - 4,039 persons
3. Colima - 6,472 persons
4. Coahuila - 7,454 persons
5. Baja California Sur - 11,481 persons

In terms of percentages, the five states with the smallest percentages of indigenous persons were:

1. Zacatecas - 0.3%
2. Coahuila - 0.3%
3. Aguascalientes - 0.4%
4. Guanajuato - 0.6%
5. Nuevo León - 0.8%

While many of the inhabitants of Aguascalientes, Zacatecas, and Guanajuato do have indigenous roots, the level of assimilation and mestizaje that took place in these areas over the last four centuries has diminished the original Indian identity.

The indigenous identity of the Mexican people is hard to quantify and classify from one state to another, from one linguistic group to another, so census statistics cannot be considered entirely reliable.  However, the 1921 and 2000 censuses do give us the best view of indigenous identity, when compared to other census years.

Note:  The 1921 and 2000 indigenous figures for all the states of the Mexican Republic will appear in the July issue of the www.somosprimos.com in a story written by John Schmal

© 2004, John P. Schmal.  All rights reserved.

Sources:

CONAPO, "Cuadro 1. Población Total, Población Indígena, y Sus Características."
Departamento de la Estadística Nacional, "Annuario de 1930" (Tacubaya, D.F., Mexico, 1932), pp. 40, 48.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática (INEGI), Estados Unidos Mexicanos. "XII Censo General de Población y Vivienda,  2000, Tabulados Básicos y por Entidad Federativa. Bases de Datos y Tabulados de la Muestra Censal."

Schmal, John P. "Indigenous Mexico: A State-by-State Analysis" (manuscript in progress, 2004).

John Schmal is the coauthor of "The Indigenous Roots of a Mexican-American Family" (available as item M2469 through Heritage Books at www.heritagebooks.com).  He is currently writing a state-by-state analysis of the indigenous people of all the Mexican states.

The indigenous classifications 
as tallied by the 1921 & 2000 Mexican census 
are provided in the following charts 
(compiled and organized by John Schmal):

© Copyright 2004, John P. Schmal. All Rights Reserved.

State

Indígena Pura*

Total State Population)

Indígena Mezclada con Blanca**

con Blanca

Total State Population

Pura" of Mexican Republic)

Aguascalientes

17,961

16.70%

71,137

66.12%

107,581

0.43%

Baja California – North and South

4,197

6.68%

40,488

64.44%

62,831

0.10%

Campeche

33,176

43.41%

31,675

41.45%

76,419

0.79%

Coahuila

44,779

11.38%

306,433

77.88%

393,480

1.07%

Colima

23,854

26.00%

62,886

68.54%

91,749

0.57%

Chiapas

200,927

47.64%

152,956

36.27%

421,744

4.81%

Chihuahua

51,228

12.76%

201,182

50.09%

401,622

1.23%

District Federal

169,820

18.74%

496,359

54.78%

906,063

4.06%

Durango

33,354

9.90%

300,055

89.10%

336,766

0.80%

Guanajuato

25,458

2.96%

828,724

96.32%

860,364

0.61%

Guerrero

248,526

43.84%

306,361

54.05%

566,836

5.95%

Hidalgo

245,704

39.49%

320,250

51.47%

622,241

5.88%

Jalisco

199,728

16.76%

903,830

75.83%

1,191,957

4.78%

México

372,703

42.13%

422,001

47.70%

884,617

8.92%

Michoacán

196,726

20.93%

663,391

70.58%

939,849

4.71%

Morelos

36,131

34.93%

63,344

61.24%

103,440

0.86%

Nayarit

29,773

18.32%

107,312

66.04%

162,499

0.71%

Nuevo León

17,276

5.14%

253,878

75.47%

336,412

0.41%

Oaxaca

675,119

69.17%

274,752

28.15%

976,005

16.15%

Puebla

560,971

54.73%

403,221

39.34%

1,024,955

13.42%

Querétaro

42,718

19.40%

176,525

80.15%

220,231

1.02%

Quintana Roo

1,434

13.08%

2,950

26.90%

10,966

0.03%

San Luis Potosí

136,365

30.60%

275,812

61.89%

445,681

3.26%

Sinaloa

3,163

0.93%

335,474

98.30%

341,265

0.08%

Sonora

37,914

13.78%

111,089

40.38%

275,127

0.91%

Tabasco

38,929

18.50%

112,941

53.67%

210,437

0.93%

Tamaulipas

39,606

13.80%

198,990

69.36%

286,904

0.95%

Tlaxcala

97,670

54.70%

75,783

42.44%

178,570

2.34%

Veracruz

406,638

35.06%

556,472

47.97%

1,159,935

9.73%

Yucatán

155,155

43.31%

121,189

33.83%

358,221

3.71%

Zacatecas

32,422

8.55%

326,615

86.10%

379,329

0.78%

The Mexican Republic

4,179,449

29.16%

8,504,561

59.33%

14,334,780

100.00%

© Copyright 2004, John P. Schmal. All Rights Reserved.

State

Persons Classified as "Indígena"

"Indígena" as a % of the State Population

Persons Aged 5 or More Who Speak Indigenous Languages

Population

"Indígena" Population as a % of the Population of the Mexican Republic

Oaxaca

1,648,426

47.9%

1,120,312

3,438,765

1.7%

Chiapas

1,117,597

28.5%

809,592

3,920,892

1.1%

Veracruz

1,057,806

15.3%

633,372

6,908,975

1.1%

Yucatán

981,064

59.2%

549,532

1,658,210

1.0%

Puebla

957,650

18.9%

565,509

5,076,686

1.0%

México

939,355

7.2%

361,972

13,096,686

1.0%

Hidalgo

546,834

24.5%

339,866

2,235,591

0.6%

Guerrero

529,780

17.2%

367,110

3,079,649

0.5%

San Luis Potosí

348,551

15.2%

235,253

2,299,360

0.4%

Quintana Roo

343,784

39.3%

173,592

874,963

0.4%

Distrito Federal

339,931

4.0%

141,710

8,605,239

0.4%

Michoacán

199,245

5.0%

121,849

3,985,667

0.3%

Campeche

185,938

26.9%

93,765

690,689

0.2%

Chihuahua

136,589

4.5%

84,086

3,052,907

0.2%

Tabasco

130,896

6.9%

62,027

1,891,829

0.1%

Sonora

126,535

5.7%

55,694

2,216,969

0.1%

Sinaloa

87,948

3.5%

49,744

2,536,844

0.1%

Baja California

81,679

3.3%

37,685

2,487,367

0.1%

Jalisco

75,122

1.2%

55,414

6,322,002

0.1%

Morelos

72,435

4.7%

30,896

1,555,296

0.1%

Tlaxcala

71,986

7.5%

26,662

962,646

0.1%

Nayarit

56,172

6.1%

37,206

920,185

0.1%

Querétaro

47,420

3.4%

25,269

1,404,306

0.1%

Tamaulipas

41,858

1.5%

17,118

2,753,222

0.0%

Durango

39,545

2.7%

24,934

1,448,661

0.0%

Nuevo León

30,051

0.8%

15,446

3,834,141

0.0%

Guanajuato

26,512

0.6%

10,689

4,663,032

0.0%

Baja California Sur

11,481

2.7%

5,353

424,041

0.0%

Coahuila

7,454

0.3%

3,032

2,298,070

0.0%

Colima

6,472

1.2%

2,932

542,627

0.0%

Zacatecas

4,039

0.3%

1,837

1,353,610

0.0%

Aguascalientes

3,472

0.4%

1,244

944,285

0.0%

Mexican Republic

10,253,627

10.5%

6,044,547

97,483,412

10.5%

Herederos de Moctezuma reclaman sus pensiones

Los descendientes del último emperador azteca, Moctezuma II, intentan recuperar las pensiones que el Reino de España y posteriormente el Gobierno de México les otorgaba desde 1550 de manera vitalicia pero que en 1934 fueron suspendidas.

Moctezuma II el joven, (1466-1520) fue emperador de los aztecas entre 1502 y 1520. Moctezuma II, herederó su imperio de Auítzotl y fue el gobernante de la gran ciudad azteca de Tenochtitlán.

En la primavera de 1519, recibió la primera noticia de la llegada de extraños a la costa este de su imperio. El 8 de noviembre de 1519, se encontró con Cortés, a quien tomó por el dios Quetzalcoatl, algo que vino muy bien al conquistador español.

Durante la ausencia de Cortés, el gobernador delegado decretó que el ritual azteca del sacrificio humano debía finalizar. El pueblo se alzó en una revuelta, y los españoles hicieron prisionero a Moctezuma, quien en un intento de sofocar el violento tumulto, se asomó a la balconada de su palacio, instando a sus seguidores a retirarse. La población quedó indignada de la complicidad de su emperador con los españoles por lo que comenzaron a arrojarle piedras y flechas, falleciendo poco tiempo después del ataque. -(Existe la version de que ya Moctezuma habia sido asesinado y solo fue exhibido para simular su muerte en un populacho, bssg)-

La princesa Isabel Xipaguazin Moctezuma hija de Moctezuma contrajo matrimonio con dos compatriotas del conquistador, primero con Alonso de Grado y luego con Pedro Gallego de Andrada. Ambos murieron poco después del enlace. Luego, según se sabe por algunas fuentes, Isabel se casó por propia voluntad con Juan Cano de Saavedra. De estos dos últimos matrimonios proceden sus actuales descendientes.

La princesa, fue nombrada por el rey Carlos I propietaria "a perpetuidad" del señorío de Tacuba, un área que actualmente corresponde a gran parte del Centro Histórico de la ciudad de México. Las rentas por el usufructo de ese señorío se constituyeron en las "Pensiones de Moctezuma" que la Corona española otorgó a perpetuidad a Isabel y todos sus descendientes, antes de que ella muriera en 1550.

Las "pensiones de Moctezuma" se han convertido actualmente en una deuda gigantesca. Tan sólo del pago de los intereses podrían vivir sin preocupaciones los descendientes de Isabel en México y los que se trasladaron a la península. La familia Acosta, que vive en México, y los condes de Miravalle -españoles que residen en Granada- son herederos de estas pensiones.

Cuando en 1821 México se independizó, el nuevo estado asumió los compromisos de la antigua colonia española y con ello también las "pensiones de Moctezuma". Pero a finales de 1933, el presidente Abelardo Rodríguez declaró nula la deuda, cesando los pagos. Luego dio inicio en España de la Guerra Civil (1936-1939) y México nunca reconoció la dictadura de Franco (1939-1975), rotas por tanto las relaciones diplomáticas entre ambos paises los descendientes españoles no volvieron a reclamar sus derechos hasta 1991.

"México tiene que reconocer que fue un error suspender estas pensiones", afirma el historiador Alejandro González, representante de los intereses de la familia Miravalle en México. Acosta apunta que los Miravalle nunca fueron expropiados formalmente y menos aún renunciaron a sus derechos, y por ello sus demandas siguen siendo válidas hoy. "El reconocimiento de los derechos de los Miravalle podría contribuir a que aquellos mexicanos, que se habían negado a ignorar la parte española de su identidad, se reconcilien con ella". Además, señala que el hecho de que muchos mexicanos sigan hoy culpando a los españoles actuales de lo que hizo Cortés, es "como si los franceses les echasen en cara a los italianos lo que hizo Julio César en la Guerra de las Galias. México tiene que aprender a reconciliarse con su pasado, con su historia" afirma el historiador.

Pero no todos los descendientes de Moctezuma II están de acuerdo con la actitud de sus parientes. "En España siempre reclamaban. No les importa México un pito, pero quieren el dinero. Eso me molesta, me indigna como mexicana que amo a mi país". Así opina la historiadora Blanca Barragán Moctezuma que se muestra orgullosa de su árbol genealógico, en el que figura el nombre de Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin. Blanca vive el la capital mexicana, es descendiente en decimosexta generación del emperador y muy conocida porque desde hace años intenta con ahínco, pese al poco éxito obtenido, que el Museo Etnológico de Viena (Austria) devuelva la corona de plumas de Moctezuma a su país de origen. Blanca dice que su abuela también cobraba dicha pensión pero que sólo en el caso de que los Miravalle reciban realmente dinero del Estado mexicano, entonces, y sólo entonces, también reclamará sus derechos, aunque tiene serias dudas de que eso realmente vaya a suceder.

Guillermo Acosta, descendiente de Moctezuma II en decimocuarta generación también reside en México. Su familia junto a la Miravalle está dispuesta a llegar hasta el final, "Incluso tras la Revolución (1910), todos reconocíeron las pensiones, hasta que en 1934 sin más, nos dijeron adiós. El gobierno mexicano obró mal, obró con prepotencia, con todo su poder y dijo ¡no te reconozco nada! ", lamenta Guillermo Acosta.

Antes de la suspensión de las pensiones, la familia de los condes de Miravalle recibía por este concepto un pago de 5.258.090 pesos oro al año. El "peso oro" en aquella época equivalía a 1.480 gramos de oro puro, (alrededor de 250.284 onzas), que cotizadas al valor actual del mercado, equivaldría a una pensión de 90.000 Euros anuales"

Doña María de las Mercedes Enríquez de la Luna del Mazo, actual condesa de Miravalle, dice haber dejado el asunto en manos de sus hijos y lamenta no haber podido viajar nunca a la tierra de sus antepasados por razones de salud. Sobre cómo se siente al ser una descendiente del gran Moctezuma, ella contesta: "Hoy en día no hay nada, se siente uno como todo el mundo".

(http://www.portaldehistoria.com/secciones/portada2/news/news_item.asp?NewsID=43)

Sent by eventos@ancestros.com.mx
Contact Name: Benicio Samuel Sanchez Garcia
Other E-mail: mexicangenealogy@ancestros.com.mx
Notes: Presidente de La Sociedad Genelogical del Norte de Mexico  http://www.Ancestros.com.mx

SEPHARDIC

The July speaker for Los Bexarenos in San Antonio, Texas was Mr. Richard Santos. His topic:
Sephardic Jews in Northern Mexico. Mr. Santos is the former Bexar County Archivist and is the author of over 30 works, including Silent Heritage: the Sephardim and the Colonization of the Spanish North American Frontier, 1492-1600.

TEXAS 

         "Texas is a state of mind.  Texas is an obsession. Above all, 
       Texas is a nation in every sense of the word."--John Steinbeck

Book: Rails to the Rios
Raymondville 100th Birthday
Famed Rancher Body to be Exhumed 
Sanchez Family Donates to TAMIU 
25th Annual Texas State Hispanic Genealogical and Historical Conference
“Racing through History – Tracing the Lives and Travels of our Ancestors”
Photos Sought to Document 25 year history of conferences 
Six National Flags have flown over Texas
Book: "With All Arms" republished
HOGAR de Dallas
South Texas Museum Captures Blended History 
Texas Newspaper Holdings Index
Lupe Martinez Honored with Likeness  
Texas State Deaths for 2002 released
Saving Texas History!  Texas General Land Office New Initiative
Texas State Library and Archives: Helpful websites
Historical Data on Buildings, Dwellings and Other Structures

Rails to the Rio 
by Glenn Harding

Rio Grande Valley History
St. Louis, Brownsville and Mexico Railroad Centennial 1904-2004

100th Anniversary
Raymonville, Kingsville, Harlingen, 
San Benito, Lyford, Sebastian, Combes, 
Robstown, Sarita, Driscoll, Bishop, Olmito

RAYMONDVIILE CELEBRATES ITS 100^TH BIRTHDAY
Sent by George Gause,  ggause@panam.edu
Source: Glenn Harding gharding@granderiver.net

This Centennial will be a great occasion and the Mayor Joe Alexandre and the city commissioners would like to invite the citizens to come and enjoy this program planned by the Chamber of
Commerce and the Executive Director Mrs. Elma Chavez, who has been working hard to make this a memorable event in the life of this community.

Conference Registration $45.00 per person if made before August 13, 2004, $55.00 per person thereafter.  Reception and luncheon are included with registration.  Student registration $15.00 (no meals included).  No refunds after August 31, 2004.  A $15 administrative fee will be deducted for all
refunds.

Make checks payable to Cultural Council of Victoria and mail to:
Bonnee Riggs, Project Liaison
Cultural Council of Victoria
PO Box 1758
Victoria, Texas 77902

For more information call Sophia Wilson in the evenings at (361) 573-1228 or
email her at sophiawilson@zamigo.net
   .

PHOTOS SOUGHT TO CELEBRATE 25 YEARS OF ANNUAL CONFERENCES

I wanted to remind everyone that I am working on a history of the Texas State conferences for a presentation at the 25th Annual Conference in Victoria. I would like to include group photos of attendees or different great photos of places or monuments from the various years the group held the conference.
 
If you have them, you can email them to me, or send me a disc, either way I can work with them as long as they are in a jpeg format. I have a scanner also and can digitize original photos, for photos before the digital age from previous conferences.
 
I know that you want to make sure that your group past and present members are represented in the history of the conference, and I know there has to be some great photos out there.
 
If you have any questions, let me know. Please forward this email to members of your organizations.
Thank-you for your support!!
 
Michael A. Salinas MikhailSal@aol.com
Events Chairperson
25th Annual Hispanic Genealogy Conference
Victoria Genealogical and Historical Society of Texas
President & Founder
Galvez Society for Hispanic Genealogy
"Racing through History- Tracing the Lives of our Ancestors"

EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI

"They Came in Ships..."

EAST COAST

National Archives Hispanic/Latino Family History Conference
Friday and Saturday, October 1st and 2nd 
14 workshops will be offered

MEXICO

Don Francisco del Árbol y Bonilla
Sitio Genealógico en Español  
Padilla Dávila en España y Mexico
Jalisco's Registro Civil 
Cristobál de Villarreal-de-las-Casas

Homenajearán historia de don Israel Cavazos  
Por Daniel de la Fuente
El Norte, 22 Junio 2004 

© Copyright 2004, John P. Schmal. All Rights Reserved.

State

Indígena Pura*

Indígena Pura (% of Total State Population)

Indígena Mezclada con Blanca**

Percentage
of Indígena Mezclada
con Blanca

Total State Population

Indígena Pura (% of "Indígena
Pura" of Mexican Republic)

Aguascalientes

17,961

16.70%

71,137

66.12%

107,581

0.43%

Baja California – North and South

4,197

6.68%

40,488

64.44%

62,831

0.10%

Campeche

33,176

43.41%

31,675

41.45%

76,419

0.79%

Coahuila

44,779

11.38%

306,433

77.88%

393,480

1.07%

Colima

23,854

26.00%

62,886

68.54%

91,749

0.57%

Chiapas

200,927

47.64%

152,956

36.27%

421,744

4.81%

Chihuahua

51,228

12.76%

201,182

50.09%

401,622

1.23%

District Federal

169,820

18.74%

496,359

54.78%

906,063

4.06%

Durango

33,354

9.90%

300,055

89.10%

336,766

0.80%

Guanajuato

25,458

2.96%

828,724

96.32%

860,364

0.61%

Guerrero

248,526

43.84%

306,361

54.05%

566,836

5.95%

Hidalgo

245,704

39.49%

320,250

51.47%

622,241

5.88%

Jalisco

199,728

16.76%

903,830

75.83%

1,191,957

4.78%

México

372,703

42.13%

422,001

47.70%

884,617

8.92%

Michoacán

196,726

20.93%

663,391

70.58%

939,849