--------
1795 Nov. 2
Carondelet, Francisco Luis Hector, Baron de
(New Orleans)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
1. Carondelet states: That the letters and documents enclosed
therewith and numbered from one to ten will make it clear to Bishop
Penalver the seditious movements caused at Natchitoches by the
partisans of Father Juan Delvaux.
2. That these movements have followed Carondelet's determination, in
agreement with the Vicar before Bishop Penalver's arrival, to remove
Father Delvaux from that parish and place him in another closer to the
capital, because of the fear Carondelet and Vicar had that Father
Delvaux might be attached to the French maxims which the letters 1 and
2 of the commander of Avoyelles prove.
3. That as Father Delvaux was suspected of directing those movements,
both from the content of the above mentioned documents and from this
long delay in observing Carondelet's order to come immediately to New
Orleans and because also the parish became quiet after his departure,
Carondelet made up his mind to consult Bishop Penalver about removing
him from this Province.
4. Carondelet suggests that they send Delvaux to Havana both to
intimidate his followers and to do away with any possible
correspondence of Delvaux with them until he receives the proceedings
of a capable commissioner whom the Baron is going to send to
Natchitoches.
5. Finally, Carondelet asks Bishop Penalver to return the enclosed
documents therewith in order that he may use them according to the
circumstances. Signed by the Baron de Carondelet. (Photostat from
L.C.)
--------
1795 Nov. 3
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
1. Bishop Penalver states: That having examined the documents
enclosed in Carondelet's official letter which he is now returning, the
Bishop thinks that the removal of Father Delvaux from Natchitoches
could not be more justifiable.
2. That since from the same documents there arises more than
suspicions about Delvaux's attachment to the French maxims, which the
Baron wants to determine through proceedings, the Bishop considers
necessary Delvaux's removal from the Province to Havana. The Bishop
considers opportune the sailing of Brigantine "Borja" of the Royal Navy
in a few days to Havana.
3. That there Father Delvaux must be secluded. To this end Bishop
Penalver will write to Bishop de Trespalacios suggesting the convent of
St. Francis as the proper place, if Carondelet agrees.
4. That all will depend on the results of the commission that
Carondelet will appoint. Signed by the Bishop of Louisiana.
(Photostat from L.C.)
--------
1795 Nov. 18
Carondelet, Francisco Luis Hector, Baron de
(New Orleans)
to Luis de las Casas
(Havana)
Carondelet states: That the documents no. 1 and 2 of his official letter to Bishop Penalver and of the latter to Carondelet will make clear to Las Casas the motives for which they decided to send Delvaux to Havana to be secluded in the convent of St. Francis while the necessary information is obtained about the movements he caused in his parish of Natchitoches and his attachment to the revolutionary principles of France. Signed by Baron de Carondelet. (Photostat from L.C.).
--------
1795 Nov. 18
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
to Bishop Felipe Jose de Trespalacios
(Havana)
Bishop Penalver notifies Trespalacios:
1. That Father Jean Delvaux will arrive at Havana on the brigantine
"Borja" under the captain Marcos de Aragon, and that he is on official
business and is suspended from his faculties until certain matters
concerning him are settled.
2. That he is to be secluded and the best place for this is the
Convent of St. Francis at Havana because his wandering about might
cause trouble according to the outcome of his judicial proceedings.
3. Finally, that the governor of this Province is informing the above
mentioned Captain just as the Bishop does now Trespalacios in order to
carry out faithfully the above orders which have direct bearing on the
service of God and the King.
To this is added a note certifying that the above copy agrees with the original. Signed by the Bishop.
--------
1795 Nov. 18
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
to Dr. Luis de las Casas
(Havana)
The Bishop notifies Las Casas:
1. That the Governor and he are sending on the brigantine "Borja"
Father Jean Delvaux for motives the latter will manifest to Las
Casas.
2. That he selects the convent of St. Francis at Havana where Delvaux
must be secluded and suspended from his faculties until his case is
settled.
3. That he is sending copies of these official letters to Trespalacios
and the Father Guardian of the Convent for the service of God and the
King.
To this is added a note by Penalver testifying that the above agrees with the original. Signed by Bishop Penalver.
--------
1795 Nov. 18
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
to Father Joseph Denis, Guardian of the convent of St. Francis
(Havana)
The Bishop notifies Father Joseph Denis:
1. That Father Juan Delvaux will arrive at Havana in the brigantine
"Borja" and that he is to be secluded in the convent of St. Francis as
Bishop Penalver communicated already to Bishop de Trespalacios.
2. The Bishop asks Father Joseph Denis to admit Delvaux under the
conditions disposed by Bishop de Trespalacios since his cause requires
it. Penalver will acknowledge the favor. A note is added by Bishop
Penalver certifying the above copy was drawn up according to the
original.
Signed by Bishop Penalver.
--------
1795 Nov. 19
Delvaux, Father Jean
(on board the "Borja")
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
Father Delvaux states (in French):
1. That he is ignorant altogether why he has been shipped as a
prisoner. However, he presumes that it is because of some events that
took place in Natchitoches towards the end of last August. Besides, he
assures the Bishop he was not implicated either directly or indirectly
in such happenings, having been preoccupied only with the sacerdotal
functions at the service of the two majesties.
2. The people of Natchitoches themselves will testify that, besides
the truths of religion, Delvaux taught them the advantages of the
present government. Moreover, Delvaux assures the Bishop that his
public zeal in the common prayers for the present war was for him a
pastoral pleasure.
3. That there was not revolution in this country whose inhabitants
have always been faithful to their monarch and very obedient to the
orders of the general government and to those of the commanders.
4. That as to the rifle shots, they have been fired by the inhabitants
of the post. But that the commander ordered them to be fired towards
eight o'clock in the evening against disarmed people.
5. That this is the truth from which he never departed. Moreover,
Delvaux pledges the honor of his character and person. He asks the
Bishop to verify the matter and to order the commander to come down
with his family that he may recognize his own fault. Delvaux suggests
too that an impartial referee should be sent to Natchitoches to seek
all the information from the inhabitants of the post.
6. That he offers two persons as security for himself to remain here
(a prisoner if the case demands) until all the proceedings may be
verified.
7. Delvaux asks permission to observe that in the Bishop's hands is
the balance of justice and his sublime pastoral virtues cause happiness
among his flock and that these same virtues have been the cause of many
acclamations in Havana during all the time the Bishop was there.
8. Delvaux asks the Bishop to regard him favorably since he is:a) a
priest who has always respected the holy character of his ministry.
b) an obedient vassal of the monarch whose rights he has defended to
the best of his possibilities.
c) an honest citizen who enjoys the public esteem and lives with an
honorable family that has supported him for the ten years he has been
living in this colony, without any blame from his superiors.
9. Moreover, Delvaux asks the Bishop how is it possible that he has
been arrested without knowing why and without being able to justify
himself.
10. Finally, Delvaux, refusing to enter into details, and considering
that he has said enough to interest the kindness of the Bishop, asks
the grace of an audience. signed by Jean Delvaux.
--------
1795 Dec. 14
Las Casas, Luis de
(Havana)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
Las Casas notifies the Bishop that as soon as the "Borja" arrived in Havana, Father Delvaux was secluded in the Convent of St. Francis, as Bishop Penalver had ordered in his official letter of Nov. 18. Signed by Luis de las Casas.
--------
1795 Dec. 19
Las Casas, Luis de
(Havana)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
1. Las Casas states: That Father Juan Delvaux arrived in Havana.
2. That he will be secluded in the convent of St. Francis as
Carondelet ordered in his letter of Nov. 18 in agreement with the
Bishop of Louisiana.
3. That all this has been fulfilled of which he notifies
Carondelet.
Signed by Luis de las Casas. (Photostat from L.C. copy of original
draft also included).
--------
1795 Dec. 20
Delvaux, Father Jean
(Havana)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
1. Father Delvaux states (in French): That according to the dispatch
of Dec. 9 he informed the Bishop of the report of the affair of M.
Lamorandiere that he has sent to Baron de Carondelet in French, which
the latter knows perfectly.
2. Moreover, he hopes that the Bishop will not consider him as guilty
either of having set free a criminal or of other things he has been
accused of. He has not offended M. Lamorandiere but on the contrary
has seriously been offended by him. For this purpose Delvaux cites
four reliable witnesses. the lists of facts proves that M. Deblanc,
Delvaux's ancient enemy, profited by this circumstance in agreement
with M. Lamorandiere to deepen the slander with other impostures.
3. Moreover, Delvaux asks the Bishop to take into account that he is
the oldest of the secular priests of Louisiana, where he has lived for
ten years honestly and Christianly, never having been blamed by his
superiors.
4. Delvaux believes that the Bishop would not consent his person and
character be damaged in such a way, without any possibility of
justifying himself.
5. Thus he offers security for his person if need be, in order to be
able to carry out the necessary proceeding to his justification. This
privilege he hopes will be granted him.
6. Finally, Delvaux says that he is sending herewith a copy of the
letter he wrote to the Baron de Carondelet about the affairs in
Natchitoches. Signed by Jean Delvaux.
--------
1795 Dec. 20
Delvaux, Father Jean
(Havana)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
1. Father Delvaux states (in French): That his two accusers, according
to public rumors, are M. Lamorandiere and M. Deblanc. The former
accused him of having set free a prisoner. The contrary has been
proved by his letter of the 9th instant. The latter accused him of
being a democrat and of having attempted revolutions. Delvaux
undertakes now to prove to the Baron the falseness of this last
imputation.
2. That after receiving the accusation of de Lamorandiere at the
beginning of last January, the Baron wrote to Deblanc of Natchitoches
to observe Delvaux's behavior and inform him of it. Delvaux assures
the Baron that his letter was not secret as he believed. It was so
communicated to several persons by Deblanc to alienate minds from
Delvaux. He stressed also the confidence the Baron had in him in such
a way that the gravest suspicions were spread concerning Delvaux's
person.
3. That, without knowing it, he was put at the mercy of a resolute
enemy who had been waiting a long time for an opportunity. To assure
the success of his project, he proceeded cunningly so that Delvaux
could not notice it. Deblanc began frequenting Delvaux oftener than
usual; he had several dinners to which Delvaux was always invited. In
the same way he visited Delvaux with his family. On the eve of his
departure to town, he called Delvaux to say good-bye and to offer his
services. They embraced each other with the greatest friendliness.
Now Delvaux is surprised at the excess of treason, but who could
believe this?
4. Thus Deblanc left for town with the poison in his heart, poison
hidden during years which the best investigation of Delvaux could not
disclose. Delvaux doesn't know either how he has been depicted to
Carondelet. He knows, however, that he has been accused of being an
enemy of the state.
5. He could not be an enemy of the state but only its most faithful
defender. He would have no motive or interest in being an enemy of the
state. On the contrary, now that the world is consumed by war, Delvaux
can only glorify the divine providence because of his happy situation
among a group of poor inhabitants and huntsmen, in an honest and quiet
solitude. Moreover, the Baron has to take into account the fact that
since Father Delvaux owes his existence for the past ten years to Spain
and has received only favors from both the government and the Spanish,
he could not have acted with such ingratitude.
6. For the same reason, supposing that the troubles which the Baron
suspected, because of slander, had happened, there would be no evidence
that the post of Natchitoches was involved in it. The Baron knows that
this post has always been faithful and obedient; that it owes all it
possesses to Spain both by the tobacco the King bought for a long time
and by the considerable advantages that have been granted to it by the
province of Texas with which it has always maintained a perfect
union.
7. So that being helped and enriched by the government, the
inhabitants of Natchitoches could not be unfaithful. But a charge must
be slander. Delvaux insists that he noticed in his parishioners a
general unmistakable satisfaction. Delvaux specifies that that
statement is not a metaphysical generality. What he says about
Natchitoches, means the greatest number of the ancients, eminent
persons and natives of the place, and not a small number of foreigners
who have done harm to both their customs and religion. This
observation is so precise as to Louisiana that Delvaux believes that in
general the weakening of the customs and religion in diverse parishes
depends on the number of foreigners who have come into each one.
8. If Delvaux had preached principles of irreligion and anarchy, he
would have been condemned by these people themselves and his enemies
would have had direct proofs against him.
9. But how could Delvaux have the desire to disturb the peace,
harmony, and religion of a people that caused their common happiness?
When Delvaux had been separated from his parishioners for a while they
did not cease calling him back. Delvaux insists that he desires no
more valuable employments, but that he prefers to finish his days in
their friendship and retirement, far from the chaos of the world and of
the noisy society which he never loved. So that if the absurd phantom
of his enemies have existed, Delvaux would have gone against his own
principles, sentiments, tastes, and duties and friendship.
10. That he could not desire any revolution because of the following
reasons:
a) They have impeded the advance of religion;
b) They have been the scourge of humanity;
c) On the side of fortune, we lose everything in revolutions without
gaining anything whatsoever;
d) On the side of honors, God knows that Delvaux has always chosen
the most obscure and retired situations.
11. How could he, then, fall into the madness of the famous goddess of
liberty? The Baron knows that natural liberty is a chimera that does
not exist even among the Indians. As to the civil liberty, Delvaux has
always enjoyed it in all its extent. Now for the first time he is
deprived of it. The same holds for the equality that never took place
either in the earthly paradise or in Noah's ark. Since then inequality
has been extreme in all times and places. The system found in Sparta
was fit only for a people of shepherds, so that it did not exist
long.
12. However, the Baron can say there was a revolt in Natchitoches
whose author is supposed to be Father Delvaux. But before examining if
Delvaux is the author of such a revolt, it would be necessary first to
know whether this would-be revolt ever existed.
13. That in this case it is false that the inhabitants of Natchitoches
have revolted against any chief. A revolt is an exterior action
opposing openly the acts of the legitimate authority or the execution
of justice. These very humble inhabitants of Natchitoches to which the
words of the Scriptures can be applied "coram tondente se obmutescet"
have always been very obedient to the orders of their superiors. Even
more to the knowledge of all the colony and of the archives of the
Baron's government, they have suffered vexations from several
commanders without complaint. When Delvaux concludes that there was no
revolt in Natchitoches.
14. That, on the contrary, within the time of which he speaks, these
inhabitants were overburdened with corvees and patrols the motive for
which Father Delvaux does not know. Yet they have constantly obeyed.
But that a violinist has received some blows with a stick and a surgeon
some punches, is not a concern of the state. Worse things happen in
the best policed towns. So also that a group of drunkards raise a
tumult in a billiard room. But what must surprise one is that shots
fired at them by an abusive act of authority do not cause any flight
because of the extreme faithfulness of these people.
15. Moreover, supposing, against all evidence, that there was a revolt
in Natchitoches, should one conclude that Delvaux is the author? And
why? Because of signs given by his enemies who present impossible
signs and proofs.
16. That the inhabitants of Natchitoches have made a representation to
the government in Delvaux"s behalf because they wanted him to stay
among them. We conclude from all this that they had affection for
Delvaux, and this is not a crime in any country. And if it is, it does
not depend on Delvaux since friendship is a free sentiment that cannot
be impeded. That same friendship received from the inhabitants of
Natchitoches, Delvaux has obtained in the parish of the Allemands where
he remained only a year and in all countries where he has been, he
experienced the same thing.
17. Even on the false supposition that the inhabitants of Natchitoches
had revolted and that Delvaux had been the occasion, he should not be
considered as its author. Their affection for him and a blind zeal
could lead them to movements that Delvaux himself would have
disapproved. The Baron knows the march of the human passions; from the
obstinacy on each side results the sparks that produce often the great
fires.
18. That happily nothing of this kind took place in Natchitoches.
When Delvaux left his parish it was most tranquil and to this he is
glad to have contributed. While these people were outraged by
injurious words and writings, Delvaux used all his power to keep them
silent. So that while others committed iniquities to acquire merits,
Delvaux acquired merits because of which he received iniquities.
19. That he exposes well known and authentic truths whose strict
demonstration is easy to make by the presentation of the facts. Torn
by the most atrocious slander, Father Delvaux fears still to bring in
personalities. He does not want to make use of the vile weapons of his
enemies. The only thing he desires is to see these accusers faced by
him in the Baron's presence. He knows that they will confuse
themselves. And in all their exterior Delvaux sees the evident sign of
the interior condemnation of the conscience that cannot be effaced by
the most inveterate practice of crime.
20. These are the real enemies of the state that the Baron must punish
because they have abused a respectable tribunal; traitors towards their
fellowmen; enemies of the public whose tranquility they did not cease
disturbing; finally, enemies of the Baron himself whom they have
infamously deceived.
21. Finally, that if the Baron doubts still of Delvaux's innocence, he
asks to be allowed to present the authentic proof when he has been
accused at the Baron's tribunal because he relies on both the justice
and the right of his cause. To this is added a note certifying that
the above is the copy of a letter sent to Baron de Carondelet, governor
of Louisiana. (It is not signed). (2nd copy in Spanish).
--------
1795 Dec. 29
Denis, Father Joseph
(Havana)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
1. Father Denis certifies: That Father Delvaux has been secluded in
this convent and suspended from the exercise of his orders according to
what has been disposed by Bishop de Trespalacios.
2. He assures Bishop Penalver that he notifies him according to his
knowledge and in testimony of the good will with which he will always
obey the Bishop's orders. Signed by Josef Denis.
--------
1796 Jan. 16
Delvaux, Father Jean
(Havana)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
1. Delvaux assures the Bishop that he would not bother him again but
for his sad and deplorable situation. So that he hopes the Bishop
knowing the things he has experienced since he left New Orleans, will
take his side.
2. Moreover, Delvaux states that since February of the last year,
proceedings have been carried out against him without any copy of them
having been delivered to him. He has been called down to New Orleans
by the Vicar's order. To this end he had to abandon his own goods, to
buy a pirogue, and to make other necessary expenses to pay the costs of
a 150 league trip. After getting to New Orleans, during a month and a
half, he has not been called to account for his delinquencies.
3. Later, when he least expected, he was taken and handed over to the
captain of the brigantine "El Borja" as a criminal, and has been
treated inhumanly in insult to his character and in danger to his
health. He was granted only a small lodging in the prow where he
passed the first night with the lowest class of people, without being
allowed even the natural functions. Besides he was under the guard of
an escort of soldiers who examined his clothes to see if he had any
weapon. They found, however, only a watch and eight or ten "pesos"
that they tried to steal, and did many other things Father Delvaux does
not want to specify.
4. The only consolation he had was the kindness of the captain and
lieutenant of the brigantine until he was moved to another ship by
which he arrived at Havana on Dec. 6 of the last year. Then he was
delivered to the commander of the "Plaza" who took him to the convent
of the Franciscans, where he has been secluded and suspended "a
divinis."
5. Furthermore, Delvaux wants to know: What are his delinquencies,
his faults, that cause him so much trouble? Why is he not heard
freely? Why is he not notified of the proceedings taken against him?
The Bishop has promised that he would be granted opportunities to
justify himself. The same request Delvaux asked the Bishop on board
the "El Borja," offering security for his person and the results of the
proceedings. Perhaps on account of just considerations, the Bishop did
not grant him. Even the Baron de Carondelet in his official letter of
Nov. 19th does not dare to consider Delvaux as a criminal and he only
states that he has been treated so severely on account of suspicions he
does not want to disclose.
6. However, despite all the reserve, Delvaux has been informed enough
by the people about the matter. And as he has manifested in his
letters of 9th and 20th of December, all the accusations against him
are false relations by vile persons. He has only to prove that with
sincere witnesses to compensate the injury done to his character and
person. That favor he asked of the Bishop then and now. He hopes to
be granted this request because he knows he is dealing with a pastor
that has an exact idea of the boldness with which the libertines attack
nowadays the behavior of the ministers of the altar.
7. Moreover, Delvaux asks permission to go back to New Orleans where
the necessary documents for his defense are and he protests to the
Bishop that he does not have other aims than those of protecting his
honor and of compensating for the injury done to his character.
8. Once more, Delvaux apologizes for the trouble he has given the
Bishop. But as he cannot pass over his present situation, he begs the
Bishop to excuse him and at the same time to count him as a very humble
and obedient servant. Signed by Jean Delvaux.
--------
1796 June 2
Carondelet, Francisco Luis Hector, Baron de
(New Orleans)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
The Baron states:
1. That the Bishop will understand the reasons why Captain Antonio
Argote had to quit the post of Natchitoches without judicial trial,
from the copy of the official letter no. 1 enclosed therewith which the
Baron received from Argote after his return from Natchitoches, in which
Argote notifies the Baron of the results of his commission.
2. That the set of original documents no. 2 will show the foundation
of the suspicions the Baron had in removing Father Delvaux from that
post and sending him to Havana.
3. That the report no. 3 proves what Argote said that if he had
recurred to a judicial trial, the Pastor would have come out whiter
than the snow because three fourths of the population of Natchitoches
were for him.
4. That the disorder of the post had their start on the decision of
keeping Father Delvaux there against the commander Louis de Blanc and
against the ecclesiastical and civil authority. Moreover, that Father
Delvaux should have obeyed immediately the orders of the ecclesiastical
and civil authority to come down to New Orleans and not have delayed
his trip even after the arrival of his successor, stirring up the fire
with his presence. So that after three months arrangements were made
to take him there by force.
5. That all the troubles of the post are over without bloodshed or
considerable damage. The disorders were not aimed directly against the
government.
6. The great number of guilty persons and the difficulty of subjecting
them if they made up their minds to start an insurrection; the dislike
of the inhabitants in a great number of other posts and of the Indians;
the restoration of peace and tranquility through the arrangements of
the Baron for transferring the commander Louis de Blanc to the post of
Atakapas and substituting for him an officer of the fixed regiment with
a small detachment at his order to prevent any trouble: that
considering all these points, the Baron resolved to compromise for some
time without taking any decision which will depend on circumstances and
the later behavior of those who were implicated in the present case.
Accordingly, he is going to persuade the Captain Bernardo Dortolans,
whom the disturbers obliged to take refuge in Nacogdoches, to go back
to the post.
7. That, in virtue of all these considerations, the Baron thinks that
Father Delvaux should continue to be detained at Havana, while the
Baron and the Bishop find out if they can trust the behavior of those
who started the past disturbances, bless the Bishop judge the
investigations carried out so far against Father Delvaux sufficient to
forbid him to exercise the ministry in this province.
8. That they have to take into account that Father Delvaux's
indiscretion and disobedience have exposed not only the post of
Natchitoches but a part of Louisiana to an insurrection which might
have been helped by the French Republic at a time when the forces of
the Baron were unable to oppose them. Signed by the Baron de
Carondelet. (Photostat from L.C.)
--------
1796 Mar. 8
Argote, Antonio
(Baton Rouge)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Argote notifies the Baron:
1. That, besides the findings he exposed to the Baron in his official
letters of Feb. 6th and 29th, concerning the situation of Natchitoches,
and the reasons that determined him to proceed extra-judicially, he had
the following reasons also:
2. Despite all he had heard from the commander of El Rapido and Don
Jose Piernas who had just arrived from Natchitoches, about the
insubordination of its inhabitants which caused Argote to march
thither, having increased his force of 15 grenadiers granted by the
Baron with 35 soldiers from El Rapido, he found at his arrival at
Natchitoches only docile and submissive people, who were willing to
obey strictly the orders of the Baron.
3. That he found out by means of secret investigation among the most
judicious and impartial persons of the district that the past rumors
arising from particular controversies between the pastor, Father Jan
Delvaux, and the commander, Luis Deblanc, whence resulted many discords
between the friends and partisans of both, were caused rather by lack
of prudence and moderation than malignant premeditation and much less
by a spirit of sedition.
4. That the inhabitants of Natchitoches never intended to get away
from the legitimate authority, despite reports spread out by
enthusiasts of France that Louisiana would pretty soon pass to that
nation.
5. Moreover, that he has ascertained both by creditable information
and from the offended persons themselves that the few incidents do not
deserve a trial because, being devoid of proof, they would cause new
troubles disturbing the new order Argote was able to reestablish.
6. That these are the motives that caused him to omit all juridical
proceedings, which could be rather pernicious than beneficial to the
quiet of the people--the main aim of Argote's commission according to
the Baron.
7. That because for the same reason he did not seek judicial
information about the authors and subscribers to the petition by which
a number of the inhabitants solicited the staying of Father Delvaux,
which could again raise the dispute between his partisans and those of
the commander Deblanc.
8. That, however, he considered as just, the order of the Baron and
Bishop Penalver in having separated from that parish Father Juan
Delvaux because the information that he received concerning his conduct
from the commanders of El Rapido, Avoyelles, and Baton Rouge, confirm
as legitimate the motives for the removal.
9. Finally, that this is all he has to say about the matter. Signed
by Antonio Argote.
(Doc. no. 1.)
--------
1796 Mar. 4
Argote, Antonio
(Baton Rouge)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Argote states:
1. That he is sending to the Baron, as he has been ordered by the
latter's official letter of Nov. 28th of the last year, the
declarations he received from Valentin Layssard, Estevan de la
Morandiere and Jose Baamonde, commanders of the districts of Rapido,
Avoyelles, and Baton Rouge, about the behavior and conversations of
Father Juan Delvaux when he passed by the first two, as the Baron has
been informed by letters of the two latter commanders in which they
assure the truth of their declarations.
2. That he was not able to make a book out of these proceedings
because of the diversity of places that disturbed the regular order and
because he wished to avoid the interpolation of Spanish and French in
which those letters and declarations are written. Moreover, M. de la
Morandiere does not understand Spanish. Signed by Antonio Argote.
--------
1796 Mar. 5
Argote, Antonio
(Baton Rouge)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Argote asserts:
1. That the information he received from the declarations of the
commanders of Rapido, Avoyelles and Baton Rouge about what they have
said to the Baron concerning the behavior of Father Juan Delvaux when
he passed by the first two posts, confirm the advice given to the Baron
by the commander of Natchitoches about the incircumspect and hardly
prudent way of Delvaux's conduct. This is conceived from impartial and
creditable persons.
2. That although these proofs are sufficient to justify Delvaux's
expulsion, the Baron, if he judges it suitable, may order the retired
ensign, Jose Piernas, to declare about Delvaux's action in
Natchitoches, since he was an eye-witness of the disturbances caused
there by the partisans of Delvaux.
3. Finally, that to avoid new disorders he did not carry out any
judicial proceedings in Natchitoches. Signed by Antonio Argote. There
follows the information received by Argote in his proceedings.
--------
1794 Dec. 10
Morandiere, Estevan de la
(Avoyelles)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
De la Morandiere asserts:
1. That as he had been informed that among the many pirogues that had
arrived at the main harbor of this post, three leagues from his home,
there was a dispute in one between the master and the "engagees" he
went with his son to pacify them.
2. That to his great surprise he met there M. Badins, who under the
advice of Father Delvaux who was going up to Natchitoches, forced the
jail and came to this port, a league from his home. With Mr. Badins
came Mr. Rainsad to trade in this post, who also knew of the escape of
Mr. Badins.
3. That he ordered Mr. Badins to go back to his home but Father
Delvaux, a little drunken, intervened assuring that it was he who
caused Badins to come over. As he persisted in retaining Mr. Badins
and had stated seditious propositions before a great number of people,
M. de la Morandiere thought he had the right to notify the Baron about
it. Signed by Estevan de la Morandiere.
--------
1794 Dec. 23
Morandiere, Estevan de la
(Avoyelles)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
De la Morandiere states:
1. That he informed the Baron about the conduct of Mr. Badins on three
different occasions:
a) First, through Mr. Francisco Hernand, a merchant of the
River;
b) second, through Mr. Miguel Pampalon, an inhabitant of this
post;
c) finally, through Mr. Duparc. Thus the Baron will have the
opportunity to know the violent, turbulent and insubordinate spirit of
Mr. Badins who has just added to his delinquencies that of having
escaped from prison. De la Morandiere does not know where he may be,
despite all attempts to catch him.
2. That Mr. Badins was induced to this last action by the indiscreet
propositions stated publicly by Father Delvaux in the main port of the
Colorado river where there were the merchants Reinaud, Nicollet and
Rebecqui with all their employees, and before many other people of the
post.
3. That these propositions of a priest have made a very bad impression
on the spirit of many inhabitants who have shown themselves after that
less zealous than before. 4. That these facts oblige him to notify the
Baron that Badins has secretly spread in this post the rumor that the
colony would soon belong to France and that then he would enjoy
freedom. To this statement he added many others of the same
nature.
5. De la Morandiere will always prevent his attempts, and to this end
he is going to embark provisionally the goods of Badins and have them
under the custody of two individuals who will answer for Badins' person
until the Baron orders otherwise. Signed by Estevan de la
Morandiere.
--------
1795 Oct. 21
Baamonde, Jose Vasquez
(Baton Rouge)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Baamonde states:
1. That at four o'clock of Oct. 6th he arrived at the post of "El
Rapido." There he was informed by its commanders and other persons
about the conversations of Father Delvaux when he passed by this post.
They are reduced to this: that the post he left was tranquil, but that
if they moved the "Revenants" (name given to six or eight drunkards of
the post), they would be ready to start again the same disorders; and
other conversations that make possible the interpretation that Father
Delvaux was the cause of everything.
2. That in the evening of the same day, Mr. Juan Dufores, son-in-law
of Mr. Louis Deblanc, arrived at "El Rapido." Then Baamonde knew that
Natchitoches was tranquil since the pastor had come down. But yet once
in a while the persons who went to the commander's were insulted. Such
the case of Mr. Ramben Conuan who was chastised with a whip and that of
Mr. Bosiee who had been lashed.
3. That the commander did not trust his militia because not even the
officers in all the riots presented themselves.
4. That, after he had herd Mr. Martin Despalier, captain of El Rapido
who came from Natchitoches and others who have been there too, that all
was tranquil except these insults, committed from time to time,
Baamonde made up his mind to write to Mr. Luis Deblanc in order to be
sure about what was going on there.
5. That as he did not receive any answer after four days and as he
knew that an inhabitant of El Rapido, Antonio Lomuine, who was coming
from Natchitoches had been insulted, and fearing other troubles, he
made up his mind on the 11th to ask of Mr. Carlos de Grandpre, the
thirty men the Baron speaks about in his official letter of Sept. 16th,
to check any dissension that might be going on.
6. But that at six o'clock P.M. of the 12th, he received the answer of
Deblanc to his official letter assuring him that all was tranquil and
that Baamonde could go back to his post, as it appeared from Deblanc's
letter here included by Baamonde:
--------
1795 Oct. 11
Deblanc, Luis
(Natchitoches)
to Jose Baamonde
(El Rapido)
Deblanc states:
a) That he received today the official letter of the general governor
that has been delivered to Baamonde by Mr. Duparc when he passed by
Pointe Coupee.
b) In view of the news the Baron has received from Deblanc in his
letter of Aug. 16th about the movements of the post, he ordered the
Captain Jose Baamonde to go to Natchitoches and cooperate with Deblanc
according to the latter's orders. There follows the content of the
letter received by Deblanc from Baamonde dated Oct. 8th.
c) Baamonde states that he has been commissioned by the Governor of
Louisiana to go to Natchitoches and inform the government of the
dissensions that took place there, acting in collaboration with its
commander , Luis Deblanc. However, Baamonde knew by Mr. Bertrand
Mayoche that all is quiet after Father Delvaux left. So that Baamonde
awaits orders from Deblanc whether he must go to the post with a
detachment of militia or not.
d) That he is sending to Deblanc the official letter of Baron de
Carondelet delivered to him by Mr. Duparc.
e) Deblanc assures Baamonde that the news he received from Mr.
Bertrand Mayoche is true, that everything is very quiet since Father
Delvaux left. So that Deblanc advises Baamonde not to undertake his
march up to Natchitoches. Signed by Luis Deblanc. After giving this
letter of Deblanc, Baamonde continues:
7. That he is sending to the Baron the three parcels of letters of Mr.
Deblanc and one of Mr. de la Morandiere.
8. Finally that his expenses for this trip are 24 pesos for two guides
from Pointe Coupee to Avoyelles, and thence to El Rapido 8 pesos.
Signed by Jose Vasquez Baamonde.
--------
1796 Feb. 22
Argote, Antonio
El Rapido
Antonio Argote commissioned by Baron de Carondelet to inquire about
the conduct and behavior of Father Delvaux in this district when he was
coming down from Natchitoches to the capital, certifies:
1. That he ordered to appear before him in lack of a notary public as
assistant witnesses, Mr. Bernardo Martin Despalliere and Mr. Guillermo
Coolk and the Captain of the Militia, Valentin Laysard, civil and
military commander of this district.
2. The latter in regard to the citation made of him by Jose Vasquez
Baamonde in his letter of Nov. 21, 1795, gave sworn testimony:
a) That all the above mentioned letter expresses in the first
paragraph is true, and that he has heard as well the author of it as
other persons whose names he does not remember.
b) That the post of Natchitoches was quiet, but that if they moved
the "Revenants," they would start again the disorders, which seems to
point out that Father Delvaux was the head of them.
3. Finally, Laysard swore to the truth of his statements and that he
is forty years old. The document is signed by Antonio Argote, Judge of
the Commission, Valentin Laysard, Bernardo Martin Despalliere,
assistant witness, Guillermo Coolk, assistant witness.
--------
1796 Mar. 3
Argote, Antonio
Baton Rouge)
Argote certifies:
1. That in the post and district of Baton Rouge, before him and Miguel
Mahier and Juan Bautista as assistant witnesses, appeared the captain
of infantry, Jose Vasquez Baamonde, commander of the district from whom
they received sworn testimony to the following points:
a) That the letter of Nov. 21, 1795 written in the post of El Rapido
to Baron de Carondelet, he recognized as his, that when he heard the
commander of El Rapido and other persons whose names he does not
remember, say that Father Delvaux when passing by, expressed himself
just in the terms stated in the first paragraph of the mentioned
letter.
2. That he swore to the truth of his statements and is 50 years old.
The document is signed by Antonio Argote, Jose Vasquez Baamonde, Juan
Bautista Henry, and Miguel Mahier.
--------
1796 Feb. 23
Argote, Antonio
(Post of Avoyelles)
Antonio Argote, commissioned by Baron de Carondelet to inquire about the conduct and conversations of Father Delvaux when he passed by this post on his way up to Natchitoches, certifies:
1. That before him and Juan Bautista Soileau and Juan Bautista
Guillauri, assistant witnesses in the lack of a notary public, appeared
Estevan de la Morandiere who swore to tell the truth.
2. That as to the content of two official letters addressed to Baron
de Carondelet on Dec. 10th and 23rd, 1794, de la Morandiere recognizes
them as his and confirms and ratifies all they state as the truth.
3. Finally, that de la Morandiere declared himself to be 60 years old.
Signed by Antonio Argote, Estevan de la Morandiere, B. Soileau and B.
Guilliauri. At the same post and on the same day Argote carried on his
proceedings. He certifies: That, having inquired if Nicollet, Renaud,
Robequi as well as their employees, mentioned in the two letters of de
la Morandiere, were in this district still, in order to receive
information from them, he was told by several persons that all were
absent:
a) Nicollet in Pointe Coupee.
b) Renaud in the Capital.
c) Robequi in los Nagodoches a dependence of Mexico. Signed by
Antonio Argote, B. Soileau, and B. Guillauri. To this is added a note,
dated New Orleans, June 8, 1796 from Baron de Carondelet.
--------
1796 Jan. 3
Carondelet, Baron de
(New Orleans)
to Antonio Argote
The Baron states: That he is sending to Argote a letter he just received from Father Jean Delvaux authorizing him to accept information from the witnesses he presents. Signed by Baron de Carondelet. To this is added Delvaux's letter.
--------
1795 Dec. 9
Delvaux, Father Jean
(Havana)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Delvaux declares about what happened to him in the post of Avoyelles:
1. That, on his way up to Natchitoches, he arrived at the port of
Avoyelles, at the beginning of December of the last year.
2. That this port is two leagues from the first habitations of
Avoyelles.
3. That as he needed both provisions and a pirogue to get faster to
Natchitoches, he made up his mind to continue on foot to accomplish
these two purposes.
4. That as it had grown dark when he was entering the country, he went
to the nearest house. It was that of Mr. Badins who treated Delvaux
very well.
5. That Badins' house announced sadness. His wife and a daughter were
ill, and Badins himself was also in a state of desolation. On asking
the cause, Delvaux was told that Badins had been arrested for several
months because of controversies with the commander, Mr. de la
Mornadiere. Delvaux was sorry for his situation and exhorted him to
patience and moderation.
6. That, on the next day, as he was looking for a pirogue, Mr. de la
Morandiere, whom he did not know nor intend to see, in the afternoon,
came into the house where he was, so that it was not possible to avoid
him. Mr. de la Morandiere offered himself to look for the pirogue and
invited Delvaux to go to his house the next day to eat, obliging him by
sending a servant and a horse to take Delvaux. This he did.
7. That he went to the meal at which were Mr. Nicollet, a merchant in
Pointe Coupee, and two other persons he does not know. When he arrived
the table was served already (the horse could not get there sooner).
Then he ate with enough appetite while Mr. de la Morandiere and those
present entertained themselves upon a heap of papers whose kind is
unknown in the country.
8. That, in the evening, while he walked in the garden with Mr. de la
Morandiere, the conversation fell upon Mr. Badins. And as he observed
good will in the commander, he made up his mind to say some words in
behalf of Badins. This was well received and the setting of him at
liberty was promised.
9. That he notified Badins of the privilege obtained in his favor, and
Mr. Nicollet, to complete the reconciliation, invited Badins to eat at
a meal in which Mr. de la Morandiere, Mr. Reneau, a merchant of New
Orleans, and Father Delvaux would be present. The party took place in
the port of Avoyelles. However, as soon as Mr. de la Morandiere saw
Badins, he began offending him severely and bade him to go back to his
prison, but Badins did not reply.
10. The party was very sad and they spoke very little. After the
coffee, Delvaux took de la Morandiere aside and reminded him of his
promise. But he received for answer only empty and meaningless words.
Mr. Nicollet and Reneau came near, but they were not better treated
either. De la Morandiere said that as to the liberation of Badins, he
could not concede it since it was a concern of the governor. So that
Delvaux censured his conduct. Then de la Morandiere answered that he
did not care for Delvaux's approbation and permitted his son to say
some disrespectful words to Delvaux who did not answer anything. That
is what happened when they separated. There was on neither side
stronger propositions than those he cited, and, much less, did they
talk at all directly or indirectly about the government matters.
11. That he went away and did not think any more of de la Morandiere.
Finally, Delvaux assures the veracity of this fact and asks that
information be accepted from Nicollet, a merchant of Pointe Coupee,
Reneau, a merchant of New Orleans, Lamatie, an inhabitant of
Natchitoches, and Francisco Lavesper, a coxswain, who were present and
are worthy witnesses. Signed by Father Juan Delvaux. To this Delvaux
adds a note certifying he arrived at Havana on the sixth in the
afternoon.
--------
1796 Feb. 8
Argote, Antonio
(Natchitoches)
Argote certifies:
1. That Luis Lamatie, an inhabitant of Natchitoches, appeared before
him and Andres Verdalay and Pablo Marcollay, assistant witnesses.
2. That asked about the content of Father Delvaux's above letter, he
said:
a) that, at that time, he was with Father Delvaux at Avoyelles when
the latter was going up to Natchitoches to take care of that parish and
that they stayed a short while in Mr. de la Morandiere's house.
b) That, on the same day and early in the morning, he saw Mr. Badins
come out from Mr. de la Morandiere's house and mount on horseback.
c) That, then, Father Delvaux told Lamatie that Mr. de la Morandiere
having promised to release Mr. Badins, had changed his mind and ordered
him to go back to prison.
d) That is all he knows and that he did not notice any dispute
between the persons mentioned above. Signed by Antonio Argote, Luis
Lamatie, Pablo Marcollay, Andres Verdalay.
--------
1796 Feb. 29
Argote, Antonio
(Pointe Coupee)
Argote certifies:
1. That Juan Bautista Nicollet, from the same district appeared before
him and Simon Croiset and Diego Ortiz as assistant witnesses.
2. That he confirmed all the statements made by Father Delvaux in his
letter of Nov. 9, 1795.
3. That, then, having Argote read to him the two letters of Mr. la
Morandiere, dated Dec. 10th and 23rd, 1795,respectively, and addressed
to Baron de Carondelet, Nicollet confirmed that the content of
Delvaux's letter is true in all the points.
4. That this is the truth and that he is 52 years old. Signed by
Antonio Argote, J. Nicollet, S. Croiset, and Diego Ortiz.
On the same day and in the same post, Antonio Argote certifies:
1. That Francisco Lavesper appeared before him and the above mentioned
assistant witnesses.
2. That the Lavesper who was then the coxswain of Juan Bautista
Nicollet, confirmed the content of Father Delvaux's letter.
3. That what he declared is the truth and that he is 50 years old.
Signed by Antonio Argote, F. Lavesper, S. Croiset and Diego Ortiz. To
this is added a note by Argote dated: Pointe Coupee, Feb. 29, 1796,
certifying that he has looked for Mr. Raynaud both in El Rapido and
Avoyelles and here to hear his declarations but he could not find him.
He has been told by many persons that Raynaud is now living in the
capital.
--------
1796 Mar. 4
Argote, Antonio
(Baton Rouge)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Argote asserts:
1. That as he has been ordered by Carondelet's official letter of Jan.
3, 1796, he received the declarations solicited by Father Juan Delvaux,
which he is sending now to the Baron.
2. That he could not complete that of Raynaud because he did not find
him in any of the posts he passed by and that, according to
information, he is now living in the capital. Signed by Antonio
Argote.
--------
1796 Mar. 10
Carondelet, Francisco Luis Hector, Baron de
(New Orleans)
The Baron states:
1. That in the year of 1794 he was notified by the Captain Bernardo
Dortolans, then a provisional governor of the post of Natchitoches in
the absence of Luis Deblanc:
a) That Father Patrick Walsh, vicar general and ecclesiastical
judge, for just reasons removed from that parish Father Delvaux and
appointed instead as his successor Pedro Pavie.
b) That then some people got together and went to Francisco
Bossier's, the syndic, in order that he might organize a junta and
authorize the brief for them concerning Father Delvaux's stay. As he
refused, they insulted him seriously. Afterwards they went for the
same purpose to the commander Dortolans and as he refused too, they
behaved in the same way.
2. That when the proprietor commander of the post, Luis Deblanc, came
back, he gave notice that the revolutionary party constituted the
society of the "Revenants." These boasting as French patriots caused
some trouble against the Spanish government. They even threatened the
Commander Deblanc, the Captain Dortolans and the syndic Bossier that
they would kill them and burn their houses. Moreover, they maltreated
indeed several honest and faithful vassals of His Majesty. This
communication of Deblanc was confirmed by those of the commanders of
Avoyelles, El Rapido, and Baton Rouge. All of them agreed in this that
Father Delvaux was the one who fomented the sedition, if he were not
its real cause.
3. That to take away from the rebels the influence of Father Delvaux,
and appease the post, the Baron agreed with Bishop Penalver who had
just arrived, that the pastor should come down to New Orleans
immediately and then be sent over to Havana.
4. That since even after Father Delvaux was removed, the disturbances
continued and since the rebels had caused trouble in the parish of
Nacogdoches in the province of Texas on some festivals according to the
information of its commander Bernardo Fernandez, the Baron commissioned
the Captain Antonio Argote who, with a group of grenadiers of the fixed
regiment of this "Plaza," to go to Natchitoches and find out what
disturbances were taking place and who were their authors.
5. Finally, the Baron orders:
a) That the half-pay ensign, Jose Piernas and the sergeant from
Nacogdoches, Jacinto Mora, who are now at New Orleans and have passed
by Natchitoches, to appear before the lieutenant governor and military
auditor, Nicolas Marie Vidal, and declare all they know concerning the
present case.
b) That, in continuation, the information sent and to be sent by
Antonio Argote, is to be filed in order that the Baron, after having
examined all, may take the necessary steps.
c) And that if there be need in some proceedings of interpreters,
the Baron appoints to this end, Estevan de Quinones and Daniel Mortimer
who are to be notified. Signed by Baron de Carondelet, Dr. Nicolas
Maria Vidal and witnessed by Carlos Ximenes. To this is added a note
by Ximenes, certifying that on the same day, and before Nicolas Maria
Vidal, he notified Estevan de Quinones and Daniel Mortimer, of the
above decree, who accepted it and swore to carry it out faithfully.
Signed by Vidal, Estevan de Quinones, Daniel Mortimer and notarized by
Carlos Ximenes.
--------
1796 Mar. 16
Ximenes, Carlos, Notary Public
(New Orleans)
Ximenes certifies:
1. That Jose Piernas appeared before Dr. Nicolas Maria Vidal and
answered, under oath, to the questions asked as follows:
2. a) That, on July 28, 1795, he went through Atakapas and Opelusas
to the place called Arrollo de las Piedras in the province of Texas and
there he stayed in the house of Pablo Bonet Laffite whom Piernas has
known for the last 28 years.
b) That then he knew through Laffite that the merchant Francisco
Rouguier from the neighborhood of Natchitoches had spread the news that
Father Delvaux would be removed from the parish of Natchitoches and
replaced by the clergyman, Pedro Pavie.
c) That to avoid this, five inhabitants of that post drew up, under
the guidance of Delvaux, two briefs demanding the latter's stay and had
them signed by other inhabitants of Natchitoches.
d) That the syndic Bossier and commander Dortolans were insulted and
threatened because they refused to yield to the petition. Dortolans
arrested the five mentioned, and, when after some days he notified them
that they were free, they refused to leave prison until the decision of
the general government.
3. Moreover,
a) That the partisans of Father Delvaux sent the boldest of them,
Verdelet, to Opelusas to consult Manuel Soto, neighbor of that post and
father-in-law of Laffite, about what should be done in that case. When
Verdelet returned to Natchitoches, they sent him back to New Orleans,
as a representative of all of them, to ask the government for Father
Delvaux's stay.
b) That the proprietary commander was already at Natchitoches and
Dortolans at Nacogdoches on the way to Abeja the capital of Texas.
4. a) That as Piernas remained three or four days at Laffite's they
went together to Nacogdoches to finish their affairs.
b) That while they were in that place they knew through Ramon
Cordova and other neighbors who arrived there that Verdelet had
returned from New Orleans to Natchitoches with the answer of the
general government concerning Father Delvaux's stay and those
arrested.
c) That on this same day of Verdelet's arrival Luis Deblanc released
the prisoners. However, that evening between ten and eleven o'clock,
four men disguised as Indians, attacked some honest and decent men who
were coming out from Deblanc's house. Among them was the violinist
Rambin. They cudgeled him and broke his violin and he could with
difficulty escape, covered with his own blood. They ran too after a
boy, son of Rambin, while the other persons fled to their houses. The
wife of the merchant Fauzin who with her husband was present and had
been insulted also, was on the point of miscarrying because she was
pregnant.
d) That the inhabitants themselves of Natchitoches testify to having
seen that evening four men disguised whom they did not know, but that
they were not true Indians coming back and forth around Deblanc's house
while a ball was going on there.
e) That once that news was spread in Nacogdoches, Laffite,
Desessard, the comedian, Francisco Monginot, the surgeon, and neighbors
of Natchitoches, and one named Chabuse, got together in the military
parade ground near the house of Francisco Santa Cruz, and praised with
much laughter the treatment inflicted on Rambin and said that all who
opposed Delvaux should be treated accordingly. They identified the
four supposed Indians as "Revenants" they knew quite well.
5. Moreover,
a) That three or four days after this meeting, Monginot left for
Natchitoches, his home, and that seven or eight days afterwards,
Piernas and Lafitte, having arrived at that post, presented themselves
to the commander Deblanc.
b) Deblanc notified them that he had shown to the ones who were
arrested the official letter of Baron de Carondelet in which the latter
disapproved Father Delvaux's stay. That, even so, the disturbances
were going on.
c) So that Deblanc asked Piernas to speak with Atanasio Poisot,
brother-in-law of Lafitte and cousin of the commander, and one of those
arrested in order to persuade him and the others to quit persecuting
those who were not for Delvaux.
d) That Deblanc showed to Piernas the letter of Baron de Carondelet
that he read and Lafitte understood it also. Both promised to talk
with Poisot and his friends in order to pacify the post.
6. Moreover,
a) That they went right away to Poisot's where they found Father
Delvaux, Poisot, Remigio Lambre, and other "Revenants" who were playing
cards for money and drinking continuously. They ceased playing for a
while and Laffite started immediately speaking against the commander,
Deblanc, and sneering at Baron de Carondelet's letter.
b) That, afterwards, he began singing an infamous song aimed at
insulting and threatening the provisional commander Bernardo Dortolans
and the inhabitants faithful to the Spanish government.
c) That this song is the one copied in the proceedings drawn up in
Nacogdoches by petition of Dortolans against Dominico Prudome and
others from Natchitoches as Piernas was notified by Dortolans. That
Father Delvaux and the other "Revenants" accompanied Laffite in his
song, which they repeated sometimes while they skipped and jumped in
great gayety.
7. Moreover,
a) That as Delvaux asked Laffite ludicrously who had composed so
nice a song, Laffite answered that it has been composed by Desessard,
the comedian, Francisco Monginot and Chabuse, at Nacogdoches some days
ago when they knew what had happened to Rambin and that the syndic
Bossier had been persecuted by Revenants riding on horseback.
b) That Delvaux told Laffite that the best verse of the song is that
against Jose Maria Armant, although that against Fausin is not bad.
c) Once the song was finished, they started playing again. Then
Piernas took aside Atanasio Poisot and explained to him what the
commander had asked him to tell Poisot, that he was exposing himself to
be treated severely if he continued disturbing the people for Father
Delvaux. That the general government would consider Poisot as the
cause of all the trouble. That he could see the ruin of his goods and
even of his own family.
8. Moreover,
a) That as Piernas remained for supper at Poisot's that evening,
several talks were stirred up aimed at criticizing and contradicting
the attitude of the general government and the conduct of Deblanc and
Dortolans about the removal of Father Delvaux. They sang again several
times the same song.
b) That Piernas remained that evening at Poisot's both because it
was too late to leave and to see what were the intentions of Delvaux,
Poisot and other "Revenants," who passed the night playing, singing,
and drinking.
9. Moreover,
a) That on the next day the "Revenants" took breakfast at Poisot's,
played and sang several times some patriotic French songs and that
these songs had been composed at Nacogdoches. Besides they sang a
French song in which they call the general governor a little pig and
other vituperations.
b) That Piernas was invited by Poisot to take luncheon at his house.
He came back about twelve thirty; the table was set and some of the
Revenants were playing cards. He saw also Monginot, Laffite, Verdelet
and Capurant, who were singing several songs composed at Natchitoches
against Dertolans, Deblanc and his family, and against all the families
obedient to the Spanish government.
c) That when the dinner was over, Monginot took Piernas aside and
told him that it was not time any longer to dissimulate; that in France
there was no longer any nobility, charters or privileges; that he was
no longer any nobility, charters or privileges; that he was equal to
Piernas; that authority in the Republic and in Natchitoches was that of
the patriots and the best law possible.
d) That if Piernas did not deliver to Monginot all the petitions he
had made to the commander Deblanc against the latter about the theft of
a horse of his and insults and offenses in word and deed, Monginot
would kill him as the true "Revenants" were accustomed to do in
Natchitoches.
e. That as Piernas tried to persuade Monginot that no document
deposited in the Archives could be taken out nor could the commander
deliver them, Monginot sought to push him farther, and as Piernas
defended himself from the blows of the former, Juan Bautista
Larrenaudiere and Atanasio Poisot and two or three others came over to
the fight and separated them. Then Monginot offended Larrenaudiere who
remonstrated in behalf of Piernas, and asked what party he belonged to,
to the "Revenants" or to the knaves (picaros) who followed the opinion
of the Commander Deblanc. And as Larrenaudiere answered that his party
was that of the honest people, Monginot and the others understood that
he was faithful to the Spanish government and threatened him very
much.
10. Moreover,
a) That, after Piernas went to the village with Laffite and
Capurant, and these on the way down told Piernas that it was necessary
to deliver to Monginot the documents he asked to avoid worse
consequences. That Monginot would not hesitate to insult and even kill
him because they no longer feared to be punished by any authority
whatsoever at Natchitoches, since the only legitimate authority was
that of the people.
b) That the people of Natchitoches had already opened their eyes and
the veil of the monarchical ignorance had vanished with the example of
the mother-country, France.
11. Moreover,
a) That, to these criminal expressions, Piernas answered that they
should consider that the province belonged to Spain still and that
their hopes of a change of dominion did not have any foundation.
b) That, even after the war between France and Spain, Louisiana
could not belong to France because it was against the interest of a
Republic, however great and strong, to have possessions as far away
from the metropolis as in the case of Louisiana. That it was difficult
to be maintained even by monarchies whose government is stronger than
that of the Republics.
c) That the experience had proved that the efficient cause of the
decadence of the monarchies lay in the excessive expansion.
d) That to no one was Louisiana more useless than to France because
she had to give it up to Spain, being unable to take care of its
maintenance.
e) That Louisiana was situated between the internal provinces of New
Spain and the Anglo-American ones. Belonging to France, at the first
war this Republic might have with Spain or the Anglo-American states,
she would lose Louisiana forever because of the difficulties of
recovering it.
12. Moreover,
a) That Laffite and Capurant answered with foolish arguments all the
above considerations and stated that nothing would change their
mind.
b) That they went afterwards to the house of Francisco Rouguier, the
merchant. That Laffite, Capurant and Rouguier went to a room, while
Piernas remained in the living room with the women of the house.
Monginot arrived then and entered that room and stayed there for a good
while. Afterwards he left angrily and while passing by the living room
insulted Piernas a great deal.
c) That presently Capurant and Laffite called Piernas aside and
urged him to deliver the documents exacted by Monginot otherwise he
would be killed by the latter. Piernas refused. Next day Laffite
pressed Piernas again to deliver the documents. Otherwise he would be
killed and the "Revenants" would do the same with the commander Deblanc
and his family and other honest neighbors of Natchitoches.
d) That Piernas had to yield and went with Monginot and Laffite to
Deblanc's to solicit the documents in question and told him that there
were reasons for that request which he manifested later on to the
commander.
13. Moreover,
a) That on the same day Piernas slept in the house of the widow
Gaspar Fiole, where Father Delvaux, Jose Capuran, Laffite, Verdelet and
other "Revenants" had taken supper and sung several of the above
mentioned songs.
b) That then he went to bed and closed the door of his room. And as
he had paper and ink, he wrote down several couplets of those songs on
small bits of paper with the intention of sending them to the general
government. Unfortunately he lost those notes probably in the pocket
of a pair of long breeches he gave to wash in the house of the widow
Fiole.
14. Moreover,
a) That, having put out the light of his room, he remained listening
to the conversation of Delvaux and the other "Revenants" who were in
the next room and who passed the night without sleeping, now playing
cards and singing, now talking and drinking.
b) That Piernas understood that they had made up their mind not to
let Father Delvaux go down to New Orleans because they were furnished
with weapons and the government would not dare to proceed against them.
And when the news of the cession of Louisiana to France came, they
would carry out their vengeance against the Spanish Monarchy.
c) That, on the next day, Piernas took Father Delvaux aside and
tried to persuade Delvaux to go down to New Orleans immediately lest
his disobedience confirm the bad reputation the general government had
of him as the real cause of the disturbances of Nachitoches.
d) That Piernas sought to convince Delvaux that the best means to
get rid of the accusation was obedience and that he with his talent and
eloquence would be able to dissipate all the suspicions the government
could have against him.
15. Moreover,
a) That Delvaux reflected for a while and as Piernas saw that he was
wavering, he profited by this occasion to tell Delvaux that to be
welcome both by the Bishop who just arrived at New Orleans and by the
government, it would be rather wise if his friends of Natchitoches
wrote a letter of congratulation to the Bishop for the happy arrival
and a brief asking Delvaux for Pastor. That would be the way to
realize their wishes.
b) That Delvaux approved the ideas of Piernas and communicated them
to his partisans who were at the widow Fiole's. Most of them agreed
except two or three, but Piernas succeeded in convincing them and, to
make them confident, he offered himself to draw up the drafts of the
two letters to the Bishop, which he thinks they have sent because their
style was rather eloquent and precise.
16. Moreover,
a) That, next morning, Piernas left with Laffite for the "Arrollo de
las Piedras" and thence to Nacogdoches, where he met several people
from Natchitoches who had come down for the festivals of "Nuestra
Senora del Pilar de Saragoza" which lasted four days, from Oct. 11th in
the evening.
b) That, among the people from Natchitoches, were Capurant,
Verdelet, and Dominico Prudome. The latter committed many scandals,
meanwhile singing publicly many revolutionary French songs, including
that composed in Nacogdoches by Monginot, Laffite, Desessard and
Chabuse.
c) That at the end of the festivals, Piernas was at Xavier Padilla's
where he was living, when Prudome came in, disturbing everybody, and
began singing the last mentioned song. Then the commander Dortolans
entered the room of Piernas and Prudome came in also without ceasing to
sing, threatening in a couplet to cudgel Dortolans.
d) That Dortolans ordered Prudome to be quiet, but he did not obey
even when the former said that as his captain he could punish him. To
that Prudome answered that as some persons of Natchitoches had reduced
the commander Deblanc so he would do the same with Dortolans. Then
Dortolans stepped out cautiously and communicated the case to the
lieutenant governor of Nacogdoches, Bernardo Fernandez.
17. Moreover,
a) That then there were several persons present, but Piernas
remembers only Juan Bautista Larrenaudiere y Ramon Cordova, a neighbor
and militia-man of Nacogdoches.
b) That by the middle of December, 1795, he went back to
Natchitoches on the way to New Orleans and remained there about ten
days. Then he knew by public notoriety of many happenings that could
have been caused only by the "Revenants" who considered themselves
independent of any authority. He is going to send a detailed report
about that as well as about the criminal prisoners, Juan Archinard and
Luis Armant, whom Piernas brought down to New Orleans and who were
handed over to him by the commander of El Rapido.
c) Finally, that what he declared is the truth and that he is 41
years old. Signed by Vical, Jose Piernas and notarized by Carlos
Ximenes. To this is added the following document.
--------
1796 Jun. 21
DeBlanc, Luis Carlos
(Natchitoches)
DeBlanc, lieutenant of the army, Captain of chivalry of militia,
political and military commander of Natchitoches, certifies:
1. That Francisco Monginot, a surgeon of Natchitoches, appeared before
him accompanied by Pablo Marcolay, ensign of this Militia, Jose Maria
Armant, Pablo Bouet Laffite, Francisco La Case, Andres Verdalay, Gaspar
Fiole, and Francisco Calle, all neighbors and merchants of the post.
Jose Piernas, half-pay ensign of the Regiment of Louisiana, was also
present.
2. That Monginot said:
a) That it is true that he had been considerably disrespectful to
Jose Piernas as the latter states in his two communications of June
17th and 19th which are in the Archives of DeBlanc.
b) That, as to the horse demanded in the first letter, he is ready
to deliver him. He was arrested as a criminal by reason of this and he
confesses to be a criminal because he has committed all the
delinquencies he has been held responsible for.
c) That all the requests and entreaties he made before Jose Maria
Armant and Pablo Bouet Laffite, to Piernas to forgive and absolve him,
he repeats now before all those present, since he regrets and recants
all he said against the honor of Jose Piernas. Piernas then forgave
and absolved him.
3. Finally, that DeBlanc had the present drawn up in order that
Piernas might use it as he wished. Signed by Luis DeBlanc.
--------
1796 Mar. 31
Ximenes, Carlos
(New Orleans)
Ximenes certifies:
1. That the first sergeant of Nacogdoches in the kingdom of New Spain
appeared before Dr. Nicolas Maria Vidal and answered the questions
asked in the following way:
2. First Mora confirmed the statements of Piernas made above under
number 17.
3. Moreover,
a) That as the lieutenant governor of Nacogdoches knew of the ill
will of the "Revenants" towards the ensign Piernas, excited by the
comedian Desessard and Pablo Bouet Laffite, commander of the "Arroyo de
las Piedras," he ordered him to go to New Orleans through
Natchitoches.
b) That Mora was ordered to accompany Piernas and take with him the
parcel containing the proceedings carried out in Nacogdoches against
Dominico Prudome, so that in case that the "Revenants" attacked or
killed Piernas, they would not get hold of that process.
c) That Mora left Nacogdoches on the 25th of Nov. with Piernas of
the last year and arrived at the "Arroyo de las Piedras" on the 29th of
the same month.
d) That they went to the house of Laffite who insulted Piernas a
great deal in the name of the "Revenants," revealing himself as one of
them, and told him that he should be glad if the "Revenants" at
Natchitoches only cudgeled him since they knew that he was an
aristocrat and had cunningly caused Father Delvaux to go down to New
Orleans, thus depriving them of their head.
e) That Laffite added so many threats and was on the point of
jumping on Piernas so that the latter was obliged to get hold of a
rifle to defend himself, which checked the other's temper.
f) That Laffite broke out with injurious language against the
commander Luis DeBlanc who was cousin of Laffite's wife, against the
Captain Bernardo Dortolans, and against all the people of Natchitoches
who did not belong to the party of the "Revenants."
4. Moreover,
a) That Mora and Piernas left next day for Natchitoches and arrived
there on Dec. 9th of the last year.
b) That during their stay of 12 days at Natchitoches, they witnessed
several scandals caused by the "Revenants" who used to sing many French
revolutionary songs against the Spanish government, against the
commanders DeBlanc and Dortolans, against DeBlanc's family and all the
honest families of Natchitoches.
c) That even when they might meet DeBlanc on the street, they did
not refrain from singing and shouting. So that they scared the people
in such a way that after dark none of those faithful to the Spanish
government would dare go outdoors.
5, Moreover,
a) That there they knew through public information that in the
evening from Dec. 7th to Dec. 8th of last year, many of the most
important "Revenants" got together and, now in two divisions, now in
only one, ran during all the night through the streets of Natchitoches,
shouting most horribly and singing their favorite songs.
b) That when they passed the house of the commander, DeBlanc, they
shouted "Fire, fire," and scoffed at him because he did not have any
forces to detain them.
c) The next day, in the morning, the feast of the Immaculate
Conception, looking down on its celebration and on the idea that she
was the protectress of the Spanish kingdom, the "Revenants" got
together in the house of Francisco Rambin, their first victim. Their
head was, then, Luis Armant, who had a large red cockade on his hat and
a green ribbon on his neck. They drank white wine in excess and sang
their usual songs. When the bell of the church rang the last peal for
the high Mass, they galloped up the street shouting as usual, and
scaring the people.
d) That when they passed by the house of Jose Maria Armant, they
called him to see his son, Luis Armant, who had changed the Spanish
"toupee" for the cap of liberty; and then they went to the suburb of
Campte in the jurisdiction of Natchitoches.
6. Moreover,
a) That next day, the commander, DeBlanc went over there to conduct
the auction of the defunct Manuel Friche.
b) That Luis Armant was there in front of the other "Revenants,"
Prudome, the Meneres, Verdelet, etc., with the same red cockade and
green ribbon, and a cane in his hand.
c) That all lined up and entered the living room of the deceased,
slowly and seriously. When passing the commander each one greeted him
in a grave and ironical way. Then they sat down, except Luis Armant
who kept walking to and fro with the same serious, grave and insolent
aspect. And while he made with his body and the cane gestures of
domineering in the parlor, the others laughed now low, now loud, and
ridiculed in the most scandalous way the commander DeBlanc.
d) That in each recess of the auction the "Revenants" repeated the
same insolent ceremony and, once it was finished, they went to a
nearby house and ate and drank excessively, singing songs, mainly the
Parisian Hymn and the "Marseillaise."
7. Moreover,
a) That, during the stay of Mora and Piernas' at Natchitoches,
Joseph Mesiere who is now in this capital, Dominico Prudome, and
Antonio Bordelon caught by night the mentioned Juan O'Reilly, and
forced upon him intoxicating beverages, and mixing at the same time
brandy, without O'Reilly noticing it, in the coffee they gave him to
drink they got him so drunk that he could not even sit.
b) That when he was thus drunk they beat him up until blood ran from
his mouth and nose, as it appears more in detail in the trial carried
out at the post of El Rapido against Luis Armant, Juan Archinard, and
Pedro Charpentier, in which Mora was an assistant witness.
c) That when Mora was living in the house of the corporal Pedro
Ramis he heard Josine Mesieres speaking about the treatment that he and
his companions had inflicted on O'Reilly, and that the same Josine
forced Mora to take a drink.
8. Moreover,
a) That, at Natchitoches, all the "Revenants" disliked and insulted
in word and deed O'Reilly, who is Irish by birth, and all the other
Irish, Americans and English of that post, whom they also threatened to
kill because they had been faithful to the Spanish government since the
beginning of the revolutions at Natchitoches; and had offered
themselves to the commander DeBlanc to patrol against the
"Revenants."
b) That when they presented themselves to Antonio Argote, the
provisional commander of Natchitoches, to ask for justice against the
"Revenants," Argote did not want either to hear them or even to accept
their brief.
c) That this brief is the one Mora is presenting now, written in
English, and that by chance fell into his hands, having found it as the
cover of a bottle.
d) That during all the time Mora and Piernas were at Natchitoches,
they were invited often by some "Revenants" to take supper at their
houses. But they were warned both by the commander and other people
faithful to the Spanish government about the bad intentions of these
invitations. The "Revenants" desired both to kill them and get hold of
the documents they were taking to New Orleans.
9. Moreover,
a) That the "Revenants" have sworn among themselves to kill the
Captain Bernardo Dortolans when he gets back from Nacogdoches.
b) That Mora himself heard Dominico Prudome at Natchitoches and
others of his party threaten that they would kill Dortolans after his
return, even after many years had elapsed.
c) That the most insolent and daring Revenants of Natchitoches were
Pablo Bouet Laffite, commander of "El Arroyo de las Piedras," in Texas,
Jose Capurant, Francisco Monginot, a surgeon, the same who was arrested
in this capital because in scorn of the Spanish nobility he named his
dog "Aristocrat," Andres Verdelait, Atanasio Mesiere, Josime Mesiere,
Santiago Mesiere (brothers), Francisco Bousquier, Manuel Prudome,
Antonio Prudome, Dominico Prudome, (brothers and brothers-in-law of
Bousquier), Luis Armant, now in this royal prison, Bautista Anty,
Atanasio Poyzot, Juan Bautista Grape, Antonio Bordelon, Alexo Cloutier,
Remigion Lambre, ensign of the company of Bernardo Dortolans, and a
brother-in-law of Bousquier the merchant, and the three brothers
Prudome.
d) That it was Remigio Lambre whom Juan Archinard asked in a letter
to notify the "Revenants" of the arrival in the post El Rapido of
captain Antonio Argote and his forces, as it appears from the trial
carried out at El Rapido against Juan Archinard, Luis Armant, Pedro
Charpentier, Francisco Langlois Morlan, Louis Fontenau and Antonio
Sauterelle.
10. Moreover,
a) That the corporal Pedro Ramis of the Regiment of this military
department was also one of the "Revenants" and that at this house took
place the most important meetings of the "Revenants."
b) That as it appears from the trial carried out against Dominico
Prudome at Nacogdoches, the "Revenants" intended after burning the
commander DeBlanc and his family in their house, to put Ramis as
commander of Natchitoches.
c) That when Mora was living at Ramis's he asked his wife to advise
Ramis not to participate in those meetings because he could get into
further troubles, she got angry with him.
11. Moreover,
a) That at the time of the trial at El Rapido against Juan
Archinard, Luis Armant, and Pedro Charpentier, Luis Armant often
insulted the commander Valentin Layssard, and Juan Archinard, when
asked questions, turned his face aside and laughed, ridiculing the
judge, and he answered only after being asked three or four times and
in an insolent and arrogant way.
b) That when Archinard, Luis Armant, and the soldier of this
military department, Duminil, who came from Natchitoches under arrest
by Piernas, were in the jail of El Rapido, they used to sing
continuously revolutionary songs.
c) That Archinard used to say that he did not mind being in jail and
that he would be released as soon as he got to New Orleans because he
had important protection there.
d) That he would do the best he could to get the imprisonment of the
commander Valentin Layssard and that many persons at New Orleans would
help him to obtain it.
e) That, in the post of El Rapido, the commander Layssard delivered
Archinard and Armant to the ensign Piernas to bring them down to New
Orleans to the official tribunal as he did. Piernas was escorted by
Mora and six militia men.
f) That this is the truth and that the declarer is 44 years old.
Signed by Vidal, Jacinto Mora and notarized by Carlos Ximenes.
To this is added a note by Bishop Penalver, dated June 8, 1796,
certifying that the above copy was drawn up according to the original
proceedings he received from baron de Carondelet in his official letter
of June 2nd. Signed by the Bishop.
To this is added:
--------
1796 Jan. 16
Brief of the English inhabitants
to Antonio Argote, civil and military commander ofNatchitoches.
They state:
1. That having offered themselves to the commander and government as
soldiers without prize, their lives and goods are in the most imminent
danger from the repeated threats and insults received since then from
the "Revenants," but their scandalous songs threaten that they will
behead the English inhabitants before next Easter.
2. Moreover, that John O'Reilly, one of the petitioners, met some
evenings ago Josine Mesiere, Dominico Prudome, and Antonio Bordelon who
said they would accompany him home. A little later, they began singing
a song against the governor. Then O'Reilly told them not to sing so
ridiculous a song against a man of so good a character as the governor,
but that they should sing one more decent. They answered they would
sing what they pleased.
3. That, then, Prudome asked O'Reilly why he had made patrols and the
latter answered that he was ordered to by the commander. And as
O'Reilly had volunteered his services to the commander, Prudome asked
him to tell the commander to go to hell.
4. That immediately Jose Mesiere having thrown O'Reilly on the ground
by surprise, the other two attacked the latter with sticks, and would
have killed him but for the intervention of Pedro Hoofnagle and
Lepemme(?).
5. Finally, they beg the commander to take into consideration their
critical situation and protect them from the vengeance and imminent
danger from the "Revenants." They are obliged to ask for the
preservation of their lives. Signed by Miguel Duffy, Juan O'Reilly,
Santiago Reel, Noble Wilkin, Alexandro Doume(?), Duforet Menor,
Santiago Cochkran(?), Daniel Field, Guillermo McUlluch, Juan Ogelsbie,
Juan Mulreyn, Miguel Goldrick, Pedro Hoofnagle, Guillermo Itherland.
To this is added a note by Patricio Walsh, on June 8, 1796, certifying
that the above copy is according to the English original he translated
into Spanish by the Bishop's order. Signed by Patricio Walsh.
--------
1796 Jun. 20
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
to Don Luis de las Casas
(Havana)
1. The Bishop states: That in his official letter of Nov. 18, 1795,
he notified Las Casas that he was sending Father Juan Delvaux to Havana
to stay in the convent of St. Francis. However, now, he has made up
his mind to let Delvaux come to Pensacola immediately or stay there if
he wants to.
2. That he made that decision in agreement with Baron de Carondelet
who in his official letter of today gives to Las Casas, as the Bishop
does now, permission for Father Delvaux to pass to Pensacola if he
pleases. Signed by Luis Bishop of Louisiana.
--------
1796 Jun. 20
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
to Bishop Felipe Jose de Trespalacios
(Havana)
1. Bishop Penalver states" That in his official letter of Nov. 18,
1795, he notified de Trespalacios he was sending in the brigantine "El
Borja," Father Juan Delvaux to stay in the convent of St. Francis at
Havana.
2. That, now, he has resolved to let Father Delvaux pass to Pensacola
immediately or remain there, at his will. Signed by Luis Bishop of
Louisiana.
--------
1796 Jul. 13
Las Casas, Luis de, Governor of Cuba
(Havana)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
Las Casas states that he is thoroughly informed of the content of Bishop's letter and that, therefore, he will give Delvuax the necessary passport to pass to Pensacola if he wants to. Signed by Luis de las Casas.
--------
1796 Jul. 17
Delvaux, Father Juan
(Havana)
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
Delvaux states:
1. That he received the Bishop's letter in which the latter notifies
him that he is free to pass to Pensacola.
2. That he will do so as soon as it is possible. Moreover, that he
could not present himself yet to the Bishop de Trespalacios and the
Governor, Las Casas, to determine about his departure, because he is
sick with fever. Signed by Juan Delvaux.
--------
1796 Nov. 10
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(Natchitoches)
The Bishop decrees:
1. That concerning the motives because of which Father Juan Delvaux
was removed from this parish, there are some particulars in the answers
given by Luis Carlos Chamard and Jose Fauzin to the eighth question
asked of them in the secret tribunal of the same parish on the eighth
instant, concerning which
2. a testimony is to be drawn up and the results brought in to decide
what is suitable. Signed by the Bishop of Louisiana, and witnessed by
Isidro Quintero, secretary and notary public.
--------
1796 Nov. 10
Quintero, Isidro
(Natchitoches)
Quintero certifies: That Luis Carlos Chamard immediately appeared
before the Bishop, from whom Quintero received under oath about the
content of the points of the edict of public sins, the following:
1. That he never noticed in Father Delvuax either manners or facts
that may contribute to disturb the public peace. But on the contrary
he is very fond of good order and union of all the neighbors.
2. That he has heard only that Delvaux had influence in the disorders
that took place a short time ago in this post, but that he cannot
affirm whether he was the cause or what was the origin of those
dissensions. Moreover, that it was then publicly stated that Delvaux
participated in those disturbances.
3. That this is the truth and that he is 53 years old. Signed by the
Bishop, Luis Carlos Chamard, and notarized by Isidro Quintero.
Immediately Jose Fauzin appeared before the Bishop, and being asked
about the same points as above, he confirmed the statements of Chamard,
declaring in the same way. Moreover, he swore to the truth of his
declarations and that he is 42 years old. Signed by the Bishop and
Jose Fauzin and notarized by Isidro Quintero. To this is added a note
by Quintero, dated Nov. 10, 1796, certifying that the above copies are
true to the answers received. To this is added a decree by Bishop
Penalver y Cardenas ordering Luis Carlos Chamard and Jose Fauzin to
appear and answer what is suitable. Signed by the Bishop. To this is
added a note by Quintero certifying that the above decree was issued by
Bishop Penalver and signed on Nov. 10, 1796. To this is added a note
by Quintero certifying that on the same day he notified both Chamard
and Fauzin of the above decree.
--------
1796 Nov. 10
Quintero, Isidro
(Natchitoches)
Quintero certifies: That, on the same day, Jose Fauzin appeared
before the Bishop as he was ordered to by the above decree and being
asked:
1. Why is he inclined to believe that Father Delvaux participated in
the disorders of this post, he answered that at the time of the
representation made to the government in order that he might remain as
pastor, Fauzin saw Delvaux visit frequently those who ask that.
Moreover, it was publicly held that he was one of those who contributed
to the formation of some revolutionary songs, but that he cannot
confirm this.
2. What act of rebellion was seen in this post? He answered that they
used to ride on horseback in the evening, and shout aloud, as Santiago
and Josimo de Mesier, threatening those who were not their friends,
although he never understood them, being shut up in his house because
of an anonymous letter in which they threatened to kill him.
3. Has he heard expressions against the Spanish government, against
that of the Province that might indicate insubordination or that Father
Delvaux might concur thereto? He answered negatively but that Father
Delvaux was in the juntas of the "Revenants"; the ones who rode on
horseback and disturbed the people, mainly in the house of Athanasio
Poisot who called himself one of the most important.
4. Finally, Fauzin swore to the truth of his statements and that he is
42 years old. Signed by the Bishop, Jose Fauzin and notarized by
Quintero.
Immediately Carlos Luis Chamard appeared and asked certain questions,
he answered as follows:
1. That the disturbances that took place at Natchitoches, were the
maltreatment of Malige, Bossier and Rambin, and that the public rumor
was that Father Delvaux protected these dissensions but that he could
not find out because he was then at Pointe Coupee.
2. That there were suspected meetings at Atanasio Mesier's, which led
one to believe they plotted some revolution and that Delvaux was one of
those who went there, so that some concluded from this that he was
implicated. Moreover, that he cannot add anything, but that the one
who can do it more in detail is Bernardo Dortolans who has just been
seen in the Bishop's house.
3. That this is the truth and that he is 51 years old (above 53
years). Signed by the Bishop, L. Chamard, and notarized by Isidro
Quintero. To this is added a decree by Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
dated Nov. 11, 1796, at St. Francis of Natchitoches, ordering Bernardo
Dortolans to appear and testify. Signed by the Bishop and witnessed by
Isidro Quintero. To this is added a note by Quintero certifying that,
on the same day, he notified Bernardo Dortolans of the above
decree.
--------
1796 Nov. 11
Quintero, Isidro
(Natchitoches)
Quintero certifies: That, on the same day, Bernardo Dortolans
appeared before the Bishop and answered questions as follows:
1. That at the time of the disorders he was the second commander of
Natchitoches and he was governing the post in the absence of the first
commander. Then he received an order from Baron de Carondelet
concerning the rising of the Negroes at Pointe Coupee, which was to be
published. Moreover, he manifested the order to Father Delvaux, who
criticized the cowardice of the government in affirming that the colony
should pass right away to France.
2. That, later on, Father Delvaux was ordered down to the capital.
Then some friends of his tried to help him with a petition to the
government. That petition was supposed to be signed by the syndic
Bossier and by Dortolans. However, both refused to do it. The
petitioner sought to remove from his employment and proceeded in such a
way that Dortolans was obliged to arrest Atanasio Poisot, Remigio
Lambre, Francisco Fouguiere the young, Manuel and Antonio Prudome, whom
after eight days he wanted to set free, but they refused, saying they
had recurred to the government.
3. That he, later on, went to Nagodoches where he knew that Atanasio
Poisot, Josimo and Santiago Mesier, Francisco Monginot, Pablo Bouet
Lafitte had styled themselves "Revenants" and rode on horseback by day
and night and raised disturbances in the post, insulted the commander,
etc. Moreover, that he was not then in the post and that among the
disturbances there were songs in which they threatened those who might
not follow them.
4. That, during the riots, he heard that Father Delvaux used to visit
the "Revenants."
5. That this is the truth and that he is 47 years old. Signed by the
Bishop, Bernardo Dortolans, and notarized by Isidro Quintero. To this
is added a decree by Bishop Penalver y Cardenas, dated Nov. 11, 1796,
ordering Pedro Mais to appear since it has been manifested that he can
testify about the case and is now in the Curial house. Signed by the
Bishop and witnessed by Isidro Quintero. To this is added a note by
Quintero certifying that on the same day he notified Pedro Mais of the
above decree.
--------
1796 Nov. 11
Quintero, Isidro
(Natchitoches)
Quintero certifies: That Pedro Mais appeared immediately before the
Bishop and answered the questions asked as follows:
1. That he does not know whether Father Delvaux was the cause of the
tumults of the post, but he can assure them that when anybody refused
to sign the petition addressed to the government that he might remain
as pastor, he used to turn his back to them.
2. That Juan Bautista Dartigo told him that on the festive days of
September of that year, he went to the house of Captain Juan Bautista
Santana, situated in the post, and saw Father Delvaux sing and dance
the revolutionary songs of the "Revenants" around Josimo de Mesier,
which indicates that he was one of them. Moreover, that when Father
Delvaux was ordered down to New Orleans, he was regularly either in the
house of the "Revenants" or they were in the Curial house.
3. Finally, that this is the truth and that he is 39 years old.
Signed by the Bishop and P.J. Mais, and notarized by Isidro Quintero.
To this is added a decree by Bishop Penalver y Cardenas, dated Nov. 12,
1796, at Natchitoches, ordering Juan Bautista Dartigo and Juan Bautista
Alliot Santana to appear. Signed by the Bishop and witnessed by
Quintero certifying that, on the same day, he notified both Juan
Bautista Dartigo and Juan Bautista Alliot Santana of the above
decree.
--------
1796 Nov. 12
Quintero, Isidro
(Natchitoches)
Quintero certifies:
1. That Juan Bautista Dartigo appeared before the Bishop and answered
the questions asked as follows:
a) That it is true that he went to the house of Juan Bautista Alliot
Santana as Pedro Mais declared. There were Josimo de Mesier, Dominico
Prudome with a violin, Alexo Clautie, etc. Then he saw Father Delvaux
enter the house, dance seven or eight turns around Josime, holding in
his hands those of Antonio Prudome, and Luis Gabriel, and sing the song
of the "Revenants," while Dominico Prudome played his violin. When he
finished dancing, he greeted those who were dancing with him.
b) That he does not know for sure who is the author of that song,
but that the public rumor attributes it to Capurant, Monginot, Lafitte,
and Father Delvaux himself. However, some say that the author of the
first verses is Don Jose Piernas.
c) That he does not have this song with him.
d) Finally, that this is the t ruth, and that he is 30 years old.
Signed by the Bishop, J.B. Dartigaux, and notarized by Isidro
Quintero.
--------
1797 Jan. 9
Carondelet, Francisco Luis Hector, Baron de
(New Orleans)
to Dugenio Llaguno
(Spain?)
The Baron states:
1. a) That the seditious movements of the post of Natchitoches can be
considered as one circumstance among several others caused by the last
war between France and Spain.
b) That the garrison of the post consisting of one corporal and four
soldiers, could not then subject its population of about two thousand
people.
c) That it was not possible to send to the commander of the post a
sufficient number of troops to punish the guilty both because of the
shortage of troops in the province and the impossibility of going up
the Mississippi and Colorado rivers without gathering a number of small
boats which would have made their purpose liable to suspicion. d)
That, accordingly, to avoid a revolution throughout the province, he
had to have recourse to prudence to put out the fire without exposing
the authority and honor of the King's arms. This he succeeded in doing
so that those seditious movements remained unknown for months to the
rest of the inhabitants of the province.
2. a) That the causes of Natchitoches' disturbances were old
disagreements between the commander of the post, Don Luis de Blanc, and
the pastor, Don Juan Delvaux, who have kept the resentments despite an
apparent reconciliation.
b) That he was notified by the commander of Avoyelles in the
official documents no. 1, enclosed therewith, of the suspicious
behavior of Father Juan Delvaux when he was passing by that post.
c) That, accordingly, he made up his mind in agreement with Father
Patrick Walsh, Vicar-General, to remove Father Delvaux from the parish
of Natchitoches and replace him in that of Mobile.
3. a) That, accordingly, Carondelet and Father Walsh sent to Father
Delvaux on May 11, 1795, the official letter no. 2, enclosed
therewith.
b) That, by the middle of July, the Baron received the official
letter no. 3 from the Captain Don Bernardo Dortolans, provisional
commander of Natchitoches, in the absence of Don Luis de Blanc, in
which that commander states that, since July 7th, the inhabitants were
collecting signatures in favor of Father Delvaux. Moreover, that five
of them presented themselves before Dortolans and demanded in a haughty
manner the deposition of the syndic Francisco Bossier who opposed
signing the petition for Delvaux's stay, as appears from the document
no. 4; that, accordingly, Dortolans was obliged to arrest the five in
their own houses.
4. a) That almost at the same time the Baron received the above-
mentioned petition.
b) That he told the one who handed it to him that it belonged to the
Vice-Royal Patron and to the Bishop to assign the pastors in this
Province, and that they thought the removal of Father Delvaux
suitable.
c) That concerning the syndic-attorney, the commander Luis de Blanc,
whom the Baron ordered to return immediately to Natchitoches, would
take Carondelet's decision.
d) That the Baron sent the official letter no. 5 to restore order in
that post and set free the five who had been arrested, after being
admonished and censured for their audaciousness.
e) That on July 22nd, the above-mentioned commander wrote to Baron
de Carondelet from the post of Avoyelles as there appears from document
no. 6, that the post of Natchitoches was in disorder due to the
intrigues of Father Delvaux to keep himself in possession of that
parish, even though his successor, Father Pedro Pavie, had taken charge
of that parish since Aug. 2nd, as appears from his letter of Nov.
2nd.
5. a) That the same commander in his official letter No. 8 of Aug.
4th, after his arrival in Natchitoches, confirms the news and his
precautions to restore tranquillity.
b) That in his letter no. 9 of Oct. 2nd, he enumerates more in
detail the excesses and the means used by Father Delvaux to remain in
his parish.
c) That, accordingly, the Baron decided in agreement with Bishop
Penalver, who had just arrived from Havana, to send to that post a
capable officer to force Father Delvaux down to New Orleans, and carry
out judicial proceedings with the commander, de Blanc, to punish the
delinquents.
d) That the document no. 10 shows how the commander of Baton Rouge,
Captain Joseph Vasquez Bahamonde [Baamonde], appointed for this end,
should carry out the proceedings.
e) That as Captain Bahamonde received on Oct. 4th at his arrival in
the post of El Rapido the news that Father Delvaux had left the post of
Natchitoches, he made up his mind to return to Baton Rouge and wait for
new instructions, as it appears from document no. 11 of Oct. 21st.
6. a) that a few days later the Baron received an official letter
from the commander, Don Luis de Blanc, in which the latter enclosed
that of the Lieutenant, Bernardo Fernandez, commander of the post of
Nacogdoches.
b) That the commander, Fernandez, complains about the unbridled
behavior and total independence of several men from Natchitoches during
the feasts of the Titular of Nacogdoches. That they sang French
revolutionary songs and criticized the Spanish government, as appears
in document no. 12.
c) That the Baron, in view of these excesses did not want to adhere
to Commander de Blanc's desire to forget the past. But being informed
that the Commander Bahamonde is a relative to Commander de Blanc, he
substituted for Commander Bahamonde, Captain Argote, a very capable
person.
d) That the Baron provided Captain Argote in a secret way with
troops so that he might arrest and send to New Orleans the most
important supporters of the disturbances of Natchitoches.
e) That in order that the presence of Commander de Blanc did not
influence the truth of the declarations, Baron de Carondelet sent to
him an order, through Argote, to retire to Pointe Coupee, 100 leagues
from Natchitoches, while Argote's commission should be carried out, as
it appears in document no. 13.
f. That in order that Father Delvaux might not influence his
partners, the Baron asked the Bishop to remove Delvaux from the
Province to Havana, in the official letter no. 14 to which the Bishop
answered in his official letter no. 15.
7. a) That Captain Argote arrived without difficulty in Natchitoches
and easily arrested five of the main supporters of the disturbances as
appears from document no. 16.
b) That for want of a prison he took them to the house of the
Commander, Luis de Blanc. However, as he heard that the partisans of
those arrested were gathering, Argote set the five free to avoid any
turmoil, under the condition that they would present themselves at his
first suggestion.
c) That the subsequent official letter no. 17 proves, as the
preceding, that without preoccupying himself anymore with his
instruction (document no. 18), Argote devoted himself to appeasing the
post, in which he succeeded, at least apparently.
d) That the last official letter, no. 19, addressed by Argote from
Baton Rouge on March 8th to Carondelet, confirms the same point.
8. a) That Baron de Carondelet transferred Don Luis de Blanc to the
command of the post of Atakapas, as he had asked for another
destination due to the injuries suffered from the partisans of Father
Delvuax.
b) That he ordered Don Francisco Capuran and the surgeon Don Luis
Monginot, implicated by the disturbances, to get out of the post of
Natchitoches.
c) That he ordered the other eight most guilty to come down to new
orleans at his first discretion, and to make them understand that if
they were forgiven it was not for weakness or the impossibility of
punishing them.
d) Finally, that he ordered two more of the guilty to get away from
the Province, at the request of many of their relatives.
9. a) That Father Delvaux's case is still pending.
b) That it is evident that if a judicial trial had been carried out,
Father Delvaux would have obtained two thirds of the testimonies in his
favor.
c) That, however, the declarations of the commanders of three posts,
ratified by Antonio Argote, and the latter's opinion, are of an
insuperable weight.
d) That Bishop Penalver, who has returned from his visit to
Natchitoches and other posts of the western part of the Province, was
informed about the irregular behavior of Father Delvaux, who exceeded
himself to the point of singing revolutionary songs at the head of a
group of several drunkards. Accordingly, the Baron thinks that it is
just and necessary that Delvaux should not return to Louisiana but that
the Royal Mercy give him another destination.
10. Finally, the Baron hopes that the means used to check that
sedition will be approved by Llaguno, and will deserve the Royal
pleasure, the rule of all Carondelet's procedures. Signed by Baron de
Carondelet. (Photostat from L.C.). To this is added the set of
documents from no. 1 to no. 19. Document no. 1 includes:
a) A letter of Estevan Delamorandiere to Baron de Carondelet,
Avoyelles, Dec. 10, 1794 (summarized already in the set of documents by
Baron de Carondelet to Bishop Penalver).
b) Another letter of Estevan Delamorandiere to Baron de Carondelet,
Avoyelles, Dec. 23, 1794. Document no. 2 includes a short letter of
Carondelet to Father Delvaux, on May 11, 1795, ordering him to come to
New Orleans and to deliver the parish to Father Pedro Pavie. Document
no.3 is a letter of Bernardo Dortolans to Baron de Carondelet,
Natchitoches, July 1, 1795, (summarized by Carondelet in his official
letter to Eugenio Llaguno). Document no.4 is the letter of the syndic
Francisco Bossier to Bernardo Dortolans, Natchitoches, June 29, 1795
(summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 5 is the letter of Baron de
Carondelet to Commander Deblanc, New Orleans, July 23, 1795,
(summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 6 is a letter of the
commander Deblanc to Baron de Carondelet, Rapido, July 22, 1795,
(summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 7 is a letter of Father Pedro
Pavie to Baron de Carondelet), Natchitoches, Nov. 2, 1795, in which the
former notifies the latter to have taken possession of the parish of
Natchitoches since Aug. 2nd. If Pavie waited so long to write to
Carondelet, it was due to the sad circumstances of the post of
Natchitoches: disturbances and the church abandoned. Now the
inhabitants frequent the church more often. Document no. 8 is a letter
of Luis Deblanc to Baron de Carondelet, Natchitoches, Aug. 4, 1795
(summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 9 is a letter of Luis Deblanc
to Baron de Carondelet, Natchitoches, Oct. 2, 1795, (summarized by
Carondelet). Document no. 10 is a letter of Baron de Carondelet to
Joseph Vasquez Bahamonde [Baamonde], New Orleans, Sept. 16, 1795
(summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 11 is a set of documents
which make up the document no. 2 (except the two letters of Estevan
Delamorandiere above mentioned) in the set sent to Bishop Penalver
(already summarized). Document no. 12 includes the following
documents:
a) Letter of Luis DeBlanc to Baron de Carondelet, Natchitoches, Oct.
21, 1795.
b) Letter of Bernardo Fernandez to Luis DeBlanc, Nacogdoches, Oct.
23, 1795.
c) Letter of Luis de Blanc to Bernardo Fernandez, Natchitoches, Oct.
30, 1795.
d) Letter of Letter of Bernardo Fernandez to Luis DeBlanc,
Nacogdoches, Oct. 23, 1795.
e) Letter of Luis DeBlanc to Bernardo Fernandez, Natchitoches, Oct.
30, 1795, (summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 13 is a letter of
Baron de Carondelet to Antonio Argote, New Orleans, Nov. 28, 1795
(summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 14 is an official letter of
Baron de Carondelet to Bishop Penalver, New Orleans, , Nov. 2, 1795
(summarized already). Document no. 15 is Bishop Penalver's answer to
Carondelet, New Orleans, Nov. 3, 1795 (summarized already). Document
no. 16 is a letter of Antonio Argote to Baron de Carondelet,
Natchitoches, Jan. 16, 1796 (summarized by Carondelet). Document no.
17 is a letter of Antonio Argote to Baron de Carondelet, Natchitoches,
Jan. 17, 1796 (summarized by Carondelet). Document no. 18 is an
official letter of Baron de Carondelet, New Orleans, Nov. 26, 1795,
giving instructions for the judicial operations for the commissioned
officer who is supposed to go to Natchitoches to find out the true
motive of the disturbance of that post and their authors. Document no.
19 is a letter of Antonio Argote to Baron de Carondelet, Baton Rouge,
March 8, 1796, (summarized already in the set of documents sent to
Bishop Penalver). (Photostats from L.C.).
--------
1797 Jul. 1
Delvaux, Father Juan
(Havana)
to Juan Procopio Bassecourt, count of Santa Clara
Governor of Cuba
1. Delvaux begs the governor to let him know:
a) Why he has been arrested two years ago in New Orleans and then
sent to the island of Cuba, where he has been living in the convent of
the Franciscans in the quality of a prisoner since Dec. 6, 1795.
b) Why he has not been either heard or summoned before a judge,
without being granted the least assignation for his subsistence.
2. Delvaux states that after all that trouble and extra judicial
proceedings carried out against him without any respect for his
character and quality as a foreigner or for the regulations of
international law, he has been abandoned and altogether neglected,
having suffered the gravest damages with this exile and
imprisonment.
3. Finally Delvaux asks the Governor to take into consideration his
petition since he has fallen into the most extreme state of
abandonment. Signed by Juan Delvaux. (Photostat from L.C.) Three
notes are added to this document. Two are signed by Santa Clara. The
other signature is Joseph (?). (The notes are illegible). The
document has the Royal Seal.
--------
1797 Oct. 16
Lemos, Manuel Gayoso de
to Bishop Penalver y Cardenas
(New Orleans)
Gayoso states: That he has been notified by M. de la Sierra (?) that His Majesty was informed by the official letter of Dec. 23 of last year NS 66 and copies enclosed therewith, of the motives that led the governor of Louisiana and the Bishop to send Father Delvaux, pastor of Natchitoches, to be secluded in the convent of St. Francis at Havana, and that His Majesty approved of this. Signed by Gayoso de Lemos. (It seems that the copy was drawn up by the Bishop of Louisiana). To this is added:
--------
1798 (Jan. 2)
Penalver y Cardenas, Luis Bishop
(New Orleans)
The Bishop states:
1. That the "Prince of Peace" (Manuel Godoy), in the official letter
of July 16, 1797, notifies him that His Majesty has made up his mind
that Father Juan Delvaux is to leave immediately all the dominions of
Spain.
2. That the Bishop was informed of this Royal order by the official
letter of Manuel Gayoso de Lemos, dated Jan. 2, 1798. Signed by the
Bishop.
--------
1798 Jan. 23
Lemos, Manuel Gayoso de
(New Orleans)
to Conde de Santa Clara
(Havana)
Gayosos de Lemos states:
1. That, on July 16, 1796, the Prince of Peace (Principe de la Paz),
Manuel Godoy, communicated to him what he is not transcribing:
a) That in the letter of Jan. 9th of the present year addressed to
the ministry of Grace and Justice (Ministerio de Gracia y Justicia),
Gayoso de Lemos proved with documents the motives on account of which
he had to separate Father Juan Delvaux, pastor of Natchitoches, from
this Province.
b) That this letter was transmitted to Manuel Godoy's office by
Eugenio Llaguno, with papers of the eighth of this month and he
notified the King.
c) That, informed thoroughly, His Majesty determined that Father
Juan Delvaux must get out from all the domains of Spain.
d) That he notifies Gayosos De Lemos in order that he may send
Father Delvaux with the necessary reserve and precaution, to these
kingdoms (Spain) so that the King's order be completely fulfilled.
2. That, as Father Delvaux is in Havana now, Gayoso de Lemos notifies
the Count of Santa Clara in order that the Royal command be carried
out. Signed by Manuel Gayoso de Lemos. (Photostat from L.C.)
--------
1798 Jun. 26
Delvaux, Father Juan
(Havana)
to Conde de Santa Clara
(Havana)
1. Father Delvaux states:
a) That he has been, during three years, successfully removed,
exported, persecuted, arrested, without knowing the cause of such
procedures. Father Delvaux emphasized that he has never escaped the
justice, but rather never received it, as it appears from the instances
carried out by him before the Santa Clara tribunal to instruct himself
about the pretended crimes he has been held responsible for.
b) That he has never been given a direct answer and no accusation
has been communicated to him. However, he has heard about an order of
the King to arrest him again and drive him out. Whatever the nature of
this order may be, Father Delvaux is willing to abide by it, as
proceeding from the Sovereign whose laws he obeys, saving the appeals
these laws authorize.
c) That as a foreigner he might have lessened and eluded the present
persecution. However, as an honest man and a priest, he wanted to
advance his constancy and resignation to the utmost, and, as a citizen,
to prove his innocence in order that he might enter again his country
with honor.
2. Furthermore, Father Delvaux asks:
a) That the Royal Order as well as all the documents that may have
some connection with his arrest or exportation, should be communicated
in order that he may carry out the necessary procedures.
b) That the letter of Baron de Carondelet which he has deposited in
the secretaryship of the government should be delivered to him. This
document is Delvaux's property and is absolutely necessary.
c) That the Conde de Santa Clara as the just and humane head of a
generous and charitable nation should have some consideration for an
alien who by his state and behavior has deserved esteem and who,
because of a hatred the root of which should have been long ago
annihilated, lies extrajudicially in the most extreme state of
banishment. Moreover, Santa Clara is skilled enough to understand that
such procedures have been the effect of a blind passion and that he has
been falsely informed, which Delvaux obliges himself to prove
authentically with the only examination of the document he is now
asking.
3. Finally, Father Delvaux hopes that Santa Clara, desirous of helping
the unhappy, will give a quick hearing to this petition. Signed by
Juan Delvaux. (Photostat from L.C.) To this is added a note, dated
Jun. 27, 1798, certifying that the above translation is faithful to the
original. Signed by Bartholeme Crawford. To this is added another
note certifying that on June 28, 1798, the following degree was added
to the original of this process: The Royal Order concerns only Father
Delvaux's departure for Spain. The documents the latter asked are not
in this government, except the letter of Baron de Carondelet which is
delivered to him in order he may use it as he judges suitable. (This
note is not signed).
--------
1798 Jun. 28
Calvo, Nicolas
(Ingenio de la Nueva Holanda)
to Conde de Santa Clara
(Havana)
Calvo states that Conde de Santa Clara will receive through Don Juan Manuel del Pilar, Calvo's dependent, the equipage of Father Juan Delvaux, made up of the things referred to by the note enclosed therewith. Signed by Nicolas Calvo (Photostat from L.C.). The follows an inventory, dated as above, of the belongings Father Juan Delvaux left in the Ingenio de la Nueva Holanda.
--------
1798 Oct. 1
El Conde de Santa Clara
(Havana)
to Baron de Carondelet
(New Orleans)
Santa Clara states: That the French priest, Don Juan Delvaux, of whom Carondelet spoke in his letter of last Jan. 22nd, did not embark for Spain because he fled from the prison where he was. Signed by the Conde de Santa Clara: (Photostat from L.C.)
V-2-a (Composed of originals S., copies, and photostats.