After the semi-converted Apalaches rebelled, the Mexico City treasury brought the situado and gasto de indios up to date. Several years afterward, the Crown asked Treasurer Joseph de Prado to report on the causes of the 1647 rebellion and also on who received the king's alms to Indians and the sum the governor yearly spent on gifts and clothing for chiefs. Prado replied that annual expenditures on the Indians had risen from a low of 1875 pesos (1364 ducats) in 1615 to over 9000 pesos (6545 ducats) in 1650. The total expenditure for the gasto de indios over the four-year period from 1648 to 1651, the second half of Salazar's governorship, had been 15,587 ducats, he said, an average overdraft of some 2400 ducats a year above the original 1500-ducat ceiling. The peak year was 1650, when the gasto rose to 6744 ducats. There would be fewer "inconveniences," Prado said smoothly, if the treasury instead of the governor handled the gift account. From the aforementioned cedulas of 1593 and 1615 in the Florida archives, the treasurer concluded that the fund, originally meant for "the messengers" and "the infieles who render obedience," was instead being "given out to fieles and infieles comarcanos"-Christians and gentile neighbors- "as a supplement and a distribution." "I feel that this is not a proper expense to Your Majesty (unless it can be considered alms), except for the amount for food, which can no way be avoided if they are going to keep coming, particularly when they fall sick, and the same for those who come to dig the fields, who should on no account be deprived of the sustenance that they have always been given. "The most equitable way to handle it, I think, is that whenever a new governor arrives (for that is when they come to render obedience) AN126 there should be a general distribution of what is customarily given to all the caciques and principales, and if this is done without delay they should be well satisfied. Also, it is the custom to repair some tools for them at the forge of Your Majesty throughout the year. This, too, could be continued, being an expense of small importance" (Prado, 1654). (Bushnell SS)