Historical proof of the right of the Catholic King to the territory held to-day by the British King under the name of New Georgia

INTRODUCTION It is an undeniable fact that the New World was made known in the year 1492 by Don Christopher Columbus, who cannot be robbed of the glory of being first discoverer, under the protection, auspices, and patents, and at the expense of the Catholic Sovereigns, Don Fernando and Dona Isabel, of glorious memory; and that the voyages of the Norwegians, Danes, English, Swedes, Hollanders, Bretons and others were made after the Spaniards had spread the news of the discovery of the Western Indies. This basic fact should prove once and for all that all these domains legally belong to the Catholic King, for the same reasons which some Englishmen put forth in support of their claim to the Continent of Florida as far as 29°.

This claim they rest on the exploration made by Sebastian Cabot, the Venetian, son of John (to whom Henry VII, King of England, gave a patent on March 5, 1496, authorizing him to go and discover lands in the northern parts of the Western Indies), solely because, without having set foot on it, he came in sight of the land of Labrador in 67° 30' north latitude.1 Thus, if the English base their pretensions on that imaginary discovery of this region, although it took place as a matter of fact four years after the real discovery by Don Christopher Columbus, with how much greater reason and justice, on the same ground, should the Spaniards be owners of all, since they were the first explorers, and since Florida is mainland, joined to the kingdoms of New Spain.2 [Bolton note: The name New Spain (Nueva Espana) was applied especially to Mexico and the northern borderlands from Texas to California.]

CHAPTER I CONCISE ACCOUNT OF THE DISCOVERY OF FLORIDA BY THE SPANIARDS 1. Discovery by Juan Ponce de Leon:* [Arredondo note: * By Don Gabriel de Cardenas Cano, in his Ensayo Cronoldgicopara la Historia General de la Florida, Decada 1*. [folios 1-2, 5-6.] It is well known that Juan Ponce de Leon, having fitted out three ships at his own expense at the Port of San German in the Island of Boriquen, or Puerto Rico, where he had been governor, set sail on the third of March, 1512.

On the 27th, the Feast of the Resurrection, he sighted land. Partly on account of having discovered it on Easter Sunday (Pascua Florida) and partly because of the peaceful, pleasant, and beautiful appearance of its groves, he gave it the name of Florida. After running along the shore in search of a harbor he dropped anchor on the coast near the point now called Cape Florida, or Martyrs' Head.t [Arredondo note: t The southernmost point of the Continent of Florida, in 25° latitude, and the southern entrance to the Bahama Channel. It was inhabited by Tecmesta Indians, who received Juan Ponce in a warlike manner. These Indians were afterward visited by Pedro Menendez many times, and were won by him to the Catholic faith, from which in time they fell away, and to allegiance to the King of Spain, in which they have maintained and still do maintain themselves.]

Landing in the early part of April, on the eighth he took possession in the name of the King, to whom he reported the nature of the land he had examined, offering to colonize it within a year.

24. Peter Martyr de Angheria relates that "Cabot ran along the coast of the land of Baccalaos;" and it is to be remarked that entire credence must be given to this author, both because of his reputaton, erudition, and carefulness, and because when he was councillor of the Indies, or appointed to attend to their business, he was able to secure, at the time of writing his Decades, the most reliable information, since he dealt constantly with the discoverers, particularly with Cabot, with whom he was in very close communication. This resulted from the circumstance that the King of Spain, in the month of September, 1512, hearing from some cosmographers that there was a strait in the region of the land of Baccalaos, wrote to Lord Willoughby,* [Arredondo note * Cardenas, in his Introduction to the Ensayo Cronoldgico, parrafo 15°.] captain-general of England, to send Cabot to him, which he did at once, as though it mattered very little to Willoughby. On Cabot's arrival in Spain he was made captain, with his residence in Seville. For this reason it must be believed that Cabot, needing the patronage of Angheria to advance his fortunes, showed him the chart and the diary of his voyage.

Accordingly, his Majesty, taking into consideration Juan Ponce's merit as first discoverer, in the year 1513 granted him warrants and patents as Adelantado.

[Bolton note: It is generally agreed now that he [Ponce de Leon] set sail from San German on March 3, 1513, instead of 1512, although the old accounts give the earlier date.

2. Voyage of Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon*[Arredondo note*: Cardenas, Ensayo Cronoldgico, Decada 1*. [ff. 4-9.]: It is common knowledge that in the year 1520 Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon, judge of the Audiencia of Santo Domingo, having been driven by a storm to the coast of Florida, explored all those regions. He landed several times in different places, especially in the provinces of Chicora [Arredondo note t: Territory in which South Carolina, or Charleston, is now situated, in 33°, from which Lucas Vasquez carried away by trickery one hundred and thirty Indians, taking them to work in the mines of Santo Domingo, to the great indignation of Chief Datha and his people.] and Orista, to which district he gave the name of Santa Elena, 5. [Bolton note: Herrera attributes the naming of Santa Elena to one of Ayllon's pilots. He says: "The licentiate Aillon equipped three ships and with them reached the Point of Santa Elena, one hundred leagues to the north of Florida. There was a town there named Orizta, but the Spaniards called it Chicora, because they never could help distorting the words a little. Another place there named Guale they called Gualdape. In this region is the River Jordan, which was named by the pilot of a ship who discovered it, who also named the Point of Santa Elena, which was discovered on that Saint's day." (Herrera, Historic General, Dec. Ill, Lib. VII, pp. 241-242.)] on account of having discovered it on that saint's day.* [Arredondo note*: This is the place selected by Jean Ribaut for the first settlement made by him under the name of Carolina, in honor of Charles IX, King of France, which he afterward totally abandoned; and here, about a league within the mouth, in 32° 30', Pedro Menendez Marques established the settlement of Santa Elena and the presidio of San Felipe.] Afterward he went to Spain and claimed as a reward the right to conquer and settle Chicora, making a report on the country which he had examined from 32° to 37° north latitude, its situation and products, and the customs of the natives.

Having been repulsed by the same Indians in the year 1521,with loss of many of his Spaniards, Juan Ponce retired, mortally wounded, to the island of Cuba, where he died. In recognition of the services of the father, the elder of his two sons, Don Luis, was named as his successor in the office of Adelantado of Florida by the Emperor Charles V.4

The King granted him [Ayllon] the favors for which he asked in 1521.

[Ayllon] had founded his [FL] establishment, and was beginning peacefully to enjoy the fruits of his expedition; but, having put faith in the nattering but falsetalk of peace which the Indians made him, he was treacherously attacked by them one night with such fury that he was compelled to retreat, having lost a number of his men, to the island of Española, where he died in the year 1524. 6.

3. Voyage of Pamphilo Narvaez: [Arredondo note t Cardenas, Decada 2*. [ff. 9-20.] Pamphilo Narvaez having made a contract with the King of Spain to explore the country from Rio de las Palmas, [Arredondo note t In the province of Panuco.] as far as the eastern coast of Florida, and to settle it, an order was given to grant him the title of Adelantado of the entire district. In fulfillment of this agreement he sailed from San Lucar on June 17, 1527, with five ships, six hundred men, and some families.When he reached Florida he dropped anchor in the bay which he called Santa Cruz.* [Arredondo note* On the Gulf of Mexico, in latitude 29° 40'. It is the same bay which Don Tristan de Luna called Santa Maria in the subsequent year of 1558, and to which Don Andres de Pez, then admiral, added the appellation of Galvez, in honor of the Count of Galvez, who was Viceroy of Mexico when it was settled and fortified in the year 1693.]

On the fourth of April, 1528, Narvaez landed and in the name of the King took possession of the country with the greatest solemnity; but the hardships which he suffered were so great, and the hostilities which he experienced from the Indians were such that he had to abandon the enterprise. 7. [Bolton note: For a brief account of Narvaez's expedition, see Bolton, The Spanish Borderlands, 19-25; a longer account is in Lowery, Spanish Settlements within the present limits of the United States, 1615-1681, Bk II, Ch. III. Sec also Barcia, Ensayo Cronologico, 9-13, 19-20; Hodge and Lewis, Spanish Explorers in the Southern United States (1907); Bandelier, A. F., and Fanny, The Journey of Cabeta de Vaca (1905).]

4. Exploration by Hernando de Soto: [Arredondo note t By the Inca Garcilaso de la Vega [La Florida del Inca,passim.] It is common knowledge that Charles V entrusted to Hernando de Soto the conquest of Florida, giving him the titles of Adelantado and Marquis of an estate thirty leagues long and fifteen wide, in any part which he might designate of the country he should conquer, and granting him for the duration of his life the titles of governor and captain-general of both Florida and the island of Cuba at the same time. 8. [Bolton note: De Soto's patent was dated April 20, 1537.

Under these obligations he [De Soto] set out from San Lucar on April 6, 1538, with ten ships and 1950 men, with whom he reached Santiago de Cuba.

After taking possession of the government, and going to Havana to leave directions with his lieutenant-governor, Juan de Rojas, he [De Soto] set sail with his fleet on the twelfth of May, 1539.

On the first of June [1539] he [De Soto] reached a bay which he called Espiritu Santo,* [Arredondo note * On the Bay of Carlos in latitude 27° 45'.] and there on the second he took formal possession of Florida, with the greatest solemnity, in the name of Emperor Charles V. Going then into the interior, discovering towns, conquering and reducing armies of Indians, now by force and now by means of kind treatment and gifts, he passed through the provinces of Hirihigua,t [Arredondo note t So-called by Garcilaso de la Vega and by Guillermo de Lille.] Muscoso, Urrivarracuri, Acuera, Ocali, Ochile, Vitachuco, and Osachile, and reached that of Apalache. He explored this province completely, and then, leaving it, he continued his explorations to the north through the provinces of Altapaha, Chalquies, Cofa,* [Arredondo note * In 35° 40', the northernmost region traversed by Hernando de Soto.] Cofaqui, Cofachiqui, Guajule, Ychiaha, Coza, Juiala, Talapuz and Movilla.

From here [Movilla] he [De Soto] marched to the provinces of Chatas, Chicaza, Aiiilco, Casquin, Capha, Quiguate, Colima, Tule, Utiangue, Naguatex, Guacane, and Guachoya. There, on the twenty-seventh of June, 1542, De Soto died, leaving the office of governor and captain-general of the kingdom and provinces of Florida to Luis Moscoso de Alvarado, until such time as his Majesty should order otherwise. 9. [Bolton note: With very few exceptions these names of Indian towns are given in the exact order in which they occur in Garcilaso, La Florida del Inca. In a few cases the spelling is slightly different but identification is easy in every instance.]

When he [Narvaez] reached Florida he dropped anchor in the bay which he called Santa Cruz.* [Arredondo note* On the Gulf of Mexico, in latitude 29° 40'. It is the same bay which Don Tristan de Luna called Santa Maria in the subsequent year of 1558, and to which Don Andres de Pez, then admiral, added the appellation of Galvez, in honor of the Count of Galvez, who was Viceroy of Mexico when it was settled and fortified in the year 1693.]

5. In the year 1558 Don Luis de Velasco, Viceroy of New Spain, received an order from Philip II to send an expedition to settle Florida. Obeying the command, the viceroy prepared a fleet of thirteen ships, supplied with everything necessary. 10.

As captain-general of the fleet and of Florida he [Viceroy Velasco] named Don Tristan de Luna, who set out from Vera Cruz, and after one month's sailing arrived with his entire fleet. Dropping anchor in a harbor which he called Santa Maria, he landed. De Luna explored several provinces, until he reached Coza,t [Arredondo note t Where Hernando De Soto had been.] where he remained until for valid reasons the viceroy ordered him to retire with all his people, which he did in the year 1561. 11. [Bolton note: While awaiting new supplies from Mexico a thousand colonists went inland to Alabama River, and an exploring party penetrated farther north to Coosa. Returning with his colony to the coast, De Luna was replaced in the command by Villafafie. After an unsuccessful attempt to settle at Santa Elena the enterprise went to pieces in 1561. Lowery, Spanish Settlement* . . . 1513-1561, pp. 351-377; Barcia, Ensayo CronMgico, 32-41; Davila Padilla, Fray Augustm, Histoid de la Provincia de Santiago de Mexico (Brussels, 1625), 189 et seq.; Greenhow, Robert, The History of Florida, Louisiana, Texas, and California, etc., Vol. I (N. Y., 1856), 119-125, 357-362.]

2. The French Abandon the Settlement: t[Arredondo note t Nicolas de Fer.] During the absence of Jean, Albert Ribaut was violently murdered by his own men, who mutinied against him because he would not agree to abandon the country. On account of the delay of aid from France, the disasters suffered by them were so great that Nicolas Barri, who was chosen from among themselves in place of Albert, left the country, compelled by hardships. A large part of them died miserably during the voyage, and all would have perished had they not met an Englishman who conducted part of them to England and part to the shores of France. On his arrival there Ribaut found nothing but sedition, tumults, sacrilege, and misfortunes, occasioned by the Huguenots, who were so greatly afflicting and troubling that Christian kingdom that the Admiral, who was occupied with greater matters, could not come to the aid of Ribaut with the necessary supplies for a renewal of the undertaking, and that Ribaut could not continue what had been begun.

CHAPTER II CONCERNING THE CONQUEST AND SETTLEMENT OF FLORIDA BY THE SPANIARDS 1. Entrance of the French into the Territory of Florida: The pleasant and fertile nature of the country of Florida coming to his notice, the French admiral, Gaspar Coligny, head and protector of the heretics, moved by cupidity, gave patents to Jean Ribaut and sent him with two ships provided with food, munitions, and Huguenot soldiers to occupy the region. This was done in the name of his King, who was ignorant of the expedition, for it is not to be presumed that he would permit lands of the King of Spain to be usurped when the latter was aiding him, with Spanish and Italian troops and with his authority and money, to put down the heretics who were agitating and disquieting the kingdom of France. Leaving the port of Dieppe on the second of February, 1562, after a voyage of two months Ribaut came in sight of land in latitude 29°, a little more or less. Sailing along the coast to the north, he entered a river which he called May.* [Arredondo note * It is situated twelve leagues north of San Agustin, in 30° 26'. It was afterwards called San Juan, which is the name it now bears (St. Johns).] Being peaceably received by the Indians, he erected a column on which he affixed the arms of the King of France. From here he continued north, passing in and out of the sounds and rivers, t[Arredondo note t He gave to others the names of those of the realms of France, and the largest, which Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon had called Santa Elena forty-eight years before, he named Port Royal.] Finally he established a fort in the province of Orista, at the port of Santa Elena, in 32° 30', naming it Carolina, for his King, Charles IX, who was then reigning in France. Leaving twenty-six men, with Albert Ribaut as commander, with the rest he set sail for France, taking Rene Laudonniere, his second in command, intending to return with more soldiers and provisions, in order to explore the entire province of Chicora, which had been discovered and trodden so many years before by Lucas Vasquez de Ayllón, as has been seen in Chapter I, paragraph 2. 12.

6. Gaspar Coligny, being somewhat relieved of his pernicious tasks, and not dissuaded by the previous failure of Ribaut and his men, ordered Rene Laudonniere to renew the undertaking. With three ships, one of a hundred and twenty tons, a second of one hundred, and a third of sixty, respectively, he set sail from the port of Havre de Grace on April 22, 1564.

On reaching the River May, or San Juan, on the 20th of June [1564] he [Laudonniere] established a settlement at the Bluffs of San Mateo*[Arredondo note * Situated three leagues up the river, on the south bank, in 30° 26', and twelve leagues distant from San Agustin. [Bluffs here mean simply high banks.] and erected a post which he called Charlesfort, without any mention of the name of Carolina, as the previous establishment had been called. Being settled now at San Mateo, the Huguenots remained there without doing anything but to solicit trade and friendship with the Indians of the territory, and to attempt by gifts and flattery to get information as to where gold and silver might be obtained. 14. [Bolton note: Laudonniere had three hundred colonists. June 24 is the accepted date for the arrival at San Juan River. Fort Caroline (not Charlesfort) was erected on the bluffs or high banks of the river about nine miles east of Jacksonville. Visits were made by the Frenchmen to neighboring tribes; tales of treasure were followed; piratical expeditions were made against the Spaniards of the West Indies. Forced by mutiny and hard times, Laudonniere began to build a vessel in which to escape. At an opportune moment John Hawkins passed by and sold the Frenchmen a ship. Just as the French were preparing to leave, Ribaut appeared with reenforcements and bearing orders for Laudonniere's recall (Lowery, Spanish Settlements . . . 16621674, PP49-100; Barcia, Ensayo Cronoldgico, 45-46).]

7. At the same time [as Laudonniere’s 2nd venture] the King of Spain had given to Pedro Menendez de Aviles the title of Adelantado. With it went the same rights and privileges as those enjoyed by the adelantados of Castile, titles to twenty-five square leagues in the territory that might be discovered and settled, the rank of Marquis for himself and his heirs, and commissions as Governor and Captain-General of Florida and its provinces, with a salary of two thousand ducats and the title of General of the Armada of the Conquest of Florida. When he was ready to start, with the necessary outfit of soldiers, families, supplies and other equipment for the purpose, the news was received in Spain that the French Huguenots had established themselves there. 8. By order of the King five hundred men, ships of his royal fleet, artillery, munitions of war, and provisions, were immediately added to the men and supplies that Pedro Menendez had ready for his enterprise, and to those he was to take on at the islands of Puerto Rico, Santo Domingo, and Cuba, for which purpose his Majesty had sent orders in advance to their governors. Thereupon the King, in his Catholic zeal, and always attentive to the spread of the Holy Gospel in the Indies, first and principal object of his care, taking into consideration the pernicious results of a colony so opposed to this object, not to mention the flagrant usurpation of the right to lands previously discovered by his subjects in his royal name, ordered Menendez to go and dislodge the Calvinists from his royal domains. 9. Pedro Menendez set out from the Bay of Cadiz on June 29, 1565, with a fleet composed of thirty-four ships and 2,646 Spaniards, with Fathers of different Orders.

On the 28th of August he [Menendez] came in sight of the land of Florida, and on the 7th of September he entered a harbor to which he gave the name of San Agustin.*

On the 28th of August he [Menendez] came in sight of the land of Florida, and on the 7th of September he entered a harbor to which he gave the name of San Agustin.* [Arredondo note: * In 29° 50'. It has always been the residence of the governors and captains-general of the provinces of Florida subject to Spain.]

10. Pedro Menindez had already been informed that Charlesfort lay twelve leagues to the north of San Agustin, and that reinforcements, both ships and men, had been brought to the French by Jean Ribaut. 11. Upon learning this he called his officers to a council of war, and informed them how desirable it was to march without loss of time by land and attack the fort with fire and sword, in fulfillment of the orders of his Majesty. Considering the justice of his case and the unreasonableness with which the Calvinists, enemies of the Religion, were unlawfully settling on the dominions of the King of Spain, those invincible Spaniards, forgetful of their need of rest, with one accord agreed to make the march by land. 12. Extermination of the French:* [Arredondo note * Cardenas, from the memorial by Doctor Solls de Meras, which was found among his papers, of the marches, ccurrences, and conquest of Florida by the Adelantado Pedro Menendez de Aviles, his brother-in-law, whom he accompanied on the expedition.] The men necessary for the expedition having been named and provisions made ready, the plan was carried out so effectively that in four days the obstacles of the bad road and the rains had been overcome and the French fort sighted. Pedro Menindez urged on his men by his example, and executed with his sword what his voice commanded. They attacked with such fury that in a few hours the Spanish banners were raised and the Spaniards were in possession of Fort Charles or Charlesfort and of the settlement. The battle ceased because there was no one to resist, for they left not one Frenchman alive, excepting seventy persons, comprising women, children, and youths up to fifteen years, who were spared by command of General Menendez, and excepting also Rene,* [Arredondo note * Nicolas de Fer.] who with twenty-six of his men was able, by throwing himself from the wall, to seize one of the boats that were on the river, and return in it as a fugitive to France. 15. [Bolton note: September 4 he sailed north and attacked the French fleet at San Juan River;

On the 28th of August he [Menendez] came in sight of the land of Florida, and on the 7th of September he entered a harbor to which he gave the name of San Agustin.* [Arredondo note: * In 29° 50'. It has always been the residence of the governors and captains-general of the provinces of Florida subject to Spain.]

On the 8th [of September] he [Menendez] ordered a solemn Mass to be sung in honor of Our Lady, and repeated the act of possession of that continent in the name of the King, receiving the oath of fidelity from his captains and officers.

13. The French having been exterminated, Pedro Menendez changed the name of Castle Charlesfort to San Mateo, because he had captured it on that saint's day. After removing the arms of France and of Admiral Coligny and putting those of Spain in their place, he appointed Sergeant-major Gonzalo Villarruel as its commander. Then, leaving three hundred men and all the provisions that had been found there, he returned with the rest of the soldiers to San Agustin.

14. After selecting the judge and council, appointing his brother Bartolome Menendez as alcalde, marking out the fort that was to be constructed, and making all arrangements for the purpose, he despatched a ship to Spain to notify the king of all that had occurred up to that time.

15. He then put out to sea. Running along the coast in a southerly direction, he arrived at the river Ays* [Arredondo note * In the Bahama Channel.] fifteen leagues further south, in 27° 30'. Having collected all the Indians of the district, who received him in a friendly manner, he established there a settlement and a presidio which he called Santa Lucia. Leaving Captain Juan Vélez de Medrano with two hundred men, he went on to Havana to attend to the necessary arrangements for the continuation of the undertaking. [Bolton note: The Ays garrison left by Menendez was placed fifteen leagues south of San Agustin. But soon after the Adelantado left for Havana the Indians revolted and drove the colony twenty leagues further south, where they founded a new settlement called Santa Lucia, only to desert it shortly afterward.

On the 10th of February, 1566, he [Menendez] set out again [from Havana], with seven ships, soldiers, and provisions, for the purpose of returning to San Agustin. On the way he stopped at the province of Carlos. 17. [Bolton note: For the origin of the name Carlos, see Lowery, Florida, 231, and authorities cited by him in note 2.] Entering the bay of this name,t [Arredondo note t In the Gulf of Mexico, 26° 15'. The chief of this province had been for twenty years called Carlos, because he had learned from some Spaniards who were ship-wrecked in that vicinity that Carlos V was the greatest king in the world: and believed that by taking his name he would become his equal in majesty and power.] he contracted an alliance with the cacique and his people, leaving the minds of those Indians prepared to receive holy baptism and to become vassals of the king of Spain. This [baptism] they [Carlos Indians] did in the following year, for, on returning to this province he [Menendez] not only left in it two Jesuit fathers, with Francisco Reynoso and forty soldiers, but likewise in the neighboring provinces of Tocobaga and Tequesta he left thirty more in charge of captains, with a presidio in each one. 18. [Bolton note: The "alliance" formed with Carlos, chief of the Caloosas, was contracted by the marriage of Menendez with the chief's sister. She was taken to Havana to be educated.

16. Returning afterwards to San Agustin and San Mateo [3/20/1566], he [Menendez] took aboard more soldiers and went on to the provinces of Guale and Orista, where he was peaceably received by the Indians. Being persuaded by the Adelantado, they venerated the Holy Cross and accepted the Catholic faith. In imitation of them, the other tribes in the neighborhood did the same. Fifty leagues north of San Agustin the Adelantado took possession of Orista at the port of Santa Elena, in 32° 30'. On petition and prayer of the Indians, he ordered a presidio constructed which he called San Felipe,* [Arredondo note * Formerly Carolina, so-called by Ribaut and self-destroyed.] leaving Estevan de las Alas as governor of it and of the province, with one hundred and ten men, and with religious to teach the Christian doctrine. 19. [Bolton note: As interpreter and guide he took with him Rutin, the Frenchman whom Rojas had picked up at Port Royal. [Bolton note: On his way to Santa Elena, Menendez spent four days at Guale (St. Catherines Island) eighteen or twenty leagues south of Santa Elena (Port Royal). [Bolton note: Fort San Felipe was established on a small island, apparently Parris Island, near the site of the French Fort Caroline. The Spanish fort (San Felipe), with the aid of the natives, was completed in fifteen days, mounted with six pieces of artillery, and manned by 106 soldiers under Las Alas (Lowery, Florida, 244-248).

17. In June, 1566, General Sancho Arciniega *[Arredondo note * Cardenas, Decada 6*. [ff. 114-115.] arrived at San Agustin with seventeen ships, fifteen hundred men, priests, and families, and many arms and supplies which the king was sending as aid. He brought letters to the Adelantado Pedro Menendez, in which his Majesty approved of all that he had done, ordered him to continue, and expressed himself as well pleased by the punishment meted out to the French Huguenots who had attempted to establish themselves in his dominions without royal authority, in order to plant their false sect, inimical to all the service of God and his Majesty. 20. [Bolton note: In May, 1566, he [Arciniega] sailed for San Agustin, reaching there at the end of June (Lowery, Florida, 222, 223, 255; Connor, Pedro Menindez de Avilis, ch. 21).]

18. The conquest of Florida being in this state, Pedro Menéndez employed the rest of the year 1566 in exploring distant provinces and bringing the heathen to the worship of the Holy Cross and to allegiance to Spain. He examined rivers, ports, and bars, so that on the eastern coast, from the bay and the province of Carlos to Santa Elena in 32° 30', he won to adherence to the King all the provinces and villages of Indians and their inhabitants, made peace with them, and founded settlements of Spaniards at San Agustin, San Mateo, Santa Elena, Santa Lucia, Tequesta,* [Arredondo note * Now called Province of the Coast Indians.] Carlos, and Tocobaga, not to mention another which Juan Pardo had planted by his order at the foot of the mountains in the province of Chief Coava.t [Arredondo note t One hundred and fifty leagues to the north, in the interior.] All were under the charge of captains and officers of character, with a suitable number of troops and religious, who, by their activity, teaching the Indians the Christian doctrine and preaching the gospel, cast out the errors of heathenism, which was the fruit to which the piety of the King aspired. 21. [Bolton note: Menendez's activities during this period were strenuous indeed. Hoping to find a northern passage to Asia, he sent soldiers and friars to found a northern outpost on Chesapeake Bay (Bay of Santa Maria), but the enterprise fell through.

[Bolton note: Under orders from Menendez, Juan Pardo, in November, 1566, with twenty-five soldiers set out "to explore and conquer the interior country from there to Mexico." He crossed South Carolina to Cuiitachiqui, continued thence northwest to the mountains, built Fort Juan at Juada (Xualla, Coava), left Boyano in charge, turned east to the Guatari (Wateree) and returned to Santa Elena. Boyano waged war on the Indians of Chisca in northern Georgia. Then he explored southwest over De Soto's old trail to Chiaha, apparently on the western border of Georgia. Going by Juada, Pardo joined Boyano at Chiaha. One of his men went on the Coosa and returned with a report. Leaving garrisons at Chiaha, Cauchi (Chattahoochee), Juada, and Guatari, Pardo returned to Santa Elena. Within a short time all these interior garrisons were destroyed by the Indians (Lowery, Florida, 275-298; Ruidlaz, La Florida, II, 465-486).

20. Returning from Spain, the Adelantado repaired the ruin wrought by Gourgues and rebuilt San Mateo, placing in it, with the re-enforcements he had brought, a garrison of one hundred and fifty men, with all other equipment, and augmenting with a hundred and ninety-three men that of San Felipe in Santa Elena. He then went to Havana, and from there for a third time to Spain, whence he brought new succor. Continuing indefatigably in founding settlements and, above all, in spreading Christianity, he succeeded in placing several Fathers of the Society of Jesus and other priests in various places and provinces in the interior of the continent. 23. [Bolton note: While in Spain, Menéndez arranged for more Jesuit missionaries, headed by Father Juan Bautista de Segura. They arrived just after Gourgues lad left San Mateo a heap of ruins. Father Segura and his band operated for a year at Guale and Orista and then went to Virginia, where they were soon massacred.

19. Attack on the settlement and fort at San Mateo by Dominique de Gourgues: x [Arredondo note X Morery, at the word "Florida."] While the Adelantado Pedro Menendez was at the court of Spain seeking the means necessary to perfect the spiritual and temporal conquest of Florida, which he had left in such a forward state, the heretics of France, indignant alike because of the destruction which the Spaniards had wreaked upon Ribaut and his companions, and of the contempt with which their court received their complaints against Menendez, endeavored to influence the secretaries by hateful lies. Finally, Dominique de Gourgues, being aided in secret, and word being given out that he was returning to Brazil, fitted out three ships with two hundred soldiers, and in August, 1567, he set sail. Arriving at the coast of San Mateo, he landed fifteen leagues farther north, where he formed an alliance with Chief Saturriva, who was moved by greed for the gifts of Gourgues. With Saturriva's men incorporated with the Frenchmen, Gourgues fell suddenly upon the fort of San Mateo and the neighboring settlements and took possession of everything. The resistance of the surprised Spaniards was not suificient to withstand him, and most of them were killed in the defense. The rest, with the exception of Gonzalo Villaruel, fell victims to the ire of Gourgues, who barbarously ordered them to be hanged. He, with a very few of his men, opened a way to life and liberty through the enemy's ranks. Gourgues, fearing for this reason that the Spaniards would return and fall upon him, put his men on board as quickly as possible, and, steering for France, reached Rochelle on the 6th of June. He expected to receive great applause for his deed, and a corresponding reward from the court; but instead he was treated as a disturber of the peace, for without orders from the King he had insulted the allies of his Crown. So, far from receiving the recompense which he hoped for, he was compelled to live miserably hidden among the people of his sect, while the French officials earnestly searched for him in order to deliver him to the Spanish ambassador, in proof of the sincerity of the Most Christian King. 22.

21. Pedro Menendez Marques,* [Arredondo note * Cardenas, Decada 7*. [ff. 146-149.] nephew of the Adelantado, who in the absence of his uncle was governor of Florida, brought many Indians of the interior to obedience, taking possession of each province in the name of the King, particularly before Rodrigo Carrión, notary of the district of Santa Elena. 24. [Bolton note: Pedro Menendez Marques, nephew of the Adelantado, was appointed by him royal factor of the colony. Marqués left Spain with the portion of the fleet commanded by Estéban de Las Alas, in the capacity of Admiral. The fleet becoming separated during a storm, Marques reached Havana in command of three vessels. [Bolton note: In August [1567] he [Menendez Marques] went with Las Alas to Santa Elena. During Menendez's absence he was left in charge of the colony and was responsible for much of Menendez's success. [Bolton note: When, in 1572, Menendez departed from Florida for the last time Marques was left in charge of the colony.]

He [Menendez Marques] also went out to explore the coasts in the year 1573, for the purpose of marking out the ports, bays, rivers, bars, and shoals, so that by this means the Spaniards might be aided by the knowledge of the way to sail those seas. He started from Martyrs' Head in 25°, and sailed as far as the bay of Santa Maria, in 36° 30', keeping an itinerary and diary of his voyage. 25. [Bolton note: Santa Maria Bay, reached by Marques, was the Chesapeake. The report prepared by Marques was lost, and we have had access only to the fragment or summary given by Barcia. This author tells us that Marques had no cosmographer and consequently prepared no maps (Barcia, Ensayo Cronoldgico, 147148; Lowery, Florida, 381; Buidfaz, La Florida, II, 731; Connor, Menendez de Avilis, 246.)]

The Adelantado having gone to Spain a fourth time to assume by the order of the King other offices in his royal service, while he was engaged in their fulfillment, this distinguished man died at Santander on the 17th of December, 1574. 26. [Bolton note: Lowery gives the date as September 17, 1574. Florida, 383.]

The Adelantado having gone to Spain a fourth time to assume by the order of the King other offices in his royal service, while he was engaged in their fulfillment, this distinguished man died at Santander on the 17th of December, 1574. 26. [Bolton note: Lowery gives the date as September 17, 1574. Florida, 383.]

CHAPTER III CONCERNING THE FIRST ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ENGLISH ON THE CONTINENT OF FLORIDA By the year 1574 the Spaniards had been owners of Florida by right of first discovery since 1512, and by right of conquest and first occupation since 1565. For this reason the sovereigns of Spain were proprietary rulers, and were in possession from Cape Florida, or Martyrs' Head, in 25°, to Santa Elena in 32° 30', inclusive, with settlements, presidios and missions. For the same reason they were proprietors and in possession as far as Cape Henry, or the Bay of Santa Maria, in 36° 30', although they were without any colony, when Walter Raleigh came to occupy the province of Virginia,* [Arredondo note * In the year 1584. Walter Raleigh's History.] inhabited by Indians, by establishing a settlement. This was the first time that the English took possession on the Continent of Florida. They made a beginning of their establishment by changing the name of Viginia to Virginia, 27. perhaps because Elizabeth, the reigning queen of England, was unmarried. In the course of a few years they extended this colony to the south, dividing it into several seigniories, counties, and baronies, until its boundaries reached as far as the Spanish settlement of Santa Elena. 28. [Bolton note: In 1584, when Sir Humphrey Gilbert's plans for a colony in America failed, his patent was given to his half brother, Sir Walter Raleigh. Ami das Barlowe was sent to look for a site, and he selected Roanoke Island. He reported the name of the country to be "Wingandacoa," but Elizabeth suggested Virginia instead, and Virginia it became. [Bolton note: Arredondo here gets ahead of his story. He alludes to the founding of Carolina in the seventeenth century.]

2. Drake's Surprise Attack on San Juan de Pinos*[Arredondo note * Cardenas, Decada 8*. [ff. 161-163.]: Queen Elizabeth having declared herself the enemy of Spain two years afterward, by giving aid in soldiers and money to the Flemish rebels, sent to the West Indies Count Christopher Carlisle and Francis Drake, with a fleet of twenty-one ships and a landing-force of 2,300 men. After burning and sacking Santo Domingo, Cartagena, and Santiago de Cuba, undefended places, in the year 1586 on his way back to Europe he did the same by a surprise attack at San Juan de Pinos, a presidio of fourteen cannon, not yet finished, situated six leagues to the south of San Agustin. This town and its fortress in turn experienced the same destruction at his hands, because the Spaniards, having been told of the superiority of the enemy forces, had retreated to San Mateo, in order to be able, by uniting with the troops there, to repulse their opponents. The latter, learning of this move, again embarked and attempted to go to Santa Elena in order to attack it, but were compelled by a storm to go to Virginia. There they found the English in the settlement recently established by Walter Raleigh perishing of hunger and want, which forced Ralph Lane, its governor, to embark with his men on Drake's ship and abandon the country. 29. Consequently the British occupation of it then came to an end. When the Spanish governor learned that the Count and Drake had contented themselves with the damage done to San Juan de Pinos and San Agustin and had entirely abandoned those coasts, he returned by land with all his soldiers and families and began to reconstruct the fort, which he finished completely with the aid of supplies sent to him from Havana.* [Arredondo note * Cardenas, Década 8*. [f. 163.]

During the next twenty years [after Drake’s raid] the Spaniards continued to develop their settlements and to pacify some tribes of Indian vassals. The Indians, with no other cause than their natural weakness and fickleness, from time to time revolted. 30. [Bolton note: For a sketch of Guale during these years, see Introduction, pp. 15-19.]

3. The English return a second time to Virginia and establish themselves: …On the part of the English there was no event or movement until the year 1606, when Christopher Newport was sent over by Bartholomew Gosnold, who, in company with John Smith and other merchants of London, had supplied him with everything necessary. After several storms which caused him incredible hardships he reached Virginia. Arriving at Cape Henry or Santa Maria, he landed against the wishes of the Indians, who compelled him to fortify quickly, in order to defend himself from their furious attack. Finally, entering Powhatan River, now called the James, he founded on the spot that seemed best to him the city of this name, in honor of James I, the reigning monarch. [Bolton note: In the Indian attack there two men were badly wounded (Fiske, Old Virginia and her Neighbors, I, 56-95).

4. Patent of James I, ceding the lands included between 84° and 41°:*[Arredondo note * Cardenas, Decada 10". [f. 177.] As a result of this event [Jamestown founded], James I, who granted what did not belong to him, made no difficulty in yielding to the petitions of Gosnold and his companions to have the company confirmed. He therefore gave his royal approbation, t[Arredondo note t The year 1607.] with permission for all the families of the interested parties to go to the new settlement of Virginia, under the conditions that he chose to impose, and granted to the company the mainland and islands situated between 34° and 41° of latitude, as though they were his own, issuing a royal decree for this purpose. 31. [Bolton note: The first patent to the London Company was granted before the Newport expedition sailed. Arredondo gives Gosnold undue prominence in the case.

The English also advanced their colonies toward the south from Jamestown, or the city of James, with all the Puritans who had fled England,t[Arredondo note t History of England, by Rapin, under the reign of James I, 1608] persecuted by Archbishop Bancroft, who wished to compel them to live in conformity with the rites of the Anglican Church. [Bolton note: Virginians early pushed south to trade with the Indians.

5. In the meantime the Spanish settlements spread from 32° 30' toward the south, and toward the west as far as Apalache, Apalachicolo, Cassita, Caueta, and neighboring provinces, with so much spiritual fruit among the Indians that in the general chapter which the Franciscan Order held in Rome in the year 1612 it was considered necessary to erect Florida into a province. To this the assembly agreed, naming it Santa Elena,* [Arredondo note * The organization which exists at the present time, preserving to this province the same title.] in honor of the settlement there of which this saint was titular advocate and patroness. The Convent of Havana was established as the head of this province. 32. [Bolton note: For Spanish expansion into Apalache, Apalachicola, Caveta, etc., see pp. 45-68. At this point Arredondo gets chronologically ahead of his story.]

But in the year 1626 Charles I for his just reasons annulled the company and, depriving it of the rights granted to it, added Virginia to his crown, appointing governors and judges to rule in his royal name. 33. [Bolton note: The Virginia charter was annulled in 1624, not in 1626.] [Bolton note: Richard Bancroft (1544-1610) became bishop of London in 1597 and Archbishop of Canterbury in November, 1604. He took a prominent part in the famous conference of prelates and Presbyterian divines held at Hampton Court in 1604. He urged in vain the enforcement of the ancient canon "that schismatics are not to be heard against bishops." Lord Clarendon said that "if Bancroft had lived, he would quickly have extinguished all that fire in England which had been kindled at Geneva." He was as lenient with the orthodox as he was harsh with nonconformers.

Its [NC] governor, being faithful to Charles II, the legitimate successor, did not wish to yield obedience to the Republic or to Oliver Cromwell, who, in the character of Protector of the three kingdoms, was ruling it in the interregnum. Therefore, Parliament was obliged to send Hiriviscon with a fleet in the year 1651 to subdue him; and to send George Ascough 35 in the following year with another of fifteen ships and two thousand infantrymen to subjugate Virginia and the rest of terra firma populated by the English;* [Arredondo note * Whitelock the author.] and to remove the governors belonging to the party of the king and appoint others of its own faction. This was easily accomplished, for the prosperity of their commerce had made them careless about fortifying themselves.

6. The year in which the English settled their North Carolina cannot be positively fixed, for this information is lacking in such papers and books as are to be found in this city [Havana]. But its establishment must have occurred in the reign of the Most Serene King Charles I, and consequently before the year 1649, in which his Majesty lamentably died. 34. [Bolton note: The first definite settlement in North Carolina recorded was made by colonists from Virginia in 1653 at Albemarle, on Chowan River.]

7. Great numbers of British subjects were attracted by reports of the advantages promised by the country. Consequently this province was extended southward as far as 33°, and was divided into North and South Carolina in the year 1665, when the latter was founded*[Arredondo note * Nicolas de Fer, in his Descripciin Geographica de la America.] under the name of South Carolina. 36. 8. However this may be, it does not take away from or add to our contention. Since South Carolina 37. [Bolton note: That is, Charleston is near 33°. Arredondo uses the names Charleston and South Carolina interchangeably.] is in 33° and San Felipe in Santa Elena is in 32° 30', the point of the argument and of this work is not contradicted by the fact that the English may have founded the two Carolinas mentioned a year sooner or later. For in any case it is proved that the country from 36° 30', inclusive, in which Cape Santa Maria is situated, to Santa Elena, in 32° 30', was usurped by the English, notwithstanding that it was not yet settled by the Spaniards, for the reason that Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon and Pedro Menendez Marques had explored it as far as the aforesaid latitude of Santa Maria, and that in the year 1573 the latter wrote a diary and itinerary of its coasts, which no other nation whatsoever reached until eleven years afterward, when Walter Raleigh settled it under the name of Virginia, as has been seen in Chapter III, paragraph 1. [Bolton note: It was in 1663 that the first Carolina patent was granted to eight proprietors (Cooper, Clarendon, Craven, Albemarle, Carteret, Lord Berkeley, Colleton, and Sir William Berkeley). Their grant embraced the area between 36° and 31°. Two years later the grant was extended on the north to 36°-30' and on the south to 29°. Charleston, for some time the southernmost settlement, is near 33°. The Carolinas were not technically separated till 1713, when each was given a governor. However, they had been practically distinct settlements from the first.]

CHAPTER VI CONCERNING THE BEGINNINGS OF THE ENGLISH OCCUPATION OF THE COUNTRY OF GUALE; THE COMPLAINTS OF THE GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA TO THE GOVERNOR OF CAROLINA AND OF THE COURT OF SPAIN TO THAT OF LONDON; THE RESULTS OBTAINED IN THE MATTER; AND THE FULL PROOF OF THE USURPATION 1. By the series of events and of undeniable proofs concisely deduced and set forth up to here it is shown that Great Britain never has had the right to possess the country lying south of Charleston; and that it has always belonged, and now belongs, to the crown of Spain; likewise, that if article 7 of the treaty of 1670, which Spain has observed with all strictness, had not intervened, England would have had no claim even to the region included between Charleston and Cape Henry.

CHAPTER IV CONCERNING THE TREATY OF PEACE MADE IN 1670 BETWEEN THE TWO COURTS OF SPAIN AND GREAT BRITAIN 1. At the cost of much Christian blood and of vast expense and labor, the Spaniards were in possession, as has been seen in the preceding chapters, of the country included between Santa Elena in north latitude 32° 30', and 25°, where the Continent of Florida terminates on the east. 39. [Bolton note: This is essentially correct for the southeastern terminus of the Florida Peninsula.] They had settlements and missions on nearly all the islands and mainland of the coast, and in the interior in the provinces of Guale, Coava, Crista, Timucua, Santa Fe, San Martfn, San Pedro, Azile, Vitachuco, Apalache, Caueta, Apalachicolo, Talapuses, and others; 40. [Bolton note: Arredondo probably refers to Pardo's garrison at Coava (Jualla) and to the settlements made in the sixteenth century by Pardo and De Luna among the Talapoosas. At all the other places mentioned there were seventeenth century settlements.] while the English were undoubtedly owners from the cape and bay of Santa Maria as far as South Carolina, or South Charleston. Then the Most Serene and Powerful Charles II, King of Great Britain, and the Most Serene and Powerful Carlos II, Catholic King of Spain, solemnly concluded a treaty and amicable agreement for the purpose of restoring and establishing peace in the Western Indies and renewing the friendly intercourse which had been interrupted by various and mutual injuries and depredations which had occurred. 41. [Bolton note: This treaty was concluded July 18,1670. It was negotiated by Gaspar de Bracamonte y Guzman, Count of Penaranda, representing Spain, and Sir William Godolphin, representing Great Britain. One of the purposes of the treaty was to clarify certain provisions of the treaty of 1667. By this treaty of 1670 Spain for the first time recognized England's right to her colonies in the Caribbean and on the American mainland. Chalmers, A Collection of Treaties (London, 1790), II, 35; Calvo, Colecci&n Complete de Tratados (Paris, 1862), I, 162.] 2. By Article 7 of this treaty it was agreed that all the offenses,* [Arredondo note * Treaty of Madrid of 1670, Article 7.] losses, damages, and injuries which the Spanish and English nations had committed against each other in America in times past, for whatever cause or pretext, should be completely forgotten and erased from memory, as though they had never happened. Moreover, it was agreed that the Most Serene King of Great Britain, and his heirs and successors, should hold forever in plenary right of sovereignty, dominion and possession "all the lands, regions, islands, colonies, and dominions in the Western Indies or in any part of America which the said King of Great Britain and his subjects hold and possess at present, so that under this name or title, or under pretext of any other claim, there cannot be, and ought never to be, any force used or any controversy started in the future.” 42. [Bolton note: The English text of this article reads: "All offences, damages, losses, injuries, which the nations and people of Great Britain and Spain have at any time heretofore, upon what cause or pretext soever, suffered by each other in America, shall be expunged out of remembrance, and buried in oblivion, as if no such thing had ever past. "Moreover it is agreed that the most Serene King of Great Britain, his heirs and successors, shall have, hold, keep, and enjoy forever, with plenary right of sovereignty, dominion, possession, and propriety, all those lands, regions, islands, colonies, and places whatsoever, being or situated in the West Indies, or in any part of America, which the said King of Great Britain and his subjects do at present hold and possess; so as that in regard thereof, or upon any colour or pretence whatsoever, nothing more may or ought to be urged, nor any question or controversy be ever moved concerning the same thereafter." George Chalmers, A Collection of Treaties, II, 37.] 3. This clearly implies that the English are and will be owners of all the lands which they possessed and held at the time when the treaty was signed, and that they are not and cannot be owners of what they did not hold or possess at that time. And although in the year 1670 they only held and possessed the territory as far as South Charleston, on the east coast of Florida, it follows that up to this place they ought legally to hold and possess, and no contention should be made against them. 4. But it is asked for what purpose was the agreement made by this solemn treaty between the two contracting crowns, which is contained in Article 7? For if the English were legal owners the statement was naturally idle. From such an act one truly infers a total lack of confidence on the part of the British court. For it plainly concedes to the court of Spain absolute dominion over all the Western Indies, by consenting, as it did consent, to an article expressed in terms so plainly in favor of the right of the Catholic King. It admits directly that as he was lord over everything it was absolutely necessary that he should legalize the British possession, and that he should declare and proclaim in the treaty that the Most Serene King of Great Britain and his heirs and successors should possess and hold perpetually, with plenary right of sovereignty, dominion, and possession, all the lands, etc. This is the same as saying that without this safeguard, whenever the King of Spain wished he could dispossess the English, which is the same as to confess their lack of sound titles of possession, and to recognize positively that only his Catholic Majesty, as supreme owner, could grant them. 5. Is it possible to believe that the court of London, if it did not know that the complete sovereignty of the Western Indies belonged truly and legally to the monarchs of Spain, would admit it by ratifying such a formal act in prejudice of its own right, or that the court of Spain would appropriate that which did not justly belong to it? Neither the one nor the other assumption is reasonable, especially since the King of Great Britain sent as ambassador extraordinary for this purpose, with full power to conclude the treaty, Lord William Godolphin, member of Parliament and a man most fit and worthy of such a charge, while on the part of Spain Don Gaspar de Bracamonte y Guzman, Count of Peñaranda, member of the Council of State and of the Indies was sent, because of the combination in his person of the qualities of great ability and judgment; hence it cannot be presumed that through omission, lack of intelligence or any other defect, such wise ministers would agree to an article that would be repugnant to the honor and right of either power.

CHAPTER V CONCERNING WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SPANIARDS IN THEIR DOMINIONS ON THE CONTINENT OF FLORIDA AFTER THE TREATY OF 1670, CAUSING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE SETTLEMENTS SITUATED NORTH OF SAN Agustin, THE ACCOUNT OF WHICH PROVES WHAT POSSESSIONS THEY HELD IN THAT YEAR. 43. [Bolton note: For a fuller sketch of English encroachments on the Spanish establishments in Guale (the Georgia coast) after 1680, see Introduction, Ch. III. Arredondo's account is essentially sound, but he does not make the order of events exactly clear at all points.]

13. It must also be noted that the granting of patent, rents, and seigniory by his British Majesty to Captain Henry N. and his companions was because he had been informed that those lands were inhabited by savages and were yet to be explored, as is proved by the context of the patent itself, for it expressly says that the King, his master, granted rents and seigniories to the said captain and the settlers accompanying him in recompense of the service which they were performing for his crown by exploring those lands inhabited by savages. The grant must therefore be regarded as null and void, for it is clearly to be inferred that the intention of the Most Serene King Charles II of England was to discover and settle them, which is the same as saying that his Majesty supposed them to be unknown to any nation, and without an owner, and that if his vassals had informed him of the facts he would not in justice knowingly have executed such a patent or have granted seigniories in domains that belonged to the crown of Spain. On the contrary, it is not to be doubted that he would have ordered Captain Henry and his companions to be severely chastised as offenders, for the daring crime of making their own prince an accomplice in the usurpation, and as violators of the peace and good understanding that existed between the two crowns. In view of this, it is not strange that the King and Parliament of Great Britain should allege that they had granted to their subjects patents to explore and settle that country, inhabited, according to their belief, by savages; nor that the King of Spain should claim this region under discussion on the ground of his undeniable right to it. In a word, the order or patent of the King of Great Britain was for the purpose of discovering and adding to his crown, lands inhabited by savages; and Parliament considers the expedition in the terms of the patent, on which it founds the dispute over its possession. And since it is proved that Captain Henry established himself in regions that belonged to the Catholic King and were settled by his subjects, and that the reports upon which the patent was issued were false, then it cannot be doubted that as soon as the King and Parliament are shown that they have misunderstood the true state of affairs they will desist from the claim, because their intention is just.

CHAPTER V CONCERNING WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SPANIARDS IN THEIR DOMINIONS ON THE CONTINENT OF FLORIDA AFTER THE TREATY OF 1670, CAUSING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE SETTLEMENTS SITUATED NORTH OF SAN Agustin, THE ACCOUNT OF WHICH PROVES WHAT POSSESSIONS THEY HELD IN THAT YEAR." 1. Uprising of the Indians:* [Arredondo note * Cardenas, Decada 18*.] In 1680 the provinces of Spanish Florida, which, by virtue of the treaty of 1670 will be so-called, to distinguish it from English Florida, 44. [Bolton note: Meaning Carolina, Virginia, etc.] were governed by Don Juan Marques Cabrera. At that time some Indians from the settlements of San Felipe in Santa Elena, San Simón in Guale, Santa Catharina, Sapala, Gualquini, and Vejezes, 45. began to show signs of discontent with Spanish rule and a lack of respect for their superiors, being incited by the English of South Carolina, from whose proximity nothing else could be expected, as will be seen. For, despising the counsels of the missionary instructors, and stubborn in their disaffection, little by little they became rebellious. On the false pretext that the governor mentioned had proposed to move them to the islands of Santa Maria, San Juan, and Santa Cruz, a plan to which they were opposed, some of them went over to the provinces of the English. 46. [Bolton note: The reference here is to Cabrera's efforts in 1684-5 to remove the Indians southward. Santa Maria, San Juan, and Santa Cruz mentioned in this paragraph, correspond today to Amelia Island, Talbot Island, and the coastland to the southward. See Introduction, pp. 39-41.] This act justifies the well founded uneasiness of the Spaniards at the proximity of that nation. For if it were true that the Indians loved their habitations so much that they did not like to leave them, the same reason would exist to keep them from going to that of the English, and there would be no reason after their desertion to commit the many hostilities which they perpetrated against the Spaniards, and against Indians, their allies of Santa Elena, and which compelled the governor, in order to prevent them, to abandon this settlement in the year 1686. 47.

7. Even if all the proofs given in regard to Spanish possession of the country in question after the year 1670 might not be suificient, it is very clearly established by the contents of this report made in 1724 [Newcastle 12/18/24], for, by deducting the forty years during which the English of Carolina had traded with the Indians of that region, the beginning of their commerce would be in 1684, or fourteen years after the Treaty of 1670, which is precisely the time when those Indian vassals of Spain began to revolt and to attach themselves to the British, from which arose all the troubles that have been related on this point.

2. It afterwards happened that the chief of the Christian Catholic Yamazes, a resident of the province of Guale, taking offense without cause at the Spanish governor,* [Arredondo note * Cardenas, Decada 10*.] went over with his people to allegiance to the English of Carolina, failing in that to the King. Not content with this grievous act of bad faith, he declared war upon the province of Timucua, one of those loyal to Spain, sacked and burned the mission and town of Santa Catharina, stole the ornaments of the churches and of the convent of San Francisco, put many persons to a cruel death, and carried off others as prisoners, making them slaves in Carolina, an act that certainly left no doubt of the collusion of the English. 49. [Bolton note: The allusion here is to Chief Altamaha's raid on the Timucua mission in February, 1685. Evidence of the collusion of Lord Cardross is abundant. See Introduction, pp. 40-41.]

4. It would seem that this is the place where it is proper to speak of the sale which some of the English lightly say was made to them by the natives of the country under discussion, alleging that for this reason they have the right to lordship over it. 5. It is true that the Indian Niquesalla sold to the English the territory of Santa Elena, with all the solemnities of documents, and with the ceremonies of pulling, and planting, and moving earth, which are usual in such contracts. But not having solid and true reasons, it is necessary for them to make use of inventions and unsubstantial and false foundations. The truth of the matter is that the Indian mentioned was not even a native of the country, but was a mere youth belonging to the Chicora nation, who lived in the province of this name to the north of Santa Elena. Being of a captious temper and ambitious for fame, he had made himself a bandit chief and joined the English. After conducting Captain Henry N. [Woodward] and his companions to Santa Elena, he executed the above-mentioned sale with the formality stated. 6. It might be believed that if the English were blameless in this contract and ignorant of the rights of the vendor, they might accept the sale as legal and just, notwithstanding that it was irregular. But, admitting all this, it is not credible that they should not know that for more than a hundred years the King of Spain had enjoyed possession of that territory, and that the recent abandonment by the Spaniards did not despoil his Catholic Majesty of his dominion. Neither is it credible that they would purchase that land with all the formality with which they bought it without previous sound and authentic proof of the hereditary or acquired ownership of the vendor, indispensable requisites to legalize the alienation. And since this was impossible, as he had no right of sovereignty, either near or remote, it is inferred that the English executed the formalities of purchase as mere ceremonies, and that by natural law the sale was null and void. 7. Leaving out of consideration the rights of the Spaniards as conquerors and settlers, which they had not lost through the mere accident of having evacuated the land in question, for every one knows that the owner of a possession is privileged to leave it unoccupied or in disuse if he so wishes, whether or not he has cause for it, without for this reason losing his right of ownership; and, granting that the Indian Niquesalla had the right to sell the land, that is to say, as chief and lord of it, so that the sale would be valid; even then the English would only be owners of Santa Elena and its jurisdiction, and not of Guale, the province farther south, a distinct domain and separate jurisdiction, where Spaniards were actually living, unless the said Indian clandestinely sold this land in the same way that he sold that of Santa Elena, which does not appear to have been done.

3. Expedition of the Governor of Florida against the English and Indians settled at Santa Elena. Sale of their territory to Henry 50. [Bolton note: Enrique N. was Dr. Henry Woodward. Both of my transcripts read N, for what was probably intended for W. For Woodward's proceedings at Santa Elena, see Introduction, pp. 29-30.] by an Indian*[Arredondo note * It is recorded in a letter of March 6, 1687, to the Catholic King, and in an order of his Majesty to exterminate them, which exists in the archives of San Agustin.] The Spanish captain-general then found himself with too few troops to reenforce the settlements of Santa Catharina and Sapala suificiently to assure them against further attacks like the previous one, because the force which he had was divided between the two places, and he faced the difficulty of exposing both to the dangers of disunion. In view of this situation he wisely resolved to remove the soldiers who had remained at the two posts. Then, uniting them with those of the settlement of the island of San Simón, in the province of Guale, in 31° 18', and arming two pirogues and a schooner he sent them in charge of Captain Don Francisco de Fuentes to dislodge the English and the Yamazes who were occupying Santa Elena. With this small force he succeeded in punishing them by burning the houses and bringing away thirty-seven Christian Indians who had been enslaved, with all the provisions that were found, and some Yamazes who voluntarily or in repentance left the English rule. He succeeded also in killing the Indian Niquesalla, chief of the Yguaja and Colona tribe, and a son and nephew of his who joined the English. 51. [Bolton note: It was De Leon and not Fuentes who destroyed the Scotch colony at Port Royal in 1686. Fuentes was sent on an expedition, however. The statements here about the Niquesalla and the sale to Captain Enrique (Woodward) are essentially the same as those contained in a letter of Cabrera, March 6, 1687, and repeated in a royal ceclula to Quiroga, August 14, 1688 (A. G. I., 87-1-1, Doc. No. 3).] ...8. Returning to the expedition of Don Juan Marques Cabrera, when the campaign was finished he made a report*[Arredondo note* In a letter of the 6th of March, 1687.] to the King of all that had happened, representing the evils and fatal results that followed to his Catholic Majesty. He sent to his Majesty at the same time the English papers which Captain Don Francisco de Fuentes had found in Santa Elena, from the contents of which it was inferred that it was the intention of the King of Great Britain to settle that region; for among them there was a patent by which it appeared that he granted rents and ownership to the above-mentioned Captain Henry N. [Woodward] and his accompanying settlers, in recompense of the services which they were performing for his crown by exploring those lands inhabited by savages.

10. The decree or letter of donation referred to in the report of the Council of Carolina [Newcastle's 12/18/1724 claim that Spain ceded Altamaha] is also contradicted by its incompatibility with the act of Señor Don Carlos II in the year 1688, who not only approved the expedition against the English settled in Santa Elena by Governor Don Juan Marques Cabrera, but also commanded and ordered his successor, Don Diego Quiroga, to continue the operation until he should effect their complete dislodgment, on the ground that it was territory belonging to the crown of Spain, sending him for this purpose a reenforcement of one hundred men, with provisions and munitions, as has been set forth in Chapter V, paragraph 8. 68. [Bolton note: See p. 183 and Note 52.]

In consequence of this [Cabrera’s report of 3/6/1687], by a decree issued at Madrid on the 14th of August, 1688, to Don Diego de Quiroga y Losada, successor to Don Juan Marques in the governship and captaincy-general of Florida and its provinces, his Majesty approved all that had been done up to that time, and charged and ordered him to proceed to totally dislodge the English and Yamazes settled in the aforesaid lands of his dominion, sending for this purpose one hundred men as reinforcements, arms, provisions, and munitions by the ship in charge of Captain Juan Ayala y Escobar. 52. [Bolton note: This is the cedula cited above (A. G. I., 87-1-1, Doc. No. 3): "I charge and order you to continue the operations begun by him until you succeed in dislodging the enemies, Scotch, English and Yamassees, who were settled on the said islands of Santa Elena and Santa Catharina and others near by to the north of those provinces, with the men of the presidio and the friendly Indians, which you think best."] 9. No one can fail to see that if the King of Spain had had a very well-founded right to the possession of Santa Elena, which, for the reasons stated in the preceding paragraphs, the Spaniards abandoned, his Majesty by virtue of their friendly relations, not only would not have approved of the expedition of Don Juan Marques, but he would have severely reprimanded and chastised him as a disturber of the peace and perfect harmony that existed between the two crowns. 10. Neither can anyone fail to see that it is not natural that the King of Spain, sovereign owner of so many and such vast regions and domains in the Western Indies, would wish to interrupt the peace in order to usurp and take by force so small a portion of the country as belonged to Santa Elena, especially as he had with so much liberality granted to England the possession and the right of sovereignty over as many lands as he conceded by the treaty of the year 1670. 11. It is also clear that if that territory had belonged to Great Britain, the governor of Carolina would have made his complaints in regard to the violence of the Spaniards, and the court of London would have sent dispatches to that of Spain. But since this was not done, the inference to be drawn from its silence is that it had nothing to complain of or to discuss concerning what had been done by the governor of Florida, or by the reiterated orders of the King of Spain for the dislodgement of the English. 53. [Bolton note: As a matter of fact, the Proprietors charged the Carolinians with the blame and exculpated Cabrera. Arredondo would have found comfort and support in what they said. See Introduction, pp. 43-i4.] 12. It would be remarkable if the King of Spain had granted to the English, as he did grant by Article 7 of the treaty of the year 1670, all the provinces and regions that Great Britain possessed at that time in the Western Indies, and then seventeen years later should desire to take away from him so small a part. It is clear, as has been demonstrated by specific facts, that in that same year 1670 the English possessed on the Continent of Florida only the territory from Cape Henry to South Carolina. 54. [Bolton note: That is, Charleston, which he interchanges with South Carolina.] This is proved by the fact that the Catholic King did not order his governors to recover these domains; for he directed his orders only to dislodge the English from Santa Elena, since his Majesty bore in mind that the English were legal owners from Carolina to 36° 30', by force of the treaty of 1670. From this it is clearly inferred that if the jurisdiction of Santa Elena had been included in the domains which his Majesty had ceded to the English, he would not have issued orders to dislodge them from it, since he did not order them ejected from the rest. And if Great Britain had been in possession of this territory at the time of the ratification of the treaty, it would have obtained the investiture of ownership in the same way that it obtained it for the other regions; and, consequently, the Catholic King would not have expressly approved the expedition of Don Juan Marques, directed against the English established at Santa Elena; nor would he have sent to his successor troops, arms, and munitions with which to proceed until he should entirely dislodge them from those places. This expedition was frustrated by a violent storm which fell upon the fleet in the neighborhood of the port of its destination and damaged the ships, compelling the abandonment of the undertaking for the time being. 55. [Bolton note: Arredondo refers here to the De Leon expedition of 1686. See Introduction, pp. 41-43.]

[Benavides] prescribed [FL boundaries]… by the same parallel of 32° 30', as far as the country of the Talapuzes and Cauetas, nations subject to the rule of the Spaniards and inhabited by them up to the year 1692. 69. [Bolton note: I have seen no evidence that Spain had a post among the Talapoosas till 1692.]

When he [Narvaez] reached Florida he dropped anchor in the bay which he called Santa Cruz.* [Arredondo note* On the Gulf of Mexico, in latitude 29° 40'. It is the same bay which Don Tristan de Luna called Santa Maria in the subsequent year of 1558, and to which Don Andres de Pez, then admiral, added the appellation of Galvez, in honor of the Count of Galvez, who was Viceroy of Mexico when it was settled and fortified in the year 1693.]

14. After the year 1693, in which Don Laureano de Torres succeeded Don Diego Quiroga as governor of Florida and its provinces, there was no particular action or noteworthy event in the matter, the English remaining in possession of Santa Elena and the Spaniards of San Simon, 56. [Bolton note: I have seen no evidence that the Spaniards maintained a settlement on San Simon after 1686. Arredondo is dealing only with Guale, or the coast settlements, and does not here keep track of the contest for the back country.] Santa Maria, and Santa Cruz, in the province of Guale, until the year 1701. Then, war having been declared, Vice-Admiral Benbow went to the Indies with a fleet of twenty ships, carrying troops with which he reenforced Virginia, Carolina, San Cristoval, and other islands. When Don Joseph de Zuniga arrived to relieve Torres of the command, he saw the bad state of the defenses of the presidio of San Agustin and the settlements in its district, the delay of aid asked from the King by his predecessors, and the warlike movements with which its English neighbors were threatening it. He therefore decided to send Don Juan de Ayala, one of the captains of the soldiers in his command, to the Court, to inform the King of the danger in which San Agustin stood and of the preparations that were being made in South Carolina. 57. [Bolton note: This was the War of the Spanish Succession, or Queen Anne's War. France and Spain were allied against England. The war areas in America were extensive in this struggle. The West Indies, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Louisiana in the South, and New England, Acadia, Newfoundland, and Hudson Bay in the North all were scenes of conflict. To strike at Spanish commerce England sent Admiral Benbow to the Caribbean, where he encountered the French fleet under Du Casse. New Providence, in the Bahamas, was captured by the French and Spaniards. The Indian allies of the English destroyed the Mission of Santa Fe in the Apalache district. [Bolton note: The English traders of Carolina also turned their Creek allies against the French who had recently settled in the Mobile district. Clowes does not mention reenforcing the mainland colonies. Benbow left the Channel with ten vessels, but in the islands was reenforced "by several vessels from England." (Bolton and Marshall, Colonization, 267-271; Clowes, The Royal Navy, II, 367-373.) See Introduction, pp. 58-61.]

15. In the following year, 1702, by order of the king, General Du Casse embarked at Coruña in the fleet under his command, with two thousand Galicians, for the purpose of aiding the presidios of America. Part of the men were left at this fortress of Havana. Its governor, having been notified by Don Joseph de Zuniga that Colonel Moore was planning to fall upon San Agustin, promptly sent to their aid seventy Galicians in charge of Captain Don Joseph Primo de Rivera. 58. [Bolton note: Barcia gives a good account of the events in Florida during the War of the Spanish Succession, Ensayo Cronoldgico, pp. 318-327. Arredondo follows him here.] 16. Having received this assistance, Don Joseph de Zuniga endeavored to have his enemies find him in the best possible state of defense. For this purpose he took all the precautions that were within his power. By these means, and through the bravery of the Spaniards, he succeeded not only in resisting the siege that Colonel Moore laid to the city and fort of San Agustin, but also in forcing him to retire with considerable damage and loss of men. …18. Since the siege ended in the manner stated, and since Colonel Moore retired with all his men to Carolina, it ought not to be alleged, as is sometimes done, that in consequence of this expedition the ownership fell to the English, for it is clear that in it nothing was accomplished except to harass the Spaniards as much as possible.

17. It is well known to most people living in San Agustin, Spaniards as well as Indians, that on the occasion of this siege all of those living in the provinces of Guale and Timucua, in the settlements of San Simón, Santa Maria, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo, with the soldiers and officers who composed their garrisons, retired to the city. They did so partly because they considered themselves anything but safe from the multitude of enemies who were coming down from Carolina to attack them, and partly to oppose with united forces the capture of the capital, upon whose defence depended the safety of the rest of the province. It was, therefore, in this year of 1702, that the Spaniards voluntarily withdrew from the province of Guale and the other settlements mentioned above.

11. The fact that the Spaniards after the year 1702, in which they abandoned those lands, had never occupied or cultivated them, as is stated by the Council and Assembly, does not take away from the crown of Spain its right of ownership in them, as every reasonable person knows. On the contrary, replying on this date with the testimony given before him, Don Antonio Benavides concludes that up to the year 1702 the Spaniards were in possession. Consequently, it would naturally be supposed that the alleged decree of donation of Señor Don Carlos II would exist, for the orders which his Majesty would necessarily have issued in order that his vassals who were indisputably inhabiting the country under discussion might retire and leave the English in possession, would be forthcoming.

…the court of London could not fail to bear in mind Article 8 of the Treaty of Utrecht dated July 13, 1713, in which*[Arredondo note * A literal copy of Article 8 of the Treaty of Utrecht.] "the Most Serene and most Powerful Princess Dona Anna, Queen of Great Britain, promises that she will aid the Spaniards with her forces and means, so that the former boundaries of the regions in America belonging to Spain may be restored and perpetuated as they were in the time of Senor Don Carlos II, and the losses and diminution from which they have suffered since the said Carlos II died may be repaired." 64. [Bolton note: The English text of the treaty reads as follows: "On the contrary, that the Spanish dominions in the West Indies may be preserved whole and entire, the Queen of Great Britain engages, that she will endeavour, and give assistance to the Spaniards, that the ancient limits of their dominions in the West Indies be restored, and settled as they stood in the time of the above-said Catholic King Charles the Second, if it shall appear that they have in any manner, or under any pretence, been broken into, and lessened in any part, since the death of the aforesaid Catholic King Charles the Second." Chalmers, George, A Collection of Treaties Between Great Britain and Other Powers, etc., II, 82 (London, 1790); the same in Herstlet, II, 201 (London, 1840). A Spanish version is in Calvo, Carlos, Coleccion Completa de Tratados, II, 119, (Paris, 1862).] 5. This is the same as though the Queen of Great Britain had guaranteed to maintain and defend the right of the crown of Spain to the Western Indies, and very far from any intention of usurping it. And since the original possessions of the Spaniards in this region in the time of Senor Don Carlos II of Spain extended to Santa Elena, according to what has been alleged and proved, and since the losses and diminution happened after the treaty of 1670, it follows as a necessary consequence that they ought to be repaired, in fulfillment of the guarantee of the Most Serene Queen of Great Britain, stipulated in the Treaty of Utrecht of the year 1713, 65. [Bolton note: See Note 64.] and in that of the 18th of November, old style, of the same year, ratified between his Catholic Majesty and his British Majesty, in which, by the first article, their Majesties promised mutually to observe and fulfill all that was contained in the articles of the preceding treaties.

and in that [treaty] of the 18th of November, old style, of the same year [1713], ratified between his Catholic Majesty and his British Majesty, in which, by the first article, their Majesties promised mutually to observe and fulfill all that was contained in the articles of the preceding treaties.

This territory [between the San Juan River and Santa Catharina] the English of Carolina began unlawfully to settle in the year 1718 with the fort at San Simón, Tamaja, or Bocas de Talaxe, 79. [Bolton note: Fort King George was built at Tamaja in 1721. Three years earlier Benavides was warned that the English were fortifying Santa Catalina Island. Barcia, Ensayo CronoUgico, 340-343. See Note 59.] treated of in this chapter. They also abandoned it in the year 1727, leaving it depopulated until the formation of the Company of New Georgia…

2. Don Antonio de Benavides Bazan, captain-general of Florida and its provinces, reported to the King, his master, the hostilities experienced by the vassals of his Majesty from the English and the Indians of Carolina. He reported also the information given him by Joaquin Boto, 59. who had made port at San Agustin in the year 1721 to sell the cargo of flour which he brought, to the effect that the English were erecting a fort at La Tamaja, or Bocas de Talaje, thirty-three leagues to the north of San Agustin in latitude 31° 12', which corresponds to the island of San Simón, or Gualquini; and that, having sent, in view of this information, a message and letter to the English governor complaining of the manifest usurpation, since the territory belonged to the crown of Spain, and considering the harmony and the friendly relations which ought to be maintained between the vassals of both Majesties, the English governor had replied to him that he had orders from his sovereign to provide for the safety of his dominions with fortifications and settlements as best he could. 60. In consequence of this report, Don Antonio Benavides received orders from the Catholic King issued on the 25th of March, 1721…

This territory [between the San Juan River and Santa Catharina] the English of Carolina began unlawfully to settle in the year 1718 with the fort at San Simón, Tamaja, or Bocas de Talaxe, 79. [Bolton note: Fort King George was built at Tamaja in 1721. Three years earlier Benavides was warned that the English were fortifying Santa Catalina Island. Barcia, Ensayo CronoUgico, 340-343. See Note 59.] treated of in this chapter. They also abandoned it in the year 1727, leaving it depopulated until the formation of the Company of New Georgia…

In consequence of this report [of an English fort south of Charleston], Don Antonio Benavides received orders from the Catholic King issued on the 25th of March, 1721, at Aranjuez, on the 10th of June, 1724, at Buen Retiro, and on the 18th of August of the same year,* [Arredondo note * They are in the archives of San Agustin and of the government of Havana.] all in regard to these matters, and commanding him to go personally to see the governor of Carolina, so that together they might arrange and agree upon the boundaries appertaining to each Power. 61. [Bolton note: This correspondence is printed in Serrano y Sanz, Docvfmentos Histdricos de la Florida y la Luisiana, Sighs XVI al XVIII (pp. 243-264).]

This was confirmed afterwards by the Treaty of Madrid, made on the 13th of June, 1721, between his Catholic Majesty and King George I of Great Britain, in which by Article 2 it was agreed*[Arredondo note * Article 2, literally copied from the Treaty of Madrid] that his British Majesty would "expedite the necessary orders to his governors for the fulfillment of the agreement between the two crowns in the Treaties of Utrecht, particularly as to whatever may not have been put into execution in regard to the points regulated by Articles 8, 11, and 15, which make mention of leaving to the Spaniards the free commerce and navigation of the Western Indies, and of maintaining the ancient boundaries of America as they were in the time of King Carlos II, etc. 66. [Bolton note: The words of the treaty are as follows: "As in like manner shall be given, on the part of his Britannic Majesty, the orders which shall be demanded and judged necessary for the accomplishment of everything that has been stipulated and agreed between the two crowns in the above-mentioned treaties of Utrecht; and particularly as to what may not have been put in execution of the points settled by the eighth, eleventh, and fifteenth articles of the treaty of peace, which mention the leaving to the Spaniards the free commerce and navigation to the West Indies, and the maintaining the ancient limits in America, as they were in the time of King Charles II," etc. (Chalmers, George, A Collection of Treaties between Great Britain and Other Powers, II, 210. A French version of the treaty is in J. Du Mont, Baron de Carels-Croon, Corps Universel Diplomatique du Droit de Gens, Tome, VIII, Partie II, p. 34.)]

3. In view of this the governor of Florida, in order to proceed with greater certainty and justification in the deliberations of the meeting, wished, with the assistance of the government clerk, to secure a report from some of the persons living in San Agustin who could give personal information regarding the confines and boundaries of the lands which the King of Spain possessed and which his vassals occupied, to the north of that city, many years after 1670. His aim was to be able more clearly to convince and demonstrate to the governor of Carolina, in case he should oppose the just possession of the country, that it belonged to his Catholic Majesty; for he thought that by presenting facts so well authenticated he would avoid many discussions and arguments which otherwise would undoubtedly be offered by the English. He therefore ordered to be called into his presence Don Juan Mexia, captain of the garrison; Don Juan de Ayala, sergeant-major; Juan de Sandoval, soldier in the infantry; Don Josef Rodriguez Menendez, and Don Alonzo de Avila Saavedra, adjutants; and the accountant, Don Francisco Menéndez Marqués. Each one having been interrogated separately under oath, they made their declarations, as eye-witnesses with certain knowledge, that they had all served in the garrisons, some as private soldiers and some as corporals, in the settlements of Santa Catharina, Zapala, Gualquini, Santa Maria, and San Juan, long after 1670, and that the fort in question was in the territory legally belonging to the King of Spain. Captain Don Juan Mexia and the adjutant Don Josef Rodriguez Menendez added that they had been with the second expedition which Governor Don Diego de Quiroga attempted by order of the King for the dislodgement of the English 62. settled at Santa Elena, which on account of a storm that broke up the fleet, did not succeed, as has been stated in Chapter V, paragraph 12.* [Arredondo note * Proceedings which appear in the records of the matter, existing in the archives of San Agustin and Havana.] [Bolton note: Arredondo here again speaks of Quiroga's second expedition against Santa Elena. He seems to have De Leon's expedition in mind. After he left Florida, Quiroga made a long list of his deeds as governor between 1687 and 1693, but he does not mention any expedition to Carolina. I suspect that Arredondo is wrong. El Maestro de Campo Don Diego de Quiroga y Losada, Governador y Capitan General de la Florida a S. M. (A. G. I., 68-1-27).] 4. It is clear that such a report from persons so well informed [testimonies from Spaniards who served in GA] fully proves Spain's ownership of the region in question, for it establishes the true state of the matter, which is not contradicted by the fact that the Governor of Carolina replied to the letters from the Governor of Florida in such terms as he did, for nothing is more natural than that he should receive orders from his sovereign "to make his dominions secure with fortifications and settlements in the best way possible." These orders explain in themselves the meaning of his British Majesty, for he did not aim at securing and fortifying foreign dominions, such as those in question were and are; therefore the governor of Carolina ought not thus to interpret the orders, absolutely appropriating to himself and to the crown of his King a country which did not belong to him. On the contrary, he ought, in view of the mutual friendliness, to have convinced the governor of Florida with arguments and clear proofs, authenticated by documents, and to have shown him the titles proving the King his master to be owner of the territory 63. [Bolton note: See Middleton's letter, Serrano y Sanz, op. cit., 255-257.] in question, especially since the court of London could not fail to bear in mind Article 8 of the Treaty of Utrecht dated July 13, 1713, especially since the court of London could not fail to bear in mind Article 8 of the Treaty of Utrecht dated July 13, 1713, in which*[Arredondo note * A literal copy of Article 8 of the Treaty of Utrecht.] "the Most Serene and most Powerful Princess Dona Anna, Queen of Great Britain, promises that she will aid the Spaniards with her forces and means, so that the former boundaries of the regions in America belonging to Spain may be restored and perpetuated as they were in the time of Senor Don Carlos II, and the losses and diminution from which they have suffered since the said Carlos II died may be repaired."

In consequence of this report [of an English fort south of Charleston], Don Antonio Benavides received orders from the Catholic King issued on the 25th of March, 1721, at Aranjuez, on the 10th of June, 1724, at Buen Retiro, and on the 18th of August of the same year, all in regard to these matters, and commanding him to go personally to see the governor of Carolina, so that together they might arrange and agree upon the boundaries appertaining to each Power. 61.

For this purpose [determine boundary of FL] his British Majesty communicated with his Catholic Majesty through a letter by the Duke of Newcastle, dated at Whitehall on the 22d of June, old style, 1724*[Arredondo note * In the archives of San Agustin and of Havana.]. Replying to the complaints made to the King his master through the minister of the Catholic King at the court of London, Don Jacinto Pozobueno, by virtue of his royal orders, in which he insisted that the governor of Carolina should immediately cause to be demolished the fort that was being constructed by the English in Spanish territory and domains, since on the contrary his Catholic Majesty would be compelled to maintain his rights, the Duke of Newcastle said that his Sovereign, earnestly desiring to live in perfect understanding with his good ally, the King of Spain, and to avoid everything that could give the slightest occasion for any alteration of the union that existed and of the mutual affection that he desired to maintain between the two crowns, gladly consented to the proposal made on the part of Spain that the two governors, in order to conclude the differences, should arrange and determine between themselves the limits of each territory, and should demolish the fort in question, if it were in Spanish domains, unless they could arrange for an equivalent to the satisfaction of the Catholic King; and that for these ends his British Majesty was ordering that the necessary despatches be sent to the governor of Carolina, upon the first opportunity and without fail.

In consequence of this report [of an English fort south of Charleston], Don Antonio Benavides received orders from the Catholic King issued on the 25th of March, 1721, at Aranjuez, on the 10th of June, 1724, at Buen Retiro, and on the 18th of August of the same year, all in regard to these matters, and commanding him to go personally to see the governor of Carolina, so that together they might arrange and agree upon the boundaries appertaining to each Power. 61.

6. The court of London is not ignorant of the fact that the crown of Spain possessed the province of Guale, and that its subjects were inhabiting it in the year 1702, after the death of Senor Don Carlos II. In regard to this the Duke of Newcastle, in a letter of the 18th of December, 1724, to Don Jacinto Pozobueno,t [Arredondo note f In the Archives of San Agustin and of Havana.] says, that in the matter of the construction of the fort which the vassals of Great Britain had built on the River Tamaja, or Bocas de Talaje, he would have replied to him if Mr. Nicholson, at that time Governor of South Carolina, who was expected in London, as he had obtained permission from his British Majesty, had arrived; but since he was delayed, and since Don Jacinto insisted upon some special statement in this negotiation in order to report to his court, the Duke had orders from his Sovereign to reiterate the assurances which had previously been given to him to the effect that the King his master was ready to do everything possible to contribute to the termination of this controversy according to the most exact rules of justice; and he enclosed a copy of a report which had been made by the Council and Assembly of Carolina, in conformity with the orders that Governor Nicholson had received from his court, for the purpose of instructing his British Majesty on these matters. This reduces itself in substance to saying that*[Arredondo note * Report of the Council of Carolina, in the archives of San Agustin and Havana.] the fort under discussion had been constructed at the mouth of the Tamaha River, which, by decree or letter of the Most Serene Señor Don Carlos II (may he rest in glory) was ceded to his British Majesty—not only the said river, which lies in 31° 12', but also a great territory to the south of that river; that after this cession the Spaniards did not occupy or cultivate any lands whatever on it; and that in the year 1702 they abandoned that region, with the exception of some outposts which they maintained at the mouth of the San Juan River. The report added that for forty years the English nation had had considerable commerce with the Indians living on the banks of the river. 8. The same thing [Spanish possession of Guale post 1670] is confirmed by the declaration of the Council and Assembly of Carolina, which says that the Spaniards abandoned those lands in the year 1702. 67. [Bolton note: See above, paragraph 6, pp. 179-181.] 9. And as to the pretext which the Council and Assembly set up to the effect that by a decree of the Most Serene Senor Don Carlos II donation was made to his British Majesty, not only of the river in question [Altamaha], which lies in 31° 12', but also of a large district to the south of that river, their honorable members must permit this to be denied absolutely and stamped as cavilous and false. For in case it were true, the King of Spain would not demand the restitution of the region under discussion, nor would the King of England have had any need to ask for a report from the Council and Assembly of Carolina, or to await the arrival in London of Governor Nicholson in order to acquire information concerning this affair. For the presentation of the decree or letter of King Carlos II, with citation of its date and circumstances, would have been more than suificient to terminate the entire dispute. And it is to be believed that if Great Britain had had this document she would not have neglected a means as easy as it would have been efficacious for the purpose. ...11. The fact that the Spaniards after the year 1702, in which they abandoned those lands, had never occupied or cultivated them, as is stated by the Council and Assembly, does not take away from the crown of Spain its right of ownership in them, as every reasonable person knows. On the contrary, replying on this date with the testimony given before him, Don Antonio Benavides concludes that up to the year 1702 the Spaniards were in possession. Consequently, it would naturally be supposed that the alleged decree of donation of Señor Don Carlos II would exist, for the orders which his Majesty would necessarily have issued in order that his vassals who were indisputably inhabiting the country under discussion might retire and leave the English in possession, would be forthcoming. 12. Even better proof in confirmation of the preceding is the fact that the Duke of Newcastle, after giving the foregoing information, concludes his letter by saying that, without entering into a longer discourse, the King his master wished to suspend his judgment in regard to this affair until the arrival of Governor Nicholson, from whom he would receive any fuller information that he might have in this matter, in respect to which he would do everything that might be expected for the satisfaction of the crown of Spain; but that, nevertheless, with the object that nothing should be lacking on the part of his British Majesty to satisfy the desire of his Catholic Majesty, he had ordered that instructions should be written to those in charge of the government of Carolina during the absence of the said Nicholson, commanding them to go and have a talk with the Spanish governor, for the purpose of clearing up this matter as far as possible and of obtaining exact information, the outcome of which he would report to Don Jacinto de Pozobueno. 13. If the instrument, in the form of a decree or letter of donation from Señor Don Carlos II, actually existed in the archives of England, what doubts could there be to compel His British Majesty to suspend his judgment? Or what embarrassment could there be in his proving by his acts his desire to satisfy his Catholic Majesty? Or what would the arrival of Nicholson or of his report in London matter? Or of what use would the orders to the officials of Carolina be in a discussion of the affair with the Governor of Florida, since nothing more was required than the presentation of the decree itself? In view of all this, the answer is left to the English. The results in reality make it clear that there never was any such decree of gift.

After the reply of the Duke of Newcastle had been examined in the Council of the Indies, together with the report mentioned, which he enclosed with the antecedents of the matter, by the advice of the fiscal his Catholic Majesty resolved to repeat to the governor of Florida, with date at Madrid of June 22, 1725, the orders that he had given in the despatches before quoted, of June 10 and August 8, 1724. He commanded him to execute the terms of these orders without the slightest omission, and directed that in case the court of England had not given orders to the governor of Carolina, or that the latter should not concur in the arrangement of boundaries agreed upon, he should summon him on his part to execute the said demarkation. To put the demarkation into effect he ordered him to go, with the assistance of qualified persons, and carry out the measures himself; and if it should result that the fort was situated in the dominions of his Catholic Majesty, he was to call upon the Governor of Carolina to demolish it, without agreeing in any manner whatsoever to the alternative proposed by the court of London for the equivalent of the said fort.

14. Measures taken by the Governor of Florida in regard to the fixing of the boundaries between his jurisdiction and Carolina:* [Arredondo note * In the archives of San Agustin and Havana.] The foregoing orders [from King 6/22/1725] having reached the hands of Don Antonio Benavides, he proceeded to carry them out, naming Don Francisco Menendez Marques, proprietary Accountant of the Royal Exchequer of San Agustin and the provinces of Florida, and Don Joseph Primo de Rivera, Captain of Cavalry and commander of the fort, as trustworthy and energetic persons, conferring upon them full power as his personal representatives, to go and confer with the English governor in regard to the demolition of the fort and the division of territories ordered made by the two monarchs, Catholic and British. Having instructed them concerning the very ancient right of the Crown of Spain as far as 36° 30', he prescribed for them definite limits only as far as the island of Santa Elena in 32° 30', by which the boundaries of both jurisdictions should be marked on the north, while to the west they should be distinguished and designated by the same parallel of 32° 30', as far as the country of the Talapuzes and Cauetas, nations subject to the rule of the Spaniards and inhabited by them up to the year 1692. 69. [Bolton note: Arredondo's distinction here is correct. Spain had settlements all the way up the coast to Santa Elena, but none beyond that place after 1570, when Father Segura's mission in Virginia was destroyed. I have seen no evidence that Spain had a post among the Talapoosas till 1692. She had a post at Apalachicola which was withdrawn in 1691.] Being charged, likewise, always to bear in mind the Treaty of 1670, in order not to claim a greater extent of territory than was permitted by the good faith with which its stipulations ought to be observed, they presented themselves in Carolina.

15. In the first council assembled after the arrival of Don Francisco Menendez and Don Joseph Primo, to which they were summoned, after exhibiting their commission and the despatches of their Catholic and British majesties, they represented to the council what seemed best to them and most in harmony with his Catholic Majesty's unquestionable rights of possession. The reply which they got was that the officials of Carolina had not received direct orders from their King in regard to the matter, but if they had them they would do what was proposed without opposition; and that as soon as they received them a meeting would be arranged to carry out the orders of the two sovereigns. In a letter of September 10/21, 1725, to the governor of Florida, Mr. Middleton, governor during the absence of Nicholson, who was in London, reiterating the reply given by the Council, added that, as long as he had no definite order from the King his master, he would maintain the fort and the dispute concerning the territories, in which, in view of his duty, he would take special care. 70. [Bolton note: The letter is printed in Serrano y Sanz, Documentos Hist&ricos de la Florida, 255-257; Carroll, Historical Collections, I, 269-271, gives a sketch of the relations between Carolina and Florida.] 16. It will be seen, therefore, in what manner were eluded the repeated complaints of the Court of Spain in regard to the unwarranted construction of the fort of Tamaja, and the agreements of both crowns that the two governors should communicate to each other the orders for the adjustment of the boundaries and the termination of these controversies. 17. Truly, words are lacking with which to characterize this sort of bad faith, practiced with such perfidy, although at that time it was not known who was to blame for it, whether the Court of London, through not having given the orders agreed upon, or the government of Carolina, through not having obeyed them. It is only known that there cannot be any nation, either civilized or barbarous, that would not be amazed to see the laws of friendship and good understanding broken with such effrontery, the sacred faith of treaties violated without concealment, the rights of man transgressed, and the mandates of justice trampled under foot. In short, it is fully established and proved that Spanish dominion was usurped as far as Santa Elena 71. [Bolton note: He means that the occupation of the region south of Santa Elena is a usurpation of Spain's domain.]by the very fact that the English avoided the reply and the fulfillment of the pact between the two courts.

Among other outrages, it happened that when* [Arredondo note * Declarations of Captain Don Juan Mexia, Sergeant-major Don Juan de Ayala, Juan de Sandoval, Don Joseph Rodriguez, Don Alonso de Avila and others, given at San Agustin, September 16, 1726.] the royal officials of San Agustin were going, according to their yearly custom, to pay the troops who were serving as garrison in that presidio [Santa Elena] and on the other islands, they were iniquitiously murdered on the road. 48. [Bolton note: Arredondo seems to be confusing this uprising with that of 1576. See Introduction, pp. 12-13.] From this resulted the abandonment mentioned, and the secure establishment of the English there, which is certain proof that their influence disposed the minds of the Indians to these offenses.

This territory [between the San Juan River and Santa Catharina] the English of Carolina began unlawfully to settle in the year 1718 with the fort at San Simón, Tamaja, or Bocas de Talaxe… They also abandoned it in the year 1727, leaving it depopulated until the formation of the Company of New Georgia…

They also abandoned it [territory between the San Juan River and Santa Catharina] in the year 1727, leaving it depopulated until the formation of the Company of New Georgia, to which the reigning British Majesty granted a patent in the year 1732, in which he disposes of the dominion of that continent, granting to the company all that may not have been previously occupied by subjects of England. 80. [Bolton note: It does not seem to occur to Arredondo that Georgia might be founded within the territory assigned to Carolina.]

But this [Oglethorpe’s contrary orders of 1735] was quite in keeping with the patent issued by the British King, on June 9/20, 1732, in which he disposes of the domains of that continent and even of the sea, granting to the company formed for the establishment of the colony of New Georgia everything not already settled by the vassals of England. 73. [Bolton note: The charter of the Georgia colony is printed in Stevens, A History of Georgia, I, 476-493.] This is a concession diametrically opposed to the Treaty of 1670, which excludes from his possession everything which he did not hold or possess in that year, and is the very foundation and beginning by which the boundaries of the two jurisdictions must be regulated. For it is certain that if the English were undeceived, and the injustice with which they possess the territory in question were established, they would restore it to the Crown of Spain, evacuating it entirely and removing the colony of New Georgia and its fortifications, since it is not a possession which they had in 1670, but is land that was inhabited by the Spaniards.

18. Above all, it must cause surprise, after the British Ministry in 1735 had assured Don Tomas Gerardino, minister-plenipotentiary of his Catholic Majesty in London, that Mr. James Oglethorpe, destined to Carolina, carried orders for arranging its boundaries concurrently and in agreement with the governor of Florida, to learn that those which he showed him on his arrival should be so contrary that they contained orders to settle all the territory yet unsettled. 72. [Bolton note: For the coming of Oglethorpe and subsequent events, see Introduction, Chapters V-VII.]

Several conferences and debates were held with that official [Arredondo's visit in 1736], in which Oglethorpe exaggerated supposed rights, alleging that*[Arredondo note * Reply given in writing by Oglethorpe to the official sent, which remains in his possession and in the archives of Havana.] the country had been discovered and conquered by Sebastian Cabot in the year 1497 under patents from Henry VII of England, and that title had been subsequently sustained by Francis Drake, who, by order of Queen Elizabeth, had taken and destroyed the fort of San Agustin, and that all the lands as far as 29° had been granted to the Lords Proprietors by Kings James I, Charles I, and Charles II.

19. Official communication from the Governor of Havana to Mr. James Oglethorpe: Complaint was made to Oglethorpe on the part of the captain-general of the island of Cuba, Don Juan Francisco Guemez y Horcasitas, through an official 74. [Bolton note: That official was Arredondo himself. See Introduction, p. 73.] whom he sent to New Georgia from Havana in 1736, of the wrongful possession of the thirty-eight leagues of territory from north to south which he had occupied (for the settlements which he was undertaking in the domain of his Catholic Majesty comprised that much); and demand was made in his royal name that he should retire from, evacuate, and quit all that he had wrongfully settled, with such notorious breach of good faith, from the island of Santa Elena, inclusive, as far as the San Juan River. Several conferences and debates were held with that official, in which Oglethorpe exaggerated supposed rights, alleging that*[Arredondo note * Reply given in writing by Oglethorpe to the official sent, which remains in his possession and in the archives of Havana.] the country had been discovered and conquered by Sebastian Cabot in the year 1497 under patents from Henry VII of England, and that title had been subsequently sustained by Francis Drake, who, by order of Queen Elizabeth, had taken and destroyed the fort of San Agustin, and that all the lands as far as 29° had been granted to the Lords Proprietors by Kings James I, Charles I, and Charles II. Oglethorpe having been convinced by the well-founded replies made to him by the official mentioned, and by the demand for his complete withdrawal, agreed to quit and entirely demolish the fort and settlement of San Juan, which he did immediately.

20. None of the many authors who speak of the voyage of Cabot say that he reached 29°. Examine all those who have written of the Western Indies and it will be seen that they unanimously state that his exploration was from 60° northward. 21. Juan Bautista Rhamucio, 75. [Bolton note: This passage is identical with that in Barcia, "Introduction," p. 4, where Rhamusio is quoted. Evidently Arredondo did not see Rhamusio, but followed Barcia (Cardenas).] on folio 4 of his introduction to the third volume of his Navigations, states that "Cabot sailed to New France at the expense of Henry VII, King of England, and arrived at sixty-seven degrees and thirty minutes latitude; and, finding the sea always open and navigable, he imagined he might discover a road to Gran Cathay, but, in the midst of his plans, his crew mutinied and compelled him to return." In his discourse on the land of Labrador, folio 417, he says that "at the expense of Henry VII he discovered that of Baccalaos, reaching 67°, whence he was compelled to return because of the cold." 22. Francis Bacon, 76. [Bolton note: This passage from Bacon, and those below from De Fer, Bernard, and Peter Martyr, are nearly identical with corresponding passages in Barcia (Cardenas), Ensayo Cronologico, "Introduction," pp. 4-6. In all probability Arredondo did not have access to the works quoted.] of Verulam, author of the personal history of Henry VII, recounts as an event pertaining to it, that "Sebastian Cabot, emulating Christopher Columbus, and conjecturing that there were many lands north of the Western Indies up to that time unknown, which he might discover, his belief being based on sounder reasons than those of Columbus, urged Henry VII to aid him, assuring him that he would find an island abounding in riches and commodities for trade. His British Majesty, being convinced of his ability, gave him a ship provided with everything necessary, in which he set out, and, sailing west by north, reached the land of Labrador in sixty-seven degrees thirty minutes north latitude, finding the sea always open and navigable." 23. Nicolas de Fer asserts that "the banks to which they go to catch codfish were discovered by Cabot, with the islands of Newfoundland;" and Jean Frederic Bernard, in The Collection of the Voyages to the North, folio 19, says that"John and Sebastian Cabot, with some other Venetians, set out from England by order of Henry VII, and on their return reported some countries situated to the northwest." 24. Peter Martyr de Angheria relates that "Cabot ran along the coast of the land of Baccalaos;" and it is to be remarked that entire credence must be given to this author, both because of his reputaton, erudition, and carefulness, and because when he was councillor of the Indies, or appointed to attend to their business, he was able to secure, at the time of writing his Decades, the most reliable information, since he dealt constantly with the discoverers, particularly with Cabot, with whom he was in very close communication. 25. However that may be, it is clear that the voyage of Cabot was of no consequence whatever to the rights of the Crown of England, not only because he did not take possession in any place, but contented himself with merely seeing the coasts (as Liu's Morery says in his great Historical Dictionary) ,t [Arredondo note t At the word "Florida."] and returned without examining the country or learning anything about it, as Herrera states; but also because the lands of Bacallaos, Labrador, and Newfoundland have no connection with Florida in general, and still less with the particular province of Guale and Santa Elena, the regions under discussion. And if the claim of England to these dominions is based without dispute upon the discovery of Cabot, as Oglethorpe alleged, let him and all his adherents say to what end the Court of London consented, by Article 7 of the Treaty of Madrid of 1670, that the British Crown should be deprived of this right, and should admit that its possession of the lands held at that time in the Western Indies was by the mere favor and consent of Spain—proof that Great Britain lacked any basis or foundation to allege in favor of its claim on the ground of the exploration of Cabot.

26. Judging from the reasons stated, by which the antecedent of the argument of Oglethorpe [Cabot’s discovery] is denied, the destruction of the consequent which he alleged of the sacking and burning of San Agustin committed by Francis Drake naturally follows. For if the latter wished by such means to subsequently sustain the title acquired by Cabot's exploration, since this was chimerical and false, according to what has been proved, the results also are necessarily false. 27. In the acts of the British Parliament, and in the dispositions of Queen Elizabeth, no orders appear informing Drake that the direct purpose of the expedition against San Agustin was distinctly for the purpose of recovering it, a necessary requisite to prove to some degree that in their opinion the country was wrongfully possessed by the Spaniards. On the contrary, the motive of Queen Elizabeth* [Arredondo note * History of England, by Rapin (under the Reign of Elizabeth, vol. 2, p. 122).] in sending the Count of Carlisle and Drake to America with 2,300 troopers, in twenty-one ships-of-war, is well known. 77. [Bolton note: Arredondo is evidently sound here in asserting that San Agustin was not a primary objective in the expedition. For a comment on Drake, see Note 29.] The arms of the Spaniards had been openly provoked against her because of the aid sent to Flanders in accord with the public contract between her British Majesty and the Allied States. The well-known condition was the cession of Flecinga and Ramichin in Zeeland and of Brila in Holland, principal posts on the coasts of those provinces, as security to Great Britain. The Queen was fearful that the King of Spain would not be satisfied with the reasons for this alliance which she published in her manifesto ^ [Arredondo note t Public Acts of England, chap. 15, p. 799.] and that his Catholic Majesty would regard the assistance given to vassals rebelling against his crown as a declaration of war. Her British Majesty wished to anticipate it, and to this end she sent the fleet of Carlisle and Drake, without indicating any definite objects for the expedition. In consequence they sacked Santo Domingo, and afterwards Cartagena, with their forces, and on their way back to Europe they stopped to burn San Juan de Pinos and San Agustin in Florida. By these operations it is clearly seen that the two commanders mentioned acted in this campaign as enemies of the Crown of Spain, and not as maintainers of the right to the country of Florida acquired through the discovery of Cabot, as Oglethorpe asserted to the official. 28. Everyone must be able to see that if Drake had had orders from his court to take from the Spaniards, under the claim of restoration, the country which they held on the Continent of Florida, after his victory, obtained without opponents, who had retired to San Mateo, he would have placed there an English garrison, as the rules prescribe, and would have continued his task by land and sea until the work was finished, if it had been possible, in fulfillment of the purpose of the British Court. For, notwithstanding the loss of seven hundred men who died of sickness, he had forces incomparably larger than those of the Spaniards, to use if he had wished to attempt its accomplishment. But he had scarcely sacked and burned San Agustin and the fortress when he again embarked his troops and set sail, with the intention of going to Santa Elena and attacking it. But, a heavy storm came up which separated his forces to such an extent that they did not come together again until they reached England, and Drake went to Virginia, where he found some of the English whom Walter Raleigh had taken there. They were perishing, and he was compelled to take them on board. All these operations indicate the contrary of what Oglethorpe represented to the official, since it is certain that if the object of the expedition had been conquest Drake would not have abandoned the prizes.

29. As to the statement that Kings James I, Charles I, and Charles II had granted to the Lords Proprietors all of the lands as far as 29°, neither is it true, nor is it an argument of justificatory force. For, through lack of authority they could not do it, and therefore these kings only gave patents of possession to the country as far as Charleston, inclusive, as is seen in the counties, seigniories, and baronies of Edward, Count of Clarendon; George, Duke of Albemarle; William, Count of Craven; John, Lord of Berkeley; George Carteret and John Colleton, knight-baronets; and Anthony, Lord Ashley, which are all comprehended in the jurisdiction of South Carolina, as is shown in all the maps and well known to all the world. 78. [Bolton note: Sir William Berkeley's name is omitted. For the Carolina charter, see Carroll, Historical Collections of South Carolina, II, 41.] In view of this, it clearly appears that Oglethorpe, confusing the anterior rights with the posterior, wished that the grant which was limited on the south by Charleston should extend itself as far as 29°, solely because he said so, perhaps without more authority than having dreamed it, and without paying attention to the fact that the land under discussion was inhabited by Spaniards at the time when the sovereigns named issued the patents, and without bearing in mind that if the lords above-mentioned had had greater privileges in their patents they would not have failed to take full advantage of them, which is proved by the fact that they did not do it. Therefore, up to the year 1702, the Spaniards did not voluntarily leave unoccupied and deserted the lands comprehended between the San Juan River and Santa Catharina. 30. Note how clearly and distinctly it is proved, both by events posterior to the patents cited by Oglethorpe, and by the context of the patent granted to the Company of New Georgia, that this territory in question has never been given by the sovereigns of England to any of their subjects, and that Oglethorpe's pretext to the official was made either with intentional equivocation or with malice. For if the predecessors of the British king then reigning had given to the lords mentioned possession of the lands spoken of, he would not have been able to form the Company of New Georgia. Nor would there have been any unoccupied territory in this region, as the same clause of the patent issued in favor of the company assumes. Hence the seigniories, counties, and baronies of the lords named in the preceding paragraph could not, and must not, extend further than to South Carolina, inclusive. 81. [Bolton note: Here again Arredondo uses South Carolina for Charleston.] 31. Finally, if Oglethorpe had really known that the lands which he was settling actually belonged by good title to the crown of Great Britain, and that the claim of the Spaniards was ill-founded, in fulfillment of his obligation, and in view of the right which in that case he would have had on his side, it would have been easy for him to convince the official of Havana. In consequence, the demands and complaints which the latter made to him that he should demolish the fort erected at San Juan and completely remove that settlement would have had no effect. But since the result of their conferences was that the Englishmen totally abandoned the post, as has been seen, there is no doubt that he lacked solid reasons to offer against those presented to him by the official mentioned in favor of the right of the king his master.

33. The Court of London cannot ignore the facts set forth in the official letters sent by Don Tomas Gerardino by order of his sovereign on the 2d of October, 1736, and the 8th of August, 1737, both on this subject.

Picture: Arredondo’s Map of Gualquini Harbor 1737

33. The Court of London cannot ignore the facts set forth in the official letters sent by Don Tomas Gerardino by order of his sovereign on the 2d of October, 1736, and the 8th of August, 1737, both on this subject.

And, having been informed of the indisputable right of the sovereigns of Spain to the dominion in question, it [Court of London] will not persist in the doubt whether the limits of that jurisdiction are or are not marked in the treaty of 1670, as it asserted in a letter of the Duke of Newcastle, done at Hampton Court, on September 2/13, 1737, in reply to those letters of Don Tomas Gerardino. In this letter he says*[Arredondo note * Letter of the Duke of Newcastle, existing in the office of the secretary of the government of the captaincy of Havana.] that the British King does not understand upon what pretext Spain can formulate this demand, and that, having ordered the said treaty and that of Utrecht of 1713 to be examined with great care, he had given him orders to make known to the minister of Spain that there was in them no special demarkation of the I boundaries of the provinces spoken of, and that Article 7 of the Treaty of 1670 especially, in accordance with which his British Majesty was of the opinion that the respective possessions in America ought to be fixed, very far from containing any description or regulation of this sort, did not prescribe any other rule than that of possession. 82. [Bolton note: For the Geraldino-Newcastle correspondence, see pp. 72-73.] 34. The Court of Madrid does not recede one jot from the rule of possession prescribed in the [1670] treaty. On the contrary, its demand is reduced to the desire that it be observed, for this rule of possession clearly and expressly states that it is understood and ought to be understood as the regions, islands, colonies, and dominions held and possessed by Great Britain in that year. This is the same as excluding her entirely from those which she did not hold or possess. And since the beginning, middle, and end of this work have clearly shown that in the year 1670 England did not hold or possess any other territory in this region than that extending from Virginia to Charleston, inclusive, and that the rest, to the southward, was inhabited and ruled by the Spaniards, it follows as a necessary consequence that Article 7 of the treaty referred to makes the King of Great Britain owner of the territory as far as Charleston, and the Spaniards as far as Santa Elena, of which jurisdictions the respective nations were in possession. 35. From this arise the incontestable reasons why the limits of the two territories were not distinctly marked. They were ignored by the Court of London, which did not see that it was a useless procedure, since the words of Article 7 left no room for doubt or for interpretation, for they say that "the sovereigns of Great Britain, their heirs and successors, with plenary right of sovereignty, shall hold and possess perpetually all the lands, regions, islands, colonies, and dominions in the Western Indies that they hold and possess at present in the name of the British King." Pray, tell what clearer distinction or more particular demarkation of limits does the Court of London wish to find in the treaty than the possessions of each nation in the year 1670? If Great Britain had possessed more land toward the south of Charleston, or less toward the north, there could never have been any controversy or doubt concerning the boundaries, for their limits are explicitly defined in that document, with the concession of the lands that they held, expressed in those words: "which they hold and possess at present in the name of the British King." 36. One can do no less than ask England to observe that in case the words of the article were not so express and clear (which is not possible) by virtue of which there might be some reason for doubt as to the limits, it ought not to be supposed that this defect would concede to Great Britain greater right than to Spain, for there is no title or prerogative by which it might claim preeminence. On the contrary, bearing in mind, as one should, the generic nature of the beginnings and the origin of the basic right of acquisition or first occupancy acquired by his Catholic Majesty to all the Western Indies, all dispute would cease. For any territory that might not be clearly defined ought to be adjudged favorably to the Crown of Spain, and not to England, who would not have in her favor the least presumption or foundation for this adjudication. 37. In consideration of such powerful reasons, it is strange that the British Minister should deduce from the treaty conclusions so incompatible as to say farther on in the quoted letter of the Duke of Newcastle that, "from the words of the said treaty it is inferred that the predecessors of his British Majesty were not only in possession of the region which bears the name of South Carolina before the conclusion of the treaty, but also of the part of the said province now called Georgia, and that they had also granted to their subjects before the said treaty was made the country between 36° 30' and 29° north latitude, inclusive, which comprehends not only South Carolina, but also all the province and country called Georgia, which has always been held since then as part of South Carolina by the subjects of his British Majesty, by virtue of the patents which have been granted to them, and the boundaries which are indicated here have been publicly recognized and always acknowledged." And the minister added that care had been taken that the letters patent granted by his sovereign to the Company of Georgia in the year 1732 should not cover a greater territory than those granted by the predecessors of his Majesty to his subjects. 38. A fine way of arguing, indeed! There is no person living who could be convinced by such arguments, or who would not freely say that the treaty in no way prescribed such conditions that terms for the boundary may be drawn from them. For there is not a word in the whole of it that can lend the least support to the statement that "the predecessors of his British Majesty were in possession not only of the dominion that bears the name of South Carolina before the conclusion of the treaty, but also of the part of the said province now called Georgia." On the contrary, it definitely points out the limits that ought to be enjoyed by each one of the nations in the words, "that the sovereigns of Great Britain, their heirs, etc., shall possess and hold perpetually all the lands, etc., that they hold and possess at present in the name of the British King;" which is certainly the same as saying that those which they did not have and possess before the conclusion of the treaty they could not and ought not to hold afterward. 39. For Great Britain to pretend to some show of right to the territory which she is now occupying under the name of Georgia, it would not be suificient merely to demonstrate that it was deserted and unoccupied by any kind of inhabitants since before the year 1670. Besides this, two impossible things should be alleged and proved in order that the possession conceded by the agreement of Article 7 might fall with some legality to the British Crown, as that of the other regions fell to it. One is that England held and possessed it before the treaty; the other is that the Spaniards were not the owners and inhabitants, as they really were, in the year of its ratification. 40. In addition to these attempts, so contradictory to each other, it would also be necessary to show that the dates of the patents issued to the Company of New Georgia were anterior to the year 1670, and not sixty-two years after its ratification. But since all the world knows that they were granted in 1732, how can the British Minister, without causing astonishment and amazement, draw the inference that "the predecessors of his British Majesty were in possession of the dominion called Georgia before the conclusion of the treaty?" The inconsistencies are manifest in themselves. 41. No one can fail to see that it would be necessary for the English subjects who were living in this territory to have the gift of invisibility, and the need to live incompatibly incorporated with the Spaniards who dwelt in it until the year 1702 without any one knowing of their presence; and that they must have removed to some other place after the formation of the Company of Georgia. For it is evident and notorious that this province has not had, and has not now, any other inhabitants than those that Oglethorpe brought with him to settle it, and those which the said Company has subsequently sent. 42. The British Minister tries to draw the inference from the treaty "that the predecessors of his British Majesty had granted to his subjects before it was ratified the country between 36° 30' and 29°, inclusive, etc." Laying aside all the proofs given to the contrary, but granting how improbable this would be if the subjects of Spain were actual owners of it, as they indeed were, it should be replied that in none of the articles agreed upon is there a word or expression to be found which gives any indication that the Court of Spain had had any notification whatever of the concessions he speaks of, or that his Catholic Majesty had recognized or consented to the fixing of the limits in accordance with the patents of Great Britain, much less that the province and country called Georgia had always been possessed as a part of South Carolina. 43. Those words in Article 7, "shall hold and possess perpetually all the lands, regions, islands, colonies, and dominions in the Western Indies under the name of the British King," refer, clearly and expressly, only to what his vassals held and possessed as such occupants, and do not in any manner concede to Great Britain the countries which in his imagination he had granted to his subjects by his patents, both because these patents did not constitute possession, and because the Court of Spain was totally ignorant of them. And it is not possible to imagine that his British Majesty would have given to his vassals possession of territory to which he had no right, and over which the Spaniards had enjoyed full dominion for more than one hundred years previously. 44. It is certain that in order to prevent the Spaniards at any time from disputing with England the possession of the country under discussion, it would have been necessary to have in the treaty between the two courts stipulations like the following: "that the sovereigns of Great Britain, their heirs, etc., shall possess and hold perpetually not only all the lands, etc., that they now hold under the name of the British King, but also those to which patents may previously have been given to his vassals as far as 29°, inclusive," and to have added at the same time "notwithstanding that they may be inhabited by Spaniards." In this way, indeed, England would possess with legal title of ownership the province of New Georgia, and his Catholic Majesty would have no right to insist upon the just claims upon which he is now insisting. On the contrary, as soon as the treaty was ratified it would have been necessary for him to give orders to his subjects to demolish the old fort of Santa Elena and remove themselves from the province of Guale, in which they were living in the year 1670. And then the city of San Agustin and the rest of the Spanish settlements as far as Mosquito Inlet, inclusive, being comprehended within the 29th degree, would, by force of the treaty, have had to be evacuated, in order to leave the English in full possession of their jurisdiction. These circumstances did not exist, nor should they have existed, for the conditions were totally lacking in the treaty under which they would have been prescribed, and which would have been necessary in order that Great Britain should have the power that is requisite in a Prince to concede patents to his subjects to settle dominions which neither directly nor indirectly belong to him. 45. Not less pertinent to the subject is the palpable inconsistency into which the Duke of Newcastle found it necessary to fall in his letter already quoted. In his attempt to deprive the Crown of Spain of its right, in order to argue in favor of his court, he did not scruple to say: "that in the treaties of the year 1670 and that of Utrecht in 1713 there is no description or particular designation of the limits of the said provinces." And in the next paragraph, wishing to draw the inference from the treaty of 1670, that "the predecessors of his sovereign not only were in possession of the region which bears the name of South Carolina before conclusion of the treaty, but also of the part of the said province now called Georgia," he freely states that "the limits indicated here have been publicly recognized and always agreed to." Therefore, it is easy to see that the Court of London, being obfuscated, and not knowing how to combine at once a negative and an affirmative into one proposition, asserts in its own favor the very thing it denies, and inadvertently denies, on the other hand, the very thing it admits, without seeing that its self-contradiction convicts it of its own lack of logic.

Title Descripcion geographica de la parte que los españoles poseen actualmente en el continente de la Florida del Del Dominio en que estan los ingleses con legitimo titulo solo en virtud del tratado de pases del año de 1670 y de la jurisdicion que indevidamente an ocupado despues de d[ic]ho tratado en que se manifiestan las tierras que usurpan y se definen los limites que deven prescrivirse para una y otra nacion en conformidad del derecho de la Corona de España Contributor Names Arredondo, Antonio de. Gómes, José Luis. Created / Published 1914. [Bolton: From the original in the Spanish Archives. Through the reduction the details are lost, but the heavy parallel lines convey Arredondo's idea of the area in dispute.]

But, leaving aside this patent fact, since the principal object of this demonstration is to make plain the legality of the title of the King of Spain to the territory or province of Guale,3 [Bolton note: Guale was the name applied to the Georgia coast. See Introduction, pp. 1, 9.] which recently has been wrongfully occupied by the English under the name of Georgia, let due attention be paid to the truth concerning events and to the natural inferences which events carry with them, as proofs and arguments against the ignorance of some, the evident malice of others, and the mistakes of many—means which have served the English nation to defraud Spain of part of her rightful domain. The author is to be excused for his poor style, partly because of his lack of ability, and partly because he has given all his attention to baring the truth, which is distorted sometimes perhaps by a resort to eloquence.

6. By the facts set forth up to here it is shown how indisputable are the rights of the sovereigns of Spain to the Continent of Florida, not only because the discoveries mentioned were made at their royal expense and by orders given to their subjects, but also because no foreign nation had the slightest part in them. Since other proofs are unnecessary, and other instruments to authenticate such well-known deeds are not needed, they are omitted; for whoever may wish to controvert them must present facts of suificient weight to convince the world of the contrary.

9. Up to this point the beginnings and early history of the discoveries, conquests, and establishments of the Spaniards and English on the Continent of Florida have been set forth with discrimination as to events and the years in which they took place, and also as to what unquestionably belonged to each nation. A clear statement has been made of the legal rights of the Catholic King to the region from San Felipe, in Santa Elena, the last settlement and presidio in the north of which his Majesty enjoyed possession, to the cape and bay of Santa Maria, because it was not settled by the English until after the explorations of Lucas Vasquez de Ayllón and Pedro Menendez Marques. And a detailed account has been given of the errors authenticated by some maps, sea-charts, reports, and printed books, carelessly and with lack of correct information, because of the confusion into which events have fallen on account of the many and diverse names that have been given to these provinces, coasts, capes, towns, and rivers, each one endeavoring to make himself plausible by fabrications, obscuring with recent designations the places which previously had names bestowed by the Spaniards, the first possessors and explorers, and now forgotten because the nations have given those that they have liked to the seas and lands which they reached, or imagined they reached. The great mischief resulting from these causes was observed by Antonio Herrera*[Arredondo note * Historia General de las Indias, Decada 1*, Libro 5°, capitulo 51.] and afterwards by John Bacon.t[Arredondo note t In the Notes a la Introduction de la Geografia de Culberio, Libro 6°, Capltulo 12°, Folio 504: Cum Hispani alia, et GaUi [alia] hisce, locis indideruni nomina, magna, reperitur, in tabulis Geographisis discrepantia.] 38. [Bolton note: The transcript reads "Bacon," but Barcia, whom Arredondo is following, gives "Juan Bunon," (Barcia, "Introduction," folio 1.)]

6. It follows then by necessary inference, that Great Britain has legal ownership (permissive and only by force of the treaty) over all the lands held by it in the year named, and no others; and since it is clearly proved in the paragraphs concerning the discoveries, conquests, and possessions, that in the year specified the English were not owners of the territory comprised between latitude 32° 30' inclusive (that is, San Felipe in Santa Elena) and 29°, which region for the past ten years they have called Georgia, it naturally follows that such an establishment is a usurpation, and beyond dispute calls for another treaty like that of the year 1670, in which by another article like number 7 the Catholic King may grant to Great Britain plenary right of sovereignty, etc., such as he granted in the former, over the rest of the regions and islands that he possessed at that time. But without this requisite, the Spaniards justly claim and ought to claim all the country from 32° 30' to 30° 26', where the San Juan River is situated, the point to which during the last ten years the British nation has extended itself under the name of Georgia; for from that river toward the south the Spaniards are now living, as is well known.

…Thus on all grounds and by all reasons, one sees clearly and distinctly dissolved the doubts that may have arisen from lack of correct information concerning the facts, the times, and the circumstances of each particular area. The analysis of these regions into their respective parts, without confusion as to what was discovered, conquered, settled, and possessed by Spaniards and English, incontestably decides what lands each Power ought to enjoy on this continent; and clearly shows that Santa Elena, inclusive, is the boundary which ought to be prescribed for both nations by force of the facts that determine it, and the rights of the peoples who fix it, without the possibility of the slightest objection being interposed.

32. From all that has been said, it cannot be doubted that his British Majesty will be informed with all accuracy of the real and true state of the matter, and of the legal titles by which his Catholic Majesty has always claimed, and does now claim, the entire colony of Georgia, as belonging to his crown. And in view of this it must be believed that when the British court is fully informed these differences will cease entirely, and that it will order these forts demolished and the lands occupied by the vassals of his British Majesty evacuated. 33. The Court of London cannot ignore the facts set forth in the official letters sent by Don Tomas Gerardino by order of his sovereign on the 2d of October, 1736, and the 8th of August, 1737, both on this subject. And, having been informed of the indisputable right of the sovereigns of Spain to the dominion in question, it will not persist in the doubt whether the limits of that jurisdiction are or are not marked in the treaty of 1670, as it asserted in a letter of the Duke of Newcastle, done at Hampton Court, on September 2/13, 1737.

46. There is no doubt that if Great Britain now has legal rights of ownership over the country under discussion, it would have had the same rights in the past century and in the preceding one, both because the Spaniards have never held possession of any territory , that has not been theirs by absolute ownership, and because the English would know when and how they had acquired it. In that case, when these controversies began, which perhaps would not have occurred, they would have been quickly terminated through exhibition by Great Britain of her legal titles, such as would have the necessary force not only to satisfy the world, but also to set aside the true right of the Crown of Spain by obscuring the deeds of her subjects and proving false the original discoveries of the Spaniards as far as 36° 30' made by Juan Ponce de León, by the elder of his two sons, by Lucas Vasquez de Ayllón, by Pamphilo de Narvaez, by Hernando de Soto, and by Don Tristan de Luna. In such a view the Spanish conquests, which were made with so many hardships, such effusion of blood, and the expenditure of great fortunes, by Pedro Menendez Marques and his successors, of all the lands as far as Santa Elena, with the settlements and forts which they built, on the coasts as well as in the interior, were mere inventions. The physical and actual possession by the Spaniards of Santa Elena and Santa Catharina from the year 1566 up to 1686 and of the province of Guale up to 1702 was but a dream. The evident and well-established plots of the English of Carolina against their Spanish neighbors, practiced by themselves and the Indians, their allies, were chimeras; and, the treaties of Madrid made in 1670 and 1721, and that of Utrecht in 1713, being useless, it would have been nonsensical of the Court of Spain to give orders to its governors for the recovery and conservation of its dominions, by force or by good will, and to its ministers for the official communications that they were to present in the Court of London in regard to these matters. All the documents, occurrences, and acts which fully justify the right of the Crown of Spain would be null, imaginary, and suppositious. On the other hand, that of the British Crown would be established and legitimate, solely because upon its word, without other authority, power, or justification than that of Sic volo sic iubeo, the decree of gift by Don Carlos II would be true, regardless of the fact that if England had legal right she would not need it, and that if it existed it would not be hidden. It would be true that up to the year 1702 the Spaniards inhabited the district of Guale, now contained in Georgia, and that the English were in possession of it at the same time, even though in the year 1724 it was only forty years since they had begun to trade with the Indians of Tamaja River. It would be true that the predecessors of his British Majesty had granted to his subjects the regions as far as 29° before the treaty of 1670, notwithstanding that those of his Catholic Majesty were inhabiting them. The doubts of the British ministry in regard to the matter would become certainties, notwithstanding its need of a report from Nicholson and from the Council of Carolina for its information. The right acquired through the imaginary exploration of Cabot, sustained ninety years afterwards by Drake, would be unassailable, solely because the former came in sight of land at 60° and farther north, and because the latter, for different purposes and other reasons, went to America, sacked Santo Domingo and Cartagena, burned San Agustin, and returned to England with 60,000 pounds sterling in spoils. It would be clear that in the treaty of 1670 there is no description of boundaries touching upon the rights of his Catholic Majesty, while there is such regarding those of his British Majesty, for the British ministry extends its power to the impossible, reconciling two self-contradictory facts. Injustice would be equity. The violation of the sanctity of laws and the rights of peoples would be friendship. And, finally, the proved usurpation of his dominions would be a wish on the part of the British King to please his Catholic Majesty.

HISTORICAL PROOF of the right of the Catholic King to the territory held to-day by the British King under the name of New Georgia in the provinces and Continent of Florida, by which is proved the unquestionable title of the King of Spain as far as north latitude 32° 30', inclusive, where lies the harbor of the island of Santa Elena, the point by which the limits of the respective possessions in this part of the world, between Florida and Carolina, should be marked. Havana, March 20, 1742. By Antonio de Arredondo

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. Most Illustrious Sir, My dear Sir: The accompanying paper which I enclose makes clear the rights and limits which should be recognized and established for the territory of the province of San Agustin in Florida. It was prepared at my orders by Second Engineer Don Antonio de Arredondo, in accordance with the truth concerning the deeds and events of the time, without any possibility that the smallest circumstance can be disputed or the least error noted. It has seemed to me proper to place it in the hands of your Illustrious Lordship, in case it may in any manner contribute to the fullest knowledge, and dissipate any doubt or dispute however small that may result from ill-founded understanding or malicious intention, so that whatever occurs may be judged according to what is described in it, and his Majesty may be informed of his legal and rightful ownership of these provinces. May God preserve your Illustrious Lordship many years, as I desire. Havana, April 4, 1742. Most Illustrious Sir, your most humble servant kisses the hands of your Illustrious Lordship. Don Juan Francisco de Guemez y Horcasitas. (Rubric.) Most Illustrious Senor Don Joseph del Campillo. Duplicate. 83. [Bolton note: This letter is fastened within the foregoing document at page 22.]