Distribution of mules & horses in both Californias — price charged to the troops (a 1775–78 dossier): the Cal. Gobⁿᵒ's 25-Mar-1775 purchase of 200 mules + 200 horses (paid from Álamos), the Viceroy's ruling (w/ Ministers Manuel de Soto & José Rodríguez, 1776) charging each soldier $20/mule & $12/horse per Habilitado J. de Fabres's arancel via the Comisaría de Loreto; the Asesor opinion (Salido/Navarro, 26 Sep 1781) w/ ⭐ the 100%/150% recargo regime quantified (effects surcharged 100% New Cal. / 150% Antigua Cal.), counts (108 mulas/44 caballos/14 potros + losses 38 mulas/27 caballos) — the fiscal-surcharge spine (cf. d70)
| Date | 1781-10-16 (encl. 1775–78) (exact) |
|---|---|
| From | Antⁱᵒ Bonilla (cert.) |
| Place | Arizpe |
| Series | Provincial State Papers |
| Tomo | III |
| Original tomo page | p.455–469 |
| Savage copy page | 254–256 |
| Scan leaf | n257–n259 |
| Document type | abstract |
| Source | Savage abstract |
Read this leaf on the Internet Archive ↗ · leaf n257–n259
How to cite this document
Antⁱᵒ Bonilla (cert.), Arizpe, 1781-10-16 (encl. 1775–78), Provincial State Papers, III, p.455–469, Archives of California, C-A 2, Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley.Cite the document by series, tomo and original tomo page, as the literature does; the C-A number locates it in the repository. To cite this catalogue entry itself, use https://archivesofcalifornia.com/record/ca2/ca2-d137.htmlThe originals of these records burned in the 1906 San Francisco fire. What survives is Thomas Savage’s 1870s copy, and this page describes that copy.
See something wrong? Corrections are reviewed against the leaf and published in the errata register on this very page, with credit.
What kind of problem?
What should it say? (quote the leaf if you can)
Your name (optional, for the acknowledgment):
Thank you very much for helping. Accepted corrections appear on this page, in the corrections block above, with your name beside the fix.