206 The Founding of New Mexico 
assume the responsibility of authorizing Oñate to proceed with his 
expedition. 63 
The above facts were contained in a letter from the viceroy to the 
king on November 15,1596. Accompanying it, and bearing the same date, 
was a statement containing thirteen principal reasons why, in the viceroy’s 
opinion, Oñate and not a person sent from Spain should lead the expe¬ 
dition to New Mexico. The gist of each of the viceroy’s thirteen points 
is as follows: (1) it would be unjust and injurious to Oñate in view 
of his legal contract with the viceroy; (2) by removing Oñate the king 
would lay himself liable to a civil suit in which he would most certainly 
lose, and that at great expense; (3) to change leaders would disappoint 
and embarrass many of Oñate’s relatives and friends who had sold every¬ 
thing in order to go with him on the expedition; (4) a change of leaders 
would be followed by excesses and outrages by the rank and file of Oñate’s 
men; ( 5 ) the latter would probably unite with or exert a baneful influence 
upon the recently conquered Chichimecas of the north, with the result 
that they would apostatize or rebel; (6) part of Oñate’s force would 
probably proceed without authorization into New Mexico, where there was 
danger of their uniting with Captain Leyva de Bonilla, who had made an 
illegal expedition into New Mexico in 1593; (7) to change leaders would 
result in the northern provinces having a second time to experience all 
the annoyances of recruiting and transporting the members of the ex¬ 
pedition that should be organized; (8) such a change of leaders would 
establish a bad precedent and thereby discourage others from volunteering 
for similar work in the future; (9) should Oñate’s force be broken up, 
great delay and greater expense would be incurred in collecting another 
one; (10) it was doubtful whether one who had no relatives or personal 
property in New Spain could assemble a force at any cost, and certainly, 
if he did, it would be at no less cost than 1,000,000 pesos; (11) advantage 
lay with Oñate in that he had had years of experience with the Indians 
of New Spain; (12) a leader coming from Spain would not bring near 
relatives, all of whom would be great assets on such an undertaking; (13) 
with such notable exceptions as that of Cortés and a few others, failure 
had usually attended similar undertakings, which had been organized in 
and started from Spain. 64 
The viceroy’s letter of November 15, 1596, and the enclosed recom¬ 
mendations summarized above were received in Spain just at the very 
time when the confidence of the king in Don Pedro’s ability to lead the 
expedition was shaken. 65 It is not surprising, therefore, that on April 2, 
1597, the king authorized Oñate to proceed with his expedition. 66 
53 Letter from the Count of Monterey to the king, Mexico, Nov. 15, 1596. This volume, 
p. 381. 
54 Statement of the viceroy, the Count of Monterey, Mexico, Nov. 15, 1596. This 
volume, pp. 383-389- See also report of the fiscal, this volume, pp. 389-395. The above 
arguments deduced by Viceroy Monterey disprove Bancroft’s {Arizona and New Mexico, 
p. 118) statement that “in the new viceroy’s policy was his favor to one Pedro Ponce 
de León, who wished to make the conquest himself”. 
55 It was on Feb. 7, 1597, that the king first learned of Don Pedro’s insolvency. 
See p. 345. 
56 Royal cédula, Madrid, Apr. 2, 1597. Ibid. 
