Title to ownership of land and use of water resources is a problem that plagues many southwestern communities that date their founding from Spanish colonial times. When litigation concerning property or water rights occurs, these communities have to take recourse to Spanish colonial laws and to official reports and instruments of founding that are often housed in the Mexican or Spanish archives. Such was the case in 1959 when the City of Albuquerque became involved in a dispute with the State Engineer over the use of waters in the Rio Grande basin of the Albuquerque area.
The Founding of Albuquerque, 1706: An Historical-Legal Problem
By Richard E. Greenleaf
University of the Americas. A. C. Mexico 10, D. F.
Part One
Title to ownership of land and use of water resources is a problem that plagues many southwestern communities that date their founding from Spanish colonial times. When litigation concerning property or water rights occurs, these communities have to take recourse to Spanish colonial laws and to official reports and instruments of founding that are often housed in the Mexican or Spanish archives. Such was the case in 1959 when the City of Albuquerque became involved in a dispute with the State Engineer over the use of waters in the Rio Grande basin of the Albuquerque area.
The City of Albuquerque based its case on the fact that Spanish colonial pueblos were conceded by royal legislation all of the water necessary for their growth and development. Since the doctrine of pueblo water rights had been established by California courts and since Texans were employing a like doctrine, the lawyers for the City of Albuquerque also pursued the same legal and historical path. There were many problems involved. Foremost of these were points of law and history which will be discussed later: Could the instrument of foundation of the City of Albuquerque be found? Could the doctrine of pueblo water rights established in California in the 1780’s be applied to the earlier Albuquerque founding? Did Book IV, Title Seven of the Recopilación of 1680 apply to New Mexico in the early eighteenth century? Did the pueblo doctrine apply to underground waters as well as surface ones?[1]
Many scholars of New Mexicana had searched in vain for the charter of the City: Lansing Bloom had come up with a certificate of the founding; the foremost student of New Mexico’s colonial history, the indefatigable France V. Scholes, had spent a lifetime searching the archives of Mexico and Spain for New Mexico materials; both Eleanor B. Adams and Frank D. Reeve had meticulously traversed the documentation for eighteenth century New Mexico; others including George P. Hammond, Charles W. Hackett, Adolph Bandelier, and their collaborators also had combed the archival materials. In light of previous searches and the activities of the fore‧mentioned investigators, the author of this article realized the magnitude and hopelessness of the task when the City of Albuquerque charged him to find the instrumento de fundición and any analogous materials relating to the history of Albuquerque during the year 1706. This investigator searched through countless volumes of documents in Mexican national and provincial archives trying to find the charter where it might have been filed, or mis‧filed, in litigations, economic materials relating to the Albuquerque area, or in political or Indian affairs documents. The results of the search were only moderately successful and are included later in this essay.
Historical research into Spanish law of the thirteenth through the eighteenth centuries dealing with land grants and water rights consumed many hours. The Spanish law assumed new importance when, on December 12, 1958, the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico handed down its decision in the case of Cartwright et al. vs. Public Service Company of New Mexico that the law of pueblo rights, as known and recognized in California, was the law of New Mexico.[2] The California pueblo doctrine was founded on the legal code of the Commandancia General of the Provincias Internas [3] as detailed in the Plan of Pitic of 1789.[4] This plan for establishing the new town of Pitic, Sonora was prescribed by the Crown as the model for the founding of other pueblos in the Interior Provinces. The Plan of Pitic was merely an extension, in some cases re‧expression, of colonization ordinances followed in Mexico since the 1570’s and included in the Recopilación of 1680.[5] It was the pueblo water doctrine established by the Plan of Pitic and recognized by the California courts that the New Mexico Supreme Court recognized as the law in the Cartwright decision. Pursuant to this decision the Albuquerque case was argued.
The most succinct statement of the City of Albuquerque’s claim to coverage by pueblo water rights doctrine can be gleaned from the table of contents of the City’s brief submitted to Judge McPherson in the District Court of Bernalillo County:[6]
Point I.
The Pueblo of San Felipe de Alburquerque was duly established under law as a Spanish colonization pueblo in the year 1706 and thereafter confirmed by royal decree.
Point II.
As a duly founded colonization pueblo, the Villa of San Felipe de Alburquerque enjoyed the prior and paramount right to such amounts of water within its limits, both underground and surface, as were necessary to meet the needs of its inhabitants.
Point III.
The City of Alburquerque is the successor in interest of the Villa of San Felipe de Alburquerque and as such, is entitled to all of its rights.
Point IV.
The pueblo water rights of the Villa of San Felipe de Alburquerque, to which the City Albuquerque is the successor, are protected and exist today.
Point V.
The appropriation of water from the four wells involved in this litigation is needed by the City of Albuquerque for the use and benefit of its inhabitants.
Point VI.
The Rules and Regulations of the State Engineer cannot impair the pueblo water right of the City of Albuquerque.
Obviously the City’s case rested upon proof that the City of Albuquerque was duly founded as a Spanish colonial pueblo, and this meant the submission of a certified copy of the instrument of foundation. In 1935, after examining many documents subsequent to 1706, Lansing Bloom opined that “unfortunately the official record of the actual founding seems to be lost beyond any hope of recovery.”[7] Bloom placed responsibility for the loss to Albuquerque’s first Alcalde Mayor, Capitán Martin Hurtado, who could not produce the instrument in 1727 when the governor wanted to see it in connection with land grants that Albuquerque inhabitants said Hurtado had made illegally. The recent Greenleaf search of archives at the behest of the City of Albuquerque has tended to support the Bloom statement. However, documents relating to Albuquerque in early 1706 contained in the same ramo as the Bloom certification of the founding tend to corroborate the City’s claim to having been founded as a Spanish colonial Villa in accordance with Book IV, Title VII of the Recopilación. Eleanor B. Adams and Angélico Chávez have given us the most complete statement in print of the founding of Albuquerque:[8]
During the seventeenth century and after the Reconquest until 1706, the general area of Albuquerque was variously called “Bosque Grande,” “Bosque Grande de Doña Luisa,” “Estancia de Doña Luisa de Trujillo,” and “Bosque Grande de San Francisco Xavier.” This Bosque extended from the southern limits of Alameda pueblo lands south to the swamps of Mexía, and the original limits of Albuquerque were set within this general area from the lands of Elena Gallegos on the north to the swamps, also called “of Pedro Lopez,” to the south.
The official contemporary documents concerning the founding of Albuquerque state that there were thirty‧five families, with 252 persons, including adults and children. The early baptismal records indicate a population of at least this size. On the basis of the Noticias of Juan de Candalaria (New Mexico Historical Review 4 (1929): 274‧97), written some seventy years later when he was in his eighties, it is usually assumed that the Villa of Albuquerque was founded with twelve families and soldiers from Bernalillo. It is undoubtedly true that some of the first citizens of the Villa of Albuquerque came from Bernalillo, but more came from other districts. Both the Albuquerque and Bernalillo areas had Spanish settlers before 1680 and after the Reconquest.
The Adams and Chávez synthesis of known documentary sources on Albuquerque is borne out by the corroborative documents in the Mexican archive—sources which some scholars have known for years but which, until the Albuquerque water litigations, have not been examined in detail.
Part Two
The history of Albuquerque in 1706, as we know it today, comes from letters and other official documents of the colonial New Mexican government contained in the Mexican Archivo General de la Nación in the Ramo de Provincias Internas legajo 36.[9] These manuscripts date from February 23, 1706, to July 25, 1706, and yield considerable data on the founding of the City.
The earliest of the sources is a letter of the Cabildo of Santa Fe to the Council of the Indies, signed in Santa Fe on February 23, 1706, which praised the services of Governor Francisco Cuervo y Valdéz since his assumption of the governorship on March 10, 1705. Cuervo’s farsighted policy in pacification and resettlement of Indians was given prominent mention by the Cabildo as well as his salutory economic policies which had resulted in good harvests of grain. The Cabildo then reported that Cuervo had authorized volunteer families from the province to “go and settle in the great forest of Doña Luisa, located on the banks of the Rio del Norte twenty‧two leagues away from this Villa (Santa Fe) …” as had been decided in 1698. After some families announced their intention to participate in the new settlement, Governor Cuervo ordered Juan de Ulibarri, the Procurador and Rexidor of the Kingdom, to explore the site and determine its suitability. Ulibarri reported that the Bosque was a very good place for a new villa and the Governor ordered that the settlement proceed. He gave the colonists an escort of a squad of ten soldiers and he empowered the capitan of the squad as justicia mayor and capitan de guerra of the area. Finally the Cabildo reported: “. . . (and so) this place was peopled again, which he (Cuervo) called the Villa de Alburquerque, and gave it as a patron saint the Apostle of the Indies San Francisco Xavier …”[10]
On April 16, 1706, the first notice of the founding of Albuquerque by the church was made. Fray Juan Alvarez, O. F. M., Commissary of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, Custodian and Ecclesiastical Judge Ordinary of the Province of New Mexico, wrote to the Viceroy about conditions in his jurisdiction.[11] Alvarez recounted the depredations of the Apache on the ranches and settlements of the province and their raids on settlements of Christian Indians. He went on to describe the Governor’s deployment of troops to guard New Mexico against these attacks in the neighborhood of Cochiti, Santo Domingo, San Felipe, Santa Ana, Zia and Jemez, and finally Albuquerque:
Another squad is being kept (for greater security) in the new town established by the said governor and capitan general in the bosque of Doña Luisa, on the Rio Abajo, called the Villa of Albuquerque, and giving it as patron Saint Francis Xavier. Its inhabitants have (now) the best cattle and are increasing their farming lands, each one in his place. The first place was assigned to the church and the convent, and a decent church has been built to be attended by the religious man that the King our lord will grant for administering the Holy Sacraments.…
A letter of April 17, 1709, was presented to Governor Cuervo and forwarded to the Viceroy in which the Cabildo of Santa Fe requested better pay (and back pay) for soldiers who were to guard the proposed new settlements down river from the Villa of Albuquerque.[12] In this letter reference was made to a certified document sent on February 23, 1706, concerning the founding of the new towns as well as a report on the progress of Albuquerque:
… (and also) (we report) the growth and improvement which the new towns are making each day, especially the Villa de Alburquerque and its jurisdiction. So much progress has been made that we have evidence that many of the inhabitants of the other jurisdictions are ready to come and settle in these sites, houses and haciendas which are ruined on the meadows of the Rio del Norte below the said Villa de Alburquerque, on both banks, because of their fertility, and availability of lands, waters, pastures and woods, as well as for the security given them by the squad of soldiers that Your Lordship has given them.
Two important letters of Governor Cuervo y Valdéz were written on April 24, 1706, certifying to the founding of Albuquerque. In the first of these the governor gave notice to the Viceroy of the establishment of the towns of Albuquerque and Santa María de Gracia de Galisteo and requested him “to order the royal officials to furnish money for the bells, ornaments, missals, images and other jewels which are necessary for the celebration and ornamentation of the divine cult, alms which his Majesty (May God save him) has granted for the first time to new churches of new towns.”[13] Along with the request for church equipment Cuervo sent a formal letter of certification of the founding of Albuquerque and Galisteo, dated in Santa Fe on April 24 1706 This document was published by Lansing Bloom in 1935.[14] In order to make this essay complete the Bloom translation will be quoted here:
(I) Don Francisco Cuerbo y Valdez, Caballero of the Order of Santiago, Governor and Capitan General of this Kingdom and (the) Provinces of New Mexico, and Castellan of his forces and Presidios for H (is) M (ajesty) etc.
Certify to His Majesty (whom may God guard for many years), to his Viceroys, Presidents, Governors, and other Officials:
That I founded a Villa on the margins and meadows of the Rio del Norte in a goodly place of fields, waters, pasturage, and timber, distant from this Villa of Santa Fe about twenty-two leagues, giving to it as titular Patron the most glorious Apostle of the Indies San Francisco Xavier, calling it and naming it the Villa of Alburquerque (I located it) in a good site, keeping in mind what is prescribed by His Majesty in his Royal Laws of the Recopilación, Book IV, Title VII, and there are now thirty‧five families settled there, comprising 252 persons, large and small. The Church (is already) completed, capacious and appropriate, with part of the dwelling for the Religious Minister, the Royal Houses (are) begun, and the other houses of the settlers finished with their corrals, acequias ditched and running, fields (already) sowed‧all well arranged and without any expense to the Royal Treasury.
On June 22, 1706, the Viceroy‧Duke of Alburquerque referred these letters to his attorney, Dr. José Antonio de Espinosa, who took action of the request for Church ornaments on July 25, 1706.[15]
Governor Cuervo made a longer report to the Viceroy recounting the founding of Albuquerque from Santa Fe on April 26, 1706.16 After a discussion of his Indian policies the Governor proceeded to the subject of the newly‧founded Villa:
And so enjoying this peace and happy time offered by the truces, as well as (enjoying) the experience which I have acquired in this kingdom, wishing that it were more extended, I ordered that one of the best sites of the Rio del Norte be peopled, below the post of Bernalillo and Alameda. This (place) was inspected by the said general Juan de Ulibarri, sargento mayor, procurador general, and rexidor of this kingdom. He found it to be the most fitting and convenient (of all places) for the establishment of people and a new villa. Having publicized it, many families of the other jurisdictions offered themselves to go (there) taking at least some large and small cattle. For their security I decided that a group of ten soldiers of this presidio should go in a squad (with their families) to escort and guard them, because (the place) is in the main frontier of the barbarous nations of the Chilmos, Jilas, and the said Faraones. The command of the troop was given to a commander with full military experience. I do not doubt, very excellent lord, that in a short time this will be the most prosperous Villa for its growth of cattle and abundance of grains, because of its great fertility and for having given it, in spiritual and temporal things, the patron saints that I have chosen, namely the very glorious apostle of the Indies, San Francisco Xavier, and Your Excellency, with whose names the town has been entitled Villa de Alburquerque de San Francisco Xavier del Bosque. The Villa was sworn, taking into account the things ordered by his Majesty in his royal laws of the seventh title, fourth book of the Recopilacion. There have been settled thirty‧five families and within them two hundred and fifty‧two persons. The church has been finished and is quite large. Also part of the dwelling of the religious minister (has been finished) and also the other houses of the inhabitants, with their corrals and irrigation ditches flowing. Everything has been done with good will and to the liking, relief and convenience of the said inhabitants.
This report of Governor Francisco Cuervo y Valdéz was forwarded by the Viceroy to his attorney for study. On July 25, Dr. Espinosa added several half‧pages of marginalia to the Cuervo report. One item seems particularly appropriate to quote in light of the 1959‧1962 litigations:
In the fourth place, the governor reports that he has resettled the Villa of Galisteo with the inhabitants who used to people it and who were scattered in several parts due to the hostilities of the rebel enemies; and likewise he says he founded
a villa which he called Alburquerque, which lacks a bell, ornament, chalice, vinegar‧cruets and albas. And although before founding it, he should have consulted Your Excellency, however, since it is already founded, and since it is evident from the autos, that he has been successful in the government, (his action) can be permitted and orders can be given so that he may be helped with the ornaments and other things which the royal law grants once to the new towns, and orders (can be given to) the said governor not to build any other town.
On July 28, 1706, three days later, Dr. Espinosa’s recommendations were considered by a Junta appointed by the Viceroy. The committee reviewed all of Governor Cuervo’s reports of April 1706 along with Fray Juan Alvarez’ letters, and correspondence from the Cabildo of Santa Fe. Together with other matters (soldiers salaries and Indian policy primarily) the Junta made decisions about Cuervo’s founding of the new Villa de San Francisco Xavier de Alburquerque. It was unanimously agreed that the equipment requested for the Albuquerque church be appropriated in accordance with royal precedent. It was in this committee that the order was given to change the name of the new Villa to San Felipe de Alburquerque because of a royal decree ordering that a new población be founded in name of the patron saint of King Philip V.[17] Although they do not contain the detail or legal significance of the foregoing letters and reports, several other documents of the months April through June of 1706 allude to the founding of the Villa de Alburquerque. For instance, on April 28, 1706, Governor Cuervo reviewed the Albuquerque and Galisteo establishments for the Viceroy and detailed the need for re‧establishing the old site of Socorro in order to contain the Apache menace and keep the
sedentary pueblos in line.[18] Fray Juan Alvarez once again commented on the happy condition of the Spaniards “settled in the Nueva Villa de Alburquerque” in a letter to the Viceroy on June 5, 1706.[19] A letter of June 18, 1706, from the Cabildo of Santa Fe to the King and Council of the Indies indicated that General Juan de Ulibarri had escorted scattered inhabitants to the site of Santa María de Grado, where he gave them “Royal Possession”, and the letter continued with reports on Galisteo and the Villa de Alburquerque, “where its inhabitants have achieved this year the most successful birth of cattle since they entered this Kingdom.”[20]
Finally, among the Provincias Internas group of Alburquerque documents, there is a letter dealing with Spanish Indian relations signed by Martin Hurtado, Alcalde Mayor and Capitan de Guerra of Albuquerque dated June 19, 1706,[21] and accompanied by a letter of transmittal to Governor Cuervo signed on June 20.[22] These two documents were forwarded to the Viceroy by Cuervo with a second letter of transmittal issued in Santa Fe on June 22, 1706.[23] Alcalde Hurtado recounted in his letter the arrival of an Apache in Albuquerque who told the settlers of a vision that the Indians in the Sandia mountains had, a vision in which they were encouraged to accept Spanish authority and to trade with the Spaniards. The letters also describe the flourishing Apache‧Spaniard barter trade going on at the time:[24]
Sir: The letter and enclosed certified documents tell of the news given to me by capitan Martin Hurtado, alcalde mayor and capitan aguerra of the Villa of Alburquerque and its jurisdiction. He has also been given other news concerning the good state and progress of the said Villa and its inhabitants, and the peaceful visits made by the pagan Indians of the faraon apache nation. (The apaches) have constantly come to trade and barter with the Spanish inhabitants of the said Villa of Alburquerque and the christian Indians of the mountain passes and towns of this district and jurisdiction.
Of course these contemporary accounts of Albuquerque from January to June of 1706, were no substitute for the instrument of founding as far as the courts were concerned. However, as corroborative evidence of the City’s founding they were highly useful and quite illuminating.
Part Three
The Albuquerque brief correctly stated and offered adequate proof that there was “ample evidence to support the presumption of an actual grant, which during the more than 250 years since its issuance has been lost or destroyed.”[25] Furthermore, the foregoing documents state clearly that the Villa de Alburquerque was founded according to the procedures outlined in Book IV Title VII of the Recopilación. Even though Bloom indicates that the Hurtado documents of the 1720’s point to the fact that there was a charter, it is quite possible that no specific merced was issued by Governor Cuervo or his agent Juan de UlibarrI. On the other hand, when Cuervo stated in his report that UlibarrI had taken the new settlers to the Albuquerque area and given them possession, this assertion plus the following description of the ceremony of investiture certainly clinches the argument that a Spanish colonial pueblo was duly founded: “The Villa was sworn, taking into account the things ordered by his Majesty in his royal laws of the seventh title, fourth book of the Recopilación.”[26]
It appeared that on August 11, 1960, the City of Albuquerque had won its case with this line of historical and legal argumentation, for on that day the District Court of Bernalillo County upheld the pueblo water rights doctrine in the Albuquerque litigation.[27] However, the State Engineer appealed the decision to the New Mexico Supreme Court, which reversed the district court’s ruling on December 14, 1962.[28] The Supreme Court’s deliberations led that body to conclude, as Professor Clark had opined earlier,[29] that the City of Albuquerque could not base its claims to unrestricted use of water on the pueblo rights doctrine, and that the historical evidence presented in the case was not germane:
We therefore hold that all of the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the district court, relating to the Pueblo of San Felipe de Alburquerque and the claimed pueblo water rights, should be stricken as not being within the issues properly before the court, and that the judgment of the district court, insofar as it is based upon such findings and conclusions, should be reversed.
In commenting on the City’s use of the pueblo water rights doctrine to substantiate its claims, the Supreme Court implied that other valid legal arguments should have been employed:
As to the argument of the city that no other legal avenue is open to it by which this claimed right can be adjudicated, we are wholly unresponsive. We will not in this opinion attempt to outline the way, but one will no doubt be found should the city continue its claim of prior and paramount right to the use of all of the water of the Rio Grande Stream and Underground Basin to the extent necessary to supply its inhabitants.
Despite the decision of the New Mexico Supreme Court and any future litigation of the City of Albuquerque to press its claim to water rights, the historical and legal issues raised by the City in this case have generated an enormous amount of interest in Albuquerque’s historical past and its proud tradition as successor to the Spanish colonial Villa de San Felipe de Alburquerque. This writer would be overjoyed to learn that some archivist had found the instrumento de funclición at long last.
Notes
1. Professor of Law Robert E. Clark of the University of New Mexico has dealt with the technical legal issues, and some of the historical ones, in his “The Pueblo Rights Doctrine in New Mexico,” New Mexico Historical Review XXXV (1960), 266‧283. It is not the purpose of this essay to present either a legal analysis or a history of the pueblo water rights doctrine. The reader is directed to the most recent survey of the subject (with considerable technical materials) of Betty Eakle Dobkins, The Spanish Element in Texas Water Law (Austin: The University of Texas Press, 1959). For the legal and historical issues as they are presented by the City of Albuquerque, consult the Applicant’s Brief before the District Court of Bernalillo County No. 70800; Specific citations from the Albuquerque Brief will be made later.
2. Cartwright et al. vs. Public Service Company of New Mexico (Dec. 12, 1958) 66 N.M. 64, 343 P.2d 654.
3. Bernardo dc Gálvez, Instructions for Governing the Interior Provinces of New Spain, 1786. Translated and Edited by Donald E. Worcester (Berkeley: The Quivira Society, 1951).
4. “Instructions approved by His Majesty, and made for the establishing of the new town of Pitic, in the Province of Sonora, ordered to be adopted by the other new projected settlements (Poblaciones) and by those that may be established in the district of this General “Comandancia.” This document from California Archives, Volume I, 853ff is published in Appendix VII of John W. Dwindle, The Colonial History of the City of San Francisco (San Francisco: Towne and Bacon, 1863). The Albuquerque Brief, 13, cites titles six and seven of the Plan; the entire document was entered as evidence. For analogous materials to the Plan of Pitic, see Dobkins, op. cit., 94‧102.
5. Recopilación de leyes de los Reynos de las Indias [1680] (Madrid: Boix, 1841). Four Volumes.
6. Albuquerque Brief, i.
7. Lansing Bloom, ed., “Albuquerque and Galisteo Certificate of their Founding, 1706,” New Mexico Historical Review X (1935), 49.
8. Eleanor B. Adams and Angelico Chávez. The Missions of New Mexico, 1776. A Description by Fray Atanasio Dominguez with other Contemporary Documents (Albuquerque: The University of New Mexico Press. 1956), 145, n 1.
9. AGN, Provincias Internas, legajo 36 has been paginated several times. The old ramo 5 cited by Bloom in 1985 has been re‧arranged into expedientes. The entire legajo has New Mexico documents, including many that allude to Albuquerque, other than the ones cited in this article. Copies of many of the letters and reports also are found in Sevilla in AGI, Guadalajara 116. Other copies are found in the manuscript collection of Mexico City’s Museo Nacional, 2da serie, legajo 59, exps. 6‧12. Even though this essay will use the new citations to AGN, Provincias Internas, legajo 36, researchers may prefer to use only the folio references which still remain the same as they were in the 1980’s. The new expedientes have been designated thusly: expediente 4, 353‧379; expediente 5, 380‧419; expediente 6, 420‧425; expediente 7, 426‧461; expediente 8, 462‧476; and so forth.
10. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 7, 456rv‧461r.
11. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 7, 455r. Fray Juan Alvarez alluded to the founding of Albuquerque in an earlier dispatch which indicated that the settlement had begun in early January 1706 (perhaps December of 1705). In a report on the New Mexico missions dated at Nambé January 12, 1706 he concludes:
It remains to add that there have gone out two squadrons of soldiers for the new settlements which Governor … Don Francisco Cuervo y Valdéz is making. One of the settlements is of Thanos Indians in the Pueblo of Galisteo, and the other is of Spanish settlers in El Bosque de Doña Luisa, down the River.
The report is from AGI, Guadalajara 116 as is published in C. W. Hackett, ed., Historical Documents Relating to New Mexico, Nueva Vizcaya, and Approaches Thereto, to 1773. Collected by Adolph F. A. Bandelier and Fanny 17. Bandelier, 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1923‧1937), III, 378.
12. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 86, exped. 5, 416rv‧418r.
13. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 7, 454rv.
14. Bloom, op. cit., 48‧50.
15. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 454r.
16. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 8, 463rv‧468rv.
17. The Albuquerque Brief, 5, incorporates this entire document as exhibit 13: “Testimonio del mandamiento del Virrey Duque de Alburquerque sobre In fundición de la Villa de Alburquerque, 1706” taken from “The Bandelier Collection of Copies of Documents Relative to the History of New Mexico and Arizona,” in House Executive Documents, 3d ses,., 53d Cong., 1894‧95, serial 3322, p. 313. There is a paraphrase of the document in C. W. Hackett, ed., Historical Documents Relating to New Mexico, III, 380. Adams and Chávez, op. cit., 146, n. 3, give full treatment to the name change and the subsequent confusion over use of San Francisco as opposed to San Felipe de Alburquerque.
18. AGN. Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 5, 395rv‧397rv.
19. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 5, 391rv.
20. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 5, 392rv‧393rv.
21. AGN. Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 5, 400rv.
22. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 5, 398rv.
23. AGN. Prov. Inter., leg. 36, exped. 5, 399r.
24. AGN, Prov. Inter., leg. 86, exped. 5, 401r.
25. The Albuquerque Brief, 6.
26. Supra, note 16.
27. The City of Albuquerque vs. The State Engineer of New Mexico (August 11, 1960) District Court of Bernalillo County, No. 70800.
28. City of Albuquerque, New Mexico vs. S. E. Reynolds, State Engineer of New Mexico (Dec. 14, 1962) The Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico, No. 7013.
29. Clark, op. cit., 278‧279, 281 et passim.
Albuquerque; 1700s; Eighteenth Century; New Mexico Colonial History