After this criticism was written I asked for the opinion of the learned and courteous Father Zephyrin, the Franciscan historian. In reply the following letter was received, which so clearly gives another side to the matter that I am glad to quote it entire: "I do not think your criticism from an artistic view is too severe; but it would have been more just to judge the decorations as you would the efforts of amateurs, and then to have made sure as to their authors. "You assume that they were produced by the padres themselves. This is hardly demonstrable. They probably gave directions, and some of them, in their efforts to make things plain to the crude mind of the Indians, may have tried their hands at work to which they were not trained any more than clerical candidates or university students are at the present time; but it is too much to assume that those decorations give evidence even of the taste of the fathers. In that matter, as in everything else that was not contrary to faith or morals, they adapted themselves to the taste of their wards, or very likely, too, to the humor of such stray 'artists' as might happen upon the coast, or whom they might be able to import. You must bear in mind that in all California down to 1854 there were no lay-brothers accompanying the fathers to perform such work as is done by our lay-brothers now, who can very well compete with the best of secular artisans. The church of St. Boniface, San Francisco, and the church of St. Joseph, Los Angeles, are proof of this. Hence the fathers were left to their own wits in giving general directions, and to the taste of white 'artists,' and allowed even Indians to suit themselves. You will find this all through ancient Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. The Indians loved the gaudy, loud, grotesque, and as it was the main thing for the fathers to gain the Indians in any lawful way possible, the taste of the latter was paramount. "As your criticism stands, it cannot but throw a slur upon the poor missionaries, who after all did not put up these buildings and have them decorated as they did for the benefit of future critics, but for the instruction and pleasure of the natives. Having been an Indian missionary myself, I acted just so. I have found that the natives would not appreciate a work of art, whereas they prized the grotesque. Well, as long as it drew them to prize the supernatural more, what difference did it make to the missionary? You yourself refer to the unwise action of the Pala priest in not considering the taste and the affection of the Indians."