I, Teresa de Herrera y Sandobal, come before you and state that the deed was executed before Your Honor and that it was signed by my father, don Tomas de Herrera y Sandobal, to which I desire to say that I being married, recognize only the authority of my husband, Diego Martin, who did not give me his consent to make this sale.
In regards to me having the articles nice the contract was made, I say that it is true, but when trades and adjustments are made without the sanction of the husband or minors the deeds are not valid and the documents are cancelled. Besides she appealed to me for an agreement and has not consented to any.
With regard to the “trade was malicious” because her husband was absent the embarrassment arose that he still owes me 50 pesos and the on another occasion or occasions it was said that the amount was 40 pesos; whether it was 50 or 40 does not take it away. With Antonio de Moya and his wife had said that they had given the cloth for the shawl for 20 pesos and the skirts for 30 pesos and that her husband still owed a balance of 50, which he was to pay during this month of March.
As to the point about the document being void because it was signed in my name, though I do know how, I say that only is a deed or promissory note should it state that because Teresa de Herrera did not know how to sign she requested a witness to sign. In petitions one does not sign by request.
In the last point of her statement she further states that she could not wait for two years or until he return of her husband to support her children. She is ignoring the debit in past and confessing her delay and if this is true, all of the clamor, that no release form the debt was given, that no document should have been made and it is was made it would have contained the clause in which the debt is acknowledged. Teresa de Herrera y Sandoval (rubric)
Reference: Spanish Archives of New Mexico, Series I, Twitchell 401, Reel 3, Frames 66-78
©Henrietta M. Christmas