The Risk

Instructions for Colonists

Bacconlini writes, “When we choose Utopia, we are choosing a particular set of instructions” (308). For the Pacific Colony, this was taken literally as Owen wrote instructions each time a new wave of members would be traveling to Topolobampo. The first was sent out to pioneers in 1886, was later reinforced in 1887, and again in 1892. The instructions here were presented to colonists leaving for the colony in November of 1887. In these instructions Owen states that each person must receive written permission from Owen himself, have $10 of shares in the Credit Foncier Company, $10 for a lot in Sinaloa, and $100 for a Special Fund for the purchase and preparation of a farm. There is also the reminder to colonists that they must have read and signed the “Constitution of the Credit Foncier Company” pledge (published in The Credit Foncier of Sinaloa vol. 2 no. 3), because the only way to succeed is enforce disciple with its members and that “those who will not obey are not fit to command, and must not go to Sinaloa under our concessions”. These instructions, though offered as a way to ensure that the ideals of co-operation were to be followed through with in the community, are a clear example of how the plan of utopias can become totalitarian in their practical application. It is then up to the people to decide whether or not the utopian ideals are worth the instructions that come along with it.

Colonists' Application to Permit

Along with the instructions that Owen sent out to its new colony members, there was also a permit that needed to be completed before being accepted into the Pacific Colony. The application requires a written understanding that colonists will endorse the plan for co-operation, a list family members that will be living at the colony, a statement of which of Owen’s works on co-operation have been read, and an assurance that the colonists owns at least one of the several funds connected to the colony (Credit Foncier, Kansas Sinaloa Investment Company, Income Bonds, Land Fund, or Improvement Fund). There were plenty of volunteers who were willing to sign the pledge of co-operation and give up their livelihood in the United States to start a new. One person, in fact, wrote to Owen, “I sometimes feel that Pacific Colony is my last peaceable hope” (Cat’s Paw, 24). On the other hand, another person had written to Owen expounded how, “the human nature of Sinaloa colony will be just like the average human nature that lives all over this and other lands. The evils they propose to flee from are not so great as those to flee to” (Cat’s Paw, 22-23). As Bacconilini explains, those who are fearful and resentful of utopias are those who are unwilling to risk their comfortable positions (302). In the end, it is up to the individual to decide whether the hope for change that Topolobampo offered was worth the risk of leaving everything else behind.

New City

During the colony’s implementation, John W. Lovel’s publishing company in New York City published the New City newspapers from 1892-1894 to acquaint non-colonists with the mindsets of those in Topolobampo. The writers for New City were strong supporters of the Pacific Colony and often encouraged others to a new world in which opportunity was simply waiting (vol. 1 no. 1), praised how the Credit Foncier would bring harmony from chaos (vol. 1 no. 16), and declared that the colony itself was a representation of the “ethical-social reformation” of its day (vol. 2 no. 14). Yet, even from a source that believed in the utopian ideals of Topolobampo, it is here we also see the antagonism that the colony faced. For example, in Vol. 1 no. 19 (as presented) details the discord between the Credit Foncier Company of Sinaloa and the Kansas-Sinaloa Investment Company due to misunderstanding and disagreements on both sides about the maintenance of the ditch and further progress of the railroad. These instances of disharmony illustrate Bregman’s point about how utopias are a “breeding ground for discord, violence, and even genocide” and how no matter what ideals are being presented, “Utopias ultimately become dystopias” (22), because no matter how many people may have believed in the hope for perfection, there will always be people who disagree on what that perfection is supposed to look like.

Topolobampo's Harrowing Tales

On March 4, 1887, San Francisco’s Daily Examiner details the bleak outlook the majority had about the Topolobampo colony. It describes the “tales of woe” concerning the “Topolobampo scheme” and its “victims”, about how Topolobampo is on dry desert with no water or food and that many taken to talking the railroad tracks only to be murdered or robbed. In Cat’s Paw, however, Reynolds comments on how many of the “terrible tales” that came from ex-colonists were a mix of “gross falsehood, half-truth and fact” (36). Whatever horrible truths or half-truths were told about the poor conditions of the colony, there were still colonists who believed that the risk that came with forming the utopia of Topolobampo was worth the progress that could be made. In one of his letters while at the colony, Ira Kneeland writes, “I will starve to death in Sinaloa before I will be caught trying to make a living in the U.S again” (Cat’s Paw 73), still believing that the possibility of what Topolobampo could become was better than remaining in an otherwise static state.

Sargent writes, utopias are often defined by their “inevitable dialectic of hope”, and how they straddle between the rejection of hope and the renewel of hope (conclusion). Failure, as many have declared the colony of Topolobampo Bay to be, is not necessarily a category that any utopia can fall under. For it is not the continuation of a perfect society that makes a utopia, but rather the ideals that encourage social change.Even throughout all these problems, the colonists that remained in Topolobampo were determined to live towards that social change.

Our Hatchet

Our Hatchet is a newspaper stationed in Sinaloa, Mexico that, while it doesn’t have a direct connection to the colony in Topolobampo Bay, often wrote about the colonists. In their first issue they referred to Topolobampo Bay as “ill-fated”, and later mocked Owen’s title of Pacific City, as: “it is not even a town...The tract of land that for the past twenty years has been designated as the ‘city site’ is as destitute of inhabitants as the heart of the Sahara desert” (vol. 0 no. 5). These articles represent an outsider’s point of view on the struggles that the colonists put themselves through all for the sake of the utopia, providing a cynical tone about the colony in general but with an overall approval of the colonists’ determination and hope. In one issue they printed an article written by one of the colonists: “We read a great deal, and, I suppose, dreamed as much more, before we came here, of the beauties and comforts that would so soon surround us in this land of promise” but how “one by one those hopes slipped away into that old ‘might have’ bin, but new ones ever sprang up to their places” (vol. 0 no. 10). Despite all the hardships that the colonists endured, and all of the criticism they received, those who remained in Topolobampo continued to hope, believing that by reaching towards perfection, they would at least land on something better.

Where Utopia Failed

Years after the Pacific Colony was evacuated from the harbor of Topolobampo Bay, the San Diego Union wrote a piece on remembering the “failed utopia” on May 14, 1967. It describes how, like other hopeful communities of the nineteenth century, people believed “faith, toil, and script were expected to build a new Utopia”. When people settled in Topolobampo to “hold shares on land the could never own”, they were met with further struggles and dissension, but many within the colony still hoped for something better. In fact, as the San Diego Union recalls, in 1888 the Navy had sent Iroquois to evacuate colonists from Topolobampo Bay because circumstances had gotten so bad, but most had refused to leave and continued on living in perilous conditions. It wasn’t until Owen himself, tired of the lack of quantifiable success from the Credit Foncier, distanced himself from the colony and left entirely that the members of the Pacific Colony finally called it quits.

Still, even after the colony dissolved, there were a colonists who still saw Topolobampo as a utopian land of hope. In one of her letters after the dissolvement of the colony, Marie Howland writes how the Pacific Colony was blamed for having deceived people away from their homes to a barren land, but she herself had no regrets settling in Topolobampo (Cat’s Paw 107). Howland and Kneeland are only two examples of colonists who continued to hold out hope for that something better Topolobampo was meant to provide. Their perseverance is valued, not because the society became “successful”, but because they continued to risk so much to work towards their utopian ideals.