Chapter X: of this book

[83] Dávalos to the King, June 20, 1585, A. I., 67-6-18.

[84] Memorial of Salazar, June 24, 1590, A. I., 67-6-67.

[85] Ibid.

[86] Memorials of the organization and officials of Manila for the removal of the royal audiencia, June 26, 1586, A. I., 68-1-33.

[87] Dávalos to the King, June 20, 1585, A. I., 67-6-18.

[88] Santiago de Vera to Contreras, June 20, 1585, Blair and Robertson VI, 67-68.

[89] See Recopilación, 9-45, for regulations of the galleon trade between Acapulco and Manila. By these laws, promulgated from 1583 to 1636, the governor of the Philippines was given authority in Manila over the dispatching, manning, lading, and control of the galleon (see Recopilación, 9-45-3, 4, 20, 24, 29, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 59). He retained these powers until the latter part of the eighteenth century, when the abuses resulting from his control were eliminated (Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 268).

[90] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 94-95; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 183-186; see Ortega's Memorials to the King, Blair and Robertson, IX, 95-119.

[91] Memoria y consultas de Fr. Alonso Sánchez (no date given), A. I., 67-6-27; see also Juan de la Concepción, Historia general de Filipinas [cited hereinafter as Concepción, Historia general], II, 103-184. These agreements are interesting because they show how intensely nationalistic were the respective sentiments of the Spaniards and Portuguese with regard to their Asiatic colonies, notwithstanding the fact that since 1580 the home governments of the two nations had been united. This correspondence illustrates the fact that the Portuguese regarded their former colonies as still distinctively their own.

[92] Royal cédula for the restoration of the Audiencia of Manila, November 25, 1595, A. I., 106-4-19.

[93] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 65-66.

[94] Suppressed Audiencia to the King, June 20, 1590, Blair and Robertson, VII, 208-211; also Recopilación, 2-15-181.

[95] Salazar to Felipe II, June 24, 1590, Blair and Robertson, VII, 252.

[96] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 75.

[97] Dasmariñas to Felipe II, June 20, 1591, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 142-168, passim.

[98] Salazar, on reaching the Spanish court, was made first archbishop of the Philippines. He died on December 4, 1594, before he could assume his new post.

[99] Cédula of January 17, 1593, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 315.

[100] Ibid.; see also cédula of same date in Recopilación, 6-6-8.

[101] Morga remained in the Philippines throughout a period of eight years and during this time distinguished himself as a lawyer and judge, administrator, soldier, and later as a historian. It was due to his energies as senior magistrate that Van Noordt, the Dutch free-booter, was defeated at the entrance of Manila Bay. Morga, in his Sucesos, already quoted several times, has left us a scholarly view of conditions as they existed at the time of his residence in the Islands. Morga left the Philippines on July 10, 1603, with a promotion to the Audiencia of Mexico; he served in New Spain for several years and in 1616 he was again promoted to the post of president of the Audiencia of Quito.

[102] Dasmariñas to the King, December 6, 1595, A. I., 67-6-18.

[103] Misa to the King, May 31, 1595, A. I., 67-6-29.

[104] The amount legally permitted to be taken to the Philippines at this time was 500,000 pesos (subsequently 1,000,000 pesos). The galleon, on the voyage from Manila to Acapulco, could carry merchandise to the registered value of 250,000 pesos (later 500,000 pesos). This regulation was first enacted January 11, 1593 (Recopilación 9-45-6, 9). On the same date residents of New Spain were forbidden to trade in the Philippines and the entire Philippine and Chinese trade was expressly reserved to subjects in the Philippines. The latter were given the exclusive privilege of sending goods to New Spain (ibid., 1). They were permitted to buy only from the Chinese merchants who came to Manila (ibid., 34).--See Martinez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 266-270.

[105] Cédula of January 11, 1593, Recopilación, 9-45-44.

[106] Morga to Philip II, July 6, 1596, Blair and Robertson, IX, 271.

[107] Ordinance for the re-establishment of the Audiencia of Manila, November 26, 1595, A. I., 106-4-19; also in Blair and Robertson, IX, 189-191.

[108] The Archbishop of Manila, in a letter to the king, on August 15, 1624, stated that the principal motive which influenced Philip II to re-establish the audiencia at the time of Governor Tello, was that in a district so remote and distant from his royal presence the governors might not be so absolute, but that there might be a superior arm to check them, and to prevent their extortions from innocent people (Blair and Robertson, XXI, 95). It is certain, too, that the audiencia was also destined to champion the royal prerogative in the face of the encroachments of the higher officials of the church. This need was especially urged by Morga.

Grao y Monfalcón, the procurator of the merchants of Manila at the
court in 1636, wrote on June 13 of that year: "In the year 590 the
royal Audiencia of Manila was suppressed ... and its suppression
must also be reckoned among the hardships of that city ... because
of those which it suffered until the year 597, when the Audiencia
was reëstablished (sic)." (Blair and Robertson, XXVII, 189).

[109] Pancada, the wholesale purchase of the goods brought to Manila by the Chinese. These goods were bought by a committee of two or three persons, acting for the governor and ayuntamiento, then sold or apportioned among the merchants of the city in proportion to the amount of money which they were able to invest. This arrangement was designed to give all the merchants a chance to buy and at the same time to prevent the Chinese from selling at exorbitant prices (Cédula of January 11, 1593, Recopilación, 9-45-34.)

[110] Cédulas of May 5, 1583, and May 25, 1596, Recopilación, 2-15-11. It will be noted that this authority was granted to the first audiencia established in Manila. This same faculty was conferred by the Ordenanzas nuevamente formadas para el régimen y govierno de la audiencia nacional de Manila, Art. I, Chap. 1, Sec. 1 (A. I., 106-4-19).

[111] Martínez de Zúñiga has this to say concerning the work and purpose of the tribunal: "The royal audiencia was established to check the despotism of the governor, whom it has never impeded, because its learned members were always the weaker, and the governor may send them as prisoners to Spain, exile them to the provinces to take census, or imprison them in Fort Santiago, as has been done" (Martínez de Zúñiga, Estadismo, I, 244).

[112] Recopilación, 2-15-32.

[113] Ibid., 34-36, 44.

[114] Ibid., 41.

[115] Certain phases of these questions remained within the jurisdiction of the church courts.

[116] Recopilación, 2-15-53.

[117] Parián, a market-place; the name given to the quarter set aside by the government wherein the Chinese were confined. This restriction was imposed in 1603, to give added security to the city of Manila, endangered by a Chinese uprising at that time.--See Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 146-148; Recopilación, 2-15-55; 5-3-24; 6-18-5.

[118] Ibid., 2-15-64; 2-16-16 to 20.

[119] Ibid., 2-15-180.

[120] Ibid., 70. See Chapter I of this book.

[121] Ibid., 71.

[122] Ibid., 3, 5, 67. See Chapter I, note 20, for distinction between oidores and alcaldes del crimen.

[123] Ibid., 68; 2-19-2.

[124] Ibid., 1, 3.

[125] Ibid., 2-15-63, 71.

[126] Ibid., 2-15-74 to 85.

[127] Ibid., 90-91.

[128] Ibid., 93.

[129] Exemption from the jurisdiction of the civil authority having been claimed by the military and religious orders of Santiago, Calatrava, and Alcántara, Philip IV, on April 1, 1635, gave jurisdiction over these orders to the audiencias.--Ibid., 96.

[130] Ibid., 5-10-1.

[131] Ibid., 2.

[132] According to the Recopilación, 5-13-1 (laws of October 20, 1545, February 13, 1620, and the Ordinance of Audiencias [1563]), the value of the peso was fixed at 450 maravedís.

[133] Recopilación, 2-15-88.

[134] Ibid., 5-12-20.

[135] Ibid., 5-12-29.

[136] Ibid., 5-10-3.

[137] Ibid., 5-13-8.

[138] Ibid., 4, 7.

[139] Ibid., 5-10-4.

[140] Ibid., 5-13-1.

[141] Ibid., 2-15-97.

[142] Ibid., 88.

[143] Ibid., 103, 107, 108. Magistrates were forbidden to sign decisions during office hours--valuable time which should be devoted to hearing cases (ibid., 109).

[144] Ibid., 105.

[145] Ibid., 117. Pesquisidores were special investigators with extraordinary executive and judicial powers who were sent out by the home or central government when need arose to correct abuses in colonial or provincial administration. Visitadores (visitors) were sent regularly to inspect the government of a province or colony. The governor was supposed to dispatch visitors to examine the work of alcaldes mayores and corregidores every three years.

[146] Ibid., 118.

[147] Ibid., 178.

[148] Recopilación, 5-15-21. Acuerdo, the joint consultative action of the governor and audiencia. See Chapter VI of this book and note 78 of the same chapter.

[149] Ibid., 5-13-3. The periods of validity of cases appealed from the audiencias of Ultramar varied with the distance and the time necessary for the transmission of autos to the Council. The time assigned by the laws of the Indies was as follows: Chile, one and a half years, Tierra Firme, New Granada, Santo Domingo, New Spain, one year, and the Philippines, two years. This law was promulgated first on September 24, 1621, and again on March 30, 1629.

[150] Recopilación, 2-15-123 to 133.

[151] Ibid., 133 (1563). Helps (Spanish conquest, I, 102, 103-104) states that the repartimiento system was originated in 1496, from the requirement of Columbus that the natives of Hispaniola should pay him a certain quantity of gold as tribute. In view of the inability of the natives to meet the demands of the Spaniards in regard to the precious metal, "the villagers were ordered to make (and work) the farms in the Spanish settlements. This may be considered as the beginning of the system of repartimientos, or encomiendas, as they were afterwards called."

In a subsequent chapter the same author tells of the difficulty which Ovando had in compelling the Indians to live among the Spaniards, to pay tribute and accept religious teaching. Ferdinand and Isabella, in a letter dated December 20, 1503, directed Ovando to compel the Indians to deal with the Spaniards, to work for wages, to go to mass, to be instructed in the faith, and further, that they should do all these things "as free persons, for so they are." ... "Ovando adopted the following system," says Helps; "he distributed Indians amongst the Castillians, giving to one man fifty, to another a hundred; with a deed that ran thus: 'to you, such a one, is given an encomienda of so many Indians, with such a Cacique, and you are to teach them the things of our Holy Catholic Faith'. The word encomienda ... was a term belonging to the military orders, corresponding to our commandery or preceptory; and this term naturally enough came into use with the appointment, as governors in the Indies, of men, who held authority in those orders, such as Bobadilla and Ovando." (See also Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 262.) "With respect to the implied condition of teaching the Indians 'the Holy Catholic Faith' it was no more attended to from the first than any formal clause in a deed, which is supposed by the parties concerned to be a mere formality."

"We have now arrived," continues Helps, "at the climax of the repartimiento system. That which Bobadilla did illegally, was now done with proper formalities on parchment: ... We may notice again that the first repartimientos made by Columbus ... apportioned to any Spaniard, whom he thought fit, such and such lands, to be worked by such a Cacique and his people--a very different procedure to giving men--a feudal system, not a system of slavery."--Helps, Spanish conquest, I, 138-139.

[152] Recopilación, 2-15-129.

[153] Ibid., 127.

[154] Ibid., 5-15-181.

[155] Francisco de la Misa to the King, May 31, 1595, A. I. 67-1-29.

[156] In this and in other letters of officials in the Philippines we find the amount frequently referred to as 1000 pesos, although in the Recopilación (2-15-129 [1609]) the jurisdiction is fixed at 1000 ducats. According to law 181 (1589), the authority of the governor (the audiencia had been suppressed) was extended to cases of the same value.

[157] It is probable that Misa meant that there was not sufficient distinction between the governor's asesor and the teniente de gobierno. This combined post was filled by Pedro de Rojas until 1593 and then by Antonio de Morga. These officials were the private advisers of the governors in legal matters, and active magistrates at the same time.

[158] Memorial of Antonio de Morga, July 6, 1596, Blair and Robertson, IX, 271 et seq.

[159] Cédula of May 26, 1596, A. I., 106-4-19.

[160] Pardo de Tavera, in Census of the Philippine Islands, I. 335.

[161] Recopilación, 1-1, 2, 3; 5-1.

[162] King to the President and Oidores, February 16, 1602, A. I., 105-2-1; Cédula of October 25, 1870; Colección legislativa de España, CV, 449-463; Cédula of April 12, 1875, ibid., CXIV, 516-524.

[163] Recopilación, 2-15-81, 83.

[164] Tondo is now a district or ward of the city of Manila. At the time referred to here, the barrio of Santa Ana (small district under a teniente of a corregidor or alcalde mayor) was within the jurisdiction of the corregimiento of Tondo.

[165] Recopilación, 2-15-71, which forbade the trial of alcaldes and provincial officials before the audiencia.

[166] Council of the Indies to the Fiscal, A. I., 105-2-10.

[167] Recopilación, 5-2-3; 2-15-81, 83.

[168] This decision conforms with the Recopilación, 5-2-3, 4, and 2-15-68; 117. These laws give to the audiencia and the governor jurisdiction over excesses of the provincial judges and executives, and over cases appealed from them. Ibid., 2-16-44 gave jurisdiction to the viceroy over criminal charges against oidores and alcaldes.

[169] Council of the Indies to Audiencia, December 16, 1687, A. I., 105-2-1. The facility with which witnesses may be procured is from one point of view a great aid to the administration of justice in the Philippines today. See Elliott, The Philippines to the end of the military règime, 246-8.

[170] Royal decree on Usurpation of Indian Lands, November 7, 1751, Blair and Robertson, LXVII, 27-34. See Cunningham, "Origin of the friar lands question in the Philippines" in Political science review. X, 465 480.

[171] Fuero mixto, in this case a fuero or concession to the ecclesiastical government of jurisdiction over secular matters. See note 53, Chapter XI, of this volume.

[172] Audiencia to the King, September 27, 1617, A. I., 67-6-20. Three of these friars were hanged at once, and one, Juan Ocádiz, escaped to New Spain. He was said to be the illegitimate son of Doña Ana of Austria (see Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 82-88).

[173] Recopilación, 2-15-134 to 153; 2-16-15; 2-18-29, 30; 1-4-3, 20; 1-6-26, 39, 57; 1-7-18, 29 to 31; 2-15-146, 147, 149. See note 3,