Chapter XI: , of this volume (2)

[419] Governors, captains-general, and viceroys were assisted by an asesor, or legal adviser, who gave his opinion in all matters of law that came up for solution. The necessity for this official developed through the fact that as most governors were soldiers, they were incapable of rendering judgment on legal and administrative questions. As counselor to the governor, this official bore the same relation to the executive as the fiscal did to the audiencia. The asesor was held responsible in the residencia for all decisions rendered by the governor in matters of justice, and in governmental affairs the governor and asesor were jointly responsible. Frequently the asesor was able to block completely the work of the audiencia and his opinion nullified the judgments of magistrates who were as learned in the law and as well qualified, if not better, than he. Martínez de Zúñiga (Estadismo, I, 224) discusses the influence of the asesor in the following terms: "Expedientes are sent to one of the two royal fiscales to ascertain their legality; afterwards they are sent to the asesor whom the governors must consult; the latter place (of asesor) is a very good one, ... besides 2000 pesos as salary it has its private revenues in addition to 500 pesos yearly from each of the royal monopolies (discussed in Chapter V of this volume). There are many persons in Manila who are exempted from ordinary justice through their military connections or on account of being employed in the royal monopolies, and as they depend on him, he exercises great power; ... there are few who desire him for an enemy, for when they least think of it they are in need of his favorable opinion in some expediente which they have brought before the government." The laws of the Indies forbade that an oidor should act as the governor's asesor if any other appointee with the requisite qualifications were available (Recopilación, 3-3-35, and note). See cédula (and accompanying expedientes) of September 26, 1756, A. I., 106-4-16.

[420] Recopilación, 2-15-61 to 63, 169; 2-16-12, 31, 32.

[421] Ibid., 2-15-38.

[422] Ibid., 3-3-36, 38.

[423] Ibid., 3-3-60. Relative to the relations of the viceroys and audiencias of the Spanish colonies, Robertson (The History of America, IV, 19-20) says: "The Spanish viceroys have often attempted to intrude themselves into the seat of justice, and with an ambition which their distance from the controul (sic) of a superior rendered bold, have aspired at a power which their master does not venture to assume ... the viceroys have been prohibited, in the most explicit terms, by repeated laws, from interfering in the judicial proceedings of the courts of Audience, or from delivering an opinion, or giving a voice with respect to any point litigated before them. In some particular cases, in which any question of civil right is involved, even the political regulations of the viceroy may be brought under review of the court of Audience, which in those instances, may be deemed an intermediate power between him and the people, as a constitutional barrier to circumscribe his jurisdiction. But as legal restraints on a person who represents the sovereign, and is clothed with his authority, are little suited to the genius of Spanish policy; the hesitation and reserve with which it confers this power on the courts of Audience are remarkable. They may advise, they may remonstrate; but in the event of a direct collision between their opinion and the will of the viceroy, what he determines must be brought into execution, and nothing remains for them, but to lay the matter before the king and the Council of the Indies."

[424] Recopilación. 3-3-27, promulgated July 19, 1614, conferred general pardoning power on the viceroy.

[425] Regent to the King, July 9, 1793, A. I., 106-4-18; Cédula of October 24, 1803, A. I., 105-2-10.

[426] Royal decree of July 4, 1861, Colección legislativa, LXXXVI, 1-45.

[427] Recopilación, 3-3-65. It is to be noted that the New Laws of 1542 conferred on the audiencias the duty of protecting the Indians. Professor Moses, in his Spanish dependencies in South America, I, (212-3), says: "The audiencias were commanded to inquire into the treatment which the Indians had received at the hands of governors and private persons; and, in case of excesses and ill-treatment, the guilty parties should be punished.... While it was acknowledged that some persons had a sufficient title to hold Indians, it was ordered that when the number held was excessive, the audiencia should gather the necessary information and reduce the allotments made to the said persons in a fair and moderate quantity 'and place the rest under the Crown'."

[428] Ibid., 53.

[429] Ibid., 3-3-61; 3-4-7. We have a notable illustration of this in the banishment of Archbishop Poblete by Governor Salcedo (1663-1668) as a result of the resistance of the former to Salcedo's intervention in ecclesiastical matters on the basis of the royal patronage. Salcedo did not solicit the aid or intervention of the audiencia in this matter.

[430] Ibid., 2-16-8.

[431] Ibid., 3-3-58; King to Audiencia, March 6, 1781, A. I., 105-2-9.

[432] Instruction to Tello, May 25, 1596, Blair and Robertson, IX, 229, 232-233, 238-239.

[433] Recopilación, 1-14-29 to 31.

[434] Ibid., 31.

[435] King to the Audiencia, March 6, 1781, A. I., 105-2-9.

[436] Recopilación, 3-3-45.

[437] This is treated in the first chapter of this book. See Solórzano, Política Indiana, II, 271-279.

[438] Recopilación, 2-15-11.

[439] Constitution of 1812, Martínez Alcubilla, III, 408 et seq.; Acuerdo for the promulgation of the Constitution of 1812, Montero y Vidal, III, 404; Acuerdo of January 15, 1814, Ordenanzas, etc., A. I., 106-4-19; Cédula of September 26, 1835, Zamora y Coronado, Apéndice, 41-138; Royal Decree of January 30, 1855, Colección legislativa, LX, 105-147; see also Royal Instruction to Regents, June 20, 1776, and Cédula of April 8, 1778, in Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 22-28.

[440] Ordinances enacted by the Audiencia of Manila, June 13 to December 19, 1598, Blair and Robertson, X, 293-316; Ordinances etc., January 7, to June 15, 1599, ibid., XI, 1-81. Reference may also be made to the five volume Colección de autos acordados de la real audiencia ... de Manila, 1861-1866; see also Estadísticas de las causas y expedientes de gobierno despachadas por la audiencia de Filipinas durante el año de 1876. For New Spain we have the Recopilación sumaria de algunos autos acordados de la real audiencia de Nueva España, Mexico, 1787. Of similar import and character was the well-known collection of Puga, cited in the bibliography of this volume. See also Solórzano, Política Indiana (2 vols.).

[441] Blair and Robertson, L, 191-264; see, also, Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 380-385, also correspondence relative to the modifications of these ordinances by Raón in A. I., 105-4-5. Marquina's efforts along this line may be noted in A. I., 105-4-6.

[442] Acuerdo of January 15, 1814, A. I., 106-4-19; see also Montero y Vidal, Historia general, III, 404; 430.

[443] Carvajal to the King, December 5, 1785, A. I., 107-5-14; Carvajal to the Audiencia of Manila, December 29, 1787, A. I., 107-5-15; Testimonio del expediente sobre poner la real jurisdicción y el gobierno y policía de estas islas en el ser y estado que tenían antes, December 20, 1788, A. I., 107-5-18, 105-3-5.

[444] King to the Audiencia, August 13, 1793, A. I., 105-2-10.

[445] Recopilación, 3-2-70 (after 1680), 67.

[446] Rodríguez San Pedro, Legislación ultramarina, VII, 67.

[447] Mas, "Internal political condition of the Philippines," in Blair and Robertson, LII, 70-73. Mas was a Spanish diplomatic official stationed in China, who visited the Islands in 1842 on a semi-official mission. This writer was not favorably impressed with the effectiveness of the acuerdo. He wrote: "Whatever difficulty occurs in the fulfilment of an order, it must be solved by means of a conference and advice [consulta], from which a reply is not obtained until from twelve to fourteen months." Instead of governmental matters being referred to the acuerdo, Mas stated that they were referred to Spain, hence there was great delay. He stated that the governor scarcely decided any question by himself, and those which were solved in the colony were referred to the asesor, and "from this practice," he continued, "arises the system of expedientes, which reigns, and which is so fatal to the prosperity and good government of the country, since very often the arrangement that appears good to some, is contrary to the opinions or interests of others.... Thus much valuable time is lost and the expedientes result in only a waste of paper, besides great injury to the islands. The governor often has to conform to the opinions expressed in the expediente, although he knows they will be the cause of injustice. On the other hand, the governor is often directly at fault, because he enforces his own opinion on his assessor (sp.), who has often obtained his position through favoritism and is not a lawyer, and decides questions according to the will of the governor.... The chiefs of the various departments carry on correspondence with the directors-general of their respective departments in Madrid, without the knowledge of the governor, a fact that increases the confusion and disorder." (See also Revilla Gigedo's description of the evils of the expediente in New Spain [1790]. Smith, The viceroy of New Spain, 190-191.)

This description of the Philippine government in 1842 would seem to indicate that aside from the limitations imposed upon his rule by the audiencia, the governor was obliged to contend with a number of other officials, departments, and regulations, which effectively prevented him from exercising absolute power, even at the sacrifice of efficiency. We note in this description, moreover, that tendency of Spanish colonial government which has been emphasized so often in this treatise--namely, the failure of the home government to leave to the colonial officials sufficient scope of action or authority to deal adequately with the ordinary problems of government. Up to the end of the eighteenth century the audiencia was the only civil authority or tribunal present to exercise any check on the executive in administrative affairs. However, in the last century the importance of the audiencia in this regard was diminished by the creation of other departments, ministries, and offices, by the elimination of time and space, due to the progress of invention, which brought the colonies nearer to Spain, and finally by the fact that the tribunal itself was more and more confined to judicial affairs.

[448] Governor Torres to the Queen, March 18, 1835, A. I., 106-4-21.

[449] Colección legislativa de España, LXXXVI, 1-45. Elliott, in his Philippines to the end of the military regime, p. 242, states incorrectly that this reform took place in 1865. Mr. Elliott did not make use of the sources. It is to be noted, too, that Dr. Barrows in his article on "The governor general of the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history makes contradictory statements relative to this matter. On page 242 he asserts that the governor was president of the audiencia till 1844, and on page 248 the statement occurs that "a further specialization of 1861 deprived the governor-general of his judicial powers."

[450] Instruction of the King to Governor Acuña, February 16, 1602, Blair and Robertson, XI, 263-88.

[451] Fray Sánchez, in his memorial of July 26, 1586, stated that the audiencia had stopped the practice of conceding encomiendas (A. I., 67-6-27), which the governors had followed prior to its establishment. Nevertheless the governor's authority to bestow encomiendas was recognized by the royal instructions to Governor Dasmariñas, issued May 25, 1593 (Blair and Robertson, IX, 232). The statement of Sánchez may be interpreted to mean that the audiencia had stopped the abuses which had been perpetrated by various governors in bestowing encomiendas on their friends. Encomiendas were conceded by different governors in the Philippines throughout the eighteenth century. This matter has been discussed in an earlier note.

[452] Mas, "Internal political conditions of the Philippines, 1842," Blair and Robertson, LII, 69-70 and note. The keen observations of this official on social and governmental conditions in the Philippines are peculiarly pertinent, and they are as true in many regards today as they were seventy-five years ago. He recommended a regency to govern the Philippines, consisting of the governor as president, a military commander and an intendant of finance. The audiencia, according to his plan of reform, was to be limited to judicial affairs, with appellate jurisdiction over civil, criminal, and commercial cases. Instead of the audiencia as a court of appeals against the governor, the regency was to entertain appeals from the audiencia. Many of his ideas were incorporated into the new laws of the last half of the nineteenth century (ibid., 78-85).

[453] Recopilación, 5-12-22; 2-15-35; 36, 41.

[454] Ibid., 3-3-51.

[455] Ibid., 2-15-35, 36, 41; 3-3-2, 34, 42; 3-14-1; 5-12-22.

[456] Acuña to Felipe III, July 15, 1604, Blair and Robertson, XIII, 235. Acuña stated that the soldiers and military officials were "discontented and grieved at the ill-treatment which the said auditors accord them; and at seeing that they are hindered by them, an auditor commanding at his will the arrest of a captain, official, or soldier, without cause or reason, and interfering in all the details of service--even going so far as to inspect their quarters, and send them to the public prison, for very trivial affairs, against all military precedents." The governor said that when affairs went on in a peaceful and orderly way, it was because the oidores were not interfering with them. He stated that it was the opinion of all right-thinking men that soldiers were of more use in the colony than judges (ibid., 237).

[457] The terms of these governors were as follows: Fajardo, 1618-1624; Corcuera, 1635-1644; Vargas, 1678-1684; Arandía, 1754-1759; Anda, 1762-1764, 1770-1776.

[458] Rios Coronel to the King, June 27, 1597, A. I., 67-6-19; see also Bourne, "Historical introduction," in Blair and Robertson, I, 53, note.

[459] These arguments are noted in detail in Chapter II of this volume.

[460] Viana to Carlos III, May 1, 1767, Blair and Robertson, L, 126-135.

[461] Delgado, 212-215, reproduced in Blair and Robertson, XVII, 316.

[462] "But," he continued, "if a man come to these islands with the intention of escaping his natural poverty by humoring the rich and powerful, and even obeying them, the wrongs accruing to the community are incredible" (ibid., 317).

[463] Reforms in Filipinas, April 26, 1827, by Manuel Bernáldez Pizarro, Blair and Robertson, LI, 219; see 213-218.

[464] Montero y Vidal, Archipiélago Filipino, 162-168. "The Spanish régime in Filipinas lasted 333 years.... During that time there were 97 governors--not counting some twenty who served for less than one year each, mostly ad interim, and the average length of their terms of office was a little less than three and one-half years, a fact which is an important element in the administrative history of the islands" (Blair and Robertson, L, 74, note 46).

[465] Recopilación, 3-3-3.

[466] Ibid., 3-11-1 to 3.

[467] Ibid., 3-11-1, 2, 3 to 10; 3-10-3, 11; 5-10-15.

[468] Ibid., 2-2-72, 74, 77; Consulta de 18 de Febrero de 1673 sobre atribuciones de la Junta de Guerra de Indias, A. I., 141-5-8.

[469] Auditor de guerra, "the juez letrado, who has jurisdiction in first instance over cases under the military law, subordinate to the captain or commandant-general of an army or province" (Escriche, Diccionario, I, 369).

[470] Royal order of January 30, 1855, Colección legislativa de España, LXIV, 105-147.

[471] Royal order of January 22, 1787, A. I., 107-5-16.

[472] That the consejo de guerra was something more than a (tribunal of) courtmartial and that it actually participated in the administration of military affairs may be seen in the cédula of June 22, 1599, which authorized the local consejo to act with the audiencia and cabildo in restraining the military officials in the provinces from imposing undue exactions on the natives, assessing them too heavily or confiscating their property in the equipment of military forces in time of threatened invasion (Recopilación, 3-4-3).

[473] On March 12, 1781, Governor Basco y Vargas complained to the king against the inconvenience of having to appeal the decisions of the local council of war to the Supreme Council in Madrid. This was the practice followed in other parts, he said, but it was undesirable in the Philippines on account of the isolation and the distance. He recommended instead that these cases should be appealed to a board consisting of the governor and two asesores--one his own, and the other an oidor to be designated by him. This recommendation was not accepted (A. I., 106-1-18).

[474] Audiencia to Váldez, December 11, 1788, A. I., 107-5-16.

[475] Royal order of March 27, 1802, A. I., 107-5-16.

[476] Case of Don Diego Salvatierra, November 20, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10.

[477] Case of Don Josef de Áviles, November 2, 1792, A. I., 105-2-10.

[478] Recopilación, 2-16-12; 2-15-36.

[479] Ibid., 2-16-11.

[480] The memorial which the governor sent in answer to the arguments of the oidor was an interesting exposition of his opinion of the audiencia. He said that the lack of time alleged by the oidor was a mere pretense, as the regular sessions of the audiencia did not exceed three hours a day. The governor stated that none of the oidores were occupied more than that length of time, excepting those who had special conservatorships of cockpits, tobacco, cards, betel, and wine. The suits of Spaniards and Indians were few, he alleged, since most of the questions involving commerce were tried in the tribunal of the consulado (Governor Marquina to the superintendent-general, July 10, 1789, A. I., 107-5-18); see Chapter III, note 88.

[481] Recopilación, 3-11-2.

[482] Ibid., note 2.

[483] See citation of the cédula of January 24, 1773, applicable to Perú, wherein an oidor was permanently charged with the duty of serving as auditor de guerra (ibid.).

[484] Morga states that after the audiencia was established in May, 1584, "they (the oidores) began to attend to the affairs both of justice and of war and government" (Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 60).

[485] Memorial of April 19, 1586, Blair and Robertson, VI, 197-233. The purpose of the proposed expedition was declared to be to "forestall the danger that the French and English, and other heretics and northern nations, will discover and navigate that strait which certainly lies opposite those regions--that of Labrador." A note suggests that this probably referred to the St. Lawrence River. Delgado says that Governor Sande called this council together on April 9, 1586, evidently meaning Santiago de Vera, as the latter became governor in 1584, and Sande left the Islands in 1580. De Vera's signature is affixed to this petition. Other letters of special importance, from the audiencia or individual oidores to the court, entirely or in part on military affairs, written during this period, may be noted in Blair and Robertson, VI, 56-65, 157-233, 254-264, 265-274, 311-321, XVII, 251-280, and throughout this series from Volumes VI to XXXV (1584-1650) especially. The general subject is covered in A. I., 67-6-6 to 26.

[486] Luzón Menaced, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 284-297. We shall see, in the next chapter, that Governor Bustamante, on a similar occasion, asked for the written advice of the various ecclesiastical authorities and corporations on the question of whether he had a right to remove and appoint oidores without express royal authorization.

[487] Opinions of the religious communities on the war with the Zambales. January 19-20, 1592, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 199-233.

[488] Audiencia to the King, January 7, 1597, A. I., 105-2-1.

[489] A. I., 105-2-1 to 10 are replete with documents illustrating this phase of the relation of the audiencia and the governor.

[490] Torre to the King, July 26, 1744, A. I., 108-2-21.

[491] Report of Council of War, June 18, 1746, A. I., 108-2-21. See note 17 of this chapter, which deals with the local council of war. On the occasion referred to, it acted as a courtmartial. It also had power to advise the governor, and even to prevent the military officials from taking steps which would inflict injustice on the natives in connection with military operations. Here it may be seen that magistrates were actually members of this council, and in this capacity they advised the governor as to the best means of fortifying and defending the Islands. The laws of the Indies are singularly lacking in definite statements as to the legal composition and membership of this council.

[492] Obando to the King, August 15, 1748, A. I., 108-2-21.

[493] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XV, 205-237.

[494] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 239-241.

[495] In recommending the services of Licentiate Madrid y Luna, oidor of the Manila audiencia, Alcaraz wrote to the king as follows: "On that account, and for the good accomplished by his services in this Royal Audiencia, the said Licentiate Madrid claims that your Majesty should grant him as a reward permission to marry some of his seven daughters and three sons in Mexico" (Alcaraz to Felipe III, August 10, 1617, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 52).

[496] Formosa lost to Spain, Blair and Robertson, XXXV, 128-162.

[497] Audiencia to the King, July 15, 1598, A. I., 67-6-18.

[498] Audiencia to Felipe III, August 8, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 77-89.

[499] Recopilación, 5-3-24; also A. I., 105-2-1.

[500] Recopilación, 2-15-55. Don Antonio de Morga, writing in his Sucesos in 1609, described the Chinese government of the Parián as follows: "The Chinese have a governor of their own race, a Christian, who has his officials and assistants. He hears their cases in affairs of justice, in their domestic and business affairs; appeals from him go to the alcalde-mayor of Tondo, or of the Parián, and from all these to the Audiencia, which also gives especial attention to this nation and whatever pertains to it" (Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XVI, 197). See W. L. Schurz, "The Chinese in the Philippines," in The Pacific Ocean in history, 214-222.

[501] The Chinese were altogether too shrewd in business for the other residents of Manila. The desire to avoid trouble and to keep from provoking the Chinese to rebellion were also factors, and there were institutional and religious reasons. The Chinese were of different race and heritage and their practices and beliefs were regarded by the Catholic Spaniards as altogether heathenish and heretical, and judging by almost any standard of morality and cleanliness it must be conceded that some of them at least were indecent and revolting.

[502] Cédula of December 1, 1606, A. I., 105-2-1.

[503] Recopilación, 6-18-6.

[504] King to the Audiencia, December 4, 1630, A. I., 105-2-10. The Chinese had asked the king on this occasion to remove Governor Tavora. The magistrates, jealous of the governor, and desiring to see him dispossessed of his office, forwarded this request to the king.

[505] Royal instructions to Gerónimo Ortiz y Capata; February 4, 1631, A. I., 105-2-1.

[506] King to the Audiencia, December 4, 1630, A. I., 105-2-10.

[507] King to the Audiencia, August 8, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1.

[508] King to Governor Silva, March 27, 1616, A. I., 105-2-1.

[509] King to the President and oidores, July 25, 1619, A. I., 105-2-1.

[510] King to the President and oidores, December 21, 1630, A. I., 105-2-1.

[511] Acuerdo of July 27, 1713, A. I., 68-4-17.

[512] Attention was called in the last chapter to the acuerdo power of the audiencia in Chinese affairs. It was seen there that the audiencia passed ordinances regulating the Chinese trade, also their organization and manner of living in the Islands.

[513] King to the President and oidores, May 14, 1790, A. I., 105-9-10. This tax was collected from the Chinese in 1852, when Jagor, the celebrated German traveller, visited the Islands. Chinese who were engaged in agriculture paid merely the tribute of twelve reales, which was collected from natives as well. In addition to the tax of six dollars (probably Mexican, which were equivalent to the silver peso) merchants paid an industrial tax of twelve, thirty, sixty, or one hundred dollars, according to the amount of business transacted (Blair and Robertson, LII, 57-58, note).

[514] Consulta of June 28, 1786; Intendant Carvajal to King, December 31, 1787, and other letters; A. I., 107-5-15.

[515] Testimonio de autos sobre sublevación de los sangleyes, substanciados y determinados por el oidor, Don Pedro Sebastián Bolívar y Meña, 1686-1690, A. I., 68-1-27.

[516] Marquina to the King, June 30, 1793, A. I., 107-5-22.

[517] King to the Audiencia, November 30, 1797, A. I., 105-2-18.

[518] King to the Audiencia, February 19, 1806, ibid.

[519] See Chapter II, notes 61 and 64 of this book. The study which Dr. David P. Barrows has recently made of the office of governor and captain-general is of value in showing the continuity, and at the same time the evolution of the office from Spanish times to the present. Dr. Barrows states that Miguel López de Legaspi became governor and captain-general of the Philippines when the office was created in 1567. The original cédula of establishment and appointment is in Blair and Robertson, III, 62-66, and bears the date of August 14, 1569. See Barrows, "The governor-general of the Philippines under Spain and the United States," in The Pacific Ocean in history. p. 239.

[520] Fiscal to the King, July 21, 1599, Blair and Robertson, XI, 114, 115; Maldonado to the King, June 28, 1605, ibid., XIII, 307-315.

[521] Audiencia to Felipe III, August 8, 1620, ibid., XIX, 87-89; see also Messa y Lugo to King, July 30, 1622, ibid., XX, 161-163.

[522] Messa y Lugo to the King, July 30, 1622, ibid., XX, 162-163; see Recopilación, 9-45-3.

[523] Recopilación, 8-20-1.

[524] Recopilación, 2-16-43 and 44.

[525] Messa y Lugo to the King, op. cit., 186.

[526] Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 177.

[527] In accordance with Recopilación, 5-15-2.

[528] Foreman, Philippine Islands, 60; Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 208-219.

[529] The governor arrested and imprisoned magistrates Zalaeta and Lezana before the arrival of Valdivia. Oidor Viga was exiled to Samar and Bolívar was sent to Mariveles. Both of these last-mentioned magistrates died in exile. By the time Valdivia arrived Fiscal Alanis was the only person connected with the former audiencia who was left to be punished. His residencia was taken and his property confiscated (Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 135, 231-233, 277, 281-295).

[530] Bolívar to Valdez, June 15, 1685, ibid., 221.

[531] Ibid., 223.

[532] Pimentel to Rodríguez, February 8, 1688. Blair and Robertson, XXXIX, 240. Pimentel accused the governor of scandalous conduct, "in the matter of chastity, not sparing any woman, whatever may be her rank or condition; and he keeps some worthless women who serve as procuresses for conveying to him those whose society will give him most pleasure." Pimentel stated that the archbishop and the friars of the city did nothing to check this conduct, but knowingly permitted it.

[533] Pimentel to Rodríguez, February 8, 1688, XXXIX, 239-240.

[534] Ibid., 242-243.

[535] Torralba to the King, June 23, 1718, A. I., 68-4-18. When Governor Bustamante arrived in Manila in 1717, Torralba's services as oidor and temporary governor, extending over a period of eight years, were investigated. Wholesale bribery was the leading charge against him. He had levied blackmail on alcaldes mayores, encomenderos, and Chinese and Spanish merchants. He was also charged with the misuse of government funds, and was held responsible for large deficits. It was said that he had sent his wife to Macao with most of this ill-gotten money. In his residencia he was fined 120,000 pesos, exiled forever from Madrid, Manila and New Spain, and was reduced subsequently to such poverty that he was compelled to beg. He died a pauper in the hospital of San Juan de Diós, in Cavite, in 1736.

[536] Government of Bustamante, Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 151; this account (pages 148-165) is a summary of Concepción, Historia general, IX, 183-424; see also Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 410-429.

[537] Consulta del gobierno de Filipinas sobre la formación de aquella audiencia, 2 de Mayo de 1718, Zulueta Mss., Manila.

[538] Report of Archbishop de la Cuesta on the Bustamante Affair, June 28, 1720, Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 182-195.

[539] Recopilación, 2-15-11.

[540] Ibid., 2-16-29.

[541] Contestación de la Compañía de Jesús, 6 de Mayo de 1718, Zulueta Mss., Manila.

[542] Recopilación, 2-16-93.

[543] Opinión de la Universidad de Santo Tomás, 9 de Mayo de 1718, Zulueta Mss., Manila.

[544] Recopilación, 2-16-44.

[545] The legal phases of this question together with the opinions of the royal fiscal and the leading councillors are set forth in the consulta of the Council of the Indies of March 18, 1720, A. I., 68-2-8. In this consulta an effort is made to fix responsibility for the murder of the governor, and to determine the legality of his acts.

[546] This refers to the reception of the French papal delegate, Tourón, who came to the Islands to inspect the archbishopric, and who was received by the audiencia without the authority of the Council of the Indies. This will be treated further in Chapter X of this book.

[547] Fr. Diego de Otazo, the Jesuit confessor of Bustamante, in a letter to his superior, described the power of the governor and his treatment of the audiencia as follows: "Here, my father," he wrote, "the governor takes away and establishes, gives, commands, unmakes and makes more despotically than does the king himself;... Royal decrees are not sufficient; for either he hides them, or he does not fulfill them as he ought. The Audiencia does not serve [as a check] on him, for he suppresses and he establishes it, when and how he pleases; nor do other bodies, whether chapters or [religious] communities (dare to oppose him), ... for he does the same thing [with them]. And never do there lack pretexts for doing thus, even though such bodies are appointed by the king; and with the pretext that account of the matter has already been rendered to Madrid, what he has begun remains permanently done, or else he proceeds to change it, as seems good to him." (Letter of Diego de Otazo, S. J., November 19, 1719, Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 175.)

[548] Recopilación, 2-16-93.

[549] Government of Bustamante (from Concepción), Blair and Robertson, XLIV, 161.

[550] Recopilación. 2-16-43, 44, 46.

[551] King to Basco y Vargas, December 10, 1783, A. I., 105-2-10.

[552] Sociedad de los Amigos del País, an economic, commercial, and agricultural society established in the Philippines by Governor Basco y Vargas in 1780.--Original autos and plans for society in A. I., 106-1-14.

[553] Audiencia to the King, December 17, 1788, A. I., 106-4-17.

[554] Expedientes sobre establecimiento de intendencias y subintendencias en Filipinas, A. I., 105-1-17, 107-5-18, 105-3-5, 146-6-13.

[555] King to the Audiencia, August 1, 1788, A. I., 105-2-10.

[556] King to Basco y Vargas, October 9, 1777, A. I., 105-2-9.

[557] Audiencia to the King, December 23, 1789, A. I., 106-4-17.

[558] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, II, 324, note.

[559] For further testimony bearing upon the formative period of the audiencia's history, see Chapter II of this volume, wherein are described the conflicts attendant on the establishment of the audiencia in the Philippines.

[560] Dasmariñas to Felipe II, June 6, 1592, Blair and Robertson, VIII, 253.

[561] Acuña to Felipe III, July 15, 1604, Blair and Robertson, XIII, 232.

[562] Acuña continued as follows: "If the governors do not consent to this (the appointment of the relatives and dependents of oidores), the auditors dislike them, and seek means and expedients whereby the worthy persons to whom the said offices and livings are given shall not be received therein. Accordingly the governors, in order not to displease the auditors, give up their claims and dare not insist upon them" (ibid., 234).

[563] Acuña further commented on their commercial abuses: "The said creatures and connections of the said auditors trade and traffic a great deal in merchandise from China; and the citizens complain that it is with the auditors' money (their own or borrowed), and that with the favor they receive they cause great injury to the commonwealth, for they take up the whole cargo. They desire to be preferred therein, and in buying the cloth and in every other way, try to take advantage. If the president wishes to remedy this they do not cease to offer him little annoyances; for the auditors know how to magnify themselves, in such a manner that they give one to understand that any one of them is greater than he; and they attain this by saying that what the president or governor does they can cancel, and that what the auditors decree has no appeal, recourse, or redress" (ibid., 234-5).

Acuña testified that the magistrates had rendered life unpleasant for the residents of the colony, because of their selfishness. He continued: "the resources of this land are scanty, but if there is anything good the auditors also say that they want it for themselves; and when there is a Chinese embroiderer, tailor, carver, or other workman, they proceed to take him.... Such benefits do not extend to the citizens; but rather, if any of these things are available, the said auditors demand them and by entreaty and intimidation get possession of them. It is the same thing in regard to jewels, slave men and women, articles of dress, and other things.... We are compelled to overlook these things, and others of more importance, that we may not experience worse trouble; ... as your Majesty is five thousand leguas from here and redress comes so slowly" (ibid., 235-236).

[564] Their salaries must be preferred, he wrote, "even if it be from the stated fund for the religious orders, bishops, ministers of instruction, and for the military forces, who are before them in order,--they have difficulties and misunderstandings with the royal officials (ibid., 236) ... as the treasury is always straitened (sic), and, on account of the great care which the auditors take to collect their salaries, as it cannot be so prompt as they would wish, they seek borrowed money from the citizens--who give it to them, willingly or unwillingly, each one according to his means or designs. From this follow difficulties, to which they pay no heed; as some of them demand these loans from persons who are parties to suits at the time, who grant these to the auditors in order to place them under obligations, and profit by them" (ibid., 239).

[565] The rebellion referred to here occurred in 1603. It was said to have been instigated by two mysterious mandarins who came to Manila for the alleged purpose of searching for a mountain of silver, which was located near Cavite. On the Eve of St. Francis the Chinese made their attack with great success, owing, the ecclesiastical element claimed, to the personal intervention of St. Francis, who appeared on the walls and led his followers to victory. In this revolt 24,000 Chinese were hunted down and slain. In 1639 another rebellion occurred. A third insurrection of the Chinese took place in 1660. In 1763 the Chinese joined with the British in their attack on the city. It is estimated that Anda, in his campaign in the provinces, put an end to 6,000 Chinese. Another massacre, and the last in the history of the Islands, took place in 1820. This was an uprising of the natives against all foreigners who were thought to be responsible for the plague of cholera then raging (Foreman, Philippine Islands, 108-119; A. I., 105-1 to 10 and 68-1-27).

[566] The entire dependence of the colony on the Chinese trade is attested by Concepción (Historia general, IV, 53). He states that: "Without the trade and commerce of the Chinese these dominions could not have subsisted." Morga, in his Sucesos (349), further testifies: "It is true the town cannot exist without the Chinese, as they are the workers in all trades and business, and are very industrious, working for small wages."

[567] Acuña to Felipe III, July 15, 1604, Blair and Robertson, XIII, 239-241.

[568] Fajardo described "the oppression caused by the multitude of relatives and followers (of the auditors); their appropriation of the offices and emoluments, to the injury of the meritorious; their hatred and hostility to those who unfortunately fall out with them; their trading and trafficking, although it be by an intermediary, since they, being men of influence, buy the goods at wholesale and protect their agents." He stated that this caused him great embarrassment and made good government almost an impossibility (Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 126).

[569] "The auditors," Fajardo wrote, "have few important matters that oblige them to close application, (and) they must apply the greater part of their time to devising petty tricks on the president in order to vex and weary him, until, [as they hope] not only will he allow them to live according to their own inclination but also their relatives and followers shall, in whatever posts they desire, be employed and profited. And since harmony has never been seen here without this expedient, one would think it easy to believe such a supposition" (Fajardo to the King, August 15, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 120-121).

[570] Recopilación, 8-20, 21, 22.

[571] Decree written on margin of letter: Fajardo to the King, August 15, 1620, Blair and Robertson, XIX, 136.

[572] Ibid., 122.

[573] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 126.

[574] Fajardo to the King, July 21, 1621, Blair and Robertson, XX, 53.

[575] Ibid., 54. Fajardo continued as follows: "To such a point has it (the dissension) gone that if this country were not involved in the perils of war as it has been, and as they are still threatening it, I should beseech your Majesty to place it in charge of some other person, who would be more interested in documents. But may God not choose that I should be relieved from the service of your Majesty, in which from the age of fifteen years I have been engaged; ... It would be no little pleasure to me to be employed in naval and military affairs and other things in which, with my counsel and my personal aid, I might be able to help; and to know that the matter of auditors and their demands, their rivalries, and their faultfinding, should concern another."--Ibid., 55-56.

[576] Concepción, Historia general. VII, 168 et seq.; see Lea, Inquisition in the Spanish dependencies. 299-318, and Cunningham, "The inquisition in the Spanish colonies; the Salcedo affair," in the Catholic historical review, III, 417-445. The Salcedo affair will be more fully discussed in Chapter XI, of this book, which treats of the relations of the audiencia and the church; citations 60-72, Chapter XI.

[577] See Augustinians in Philippines, in Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 235, 239, 269-273.

[578] Robertson, History of America, IV, 20. See Chapter VI, note 54, of this book.

[579] Recopilación, 2-15-46.

[580] Moses, The Spanish dependencies in South America. 1, 221. The Council of the Indies manifested its disapproval of the acts of the audiencia and of Pizarro by commissioning Pedro de Gasca as president of the Audiencia of Lima. Gasca was ordered to restore that viceroyalty to the sovereignty of Spain, and to do whatever the king would do under like circumstances. This was in May, 1546. "He (Gasca) was at the head of every department of the administration," writes Professor Moses; "he might raise troops, appoint and remove officers, and declare war; he might exercise the royal prerogative of pardoning offenses; and was especially commissioned to grant an amnesty to all who had been engaged in the rebellion. He was authorized to revoke the ordinances which had caused the popular uprising and the overthrow of Blasco Núñez; and, returning to the earlier practice, he might make repartimientos, or confirm those which had been previously made. In accordance with his expressed wish, he was granted no specific salary, but he might make any demands on the treasuries of Panama and Peru." Ibid., I, 225.

[581] Ibid., I, 264.

[582] Ibid., I, 267.

[583] Ibid., I, 276-301. See Recopilación, 2-15-8.

[584] Ibid., II, 82.

[585] Ibid., II, 16.

[586] Ibid., I, 361.

[587] Bancroft, History of Mexico, II, 273-295.

[588] Ibid., II, 318-340; 367-381.

[589] Ibid., II, 410.

[590] An audiencia was created at Compostela, Nueva Galicia, in 1548. This tribunal bore the same relation to the audiencia and viceroy in Mexico as did that of Santa Fé de Bogotá to those in Lima. The Audiencia of Nueva Galicia had both judicial and administrative functions, exercising its jurisdiction over the partidos and corregimientos, with their respective alcaldes and corregidores. It concerned itself, moreover, with projects of conquest, discovery, the development of mines, and internal improvement. Subsequently this audiencia was transferred to Guadalajara and given that name. See Recopilación, 2-15-7.

[591] Bancroft, History of Mexico, II, 586.

[592] Ibid., II, 602-7.

[593] It is interesting to note that in 1564, while the Audiencia of Mexico was governing ad interim, the voyage of Legaspi and Urdaneta was undertaken, and the first permanent settlement was made in the Philippines by authorization of that tribunal. Bancroft (History of Mexico, II, 599-600) is both indefinite and inaccurate in his account of the expedition of Legaspi and Urdaneta to the Philippines. He says: "Finally on the 21st of November, 1564, the squadron sailed, and after a prosperous voyage, reached Luzón, where Legaspi founded the city of Manila." It is well known that Legaspi did not sail directly to Luzón, as Bancroft implies, but he visited a number of islands in the Archipelago before he settled at Cebú on April 27, 1565. Manila was not formally claimed until May 19, 1571 (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 39; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, 113-119). Bancroft (op. cit., II, 743) states that Manila was founded in 1564 by Miguel de Legaspi. Manila was a prosperous commercial center before the Spaniards came to the Islands. Dr. James A. Robertson in his article entitled "Legaspi and Philippine colonization" (see American Historical Association, Annual report, 1907, I, 154), states on the basis of original documents that "this well-situated and busy trade center was erected into a Spanish city on June 3, 1571, and on the 24th the necessary officials were appointed." Dr. Robertson states in a note (p. 154) that "possession was taken of Luzon, June 6, 1570."

[594] Recopilación, 8-4-24.

[595] Ibid., 3-2-47.

[596] Ibid., 2-15-47 and 48.

[597] King to the Audiencia, November 23, 1774, quotes the cédula of September 13, 1608, as testimonio; A. I., 105-2-9. A copy of this cédula also exists in A. I., 67-6-3.

[598] Testimonio al acuerdo de 19 de Julio de 1654, Audiencia de Manila, A. I., 67-6-3. See Recopilación, 2-15-58.

[599] Copies of the cédula of January 30, 1635, and of April 2, 1664, and of the consulta of September 9, 1669, exist in A. I., 67-6-3.

[600] Recopilación, 2-15-45. It will be seen that this law was slightly modified by laws promulgated in the eighteenth century.

[601] Ibid., 60.

[602] Ibid., 56; 3-2-12, 13, 53, 28-33.

[603] Ibid., 9-11.

[604] Ibid., 10.

[605] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 94; Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 184-192.

[606] Ibid., I, 192.

[607] Ibid., I, 199.

[608] Montero y Vidal, op. cit., I, 106-107; Martínez de Zúñiga, op. cit., I, 195.

[609] Morga's Sucesos, Blair and Robertson, XVI, 61.

[610] Acuña designated Almansa to supervise military affairs instead of Oidor Maldonado, who was in reality senior magistrate, and as such should have assumed the direction of military affairs in accordance with the practice elsewhere, and in compliance with the laws of the Indies. The fiscal objected to this illegal procedure, as he termed it, alleging that the governor was not authorized by law to choose his own successor. He pointed out that, according to the existing laws, the senior magistrate should succeed to the military command by his own right, without the interference either of the governor or the audiencia. Notwithstanding this protest, Almansa continued to hold the post of acting captain-general, for which it was said that he was better fitted than Maldonado.

[611] Audiencia to Felipe III, July 6, 1606, Blair and Robertson, XIV, 140-148. These demands were ultimately met by a subsidy from the treasury of New Spain. It may be remarked in this connection, that the oidores were probably interested in somewhat more than increased revenue for defense, since they were known to have been absorbed in commercial ventures. This episode marks the beginning of a struggle on the part of the Manila merchants for increased trading privileges--a battle which continued until the close of the eighteenth century. They were opposed by the merchants of Cádiz and Seville, and it was in the interest of these last-mentioned cities that the Manila trade was restricted (Royal order of November 10, 1605, and King to the Audiencia, February 6, 1606, A. I., 105-2-1).

[612] Although the laws of the Indies forbade the oidores from trading (Recopilación, 2-16-59, 60, 62, 64, 66), and the correspondence of the period shows that the oidores were at first denied trading privileges, (King to Conde de Monterrey, April 14, 1597; A. I., 105-2-1), they were allowed to send to Spain sufficient cloth, silk and other dress materials for their own use and for that of their families (Recopilación, 2-16-63). This last-mentioned privilege was abused, however, until the right of each official to send only a limited amount of cargo on the galleon was generally recognized. For example, the cargo list of the galleon "Trinidad" in 1753, shows that ministers were assigned six boletas, or bales, of the nominal value of 125 pesos each--that being only half the amount usually allowed. This reduction, effected by Governor Arandía, caused much opposition on the part of the audiencia (Expediente of January 30, 1754; A. I., 108-3-11). The officials having first claim on the right to send goods in the galleon were those of the municipal cabildo of Manila. On March 27, 1714, they were conceded the right to ship 132 fardillos, the specifications of which were not given. It was mentioned, however, in the consulta which recommended this bestowal that this was a re-enactment of the grant of 1699, and that it was the policy of the king to be generous to the regidores in this matter because they were not given salaries (A. I., 68-2-8). The royal order of June 30, 1786, bestowed on the regidores the right to ship one ton of goods. This right was confirmed by the consulta of October 7, 1789 (A. I., 105-3-5). The cédula of April 25, 1803, conceded five boletas, each valued at one hundred pesos, to each regidor. The oidores were each allowed ten boletas by this cédula (A. I., 106-2-15).

[613] Audiencia to Felipe III, July 6, 1606, Blair and Robertson, XIV, 147.

[614] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 230-331.

[615] Ibid., I, 239, et seq.; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 162, et seq.

[616] Martínez de Zúñiga, op. cit., I, 241; Montero y Vidal, op. cit., I, 166.

[617] Inventario de Residencias, A. I. op. cit.

[618] King to the Audiencia, August 9, 1609, A. I., 105-2-1.

[619] See Chapter VII, notes 49 to 56.

[620] Recopilación, 2-15-56; 3-2-47; 3-2-11 and 12.

[621] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 127. In regard to the points covered in the above letter of Fajardo, the audiencia legally lacked the power of granting encomiendas at this time, although it undoubtedly bestowed them, nevertheless. The power to grant encomiendas for the period of its temporary rule was granted October 24, 1655. Moreover, by cédulas of May 25, 1596, August 24, 1619, and September 5, 1620, the audiencia was conceded authority to make temporary appointments to offices when it assumed the government ad interim (Recopilación, 2-15-56; 3-2-47; 3-2-11 and 12).

[622] Fajardo to Felipe III, August 10, 1618, Blair and Robertson, XVIII, 124-125.

[623] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 250-251. The latter Silva was a relative of the viceroy, the Marqués de Cerralbo. He was well known in the Philippines, where he had formerly resided and married the daughter of an influential resident. He held the temporary governorship about a year. It was during his administration, and through his efforts, that the first Spanish expedition was made to Formosa, Silva having ordered the alcalde mayor of Cagayán to land there with a military force and establish fortifications. This was done; thereupon a large number of Dominican friars sought and obtained permission for the spiritual conquest of the Island. Zúñiga says that the latter "exerted themselves with such zeal, that in a short time they built several towns, and were able to number the greater part of the natives among the professors of our faith" (ibid., I, 252-253; Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 180-181).

[624] Audiencia to the King, July 24 and August 15, 1624, Blair and Robertson, XXI, 84-97.

[625] Silva to Felipe IV, August 4, 1625, Blair and Robertson, XXII, 62-78.

[626] Ibid., XXII, 66. The governor estimated the services of the magistrates in a special report to the king on July 30, 1626. He stated that Messa was "an upright judge, and zealous in the service of your Majesty." His comments on the other three were as follows: "Geronimo de Lagaspi does what his two sons wish, whom, on account of their reckless lives, the governors cannot employ, and thus they are unable to satisfy their father, who is not contented except with favors. Don Juan de Valderrama does as his wife says; and Don Matias Flores, although a young man, is less harmful;... He makes all the profit he can from the office, and on the whole is not acceptable to the community, which is always disturbed by him" (Silva to Felipe IV, July 30, 1626, Blair and Robertson, XXII, 102).

[627] Instructions to Francisco de Rojas y Ornate, August 17, 1628, A. I., 105-2-1.

[628] See Royal Instructions to Rojas y Ornate and Tavora (duplicates), June 4, 1627, A. I., 105-2-1.

[629] Martínez de Zúñiga, An historical view, I, 264-266, Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 189-200. The method of filling vacancies in the governorship during this period was described in a letter from Governor Corcuera, Cerezo's successor, to the king, dated June 30, 1636. He wrote: "Your Majesty has conceded to your viceroys of Nueva España authority, in case of deaths and vacancies in this government, to send commissions to those who are to have charge of military matters; and until the arrival of the regularly appointed governor you order them to send another governor from Mexico" (Corcuera to Felipe IV, June 30, 1636, Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 150).

[630] Cédula of January 30, 1635, A. I., 67-6-3.

[631] Corcuera to Felipe IV, June 30, 1636. Blair and Robertson, XXVI, 150 et seq.

[632] Fajardo to the King, July 10, 1651, A. I., 67-6-9.

[633] Ibid.

[634] Governor Lara to the King, July 19, 1654, A. I., 67-6-9.

[635] Cédula of April 2, 1664, with testimonios of former cédulas and correspondence on succession, A. I., 67-6-3.

[636] These two magistrates had come to the Islands on the same ship; Montemayor had disembarked at Cagayán and had come to the city by land, arriving a few days earlier than Coloma (Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 336).

[637] Events in Filipinas, 1668, Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 23-63; also correspondence of Governor Manuel de León, and consultas of the Council of the Indies on Salcedo Affair, 1670-1673, A. I., 67-6-9, 10, 11; 67-6-3. For a more extended account of this episode, see Cunningham, "The inquisition in the Philippines; the Salcedo affair," in the Catholic historical review, III, 417-445.

[638] Augustinians in the Philippines, 1641-70, Blair and Robertson, XXXVII, 273-275; also Consulta of Council of the Indies, July 16, 1674, A. I., 67-6-3.

[639] Montero y Vidal, Historia general, I, 354-361.

[640] Ibid., I, 375. See Chapters X and XI of this book.

[641] There is no question of the harmful effects of the intervention of the church in the government on this occasion. For a general survey of this subject throughout the history of the Philippines, see the author's article entitled "The ecclesiastical influence in the Philippines" (1565-1850) in The American journal of theology, XXII, 161-186, and Robertson, "Catholicism in the Philippine Islands," in The Catholic historical review, III, 375-391.

[642] See Chapter VIII, note 16. On June 30, 1716, Torralba forwarded an elaborate memorial to the king, showing that the finances were in an excellent state, a net gain of 38,554 pesos having accrued to the treasury since the beginning of the audiencia's rule. On the day that this report was filed there existed in the treasury, according to Torralba's figures, a favorable balance of 294,000 pesos. This report contains the following interesting data: Income from the subsidy, 250,000 pesos; betel monopoly, 13,167 pesos; tributes, 109,152 pesos; royal auctions, 20,377 pesos; medias anatas, 16,373 pesos; almojarifazgo, 20,377 pesos; wine monopoly, 14,000 pesos (Report of Torralba on Financial Affairs, June 30, 1716, A. I., 68-4-18). In a letter dated July 8, 1716, Torralba reported his compliance with the cédula of October 10, 1713, by means of which the king had appealed for a "free gift or contribution on the part of the inhabitants of the Islands to assist in putting down a Catalonian conspiracy." Torralba stated that the audiencia had seen to the fulfillment of this command and had collected the sum of 7,042 pesos (Torralba to King, July 8, 1716, A. I., 68-4-18).