Cases of fuerza were those which came to the audiencia through the abuse of their judicial powers by prelates or ecclesiastical judges; cases, literally, in which the latter had usurped or trespassed the authority of the civil courts or government. [828] The execution of the decision of an ecclesiastical judge could be suspended by an edict of the audiencia on the grounds of fuerza, while the case was being investigated by that tribunal. [829] The civil government usually took the initiative in these appeals, but there were occasions in the history of the Islands in which ecclesiastical authorities and tribunals interposed recursos de fuerza against the archbishop. In dealing with these cases the audiencia first ascertained whether fuerza had been committed and then, if the results of the investigation were affirmative, the tribunal was empowered to raise the fuerza (alzar or quitar la fuerza) [830] and place limitations upon the ecclesiastical authority in order to prevent future abuse of power. [831] The audiencia was without authority to fine prelates, bishops, or ecclesiastical judges, but it had sufficient jurisdiction to remedy excesses and restore conditions to their former state. The tribunal was urged to use the utmost discretion in dispossessing offending prelates and judges of their benefices or positions, [832] as a punishment for fuerza, and not to proceed to such lengths except in exceptional cases, wherein the strictest measures were necessary. On such occasions the audiencia might exile the offending ecclesiastic, giving account of its act to the Council of the Indies. [833] All proceedings of this nature had to be carried on secretly and with the greatest possible dispatch and brevity, [834] and all churchmen who were deprived of their benefices through the recurso de fuerza had the privilege of an appeal to the Council of the Indies. [835] In the treatment of cases of fuerza an informal judicial hearing was given; the spirit of the proceeding was supposed to be that of a harmonious investigation, in which both sides, ecclesiastical and civil, were mutually and equally concerned in the solution of a given problem, and in ascertaining wherein error had been committed. The object of this proceeding was said to be the furtherance of the interests of the crown, the salvation of souls and the spread of the benevolent influence of the church. That the spirit of peace and harmony failed to manifest itself at many of these investigations, is shown by the bitter contests which arose between the civil and ecclesiastical judges as results of the entertainment of the recurso de fuerza. The spiritual authorities alleged on these occasions that they regarded the restraining action of the government as presumption, unauthorized by ecclesiastical canons.