The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies: Sicily—Naples—Sardinia—Milan—the Canaries—Mexico—Peru—New GranadaLea, Henry Charles
History
The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies: Sicily—Naples—Sardinia—Milan—the Canaries—Mexico—Peru—New Granada
Lea, Henry Charles
Inquisition
This elaborate arrangement is only of importance as showing that, in
spite of the suppressed canonries, the treasury was still required to
support the tribunal and that the latter could be bound by no agreements
however solemnly entered into. Except at Cartagena it was never carried
into effect. No statement of receipts was ever rendered. In 1651, Count
Alva de Aliste, the viceroy, reported to Philip IV that he had no means
of learning what the confiscations amounted to but, on cautiously
sounding the inquisitors, they told him that they reported them to the
Suprema and would obey its instructions. They might well keep the facts
secret. In the exterminating persecution of the wealthy New Christians,
during the decade 1640-50, of which more hereafter, the confiscations
were very large, placing the tribunal at its ease for all future time,
besides what was embezzled by the inquisitors. The auto of 1646 yielded
38,732 pesos; that of 1647, 148,562. What was gathered in two autos held
in 1648 does not appear, but between November 20, 1646, and April 24,
1648, the inquisitors remitted 234,000 pesos in bills of exchange while
the crowning auto of 1649 furnished three millions more.[434] In spite
of this enormous influx of wealth, the Inquisition still maintained its
grip on the royal subvention of 10,000 pesos per annum, though for how
long it is impossible to determine with positiveness. In the prolonged
controversy which raged between the Suprema and the Council of Indies
over the relations of the colonial tribunals, the former, in 1667,
positively declared that, after 1633, there had been no subvention paid
in Mexico or Lima and this assertion was repeated in 1676, but the
statements of the Suprema are so full of duplicity that no reliance can
be reposed in them.[435] On the other hand, in 1668, we find the Council
of Indies earnestly advising the king to withdraw the subvention on the
ground that the tribunals were rich and could support themselves, as
they do in Castile; in 1675 it speaks of the payments as still
continuing and urges their discontinuance without consulting the
Suprema, as it is a matter wholly within the control of the treasury
and, in 1676, Carlos II answered the Suprema by demanding a prompt
decision as to a proposition made by the Council of Indies to
discontinue the subventions enjoyed by the three tribunals for the
salaries of their officials.[436] When they were definitely discontinued
it would be impossible to assert, but it is probable that those of
Mexico and Lima were stopped in 1677, while that of Cartagena was
prolonged even later. In 1683 Inquisitor Valera of that tribunal
complained that, owing to the exhaustion of the public treasury through
wars and piratical attacks, an arrearage had accumulated of thirty-three
_tercios_. He claimed that the king was indebted to the tribunal in the
sum of 58,000 pesos and he urged its transfer to Santa Fe, where the
royal treasury was in better condition to meet the obligation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account