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
It is scarce worth while to follow in detail the discussion which
ensued, lasting, with true Spanish procrastination, until 1677, when the
effort to make the Inquisition refund seems to have been abandoned out
of sheer weariness. Of course the feeble queen-regent and the feebler
boy-king, Carlos II, failed in the attempt and the only importance to us
of the debate lies in the falsehoods and prevarications of the Suprema’s
defence. It was notorious that there had been heavy confiscations, for
persecution, as we have seen, had become active and exceedingly
profitable as the half-century had drawn to a close. The tribunal had
grown rich and had made large investments, besides the enormous
remittances to the Suprema, and these had been derived almost
exclusively from the confiscations and penances. Yet the Suprema
endeavored to make it appear that financially confiscation had been a
failure. There had been some confiscations, it admitted, in Mexico and
Lima; there was the one of Diego López de Fonseca, amounting to 79,965
pesos, but Jorje de Paz of Madrid and Simon Rodriguez Bueno of Seville
had come forward with claims amounting to more. They had asked to have
the money sent to the receiver of Seville for adjudication and, on its
arrival, the king had seized it and, by a cédula of July 14, 1652, had
bound himself to satisfy the claimants, which he did by assigning to
them certain matters. It was true that, in 1642, a number of Judaizing
Portuguese had been discovered in Mexico, of whom some had moderate
fortunes and one was reputed to be rich, but on the outbreak of the
Portuguese rebellion, for fear that the viceroy would embargo their
property, they had concealed it, and although the Inquisition had
published censures, only a little had been discovered, while there came
forward creditors with evidences of claims amounting to 400,000 pesos,
so that it was difficult to make the confiscations meet them, to say
nothing of the heavy expenses of feeding the prisoners, hiring houses to
serve as prisons and the increased number of officials required. Besides
this, there was protracted and costly litigation in investigating the
claims and detecting suspected frauds. For this, Archbishop Mañozca was
appointed visitador; on his death Medina Rico was sent out for the same
purpose and, when he died, the matter had not been settled, nor has it
yet.[442] If the Suprema was to be believed, confiscation cost more
than it came to.
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