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 project for the settlement of competencias was ineffective. A
cédula of February 7, 1569, had extended to the colonies the system in
force at home, and under it there had been in Mexico, during the
remainder of the century, seven cases; there was one in 1601 and another
in 1602, after which they ceased.[493] Solorzano tells us that they were
not revived by the new regulations, which omitted to specify the place
where the conferences were to be held, and the judges and inquisitors
each summoned the others to come to them. The judges had old custom and
royal cédulas on their side, but the inquisitors refused compliance
because the orders had not been transmitted to them through the Suprema
which they claimed was requisite to their validity, and thus important
cases, both civil and criminal, remained undecided, to the great injury
of individuals and the public. Moved by the complaints thus occasioned,
Philip III, in a cédula of November 19, 1618, ordered that the
conferences be held in the vice-regal palace, where the senior judge was
to have precedence over the inquisitor, and this was repeated in a
cédula to the court of Lima, May 28, 1621, but again the inquisitors of
both Mexico and Peru refused obedience on the same pretext as before.
Thus cases continued undecided until the urgency of the Council of
Indies led Philip IV to consult both councils and, in 1636, he ordered
that the judge and inquisitor should meet before the viceroy, the one
who was senior in office taking the right hand.[494] This compromise did
not suit the pretensions of the Holy Office for precedence and it gained
the victory in a cédula of May 30, 1640, which recites that, after many
conferences, it was determined that the senior judge must go to the
Inquisition, where the senior inquisitor was to have precedence, when
the competencia was to be settled under the provisions of the Concordia
of 1610.[495] Apparently this assumption of their inferiority was
insufferable to the judges, for no formal competencia occurred between
1602 and 1711. Matters in dispute were occasionally referred to the
councils in Spain, but this was of little benefit for it was usually
the last heard of the case.[496] To appreciate fully the cruelty of all
this, we must reflect that perhaps some accused person or unlucky
alguazil, arrested for executing the orders of his superiors, might be
languishing in gaol for a life-time, awaiting the settlement of a
conflict of jurisdiction which could never be settled.
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