The inquisition in the Spanish dependencies: Sicily—Naples—Sardinia—Milan—the Canaries—Mexico—Peru—New Granada — John Shaqi
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
decision--a process which usually prolonged it indefinitely.[64]
The secular authorities were naturally restive under this and quarrels
continued. In 1589 there was an outbreak, when the Gran Corte undertook
to try a familiar named Antonio Ferrante. The Inquisition claimed him;
the viceroy, the Count of Alva, was less enduring than some of his
predecessors; he caused the sentence of hanging to be executed and, in
the ensuing recriminations, he imprisoned the consultors of the
Inquisition and its judge of confiscations. Both parties appealed to
Philip II who, after examining all the documents, wrote to Alba, March
29, 1590, strongly reproving him for bringing such scandal and discredit
on an institution so necessary for the peace and quiet of the land. In
future he must strictly observe the Concordia and the judges of the Gran
Corte must present themselves individually before the inquisitors and
obey their commands. Alba apparently had argued that the consultors were
not formally officials, for in 1591 Philip decided that they were so and
were entitled to all the privileges of that position.[65]
Philip was firmly convinced that the Inquisition was essential to keep
Sicily in subjection, which accounts for his upholding it against his
own representatives, but his eyes were somewhat opened by another case
which was in progress at the same time. Count Mussumelli, a familiar,
was charged with the murder of Giuseppe Bajola, fiscal of the Gran
Corte; he was claimed by the Inquisition and took refuge in its prison.
From this the Count of Alva took him forcibly, whereupon the inquisitors
excommunicated the subordinates concerned in the act and, finding this
ineffective, on April 6, 1590, they not only laid an interdict on the
whole city, but stretched their jurisdiction by prohibiting all vessels
from leaving the port. This brought Alba to terms; Mussumelli was
restored to the inquisitorial prison and the interdict was lifted.[66]
The case was necessarily carried up to the king and, as usual, was
referred to a _junta_ consisting of two members each of the Suprema and
of the Council of Italy. To the consulta which they in due course
presented, Philip replied, expressing his grief at the atrocious crimes
of recent occurrence in Sicily. That of the Count Mussumelli was so
aggravated that its impunity would render difficult the enforcement of
justice and he must therefore be remitted to the viceroy and judges of
the Gran Corte. As for the Count of Rocalmuto and the Marquis of la
Rochela, they were to be left to the Inquisition, in full confidence
that their punishment would correspond to the enormity of their
offences, for which he charged the inquisitor-general and Suprema.
Moreover, to prevent such occurrences for the future, he decreed that
the crime of assassination should be excepted from the immunity enjoyed
by familiars and should not be made the subject of competencias. In
addition to this, he proceeded to state that experience had shown the
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account