any difficulty, they would be justified in making war there, because of the treachery that its inhabitants had shown to Captain Hernando de Magallanes--whom they had killed treacherously with many of his men, at a banquet, where they had been invited in good faith. Besides that, those Indians had offered themselves for the service of the king of Espana, and many were baptized, in the time of the said captain, who afterward apostatized. This was a very strong and sufficient foundation, upon which father Fray Andres de Urdaneta and the others based the right to make war, in case that the Indians refused to receive them peacefully, as was their pretense. All approved this opinion. However, I must note here the strongest reason that they ought to have alleged, unless they must have neglected and passed it by as being so well known, in order to find others more constraining. When I read the various opinions of the doctors regarding our right to make war on the western Indians, although they are somewhat sufficient, that which has most real power to quiet the conscience--while those who opposed it can only be esteemed as rash--is the concession of Alexander VI which is, in brief, as follows. [Here follows the portion of the bull of Alexander VI of May 4, 1493, included in _Et tu tanti negotii ... auctoritate et jurisdictione facimus, constituimus et deputamus_.] [22] Since, then, the supreme pontiff says that he can give, and does really give them, he would be rash who could have any scruples about the right of our kings to possess these provinces, and the right of the conquistadors therein to make war, since the latter did it by order of their kings. For who doubts that the supreme pontiff, who never was known to be tyrannical or unjust, had not well considered his powers in order to make this concession? The reasons that could influence his Holiness are not unknown, but they are rather for the schools than for this place. The above has been given with the end of quieting the consciences of the conquistadors, and of sealing the mouths of the ignorant, since whatever scruples do or can arise in this matter are settled so completely by Alexander VI's brief. The soldier has no call to judge or investigate the justification of the war, as the doctors unanimously agree. It is sufficient that he consider it as not manifestly unjust, and that he consider his king--as we all do ours--as so Catholic and so good, that he will war upon no one without a very just reason. For the justification of a king in matters of conscience, the declaration of the first rule is sufficient, namely, the certain knowledge of the Roman pontiff.