This [intermediary] chapter considered that many religious were dying, and that, since the father priors always came to vote, some house must necessarily remain empty, and be entrusted to the fiscals of the villages. This appeared full of inconveniences, both temporally and spiritually, which it is not right to express, since they are so apparent. And even were there nothing else than the great danger of many persons dying without holy baptism, and others without confession, that was sufficient. But there were many other reasons, which, although not so serious, aided not a little. The expenses that would be saved were many; and this reason, that the priorates would have such persons, for the best ones would always be chosen for them. This was opposed very strongly, and the opposition alleged what, in their opinion, were not a few reasons. They asserted that this was a kind of tyranny, and that their opponents were trying to reduce the province to fewer votes in order to perpetuate themselves in the government; and that it was less easy to make sixty votes agree than twenty. The province had commenced thus and should continue thus, and it was a manifest grievance to deprive those elected by the intermediary (or rather, the full) chapter of their votes. They said that that matter was very serious, and should be carried over to the _ipso pleno_ [_i.e._, the full chapter], in which, after being considered by so many, it could be determined. The whole question was put to vote by our father provincial, Fray Miguel Garcia, who held the affirmative side. With his Paternity were our father Fray Diego de Guevara (who presided as visitor-general), the father definitor, Fray Vicente de Sepulveda, and the father definitor Fray Francisco Bonifacio. On the other or negative side were father Fray Estacio Ortiz, the father definitor Fray Juan de Tapia, the father visitor Fray Juan Enriquez, [27] and the father visitor Fray Juan Villalobos. [28]