He agreed to this, and my secretary read the said act, which contains three points. In the first, I declared the said very reverend archbishop to be disobedient, rebellious, and contumacious, considering that he had not obeyed as he should the said my compulsory act, sent to him from the city of Nueva Caceres; likewise, I declared that he had incurred the penalty of suspension from the priestly office latæ sententiæ, under which I had commanded him to order his secretary within twenty-four hours to surrender the acts for which I had asked, or to make an authentic copy of them. And because he had exercised the said priestly office on Holy Thursday, consecrating the sacred oils; and on Holy Saturday, in conferring the higher orders of the ministry; [11] and likewise on other days, in saying mass while he was under suspension: I declared that he was under censure as irregular. In the second part of the said act, I again commanded him, under penalty of major excommunication, latæ sententiæ, and of a fine of two thousand pesos to be applied according to law, to order his secretary within six days to deliver up the papers as aforesaid, or make an authentic copy of them. And in the third part, under penalty of being considered rebellious and contumacious, in order to place him under greater obligation, I prohibited to him in the interim the cognizance of this cause and legal proceeding therein. After the said very reverend archbishop had heard the act, he appealed from it, in writing, and on the following day brought this appeal into court. I did not on this account defer the declaration of the said censures, since the appeal was frivolous and useless; and I yielded in the matter of the copy of the documents only for the reason that he alleged, that the originals of these were in the Audiencia. After he had interposed the said appeal, he immediately ordered his secretary to notify me of an act by himself, in which he commanded me, under penalty of major excommunication, latæ sententiæ, and a fine of 4,000 pesos, to depart instantly and without delay from this archdiocese, to go to reside in my own bishopric, and not to meddle with his jurisdiction. To this I replied that I had received this notification, and asked him to give me a copy of the said document, solely for the purpose of showing in what consisted his illegal and unwarranted act; and I took leave of him and returned to my house. On the following day, the thirteenth of the said month of May, the said very reverend archbishop sent his secretary to notify me of another act, in which also he again commanded me, under penalty of major excommunication, latæ sententiæ, and of another 4,000 pesos, to depart within two days from the archdiocese. To this I replied that I had come [to Manila] on account of the appeal [made to me]; that I was a delegate of your Holiness, and moreover superior to the said very reverend archbishop, and as such I did not listen to his acts or censures.