[87] "The seizure of these champans was afterward the cause of a clamorous lawsuit incited by various officers against the master-of-camp Abad, accusing him of having kept for himself the best part [of the goods seized]. It was also proved that he employed the vessels of the royal navy in his mercantile speculations; this evil was very general in that period, and to it must be attributed, in large part, the scanty results of most of the expeditions against the Mahometan Malays of southern Filipinas." (Montero y Vidal, Hist. de piratería, i, p. 294.) Another Chinese champan was seized by the Spaniards, apparently not long afterward, near Malandi; it was laden with goods for trade in Mindanao, which included a number of guns and other weapons, with ammunition. These were confiscated by the Spaniards, an act which was greatly resented by Jampsa, the sultan of Tamontaca, who therefore abandoned the Spanish alliance and sided with the hostile Moros. (Concepción, xiii, pp. 1-5.) [88] This proceeding took place at midnight on August 3, and the number arrested was 217 persons: these included Alimudin's four sons, his brother and sister, four of his daughters, five brothers-in-law, a son-in-law; a Mahometan jaddí ("the second rank in that sect, equivalent to a bishop") and five panditas; also two prominent chiefs, one hundred and sixty of the sultan's vassals, and thirty-two concubines and female servants. (Montero y Vidal, Hist. de piratería, i, p. 298.) Cf. Concepción, xii, pp. 288, 289. [89] Alimudin and his household arrived as prisoners at Manila in September, 1751. Soon afterward the Manila government declared war, with fire and sword, against the Joloans and all those Moro peoples who aided them; permitting the enslavement of all who should be captured, whether men, women or children; and giving all their property and possessions to their captors, free from all royal dues or imposts. See copy of this proclamation in Montero y Vidal's Hist. de piratería, appendix, pp. 29-31. Concepción (xii, p. 344) regards this declaration of war as unjust; he adds that the Joloan captive princes, whose arrest was incited by ambition and greed, were so unfortunate as to lose their protector, Bishop Arrechedera, by death (November 12, 1751). In the same month died also Bishop Arevalo, of Nueva Caceres. [90] Here, as most often elsewhere, "captives" are synonymous with "slaves." Montero y Vidal (Hist. de piratería, i, p. 299) protests against this permission to enslave the Moros, as being contrary to the provisions of the laws of the Indias, which forbid slavery in Philipinas.