[77] “... e fueron aplicados todos sus bienes para la Camara del Rey y de la Reyna, los cuales fueron en gran cantidad.”--Pulgar, “Cronica,” cap. xcv. [78] Paramo, “De Origine,” p. 136. [79] See letter quoted in Appendix to Llorente’s “Memoria Historica.” [80] The bull of nomination is quoted in full by Paramo, “De Origine,” p. 137. [81] “Hist. Critica,” tom. i. art. i. §. 2. [82] Afterwards Ciudad Real. [83] “Copilacion de las Instrucciones hechas, etc.” Press-mark C. 61. e. 6. [84] Eymeric, “Directorium,” pars iii. Quæst. xli. _et seq._ [85] The compendious tome including these very ample annotations and commentaries was published first in Rome, 1585. [86] Tennyson’s “Queen Mary,” Act V. sc. i. [87] See Eymeric, “Directorium,” pars iii. p. 315 _et seq._ [88] See Fidel Fita in “Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia,” vol. xi. p. 296. [89] “Vida de Arbués,” p. 56. It is interesting to turn to modern writers who defend this secrecy--such, for instance, as the Rev. Sidney Smith, S.J., whose good faith there is no cause to doubt. He writes as follows: “To pass over the question of injury often done to the reputation of third parties, it has occasionally been forced on public attention that crimes cannot be put down because witnesses know that by giving evidence they expose themselves to great risks, the accused having powerful friends to execute vengeance in their behalf. This was exactly the case with the Inquisition. The Marranos had great power through their wealth, position, and secret bonds of alliance with the unconverted Jews. These would certainly have endeavoured to neutralize the efforts of the Holy Office had the trials been open. Torquemada, in his statutes of 1484, gives expressly this defence of secrecy, etc.”--“The Spanish Inquisition,” p 17, in “Historical Papers.” The argument is specious, and it is fundamentally true. But when it is considered that the delator, so carefully screened from all danger, was protected entirely at the expense of the accused, it becomes clear that such a procedure must argue a reckless eagerness to accumulate convictions. It suffices to reflect that, whilst all the arguments advanced to justify this secrecy could with equal justice have been urged by the contemporary civil courts of Europe, it is impossible to point to a single one that had recourse to so inequitable a measure. The inquisitorial point of view may be appreciated, even with a certain sympathy, by the extremely tolerant. It cannot be justified. [90] “Directorium,” pars iii. p. 312. [91] “Historia Critica,” vol. ii. p. 15. [92] Pars iii. quæst. cxiv. and cxv. [93] See “Directorium,” pars iii. p. 387. [94] See Llorente’s “Historia Critica,” I. cap. xxviii. [95] “Las delaciones sobre solicitacion en el confessionario se deben recibir con gran cuidado, haciendo que la denunciante declare todas las circunstancias siguientes: