History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 3/Chapter 23

by Hubert Howe Bancroft

 

CHAPTER XXIII.

EXPULSION OF THE JESUITS.

1720-1810.

The Society of Jesus in Mexico — Last Services — Moral Condition — Squabbles about Tithes, and the Consequences — The Situation in Mexico and the World in 1750 — Members, Houses, and Missions in Mexico in 1767 — Converts Made — Unsuccessful Renunciation of Missions — Clouds Portentous of Disaster — Persecution in Portugal and France — Obloquy and Refutation — Expulsion from Spanish Dominions and Other Nations — Causes therefor — How Effected in Mexico — Sufferings of the Exiles — Harsh Treatment — Means of Support — Revolutionary Movements in Mexico Quelled — Relentless Punishment of the Leaders — Papal Suppression of the Society — Later Moderation — The Order Restored and Readmitted in Mexico to be again Expelled.

We come now to one of those episodes in the history of intellectual development which occasionally startle us from our contemplation of the more usual monotony of facts; in this instance an episode which causes us to wonder at a state of human society that could evolve such phenomena. There are few events in the annals of the race, very few upon its later pages, wherein is so displayed the mighty power of one over the many, not of one mind over the will of the many, as frequently occurs in the great currents of superstition, but the arbitrary and unjust domination, the iron tyranny of one will over the minds and bodies of millions. In the midst of its palmiest days, at a time when its wealth and influence are almost limitless, the church throws a faint, almost imperceptible scowl at the state, and instantly one of her most powerful divisions is hurled hence, and dissipated to the winds; and this in a Catholic country, by a Catholic monarch, and in defiance of the pope of Rome. It was during the administration of the marqués de Croix that New Spain, as well as the other dominions of the Spanish crown, was subjected by Cárlos III., their king, to this catastrophe which brought to thousands humiliation and distress.

I have given, with sufficient detail, the origin and progress in Mexico of the society of Jesus to the end of the seventeenth century. The order continued to spread during the next hundred years, and its hold on the country was such that, to all appearances, no power could shake it so long as it pursued its established policy.^[1] In 1732 the Jesuits entered the field of Guanajuato, and took initiatory steps toward founding a college in the city of that name. The site was determined, and the appurtenances received in September,^[2] but it was not until 1744 that the royal authorization was obtained.^[3] The corner-stone was laid in 1747, fifty thousand pesos having been secured, besides four haciendas valued at double that sum.^[4] The church of the college was consecrated in 1765. There was at Leon in Guanajuato a beaterio of Jesuit women for the education of girls, the only one in America. In Michoacan the order had a mission in San Juan Puruándiro of the district of Pátzcuaro.^[5] The college of San Javier was given to the society by the bishop of Michoacan. In Jalisco, the conversion of the natives of Nayarit was taken in hand by the Jesuits in 1720.^[6] They labored in that barren field amidst difficulties and hardships. Much of the trouble arose from the conduct of the whites, including the troops of the presidio, whose captain could not control them.^[7]

The moral condition of the province seems to have been satisfactory to the general of the order in 1747, as he so expressed himself to the provincial in Mexico, who in his turn made it known to his subjects, in his letter enjoining the strictest discipline, in order that the general's words should be sustained.^[8] The question of payment of tithes by the society on its estates had been for several years a cause of contention between it and the archbishop, in which the real audiencia sided with the latter. In December, 1734, the jueces hacedores of the archdiocese passed a decree, wherein, after noticing the decrease in the amount paid by the managers of the haciendas owned by the society in New Spain and the Philippines, the collection was provided of the full tithes due for that year by the aforesaid estates. The judges also published censuras against their managers and several other members of the society, even though it had an appeal pending before the audiencia. The provincial refused to accede to the demand, and pretended to pay little or no heed to the censuras.^[9] However, in October 1735, the provincial proposed to the audiencia a temporary arrangement, which was rejected May 12, 1736, on two grounds: first, that the provincial had insulted the archbishop-viceroy and the members of the audiencia; and second, that he had paid no respect to the censuras issued against the priests administering the haciendas of the society. It was ordered that the collection of the whole tithes for 1734 should be made, and that a copy of the proceedings should be forwarded to the royal council at Madrid.^[10] The provincial had objected to the second order to pay the decimal tax, entering a solemn protest against it, and adding that as it would not be decent for his people to use other weapons than those of reason, the collector of tithes would need no armed force to effect his purpose, but only assistants to measure, count, and weigh.^[11]

The subject having been duly considered in the king's council, it was decreed^[12] that the payment of the tithes should be enforced, and censures, if necessary, applied. The society was required, under that decree, to produce sworn statements of the produce of its estates subject to tithes; afterward, if it had any exceptions to make, to send them to the royal council. The audiencia in Mexico decreed October 8, 1736, the fulfilment of the royal order.

The matter did not stop here. The Jesuits were showing a marked disposition toward the acquisition of worldly wealth, and no more fondness for paying taxes than have most corporations. But finding that they could not escape the infliction, they did the next best thing: they paid as little as possible. In the reign of Fernando VI., through Father Pedro Ignacio Altamirano, they made with that sovereign in January 1750 a contract of compromise for the tithes, under which they acquired privileges and facilities denied to other religious orders. They were thereby privileged to pay one out of every thirty-one, instead of one out of every ten. This concession was not only an unfair discrimination against the other religiosos, and in fact against all other producers, but had been actually obtained under a false representation of the quality and quantity of the crops. As a natural consequence, the ecclesiastical chapters of other religious orders in due time represented the facts to Fernando’s successor, Cárlos III., who referred them to his council; and though the pleas of the attorney of the society of Jesus were duly weighed, the crown's fiscales found them wanting, and asked that the so-called transaccion, having been obtained on false pretences, should be declared null, whether it was looked upon as a compromise or as a favor, for the right of the crown to the tithes recognized no privileges either anterior or posterior granted by the holy see. Thereupon they insisted that the Jesuits should be in future compelled to pay tithes like other producers. The attention of the council was also called to the studied policy of the Jesuit society in delaying the conclusion of this tithes question for over a century, to the injury of the royal treasury. The council, composed of eleven members, stood six to five in favor of submitting the case to the supreme court of justice. The king then called a council of members drawn from the councils of Castile, the inquisition, órdenes, and hacienda or exchequer, to which were also invited several distinguished theologians who took part in the deliberations. Of the eleven members constituting this council, ten cast their votes for the annulment of the compromise, and thus it was declared in the royal decree of December 4, 1766. The Jesuits were then required to pay thereafter one per decem upon all the produce of their haciendas, ranchos, and ingenios, or sugar plantations.^[13]

The society of Jesus on the 31st of August, 1750, had in the province of New Spain, which included Guatemala, Cuba, and Florida, 625 members, of whom 382 were ordained priests. About one half of them were natives of America, and the larger portion of the latter were born in Mexico.^[14] In the summer of 1767, when disaster overtook the society, there were in the province of New Spain 418 priests, 137 escolares, and 123 coadjutors, making a total of 678, of whom 464 were natives of America, 153 from Spain, and 61 foreigners.^[15] The society had in the province one casa profesa in the city of Mexico, 23 colleges, one house of probation, eight convictus et seminaria, and five residences. It had taken root in every province of the country, controlling 103 missions with 104 priests, besides one visitador-general of missions and his associate.^[16] In 1766 the provincial, Father Francisco Ceballos, had, after due deliberation, solemnly relinquished to the viceroy all the missions, more especially those in California, offering to establish others among the heathen whenever desired. This must have been put forth as a test, with a full conviction that the surrender could not and would not be accepted. And so it proved. The viceroy called a council, consisting of oidores, the auditor de guerra, and the fiscal, who asked the opinions of the bishops and governors of the regions where the missions were situated. The bishops and most of the governors objected to the renunciation, stating their reasons. The viceroy then referred the matter to the crown.^[17]

 

This great association, notwithstanding its wealth and almost unlimited sway over the Roman Catholic mind and conscience, was now to undergo a great calamity. Persecution,* dire and relentless, was at hand. On the 27th of February, 1767, King Cárlos III., after a consultation with his intimate counsellors, and for reasons that he reserved in his royal breast, issued a mandate to his minister of state, the conde de Aranda, for the expulsion from his dominions in Europe, America, and Asia of all the members of the society of Jesus^[18] that is to say, ordained priests, lay-brothers, or coadjutors who had taken the first vow, and novices who refused to abandon the society, together with sequestration of their estates.^[19] The order was confirmed by the pragmatic sanction of April 2d, published the same day, making known the royal action in the premises, and that the exiled would be allowed, out of the income of the suppressed society’s property, a yearly pension of one hundred pesos to each ordained priest, and ninety pesos to each lay-brother, the foreign born and those of immoral conduct being excepted. It was strictly forbidden them to write anything savoring of rebellion against the royal act, under penalty, in the event of violation of that clause, if it were only by a single member, of the forfeiture of the pensions of all his brethren. Nor was this all. Any Jesuit who should, without the king’s express leave, return to the Spanish dominions under any pretext whatsoever, even that of having resigned from the society and being absolved of its vows, would be treated as a prescript, incurring if a layman the penalty of death, and if a priest that of confinement, at the option of the ordinaries.^[20] The causes prompting the Spanish sovereign to adopt so extreme a measure, very much against his feelings^[21] as we have been told by some friends of the victims, were, as I have said, reserved to himself. It has been asserted that the grounds on which the council based its advice were purposely or otherwise removed from sight, thus not enabling us to judge with any degree of certainty what it was that had biassed the king’s mind; and fault has been found with his reticence in a case calling, in his judgment, for so severe a punishment. But if that record is lost, the causes are extant in another equally important document, of which I possess a copy and will take notice in this connection.

A measure of such magnitude affecting so vitally the interests of the church, could not have been consummated by a faithful Catholic and high-minded king and gentleman, such as Cárlos III., without apprising the Roman pontiff of the intention, and perhaps of some of his motives. He dutifully discharged that obligation. His action met with opposition on the part of Clement XIII., who felt both distressed and indignant; indeed, the destruction of a religious order from which the papacy derived so much support and so large a revenue, could but be unpalatable, aside from other considerations, such as the possibility of the pensions being suddenly stopped, and the pope's treasury becoming burdened with the maintenance of the poverty-stricken. His Holiness made up his mind not to receive the ejected Jesuits in his dominions.^[22] Still, Cárlos was a powerful monarch, and a stubborn one, upon whom the fulminations of the Vatican would fall harmless; conciliation was then the only available recourse. It was thought that he might be amenable to papal reasoning; that something might be gained by a friendly interference to obtain a revocation, or at least a suspension of the obnoxious decree. The plan was tried and failed. Indeed the pope's brief of April 16th, overpraising the virtues and other merits of the Jesuits, at that particular time, and bespeaking favor for them, was a blunder; at all events, it did not mend matters.

The king submitted the brief for advice to his council, which on the 30th of the same month met in extra session, and after minutely reviewing its contents, expressed the opinion that the pope had no business to interfere in a matter so entirely temporal in its nature, and of the king's exclusive province; and that no power on earth had any right to call him to account for his decision thereon, much less after he had, from pure courtesy, advised the pope of his action in the premises. The council, furthermore, not recognizing in the Jesuits the merits ascribed to them, but on the contrary many serious faults that made them dangerous, could see no reason why the sovereign should abandon or even modify his order.^[23] It concluded that the presence of the Jesuits in the Spanish dominions was extremely prejudicial, through their complicity in traitorous attempts, grasping and seditious spirit, fanaticism, disobedience, and intolerable pride. The unanimous decision of the members, the fiscales concurring, was that no discussion of the subject with the papal court should be entered into, and a mere acknowledgment of the receipt of the brief should be returned in answer.

Without discussing the merits of the charges preferred against the society for its conduct in Europe, or attempting to deny its worldliness in the acquisition of property and its selfish efforts to escape the burdens weighing upon other members of the church and the body politic in America, and without laying particular stress on its overbearing deportment, several instances of which have been recorded in the course of this history, it must be confessed that the Jesuits maintained, if not perfect purity of conduct, at least a degree of virtue that made them the exceptional members of a church which had at that time, but for them and a few other honorable exceptions, almost become an exemplar of vice. At all hours and seasons they were found performing the offices of religion and charity. The service of God in their churches was reverent and dignified. They spread education among all classes; their libraries were open to all. They incessantly taught the natives religion in its true spirit, as well as the mode of earning an honest living. Among the most notable instances, in support of this last assertion, are those of Nayarit, Sonora, Sinaloa, Chihuahua, and Lower California, where their efforts in the conversion of the natives were marked by perseverance and disinterestedness, united with love for humanity and progress.^[24] Had the Jesuits been left alone, it is doubtful whether the Spanish American provinces had revolted so soon, for they were devoted servants of the crown, and had great influence with all classes—too great to suit royalty, but such as after all might have saved royalty in this quarter.

Never was the king's absolute power made so manifest as upon this occasion, when he determined to crush at one blow the most powerful association in his dominions. The conde de Aranda, clothed with royal authority,^[25] on the 20th of March circulated his orders, which contained minute instructions prepared by Campomanes, the fiscal of the royal council. Everything had been foreseen, time and distances calculated, so that the society should be stricken without fail at one and the same moment, on the night between the 2d and 3d of April. A later order of March 28th hastened the execution by two days in Madrid and neighboring places, and it was carried out on the night of the 31st of March. When the inhabitants awoke the next morning they learned with astonishment that the Jesuits were already several leagues from Madrid, on their way to the ports at which they were to be embarked. It was done with the utmost secrecy, and even the officers charged with the duty, though many of them were doubtless friends, relatives, and supporters of the victims, dared not disobey.^[26] To other parts of the Spanish dominions strict orders had been transmitted, and dates exactly fixed for the arrest of every member of the society of Jesus. Troops were at hand to aid the authorities should necessity arise.

Let us now return to New Spain and see how the order was executed; and let us mark carefully the method of it, for it is full of interest and instruction. Early in the evening of the 24th of June 1767, the viceroy, marquds de Croix, received in the palace the audiencia, the archbishop of Mexico, and the rest of the high officials, whom he had summoned to a meeting for the consideration of an important and confidential affair of state. Croix then produced a sealed package which he had received from the supreme government. Upon removing the outer envelope there was found another, upon which was written the following words: "So pena de la vida, no abrireis este pliego hasta el 24 de Junio á la caida de la tarde."^[27] This cover being removed there were found instructions concerning the measures to be adopted in the arrest of the Jesuits, naming the men who were to do the work, and telling how they should do it. On removing the last wrapper the full order was found expressed in the following terms: “I invest you with my whole authority and royal power that you shall forthwith repair with an armed force—á mano armada—to the houses of the Jesuits. You will seize the persons of all of them, and despatch them within twenty-four hours as prisoners to the port of Vera Cruz, where they will be embarked on vessels provided for that purpose. At the very moment of such arrest you will cause to be sealed the records of said houses, and the papers of such persons, without allowing them to remove anything but their prayer-books, and such garments as are absolutely necessary for the journey. If after the embarkation there should be found in that district a single Jesuit, even if ill or dying, you shall suffer the penalty of death. Yo el Rey," these last words being the sovereign's autograph signature, and meaning I, the king.^[28]

Pursuant to this command the viceroy gave his orders; and on the 25t^[29]“ of June, a little before daybreak, the Jesuits were arrested in their residences, and their papers^[30] and effects seized. In the casa profesa the notification was made by José Areche, fiscal of the audiencia, to the father praepositus, the provincial, Salvador Gándara, being then absent in Querétaro, and the other members, all of whom humbly submitted, knelt down, and prayed.^[31] From that moment the Jesuits were kept confined in their colleges in Mexico, and troops were stationed in the crossings of the streets leading to them. That same day the viceroy published an edict to all the inhabitants "de este imperio," notifying them of the king's peremptory order for the expulsion of the Jesuits, which he had put into execution. He warned all the king's vassals, without exception, of their duty to respect and obey his ever just decisions, which they were bound to venerate and aid to carry out with the utmost fidelity, or incur his Majesty's displeasure, and the severest punishment, should they by word of mouth or writing manifest any disapproval or hostility to the measure.^[32] The people were told once for all that they were born to obey and hold their peace.^[33]

On the 28th the Jesuits were conveyed in coaches strongly guarded by troops to Vera Cruz. At Guadalupe they were allowed by José de Galvez, the visitador, who superintended the proceedings, to enter the santuario, where they sent up prayers to heaven for the happiness of a people who had ever idolized them. Large crowds of sorrowful friends surrounded the carriages. The entry into Jalapa resembled a triumphal march, though it was attended by so much bitterness. The throng in the streets was so large that the troops in some places had to open a way with the but-ends of their muskets.^[34] The exiles from the capital and neighboring parts finally arrived in Vera Cruz, where they were gradually joined by their brethren from other provinces, who had been arrested and treated in the same manner as themselves.

During the sojourn of the Jesuits in that port thirty-four of them died.

On the 24th^[35] of October the government provided the requisite ships, and on that day the Jesuits embarked for Habana.^[36] Four days out there was a violent gale which dispersed the convoy, and nearly caused the destruction of all. November 13th they reached Habana, and were kindly treated by the governor captain-general, their condition being truly pitiable. After recruiting their strength, having lost a few more members, they were reembarked December 23d for Cádiz, where they arrived the 30th of the following March.^[37] They were then taken to the puerto de Santa María, and together with many others placed in an asylum. In the middle of June, 1768, having lost fifteen of their brethren by disease at Santa María, they were reëmbarked, those from Mexico numbering now about 528, for the Roman states, where they arrived only to be refused admission.^[38] The unfortunate exiles were then obliged to wander about the Mediterranean, suffering for the necessaries of life, closely confined in the ships, and subject to the harsh treatment of the commander, till they were finally given refuge in Corsica. But as this island was the next year ceded to France,^[39] they had to transfer themselves to Genoa, whence they eventually reached the papal states. In Naples and Parma, whose sovereigns depended on the king of Spain, the Jesuits met with no hospitality. Nearly all writers, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, even those who justify the act of expulsion, condemn the arbitrary and cruel manner of its execution. The Jesuits were arrested and violently handled, as if they had been guilty of heinous crimes, and without trial were driven from their homes and country, exposed to want,^[40] and compelled to live in Italy under pain of forfeiting the pittance allowed them for their support out of the millions that had been ruthlessly taken from them.^[41]

Returning again to Mexico, we shall see what occurred there. 'On the 18th of July 1767 the viceroy and audiencia issued an edict for the sequestration of the temporalities of the Jesuits, again warning the people to be obedient and submissive to the king's orders.^[42] The expulsion of the society from Mexico was felt in various ways. It was a heavy blow to the feelings of the people, because of the affection they bore it, and of the degradation inflicted on them by the assurance that they were mere serfs, born to obey, and not to think about, much less dispute, the acts of their master. Some persons, doubting the truth of the mandate, ventured to expostulate, and suffered for it.^[43]

But in destroying what the royal government considered an evil which must be eradicated at all hazards,

Guanajuato, Queretaro, and Mexico.

even against the dearest traditions of the people, every preparation had been made to confront any possible attempts at rebellion. The fact should not be lost sight of that the natives of Spanish descent, being mostly attached to the Jesuits,and at the same time displeased at the preference shown by the government to subjects from Spain, in open violation of the right and privileges given the former in the laws of the Indies, were indignant at the treatment the Jesuits had met with, and which could be regarded as nothing less than rank despotism. In and near the capital, where the government had great military resources, the discontented could not openly resent the insult. But in the more distant parts the people imprudently gave vent to their feelings, and this in overt acts, planning a dangerous conspiracy against the Spaniards from Europe, and the government. There is no means of ascertaining what was its real scope, but it is believed that in Guanajuato, Michoacan, San Luis Potosí, and Querétaro, those who were engaged in it purposed to break the connection with Spain, and establish in Mexico a monarchy with a Mexican dynasty. The plan had been matured with great secrecy, but owing to an imprudent act the revolt broke out prematurely in the town of Apatzingan, seconded in Uruapan, and followed up in Pátzcuaro, Guanajuato, San Luis de la Paz, and other places. The pretext alleged was the king's rescript for the expulsion of the Jesuits. Everywhere was heard the cry of mueran! mueran! There were constant violations of law and order; life and property became insecure. The motto was "nuevo rey y nueva ley." The creation of a nobility and other hare-brained projects was contemplated; but nothing was done toward accomplishing the national independence except the removal from the court-rooms and other public places of the king's portraits, coats of arms, etc. Nor did the conspirators even attempt to restore order among their followers. When this state of things became known in Mexico, the viceroy clothed the visitador José de Galvez wnth full powers to crush the rebellion, and punish the leaders. Galvez appointed commissioners to investigate, under his direction, the cases of treason, reserving for his own more particular scrutiny those in Valladolid, Guanajuato, and San Luis Potosí. There was fighting in several places, Indians taking a prominent part, and, as might be expected, the disorganized rebels were soon defeated, the punishment of the leaders being both swift and severe.^[44]

The Spanish and American Jesuits, to the number of about six thousand, residing in the pontifical capital and legations, were punctually paid their pensions. Some years later, in 1784, a royal order declared that they had a right to inherit and possess real and personal property, but this was subject to restrictions.^[45] In 1796, with the invasion of the pope's states, the remaining Jesuits became dispersed, and the few Americans returned to their respective countries. Some of them had their pensions doubled and trebled, and received other compensations. But the privilege of living in their native country did not last long. The Spanish government, controlled by Godoy, the favorite of King Cárlos IV., caused the last survivors to be confined in convents.^[46]

The deputies from America and the Philippines to the national córtes in Spain, presented several petitions for the restoration of the society of Jesus in the Indies. The eleventh and last was on the 16th of December 1810, and was ratified on the 31st of the same month by new members from Mexico. The reasons^[47] adduced were the great importance of the society in promoting science, and the progress of missions which introduced and spread the Christian faith among the Indians. Nothing was done, however, till Pius VII., by bull of Augu.st 7, 1814, reinstated the society. Fernando VII. issued his exequatur September 17, 1815, appointing a board to restore, as far as possible, the sequestered property. The royal order was executed in Mexico, the solemn installation of the Jesuits being made May 19, 1819, at the college of San Ildefonso, which was delivered to fathers José María Castañiza, Antonio Barroso, and Pedro Canton, natives of Mexico, and members of the late society.^[48] But the persecuted society was not long to enjoy peace. It was again expelled by a decree of the Spanish córtes of 1820, which was carried out in New Spain in January 1821.^[49] The disposal made of the society's property and missions will appear in connection with financial and general church affairs, treated of separately in this volume.

The first attempt to record the labors of the Jesuit order in America was the Historia de la Provincia de la compañia de Jesus de Nueva España, by Francisco de Florencia, one of the society, published in Mexico in 1694. This was a mere beginning, however, for although the author evidently intended to complete the work it was never extended beyond the first volume. The period covered is the decade beginning in 1571, during which the Jesuit establishments at Mexico, Pátzcuaro, and Oajaca were founded. Beyond the facts connected with these establishments, and the lives of the founders and first two provincials of the order in Mexico, the historical data are meagre. The arrangement is faulty, the dates for many important events are wanting, and the style is that common to the monkish chroniclers of the fourteenth century. The most extensive account of Florencia's life is given by Beristain. According to this author he was born in Florida in 1620, studied in the college of San Ildefonso of Mexico, and in 1643 took the Jesuit habit. Having successfully occupied the chairs of philosophy and theology in the Jesuit college of San Pedro y San Pablo, acquiring considerable fame in the capital as a preacher, and having held several important commissions in connection with the inquisition, he was appointed in 1688 procurator of his province at Madrid and Rome. Subsequently he filled for several years the office of procurator-general at Seville of all the provinces in the Indies. He finally returned to Mexico, where he died in his seventy-fifth year.

Of his numerous writings, which are wholly of a religious character, and some of which have passed through several editions, his fame rests chiefly on the work already cited, and the Zodiaco Mariano, Mex., 1755, a posthumous work of considerable importance for the ecclesiastical history of Spanish North America, in which the details are narrated with great fulness, with names, dates, and circumstances, and with authorities and bibliographical citations. Nicolás Antonio, Bib. Hisp. Nova, i. 426, makes no mention of these two works, only two of his earlier and less important publications being cited. Of the author he says 'tum Roma, tum Hispali omnium Indicarum provinciarum procurator.' Alcedo, Bib. Am., MS., i. 400-1, who follows Antonio, adds to the latter's list two more works of the same class. While Beristain's list of this author's works is very complete, Sabin gives some valuable information relative to the various editions.

Florencia's incompleted task was destined to be continued by one greater than he, but who. like him, was also fated to leave the work unfinished. His successor, Francisco Javier Alegre, was born in 1729 at Vera Cruz, where ho received his early education and studied Latin. Thence he passed to Puebla, where, having distinguished himself in the study of philosophy and the other branches taught at that period, he began a course of canonical law at the capital. On the 19th of March 1794 he took the habit at the Jesuit college of Tepozotlan. During his novitiate he committed to memory the works of St Francis of Sales, and the ascetic writings of Friar Luis de Granada and others, and, after professing, diligently devoted himself to the study of the Latin writers of the golden age. Later he dedicated himself with such earnestness to the study of theology that his astonishing progress in this science gained for him the applause of his companions, but so affected his health as to compel his transfer to Habana. There he taught philosophy, and perfected himself in Greek, mathematics, and the modern languages. Seven years later he passed to the Jesuit college recently opened in Mérida, Yucatan, where after a few years, his superiors recognizing his fitness for the work, he was called to Mexico to continue the history of the society.

Availing himself of the work of Florencia, the valuable writings of Ribas, Kino, Fray Martin Perez, Friar Ignacio Trysk, and an immense mass of annual reports and private correspondence, he described in a simple but correct and elegant style the extensive labors of bis order from their establishment in Florida in 1566 to about 1765, when its members had already completed the conquest of the north-western provinces of New Spain. Two volumes in manuscript had thus far been completed, when two years later the further continuation of the work was prevented by the expulsion of the society. Having, with the majority of his exiled companions, taken up his residence at Bologna, he continued his studies and teachings, published a translation of the Iliad, wrote Alexandriada, a poem on the conquest of Tyre by Alexander, and finished fourteen books on Elementos de Geometria, and four lectures on Secciones Cónicas. Here also he wrote the most famous of his works, the Instituciones Teológicas, consisting of eighteen books in seven volumes, and published a year after his death, which occurred August 16, 1788, near Bologna. In all, he wrote twenty works, which are enumerated by Beristain, Bib. Hisp.-Am., i. 54. Alegre's early studies are evident in his various works, his good taste and judgment being everywhere apparent. His expressions against the enemies of the society are moderate, and the space given to religious rhapsodies and accounts of miracles not ex- cessive. His Historia de la Compañia, the best work of its kind left by the Jesuits, and invaluable for the history of the north-west provinces of Mexico, remained unpublished until 1841, when it was rescued from oblivion by the efforts of the celebrated Mexican writer, Cárlos María Bustamante. In May of this year a bill to permit the re-establishment of the Jesuits in Mexico was laid before congress and supported, among others, by Bustamante, who sought to influence the public in their favor by the publication of this work. It was issued in 1841-2, in 3 vols. with notes and a portrait of the author.

 

 

1. The society's extraordinary privileges had been at various periods—1708 to 1757—renewed by the papal court, the last extension being for twenty years. Morelli, Fast. Nov. Orb., 518-625.
2. It is stated that as early as 1616 the people there had asked for Jesuits; and there was a tradition that for fifteen days before a priest named Vidal visited the place, the form of a Jesuit was seen in the pulpit of the parish church. Vidal vanquished and drove out the devil, who had declared that he would prevent the Jesuit entry. Lazcano, Vida del P. Oviedo, 270-5.
3. Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 241-3, 284-6.
4. As many as 500 miners helped at the work on certain days without wages, and yet the college and its magnificent temple cost over half a million pesos. Romero, Mich., 160-1.
5. Villa-Señor y Sanchez, Theatro, ii. 28.
6. When these people earnestly asked for them. They had since 1635 refused Christianity, and in 1713 declined to listen to the Franciscan friar Antonio Margil, and even struck his face with a fox. Arlegui, Chrón. Zac., 173.
7. The troops were made up of bad men who countenanced the Indians in their idolatrous and other evil practices, to gain their good-will, and thereby get them to work on their farms, and to show them where the good mines were. Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 238-9. It is said that in the Nayarit missions, whilst the Jesuits had them the Indians were confessed only in articulo mortis, frequently through an interpreter. Maséres, Informe, in Pinart, Col. Doc. Mex., 209.
8. 'Y que si ay, como en comunidad de hombres, sv mal necessario, se corrigen, y se dan las penitencias.' Papeles de Jesuitas, MS., no. 43, 1-11.
9. It was claimed that the censuras had no value whatever in foro conscientiæ; that they had no power over members of the order of Jesus, because it was not subject to the authority decreeing them, but directly to that of the holy see; that as they were null and void in foro interno et externo, they imposed no obligation of asking for or accepting absolution ad huc ad cautelam. It was also alleged that a royal order of October 4, 1705, pursuant to a papal bull of October 10, 1704, had forbidden the ordinaries of Mexico, Central America, and the Philippines from issuing excommunications against
10. Auttos Secrettos, in Mex, Doc. Ecles., MS., no. 1, 1-82. See also Diezmos de Ind., nos. iv., ix., xii.-xiv.
11. The concluding words of the document are characteristic, conveying as they do malignancy under the garb of humble submission. It was to be understood, he said, that the assent by the manager of on estate to the demand for one out of every ten, would be like that of a peaceable unarmed traveller patiently submitting to necessity when stopped on his way, and forced to surrender his goods. Barba, Respuesta, in Segura, Defensa Canónica, MS., 211-14.
12. June 16, 1736. Diezmos, Real Cédula, official copy, 1-15.
13. The viceroy had the orders published in Mexico, and endeavored to execute them, but the Jesuits again opposed a resistance. Rivera, Gob. Mex., i. 408-9.
14. In theie Spanish dominions, including all America and the Philippines, there were 5,167, of whom 2,774 were priests; in Portugal, 1,754, of whom 927 were priests; in France, 1,542, of whom about half were priests. In the world, 22,642, of whom 11,345 were ordained priests. Cat. Personarum et Domiciliarum (1-21); Comp. Jesus, Col. Gen., 24.
15. Comp. Jesus, Catálogo, 4-70. The neophytes converted and directed by the order in Mexico were 122,000; in the rest of America, 191,000; in the Philippines, etc., 165,000; making a total of 478,000. To that number must be added the neophytes in the Portuguese possessions. Boero, note, in Expulsion des Jésuites, 220.
16. In Upper Pimería, 8; Sonora, 18; Sinaloa, 16; Chinipas, 7; Taraumara, 13; Tepehuane, 12; Piastla, 10; Nayarit, 6; Lower California, 13. Cat. Personarum et Domicil. (1-21). All existed in 1767.
17. Meanwhile the California missionaries asked to be at least relieved of the two southern missions, which were troublesome, overtasked, and less fruitful, particularly since the opening of mines. The request was not granted. Clavigero, Storia Cal., ii. 160-70.
18. The order had been expelled from the dominions of King José I. of Portugal, by a royal decree of September 3, 1759, in which the Jesuits were declared traitors and rebels, and the society’s estates confiscated. On the same date of the previous year the king was shot at and wounded in the public streets, and the Jesuits were accused of being at the bottom of a plot; three of their number were imprisoned, and the chief among them suffered death, against the express disapproval of the pope. The expulsion was said to be the work of the minister of state, marqués de Pombal, the first to raise the standard of persecution, who had resolved to reform the church, bringing its members under the control of the royal government; to accomplish which he committed numerous acts of despotism and cruelty, notably those against the Jesuits. So was asserted by their friends. The expulsion from Portugal was followed by the suppression of the order in France. A decree of the parliament of August 6, 1762, declared it inadmissible in any civilized state, because of its hostility to natural rights, as well as to spiritual and tempral authority. The society should l>e dissolved and its property confiscated. Other decrees were passed, and finally, King Louis XV., in November 1764, extinguished the order, permitting its members to reside in France subject to the ordinaries, and submissive to the laws of the kingdom, though later they were forced to quit the country. The suppression was the result, as the partisans of the Jesuits alleged, of palace intrigues. Madame de Pompadour, the king’s mistress, entertained a great animosity to the order, because of the opposition of one or more of its members to her residence at court, and brought her influence to bear upon the king, the minister, duc de Choiseul, and other men, all affliated in the new school of philosophers, to accomplish the ruin of the society of Jesus. It is not my purpose, it being not within the scope of this work, to enter into a full disquisition of the actual causes that prompted the policy of these two prominent sons of the Roman church, the kings of France and Portugal, nor into the history of their negotiations on the subject with the head of the church. The question is fully treated by a number of writers, to whom I must refer the reader. Among them may be mentioned: Expulsion des Jesuites; Encycloæadia Britannica; Dictionnaire de la Conversation; Bustamante, Suplem., in Cavo, Tree Siglos; Id., Expatriacion, in Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus; Beaufort, Histoire des Papes; Alaman, Disertaciones; Mendo, Crísis Comp. Jesus (i.-xiii.), and 1-284.
19. Subsequent decrees prescribed the mode of disposing of the property. Beleña, Recop., i. pt. iii. 336-40.
20. Aiders and abettors, and persons knowing of such arrivals who failed to make them known to the authorities, incurred the penalties prescribed in the royal rescript. Comp. Jesus, Catálogo, 1-2, 36-73; Beleña, Recop., i. pt. iii. 337; Col. Real Decreto, Feb. 27, 1767, in Reales Ord., v. 226-39.
21. He has not been included among persecutors out of extreme charity for his blindness. Expulsion des Jésuites, pref. He acted 'siguiendo agenos influjos.' Alaman, Hist. Méj., i. 83.
22. This is made to appear in the official correspondence of the duc de Choiseul, and the marquis d'Aubeterre, French ambassador at Rome. Expulsion des Jésuites, 398-438.
23. It has been said that the real reason was that Clement XIII. and his minister Cardinal Torregiani had seen through the motives of the enemies of public order and opposed them with all their might. Schœll, Cours d'Hist., in Alaman, Disert., iii. 305. The king's council said, the hand of the Jesuit general, Lorenzo Ricci, could be detected in the brief, he being the confessor and spiritual adviser of the cardinal, with an influence potential. It charged the Jesuits with the introduction of false doctrines in the church and corruption of morals, probably referring to what has been published under the title of secret instructions of the Jesuits, of which I have a copy, but whose authenticity I have no means of verifying. It accused them of being promoters and accomplices in several riots, rebellions, and regicides in various kingdoms of Europe, as evidenced in solemn decisions standing against them in courts of justice; of being the persecutors of bishops, and keeping prelates, chapters, orders, universities, etc., in turmoil by banding themselves as to have their own opinions and schemes prevail over those of other respectable corporations or persons: 'assi sedio â conoser la Compañia desde q^e se fundo; y assi se hallaba quando V. M. se sirviô por su Rl. Decreto de 24 de Febrero mandarla extrañar de sus Dominios.' The necessity was denied of the society's existence; and even its usefulness was greatly doubted, as it had tolerated superstition in America; and in the Philippines caused a revolt of the natives in favor of the English; and everywhere its members had made themselves the actual sovereigns; y en todas las Yndias, como en el Paraguay, Moros, Maynas y Orinoco, California, Sinaloa, Sonora, Pigmería, Nayarit, Tayanularit, y otras naciones de Yndias, se han apoderado de la soberania.' It had treated Spaniards as enemies, depriving them of trade, and teaching them horrible things against the king's service, of all which the pope was ignorant. Even the spiritual care of the missions had been neglected by the Jesuits, according to their own confession in their intimate correspondence. Other charges were enumerated, one of the most serious being that the society had worked to bring about in Spain a change in the government to suit itself. Consulta del Consejo, in Papeles de Jesuitas, MS., no. 6, 1-9. According to Alaman, Disert., iii. 315-17, the king was induced to believe that the Jesuits had promoted a riot that occurred, with the purpose of deposing him, to prove which seditious papers were produced to him of such a nature that they could not be divulged without compromising the dignity of the crown and the decorum of the royal family. It was also asserted that Cárlos III. was chagrined at the Jesuits' opposition to a darling project of his, namely, the canonization of Juan Palafox, former bishop of Puebla and viceroy of Mexico, and of Brother Sebastian del Niño Jesus, who foretold him that he would be king of Spain, when he was not the heir presumptive.
24. Two distinguished officers of rank in the Spanish royal navy, Jorge Juan and Antonio Ulloa, in a secret report to the crown upon affairs of South America, equally applicable to Mexico, had nothing but words of commendation of the Jesuits and their work. Juan and Ulloa, Not. Secretas, in Quart. Rev., XXXV. 333-4. Azara, an adversary of the Jesuits, admits that they used their supreme authority over the missions with admirable moderation and mildness. Magarinos Cervantes, a liberal and judicious Spaniard, says that under Jesuit influence the administration of missions rose to the highest grade of prosperity, and as soon as it fell into other hands they were ruined. Art. Ducrue, in Dice. Univ. Hist. Geog., ix. 240-1. Such statements are borne out by those of many other writers; Brigadier Diego Albear, Gonzalo de Dobás, lieutenant-governor of Buenos Ayres, the traveller Pagés, who were eye-witnesses, Robertson, Raynal, Chateaubriand, Humboldt, etc.
25. Beleña, Recop., ii. 387-8.
26. Alaman, Hist. Méj., i. 82-4.
27. Meaning, 'under the penalty of death you will not open this despatch till the 24th of June at nightfall.'
28. Davila, J. M., P. Salvador Gándara, in Dicc. Univ., iii. 547.
29. Some modern authorities by mistake say it was on the 20th. Zerecero, Mem. Rev. Mex., 442; Mora, Rev. Mex., iii. 264.
30. Father Joseph Och repudiates the idea that anything detrimental to the Jesuits was found in their papers, but he made haste to destroy all the writings in his possession at the first opportunity. He denies the imputation that there was anything secret about the system or relations of the Jesuits, but perhaps forgets himself when he admits that many persons would have given $1,000 to speak to some of them when confined, and exults over the fact that one man actually did smuggle himself in under the pretence of being a doctor. Och, Reise, in Murr, Nachrichten, 94-6; Och, Joseph, Nachrichten von seinen Reisen, 1757 bis 1767, in Murr, Nachrichten. Halle, 1809. Och was a Jesuit priest who came to Mexico in 1756; soon after he was assigned to a mission in Pimería, and remained there till 1767, when he returned in ill-health to Mexico. He was one of the Jesuits expelled from the country, and seems to have been a sociable, jolly priest, and not over pious. His autograph memoirs contain much information on the country and its inhabitants, but little on missions. In treating of the enemies of his order he indulges freely in sarcasm, relating several exaggerated and even unsavory stories in reviling such government officials as had a hand in the expulsion. The memoirs were given by Abbot Franz Huberti to Murr, who published them, as he tells us, reforming them to suit the public taste. Father Och died of apoplexy in the Jesuit college of Würzburg early in July 1773, and only a few days before the suppression of his order.
31. The commissioner having demanded the consumption of the consecrated hosts in the ciborium previous to forming an inventory and seizing the sacred vases, Father Iragorri inquired if the Jesuits present desired to take the communion, and all so expressed their wish. Bustamante, Expa'riacion, in Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus iii. 302; Id., Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. 2. Father Diego Josá Abad, a Tarasco Indian, uttered harsh remarks in Tarascan to Father Iragorri. Areche then said to him: 'Father, were you to swear in Basque, you and your interlocutor must, whether it be to your liking or not, visit distant lands, and make your racket to people that do not know Indians as we do.' After which he confined Abad in a cell, and placed two sentries over him. Zerecero, Mem. Rev. Mex., 442.
32. 'Me veré precissado á usar del último rigor, y de execucion militar.' Disposiciones Varias, iv. 67.
33. 'De una vez para lo venidero deben saber los súbditos de el gran Monarca que ocupa el Trono de España, que nacieron para callar, y obedecer, y no para discurrir, ni opinar en los altos assumptos del Govierno.' Id.
34. Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, i. 137-40.
35. Och's Reise, in Murr, Nachrichten, 79-138, gives the dates of embarkation as the 22d and 23d.
36. It seems that ten priests, one escolar, and three coadjutors were after all permitted to remain in America, probably for advanced age and infirmities. Among them were fathers Francisco Chavez, José Maria Estrada, and Regis Salazar, kept in confinement in Puebla, and the first named eventually taken to Mexico. Eighteen novices abandoned the order in America, and 28 priests were allowed to remain in Spain. Comp. Jesus, Catálogo, 88-90.
37. The barque Bizarra, with the provincial. Father Salvador de la Gándara, was driven upon the coast of Portugal, where she was on the brink of destruction. Bustamante, Expatriacion, in Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 303; Id., Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. 3.
38. Expulsion des Jesuites, 446.
39. The duc de Choiseul would not let them stay there. Alaman, Disert, iii. 319-20.
40. This was in violation of the king's order, which expressly said that they should be well treated: 'Se les tratará en la execucion con la mayor decencia, atencion, huinanidad y asistencia.' Comp. Jesus, Col. Gen., 2.
41. All the sovereigns of the Bourbon family demanded vi et armis of Pope Clement XIII. that he should abolish the society of Jesus forever, but he never acceded to the demand, and death came to relieve him of his responsibilities in 1768. His successor, Ganganelli, who took the name of Clement XIV., was a Franciscan. He at once set to work to restore harmony with the Catholic sovereigns, and was successful. But the sovereigns before mentioned being joined by Austria, and by the grand master of Malta—the last named had, April 22, 1768, exiled the Jesuits from his dominions, allowing annually to each eighty Roman scuti—Insisted on the abolition of the obnoxious society, and even made demonstrations to force compliance. The pope at last submitting to the inevitable, on the 21st of July 1773, upon the plea that the society could no longer be useful, issued the famous bull, Dominus ac Redemptor Noster, for its extinction. Clemente XI V., Bula, 1-52; Reales Órdenes, v. 260-89; Beaufort, Hist. de los Papas, v. 330. After Clement's death, in September 1774, Pius VI. confirmed all the prohibitions against objecting to the suppression: 'imponiéndose perpetuo silencio en el asunto;' all violations were to be punished for disobedience and contempt of the mandates of the pope and the king, and any disturbance of the public peace and high treason. Beleña, Recop., i. pt. iii. 338. Jesuits residing in Prussia and Russia, engaged in the education of Roman Catholics, remained with the consent of the respective sovereigns, Frederick II. and Catherine II.
42. March 14, 1768, was published another edict embodying a royal order of November 11, 1767, which forbade the return of Jesuits, under any name, character, or pretext, to the Spanish dominions, without the king's special leave. Disposiciones Varias, iv., nos. 68 and 69. April 3, 1769, the viceroy made known other orders of the king and council to suppress from the universities and colleges every chair called Jesuítica; and no texts of the order or recommended by it were to be thereafter used. In this he was seconded by the bishops. Id., nos. 70-72; Croix, Real Cédula, Ag. 12, 1768; Fabian, Col, de Providencias, 455-61.
43. A canon of Mexico, Francisco Javier de Esnaurrizar, for free utterances in private, was shut up in San Juan de Ulúa. Doctor Antonio Lopez Portillo, accused of being the author of a hostile article, was sent to Spain, and because of his great learning, then deemed very dangerous, was never permitted to return to his country. Bustamante, Expatriacion, in Aleyre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 305; Id., Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. 5. In Jalisco the nuns sided with the Jesuits, and some fanatical prophecies were made in favor of the fathers’ return. The bishop of the diocese in 1768 reproved them, quoting the words of the royal cédula. Rivas y Velasco, Carta Pastoral, passim. The government itself violated the order for silence, by publishing a pamphlet which pretended to give chronologically the offences of the society from its installation. A pastoral of the bishop of Puebla of October 28, 1767, was severely criticised by one Sambeli, who used abusive language against the government, accusing it and its agents of robbery, and assuring the king that he would get no profit from the Jesuits' estates, because 'á los ministros que anduvieron en la danza se les ha pegado mucho en las uñas' .... 'quien hurta á ladron gana cien años de perdon.' Fabian, Col. de Providencias, 231-93; Lexarza, Diligencias, in. Pap. de Jesuítas, M.S., no. 4, 1-4.
44. Galvez, Informe del Visitador, MS., 11-48, 54-81; Galvez, Informe Gen., 138-9; Doc. Hist. Mex., série iv. ii. 62-4; Iturribarria, in Soc. Mex. Geog. Boletin, vii. 289-90; Alaman, Disert., iii. app. 66; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., X. 313. Upward of ninety persons perished on the scaffold, after undergoing the most cruel torture, and their limbs, exposed to view in high roads and public places, remained without burial for a long time. Many others were sentenced to cruel cudgelings, or to hard labor in chain-gangs, and not a few to imprisonment for life. Mora, Rev. Méj., iii. 265-70; El Indicador de la fed. Mex., iii. 151-4. The visitador not only hanged some of the rioters of Guanajuato, but laid a yearly tribute of $8,000 on the city, which proceeding told against the Spanish government in 1810. Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus (footnote), iii. 244. That odious tribute was paid by the tribunal de minería every year till September 12, 1810, when Intendente Riaño, to propitiate the goodwill of the people and avert the revolution, repealed it. Romero, Mich., 161.
45. To prevent the removal from the Spanish dominions of the proceeds of such estates, they were to be administered by the nearest relatives of the heirs, without the privilege of selling, and with the obligation of investing moneys and other effects so as to obtain incomes therefrom. Ex-coadjutors, if unmarried, were to receive one half the income during their lifetime; if married, two thirds; the other half or third, as the case might be, was for the administrator of the estate. The same rule applied to novices. The children of ex-coadjutors or ex-novices were allowed to reside in the Spanish dominions, by first obtaining, should there be no objection to their personal behavior, a special passport from the crown. Ordained priests were allowed one half the income; at their death the estates were to go to their legal heirs ab intestato. Whenever an ex-Jesuit acquired by inheritance an income exceeding $200 a year, his pension from the crown was to cease. Reales Órdenes, v. 412-17.
46. Bustamante, Expatriacion, in Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 304; Id., Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. 4. Father Rafael de Célis, a native of Vera Cruz, wrote in 1786 a catalogue of the province of Mexico containing biographical data, and showing the date of death of each member till the time of his own demise. The list was continued by Father Pedro Manjuez. Only 99 were alive at the beginning of the 19th century; and in 1820, 96 of them were already dead. Comp. Jesus, Catálogo, 3-202; Gaz. Mex. (1798-9), ix. 85-7. It is well known that several of the exiled Jesuits wrote voluminous works, for which the learned world has given them due credit. Among such writers were several natives of New Spain, from whose productions I have often quoted in the course of this work. Their names and writings will be duly noticed elsewhere. Others had won themselves in the eighteenth century an honorable and revered name in Mexico, for their virtues and apostolic zeal; namely, Antonio de Hordoñana, Francisco Chavez, Francisco Javier Solchaga, Juan Villavicencio; Francis Herman Glandorff, a native of Westphalia, the great apostle of Taraumara, who was compared with Saint Francis Xavier, and died August 9, 1763; Juan Francisco Iragorri, the 'santo americano;' Francisco Javier Gomez; Juan Perez, of whom Father Oviedo said that a man of approved spirit saw 'subir su alma de la cama al cielo, sin pasar por el purgatorio'—seeing the soul fly up is certainly a dramatic form of expression. Perez died in March, 1780; he was noted for the charitable care he took of insane females. Then there were Agustin Arriola, Manuel Álvarez, Juan Carnero, who foretold the day of his death; José de Guevara, Cristóbal Flores, Salvador de la Gándara, Manuel Arce, Pedro Canton, Juan Antonio de Oviedo, Juan Mayora, and Agustin Marquez. Excepting Glandorff, Gomez, Perez, and Alvarez, the above named were born in New Spain. Mayora, Rel., 1-78; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., i.-x. passim; Jesus, Cat. Comp., 200; Lazcano, Vida del P. Oviedo, 1-582; Pap. de Jesuitas, MS., no. 20, 1-31; Castañiza, Rel., frontispiece.
47. The new deputies asked for their consideration, 'con la preferencia que demandan las Américas, y la urgencia de que somos testigos.' Bustamante, Defensa Comp. Jesus, 15-16.
48. Father Canton had been quietly living in the country since 1808. Bustamante, Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iv. 176.
49. Id., 177; Id., Defensa Comp. Jesus, 17.