my reasons therefor, the Audiencia insisted no more in the case. The other case concerned the general investigation which I had made of the prebendaries and clergy—two of whom appealed against the sentence which I imposed, stipulating that the tenor thereof be observed as is expressly commanded by the Council of Trent. They had recourse to the Audiencia; and when an order was given for the record of the case to be presented, I replied that there were secret matters touching the honor of the clergy, which I could not show, but that I would show that part referring to the two ecclesiastics; as they wished their offenses to be known. Nevertheless, it was not right to exhibit the guilt of the others, as they did not feel that their sentences were unjust. There were many arguments over this point, and all the theologians of this land said that I was right. To avoid scandal I openly consented that the two ecclesiastics should appeal to the archbishop.[1] Both then and now I have felt much aggrieved by the injustice done me by the Audiencia. I have sent a complaint thereof to your Majesty, and do not know why the testimony I sent has not yet arrived there. I had then and still have reason for complaining that the Audiencia usurped my jurisdiction and discussed proceedings which properly belong to me, but in which they have forestalled me. A citizen of this city left a piece of land whereon was built a hospital and church for the poor. Although this was ecclesiastical property, they deprived me of judgment in
- ↑ Reference is here made to the archbishop of Mexico, who had ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the Philippines until the archbishopric was created there. At the time when Salazar's letter was written, the see of Mexico had no incumbent, the diocese being governed by the dean and chapter.
