success 1 It had already raised in every Spanish heart a strong admiration for the hero, which overlooked everything but his greatness. Nor was the crown insensible to the necessity of justifying the means to such an end. The surpassing fitness of the man for his position was undeniable; besides, none could deny that Velazquez had been also irregular in his conduct, while his rival had suffered enough injury and opposition to justify many an overt act. The natural result was a decision in favor of Cortes, with the recommendation that neither Velazquez nor Fonseca should be allowed to interfere further in his affairs. The claims of the former to his share in the fleet, and other interests, belonged to the province of the court of law just established for suits connected with the Indies. The emperor rendered his decision in accordance, influenced mainly, it seems, by the charge that the Narvaez expedition had been the real cause for the great uprising which ended in the disastrous expulsion of Spaniards from Mexico.[1]
The blow fell with unnecessary humiliation on Velazquez, being heralded on his own island, to the sound of trumpet, by the messengers who bore tokens of royal favors to his rival. His fortune had really been wrecked by the cost of expeditions and efforts against Cortés, which proved the chief means for his condemnation; and now every ambition was crushed, even the lingering hope of vengeance. The offer of regaining a small portion of his losses by appealing to the tribunals seemed irony. In sullen mood he retired to his residence stricken by grief and rage which fast consumed him. Once more he resolved to make fresh representations to the sovereign, and in 1524 he
- ↑ Cédula, October 15, 1522, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xxvi. 66. Gomara states that both Velazquez and Fonseca-were removed from office, though he is not quite clear about the latter. 'Mādo al Obispo . . . q no entendiesse mas en negocios de Cortes, ni de Indias, a lo que parecio.' Hist. Mex., 237-8. Bernal Diaz affirms this more strongly. Hist. Verdad., 183, and in Cortés, Vida, Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., i. 352, the bishop is allowed to retire voluntarily; but the case is doubtful, Remesal declaring that his successor, Loaisa, did not assume the presidency till August 2, 1524. Hist. Chyapa, 9.
