quisition had attained great predominance, causing even the viceroy and audiencia to lose much of their power and prestige.[1] In 1747 the inquisidor general had issued an ordinance in thirty-four sections intended to avert all disputes on jurisdiction, and to maintain intact the prerogatives of each department of government. That ordinance was, however, often disregarded by the inquisitors of Mexico.[2] Between the year 1600 and the end of the eighteenth century occurred many autos de fé, both particular and general, the records of which have not been completely published.[3] In the latter part of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century, the inquisition, which till then had been mainly engaged in persecuting Portuguese Jews, sorcerers, witches, apostate priests, bigamists, and other offenders, found a new and fruitful field among the readers of modern philosophical works, most of which were
- ↑ 1727 the king ordered the viceroy to protect the royal jurisdiction against encroachments of the inquisition under pretext of privilege. At the same time he wished the court to be aided in every way, and its officers and attachés respected in their rights and functions. Beleña, Recop., i. 212-17; Provid. Reales, MS., 261-6.
- ↑ This body was seriously rebuked for it in 1785 by the crown. Rescrip. Reales Ecles., MS., 8-19, 27, 113-10; Reales Cédulas, MS., 208-10; Reales Ord., vi. 65-8.
- ↑ A notable one was the case of William Lampart, an Irishman, or of Irish descent, who came to Mexico in 1040, and was known as Guillen Lombardo, alias Guzman, arrested in 1642 as an 'astrólogo judiciario con mala aplicacion de sus estudios,' and put into a dungeon. Dec. 24, 1050, he with another man broke jail, and sent to the viceroy several documents, and scattered others, against the archbishop and inquisitors, accusing the latter of treasonable views, ignorance, and theft. Much trouble might have been occasioned had not Lampart and his companion been recaptured. His fate remains unknown, though there is some reason to surmise that he perished as a heretic in November, 1659. Torquemada, iii. 380-1; Guijo, Diario, 4, 5, 32, 42-53, 105-6, 120-7, 102-3, 220, 427, 492, 525, 501; Puigblanch, La Inquisicion, 84, and notes. 38; Panes, Vir., in Monum. Dom. Esp., MS., 100-1, 130; Diario Méx., V. 380-4; Rivera, Gob. Mex., i. 159-01, 172-0,185; Sosa, Episcop. Mex., 99-102; Robles, Diario, 50-7, 86, 98, 214, 232, 242-3, 292, 315; Gaz. Méx. (1784-5), i. 308-9, 326. Zamacois, Hist. Méj., x. 513, alleges that in the 249 years the inquisition existed in Mexico, there were altogether 30 autos de fé, and 405 prisoners tried, of whom nine were burned alive, 12 burnt after execution, one, the patriot chief Morelos, shot, not for religious but political reasons, and 69 burnt in effigy. Reports of cruelty to prisoners in dungeons he declares false and calumnious, and incited by party spirit. It will be for the reader a question of veracity between the numerous accusers of the inquisition, and of the government sustaining it, on the one pact, and Zamacois' bigotry, and exaggerated 'españolismo,' on the other.
