The meeting and resolution held by the bishop in regard to the
execution of the decree about slaves
Monday, October sixteen of this year one thousand five hundred and
eighty-one, while the most illustrious and reverend Don Fray Domingo de
Salazar, first bishop of these Philipinas Islands, was in the monastery
of St. Augustine in Tondo, he had the very reverend fathers, Fray Pablo
de Jesus, [70] custodian of the Order of St. Francis, Fray Andres de
Aguirre, [71] provincial of the Order of St. Augustine, Father Antonio
Sedeño, [72] rector of the Society of Jesus, Fray Francisco Manrrique,
[73] prior of the monastery of St. Augustine in Manila, Fray Diego de
Muxica, [74] prior of the said convent of Tondo, Father Alonso Sanchez,
[75] of the Society of Jesus, Fray Cristobal de Salvatierra, [76] of
the Order of St. Dominic and the bishop’s associate, Fray Puan de
Plasencia, [77] of the Order of St. Francis, and Fray Alonso de Castro
[78] and Fray Juan Pimentel, of the Order of St. Augustine, [79]
summoned and assembled in the said monastery. He informed them that the
very illustrious Don Gonçalo Ronquillo de Peñalosa, his Majesty’s
governor of these said islands had communicated with his Lordship in
regard to the decree concerning the slaves certain methods that he
thought advisable in order that his Majesty’s instructions in regard
to the matter might be carried out with more mildness and less severity
and hardship to the community. Their Lordships having exchanged
opinions regarding the matter, the bishop declared that he thought the
matter one of so great seriousness as it touched so deeply on the life
and conscience that it ought not to be determined without referring it
to the prelates of the orders and the learned and weighty persons of
the orders. For his Majesty had sent him to that land and was
supporting them there for such necessities and cases. After his
Lordship had informed all the abovesaid fathers of the above matter, he
said that he had assembled them in order to lay the following matters
before them.
First: Whether the hardship that it is thought will follow on the part
of those who hold slaves or any other reason that the former can offer
in their behalf will be a sufficient reason so that the governor may in
conscience neglect to publish and execute the said decree.
Second: Whether, after the publication and order to execute [the
decree], he can in conscience neglect the prosecution of its terms and
execution because of the petition that may be presented to his Majesty
in behalf of the masters of the slaves.
Third: Whether, after the said decree has been ordered executed, the
governor can in good conscience assign any limit within which the
masters shall release the slaves and the latter be recognized as free;
or whether the masters be obliged to declare them free immediately.
Inasmuch as the matter is so serious the bishop requested and charged
them to commend it to God, and to consider and confer, and then under
charge of their consciences to declare their opinion with all freedom
and truth. After they had examined and conferred upon the matter among
themselves, they resolved as follows.
In reply to the first point they declared that his Majesty’s decree
is no new law or order, but a declaration of the justice that the
matter of the Indians has of itself, and a reply and resolution of the
petitions and reports that have been made from here. It is the
confirmation of another decree given for the same purpose by the
emperor Carlos Fifth of blessed memory in the former year one thousand
five hundred and thirty. He ordered therein that from the time of its
date and thenceforth all the Indians yet discovered or to be discovered
should not be allowed to become slaves however they might be acquired,
whether in just war, or got or bought from the natives, although they
should be held by the latter as legitimate slaves. Consequently, it is
clear from the above that no fear or suspicion of any inconvenience or
hardship is sufficient for the governor or any other person, on whom
devolves the execution of the decree, to neglect the execution of it,
or to declare the liberty which the Indians possess inherently, and
which his Majesty declares and concedes. On the other hand he who shall
do the contrary, besides the most grave sin that he will commit, will
be obliged to restore immediately to the Indians all the service and
wrongs that they shall have received in their persons, possessions, and
honors. The former governors were in duty bound to have endeavored to
free the slaves, although no new decrees were despatched by his
Majesty, both because of the decree already issued and because of the
manifest injustice that was being practiced toward one whom they were
obliged to protect, defend, and give justice; for his Majesty has sent
the governors to this land for the correction of those and other like
injuries, and thereby relieves his conscience through them. In regard
to what is feared from any troubles, it is not credible that they will
follow to a people so loyal and obedient to their king, because they
are ordered to obey him in a matter so just and so reasonable.
In reply to the second point, they declared that it is clearly inferred
from the answer to the first article that the governor cannot
conscientiously neglect to follow up the liberty of the said Indians,
even though their masters appeal from the decree. For his Majesty has
also been informed of this matter as appears from the old and new
decrees, and from the general custom of all the other Yndias, in all of
which nothing contrary has ever been allowed or any slave permitted.
Hence, it is clear that the present petition is only a means to
postpone and prolong the injustice. The judge on whom this matter
devolves cannot in good conscience neglect to execute the decree and to
further the liberty of the Indians, in spite of any petition or effort
to the contrary.
In reply to the third point, they declared that the freedom of the
Indians could not be deferred as it was a matter of natural and divine
right and clear justice, just as he who has anything belonging to
another is obliged instantly to restore it, as soon as he knows it, and
the judge who tries the case is bound to order the restoration.
However, they thought that if the Indians were declared free
immediately and were set at liberty, the governor could order them not
to leave their masters for a brief time, because of the trouble that
they would suffer if their slaves left them suddenly. When they were
asked how long his Lordship could detain them in the power of their
masters without endangering his conscience, they said that that
depended on the judgment of good and prudent sense. They all thought
that his Lordship might extend the time for them for the space of
twenty or thirty days. Whoever dared to detain them for a longer period
would be committing mortal sin and be obliged to make restitution.
The bishop having examined the opinions of the abovesaid fathers,
declared that after he had left his Lordship he had also considered the
matter very deeply and had conferred upon it with grave and very
erudite persons of conscience. The above opinions and the final
resolution of the fathers seemed to him to be quite in harmony with the
law of God, and with natural, divine, and human law, and to be
established on entire truth and justice. As such he approved and
confirmed those opinions and said that his opinion was the same as
theirs. In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, amen. His
Lordship signed the same and ordered it sealed with his seal. The
others above named, who gave their opinions in the form herein
contained, nemine discrepante, also signed it. Given in the convent of
Tondo, October seventeen, of the above-mentioned year. This opinion was
given to the governor with the signatures of all the religious herein
contained. In testimony thereof, I affixed my signature to it.
Fray Domingo, bishop of the Filipinas.