OF THE PROCEDURE OF THE MODERN INQUISITION.
After the death of the Inquisitor-general, Torquemada, Ferdinand and
Isabella proposed Don Diego Deza, a Dominican, to the Pope, as his
successor. Deza was Bishop of Jaen, and afterwards became Archbishop of
Seville. The Pope signed his bulls of confirmation on the 1st of
December, 1498, but limited his authority to the affairs of the kingdom
of Castile. Deza was displeased at a restriction which did not exist in
the bulls of his two colleagues, and refused to accept the nomination,
until the Pope invested him with the same power over Aragon, in a bull,
in 1499. The new inquisitor-general did not show less severity in the
exercise of his office than his predecessor; but, before I enter on this
part of the history, it is necessary to give some account of the mode of
proceeding of the holy office, as it was the work of Torquemada, the
effect of the laws which he formed, and properly belongs to his
history.
The processes in the Inquisition began by a denunciation, or some other
information, such as a discovery accidentally made before the tribunal
in another trial. When the denunciation is signed, it takes the form of
a declaration, in which the informer, after having sworn to the truth of
his deposition, designates those persons whom he presumes, or believes,
to have anything to depose against the accused person. These persons are
then heard, and their depositions, with that of the first witness, form
the _summary of the information, or the preparatory instruction_.
_Inquest._
When the tribunal judged that the actions or words which were denounced
were sufficient to warrant an inquiry to establish the proofs, the
persons who had been cited as knowing the object of the declaration were
examined, and were obliged to take an oath not to reveal the questions
which were put to them. None of the witnesses were informed of the
subject on which they were to make their depositions; they were only
asked in general terms, _if they had ever seen or heard anything which
was, or appeared, contrary to the Catholic faith, or the rights of the
Inquisition_.
Personal experience has shown me that the witnesses who were ignorant of
the cause of their citation often recollected circumstances entirely
foreign to the subject, which they made known, and were then
interrogated as if their examination had no other object; this
accidental deposition served instead of a denunciation, and a new
process was commenced.
The declarations were written down by the commissary or notary, who
usually aggravated the denunciation, as much as the arbitrary
interpretation of the improper or equivocal expressions used by ignorant
persons would permit. The declaration was twice read to the witnesses,
_who did not fail to approve all that had been written_.
_Censure of the Qualifiers._
When the inquisitors examine the preliminary _instruction_, if they find
sufficient cause to proceed, they send a circular to all the tribunals
in the province to inquire if any charges against the accused exist in
their registers. This proceeding is called the _review of the
registers_. Extracts are made of the propositions against the accused,
and if each is expressed in different terms, which is almost always the
case, they are sent as accusations advanced on different occasions. This
writing was then remitted to the theologians, _qualifiers of the holy
office_, who write at the bottom of the page if the propositions merit
the _theological censure_, as heretical, if they give occasion to
suppose that the person who pronounced them approved of any heresy, or
if he is only suspected of that crime.
The declaration of the _qualifiers_ determines the proceedings against
the accused, until the trial is prepared for the definite sentence. The
_qualifiers_ were generally scholastic monks, almost entirely
unacquainted with true dogmatic theology, and who carried fanaticism and
superstition to such a height as to find heresy in everything which they
had not studied: this disposition has often caused them to censure some
of the doctrines of the fathers of the church.
_Prisons._
When the qualification has been made, the procurator-fiscal demands that
the denounced person shall be removed to the _secret prisons_ of the
_holy office_. The tribunal has three sorts of prisons, public,
intermediate, and secret. The first are those where persons are
imprisoned, who are not guilty of heresy, but of some crime which the
Inquisition has the privilege of punishing: the second are destined for
those servants of the holy office who have committed some crime in the
exercise of their functions, without incurring suspicion of heresy.
Those who are detained in these prisons are permitted to communicate
with others, unless they are condemned to solitary confinement. The
secret prisons are those where all heretics, or persons suspected of
heresy, are confined; they can only communicate with the judges of the
tribunal.
These prisons are not, as they have been represented, damp, dirty, and
unhealthy; they are vaulted chambers, well lighted, not damp, and large
enough for a person to take some exercise in. The real horrors of the
prisons are, that no one can enter them without becoming infamous in
public opinion; and the solitude and the darkness to which the prisoner
is condemned for fifteen hours in the day during the winter, as he is
not allowed light before the hour of seven in the morning, or after four
in the evening. Some authors have stated, that the prisoners were
chained; these means are only employed on extraordinary occasions, and
to prevent them from destroying themselves.
_First Audiences._
In the three first days following the imprisonment of the culprit, he
had three _audiences_ of _monition_, or caution, recommending him to
speak the truth, without concealing anything that he had done or said,
or that he can impute to others, contrary to the faith. He was told that
if he followed this recommendation he would be treated leniently; but in
the contrary case, he would be proceeded against with severity. Until
then the prisoner is ignorant of the cause of his arrest; he is only
told that no person is taken to the prison of the holy office without
sufficient proof that he has spoken against the Catholic faith, and,
therefore, it is for his interest to confess his crimes voluntarily.
Some prisoners confessed themselves guilty of the crimes stated in the
preparatory instruction; others acknowledged more; others less;
generally the prisoners declared that their consciences did not reproach
them, but that they would endeavour to recollect the faults which they
had committed if the accusations of the witnesses were read to them.
The advantages of the confession were, that it lessened the duration of
the trial, and rendered the punishments inflicted on the accused less
severe when the reconciliation took place. Whatever promises might be
made to the prisoners, they could not avoid the disgrace of the
_san-benito_ and _auto-da-fe_, or preserve their honour or their
property, if they acknowledged themselves _formal_ heretics.
Another custom of the Inquisition was to examine the prisoner on his
genealogy and parentage, in order to discover by the registers of the
tribunal if any of his family had been punished for heresy, supposing
that he might have inherited the erroneous doctrines of his ancestors.
He was also obliged to recite the _Pater_, the _Credo_, and other forms
of Christian doctrine, because the presumption that he had erred in his
faith was stronger, if he did not know them, had forgotten them, or if
he made mistakes in the repetition. In short, the Inquisition employed
every means, and neglected nothing in the trial of the prisoners, to
make them appear guilty of heresy, and all this was done with an
appearance of charity and compassion, and in the name of Jesus Christ.
_Charges._
When the ceremony of the three first audiences is finished, the
procurator-fiscal forms his act of accusation against the prisoner, from
the preliminary instruction. Although a semi-proof only exists, he
reports the facts in the depositions as if they were proved; and what
is still more illegal, he does not reduce the articles of his
_requisition_ to the number of facts, but following the practice in
forming the extracts of the propositions for the act of _qualification_,
he multiplies them according to the variations in the statements; so
that an accusation which ought to be reduced to one point, contains five
or six charges, which appear to indicate that the accused has advanced
so many heretical opinions on different occasions, without any
foundation but the different manner in which each witness relates the
conversation.
This mode of proceeding produces the worst effects; it confuses the
prisoner where the charges are read to him, and if he has not coolness
and intelligence, he imagines that several crimes are imputed to him,
and replies, for instance, to the third article, and relates the facts
in different words from those which he employed in answering the second;
this variation taking place in each article, he sometimes contradicts
himself, and thus furnishes the fiscal with fresh accusations against
him, for he is accused of not adhering to truth in his replies.
_Torture._
Although the prisoner has confessed all that the witnesses deposed
against him in the first audiences, yet the fiscal terminates his
_requisition_ by saying, that he is guilty of concealment and denial,
that he is, therefore, impenitent and obstinate, and demands that the
question shall be applied to the accused.
It is true, that it is so long since torture has been inflicted by the
inquisitors, that the custom may be looked upon as abolished, and the
fiscal only makes the demand in conformity to the example of his
predecessors, yet it is equally cruel to make the prisoners fear it.
In former times, if the inquisitors judged that the prisoner had not
made a full confession, they ordered him to be tortured: the object was
to make him confess all that formed the substance of the process. I
shall not describe the different modes of torture employed by the
Inquisition, as it has been already done by many historians: I shall
only say that none of them can be accused of exaggeration. When the
accused acknowledged the crimes imputed to them, during the torture,
they were obliged the next day to ratify or retract their confession
upon oath. Almost all confirmed their first statement, because they were
subjected to the torture a second time if they dared to retract.
_Requisition._
The requisition or accusation of the procurator-fiscal was never given
to the prisoner in writing, that he might not reflect on the charges in
prison and prepare his replies. The prisoner is conducted to the
audience-chamber, where a secretary reads the charges, in the presence
of the inquisitors and the fiscal: between each article he calls upon
the prisoner to reply to it instantly, and declare if it is true or
false.
It is evident that this proceeding is intended to embarrass the
prisoner, by compelling him to reply without previous reflection. Such
stratagems are allowed in other tribunals where the prisoners are guilty
of homicide, theft, or other offences against society; but it must be
allowed that it is against the spirit of Christianity to employ them
where zeal for religion and the salvation of others seem to be the
motives for acting.
_Defence._
When the charges and the _accusation_ have been read, the inquisitors
ask the prisoner if he wishes to make a defence; if he replies in the
affirmative, a copy of the _accusation_ and the replies is taken. He is
then required to select the lawyer whom he wishes to employ for his
defence, from the list of those belonging to the holy office. Some
prisoners required permission to seek a defender out of the tribunal, a
pretension which is not contrary to any law, particularly if the lawyer
has taken an oath of secrecy; yet this simple and natural right has
seldom been granted by the inquisitors.
It is of little consequence to the accused to be defended by an able
man, as the lawyer is not allowed to see the original process, or to
communicate with his client. One of the notaries draws up a copy of the
result of the _preliminary instruction_, in which he reports the
deposition of the witnesses, without mentioning their names, or the
circumstances of time or place, and (what is more extraordinary) without
stating what has been said in defence of the prisoner. He entirely omits
the declarations of the persons who, having been summoned and
interrogated by the tribunal, have persisted in affirming that they knew
nothing of the subject on which they were examined. This extract is
accompanied by the censure of the _qualifiers_, and the demand of the
fiscal for the examination, and the accusation, and the replies of the
accused. This is all that is given to the defender in the
audience-chamber, where the inquisitors have commanded him to attend. He
is then obliged to promise to defend the prisoner if he thinks that it
is just to do so; but, in the contrary case, that he will use all the
means in his power to persuade him to solicit his pardon of the
tribunal, by a sincere confession of his sins, and a demand to be
reconciled to the church.
Those who have acquired any experience in criminal proceedings, are
aware of the great advantages which may be derived from the comparison
of the testimony of the witnesses in the defence of the accused; but the
direction given to the proceedings by the Inquisition is such, that the
lawyer can rarely find any means of defence but that which arises from
the difference and variations in the depositions on the actions and
words imputed to the prisoner.
As this is not sufficient, (because the semi-proof exists,) the defender
generally demands to see the prisoner, that he may inquire if it is his
intention to challenge the witnesses, to destroy, either in part, or
entirely, the proof established against him. If he replies in the
affirmative, the inquisitors order proceedings to prove the irregularity
of the witnesses.
_Proof._
It is then necessary to separate all the original declarations of the
witnesses from the process, and send them to the places which they
inhabit to receive a _ratification_. This takes place without the
knowledge of the prisoner, and as he is not represented by any person
during this formality, it is impossible that the challenge of a witness
should succeed, even if he was the greatest enemy of the prisoner. If
the witness was at Madrid at the time of the instruction, and afterwards
went to the Philippine Isles, the course of the trial was suspended, and
the prisoner was obliged to wait till the ratification arrived from
Asia. If he demanded an audience, to complain of the delay, he was
answered with ambiguity, that the tribunal could not proceed with
greater haste, as it was occupied with particular measures.
The prisoner made his challenge of the witnesses by naming those whom he
considered as his enemies, giving his reasons for mistrusting them, and
writing on the margin of each article the names of those persons who
could attest the facts which are the causes of the challenge. The
inquisitors decree that they shall be examined, unless some motive
prevents it.
As the prisoner is not acquainted with the proceedings, he often accuses
persons who have not been summoned as witnesses. The article in which
they are mentioned is passed over with those of the witnesses who have
not deposed against him, or who have spoken in his favour. Thus he
encounters his accusers only by chance.
It sometimes happens that the procurator-fiscal secretly obtains the
proof of the morality of the witnesses, in order to destroy the effect
of the challenge; and as this is more easy to accomplish than the
measures taken by the prisoner, they are generally rendered useless,
because in doubtful cases the inquisitors are always disposed to depend
upon the witness, if he is not known to be the declared enemy of the
accused.
_Publication of the Proofs._
When the proof is established, the tribunal publishes the state of the
trial, the depositions, and the act of judgment. But these terms are not
to be understood in the common sense, since the publication was only an
unfaithful copy of the declarations and other facts contained in the
extract formed for the use of the defender. A secretary reads it to the
prisoner in the presence of the inquisitors; after each article he asks
him if he acknowledges the truth of what he has just heard; he then
reads the declarations, and if the prisoner has not yet alleged any
thing against the witnesses, that privilege is given him, because, after
hearing the deposition, he is generally able to designate the person who
has made it.
This reading is only a fresh snare; for if the least contradiction is
perceived, he may be considered guilty of duplicity, concealment, or a
false confession, and the tribunal may refuse to grant the
reconciliation, although he demand it, and even condemn him to
_relaxation_.
_Definitive Censure of the Qualifiers._
After this ceremony the _qualifiers_ are summoned, who receive the
original writing of the sentence passed in the _summary_ instruction,
with the extract of the replies of the prisoner in his last examination,
and the declarations of the witnesses which were communicated to him.
They are commissioned to qualify the propositions a second time, to
examine his explanation, and to decide if his replies have destroyed the
suspicion of heresy which he had incurred, or if he had confirmed it,
and was to be looked upon as a _formal_ heretic.
Every one must be sensible of the importance of this censure, since it
led to the definite sentence; yet the _qualifiers_ scarcely took the
trouble to hear a rapid perusal of the proceedings; they hastily gave
their opinion, and this was the last important act in the proceedings,
as the rest was a mere formality.
_Sentence._
The trial was then considered as finished. The diocesan in ordinary was
convoked, that with the inquisitors he might decide upon the proper
sentence. In the first ages of the holy office these functions were
confided to _consultors_: these were doctors of law, but as they could
only give their opinion, and as the inquisitors pronounced the
definitive sentence, the latter always prevailed if they chanced to
differ. The accused had the right of appealing to the _Supreme_ Council,
but appeals to Rome were more frequent. The inquisitors of the provinces
were afterwards obliged to submit their opinion to the council before
they pronounced the definitive sentence; the council modified and
reformed it; their decision was sent to the inquisitors, who then
established the judgment in their own names, although it might be
contrary to their previous opinion. This proceeding rendered the office
of the consultors useless, and it was discontinued.
Although the prisoner was acquitted, he was not acquainted with the
names of his denouncers and the witnesses. He rarely obtained a more
public reparation than the liberty of returning to his house with a
certificate of absolution.
_Execution of the Sentence._
The nature of the punishments inflicted by the Inquisition has been
already described; it is, therefore, only necessary to remark that the
sentences were not communicated to the victims until the commencement of
the execution, since the condemned were sent to the _autos-da-fe_,
either to be reconciled or given over to secular justice; on leaving
prison the _familiars_ attired them in the _san-benito_, with a paper
mitre on their heads, a cord round their necks, and a wax taper in their
hands.
When the prisoner arrives at the place of execution, his sentence is
read, and he is then reconciled or _relaxed_, which means, that he is
condemned to be burnt by the justice of the king.
_San-benito._
The _San-benito_ was a species of _scapulary_, which only descended to
the knees, that it might not be confounded with those worn by some
monks: this motive also made the inquisitors prefer common woollen stuff
of a yellow colour with red crosses for the _San-benito_. Such were the
penitential habits in 1514, when Cardinal Ximenez de Cisneros altered
the common crosses for those of St. Andrew. The inquisitors afterwards
had a different habit for each class of penitents.
Those who abjured as _slightly_ suspected of heresy, wore the scapulary
of yellow stuff without the cross. If he abjured as _violently
suspected_, he wore half the cross; if he was a _formal heretic_, he
wore it entire. There were also three different kinds of garments for
those who were condemned to death. The first was for those who repented
before they were sentenced. It was a simple yellow scapulary with a red
cross, and a conical cap, denominated _Caroza_, which was formed of the
same stuff as the _San-benito_, and decorated with similar crosses.
The second was destined for those who had been condemned to be burnt,
but who had repented after their sentence, and before they were
conducted to the _autos-da-fe_. The _San-benito_ and the _Caroza_ were
made of the same stuff. On the lower part of the scapulary a bust was
painted, in the midst of a fire, the flames of which were reversed, to
show that the culprit was not to be burnt until he had been strangled.
The _Caroza_ was painted in the same manner.
The third was for those who were impenitent. It was similar to the
others, with a bust, and the flames in the natural direction, to show
that the person who wore it was to be burnt alive; grotesque figures of
devils were also painted on the _San-benito_ and _Caroza_.