THE EMBARKATION.

441

ing the sojourn of the Jesuits in that port thirty-four of them died.

35

On the 24th of October the government provided the requisite ships, and on that day the Jesuits embarked for Habana.38 Four days out there was a violent gale which dispersed the convoy, and nearly caused the destruction of all. November 13th they reached Habana, and were kindly treated by the governor captain-general, their condition being truly pitiable. After recruiting their strength, having lost a few more members, they were reëmbarked December 23d for Cádiz, where they arrived the 30th of the following March. They were then taken to the puerto de Santa María, and together with many others placed in an asylum. In the middle of June, 1768, having lost fifteen of their brethren by disease at Santa María, they were reëmbarked, those from Mexico numbering now about 528, for the Roman states, where they arrived only to be refused admission.33 The unfortunate exiles were then obliged to wander about the Mediterranean, suffering for the necessaries of life, closely confined in the ships, and subject to the harsh treatment of the commander, till they were finally given refuge in Corsica. But as this island was the next year ceded to France, they had to transfer themselves to Genoa, whence they eventually reached the papal states. In Naples and Parma, whose sovereigns depended on the king of Spain, the Jesuits met with no hospitality.

$9

35 Och's Reise, in Murr, Nachrichten, 79–138, gives the dates of embarkation as the 22d and 23d.

36 It seems that ten priests, one escolar, and three coadjutors were after all permitted to remain in America, probably for advanced age and infirmities. Among them were fathers Francisco Chavez, José María Estrada, and Regis Salazar, kept in confinement in Puebla, and the first named eventually taken to Mexico. Eighteen novices abandoned the order in America, and 28 priests were allowed to remain in Spain. Comp. Jesus, Catálogo, 88-90.

37 The barque Bizarra, with the provincial, Father Salvador de la Gándara, was driven upon the coast of Portugal, where she was on the brink of destruction. Bustamante, Expatriacion, in Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 303; Id., Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. 3.

38 Expulsion des Jésuites, 446.

39 The duc de Choiseul would not let them stay there. Alaman, Disert., iii. 319-20.

Nearly all writers, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, even those who justify the act of expulsion, condemn the arbitrary and cruel manner of its execution. The Jesuits were arrested and violently handled, as if they had been guilty of heinous crimes, and without trial were driven from their homes and country, exposed to want, and compelled to live in Italy under pain of forfeiting the pittance allowed them for their support out of the millions that had been ruthlessly taken from them."1

40

Returning again to Mexico, we shall see what occurred there. On the 18th of July 1767 the viceroy and audiencia issued an edict for the sequestration of the temporalities of the Jesuits, again warning the people to be obedient and submissive to the king's orders. The expulsion of the society from Mexico was felt in various ways. It was a heavy blow to the

12

40 This was in violation of the king's order, which expressly said that they should be well treated: 'Se les tratará en la execucion con la mayor decencia, atencion, humanidad y asistencia.' Comp. Jesus, Col. Gen., 2.

All the sovereigns of the Bourbon family demanded vi et armis of Pope Clement XIII. that he should abolish the society of Jesus forever, but he never acceded to the demand, and death came to relieve him of his responsibilities in 1768. His successor, Ganganelli, who took the name of Clement XIV., was a Franciscan. He at once set to work to restore harmony with the Catholic sovereigns, and was successful. But the sovereigns before mentioned being joined by Austria, and by the grand master of Maltathe last named had, April 22, 1768, exiled the Jesuits from his dominions, allowing annually to each eighty Roman scuti-insisted on the abolition of the obnoxious society, and even made demonstrations to force compliance. The pope at last submitting to the inevitable, on the 21st of July 1773, upon the plea that the society could no longer be useful, issued the famous bull, Dominus ac Redemptor Noster, for its extinction. Clemente XIV., Bula, 1–52; Reales Órdenes, v. 260-89; Beaufort, Hist. de los Papas, v. 330. After Clement's death, in September 1774, Pius VI. confirmed all the prohibitions against objecting to the suppression: 'imponiéndose perpetuo silencio en el asunto;' all violations were to be punished for disobedience and contempt of the mandates of the pope and the king, and any disturbance of the public peace and high treason. Beleña, Recop., i. pt. iii. 338. Jesuits residing in Prussia and Russia, engaged in the education of Roman Catholics, remained with the consent of the respective sovereigns, Frederick II. and Catherine II.

42 March 14, 1768, was published another edict embodying a royal order of November 11, 1767, which forbade the return of Jesuits, under any name, character, or pretext, to the Spanish dominions, without the king's special leave. Disposiciones Varias, iv., nos. 68 and 69. April 3, 1769, the viceroy made known other orders of the king and council to suppress from the universities and colleges every chair called Jesuítica; and no texts of the order or recommended by it were to be thereafter used. In this he was seconded by the bishops. Id., nos. 70-72; Croix, Real Cédula, Ag. 12, 1768; Fabian, Col. de Providencias, 455-61.

CAUSE OF THE MEASURE.

443

feelings of the people, because of the affection they bore it, and of the degradation inflicted on them by the assurance that they were mere serfs, born to obey, and not to think about, much less dispute, the acts of their master. Some persons, doubting the truth of the mandate, ventured to expostulate, and suffered for it.43

But in destroying what the royal government considered an evil which must be eradicated at all hazards,

GUANAJUATO, QUERÉTARO, AND MEXICO.

even against the dearest traditions of the people, every preparation had been made to confront any possible attempts at rebellion. The fact should not be lost sight

43 A canon of Mexico, Francisco Javier de Esnaurrizar, for free utterances in private, was shut up in San Juan de Ulúa. Doctor Antonio Lopez Portillo, accused of being the author of a hostile article, was sent to Spain, and because of his great learning, then deemed very dangerous, was never permitted to return to his country. Bustamante, Expatriacion, in Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, iii. 305; Id., Suplem., in Cavo, Tres Siglos, iii. 5. In Jalisco the nuns sided with the Jesuits, and some fanatical prophecies were made in favor of the fathers' return. The bishop of the diocese in 1768 reproved

of that the natives of Spanish descent, being mostly attached to the Jesuits, and at the same time displeased at the preference shown by the government to subjects from Spain, in open violation of the right and privileges given the former in the laws of the Indies, were indignant at the treatment the Jesuits had met with, and which could be regarded as nothing less than rank despotism. In and near the capital, where the government had great military resources, the discontented could not openly resent the insult. But in the more distant parts the people imprudently gave vent to their feelings, and this in overt acts, planning a dangerous conspiracy against the Spaniards from Europe, and the government. There is no means of ascertaining what was its real scope, but it is believed that in Guanajuato, Michoacan, San Luis Potosí, and Querétaro, those who were engaged in it purposed to break the connection with Spain, and establish in Mexico a monarchy with a Mexican dynasty. The plan had been matured with great secrecy, but owing to an imprudent act the revolt broke out prematurely in the town of Apatzingan, seconded in Uruapan, and followed up in Pátzcuaro, Guanajuato, San Luis de la Paz, and other places. The pretext alleged was the king's rescript for the expulsion of the Jesuits. Everywhere was heard the cry of mueran! mueran! There were constant violations of law and order; life and property became insecure. The motto was "nuevo rey y nueva ley." The creation of a nobility and other hare-brained projects was contemplated; but nothing was done toward accomplishing the national independence except the removal from the court-rooms and them, quoting the words of the royal cédula. Rivas y Velasco, Carta Pastoral, passim. The government itself violated the order for silence, by publishing a pamphlet which pretended to give chronologically the offences of the society from its installation. A pastoral of the bishop of Puebla of October 28, 1767, was severely criticised by one Sambeli, who used abusive language against the government, accusing it and its agents of robbery, and assuring the king that he would get no profit from the Jesuits' estates, because á los ministros que anluvieron en la danza se les ha pegado mucho en las uñas'

'quien hurta á ladron gana cien años de perdon.' Fabian, Col. de Providencias, 231-93; Lexarza, Diligencias, in Pap. de Jesuítas, MS., no. 4, 1-4.

SUBSEQUENT SUPPORT.

445

other public places of the king's portraits, coats of arms, etc. Nor did the conspirators even attempt to restore order among their followers. When this state of things became known in Mexico, the viceroy clothed the visitador José de Galvez with full powers to crush the rebellion, and punish the leaders. Galvez appointed commissioners to investigate, under his direction, the cases of treason, reserving for his own more particular scrutiny those in Valladolid, Guanajuato, and San Luis Potosí. There was fighting in several places, Indians taking a prominent part, and, as might be expected, the disorganized rebels were soon defeated, the punishment of the leaders being both swift and severe." 44

The Spanish and American Jesuits, to the number of about six thousand, residing in the pontifical capital and legations, were punctually paid their pensions. Some years later, in 1784, a royal order declared that they had a right to inherit and possess real and personal property, but this was subject to restrictions. 45

Galvez, Informe del Visitador, MS., 11-48, 54-81; Galvez, Informe Gen., 138-9; Doc. Hist. Mex., série iv. ii. 62-4; Iturribarría, in Soc. Mex. Geog. Boletin, vii. 289-90; Alaman, Disert., iii. app. 66; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., x. 313. Upward of ninety persons perished on the scaffold, after undergoing the most cruel torture, and their limbs, exposed to view in high roads and public places, remained without burial for a long time. Many others were sentenced to cruel cudgelings, or to hard labor in chain-gangs, and not a few to imprisonment for life. Mora, Rev. Mėj., iii. 265–70; El Indicador de la fed. Mex., iii. 151-4. The visitador not only hanged some of the rioters of Guanajuato, but laid a yearly tribute of $8,000 on the city, which proceeding told against the Spanish government in 1810. Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus (footnote), iii. 244. That odious tribute was paid by the tribunal de minería every year till September 12, 1810, when Intendente Riaño, to propitiate the goodwill of the people and avert the revolution, repealed it. Romero, Mich., 161. 45 To prevent the removal from the Spanish dominions of the proceeds of such estates, they were to be administered by the nearest relatives of the heirs, without the privilege of selling, and with the obligation of investing moneys and other effects so as to obtain incomes therefrom. Ex-coadjutors, if unmarried, were to receive one half the income during their lifetime; if married, two thirds; the other half or third, as the case might be, was for the administrator of the estate. The same rule applied to novices. The children of ex-coadjutors or ex-novices were allowed to reside in the Spanish dominions, by first obtaining, should there be no objection to their personal behavior, a special passport from the crown. Ordained priests were allowed one half the income; at their death the estates were to go to their legal heirs ab intestato. Whenever an ex-Jesuit acquired by inheritance an income exceeding $200 a year, his pension from the crown was to cease. Reales Órdenes,

v. 412-17.