Franciscan friar Antonio de los Reyes," who took possession in 1783.40

41

The cathedral of Mérida in the diocese of Yucatan was finished in 1598 though not consecrated until the 12th of December, 1763. The revenue of the see was small, yet the cathedral was well provided with everything required for decorous public worship, many of the ornaments and regalia being very rich; some of its paintings were also fine works of art, the king, the bishops, and the canons liberally contributing toward that end. According to the bull of erection, its chapter was to be composed of the same number of members as that of Mexico; but on account of the small revenue from tithes, was afterward diminished.42

39 Beleña, Recop., i. 291; Córtes, Diario, 1812, xii. 348. He was the poorest of the bishops, his annual stipend being only $6,000, and he received no share from tithes. Escudero, Not. Son., 40.

40 His successor was José Granados y Galvez, who was in charge from 1787 to 1794, and was transferred to the see of Durango, but died before taking possession. The third prelate was Friar Damian Martinez de Galinzoga, a Franciscan, and the fourth and last of the 18th century was also a Franciscan; he was named Francisco de Jesus Rouset, and was appointed in 1796, though not consecrated till 1799. His death occurred in 1814. Hist. North Mex. States, ii. this series. Iglesias y Conventos, 342, wrongly asserts that the time of the erection of this see is unknown, and gives Bishop Granados as its first prelate, and Bishop Rouset as the second.

41 By Bishop Alcalde. Its cost was $300,000.

42 Instead of twenty-seven members as at first, the chapter included only the dean, archdeacon, precentor, and chancellor, two canons who acted as magistral and penitenciario, and two racioneros. Cogollvdo, Hist. Yuc., 207; Iglesias Conv., 327-34. Between 1604 and 1802 there were twenty-one prelates. Among them some had opportunities for displaying greater qualities of heart gad mind than others. Several obtained higher preferments. Diego Vazquez Mercado became archbishop of Manila. Juan Alonso Ocon in 1643, Juan Gomez de Parada in 1728, Francisco Pablo Matos Coronado in 1741, and Antonio Alcalde in 1771, were transferred respectively to the sees of Cuzco, Guatemala, Michoacan, and Guadalajara.

The following list contains some additional authorities which have been consulted for the preparation of the matter connected with the several sees and their bishops: Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 71–301, passim; ii. 33–4; Fernandez, Hist. Ecles., 135-6; Iglesia Catedral, Reglas y Orden., 1-62; Concilios Prov., 1st and 2d, 248-375; Concilios Mex., iii. and iv. 63, 202; Figueroa, l'indicias, MS., 70-90; Ord. de la Corona, MS., ii. 213; iii. 85, 134; iv. 61; v. 5, 7, 69; Reales Cédulas, MS., i. 100; Provid. Reales, MS., 172–5; Veitia Linage, in Doc. Ecles. Méx., i. no. 5, 37; Patronatto, in Id., i. no. 1; Dávilla Padilla, Teatro Ecles., i. 124-36, 182-5, 231; ii. 64; Cogollvdo, Hist. Yuc., 404, 467, 617, 659-61; Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, ii. 68, 138-9, 158-9, 471; Florencia, Hist. Comp. Jesus, 232-3, Cavo, Tres Siglos, ii. 86; Villa-Señor y Sanchez, Theatro, i. 241-8; Burgoa, Geog. Descrip., ii. 410; Pap. Franciscanos, MS., i. 1st ser. 414; Remesal, Hist. Chyapa, 704, 718; N. Esp., Breve Resú men, i. 245–6, 273-4; Medina, Chrón. S. Diego, 239-41, 246; Gaz. Méx., 1st

TRAINING FOR THE MINISTRY.

695

It is not an easy matter to arrive even approximately at the number of the secular clergy in New Spain. Very early in the present century, however, it was computed at about five thousand. Most of the

sees had special seminaries for the education of young men desiring to enter the priesthood. They were under the real patronato, and had a number of scholarships in the patronage of the king's representative, who made the choice upon the report or recommendation of their respective rectors. There were other scholarships endowed by private individuals and open to competition. There was also a number of professorships whose incumbents were appointed by the vice-patron."

ser., in Doc. Hist. Mex., 2d ser. iv. 18-19; Id., 2d ser., in Id.; Id., iv. 75504, passim; Gaz. Mex. (1784-5), i. pref. 3, p. 114; (1786-7), ii. 21, 257; (1788-9), iii. 145-9; (1790-1), iv. 165-356, passim; (1794-5), vi. 645; (1800), x. 12-14, 73, 89; (1804-5), xii. 117-20; Gaz. Mex., 1728 and 1729, in Arévalo, Comp., 29-30, 184; Gaz. Gob. Mex. (1810), i. 802; Calle, Mem. y Not., 62, 72, 83, 90-1, 99, 122; Dávila, Continuacion, MS., 193, 285; Vetancvrt, Trat. Mex., 26, 27, 52, 53, 71, 72, 77; Vetancvrt, Menol., 137; Robles, Diario, 223-495, passim; Gomez, Diario, 15–312, passim; Guijo, Diario, 218, 277-8, 371; Castro, 13, 14, 18, 19, 39, 43, 47-8, 56-7; Juarros, Guat., i. 291; Juarros, Comp., 284–90, 297-8, 359-60; Santos, Chrón. Hosp., ii. 480; Dávila, Mem. Hist., pt. i. 117-57; Disturbios de Frailes, MS., i. 571; ii. no. 2; Rivera, Diario Curiosa, in Doc. Hist. Mex., 2d ser. iv. 88; vi. 12, 18-19, 26; Oax., Asuntos, in Doc. Ecles. Mex., MS., no. 2, 2, 74; Diario Mex., viii. 285; ix. 177; xi. 207-9, 565; Cedulario, MS., i. 209; iii. 140; Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, viii. 547; Iglesias, Rel., 287–300; La Casas y la Mota, Memorial, 102; Arévalo, Comp., 30; Gaz. Mex., Aug. 1728, in Arévalo Comp., 69; Perez, Orac. Fúnebre, 1-42; Alcedo, Dicc., i. 108; ii. 246; iii. 141; Alcalde, Elog. Fúneb., 34-41; i.-xxviii. 1-49; Sermon Panegírico, 1-23; Oratio Fúneb., i.-xxxix.; Sermon Predic., 1-30; Rel. Senc. del funeral, 1-13; Mora, Revol. Mex., iii. 358; iv. 58; Mota-Padilla, Cong. N. Gal., passim; Descrip. y Prosp., 1-13; Subsidio Ecles., in Doc. Ecles. Mex., MS., iii. no. 1, 59, 276; Jal. Mem. Hist., 205–7; Registro, Yucateco, i. 228-30; ii. 331-43; Castillo, Dicc. Hist., 9-314, passim; Guadal., in Doc. Ecles. Mex., MS., i. no. 6, 9; Castilla, Espejo de Exemp. Ob., passim; Escudero, Estad. Dur., 23; Escudero, Not. Son., 40; Romero, Not. ich., 14-21, 25, 151; Linares, Cuadro Sinóp., in Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da ep. iv. 639-40; Montaña, El Corazon de las rosas, passim; Carriedo, Lstudios, 67-8, 114-17; Alaman, Hist. Méj., iii. 381; Iglesias y Conv., 175-7, 231-3, 316-20; Sosa, Episcop. Mex., 80, 99, 126, 145, 151, 160, 175–7, 231–3, 316-20; Arroniz, Biog. Mex., 152-5; Lázaro, Sermon Fúnebre, nos. 6 and 7, in Arteaga Josias Domenech, Hist. du Mex., i. 282; Alfaro y Piña, Cat. de Guad., 5-14; Ancona, Hist. Yuc., ii. 201-518, passim.

43 Humboldt, Essai Pol., i. 127; Real Consulado de N. Esp., in Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, ii. 6; Mex. Diario, vi. 94. Calle, Mem. y Not., 45, gives the number of clergymen at 6,000 in 1646; he probably meant both secular and regular priests, otherwise his figures appear excessive.

Estalla, xxvii. 192-3; Iglesias y Conv., 16, 24, 147-52, 190-1, 236, 275, 304-5, 334; Fabian, Col. de Provid., 307-11, 522-656, passim; Haro y Per alta, Carta Pastoral, 1-266, passim.

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries a number of religious cofradías or fraternities were established in Mexico and other towns for the purpose mainly of rendering special worship to God, or the virgin, in some of their attributes, or to saints in whose influence and intercession in heaven they placed their trust. Among them are many that deserve mention for their exertions in succoring the needy and sick, and in the spread of education as well as of religion. I am unable for want of space to furnish a history of these associations and their work, but as a mark of respect to their good intentions will name a few of them. The colegiata de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, of which much has been said in other parts of this work; an institution of a similar character in Querétaro; the archicofradías of La Cruz and the Santísimo Cristo de San Marcelo, the first named of the two being founded by the conqueror Cortés; the archicofradías del arcángel San Miguel and of La Inmaculada Concepcion; cofradías de San Anton, Nuestra Señora del Socorro, and Santiago; and that of the Santísimo Sacramento in Vera Cruz. The country teemed with sanctuaries, and to some of the images kept therein were attributed miraculous manifestations.45

The church of Mexico owned real estate, probably to the value of between two and three million pesos. After the suppression of the Jesuits few lands went into the possession of the church. Its real wealth consisted of the tithes and vast amounts secured by mortgage, á censo redimible on the lands of private parties.

45 The following authorities treat of this subject: Órd. de la Corona, MS., iii. 169-70; Recop. de Ind., i. 33-4, 189; Navarrete, Rescriptos Reales, MS., 56-62; Rel. Peregrina, ii. 95-248, passim; Siguenza y Góngora, Glorias de Quer., 51., 235, 4 1.; Archicof. del Arcángel S. Miguel, 1-48; Cabrera, Escudo de Armas, 97-106; Cedula, Feb. 6, 1768, 1-27; La Casa Peregrina, passim; Covadonga, Constituc., 1-83; Indulgencias Perpetuas, 1-20; Florencia, Origen del Célebre Santuario, 1-234, passim; Estalla, xxvi. 326-8; Velasco y Texada, Hist. Milagros. Imágen, passim; Zavala, La Ven. Congreg. S. Felipe Neri, 16137, passim.

WEALTH OF THE CHURCH.

697

The aggregate value of the church property, both secular and regular, in estates and mortgages, must have been, in the early part of the present century, not less than one half the total value of real estate in the country. As early as 1644 the ayuntamiento of Mexico petitioned King Felipe IV. to check the increase of convents and of investments for religious purposes. The possessions of the church were considerably reduced in 1767 by the expulsion of the Jesuits, whose estates reverted to the royal treasury, though the rights of the benevolent establishments of which the Jesuits had been in charge were duly respected. Nevertheless, at the beginning of the nineteenth century the aggregate must have been as above stated, and represented a money value of about $44,500,000.47

In 1809, at which date it will be remembered war broke out with France, the Spanish government seeing no escape from impending bankruptcy, in consequence of an over-issue of royal vales, or treasury notes, attempted a very dangerous financial measure, by ordering on the 26th of December, not only the

46 The greater portion of the landed property being in one shape or other in the hands of the church, it was feared that if left unchecked it would soon own all the land in the country. No more convents were needed; there were too many nuns and servants there already, and too little with which to support them. The number of friars and clergymen was also represented in the same memorial as excessive, and so was that of holidays, with which 'se acrecienta el caudal de la ociosidad, y daños que causa esta." Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 16-17.

47 Their investments bore the title of capitales de capellanías y obras de la jurisdiccion ordinaria. They were situated as follows: Archbishopric of Mexico, $9,000,000; bishropic of Puebla, $6,500,000; bishopric of Valladolid (very exact), $4,500,000; bishropic of Guadalajara $3,000,000; bishropics of Durango, Nuevo Leon, and Sonora, $1,000,000; bishoprics of Oajaca and Yucatan, $2,000,000; Obras pías, of the regular clergy, $2,500,000; Fondo dotal of churches and of male and female religious communities, $16,000,000. These figures were taken from a memorial of the citizens of Valladolid in Michoacan to Viceroy Iturrigaray, on the 24th of October, 1805. Humboldt, Essai Pol., ii. 475–7. Alaman, Hist. Méj., i. 66-8, claims that the aggregate must have been much larger, grounding his judgment both on the results of the assessments to collect the direct tax in later years, and on the fact that scarcely one single estate was not thus encumbered. Many of the estates were mortgaged for their full value, and some for even more, thus rendering it necessary in the course of time to require the proprietors to produce evidence that their lands were not mortgaged for more than two thirds of their

sale of the real estate of the church, but that all its invested funds, of every kind, should be forwarded to Spain and deposited in a caja de consolidacion de vales reales. The resistance of the proprietors was so strong, however, that between May 1805 and June 1806, the caja de consolidacion had received from the sequestrated estates only 1,200,000 pesos.

Aside from the income obtained from real estate and investments, the revenues of the church were derived from various sources, as the primicias or first fruits, payable to the parish priests, a tax claimed to have existed from the earliest days;49 fees for masses, marriages, and burials, which yielded largely in most of the dioceses;50 and last, though by no means least, the tithes. The king of Spain possessed under the bull of Pope Alexander VI. issued in 1501, the exclusive right of collecting the tithes in America, subject to the sole condition of providing for the religious instruction of the natives.61

48 Humboldt, Essai Pol., ii. 476; Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da ép. i. 48695; Suarez, Informe, 7; Diario Mex., vi. 366-8; Mora, Obras Sueltos, i. 70117; Lacunza, Disc. Hist., no. xxxvi. 533-4. Zamacois, Hist. Méj., v. 622, tells us that the archbishop and chapter of Mexico had donated to the crown, in 1777, $80,000.

19 If the crop of grain reached six fanegas, the tax was a half fanega, and so in proportion. On live-stock the tax was one head for every twelve; on milk, the quantity obtained in the milking of the first night of each year. Edicto, MS., in Maltrat. de Ind., no. 7, 1-2; Mex. Represent., MS., in Maltrat. de Ind., no. 1, 1-39.

5 In September 1619, the real audiencia required of the archbishop of Mexico compliance with the royal order of May 12th of the same year, to keep and observe the 'sinodo y aranzel de Sevilla' of burial fees. The pope also issued stringent orders. Changes were made from time to time in the fee bill with the view of reducing it, but it never ceased to be a heavy burden. Montemayor, Autos Acord., 7, in Montemayor, Svmarios, Morelli, Fast. Nov. Orb., 373-97, 415, 454; Rubio y Salinas, Aranz., 1-19; Lorenzana, Aranz., 1–10; Inform. sobre Aranceles, in Maltrat. de Ind., MS., no. 23, 1–40; Mex. Aranceles Parroq., in Id., MS., no. 24, 1-16.

51 The gross amount of tithes was first divided into four equal parts, two of which went to the bishop and chapter; the other two were divided into nine equal parts; two for the crown, three for building churches and hospitals, two for salaries of curates, and where the amount was insufficient the king allowed them salaries of $100 or $120 a year from his own share; the remaining two parts went to pay the dignitaries and employés of the diocese. Estalla, xxvii. 233-5; Mota-Padilla, Cong. N. Gal., 178. The collection and distribution were provided for in royal orders of 1627, 1631, 1777, 1786. Recop. de Ind., ii. 578; Beleña, Recop., ii. 145-51; Zamora, Bib. Leg. UU., iii. 40, 42– 55. The collection of primicias and tithes and the adjudication of disputed questions were in charge of the haceduría or juzgado de diezmos, consisting in