Charles Henry Cunningham - The Audiencia in the Spanish Colonies

BY
CHARLES HENRY CUNNINGHAM, Ph. D.
Adjunct Professor of History in the University of Texas

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
BERKELEY
1919

Table of Contents

It seems proper to say at the outset that a general study of the Spanish colonial system convinced me of the need of an extended investigation of the audiencia, which was the central institution in the colonies. It was, however, the circumstance of my being situated in Manila for some years and thus having at my disposal the original documents bearing upon the history of the audiencia which was situated there that led me to study this particular tribunal. At first sight it may appear that something of direct applicability to Spanish-American conditions, which would have been gained by the study of the Audiencia of Mexico, or Guadalajara, or Lima, has thus been lost. Nevertheless, if it is borne in mind that the audiencia system was common to all the Spanish colonies, and that the laws by which it was constituted and regulated applied to the different political divisions of America as to the Philippines, the assumption will not seem wholly unjustified that the Audiencia of Manila may be taken as a typical legal and political institution.

A large part of the time expended in collecting the materials upon which this book is based was spent in the various depositories in Manila. The most notable group of documents there is to be found in the Philippines Library, and it is with pleasure that I express here my obligations to Dr. James Alexander Robertson, the librarian; for not only did Dr. Robertson place at my disposal all the resources of the library, but he contributed generously from his adequate knowledge of Philippine history and afforded continual inspiration during the course of my labors in Manila. I am also deeply conscious of the assistance so kindly rendered by Don Manuel Artigas, chief of the Division of Filipiniana, and by Don Manuel Yriarte of the Philippine Archive.

In addition to research in the Philippines Library, the Philippine Archive, and the Audiencia Records in Manila approximately three years have been spent in the archives of Spain. The main centre of my work, of course, has been the Archive of the Indies at Seville, where I was given free access to all the available materials, and every facility was extended to me by the chief of the archive, Don Pedro Torres Lanzas, and by his obliging assistants. I am also indebted for many courtesies to Don Miguel Gmez de Campillo of the National Historical Archive at Madrid, and to Don Juan Montero, chief of the archive at Simancas.

The object of this prefatory note would not be achieved if I failed to express adequately my acknowledgment to my teacher and friend Professor Frederick J. Teggart, of the University of California. His inspiration led me to appreciate the importance of institutional studies; his continued encouragement has helped me over the hard places in the work; and I am conscious now of the extent to which he has sought, by vigilant criticism, to guard me against precipitateness. I am indebted to Professor Herbert Bolton for valuable aid and for advice in the final presentation of the manuscript; to Dr. Charles Wilson Hackett for a systematic revision of the Bibliography and of the footnotes; to Professor E. C. Barker for advice and assistance; to Professor W. R. Shepherd and Professor Francis S. Philbrick for their criticism of portions of this book; and to Messrs. A. H. Allen and Morse A. Cartwright of the University of California Press for their many manifestations of courtesy and patience in the supervision of its publication. To Professor H. Morse Stephens of the University of California and to the generous order of the Native Sons of the Golden West I am indebted for the rare opportunity of two years of foreign residence and research in the various archives of Spain.

Finally, my greatest indebtedness is to my wife, who has cheerfully given up the pleasures and conveniences of life among friends in home surroundings to accompany me to less pleasant places, in order that I might succeed in the work which I have undertaken.

Charles H. Cunningham.

University of Texas, Austin, Texas,
March 1, 1918.

The audiencia was primarily a judicial tribunal. It has been considered almost entirely as such by these modern historical writers who have referred to it in passing. Its legislative, administrative, executive, and ecclesiastical functions have received little attention. This may be owing to the fact that little or no documentary study of the audiencia has heretofore been made. A great deal of attention has been devoted in this book to the non-judicial functions of the audiencia. A chapter has been given, indeed, to its purely judicial activities, but the chief purpose of this investigation has been to show that the audiencia was more than a court of justice, and to bring out its governmental and ecclesiastical functions.

This study will be confined, chronologically, to the period extending from the time of the creation of the audiencia, at the close of the sixteenth century, to the end of the eighteenth. This limitation is advisable, first, because the vastness of the subject requires it, and second, because the audiencia became more concerned with judicial and less with administrative, political, and economic affairs through the constitutional changes which were made at the close of the eighteenth and at the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. The audiencia thus loses its interest, from our present viewpoint, after the eighteenth century. Again, it may be said that owing to the loss of colonies by Spain in the early nineteenth century, and the general anarchy that prevailed after 1810, a continuation of an intensive study beyond that period would be without value because its subject-matter would be no longer characteristic.

In assuming that the Audiencia of Manila was typical of all the audiencias in the Spanish colonial system, it is not claimed that the tribunal in the Philippines was identical in every function and detail with those of the other colonies of Spain. It is no doubt true that local conditions brought about pronounced differences and that each audiencia had its own local characteristics and powers, which differed from those of the others. The subject is so vast, however, and the research required for a comparative study of all these institutions would be so extensive that it would occupy more than a lifetime to complete it.

The main interest of this investigation does not lie in the organization, the scope, nature, or detailed powers of the audiencia as an institution of the Philippines, but in its larger relation to the general field of Spanish colonial history and government. It applies to the entire field of Spanish colonial administration. It is related to the government of Per, New Spain, Cuba, and other colonies wherein there were audiencias, and where functions similar to those of the Manila tribunal were exercised. The establishment of all these audiencias was part of the same movement, and the act of their creation was the product of experience gained in Spain through efforts at centralization there. The audiencias of the colonies were alike dependent on the Council of the Indies; common institutions and departments of government existed in Spain for the control and regulation of the tribunals of the colonies. All were of equal judicial rank before the Council of the Indies, and cases appealed to the latter from the several audiencias were treated in the same manner and considered as having equal rank and importance. The general powers and attributes of these audiencias were prescribed in the same code, the