Note 22 — The Pardo Controversy

In this royal Audiencia a suit was pending for a long time between Captain Don Pedro de Sarmiento y Leoz, as husband of Doña Michaela de Lisarralde22—daughter of Don Juan de Lisarralde, and great-granddaughter of Doña Maria de Roa, deceased, who had been executrix for the said Don Juan de Lisarralde, and guardian of the said Doña Michaela—against Father Geronimo de Ortega of the Society of Jesus (who had been executor23 for Bachelor Nicolás Cordero, and is executor for the said Doña Maria de Roa), over the guardianship and inheritance which belonged to the said Doña Michaela, and the account which had been demanded for all the above affairs. The said father, in conformity with the acts which had been made known to him in this regard, presented the accounts in the royal Audiencia, after the appointment, acceptance, and oath-taking of auditors therefor. This suit, as stated, lasted a long time,24 and in it came up revised acts of the said royal Audiencia ordering that all who were interested in the said executorships should prefer their claims in the said royal Audiencia. The affair being in this condition, the said captain Don Pedro Sarmiento—urged on by Licentiate Nicolàs de la Vega Caraballo,25 an ally of the archbishop—demanded before the said archbishop that the said Father Ortega should be commanded, under penalty of censure, to furnish him the said accounts. This command was laid upon him by repeated acts; nevertheless, the said father refused [the ecclesiastical] jurisdiction, since he had [the case] in a competent tribunal, pending judgment, and the said accounts had been presented—in proof of which he presented sworn statements to the said archbishop. Nevertheless, the latter persisted in ordering the said father to give him the said accounts—even going so far as to denounce him as excommunicated. The ground for this action was, that in the ecclesiastical court demand had been made by the said Don Pedro for the surrender of the bequest26 to the said Archdeacon Cordero. Father Ortega made appeal in the proper quarter from this censure, but the archbishop refused to allow the said appeal; from this arose the recourse to royal aid from the act of fuerza in having denied to the father the said appeal and attempted to compel him to what he had no right to do—the surrender of the said accounts, which had already been presented in the said royal Audiencia.27 On that account, and because of the very nature of the case, it was wholly within the cognizance of the royal Audiencia, and concerned laymen. For this reason, the usual royal decree was issued, in order that the notary should come to make report. This being made known to the archbishop, he made a very prolix reply, taking the ground, in very disrespectful language, that the appeal was not legitimate, and that he was not obliged to send the documents; but saying that, upon the necessary declarations, and with the stipulation that the acts should not pass into the possession of any official of the Audiencia, but must remain in the hands of his own notary, he would give orders that the latter should go to make the report, whenever the Audiencia should command it, but he must refuse to absolve the said father. The Audiencia, in order to avoid new occasions for controversy with this prelate, overlooked his imposing upon it a condition, and one which was so unusual. Domingo Diaz28 having made the report, and noted in the course of it two false assertions—which he discovered while inspecting the acts, having read them through—the said notary went away, carrying them with him, without waiting for the opinion and decision of the said royal Audiencia on them to be affirmed. That tribunal declared the said suit,29 and the cognizance of it, as it concerned laymen, to be altogether secular—as were also questions of guardianship, inheritance, the charge of property, dowries, and other matters of that nature; and that, by virtue of this, all [episcopal] acts regarding these questions be suspended in this royal Audiencia. As for the pious legacies contained in the said testaments, the archbishop was declared to have committed fuerza in not granting to Father Ortega the appeal which he had interposed before the delegate of his Holiness; and the Audiencia resolved that, in consequence of all the above facts, the prelate should absolve the said father, and immediately remove his name from the list of excommunicated persons, and that a royal decree [to this effect] be issued in his behalf. When this was made known to the archbishop, he gave an extremely insolent and uncivil reply, opposing the authority of this royal Audiencia, the royal jurisdiction, the governor, and the auditors. He refused to send the acts [to the Audiencia], or to absolve the said father, and declared in plain terms that he would persist in this opposition, and that the Audiencia might therefore inflict whatever violence they chose on him and his dignity.