Note 8 — COMMERCE OF THE PHILIPPINES WITH NUEVA ESPAÑA

193–197. [In this place is presented the informatory report of the royal accountant at Mexico to the viceroy in 1730, because it is frequently cited in this controversy; but it is concerned mainly with the size of the packages on the Manila galleon.8 It appears that these were measured by the vara de Ribera,9 instead of the Castilian vara, the former being “longer than the Castilian, by four dedos and part of another;” but allowance was afterward made for this difference. Ardila, the accountant, also recommended to the viceroy the enlargement of Manila’s permission to 1,200,000 pesos of returns, and the reopening of the commerce between Nueva España and Peru. The royal Council discussed the fiscal’s reply and other documents, and advised the king (December 19, 1733) to order the viceroy to recall his obnoxious orders relative to the galleons of 1734 and succeeding years, and to regulate the cargoes by the decrees in force from 1712 to 1720—“excluding absolutely the regulation of the permission by piezas, and commanding that this be made in future strictly by invoices and sworn declarations.” The ministers did not agree on the question of the amount of returns to be permitted to Manila, five being of opinion that no change should be made in the allowance of 300,000 pesos of investment and 600,000 of returns, and the five others advocating an increase to 500,000 and 1,000,000 pesos respectively. (The names of the first five are: Don Manuel de Sylva, the Marqués de Almodobar, Don Antonio de Sopeña, Don Fernando Verdes Montenegro, and Don Francisco Antonio de Aguirre; of the last five, Don Diego de Zuñiga, the Marqués de Montemayor, Don Matheo Ibañez de Mendoza, Don Antonio Alvarez de Abreu, and Don Joseph de Valdiviesso. Abreu was the compiler of the Extracto.) The reasons for each of these opinions are given in detail.]