also avowedly despatched to
refute certain statements made by the Dominicans in their version of
the controversy of 1635-36. It is evidently written by some friend
of the Jesuits who was a lawyer--possibly by Fabian de Santillan,
whom they appointed judge-conservator against the bishop. In it is a
curiously lifelike and interesting picture of the dissensions that then
involved all circles of Manila officialdom, both civil and religious;
and of certain aspects of human nature which are highly interesting,
even if not always edifying.

Governor Corcuera writes to Felipe IV (June 19, 1636), commending the
Jesuits and their work in the islands, and asking that more of them
be sent thither, in preference to those of other orders. The bishop
of Nueva Caceres also writes by the same mail, commending Corcuera
and complaining of the hostility displayed by the orders against the
governor, and of their ambition and arrogance. The bishop (himself an
Augustinian) arraigns all the friar orders except his own, in scathing
terms, saying of these religious: "They live without God, without king,
and without law, ... as they please, and there is no further law than
their own wills." "They say openly in their missions that they are
kings and popes." Zamudio accuses them of being "notorious traders,"
of domineering over both the Indians and the alcaldes-mayor, and of
infringing upon the royal patronage; and claims that the conduct of
the Franciscans in Camarines is such that he cannot remain there in
his own diocese. He ascribes the late troubles with the archbishop
mainly to the mischievous influence of the friars, and explains
his restoration to his see as "the act of a Christian gentleman"
on Corcuera's part. The friars in Zamudio's diocese have refused to
let him make a visitation among them, although he obtained from the
governor a guard of soldiers to protect him. He recommends that the
friars be deprived of their missions, and replaced by secular priests.

The archbishop of Manila furnishes (1636) a list of the persons
composing the ecclesiastical cabildo of the Manila cathedral; and
another, of ecclesiastics outside that body from whom might well
be supplied any positions in the cabildo which his Majesty might be
pleased to declare vacant. In each case the archbishop mentions various
particulars of the man's age, family, qualifications for office, etc.,
and of his career thus far in the Church. According to the archbishop,
some of