d hang him." The Indians were to be slandered, and represented as
incorrigible criminals, and then doomed to slavery. Moreover, in the few
cases in which revolts or attempted revolts had occurred, the blame
should rest upon the Spaniards more than upon the Indians, for the
former had goaded the latter to desperation by inhuman cruelties, in
resisting which the Indians were manifesting not savagery but manhood.

In support of this view of the situation, Rojas was able to cite many
specific and perfectly well authenticated instances of cruelty and
injustice. To correct these evils he recommended that whenever it was
proved that a mine-owner, farmer or other employer of native labor, had
deliberately treated his Indians cruelly or unjustly, the men should be
taken away from him and either set at liberty or be assigned to a more
humane employer. The danger of thus being deprived of their workmen
would, he plausibly believed, restrain employers from brutality. He also
insisted that the professional "slave catchers," who made a profitable
business of running down and returning to their employers fugitive
Indians, and who notoriously treated such captives with gross cruelty,
should be forbidden longer to ply their nefarious trade.

This wise and humane policy was approved by the crown, and Rojas
sincerely and perseveringly strove to make it effective throughout the
island; devoting to it for a couple of years the greater part of his
time and attention. But unfortunately he found the people, the civil
officials, and to a large extent the clergy, arrayed against him. The
_auri sacra fames_ possessed the people. Slave labor was profitable;
therefore they resented and opposed anything which would deprive them of
it. Especially did they oppose the provision that men should be deprived
of their workmen because they had treated them cruelly. Fines or other
penalties for excessive brutality might be well enough, but to take a
man's slaves away from him was, in their opinion, going too far. He was
not thus deprived of his horses and cattle. Why should he be deprived of
his Indians?

Yet in the face of such opposition Rojas bravely persevered. He seems to
have been animated by two motives, both creditable and honorable. One
was that of humanity and justice. It revolted him to see his fellow
human beings treated as badly as beasts. The other was that of patriotic
policy. He believed that it was bad for Cuba, that it corrupted the
prese