mpetent
testimony, the agents of the archbishop went to the said ship, on the
day following that on which the attorney-general had demanded aid,
and, without presenting any warrant to the commander, had undertaken
and proceeded to make seizures and deposits of bales. [68] This affair
was not finally decided, because it was known outside of court that
the archbishop had relinquished his claims therein. [69]

In this royal Audiencia a suit was pending for a long time
between Captain Don Pedro de Sarmiento y Leoz, as husband of Dona
Michaela de Lisarralde [70]--daughter of Don Juan de Lisarralde,
and great-granddaughter of Dona Maria de Roa, deceased, who had been
executrix for the said Don Juan de Lisarralde, and guardian of the
said Dona Michaela--against Father Geronimo de Ortega of the Society
of Jesus (who had been executor [71] for Bachelor Nicolas Cordero, and
is executor for the said Dona Maria de Roa), over the guardianship and
inheritance which belonged to the said Dona 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, [72] 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 Nicolas de la Vega Caraballo,
[73] 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 bequest [74] to the said Archdeacon
Cordero. Father Ortega made