Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-07T07:26:37.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Creole Appointments and the Sale of Audiencia Positions in the Spanish Empire under the Early Bourbons, 1701–1750*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

M. A. Burkholder  and
D. S. Chandler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Soon after Philip V assumed the Spanish throne in 1700, he began selling appointments of oidor, alcalde del crimen, and fiscal for the American audiencias. By 1750 he and his successor Ferdinand VI had sold about one-fourth of all appointments; the Crown added over 1,000, 000 pesos to the treasury by resorting to this expedient. Primarily through purchasing judicial appointments, numerous creoles (Spaniards born in America) entered these prestigious tribunals.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Latin American Studies , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , November 1972 , pp. 187 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 An audiencia was an appellate court with administrative and advisory responsibilities. Its jurisdiction extended throughout a territorial unit also called an audiencia. Oidores were judges of the audiencias; they handled civil and criminal cases except in Lima and Mexico where they were civil magistrates alone, criminal cases being the responsibility of the alcaldes del crimen who were present only in these two courts. The fiscal was the crown attorney and carried the particular charge of defending royal interests in financial questions.

2 The evidence for these sales comes from two principal sources. In 1746 the Marqués de la Ensenada ordered the Secretariats of New Spain and Peru to form registers of all salaried positions sold during the reign of Philip V. These registers are in the Archivo General de Indias (hereafter AGI), Sección V, Indiferente General (hereafter Indiferente), legajos 525, 526, and 1847. They contain the names, dates, prices, and conditions of the sales made for each audiencia. The titles (tíitulos) of office in the Archivo General de Simancas (hereafter AGS), Sección XXIII, Dirección General del Tesoro (hereafter XXIII), Inventario 2, legajos I through 14 and 16 through 38, and Inventario 24, legajos 173 through 182 corroborate the lists in nearly every case and contain additional information on sales and appointments. The data on sales and creole appointments in this article is based primarily on these sources.

3 For examples of single sales, see Defourneaux, Marcelin, Pablo Olavide ou l'afrancesado (1725–1803) (Paris, 1959), pp. 36–7,Google Scholar and du Dézert, G. Desdevizes, L'Espagne de l'ancien régime, Vol. II, Les institutions (Paris, 1899), 149.Google ScholarOts Capdequí, J. M. recognized the sale of some oidorships in El estado espa…ol en las Indias (4th ed., Mexico, 1965), p. 48.Google Scholar

4 Ibero-Americana, no. 37 (Berkeley, 1953), pp. 6–47.

5 The Council of the Indies was the supreme court for the Crown's possessions in America (or “the Indies” as the Spaniards called it) and the Philippines. It also had administrative and advisory responsibilities.

6 Parry, , Sale of Public Office, pp. 51–5.Google Scholar

7 For examples of the sale of positions on the American audiencias under the Habsburgs, see Jorge, Tovar Velarde, ‘La Audiencia de Lima 1705–1707. Dos a…os de Gobierno criollo en el Perú’, Revista histórica (Lima), tomo 39 (1957–1958), 355, 361, 369;Google ScholarAntonio, Domíinguiez Ortiz, ‘Un virreinato en venta’, Mercurio peruano (Lima), a…o 39, vol. 49, núm. 453Google Scholar (encro-febrero de 1965), 46; Richard, Konetzke, Colección de Documentos para la Historia de la Formación Social de Hispanoamérica 1493–1810, 3 vols. (Madrid, 1953–1962), III, tomo 1, 34–9, 49–50;Google ScholarErnesto, Schäfer, El Consejo real y suprcmo de las Indias, 2 vols. (Sevilla, 1935–1947), 11, 191. Antonio Domínguez Ortiz revealed the sale of the office of viceroy of New Spain and Peru in the 1690s in ‘Un virreinato en vents’, pp. 46–51.Google Scholar

8 The term ‘servicio’ described the cash payment. Although this term has far broader implications, in this instance it meant simply the monetary ‘service’ rendered to the Crown in a time of financial distress.

9 Franklin, L. Ford, Robe and Sword: The Regrouping of the French Aristocracy after Louis XIV (New York, Harper & Row, 1965), pp. 105–15.Google Scholar

10 Konetzke, , Colección de Documentos, 2, tomo I, 359–61, 402–4, 418–19.Google Scholar Examples of men who received their appointments as part of their wives' dowries include Alonso de Zárate y Verdugo (alcalde del crimen, Audiencia of Lima, 1660) and José Tello de Meneses (supernumerary oider, Audiencia of Guadalajara, 1664). Schäfer, , op. cit., 1, 488, note 2 and 496 note 4.Google Scholar

11 Cited in ‘Consulta del consejo de las Indias sobre los inconvenientes que resultan en beneficiar los oficios en Indias, y especialmente los puestos de justicia y gobierno’, Madrid, , 9 11 1693.Google Scholar Published in Konetzke, , op. cit., 2, tomo 1, 34–9.Google Scholar

12 A futura was the promise of appointment to a given office at a future date, usually after the death of the incumbent. The Crown made over 525 appointments from 1650 to 1700. Schäfer, , op. cit., 2, Appendix 2, 443–524.Google Scholar

13 Konetzke, , Colección de Documentos, 3, tomo 1, 34–9.Google Scholar

14 For an example of the reform decree of 6 March 1701 at work, see AGS, XXIII, 24–173–48, Buen, Retiro, 8 07 1703. A supernumerary was an extra minister above the number authorized by law. In most cases he moved into a regular (de numero) position upon the death of an incumbent.Google Scholar

15 Peninsular Spaniards, Alamán avowed, held ‘almost all the high positions’. All but four of 170 viceroys and fourteen of 602 captains-general and presidents prior to 1813 had been born in Spain. Only 105 of 706 bishops had been Americans, and these had generally served dioceses of secondary importance. The number of Americans who had been oidores and canons did not alter the generalization. Lucas, Alamán, Historia de Méjico desde los primeros movimientos que prepararon so independencia en el a…o de 1808 hasta la época presente (5 vols., Mexico, 1849–1952), 1, 12–14 and notes 6 and 7 on pp. 52–53. An important contemporary statement of creole exclusion from power was Simón Bolívar's famous Jamaica letter’ of 1815.Google Scholar

16 The large number of creoles holding high office in Chile has been pointed out by Bailey, W. Diffie, Latin American Civilizations: Colonial Period (New York, 1967), p. 489;Google Scholar and by Jaime, Eyzaguirre, Ideario y rota de la emancipación chilena (Santiago, 1957), pp. 55–6. John J. TePaske's work on Peru in the early eighteenth century has led him to deny the traditional view for Peru and to raise the question of its validity elsewhere.Google Scholar

17 (Cambridge University Press, 1948), p. 195.

18 Spanish Colonial Administration, 1782–1810: The Intendant System in the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata (London, 1958), p. 77. As John, R. Fisher notes, however, in his more recent study: ‘The idea that creoles were excluded from government is a misleading oversimplification’. Government and Society in Colonial Peru: The Intendant System 1784–1814 (London, 1970), p. 8.Google Scholar

19 The Kingdom of Quito in the Seventeenth Century Bureaucratic Politics in the Spanish Empire (Madison, 1967),. 145.

20 In his recent work Miners and Merchants in Bourbon Mexico 1763–1880 (Cambridge University Press, 1971), David A. Brading recognized the importance of numerous creoles on the Audiencia of Mexico in mid-century. John L. Phelan noted creole dominance in the Audiencia of Santa Fé de Bogotá in his review of Germán, Colmenares, La Provincia de Tan ja en el Nuevo Reino. Ensayo de Historia Social (1539–1800), The Hispanic American Historical Review, 51, no. 3 (08 1971), 515.Google Scholar See also Mark, A. Burkholder, ‘José Baquíjano and the Audiencia of Lima’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Duke University, 1970), pp. 62–9.Google Scholar

21 This represents the minimum confirmed number of creoles. The authors believe that further research may push the figure even higher. The Crown did not usually refer to a nominee's place of birth unless there was some reason. For instance, in 1742 the King appointed Antonio de Villaurrutia y Salcedo as oidor in Santo Domingo. There is no mention of Villaurrutia's origin on the title of office, so he would normally appear as a peninsular in our statistics. He is recorded as a creole, however, because Rafael Matos Díaz, in Hombres de America, los Villaurrutia ‘, Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala, XXXI (enero-diciembre, 1958), 167–73, identifies Villaurrutia as a creole, born and educated in New Spain. In addition to archival sources, Guillermo Lohmann, Villena, Los Americanos en las ordenes nobiliarias (1529–1900), 2 vols. (Madrid, 1947) was particularly valuable in identifying creoles.Google Scholar

22 In 1704 Philip V sold a supernumerary oidorship in Lima to Juan de Peralta y Sanabria, but this isolated case preceded the commitment in 1706 to sell audiencia seats as a regular policy (AGI, Indiferente, legajo 525); the other two sales were to Manuel Antonio Borda y Echevarría (AGS, XXIII, 2–30–351, Ildefonso, San, 14 07 1736) and to Pedro Bravo del Rivero in 1733 (AGI, Lima, legajo 1082); the two sales in the 1730s were made during the War of the Polish Succession; all three men were creoles.Google Scholar

23 Because of the great pressure of business and the resultant long delays in hearing cases, in 1737 the Crown authorized a special one-time augmentation in the Audiencia of Mexico of four oidores and two alcaldes del crimen. This brought Mexico's total to twelve oidores and six alcaldes del crimen and allowed the operation of three separate chambers. The titles of office in the AGS reveal that these extra appointments were indeed made; the audiencia was allowed to return to its normal complement by attrition. Consulta of the Council of the Indies, February 2, 1737, AGI, Mexico, legajo 452.

24 Recopilación de leyes de los reinos de las Indias, 3 vols. (Madrid, 1943), libro 2, título 15, leyes 2 through 12.

25 Ibid., libro 2, título 2, ley 34.

26 For example, Juan de Echavarría Zuluaga as oidor in Lima (AGS, xxiii, 2–5–46, Buen, Retiro, 3 07 1708); and Clemente del Campo y Zárate as alcalde del crimen in Mexico (AGS, XXIII, 2–26–108, Cazalla, 25 06 1730).Google Scholar

27 For example, Francisco de Casa Alvarado was to receive full salary as a supernumerary alcalde del crimen in Mexico (AGI, Indiferente, legajo 1847); Juan José Martínez Pati…o was to receive half salary as a supernumerary oidor in Guatemala (AGS, XXIII, 2–32–273. Ildefonso, San, 28 06 1740); Martín de Recàvarren, appointed a supernumerary oidor in Panama, was to receive no salary until he held a regular position (AGS, XXIII, 2–3–67, 23 05 1707).Google Scholar

28 Phelan noted this ‘professional esprit de corps’ in the Council of the Indies in the 1640s. Kingdom of Quito, pp. 129–31.

29 Consulta of the Council of the Indies, 21 Aug. 1737, AGI, Mexico, legajo 9970. TIse next three paragraphs are based on this document.

30 An unsigned note in Ibid. expresses the royal decision.

31 Unsigned memorandum so the Marqués de Villarias, Buen, Retiro, 12 1739, AGI, Mexico, legajo 1970.Google Scholar

32 Marqués de Villarias to José de la Quintana, El Pardo, 25 Feb. 1745, in Ibid., mentions the loss of pertinent papers in a recent fire at San Ildefonso.

33 Fernando Verdes Montenegro to José de la Quintana, Buert, Retiro, 13 03 1740Google Scholar. in Ibid.

34 Consulta of the Council of the Indies, 18 July 1740, with an addendum dated 28 Mar. 1741 expressing the royal will, in Ibid.

35 Although the Crown both granted freely and sold natives dispensations in order to serve on the audiencias of their births, there was no law in the Rccopilación explicitly denying natives the right to serve at home. AGI, Audiencia of Lima, legajo 6zo, Comment of the mesa to 19 February 1794.

36 AGI, Indiferente, legajo 1847.

37 Ibid.

38 AGI, Indiferente, legajo 526.

39 AGS, XXIII, 2–33–6, El Pardo, , 12 02 1741.Google Scholar

40 AGS, XXIII, 2–32–277, San, Ildefonso, 08 1740.Google Scholar

41 AGS, XXIII, 2–33–734, Buen, Retiro, 18 07 1740.Google Scholar

42 AGS, XXIII, 3–25–95, Buen, Retiro, 8 07 1745.Google Scholar

43 AGS, XXIII, 2–35–204, San, Lorenzo, 29 10 1745.Google Scholar

44 AGS, XXIII, 2–22–29, Zaragoza, , 23 04 1711.Google Scholar

45 Six years later the Crown issued an order removing the creole from his post because he had failed to complete his legal education. The King returned the purchase price. AGS, XXIII, 2–20–62, Aranjuez, , 18 05 1722.Google Scholar

46 The percentage of appointments sold for each audiencia (rounded to the nearest whole number) are: Santo Domingo, 0%; Santa Fé, 7%; Manila,11%; Mexico, 19%; Guatemala, 24%; Panama, 28% Lima, 34%; Charcas, 40%; Quito, 40%; Guadalajara, 41%; anti Chile, 42%.

47 AGS, XXIII, 2–34–40, Aranjuez, , 31 05 1743;Google Scholarx 24–181–21, San, Ildefonso, 18 09 1742;Google Scholar and 2–33–370, San, Ildefonso, 26 09 1742.Google Scholar

48 The percentages of sales for the eleven-year period 1740–50 are: Santo Domingo, 0%; Manila, 0%; Mexico, 12%; Guatemala, 12%; Santa Fe, 25%; Panama, 50%; Chile, 67%; Lima, 69%; Guadalajara, 71%; Charcas, 78%; and Quito, 83%;. The percentage for Santa Fé is unnaturally high because there were only four appointments there during the decade, one of which was sold.

49 The percentages of creoles during the entire period are as follows: Santo Domingo, 11%; Santa Fe, 17%; Manila, 11%; Mexico, 35%; Guatemala, 9%; Panama, 55%; Lima, 55%; Charcas, 68%; Quito, 56%; Guadalajara, 32% and Chile, 68%;. The figures for the period 1740–50 are: Santo Domingo, 14%; Manila, 33%; Mexico, 50%; Guatemala, 0%; Santa Fe, 25%; Panama, 50%; Chile, 83%; Lima, 100%; Guadalajara, 57%; Charcas, 78%; and Quito, 67%;.

50 Nota de los empleos … que desde el a…o de 1717 se han excluydo del beneficio por las razones que militan por ello, Buen Retiro, June 1740, AGI, Mexico, legajo 1970.

51 José de la Quintana to the Marqués de Villarias, Buen, Retiro, 28 08 1740; also, consulta of the Council of the Indies, 18 07 1740Google Scholar, in Ibid..

52 Information on the salaries paid the judges comes from their titles of office in AGS, XXIII.

53 For instance, Juan Antonio de Mena Caballero purchased a position as alcalde del crimen in Lima for four thousand doblones (AGS, XXIII, 24–174–301, July 1708); Alvaro, Cavero Medina as oidor supernumcrarioGoogle Scholar for sixteen thousand pesos (AGS, XXIII, 2–9–57, Corella, , 2 07 1711);Google Scholar Bartolomé de Munarriz as alcalde del crimens for five thousand doblones (AGS, XXIII, 2–4–31, Buen, Retiro, 20 07 1708); and Francisco de los Santos as a supernumerary alcalde del crimen in 1707 for four thousand pesos (AGI, Indiferente, legajo 525). A peso was equal to eight reales or 272 maravedís while a doblón equalled four pesos.Google Scholar

54 The media anata was a tax of one half of the first year's salary while the anata entera was a tax of the first full year's pay. Requiring either tax, of course, added to the amount the Crown was able to realize immediately from its sale of positions. For a summary of the anata entera decree of Oct. 1704, see the title of office of Pedro Antonio Echaves y Rojas as fiscal juturario in Lima (AGS, XXIII, 2–8–134, Madrid, , 11 01 1710).Google Scholar

55 For representative Mexican appointments, see the titles of Diego Francisco de Casta…eda as alcalde del crimen supcraumerario for five thousand pesos (AGS, XXIII, 2–9–34, Zaragoza, , 25 03 1711);Google Scholar Tristán Manuel de Rivadeneyra as supernumerary oidor for fourteen thousand pesos (AGS, XXIII, 2–5–547, Buen, Retiro, 30 09 1708);Google Scholar Agustín Franco de Toledo as supernumerary oidor for eight thousand pesos (AGS, XXIII, 2–8–4, Madrid, , 18 07 1710);Google Scholar and Francisco de Oyanguren as fiscal fururario for two thousand doblones (AGS, XXIII, 2–8–39, Madrid, , 22 04 1710).Google Scholar

56 José Gálvez commented on the creole majority in Mexico during his visita. See his Informe, que el Sor Visitador ha dado a S.E. con fecha de 31 de Dizee de 1711 (a copy of Gàlvez' inspection report to Viceroy Bucareli), AGI, Mexico, legajo 1509. See also Brading, Miners and Merchants, part I. For Lima see Burkholder, M. A., ‘From Creole to Peninsular: The Transformation of the Audiencia of Lima’, The Hispanic American Historical Review, Vol.52, no. 3 (08, 1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

57 Ibid.