Page:Vol 2 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft.djvu/591

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

TENURE OF ENCOMIENDAS.

571

One of the objects of Ramirez' trust was to officially apprise the encomenderos that their tenor would be only for the natural life of themselves and their next legitimate son or daughter, but at the death of the second holders the repartimientos were to revert to the crown. This was pursuant to the royal decree of April 5, 1552, providing the succession to an encomienda in the eldest son or direct heir lawfully begotten.^[1] Not long afterward the succession was extended to the second, and later to several more generations,^[2] so that in effect it became perpetual.

The royal order giving preference to the conquerors was extended to their sons, notably by a law

↑ In the event of his inability or unwillingness to accept it, then the second son, and so on to the last; if there were no sons, then the eldest daughter, and in her default, the next in succession, under certain obligations; if there were neither sons nor daughters, then the widow. After the death of this second holder, the encomienda was to revert to the crown. Under the king's general regulations no mulatto, mestizo, nor any one of illegitimate birth could hold an encomienda. If any was so holden, it was to revert at once to the crown. The order was subsequently modified, allowing the viceroy of Peru in 1559 to legitimize children born out of wedlock, even where the mothers were Indians, upon the payment of a sufficient sum to secure the encomiendas they were to inherit. That privilege was rescinded in 1561; its revival asked for, was refused in 1573, and had not been allowed as late as 1612. It is likely that the same rule held good in Mexico. Puga, Cedulario, 136.
↑ The right of transmission to the third generation having been tolerated in New Spain in 1555, Viceroy Velasco was in doubt if, in default of children, the privilege extended to widows and other heirs. This was at first refused; but on the 9th of February, 1561, the viceroy and audiencia were directed to permit, when there were no sons or daughters in the third generation, surviving husbands to inherit the encomiendas of their wives, and vice versa, until the crown should enact some general law. This led to abuses in marriages between old women and young men, or of old men with young women, to secure the inheritance of encomiendas, which were frequent and continued until in later years the king adopted measures to prevent such unequal alliances. February 27, 1575, and July 8, 1603, such inheritances were forbidden in the second and third generations, unless the parties had been married and lived together at least six months. Puga, Cedulario, 132, 136, 139, 149-50, 184-6, 192-3; Testimonio, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 478-80; Montesclaros, in Id., vi. 284, 288-90. In 1563 the crown resolved that encomiendas should no longer be transmissible to heirs in the third generation. This project exasperated holders of the second generation, and much trouble arose in consequence. Peralta, Not. Hist., 195. But it was not carried out. And there were cases, on the contrary, in later years, where the tenure passed to the fourth and even to the fifth generation. The encomenderos were required by law to dwell in the provinces where they held their encomiendas. The provision was, however, often disregarded. Those living in Mexico with permission were not authorized to compel their Indians to bring the tributes thither; nor had they the right of taking from the Indians any article of food without paying therefor. Puga, Cedulario, 154.

[1] In the event of his inability or unwillingness to accept it, then the second son, and so on to the last; if there were no sons, then the eldest daughter, and in her default, the next in succession, under certain obligations; if there were neither sons nor daughters, then the widow. After the death of this second holder, the encomienda was to revert to the crown. Under the king's general regulations no mulatto, mestizo, nor any one of illegitimate birth could hold an encomienda. If any was so holden, it was to revert at once to the crown. The order was subsequently modified, allowing the viceroy of Peru in 1559 to legitimize children born out of wedlock, even where the mothers were Indians, upon the payment of a sufficient sum to secure the encomiendas they were to inherit. That privilege was rescinded in 1561; its revival asked for, was refused in 1573, and had not been allowed as late as 1612. It is likely that the same rule held good in Mexico. Puga, Cedulario, 136.

[2] The right of transmission to the third generation having been tolerated in New Spain in 1555, Viceroy Velasco was in doubt if, in default of children, the privilege extended to widows and other heirs. This was at first refused; but on the 9th of February, 1561, the viceroy and audiencia were directed to permit, when there were no sons or daughters in the third generation, surviving husbands to inherit the encomiendas of their wives, and vice versa, until the crown should enact some general law. This led to abuses in marriages between old women and young men, or of old men with young women, to secure the inheritance of encomiendas, which were frequent and continued until in later years the king adopted measures to prevent such unequal alliances. February 27, 1575, and July 8, 1603, such inheritances were forbidden in the second and third generations, unless the parties had been married and lived together at least six months. Puga, Cedulario, 132, 136, 139, 149-50, 184-6, 192-3; Testimonio, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 478-80; Montesclaros, in Id., vi. 284, 288-90. In 1563 the crown resolved that encomiendas should no longer be transmissible to heirs in the third generation. This project exasperated holders of the second generation, and much trouble arose in consequence. Peralta, Not. Hist., 195. But it was not carried out. And there were cases, on the contrary, in later years, where the tenure passed to the fourth and even to the fifth generation. The encomenderos were required by law to dwell in the provinces where they held their encomiendas. The provision was, however, often disregarded. Those living in Mexico with permission were not authorized to compel their Indians to bring the tributes thither; nor had they the right of taking from the Indians any article of food without paying therefor. Puga, Cedulario, 154.

[1]

[2]