[4] Ibid., notes 1 to 4.
[5] Ibid., 2–31–1.
[6] Ibid., 5–12–9.
[7] Ibid., 5–11–6; see also, 5–12–14.
[8] Ibid., 5–15–36 to 39; 7–1–10 to 13.
[9] Ibid., 5–12–7 to 9.
[10] Bancroft, History of Central America, I, 250–1. Special emphasis should be placed upon the last clause of the above definition. The periodical residencia was not the sole means for the removal of officials in the Spanish colonies. The conclusion seems to have been reached by many historians that officials were permitted to conduct themselves carelessly, running their offices to suit their own personal convenience from the date of their appointment, in the assurance that their tenure was sure until the termination of a specified term, and that the periodical residencia was the only occasion on which they might be held to answer for their sins. Only the most scant attention has been given by modern writers to the residencia. See Bourne, “Historical introduction,” in Blair and Robertson, I, 50–52; Moses, Establishment of Spanish rule in America, 172; Vander Linden, L’expansion coloniale de l’Espagne, 349.
[11] Bourne, “Historical introduction,” Blair and Robertson, I, 51–52; see De Pons, Voyage, II, 25; Churchill, Voyages, IV, 427–428; see also Barrows, “The governor general of the Philippines, under Spain and the United States,” in The Pacific Ocean in history, 246.
[12] Recopilación, 7–1; 2–15–117.
[13] Ibid., 5–15–19.