The Philippine Islands / A Political, Geographical, Ethnographical, Social and Commercial History of the Philippine Archipelago, Embracing the Whole Period of Spanish Rule

by F.R.G.S. John Foreman

From the year 1720, during the period of prohibitions, the Royal Treasury lost about ₱50,000 per annum, and many of the taxes were not recovered in full. Besides this, the donations to Government by the citizens, which sometimes had amounted to ₱40,000 in one year, ceased. A double loss was also caused to Mexico, for the people there had to pay much higher prices for their stuffs supplied by Spanish (home) monopolists, whilst Mexican coffers were being drained to make good the deficits in the Philippine Treasury. The Manila merchants were terribly alarmed, and meeting after meeting was held. A Congress of Government officials and priests was convened, and each priest was asked to express his opinion on the state of trade.

Commercial depression in the Philippines had never been so marked, and the position of affairs was made known to the King in a petition, which elicited the Royal Decree dated April 8, 1734. It provided that the value of exports should thenceforth not exceed ₱500,000, and the amount permitted to return was also raised to ₱1,000,000 (always on the supposition that 100 per cent. over cost laid down would be realized). The dues and taxes paid in Acapulco on arrival, and the dues paid in Manila on starting, amounted to 17 per cent. of the million expected to return.[5] This covered the whole cost of maintenance of ships, salaries, freight, and charges of all kinds which were paid by Government in the first instance, and then recovered from the Consulado.

The fixed number of merchants was to be decided by the merchants themselves without Government intervention. Licence was granted to allow those of Cavite to be of the number, and both Spaniards and natives were eligible. Military and other professional men, except ecclesiastics, could thenceforth be of the number. Foreigners were strictly excluded. The right to ship (boleta) was not to be transferable, except to poor widows. A sworn invoice of the shipment was to be sent to the royal officials and magistrate of the Supreme Court of Mexico for the value to be verified. The official in charge, or supercargo, was ordered to make a book containing a list of the goods and their respective owners, and to hand this to the commander of the fortress in Acapulco, with a copy of the same for the Viceroy. The Viceroy was to send his copy to the Audit Office to be again copied, and the last copy was to be forwarded to the Royal Indian Council.

Every soldier, sailor, and officer was at liberty to disembark with a box containing goods of which the Philippine value should not exceed ₱30, in addition to his private effects. All hidden goods were to be confiscated, one-half to the Royal Treasury, one-fourth to the Judge intervening, and one-fourth to the informer; but, if such confiscated goods amounted to ₱50,000 in value, the Viceroy and Mexican Council were to determine the sum to be awarded to the Judge and the informer.

If the shipment met a good market and realized more than 1,000,000 pesos, only 1,000,000 could be remitted in money, and the excess in duty-paid Mexican merchandise. If the shipment failed to fetch 1,000,000, the difference could not be sent in money for making new purchases. (The same restriction as in the decree of 1720.)

The object of these measures was to prevent Mexicans supplying trading capital to the Philippines instead of purchasing Peninsula manufactures. It was especially enacted that all goods sent to Mexico from the Philippines should have been purchased with the capital of the Philippine shippers, and be their exclusive property without lien. If it were discovered that on the return journey of the galleon merchandise was carried to the Philippines belonging to the Mexicans, it was to be confiscated, and a fine imposed on the interested parties of three times the value, payable to the Royal Treasury, on the first conviction. The second conviction entailed confiscation of all the culpritsʼ goods and banishment from Mexico for 10 years.

The weights and measures of the goods shipped were to be Philippine, and, above all, wax was to be sent in pieces of precisely the same weight and size as by custom established.

The Council for freight allotment in Manila was to comprise the Governor, the senior Magistrate, and, failing this latter, the Minister of the Supreme Court next below him; also the Archbishop, or in his stead the Dean of the Cathedral; an ordinary Judge, a Municipal Councillor, and one merchant as Commissioner in representation of the eight who formed the Consulado of merchants.

The expulsion of the non-christian Chinese in 1755 (vide p. [111]) caused a deficit in the taxes of ₱30,000 per annum. The only exports of Philippine produce at this date were cacao, sugar, wax, and sapanwood. Trade, and consequently the Treasury, were in a deplorable state. To remedy matters, and to make up the above ₱30,000, the Government proposed to levy an export duty which was to be applied to the cost of armaments fitted out against pirates. Before the tax was approved of by the King some friars loaded a vessel with export merchandise, and absolutely refused to pay the impost, alleging immunity. The Governor argued that there could be no religious immunity in trade concerns. The friars appealed to Spain, and the tax was disapproved of; meantime, most of the goods and the vessel itself rotted pending the solution of the question by the Royal Indian Council.

There have been three or four periods during which no galleon arrived at the Philippines for two or three consecutive years, and coin became very scarce, giving rise to rebellion on the part of the Chinese and misery to the Filipinos. After the capture of the Covadonga by the British, six years elapsed before a galleon brought the subsidy; then the Rosario arrived with 5,000 gold ounces (nominally ₱80,000).