[98] A Brief History of the Voyage of Katharine Evans and Sarah Cheevers to the Island of Malta and their Cruel Sufferings there for near Four Years. London, 1715.
[99] History of the Inquisition of the Middle Ages, II, 268.
[100] Itinerarium Beniamini Tudelens., pp. 21-5 (Antverpiæ, 1575).
[101] Wadding, Annal. Minorum, T. III, Regesta, p. 392; ann. 1447, n. 10.
[102] Ripoll Bullar. Ord. FF. Prædic., II, 689.
[103] Zurita, Hist. del Rey Hernando, Lib. v, cap. lxx.
[104] Archivo de Simancas, Inquisicion, Libro I. An episode of this business concerned one Nofre Pelayo, a merchant of Valencia, who was arrested on the charge of concealing some of Pantolosa’s property. On January 15, 1498, Ferdinand warmly praised the inquisitor for this action but he speedily changed his mind and, on March 6th, scolded him for keeping Pelayo in prison and refusing to admit him to bail. It seems that he had in his hands two hundred and fifty ducats, supposed to belong to Pantolosa, but the sum was claimed by Miguel de Fluto, who luckily was a kinsman of the Neapolitan ambassador; the latter induced his master to write on the subject to Ferdinand who, on March 19, 1499, ordered the sum to be paid to the ambassador’s order.—Ibidem.
These transactions are worth noting as an illustration of the destructive influence on commerce of the methods of confiscation.
[105] Archivo de Simancas, Inquisicion, Lib. I.
[106] Amabile (Il Santo Officio in Napoli, I, 93) assures us that there is no trace of such a condition expressed in the documents, but undoubtedly some compact of the kind must have been made. This is evident from the fact that when, in 1504, Ferdinand and Isabella resolved to introduce the Inquisition they formally released Gonsalvo from the obligation, giving as a reason that no Catholic was required to observe obligations in derogation of the faith—“non obstantibus in præmissis aut aliquo præmissorum quibusvis pactis, conventionibus aut capitulationibus per vos præfatum illustrem ducem aut alium quemcunque, nomine nostro vel vestro in deditione civitatis Neapolis aut alias quandocunque factis, conventis aut juratis, cum ea quæ contra fidem faciunt nullo pacto a Catholicis observanda sunt, quinimmo easdem si tales sunt quæ prædictis aliquatenus obviare censeantur cum præsentibus quoad hæc revocamus, taxamus, annullamus et irritamus, pro cassisque, irritis ac nullis nulliusque roboris seu momenti haberi volumus et habemus, cæteris autem ad hæc non tangentibus in suo robore permanentibus.”—Páramo, De Origine Officii S. Inquisit., p. 192.