It was especially declared that we, in this reasoning, made no request of the King of Portugal. And inasmuch as we were the defendant we neither wished to, nor ought we to have any desire to assume the duties of the plaintiff, because if the King wished anything from us for which he should petition us, we were quite ready to fulfil in entire good faith all the obligations of the said treaty.
Furthermore it was declared that, supposing—which is not at all true—that the King of Portugal had found Maluco first, and that he should claim that we should restore it to him, asserting that he had been despoiled of it by our having taken possession of it on our own authority, when we should have petitioned and received it from him; or alleging that we did not disturb or trouble him in the possession of what he does not have, nor ever had in his possession, it was quite clear that the case was not comprehended in the said treaty. Neither was it provided for nor determined in the treaty, which was not to be extended, nor did extend to more than was expressly mentioned and set down therein, which it did determine. Rather this appeared to be a new case, omitted and unprovided for by the treaty, which must be determined and decided by common sense or common law.
Accordingly, since this matter was outside of the said treaty, we were not bound by the treaty, nor in any other manner to leave our right unexamined, nor was it either reasonable or proper to restore immediately in order to have to petition later, thus making ourselves, contrary to all ideas of equity and good faith, original criminal, prosecutor, or plaintiff; especially as it would be impossible or very difficult to recover what we should restore. For this very reason even the restitution of what was well known to be stolen was deferred by law, until the case of ownership was decided.
Furthermore the right of our ownership and possession was evident because of our just occupation. At least it could not be denied that we had based our intention on common law, according to which newly-found islands and mainlands, belonged to and remain his who occupied and took possession of them first, especially if taken possession of under the apostolic authority, to which—or according to the opinion of others, to the Emperor—it is only conceded to give this power. Since we, the said authorities, possessed these lands more completely than any other, and since the fact of our occupation and possession was quite evident, it followed clearly and conclusively that we ought to be protected in our rule and possession, and that whenever anyone should desire anything from us, he must sue us for it; and in such suit must be the occasion for examining the virtue and strength of the titles, the priority, and the authority of the occupation alleged by each party to the suit.
Meanwhile, and until it should be stated legally before one or the other, and that there ought to be a better right than ours, which we neither knew nor believed, we would base our intention upon common law. Therefore we held and possessed Maluco justly, since our title to acquire dominions therein was and is just and sufficient; and from common law arose, both then and now, our good faith and just intention. Our good faith and the justice of our side was apparent by these and other reasons, by the said treaty in what falls within its scope, and by common law and common sense in what falls outside it, or by all jointly. There was no reason or just cause in what the ambassadors petitioned, as formerly in this matter of possession, Silveira, ambassador of our brother, the most serene King of Portugal, the first to come upon this business, had been given thoroughly to understand. Now inasmuch as my wish has ever been, past and present, to preserve the relationship existing between the said most serene King and myself, and in order that the affection and alliance we have ever had may continue to increase, as is in accordance with our desire and actions regarding this matter, as well as upon everything most intimately connected with it, I commanded the members of our Council to review this question in private, and with care; and I charged them in the strongest possible manner that upon God and their own consciences they should declare to me their opinion When it had been examined and discussed again thoroughly, all these members agreed, nemine discrepante, that, from everything observed up to the present, we held Maluco rightly. Now because, as you will understand, since all the members of my Council say the same thing, I ought to believe them, and it would neither be honest nor reasonable to disregard their opinion, especially in a matter upon which I acting alone could not nor can be well informed, I commanded that, according to the above, their opinion would be the answer to the said ambassadors, giving them to understand thoroughly the causes and reasons abovesaid, and others, which although clear and evident, the ambassadors would not accept. Rather they continued to persist that Maluco ought to be surrendered to them. They said they had information that Maluco had been found by the King of Portugal, and by his ships. But that information being unauthorized and in the same the witnesses being subjects of the King of Portugal, (you see how much advantage, honor, and increase it is to this nation to succeed in this undertaking), and it being a thing beyond the bounds of reason, and a matter of no credence or damage, we did not permit examination of it; for even though the evidence should prove damaging to the King of Portugal, he could not be compelled to abide by it, as it had not been presented in a regular court of law, nor sufficiently empowered by him. It was a departure from the principal matter of negotiation. And then too the said ambassadors, although other information better than their own was offered on my part, would not accept it, nor would they abide by it. Although, as you see, I ought not to depart from the said treaty, which was the only petition made me by the said ambassadors, they not wishing to stick to the truth, persisted obstinately in so doing, and then it was sufficient to have satisfied themselves as to its full observance.
But paying no heed to this, nor to the harm ensuing to us in persuading them, on account of my great affection to my cousin, the said most serene King of Portugal, and those causes already declared, proposals were made to the said ambassadors in my behalf, to wit, that it be considered immediately by the court of demarcation, and for this persons be appointed in accordance with the said treaty and the prorogation of it, and within a convenient period, which would not lengthen greatly the business in hand, nor be so short that it would seem that the matter could not be concluded in the time named, and the said declaration and demarcation should be determined. While this was being done, neither he nor I would despatch ships, nor engage in any new undertaking. This would be without hurt to either one of us, so that, if the demarcation was not determined in the time appointed, each one's right would remain and continue fully in force. This expedient, although, it was very prejudicial to our evident and peaceful possession to discontinue it by any compact, and withal a compact made with the side opposing us, the ambassadors would scarcely listen to, declaring that they were not empowered by the King of Portugal to discuss any halfway measures. And afterwards, although with great urging on our part they consented to write the latter concerning this question (and they say they did write him concerning it), they gave out that the reply received was in the way of a refusal.
And notwithstanding that it was seen and known that they did not wish to abide by the said treaty, nor to adopt a middle course or any reasonable conclusion, another expedient was proposed by certain members of our Council, to whom I committed the matter, namely, that while the court of demarcation was sitting, as aforesaid, each side should have entire liberty to despatch ships, if he so wished. For by this means the King of Portugal could take no offense, since this expedient was the same for both. Rather, if any harm resulted, it appeared to be against our right, for of our own free will we permitted them to make expeditions, from which would follow the disturbance of our peaceful and continued possession. Upon every point, although they were given the choice between the said expedients, they answered as at first maintaining an obstinate silence and asserting that they were not authorized. Thus by their own decision and choice they left everything to us.
Then because there remained nothing more to attempt, and in order to convince them thoroughly, and that the King of Portugal, our cousin, might know our intention thoroughly, it was proposed to them that since they were not abiding by the treaty upon which they based their pretensions, nor accepted the expedients proposed to them, that they themselves should propose other expedients, so that if they seemed proper (as were those proposed to them), they might be deliberated upon. To this they answered for the third time that they had no authority to discuss halfway measures, but that Maluco should be surrendered to them. Seeing that all these compliments and offers of expedients made to them on my part, which were submissions rather than compliments, rather proved a loss than a gain to the negotiations, they were abandoned, and the question remained as at first. Inform the most serene King of Portugal in regard to these entire proceedings, for it is the truth. And see that he understands fully my wish, which is as above stated to you; and that I have not failed on my part to do all required by the said treaty, nor to consider any proper and reasonable expedient. Advise me fully of all that is done in this matter. Pamplona, December 18, 1523. I the King. [177] [Countersigned by the secretary Cobos. Signature of the chancellor and of Carvajal]
Treaty Between the Emperor and the King of Portugal Concerning the
Limits and Possession of Maluco
[This treaty was negotiated in the city of Vitoria, being signed February 19, 1524. The negotiators acting for Spain were the following: Mercurinus de Gatinara, Grand Chancellor of his Majesty; Hernando de Vega, Commander-in-chief in Castile of the order of Santiago; García de Padilla, Commander-in-chief of Calatrava; and Doctor Lorenzo Galindez de Carvajal: "all members of the Council of the most exalted and powerful Princes, Don Cárlos, by the divine clemency Emperor ever august, and King of the Romans, and Doña Juana, his mother, and the same Don Cárlos, her son, by the grace of God King and Queen of Castilla, Leon, Aragon, the two Sicilas, Jerusalen, etc." Those acting for the Portuguese monarch were Pero Correa de Atubia, seignior of the city of Velas, and Doctor Juan de Faria, "both members of the Council of the most exalted and excellent Lord, Don Juan, by the grace of God, King of Portugal, of the Algarbes on this side of the sea and in Africa, seignior of Guinea, and of the conquest, navigation, and commerce of Ethiopia, Arabia, Persia, India, etc." The respective monarchs delegated full powers to these representatives to negotiate, in their names, this treaty, in which the ownership of Maluco was to be determined. The Spanish letter of authorization was signed in Vitoria, January 25, 1524. (Navarrete omits the Portuguese letter of authorization.) The treaty proper follows:]