19. His Majesty orders and commands his [i.e., Zabalburú’s] successor in the government, Count de Lizaraga, as soon as he received this despatch, and without the slightest delay, to immediately remove all the foreign seminarists from such seminary; while of those who should be his own vassals, all those in excess of the number of eight, whom he had preferred, and for whose support the calculation had been made, by deciding with the necessary teachers upon the suitable allowance, if they desired to enter as boarders, they could not exceed the number of sixteen. [This was done] in order to avoid the troubles that might result if the privilege of admission were extended farther, in a territory where there were so few Spanish inhabitants, where it was necessary for the natives to apply themselves to the cultivation of the soil, and the industries of the community. It was to be noted that no one could enter without the permission of the vice-patron, to whose activity he charges the especial care, and orders him to aid by all means possible the progress and conclusion of the seminary, which he had founded, in order that it might subsist in the manner and according to the laws established, without transgressing those laws in any manner. He was to arrange with the persons who with good faith assisted in the said building fund, with incomes, edifices, and other things, which they applied liberally, in order that they might condescend to apply the whole to what his Majesty had ordered to be erected. In case they did not agree thereto, the just price was to be paid them, of whatever should be considered useful to the said seminary, while what might be considered useless was to be returned to its owners, in the best and most fitting form, except the buildings, which were to be necessarily destroyed. His Majesty insists that he be informed as quickly as possible, because of its great importance, of the observance of his resolution. For the same purpose, he orders the same of his royal Audiencia, by a despatch of the same day, and orders that decree to be read annually at the opening [of the seminary] in January (as is done), in order that it might be exactly observed and in order to avoid such intrusions, to the great prejudice of the supreme rights and privileges.
20. In fulfilment of that royal decree, the investigation of the alms gathered by Abbot Sidoti was made. The application of those alms, by virtue of the conditions of the pious foundations, could not be used for the support of the eight seminarists, who were appointed at his Majesty’s account; nor to aid the expenses of the royal treasury in the new building of the college on the site of the houses sequestered from [the property of] Licentiate Don Manuel Suarez de Olivera. The inhabitants who had contributed to the building fund and incomes with their alms were asked that such be allowed to be freely applied to the college ordered to be erected by his Majesty. In such an innovation, greater expenses were incurred by the royal treasury on the site opposite to the archiepiscopal palace and solicited by the governor and archbishop, because the purchase and expense of timber and its haulage were effected at a cost of four thousand pesos which were paid on the account of the royal treasury to General Don Miguel de Eloriaga so that they might be spent with the intervention of the said abbot. That is evident in the records of the account of said general presented and sworn to, in regard to such expenses, with an attestation from the said Sidoti that it was true. Thus that was a superfluous expense on the royal treasury. For although a portion of the timber bought for that money was used for the addition to the new building on the site next the sequestered house of Licentiate Suarez, in order to give greater extension to the college, very little of it was useful, and did not amount, together with that which was sold, to two thousand pesos in value. The remainder was lost with the purchased and abandoned site which was used for nothing. That could have been built with four thousand pesos if the building attempted opposite the archiepiscopal palace had been left out of the question. In that the cost to the royal treasury was about six thousand pesos, the annual maintenance aggregating one thousand two hundred pesos, without noting the necessary expenses for physician, apothecary, and other things, plus two hundred pesos for two professors in philosophy and theology.
21. His Majesty also resolved to order and command his governor, as soon as he received that despatch, to order and take measures, as was most advisable and efficacious, to suppress the name of San Clemente which had been given to the seminary by the abbot, and to change it into that of San Phelipe, in order that no remembrance might be left of the sinister reports of which his Holiness had been informed to the discredit of the royal and earnest zeal in providing measures for the advance of religion, without giving the slightest motive for so peculiar and special influences. The fitting measures for the change of name were really taken, and that fact was recorded in the books of the accountancy and of the said college. The archbishop, dean, and cabildo were informed thereof, in order that they might properly observe it.
[As punishment for his omission, Governor Zabalburú was dismissed, although his term was already ended, as were also the auditors. The governor was a just man, but his intimacy with the Jesuits caused him to be distrusted.]
[Chapter xiv contains the following in regard to this seminary.]
2. During his government [i.e., of the new archbishop, Fray Francisco de la Cuesta, of the Order of San Geronimo] arrived the resolution regarding the seminary college of San Phelipe. Its erection was entrusted to his Excellency, Señor Cuesta. He having made the foundation, proceeded to draw up its rules, which being milder for the seminarists, corrected those of the most illustrious Camacho. However, most of them were not in accord with the royal patronage, and its rights. His Excellency incurred the inadvertence of prescribing in the second of his rules that the escutcheon of the royal arms should be placed on a prominent spot, while in the interior or in any other part of the said seminary, were also to be placed the arms of the archbishop. In doing so, he said that he was in accord with the second law of the first book and twenty-third título of the Recopilación [4] of these kingdoms. That would be allowable if the seminary had been founded at his cost or at the cost pro rata given by his prebendaries and others who are mentioned in the Council of Trent. In that he claimed the right of private patronage, reserving for his Majesty only the universal patronage. That was a surprising resolution, since the archbishop himself confessed that the seminary had been founded at the expense of the royal treasury, while the placing of escutcheons and arms signifies one’s private expenses and special zeal; when his Majesty, without any controversy, is the sole founder. Therefore its foundation was purely lay, and in such concept, beyond any question the universal and private patronage belonged to his Majesty, as it was founded at the expense of his royal patrimony. Still more harmful were the fourth and fourteenth rules, in which it is declared that the nomination and election of the collegiates is at the disposition of the ordinary, after conferring and obtaining the opinion of the prebendaries; as is also their expulsion in the case of incorrigibles, after their rector has informed the ordinary of such: although that nomination and expulsion belonged very properly (and exclusively) to his Majesty, as its foundation was not couched in the terms mentioned by the Council of Trent. To him could only pertain by delivery and by royal disposition their spiritual government, because of the greater care in investigating and restraining their morals. The error of his Excellency was notable in this regard, for although the governor petitioned that he be given possession of such seminary, in the name of his dignity and of his church he declares that the appointment of rector, administrator, and master is in the first place, a right of the superior government by virtue of the laws of the royal patronage, and that he deign to make provision of such posts in persons justified and qualified as most fitting. For being univocal and in accord with the doctrine, founded on laws, the naming and disposition of the collegiates ought also to be private.
3. No measures were taken for the time being to revise the rules, especially the ones mentioned, conforming them to the royal patronage. The practice continued of the ordinary giving the despatches and titles in his provision, until the report of Señor Cuesta to the government asking that the two professors of philosophy and theology might be removed, as he considered such chairs unprofitable. He represented that as a charge on his conscience, asking that fruitless expenses might not be continued for the royal treasury, thus opposing the two professors at that time. The matter was given to his Majesty’s fiscal for examination, at that time Señor Vedoya. His reply was that those professorships ought to be suppressed because of the reasons alleged; namely, because they were costly to maintain and of none effect. Thereupon, his Majesty’s fiscal reported the special measure of the royal decree of foundation, which provides that no one shall enter the said college without the express license of the vice-patron; that the rules cited were harmful to the universal and private patronage, and that with the opinion of the assessor, an express clause should be added to the above-mentioned fourth rule, by which in order to be admitted into the seminary, the collegiates were to be presented to the vice-patron, and the permission petitioned which is provided by the royal decree. The government in accord with that opinion, and with that of the assessor of the same tenor, informed the archbishop of the measure. The latter replied that from the time of the receipt of the decree, no nomination had been made, or any election of collegiate or boarder of those who had been admitted, as no advice of such circumstance of license for entrance into said college had been given. In answer to his reply the fiscal insisted with strong reasons that the royal patronage, both universal and special, be put into due practice, without allowing errors in the appropriation of the appointments and approvals in the entrance of collegiate seminarists. To the ordinary was alone left, by virtue of his trust from his Majesty, the government and administration of the collegiates, for the greater security in the investigation of their qualifications and morals. That was done, and the royal patronage was left in power.
[See also the fuller account given by San Antonio, in VOL. XXVIII, pp. 117–123; Concepción’s Historia, x, pp. 170–184; and Martinez de Zúñiga’s Historia, pp. 518, 519. Concepción says that the king resolved, January 27, 1714, upon the erection of three chairs, for laws, canons, and institute, respectively, to be appointed by competitive examination. These were for the purpose of educating the natives for the cathedral dignities. The despatch concerning this matter was received in Manila, in August, 1717. With the decree of July 26, 1730, the seminary virtually came to an end.]