,Cross, Bahia del Esp-rritu Santo, on the thirty-first day of. la Pizcina, life-time captain by order of His Majesty,

Transcription

1 12,Cross, Royal presidio of Nuestra Sefiora de Loreto and Bahia del Esp-rritu Santo, on the thirty-first day of the month of January of the year one thousand seven hundred fifty=eight, before 9me ^ Dora i'ai^uei Ra^nirez de la Pizcina, life-time captain by order of His Majesty, may God protect him, of this said royal presidio, deputy gnneral of all this province of Tejas and New Philippines by order of the seplor governor and captain general of the said province, Don Jacintto de Barrios y JAurigui, acting before me as 'uez receptor with attendant witnesses in the absence of a notary, public,or royal, because there is none in the terms pre-. - scribed- by -law, the folloti=ring -petition was presented: Inco?nplete SePior Deputy General: I, Don Juan Joseph Flores Abrego, a vecino of the villa. of, San.Fernarido, in the best form. according to law, appear before you and state:.

2 13 That on the first day of January of this present year, after I had retired to the quietness of my home, the Very Illustrious Cabildo of this villa sent for me and informed me that by their unanimous vote I had been elected to the noble position of ordinary alcalde of first rank, as is the annual custom in all the villas, and towns. After I had been so informed, realizing on the one hand my inability and on the other my lack of any worldly substance for holding the said office since I had nothing but my work, I begged them to elect someone else with more wealth and ability. They did not accede to this but compelled me to accept the said office,which was conferred upon me by the willing vote of all alike, and I went publicly in the company of all e regidores to the public ceremony that is customary in the parochial church. Because of this act, no one can deny that I publicly took possession of the said.. office, and further confirmation was added by closing the election with the signature of all.the members3. Five days later, the truth of this was corroborated when?. by default of the alguacil mayor, I was assigned the distribution of the lands that were given to Don Joseph Padr6n, a regidor and to Andr6s Ram6n, a lawyer, and to others to whom I gave legitimate possession as a legitimate judge. Eight days after my election, I

3 14 lv ordered the promulgation of a decree for good //government as ordered by royal laws and as is the custom in all towns. In consequence thereof, Don Joseph Curbelo, a regidor, issued a decree contradicting my entire proclamation, as.is publicly known and recorded in juridica.1"-proceedings. On the sixteenth day he surprised me with a dispatch from you, by whose petition I do not know, since it was simply announced by the said Curbelo that I had been removed from office, nor did I know for what reason. This was done de facto and most unjustly. On this supposition, I proceeded to plead my rights before you from whom I seek justice, but if it is not granted, by this same petition I appeal to any tribuanl that may admit me. t2y reasons for doing so, are the following: First: No criminall however atrocious his crimes may be, should be punished without first being heard and convicted according to law. This is a legal principle so common that no judge questions it, whether the cause is civil or ctiminal, and its very nature results in nullification of the cause. Therefore, since I was not informed of the causes for my removal from office, I 8 must say that it is wrong and justice demands my reinstatement. The rights of ;t person removed from office are

4 15 clearly proved by law, as is of record in the entire section entitled de restitucione spoliatorum. First of all he must be reinstated. This means that although there may be sufficient cause, the removal must not be made until thi point is proved by juridical". process; therefore, if I have been deprived of something that justly belongs to me, I should first of all be reinstated in my office until I am convicted by due process of law. Second, in my case no one will deny that I had taken legit imate possession as indicated by the public acts stated above. hos p untos de curia are inviolable laws; the one.applicable here is to the effect that he who has taken possession of an office cannot be removed from the same until he has been convicted in court: Read the third paragraph, number two, of Civil Process. Therefore, since I had taken legitimate possession of the office of ordi- 2 nary alcalde, I should not have been re//moved from the same until I had been convicted in court. Third, it is unjust that in so serious a matter I should have been humiliated by the d.e-privation of my authority without a hearing or an examination of the election records to see whether there was agreement or disagreement among the votes; for in the latter case it would be possible to 8 take just and legal action against me, and though I did

5 16 not succeed in retaining my office, I would not be subjected to the painful loss of reputation and dishonor which I am now enduring as a result of the aforesaid violent and unjust dismissal inflicted upon me, which is,. null because it was effected, without investigation by legal process before an a_sesor letrado. Fourth, one of two,things is true, of the cguse which was instituted by Don Joseph Curbelo and by virtue of which the dismissal was effected: Was it presented before you, and by virtue.thereof did you order my dismissal, or was it instituted after the dismissal? If the first hypothesis is true^^, may I ask Don Joseph Curbelo before what judge he made.his representations,: not before me, and much less before Don Sim6n de Arocha, But if he did make them before the latter, two things are evident: first the representation, is null because of Don Sim6n Arocha's being a party to it; and second, since Don Sim6n rde Arocha, is at his ranch, he should not exercise jurisdiction at that distance; otherwise there would be three ordinary alcaldes, the aforesaid Don Sim6n, Don Martin Flores to whom, as first regidor, he has delegated authority, as is of record in the book of elections, and I; and thus it is inferred that if he pre-' sented it before you, it was made before Santa Maria, his comna.dre, who went around collecting signatures and gathering people in order to arouse indignation today in this entire toe,m, as will be seen from formal proceedings. If,

6 17 on the other hand the action, was instituted after the, dismissal, the following is true: First, said action, is-null, and no proof is necessary since it wa:$ made before Curbelo himself or before, his full nephew' Don Simbn; second, if the action was instituted afterward, you did not dismiss me in conformity with the law because you dis- 2v missed me merely for an imaginary cause //rather than;for a truely existing cause, and, therefore, the dismissal was null; and consequently I should be^ reir_stated in the office of ordinary alcalde, aid if anyone has any eharges to make, he may bring suit because I profess to act entirely within the law. Fifth, it is unjust that all these difficulties which have arisen, the damage which has.oppressed me, and the embarrassment -which--has-been -infli-cted uponme with...siuch great inconvenience to my person as well asto my family, have all been created by subordinating a common law to the interest of an individual. Such barbaftsm is not customary among infidels for the ma;jiority of them live according to natural law, and the common welfare is their ultimate guide. How in God's name can it be good when Don I Joserh Curbelo,. a regidor, and even today the senior depository of authority^who according to law should not be in the Catrildo because he is diseased and even almost blind as a result of the habitual malady which afflicts

7 18 him, ^how can it be good when this man, is a public drunk=i ard giving cause for scandal in the town with his private comforts and when the public cause of God is scorned? You are not ignorant of the many sins deriving from aguardiente. Scandals are public, lewdness is increasing, blasphemies abound, and all respectability is lost. Can it be right, I ask again, if in defending the cause_ of God and also of the King, as is of record in his royal cedulas, the judge who so defends it is deprived of his office? It seems an act of barbarism that this is the sole crime for which I was disrnissed, as,is of record in the proceedings. This is the reason for my having been accused of impediments that I do not have and for charges having been made against me of which I am not guilty. If the impediment of a notary were one, which it is not, then we have living exami:les even in this bishodric^ as in the case of Don Franco Xavier de Abila, notary public and alcalde mayor del Balle de Guajuco, Don Ygnacio TreviPlo, notary public. and ordinary alc4lde of the city of Monterrey, in which instance it is a case of being subject to both jurisdictions. This is no impedimen.t to me for I made my renunication last year, as is of record in the legal certification of the SefSor Vicar. The dause which Seftor Pe:4r n Don Joseph Padr6n is said to have made against me was due to my opposition cd..s.1 January pp. l-2v,