The first step was an order to the Archbishop, dated August 22, 1821, to close all the houses of spiritual exercises.  This was politely refused; but, at the same time, the prelate stated, that if any confessor disturbed public order, he would take the requisite measures for his punishment.  On the 27th, the Archbishop was told in reply, that “the Protector’s orders were irrevocable, and he must at once decide on the line of conduct he intended to adopt.”

On the 1st of September, the prelate, in an admirable letter, told the Protector, that “the principal obligation of a bishop was to defend the deposit of doctrine and faith which had been confided to him, and, if threatened by any great potentate, to remonstrate with respect and submission, to the end that he might not be a participator in crime by a cowardly condescension.  God had constituted bishops as the pastors and guards of the flock, and he tells us, that we are not to be cowards in the presence of the greatest potentates on earth, but, if necessary, we must shed our blood, and lay down our lives, in so just a cause; anathematizing us, on the contrary, as dumb dogs who do not bark when the spiritual health of the flock is in danger.”

The end of this was, that the Protector urged on the Archbishop to resign, promising him a vessel to convey him to Panama; relying on which promise, he sent in his resignation, and was ordered to quit Lima in twenty-four hours!  As the promise of a conveyance to Panama was broken, the Archbishop embarked in a merchant vessel for Rio de Janeiro, addressing to me the following letter previous to his departure.

   Chancay, Nov. 2, 1821.

   My dear Lord,

The time is arrived for my return to Spain, the Protector having granted me the necessary passport.  The polite attention which I owe to your Excellency, and the peculiar qualifications which adorn and distinguish you, oblige me to manifest to you my sincere regard and esteem.

In Spain, if God grant that I arrive in safety, I request that you will deign to command me.  On leaving this country, I am convinced that its independence is for ever sealed.  This I will represent to the Spanish Government, and to the Papal See, and will do all in my power to preserve the tranquillity, and to further the views, of the inhabitants of America, who are dear to me.

   Deign, my Lord, to receive these sentiments as emanating from
   the sincerity of my heart, and command

   Your obliged servant and Chaplain,
   BARTOLOME MARIA DE LAS HERAS.

This forcible expulsion of the Archbishop was an act of political folly, as being tantamount to a declaration that he was too good a man to countenance the designs of those who had usurped an unjust dominion over his flock.  Had the promises of Chili been carried out in their integrity, both the Archbishop and his clergy would have used all their influence to promote the cause of liberty—­not more from interest than inclination.  The expression of the Archbishop, that “the independence of Peru was for ever sealed,” was, however, erroneous.  Tyranny is not composed of enduring materials.