Luis de Leon,[178] and this perhaps decided the tribunal in giving judgement.  We may think that the court unconsciously allowed itself to be swayed by personal prejudice against a prisoner who was at no great pains to conceal his estimate of its capacity.  However that may be, it must be admitted that the decision of the Court had behind it a great body of what may be called expert opinion.  The question of the authority due to the Vulgate was skilfully kept in the foreground; and the report of even so liberal-minded a man as the Dominican Hernando del Castillo was not wholly favourable.  Castillo, indeed, came to the conclusion that Luis de Leon had uttered nothing against faith; but while he acquitted the prisoner of teaching ’erroneous, temerarious or scandalous doctrine’, he held that Luis de Leon was much to blame for dealing with the question when and where he did.[179] The opinion of other calificadores was still more hostile, though it is to be noted that their hostility diminished as time went on and the hour for the delivery of a decision drew near.[180]

That decision had at last to be given.  It had been put off year after year.  This series of postponements—­ordered, despite the wishes of the prisoner and (as he contended) against his interests—­had got on to Luis de Leon’s nerves, had led to occasional moods of depression, and had betrayed him into a few irritable or intemperate outbursts.  But these results were unintentional.  The Valladolid judges were well aware from the outset that no time was to be lost.  As early as July 29, 1572, they delegated a piece of work to one of their commissaries in Salamanca, and impressed on him the urgency of dispatch.[181] They secured from Benito Rodriguez, the commissary in question, greater speed than they attained themselves.  This may have been due to accident, or to incompetence on their part.  But the policy of continual adjournment could not be prolonged for ever.  It had lasted too long for the patience of the Supreme Inquisition:[182]

   ...even the weariest river
        Winds somewhere safe to sea.

On September 28, 1576, a vote was taken on Luis de Leon’s case.  Seven members at least were present:  Francisco de Menchaca, Andres de Alava, Luis Tello Maldonado, and Francisco de Albornoz voted that Luis de Leon should be put to the torture—­a moderate amount of torture in view of his frail health—­and, when this was done, the court should sit again and determine accordingly.  Dr. Guijano de Mercado and Dr. Frechilla took a more lenient view, recommending that, in consideration of the more exculpatory reports recently given by the calificadores, in consideration also of the replies made by the prisoner and by Mancio, Luis de Leon should be reprimanded for dealing with so grave a matter (as the authority of the Vulgate) at an unsuitable time, before an unsuitable audience; that he should be called upon to renounce publicly certain views which seemed ambiguous; that he should