cause and the corresponding acts [of the Audiencia], in order to determine what he should do.  But the auditors sent him another royal decree, warning him that he would be considered to have incurred the said penalties if he did not immediately lift the censures and interdict.  Since the archbishop held firm, the auditors sent the chief court constable, together with the actuary of the Audiencia and thirty pikemen under command of an adjutant, at four in the afternoon on that same day, in order to take charge of the episcopal residence, with orders not to permit any one to leave it or anything to be taken from it.

At this juncture, the rector of the Jesuit college and others advised the archbishop to raise the censures ad reincidentiam [i.e., “until a repetition of the offense"], and the interdict for one week, since they thought that the auditors would return the prisoner.  That was done, and the archbishop requested the opinion in writing of the orders and learned persons, which they gave him—­with the exception of the Dominicans, who excused themselves.  The archbishop, seeing that the auditors not only did not do what was promised, but even issued another decree to arrest and expel the provisor, called another meeting, at which the Dominicans had no part.  In that meeting it was decided to defend the ecclesiastical immunity, and that two individuals of the assembly should go to talk with the auditors in the name of the assembly, and notify them that the prisoner must be returned, or else the archbishop could not raise the censures or interdict.  Two Jesuits went, and the auditors replied to them that they would not desist or turn back.  The interdict was immediately imposed again, and the auditors were publicly declared to be excommunicated.

A Jesuit, who was a friend to the governor, advised him to take a hand in the matter in order to cut short such scandals.  The result was that the governor decided to see the archbishop at the residence of the Society, in order to discuss the most suitable method.  The interview was held, but without result.  Another interview had the same result.  Meanwhile it was decided to appoint two arbitrators, one from each side.  Doctor Jolo was appointed for the auditors, and Father Juan de Bueras, [22] rector of the residence of the Society of Jesus, for the archbishop.  They agreed that the prisoner should be returned to the episcopal prison, and that each side should desist from their claim in what was accomplished.

When the time came to execute the agreement of the arbitrators, the auditors put difficulties in the way.  But, since at the same time it happened that the provisor, as commissary of the holy crusade, had drawn up acts against the auditors for the violation of his house and tribunal, against which there was no recourse by force in these islands; and since, on the other hand, the governor demanded from them the record of all that had been done (separating himself from them, as not being a lawyer) in order to inform the king:  they resolved to form an assembly without the governor, and voted that the prisoner should be returned to the ecclesiastical prison, while the ecclesiastical judge was investigating whether the church was protecting him, which was what the archbishop claimed.