According to him, the conclave, which agitated
this "question of expediency," consisted of the "officers of the
Crown and those of the army, a certain doctor learned in the law,
that chanced to be with them, and the reverend Father Vicente de
Valverde."]
[Footnote 26: "Respondio, que firmaria, que era bastante, para
que el Inga fuese condenado a muerte, porque aun en lo exterior
quisieron justificar su intento." Herrera, Hist. General, dec. 5,
lib. 3, cap. 4]
Yet there were some few in that martial conclave who resisted
these high-handed measures. They considered them as a poor
requital of all the favors bestowed on them by the Inca, who
hitherto had received at their hands nothing but wrong. They
objected to the evidence as wholly insufficient; and they denied
the authority of such a tribunal to sit in judgment on a
sovereign prince in the heart of his own dominions. If he were
to be tried, he should be sent to Spain, and his cause brought
before the Emperor, who alone had power to determine it.
But the great majority - and they were ten to one - overruled
these objections, by declaring there was no doubt of Atahuallpa's
guilt, and they were willing to assume the responsibility of his
punishment. A full account of the proceedings would be sent to
Castile, and the Emperor should be informed who were the loyal
servants of the Crown, and who were its enemies. The dispute ran
so high, that for a time it menaced an open and violent rupture;
till, at length, convinced that resistance was fruivless, the
weaker party, silenced, but not satisfied, contented themselves
with entering a written protest against these proceedings, which
would leave an indelible stain on the names of all concerned in
them.
Pages:
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537