230
THE MESTA
ance under Charles V and Philip II that they frequently resented
the dictation of roving sheep owners. Occasionally they were
ordered by Charles, as they had been by Ferdinand and Isabella,
to cooperate with the entregadores in insuring the enforcement
of royal decrees regarding local taxes.1 As the century progressed,
however, we find the Corregidores taking matters into their own
hands and usurping for themselves the former function of the
town alcaldes. They accomplished this by hearing charges
against Mesta members accused of tax dodging.2 At times, they
even became the defenders of local sheep owners against fiscal
agents of the Mesta who were collecting assessments or dues for
the support of their organization.3 Such procedure naturally
brought them into direct conflict with the entregadores,4 over
whom, it will be recalled, the Mesta and its royal patrons did not
acquire complete control until 1568, when the proprietary
entregador-in-chief sold his rights to the sheep owners. We can
readily understand, therefore, the thinly disguised gratification
of the Hapsburg monarchs over this assumption of new fiscal
jurisdiction by their Corregidores. In fact, these assiduous agents
soon became so active that the Mesta had to resort to the final
authority of the Royal Council, the highest court in the land,
and to the Chancillerias, in order to override or modify some of
the more obnoxious decisions and decrees of the Corregidores.5
During the reign of Charles V the ChanciIlerias proved to be
welcome havens for the sheep owners in their conflicts with local
tax gatherers. It will be recalled 6 that these high courts at
Valladolid and Granada did not display their attitude of arrogant
contempt for royal authority until the closing years of Charles
V’s long career. It was not until about 1545 or 1550 that they
began to come forward as staunch defenders of local privilege
and of traditional Spanish separatism, as opposed to the Mesta
and its friend, the Royal Council. Previous to the early 1540’s,
ɪ Arch. Mesta, B-ι, Badajoz, 1727 (cases of 152g ff.); M-4, Montaches, 1549.
2 Ibid., A-7, Andfljar, 1530; А-g, Ansejo1 1556; U-ι, Übeda, 1532.
3 Ibid., A—2, Agreda, 1552.
4 Ibid., C-ι, Câceres, 1551.
6 Ibid., U-ι, Ubeda, 1532; M-ι, Madrid, 1565.
β See above, p. 114.
TAXES UNDER THE HAPSBURGS AND BOURBONS 231
however, the Chancillerias were not only active in their support
and confirmation of the rulings of the entregadores, but in addi-
tion they were frequently resorted to as courts of first instance by
the Mesta attorneys. Such direct appeals to the highest courts
of the land for the prompt and final settlement of disputes over
local taxation clearly indicated the importance attached by the
sheep owners to this subject, and their fear of the power of the
defendant towns.1
For a period of some thirty years, following the accession of
Charles V in 1516, the protecting aegis of the great Emperor’s
firm autocracy assured to the Mesta the invariable and immediate
support of the high courts at Valladolid and Granada. In that
period nearly thirty notable tax decisions were promptly handed
down by the Chancillerias in cases which had not been previously
heard by any lower courts. It was indeed gratifying to the sheep
owners to have their petitions against the tax collectors of such
powerful municipalities as Avila, Segovia, Toledo, Granada,
Toro, and Cuenca answered with despatch, and, on the whole,
with unreserved affirmation. Some of these decisions, for ex-
ample those against Segovia and Cuenca, were frankly intended
to exempt Mesta members from taxes justly levied by their
own towns. This illustrates vividly the enfeebled condition of
the once vigorous and militant spirit of local autonomy, and the
growing arrogance not only of the Mesta, but of its royal patron
and of the Chancillerias. The latter also proved during this
period to be invaluable allies against the great nobles, who had
in previous decades, as a rule, been quite impervious to the timid
attacks of itinerant entregadores. Now, however, the two chan-
cillerias, with cordial encouragement from the by no means dis-
interested monarch, handed down a series of stern mandates
against that once perennial and obnoxious practice of the baron-
ɪ There is only one case of the Chancillerfa sitting in a Mesta case as a court of
first instance previous to the accession of Charles V. Arch. Mesta, F-2, Fuente el
Sauco, 15n. The more important cases between 1516 and 1550 are found in C-2,
Camarena; F-2, Fuente el Sauco; G-r, Granada; M-2, Majambrez; T-4, Toro;
Z-ι, Zaias; F-2, Fuerte Escusa; S-5, Segovia; A-3, Alhambra; C-2, Cuenca.
One of the most important of these decisions was that against the tax collectors of
the Hennandad of Toledo (M-4, Montalbân), a powerful organization owning ex-
tensive pastures and valuable taxation privileges.