and they persist in their evil ways after being admonished, reason says they shall be punished rigorously.  The opposite course would only give them occasion to go on and become more hardened in their sin and misdoing, and cause others, after the example of these, to do the same—­that appearing to them to be lawful, when they see that it is not punished.  And such is the teaching of c. Qui vult, de Paenitentia, 3. 6., attributed to St. Augustine:  Cum enim tot sunt qui labuntur ut pristinam dignitatem ex authoritate defendant et quasi usum peccandi sibi faciant, rescindenda est spes ista. [29] Then, as these Zambales have many times been warned, and have promised and sworn peace and amends, and have totally defaulted, as we have already said, and have taken occasion, from the lenity shown them, to do greater mischiefs with more boldness—­mistaking for timidity the kindliness that we have used toward them—­it follows that, numerous though they are, we ought no longer to dissemble with them, but must punish them sternly; for the more numerous they are, the more mischief they do.

What we have stated in enforcing our thesis affords us occasion for explaining here the mode of procedure in this war, and—­assuming it to be a lawful war, as has been sufficiently proved—­for inquiring what considerations may be urged by those who carry on the war.  And, for the sake of brevity and clearness, we will resolve the matter into a few points, without any arguments, for these points are corollaries of a just war.

First:  If, to attain what is purposed—­to wit, to bring the said Zambales under control—­it becomes necessary that we burn their crops, their houses, and their other properties, and even kill those who make resistance, even if the presumption be that among them are some who are guiltless—­it is lawful to do all this during war, until the final victory is won which is purposed.  We say “if necessary,” for unless the purpose of all that is done in the war is the final victory, such deeds will be impious and tyrannical.  And hence the matter should not be left to the arbitrary will of the soldiers, but should be directed by the order of him who governs them.

Second:  Also, if during the war there be lack of subsistence, or of other supplies needed for its prosecution, these may be taken from what the enemy have, even though the owners be guiltless, and this without obligation to restitution—­the reason being that cum licet bellum licet apponere media necessaria ad finem victoria. [30]

Third:  Ex jure gentium, during the war, all movables taken from any one of the enemy belong to him who has them, and there is no obligation to restitution:  Sylvester Presbyter (Bellum, 1 Sec. 10), and Cajetan (in Summa).  I say “during the war,” because when it is ended non licet ultra praedari. [31]