In the summer of the same year, the citizens of Manila ask that they may be allowed to trade with the inhabitants of Macao, the Portuguese settlement in China.  Dasmarinas orders an inquiry to be made into this matter, and has various witnesses examined.  This is done according to a detailed interrogatory—­the witnesses testifying that the Portuguese of Macao trade with the Philippine Islands, with much profit and advantage; that the trade of Macao is rapidly increasing in extent and range, and yet does not notably decrease the abundance of goods to be had at that port; that, if the Spaniards trade there, it will be much easier to introduce the gospel into China; that hitherto no trading ships have gone from the Philippines to India; that trade with Macao will enrich the islands; that the Portuguese at Macao have plundered a ship sent thither by Dasmarinas; and that the Chinese desire the trade of the Spaniards.  To this are appended various declarations and decrees which bear upon the question discussed; and, finally, the recommendation of Dasmarinas that the king permit trade between the islands and Macao.

Hostilities arising with the Zambales of Luzon, the governor calls upon the religious orders for their opinion regarding the justice of waging war against these Indians.  The Augustinians make a long and elaborate response; they state three conditions as necessary to make a war righteous—­that he who begins it must have authority, just cause, and righteous intention.  These are explained in detail, as general precepts, and then applied to the question now before them—­all fortified by citations from doctors of law and theology, and from the Bible.  Their conclusion is that war may be justly waged against the Zambales.  They also lay down the rules which should, ex jure gentium, be followed in the conduct of such war; and end by recommending that the Zambales, when conquered, should be transplanted to some other district, and remodeled into an agricultural people.  This document is presented in full, as a curious and interesting example of the reasoning employed by churchmen of that time in settling questions of public concern, and of the opinions then current regarding the laws of war.  The Dominicans mention the evil practice of head-hunting among the hostile tribes, and declare that the latter have no right to attack, as they have done, the peaceable tribes; on the contrary these latter have just cause for war on the Zambales and Negrillos.  To them the question is, whether it is, in the circumstances, expedient and necessary for the Spaniards to attack these ferocious peoples.  The fathers consider this war as justifiable; the enemy should be destroyed, and all who are taken captive should be enslaved for a specified time.  The Jesuits consider that the first step is to ascertain who are guilty of inciting the outrages which the Zambales have committed against both the Spaniards and their Indian allies—­whether all of that people, or only a few; whether their chiefs,