ANTONIO PEREZ AND PHILIP THE SECOND.
ALTHOUGH forgotten save by the historical student, the case of Antonio Perez, Secretary of State to Philip the Second of Spain, was at one time an occurrence in all men's mouths, and is in itself a singular example of crime in high places and of reverse of fortune, as well as of the power which patience and intellectual ability, though rather of the ser- pent character, possessed to thwart the Monarch of " Spain with both the Indies," even in the sixteenth century. The case was shortly this.
Antonio Perez was a natural son of Gonzalo Perez, a Secretary of State both to Charles the Fifth and Philip the Second. He had been legiti- matized by a diploma of the Emperor; was early trained to public busi- ness ; and rose, while yet a young man, to the post his father had filled. He was an active and influential member of the party opposed to the Duke of Alva ; and was greatly in the confidence of the King, so far as a monarch like Philip the Second trusted any one. To gain the favour of the King, he betrayed his own party, and was thus left without other support than the Royal countenance, which deserted him at his utmost need, after he had perpetrated a crime, of which Philip, according to Perez, was the instigator. The celebrated Don John of Austria was a member of the same party in the court as Perez ; but being suspected, upon good grounds, of entertaining ambitious projects in his government of the Netherlands, Perez undertook to fathom them, at the King's desire. For this purpose, he entered into a correspondence with Don John's secretary, Escovedo, pretending dissatisfaction with Philip ; drew him on to unfold his plans, and most probably exaggerated them ; in consequence of which, when Escovedo came to Madrid on business, he was assassinated in the streets. Perez was immediately accused by the family of Escovedo, sup- ported by his former political friend, but now his enemy and his rival, the Minister Vasquez ; and Philip, though seeming to uphold him at first, gradually abandoned him to his enemies, till he sank through various stages, from mere surveillance, to close imprisonment, chains, and tor- ture. Sentence of death was impending over him ; but he managed to escape into Arragon, and claimed the privilege of the fueros of that inde- pendent people ; which was in fact beginning the trial anew, before an unbiased tribunal. Finding all compromise hopeless with the Court, he drew up a Memorial or statement of his case, for the tribunal, in which he charged Philip as partieeps crintinis, or rather commander of the offence, inserting the Royal letters which he had retained. The result was an acquittal : but Philip, determined not to be baffled, ordered the In- quisition to claim Perez as a heretic ; grounding the charge on some loose and impatient expressions which it was said he had made use of. At this alleged violation of their liberties, the people, headed by some nobles, rose in revolt, and rescued Perez from the clutches of the Holy Office ; but at the expense of their own freedom. A Royal army invaded Arragon; the principal nobility, with many others, were executed under colour of this rebellion; and the fueros virtually destroyed. Perez, however, escaped into France ; was patronized by Henry the Fourth ; and subsequently going to London, published there, under the name of Raphael Peregrino, his once celebrated Relaciones; which contained a no doubt highly coloured account of his own persecutions and of Philip's conduct, and was immediately circulated through the reading parts of Europe. This was the last action of the once powerful Spanish Minister. His restless, in- triguing, self-confident spirit, lost him friends almost as fast as his insinuating qualities procured them. He lived twenty years after his escape ; surviving his old master Philip, Queen Elizabeth, and Henry the Fourth, and dying at Paris in a state of poverty, after having vainly sought permission to return to Spain. It may assist the reader in his contemporary comparisons to give the leading epochs of the life of Perez. He was born about 1540 ; Escovedo was assassinated in 1578, and Perez arrested in 1579; he suffered disgrace and imprisonment about a dozen years, escaping from Castile into Arragon in 1590, and the following year flying into France; in 1594 he published his Relaciones in Lon- don; and in 1611 he died.
The fact of Escovedo's murder in the streets of the capital by order of the King and the contrivance of his Minister is clear enough. The motives which caused it are more obscure. However able or trusted by his master Escovedo might be, it does not seem that any permanent advan- tage would follow from his death ; since Don John was known to have hankered after an empire to be conquered by the arms of Spain, but re- tained by himself, before Escovedo was in his employ ; and his health was sinking at the time of the murder—indeed he died within a few months of it. We therefore agree in conclusion with M. Mignet, that Perez was the real author of the crime, and secretly instigated Philip. The motives of Perez are attributed to fear and personal enmity. Perez was engaged in an intrigue with the Princess of Eboli, who is said to have been one of the King's favourites. The fact of her connexion with Perez was generally suspected by her friends, who were highly indignant ; but one day Es- covedo surprised them together in an unequivocal position, and exclaimed,
_ " This is what cannot be suffered any longer, and I am obliged to give an account of it to the King." Here was surely enough to provoke the
vengeance of a proud Spanish woman of the sixteenth century, and of Perez, without attributing it to his fears of the King's jealousy, or ascrib- ing the subsequent persecution of his Minister to the same cause. It may have been so ; but there are very slender proofs of Philip's intrigue with the Princess, and none at all that jealousy instigated his feelings towards Perez. It is a maxim in the school of politicians which perpetrates such crimes, that an inferior possessing so fearful a secret must perish ; and Philip, when the deed was done, might see its uselessness, suspect Perez of exaggerating Escovedo's treason, and feel that he had been ensnared. The slightest of these motives is sufficient to account for the Minister's downfal : the wonder is, that the King did not silence him at an early stage of the business, by a stretch of power, or some shorter method.
The published works of Perez contain all that he has to say in de- fence of himself, or against Philip and Escovedo : but, however curious for their matter, and a sort of vivacious elegance of style, they are too obviously onesided to be received as proofs. Nor would M. Mignet have undertaken a work upon the subject from them alone ; but in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs there is a copy of the whole process against Perez in Castile. In the Royal Library there are seventeen volumes of Llorente's upon the "Acts of the Inquisition in Spain," in which are contained the original documents, pamphlets, and so forth, relating to the proceedings against Perez in Arragon. The State Paper Office, the Royal Library, and some collections in Spain, have yielded important information upon particular incidents, especially in the career of Perez after his escape ; so that, as far as materials go, we are not likely to have further light thrown upon the subject than M. Mignet has possessed for the composi- tion of this volume. Perhaps a more attractive narrative might have been made. The execution is able and exhaustive ; the particular occur- rences are presented in order, and examined with the fulness of a legal inquiry without its formality and pettiness; whilst the history connected with the subject—as the revolt in Arragon—is written with breadth. At the same time, it wants something of vigour and rapidity ; and, considering the remoteness and obscurity of the subject, the treatment is rather too detailed, unless it had been animated by more of dramatic vigour. M. Mignet has himself a thorough knowledge of the difference between those times and ours, and perhaps of the difference between Spain and other countries ; but the work is not pervaded by this spirit— though attention is called to occasional instances. The reader in conse- quence scarcely feels the differences, unless they stare him in the face in some quotation. For example, the idea of a King and a Secretary of State concocting a secret murder is strange to a person who does not transport himself " beyond the ignorant present." But in those days as- sassination was a common practice in Europe : in Venice it was a quasi- judicial proceeding,—that is, the case of a man at liberty was discussed, and if it went against him he was secretly smitten. The instances of Rizzio, Darnley, and the Gowrie conspiracy, show how familiar violence was to the minds of men of rank even in Scotland; and Elizabeth would have covertly removed Mary, could she have found instruments. Zealots, M. Mignet remarks, justified the act, sometimes in favour of kings, sometimes of the people ; though he should rather have said Jesuits. At all events in Spain, the casuistry of Rome was ready to justify such deeds for kings. Perez publishes this defence of his part of the murder, as coming from Diego de Chaves, Philip's confessor.
" ' According to my view of the laws, the secular prince, who has power over the life of his inferiors or subjects, even as he can deprive them of it for a just cause and by judgment in form, may also do so without all this, since superfluous forms and all judicial proceedings are no laws for him who may dispense with them. It is, consequently, no crime on the part of a subject who, by a sove- reignorder, 'has put another subject to death. We must believe that the prince has given this order for a just cause, even as the law always presumes that there is one in all the actions of the sovereign.' "
The state of the Spanish mind upon the subject of murder may also be considered. See how coolly the question is discussed by the servants of Perez. It is from the evidence of Antonio Enriquez, a page, and subse- quently an approver.
"'Being one day at leisure in the apartment of Diego Martinez, the major- domo of Antonio Perez, Diego asked me whether I knew any of my countrymen who would be willing to stab a person with a knife. He added, that it would be profitable and well paid, and that, even if death resulted from the blow, it was of no consequence. I answered, that I would speak of it to a mule-driver of my ac- quaintance; as in fact I did, and the muleteer undertook the affair. After- wards, Diego Martinez gave me to understand, with rather puzzling reasons, that it would be necessary to kill the individual, who was a person of importance, and that Antonio Perez would approve of it: on this I remarked, that it was not an affair to be trusted to a muleteer, but to'talons of a better stamp. Then Diego Martinez added, that the person to be killed often came to the house; and that, if we could put anything in -his food or drink, we must do so, because that was the best, surest, and most secret means. It was resolved to have recourse to this method, and with all despatch.' "
Something was concocted for poison; and the witness proceeds.
" 'A few days after, Martinez told me he had in his possession a certain liquid fit to be given to drink; adding, that Antonio Perez, the Secretary, would trust nobody but me, and that, during a repast which our master was to give in the country, I should only have to pour out some of this water for Escovedo, who would be among the guests, and for whom the preceding experiments had already been tried. I answered, that unless my master himself gave me the order, I would not have a hand in poisoning anybody. Then the Secretary, Antonio Perez, called use one evening in the country and told me bow important it was for him that the Secretary Escovedo should die; that I must not fail to give him the beverage in question on the day of the dinner; and that I was to contrive the execution of it with Martinez; adding, moreover, good promises and offers of pro- tection in whatever might concern me.' " The attempts at poison failed, however; the victim was waylaid by several assassins, and slain by a single thrust of a sword. The reader of the Spanish novels will remember the universal corrup- tion of the Ministers which is there satirized ; and, strange as it looks, it seems to have fallen short of the fact. Once in disgrace, all the evil that could be told of the fallen Minister was freely spoken, and an inquiry into his "fidelity and integrity" took place. " The result of this first inquiry was very disadvantageous to Perez; his cor- ruption was evident. Rodrigo Vasquez took the deposition of the following con- siderable persons, all worthy of credit: Louis de Overa, Knight of St. James; Don Juan Gaeten, Major-domo to the Archduke Albert; Count Fuensalid•' Don Pedro de Velasco, Captain of the King's Spanish Guard; Don Fernando de Solis, and Don Rodrigo de Castro, the Archbishop of Seville. The venality of Perez, his extravagant luxury, and his close intimacy with the Princess of Eboli, were made manifest by their depositions. It was proved that his father, Gonzalo Perez, had left him nothing at his death; and that he possessed a fortune and an establishment out of all proportion with the emoluments of his office. ' He has displayed more pomp,' says. Count de Fuensalida, ' than any Grandee of S*n; he has so many valets in his service, that on the days when he did not dine at Court, they served him with as much ostentation of lacqueys and silver plate as if he enjoyed an income of a thousand comics . . . One day, going to Toledo, I met him at Torrejon with coaches, car- riages, and litters, and accompanied by numerous followers, on foot and horseback.' Don Pedro de Velasco, Captain of the Spanish Guard, says that Perez had had his chamber furnished like the King's; he estimated his household furniture at 140,000 ducats (the intrinsic value of ihe ducat being 8 francs 94 centimes,) and asserted that his income was as much. The Archbishop of Seville, with more moderation, reckoned his annual expenditure at from 15,000 to 20,000 ducats; and even this was enormous. To amass this fortune, support this establishment, maintain this luxury, and gamble to such an extent, Perez had abused his posi- tion and sold his favour. Louis de Overa deposed, that he himself had given Perez 4,000 ducats for the commission of Commander of the Italian Infantry, granted to Pierre de Medicis; that Andre Doria gave him annually a considerable gratuity, that he might support his interests with the King; that the princes of Italy, and all those who aspired to anything in Spain, acted with the same gene- rosity towards him, and made him presents, that he might favour them; and that lie had heard several Italians say, they would rather give Perez what they had to spend in that court in the pursuit of their pretensions, than remain there a long time doing nothing, considering themselves very lucky in knowing the means to succeed."
Previous page
