A defense of the Padroado Real in connection with the dispute over the "Chinese rites, and the arrest of Cardinal de Tournon at Macao."--OCLC note from library of C.R. Boxer.

Although Fr. Chan cites the Grande Enciclopedia Portuguesa e Brasilera below, the catalog note from the National Library of Australia reads:

This man probably never existed being possibly a name used by the Jesuits to set forth their point of view in the disputes promoted by Cardinal Tournon in China. The Jesuit General did not wish further controversy, hoping that the other orders would likewise leave matters in abeyance. However this was not to be, and the Jesuits felt that something should be done, hence this book which was printed from wood block xylographic process probably at Macao, and not Hiang Xan, the Chinese district near Macao. See also Vera ac Sineera Historic Actrum 1707 in Braga Books in N.L.A.

----------------------------------

Citation: Albert Chan, S.J., Chinese books and documents in the Jesuit Archives in Rome, p.465-468.
Jap-Sin II, 173

Relacion sincera y verdadera de la justa defension de las Regalias y privilegios de la Corona de Portugal en la Ciudad de Macao. Escrita por el Doctor D. Felix Leal de Castro en la misma Ciudad. A 4 de Febrero de 1712.
Spanish book written on bamboo paper.
One volume with a paper cover.
Printed in Xiangshan district 香山 (Guangdong) in 1712.
Forty-nine folios, in addition to the back and title page. 23 x 16 cm.

According to the Grande Enciclopedia Portuguesa e Brasilera, vol. 6, the author was a Doctor of Law from the University of Coimbra, who lived at the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century. For a number of years he resided in Macao, where he published the Relacion sincera. The Encyclopedia Portuguesa Illustrada Diccionario Universal (Porto, no date), vol. II, p. 647, says that he resided in Goa for many years where he published his book in Spanish, and this was printed in Macau in 1712.
This book begins with the arrival of the Papal Legate Maillard de Tournon in Macao in 1705, his expulsion from Peking, his detention by order of the K’ang-hsi emperor in Macao (30 June 1707) and the subsequent events. It is divided into fifteen sections, giving a fairly detailed account of the story. As a loyal subject of the king of Portugal he naturally defended the jurisdiction of the crown. The book begins, thus:

Having read a relation by an anonymous author under the title: Breve Relación de las violencias, que tiene padecidas el convento del Orden de San Agustín de la Ciudad de Macao, por la obediencia alla Silla Apostólica en su Legado [i.e., A brief account on the violence inflicted on the convent of the Order of St. Augustine in the city of Macao, as a result of its obedience to the Holy See in its Legate]. I deemed it necessary to apply the antidote right away against this poison before it affects the body of the Catholic Church, which might cause universal scandals. It might also bring great infamy to the Portuguese nation. It could do serious damage to people, primarily to the Viceroy and the high officials of the East Indies, to the bishop and the Captain General of Macao.

We do not know the author of the Breve Relación against whom de Castro wrote this tract in defense of the Portuguese crown. It was published in Macao on 17 January 1712. A month later de Castro published his paper in which he focused on the main points of the accusations. The following are some of these points:

1. When de Tournon arrived in Macao on 2 April 1705, he did not want to enter the city but went to stay with the Jesuits on a small island nearby. He then handed to the bishop of Macao a Brief of Pope Clement XI, dated 30 January 1702, which showed that he had no jurisdiction over the bishop or the city of Macao, but rather only over the missioners and the newly converted in China (pp. 1–3).
2. With regard to the Brief given on 30 October 1706, in which the Pope disapproved the actions of the Archbishop of Goa against the jurisdiction of de Tournon, it is said that in a letter of the said Archbishop, dated 4 May 1711, he confessed that up to then he had not received any brief from the Pope concerning the jurisdiction of the Papal Legate. Hence the conclusion was that either the brief is not genuine or it might have been given in a moment of necessity, namely, to console the Legate (pp. 3–5).
3. In 1707 the bishop of Macao had already received replies from the Viceroy and from the Archbishop of India to the effect that the Papal Legate had the intention of exercising his jurisdiction in the city and diocese of Macao and in other bishoprics of the Portuguese crown without first presenting the Papal Bulls. The king, however, objected to this. In Goa a meeting among jurists and theologians was held and they were of the opinion that the Papal Legate should by no means be allowed to use his jurisdiction under any circumstances. In May 1706 the Viceroy of India ordered the bishops of Macao, China and Malacca, and also the Captain General not to allow the Papal Legate to exercise his jurisdiction (pp. 5–9).
4. On 30 June 1707 the Papal Legate arrived in Macao, exiled by the Chinese emperor. He told the Captain General that if he, the Captain General, had orders from the Viceroy of India, he had the contrary orders from the Pope and the latter must obey these. On 6 July 1707 the Papal Legate excommunicated the Jesuit provincial Francisco Pinto (He Dajing 何大經, 1662–1731). That same day the Captain General had a talk with Fray Constantino, Prior of the Convent of St. Augustine. The latter denied that the orders came directly from the king and attributed them to the Viceroy. He therefore insisted that he was obliged to obey the Papal Legate. As a result the Captain General put guards around the Augustinian convent and entrance was allowed only to those who had permission from the Captain General (pp. 9–17).
5. The Augustinian Prior was regarded as disloyal to the Portuguese crown because he had received the Papal Legate to his convent. It was declared that all who disobeyed the royal edict would be considered unfaithful to the crown and would be subjected to imprisonment and deportation to Goa (pp. 17–18).
6. The Augustinian Prior was given a choice: to serve in prison or to leave for Goa. He chose the second and left for Goa in January 1708. In Goa he did all he could to help the Papal Legate to exercise his jurisdiction, but without result (pp. 18–20).
7. Three letters from the king of Portugal (April 1709) to the Jesuit, Dominican and Augustinian provincials telling them to send back their subjects who had recognized the jurisdiction of the Papal Legate (pp. 20–22).
8. A ship from Manila arrived in Macao in November 1708, which brought the news that the Papal Legate had been promoted to the cardinalate. There was a consultation between the Captain General and the Senate and it was decided to remove the restriction on the Papal Legate. Honorary guards were stationed at the Augustinian convent and visitors were free to go in and out. The free entrance to the convent brought many visitors to the Papal Legate, especially non-Portuguese missioners who had been expelled from China because they had refused to take the piao 票 , as ordered by the emperor. This strengthened the jurisdiction of the Papal Legate. It is to be noted that when the Chinese Mandarins noticed the withdrawal of the Portuguese guards from the Convent, they put Chinese guards in their place and restricted the number of visitors to the Papal Legate. Later when the Chinese emperor had been fully informed about the Papal Legate’s death, he ordered the removal of the guards. Meanwhile Spanish and Portuguese religious who were in favor of the Papal Legate, resisted the authority of the Captain General and the convent was once more being guarded by soldiers. The religious were taken to a fort and eventually were sent to Goa (pp. 22–32).
9. On 26 July 1710 a ship arrived in Macao from Goa with the order of the Viceroy of Goa which forbade obedience to the Papal Legate. It also brought the news that an order had been received from the king, dated 22 March 1708, that the bishop of Macao should on no account submit to the jurisdiction and the orders of the Papal Legate, which he made while staying either in Macao or in China. At the time these orders reached Macao, however, the Papal Legate had already died (8 June 1710) (pp. 32–34).
10. The differences between the Augustinians and the Jesuits in Macao. (1) The Augustinians obeyed one sole Brief of the Pope which did not establish clearly the jurisdiction of the Papal Legate in Macao and they disobeyed many Bulls given by many popes to the Portuguese king. The Jesuits, however, did the opposite. (2) The Augustinians defended a magistrate who had proclaimed an official of the Holy Office, while the Jesuits defended the official of the Holy Office who had been declared as a criminal by the magistrate (pp. 34–37).

For the mission of de Tournon to Peking, see Francis Rouleau, S.J., “Maillard de Tournon, Papal Legate at the Court of Peking, the first imperial audience (31 December 1705),” AHSI 31 (1962), pp. 264–323:

Unhappily, the glowing enthusiasm that characterized its beginnings was short-lived. Within a matter of months the royal benevolence gradually changed to suspicion, then to acts of irate truculence, climaxed at last by what amounted to a curt dismissal from the country. With anguished soul and ailing in body the Legate set out from Peking (28 August 1706) on the long, tedious journey southward by canal boat, first to Nanking for a halt of three months, then down to the terminal port of Canton where at rare intervals a French or English vessel could be expected for the China merchant trade. But journey’s end was the prelude to tragedy, not embarcation. Scarcely had the disgraced prelate reached Canton than he was overtaken by a fresh imperial mandate that, instead of departure for Europe, now ordered his transfer to the nearly Portuguese enclave of Macao. He was to be detained there as “hostage” (Tournon’s own expression) until two Jesuit messengers returned from Rome. (p. 265)

De Castro’s account gives a fairly detailed picture of the Papal Legate in Macao after his return from Peking in 1707 and thereafter. If we combine Rouleau’s article with this book we have a substantial outline of the mission of de Tournon in China. De Castro in his paper, however, kept silent about the death of the Papal Legate. The question was perhaps too delicate to be mentioned since it necessarily involved the Holy See, and furthermore, in Rome there was Cardinal Ganganelli, an uncle of the Papal Legate. “15 de Janeiro de 1712. Deste dia em diante ficou o convento de Santo Agostinho e a sua igreja sob a administração do Ordinário, pela ausência dos padres daquele convento, que foram presso para Goa à ordem do Vice-Rei, e o motivo porque foram presos foi o das controvérsias do patriarcha de Antioquia, a quem sempre estes tão sòmente prestaram obediência, o que tudo consta com exacção na Relação impressa em Roma, por ordem do cardenal Ganganelli, tio do dito patriarcha.” (Colleção de varios factos, etc.); cf. Manuel Texeira, Macau e a sua Diocese, vol. III, (Macau, 1956–1961).

Cf. Streit, BM 7:184 (no. 2766); Boxer, pp. 207–208 (no. 9), 210 (photocopy of title page); Paul Pelliot, “La Brevis Relatio,” T’oung Pao 23 (1924), p. 359, n. 3.

Local access Digital Archives ARSI Jap-Sin I-IV folder [Jap-Sin II, 173]

Online at ARSI via Internet Archive.