tural conditions of the historic moment, attribute all evils, disorders and social revolutions, purely and simply to heteredoxy. Thereupon they proceed in approved theological-dogmatic style to establish the evidence of Ferrer's guilt: the insurrection was caused by the spirit of irreligion; Ferrer was a disseminator of irreligion, therefore Ferrer must be the cause of the insurrection. And this theological thesis was of course religiously accepted by the good believers who are still in the majority in Spain, and who are always ready to believe in the absurd (Credo quia absurdum). The author, with professional sagacity, points out the "legendary" character of the accusation which, as in all myths, starts with the turning of a well-known person into the symbol of a certain quality, and then attributing to that person all sorts of adventures well chosen to throw that quality into relief. Ferrer had become the symbol of hatred against the Catholic Church, therefore (in the minds of the Catholics) he must be the instigator of the burning of convents, the killing of priests, etc. Such was the genesis of the accusation against Ferrer.
But to come back to the historical events; it was at this juncture that the Supreme Public Prosecutor, Senor Ugarte, was sent to Barcelona by the Government to investigate the recent troubles. It is noteworthy that Senor Ugarte was a well-known fervent clerical member of many clerical associations which helped him to power, and a protege of General Azcarraga, of pious fame. As soon as he came, he made it known through the Catholic papers that he would hear with pleasure all the citizens who had any information to impart or declarations to make. But it seems that the only ones to answer the invitation were the priests, monks, Carlists, Integrists and, in one word, all the different sorts of clericals. The people of different opinion either did not want to impart any information to Senor
