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 if 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, or certain lawless individuals. When this shall be known, then the guilty, and they only should be punished. If the tribe as a whole, or their chiefs, are responsible, war against them is justifiable; but it should be waged with all possible mercy
