HISTORY OF MEXICO. 



359 



tion, and the vigilance of the fovereigns, kept the magis- 

 trates in check ; and that care which was taken to fupply 

 them with every neceffary at the expenfe of the king, 

 rendered any mifconduft in them inexcufable. Thofe af- 

 femblies which were held before the fovereign every 

 twenty days, and particularly that general affembly of 

 the whole of themagiftrates every eighty days, to termi- 

 nate all caufes then depending, befides avoiding all the 

 evils occafioned by the delay of juftice, were productive 

 of a communication between the magiftrates of their dif- 

 ferent lights, made the king know thofe whom he had 

 conftituted the delegates of his authority, innocence had 

 more refources, and the form of judicature rendered juf- 

 tice ft i 1 1 more refpedlable. That law which permitted an 

 appeal from the Tribunal of the Tlacatecatl to that of 

 the Cihuacoatl in criminal but not in civil caufes, evinces 

 that the Mexicans, refpe&ing the laws of humanity, dif- 

 cerned, that there was more required to prove a man 

 guilty of fuch crimes than to declare him a debtor. In 

 the trials of the Mexicans they admitted no other proof 

 againft: the accufed than that of witneffes. They never 

 made ufe of the torture to make the innocent declare 

 thpmfelves guilty, noc thofe barbarous proofs by duel, 

 fire, boiling-water, and fuch like,.~that were formerly fo 

 frequent-in Europe, antl .which' we now read of in hifto- 

 ry with amazement and abhorrence. " There will be 

 " no perfon who will not wonder," fays Montefquieu, 

 fpeaking on this fubjecl:, " that our anceftors made the 

 fame, fortune, and property of citizens depend on cer- 

 " tain things which belonged lefs to law and reafou 

 " than to chance, and that they mould have ufed con- 

 " ftantly thofe proofs which were neither connected 

 " with innocence nor guilt ; what we now fay of thofe 



" proofs 



