120 Law and Morality Abroad (to ca. ad 1550)that the pope “has power in temporal things insofar as they concern spiri-
tual things.” It was also within the pope’s discretion to entrust evangeliza-
tion programs to single states exclusively— and that this can even include a
monopoly on trading rights “if this is con ve nient for the spreading of the
Christian religion.” He went on to hold that monopoly trading rights in the
allocated areas were necessary for the orderly progress of missionary activ-
ity and therefore were legally valid. Moreover, popes had the power to “dis-
tribute” the territories of Saracens to Christian princes “for the preservation
of peace and the progress of religion.” Th at meant that popes had the power
to “make new princes for the furtherance of religion... in places where there
had never before been any Christian princes.” At the same time, though,
Vitoria introduced an important cautionary note. If the Indians, of their own
free will, allowed missionaries to come among them and preach, then there
would be no need, under the circumstances, for the Spanish to depose their
rulers and conquer their kingdoms.
Not surprisingly, the king of Spain, Charles I (better known in his capac-
ity as Holy Roman Emperor Charles V), was displeased to fi nd his policies
publicly questioned by self- appointed critics. He ordered the prior of San
Esteban monastery to stop his charges from debating this sensitive matter.
At the same time, though, Charles revealed that doubts were gnawing
away even in governmental circles. In 1550, he ordered a suspension of all
conquest expeditions and the convening of a special panel of theologians
and advisers, to determine the criteria for the lawful waging of wars of
conquest.
Th ese deliberations took place in Valladolid in 1550– 51—and turned into
a momentous debate over issues of international law. Th ere were fourteen
judges. Vitoria was not one of them, as he had died four years earlier. But his
former student and assistant (and future professorial successor) Domingo
de Soto was the leading member. Soto had left the academic life in the 1540s
for royal ser vice, representing Spain at the Council of Trent and serving as
confessor to Charles V. By this time, though, he was back at Salamanca. His
fellow panel members were three other prominent ecclesiastics and ten gov-
ernment offi cials.
Of greater prominence than the panel members were the opposing advo-
cates. Arguing against the policy of conquest in the ser vice of conversion
was a Dominican bishop named Bartolomé de las Casas. He was the most