Cajas de comunidad: the corporate treasuries of the Indian towns
Indian towns in the Spanish Indies held property in common — land worked collectively, rents, and capital lent at interest — kept in a locked chest whose keys were divided, audited by a judge of the Audiencia and legally shielded from the crown's own emergencies. Thirty-seven laws in the code govern it. They also record the corregidores robbing it, and make that theft a capital crime.
Why this wins its question: English-language accounts of colonial Spanish America rarely mention that Indian towns were corporate property-holders with statutory treasuries, and where the caja de comunidad appears at all it is a line in a study of tribute. The código gives it thirty-seven laws, and they are quoted here from a digitised printing opened page by page, each with the monarch, place and date the compilers set in the margin: a locked chest with divided keys, four prescribed account books, capital lent at censo under the Acuerdo of the Audiencia, an oidor as privative judge and the fiscal as the communities' advocate, and a clause refusing the crown's own emergencies access to the money. The same título supplies the cost — the labour levy that funded it, the idolatry-extirpation missions charged to it, and the crown's own finding that the corregidores were robbing it more openly every year.
Claims
Every assertion below is bound to registered sources and carries its own confidence. Weight them; do not treat the page as uniformly authoritative.
The institution has its own título in the code: Recopilación libro VI, título 4, "De las Caxas de censos, y bienes de comunidad, y su administracion", running to thirty-seven laws. Its opening law, margin "D. Felipe III allí á 13 de Febrero de 1619. D. Felipe IIII allí á 16 de Abril de 1639", begins by conceding the problem rather than the achievement — the crown had understood "que se cometian algunos excesos, y desórdenes en la administracion de censos, y bienes comunes de los Indios" and had issued diverse orders over time, the matter being "de tanta gravedad, que necesita de especial recomendacion".
What the chest held was corporate, not royal, property. Ley ij directs that into the Caxa de Comunidad enter "todos los bienes, que qualquier Pueblo tuviere, para que se gaste el precio en beneficio comun de todos", along with the writings and receipts; ley iij makes it an offence, punishable by confiscation and the fourfold penalty, for any minister to introduce into these chests gold, silver, reales, bars, jewels or quantities "que no pertenezcan á los Indios en comun"; and ley iiij requires the proceeds to be kept in a separate arca placed "en fortaleza, seguridad, y grandeza".
The funds were not idle capital but a lending institution. Ley v orders the oidor, fiscal and royal officials to keep watch on the silver held in each chest and, where the sum is considerable, to invest it "en nuevos, y seguros censos, para que no esté ociosa", each community buying with its own funds and taking its own rents; leyes vj and vij govern what happens when a censo is redeemed, requiring public pregones, written memorials of the persons and properties offered as security, and a decision taken in the Acuerdo of the Audiencia rather than by one official.
The strongest clause is the one that shields the money from the crown's own needs. Ley x, "Que no se pueda sacar hacienda de las Caxas de Comunidad" (Philip III, Madrid, 13 February 1619), forbids drawing money from these chests in any case "pensado, ó no pensado, extraordinario, ó fortuito", by way of loan, and specifically for paying guards, public buildings and ayudas de costa, "ni otras qualesquiér necesidades que sean, ó se llamen públicas, pues ninguna puede haber mas universal, y privilegiada, que la de los Indios cuya es esta hacienda". A copy of the law itself was to be kept inside the chest.
Custody was deliberately divided and audited. The chest had multiple keyholders — ley xxx speaks of "todos los Ministros, que han de tener las llaves", who must be present for a payment to take effect — and four separate account books were prescribed by ley viiij (Philip III, Madrid, 13 February 1619): one for income and expenditure by items, one inventory of all the censos with the debtor communities and their terms and the escribano before whom each was granted, one separate account per community, and one recording what was collected on each community's behalf, so that community money "no se mezcle, ponga, ni confunda otra ninguna cuenta de qualquier género y calidad que sea".
Where the capital came from is stated without euphemism. Ley xxxj, margin "D. Felipe II en Lisboa á 4 de Junio de 1582", records the order that in New Spain "cada Indio haya de labrar diez brazas de tierra al año para maiz, en lugar del real y medio, que pagaban á sus Comunidades", commands that this continue, warns that caciques and principales be relieved somewhat, and directs that the same be introduced in Peru. The community endowment rested on a labour levy on the community's own members.
Spending was legally confined to the members' benefit, with tribute relief named first. Ley xiiij — Philip II at the Bosque de Segovia, 13 November 1565, and at San Lorenzo, 20 August 1598 — directs that the plate arising from these goods and rents be spent "solamente en lo que se dirigiere al descanso, y alivio de los Indios, y convirtiere en su provecho y utilidad", including help in paying their tributes where needed, and that nothing be taken out "si no fuere de consentimiento de los Indios". Ley xvij confines such relief to the interest, "sin tocar en la suerte principal", except in a grave and urgent case.
The same fund was also opened to purposes the community had not chosen, and the law that does it sits four pages from the law protecting them. Ley xv (Philip III, Madrid, 17 March 1619) allows the costs of "Misiones para extirpar, y desarraygar la idolatría de los Indios, Casas de reclusion, y Seminarios de los hijos de los Caciques" to be drawn from the caja of the city where the expense falls, requiring only that the amounts be moderate and that no salaries or ayudas de costa be assigned from them. Community property could be spent on suppressing the community's own religion.
Smaller leakage is legislated against by name. Ley xvj (Philip II, Toledo, 16 February 1561) records that doctrineros, clerics and religious "suelen gastar algunas cantidades de las Caxas de Comunidad de sus Pueblos en pinturas, comidas, y fiestas", and forbids it without licence of the viceroy and Audiencia; ley xviij (Philip III, Valladolid, 6 April 1601) records Indians selling and drawing down the censos and goods of their communities to pay tributes and arrears "sin hacer distincion entre principal, y réditos", to the ruin of the common purse.
The heaviest counterweight is the crown's own account of the officers it appointed. Ley xxxiiij (Philip III, Ventosilla, 26 October 1615) states that although the trading and dealing of the corregidores of Indian towns with the community chests was already prohibited, "no solo se dexa de executar, sino prosigue el exceso á mayor aumento, libertad y publicidad", and that the residencias produce no reform "porque como los sucesores vienen á continuar lo mismo, no tratan de averiguar la verdad, y satisfacer á los Indios; ántes procuran ocultarla, esperando el mismo suceso en sus residencias".
The response was to reclassify the offence. Ley xxxv (Philip IV, Madrid, 10 June 1621) orders that suits over shortfalls in the caxas and community goods against corregidores de Indios "se han de seguir en juicio criminal, hasta pena de la vida, segun la calidad del hurto", on the reasoning that "la substraccion, que los Corregidores hacen del dinero público, y de Comunidades, es propiamente hurto, y como tal se ha de castigar". A capital penalty for embezzling indigenous community funds is on the statute book.
Enforcement was given to a judge of standing, not to the local officer. Ley xx (17 November 1629 and 16 April 1636) puts the collection and oversight of these goods, censos and chests in the charge of one oidor in each Audiencia, removable at the viceroy's or president's discretion; ley xxj gives that oidor first-instance jurisdiction over all civil, executive and criminal suits touching the property, "con inhibicion á las demas Justicias", with appeal to the Audiencia; and ley xxij (Philip III, Madrid, 13 February 1619) makes the fiscal the communities' defender and advocate in every suit over their funds.
What this evidence can and cannot carry should be said plainly. The Recopilación is codified law: it shows what was ordered, by which monarch and on what date, and — through its prohibitions — which abuses the crown thought worth legislating against twice. It does not show how much money any community actually held, how often the capital penalty of ley xxxv was imposed, or what the chests were worth by the eighteenth century. No claim here should be read as a measure of outcomes.