They never imposed a pecuniary fine, nor punished by the confiscation of goods, because they said that to do so, and at the same time to allow the delinquent to live, was not to rid the commonwealth of an evil, but only to deprive an evil doer of his property, leaving him with liberty to do more evil. If any curaca rebelled (a crime which, was more severely punished than any other by the Yncas), or committed any other fault which, was worthy of death, even if that punishment was inflicted upon him, his successor was not deprived of his right; but received the command with a warning not to do anything to merit a similar fate. Pedro de Cieza de Leon, in chapter xxi, has the following passage on this subject:

“They also adopted another plan in order that they might not be detested by the natives. They never deprived the native chiefs of their inheritance; and if any of them was so guilty as to merit deprivation, the vacant office was given to his sons or brothers, and all men were ordered to obey them.”

So far is from Pedro de Cieza. The same rule was observed in their wars, the native chiefs of the provinces whence troops were drawn never being deprived of the command of them. They were left in the enjoyment of their appointments, even if they were masters of the camp, while commanders of the blood royal were placed over them.