Even if I am unsure if I am to believe your characterization, I think you brought up a large number of interesting counterpoints, which really deserves wider discussion.

For now I wanted to focus on the highlighted item. Ever since I read Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, it has been my impression that Spanish legal system was not very objective or fair, compared to the British. Of course Smith was not an impartial observer.

But there are still aspects which needs explaining. Smith talked about this in context of business and trade. A British merchant or craftsman had stronger rights than a Spanish as even an Aristocrat could get rules against in court. The law was the same for all. E.g. for failing to pay for commissioned work.

Here it was remarked on the significance of use of lawyers to represent the accused as well as juries. Both which was lacking in Spain to my knowledge, leading to a weaker position for the accused.

In fact I seem to remember that it was a problem for British authorities to make punishments harsher, because juries out of sympathy just started acquitting more people.

I don’t know much about Spanish legal traditions, so it would have been interesting to hear your thoughts on this.