Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and Republican/Volume 1/Book 3/Chapter 5
CHAPTER V.
1824—1829.
We must pause a moment over the past history of Mexico, for the portion we now approach has few of the elements either of union or patriotism which characterized the early struggles for national independence. The revolutionary war had merited and received the commendation of freemen throughout the world. The prolonged struggle exhibited powers of endurance, an unceasing resolution, and a determination to throw off European thraldom, which won the respect of those northern powers on this continent who were most concerned in securing to themselves a republican neighborhood. But, as soon as the dominion of Spain was crushed, the domestic quarrels of Mexico began, and we have already shown that in the three parties formed in the first congress, were to be found the germs of all the feuds that have since vexed the republic or impeded its successful progress towards national grandeur. After the country had been so long a battle field, it was perhaps difficult immediately to accustom the people to civil rule or to free them from the baleful influence which military glory is apt to throw round individuals who render important services to their country in war. Even in our own union, where the ballot box instead of the bayonet has always controled elections, and where loyalty to the constitution would blast the effort of ambitious men to place a conqueror in power by any other means than that of peaceful election, we constantly find how difficult it is to screen the people's eyes from the bewildering glare of military glory. What then could we expect from a country in which the self-relying, self-ruling, civil idea never existed at any period of its previous history? The revolution of the North American colonies was not designed to obtain liberty, for they were already free; but it was excited and successfully pursued in order to prevent the burthensome and aggressive impositions of England which would have curtailed that freedom, and, reduced us to colonial dependence as well as royal or ministerial dictation. Mexico, on the contrary, had never been free. Spain regarded the country as a mine which was to be diligently wrought, and the masses of the people as acclimated serfs whose services were the legitimate perquisites of a court and aristocracy beyond the sea. There had been, among the kings and viceroys who controlled the destinies of New Spain, men who were swayed by just and amiable views of colonial government; but the majority considered Mexico as a speculation rather than an infant colony whose progressive destiny it was their duty to foster with all the care and wisdom of christian magistrates. The minor officials misruled and peculated, as we have related in our introductory sketch of the viceroyal government. They were all men of the hour, and, even the viceroys themselves, regarded their governments on the American continent as rewards for services in Europe, enabling them to secure fortunes with which they returned to the Castilian court, forgetful of the Indian miner and agriculturist from whose sweat their wealth was coined. The Spaniard never identified himself with Mexico. His home was on the other side of the Atlantic. Few of the best class formed permanent establishments in the viceroyalty; and all of them were too much interested in maintaining both the state of society and the castes which had been created by the conquerors, to spend a thought upon the amelioration of the people. We do not desire to blacken, by our commentary, the fame of a great nation like that of Spain; yet this dreary but true portrait of national selfishness has been so often verified by all the colonial historians of America, and especially by Pazo and Zavala, in their admirable historical sketches of Castilian misrule, that we deem it fair to introduce these palliations of Mexican misconduct since the revolution.[1]
The people of New Spain were poor and uneducated,—the aristocracy was rich, supercilious, and almost equally illiterate. It was a society without a middle ground,—in which gold stood out in broad relief against rags. Was such a state of barbaric semicivilization entitled or fitted to emerge at once into republicanism?
Was it to be imagined that men who had always been controled, could learn immediately to control themselves? Was it to be believed that the military personages, whose ambition is as proverbial as it is natural, would voluntarily surrender the power they possessed over the masses, and retire to the obscurity and poverty of private life when they could enjoy the wealth and influence of political control, so long as they maintained their rank in the army? This would have been too much to expect from the self-denial of Creole chiefs; nor is it surprising to behold the people themselves looking towards these very men as proper persons to consolidate or shape the government they had established. It was the most natural thing conceivable to find Iturbide, Guerrero, Bustamante, Negrete, Bravo, Santa Anna, Paredes, and the whole host of revolutionary heroes succeeding each other in power, either constitutionally or by violence. The people knew no others. The military idea,—military success,—a name won in action, and repeated from lip to lip until the traditionary sound became a household word among the herdsmen, rancheros, vaqueros and Indians,—these were the sources of Mexican renown or popularity, and the appropriate objects of political reward and confidence. What individual among the four or five millions of Indians knew anything of the statesmen of their country who had never mixed in the revolutionary war or in the domestic brawls constantly occurring. There were no gazettes to spread their fame or merit, and even if there had been, the people were unable to buy or peruse them. Among the mixed breeds, and lower class of Creoles, an equal degree of ignorance prevailed;—and thus, from the first epoch of independence, the People ceased to be a true republican tribunal in Mexico, while the city was surrendered as the battle field of all the political aspirants who had won reputations in the camp which were to serve them for other purposes in the capital. By this means the army rose to immediate significance and became the general arbiter in all political controversies. Nor was the church,—that other overshadowing influence in all countries in which religion and the state are combined,—a silent spectator in the division of national power. The Roman Hierarchy, a large land-holder,—as will be hereafter seen in our statistical view of the country,—had much at stake in Mexico, besides the mere authority which so powerful a body is always anxious to maintain over the consciences of the multitude. The church was, thus, a political element of great strength; and, combined with the army, created and sustained an important party, which has been untiring in its efforts to support centralism, as the true political principle of Mexican government.
On the 4th of October, 1824, a federal constitution, framed partly upon the model of the constitution of the United States, with some grafts from the Spanish constitution, was adopted by Congress; and, by it, the territory comprehended in the old viceroyalty of New Spain, the Captaincy General of Yucatan, the commandancies of the eastern and western Internal Provinces, Upper and Lower California, with the lands and isles adjacent in both seas, were placed under the protection of this organic law. The religion of the Mexican nation was declared to be, in perpetuity, the Catholic Apostolic Roman; and the nation pledged its protection, at the same time prohibiting the exercise of any other!
Previous, however, to these constitutional enactments the country had not been entirely quiet, for as early as January of this year, General Echavari, who occupied the state of Puebla, raised the standard of revolt against the Triumvirate. This seditious movement was soon suppressed by the staunch old warrior, Guerrero, who seized and bore the insurgent chief to the capital as a prisoner. Another insurrection, occurred not long after in Cuernavaca, which was also quelled by Guerrero. Both of these outbreaks were caused by the centralists, who strove to put down by violence the popular desire for the federal system. Instead of destroying the favorite charter, however, they only served to cement the sections, who sustained liberal doctrines in the different provinces or states of the nation, and finally, aided materially in enforcing the adoption of the federal system.
Another insurrection occurred in the city of Mexico, growing out of the old and national animosity between the Creoles and the European Spaniards. The expulsion of the latter from all public employments was demanded by the Creoles of the capital, backed by the garrison commanded by Colonels Lobato and Staboli. The revolt was suppressed at the moment; but it was deemed advisable to conciliate feeling in regard to the unfortunate foreigners; and, accordingly, changes were made in the departments, in which the offices were given to native Mexicans, whilst the Spaniards were allowed a pension for life of one-third of their pay. At this period, moreover, the supreme executive power was altered, and Nicolas Bravo, Vicente Guerrero, and Miguel Dominguez, were appointed to control public affairs until a president was elected under the new constitution.
Early in 1825, the general congress assembled in the city of Mexico. Guadalupe Victoria was declared president, and Nicolas Bravo vice president. The national finances were recruited by a loan from England; and a legislative effort was made to narrow the influence of the priesthood, according to the just limits it should occupy in a republic.
All Spanish America had been in a ferment for several years, and the power of Castile was forever broken on this continent. Peru, as well as Mexico, had cast off the bonds of dependence, for the brilliant battle of Ayacucho rescued the republican banner from the danger with which for a while it was menaced. The European forces, had never been really formidable, except for their superior discipline and control under royalist leaders,—but they were now driven out of the heart of the continent,—whilst the few pertinacious troops and generals who still remained, were confined to the coasts of Mexico, Puru, and Chili, where they clung to the fortress of San Juan de Ulua, the castle of Callao, and the strongholds of Chiloe.
Victoria was sworn into office on the 15th of April, 1825. Several foreign nations had already recognized the independence of Mexico, or soon hastened to do so; for all were eager to grasp a share of the commerce and mines which they imagined had been so profitable to Spain. The British, especially, who had become holders of Mexican bonds, were particularly desirous to open commercial intercourse and to guard it by international treaties.
In the winter of 1826, it was discovered, by the discussions in congress of projects for their suppression, that the party leaders, fearing an open attempt to conduct their unconstitutional machinations, had sought the concealment of masonic institutions in which they might foster their antagonistic schemes. The rival lodges were designated as Escocesses and Yorkinos, the former numbering among its members the vice president Nicolas Bravo, Gomez Pedraza, and Jose Montayno, while the Yorkinos boasted of Generals Victoria, Santa Anna, Guerrero, Lorenzo de Zavala, and Bustamante. The adherents of the Escocesses were said to be in favor of a limited monarchy with a Spanish prince at its head; but the Yorkinos maintained the supremacy of the constitution and declared themselves hostile to all movements of a central character. The latter party was, by far, the most numerous. The intelligent liberals of all classes sustained it; yet its leaders had to contend with the dignitaries of the church, the opulent agriculturists, land holders and miners, and many of the higher officers of the army whose names had been identified with the early struggles of the independents against the Spaniards.
These party discussions, mainly excited by the personal ambitions of the disputants, which were carried on not only openly in congress, but secretly in the lodges, absorbed for a long time, the entire attention of the selfish but intelligent persons who should have forgotten themselves in the holy purpose of consolidating the free and republican principles of the constitution of 1824. The result of this personal warfare was soon exhibited in the total neglect of popular interests, so far as they were to be fostered or advanced by the action of congress. The states, however, were in some degree, free from these internecine contests; for the boldest of the various leaders, and the most ambitious aspirants for power, had left the provinces to settle their quarrels in the capital. This was fortunate for the country, inasmuch as the states were in some measure recompensed by their own care of the various domestic industrial interests for the neglect they suffered at the hands of national legislators.
At the close of 1827, Colonel José Montayno, a member of the Escocesses, proclaimed, in Otumba, the plan which in the history of Mexican pronunciamientos, or revolts, is known by the name of this leader. Another attempt of a similar character had been previously made, against the federative system and in favor of centralism, by Padre Arenas; but both of these outbreaks were not considered dangerous, until Bravo denounced president Victoria for his union with the Yorkinos, and, taking arms against the government, joined the rebels in Tulancingo, where he declared himself in favor of the central plan of Montayno. The country was aroused. The insurgents appeared in great strength. The army exhibited decided symptoms of favor towards the revolted party; and the church strengthened the elements of discontent by its secret influence with the people. Such was the revolutionary state of Mexico, when the patriot Guerrero was once more summoned by the executive to use his energetic efforts in quelling the insurrection. Nor was he unsuccessful in his loyal endeavors to support the constitution. As soon as he marched against the insurgents, they dispersed throughout the country; so that, without bloodshed, he was enabled to crush the revolt and save the nation from the civil war. Thus, amid the embittered quarrels of parties, who had actually designed to transfer their contests from congress and lodges to the field of battle, terminated the administration of Guadalupe Victoria, the first president of Mexico. His successor, Gomez Pedraza, the candidate of the Escocesses, was elected by a majority of but two votes over his competitor, Guerrero, the representative of the liberal Yorkinos.
These internal discontents of Mexico began to inspire the Spanish court with hope that its estranged colony would be induced, or perhaps easily compelled, after a short time, to return to its allegiance; and, accordingly, it was soon understood in Mexico, even during Victoria's administration, that active efforts were making in Cuba to raise an adequate force for another attempt upon the republic. This, for a moment, restrained the fraternal hands raised against each other within the limits of Mexico, and forced all parties to unite against the common danger from abroad. Suitable measures were taken to guard the coasts where an attack was most imminent, and it was the good fortune of the government to secure the services of Commodore Porter, a distinguished officer of the United States Navy, who commanded the Mexican squadron most effectively for the protection of the shores along the gulf, and took a number of Spanish vessels, even in the ports of Cuba, some of which were laden with large and costly cargoes.
The success of the centralist Pedraza over the federalist Guerrero, a man whose name and reputation were scarcely less dear to the genuine republicans than that of Guadalupe Victoria,—was not calculated to heal the animosities of the two factions, especially, as the scant majority of two votes had placed the Escoces partizan in the presidential chair. The defeated candidate and his incensed companions of the liberal lodge, did not exhibit upon this occasion that loyal obedience to constitutional law, which should have taught them that the first duty of a republican is to conceal his mortification at a political defeat and to bow reverentially to the lawful decision of a majority. It is a subject of deep regret that the first bold and successful attack upon the organic law of Mexico was made by the federalists. They may have deemed it their duty to prevent their unreliable competitors from controling the destinies of Mexico even for a moment under the sanction of the constitution; but there can be no doubt that they should have waited until acts, instead of suspicions or fears, entitled them to exercise their right of impeachment under the constitution. In an unregulated, military nation, such as Mexico was at that period, men do not pause for the slow operations of law when there is a personal or a party quarrel in question. The hot blood of the impetuous, tropical region, combines with the active intellectual temperament of the people, and laws and constitutions are equally disregarded under the impulse of passion or interest. Such was the case in the present juncture. The Yorkinos had been outvoted lawfully, according to the solemn record of congress, yet they resolved not to submit; and, accordingly, Lorenzo de Zavala, the Grand Master of their lodge, and Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, who was then a professed federalist, in conjunction with the defeated candidate Guerrero and Generals Montezuma and Lobato, determined to prevent Pedraza from occupying the chair of state. Santa Anna, who now appeared prominently on the stage, was the chief agitator in the scheme, and being in garrison at Jalapa, in the autumn of 1828, pronounced against the chief magistrate elect, and denounced his nomination as "illegal, fraudulent and unconstitutional." The movement was popular, for the people were in fact friendly to Guerrero. The prejudices of the native or Creole party against the Spaniards and their supposed defenders the Escocesses, were studiously fomented in the capital; and, on the 4th of December, the pronunciamiento of the Accordada, in the capital, seconded the sedition of Santa Anna in the provinces. By this time the arch conspirator in this drama had reached the metropolis and labored to control the elements of disorder which were at hand to support his favorite Guerrero. The defenceless Spaniards were relentlessly assailed by the infuriate mob which was let loose upon them by the insurgent chiefs. Guerrero was in the field in person at the head of the Yorkinos. The Parian in the capital, and the dwellings of many of the noted Escocesses were attacked and pillaged, and for some time the city was given up to anarchy and bloodshed. Pedraza, who still fulfilled the functions of minister of war previous to his inauguration, fled from the official post which he abandoned to his rival Santa Anna; and on the 1st of January, 1829, congress,—reversing its former act,—declared Guerrero to have been duly elected president of the republic! General Bustamante was chosen vice president, and the government again resumed its operation under the federal system of 1824.
Note. —Although a masked Indian slavery or peonage, is permitted and encouraged in Mexico, African slavery is prohibited by positive enactments as well as by the constitution itself. But as it may interest the reader to know the Mexican enactments relative to negroes, on this subject, the following documents are subjoined for reference:—
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.
The President of the Mexican United States to the Inhabitants of the Republic.
Be it known—That, being desirous to signalize the anniversary of independence, in the year 1829, by an act of national justice and beneficence, which may redound to the advantage and support of so inestimable a good; which may further insure the public tranquillity; which may tend to the aggrandisement of the republic, and may reinstate an unfortunate portion of its inhabitants in the sacred rights which nature gave to them, and the nation should protect by wise and just laws, conformably with the dispositions of the thirtieth article of the constituent act, employing the extrordinary faculties which have been conceded to me, I have resolved to decree—
1. Slavery is and shall remain abolished in the republic.
2. In consequence, those who have hitherto been regarded as slaves, are free.
3. Whensoever the condition of the treasury shall permit, the owners of the slaves shall be indemnified according to the terms which the law may dispose.
Mexico, Sept. 15, 1829.
MEXICAN LAW FOR THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY IN THE REPUBLIC.
Art. 1.—Slavery is abolished, without any exception, throughout the whole republic.
2. The owners of the slaves manumitted by the present law, or by the decree of September 15, 1829, shall be indemnified for their interests in them, to be estimated according to the proofs which may be presented of their personal qualities; to which effect, one appraiser shall be appointed by the commissary general, or the person performing his duties, and another by the owner; and, in case of disagreement, a third, who shall be appointed by the respective constitutional alcalde; and from the decision thus made, there shall be no appeal. The indemnification mentioned in this article shall not be extended to the colonists of Texas, who may have taken part in the revolution in that department.
3. The owners to whom the original documents drawn up with regard to the proofs mentioned in the preceding article, shall be delivered gratis—shall themselves present them to the supreme government, which will authorise the general treasury to issue to them the corresponding orders for the amount of their respective interests.
4. The payment of the said orders shall be made in the manner which may seem most equitable to the government, with the view of reconciling the rights of individuals with the actual state of the public finances.}}
April 5, 1837.
The Constitution of 1843, or Bases organicas de la Republica Mejicana, of that year, declares that: "No one is a slave in the territory of the nation, and that any slave who may be introduced, shall be considered free and remain under the protection of the laws."—Title 2d.
The Constitution of 1847—which, in fact, is the old Federal Constitution of 1824—does not reenact this clause; but, in the Acta de Reformas annexed to it in 1847, declares, "that every Mexican, either by birth or naturalization, who has attained the age of twenty years, who possesses the means of an honest livelihood, and who has not been condemned by legal process to any infamous punishment, is a citizen of the United Mexican States."— Acta de Reformas, Article 1. "In order to secure the rights of man which the Constitution recognizes, a law shall fix the guaranties of liberty, security, property and equality, which all the inhabitants of the republic enjoy, and shall establish the means requisite to make them effective."— Id. Article 5. The third article provides that "the exercise of the rights of citizenship are suspended by habitual intemperance; by professional gambling or vagabondage; by religious or ders; by legal interdict in virtue of trial for those crimes which forfeit citizenship, and by refusal to fulfil public duties imposed by popular nomination" (nombramiento popular.)
- ↑ Zavala's Hist. Rev. of Mex. 2 vols.;—and Pazo's letters on the United Provinces of South America.