THE EVOLUTION OF MODERN MEXICO
Monarchical _regime_ of Iturbide--Great area of Mexican Empire--Santa
Anna--The Holy Alliance--Execution of Iturbide--The Monroe Doctrine--
British friendship--The United States--Masonic institutions--Political
parties--Expulsion of Spaniards--Revolution and crime--Clerical
antagonism--Foreign complications--The "pie-war"--The Texan war--The
slavery question--Mexican valour--American invasion of Mexico--Fall of
Mexico--Treaty of Guadalupe--Cession of California--Gold in
California--Benito Juarez appears--Conservatives and Liberals--Massacre
of Tacubaya--The Reform laws--Disestablishment of the Church--Dishonest
Mexican finance--Advent of Maximilian--The English, Spanish, and French
expedition--Perfidy of the French--Capture of Mexico City by the
French--Crowning of Maximilian--Porfirio Diaz--Rule of Maximilian--Fall
of his empire--Death of Maximilian--The tragedy of Queretaro--Diaz
takes Mexico City--Presidency of Juarez--Lerdo--Career and character of
Diaz--First railways built--Successful administration of Diaz--
Political stability--Forward policy.
Mexico began her independent history with a monarch, a prominent figure
which now stands forth in the history of the country,
Iturbide--royalist, soldier-general, candidate for viceroy, insurgent
chief, and Emperor by turns. Despatched at the head of the Spanish
Royalist army from the capital to crush the insurgent forces under
Guerrero, who maintained defiance in the south, Iturbide, after
conference with the enemy, announced to his officers and army that he
espoused and would support the cause of independence. Whether this was
a result of conviction of its justice, or whether it obeyed dictates of
personal ambition to whose success a surer road seemed to open by his
defection, remained best known to himself; but, be it as it were, his
eloquence and enthusiasm inspired all who lent ear to him.
Events followed rapidly. The "plan of Iguala," a document proclaiming
the independence of Mexico, with a suggestion of royal rule, was drawn
up and promulgated on March 2, 1821, and the change of side by its
author, Iturbide, called many other persons to the insurgent cause, and
city after city fell to their arms or capitulated at their advance. At
the moment the last Spanish Viceroy, Don Juan O'Donoju, was landing at
Vera Cruz, but, sagely taking in the situation, he saw that Mexico was
lost for Spain, proposed a conference, accepted the plan of Iguala,
joined forces with Iturbide, and, all obstacles having been overcome,
the insurgent army made its way to the capital, entering it, with
Iturbide at its head, on September 27, 1821. The triumph of the
independent cause was assured and the birth of the new Empire of Mexico
was heralded at that moment.
The geographical extent of Mexico at that date was very considerable.
It embraced all that enormous area of territory of Texas, New Mexico,
California, the whole of modern Mexico and Yucatan, and the present
south-bounding republic of Guatemala. This great area of the Empire of
Mexico was, indeed, the third largest country in the world, coming next
after the Russian and Chinese empires. Such was the great political
entity over which Iturbide's brief royal sway extended--brief, for,
crowned Emperor Augustine I. on July 21, 1822, he abdicated on March
19, 1823--a brief kingship of a few months--left the country, returned,
hoping to benefit it, and was "executed" on July 19, 1824! Thus passed
the Empire--the first attempt for royal rule in the Americas, although
not the last.
It is not to be supposed that the birth of independence in Mexico had
brought forth peace and order among the Mexicans. Far from it. If the
_grito_ of Hidalgo had heralded political liberty it was also the
signal for the almost continual internecine wars and bloody struggles
which made the name of Mexico a synonym for revolution and bloodshed
for more than half a century, and which it only began to lose at the
close of the nineteenth century. The execution of Iturbide showed the
rise of that spirit of ferocity and remorseless ingratitude which has
always characterised the political history and strife of Latin America,
whether Mexico, Peru, Venezuela, Chile, or any other of the Hispanic
self-governing countries. Immediately after the formation of Iturbide's
regency, which included O'Donoju, whose acts had been repudiated by
Spain, dissensions arose, and the first Constitutional Congress, of
February 24, 1822, soon formed itself into political sections, some of
which regarded Iturbide with disfavour. From his position as Emperor he
threw various Congressmen into prison for opposition to the empire (a
sentiment which grew rapidly), and finally dissolved Congress. At this
time the somewhat sinister figure of Santa-Anna arose, with a
_pronunciamiento_ at Vera Cruz in favour of a republican form of
government; and although supported by Bravo, Guerrero, and others, the
insurgents fell before the forces of the Emperor. Iturbide, however,
did not desire to disrupt the nation. He had been crowned and anointed
with great pomp and ceremony in the beautiful Cathedral of Mexico, but
he abdicated, and sailed on an English ship for Italy, and the Congress
passed an Act pronouncing him an outlaw and traitor. This Act, as
before stated, showed the spirit of singular remorselessness and
ferocious ingratitude characterising the Spanish-Americans' political
methods. These were the days of the "Holy Alliance," which strove to
bring about Spain's re-domination of America, and Iturbide, in London,
learning of the plan, and ignorant of the iniquitous Act launched
against him, embarked for Mexico, thinking to lend his sword on behalf
of his native country if she were threatened by the Alliance. He was
captured and illegally sentenced by the Congress of a petty Mexican
province--Tamaulipas--and shot. Serene and disdainful, he fell, a
figure which compels more respect than censure in the mind of the
student of to-day.
These were portentous times in the history of the New World. It must
not be forgotten that the independence of Mexico took place in what was
a reactionary time in Europe, and the spirit of the Holy Alliance was
rendered evident by the attitude of France. But there was Britain to be
reckoned with. Britain did not hesitate to declare for the emancipation
of the Spanish colonies, and the "Monroe Doctrine" was conceived by the
famous words of Canning in "calling into being the New World to redress
the balance of the Old." In August, 1823, Canning sounded the American
Government as to whether they "would act in concert with Britain
against any aggression against the independence of the Spanish-American
Republics," which brought forth the famous enunciation of President
Monroe in Washington "that any such aggression would be hostile to
themselves and dangerous to their peace and safety"--the basis of the
now well-known Monroe Doctrine. Nevertheless, the United States
regarded Mexico at that period with little favour or sympathy, and
indeed this fact has been noted with some resentment by Mexican
historians. But it is to be recollected that the United States itself
was weak, and could not be expected to antagonise Europe too deeply. As
it was, Mexico entered into the concert of nations without a friend in
the world, save as the not necessarily disinterested or altruistic
declaration of Britain and the United States might be construed as
friendship. But the recognition of Mexico's independence by Britain in
1825 and treaty of friendship brought the first foreign capital to the
land's resources, whilst the war between Mexico and the United States
in a territorial dispute, showed that a spirit of equity was yet
foreign to the Anglo-Saxon Republic.
On the ruins of the transient empire of Iturbide the building of the
Mexican Republic was begun. The National Constitution was proclaimed in
October, 1824, by the Federal Congress, and the famous insurgent
leader, Guadalupe Victoria, named President, with Bravo as
Vice-President. Great Britain and the United States recognised the new
Republic in the first year--1825--of its existence, and the latter
country sent its Minister in representation. Two political parties came
into existence--the Centralists, principally Spanish, and the
Federalists--and to the dissensions of these the continual revolutions
and disturbances from that date to the middle of the century were due.
Another disturbing factor was the introduction of Masonic lodges--the
Scotch rite and the York rite, the latter introduced by the American
Minister, which, becoming adopted by various partisans, were
respectively opposed by others--and these Masonic institutions were the
cause of disturbance in the politics of Mexico for many years. Among
religious people the word "Mason" became a term of reproach. Due to the
work of the York Masons, a great expulsion of Spaniards took place in
1827, the Spaniards having been finally ousted from the country, losing
their last stronghold of the Castle of San Juan de Ulua at Vera Cruz in
1825.
It might have been supposed that Mexico, having gained its heart's
desire of freedom from the dominion of Spain, with its own independent
Government, would have established itself in peace, and continued on
along the lines of national development. But it was not so. Insistent
and sanguinary revolution reared its sinister head, to destroy all
peace and security, and hold the country in barbaric strife for many
years. It would be tedious to follow the causes and incidents of these
_pronunciamientos_, imprisonings, seizings, shootings, executions,
treachery, cruelty, and bloodshed of which this half-century of Mexican
history is largely built up. The profession of arms became almost the
only one which ambitious men would follow, and ambition and
unscrupulousness went hand in hand. A condition of chronic disorder
grew which paralysed the civil development of the country, made
bankrupt the national treasury, and prostituted the people to becoming
mere levies of insurgents, to be drawn upon by this or that
revolutionary leader whose sinister star for the moment happened to be
in the ascendant. Armed highwaymen infested the roads and inhabited the
mountains, and travel was impossible without an escort. A terrible
disregard of human life resulted, and became so strong a characteristic
of the Mexicans as has even to-day not become eradicated.
In 1833 the beginning of a serious cause of civil trouble made its
appearance, and one which has profoundly influenced the Mexicans and
their life. This was the antagonism between the people and the
politicians, and the clergy. Intensely religious, in the Romish faith,
the Mexicans, like the South Americans, were subject to periods of
bitter and relentless feeling against clerical domination, the result
mainly of the extortions of the Church and its insidious acquiring of
temporal power and amassing of wealth. Speaking generally, the Church
brought about its own disestablishment by its own fault. Enactments
were passed at this date to curtail the power and privileges of the
clergy, declaring that tithes should not be collectable by civil law,
nor the fulfilment of monastic vows enforced, and prohibiting the
Church from meddling with public instruction. The political parties
which then grew to being for or against these measures respectively
were the Liberals and Conservatives, and to their dissensions were
mainly due the subsequent disorders; and up to the present day they
form the party divisions of Mexican politics. These measures were the
precursor of the famous Reform Laws of 1859, under Juarez, which
disestablished the Church and appropriated its property.
The incessant turbulence at home was varied from time to time by acute
questions with foreign Powers. In 1829 Spain made a determined attempt
to regain Mexico, with an expedition of 4,000 men, which, however, was
absolutely repulsed by the Federal army under Santa-Anna and Mier: the
Spanish general, Barradas, surrendering his armament and flags, at the
news of which immense rejoicing took possession of Mexico. The
independence of the Republic was recognised by Spain in 1836. Two years
later--1838--a complication arose with France, and the war known as the
_Guerra de los Pasteles_, or "Pie-War," came about, its singular
designation resulting from the claim of a French pastry-cook for sixty
thousand dollars as indemnity for the theft of some pies! Expensive
confections these proved to be, for under the Prince de Joinville the
French landed and surprised Vera Cruz, attacked the house of
Santa-Anna--this famous general losing a leg by a cannon-shot--whilst,
on peace being concluded soon afterwards, Mexico agreed to pay $600,000
to settle all questions against her.
Following upon these incidents revolutions and _pronunciamientos_
succeeded each other like autumn leaves, and rights and obligations
were trampled underfoot almost as ruthlessly as these. In 1837 the
Federal system had been supplanted by "Centralism," and the marchings
of armies and the rise and fall of generals and Presidents come thick
and fast throughout the country. A party was formed for the restitution
of a monarchical form of government following upon the publication of a
pamphlet by Gutierrez Estrada to the effect--and the student of history
will scarcely contradict it--that the Mexican people were not fitted to
live under a Republican _regime_.
But the greatest event of this period of Mexican history now looms
up--the war with the United States. The origin of this was the question
concerning the great State of Texas. Much earlier, in 1821, some
colonisation of that territory had been initiated by the Austins,
father and son, who founded the city of that name. The Austins were
Americans, and had obtained permission from the Government of Mexico to
establish a colony, but disagreements soon came about. American
filibusters of lawless character began to settle up the country, as
well as peaceful colonists, and questions soon arose as to political
representation and influence. A decree had been made by the Mexican
Government forbidding slavery, and this became a poignant cause of
discontent to the Texans, who, partaking of the character of the
Americans of that period, saw nothing incompatible in holding their
fellow-creatures in bondage under the aegis of "Liberty"! Whatever may
have been the faults displayed--and there were faults, both on the
Mexican and the Texan side--the fact remains to the honour of Mexico
that she forbade slavery, which showed her civilisation certainly not
inferior to her Anglo-Saxon neighbours. The lawlessness and system of
slavery established in Texas at that period bore afterwards a terrible
fruit, which the "race-war" and "colour-line" of to-day show are not
yet eradicated. Santa-Anna had been sent against Texas, and he played a
far from creditable part. The war for Texan independence began in 1835,
and its fortunes varied at first, the Mexican general treating the
Texans with barbaric cruelty upon winning a first engagement. But Sam
Houston arose--his name is greeted with acclamation in Texas
to-day--and Santa-Anna, beaten and captured, took a discreditable and
craven part, signing, in return for his release and safety, an
agreement to recognise Texan independence. Mexico, however, did not
recognise this, notwithstanding that a Texan Constitution was set up in
1836. Returning now to Santa-Anna's Presidency, his erratic acts
disgusted his countrymen, and _pronunciamientos_ followed. Hoping to
divert popular opinion from himself, Santa-Anna proposed the
prosecution of a war with Texas, for its recovery, notwithstanding his
personal previous agreements.
The assertion of hegemony by the United States brought on the
beginnings of war between the two dominating peoples of the North
American continent. The Republic of Texas, the United States declared,
must remain untouched; any hostile act against it would be considered
directed against the States itself, with which Texas was now to be
incorporated. Mexico, torn by dissensions of its own, was not in a good
position to oppose the policy of its neighbour at the moment. The
revolutions against Santa-Anna culminated in his defeat and departure
from the country under an act of banishment.
It is not to be supposed that the Mexicans, oppressed as they were by
the revolutions and disasters arising from their own character, were
without any good and noble traits which might redeem the lawlessness
from which they suffered. Many deeds of Mexican arms, of
self-abnegation in times of peril, and of heroic acts in the face of
deadly odds, have left glorious episodes in their history. It is to be
recollected that the struggles in which they were engaged arose often
from an excess of zeal for liberty, and a strong spirit of
individualism which could not support political oppression or affront.
An instance of their heroic spirit is afforded by an incident in the
American War. The storming of the Castle of Chapultepec was being
carried on by the United States troops, who, after severe hand-to-hand
fighting, penetrated to the fortress and made their way to the turret,
to haul down the banner upon which the colours of Mexico, and the
eagle, serpent and cactus were displayed. But the turret was disputed
hotly by a few young Mexicans--boys almost--military cadets there.
Seeing their beloved flag about to fall into the hands of the--to
them--hated _Yankees_,[20] they fought to the last drop, and, rather
than the standard should be captured, one of them, wrapping it round
his body, leaped from the turret and was dashed to pieces on the stones
below!
[Footnote 20: The designation of Yankee is very generally used in
Spanish-American, for the Americans--not, however, in an offensive
sense.]
[Illustration: THE CASTLE OF CHAPULTEPEC.]
But we anticipate. The first battle between the forces of Mexico and
the United States was fought at Palo Alto in the north, in May, 1846;
the command of the former being under General Arista, and the latter
under General Zachary Taylor, but the Mexicans were defeated. Texas had
been declared a part of the American Union in the previous year
(December, 1845), and the military occupation by the Americans of
Mexican territory--for the boundaries were ill-defined--formed the
culminating _casus belli_. Torn by dissensions at home, and betrayed by
the treachery of her own generals--among them the traitorous
Paredes--Mexico was in no position to face a war with her powerful
neighbour. Following on the battle of Palo Alto, Santa-Anna, who had
returned, had been elected President, but had declared he could serve
his country best by leading its army, and he advanced against the
Americans under Taylor. Previous to this, the Americans, with a force
of 6,700 men, had taken the city of Monterrey--a pretty, Spanish-built
town far within the border of Mexico, which had been established by one
of the viceroys--notwithstanding that the Mexicans, 10,000 strong,
under General Ampudea, had defended it. The engagement under Santa-Anna
lasted for two days--the battle of Buena Vista, February, 1847. Its
issue long hung in the balance, and although the Americans gained the
victory, it was a doubtful and indecisive one.
The American Government now decided to push the war to the end. But
serious obstacles discouraged the attempt to march upon the capital of
Mexico. The vast stretches of appalling desert which at that time
formed that part of the continent of North America--now included in
Texas, Chihuahua, and Coahuila--were waterless, and without resources,
and beaten by a fiery sun; conditions which to-day, in some parts of
the regions, are scarcely altered. The bravery and ferocity of the
Mexicans, who were--and are--among the most expert horsemen in the
world, would have rendered the advance over the intervening
topographical wastes between Mexico's frontier and her capital of
extremely doubtful issue. Attack was made, therefore, by sea, and an
army of 12,000 men under General Winfield Scott landed at Vera Cruz on
March 9, 1847. By September of the same year Vera Cruz, Puebla
Contreras, Molino del Rey, Chapultepec, had all been the scene of
strenuous engagements; but Mexico was to lose, and the invading
Anglo-Saxons, having eaten their way to the heart of the Latin
Republic, against considerable odds, occupied the capital on September
14, 1847.
Split into factions by political strife, which even the hammering at
their gates of a common enemy had not sufficed to heal, Mexico received
a terrible lesson. The history of Mexico had repeated itself. Just as
Cortes and his Spaniards had penetrated from Vera Cruz to Tenochtitlan,
thanks to dissensions among the Aztec inhabitants of the country, so
had the Americans ascended over the same route to a similar victory by
analogous circumstances. Even whilst the victorious forces of the
Anglo-Saxons were marching onwards, the mad political generals and
transient Presidents of Mexico were launching _pronunciamientos_,
fighting among themselves, and shedding the blood of their own
countrymen; and not until February 2, 1848, was peace entered into with
the Americans, and the treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo signed. Mexico
ceded to the United States under this agreement the area of an empire!
Texas had already been lost; California and New Mexico[21] were given
up now, rich and extensive regions, although little known at the time,
as indemnity for which the United States Government paid the sum of
fifteen million dollars.
[Footnote 21: The English reader may ask, Where is New Mexico? It is
that territory lying between Arizona and Texas, forming part of the
American Union.]
So was concluded what the Mexicans have termed "the unjust war," and
the historian will probably not feel called upon to dispute the
designation. Great bitterness of feeling between the two nations was
aroused on account of this conquest and cession of territory, which,
among the Mexicans of the great plateau, is, even at the present day,
far from being forgotten. It was but a short time after the cession of
California that gold was discovered--the famous days of 1849--and
Mexico did not know what she was losing. Perhaps in the interests of
the development of the fine State of California and its progressive
people, circumstances were for the best as they were. Santa-Anna
disappears from the scene in 1855. After the war he had assumed
semi-regal titles and pretensions, and had brought about or permitted a
further cession in the unpopular treaty with the United States. Further
revolutions and _pronunciamientos_ followed, and civil war divided the
country.
The figure of Juarez, famous in his country's history, was appearing,
and this remarkable man became President in January, 1858. In the
previous year a new Constitution had been adopted, and is that which
has remained in force to the present day. It was duly subjected to a
futile _pronunciamiento_! Further legal enactments were made by the
Liberals against the clergy, as well as the anti-mortmain statute,
framed by Lerdo with the object of releasing the great properties held
by civil and religious corporations; and it was mainly aimed at the
power and wealth of the Church--a foretaste of the Reform Laws.
Benito Juarez was a Mexican in whom no strain of Spanish blood existed,
his parents having been pure-blooded Indians of the Zapotecas of
Oaxaca. Shepherd, student of divinity, Governor of Oaxaca, Minister of
Justice, and President by turns, the name and fame of this remarkable
example of aboriginal intelligence stands strongly out in the history
of his country. The Conservative party were not slow in launching
_pronunciamientos_, and disaster befel the Liberal Government of
Juarez, who was compelled to flee for the time being. The whole of the
Republic again became the scene of desolating civil warfare, due to the
bitter struggles of the Liberal and Conservative parties. Generals,
calling themselves Presidents, set up Governments in various parts of
the country, and _pronunciamientos_ and bloodshed were the order of the
day. But chief among the sanguinary scenes of this appalling drama,
carried out with the religion of Christ as its mainspring, was the
Tacubaya massacre. This place, a beautiful residential suburb of the
City of Mexico, became the field of a strenuous engagement, the
victorious forces of the Conservatives, under General Marquez,
signalling their triumph by an abominable massacre, in which the
medical attendants, including an English physician, all of whom had
voluntarily given their services for succour of the wounded, were taken
out and deliberately put to death in cold blood, by order of the
ferocious Marquez. Another murder lies to the account of Marquez--that
of Ocampo, one of the best of the Liberal statesmen. But the Liberal
cause gained ground. Juarez landed at Vera Cruz; and the famous Reform
Laws of July 12, 1859, were made, forming part of the basis of the
administration set up at Vera Cruz. This code was directed against
clericalism. The property of the Church was confiscated and
nationalised; the clergy were severely arraigned as the authors of the
sanguinary and fratricidal wars which had devastated the country;
accused of abusing their power in a scandalous manner, with baleful
control of their wealth; and, in short, the Church was disestablished
and religious freedom proclaimed, together with the abolishing of
religious orders and institutions, whilst marriage was later declared a
civil contract.
Torn by their unceasing dissensions at home, the unfortunate Mexican
nation now brought upon themselves complications from abroad. The
Government of Juarez, having triumphed over the Conservatives, had been
installed in the capital amid popular enthusiasm. But what was the
state of the country over which it ruled? Sources of public revenue
were paralysed or hypothecated; there was not a dollar in the treasury;
and private enterprise and the activities of ordinary wealth were
ruined. Funds must be obtained in some way; and an Act of Congress was
passed in July, 1861, suspending the payment of Mexico's foreign debts.
This grave step laid Mexico open to the most serious charges in
European capitals, and her action was stigmatised as repudiation and
robbery, especially in London, where the first Mexican loan had been
contracted in 1823. This act of the Mexican Liberal Congress was
naturally painted in its worst colours by the reactionary
representatives of the Conservative party in Europe, who, desirous of
bringing back a priestly and monarchical _regime_, thought this an
opportunity and motive for compassing it by means of European
intervention. In justice to Mexico at that period it must be chronicled
that repudiation of her debts was not intended; only suspension in her
temporary distress. But the reprehensible Act of President Miramon, in
violating the British Legation and seizing $660,000 belonging to the
British bondholders, in November, 1860, had not been forgotten.
Maximilian--the picturesque and melancholy-appearing figure: the
ill-fated monarch of an unnatural New World empire--was the culminating
figure of Mexico's internecine warfare and questionable financial acts.
The story of Maximilian stands out from the pages of Mexico's history
in pathetic colours, wringing a sigh from us as we scan its pages, or
halt a space in the museum of Mexico's capital before the gilded tawdry
coach of the ill-fated Austrian, which is preserved there in musty
ruin. For up rose Napoleon III., pricking up his ears at this
suggestion of a monarchy in America; and, urged by him, the tripartite
convention by France, Spain, and England was brought to being in
London, October, 1861, whose purpose was--or, at any rate by the
British and Spanish--intervention and the enforcement of the just
claims of their bondholders against the defaulting Mexicans. Sailing
from Europe, the fleets of the three Powers arrived at Vera Cruz at the
end of the year. No idea of conquest of, or interposition in, Mexican
territory was intended in this action, only enforcement of just claims,
and so it was proclaimed; and a conference having been celebrated with
the Mexican representatives, and a preliminary agreement entered into,
the Spanish and British ships in all sincerity withdrew and sailed for
home. Not so the French--and the charge of perfidy is recorded against
France for her act--for the troops of Napoleon repudiated the agreement
and entered upon a war of conquest or subjugation. Severe reverses
marked their campaign at first, the Mexicans obstinately defending the
integrity of the country, under the administration of Juarez, with able
generals at the front. Among these was Diaz--later the famous President
Diaz--who won some early laurels in the defence of Puebla. But Puebla
fell, Juarez abandoned the capital, and the French, under General
Forey, entered the City of Mexico without opposition and set up a
_junta_ of prominent Mexicans to decide on the form of government to be
adopted. The decision of the _junta_ was for a limited monarchy, whose
sovereign should be designated Emperor of Mexico, and whose crown
should be offered to Maximilian, Archduke of Austria, or, failing him,
to some other Catholic prince who might be nominated by "the kindness
of his Majesty Napoleon III. of France!" So it befel; a deputation of
Mexicans was sent to the Hapsburg prince in his castle upon the far-off
Adriatic Sea. Maximiliano accepted under certain conditions; arrived in
Mexico, and in company with his wife Carlota, daughter of Leopold, King
of the Belgians, was crowned with great solemnity in the Cathedral of
Mexico in June, 1864.
Meantime the Liberal party, thus ousted from the seat of Government,
was not idle. Juarez established his administration in successive
northern towns, approaching the United States border. War to the death
against the monarchical system, which had been crammed down the Liberal
throat, was their slogan and source of inspiration. The doughty
Porfirio Diaz, nominated to a high command, was despatched to Oaxaca;
besieged there by the French under Bazaine, making a most determined
stand; surrendered at length through lack of food, ammunition, and
disaffection among his own people; was captured, imprisoned; escaped;
turned against the pursuing enemy and overcame them, re-capturing again
his native city, and once more turned the tables upon the Conservatives
and the Monarchy.
[Illustration: CITY OF OAXACA: SPANISH-COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE; THE
PORTALES OF THE MUNICIPAL PALACE AND PLAZA.]
The star of Empire, which shone for less than three years under
Maximilian, now sets with dramatic suddenness. From the first it was
seen that the Emperor was no bigoted Churchman, and his refusal to
rescind the clauses of the Reform Laws involved the Imperial Government
in grave questions and antagonisms with the disappointed clericals; and
the Emperor, indeed, showed himself much in sympathy with the Liberals.
These, however, bent upon their own absolute way, would hold no parley
with him, notwithstanding that overtures had been made to Diaz after
the recapture of Oaxaca.
The end approaches rapidly. The city of Puebla, a Conservative
stronghold, falls before Diaz and three thousand of the Republican
army, and siege is laid to the City of Mexico in April, 1867.
Maximilian had seen the trend towards the inevitable, but had striven,
during the previous year, to consolidate the clerical party, whilst the
Empress Carlota--brave and pathetic figure of these dramatic
events--had gone to France to implore Napoleon to countermand his
perfidious withdrawal of the French troops, and to endeavour to secure
a settlement of the matters at issue with the clericals with Pope Pius
IX. It was useless. The French army left the shores of the country they
had wantonly outraged, abandoning the unfortunate figure-head placed
there as a result of French machinations, with only the Belgians and
Austrians of Maximilian's immediate following. The ill-fated Austrian
wavered between his advisers--whether to abandon the thankless task
upon which he was engaged, or whether to stay with it to the bitter
end. He ultimately chose the latter course; reversing a first intention
of abdicating, returned to Mexico city; left thence for Queretaro, and
intrenched himself, with an effective force of some nine thousand
Imperialists, in that town. The Republicans, twenty-one thousand
strong, laid strenuous siege to and attacked the place, suffering
several repulses; but the treachery of Lopez, of the Imperialist army,
afforded them the entrance to the town, and Queretaro fell.
The fate of the Emperor Maximilian was now in the hands of Juarez. A
court-martial was called, and Maximilian was permitted to select
counsel for his defence. The deliberations resulted in a sentence of
death against Maximilian and his two chiefs and faithful generals,
Miramon and Mejia. Juarez took his pen to sign the death-warrant, when
before him--the Indian President, son of a despised race--there
appeared and kneeled the figure of the Austrian princess, Carlota,
supplicating for clemency for her husband. It is said that Juarez
wavered, but at that fateful moment the stern Lerdo appeared at the
door of the apartment, and shaking a warning finger, uttered those
words which sealed the doom of Maximilian, and which have come down
ever since in Mexico's history as a species of national axiom--"Ahora o
nunca se salva la patria!"[22] Juarez signed; the condemned Emperor
took his stand upon the Cerro de las Campanas outside Queretaro, and
faced the file of carbines pointed at his breast, serene and dignified.
"Take you the place of honour in the centre," he said in turn to
Miramon and Mejia--the latter a full-blooded Indian general who had
been privately offered, and had refused, a pardon by Juarez. But both
declined, and the three brave men faced forward. A volley rang out upon
the early morning air, and with it passed the life of Maximilian and
his chiefs, and the last Imperial _regime_ of Mexico.
[Footnote 22: "Now or never for our country's salvation."]
This execution--or murder--of Maximilian--for the student is at liberty
to term it which he will, according to the trend of his
sympathies--took place on June 19, 1867. The wife of the ill-fated
member of the unfortunate House of Hapsburg went mad, and in that state
lived long in Europe. To the commander of the Austrian warship, who,
arriving at Vera Cruz, demanded the remains of the "Emperor of Mexico,"
answer was returned by the Mexicans that no such person was known; when
he then requested the body of "Maximilian of Austria" it was delivered
to him. "Savages and barbarians" was the verdict of Europe against the
Mexicans for the termination of this drama, and only of recent
years--1901--have diplomatic relations been reopened between Mexico and
Austria. The impartial historian sees in the _denouement_ the dictates
of fate for a Republican _regime_ throughout the New World, and
acknowledges the philosophical right for this form of government;
although it may well be open to question if the republicanism of the
Americans has yet brought much of advancement to mankind in general or
to their own civilisation in particular. The figure of Maximilian, weak
though it may have been, was not without nobility; nor did his brief
rule lack possibilities for the nation--one party of which had invited
his advent and the other consummated his destruction.
The City of Mexico capitulated to Diaz. President Juarez returned
thither and assumed the reins of government amid general approval and
that popular enthusiasm which usually acclaims a change of _regime_ in
any time or country, and which was followed a few years later by
renewed dissensions. But the figure and name of Juarez are engraved on
the history of his country among its greatest, and furnish an example
of the possibilities of intellect and power to be encountered in the
aboriginal races of Mexico, stifled but not destroyed by the advent of
the white race. Juarez is the only President of Mexico who has died in
the occupancy of his office! He was followed by Lerdo, against whose
government a _pronunciamiento_ and revolution was launched, with a
result that Lerdo fled to the United States. An event of much
industrial importance to the country took place during Lerdo's
term--the completion and opening of the railway from Vera Cruz to the
capital, in January, 1873, thus placing in connection with the seaboard
and the outside world the much-contested City of Mexico, with its
chequered history.
The fall of Lerdo was the signal for, or rather the result of, the
coming forward of the most prominent figure of Mexico's modern
history--a figure, moreover, which links the turbulent past with
progressive Mexico of to-day. This is the figure of Porfirio Diaz, the
son of an innkeeper: student for priesthood, law student,
revolutionist, soldier, statesman, and President by turns. Diaz has
also Indian blood in his veins, upon the maternal side. After the
events connected with the fall of the Empire the ambitions of Diaz
found outlet in the disaffections against Lerdo's government. It was
hardly to be expected that the ambitions and jealousies of the times
could yet give way to consolidation for national interests and desire
for peace and development; and the only hope for the country was in the
advent of a strong man and a strong system, such as, under better
auspices, the monarchical _regime_ might have afforded. The strong man
appeared in the very antithesis of monarchy--Porfirio Diaz; and the
autocratic _regime_--almost monarchical except in name--in the
military-civil government which followed. Good, indeed, seemed to
proceed out of evil, and the autocratic President of Mexico came
through chaos to power as a revolutionist himself, by the edge of the
sword, shedding his own countrymen's blood, and borne on the crest of
an insurrectionary wave. Yet there was more behind the fortunes and
character of Diaz than mere selfish ambition or the habit of a
disorderly soldier-spirit. He had early conceived Liberal views against
clerical domination, and his earlier career showed loftier aspirations
than those of the ordinary tawdry revolutionist of the times, who,
under the name of liberty, indulged too often personal or party licence
against law, decency, and humanity. Diaz, after the revolution, assumed
executive power in November, 1876, and after a brief interval took the
oath and Presidential chair on May 5, 1877. The term of President
Gonzalez followed, and during this measures of civil progress were
inaugurated. Diplomatic relations were reopened with Great Britain, and
a beginning made to adjust the debt with the foreign bond-holders. The
Mexican Central Railway, linking the Republic with its neighbour the
United States, was inaugurated, and was an important factor in the
political settling-down of the country.
Diaz was re-elected to the Presidency for December 1, 1884. From that
period until the present day he has held the office continuously--seven
Presidential terms--a _regime_ which has partaken more of the nature of
a hereditary sovereignty than of an elective post. It is to be
recollected, however, that in all Spanish-American countries--and
Mexico has been no exception--intimidation and bribery at the polls and
breaches of constitutional law have been potent factors in election
matters. It would not be correct, however, to ascribe these influences
to the latter terms of office of President Diaz, who, there can be
little doubt, has enjoyed the confidence of his fellow-citizens and a
majority of their votes.[23] His enemies, the inevitable enemies of a
political chief, have been few and silent; and, moreover, in these
years of Mexican history sudden and silent retribution has been visited
upon the least whisper or suspicion of _pronunciamientos_, whether near
the capital or whether in the remote towns of the great plateau!
[Footnote 23: The character of President Diaz has been drawn in the
various books recently written on Mexico. It is not the intention of
this work to indulge in the flattery which in some cases has been given
to him, especially in Mexican books. I had the pleasure of meeting the
President on a brief occasion some years ago. Diaz completes the 80th
year of his strenuous life in 1910. (See also page 165.)]
[Illustration: THE PRESIDENT OF MEXICO, GENERAL PORFIRIO DIAZ.]
A certain main and important condition presented itself to the
comprehension of Diaz early in his administration, and compliance with
it has been one of the principal contributing causes to his success.
This was the necessity for the bettering of the means of communication
of the country. Roads, railways, and telegraph multiplied accordingly
under the fostering work of the Diaz Governments, mainly by inducements
held out to foreign capitalists; partly by the expenditure of national
funds. When troops and messages can be moved and flashed about rapidly
_pronunciamientos_ tend to diminish. The credit of the country abroad
was firmly re-established in 1886 by a proper adjustment of the foreign
debt with Mexico's European creditors; and as a result further loans
were secured. The Mexican National Railway, traversing the country from
the capital to the United States frontier, was opened in November,
1888, as well as a line southwards to Oaxaca, later; and thus the
nineteenth century closed with an era of growing stability and
prosperity at home and a creditable reputation abroad. The old elements
of unscrupulous ambition had been outlived, and the best men the
country produced were directing its governing and development. The
fiscal policy of the administration had been wisely thought out and
applied, and had proved a success, and difficulties due to the
depreciation of the silver coinage had been weathered.
The twentieth century opened for Mexico with a continuance of the same
governing elements, policy, and general development, Diaz being
re-elected for the term beginning in December, 1900, and again for the
term 1904-1910: this being his seventh tenure of office. Important
public works have been carried to completion during these last periods,
chief among them being the drainage of the Valley of Mexico--that
historical scheme begun by the viceroys--and the harbour works of Vera
Cruz; rendering shipping safe from the great "northers" which since the
time of Cortes have harassed vessels lying in the bay. These works were
performed by British firms; and yet another, under similar auspices,
was the completion of the Tehuantepec Railway--a trans-Continental line
from the Atlantic (Gulf) to the Pacific; all of which works are of
really historical importance. The present time--1909--finds Mexico an
established power on her continent, with considerable opportunities for
good or evil in the influence of international matters in North and
Central America, and with her own future well mapped out in so much as
the ingenuity of her public men may devise.
What this future will really be must depend upon the temper of her
people and the prudence of political changes. The staunch leader who,
thanks to the species of limited Presidential Monarchy which
circumstances have required and permitted, has successfully carried on
the leadership must, in the natural course of events, yield this up.
This will afford an opportunity for ambition and possible strife on the
part of those elements which have been overawed in the past, and which
it is too much to expect have been altogether eliminated. Then will be
the real test of Mexican self-control and prudence, and it seems
probable that these will be exercised.