1824-1829.
REVIEW OF THE CONDITION OF MEXICO AND THE FORMATION OF
PARTIES.--VICEROYAL GOVERNMENT--THE PEOPLE--THE ARMY--THE
CHURCH.--CONSTITUTION OF 1824.--ECHAVARI REVOLTS.--VICTORIA
PRESIDENT--ESCOCESSES--YORKINOS--REVOLTS CONTINUED.--
MONTAYNO--GUERRERO.--GOMEZ PEDRAZA PRESIDENT--IS
OVERTHROWN.--FEDERALISTS--CENTRALISTS--GUERRERO
PRESIDENT.--ABOLITION OF SLAVERY IN MEXICO.
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 controlled 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.[63]
* * * * *
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 semi-civilization entitled or
fitted to emerge at once into republicanism? Was it to be imagined that
men who had always been controlled, 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 landholder,--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, Peru, 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 José
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 Arénas; 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 controlling 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.
GUERRERO.
_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 rëenact 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."--_1d.
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 orders; 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_.)
[Footnote 63: Zavala's Hist. Rev. of Mex. 2 vols.;--and Pazo's letters
on the United Provinces of South America.]