THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE
When the English retired from Buenos Aires and Montevideo there
seemed no reason to expect any change in the relations between
Argentina and the mother country. The Spanish rule was not rigorous,
and, from a financial point of view, its policy was now highly
favourable to the colonists. They also warmly sympathised with their
European kinsmen in the apparently hopeless struggle against the
oppression of Napoleon. When Charles IV. abdicated in 1808, all the
Spanish-American dependencies hailed Ferdinand VII. as their King
with enthusiasm. Nothing seemed less likely than any kind of disloyalty.
And yet a very few years saw the beginning of a struggle which ended in
an old and haughty nation being stripped of every one of the dominions
she possessed on the American continent, and sinking into a state of
lethargy and decay from which, after the lapse of a century, there seems
little prospect of a "Roman recovery." The causes of this strange
phenomenon certainly do not seem adequate. It is, of course, obvious
that the weakness of the Home Government and their own successful
repulse of the English showed the Argentines that if they had the will
to be independent there was no doubt about the power. Again, their sense
of importance could not but be increased by the eagerness with which
foreigners sought for a share in their trade, and Cisneros, the Viceroy,
had strengthened this impression by admitting neutrals unreservedly to
the South American trade--a step which he took with great reluctance.
But neither of these circumstances could have had any effect if goodwill
and loyalty had remained unimpaired. These had probably been undermined
by the jealousy between Creole and Spaniard, by the pride of caste shown
by the latter towards the former, and by the preference always given to
Spaniards in the matter of official appointments. As the people of
Argentina increased in consciousness of worth and power, they would be
the less willing to brook this assumption of superiority, and doubtless
hot-headed young men had frequently discussed the possibility of the
step for which the cant term is now "cutting the painter." There is a
further circumstance which may have had influence on the course of
events. Able and ambitious men could not but see that in the turmoil of
revolution, followed by independence, there was a prospect of unbounded
riches, and power, which, however speculative, is always more attractive
to such minds than to be seated in the mean. Indeed a certain Francisco
Miranda from Caracas, ex-volunteer in Washington's army, had, at the
close of the war, discussed Spanish emancipation with Washington
himself. He then visited Europe, fought in the French revolutionary
army, and actually attained to the rank of general. His efforts
subsequently to induce Pitt or President Adams to initiate a war of
liberation in South America were, however, unsuccessful, but his
constant intrigues with Spanish Americans show that the project was
undoubtedly in the air.
Yet when we have gone over the meagre list of possible causes, we
cannot but attribute the chief place to one which strengthened all the
circumstances favourable to change and neutralised or reversed those
which were unfavourable. This was the doctrine of the Rights of Man or,
to be plain, the revolutionary spirit itself. Its influence was felt
by all classes, and it caused ferment and bloodshed in such widely
different places as Ireland and the West Indies. It had already
invaded England, and afterwards attacked her ancient rival and
overthrew the French monarchy and trampled down the French Church.
Thus, this purely moral cause must be taken as the efficient factor of
the Spanish-American Revolution; the others could have effected
nothing had not the seemingly barren dogma of equality provided an
atmosphere and a soil ready to foster any revolutionary seed that
might find its way to South America.
Ferdinand VII. was proclaimed King in 1808. The heroic Liniers was
then Viceroy at Buenos Aires, but doubtless his French nationality
gave rise to suspicions, and as soon as the news came that Joseph,
the puppet of Napoleon, had been imposed upon Spain, the Frenchman was
deposed, and on July 19, 1809, Cisneros became Viceroy in the name of
Ferdinand. As stated above, he threw open the ports with startling
results, for the customs revenue was immediately quadrupled. And
yet this wise measure revealed to the people their strength and
self-sufficiency, and may have predisposed them to revolution.[48]
On the 13th of May, 1810, news came from Spain that the mother country
was now under the heel of France and had no longer any power to help
or control them. Cisneros was in a very difficult situation. On May
25th he consented to the formation of a Council under the title of the
Provisional Government of the Provinces of Rio de la Plata, and this
date has been generally regarded by historians as the beginning of the
Revolution. Prominent among those who desired change were Moreno,
Belgrano, Saavedra, and Castelli. Moreno, who was secretary to the new
Council, was a man of large views, irresistible enthusiasm, and full
of daring. Belgrano was equally fervent in the cause and was devoted
to Moreno, content to serve him without reward for the liberation of
Spanish America, and he was one of the few men in the Province who, by
business aptitude and coolness of character, was qualified to direct
the movement. The Council acted with considerable adroitness.
Professing to be acting for Ferdinand and thus conciliating all
classes, they worked steadily in the direction of depressing and
discrediting all Spanish officials, and at last, on June 1st, Moreno
ordered Cisneros and other high functionaries to be seized and
deported. A merchant brig conveyed them to the Canaries and they
vanish from history.
Moreno anticipated trouble from Cordoba; but even there his opponents
were losing ground. Liniers had retired thither, but despairing of
success he, with several loyal Spaniards, collected a force of about
four hundred men and marched in the direction of Peru. They were
pursued, overwhelmed, and captured. The liberator of La Plata and
five of his colleagues were thereupon shot. This outrage, equally
remarkable as an instance of atrocity and ingratitude, was a fitting
prelude to Spanish-American history. Before the end of the year the
whole of the north was in the hands of the revolutionists, and about
the same time they experienced an equally valuable success. The
loyalists still held Montevideo and their fleet blockaded Buenos
Aires. Moreno took advantage of the English anxiety for open markets,
and appealed to the English Minister at Madrid. He received the reply
that the British Government could not recognise the blockade, as it
desired to maintain a position of perfect neutrality, and thus a
potent Spanish weapon was rendered innoxious.
However, it was very early evident that unity and federation would not
characterise the Revolution; that each Province would aim at its own
particular independence; that Buenos Aires would not be the New York
of a single new nation. An expedition sent to Paraguay, with the
object of extirpating the Spanish partisans, failed altogether to
attach that country to Argentina. Paraguay, like its neighbours,
preferred independence.
At the same time jealousies broke out between the leaders. Moreno was
worsted in a personal dispute with Saavedra, and at the beginning of
the year 1811 was glad to accept an important mission to England. He
died on the voyage thither. But the revolutionists were reminded that
internal dissensions were out of place by the arrival at Montevideo of
the able and energetic Elio, who had been appointed Viceroy by the
Home Government. Although he was speedily forced to content himself
with holding the town only, he was a source of great trouble to the
Council and formed a valuable rallying-point for the loyalists. The
Peruvian partisans also harassed them in the north, but Belgrano, by
the victory of Tucuman on September 25th, laid the foundations of
Argentine independence. The triumphant general wrote to Buenos Aires:
"Our country may celebrate with just pride the complete victory
obtained on the 25th of September, the anniversary of Our Lady of
Mercy, whose protection we had invoked. We have captured seven guns,
three flags, one standard, fifty officers, four chaplains, two curés,
and six hundred men, besides four hundred wounded prisoners, the
stores belonging to the infantry and the artillery, the largest part
of the baggage. Such is the day's result. Officers and soldiers have
behaved gloriously and bravely. We are pursuing the routed enemy."
This victory freed the north from all fear of invasion in the future.
There is no need to give details of the skirmishes with the royal
forces or the skirmishes between intriguing leaders which occupied the
next eighteen months. It is sufficient to say that during this time
the influence of the soldier San Martin was growing rapidly, and
towards the close of the year 1813 he replaced Belgrano as commander
of the northern army. Hitherto power had been in the hands of two or
three men, among whom Alvear was now the most prominent; but in
January, 1814, a Congress assembled at Buenos Aires, and on the 31st
of that month it chose Posadas, a relation of Alvear, to be Dictator
of the so-called United Provinces. In June Alvear captured Montevideo,
and the hopes of Spain in the Plate district were for ever quenched;
but Uruguay refused to be subordinate to Buenos Aires, and Posadas was
in no position to coerce her. Uruguay, therefore, finally severed the
connection with Argentina, and passes out of our history.
Meanwhile San Martin, who had become Governor of Mendoza, was carrying
on that campaign for the liberation of South America which was to make
his name immortal; but in Buenos Aires affairs were going by no means
well--in fact, anarchy reigned. The appointment of Puirredon as
Dictator brought about some improvement, and on July 9, 1816, the
separation from Spain was formally announced.
The next year San Martin, with an efficient army of four thousand men,
moved to help the Chilians, and gained a glorious victory over the
Spaniards at Chacabuco, not far from Santiago. A year later he won a
no less decisive triumph at Maipu (April 5, 1818), which secured the
independence of Chile, and by his victories he also strengthened the
position of Puirredon and the Government at Buenos Aires.
It was now time for constructive work. A Congress assembled once
more at Buenos Aires, and, on May 25, 1819, promulgated a federal
Constitution on the pattern of the United States of North America. At
the same time Puirredon was glad to resign his difficult position,
and, in his stead, General Rondeau became Dictator, or President. He
was incapable, and the system of government by Juntas or Dictators,
which had distracted the country for ten years, came to an end, and
seemed likely to be succeeded by even worse conditions, for all the
"United Provinces" flew back to particularism and anarchy. But in
1821 the able and honest Rivadavia intervened, and reduced affairs to
some semblance of order. In that year also San Martin entered Lima in
triumph, and it was clearly necessary to organise the new and
sovereign States of South America. In 1822 Lord Londonderry declared
for the part of the English Government that "so large a portion of the
world could not long continue without some recognised and established
relations, and that the State, which neither by its councils nor by
its arms could effectually assert its own rights over its dependencies
so as to enforce obedience, and thus make itself responsible for
maintaining their relations with other Powers, must sooner or later be
prepared to see those relations established by the overruling
necessity of the case in some other form." The United States had
recognised the independence of Argentina, and in 1823 the complicated
state of world politics made decisive action necessary. Spain was once
more in the grip of France, and it was the object of England to
counteract her influence. Accordingly it was intimated to France that
England considered the separation of the colonies from Spain as
complete, and in the December of that year the United States put
forward the celebrated Munroe Doctrine to serve as a warning to France
or any other European Power that might cherish transatlantic designs.
It was on January 23, 1825, that the inevitable result was brought
about. With the countenance of Sir Woodbine Parish, the English
Minister, whose name is preserved by a meritorious work upon the
country where he played so conspicuous a part, the federal States
assembled and decreed the fundamental law of the Constitution. Here we
may date the true commencement of the Republic of Argentina. The
Revolution was at an end. True to the general character of her history
Argentina displayed, in this important struggle, fewer striking events
than any of the other young nations. The battles in her territory
were few, and even the city feuds and inevitable executions were
comparatively mild and infrequent. And yet that Argentina had the
leading share in the Revolution no one can doubt, for, first of all,
she gave to Spanish America that disinterested patriot San Martin, who
was the George Washington of South America; and, in the next place,
the victory of Belgrano at Tucuman went far towards paralysing
loyalist activity in Peru, and finally Buenos Aires was even then
regarded as the capital of the continent, on which were fixed the eyes
of all South American revolutionists, and towards which all the plans
of European statecraft and private intrigue were directed. Argentina
was the leader and organiser of victory.
And what good came of it all? It may be regarded as a regrettable
necessity due to the weakness of Spain. Spain was too feeble and the
other Powers were too alien in every way to control this great Empire.
It was necessary to act; but who will say that the consequences of the
action were wholly beneficial? Argentina exchanged a benevolent, if
unenterprising, Government for a long period of anarchy, alternating
with despotism, but she was less unfortunate than most of the sister
Republics. The men who fought and laboured for the cause of South
American independence had no illusion on the subject. General Bolivar,
the Liberator, when his task was over, said: "This country will
inevitably fall into the hands of the unbridled rabble, and little by
little become a prey to petty tyrants of all colours and races. If it
were possible for any part of the world to return to a state of
primitive chaos, that would be the fate of South America."
South America was in every respect most unfortunate. The weakness
and misfortunes of Spain followed closely upon the growth of the
revolutionary spirit which disturbed the whole world, and though the
Continent was for a long time comparatively little affected by it,
vigorous intrigues in Europe kept it alive, and when the time was ripe
the revolutionists set to work. Equally unfortunate was it that the
Revolution took place at a time when unchecked democracy was
considered a practicable form of government. Experience has shown that
it is beset with difficulties in all States; but where a portion of
the people have political instincts and capacity, public affairs may
go on, even if to some extent hampered by professions of a belief in
ochlocracy, without serious disaster. Few people in the world could
have been found less suited to direct democratic institutions than the
Spanish Creole was at the time of the War of Independence. Little town
communities, paternally governed groups of villages, all with complete
local self-government and united only by common loyalty to a King or
Viceroy--such was the form of government under which the Indo-Spaniards
might have lived and prospered; but the constitutions which they
attempted to formulate were altogether incongruous under the
circumstances. Political theorising has cost South America very dear.
Canning's oft-quoted sentence about the "New World which was called
into existence to redress the balance of the Old" is, in the sense in
which it is often quoted, a piece of cheap rhetoric. But, in fact, he
was arguing that it was not worth while to go to war with France on
account of the marching of French troops into Spain; the present
Spain, he said, was not the country of which our ancestors were
jealous; the Spain over the waters is independent, and the fact has
entirely changed the balance of power.
To suppose, as those who quote the phrase often suppose, that South
America was initiating a happy age in contrast to the wrongs and
oppressions of the Old World, is too extravagant a belief to require
refutation. In the nineteenth century the countries of Europe made
steady progress, and even their internal troubles were generally
fruitful in improved conditions. In South America most of the
countries retrograded, and the whole continent was drenched with blood
uselessly shed. Comparative tranquillity now prevails, but this is due
to the general progress of the peoples--a progress which it would be
rash to say was furthered by their political institutions. The heroics
which have been uttered over the Spanish-America War of Independence
are discounted by the facts of South American history. For a long time
bloodshed and tyranny were its results; the people were as yet
unfitted for full emancipation, and so little advantage has been taken
of the experiences of three-quarters of a century that the promise of
the future is by no means serene, and its chief hope is that material
prosperity may counterbalance defective political conditions. These
are still unsound, and until rulers and subjects advance in civic
capacity the good of Argentina will be the effects rather of the
industry and enterprise of private individuals than of assemblies and
statesmen.
FOOTNOTE:
[48] "The Liberal Creoles were delighted, for experience showed them
the immense resources of their country, and proved that it could
subsist upon its revenues without asking for anything from Peru or
Spain" (Arcos, "La Plata," p. 241).