With the solemn signing of the foregoing articles of capitulation on the
twelfth of August, 1762, began the occupation of Havana by the British,
who thus seemed to have attained the goal of their covetous aspirations.
It was a great day for them; it was a day of mourning for the Cubans.
While these articles of capitulation were in themselves not unjust,
differing in no essentials from those usually exacted by the victors
from the vanquished, the people of Havana found it difficult to obey all
these injunctions coming to them from a foreign authority. History
furnishes abundant proofs that it is comparatively easy to conquer a
country by numerical superiority or clever strategy, but that it is
infinitely more difficult to conquer the hearts of its people. The
Spanish historian Alcazar records an incident belonging to the history
of the capture of Havana which illustrates this point.
As soon as the British were masters of the city Lord Albemarle called an
extraordinary meeting in which he declared to the Municipio that, being
masters of the city by force of arms of King George III. of England,
they had to insist upon obedience and allegiance to him as sovereign.
The Alcalde D. Pedro Santa Cruz at once rose to say that subjects of Don
Carlos III. of Spain could not without committing perjury swear
allegiance to any other monarch. He added: "The capitulation compels us
to passive obedience. Count on this, but never on our dishonor." It
seems that these noble words found an echo in the heart of the British
commander who henceforth let the people choose whether to take the oath
or not.
This story is symptomatic of the attitude of the population of Cuba
towards the conquerors. When the morning of the thirteenth of August,
1762, dawned, the British were in possession of the town and port of
Havana with one hundred and eighty miles to the east and all that tract
of land to the west which terminates the island on that side. They took
without resistance Managuas, Bejucal, Santiago, Mariel and Matanzas. The
commander of the fort of San Severine in Matanzas, D. Felipe Garcia
Solis, had stored up a large amount of provisions and supplies of all
kinds in view of an eventual attack. But when he heard of the
capitulation of Havana, he blew up the fort and retired with part of the
garrison to Santiago. The governor of that city, D. Lorenzo Madriaga,
was recognized as the authority to be obeyed by the people in that part
of the island not taken by the British. Perhaps the British had gauged
the sentiment of the population; perhaps they felt that their forces
were too much weakened by the hardships of the siege. They made no
attempts at further extending their conquest.
According to the agreement between Admiral George Pococke and Lord
Albemarle on the one side and the Marques of the Royal Transports and D.
Juan de Prado on the other side, the Spanish garrison was to retire with
military honors; artillery arms and munitions were to be delivered to
the British; the Spanish troops were to be sent back on British
transports; but the British were to respect the Catholic religion, its
ministers, and churches, hospitals, and colleges; and the population was
not to be disturbed in the exercise of wonted occupations and
employments; and the laws of Spain were to remain in force. On the
thirteenth of August, the gates of Tierra were opened to the British
and on the following day they entered with two pieces of artillery and
planted their flags on the forts. The following day the Spanish vessels
were delivered to them: _Tigre_, _Reina_, _Soberano_, _Infante_,
_Aquilon_, _America_, _Conquistader_, _San Antonio_ and _San Genero_.
Many merchant vessels in the bay were also taken. The value of their
booty was estimated at fourteen million pesos. But according to Valdes
their losses during the first twenty four days of the siege had been
seven thousand men, some killed in combat, some deserters, but the
greater part victims of the Cuban climate. Hence in spite of
reenforcements from Jamaica and North America, they had only three
thousand men of infantry when Havana was taken.
The departure of the Spanish troops was scheduled for the twenty-fourth
of August. The British held ready for them three transports which on the
thirtieth sailed through the gate of la Punta. One of them carried the
Governor and his family. On his arrival in Madrid he was tried by a war
council, which for his lack of foresight and energy in preparing the
defense of Havana, condemned him to exile. But the king commuted the
sentence to imprisonment for life. The British commanders, no longer
needed in Havana, worn out with fatigue and weakened by the climate,
also hurried to leave. Brigadier Burton returned to North America,
Admiral Keppel to Jamaica, Pococke to England. He met with terrible
tempests, lost one ship of line, and twelve transports. But the greeting
he received on his arrival in England was most enthusiastic. Though the
parliament was divided on the question of extending British conquests in
Spanish America, there was still the party representing commercial
interests to be reckoned with.
With a promptness quite unusual at that time a book was published
shortly after the capture of Havana, which outlined the course to be
pursued in order to reap the benefits of the South Sea trade, which so
far had been in the hands of the French and Spanish. It was entitled
"The Great Importance of the Havana" set forth in an "Essay on the
Nature and Methods of Carrying on a Trade to the South Sea and the West
Indies, by Robert Allen, Esq., who resided some years in the Kingdom of
Peru, London, printed for J. Hinxman in Paternoster Row and D. Wilson in
the Strand, in 1762. Dedicated to the most Hon. Thomas Harley, Esq., M.
P. and Merchant of London." The author begins with reference to an old
tradition that a Prince of Wales had made an expedition to the coast of
Mexico in 1190 and died there. Upon this tradition and the assertion
that the Mexican language abounds in Welsh words, he seems to base the
right of British priority to Spanish America.
Mr. Allen was evidently much concerned with the activity of the French
in West Indian waters. He says: "As to the slave-trade, it is too well
known that the French are now under contract with the Spanish Assiento
to supply them with four or five thousand negroes yearly and the greater
profits and advantages which they reap from this trade has encouraged
them to send many strong ships yearly to the coast of Africa which have
not only taken many of our own ships on that coast, but also destroyed
several of our many forts and settlements and likewise made several new
settlements of their own, all which has been frequently represented both
in the governing and legislative bodies of Britain, and no effectual
reconciling remedy taken yet." He continues, that the channel of Spanish
trade is quite altered from Jamaica "and the French, a nation whom we
least suspected in trade, have of late years engrossed much of the
greatest part thereof to themselves." He tries to rouse the British to
the need of regaining the Spanish market in America, which was slowly
slipping away from them, by a strenuous appeal to his Majesty to
encourage such commerce by underselling the French. After giving a list
of commodities and manufactures proper for this trade, he adds the
postscript:
"If Queen Anne, at the treaty of Utrecht, obtained so valuable a branch
of trade as the Assiento contract by the success of the Duke of Marlboro
alone, which according to stipulation was for two millions in shares
annually, but doubly augmented under that contract in other goods (tho'
given up by the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle with our right of logwood) how
much more ought we to insist on valuable terms since the reduction of
Cuba, the key to the South Sea trade?"
While the British people, like all people under a mass suggestion, were
giving themselves up to jubilating and celebrating, the politicians in
Parliament and elsewhere to controversies on technical questions, the
business world of London and the great industrial and manufacturing
centers of the country were considering investments in West Indian trade
and calculating the profits to be made thereby. After all human nature
is very much alike the world over. That the British as victors were also
not different from other conquerors by force of arms and exacted
requisitions and even without any formalities and ceremonies
appropriated the treasures that seemed worth taking possession of, is
evident from many data in the chronicles of those days. Not only were
the royal chests taken, but also the property of private corporations,
and individuals. Some documents relating to the "right of bells" have
been presented and are interesting reading. Lieutenant Colonel Samuel
Cleaveland, Artillery Commander of the island, addressed the following
communication to Bishop Senor D. Pedro Agustino Morell of Santa Cruz,
and to other priests:
"According to the rules and customs of war observed by all official
commanders of artillery in all European countries when a besieged town
surrenders by capitulation:
"I command that the city of Havana and the neighboring towns, where the
army was situated, give account of all the bells found in all the
churches, convents and monasteries, as well as in the sugar-plantations,
and of other metals similar to bells, in order that said point shall be
put into effect.
"Havana, 19 August, 1762.
"SAMUEL CLEAVELAND,
"Lieutenant-Colonel of Artillery."
The bishop addressed a letter of inquiry concerning this "Derecho de
companes" to Lord Albemarle and received the reply, that the war custom
was well known, that the chiefs of artillery receive a gratification
from any besieged and captured town or city, and that the
Lieutenant-Colonel insisted upon compliance with his demand, adding,
however, that it would not be disproportionate. Cleaveland was offered
one thousand pesos in place of the coveted bells, but the British
considered this amount too small, and the bishop received another letter
from Lord Albemarle, which reads:
"Illustrious Sir:
"The compensation offered to the Commandant of Artillery of His British
Majesty for the bells of the city is so low as to compel me to express
my indignation. In order to have the matter settled, I say, that your
Reverence can give the said official for all the churches ten thousand
pesos and I am in the hope that this letter will deserve your immediate
attention.
"Your obedient servant,
"ALBEMARLE.
"Havana, 27 August, 1762."
The Bishop tried to obtain the sum demanded by alms and collections
among his parishioners. But at a meeting on the thirty-first of August
it was seen that the collection amounted only to one hundred pesos and
four reales, which together with the previous one thousand pesos did not
nearly approach the sum required. This was communicated to the British
General with the remark that it would be impossible to raise more. This
communication received no reply and the Commander of Artillery came to
ask for the delivery of the bells, although this was not to take place
until September fourth. He did not receive the bells, for the ten
thousand pesos were got together by a loan, and the money was paid to
Cleaveland on the sixth of that month.
Difficulties between the British authorities and the Spanish clergy
increased as time went on. On the twentieth of August the Junta of
priests and prelates had a meeting at which was discussed the demand of
the British Lieutenant-General, the local governor of the place, for a
church in which the Anglican worship was to be instituted. The Bishop
decided at once to send the communication to said governor, explaining
to him that this demand was not contained in the articles of
capitulation and if his Excellency had some other basis to justify his
claim, he should communicate it. In reply the Bishop received on the
thirtieth of August the following letter:
"Havana, Aug. 30, 1762.
"Rev. Sir:
"I wish and ask that your Reverence provide for the British troops a
church for their divine worship, or that an alternative be arranged with
the Catholics for such hours in the morning or evening, in which they
don't use their church.
"I request at the same time that an account be given me of all churches,
convents, monasteries of every denomination, that are comprised in the
jurisdiction of the Bishop of Cuba, as well as of Superiors and public
officers associated with them.
"Very respectfully, etc.,
"ALBEMARLE."
In a long letter dated September second, 1762, the Bishop replied, that
he had to consult with the government of his Spanish Majesty and briefly
avoided complying with the demand. Thereupon he received a caustic
communication from Albemarle saying:
"Sir:
"I received your very large letter, but which is no answer to mine. I do
not know having read a particular Capitulation made with the Church, but
I am sure that there is none that can exclude the Subjects of H. British
Majesty of their public worship in churches; and for that reason, if you
do not assign me a church I shall take one that suits me best, and
please remember that all Ecclesiastical employes or dignitaries have to
receive my approbation, and also that you better comply with my demand,
and cease writing such long Epistles.
"ALBEMARLE.
"Havana, September 4, 1762."
After a consultation with the other prelates the bishop informed
Albemarle that since he was so decided, he should choose any church that
he liked best. Albemarle selected the Church of San Francisco. But he
insisted upon his other claims, as can be seen from the following letter
dated September 25:
"Some time ago I asked for a list of all Ecclesiastical Benefices (to
which is associated a curacy) of the Donation of Your Honor; and once
more I repeat my wish to be complied with without loss of time.
"I learn that the Jesuit college received in their order an English
official dismissed from the Royal Service on account of his bad
proceedings; I can hardly believe that such a thing has been done
without my license. That order has even in Spain a bad reputation, and
in Portugal and France they have been expelled. If they are not entirely
under your jurisdiction, send to me their Rector, etc.
"ALBEMARLE."
The Bishop replied that the story about the admission of the discredited
Englishman into the Jesuit seminary was altogether untrue, since the
authorities of that college could not admit anybody, this being a
special privilege of the Provincial residing in Mexico. A somewhat
amusing incident of these disputes between the British authorities and
the Spanish clergy of Havana is recorded in the following letter of the
Bishop dated October twenty-second. It reads:
"Your Excellency:
"Yesterday between 4 and 5 o'clock in the afternoon, there called on me
on your part a person whose name and nationality I do not know. All I
know is that he speaks Spanish, though with a foreign accent and wears
golden earrings as is customary with women. He addressed me with
'Usted.' I informed him in the conversation that in speaking to me he
had to use a more dignified title. He replied that he would always use
'Usted.' It then occurred to me that this obstinacy might be justified
by his higher rank. I asked him and he said that he had no other rank
but that of a bomb-thrower in his Majesty's name. He continued in his
way of speaking to me with a loud voice, and since in all his conduct he
was wanting of the respect due to my dignity, I deem it fair that it
should be corrected and that your excellency give me satisfaction."
Lord Albemarle seems to have paid no attention to this letter. But on
the same day the Bishop received another urgent order in which Lord
Albemarle, as Governor and Captain-General of the island, insisted in
his demand to receive a list of all ecclesiastical orders and benefices,
in order to know and be the "competent judge" of the persons appointed
by the Bishop and be able to consent to their appointment. The Bishop in
his reply referred to his previous letter, stating that the Governor
could neither before nor after the appointment be a competent judge of
the appointees, since ecclesiastics, according to all rights, were
exempt of protests by the laity, and their privileges were inviolate.
According to the historian Blanchet, Bishop Morrell was at the end
exiled to Florida for having refused to obey certain orders given by the
British authorities.
Although Albemarle cannot be said to have governed with the tyranny that
characterized the German governors of occupied territories in the recent
war, he failed to win the people. Those residents of Havana who were
able to leave the place, moved into the country or to towns like
Villa-Clara. The peasants of the neighborhood, who had carried on a
profitable trade with the city in garden and dairy products, fowl,
venison, etc., preferred to renounce these profits rather than go to the
market and have the British buy what their soil had raised and their
hands had tended. The spirit of the people was unanimous in the hatred
of the enemy conquerors. Their intemperance, their customs, and even
their language irritated them. Altercations that terminated in bloodshed
became more and more numerous as time went on. Any act of violence
against the British was severely punished, and not a few Cuban "rebels"
were executed; the atmosphere of Havana was soon charged with invisible
mines that a spark could set off.
Complying with the orders of the British government, Albemarle had to
exact the payment of certain sums from the population, including the
clergy and the religious organizations, and found great difficulty in
enforcing these orders. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that the
feelings of the population were being deliberately hurt, especially by
the disregard of the British authorities for the institutions maintained
by the clergy. Thus a wave of indignation swept over the city, when the
beggars and the sick were ejected from the convent of San Juan de Dios,
which was turned into a hospital for the British. Without remuneration
they occupied almost one-third of the buildings subject to an
ecclesiastical tax, they transformed private residences into jails; they
seized merchandise and funds that were owned by the Real Compania de
Comercio and when these were claimed as private property, they were
returned only after payment of one hundred and seventy-five pesos. As
the tension grew crimes committed from vindictiveness increased among
the population. M. Savine, the French writer referred to previously,
reports that the Guajiros of the mountains poisoned the milk furnished
to the garrison. A Cuban "rebel" who had escaped from the jail went
about in the part of the island not occupied by the British and preached
a "holy war" against the invaders of the island. Conditions were such
that Havana might have become at any moment the scene of a new Sicilian
Vespers.
It was at this time that the Commissary D. Lorenzo de Montalvo wrote to
the Minister of War at Madrid under date of October eighteenth, 1762:
"The extraordinary mortality of the British troops has reduced them to
the state which Your Excellency will see from the included papers. If at
this moment eight or ten vessels arrived with two or three thousand men
to debark, it would not be forty eight hours before they would
capitulate."
There was indeed a movement on foot in the unoccupied part of Cuba to
collect a force, march against Havana and deliver it from the British
conquerors. A force of guerilleros was ready for action under command of
the intrepid Aguiar. He was only waiting for enforcement promised him by
Governor Madriaga of Santiago, who had three hundred and fifty men with
two thousand and five hundred guns, collected at Yaguas and Villa-Clara.
But he lingered at Yaguas and it was supposed that he was afraid of
losing his position if the British should decide upon moving against
Santiago. Madriaga was however associated with Aguiar, D. Lorenzo
Montalvo, D. Nicolas Rapua, D. Pedro Calvo de la Puerta, D. Augustin de
Cardenas and other prominent citizens and patriots of Cuba in a pact to
reconquer Havana at an opportune moment, and action may have been
delayed only because rumors were afloat that peace was about to be
signed.
In Spain itself feeling ran high. The provinces of Murcia, Granada,
Aragon, Valencia and Catalonia sent an address to King Charles III.
asking to defend the colonies. It said among other things:
"Sir:
"Now is the moment to hold high the glory of the nation; let us
humiliate under your auspices ambitious England which in her folly
proposes nothing less than the ruin of all Europe. As her only aim is
commerce, that is sordid gain, she wages a regrettable war upon a
warlike nation that does not know meanness and has no other sentiments
than the love of her king and her country. Money may be needed in
London, as once in Carthage; but virtue, constancy and heroism we shall
never lack, as they never failed the ancient Romans."
But there is no record that this address elicited anything more than an
appreciative reply from the government at Madrid. For the diplomatic and
political world of Spain as of Great Britain was indeed occupied in
considering a settlement of the Spanish-British problem.
Nevertheless there were Spaniards, who even at that trying time must
have viewed the state of things dispassionately, for the historian
Pezuela gives the British much credit for the moderation and
conciliatory tendency of their policy during the occupation. He records
that they did not materially alter the general regime of the city, nor
even make any radical changes in the municipal government. On taking
possession of the town, Albemarle named for civil lieutenant-governor
the Alderman D. Sebastian Penalver, a prominent lawyer; for the latter's
Suplente or alternate, the alferez real or chief ensign D. Gonzale
Oquendo, and for common civil judge D. Pedro Calvo de la Puerta, a
high-constable and property holder highly esteemed by his fellow
citizens. These three officials by their wisdom, unselfishness and
impartiality lightened the burden of the foreign yoke.
Both Albemarle and Keppel had soon recognized some of the greatest evils
of the colonial administration, among them the corruption of the lower
courts and the amazing amount of bribery going on even in the higher
departments of the government. They tried to check the malpractice of
lawyers, and in a decree dated the fourth of November, 1762, prohibited
the making of gifts or presents of any kind to the principal governor
and to the inferior authorities, considering such practice as means to
promote dishonesty. However, the attitude of the great majority was and
remained hostile to the British and it needed all the prudence and tact
of men like Oquendo, Penalver and Puerta to avoid conflicts between the
citizens and the foreign authorities. Nor should the Intendant Montalvo
be forgotten, whose services were highly appreciated by Albemarle.
In the British parliament there existed at that time a state of turmoil.
The Earl of Bute, friend and adviser of George III., did not care for
further extension of Britain's colonial possessions in America, saying
that it was much greater importance "to bring the old colonies in order
than to plant new ones." Others favored the return of Havana to Spain in
exchange for Porto Rico and Florida. On the twenty-sixth of October,
1762, the British King expressed his approval of the latter proposal and
urged the diplomats engaged in deliberating upon the subject speedily to
draft a treaty. He wrote to Bedford, as quoted by Bancroft in his
"History of the United States," Vol. III., p. 298:
"The best despatch I can receive from you will be those preliminaries
signed. May Providence, in compassion to human misery, give you the
means of executing this great and noble work."
The terms proposed to the French according to the same authority were
severe and even humiliating, and Choiseul is reported as having said:
"But what can we do? The English are furiously imperious; they are drunk
with success; and, unfortunately, we are not in a condition to abase
their pride."
The preliminaries of a peace which was to bring a certain stability to
the colonies in America and permanently settle the claims of the three
nations that had for three centuries been striving for supremacy in the
New World, were signed on the third of November, 1762. They contained
the following stipulations: England was to receive the Floridas and some
islands in the West Indies, but abandon Havana; it was to have Louisiana
to the Mississippi, but without the island of New Orleans; it was
likewise to have all Canada, Acadia, Cape Breton and its independent
islands, Newfoundland, except a share of France in the fisheries, with
the two islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon as shelter for their
fishermen. In Africa England was to have Senegal, which insured for it
the monopoly of the slave-trade. In the East Indies, too, France
recovered only what she possessed on the first of January, 1749, the
rest going to England and assuring its sway over that territory. France,
on the other hand, to indemnify Spain for the loss of Florida, ceded to
Spain New Orleans and all Louisiana west of the Mississippi. There is no
doubt that France came off worst in this settlement; but, as her
minister Choiseul said, it was at the time helpless. In England, which
by this settlement laid the foundations of her great power, there was a
great display of flamboyant oratory. The king was reported to have
said:
"England never signed such a peace before, nor, I believe, any other
power in Europe."
Granville, then, on his deathbed, exclaimed:
"The country never saw so glorious a war or so honorable a peace," and
Bute, roused to defend it against some opponents in Parliament, uttered
these words significant of the high esteem in which he held himself and
whatever services he rendered England as favorite of the king:
"I wish no better inscription on my tomb than that I was its author."
It is needless to say that the effect of this document upon Spain was of
quite a different nature. For it practically checked for all time her
ambitions for maintaining supremacy in the world her discoverers and
explorers had once claimed under her colors. Cuba, of course, rejoiced
at the prospect of the restitution of Havana. Lord Albemarle, suffering
from the strain of the siege and the climate, as no less from the
realization that he would never be able to reconcile the Cubans to a
recognition of his authority, had left early in the year 1762 and Sir
William Keppel occupied his post. The peace was ratified at Paris on the
tenth of February, 1763, and the people began to look forward with
impatience to the arrival of a new governor from Madrid and to the
debarkation of the British. In spite of the harassing situation which
they had endured during the rule of the enemy they had not been idle,
but planned many improvements and reforms which they promised themselves
to execute as soon as the British domination would end. They had
learned, too, to appreciate the advantages of free trade; for during the
British occupation no less than nine hundred merchant vessels entered
the harbor and not a few cargoes of negroes were landed.