The Creation of aFilipino Consciousness

The Making of the Revolution

The

1880-1895
REVISED EDITION

John N, Schumacher, S,J,

,'
ATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITY PRESS
'
I
 To my Mother

ATENEO DE MANILA UN IVERSITY PRESS

Bellarmine Hall, Katipunan Avenue
Loyola Heights, Quezon City
P.O. Box 154, 1099 Manila, Philippines
Tel.: (632) 426-59-84 / FAX: (632) 426-59-09
E-mail : unipress@admu.edu.ph
Website: www.ateneopress.org

Revised edition copyright 1997 by Ateneo de Manila University

First printing, 1997 / Second printing, 2000
Third printing, 2002 / Fourth printing, 2009

Cover design by J. B. de la Pena

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the Publisher.

The National Library of the Philippines CIP Data

Recommended entry:

Schumacher, John N.
The Propaganda movement : 1880-
1895 : the creation of a Filipino
consciousness, the making of the
revolution / John N. Schumacher. -
Rev ed. - Quezon City : ADMU Press,
1997
IV

I. Philippines - History -
1812- 1898 - Propaganda. 2. Propaganda
movement - Philippines. I. Title.

0 S675 959.9025 1997 P971000002

ISBN 971 - 550-209- 1 (pbk.)
ISBN 97 1- 550-231- 8 (hb.)
 Contents

Abbreviations ........................ ....... .. ..... ....... ........ .... ........ ............... ... ,,i
Preface to the Revised Edition ...................................................... vii
Acknowledgments .... ............. ................. ............. ........ ............ ......... x
l The Philippine Background ............ ............. ............. .......... ......... .. 1
2 Early Filipino Student Activities
in Spain , 188 0-18 8 2 . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... . ... . .. .. .. ... .. .. ... . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. . 19
3 Journalism and Politics, 1883-1886 ..... ............. ................. ........... 40
4 Espana en Filipinas, 1887 .............. ............... ........... ................ ...... 59
5 The "Noli me tangere," 1887 ...... ... ........................ .................. ..... 83
6 Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Nationalist
Activity in the Philippines, 1887-1888 ....................................... 105
7 The New Filipino Newspaper in
Barcelona, 1888-1889 ......... ....... .. ............... ................ ..... ............ 128
8 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona
of "Th e Propaganda" .. .......... ..... ...... ........ .... ......... .... ... ........ ...... .. 147
9 Filipino Masonry .......................................................................... 171
10 Renewed Activity in Madrid ........................................................ 18 2
11 The Filipino Past and Educatio11
for the Future, 1887-1891 ....... ...... ............... ............................... 212
12 Rizal' s Break with Del Pilar ...... ............. ....... .... ............. ..... ......... 245
13 Decline and Death of "La Solidaridad" ..................................... 281
14 An Assessment ...... .... ........ ........................ ..... .. .......... ..... • • . .• ••• •• • • •• 295
Bibliography ..... ........... .. . .. ..... ...... ... ........ ...... ...... ..... •••• • • • •• •• ••• ••• • ••• 309
Index .... ....... ................. •. •. ••. ••••••••••••.. . . . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. ••••••••••••••••••• • • • • • •• 322
 Abbreviations

ADN Archivo de la Delegacion Nacional de Servicios

Documentales. Salamanca.
AHN Archivo Historico Nacional. Madrid.
AMAE Archi,,o del Ministe1~io de Asuntos Exteriores. Madrid.
ARSI Archivum Romanum Societatis Jesu. Rome.
AT Arcl1ivo de la Provincia de Tarragona de la Compaiiia de
Jesus. San Cugat del Valles. Barcelona.
Ep. Pilar Epistolario de Ma'rcelo H. del Pilar
Ep. Rizal Epistolario Rizalino
Espasa Enciclopedia Universal ilustrada euro,pea-americana (Barcelona:
Espasa-Calpe, 1907-1933)
MBB Museo-Biblioteca Balaguer. Villanueva y Geltru. Barcelona.
NA-DSCM National Archives: Department of State - Constilar
Letters, Manila. Washington, D.C.
NA-PIR National Arcl1ives: Philippine Insurgent Records .
Washington, D.C.
NL Newberry Library. Chicago.
SHM Servicio Hist6rico Militar. Madrid.
 Preface to the Revised Edition

The first edition of this book, over t\-venty years ago, ,,vas dela) ed in
1

its appearance, and almost did not come out at all. One of the Marcos
underlings was alarmed by the subtitle "the makers of revolution."
Though eventually the book appeared ,-vhen the bureaucrat was con-
vinced that it was the Revolution of 1896-98 that was referred to,
perhaps the man was not so wrong after all. There is much in this
book which called for another revolution, not a violent one, but the
one Padre Florentino referred to, speaking for Rizal, at the e11d of
the Fili: "We must win [our freedom] by deserving it, exalting reason
and the dignity of the individual, loving what is just, what is good,
wl1at is great, even to the point of dying for it. When the people rises
to this height, God provides the weapon, and the idols fall, the ty-
rants fall like a house of cards."
In February 1986 the people did rise to that height, and as Rizal
predicted, God did provide the weapons, and the tyrant fell like a
house of cards. I like to think, however, that the relevance of this
book of mine did not cease in 1986. So many of the characters and
situations are still with us, not only tl1ose of Rizal's novels, who 1-e-
main as living as they were then, perhaps with a Filipino face rathe 1-
than a Spanish one, but also those described here, ,-vho took part in,
abandoned, betrayed, or died for the goals of the Propaganda Mo,,e-
ment which made possible the Revolution of 1896.
I have not seen any reason to make major changes in tl1is edition.
Several minor factual errors have been corrected; additional informa-
tion on certain points has been supplied from the few relevant works

• •
Vll
 ...
\ '111

'"
1
l1i cl1 l1a,,e a ppeared si11ce tl1 e first publicati o n ; the bibliography has
bee11 upda ted, thougl1 I have not l1acl tl1e opportltnity to const1lt a
fe,v arcl1ives abroad wl1icl1 l1ave been furtl1er open ed since I first in-
vestigated tl1en1. None of these, however, in my opinio11, would seri-
ously affect any of the major conclusions of this book.
\t\Tl1 e n I pt1blisl1ed the first editio11, the prevailing historical ortho-
doxy, as represented by Teodoro Agoncillo and l1is followers, had writ-
ten off the Propaganda Mo,,ement as a more or less ft1tile "1·eform
1novement," whose inadequacies ,-vould be overcome only by Bonifacio
and the Katipunan. T,-vo decades later, ignori11g what I l1ad w1·itten
l1ere in the meantime , Re11ato Consta11tino felt compelled by his ideo-
logical position to take a similar view. I ha,,e 11ot seen, however, any
reexa1nini11g, much less retutation, of the facts that I have presented
in this book. The major points I have made, and would like to reiter-
ate here are several.
There was a reform movement-11ot only that of Burgos and l1is
colleagt1es, but tl1at which lasted from about 1880 to 1885, and a good
number of Filipinos in Europe never moved or dared to express them-
selves beyond that stage. But after 1885 at least, there was also a sepa-
ratist movement, led cl1iefly by Rizal, but not confined to l1im. As
time went on, the number of advocates of eventual i11dependence
had grown to the majority of tl1e Filipi11os in Europe and their sup-
porters in tl1e Philippines, thot1gl1 few except Rizal and Marcelo del
Pilar dared to put their names to their writings. It is true that the
professed goal was assi1nilation-exte11sio11 of Spanish laws and gov-
ern1ne11 t to the Philippines. As the readiness of many later to collabo-
rate witl1 tl1e Americans would show, this was undoubtedly all that
some wa11ted, but for me11 like Rizal, Del Pilar, Antonio Lt1na, and
otl1ers, it was the only front bel1ind which they could operate in pur-
suit of their real goal, independence of the Philippines from Spai11.
To talk of assimilation in Spain was dangerous enough, to speak of
independence would have been fatal, not only in the Philippines, but
even in the Peninsula.
A third conclusion is that united as the real leaders of the Propa-
ganda Movement might be on the goal of eventual i11depende nce
from Spain, they were irrevocably separated on the strategy to be used.
For Del Pilar it was to make use of jot1rnalism, politics, Mason1)', in
Spain to bring about political meast1res whicl1 would end the l1e-
gemony of the friars in the Pl1ilippines, and thus enable Filipinos to
 •
lX

t1se sim il a r 1ne tl1o ds at hom e to e nd Spanish sove reignty. For Rizal,
on the otl1er l1a11d , everytl1ing directed to Spaniards was a waste of
time ; wl1at was need ed ,.vas to address Filipinos direc tly. Tl1 e goal was
to b uild up a na tio n of Filipin os wl10 would obtain tl1eir rights by
being willin g to stand up for , and , if 11ecessary, to die for thern . Edu-
ca tio n , no t m e rely in tl1e narro,.v sense of i11tellectual instrt1ction, but
m o ral educa tion toward th e asse1·tion of human dignity and equality
Vlas the way he saw. Otl1en.vise, "the slaves of today will be the tyran ts
of tomo rro,.v," even when the Spanish flag vvould have disappeared.
It was in the senrice of this education of l1is people that he had
writte n his no,,els and his historical works; it would be with this goal
in mind that he founded the Liga Filipina, whose legitimate successor
on his d e portation was the Katipunan, not the revived Liga of 1893. If
Rizal would refuse l1is asse11t to the revolt of 1896, it was not because
h e disagreed with its goal, which flowed from his program, but be-
cause the time was not )'et ripe.
Finally, I trust that it is obvious from this book how mistaken is the
effort to pt1t Graciano Lopez Jaena on the same plane as Rizal and
Del Pilar as the "political trinity" of the nationalist movement. The
p a rt Lopez Jaena played was small, and he contributed nothing of
p e rmanent value to the vision of a future Philippines. In the end he
would re nounce the Filipino cause completely in favor of Spanish poli-
tics. It is true he was used by Del Pilar to gain entrance to Spanish
politics and Masonry, as he later complained, but his interests were
elsewhere.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Frankie Sionil Jose,
who i11 1972 first expressed his interest in and published the manu-
script which is so largely concerned with the newspaper, La Solidaridad,
which has given his bookshop and his magazine their names. He has
been gracious enough, too, to permit this new edition in the Ateneo
P1·ess Ce11tennial series. I am also grateful to Esther M. Pacheco, di-
rector of tl1e Ateneo de Manila University Press, for inviting me to
pre pare a new edition, and for her unfailing attention to the details
which have h elped ready this book for publication.
 Ackno1vledgments

Tl1e research i11 Spai11 for the Georgetown U 11i,,ersi ty disse1·tation

on ,,vhich this book is based was made possible by a Fulbright Student
Grant in 1962-63. A grant from the Faura Research Center assisted
me in p1-eparing tl1e present work fo1· publication.
My sincere tl1anks go to the ma11y people in the United States,
Spain, Rome, and the Philippines wl10 assisted me with advice and
aided in the location of materials. Similarly thanks a1·e due to the
custodians and staffs of the nu1nerous archives and libraries consulted.
not a few of whom went much beyond the demands of courteotlS
service in making materials available to me.
To name individually all who assisted and encouraged me vvould
demand a lengthy list. But I cannot refrain from expressi11g ffi)' grati-
tude to Francis X. Clark, SJ., who first interested me in Filipino n a-
tionalism in an undergraduate semi11a1- on Rizal almost fifty vea
, 1·s aero
b •
and who has continued l1is interest in my work till the present; to
Mathias Kiemen, O.F.M., Professors Edgar Wickberg and the late Han"''
•
Benda, Horacio de la Costa, SJ., and Alfredo Pa1·pan, SJ., all of ,\,}lorn
read the manuscript in whole or in part at different stages. For u1eir
c1·iticisms and suggestions I am much indebted thougl1 , of course . the
responsibility for tl1e defects of the work is only mi11e.
 CH.'\ PTER l

The Philippine Background

Early History

Spanish so,·e reignt)', first brought to the Philippines by Magellan i11

152 1, "''as fir1nl) establisl1ed by Miguel Lopez de Legazpi when he
1

founded the first permanent Spanish settlement on tl1e island of Cebu.

Legaz1)i a11d }1is successors qui ckly and, for the most part, peacefL1ll)'
brought the larger part of the Islands under Spanish control. Augt1s-
tinia11 friars accompanied Legazpi, and were s0011 followed by other
religious 0 1-ders, so tl1at by the end of a century, the larger part of
tl1e population was Christian .
To an extent st1rpassing t}1at in Ameri ca, the religious orders played
a dominant part in Philippine life . Spa11isl1 colonization was limited
for practical purposes, especial ly after the rapid decay of the
en comie11da system , to the ,valled city of Manila and a few other small
settle m en ts. In the immense majorit)' of to,-vns and ,,illages, even down
to the ni11eteenth century, th e only European to be found ,-vas tl1e
n1issio11af)', and the Spanish governme11t depended on him to con-
trol, and i11 large pa1-t administer, its colo11y.
Priests directed the building of roads and bridges, founded and
directed the schools, supe rvised local nati,,e officials, resolved their
problems, and d efended them against the exactions of Spanish gover-
nors and e n comenderos. In the unceasing raids carried on by the
Muslim Moros from tl1e soutl1em Islands on Christian settlements
'
parish priests frequen t])' h ad to organize the resistance and, mo1·e
than once. pu t themselves at the h ead of the native militia to carry
the war against the e 11emy.
1
2 'f/1e P/1.ilijJ/Jin.e Br,rl?groi, 11rl

Up to tl1e e nd of tl1 e eigl1tee ntl1 cen tLif)' tl1 e Pl1ilippines m eant

Ii ttle to Spai 11 in a 1na te rial wa)' except as th e te rm in us of the gall eon
t1·ad e ,vith Nlexico, intermedia11, be nveen tl1e merchants who floc ked
to Manila ,vith luxt1ry goocls from Cl1ina a 11d th e silver-rich markets
of Ne,,v Spai11. On this trade the Spaniards of Ma11ila live d and pros-
IJered , a11d ,,vere ge11e1·ally content to leave tl1e rest of th e country to
its patriarcl1al life t1nder its p1iests.
By the e11d of tl1e eigl1tee11th centu11 110,-ve,,er, the stirrings of a
1,

new era were disce1·nible. Tl1e i11trodt1ction of the tobacco monopoly,

the promotion of agricultt1re b)' enlightened governors-gen e ral like
Jose Basco )' Vargas and b)' the Royal Pl1ilippine Company, the r elax-
i11g of rest1·ictio11s agai11st foreig11ers, the opening of the Pl1ilippines
to ,-vorld trade in 1831 all helped to bring new life to the colon)'·
Moreover, the g1·0\ving economic prosperity gradually led to the rise
of a well-to-do class of mestizos and natives.

Nineteenth-Century Spain

Meanwhile, profot1nd changes had been taking place ,-vithin Spain

itself, many of vvhich were to have their reperct1ssions \vi thin the Phil-
ippines, contributing to the rise of Filipino nationalism. U11der diffe r-
ent conditions in the mother cot1ntry Filipino nationalism \\lould ha,·e
emerged as a matter of course, but the political, social, and economic
situation of Spain in the latter half of the nineteenth centt1ry '\\'as of
great significa11ce in setting the course which Filipino nationalism ac-
tually took and, particularly, for determining the t)rpe of acti,rit)· cai·-
ried on by Filipino leade1·s.
The first three quarters of the nineteenth centu11' l1ad been a pe-
riod of almost uninterrupted chaos a11d tt1n1ult for Spain. l Jnder co,·er
of the War of Independence against the F1·ench in,·aders a11d the "in-
truder king," Joseph Bonaparte, the first steps to,vard constitutio 11 al
government l1ad bee11 taken ,.vl1en the Constitt1tion of 18 12 ,vas pr..:>-
claimed at Cadiz by the Liberal Cortes, purporting to act in tJ1e 11a 111 e
of Fernando VII. On l1is restoration in 1811, Fe rnando l1ad quickl, ,

returned to absolute governn1ent, and except fo1· a11other co11stitt1-

tional interlude, 1820 to 1823, l ,iberals suffered more or less cor1tint1-
ous repressio11 until Fern,tr1do 's clea th in 1833.
He ,-vas st1cceeded by his infant dat1gl1ter Isabel, tinder th e regenl·~·
of he r mother Ma1·ia Cristi11a. Alr·eady 1·e\·o lts had broken o ut a rnong
 The Pliilippin,e Background 3

the followers of Don Carlos, th e King's you11ge r brother, in support

of the latter's claim to the throne. As tl1e Carlists were largely made
tip of the absolutists and traditionalists ,vho l1ad found Fernanclo i11-
sufficie ntly reactionaI)', Marfa Cristi na inevitably sought and wo11 the
support of the Liberal forces, wl1ose factions were to domi11ate in the
succeeding years.
Tl1ough they managed to bring the Carlist War to an e11d in 1839,
the Liberals proceeded to widen a11d perpetuate tl1e breach benvee11
them and the majority of the clergy. l11 1834 and 1835 mobs bt1rned
religious houses and murdered many of their occupa11ts in tl1e la1·ge
cities of Spain, with the tolerance, if not conniva11ce, of tl1e Liberal
authorities. In 1835 the Jesuits were suppressed, and their property
was confiscated. In 1836 all monasteries and most conve11ts through-
out the country were closed down, and their property ,vas put up for
sale. The new Liberal constitution of 1837 secularized all religious
orders with a few exceptions, which significantly included tl1ose houses
engaged in preparing missionaries for the Philippi11es.
These events had a manifold meaning for the Church in the Phil-
ippines. The exception of the Philippine missiona1-y colleges and of
the friars actually working in the Philippines from the decrees of co11-
fiscation and secula1·ization showed the reliance even anticlerical gov-
ernments placed on the religious orders for administering the affairs
a11d preserving the loyalty of the Philippines. The unjust and vexa-
tious measures of the Liberal governments also had a twofold effect
on tl1e attitudes of the friars.
Their continued existence in the Philippi11es to carry on their reli-
gious work had been made to depend on thei1· secular usefulness to
the Liberal governments. Consciot1sly or u11co11sciously, they were un-
der a compulsion to act more than ever as the representatives of Spain
to uphold the authority of the mother country. At the same time they
inevitably hated the ideology that had actuated their spoliation and
persecution in the mother country, and did all they could to prevent
the introduction of Liberalism a11d its reforms into the Philippines.
Both these attitudes would bring them into conflict with tl1e rising
forces of Filipino nationalism.
TI1e st1cceeding years up to 1868 sa,-v various al ter11ations of ivlod-
erate and Progressive Libe1·al governments, all creatures of military
revolts. At the same time , Isabel II by her vacillatin g incapacit)', her
scandalous private life, her apparently sincere, thot1gh u 11 e 11 Iigh tened
,tnd superstitiot1s, piety, ancl li er l1igl1-l1ancle cl officiot1sness i11 go\·e rn-
111e11t. t1ncler tl1e inflt1e11 ce of li er camari lla steaclily los t fa\'Of. Finall ~
sl1e was overtl1ro,".r11 by the Sep tember Revoluti on of 1868.
T l1e re,,olutio 11a1)' junta dre,,v up tl1e radical Constitutio n of 1869, and
began looki11g arot1nd for a m o11arch. After t:\\'O years of sl1 oppi11g around
tl1e cotirts of Europe, a11d i11cide11tall)' occasioning the Franco-Prussian
War, the provisio n al go, 1e111ment cl1 ose An1adeo of Sa,,oy as king. Th e
latter's abdicatio11 after nvo i11effecti, e and chaoti c years was follo,ved b~·
1

the First Rept1blic, ,vhich four presiden ts withi11 a single year fai led to
goven1 . Mea11wl1ile Spai11 was bei11g prostrated by the cantonal mo,'e-
men t on 0 11e side a11d b)' a ne"'' Carlist ,var on th e o the r .
Fi11ally, the A.ml)' , havi11g closed the Cortes, restored a semblance of
orde1· under the military dictatorship of General Francisco Serrano, and
began to drive back the Carlists. With tl1e countf)' reduced to titter ex-
haustion , the ma11 wl10 ,vas to dominate Spa11ish politi cs for the rest of
tl1e centUf)', Ai1tonio Canovas del Castillo, begar1 to prepai-e tl1e res tora-
tion of the Bourbon 1no11arcl1y i11 the person of )'Oung Alfonso XII, o n
of Isabel II. Though his carefl1l plans to set up the monarch y 0 11 a legal
basis without military intervention ,vere fo1·estalled by General At:senio
Martinez Campos' pro11t1nciarniento i11 favor of Alfonso in December
1874, tl1e restoration took place witl1out notable oppositio11.
All tl1is ferment in Spain l1ad its influence on the cou1-se of Philip-
pine affairs. The deportations conseqt1ent upon tl1e variot1s cot1ps prio r
to 1868 had brought a certain number of Libe ral and Rept1blica11
exiles to the country, who \.\7ere, one may suppose , 11ot co1npletel\·
silent about their ideas and ideals. More impo1·ta11t, the \'ear , foli o ,,·-
ing the Revolution of 1868 the Suez Canal opened, tl1us shortening
the voyage fro1n tl1e motl1er cou11t.1)' fro1n tl1ree 0 1· fot1r 111onth lt)
one. Besides facilitating the journey of Filipi11os to Et1rope, tl1 is ga,·e
a treinendous impetus to tl1e flood of ft1nctionaries \.\ l1icl1 sticct~~-~i,·r 1

regimes had increasingly been sendi11g to the Pl1ilippi11es as tl1e stip-

ply of places for political rewards 0 11 the Pe ni11sula pro,·ed i11 adt.. qti,\ ti.·
I
to the demand.
The Revoltttio 11 itse lf, most r-adical of th e cl1a11ges c>f g<>,·t• 1~1111,t~t ll
till this time, provided 11o t onl)1 ,1 rapid st1ccession ot· go\.·ernn1e nt.s.

-- --- - ----
l . Jose Montero y \ Tidal, J·listoria wn,,.ral flf l◄'ilipi1i,1_1; ,J, ,dt ,I rlt1cu.lmmie-,,10 dP d trha-'
l slrL~ litista ,iue.slros dias (3 vols.; Madrid : 1'c llo , 1887-95), 3:90-9 1. 1r11J n ~ rt1 e :\t~· 1.)f
the Ayer Collection of Ne \.'1'be rry l.ibra ry tl1ere is i i contide ntiaJ lctt t:'r fror, 1 <.;o,i:-m or-
 Tlie Philippine Backgro1lnd 5

each accompanied by new applications of the spoils system, bt1t a ne,-v

governor-general and an overseas minister anxious to institute the n e,-v
democratic practices of the Peninsula i11 the Philippines as well. Tl1e
governor-general was Carlos Maria de la Torre; the minister, Segismu11do
Moret Y Prendergast. But before consideri11g the measures taken by these
n1en and their results, it is necessary to take a look at the increasing
agitation by tl1e native clergy, an activity intimately linked to the refo1-m
n1ovement that would be initiated by Moret and De la Torre.

Tl1e Filipino Clergy and the Cavite Mtitiny

Tl1e expulsion of the Jesuits in 1768 a11d tl1e resounding failure of

an ill-planned and impetuous attempt to replace the religious pa1-ish
priests with hastily-ordained and largely unfit Filipino secular p1iests
l1ad made the four orders of friars.-the Dominicans, Franciscans,
Augustinians, and Recoletos (Discalced Augustinians)-more secure

Gen e ral Narciso Cla, e ria to tl1e alcalde-mayor of the Pro,ri11ce of Tondo, dated 12 Feb
1

1849, infonning l1im that tl1e l1ome governme11t l1ad sent a nun1ber of political ltnde-
sirablcs to tl1e Philippines, who ,.,..,ere to be distributed among the various pro\rinces.
TJ1 ey were to be ,vatched carefully so that they 1night 11ot i11fect the Filipi11os ,vi tl1
t11eir ideas, nor form proselytes among them, etc. This is evidently a form letter di-
rected to all the alcaldes-mayores to whose provinces tl1e deportees were bei11g se11t.
As to tJ1 e flow of fltnc tionaries to tl1e Philippines, tl1ere ,vere complai11ts as early as
1838, ,vJ1en an Augustinia11 friar complained of the 11umber ha\ri11g doubled since
18 18, with the creation of 11e,v posts simply to pro\ride for friends and relatives (Suci1ita
,nemmia que contiene el estado actual de las fs/,as Filipinas pm· itn verdadero espaiiol [Valladolid:
Roldan , 1838), 57-58). T e n years later a Frencl1 mjlitary officer reported on the great
excess o f functionaries, wl10, he asserted , only retarded the progress of business, a
number which )1ad triple d since 1820 (Th. Aube, "Manille et les PJ1ilippines,'' Revue
des deux Nlondes, 5 serie, 22 (1848): 347-48). Baltasar Giralidier, a long-time reside nt
of the P}1ilippines and publisher of various newspapers in Manila, saw the difficul ty in
J888 of tJ1e flood offunctionaries coming from the Peninsl1la, depriving the Filipinos
wh o had previou sly l1eld many o f these positions (Los Fra.iles de Filipirias. Breves
ronsideraciones de actualidad, escritas por un espaiiol pe-nirlsular [Madrid: Pe rez Dtibrull,
1888], 23). See also V. de Mascaro del Hierro, A 11ii simpatico a,nigo N. reside1ite en
lvlariila [Malaga (?). 1870 (?)], 3-6. It would seem the n , tl1at prior to 1869, thougl1
there v.ias already considerable bureaucratic o,,er-inflation, it l1a d not been so easy to
send personnel fro m the Pe ninsula as it was after the o p e ning of the Suez. It li ad
therefore been bo tl1 less exte11ded and less obnoxious to the Filipi 11 os, wl1o l,cld 50111 e
of the posts.
6 Tlif Pl1ilippine Brtcl<groitn,rl

than eve r· in th e ir positio11 as tl1 e m a instay of tl1e Cht1rch i11 tl1 e Pliil-
ippin es. T l1e fears aroused i11 Span isl1 governn1en ts SLll)sequen t to tli e
e1na11cipation of Mexi co 'vvith the 1)articipatio11 of native priests caLtsed
tl1e State likewise to put its d e pendence on the friars, vv110 were, at
least in the ninetee11 th cen tLlf)', all Peninst1lar Spa11ia1·d s, exalting the ir
2
position a t the expe nse of tl1e nati,,e secLtlar priests.
Just as tl1e Filipino cle rgy was begi11ning to raise itself to hig h er
intellectL1al a11d moral standards, th e move to restric t its influence
grew apace. Fatl1er Pedro Pelaez, a Pl1ilippi11e-bo1·11 Spaniard vvh o rose
to the position of ,ricar capitular and ten1porarily ruled tl1e A1·c hdio-
cese of Manila after tl1e death of Archbishop Jose Arangt1ren in 1861 ,
led the fight against the successive royal decrees tu1·11ing secular par-
ish es over to the friars . The struggle l1ad beco111e particL1larly acute
after tl1e 1·eturn of the JesL1its to tl1e Islands in 1859.
Assigned to co11vert the still pagan a11d Muslim peoples of Mindanao,
the J esuits were given charge over tl1e entire island , including some
parishes among Christia11s held by the Recoletos on the no rthe1·n coast.
The latter were given in compensatio11 parishes in tl1e A.1.-chdiocese of
Manila which had till then been administered by the Filipi110 clerITT··
Since some of these were among tl1e wealthiest parish es in the coun-

2. For a good account of tl1e Spa11ish policy on a Filipino clergy a11d an analys is of
tl1e problems, see H oracio de la Costa, SJ., "The Developme11t of tl1e 1ati, e ClerQ"\· 1
0
i,1
me Philippines," in Gerald H . Ande rson (ed.) , Stu.dies in Philippine Chi,rcli Hist0 , 1, (Im aca
-
and London: Corn ell University Press, 1969) , 65-104. The precedent of the l\1exican
clergy's part in tl1e emancipation of that cottntry recurs fre qt1ent1~, in tl1e poletll ic
literature of tl1e ni11eteenth ce11tury. An example is one of tl1e pa111phlets of the co,i-
troversy led by Father Pedro Pelaez, discussed belo,,v, enti tled Refutaci611 al ,nanuscrito
de un sacerdote indigena cif lczs Islas Filipinas acerca de la a,novilidad de los Cttras Regularts
(Madrid, 1863), pro bably by a friar. This pamphlet l1as joined t o it tl1e leafle t '"liicti
was being refttted, e11titled Papel volante que un Sacerdote del Ciera Secultlr /ln,6 en persona
a domicilio CL Los miembros del Consejo de A{itnin.i.slraci6n para q11e en su i1isla _fallmro Ir.
exposici6n de los Se1iores Diocesanos cotno se pi<ie.
Though u1ere seen1s to l1ave been no absolute prohibitio11 o f Filipi11os c- tllt'nnR
u1e re ligious orders, and a fe,-v mestizos a11d creoles at le ast l1ad bce11 friars ir 1 tll<.'
earlier cei1tu ries, t11is seems no t to liave been tn.1e at all i11 tl1 t' 11ine tcc r1th , perli Jps as
a reaction against m e sect1larizatio n su-uggles a11d tl1cir tragic conscqt1e 11c-e s uit dt'r
Archbisl1o p Sanc11o d e San ta Jt1sta. See tJ1e testin1011y o [ tl1e friar provincials be fc) rc
tlle Taft Philippine Co mmission in 1900 ( l l.S. Sena te , l~and field for 1:crl.e~ia.stirnl or
r:tr..
Religious Llses in tlie Philifr!Ji11.e Islands, Docun1e nt 190: 56t11 t-:o ng re ·s, 2ncJ Ses.- 1011
[Wasl1 ingto11, D.C.: Gove r11n1 e nt P1i11ting Office-, 1~10 I ) , 48 , 66, 72 ) .
 Tlie Pliili/J/Ji11e Bacllground 7

try a11d since tl1e ir loss 1neant that 1nemlJe rs of tl1 e Filipi110 cle rgy
would have little hope of becoming pa1·ish pri ests, tl1 e ot1tcry was great.
Pelaez, howe ver, died the next year in the r1.1i11 s of th e Ma nilct catl1 e-
dral duri11g the earthqt1ake ,,vl1icl1 dest1·oyed it. 3
Though the campaig11 of tl1e Filipi110 secular clerg) against tl1e f1·iar1

parish pri ests suffered a tempo1·ary setback, a pupil of Pelaez, Fa tl1 e r

Jose Burgos, soon took over its leade1·ship. At this jt1nctt1re De la Torre
arrived as governor-general , appointed by the p1·ovisional gove rnme nt
set up after the Revolution of 1868. Tl1 e 11e¼'S of the Revolutio11
spurred a group of liberal-mi11ded creole and mestizo lawyers a nd
merchants to agitate for reforms, with Fathe1· Burgos and l1i s support-
ers amo11g the cle1·gy joining tl1em.
De la Torre encouraged the aspiratio11s of tl1e reformists, abolisl1ed
censorship of the press, and raised e)rebrows in Spa11ish Manila by
receiving a demonstration of Filipinos into l1is palace and allegedly
joining them in a toast to liberty. Refo1·m commissions ,,vere set up
and public discussions took place i11 tl1e newspapers for the first time.
But on the heels of tl1e work of these 1·eform commissions, of which
Fatl1er Joaquf11 Fonseca, O.P., was a member, came a series of de-
crees from the ne,-v gover11ment set up in 1870, ,,vitl1 Segismt1ndo Moret
as overseas minister, wl1ich were bound to alienate the sympathy of
the friars for any reforms. Among Moret's decrees we1·e 011e taking
tl1e University of Santo Tomas from tl1e Dominica11s and placing it
under the government, a11d anotl1e1· authorizing all friars to secularize
themselves, while assuring them continued possession of their par-
4
ishes in defiance of their religious superiors.
With the accession of Amadeo, however, De la Torre was replaced
by General Rafael de Izquierdo in April 1871. Izquierdo, thougl1 the
nominee of an anticlerical constitutional regime, quickly ct1t off tl1e
reforinist discussions his predecessor had encouraged and 1noved to
return to the former status quo, while Moret's st1ccessor ,,vitl1dre,,v 11ot
only the antifriar decrees, but tl1e reform dec1·ees. Tl1e unfortt111ate

3. Pe laez carrie d o n his campaign not only fro m his official positio 11 as ac tii1g
archbist1 op, but be fore a nd after, also in Madrid, esp ecially througl1 tl1 c 11 ev.·sp ape r El
Clamor Publico. A p amphl e t publisl1e d anOn)1m ou sly a t tl1is tinie conta i11 s mticti of the
docume n tation of his campaig n: Documentos imp orla rt l f's para la c-u,,stio1, prodintlf' sobre la
/mroision de curatos m Filipinas (Ma drid: El Clam o r Pu blico, 1863).
4. Mo ntero y Vi dal, Historia, 3:498-533; AJi N, l lltran1ar, leg. 53,14,
8 TliP Plzilippinf Backgrou11d

lumping of tl1e progressi,,e reform decrees with oth ers directly ain1 ed
at dest1·0)1ing the work of· the friars mt1st have }1ad its influe n ce on
the friars' opp ositio n to later reform m ovemen ts, wl1icl1
r;
they would
associate with tl1e ea1·lie1· one that was hostile to them ..)
On 20 January 1872, a mutiny broke out among the Filipino sol-
diers i11 tl1e arsenal of Cavite, some thirty miles down the Bay fi·om
Manila. Thougl1 there is little con,rincing evidence that more than a
mt1tiny over local g1ievances was in,,ol,,ed (one qt1ickly put down by
Filipino troops), the autl1orities took advantage of tl1e h ysterical at-
mosphere to arrest all who were suspec ted of liberal leanings. Nine
Filipino priests and thirteen laW)'e rs a11d businessmen were d e ported
to the Maria11as Islands, and Fatl1e1· Burgos and two other priests,
Mariano G6n1ez and Jacinto Zamora, were executed by the garrote
6
for alleged complicity in the rebellion. Though there is likewise n o
convincing evidence for it, many Filipinos, at least among the enlight-
ened class, l1eld that tl1e friars were behind the execution of the tl1ree
priests for having been leaders in the campaign for the secularization
7
of the parishes.
The Cavite mutiny and its aftermath l1ad lasting and important ef-
fects on the Philippine situation, particularly where the friars ,,vere
concerned. The Spanish authorities grew more suspicious than e,.re r
of Filipino priests and of Filipino ilustrados as well. They tended to

5. Pablo Fernandez, O.P. , Dorriinicos donde ·nace el sol (n .p., 1958), 377-78. The Do-
minicans had even declared tl1emselves ¼rilling to accept n1any of the cl1a n ges d e-
manded by Moret in thei r scl1ools, but no t their co1n ple te spolia tion.
6. Mo 11 te ro y Vidal, Historia, 3:566-602; Edmond Plauchut. "L'Archipe l d es pJ1ilip-
pines,'' R.evue des Deux Jvl.o·ndes 3e periode, 15 Ju11e 1877, 9 18-23. The ,·ersion of
Plaucllut, a Frencl1man ,vho h ad later \risitecl Manila, is con siderabl)' diffe re ,1 t frorn
that of Montero y ' ' idal, like\vise tl1 en a residen t, and the latter bi tte rly atu'lcks Platiclltlt
(3:595-602). An objective history of tl1e events l1 as not ye t bee n ,V1itte11 , n o r can it bt'
until the records of tl1e trial of the tl1ree priests, appare11tly still ke pt i11 tile t\ rchi,·o
General Militar in Segovia, bu t t1navailable to researcl1 ers, are released. I lla\'e cli~-
cussed tlle pttblished sources in tl1 e article "Publishe d Sources fo r tl1 e Ca,ritc i\1tititl, ..
in iny book The A/faking of a Nation: Essays on Nineteenllt-Cmt1t ,)' Filipi,i o .Vntio,1<z/;,,1
(Quezon Cit)': Ate11eo de Manila University Press, 199 1), 71-90.
7. Archbish o p Meliton Martinez, wh en requested by Goven1or-Gene ra l Izqttit>rd(l
to d e frock tli e three priests before thei r executio n , refused to do so ttnless gi\'en
proof of their g-..iijt. This Izquierdo w,lS tinwilling t <.) d o, a11d tl1e arc hbish op stood
firm . The corresponde nce is in SHM . Ann. 14 , Tab. l , Leg. 4. T l1 e fact tJ1a t t11 e tll ret'
pri ests ,vere executed for their campaign agai11st t11e fri ars seems quite probable . bu t
 Tlie Pliilippine Bacllgr-oun.d 9

back the friars unreservedly, see ing e 11 e mies of Span ish rule i11 all
8
who opposed the friars. On the oth e1- ha nd tl1e reform ist movem e nt
'
of 1·ising Filipino nationalisn1 assumed a decidedly antifriar posture.
Two figt1res wh o stood out in tl1e 11ationalist movement during th e
1880s and 1890s were yot111ger brotl1ers of associates of Fatl1 e r Burgos.

Administrative Organization of tl1e Pl1ilippines

After tl1e ema11cipatio n of Spain's American colonies and the st1b-

seqt1ent aboliti on o f the Co11sejo de Indias, various expedients ,-vere
tried for tl1e governm e nt of the remai11i11g Spanisl1 possessions t1ntil
fin ally the Overseas Mi11istry (Ministerio de Ultra n1ar) was established
in 1863. Under this j t11-isdiction Cuba, Pue rto Rico, a11d tl1e Pl1ilip-
9
pin es were rt1led by gover11ors-general. Tl1e Cortes of 1810 h ad de-
clared the overseas p1-ovinces of Spain to be integ1·al parts of the
m o n arch y, and as such , the Philippines had had represe11tati\1es in
the Cortes during tl1e three constitutional pe1·iods up to 1837.
In 1837 the Libe1·al Cortes abolish ed Philippine representation and
declared that the overseas p1·ovin ces were henceforth to be r11led by
sp ecial laws. The result ,-vas that in the Philippines the Le;,es de l ndias
continued to be basic law, thot1gh gradt1ally so modified by a series of

that the friars were responsible for t11eir execution does not follo,v. Izquierdo ,,~shed
the friars to continue in the parishes from a political poin t of ~ew, ,vhich to l1im
would have been sufficient reason for the execution of tl1 e native priests, from all that
is known of l1is policy. All those d eported to tl1e Marianas we re later pardoned , but
tile Spanish governme nt refused to allow th e o riginal condemnation to be re,1ie,ved
judicially, whi ch gives furtl1er reaso11 to believe that innocent 1ne n had been con-
dem11ed. Even a man who had so li ttle sympathy with the aims of th e nat ionalist
movement as the J esuit Father Pablo Past.ells, in his Misi6n £le la Cornpa'iiia de Jes1'ts de
Filipinas en el siglo XIX (3 vols.; Barcelo11a: Editorial Barcelonesa, 1916-17), 1:127, says
that "Scarcely anyone doubts tl1at amon g them tl1ere were some innocent 1nen , or at
least some who deserved to be treated witJ1 more clen1e ncy."
8. See, e.g., the "Memoria" written by Gover11or-Ge neral Alaminos in I 874, insist-
ing on the patriotism of the friars, "carried even to the poi11L of fanaticisn1," and th e
basic dislO}'alty of the n ative priests (AHN, Ultramar, Leg. 5242).
9. Montero y Vidal, HistU1ia, 3:392-94. Ho,~evcr, Cuba and [>l1ertc> Rico later re-
ceived representation in the Spanisl1 Cortes, and otl1cr rights de1ii ed tlle Filipinos. 111
these l\\'O colo nies, of co11rse, th e larger part of the popL11atio 11 was Spailisll or t)f
Spanish descent, unlike tl1e Philippines.
'
10 Tlie PliilijJ/Ji·ne Ba.cl</troi, nd

royal dec rees exte ncli11g ,,ari ot1s pa rts of Spanish pe11i11sul a r law to th e
Islands as to lea,,e conside1·able co11ft1sion and o ppo rtt1ni ty for arl)j-
tra111 constructio n of the laws. 10
T h e gover11or-general ,vas cl1ief executive of the country' \.\rith th e
,videst of powe1·s. He ,-vas like,,vise captain-ge neral of al l th e a rm ed
forces of tl1 e cou11try, and ,rice-royal patron of the Church. In th e
latter fu 11ctio11 l1e na1ned all parisl1 priests at the proposal of tl1e ir
prelates, a11d could also re n10,,e tl1em. I-le l1 ad the rigl1 t to susp end
any la,,v coming from Madricl a11d exte11si,,e po,-ve1-s of suspension a nd
dismissal of officials of all depart1n ents of gover11me11t. The director
of Ci,ril Ad1ni11istratio11, howe,,er, took cl1arge of most of tl1e direc t
ad1ninistration of civil affairs.
Those pro\rinces under ci\ril administration ,-vere gove1-n ed by an
alcalde-n1ayor, \-\7110 exe1-cised both executive and judicial function s.
Only in 1886 were tl1ese functions separated, the former assigned to
the ci\ril go,,ernor, the latter to the judge of first instance. Thot1gh
the most flagrant opportu11ity for abuse of office was 1-emoved wl1en the
pe1mission to trade was abolisl1ed in 1844, the office still lent itself to
abundant opportunity to amass wealth beyond its modest salary.
Only on the local level did the Filipi110s have a hand in the go,,er11-
men t. Each to,-vn vvas gover11ed by a gobemadorcillo, vvl10, like the
alcalde-mayor, exercised both executive and judicial functions at tl1e
local level t1ntil justices of tl1e peace ,vere instituted in 1894. He ,vas
elected from among the principalia of eacl1 tovvn-a group composed
11
of tl1e ex-gobernadorcillos and tl1e cabezas de bara11gay. Since m an,· .
of the gobernadorcillos did not understand Spanish , the)' ,,·ere

10. A prime exampl e of tl1is ,vas th e la,vs p e rn1ilting deportatio n o f 1 ,~om. etc.
(Recopilaci61i cle las /..eyes de los Reynos de /,as Indias [Madrid: Con sejo de l-lispanid~d.
1944] , lib. 7, tit. 4, !eyes 1 y 2; lib. 6, tit. l , lcy 21). Periodi cally in tJ1e lasr n, ent,· ,·t: a r-
of the Spanish regime tl1 ese ,vere st1pple m ente d by r oyal d ecrees. and at \<lriotis tiint' ,
cl1allenged, o n th e g ro unds tl1at tl1ese dispositio 11s h ad bee11 suppl anted by tllc extc- n-
sion to the Pl1ilippi11es of tl1 e C6digo Pfnrzl of Spain (AI-IN , Leg. 5354. Expl•c.l. 1-l: ~,~_-,~,
99; 2308, 2; 2253, 55). The last-n am ed is an ex.an1ple of tl1e cteport~tio11 of 011 t ' ,,·h (,
had tried to preve nt it 0 11 tl1e grou11cls of tl1e 11e,v la,vs o f tl1e (,',>digo Pt>nal.
11. Tlle cabeza de barangay ,vas th e official respc..111sible \t11 cle r tl1t· gobt,, 1adon. ,/Jo
for th e collec tion of tribt1te fror11 tl1e fo rt y or fifty fan1il ies c.~om p o ir1g e,,cl1 barang~.,, ·.
The barangay ,vas o rigi nally based 0 11 th e structure fot111d b~· tl1e Spaniard 011 tht>ir
arrival , and tl1 e cabezas h ad bec 11 h e redi ta ry in ea rlier ce11tt1ries.
 1'he Philij;pine Background 11

assisted b)' a kind of secretar-y ,.vl1o did , call ed the di1·ectorcillo. T l1e
local police force was com posed of cuadrilleros, sen 1ing witl1out pay
ancl gen erall)' armed only witl1 bamlJoo spears. Of broader jurisdic-
tion was a constabulary k11own as the Guardia Civil, organized in 1869
to fi ght ilie bandits which infested many provjnces. It was composed
of Fi lipino soldiers wiili Spanish officers.
Besides tl1e money tribute levied o n all Filipinos, ,vith some excep-
tio 11s such as tl1e principalia, tl1e polo (forty days of compulsory a n-
nual labor on public works, redeemable b)' a money paym e nt) ,-vas
required of evef)' male. The polo ,-vas likewise under the supen1ision
of the gobernadorcillo , as "''as tl1e quinta, the selection of conscripts
for compulsory military sen rice.
A key fig11re in the local administrative set-t1p was the parish priest.
In gen eral h e ,-vas the supervising representative of the Spanish gov-
e rnment for all local affairs, whose visto buerio of approval was required
o n alm ost all acts of the local officials. H e assisted at the elections of
the local officials, and his approval was necessary for the nominees.
He was local school inspector, health inspector, prison i11spector, in-
spector of the accounts of the gobernadorcillos and tl1e cabezas d e
bara11ga)'· The census lists, tax lists, list of ar1ny' conscripts, register of
births, of deaths, of marriages-all required his approval. All these and
nume1·ous other miscellaneous functions were delegated to him by law.
His moral influence on local officials was likely to be far more ex-
tensive, and it seems clear tha t generally these officials sought-or
received-the advice of the padre on all local affairs. Finally, the laws
required tl1at his opinion be sought when a confidential dossier was
being drawn up for the administrative deportation of vagrants, or of
persons whose loyalty was ~;1spect-a circumstance of grave import to
1
the n atio n alist m ovement. -

12. U.S. Senate, land Held for Ecclesiastical or Religi.ous Uses, 58, 69, 87. These a re the
replies of th e representatives of the friar ord ers, all insisting that the parish priest
never took the initiative in ha,1ng a man d ep o rte d , bt1t only gave a report wh en this
was demanded by tl1e civil authorities, as th e la,v required . Archbishop Nozaleda (p.
I 09) said that there l1ad been a vef)' fe,v rare cases wh ere the priest had taken the
initiative. but that freqt1en tl)' th e gob ernadorcillo would tell th A d e
..
h
po rtee t at
th e
action h ad been Laken a t the request of the parish priest. The exped· t h' h
ten es \V 1c11 ave
been examined in AHN, Ultramar, Legajos 2249 and 2251 som e lh.1 fi
' rl)'- tve cases frorn
1888 co 1891, alJ sho,v great care on the part of the parish .
pnests n<1t to acct1se
12 Tl1e P}iilijJjJi·ne Bacl<.groun{i

Education

As in all Spa11isl1 colonies, atte11tio11 had been given to education

from tl1e earliest da)'S. The University of Santo Tomas, run by the
Domi11ica11s, l1ad been founded in 1611. In 1875 courses in medicine
and phar1nacy "''ere added to the existing faculties of theology, phi-
losopl1y, a11d ca11on and civil law.
On the secondary level at this period, there were the colegios of
Santo Tomas a11d Sa11 Juan de Letran in Manila, both under the Do-
1ninicans, and tl1e Ateneo Municipal, run by the Jesuits since their
return i11 1859, but partl)' supported by tl1e Ayuntamiento of Manila.
For girls there ,.vere a number of schools run by different congrega-
tions of nuns. In addition there were a number of "Latin schools"
under private auspices in various places, t1sually of very mediocre qual-
ity. All these schools, including even the Ateneo Municipal, were sub-
ject to the inspection of the Dominican Rector of the University of
Santo Tomas, and their students were obliged to appear fo1· examina-
tions before a board appointed by him. The university was considered
to be an official institution, though it was supported enti1·ely by the
Dominican haciendas, and received no state funds.
Up to the middle of tl1e nineteenth century little attention had
been given to primary education by the government, though in man~,
places the missionaries had organized elementary schools. Tl1e )'ear
1863 saw the beginnings of a public scl1ool system, and a normal scl1ool
was founded to provide teachers, under the direction of the Jest1its.
The main purpose of the normal school was to provide the teachers
with a mastery of Spa11ish, so as to spread knowledge of that lang1-1age
among the masses. The local schools ,.vere under the st1pe1"\;sion of
. h . 13
the pans priests.

anyon e, generally confini11g tl1e1nsel,1es to re porting the co1nmo n opinion in tl1c to,,'11
or disclaiming knowledge. lf tl1ese are typic,il-none of them are on politiC'al ground ·-
it would seem tl1at tl1e de po rtatio ns were n1t1ch more due to the Guardia Ci,·il a11d to
the gobemadorcillos tl1an to cl1e parish priests. Ho,vcver, e,·en the fac t tl1at tl1e p=trish
priest interven ed at all n1ust have led to all kinds o f st1spicio ns, and laid hin1 ope11 to
calumny, as Nozaled a d eclared .
13. Montero y Vidal , H istoria, 2:407-9; Daniel Grifo l y Aliaga La instroccw11 prrmarin
en Filipinas (Manila: Cl1ofre, 1894) , pp. 1-7.
 Religious Sitt1ati on

If in a ll of Spain 's e mpir e th e cl1 t1rcl1 ,vas the 1nost impo rta11t insti-
tutio nal ele n1e11t, such a situa tio n ""as m ost notably trt1e in the Phil ip-
pines. No\.\1l1ere else was a na tive people Christia nized so rapidl)', c:111d
nowh e re else clid the missio 11aries lead so conspicuo us!)' i11 fasl1io ni ng
the culture of a n i11digen ou s popt1la tio11 .
The p o mp a nd pagea11try of Spa nish Cath olicism l1acl bee11 trans-
p o rted to the Pl1ilippines , wl1e1-e its ro le in the life of tl1 e people ,,,as
accentua ted e,,e n 1nore . The rela tive scarcity' of priests, pa rtict1la rl)' in
tl1e ru1-al regio ns whe re people li,,ed scatte red over \vide a reas. in-
creased tl1is te nde ncy to ce11te r religious life on tl1e fi estas, processio11s,
and othe r exte rnal practices. Apparently, relati,,ely little ,vas do11e to im-
part syste ma tic religiotis instructio11, especially i11 the later eigl1teen th
and early nine teenth ce11tury. The acute sl1ortage of f1; ars at iliis tin1e,
tl1e ge11e rally low intellectual le,,el of tl1e Spanisl1 clergy as a \\Tl1ole d ur-
ing iliis pe riod, and the wre tch ed training gi,,e11 to the Filipino secular
14
clergy no doubt helped to accentuate tl1e exte1nals of Catholicism .

14. The J est1its on the ir re tur n to th e Pl1ilippines in tl1e second h alf of the ni11e-
teenth ce ntury ,vere sh ocke d at the conditio 11s they fo u11d in m a n y p laces. Fath er J t1a n
Bautista Vidal, Supe ri o r o f tl1e Philippi11e J esui ts, in a lette r to Ro n1 e of 18 Jun e 1867,
,vr o te that the million i11h abitan ts of tl1 e isla11d of Pan ay, "tl1ou gl1 bap tized , stiffe r
fro m a lmost the sa n1e [spir itt1al] l1u11ger as d o tl1e pagans.'' 111 1876, tJ1e St1 perior.
Fa the r Juan H e r as wro te of n o r tl1ern Mindan ao, "Our Fat11ers fo und churcl1es and
everythin g e lse in tl1 e saddest conditi o11, and wl1 at is ,..,o rse , g reat corruptio n of m orals
and the m ost a bysmal ignorance" (ARSI, Prov. Arag .. 1, I, 24, an d 1, I, 36) . Sh o rtly
after his a rrival o n 20 Nov 1859, Fath e r J ose Cuevas, the first superio r , ,vro te to the
J esttit p rovincial o f Sp ai n , p resumably speaking o f the p rovin ces 11ear Mani la, since l1e
h ad n o t yet see n m ore distant o n es: "There are tO\.\fns o f thirty an d fo r t)' tl1 o l1san d
so uls ,vt1ich fo rm o nly o n e par ish . As a resul t tl1ey are n1t1cl1 negle cted spir itually. 111
man y places h a lf or a third o f tl1e ;ndios d o no t p ractice th e ir relig ion (runiplir ro11 la
fgl.esia ), a n d th e Sp aniards a re even ,vorse" (ARSJ, Prov. Arag .. 1, l , l 0). T o n1as Co n1~11
wri ting in 18 1O, re po rted th a t due to th e scar city of rcligiol1s, al11l ost l1 alf o f tl1e pa r-
ish es h ad been give n to tll e Filipi110 cle rgy, a nd o f the re m ai11dcr, a large 11t1111be r
,..,e r e temporari ly o ccttpic d b y th e m a lso , since tl1 e re ,vere 110 re ligiot1s to fill r11c 111
(T o m as de Comyn , /,as Islas 1-i l ipinas. Progresos rn 70 n,ios. ,~·sta(/o rt /1n·nci/Jios d, estt' siglo,
segi,n Dan Jomas cle Comyn, y m 1878, Jf'gu11 el E'dilor <Le la Rroisln ,le f·'ilipinas. e d . J. F.
dcl Pail [3d ed .; Ma nila: l ,a O ceania Espa 1i ola . 1878.I , 15(>-57). l 'l1e Dc>m iriica,1~ rt"-
c-cived 110 r e info r cem e n ts fro m l 7~)7 le> l BOS. an d a g-.ii ii fro n1 t11c 11 10 18 13, ,vl1c 11 fo t1r
a rrived . Otily e iglll m o r e ca1ne in the r1c·xt cig l1 1 years (J•\·rn.1 n rlez. /)0111111 ,ro,·. 3~ 3- :~•~).
 T l1 e relig iosit1, of tl1 e people , however, and tl1eir traditional vene1-a-
tion fo r tl1e friar, becat1se of l1is rol e as protector of l1is people against
tl1 e abuses of otl1 er Spaniards a11d because of the official prestige ,vhi cl1
surrou11ded l1i1n , co11ti11ued t111diminisl1ed. Tl1is had a twofold effect.
The no11-intellectual character of mucl1 of Catholicism among the mass
of Filipi11os led a gro,ving class of Filipinos educated abroad or ob-
tai11ing u11ive rsity training in the Pl1ilippi11es to turn their backs on
Catl1olicism. 011 the otl1er hand, the devotion of tl1e people to exter-
nal practices of 1-eligion often became real fanaticism, which n o t on}~;
re pelled m an)' of the ilustrados, but proved fertile ground for exploi-
tation of religio11 , ,vhetl1er by un\-\'Orthy priests or by conscious o r
t1ncon sciot1s religious frauds.
On tl1e institutional level, the dominant role of the religious o r-
ders i11 tl1e Philippine church, existing from the earliest days, had
taken on a certain traditional permanence and inflexibility. In 1804
the friars in Spanish dominions had been separated from the rest of
their orde1·s and placed under a special vicar-general residing in Spain,
not r esponsible in any way to Rome. This naturally increased the ex-
clt1si,,ely national character of the friars in the Philippines, "''ho ,,·ere
the only ones officially remaining in Spanish territory after 1836, and
made them much more closely subject to the interference of th e Span-
ish government in religious affairs, rarely to the advantage of the reli-
.
g1ous 11e. 1· C 15

A seco11d major change was the introduction in the late eighteenth

century of the canonical institution of the friars as irre movable parisl1
priests, thus largely removing them from the jurisdiction of their 0,,11
superiors, while on the other hand they were largely beyond the control
of the bishops becat1se of the canonically exempt status of the orders.
Bourbon interference in the affairs of tl1e Cl1urch, co11ti11ued under tJ1e
Liberal govemme11ts ,vl1ich followed, certainly contributed 11othing tt)
the religious vigor of the orders dt1ring the 11ineteenth centUl")'.
Not only did the friars as individual parisl1 priests exerci,' e ext<.~11-
sive legal and mo1·al inflt1ence in the towns; as corpo ratt' e ntiti(•s tllt"'~-
h eld an impo rtant position in Philippin e society. Si11ce a grecll rn,~jor-
ity of parish priests we1·e friars, the archbisl1op of Manil,1 co11sult('d

15. Fe rnandez, Dominir:os, 289-90, 29 1-92. Tl1 r D0 1ni11ica11s ,\"ere rc11n ited t.o cht>tr
Ro ma11 111as te r-gen eral in 1872; tl1 c ;\t1gustir1ia11s j11 1894.
 1ne PliilipjJine Barl"grou:nd 15

the pro,,incials of the fol tr friar order on all matters of moment, and
precise]~· becat1se the g1·eater 11t1m ber of his priests were fria1·s, largely
exem pt from l1is at1thorit:) he could scarcel)' a,,oid st1ch consultation .
1
,

Witl1 the archbishop exercising a certai11 civil as well as ecclesiastical

authorit)', this mea11t that friar influe11ce indirectly pervaded Pl1ilip-
pine societ)' as a '"'hole .
1
v\ he11 the Jest1its rett1rned in 1859, tl1ey ,-vere accorded a place in
the councilCi ot· tl1e cht1rch \i\ri.th the other orde rs. Tl1ey n ever seemed ,
ho,ve\'er·, to l1 a,,e joi11ed tl1e churcl1 deliberatio11s on an equal footing
\,ritl1 the four traditional 01-ders, occup)ring, as they did, a somewhat
diflerent J)OSition i11 tl1e country. They '"'ere allo\o\,ed to return on con-
ditio11 that they renounce all rigl1ts to the property which had been
theirs befo1·e tl1ei1· expulsion , as ,veil as all tl1eir former parishes. They
,,,e 1·c to ,vork o nly in the missions amo11g the pagans and Muslims of
~linda11ao a11d Jolo , where, as missio naries, they received n o canoni-
cal i11stitt1tion as pastors , but remained comple tely subj ect to tl1eir
superiors, and had no parisl1es to sp eak of.
De prived of normal ecclesiastical privileges, tl1ey were f1·eed , how-
e\'er, fi·om certain insti tu tional dra,vbacks to try a somewl1at more lib-
era l approac l1 to tl1e Philippine situa ti o n , unh a mpe r ed by a n y
traditional modes of operation and tl1us more fitted to meet the n e\-\7
problems of a society in transition like tl1e Philippines. Tl1e friars ,
ha,ring worked conti11uo usly for three l1u11dred years as almost the
sole suppo1·t of cl1urch and state, l1ad naturally develo ped traditions
which \Ve re 11ot easy to break '"'itl1 , even ,-vl1 e n tim es had cl1anged to
JG
re11der 1na n)' of tl1em o bsolete.

16. An exainple of so111e irr1portancc was the l~srur,[a Nonna[ de 1\lla.estros, fou11ded in
1863 by tlie go,•ernm en t, and e11trusted to tl1 e Jesttits. C hiefl y becattse of its principal
ftinctio 11 heing to teach SJ)anist1 to tl1 e primary sc hoo l teachers, tl1 e institution met
witll bitter oppositioi1 from ma11y of t11e older friar parisl1 priests, beginning ,vi th tl1e
professor of the universit)', Fa ther Francisco Gair1za, O .P., memb er of the commissio11
to set up the normal sc l1ool. Tl1 e le tters of tl1 e J esuit sttperiors to t}1 eir Fatl1er General
in Rome frequently lament the o pposition to them from the parish priests because o f
this instittttion, and in 1881 actually proposed this as a se,;ous reason fo r aban d oning
the school (Pastells, tvlisi&n 1:335: AT, ColRcrion Paslells, 111, fol. 103; ARSI, Prov. Aragon,
1. I, no. 19, letters of Fr. Francisco Xa,,ie r Baranera, 22 Jan 1866; no. 34, Fr. J ose Ma.
Lluch , 16 Septernber 1873; no. 54, Fr. Juan Ricart, 28 Feb 188 1; a lso the published
attacks of Fr. Eduard0 Na,•arro, O .S.A.. Filipinas: /:,,studios de algunos asuntos de actualidad
[Madrid: Mint1esa d e lo Rios. 1897] • 160-6l: and Bisliop Ramon Martfr1ez Vigil, O.P.,
16 The Philippi1ie Bacl?ground

The peculiar situation an d unorthodox outlook of the J esuits did

much to set tl1 e1n somewhat apart fro m the friar orders. Even up to
tl1e e nd of the Spanish regime, tl1e latter were often te rmed and were
inclined to term themselves "las cuatro 6rdenes religiosas de Filipinas," to
the ch agrin of the J esuits. The propensity of the friar orders to close
1·anks partly explains the rather indiscriminate temper of the antifriar
movement that was part of Filipi110 nationalism.
Many of the charges made by the Filipino propagandists were
groundless with regard to some individual orders, yet because of their
institutional cohesiveness, the charges were levelled at "los frai'-es" with-
out distinction, generally excluding the Jesuits. The Franciscans owned
no haciendas like the other three orders, while the Dominicans held
haciendas chiefly for the support of the university, but "the friars"
were accused in the mass of holding immense lands. Again , only the
Dominicans had colleges and the university, but the defects attrib-
uted to tl1ese institutions were imputed to "the friars" in general. Some-
thing similar could be said of certain other charges.
Finally, it must be remembered that the Filipino nationalist mo\'e-
ment of the 1880s and 1890s was the direct heir of the campaign for
parishes led by the Filipino secular priests in the 1860s and 1870s.
The campaign for Filipino parishes had been directed against the fri-
ars as a whole. It was inevitable that a similar disposition would color
the activities of its successor.

Economic Situation

Though the economic history of the Philippines is the field least

explored till now, some of its main features may be pointed out. The
opening of the Philippines to foreign u·ade at the end of th e eigl1t-

in the n ewspaper El L iberal [Madrid] 22 Nov I 896) . It sl1ould be said, ho,,'e\'er. th3 l
th e opinion of the friars was not uniform on this matter, and that anotl1er Dominican
l1ad voted against Father Gafnza on the Normal School Commission , and th e latter
himself establish ed a 11ormal sch ool for women when later Bishop of Caceres. ~1.oreo-
ve r, the Dominican university and colleges were centers, thougt1 limited, of the teacJ1-
ing of Spanisl1 lo ng before th e return of tl1e J esui ts. The opponents of teaching Spanish
were m ore likely to be the friar parisl1 priests.
 The PhilipjJine Bacllground 17

eenth century was followed by the establishment of foreign business

firms. Though antiforeign laws re mained on the books and public
notice was frequently called to them , tl1ey appea1· to have had littl e
effect in practice. Whe n Manila ,-vas at last opened officially to world
trade in 1834, the number of foreign firms i11creased rapidly. By the
middle of the century some of the foreigners had introdticed machin-
ery for sugar milling and rice hulling. Moreover, the presence of for-
eign traders stimulated agricultural p1·oduction, and fr·om the middle
of the century exports rose sharply, particularly sugar, rice, hemp,
and,-once the government monopoly was removed in 1882-tobacco.
Apparently a r·elatively small class of Spaniards, mestizos, and some
of the old native aristocracy helped themselves to the economic feast,
leaving but a few crumbs to the ordinary people. Indeed, the lot of
the ordinary peasant farmer was worse in many ways by the late nine-
teenth century than it had been before the advent of prosperity. For
without receiving the benefits of the increased prosperity, he was
crushed by numerous unjust taxes and by the extortions of both Span-
17
ish and native officials, and of the civil gtiard.
The growing prosperity of the country was important to the nation-
alist movement in various ways. First, opportunities for trade in the
Philippines brought about increased contacts with foreigners and pe-
ninsular Spaniards. Second, the relatively small but significant number
of families who prospered could send their sons to Europe for an
education, further rupturing the isolation that cut off the Philippines

17. This charge is frequently made by friars, Jesuits and other Spaniards. A graphic
prese ntation of the legal and illegal exactions to which the small farmer might be
subject is presented in a report prepared by Father Casimiro Lafuente, "Carta e Infonne
sobre el Impuesto de Carruajes, Carros y Caballos, que el Padre Cura pa rroco de
Santa Barbara, provincia de Pangasinan, dirije al Senor Alcalde mayor de dicl1a
Provin cia," and in the letter to the direct.or general of Civil Ad1ninistration he ,-vrote
in Oct 1885, when his first report had gone unl1eedcd by tl1e alcalde-mayor (NL;
Lietz, Calendar, nos. 335-36).
For a study of the Philippine tax system , particularly in tl1e ni11etee11th centttry, cf,
Carl c. Ple hn , ''Taxa tion in the Philippines," Political Science Qttarterly 16 (1901): 680-
711; 17 ( 1901 ): 125-48.
Another testimony to the unrest due to high taxes and gen eral ad1ninistrative cor-
ruption is that of American Con st1l, Jt1lit1s G. Voigt, writi11g o n 28 Sept 1887, NA-DSC~I ,
9, no. 187.
18 The P/1,ilippine Bacligrou1id

from th e rest of the world. Their so11s absorbed the intellectual cur-
r e nts of Europe , saw a completely different type of society, and be-
cam e disillusioned with Spain itself on seeing the more progressive
state of other countries.
And then, of course, considerable funds were needed in the type
of propaganda campaign carried on by the Filipino nationalists both
in Europe and in tl1e Philippines. Without wealthy Filipinos willing to
support this campaign, it could hardly have been carried on the ,vay
'
1t was.
 CHAPTER 2

Early Filipino Student Activities in

Spain, 1880-1882

Filipino Students to Spai11

After the events of 1872, a sort of lt1ll settled on Filipi110 nationalist

activities in the Philippines and in Spain. Henceforth the Filipino cle rgy
would not take a leading part. Burgos had been executed, and the
' other Filipino priests ,-vho had been 1)rominent in the contro,,ersy
over the parishes returned from their exile apparently with little taste
for furthe1· endangering their position.
Moreover, Archbishop Melit6n Martinez, who had sympathized with
his clergy's desire to limit the role of the friars in tl1e parishes, if not
I
• with their nationalism, resigned in 1874 and was succeeded the fol-
lowing year by a Dominican, Archbishop Pedro Payo. Though the Fili-
pinos in Spain would often argue the case of the Filipino priests in
• the future, there was little sign of open activity on the part of the priests
themselves until the outbreak of the Revolution in 1896, though un-
doubtedly the resentments lived on and were eventually to culminate in
the Aglipayan schism in the early years of the American regime.
Towards 1880 the tiny trickle of students from the Philippines to
I the universities of the Peninsula gradually turned i11to a steady flo\-,,. 1

1. Plau chut, "L' Archipel," 910, speaks of some youtl1s at tJ 1e end of tll • 1 h
• Ph'l' • e e1g 1tee nt
century going from tl1e 1 1pp1nes to tl1e colleges of Mexico C l
. , a cutt.1, Goa. and
Pond1ch ery, from whose number came tl1 e re prese n tatives to th C .
. . e o rtes tn 18 12 and
1823. If th1s 1s accu ra te , they n1ust h ave bee n fe,v i11 11 tirribcr d
• an pro b ably o f creole

19
20 Student Activities in Spain

Since th e cost of travel and expenses of studying abroad were consid-

erable, these early stude nts came generally from well-to-do families ,
and were th e refore mostly creoles and mestizos. It was natural that in
the early years the creoles should predominate since they were sons
of peninsular fathers who still retained contacts with the mother coun-
try. They were soon followed, however, by young men of Chinese mes-
tizo or Spanish mestizo stock and those of the wealthy native families.
Generally the creoles, as well as many of the Spanish mestizos,
tended to identify themselves with the peninsular Spaniard, while the
Chinese mestizo identified himself with the native Filipino, or indio.
Yet at the same time all those born in the Philippines shared a cer-
tain feeling, not yet clearly defined, of being Filipinos, especially in
this early period before racial divisions had come to the fore.
What kind of Spain did these Filipino students of the 1880s come
into? Its political, religious, and educational conditions were all to
have their influence on these young Filipinos now arriving in the Pe-
ninsula, and would do much to give direction to their nationalistic
• •
aspirations.
The architect of the Restoration, Antonio Ca.novas del Castillo, was
a great admirer of the British parliamentary system, and the last qt1ar-
ter of the nineteenth century witnessed his efforts to form a Spanish
parliamentary system in that image. On the accession of Alfonso XII
to the throne in 1875-largely the work of Ca.novas-the latter cre-
ated around himself the Partido Liberal-Conservador, more common!)'
known as the Conservatives, standing for a constitutional monarchy
under the Alfonsist branch of the Bourbons.
Though a conservative group as a whole it was not of the extreme
Right and though it generally supported the church, it was not ex-
plicitly so committed. The new Constitution of 1876, which embodied

families. Plauchut also speaks of Filipino youth of the present (1877) stud)ring in S,,it-
zerland, France and England. But what little evidence there is would indica te tl,at
these were extremely few, and those who studied in Spai11, not ma11y more. Aln1ost a ll
those of whom there is any notice were creoles, such as the Azcarragas. th e Regid ors.
tlie Pardo de Taveras, and as often as not, th ey did not re turn to tl1e Philippines. bu t
spent the rest of their lives in Europe (cf the Espasa articles: "Regidor y Jurado (Antonio
Ma ria] " 50:160, "Regidor y Jurado [Manuel] " 50:160; "Azcarraga y Paln1ero [~1a nuel]"
6:1367; "Azcarraga y Palmero [Marcelo]" 6: 1367; "Pardo d e Tavera [Trinidad]" 41:J-14i-
48; "Pardo de Tavera [Fe lix]" 41:1446-47.
 Student Activities in Spain 21

the program of' Canovas, aroused bitter p1-otests from the Vatican and
th e Spanish bishops, for though it procla imed Catholicism as the reli-
gion of the Spanish nation , unlike the Constitution of 1869, it never-
2
theless tolerated the private practice of other religions.
On the Left of Canovas' party, and with his encouragement, arose
the party headed by Praxedes Mateo Sagasta, known as the Constitu-
tionalist or Liberal Party, rallying tl1ose monarchists who still held to
the Constitution of 1869, but supported Alfonso XII. After the addi-
tion by 1878 of splinter groups from both Right and Left, the party
became known as the Fusionist Party.
These two dynastic parties, though not without a doctrinal basis,
were largely united on rather opportunistic grounds and were subject
to frequent schisms and realignments, particularly the Fusionists. More
doctrinaire were the parties of Right and Left which refused to recog-
nize the Alfonsist monarchy. At the extreme Right were the Carlists,
supporting Don Carlos VII's claim to the throne, intransigently Catho-
lic, traditionalist, and absolutist. On the Left were the various factions
of republicans, hopelessly divided among tl1emselves, and united only
in opposition to the monarchy.
Emilio Castelar, last president of the Republic, led the republicanos
hist6ricos or posibilistas, proclaiming his intention to bring about the
Republic by legal means. The federalistas under Francisco Pi y Margall,
another former president, held aloof, as did the advocates of a uni-
tary republic under a third former president, Nicolas Salmeron. Manuel
Ruiz Zorrilla declared for the restoration of the Republic by means of
revolution , and from his exile in France directed endless conspiracies
to this end. In spite of their demagogic appeals to the future revolu-
tion, however, the zorrillistas or republicanos progresistas from time to
time joined in coalitions with other republican factions, now partici-
pating in, now abstaining from, elections. All these coalitions were
sl1ort-lived, however, and soon te11ninated in new internecine struggles.
The two parties which Canovas had called into existence in imita-
tion of the British parliamentary system were to share power between
them in orderly fashion till the end of the century. But the two lead-

2. The treatment of the political histOI)' of tl1is p eriod is based on Melchor

Fernandez Almagro, Histmia politica de la Espana contemporan.ea. (2 vols. Madrid: Pegaso,
1956-59).
22 .')[11,rlf n I 1\ cli11ities i 11 S/Jr1,i 'J1

e rs pe rmitted tl1 e e n tire S)'Stem to be vi tic1ted tl1rot1g l1 rnan aged elec-

tio11s. Ir1 th e 11ext twe11ty-two years till tl1 e assassi11 a tio n o f Ca11ovas by
a n an archist in 1897, tl1e two pai-ti es alter11atecl in p owe r eleve n times.
As m o re serio t1s crises ca1ne to be resolved , each would yield powe r
to th e o tl1er a11d th e su ccessor governm e n t would th e r1 proceed to
rnan age a11 electi o11 i11 ,vl1ich a resp ecta bl e minori ty of oppositio n can-
didates would be elected ,vitJ1 a scatte ring of ot1tsta n clin g re pt1blicans
and Carlists to give ve risimilitt1de to tl1 e Co1-tes.
Thou gh the h e te rogeneous compositio n of both pa1-ties a nd tl1e
continual sl1ift of i11di,1iduals a11d blocs f1·om 011e to tl1e o the r pre-
vented the syste1n fro m d egen e ra ting into a se1-ies of rubbe r-stamp
p arliame nts, tl1e a tmospl1e1·e of corruptio n tha t l1ad ch a racte1ized so
much of ninetee11th-centtlf)' Spanisl1 p olitical life was p e rpe tt1a ted . Tl1e
atte nda nt spoils S)'Ste1n was rui11o us both to minimal administrative
effi cie11cy a nd to gove1·nmen t solven cy. No t only ,ver e tl1e re ele, 1en
cl1a nges of pa rty duri11g this period, but botl1 Can ovas a nd Sagasta
within a si11gle term of office often r eorganized th eir cabine t nvo or
three times.
Each ch a nge of p art)', and to a slightly lesser e xte nt each reo1·gani-
zation of cabine t, was accompanied by a wholesale turn o, 1e r in go,·-
e rnme11t employees down to tl1e lowest echelons, as politicia11s n e,vl}'
installed p1-ovided for their follo,vers. As a rule , capacity fo1· tl1e office
in question was the least of considerations, and eve11 vvhen capa ble
men we re selected, the brevity of their te nure befor e the n ext tt1rno-
ve r precluded substantial achievements, to say n o thing of basic s u·t1c-
tural refo rms , eitl1e r in Spain or in the colo11ies.
The position of the Church i11 Spain, tho11gh it was legall}· p ri,i -
leged and actually a pote nt po litical fo rce in ma n)' vvays, ,vas some-
what ambiguot1s. Canovas' realistic compro mise be nvee11 tl1e d e1na11ds
of advocates of sepa1·a ti o11 of cl1t1rcl1 and sta te as proclaimed i11 t11e
Con stitution of 1869 a nd those of· traditi o11alist Catho lics wh o insisted
on comple te intole ra n ce h ad b ee n L'lcitl)' accepted b~· tl1e H o l)' Se <.,.
Ecclesiastical n o minatio ns we re 1nacle by the go, e rn1ne nt, ,vhich also
1

paid ecclesiasti cal sala ries as i11de mni t} for co11fiscated Cl1t1rcl1 lan<l,.
1

At the beginnin g of the Resto1·a tio n professors acct1se:-d ot· l1e te rl)-
d oxy i11 tl1eir teacl1in g vvere re1no, ed fro1n the 11ni,·e rsiti es. b 11t ,l st1c-
1

ceeding Libe ral gover11me 11t resto red tl1e n1, a11d tl1 e)' ,vere h e11cef·o rtl1
un rn o lested , i11 spite of pe1·i<)dic pro tests r·ro n1 111e n1 l)e 1·s of the l1ie 1-ar-
 Student Activities in Spain 23

3
ch y. Similarly, freed o1n of the press and of assembly a11d othe r righ ts
i11 troduced under Sagasta's governmen ts we re left t1n touch ed by la te r
Canovas regimes, though in practi ce n eith e r party always observed
th e m comple tely. The intransigence of the la rge r part of the cle rgy
and a sizable group of the more ardent Catl1olics kept tl1e m from
having any constructive influence on Spanish life, and led them to
pious pretensions which only increased the anticlericalism of otl1e r
sectors of Spanish society.
The state of education in the 1880s, though an improvement on
that prevailing during the earlier part of the century, was none tl1eless
deplorable. The larger part of the popt1latio11 was illiterate, and the
primary and secondary schools provided b)' the state were poor botl1
in numbers and in quality. The t1ni,1ersities, and the intellectual life
in general, were far behind those of the rest of Europe. The efforts of
the Church to exclude heterodox teacl1ings from tl1e universities in
1867-68 a nd in 1875, relying on the concordat, though momentarily
successful, were soon neutralized, and the heterodoxy of the Spanish
university was, if anything, accentuated.
Moreover, in spite of a few scholars of note, quite a numbe1· of
the professors and many of the students we1·e deeply involved in poli-
tics to the detriment of serious ,-vork. It was only towards the end of
the century that progress ,-vould begin to be made in renewing Spain's
4
university life.
This was the Spain that greeted the growing number of Filipino
students arriving in the 1880s and 1890s. Knowing the Spain of that
period makes it easier to understand Spanish policy in the Philip-
pines and its execution, and to see how her state of affairs affected
the young Filipinos who stepped into a world very different from that

3. Vicente Cacho Viu, L a lnstituci6n L ibre de Enseiianza (Madrid: Rialp, 1962) , 1:282-
319, 5 17-21. For a notable example of the i11effec tive protests of tl1 e bishops in a
notorious case , see Fe rnandez Almagro, 1:436-59. The case is of i11te rest since it co11-
cerned Miguel Morayta, grand master of the Masonic Gran Orie nte Esp an ol and pro-
fessor of history at the Unive rsity of Madrid. As professor l1e h ad as studen ts many of
the Filipino nationalists, including Rizal , and h e remained the 1nost active Spanish
figure in the Filipino campaign right tip to th e Revolutio n .
4. Yvonne Turin, L 'educatiorl et l 'erole en Espagne de 1874 a J902. L iberalisme et tradi-
tion (Pa1is: Presses Universitaires d e France, 1959), 91-98.
24 Studen,t Activities in Spairi

vll1i cl1 they had known in tl1eir ho1neland. The exp e rie n ce of freely
discussin g all ideas, of attacking or rejec ting institutions of church o r
sta te, of p1·oclaiming tl1e dogmas of liberty and progress would prove
a h eady stimulus to their aspirations.
On the other h and , many of them \.vould be appalled to observe
the grave defects of Spanisl1 political, social, and intellectual life close
at l1and. Accustomed to l1aving the mother-country held up to them
as the ideal, they were saddened to learn that their idol had feet of
clay when they saw ho\,v far more progressive the other countries of
Europe were. The indifference of official Spain to Philippine affairs
would add to tl1eir disillusionme11t. Noting the achievements of other
countries and 1·ecognizing their own native qualities as in many re-
spects superior to what they saw in Spain, some Filipinos began to
think on what they could make of th e Philippines by themselves.

Pedro Paterno

The only active Filipino nationalists known with certainty to have

been in Spain befo1·e 1880 were Pedro Paterno and Gregorio
Sancianco. Paterno had come to Spain in 1871, and studied philoso-
J)l1y and theology in Salamanca. Later he had gone to Madrid, where
he obtained his doctorate in law in 1880. On the completion of his
studies, Paterno continued livi11g for some time in Madrid.
As a son of Maximo Paterno, a wealthy Manila busi11essman wh o
\A.7as among those deported to the Marianas in 1872, he was likely to

have had contacts ,vith such men as Manuel Regidor and Manuel
Azcarraga, Philippine-born Spaniards who had ea1·lier left the Pl1ilip-
pines and were involved in Spanisl1 politics. In an)' case, Ped1·0 Pate rno
had made numerous highly-placed friends by 1880, and his l1ome "'ras
the scene of frequent reuniones artisticas, at which gathered m any of
the most prominent literary and political figt1res ot· Spain.
At tl1ese gatherings Paterno would read his p oetry, and in 1880
5
brought out a small volume of verse entitled Sampaguitas. T his \\"aS
presented as the first volume of a projected collection entitled Bibliotera
filipina, d esigned to make known to the public "the mature fruits p1·0-

5, Tl1 t:' Philippine fl ol,·cr sarnpaguita rcsen1b lcs ll1e jasn1i11e.

 Student Activities in Spain 25

duced by the Filipin o youth ." T hough some of tl1 e poems in cluded
a1·e deserving of n otice, Re tana's sarcastic comm e n ts on Paterno's ow-
ing his fame mo1·e to his receptions tha n to his literary 1nerit are
probably justified. The verses make only occasional mention of tl1e
Pl1ilippines, and are m ostly slight romantic lyrics. Nevertheless, th e
book is of some significance as perhaps the first attempt to project a
Filipino national personality and to present to the pt1blic tl1e wo1-k of
a Filipino, specifically as such. Paterno himself and otl1ers better e11-
dowed would carry out this program.

Gregorio Sancianco

Of greater ultimate significance and certainly of greater merit was

tl1e work of Gregorio Sancianco. Of Chinese mestizo origin, like tl1e
Pate rnos, Sancianco had already earned his doctorate in law b)' 1880.
At about this time , h e began to contribute articles to tl1e ne,¥spaper
El Dem6crata on reforms needed in the Philippines, particularly on
economic matters. In 1881 l1e published a book called El P'rogreso de
6
Filipinas. Because of its importance as the first serious stud)' b)' a
Filipino, its influence on later works by other Filipinos, and its radi-
cally different approach from that of later Filipino nationalists, the
book desenres more tha11 passing notice.
It was basically a technical treatise on the economic policy needed
to stimt1late progress in the Philippines. The author pointed to the
urgent necessity of roads, bridges, railroads, and public works in gen-
eral to promote agriculture, for the lack of communications made
efforts to increase production unprofitable when markets were either
inaccessible entirely or could be reached only by circuitot1s and ex-
p e nsive m eans. The educational system was inadequate, with only a
small portion of the sc11ools required in existence. These needs, l1 e
said, could not be met because in spite of the n egligible amot1nt spe nt
on public works and education, there was a growi11g d eficit. A radical
change in the system of raising reve11ue was n eeded , partict1la1·ly so
because the system of indirect taxation and of exacting tribute was

6. Gregorio Sancianco y Goso n , l~l progreso df 1:;1ipirias. £studios fro no rni ros ,
rzdministralivos _v politicos. Parte economic,l (Madrid: J .M. Perez, 188 1). rrt1e otlic-r parts
,vere never pl1blisl1ed.
26 Student A ctivities in Spain

u11jt1st. Tl1ose least capable of paying were the most heavily taxed,
and the tribute, he pointed out, was a form of racial discrimination.
In a series of carefully ,,,orked-ottt and extensively documented chap-
te1·s, Sancianco proposed the abolition of va1·ious indirect taxes and
customs duties, sl1owing how they impeded the progress of the
economy. In place of these taxes, he p1·oposed a property tax, an
industrial and comme1·cial tax, and others based on ability to pay. To
achieve such a system , he pointed out tl1e means that must be taken
to establish clear titles to la11ded property and to provide for the ac-
quisition of unocct1pied or state-owned lands.
The enti1·e book is e1ninently practical, treating in dispassionate
fashion the econon1ic problems of the country and their solution. But
admirable as its technical competence is, the book is more than an
economic study. Some sections of the book are charged with deep
nationalist feeling as the author touches on problems that transcend
economics. When l1e proposes to abolish the tribute, paid by all indios
and Chinese mestizos since the conquest, but from which peninsular
Spaniards and otl1ers of Spa11ish blood were exempt, the calm and
serene tone of his exposition is replaced by a muted sense of outrage
at the irtjustice and inexpediency of a law tl1at only foments divisions
between classes and races.
Far from being a safeguard of Spain's sovereignty in the Islands, he
says, by setting one class against another such a system has been at
the root of the revolts that have occurred in the nineteentl1 centuf)'•
But most of all, this tribute is a symbol of rule imposed by force, as in
the ages of barbarism, and has no place i11 the modern regime of
liberty, \\There the State is not the master of the life and property of
its citizens, but is instituted to protect and defend them, and \.vhere
its right to taxes is based on its senri.ces to its citizens.

If, then, the Philippines is considered part of the Spa11ish nation and is
therefore a Spanish province a11d not a tributary colony; if l1er sons are
born Spanish just as are those of the Peninsula; if, finally, recognizing
in tl1e peninsulars the rigl1ts of citizenship, one n1ust equally recog11ize
it in the Filipinos; no tribute in the proper sense of that ,vord can be
imposed on them, but a tax proportioned to their resources, larger o r
smaller in amount, according to the larger or smaller senices \Vhicl1
the State renders tl1em for the securit)' of their persons a11d interests.i

7. Ibid., 101 - 2.
 Student A ctivities in Spain, 27

This principle of assimilatio11-that al] Filipinos wer e Spanish citi-

zens and therefore shot1ld have tl1e sam e rigl1ts and duties as penin-
sular Spaniards was to be at least tl1e ostensible basis of most of th e
natio11alist campaig11 of the next fifteen years. If tl1e Philippin es was
a n integral part of the Spanish fatherland, as official theory main-
tained, they ought to be ruled by peninsular law a11d possess the rights
8
guaranteed to every Spaniard, above all, rep1-ese11tation in the Cortes.
Another point of significance in the work of Sancianco is the clear
line which connected him with the Philippine reform moveme nt of
1869-72. The point of departure for his treatise \Vas the recon1men-
dations of the Junta de reformas economicas, one of several reform
commissions set up by Governor de la Toi-re in 1869-70, b11t sup-
pressed on the accession of Izquierdo. Sancianco speaks with nostal-
gia of "that period of liberty and of reforms" and presents a fervent,
if somewhat guarded, defense of most of those executed or exiled in
9
the aftermath of the Cavite mutiny.
The impetuous and rigorous condemnations, he implies, were due
to the atmosphere of suspicion aroused in certain sectors of Philip-
pine society by the campaign of anonymous letters in 1870 against
the type of instruction given in the university by the Dominicans. But
these students asked

not for the destruction of the power and predominance of tl1e monas-
tic orders, but simply the supplyi11g of professors more fitted for the
curriculum, the broade11ing of this curriculum to wider horizons of ct1l-
ture, in conformity with that established in the Peninsula, and the sepa-
ration of the university, if possible, from the direction of the Dominicans,
placing it under the immediate directio11 of the government, whose
10
responsibility it is.

8. That the Philippines ,vas officially an integral part of the Spanish fatherland is
pointed out by Miguel Blanco Herrero (Politica de Espana en Ultra,nar [2d edition; Ma-
drid: Francisco G. Perez, 1890], 410). Insisting tJ1at Spain had ne, er considered her
1

overseas provinces to be colonies, l1e cites a Royal Order of 1857 in which th e

governor-general of Puerto Rico was ordered to admonish u1e Audiencia "not to use . . .
that word in an y kind of official document, applying it either to that province or to any
other overseas province."
9. Sancianco, El progreso, 5-15, 3 4.
10. Ibid .. 11 0.
28 Student Activities i'n Spain

H e re is a cautiot1s, ye t sufficientl)' explicit, opposition to the exclusive

control of tl1e cht1rch over educatio11, a deep-seated feeli11g that would
sti1- later nationalists.
The '"'hole book is pervaded by a conscious11ess of the dignity and
good qualities of his people; it takes exception to the con1mon opi11-
ion of peninsulars as to the cl1aracter of tl1e indio. Most significant is
his impassioned yet carefully reaso11ed and documented refutation of
11
the Spanisl1 commonplace of the in,doumcia del indigena. He denounces
the \Alritings of men like Francisco Canamaque who, after spending
some time as functiona1-ies in the Philippines and drawing good sala-
ries, return to the Peninsula and ridicule all that they have seen in
l9
the count1-y. -
Then, tu1·ning to the reports released by the provincial governors
on tl1e availability and value of unoccupied lands in their provinces,
he shows the contradiction between those who say that valuable land
remains unoccupied because of the indolence of the Filipino and those
who report on the high rate of immigration and on the scarcity of
land in their pro,,inces. The reason for insufficient agricultural activ-
ity, he says, is to be found not in the indolence of the Filipino, but
"in the abuses and arbitrary procedures employed there." When tl1e
small farmer sees himself exploited by all kinds of people in authority,
botl1 Spanish and Filipino, it is not surprising to find him unwilling to
exert himself in the cultivation of lands only to have others reap the
benefits of l1is sweat and toil. The so-called indolence of the native is

only a pretext to commit disgraceful abuses which discredit the Span-

isl1 name as \Vell as ruin the poor Filipino farmer. The efficacious means
of 1naking him work is to stimulate him with the profits of his toil , and
to favor this ,-vith liberal laws, such as that which lifted the prohibition
. . 13
o f exporung rice.

11 . Ibid., 223-37.
12. Francisco Canamaque, Recuerdos de Filipinas. Cosas, casos y usos de aquellas isl.as
(Madrid: Anllo y Rodriguez, 1877). Tl1e book is a satiric account of Canamaque ·s
experiences in tl1e Philippines, in which Filipinos, friars, and Spaniards of the country
are all h eld up to ridicule , and great emphasis is placed on the incurable in do/encia d~l
i1idio. The book was considered by Rizal and other Filipinos the prototype of Spanish
insults to the Filipino. Caiiamaque was later private secretary to Sagasta, but seems to
h ave had no thi11g mo re to do with Pl1ilippine affairs.
I 3. Sa11cian co , El progreso, 228, 23&-3 7. Mo re than o n ce he calls attenti on to th e
fac t that tl1e oppression of tl1e poo r farm er is due no t only to th e Spaniard . but also
 St1tdent Activities in Spai·n 29

San cianco 's book a nticipates most of tl1e prin cipal themes of the
later Filipino nationalist campaign: administrative 1·eform, eradication
of corruption in the go,,ernment, recognition of Filipino rights as loyal
Spaniards, extension of Spanish law to the Philippines, curtailm en t of
the excessive power of th e friars in the life of the country, and asser-
tion of the dignity of the Filipino. Sancian co's first con cern , ho,.veve r,
is with the economic problem of providing resources for the edt1ca-
tion of the people and the public works ,-vhicl1 ,-vill 1nake commercial
and ag1·icultu1·al progress possible. Otl1e r issues, thougl1 deeply felt,
are me11tioned only in passir1g or by way of digressio11 . Perhaps if th e
autho1· had su cceeded in publishing tl1e other two parts of his pro-
posed work, tl1ese other issues would have received full treatment.
The tone of the book, moreover, differs from mt1ch of late r na-
tionalist writing in that it is directed principally towa1·d tl1e gover11-
m e nt. Modestly, even cautiously, he presents his proposals:

If the proposed reforms are not adopted, because they do not fit ,"1itl1in
the principles held by the government, or for other motives, they ,.vill
at least serve as antecedents or even data for the studies to b e made o n
the matter. In the one case as well as the other , our efforts will be
14
recompensed.

It is difficult to assess the i11fluence of the book. Since it was pub-

lished in Spain and chiefly directed to the government, it may well be
that no great efforts were made to introduce it into the Philippines.
In any case, it was not the type of book to have a mass appeal, and
information is lacking on its circulation in the Philippines.
Jose Rizal at least was impressed by it. Writing from Madrid in 1882
to his brother, he mentioned the proximate return to the Pl1ilippines
of Sancianco "the author of El Progreso de Filipinas," implying that the
15
book was known at least to him and his brother. Rizal' s ardently
nationalist essay "Sohre la indolencia de los filipinos " in La Solidaridad
in 1890 would be based on Sancianco's treatment of the subj ect.

a t times to the Filipino of official position o r of wealth. It is a situati on t1 e is combat•

in g, rather than Spaniards as su ch .
14. Ibid, xiv.
15. One fltindred I..etlPTs of Jose Rizal to his Parents, Brollzt>r, Sislm, Reuztivl'J (tvlanila:
Phili ppin e National I--Iistorical Socie ty, 1959) , 44, 10 Oct 1882.
30 Student Activities i·n Spain

W11atever tl1e influence of the book, it seems to have brought on

its autl1or tl1e very st1spicion that he had lamented in his book as
having fallen on all tl1ose Filipinos who looked for reforms. In 1884
tl1ere was a disturbance in Pangasinan, appa1·ently over local griev-
ances, but i11 tl1e aftermath a 11umber of prominent Filipinos were
imprisoned, among them Sancianco. Eventually they were released ,
but there is no trace of any further activity on Sancianco's part before
his death a few years later.

The Filipino Colony

The first sig11 of collective activit)' on the part of the small but
growing Filipino colony in Madrid appeared du1·ing the publication
of Sancianco's book. It was a banquet given in honor of Fernando de
Leon y Castillo, overseas minister in the Libe1·al government of Sagasta,
by the Filipino colo11y in Madrid. On 25 June 1881 he had published
the long-discussed decree abolishing the government tobacco mo-
nopoly in the Philippines. The decree was more than a useful eco-
nomic measure for the Philippines; the grave abuses co11nected with
tl1e operation of the monopoly and its taint of servitude made its
abolition a symbol of liberal and progressive reform, and the Filipi-
16
nos in Madrid celebrated it as such.
At tl1e banquet the young Visayan medical student, Graciano Lopez
Jaena, delivered a speecl1. In the florid and rhetorical style then so
much admired in Spain, he eulogized the glorious mission of Spain
personified by Magellan, Legazpi, and others who had brought the
light of civilization and progress to the Philippines. Under Spain ·s
maternal care, the Philippines had gone on progressi11g, feeling "prot1d
to call herself daughter of the fatherland of Calderon and Cervantes."

16. The tobacco mo11opoly had b een establisl1ed i11 1782, a nd l1ad pro\ided the
Philippine government ,\,ith an adequate so urce of revenue for tt1e first ti1ne i11 its
l1istory. But the long-ru11 effects ,vere very bad , esp ecially i11 d epopula ting tJ1e p1·o,·-
inces ,vhe re the inhabi tants ,vere reqt1ired to raise a quo ta of tobacco to be deli,·er<>d
to the government, ancl forbidden to engage i11 otl1e r ag1-ict1ltt1re. In tJ1e co urse o f u1e
nine tee11th century the ,vl1ole systc tn '\>vas ridden witlt all types of abti.ses, briberv, 111 u g-
 Student Activities in Spai·n 31

With the new and immense be nefit 110w conferred tipon l1er by the
abolition of the tobacco monopoly, Lopez Jaena continues, she raises
her voice in gratitude to her Sovereign and his minister, and looks
forward to the breaking down of the walls whicl1 oppress the spirit of
the country and hold back her progress. When liberty and the en-
couragement of the arts shall reign in her, tl1is Pearl of the Orient
17
will be a source of inexhaustible wealth for Spain.
Thougl1 Lopez Jaena had nothi11g of tl1e organizer or leader in
him, h e would play an important role in the Filipino movement. Born
in Jaro, Iloilo , in 1856, he had first studied in the Jaro semi11ary, and
later gone to Manila to study medici11e. Apparently failing to gain
admission to the university for lack of a secondary diploma, he worked
as an apprentice in the hospital for a time, and then returned to l1is
native province.
Here he seems to have gotten into trouble with the authorities a11d
left for Spain in 1880 to study medicine at tl1e University of Valencia.
The following year he gave up his studies and left for Madrid, wl1ere
he soon began to be active in political and journalistic circles. He
appears to have been a natural orator, according to the style then
curren t in Spain, and became a frequent speaker in meetings of radi-
cal groups. A revolutionary by temperament, he would be a radicalizing
force among the Filipinos.
The beginnings of collective action at the banquet given to Leon y
Castillo soon led to the first organization of Filipinos in Madrid. Early
in 1882, they founded the Cfrculo Hispano-Fili pino under the leader-
ship of Juan Atayde, a retired Spanish army officer of Philippine birth.
In its manifesto of 20 April 1882, signed by the acting president, Rear
Admiral Claudio Montero y Gay, and its secretary,Juan Atayde, the Circulo
expressed its thanks to the Minister Leon y Castillo, to whose "support
and personal mediation it owes its existence." It p1-omised to be

gli11g, and exploitation. Despite the widespread agreeme11t on the need for its aboli-
tion, this ,vas many years in coming. For the evil effects of the monopoly, see the
extensive u·eatment in Jose Jimeno Agius, Memoria sobre el desesta nco del lllbaco en las
Islas Filipinas (Binondo, 1871 ).
Ii. Graciano 1~6pez J aena, Discursos y aniculos varios (2nd ed. by Jaime C. de Veyra;
Manila: Bureau of Printing, 1951), 18-2 1.
32 Stude11t Activities in .Spain

11othing more tha11 tl1e faithful reflection in Madrid of tl1e public life
o f tl1ose distant Spanish lands wl1ere the unique and absolute party,
ba11ne r, or po litical aspiration, is to see exalted in all parts of the world
, 18
th e g1or1ous name of the fatl1erland.

In its early months the organization seems to have been little more
than a social club; nothing of significance is known of its activity dur-
in g that pe riod . 111 September, Jose Rizal arrived in Madrid to study
medicine after a few months' stay in Barcelona. Rizal aln1ost immedi-
ately e ndeavored to give more substance to the Circulo, seeing in it a
vehicle for uniting the Filipinos.
W11etl1er owing to Rizal's initiative or to that of Atayd e, the Circulo
soon afterward founded a bi-weekly newspaper, called Revista d,el Circulo
Hispano-Filipino, whose first number appeared on 29 October 1882.
The history of this periodical is obscure, except that its life seems to
have been extreme!)' brief. Its appearance brought into the open the
difference in outlook between the you11ger me n and the older ones.
Pardo de Tavera merely says that "some Spaniards from the Philip-
pines who wrote in it, quickly stopped doing so when they saw the
19
anti-Spanish character which it was beginning to take."
In any case, both newspaper and Circulo were dead by the b egin-
ning of 1883, because of the withdrawal of the older members' sup-
port and the cessation of the subsidy which had come from the
overseas ministry with the fall of the government. The idea of united
action, however, remained ali,,e in the minds of some Filipinos, par-
ticularly Rizal, and in 1884 he made new attempts to revive the Circulo,

18. Manuel Artigas y Cuerva, "Los p e ri odicos filipinos," Bibliotera Nacional Filipi,ta~
18 Mar 1910.
19. T . H . Pa rd o de Ta,,era, Biblioleca Filipina (Washi11.gton: Govern n1ent P1;ntin~
Office, 1903), 357, no. 2362. The only arti cle whicl1 sec111s to l1ave st1rvived is 011e of
Lo p ez J aena's reproduced in l1is Disci,rsos, 101-3, en titled "La e 11seiia11 za ind ustri;_\l v
anislica en Filipinas." l11 it l1e proposes the fot111datio11 of an l:sr11ela de A,t,s y Oficiru
in eacl1 province in tl1 e Pl1ilippines, so as to take ad,ran tage of the artistic a11 d tecl11,0-
logical abili ty characteristic o f the Filipinos, a nd th us pron1ote tl1e i11dustrial ar,d co m-
mercial p rogress of tl1e cou ntry. In tl1 e arti cle l1e cites the achieven1e11ts of tt1e Filipin o
artists a11d e ngravers n ow in El1ropc. Ccrt.,i11ly th e re is not l1i11g in tl1is article ,,,hicl\
cottld l1a\'e been oflc 11sivc t.o Spa11iards.
 Student Activities in Spain 33

thot1gh without success. 20 AE, yet there was no genera I t1n1· ty o f pur-
pose among the Filipinos, and though a kind of vague national f'eel-
ing existed, it was only in some few individuals that this sentim e nt was
strong e n ou gh a nd sufficiently well-defined to issue in actio n . The
oth ers felt a certain bond expressed mainly in social gatherings, but
were disinclined to commit themselves to p olitical actio n .

Jose Rizal
Rizal's arrival on the scene brought the vague purposes of tl1e Fili-
pinos more sharply into focus. Tl1ough his first efforts in Madrid mis-
carried , h e was increasingly to galvanize their u11formed sentim ents
into nationalist fervor in the years to com e. Rizal not only served as
another link with the first nationalist movement "¼'hich e nded tragi-
cally in 1872; he was to play a decisive role in shaping tl1e course of
the later movement.
Jose Rizal Mercado y Alonso was born of a promine nt family of
Calamba i11 the province of Laguna. The family possessed a consider-
able amount of land as tenants of tl1e hacienda of the Dominicans,
largely devoted to the raising of sugar cane. Rizal' s father had studied
at the Colegio de San Jose, and his mother had been educated at the
Colegio de San ta Rosa in Manila. His paternal grandfatl1er had been
gobernadorcillo various times. On his mother' s side the1-e were sev-
e ral relatives who had held minor government posts, and a number
of lawyers a nd priests. Rizal obviously came from a family of mea ns
and conside rable education.
His older brother Paciano had studied at the Colegio de San Jose,
and had been a pupil and close friend of Father Jose Burgos, with
whom he was living at the time of the latter's execution in 1872. It
was to a nephew of Father Burgos that his family sent him in Manila
21
to get him a place in the Jesuit Ateneo Municipal. That all tl1ese

20. Jose Rizal, Dos diarios de juventi,d, 1882-1884, ed . P. Ortiz Arn1 e 11gol a 11 d A.
Molina (Madrid: Ed iciones Cultura H ispa nica, 1960), 73. 76; Ep. Rizal., I :77; One Htln-
dred, 61. 72, 77.
21. The outstanding biography of Rizal is Leon Ma. Gt1errero, Th e First J•'ilipi,io
( Manila: National Heroes Commission, 1963). O tl1er details in We 11 ceslao E. Re tana.
Vida y escritos del /)r. Jose Rizal (Mad rid: Vi ctoria110 Suarez, J 907).
34 St11clfn l J\ cl ;v ities in Spain

co n11ectio n s ,vitl1 Burgos gr eatly influe n ced Ri za] se e ms clear from

refe re11ces m ad e in his lette rs and ,vi·itings, p a rti cularly in his le tte r to
tl1e Filipino colo 11y in Barcelo na: "H ad it n o t b een fo r 1872, Rizal
would n ow b e a J esuit, and instead of writing the Noli me tangere, ,vou] d
22
l1ave ,vritte n the opposite."
£,,e n if 0 11e rejects th e numero t1s l1 ero-worship lege11cls that l1ave
gro,vn up a rou11d tl1e 11a1ne of Rizal and m e re ly keeps to pro,,e n facts ,
it is clear that l1 e ,vas som e tl1ing of a ge11ius. Besides his o u tstandi ng
acade mi c record , h e sh o," ed excepti o n al linguistic a bili ty, achievi ng
1

compe te11ce in sp eaki11 g o r at least readi11 g a11 extraordin a111 num be r

of Et11·o p ean a nd Asia11 la11gt1ages. From b o)1l1 ood h e sh owed inte rest
and conside rabl e ability in dra,vin g, sct1lpture , and esp ecia lly p oe t')·•
The )'Ou11g Rizal ,-vas a se1·iou s a11d d eepl)' religio us b oy, as his ad o-
23
lescent m emoirs a nd tl1e accou11 ts of his J esuit professors re, eal. Rizal
1

,,vas d eepl)' d e,,oted to tl1e Jest1its dt1ring his student years, a nd lo n g

re m aine d so. Even after he forsook his Catholic re ligio n , 11e rett1rned
to ,risit tl1e m , and l1eld long discussions. Only wh e n they the m seJ,,es
bro ke off relatio ns \\Tith him , sh o cked by his free-thinki11g a nd h i
n a tiona lism , did he cease to see them , lvith out losing his affection
a11d admiration for tl1em. H e re11e,-ved contact once more dt1ring his
exile in Dapitan and in his last hours b efore execution , h e ,,ras ac-
24
co1npanied b)' Jesuits from the Ateneo Municipal.
Dt1ring his student )'ears tl1e lo,,e of his mothe rland ,vhich his ch ild-
hood e nvironment must have fostered manifested itse lf in l1is ,,rrit-
ings. Writi11g of these years in 1879 when he was eighteen , he sa)·
"My second )'ear as a boarder [1876-77] was like the fi1·st, except that
in tl1at time there had b ee11 a gre at developme11t o f m~· p a uio tic sen-
time11ts, as we ll as of a11 act1te sen siti,rity." The n e xt year , his com posi-

22. EfJ. Ri.zal., 2:166.

23. 1'/ie Yoi111g Jfizal, tr. and ed . Lc611 Ma . GL1e rrcro (tvla nila: Bardavo 11 . 193 1). l lO,
14 7, 148. 164. (Refe re nces a re to tl1 e Span isl1 tex t.) Fo r th e testi1no r1y of liis p rofe _
sors, see th e a no ny1no t1s J est1it accottnt (,.vri tte n by Fatl1er Pablo Paste lls, btit irl('orp~.,..
rating remin isce n ces of otl1 cr J esuits [Letter of Fatl1e r Pfo Pi to Fatllt' r Pab lo p~~ t~lls.
17 Mar 1897; AT, "Cartas de Filipinas a \'arios 1882-19 14"1) . l,a ,ri,1.soni:.aci011 d~ f'ibpintis
Rizal)' j lt olrrn (Ba rcelc,na: L.il) re rfa )' 'fipogra ITa Ca tolica. 1897). 6-i .
•
24. Jiizr,l y su obrfl, 14- 1(1, 28- 40; also lc>tters of Riz.'11 to Blun,e11critt . l:.p. Ri:..al..
5:530- 36, ~3•18. e tc. O r1 Oapit;111 , sec- L(>o f\ . (:utl,11n, SJ .. "l-~r,1ncisco d e Pa 11 J~\ Saitc' l\t'z.
1849-19 28." Philippine S/uliirs 8 ( 19(>0): ~\3·1-t.11; and J o l111 N. cl1urn acl1 c: r. SJ., .. Soni~
Nel les 0 11 Ri zal in Da p it,111 ," Ph ili/>
pit1t' -~ludie.~ 11 ( l!l6~): 301 - 13.
 Stud,ent A ctivities in Spain 35

tion "A la juventud filipina" won the prize offered i11 Manila for th e
25
best poem by an indio or mestizo. In it h e calls o n the Filipino
youth, "fair hope of my fatherland," to rise to the glorious destiny to
which the Spaniard has opened th e way. His poem reveals a sense of
loyaJty to Spain , but Rizal makes it clear that tl1e Philippines, not
Spain, is the true moth erland.
The following year the Liceo Artfstico-Literario of Manila, whicl1
had offered the prize previously mentioned , offered another i11 a sin-
gle contest, open to Peninsulars and Filipinos, to honor Cervantes.
Again Rizal , still a medical student of nineteen, won the first prize,
this time over various peninsular journalists and friar professors of
the university, with an allegory entitled "El Consejo d e los Dioses."
Shortly after, an incident occurred that was to have a lasting effect
on Rizal. Even as a boy, with that deep sense of justice characteristic
of him , he had deeply resented the rough treatment so often given
by the local civil guard to any poor farmer who failed to salute them
on passing. One night in 1880 he passed in the darkness a lieutenant
of the civil guard, not recognizing who it was. As he told the story
years later, the lieutenant, without saying a word, struck him with his
sword , wounding him. Indignant, Rizal went later to the palace of the
governor-general, Fernando Primo de Rivera, to demand justice.
He got no satisfaction on his demand; neither did he get to see the
96
governor-general. -
This incident made a deep impression on him. Conscious of his
dignity and of his ability to compete with a Spaniard on equal terms,
he found tl1at as an indio, he was not accorded equality with the
Spaniard before the bar of justice. This demand for recognition of

25. Retana , Vida, 3 1-33, ,vh ere the poem is reproduced . Retana, ho,vever, tends to
see more signs of n ationalism in it than the text, as well as what is known of Rizal at
tlle time, seen1 s capable of supporting. The same may be said , ,.vith eve n more reason,
of his interpretation of Rizal's ]unto al Pasig. See the jttdicious remarks of Guerrero,
The First Filipino, 73-79.
26. This is the account given by Rizal in an article in 1890, answering the attacks
made by th e Spanish Academician and forme r high official in tl1 e Pl1ilippines, Vicente
Barrantes. on his novel Noli me tangere ("Al Excmo. Sr. D. Vicente Barrantes." La
Solidaridad, 15 Feb 1890). In a letter to Blumentritt in 1887, however, I1e related the
incident as having happened when l1e was seventeen years old , wl1icl1 would have
been 1878 (Ep. Rizal. , 5:95). Primo d e Rivera was not yet governor-general at tllis
time , so it would seem that tl1e 1880 date is more probable.
36 Sturlent Activities in Spai1i

tl1e equality of Filipino and Pe11i11sular was to obsess Rizal 's thoughts
i11 the years to co1ne, and its denial in theory or in practice would
goad him into a clash witl1 the offenders, no matter what the cost.
This deep sense of the dignity of the Filipino, the unwillingness to
tolerate injustice, seems to have been at least partly responsible for
his breaking off his studies at the University of Santo Tomas and leav-
ing the Pl1ilippines for Europe. Rizal apparently had words with one
of the professors of the uni,,ersity who treated the poorer students
unfairly, and felt that as a result he would never be able to finish his
27
degree there. This fact, however, cannot have been the only reason
for his decision to continue his studies in Europe, though it may ha,,e
accelerated it. The correspondence with his brother Paciano and with
other close friends, tl1ough couched in somewl1at guarded terms, at
least n1akes clear tl1at Rizal and Paciano regarded his studies in Eu-
rope as a means of fulfilling a patriotic mission, or of preparing him-
self to do something for his country.
He l1ad left without informing his parents, whose disapproval he
apparently feared, secretly assisted by an uncle and by his brother,
who was to send him money for his support abroad. A letter of Paciano,
written a few weeks after his departure, speaks of the distress of his
pare11ts and how he had been compelled to let their father in on the
secret. In the town of Calamba, his departure was the subject of at-
tempts at conjecture for many days, "but none of them hit the mark. "
He hoped that Jose would not stay in Barcelona to complete his medi-
cal course, since "the principal object of your journey to Europe is
not to perfect yourself in that career, but in other matters of greater
utility, or, to say the same thing in other words, in that to iuhich )'Ott are
28
more inclined. " The following month his cousin and close friend
Vicente Gella wrote Rizal that they sorely missed him while he was "in

27. Retana, Vida, 53-54. Pastells merely says that Rizal left the universi ty "disgustado
co11 alg(1n profesor" ,vith a vague reference to "motivos analogos al indicado antes~
which apparently refers to wl1at Pastells had said about the loss by th e indio of l1is
profound respect for everything Spanish, due to the distLtrbing scenes resuJti11g frorn
the Revolt1tion of 1868 in Spain. This would suppo rt Retana's assertion that it ,vas due
to Rizal 's revulsion at the treatment of stude11t.s by a Dominican professor, as por-
trayed later b)' Rizal in l1is novel £/ Filibusterismo. Pastells, l10\•i1e,•er, does n o t i11dicate
whether or not the professor was a Dominican (Rizal y su om-a, 9).
28. tp. Rizal., 1:19-2 1. (Italics supplied.)
 Student Activities in Spai7i 37

search of the good which we all desi1·e. ... May God assist you in re ttirn
for the good ,,vhich you are doing on behalf of you1· countrynien." An-
oth e r intimate friend advised him to study law as well, "becat1se it will
29
be of much use for the purpose you have in mind. "
A few days after arriving in Barcelona Rizal wrote to his family of
how the Jesuits there, to whom he had letters of i11troduction from
his former Ateneo professors, had helped him find lodging, and had
lent him money till his funds from the Philippines arrived. "I have
gone through their college, and am making studies on various mat-
ters in order to apply them there when I get back." Later that year l1e
wrote to Paciano, hoping that if the sugar crop was sufficiently good,
the latter might join Rizal for a year or two in Europe, and that their
brothers-in-law might later do the same. "Tell your friends, those who
have the resources, that I invite their sons to come to these parts. I
would wish that the coming generation, that which is to govern and
direct Cala1nba by the principles of the twentieth century, may be a
generation of brilliant light, intelligent and progressive."
Rizal conceived his task to be one of bringing the culture and
progress of contemporary Europe to his countrymen. Exactly how he
planned to do this was not made clear. Engaging in politics in Spain
did not seem to be part of his plans, for he wrote later to one of his
sisters, apparently explaining why he would not make use of political
influence to get himself a government post, "I ... have always consid-
ered myself here as a foreigner, and ... have not concealed my indif-
3
ference to all who have proposed that I joi11 political parties." For a °
time l1e considered a professorship in his homeland, but soon came
to believe that he would never be accepted at the university by t11e
31
Dominicans, who now looked on him with suspicion.

29. Ibid., 22, 38. (Italics supplied.)

30. Rizal, One H undred, 31, 52, 233.
3 1. A le tter of 26 Nov 1884, to l1is famil y declared Lhat it was useless for him to
finish the doctora l degree either in m edicine or in pl1ilosopl1)' and le tte rs, since Lhe
Dominicans would n ever appoi11t hi1n to a chair in eitl1er field at tl U • .
1e n1,·ers1ty o
f
Santo Tomas. Similarly in a letter to Blume ntritt of 13 Apr 1887 h e l d ..
. • a rne nte : If 0 111)'
I could become a professor 1n my home land, I would a,vake n tJ1 d"
. . . . . ose stt1 1es of o ur
cou11try, tl11s nose1 t£ ipsttm, wh1 cl1 gives true self-unde rstandin g a d d . .
. · n n ves n at10 11s on
to great deeds. But I wtll never be allo\ved to fotmd a college · ~
Rn.al., 5: l 10). ' in my fatl1erlancl" (Ep.
38 Student Activities in Spain

Tl1e extent to \.\'hich the idea of national regeneration through edu-

cation domi11ated Rizal 's thinking appears clearly in a significant arti-
cle which he wrote shortl)' after his arrival in Barcelona for the
short-lived bilingual nationalist newspaper of Manila, Diariong Tagalog.
The first newspaper to appear in Spanish and Tagalog, the Diariong
Taga,log was chiefly the work of Filipinos, Basilio Teodoro Moran and
Marcelo H. del Pilar, but the titula1· ownership of the paper ,.vas vested
in Francisco Calvo y Munoz, a peninsular functionary who allied him-
self at this time, and later in Spain, with the Filipino nationalists. Rizal
was asked by the managing editor, Basilio Teodoro, to contribute arti-
cles to the newspaper. The first of these, "El amor patrio," appeared
32
in the issue of 20 August 1882.
In it, Rizal recalls how all men of all ages have hymned their fa-
therland with all their command of language. But well-worn though
the subject is, he says, it is fitti11g that we too should be grateful to
our beloved country.

In the fashion then of the ancient Hebrews, who offered in the temple
the first fn1its of their love, we, in a foreign land, will dedicate our first
accents to our cou11try, still wrapped in tl1e clouds and mists of the
morning, but al,vays fair and poetic, ever more fervently worshipped, in
proportion to our distance and tl1e length of ot1r absence from her.

In affecting paragrapl1s reflecting his nostalgia in Spain, to him a

foreign land, he sings the praises of love of country. He calls on his
countrymen to love their country, as men in every age have loved and
fought and died for theirs. He concludes:

Love her, yes! , but not as men loved in other times, practicing fierce
virtues, virtues rejected and reprobated by true 1norality and b)' Mother
Nature! not b)' glorying in fanaticism, in destruction, i11 cruelt)·, no ! A
more smiling dawn no,v appears on the horizon, of soft and peaceftil
rays, messe11ger of life and of peace; the t1"Ue dawn of Christianit}', an
01nen of days of happiness and tranqt1ility. Our duty will be to follo,v
the arid, bt1t peaceft1l and productive paths of kno\vledge, ¼'l1ich lead
on to progress; and from there to the t1nion desired and prayed for b)'
Jesus Christ in the 11igl1t of His Passion.

32. It was reprinted, t111de r the pset1do n)'lTI "Laong Laan ,'' da ted Barcelon a, J u ,1e
1882. in !~a Solidaridad, 31 O cl 1890.
 Student Activities in Spain 39

T h e reliance o n study, on knowledge, as a necessary means by which

a true Filipino patrio t must love his country and promote her progress
expressed an essential and, at this time , predominant note of Rizal 's
na tio nalism. But the clear distinction of tl1e Philippines from Spain,
"the fo reign land ," caused many a Spaniard in Manila to frown, as his
brother-in-law wrote him some months later, warning him to "be care-
33
ful , becau se you seem to be on their list." Among many Filipinos
though, the article was received enthusiastically, and the editor wrote
to Rizal asking him for more. However, a few months later the news-
paper ceased publication for lack of funds, struck by the twin disas-
34
ters of a d evastating typhoon and the cholera epidemic of 1882.
These years 1880-82 had seen the first faltering, and as yet not
fully conscious, steps towards the creation of a nationalist movement.
Pedro Paterno, Gregorio Sancianco, Jose Rizal-each in his own way
had begun to articulate growing consciousness among Filipinos abroad
that they were not merely vassals of Spain, but a people equal and
distinct, with their own national character and a destiny of their own
to seek and cherish. The thought of independence is not yet a cloud
on the horizon; the first aspiration is rather to be recognized as fully
Spanish citizens. But the growing consciousness of a national self, of
an identity as a distinct people, is at work in the minds of at least a
few. For the moment the first of these aspirations is dominant, but
when it becomes clear to the more far-sighted that the reformist
assimilationist ideal is unattainable, this national self-consciousness will
begin to blossom into a full-grown nationalist movement.
For the latter to be viable, an organized structure will be necessary
around wl1ich to unite the Filipinos. The cautious and somewhat nebu-
lous Circulo Hispano-Filipino, together with its newspaper, had quickly
proved inadequate and premature. But the notion of a corporate body
of Filipinos in Spain did not die, and kept alive by subsequent at-
tempts to revive the organization, would prepare the ground for some-
thing more substantial when the incipient national feeling had further
matured.

33. Ep. Rizal., 1:79, From the context the referen ce is to tl1e Dominican friars.
34. Ep. Rizal,. , 1:39, 63, 77-78.
 .....

I
I

I
CHAPTER 3

Journalism and Politics, 1883-1886

The Campaign in Los Dos Mundos

Despite the failure of the first efforts at organized action on the

part of the Filipino colony, not all were ready to write off the Filipino
cause in Spain. Before the newspaper Espaiia en Filipinas made its bo,v
a few years later, various members of the Madrid colony turned to
journalism to promote their country's interests, and sought to estab-
lish political contacts that might be fruitful.
On 8 January 1883 a periodical called Los Dos Mundos, devoted to
the overseas Hispanic world, made its first appearance with the Span-
iard Jesus Pando y Valle as editor. Though it ca11not be deter 1nined that
this publication was a Filipino project, Filipinos were associated with it
from the start. Moreover, very early on, there were Filipino staff mem-
bers, Graciano Lopez Jaena and Pedro Govantes y Azcar1aga. Tl1e ne,\75-
paper outlined its program in its first issue as follows:

to demand for Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, equality of rights,
as far as possible, with the other Spanish provinces; to contribL1te with
all our forces to the promotio11 of the general interests of the fath e r-
land; and to do whatever is necessary to extend to it the progress made
in foreign countries, and to give i11 tur11 to the other nations of tl1e old
and the new world an idea of ot1r o,.vn progress.

In the first issue was an article by Tomas <lei Rosa1-io, \.vhich e xe1n-
plifies the cautious attitude taken by these ea1·ly Filipino stude nts in
their writings, wl1ether ottt of conviction or necessity. Having proposed

40
 Journalism and Politics 41

to discuss Philippine questions, he l1astens to proclaim that his guide

in writing will always be "the indissoluble bonds of inheritance which
link those Islands with the mother-country, the profound respect which
all the religious institutions deserve from us and all the national feel-
'
ing which throbs in the h earts of both peoples."
In March Lopez Jaena made his first appearance in Los Dos Mundos
less timorously with an impassioned protest against an article of
Valentin Gonzalez Serrano, a Spaniard lvho had been vice-president
of the d efunct Cfrculo Hispano-Filipino. The latter, writing in a mili-
tary n ewspaper on the need of a proper army in the Philippines, had
spoken of the mestizos as being disloyal and hostile to Spain, and of
the indio as indolent, without aspiration or interest in progress. In
his answer Lopez Jaena defended the indio, referring to what
Sancianco had written on the so-called indolence being due to the
peninsular's failure to provide the native with adequate education and
sufficient incentive, while victimizing the indio for all he was worth.
Turning to a parallel which was to be much used by the Filipino propa-
gandists, Lopez Jaena compared with the Philippines other colonies of
the Orient

In Singapore, in Calcutta and Java, with the colonial regime and the
example of the English and the Dutch respectively, the Malay indios,
brothers of our own, abandoned tl1eir laziness to give themselves to the
energy of activity and of work; in ot1r Archipelago of San Lazaro with
our colonial regime and the example of our colonizers, who though
they had been diligent in the Peninsula, on coming among the indios,
rather than opening their eyes to civilization, rather than guiding them
alo 11g the path of progress, have lived like them. Therefore, as must
necessarily happen , the indios continued being indolent.

Replying to the charge of disloyalty against the mestizos, he de-

clared that the only disaffection was against the abuses of so many
peninsulars in the Islands, who, instead of guiding the people toward
progress, tried to keep them ignorant so as to exploit them. But know-
ing Spain's interest in the welfare of her colonies, the Filipinos 1~eal-
1
ize, h e said, that all this is not to be blamed on Spain.
This was perhaps the most forthright criticism of the Spanish re-
gime that had been published so far, or would be for some time.

l . "Una protesta," J.,os Dos Mun dos, 18 and 28 Mar 1883.

12 Journalism and Politics

Lopez J aen a was, h oweve1-, careful to distingt1ish between Spain 's no-
ble purposes in the Philippines and what was actually done by the
Spanish administration. The comparison of the Spanish system in the
Philippines "'rith that employed in the British and Dutch Asiatic colo-
nies was interesting for what it implied: the secularizing of the Philip-
pine administration. This conclt1sion was not drawn here, but soon
would be.
The following month appeared an article by Pedro de Govantes,
who represented a somewhat different tendency witl1in the Filipino
group. In an article on the new Commercial Code, shortly to be prom-
ulgated in the Peninsula, he urged its submission to the Cortes for
extension to the Philippines also. For even under the old absolute
regime, the ove1·seas possessions of Spain were governed by the Consejo
de Indias, which ruled overseas as the Consejo de Castilla did in the
Peninsula. Thus, as far as possible, every effort was made to eliminate
all political difference between overseas and peninsular Spain.
Surely then, he concluded, the present constitutional regime should
not be more fearful than the old absolute one, and Philippine affairs
2
should be treated in the Cortes, and not merely by royal decree.
Govantes' approach to reform , thougl1 earnest enough and
well-reasoned, was basically conservative and written from a Spanish
point of view, even though similar in its aim to what men like Lopez
Jaena were seeking.
The two points of view may be distinguished more clearly in the
next articles published in Los Dos Mundos by the two men on the
question of the tribute and of the polo, the annual forty days of labor
on public works required of indios and mestizos. In articles of June
and July 1883, Lopez Jaena attacked the tribute and compulsory labor
as being symbols of the vassalage of the Filipinos. He called for their
immediate abolition and replacement by a system of direc t taxation,
which would remove the stigma of distinctions between peninsular,
Spanish mestizo, Chinese mestizo , and native. As long as the tribute
persists,

2. "EI C6digo de Comercio en Filipi11as," Los Dos M11ndos, 28 Apr 1883. Govantes
was the son of Felipe Govantes, a Spaniard who h eld many posts in the Philippi11e
adm inistratio n , a11d remained pern1anently tl1ere. Pedro was t11e 11epl1e," of tJ1e
Azcarragas, and h ad bee11 active in Manila journalism for a fe," years before coming
to Spain to get his doctorate in la'"·
 Journalism and Politics 43

it seems that there is no desire to consider those Islands as a Spanish

province, but rather as vassal peoples, feudal peoples, whose feudal lords
and masters (seiiores de pend6n y caldera, de horca y cucliillo) are the gover-
nors and functionaries, the friars, the peninsulars, their sons, and th e
3
mestizos; their slaves and beasts of bt1rden are the t1nfortunate indios.

Govantes, writing the following month, was more concerned with

economic and administrative matters, the use of the funds whicl1 ac-
crued from the redemption of the polo, funds which ,.vere supposed
to be set aside as local funds to be used for the public works which
the polo itself was meant to take care of. Once these local funds were
centralized in 1858, they eventually ceased to be used for their proper
purpose, and were instead expended to meet the growing needs of
the central government. The result was the steady disrepair of schools,
4
roads, bridges, etc.
To Govantes as well as to Lopez Jaena, the tribute and the other
obligations of quasi-feudal nature deserved no place in the modern
,vorld. But Govantes approached the question as an administrative
reformer, Lopez Jaena as a nationalist most deeply concerned about
the stigma of inferiority stamped upon his race by such a system. This
difference in attitude \\7as to become more strikingly apparent, for-
cing a major split in the Filipino refor1r1 movement.

New Directions

Early in 1884, Filipino activity in Mad1id took a new turn. Criticism

of Spain's handling of Philippine affairs became more open. More
members of the Filipino colony were active in making speeches and
writing for newspapers. Some of the speeches and writings, moreover,
were marked by frankly antifriar sentiments.

3. "La cuesti6n del impuesto tributario en Filipinas," Los Dos Mttndos, 28 Jtine, 8
July 1883.
4. "Filipinas. Los reales decretos de 12 de Julio," Los Dos A1unclos, 18 At1g 1883. Tl1 e
idea in centralizing the administration of these funds had been to provide for their
more efficie nt use in public works. But an examination of tl1e records of th e Overseas
Ministry in AHN sh ows that countless expe nses, t1seful and useless, n on e o f v.rl,ich h,ld
an)'thing to d o witl1 education or pt1blic wo rks, were cl1 a rged to tlt ese fund~.
44 Journalisr,i aricl Politics

A se ries of a rticles begun in November 1883 by Lo pez J aena on

Philippine local institutions, a nalyzing n1etl1odically the defects of th e
system, sudde nly tt1rned in 1884 into a bitte r attack against the power
of the fria1· p arish priest over tl1e local govern111 ent. Whe1·e the friar is
not restrained by the presence of pro\rincial ci\ril authorities, h e wrote ,

h e lives like a true feudal lo rd: l1e recognizes 110 other autl1 ority prio r
and superior to his, nor does the gobernado rcillo give o rders there,
11or any otl1e r municipal au tl1ority except }1imself; and as l1e commands
desp otically and tyrannicall)', so he punishes cruell)' and barbarously if
l1is commands are no t executed; i11 a ,vord , he sets l1imself up as cacique
in those to,vi1s whic}1 are at a distance fro1n tl1e capitals of the provinces.

In pro\rincial capitals, however, the friar seeks to be 011 good ter 111s
with the authorities, so as to act freely lvith their connivan ce. Edu-
cated Filipinos, therefore, avoid municipal offices like th e plague , for
"who of the enlightened classes is able to expose himself to the n et-
work of abuses, of annoyances, of occult p ersecutio ns which a ppear
from the limitless powers of the peninsular authorities and the \.Veight
5
of the dominant influence of the religious communities."
At about this time , some of the Filipinos established closer rela-
tions with the republicans, perhaps out of disgust with the failt1re of
the Liberal Fusionist governments to fulfill their promises before be-
ing 1·eplaced once more b)1 the Co11servatives. The republicans, moreo-
ver, had traditionally been the cl1ief supporters of refo1ms for tl1e
overseas colonies, partly because such reforms logically flowed from
their theories of government and partl)' because, being al,vays ot1t of
po,ver, they did not have to be responsible for seeing throu g l1 the
refor1ns which they might propose. Bo th Rizal a nd Lopez J ae11a be-
gan to write for the radical re publican daily, El Progreso, \Vhicl1 ,vas
attacking the government so fi e rcely that it ,.vas under con ti11uot1s le-
gal harassme nt by the Canovas ministt)'.
An article of Lo pez .Jaena's e ntitled "La logica en Filipi11as·· pre-
sented a full-scale i11di ctme 11t of the 1·egime i11 the Pl1ilippines: tl1e
lack of modern cod es of law; tl1e consta nt changing of' ft1n ctio11~1ri~ ·

5. "Breve rcsciia y consideracio11es gcn<-ralcs acerca d e las i11stit\1cio1,cs filipina.s ,

plan de una organizaci6n 111unici JJal e 11 aqt1ella.-. islas:· Los Dos NJ,,,idos, 8 No,· 1&~3: ~~
Nov 1883; 8 J an 1884; l8 Feb 1884; 18 Apr 188,t; 28 Nov 1884. The pas.~-ige~ qtiotc.-d
are from Nov 1884, but tt1e lirst attack 0 11 tJ1e friars is i11 the 11un1l)er of .r\pr 1884.
 Journalism and Politics 45

and even of the governor-ge11eral before they could get to know th e

country; the incompetence of provincial governors, partict1larly their
inability to understand the language of their provinces; to say noth-
ing of the widespread dishonesty, the lack of communications, th e
impractical nature of education under control of the friars, the cen-
6
sorship of the press. Lopez _Jaena flung a challenge. "Let the censor-
ship of the press be suppressed, and we will see how many ills, how
many irregularities, how much immorality will be brought to light."
In April 1884 there we1~e disturbances on tl1e island of Samar, ap-
parently due to religious fanaticism, in which a number of people
were killed by government forces. When rumors of the disturbances
reached Madrid, the newspaper of the Conservative government, La
~

Epoca, denied all reports, declaring that there was complete tranquility.
The republican newspaper El Liberal gave further details. La Epoca was
forced to admit the facts, but tried to dismiss the entire affair on the
ground that there was no evidence of sedition (filibusterismo).
At this point, the Filipino colony, apparently led by Lopez Jaena,
signed a protest, calling on the government to clarify matters. To this
La Epoca replied with the account of the events given by the Diano de
Manila, and decried the exaggerations in the declaration of "the
so-called Filipino colony of Madrid" printed in El Progreso. For each
one of those signing the protest, it declared, there are twenty in the
Philippines who are perfectly content with the government of Gen-
eral Jovellar, with the clergy, and with the functionaries of the admin-
istration. Though, as LopezJaena pointed out in the subsequent article
in El Progreso, no charges had been made against the government of
Jovellar, the reply of La Epoca is significant for showing the terms in
which the Filipino demands for reforms were already conceived. Any
Filipino complaints with which Lopez Jaena was associated were likely
to be interpreted within the context of his general broadsides against
7
the administration a11d the friars in the Philippines.
A similar polemic, this time 1nucl1 more extensive, took place in
July and August as a result of disturbances in the province of
Pangasinan, which seem to have been due to oppression of local offi-
cials by higher authorities because the local officials were behind in the

6. Reprinted in Discursos, 130-37._

7. EI J,iberal, 27 and 30 May: J.,a Epoca, 19, 28 and 29 May; Discursos, 118-20.
46 journalis-m and Politics

payment of the tribute. The Manila government was caught in a some-

v\1l1at l1ysterical state of ala1m since a large number of arrests were made
in Manila and in the provinces of various native priests and of wealthy
8
Filipinos and mestizos, among them Gregorio Sancianco.
Gova11tes, writing in El Liberal, denounced the arrests, based on
false denunciations as in the aftermath of the mutiny of 1872, and
emphasized the need for parliamentary representation for the Philip-
. 9
pines so that such injustices might be brought before t h e , nation.
Lopez Jaena again carried on an extensive polemic with La Epoca and
La Correspondencia de Espana, anothe1· orga11 of the Conservative gov-
ernment, which attempted to justify the procedures followed and to
minimize the importance of the measures taken by the government.
This time he wrote in El Porvenir, another organ of the Progressi,,e
10
Republicans of Manuel Ruiz Zorrilla.
Shortly thereafter, Rizal entered the lists with an article entitled "El
filibusterismo en Filipinas." Referring to the disturbances of recent
months, he commented that since these were wrought by peaceful
and unarmed peasants, the provocation must have been great. But in-
stead of investigating the reasons for such unrest, the go,,emmen t would
undoubtedly attribute everything to filibusterisrrw, and make scapegoats of
innocent men to conceal official negligence in getting to the bottom of
11
the matter or to shield the guilty parties, as it did in 1872. There are
.filibusteros in the Philippines, Rizal asserted, only because they are gi\·en
this name, whether out of a stupid fear or out of malice:

8. Governor-Ge11eral Jovellar communicated to tl1e Madrid Government tl1 e rumors

tl1at there ,vere groups i11 Ho11g Kong a11d tl1 e U11ited S~ttes promoting a revolutio11
i11 tl1e Pl1ilippines. TJ1ougl1 l1e considered these rumors to be grou11dlcss, he se11 t 0 11
the minutes of the meeting of tl1e Ju11ta de Autoridades of 17 Jt111e 1884, held to
co11sider tl1 e state of affairs after the ttprising in Pangasina 11 . In these 1nint1tes it ap-
pears that the governor-general l1ad received reports from several places of i111n1incnt
revolts, etc., all of whicl1 l1ad proved to be grot1ndless. l ~hc ,vl1ole report is of great
interest for tl1e facility ,vith wl1icl1 the Spaniards in th e 1>J1ilippines ,vere like}~, to be
alarmed , and th e rash a11d l1arsl1 measures witl1 \.\1hich they believed tl1c goven1n1et1l
shottld respond (copy i11 AMA£. Leg. 2962, "1884 Filipi11as. Sohre trab~~jos st'paratistas
de las Islas Filipinas en los Estaclos Un idos y e11 H o11g-Kc>ng") .
9. 30 July 1884. under the pset1dony1n P. l)ro.
10. Disritrsos, 121-27.
11. The ter1n filibi,stero in late 11ir1<"l<-e11tl1-centu1)' Pl1ilippincs had a speci.-ll 111 c.~.lI\-
ing, designating 0 11e wh o was tryi11g Lo ovcrtl1ro,v Spa11isl1 rt1 le i11 L11e Pl1ilippines. It
 Journalism and Politics 47

In the Ph ilippines all th ose are filibusteros in th e towns wh o d o n ot

take off th eir h ats o n meeting a Spa11iard, be tl1 e ,veatl1er wl1a t it m ay;
th ose wh o greet a friar and do n ot kiss l1is sweaty l1and , if h e is a p ri est,
or his h abit, if h e is a lay-broth er; those ,vh o man ifest displeast1re at
being addressed by the familiar tu by an)'One and everyone, accustom ed
as tl1ey are to sh ow respect and to receive it; those wh o are subscribers
to some periodical of Spain or of Europe, even if it treat of literature, the
scien ces, or the fine arts; those wh o read books other than the n ove11as
and fairy-stories of miracles of the girdle, the cord, or the scapular; tl1ose
wh o in the elections of the gobemadorcillos vote for one wh o is not the
candidate of the parish priest; all those, in a word, ,vho am ong normal
civilized people are considered good citizens, friends of progress and en-
lightenment, in the Philippines are filibusteros, enemies of order, and,
12
like lightning rods, attract on stormy days wrath and calamities.

H e concluded by saying that if Spain wished to remove all danger of

filibuste rismo from the Philippines, all that was n ecessary was to cor-
rect the abuses that existed there. Then it need give no furth e r cre-
. 13
d e n ce to su e h accusations.
This inclusion of an attack on the friars , as well as on the abuses of
p e ninsular officials, was nothing new in Rizal. Before leaving the Phil-
ippines he was already on bad terms with some Dominicans of the
University. But certain phrases of his adolescent memoirs show that
l1is resentment was more extensive than this and that he shared the
impatie nce of other young Filipinos with the power exercised by the
14
friars in Philippine affairs.

seem s to h ave be en employed, as Rizal d ecries in this article, witl1 great recklessn ess
by tl1e Span iards in the Philippines. Leon Ma. Guerre ro, in his translatio n of Rizal 's
second po litical n ovel, El Filibusteris-mo, h as a ptly r ende re d it as "Th e Subversive," for it
con taine d all the connotatio ns whicl1 the la tter term l1as com e to h ave .
12. It was custo m ary for the friars and othe r pe ninsular Spa niards in th e Philip-
pines to address all Filipinos wi tl1 tl1e familiar pronoun tu. T his was d eeply reseilte d
by th e m ore educated ~ilipinos,_ particul arly in an age wl1e11 pro pe r fo rms in Sp anish
demande d m o re form ali ty tl1an 1s generally true to day.
13· A, Proureso,
o· 4 Aug 1884. Tho ugh ano nymous, internal evid ei,ce a nd s ti b seque nt
citation s11ow it to be Rizal's.
14. The Young Rizal, 146-47, where h e speaks of D. Antonio Vivencio d e l R .
· 1 · · d h' osan o,
the alcalde-m ayor wh o tinJust y 1mpnson e 1s m o the r for som e u·m • 1 . b
. e in 11s oyh ood
as th e "domest.ico d e los fra1 les"; and p. 149, wh e re h e speaks o f tll S . h . ·
. . e p an1s m esu zos
who lived in the sam e board111g-l1ouse ,v1th t1im as bei n g " f 1· d
• .. . . • u tos e los a1nores
fra1lunos. These passages, tl1ough dealing wi th earlier years w . . .
' e i e ,vn tte n 1n 1878 a11rl
48 J ournalism and Politics

In 1883 an t1nfortunate incident occurred that caused his resent-

ment to burn at white h eat. The parish p riest of Calamba, a Filipi110
secular priest a11d Rizal's close friend and confidant since boyhood,
died. According to Paciano's lette r to Jose, the regional vicar, the
Dominican Father Villafranca, came to take ch arge of the church ,
and finding the funds locked in a box, the key of which was in Ma-
nila, h e ordered Rizal 's father ,

in virtt1e of th e key of Saint Peter, to appear before him in the Haci-

enda, wh ere h e obliged him to give in advance the quantity locked in
the box, making use of intimidation, to the effect that h e would m ake
kno,.vn to the Archbishop secrets of the dead man, which are related in
a certain ,vay to a m ember of our family. Our father, in face of this
pressure, had to advance the money in gold to have it returne d in
silver at the end of three weeks. Tl1is intimidating an old man a11d
disinterring secrets whicl1 he may p erhaps have, is a really repugnant
type of conduct.

Rizal 's reply reveals the extent of his resentment:

I felt d eeply the death of the parish priest, not precisely b ecause of
his being a friend, but because h e was a good priest, which is a veI")'
rare thing ... . My blood boils every time I read what you say of Father
Villafranca, but I am contented, since he supports and justifies m y preju-
dices against him . If he had acted otherwise, I would perhaps h ave had
to say that I was mistaken . A bonze or a brahmin could not have done
more; those priests, those virtuous ministers of God who exact secrecy
and avoid scandal, who have fine, oily words; those who believe them-
selves simple as doves and wise as serp ents; those who speak of respect
for the old and respect for the grave; those who always talk of fasting,
of prayer and of the Mass, who have God on their lips while they rob
the poor man of his real to enrich themselves: that they should threaten
the revelation of faults committed in his youth to dishonor the illustri-
ous m emory of a wise old man who perhaps h as wept over his faults
15
and has been less of a hypocrite than these pre tended judges.

1879. See also the letter of his friend]. M. Cecilio , wl10, ,vriting about Ri zal's going to
Europe for the good of his country, adds: "As you know, there are certain types \\itl1
excessive influence in this country, and they are the friars, wh o are tl1e h eigl1t o f
despotism. It would be good that you sh o uld do s01netl1i11g for tl1en1" (Ep. Rizal..
l :38) .
] 5. Ep. Rizal., 1:90-91 ; Rizal , One Httndred. 141-42.
 Journalisni artd Politics 49

About this time Rizal gave up the regular practice of the Catholi c
religion , though tl1is ,-vas no doubt not simply becat1se of this inci-
dent.1 6 But the vehemence of his feelings was an intimation of the
major anti-friar novel to come. Taking its cu e f1~om Rizal, tl1e Filipino
campaign against existing conditions in the Philippines ,-vould eventu-
ally concentrate more and more of its fire on the friars.

Banquet for Luna and Hidalgo

In 1884 at the Exposici6n de Bellas Artes in Madrid, rn10 Filipino paint-

ers won prizes. Juan Luna y Novicio received a gold medal of the first
class for his Spoliarium, and Felix Resurreccion Hidalgo, a medal of
the second class for his Virgenes cristianas expuestas al populaclio. The
Filipino colony was jubilant over the triumph of tv\lo of their compa-
triots, and at the initiative of Pedro Paterno held a banquet to honor
the two painters, and to make the Philippines better known among
the politicians and journalists of Madrid. The accou11t of the banquet
given in the liberal newspaper, El Imparcial, the following day showed
I
the different forces at work in the Filipino movement.
Among those present were various Spanish artists, representati,1es
of t11e principal newspapers of Madrid, various politicians of left-wing
Liberal or Republican affiliation , such as Segismundo Moret, Miguel
Morayta, and Rafael M. Labra. In the course of the banquet, telegrams
were read from the Ministro de Fomento (Alejandro Pidal y Mon)
and the Ministro de Ultramar (the Conde de Tejada de Valdosera),
excusing themselves from attending, but "adhering to the intention
of the banquet." As members of the Conservative ministry, these two
apparently were unwilling to become involved in what ,-vas likely to be
a liberal or radical manifestation-an indication of tl1e Spanish atti-
tude towards the Filipino colony in Madrid. Among the guests, J1 ow-
cver, was Manuel Azcarraga who, in spite of his Conservative political
affiliation, was still closely associated with the Filipinos.
In the course of the banquet, a toast was offered by the Reptibli-
can, Rafael M. Labra, representative of the Cuban autonomists , in
which he announced tl1at following the English custom of ending a

I 6. See his mother's letters reproving l1 iin, dated 27 Nov 188 3 d

. . , . · an 11 Dec 1884:
Ep. Rl.Z.lll. , 1: l 03-4, 130-3 l ; and Rizal s ar1s,ve r , One 1-lu ndrPcl, 22~-24..
50 Journalism ancl Politics

banquet by a toast to the Queen, he would propose a toast to the

patria espaiiola. After the entl1usiastic applause, Azcarraga, who had
given a toast earlier in tl1e banquet, 1-ose again to toast "the King of
Spain, personification of the fatherland, " obviously to reprove the ex-
pression of republicanism which had preceded.
Among tl1e Filipinos, Lopez Jaena and Rizal made notable speeches.
The former delivered a fervent panegy1-ic of the two artists, and then
tt1rned his thoughts to the land of their birtl1 . Through them there
has now dawned for tl1e Pl1ilippines "after a dark night of more than
three hundred years, tl1e brilliant sun of justice." At last she begins to
move along the path of progress "despite the theocracy, ever despotic
and ignorant, livi11g as it does amid shadows and mysteries, despite all
the colossal power of intransigence, which, after domi11ating for three
centuries, denies you entrance into the circle of modern culture." He
went on to exalt the pre-Hispanic civilization, so often depreciated in
order to deny the capacity of the Filipino for modern civilization.
The triumph of Luna and Hidalgo has given the lie to this deprecia-
tion, while at the sa1ne time expressing the laments of a people "de-
voured by the nepotism and the greed of the bureaucracy, choked by
the errors of a semi-absolute, autocratic policy, and trampled under-
foot by the outrages of the intolerant, prostituted, and liberticide the-
ocracy which maintains with more zeal than ever the division of 1-aces.n
Rizal, on the other hand, made only a passing remark on the op-
position to the learning of Spanish in the Philippines by

those short-sighted pygmies, who in assuring tl1e present, are not able
to see the future, do not weigh the consequences; nurses, ,,,ho are them-
selves diseased; corrupt and corruptors.

But he passes over them, "for they are dead; they have no breath of
life, no soul, and the worms are gnawing at them!"
The main burden of his speech was rather to exalt Luna and
Hidalgo as the glory of two peoples-Spanish and Filipino. Address-
ing the Spaniards present, he proclaimed:

to you is due the beauty of tl1e diamonds wl1ich the Philippines ,,•e~-trs
in her crown; she l1as give11 the precious stones, Europe has pro,rided
the polish to iliem . And all of us contemplate ,vith pride , you. your
work; we, the flame, the spirit, tl1e materials, which we ha, e supplied.
1
 .Journalism and Politics 51

Spai n is 11ot li1nited by th e boundaries of the Peninsul a; Spain is to

be fot111d wh e rever h er influe nce exte nds.

And tho u gh h er fl ag sho uld disappear , h er memory \vill rem ai n , e te r-

n al and impe rish able. What effect does a piece of red and gold cloth
h ave, wh at can guns and canno11s do , wl1ere a sen timen t of lo,,e an d
affection does not spring fo rth; where tl1ere is no fusio n of ideas, u nity
of principles, con cordance of opinio ns?

This banquet has been composed of both Spania rds a nd Filipin os to

• •
give expression to

that mutual embrace of two races who l1old eacl1 otl1er i11 love and
affectio n , united morally, socially, and politically for tl1e space of four
centuries, so that they may form in the future 011e single na tion in tl1e
spirit, in tl1eir duties, in their outlook, in their privileges.

Finally he proposed a toast to the Filipino youth, "the sacred ho pe

of my fatl1erland ," that they may follow the example of these two
men , and to the hope that "Mother Spain, solicitous and atte ntive to
the good of h e r provinces, may soon put into practice the refo1·m
. . ,, 17
that sh e has 1ong b een me d itaung.
This clear and proud assertion of the equality of the two peoples,
joined by bonds of affection and not by any right on Spain's pa rt,
implied quite clearly that this ui1ion could only subsist on the basis of
equal rights and that if Spain did not heed the needs of her citize ns
in the Pacific, this union would not last. Rizal even looked ahead to a
time when Spain would only be remembered with affection , her flag
no longer waving over the Philippines.
While the speech of Lopez Jaena openly attacking the friars and
the administration in the Philippines raised eyebrows even in Spanish
circles that could hardly be called clerical or conse rvative in outlook ,
such as El lmparcial, Rizal' s declarations more far-reaching in their
implications appear to have drawn no unfavorable respoi1 se in tl1e
Pe ninsula. But in the Philippi~es Rizal_'~ speecl1 l1ad disturbing ef-
fects. At the e nd of August. Jose. M.. Cecilio \\'ro te with e ntl1t1s1asm
· o f
the speech , and told of having distnbuted the copies of L D "'f d
. . . . OS OS LY. 'll 1l OS,
which h ad pnnted the entire discourse, to those fo r , l1 0 th
1/ m ey ,ve re

17. El lmparcial, 26 June 1884; IJos Dos Mu11<los, 8 July 1884 .

52 Journalis1n and Politics

in tended. H e added, however, "I think tl1at many here will not under-
stand the true extent a11d meaning of your speech."
Whether or 11ot they understood its full significance, many Span-
iards h e n ceforth looked on Ri zal as a filibustero , for in November
Pacia110 ,vrote him, implying that his m o th er ,~as dismayed to hear so
many people comment tha t after this speech, h er son would n ever be
able to return to tl1e Philippines again. And in a letter of her o,vn, she
told him of the so1Tow sl1e felt at these comments, and begged him not
1
to "get mixed up in affairs which can bring dark clouds over my h eart."

Literary Activity, 1884-1886

Among articulate Filipinos, Govantes was the most active campaigner

for reforms during the next two a nd a half years. Most important of
his writi11gs was a conference on the commercial potentialities of the
Philippines held at the prestigious Ateneo de Madrid, and published
19
in Los Dos Mundos. In this conference he outlined a series of pro-
posals for economic, administ1·ative, and governmental reforms which
would facilitate Philippine commercial developme11t. These r efor111s-
including abolition of censorship and establishme nt of at least lim-
ited parliamentary re presentation-all but coincided with the entire
reform program which the Filipino nationalists would work for dur-
ing the next ten years. There is one significant exception: his attitt1de
toward the friars. Mentioning the lands owned by the religio us or-
ders, he even commented on the liberal conditions 011 wl1ich the,,,
leased them to their te nants, though he did note i11 passing that tl1ey
were not ''inclined to no,,elties."
Though o ther articles published by Govantes in El Liberal unde1·
the pse udonym "P. Dro" we1·e perhaps somewhat more bold, to jt1dge
from the ire they a1·ot1sed in the Diario de Manila, his ,\Tiitings are
20
clearly reformist rather than properly nationalist. Tl1e)' display e, i-

18. Ap. Rizal., I : 122-23, 128, 130-31.

19. 18 Mar 1885; 8 Apr 1885.
20. L6 pez j ,1ena's, "Al 'Di,1rio de rvtanila'" (Los Dos l\1undos, 28 J a11 188..~) is a d efe 1l · e
of Govanles and of "IJ.T." (Eduardo d e I.etc ), ,,,110 had been publishi11g ~,rticles i11 tht-
Republican El Gl.obo of Madrid, attacki11g tl1e failt1 rcs rlf go,·ernmt'nt a11d Church in
tl1e Philippines.
 Jou.rnalism and Politics 53

dent compete11ce in their proposals for administrative and jt1dicia]

reforms, and are written in sensible and measured terms. But one
does n ot find in them the passio11 a te feeling that pe rmeates th e some-
what bombastic writings of Lopez J ae na or the more restrained, but
no less ardent, nationalism of Rizal.
Besides Le te 's articles in El Globo, there were occasionally other ar-
ticles which apparently came from th e pen of a Filipino in such news-
pape rs as El lmparcial and El L iberal. Most notable was an anonymous
series advocating various economic, judicial, and administrati,,e re-
for n1s, which appeared in the latter paper in 1886. Only once is there
an anti-clerical allusion in these articles, when tl1e author remarks
sarcastically that in spite of the sad lot of the poor indio, at least on
the night of the town fiesta, after thousands of pesos have been spent
in offerings for Masses, sermons, candles, and rockets, "the poor indio
can slee p peacefully, lulled to slumber by the embrace of the resplend-
21
e nt joys of Catholicism."
Lopez Jaena, on the other hand, was passionate not only in his
defenses of the Filipinos, but in his open attacks both on friars and
peninsular officials. But his work was erratic. A further installme11t of
his study of Philippine institutions finally appeared in November 1884,
but was left incomplete. In October he had published, likewise in Los
Dos Mundos, a biography of Juan Luna, in which he could not resist
firing a broadside against the control of education in tl1e Pl1ilippines
by Jesuits and friars. By this time Los Dos Mundos was being seized at
customs by Philippine authorities and its circulation prevented, as
Lopez Jaena charged in his article of 28 January 1885, defending
Govantes and Lete.
Rizal appears to l1ave begun work on his first political novel at
about this time, and in the autumn of 1885 left Spain for Paris, and
22
later Ger 1nany. He wrote one or two articles for the Republican news-

21. 1'La reforma en Filipinas," El Liberal, 19 Jtily 1886.

22. In Paris he continued his medical studies in lhe clinic of a distingt.1ished ocu-
list. In February 1886 he went lo Heidelberg where he spent some months, also in
medical studies, then toured parts of Germany, spending a few mo nths in Leipzig,
and firially going to Berlin in November, where he stayed until the publication of his
novel was completed i11 early 1887. In all of tl1ese places ,vl1ile perfecting himself in
his specialization as an oculist, and improving llis knowledge of German, he e11deavored
to come in contact witli Ge rman ethnographers, anlhropologislS, arid gcograpllers
54 J o1trnalism and Politics

paper La P·ublicidad of Barcelona while passing some time the re on

l1is "''a)' to Paris, but probably did not write further for n ewspapers
23
during the next few years.
In 1885 also appea1-ed Pedro Paterno 's novel, Ninay: Cost1lmbres
Filipinas. AB a no,,el, it is of less than mediocre worth, being little
more tl1an a f1-ame,-vork into \vhicl1 were inserted various scenes and
customs of Philippine life. These are frequently explained in long
footnotes, and tl1e entire structt1re is conu-ived. The novel is without
political implications, and its chief interest lies in some efforts to ex-
alt pre-Hispanic Filipino civilization, efforts which would be contin-
ued later by Paterno in a series of "ethnographical" works.
The no,,el appears to have had little or no effect on Spaniards or
Filipinos in Spai11 or at home. But it deserves notice as an indication
of the growing awareness among the Filipinos of what was peculiarly
tl1eir ow11, and a belief in the value of what was properly Filipino.
This was the impulse behind the celebration of the triumph of Luna
and Hidalgo in the artistic competition of 1884. Filipinos had com-
peted with peninsular Spaniards on even terms and l1ad emerged \1C-
torious. More than personal triumph was involved; it was the trit1mph

,-vho had written on the Philippines, notably Feodor Jagor, A. B. Meyer , and Rudolf
Virchow. He took every opportunity to study further tl1e past of l1is people and ,,·as
working on his novel Noli me ttingere (cf. chapter 5).
23. There is an article by "Un Filipino," "La o pinion en Filipinas," in La Pi,blicidad
for 28 Oct 1885, whicl1 appears from its style to be Rizal 's. In it he speculates on the
loyalty of tl1e Filipinos to Spain in a conflict with Germany, since tl1e present polic , of
exploitation in the Philippines a nd tl1e p ersecution of the edt1cated classes, if con ti11-
ued , can only lead to disaffection and ,villingness to accept anotlier 1naster. Nor can
Spain put h e r confide n ce in tl1 e ties of religion. Religion the re "goes 110 d eeper tl1a11
the surface; sl1owy practices mixed with st1pe rstitions, a11 externa l, facile religior1 , cl1ild-
isl1 play-acting. Dogma is not important, pro,,ided tl1at one compl)' ,,rith tl1~ cercmc>-
nies." The friars, wealthy, powerful, explo iters and in1moral, can 110 lo11ge r ro \1se tl1e
p eople. And though the JesL1its, ,vitl1 tl1eir learning and abilit)' to d eal ,vi1l1 the pl'()-
ple, are growing in prestige, tl1ey have powerful e11emies wl10 combat the1n ir1 ~l~t11ila.
and the ir sphere of action is only Mindanao. U nless Spain can rcturr1 to the spirit of
ilic first conquistadares anc.l missionari es, and thus restore religion a11d p,ltriot.is1n . tl1 ere
is great d.a ngcr.
Letters of Ceferino de Leo11 to Ri zal froc11 Madrid on 9 a11d 28 October co11grat1J-
late l1im on his articles. the seco11d of tl1ese n1e11tio 11ing La Publicidad (see also E.p.
Rir.al., 2:203).
 j o1.1,rnalis17i rtnci Politics 55

of a wh o le p eople, now g radt1ally becomin g ft1lly co nsc io u s o f its _o,vii

"''Orth. Pa te rno 's efforts to g ive ft1rtl1er ex1Jressio 11 to tl1at con sc iotis-
n ess may h ave bee n i11ept, but tl1ey p ointecl o ut a directi o n ,,vhi cli
others wot1ld follo,,v ,,vi th g reater skill.

Poli ti cal Con tacts

Du1·ing this p e ri o d the more active Filipi110 n atio11a lists \.Ve re b e-

coming m o 1·e a nd more closely associated ,\,ith tl1e ,,arious R e publi-
ca11 grot1ps. Lopez Jae na had proclaimed himself a Re publi ca11 fro1n
the beginning, and was associated with tl1e most 1·adical group, tl1 e
followers of Manuel Ruiz Zo1·rilla. Nothing precise is kno,,v11 o f l1is
political activity at this time, except tJ1at h e wr·ote for the n ewsp a pe rs
affiliated with tl1e 'Zorrillistas, El Progreso and El Poroe1ii1·. Eduardo d e Le te,
,vho later ,-vas active in the politics of the posibilista Republicans of E milio
Castelar, ,-vas al1·eady writing for their Madrid ne,-vspaper, El Clabo.
A Re publican politician who was to play an influential role in tl1e
futu1·e of the Filipinos had by now entered the scene. Miguel Mo 1·ayta
Sagrario, close associate of Castelar, h e ld high positions in Masonry
and was president of the Liga Anticlerical. He had been re moved
from his cl1air in the university tinder the reactionary gove1·nment of
1865, but was restored after tl1e Revolutio11 of 1868. As professor of
world history he taught man)' of the Filipi11os, Rizal amo11g them . A
friend of Pedro Pate1·no, he "''as among tl1e Spanish guests at the
Filipino banquet in honor of Luna and Hidalgo. On this occasion he
was much impressed by Rizal, and made an effort to cultivate his
. d s h"1p. 24
f r1er1
At the opening of the academic year 1884-85 Morayta deli,,erecl
the inaugural lecture at the university. In the course of it h e attarked

24. Just after the banque t Rizal ,vrote to l1is fa1nil y ( One H urtdred, 184, le tter o f 28
Jt1ne 1884) that after l1is o,vn sp eech , Morayta l1ad propose d a toast to the Filipinos as
"la glo ria d e la Universidad" a nd speaking to him pe rsonally a fte n vard s, h acl told liin
1
to prese nt l1imself for the examination n ext day. Whe n Ri zal re plied tllat lie h ad not
p repared anything yet and wot1ld take tl1 e examination i11 Septemb M .
. . . . er. orayta re plied
that lll September he \\'Ould fail h1n1. Rizal Ll1e rcfore took Ll1 e e r • •

. . . . xam111at1011 tl1e fc>llo,,·-

1ng day. rece1vtn g a grade o f sobrPsal,.entr, ,,·hi cl1 lie d <'c larecl "I .
.. 1
)e 1lCVt: tlltll I clo 11 o t
d eserve.
56 Jo1, 111r1lis1t1 r1r1{l Politics

tl1 e l1isto rical c l1 ,1 rac ter of tl1 e Bible, a 11 cl de li,,ered ,1 ma11ifest<J f cJr
acad e mi c freedo n1 ' t1ntr,1mme led by, a n,,, res trai11 ts l)11t tl1<:· profcs ·<>r·~
prude11ce. ¼11 en ,ra1ious bisl1ops attacked tl1e go,·er11ment's toler-ant atu-
tt1de to,,rard Morayta as a ,~olatio11 of tl1e Catl1o lic 11 att1re of tl1 e Spa11i.sl1
state, 111a11ifesl£,t.io 11s a11d cot111te1rr1a 11ife tatio11s of tl1e stt1dents scJon fol-
Io,vecl, ct1lmi11ating i11 a police raid 011 tl1e ttni,,ersit)'. Soon aften,-ard,
tJ1e go,,emme 11t re placed the rector, ,vl10 l1ad resigned i11 protest. :\'Iora)ta
h e11ceforth beca1ne a S)'llllJol o r· tl1e a11t.icle1-icaJ a11d f'ree tl1inking forces
,.vitl1in m e uni,,ersitv, a11d a h ero to 11t1n1erot1s stt1dents.
I

Rizal s11 0,ved kee11 i11 terest i11 tl1 e e,·e n ts, a 11 cl barely escaped bein g
arrested i11 tl1 e ri ot. Tl1e ,,e }1e n1e n ce witl1 ,,,hich li e ,vrote to hi s fa1nil, •

of tl1 e i 11 cide 11 t s110,vs 11 0,-v a rcle11 ti)' l1 e sided '"~ th ~lora)'ta, declaring
tl1a t l1e ,,vot1ld neve1- ta ke l1is d octo r 's degree from th e uni, ersil)' ,v}1ic}1 1

l1ad been so disl10 11ore d by tl1e 11 ew go,,ernn1 ent-appointed rec tor.

Sl1ortl)' aftenvards, Morayta i11\ri ted Ri zal to take part in a progran1
to l1011or Giordano Bruno, tl1e sixteentl1-centt117, victim of the l11qui i-
tion , wl1icl1 ,,,o tild be "a m a11ifestation in favor of freedom of thought.-
Wl1e tl1er Rizal took part or not is u11ce1-tain, lJut it is clear tl1at ~l ora~'tc1
continued to make contacts ,,,itl1 him and to a tten1pt to culti\'ate l1im.
Wl1 e n l1e p assed throt1gh Barcelona som e m o nths late r o n his •
to ,,-a,·
F1·ance, l1e ,vas introdt1ced by Mora)'ta to tl1e o,vn e r o f tl1e p o ibili ta
Rept1bli can n e,,'spape1- La Publicidad, Eusebio Corominas, for ,,·h on1
. I 2s
l1e wrote s01ne a1-uc es.
Rizal also counted an1ong his frie11ds Francisco Pi )' ~1a1-gall, 011e ()f.
tl1e preside nts of tl1e short-li,,e d Rept1blic of 1873, a11d leader of' tl1e
fed e ralist re publican s. Pi 's ideas on tl1e fede ral orga11izatio11 of Spai11
were ,,ery n1ucl1 in accord ,,ritl1 th ose of the Filipi11os. Rizal see1ns to
h ave form e d a close friendship \,ritl1 hi1n , and freqt1e11tl\' ,isitt'd hi111
. } 26
at h 1s 1on1e .

25. Ont /-/1111drP(I, 198-200, /~J. Rizal .. 1:79-80, 15:r-:>fi. St'e no tt· 2:\.
26. l!-fJ. Juz.al., 1:7 1, 84, 93. \i\'l1 e r1 Ri1.,I ,v-,,s abo\1t 10 bc:- ext~ct1tt'd, 1~i v ~1 a~\ll . ,,t,o
hatl alwa)'S refused to rn ake a11y p eljti o n ,,•hic l1 ,,10 \1ld st'e1n 10 r(·C<)~ni1c: rt,c- lt"~ri
mac-y of th e rno11arr l1 y, \<~~11t perso11ally lt) c ~1110,-;is del c:a.stillt) 1"1 rt·qttC'~l ,'\ 1>;1rc.tt,r,
for Ri zal. The story is tr,ld i11 rll·lai l, if bOIIll' \ \'l1at <ln,111,1ticall,·. l>v R.lf~,t"l (le i •la,,. -1k,,
giga,1tcc. y ltn J)igrnt~c) (Ri1al, Pi )' M., rg,,11 v (:,,111>\.l.S) 1~:pL~c.lclt<l t1i,toric,>, .. [)i11 f ,i,pi1u>.
Ma11ila (3() Dec 19 13). Bt•gi1111i11K ,,•itl, l H~l l , l'i oftc11 d<"fe1trl<"cl Filipi110 11.,tionalL, t
icieals in l, is r1cws1>af>t·r /~/ 1Vun.10 /l,:l!f"~-.,,. l>tll tlt ere:- js r1t)tJ1ing of thi\ na n1re in Iii
rtt.:,vspapt·r l .11 lvpublir,1, ,vl,i r J, l)e),('i\ 11 J>lJ lJltc ;tll(ll\ Ill 1: l'bt·lltll'"\' l &(-! , 1]1o t1gl1 iL\ ( lpt"O·
 ] 011,rnali,~,,1 an,d Politics 57

Rafael M. Labra, Lhe aut.o non1ist de pL1 ty of Cuba , was ,1no tl1 e r Re-
publican politician witl1 wl1 on1 tl1e Filipi11os associated , Ma nuel Regiclo r
having wo1·ked v.rith Labra i11 tl1e 1870s. Labra was 011 e of tl1e po liti-
cians prese nt at the banque t fo r Lt1na a11d Hidalgo . His ,,olt1rnin o t1s
writings on colonial qL1 estions probably influenced Filipi110 thinking
as they had i11fluenced tl1e activists of 1869-72, but l1 e ,vas so closely
linked to the p1·ogram of autonomy for Cuba that it is not like l)' tl1at
he could have been very closely associated with th e Filipinos, ,vl10
were still hoping fo1· assimilation rigl1ts and could not e,,e11 speak of
autonomy at this point. Hence the attempt to place Filipin o aspira-
27
tions u11der his aegis sornewl1at later would not prospe r.

Situation in 1886

Early in 1887 two events ,vould take place·-the Filipino colony in

Mad1·id would put out its own newspaper, Espana en Filipin.as, wl1ile
Rizal in Germany wot1ld publish his political and nationalist novel,
Noli me tanger-e. The publication of Espana en Filipinos and its subse-
quent demise was to climax the conse1-vative efforts towards orga11ized
action, and likewise mark their failu1·e. It would, moreover, bring to a
head the contradictions withi11 the Filipino colony. The Noli me tangere,
on the other hand, would set forth the program for the st1cceeding
years, and put Rizal firmly at tl1e head of tl1e active Filipino national-
ists. At the same time, it would carry the struggle to the Philippines
itself, and unite it with the growing semi-clandestine activity tl1ere.

ing numbe r gi,•es as its program tl1e follo,.ving: "We do not wish any kind of special
regime for the colonies; we consider tl1e m provinces of Spain, and as such autono-
mous in all tl1al constitutes tl1eir life in relation with tl1e mother country" (La Repiiblira,
I Feb 1884 ) .
27. For th e principal d e tails of Labra's ac tivi ty in Spanisl1 p o litics and on be ha lf of
C uba, see "Labra y Cadrana (Rafae l Marfa d e) " I~spasa 29:101-2.
An o the r re p11blican who may l1ave influe11ccd tl1 e Filipi11os, tl1o l1g l1 l1 e 11eve r j oiricd
the ir acti,ritics, was Docto r Santiago Gon z,1lez Encinas, a pro fessor t)f 1nedicinc at tl,e
Uni,·e rsity o f Madrid. In l1is diar,1 Rizal me ntio ns E11ci11as co ming to his q,1 artc- rs in
the Call e d e l l ,o bo, "for tl1 e fi rst time ," ancl taking () art i11 " very s tror 1g discti . •io n
am o n g the Filipinos tl1ere (Dos diarios, 31 Jan 1884). Enr in~t.s is lh r t>rlly µro tes t)r
rne n tion e d by Rizal in his n<)te b(>o k. "C:Ji11i c,1 rne<lica," ,vl1 t'.'rc t1c speaks t,ighly o f lt ittl
as a p rofessor ( Retana, \1irlri. 65) . ·
58 Jou·rnalism. arld Politics

Tl1e end of 1886 may be taken as a point from whicl-1 to vie,-v wl1at
had been accomplisl1ed thus far. From 1881 the Filipinos had made a
series of attempts to bri11g tl1e case for 1·eforms in their homeland
before tl1e Spanish public and the Spanish politicians. In spite of the
failure of tl1eir first pe1iodical, they had inc1·eased their journalistic
activit)' to make their needs known . Except for Lopez Jaena and
Govantes, however, almost all of their journalistic efforts had been anony-
mot1s. Even \-vhen ,-vritte11 anon},mously, articles touchi11g on anything
related to the position of tl1e friars were generally quite circumspect.
The i11itiative l1ad, ho,-veve1-, passed from the older men to tl1e stu-
de11t group, a11d if the articles published showed little sign of radical-
is1n, a good deal \\1as latent. Tl1ougl1 there were two approaches, a
moderate one exemplified by Govantes and a more radical one, found
in its extreme form in Lopez Jaena, all based their demand for re-
forms on the principle of assimilation: the Philippines, being an inte-
gral part of Spain, was tl1erefore entitled to the rights enjoyed b}'
e,,e11' Spaniard. But in certain Filipinos, particularly Rizal and, to a
more superficial degree, Lopez Jaena, there was a more far-reaching
nationalism wl1ich saw the Philippines as indeed a part of Spain, but
as an equal partner whose rights could be neglected only with peril.
 CI-IAPTER 4

Espana en Filipinas, 1887

New Life in the Filipi110 Colony

So me time in 1886 new efforts were made to organize the Filipino

colony i11 Madrid into a cohesive group, and new figures came into
the pic ture, Rizal being by now in Germany. T\vo close frie11ds of
Rizal , Julio Llorente and Evaristo Aguirre, are known to have joined
1
Masonry at this ti1ne in a lodge largely made up of CL1bans.
The asso ciations cultivated tl1ere may well have spurred on tl1e foun-
d a tion of a n ew organization, set up with the intention of collaborat-
ing with Cubans and Puerto Ricans in Madrid in a political campaign
to secure rigl1ts for Spain 's overseas provinces. Ag11i1-re , in a lette1- to
Rizal of 26 September 1886, told of the formatio11 of a general a11-
tonomist organization, with Llorente as president. Its object was to

I . See chapter 9, ,vhe re the origi11s and acti,~ry of Filipino Maso11ry are disct1ssed.
E,1aristo Aguirre ,.vas born of Spa11is)1 paren ts i11 Ca~te, and was at tJ1is time a
st11dent in Madrid. H e ,vas a co nfidant a11d assiduo us correspo11dent of Rizal, a11cl l1is
letters are a principal source for the eve nts of this period. In spite of being of ptire
Spanish blood , his letters sho,v tl1at l1e considered himself purely Filipino, and liis
nationalisn1 ,vas of th e most ardent.
Julio Llo rente, a classmate and intimate friend of Rizal at tl1e Ateneo Mu11icipal,
obtained the doctorate in law in Madrid in 1885. Though acti\'e i11 tl1ese years in tlie
Filipino colony. he ,vrote little or no t11ing, at least tinder his 0,.,,11 name, and re turned
to tl1e Pl1ilippines i11 1891. Arrested at th e outbrea k of the Revolution in 1896, lle ,vas
released through the intervention of Moret, and was an important figure in the j udici-
a1y, from the earliest years o f tl1e Ameri can regime.

59
60 Espa1ia eri Filipinas

act in co11cert ,.vith Puerto Ricans a11d Ct1bans u11cler tl1e leadership
of Rafael M. Lab1·a.
The movement, Aguirre predicted, \.Vas not likely to st1cceed. It was
too difficult to get Filipinos, Cubans, and Pue1·to Ricans to work to-
gether. Moreover, the leadership of Labra gave to the organization a
distinctly republican complexion that ,.vas hardly likely to excite the
approval of the t\.vo majo1·ity monarchical parties, who had, besides,
rejected tl1e program of autonomy for Cuba i11 the previous session
of the Cortes. How then could the Pl1ilippines, represented only by
young Filipinos in Madrid without official status, ,.vin autonomy when
it had 11ot yet attained even the lower status of assimilation?
The logic of Aguirre's assessment appeared unanswerable, since even
the modest demands of tl1e Filipinos for rights theoretically theirs in
principle had been rejected as subversive presumption. Even to the
last and most strife-tor11 years of Spanish rule, there were relatively
few Spanish politicians who were ready to admit the possibility of in-
ternal autonomy for Cuba, while tl1e Philippines never even ap-
proached the assimilated status witl1 which the Cubans were long since
dissatisfied.
Ne, ertheless, Aguirre saw some advantage in the ne,.vly-for1ned or-
1

ganization, wl1ich would require the Filipinos to meet regularly and

contribute sometl1ing, however small, to the commor1 cause. In this
way a fund could be built up, as he and Govantes proposed,

to pay for articles in the newspapers (if they ,.vill not admit them other-
\.vise), and to pay also representatives in the Cortes, wl10 \.vill speak and
interpellate on Philippine affairs . . . . These are the times ,,.,e live i11,
and in the name of tliese princip!,es, interpellations are made , a11d rights
are demanded. Let us accommodate ot1rselves then to tl1e times, a11d
make use of all means to make progress, eve11 if it mea11s satisfying tl1e
personal e11ds of a Deputy; let u s say that inasmuch as this gentlerna11
needs money, the government does great wrong and the overseas min-
ister does great wrong, in not decreeing the refor1ns ""hich the Pl1ilip-
pines demand; if t~en, they give us the reforms, blessed be tl1e hu11ger
of the interpellant!

Aguirre's skepticism abot1t the ne,,., organization ,vas soon pro\·e11

correct. A month late r he wrote Rizal rega1·di11g tl1e gradual disi11te-

2. Ep. Rizal.. 1: 198-99.

 Espe, na e11 Filipinas 61

gration of th e grouJJ. The 1nan elected secretaf)' (p1·o bably Manuel

Regidor) l1ad gi,·e n up t11e positio11, ai1cl no,,v no lo nger declared h im-
self a11 autonom ist. Not o nl)' those ,vh o 1nade him secre tary, lie d eclared ,
3
bt1t th e o ther who failed to pro test at tl1 e time, bore the blame.
1
o furthe r me nti o n was n1ade of the o rga11ization , and presumably
it d ied a qui e t d eath sin ce a le tte r of ea1·l)' 1887 speaks of th e d ispir-
ited sta te of tl1 e Filipino colon)' a t th e tradition al New Year's Eve ba n-
que t. Ll o r e nte d eliver ed 011e of th e few sp eecl1es a t the ba11que t,
expressing l1is l1o pes that the situation in tl1e Philippines wot1ld dail)'
grow \>Vorse , so tl1a t fin ally "'the mi11e may explode." Sarcastically, Aguirre
also me n tio11ed the speecl1 of Ed uard o Casal, 011e of the m ore co11serva-
ti\·e Filipinos, who spoke in fa,1or of scl1ools, pa1·liamen tary rep1·esen ta-
tio n , a11d otl1e r needs of the country, "needs \vhich sl1ould be mad e
4
known , fo r in all innocence our good Mother is ignorant of them."
In th e m id st of tl1is pessimis1n , 110,-vever, tl1ere we1·e o thers ,-vl10 still
had faitl1 in tl1e p o,-ver of th e press a nd of poli ticians ,vho n1ight be
won o, e r. Govan tes had been approach ed late in 1886 by a d eputy,
1

Felipe La Guardia, ,vl10 wished to settle a score with the overseas min-
iste r, Ge rman Gam azo, by embarrassing tl1e latter in tl1e Cortes of
1887 \1/l tl1 an in terpellation o n Philipei11e affairs. Govan tes offe1·ed to
suppl)' ]1im with data for his a ttack.!) Likewise a t the beginning of
1887, tl1 e Filipin os o btained from th e Mad rid newspape r, El Resumen,

3. Ib id., I :207.
4. Ibid., l :226.
5. Jbicl. , 1: 198. T h at th e depu ty was La G ua rdia see ms clea r fro 1n tl1 e fact tl1at
LaGuard ia did propose certain p roj ects 0 11 Philippine affairs in Lh e Cortes in Feb ruary
1887, in ft tlfillme n t of pro m ises n1ad e to tl1 e Filip inos. By tl1 is ti111e, however, th e re
was a ri e,v O\'Crseas ministe r , a11d instead of n1e re ly l1arassing tl1e ministe r, La Guard ia
p ro posed ,·a rio tlS p ositive re fo rms, in cluding pa rliamentary re presentation for th e Phil-
ipp ines. l .o pez Jae na, v.ri th his usua l impe tuo usness, made pu blic to th e newsp apers
Filipi110 gra titude , a nd anno unced a Filipi n <) ban q ue t to h o nor h im. LaGuardia ,\las
then threate n e d ,\li th expulsio11 from th e maj o rity pa rty by Sagasta if h e should m ai n-
tai11 his pro p ositio ns, and begged Go,,an tes to have the Filipin os abstain from fu rthe r
publicity. It is not clear just wl1at furthe r steps lie took, if an y, but in a ny eve nt, it is
clear tl1 a t n o thing ,vas accomplish ed in th e e nd (see th e le tte r o.f Rizal to Blurne n tritt
anno uncing th e pro p osed laws in t;>. Rizal., 5:70 an d of Aguirre a nd Lo pez J aena to
Rizal, ann o unc ing the failure in Ep. Rizal., 1:235- 36, 251-52). 1~6 p ez j ae na conclt1des:
..The re is n othing th en to b e h op ed for fro m go\'e mme n ts; let us accomplisl1 fo r
Otlrse lves our re ge n e ra tion and our p rogress."
a 11 agree1ne 11t to pt1blish a rticles of theirs on condition t11 at the Filipi-
11os (tll st1 l)sc1·ibe to tl1e 11ewspa pe 1·, a nd solicit subscriptions for it i11
0
tl1e Philippines.
Mectnvvl1ile a n e,"1 issu e a rose tl1at stu11g tl1e Filipino colo n y to ac-
tion. Fro1n tl1e middle of 1886, a series of essays on Philippine life
l1ad bee n appearin g in tl1 e Madrid 11ewspa pe r El Liberal, written tin-
d e r tl1e pseudo11)'ffi "Qt1ioqt1ia p " by Pablo Feced y Te1nprano, a pe-
ninsular Spaniard living i11 tl1e Pl1ilippines. QL1ioquiap ,vrote in a satiric,
\ 1ivid, ofte11 cleve1· style, and 11otl1ing was sparecl the pricks of his pen.

111 early articles he satirized tl1e bt1reaucratic organization of tl1 e

Pl1ilippines, a nigl1t' s lodgi11g in tl1e t,~ib·u:nal of a provincial town , a
friar parisl1 priest, the Cl1i11ese, the p e tty ambitions of the principalfa
in a pro,,incial to,-v11, the i11dio labore r, etc. ThoL1gh ma11y of these
co11tained caricatu1·es ""l1icl1 ,,vould certainly l1ave been offensive to
the Filipinos, there was no reactio11 from them t1ntil the essay entitled
"Ellos y 11osotros" appeared 011 13 Febrt1ary 1887, in which he ex-
pot1nded l1is views 011 the t1ndoubted st1pe1·iority of the wl1ite Span-
iard to the i11dio, ridict1li11g efforts to equalize castila a11d indio.
Tl1e indio is no more tl1an a big child, he says, lacking even tl1e
bea rd whicl1 is the sign of virility i11 a race . His facial a11d bodily cl1ar-
acteristics "continuall)' bring to 1nind .. . tl1e Darwinian theo11' and
the anthropoid ancest11' of these people." No matte1· f1·om what point
of vie,.v one looks at the questio11 ,

tl1ere al,,vays appears a11 abyss be n vee11 thent and us. How u11fo rtttna te
tl1at offi cial science a11d bt1reaucratic rot1ti11e do 11ot see these differ-
e11ces, tl1ese distan ces, these abysses.
The con,,entional ancl artificial law 1na)1 pretend to blot o ut these
differe11ces, but Natt1re, uncontrollable i11 l1e r po,ver, tl1ro\,'S to tl1e
grou11d ever)' bureat1cratic strt1ct11re, and ,vh en tl1ese abst1rdities t~' to
com e to life i11 tl1is m otley social organis1n, there al,va)'S 111a)' be seen i11
the backgro und of the picture, tl1e castila, prot1dly 011 his feet, the l\1lala)·,
st1b111issively 011 11is knees.

6. f41. Rizal., 1:238-39, Agl1irre-Ri zal. 1-Io,veve r, tl1e only a rtic le 011 Philippin e affai rs
,vl1ic l1 st1bscqt1e 11tly ap p ea red in l ~I /{('su,nnz i11 tl1e year 1887 ,,'as o r1c of l i ~la rel1.
e ntillecl "Lo clc Filipi11as," by P., ,vl10 is itle 11tified by tl1e ec{itor as "un dis1ingt1ido
filipino. " Tl1c lack o f rea l i11Le re st l>y El l u su,nf'11 i11 Filipino aspir.1tio n s is s110,,n bY tli e
fc1c1 that a m o11t.l1 ~t11.d a l1alf late r, it \\'as t)rec ise ly tl1is n e,,•::,paper , vl\ic l1 ,,~as gt1ilt,· () f
1)1 <.· 111ost o fTe 11si\'c r e mark.-; a lJottl tl·1c Filit)i11 us i11 tl1e l~xp osition.
 Espana en Filipinas 63

What does the p oor indio, weak in body and weak in mind . . .
unde rstand of all this ch atter of motl1erl1ood ancl brotl1e rl1ood, of civi-
lization and of ctilture? . . . Bodies with out clo tl1es, brains \-Vith ot1t ideas
. . 7
... an 1nan1mate h eap of human e ntities.

The Colony flared up at this series of scurrilous attacks. W11ile tl1ey

were discussing what to do about it, Lopez Jaena cam e back in El
Liberal with a ringing rejoinder. These maligned Filipinos, l1 e recalled,
"were those who one day fought manfully at the side of a handful of
Spaniards against the invading fleet of the Cl1inese Limaho ng. " It was
they who , under the leadership of Simon de Anda, fought off the
English after the archbishop-governo1~ had ignominiot1sly surrendered
Manila in 1762. They have fougl1t for Spain in Jolo, Borneo,
Cochin-China, wherever Spain has needed their services. They have
not progressed as far as they should have, it is true, but this is due to
their lack of liberty. Yet in spite of all the obstacles placed in tl1eir
way, they have done much.

We do not d en y that the Philippines is behind times, far behind,

and this backwardness, far from h aving as its cause a lack of receptivity
to culture, or the incapacity of our race for progress, is due (let us say
it in a loud voice), to tl1e friar, who thot1gh missionary of tl1e Catl1olic
Faith and representative of Spain and her civilizing function in those
regions, has found in the indio an inexhaustible mine of exploitation,
8
burying him in ignorance and fanaticism.

Ignoring Lopez Jaena's answer, Quioquiap continued to write in

the same satiric vein in El Liberal throughout most of that year. His
articles were published in book form the following year. Quioquiap
would be a central adversary of the Filipinos in later years, and would
frequently occupy their attention. For the moment, a new project en-
gaged much of their energies.

The Filipino Newspaper

The abortive effort to form an organization of Filipinos in the au-

tumn of 1886 revived the idea of a Filipino n ewspap er. Though the

7. Quioquiap, "Ellos y nosotros," El Liberal, 13 Feb 1887. Whe 11 tll ese artic les ,vere
later collected in book fonn as Esbozos y pincela<las., ll1is article did 110t appear.
8. Gracian o Lopez y Jaena, "Los ir1dios de Fi lip in,ts," / ~/ Liberal, 16 l~e l) 1887 .
64 Espa:iia en. Fi lipinas

orga11ization petered out, the idea of a Filipino ne,vspaper persisted.

Early in 1887, spurred on perhaps by the articles of Qt1ioquiap, Lopez
Jaena and a fev.r others proposed setting up a newspaper. Most of the
o the r young Filipinos seem ed to favor the idea, bt1t it was agreed that
Lopez J aen a's impetuous temperament ruled him out as editor. Be-
sides, his name was li11ked i11 the public mind with radical te nde n cies,
a11d l1e had incurred the Spa11iards' distrust.
Tl1e 11ewspaper ,-vas planned to be moderate in outlook, not openly
opposi11g "existing institutions" in the beginning. By beginning with
n1o d eration, it was felt, they could win a hearing, and as need arose,
the paper could take a stronger line. Govantes was apparently among
those who led in organizing the paper, but when he declared himself
unable to take the position of editor-in-chief, Eduardo de Lete was
9
selected instead.
At this point Lopez Jaena refused to collaborate with the paper,
partly because of wounded sensibilities, partly because of contempt
for what he believed to be the over-moderate tendencies of the pa-
per, and partly becat1se of hostility to the mestizos and creoles who
dominated the editorial staff. Aguirre wrote Rizal, accusing Lopez Jaena
of doing his best to bring about the failure of the paper and to dis-
10
cot1rage others from collaborating with it. The contempt and re-
sentment with which Lopezjaena wrote to Rizal about the paper gave
substance to the accusations.

9. Ep. Ru.al., 1:236-39, Aguirre to Rizal, 10 Mar 1887. That a n ewspaper had b een
proposed at the time of the abortive organization of autumn 1886, is de duced from
Aguirre 's statement that wl1en the founding of a n ewspaper \\/as proposed by Lopez
Jae na a11d others, the maj o rity adhered to the idea, "emp ezando por Govan tes [que
como] V. sabe, ya ideo la cosa cuando se trato de resucitar [aquel artic]ulo.'' The
sections in brackets h ave been restored from the de teriorated m anuscript by the edi-
tors of Ep. Rizal., bu t it would seem from tl1e context th at tl1e second restoratio n
sl1o uld read "aquel Cfrcu]o" rather than ''aquel articulo." The "Cfrculo" i11 qt1estion
,vould be the orga11izatio n of Llo re nte in autumn 1886. H o\.\rever, it is also possible
tl1at it could refer to the attempts in 1884 to revive the Cfrculo Hispano-Filipino.
thot1gh there is no me ntio n of a n e,\/spap er in tl1e references to the Circt1lo in RizaJ's
d iary for 1884.
10. Ep. R izal., 1:238-43. According co Aguirre, IJ6pez J aena ]1imself recognized that
he cot1ld n o t be editor of a ne\\/spape r wl1ich was to take a moderate approacl1 . Tl1e
Filipinos urged him to take parL in the n o npolitical sections and to publish his politi-
cal articles in El Resumen. Bt1t l1e reft1sed to COOJ)erate in a ny way.
 EsjJaiia erL Filipina.s 65

In a le tte r fo llowi11g the publication of tl1e second number, l1 f' ridi-

culed tl1e insipidity of the pap er: "It is all puerili l:)', and lacks tl1 e
en e rgy wl1icl1 every publication 1nust have wl1i cl1 strt1ggles fo r grea t
ideals. Don't you think tl1 a t fa1· from bei11g eith e r te111pe rate o r
low-keyed, it is 1-ather servile and flattering (la1iguisero)?" H e rea li zes
that in treating of questions of colonial poliC)' here in Spain , "\vhi ch
is our master and oppressor, one cannot be a Red, as h e ,vould desire,
but rather temperate and moderate. " But it is not necessary to be
so excessively contemplative and ministerial as these two 11t1mlJers
have been.
He had grounds for berati11g the excessive timidil:)' of th e pa1)e r,
but from the rest of the letter, it seems that tl1ere was som ethi11g else
behind his criticisms.

It is not we genuine or real i11dios wl10 are encouraging the disun-

ion, but rather the mestizos, ,vl10 hold meetings and conve nticles be-
hind our backs, giving tis no part in the ir conspiracies ...
I am becoming dail)' more convinced that otir co untrymen , the m es-
tizos, far from working for the common good, are follo"\·ing the policy
of their predecessors, the Azcarragas; I ai11 glad that it is they ivho are
11
bringing about the division and not we.

Since those who worked on the newspaper included not only 1nesti-
zos and creoles, but otl1ers, such as Llorente, who were as genuinely
indio as Lopez Jaena, and since even a c1-eole like Aguirre was just as
fervent in his nationalism and as bitter against Spain's negligent treat-
ment of the Philippines as Lopez Jaena or Rizal, this attitude ,vas
rather unfair to those who believed a moderate poliC)' the better tac-
tic, who felt that radicalism would only jeopardize Filipino inte1-ests.
Rizal from Germany tried to patch up the qt1a1-rels, but ,vithout im-
mediate success.
The first issue of Espaiia en Filipinas came off tl1e press on 7 Marcl1
1887. The paper was to be published fou1- tim es a month. The )'Ot1ng
men of the Filipino colony provided the initial fi11an cing. No appeal
was made to the older men in the begin11ing, bt1t after seeing the
first issue, a number of them agreed to contribute to tl1e costs. Tlie
opening editorial proposed

- - -·- - - -
11 . Ep Rizal. , 1:252-53.
66 Espa'iia en Filif1inas

to sustain in tl1e are na of tl1e press all those solutions \¥hich te nd to

re n ew o nce m ore tl1e open-mi11ded policy of assimilatio11 , traditio nal in
o,,erseas Spai11. This assi1n ilation , by making one si11gle unity out of
territories separated by the oceans, assures for tl1e foreseeable ft1ture
tl1e na tio11al integrity, only put in danger by unjt1stified differences and
offensive prejudices wl1ich draw those lines of division that have brougl1t
12
so man)' days of grief on our common mother.

By poir1ting out the sl1ortcornings of the Philippine adn1inistration

and the needs of the country, it tried to compensate for the lack of
parliamentary representation for the Philippines. In particular it pro-
posed: a greater Spanish and Philippine share in the economic life of
the country; representation in the Cortes for those parts of the coun-
try fitted for it; intervention of the Cortes in all measures of legisla-
tive character concerned with the Philippines; individual constitutional
rights for all in the country, even those outside the localities qualified
to elect parliamentary representatives; presentation of the Philippines
to the Spanish people in its true colors, instead of as something of
which Spain ought to be ashamed.
The other articles of the first issue did little to fulfill these pur-
poses. Govantes contributed a 1·eview of foreign affairs and a non-
partisan political chronicle, which lamented briefly the lack of attention
given to Philippine tobacco and the overly favorable contract given to
the Compaiiia Transatlantica for service to the Philippines, heavily
taxing the Philippine treasury. Another brief article of Govantes lauded
the proposal which had been made for a congress of all Spanish
sugar-producing regions. The review of the local press by Llorente
reproduced opinions of various newspapers on different topics, none
of them connected with the Philippines except the above-mentioned
sugar congress.
Though there were a few more contributors writing and somewhat
more attention was paid to Philippine affairs, the second number fo l-
lowed the pattern of the fi1-st. The review of foreign affairs was done
by Javier Gomez de la Serna, the political chronicle by Govantes, the
review of the local press by Llorente, none of them touchi11g o n Phil-
ippine affairs. The editorial by Lete dealt with the econornic pro ble m
created in the Philippines by the low prices for tobacco, owing to the

12. "Campa.ii.a e mpre11did a" Esj1ana er1. f 'i.lifJinas, 7 Mar 1887.

 Espaiia en Filipinas 67

virtual monopoly given to o n e compa ny. A brief paragraph by S. Jugo

Vidal requested assistance for the provinces afflicted by low sugar and
tobacco prices a nd now devastated by a plague of locusts. A le tte r
from the Philippines told of recent events, and praised the latest d e-
crees from Madrid, while lamenting the economic situation. A section
devoted to "La vida cientffica" discussed the progress of the Philip-
pines in the arts, which ought to be followed by progress in the sci-
ences. The need of liberty, particularly of the press, was stressed,
without which scie ntific thought cannot develop.
The first two issues of the newspaper dealt largely tl1en with
non-Philippine affairs, were non-partisan, and though advocating re-
for ins for the Philippines, dealt little with political questions. With
the third issue, the editors announced a change of policy, dropping
the reviews of foreign affairs, local press, and local political affairs, to
devote themselves to Philippine affairs entirely. The principal articles,
13
though still anonymous, were by Govantes. In them he discussed
the need for preferential treatment of Philippine sugar, a potential
source of weal th for Spain if given proper encouragement; criticized
the sending of people from the Carolines and the Philippines to Spain
for the forthcoming Exposici6n de Filipinas; and made a plea fox· fur-
ther judicial reform.
The editorial marked the paper's first real entrance into contro-
versy. It denounced the
,
articles which had been appearing in the Con-
servative organ La Epoca, provoking alarm at supposed disturbances
of order in the Philippines as a result
,
of the extension of the Spanish
Penal Code to that colony. La Epoca, followed by La Union Cat6lica,
had appealed for the suspension of the Penal Code, basing its posi-
tion on the recommendation of the majority of the Junta de
Autoridades, particularly of Archbishop Pedro Payo. Such assimilative
refor1r1s, to say nothing of the extension of other individual rights,
would, it charged, be taken advantage of by the centers of filibusterismo
existing in Paris and other foreign capitals.
In his reply, Govantes pointed out that the Code now instittlted at
the orders of the Li~eral ~inister, Victor Balaguer, had already been
submitted for r econs1derauon under the pre,,ious Conservative rrlinis-
ter, and then re-approved by him; that the membe rs of the Junta d e

13. For the authorship of t11ese and oth er articles, see t.p. Rizal .
., 1....936
~ , 2 46, 263.
68 Espafia en Filipi1ias

Autoridades who, tl1ot1gl1 a minority, had favored tl1e immediate in-

stitutio11 of tl1e Code were precisely tl1ose of the judiciary, who had
most con1petence in the matter; and that tl1ey were 011ly opposed by
"persons '"'ho are inco1npete11t, even if tl1ey occupy the episcopal
thro11e of Manila, or direct the erroneous course of the Philippine
treasury." In fact, he continued, the Code '"'as really reactionary in
so1ne of tl1e restrictio11s tl1at it maintained. Finally, there was no legal
warrant in the present case for suspension of the Code, since it had
already been resubmitted for study once before on similar grounds, which
14
were then found wanti11g. The polemic continued in succeeding issues,
and the Filipinos were able to get Deputy LaGuardia to interpellate the
15
overseas minister and thus force the issue successfully.
In the same issue, the article on the Exposition noted that the
Central Commission in Manila, which was preparing the exhibits, was
headed by the archbishop. The latter, the article conceded, was a
man of great initiative and activity, and of liberal tendencies, but

14. "El Codigo Penal de Filipinas.'' Brief attention had also been given to the sul:r
ject i11 a last mint1te paragraph i11 the previous number, entitled ,
"Temores infundados,"
where tl1e opinion of Archbishop Payo on which La Epoca l1ad based its position is
rejected as implying that "said prelate l1ad sufficient authority to impose his veto on a
disposition of tl1e civil order, just as if we were still in the fifteenth century."
15. "Mas sobre el Codigo penal de Filipinas," Espana en Filipinas, 28 Mar 1887;
"Notes y recortes: Dos periodicos y un solo redactor," Espana eri Filipinas, 7 Apr 1887.
In tl1e former of these articles, the parliamentary exchange between Balaguer and
LaGt1ardia is reproduced. The Code had been sent to tl1e Philippines b)r a Royal
Order of 4 Sept 1884, but was suspended by the Governor-General J oaquin J ovellar.
To the difficulties proposed by Philippine authorities, the Code Co1nmission had re-
plied t11at cJ1e Code did not supplant existing restrictions on individual rigl1ts in tl1e
colonies, and recommended its pttblication. A n ew Royal Order of 17 Dec 1886, once
more sen t it to the Pl1ilippines (Balaguer, Mernoria redactada, 144 46). Tl1e acting
govemor-ge11eral, Anto nio l\ilolt6, after co nsultatior1 \vitli the Jt1nta d e At1toridad es.
telegrap hed to Balagt1er urgin g tl1e st1spen sion or the Code agai11 b ecause of tl,e ab-
se nce of Governor-General Emilio Terrero in Mindanao. He follo,\'ed this \'1ith a letter
explaining his reasons, to which Balaguer replied ,vitl1 a telegram of 11 ~larcl1 order-
ing immediate complia11ce. Tl1crefore, in spite of the remark of B~1laguer i11 his l ttc r
to Mollo of 30 March , explaining l1is tclegran1, that "tl1e Deput}· l.aGuarrlia demanded
it i11 the Con gress," n e ither tl1 e arti cles of K ..pnna r.n f1lipinas n o r the it1terpellation of
LaGuardia were reall y respo11s iblc, since Balagt1er l1ad acted before c>ither c)f t1 1e 111 .
Th<" co rrespondence is i11 MBB, 11 3:~)l- 92, 101 , 106-7; ~111d tl1e te legrarns are in AH~ .
Ultramar, leg. 5277, "Filipi11as, 1887. Direcci6 r1 Grat. de Gracia)' Jttsticia."
 Espaiia en Filipi1ias 69

unfortt1nate ly th e ties which bin d him to the Order from v.rl1icl1 h e

cornes, rath er than his own p erson al convictions, oblige him to oppose
all that is ch aracteristic of mod ern governme n ts. For it is kn own , tl1 a11 ks
to unh appy ex1Je ri en ce, th at the religious cominunities of EL1rope h ave
m ade commo 11 cause with the e11emies of tl1e constituti onal systen1 a nd
its logical de rivati,,es, su ch as the codification of Ia,vs, tl1e openi11g of
por ts to world comm erce, the secularization of educatio11, the division
of po\.vers, and other im~roveme nts in ci,ri.l society "''hich modify in it
the theocratic influence. 1

Tl1is criticism of the clerical control of Philippine affairs, togetl1er

with the editorial cited above, marked the new direction of the 11ews-
pape r 's policy, even tl1ough all such criticism still 1·emained anony-
mous. Yet the criticism, from political and religious points of view,
\¥as reasonable and valid , and there was notl1ing of the direct a11d
abusive attacks typical of the Spanish anticlerical press of the pe1·iod.
Succeeding numbers of Espana en Filipinas contint1ed to be devoted
to Philippine affairs, both economic and political. Gradually the pa-
pe r took more forthright positions on the policies of tl1e government,
but though proclaiming its liberal aspirations, was careful to avoid
identification with any party. Since the governing party at the time
was the Liberal Fusionist party, its criticisms were directed more towards
the Liberals than me Conservatives, frequently pointing out that indi-
vidual Conservatives showed themselves more liberal than the Liberals.
Philippine economic problems received frequent attention. The pa-
per repeatedly stressed the deleterious effects of government policies
on the economic development of the Philippines and the growtl1 of
its trade witl1 the mother country. Some of the subjects discussed were
the inequitable tariff on Philippine sugar; the disastrous effects which
would come from proposed new import duties in the Philippines; the
•
harm done to Philippine trade by limiting the free importation of
Philippine products into tl1e Peninsula to those carried on ships fly-
ing the Spanisl1 flag, when there was only one such line to the Philip-
pines, and that a mail line; the costly preferential treatment given the
Compaiifa Transatlantica, wl1ich -~eld_ the mail franchise to the Philip-
pines, at the expense of the Ph1l~pp1ne Treasury; the currency ci·isis
in the Philippines and the resulung heavy losses on the transfer of

16. "Desde e l Archipie lago: Prensa filipina ," t spana en Filip; 1,as 7 A
, pr 1887.
70 Espaii,a en Filipinas

funds to the Peninsula; the unjust conditio11s imposed 011 Filipino

tobacco growers by tl1e virtt1al monopoly of the Tabacalera.
As the paper was careful to point out, i11 most of these cases the harm
done to Philippine commerce was due either to ignorance of the situa-
tion tl1ere, which often led to measures i11tended to benefit the Philip-
pines but producing co11trary results, or to some special interest being
favored at the expense of the Philippines, wl1ich had no representatives
to present its side of the question. In both cases the only ade~uate solu-
1
tion lay in the representation of the Philippines in tl1e Co1·tes.
Apart from these articles t1rging parliamentary representation for
the proper govern1nent of the Philippines, other articles argued the
issue from the standpoint of assimilation: that the Philippines, as a
Spanish province, should have the same rights as any other Spanish
province, including representation in the Cortes. The movement to
extend peninsular law to Cuba and Puerto Rico must not stop there,
they insisted, but must include the Philippines as well, to avoid such
unfortunate consequences as have come from the denial of these rights
to Cuba in the past.
Commenting on a speech by a Conservative senator, the Marques
de Casa:Jimenez, in which he urged his colleagues to give thought to
the question of eventual representation of the Philippines as being
the logical consequence of the regime of assimilation which Spain
professed for her overseas provinces, Espana en Filipinas rejoiced at
this support for its position from an unexpected qua1·ter, and con-
trasted it with the evasions of the Liberal Overseas Minister Balaguer.
Though the latter had given some encouragement to these aspira-
tions, the policy of his chief Sagasta prevented him from L:1.king an
open stand.
Espana en Filipinas went on to say that it was not urging representa-
tion for the entire Philippines, but merely for those regions of ad-
vanced culture, such as Manila and a few others. If a city like Manila
should be incapable of choosing worthy representatives after tl1ree
hundred years, this would be the most damning evidence that could
be brought against Spain's rule. But the real reason why parlia1nen-
tary representation was not granted to tl1e Philippines, the article con-
cluded, was that ilie majority of the constitutionalists were not sincere

17. Espana en Filipinas, 28 Mar, 28 Apr, 7 .June, etc.

 Espana en Filipinas 71

about th e system they professed to uphold. Wl1en in power the)' t_ri ed

to keep the Cortes from interfering in tl1eir gove rnment, and Slnce
the re presentation of the Philippines would not bring them further
. . . 18
power, t h ey h a d no interest 1n 1t.
With the succeeding 11umbers the approach became bolder and
more openly critical of matters which in tl1e beginning l1ad scarcely
been touched upon. This growing audacity was due in part to the
forthright dissertations of men like Aguirre and Lete, who had held
radical opinions from the beginni11g but tl1ought it prudent not to
express them while concerned about the ticklish job of launching the
•
paper; in part to the participation of new writers, notably Rizal and
Lopez Jaena; and in part to the strong feeli11gs aroused by incidents
at the Exposici6n de Filipinas, then being prepared in Madrid.
Rizal, who had till the end of March been occupied with the publi-
i
cation of his novel , had his first article, sent from Germany, published
•
in the 28 April issue. In it he delivered a satiric attack on the articles
(
Quioquiap continued to write on the Philippines, advocating a stern
paternalism as the only way to rule the childish indios. The following
month another satiric article by Rizal appeared, inquiring whether
Filipinos may be said to have souls or not:

Our Very Reverend Padres Curas say yes, and recommend that we
save them with good hulas, Masses, candles, cords, and scapulars, ,vhich
I
••
I
cost a good deal. However, Father Gaspar de San Agustin only con-
cedes us half a soul, saying that we are descendants of monkeys.
f•
I Our most excellent governors are not of the same opinion; it is true
' that they ask us for taxes, and exact military service, and we die for the
government almost in the same way as other men who are acknowl-
edged to possess a soul.
If there were not what are called the rights of man, we would almost
understa11d the belief that we have a soul, if to possess one only meant
to suffer the tortures which otl1ers who possess one do. Unfortunately
some_ id~alists belie:e th~t the soul's existence creates an exigency fo;
certain r1gh:5. At ~his point the government is no longer in agreement
with the parish priests, who recommend poverty to us to save O
. . d ur sou1s.
' Those b Iesse d priests, 1n or er to save us, risk tl1e ir ow11 soul
. s, consent-
ing to take on themselves the guilt of the little mo 11 ey ,ve ea I- 1 I k
one feel li.ke weeping
· out o f pity
· 1or
c
them! And the go n. t ma-:>
es
. 'd' . . vernme11t. A} 1 t
the government 1s a presti 1g1tator 1ike all the rest.

18 . .. Marea crcciente," 21 May 1887.

72 Espana en Filipinas

v\'hen it h as to ask us for som e th in g, it puts a l1 uman natu re in o ur

bodies, and takes it away ,vl1e11 we ask for represe11tation in tl1e Cortes,
free dom of press, righ ts, etc.

And h e concluded the article with increasing bitte rness:

W11 0 will ans,ver my question: Wliat is the Philippines in the eyes of

Mo tl1er Spain ?
No one will give a clear and categorical answer. Of that I h ave no
19
d oubt!

The Exposici6n de Filipinas

Shortly afte r taking office as overseas minister, Balaguer announced

an exposition for the following year to publicize the Philippines a nd
20
its resources, and thus e ncourage economic development. Plans were
made to bring samples of the various plants, animals, and miner al,
forest, agricultural, and industrial products, etc., to be exhibited.
In O ctober 1886 the Filipinos in Madrid h eard of the pla n to bring
Filipino artisans along who would demonstra te their craftsma n ship in
the Exposition. In an indignant le tter to Rizal, Aguirre deplored the
Machiavellian purpose he saw behind it all: to bring specimens of the
less civilized peoples of the Archipelago so as to convince people in
the Peninsula of the still uncivilized state of the Philippines and its
incapacity for the assimilative reforms tl1at were being called for. The
newspapers would enjoy poking fun at the rudeness of these Filipi-
nos, and the representatives of the friars would be a1-ound to give
their hands to kiss and to inform the public, from their vast kno\vl-
edge of the country, of how docile were tl1ese indios, bt1t h ow a pa-
21
thetic and ignorant in spite of all the efforts of the missiona1·ies, e tc.

19. J. R. "Dudas," 28 May 1887. The evide n ce fo r Rizal 's autl1orsl1ip of th is as \\'ell
as the preceding a rticle is in Retana, Vida, 465.
20. See Vi cto r Ba laguer, Islas Filipi1ias (Me mo1;a) (Madrid: Angles, 1895) , for a
somewh a t rhe to rical accoun t of th e Expositio n of 1887. The book \vas \\'l·itten to pro-
pose a no ther series of Ex positions. Balaguer's account of l1is m inistry fro n1 Oct 1886
to June 1888, Mernoria redactada par el Ministro de Ultra,nar D. Victor Balagut>r acn-ca d~ s,,
gestion ni el departame,ilo de stt cargo (2 vols.: Mad,;d: T ello, 1888) , co11tajns the prirlci-
pal official documen ts con nec ted wi tl1 the Expositio11.
21. Ep. Rizal , 1:204-7; see also 222-25.
 Espana en Filipinas 73

The n ewspapers made the most of the situation, as Aguirre had

feared. v\'hile the government organ, El G'orreo, early in May announced
the proximate ar1·ival of the "natives of the Philippines who will be
22
exhibited." El Resumen, on the arrival of the Filipino artisans a few
days later, was far less subtle "In the majority of them one sees the
stamp of stupidity and imbecility; the feeble ray of intelligence which
may be glimpsed through their slanted eyes reveals neither surprise
nor astonishment, but rather fear of strength."
This provoked an outcry from the Filipinos. Aguir1·e fulminated in
the following issue of Espana en Filipinas against the affront to hu1nan
dignity involved in exhibiting human persons, as if they were animals,
to the gaze of the curious. Nor could it be said that they had come
only as artisans hired to display their skill, for the Moros from Jolo,
the Igorots from the mountains of northern Luzon, and the Negritos,
exe1·cised no craft, and were merely there , as specimens to be exhib-
ited. Wl1y, he asked, had no protest been raised by the authorities in
the Philippines or the religious orders against such an indignity, ready
as they were to protest against a measure beneficial to the country,
23
like the institution of the Penal Code.
Although members of the Commission for the exposition protested
that all had been done to provide Filipinos with proper housing and
comfort, near the end of May one of the Moro women from J olo,
named Basalia, died of pneumonia. Lopez Jaena immediately pub-
lished in El Liberal a communication, in the name of the Filipino colony
of Madrid, denouncing the conditio11s which had led to this misfor-
tune. 24 In Espana en Filipinas there likewise appeared an article, though

22. "Exposici6n de Filipinas," El Correo, 2 May 1887. This acceptance of such an

occurrence as normal inft1riated the Filipinos. Most of the articles which appear ii1 El
Correo by those in charge of the Exposition show a certain surprise and dismay at the
indignation of tl1e Filipino Colony, which shows that, if their attitude was regrettable,
\¥hat had been done was large ly done in good faith. Tl1e sam e is not tnie of the
article of El Resumen, B. B., "Una hora en Filipinas," 7 May 1887.
23. "Ahi est.in," 14 May 1887.
24. "Que inhumanidad," El Libera~ 28 May 1887. The "comunicado" is publislie d
immediately following El Liberal's account o f Basalia's d eath , "La muerte d e Basalza
[sic] ," and is signed by Graciano Lopez y Jaena, Jose H. d e Crame Fran c· s· .
, 1sco un1co
"'por la Colo nia filipina residente en Madrid." It is also reproduced 1· D . '
11 zsr.ursos, 160
The an n oyan ce caused to the governm ent by th e articles o f Lopez J a b ·
· ena m ay c seen
in a letter of Ba laguer to Govern or-General Terrero in u1e Pliilip • .
p111 cs, telling of U\e
74 Espana en Filipinas

somew11 at m o r e 1nod e rate in to ne, la me nting the lack of care which

l1ad brou gl1t about this deatl1 . A new po lemic e nsu ed benveen El Correo
and Lo p ez Jaena in El Liberal.
Alth ough furtl1 e r criticism was muted to prevent the total failure of
the expositio11 , which , it was h op ed , wo t1ld draw the Spania rds' inte r-
25
est to the Philippines, a number of Filipinos were furious. Rizal wrote
to his frie nd Blume ntritt recot1nting wh a t h ad happe n ed a nd ex-
claimed :

May tl1e Philippines be able to fo rget that he r sons l1ave been so treated ,
exhibited , and mocked . . . . When I thi11k of these things, I cry o u t: ' I
rejoice that I am leavi11g Europe.'

Whe n Rizal re proacl1ed Le te for h aving had anything to do with tl1e

exposition, the latte r replied that he had only taken a p ositio n to d o
some thing for the Filipinos,

the Igorots a11d others whom I have taught n ot to rem o,1e their h ats o r
kiss the hands of anyone, and ,\Th om I h op e will return feeling a n d
thinking as I do .. . . For this reason I am branded a filibuste ro h e re in
. 26"'
Spain.

Had he not taken this position, he felt, there would have been no
f
one to rotect them from the outrageous conduct of spec tators and
2
others.

u nfortun a te d eath , a nd assu1; ng him that everyth ing possible h ad b een d one to care
fo r Basalia. He e n closes the a nswe r ,vl1ich appears i11 El Con·eo to the protest ir1 El
Liberal by "three indiviclua ls of th e Filipi110 Colony" (MBB 11 3 [part 2]: 143, dr.Lft of a
letter of 30 Apr [sic- should be May] 1887).
25. In an article e ntitled "La Exposici6n de Filipi11as" rep rodttced \"1tl1ot1t gi,i11g
th e source, in Discursos, 164-66, Lo pez J ae na says tl1at he h as ke pt sile nt for t11rre
mon ths because h e was told tha t l1 e wo uld ha rrn tl1 e cause o f th e Philippi11c~ bv
a ttacking the Expositio 11, bt1t tha t no\~, afte r fot1r dcatl1s l1ave occtirred amo11g tl1e
Filipinos exhibited , l1 e no lo nger feels a11y oblig-ation to keep sile 11t at1(l att.'l("ks the•
way the Expositio r1 was ru11 witJ1out arty Filipi110 be ing invited to take part in tht·
• •
comm1ss1 011 .
26. t.p. l lizal. , 5: 154-55; tp. lliz.al., 1:28 1-82.
27. A le tter fro m Fathe r J>ascual Bttn.t.d(J, a J esuit \ v t1 0 l1ad spc11t son1e vears
•
in tlt<'
Philippines, to tl1e .Jesl1it Pl1 ilippine Su perior. l-~atl1t>r J tran Ric,irt, tells 1)f his visit lt)
the Expositio n . H e re la tes sorne of the u nplc:asa11t re1narks made by Spaniard con~
 Espana en Filipinas 75

The ht1miliating treatment of the Filipinos at the exposition seemed

to have to uched th e core of nationalism in many of the Filipino colony.
In the Philippines the pagan Igorots and Muslim Moros were consid-
ered and treated by Christian Filipinos as outside the civilized Fili-
pino community. Now a new feeling of solidarity with the Igorots and
Moros at the exposition was displayed by the educated, middle or
upper-class Filipinos in Madrid, some of them partly or completely of
Spanish blood. The efforts of Spaniards in Manila to use these poor
people to portray the Filipinos as still without civilization and culture
stung many of the educated Filipinos into identifying themselves with
these their "brothers" and "countrymen." This was not m erely a ques-
tion of meeting one propaganda move with another; many of them
were dee ply moved by this new solidarity and stirred by their resent-
28
ment against the Spaniards who had maligned their people.
Moreover, the whole affair intensified Filipino feeling against the
friars, whom they considered largely responsible for this denigration
of the Filipinos. Angrily they made the accusation against them:

What was the idea which inspired the Central Committee of Manila,
presided over by his Excellency the Archbishop in sending these poor
people to this Capital? To mislead the opinion of our governments, or
that of society concerning the state of civilization of the inhabitants of
the Philippines, in order that in view of such rude specimens, no re-
form or liberty might be possible among that people for a long time?

Such a procedure, they declared, is a two-edged sword. If it shows the

savage state of these Filipinos, it likewise shows that the supposed ne-
cessity of missionaries for the Philippines is false, since in three hun-
dred years, they have been able to do nothing for these people, who

cerning the Filipino cigar-makers, thinking they would not understand, and llow one
of the latter replied to them in perfect Spanish. Tl1ougl1 the Christian Filipiilos in
general showed far more good breeding than many Spaniards who came to stare a t
them, "the Igorots and_ othe r non-Ch_risti~ns o~er ~ picture of the most llumilia ting
and repulsive d egrad ation ... and hide 1n their miserable huts through whose win-
dows t11 e spec tators stare at them as if they were wild animals shtit up 111 - th . ..
e1r cages
(AT, E-11-e--9, copy of a letter of 1888).
28. E.g., Aguirre 's "Nuestros he rmanos en el Retiro," Espana en Filipin . ,
1887; Lopez J aena, "La Ex pos1c1on · · - d e y·i· • .,
1 1p1nas, Discursos, 164; Rizal i
as,, 2 1 .Ma}
. ' b'd 20 7 ' n 1-P· Ru.al
5:164; Lete, Ep . .Rizal., 1:281 ; Agu1rre, 1 1 ., 4- . · ,
76 Espana en Filipin.as

demon strate a great capacity for civilization. The con clusion must be
that "a certain collectivity exists there with a11 inte rest in m aintaining
this kind of dark11ess i11 the intelligence of the inhabitants of th e Ar-
chipelago for the purpose of a more efficient and more facile exploi-
29
tation of the m ."
The attacks on the friars h ad already begu11 with a n a rticle attribut-
ing the deficie n cies of Filipino civilization to the faulty system of edt1-
cation. This in tur-n , the article continued, is weakened by the lack of
grasp of the Spanish lan guage, neglected or obstn1cted in th e pri-
mary schools, "where the teach er is a t times the bli11d in strum ent of
one who, though the exacting guardia11 of the exterior m orali ty of a
people, makes no effort for its educatio n and instruction, but rath er
attempts to leave it sunk in the greatest errors."
A subseque nt article attacked the control over university edu cation
exercised by the Dominicans, while another pointed to the great wealtl1
of the Augustinians, and called on the people not to waste their money
on exterior religious solemnities. "When we are less lazy and indo-

29. "H o nroso espectaculo," Espana en Filipinas, 21 June 1887. The article is appar-
e ntly by Le te; see Ep. Rizal., 1: 282. A le tte r of Archbish op Payo to Balaguer of 24 J t1ly
1887 gives some substance to this charge:
With respect to the natives of these Islands ,vho we re se nt to the competi-
tion (cert.amen), I h o pe that th eir presence will h ave modifie d som e,vh at certain
ideas generally admitted concerning the inhabitants of these Islands, e\•en thot1gh
these natives a re far from representing completely the diversity of races ,v-h ich
people this Archipelago. . . . I consider it, n o ne theless. of much utili tv• and
transcendence that, at least in imperfect fashion a study m ay be n1ade in Spain
of the indio ,vho can be called civilized , tl1ose wh o for1n pa rt of the m ot1ntai11
tribes, and the Moros, who are so refractory to European ctistoms a nd usages.
(MBB 334:64-65)

Tho ugh the Arehbishop's i11tent m ay be m erely to sh o,,, tl1at the re ,vere difTt"re111
degrees of ct1lture within the Philippi11es, and that progressive re forn1s cot1ld not be
indiscriminate ly applied to all, the inten t of the Augt1stinian Fatl1er Salvador Fonc is
qt1ite evide nt when h e later attacked tl1e ideas of Rizal and Pa te,-n o 0 11 a })re-H isp,,nic
civilization by sayin g:
It is n o t n ecessary Ll1at tl1e Pate rnos a nd Rizals te ll tis; in t.11 <;> Philippi11t· Expo i-
tio n of Madrid ,ve l1ave seen in its actua lit)1 th e lgorot ciYili2.atio r1.

H e went o n to d escribe U\e savagery o f tl1e lgorots, c\n d to assert th,1t tl1is ,vas tht'
civilization which the Filipi11os had a t tl1c con1i11 g o f th<~ Spar1iards (/·)lipirias: Prt./,lrma
funli.a mmta~ 11 ) .
 Espana en Filip inas 77

lent. we will ha,,e less processions to make our fields fruitful, and we
will increase our wealth, with the blessing of God, who l1as imposed
on us the law of labor so as to attend with its product to our own
necessities and to tl1ose of our needy neighbor."
An article by Lopez Jaena blamed the backward state of the Philip-
pines on the instruction in the primary schools, where Spanish is ne-
glected because of friar opposition, and no useful subjects are taught,
but only "the Rosary, the Trisagi,o, the thousand and one novenas of
Saints, of Virgins, of Martyrs, with which the intellects of tender chil-
30
dren are nourished spiritually and falsely."
All these themes were to become the staples of future propaganda
against the friars, and would be expounded with greater detail and
increasing bitterness.

Death of the Newspaper

The days of the Espana en Filipinas, however, were numbered. From

the beginning the Filipinos who collaborated on the paper differed
as to its purpose and the attitudes it ought to take. Though the early
dissidence of Lopez Jaena and his efforts to undermine the paper
had been overcome and he came to collaborate with the others, the
more conservative members of the Filipino colony had little sympathy
31
for the stand he took.
Among the minor collaborators were such men as Manuel Lorenzo
D'Ayot and Eduardo P. Casal y Ochoa. D'Ayot, a creole, wrote only
literary articles for the paper, and seemed to have made use of it

30. J 4 June 1887; 21 June 1887.

3 1. Lopez Jaena ,vas finally persuaded to join the other Filipinos in June. Even
befo re this, howe,,e r, the paper had reproduced an article of Lopez Jaena from the
Revista Econ6mica de la Camara de Comercio de Espana en Londres, "Producciones agrfcolas
e n Filipinas," 28 Apr; and a summary of a conference he had given entitled "Filipinas
ante la histo ria y el progreso," 7 May. This summary is preceded by an introduction
sayin g: "Wha tever may be the differences of opinion ,vhich separate us from Senor
Lop ez J aena on certain questio ns, they ought not be an obstacle to ou . .
. . . . . . . . r recognizing
tha t h e possesses bnlliant ideas 1n his brain, and an imagina tion ,vhicl . .
,, . 1 supp 1ies him
with felicitous ph rases. Antonio Luna, ,vhen later combating Lete for th
d 1·rector of a revive
· d Espana - e11 ,·z
L-1·zpinas,
· accuse d h 1m,
' am 011g otlle r th· e post . of
'b'l ' r . I b L, . ings. of ha,rin g
refused to take respo ns1 1 1ty lOr an aru c e y opez J aena ( Ep. Rizal., :Sg).
2
78 Espana en Filipinas

merely to publish his writings without having any real interest in Phil-
ippine affairs. Casal was a mestizo educated in Europe as an engi-
neer. Though apparently anxious for reform, he had no desire for
radical measures, and was opposed to the antifriar tone the paper was
taking. To avoid being identified with the more radical contributors,
32
he always published his articles under his own name. La Serna and
Govantes were creoles, and neither favored the radical tendencies of
33
Lopez Jaena and Rizal, nor did Lete.
A racial element appears to have figured in all their dissidences,
with the lines largely drawn between the creoles and Spanish mestizos
on one side, and the Chinese 1nestizos and indios on the other. Even
where such distinctions did not clearly apply in certain cases, there
was a tendency to attribute antipathies due to Eersonal motives or
4
other differences of opinion to racial antipathies.
In such an atmosphere a crisis was only a minor provocation away.
The death of the Muslim woman, Basalia, produced the provocation.
Together with the article which denounced the conditions that had
led to her illness and death, a sonnet by Aguirre appeared, entitled
"A Basalia." In it he addressed her as:

32. Pardo de Tavera, Biblioteca filipina, 89, no. 531; Ep. Rizal , 5: 123-24. In 1888
Casal published a book, Cuestiones Filipinas. £studio politico-soci(ll (Madrid: Moreno v,
Rojas, 1888), in which he called for moderate reforms in tl1e Philippines, ,vhile d e-
fending the friars as necessary at lea.st in the present state of the country. Rizal, in a
letter to Blumentritt, ,vho was also a friend of Casal's, commented that Casal had n o
knowledge of the Philippines, ha,ring spent most of his life in Europe. Tl1e book l1e
believed to have been written by a friar and only signed by Casal (Ep. Rizal., 5:394-
95) . Casal died in Europe in 1892 at the age of twenty-seven .
33. La Serna later began to publish in Madrid a ne,vspaper of rus O\V11, e11titled /.,a
Paz. According to Retana, Aparato, 3, no. 2639, it ,vas asi1nilista in its policy but not
radical. Unfortunately it has been impossible to find any copy of it. Tl'1ere is no i11 di-
cation in the documents of whether or not any of tl1e other Filipinos collaborated itl
it; only a complaint on the part of Rizal that it had attacked his Noli TIU' ta~ (1-:p.
Riz.al., 2:82) . La Serna remai ned in Spair1 and was active in Spanish politics. In a lat~r
article }1e told how he and Rizal had had many differe11ces of opinion ,vl1en togccl,er
in Madrid: "I, a partisan of the progressive evolution of tl1e Pl1ilippines \\ritl1 Spain
and without the friar; he, very pessimistic.'' He goes on to s;.\y that 011e day Rizal
terminated tt1eir argument.~ by saying that L1. Sen1a cot1ld never be .. o ne of ours~
because of "the differe11t color o f our skin" ("Rizal," 1~·1 Re11acimin1to. Manila, 12 ~tar
1904).
 cspaiia eri Filipi1ias 79

Daughter of a people \.vl1icl1 in rL1de combat,

U nconqt1c red resists the foreign yo ke.~;;

Thot1gh the pl1rase passed un11oticed b)' the otl1er Filipinos, and ap-
parently by Agui1·1·e himself, there were Spaniards who did 11otice,
and immediately accused tl1e paper of harbori11g separatist sentiments.
Govantes announced he wot1ld have notl1ing furtl1er to do witl1 tl1e
paper, for, l1e declared, it had destroyed its useft1lness as a ,,oice in
favor of assimilationist refoi-m. Tl1is was an exceedingly heavy blow,
f"o r not only did it deprive the paper of tl1e only editor able to discuss
eco11omic and administrative p1·oblems; it greatly aggravated a11 al-
ready precarious financial situation. Both Govantes and his uncle,
I
Manuel Azcar1-aga, withdre,.v their substantial contributions to the pa-
pe1·'s funds. Consternation reig11ed i11 the Filipino colony; despe1·ate
efforts we1·e made to persuade Govantes not to withdraw, but in vain.
Finally it was resolved to try to continue the publication, while seek-
36
i11g help from the Philippines.
The knell, however, ,.vas about to sound for the paper. It could not
st1rvive tl1e combination of financial difficulties and furtl1e1· qua1·rels
'•• and divisions among the Filipinos involved. Rizal l1ad been alienated
by Lete's treatment of his novel and tl1e refusal of some of his

Go,,antes likewise became involved in Spanish politics, thougl1 he contintied to

remain o n good terms witl1 the Filipinos, and often acted as intermediary for them, or
•
as lawyer, as will be seen belo,v .
I
34. Besides tl1e incident mentioned in 11ote 33, and the altitude of Lopez Jaena
11 oted pre,'iously, see tl1e letters of Aguirre , Llorente and Anto11io Luna in Ep. Rizal.,
2:78; 1:3 11 ; 2:58-61; etc. Aguirre , ,...,110 seems to have been a close friend of Lete,
protests against the efforts of others to reject him on tl1ese grounds, a11d proclaiins
t1 imself to recog11ize no o ther fatherland but tl1e Philippines, i11 spite of tile fact that
he is of Spa11ish blood.
35. 28 May. It must be borne in mind that though tl1e Muslim ter1itory of Mii1clanao
and Jolo t1ad theoretically bee11 under Spa11isl1 dominatio11 for t.hree htlndred years,
Spain never had control of more than a few fortified pl aces t1ntil the advent of stean1-
ship in the nine tee 11th ce11tury, and Mus_lim pirates and slave-traders co ntintlally raided
Christian se ttleme n ts rig}1t up to Manila. Even up to 1898, in spite of a series of
e>..r peditions , Spai1ish contr ol in Mindanao and Jolo was always more or less ten u otis.
36. Ep. Rizal. , 1:269-71, lt"t~e~ of Agt.1i1Te lo Rizal, t1ndated, but from til e e i,d of
May or first days o f June 1887; 1b1d, 277-79.
80 Esj;aiia en Filipinas

7
articles.~ Llo rente also witl1clre\.v because of Lete 's treatm e n t of Riza l
a11d becattse of otl1e r diffe re11ces witl1 him. Otl1ers too seem ed di s-
38
gt1sted witl1 Le te as edito r. At th e beginni11g of July two special n tim-
bers we re published , gi,ring an accot111t of the exhibitli at the expositio n .
At least one 1nore numbe r appeared, bt1t with this, or sl1ortly afte r-
39
ward , tl1e pape1· seem s to have ceased publication.
Mariano Ponce, who was closel)' associated witl1 a group of active
nationalists in the Philippines, l1ad arrived in Barcelona in June. On
seei11g the precariotts state of tl1e newspaper, he qt1ickly wrote to l1is
friends in the Philippi11es for co11tributio11s. Thougl1 he was successft1l
in raising nvo hund1·e d pesos ,-vith p1·on1ise of more , by the tim e the
money arrived , the bell l1ad already tolled for Espana en FilijJi1ias, and
the Filipino colony was too disunited to do anything further for the
.
time b e1ng.
. 40

37. Ibid., 1:283-85; 2:82-84, 73-74; 5:339-41 . Tl1e first two lette rs a re o f Le te to
Rizal, 20 June 1887 and 11 Nov 1888; th e tl1ird is of Rizal to Ponce, 9 Nov 1888; a nd
the fourth from Rizal to Blumentritt, 14 Nov 1888. On receiving Rizal's novel, Le te
had publish ed a sh ort notice of it (I, 10, [14 Ma)' 1887], 4), pro1nising to give it
fur tl1e r atte ntion later. v\The tl1e r delibe rately, as Rizal and his fri e nds thou gl1t, o r sim-
ply through force of circt1msta11ces, as Lete claimed , n o revie,v appeared in tl1e nvo
months of life wl1icl1 re mained to the pape r. The feeling between Rizal and Le te ,vas
to l1ave important conseqt1ences more than once in tl1e st1cceeding years.
38. v\Then efforts were b eing made to revive the pape r in November 1888, Anto ni o
Luna, who l1ad _joined tl1 e Filipino colony in Madrid some time before tl1e pape r ceased
publication, decla red Le te to l1ave alienated a large proportio n of tl1e Colo 11y, a11d
said tl1at many would not cooperate ,,vith a pa per revived under Le te 's editorsl1ip.
Certai11ly Luna himself was strongly l1ostile to Lete (cp. Rizal., 2:58- 61, 62- 65) . See
also the le tter of Aguirre to Rizal of the same pe riod, ibid. , 78, d efe nding Le te.
39. Only pp. 3-4 of this number (I, 16 [7 July 1887]) l1ave bee n located , preserved
because of an article of Rizal: J. R. "El l1isto riado r d e Filipinas, Do n Fe r n ando
Blumentritt" (in t11e Ayer Collection of Newberry Library). Tl1aLtl1is ,vas tl1e last 11uti1 1X' r
is indicated , apart fron1 tl1 e fact tl1at no furtl1er number has b een located, bv• th e fdc t
that the co11tinuatio11 of Rizal 's article, promised l1erc, 11ever a ppearecl, acco rdi11g to
Ma ria no Ponce, who ,,vould certai11ly have kn o\.vn if it l1ad (Re ta11a, ¼<la, 465, 110 . 69 ).
40. Pon ce clearly says in his le tter to Ri zal of 22 Ju11 e 1888, tl1at l1e h acl a rri ved i11
Spain tl1e preceding June , and fro m tl1e rest of the iette r, it woulcl see1n rc, tl1er e 4\rl,
i11 June. In an o ther le tte r he speaks of th e pape r as b ei11g i11 its fin;\l stages .. sus
ultimos mornentos d e vid a'' wh en h e a rrived . All tl1is goes to confi rm tl1e p robabilit,·
tJ1at the number of 7 July was t.hc las t 11umbe r of tl1c p aper (see C/ J. R izal. , 2: I S; 1 :68:
also Pon ce , Ef emerides, 163-64).
 Es/Janet en Filipinas 81

The effect Espa1ia eri Filipinos had on Filipin o nationalist aspira-

tio ns \Vas som ewl1at complex. Tl1o ugh it l1ad made tl1 e Filipi110 ,,o ice
heard i11 the Ove rseas Ministry a11d had engaged th e atte nti o n of· a
portion of the Madrid fress, tl1ere is no e,ride11ce that it i11flu~n ced
any cl1anges of policy. It had defended Filipino dignity a nd r1gJ1ts,
1

particularly in the matte r of tl1 e expositio n , but again tl1ere ,vere fe,v
12
sig11s that it influe n ced attitudes or actions in Spain : It 110 dot1bt
helped 1-ender Filipinos abroad highly suspect as e11e mies of the fria1·s
43
by its increasingly critical attitude.
In the Filipino colony itself, the initial effect ,-vas to d eepe n th e
divisions witl1in the Colony apparently beyond l1ope of 1·estoring l1 ar-
mony. Even though fi11a11cial support f1-on1 th e Philippi11 es "''as soon
forthcoming, some time was to pass before the Colo11)' cot1ld rail)' its
forces a nd begin a new pape r, witl1 an i11fusion of ne\v elen1e nts fron1
th e Philippi11es. The ne,-v paper would take a differe nt tack, a11d 1na t1)'
of tl1ose who had collabo1-ated on Espana en Filipina.s ,vould no longer
44
be included in the Filipino nationalist efforts. Most of tl1e creoles
and Spanisl1 mestizos, both yot1ng and old, would take no further
active pa1·t in Filipino activities.

41. Aguirre in a letter to Rizal written to,-vard tl1e e nd of May o r begi nning of Jun e
1887 says that tl1e p a p e r is "atendido por el Mi11istro de Ultramar" (Ep. Rizal., 1 :269).
H owever , tl1e r e is no m e ntion of it i11 Balague r 's correspo11d e nce o n Philippine affairs
in ~1 BB. As was p oi nted out, above in note 15, even th e p o lemic \.villi regard to tlle
Penal Cod e with La Epoca a11d La Union Catolica l1ad no effect 0 11 the favorable resolu-
tion o f tlle case, since this l1ad already b een d ecided earlier.
42. In m e Jetter cited in n ote 4 1 Aguirre sp eaks of the paper b e ing esp ecially
h eeded by the Comisarfa Regia and tl1e Comite Ejecutivo o f the Exposition . There
was ve ry likely som e effec t achi eved f ro n1 the paper's recrimin ations 0 11 tJic livin
conditio n s of the Filipinos in th e Exposition , bt1t it is note,vorthy tha t in tl,e polc-rni;
o n u,e question , the articles by th e n1e mbers of tl1c Co misarfa Regia we re all direc ted
L' p -
' e o f ,.-.s
tO\\'ard me attacks of Lopez Jae na in El I~iberal, a11d no 111c n tio r1 is- inad nnci en
Filipinas.
43. Even frorn its ninth numbe r , befor e any o f th e 111o re racli c··' . •r . .
. . · , u ant1, r1a r aruc lc- ·
h ad a ppeared , it ,vas a nswcnng cl1argcs of tl1c n ewspape r £/ (:o,Ti•o d 1., . . .
, ,, ' ' ~pana of bc-1r1g
an ticlerical ("Ente ndc m o n os. 7 May).
44. Amon g those who collabordted in Jir/1an,z en l·rlipi 1ias biit ,vh ) l' .
· · · f h F'J' · · s · <. < •ct 11o t 111 later
P ropaganda acUV1t1es o t e 1 1p1nos 1n ~ p ,11n. ,vcr<.· Lt Sc rii·,• • [)'Avot C.>t.sal
.
t\. 1.
Go,iantcs, Manue l Regidor , a nd f<>r a time , Lt~tt~. · · • • • • brt 1r r t" ,
82 Es/Jaiia m Fili/Jin.as

On tl1e other hand, positive results had bee n gained. T11ot1gh the
,,~thdrawal of most of tl1e Spanisl1-oriented group ,-vas preceded by a
good deal of i11ternecine fetiding and much bad feeling, it eventually
led to a new group more t1nified in purpose. Moreover, the idea of a
r1e,"'spaper as an orga11 of Filipino interests had cat1ght on, not only
among the Filipinos in Spain, but, more importa11t perhaps, amo11g
many back in tl1e Philippines ha,ring tl1e necessary resot1rces.
Mean,-\1hile , otl1er i11fluences ,-vere afoot quickening the spirit of
11ationalism and reform in the Pl1ilippines. Among these, Rizal 's first
political novel occupies a principal place. Thot1gh its publication early
in 1887 slightly preceded the appearance of Espana en Filipinas, it only
began to circulate widely some months later. Nonetheless it may well
ha,,e spurred the growing radicalism of tl1e newspaper during its lat-
ter period.
I CHAPTER 5

The ''Noli 1ne tangere, '' 1887

•• Until 1887, the Filipinos had assailed the colonial acl1ninistratio1)

and the predominance of the friars i11 the Pl1ilippin es in a sporacli c,
unorganized, and more or less veiled man11er. Tl1eir gro,,,ing se11se of
national identity had likewise received onl)' occasional pt1blic expre -
sion. The first clear break witl1 this h esitant stance came i11 early 1887
1
with the publication of Rizal's no,,el. Tl1e Noli 1ne tangere ,, as a scath- 1

ing, full-scale indictment of the Pl1ilippine political and religious

•
regime.
But Rizal's book was more than a 111ere attack on the existi11g Phil-
ippine establishment. It ,vas a proclamation of the gospel of Filipino
nationalism, a call to the regeneration of tl1e Filipino people. For this
purpose, as Rizal declares in l1is dedication to "mi patria," he 11as
uncovered the cancer, so sensitive to tl1e slightest toucl1 , ,,,hicl1 is eat-
ing away at the vitals of Philippine society. 011ce its diseased co 11 di-
tion is laid open, a remedy for this social cancer can be fot1nd, and
the fatherland can be restored to l1ealth and vigor.
In a letter to a Filipino friend wl1ich accompanied 011e of tl1e fii·st
copies of his novel, he st1mmed tip l1is ,vork thus:

I ha,,e tried to do what no one has l)een ,villing to clo; I }1 a,·e llad 10
reply to the calltmnies wl1ich for ce11 tt1ries t1;tvc l)een ))c·•ped
u
l1po 11 llS

J. J ose Rizal, Noli mt tringf'rf'. Noi1ela tagala ( Berlin · Berti

• tt t r
nA .
tic 1tdr,1r k t" r r-i
Accien-Gesellschafl, 1887 ). l 'l1ougl1 pul:>lisl1ed ir1 B<·rli,, tll <.' . -
• 110\.(' 1 \'-"1S · .
·
Spanish. · trans1at1ons
Engl1s)1 · ·
are n11ne, t111less l)ll1envisc 11 otc<i. •• • \,·1·11te11 111
84 N oli 1rie Lri1igf're

a11d o ur cot111 try; I }1ave descr ibed the state of ou r socie ty, O LLr life , ot1r
beliefs, o t1r liopes, ou r desires, o ur lamen ts and o t1r grieva11ces; I lia\'C
unmasked the hyp ocrisy, ,vhich , under the cloak of religion , ca1ne amo ng
us to in1po, erisl1 us, to brutalize us; I have distinguishe d tl1e true reli-
1

gio n from the false, from tl1e st1perstitio us, fro111 that wh ich traffi cs
,,vitl1 tl1e sacred ,vord to extract m o11ey, to make us belie,,e in foolish-
n ess whicl1 Catl1olicism would blt1sl1 a t if it had kn owledge of it. I have
unveiled what lay hidden bel1i11d tl1e deceptive a11d brillia nt wo rds of
o ur gover11ment; I have told our com patriots of our faults, o t1r vices,
o ur culpable and sh a111eful complace11ce with tl1ese 1niseries . . . . The
facts whi ch I have related are all trt1e and real; I can give proof of
2
th em .

The plot of the n ovel is nothing extraordinary. Jua n Crisostom o

Ibarra, son of a wealthy creole father a nd a Filipina mother, r e turns
to the Philippines after several years' study in Europe . In his a bse n ce
his fa the r had incurred the displeasure of the parish priest of San
Diego, Fray Damaso, and of othe r influe ntial pe rsons. W11e n h e be-
came accidentally involved in the death of a Spanish tax-collecto r, h e
was put in prison and kept there on various pre texts till h e died . As a
freethinker wh o had not gone to confession , h e was de nied Ch ristia n
burial by Fathe r Damaso, who ordered the corpse dug up fro m tl1e
cemetery where it h ad been buried in his absen ce by his n a ti\·e
coadjutor. W11en the governor-gen e ral indigna11tly dema nded tha t tl1e
friar b e punished for this act, his supe rior m er ely tra nsfe rred l1i1n to
an o ther town.
On the day of his arrival in the Philippines, young Ibarra, still ig-
nora nt of the manner of his fa the r's death a11d of the fa te of }1 is
corpse , h as his first e ncounter witl1 the friar a t a di11ne r in the h o ltse
of Don Santiago d e los Santos (Capita n Tiago ). The la tter is tl1e fa-
the r of Ma rfa Clara, Ibarra's betrothed. In spite of the young 1nan ·s
courtesy and refusal to ta ke offe nse a t the friar 's 1·ude treatment of

2. Th is le tter app ears in d raft fo r1n in a n o teboo k o f Rizal ·s e11title d "C li11ica 111 edic;,-
n ow a m ong tl1e MSS of the Ayer Collectio11 o f tl1e Ne,vberry l ..illrary. C l1icago. Retana
( Vida, 125-26) gives tl1e complete tex t of Lhe le tter , ,,,ritt.e n in Fre n c ~,. ir1 liis biogr,\-
pliy o f Rizal. It. wcJ uld a prJe;ir, fron1 tJ1e co11 te r1 ts of tl1 e le tte r a nd tl1c facttlia t it '"-a-"
writte11 in Fre n cl1 , tha t ii ,va.s d irec ted Lo llizal 's frie nd, t.l,e Filipino p ainter Rt'sttrre,:ci{')n
J-lidalgo, wl1 0 \.Vas living in J>...1ris.
 Noli 1ne tringere 85

l1in1, th e la tte r continues to make inst1lting re marks to tl1e assembled

compan y about the waste of time spent in stt1dying abroad by certain
young 1ne n . Ibarra passes it off with a smil e .
Late r the )'Oung man learns of tl1 e desecration of l1is fatl1e1-'s 1-e-
mains, but as a loyal Spaniard and fervent Catholic, ratl1er ilian avenge
him, he sets about realizing his fatl1er's ideals of educating the peo-
ple. Hearing of' the ,-vretcl1ed state of tl1e local school \ivithout build-
ing or books, harassed by the parish p1·iest, and tl1erefore looked upon
with fear and suspicio11 by the ignorant populace, he obtai11s at1thori-
zation to build a modern scl1oolhouse, modelled on those he had
seen in Germany.
At the laying of the school 's cornerstone during the town fiesta,
Ibarra is almost killed by the collapse of the scaffolding, an "accident"
which, it is hinted, ,-vas paid for by Fray Damaso and/ or Fray Salvi,
the new parish priest, an ascetic but harsh and avaricious man, who
secretly covets the love of Marfa Clara. Ibarra is saved by a certain
Elias, a boat pilot whose own life Ibarra l1ad saved on an excursion to
the lake.
Later in tl1e day at tl1e banquet, Fray Damaso again begins his of-
fensive remarks about Ibarra, wl10 tries to ignore them. However, when
the priest insults the memo1-y of his dead fathe1·, Ibarra can bear no
more, and knocking the friar to the ground, is about to kill him when
Maria Clara intervenes. For laying hands on the priest he is automati-
cally excommunicated, and Capitan Tiago, st1bmissive to the friars,
forbids Marfa Clara ever to see him again.
Though the excommunication is lifted by the archbishop througl1
the intervention of the liberal-minded gove1·nor-general, who admires
Ibarra, new steps are taken to destroy him. The l1ead-sacristan of Fa-
ther Salvi organizes an uprising among various malconte11ts of San
Diego who have been driven to desperation by their poverty or by the
abuses suffered at the hands of tl1e civil guard, assuring them that the
uprising is being paid for and led by Ibarra. F1·ay Salvi then denotinces
the mutiny to the civil guard, and it is crushed.
In the after1nath, all t~ose wh.o l1a~e expressed liberal opinions or
who have off~nded the friar are 1.mpr1son~d, cl1ief among then1 being
Ibarra. ConVIcted througl1 the distorted 1n terpretation of a letter Ile
had written to Marfa Clara from Europe, Ibarra escapes wi·u h .d
. . 1 t e a1
of Elias. On his flight he stops to say a final reproachful f I
are,ve I to
Ma ria Clara. H e1·e l1e finds that Fray Salvi had extra t d h
· c e t e le tte r
86 Noli 17lf la11gerf

from h e r du1-i11g a pre,,ious sickness in excl1ange for l1er 111otl1er's

t\.vo le tters to Fray Damaso, ,.vhich proved the latter to h ave b ee n Nlaria
Clara's real father . T o save tl1e rept1tation of h er mother, as \veil as
tl1ose of h e r 1-eal a11d pt1tative fatl1ers, sh e l1ad st1rrendered Ibarra 's
letter , little su sp ecting tl1e use to be made of it.
A5 Iba rra a11d Elias 1nake their wa)' tip tl1e river to the la ke, th e)'
are pursu ed by a con stabt1laf)' p atrol. Elias s,.vims foi- sh o re tinde r
gt111fire to distract tl1e atte11tio11 of the patrol, while lba1-1-a drifts on
in the bottom of tl1e boat. Tl1e 11ex t day tl1e n e,-vspapers report the
d eatl1 of Ibarra. Marfa Clara the11 refuses to go th1-ot1gh with the m ar-
1-iage to a young Spa11iard wl1icl1 Fray Da maso had arra11ged for l1 e r ,
and decla1-es sh e \.vill e11ter the convent of Santa Clara. H ere Fra,, I

Salvi is made ch aplain , and the story ends \.vith th e scen e of a yot1n g
woman on tl1e roof of the co11vent one stormy night, calling o n th e
Lord to delive1- l1e r.
In and ot1t of the story passes the noble figure of Elias, the \11Ctim
of successive tragedies over three generations of his family and an
ot1tlaw to human justice. In the discussions bernreen Elias ancl Iban-a.
Elias is at first the voice of revolution, pleading the impossibilit)· of
obtaini11g justice under the existing system, the hopeless11ess of ,,rin-
ni11g reforms from Spain. To lbarra's arguments for patience, for mist
in the good intentions of the government, for the need of the light
of education , Elias answers witl1 an eloquent and-to many 1-eaders-
more convincing argument on the futility of Stich hopes:

Without freedom , there is no light ... . You see nothi11g of the strt1ggle
that is bei11g prepared , or the cloud on the horizo11. Tl1e st1-t1ggle be-
gins in the field of ideas, but will descend i11to the are11a, ,lnd stain it
with blood. I hear tl1e voice of God. Woe to tl1ose ,.v\10 ,vill resist Hi 111~
For the1n HistOf)' l1as not bee11 ¼1ritte11.
Our people slept for centt1ries, but 0 11e day tl1e ligl1tni11g struck and.
in its very act of d estro)1ing, it called fortl1 life. Si11ce then ne,,· te ndeti-
cies work on our spirits, and tl1ese te11de11cies, no,v scatte red. ,,·ill o 11 e
day unite tinder tl1e guida11ce of God. God l1as no t f~1iled o tl1er pt~o-
ples; H e \viii n ot fail o urs; tl1eir cat1se is tl1e cause of freed o111.

Wh en Elicts calls for 1-adical refor1ns i11 the cle rgy, the o ppt·esso 1·s 0 1-
th e p eople , Ibarra urges "tl1e imn1e n se d ebt ot· grati t\1de to those ,vi\<)
redeemed the Philippines frorn e r1·or a11d ga,,e h e r tl1e Faith, to t11ose
who protec ted h er agai11st tl1e tyra11ny of tl1e ci, il po,.ver." Elias an-
1

s,-vers in tl1e name of the p eople:

 Noli nie tan,gere 87

Do yo u call those external practices fait}1 , or tl1e co1nme rce i~1 cords
a11d scap ulars, re ligion ; o r th e stories of mira.cles and otl1er ~airy ta les
tl1a t \-Ve h ear every day, truth ? ... A God did not l1ave to le t H1ms~lf be
crucified for tl1is, no r we assume tl1e o bligation of e ter11al gra tittide;
supe rstitio n existed lo ng before tl1is; all tl1at was 11eecled was to per~ec t
it a nd to raise th e price of the merchandise. Yo u ,vill tell me tl1at im-
p erfect as o ur prese11t religio11 may be, it is preferable to the on e we
ha d before ; I be lie, 1e tl1is and I agree witl1 you, bt1t it is too expensive,
b ecause i11 re turn for it we have renou11ced o t1r 11ational ide11ti ty, a11d
o ur indep enden ce; i11 return for it ,ve have give11 to its priests our best
to\-\rns and o ur fi elds, and we are still givi11g our sa,,ings for the pt1r-
ch ase of religious o bjects .. .. I admit a gent1ine faith and a trt1e love
of hu1na nit:)1 guided tl1ose first missionaries ,vho came to our shores; I
recognize o ur debt of gratitude to those 11oble-h earted me11 . .. . But
because tl1e fo rerunners ,vere ,iirtuous, are we to submit to tl1e abuses
o f tl1eir d ege ne rate d escendants ?3

Ye t in th e e nd , when Ibarra, drive11 to d espair by the misfortunes

whicl1 l1a,1e come on him, is ready to dedicate himself to agitatio11, to
rouse up the masses to revolt, Elias remo11strates with him.

Yo u are going to stir up a ,var, fo r you h ave mone)' and brains a11d will
easily find many h elping l1ands; unfortunately, 1nany are discontented.
But in this struggle \vhich you are about to undertake, the defen seless
and tl1e i11nocent ,,viii stiffer most. The same sentiments that a mo11tl1
ago led me to as k you for reforms lead me now to ask you to reflect.
Ot1r country does not thi11k of separating herself from the Motherland;
she asks nothing more than a small measure of libercy, of justice, a 11 d of
love. Tl1e disco11tented, tl1e criminal, and the desperate will follow )'OU,
but tl1e people will stand back . ... I ,vould not follow you myself: I ,vill
n ever resort to these extreme remedies ,-vhile I see some hope in me 11 _4

Woven througl1 the plot are episodes a11d vignettes which, if they
do not impro,,e the unity of the novel, effectively ca1·ry out Rizal 's
pt1rposes in ¼rriting it. The scene in the cockpit scathingly portrays
the d e basing effects of the passion for gambling. Tl1e vivid All Souls,
Day dialogue of the Tertiaries on the acquisition of indulge 11 ces is a
caustic and unforgettable de~unciation of fanaticism and superstition.
The fiesta sermon of Fray Damaso, a cruder Pl1ilippine version of Fray

3. Rizal. Noli nie langere, 280, 273--74.

4. Ibid. , 338.
88 1Vol; rnf tangerr
r,en1n dio, eloque11tl)' protests against tl1e vulgar ignoran ce and hypo-
criti cal religious despotism of tl1 e fria rs.=>
In tl1ese episod es pe1·haps, rath e r than in th e n ovel as a wh o le, lies
th e book's po\ve r. As a 11ovel, it has noticeable lite rary d efects, bt1t as
a \\lork of political pro paga11da, it is po,verful a nd n1ovin g. T h e t1lti-
mate n1essage is no t always clearly spelled out, but the a buses and
defects of tl1 e colo nial regime are pitilessly laid bare . Th e discussio ns
of Elias a nd Iba rra disclose possible solutions, and th o ugh Rizal is
careful no t to opt for revolutio11, tl1e threat is unmistakable if radi cal
6
reforms are not fo1-thcoming.
Rizal 's book rele ntlessly unmasks conte mpo rary Spa nia rds in the
Philippin es of every stripe. Tl1e corruption and brt1tali ty of tl1e civil
guard drive good me n to outlawry rather tha n curb banditry. The
ad m ini stra tio n cra,vls \Vith self-seeke rs, ot1t to make their fo rtun e at
th e expe11se of the Filipinos, so th a t t11 e few officials wl10 ar e l1011est
a nd si11 cere a re unable to o, ercome the insidious workings o f the
1

S)'Sten1, and th eir effo rts to help the cou11try ofte11 e11d up i11 frustra-
ti on o r in se]f-ruin. The fria rs ha,,e mad e tl1e Catholic religio n a n
instrume nt for e nri cl1ing tl1e mse lves a nd pe rpe tua ting tl1e mselves in
power by seeking to mire the ignora nt Filipino in fanaticism and su-
pe rstiti o n instead of teaching l1im trt1e Catholicisn1, by controlling
th e go\ e rnme nt, by opposing all progress and by p ersecuting tl1e Fili-
1

7
pino ilustrad o, unless he makes hin1self their se rvile fl atte re r.

5. fbid., 253-61; 8 1-85: 169-76.

6. Retana ( Vida, 120-23 ), in his still classic, though biased and far fro m d efi ni tive
biography, sees Ibarra as rep resen Ling th e mind of Rizal, and Elias, that of tl1e dema-
gogic revolulio na11·, such as ,vould be Andres Bonifacio, th e organizer of tl1e Katip unan
an d lead er of th e Revolution of 1896. Re tana, however, igno res the role of Elias at the
end of the novel in tryi ng to restrain Ibarra from violence. It would seem n1 o re cor-
rect to say that nei th er man fully rep resen ts th e mind of Rizal, but rather their di a-
logue represen ts tl1e conflict in his own min d and i11 that of o the r Filipi nos. Retana
had been a lead ing Spanish opponent of Ri zal and th e other Filipino natio11alists, but
after RizaJ's death became his admirer and biographer. For an estimate of Retana and
his volumi nous h istorical writings on th e Ph ilippines, see my article "Wenceslao E.
Retana in Philippine History," Scl1umacher, The 1\1aking of a NaJion (Quezon Citv: At("neo
•
de Manila Universit)' Press, 1991), pp. 134-55. He is an in,·aluable sot1rce for the period
being studied. b u t must be used witl1 considerable care in matters of interpretation.
7. Gt1errero ( Tlie First f i lipino, 134-37) has pointed ot1t th at R.izal's treatment of
the friars in his novel amounts almost lo an obse sion, and that th e~' alone are pre--
 Noli 1ne tangere 89

Rizal does not, l1owever, spare his fellow-coL1ntry1n en. The supersti-
tious and l1ypocritical fanaticism of many who consider themselves
1·eligious people, the ignorance, corruption, and brt1tality of th e Fili-
pino civil guards, the passion for gamblin g unchecked by the tl1ougl1t
of duty and responsibility, the senrility of the wealthy Filipino towards
friars and government officials, the ridiculous efforts of Filipinos to
dissociate themselves from their fellow countrymen or to 101-d it o,,er
them ,- all these are held up to scorn in the novel. 8 Nevertheless, Rizal
clearly implies that man)' of these failings are traceable to association
with the Spaniard, or to the misguided policy of tl1e governme11t and
the questionable practices of the friars.
Rizal balances the national portrait by l1ighlighting the virtues and
good qualities of the unspoiled Filipino: the modesty and devotio11 of
the Filipino woman, tl1e unstinting hospitality of the Filipino family,
the devotion of parents to their children and children to their par-
ents, the deep sense of gratitude, the solid common sense of many an
untutored Filipino peasant. Over and over again the cl1aracters refer-
to the words of the Tagalog poets, partict1larly Francisco Baltazar, and to

sented without any redeeming qualities, in spite of the fact tl1at none of tl1e misfor-
tunes which had till tl1en afflicted Rizal and his family could be blamed on th e friars.
He sttggests tl1at explanation may be found in the gro,-ving dispute ben.veen the Do-
minican hacienda in Calamba and tl1eir tenants, among wl1om were the Rizals, as well
as in the influence on Rizal of Spanish anticlericalism. More important is the sugges-
tion that
an analysis of the political situation in tl1e Philippines had led him to the co11-
clusion that the Friars, in 1886, no less than in 1872, ,vere the real e nemies of
reforms and progress in the Philippines and that they must at all costs, eve n at
the cost o f fairness and charity, be stripped of their sacerdotal immunities and
mystical po,-vers and exposed to ridicule a11d hatred. (p. 136)

This point ,,rill be considered more in detai l later, ,-vith reference to the Filipi 110 na-
tiona list group as a whole, but it seems ,-vortl1 noting here i11 connection ,vith the
co ntention made in this chapter t11at the purpose of tl1e nove l ,vas m ore to stimtilate
Filipino nati onalism than to attack a buses. The latter ,.vere important only as ob stacles
to the developme nt of th e Filipino people.
8. RizaJ 's critic Barrantes was later to taunt him ,vith making th e Filipinos jus t as
ba d as u1e friars and civil guarcls (Vicente Barrantes. "Secci6 n l·lispa n o-Ultra m a rina,"
[.,a E.spaiia Moderru, 2 Uan 1890): 178. Tl1is is because Ba rrantcs con cei,,ed tlle b ook to
be o11ly an attack on t~ e Sp_an ish administra tion a nd cl1urc~1 . i1 0 L u11dc rsu,11ding tl1e
,-vider scop (' RizaJ l1ad g1ve11 1t.
90 1\ 'oli rne tangr>re
9
tl1e ,visdom ensl1ri11ed in Tagalog literature. The bealtt)' of the Tagalog
langt1age and tl1e perfections of its peculiar character are extolled.
The Noli 11ie ta1igere is, therefore, n ot merely an a ttack 011 the Spa n-
ish colonial regime; it is a cl1arte1· of 11ationalis1n. It calls 0 11 the Fili-
pino to reco,,er l1is self-confide nce, to appreciate his own wortl1, to
retur11 to th e l1eritage of his ancestors, to assert hi1nself as the eqt1al
of tl1e Spaniard. It insists o n tl1e need of educatio11, of d edication to
the cot1ntry, of absorbi11g aspects of foreign cultures tl1at ,-voL1ld en-
h a nce the native tradi tio11s.
In a lette1· to his fri e nd , the Austrian professor Fe1·dinand
Blumentritt, Rizal tells 110,,, h e h ad originally planned to write l1is
no,,el in Fre nch , so as to make his country's plight known to the
civilized world, but then l1ad realized tl1at

it is better to write for m y coun try1nen. I must wake from its slumber
th e spirit of m y fatherland .... I must first propose to 1ny cot1ntrymen
a n exa1n ple with \Vl1ich to strt1ggle against their bad qualities, and after-
,vards, "vl1en the)' l1a,1e reformed, tl1en ma11y '"'riters will rise Llp ,vho
can present n1y fatherland to prot1d Europe, as a young damsel enters
10
society after sh e has comple ted h er education.

The novel took some two years to write, Rizal working on it during
wl1at time h e could spare fro111 his studies. In 1884 he l1ad proposed
to the Filipinos i11 Madrid tl1e publication of a collective work, d e-
sig11ed to make tl1eir country kno\-\rn to the world. Howe,,e r, the project
11
did not prospe r, and Rizal d ecided to write himself.

9. Fra11cisco Baltazar, o r as l1 e is more co mm o11ly kno,vn , Balagtas (1788- 1862).

,vas tl1e outstanding T agalog poet of the ni11 etee11th ce11tt111'. I-lis Florante at J_a1,rr1, a
le 11g tl1y 11arrative poe1n i11 Tagalog of the t)rpe kno,vn as ronido, is still co11sidered to
be th e masterpiece of T agalog poetry. Thougl1 th ere have bee11 m a ny stttdies of Ba lagtas
and his \Vork, a still useful o ne , especially for sl10,vin g the infl1te11ce of the F/,o1c1 11 1, on
Rizal , is Epifa11io de los San tos C ristobal's "Balagtas y su Florante" (Ph ilLppine R.t>vin.t' 8
[Aug 1916): 3&--64); see also Po11ce, tfe,nerides, 182-84.
IO. E/J. Rizal., 5:29 1-92 , 26 Aug 1888. 111 another le tte r Lo Ma ria 110 Po11ce 0 11 ~ I)
Sept, he tirges l1im to sen d a ll re1nai11i11g copies of l1i.11 11ovel off to l-lo11g Kong. fr<) lll
,vh ere they may be sm11gg le d into tl1e J)l1ilippines, because "it has bee11 v.•ritten for tl1 e
Fi lipinos, and it is n ecessary tl1at tl1e Filipi110s read it " (Ep. Rizal., 2:49).
11 . For the project or tl1e colle ctive book, see Ri zaJ. Dos diarios, 73-7,1. Re ra 11 a
( \ 1itla. 73. n . 61 ), conjec tt1res rt1a t tl1is ,v,\S tll e source of tl1e 1\'oli. At a11v rate. Ri zal

111t1s t have be~1111 tJ1c r1 0\'cl sometime durir1g tl1is vcar. ,

 Noli 111.f tangere 91

At ab o ut this ti1n e h e h ad read the a nticle ri cal n ovel of Et1ge11e

Su e, The \Vandering Jew, ,,vhich m ad e a g1·ea t impressio11 o n l1im . It
p e1·h a ps occurred to him th en tl1at tl1 e literary fo1·m of a n ovel "vot1ld
best serve his purpose of a1·o t1sing feeling agai11st tl1e existing Pl1ili p-
pin e situation and proposi11 g to his count11r1nen tl1e id eals h e ,-van tecl
12
them to ad o pt. By tl1 e time li e left Madrid for Paris i11 inid-1 885, tl1e
n ovel was alread y half-completed , and h e co11tinued to ,vork o n it
durin g his m o nths in Paris. The last part of the book ,-vas con1pleted
in Germany, and the influen ce of Rizal's stay tl1ere, and l1is admi1·a-
tio n fo r wh at h e observed , is evident.
H e himself wotild later att1ibute to l1is German experien ce a mod-
e ra tin g effect, enabling him to see things mo1·e in p erspective , o nce
h e was away from Spain and "in the calm peculiar to that [ th e Ge1·-
13
ma11] p e ople." H e also admitted a positive i11fluen ce from "th e envi-

12. See Ri zal, Dos diarios, 78-79 fo r Rizal's e n tl1usiastic com1nen ts o n St1e's 11ove l
wh e n lie fi11isl1ed reading it o n 25 J an 1884. Carlos Quirino ( 1'he Great Mala)ia.n [ r-.1a-
nil a , 1940 ] , 75 ) , sp eaks of th e likely influe n ce of Su e, a11d also s1)ect1la tes o n possible
influe n ce of Be ni to Pe re z Gald6s' n ovel Doiia Perfecta.
Benvee n Sue 's n ovel and Ri zal's, th e re is li ttl e in commo n except tl1 ei r a11ticlerica l
p u rpose , bu t ,.vh e reas St1e's ,,illa ins are tl1e J esuits, tl1ese are specifically exce p ted fro m
Rizal's attacks 0 11 the fria rs. T l1 e influe 11ce, if any, \.VOttld see m to be in li ttle mo re
th a11 the id ea of u si11g a n o, e l as a vel1i cle for l1is pur poses. Gal dos' n o,,e l, 110,.,vever,
1

th o ugl1 11e,,er m e11tio ne d by Rizal in l1is letters o r dia ri es, presents so 1nany poin ts of
simila rity in plo t th a t it is h ard to b elieve tha t Rizal did n o t h ave it i11 mind ,vh e11
planning l1is own 11ovel. Tl1e Philippine O r baj osa is Sa11 Diego, and just as Pe pe Rey,
tl1e m o d e l o f u prigl1tness a nd n1oderni t)', is separated from his betro t11e d Rosario a11d
com es to ruin th roLtg h th e influe 11ce of the priest Do 11 Inocen cio 011 th e fan atic Do n a
Pe rfecta , so Iba r ra loses his be loved Marfa Clara and com es to disaster tl1rough tl1e
evi l influe 11ce o f Fray Damaso a nd Fray SaJ,f over supe rsti tioL1s Capita11 Tiago. J aci1ito
and Linares, D o 11 Ca)'e ta110 a11d Capitan Basilio, are typ es \.vl1ich co rresp o nd q Ll ite
close ly. Rizal's n o,,e l is, o f cot1rse , a na tio11alist 11ovel in a se11se ,vl1i ch Gald6s' is 11 o t,
and th e di ffe ren ces bet,,veen tl1e t,.,,o are gre a t, l)tlt it see ms li kely tl1at tl1ere is .-\ rea l
infl ue n ce of Gald6s o n Rizal.
Guerre ro has like,vise p o i11ted o u t a 11umber of paralle ls b e t,\/een tl1e )) lot of th e
,Voli a nd rl1a t of Pa terno 's Ninr1y, tl1ot1gl1 l1e n otes tl1at tl1e rese111b la11ce is q tiite Sttp e r-
ficial ( The First Filipino, 128-29, 134). v\'hat pa ralle ls tl1 e re are , l10,veve r, ,vo uld seetI\
Lo fi nd sufficie n t expla na tio11 in Patern o 's own acqu ain ta nce , vitl1 (;ald6s, ,vliose \vo rks
,ve re tl1e n popular in Spain .
13. See th e lette r ad d ressed to Fa tl1 e r Pa blo ~ascells, fro n1 his e xile it1 Dap ita n 0 11
11 Nov 1892 (Ep. Rl z.al., 4:63- 64). Pas~ells a'.1d Ri zal carrie d o n a le 11g tl1y cor respo 11cl-
e i1ce on doctrin al n 1a tte rs i11 1892-93, 1n wh1 cl1 tl1 e fo rmer Lriccl to bn' n g R"· tza 1 1l rtCk l <)
 92 Noli r,ie tri1igere

ro nme nt i11 whicl1 I was li,,ing, above all 011 recalling my fatl1erland i11
the midst of tl1at people, free, l1a1·d-,-vorking, stttdious, ,.vell-go,,e rn ed ,
full of confidence in its o,-vn futt1re, and master of its own destiny."
Rizal 1nar,,eled so at the Germat1)' he kne\v tl1at l1is adm ira tion for
German ct1stoms a11d especially for tl1e Ger1nan edt1cational systen1
14
makes i tseli~ felt th 1·oughou t the book. This , so me Span isl1
st1perpatriots felt, was cause enot1gh to l1ave his book banned.
The book was ,-vritten in Spanish and pt1blished apparently in March
15
1887 by a small press in Berlin. Though Rizal sent a few copies to
his friends in Spain a11d elsewhere in Et1rope, he wanted badly to get
the book i11to the Philippin es. To do tl1is, it was important that its
conte11ts not be know11 . Under existing Philippine law, not on ly \\'ere
all local books and 11ewspapers censored; no book could be intro-
duced into the cot1ntry without the prior approval of the Comisi6n
permanente de censura. There \\7as only one thing to do : smuggle the
books in, and pay off the proper customs officials, without attracting
the atte11tion of the authorities. With the h elp of various friends, a
number of books were sent off to the Philippines, and the novel b e-
gan circulating clandestinely by June 1887, two months before Rizal
16
himself a1~rived back in the Philippines.

First Reactions

The reaction of Rizal 's friends in Europe was generally entl1usias-

tic. From Barcelona his for·n1er Ateneo classmate, En1ique Rogers,
wrote: "Let it suffice to say that it has aroused great entht1siasm in the
few who have known how to understand it." Writing from Lo11don.

the practice of his CaLholic faitl1. It has been thoroughly stt1di cd by Raul J. Bo n oan, .J..
The Rizal-Pastells Corresponde1ice (Quezon Cit)1: Ateneo de Manila Un iversit)· Press, 1994 ).
14. Rizal, Noli 11ie lan.gere, 12, 88, 11 9, 147.
15. The date generally give11 in bibliograpl1ies is 1886, since tl1e dedical~on is d a tcli
"Europe , 1886.'' But il is clear fr om Rizal 's correspo11dence tl1at the book ,,"a.S still itl
tJ1e process of pttblical.io11 at t11e e nd or Febrttary 1887 (l~p . Riial., 1:234-35). B, tl1~
end of Mar ch Rizal was alread y receiving lette rs o f co ngratula tio ru; fror11 tht" first r ~
cipi e nts of th e b ook (ibid., 253, 256). He also S}Jeaks o f se11dir1g Ll1e li rst copit's tt, LJ1 e
Philippines in March (ibid .. 5 :268) .
16. See th e le tters of Evaristo Agttirre to Rizal , /:'fJ. Rii.nl-, l :234--35; a r1dJ.~l. C.«ilio
I
I Lo Rizal, ibid., 264-65.
 Noli 'me tcinger-e 93

Antonio Regidor, 011e of those exiled for sttpposed complicity in the

uprising of 1872, declared that with regard to po litical and social mat-
ters, "your book gives a photograpl1ic reproduction of part, if n o t all,
of the great ills which afflict the country.'' T11e effective narration
"wrings from the reader a shout of i11dignation and scorn for that
a bominable system."
Rizal received congratulations from Ferdinand Blumentritt, a re-
cent correspondent and a11 Austrian scholar who had writte11 exten-
sively on the Philippines, and from his friend in Madrid, Evaristo
Aguirre, though Aguirre objected to what 11e felt was an overvivid
17
pictu1·e of the brutisl1ness of Filipino peasants.
On his arrival in the Philippines, Rizal ran into much more lively
reactions, for and against. The book was much sought after by Filipi-
18
nos in Manila, but few copies were obtainable. With the feverisl1ness
of a society denied freedom of information, Filipinos wanted to lay
their hands on the book which said what no one had dared or been
allowed to say before in public.
But Filipinos were not the only ones reading the novel. As vvord
about the book spread, the Archbishop Pedro Payo, a Dominica11, got
hold of a copy and sent it on 18 August to the rector of the Univer-
sity of Santo Tomas for judgment. The three-man committee appointed
by the rector soon rendered its report, which was forwarded to tl1e
archbishop on 30 August. It declared the Noli me tangere "heretical,
impious and scandalous in the religious order, and antipatriotic, sub-
versive of public order, offensive to the government of Spain and to
its method of procedure in these Islands in the political order." 19
The archbishop forwarded the report to Governor-General Emilio
Terrero, who summoned Rizal to the palace. The governor-general, a

17. lbid., 1:256, 268, 274, 279-80; 2:1-5.

18. See the le tte rs of Feli~ M. Roxas, ibid., 294, and Balbino Ventura, ibid., _
3 19
20. Though a number of copies l1ad gotten to Manila (ibid 264-65) tl .
·• , o ,1e rs ,ve re still
being h e ld up in the custo1ns, so tl1a t relatively fe,v got into Man·t d . .
1 a ur1r1g tl1e six
months that Rizal was there. See ibid., 320, for a lette r of Pedro Se .
rrar1 0, le 11 111g of the
impossibility of getting a shipmen t released .
19. Retana, Vida, 128-29. Retana possessed a copy of the re ort of h .
·
given h'1m by a D om1n1can,
· · wh 1c11
' l h e reprod11ces h e re. Very t·k P . t e committee '
• , . i e 1y It came from Fath
Evansto Fernandez Anas, a member of the committee with h er
the11 in the Philippines, was on inti.Jnate te rms at the ti~e. ,v om Retan a, ,vl1(J \-\'aS
94 N oli 111.P Lri11,g e·r f

liberal-n1ind ed 1nan , received l1i111 grac ioLtsly, and told l1im that he
l1acl recei,,ed vef)' bad 1-eports abot1t l1is novel, ,vhich \vas all eged to
be subversi,,e. He tl1erefore wished to read it.
Rizal pro tested that l1 e had desired to tell nothing more than tt1e
trutl1 to ft1lfill l1is duty to Spain and to tl1e Pl1ilippin es. H e hacl in-
tended, he said, to present copies to botl1 the go,,er11or a nd the arc h-
bisl1o p , but l1ad no11e with l1im . H e asst1red l1im tl1at l1 e wot1ld tf)' to
get 011e from a friend. H e tl1e11 we11t to tl1e J esuits of the Ate 11eo
Municipal to get tl1e cop)' l1e had g iven tl1 e m , bttl they ,,•ot1ld not
give it up. Fi11all)', l1e was able to get a soilecl cop)' fron1 o n e of hi
20
fri e11ds a11d presented tl1is to tl1e go,,ernor.
Tl1e Co111isi611 permane11te d e censt11·a ,vas asked ,.vhether the JVoli
was to be allowed to e nter the Philippines. Father Salvador Fo11t, an
Augustinian, prepared a 1·eport, dated 29 December 1887, recomn1e ncl-
ing tl1 e co1nplete prohibition of tl1e book in the Philippines, for not
011ly did it a ttack directly

the religio11 of the state, [and] institL1tions and persons \vorth)' of re-
sp ect becat1se of tl1eir official character, [but also] tl1e book is fLtll o f
foreign doctri11es a11d teachi11gs, and its o,,erall effect is to inspire in
tl1e st1bmissi,1e and lo)1al sons of Spai11 in tl1ese distant islands a d eep
and bt1rni11g h atre d for the Mother-Cot1ntry. For it sets abo,·e l1er for-
eign 11atio ns, especially Germa11y, for ,vhich tl1e at1thor of l'•loli 111e ta 1zgere
seems to have a special predilection. His o nly objecti, e is the i11de- 1

2
pe nde11ce of the cou11try .

By Fe bruary 1888 Rizal had alread)' left th e cot1ntry, )'et n othing

had been done to ban tl1e 11ovel, probably becat1se of the st1-ained
relations between tl1 e gover11or-general and th e a1·cl1bisl1op. Rizal ,,,·ote
Blun1e ntritt fro1n Ho11g Ko ng tl1a t life had becon1e i1npo - ible for hi111
in tl1 e Philippin es, fo r rt1n101·s c:111d acct1satio ns of all kind ,,,ere (-c111-
tint1ally being levelled at l1im. He l1 ad bee11 acct1sed of raising tt1e
German flag witl1 a grot1p of co11spira tors o n top of ~'l l)t111t ~1~1kiling.
nea r his fan1ily l1 01ne in Cala111ba , altl1ough l1e ,,-J.s c:011ti11t1all\· ~le-

20. 'fhe acc ot111 l is i11 lliz.al's letter or 5 Sc pl 1H8i, ,vritL<·11 tl) ttl11111<"'ntritt 111,nled1-
a1c ly after 1J1c i11te n ·ir,v ( l·.jJ. /?1,:.a/., 5: I 9i) .
21. l·1lipi11r1s. f >rnb/11ntfl ju110.a111nil ol, /Jur un rspa,iol ,tr la,gu ,,~Jrdr11r ,,1 c111 'Ufl'"lh,, i.,la{
(M:.idricl: Aguado, 1~9 1), p . 42. "fl1is 1,a ,11y, l1l c-t , ptil)lisl,t:'cl ~tr1tJ n\'lTI<J l1~1, l>~ f"att1er F \.) t1t
i 11 189 1. re pro cl11 cco; tl1c c,flirial Cl ' l l5• >r ' , rt•1Jort 0 11 pf). 2:~11.
 Noli ,n.e tangere 95

co1npa11ied by tl1e civil gi.1ard lieutenantjose Taviel cle Anclrade, wl1om

Terrero had assigned to him.
Daily the archbisl1 op a nd the pro,ri11 cials of tl1e f1-iar orders went to
the go,,ernor to co111plai n of l1i1n. 0111)' tl1e sym1Jath y of the
governor-general, of tl1e dir·ector of· Ci,ril Admi11istration and of th e
22
civil go,,emor of Manila had saved him from being imprisoned. These
three ,-vere at tl1at time engaged in a power struggle agai11st tl1e arcl1-
bishop and the friar orders, and no dot1bt welcomed the opportunity
to thwart th em by protecting Rizal.

Attacks and Defenses

The novel was as yet scarcely kno\.\,n in Spain, except an1ong the
Filipinos. Two Barcelona republican newspapers gave it 11otice: El
Diluvio printed a revie"'' "''ritte11 by 011e of the Filipinos in Ba1-celona;
and L a Publicidad, whose editor, Eusebio Corominas, was a frie11d of
23
Rizal's, rep1-odt1ced some passages from the novel. In Madrid even
the Filipino n ewspaper, Espana en Filipinas, gave it only a brief notice,
promising an extended revie,-v later, a review that neve1- appeared. 24
An an ti clerical republica11 paper, El Pais, was tl1e only other one to
make me11tion of it in a bitter attack on

22. Ep. Rizal., 5:227-28.

23. Ibid ., 1:302. The letter is signed J. Peilifen, a pseudo11ym , \\ll1ich tl1e edi tor
ide11tifies as Jose Ma. Panga11iban. However, tl1e internal evidence shows it clearly to
be ~taximo Viola, who had ,ri.sited Blumentritt together v.ri.tl1 Rizal in May 1887. Viola
had pre,ri.ously loan ed Rizal t11e money to 1nake possible the publication of tl1e Noli.
2·1. The notice, which appeared in tl1e number of 14 May 1887, read:

The lean1ed Filipino doctor D. Jose Rizal, l1as publisl1ed in Berlin a Tagalog
11ovel ,vl1icl1 l1e entitles Noli ,ne langere. v\'hen we l1ave l1ad time to read it care-
f11lly, we will discuss it, gi,ring our sincere opinion. Mea,1,vhile, l1eartiest con-
gratulations to the young Filipi110, '\\1110 tl1us gives luster to ot1r national literatLire
by studying ,vith a critical and reflective judgment a great social cancer.

Up Lill the time tl1e newspaper ceased circulatio n i11 July 1887, no revie,v had ap-
pe ared. Rizal and se,·eral otl1er Filipinos felt that the omission l1ad been deliberate,
and this became a source of division amor1g tl1e Filipinos in Spai11 . See l:,p. Rizal.
( l :283-85; 2:58-61 , 80-84 ), for some of th e correspondence on tl1e affair, and tile
e ffo rt.,; of Eduardo de Lete, tl1 e editor, to d efend himself (see chapter 4, note 7).
3
96 Noli 1ne tangere

a badly tl1o t1gl1t-out and ,~orse writte n little 11ovel, which is the wo rk of
a n inexp e rien ced Filipino youth , cultivated by the J esuits. In it, while
te lling certain truths which we all know from m emory, h e exaggerates
facts , pictures distorted types, and eve11 invents some which d o n o t ex-
ist there, in order to paint the Friar of the Pl1ilippines with colors so
fantasti c that tl1ey hide by their disharmony th e true lin es of th e
. 25
picture .

This was not the first attack in Spain, however. In June 1888, dur-
ing a debate in the Senate o,,e r the recent manifestation in Manila
asking for the expulsion of tl1e archbishop and the friars , Senator
Fernando Vida denounced the anti-Spanish and anti-Catholic propa-
ganda in the Philippines which had prepared the way for this mani-
festation. He especially directed his attack against the Noli -me tangere,
written , he said, by a native "doctor of medicine from the University
of Madrid, who claims to be an intimate friend of Prince Bismarck,
and to have obtained a chair of medicine in a German University."
The novel was "anti-Catholic, Protestant, Socialist, Proudhonian, and
in it the indios are told that the estates possessed by the religious
orders are usurpations of property, and that within a year, these prop-
26
erties will be taken away from the religious orders."
Mean,vhile , back in the Philippines, the enemy had sprung to tl1e
attack as, in spite of tl1e obstacles, the novel 's clandestine circulation
became more widespread. The official censure rendered by Failier
Salvador Font had remained unenforced , either because the
governor-general sat back and folded his arms to spite ilie friars or
because it was considered more prudent to do nothing in order to
avoid giving the matter further publicity.
Nevertheless, early in 1888 Father Font had a small number of cop-
27
ies of his report printed clandestinely. The censt1re was divided into

25. "Los frailes y los indios e n Filipinas," El Pais, 4 O ct 1888. Tl1e fact th a t tl1 is
a ttac k on tl1e Noli appeared precise ly in a n article d evoted to d e n o t1nci11g th e Pltilip-
p in c friars sh ows th at the n ove l was more tl1an a 11 a nlifria r tract, a nd }1ad pttl its
fin ge r o n m an y o the r so re sp ots in tl1e Pl1ilippine sitt1a tio n .
26. Cited in Re ta11a, \Iida, 132.
27 . Re tana (Aparalo bibliogrrifico de 11:na historia genn-nl cit f1lipinas, 3: 11 04 , n o . 2603)
says tha t tl1e editio n was o f som e twenty cc)pies, pri11te d cla r1destir1ely in tl1 c p rc-ss l>f
tl1e Augustinian o rpha nage o f G u ad a lL1pe , "b ecaltse it did n o t suit the gover11ment
tha t any publicity b e give n to this 11ovel." Vicente Barrctntes, i11 the critiqt1e ,,·l1ic f1 ,\'ill
 Noli 1rie tangere 97

four sections: attacks on th e religion of the State; a ttacks o n the ad-

ministration , th e governme nt e mplqyees, and tl1e courts; attacks on
the civil guard corps; attacks o n the te rritorial integrity of Spai11. Sin ce
h e made no effort to refute the instances of tl1ese various attacks l1e
alleged, apparently leaving them to inspire indignation by the ir very
e nunciation, the result was not only to summarize conveniently all
the points the novel was trying to make, but to give rise to furtl1 er
conclusions which the author himself had not drawn .
On receiving a copy of the first part of this critique from Mariano
Ponce in Barcelona, Rizal replied: "Father Font's publication gives
me great delight; I have a notion to add it as an appendix to the n ext
printing of my book." And on receiving the rest of the critique, l1e
wrote: "What a critique! If the author of a novel had to be responsi-
ble for everything said by his characters, good heave11s, to what con-
clusion must we come! ... Clearly the autl1or is only responsible for
what he says in his own name, and the facts and circumstances will
28
justify what is said by the characters."
Father Font's pamphlet was not meant as a refutation on a popular
level since only twenty copies were printed, no doubt ,vith the inte11-
tion of bringing the novel to the notice of those who could have it
suppressed. Shortly afterwards, however, a series of popular pamphlets
by Father Jose Rodriguez began to issue from the Augusti11ian press
near Manila under the general title Cuestiones de sumo interes. The first
of the series, entitled iPorque no los he de leer?, is a little treatise 011 the
danger of reading books forbidden by the Church, like Rizal 's Noli,
which is:

be discussed be low, saw in the necessity of clandestine publication a proof that tile
clim.a te of official opinio11 was not unfavorable to the ideas of Rizal , ir1 spite of tl1e
a ll eged all-powerful influence of th e friars on Philippin e life ("Seccio n
H ispano-Ul tramarina," La Espana Modema I : 140).
The referen ces given in this cl1apter to passages from the censure ai·e ~., k f
en ron1 a
ul
later, anonymous pamphlet, wl1ich repro duced the e ntire o riginal cei,sure as o n e o f
its ch apte rs. The author o f the pamphlet, according to Reta na ,v110 , . ..
. • vas 1n a pos1uo n
to know, was Father Salvador Font himself (Apara.Lo, 3, no. 3011 ) Tl
. . . , · le pa1npl1let \\'as
enutled Fi,/iprnas: Probl.ema fundarnental, por 1.trt espa1iol <le Largo re.sid . .
(Madrid: Aguado, 189 1). encza en aq71.t'll.f"Ls LS/as
28. Ep Rizal., 2:3 1, 45-46.
98 Noli 11te tangere

a boo k full of l1eresies, blasphemies, and th e grosses t errors, contain-

i11 g, as it d oes, propositio 11s whicl1 are false, rash, offensive to /Jious ears,
injuriou.s Lo tlie sacred liiera1·ch)' ci11,d to tlie faitliful, i·mpious, foolish., erroneous,
likely to lead into e1Tors conde11z1ied in Luther a·nd other heretics, savoring of
liereS)' and lie,·etical, and even likel) to learl to ath,eism.
1

Ha,ring thus judged tl1e novel on a doct1·inal le,,el , Fath e r Rodriguez

adds in a footnote that from a lite1·ary point of view,

it is a book, as tl1e)' ,rt1lgarly sa)', ,-vritte11 ~vith the feet, wl1ich on every
page reveals tl1e crassest ig11orance of the n1les of literature and espe-
ciall)' ot· Spa11isl1 gran1mar. Tl1e 011ly thing notable which can be see11
in tl1e author is a stupid l1atred for e, 1e11rthing connected with religio11
an d ~v1, tl1 spain
. .29

The pampl1let is ,vritte n in a simple style, designed e,ridently to

instruct simple people and, to judge from the prices, aimed at mass
distribution through the parish priests. Marked by the nai,,e intransi-
gence of its a uthor, it provided an ideal target for Rizal's satirical
30
pamphlet e ntitled La Vision de Fra)' Rod1i guez.
In it St. Augustine appears to the sleeping Friar Rodriguez and
berates him for making him a laugl1ingstock to all the host of h ea,,en
by his foolish writings. Emergi11g from the h eavenly court, Tasio the
philosopher ( the character of the Noli who had voiced most of tl1e
doctrinal errors denounced by Father Rodriguez) , blames him for n1 ak-
ing Rizal responsible for Tasio's heresies and for giving t1seless proofs

29. Jose Rodrfguez, O.S.A., i Parque n.o los lie d.e leer? ( [ GuadalLtpe]: Pequena inip.
de! Asilo de Hue rfanos, [ 1888]), 9-10.
30. Rodriguez' pamphle t is best characterized by its conclusions (pJ). 23-26): one
shot1ld not buy a book o r n ewsp aper L1ntil i11fonned if it is prohibited , or OLtglit co be
prol1ibite d . Be lter still , do 110L reacl anything unless it l1as tl1e i1nprim<1l11.r of ecclesiasti-
cal a utl1ority. Besl of ,lll, do not read a11ytl1 ing ,-viLh o ut first co11sulti11g a priest.
Rizal 's pa1nphle t ,vas pt1blisl1ed in Barcelona ( 1889) , u11de r the p seud o n,111 "Di 111 ,is
Alang ... Accordi 11g to Retana (Apara lo, 3: 1129, 110. 27 I l ), tl1is })ainpl1le t , pl1blish ed
clandestin e ly in Barcelo11a by Mariano Ponce, ,vas extre me ly rare , si11ce the larger pan
of the editior1 ,-vas confiscated by rl1c police ,vl·1e 11 Po n ce ·s l10 1ise was searcl1ed in
Dece mber 1889, as the rest1lt of a denunciation by :1 former Spanisl1 collaborator. The
pseudo 11ym Dimas Ala11g is a T agalc)g ve rsion of t11e ,vords iVoli ,,v tringrr, (Di ntas.-tlang),
It was a lso Riz,'ll's syrnbo li c 11a111e in Masonn·.
 Noli 1ne tange,·e 99

of tl1e doctrin e of Purgatory. God I-Iimself spea ks, d eclari11g tl1at H e

d oes not \Vant to b e used as an instrum e nt of selfish passio ns, n or are
th e enemies of th e friars His e n e mies. As a pu11ishme11 t fo r l1is fool-
ishness, Fath e r Ro drigu ez is conde m11ed to go on writing st1ch n o11-
sen se, so th a t all th e world may laugl1 a t him.:31
At ab o u t the sam e time Rizal unleash ed anotl1e1· p amphle t ridicul-
ing Fa the r Fo nt, called Por telifono. In a satirical fan tasy h e 1·ela tes a
supposed lo n g-distance tele phone conversatio n between Madrid a11d
t
th e Philippines. The principal char acte r is Salvad o rcito T ont, ,-vh o is
'
supposedly being upbraided by his Supe rior for accepting the gift of
a h acie nda for tl1e Augustinians, compromising the struggle of his
bre thre n against their vows of wealth , lust, p1·ide, e tc. H e is told n o t
to 1·e tt1rn to tl1e Philippines; otherwise, the indios will accuse l1im of
32
antiesjJaiiolismo and bring about his de portation.
Though directed immedia tely against Fatl1er Fo11t, the pamphle t is
a bitte r attack on the friars in gen e ral. The l1umor is ra ther strained
and h eavy-ha nded at times, but the pamphlet was probably far more
effec tive than th e rathe r naive a nd pedanti c writings of Fath e r
Rodriguez, particularly among the ordinary p eople for wl101n they we re
.
1nte n d e d .33
Defenses of Rizal 's novel were not lacking, though they wer e not so
likely to be made publicly. In a le tter of 6 October 1888, Ponce told
Rizal about an old Filipino priest's refutation of Father Rodrigu ez'
conde mnation, in which he denied the latte1·'s allegations of h er esy

31. Rizal is supposed to h ave commen ted sh ortly before l1is execution in 1896 tha t
h e h ad found that wh en his book was attacked a11d preached agai nst from the pu lpits,
and ,vhe n eve n indulgen ces were given for readi11g tl1e pamphle t of Fath e r Rod rigu ez
agai nst him, "each sermon , i11 tl1e eyes of my countrym e n , was a l1omily; each insul t, a
eulogy; each a ttack, n ew propaganda for my ideas" (Retan a, Vida, 418, citing a private
le tter of San tiago Mataix, corresp on dent of tl1e n e'rvspap er El Heraldo de 1'1.ad·rid, 'rVllo
inte rviewed Ri zal in prison tl1e day before his execu tion ) . Tl1at Arc hbisl1o p Pedro
Payo did gran t eigh ty days' indulge nce fo r read ing Fatl1 e r Rodrfgttez' p a mphle t is a
fact, as app ea rs o n p. 2 of th e pam phlet.
32. T he principal ch aracter's n am e is a play on ""ord s, botl1 wi tl 1 the n a m e Fo nt
and the Spanish word tonlo, m ean ing fool.
33. Rizal's pam pl1le ts we re 8 x 11 cm., t~ e same size as tl1ose o f Fa ther Rodrfgu ez,
and thus could be su bstitu ted for th e la tter 1n the churcl1es in t11e Phil'tppi' n
es, as t 11ev 1
were by ente rprising m embers of tl1e propaga nda grottp tl1ere (see T eodoro M 1., ,.
. . . ""' 1a,,,'
Gregorio ff. d~l Pilar (El lieroe ,1, Tirrid) [Man ila: Bureatt o f Printin g, l ~)30 I, 8_ ).
9
100 Noli nze ta11,gere

a nd blasphemy. The priest was Father Vicente Garcia, a doctor in

theology, a11d translator of' the /r,iitation of Christ and other devotional
34
,vorks into Tagalog.
The book, wrote Father Garcia, must be considered a Ii terary work
and not a doctrinal one, and must be judged this way. Moreover,
what is being attacked is not the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, but
tl1e abuses of· indulgences. He added that he did not completely ap-
prove of the book, since ''the strong and vivid colors of his criticism
are offensive to the pious and delicate ears of this faithful people,
eminently Catholic." Saying this is far from accusing the book of be-
ing heretical and blasphemous. On the latter point, he concluded,
only the diocesan authority has the right to pronounce, and he has
made no statement on the book.
This defense by a coun tf)rman unknown to him, Rizal wrote
Blumentritt, made him almost weep for joy. In a letter to Ponce Rizal
said, after commenting on the attacks made on him elsewhere:

While these things make me laugh , the fact that Father Vicente Garcfa
defends me, 1noves me deeply, and tells me that I should continue on
the path which I have traced. To have an old man at my side like that
is to believe that I am not in opposition to the spirit of my cot1ntry. It
3
is the most pleasant ne,vs you have yet given me.

Among the Jesuits too, Rizal appeared to have some defenders,

though with certain reservations. One of the Jesuits was said to have
taken to task a student who was reading the pamphlet of Father
Rodriguez against Rizal, telling him that "it is this pamphlet which is
36
written with the feet, and not the Noli me tangere of Mr. Rizal." Dis-

34. Ep. Rizal., 2:51 . According to Ponce, Father Garcia l1ad intended to send the
letter to Father Rodriguez, but was persuaded by some of his friends that this wo uld
be imprudent. They then proposed to make a pamphlet out of it and publish it.
There is no evidence whetl1er this was done, but the letter was later published ur1der
the pseudonym of V. Caraig (anagram of Garcia) in the Filipino ne¼-spaper in ~fa-
drid, La Solidari.dad, 31 Mar 1890.
35. Ep. Rizal. , 5:332- 33; 2:74-75.
36. Ibid., 5:348, 18 Nov 1888. He went on to say that it is reported to l1im tl1 at fo r
tl1is reason tl1e Jesuits are in bad relatio11s "'~th the otl1er Orders, \Vho have no t in-
\rited iliem , as was customary, to preach at the solem11 novenas. H e himself belie,·es,
l1owever, tl1at the falling out is due to a dispute over tl1e possession of son1e o f the
parish es in Mindanao, a nd no t over their defense of him .
 Noli me tangn-e 101

cussing his relatio ns with the J esuits i11 another le tter to Blumentritt,
Rizal related h ow, upo11 his re turn to the Pl1ilippines after the pt1bli-
ca tio n of the Noli, his form e r rl1etoric teacher, Father Francisco
Sanch ez,

d ared to d e fe nd me in public and to praise my book, though in secret

l1e to ld m e that I could better have written an ideal book, in which I
could p ortray a completely ideal picture of tl1e ideal priest, etc. , and
thus bring to light the contrast. I replied that I did not ,.vrite for the
thinking read e rs, bt1t for th e public which does not think; that there
ar e so m any books in \vhich the ideal priests are portrayed, and these
37
the bad ones use to clothe themselves like wolves ,.vith lamb-skins.

One of the other Jesuits tried to discuss the question of Purgatory

with him. Though in the beginning they argued on philosophical
grounds, later h e took a canonical point of view, and Rizal declared
that the r e could be no discussion from that standpoint except be-
tween Catholics, who accept the Pope unqt1estioningly, as he did not.
The Jesuits also objected to his putting them only at the tail of the
cart of progress, pointing to their many learned men in the sciences.
To this he replied that science alone did not mean progress; one
must also accept the liberal principles of progress, such as freedom of
38
the press, freedom of thought, freedom of religion.
By the middle of 1888 the situation in the Philippines had changed.
The semi-complacency of Terrero had been succeeded by the ener-

37. Ibid., 5:530-31, 2 Feb 1890. Father Sancl1ez had been the favorite professor of
Rizal, and they remained very close friends , even during the time Riz.al had given up
the Catho lic religion. When l1e was exiled to Dapitan in 1892, Father Sanchez \Vas
sent to assist in the Dapitan mission, in the hopes that he might win Rizal back to }1is
religion . Though this did 11ot happen at tl1at time, tl1ey shared commo11 scientific
interests, and worked togetl1er for the welfare of the people of Dapita11 (see my article
..Som e Notes o n Rizal in Dapitan," Ph.ilippine Studies 11 [1963]: 301-13) , reproducing
Fath er San ch ez' account of this period.
38. The account of Rizal's discussions with th e Jesuits on his return to the Philip-
pines in 1887, by FatJ1er Pablo Pastells, SJ., though not contradicting tl1e abo,•e, presents
a slightly different impression. After _vain)~ t~ng to "bring l1im back to th e good
path .. and fi nding that he had lost his belief 1n Catholicism , Father Faura had told
h im that the J esuits \vould then l1ave to break off all communicatio ns with llim. and
cotinseled h im to leave the Philippines foreve r, lest h e end up on the scaffold ( I .ft
Masonizaci6n de Filipinas. Rizal y su o&ra [Barcelon a: Libreria Cat6lica , - ) Th '
< • ' J. b ~ t J . lS
102 Noli ll'lf tarigere

getic action of tl1e 11e,-v gove1·11or-ge11eral, Valeriano v\7eyle r , later to

become 11otori ot1s a1no11g America11s fo1· l1is reco11ce11tration policy in
Ct1ba just before tl1e 0 L1lbreak of tl1e Spanisl1-A.Jnerica11 v\7ar. Weyler,
tl1 ougl1 i11 n o sense cle1·ical in l1is private opi11io11, was of a strong
at1tl1 01·itaria11 tempera1ne11t, a11cl l1is ter1n was cl1aracterized by firm
~9
support o f tl1e f1iars and rigorot1s sL1ppression o f any attac ks on th e1n.
Ma1·iano Po11ce kept 011 shippi11g copies of tl1 e Noli from Barcelona
to Manila by variot1s chan11els, a11d the sale of t11e book co11ti11L1e d to
be brisk. S0011 aftenvards, h o,-vever, came n e,-vs of tl1e arrest of a stu-
d e11 t for possessing copies of the book. Tl1is was follo,-ved by wide-
sp1·ead sea1·cl1es i11 Manila a11d nearb)' Cavite, a11d tl1e imprisonrr1ent
of , 1a1iot1s otl1er possessors of tl1e book, on t11e g1·ot1nd that the Span-
ish Penal Code ban11ed a11y book written against tl1 e ecclesiastical au-
thorities. Tl1e p1·isoners were all released soon afterward, but tl1e book
,-vas he nceforth officiall)' forbidden .

book ,vas p u b lished anoI1)'1TlOusly in 1897, first in tl1e Jesuit magazine o f Barcelona,
La Juventud, a nd tl1en in pan1phlet form , but it is clear fro1n t11e co rresponde11ce of
Fatl1er Paste lls in ilie arcl1ives of the J esuit province of Tarrago n a, tl1at h e ,-.-as the
at1th o r, as Retana ( \Iida, 22) , had already asserted. At tl1e time this book was pub-
lished tl1e J est1its were under heavy fire botl1 i11 Manila and in Spain, as bein g unpatri-
otic, sin ce in tl1e i11surrection whi cl1 had broken out, tl1ey alo n e of tl1e Spanish priests
l1ad been left u11l1armed by th e revolu tionists, a nd tl1eir scl1ools ,ver e acct1sed of bei11g
tl1 e sotirces of Filipino separatism. ~loreove r, Fatl1er Pas tells l1imse lf ,vas a l\\ra,-s
,
otit-
spoke n in l1is co11demnatio n of tl1 e Filipin o reformis t moven1e nt, as l1is p1;va te corre-
spo11de11ce sl10,vs. TJ1ese t,,vo circttmstances easily explai n tl1erefore the different tone
of the two accou11ts.
39. Fernandez Almagro, HisLon·a politica, 2:432, cl1aracterizes hi1n by sa)'ing: "He
did 11ot kno,-., what it ,-.,as to re bel. . . . Thougl1 his anti-cle ric,1lis111, ,vl1ich he
111,· 0
.
confessed to l1is in timates, cot1 ld l1ave inclin ed hin1 to,vard the Left, his tem peran1 en-
tal auth oritarianis1n served as a cottnter-balance." His a ttitude to,,-ard the friars in the
Philippi11cs is clear from l1is co nfide11tial n1e 1no ria l just before the <'rtd of l1is tem1 .
wl1ere he insisted:

T l1 e 1nissio t1 of tl1e rel igious Orde rs l1 as not ye t tern1ir1ated .... Far rron1 rcligil.)\lS
'-
cx aggera ti on bei11g an obstac le i11 tl1c Pl1ilippi11es, it sl1<)t1ld be supportt·d, so that tilt:
i11tlue 11ce t1f tl1 c p arisl1 priest 11t a)' l)e ,vital it sl1 ot1lcl b e . . .. Rcl igio11 c ,,11 a11ci shl.1t1lll
be ir1 Luzor1 a 11cl tl1c Bisay.:is a rn ea ns c)f governrrtc 11t ,.vl1icl1 is to bt' taken advantage
or
of, an d ,vl1 icl1 jtts t.iiies tl1 e 11ecess ity Lite rc lig-iotts ureters.

v\'11ile such a utilit)' mig l1t provide:.· tc 111pt1rary sccurjty to 1J1e re ligiotlS o rders. in tl1e
ertd it cou ld on ly n1ake th e rr1 tl1<' 1>rime t,trgel c)f tl1e I◄'ili[Jino 11atiot1alists.
 Noli mf tangere l 03

Nonetheless it continued to be shipped to th e Pl1ilippines by Jose

Ma1·fa Basa, a Filipino deported in 1872 for alleged co1nplicity in tl1e
uprising, 110,~ a ½1ealthy businessman in I-long l(o11g, and a sworn e n-
emy of th e friars. Tl1rot1gl1 his business connections in Manila, l1e
continued to deliver copies of the novel to tl1e Philippines witl1 obvi-
·
ous enth us1asm. 40

The controversy ove1· the Noli entered a 11ew round with tl1e publi-
catio11 in Barcelona in the middle of' 1889 of a defense of the book
b)' his frie11d Ferdina11d Blume11tritt, a recognized authority on Phil-
41
ippine histo11 and ethnograpl1y. After writing the pamphlet i11 Ge1·-
1

man , he sent it to Rizal, who translated it and had it publisl1ed througl1

the Filipino colony in Barcelo11a. Rizal hi1nself contributed the fo1·e-
word, pointing out that tl1is was tl1e judgment of "a fervent Catl1olic,
an obedient son of the Roman Church."
Blumentritt empl1asizes l1is Catholicism in l1is defense of tl1e Noli
against Father Font and Se11ator Vida, deploring Rizal's introduction
of theological considerations into l1is novel. He praises both the work
of tl1e Jesuits in the Pl1ilippines and the accomplishments of the fri-
ars in the past. But he maintains that they have failed to keep up with
the times. Tl1ey see the legitimate criticisms of Filipinos educated
abroad regarding the Philippine situation as treason, and forthwith
denounce them as filibusteros.
Spaniards live in intellectual isolation, and therefore tend to be
suspicious of all that is foreign (particularly, if it is German) and to
resent any criticism of tl1emselves by non-Spaniards. Deplorably, Span-
iards in general have looked on the Filipino as an inferior being. This
racism, combined with their distrust of all things foreign and their
,
touchiness over criticism, explains tl1e tremendous outcry raised against
the Noli. Yet in reality, the work of Rizal is a patriotic one, a sincere
effort to open tl1e eyes of Spain to the evils crying for a remedy, and
Spaniards must learn to accept criticism. The real 1·eason for the at-
tack is that Rizal sl1ows the all-powetlul influence of the friars, who
put their own interests above those of the state .
.
•

40. Ep. Rizal., 5:295-96; 307; 2:49. In a letter of Jan 1889 l1 owevei· Rizal
' , · ,vrote to
Basa, asking him not to s~nd more copies of tl1e Noli to the Pllilippines tinless e
11
recei,,ed specific requests, s1nce many feared to receive it (ibid. , 2:110 ).
4 1. El Noli 1ne Tringere cle Rizal j11,1.gado por f'l JJrofesor J•: lilurnentritt (B
arce 1ona: Fran-
cisco Fossas, 1889).
104 Nolimetangere

Spa11iards could hardly be exp ected to take kindly to such a cri-

tiqt1e, written as it was in a rather condescending tone. That it issued
from the pen of a German professor fanned their resentme nt even
more, and touched off new waves of Germanophobia.
A prime example of such reactions was that of Vicente Barrantes,
tl1e Spanish academician, writing in the ct1ltural review La Espana
Moderna. Barrantes l1ad spent a number of years in l1igh posts of the
Philippine administration himself, and wrote a regular section on the
literature of the Hispanic world for this re,riew. In 1889 he had ques-
tioned Blumentritt's venturing to concern himself with Philippine af-
fairs though a foreigner, "and a German besides."
Blumentritt replied with a series of articles in the Filipino newspa-
per of Barcelona, La Solidaridad, defending his right to speak, which
he declared he did out of his love for Spain, just as he had defended
42
the rights of Spain to the Carolines i11 1885. Barrantes replied in
January 1890, picturing Blumentritt as leading the young Filipinos on
a dangerous path, hinting that he might well be paid out of the
"reptile-fund" of Bismarck's secret agents. He appealed to Rizal , "a
spirit warped by a German education" and the otl1er young Filipinos
not to be seduced by the programs of othe1·s, perhaps based on Euro-
43
pean judgments or even special interests.
Some time before this, the Filipino campaign had already entered
on a new and greatly expanded phase. This expanded movement,
though partly independent of Rizal, had received a powerful boost
from his novel, and the future work of the Filipinos in Madrid and
Barcelona would be largely devoted to reiterating the issues and accu-
sations Rizal had raised in the Noli. The movement would be racked
by grievous differences of opinion on methods and even on ends, btit
much of its drive and inspiration ,-\'ould continue to come from Rizal 's
novel.

42. Blume ntritt, •\~Cui Bono? Artic\alos d edi cados al F.xcrno. Sr. D. \ 'ict"rlte
Barrantes," La Solidaridarl, 1 (1889) 3 1 Oct, 15 Nov, 30 Nov, 15 Dec.
43. Vicente Barrantes, "Secci611 Hispano-Ultran1ari11,l," IA Espa1ia A-fodn-na 2 Uan
1890): 161-90.
 CHAPTER 6

Marcelo H. Del Pilar and Nationalist Activity

in the Philippines, 1887-1888

While much was going on in Spain, other forces were at work in

the Philippines, forces which received a powerful impulse from Rizal's
Noli, but independent in origin. These forces, moving at first by steal th
and with caution, were to surface in a series of dramatic episodes in
the years 1887-88, only to be driven underground again.

Early Activities of Del Pilar

The principal figure in the nationalist activity in the Philippines

during these years was Marcelo Hilario del Pilar y Gatmaytan, brother
of one of the Filipino priests exiled to the Marianas as a result of the
events of 1872. 1 Born in 1850 in the province of Bulacan, north of
Manila, he studied at the Colegio de San Jose, where he undoubtedly ·

1. TI1e principal biographer of Del Pilar was Epifanio de los Santos Cristobal, a
yo unger contemporary of his, who had access to many of l1is letters, as ,-veil as the
collaboration of Mariano Ponce, Del Pilar's disciple and constant companion in his
years in Spain. The first biograpl1y by De los Santos appeared in the newspaper of
Malolos, Bulacan, Pltiridel, in 1907 in an irregular series of installments from I Jan to
31 Atig, under the title "Marcelo H . del Pilar." It again appeared in somewhat altered
form in Tlie Pliilippine Review 3 (1918):775-80~, 8~~-85, 947-75. The Tagalog biogra-
phy by Jose P. Santos, Buhay at mga sinulat ni Plandel (Maynila: Palimbag n Dala
1931) ' contains little which is not found in his father's works except 11c0 r th e glet~no gaf,
Del Pilar to his wife. Thougl1 the latter are of considerable valtte • tliey have since
. b een
reproduced, together with Del Pilar's otl1er extant correspondence 1· Ep· ,__._
, n zsto"-',w de
Marcelo H. tlel Pilar.

I 105
106 DPL Pilar a11d Nationalist Artivil)1

kne1rv tl1 e leader of tl1e Filipi110 clerg)', Fatl1er Burgos. About 1870 he
is said to have bee11 forced to aba11do n his legal studies at the U11iver-
sit)' of Sa11to Ton1as, because of: a quarrel over fees 1rvith a friar parish
2
priest at a baptisn1 at which he stood godfather. Th e ft1ll story is not
kno,m , but it seems likely that tl1 e qt1arrel may have bee n an incide nt
in tl1e larger context of tl1e 11ationalist struggle benveen th e Filipino
secula1- clergy and the friars, then at its l1eight. Fo1- at tl1e time of th e
outbreak of 1872, l1e was living with tl1e Filipino priest, Father Mariano
Se,rilla, who was 011e of tl1ose exiled to tl1 e Marianas in the aftermath .
Little is kno,,vi1 of the years i1nmediately follo,.ving 1872, except th a t
Del Pilar was e mployed at leas t part of tl1e time in minor posts of tl1e
bureat1cracy. In 1878, he r esumed his legal studies and r eceived the
licentiate in law from the Unive1-sity of Santo Tomas in 1880.
In 1882 Del Pilar was a member of the grot1p vvhich fot1nded the
first bilingual newspaper-Tagalog a11d Spanish -in the Philippines,
Diariong Tagalog. Though the publisher was ostensibly Francisco Calvo
Munoz, a peninsular treasury official i11 the Pl1ilippines, the 1-eal mo,'-
ing spirits behind the paper were Del Pilar, ,-v-110 acted as editor of the
Tagalog section, and Basilio Teodoro Mor.in, the business manager. Much
of tl1e capital with which the newspaper vvas begun, as well as several of
those active in tl1e enterprise, came from Malolos, capital of the pro,·-
ince of Bulacan, for here Del Pilar had formed around him a group of
relatives and associates who shared his nationalistic inte rests.
The regime of Governor-General Fernando Primo de Ri,,era had
seen a considerable relaxation of the censorship of the press, and the
Diariong Tagalog took full advantage of this relative liberty to sp eak
out in favor of various reforms, as well as to promote a moderate gospel
of nationalism. One of the notable articles in this se11se was the "El am 01-
patrio" of Rizal, u-anslated into eloquent Tagalog by Del Pilar.

Thougl1 the biograpl1ies of Epifanio de los Santos a re in,·aluable for tl1 eir autltor·s
access to tl1e facts, tl1 ey a re by n o n1eans critical works, and arc often ra tl1er tenden-
tious i11 their treatment of th e f1·iars. This is particularly true of tl1e e,1rlitr vci i o r\,
written as it ,vas at a time a ncl in a place wl1ere tl1e memories of the a11tifri,tr ca m~
paigr1 were still alive.
Marcelo del Pilar's brother was Fatl1er ·r o1ibio 1-lilario del Pilar. Little is ki1o,,·ri of
him, eitl1e r before 1872 or aften,vards, but it sec1ns that he had 110 part irt tl 1e acli,it,
o f his bro ther.
2. Santos, Philip/linf l'U'Vieru 3:i75-76.
 Del Pilar and Nationalist Activity 107

v\ne n the n ewspa per fa iled before the e nd of the year becau se of
tl1e econo1nic situation l)rougl1t on by natural catastro phes, Del Pilar
devoted himself to th e practice of la,-v. At th e same time h e was in de-
fatigable in spreading natio11alist a11 d an tifria1· id eas, bo tl1 in Manila
a mong the students and in the town s of Bulacan wh erever he could
gather a c1·owd , be it a barrio baptismal par ty or a local cockpit. His
faci le conunand of Tagalog won hin1 a.ttentive crowds in tl1is regio n
prot1d of its Tagalog eloquen ce.
A born politician, h e kne,~ 110w to plan t in the minds of the young
students of Manila the seeds of 11atio nalism, a nd to stir up resen t-
3
ment against existing conditions. In Malolos l1e carried on a political
activity scarcel}' known tl1 en i11 the Philippines, organizing his gr oup
so as to get possessio n of the municipal offices a nd gradually bring-
ing about a confron tation \-\rith tl1e friar parish priest for control of
the town's affairs.

An ti friar Poli tics

More o p en activity began i11 1884, wl1en tl1e group around Del
Pilar m a naged to have a gobe rnad o rcillo elected over the candida te
backed by tl1e pa risl1 p riest. Tl1e follo\.,,ing }'ear the principalfa of the
town p rovoked a n incident with the priest to bring about a showd own
over tl1eir right to go,,ern the town without his inteiventio n .
Relyi11g o n the wording of the decree 011 the collection of taxes for
th e cedula personal, wl1ich was substituted fo r the fo rmer tributo in 1884,
tl1ey refused to recogi1ize any obligation to compare tl1eir tax lists
,vith th e pa1·ocl1ial lists of the parish priest. Their refusal was over-
ruled by the governme nt, a nd they were orde red to consult with
(asesorar) the pa1·ish priest whe n removing names from the tax list

3. Santos (ibid .• 949), citing Mariano Pon ce, ,vho told of l1o,v e,,en ,vh e n lle was
still a higl1 school s_tt1den~ ~n 1880, h e. used to m eet frequently witll a gr ou p of stu-
dent~ ,vhose an imaung sp1nt was Del Pilar. The latter filled their minds with ideas of
patriotism and desires to remedy the situation of their cou n try. See San Los Pl ' .de
·1a , · · · th . , an L, 7
;\.ug 1907. for Del P1 · r s acuv1t}' in e provinces, and how J1e entered •
.. . . 1n to p artner-
ship with tl1e F1l1p1no pnest Don Rafael Canlapan to run tl1e local k .
. . . coc p it . H ere h e
t1sed to spread his doctnnes and gather recrwts ainong t11ose wh 0 f
re qt1enLed the
cork.figh ts.
108 Del Pilar and Nationalist Activity

because of deatl1s, over-age, e tc. T he parish p1iest maintained that it

was their duty to correct their lists according to the parish register;
they insisted on merely comparing (cotejar) their lists with his, reserv-
ing the right to accept or not his corrections. In the end the pri est
was supported by the intendente, but the battle line betwee n him and
4
the followers of Del Pilar had been drawn.
Soon, however, Del Pilar l1ad Spanish allies in the persons of the
local commander of the civil guard, Julio Galindo, and the civil gov-
e rnor of Bulacan, Mantiel Gomez Florio. With the protection of these
men, he was more free to act, and began to meet regularly with a
group in Malolos, which included the coadjutor of the parish, th e
5
Filipino priest, Don Rafael Canlapan. He also kept in close touch
with the groups in Manila which were organizing a series of mo,,es
aimed at destroyi11g the prestige of the friars and divesting them of
any power to intervene in the government.
In Manila the climate created by changes in the government favored
action against the friars. The governor-general, Emilio Terrero y
Perinat, appears to have been a man of somewhat weak character,
easily moved in one direction or another according to the pressures
brought to bear on him.
Under the influence of his secretary, Felipe Canga-Arguelles, h e
had conducted in the first year or so of his te rm of office su ch a
strong campaign against officeholders who ,-vere Masons or wl10 were
living in concubinage that he provoked bitter protests to the Madrid
government even from relatively conservative qttarters . After
Canga-Arguelles was removed from office, Terrero came under ne,v
influences, particularly with the appointment of Jose Centeno as act-

4. Ibid., 5-6. Navarro ( }'"ilipinas, 30), likewise relates the incident, noting that the
o rder to copy the parish register ,vas due to tl1e fraudt1lent removal of na111cs fro1n
the tax-lists. Del Pilar, on the otl1er hand, claimed that the friar did not pen11ic 11a.i11es
of tl1ose wl10 l1ad died or moved away to be ren1oved, since the parish priest's salan ·
was based o n a percentage of the number of tribu tes due. rather tl1an the su1n col-
lected. In either case, whatever be the faces of th e matter, the incident \\'"a s inte nded
by Del Pilar as a challenge to the power of the friar.
5. See the extracts fro m the reports of tl1e special commissioner sent to ~talo lo in
1888 by Governor-General Valeriano ¼'eyler after the ren1ova] of tl1e provinciaJ go,·t"r-
nor (Santos, Pl1ilippine Revieru 3:783-85) . Various incide11l5 narrated sho," the close
relationship with De l Pilar noL only of tJ1 esc officials, but also of the director o f Ci,;l
Administration , Benigno Quiroga.
 Del Pilar and Nationalist A ctivity l 09

ing civil governor of 11anila in April 1887, and the arrival of Benigno
Quiroga y Lopez Ballesteros in June.
Centeno, a l1igh-ranking Mason, had been in tl1e Philippines for
many years in the corps of mining engineers, but had never hitherto
held political office or take11 part in political affairs. Once he took
office, however, he showed his antifriar animus, and was soon in con-
tact with Filipinos of like mind, while keeping tl1e strong support of
6
Terrero.
Reinforcing this new political climate was Benigno Quiroga, a young
member of the democratic left wing of the Liberal Fusionist party,
and protege of Segismundo Moret. Quiroga arrived with great plans
for refor1r1s in the Philippine administration. He does not seem to
have been anticlerical in the same sense as Centeno, yet he soon
showed himself opposed to clerical influence in the government of
the country, and willing to cooperate with the antifriar Filipinos in
. 7
t l11s respect.
Though Terrero was never involved in any way with the Filipino
antifriar group, he fully supported the measures taken by Centeno
and Quiroga, ostensibly to maintain the authority of the government,
whose prestige hung on the actions of Quiroga and Centeno.
Counting on the government's new support, the Filipino antifriar
elements fi1~st raised the question of precedence in the parish of

6. Centeno had bee n proposed by Terrero for secretary in December 1886, and
when Balagt1er replied that tl1e post .h ad to be given to a political friend of Sagasta,
had appoi11ted him acting civil governor, and asked that this appointment be made
permanent. Tl1is too was later denied; see the letters of Terrero to Balagtter in MBB
113:55, 129, 399,1 • See also a telegram from Terrero to Balaguer of 6 Aug 1887, rela)'-
iog and supporting the request of the Ayuntamiento of Manila that Ce11teno's ap-
pointment be made permanent (in AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5277, "1887, Filipinas, Personal,
Recibidos"'). Tho11gh Centeno v.•as a leading Mason, and undoubtedly this was not
,vithotit influence on his J1ostility to tl1e friars, there is no e,ridence for the statement
of Fe rnandez, whicl1 attributes all the antifriar events of 1887-88 to "consignas
p recedences de las logias de Madrid," stirring to action the Masons of the Philippines
(Dominicos, 371). As wi ll be seen, none of tl1e Filipinos involved were Masons at this
time, with the exceptio11 of Ramos.
7. Retana, Aparato, 3: 1628-29, no. 4498; idem, Cites ti ones filipinas: Avisos y profecias
(Madrid: Minuesa de los Rios, 1892), 17&-77. For Qt1iroga's reformist ideas, see his
letter to Moret shortly after his arrival in Manila: "the only thing bad in Manila is the
Spaniards. What things the mother-coltntry spits out on tl1is land! ... One would think
that their papas consider this a penal colony" (MBB 383 "Autografos 1887." no. 53 ).
1 IO Del Pilar an,d Nation(1,list Activil)'

Bino ndo , the C11i11ese sec tion of Ma11ila.R Histo rically, Bi11011do l1ad
been tl1e parish of tl1e Cl1inese Cl1ristians, bt1t by th e la te nine tee ntl1
ce11tury, its large population of Chinese and Cl1i11ese m estizos was
a ugmented by an even larger number of native Filipinos. In sections
sL1ch as tl1is, the ordi11ary municipal government system of
gober11adorcillo with l1is principalfa was modified so as to set up three
municipal governi11g bodies cor1·espo11ding to the gremio cle natu-rales,
the greniio de mestizos, and th e gremio de clii1ios. Tl1e gobernado1·cillo de
naturales had ge11eral territorial jurisdiction, while th e otl1er t,vo
gobernadorcillos l1ad jurisdictio11 011ly over the members of their re-
spective gren1ios.
This system led to nun1erous conflicts, especially i11 Binondo. Span-
ish law provided that precedence in civil and religious ft1nction s be-
longed to the gobernadorcillo de naturales a11d his principalia.
Nevertheless, in the district of Binondo, because the church l1ad origi-
nally been built for the Chinese (la1·gely witl1 Chinese funds) and
maintained chiefly by wealtl1y Cl1inese and Chinese mestizo merchants,
the mestizos had traditionally held the place of l1ono1· in spite of end-
less quarrels over precedence.
In 1886 at the petition of the parish priest, the D01ninican Fatl1er
Jose Hevia Campomanes, tl1e intendente had decreed that the mesti-
zos and Chinese were to take charge of the fiesta of Our Lady of the
Rosary, and the naturales that of St. Nicholas, thinking to 1·esolve the
disputes. This the natu1·ales protested, a11d succeeded in getting a ten1-
porary reversal of the decision, so tl1at they could continue to share in
the fiesta of tl1e Rosary. They followed this up with a lengiliy exposition
on why tl1ey should receive the position of honor fo1· the ft1tu1·e.
~ fiesta time neared the follo,ving year, tl1e gobernadorcillo de
naturales, Timoteo Lanuza, requested the place of l1onor f1·om FatJ1er
Hevia. When the latter insisted on adl1ering to the traditional p1-ac-
tice, Lanuza, with tl1e aid of Centeno, obtained a dec1·ee fro1n Te 1·rero
ordering precede11ce to be give11 to the 11aturales. Tl1e friar's remo11-
strations ha,,ing proved ineffectt1al, he first refused to go 011 ,,,itl1 the

8. The docu1nents o n this questio11 are contai11cd AH N, leg. 2249. exp. 8;~. a 11 d
i11

leg. 2256, exp. 6. For tl1e early l1istory of Bino ndo and tl1c dcveloJJmcnt ot tl\e gr-rm,~ .
see Edgar Wi ckbcrg. "The Cl1ir1cse Mestizo in l>l1ilippine 1-listor:,•." ./ourri,,l of SouLlu-tJ.SI
Asian History, 5 (1964): 69-70, ,vl10 l1as used clocLtrn e ntatio11 0 11 1J1e questil)n fron1 tl1 e
Pl1ilippine National Archives.
•
• Del Pila1· and Nationalist A ctivity 111

fiesta. On T e r1·er o 's 01·dering it to b e l1eld , t11 e fri ar kept a'\ivay f"ro n1
the celebrations.
I
The governor-general ordered l1is removal as parish priest over tl1e
l• protests of the arcl1bishop, and discharged the gobernadorcillos of
'
• the Chinese a11d the m estizos. At the fiesta as finally l1eld, not only
did the naturales of Binondo hold the place of l1011or, but tl1e cel-
e bration was attended by almost all tl1e otl1er native gobernadorcillos
••
' of Manila in a demonstration of solidarity.
' Thougl1 the incident seemed tri,rial, it was of great symbolic impo1·-
..' tance to tl1e Filipino nationalist group. Not onl)' was their 11atio11al
I
•
•
self-esteem gratified by seeing the Chinese a11d Chi11ese mestizos l1um-
•
bled, but mo1·e important, they had prevailed against tl1e f1·iar parisl1
1
'
' priest a11d even tl1e archbisl1op, a significant step towards the desired
t
j secularization of their government. The entire affair had been 1nan-
I

•
i
aged by Juan Zulueta, Del Pilar's associate and, apparently, with the
•I
•
, d .
1atter s a vice .g
'I
An even mo1·e serious blow to ecclesiastical prestige ,-vas soon to
I
follow. Quiroga published a decree on the care of ecclesiastical cem-
ete1·ies, in whicl1 he recalled that in the general health law of 1856 it
10
I had been forbidden to bring corpses into tl1e churches. When the
I arcl1bishop and tl1e provincials of the religious orders inquired if tl1is
I
completely forbade the practice, Quiroga answered ambig11ously. The
I
archbishop interpreted the answer according to tl1e Ch11rch 's c11stoms
•I

:
9. Neither Zulueta's name nor tl1at of Del Pilar appear i11 tl1e documents, bt1t
t
l Santos (Philippine Revier,v 3:776) asserts: "del Pilar fue el asesor de Juan Zulueta, pri11ci-
'I
pal instigador d e la fac ci6n de los natt1rales en co11tra de los mestizos de sangley,
pro tegidos por Fr. Hevfa d e Campo1na 11es." From a11 analysis of the documents it is
evident tha t some coordinating fo rce was active to u11ite the gobe r11adorcillos o f most
o f the city.
The rivalry with the Chi11ese m estizos r equires some expla 11atio11, si11ce else,"he re
in the country the distinction of m estizos and in.dios J1ad quite broke 11 do,v11 , and
m a 11y o f the most ardent Filipino natio nalists were actua lly Cl1inese mestizos. Bino tldo
seem s to have b een quite exceptio nal in this respect, undo ttbte dly for }1is to rical rea-
sons, as ,ve il as fo r the exis te n ce of a large C l1i11ese popt1latio n in tl1e district.
10. The officia l d ocuments a11d corresponden ce o n tl1e qt1estion are c-otltaii1ed i,1
,-\HN, U ltra m ar, leg. 5266, exp. 26. The telegrapl1i c corresp o 11der1ce is in leg. S2?i :
.. 1887, Filipinas. Direcci6 n g ral. d e G racia)' .Jt1sticia ," "1887 Filipi11as. Po litica··; .. 1888 ,
Filip in as. Po liti ca ." Also l\1BB. vol. 11 3, uno ffi cial co rresp o nde iice o f Ba lague r a 11 d
T e rre ro, passim, fro m O ct 1887 to Mar 1888.
112 Del Pila.r and Nationalist Activity

and thus i11formed his priests. Qui1-oga the n issu ed a n ew circular to

the effect that the archbishop 's circular h ad been badly interpreted
11
and that gobernadorci llos were to obey the original d ecree. Centeno
and certain other gover11ors made a great show of enforcing the de-
cree by ordering troops against some priests who, relying on the cir-
cular of the archbishop, attempted to have the bodies brought into
the churches for funerals.
The entire affair was evidently intended as a provocation, and was
taken advantage of by Del Pilar's group. In Malolos, Quiroga's decree
was proclaimed in the streets to the accompaniment of a brass band.
Similar incidents occt1rred in other places whe1-e parish priests at-
tempted to carry out the traditional practice. The clergy protested in
vain. The governor-general not only ignored the protests of the arch-
bishop and the provincials, but replied to their protests with a warn-
ing that any effort on the part of the clergy to disturb public order
would be met with stern measures. It was a signal triumph for the
an tifriar forces.

According to the Manila correspondent of th e anticlerical Madrid daily El Pais, the

d ecree was issued at the suggestion of Centeno, as a reprisal for the refusal of ecclesi-
astical authorities to grant Christian burial to one Hermosilla, director-general of Com-
munications, as being a Freemason (Patricio Escalera, "Carta de Manila," El Pais, 29
Dec 1887). Tl1ough this is nowhere mentioned in the documents, there is no reaso n
to think that El Pais would have any interest in distorting the truth in this case, and
would explain more ful ly the interest of Centeno, tl1e head of the local Masonic lod ge,
in the wl1ole affair.
11 . Retana, Avisos, 342, n. 17, says that the interpretation given by the archbish op
to his clergy had been previously shown to Quiroga, who made correctio11s in it in his
own hand, and later reapproved it in the galley proofs. Retana's source was Fat11er
Evaristo Fernandez Arias, 0 .P., professor of the university, wl10 accompanied t11e arch-
bishop to his conference with Quiroga. This confirms the impression of the docu-
ments that Quiroga either deliberately led the Archbishop on so as to disauthorize
him more fully later, or first decided to compromise and later changed l1is mind and
went back on his agreement without informing the Archbisl1op. Tl1is conclusion can-
not be demonstrated fully here, but an analysis of the documen ts and the c-orrespo11d-
ence \.vith tl1e h ome go, emment clearly points to this conclusion. Pastells ( 1\fisi6-,1,
1

2:191-93) relates the interpreration given by Quiroga himself to the J esuit, Fat}1er
J oaquin Sancho, on a visit of th e former to Zamboa11ga in southern Mindanao, differ-
ent from tl1at contained in tl1e second circular of Quiroga. Tl1e latter's brother had
been a j esuit who had died young a fe,v years before, and tl1o ugh the Jesuits deplored
many of his policies, he seems to l1ave sh own them a certain amoun t of favor. Tl1is
too confirms the provocatory intention of Quiroga in his treatment of the Archbishop.
 /)rl p;uzr and Natinnalist Arliv;t)1 11 3

.\ , e ries c>f rll()\'t's clesigned to embarrass, or ch all e n ge the influ-

ence of. the friars sl1<)rtl,· e n u ed. al) fo llo,vin g a certain pattern . On
~() N<J,·ember 1887. t11 e gol)ernadorcillo and prin cipa les of tl1 e t0\-'/11
of Na"·otas pre-s~nted a r1 expositio n to the go,,e rnor of Manila against
the proximit,· of· the parish ce1ne ten to the to,,v11, a nd asked for the
1

ad111i111~tratic>n of the cemete ries b~· tl1 e municipal government.

ll1e fclllc>\,;ng d a)· a11oth er exposition was presented by one l\1ateo
~larianc) of tl1e ame t0\\11, accu si11g the friar parish priests of exact-
ir1g exce i,·e tole fees and of beating him tor being unable to pay
them. The exp o ition ,,·e nt on to d e ma11d not only that the friar be
remo,·ed . but tl1at all churcl1es, being the property of the people, be
put under tl1e adrninistrarjon of the gobernadorcillos.
Earl)· in Janua~· 1888, a pe tition b earing some five hundred signa-
tti res y;a s pr esen t ed to the go, e rnment in Madrid by the
1

gobernadorcill o a11d principales of the Santa Cruz district of Manila,

asking tl1 a l th e ter111s o f Go,·ern o r-Gen e ral Terrero and Director
Quiroga be prolonged and that the tempora171 appointme11t of Centeno
a.s go,·ern o r o f· Manila b e made perman ent. Among notewortl1y mat-
ter cited in fa,,o r of tl1 ese men were Centeno's wise soluti on to tl1e
di putes of Bi11ondo the pre,rious October, Quiroga 's recent disposi-
uons o n funerals to safegt1ard public h ealth , a11d Terre ro's steadfast
faith 111 the loyalty of the Filipinos, ign o ring the warnings about disor-
ders a11d re,,o lts uttered by certain ele me nts who feared the reduc-
tion of their pecuniary gai ns and the curbing of tl1eir power to
. -I 12
1nte 1,e re .
r\no ther expositio 11 0 11 17 January by Ca11dido Garcia of tl1e district
of Panda can to the governor of Manila complained of his fear of
being d e p o rted as a result of his calling the acting gobernadorcillo 's
a tte ntion to variot1s violations b)·' the parish priest o f the decrees on
.ftmerals and to his illegal maintaining of confraternities and third
orders, wl1ich impoverish the country by the contributions exacted

- -- --
---
12. Onginal in AHN. Ultramar . Jeg. 5258, in the expedient~ personal of Terrero. Thou h
the petition is from the district of Santa Cruz and is h eaded by the gobemadorci~o
Doroteo Jo~, it also contains names of other Filipino progressists, su ch as Timoteo
Lanuza ,1 f Binond o . A telegram in the same terms, signed by "Centeno Vecinos Ma-
nila♦'" and a ddressed to the Queen, is found in AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5277, ..
1888
Ftlipinas, Telegra:inas," wi th date of 8 Jan 1888. ·
11 4 Del Pilar arid Nationalist Activit_)'

fro m th eir m e n1bers, tl1e si1non iacal tracle in religious objects, the
excessive sto le fees, e tc. The fri a1·s in g·e n eral a1·e e n emi es of Spain ,
J1e asserted , fo r tl1e)' pre,,e nt tl1e teacl1ing ot· Spa nish a nd seek to
sepa ra te the indi o fro m l1is fellow Spa nia rds. In conclusio n , h e urged
tl1e pu11isl11ne11t of tl1e })arish priest, tl1 e st1ppression of the illegal
confra te rnities, the rem oval of all fr iars from the pa1·ishes of the Is-
13
la nds and the confiscatio11 of tl1eir estates.
In Malolos, a some,,vhat differe nt move was bei11g made against the
fri ars, appa re11tly agai11 in coo1)e ra ti o11 Viri tl1 Qt1iroga. A pro posal of
se, 1e1·al years' standi11g to fot111d a11 orphan asylum , togetl1er wi th a
school of a rts and trad es and an agricultural scl1ool, l1ad bee n e n-
trusted to the Augustinians, pa rt of the costs to be paid by th e gov-
e rnment. Tl1e Augustinians la te r found the form in which the proj ect
had been set up unacceptable, and made a new proposal, calling for
further contribution by the government, but Augustinian contro l of
tl1 e teaching p ersonnel.
Quiroga countered with a decree proposing that the establishm e nt
be set up in comple te i11depende nce of any religious o rde rs, with su ch
government assistan ce as the resources of the Treasury allowed. As if
on cue, tl1e principales and otl1er leading citizens of Malolos offe red-
th1·ot1gh a n expositio11 so promptly presented as to indicate collt1sio n-
to ope n a public subscription to supply what the go,1e1·nme11t lacked
in financial resot1rces to establish such a school free from ecclesiasti-
14
cal contro l.

The Antifriar Manifestation

Flush ed with t1·iu1nph , the antifria1· fo1·ces now began pre p a rations
for an even stronge r m ove against tl1e prestige of the fri a1·s, a massi,·e
manifestatio n in Ma nila, aski11g fo r th e expulsio n of· th e fr iars fron1
the Philippines and the exile of the a rcl1bisl1op . Tl1e m a nifes ta tio 11
was organized i11 secrecy. Its principal lead er a ppears to l1a,·e be-e 11
Do ro teo Cortes, assisted by J ose A. Ra m os a11d Del Pila r, thougl1 tl1ei 1-

13. What appe,1rs Lo be Ll1e o rigi11al or Lhis ex p os i t io 11 Ls i11 NL (l~ietz. u,lr,1dn, . ntl.
342).
14. See tl1e ne\.vspaper artic les 0 11 th e sttl~jec t reprod\1ccd in 1\Jonas1;r 5iup,nnan ·.
157-61.
 Del Pila1- and Ncltio-,1alist Acti1.1£ty 11 5
l

1
names• •
d o~
I :-,
not a ppear in tl1e long lists of signatures accompanyi11g the
p e uuon .· ·
•I
On the morning of 1 l\tlarcl1 1888, the gobernadorcillos of the clis-
' tricts of Manila and its suburbs f)assed in procession th1-ot1gl1 the city
to the office of the civil go,,ernor. Here Centeno recei,,ed them, and
• the}' gave him their petition for transmittal to the governor-general
since they had learned that the governor-general himself ¼'as u11,,vill-
• ing to 1-eceive tl1em. Quiroga had earlier dissociated l1imself from the
manifestatio11, feigning sick11ess a11d se11di11g an emissary to the arch-
16
bishop to convey his protest against the offense offered to tl1e latter.
Tl1e exposition , addressed to the go,,er11or-general, was a s11mmary
rI' of the various charges made against the archbisl1op and tl1e friars in
[

15. Isabelo d e los Reyes, an ardent natio11alist, ,vl10 11onetl1 e less did not invo lYe
I l1imself i11 an)' of the o rganized political move me11ts before 1896 bt1t d evo ted himself
•
to journalism a11d the publication of va1-iot1s \VOrks 011 Philippi11e l1istory and eth11ol-
Og)', d eclared i11 l1is La sensacional 1nemoria ([Ivladrid: J. Corrales, 1899] , 101 ) tl1ac l1 e
I ,vas approached by Ra1nos and Cortes in 1888, aski11g l1i1n to sign tl1e petition a11d
join i11 tl1e ma11ifestation against tl1e friars. 011 finding tl1at it ,vas also directed against
the arcl1bishop he refused, a11d later fou11d that 11either Ran1os nor Cortes had sig11ed,
tl1 o ugl1 the latter was tl1e principal instigator. 111 treati11g of tl1e Revolutio11 and of tl1e
friars in particular, de los Reyes is ofte11 unre liable, even fantastic. Ho\veve r, Ll1ere is
• no reaso11 to doubt the accuracy of tl1is statement, since all otl1er contemporary sot1rces
!
p o int to Cortes as the author of the manifestation, though 11one could prove it. See
• tl1e expediente prepared for Cortes' deportation in 1892 i11 AHN, Ultramar, leg. 2308,
•
exp. 7, in \Vl1icl1 co11siderable e,ridence is given of l1is role as an agitator, enemy of the
fri ars and of Spaniards in ge11eral. I-Ie is here said to l1ave kept a group of paicl
\,i tr1esses wl10 ,.vo uld s,,vear to a nytl1ing he desired in tl1e frequent fraudulent ci\'i l
I
) cases in which h e v.1as involved (see also Retana, Avisos, 187, and Vida, 146).
I Jose A. Ramos had studied i11 England, \vhere he married a11 E11glish ,vife. His
' bazaar, "La Gran Bretana," i11 Ma11ila ,vas a meeti11g place for those active i11 11atio11 al-
• ist agitation , and the distributio11 ce nte r for all ki11ds of a11tifriar broaclsides aiid pa 111 _
'
JJhlets. Ramos l1ad been initiated i11to Masonr) 1 in E11gla11d and was at this tiine tl) e
on l}· Filipino adm itted into a Masonic lodge i11 tl1e Pl1ilippi11es, IJe i11g a 111 einber o f
til e Lodge "Lt1z d e Oriente," togetl1er ,•.ritl1 Cente110. See E. Arsenio Manttel, Dictionrir,•
of Philip-pine Biogra/Jliy (Quezo n City: Filipiniana Pttblications, 1955), I :353-55; AON,
leg. 219A, "R Log. Ltiz de Orie nte, N. I." Tl1e Dictionary, article is based on Rainos'
un publishecl memo irs and intervie,.vs with conten1poraries of his. \1/l1a rever part Ramos
may have t1 ad in the affair did not come to ligl1t, and he '"ras 1iot prosecuted ,,ith
Doro teo Cortes and the sign ers of the expositio11.
16. Re tana , Avisos, 1_87-89; Pas t~lls, 1\11isi~n, 2: l 90-91 . T l1 e latte r tells of Qtiiroga
calling
·
for Father Fed e rico
.
Fat1ra, d irector of the J es11it Obse rva torv ai ct se n . h'
· , , 1 • c1In g 1111
ir1 his name to the archb1sl1op.
116 Del Pilar a11d Nationalist Acti11it,1 ;

1
ge11eral in the preceding m o ntl1s. i T he former ,vas charged ,vith diso-
beyi11g the circttlars of tl1e director of Ci,ril Admini stra tion on fun er-
als becat1se of his d esire fo1· profit, as well as with disrespec t to the
a uthorit)' of the governor-general.
His disobedie n ce, the accusation continued, was due to his being a
friar. Friars, tl1roughout their history, h a,,e shown tl1e mselves h ostil e
to the com1na nds of civil authority, emboldened by their imme nse
wealth. They l1ave opposed tl1e teacl1ing of Spanish so as to be able
to better exploit the ignorant Filipino; they l1a, e protected the trai- 1

torous Chinese, as Fatl1e r H evia did in Binondo. They l1ave al,vays

been a danger to the go,,ernme11 t, a nd l1ave even deposed 01· assassi-
18
11ated governors who opposed the m, like Salcedo and Bt1stamante.
Tl1e friars, it was further charged, were drai11ing tl1e country of its
wealth tl1rough their sales of scapulars, through nove n as, etc., thus
making the people unable to pay their taxes to tl1e government. Finall)',
f1·eely quoting Canon Law and the Laws of the Indies, the petition de-
manded the expulsion of the friars from the Islands and the ha nding
over of their parishes to Filipino or Spanish secular priests, for

ambitiot1s, d espotic and ung1-ateful me11, such as they are, o nly inspire
aversion in the sons of the Philippines, who ,vill finally expel them ,io-
lently, if the go,,ernment does not do so sooner.

As for the archbishop, for being disobedient to civil authority, he

should immediately be sent, the demonstrators demanded , back to
the Peninsula.
Apart from the truth of the various accusations, som e of ,vhich
were manifestly exaggerated or distorted, the w}1ole docume nt sh o,,>s
considerable naivete. No Spanish official was likely to belie,,e that the
"gobernadorcillos, principales, y vecinos" \.\1}10 sign ed a nd preser1 ted

17. Text in Retana, At,isos, 19 1-24; also in Vitia F.spa1ia, \'iva el Rf-:.•, \ 'i11a ,I ,jn-c,10.
Fuera losfraiks [Hong Kong: n.p. 18881. pp. 9-20.
18. Governor Diego Salcedo \-Vas i111prisoned in 1668 by Lite A,tgitsrinian comi~1, · c.'-I
lhe Jnquisi tio n , Father Jose Pa te rnin a, a nd se 11t off to Mexico t o st.-ind trial, but die-d \J t 1
lhe voyage. Governor Fc rr1ando Btistan1antc, after ha,i ng in1pri.~011ed tl1e arc-hl,i.5ht,p.
was mur(le recl by a ,nob cxcilcd by the p reacl1ing of som e fri,\rs i11 lil9 ( ee Bl;\ir ,u1d
Robertson. 44: 165-81). AJso Cantius J . Koback. OFM, "Go\'ernor Btl5tamante's ..\s..~111'.!-:
An H isloricaJ Appraisal," Pltilij,pinia1t{i Stic:ra 11 ( l 9i6) : i2-l 0 3. Tl1ese t\\'O incide,1~
were often m ade tisc of tJy tl1c l•ilipino J)ropag-.i ndist.s in tl1e ir a ttacks o tl the- ftiars.
 Del Pilar and Natio11,alisl Activity 117

the docu1nent could be knowledgeable enough to quote Can on La\v

•
•
and the Laws of the Indies so copiously. Nor was an)' responsible au-
thority, anticlerical though he might be, likely to look a1niably o n the
threat to use violence to exp el tl1e friars if th e government did 11ot
act soon enough.
The upshot of the ma11ifestation thre\<v the antifriar forces into con-
fttsion. The Spanish community of Manila, and la1·ge numbers of Fili-
pinos, reacted unfavorably, particularly against the dema11d for tl1 e
exile of tl1e a1·chbishop.
At the meeting of the Junta de Atttoridades the following day, Centeno
attempted to exculpate himself. Within the week, however, he handed in
19
his resignation, which was accepted by Terre1·0 the following day.
•
The Ju11ta de Autoridades resolved to hand over tl1e entire affair to
C the courts for possible prosecution, to which Terrero ag1·eed. Even
Spaniards wl10 had shown little clerical sympathies up to the present
hastened to pay their respects to the archbishop, denouncing the mani-
festation as filibustero.
Tl1ougl1 Terrero turned the case over to the courts, he tried to
20
play down tl1e incident in his report to the Madrid government.
Centeno left for the Peninsula within a few weeks, and Terrero him-
self, whose ordinary term was at an end, departed on 25 April .
•
The acting governor-general, General Antonio Molt6, immediately
j
took steps to undo the results of antifriar activities of recent months.
Quiroga's decree forbidding funerals inside the churches was super-
seded by one which declared that until separate mortuary chapels were
built for each church with government aid, funerals could take place
21
inside the cl1urches as forrnerly. No further mention was ever made of
I

the proposed chapels, and the traditional practice was resumed.

19. The Junta m e t on 4 Mar, Cente n o resigned on 7 Mar. On 17 Ma r, te legraphic

orders cam e from Madrid, recalling him "011 commission.'' H e ,vas granted retirem e nt
from the service on his arrival in Madrid (Retana, Avisos, 355-56). The proceedings of
the Junta are in SHM, 13, 1, 3, n o. 1.
20. Jn a letter to Balaguer of 4 Mar 1888, he ,-vrote "the i1n1nense m ajority of the
indi,ridu a ls ,,vho sign ed said documents are co mpl etely foreign to th e spirit of
ftlibuste rismo revealed in it."
21. This decree actually cam e fro m T errero, sl1ortly before l1is de parture, being
published 17 Apr 1888. (Pastells, Misi6n, 2: 193.) Already in November, Balagtier had
written to Terrero ordering him to act so as to res tore good relations, ,vl,ile preserv-
in g official prestige (M BB 133:285-87) .
 11 8 Del Pi/r1r anrl Nationnli,~I Arti1Jil). 1

Fa tl1cr 1-Ievia, tl1 e pa1isl1 JJriest o f Bi 11011do, \Vas resto re d to 11is pa r-

isl1 i1nmediate l)' 0 11 tl1 c departu1·e of Te n·e ro. Tl1 e gol)cn1 adorcill os
\\1110 had sig11ecl tl1e p e tition ,vere remo,1ed f1·om office , a11 cl sulJj ectc <l
to judicial proceedin gs for "i11sult to public authority and to d e te r-
1ni11ed classes a11d co1-poratio11s of tl1e State,'' "illicit non-pea ceful m ee t-
i11 g," a 11d "falsification in a public doct1n1en t. '' 22 N1ol to ci1·ct1larize<J
tl1 e provincial governors, o,·dering tl1em to

raise th e pres tige of the cle rg)' to Ll1c l1eigh t ,vl1icl1 it has a l,va}'S had in
tl1is Arcl1ipe lago, n o l 0 111)' beca L1se o f tl1e a L1gL1SL missi o 11 \\lhi c l1 iL~ a-
er e ct n1inistry re prese11 ts, but becat1se iL \\IO L1l cl be i11 C\ 'Cf")' res p e c t i111-
prttdent to lesse11 tl1c pre rogati\·es of an e le m e nt ,vhi ch re prese n ts so
. 23
many g Ior1e s.

Tl1e judicial i11, estigation soon sl1olved tl1at the entire manife ta-
1

24
tion l1ad been the ,vork of relati, el)' fe,,, individuals. Man)' o f tl1 e
1

signatt1res ,-vere complete ly fictitious ; otJ1ers we re of incli,,iduals lo 11g

dead. Some denied that tl1e signatures ,,,ere theirs, or declared tha t
they l1ad sig11ed blank sl1eets of paper on being told that th e~· ,,·ere
sig·ning a petitio11 for the lo,vering of taxes, or a manifestati o n of

22. T l1e judicial process ,vas lo11g and co1nplicated, appare11tly ,-.·ith tl1e intentio n
to drag out tl1e case b)' tra nsferrals of jurisdiction, e tc., ,vithout ac tu;tlly pro d t1cing a
convictio n . See AH N , Ultramar, leg. 2249, exp. 43 a11d 62. See also tl1 e le tte r of Sittli'l ,1
L'Aktav,, [Pedro Serra110] to Laon g Laa11 [Rizal ] in E/J. Ri:al., 2:36-ll . ,-.i t.110\it date-.
but from 1888; De l Pilar to Rizal, 10 !\1ar 1889, tp. Pilar, 1:53. The cl1a rge o f illC'!-,Y3l
m eeti11g ,vas dismissed as a resu lt of a general a n1nest)' for certai11 o fle n es gra11tro b,·
th e qt1ee 11, and tl1 e priso11ers ,vere released ir1 early l 88~), tl1o t1gl1 still st1bjec t to pros-
ect1tio11 0 11 tl1e otl1e r l\\'O cot111 LS. It is 1101 clear ,,·he11 or if Lit t> l;1ttc r ,,·t· rt' 11 .ilh t,
droppecl, bt1t tl1cy v,re re appare ntly r1ot presse<l a11y ft1rtl1 er.
23. AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5360, usobre la rvtisi6 11 de l Cle ro. 2 1\1,lyl) 1~~8."
24. Tl1c records of tl1e judicia l investigt1ti o11s f)assc.·c.l tl1rc>ugl1 rl1c l1,\11cls llf R e t.l J\,&.
'"110 mad e a careful a11alrsis of tJ1cn1 and took abtu1c lant 11o tes. Rc ta11a ·s r1 o tc,s .in· i,,
,l

bot1n,l M S e11tit..Icd l,o "1\1a11ijf slr1,-i611 /Jntn·o1irr1 .. de 1° <le ,\·tar::.o tU JS<'j/? rn ,\t,,,,ita 1 ( . ni-,i
b11itu.elo fJo/itico). AfJ1l nll'J l on1nd os dRl prorf'so orif!j nal ( M,tni la: J a11 l 8~l0). 'l' l1is ~f S \)f ~,.1 n 1f'
300 page!-> conLL"li11s lc 11gtl1 y cxL1, 1ct~ f'ro 1n Lit e ()ri gi11,tl cioc l1n1e nts. 1o~c-tl1 c'r ,,·1 th 11\.llct ~
of Rt't.ana, all in l1is u,v11 l1 a11d,vri tir1g. At tl1c ('11cl is tl1c fclll ()\,i 11g 1101~: "l) . J. Ro<ln~,tc,
( :os tas, . .. ft1 e c11iic.-11 n1 c: JJr<·,tc'l tc>c.las las pi,~z..,1s." Rc ta11a ar111ot1 nct"d a l){>ok \\l t f1 i ht·
above title, btll fina lly JJt1blisl1 ccl it c1nl r as tl1 c sect111rl J>art o f n cc>llcc t1tJn ell his J.Ttl·
cles in tl1 c bo<>k 1\t1isos )' p,v_jrr,af, 155-:iGi . 1\ .\ n1ay t>c ~..ttl1(_'rt·<l trc)1r1 t11s i 11trod\t\."U1.lfl
( 16 1-62) , Ret.a11,, ft)t111ci l1i111st·lf t111.tt>lt· t<> }Jtll>lisl, tl1 ~ I.Jt1o k l1e llad origi1talJ, a.n-
 Del Pilar a11,d Natio1ictlist Activity 11 9
2~
gratitude to Terre ro or to the king, and oth er suc h pre tex ts. ;)
Two-thirds of tl1ose who did admit signing at all were u11 able to speak
Spanish , and th e vast majority were small farmers, day laborers, or
unemployed. Almost none of tl1e pri11cipal organizers of the affai1-
had dared to sign their 11ames to the petition. 26
De l Pilar was clearly in some way invol,,ed behind tl1e scenes in all
these activities. The variot1s expositions used in tl1e antifria1· moves,
i11cluding the ill-conceived 1 March manifestation, show unmistakable
similarities of style and content, similarities seen in later an ti friar writ-
ings of Del Pilar, particularly his La frailocracia filipina. Tl1e wo1-k of
Del Pilar, ho,-ve,,er, must have been collaboratio11 with Cortes rather
tl1an principal autl1orship since it is quite certain that Cortes actually
organized and directed the campaign in Manila. Del Pilar, moreover,
l1ad been opposed to making any attack on the archbishop in the
manifestation of 1 March 1888; so it is hardly possible for him to be
the principal author of the document. Likewise, the considerable
naivete evident in some of the documents, when compared with the
more sopl1isticated antifriar writings of Del Pilar in La soberania monacal
and La frailocracia filipina, would seem to indicate that they were pri-

noun ced because of some of the Spanish political figures involved. Unfortu11ately,
h owever, this writer ,vas unable, due to lack of time, to cl1eck the publisl1ed version
against the MS notes to any great exte11t, so as to determine ,vhat was suppressed
,vhen the study was published. The MS is in the Navarro collec tio11 in the library of
the Colegio-Seminario d e PP. Agustinos Filipinos of Valladolid, Spain.
Retana's Avisos is a book publisl1ed as part of his campaign against the Filipino
nationalists. Tl1erefore his comments and conclusions are often te11dentious: 110,vever,
used ,vitl1 care, th e book is th e best source for this whole affair and reliable as far as
tl1e actual facts are concerned.
25. Retana, Avisos, 164; Balaguer, Memaria redactada, 2:234-35. Retana's analysis sl10,vs
that out of 810 signatures, of ,vh om eight)1-five persons were n ever exan·1ined, th e re
were fifty-six who could not be identified, tl1irty-ni11e minors, twenty-t\vo ,vho cle11ied
the signature was th ei rs, sixtee n who l1ad been d ead before the docu1nent ,vas dra,v11
up. Of tl1e remaining 592, fifty-three v.1ere Ltnemployed , a11d 384 did r1 o t kno,v Spati-
ish, and therefore could n ot l1ave understood tl1e docum ent even if they I1ad read it
(229-308).
26. The only ones who cotald in an)' se nse be considered leade rs ,vJ1ose signat,1 res
appear are Doroteo J ose, gobern ad orcillo of the distri ct of Santa Cru z. and Tiano teo
Lanuza, gobemadorcillo of Binondo. H owever, tl1e 11;,u ne of Doroteo Cortes did come
out in tJ1e jtidicial proceedin gs, and l1e was tri ed togetl1er ,-vith several c1f tli e c> tll c·r
gobernad orcillos.
120 Del Pila1· and NatiorialL~l Artivif)'

111arily co1npositions of Cortes or others, though Del Pila1· probably

27
supplied co nsiderabl e data and id eas.
Rizal was still in the Pl1ilippines duri11g 1nost of this period-t1ntil
Febrt1a1)' 1888-and was certainly in tot1cl1 with some of tl1 ose ,-vho
organized the 1 Marcl1 manifestation. H e too, l1owever, had ad\ised
28
against it. He was, ho,ve,,er, active in his to"\-\rn of Calamba, organiz-
ing his family and neigl1bors to challenge in tl1e cotirts the propert)'
rights of the Dominican l1acie11da. It is not clear that there ,vas an}'
collaboration of Rizal witl1 Del Pilar in this as part of a con ce rted
campaign, though they ,vere undoL1btedly acqt1ainted with each otl1er.
But it seems certain tl1at tl1ere were al1·eady contacts between tl1ose of
Calamba and the Manila g1·oup of Cortes, and thus also with De l Pilar·s
29
followers in Malolos, at least indirectly.

An tifriar P1·opaganda

Del Pilar ,,vas meanwhile occupied ,.vith other literary activity on

t\.vo different fronts. From the end of 1887 he began to write political
articles ,.vhich he se11t to his friend and disciple, Mariano Ponce, then
a u11iversity stt1dent in Barcelona. In these articles, publish ed i11 re-

27. See Del Pilar's letter to P. Ikazama [Pedro Serrano] of 7 Mar 1889: ..sabes qu~
)'O estaba opuesto a que se atacase al P. Payo" (EfJ. Pilar, 1:50). De los Santos seen1 · to
asc ribe to Del Pilar too exclusive and predominant a role in the composirio11 of all
these antifriar ,vritings ( Philippine Review, 3:777) .
28. Accordi11g to his remark to the con1andante, Ricardo Carnicero, in Dapitan in
1892, l1 e learn ed of the manifestation while in J apa n, ,,·l1e re h e ,,ras living al the
pan-
isl1 Legation. Shortly aftenvards his f1-iends f ro rn Manila co11st1lte d l1i111 a· to ,~.h.it
course th ey sh ot1ld take , and h e re plied : ''l11asmucl1 as )'Ou h e ld tl1e ma11ife~tat1o ,,
without n1y co nse nt, you may suffer tl1 e conseqltc n ces; I ca r1not gi,·e a11y advice:- 111 tllt"

affair. " See the letter of Ca r11ice ro to Governor-General Eulo gio Despt~j o l o f :-\0 ,,~
1892, in £p. Rizal., 4:30. See also Rizal 's le tter to Blu111e ntritt. ,,·here. th ot1g h bla111111~
tl1e friars, l1e disa pproves of tl1e pretexts that ha\'e been 1.1sed to acc,1. e them t l) tl\("
goven1me nt (Ep. Rizal., 5:270).
29. Ep. Pilar, 1: 15- 1fi; Ep. f~izc,l., 2:36-4 l ; 56-58. Fo r the Cala 111ba affair. set' rh,lp-
ter 12 beltl\\'. That Riz:1 I alsc, v.ras active ir1 stirti11g ttp antifriar se ntim("n t i11 ~lanil.,
111ay be seen bv tl1e- let ter fr<) ll\ l1is fri e11d Va le 11tfn Ven tttr;t r>f 13 Jt11,, 1R~~ (t..p . Rr::.al.,
2:31): .. From wl1at I l1 ave h ea rd , it ~cc111s that YLlUr tri p t,a~ not b<..'e11 11seless, since.
according to a n1ult1a l fri c11d o f o t1111 . o r1c- ca11 ~t'<" a ,tidical cl1 a n ge ir1 111an\' fan1ilie
,vhicl1 vou visi te d ir1 ~fa r1ila; some of tl1cm rlo n (>t t',·e11 ,,·isl1 to go to ~fass ...
 Del Pilar ancl Natiorialist Activil)1 121

publican ne\\'spapers there, h e attacked the politi cal power of t11e fii-
ars in tl1e Philippines, argued against tl1e system of d e portatio n b}'
administrative decree , and presented an eloque11t defen se of Rizal's
,.Noli me tangere against the critique of Father Font, usi11g the pseu do-
nyms Piping Dilal and Plaridel.
While waging a fight in Spain against the friars and in fa,,or of
political rights, h e was working on another level in the Philippines
I
for the same ends. To counteract tl1e influen ce of Fatl1er Rodriguez'
pamphlets, he wrote, under the pseudonym Dolores Manapat, a
Tagalog p amphlet entitled Caiigat cayo, parod}ring the title of Father
Rodrfguez. In it he defended Rizal , and attacked tl1e friars as traffi ck-
30
ers in religion, adulterating the religion of Jesus, etc. Otl1er pa1n-
phlets and broadsides were circulated in Malolos a11d in Manila at
this time, and Del Pilar and his associates ,.vere responsible for tl1e ir
31
circulation, if not their actual publication.
In Malolos he kept up his campaign to destroy the prestige of the
friar parish priest and to make the townfolk hostile to him. There

30. Dolores Manapat, Caiigat cayo (Manila [?], 1888), reproduced in Sa11tos, Phili/>-
pine Review, 3:961-63. Tl1e second pa1nphlet of Father Rodriguez h ad been entitled
Guardaos de ellos, and in Tagalog translatio11 Caiingat ca)10. Del Pilar's title, n1eaning
"Keep on hooking igat," (a species of eel), is a play on tl1e title of Father Rodrigi.1ez,
,vhom h e compares to the igat.
31 . In the information given by the parish priest of Malolos, Fatl1er Felipe Garcfa,
\vhen the expediente was being prepared for Del Pilar's deportation in October 1888,
Father Garcfa m en ti ons havi ng come upon manuscript copies of an article entitled
"Dudas," being circulated in the province. This is u11doubtedly Rizal 's article in Espana
en Filipinas. H e also m entions the pamphlet Viva Espana. lliva el Rey. lliva el ejercilo.
Fuera Los Jrail£s, which was a collection of the various expositions presented to Centen o
and Terrero before and just after the manifestation of 1 Mar 1888 (Ep. Pilar, I :277).
This pamphlet h ad been published in Ho11g l(ong, probably by, or at lea.st ,,ritJ1 tlle
aid of, J ose Ma. Basa. Likewise from Basa was the broadside, also 1nentioned by FatJter
Garcia, entitled Escandaloso, horrendo, y punible delito pp,ryelrado en el Alonaslerio d, Santa
Clara Por un Fraile Franciscano, Vicario de la misma. 1'11is relates a11 i11cident, purported
to h ave taken place in 1883, which formed tl1e basis for t11 e closi11g sccr1e j 11 Rizal's
Noli me tangere. T l1e broadside con cludes: "Fuera los canallas frailcs, y ve 11~n clerigos
•
peninsulares." The rest of it is in the same se11satio11alist and d emagogic vein. That
this was printed, if 11ot composecl, by Basa, n1ay be ga thered fro1n til e letter of Ilizal to
him acknowledging receipt of a number of copies in J a nttary 1889 (/~'j,. Ri:.al., 2: IOg)_
Father Garcia mentions that th ere were reportedly otl1er surl1 writings in ci rculation in
Bulacan in 1888, bt1t that he had been able to ~ec ure copies onl)· of Lttos,.. 111 . d
· '- Cf1Ul) ll e ,
122 Del Pilc,.r and Nationalist Activity

may l1ave been private reasons for such a campaign, but later events
made clear t11at it was not perso11al hostility which was mainly involved,
but a calculated plan to liberate the people completely from all friar
.1nfl t1ence. 32
In this campaign Del Pilar and l1is associates found aid a nd protec-
tion from the provin cial governor. When press ure from the
governor-general forced the removal of the gobernadorcillo, Manuel
Crisostomo, h e was replaced by Vicente Gatmaitan, brother-in-law of
Del Pilar as well as of Cris6sto1no, a11d the latter contint1ed to enjoy the
friendship of tl1e provi11cial governor, who knew about their activities.
The fa,,orable climate and support for antifriar activities, however,
definitely ended after the steps taken by Molt6 as acting
govemor-ge11eral. The new governor-general, Valeriano Weyler, arrived
in June 1888. Weyler, tl1ough far from being clerical, firmly believed
that the friars were n ecessary for preserving the loyalty of the Filipi-
nos to Spain, a nd acted energetically to maintain their position.
Not too long after Weyle r 's arrival, Gomez Florio was removed as
governor of Bulacan, and a special investiga tion of the situation there
33
was ordered. Sl1ortly the reafter the secret administrative machinery
,-vent into action to bring about Del Pilar's deportation as "filibustero
y anti-espanol." Del Pilar was informed, very likely through Quiroga,
34
of what was coming, and prepared to make his escape. Seeing, more-

32. See th e testin1ony of Gover11or-General Ramon Blanco, where he notes that the
lead ers of Malolos had continued their effor ts to destroy the prestige of tl1e parish
priest despite tl1e ,,arious substitutions wl1ich had taken place in an effort to restore
good relations, and th at they tl1emselves had confessed that it was not the person tl1ey
,vere combatting, but tl1e friar parish priest as sucl1 (Memoria que al Se11ado dirigt ,I
General Blanco acerca de Los ultimos sttcesos ocurridos en la Isla de Li,z.6n [ !\lad rid:
Establecimiento tipografico d e "El Liberal," 1897], 146-47). See also the letter of Del
Pilar to P. Ikazama [Serra110] of 25 Mar 1889 (Ep. Pilar, 1:73-74): "It seerns tl1at the
friars think that tl1e crisis of Fray Felipe has been accidental: t11ey are mistaken. for
that ,vas al] planned against him precisely because he is tl1e most able man (s(wng
pinttka may u/,o) ir1 our province."
33. The report is in Ep. Pilt1r, l :279-84.
34. Wher1 Ma11ucl Tin1oteo de Hiclalgo. brothe r-in-la\\' of Rizal, "\\aS deporced at
about this same time, Quiroga obtained infonnation for l1im fro1n t11e governor-general
concerning tl1 e expedi en te on l1irn (l .;p. Rizal. , 2:56-57). Considering the closeness of
ilie relationship between Del Pilar arid Q tiiroga, l1 e:- wotild likely have- do11e at least as
mt1cl1. See also Santos, Plaridel, I :8.
 Del Pilar and Nationalist Activity 123

over, that tinder th e present regime there was little cha11 ce of chang-
ing the general situation from Manila, he cam e to a11 agreeme11t with
a group of likeminded me11 on tl1e n eed for l1is going to Spain to
,-vork there for reforms and liberties for the Pl1ilippines.
Del Pilar's support include d both a Manila-based organization and
35
his original Malolos supporters. Heading tl1e Comite de Propaga11da
in Manila was Pedro Serrano Lakta,v who like Del Pilar was from
36 ' ' '
the town of Bulacan. Serrano kept Del Pilar informed of events in
the Philippines, was in charge of raising and remitting funds to
support him and to carry on propaganda work in Spain, and took
care of the distribution of propaganda pamphlets and newspape1-s sent
from Spain.
Closely associated with Serrano, but apparently working in some-
what parallel fasl1ion and with some degree of indepe11dence was

35. The d escriptio n of the organizatio11 in Manila give11 in tl1e follo,ving paragraph
is based on tl1e letters betwee n Del Pilar and tl1ose aiding him from Ma11ila, dt1ring
the year 1889, in tp. Pilar, vol. 1. Since th e letters are general!)' ,v1itten in cryptic
terms, usi11g pseudonyms for both sender and recipient, presumably out of fear tl1at
tl1ey might be intercepted , a close analysis and comparison of th e con te11ts of differ-
ent le tters is necessary in order to d etermine who was active and what was being don e.
~1oreover, it is clear that many letters are missing from the collections. The pseud o-
nyins used by Del Pilar in this correspondence are: Carmelo, L. 0. Crame, M. Calero,
Plaridel, M. Dari.
36. Serrano ,-vas an e lementary school teacher , graduate of the Escuela Nor,nal. In
his le tters to Del Pilar, Serrano used tl1 e follo,-vi ng pseudo11yms: R. 0. Serna, P. Dore;
and also i11 letters to Rizal: S. (or Simon) L'Akta,v. Tl1e collection of letters in Ep.
Pilar, 1, sh ow no letters of Del Pilar to Serrano. However , it seems that all the letters
addressed to P. Ikazama (whom the editors of Ep. Pilar iden tify as Pedro Icasiano) are
actually d irected to Serrano. First of all, tl1ere are more letters to P. Ikazama than to
anyone else in Manila except Deodato Arellano. Moreover, it is clear from the con-
tents of the letters that these two are closely associated and that Ikazama occupies a
place at least as prominent as Arellano and Serrano, if not mo re so. If Pedro Icasiano
were the real P. Ikazama, h e must be one of the leaders of tl1e Propagan da Commit-
te-e, yet no mention is anywhere m ade of him i11 the sources on tl1is pe1io d. Finally, a
close comparison of tl1e matte rs treated in the letters of Del Pilar to P. Ikazama and
those of Serra110 to Del Pilar sh ows that in several cases the two must be identified.
A~ to the title "Comite de Propaganda," it is n ot completely clear wl1eth er or no t it
"-ra.5 used at tl1is early period, thougli it cer tain!)' was in the successor organi zati on
which continued th e work after th e retireme11t of Serrano (see tp. J~izal., 3:88, 20 l ,
216, 350, etc.) .
124 Del Pila.r and Natio'nalist Activity-

37
Deodato Arellano, Del Pilar's brother-in-law. He was Del Pilar's con-
fidant, and seems to have worked independently to send additio11al
fu11ds to him. He appears to have been the liaison between the ~1a-
nila Committee and the Malolos group.
Others know11 to have been active in the work of the committee
were D01-oteo Cortes, Jose A. Ramos, Gregorio Santillan, Basilio
38 . d. .
Teodoro, and Amb1-osio Rianzares Bautista. There are 1n 1cat1ons
tl1at individt1als in various Tagalog provinces maintained at least occa-
39
sional contact with Del Pilar and his activities.
The general picture is one of a small but active group who raised
funds and distributed propaganda, with a much larger number of

37. Arellano \Vas Del Pilar's most faithful correspondent, and seems to have been
l1is personal representative to the various groups aiding him from tl1e Pl1ilippines.
Later l1e ,.votild be 011e of the first organizers of tl1e Katipunan.
38. Cortes became head of tl1e Propaganda Committee in Manila, replacing Serrano,
near the end of 1889, and used the pseudonym M. Montilla (see the letter of Del
Pilar to Rizal i11 Ep. Pilar, 1:208). 111 the expediente prepared for the deportation of
Cortes in 1892, l1e is pointed out by several provincial governors as the one ,.vho
collected funds in their pro,rinces for the work of propaganda, and is declared to be
tl1e president of the junta suprema of propaganda in Manila (see AHN, Ultramar, leg.
2308, exp. 7). Del Pilar refers to Cortes in his letters as "Teo."
For _Jose A. Ramos, see note 15 above.
Sa11tillan was one of the three who accompanied Del Pilar aboard ship when he
\Vas leaving the Pl1ilippines, the otl1ers being Manuel Crisostomo, the leader of the
Malolos group, and Deodato Arellano (Santos, Philippine Review 3:789). He is appar-
ently to be identified with "Goyo," who is mentioned frequently and prominent!)' in
tl1e correspo ndence concerning the Propaganda Committee, a11d wl10 is not to be
identified with any of tl1e other kno,m associates of Del Pilar (see, e.g., the letter of
Del Pilar to Serra110 of 27 June 1889 [Ep. Pilar, 1:192]), ,vhere l1e asks the latte r to
read tl1e letter to "mi cunado [Arellano], a Teo [Cortes] , Goyo y otros." See also ibid.,
177, where Goyo is distinguished from Serrano.
Teodoro who was also from Malolos, worked with Del Pilar in tJ1e publication of
Diari.o·ng Tagalog.
Rianzares Bat1tista had been one of those deported as a result of th e events of
1872. His son Pablo was in Barcelona studying, and apparently closely associated ,,ith
Del Pilar. Tl1ougl1 clearly sharing Del Pilar's aspirations for reforms and liberties i11
th e Philippines, it is not clear wl1ether he l1ad any active part in the antif1iar acti,'ities,
tl1ougl1 he apparently was i11 frequent contact ,vith Serrano (\\·ho often disagreed ,,rith
l1im) and h elped st1pport Del Pilar financially.
39. See, for exam ple, tl1 e letter of Del Pilar to Maximo Viola, of 11 June 1889.
thanki11g l1im for the contributior1 of 011e l1 t111dred pesos received fron1 him (Ep.
 Del Pilar and Nationalist A ctivity 125

sympathizers, wl10 contributed money occasionally and wl10 bought

and spread the materials received from abroad by the propaganda
· 40
committee.
On the day b efore his departure, Del Pilar met ,-vith Serrano and
his fellow townsman , Rafael Enriquez, to compose a series of an tif1·iar
writings in Tagalog. Cl1ief among them was a mock catecl1ism and
41
prayer book, entitled Dasalan at Toksohan. T l1ough displaying its au-
thors' m astery of the Tagalog language and a certain amount of clev-
ern ess, it is a rather crude burlesque of the friars and of tl1eir religio11.
The Lord's Praye r , Ama namin in Tagalog, runs in pa rt: "O ur
step-father, who art in the convento, cursed be thy name, thy greed be
far from u s, thy throa t be cut on earth as it is in l1eaven ."
The other common Catholic prayers are similarly parodied. The Ten
Commandments are turned into the "Commandments of tl1e Friar":

1. Worship the friar above all things.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

5. Thou shalt not die without having money for the funeral.
6. Thou shalt not commit adultery with his wife.
7. Thou shalt not join him in stealing.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

9. Thou shalt not refuse him thy wife.

I 0. Thou shalt not refuse him th)' goods.

Pilar, l :171 ). Viola had lent Rizal the money to publish his novel in 1887 ,vl1en the
la tte r was without funds, and had h elped to send it back to the Philippines from
Barcelona after Rizal 's departure, but it does not seem that h e took part in a11y of tl1 e
activities in the Philippines after his return there to practice medicine in San Miguel,
Bulacan . Also, ibid., 5- 7, 34, 170.
40. Another who seems to have had a part in the work of the Propaganda Commit-
tee is D. Rafael Canlapan, the Filipino coadj utor in the parish of Malolos, ,vho is
mentioned by the p arish priest as b ei ng closely associated ,1/itl1 De l Pilar a11d his group,
and wh o m th e sp ecial commissioner to Bulacan , Manuel Dfaz G61nez, recomn1e 11 ded
to b e remove d from the town. According to a letter of R.i anzares, tl1e arcl1bis11op
refused to do tl1is , but on the latter's death, tl1 e vicar-capitt1lar immedia telv. trans-
ferred him to the province of Cavite. It seem s that h e sl1 ould be identified \vith "Ape"
who is called to Manila to m ediate i11 th e qt1arre l be twee11 th e ~1a lo los group and
Serra110, as told in the le tters of Serran o and of Goyo of 24 May and I Ju 11 e 1889 (.t/J.
Pilar, 1:133-35, 150-51, 163-64, 28 1, 48).
4 1. Dasalan at toksohan (Banal na Kasu!,ata·n , vol. 11 ; n .p., n.d.) . Cop)· in NA-PJR,
folder 467, no. 3 (microfilm roll 29) . Del Pilar appears to l1ave h ad tJie tJatnphlet
• printed in Barcelona after }1is arrival a nd se nt back to the· Propaganda Committet• iii
Manila (see t.p. Pilar, 1:66).
126 Del Pila,· an.d Nationalist Activity

Similar parodies complete tl1e prayer-book sec tio n (da.salan). Tl1e sec-
011d part (toksolian) is a series of qt1estions and answers on the nature
of tl1e friar, imitating tl1e section of tl1e catechism on the nature
of God.
A.t1other composition of tl1e three men was the Pasiong dapat ipagalab
nang puso nang tauong babasa (Pasion which ought to inflame the h eart
of the reader), a bitte1· and inflammatory attack in verse on tl1e friar,
which begi11s: "Oh f1·iar, full of cruelty, whose only thot1gl1t is to \ an- 1

quish and to overcome; oh f1~iar, ,-vitl1out pity on the blood of inno-

2
ce11t ones" and ends \-\Tith the threat of extinction by dynamite.-1
On 28 October 1888, Del Pilar left Manila for Spain, stopping in
Hong Kong, where he spent some ti1ne in the company of a sn1all
group of Filipinos led by Jose Ma. Basa, one of those exiled in 1872,
and a bitter enemy of the friars. Basa l1ad set himself up in business
in Hong Kong, and had many co11tacts \-\Tith Manila commercial firms.
Rizal l1ad already established contact \-\Tith Basa on his way back to
Europe the previous February, and Basa had become the agent for
smuggling Rizal's novel into the Philippines.
It seems likely that such pamphlets as Viva Espana, Viva el Rey, \'iva
el e_jercito, jFuera los Frailes.' and Mani.fiesta que a la noble naci6n espanola
derigen [sic] los leales filipinos ... in which the various expositions against
the friars from 1887-88 were circulated were printed through Basa's
enterprise, as a result of Del Pilar's stay in Hong Kong.
From the end of 1888, moreover, large nt1mbers of antifriar broad-
sides or proclamas, as they ,-vere called, began to be wdel)' circt1lated
in Manila and the neighboring provinces. Apparently Basa sn1uggled
them into Manila tl1rough Jose Ran1os together with merchandise,
43
and Ramos saw to their distributio11. Ramos himself seems to ha,·e
been responsible for printing some of tl1em in a clandestine press,
such as one entitled jAlerta, paisanos, alerta.', ,-vl1icl1 t1rged Filipinos no t

42. This pamphlet is reproduced i11 S,1nlos, Philippine Rroiro, 3:959-60.

43. Ep. Rizal. , 2:266: 5:295-96; Mant1e l, l)ictio1tat)', 353-55. Ho,ve,rcr, o tl\t"r mea11s
and persons wer e also used. Sec tl1 e correspondence: o f Ser ra110 ..1r1d Dt·l Pilar 0 11
sending propaganda pan1pl1le t.s to a Cl1i11esc 1nc rc)1ant ir1 Si11gapo re. ,\'h o ,,·o t1ld rl,ei,
s1nuggle the1n into Ll1c Pl1ilippines tl1ro u gh J o lo (£.p. Pilttr, 1:40, 66. 11 2. 158). :\lso
ibid., 135.
 Del Pilar and .Nationalist Activity 127

to contribute to the subscription tl1e n being taken up to l1 o n or tl1e

golden jubilee of Arc hishop Payo. 44

The Political Program of Del Pilar

Tl1e manifold activities of Del Pilar and l1is associates in the years
before h e le ft for Spain conform ed to an integrated plan having but
one immediate aim : the administration by Filipinos of their ovvn
affai1·s.
Since considerable self-go, ernme nt was, theoretically, already in op-
1

eration on the local le,,el, this was the logical starting point of Del
Pilar 's plan of action. The confrontation with the friars was bound to
take place here, precisel)' because it was at this level that tl1e friar
parish priest loomed so large as the effective embodiment of Spanish
autl1orit) Del Pilar may have had personal reasons for his animosity
1
•

tO\\'a.rd th e friars, but these seem to have played no significant part in

setting the course h e took.
\\7hen the die v. as cast, Del Pilar made his move against the parish
1

priest in Malolos. Though no t a resident of tl1at town, he chose it as

his initial targe t becat1Se he found allies there and also because l1e
felt that as a major provi ncial capita], Malolos was a strategic starting
point. It had the m ost able parish priest in the province. Defeating
him would n1ake ha ndling lesser men easier.

44. Manuel, Dictionary, 354. citing tl1e unpublisl1ed memoirs of Ramos. A letter of
Pase.ells co the Jesuit pro,rin cial in Spai11, d ated 29 Mar 1889, laments the "propaganda
inmoral y filibustero" \\•l1ich is continually on the increase, and continues: "Yesterday
I 7 indi,iduals and a cla ndestine press were discovered. It is said that a native priest is
involved" (AT ... Cartas al P. Pro\-incial"). If the report is reliable, it is difficult to kn ow
to whom tJ1e press belonged. J ust at this time the brother of Basa and anoilier Span-
iard were arrested for possessin g anti.friar propaganda, but the correspo ndence of Del
Pilar on th<- su~ject does not sh ow that any of those closely associated with him were
arrested (Ep. Pilar, 1:89-91. 92. 93-94. 94-95, 95-96, 102-3, 137) .

..
 Cl-W'TER 7

The New Filipino Newspaper in Barcelona,

1888-1889

Mariano Ponce Opens Negotiations

While Del Pilar was engaged in seeking the downfall of the friars
in the Philippines, the nationalist movement in Spain was getting on
its feet again after the fiasco of Espana en Filipinas. The antagonisms
which had rent tl1e Madrid colony and wrecked the newspaper, ho,v-
ever, were still at wo1-k, and the main scene of activity shifted from
Madrid to Barcelona. Here Del Pilar's influence, acting through his
disciple Mariano Ponce, ,-vas felt in a new movement that was des-
tined to pass eventually under Del Pilar's control.
Ponce, a native of the province of Bulacan, had been one of a
group of students in Manila who became involved in the nationalist
ferment from frequent talks with Del Pilar. Even before his departure
from the Philippines, he had already been caught up in the entl1 tisi-
asm for Filipino customs and folklore then being stimulated in ~fa-
nila, writing articles on the folklore of his l1ome province. 1
In 1887 he left for Spai11, arri,ring in Barcelo11a in June of tl1at ,rear
•
to continue his medical stt1dies. Here he quickly became acti,,e in the
nationalist movement. Seeing the languishi11g state of Espana ni
Filipinas, he took it upon himself to sencl copies to Manila, u7; 11g to
interest his friends the1·e in supporting this Filipino organ . Tl1otigt\
the funds arrived too late to sa,,e the paper, inter-est ir1 tl1e project
had been aroused in Ma11ila, and Ponce \Vas encot1raged to ,,·or·k ft.,r
the 1·evival of I~sjJfLil.a en Filipirtas.

-·- - - -
1. Po11ce. /ifp111irirl,s, 28 1.

128
 New Filipino Neruspa.per 129

Infected by the nationalist contagio11 spread by Del Pilar back in

Manila, Ponce seem s to have undertaken som e journalisti c ac tivity on
behalf of the Philippines. Beginning in January 1888 articles e ntitled
"Cart.as de Filipinas" began to appear in the Barcelona newspap er La
Publicidad, already known for its sympathy to the Filipino group. Tl1ese
ule tters," dealing with Del Pilar's activities in the Philippines a nd prais-
9
ing Quiroga's efforts at reform, are almost certainly Ponce's ,vork. -
I
He seems to have had little confidence in his own writing ability, how-
I
ever, and soon ceased to write, but remained active in having articles
sent him by Del Pilar published. He also took over from Maximo
Viola, who was returning to tl1e Philippines, the responsibili ty of send-
3
ing copies of Rizal 's Noli into the country.
Ponce devoted his main efforts, however, to providing an organ of
' Filipino opinion in Spain. As a result of his appeal to the Philippines
for funds to sustain Espana en Filipinas, interest had been aroused among
the group associated with Del Pilar, and Pedro Serrano wrote to Po11ce
asking that the fo1111er staff of the defunct newspaper draw up an esti-
mate of costs for a new or revived paper. At Ponce's request, Lete drew
up the estimate and had a circular printed, which was sent to the
Philippines for the purpose of soliciting funds for the new enterprise.
Lete naturally assumed that he would again be editor of the paper,
but it soon became apparent that the resentments over Espana en
4
Filipinas were yet astir. In Spain and in Manila, Rizal was generally

2. Ep. R izal., 2:15. In this le tter of 22 June 1888, to Rizal, who had been urging
him to write for the newsp apers, Ponce speaks of having already published articles i11
a certain newspaper of Barcelona. The paper with which the Filipinos h a d alread)'
mad e contact there, through Migu el Morayta, was La Publicidad, the organ of the
Pos.sibilist Re publicans. In this pape r appea r three articles on the even ts in Mai1ila,
signed by "N.," entitled "Carta de Filipinas" (7 Jan, 18 Mar, 6 Apr 1888) . Since these
correspond to the pe riod spoken of by Ponce, and sin ce the la tter freqt1ently ttsed tlle
pseudonym Naning in his la ter writings, it seem s logical tha t "N." sh ould be Ponce,
who would h ave received the data in le tte rs from De l Pila r 0 1- Serran o.
3. Ep. Rizal., 2:7, le tter of Rizal from San Francisco, California, to Ponce in Barce-
lona, dated 20 Apr 1888. This was the first communication o f Rizal to Po n ce, ackno,vl-
edging a letter of congratulations the latter l1ad sent him o n l1is Noli. There seeins to
have been no formal organization in Barcelona, thougl1 the Filipino col
. . . . . . ony some-
umes acted collecuvely, tinul th e foundation of the association "La Solidaridad" on
1
Jan 1889. Viola had si mply represented Rizal, a11d Ponce took over fron1 h 1m .
.
4. Ep. Rizal., 2:68-69, Ponce to Rizal; 80-8 1, Lcte to Rizal· Pon ce 1,·r. • .d fi.<J
, , 1.:.J nnm r.s 1 :1-
64. The la tter version, h owever. glosses over tl1 e e nmities a nd stru ggles invc>lvect.'
130 New Filipino Netvspaper

fa,,ored as editor. Ponce wrote to him on 6 October 1888 asking if h e

in te nded to 1·emain in England. If l1e we re to come to Spain, most
Filipi11os would want him as editor.
Rizal replied from London, declining the honor, since he wished
to devote himself to further study of the Philippines and its history to
prepare for writing 011 the country's problems. Solid scholarly prepa-
ration , he stressed, was needed for the struggle which lay ahead, so as
to be able not only to car1~ on the st1·uggle, but "to rout the enemy."
For sucl1 study there was no better place than the British Museum
5
with its priceless collectio11s.
During October various members of the Madrid colony went to
Barcelona to see the exposition then taking place, and conferred with
Ponce on the difficulties involved in the question of editorship.
Antonio Luna returned to Madrid determined to prevent Lete from
assuming the position, and made a new appeal to Rizal to accept it.
When Rizal's 1·eply appeared to leave an opening for acceptance,
Luna wrote back assuring him that of the thirty Filipinos who met
together in Madrid, at least twenty-five were for him, and the opin-
ions of the other five were unknown. If elected with virtual unanim-
ity, would he accept? If Rizal were unwilling, Luna declared himself
ready to elect Llorente, for Lete 's triumph would only mean further
schisms in the colony. Ponce too, apparently convinced by Luna, wrote
that he sensed general opposition to Lete, and urged Rizal to accept,

5. Ibid. , 54, 55-56. In explaining l1is refusal Rizal makes an interesting re111ark
about being "ya comprometido o poco menos a dirigir uno." Just what this othe r
ne,vspaper may have been is somewl1at mysterious, tl1ougl1 it is possibly ,vl1at Rizal is
referring to i11 his letter to Blume11tritt of 9 Sept 1888, in ,vhich he speaks of Ramos
as "the one ,,vho wished to publish a review" (ibid., 5:302). The most plat1sible expla-
natio n is tl1at Ramos had spoken to Rizal on the st1bject of a ne,vspaper wl1ile t11e
latter was in tl1e Philippines in 1887, but before tl1 e 11egotiations were begun by Po11ce
from Barcelona for the revival of Espana en f zl ipi1ias or a successor to it. Since no
further mentio11 is ever mad e of another paper, it is reasonable to suppose tha t Ran10s
had joined with the rest of tl1e Manila supporters of Ponce, who likewise ,va11ted Ri zal
as editor. Since tl1 e latter l1ad bee11 o ut of con tact witl1 d evelopme n ts i11 Spai11 a11d
Manila, l1e wo uld l1ave been u11a,,vare that tl1 e 11e,,1 o rgan proposed by Ra1nos ,,-as
identical witl1 that being spoke n of by Ponce. Tl1is is co11firmed by tJ1 e pains that
Antonio Luna took i11 th e letter cited be low to emph asize that th e editorship being
offered was of a new paper , not a mere re,rival of E:,pa1ia m l·'ilipinas, "aque] d esastroso
ensayo," which was respo r1sible for tl1e present disu11ited state of ilic Filipinos in Spain.
 New Filipino NewsjJajJer 131

though he realized tl1at his studies i11 London were of g1·eat impor-
6
tance for the Philippines.
In spite of these appeals, Rizal seems to have hesitated, partly because
of l1is desire to continue studying in London , pa1·tly because past expe ri-
ence led him to doubt the usefulness of a Filipino paper in Spain or of
I
political activity outside the Philippines in general. He would ra_?1er de-
1
vote himself to the political and cultural education of his people.
I
I
Lete, meanwhile , had received a letter from Antonio Regidor i11
• London , telling of disquieting divisions i11 the various Filipino colo-
nies in Europe over the opposing candidacies of Lete and Llorente,
and urging him in the interests of peace to resign in favor of Rizal.
Whether this action of Regidor was taken in conce1·t with Luna or
whether it was a feeler inspired by Rizal (who was in close contact
with Regidor at this time), it seems to l1ave precipitated tl1e crisis.
Lete was now fully aware of the opposition to himself. Though h e
declined Regidor's suggestion, he decided to relinquish tl1e post of
8
editor after conferring with Ponce in Barcelona.
On the other hand, Rizal had become convinced, either through
Regidor or through other correspondents in Madrid, like Aguir1·e,
that opposing his candidacy to Lete's would only deepen the divisions
in the Filipino colony. Without waiting to hear from friends wl1ose
advice he had sought on the matter, Rizal renounced further interest
in the editorship.
He refused, however, to name his choice between Lete and Llorente,
since the latter was his friend and he resented Lete's refusal to review

6. Ep. Rizal., 2:58-61, 62-65, 69.

7. See the letter of Rizal to Blt1men tritt on I Nov 1888, expressing l1is doubts and
asking advice (ibid., 5:324). Also the sentiments along these lines expressed by Evaristo
Aguirre in a letter to Rizal of 26 June 1888; and in 011e of Valentf11 Ventttra, of 23
Nov 1888 (ibid., 2:16-18, 86-87). Neitl1e r of th ese men took a11y part i11 La Solidarida<l
after its foundation, thougl1 Ventura was later to put up tJ1 e ft1nds necessary for Lile
publication of Ri zal's second novel, El Filibuslerisrno. From the co11text of cl1e corre-
sponde n ce, it seem s that botJ1 me n felt that Rizal sl1ared thei r icleas on til e 11 ecessity
of carryin g on the work of propaganda in the Philippi11es, a nd the ft1tility o f attempt·
•
ing it in Spain (ibid., 2:16-18; 86-87). Earlier, Aguirre l1ad placed more faitll iil tile
reform propaganda in Europe, more so than Rizal.
8. Ibid., 2:80-84, Le te to Rizal, 11 Nov 1888. [n a 110 Le written i11 1929, jttst before
the publication of Rizal's lette rs, Lele, tl1e11 residing ir1 ~1adrid . g;ive a slig11tl)' difl'c• r-
ent version (ibid., 92-93, footnote ). with furtl1cr details. ·
132 New Filipin,o Newspaper

the Noli in Espana en Filipinas and to publish some of his articles. By

supporting Llo1·ente against Lete or taking the position himself, he
would seem to be spiting Lete. Having made this renunciation, Rizal
proceeded to show the depth of his resentment by declaring that if
Lete were chosen editor, he would not contribute to the paper, though
he would give it moral support. 9
The divisions within tl1e Filipino colony could scarcely have been
sharper or more bitter. Presumably Llorente too refused to accept
the editorship of the paper since there is no further mention of him .
Early in December, Rizal showed himself somewhat disposed to re-
co11sider his decision on learning that the Filipino colony wanted him
in spite of his 1·enunciation. Shortly thereafter he made a short trip to
Barcelona, where he met Ponce personally for the first time and re-
newed contacts with Lopez Jaena, Fernando Canon, and the other
10
members of the Filipino colony there. Undoubtedly the question of
the newspaper was among the subjects discussed, judging from the
quickening pace of subsequent events.

The Filipino Colony of Barcelona

By Christmas, Rizal was back in London. At the traditional New

Year's Eve banquet in Barcelona, a new organization called "La
Solidaridad" was founded, with Galicano Apacible as president, Lopez
Jaena as vice-president, Manuel Santa Maria as secretary, Ponce as
treast1rer, and Jose Ma. Panganiban as auditor. Rizal was elected hon-
orary president. Rizal's letter accepting the latter distinction sho\vs
that the purposes of the society were fairly general, but designed to
11
promote Filipino nationalist interests.
Previously the Barcelona colony had launched tentative efforts to
work for the homeland, particularly in October 1888, ""hen the Colo 11, -
•
l1eld a banqt1et to honor Morayta and Manuel Labra, two Spaniards
who had joined a group of Filipinos from Madrid to fo1·m tl1 e
Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina to advocate refor1ns for the Pl1ilippines.

9. Rizal to Antonio Luna, ibid., 73-74; Rizal to Ponce . ibid., 74-75: Rizal to
Blumentritt, ibid .. 5:339-41.
10. Ibid .. 5:362-63, 369.
11 . lbid., 2: 102-3, 11 2-13.
 Nerv FilijJino NewsjJaper 133

The organizers of the banquet seem to l1ave been Ponce and Lo p ez

_Jaena, who had recently made Ba1-celona his reside nce. To tur11 th e
banquet into a propaganda tool for the ends of the association , lead-
ing journalists had been invited. This was a tactic adopted in Madrid in
earlier years, and would be resorted to more frequently in tl1e future.
The speeches extolled cooperatio11 between Peni11sulars and Filipinos,
all sons of a common Mother Spain, and reiterated the need to extend
to the Philippines the 1ights and liberties that belo11ged to all Spania1-ds.
Lopez Jaena in particular, in what was apparently the principal speech ,
denounced in impassioned rl1etoric the exploitation of tl1e Isla11ds by
the horde of functionaries and fria1-s, by whom , he declared , the Filipi-
nos had "for three hundred years been oppressed, degraded, condemned ,
and tor 111ented." Let the friars be expelled totally from tl1e Islands, and
the Philippines will become "the paradise of humanity on earth." Ponce ,
Canon, Lete, and others asked for refo1ms in somewhat more moderate
tones, declaring that in the Pl1ilippines there were no filibuste1·os, only
12
loyal sons of Spain seeking necessary refo1 111s.
A few days late1· the Madrid newspaper La Voz de la Patria com-
mented sarcastically that it was not strange to find the Masons Morayta
and Labra taking part in a banquet directed agai11st the religious or-
ders, but this was hardly to be expected of Filipinos ,-vho professed
themselves Catholics and loyal sons of Spain. Such is the result, the
article declared, of the attitude of certain authorities in the Philip-
pines, who, instead of aiding the patriotic work of the religious or-
ders, apparently propose to assist the rapidly increasing number of
filibusteros there to plunge these precious jewels of Spain into a dis-
astrous civil war.
In the next two weeks there were further articles arguing that the
friars were necessary for Spain to l1old the Philippines. To seek t11eii·
expulsion was merely the first step of a filibusterismo disgt1ising itself
13
under a cloak of patriotism. To these efforts to ide11tify all attacks

12. The announceme nts of the banque t and tJ1 e account of it are to b e fottl\d in
the "Cronica general" of La Publicidad, 27, 28, 29 O ct 1888; a11d esp ecially tl, e article
.. Una fiesta familiar," ibid., 29 Oct 1888. It ,viii be recalled that ~1o ra,,..,. ,......... a
• \•• " u.3 corrt'-
spondent, ,1nd apparently partowner of /.,a Pu.blicidad, a11d tl1is a ccO llnL, fo r th e Stlb-
n
stantial amount of pt1blicity given to tJ1 e banqt1e t a11d tl1 e speecl,c-s. 1e ftlll rcx t of
Lopez Jaen a's speech is give n in l)iscursos, 40-45.
'
13. 30 O ct 1888, 6 N ov 1888, 12 Nov IH88.
l 34 Nezv Filipin,o NewsjJaper

011 the f1-iars ,-vith an anti-Catholic revolutionaI)' movement against

Spai11, Lo pez J aen a and Morayta replied in La Publicidad with ft1rther
obscuri11g of the issues, declaring that there was no relation at all be-
tween being opposed to friars and being opposed to Catholicism, much
14
less with any sedition against tl1e mother country. This was to be the
major point of the journalistic polemic of the succeeding years, into which
both sides ,.vot1ld submerge n1any of the other real issues at stake.
Around the end of November or the beginning of December,
Benigno Quiroga returned from the Philippines, having been replaced
as director of civil administration. His relations with Governor-General
Weyler had been strained, but when he was re placed by a new politi-
cal appointee, he was offered instead the position of intendente. This
Quiroga declared himself willing to accept only on condition that he
be given a free l1and to institute various reforms, among which was
15
the expropriation of the lands of the friars. Most likely he deliber-
ately imposed conditions he knew would not be granted, but in any
case he ,.vas given a commission for the Peninsula.
On his arrival in Barcelona the Filipino colony held a banquet in
honor of Quiroga and of Manuel Gomez Florio, the civil governor of
Bulacan who had cooperated with Del Pilar in his antifriar activities
in Malolos. Lopez Jaena's speech, the only one preserved, is a violent
attack on the friars in the gt1ise of a panegyric on Quiroga. The latter
was exalted as a worthy successor to Mendizabal and Antonio Romero
Ortiz, and proclaimed the "legendary hero of future Filipino liberties."16

The Founding of "La Solidaridad"

These banquets marked the return of Lopez Jaena as an active p ar-

ticipant in Filipino nationalist activities. Though he showed little abil-
ity as a leader or organizer, he was so active in his relatio ns witl1
Spanish republican circles and so charged with fiery eloquence as writer

14. 11 Nov 1888 (Discursos, 192-95) ; 20 Nov 1888.

15. Lopez J aena, "Discurso pro nun ciado e n e l banque te dado en e l H otel
lnte rn acio11al por el ex-Direc tor de Ad1ninistraci611 Civil Sr. Quiroga Ballesteros:·
Discursos, 46-49.
16. Juan Alvarez Mendizaba l, as First Mi11iste r i11 1836, had co ruiscaled the prop-
e rty of tl1e religious orders; Anto11io Rom e ro Ortiz, as tv1inistro de Gracia y Jt1stic ia in
1868, l1 ad decreed the a lJolition of re ligious orders.
 New Filipino Newspaper 135

that he was eyed as a possibility when the negotiations for Riz!11, Lete,
11
or Llorente as editor of the p1·ojected n ewspaper had failed. At this
point Po n ce and others of tl1e Barcelona colony seemed to l1ave de-
spaired of resolving tl1e divisions whicl1 rent the colony of Madrid,
and decided to found a newspaper on their own resources while a,-vai t-
ing the expected funds from Manila.
In early January they started setting up the newspape1·, each of the
group subscribing a certain number of shares, according to his re-
sources. Ponce and Pablo Rianzares, son of Ambrosio Rian zares
Bautista who worked with Del Pilar in Manila, seem to have been the
principal supporters. Lopez Jaena, wl10 was without funds, as usual ,
18
was to contribute his services as editor. Del Pilar arrived in early
January 1889, and quickly joined in the project, working behind the
scenes stimulating and inspiring the others.
The first number of the periodical apeared on 15 February, bearing
the title La Solidaridad, and subtitling itself Quincenario denwcratico. In its
first article, "Nuestros prop6sitos," it defined its program as follows:

to combat all reaction, to impede all retrogression , to applaud and ac-

cept every liberal idea, to defend all progress; in a word: one more
propagandist of all the ideals of democracy, aspiring to make d emoc-
racy prevail in all the peoples both of the Peninsula and of the over-
•
seas provinces.
I

Though it would interest itself in the general affairs of the nation,

its particular concern ,-vould be Spain's overseas provinces, Cuba,
Puerto Rico, and especially the Philippines. Since the latter still lacked

I 17. In O ctobe r 1888 Antonio Luna was trying to raise money among the Filipinos
in Europe for the support of Lopez Jaena, and Ventura was speaking of the possibili ty
of raising e n o ugh money each month to enable him to conti11ue his studies. Tlle
following month, Ventura on a visit to Barcelo11a, found him "muy cambiad o, con
muchas ganas d e trabajar" a.nd with expectations that Morayta would get him a post
on the staff· of La Publicidad. In J anuary Ponce wrote to Rizal that l1e was puttir1g a,vay
on deposit twenty-five pesetas sent to Lopez Jae na, lest h e squand er ll1em, a nd agairl
be left without resources. H e adds in explanation: "co11oces el caracter derrocllador de
este infeliz paisano nuestro." In spite of the turbt1lent, spendthrift, erratic character of
tlie man, however, }1e seems to l1ave excited considerable sympatl1y and a certain adnli-
ration from many of h is countryme11, at least for l1is gifts as a speaker and writer.
,.. 18. Ponce, Efemerides, 164; Artigas, "Los peri6dicos filipinos," Biblioteca Nacional
Filipina, 24 May 1910.
136 Ne:w Filipino Net.uspafJer

pa rliam e ntary re presentation, it most dese rved to have its problems

and needs exposed to public attention. "That population of eight mil-
lion sot1ls is not to be, ought not to be, the exclusive patrimony of
the theocracy and of traditionalism."
This first issue included an analysis of European and American poli-
tics by Lopez Jaena; an article on the teaching of Spanish in the Phil-
ippines by Del Pilar, blaming the inadequacy of the present system
on the influence of the friars on whom the teachers depended for
their livelihood; a section entitled "Ecos de Ultramar"; another for
official documents; and still another entitled "Cronica."
The "Ecos de Ultrama1·" was an account of the request of the young
women of Malolos addressed to the governor-general for per1nission
to open a night school in which they might learn Spanish . The offi-
cial section contained a decree recently published by the overseas min-
ister, Manuel Becerra, ordering ft1ll compliance with the decree of
1883 requiring that Spanish be taught in all the scl1ools. The chroni-
cle contained various items on Philippine or Cuban affairs, as well as
a notice of recent republican activities in Barcelona.
The following issue showed an increase from eight to twelve pages,
but two-thirds of this was devoted to a speech by Lopez Jaena, on the
Philippine exhibits in the recent Exposition of Barcelona. Decrying
the ineptitude and malice which, l1e charged, were responsible for
the miserable showing, he proceeded to denounce the friars as re-
sponsible for the ills preventing a country so rich in resources as the
Philippines from being a source of prosperity and pride to Spain.
Another article by the same writer on the inaction of the Liberal gov-
ernme11t now in power, one by Del Pilar refuting the contention that
friars were needed to maintain Spanish sovereignty in the Philippines,
and some minor items completed the issue.
These themes formed the basic pattern of succeeding issues;-an
article on general Spanish politics, usually by Lopez Jaena, one or
more articles attacking the friars by Del Pilar or others, and one 011
19
other needed reforms in the Philippine situation. The political arti-

19. The articles of Del Pilar can be identified from the bibliograph}' b)' Po nce
reproduced in De los Santos' biography. Lopez Jaena 's are identified by the ir inclu-
sion in his Discursos. The principal reforms discussed by Del Pilar include press cen-
sorship, pt1blic instructi on, civil registration o f births. marriages and d eatl1s, mun icipal
gove rnment, etc.
 New Filipino Newspaper 137

cles were gen e rally highly critical of the Sagasta government, as befit-
ted Lopez Jaena's republica11 affiliation , and the frequent favorable
refere n ces to republican figures , meetings, newspapers, etc., gave the
20
paper a definitely republican outlook.
The articles i11 the first two issues were all unsigned, as those by
21
Filipinos would continue to be for some time. In the third number
began a series of letters from correspondents abroad, beginning with
those entitled "Carta de Filipinas" by D. A. Murgas and "Carta de
:
I Borneo" by L. 0 . Crame. Both authors' "names" were Del Pilar's pseu-
I
I
I donyms. The "letters" were based on data received from Pedro Serrano
I

I and Jose Ma. Basa. The correspondence with Basa accounts for the
I
frequent reference to articles in the Hong Kong Telegraph. These arti-
cles were written for the Hong Kong paper, or at least inspired, by
Basa, who received material for the articles either from the Philip-
pines directly or from Del Pilar, the articles being translated into Span-
I ish to be ~ublished in turn in La Solidaridad as representing "foreign
2
•• opinion." Another section which began in the third number, called
I
•
1
"Letras y Artes," had a sonnet addressed to the young wome11 of
t

l Malolos and an essay on the role of a free press in the development

!
I
of thought for the benefit of humanity.
i
I
I
A final section "Bibliograffa," with its review of the book Cuestiones
•
filipinas by Eduardo P. Casal, one of the Filipino collaborators of Espana
I
•
en Filipinas, showed the marked difference in orientation between the

20. Del Pilar, writing to Serrano after the second issue and discussing the oppor-
I
l
tuneness of affiliating ~vith one of the Spanisl1 parties, notes that on the appearance
of the first number ulos posibilistas nos llaman 'posibilistas,' y los zorrillistas, 'zorrillistas' ;
y los autonomistas nos conceptuan 'autonomistas"' (L. 0. Crame to P. Ikazama, Ep.
I
Pi/,ar, 1: 51). See also the letter, ,vritten under the pseudonym Carmelo, where he
speaks of the invitations he has had from the zorrillistas, to whose party Lopez Jaena
be lo nge d, to affiliate with them; and his evasive answer (ibid., 64) .
21. All of Rizal 's articles bore his name, with the exception of some literary pieces,
signe d Laong Laan. In a letter of 22 June 1889, he wrote to Del Pilar urging t11at all
sign their names to their articles, so that the Filipinos, seeing tl1eir courage, might
h ave more courage themsel,,es to defy their enemies, and that the latte r might be
frigh tene d at the sight of the young Filipinos' willingness to suffer and even die for
the sake of their c~unt~ (Ep. Pilar, 1:184). ~eginning \vith tl1e number of 30 Sept,
De l Pilar be gan to sign h1s name, but rarely did any of th e others follow this ex
amp1e,
d urin g this pe riod a t leasL
,l 22. See Ep. Pilar, 1:123, 176.
138 New Filipino Nervspaper

former Filipino paper and La Solidaridad. After a slightly incredulous

reference to Casal 's thesis that the friar was at least a necessary evil in
the present state of tl1e Philippines, the reviewer takes sharp issue
with l1is statements on Philippine culture and with his proposals to
teacl1 Philippine languages in preference to Spanish in the schools,
refuting him with a quotation from one of his own articles of 1887 in
Espana en Filipinas.

Ne\\ Collaborators
1

Gradually the group of collaborators with the paper grew. Though

the official staff was composed of Lopez Jaena as editor and Mariano
Ponce as business manager, Del Pilar did yeoman service in organiz-
ing the paper and in writing or coaxing from others an increasing
number of articles. Damaso Ponce appears to have participated for a
short time , and Jose Ma. Panganiban became a regular contributor
23
beginning with the third issue. His series of articles on the Univer-
sity of Santo Tomas, beginning with the fifth number, was a carefully
worked out, hostile critique of the University, attacking its inadequate
facilities, antiquated methods, and unprogressive system of education.
Rizal had offered his collaboration while the paper was being or-
ganized, and sent some of his earli er literary articles and poems to
help provide material, promising further serious historical articles based
24
on the studies he was then making in London. But before Rizal

23. Damaso Po11ce was a cousin of Mariano. The only article known to be his is
one signed by Amado Pecson (the anagram of l1is name) , "Vox populi," La Solidaridad,
15 Feb 1889, attacking tl1e friars as false patriots, endangering the love of tl1e Filipi-
nos for Spain. See Ep. Pilar, l :88. Damaso Ponce later disappeared from Madrid leav-
ing heavy debts, to tl1e shame of the Filipino colony (See Tomas Arejola-Rizal , 9 Feb
1891, Ep. Rizal , 3:160).
Panganiban was a 1nedical st11dent from the province of Camari11es, and appare11tly
one of the most diligent and promising students amo11g the Filipinos ir1 Europe. H e
soon overtaxed himself, and died of tuberculosis in August 1890 (see tl1e obituary
article on him 'Jose Panganiban," La Solidaridad, 31 Aug 1890; and the se1;es o f arti-
cles devoted to him, ibid., 30 Sept 1890.
24. Ep. Pilar, 1:24; 29; 35; Rizal-Plaridel, 4 Feb 1889, Plaridel-Laong Laan, 1i Feb:
Laong 1.aan-Plaridel, 22 Feb. The poem, "Me piden versos," from 1882 appeared on
31 Mar 1889; "Los viajes," which had appeared in the Diariong 1agalog in 1882, on 15
May 1889, both under the pseudon)'ITI of Laong Laa11.
 New Filipino Newspaper 139

could work on th ese, he was forced to make use of his knowledge of

Philippine h istory in a series of pole mic articl es against various d e-
tracto rs of the Filipinos or defe nde rs of the friars. Apparently Del
Pilar sent him a rticles which he wanted answered. Though Rizal com-
plied , he expressed distaste for pe tty polemics. He preferred to take
up a subj ect a nd treat it in depth, without disdaining an occasional
rapie r-thrust of e rudition against a pretentious opponent. 25
Such was l1is answe r to the El teatro tagaw of Vicente Barrantes, the
Spanish academician who, because of his years in the Philippine admin-
. istration , passed for something of an authority in Spain on things Fili-
I

pino. Ince nsed by Barrantes' denial of all originality in the literature of

the pre-Hispanic Filipinos and, indeed, of the Filipinos' possessing intel-
lectual capacity of any kind, Rizal wrote a satiric and devastating critique
26
of Barra11tes' work. Laying bare Barrantes' ignorance of Philippine his-
tory in spite of all his pretensions, Rizal proudly vindicated the values to
be found in the indigenous Filipino dramatic work.
For the all-knowing Spanish academician looking down his nose at
all that was Filipino, Rizal had only contempt:

The greatest insult of Your Excellency is an honor for my race .. . .

Calumniate us, denigrate us, place us in the lowest step of the zoologi-
cal scale, it makes no difference to us ... the descendants of those "'rho
poure d out their blood for Spain, for her flag, for the extension of her
domains in the Orient, for the preservation of her colonial empire
against Chinese, Japanese, Mohammedans, Dutch, Portuguese, and Eng-
lish ... . We will continue our path, loyal to Spain, as long as those who
direct our destinies have a spark of love for our country, as long as
tl1ere are ministers who implant liberal reforms, as long as the shouts

25. Ep. Pilar, 1:1 86, Rizal-Del Pilar, 22June 1889. See also the later letter of 12 Aug
189 1: "francamente no me gusta perder el tiempo atacando y luchando con empresas
particulares com o la del P. Font, Quioqt1iap y otros. Yo lucho por la naci6n, Filipinas"
(ibid., 248).
26. Barrantes m akes su ch statements as the following: "Pierden el tiempo los que
buscan en las historias d e Filipinas datos que demuestran la poten cia intelectual de la
raza tagala" (5 ); "Razas de aluvi6n , por decirlo asf, pertenecientes a los ultimos grados
de la escala h u mana, faltas de virilidad y espontaneidad" ( 11 ); "este embri6n [of the
Tagalog drama l , como tod os los escasos elementos civilizadores que h an p odido
aclimatarse en tierra tan movediza y exotica, del gran tron co espanol procede y lleva
el s.ello caballeresco-mfstico de nuestra raza" ( 17); an d other staten1en ts equally ri-
diculo us and insulting to th e Filipin os.
140 Ner.u Filipino NewsjJaper

of invective do not blot ot1t from our m emories tt1e naines of Legaspi ,
Salced o, Carried o , a11d especially those of tl1e Catholic Kings ivho pro-
27
tected from afar the unhappy Mala)'S of th e Philippines!

Another ardent d efe nde r of the Filipinos against the m eth o dical
de nigrators of their race ,.vas Ferdinand Blumentritt, the Austrian pro-
fessor, who was to become one of the m ost assiduous collaborators of
La Solidaridad. Blumentritt had corresponded with various Filipinos
who had written some thing on th eir country, sucl1 as T . H . Pardo d e
Ta,,era, Edt1ardo Casal, Isabelo d e los Reyes, Jose Ma. Pa nganiban ,
and partict1larly Rizal.
The correspo11dence of Rizal and Blumentiitt, begun in 1886, had
quickly ripened into close friendship . Blumentritt wa1·mly admired Rizal 's
talents, and his ge11uine interest in the Filipino people moved the ardent
nationalist to profound gratitude, enriching the intellectual esteem in
which Rizal held the Austrian professor. Rizal visited Blumentritt in 1887
at his home in Leitmeritz, Bohemia. Their increased rapport dre\\'
Blumentritt irresistibly into the Filipino nationalist struggle.
Before he knew Rizal, Blumentritt had corresponded with some
friars and a number of Jesuits in the Philippines, and had n o thing
but praise for the work of the religious orders there. In an earl)' letter
to Rizal, he had admonished him for his religious views and had taken
issue with his criticism of the friars . Later, though apparently a good
Catholic, he came to accept to a large extent Rizal's views on the
friars in the Philippines, and joined in the Filipino campaign. On
arriving in Europe Del Pilar began \\rriting to Blumentritt, and soon
had the latter contributing articles to La Solidaridad also. 28
His first article, "Carta de Austria-Hungrfa: Quioquiap jt1zgado por
un profesor Bohemio," appeared in the fot1rth nt1mbe r, and '"as t)-pi-
cal in many ways of the articles Blumentritt was to kee p writing right
up to the death of La Solidaridad in 1895. Blt1me ntritt takes his posi-
tion as the cl1ampion of "the noble and valiant Spanish natio n ~ against

27. J ose Ri zal, "Excmo. Sr. D. Vice11te Barrantes," 15 Ju11e 1889: 30 Jt1ne 1889. fh
p assage quo red l1e re is from p . 110.
28. Rizal advised De l Pilar to se11d COJ>ies of eacl1 isst1e lo Blu1nc ntritt 1 a11ct soo,1
the latter was o fTeri11g data to Del Pilar fo r artic les. By ~tav, Del Pilar \vas se11ding
adverse articles fro1r1 Spa11isJ1 and PJ1ilippi11c papers to Blwne11tritt to l>e a ,m,7er~d
(l;;p. Pilar, 1:35, 5tl , J 3 1).
 New Filipino Newspaper 14 l

such degenerate sons as Quioquiap, who, in their ignoran ce or mal-

ice, reject the traditional Spanish colonial policy of assimilation with
specious appeals to tl1e efficient policy of the Dutch in Java or of th e
British in India .
•
•

Spain must fulfill h e r great mission, her duties, her promises dating
from the conquest of the Philippines. Spanish legislation detests and
abominates the distinction of a dominant race from one which is domi-
nated; the noble and beneficent mother country knows only Spaniards.
The Philippines is an integral part of the fatherland, not a possession ,
and is united by the same religion, the same civilization, the same de-
sires, the same aspirations, an identical patriotism; it only lacks the com-
mon language, but this defect is to be attributed to that omnipotent
caste \vhich has put obstacles to the ardent desire of tl1e poor far1n er:
to speak the language of the castila.

Since Spain's colonies exist only for· the civilization and Christianiza-
tion of their inhabitant.s, Spain must not and cannot resort to tl1e
system of maintaining the prestige of the master race adopted in the
British and Dutch colonies to exploit their resources.
Spain's traditional colonial policy of assimilation was to be a con-
I
stant theme in Blumentritt's broadsides in La Solidaridad against
superpatriot.s like Quioquiap, Barrantes, and Retana. His journalistic
sallies against Hispanic chauvinism and racism were formidably sup-
• ported by historical erudition. Closely related to his recurrent theme
was his vigorous defense of the capacity of the Filipino, and of the
non-European races in general, against the aspersions of Quioquiap
and company. His scholarly studies of the Philippines and of the Ori-
ent, as well as his acquaintance with Filipinos like Rizal, Del Pilar, De
los Reyes, and others, had disposed him to identify himself with Fili-
pino aspirations. It is hardly surprising to find not only his polemic
articles in La Solidaridad, but also his private correspondence flashing
with indignation at the ignorance and malice of those wl10 asserted
. 29
the superiority of the w h 1te race.
To answer charges of anti-Hispanic sentiments, Blumentritt men-
I

tions his services to Spain through his studies, pa1·ticularly his defense
of the right.s of Spain to North Borneo against British occupation and
•

29. E.g., in 011e of l1is letters to Rizal he writes; "Wl1oever still believes i11 Ll1e innate
superiority of the white race, ougl1 t to be yoked up will1 a carabao in front of a plo,,,..
• (Ep. Rizal., 3:42; also 3:134; 1:296-97) .
142 New Filipino Newspaper

to the Carolines against Bismarck's claims in 1885. The decorations

and honors he has received from various Spanish learned societies
recognize his devotion to the cause of Spain , so that if he writes in
favor of reforms such as parliamentary representation and the aboli-
tion of censorship, it is because of his desire to preserve the Philip-
pines for Spain.
Moreover, in his attacks on the friars, he is careful to emphasize
that he is a Catholic; that he submits to tl1e teachings of the Church;
that he is not against the friars as such; that he does not advocate
their expulsion or the confiscation of their lands. Rather, he opposes
only their excessive power and their preventing the spread of knowl-
edge, as contrasted with the enlightened practices of the _Jesuits. He
contrasts the intolerant Spanish ecclesiastical attitude with that of the
Church in countries like Germany, England, and the United States.
Finally, he emphasizes that he is familiar with all that has been
written on the Philippines, not only by Spaniards, but by scholars of
other countries, while his opponents in Spain and in the Philippines
know only what has been written by their countrymen.
The Filipinos were fortunate in having such a redoubtable and dedi-
cated advocate. Not only did the name of a recognized foreign authority
on the Philippines lend prestige to their newspaper; his profession of
Catholicism helped to bolster their contention that it was not Catholi-
cism as such that they opposed, but only the abuses of the friars . As the
papers in Manila and in Spain pressed their attacks against Blumentritt,
it was inevitable that most Spaniards would refuse to recognize
Blumentritt's qualifications or his devotion to Spain. Bt1t the Filipinos
were of a different mind. The knowledge that a foreigner was defending
the Filipino cause undoubtedly raised the morale of the staff, the col-
30
laborators, and Filipino readers of La Solidaridad.

30. On various occasions groups of Filipinos sent gifts to Blume ntritt tllrol1gl1 Ri zal
to express ilieir appreciation (see, e.g., 1:-p. Rizal., 3:95, Blt1me ntritt-Rizal; also Ep. Pil(_zr.
1:231 and 233-34, letters of Luis Habana and of Nicolas Eigasani fro1n KaJa 111 ba ) .
When the Manila n ewspape rs attacked Blume ncritt for his articles in /.,a Sa/idandcu.J,
and demanded his expulsion from tlle Real Socie dad Eco116 mica dt' los Amigos d el
Pais, the two ,vl1icl1 had proposed this m easure immediate ly suffered a notable drop
in subscripti ons frorn Filipinos ( Reta11a, folletos .filipi1ios, ,,o t. 2: Apu nles para la l,istonn
[Aniterlas _v Solidarid&les] [Madrid: Minuesa , l 890), 50]) . Retana was one o f the ,,·riters
involved.
 New Filipino NecvsjJajJer 143

Filipino n ationalists in Europe and at home l1ad received tl1e first

issues entl1usiastically. Four hundred copies were sent to tl1e Pl1ilip-
pines, a l1undred n1ore to Basa, with tl1e request to send on to Manila
those he did not need. Soon Serrano was asking for 1,500 copies,
despite the difficulties of getting the paper into the country. Although
different stratagems were employed to smuggle the paper i11, the ship-
ment of the fourth number ran into difficulties. The governme11t l1ad
begun seizing copies in the mail and burning them. Some of those
seized were recovered by dint of palm-greasing. Before the end of the
year even registered mail was being opened to intercept the paper,
but the Filipinos were not slow in devising new ways to outsmart the
. . 31
au th or1ties.
In Spain, copies were sent to the cabinet ministers, and soon Del
Pila1· received word from Centeno that the paper was receiving the
attentio11 of the overseas minister, Manuel Becerra, who had called in
Quiroga and Centeno for consultations on Philippine policy. From
Paris and London came subscriptions from the Filipinos residing there,
while Rizal secured financial contributions for the paper from Antonio
Regidor in London and from a number of his townsmen back in
32
Calamba.
Otl1ers soon began contributing articles for the paper, among them
Regidor, the Cuban student Juan Jose Canarte, the Spanish army of-
33
ficer and writer Colonel Pio de Pazos. By July Antonio Luna joined

31. See the article "Atropello inaudito" (La Solidaridad, 31 Oct 1889) , protesting
the seizure of registered mail, but assuring those ,-vho do that La Solidaridad will find
other means. For some of these attempts, see Ep. Pilar, l: 135, 154, 177.
32. Ibid., 150, 120, 124, 34-35, 195.
33. Canarte wrote "cY diga V. . . .?" La Solidaridad, 15 Apr 1889; "Los dineros del
sacristan," ibid., 15 May 1889. It is not unlikely that Canarte, being a Cuban wrote t\vo
other articles which appeared at this time-the only ones fulfilling La Solidaridad 's
program of concerning itself wit11 all Spain 's overseas provinces: Juan , "Se vende Ctiba"
(31 Mar 1889) ; Juan, "El canal d e Panama" (15 Apr 1889) .
Canarte had belonged to the Masonic lodge in Madrid witl1 the Filipinos Agtiirre
and Llo rente, and was active precisely at the time of th ese articles i11 organizii1 g th e
Lodge "Revo lucio n" in Barcelona witl1 the Filipinos and a few otl1e rs.
Under th e p en name Padpyvl1, Pazos wrote "Blumenu;tt," (3 1 Aug 1889 ); aiid "Los
frailes en Filipinas," (3 1 Aug, 15 and 30 Sept, 15 Oct 1889). TI1e first is a d efense of
Blumentritt an d his right to write on the Pl1ilippines; the secor1d is an attack on tlle
friars, refuting a defense publisl1ed ano nymo usly in 1869 by Fr. J <Jaqui'n d e- Cori.,, u 1e
144 New Filipino Newspaper

the regular contributors to the paper, writing articles on events in

Paris at first, but always with some reference to Philippine problems.
It is possible that other members of the Barcelona colony, such as
Galicano Apacible, Pablo Rianzares, and Enrique Rogers, wrote occa-
sionally for (or at least helped with) the paper, though none of them
34
did so under his own name.

Del Pilar Takes Control

While Lopez Jaena was nominally the editor, Del Pilar became in-
35
creasingly the driving force behind the paper. Del Pilar l1ad worked
energetically in setting up the pape1-, but had at first left its actual
administration to Lopez Jaena and Ponce. His own plans called for a

Franciscan commissary general in Spain. Coria's book ,-vas apparently publisl1ed with
the purpose of persuading the government to permit further missionary colleges in
Spain for the Philippines, and i11sists strongly on the usefulness of the friars for the
maintenance of Spa11ish rule in tl1e Philippines. Pazos' articles ,vere later published in
book form: Padpyvh, Los Jrai/,es en Filipinas. Refutaci6n a la "Memoria apologetica sobre la
utilidad y seroicios prestados a Espana por los religiosos misioneros de Filipinas, " redactada por
un religioso misionero Jranciscano; dedicada al feroienle filipin6logo y sabio catedratico de la
Universidad de Leitmeritz, Dr. Fernando Blumentritt ("Biblioteca de La Solidaridad," no. 2;
Madrid: Imprenta Iberica de Fernando Fossas, 1889). Pazos had been an am1y officer
for ma11y years in the Philippines, ,vhere, accordi11g to the biograpl1ical article .. Pazos
y Vela-Hidalgo, Pio A.," in Espasa (42: 109) "distingui6se por su afecto a los elementos
avanzados del pais." Reta11a (Aparalo, 3:2764) wrongly identifies Padpyvh as Del Pilar,
but Del Pilar himself, in a letter to his wife, identifies him as Pazos (Ep. Pilar, 2:60).
34. Apacible was president of tl1e association "La Solidaridad," and active with Del
Pilar, Lopez Jaena, and Ponce in much of their political activity in Barcelo11a. Though
there is no mention of his name in the correspondence as ,vriting, it seems likel)· that
he may have helped with tl1e work of the paper or written an occasional article. The
same might be said of Ria11zares, inasmt1cl1 as he had been one of the chief co 11tribta-
tors of the capital with which the paper was begun. Enrique Rogers ,vas the st1bject of
much urging by Rizal that he might help with the paper, and it seems that h e finall,
agreed to do so in July (Ep. Pilar, 1:198). Ho,veve r, he died on Christmas day, 1889. o f
tuberculosis, and to judge by the obituary article of Na11ing (Po nce). he never actuallv
'

did more thar1 help "por sus consejos" (La Solidaridad, Hoja suelta del numero, 3 J
Dec 1889) .
35. This is the i1npression conveyed by Del Pilar's co1Tesponde11ce almost from rhe
beginning, and tl1e proportio n of his articles to Lopez Jaena's increases "vith time .
T11e main source of funds as well as the dist1;bt1tion of tl1e paper ,vere De l Pilar's
 New Filipino Neivspaper 145

newspaper in Madrid, and Serrano was active in raising tl1e capital

necessary for st1ch a project. La Solida.ridad was originally rega1·ded as
a preliminary ste~ i~ the establishment of the rea~ propaganda o rgan
6
planned for Madrid. Before long, however, Del Pilar and Ponce ,-vere
doing most of the work of tl1e paper, and what was done by Lopez
Jaena had to be all but dragged ot1t of him.
T emperamentally incapable of sustained work, he spent his days in
the cafes. He could arouse a crowd with fiery rheto1·ic, but he could
not or would not do the careful analysis and marshalling of argu-
37
m ents that went into the articles and pamphlets of Rizal and Del Pilar.
In spite of his ability to write eloquently on the needs of the Philip-
pines, he had none of that single-minded drive pushing Rizal and Del
Pilar on in constant pursuit of their goal. His interest was rather in
politics, particularly Spanisl1 politics, often with no 1·eference to the
Philippi11es at all.
Del Pilar gradually took ove1· more and more of the running of the
paper. When he finally decided to go to Madrid, the paper went with
him. It could not go on without him.
In the latter part of October 1889 Del Pilar and Lopez Jaena went
to Madrid, ,vhere they were feted by the Filipino colony. That same
day Del Pilar wrote to Ponce announcing that he had made a con-
tract with a new press and asking him to come to Madrid witl1 the

collaborators in Manila. Later, whe n both Lopez Jaena and Rizal ,-vere at odds with
Del Pilar, tl1e former would write to the latter complaining that Ponce and Del Pilar
had kept him in ignorance of everything, so that he had not even known till just
recently that such an organization as the Comite d e Propaganda existed in Manila.
"Yo he sido fundador y Director de La Solidaridad, en Barcelona, y mas era Director
de n o mbre con responsabilidad ante la Ley, como carne de ca.reel, que Direc tor d e
hecho" (Ep. Rizal., 3:252). As will be seen be low, this was not without reaso11 on th e
part of De l Pilar, given the character of Lopez Jae na.
36. Even in his letter of 19 Feb 1889, to Deodato Arellano, Del Pilar speaks of his
moving to Madrid (ibid., 33; also, 42, 66),
37. Since th ere is a te nde n cy among som e historians to associate Lopez Jaena witll
Rizal and De l Pilar as the "political trinity" of Pl1ilippine indep e nde nce, it ou gl1 t to b e
emphasized that his contribution to Filipino nation alism and indep e nde n ce ¼ras of a
very diffe rent level. Alejandrino, who was a radical separatist a t least from 189 1, as llis
correspondence with Rizal sh ows, and therefo re cannot be st1specte d o f be ing an op-
ponent of Lopez J aen a for his radicalism , d esc ribes l1i1n as editor of La Solidnrirlad a..;;
follows:
146 New Filipi·no Newspaper

38
masthead of th e paper. Tl1 e fi1-st numbe r pri11ted in Madrid was
dated 15 November 1889. Tl1e December 15th issue annot1nced tl1a t
owing to his occupations in Barcelona, Lopez Jaena had had to leave
the paper and that its editor would henceforth be Del Pilar.
No open break betwee n Del Pilar a11d Lopez Jaena seems to have
occurred altl1ough the latter ceased to write for the paper for some
time. When the transfer to Madrid was decided, Lopez Jaena appar-
ently did not wisl1 to give up his political contacts in Barcelona, and
voluntaril~ relinquished the post of editor, a turn that suite~ Del Pilar
perfectly.
Once in Madrid, Del Pilar would gather around him all the organ-
ized Filipino activity in Spain, and proceed to expand tl1e movement
in the Philippines as well. During the early months of La Solidaridad's
existence other activities had been going on in Madrid and in Barce-
lona as the moving spirits of the Filipino campaign set to work get-
ting their paisanos to close ranks for an all-out, massive effort.

in order to make him ,1/rite, most of the tin1e they literally had to starve him
out. He had th e custom of going to a cafe upon waking up and to re main the re
as long as he had money to spe11d, or as long as somebod)' had money to sp e nd
for him. There they had to look for him and promise to pay his exp enses pro-
vided he would write his articles. Benvee n cups and cups of dri11ks, t11 ey placed
before him shee ts of paper which he filled llp ,vith surprising ease. 111 this man-
ner were ,vritten many articles ,vhicl1 contributed to stir up tl1e spi1;t of otir
generation whicl1 ca1Tied out the revolt1tion (Al ejandrin o, pp. 39-40).

The supe rficiality which m any of Lopez J aena 's articles show is borne ou t b,, ,
\\'l1 ac
Alejandrino says about his willingness to speak witl1out preparation, citing ,,·1,oll)' im-
aginary facts, to the dismay of his fellow Filipi11os, and justifying hi1nself afterv.--ards (.1n
the grounds that his at1dience kr1ew even less tl1a n lie, and so cot1ld r1ot catcl1 l1i111 in
e rror (p . 39). See also EjJ. Rizal., 2:207.
38. Marcclo-Naning, l;,p . Pila,~ I :201.
39. The last certainly identifiable article of l1is is "A 'La Voz de Espat1a·,~ 15 O ct
1889; though it is probable th at "Atropello inaudito ," 31 Oct 1889, is also his. He did
not return to "''Titc for La Solidarida,J u11til 1\ugt1st 18Yl .
 CHAPTER 8

Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona of

''The Propaganda''

Nature of the "Delegation"

Much as Del Pilar was occupied ,-vith La Solidaridad, this l1ad not
brought him to Spain originally, nor did it engage all his energies
•
o n ce l1e had become involved in it. His purposes were much broader
\
and more far-reaching, though these purposes evolved gradually as
•
he became better acquainted with the situation in Spain.
• Del Pila r was the official delegate in Spain of the Comite de Propa-
1
ganda of Manila. The committee's plan of action had two stages: the
first was a p eaceful, legal campaign, using political means in Spain to
win advocates for the Philippines in the Cortes and thus to push
through n ecessary reforms. In this campaign propaganda for the Phil-
ippine cause, carried on through newspapers and pamphlets, was an
essential part. Once basic liberties were obtained, the campaign could
be continued in the Philippines. Del Pilar had apparently thought of

1. Liettten ant Olegario Diaz, in the account drawn up from the in terrogations and
trials of th ose arrested as a result of the Revolution of 1896, speaks of the forn1 ati on
of the Prop aganda Committee, which n am ed "un a d elegaci6 n qu e d e pe ndiera
directamente d el comite recien constitufdo, d elegaci6n que h abia de residir en Barce-
lon a y dedicarse a ges tionar d e los pode~:s publicos la cot1cesi6n para el Arcllipielago
.• de mayores libertad es y la re presentac1on en Cortes en primer termii1 o" (Retan a,
Archiuo, 3:417). Thou gh the account of Diaz, as all the d eclarati o11 s of the political
prisoners on which it is based , must be used with caution, ye t since all the o tl)er facts
here given are known oth erwise, it may be assttmed th at the "d elegaci6 n,, ,vas an
official post as h e 1.1nderstands it. Del Pilar himself speaks of "este p uesto" (Ep p ·t
• z.ar,

147
148 Del Pilar as Delegate i'l1 Barcelor1a

2
waging the legal campaign in Spain for one or t\"10 years. This \Va~ to
i11clL1d e propaga11da for the Pl1ilippines, printed in Spain and distrib-
uted by the propaganda co rnmittee back in the Philippines, to pre-
pare the minds of the people for the seco11d stage.
Just what the projected second stage \Vas to involve is not com-
pletely clear, and \Vas perhaps not yet fully conceived at tl1e time . It
certainly included a strL1ggle for control of tl1e Philippines. Th e re is
good evidence that this struggle may l1a,,e bee11 envisaged, even as
ea1-ly as May 1889, as an actual revolution to sepa1-ate tl1e Pl1ilippines
3
from Spain and obtain independence. Tl1e second stage ce rtainly in-
volved the eventual expulsion of the friars f1-om tl1e Pl1ilippines, and
at least an auto11omous government controlled by Filipinos was con-
4
templated.
Later Del Pilar and Rizal would break, largely over the question of
'"'hether anything "''as to be achieved by propaganda and political ac-
tivity in Spain, and Del Pilar would continue the campaign in Spain
until the end of 1895. The first stage of the campaign, originally pro-
jected for one or two years, not yet having reached its goal, Del Pilar

1: 125; a lso see 162), a11d in later years \1/ould distingt1ish tl1e mone)' sent to }1im for
the "delegaci6n" from that sent for La Solidaridad. (See e.g. , Apolinario l\1abini-Del
Pilar, 15 Oct 1894, in Las Cartas politicas de Apolinario Mabini, ed. Teodo ro l\1. Kala,,·
[Manila, 1930] , 23-24.)
2. "For my part, I would ,-rish to have the work of propaganda finished !.his ,,ear or
next year a t the latest" (L. 0. Crame-Pepe [Rizal], 24 May 1889, ibid., 130-3 1) . ln a
letter to Arella110 of 20 Mar 889, Del Pilar l1ad written asking tl1e former to tn to
raise money to be deposited for tl1e expenses of his rett1rn , since "as s001\ as all thi is
organized, I want to return there."
3. In the le tter to Rizal qt1otcd i11 note 2, Del Pilar is urging l1im to sot111d otit tht'
Filipino millionaire, Pedro Roxas, then cltae to arrive i11 Paris, as to tl1e po sibili() tl,~lt
lie would lend support to tl1 e Filipi110 campaigr\. I-le contint1cs: ''if ,,ve are 1101 ur<> ,.)f
financial support, \Ve ca11not pass on to the second pl1ase of ot1r ran1paigr1" and g0<.·~
on to remind Rizal of the extreme caution 11ecessary i11 this matter, sitlCt" Roxas· ~nt..,_
ments were unknown. It seems clear the11, that refere nce is m ade to 01ne kind '-"f
stn1ggle which will require even greater finan cial resources tl1a11 at prc. e 11t. ,\nd '"'harll
wi ll be carried on i11 the Philippines. T l1 c 111ost ob,riot1s n1eaning- ,vould st"en1 l\.l tx·
organization for revo lutior1, ii, a not too dist..-i11t ft1tt1re .
4...Afi to their cxpulsio11, yo u kn o"v '"'e cannot. lt<>p<" tJ1a t tl1e gtl\'("ffimt' rtt ,,i ll ci o it:
we l1ave to do it our.111elves" (Carm elo-P. Jkaa111a, l:.fJ. Pilar, 1: 11 2) . See a lso the Tagall>g
antifriar pamphlet.s treatcct bclo,v, irn1, Iici 1l)1 ir1citin~ tl1e p<'ople to the expuls.i1..1r\ uf
the friars.
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona 149

would continue his activity in Europe always l1opeful of soon winding

up the first stage successfully.
That eventual indep endence , or at least full autonomy, was the goal
Del Pilar had in mind is clear from the plans he was making at this
time with Ponce, Rizal, and others of like mind . In March 1889, for
example , he was already discussing with Rizal, Ponce, Apacible, and
Lopez Jaena whether the future language of the Philippines ought to
5
be Spanish or Tagalog. He felt strongly too about the "great destiny
reserved by Providence for our race," and the need for keeping the
Filipino people from being tainted by the customs of the Spaniards,
6
' for which he expressed contempt.

The Propaganda Literature

Propaganda and politics.-that was the function of the delegation

in Spain, as Del Pilar saw it. With La Solidaridad originally intended as
a precursor of the official propaganda organ to be published in Ma-
drid , plans were still afoot, after the Barcelona organ had been sev-
eral months going, for a separate paper. Consideration was being given
to whet11er it was possible to support a daily newspaper, or whether a
weekly or biweekly would have to do.
• As it turned out, La Solidaridad proved an effective propaganda or-
gan both for influencing Spanish politicians and for combating the
prestige of the friars in the Philippines so much to Del Pilar's liking
that he gave more and more of his time to the paper.
He was also deep in other propaganda activities. During his voyage
from Hong Kong to Europe he had been working on a substantial pam-
phlet attacking friar domination in the Philippines, which he entitled La
soberania monacal en Filipinas. Published at the end of February 1889, the
pamphlet is quite a change from his Tagalog works against the friars.
Intended for distribution in Spain as well as in the Philippines, the
tract adopts a se1ious and measured tone, and presents a detailed
indictment of the friars in the Philippines as enjoying a predominance

5. Letter of Plaridel to "Pinakamamahal kong kaibigan" (My dearest friend), Ep.

Pilar, 1:73. The editors identify the addressee as Pedro Icasiano, bu t the contei1 t shows
it clearly to be Ri zal.
6. See the lengthy remarks in tJ1e le tter of Carmelo (Del Pilar) to P. Ikazanla
(Serrano). t,p. Pilar, 1:63-64. Also to Deodato Arel lano, ibid .. 32.
l 50 Del Pilar· as Delegate iri Barcelona

most l1arn1ful to state an d churcl1. Since this is perhaps Del Pilar's

m ost carefully tl10L1ght-out work and presents virtu ally all th e argu-
me nts that were to be used in su cceeding years in La Solidaridad against
the friars, it is worth discussing in some de tail.
The opening paragraphs sound the the me of the ,-vork:

It is no\-v three centuries si11ce the blood of Legazpi a11d of Sicatuna,

mingled in a ct1p \-vl1ich both me11 drained in sig n of eternal friend-
ship, ratified their oatl1 to fuse fro1n that day fonvard in to one single
ideal the aspiratio11s of Spain a11d of the Philippines.
But the tin1e which has passed since, wit11ot1t consolida tin g that fu-
sion , h as o nly strengthe11ed tl1e domination of tl1e monasteries ,-vhich
7
have converted the Islands into a colo ny for mo n astic exploitation.

The Philippines, h e goes on to declare , has no otl1e1- aspiration

than to identify itself wholly with the Mother Cot111try, an d h as proved
it b)' sharing in her glories and her misfortunes. Fo1· this reason sh e
has offered her sons to pour out their blood for Spain over three
centuries, from tl1e defeat of the Chi11ese Limal1ong in the sixteenth
8
century to the battles of the Caroli11es and Jolo in the present d a) 1•

But since the Mother Country has not desired to have friars for h er-
self, why sl1ould she leave the Philippines in their hands?
In its political aspect this dominance is due to the friars' position
9
as parish priests, and manifests itself as follows:

7. P. 3. The m e ntion of Legazp i and Sicatuna is a reference to tl1 e " pacto de

sangre " wl1ich Legazpi made with a cl1ieftain of Cebu in to ke n of friendship and
allegiance in 1565. Tl1 e Filipino natio11alists of this period liked to look 0 11 tl1 is pac t
with what was undo ubted ly m erely a local datu as the agree men l bet1vee11 equals on
which Spain's rights in tl1e Philippi11es wer e based (see ch apter 11 belo\v).
8. P. 4. Lima h o n g was a C l1i11ese pirate ,,vl10 attacked ~1a 11ila ir1 1574 and ,,-a.s
d efeated by Governor-General Guido de Lavezares \\'ltl1 the aid o f Filipino troops. Tl1t'•
troops used by th e Spaniards in putti11g do\m the insurrec tio 11 in tl1 e Carolines i,1
1887 and at varioL1s times in J o lo against tl1e Moros \Vere gen erally all Filipi110 <"Xc-t'pt
for tl1e o ffi ce rs.
9. Pp. 5-12. For a defen se of the friars aga inst tl1e cl1a rge of preventi11g tlit· lt·.\c l1-
ing of Spanish, see ManL1el Meri 110. O.S.1\ ., ''Los n1isio11e ros y el ca.ste llano e,1 Filipi11:.ts, ..
Missionalia Hisj1anirt1 5 (1948):27 1-323. Merino 1nakes tl1e i111por1.a1lt poi11t that tile-
principal reason ,vl1y Spa11ish \\'as never ,vi(le lv tau g l1t was precise ly the lack or teach-
ers ttntil la te in tJ1c 11ine tcentl1 ce11 tUI) ', as \\'ell as tl1e lack of ar1y a pprl•ciable numbe1
of Spaniards in tl1c Pl1ilippines. w l1 0 1nigl1t t1avc pro,ided Filipi11os ,,·ith an incenti,·t'
to learn Spanisl1 .
 Del Pila1· as Delegate in Barcelona 15 1

1. Their control of the election of municipal officials.

2. Their control of the municipal officials in th e exe rcise of th eir
authoril),, by the visto bueno of the priest, required for so many
official acts.
3. Their control of public educatio11, as local school inspectors,
thus impeding the learni11g of Spanisl1.
4. Their power to procure administrative depo1·tation of any ,-vl10
oppose them.
5. Their supposed necessity for the preservation of the "integ1·idad
de la patria."

The economic dominance of tl1e friars is show11 in their g1·ea t

wealth, a sl1arp contrast to the inability of the gover11ment to fi11d
10
sufficient sources of revenue. This ,-vealth is obtained as follows:

1. The large estates held in mortmain, and rented at arbitrary rates,

with consequent detriment to agricultural progress.
2. The substantial sums spent by the people on the frequent
fiestas and novenas.
3. The stole fees collected in excess of the officially fixed rates.
4. The traffic in scapulars, rosaries, and other pious objects.
5. The method of gi,ring the parish priest a percentage of the pre-
dicted revenue from the cedula tax rather than of the actual
1·evenue, the list of taxpayers remaining under the parish priest's
control .
•
In religious affairs, the pamphlet continues, the friars 1·efused epis-
copal jurisdiction from the sixteentl1 century till the creation of a
11
native clergy in the eighteenth. Then, submitting to episcopal visita-
tion to save their parishes, they have held on to them, contrary to the
Council of Trent. The former privileges given to tl1em in this regard,
granted because of the lack of secular priests to occup)' the parishes,
are no longer valid when there are not only Filipino priests, but also
a n abundance of sect1lar priests in the Peninsula, who would just as
effectively preserve the loyalty of the Filipinos to Spai11. Actually, the

10. Pp. 13-28.

11. Pp. 29- 38.
1~2 Del Pilar as De/,egate in Barcelona

i11flt1e n ce of th e fria rs with the Filipinos is n ow gon e, as the a nony-

m otis attacks of 1869 and the pub lic attacks of 1888 sh ow. T h e good
of the na tion and th e importance of the Cath olic religion as a bu l-
wark of Spa11isl1 so,1e reignty in th e Philipp in es demand the substitu-
tion of peninsular secular cle rgy for th e fria rs in the Philippines.
T hough cer tain half-truths, o,,e r-simplificatio ns, a nd g ross exaggera-
tions ,vere in cluded in this indictment, the m ode ra te to n e of the pam-
p l1let, togethe r with its basic argument pleading the inte rest of Spain
in binding the Filipinos m ore closely to he r by fra nkly e mbracing h e r
tradi tional p olicy of assimila tion , ably presented Del Pila r 's case to
Spanish poli ticians.
Copies Vlere sent to th e cabine t ministe rs a nd to vari o us othe r pub-
lic m e n , while Qui roga and Centen o saw to it tha t it was distribute d
to still o the rs. Th e acknowled gme n ts which survive, h owever, d o n o t
refl ect the enthusiasm wi th which Del Pilar seems to h ave fe lt it h ad
been 1-eceived , considerin g tha t they were from me n wh o migh t h ave
been conside red already frie ndly to th e cause.
That of Rafael M. Labra, for example, tl1anked him for tl1e pa mphle t
as containing mucl1 of interest. Fonner Governor-General Terrero, tho ugh
1nore cordial, is scarce]}' less non-<:ommittal, acknowled ging the receipt
of the "interesting pamphlet" and adding: "recognizing the loyalty a nd
a ttachme11t of the Filipino people to the Mo the r Country, I thank yot1
most cordially fo r your act of defere11ce and attentio n to m e ." Fro m
Miguel Morayta, he received much m ore entht1Siastic atte ntion, as well
as from Blume ntritt and fro m otl1er Filipinos in Europe, but the re is no
evidence to sho,v that the pamphle t had an y great effect o n Spanish
political o pinion , not even on that of the anticle rical Left. 12
Other works, serio us in tone like La soberania monacal, issu ed from the
press of La Solidaridad during this year, likewise intended m ore for Spa n-
ish than Philippine consumption . One of these was Del Pila r 's refuta-
tion , again writing under the pseudonym Plaridel, of a pampl1let writte n
in defense of the friars and expressing the indigna tion in the Spanish
community of Manila over the manifestation of 1 March 1888.13

12. Ep. Pilar. 1:52, 71. 78, 107-8, 120, 156. 166--67.
13. The d efe nse of th e friars ¼'as Los }'railes de Filip inas. Brrofs considf'Tano,ies d,
artualidad, escritas por un f.SfJaiiol peninsttlar (Madrid: A Pe rez Dt1brull, 1888). The atl-
th or was Bal c.asa r Gi raudier. publish er of th e Diario dt J\,fanila, a11d a lo ng-tim e resi-
de nt of Ma n ila.
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona 153

Del Pilar's pamphlet, e ntitled La Jrailocracia filipina, complem ents

h is La soberania monacal, but suffers by compariso11 in its 01·ganization
14
and the coge n cy of its argument. Though purpo1·ti11g to be a
point-by-point refutation of the pro-friar pampl1let, it largely ignores
its arguments or simply denies its assertions. Del Pilar d enies tl1e ex-
isten ce of filibusterismo, decries the patriotism of the friars and tl1eir
contribt1tion to Philippine civilization (which he attributes to tl1e work
of the conquistadores and the pacto de sangre made by Legazpi with
the Filipinos). The solution to Philippine problems, he insists, is not
to depend on the influence of the friars to keep the Filipinos lo)1al to
Spain. Rather, what is needed is to end their powers by replacing
them with secular priests, and by instituting a genuine policy of as-
similation for the Filipinos.
Another pamphlet by Blumentritt, Consideraciones acerca de !,a actual
siluaci6n politica de Filipinas, raised the question to a somewhat different
plane, and discussed the whole Philippine problem as an interested and
impartial obseiver, devoted to the mutual interests of Spain and the Phil-
ippines.15 Writing with his usual historical erudition, Blumentritt recalls
to reluctant Spaniards their traditional colonial policy of assimilation. He
decries what he terms the departure of the friars f1·om tl1eir traditional
role of defender of the Filipinos against the corruption and rapacity of
Spanish officials. Further, he denounces the excessive powers of the
governor-general, the censorship of the press, the corruption of the bu-
reaucracy, the use of administrative deportation, the efforts of friars to
obstruct the general enlightenment of the country, their holding 011 to
the parishes instead of attending to the conversion of the pagans, their
belittling of Filipino native capacity. As a solution to Philippine prob-
lems, he calls for the gradual transfer of the parishes from the friars to
peninsular and Filipino secular clergy, the representation of the Philip-
pines in the Cortes, and an honest policy of assimilation, lest Spai11 lose
the Philippines through disaffection because of abuses.

14. La Jraiwcracia filipina (Barcelona: Impre11ta Iberica de Fra ncisco Fossas, 1889)
,\13.S published under del Pilar's pe n name Ml1. Plaride l.
15. Though published in Barcelona at the Fossas press from ,vhich JJa Solirlarida,J
and the other pamphlets issued , the costs of printing this parnpl1let we re borne bv
Rizal (Ep. Pi lar, 1:196), wh o apparently translated Blume11tritt 's original into Spanisl;.
Rizal appears to have supplied the funds for all his own pttblications, evc 11 if distrib-
11ted by Del Pilar.
154 DP! Pilar as Delfgate in Ba·1·relona

Large1y· d e pende nt 011 th e pamphlets and articles of Del Pilar and

on Rizal 's no,,el , Blt1mentritt's pamphlet says little that was 11e,,v. Its
cl1ief ,,a}ue to tl1e Filipi11os as a propaganda weapon was its being
a bl e to present itself as the e,,aluation of a foreigner wl10 had proved
l1is sympathy for Spain, a11d who was an internationally recognized
authorit:)1 on the Philippines.
Alongside these works intended fo1· the Spanish public, a series of
other works issued from tl1e Barcelona headquarters of Del Pilar, to
be distributed in the Philippines througl1 his organizatio11 there. One of
tl1ese was a Tagalog pampl1let he had composed on his voyage to Eu-
rope, entitled Sagot nang Espana sa hibik nang Filipinas (Reply of Spain to
16
the Lament of "Filipi11as"). In forceful Tagalog verse, he has Mother
Spain ar1swering the laments of her beloved child "Filipinas" with an
inflammatory provocation to expel tl1e friar, source of all misery, pitiless
robber of the widow and orphan, disn11·ber of the peace of families, etc.
Though Spain's final counsel is to endure in hope of a futu1·e de-
liverance, this formal shrinking back from violence after dozens of
in ce11diary verses urging retribution, does not weaken the message.
This pamphlet i11 which he exploits powerfully the resources of the
Tagalog la11guage, is the most inflammatory of all Del Pilar's ,,vritings,
and the more striking for its contrast with his Spanish pamphlets.
Another pamphlet of the following year represented a different type
of attack. Del Pilar printed the official church schedule of stole fees
to be offered for baptisms, weddings, funerals, etc., together ,-vi.th a
17
Tagalog translation. This schedule , set up by Archbishop Sancho de
Santa Justa in 1772, was still technically i11 force in the Philippine
cl1urch, tl1ough, given the great economic changes which had taken
place in the Philippines between 1772 and 1890, it most likely had

16. O riginally published anonymously i11 Barcelona, it is reprinte d in De los Santos,

PhilipjJine Revierv 3 (Nov 191 8): 869-73. These verses \-vere \\rntte11 as a reply to ,vl1a t
,vas appare ntly another a11tifriar ,-vork by tl1e Bulacan poet, H er1ne n egildo Flo res. Hibik
ng Fili/1inas sa /nang t ~'ipafia (Lament of "Filipinas'' to Motl1er Spain ).
17. Ara11cel dP los Derechos Parroquiales en las Islas Filipinas publirad.o co1l su tradurci6n
ta.gala (Barcelo11a: Imprenta Iberica de Francisco Fossas, 1889). I ha,·e 11o t fo und a
copy of tllis p a1n phle t but ~1ave taken the bibliograpl1ical referen ce from Retana.
A/Jarato, 3:1153, no. 2820. Retana was t1nsu re of the tra11slator, bt1t a lette r of De l Pila r
to Po nce (l:,JJ. Pilar, 1:213-14). s110,vs it to have lJeen th e form er , and tl1at the pam-
phlet ,,·as not actt1ally p,1blisl1 ed until 1890.
 Del Pilar as Delegate i11 Ba1·celo1ia 155

falle n into disuse. T h e Filipino oppone11ts of the friars freqt1e11 tly raised
the charge tl1at it was ignored by friars, ,-vl1 0 cl1arged unautl1ori zed
and excessive fees. By printi11g the offi cial scl1edule in Tagalog a11d
seeing to its m ass dist1·ibt1tion , they would either reduce tl1e incorne
of the friars , or at least incense the p eople against their parish priests,
18
all by legally unobj ectionable means.
Already during tlie first months of 1889 Del Pilar a11d Ponce ,-ve re
sending copies of Del Pilar's po pular Tagalog pamphlets as well as of
Rizal 's La vision de Fray Rodriguez, to the Pl1ilippines throt1gh Si11ga-
pore, tl1rough Basa i11 Hong Kong, and directly to Manila, fo1· distri-
bution by the Comite de Propaganda. Shortly after followed Rizal 's
Por telifono, Blume ntritt's defense of tl1e Noli, a11d perhaps otl1er wri t-
19
ings of Rizal and Del Pilar.
Meanwhile, Basa ,-vas also flooding Manila throughout 1889 witl1
an tifriar broadsides, generally inflammatOf)' in nature a11d replete with
sensational and at times even ridiculous charges. These b1·oadsides
insisted tliat no filibusterismo existed among Filipi11os, but tlia t tl1e
friars were the real filibusteros, who were plan11ing to simulate sedi-
tious outbreaks or print subversive handbills to justify oppressio11 of
the Filif ino progressists alleged to be responsible for· such propa-
ganda. 2 It appears that neither the staff of La Solidaridad nor Rizal
had a11ything to do with these broadsides, and in fact disappro\red of

18. Examples of the use of arguments over stole fees to provoke resentmen ts against
tl1e parisl1 priest may be fou11d e.g., in a letter of R. 0. Serna [Serrano] to Del Pilar,
Ep. Pila1~ 1: 141-43. Tl1ese i11cidents provoked by Del Pilar's follo,vers suggest that tl1e
main purpose of prin ti11g tl1e Arancel was precisely to afford occasion for provocations
,\'hich could only serve to discredit the friars.
19. Ep. Pilar, 1:31, 33, 49, 11 3, 158. In tl1e last-cited letter of Del Pilar to Serra110 ,
he speaks of investing the money sent him in "sag-tang-lu,ce-ara." From tl1e context it
,vould see m that pamphlets are i11dicated , of ,,vl1ich the first \vould be tl1e Sagot, atld
the fourth the A,·ancel. It is not clear wl1at th e oth er r,vo may l1ave bee 11 .
20. There are copies of a number of broadsides in NA-PIR, folcler 610, 110 . 8, ,vliicll
the collector, Captain J. R. M. Taylor, atu·ibuted to "th e Ho11g Kong Jttnta." Some of
tllem, 11owever, are from later years, and Rizal or otl1ers may l-1 avc llad part in t11 e nt.
Those clearly from 1889, and from Basa, are: "jOjo, paisa110s, ojo! ," signecl by "Ia
poblacio n de Manila," "Castiguc Dios a los malvados," signed by Isaac Fe rnatldo Rios.
and d a ted 15 June 1889, Paris; "Aquf no h ay filibusteros": "Esta es la verdad.,, \ 'err
likely a lso Basa's is one enti tled '' jPobre patria n1ial ," whi,11 reprodttC"'s and k '
'- " atrac s a
P rofriar 01 arufesto by Felipe Buencami110 entitled "A 11u e stra qti e rid a 11. . d p .
, 1
iv ._1 r <> at r1a
• 1Espana!!!"' of 24 Attg 1889. Isaac Fernando Ri os ,va,; a Matl il·i Sp·, •
• ,. l
• • ' tltarc '"110 11,lcl
156 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barrelona

. h. k 21
some of Basa's methods, thot1gh encouraging l1im to conanue 1s ,-vor .
Despite increased vigilance on tl1e part of the government, there is evi-
dence that a considerable amount of clandestine propaganda was able
to be introduced and to circulate, at least around Manila.

Political Activity

Meanwhile , Del Pilar plunged into political activity on many levels.

As the delegate of the propaganda committee, he was called on to
stud)' the Spanish political situation on the spot and to seek recogni-
tion of Filipino aspirations by some party, which the Filipinos would
then support.
The Conservative party and all those of the Rigl1t he did not even
consider, as they would never support any anticlerical program, to say
notl1ing of their general suspicion of reforms. Sagasta's Fusionists he
found disunited and ineffectual in carryi11g out tl1e reforms they prom-
ised. Castelar's Possibilists offered little hope because of the indecisive
position taken by their leader regarding the monarchy. In spite of the
fa,,orable refor1ns the Zorillistas promised for the Philippines, Del Pilar
felt that they were likely to be weakened by schisms, and had avoided
committing himself, particularly since Lopez Jaena was already affiliated.
He was keeping an eye on a possible schism within the Fusionists by a
group led by More½ among whose followers was Quiroga. The most prom-
ising among those likely to be of help, however, seemed to be Mora)rt.a.
Second to Castelar among the Possibilists, Morayta was dissatisfied
with his chief s approach to the monarchy, and would probably break
away if he thought he had strength. "Let us see," concluded Del Pila1-
in his analysis of the parties, "if, encouraging the hidden aspirations
22
which I suspect in Morayta, some idea may occur to us. "

denot1nced Basa's brother to tl1e police for possessing subversive propaganda. !vlost of
th e broadsides mentioned here deal with this incident, and Basa took l'1is revenge b,
signing Rios' name to tt1e propaganda (Ep. Pilar, 1: 175, 182).
21 . See Del Pilar's letter congratulati11g Basa (ibid., 30), but also Rizal's declaration
tl,at he and Del Pilar are not in agreement ,~u1 the idea of signing Isaac Fernando
Rios' name to tl1e propaganda (Ep. Riuzl., 2:22 1-22).
22. Carmelo-P. Ikazama, tp. Pilar, I :62-65. The lengtl1y political analysis ,,·hich t,e
gives he re is continued in ftirth er letters to tl1e Manila Committee: 84-85; 172-73:
188-91 .
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Ba'rcelona 15 7

Tho ug l1 r esolved not to make any final decision on affiliation until

h e saw the situa tio n in Madrid at first hand , Del Pilar seems to h ave
establish ed close contacts with Morayta from the time of tl1e latte r 's
visit to Barcelona in April 1889. At the sa1ne time he remained in
close con tact with Quiroga, who in turn was being const1l ted by
23
Sagasta's ove rseas minister, Becerra, on Philippine affairs.
On 16 April 1889, Morayta came to Barcelona, where Del Pilar met
him and had a series of confere11ces with him. On 25 April the Fili-
pino colony honored Morayta with a banquet, at which tl1e latter ex-
pressed himself as deeply interested in the progress of the Pl1ilippines
and therefore committed to the expulsion of the friars , tl1e chief ob-
stacle to that progress. Included in the speech was a provocative ref-
erence to the massacre of tl1e friars in Spain in 1835, urging the
Filipinos to continue denouncing the abuses of tl1e friars, so that if a
similar massacre should perchance occur in the Philippines, the gov-
e rnment would know the real cause of it.
At this banquet a resolution was adopted in favor of the liberal re-
forrns promised by Becerra, and an exposition addressed to the minister
was signed by peninsulars and Filipinos present. This petition, signed by
the representatives of the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina of Madrid, of the
association "La Solidaridad" of Barcelona, and of the newspaper La
Solidaridad of Barcelona, recalled tl1at, in spite of reactionary predictions,
recent modem economic and judicial reforms had produced no distur-
bance in the Philippines, and therefore called on the minister to grant
to this Spanish province the fundamental rights enjoyed by all other
peninsular and overseas provinces, particularly: (1) representation in the
Cortes; (2) abolition of previous censorship; and (3) prohibition of gov-
24
ernmental deportation without a judicial sentence.
Del Pilar entertained no illusions about obtaining these fundamen-
tal rights so easily. He had some hope that the prohibition of depor-
tation might be conceded. It might not be. What was more important,
he felt, was that the exposition would "make clear in a positive, au-

23. De l Pilar-Quiroga, ibid., 93-94; Quiroga-De l Pilar, Lop ez Jaena y d em as de La

Solidaridad, ibid., 94-95. M. Dati (Del Pilar ) -P. lkazama (Se rrano), ibid., 124. I lia,,e
seen othe r corresp o ndence, still unpublisl1ed, benveen De l Pilar and Quiroga, but its
o,mer h as thus far been unwilli11g to h ave it used .
24. The text of tl1e pe titi on may be fot1nd ibjd., 103-4.
158 Del Pila1· as Delegate in Ba1-celona

thentic and notoriously public fashion , that the Filipino aspiratio11 is

not anti-Spa11ish. " For tl1is reason, as he wrote to his brotl1er-in-law,
l1e was glad the tone of the banquet and the speeches had been tran-
quil and dignified, not "hair-raising, as in other banquets celebrated
l1ere before my arrival, " thus sl1owing that the Filipinos were most
interested in consolidating the bonds of interests and sentiments be-
tween Spain and the Pl1ilippines.
An incident tl1at occurred at about this time, thot1gh trivial in it-
self, gives some idea of how Del Pilar purst1ed his political activities.
Jose Basa's brother, Matfas, and a peninsular Spaniard named Abello,
botl1 agents of Jose Basa in Manila, were arrested when a search of
their houses yielded packages of antifriar broadsides. Arrested with
them was the captain of the ship on which the packages were trans-
ported. When Jose Basa received the news, he immediately sent off a
cable to the overseas minister to the effect that friar intrigues had
brought about the unjust imprisonment of many 1-espectable citizens,
and asked for justice. At the same time he sent a cable to Ponce
requesting assistance for tl1ose imprisoned, following it up shortly there-
25
after with a letter giving details.
Del Pilar immediately went into actio11, gathering the Filipinos in
Barcelona for a collective telegram to Minister Becerra on behalf of
the newpaper La Solidaridad, the association "La Solidaridad," and the
Filipino colony of Barcelona; relaying the telegram from Basa; and
asking tl1e minister to demand a clarification from Manila. This they
followed up with a letter to Becerra, exposing the alleged situation in
tl1e Philippines. At the same time, letters were sent to Rafael M. Labi·a
that he might interpellate the officials concerned in the Co1·tes, to
Quiroga that he might use his influence with Becerra, and to Mora)'ta
that he might convoke tl1e Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina to take action.
A telegram was likewise sent to Rizal in Paris, asking him to get t11e
Filipinos there to call on any connections tl1ey might ha,,e i11 Madrid
for help, and requesting him to telegraph Regidor in London that he
might do the same.
v\'hat came of all tl1is bt1stle is a measure of the stre11gtJ1s and '"eak-
nesses of Del Pilar's organization and the attitudes of ilie perso 11s

25. N. Butro n Uose M. Basa) -tvlarcelo 1--Iilario <le i Pila r , ibid. , 88-9 1; Del Pilar-P.
Ikaza1na (Serrano) , ibid., 84.
I
'
•

Del Pilar as Delegate in, Barcelona 159

involved. Labra re plied tl1at owing to th e lack of st1fficient data h e

could no t d o a nything in the Cortes. The newspapers, La Publicidad
in Ba r celo na, El Globo and El Dia in Madrid, as well as La Solidaridad,
publish ed the te legrams, the first two undoubtedly at Morayta 's be-
h est, the othe r probably at that of Llorente or some otl1er Filipino in
Madrid. Both Morayta and Quiroga sought out Becerra. Finding him
I simultaneously in the Cortes, they prevailed upon him to ha,,e a con-
fe re n ce with them on the Philippine situation, and urged him to ca-
•

. ble Manila demanding an explanation from Go,,ernor-General Weyler .

•
Wh e n matters came to a standstill, Quiroga got a Deputy, Senor
Mus6 , to interpellate in the Cortes on the affair and to speak as well
on the d e portations which l1ad been taking place. Coincidentally, the
Conservative , General Pando, spoke out in the Cortes on the public
disturbances and the danger of revolution in the Philippines. Hemmed
in by both sides, Becerra finally cabled Manila, only to be told that all
rumors of disorders were false.
•
• Shortly thereafter Serrano wrote to Del Pilar, telling l1im to disre-
I gard Basa's exaggerations, for there had been no campaign of terror,
no mass imprisonments. Only Matias Basa, Abel lo, and the ship cap-
tain were involved. Since these had been charged with attempted re-
' bellion, it was impossible to get them out on bail; it was also impossible
to prove such a charge. The judge was simply delaying action on the
case jt1st to let Basa and Abello sweat it out in jail for a while. Eventu-
•
I
• ally he would have to acquit them.
'• Del Pilar continued to keep the matter in the public eye through
La Solidaridad, playing up the legal impreciseness of qualifying the
offense as attempted rebellion. He attempted to sway the Tribunal
Supremo into intervening in tl1e case to force its being brought to
26
•
trial. The following montl1 the case was dismissed and the prisoners
were released. Whether the various activities of Del Pilar and his asso-
ciates had anything to do with obtaining their release is not at all
.d
evi e nt.
27

.I
•I
I
26. T h e account of the affai r is taken from various letters in Ep. Pilar, 1:83, 84, 94-
95, 96, 102-3, 122- 23. 137. The te legraphic correspondence is in AHN, Ultrama r, leg.
'
• 5277, " 1889, Filipinas, Po litica, Recibidos"; a11d ibid., "Expedidos."
27. Basa \\'Tote than ki ng h im on 20 June 1889. and announ cing the immine i) t
re lease o f t11 e accused , bt1t witl1ot1t sayi ng h ow it was ach ieved (ibid., 175-76). Tlle re
160 DP-l Pila1· as Deleg{1lt1 i11 Ba1·relona

H ere Del Pilar is see n a.s activis t in l1igh gear. He h eld no illusion s,
but l1 e 1nad e tl1e m ost of possibiliti es or opportuni ties at hand. He
might m ake u se of his varied political co11nectio ns for particular im-
mediate e nds; h e wotild n eglect n o tl1ing that cot1ld possibly be h elp-
ful , but 1·egarding tl1eir efficaC)' to,vards achieving the principal ends
h e sought, l1e privately expressed co11siderable ske pticism.
In his analysis of Spanish politics, l1e l1ad o bsen 1ed little to temper
l1is h a rsh jt1dg111ent of Spaniards in ge neral, a11d felt that "we sh ot1ld
bless, yes, bless God e ternally, for having sa,,ed our 1--a.ce from adopting
the ct1stoms of our colonizer." H e e,,en spoke of gratitude to the friars
for having isolated the Filipinos from contact \vith otl1er Spaniards.
Shortly after d eli,,ering l1imself of this left-handed compliment to
the friars , h e \Vrote of the situation of Spain at ho m e and a broad . At
home the re is great d anger of a "gen eral conflagration," a nd the gov-
e rnn1e nt therefore "has no time to attend with any inte rest to our
aspirations out there, and consequently it is necessary that we start
tl1inking of ,-vhat means we are to m ake use of to obtai11 the e nds \\'e
l1ave proposed to achieve ."
The international complications caused by Ge1·n1any and France in
Africa, h e continued, likewise occupy tl1e attention of the government,
and prevent it from occupying itself Mth the interests of tl1e Philip-
pines or eve11 of Spain itself. Moreover, "no overseas minister \va11ts
to take on himself tl1e responsibility of a radical innovation in that
cou11 try, tl1ough I believe that they Mil accept the logic of accom-
28
. l d f
p 11s 1e acts. "
No11etheless, Del Pilar's meeting Mth Mo1·ayta seems to h a,,e gi, ,en
him renewed hope of accomplishing something by political means,
a nd tl1is hope would sustain him fo1· se,1e ral years m ore, ,,·hile l1e
pursued the su ccesses tha t would alvlays slip past l1is grasp. The inft1-
sion of Del Pilar with fresl1 ho pe owed much to the ~Iasonic connec-
tio ns wl1ich the Filipinos of Barcelona fo nned at abot1t this tin1e. Tl1e ·e
connections were to lead the m oveme11t in a direction i11c1·easi11gl,·
anti-Catholic as well as a ntifriar, a facto1· whicl1 ,-vould late1· beco111e a
source of divisio n a m o ng th e Filipi11os.

are o ther Lelegrarns of a sensa tional nattire, a r111ot111c ing rebclli1lns tirred up b,
agentsJprovocateur.\ of tl1c fr iars, e tc .. i11 ,\1-f N irt the files t>f tl1e O,·t:rst."as ~Ji11istn·. d~\ted
H o 11g-l(ong, wl1ich are pro babl)' fro 11, li~lSr\.
28. l.cttcrs to Serr.1110; /:);. J>ila, , l :ti:~. 84-85.
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona 161

Towards Secularization of Philippine Society

'

On 2 April 1889, tl1e Masonic lodge "Revoluci6n," organized by

the Filipinos of Barcelona, had petitioned Miguel Morayta, grand mas-
•
ter of tl1e Gran Oriente Espanol, for affiliation of their lodge with his
c d · 29
1e eration . Two weeks later, Morayta had arrived in Barcelona and
Del Pilar had se,,eral private conferences witl1 him. The result of these
conferences was increasi11g activity on the part of Morayta in behalf
of the Filipinos, and Del Pilar's alliance with Spanish Masons in sup-
port of th e mission to the Pl1ilippi11es of Manriql1e Alonso Lallave.
l
Shortly before this time Serra110 had proposed the reprinting of
another pamphlet, Los Frailes en Filipinas, as part of the antifriar lit-
erature being distributed by the committee in Manila. Tl1e autl1or,
Lallave, was a former Dominican, who had been parish priest in the
to,-vn of U1·daneta, Pangasinan. Having attempted to take advantage
of Moret's sl1ort-lived decree in 1870 permitting Philippine friars to
I
leave their orders, he had been dismissed from the Dominicans and
•
I expelled from the Philippines by the government of General
I 30
•
• Izquierdo. On his return to Spain he l1ad become a Protestant pas-
• tor and published this diatribe against the friars, accusing them of
I
' every imaginable crime and demanding their dissolution.
Lallave 's pamphlet is full of the most manifest exaggerations and
falsehoods , recklessly maligning the religious orders in every respect.
But the author is no friend of the Filipinos or defender of their rights

29. See chapter 9 for the organization of Filipino Masonry.

30. The account of Lallave 's dismissal from the Dominicans and expt1lsio11 from
I
th e PI1ilippines with tl1ree companions, parisl1 priests of neighboring towns in
Pangasinan, is in AHN, Ultramar, leg. 2223, "Sobre expulsion de las Islas Filipinas de
los Re ligiosos de la Orden de Sto. Domingo, Fr. Jose Ma. Islas, Fr. Nicolas Manrique
Alon so. Fr. Joaqui11 Palacios y Fr. Remigio Zapico.'' All were found guilty of a number
of serious charges. The documents show on tl1e one l1and tl1 e possibili ty of serious
abuses on th e part of friar parish priests, and on th e othe r hand, tl1 e stern measures
taken by their Orde r to expel unworthy members. An article by T. Vale 11 tino SitO)',
"An Ab orted Spanisl1 Protestant Mission to the Philippines,'' Sil/i1na1l Jounia/ 15 ( 1968):
254-55, attributes Lallave's separation from the Dominican order a11d from the Ca tholic
Ch urch to "a question of conscien ce." Though th e article contains much useful info r-
mation on Lallave's relations witl1 tl1 e Britisl1 and Fore ig11 Bible Socie ty, its fa ilure to
take accotint of these doct1me n ts makes its eval11atio n of Lallave and his m o tives unre-
liable, an.d it con tains a numbe r of fac tual erro rs 011 l1is relatio 11 to Del Pila r .
•
•
162 Del Pilar as Delegate in, Ba·rcelona

eithe r. He denies that Filipinos have any ability whatsoever, and in-
sults tl1em in a way worthy of Quioquiap:

Tl1ere you will not find that magnificent brilliance of intelligence .. .

nor will )'OU discover in the work.s of me11 tl1e graphic expression of the
po,, er of their ,~11; you ,vill see only lo\\rness, small-mindedness, fear,
1

sen ,ility in execution, poverty of will in every respect, and degradation

of the i11telligence . That people still lacks poetry; as yet it has not in-
,,e nted a so11g-rather, its songs and harmonies are the l1armonies and
songs of savages!

The entire people, he continues, are "liars by their very nature" and
31
altogether without any sense of morality.
Undeterred by this vilification, Del Pilar proposed to make use of
Lallave in his campaign to destroy the friars in the Philippines. He would
ally himself with Lallave, Morayta, and other elements in Spanish politi-
cal life, notably the ex-revolutionary, fo1111er grand master of the princi-
pal Masonic federation in Spain, Manuel Becerra, now overseas minister
32
in the cabinet of Sagasta. Becerra's term of office was to be a continu-
ous threat to the church in the Philippines, though few of his projects
33
ever succeeded in winning the approval of the rest of the cabinet. Del
Pilar, however, anticipating the opportunities offered by Becerra' s
projects, would use his organization in Manila to cooperate.

31. Manrique Alonso Lallave, Los frai/,es en Filipinas (Madrid, 1872) , 44, 48, 53-57.
32. Bece rra had headed the Gran Oriente d e Espana from 1884 to 1886, ,vhen h e
resigned after the federation ,,vas tor11 by dissensions as a result of financial irregulari-
ties on the part of tl1e grand secretary (see the "Historia general de la Francrnasoneria,"
in Lorenzo Frau Abrines and Rosendo Arus Arderiu, Diccion.ario enciclopedico d11 la
Masoneria (2d edition; 3 vols.; Bue11os Aires: Editorial Kier, 1947) , 3:467. This ,vo rk I

originally published in Spain in 1891, emanated from the faction of Spanish Mason n •
'
to ,vhic}1 Becerra and Morayta belonged. Though it hardly qualifies as a scho larlv,
work because of its serious omissions and errors, as well as a flagrant bias against
other Masonic federations of opposed factions, it is perhaps the best general sotirce of
information on Spanish Masonry, particularly fo r the lodges in which th e Filipinos
,~ere mainly involved.
33. Among Becerra 's projects were the separation of tl1e faculties o f m ed ici,1e and
pharmacy frorn th e llniversity, the subj ectio n of all the religio11s colleges o f secondan
education to an instilttte to be founded in Manila, tJ1e dispatcl1 of o ne hundred p~
ninsular teachers as i11spectors of primary cducatio11 in place of the pa rish p riests, the
substitution of government-appointed lay teachers in tl1e Normal Sch ool in place of
th e J esttits, tl1 e reduction of tl1e parish p riests to a scale of salari es fixed (at lo\v levels)
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona 163

One of Becerra's early measures was a circular an11ou11cing his in-

tention to submit the Philippine budget to the Cortes for the first
time, together with a law defining the limits of authority of the
governor-general and his advisors in the Philippines. The circular co11-
cluded with eloquent praise for the work of the religious orders and
called on the governor-general to continue encouraging their work
with his protection. However, tl1e decree added, he must always
preserve the integ1-ity of his powers as vice-royal patron, nor must
he forget

that in the territory of that jurisdiction there are Europeans, Asians,

and Americans ,-vho profess different religions. All these sl1ould be re-
spected in _their beliefs and in their worship, as the:i4 have been ever
since the wise Laws of the Indies were first laid down.

To the undiscerning, this might appear an innocuous statement,

35
corresponding to what had always been general Philippine practice.
I
I
•
I
Del Pilar, however, noted in a letter to Serrano that he considered it
''
.I
•

by the government, and a general redt1ction of the ecclesiastical budget. All tl1ese
measures were destined in one ,vay or another to weaken the position of the religious
orders a11d to secula1;ze education. There was naturally great opposition from the
bishops and religious orders, as well as from Governor-General Weyler. Sagasta's cabi-
net was apparently unwilling either to approve these measures or openly to discounte-
!
I
nance Becerra after he had made them public. They remained under discussion for
several months until the fall of the Sagasta ministry, when they were finally withdra,vn
by Becerra's successor, Antonio Fahie. Becerra likewise announced a number of other
reforms, such as the introduction of the Civil Code into the Philippi11es, but without
taking the necessary administrative measures to give the1n effect. Many of these meas-
!•
ures were certainly not of advantage to the Filipinos, e.g., the appointment of penin-
sular teachers to the l1igher posts in the primary school system, which was simply
another source of political posts for Becerra to reward his followers, but Del Pilar
supponed th em all, apparently for tl1e sake of a powerful ally against tl1e friars. For
the ecclesiastical projects of Becerra, see Pas tells, Misi6ri, 2: 176-82; for the civil re-
fonns and the administrative ineptitude or recklessness of Becerra, see Retana, Manda
' de Weyler, 76-84. Botl1, of course, are hostile accounts.
34. Text in "Las circtilares de Ultramar," El Dia (Madrid) , 19 Jan 1889.
35. The key wordli, of course, were "en SLt culto," under co,,er of wl1ich it v.ras
I
hoped to introduce freedom of public worship, sometl1ing forbidden in t11e Philip-
pines. That mis "vas not noticed by everyon e may be see n from t11e letter of Anibrosio
I
Rianzares Bautista to Del Pilar on 3 Mar 1889, declari11g tl1at in vie,v of the circular of
\
Becen ·a in favor of the friars, th ere was notl1ing n1ore to be h oped for fro nl tll r
•
•
164 Del Pila·r a.s Delegate in Barcelona

tl1e gra,,est tl1reat tl1at under the cL1rrent legislation ca11 be m ade against
tl1e tl1eocratic power. Becerra cannot descend to d e tails. The qL1estion
is wl1e ther we k11ovv h ovv to d evelop its potentialities.

He ,-vent on to explain how he proposed to do so:

Under protectio11 of tl1at circular, yot1 ha,,e coming to you there in

person, in body and sot1l , your Manrique Lallave, now a Protestant pas-
tor. Tl1e government will not be able to prosecute him, since he is
protected b)' the circular. If l1e succeeds in maki11g proselytes, an expo-
sition will be presented to the gove rnment with 300,000 signatures in
dema11d of greater tolerance a11d even of freedom of ,-vorship. This
latter is still a remote possibility, but eve11 toleration is already a 1011g
step against the monastic power. A5 to their expulsion , you kno,-v al-
ready that "''e can11ot hope for this from tl1e government; we have to
do it ourselves.

He tl1en counseled Serrano to aid Lallave clandestinely, with the aid

of Doroteo Cortes and of Jose Ramos, avoiding anything which might
be considered public and active propaganda in favor of a non-Catholic
religion, an offense punishable under Philippine law. In a letter to
Teodoro Sandiko a few weeks later, he urged him to work with Serrano
in helping Lallave, "because you have here the unfolding of one of
,,36
t h e p 1ans o f Becerra.
In his letter to Cortes, Del Pilar gave some idea of his relations
with Becerra in this matter:

Senor Manrique Lallav·e and his companions are going there to carry
on some business. which they will explain to you. Believing their inter-
ests to be antagonistic to those of certain monopolizers of the country.
I ,-vould wisl1 that, on your part and that of )'Our friends , you ,vould
bestow every kind of protection on them, being assured that tl1ese gen-
tlemen and tl1e elements on which they depend, with whom we are i11
complete t1nderstanding, are disposed to render tts service in r e tur 11 . 3 i

go ve rnm e nt (£). Pilar, 1:48). Othe rs ,-vere n1ore pe rceptive t10,,·ever , as ma y be seen
by the letter of the vi car-capitular of Ma nila a11d the provincials o f tl1e rcligio tis ordt'n
to th e Queen, pro testing tl1e introduc tior1 of "libertad d e cultos" into tJ1 e Phili ppin es
(AH N. Ultra n1ar, leg. 2305, e xp. 98) .
36. Ep. Pilar, 1:112 , 161 .
37. Ibid., 106. The impo rtant ph rases are: "esos sen ores y los e le m e nto s d e qta e
de penderi, co n los cuaJ es esta.1110s e n pe rfecta inte liger1cia , est.an dispuestos a presran1 os
 Del Pilar rJS Delegate in Barrelon a 165

The plan did not prosper, ho,.vever, since Lallave contracted a fever a
few weeks afte r l1is arrival in Manila, and died after a two week illness.~~
Del Pilar's part i11 all this raises ce1·tain questions. First of all, ,,vl10
,vere "the elements on which they depend" with wl1om Del Pilar "''as
"in complete understanding"? Second, what was the 11ature of tl1e re-
lationship between Del Pilar and Becerra? Third, were the efforts of
l Del Pilar directed merely against tl1e friars, or against Catl1olicism in
the Philippines as a whole?
tI
1I To the first question, two possible answers offer themsel,,es: a group
I of Protestants, or a group of Masons. The first seems highly improb-
I able, since the scattered Protestants in Spain at this time could scarcel)'
have done an),thing for Del Pilar and l1is associates that would justify
l' the phrase "disposed to render us se1vice in return." Moreover, Lalla,,e,
I
' who had been a Presbyterian pastor in Seville from 1874 until 1888,
was deprived of his pastorate in 1888 because of accusatio11s made
•
against him. It is unlikely that his chu1·ch, having deprived him of l1is
pastorate for alleged bad conduct, would have entrusted him with
opening a new mission in the Philippines. It is known, however, that
his mission did have the sponsorsl1ip of the British and Foreign Bible
Society, to which he had offered his services to open a Bible depot in
iI Manila. But it is even less explicable how the latter organization could
,l

reciproco senricio." Lallave ,vas accompanied by a young Spanisl1 Baptist convert 11amed
,
I
; Francisco de P. Castells, ,vho ,vas also a Mason (Sitoy, "Nineteentl1 Century Evangeli-
I
I cal Beginnings in the Philippines," The South East Asiajournal of Tlieology 9 (1967] : 53).
I
38. Antifriar writings of a later period have often charged that Lallave ,vas poi-
'•
soned by the friars. Serrano wrote to Del Pilar however: "Lallave died after 2 weeks of
• a fever ranging benveen 39° and 41 °" (Ep. Pilar, 1 :178). A more detailed accot1nt in El
f
l Dia (Madrid) , 2 Aug 1889, relates the vain efforts of a Dominican to visit l1im during
•
his fatal sickness. These two accounts from a11tifriar sot1rces make no mention of any
•
suspicion of poisoning. Castells, forty years later, declared tl1at he himself ,vas taker1 ill
•
I
and that a British doctor believed that he was suffering frorn food poisoning; l1e co11-
•
l cluded that the same must have been true of Lallave. Tl1is is apparently tl1e basis for
the charge, though it is hard to believe that Serrano or tl1e author of the account in
I El Dia would l1ave failed to report any suspicions of poisoning if sucl1 l1ad existed at
l the time, since particularly the letters of Serrano in tl1is pe1iod are filled ,vith acc ltsa-
I
•
' tions and re ports of accusations against the friars, whicl1 he fo n varded to Del Pilar for
• inclusion in La Solidaridad. In his article i11 Silliman j ournal (15:277- 78) Sitov, incliiles
•
to th e belief that I.,allave was poiso ned , Ll1ougl1 conceding that tl1e qttcstio ,1 niust he
left "unanswered ." He fails to t.-ike account, h o,veve r, of tl1e c-\'iden ce fro n1 Sc•r ra ri o
an cl El Dia.
166 Del Pilar as Delegate in Ba1·celon.a

l1ave, or would l1ave, re ndered tl1e services which Del Pilar expected
39
i11 retur11 for }1is aid.
Ratl1er, it seems clear that the "elements" spoken of by Del Pilar as
Lallave 's principal backers were Masonic, specifically the Gran Oriente
Espanol of Miguel Morayta. Lallave had been an active Mason for
many years, had published a number of Masonic works, and was edi-
tor of the Masonic 1·eview Taller from the time of its foundation. Hav-
i11g first been a member of the lodge "Numantina" of the Gran Oriente
Lusitano Unido, he had helped found the Gran Logia Simb6lica
Independiente Espanola in 1881, and had been founder and Worshipful
Master of the lodge "Numancia." Lallave was therefore certainly no
stranger to Becerra a11d Morayta, since he was active in Masonic circles
40
friendly to these men right up to the time of his departure for Manila.
It may be 11oted that the 1·ecommendations of Del Pilar to his friends in
Manila that they should aid Lallave were written at the beginning of May
1889. This was precisely tl1e time of departure for the Philippines of the
first mail boat to sail after Del Pilar's meetings with Morayta, when the
latter came to Barcelona for the affiliation of the newly created lodge
"Revoluci6n." In the absence of any alternative hypothesis, the connec-
tion between Filipino support of Lallave's mission and the conferences
41
between Del Pilar and Morayta seems clear.

39. Frau-Aru s, Diccionario, 1:614-15. WhetJ1er the accusations ,vere true or n ot d oes
not alter the fact tha t tl1 e church did dismiss him from his pastorate even leavi ng }1im
d estitute , according to me f1;endly accou11t in Fratt-Arus. It ,vas apparently under these
circumstances tl1at l1e offered his services to tl1e Bible Society in 1888 (SitO)', Silliman
j ournal, 267).
40. Tl1e clearest evidence of Lallave having been close to Morayta is tJ1e laudator.·
•
n ature of tl1e article on him i11 Frau-Ar(1s. As noted above, tllis Dicri.onario, fi rst pub-
lished in 1891, is stro11gly biased in favo r of Morayta and l1is associates, ,vhile simplv
ignori11g, o r even attacki11g bitterly, pro minent Masons of 0L11er factions o r federatio 11s.
41. Sitoy (Silli1na·n .Joumal 15:272), shO'\\fS tl1at l,allave must have arri\'ed ir1 ~1a11il a
at the latest 011 8 May 1889, and tl1us l1ave left Barcelo na by 12 April. Tl1e fac t tJ 1at
De l Pilar did 11o t write his lette rs of r ecomme ndation Lill the time of the- r1cxt 1nail
boat m akes it hig l1ly impro bable that l1 e was acquai11ted ,vith Lalla\'e person.illy. a11cl
tl1erefore only undertook to aid his 1nission as a rest1lt of Ivlora)'la 's rneeting ,vitl1 hi111
after the departure of Lallave and Castells. The referer1ce to l ..llla,•e's ,lfrival in Serrano's
letter of 24 May, rather th~\11 sl10,-vi11g l1 c l1ad prior k110,-vled ge of tl1e f<)m1er's 1nis-
sio n, is explai11ed by the fact tl1at Serrar10 t,ad al read y 111ade plans to reprint L.111~1,-e 's
pampl1let independently of its autl1or.
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelonct 167
•'
I

The second question as to what relations Del Pilar had with Becerra
regarding Lallave's mission can perhaps be answered best by observa-
tions on the circumstances surrounding the negotiations for this mis-
sion. Del Pilar 's letter to Serrano gives the impression tl1at Becerra's
circular, under p1·otection of which Lallave was going to the Philip-
pines, was the result of a previous plan with whicl1 Del Pilar was ac-
I
I
42
quainted, though he actually had no part in its formation. The letter
to Sandiko speaking of "the unfolding of one of the plans of Becerra,"
I

I leaves Ii ttle room for doubt that Becerra was actively facilitating
' Lallave 's mission , if not initiating it himself.
Becerra had been the Gran Comendador of the Gran Ori en te de
Espana, out of which, shortly after his resignation, had sprung the
43
Gran Orie nte Espanol headed by Morayta. Since there had been no
contact between Becerra and Del Pilar up to this time, except through
• Morayta or Quiroga, it seems clear that either Becerra himself was
,
•
l the sponsor of Lallave, or more likely, Morayta was the immediate
instigator of Lallave's mission, as part of the general program of
secularization of Philippine society projected by Becerra. In either case,
•
I
I Morayta was the intermediary in enlisting Del Pilar's aid, and it was
I
'' th rough Morayta that Del Pilar expected to obtain reciprocal assist-
•
ance for his own ends in the future .
I•
•
A ft1rther corroboration of the close collaboration between Morayta
and Becerra for the elimination of all clerical influence frotn Philip-
pine society is Morayta's denunciation of the Jesuits' control of the
Escuela Normal of Manila in his address at the pedagogical congress
held during the Exposition of Barcelona in 1888. In that attack Morayta
had deplored the ignominy to the Spanish nation of allowing Jesuits
to wield such power, and had demanded that the normal school be
removed from their administration. When Becerra became overseas

42. See also n ote 41 above.

43. Becerra resigned in 1886 in the midst of dissensio11s. The federation soon broke
up into quarrelling factions, one of which was led by Morayta . After vari o us
recombinations with factio ns of the Gran Oriente Nacional and o t11er Masonic groups,
Morayta and his followers ch allen ged the eleclions of tl1e latest federation a 11 d broke
a,vay again at the beginning of 1889 to constitute tl1e Gran Oriente Espanol, witll
Morayta as Gran Comendador and Gran Maestro. Bece rra, l1owever, took 110 active
part in these struggles an d realignments after l1is resigna Lion (Frau-Arus, Diccio,iario,
3:457-59).
168 Df l J:Jilar a,s Del.egate in Ba,rceloria

minister a fe\v montl1s later, on e of th e importan t refor1n rneasures

h e proposed for th e Philippines ,vas the rernoval of the ~Jesu its from
11
ha,ri ng a ny part in tl1e 11o rmal educatio n give n th e re.-•
As far as can be ascertained , the refore, Del Pilar's relations ,,1tl1
Becerra we1-e only indirec t, with Morayta as the interm ediary. T he aid
extended by Del Pilar to the mission of Lallave as part of the plans of
Becerra a nd Morayta fo r the secL1la rizatio n of Philippine societ)' vvere
to be of far-reaching significance to th e Filipin o 11atio n alist cam paign .
as it becam e m o re and more closely tied up ,.vi th Mora)rta and the
Gra n Orie11te Espaii ol. Th e qu estio n remains as to whe th e1- this ,,,as a
me re tactical allia nce fo1· lin1ited e nds-that is, to break tl1 e power of
the friars- or whe the r Del Pilar 's campaign too ,-vas d irected against
Philippine Catholicisn1 as a whole.
In atte mpting to a11swer this question , on e is face d with an appar-
e nt inconsiste ncy in Del Pilar's public positio n and l1is cla ndestine
acti\rity. In l1is Spanish pampl1le ts against ilie fria rs-me o nly 0 11es
known a t all publicly to be his-and in L a Solidaridad, h e al,-vays in-
sisted tl1at he was attacking only the friars, 11ot the J esuits, much less
the secular clergy, Spanish or Filipino, whom he pro posed to substi-
tute for the friars in the Philippines. He proclaimed his interest in
the welfare of ilie Churcl1 , toge ther with the inte rests of Spain , as a
principal reason for the restriction or expulsio n of ilie friars. In hi
le tters to Blume ntritt, who held su ch a position himself, Del Pila1-
to ok a similar stand .
But a letter of Del Pilar to Rizal, writte n jt1st at the time h e ,,ras
forging his allian ce with Spanish Masonry, conveys a rathe r different
impression. Discussing the lo ng-ra11ge objectives of the na tio nalist can1-
paign, such as the future language to be ad opted in the Pl1ilippi11es
(Spanish o r T agalog ), h e declared :

44. [Pastells) , Rizal y su obra, 2 1; a lso tl1 e letters of Fr. J uan Ricart, SJ. to l-'r, Pablo
Pas te lls, SJ ., 31 O ct 1888 and 17 Sept 1889, in AT, .. Cartas de los PP. Pro,ii1cial~~ .1 ll~
Superio res de Filip in as, 1883-1890." In tl1e la tter of these h e speaks of a J,, tt('r fr\'ln,
Father Mendaro, J es11i t Proct1 r.1to r \\'itl1 tl1e Madrid go,·em n1e11L. ..,,·t1icl1 co1,fin1t-" 1,,,
suspicions (wl1ich v.·t' re almost p roofs) th at Becerra ,va.s 11o t si11cerc a11d tl1at th<" dt"-
Cath oliciz:ation of tl1 c l' l1ilippin es tl1rot1gl1 µ1;111ary education ,,,as a plar1 alre-ad,· ,,.\1rked
ou t with the lodges. " Becerr.1 l1 ad earlier a\Sttre d the J eslt its. ir1 the JJerso11 of Fad1e1
Federico Fat1ra, directo r of tl1e Ma11ila Ob!lic-1, ,.1tc,ry, tl1at the 1o rmal Scl,ool ol' t11e
Jesuits ,vould n ot b e d isturbed.
 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona 169

I understand clearly now that what is needed among us is a weaken-

ing of tl1e po,ver of the Pope. Among us there is 110 prop to keep
standing some thing which is being overthrown by everyone. Yet since
those who have just awakened are frightened easily, we think it a good
idea that they be frightened at the friar and not at us. In that way we
\\rill gradually bring them over to the point we are really aiming a t.
Moreover, as I see it, the seed the Pope sowed in our country is not
very deeply-rooted. It was not planted in the mind, but accepted be-
cause of the awe of the ign ora11t. Therefore, once the falsehoods they
believe in are discre<!ited a little, the faith of the Tagalogs will be dis-
. d completely. 4:i
ere d 1te

It is difficult to interpret this passage in any other sense than as

definitely conte mplating the weakening of Catholicism in the Philip-
pines. Del Pilar realized quite well that an open attack on Catholi-
cism was impossible among the mass of Filipinos. Even if it could be
effective with the Filipino people, he knew the Spanish government
would promptly suppress it to insure political security, if for no other
reason.
On the other hand, Del Pilar was by no means an irreligious man.
A number of his letters, like the ones he wrote to his wife Marciana
and to Serrano, reveal a man who had indeed rejected much of what
he knew as Catholicism, but who believed firmly in a Providence guid-
46
ing the destinies of peoples, especially his own. No doubt he shared
much of Rizal 's thought on this point, seeing the elimination of the
friars from Filipino life as inextricably tied up with weakening the
religion they represented.
In a letter to Blumentritt in 1890, Rizal related how Trinidad Pardo
de Tavera had defended Rizal's Noli before the Jesuits in Manila by
saying that Rizal was attacking not religion itself, but the friars. This
prompted Rizal to point out that Pardo's illustration, saying that Rizal
had tried to hit the friars with his stone and had accidentally struck
religion, was not completely accurate:

45. Ep. Pilar, 1:72-73. As pointed out in note 5 above, th e editors have wrongly
identified the addressee of this letter ("Pin akamamah al kong ka ibigan") as Pedro
Icasiano, but it is clearly Rizal, as th e reference to th e Association des Philippinistes of
Rizal shows.
46. E.g,., Ep. Pilar, 1:50; 2: 10-11; 182; etc.
170 Del Pilar as Delegate in Barcelona

I wanted to hit tl1e friars, but since the friars use religion not only as a
shield, bt1t also as a weapon, protection , citadel, fortress, am1or, etc., I
was therefore forced to attack their false and superstitious religion in
order to combat the enemy who hid bel1ind this religion . . . . Why
should I not attack this religion with all my strength, if it is the prime
cause of ot1r suffe1ings and our tears? The responsibility lies on those
who misuse its name. Christ did the same witl1 the religion of His coun-
47
try, which the Pharisees had so misused.

Given this attitude of Rizal and Del Pilar, Spanish Masonry with the
determined opposition to the Catholic Church which then character-
ized it, became a natural ally to the Filipino antifriar movement. The
mutual relations deserve to be discussed in some detail.

47. Ep. Rizal., 5:523-24.

 CHAPTER 9

Filipino Masonry

The Masonic lodges had served as centers for many of the Liberal
conspiracies in Spain during the first three-quarters of the nineteenth
century, and Masonry had played a considerable part in the emanci-
pation of the Spanish American republics. In Cuba too, Masonic in-
flue nce was strong in the insurrections of the second half of the
nineteenth century.
It might be expected then that in a society far more theocratic like
the Philippines, Masonry would play a considerable role in any active
nationalist movement. A very large proportion of the Filipino nation-
alist leaders were at one time or another Masons, but the role of
Masonry in the nationalist movement and in the succeeding Revolu-
tion has been exaggerated and misinterpreted both by its friends and
its enemies. Tl1e writings of friars and Jesuits of the period, both pub-
lished works and private correspondence, tend to picture Masons lurk-
ing in every corne1·, and books have not been lacking, even in recent
times, which picture the entire last two decades of nineteenth-century
Philippines as a Masonic plot, directed by the Supreme Council of
1
Charleston, to strip Spain of her last overseas provinces. In the light
of the cooperation between Morayta and Del Pilar, it will be of inter-
est to examine the evidence as to the real role Masonry played in the
Filipino nationalist movement.

I . Fo r d etailed referen ces to the literature, see my article "Philippine Mason ry to

1890," Asian Studies 4 (1966): 328-29.

171
172 Filipino IV!asortry

Early Masonry among Filipinos

There are va1·ious conflicting a nd ,,agu e reports about Masonic

lodges i11 the Philippines from the middle of the nineteenth century,
but all available evid e nce goes to show that these ,.vere composed of
Europea11s-,e ither foreig11 me rcl1ants or Spa11ish functionaries and
army officers sta tioned in the Philippines. T l1e only Filipino wh o can
be identified with certaint)' as having belonged to a lodge in the Philip-
pines before 1891 was Jose A. Ramos. Ramos had, l1owever, been initi-
a ted in Londo11 , where he had m arried a n English wife, and was a
2
Spanish mestizo, listed in the records of l1is lodge as a n espaiiol filijJino.
The fact that Masonry in the Philippines had not at this time opened
its doors to Filipinos perhaps explains the readiness of Filipino stu-
dents in Europe to join Masonic lodges that imposed no race barrie1·.
Lopez Jaena was apparently initiated as early as 1882, and other indi-
3
viduals may similarly have joined lodges during these years . In 1886,
however , the lodge "Solidaridad" came into existence with a m ember-
4
ship which indicated its connection with Filipino aspirations.
Of the founding members two were Filipinos-Rafael Del Pan and
Ricardo Ayllon-three were Cubans, one a Puerto Rican, and the other
two peninsulars. Shortly after its fot1ndation two other Filipinos, J t1lio
Llorente and Evaristo Aguirre, also joined "Solidaridad" and a large
proportion of those initiated in the succeeding months were eitl1er
Cubans or Puerto Ricans. This association with students from Spain's
other overseas provinces, more advanced in self-go,,ernment than the
Philippines, no doubt stimulated Filipino nationalist thinki11g.
Likewise significant was the role Miguel Morayta appea1·s to h a,·e
played. One of the founders was a Pt1erto Rican na m ed Herminio
Dfaz, a membe1· of Morayta's own lodge, "Hijos del Progreso." Mora)·ta
himself is listed as an honorary m ember of the lodge "Solidaridad ."

2. Ib id., 329-31, wh ere tl1 e standard account of T eod o r o M. Kala,v, Philippin, 1\ro-
sonry, tr. and ed. by Frederic 1-1. Ste,,e ns and Antonio 1\1nec l1 azt1rra (f\1ani la. 195t}) is
st1pple m c nted and correc ted from the reco rds of tJ1e Philippi.tie lodges pre.se t~·ed itt
ADN, leg. 219-A. In tl1 e ligl1l of these reco rds it 11:.is bee n J)Ossibl e to corrc·ct n1anv• of
tl1e distortions a 11d e rrors of a number o f Maso11ic ,vorks of the tttn1 of tl1e cenct1n·. ,

3. Schumac)1er, ibid., 332-33.

4. AON, leg. 736 A, exp. 11-A. contai11 s tl, e st1rvi\-111g reco rds of tl1c lodge, inclt1d-
ing detailed m e 1nbership lists.
 FilifJino P.1asonry 173

¼rith the title of "Honorary Worshipful Master," and the two lodges
1naintained close r elations during the rather ephemeral existen ce of
"Solida ridad. "
The lodge appears to 11ave led a rather languid life before its dissolu-
tion in May 1887. There was a rapid turnover of members in gene1-al,
and little evidence of concrete activity. When the majority of the remain-
ing members, including Lopez Jaena, voted to join with certai11 otl1er
lodges to for1n a new lodge, apparently the only remaining Filipi110 was
5
Uorente. The significa11ce of this early "Solidaridad," howe,,er, '\-\ra.5 that
though Filipinos l1ad formed only a small proportion of its members, it
had established Filipino co11tacts with Masonry unde1- the aegis of Morayta.
When the opportune time came, it would be revived under Llorente as
an all-Filipino lodge, affiliated to the federation l1eaded by Morayta.
The latter was to play a significant role in cooperating with Filipinos
in various affairs until his death thirty years later.

The Lodge "Revoluci6n"

The first predominantly Filipino lodge was founded in Barcelona

6
in early 1889 '\-\ritl1 the title "Revolt1cion." The initiative seems to have
come from a former Spanish army officer in the Philippines, named
•
Celso Mir Deas, who had married a Filipina. In addition to Mir, who
was an active republican and editor of the Barcelona republican ne,-vs-
.• paper, El Pueblo Soberano, the original members of the lodge were Lopez
•
Jaena, Del Pilar, Ponce, Jose Ma. Panganiban, and two Cubans-Justo
-
Ai·gudin and Juan Jose Canarte. The latter two had been members of
the lodge "Solidaridad" in 1886, and Canarte ,-vas at this time a col-
laborator of the Filipino newspaper La Solidaridad. Immediately after
the foundation of the lodge Lopez Jaena, its Worshipful Master, peti-
tioned Morayta for affiliation to the Gran Oriente Espanol, which the
latte r had founded after a schism within the Gran Oriente Nacional. 7

5. Ibid.; see also Schumache r, Asian Stu dies, 332-33.

6. Ibid., 333, citing corresponden ce from AT ; ADN. leg. 620, exp. 14-A.
7 • For a n accoun t of th e schism a nd the formation of tl1e two 1"ed '
e rau·o r1s, see
Frau-Ams, Diccionario, 3:457-59, which presen ts Morayta 's side. A hostile acco unt in
• Luis Martfn y d e Castro, /Ja mns07leria rn la Isla ~ ()ubn )' los Gra1t,ies Ori.en/,-s de l~pa,,n
(Gtiantanamo, 1890 ), 89-9 1, confirms th e essenl1aJ facts.
174 Filipino Mason1y

It was just two weeks late r that Morayta made the trip to Barcelona,
where h e was h onored with a banquet by the Filipinos, and made his
first personal contacts ,-\Tith Del Pilar. At this tim e Del Pilar must h ave
agreed to support Manrique Alonso Lallave in his attempt to set up a
Protestant chapel in Manila under cover of Becerra's decree, and
forged the links between his organization a nd Morayta which were to
play so important a part in the succeeding years.
The surviving records of "Revoluci6n" for the year 1889 show an in-
flux of most of the Filipinos in Barcelona into the lodge and a rapid
ascent of these Filipinos to the higher degrees of Masonry. The addi-
tional recruits included Santiago Icasiano, Arist6n Ba11tista, Galicano
Apacible, Damaso Ponce, Ramon In1perial, Agustin Blanco, Domingo
Marcelo Cortes, and Teodoro Sandiko. The rapidity ,.vith which the ma-
jority of these men, at least those active in the nationalist movement,
rose in Masonry seems rather extraordinary. It could perhaps be attrib-
uted to a desire on Morayta's part to build up new lodges quickly, so as
to consolidate his still shaky federation, or even to financial considera-
8
tions on his part. But more likely, though without disregarding Morayta 's
motivation, it corresponded to the desire of the Filipinos, particularly
Del Pilar and Ponce, to rise to positions in Masonry where they could
make effective use of their Masonic contacts for their political purposes,
particularly the destruction of friar influence in the Philippines.
Even at an early stage Del Pilar had entertained high hopes from
Filipino Masonic contacts. Shortly after presenting to the overseas min-
ister the exposition petitioning parliamentary representation, aboli-
tion of censorship, and prohibition of administrative depo1·tation , h e
9
wrote to Rizal, who seems to h ave joined Masonry earlier:

If you can take advantage of the support of the "Gran Familia," n o,v is
the time. For Becerra belongs to it, and besides, this oppressive 1neasure
[administrative deportation] affects its prestige and good n ame . since it is
10
its o,m members and its friends who are st1bject to this persectition.

8. Deta ils i11 Sch\unacher, ibid., 334-35.

9. Rizal's vari ous biograpl1 ers give differc11t dates a nd places for his i11itiatio 11 itl tl)
Masonry. Wha t is certain is th at h e rece ive d the degree of ~laster ~1aso11 0111~· i11 189()
from tl1e lodge ''Solidaridad" ir1 Madrid. ,Jltst ho\v lo 11g befor~ this l1e ,vas first ini ti-
ated ca11not be determined ,,~Lh ceru_1inty, bLit Del Pilar's letter in1plies t}1at it 11,ld
taken place before May 1889 whe n lie ,vrole to Rizal . S<."e also Dorunvntos Ri=.alino~
r11galados pur el pueblo eJpaiiol c,l p,ublo filipino ( Manila: lmpre11ta Publica, 1953). 189.
10. EjJ. Rizal. , 2: 176, t.11. Pilr,r, 1:192.
 Filipino Masonry 175

Rizal, however, was t1nwilling to make use of Masonic influen ce,

since h e declared that h e did not want "to owe th e tranquility of the
Philippines to a11yon e except the forces of the country itself. " Del
Pilar was undismayed , and l\rithout communicating anything further
to Rizal, began to campaig11 among other Masonic lodges to obtain
th ei1- support for a peti tion to Sagasta and Becerra, against permitting
administrative deportation in the Philippi11es. 11
On 2 July, Lo p ez Jaena forwarded to Morayta copies of an exposi-
tion making this petition, signed by various lodges not only of the
Gran Orie nte Espanol, but also of otl1er federations. In his official
letter as Worshipful Master of "Revolucion" he asked Morayta to see
to it that these expositions be placed in the hands of the ministers to
whom tl1ey were addressed by their brother Masons. In a confidential
unofficial lette r which accompanied these documents, he offered the
acti,rity of the lodge "Revolucion" in securing the cooperation of lodges
outsid e the Gran Oriente Espanol as a proof of the Masonic zeal of
the Filipinos, pointing out that this might well be a first step in bring-
ing more lodges under Morayta's leadership. In return for this service
h e asked to be rewarded with the thirtieth deg1·ee without his having
12
to make a fo1111al reqt1est (that is, without paying the customary fees).
Tl1e incident is significant for showing how Del Pilar intended to
make use of Masonry to influence prominent political figures who
,vere Masons. For in spite of the letter of Lopez Jaena in his official
capacity as Worsl1ipful Master, the correspondence of Del Pilar makes
clear that it was tl1e latter who was behind the move, though un-
dot1btedly the long-standing political and Masonic contacts of Lopez
J aena had been largely instrumental in making the move possible. 13
The1·e is no evidence, however, that these petitions based 011 frater-
nal Masonic loyalty actually accomplished anything towards achieving
their o bj ect, or even influenced their intended addressees at all.
Becerra had al1·eady embarked on a program of radical reforms for
the Philippines earlier, which was meeting intense opposition. Though

-------
11. Ep Pilar, 1: 186.
12. ADN, leg. 620, exp. 14-A
13. Later when both were at odds with Del Pilar, Lopez Jaena ½'ould write to Rizal:
"I was everything for tl1e m wl1en they arrived here i11 Spain; I was th e o ne ,v110 made
something of them; it was I ,vl10 introduced them to the societies, to u1e p olitical
figures'" (l ;;p. Rizal. , 3:252, 15 Oct 189 1).
176 Filipirlo Masonry

l1e might possibly h ave supported the object of this pe tition, h e was
by 110w not in a position to propose any furth er Philippi11e refor,ns.
Sagasta, ,-vho was not even willing to compromise himself at any tim e
for the sake of the controversial projects Becerra had earlier proposed ,
would scarcely have allowed himself to be led to a further step which
many, even Liberals, considered likely to weaken Spanish control in
14
the Philippines, simply because of lobbying from Masonic lodges.
Not only the friars and other conse1vatives overestimated the strength
of Masonic influence in politics, but apparently Del Pilar also.
After September the records of "Revoluci6n" show an increase of
non-Filipino members, and a corresponding decrease in active par-
ticipation by Filipinos, no doubt due to the plans of Del Pilar to trans-
fer all his operations to Madrid. Sandiko, Bautista, Damaso Ponce,
and perhaps Apacible, all moved to Madrid about the same time as
Del Pilar, with Mariano Ponce soon to follow. Since Panganiban al-
ready had only months to live, all the Filipinos who had shown them-
selves active in the lodge "Revoluci6n," with the exception of Lopez
Jaena, were now gone. The latter resigned as Worshipful Master at
the end of November, and there is no mention of the few remaining
Filipino members in the surviving records after November.

The Revived Lodge "Solidaridad"

No sooner had Del Pilar settled in Madrid than he initiated mo,,es

to maintain the Masonic connections of his organization by setting
up an all-Filipino lodge there. Moving behind the scenes in his usual
fashion, he worked with Llorente, as the only remaining Filipino mem-

14. Besides the natural opposition of tl1 e religiot1s orders (Pastells. Nf ision, 2: 176-
82), Governor-General Weyler as well as several of Becerra's colleagues in tl1e Sagasta
ministry also opposed the secularizing meast1res l1e had projected (AT, letter of Migu("l
Roses, SJ., to Juan Ricart, SJ., 23 May 1889, and Jose Me11daro, S.J. , to Rican. 20 Sept
1889) . As a matter of fact, the Sagasta ministry never sanctioned Becerra ·s proje-cts.
and when the ministry fell a year ai1d a half later, they were witl1drawn by his succes-
sor. As to Sagasta l1imself, th e laudatory article in Frau-Artis (Diccianario, 2:()61-62 )
admits: "Though an o ld a11d prove n Mason , Brotl1er Sagasta took very little pan in
Masonic affairs." Though he was perst1aded to take the higl1est post in tl1e Gran Oriente
de Espana in 1876, l1e resigned it as soon as he l1ad tl1e opportunity to form a cabinet
in 1881.
 FilijJin,o Mason.ry 177

15
ber of the old lodge "Solidaridad," to revive it. On 10 December
1889 a preparatory m eeting was held at Del Pilar' s quarters in which
Llorente was elected Worshipful Master; Del Pilar, Senior v\1a1-den;
with other officials and members generally proceeding from tl1e old
16
Barcelona lodge "Revolucion," however all of them Filipinos tl1is time.
They agreed to seek recognition and affiliation from the Gran Oriente
Espanol, asking Morayta to grant them the charter belonging to tl1e
old lodge "Solidaridad." This they received in May 1890.
There is no record of external activity on the part of the lodge
during the 1-est of that year, though the members seem to have met
periodically at least to hear lectures on Masonic ideals for the Philip-
pines.1 7 Rizal and Serrano, who had come to Madrid in Augt1st 1890,
both received minor posts in the elections of December. Though
Llorente was again elected Worshipful Master, he returned to the Phil-
ippines the following month, and Del Pilar succeeded him; Ponce
had already been elected secretary. Del Pilar and Ponce were to con-
tinue to hold these posts until the dissolution of the lodge shortly
before the collapse of the Propaganda movement, and were likewise
to become members of the Supreme Council of the Gra11 Oriente
18
Espanol, holding the highest degree.
Under Del Pilar's formal leadership "Solidaridad" actively commu-
nicated with other lodges, making use of their collaboration in vari-
ous petitions to obtain reforms and rights for the Philippines. Already
in October 1890, the Gran Oriente Espanol had circt1larized its con-
stituent lodges, asking them to bring their influence to bear on mem-
bers of the Cortes to support the proposed grant of representation to
the Philippines. In June and July 1891 the lodge "Solidaridad" itself
prepared a petition to the Cortes urging representation for the Phil-
ippines, and sent it to the other lodges for signatures supporting the
petition. The following April it followed this up with another lette1- to
•

15. ADN, leg. 736-A. exp . 11-A.

16. The one apparent exception was Eleute rio Rui z de Leon, who was, ho,vever,
manied to a Filipina, and had been a patron of the Filipino stL1denLc; i 11 Madricl fron1
as early as 188 1 (see Felix M. Roxas, The Wcrrld of Jie[ix Roxas, tr. by Angel Estrada a r1 d
Vice nte del Carmen [Manila: The Filipiniana Boo k Guilcl, 1970], 39).
17. Kalaw, Philippine /vlasonry, 28-37.
18. ADN, leg. 73&.A, exp. 11-~ A nuario de[ Gran OrienlP l.:S/1a1iol ( 1894-95). cited in
Mauricio, La gran traici6n (Barcelona: Borras, 189~)), 92 .

.•
178 Filipino Mason·ry

all the lodges, ,.vhich cited tl1e preamble of the constituti o n of the
Gran Oriente Espanol, pledging tl1e federation to work for tl1e libera-
tion of the Filipino people fron1 the crushing yoke of clericalism, and
asked their cooperation in sect1ring as many signatures as possible.
Witl1 the hoped-for proximate return to power of a democratic gov-
ernment, there ,.vot1ld be an opportunit)' to present this petition with
. . 19
its signatures to the Cortes with l1ope of success.
Though the petitio11 finally presented to the Cortes in 1895 fail ed
to achieve its pt1rpose, this attempt to use the support of the Maso11ic
lodges was very successful with 1·egard to securing the signatt1res. By
the middle of 1892 there were several thousand signatt1res from cities
and towns in all parts of Spain, though, because of the political situation
at that time, nothing further was done about presenting the petition
20
until over two years later. The effectiveness, however, of his Masonic
plea for cooperation in obtaining Filipino rights undoubtedly encour-
aged Del Pilar further to promote Masonry among the Filipi11os.

Filipi110 Masonry in the Philippines

More important, perhaps, than the political support which was ob-
tained or hoped for in the Peninsula through tl1e Filipino lodge
"Solidaridad," was the opportunity thus won to set up lodges in the
Philippines open to Filipinos. It appears that the Filipinos obtained
this authorization from Morayta in 1891 , and plans for organization
were drawn up by Antonio Luna and Pedro Serrano Laktaw.
On the return of Serrano to Ma11ila in late 1891 or the beginning
of 1892 with the authorization of the Gran Oriente Espa1i.ol, Se1·rano,
Moises Salvador, Timoteo Paez, and Jose Ramos set tip the first Fili-
pino lodge, "Nilad," on 6 January 1892, with Ramos as Worshipfttl

19. One of tl1ese printed circltlar le tters. addressed in this case to tl1c lodge
''Firmeza" of Cadiz, is in ADN, leg. 736, exp. 11 -A. Parts of it are reproduced in K.\1 ~1,,..
Philippine Masonry, 38-40.
20. In Al-IN, Ultramar, leg. 5264, there is a bol1r1d volur11e of o,rer tl1ree ll llrtdrt'd
folio pages, containing the p etitio 11s fron1 all over Sp ai11 a11d tl1e lists of signatures.
T11e petitions are n1ade, 11ot in tl1e nan1e of Masonic lodges, ht.it of tJ1e Asc)cia.cio n
Hispano-Filipina. The signatures, for tl1e 111ost })art, come from tl1e period of n1id-l 89 1
to mid-1892, sl10,vi11g that tl1e Masonic appeal of Del Pilar \\las 1argel)' effec tive . For
the presentation of tl1e J)Ctitions to tl1e Cortes, see belo\V, cl1aptcr 10.
 Filipino Masonry 179
21
Master. One of the early acts of "Nilad" was to name Rizal its honor-
af)' ½' o rshipful Master , as Serrano notified him at the beginning of
February.
After the first month new members were initiated with rapidity,
and a second lodge, "Balagtas" sprang out of "Nilad" in March, with
Moises Salvador as Worshipful Master. Other members from various
provinces of the Islands returned to their homes and formed trian-
gles, a number of which later became lodges in their own right.
In the beginning the lodge "Nilad" under Ramos and Serrano was
known as the "mother lodge" a11d acted as a sort of deputy of the
other lodges with the Gran Oriente Espanol in Spain. Before long,
l1owever, disagreements arose, and accusations of misuse of funds were
made against Serrano. As a result, after many months of struggles
and a threat to withdraw from the Gran Oriente Espanol, the Filipino
lodges received authorization to set up an autonomous Gran Consejo
Regional, constituted by the Filipino lodges, ,vith Ambrosio Flores as
.d
g ran d pres1 ent. 22

Through all the activities and vicissitt1des of the Masonic lodges in

the Philippines, what fundamental purpose informed Del Pilar's ef-
forts to organize Masonry in the Philippines? Ponce in later years ex-
pressed it in the following terms:
•
Masonry ,vas establisl1ed to give our people a school ,,vhicl1 would pro-
,ide it with 1nodels for cooperative action (normas de sociabilidad) and
acct1stom it to live as a collectivity. In the bosom of Maso11ry we have
lear11ed to Jive a life of association; in the midst of that brotherhood we
• have co1nmunicated to one another our impressions, our thoughts, our
aspirations, and we have made ourselves apt to unite our desires and
23
our acts.

, This meant tl1at the basic purpose of Masonry was an educative

one, that of readying the minds of Filipinos to accept the antifriar,
nationalist, and progressist ideas that lay at the basis of the Propa-
•• ganda campaign in general. It was a reinforcing and reiteration of

21. See my a rticle, "Filipino Mason1,1 in Madrid," Pliilippine Historical Revieru 1

• (1966):174-75 fo r d e tails.
2

22. Ibid., 175-76: Kalaw, PhilipjJine lv!asonry, 49- 53.

23. Qtio ted in M. M. Norton , Buiulers of a Nation (Manila, 19 14), 32- 33.
180 Filipi,no Masonry•

the message of La Solidan dad and of the propaganda works of Del

Pilar, Rizal, and others.
Besides this gener-a.l ed ucative fun ction of Mason ry in bri11ging about
a receptiven ess to natio11alist and progressist ideas, Del Pilar sa\\T a
more specific functio n for the lod ges. In a letter to the Consejo Re-
gion al he u rged tl1at efforts be mad e to stimulate th e lodges

to study problems of political o rganization of our countJ)', of econ o mic ,

of m ilitary o rganizatio n , etc., and esp ecially the be tter d evelo pme nt of
the ne,,1 municipal governmen ts. Fo r Mason f)' is the brain, called on to
think o ut wl1at p eoples are to do. Suppose Spain sh o uld gra11t u s to-
m o rrow the interventio n ,vhicl1 we have been askin g for in the govern -
m ent of the State. What p ositive and concrete solutio ns do we h ave to
put into prac tice? v\'hat refo rms 11a, e ,,ve thou ght out to improve the
1

situa tion of the cou11try, to develop its sources of wealth, e tc., e tc.? This
is ,\That I ,vould like tl1e lodges to be thinking abo ut; let each o n e sp eak
o ut h is ideas, let th em give confere nces o n th e subjects the)' h ave com-
pete11ce in : the b t1sinessm an o n business, the farmer o n fann in g, tl1e
military man o n militaf)' affairs, e tc., etc., and tha t variel:)' of stt1dies ,vill
24
be fruitful for all . Thus will Mason ry be tiseful .

In addition to these specific fun ctions of an educative nature, how-

ever, Mason ry had the more immediate and practical job of raising
funds for the Prop aganda campaign . In th e beginning all o ther lodges
were in a certain way subj ect to the mother lodge "Nilad ," to whom
they paid half their initiatio n and oth er fees. "Nilad " was then to u se
this and o ther funds raised to main tain th e variou s Pro paganda activi-
ties of the lod ge "Solidaridad " in Mad1~id and o f the Asociaci6 n
Hispa110-Filipina. T o the regular dues was added a contributio n of a
half peso a month fo r this purpose. The use of these ft1nds, ho\vever,
was to be a so urce of considerable discord within Mason ry, wh e n in
1893 Serrano was accused of mis..using them , and the lod ges agreed
2
to discontinue the contributio n. ~ Later in 1894 som e of th e lod ges
seem to have resumed contributio ns for the work of Pro p agan da,
26
though it is not clear th at this was done on the sam e regular basis.

24. Retana, ,4.rcliivo, 3: 120- 21.

25. Ibid .. 87- 100; also Schumacher , Pliilipt,inf H istorical RroiRlv, 175- 76.
26. Ibid .. 176.
 Filipino Masonry 18 l

The question may be raised wh e ther Pl1ilippine Masonry had any

o ther ft1n ctio ns, wh ether it was an actively separatist organization and
aimed a t a re,,olution in th e future. Although a complete and defini-
ti,,e answer cannot be given to this question on the basis of available
but incon clusive evidence , it would seem that Masonry was not a revo-
lutionary organization in any true sense though many individual Ma-
sons b elonged also to other nationalist organizations, some of which
were or seemed to be reformist, such as the Liga Filipina and the
Cu e rpo d e Compromisarios, and others were definitely revolutionary,
such as the Katipunan. But Masonry as such seems to have kept free
of any revolutionary activity, and confined its activities to concerns of
27
a less disruptive order. W11atever his personal attitude toward sepa-
ra tion from Spain, Del Pilar excluded from Masonry any revolution-
ary activity, or any real political activity at all. In a letter to Juan Zulueta
in 1893 h e wrote:

Masonf)' in the Peninsula is for us a means of propaganda. If the

Masons ir1 the Philippines try to make Masonry an organ for action,
they would make a serious mistake. A special organism, dedicated spe-
cially to the Filipino cause, is needed. Even tl1ough its members or
some of its members be Masons, it is necessary that it not depend from
Masonry. It seem s that this is what the Liga Filipina is coming to ac-
28
complisl1 .
•

The above quotation from Del Pilar also calls attention to the fact
that Masonry, whether in the Peninsula or in the Philippines, was
only one element in the complex organizational set-up that Del Pilar
•
•
'
envisioned and largely brought into being. It was an important ele-
ment, and Del Pilar undoubtedly tried to coordinate as closely as pos-
•
sible its activity with that of other elements and organizations, but it
•
never dominated the entire picture .
'

•
•'
)
•
'

.•

..$, ---- - - - --- -

27. lbid., 176-82.
28. Ep. Pilar, 1:265.
 CHAPTER 10

Renewed Activity in Madrid

The breakup of the Filipino colony in Madrid with the demise of

Espana en Filipinas had not meant the cessation of all activity, but the
various initiatives were somewhat sporadic and unorganized. Del Pilar's
move to Madrid would attempt to coordinate Filipino nationalist ac-
tivities in Spain by integrating these efforts with the organization he
l1ad begun in Barcelona.

The "Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina"

The exact origins of the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina are somewhat

obscure, but it seems to have been founded at the initiative of Morayta,
1
and to have taken its first steps in July 1888. A group of Filipinos
joined with a few peninsular Spaniards to draw up the statutes of an
association that proclaimed its aspiration "to work for the material
and moral improvement of the Philippine Archipelago." This it pro-
posed to achieve only by means of legal propaganda to influence pt1blic
opinion, thus obtaining the needed political and administrative re-
forms from the government and the Cortes.
As its initial objectives, it proposed the following reforms:

1. Obligatory teaching of Spanish in all the schools of the Archipelago,

2. Suppression of the stocks, of fetters, and of flogging, in the pris-
ons and courts of justice,

I . Antonio Luna to Rizal, Ep. J~izal., 2:73.

182
 Renewed Activity in Mad1i d 183

3. Desirability of the judges' knowing the dialects of that country,

so that the intervention of interpreters in tl1e courts m ay cease,
4. Establishment of the property register and th e civil register,
5. Abolition of tl1e diez11ios prediales and the sanctorum tax,
6. Creation of institutes of secondary education in two or three
provinces of the Arcl1ipelago,
7. Radical reforms of the University of the Philippines, so that it
may come up to the sta ndard of those of the Peninsula a11d be
administe red like them,
8. Promoti o n of the growing of cotton, cacao, and indigo,
9. Re,rision or celebration of treaties of commerce with China and
J apan ,
10. Establishment of agricultural banks,
11. New territorial delimitation of tl1e provinces of the Philippines,
12. Construction of an extensive network of highways and local
roads, and of economic railroads,
13. Cau ses and origin of the mo11etary crisis in the Philippines,
14. Measures to meet the agricultural and commercial crisis in the
Philippines,
15. Tariff reforms in the Archipelago, and
16. Reforms in public administration.

In addition, tl1e association proposed to devote itself to the study of

the social and administrative state of the Philippines, so "that tl1e ge-
ography, the products, the industry, the administration, and every-
2
thing co11cerning those Islands be universally known. "
Founded on this essentially nonpolitical program, which, on paper
at least, should have proved unobjectionable to any Spaniard, the as-
sociation seems perhaps for this very reason to have shown little sign
of life . When Morayta and Manuel Labra were feted in Barcelona in
October 1888 by the Filipino colony there, the association came un-
der attack by the Madrid newspaper, La Voz de la Patria, not because
of its professed purposes, but because of the attacks on the friars that
set the tone of the banquet. This attack and tl1e ensuing pole mic
perked up the organization. A new executi,,e commission was named,
and the formal inauguration of the association finally took place on
12 January 1889.

2...Asociacio n Hispan o-Filipina," El Dia (Madrid), 16July 1888 .

184 Ren,ewed Activity in, Mad1~id

The officers were: Miguel Morayta, president; a Pe11inst1lar nam ed

Rivas Moreno, ,rice-president; Dominador Gomez, secretary; An ton io
Lt111a, t1·east1rer; Manuel Labra a11d Sin1plicio Jugo Viclal, voting m e m-
bers. The inaugural session was marked by considerable porn p and
attended by politicians and newspapern1 e n , some of whom d elivered
addresses. Telegrams from Filipinos in Barcelona, Paris, and London,
pledging adherence to the Association, were read, a11d an eveni11g of
musical entertainment followed.:~
Despite the pomp and circumsta11ce, the e nthusiasm that the Asso-
ciation had aroused among the Filipinos as a grot1p was not gr eat.
Many 1·efused to join. Some, like Aguir1·e and Llore11te (who hacl origi-
nally bee11 named treasurer), had been disillusioned by tl1e fiasco of
Espana en Filipinas and felt that each Filipino could do more for his
country as an individual than as a member of an organization in which
pe1·sonal ri,,alries embittered all. Others were afraid or considered it
useless to give their names to an organization that had already ac-
quired an antifriar rept1tation and whose president ,-vas a publicly ex-
communicated heretic. Still others like Ventura a11d Rizal, who h ad
been offered official posts, refused to take part for quite different
reasons. Ventura felt that an organization, many of wl1ose member·s
,-vere Spaniards, would hardly be likely to promote Filipino interests
arid that, in an)' case, activity in Spain was already futile; the place for
propaganda was in the Philippines. Rizal seems to have more or less
shared these sentiments, and refused to accept the in,,itation gi\'en
him to be a member of the Junta directiva, thot1gh he had accepted
the position of honorary president of the association "Solidaridad" of
Barcelona, which was composed only of Filipinos.
Even Antonio Luna, who had accepted the positio11 of u·easure i·,
confessed that he had clone so only to keep the organization fro 111
dying before it was ever inaugurated, lea,ring its fot1nder, Mottt\'ta. ,
j 11
the ridiculous position of wanting reforms for the Pl1ilippines aiid
not finding any Filipinos eager to obtai11 tl1em. In spite of the diffi-
culties, he judged it a patriotic duty to cooperate, lest the Filipino ~
seem to have been frightened off by tl1e attacks of La l'oz d.e lfi Patria.
Nonetheless, l1e held out little l1 ope of accornplishing a11) tl1ing , foi·
1

apart from tl1e list of· refo1·ms sougl1 t (apparently ir1adeqt1;tte for Lttna),

3. J:p. Rizal., 2:72; Po11 ce, Iifenliridt'.5, 39-4.1.

 Renewed Activity i11. Madrid 185

he felt that there was little real i11terest among the Spa11ish m embers
of tl1e associatio11 for the welfare of tl1e Pl1ilippines. "I consider it
very doubtful that tl1e Spaniards will be the ones to offer tis rights
4
and liberties to enjoy. That is for them; for us the1·e are only dt1ties."
A few weeks later the association held a banquet in l1onor of Over-
seas Minister Manuel Becerra, in gratitude for his decree making the
5
teaching of Spanish obligatory in the schools of the Philippines. The
decree, of course, actually did nothing effective to compel the teach-
ing of Spanisl1, which had long been obligatory but was largely not
carried out. The decree did not remove any of the known obstacles,
but provided propaganda material for Filipino aspirations and an ex-
cuse to attack the friars for their alleged obst1~uctionism in tl1is mat-
ter. It also gave Morayta a chance to point to the effectiveness of tl1e
6
association in securing one of its proposed reforms so qt1ickly.
There is little evidence that the pessimism of Luna and other Filipi-
nos concerning the association was proved unfounded by its activity for
the rest of the year. Nonetheless Del Pilar and Ponce seem to have seen
its possibilities, and did their best in Barcelona to cooperate with Morayta
and to give publicity to anything connected witl1 the association.
Shortly after its inauguration Del Pilar wrote an article on it for tl1e
Barcelona newspaper La Publicidad, and after the foundation of La
Solidaridad, the latter paper carefully reported the association's activi-
ties. During Morayta's periodic trips to Barcelona he was given public
banquets by the Filipino colony there, to which newspapermen and
friendly politicians were invited in tl1e hope of having the speeches in
7
favor of Philippine reforms reported in the newspapers. Though per-

4. Ep. R izal., 2:70-71, 73, 100, 108.

5. The account from La Publicidad is re produced i11 La Solidaridad, 15 Feb 1889,
"Cr6nica." It is interesting for showing the means used for publicity, for the re is a
telegram from tlie Association in Madrid to the Barcelo11a colony, \Vl1ich La P1tblicidad
in Barcelona publish ed at the request of the Barcelo na Filipinos (ur1do ubtedly tl1rot1gl1
the influence of Morayta in La Publicidad, of wl1ich l1e was th e Madrid co rrespond-
ent); th e Barcelona Filipinos in turn tl1en published tl1cir o,vn telcgra n1 in La
Solidaridarl, as h aving been copied from La Publicidad.
6. As h e frequently did. See, e.g .. his speech in Barcelo na as reported in "Lt
Asociacion Hispano-Filipina" La Publicidad, 27 Apr 'I 889; and again in l\1adrid se,,eral
months later, in "Asociacio n H ispano-Filipina ,·• El Pais, 16 Dec 1889; etc.
7. See the account in J..,a Publicidad ci ted in note 6, ,tnd tl1 a L l)f f_a Solidaridad, 30
Ap( 1889. Among the Spaniards \vl10 spoke at the banquet, besides l'vlorayta. \\·ere
186 R.e1ierverf Aclivil)' in Mad1irl

l1aps 110 more sanguine tl1an Lu11a or Rizal abo ut tJ1e inclina tion of Span-
iards to gra11t liberties for tl1e PJ1ilippines, Del Pilar saw tl1e associatio n
as an i11strume nt iliat could be used fo1· Filipino goals, and he was read y
to accommodate himself to promo ting st1cl1 an organizatio n.
Fo r tl1is 1·eason l1e was disturbed wh e11 l1e l1eard a re port in May
1889 tl1at a Circulo Hispa110-Filipino ,-vas abo ut to be o pe n ed in Ma-
drid. He feared , fi rst of all , th at it might be a stratagem of Fa th e r·
Salvad o r Font, who had just come to Mad1·id fro m Manila to act as
procurato r of the Philippine Augustinians ,-vith ili e governme nt, a nd
wished Rizal to inquire into it from l1is fri e nds in Madrid. Even if it
wer e a genuinely Filipino o rganizatio11 , he saw diffi ct1lties in it.

Give n the existence of the Asociacio n Hispan o-Filipina, wi th a presi-

dent so e nthusias tic, if n o t for the Philippines, at least for related inte r-
ests, I do n o t see tl1e necessity of an otl1er circle, u n less it b e fo r
8
pe rsonif)ri ng and mag11if) ing tl1e divisio ns in tl1e colo ny of Madrid .
1

Nothing came of the proposed Circulo, but Del Pilar's words r e-

vealed his attitude toward Morayta and ilie associa tion, and th e tac tics
he intended to employ. Del Pilar ,-vas under no illusions that ilie eniliusi-
asm of Morayta for ilie Philippines ,vas an altruistic one, but political
realist iliat l1e ,-vas, l1e was ,-villing to aid Morayta and ilie Gran Ori en te
Espanol in ilieir desire to destroy tl1e power of the religious orders in
ilie Philippines and of the cht1rcl1 in general, since it would sen ·e his
own purpose of win11ing political power and refor1ns in ilie Philippines,
for which a weakening or removal of the f1iars was necessary.
Unlike Del Pilar, Rizal wot1ld find it diffict1lt to work witl1 those
who sot1ght any e nd othe r than tl1e welfa re of tl1e Philippines, a nd
tho ugh practical considerations might occasionally fo rce hi111 to sttb-
mit to distasteful alliances, soo11e r or la te1· l1e wot1ld b1·eak ,vi tl1 stic h
doubtful allies. Del Pilar alon e possessed the pragmatism 11ecesSclf)' to
carry o n the campaign in Mad1·id , a11d Rizal's la te r active e 11t1, · into it
was bound to e nd in a bitte r clash be twee11 tl1e t,vo me n .
In the 1neantim e, Del Pila r co11tint1ed to orga11ize the cam paign.
and pre pared to m ove 011 to l\1adrid to complete the ties ,vim l\1ora,·t.., .
•

Emili o Junoy, o f La l ' ubliridafi , ,vl1 (1 ,vas lo t)t' (>f assist.'111ce Lo Ll1e Filipi11t.1s tlt rottgll
many years, a11d Celso Mir OC",ts. o f tl1e Catala11 ne,vs1Japer l.n l.lt,rzw1i"a· ,,,110 liad
been ac tive in tl1e o rga r1izaLi o n of tl1 e Fili pi11 (> lodge "Revolucic,11."
8. 1:.p. Pilar, 1:130; Ep. Riuzl., 2: 19~J.
 Renewed A ctivity in. Madrid 187

Meanwhil e, oth er Filipinos i11 Madrid were e ngaged i11 seeking con-
cr e te advantages for the Pl1ilippines.

Filipino Press Campaigns in Madrid

I
The desire for a Filipi110 organ in the press ,.vas neve1· far from tl1e
minds of the more ardent Filipino 11ationalists, even after the failure
of Espana en Filipin as. Even before this desire took shape in tl1e fou11d-
ing of La. Solidandad, another ne,.vspaper that might be called Fili pino
had been set up by some of tl1e former collaborators of Es/Jana en
I
• Filipinas, entitled La Paz, pt1blished ,.veekly i11 Madrid. Its publish e r
and editor ,vas Javier Gomez de la Ser11a.
As a creole, La Serna l1ad been one of tl1e 1noderates of Espan a en
Filipinas, and though antifriar, was far more conservative i11 his politi-
cal views than Rizal, let alone Lopez Jaena. After 1887 he gradually
dissociated himself 1nore and more from the Filipino group, and later
was to be active in Spanish politics, occupying a seat in the Cortes
and aba11doning any connection with the Philippines.
La Paz, which began publication 3 April 1888, ceased wi tl1 tl1e is-
sue of 26 November 1889. According to Retana, La Serna edited the
paper practically single-handedly. Chiefly devoted to Philippi11e affairs,
it treated them from a point of vie,.v which Retana terms
"espaiiol-filipino, asimilista." Retana does not expand on his assess-
ment; he merely attributes the paper's short life to the fact that it
9
never adopted the radical approach of La Solidandad. There is little
mention of it among the Filipinos of Madrid and Barcelona, wl10 no
doubt felt that there was notl1ing notably Filipino about it. Rizal re-
sented what was apparently an unfavorable judgment on l1is Noli, and
wrote to Ponce:

If my enemies only wrote like Fathers Rodrfguez and Font, it ,vould not
bother me a bit, but the trouble is tl1at I have e11emies also a111o ng otir
countrymen, some of whom discredit n1e a great deal with their an1-
biguous phrases. Have yot1 read what l1as been said about me by tl1e
paper La Paz, wl1ich our countryman La Ser11a publisl1es? Patie11ce!10

9. Retana, AjJar al o, 3: 111 2, n o . 2639.

10. t..p. Rizal., 2:49, 30 Sept 1888.
188 Renezverl Activit)'
, in Madrid

Mo1·e tr1-1ly Filipin o ,vas tl1e pap er founded in Mad rid by Simplicio
J ugo Vidal. J t1go Vidal, like La Ser11a, h ad bee n associated with Rizal
in tl1e Filipino colo n)' as early as 1883. H e l1 ad writte n for Espana en
Filipin.as, a nd l1ad take11 pa rt in the o rganizatio n of the Asociaci6n
Hispan o-Filipin a, in which h e was one of the elected me mbe rs of th e
executive co1nmittee. H aving obtained Rizal's con sen t to act as a re p-
resenta tive for tl1e paper, Jugo wrote to thank l1im and solicit articles.
In this le tte r h e set fortl1 his ideas in fot1ndi11g the p ap e r, conscio t1s
as h e was of Rizal 's little confide n ce i11 pro paganda in Spain:

Perhaps )'OU are not in agreen1ent with the course we are fo llo\vin g
l1ere, fo unding newspapers to make known what is going o n th ere [i n
th e Philippines], because yot1 will sa)' that all this is useless and will j ust
b e preaching in the desert as lo ng as radical remedies are n ot take n . But
until those remedies come, and because it is boring to wait, I think it
,-vill not be useless to spend the time writing n e,1/spap ers until the time
11
. d th"
a1T1\ es to o some 1ng e se.
1 1

In a subsequent letter he expanded on the subject, declaring tha t

though h e had little confidence in Spanish politicians, h e h ad n o t yet
given up hope that there might be a radical change of governme nt.
Yet, the main task, he agreed with Rizal , was to wo rk for the instruc-
tion of the Filipino people, and to that task his newspape r wot1ld tf)'
to contribute.
The first issue of La Vanguardia Filipina appeared on 27 April 1889.
In the opening article it proposed to act as the "faithful ech o of tlie
complaints and of the legitimate aspirations of our rich provinces of
the Philippine Archipelago" which , lacking pa rliam entary r epresen ta-
tion as it does, is forgotten by our politicia ns. The a rticle goes o n to
proclaim its list of r eforms for the Philippi11es, and justice and m oral-
ity for all, "without exce ption of classes nor castes, blo tting out man \·
diffe re nces and hatreds. " Disclaiming any relation to any po litical par~ .
•
it announced its inte ntion to devote itself to obtaining fo r tl1e Phil ip-
pines "the most comple te assimila tio n of those provi11ces ,vith t1iose
of the Pe ninsula."
The rest of the fo ur-page number includes a la rge pho tograpll and
lauda tory a rticle of Manuel Becerra; a review of po litical 11e\\·s b,·

11 . Ep. Rizal., 2: 169, 173.

 Re11ewecl A clivil)1 in 1\1/arlrirl 189

"Retacito"; a n article by the p e ninsular Enriqt1e Ta,,iel d e Ancl1·acle on

the g1·eat future which a\vaited tl1e Philippin es ,vith the o pe 11ing of
the Panama Canal; minor bits of n ews f'rom tl1e Philippines; a criti-
cism of Weyler for illegal deportations; th e cablegram f1·om Basa o n
the imprisonment of his brother for tl1e possession of antifriar propa-
• ganda, as it had appeared in La Solidaridad.
!
t One article , "Lo que debe ser, " appears in vvhich the friars a re
attacked, unsigned like the 1·est of th e articles except that of Ta,riel d e
Andrade. Tl1e autl1or declares that until now th e Pl1ilippines has been
I largely abandoned by Spain to tl1e influence of the friars, v. ho "i n
l
'
1

converting the ignorance [of tl1e Filipinos] into a raving fanaticism,

have converted the Philippines into a kind of fief O\.VI1ed by th em,
where nothing can be done 01· attempted ,-vitl1out their approbation ,
and ,-vhere all energies are destroyed if the)' oppose tl1eir influen ce. ''
I
What is needed is to administer the Philippines ,,vell , to stimulate and
I favor industry, to abolish privileges, to enfo1·ce tl1e laws, to promote
f intelligent and honest fu11ctionaries , to limit the religious orde rs to
their proper sphere of action, and to extend education and the knowl-
I
!I edge of the Spanish language.
I
•
This frontal attack on the friars was not repeated in tl1e succeeding
i
'1 numbers, though the paper took occasional pot shots. The articles in
the next two numbers dealt with the proble1ns of educatio11, admi11is-
, trative reorganization, the monetary situation. Se,,eral articles centered
,f
•
I
on the reforms Becerra was introd11cing, praising his ,vork and calling
t on him to continue, so as to bring about freedom of the press a11d
t•
parliamentary representation for the Philippines. In the second
number there appeared a photograph of Morayta, capping a lauda-
I
I
tory article on his disinterested efforts in behalf of the Philippines,
•
t
•
and in the third, another article of Taviel de Andrade with a "patri-
o tic" attack on the British in Hong Kong. Various items we re repro-
duced from La Solidaridad, including the notice of the banqtiet given
•
by the Barcelona Filipinos honoring ~Jorayta a11d tl1e pe titio n sent b}·
them to the overseas minister.
I
J Though it was supposedly a weekl)', tl1e second numbe r can1e out
twelve days after the first, and the third , eleve n da)'S la ter. It is llOt
difficult to see why. Jugo confessed to Rizal tl1a t h e kne,v 11 ext to
nothing about running a 11ewspape1-, and was deeply g1-areful to Del
Pilar and Ponce for the help tJ1ey gave l1im by letter 0 11 ad111 inistr-a-
tive affairs. Moreover, he complained tl1a t not a si11gle Filipi 110 , ,vi tt,
l 90 Renewed Activity in Madrid

the exception of Dominador Gomez, l1ad W1·itten anything for the

paper, either because tl1ey tl1ought the press useless or because they
12
were afraid. It would appear that except for tl1e two a1·ticles of Taviel
de Andrade, Jugo virtt1ally wrote the entire paper, presumably with
tl1e help of the editor, Jose Rodon )' Avella. Rizal and Del Pilar both
seemed to have encouraged Jugo, in spite of the former 's misgivings
about the utility of the press, b11t Del Pilar soon found La Vangua·rdia
13
Filipina much too timorous for his taste . After its tl1ird number of
20 May 1889, it apparently ceased publication.
There were also attempts to make use of tl1e Spanish press to pub-
licize the need of reforms in the Pl1ilippines. Occasionally Antonio
Regidor seems to have written articles on the Philippines, which were
published in El Pais or perhaps in El Liberal. Rizal sent an article of
his own in 1889 to Antonio Luna in Madrid to try to l1ave it pt1b-
lished in El Clabo through Morayta. Sometime in 1889 or early 1890
Lete began publishing articles in La Correspondencia M ilitar in the for,11
14
of supposed letters from the Philippines signed Edilberto de Leporel.
Other newspapers, particularly tl1ose of republican affiliation, printed
articles on the Philippines from time to time, perhaps at ilie urging of
one of ilie Filipinos who happened to be friendly wiili one of the editors
15
or perhaps because one of the staff was interested in ilie Philippines.

12. Dominador Gomez was a medical stude11t in Madrid. As h as been see11, l1e ,vas
active witl1 Jugo in tl1e Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina, and on the transferral of La
Solidaridad to Madrid, would collaborate actively with Del Pilar, cl1iefly under the pseu-
donym Ramiro Franco. H e later served in the Spanish Army Medical Corps in C uba,
and after tl1e end of t11e war, collaborated in the newspaper Filipinas a11te Eur()pa in
Mad1;d. He returned to the Philippi11es in 1902, where he ,vas active in labor unio ri
activity.
tp Rizal., 2: 178-79.
13. tp. Pilar, 1:114-15, 129-30.
14. EjJ. Rizal. , 2:109, 144; 3:2.
15. For example, tl1e re are articles on tl1e Philippines in Las Domin;ca/,es del l~ihre
Pen.samiento, wl1ich sh ow clear influe11ce of a Filipino. Th e first by one of th e e ditors.
Dem6filo [Fe rnando Lozano Mo ntes], "iPie dad para Filipinas!" 10 Nov 1888. i ei,-
tirely in t11 e line of De l Pilar's antifriar pa1nphlets, \vith the san1e exa mples c\nd all, Sl)
that it must derive from data provided e ith er b)' 011e o f the Filipinos or by Sl)llteone
very closely connec ted witl1 th e 1n, st1cl1 as Morayta (\,·)10 was associated ¼rit}1 the edi-
tors of /.,as Do1ninicales) o r Centeno. Ar1oth er editorial comme11t o f 12 Apr 1889. ,tnd
an unsign ed article o f 15 Apr, e11titled "El conflicto e 11 Filipinas"' like,vise give d etails
which sho,¥ a similar origin.
 Rene1.ved Activity in Macl1id 191

Of notable interest was El Dia, a Madrid daily of Liberal tencle n-

cies, though not connected with any particular party. During 1888
through early 1889 it ran a periodical column entitled "C1~6nica de
Filipinas," generally corresponding to the date of arrival of the mail
boat from the Pl1ilippines. This column gives every appearance of l1av-
ing been written by one of Del Pilar's group, since it gave ma1·ked
attention to the campaign against the friars in late 1887 and 1888
under the regime of Terrero, Quiroga, and Centeno. It must have
been written by a Spaniard very closely connected with , and sympa-
16
I thetic to, the antifriar campaign, perhaps Quiroga himself.
II
El Dia likewise p11blished in detail the program of the Asociaci6n
Hispano-Filipina, when this was first founded in July 1888. Other arti-
cles concerned with the Philippines and a section "Cor1·eo de Filipinas"
often contained criticisms of the friars in the Philippines, reflecting
f
l those of the Filipinos of La Solidaridad. Yet it is clear that the paper
•I
was not completely under Filipino influence at this time, for it pub-
I
lished an article of Quioquiap displaying his racist passion in all its
virulence. Advocating peninsular immigration into the Philippines, he
•
. decries the "error of expecting fruitfulness from land not irrigated
•
with the sweat fallen from a white brow, like the error of looking for
i culture far from white skins." Proclaiming "Progress is white" he de-
picts the Filipinos as "refractory to all culture, incapable of constant
and sustained work, nullities as producers, but with great aptitude for
f the absorption of the wealth others create, mystifiers by instinct and
incredibly corrupt." The Filipinos bristled, but decided, in view of the
generally favorable attitude of El Dia, to let it pass with a gentle com-
17
plain t. No further article of this type appeared.
I
'

I
• 16. These "Cr6nicas" extend from Jan 1888 up to the departure of Quiroga at the
e nd of 1888. One published on 8 Dec 1888, dated Manila, 24 O ct, gives details of the
confrontation of Quiroga and Weyler, resulting in tl1 e forme r 's resignation, ,vhich
appear nowhe re else, and must have had their source at least, in one of t11 e two m e n
involved. After the beginning of 1889, the "Cr6nicas" become much less freque nt, a,1d
f
while they could come from a different aut11or tha11 those of 1888, could like,,rise llave
com e from som eone like Quiroga, already in Spai11 , elaborating on re po rts comin .
from the Philippines, for they contint1e to follow vvithout d evia ti on ,v}1 a t rnigllt b:
termed the Quiroga-Del Pila r line of attack. Tl1e re is ofte n a close parallclisin ,,~th Ln
Solidaridad.
l 7. "Cr6 ni ca," / Ja Solidaridad, 15 Mar 1889.
192 Rerinved Activity i·n Ma.drid

Sometime in 1889 som e m embers of tl1e Madrid colo n y, led by

Modesto Reyes and Guillermo Puatu decided to attempt to subsidize
El Dia because of its fri e11dly attitude, so as to b1ing the Filipino cat1se
before the public of Madrid. 18 The editor sympathized with their aspi-
rations, but refused to accept any monetary subsidy, lest the integri ty
of his editorial policy be suspect. Nonetheless he agreed that if they
would obtain twenty-five subscriptions for the Philippines, any of the
subscribers could insert articles in the pape r whene,,er tl1ere were no
articles of greater importance, on condition tl1at the editor correct
a11d revise them if necessary.
Nine of the Filipinos collaborated on tl1e project, but when they
failed to get fu1~t}1e1· support in Madrid, decided to pay for all twenty-
five subscriptions themselves until tl1ey could get people in the Phil-
ippines to share the burden. Once this st1pport came, they hoped to
spend the rest of their contributions either in reviving the old Circulo
Hispano-Filipino or in subsidizing El Globo or some other newspaper.
Rizal , whom Pt1atu informed on the details of the plan, contributed
to the group, but it is not known whether any of the series of articles
that appeared in the succeeding months were from his pen.
The project was set up just about the time that Del Pilar moved La
Solidaridad to Madrid, but continued nonetheless at least until the
follo,ving June, after which it seems to have been abandoned. There
is no indication whether the project was carried on in cooperation
\vi.th, or independently of Del Pilar, though the articles that seem to
be the ,vork of a Filipino certainly differed in no way f1~om the edito-
rial policy of Del Pilar in La Solidaridad, and many of them cot1ld
easily have been written by Del Pilar himself. By the time tl1e project
faded out around mid-1890, the Filipino colon)' was about to reach its

18. Guillermo Puatu-Ri zal, tp. Rizal., 2: 273-75. From tl1e contenL<; of tl1 e lettt·r o f
PL1atu, it would seem tl1at me st1bsidy pla11 had already bce11 L111dc r,vay• for a fc,,· ,ve-eks
al tl1is time, and it is qtiilc like ly tl1at tl1e first article publisl1ed by th e Filipint.1.s t1r1d("r
ilie agreement here outli11ecl, was "Novelas filipinas,'' in tllt' issL1e of 12 Oec 1 s~.
which is a d efe r1 se <>f tl1e Filipinos i11 Barcelo 11a i11 tl1e alleged cc)11spir;.\c)· c.ts(" tti~
c\tssed bclo\v. Accordi11g lo PL1atu's le tter, Reyes ,.,ras tl1e 011e ,,·110 l1ad the 11nderstand-
i11g wi tl1 the edito r of El Dia, bl1L h e hi111s('lf ,vru; handli r1g tl1e ·t1bscriptio11s dl11ing
Reyes' sickn ess.
 Renewed Activity in Madrid 193

high point of unity and effectiveness, and would attempt to e11com-

19
pass all Filipino nationalist activities.

Police Raid in Barcelona

I
I
I Just as Del Pilar was setting up La Solidaridad in Madrid and pre-
'
II paring to breathe new life into the Filipino organization tl1ere, a clos-
ing chapte r to the Barcelona period was being written. In the 31
'l October issue of La Solidaridad Antonio Luna published an article
I
'
under the pseudonym Taga-llog entitled "lmpresiones madrilenas de
un filipino." The essay is an ironic picture of the disenchantment of a
l Filipino with Madrid as he sees through the idealistic image he had
I been given by Spaniards in the Philippines. With stark realism l1e por-
trays the crude ignorance of the Madrileno with regard to the Philip-
I
I
' pines, the idle loungers that fill the cafes, etc. The cleverly-written
•
essay, which no doubt mirrored the reactions of many a Filipino stu-
I
'
I
d ent on arrival in the metropolis, closes with an appeal to the Filipi-
nos at home:
I
I
! Filipinos there in the Philippines, do not let yoursel,1es be carried
'
I
I
l' away by the song of the siren to the immense sea of fancies, for tl1e
disenchantment will be terrible. They talk so much to us of it [the
Puerta del Sol, center of Madrid] ... they place it so high, so higl1,
I that once the wings of the image we have formed are melted by tl1e

i heat of the sun of realism, the fall brings death.

l
•• This satire on Spanish life nettled the editor of the zorrillista re-
publican newspaper, El Pueblo Soberano, Celso Mir Deas, who had been
'I•
'
'I friendly with the Filipinos and had inspired or helped them to found
'

'I
'
19. Puatu likewise made arrangements for publishing articles in the newspaper El
Clamor through a friend on the editorial staff. Since the paper was the organ of the
dissident conservative p olitician Francisco Romero Robledo, who was opposed to par-
i liamentary re presentation for the Philippines, Puatu asked Rizal to speak of such lib-
l
••
f .
eral reforms o nly covertly if he would write an a rti cle. Give n the attitLtde of Rizal
I
I
lO\vards hiding his convictions, it is hardly likely tl1at he acceded to the request, and
I
.' in a ny case, no article on the P11ilippines appears in the pape r during tl1e next three
months (Puatu-Rizal, Ep. Rizal., 2:2).
194 Renerved A ctivily in !VJa.drid

tl1e lodge "Revoluci611." Mistaken ly identifying Taga-Ilog as Antonio 's

brotl1er, the painte1· Juan Lt1na, Mir published a bitter arid insulting
attack on the latter, quoting from Canamaque's Recuerdos de Fili/Jinas
various parag1·aphs denigrati11g the Filipino people.
Tl1e Filipinos were aroused. With the st1pport of the colony of Ma-
drid, Antonio Luna went to Barcelona to d emand satisfaction from
Mir, challe11ging l1im to a dt1el. v\lhen Mi1· refused repeatedly a nd
continued to insult tl1e Filipinos, Luna publisl1ed an account of the
whole business in El Diluvio, anotl1 er Barcelo11a re pt1blican paper. The
Filipino colonies of Madrid, Barcelo n a, a nd Paris rallied round Luna,
considering it a commo n Filipino cat1se, an d sh ared in the exp enses
of getting Lun a's side of th e story publish ed in the ge ne ral public
press. Luna submitted the affair to a "tribunal of honor," composed
of membe rs of the Madrid and Ba1·celona press, whicl1 gave a verdict
20
upholding l1is l1onorable conduct in the whole affair.
At tl1is point, when a moral victory seemed to have bee n gained for
the Filipinos, Mir Deas took his revenge, and the affair assumed a
more serious aspect. Mariano Ponce, who had remained in Ba1·celona
to wind up affairs there after Del Pilar moved to Madrid, was de-
nounced to the police as possessing clandestinely-printed pamphlets,
and his quarte rs were searched. Immediately a report appeared in a
leading Madrid paper that a center of conspiracy had bee n discov-
ered in the "Centro Filipino" of Barcelona, where there were fot1nd
pamphlets which "attempt to loose n the bonds of union with the
,,21
mot11er country.
This was quickly seized upon by tl1e pro-f1·iar n e,vspape r La Pat1ia
of Madrid. Fortunately for Ponce, only a small numbe r of pa mpl1lets
were taken, of wl1icl1 som e were actt1ally those of Father Rodrfgt1ez,
and he asserted that h e ,-vas in no way respor1sible for all these pam-
phlets, but that they had n1erely been recei,,ed in the editorial office
of La Solidaridad by mail.
The Filipino colo ny of Barcelo11a immediately sent a co1nmis ion
to leading newspapers a nd to the civil go,,e rno r to de n ot1nce tl1e fal-
sity of the accusations, a nd to pro tes t tl1ei1· lo),alty to Spai11, etc. Tl1e,·

20. "St1plcmento," /.,a ,')olidaridad. 15 Der 18R~}: f.p. Ri:.al., 2:239-40, 248, 25 1- 52.
258-59.
2 1. f~J f m/>arrial. as q uoted i11 l~r1 l't1lria, l l Dec I 889.
 Renewed A ctivity in Madrid 195

dispatched a telegram to the oversea.s minister , protesting against th e

calumny and reiterating their adherence to Becerra's reforms . Similar
communications were sent to the Liberal and Republican papers of
Madrid and Barcelona, most of whom joined in refuting the accusa-
tions leveled at the Filipinos by newspapers like La Patria and La Union
Cat6lica.
Finally in January 1890 the Barcelona Filipinos gave a banquet in
honor of the members of the Barcelo11a press, thanking the1n fo1·
I 22
supporting the Filipinos. Though the case against Ponce was dis-
;
missed, he was kept waiting many months in Barcelona for disposi-
l
•
tion of the case against him and of his suit against Mi1~ for false
•
denunciation, much to the dismay of Del Pilar and of Rizal, both of
whom kept writing to him to hurry to Madrid as Del Pilar alone could
not cope with the work of the newspaper. 23
The enmity of Mir aside, the incident does not seem to have aroused
24
any lasting suspicion against the Filipinos. If anything, the publicity
and the banquet for the press turned a gratifying spotlight on their
reform campaign.

Organization of the Delegation in Madrid

l•
•

Meanwhile Del Pilar was consolidating his organization i11 Madrid

after having transferred La Solidaridad there in November 1889. This
accomplished, he quickly proceeded to revive the Asociaci6n

22. Among those newspapers which supported tl1e Filipinos were La Publicidad, El
.f
Globo, El Resumen, El Libera~ El Dia, La Correspondencia Militar, El Pais. The telegra1ns
are in AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5277, 5286.
f 23. Ep. Rizal., 2:259-60, 304; 3:53; Ep. Pilar, I :228, 230, etc. Ponce finally arrived in
•
f' O ctober or November 1890.
l
24. Besirles being i1nplicitly condemned by ilie "tribunal of l1onor" of m ost of the
liberal press of Barcelona, which justified Luna, Mir was apparently ordered to be
brought to trial in the lodge "Revoluci6n" by Morayta. This h e escaped by applyi 11 g
for his ,\Tithdrawal fro m the lodge on 10 December, the day on which h e made tJie
denunciation to the po lice (ADN, leg. 620, exp. 14a, letter of 2 J an 1890, from tl1e
Worshipful Master of the lodge "Revoluci6n" to the presid ent of tl1 e Gran Co 11 sejo de
la Orden). The condition of the judicial records of Barcelona made it in1possi ble to
find any records of Ponce's trial and tl1e subseql1en t sui t he- broltght against Mir, if
such exist.
196 Renewed Activity in Madricl

Hispano-Filipina and make it a11 effective organ of action. On 25 No-

ve1nber a general meeti11g took place to elect n ew officers. Reelected
\Ve r e Morayta, president, and the tl1ree P e ninsulars \.\7ho were
vice-presidents, Antonio Balbin de Unquera, Luis Vidart, and Felipe
de la Co1·te. These three 111en none of wl1om were associated either
'
,.\1itl1 Masonry or with tl1e republican and anticlerical circles of Morayta,
provided an excellent testimony to the proclaimed nonpolitical and
nonreligious character of the organizatio11. Balbin de Unquera and
Vidart had earlier ,-vritte11 for Los Dos Mundos, and General de la Corte 's
conferences on Mindanao in 1887 had been featured in Espa·n a en
Filipinas, but it is not at all clear tl1at they took any active part in the
Asociaci6n.
Teodoro Sandiko, a close collaborato1- of Del Pilar from Malolos,
was elected treasurer. The executive committee had as its members
Del Pila1-, Jugo Vidal, Jose Hernandez Crame, and Morayta's associate
in Masonry and politics, the peninsular Manuel Labra. The Asociaci6n
was for practical purposes the alliance of Morayta with the activist
25
Filipinos led by Del Pilar.
A quickening of the rhythm of activity was noticeable. In the elec-
tion meeting itself it was ,,oted to send the executive commission to
pay a visit to Minister Becerra to express the gratitude of the associa-
tion "for the beneficent reforms which he is undertaking on behalf of
the progress of the Philippines." The follo,.\7ing month the association
held an anniversary luncheon for the representatives of the ''demo-
cratic press." In a tactic that had been employed before and was to be
repeatedly employed in the future, the luncheon provided a fortim
for the Filipinos to get their ideas into tl1e general press through the
reports of the speeches given at the luncheon itself as well as an op-
portunity to ingratiate themselves with those representatives of the
p1·ess likely to help them in the future with favorable comme nts 0 11
their program and activities. Tl1e roste1· of gt1ests included representa-

25. "Asociacion Hispano-Filipina," La Solidaridlzd, 30 No\' 1889. There is n c.) nietl-

tion of the original vice-preside11t, Rivas More110, e lected in J antlary I 889; 11o r i • it
clear whe n the tl1ree vice-presidents said to be reelected at. tl1is tin1c-, )1ad fi rst been
e lec te d . All available evide n ce p oin ts to th e e lectio 11 of tl1ese ,ice-presid e r1t.s as in-
tended principally, u· not exclusively, to giYe ,,e risi1nilitt1de to tl1 e o rgai1ization a~ be-
ing compose d of Pe ninsulars as '"ell as Filipinos, and to cover its relati o ns \\.'1th Spanish
Mason ry.
 i Renewed Activity in Madrid 197
!
I
tives of' El Pais, El Liberal, El Globo, La Justicia, and El Resumen, all of
f

them of republican or leftist Liberal affiliation, the only other

Peninsulars being Manuel Ortiz de Pinedo and Manuel Labra, together
with their political chief, Moi·ayta. 26
Once the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina was on the move again , Del
Pilar set about organizing the Filipino Masonic lodge. Before the end
of 1889 all three elements of his organization were set up, tl1ough the
lodge "Solidaridad" did 11ot obtain its charter until the following May.
Each of these elements had its own specific purpose: Masonry, to
obtain the clandestine support of Spanish Masons for the Filipino
reform program; tl1e Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina, a respectable, pur-
portedly nonpolitical organization, to act as a corporate personality
before the government and other establishments in presenting the
reform program; La Solidaridad, an organ of propaganda for the
Asociaci6n and the Filipino program as well as an organ of propa-
ganda in the Philippines itself, to arouse opposition to the friars and
to enlist support for the propagandists abroad. Masonry too was even-
tually to have its other function within the Philippines of promoting
the ideals of the propagandists among the people.
In each of these parts of the organization, Del Pilar held the reins,
working directly or through others. In La Solidaridad, he was now edi-
tor, with Mariano Ponce soon to be his managing editor. In Masonry,
he held second spot as Senior Warden under Llorente, but in 1891
would succeed him as Worshipful Master of "Solidaridad" witl1 Ponce
as secretary, and both would rise to a high position in the Gran Oriente
Espanol as well. In the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina he headed the list
of members of the executive commission under Morayta's presidency,
f and after Ponce 's arrival in Madrid, the latter joined him on the com-
I• mission.27 But in all of these, whether holding high official position
•
or not, l1e was the moving spirit and the spearhead of action.
i

Campaign for Representation in the Cortes

1 Al\vays prominent among the reforms sought by the Filipinos since

'
the first student efforts in the early 1880s, the question of representa-

26. "Asociaci6n Hispan o-Filipina," El Pais, 17 Dec 1889.

27. "Boletin oficial d e la Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipir1a," La Solidaridad, 15 Jun e 189 ! .
198 Renewed Activity i 1i Madrid

tion for tl1e Philippines in tl1e Cortes now became the leading issue
for Del Pilar and the mai11 goal of tl1e forces he controlled.
At the e11d of February 1890, Del Pilar got in touch ¼rith his for111 er
associate in tl1e Diariong Tagalog, Francisco Calvo Munoz, who was by
28
this ti1ne a dept1ty to the Cortes for the Liberal party of Sagasta.
Calvo ML1noz pron1ised to help Del Pilar, and sl1ortly thereafter pre-
sented an amendment to tl1e new electoral law providing for unive r-
sal suffrage bei11g discussed at this time in tl1e Cortes. Calvo Munoz'
amendment, signed by six deputies besides himself, provided for three
deputies to be elected from the Philippines by a limited electorate,
restricted to ce1·tain office-holders a11d to those paying taxes of more
than 50 pesos a year.
When tl1e commission for the electoral law declared that it could
not accept the amendment, Calvo Munoz spoke at length in defense of
it. He related the history of Philippine representation in the Cortes and
how it had been abolisl1ed, and pleaded the justice and even necessity of
its restoration, especially now iliat the reforms of Becerra on other levels
had removed the objections that might have been raised.
At tl1e conclL1sion of Calvo Muii.oz' speech Becerra himself took
the floor, lauding his zeal for the welfare of the Filipinos and pro-
claiming his own desi1·e that Filipinos be given parliamentary repre-
sentation in a form mL1ch more generous than that proposed. To this
end he had directed his reforms, he declared, but he judged that the
time was not yet ripe for i11troducing this measure. He tl1erefore asked
his colleague to withdraw his amendment "in the assura11ce that the
government is resolved to travel in that direction.''
The following day, the chairman of the commission for the elec-
toral law, Antonio Ramos Calderon, also of the Libe1·al party, spoke,
likewise praising with eloquence the intentions of Calvo Mui1oz and
pledging the support of the Liberal pa1·ty for its c1·o"vning effoi·t to

28. Marcelo-Tsanay (his wife Marciana), EjJ. Pilar, 2:5 1. H e l1ad beco1ne d c put,· ii,
time to make ttse o f his parliam entary imn111ni ty to prever,t l,i.s being prosecute d ft") r
his conn ection with misuse of pt1blic pro p e rty amot1nti11g to som e 280.000 pesos ,,'Ort.Jl
of tobacco. The case was delayccl from 1886 b)' variotLs leg-al ma11eu,,crs a 11 d othf'r
reasons. Firially, after tf)ring vai nly to ge t actio11 fro1n tl1e Co r tt~s on perrt1issio n to tf\-·
Calvo Munoz, Lile case ,\las dismissecl in J?ebruaf)' 1889 (r\rIN . U ltra111ar. leg. 225 1. 110 _
48: "Sobrc causa scguicla en e l juzgado d e lntran1t1ros de Ma11ila contra D. Rafae l de l
Val y D. Francisco Calvo ~1t11i<JZ y otros por malversaci6 r1 de efectos publicos") .
 Renewed Activity in Nladrid 199

raise the Filipino people to their proper place within the Spanisl1
t
realm. But l1e to o appealed for a more propitious time for taking
action, pledging that "a day will come when the Spanisl1 natio11 will
have done justice to those great virtues a11d those great qualities" and
grant full recognition to them. With this, Calvo Munoz rose, and thank-
ing his colleagues for the deference shown him, agreed to withdraw l1is
'
•
amendment to wait for tl1e action promised by Becerra, reserving to him-
self the right to bring up the question again in due time if necessary.
Whether or not Del Pilar placed any real faith in the glib assur-
ances of Becerra and Ramos Calderon, he professed to do so, and
quickly set about taking advantage of the acceptance in principle of
Philippine representation, giving it the widest publicity possible. Tl1e
following Sunday the Asociacion Hispano-Filipina gave one of its luncl1-
eons in honor of Calvo Munoz, attended by tl1e usual friendly jour-
nalists and accompanied by the usual champagne and toasts, centered
29
this time on the theme of Philippine representation in the Cortes.
The next issue of La Solidaridad contained not only the verbatim
record of the speeches of Calvo Munoz, Becerra, and Ramos Calderon
in the Cortes, but also a leading article by Del Pilar, emphasizing with
some exaggeration that though the amendment had been rejected,
the idea had been accepted with enthusiasm by the commission and
by the government. He stressed that though the modest nature of the
proposal was not at all proportioned to the real need of the Philip-
pines, it was an important first step and the best means of assuring
Spain's security in the Philippines. Another article recounted the lunch-
eon of the Asociaci6n and related the speeches there in favor of the
sought-for reform, so that practically the entire issue was devoted to
the question. Shortly thereafter, Del Pilar put out a pamphlet repro-
30 ·
ducing the speeches in the Cortes.
More realistic, and more skeptical, was the article of Rizal pub-
lished in the succeeding issue. Noting that the Filipino people had
shown itself grateful for the proposed reforms of Becerra, even though
,
few had been decreed and fewer still were being executed, he under-
took to refute Becerra's assertion that time was needed to wipe out
the ignorance in which the Filipino people still lay, not throt1gh their

29 ...A.so ciacion Hispano-Filipina," J..,a Solidnridad, 16 Mar 1890.

30. Filipinas m las Cart.es. Discursos pronunciados en el Congreso de Dipttlados sol,,-e la
representaci6n parlamentaria del Archipielago l"ilipino (Mad1i d : Jara1nillo, 1890) .
200 R.enewed Activity in Madrid

own fault, before tl1e d esired re presenta tio n could be granted. Not
only is this highly exaggerated, Rizal remarked, but tl1e best means to
•

overcome this ignorance is to grant parliame11tary re presentation to-

gether with freedom of the press. Witl1 the latter safeguard and th e
limitation of suffrage to those who have achieved a certain le,,el of
instruction, there will be no danger of this parliamentary representa-
tion falling into the ha11ds of reactionaries. He ended witl1 a warning
that time was short: Becerra should not leave for tomorrow what must
31
be done today.
Despite the difference of approach, Del Pilar was not more sure
than Rizal of what might be expected of Becerra, and continued to
work with Calvo Munoz, urging him to present, not merely an amend-
ment this time, but a specific law directed to the purpose. In April
there was a rumor that Weyler would be replaced by General Agustin
de Burgos and that Calvo Munoz would return to the Philippines as
director of Civil Administration. Alarmed by the prospect, despite his
enthusiasm for the rumored new authorities, Del Pilar begged Calvo
Munoz not to leave without presenting the bill granting representa-
tion to the Philippines.
By May, either he or Calvo, or both together, had drawn up the
proposed bill, which raised the number of deputies to be elected to
sixteen, and lowered the minimum annual tax contribution for an
elector to thirty pesos instead of fifty. In two articles in La Solidaridad
in late May and mid-June he proposed an even more generous project,
apparently with the idea that it would be subject to revision do,\'11-
32
ward in the effort to get it through the Cortes. Meanwhile he had
been lining up deputies to vote for the measure and getting othe1·s,
both Filipinos and Spaniards, to do likewise. In a letter to Rizal h e
announced that the presentation of the projected new law only awaited
33
the return of Calvo Munoz from a trip he had taken.

31. Jose Rizal, "Filipinas en el Congreso,'' La Solidaridad, 3 1 Mar 1890.

32. "Regimen electoral para Filipinas," 31 May 1890; "Regimen parlamenta1io para
Filipinas,'' 16 June 1890.
33. Ep Pilar, 2:60; 1:222. He names as h elping l1im the republica11 d eputy \ 'illalva
H ervas, who assured l1im that lie could get 11ot o nly republicans. but so1ne Consen-a-
tives to vote favc>rably, n otably Silvela, leader of o ne of the opposi11g factions l ltlder
Canovas. Marian o Cunanan, one of the Filipino stt1den ts in Madrid, h ad p ron1ised to
use his influence witl1 Ge rman Garnazo, leader of 0 11e of th e factions an1 o ng the
Fusionists.
 Renewed Activity in Madrid 201

What th e chances were of securing passage of the proposed Ia,¥ is

hard to say. There was no way of finding out, for the Sagasta govern-
ment fell on 3 July 1890, and the Conservatives under Canovas came
to power. Embittered o,,er tl1e unwelcome turn of events, Rizal causti-
cally recalled in an article his exhortation to Becerra not to put off
for tomorrow what sl1ould be done today. He held out to Filipinos
the consolation, laced with irony, that even if Becerra had not carried
out his promises, they had at least heard of many wonderful reforms
during his ter111 as minister. In a more sober tone, he exhorted them
to place their hopes for the future "on One who l1as a bette1· memory,
One who knows better the value of justice and of a sacred promise,"
34
o n God more than on men.
• On the other hand, Del Pilar-·always the pragmatist-while lament-
I ing the fall of the Liberals without the fulfillment of their promise,
t'
t
f
was careful to preserve friendly relations ,.\Tith them. In his editorial
• comments on the political changes, he related the visit of a commis-
I
••
sion of the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina to pay their respects to Sagasta
after the fall of the ministry, during which the latter declared that he
had a project of representation for the Philippines all prepared, and
would certainly have presented it had the ministry not fallen. Not
only did Del Pilar put on a grave air of taking this seriously; he even
expressed the hope that the Conservatives would not consider the
I
I question in a partisan spirit, but would themselves bring about the
. d . 35
d es1re representation.
•
While awaiting the return of the Liberals to power, however, Del
Pilar had no intention of sitting still. Even before the fall of Sagasta,
the lodge "Solidaridad" had begun to circularize the other Masonic
lodges to obtain signatures to the petition to be presented by the
Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina to the Cortes, asking for parliamentary
representation for the Philippines, a move that bespoke the relation
between Masonry and the association. In October, Del Pilar wi·ote to
his wife concerning his plans for a great banquet to which the leaders
of all the parties were invited and in which the speecl1es would d eal
with the question of representation for the Philippines. Stenographers
were to be there to take down the speeches, which would later be

,
•
34. Jose Rizal, "Una esperanza," La Solidaridad, 15 Jul I 890, 153-54.
•
35...Revista politica," ibid., 154-56.
 202 Renewed Activity in Madrid

published. Thus when the Liberals returned to power, they would

l1ave to make good their promise. The Asociacion Hispano-Filipina
issued a press release, announcing its campaign for parliamentary
. 36
representation.
When the banquet finally took place on 23 December 1890, the
37
reality was considerably less than the plans. The only politicians
present at the banquet were Becerra and Ramos Calderon, and though
Dominador Gomez, as secretary, read letters to Morayta from Moret
and Jose Canalejas, and transmitted an oral message from Leon y
Castillo, all these leading figures of the Liberal party were very care-
ful to avoid committing themselves to advocacy of Filipino representa-
tion , confining themselves to expressions of enthusiasm for Philippine
progress and of admiration for the work of Becerra. Even Calvo Munoz
was absent from the banquet. Becerra talked at length of his reforrr1s
and the reactionary policies of the religious orders, but his statement
on parliamentary representation was as vague as it had been nine
months earlier. Still, the occasion was redeemed somewhat by eloquent
speeches favoring representation, not only from Morayta, Gomez, Del
Pilar, and the young Filipino student Gregorio Kahili, but also from Gen-
eral de la Corte and, among the representatives of the press, Gonzalo
Reparaz of El Resumen and C. Soldevilla of El Imparcial.
Despite the limited success of the banquet as a means of commit-
ting Liberal politicians to the cause of Filipino representation, Del
Pilar did not slacken his efforts. The various republican factions had
already, or would soon, put Filipino representation in the programs
of their respective parties, but with their relatively small numbers, there
was no likelihood of their coming to power or of their being able to
38
push through such a law without the Liberals' support.

36. Ep. Pilar, 2:75-76; La Solidaridad, 31 Oct 1890.

37. "Resena del Banquete al Senor Becerra," I~a Solidaridad, 31 Dec 1890. The
transcripts of the speeches are printed in installments in tl1e succeeding numbers
from 15 Jan 1891 to 15 Mar 1891 .
38. Ruiz Zorrilla bad placed parliamentary represe ntation for the Philippi 11 es in his
"Manifiesto de Lo ndres," befo re the Filipinos eve11 began to request it, as El Pais re-
minded thern in tJ1e article "Representaci6n parlamentaria de Filipinas,'' o n 5 No,·
1890. The Federal republi cans logically h eld th e same position, by tJ1eir concept of
federal union amo ng the different parts of th e Spanish do1ninions. Tl1e coalition of
most of the various republican factions in 1891 declared itself for Philippine represe 11_
tation in its Manifiesto ("Cr611ica," I...a Solidaridad, 31 rvtay 1891 ) .
 Renewed Activit)' i1i Madrid 203

In June 1891 the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina prese nted to the

Cortes an exposition on the state of the Philippines under the op-
pressive, almost absolute rule of a governor-general, witl1out means of
expressing itself o r making its needs known in the Cortes. Tl1e expo-
sition asked that the Philippines be allowed elected representatives to
the Cortes and that the right of free assembly and free expression be
permitted as a prerequisite for elections. 39 Under the prevailing dis-
pensation , the Filipinos could not have expected to obtain by this
exposition anything beyond keeping the question alive in tl1e minds
of the deputies while waiting for the return of the Liberals to power.
In La Solidaridad the question was frequently played up in general
articles, and received special treatment from time to time.
In December 1892 the Liberals finally returned to power with a
new Sagasta government in which Antonio Maura held the post of
overseas minister. Del Pilar immediately jogged Liberal memories, re-
calling Sagasta's promises in an article in La Solidaridad and reviving the
40
projected law that Calvo Munoz had been about to present in 1890.
Maura, however, was a Liberal of a different order from Becerra
and not likely to be influenced by the circles in which Morayta
41
moved. Moreover, the major project of his ministry was tl1e laws of
municipal reform for the Philippines and for the Antilles, one that
had the support of Del Pilar and his followers, but which aroused so
much controversy among reactionary forces that Maura could have
neither the time nor the enterprise to carry through so controversial
a project as Philippine representation in the Cortes, even if he had

39. "Boletin oficial de la Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina," La Solidaridad, 15 June 1891 ;

also "No est.amos solos," ibid. , 30 June 1891, where the text of the exposition is printed .
The original may be found in AHN Ultramar, leg. 5329, exp. 36, "La Asociaci6n
Hispano-Filipina por medio del Senado remite instancia solicitando varias reformas
polfticas." There is a note attached, d ated 14 Feb 1892, transmitting the exposition to
the overseas minister "para los efectos oportunos"; that is, th e archives .
•
40. "Ya es tiempo," 15 Dec 1892; "Insistimos," 15 Jan 1893.
41. Though Maura was to do more in the way of truly liberal reform fo r the Philip-
pines than an y other Liberal overseas minister, by his municipal reform lav.1 , he ,vould
be strongly opposed even within his party. After 1902 he joined th e Conser,iative part)',
of which he soon became th e leader. Even while in tl1e Liberal party l1e seems to have
had nothing to do with the more radical, an ticlerical element wt1ich d ominated it. See
'"Maura y Mont.aner (Antonio)," 1:,s pasa, 33:1195-1202.
204 Reneu,ed Activit_-y iri Mad1id

42
wish ed to do so. La Solida:ridad like,-vise devoted its e ne rgies to SL1p-
po rtin g Maura's n1unicipal reform , ,-vithout neglecti11g to bring u p
the questio n of parliamen tary rep1·esen tatio11 from time to time and to
express its confidence tl1a t tl1e Libe1-als would fulfill their promises.
Finally, in March 1894, o n the r esigna tio n of Maura, Sagasta's n ew
cabine t included Ma nuel Becerra as overseas ministe r. But it \Vas a
cautio us Becer ra, wh o, whe the r because of cl1an ged convictio ns or
because of conditio ns laid d o,,vn by Sagasta fo r his e n try into th e new
ministry, no t o nly h ad lost in terest in his previo us commi tm e n t to
Philippine represe11tatio n ; · l1e had develo ped a cool11ess toward the
many educational and religious reforn1s he l1ad proposed but failed
43
to ma ke effective in 1889- 90. Del Pila r appa re ntly tried to soL1nd
him out witl1 a question fro m a frie ndly deputy, Emilio _Junoy, wh e ther
Becerra intended to b1i.ng the Philippine budget before th e Cortes
C
1or d"1scuss1on.
. 44

As ministe r in the previous Liberal administra tio n , Becerra had

pointed to this as the first step toward Philippine re presen tatio n , a nd
he himself h ad questioned th e Conservative Minister Fahie in the same
sense. Bece rra temporized as usu al, but by this time Del Pilar h ad
made an agreement with Junoy to present to the Cortes the se, e n 1

thousand signatures tha t the Masonic lo dges h ad gathe red fo r the

petition of the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina, and the n himself to in-
troduce a bill providing fo r the granting of represen tation in the Cortes

42. Tl1e reform in tl1e Philippines m e t o p position , but chi e fly from tl1e reacti o n an ·
o ppone n ts o f all innovatio n. T he m ore a dvanced reform fo r th e Antilles m et su ch
opp osition from vario us sp ecial in te rests that Sagasta re fused to n1ake it a cabin e t
question , a nd Mau ra fina lly resigned (see Fen1andez Alm agro, Historia, 2: 190-99).
43. See the article of Del Pila r o n Becerra 's accession, "La crisis," 15 ~far 1894. 1-:1~
m e nti ons th e rumor tha t Becerra h ad been p assed ove r in th e pre,riotis mini ·tn· for
being u nwi lling to re n o unce his forme r proj ects, a nd e xpresses the l1o pe t11at h i
coming to office no\v is not tl1 c result of a com pro m ise on l1is parL
44. Jun oy h ad been friendly to the Filipinos from th eir firsr days in Ba rcelo r1 .1
wh en he was a m e mbe r of tl1e skill of La Pttblicidad, an d had acte d as Ja,,'\·er fl)T
Ponce whe 11 th e latter 's h ot1se was sea rche d and the pain pl1lets seized becall e of tht·
d e nunciati on of Mi r Deas i11 1889. By 1894 l1 e ,-vas e d ito r-in-cl1 ie f o f I.a l"ublicrdad. ar1d
h ad re cently be en e lec ted d e puty fro m th e district of Manres.-i. After Caste la r· reu~
men t from p o litical life , J un oy t1,1d j oi11ed ,vitl1 Mo rayta a11d l)thers t o forn1 the P-.artido
Rept1blicano Histo ri co (see th e artic le l)y Na nin g [Po11cc ] ... E1nilio J11n o)•,'" La
Solidaridt1d, 31 Jt1ly J 894 ).
 Renewed Activity in Madrid 205
45
to the Filipinos. The p e tition was presented on 21 February 1895,
and on 8 March , Junoy made a speech in favor of a bill providing for
31 deputies and 11 elective senators representing the five districts into
which the Philippines was divided .46
Just what happened to the proposed law is not certain, but appar-
ently it never even came up for discussion. The Liberal cabinet fell
two weeks after the bill was introduced, and the return of the Con-
servatives to power under Ca.novas del Castillo seems to have ended
47
any hopes of having the law enacted. Yet the record of the Liberal
Party with regard to the Philippines raises doubts that the proposition
would have fared much better at the hands of the Liberals. They would
have resorted to every trick and device of diplomatic evasion to avoid
being pinned down to earlier commitments or what, to the Filipinos,
passed for commitments. Becerra's inaction betrayed Sagasta's think-
ing, and neither the petitions, whose source he was well aware of, nor
the speech of the republican Junoy was likely to move him to a differ-
ent course.

45. M . H . del Pilar, "Emilio Junoy," ibid., 140. It seems likely that Junoy is the
wealthy deputy Del Pilar speaks of in letters to his wife and to Apolinario Mabini (wl10
was at this period handling the remission of funds to Del Pilar from tl1e Philippines).
He tells his wife that since the deputy is wealthy, and "is not out for money, but only
for honor," he hopes that victory is within sight (Marcelo-Tsanay, Ep. Pilar, 2:162; also
Alipio Oran [Mabini] R. Lipa [Del Pilar], 11 Dec 1893, Las cartas politicas de Apolinario
Mabini, 10) .
46. For the speech of Junoy and the text of the proposed law see "Al Congreso de
Diputados," La Solidaridad, 31 Mar 1895. An account of the presentation of the peti-
tion s and the introduction of the bill by Junoy (with all details of the behind-the-scenes
activity by which it was arranged omitted) , is also in Ponce, Efemerides, 185-87.
47. Neither La Solidaridad nor its opponent La Politica de Espana en Filipinas make
any m e ntion of the subject during the succeeding months, as both wot1ld l1ave bee n
like ly to do had any action been taken on Junoy's proposed law. The b ook of p e ti-
ti ons in AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5 264 is accompanied by a document transmitting it to the
overseas minister, "por acuerdo del Congreso tornado en la sesion de ayer [ 14 May
1895] y p ara los efectos oportunos." Neither is there any m e ntio11 of a banque t l1 e ld
fo r Jun oy, for which Mabini h a d sent Del Pilar on 31 O ct 1894, a to tal of 257 p esos
•
and 95 centavos, in addition to the re gula r re mittance of 100 pesos, as the result of a
subscription fro m th e lodges .. Mod es tia" and ''Binhi," and fro m tl1 e Cu e rpo d e
Compromisarios (a group of regular contributo rs to De l Pilar's wo rk, o rga11ized in
•
1894) (Mabini, Carias, 24) .
 206 Renewed Activity in. Maclrid

Effectiveness of the Political Activity

It is pertinent to inquire at this point in to the effectiveness and

actual natt1re of tl1e Asociacion Hispano-Filipina. Though its program
and its members might disclaim partisan interest in either politics or
religion, the fact that its president and only really active peninsular
member was grand master of the Gran Oriente Espanol and a lead-
ing figure in the Possibilist Republican party stamped it from the be-
ginning with a notably partisan religious and political cl1aracter in
the eyes of most Spaniards.
The only peninsulars who seem actually to have belonged in any
sense to the association besides Morayta and Manuel Labra, the found-
ers, were the three vice-presidents, Luis Vidart, General Felipe de la
Corte, and Antonio Balbfn de Unquera. Vidart apparently never took
part in the affair·s of the association, and in 1891 actually wrote ap-
provingly of Retana's anti-Filipino pamphlet, Frailes y clirigos. Never-
theless, he was reelected in June 1891 , but when he ignored the
election, La Solidaridad finally had to conclude that l1e wanted no
48
part of it. Balbfn de Unquera worked with the Filipinos for some
time, and on at least one occasion spoke of the need for reforms in
the Philippines. But as a prominent member of a professedly Catholic
party, he could not long fail to see the Masonic connections of the
association, and likewise ceased to have anything to do with it. 49 La
Corte continued to take part for some time in the meetings and pro-
tests of the association, though not in its attacks on the friars. He
50
died, however, in 1892.
Not only did the association actually have ve1~ little Spanish about
it after 1893 but it showed few signs of life at all. Even in the earlier
years it carried on with far more bt1stle than actual accomplisl1ment.
After 1892 there is no mention of electio11 of officers or of ba11quets
51
no doubt owing to lack of funds. In 1893 it see1ns that Morayta \\'a~

48. Eduardo de Lete, "Panegiristas asalariados," La Solidarida.d, 31 Jan 1891). 3 l i-

19; "Boletfn oficial de la Asociaci6n Hispan ~Filipina," ibid., 15 Jul 1891 .
49. "Cr611ica," La Solidaridad, 31 Oct 189 1.
50. "Don Felipe de la Corte," ibid., 15 At1g 1892.
51. The le tters of Del Pilar to his ,vifc ir1 t.l1 c latter half of 1892 and the first half of
1893 speak pathetically of his ciesper.1te fi11ancial sitt1ation ~1 nd Ll1 e dar1ge r he is in of
dying from J1unger.
 Renewed Activity in Mad·ri.d 207

able to get the Filipino lodges in the Philippines to finan ce offices

that were to serve simt1lta11eously as a Masonic temple and as tl1 e
headqt1arters of tl1e association , but La Solidaridad reports no further
activity except for a few protests or statements to the governme11t,
52
issued over the names of the officers. The association had become a
mere name to lend substance to the effo1-ts of a few men.
Typical of such efforts were the petitions presented by Junoy to the
•
Cortes in 1895-all the work of Masonry to further its aims under th e
name of the Asociacion Hispano-Filipina. Morayta confi1-med a gen-
eral impression when he said at the outbreak of the Philippine Revo-
lt1tion in August 1896 that the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina had been
inactive for more than two years and tl1at tl1e dozen or so members
,vho still remained kept the headquarters open because tl1ey had "ere-

52. On Morayta's efforts to get financing for the lodges, see the correspondence
benvcen Morayta and tl1e gra11d sec retary of tl1e Gran Orie nte Espanol on tl1e one
hand and Panday Pira (Pedro Serrano) , of the lodge "Nilad" on the other, in Retana,
Archi1.10, 3:90-100, especially 94-95. Thot1gh these letters do 11ot make clear to ,vhat
extent me Filipino Masons agreed to finance botl1 ilie Asociaci6n a11d Morayta, ilie
fact that w)1en the police closed the headquarters of tl1e Gran Oriente Espanol a11d
seized its papers at the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution in August 1896, boili
•
organizations were in ilie same place, seems to show tl1at Morayta ,vas st1ccessft1l (see
the accounts in me Madrid newspapers, La Correspondencia de Espana, El J,nparcial, El
Globo, and La Epoca, from 22 Aug to 26 Aug 1896). The early accounts are consider-
ably garbled, and it is only by piecing them togetl1er and comparing ilie various pa-
pe rs that the wl1ole story can be reconstructed. The article "Masones y filibusteros ,"
La Correspondencia de Espana, 23 Aug 1896, co11tains a letter, allegedly by four Master
Masons, which had been presented to the Gran Orie11te Espanol some time previ-
ously, complaining of the fact that the building ,vhich s11ould b e ilie Masonic temple
bore t11e title "Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina," and that tl1e latter l1eld dan ces of rather
disreputable character in its precincts, thus disgracing Maso11 ry. If authentic, this \vould
be funher confirmation. As far as I could dete rmin e, tl1ere ,v-as 110 d e nial by Morayta
•
of its authe nticity.
After a resolution of congratulations to Goven1or-General Desp1tjol in /Ja Solidatidad
(30 June 1892), the only acts of the association reported in tl1e paper are a le tter of
r condolence to Blume ntritt on t11e death of }1is fath e r i11 its issue of 15 JL1i1e 1894,
signed by Morayta and Lete; and the message to tl1e Co11greso d e Dip11tados of 7 tvlay
1895 (issue of 15 May 1895), signed by Morayta, Del Pilar, and Po11cc. None of tli ese
•
show evidence of any real corporative act, a ncl it seetns likely tl1at by 1895 tlic re ,vas
no o n e even left to sign for the associati c>11 to keep up tl1c prete nst~s. cxct'pl til e tllree
208 Renewed Activity i1i Madrid

ated a r ecreational section to entertain their lady-frie11ds with dances

. 53
a n d 11terary seances."
Other politicians like Segismundo Moret, Francisco Pi y Margall,
Rafael M. Labra, and Quiroga, often sympathized with Filipino aspira-
54
tions, and favored reforms in the Philippines. But for , 1arious rea-
sons, they could not be expected to support the Filipino cause
unreservedly. Pi and Labra, for example, were republicans: the first
was an advocate of the federal system; the second, an autonomist for
Cuba. However considerable the respect they might command from
other deputies, their influence on government policy was negligible .
Moret held a high place in the Fusionist political circles, but was of-
ten at odds with Sagasta, and while he advocated many reforms for
the Philippines, he was not disposed to be the unconditional cham-
pion of the Filipino cause as conceived by Del Pilar and his followers .
Quiroga had at first served Del Pilar well as intermediary with Becerra,
as advisor, and as the "leak" in high government councils. But in later

53. "Protesta del Sr. Morayta," El Pais, 27 Aug 1896. This is a letter from the bor-
der town of Bourg-Madame in France, ,.\There Mora)rta had fled on h earing of the
police seizing the headquarters of the Gran Oriente Espanol and th e Asociacion
Hispano-Filipina at the outbreak of the Philippi11e Revolution.
54. See Rizal 's letter of 22 Sept 1889 to Blumentritt on Moret's requesting to see
the author of the Noli me tangere wl1ile in Paris, and on l1is good dispositions (Ep.
Rizal., 5:494). In 1897 Moret secured t11e release from prison of Antonio Luna, and in
1898, sent a reco mmendation for Julio Llorente, both of whom had bee n imprison ed
on probably unfounded cl1arges of rebellion (AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5359, "T e legrarnas
recibidos," 12 Oct 1897, Ministro de Ultramar al Gobernador General de Filipinas;
leg. 5348, "1898. Expedidos. Polftica," 30 Apr 1898, Ministro de Ultramar al Gobernador
General de Filipinas).
From the foundation of his newspaper El Nuevo Rigi,men, in 1891 , Pi pttblished fre-
quen t articles on Philippine problems, generally in tl1e line of the Propagandists. H e
had been very friendly with Rizal, n ot only in the latter's stude nt days, but also ,,,}1en
Rizal returned to Madrid in 1890 (see tl1e letter of Carnicero co Despujo l, recording
Rizal's remarks to l1im in tl1eir conversation s i11 Dapitan [Retana, \Iida. 274], also tlle
lette r of Manuel Timoteo de Hidalgo to Rizal, 1 Dec 1891 , Ep. Rizal, 3:261).
The centralistc1, republicans, of whom Labra was a leading 1ne1nber, spoke out in
favor of Philippine parliame ntary re presentation and o th er reforms (Rodriguez-Solfs,
2:755) . See also La bra's note to Del Pilar on receivir1g la soberania monacal, 25 ~Ja,·
1889, Ep. Pilar, 1:156. Also tJ1e le tte r of Po nce to Labra front Ho ng Kong, 23 Feb 1898
( Cartas sobre la Revoluci611, 110), where Port ee speaks of tl1e interest Labra l1ad sho,vn
in tl1e former campaign of la Solidaridad. H owever, the re is no evidence of more t11an
mere inte rest and agreement.
 Renewed Activity in Madrid 209

years there is n o mention of him in Del Pilar's correspo nden ce, and
at no time did h e appear publicly associated with the Asociaci6n
55
Hispano-Filipina, su ch as by attending or speaking at their banquets.
Other friendships too developed between individual Filipinos and
certain Spanish politicians. But these were much more likely to in-
volve personal favors rather than support for a Filipino political pro-
gram. Still, certain accommodations could sometimes be wangled to
help the nationalist cause. Thus, even under the ministry of the Con-
seivative Fahie, certainly no friend of La Solidaridad, copies of this
paper were being sent into the Philippines clandestinely in envelopes
marked with the seal of the subsecretariate of the overseas ministry
56
and even with that of the private office of the minister himself.
But such occasional minor triumphs by no means insured the suc-
cess of Del Pilar's political program. The newspapers were a more
substantial source of aid. A number of the journalists invited to the
banquets of the association responded with publicity for its program.
The only ones, l1owever, that consistently showed interest in Filipino
aspirations were those of republican affiliation, particularly La Justicia,
El Pais, El Nuevo Regimen, and, to a lesser extent, El Globo and El
Resumen, in Madrid, and La Publicidad in Barcelona.
El Pais, the organ of the Progressist Republicans, frequently dealt
with Philippine problems, particularly during 1889-92. In these years
Jose Francos Rodriguez, who constantly attended the banquets of the
Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina, was one of the editors of El Pais, and was
chiefly responsible for the favorable attitude, though Lopez Jaena's
57
prominent position in the party also helped. Francos Rodriguez' role
is apparent from the change in attitude of La Justicia when he be-
came editor-in-chief of this paper. Though it had frequently shown

55. In the period in Barcelona, Quiroga had been in frequent co11tact witl1 Del
Pilar, as also in the early days in Madrid, where the latter speaks of telephoning I1im
frequently, receiving information from him, etc. (Ep. Pilar, 1:214; 2:60, 105) . Perhaps
Quiroga's association with the Moret faction is the explanation .
56. AHN, Ultramar, leg. 5289, exp. 9: "El Gobemador General de Filipinas da cuenta
de haber interceptado cartas dirigidas a personas de antecedentes sospecl1osos." The
envelopes and numbers of La Solidaridad are there, having been seized in May ar1d
June 1891. See also Retana, Mando de Wryle,~ 397-98.
57. An indicatio n may be seen in the coverage of a banquet gi,,en i11 Marcl1 1890
by the Progressist Republicans in honor of _ Juan Sol y Ortega, o ne of tl1e leaders of
the party, whose protege Lopez J ae na was. In th e accot1nt of the banquet in El Pars,
 210 R.enewed A ctivil)' iri Madrid

itself friendly o n varioL1s occasions, it also printed articles opposing

Filipino aspiratio11s, and bitterly attacked Rizal a t the time of his d e-
58
portatio11 in 1892. During the year 1893, during which Francos
Rodriguez became editor, however, it showed a consiste ntly friendly
a ttitude, openly espot1sing the cause of La Solidaridad.
El Nuevo Rigi,men, the organ of Pi y Margall and his Federalist Re-
publicans, was from its beginnings favorable to Filipino interests, and
would continue to be so even up to the separation of the Philippines
from Spain. But Pi y Margall's advocacy of Filipino (and Ct1ban) rights
owed less to Del Pilar's political activity than to a logical application of
his federalist theory of government, and a friendly paternal interest he
had always shown in the Filipino students in Madrid, notably Rizal. 59
El Globo and La Publicidad, as organs in Madrid and Barcelona, re-
spectively, of the Possibilist or Historical Republicans, both counted
Morayta among their collaborators, though his influence wa.s not pre-
dominant with respect to El Globo, which only showed interest in the
60
Filipinos occasionally. La Publicidad, however, with Eusebio Corominas
as publisher and Emilio Junoy as editor, had always shown itself friendly
to the Filipinos though, except for the articles of Morayta in his regu-
lar column, it treated less of Philippine affairs after the Filipinos shifted
their main activities to Madrid.

the only one of tl1e nine orators to whose speecl1 specific attention is given is to
L6pezjaena, from whom liberal excerpts are quoted (see "En l1onor de Sol y Ortega,"
9 Mar 1890) .
58. E.g., the articles of opposing criteria of Mariano Zaera Vazquez and Alberto
Aguilera y Arjona of 2 July, 3 Aug, 16 Aug, 4 Sept 1892. The last t\VO mentioned,
though giving conu-adictory reports of the Philippine situation, agree i11 attacking Rizal
bitterly and d emanding severe punishme nt for his supposed crimes.
59. See the article of Rafael Del Pan cited earlier and Retana, Vida, 199, 273-74 for
Rizal and Pi. Antonio Luna proposed to have Pi wri te the p rologue to his book.
lmpresiones madrileiias (Luna-Rizal, Ep. Rizal., 3:180). Tho ugh l1e did not d o so, Luna's
book received l1igh praise in Pi's paper on its publication , as did Rizal's ne,v n ovel
and Paterno's books.
60. In 1895, whether because Francos Rodriguez was new editor-in-cl1ief (it is not
known just when dt1ring 1895 he assumed this position), or because tl1e paper ,vas in
need of money, Morayta had proposed through Del Pilar tl1at tl1e Manila Filipinos of
the Propaganda subsidize El Globo. See the answer (apparently negative) of Mabi11i in
his letter to Del Pilar of 20 Mar 1895, CartrJS de Mabini, 35.
 Renewed Activit)' in Madrid 211

El Res·un1en was also sporadic in the atten tio11 it gave tl1e Filipinos.
It cooperated with th e m, however, when specifically requested to d o
so, ¼rithout devoting general atte11tion to Philippine affairs. Tl1is ma}'
have been due to the influen ce of More t, who was a leading figure i11
the Izquierda Dinastica p arty or faction, of which El Resumen ,-vas the
organ. The paper became less cooperative ,-vhen Moret formed part
of the Sagasta governments and was therefore committed to the pro-
gram of the Liberal Fusionist party.
Since these papers were minority organs, it is doubtful whether
they wielded much influence outside the republican or democratic
circles tl1at sponsored them. Though their advocacy rnay l1ave d1·awn
a small numbe r of republicans.-not always for disinterested motives-
to espouse the Filipino cause, their sponsorsl1ip probably ft1rther al-
ienated the governing monarchical parties.
In spite of all the efforts, money, and political skill expe nded to
pusl1 Del Pilar's political program, the signs held out little l1ope for
its successful prosecution. Some Filipinos would realize this much
sooner than Del Pilar, and the years after 1890 ,-vot1ld see a stead)'
dwindling of the group in Madrid. But tl1e beleaguered Del Pilar and
the steadfast Ponce would hold out as long as they had resources.
While Del Pilar maintained a killing pace in pursuing his goals on
several fronts simultaneously, another phase of the Propaganda cam-
paign was on the move, drawing inspiration from and spearheaded by
Rizal. It was a phase more concentrated in approach , more reflective
in outlook, more solidly rooted in historical realities. It ,,vas aimed at
the Philippines and the Filipinos ratl1er than at the Spaniards.
 CHAPTER 11

The Filipino Past and Education /01·

the Future, 1887-1891

The wounded sensibilities and n ational pride a m ong the Filipi11os

in Et1rope that 1-eacted fie rcely in spirited rejoinders to th e aspersions
of tl1e Quioqt1iaps ,vas more than a mere resp o nse to offensi,,e Span-
ish attitudes. It was part of a gro,ving con sciousness of national iden-
tity which soon manifested itself in a co11cern for the roots of th e
Filipino national personality in the pre-Hisp anic p ast. Filipino nation-
alism in this sense belongs in the mainstream of romantic n ational-
ism that prevailed in 011e for1n o r another in e, ery European coun0:·
1

in the nineteenth century, a patriotic sentime nt that ,vas m ediated to

their countrymen by the Filipino stt1dents \Alho had gone to Europe.

Spanish Views of Pre-Hispanic Philippines

The growth of nationalist feeling among the edt1cated Filipinos

should be seen in the light of ,-vays of tl1inking pre,,alent a1nong Span-
iards in the Philippines. Tl1e general atmospl1ere of ron1a 11tic natior\-
alism tl1rived in Spain as ir1 the rest of r1ine teenth-centt lt)' Etirope,
thougl1 witl1 differences that migl1t be expected from Spain ·s 1-e lati,·t"
isolation from the main cttrre nts of European tl1o t1ght. An1ong Sp;\tl-
ish conservatives a11d reactionai-ies, which inclt1ded al111ost tl1e e tltirt""
cle rgy, traflicio11alisrno had identifie d Catholi cis111 a11ci Spani~11 flat1~iot-
is1n almost in extricabl)', a nd looked ,vitl1 11osta lgic pride to Si>ait1 's
golclcn centur-y when sh e bro t1g l1t tl1 e C,,tltolic faitl1 to tl1e Ne,,· \\'orld.
Tl1e chat1vinisn1 co1nn1o n to 11tc111lJ<.~ r s or· gc,,,er11ing 1-a<·es ir1 a ll col()-
nies, p a rticularly amon g tl1ose \.\ l1osc.- lc)11 g abse 11(·t:· fro111 tll(' t1ortie-
1

212
 Education for the Future 213
•

land in clines them to idealize t11e m o t11e r country to excess, was very
I
much a part of Sp a nish communities in the Philippines. This trait was
decid edly pro 11oun ced among the religious orders, sharing as they
1
did the qt1asi-religio us patriotism of traditionalist Spain. Moreo,,er,
in an age when an a11 ticlericalism was rife in Spain and respect for
the religious mission of the orders low, they were under considerable
pressure to prove the mselves indispensable as the upholders of Spain's
2
• mission and sovereignty in the Philippines. They often , therefore,
' impressed on t11eir Filipino parishioners the debt of gratitude and
I
loyalty owed to tl1e Mother Country for the great benefits Spain had
bestowed o n the Filipinos. Imbued with this religious nostalgia, itself
further h e ighte ned by the influe11ce of the typical nineteenth-century
indifference of Western impe rialists to indigenous culture, their exhorta-
tion to gratitude often led to a wholesale writing off, or even execration,
of pre-Hispanic Filipino culture. Even the most devoted to the wel-
fare of their people often showed a remarkable insensitivity in this.
A typical example is the first pastoral lette r of a bishop noted for
his zeal and d evotion to his people, Francisco Gafnza, O.P., conse-
3
crated bishop of the diocese of Nueva Caceres in 1863. His pastoral
le tte r could not be a reaction to nationalist propaganda since it was
issued during a period when there was no organized Filipino nation-
alist movement to speak of. Afte1- addressing his clergy and the Span-
iards, h e turned to the naturales, relating the fine reports he had

1. A striking example is a lette r of Bishop Fra11cisco Gainza, O .P., to the "Excmo.

Presidente de Ministros, Ministro de Guerra y de Ultramar [sic]" accompanying a
copy o f l1is pas toral letter cited below. In this lette r h e says that perhaps th e minister
,vill find th e language of the pastoral somewhat lacking in religious unctio11 and al-
most secular in tone, but this is only apparent. For one wl10 knows tl1 e Philippines
well understands "that h ere Religion and Spai11 are so intimately identified tl1at the
former would perish if the paternal rule of tl1e latter sl1ot1ld be lacking, and tl1e tree of
the Cross would lose its vitality and luxurian ce the mome11t tl1at tl1e beneficent sl1ad e of
the banner of Castile should disappear'' (AHN, Ultramar, leg. 2246, exp. 5, n o. 7) .
2. On th ese grou nds th e co nfiden tial m emo rials in AHN and MBB of all tl1e
governors-general from Izquierdo to Weyler, no matter what r11eir political affiliation
o r religious sentiments, insist on the need of presenring the prestige of the friars in
th e Philippines.
3. Carta pastoral que el Jlmo. y Rtno. Sr. Dr. D. Fr. Francisco Gainz.<l del Sagrado Orden dJ,
PYedicadores, Obispo de. Nuroa Caceres dirige a sus 1n1,y amados diocesan os co11 motivo de su
consagracion (Manila: Estab. tip. de Santo Tomas, 1863).
214 Education for llie Future

received a bout the p eople of the Bicol r egio n from th ose wl1 0 knew
tl1em . Tl1ey owed these fi11 e qt1alities, this culture and civilizati on, to
their h o ly religion, to tl1e nation that at great sac1-ifice brougl1t it to
their sh ores, and to the indefatigable toils of the missionaries ,vho
had labored to lift them from the d egradation of their ancestors.
He goes on to portray the pre-Hispanic Filipinos, wh o

lived in tl1e midst of eternal h atred and vengeance, hun ting one an-
oth e r down in the thick forests \.Vithout oth er la,.v than tl1a t of oppres-
sion, witho ut other right tl1an force, ignoran t or conte mptuous of tl1e
eter11al principles of justice, and bo,,ving tl1 eir h eads ... before ridicu-
lous figures, symbols of a repugnant cyni cism!

He recoils at the thought of

their character, as deceitft1l as it "''as savage, the depravity of th eir cus-

toms, tl1e degeneratio n of their intellectual faculties, their savage sacri-
fices, and even their feasts and pleasures, so often bespattered with
human blood, the infernal h a1mony of their acct1rsed dances, of their
impure bacchanals.

Similarly flavored with denigration is another work of a somewhat

different kind, written by a man later to be bishop, Father Casimiro
4
Herrero , O .S.A. Published under a pseudonym , the book purports to
be a Spanish translation of a Tagalog work by the simple and loyal
Captain Juan, and is intended to counteract ideas of liberty, eqt1ality,
fraternity, which he looks on as being nothing but execrable "legiti-
mate fruits of Protestantism" stirred up during the discussio11s a nd
5
agitation of 1869-72.
After refuting Protestantism , liberalism , e tc., tl1rot1gh Captain Jtian ,
the book goes on to sum up the condition of tl1e Filipinos wh en the
Spaniards landed, then seeks to establisl1 the legitimacy of Spanish
sovereignty in the Philippi11es and to demonstrate the progress made
by the Filipinos under Spanish rule. Captain Jt1an finds it ct1riotis tllat
the ancient Filipinos were submissi,,e and respectful in spite of t1 1 e
fact tl1at they were almost completely gt1ided by instinct. It is con cei\·-

4. He rrero ,vas r:on1isario of tl1 e Spanisl1 Augt1stin ia11s at tl1e ti1,1 e l\e pttl)lisl,cd th<'
book disct1ssed be lo\v. I-le beca me bish op of Nt1c,c1 Caceres fro 1t1 1880 co 1886.
5. Filipi-nas ante la raz611 drl in.tlio, obr(1 rornJJ11rsta por t'l in.dfgma Capitan Ju,111 para
1,tilidad de sus paisanos y j>ztblirada m castr/lan o por rl rs/Ja1iol P. Ca ro (Madrid: A. Go inez

Fuentenebro, 1874).
 Education for the Futu1·e 21 5

able, h e says, that this could come from Nature, bt1t such a thing
would be extraordinary, "since more intelligent and active races . • •
prese rve notl1ing like tl1is, in spite of l1aving a better organized gov-
ernment." Rather the explanation must be sought in the climate, \,vl1ich
is conducive to laziness and inaction and therefore makes submissive-
ness a necessity rather than a virtue.
Discussing the special penal code that governed the indios, Captain
]ti.an notes that it takes into consideration "our limited understanding in
abstract questions," "our weakness of will to maintain a sworn declara-
tion" and the fact that "moral sanctions were not real punish men ts, be-
cause of our imperfect acquaintance with honor, with morality, a11d "vith
justice." For this reason Spanish law has deemed it necessary to adopt
6
the custom of flogging with the bejuco as a common punisl1ment.
After taking up other similar considerations, the book ends with a
"Catecismo racional y social para utilidad de los indios," which con-
tains such passages as the following:

What was their religion [ the ancestors of tl1e Filipinos]?

A mass of ridiculous superstitions, which deprived them of libert)1
and filled them with terror ...
Why should this society not be called peculiarly Filipino, since it is
located in our land and we are the majority ?
Because we have contributed nothing of what constitutes civilized
7
society; it is the Spaniards who have done it all.

If intelligent bishops adopted such an approach, individt1al parish

priests in the provinces were likely to take a similar or even crt1der
one. Though such an approach may often have been effective amo11g
simple peasants, it aroused deep resentment even amo11g educated
young men of the middle and upper classes who never left the Philip-
pines. Among those educated abroad fiercer fires were kindled.

Filipino Disillusionment in Spain

The religious in the Pl1ilippines never ceased wringing tl1eir l1ands

over the evil effects on the Filipino youth of going to Spain or other

6. Ibid., 109- 11 ; 137-38. The hejuco was a rattan \V hip, co1nn10 11ly llSt'll fo r Oc.)ggi,,g
at this time in the Philippines.
7. Ibid., 274, 277.
216 Education for the Futu·re

parts of Et1rope. Such repinings were generally based on the assump-

ti on that in Spanisl1 uni,,ersities the young Filipinos would be exposed
to tl1e l1eterodox teachings ct1rrent there, lose their faith, and pick
8
up liberal ideas dangerous to Spanish rule in the Pl1ilippines. There
was indeed greater freedom to absorb "liberal" ideas in Spain . But
the Spanish religiot1s missed another ,rital point that, among other
tl1ings, led to the disruption of Spanish domination in the Philip-
pin es: the disenchantment of many Filipinos with Spai11 and all that
\\'as Spanish, once the illusio11 so assiduously sustained in the Philip-
pines was swept away by bumping into the reality in Spain.
The disillusionment experienced by Taga-Ilog (Antonio Luna) on
seeing what the famed Puerta del Sol really amounted to was not
merely propaganda. In spite of Mir Deas' attacks and the unpleasant
consequences they brougl1t, Luna continued to publish his
"Impresiones Madrileiias" in La Solidaridad over the next year and a
half, satirizing ,,arious types of people and aspects of life in Madrid.
On publishing the collection he begs his reader, it is true, not to see
in his realistic pictures the hand of a native of the Philippines, but
rather "the Spanish citizen with his freedom to criticize scenes of his
9
own soil which, by common consent, ought to disappear." Thougl1
tl1e plea is valid in itself, Luna's purpose became obvious when he
wrote to Rizal that he expected violent attacks on his book "because
it l1as the wicked p1·esumptuousness to overthrow the idol, smashing
10
its pedestal to pieces." Behi11d these often devastating pictures of
the morals and customs of Madrid, so handy as propaganda for cut-
ting the kastila do,-vn to size among the mass of Filipinos at }1ome,
there is genuine disillusionment on the pa1·t of the author himself.

8. See for example, the remarks of the J esuit Fatl1e r Pastells 011 110,v much bette r
Rizal ,vould have done to have follo,1/ed the advice give11 him to d edicate l1imself to
agrict1lture and rett1rn to l1is hom eto,.m , ,~,11ere l1e lvould t111do\1btedly l1avc bec 0111e a
gobernadorcillo, ,vorking for tl1e uplift of l1is fello,"' to,vns1ne11 (Ri.z.al y su obra, 7-8) .
9. I·,,ipresiones, por Taga-Ilog (Madrid: In1prenta de "El Progreso Tipografic-o , 1891 ) .
.. Al lecto r.''
IO. f:..p. R izal., 3: 180. Tl1a t Lt111a ,vas not n1istake11 in l1is expectatior1s ma~, be se~11
in th e attack in Antonio Chapuli Navarro, SiluPlas y rnatices (Galeria filipi,ia ) (tvladrid:
Minuesa de Ios Rios, 1894), I 66, n. 2. I 6~)- 70; and n1ore sig11ifica11tJy, tltat of Ja,·ier
Gom ez d e la Sen1a, a Filipino Spa11iard, fonnerl y part of tJ1e Madrid colo ny. ,,·t,o
,vrites th e prologue to Cl1a pt1li Navarro's b oo k (x_ii) .
 Education for lh.e Fut1-1,re 217

Luna 's disenchantrn ent ,,vas sh ared by otl1er Filipin os abroad. Riza],
,vriting to his brother Paciano sh ortl)' after his a1·rival in Madrid , d ep-
recated the decadent moral atmosphe re, the scandals in l1igh places
i11 governmen t and society, the prevalen ce of prostitution, e tc. Mo re
noteworthy are th e reaction s of th e m ature Del Pila r o n his arri,1al in
Barcelo n a . Not o nly does Nature the re seem to him dism al and mis-
erable, bu t ab o,,e all , h e misses "the graciou sness, the sin ceri ty, a11d
cordiality of our o rien tal custo m s." In a letter to Serrano, he exclaims
that h e almost feels grateful to the f1·iars fo r h aving isolated tl1 e Fili-
pino from tl1e rest of the Spaniards:

At least, we must recognize tl1e l1and of Providen ce, ,-vl1ich perha ps

reserves great desti 11ies for o u r race. Due to this isola tio n their customs
could n ot substitute tl1e m selves for ours, in spi te of the spirit of imita-
tion wh ich pred omina tes in m any; and we should bless, yes, bless God
eternally, for h a,,i ng sa,·ed o ur race fr om th e pe n etration of the cus-
to m s o f th e colo nizer . T h us o ur vir tues h ave bee11 presen,ed : our love
for o rde r , ou r h ospi tali ty, tha t spirit of eminent ch ari ty, which there
you can scarcely n o tice for its being so common and ordinary a thi11g,
bu t ,vh ich h ere the na tive of ou r country finds lacking in the midst of
th ese souls, as selfish as they are frivolous, ,-vithout ideals, ,-vi tl1 n o othe r
con,1 iction tha11 the ir own pe rson al and m om en tary con, e nien ce. Be-
1

lieve m e, r.liico, I cam e h ere \\ri th very fl attering predispositions, but each
day I go o n acquiring th e very sad con victio n of the incompatibili l:)1 of
this race ,vi tl1 sentirne11ts of hon or. It is sad to ackn owled ge it, bt1t ,-ve
,,rill learn n o thing fro m this accursed race, and accursed 1nt1st be tha t
race which treated \\rith great cruelty its fath ers (Arabs and J ews) .

A few weeks later , writing to his wife, he expressed similar senti-

men ts, sayi ng tha t Filipinos showed far greater compassion fo r the
poor. T h o t1g h the Tagalog is often lazy and spends the day with l1is
fighting-cock , the Spaniards are no b etter, idling their days away in
cafes watch in g lewd d ances and low comedies. In a letter to Basili o
Teodoro a few m o nths later h e related with approval ho,.v young Jose
.!\lejandrino, recently arrived in Barcelona, h ad shown his fin e up-
bringin g by his indign atio n at the suggestive dances tha t were part of
11
a play th ey h ad a ttended togeth er recen tly.
~o dot1bt there was a certain amou11t of exaggeration in all this,
but such reactions ,.\'ould make the Filipinos less willing to accep t Span-

---~- - - -
11 . Rizal, One Hundred, 76-81, Ep. Pilar. 1:32, 63, 11 9; 2:7.
218 Education for the Future

ish criticisms of Filipino customs meekly, and would deepen their pride
. th e rr
1n . own peop le. 12

Filipino Views of Pre-Hispanic Philippines

Sancianco was one of the earliest defenders of the indio against

the charge of indolence so often made by Spania1-ds. When Spanish
racism rose to strident heights in the type of malevolent slurs of
Quioquiap in 1887, the Filipino colony as a whole had 1-eacted fiercely.
But it was above all Rizal who possessed both the passion and the
competence to meet this denigration of his people.
On his return to Europe from the Philippines i11 1888, Rizal estab-
lished himself in London so that he might devote his time to the
study of his country's history in the library of the British Museum. H e
was convinced tl1at only by such efforts could he hope to do anything
solid and enduring for the Philippines. The fruits of his study were
not long in coming. Beginning in May 1889 he began to write articles
for La Solidaridad answering various publications re,riling the Filipinos
or denying their capacity for civilization, etc.
Notable among these is his answer to Vicente Barrantes' book, El
teatro tagalo, in which his study of the old chronicles, like those of
Chirino and Colin, is evident. A foreshadowing of the direction of his
investigations appears in his "Verdades nuevas," where he points to a
certain decline in Philippine civilization: at the coming of the Span-
iards all Filipinos had been literate; today after three hundred years
of the "civilizing influence" of the friars, Filipino literacy stands at
only seventy percent.
This theme appears again in the series of articles that b egan ap-
pearing soon afterwards under the title ''Filipinas dentro d e cie n
13
aiios." To visualize the future of his cot1ntry, he examines its past,
describing how it lost its traditions, its way of writing, its literature, its

12. No doubt the oth er side of the story is also true; namely, that the Filipinos
fot1nd their eyes ope11ed to a moder11 v.rorld they had never kno,"n whe11 U1C)' arri,,ed
in Spain (see F. M. Roxas-Rizal, EfJ. Rizal., 1:294. Bt1t this did not prevent then1 fro in
seeing the defects and being more impressed by tl1e m, especially when they COltld feel
that th e progress and e nlightenment they fo und in Spain ought to l1 a,·e bee r1 tlieirs in
tl1e Philippines too.
13. La Solidaridad, 15 June, 31 Jul, 30 Sep. 310ct. 15 Dec 1889; l Feb 1890.
 Education Jor tlie Future 219

moral code. It had become ashamed of its past, adopting the new
\vays of the conquerors, ways which it did not understand , but before
\Vhich it bowed as it substituted new masters for the old rulers, who
l1ad been unloved because of their despotic rule. Almost totally de-
moralized, the Filipino people remained submissi,,e until at last it was
aroused by those who tried to abase it still further, denying it a fully
human nature and the capacity for either vice or virtue. Smarting
under the indignities heaped upon it, the Filipino spirit awoke to
new life and self-awareness. With its new educated class, the Philip-
pines could no longer adhere to Spain without radical reforms, par-
ticularly f1·eedom of the press and representation in the Cortes. Spain
must wholly assimilate the Philippines; otherwise, an independen ce
movement could not be stopped. But independence, precipitate and
ill-prepared for , was likely to end in domination by some other for-
eign power, probably the rising United States.
This lengthy essay has since excited widespread interest for its re-
markable prediction of American sovereignty succeeding the Spanish
when Spain was overthrown for failing to i11stitute reforms. But the
importance of "Filipinas dentro de cien anos" lies in the program
Rizal clearly outlines here. To understand the present sitt1ation of the
Philippines, he says, one must look back to see what it once was. Then ,
in the light of the past and of the present, one can cl1art possible
courses for the future. This program he had begun with his picture
of the present in the Noli me tangere, and was now about to complete
its second step by his newest book, an annotated edition of the early
seventeenth-century history of the Philippines by Antonio de Morga.
In his dedication of the book "To the Filipinos," he traces those steps,
and describes his own evolution as a nationalist:

In the Noli me tangere I began the sketch of the present state of our
fatherland; the effect which my attempt produced made me understand
that before continuing to unveil to your e)1es other succeeding pictures,
I must first make known the past, so that it may be possible to judge
be tter the present and measure the patJ1 whicl1 l1as been traversed dur-
ing three centuries.
Borr1 and brought up, as almost all of you, in th e ignorance of Otlr
Yesterda),, without an authoritative voice to speak of wl1at \\'e neither
saw nor studied, I considered it necessary to invoke the testi111o ny of an
illustrious Spaniard who directed the destinies of tl1e Filipinos in the
beginnings of the new era and witnessed tl1e last mo me nt~ of o ur clrt-
cient nationality.
220 Educcllion for the Future

If this book succeeds i11 a,.vakening i11 you tl1e conscio usness of our
past, ,vl1 icl1 l1as been blo tted out from 0L1r memo ries, and in rectifying
,,vl1at l1as bee11 falsified b)' calum11y, the11 I ,vill 11ot h ave labored in
,,ain , a11d ,,ritl1 this fo undatio11, tiny as it may be, "'e can all d edicate
14
o urseJ,,es to stud)ring tl1e fu ture.

Rizal bega11 vvork 011 tl1is book in 1888, consideri11g Morga the only
one among tl1e early chroniclers who showed stifficient impartiality to
warrant servi11g as a basis for the history of the Filipino past he pro-
j ected . This rare chronicle l1 e l1ad laboriously copied by hand in the
British Mt1seum, and over the space of a year l1ad annotated it from
his studies of tl1e other early chronicles. Though it bore the publica-
tion date 1890, the first copies of his book were already in the hands
of l1is friends i11 Spain by December 1889. He knew that the book,
me1·ely because it bore his name, to say nothing of the conclusions it
led to, wot1ld be banned in the Philippines. As usual, he arranged to
l1ave it smuggled in through Jose Maria Basa from Hong Kong and
tl1rough the Spanisl1 Mason, Manuel Arias Rodriguez, 0W11er of the
15
Agencia Editorial in Manila.
The book is at once a glorification of the Filipino past and an
indictment of the Spanish conquest and the work of the missionaries.
Apropos of Morga's remarks on the failure of Gove1·11or Perez
Dasmarinas' cannon fou11dry for lack of master workmen , he notes:

This sl1ows tha t, with tl1e d eath of Pandapira [a Filipino who had
forged cannon before the comi11g of Spaniards], there were no Span-
iards who were able to do what he had done, nor ,.vere his sons as
skilled as their father.

When Morga mentions the early Filipinos sending silk to Japan, Rizal
r emarks: "In those times the Philippines exported silk to Japan; today
the best silk comes from there." He makes similar remarks regarding
Morga's observations on the skill of the Filipinos in shipbuilding, in
ag1·iculture, and in mining, and notes the decline in population and
industry that took place in various provinces during the seve ntee nth
century.

14. ,5ucesos tie las Islas Filipinas, por el Dr. Anton.io cu Morga, obra publicada en Mijico el
aiio de 1609, n u eva1nerile sacada a Luz. y a·notada por Jose Rizal y precedida de u1l prologo dal'l
Prof Ferna1ido Blume.ntritt (Paris: Garnier, 1890) , v.
15. Ep. Rizal., 5:288, 29 1. 305-7; 2:264 , 279-80, 309; 3:88.
 l~clitcalio,, for t/1,e l·1£l 1trf 22 1

On ll1e o th e r h a nd, the co11quis ta dores are jt1s tly c ritic ized. v\7l1 en
~1orga sp eaks of a M oro r a id 011 the isla 11d o f Pa n a)' in 1599, Ri za l
com1nents:

111 the records of the history of tl1e Philippines, tl1is is the first act <)f
piracy committed by the i11l1abitan ts of tl1 e Sou tl1 . "v\'e Sa)', by the in-
habitants of the Soutl1, because tl1e first acts of piracy l1ad been coin-
mitted b y th e expeditio11 of Magella n , wl1en tl1ey seized ships fro n1
friendl)1 islands , and even from ones ,vhicl1 ,,vere unkno,vn, de1nandi11g
hea,ry ransoms fro in them.

And apropos of tl1e unjust killing of p eaceful Filipi11 0s 11a r ra te d b )·

Morga, l1 e takes to task biased Spanish l1i storians fo r fo s t e ring
anti-Filipino p1-ejudices:

The l1istoria11s of the Pl1ilippines, \vl10 11eglect 110 suspicio11 n or acci-

d e nt, in order to interpret the m in a sense Ltnfa,•ora ble to the indios,
forget that on almost all occasions the reaso11 for t11e quarrels l1as come
from those who claimed to civilize th e m , b)' means of arqL1ebt1ses and
at the cost of the territories of the ,,veak inhabita nts. W11at ,vould tl1ev•
not say if the crimes committed b)' Portuguese, Spaniards, Dutcl1 , e tc. ,
in the colonies, 11ad been com1nitted b)' the islanders?

He emphasizes at great length the superiority of the Filipino se 11se

of ,ralues with regard to the family: hono1- to parents , indepe nde n ce
and dignity of the woman in marriage, rai-il)' of di,101·ce if tl1ere v. ere 1

c hildren, etc. Even vices are extenuated, as wl1en 11e considers the
custom of the husband's condoning adt1lte1,, t1pon collecting dam-
ages from the guilty p arty more sensible than the European ct1stom
of c hallenging the adulterer to a duel, wl1icl1 exposes tl1e l1t1sb a nd to
public ridicule as a cuckold and also to the dange r of bei11g killed. Morga's
remarks about the low estee1n of ch astity among tl1e Filipinas, and t11e i r
susceptibility to being bougl1t, draw this double-edge d r ej o inde 1·:

This ready compliance of the indias wl1icl1 tl1e l1isto1ia11s report see 111 s
to be a ttributable not on ly to the si11cerit)' ,vitl1 ,vl1icl1 they <)be ed N,t·
ture and tl1eir own instincts, but also to a religiot1s belief l)f ,vt1 icll
Father Chirino speaks . . .. Moreover, tl1e religioL1s l1ist(> ri,1r1s, Sf)t•aki,1 g
of the missions in th e first years of Cl1rislia11izatio11 , rela te llllll\t'rt>ll~
examples of chastity in yo t1ng women ,vl10 resistecl an cl f>referrt> c.l clt' ,ltli
rather than yie ld to tJ1e vil>lenre a nrl tl1 rt"a ts c,f tll t' sr>l<lit'rs ~\lt ll
encomenderos. This weakness for p,1y ,,,c bclievt: Tl <)l 10 l)l" ,1 <left·ct 111 ,,..
nopolizec\ by Filipinos and Filipin~; ,ve fi11 cl it t·ve:-11,,·l,l·ir ii, tlic.- '"<>rl(t .
222 Education for tlie Future

even in Europe , so satisfied \.vith its own morality, and that during its
entire history, often accompanied by crimes, scandals, etc. The cults of
\ 1ent1s, Priapus, Bacchus, etc., the orgies and bacchanals, the history of
prostitutio11 in Christia11 Europe and especially in Papal Rome, prove
that in tl1is matter there is 110 nation which can hurl tlle first stone at
anotl1er. l11 any case , today tlle Filipinas have no reason to blush be-
fore tl1e wo1nen of tlle most chaste nation in the world.

On the remarks of Morga on usury, debt-slavery, and illicit con-

tracts among the ea1-ly Filipinos, he draws similar parallels.
The indictment of Spanish rule in the Pl1ilippines is more than
once made explicit, exposing as t1njustified the current insistence by
Spa11ish w1-iters on the gratitude owed by the Filipinos to Spain, who
had allegedly given all to the Filipinos without benefit to herself. Enu-
merating the various classes of Spaniards who drew their salaries from
the Philippine treasury Rizal concludes sarcastically:

Doubtless all this is nothing in comparison \.vith so many captives, sol-

diers killed in expeditions, islands depopulated, inhabitants sold as slaves
by tlle Spaniards themselves, the death of industry, tlle demoralization
of the inhabitants, etc., etc.-enormous benefits which were brought to
tlle islands by that holy civilization.

And completely turning the tables on the Spaniards, he declares that

though the Spanish King had spent 250,000 pesos annually for the
maintenance of the Philippines, for his own prestige and wealth, and
"to fulfill a duty of conscience which he had imposed on himself' the
Filipinos, for their part,

had given their independence, their liberty; they ,vere giving him their
gold, their blood, their sons, to carry on his wars and to maintain the
honor of his flag, and thus to e11rich, if not himself, l1is subjects, giving
him from tl1e first years more tllan 500,000 pesos annually in u·ibtltes,
a sum which rose to millions. And all this in order not e, en to ha,•e the
1

right to tlle name of Spaniards, to lose at the end of three centuries of

fidelity and sacrifices even tlle rare deputies and envoys who defended
tllem , to have no voice i11 the cot1ncils of the nation; to exchange the ir
natio11al religion, their history, ~fir usages and customs, for otl1er bor-
rowed and ill-t1nderstood usages. )

16. Morga-Rizal, Sucesos, 27, 191 , 267, 284. 142-43, 71 , 301-3, 263, 304, 305, 143 ,
362.
 Eclucalion /0 1· t/1,e l "ltlure 223

The prologue to the book ,.vas ,,vritte n by Blt1me ntritt, wl10 , wl1il e
praising Rizal 's e ruditio11 and th e contril)uti o n l1 e had made to kn o,vl-
edge of the early Filipinos, expressed disagreeme nt on t\\'O poi11t~.
The first was Rizal 's attacks on Catholicism , whicl1 Blume11tritt de-
cla1·ed ought not to be confused with th e abt1ses of so1ne of its n1i11is-
te rs. The second was a tendency to judge the sixteentl1 ce ntury1 b)' th e
standards of the nine teenth, a practice that could only result in a n
17
unfair evaluation of much of what had been done b)' tl1e Spania rds.
Retana in his biograpl1y of Rizal , though expressing adrnira tio n fo r
Rizal 's diligent research and his contributions, co11cludes that Rizal
"proves too much." In spite of the prejudices fron1 ,vl1icl1 Re ta11a hin1-
self ,.vas by 110 mea11s exempt, it seems clear that fron1 a scie11tific
point of view, despite the new pe1·specti,,es that he gave to tl1e wh o le
question of pre-Hispanic Philippine civiliza tion , in l1is total picture
Rizal had gone to the othe1· extreme, as he tacitly acknowledged by
18
printing Blumentritt's criticism as the prologue to his book. But as
nationalist propaganda, howeve1·, the book was an emi11ent success,
and its influence would be felt on 1nany levels in the future .
A complement to Rizal 's edition of Morga, and a ft1rther de,1elop-
ment of a point he had already raised there, ,.vas tl1e series of articles
in La Solidaridad in July-September 1890 entitled "Sohre la indole ncia
de los filipinos ." This theme, a11 unfailing sou1·ce of witticisms for t\\rit-
ting Spanish detractors, had already been dwelt on by Sa11cianco in
his El progreso de Filipinas, and Rizal acknowledged his debt to him.
But lie went on to probe the question further in the ligl1t of his his-
torical studies. Acknowledging the existence of a tendenC)' to indo-
lence due in part to the tropical climate, he notes that it is the
European, st1rrounded by senrants, who is a prime example of i11do-
le nce in the tropics, the peninsular official surpassing l1is indio clerk
in this respect, the friar his indio coadjutor.
Acknowledging its existence , one must look for the cat1ses. Tl1e
testimony of the ea1·ly chroniclers, Morga , Sa11 Agustf 11, Colfn, and
o thers, s11ows that the pre-Hispanic Filipi11os o,,e rc,lme tl1is te11den c,,
•

- ----- - - --
17. lbid., xii.
18. Re ta n a's critiqltC ( \lidtl, 173-76). tl10L1g l1 basically cc>r rec t, is 11o t ,vitll o ti t o,·er-
toncs o f indign a lio n rare in tl1is bi ogr,lpl1 y. Ret..,1.na l1i111sel(' la te r p u b lis lic-<l a Il l'\\'
e dition o f M orga, b ased on l1is resear cl1es in tl1 c Arcl1i\'o cle l11d ias i,1 Seville, ,,·l,i c l,
Rizal never visited . rfl1is is tl1e standa rd ecli tio 11 ttsed tocl:Jv.
'
224 Erltlcalion /01· tlie Ftlture

to indolence, so that industry, manufactures, mini11g, and commerce

flou1-isl1ed among them. But when the Spaniards se t foot on Philip-
pin e soil, all these began to decline through the Spanish wars in the
Moluccas and elsewhere in the Orient carried on with Filipino troops,
th e forced labor in shipbuilding, the piracy of the Muslims, and their
e nslavement of Cl1ristian Filipinos. Demoralized by te1-ror, by the on-
e rot1s demands of the gover11ment on him, by a sense of futility at
seeing his work unprofitable, the indio ceased to work.
Tl1is falling off of Filipino industriousness is thus directly attribut-
able to the Spaniards, as the early Spanisl1 chroniclers tl1emselves agree.
Today this indolence is perpetuated by policies of the government
that hamper agriculture and commerce; that entangle all enterprise
in red tape and choke it with the exactions of corn1pt officials; that
tolerate the banditry preying on the peasants. The Spaniard, disdain-
ing manual work, sets a bad example, and the friar not only discour-
ages in his people the desire for wealth, but wastes their time with
fiestas , novenas, etc., and teaches them to depend more on miracles
a11d blessi11gs than on their own hard work. Were this not enough,
tl1e i11dio must endure the lack of personal security, the discrimina-
tio11 against Filipinos in favor of peninsulars, the miserable state of
education. Is it any wonder, then, that the indio is un,,villing to exert
l1imself to promote progress in his country?
Undoubtedly tl1e same exaggeration that occurs in Rizal's edition
of Morga on the flourishing state of Philippine society before the ar-
rival of tl1e Spaniards and the decadence consequent on their arrival
is present here. Yet, the anal)'Sis contained much that was ,,alid both
in its historical aspect and especially in its description of the current
situation. Though Rizal certainly intended his writings to inftise his
fello,,v Filipi11os with pride in their own race and to destroy any sense
of servility towards the Spa11iarcls, he just as certainly believed in the
scholarly ,,a]ue of his "''riting, and was ready to defend it.
Thus when Isabelo de los Reyes in l1is Historia de llocos, disagreed
with Rizal on the level of civilization he had attributed to tl1e earl)'
Filipinos i11 his Morga, att1-ibt1ting his overly bright pictt1re to his p a-
19
triotism, Rizal ,-vas furious . De los Reyes had no intention of starting

19. Fo r de los Reyes's co tn m e n l'S, see l1is 1-Jistoria elf /locos (2cl ed.: 2 vols .. ~fa nila:
··La O pinio n,'' 1890). I, 104 . 11. 1.
 Education for llie Futtl're 225

a controve rsy or a ttacking Rizal, a nd his own book was bein g a ttackecl
in Manila as fi lib ustero. But in Octob er 1890 Rizal wro te a re ply in La
s·olidaridad which for all its pro testa tio ns of esteem for De los Reyes
and l1is work, a nd its schola rly answer to th e pa rticular po i11 ts raised,
betrayed a Rizal d eeply resentful of tl1e qt1estio ns raised aaainst his
90 b
scho larsl1ip. -
De los Reyes had preceded Rizal in studies of ea1·ly Filipino cus-
toms and history witl1 El Folk-Lore Filipino; Las Islas Visayas en la epoca
de la conquista; H istoria de Filipinas (vol. 1) : Preh,istoria de Filipinas; and
21
Historia de llocos. De los Reyes ,,vas an i11defatigable worker fully d e-
voted to j ournalism , wh o shared the nationalist and reformist aspira-
tions of his compa triots ir1 Madrid. Tl1ougl1 frequently unde r attack
by Spania rds in Ma nila fo r his writings, he continued to write articles
on history, fo lklore, a nd such political matters as tl1e ce11sor would
pe n11it him in Manila. The articles that could not get b)' tl1e ce11sor,
22
he se11t to La Solidaridad to be published under a pseudonym.
De los Reyes' boo ks ,-vere all first publish ed as articles in the ,,a ri-
ous Ma nila newsp a pe rs \vith which l1e collaborated 01· ,,vhich he l1in1-
23
self edited , a11d all bear the stamp of their origin. Th ey like,"rise show
the unscie ntific background of tl1 eir autl1or, who was ,vitl1out a ny aca-
de mic training in the field and who, up to this time, had 11ot bee n

20. Jua n Lt111 a ,.vro te Ri zal a frie ndly le tter 011 seein g h is article an s,\lerin g De los
Reves, lame nting Rizal's oversensitivit)' to tl1is criticism , and l1in ting tl1at Rizal l1ad
perh a ps exagge rated b ecause of his "excessive patrio tism " (tp. Rizal., 3:1 22; also
Blumentritt, ibid., 127-28).
21. El Fo/,k-Lore Filipino (2 volumes), whi ch ,.vas printe d in 1889 (Man ila: Im 1)re11ta
de San ta Cruz) , won a prize at the Exp osition of 1887 i11 Madrid. Tl1e secti on on tl1e
pro,iince of Bulacan was done by P on ce; tl1at on Pa mpan ga by Serra n o.
22. Reyes, Sensacional memoria, I 02-5. Several a rticles wl1i ch appear unde r th e pseu-
don}m Kasalo, b egi nning in 1890, seem to b e fron1 De los Reyes. A num ber of tl1 e1n
deal wi th can onical questions and th e relations of tl1e friars a ncl tl1e Filipino secular
clergy. De los Reyes was to b e cofounde r \.\rith Fathe r Gregori o Aglipay of tl1e scl1is-
matic Iglesia Filipina Indep e11dien te in the beginrting of tl1e twe11ti eth cent L11;r.
23. H e was a collab orator in several n ewspap ers a t one tim e or an oth e r, and e dito r
of the Tagalog-Spanish La l~ectura Popular. In 1889 h e fou11 ded, and edited almost
single-hand ed, El Jlocano, a Spanisl1-Ilocan o fo rtnightJy, largely edt1cational in ten de iic~·,
,vhich though written for his fellow-Ilocan os in n ortl1ern Luzo11, \Vas publisl1ed in Ma-
nila. Those of }1is books wl1ich are listed as "segunda edici611" l1ad the ir fi rst edi tio 11
as ~eries of ne,,·spape r articles.
 226 Education for tlie Future

o utside the Philippines. His historical and ethnographical studies were

a combination of tl1e autl1or's obsenrations on contemporary folklore,
especially of his native !locos, and l1is gleanings from tl1e old chro11i-
cle rs available to him in Ma11ila, often extracted at great length.
Thot1gh they cannot be compared in depth and accuracy to those of
Rizal, they l1ave the ,rirtue of presenting the data of the past in some-
,-vhat more dispassionate fashion. Their propaganda value was there-
fore nothi11g like that of Rizal 's writings, but they too contributed to
the climate of thought created among Filipinos more impressively by
Rizal 's Morga and his articles in La Solidaridad. They manifest the
same nationalistic desire to return to his people's past that impelled
Rizal to undertake l1is own historical studies.
Another Filipino who turned his attention to the early Filipinos,
though in a most exaggerated fashion, was Pedro Paterno. In 1887 he
published in Madrid his La antigua civilizaci6n tagalog, which may per-
haps be called a precursor of Rizal's edition of Morga in the same
sense that Paterno's Ninay was a precursor of Rizal's Noli me tangere.24
The book sets out to portray the early stages of development of "the
Luzonic Islands," attempting to show the parallel between this civiliza-
tio11 and the early cultures of European nations. It is an undigested
mass of quotations-often several pages long-gathered from various
sources and often irrelevant to its subject. This extravagant work is of
no importance as a product of scholarship, but it does indicate a trend
among thoughtft1l Filipinos to go back to the sources of their society,
to try to show the value of wl1at was properly indigenot1s, and to as-
sert their own national personality on a level with the Spaniards. 25

24. La antigua civilizaci6n tagalog (Apuntes) (Madrid: Mant1el Herna11dez, 1887) ap-
peared ,,rith the at1thor's na1ne written t11t1s: "Pedro Alexandro Molo Agustin Paten1 o
y dt' Vera Ignacio (Maguinoo Pater110)." The title "Maguinoo" ,vas a title of the an-
cie11t Tagalog nobility, affected by Pa ter110, much to the amuse rne r1t a11d scorn of }1is
fello,v-Filipinos (see Cauit [Aguirre]-Rizal, Ep. Rizal. , 1:280).
25. Rizal in a letter to Blu1ne ntritt discussing the Tagalog ,vord Balliala (the a11 _
cie nt name for the Creator God) 1nakes a remark abottt Paterno's treatme11t of the
question ,vl1icl1 migl1t ,veil be applied to th e ,vl1ole book: "As to tl1e ,vork of 1ny cottn-
t.f)man P. A. Pater110, 0 11 Batliala, pay 110 atten tio n to it, 1 ad\rise ) 'OU. P. A. Paterno is
a kind of ... I ca1111ot fi11d any \.vord to express it except this dra,vi.ng f tl1erC:" follo\,-s a
spiral-like scrawl)'' (Ap. Rizal., 5: 105) .
In his Morga, 110,veve r, Ri zal merely says: "P. A. Paterno gives a very inge11iolis
ir1terpre tatio 11 ... [of Bfzlhal<t]" (p. 311 , 11. 4).
 EducatiorLfor tlze Fulu·rf 227

Similar in nature and equally wortl1less was his book, Los itas, 011
t11e customs of the Negritos. Published i11 1890, it pt1rported to sl1 0,,·
the earlier civilizatio n out of ,-vhicl1 h ad evol,,ed those of the Tagalogs
and the Visayans.
Even more fantasti c was l1is El Cristianismo en la antigua civilizaci6n
~l 26 H .
laga. og. ere, 1n answer to the articles written by the Dominican
Bishop Ramon Martinez Vigil, in which the latter had alluded to the
tendency among certain Filipino writers to exaggerate th e ancie nt Fili-
pino ci,rilization, Paterno tries to show that Christianity h ad existed in
tl1e Pl1ilippi11es before the coming of the Spaniards i11 the form of
balhalismo-ilie worship of the supreme being, Bathala-and d\vells
27
011 the body of doctrine he t1ies to associate witl1 it. This ,-vas th e
reason , he asserts, why it l1ad been so easy for th e Spaniards to con-
vert the lowland peoples to Catholicism in the sixteen th ce11 tury. H e
goes on to try to show that sucl1 Christian doctrines as the Incarna-
tion and the Redemption, most of the sacraments, and even elements of
the mystery of the Trinity were all contained in bathalismo. The expla11a-
tion of these most remarkable coincidences Paterno finds in a11 in1ag-
ined contact wiili the Indian civilization, whicl1 supposedly had recei,,ed
the preaching of ilie Apostles St. Ba1~tholomew and St. Thomas.
Equally ingenious are La familia tagalog en la histori.a u1iiversal, pt1b-
lished the same year, dedicated to showing the superiority of ancient
Filipino marriage customs and moralil:)', and El Barangay, which out-
lines the organization of government under the barangay system of
pre-Hispanic times, concluding that the "Tagalog kingdom" was demo-
cratic in organization, but with monarchic elements, all based on the
28
ancient principles of bathalismo.

26. [Pe dro) Paterno, El cristianis1no en la an.tigua civilizaci6n tagalog. Contestaci6n al

,\1.RP. Fr. R Martinez. Vigi,i (Madrid: Impre nta Moder11a, 1892). This book ,-.'as pttb-
lished in installments in La Solidaridad, with a brief note tl1at tl1ot1g l1 Pa tern o ,vas not
a member of the n c,vspape r , the subj ec t was of g rea t interest. a nd tl1t'refore tl1e ecli-
tors had o btained his con sent to print it l1ere.
27. Martinez Vigil who had been, fo r m a 11y years, pro fessor a t tl1 e Un iversity o f
Santo Tomas but was at this time bishop of Oviedo i11 the Pe11inst1la J1ad ,v1itten "I.a
antigua civi lizaci6n d e las islas Filipinas" in /Ja l:s/Jana Modern a, Apr 189 1; f\lay l 8~}l ;
June 1891 .
28. [Pedro) Pa terno, t ·t Barangay, con la rrlaci6n <.le Fr. Juan de l'laJn1cia rsrri f<l ~"
1589 ~ c6mo se gobemabari los tagalos en la a11tigi1eclad (Maclricl: Cuesta, 1892). Jlarrlc> c-lt--
Tavera po ints ot1t the falsity of Pa terno 's assertio 11 tl1at l1 c J)OSSt'~e rl tl1t~ :\ IS t) f }>lasc-i\r ia
228 Education for tlie Future

Ri zal, De los Reyes, and other intelligent Filipinos, of course, real-

ized tl1e abst1rdity of Paterno 's specious displays of· miscellaneous eru-
dition , but from tl1e opposition he aroused, many Spaniards seemed
29
to take him som ewhat seriously. Moreover, however slight might be
the scholarly value of such books as Paterno 's, they were symptomatic
of the gro,.vi11g conviction among Filipinos, nurtured more substan-
tial!)' and more effectively by Rizal: that the Filipinos had been a peo-
ple witl1 a 11ational ide11tity of their own; that the Filipinos were as
good as, if not better than, the Spaniards; that the conquest by Spain
had perhaps been a mixed blessing for the Philippines.
One of the principal points emphasized in all these historical writ-
ings, and one that was to receive considerable practical development,
is the pacto de sangre. This custo1n among the ancient Filipinos of seal-
ing a treaty of alliance and friendship by mixing the blood taken from
an incision in the arms of the two leaders entering into alliance had
been adopted by both Magellan and Legazpi with the native rulers
with whom they first concluded a friendly alliance. The compact be-
tween Legazpi and Sikatuna had been celebrated by Juan Luna in his
El paclo de sangre, painted for the Ayuntamiento of Manila, arid Span-
iards and Filipinos alike regarded it as a symbol of the union of tl1e
Philippines and Spain. But the pacto de sangre had deeper implica-
tions, on which tl1e Filipinos soon began to enlarge.
Paterno, Rizal, Del Pilar, presented the pact as a contractual agree-
me nt between equals, by which the Filipinos had sworn loyalty to the
king of Spain and simultaneously had become Spaniards in the full
sense of the word. Del Pilar expresses this co11cept in an early article
in L a Solidaridad:

The annexation of the Philippines to Spai11 was effected tinder the ob-
ligation in honor on the p art. of the latter to assimilate the islanders to
the conditions of Spain. Tl1e different oaths which representatives of

i,1 his personal libra 1)'. Pard o also asse rts that a number of the books ,vhicl1 P aterno
,-vas accttstorn ed to list as further works of l1is, existed o nly in the imagination of tlleir
a u th o r , a nd qualifies him "un \'Ulgar impostor" (Biblioteca, 302, nos. 1941 arid 1944 ) .
29. See the article "Pedro A. Patern o," El Globo, 22 Jan 1894, defe11ding him aga inst
th e attacks ,vhi cl1 l1ad come from oth er n ewspapers in Madrid (especially /_a Politica ~
J!.sparia en ri lij,in.a.s) 011 tl1e occasio11 o f l1is receiving th e Gran Cruz d e Isabe l la Catolica,
ai1 d being named d irector of the ML1seo-Bib li oteca of Manila (a largely h o n orific pos t)
by Maura. tl1en overseas minister.
 Education, for tlie J:Utu re 229

this noble and illustrious nation sealed with the j1aclo df sangre, l1ave
given a special ch aracter to Spanisl1 colonization. Tl1erefore to cou11sel
the rejection of Filipino asimilisnio is si1nply to desire the pe rjuf)· of
. ~o
Spain.

Rizal is mo1-e explicit in his assertion that Spain has violated he r

co11tract with the sovereign Filipino people. Commenting 011 Morga's
judgment that Filipino contracts and business deali11gs were ge11erally
illicit since tl1e indios sought only tl1eir own advantage and interest,
Rizal says:

Such also are the contracts of all nations and of all peoples, and
such too, conceived in the same spirit, were the co11tracts ,vhi cl1 th e
first Spaniards made with the Filipino cl1iefs. Would tl1at tl1e)' had al-
31
\Va)'S abided by the letter of those co11tracts.

Paterno too expanded on the docu-ine of tl1e pacto de sangre en-

tered into between the early Spaniards and the maguinoos of the Fili-
pino people not only in his books, but in speecl1es in Manila, and
spoke of the Filipinos as "ever-free allies" of Spain. All these state-
ments could, of course, be interpreted in a nonseditious sense, and
Paterno was always careful to add qualifications and explanatio11s. But
they could also signify the right of Filipinos to withdra\.\1 from the
pact their ancestors had entered into, inasmuch as tl1e Spaniards had
,iolated their side of the contract. This, in fact, Andres Bonifacio wot1ld
do in 1896 to start the Revolution througl1 the Katipunan .
In a clandestine newspaper, Kalayaan [Freedom], p1-inted in early
1896, Bonifacio declared that by the pact between King Sikatuna and
Legazpi the Filipinos had accepted the Spanish offer to guide tl1en1
in both wisdom and prosperity in return for mate1-ial aid to the Spa11-
iards. Before the coming of the Spaniards, the Filipinos possessed
wealth , culture, a }1igh code of morality, and had commercial rela-
tions with the rest of tl1e Orient. Later, howeve r , despite loyal
fulfillment of the compact on the part of the Filipinos, gi,ring tl1eir
,vealth and their blood in behalf of the Spa11ia1-ds, the latte r ha,•e

-------
30. "Asimilaci6n de Filipinas," 30 Sept 1889: also l1is "Sc,\111os j11stos." 30 ,\pr 189 1;
and Fuipinas en las Cortes, 9.
31. Rizal-Morga, Suresos, 304, n. 4; see also xxx iii . 11. ] .
 230 liducalio11 _/err t/1.e ] ~ .turf

fa il eel to resp o nd ; they have destroyed Filipino C\1stoms by their im-

m o ral it)' a11d false religion, and have impove risl1 ed th e m , pe rsect1ting
tl1em if t11ey complained. Hence the Filipinos are no longer bound
32
by tl1e pacto de sangre, a11d not st1bject to Spanish sovereignty.
Anotl1er Tagalog 1·evolt1tionary a11d a11tifriar pamphlet, written for
1nass const11nptio11, has a dialogt1e betwee11 a IIatipunero a11d the peo-
ple, telling tl1e latter how originally the Philippi11es belonged to the
Filipinos, wl10 kne"'' the trt1e God, wl10 l1ad kings, principales, and
great wealth. Then the friars came, and the kings and principales, out
of tl1e goodness of their hearts, gave them a place to live. Since the n ,
the friars have bee11 robbing the Filipinos by means of false miracu-
lous images, fiestas, scapulars, fees for weddings, baptisms, etc. The
pampl1let concludes with an inflammatory appeal to all to join in de-
fe11ding tl1ei1· homeland a11d driving out their oppressors, even with
only a sharpened bamboo lance to put out tl1e eyes of the bandit
33
friars, etc. This is a far cry from the scholarly researches of Rizal
amid the old chronicles of the British Museum or the ingenious
pseudo-erudition of Paterno, but the lineage is not difficult to trace.

Rizal, Scholar and Nationalist

Rizal was by temperament and desire a scholar. Such scholarly ,vor·k

as his preparation of the edition of Morga meant something more to

32. Agapito Bagumbaya11 [Ai1dres Bonifacio], "Ai1g dapat mabatid ng 1nga tagalog
[W11at the Tagalogs Shot1ld Know]," reproduced in a Spanisl1 tra nsla tion in Retana.
Arcliivo, 3:144 48. For the ide ntity of Agapito Bagun1bayan and the backgrotmd of the
newsp ape r Kalayaan, see Agoncillo, 79-80, 91-93, 333. Majul (p. 77) notes that the
Filipi110 representative Felipe Agoncillo also made use of this "corr1pact theory" j 11 his
official protest against the Treaty of Paris, as did General Agt1i11aldo i11 l1is m essage of
1900 to the Filipino p eo ple .
33. Tl1e pamphle t is preserved in a l'vfS Spanisl1 tran sla tio n enlitled: .. Respul·s ta a la
' Medicina qt1e da la vida,' co m1)u esta por Frailes fementidos represe11t~\11tc ' d e
J esucristo, a fin d e que se e,ri te n st1s lazos. '' The painpl1le t being co1nb«1tc d . by 311
AL1gttstinia11 Friar, is e ntitl ed : Ang cr1ga1nuta 11g 1nacabub1,hay o casa_)\tay,111 11a,1g ,nan~Tfl
catz,tulianang da/Jlll 1naal<1rnan nang mnn.ga tnu.o ·ria,zg 1narapag-i11gr1t si/a sa tna11gn bruagttlo.
quinatlia nang is<1ng Pr,dre [Tl1e life-givi11 g re r11e d y, o r a11 accou11t of tl1c tr11tl1s \\'hic t1
1nen sl1o uld k.11 0,v i11 ord e r to be on tlt e ir gt1a rd ag--c1inst distt1rbances, ,vritte 11 bv a
•
Padre] (Malabon: Asi lo cle l·lL1c rfa11os cle Ntr.t. Sra. de Co11sol,tci6 n , J 896) . (Both ar~
in ..\.I)N , leg. 219-A.)
 Educatiori for the Future 231

him tha n a me re step in the political program of nationalist propa-

ganda. In an early lette1- to Blumentritt, he had lamented the hard
necessity that prevented the Filipino yout11 from devoting themselves
to scholarsl1ip "like the youth of happy nations. We must all offer
something to politics, even if we have no pleasure in it." He spoke
\vith admiration of the knowledge of the Philippines possessed by
Blumentritt and other Ger1r1an scholars, from which the Filipinos must
learn, and deplored that he would never be permitted to open a school
in his own country. Could he only do that, he would "awaken these
studies of ot1r homeland, this nosci te ipsum which creates a true
self-esteem, and spurs nations on to great deeds. "34
Convinced of the importance of more profound knowledge of the
Philippines, Rizal conceived the idea early in 1889 of an Association
Internationale des Philippinistes, embracing scholars from all coun-
tries who might be interested in the Philippines. The pu1-pose of the
Association would be to convoke periodic international congresses,
beginning with one to be held at the Paris Exposition of that year; to
hold public competitions on subjects concerned with the Philippines;
to work for a museum and a library devoted to the Philippines. He
asked Blumentritt to accept the presidency of the association, as the
Frenchman Edmond Plauchut had accepted the vice-presidency,
Antonio Regidor and Doctor Reinhold Rost the posts of counsellors,
35
with Rizal himself as secretary. He also sent to Blumentritt the program
for the proposed International Congress to be held in August 1889, com-
36
prising historical, ethnological, philological, and other sections.
In the succeeding months Rizal corresponded with Blumentritt, Doc-
tor Adolf B. Meyer, and others, trying to get noted scientists from

34. Ep. Rizal., 5:110-11, 13 Apr 1887.

35. Plauchut was a French writer who had been in the Philippines son1e years
earlier. See p . 8, note 6 above.
Rost, an Englishma11 of German birth, was an experl i11 Asian langt1ages, ar1d li-
brarian of the India Office in London. He had a number of publicatio11s on Inclia
and on Sanskrit, and is said to l1ave been surpassed by very fe,v as a tiniversal lingt1ist
(Arthur Naylor Wollaston, "Reinhold Rost [1822-96] ,'' Dictionary of National Biogra/Jlty,
17:290-91) .
36. Rizal-Blume ntritt, Ep. Rizal., 5:375-79. Enclosed in lhis letter ,vere the pro-
posed statutes of the association, and the prograr11 for tl1e projecled congress (ibid.,
38~9).
232 Education. for t/1.e Future
37
each of the majoi- countries of Europe for the junta Directiva. Be-
sides Blttme ntritt from Austria-Hungary, there was Meyer from Ger-
ma11y, Rost from England, Plaucl1ut from France, and appare11tly Dr.
38
Johan G. F. Riedel from Holland. At tl1e beginning of April, Rizal
answered Del Pilar's inqui ry as to conditions of membership, stating
tl1at anyone who wished to do so might become a member of the
Association, provided that he was engaged in studies 011 the history,
languages, customs, politics, etc. of the Philippines. Anyone who had
published a book on tl1e Isla11ds would be admitted as an h o n orary
39
member.
011 his arrival in Paris, however, l1e found that the French Govern-
ment had limited the number of congresses that might be h eld and
tl1at, his could not obtain tl1e required permission. Nonetheless, h e
conferred with Rost and Meyer during their visits to the Exposition,
40
and tried to persuade Blumentritt to come at Rizal 's expense. The
Association, however, never really came into being. Answering
Blumentritt's inquiry in October, Rizal said that it would have to re-
main dormant until he finished his Morga. But in April 1890 h e ,vas
still waiting anxiousl)' for the money to come from the Philippines to

37. Meyer ,.vas director of the Royal Ethnographical Mt1seum of Dresden. Earlier
h e had spen t a number of years travelling in the Philippines in anthropological s tud-
ies and in assembling an out.sta11ding collectio11 of Philippine objects for u1e rnttseurn.
He ¼'as a close friend and collaborator of Blumentritt, throug h ,vhom l1e had smick
up a friendship with Rizal on the latter's visit to Dresden in 1887. Rizal a11d ~1e·v er
.
were to continue th eir friendship by corresponde nce rigl1t up to the former's deatll.
Pardo de Tavera (Biblioteca, 265-66) lists so1ne of tvleyer's rnore important scholart,,
publications on the Philippines. See also "l\1eyer, Adolf Bernhard," D,,r Grosse Brockluius.
15th ed., 12:493.
38. Having first thougl1t of aski ng Kern (see note 44) as tl1e Dutcl1 represent..,ti,·c ,
Rizal then requested Meyer to propose one. T l1e latter first named Dr. G .K. Nit.' Inan,,
[ tl1e editors of 1!-fJ. Rizal }1ave Niun1anri, but tl1is is an error in transcriptio11J. \\1le n
Niemann d eclined with the plea of excessive occupations, ~1le)1er st1ggested Ri ed e l.
Tl1ougl1 Rizal wrote to him, tl1ere is 110 furtl1er letter lo sl10\\I wlte t}1 c r o r tl o l llc
accepted. There is, l1 owever, a11 an11ouncen1e11t of tl1e Association, \,ritll i~ prospec ttt.s
and list of officers, by Rost in "Oriental Notes," Trii.h,z,-r's Record, 3 rd series. 4'1!trch
1889, in \\ hich Riedel is listed ar11ong Ult' ronseilh>t,rs.
1

39. tp. Pilar, l :73, 8 1.

40. Rizal-Blun1c11t1itt, 23 Apr 188Y, l•'.J,. Rizal., 5:425-27. It does 11ot "tppear th..tt
Blt1mentritt took advant.'lgc of tl1e i11,·it.--itic,11.
 Education f or the Future 233

41
enable him to get the Association unden.vay. He wot1ld never receive
that money, however, for by this time the Rizal family were deeply
involved in their lawsuit against the Dominican hacienda, which would
finally result in their eviction. For the remainder of his stay in Europe
Rizal would have difficulties enougl1 in supporti11g himself, and tl1e
Association remained but a dream .
Rizal, however, kept in constant touch with the scholarly world of
Europe all through his career. Already in 1887, dt1ring his stay in
Berlin, he had become acquainted through Blumentritt with the noted
scholars Rudolf Virchow, Feodor Jagor, and Wilhelm Joest, all of whom
42
had written on tl1e Philippines. Through Virchow, who was its presi-
dent, he became a member of the Berliner Gesellschaft fur
Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte, and in April 1887 read
a paper before this society on the art of versification in Tagalog. Later,
in London, he became an intimate friend of the distinguished Orien-
43
talist Reinhold Rost, also through Blumentritt. Through Rost he pub-

41. Ibid., 552. In a letter of 10 Feb 1890, Del Pilar announced to Rizal that Arellano
(presumably on behalf of the Comite de Propaganda in Manila) had designated sev-
enty pesetas as a co11t1;bution for tl1e association (fp. Pilar, 1:208).
42. Virchow, the founder of cellular patl1ology a11d a leader of the Liberal opposi-
tion to Bismarck in Germany as ,-veil as of the Kulturkampf, ,vas also an anthropolo-
gist, wl10 had published a number of studies on the skulls of certain mot1ntain tribes
in the Philippines (see Pardo de Tavera, Biblioteca, 431-32 and Erwin Heinz
Acke rknecht, Rudolpl1 Vircliow: Doctor, Statesman, Antliropologist [Madison: University of
Wisconsin Press, 1953] , 217). For Rizal 's account of his meeting ,.vitl1 Virchow at the
monthly meeting of the Gesellscl1aft fur Erdkunde of Berlin , see his letter to
Blumentritt, Ep. Rizal. , 5:57-58. He was proposed for membersl1ip in the society by
either Virchow or Jagor.
Jagor, who had travelled in the Philippines i11 1859-60, was the author of Reisen in
den Philippinen (Be rlin, 1873). The book is a principal source for life in mid-nineteenth
ce ntury Philippines, and ranks far above the usual travel literatt1re because of its sci-
e ntific point of view and accuracy. It was used liberally by botl1 tl1 e Filipinos and tl1eir
oppon e nts in the polemics on the readiness of tl1e Pl1ilippines for libe ral reforms .
.Joest was a world traveller and ethnographer. 011 or1e of l1is expe ditio11s l1e l1ad
visited the Philippines and l1ad publish ecl articles on it in e tl1nograpl1ical joun1als
(Victor Hantzsch, 'Joest, Will1elm J.," Allgemeine Deutsche Biograpliie 50:680-83) .
43. Rizal-Blume ntritt, E-p. Rizal., 5:66, 249-52. Accordi11g to Regido r, Rizal ,vas a
regular St1nday guest at the Rost home during his stay in Lo11d o11 (Re ta11a , \ 1ida, 17 l ).
Rizal a nd Rost continue d a frie11dly and scientifi c correspo 11de n cc, like lVleye r's, taiitil
Rizal's d eatl1 in 1896.
 234 Education for tlie Futu-re

lished articles o n Tagalog folklore in Trubner's Record, one of which

was later the subject of a paper at an international congress of Orien-
talists in Stockholm by another acquaintance of Rizal 's, Doctor Hendrik
Kern, professor of Sanskrit at the University of Leiden in Holland
44
and a specialist in Malay languages.
During l1is studies too he had become interested in a reform of
spelling for the Tagalog language, basing it on the actual phonetic
system of the language rather than on Spanish orthography. Already
in 1886 when translating Schille1-'s Wilhelm Tell into Tagalog, he had
begun to adopt the orthographic changes he felt were needed , and
45
urged his friends to do likewise. Meanwhile Doctor Trinidad H. Pardo
de Tavera, trained as he was in Malay languages, had published a
more complete and perfect system of orthography based on the na-
ture of Tagalog. On becoming aware of Pardo de Tavera's work, Rizal
adopted his improvement and published an article in La Solidaridad
in April 1890, explaining the new system and its advantages. Through
his advocacy the new orthography eventually displaced the older one
entirely in spite of, or perhaps because of, the ridiculous charges of
such Spanish Manila journalists as Quioquiap that the "k" introduced
by the refor1r1 was of German origin and that the whole project was a
clear case of filibusterismo.
More than a mere spelling reform was at stake. Besides the broader
implications involved in Rizal 's taking measures to reform Philippine

44. Rizal 's articl es in Trubner's Record (3rd series, May 1889 and July 1889) ,vere
"Specimens of Tagal Folklore," and "Two Eastern Fables." Rost ,vas the edito r of tl1 is
journal. The second article is a comparative study of the fable of the to rtoise a nd tile
monkey in its Japanese and its Tagalog ve rsions.
On Kem , see H erm an van Looy, "Kern Uohan ) H endrik (Caspar)," \t\'inkler Prins
Encyclopaedie, ed. E. De Bruyne, G.BJ. Hil termann, H .R. Hoetbink; 6th ed., 12:70. A
numbe r of Ke rn 's articles on the Pl1ilippines are liste d by Pardo de Tavera, Biblioteca,
222-23.
45. In a letter to Paciano from Leipzig, 12 Oct 1886, he sends the translation
asking Paciano and his brothers-in-law to check the Tagalog for him ( One Hundred.'
300). The translation was n ot published at that time, nor was Ri zal able to carry tJ1ro ltg}1
his plan, also an11ounced to Paciano i11 this letter, of devoting himself on his return to
the Pl1ilippines to the translation of Frenc h, English. German, Italian , and Spatlish
classics into Tagalog. Tl1e only otl1er translation seems to l1ave been som e of t11e tales
of Han s Christiai1 Anderse n . The Lranslation of the vVi/Jzel11i Tell ,vas Jater pttblis}1ed b,·
Ponce: Friedrich von Schiller, \t\1ilhel11i Tell, tr. Jose Rizal, ed . Mariano Ponce (...Bibliotec;
Popular Filipin a," I; Manila: Li brerfa Manila FilaLelica, 1907) .
 Education for the Future 235

educatio n without refe rence to the government, he himself saw the

1na tter as providing his people with an escritura nacional, and wrote to
Ponce, on receiving the first copies of pamphlets printed in the new
S}'Stem, that now it could be said the Filipinos had their own orthog-
raphy.46 An indication of the nationalist character of the innovation
may be found in the fact that of all the Tagalog books or pamphlets
printed between 1890 and 1900 listed in the Biblioteca filipina of Pardo
de Tavera, none of those written by Spaniards adopted the new or-
47
tJ1ography, while all those written by Filipino nationalists did so.

Rizal and the Education of His People

In his essay introducing the ne,,v orthography to the Filipinos, Rizal

mentions that he had been stimulated to do something about the old
orthography while making studies of the pedagogical methods t1sed
in the schools of Saxony during his stay in Germany in 1886-87. Edu-
cation is the key to understanding much of Rizal's career, for his
whole career was bound up with education: his own education and
the education of his people. Fired by the resolve to improve himself
at every opportunity, learning one new language after another, he
urged Del Pilar to learn Frencl1 or English on his arrival in Spain
because the language "opens to you the treasures of a countf)', that
48
is, the knowledge, the science stored up in the language." Each coun-
lf)' he visited, he felt, had something to offer from which he might
learn to help bring progress to the Filipinos.

46. Rizal-Ponce, Ep. Rizal., 3:32. The pamphlet ,¥as tl1e Arancel referred to in cl1ap-
ter 8.
47. Ctiriously enough, one of Pardo de Tavera's o,¥n medical pamphle ts, translated
into T agalog in 1895 still uses the old system. This is a11 indication of the differen ce
between the latter's ad,•ocacy of tl1e changes, based on purely pl1ilological grot1n<ls,
and Rizal's, based more on 11ationalist grounds. Pardo had pl1blished an arti cle 011 tl1 e
su1)ject in a Ma.11ila n ewspaper in 1888, ,¥itl1out appare11t effect, but ,vl1en Rizal ptit
the reform in its 11ationalist co11text a11d pt1t his o,vn prestige bel1ind it, it was quickly
adopted (see De Ios Reyes, H istoria de llocos, 1: 162, n. 2) . It may ,vell be tha L Pardo de
Tavera d elibe ra tely refrained from using his o,vn orthographic syste m (thougl1 he is
not the transla to r of his pan1ph1e t [Bihlioteca., 300, 110s. 1928-29]) becaL1se it ha d take n
011 a nationa list connotati o11, and Pardo ,vas very careful 11ot to be p11blicly associa ted
with u1e Filipino n ationalists up to 1896, though privately 011 fri e ndly te rms.
48. Rizal-Del Pilar Uan t1ary 1889], t J>. Pilar, l :16.
236 Education fo·r the Future

Even as a yot1ng student in 1883, h e lame nted to his family tl1 at so

few Filipinos were studying various crafts and industries, such as the
ma nufacture of paper, of glass, of porcelain, of tex tiles, e tc. Rather
than concentrate on law and medicine, as almost all do, th ey should
imitate the Japanese and tt1rn to industry, engineering, and agricul-
ture. In 1890 he sought information from Blumentritt o n the cur-
ricula of the university-level technical and engineering schools in
Germany and Austria, so that the Filipinos who would go there could
determine wl1at best suited their purposes. Rizal appears to have p e r-
suaded Jose Abreu, Jose Alej andrina, and Edilberto Evangelista, three
of the Filipino students in Madrid, to leave for Ghent to study e ngi-
neering. Pedro Serrano too appears to have been influe nced by Ri zal
to come to Europe and continue his pedagogical studies in Spain so
49
as to obtain the title of Maestro Superio1·.
Always combined with this insistence 011 the Filipinos perfecting
themselves intellectually was an equal insistence 011 tl1e intense moral
seriousness demanded of tl1ose who were working fo1- national regen-
eration. After various reports had reached him in Brussels, where h e
was working on his second novel, of the gambling going on among
the Filipinos in Mad1·id, he w1·ote to Del Pilar:

Is there nothing tl1ere to remind them that the Filipino does not com e
to Europe to gamble and enjoy himself, but to "''Ork for his libert)' and
for the dignicy of his race? To gamble there is no need to leave tl1e
Philippines, tl1ere is too much gambling there alread)'· lf we, who are
called to do somethi11g, if we, in ,vhom the poor people places its m od-
est hopes, pass our time in these things, precisely when the years of
our youth ought to be used in son1ething more noble and gr-and b)' t11e
very, fact tl1at youth is noble and generous, I h ave great fears tI1at ,ve
may be struggling for a useless illusion, and that instead of be ing ,vor-
tl1y of libercy, we may only be ,vorthy of slavery.
I appeal to the patriotism of all the Filipinos to give to tl1e Spanish
people a proof that we are superior to our n1isfo rtune , and tha L ,ve
cannot be degraded nor 0L1r n o ble sentiments be lulled to slumbe r b,,
. f
th e corruption o mora s. l so .

Such exhortatio ns, often re peated by Rizal, worked 011 certai11 itldi-
viduals, but often tl1ey m e rely alie n ated the Filipinos addressed.

49. ()ne Hun,rJrrcl. 166-67; E.]J. Riu il., ~:103,1()8-9; J>()nce-De \ re~rra. Efemm~s. 170-7 1.
50. EjJ. Pilar, l :220-2 1.
 Education for tlie Future 23 7

One notable attempt of Rizal to inspire greater self-dedication

among the Filipinos in Europe and to further tl1e education of those
at home was the organization of Los Indios Bravos during the Paris
Exposition in 1889. The occasion was a Wild West exhibit at the Ex-
position, in which American Indians showed their skills on horseback.
Impressed by these "Wild Indians" and the attention and applause
they received, Rizal suggested to his companions that instead of re-
sen ting the derogatory name of indio applied to them by the Spa11-
iards, they ought to take pride in their race and call themselves Indios
Bra,,os, while they so conducted themselves as to make Spaniards re-
vise their idea of the indio. He would freque11 tly appeal to tl1is con-
cept of the Indios Bravos in succeeding mon tl1s.
Yet there was something more to the group, for precisely at the time
it was founded, Rizal wrote to Basa in Hong Kong, telling him that

we have just founded a society which has as its 011ly purpose tl1e propa-
gation of all useful skills (conocimientos), be they scientific, artistic, liter-
ary, etc., in the Philippines. It does n o t involve a11y furtl1er obligations
tha11 that of giving aid to each other when it is a question of propagat-
51
ing some skill or knowledge.

For instance, if Basa received a package ,-vith the initial Rd. L.M., l1e
\\ras to take special care to see that the package arrived in the Philip-
pines· if it had the initials J.B. Rd. L.M. (arranged in a special fashion
' 52
Rizal indicated) , even more care was to be taken. Basa ,vas to be the
correspondent of tl1e society and to continue as before, making sure
that there were Chinese, sailors, servants (on ships), etc. at his dispo-
sition "to foster the ends of our society, such as the propagation of
instruction in our country. Neither religion nor politics l1ave any part
in these matters." Basa too sl1ould use these initials in his letters to
Barcelona and Madrid, but only with the "principal men in eacl1 de-
partment, and the persons in ,vhom one can have confidence," such
as Del Pilar, Ponce, Llorente, Aguilera, Roxas, etc.

51. tp. Rizal., 2:222-23. See also Llore nte 's reply to Rizal's inviLarjon tl1a t l1 e join:
ul will do all I can in favor of e ducatio11 , tl1e primary pL1rpose of that association"
(Ibid., p. 229).
52. I h ave b een unable to determine th e rr1ea11 ing of these initials. If it is to be
~upposed that the o rganization was Masonic, in accorda11ce ,vit.11 v,1hat is sa id belo,v.
th e ..L .M ." could well stancl for "Logia Mas6nica," ,1S is no t ttn co m1no t1 in 1\1,lSo r,i c
docum ents.
238 Education for the Future

T11e association showed little activity once the Indios Bra,,os had
returned to Madrid. Ri zal, who signed his letters G. [ran] Indio Bravo,
kept writing to encourage a11d inspire , but witJ1out getting much re-
sponse, as he complai11ed to Del Pilar. On hearing again of the dissi-
pation of tl1e Filipinos in Madrid, who squandered their time because
they l1ad more money than was good for them, he wrote to Baldomero
Roxas and to the other I11dios Bravos, urging them to try to raise the
moral level of tl1e Colo11y.

Let us see if you can preach to them ,,,ith yo ur example: precisely at

tl1e prese11t wl1en ,ve are engaged in battle , ,ve must redouble all ot1r
efforts, ,ve n1ust sacrifice all to tl1e good of our failierland. ¼'itl1out
,,irtue tl1ere is no libe rty. I am trying to address m yself to all the Fi lipi-
nos, to arot1se tl1eir interest in reformi11g the spirit of the Colony, to
create a Colony v.1hicl1 is serious, hard-working, and stt1dious . ... Only
virtues ca11 redeem the slave; it is tl1e only way to make the ryrants
respect us and to get foreig11ers to make common cause with us. 53

If this appeal had any sobering effect, it did not last long since Rizal
,.vot1ld soon be writing agai11, but he no longer addressed his appeals
to the Indios Bravos, wl1ich had presumably faded from the scene.
One letter suggests, howe,,er, that there may have been sometlling
more to the organization than appears on the surface. In Wiiting to Del
Pilar on 4 November 1889, Rizal makes tl1e following communicatio11 :

The bearer of tl1is letter is a secret brother of ours in the Rd. L.~1 .
holding the second degree. No one ougl1t to come to kno'\v iliat he is a
brother except ilie n•,ro of us.
He is making the trip iliere to Madrid in connection with an affront
he has suffered in Manila. So iliat in the ft1ture he 111ay 11ot again be
humiliated, l1e desires to obtai11 a high dig11it)1 in tl1e catl1edral, sucl1 ,lS
a canonry. Therefore, according to l1is promise to 111e iliat h e ,,·ill help
us secrell)' to the utmost of l1is abilit)1, I a111 offe1ing l1i111 ot1r help in
return. I believe that yot1 and Llore11te, in accordance ,vith tJ1e posi-
tions you hold i11 yot1r Society, can help hin1. I-le has 1no11e)' to spend.
but if' it is possible that h e not be "111ilkecl," it ,vo t1ld be better. \i\'liat is
saved ca11 be given to tl1e Sol.'. In Ol)' opinio11 )'OU ca11 pl~l)' on tile
determination / lcaloobcin} of Mora)'ta and Becerra; tl1e otl1e1 , ,vho 111 ,1".
act deaf, may be n1ade to h ear the ji11gling [of 111 011<")'] i11 their ears_:; , ·

53. Rizal-Rox,1s. 28 Dec 1889. OtLf Hu1tclrfd, 53~)-4().

54. lEp. Piwr, 1:202.
 Education for the Future 239

The bearer of the le tter was evidently a Filipino priest, most likely
Father Jose Ch an co, who was to be active at the end of the Spanish
regime in pleading the case of the Filipino priests against friars in
Rome and who actually received a canonry in Puerto Rico in Becerra's
subsequent term as overseas minister, in 1894. 55
It may be asked in connection with this letter what the not-so-obvi-
ous nature of tl1e organization of Indios Bravos was. The appeal to
the positions held by Del Pilar and Llorente in "your Society" undoubt-
edly had to do with Masonry, an inference that makes sense in the
light of the reference to Morayta and Becerra. The need for strict
secrecy with regard to Chanco's membership, the appellation "brother,"
and the mention of the "second degree," give further grounds for
presuming that a Masonic organization was involved. Moreover, tl1e
description of the society given by Rizal to Basa in the letter cited
above as alien to religion and politics, devoted to the propagation of
useful knowledge, and offering mutual help for these ends dovetails
•
,.vith the professed aims of Masonry. Nonetheless, since several, if not
all, of the known Indios Bravos were already affiliated with Masonry,
it is hard to see what purpose would have been served in founding
56
another Masonic group. What seems more likely is that tl1e Indios
Bravos was an organization partially modeled on Masonry like the Liga
Filipina, which Rizal would found in 1892 in Manila, with very si1nilar
ends of education in its broadest sense and mutual help.

•
55. Chanco was certainly in Madrid in 1890 and 1891, and in close and regular
•
contact with the Filipino colo11y there (Ep. Rizal., 3:1, 213). Presumably he stayed
there until 1894 ,vhen he received his ca11onry from Becerra, as La Solidari.dad implies
in announcing the post, speaking of him as one of the "familia filipina de Madrid,"
and a friend since student days at the University of Santo Tomas ("El P. Chanco," 31
May 1894). For Chanco's activity in Rome later, see the pamphlet by Jose M. Chanco
R.eyes and Salustiano Araullo y Nonato, Memoria para plan de repre.sentacion y proorra.ci61i
<Ul pueblc y clero .filipinos en Roma, con las gestione.s hechas de.sde el 20 <le junio de 1900 ante.
la .~uprema Corte Valicana en defensa de Los legitimos intere.se.s, por Los sacerdotes ].C. R. y s.,\.N.
(Pardo de Tavera, Biblioleca, 126, no. 785.) The pope refused to see the1n, as appears
from the pamphlet. I have seen a MS copy with slight variatio11s in title in the Coleccio,,
Pa5tells, vol. I 10, doc. 46, fols. 203-15, in AT.
56. All the "Indios Bravos" in Madrid were certai nl y Masons in t t1 e lodge
..Solidaridad" the following year, and at least Del Pil<tr, Llorente, Bat1ti.sta ,verc alre..,d,•
•
Masons at this time with high degrees.
240 Education for tlie Future

Even more important in Rizal 's judgment than learning from other
natio11s was the need to cultivate and propagate among Filipinos the
"heimatliche Stt1dien"-studies of his native land-he had spoken of
to Blumentritt. For this reason he had felt the need to devote himself
to prolonged study in the British Museum of the history, administra-
tion , etc., of the Philippines, not only for the preparation of his Morga,
but for all his patriotic efforts. He outlined his ideas at some length in a
letter to his friends in the Barcelona colony at the beginning of 1889:

I recommend that you try to buy and read, though ,vith a critical
sense, all the books you see pt1blished there on the Pl1ilippines; you
must st11dy all matters related to our country. The knowledge of a thing
prepares its mastery; to kno,v is to master. We are the only ones who
can come to that perfect knowledge of our country, because we know
both languages, and besides we are informed of the secrets of the peo-
ple in whose midst we are educating ourselves. The Spaniards will never
come to know us well, because they have many prejudices, they do not
mix witl1 the people, they do not understand the language well, and
they stay there only a short time. The most tl1ey can kno,v is what goes
on in the offices, and that is not the country. Learn, so that ,vhen the
hour arrives, it may not find you unprepared.

Shortly thereafter he wrote to Del Pilar, urging that one of the

Barcelona Filipinos learn Italian ("Italian is easy; it can be learned in
a month by the Ahn Method."), because

I have here Italian manuscripts treating of tl1e first coming of the Span-
iards to the Philippines. They are written by a companion of Magellan,
and since I have no time to translate them because of my man)' occu-
pations, it would be good that one of our counu-ymen translate them
to Tagalog or Spanish, so that people may kno,v in what state ,ve were
57
in 1520.

Rizal had always 1·egarded La Solidaridad as an educational organ,

directed primarily towards the Philippines. Therefore, l1e ,vrote to
Ponce, it would be a good idea tl1at part of the income from La
Solidaridad should be spent on books treating of the Philippines. These
the editors should study, "but ca1·efully a11d critically, since most ot·
these works have much jJinawa, and they a1·e written by tliern." More-

57. Ep. Riz.al., 2:55-56, 99,11 8.

 Education /01· the Futu·re 241

O\'e r, the~· should bu)' books written by Filipinos, mentio11 the authors'
r1ames and q11o te from the ,vritings of such talented Filipinos as Fathers
Pelaez. Garcia, a nd Burgos, and of contemporaries like Lopez Jaena.
°"''e have to bring out into the light our p!ana mayor, which as a matter
58
of' fact is of high quality, but they do not make it known as such."
In a letter to Father Vicente Garcia, ,vritten in gratitude for the
latter's defense of the Noli me tangere, Rizal enlarged on the need to
tum to the outstanding Filipinos of the past and of the present for
guidance, for in carrying on

the titanic '"'Ork of the common regeneration, ,,v ithout failing to march
fon•.ard , '"'e tum our ,rision from time to time towards our elders to
read in the ir countenances the verdict on our actions.

Urging the need to have the elders record the lessons of their experi-
e nces for the generations to come, so that the work of national bet-
te1111ent ma}' not always have to begin anew, he argues:

The \\Thole reason for the little progress that the Filipinos have made
in these three centuries of espanolismo is, to my mind, the fact that our
great tale11ts have died without bequeathing us anything more than the
fame of tl1eir name. We have had very great intellects, we have had a
Pimpin, a Dr. Pilapil, Father Pelaez, a Father Mariano Garcia, a Dr.
Joson , e tc.; we still have a Benedicto Luna, a Lore11zo Francisco, and
59
others besides. Yet, all that these men have studied, learned, and dis-

58. Ibid., 149. Pin.awa is unpolished rice.

59. Tomas Pimpin (Pinpin) ,vas one of the first, if not the first Filipino printer,
and author of a Spanisl1 grammar in Tagalog published in 1610, undoubtedly the first
printed book with a i--ilipino author, I~ibrong pagaaralan nang manga Tagalog narig uicang
(AStilla ( 1610) (Pardo de Tavera, Biblioteca, 309, no. 1983).
Dr. Mariano Pilapil ,vas a Filipino priest, born in Bulacan in 1756. For many years
he was professor of Latin and of rhetoric i11 the Colegio de San Jose, and was a
distinguish ed poet~ preacher, and v.rriter in Tagalog ("Pilapil, Mai;ano Bernabe," Espasa,
44:868-69).
Father Mariano Garcia ( 1778-1871) was a Filipino priest, canon and archdeacon of
I.he Manila Cath edral, rector of tl1e Colegio de San Jose for twenty-seven years (Manuel,
Dtctumary, I: 182-84) .
J have been unable to find any informatio11 on Joson, or on Francisco.
Benedicto Luna ( 1838-99) ,vas known as a philosopher. He opened a private sec-
n11dary school in Sta. Cn1z, Manila, which was most noted amo11g pri,rate schools of
the time (J,;nnclopedia of the Philippi,nes, 3:491- 92).
242 Education for the Future

covered, will die in them, and will come to an end in them , and we \Vill
once m ore recommence the study of life. There is then , a progress or
perfecting on the individual level in the Philippines, but not one which
is national, general. This is why only the individual perfects himself, and
. 60
not t h e species.

This compelling idea invested Rizal with the sense of vocation he

so frequently showed in speaking of his books. He, like other Filipi-
nos, must look to the customs, to the ways of thought, to the teach-
ings of their forbears. But he must also pass on the knowledge he
had gained for himself through his laborious studies, through his ac-
quaintance with other countries, through his experiences. That knowl-
edge must not be lost, but handed on to generations to come.
This compulsion to teach, to communicate his learning to his fel-
low countrymen, found expression in manifold ways. It was but natu-
ral that in his university days Rizal had hoped and planned to engage
in formal teaching. He seems never to have lost sight of this ideal. In
early 1890 when the negotiations with Calvo Munoz brightened pros-
pects of parliamentary representation for the Philippines, he wrote to
Blumentritt of his dreams in an outpouring of youthful idealism. He
believes, he says, that the time is near when he will be able to return
61
to the Philippines to found a school with a great library. Then
Blumentritt can come to be director of the school, and both will dedi-
cate themselves to science and be like Goethe and Schiller, with all
the youth of the Philippines coming to sit at their feet. Once Filipino
representatives sit in the Cortes, there will be voices there to speak
out against abuses, so that there will then be personal security for
Rizal in the Philippines. "Then we will rest, and devote all our powers
to the education of the people, for this is my highest aim."

60. Ep. Rizal., 3:136-37.

61. On Rizal's library, which contained over a thousand titl es, see Esteban A. d e
Ocampo, Rizal as a Bibliophile (Manila, 1960) . The memoirs of th e Madrid bookseller
Pedro Vindel contain some interesti11g details on Rizal 's urging him in 1884 to collect
e,,erything available on the Philippines. Rizal bought as many of these books as his
finances allowed at the time, and recomme nded Paten10 to buy the rest. H e rene,ved
his urgings in 1890, promising that if h e sh ould get the money, he ,vould buy heavily
fTom Vindel. (See Paul Cid Noe [Francisco Vindel. Pedro Vindel: Hisloria de una libreria
{1865-1921) [Madrid, 1945] , 176-77.)
 Education for the Future 243

The followin g m o nth , though in less effusive fashion , he repeated

his intentio n to Del Pilar, urging the latter always to sign his articles
so that his name would become better known and would eclipse Rizal's,
for it was Del Pilar who should take the position of deputy of the
Philippines when the time came, while Rizal retired to devote himself
. 62
to teac h 1ng.
Once, probably when he saw little hope of returning to the Philip-
pines, Rizal thought of opening a school in Paris. Later wl1en he de-
cided to leave Europe, but could not return to the Philippines, he
decided on a school in Hong Kong modeled on the Jesuit colleges, to
which young Filipinos might come. Having obtained the promise of
Mariano Cunanan, one of his Filipino companions from Madrid, to
put up the necessary capital for the school, Rizal drew up the plan of
63
studies, disciplinary regulations, etc. Tl1ough circumstances did not
favor his proceeding with the Hong Kong project, he never aban-
doned the urge to teach. During his exile in Dapitan, he first worked
with his old Jesuit professor, Father Francisco Sanchez, to supplement
the education of the local children with special classes on Sundays,
and later opened a school of his own. Success attended his efforts in
this small provincial town in Mindanao, but later events forced him
. 1t
to give . a 11 up. 64
Though Rizal did not reject political means in the struggle for his
people's freedom, he assented to such measures with a certain reluc-
tance, as if he were putting up with a necessary evil. Del Pilar, on the
other hand, while applauding all that could lead to the proper recog-
nition of Filipino capacity and interested in raising the level of the
•
people's education, generally had a pragmatic eye on the political use
to be made of this knowledge and firmly believed in political propa-
ganda and political negotiations as the means of winning liberty for

62. Ep. Rizal., 5:546-48; 3:7-8.

63. Retana, Virla, 193; Ep. Rizal., 3:143.
64. Tlle MS "Diario d e la Casa de Dapitan" in AT gives details of Ri zal 's school a nd
the success it h ad in spite of th e opposition of the parisl1 priest, Fathe r Antonio Obact1,
SJ .. who h ad h ad differe nces with Rizal after the departure of Father San ch ez, and
considered him a b acl influen ce on the children . \\'l1e n Rizal beca111e co11scious of t11e
opposition , h e ,,o luntarily closed the sch ool. See also Epifa nio (te los Santos, "Mas
sobre Rizal," Philippine Review 1 (December 19 16): 24-25; 37-44: a 11d my article, "Son1c
Notes on Rizal in Dapitan," Philippine Studies 11 ( 1963): 301- 13.
244 Education for tlie Future

65
tl1e Filipi11 os. Since bot11 me n recognized the need of the course of
action the other pursued, they could work together for a time to at-
tain their common goals, but a clash between two such disparate per-
sonalities and such different concepts of what was primary to the
national struggle was bound to come, as it did not long after Rizal
joined the Madrid colony in 1890.

65. E.g., Filipinas en las Cortes, 11, where Del Pilar summarizes many of the points
made by Rizal to enforce l1is proposition that parliamentary representation should not
be denied on the grounds that the Filipinos are incapable of civilization.
 CHAPTER 12

Rizal 's Break with Del Pilar

Mid-1890 saw the high point of the Propaganda Movement.

Del Pilar, as sole editor, had set up La Solidandad in Madrid. The
paper was doing itself proud with regular articles by Del Pilar, Rizal,
Blumentritt, Antonio Luna, Dominador Gomez, and Mariano Ponce.
The Del Pila1· and Rizal pamphlets of 1888-89 were circulating rela-
tively widely in the Philippines, and financial support sent to Madrid
\<Vas apparently adequate and regular.
Most of tl1e Filipinos in Spain had been organized into a Masonic
lodge of their own in which Del Pilar had a leading role. Together
with the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina, it was providing means of influ-
encing Spanish politicians to endorse Filipino aims. The contact with
Becerra in particular seemed to augur well for the future, and his
proposed educational and other reforms in the Philippines threat-
ened to erode the influence of the friars and the church. The issue
of parliamentary representation had been raised and supported i11
the Cortes, and seemed to have the backing of the overseas minister
and the incumbent Liberal government.
Rizal had published his edition of Marga's history, which was al-
ready circulating in the Philippines, and was now working on the se-
quel to the Noli, a novel that would enlarge on the message of tl1e
Noli and further stir up the hearts of l1is country,me11. The essential
objects gained, Rizal could return to the Pl1ilippines to devote him-
self to the co11tinuing education of l1is people wl1ile Del Pilar could
assume the post of deputy in the Cortes to contintte to watcl1 out for
Filipino interests from a stronger position.

245
246 Rizals Breal<- witli Del Pilar

These higl1 hopes received their first damaging blow with tl1e fall
of the Sagasta ministry, tl1e promises of Becerra and Sagasta still a
thing of the future. In Del Pilar's view, holveve r, the blow was by no
means mortal. Without wasting a moment on futile breast-beating, h e
set about deploying his forces once mo1·e to renew the battle. The
following six months were to see great activity on the part of the
Filipinos in Madrid. Rizal 's arrival appeared to give the Filipino colony
the shot in the arm it needed, making it more cohesive . Appearances
were deceiving, l1owever, and tl1e train of e,,e11ts was already undenvay,
gathering mome11tum, that would eve11tually wreck the wl1ole organi-
zation in spite of the acl1ievements still to come .

The Calamba Hacienda Troubles

Events set in motion three years earlier, when Rizal was in his home
town of Calamba, were now coming to a head. In answer to an offi-
cial inquiry on land holdings and rents, the principalia of Calamba,
apparently inspired, or at least aided by Rizal, had taken occasion to
present their long-standing grievances against the hacienda adminis-
tration. Alleging that the boundaries of the l1acienda had been ex-
tended beyond its original limits to include lands cleared by indi"iduals,
that hacienda rents were excessive and raised arbitrarily in such a ,vay,
as to discourage agricultural progress, tl1ey demanded eitl1er an equita-
ble for 1nal contract bet\.veen tenants and hacienda, or the sale of the
lands to those ,.vho had clea1·ed them. A subsequent petition to the go,,._
emment, also having Rizal as its principal author, called into question
1
the legitimacy of the title to at least pa1:t of tl1e hacie11da lands.
Even after Rizal's departure fro1n the Philippines, the larger pro-
portion of the tenants reft1sed to pay furtl1er re11t to the hacienda,
demanding to see the titles. When tl1e hacie nda began to take the
cases to court and proct1re eviction orders agai11st tl1ose ,.,,h o h ad re-
fused to pay, Rizal encouraged them in their resistance, so that the
case might be raised to tl1e Supreme Court in Spain, as i11deed it
eventually was. In C,Llamba m eanwhile, the resistance ,vas coordinated
by Rizal's brother and b1·others-i11-law, partict1larl) M~\11t1el Timoteo 1

Hidalgo. TenanL5 evicted by cot1rt orcle1· rett1rned to tl1eir la11ds, attd

l . Jose Rizal . "l ,a ve rdad 1>ara todos," / ,n ,'lolid<1nrlad, 3 1 !Vlav l 88~). TJ,e cloc, 1n1e ,1 c.s
are reproduce d in Dt=l J>itar's /,a sob,•rtz 11ia ,no11acr1~ i2- 76. See aJso l:p. Rizal. , l : 146.
 Rizal 's B'reak witli Del Pilar 24 7

\-Vhen efforts were m ad e to turn over the lands of the dispossessed to

2
otl1ers, no o n e would take them , and tl1ey were left u11 cL1lti,1ated .
Given the complicated system of land te nure in operation at th e
time, the abse nce of an adequate system of land-title registration , the
fac t that the hacie nda normally passed on leases from father to chil-
dren , it is difficult, if not i1npossible in the present state of evidence
to say just wl1ere legal right in tl1e matter lay. 3 As the Rizal family
lawyer, Felipe Buencamino, wrote to Jose early in 1891 , "Tl1e friars
cannot prove their ownership of the lands of Calamba, bL1t your to\.\111s-
4
men cannot do so either." The only thing certain, he ,,vent 011 to say,
,-vas the historical fact of rent havi11g been paid, wl1ich created a legal
presumption in favor of the Dominicans.
In May 1890 Paciano wrote to his brother on heari11g tl1at Nozaleda,
the 11ew Dominican Archbishop of Manila, had indirectly proposed to
Del Pilar a fo11r1ula of accommodation to resol,,e the struggle of tl1e
Filipino group in Europe against the friars . If the Calamba qL1estion en-
tered into the proposal, Paciano declared, the majo1ity of the Calambenos
were in favor of some kind of compromise, si11ce they recognized tl1at
the larger part of the hacienda lands belonged to the Domi11ica11s from
their original purchase in the early nineteentl1 century. However, after
manifesting the opinion of the people, Paciano ,-vent on to make clear
that there was more involved than the land dispute:

If the accommodation in the above sense cannot injure tlie ca'use 1uliicli
yo11. are upholding, you can propose it, so as to put a halt to tl1e u11bear-
able sittiation in which the people find tl1emselves. If it would be harm-
ful, I \vill always belie,,e that interests of secondary order should be
5
subordinated.

2. Ep. R izal., 2: 104-5 ; 3:34; 4: 166; One Hundred, 372. (Internal evidence sl10,vs that
t11e first a nd third of tl1ese letters should be da ted in 1890. )
3. J ose S. Arcilla, SJ., "Documen ts conce rni11g the Calamba Deportations of 189 1'.
(Philippine Studies 18 (1970): 577-633) has reproduced an accou11t fron1 tl1 c Domi11i-
can a rch ives, ,vritten in 1909 by tl1e form e r admi11istra tor o f t11 e l1aciend a, Fray Felipe
Domin guez. Th o t1gh it contains some clear i11accuracies, su ch as referring to Pacia 110
as Pon cian o, it provides som e i11sigl1t i11to the complexity of tl1 e o rigin al dispt1te, a nd
how both sides co uld h o n estly consider th eir p ositio n s justifi ed. No n e the less, it still
lea,,es many questio n s una nswe red. See also Gu e rre ro , First .rzli/Jino. 18 1-86.
4. tp. Rizal., 3: 15 1.
5. Ibid ., 3:3f>-36. I talics s1Jpplied . In his m e mo irs, Fe lipe Bue 11ca mi110 ,,ras latt' r 10
claim th at the compron1ise p ro p osed by Nozaled a ,va,; o n e- \vorke ct ot1t bv l1 i 111sclf
 248 R izal's Breali with Del Pilcl'r

Paciano's lette r makes clear tl1at the Rizals believed in th e justice

of tl1eir claim and did not press it merel)' as a weapon against the
friars. However, tl1e passage qt1oted also makes it clear that he at least
was not u11,.villing to use the claim as a weapon.
I11 July, Rizal wrote to Del Pilar tl1at he \Vas waiting for the power
of attorney to have his family 's case presented before the Supreme
Cou1-t, and added: "My brotl1er tells me, since what brought you here
to Europe was the fight against the friar, if we defeat the friars [in
6
this case], they will be very much weakened. "
The effort to bri11g the whole matter before the cot1rts in Spain
and to secure a judicial verdict which could not be challenged by
Philippine authorities was part of the strategy of assimilationism. If
the official theory of the Philippines being an integral part of Spain
,.vere to be carried to its logical consequences, then it should be possi-
ble to appeal the Calamba dispute to the supreme judiciary body in
the Peninsula and defeat the colonial establishment there. The ap-
proach was different from the appeal for Philippine representation in
the Cortes, but the basis was the same. Its failure was to complete the
destruction of Rizal's already weak faith in the efficacy of a campaign
for Filipino rights carried on in Spain.
But if the Filipinos saw the judicial battle in a larger context than
the immediate case of the Calamba land dispute, so did their formi-
dable adversary in the Philippines, Governor-General Valeriano Weyler.
He too saw it as a struggle for power, and was in no mood to wait for
the results of any appeal to the Supreme Court. In November 1889
he visited Calamba personally to size up the situation, and urged the
Calambenos not to listen to the "vain promises of ungrateful sons."
He returned the following month, throwing the full weight of his pres-
7
tige behind the Dominicans.
Evidently Weyler considered the sitt1ation a seriot1s one from a po-
litical point of view, and refused to look 0 11 the passive resistance of

tl1rough intermediaries. He likewise asserted that \.vl1en consulted by tl1e Ri zal fa 111ily,
Jose disapproved the arrangemer1t by cablegra1n. To Buencamino this indicated lh.,1t
Rizal 's purpose was political rat11er tl1an private, and l1e witl1drew fron1 tl1e case (.. Sixty
Years of Philippine History," tra11s. by Alfonso Lecaros ar1d ed. b,· l\1auro Garcia , His-
torical Bull.eli1i 13 [ 1969]: 14- 15).
6. Ep. Pilar, 1:226-27.
7. tp. Rizal, 2:250-5 1, 266.
 Rizal's Break witli Del Pilar 249

the Calambenos as som e thing con cerning only private i11terests. As h e

wrote to th e overseas minister, if today they could resist paying the
rent for their lands, tomorrow tl1e same united purpose might be put
berund a movement to refuse payment of taxes, and the efforts to
detract from the prestige of the Dominicans would be only the first
8
steps towards a true independence movement. Conceiving the strug-
gle in those terms, any colonial governor would have to act to pt1t
down the challenge. Given the firm conviction inspired by Rizal in
the Calambeiios and the stern determination on Weyler's pa1·t, it ,.vas
inevitable that the consequences would be severe.-and far-reaching.
In January 1890, Rizal 's brothers-in-law, anticipating deportation ,
•
took the precaution of sending him power-of-attorney. In August the
Spanish provincial governor, Juan Mompeon, on whom Paciano had
relied as protector because of his known antifriar sentiments, called
•
the leaders of the movement together and warned that unless they
•• came to an agreement with the hacienda, there would be regrettable
,
consequences. Rejecting their plea to wait for the decision of the Su-
preme Court on the appeal already filed by Francisco Rizal and Nicasio
Eigasani, he ordered Paciano Rizal, his two brothers-in-law, Silvestre
•

Ubaldo and Antonino Lopez, and two other relatives, Mateo Elejorde
and Leandro Lopez, to report to the provincial capital, wl1ence they
9
we1·e deported to the island of Mindoro.
.
•

, Rizal in Madrid

Rizal, in the meantime, had half a mind to return to the Philip-

pines, regardless of the consequences, for as he told Del Pilar in April
1890, speaking of his plans to return and devote himself to teaching
once parliamentary representation was obtained, "I believe that noth-
ing else can redeem us except our heads, materialiter vel idealiter
10
sumptum." If he could not redeem his country by putting his head at
its service, he felt that only the willingness to sacrifice his head as a
••
•
martyr to the cause of freedom would suffice. He soon ceased writing

•
• 8. Letter of 30 Aug 1890, accompanying the papers on th e deportations of various
relatives of Rizal, AHN, Ultramar, leg. 2308, exp. 10.
9. Ibid.; also Ep. Rizal., 2:271-72; 3:89-91.
10. Ep. Pilar. 1:216-17.
250 R izal 's B1·eak with Del Pilar

regularly for La Solidaridad in orde r to complete the sequel to }1is Noli

befo1-e r e turning to the Philippines.
Though his intention to go home was harde11ing into a resolve ,
Rizal began to have seconcl thoughts when his friends vehemently
opposed the idea. He sought to find out through Basa if the Comite
de Propaganda in Manila '"'ould pension him with a hundred pesos
monthly to enable him to work in Madrid, as Ponce had urged him
11
to do. Serrano's arrival in early August with a new power-of-attorney
f1-om Paciano and a letter tirging him to exert his utmost in prosecut-
i11g the Calamba case before the Supreme Court brought him to Ma-
drid, still somewhat tip in the air.
Soon, howe,,er, he thre"v himself into the task at hand, and at the
end of September the Filipino colony, represented by Del Pilar, Rizal ,
and Dominador Gomez, personally presented a protest to the over-
seas minister, tl1e Conservative Antonio Fahie, against the deportations
from Calamba. Various Madrid newspapers of Liberal or Republican
affiliation supported the Filipino protests, and gave increased atten-
tion to Philippine affairs, publicizing the resolutions of the Asociaci6n
Hispano-Filipina in favor of parliamentary representation and other
12
1·eforms. Since a trip home at tl1is time was anything but advisable,
he settled down to making the Filipino colony in Madrid a more
close-knit orga11ization for furthering Filipino interests.
The conduct of many of the Filipino students in Madrid had always
been a sore point "'~th Rizal. They were more serious about gambling
and women than about their studies 01· about joining in the national-
ist campaign of La Solidaridad. Thus he sent a steady st1·eam of admo-
nitions and exhortations to Madrid and Barcelona by letter, and did
his best to provide moral leadership for the Colony through sucl1
1neans as organizing the Indios B1·a,,os. Though gene rall)' ackt1o,vl-
edged as the moral leader of the Filipinos, he had ne,,er bee n able-
awa}' from the scene-to make his leadership as effective as he felt it
should be. Now, living in Madrid, in daily contact with the Colon}', he
felt called upon to do so.
Closely bound up in the crisis that ¼1as about to break ,vas Rizal's
basic disag1·eement ,vith the methods t1sed b)' Del Pila1·; indeed , ,,ith

11 . EjJ. Rizal., 3:60-61 , 79, 80, 82 , SR.

12. [,a Solidari(/arl, 30 Sept 1890, 218-19: Retar1 a , A11isos, 89-91; /,,a £.poca. 3 1 O ct
1890.
 l~izrLl 's Break 1uitl1, Del PilrL1· 25 1

tJ1 e ,vh o le idea of Del Pilar a11d his delegaci6n. Rj zal l1ad 1011g si11 ce
o pted for th e eventual inde penden ce of tl1e Philippines. In a n ex-
change of letters with Blumentritt i11 1887 he had said some,vhat cat1-
tiously, speaking of the even tual peaceful e,,olution of the Pl1ilippines
towards an independent status apparent!)' proposed b)' Blt1n1entritt:

It ,vill 11e,•er come. Tl1e peaceft1l struggle 1nust re1n ain a d rea1n , fo r
Spain ,.viii never learn from her earlier colo11ies in Soutl1 Ainerica. Spai 11
does not see wl1at En gland l1as learned in Nortl1 America. Bttl in tl1e
•
• present c1rct1mstan ces we \vant 11 0 separation from Spain; all ,ve cle-
mand is m ore care, bette r instruction , better officials, 011e or nvo re pre-
sentatives, a nd more securi ty for oursel,1es a11d our property. Spai 11 ca11
still "'rin the Philippines for l1erself forever, if' onl)' Spain ,vere mo re
reasonable .

A month la ter he is more d efinite . Speaking of the attacks of

Quioquiap, he says bitterly:
•
Quioquiap is a little more cr11de than Caiiamaqt1e, Mas, S. Agt1stf11 ,
etc., but more honest; l1e ,.vants separation , political separation, and l1e
is rigl1t. The Filipinos h ave long desired Hispanization, and l1a,·e bee11
wrong. Spai11 shot1ld desire this Hispanization, not the Filipinos; 110,v
,ve receive this lesson from the Spaniards, and \Ve express ot1r thanks to
13
them .

In his articles in L a Solidaridad, he treated tl1e question of future

•
independence for the Philippines as somethi11g depende nt 011 110,,r
Spain would respond to the Philippine situation-whether she would
listen to or ignore the reasonable demands of tl1e Filipinos. His cor-
respondence shows he was con,rinced that Spain would not listen. v\71-it-
ing to Basa and mentioning Regidor's articles in early 1889, h e says
sarcastically, "It seems to me that in Spain, on reading those articles,
many say: 'As long as you do no more tl1an con1plain , everything ,,,ill
be all right'" Ventura, writing about his misgi,~ngs to Rizal conce1·11i11g
the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina about this same time, recalls their 111t1-
tual concurren ce in the conviction that "all tl1at can be do11e l1ere is a
waste of time, since it is proven that they a1·e un¼rilling to listen." 14

13. Ep. Rizal., 5:64, 75.

14. Ibid., 100, 109. Comp are, e.g., ''l11co nsecuc n cias," lJa 5,olir111,idrz<l. 30 o,· l H8~l:
"filipinas de ntro de cien ai10s,'' ibid .. 15 Dec l 889.
252 Riz.al's Break with Del Pilar

Once La Solidaridad was founded, Rizal cooperated with it, because

it was a Filipino e nterprise and devoted to the welfare of the Philip-
pines, for h e was always ready to aid any united Filipino effort. But
his frequent insiste nce that the paper must be directed to the Philip-
pines, that it was 011ly there that it could achieve its ends, shows how
15
poorly he regarded any political activity in Spain. His own articles,
for the most part, were addressed not to Spaniards, but to Filipinos.
His readiness to take up the cudgels for his people against the insults
of Spaniards was intended more to raise Filipino self-esteem than to
change the attitude of Spaniards.
When he learned that arrests had been made in Manila in April
1889 on the heels of the discovery that Basa's brother was an outlet
for clandestine a11tifriar propaganda, Rizal declared himself unwilling
to resort to influence or recommendations to obtain the freedom of
the prisoners. "Let those whose rights have been violated appeal to
the courts if they can, and if not, let them appeal to God. " He took a
certain relish in such occurrences, for he felt that abuses are inevita-
ble evils in a corrupt society, calling attention to themselves and serv-
ing to open the eyes of the people. A few weeks later he returned to
this idea, declaring that:

though we must regret this [the arrests] as a private misfortune, we

must applaud it as a general good. Without 1872, there would not now
be any Plaridel, or Jaena, or Sancianco, nor would the valiant and gen-
erous Filipino colonies in Europe exist; without 1872, Rizal would now
be a Jesuit, and instead of writing the Noli me tangere, would have writ-
ten the contrary. At the sight of those injustices and cruelties, though
still a child, my imagination awoke, and I swore I would dedicate my-
self to avenge one day so many victims, and with this idea I have gone
on studyi11g, and this can be read in all my works and writings. God will
one day grant me the opportunity to ft1lfill my promise. Good! Let
them commit abuses, let tl1ere be arrests, exiles, executions, good! Let
Destiny be fulfilled! The day on which they lay their hand on us, the
day on which they inflict martyrdom on our innocent families for our
fault, farewell, pro-friar government, and perhaps, farewell, Spanish
government!

15. That Rizal would have wanted La Solidaridad to be directed to the Philippines is
seen, for instance, in l!.p. Pi.lar, 1: 184, 196, etc.
 •
Rizal 's Break 1,,it }1 Del Pilar 253

All tJ1ese sufferings, he co11tinued , are like a cat1terizatio11; tJ1 e sickl)'·

part of ilie Filipino may be bur11 ed a,-va)', bttt th e basicall)' sound part
16
v.'ill return th e follo,.vi11g day ,,vi th re11ewed life and vigor.
His belief tl1at sufferi11g is part of tl1e price to be paicl for national
redemption underscores l1is firm confidence in the ultimate ,rictory
I
•
i
of courage and virtue over injt1stice. v\'riting to Lopez Jaena after /Ja
J
• Solidaridad had put out a few isst1es, Rizal counseled:

•
•
•• Take care not to insert exaggerations, nor lies, a11d not to in1itate
others who make use of dishonorable 1nea11s and lo\v a ncl ignoble
I
language to obtain tl1eir ends .... We 1nust sl1ow our ene1nies that ,,,e
are superior to them, morally and humanly speaki11g. Pro,,icle d tl1at ,ve
' speak the truth , we ,vill have won our caL1se, for re,1so11 ar1d justice arc.·
•
on our side .

The Filipinos in Europe must set an example of courage,

ilieir own names to ilieir articles in La Solidaridad.
J

Our countrymen, on seeing our courage, on seeing not the courage of

one, but of many, on seeing tl1at Rizal is not a11 exception , but the
general rule, will also take cot1rage and ,vill lose their fear; tl1ere is
nothing like example. Our enemies ,vill be frightened 011 finding them-
selves face to face with youth who fear notl1ing, ... who are not frigl1t-
ened by the vengeance e1nployed. What I spoke of ,vill be fulfilled ,
namely, that tl1e more abuses they commit, the more liberal Filipinos
will come forward. Moreover, whoever wishes to take part in this cru-
sade, must have first renounced all, both his life a11d l1is fortune .. .. In
any case, they will take vengeance on us; at least let our deatl1 or our
misfortu11e be a brilliant example for the others .... Be con,rinced that
for each good example of a Filipino, tl1ousands and thousands are ,von
over, that the progression is geometric, that God or Destiny are on our
side, because we have justice and reason with tis, a11d because ,,,e strug-
gle ' not for selfish motives,
17
but for the sacred love for ot1r countl')' <111d
for our countrymen.

Del Pilar too had more tl1an a spark of idealism in l1in1 , tho \1gl1
•'
often obscured by the restless drive of l1is pragn1atism. 1-Ie ,v1·ote to
Basa on the occasion mentioned above:

16. Ep. Rizal., 2:157-58; 166-68.

17. Ibid. , 2: 152; 200-201 ; see also 222.
254 Rizal 's Break 1.villi Del Pi[a,r

Tl1e misfo rtunes whicl1 no t o nly )'Ot1r brotl1e r, bt1t also yot1, I, and
o tl1ers are suffering ... all these evils are pl1enomen a whicl1 produce
pa i11fu] impressio11s, but, for m yself, I consider tl1at they are the storm
wl1icl1 is destined to tranquilize ot1r heavil)1-charged atmosphere .
Let tis tl1en, 1Jless Providence; let us sl1ow ourselves \vorthy instrtt-
18
me11 ts of its unsearchable desig11s.

Yet, since activism colored his ,riew of nationalism, Del Pilar was
not one to 11eglect any political 1neans to acl1ieve his ends. For in this
same lette1· he disclosed what he had done and would try to do. Not
\visl1i11g to alienate Rizal , he avoided informing him of whatever he
did tl1at l1e felt Rizal would frown on. Many of Rizal's articles in La
Solida1idad differed sharpl)' from those of Del Pilar, for Rizal made no
effort to spare the feelings of Spaniards, be they friars or politicians
. 19
o f '"'h atever st1·1pe.
Since Del Pilar valued Rizal's cooperation and realized the extent
of his p1·estige among Filipinos at home and abroad, he took every
1neans to please l1im, and l1is letters never showed the sligl1 test re-
sentment at certain, perl1aps unconscious, marks of condescension in
some of Rizal's letters. But once togetl1er in Madrid, the two, so un-
like in temperame11t, would eventt1ally clash. As Rizal sought to bring
the Colony arot1nd to l1is way of thinking, his compulsive exl1orta-
tions to diligence and virtue hardly endeared him to many of the
Filipino students.
Things were building up to a crisis, ,tvhich occurred at the annual
New Year's Eve banquet of the Filipino colony on 31 Decembe1· 1890.
A few weeks earlier, when the Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina gave a ban-
quet in honor of Becerra, Rizal refused to attend. Becerra's failure to
fulfill his promise to grant the Philippines parliamentary representa-
tion and his inaction on his brother-in-law Hidalgo's deportation 1-a 11_
kled. Tl1e deportation of Rizal's family and their eviction from their
home and lands added to his gene1·al depression.
At the New Year's Eve banquet of the Colo11y three \veeks later
'
according to Del Pilar, Rizal provoked the resentment of many of the

18. r:p. JJi/ar, 1:86-88, 192. Bltl see i!Jid., 1:122; 2:88.
19. See, fo r exa mpl e, Ll1 e contr,1st be t,v~e n llizal, "U 11a esperd11za," and De l Pila i·,
"Re-vista polfLica ," i11 La ,\ oliclcLririari, 15 July 1890. Bo th of tl1em are cornme n ti r1g on
th e fai lure of Bece rra Lo fulfill l1is pro rnises 0 11 l'l1ilippi11e reprcsen t lti o r1 in tl1e Cortes
bcfc.) re tl1e fall o f Ll1 e Sa g-as la mi11istry.
 Rizal :5Break 1vitli Del Pilar 255

• Filipinos b)' his unwillingness to accept a proposal tha t h e pay for the
ch ampagne and by his remarks on th e Filipino stud e n ts' lack of ap-
plication to tl1eir studi es. This resent1ne nt still fresh , the follo,.vi ng
day some Filipinos called on Del Pilar with a proposal, suppoi-ted by
Rizal , to unite the Colo11y by electing a leade r. Despite the protests of
Del Pilar that there was no n eed of formi11g a new organization for a
Colony already united, all agreed on the proposal, and a committee
was named to draw up the co11stitution, a task delegated to Rizal .
Wl1en Del Pilar found that the proposed constitution st1bordina ted
La Solidaridad to the leader of the Colo11y, wl10 was to de te rmin e policy,
he protested that though the paper was at the se1"1ce of the Colo ny
•
and its leade r, it could not abdicate its indepe nde11ce, sin ce it be-
longed "to another highly 1·espectable entity, whose instructions are
quite definite " 1·eferring, of course, to tl1e Comite de Propaga nda.
Rizal announced that he would seek authorization from tl1a t entity to
bind the paper to the Colony.
f
The voting that then took place between Rizal and Del Pilar re-
sulted in three inconclusive ballots, ,.vitl1 two mo1·e the follo"\-\ring d ay,
after which Rizal in a pique walked out. U nder instructions from Del
Pilar, Ponce pulled strings to ha,,e the Pilaristas ,,ote for Rizal, wl10
was then elected. Further rivalries took place in tl1e election of tl1e
counsellors, in which Rizal inte1vened to prevent the election of Sal-
vador Vivencio del Rosario, declaring that otherwise he would resign
his own post. Again the Pila1·istas yielded so as not to divide the Colony.
On taking office a few days later, Rizal, according to Del Pilar, re-
proved the Colony for turning the election into a divisi,,e contest ,-vhen
he was regarded in Manila as the indisputable leader of the Colon),,
in asmuch as "every movement of opinion there at the present mo-
ment is due to his work." He went on to level certain charges at Le te
and to remark that it would have been more p1·oper if Del Pila r h ad
. . 20
withdrawn his candidacy from the beginning.
No other versions of the affair are available to qt1alif)1 o r co11fir1n
Del Pilar's account, which was sent to Manila a few n1 o ntl1s la ter i11
•
reply to inquiries about the dissensions betwee11 l1imself and Rizal.
The latter, writing to Basa a few weeks at"ter tl1e e,,e 11t, se11t hitn clll
account (which h as not survived ) to i11fo1·m hin1 ''of the co nspir,lC)'

20. Marcelo-Ka Dato [Arellano]. t,,. Pilar. 1:23~)-46.

256 R iznl~s· Brfctlf 1vitli Del Pilctr

,vl1ich tl1 e)' ,,1a11te d to co ntrive against me , making use of our fri e11d
21
De l Pila r , '"'110 ]e11t himself to it t1nkno,-vi11 g1y. Some montl1s later, at
a mee ti11g of tl1e Comite de Propaganda i11 Ma11ila, when De l Pilar's
accottnt of tl1 e affair was read , Moises Salvador rose to defend Rizal
. 29
,,·1tl1 some heat. -
H o,ve,,er Del Pilar's account may be appraised, it seems clear that
tl1 e idea of organizing the Colon)' under a single leader came from
Rizal, or ,,vas at least i1nmediately seized upo11 by him as an opportu-
nity to set the direction he believed Filipi110 policy ought to take.
v\TJ1at Rizal overlooked was tl1at there was already a de facto leade1- of
tl1e Filipino colony in Madrid and tl1at Del Pilar had already estab-
lisl1ed himself as that leader. While Rizal l1ad indeed furnished the
111ain i11spiration of the campaign and ,,vas tl1e majo1· ideologist of
Filipino natio11alism , many Filipi11os were not read)' to accept the t)rpe
of leadership he wished to in1pose upon them. Del Pilar, a skillful
politician, suppliecl a more flexible type of leadersl1ip, content to di-
1·ect the campaign th1·ough l1is position in Masonry, the Asociaci6n
Hispano-Filipina, and La Solidaridad, \.\ritl1out raising issues of unit)' in
organization or thrusting himself into the personal conduct of indi-
,·idual Filipinos.
Even though Rizal had wo11 the election, his hollow trit1mph '"'as
ashes in his mouth. A few weeks later he abandoned Mad1·id for good.
Del Pilar ,¥as elected leader of the Colon)' in his place, but since he
'"'as the de facto leader of tl1e Colony, Del Pilar presttmably disn1issed
all refere11ce to his official designation.
Rizal stopped for a short time in Biarritz and in Paris, then re-
turned to Brussels with the inte11tion of fi11ishing l1is novel. A shoi·t
time later he moved to Ghent, ha,,ing heard tl1at p1·inting costs ,vere
23
cheaper tl1ere. He was dete1·mi11ed to leave Et1rope as soon as his
book was pri11ted, thot1gh the Comite de Propaga11da, or Hermandad
d e San Pat1·icio, as it was no,v called, had t1rged him not to retu1·n to

21. EJJ. Rizal. , 3:143.

22. l .6p ez Jaena-Ri zal. Ep. Jiiz.al., 3: 216. Lopez .Jae11a l1ad bcc11 prese11 L i 11 ~lani ta a r
the mce ti11g, bttt k11 e,v 11o thi11 g of the ca,1ses o f tl1e confli ct, since lie l1ad bce11 li,·ing
in Barcelo 11a all tl1is ti1ne , an d 11ot co1111ected ,vitl1 I.a 5,ofillnrid,,d. Sal,·a dor l1ad bee 11
prese11t a t tJ1c banqltCt a11d s\1bsc qlte11t e lec tions. e tc., ,111cl l1ad retllr11ed to ~fani la
s l1 o rtly afte1""\vard.
2~. J•:µ. Pilnr, 2:207-8: 1:-jJ. Riz.al.• ~: l R-1: 5:583. 592: ,1\ leja11drino. 222-23.
 Rizal~} Brea/? 1uit /1, Del Pilctr 257

the Philippines, pron1isi11 g to se11d l1im a n1 o nthly pensio11. This pen-

It sion , h owever, arrived ,-vitl1 great ir1·egt1larit)', to Ri zal 's extre m e a11-
no)1a n ce. H e la te r n otifi ed the Comite abot1t his inte ntion of lea,ri 11g
f

•
for the Philippin es, H ong Kong, 01· .Japan, wl1ere he could earn l1is own
li,,elihood , and characteristically t1rged them to spend the money tl1e)'
24
t
II
proposed to send him o n educa ti11g so1ne you11g man in Etirope.
T o tl1e exhortatio11s fro:n Manila that h e and Del Pilar sl1ot1ld be
reconciled, h e replied , denyi11g that l1 e harbored a11y resen tm e11 t
•
again st Del Pilar. In Augt1st 1891 Del Pil ar sot1gl1 t to persuade Rizal
to contribute again to La Solidaridad i11 the i11te rests of tl1e comm o11
cause. Again Rizal denied 11ursing any rese11tme11t, but declarecl tl1at
I he l1ad ceased writing because of l1is book a11d his desire that otl1er
'I Filipinos take part, and also because he believed that a si11gle poli C)'
I
f
I sl1ould be followed. Since Del Pilar was in control, it was better for
•'
•
I
Rizal to avoid interfering with his diffe1·e11t ideas. Nonetl1eless he ,-vot1ld
continue working for the common -end from Ma11ila or Hong Kong.
l When Del Pilar attempted again to pe1·suade him to reconsider J1is
.Jl
'I
I stand shortly before he left Europe, l1e repeated his plea of in ability
to ½'Ork for a11 "empresa partictilar," and reite1·ated l1is intention to
retire f1·om politics in ,-vords that left no dot1bt as to ,-vhat l1e felt:
•

I have marked ot1t m y 11orm of co11dL1ct, ,,vl1icl1 is to leave to tl1e Filipi-

nos of Madrid tl1e conduct of ot1r politics, tl1ey ,vl10 u11derstan d a11d
f
•
know it so well. v\TI1at can I d o ,vitl1 JTI)1 impatie11ce ,111d n1y despotic
pre tensions? I L1nderstand tl1e d esire of e,·er)1 Filipino to d o ,vl1at lie
pleases, and I re11ounce ITI)' idea of forining \-Vitl1 111)1 cot111tr)11n e11 the
close-ranked phalanx I drea1ned of. Perl1aps tl1e iro11 of coin pressecl
molect1les is i11ferior to the aircurrent of free-1110,1i11g m o lect1les; I ,vas
mistaken, and I prese11t my resignatio11.
ContinL1e tl1ere, no,-v tl1at yo u are 011 top; 1nake t1se of )'OLtr po,ver to
put into practice yo ur ideas, so that tl1ere n1a}' re1nc1i11 11otl1i11g ttntried.

- ----- - - - - -
24. Ri zal-Basa. Ep. Riz.al.. 3: 143; A. T e ulttz (Jt1a11 Zt1l t1e ta]-Di1n~\s .-\l a 11g [Rizal]. il)itl. ,
178-79; Ri zal-A. L. Lo rena [Deoclato Arell ano], ibicl.. 19 1. ,\t tl1e b egi n11i11g <)I' 18~)0.
SeITano h ad b ee n succeeded as preside 11t of tl1c Comirc de l)r<.1paga11cla l1y Dor<)te<>
Cortes unde r the pset1do11y1n of M. ~10111illa. '"itl1 ··ca11dicl<1 (:011raclc)'' as secre tary
(E.p. Pilar, I :209). By th e l)egi nni11 g o f 189 1. tl1c sec retary ,,·,ts Z1dt1cta a 11d 1l1e J)rc-;i-
dent ,,ras Conrado, ,vlio apparently ,vas Deocla to Arcll a11(1 . . \1 tl1is tinie tli<."' ( :c)n 1111 it tl'<.'
began calljng itself H e r1nandad de San Pat ric ic>.
258 R izal 's Breall with Del Pilar

Otl1er le tte1-s confirm tha t Rizal was deeply hurt by the Madrid Colo-
11y's thinly veiled 1-e pt1diation of his presumptive right to lead ership
and by what h e conside red Del Pilar's effort to supplant him. H e
resisted all efforts by Blumentritt, Del Pilar, and othe1-s to get him to
contribute once more to La Solidaridad. In Paris just before setting out
for Marseilles and the ship to Asia, Rizal wrote a final letter to Del Pilar,
assuring him that he still preserved l1is former esteem for him:

In m e all my feelings, all my affections, my h atreds, and my grudges

are lasting, not to say eternal! I have tl1is defect: I pardo11, but I forget
'\-Vith difficult)', and tl1us, as I do not forget that you were m y best d e-
fender and my best champion, so too I recall tl1at yot1 were the first
25
m ass witl1 '\-Vhich they ha,,e "''ished to overtl1row me !

Nevertheless , Rizal 's resentment was no petty licking of personal

wounds. At odds were deeply-held convictions as to the policy to be
26
followed. Rizal could not have successfully carried out any policy
had he remained as the leader of the Colony in Madrid, for he set no
store by ne,.vspapers, politics, or anything else done in Madrid. Before
La Solidaridad was founded , l1e had felt that the struggle should be
carried on in the Philippines. Now he ,.vas convinced more than ever:

If ot1r countrymen hope in us here in Europe, they are certainly

mistaken .... The help we can give them is our lives in our country. The
error all make in thinking we can h elp h ere, far a,.vay, is a great mis-
take indeed. The medicine must be brought near to the sick man. Had
I not been un,,villing to shorten the li,,es of m y parents, I ,.vould
not have left the Philippines, no matter what happened. Those fi,,e
months I stayed there "''ere a model life, a book e,,en better than tl1e
Noli me tangere. Tl1e field of battle is the Philippi11es; there is ,vl1ere we
should be.

To Blumentritt he wrote:

25. l~fJ. Rizal. , 3:210-11 , 206-7, 208-9, 230-31, 242-43; 5:609-10; 3:246-49.
26. Tl1ere is 11ot tJ1 c sligh test eviden ce for tl1e asserti o11 of Lieute11ant Olegario
Dfaz. head of the sec re t police in Manila, in his official report in 1896, tl1 ::1t tJ1e di •i-
dence between tl1e t,-vo 1r1c n was due- to "la falta d e m o ra lidad e n la administrac ion de
los fondos que d e Ma nila remitia el con1itc de la propaga11da" (Retana, A rcli ivo, :~:
420). There we re to be la ter disputes a11d accusatio11S co11ce1,1ing tl1e propaganda
fu11ds, but not betwee11 Rizal and Del Pilar .
 Rizal 's Break with, Del Pilar 259

(
I beli e,,e that the .Solidaridad is 110 Io11ger our battlefield ; ,ve n o,v l1ave
to deal ,,ri th a n ew struggle. I ,vould like to give in to yot1r wish [ to
write in La Solidaridad], but I believe it is t1seless. Tl1e struggle is n o
l
I
longe r in Madrid. AJI of it is lost time. 27
•
.
•

Though Rizal a nd Del Pilar diffe red on policy, tl1ey fixed their sights
l
1 on tl1e same ends. In his speech to the Colony after Rizal had taken
j
• the office of leader, Del Pilar insisted:

In the Filipino Colon y there should be no di\'lsion, nor is tl1ere: one

',
are the sentimen ts ,vhich m ove us, one the ideals we pursue: the aboli-
l' tion in the Philippines of every obstacle to our liberties, and in dt1e
I time 2; nd by the proper m ethod, the abolition of the flag of Spain as
'' well .
l
'•
I
Del Pilar did not believe the course Rizal advocated effective and
was unwilling to let him assume sole leadership, but he had not the
•
l ren1otest inte ntion of overthrowing or discrediting l1im, as the latter
I
,• believed and continued to assert even in l1is letters of conciliation. It
was Rizal who in effect had tried to overthrow Del Pilar, thougl1 he
•
•• would n ever have admitted this even to himself. His own leadership
•
,vas real, but it was of a different order. As an intellectual, as a ma11
of ideas, as one capable of touching the wellspring of patriotic feeling
\.
••
in his countrymen, Rizal had no equal, and Del Pilar knew it. Unwill-
•

,
ing as the latter was to yield to Rizal his political leadership in the
.
Madrid Colony, the re was nothing he desired more than Rizal 's con-
tinued intellec tual and moral leadership. Thus in the account he sent
to Arellano of the conflict that had taken place, he urged him to
make pt7.ldent use of the information. For, he conti11ued:

I am of the opinion that we must a,,oid at any cost a judgment

unfavorable to our Rizal; I want to preserve intact the great name he
enjoys there. You will remember that when l1e ,vas insisting on return-
ing there, I recommended to you specially to be on the ,vatch for any-
I
l
•

27. Ep. Rizal., 3:250, 5:626.

28. "la abolici6n en Filipinas d e toda traba a nuestras libcrtades, )' a stt tiempo y
con,,eniente raz6n la d el pabell6n de Espana t.ambien" (Marcelo-Ka Dato, Ep. Pila,·.
I :246) . It is interesting to see that this was tl1e acknowledged purpose 11ot 0 11ly of Del
Pilar and Rizal, btit also, at least in the mind of Del Pilar, of th<:> Colony as a ,vl1 ole.
260 Rizctl's Brea/<. u1itli Del Pilct1·

tl1i11g \vl1icl1 COLtld di1ninish l1is statt1re; 1,,vell, it \Vas precisely that I al-
reacl)' foresa\.v i11 l1irn acts sucl1 as I ha\re now seen in actuality. The fa ct
is tl1at 1ny 1na11 l1as bee11 fo rm ed in libraries, and in librari es no ac-
cou11t is take11 of the at111ospl1ere i11 \•vl1icl1 o ne mL1st wo rk.

Tl1at Del Pilar was ear11est in his desire to l1ave Rizal 's collabora-
tio11, clespite l1is somewhat patronizi11g jt1dgment of Rizal, is clear from
tl1 e series of lette rs l1e \"'rote Rizal during the latter's last months in
Et1rope. He was co1·rect in realizi11g his need of Rizal 's collaboration,
as events were soo11 to sl10,"", i11 a wa)' l1e did not perhaps anticipate.
Bt1t Rizal 's cou1·se "''as alread)' cl1arted, and over a different rot1te, for
l1is ne,"' novel '"'as now to disclose the directions his tl1ough ts and
aspirations had taken since tl1e pt1blicatio11 of tl1e Noli me tcingere.

The New Novel

Rizal began work on the seqt1el to the Noli, entitled El Filib·usterismo,

'""l1e11 he started residing in Lo11don i11 1889. By the summer of 1891
it '"'as being pri11ted in Ghent sectio11s at a time, as funds to defra)'
printing costs were raised throt1gh desperate means. By July he had
pawned all that he l1ad, a11d since 11either the pension promised him
b)' the Comite de Propaganda nor funds from home arrived, l1e vvas
reduced to near-starvation at times, as he l1ad been when trying to
get his Noli printed in 1886-87. Finall) he had to suspend the print-
1

ing completely, until, just as his friend Viola had come to his rescue
in 1886, his friend Valentin Ventura sent him from Paris the money
he needed to finish the book. In September the book was at last com-
pleted. Rizal shipped the entire edition off to Hong Kong to be smug-
gled into the Philipfgines, witl1 the exception of a few copies sent to
9
his friends in Spain.
The plot of the novel is loose in the extreme, and as Retana noted,
l1ardly serves as more than a connecting li11k for a series of
philosophico-political discot1rses on Philippine problems. Tl1e p1·otago-

29. Rizal-Del Pila r, tp. Pilllr, 1:249; Re ta11 a, \'ida, 200-201 ; id., Apamto, 3: 1206, n o .
3069. The only notice it appears to have received i11 Spai11 \va5 tl1rougt1 f1; e nds to
\Vhoni Rizal had sent copies; Graciano Lo pez J aena, "La literaturd.. lilipina:· /.,a /:lublicidad.
15 O ct 1891 ; [Francisco Pi y lVlargall], 'J. Rizal." El 1Vt1PV0 Rigimm. 17 O ct 1891: 'f ag--d-llog
(An ton io l .\tna l, .. Noli ,n, ttingerf' y /~'l /•1/ib-usteris1110," !~a Soli<larida<l. 3 1 Oct 1891.
 Rizal 's B1·eall 1uit11 DPL Pilrlr 26 1

11ist of th e nov·el is Simoun , a sinister· figt1re of unk110,v11 01·ig in ,vl10

l1ad come to tl1e Philippines v.1itl1 the go,,e rn or-ge11eral, over ,vl101n
he wielded alm ost unlimited influen ce. A j eweler b)' professio 11-
thot1ght b)1 some to be a Britisl1 India11, by otl1e rs an American 111t1-
latto-he consta ntly ,vore la1·ge dark glasses tl1at hid much of th e t1pper
part of his face. Secure i11 the go,,er11or-general 's patronage, l1e '"'as
culti,,a ted by all ,vho sougl1t profit for tl1emsel,·es, a11d t1sed his po,"1er
to am ass an ever greater fo rtune for l1i1nself.
J Sl1ortly after th e op eni11g of the 11ovel, the young medical stt1de11t,
t
t Basilio, returns to his native town of San Diego. H e is tl1e boy sac1-is-
l'. lc1rz wh ose brotl1er h ad bee11 beate11 to death by tl1e }1ead sacristan of
I F1·ay Sal,,f in th e earlier novel and wl1ose mother l1ad been dri, e11 to 1

i
j
1
madness and d eath. H e now 1·eturns to the lonely spot in tl1e forest
i
;
,vl1 ere many years ago he l1ad me t a haggard figure wl1 0 had l1elpecl
him bu1-y l1is mother there and l1ad built a ft111eral py1·e for anotl1er
man shot to death in the lake. Since then Basilio l1ad li,,ed as a se1, 1-

ant boy, had managed by dint of hard work to get a11 education, and
f
J now would soon b e graduated a doctor.
As Basilio arrives at tl1e grave, he finds Simoun diggi11g there, ,vl10111.
,,~tho ut tl1 e glasses disguising the jeweler's featt1res, he recognizes as
tl1e man he had met tl1ere thirteen years earlier. It is Ibarra, ,vl10111
all believed to have died from his pursuers ' fusillade. Recog11ized 1)~-
! Basilio , Simoun debates wl1ether h e should kill the man wl10 ca11 e11-
danger all his plans: "for what is the life of one ma11 co1npared ,,vitl1
the end I pursue?" 30 But recognizing in l1im another who has accot1nts
to se ttle with society-to avenge his mother and his brotl1er-l1e tells
him his story. He had wandered over the world, amassing a fo1·tt1ne
to e nable him to destroy the vicious system that had dest1·oyed l1im.
Unable to rest1scitate the corpse of a dead social system, on which the
\1l.llture of greed everywl1ere fed, he resolved to hasten tl1e process of
comple te disintegration.

I ha,,e sti 1n 11 lated greed, I ha,,e favored it; i1~j11stices and abuses m11lti-
•
plied; I 11ave en couraged crime a11d acts of cruelty, so tl1at tl1e people
might grow acct1stomed to tl1e idea of dea th; I ha,,e fostered insecu1·i~,.
so that fleeing from it, there be a readiness to embrace a11y sol11tio11; I
have placed obstacles to trade, so that ,,vith th e cou11try in1po,·erished

30 . El Filibusterismo, ,Vot1fla filifJiria (G e11t: F. Meyer-\ 1a 11 Lo<). 1891 ). 45.

262 Rizal 's Brea/, witli Del Pilar

and in misery, no one might be afraid; I have sti1nulated ambitions, so

tl1e Treasury might be exl1austed . Wl1en all tl1is did not st1ffice to stir
up a risi11g of tl1e people, I ,vou11ded them i11 the most painful way, I
made tl1e vulture insult and pollute tl1e very corpse it lived on.

But just at the mome11t when all this was to reach its culmination,
naive young students like Basilio and his f1·iends have come along
witl1 their entl1usiasm for assimilatio11, for the spread of the Spanish
language, with tl1eir appeals for loyalty and confidence in the govern-
me11t. This Hispanization is the deatl1 of the people, the destruction
of their national character, and will only serve to fix the tyranny of
the government more firmly on them for the future. Worst of all is
tl1eir aspiration to extend the learning of Spanish.

Spanish ,vill never be a general language in the country; the people

\vill never speak it, because the ideas of its brain and the sentiments of
its heart find no phrases to express themselves in it; every people has
its own language as it has its o,vn way of feeling . . . . AI, long as a
people keeps its language, it keeps the pledge of its liberty, just as the
man preserves his independence as long as he preserves his own way of
tl1inking. Language is the thot1ght of peoples.

Simoun urges Basilio to join him, to work among the youth against
these yearnings for assimilation, for equality of rights, for brother-
hood. So much the better that Spain denies them representation in
the Cortes, where their presence would only serve to sanction abtises
without accomplishing anything. "The less rights they recognize in
you, the more right you will have afterwards to throw off their yoke
and return them evil for evil."
Basilio replies that he has no interest in politics; his only hope is to
use his studies to alle·viate the physical sufferi11gs of his countf)men.
His devotion to science will help to redeem l1is country, for science is
destined to outlast politics and even patriotistn. Even Simot111 's tattnt-
ing him with forgetting the wrongs done to his mother and his brotliei·
fails to shake his conviction tl1at the one thing needed by his people
at tl1e present time is education. Disgusted, Si1noun 1nocks tJ1is acqtii-
escence in tyranny, but leaves the door open should Basilio cl1 ange
. min
h 1s . d Iater. 31

31. Ibid., 46-54.

 Rizal's Breali 1villi Del Pilar 263

I
Throt1gh the novel passes the figt1re of Sin1oun , ever reacl)' to tt1rn
tl1e minds of honest and virtuous m en, victimized by tl1 e ry1-an 11y of
state, society, or cl1t1rcl1, to the possibili ty of revenge, of society's re-
n ewal unde r his aegis.
Cabesang Tales sees th e land l1e has cleared by his s,veat a nd a t
the cost of his wife and daughter, who died of fever, taken over by
the false claims of a religious order; he finds no jt1stice in the courts,
where the judges ca11not endanger th e interests of· the f1-iars; he is
d eprived of his arms a nd falls into the ha11ds of robbers, so that his
daughter is forced into domestic se1-vice to ra nsom l1i1n. At the subtle
instigation of Simoun, h e takes tl1e latter's revolver, kills tl1 ose ¼' t1 0
have caused his misfortune , and j oins the bandits i11 the hills, he nce-
fo1·th to be at Simoun 's service.
The schoolmaster, deported as filibuste ro for having tri ed to teach
m e children Spanish against tl1e priest's wishes, is pardoned tl1ro ugl1
Simoun 's influence, and becomes the latte1·'s gunpowder expert.
Placido Penitente, the university student ,.vh o finds l1imself out of the
university because he has refused to submit any longe1- to th e inst1lts
daily heaped on the students by meir friar professor, becomes a trusted
•
assistant.
Where Simoun finds no abuses, he creates them, encouraging the
governor to order the demolition of all nipa houses for a substantial
bribe from a dealer in galvanized iron roofing. Paying the debts of
arrny officers, he puts them unde1· obligation to him, read)' to start a
mutiny at his word, some under the illusion tl1at it is backed by the
friars so as to make secure their position, omers that it is a scheme of
the governor-general's to prolong l1is te11n of office.
•
Finally, all is ready for the uprising. Once more he approaches
Basilio, offering him a last cl1ance to join the revolution due to begin
wi min the hour. Not only the oppressors, but all ,vho l1ave failed to
help will be slaughtered. All Basilio has to do is to take a bo d)' of
men to batter down the gates of m e convent of San ta Clara at the
height of th e revolution , and resct1e Ibarra's lo11g-lost be trothed, Marfa
Clara. Whe n Basilio confronts him with tl1e news of l\1la1·fa Clat, \'s
death that very day, Simou11 goes out in despair, and t.l1 e revolt1tio11
does not take place.
Meanwhile, the project of tl1e young students to open a11 acact(~n1}·
• for the teaching of Spanish had me t with tl1e opJJosition ot· the t111i-
versity and in spite of all the st1pport given the -~t11clents l1)' frie 11cll)'
264 R izal 's B1·eak 1.uilli Del Pila1·

Father Fernandez and a co1nplace11t Canon Ire11e, won over by a gift,

tl1e best that can be done is to entrust the study of· the project to th e
pseudo-liberal offi cial counsellor. Torn by conflicting desires to please
the friars , to abide by his "libe ral principles," and to satisfy th e wish es
of his favo1·ite dancer Pe pay, whose support the students had e nlisted ,
Don Custodio, in an inspired st1·oke, finally recommended that the
acad emy project be approved, but under the di1·ection of the friars of
the university. Defeated, the students console themselves at a Cl1inese
restaurant. The next 1norni11g the doors of the university are fot1nd
plastered with antifriar posters, and the members of the stude nt asso-
ciation are arrested, including Basilio, who had not even been present
at the dinner. All are eventually released , except Basilio, who, havi11g
no protector, remains in priso11 as a scapegoat to t1phold the "pres-
tige of authority."
When Basilio finally emerges from prison after months of suffer-
ing, he presents himself to Simoun, ready for orders. That night a
wedding feast is to take place to which all of Manila society, headed
by the departing governor-general, are invited. Simot1n has prepared
a magnificent lamp as the governor's wedding gift, but it is filled with
nitroglycerin, and the entire pavilion is mined with gunpovvde1·. At a
given moment, the ,.vhole place will explode, destroying all those high
in state and church, while Simoun 's troops and the bandits loyal to
him will burst into the city, and the people, convinced that tl1ey are
all to suffer the consequences, will rise to defend their lives. Basilio is
to lead them to the warehouse where Simoun has stored arms, a11d at
the head of tl1e crowd, ,.vill put to death all ,.vho refuse to follow.

All! indios, mestizos, Chinese, Spaniards, all ,-vl10 are found ,vithottt cotir-
age, without energy.. .. We mt1st renevv the race! Co,vardly fathers ,,rill
only beget sons ,-vho are slaves, and it is not worth-,vhile to d estrO)' o nl)·
to b11ild again with rotten materials ... [It is] the inexorable la,v of
Nature, the law of struggle in whicl1 the unfit must perish so that tl1 e
defective species may not sunrive and the process of creation go into
reverse . . . . Let the eternal laws be fulfilled and let us assist in the
32
process.

Persuaded by Simoun under the influe11ce of his tJ1irst for re,,e 11 ge.
Basilio agrees and goes o ut into the 11ight. Waiting for tl1e appoi11ted

32. Ibid, 249.

 Rizal's B1·eak 1vitli Del Pila·r 265

hour, he \.Vanders to the sce n e of the ,vedding f·east. Seeing the

death-dealing la mp already in place, h e turns to leave when sudde nly
he meets his friend Isagani , tl1e disappointed lover of the girl about
to be married. U nable to d1·aw Isagani away, Basilio is obliged to reveal
the plo t to him, and Isagani dashes into the pavilion and hurls the lamp
into the nearby river. The gunpo¼,der is discovered, and tl1e revolt aborts
in a bandit raid , wh ose captured perpetrators implicate Simoun.
A \-\'Ounded fugitive, h e takes refuge wi tl1 the ki11dly retired Filipino
priest, Father Florentino, in l1is home by the sea. When word arrives
tl1a t the civil guard is comin g to arrest him , dead or alive, Simoun
takes poison before Fatl1e1- Flo rentin o can stop him and then, before
he di es, pours ot1t l1is secret to the astottnded p1iest.
In the dialogue between Simoun-Ibarra and Father Florentino, Rizal
not on ly d eli,1e rs l1is judg1nent on the me thods of Simoun, bt1t also
sets forth l1is program for the nation. To Simoun 's despairing qt1es-
tio11 if it be God 's will that the Philippines should continue in their
present conditi o n, Father Florentino replies:

l do n ot know, I can11ot read the mind of the Inscrt1table. But I kno"''

tha t H e h as 11 o t forsake11 those people that in times of decision have
place d the111selves in His h ands and made Him tl1e Judge of tl1eir op-
pression; I kno,,.,, tha t His arm has never bee11 ,van ting ,vl1en , with jus-
tice tra mpl ed u11der foot and all other resources exhausted , the
oppressed have taken up th e s,vord and fought for their homes, ,\fives,
child 1-en , and . . . ina lie nable rights .... God is justice and He cannot
abando n His owi1 cause, the cause of freedom without which no justice
is possible.

Because Simoun l1as used methods of wl1ich God cannot approve, He

has abando11ed him in l1is struggle, for

if o ur coun try is some day to be free , it ,vill not be through vice and
crime, it will not be tl1rough the corruption of its sons .. . . Redemp-
tion presupposes virtue; virtue, sacrifice, and sacrifice, love!

If the Filipino people now has to suffer, it is because it tolerates vice,

and acqt1iesces in the d eprivatio n of its freedom.

He is the God of liberty ... ivh o makes us lO\'e it b}' making the }'Oke
heavy llpon us; a God of mercy and justice, ,vl10 betters us as h e ch as-
tises us, and onl}' grants l1appi11ess to l1i1n '"'110 has m erited it by his
266 Rizal's Breal< witli Del Pilar

efforts. The scl100] of suffering tempers tl1e sot1l; the are na of combat
gives it stren gth. I do not mean that o ur freedom is to be won at the
point of tl1e S\\'Ord; the sword counts for little in the destinies of m od-
ern times. But it is true tl1at we must win it by deserving it, exalting
reason a11d the digi1ity of the individual , loving what is just, what is
good, what is great, even to the point of dying for it. When the people
rises to this height, God provides the weapon, and the idols fall, the
tyrants fall like a house of cards.... We owe our misfortunes to our-
selves; let us not blame anyo11e else. If Spain were to see us less com-
placent ,-vi.th tyranny a11d more disposed to struggle a11d to suffer for
our rights, Spain ,vould be tl1e first to give us liberty.

As long as the Filipino people does not have the courage and vigor to
protest, to proclaim its rights, even at the cost of suffering; as long as
it keeps silent in the face of tyranny so as to save its own skin, there is
no use giving it freedom.

Wiili Spain or without Spain, they would always be the same, and per-
l1aps, perhaps even worse! Why independence, if the slaves of today
will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And they will be, without doubt, for he
loves tyranny who submits to it!

And as Simoun dies, Father Florentino whispers:

Where are the youths who are to consecrate their budding years,
their idealism and enthusiasm to tl1e good of their country? Where are
they who are to pour ot1t their blood generously to wash away so much
sl1ame, so many crimes, and abominations? Pure and immaculate must
ilie victim be so that the holocaust may be acceptable! Where are you,
oh youth who are to embody in yourselves the vigor of life which has
been drained from our veins, the purity of ideas which has been stained
in our minds, the fire of enthusiasm whicl1 has been quenched in oui·
l1earts? We await you, oh youth; come, for we await you. 33

The message of the novel is clear: the present system of governing

the Philippines through corrupt and self-seeking officials, dominated
by the friars and subservient to their interests in one fashion or an-
other, can only lead to disaster for Spain. By its nature and operatio11
the system inevitably drives all intelligent, ge nerous, hard-working, cou-
rageous, and loyal citizens, even those most de,,oted to Spain, into

33. Ibid., 281-85.

 Rizal 's Break with Del Pilar 267

opposition, crin1e, and subversion . The gover11ment is arbitrary, cruel,

comple tely lacking in a sense of justice or of responsibility, and witl1-
out interest or trust in the people it is to govern. The friars are painted
in even harsher colors than in the Noli: the)' ab11se their power to
satisfy vile lusts; to rob men of tl1eir lands; to preserve their monopoly
of edt1cation, which is the enemy of knowledge; always seeking their
own interests rather than those of the cou11try, or even of Spai11.
Yet in this l1arsh picture tl1ere are bright spots: the higl1 official
who remonstrates with the governor-general over his arbitrary pro-
ceedings, and who sympathizes with and defends the Filipino people;
and the open-minded Dominican, Father Fer11andez, who favors the
petition of the students for a Spanish academy, and is willi11g to dis-
cuss with the student lsagani on equal terrns what the students expect
from the friars. But both these bright spots are clouded by dark forces.
Tl1e high official cannot prevail on the governor-general to do what
is just, and finally, out of his love for Spain, denot1nces the policy her
representatives are pursuing and submits his resignation rather than
be a party to it. As he leaves the governor-general , he tells the Fili-
pino who opens the door for him, "When you declare yoursel,1es in-
dependent some day, remember that there were not lacking in Spain
34
hearts that beat for you and fought for your rights."
After Father Fernandez and Isagani have carried on a frank discus-
sion and the friar promises to speak to his brethren about the subject
of their conversation, he adds: "I hope that sometl1ing can be done.
I only fear that they may not believe you exist." And Isagani replies in
tum "I fear the same thing; I am afraid that my friends will not be-
35
lieve' that you exist, such as you have sho,m yourself to be."
Rizal sees little hope that Spain will rule on the basis of justice
rather than prestige, and though he must record the rays of l1ope
that still remain, he is essentially pessimistic.
Parallel to the message of warning to Spain in the novel, a11d be-
coming ever more dominant, is the message to his counlr)1men on
the course to be taken if Spain does not heed l1is warning. If Riz,11 is
harsh in denouncing Spanish corruption, greed, exploitation, and i11-
justice, he is no less hard in condem11ing Filipino corrt1ption , greed,

~34. Ibid., 240.

35. Ibid., 15.
268 Rizal 's BrPak tvilIi Del Pilc1.1·
•

co1nplace11cy, hypocriS)', ancl co,-vardice, which share i11 , or p e rmit,

Spa11ish abt1ses. Tl1e Filipina, Dori.a Victorina, asl1amed of her race ;
the co,vardly, time-servi11g Filipino lawyer, Senor Pasta; tl1e brutalized
ci,,il guard, cruelest of all to tl1eir own countrymen; the corrupt mu-
ni cipal officials-all are bitterly taken to task.
Scarcely less bitter is tl1e castigation of spineless students who lack
self-respect and courage to fight a stultifying system of education; tl1e
frivolity of· a Paulita, who chooses the cowardly bt1t wealthy braggart
Pelaez over an Isagani "''hose bra,,ery and patriotism have gotten him
into trouble with the authorities; the superstition and fa11aticism of
t11e San Diego women.
Rizal all but justifies Simoun 's plan to exterminate the greater part
of tl1e race so as to begin afresh to build a nation. I-le does proclaim
more than once the precarious statt1s of Spanish sovereignty in the
Philippines, accepted only as fait accompli, a stra11ge fate that st1b-
jected a people to a passing traveller and his cot111trymen for ever
more, strengtl1ened perhaps by doubtful bonds of history, religion ,
and language, but based on promises of civilization, of enlightenment,
36
peace, prosperity, and justice, all of whicl1 110w stand violated.
Yet he never urges revolution. Not only does he condemn an inde-
pe ndence won by immoral means, like Simoun 's; l1e does not eve11
want immediate independence, which could only mean a new serf-
dom. The task ahead for the Filipinos is to prepare themselves, to
make the1nselves ,vorthy of freedom , and then God will g1-an t the
means, be it revolution or peaceful separation from Spain.
Education, exemplary lives, willingness to sacrifice for one's con-
,,ictions, even to suffer martyrdom-this is the road to freedom that
Rizal would have his countryme11 travel.
That this message to the Filipinos was Rizal's main aim may be
gathered from his decision to send the whole edition of the novel to
the Philippines. Perhaps when he began to write he still hoped to
address himself both to Spaniard and to Filipino, but by mid-1891 ,
that hope had all bt1t ,,anished , and his only preoccupation "''as to
prepare his people, to point out to them the path to be take n. H e
himself now proposed to put his p1-ogram into action , to take the

36. Tll is sLibj ec ti o 11 (ibi cl. , 2 12-13. 186) is <ip o kcn o f tl1 e Caro li11 es, b lll o b,i o tis ly i:i;
inten ded to 11a,•e the sa1n e ap pli ca ti r) 11 i11 the case of the Pl1ili p J)ines.
 Riza,l 's Break witli Del Pila1· 269

lead do,-vn the path he had pointed out. Close bel1incl his novel, he
3-
booked passage for Hong Ko11g, where l1e vvot1ld cl1art the next step. '

Hong Kong and Manila

As Rizal was retumi11g to,vards his native land, the drama of Calan1ba
\\Ta.5 reacl1ing its de11ouement. In the last fe,-v "''eeks before his ter1n

ended, Weyler had all court decisions of eviction rigidl)' e11forced,

and took stringent measures to wipe out all sources of u11rest in
Calamba. Besides a hea,ry concentration of ci,,il gt1ards, he sent i11
regular troops as well.
Some four hundred tenants were e,,icted fron1 their homes· tl1e
'
houses we1·e dismantled and their owners gi,,en n-ven ty-fou1· l1ours to
remove the materials from p1·opert)' belo11ging to the hacienda. W11en
the owners failed to do so, everything was burned. In addition, some
nve11ty-fi,,e persons were ordered deported to Jolo, includin~ the sev-
enty-eight-year-old fatl1er of Rizal, and three of l1is sisters. 8 In tl1e
next fe"'' weeks, Rizal 's motl1er a11d siste1· ,-vere t\,vice arrested in Ma-
nila, and after several days' imprisonment, forced to go back 011 foot
to the courts of tl1eir province, wl1ere they ,vere finally released.
By this time Weyler had departed for Spain, and had been suc-
39
ceeded by General Eulogio Despujol y Dusay. I11 his despair, Rizal
,vas dete1-mined to come to Manila, but ,,vas dissuaded b)' his family,
who in the succeeding mo11tl1s gradually made their ,-vay to Hong
Kong, as many as had been able to evade deportation 01· we1·e granted
pardons by Despujol.
In Hong Kong Rizal engaged in the practice of medicine, all tl1e
time continuing his work and plans for the Philippines. ,tV11ile tf)ring

----- -- - - -
37. Rizal sailed from Marseilles, it seem s, on I 8 Oct 189 1 (J·,'p . Pilftr, 1:252).
38. Retana, A1ando de vl',:)'lr>r, 110-31 ; P. Pabl o Paste lls-P. Jua11 Ricart, 2 Nov 189 1,
.\T ; Valeriano Weyler-Excmo. Sor. Ministro d e Ultramar, 30 1-\ ug 189(}, ,\1-1 N, Llltra n1ar.
leg. 2308, exp. IO; e.-cjJerl ien tf for tl1e deportation to J o lo of Patricio Ri za l, ibid., exp.
20; "Datos devueJtos p or el Congreso de los Dipt1tados rc la tivos a deportacio11cs
decretadas por el Gobe mado r General d e Filipinas," ibid., exp. 23.
39. Despujol took ove r from Weyler 011 17 Nov 189 1 (AJ-JN, Ultra n1ar, leg. 528H,
exp. 46). The last of the d eportations l1acl bee n ordered 011 15 No\'e1nbcr, i11dicati11g
tl)al \,\7e'\,ler
.
\va s anxious to put )1is o,v11 c 11d to the affair a11cl 1101 lea\'e its sc-r1lcn,<•11 1
1,, anvone e lse.
270 llizal 's Break with Del Pilar

to obtain through friend s in Spain tl1 e freedom of those deported, he

wrote articles in English for the Hong Kong newspapers on the events
in Calamba, and witl1 the cooperation of Basa, pre pared propaganda
leaflets and l1andbills i11 Spanish and Tagalog for distribution in the
40
Philippines. Among them were a translation of his Hong Kong arti-
cles on Calamba, and one of the Declaration of the Rights of Man
proclaimed by the French Revolution . He was also at work, with the
help of his brother Paciano, now in Hong Kong, on a translation of
the Noli into Tagalog, a11d apparently also of the edition of Morga, as
well as a third volume of the Noli. He ,.vas likewise making efforts to
organize the shipment of L a Solidaridad into Manila, but soo11 ga,,e it
41
up as hopeless for lack of cooperators in Manila.
His efforts on behalf of La Solidaridad show Rizal 's sincerity in tell-
ing Del Pilar that though he could not write for the paper he would
not attack it, but would work with it for the common goal.
There was growir1g disenchantment, however, with the methods of
La Solidaridad. Even before Rizal's return from Europe, a group in
Manila broke with the Comite de Propaganda, apparently as a reac-
tion to the Rizal-Del Pilar dissension in Madrid, and prepared to set
up their own committee and to work for the support of a different
course of action. The leaders of this new group seem to have been
Basilio Teodoro, Timoteo Paez, and Moises Salvador.
In June 1891 Lopez Jaena by invitation of the Comite de Propa-
ganda and at its expense, returned to Manila secretly under the alias
Diego Laura. Here he spent only four days in constant fear of being
discovered, and finally escaped, disguised as a sailor, 011 a boat to
Hong Kong, whence he returned to Barcelo11a. He relayed to Rizal in
August the proposition entrusted to l1im by Basilio Teodo1~0 that Rizal
should "remain travelling in Europe and America, to sou11d ot1t the
attitudes of the governments of other nations with regard to the Pl1il-
ippines, and to find out what idea of it they have .'' Fo r this they pro111-

40. On his efforts for tl1ose d e po rted, see Aure lio Li11a res Ri\,as--RiL'll, Ep. Ri:aL.
3:282. Lin ares Rivas, a r11e1nbc r o f tl1e (:o nse rvative gover11me 11t, ,,ras l.l1e la,,,yer Rizal
h ad retai11ed to h a ndl e the case of l1is re la tives· d e po rtatio n after Pedro de Go,-antes.
the o riginal lawyer, had re lL1med to tl1e Jl J1ilip fJines, and RizaJ hirnse- lf left !\1adri<l
(Marcel~Ka Dato, 11/). Pilar, 2: 107).
4 1. r-;p. Rizal., 3:298-£~9; Retan a , \'ida. 4i0, 110s. 11 3-16. 120: 011e llundred, 650.
 Rizal 's Break witli Del Pila1· 27 1

ised hi1n two ht1ndred pesos a m o nth in additi on to l1is travelling

'1 2
expenses.
In early Novembe1· the junta directiva of the new Committee made
a formal offer to Rizal to act as editor of a new fortnightly paper, witl1
Lopez Jaena as associate editor. Anotl1er letter of Moises Salvador,
,vl1ich apparently accompanied the official Committee lette1·, informed
Rizal that Deodato Arellano a11d Doroteo Cortes opposed the 11ew
Committee's attempt to withdraw their funds. To avoid an open clash,
the new Committee resolved to collect new funds that ,-vot1ld be a t
Rizal 's disposition as soon as they knew where l1e was sta),ing. A few
,veeks later Salvador amplified the above terms, announcing the set-
ting up of the Partido Rizalino. If Rizal was not ready to re tt1rn to
Europe immediately, he asked that he entrust the founding of the
paper to Lopez Jaena in Barcelona, under the nominal direction of
Rizal, who would contribute articles to it until he was ready to return
43
there and take over its editorship actively.
I
In February Rizal received a letter from his former companion in
Brussels, Jose Alejandrino, telling of the latter's father's part in the
"society, whose object is to counteract the lamentable policy of Del
Pilar" and desiring Rizal 's return to Europe to direct Filipino poliC)'
there. Meanwhile, although he had assured Blumentritt in February
that he had received only rumors of another Filipino newspaper, Rizal
seemed to be seriously considering the offer. In a letter written in
January 1892 evidently answering Rizal 's request for advice, Antonio
Luna declared himself in favor of organizing for revolution withot1t
abandoning the campaign i11 Madrid. It was necessary to work, l1e
. said, in the Philippines and to raise money for the time when Spain
'
would be involved witl1 some other nation, so that then the Filipinos
might be ready to strike and shake off the Spanish yoke.
With regard to the proposed newspaper, Luna offered himself un-
conditionally if it were to be a revolutionary paper, such as could be
set up in Hong Kong or elsewhere, even if this paper were to attack

42. Ep. Ri.zal., 3:216-26. It is not absolutely clear that Teodoro actually belo11ged to
the new committee with Paez and Salvador, since Lopez J aena merely speaks of tl1e
proposition as emanati ng from T eodoro and some fri ends of l1is, actir1g i11depcr1d-
ently of th e old committee. If this \Vere a tl1ird group, it ,vould be even more indica-
tive o f tl1e disunion i11 Manila.
43. Ibid., 3:255-56. 256-57, 258-59 .

. . .
 272 R izal's Break witli Del Pilar

L a Solidaridad. Rizal seems to have made some kind of conditi o nal

reply to Alej andrin o, "'rh o wi·o te in April advisin g th at he had tra ns-
mitted the co11ditions to Manila and urging Rizal no t to refuse. Shortly
thereafter Evangelista likewise wrote from Ghent, urging Rizal to sound
out others who might be of the same mind as he and to found a
r evolutionary club in Hong Ko ng or elsewhere as the Cuba ns h ad in
44
the United States.
By the time these lette rs arrived , however, Rizal had d efinitely re-
nounced any idea he l1ad had of directing a no the r pape r in Euro pe!
4
whe ther competing with or simply supple me nting L a Solidaridad. ::,
Though these negotia tions came to no thing, they reflected the grow-
ing cleavage between the Rizalistas and the Pilaristas a t home and in
Europe, on the policy to be followed . The spurt of strong separa tist
sentiment cannot be attributed exclusively to the events of Calamba,
but Weyler's brutal solution undoubtedly helped to crystallize the in-
creasing despair over achieving anything in Spain that h ad vaguely
troubled many Filipinos. And while Rizal renounced the idea of found-
ing a revolutionary newspaper, he had not given up the idea of pre-
paring for an eventual revolution.
Perhaps even his projected colony in Borneo fitted into this plan.
By the time of his arrival in Hong Kong, Rizal had become inte r ested
in the possibility of founding a Filipino agricultural colony in Borneo
where his relatives and friends who had lost their lands in Calamba
might start anew. After his friends had urged him not to re tl1m to
the Philippines, he devoted more thought to the plan, and i11 late
March 1892 made a trip to British North Borneo to survey the p ossi-
bilities. He then drew up a plan for the projected colony, h aving writ-
ten to some of his friends in Europe to interest them i11 the idea. 46

44. Ibid., 5:279- 80; 3:29 1-93, 320, 327. It is n ot, h o,veve r, absolutely clear that th e
Alejandrino pro posal e m a n a te d fr o m tl1e Pa rtido Rizali110 of Paez. sin ce l1e dO<"s tlot
m e ntio n a n ewspape r but o nly th at Rizal di rec t a Filipino po licy cot1nte r to tl1at o f De l
Pilar. T h e purpose was, l1owever, clearly the sa1ne , to aba ndo n Sp anisl1 politics in
favo r o f direct acti o n o n tl1e Philippines.
45. RizaJ-Baldo m e ro Roxas, 17 May 1892, O,tt H 1,ndred, 550.
46. Ep. Rizal., 3:267, 268, 286, 288, 294, 342; 5:635, 639. account of tl1e Bon1" 0
At1
n egotia tio n , may be found in Austin Coates, "Ri zal in Sandaka11," Sarawalr J\1usncm
Journal 1O ( 1962): 537-53. T he lette rs on tl1e st1 bject are in Esniios tk Josi l?iz.al, to mo
3, libr o 4, 168-99.
 Rizal's Break with Del Pilar 273

He also ,vrote to Governor-General Despujol offering to rem ove him-

self from the scene since l1is presence in the Philippines te nded to
disturb the country's peace. With this in mind, he asked per1nission
to change his n a tionality and a guarantee of freedom to emigrate for
his friends and relatives who have been deemed harmful to peace in
the Philippines.
Though Despujol did not reply to the letter directly, some time
later he had tl1e Spanish const1l in Hong Kong inform Rizal that he
considered this an unpatriotic project in view of the great need to
47
develop agriculture in the Philippines. Rizal's frequent correspond-
ence during this period with those who advocated separation from
Spain raises the question whether Rizal had more than an agricul-
tural colony in mind, whether he saw the colony as a possible base of
action for future revolutionary activity in the Philippines. 48
Whatever his precise intentions may have been, just as he had pre-
pared an article for La Solidaridad on the proposed colony in Borneo,
a Solidaridad article appeared which was to thrust Rizal back into ac-
tion , and cause him to return to the Philippines, abandoning all plans
for Borneo.
In the 15 April 1892 issue, an article by Lete entitled "Redentores
de perro chico" appeared, a crude satire on "Iluso I," the great pa-
triot of Villailusa, who urges the people to rise against the tyrants and
to procure liberty. To the objection that they lack arms, money, or-

47. Ep. Rizal., 3:305-7.

48. ln a letter to Retana in 1897 Blumentritt declared that Rizal had asked him "to
go wi th m y family to his proposed Tagalog Colony, to found tl1ere a station for eth-
nography, linguistics, and natural history, where he a11d I \vould live far removed from
anything savoring of politics" (Retana, Vida, 230). In a letter to Juan Zulueta o n the
other hand, Rizal speaks of dedicating himself to "preparing for our countrymen a
safe refuge in case of persecution, and to writing som e wo rks of propaganda, ,vl1ich
~;u soon appear" (cited ibid., 367). The "safe refuge" migl1t l1ave i11clltded tl1e idea of
a base for armed revolutionary activity, but there is no proof Lhat it dicl in Rizal's
mind. Antonio Luna, however, did speak of its becoming for tl1e Filipin os ,vl1at Kt·y
\\rest \\las for th e Cubans (l.!,p. Rizal., 3:294), but Rizal's reaction lo tl1is idea is n o t
recorded. It seem s probable tha t his own ideas had n o t fu lly crystallized, at least as to
the immediate ft1ture. Coates' assertio n (553) Ll1at l1e planned tl1e Borneo co lo11y as
pan of a scheme to unite all of th e Malay peoples is t1nsl1pported by evide n ce , as is
his somewhat different version in Rizt1.l: Pltilippine Natiorialist and J\1a,tyr ( }-lo 11g Koi1 g,
1968) 175.
I
 274 Rizal 's Break witli Del Pilar

gan izatio n , he replies with disd ain that n o11e of th ese are necessaf)' to
the tn1e patrio t, but as for himself, "I ougl1t 11ot to figl1t! My life is
sacred and my n1ission of a higher natt1re!" If th ey d o not go forth ,
he proclaims, "I will curse )'Our love for tl1e soil wl1ich gave yot1 birth;
I will call you voluntary slaves; I ,.vill spit i11 your faces and retire to a
solitary wilderness to bewail in deeply-fe lt elegies the misfortunes of
my e nslaved country." Whe11 a few deluded wretcl1es take him at his
word, they end up on the gallo,-vs or in exile, while h e, who h as sh o,vn
his patriotism by orating, sits in solitary grandet1r, proclaiming: "I am
reserved for greater enterprises! I am tl1e o nly prophet, the only one
who loves his country as it sl1ot1ld be loved! "
To anyone who has read the letters and exhortations of Rizal to his
compatriots, the subject of the caricature is evident, even if it is an
unfair caricature. Rizal was stung d eeply by the article in which h e
saw himself attacked, and poured out his indignation and bewilde r-
n1ent in rambling and almost incoherent letters to Del Pilar and Ponce,
vainly trying to probe the rationale behind such an attack. H e con-
cluded in a letter to Del Pilar:

Who knows, however, if after all it may not be a good thi11g; it ,vakes
m e from slumber, and after a long silence I enter once more o n the
campaign. And here I assure you once 1nore: I enter into the cam-
paign, but without taking up arms against you or any Filipino. I am
going to activate the propaganda again, a11d strengthen the Liga.49

Less than a month later Rizal left Hong Kong for the Philippines.
It ,.vas a somewhat different Philippines than that of seven n1 onths
earlier under Weyler. Despujol had in ma11y ways purst1ed a policy
diametrically opposed to Weyler's, one called for so earnestly b~· Rizal
in El Filibusterismo, a policy based on justice, 11ot on prestige. Despuj o l
took pains to impress the differe11ce upo11 the populace at large , both
Spanisl1 and Filipino. Friends and enemies alike agreed tl1at l1e '"'"lS a
man of absolute moral integrity.
Despujol had moved quickly to suspend corrupt officials f1·om of-
fi ce and to pack the m off to tl1e Pe11inst1la by tl1e n ext sl1ip, publi h -
ing in th e Gaceta de Ma,iila the full 1·casons f-01· tl1e c.lctio11. If tl1is di-e,,•

49. l~p. Rizal., 3:338; and Lo Ponce, ibid., 333. Lctc 's explanatio n. v.•ritlen in 1929 to
d eny any intentio11 of attackir1g l{izal, 1nay l)t' fo t1ncJ ibid., 339-t 1.
 Rizal's Brea}( witl1, Del Pilar 275

do\,'n on him the indignation of Spaniards anxious to maintain the

"prestige of the superior race,'' it drew a l1earty response f1·om the
Filipinos as a "''hole. He further spurred popular enthusiasm by ap-
pearing in public with the footmen of his carriage dressed in native
garb, and delivered discourses to the cheering crowds at every oppor-
tunity. He appointed a commission to study n1unicipal organization
so as to propose government reforms in this direction , and encouraged
a relaxation of censorship of t11e press. Known as an ot1tstanding and
fervent Catholic, he nonetheless made it clear that he was in no way
subservient to the religious orders as he was not to anyone else. 50
If Despujol was tl1e idol of the Filipinos, his name was anathema to
most Spaniards in the Philippines, and not a few of high position in
Madrid. Though the appointee of a Conservative government, he was
bitterly attacked by the Consen,ati,,e La Epoca, and defe11ded and
51
lauded by La Solidaridad and not a few republican papers of Madrid.
Before his ordinary term was up, after having refused the resignation
asked of him by the Conservatives, he would eventually be removed
52
from office by the succeeding Liberal government.

50. P. Pablo Pastells-P. Jaime Vigo, 25 Jan 1892, AT; P. Pio Pi-P. Hern1enegildo
,
Jacas, 4 Apr 1892, AT ; Pas tells, Misi6n, 2:464; [Retana], "Filipinas," La tpoca, 28 Apr
1892; Marcelo [Del Pilar]-Tsanay, 14 Apr 1892, EjJ. Pilctr, 2:131. For Despt~ol's O\\'n
expositio11 of his theory of government and the methods he e111ployed, see l1is letter
to tl1e o,·erseas minister, cited in note 53 belov.1 and the interview he granted 011 his
arrival in Barcelona in April 1893, after having been removed summarily from office
bv the Liberal overseas minister, Antonio Maura ("El General Despujol," El 1Voticiero
I

L·nivmal, 10 Apr 1893).

51. Besides tlle a ttacks in La t'poca, mostly anonymous articles of Retana, ,1/ho did
not dare attack openly in La Politica de Espana en Filipinas, because of the previot1sly
latidatory articles he l1ad publish ed tl1ere 011 Despujol 's appointment, tl1ere v,ras also
the satirical fortnightly El Diablillo Suelto, published i11 Madrid by M. Walls y Merino
,,i th almost the sole object of attacking Despujol. The same man also published tl1e
pamphlet El general Despujol en Filipinas (Madrid: L. Minon, 1892). On tl1e otl1er side,
Oespujol was just as bitterly attacked by the democratic and repu blican papers t,'/
/Jemocrata, El Gwbo, El IJiberal, a ll of Madrid, while being defended by Morayta i11 La
Publiadad, and by /Ja Solidaritlad. Ironically enough, a \Veek after Despujol's deporta-
non of Rizal , but befo re it was known in the Pen instila, La P1.1blicidad published a
~Protesta de la Asociacion Hispano-Filipina," signed by Del Pilar a11d Letc, defe 11 ding
Oe-;pl!jol against El Dern6crata 's accusations.
52. The expedientf' personal of Despttjol (Al-I N, LTltramar, leg. 5288, exJl. 46) co nulins
an exchange of telegrams benvee n the overseas 1ninister ancl Ocspttjol. extendiilg ovt'r
276 Rizal's Break with Del Pilar

Meanwhile, the enthusiasm of the Filipinos for Despujol was at its

l1eight. Rizal had first written to him shortly after his arrival in Hong
Kong in December 1891. Encouraged by Despujol 's invitation to all
Filipinos to cooperate for the good of the country and his promise to
base his policy on justice, Rizal offered his own services to Despujol
for these ends. Just at this moment, however, the first copies of El
Filibusterismo arrived in the Philippines. The book caused Despujol to
have serious reservations about Rizal's offer. He refused to reply. Rizal 's
second letter in March, asking that since he was considered a threat
to the country's peace, he be allowed to go with his family and friends
to settle in Borneo, was answered indirectly. Now Rizal wrote a third
letter on 21 June 1892, announcing his return to Manila against the
advice of his friends and relatives. He was relying on Despujol's re-
puted sense of justice, and wished to take upon himself the conse-
quences of the charge for which his family and friends had been
53
persecuted in the past, and thus restore peace to the innocent.
On 26 June, he arrived in Manila, registered in a hotel, and sought
an interview with the governor-general. Despujol received him briefly,
granting him the pardon of his father and of his sister Lucia, who
had accompanied him from Hong Kong. The following day Rizal ,vas
granted another interview and later a further one, but Despujol would

some weeks, in which the former tried to get Despujol to resign, and he refused to do
so, attributing the charges against him to calum11y by those ,-vhom he had remo,•ed
from office for malfeasance, as they probably were. He ,-vas finall)' summarily disrnissed
in late Febuary 1893. Such was the fate of one of the few governors of the last three
decades of the Spanish regime who was indispt1tably honest as ,-vell as appreciati,,e of
Filipino aspirations within the framework of continued Spanish n1le. His term of of-
fice and his ideals of government deserve more attention than they have received , due
to his responsibility for the deportation of Rizal.
53. Ep. Rizal., 3:270-71 , 305-7, 348-49. AHN, Ultramar, leg. 2308, exp. 11 . O f th e
same time are two letters which he left behind to be published after his d eath. tlie
one to his parents, family, and friends, the o ther addressed "A los Filipinos.,., 111 bo th
of them he makes clear that h e knows he is risking his life in rcturr1ing to tJie Philip-
pines, but feels that it is his duty to do so wt1en so many have had to suffer for liis
sake. Though he wo uld be ready to take agai11 tl1e same course tie has take 11 , cor, sid-
ering that h e has only d o ne his duty, even tl1ough he should kno\'\' it ,vouJd bring so
much suffering on l1is relatives and friends. ye t he feels obliged to d o ,-vhat he can to
take that persecution o n himself, happy if by his death others ma~• be freed . (A mi
queridos padres, hennanos y amigos, Ep. Rizal,, 3:305-7; A los Filipinos, ibid., 34S--49. )
 Rizal's Break witli Del Pilar 277

not pardon the other Calambenos who were in hiding under sen-
tence of deportation until they surrendered themselves.
Rizal j ourn eyed through the nearby provinces along the new rail-
road, making numerous contacts with those active in supporting the
movement, largely in the company of Serrano. 54 On 3 July he met
with a large number of these men in the house of a Chinese mestizo
named Ong:junco in Manila. Here was formally organized the Liga
Filipina, a society that e mbodied the ideals Rizal had set forth in El
Filibusterismo and his letters of the last few years. 55 He had already had
the society in mind at the end of 1891, and seems to have drawn up
the statutes and sent them to friends in Manila, apparently with the
intention of having them set up the organization themselves. 56 It ap-
pears, however that there was no real organization before Rizal ar-
rived. The purposes laid down for the Liga were as follows:

1. The unification of the whole Archipelago into a compact, vigor-

ous, and homogeneous body.
2. Mutual protection in every want and necessity.
3. Defense against all violence and injustice.
4. Promotion of instruction, agriculture, and business.
5. The study and application of reforms.

Organized as a secret society, it demanded blind obedience of its

members, who obliged themselves to give preference to fellow-mem-
bers in buying and selling, to come to the aid of any member in

54. Letter of Despujol to the overseas minister, 14 Nov 1892, and "Expediente
reservada instruido en Manila a consecuen cia de propagandas anti-patri6ticas y
anti-religiosas realizadas por el Dr. Rizal y sus adeptos. 1892," both in AHN, Ultramar,
leg. 2308, exp. 11. The other d eportees were later pardoned by Despujol after their
surrender and Rizal's d eportation (Ep. Rizal., 4:24, 41).
55. The principal basis for accounts of the Liga are the declarations made by Moises
Salvador, Domingo Franco, Jose Reyes, and others in 1896, and reproduced among
the ..Documentos politicos de la actualidad" in Retana, Archivo, vol. 3. However, as has
been remarked previously, these declarations were extracted generally under pressure
of barbaric tortures, and must be used with care.
•• 56. Ep, Rizal., 3:286, 296, 332. Retana, Arcliivo, 3: 290-93, 4:407. Timoteo Paez later
assened that Rizal had replaced the Partido Rizalino by the Liga (Felipe Buencarnino,
• "Sixty Years of Philippine History," 16) .
278 R izal's Break iuith Del Pilar

need , 11ot to submit to any humiliation, nor to treat any other so as to

humiliate him. To each meeting of tl1e local council, each was to
b1·ing "some work, some observation, a stt1dy, or a new member"; and
each was assessed a small sum as monthly dues. The members were to
be organized into popular councils which elected their own officers.
The heads of these local cot1ncils formed a provincial council and the
heads of these in turn formed the Supreme Council. The funds col-
lected by the organization were to be used for such ends as the sup-
port of a member or his son who showed great aptitudes, but lacked
the means to educate himself; to give aid to those who had suffered
misfortune, or to defend their rights against the powerft1l; to grant
loans to members who needed capital for industry or agriculture; to
favor the introduction of machines, and of new or necessary i11dus-
tries into the country; to open stores where the members could buy
57
more cheaply.
Rizal has here provided a concrete articulation of the course pointed
out by Father Florentino to the dying Simoun in El Filibusterismo. There
is no thought of a violent overthrow of the Spanish regime; rather
Rizal proposes a means to achieve the national community that he
deemed a prerequisite to any attempt at independence. Since the Span-
ish regime of cht1rch and state seemed incapable of providing the
education, the economic progress, the personal security and safeguard-
ing of rights that a nation owes its citizens, he proposed the forma-
tion of a competitive and substitutive community to fulfill those
functions, which would aid the necessary growth to enable a Filipino
national community to come to maturity and supplant the existing
. 58
regime.
This attempt to give his lofty national ideals concrete organizational
form is perhaps Rizal's best answer to Del Pilar's scoffing remai·k on
the man "formed in libraries." Its attention to the economic aspect is
notable, co·nsidering the milieu in whicl1 it was conceived, and e 111 _
bodies many of the principles of modern cooperatives. Howe,,er,
whether applying cooperative economic and social principles witl1in
the structure of a rather higl1ly authoritarian secret societ)1 operating

57. Statutes are reproduced in Retana, Vida, 236-41 .

58. Sec the deve lopment of tl1 cse ideas in Cesar 1\dib Majul, A Critiqzu of Rizal 's
Coricept of a Filipino Nation ( [Qt1ezo11 City] , 1959) .
 Rizctl :\· Brrrtl< 1,1itll Dr/ Pilar 279

tir1 der a basically h os tile gove rnment woLtlcl have been st1ccessft1I is
•
open to questio11. For it is 11ot clear ,-vl1e th er Rizal inte11ded to stay in
59
the Philippines. Bt1t ,-vitl1out l1im th e Liga would withe r a,,,a)'· Its
•
su ccess depended o n kee pi11g alive st1-ong nationalist sentime n ts. Ri zal
could perhaps have st1stained such se11time11ts among large sec tions
of l1is countryme n , but l1e could not have done so fo1- 1011g t1nde1- th e
already su spicious eye of a colonial go,,ernm e11t, ho,vever be11e,1o le nt
tl1e governor-general.
In fact, Rizal 's plans were not to be put to tl1e test. For all his se11se
of justice and sympath)' with Filipino aspiratio11s, Des1Jujol had all owecl
Rizal i11to the Philippines "''ith great sus1Jicio11, tl1ougl1 dete rmin ed
60
not to take hostile m easu1-es t1nless pro,,oked. Tl1is pro,,ocatio11 ap-
peared upon the discovery of some handbills en titled "Pobres Frail es,"
emphasizing the wealtl1 of the Philippine Don1i11icans a11d satirizi11g
•

the readiness of the Filipinos to contribt1te to tl1e i11crease of tl1e

"''ealth of the friars. More serious in Desptuol 's view were tl1e satiric
I
•, remarks about the wealth of the papacy and its use by Leo XIII, ivl1ich
I
• he considered an attack on Catl1olicism and thus 011 tl1e Spanish re-
61
t gime itself. These l1a ndbills had been discovered in the baggage of
•
•
Rizal 's sister by tl1e customs officials, but Desp1uol l1ad said 11otl1ing
I

••
• to Rizal to see if he would ft1rther compromise l1imself a11d, tl1rot1gl1

I
59. There is no certain t}' that Rizal had renounced tl1 e Borneo pl a11; ra tl1 e r, son1 e
of those \vith whom Riza l ,.vas in contact during his first ,veek i11 tl1 e Pl1ilippines, later
• declared on qt1estion ing that l1e had been collecting funds for th e colony to be fot1ndecl
• in Borneo. See th e expediente cited i11 n ote 54 .
60. See h is lengthy detaili11g of l1is reactio ns to Rizal's pla11 of co1ni11g to tl1e Pl1il-
ippines, and th e plans l1e made o n fi11di11g tl1at Ri zal was actually on l1is ,va~·. in tl1 e
•
lette r cited in note 54 above. Among these precat1tions ,vas dirccti 11g tl1 e co11st1l to
ascertain wh e tl1e r it \ 1/as true or n ot that. Rizal h ad alread y cl1an gecl l1is 11ation,tlity.
•
61. Bo th in his letter to th e overseas mir1iste r and i11 tl1e decree or dcpt1rL.'l tio11, as
it appear ed in th e offi cial Gacela de Man.ila, 7 July 1892. Despt~jo l e 11111l1asizcct this
• point as the principal one, not the attacks 0 11 tl1e friars. Tl1 c l1a11dbill spoke- of tlic-
pope as h avi ng los t fourteen millio n througl1 bad aclmi11istratio n of I l1 e carrlir1als. a 11 d
• alluded sar castically to l1is havi11 g given a ni ece a palace a11cl ~00.00() fra n cs fo r ll<'r
marriage. To the comanda11te of Dapitan, Ricardo Car11icc-ro, Rizal late r claimer! u1at
he had not composed tl,is har1d t)ill, but wl1e n its at1tl1 o r l1aci bro t1gl11 l1in1 l11 t· rt) tt g h
draft, "la corregio. atimentan<lo algu nas r)a labras·· ((~ar11iccr<>-l) espt!j(>I. '.\() :\ti ~ 1H~)2,
l:p. Ri.utl., 4:34).
~80 Rizal's Brea/<, ,villi Del Pilar

his contacts, to find out tl1e extent and nature of reformist and/ or
62
st1bversive activities in the countI)'.
A close watch was kept on Rizal 's movements. After leaving him at
liberty for some days, Despujol confronted him v\rith the evidence in a
third interview on 6 July. He was placed under arrest, and simultane-
ously, as pre-a1·ranged, the ho1nes of dozens of men in the surround-
ing provinces, known to be in contact with Rizal or active propagandists
of the reform movement, were searched. The follo,.ving day Rizal was
deported to Dapitan in Mindanao. Afte1· the evidence obtained in the
searches was collated and sifted, several active nationalists from the
various provinces su1·rounding Manila were deported to other parts of
the Isla11ds, including Doroteo Cortes, Mariano Alejandrino, and
Ambrosio Salvador. Otl1e1·s who l1eld government posts, such as
63
Serrano, were deprived of them. Rizal would remain in Dapitan un-
til 1896, cut off from almost all contact with those still active in the
nationalist moveme11t and devoting himself to agricultu1·e, teaching,
and philological studies. The field was now left entirely to Del Pilar.

62. Rizal denied any kno,vledge of the handbills, and later told Carnicero that he
did 11ot believe his sister l1ad been so foolish as to bring them either, but that the)·
must h ave been placed there in Manila, since nu1nbers of tl1em l1ad been sent there
from Hong Kong a fe,v days pre,riously (ibid. , 28-29) . A note in Palma (246) says that
"la opinion filipina" attributed tl1is to the friars, for a nephe,v of Archbishop Nozaleda
l1ad been the customs officer wl10 inspected tl1e baggage. Since there is no further
proof of this assertion, it must be classed ,vith the rumors of tl1at t)rpe ,,•hicl1 ,\'ere so
common at the time.
63. See the expediente cited in note 54 above.

•
•
I
•.
••
 CHAPTER 13

Decline and Death of ''La Solidaridad ''

Ri zal ' s break ,-vi tl1 La Solida1·idad in Ja11 uary 1891 mark ecl a
turning po int i11 the fortun es of the Filipino newspaper. Tl1ougl1 al-
most five )'ears of life still re1nainecl to it, these years were to l)e a
period of stead )' d ecline from tl1e high point of 1889-90, culn1in atin g
in a lo ng dra\-\111-out d eatl1 agony. However, it was not immecliate l)'
apparent tha t such was th e situation. Indeed , the staff of the pape r
appeared to h ave bee n in some wa)'S stre11gtl1e11ed, eve11 tl1ottgl1 it 11 0
lon ger J)Ossessed a ,vrite r of the statt1re of Ri zal. In September 1890
Anto nio Lu11a l1ad receive d an official place on th e staff at cl small
1
salary Sl1ortl)' afterwarcl Mariano Ponce had finall y left Barcelona for
1•

Madrid, ,vh e re l1e not only took over the busi11ess manageme11t of Ll1e
2
pa pe r, but bega11 to write witl1 greater regularity. Once Rizal l1c1d
d e parted, Eduardo de Lete joined tl1e Filipino journalists for tl1 e first
time si11ce l1e had been excluded as the editor of La Soliclarirlad i11
1888. 3 Dominador G61nez too continued to contribtite articles from
time to tim e, a11d others ,vrote occasional pieces, in clucling Jose
Alejandrino and Gregorio Aguilera. All of tl1ese articles, 110,ve,,er,

------- --- -
1. Ltina had already been ,vriting ,vitl1 so1ne regt1la rity, l)ut received a regular sala-
ried position o nly at th is time (Ep. Rizal.. 3:36, 227 ).
2. Ep. Pilar, l :230, i4 l. Ponce's articles b egan to a ppear ,vith som e freqtie 11 cy fro in
earlv 1891, tinder tl1e pse udo n )'ITlS "Nan in g,'' "Kalipulako ,'' and "Tigb ala 11 g. •·
3. Lete 's first article app eared in the r1umbe r of 3 1 J an 189 1, Lhollgl1 Ile di d not
\\-Tite regularly till May. J--I e was living ,vil.h Del Pilar and Ponce at L11is t.iine .

281
282 /Jpc/i11f an(! Deat/1 of "l.,a .Solirlarida.d "

a ppea red under psettdOn)rmS, ,,vith the e xceptio n of th ose of Lete a nd

4
Del Pil ar. Most pro lifi c after Del Pilar himself was tJ1e Au stria n frie nd
of tl1e Fili p inos, Ferdinand Blume n tritt. Displayi ng his broad e rudi-
ti o n i11 history, e tJ1nolOg)', pl1ilology, and colonial theory and prac-
tice, his regula1~series of articles were biting attacks o n the anti-Filipino
,vritings of su ch a ntago11ists as We n ceslao Re tan a, Quioquiap (Pablo
Feced ), and Fathe r Salvador Font.
Th e o pposition had , 11ov.1ever, itself grown in statt1re a11d o rga niza-
tion . 111 1890 Reta11a, who had combatted La Solidaridad in the col-
umns of Ma nila 11ewspapers, re turned to Madrid ,vhere h e publish ed
11is four Folletos Filipinos, attacking tl1e Propagandists a nd d efe nding
the cause of th e fria rs. Early in 1891 , together with Jose and Pa blo
Feced , he founded La Politica de Espana en FilijJinas, a fortnightly pa-
~

pe r aimed at counteracting La Solidaridad.:1 Wh e ther or not Del Pilar

,vas correct in believing tha t tl1e pape r '"'as subsidized by the Aug,.1s-
ti11ia n Procura tor in Maclrid , Fatl1 e r Font, it v.1as, as was natural ,
,veil-pa tro nized by the friars, '"'ho at least appear to l1ave been one of
6
its chi ef sources of infor1natio n. As far as compete n ce a11d literary
q uali t) were co nce rn ed , it sh o,ved itself a formidable antagonist ,
1

th ough its actt1al inflt1e nce is as diffict1lt to de termine as is that of La

4. Gomez used tl1 e pseud onyms ''Marte" a11d "Ra1n iro Franco"; ar ticles evidently
con1i11g fro1n Alejanclrino ap pear tinder th e 11ame "Al~jand ro Maranl1al"; and th ere is
one by Agi.1 ilera using tl1e pse udo nym "l(ikil." Besides writi11 g unde r his o,-vn name ,
Le te at Limes used "Edilberto de Lepore I," particularly whe11 publishing mo re than
one article in tl1e same 11u1nber.
5. Tl1e Ni11nero prospeclo is dated 20 J an I 89 1. Retana in later years clai med tha t th e
paper l1ad bee11 found ed o n his initiative, though J ose Feced was the edito r (Aparato
bibliogrcif ico, 3: 1202, 110. 3054). Most of the actt1al ,-vriting see ms to have bee n d o ne by
Pablo Feced an d Retana. After La Solidaridad ceased publicatio n at the end of 1895
tl1e Feceds retired from th e paper, and Retana ,vas so le ed itor fro n1 1896 to 1898.
Du ri ng tl1is perio d he published a number of his historical an d bibliogra phical \.\'Orks
here.
6. Ep. Pilar, 2: 13 1. Retana later told th e Filipino historian Clemente J . Zulue ta tl1 at
he l1ad "fo ught in fa,·o r of the friars because they paid l1im, by means o f purchasu1g
h is books and su bscribing to his newspa per" (Letter in Spanish , Zul ueta:James A. Le
Roy, 26 Apr 1904, in J ames A. Robertson Collection, Manuscript Divisio11. Duke LTn i-
versity Library, Durham, No rtl1 Carolina: X-F, Letters, 1902). See n1y d iscussio n o f th e
poin t in "Wenceslao E. Reta11a: An 1-Iistoriographical Essay," Pltil1j>pineStudif's 10 ( 1962) :
571-72.
 Decline and Dealfi of "La Solida1idad " 283
~

Solidaridad.' It certainly provided frequent occupation for th e latter in

answering its attacks, and a ne\\, section entitled "Picadillo" was soon
added to La Solidaridad for tl1is purpose.

Growing Financial Difficulties

The effe cts of the rift bet\.vee11 Rizal a11d Del Pilar ,vere no t lo ng i11
making tl1emselves felt, pa1-tict1larly because of tl1 e reperct1ssio11s ir1
the Comite de Propaganda in Manila. Betwee11 July and O ctobe r 189 1,
when Rizal sailed for Hong Kong, Del Pilar made repeated efforts to
get him to ,mte once more, apparently u11der presst1re from tl1 e Co1n-
mittee.8 When both these efforts and tl1ose of tl1e Com1nittee itself
failed , the partisans of Rizal attempted to "vitl1draw funds from Del
9
Pilar to use them to back Rizal in a new journalistic venture. Tl1ougl1
the attempt did not succeed, la1-gely due to the un,.villing11ess of Ri zal
to lend himself to anything whicl1 wot1ld disunite the Filipi11os, it must
have had its effect on future contributions.
Moreover, besides those who withdrew st1pport because tl1ey 110
longer believed in the efficacy of the Madrid campaign after what
had happened in Calamba, and those ,.vho resented the treatme nt of
Rizal by the Pilaristas, the organization of Masonry in Manila in ea1-ly
1892 also caused a slackening of support fo1· the Madrid ca1npaig11
10
for a time. The results of all this may be see11 i11 the a11guished
letters of Del Pilar to his wife during 1892, begging her to get his
relatives to raise money for his return to the Philippines. Even if it
should mean his deportation, he wrote, that would be better than
living without food in Spain, and having to collect cigarette butts to
11
be able to smoke.
Antonio Luna, meanwhile, had quit 'the paper in October 1891 ,
partly over resentment with Del Pilar, whom lie accused of exploiting

7. An article e ntitled "Las Islas Filipinas" in th e Madrid republica11 paper L<i ju.sticia,
23 July J893, though written from a point of view frie11dly to l Ja Solidaridad, said:
"Both of these papers are hardly read at all in the Peninsttla."
8. Ep. Pilar, 1:247, 251, 254. Ep. Rizal., 3: 178-79, 210-11.
9 . Ibid., 255-59, 279, 293, 320; 01ze H un,<lred, 550. See cl1apter 12 abo\'e.
10. Kalaw. PJiilippine Masoriry, 59, citing a n unpt1blisl1ed le ttc-r of Deodato 1\rellai1 0
to Del Pilar, 24 _Jun e 1892.
11 . Ep. Pilar, 2:137-38; cf. also 128, 129, 13 1, 135, t'tc.
284 DPrlir1e a 11.d [)pat,li of "l~rl ~Sr>lidaridnd ''

l1i1n , pa1-tly l)ecat1se of l1is p e rso11al sympath)' wi tJ1 Ri zal, "1nd his ideas
12
011 l10,v tl1 e campaign sl1 ot1ld be conducted. Lo pez _Jaena had be-
g1111 to ,,vrite for La Solida·ridcicl again on his re tt1rn to Europe in Au-
gt1st 189 1 011 pro1nise of a pensio n f1-om the Ma11ila Committee. BL1t
,vl1 en tl1e pe nsio11 was 11ot forthcoming i11 Noven1ber, h e gave tip in
disgt1st. Afte1- writing a few m o re articles in April-:Jt1ne 1892, h e se,'-
13
e red all ft1rtl1e1- co1111ections with tl1e Filipino cam paig11.
111 additi o11 to dwi11clli11g support, botl1 fina11cial and pe1-sonal, / ,,rt
Solidaridad had to cot111t '1\rith increasing difficulties in gainin g e ntra n ce
i11 to tl1e Pl1ilippines. In tl1e latter pa rt of 1891 Governor-Gen eral
\ Ne)1le r l1acl in te 11sifi ed gover11n1en t ,rigilance to 1Jre,1e n t its circt1la-
tio11. E,,e11 tl1e stratagem of i11troduci11g the })aJ)e r t111de1- tl1e seal of
1
tl1 e O,,erseas Mi11istry failed to escape tl1is survei lla11 ce. -1 Like"vise the
syste n1 of smuggling it in 011 ships fro1n H o11g l(ong thro t1gh passen-
gers a11d crew broke do,1/11 ,-vh en the couriers a11d ft1nds to pay them
15
,vere lacki11g. These obstacles to its circulation 11a turally in creased
still ft1rtl1er tl1e fi11a11cial distress of tl1 e p ap e r.
Stt111g b)' reports tl1at l1e ,vas bei11g bla1ned for cutting off the funds
from La Solidaridad, Rizal t1sed his influence in Filipino Maso11ry vvhen
l1e 1-e rt1rned to Ma11ila in Ju11e 1892 to co1nmit tl1e lodges tl1e 1·e to a
16
1)1-og ram of st1pport for tl1e Madi-id campaign . Tl1e n ew syste m , h o,v-
e,,e r, did not survi,,e the depo1-tatio11 of Rizal in Jul)', a nd tl1a t of st1cl1
leadi11g activists as Doroteo Cortes, Amb1·osio Sal,1ador, and Nl a1·ia 110
Alejandrino i11 Septe1nber. Fea r spread among the o tl1ers, as Desptu o l
l1ad i11te11ded in orderi11g tl1ese deportatio11s, a11d Masonic acti,,ities
were s0011 suspended, a suspensio11 wl1ich seen1s to l1a,,e b ee11 quite
ge11eral t1ntil Despujol was relie,,ed of office at the e11d of Febrt1a n ·
I...1 .
1893. Sl1ortly thereafter, ho,1/ever, Mason1-y itself was 1-e nt by inter-
nal di sse nsion s, chiefl)' directe d agai11st tl1 e l1 ege n1 o n )' of the

12. tJJ. Rizal., 3:240, 254, 226-27.

13. Ib id. , 220, 278-79. Some of these artic les ,ve r e publisl1e d tinder the pset1don\'m
•
"Nicolas San Pascual.,.
14. AI-IN, Ultramar, leg. 5289, exp. 9: "El Gobernador ge11eral d e Filipi11a da c u e11ta
de h abe r i11tercep tado cartes dirigidas a p e rson as d e a11tecedentes sospecl1osos.'' S<·e
als<> Retana, Ma ri.do del General We\!ler, 3~}7-98.
-
15. 1:p. Pilar, 1:257.
16. i!-JJ. Rizal., 3:334; Kala,\'. PhilipfJine 1\·l<LSoriry, 59.
17. Le tte r of Oespujo l to the ove rseas n1i11ister, 14 Ne)\' 1892, ir1 AJ-f N, Ultramar.
leg. 23()8, exp. 11 . Also Kala¼', Philij1pine ~1aso111)', 11 2- 14.
 Decline and Death of "L a Solidaridad " 285

•
!
Moth e r-Lo d ge "Nil ad ," h eaded by P ed1-o Se rran o La ktavv. Wh en
f Serrano was accused of misuse of the funds destined fo r tl1 e wo rk of
the Propaganda, the co n tributio ns made by the lo dges througl1 "Nilad"
were disconti nued.18
Meanwhile, h owe,rer, in April 1893 a number of the original membe rs
of the Liga Filipina, inactive since the depo rtation of Rizal, decided to
reconstitute the organization unde r the presidency of Domingo Franco.
To th e o rigin al purposes of the Liga th ey now added tha t of

supporting La Solidaridad an d ,,vorking fo r th e reforms it ,-vas seeking;

a11d gathe rin g fu n d s fo r th e expenses 11ot o nly of tl1e paper, but also of
the meetings l1eld in Spain to support tl1ese reforms publicly, a11d of
the d ep u ties ,vl1 0 wo uld defen d th em in tl1e Cortes. 19

It ,vas not lo n g, h owever, befo re tl1 e leaders of tl1e Liga fot111d that
most of tl1e p o pula r councils, largely organized by Andres Bo11ifacio,
were con vin ced of the uselessness of the legal campaig11, and ,-ve re
rath e r thinking in te rms of revoluti on . They ,,vere, tl1erefore, unwill-
ing to continue to contribute to the Madrid campaign . Alarmed at
the p ossi bili t:y tha t the followe rs of Bo nifacio migl1 t gain co11 tro l of
the Liga in a p o pular electio n , and fea1-ful that tl1e dissiden ce wi th i11
th e 01-ganizatio n might bring it to the n o tice of Spanish authorities,
20
th e lead e1-s dissolved it in O ctober 1893.
Once m o r e Mason ry becan1e the principal ,,ehicle fo r the collec-
tio n of funds whe n the Gra nd Regional Council of tl1e Pl1ilippines
resolved early in 1894 to undertake bo th tl1e collection of ft1nds and
the distributio n of such copies of L a Solidaridad as migl1t be smuggled
in.21 But the r espite given to Masonry by the relief of Despujol did
no t last. His su ccessor, Gen e ral Ramon Blanco, at first showed him-
self quite tole ra nt of Masonry, but under pressure from Madrid h e
began a severe r epressive campaign in the latter part of 1894, so tha t

18. Kalaw, Philippine tvlasonry, 59-68, Ep. Pilar, 1:265; "Documentos politicos <le la
actualidad," in Retana, Archivo del bibli6filo filipino, 3:244-45, 274-75.
19. Mabini, La Revoluci6n Filipina, 2:297. Mabini, secrel.al')' of the restored Liga,
admits tJ1 at sin ce he h ad not bee n a mem be r of the origina l Liga of Rizal, h e could
not compare th e finality of th e second wi th the first. But from l1is descrip tio 11, th e
restored Liga woul d seem to have lar gely con fi n ed itself to tl1e p urposes m e ntioned j 11
th e text, functions which Rizal had en trusted to Masonry in J u n e 1892.
20. Ibid., 298; Reta na, Archivo, 3:227-31 .
2 1. Kalaw, Philip-pine Mason ,y, 114-15.
~86 Derline a11d Deal Ii <if "[_,rt S'o/idarirl.ad "

111ost of th e lod ges gradual}), ceased to m ee t. Conseqt1e11tly th e r e1nit-

~•>
tances of fu11ds to Del Pila r agai11 became more a nd 1nore irregt.1lar. -
T o re1nedy tl1is situation, aggra,,ated by the rapicll)' 1·ising discount
i11 tl1e Pe11insula on bills of excl1a11ge fro1n the Pl1ilippines, new ef-
fo rts were made to organize finan cial support. In At1gust 1894,
Apoli11ario Mabini, former secretary of the reconstituted Liga and Del
Pilar's regt1lar correspondent in Ma11ila, wrote him that a number of
l1is supporters l1ad decided to constitute a Cue1·po de Compromisarios
23
of fifty members, eacl1 pledged to co11tribt1te five p esos montl1ly.
Tl1ot1gh this group, t111der tl1e presidency of Numeriano Adria110, n ever
seems to ha,,e succeeded in getti11g tl1e p1·ojected nu1nber of con-
tributors, fu11ds from otl1er sources, like,,vise passing tl1rot1gl1 tl1e l1ands
2
of Mabi11i, supplemented tl1e remitta11ces of the Compromisarios. -t
At least till late i11 1894 it seems to have been possible to raise extra
fu11ds for an extraordinary occasion, as when Mabini sent two bills of
exchange f1·om the Comp1·omisarios, together with two others from
Maso11ic lodges, tl1e latter three of these bei11g in tended for a ban-
qtiet l1onoring the Spanisl1 deputy Emilio Jt111oy, who was to present
25
to the Cortes petitions for Filipino representation in that body.

F11rther Defections

Accompa11yi11g tl1ese financial vicissitudes were other difficulties

witl1in La Solidaridad itself. As time ,ve11t on tl1e staff was gradt1ally

22. Blanco was frequ e ntly u11de r attack by tl1e religious o rders for his "a patll),,.
toivard the growth of Masonry, and acct1sed of bei11g a Mason hin1self. De fe nding
l1i1nself before the Senate in 1897, he told of l1 avi11g sent o t1t a confidential circular as
early as September 1894, and claimed tl1at before tl1e o tttbreak of the Re,•olutio n in
August 1896 he hacl already de p o rte d 1042 persons as be ing "tvl aso ns, disaffectt"d ,
suspicious, o r }1armful to tl1 e ir toiv11s" (J\lle111oria que al Se11ado di ,,ge el C¥tt11ernl Blanco
acerca de las itlti,nos s·ucesos oc·urriclos en la Isla de Luzo1t [Madrid. 1897], 8-9. 20 ) . See
also Kalalv, PltiliJ;pi,ne Nlasonry, 11 5-1 8, and Mabini, Carias, 34.
23. Mabir1i, Cartas, 15, 17. 20. By Noven1ber 1894 tl1e ra te of discot111t w.1s 50 per-
ce11t (ibid .. 28) .
24. TJ1 e Compro rnisarios · re milta11 ccs of ll1 e succeeding 1no 11tt1s ;1re a l\\"J}'S fo r l 00
pesos. Since i11 t1is late r acco ttnt of tl1 c eve n ts lcadi11g tip to the.· Revolutio 11, t\.-labi n i
sp eaks of a m o nthly quo ta of live pesos ( J{n ,oluri,111 Filif,.itia 2:298) . it ,vould see m that
tl1 c numbe r of Compromisarios m ~1y l1 avc bee11 0 11ly t,ve nt)' ra the r tha n fifty.
25. l\.fa bini , Cart{it, 15. 24·, 26, ~3.
 Decli·n.l' a·rid Death o_f "Lr1 ,~olidaridad" 287

reclucecl to merel)' Del Pilar a11d Po n ce. Le te's colla borati o n , alrecld)1
sporaclic in 1892, cam e to a l1alt i11 early 1893. 26 Mo re a11d 1nore f-re-
q u e n tly tl1e p a per rep rinted confe re n ces, histo1ical d ocL1me11ts, pa1n-
phlets, e,,e n ,vh o le books. Th ese ,ve1·e fo r th e 1nost pa rt 1·ela ted i11 a
ge11eral ¼ 1ay to Filipino interests, bL1t tl1e i11creasing proportio11 of space
they occupied indi cated tl1e lack of sL1bsta11tial origin al arti cles 1no re
directly p e rtine nt to the purposes of tl1e p ape r.27
Pon ce carried o n his researcl1es into Pl1ilippi11e l1istory ,vitl1 liis
"Efe m e rides Filipinas," recordin g 11otable l1isto rical eve11 ts fo r each
two-vveek p e rio d , a nd l1is "Cro no logia de los Mi11istros de Ultra1nar,"
but tl1ese were little m o re tl1an cl1ro nicles of facts \\1ith little of th e
'
na ti o n alist fe n 1o r a nd less of the b1-oad e rt1ditio11 of Ri zal 's l1isto rical
,vritings. Del Pilar co11tinued l1is m o1·e topical a r ticles, l)ut for tl1e
m ost pa rt he had disct1ssed the pri11cipal issues ma11y times before,
a nd it was ofte n difficult to say anythi11g ,,e ry 11ew 011 tl1em . Not o nly
was La Solidaridad losing wh a tever intri11sic inte1·est it may l1ave l1ad
for Spanish p o liticians, but it l1ad less effecti,,en ess too as an instrt1-
me n t of indoctrination witl1in the Philippi11es.
Most symbolic of La Solidaridad's decline , apa rt from its int1·i11sic
i111portance, ¼'as the defection of its founde r a nd first editor, Lo pez
Jae11a . Fro1n a g rowing disinterest and estra11gen1 e11t he now moved
to ope n a ttack on his fo1-mer colleagues. F1·om the begi1111ing the other
Filipinos had l1ad to lament his undepe11dability. As early as jL1ly 1889,
,vhile still nominally edito1·, h e h ad already proposed to lea,,e Spai11
28
for Ame rica . Tl1ough this ¼'as appare nt!)' d ela)1ed for a tin1e by hopes
of obtaining funds from a 1·elative to co11tint1e l1is stt1dies and b)' l1is
involveme nt in poli tical activities of the Rept1blican Progresistas i11
Ba rcelona, th e following Ju11 e the Filipi11os we1·e collecti11g contribL1-
tio ns to h elp him to go to Cuba, and the ove1·seas mi11istf)1 l1ad co11-
ced ed him free passage. In spi te of Rizal's exl1ortatio n to go ratl1e r to

26. O ne furtl1e r a r ticle a p pea red in Fe b rtLa t}' 1894. lt is, of course, pc>ssilJlc tl1a1
Lete may }1 ave co 11 tribt1ted o tl1 e r t111signed a r tic les, ll1 ot1g l1 1!1 c rc is 110 a1JJJare11t rea-
son '"'hy t1e sliou ld l1ave stopped sig11ir1g l1is 11a1n e or usin g l1is t1st1 al pset1do 11yn1 at
this poi n t.
27. Sucl, for example '"'ere tl1e "Me m oria l" o f Arcl1l)isl1orJ Sa11cl10 d e Santa j t1s t;1 tc)
King C l1arles III agai11st tl1e re ligiot1s o rders. tl1e l)oo k of l'eclrc) P,ttcrtlf>. /:'/ (:ristio,iisn10
ni la antig•11a rivilizririon 'J'rigiilog, ancl Blt1111e11tritt 's .Dirriunario 111itnloK,ro rlf J-1lipi11rL~.
28. Le tter of Graciano Lopez to ~ligt1e l l\,Jc>rayta, 2 .J uly 18H~l. i.11 :\ON, le~. 6~C), t'X l).
14a.
288 Decline and Deatli of· "La Solidaridad"

th e Philippin es a11d let himself be kill ed as a m artyr to his ideas, l1e

pe rsisted in l1is pl a ns to go to Cuba, wh er e he pro mised to "d o every-
29
thi11g in l1is power for the good of o t1r countf)'." Non e theless, fo r
so me reason notl1ing furtl1er cam e of the p1·op osed e migration , pe r-
h aps because tl1e fall of Ma nuel Becerra from th e ove rseas ministry
caused the witl1drawal of th e f1·ee p assage. H e continued to o ccupy a
pro minent place in rept1blica11 circles i11 Barcelona, a11d was freque ntly
on e of tl1eir banque t ora to rs, while writi11g occasio n al articles fo r the
Ba rcelona re publican pape1· La Pitblicidad and pe rl1aps also for El Pais
of Madrid . Be nveen these sp oradi c activiti es a nd the ch arity of his
fello,v-Filipinos l1 e eked ou t a livi11g in Barcelona, but was ,vh olly in-
30
volved in Spanish politics rathe r tha11 Filipino affairs.
In spite of this, the Comite de Propaga nda offe red him a monthly
pension of forty pesos on his brief return to Manila in Jun e 1891 on
condition tha t h e write fo1· La Solidaridad. Though h e did so for a few
months , by the end of October l1e was pour ing out his resentme nt
against Del Pilar and Ponce in le tters to lli zal, urging him: "Le t us
unite to overthrow all those patrioteros who exploit patriotism for their
31
own profit. " Judging tha t all efforts short of revolution we r e useless
as far as tl1e Philippines was conce1·n ed , h e proposed h e n ceforth to
devote himself to winning election to the Cortes with tl1e h elp of
Filipino money and th e promised sponsorship of the Barcelona re-
pt1blicans. H e was frank about his motivation.

Certainly if I \Vant to be a deputy in Spain it is to satisfy p erson al a mbi-

tion s, 11othing m ore; I make no claim to give by ID)' investitt1re as d e puty
rigl1 ts or libe rties to th e Philippines. Sl1e m t1st ,vi11 them M th l1e r blood ,
and our indep enden ce also.
If I want to be deputy, it is Mth the object of b eing able to say with
pride that a Filiri110 h as been elected b)' the ltastilas themsel, es in a 1

3
Spanish district.

His le tte rs in this pe riod a re ft1ll of complain ts against tl1e ingrati-

tude of the Filipinos to himself, a nd contemptuo11s of tl1 e timo 1·o us-

29. Ep. Rizal. , 3:66, 79, 80. In Ap ril 1890 l1e \\'as a pri ncipal speaker at tl1c b a 11qttet
of the Progresistas of Ba rce lo n a (Lo p ez J aena, Discursos, 50-52).
30. La Publicida<l, 3 O cl 1890, speaks of l1i111 n.s speaking "i11 the 11ame of El Pais."
See also the n u mbers of 16 .July 1890, arid 29 J a11uary 189 1.
31. t.p. Riz.al., 3:253.
32. Ibid, 254.
 \
I

I
Decline an.d Dratlz of ''!Ja Solidanrlrtcl ,, 289
Il

ness of· tl1e Committee in Manila, forgetti11g tl1at l1 e himself J1acl fl ed

from the Philippines i11 terror after four da)'S th ere tl1e pre,rioLtS Jl1l) 1
,

f
and still trembled at the tl1ot1ght of his escape wl1en in Barce lon a
!
I
o,,er a month later. He rejected indignantly a11 offer fro1n t11e a11ti-Pilar
faction i11 the Committee to edit a fortnight!)' paper i11 ri,,al17 ,,,ith J.,a 1

' Solidaridad, insisti11g tl1at l1is position in tl1e Progressive Rept1l)lic,111

I party demanded a daily, or at least a semi-\-\,eekly paper, a11d that it
I
•
should be devoted to Spanish politics, not Pl1ilippi11e affairs. ;\~ No11e-
I•
theless, he made one fi11al appearance i11 three articles i11 La Solidr1riclacl
I beginning in April 1892, very probably due to tl1e efforts of Rizal to
I
I obtai11 a pension for him from Ma11ila, a11d to u11ite tl1e Filipi11 0 forces
••
34
once more.
With the deportation of Rizal, it ,vould seem that Lopez Jae11a l1 ad
nothing furtl1e1· to do with Filipino affairs, a11d nothi11g 1nore is k110,v11
of him t1ntil he appeared as editor of a weekl)' ne,vspaper in Barce-
lona in October 1893, under the auspices of a ne,v rep11blican coali-
tion . El Latigo Nacional (The National Whip), as the newspaper called
I
;
•I
itself, bore tl1e expressive subtitles: "Revolutionaries in face of reac-
l tion; conservatives in face of anarchy. Fo1- reason e,,en b)' force. Tl1 e
I "·vill of a people is more powerful than a hundred tyrannies." To jt1dge
from the surviving issues, the paper did not concern itself ,,vith Pl1ilip-
pine affairs beyond the customary bow in the directio11 of all tl1e o,,er-
!
••
seas provinces common to republican programs, the pledge to obtain
•
•
for tl1em ''all the liberties, all ilie material, moral, and political progress
35
: compatible lvith citizenship ,.vithin the integrity of the fatl1e1·land."
Its first attention to Philippine affairs would see1n to have bee11 a
denunciation of 30 December 1893 against a series of anti-Maso11ic
•
'• articles appearing in La Politica de Espa,-fia en Filipinas. With sco1·11 it
dismissed not only the reactionary paper, but also La Solidaridad, tl1e
Filipii10 Masons, the asimilistas, auto1iorriistas, and all in general ",vl1 0
do not know how to sacrifice tl1emselves for tl1eir ideals a11d to str11g-
gle for them. " Ironically for one wl10 l1ad fled in panic fro1n tl1e Pl1 il-
ippines in 1891 , the editor proclaimed: "While tl1e Filipi110s are deacl
I
•
---- - - - - -
33. Ibid., 278. Sec also 218-21.
34. Kalaw, Philip/1inf. Aitr1s011,ry, 59.
35. From the first isst1e, 28 Oct I 893. Tl1c 011ly ot l1 c r nl11nher ,vl1irl 1 Ital) OC'l'll
found is the fotirtl1 , dated 18 Nov 1893. Both are i11 tl1e nr,vs1>J J)l' t fil t's <Jf tll <:' ltl '\Ulllltl
Municipal de Historia of Barce lo 11a.
29() Derlinf r111rl Der1t/1 of "l~rt .Solic/arirlacl "

,,·itl1 fear in tl1e prese11 ce of tl1e fri ar, vvitl1 o r ,vitl1ot1t Ma50 I1 r')' th ey
36
,,·1·11 go 11 0,, l1e re ."
1

T l1o t1gh La Solidc11idrtd l1ad been l1 eld ttp to ridict1le by 11a m e, D e l

Pil,1r ,ln s,ve re d softl)', atte mpting n eitl1e r to ide n tify l1imself ,-vith Fili-
p in o Nl aso 11I")' n o 1- to accept Lo pez J ae11a 's scornful evalua ti o n of it
a11d of practicall)' all those ,-vl10 we1-e "''01-ki11g for Filipin o rig h ts. Noth-
i11 g ft11-tl1e1- is kno,-vn of El Latigo Nacional, but it m a)' b e surmised th a t
it e ith er expire d soon afte r , o r a t least did n o t fttrth e r occt1py itself
,vitl1 Philippi11 e affa i1-s. Bt1t th e publi c and o p e n break with L a
Solirla·ridc1d b)' its fo t1ndi11g eclitor ,-vas a ft1rth e r blo,-v to the Filipino
n a ti o11 alist camp i11 Et11-ope.

Death of the P1-opaga11da Moveme11t

Mean,-vl1ile , e,,e n ts ,-ve1-e combining to bring abot1t the final dissolu-

tion of the ca111paigr1 of D el Pila r in Spain. The Si11 oj a p a11.ese W ar of
1894-95 ,-vitl1 its ra pid and striki11g J a pan ese victories, which later- was
to b e seen as tl1e sot1rce fro m ,-vhi cl1 m any curren ts of Asia 11 11ationa l-
ism took tl1eir o rigi11 , found eager atte ntio n a mo11g a p e opl e alre a cl)·
so far ad van ced i11 11a tio11al co11sciot1s11ess as ,-ve1-e the Filipinos. Lrt
Solidaridad itself co11t1-ibt1te d to l1e igl1ten this i11te1-est ,vi th a r ticles 011
J ap a11 a 11d its po liC)', co111me 11 ts o n the Hispanoja p an ese tre a ty, and
lat1datory biogra phies of leading J a p a11ese generals a11d sta tesm e n. T o
,-vh ate,,er ex te nt La Solicla1-idr1cl n1ay l1ave b ee11 1-esp o 11sible fo1- it, o r
111ere ly refle cted it, the inte rest i11 Japa n g rew ra pidly amo11g those
,,,110 h ad been a t tl1 e l1 eart of tl1e Pro paganda movem e11t in the Pl1il-
i p p ines . This i11 te rest, h o,,,ever , did 11o t l1elp the cause o f D el Pila r .
T l1e ''asignaci611 P e n a," wl1ich st1pplem e 11ted the re 111ittan ces D e l Pila i-
1-eceivecl fro n1 tl1e C u e rpo d e Compro111isarios, h ad alread y ceased b y
the e 11d of 1894. In spite of· tl1is, Ma bi11i h acl to re p o rt tl1a t th e)' ,,,e re
37
una ble to inc1-ease the regt1la r hunclre d p esos 111o ntl1ly. T,-vo m o 11 u1s
later , re plyi11g to a pro p osal to st1bsidize l:l Globo, a ppa re n tl)' a t tlie
st1ggestio11 of Mo rayta , h e d e clared it i1111)ossible, a nd re p ea te d tl1e

36. T h e q uo ta ti o 11s fro 111 tl1is article a re cake 11 fro n1 Del Pi la r ' a11s,ve r in f~a
Solirl<tridad, 15 Jan 1894, ,vl1 e re h e re prl)Cll1ces l~6 pez J ae na ·s ~1rticle at lcn gtl1 IJefore
. .
a11!,"\Ver1ng 1t .
37. Nla bi11i , CarlnJ, 33.
 Decli11e a-11-cl DerLIIL of "La .s·otirla·,i clad ., 291

futilit)' of a ll effo1·ts to i11crease tl1e 111ontl1l)' re111itta11ce, i11 spite of its

38
ack11owledged insufficie11C)'. Tl1e follo,,vi11g 1no11tl1 h e re p eatecl: "111
spite of our efforts \\ e clo 11 ot, for tl1e present, succeed i11 attracting
1

the attention of o u1· frie11ds , fixed as it is on the eve11ts taking place

bet\,,een Chi11a a nd J a pan and attracted b)' tl1e encl1a11 tme11 t of tl1e
ne,v and unexpecte d. "39
In May, Mabini cabled Del Pilar to suspe11d se11cli11g La. Soliclariclc,cl
or even le tte 1·s to tl1e Pl1ilippi11es. As I1e explai11ed in a follo,vi11g let-
te r , tl1e packages of tl1e pa1)er l1ad bee11 stopped i11 tl1e previotis 1nail,
a nd now those suspected of 1·ecei,ri11g it ,vere L111der st1r'\ eilla11ce b)' 1

tl1e police. It was said tl1at prepa1-atio11s ,,vere be i11 g 1nade i11 Malolos
c d · 40
1or e portat1ons. As a matte1· of fact, Go,,er11or-Ge neral Bla11 co l1ad
al1·eady decreed th e removal from office of all the 1nt111icipal officials
of Malolos, a11d tl1e i1· deportation to ,1ariot1s points i11 tl1e sot1tl1er11
Isla11ds. Amo11g tl1em ,,vere Del Pilar's relatives, Luis del Pilar a11d
\ ' icente Gatmaitan, both of wl1om had bee11 active i11 raisi11g mo11e)·
for his pe1·so11al support i11 addition to tl1e ft111ds of tl1e Propaganda.-l 1
The situation of Del Pilar was 110,v despe1·ate.
But worse ,-vas still to come. The temporary suspe11sio11 of maili11g tl1e
pape1· to the Philippines at the end of May was follo"ved by a letter of 19
At1gust, announcing that the ti1ne l1ad come to cease publicatio11 co1n-
pletel)', d11e to the impossibilil)1 of raising furthe1· fi.1nds. Even if someone
,.vere to come along ,-vith great inflt1ence and vast ,-vealth, Iviabini de-
clared, it was still difficult to see l1ow tl1e obstacles to getti11g tl1e paper
i11t.o tl1e country cot1ld be overcome. He lamented tl1e imp1·essionable11ess
and lack of reflection which had brought it about tl1at

the fe,v ,-vl1o ,vere l1elpi11g us, attracted b)1 the rece11t eve11ts ,vl1ich )'Ott
a re not ignora11t of, l1ave taken a,-va)' all hope fro1n the re (Sp ain ) a11cl
ha,,e place d it entirely else,vl1ere. I do n ot k110~-v if tl1ey have reflectecl
on tJ1e difficulties '"'hicl1 would accompa11)1 t111s n e,v procedt1re , a11d
J1ave considered whet11er they ha,,e st1fficie11t stI e11gtl1 to o, 1e rco111e t11e1n.
I only know tl1at they l1ave believe d tl1at it is tl1e 0 111)1 good m ean s, a11d
tI1ey do not even wish to conside r ""hetl1er tl1e cleatl1 o f the pape r cotild
cause us harm or not.

38. Ibid., 35.

39. Ibid. , 37-88.
40. Jbid., 40-41.
41 . Tlie expecliente for th e <lcportati(>11s is i11 l :JJ. Pi/(lr, l :~87-~J~l.
 As fo r )'Ottrself, frie 11d Pilc1r, a11d Senor Po 11 c<:.·, ,ve ,vi ii tf)' to se11d
~-ou ,vhate,1er Sl11n o f 111one)' ,ve ca 11 collect, so that )'O U 111ay l)e ,1ble to
l<.~a\·e tl1ere if )'Ot1 , visl1. All ,v,1nt yolt to go to J a pan, whe re s0 111 e f r o n1
49
l1e re cllread)' a r e. -

Tl1e letter mt1st l1ave re acl1 ed De l Pilar sl1ortl)' after th e a ppear-

ance of tl1e issu e of 15 Se pte1nber. Notl1i11g ft1rtl1 e r appeared until 15
No,,ember ,vh e11 a notl1 e r 11L1111be r carne o ff tl1e ])ress, lJearing on the
fi11al page a brief n otice to tl1e effec t tl1at diffict1lties placed b)' the
reactio11 a111 e le 1ne n ts to its e n tra11ce i11 to tl1e Pl1 ilippi11es l1ad caL1sed
its st1spensio11. Now tl1at tl1e ,vay see1ns to ope11 to overcome tl1ese
obstacles, efforts ,,rill co11tint1e to be m ade to do so, for tl1e sake of
the libe rties of an oppressed people.

v\'e are o perati11g t111cler tl1c protectio11 of tl1 e l,1,vs, a11d tht1s '"'e ,,rill
co11ti11t1e pl1blisl1i11g this Re, ie,v, h e r e or e lse,vl1ere , accordi11g to th e
1

e xige11cies of th e strt1ggle ....

43
Here or else,vhere "''e will co11ti11ue carryi11g ot1t ot1r program.

What exactly Del Pilar had i11 mind in writi11g those words is diffi-
cult to tell. He does not seem yet to have made tip l1is mind to join
the members of the former Comite de Propaganda '"'ho were alreadv I

in Japan or inte11di11g to go there-Jose A. Ramos, Do1·oteo Cortes-

44
to solicit Japanese inten,ention. He published articles in El Globo in
November 1895 and January 1896, and very likely inspire d the articles
'"'hicl1 appeared in El Pais at this time 1·efer1ing to a party now fo1·rn-
ing under the leadership of Cortes i11 Japan from an1ong those \\·ho
45
l1 ad forn1erl)' marcl1 ed i11 ilie Filipino liberal ranks. The a t1thor goes
on to say tl1at thoL1gh th e liberal Filipinos conti11ue to be lo}ral to
Spain, if tl1 e government conti11t1es to sl1ovv su cl1 intra11sige11ce to tJ 1eir
plea for parliame nta1-y re prese11tatio11 , the p1·0:Japanese a nnexatio r1ists

42. Mabini, Carlr1s, 41-42.

43 ... Cr6ni ca," 15 No,' j 895.
44. Ra1nos a rrived i11 J a1)a11 i11 A t1g t1s 1 1H95; C<)rlt'S joi11 c.-d l1ir11 i 11 ~lav 1896. 1·11 c,·
•

,verc: la te r joi11 ed by L1 lhers. a11cl we re i11 C<)11 tact ,vitl1 \'ariot1s J ap a11est' of S<>111e prt)lll i-
ncnce. For tJ1,·se negotiations. see J c>sefa J\,I. Sa niel . ./ n/Jar, <1r,d the Philipp,nrs, I <~6<~-
1898 (Qt1ezo n (:ity, 1~)63), 17 1-75.
•15. De l Pil.tr's arti cles i11 /~/ (Jlo/Jo ,ve re .. Ca11al Ba,l1 i" ( 19 Nov 1895) ._t11d .. ()t rc>
pcligro coloni.11" (26 J a n l 8~16).
 Decline an,cl Deat/i of "La .~'olidaridacl" 293

4
are sur e to win o ut. G Som etime in the ea1·ly m o ntl1s of 1896, holv-
ever, Del Pilar and Pon ce fi nally d ecided to retur11 to Ho ng Ko11g. In
Barcelon a Del P ila r was ove rtake11 by the i11creasing bad l1ealtl1 of tl1 e
past year or m o re, a11d after seve ral m o n th s of illness, he died o n 4
J uly 1896, j L1st fi fty t ears to tl1 e day before his cot111try was finally to
41
gain i11dep e11dence. Six m on ths earlier L6pez jaena had likewise died
in po,,e r ty in Ba rcelo n a. 48
The fo llowing month the discovery of the IZatipt111an precipita ted
th e Revolutio n . T h e Katipuneros took to tl1e countryside to carry 011
tl1e ba ttle against Sp anish tro ops. Bt1t in Manila l1t1ndreds were a r-
rested , to rtui-ed , d ep orted , and executed . Iro11icall)', the principal 011es
to su ffe1- wer e n o t tl1ose ,-vho had actively !)lo tted tl1e Revolutio n , but
ilie m o d e ra tes-the supporte rs of L a Solidaridad, members of the Liga
F1·1·1p1na,
. M ason ry, and the Cu e rpo de Compromisarios. 49 Rizal, l1a\'-
ing offe red his sen rices as a physicia11 to the Spa11ish forces i11 Ct1ba
in orde r to free himself fro m l1is exile i11 Dapitan , was brought back
fro m Spain to face the militaf)' tribunal i11 Manila. Though it is qt1ite
certain tha t h e h ad had noiliing to d o with the outbreak of tl1 e Re\ 0 - 1

lutio n a11d conde mned it as premature, tl1ere was little chan ce tha t
ilie man \vh o had symbolized to Spaniards and Filipinos alike all tl1a t
had h appe n ed in the te n years since the publication of the Noli me
tangere, wo uld escape from the h yste ria whi ch g ripp ed Sp a nish

46. Rafael De lo rme, "Contra la domin aci6 n espanola e n Filipi nas," El Pais, 20 Nov
1895; "El filib t1ste rismo filipi no, '' ibid., 30 J an 1896. Delorme v,1as one of tl1c corre-
sponde11tli frie ndl)' to De l Pilar, who ttsed to take part in the banque ts of tl1e Asociaci611
H ispa no-Filipi11a. The d e taile d data are sucl1, h o,veve r, tl1at l1e 1n ust l1ave b een st1p-
p lied witl1 informa tio n by Del Pilar or Po 11ce.
47. Po n ce-Satur11ino A. Doria, o f the Asociaci6n Be11efica I1ispano-Filipina of Ne,v
Orle a ns, 1 O Sept 1897, Cartas sabre la Revoluci6n, (Ma11ila, Bt1reau of P ri11ti11g, 1932),
35; J. P. Bantug , La Varig;u,ardia, 16 June 1926, cited i11 Sa11tos, Bu.lia)' ni Plizridel, 11 5;
.. Los precurso res de la Revoluci611 filipina," Filipin{LS ante Europa, 25 Feb 190 1.
48. "Los precursores de la Revoluci6n filip ina ," Filipi·1ias an tP Eu.ropa, 25 Fe b l 90 l ;
"Notes su e ltas," La Politica de As paiia en Filipinas, 29 Fe b 1896.
49. For th ose arres ted as a resul t of tl1 e ot1 tbreak of tl1e Revolt1tio n , sec th e
"Oocu m entos politicos de la actualidad ," pttblish ed by Re tan a i11 A rrhi110, vols. 3 a11d 4.
Precisely b eca use th ese m e n were not memb e rs of tl1e Katipu11an , they ,vere un a,vare
tha t th e organ ization had bee11 discovered, a11d ,vcre quickJ ~, a rrested . St1cl1 1ne 11 as
Dotnin go Franco, Num e ria n o Ad riano , Moises Salvador, ,vere exec t11ed , ,vl1 ile ot11 e rs
like Anto n io ail d Juan Luna a nd lsabc lo cle los Reyes, ,vl10 escar,e(I ,vitl1 111c ir li,·es.
were sen t to prison in Spa in or Afri ca.
294 Decline a'fi£l Deal Ii o_( "I.Jr, .)olirla,·iclacl"

Ma11ila. Reco11ciled ,-vith tl1e Cl1 t1rc l1 lJ)' l1is fo1·m e r ~Jest1i t p1-ofessors,
l1 e "''as executed p1·o testi11g to tl1e encl tl1at l1 e l1 ad 11e,,er bee11 a trai-
tor to spa111.
. 50

Alon e of the principal figt1res of the Propaga11da 1V1ovem e nt, Ponce

still st1rvived i11 Spain. Surp1·ised by tl1e ot1tbreak of tl1e Re,,o lt1tion
\\rhil e still in Catalo11ia, l1e was arrested b1·iefly, tl1e11 1·eleased. Later
h e 111ade his wa)' to H o n g I(o11g to j oi11 the Revolt1ti o n a 1>' Jt1nta tJ1ere,
and was to be acti,,e for tl1e 11ext se,,eral years t.17ring to get J apanes_e
aid 01· a rms, bo th against Spain a11d l<1te1· agai 11st tl1 e U n1te . d S tates. :.1 I

Tl1e l1eadquarte rs of tl1e Asociaci6n Hispa110-Filipin a a nd of tl1 e Gran

Orie11te Espanol in Madrid were raidecl l))' the police, tl1 e ir papers
,-vere seized , a11d leaders of both organizatio11s arrested. l\ifigl-1el Morayta
saved l1i1nself by fl eei11g across th e Frencl1 border, protesting his in-
n ocence. v\Tl1en the investigation ,vas over , it b ecam e clear that the
Re, olution had bee n inde p e11de nt not 011ly of tl1e Gran Oriente
1

Espanol, bt1t also of tl1e Asociaci6n Hispa110-Filipi11a, ,vhicl1 by the 11

,-vas nothi11g more tl1an a11 occasio11al ce11ter for social acti,rities of the
-9
fe,-v Filipi11os still in Madrid.:)_ Tl1e Propaganda Mo,,emen t ,-vas indeed
over and its organization dead. Ne,-v fo1·ces were now at tl1e forefront
of Filipino nationalisn1 , and the)' were carrying 011 tl1e ir campaig n i11
the cot1ntryside of Luzon .

50. Tl1e best Lreat1nent of tl1 e eve11 ts leading to R izal's death is in Leon i\la.
Gt1erre ro, The First Filipino (Ma11ila, 1963), 382-49 1, ,vhere he se11sibly• deals "'ritl1 the
co11tro,·ersy 0 11 Ri zal 's reconciliation ,vitl1 the Cl1t1rcl1 by distingt1isl1i11g bet,\·ee 11 t11 c
fact of the retractio11 a nd its mea11i11g. I t is interesti ng to 11ote t11a t appa1·e ntly Del
•
Pilar a lso r etracted tvlaso11ry befor e l1is deatl1 Uesus Ca,·a1111a , Riz.al's L',Lj<1di1ig G/0 ,-1,
" -
[Ma11ila, 1966), 33, a11d J ose P. Ba11tL1g, i11 the article cited i11 11ote -17 abo,·e ).
51. Po11ce, Carias sobre lr1 Revol1tci6n. 11 , 63, a nd j,assi,n.
52. Tl1e accot111t of tl1ese eve11ts 1nay b e fot111<l i11 tl1e series of art icles a ppeaiing
during tl1e latter half of A11gt1st 1896 i11 tl1 e 11ewspaper El .Vario1ia1 of t\ la<l1·id. :\'l<lr,,,·ta ·:-.
dcfe11se of l1imself a 11d l1is associates appeared i11 l:l Pais, esp ecially tl1c iss11c l)f 27
A11g. 1896. Actt1ally n o11e of th e officials of tl·1e G ran Orie 11tc Espai1ol ,vl10 ,,·t>rc ar-
rested l1ad a11) thing to clo i.,itl1 Pl1il.ipp i11 e afT~1irs. Tl1e on ly Filipi110 arrt·stecl ,,...\ T<>in~\s
1

Arcjola, l1eacl of tl1e "secci6 11 recrea ti\'a" o f tl1 e Asociaci611. 1\ll ,vere S0<>11 rl~lt' .1.St, rl ,
and ,,,hen Moravta ret11rned to rvlaclricl, tl1 e rase ,ras c.iis111isst·cl.
✓
 .........

CHAPTER 14

An Assessment

Looking back at tl1e Filipino natio11alist acti,,it)' of fifteen years in

Eu1·ope, we ask: W11at was achieved? Was the campaign a sL1ccess? TJ1e
ans\ver to tl1e second of tl1ese questio11s is as complex as tl1e cam-
paign itself ,vhicl1 sougl1t not one, but several ends, at least as proxi-
mate o bjectives. Eve11 with regard to ulti111ate objectives, not all the
Filipino 11ationalists sought the same goal 11or did the)' agree 011 110,v
and \vl1en it should be achie,,ed. We need then to assess the acl1ie, e- 1

ments and the failu1·es of tl1ese years of acti,rity.

Successes and Failures

Conceived as a campaign for reforms, as a movement ain1ing at the

complete assimilation of Filipino and Spaniard, ,.vith the former en-
jo}ri11g the rights theoretically guaranteed to him as a Spanisl1 citizen ,
the Filipino nationalist activity in Europe must be te1·med a substan-
tial failure. From 1881 to 1895 a numbe1· of reforms were introdt1ced ,
so many indeed that the writings of Jest1its and friars a11d of Spa11-
iards in tl1e Philippin es in general a re ft1ll of forebodings as to tl1e
e\11 results of sucl1 an accele1·ated pace of reform . S01ne i11deed c,\lled
1
not only for a halt, bt1t e,1en for "a prude nt step back,va1·d."
In those fifteen years, tl1e tobacco monopoly, one of tJ1 e great ob-
stacles to agriculture as well as a d egrading restrictio11 of freedon1,

- -· -- ------ -
l . Navarro, f zl ij;inns, 276.

295
296 An Assessment

,vas abo lisl1ed ; th e tribute, an a11acl11·o nistic sig n of ,,assalage , d isap-

peared ; co1npulsOT")' la bo r 011 public ,-vorks was drastically reduced , a nd
co nd iti o ns fo r exemption a pplied equall)' to p e ni11 sular a11d indi o; a
civil registf)' ,-vas introd L1ced ; registra tio n of proper ty, a m o rtgage la"v,
a11d o tl1 er st1cl1 m easures ,-vere taken to secure la nd titles a nd facili-
ta te th e expa nsio n of agrict1ltt1re; tl1e Spa nish pe n al and civil cod es
and Spa nisl1 judicial process were exte nded to the Philippines; pri-
mary education, teacl1er training, secondary and university educati o n
,-vere all expanded a11d in1pro,,ed; fin ally, municipal governm e nts a nd
municipal justice of the peace courts were se t t1p , thus gr eatly inc reas-
ing Filipi110 direction of th eir own affairs.
How many of these measures were due to th e activity of the Fili-
pino reformi sts in Europe is difficult to dete rmine. It is proba ble tha t
very few wer e directly a tt1·ibutable to the writi11gs of tl1 e Filipinos, fo r
the a rchives sho,-v that most of these reforms had been unde r consid-
e ration for many years, enmeshed in the interminable consulta tions,
red tape, and political vicissitudes of the overseas ministJ-y. Filipino
writings and activities in Spain, however, directed more gene ral a tten-
tion to Philippine proble1ns, and thus indirectly helped to accele ra te
the pace of reform.
Ye t even if all these reforms were to be attributed to tl1e p1·opa-
ganda carried on by tl1e Filipino reformists, the reform campaign mtlSt
still be d eemed a substantial failure . For the principle bel1i11d most of
the reforms actually imple mented was paternalistic colonialism , not
assimilation. Reforms professedly assimilationist in intent, like the e x-
ten sion of the civil and penal codes of the Peninsula to the P11ilip-
pines, were often emasculated.
The pe nal code ,-vas declared to de tract fro1n no11e of tl1 e powe rs
of the governor-general granted him by th e La\vs of the Indies, a nd
thus alongside of, and supe1·ior to, the p1·ovisions for due p1·ocess ,ve 1·e
the forme r provisio11s fo r administra tive d e porta tion witl1o ut a trial,
without even info rming tl1e accused of the cl1a rges against him . In
the civil code, the provisions fo r civil 1narriage we re suspe 11ded , a 1·e-
minder that the Philippi11es was n o t go,,e r11ed by th e la,vs o t· tl1e Pe-
ninst1la, but by the odio us "special laws." But 1nost i1npo1·ta nt of a ll .
tl1e basic conditio ns fo r pa rticipa tio n i11 po litical life \•le1·e still d e r1ied;
freed o m of the press, freed o m of ctssocia t.io n , a11cl the ultimate syrn-
bo l of assimila tion into Sp a nisl1 citizenship, tl1e rigl1t to rep1·ese t1ta-
tio n in the Cortes. C ivil a nd p o liti ca l ri g hts \•ve- re 110 more t11e
 An Assessment 297

possessio n of t11e Filipinos at the end of the Propaganda pei-iod than

•
at its begi11ning. From tl1e standpoint of assimilation , tl1e campaign
'"'·as indeed a failui-e, and the program of making Spaniards out of
Filipinos was definitely rejected by Spain.
A closer look at this progra1n, however, does not wa1-rant co11sider-
ing its failure a total loss to tl1e Filipinos. To l1ave won freedom from
administrative deportation and from ce11sorship of the press would
certainly have b ee11 a gain, but a program of complete application of
peninsula1- laws to the Philippines, wl1ere conditions were so different
in many respects, could hardly have made for good go,,ernment i11
the Philippines. And even parliame11ta11' representation, wl1ich was
, ilie main goal sought under the slogan of assimilation, was not likely
to ha,,e made a substantial improvement i11 the Pl1ilippine situatio11.
Cuba and Puerto Rico already stood as witnesses that the concession
of represe11tation in the Cortes did not bring with it effective atten-
tion to overseas interests. The ruling parties could and did dictate
I
\vho the representatives would be. Even had Philippine representa-
tion been granted, there was no assurance that the representatives
2
would have been Filipinos. Even assuming that tl1e Filipino national-
ists would be able to elect candidates of their cl1oice, it is unlikely
iliat they would not have bee11 brot1ght to heel by party discipline .
They could perhaps have made eloquent speeches on bel1alf of the
3
Philippines, but to little effect.
It is doubtful, in fact, that Spain could bring progress and prosper-
it}' to the Philippines at the end of the nineteentl1 century. The spoils
system and graft so firmly en trenched in the colonial bt1reaucracy ren-
dered ineffective even ilie best reforms promulgated in Madrid. Span-

2. Retana, for example, wl10 had had notl1ing to do with Cuba a11d had r1ever even
been there, ,.vas "elected" d eputy for the Cuban disu-ict of Guanabacoa in 1896 by tl1e
Conservative party, as a reward for his ,vritings i11 support of Conser.rati,1e policy for
the Philippines.
3. Pedro de Govantes, who had been a 111oderate leader in tl1e early campaigns, at
Jeast till tl1e deat11 of t.s f1aiia e'n Filipi11,as, l1ad like,vise been n1ade a depLtty for a dis-
trict of the Peninsula by the Conservative part)', but in spite of l1is friendship for tl1e
Filipinos, and his position as attorney for Rizal in Ll1e deportation cases of J-Iidalgo ,
seems to t1 ave don e nothing fo r tl1e Philippines from his position as ,1 deputy. lt is
tnie that h e was pro bably not in sympatl1)1 ,-vith th e more radi cal program o f /,a
Solidaridad in its totality, but h e had earlie r bce11 a strong advocate o f assimilatiori for
the Philippines b efo re attaining the post of d epLtt)'.
298 A 11 A ssess111eril

ish gover11me nts, "''l1 a tever tl1e ir icleals c>11 clLte process o J· la¼1, coL1lcl
not abolisl1 the go,,er11o r-ge11eral 's po,,ver of admi nistrati,·e d e porla-
tio11, for, gi,1e 11 tl1e inter111i11able red tape of tl1e jt1dicial syste111 011
tl1e 011e l1a11d a11d tl1e ,videspread corrtrptibility of tl1e judges o n tl1e
otl1er, it was almost impo ss ible to sec ure co11,1 iction s, as th e
gove1·n ors-ge ne ral re ite1·ated time after tin1 e . Tl1e l1ost of fu11ctio11ar-
ies, active and retired, ba tte11ing on tl1 e Pl1ilippine treasury n1ade it
impossible to attend to public ,.vorks, road s, or edL1catio11, e\·e n ,,ritl1
the meager salaries paid to teacl1ers, a conditio11 littl e diffe rent i11 the
Peninsula f1·om that in tl1e colo11i es. The alter11ati11g parties i11 the
Peninsula had beco1ne so tied to tl1e spoils system fo1· their order}~,
ope1·ation tl1at it was t111tl1inkable for a gover11ment to clo a,-va}' vvitl1
tl1e long-sta11di11g practice of re,varding tl1eir political follovvers wi tl1
posts i11 the Philippine bureaLtcraC)'·
Given tl1e instability of gover11me11ts i11 Spain, tl1is meant that the
overseas ministe1· rarely came to kno,v the condition of the colo11ies
vvell enough to make i11telligent reforms before the cabinet fell once
more. Assun1ing that refo1·ms ,.vere made, tl1e1·e was no bureaucrac,· •

on the lower levels witl1 sufficient kno,vledge of, 01· interest in , tl1e
coL1ntry to carry out these reforms, even if the succeeding ministe r
4
did not ab1·ogate ,-vl1at his predecessor had decreed. Unable to sol,·e
tl1e internal weaknesses of l1er political system in the Pe11inst1la, e,,e11
Ltp to the fall of tl1e mona1·chy in th e t\ventieth century, Spai11 ,,vot1ld
have neither tl1e capacity nor tl1e e11terprise to tindo the co11sequences
of this system in l1er o,,erseas provinces. Assimilation as a solt1tion to
Philippine problems was a hopeless quest.

Assimilatio11ism as St1·ategy

Some of the Filipi110 activists recog11ized tl1is soo11er tha11 others,

but it is diffict1lt to JJinpoi11t jt1st wl1en pa1·ticL1la1· indi,,iduals ca1ne to
look 011 inde pe11de11ce as an ultim a te goal. The p e riod of the deatl1
of Espciiia en lizlipi·nc,s and tl1e fot111di11g of La Solidariclacl. 11 0,ve, ·er.

4. The pcriocl fro1T1 188 1 tu 1895 sa," 1if1t·e11 11l e 11 occt11)Y tl1c 1>ositio11 of O \ TX-Se-~15
n1inister , an average o f 011c a year. Seve11 uf tlt<·st· cl1 at11{cs ir1volvect cl1a ng<-'" o f the
party in power as ,ve il.
 An A ssess11iP11t 299

seerns to l1cl\1e been a watersh ed for 1nost of th e Filipi110 activists i11

Et1rope. T l1ot1gl1 tl1e e,riden ce poi11ts to a general co11, ictio n a m o ng
1

those ,.vl1 0 re1nained ac tive th at eventual se1Jaratio n f1-o n1 Spa in ""as

i11e,rita ble and d esirable, they·still d iffered "''id el}' as to l10'v\' a11cl wl1 e n
this goal was to be achie,,e d , and n o d ot1bt for some at least it re-
n1ained vague .
T h e prog1-am of L a Solida1idad and tl1e complex orga11ization Sltr-
roundi11g it "vas professedly assimila tionist, btit it seen1s clear tl1 a t the
assimila tionist p1·og1·am was mt1cl1 m o re a strateg}' or a first ste p tl1a11
tl1e ultima te goal. Po litical a11d civil righ ts fo r Filipi11 0s as Spanisl1
citizen s, a bo,·e a ll re presentatio11 in th e Cortes, ,.vot1ld 111a ke possible
a11d fac ilita te tl1e n a tionalist d evelopm e11t envisagecl b)' botl1 Rizal a11d
Del Pila r. But tl1eir divergent p oints of viev,, on tl1e ,riabili ty a11d effec-
tiven ess o f this strategy very quickl)' cam e to tl1e st1rface.
Rizal and De l Pilar have been co11trasted as idealist a11d realist. Up
to a p oi11t, the contrast h as a ce1-tai11 ,,alidil:)1• Bttt i11 tl1e fin al a11alysis,
Rizal sl1 owed himself m o1·e realistic than Del Pilar , realizi11g mt1ch
sooner th e futili ty of tl1e ca mpaign fo1· political rigl1ts and for assi111i-
la tion. £ ,,e n as l1e advo cated parliamenta1-y representation , l1is advo-
cacy ,.vas fla¼red by tl1 e half-l1earted a nd somevvhat skeptical belief in
its effective n ess, d eeply tl1o u gh he de plored the irijt1stice of being d e-
nied representatio11 . In re t1·ospect, it is e,rident tl1at the dreamer, armed
,vi th tlie lib1·a1;' lo re De l Pila r scoffed at, saw the situation m ore clearl)1
and m o re r e alistically than the pragm atist. Tl1 e work, Rizal insisted ,
must be d o n e in the Philippines, 11o t in Madrid.
T h e sam e sen se of futility plague d the campaign to ,.veake11 the
positio n o f the f1ia1·s with the gove1·nme11t. The legal positio11 of tl1e
parish p1·iest as ove rseer a nd re p1·esen tati,,e of the go,,e rnment 011 tl1e
local le,,e l ,vas m odified but n egligibly until tl1e mt1nicipal reform of
Y1at1ra in 1898, a nd e,,en tl1e n tl1e m odificatio11 was 11ot substa 11tial.
The go\'e rnme nt strongly fe lt tl1at th e friars "vere necessa17, fo1· tl1e
prese rvatio n of Spa nisl1 so, 1ereig11t:}1 in th e Pl1ilippi11es a11d tl1a t tl1 e
prestige o f the religious o rde rs in tl1e Pl1ilippin es 1nt1st be 1nai11t£1i11ed
by all n1eans T his con\riction was, if an yth i11g, stre11gtl1e ne d b)' tl1c
efforts of tl1e Filipino nationalists to t111de r111ine tl1at p resti ge. Fo1- tl1e
Spanisl1 Liberals n o less than fo r G.:11nbe tta i11 F1-a11ce, a11ticlericalis1n
\ Vas fo r l1om e consumptio 11, not for expo1·t to tl1e col<)11ies. T l1e sittl,\-

. tio 11 wotild vel)' like ly h a,,e bee11 tl1e sa111e 11acl tl1e rept1bli c(\l)S e,·er
been in a position to form a go, 1ern me11t.
 300 An Assessmen l

The difference between Becerra's first term as overseas minister in

1889-90, wl1en he was out to destroy clerical power in t11 e Pl1ilip-
pi11es comple tely, and his second term in 1894, when the earlier
secularization projects were not even me ntioned, is instructive . It was
dt1e , not to any religious conversion of Becerra, but to a growing
realization of the extent to whicl1 the Spa11ish government was d e-
pendent on the friars to preserve the loyalty of the Filipinos to Spain,
and the extent to which the inf111e11ce of th e friars with the people
had been a11d was being undermined.
If the propaganda campaig11 failed to have the desired effec t on
the Spanish government, the same can11ot be said of its effects on
Filipinos at home. Here its success was mixed, but real. It was a quali-
fied success in damaging the prestige of the friars in particular and of
Spaniards in general with the Filipinos; in a positive way, it succeeded
more extensively in awakening in Filipinos a sense of unity and of
national consciousness.
The success of the antifriar activity was confined almost exclusively
to the island of Luzon, partict1larly the provinces surrounding Ma-
nila. In these provinces, the antifriar feeling was widespread, particu-
larly among those who, because of wealth, social position, or 11atural
5
ability, were leaders of the people. Much of this was due to the
spread of Masonry and of the Katipunan. But the very existence of
these organizatio11s was due, directly or indirectly, to the inspiration
of the Propaganda campaign, and the success these organizations
had in winning members is a measure of the extent to which their
minds had been conditioned by antifriar propaganda. The extent of

5. See for example t}1e le tter of the Jesuit Superior Father Jua n Ricart to Fatl1 e r
Pascual Barrado, SJ., i11 AT, 27 Mar 1893:

No lo nger does on e see that respect wl1icl1 the indios used to sh o,v to tile
Span iards and esp ecially to the religi o us. . . . 111 recent years pan1phlets i11
Tagalog an d oth e r la nguages of the country l1ave circtila ted , scoffing at re ligion
an d the friars. The re ligio us o rders have lost mucl1 of their prestige. ,.\nd as
religion loses, so does Spain , and filibusterism o grov, s together ,,rith in1pie~,.
1

The lodges a re being orga11ized . Nlay God l1e lp us ar1d l1 ave mcr0· 011 tl1ese
people 011ce so simple.

From a some,vh at different point of vie,v, bt1t confirming tt1e destruction of the
prestige of the friars , see Emilio Bravo, "La Masoneria e 11 Filipi11as," /...a Polit;r.a dP
Espa,ia en Filipinas, 31 Ma)' 1896; a nd "Desde Ma11ila," ibid.
 An Assessnient 30 I

tl1is success, however, should not be exaggerated, for the atrocities

committee! again st the friars in the name of the Revolution were
offset by coun tless instances of sympatl1y and respect sl1own them even
by tliose who whole-heartecll)' supported the Revolution. 6
To a far greater extent the P1·opaganda movement was a success in
giving the people a sense of national identity and u11ity, especial])' in
tl1e provinces of Luzon. Though the leade1·s of the Propaganda move-
ment did not plan the Revolution that broke out in 1896, it was their
ideas that caused those who did to take fire. Andres Bonifacio copied
out letters ,,vritten by Rizal and Del Pilar, and built his Katipu11an 011
the foundations of the Liga Filipina, which e1nbodied Rizal 's ideas.
Tl1e articles by Bonifacio and Emilio Jacinto i11 the Katipunan ne\.vs-
paper Kala)1aan, echo clearly tl1e writings of Rizal and Del Pilar.
Through Bonifacio a11d otl1ers like l1im these ideas wot1ld percolate
down to the masses of the people. The propaganda, largely ,,vritten in
Spanisl1, could scarcely reach the masses, but it did reach many of
the growing middle class and, in a more Hispanized area like Manila,
e\ en those further down.
1

Otl1er issues undoubtedly helped to spawn the Revolution-agrar-

ian troubles, crop failures , rising prices of food, abuses of the civil
guard, and corruption in the bureaucracy- but if a w1ifying conscious-
ness of rights l1ad not been stirred to stoke the fires of nationalism, if
an ideal had not been held out as a rallying point for these griev-
ances, there would have been no mass movement like the Revolution ,
only a series of isolated outbreaks as ineffectual as those that had
occurred during the last three centuries.

The Church a11d the Propaganda Movement

Filipino nationalism is unique in many wa)'S, born and maturing at

a time when for othe1· nations of Southeast Asia, national co11scious-
ness was but a gleam in the future. One aspect tl1at sets Filipino

6. This could be doc umented at length fro111 tl1e accoun ts of tl1e ca pti,1t,· of tl 1c
friars by the Revolutionists to be found in AT, i11 Lhe Arcl1ivo Francisca110 Ibero-Orie 11 •
ta.I in Madrid. and no d ottbt in those of th e otl1er orders. See especially tl1e unp,1b-
lishcd ~1.A. thesis of William Abbott, SJ., "The Status of War P1ison crs t1ndt'r the
\1alolos Republic," At.eneo de Manila l lniversity. 197 l.
302 A 11 AssPss11iP-n,I

na tio11a lisn1 clJ)art is tl1e 1·e latio 11 of nation c1lism to re li gion in tl1 e Phil-
ippin es. 111 otl1 e r EL1ropea11 colo nies of A~ia, BL1ddl1ism , Hindt1isn1 ,
a11d Isla1n se n ed as tl1e inspiratio11, as a frame,vork, o r as a sc ree11 for
1

7
nascent 11atio11alism. In the Philippi11 es, l10,-veve1·, the religion of the
Filipinos ,vas that of tl1 eir colonial n1asters a11d tl1e resulting patte 1·n
is quite cliffe re11t: that of Wester11 Et11·opean society e m erging from
what may be labeled "n1edie,,al tl1eocracy" into n1odern sect1la1· society.
Tl1e cl1urcl1 l1 ad brougl1t v\Teste r11 Et1ropean man fron1 the cl1 aos
,-vrou ght by tl1e barbaria11 in,,asions to tl1e o rde red a ncl cultured soci-
ety of the Higl1 Middle Ages. Bt1t ,vl1 e n Western Eu1·opean societ)'
matured , tl1e Cl1L1rcl1 failed to realize tl1a t tin1es had cha11ged , a nd its
efforts to perp e tt1ate itself as scl1ool1naste1· of the peoples it l1ad e dt1-
cated led to tl1e strife st1mmed tip in tl1e Fre11ch Revolutio11 and nine-
teen tl1-cen tury Libe ralism . Onl)' i11 tl1e rnren ti e tl1 centu ry have cht1rch
a nd sta te i11 Wester11 Europe con1e to recognize tl1eir mutual at1-
tonomy. Tl1is broad patte r11 of \,Vestern Europe ,-vas mirro re d in mi-
crocosm , and at an accelerated p ace, in the Filipino nationalist
moveme11t.
In the writings of tl1e Propagandists tl1e friars "''ere de11ounced fo1·
their immoral lives, for their wealtl1 , for th eir a,,arice. With the out-
break of the Revolution and the early years of the American regime,
these cl1arges we1·e freely aired, and were also spread widely in the
United States by certain Protesta11t 01·ganizations.
No dot1bt much of tl1is ,-vas baseless rumor or delibe1·ate calL1111n,,
, '
but it is undeniable that the moral level of" a ntimber of fria1·s in the
parishes left much to be desired. Tl1e ,vealth comi11g f1·01n tl1 e la i·ge
la11dholdings of the Don1inicans, At1gusti11ians, a nd Recoletos ,,ras
shown by tl1e pt1rchase of tl1ese lands b y the America11 go, e1·11111e nt in 1

the early )'ears of tl1e wentieth ce11 ttlf)', thot1gh it 1nt1st be add ecl tha t
the income from tl1ese lands ,vas t1sed for missio na11 a n cl edt1ca ti o11,1l 1

purposes, a nd tl1e valt1e of the lands \\1as dt1e in large part to tl1e
efforts of tl1e ir legitimate o,vne rs to d evelop tl1e1n ag1·ict1lt.t1rall,·. ,
Bttt
n on e of these c:1d e qt1ately explain tl1e rele 11tless , eh e1ne11ce of cl1c 1

antifriar campaig n .

7. See Fred R. vo11 d e r l\~e l1 clc- r1 , Rfli1-,rio11 r1t1cl .\ ..r1liu11<1/isn1 in ,\'outhrast 1\ s-1<1: Bu,112a.
f ntln·nesia, rz1id tlte Ph ifi/1/1i11es ( t\-ta diso11: l Jr1iversitly of \r\1isco nsi11 Press, 1963). fl1 e ati-
tl1or's research apparen tly clealL cl1 iefl y ,.vitJ1 B11rma ,1r1d l11clo11esia. a11d in s1)ite of ~ome
,,•o rtl1,vl1ile observatio11s. tl1e sectio11.s u 11 tl1 e Pl1ilippi11cs a re ft1ll of f,tctual errors.
 An Assessr,ienl 303

On the cha rges of i1n1norality, i1npartial obsenrers, even ene1nies of

the friars, a11d at times tl1e Propaganclists themselves, agreed tl1at th e
moral level amo11g the friars was greatly stiperior to tl1at of most of
the Filipino clergy, yet the latter drew no such invectives as ,-vere rai11ed
8
on the friars ' heads. The land questio11 was more of an issu e, bt1t of
secondary importance to Rizal and of none at all to Del Pilar.
All the evidence rather points to the conclusio11 that wl1atever sL1b-
stance there was to these cl1arges, the real issue lay else,-vhere. Rather
than a revolt against abuses or an imagined international Maso11ic
plot to de-Catholicize and de-Hispanize the Philippines, tl1e Filipino
nationalist movement was essentially the emergence of Pl1ilippine so-
ciety from its "medieval tutelage." Tl1at medieval tutelage was anach-
ronistic in the late nineteenth ce11tury, as it l1ad been in modern
Europe , but it was precisely this tutelage that had made possible th e
Filipino u11ity then being forged by giving Filipinos the common bond
of religion and even, to the extent it existed, a common language.
Though some, perhaps many, friars were t1nl1appy about the spread
of Spanish among the masses and took means to discourage it, think-
ing tl1us to preserve their flocks from the contagion of tl1e Liberal
Europe they detested, it ,-vas also the friars and Jest1its wl10 had made
possible the learning of Spanish by the minority, from which l1ad come
the nationalist leaders. Admittedly many religious, Jesuits a11d friars
alike, were opposed to Filipinos going abroad for higher education,
but the Filipinos owed to the secondary schools and the University
taught by the religious orders in Manila the competence and the honor
witl1 which they acquitted themselves at the universities of Europe.
Primary education in the Philippines suffered from ,-vretcl1ed ac-
commodations, lack of teachi11g materials, niggardl)7 pittances paid to
the school-teachers, and at times the interference of an t1nsympathetic
parish priest who was local school inspector. In comparison "'rith the
well-organized school systems of Germany, Rizal would indeed fi11d
those of }us own country sadly lacking. But tl1e record sl10\vs the pri-
mary school system in the Pl1ilippines very nearly equal to that exist-

8. See, fo r example, Rizal, l a Vision df Fray Rodngun., Esrritos, 7:74 ; Lopez J ae11a.
Discursru, 21 3; Fred W. Atkinson, Tlie PliilipfJine lslan<ls (Bosto 11: Gin 11 , l 90~), 332.
Atkinson was o n e of the early Americans in tl1c Islanrls, a11d \\'c\S first ger1eral 1-ltperitl-
tendent of education.
304 An Assessment

9
in g in peninst1lar Spain , if lite racy ra tes a re a ny indi catio11 . This was
11o t dt1e to greater go,,e rnme nt a tte11tion to educati o11 in tl1 e Philip-
pi11es, but must be attributed in large measure to th e part th e r eli-
gio us orde rs played in the Philippine school syste m.
It is no accide11t that Filipino n ationalism came of age at th e e nd
of tl1e nineteenth ce ntt1ry ,vl1en otl1e r Asian na tionalist move m e nts
,vere sca1·cely at the planning stage. Whate,,er th e ultimate fate of th e
First Pl1ilippine Republic, had it not been d estro)red by overwhelming
America11 forces in the begi11ning of this cen tu1-y, hardly any nation
that became inde pende11t after World Wai· II could even tl1en boast
of a cultured gover11i11g class or a le,,el of· education amo11g the m asses
of the people comparabl e to that ,vhicl1 the Filipinos p ossessed fifty
years earlier.
Just as the medie,,al Cl1urch had transmitted to Western European
society the culture tl1at ,vas to condition it to rebel against her con-
trol, so the friars in tl1e Philippines had l1elped bring society to a
maturity that made their role superfluous. However much certain fri-
ars migl1t disparage tl1e Filipinos as an inferior race, still, in preacl1-
ing Catholicism to them, in raising Filipinos, however inadequatel)'
trained, to the priesthood of the Catholic Church, th ey had tat1ght
them the basic equality of Spaniard and Filipino, and had made it
inevitable that the latter would one day rebel against the denial in
practice of this equality.
But just as the church in Europe clung to medieval notions of the
relations of church and society long after she herself had contributed
to make them obsolete, so too the friars in the Philippines failed to
recognize the changes that had taken place in society. The guidance-

9. In 1900 illite racy in Spa i11 for pe rsons ove r te n years of age reach e d 58. 7 p er-
cent, \Vhile th e 1903 cen sus in tl1 e Pl1ilippi11es s110,.ved a figure o f o nly 55.5 p ercct\l
among the civilize d po pt1la tio n , that is. tl1e C hristians ,vl1 0 l1ad bee n tl1e S\ibj ects of
the Spanish regime (Ell,vood P. C \1bbcrl}1, "Illite racy," A Cyclopedia of Ed1tc.ation, ed.
Patil Monroe, 3:383) . It shot1ld be n o te d, ho,-vever , Ll1at tl1e lite racy figures for U lt'
Philippines reflect lite racy in so1ne la11guagc, a n cl tJ1at 011ly a 1ni11ority \\'Ot1 ld •ia\'e bern
lite ra te in Spanish . Acco unt ,vo uld likewise l1 ave lo be takt: n o f tJ1 c acco n1p lisI11r1e ,1t.s
of th e public scl1ool syste m i11tro dt1ced during tl1 e first years o f ,.\111crica11 rllle, btit
also o f tl1e disruptio 11 caused by the years of tl1 c Revol\1tio 11 a 11d Pllilippi11e-A1neric:iri
War . Tho ugh these vario us factors preve nt exact co1n1)ariso11s, it is sufficie ntly C\'ldent
tha t there was a d egree o f equali ty be t,vecr1 tl1 c lit cro1cy leve l of th e colony and tl\e
colo nial p owe r ,,vhi ch is certai nly t1c1iqu e in lhe l1isto11· of colo 11izatio11.
 A 1i A.'isess1rlent 305

or i11tert·e rence·-of the friar parish priest that }1ad protected a nd ben-
efited the local gobernadorcillo in an earlie r age or th at migl1t still
be d esired in less advanced parts of the country was a con d esce11-
sion-or an officiot1sness-repugnant to me11 ,.vl10 hacl studied in
Manila, perhaps l1ad even gone to a university abroad, and l1ad Ii,1ed
o n an equal footing with 1nembers of a more developed society. Eve11
tl1 e humbler Filipi110, who l1ad pe rhaps learned onl)' a little Spanish
in the local school, had had contact with a wider ,.vorld tha n the one
he directly knew, and was not the man his grandfather l1ad been. At
the very least, he was st1sceptible to ne,.v and disturbing ideas sucl1 as
the Propagandists were to spread.
The failure of the friars to recognize a11d to con1e to terms with
this changed situation lies at tl1e l1eart of the Filipino nationali st op-
position to them . Such a failure was almost inevitable in men ,.vho
l1ad constituted for three ht1ndred years tl1e presence of Spain in the
lives of tl1e immense majority of Filipinos, for the three-hundred-year
tradition, in which th ey gloried, was a millstone around their necks
,vhe11 it came to innovation. A dead weight too \Vas the conservatism,
no t to say the reaction, of the nineteenth-century Cl1urch as a whole,
jt1st beginning to come to terms with the modern ,vorld under Leo
XIII. Much less of a help was the backgrot1nd of the Spanish Church
of the 11ineteenth cent11ry, conspicuously stiff-necked even amid the
general conservatism of the Church at large.
The t'i-iar opposition to the Filipino 11ationalists ,vas also a natural
reaction, having its roots in tl1e status forced on them by nineteenth
century developments in Spain. Cut off from their Roman superiors
b )' the regalism of Charles IV, the Spanish friars developed a working
spirit in tl1e nineteenth century that took on a more national charac-
ter than t11 at of their brethren elsewhere. The orders were suppressed
in the Pe ninsula in 1836, and were only permitted to maintain houses
thereafter for the preparation of missionaries for the Philippines, where
they were considered useful to the state.
He n cefortl1 they were compelled to prove themselves not me rel)'
good priests, working zealously for their flocks, but useft1l servants of
the state, carrying out the countless functions foreign to their minis-
try which had been e ntrusted to the m . Many probably wished to be
free of their extraneous functions in local governme nt, but th e)' cot1ld
hardly do as they wished. Eve11 if th e governme nt l1ad per1"I1itted them
to do so, they would h ave been left in tl1e precarious position ot· pei·-
306 A n Assessment

' . .
fo rming no functio11 to justify an anticlerical government s pe rm1tt1ng
the m to continue tl1eir work as priests, a work not otherwise consid-
ered worth its protection .
A few words need be said about tl1e relation of the Filipino Propa-
gandists to the Jesuits.
The Filipinos did not attack the Jesuits in their antifriar propa-
ganda; they freque11tly went out of their way to exclude tl1em from
tl1eir accusations and to contrast their attitudes or actions with those
of the friars. As a result, the Revolution itself, which often took on a
more generally anti-Catholic color than the Propaganda movement
did, likewise excepted the Jesuits for the most part from its attacks.
The reasons for tl1is attitude deserve at least a brief explanation for
they were multiple and complex.
First, substantial differences existed between the position of the Jesu-
its and that of the friars. The former possessed no parishes in the
developed sections of the country, only a few centers in Mindanao
from which they carried 011 the evangelization of the pagan and Mus-
lim peoples of the interior. They had therefore no occasion to arouse
antagonisms due to intervention in local affairs.
Second, they possessed no haciendas such as the other orders did
(with the exception of the Franciscans), having lost all their property
at the time of their expulsion in the eighteenth century.
Third, their educational and scientific activity had won the esteem
and favor of many Filipinos as instrumental in national progress. The
Normal School and the Manila Observatory were their creations and
the Ateneo Municipal, during most of the period in question, was
superior to the existing schools. The older schools ,vere encumbered
,\Tith the weight of tradition and rot1tine, and l1ad not kept up ,.vith
educational trends in Europe, while tl1e Jesuits had 011ly recently ar-
rived in the Philippines, fresl1 from the educational ci1-cles of tl1e Pe-
ninsula, and introduced into tl1e Philippines the methods of t11 e ii·
Spanish schools. Tl1ough there is a good deal of truth in Rizal 's plac-
ing them at ilie tail of the cart of progress in Europe , as he does in
the Noli me tangere, the rest of his statement is also true: tl1at in the
Philippines, they represented progress. Fi11ally, the ,,ast rnajo1·it)' of
the active Filipino nationalists of this period-\\ritl1 tl1e notabl e e xcep-
tions of Lopez Jaena, Del Pilar, and Ponce-we re alumni of the Ate n eo
Municipal, of which they ge nerally see1n to h ave prese1v1ed pl easant
memories. Rizal in particular re tained l1is t·rie r1dsl1ip for the J esuits,
 An AssessmPnl 307

and lost touch witl1 them on ly to tl1e exte11t that they themseI,,es broke
off relations with him after the publication of the Noli.
Besides these 1nain reasons, tl1e question of strategy o n the part of
the Filipinos was also involved. It was to their i11te1·est to emphasize
that their campaig n was not a11ti-Catholic or anti-Spanisl1 bt1t was di-
rected only against the friars. With some , this tactic was undoubtedly
sincere ; with others, s11ch as Lopez Jaena, who was openly anticlerical
and anti-Catl1olic in his sp eech es before Spanisl1 re publican groups, it
,vas a matter of strategy; with still others, it m ay have been a combi11a-
tion of both.
The J esuits, at least in an official 01· corporate capacity, did n o t
reciprocate the favor shown them by the Filipi110 nationalists, for
though tl1ey were no doubt so1newl1at pleased by it, it also grea tl)'
embarrassed them and gave rise to many acct1sations of a lack of pa-
t1·iotism on the ir part. This ch arge was baseless. Some ot· them did
•
sh ow sympathy with what tl1 ey considered to be the just aspiratio11s of
'
the Filipinos, as did indi,ridual friars and som e sincere Spanisl1 Liber-
als and Republicans, but the)' were forthright in tl1eir condemnations
•
of anti-Spanish or an ti-religious propaganda. This is especially tn1e of
the superiors of the Jesuits in the Pl1ilippines during this period , Fa-
thers Juan Ricart and Pablo Pastells, both of them hard-core oppo-
''
nents of "Liberalism" in all its forms whether in Spain or in tl1e
•'
;
Philippines. There were indeed differences and frictions bet\veen the
Jesuits and the friars , but they both opposed the separation of tl1e
Philippines from Spain and whatever they judged likely to lead to
, that result.
Painful as the Filipino nationalist movement and the Revolt1tion i11
,vhich it culminated were to Spain, they not only bore witness to tl1e
decadence of a Spanish colonial system powerless to promote pros-
perity and progress in its colony, but tl1ey underscored Spanish colo-
nial policy that, at its best, enabled a subject p eople to attain n ational
•
maturity long before that was possible in an)' otl1er Et1ropea11 colo n}'·
It is an achievement that must b e la rgely credited to th e friars, 111a-
ligned as they were by the rising nationalists, for tl1e irs l1ad been tl1 e
responsibility for much of what was best in Spanish colo nia l poliC)',
even if they must b ear p art of the responsibili ty for its deterioratio11
in the nineteenth century.
Even if Spain h ad l1eeded the de m an els for reforrn i11 tl1ese ,·cars
I

and had translated a n en lightened policy in to worki11g re,tli tv. , tl1 e

308 A 11 1\ ssessnteril

clin1ax would l1a,1e been n1e re ly dela)'ed, for a natio11 hacl bce11 fo r111ed
ready to stand o n its O½'n feet, and l1istOf)' co L1ld n ot be turned back
agai n . This ,-vas tl1e acco1nplishme nt of tl1e Propaganda Move1nent
to h ave brougl1t to the awareness of tl1 e Filipino people that tl1ey
were a nation witl1 a common l1eritage a nd a co1nmo n destiny. It was
tl1is self-aware ness wl1ich was to sustain tl1e Filipi110 people in the
blood)' struggles of the Revolutio11 against Spai11 and the desperate
resistance to tl1e Ainerican conquest. It ,-vould keep alive ilie determi-
11ation to be independe nt through a ha lf-centt1ry of peaceft1l struggle .
Today, divested of the historical circun1stances in ,-vhich it a1-ose, th e
Propagand a Move1nent and the ideals it stood for re 1na i11 at tl1e hear t
of Filipino 11atio11alism. Fo1- it was these ideals which bt1ilt the natio n .
 Bibliography

Note on the Sources

The principal de pository, of doct1me nts investigated in the course of my

•I
researcl1 was the Archivo Hist6rico Nacio11al of Madrid. Here, in the "Secci6 n
•• de Ultramar" are preserved the records of the overseas ministf)', amot1nting
•
to several thousand legajos on the Philippines alone, besides mt1ch miscella-
neous mate rial mixed in with the Cuban and Puerto Rican legaj os. Unfortu-
I
nately, the section was uncatalogt1ed at the time of ill)' research , except for a
gene ral, but l1ighly unreliable chronological listi11g. In this state of tl1ings it
,vas impossible to examine more than the bundles belonging to the subsec-
tions "Polftica" and "Gracia y Justicia," tl1e latter of wl1ich contains religious
affairs, as being under the Patronato. The legajos examined ,vere 5242-5367,
and 2222-2340, comprising the above two subsections from 1880 to 1899.
Despite the valt1e of much of this material, it would be considerabl)' greater
were it not for the custom that prevailed until the ministry of Moret in 1897,
of putting all important correspondence between tl1e o,1erseas mi11ister and
the governor-general into unofficial letters, ,vhich were then removed from
the ministry, as being personal papers, by each succeeding 1ninister.
The result of this practice ,,vas that ma11y of the 1nost important papers, if
not destroyed, passed into private collections where they are ge11erall)· ttna-
vailable today. A notable exception is tl1e private and official papers of \ 'icto r
Balaguer, presen 1ed in large quantity in tl1e Museo-Biblioteca Balagt1e r of
v'illanueva y Geltru (Barcelo na). Tl1ey are i1nporta nt not only for the years of
Balaguer's ministry, 1886-88, but contai11 other letters referring to Pl1ilip-
pine affairs, in which Balagt1er remai11e d involved to a certain exte11t. \ 'ol-
ume 113 contains tl1e unofficial correspondence of Balaguer as o,,erseas
minister with the governors-general i11 tl1e Pl1ilippi11es, principally Terrero.
Volumes 379 and 383 have also yielded letters of val11e, a11d tl1ere are u11-
doubtedly others scattered through tJ1e volumi11o us papers.

309
 Som e of tl1 e Mason ic records o f the 1: ilipin o 1oclgcs in Spa ir1, toge tl1c r
,vitl1 a small a1no u11t o f ma te rial o n early (Spc111isl1 ) Nlaso 11 ry i11 L11e Pl1ilifr
pi11es, a rc 1Jrese1,·c d in tl1c ad n1inistrati,1e a rchives of tl1 c De legaci{>11 N.-1cio na l
<le Sen 1icios DocLtn1e ntales as a result of tl1 e confiscation o f tl1 e record o f
th e Maso11i c lod ges i11 the Re publica11 zone durin g the Ci,,i1 W,tr o f I 93{j-3~J.
I h a,,e b een able to i11spect tl1e Philippine rnaterial a11d obtain 1nicrofi}111s c>f
th e important docume n ts containe d in legajos 219-A, 220-A, 620, 736--A.
T l1ese arc of conside rable importan ce fo r reconstrtic ting the Filipino orga11i-
zation in Sp ain , and offer mt1c l1 to re, 1ise e xtensive!)· tl1e "offi cial " histOf)' <>f
Philippine n1asonry b)' T eodoro M. Ka1 ct\V.
Since the go,,e rnor-ge11e ral of th e P11i1 ippines d u ri11g t.he latter h a lf of th e
11ineteent}1 centu ry \Vas al,,va)'S a military 111a n ,,ri tl1 tl1e doL1ble ft111 c ti<>n c>f
governor-ge n e ra l a11d captai11-general of all mili tary fore es, ancl si11re a ll tria ls
for rebe llio n a nd certai11 otl1e r offen ses were carrie d ot1t 1Jy militan' cottrLs,
the re should b e 1nttc11 irnportan t 111ateric1l i11 militaf)' arcl1i,·es. A re la ti,,e ly
sm all a mount of tl1e more importa11t 1nate rial rela ting to tl1e e,•e nt<; o f 1872
and the Revolt1tio11 of 1896-98 is to b e found in the "Negocia do d e U ltra m a r"
of th e Sen1icio Hist6rico Militar in Madrid for the use of tl1 e officia l n1ilit,1n. 1

historia ns of the late nine teentl1-ce ntur71 Spanish colonia l \vars. The princip ,tl
legajos found useftil h e re were i11 annario 13, tabla 1, legajos 3 a nd 5; a 11cl
armario 14, tabla 1, legajo 4. The material is catalogt1e d a11d a,ra ill'1 ble to
qualified researcl1e rs.
It is more difficult to ascertain the conte11ts o f the Archi, 0 Ge n e ral Militar
1

in Sego,ria. The section o f procesos in p articular, ,vl1ich ,,ery• like ly contain~

importa11t docume n ts from the tria ls of Ri zal and otl1er Filipino s, in part
publish ed by Retana, is completely c losed to researcl1ers. For the r est of the
Archives, tliere is no catalogue a,,ailable to researcl1e rs, a nd it is said that
much of wh a t was there has b een lost or destroyed throt1gh the years. H o,,,_
ever, I ,¥as able to fi11d a sm all amot1nt of Philippine m a terial of interest.
n o tably a memo rial of General Weyler to the ministe r of ,,•ar, e ntitle d
"Me moria correspondiente al m a ndo de Ge n e ral We),ler" (Secci6n d e
Ultra mar, Filipinas, Div. 2a-8a).
An archive whicl1 proved of conside ra ble importance for the ge n eral bac k-
ground of e,,en ts was t}1e Archivo de la Pro,ri n cia de 'farrago11a de la Co1npai1f~l
d e J esu s located in th e Colegio Maximo d e San Fra11c isco d e Bo 1ja i11 Sa1,
C ugat d e l Valles (Barcelona) . H e re is fo t1nd th e 111011t1mc ntal Pas te lls C<)llec-
tion of d ocun1e n ts ofJ esL1it histo r, ' in tl1e Pl1ilipJJi11~s. copie d fron1 the :\rchi,·o
de lnclias in Se,,ille a11d va riot1s oth e r a rchi,·es, bt1t a lso co11ta ir1ing a ~111:-1ll
am o t1nt of la te nineteen t11-cen tury m a te rial. I r1 spite <>f tl1e lin1ited prc>fes ·cd
scope o f tl1e collection a nd its o rie 11 tatio 11 towards a11 earlie r p t"rit)d , .so111t·
u seft1l doct1me 11 ts were fot111d, sin ce F,lther Pas te lls a 1)p are1ltlv ur1cl<"rstoorl
l1is limita tions to J esuit l1isto1, ' in tl1c ,,ery broad est sense . T l1ese ,,•e re in
volumes 110 a nd 111 .
Of muc h m o re i1r1po r t.c:t11 cc ir1 tl1es<." ;trcl1i,•c·s ,trt" tl1e c<>llt·cti()ns o f lett<>1
to and from the Pl1ilippin es, i11 la rge p ,trt gatl1e rt'(\ by Paste lls and titjlizt·d i11
 Bihliograj;liy 311

his three-volume M isi6ri de la. Co11ipaiiia de _Jes1-ts de Filij;i11-as en. f f siglo XIX, IJt1t
b)' n o m eans totally exploited. The re are collectio ns e ntitled "Cartas cle los
PP. Provi11ciales a los Superio res d e Filipinas, 1883-1890"; "Cartas d e Filipinas
a ,,arios, 1882-1914"; "Cartas al P. Provincial"; a nd a la rge un classifi ed sec-
tio n , arran ged c hrono log ically, ,,vl1ich seem s to comprise m ost of tl1e lette rs
used b y Father Pastells for his books. Besides the official le tters to a11d from
the Jesuit provincials in Spain, tl1e re are a good nt11n be r of pe rsonal letters
of vario us kinds, as ,veil as re ports from Madrid by the J est1i t proct1rator \.vl10
handled the Mission 's business ,,vith the overseas mi11istry.
A complement to tl1ese archives, though of co11side rabl)' less valtie, is tl1e
Archivum Ro m a num Societatis J esu , t11e ge11eral arcl1i,1es of the J esui Lc;; in
Rome. In the section "Provincia Aragoniae, Missio Philippina," 1, I, tl1e re .-1re
le tte rs from superiors a nd their consulto rs in the Pl1ilippi11es to tl1e fa th er
gene ral or to the fatl1er assistant for Spain i11 Rome, fro m 1859 to 1899.
Th ese are general!)' official le tters and contain less d etail tl1a11 tl1 ose ,vritte n
to sttperiors in Spain , but occasionally they l1ave st1pplied i11formatio n n o t
found in the latter.
There is a small amount of material 011 tl1e Philippi11es in the Archivo clel
Ministerio d e Ast1ntos Exteriores in Madrid. Mucl1 of it m e rely duplicates
d ocume nts in the Archi,,o Hist6rico Nacional, and due to the 11a tu re of the
Archives most of the r est lies outside tl1e scope of this stud)'· The pe rtinent
matei-ial is in the "Secci611 d e Ultramar," II-E, legajos 2962-2966.
A library very rich in nineteenth-centt1ry books and pamphlets on the Pl1il-
ippines, of which I was able to make o nly partial use due to limita tions of
tim e, is that of the Colegio de los PP. Agustinos Filipinos of Vallado lid. !11
the Navarro Collectio11 there, b esides many of the early pamphlets on the
contro,,ersies b e t\veen the friars and tl1e Filipino secular cle rgy, I fou 11d a
bound MS volume in Retana's handwriting, co11taining the notes he took
from the proceso of the gobernadorcillos involved in the antifriar ma nifesta-
tion in Manila in 1888, no. 25.432.
Another archive which lack of time pre,,e nted me from exploiting ft1lly
\.vas that of the Philippine Franciscans in Pastrana (Guadalaja ra ), 110,v the
Archivo Franciscano Ibe ro-Oriental in Madrid. Nonetl1eless it pro"ided some
later letters of Reta11a to Father Lore n zo Perez, O.F.M. , a nd some accottnts of
the treatment of the friars held prisone rs during the Revolt1tio n . Undoubt-
•
edly the re is more material of ,,alue.
The Vatican Archives ,ve re still completely closed for tl1e pe riod a t tl1c
time of my research . Tl1e Archivio Storico d ella Con gregazio11e "de Propa-
ganda Fide" in Rome was likewise open the n only up to 1878. Tl1ot1gl1 these
provided som e useful backgrot1n~ material, it " '_as mt_1c h less th a n mig l1t h a, ,e
been expected, since tl1e Philipp1~e Church still being_?o,,~rne ~ und<>r the
regalism of the Patro nato, theoret_ically at !east, the Pl1ilipp1rte b1sl1 ops ,ve re
not supposed to commt1nicate directly with Ro_me. bt1t o nl)' tl1ro t1gl1 the
Madrid governme nt. This \Vas evaded to a certain t>xle11t b)' som e bist1c>ps.
but the total a m o unt of m ate rial is srr1all for tl1c ;·ea rs up Lo 1878.
3 12 BibliograjJ/iy

1J1 the United States, documentary collections containing n1aterial of interest

are to be fot1nd in tl1e Ed,vard W. Ayer Collection of fue Newberry Library in
Chicago; the J an1es Alexai1der Robertson Papers in the Manuscri pt Division of
Duke Uni,,ersity Library in Durham, North Carolina; the Manuscript Division
of the Library of Congress, and tl1e National Archives in Washington.
Tl1e Ayer Collection, \vhicl1 is extremely rich in Philippine books, p am-
phlets, and broadsides, contains several MSS of value for this period. All these
are described in the Calendar of Lietz cited below. Subseqtient additi on s to
the MS collection are listed in an unpublisl1ed calendar in the Library, done
by Eliodoro Robles. A fe,.v of fuese h ave been useft1l. The books, pamphlets,
and broadsides prior to 1900 are listed in the Catawgi.u of Welsh, cited below.
Though the J ames Alexa11der Robertson Papers in Duke University Library
d eal chiefly with the early t\.ve11tiefu century in the Philippines, some letters
of interest ,.vere found in the correspondence of James A. LeRoy, which is a
part of the Robertson collection . LeRoy, who was one of the first Americans
to write on a scholarly level on Pl1ilippine history, had corresp ondence with
Clemente J. Zulueta, Epifa11io de los Santos, and other Filipinos, who com-
municated to him data on the events of the Propaganda and Revolution ary
decades. Though little of this has appeared directly in this study, it has pro-
vided useful background, particularly for evaluating Retana's \.vork, since es-
pecial!)' De los Santos was a principal source of documents for Retana's life
of Rizal. This LeRoy corresponden ce is in X-F, Letters, 1902-1906.
The Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress, though containing a
good deal of material on other, especially later, periods of Philippine history,
had littl e of interest for the ptirpose of this study, except for the
Blt1mentritt-Meyer correspondence, which is, however, all of 1897 or later,
with the exception of a few letters. The book collection of the Library of
Co11gress contains perhaps a greater number of Pl1ilippine items tha n any
other, though Ne,.vberry Library is perl1aps richer in rare ite ms, and the
Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid, Duke University Library, v\Tide ner Library at
Harvard University, and the New York Public Library, all contain exten sive
and valuable collections ,.vhich supplement the collections of Washington and
Chicago. The Biblioteca Nacional, having as the nucleus of its collection the
former Biblioteca de Ultramar, formed under the ministry of Victor Balaguer,
is especially rich in late nineteenth-ce11tuf)1 books on the Pl1ilippines printed
in Spain.
The National Archives in Wasl1ington contain am ong the records of the
Department of State the Consular Letters from Manila from 18 17 to 1899.
They have occasionally been helpful for the situation in Manila, bttt less tl1an
might be thought. Apparent!)' due to tl1e frequent changes in co11suls dtiring
the period 1880-95, there are e ither no reports a t all, or, tl1e consuls bei11g
poorly informed on local affairs because of their brief tenure, gave reports
that are extrem ely jejune. Mt1cl1 the same 1nay be said of the reports of the
B1·itjsh consul in Manila, in the Public Record Office in London, F.O . 72, for
apparen tl)' tl1e same reasons.
 Bibliography 313

The collection in the Nation al Archives u11der tl1e adj t1tant-ge11eral 's of-
fice , from the defunct Bureau of Inst1lar Affairs, known as tl1e Philippin e
Insurgent Records, h as as its nucleus the captured archives of tl1e First PhiJ-
ippine Republic. It likewise contains co11siderable other ma terial wl1ich Cap-
tain John R.M. Taylor gathered as background material for l1is official history
of the Filipino-American War. The history itself, "Tl1e Philippine Insurrec-
tion against the United States: A Compilation of Documents with Notes and
Introduction," in five volumes, is likewise found here, still in galley proofs,
I
because of its suppression by William Howard Taft for political motives. It
' has subsequently been published under the editorship of Re11ato Constantino
by the Eugenio Lopez Foundation. Among tl1ese records, now retur11ed to
J
the Philippine Government, but still preserved on microfilm in Wasl1ington ,
are a large number of the antifriar pamphlets and broadsides printed by the
•
Filipinos in 1888-97 .
Besides tl1ese manuscript collections, newspapers play an important part
in this study, given the nature of the Filipino campaign. The principal collec-
tions for Madrid newspapers are those of the Biblioteca Nacio11al and of the
Hemeroteca Municipal de Madrid. For Barcelona, the chief repository is tl1e
Hemeroteca of the Instituto Municipal de Historia. Tl1e only complete set of
La Solidaridad of which I know is that of the University of Michigan library, a
microfilm copy of which is in my possession.
At least equal in importance with the sources thus far mentioned are the
letters of Rizal and Del Pilar. The former were published in fi,,e volumes
under the title Epistolario Rizalino; the latter in two volumes as the Epistolario
de Marcelo H. del Pilar. In addition, the Philippine National Historical Society
published in 1959 letters of Rizal to his family. Tl1is latter volume, as well as
Rizal's letters to Blumentritt in volume 5 of the Epistolario, were reprodt1ced
photographically. The other volumes of both writers have not been edited
satisfactorily, for not only are there a number of demonstrable errors of dat-
ing or attribution for undated or pseudonymous letters, but also errors in
transcription of French and German letters. It has been possible in the course
of this study to correct some of these errors, and wherever it seemed that
there was likelihood of these affecting interpretation, this has been 11oted.
Since the centennial edition of Rizal's letters in 1961 simply reproduced
those letters which had previously been published else,vhere, I have retained
the footnote references to the original publications, as noted in the preface
to this book.
Mention should also be made here of two works whicl1, though bibliogra-
phies, are of considerable value also for the ge11eral information tl1ey pro-
vide on persons and events of this period. Both of them ,,rere compiled by
contemporaries more or less involved in tl1e events treated h ere, and both
were men with a developed sense of history. These are Wenceslao E. Retana's
Aparato bibliografico de la historia general de Filipirias, and Tri11idad H. Pardo d e
Tavera 's Biblioleca Filipina. Retana ,vas one of the principal Spanish oppo-
nent~ of the Filipino nationalists, later n1rned admiring biograpl1er of Ri?.al,
\,·itt1 co11si<lc1c1l) le access to the latter's JJap(' r · a ,1d C<)mn1unications from h is
ass<Jci,1tes. l\1orco\'Cr, cl!) a 11 offi c iaJ i11 th e O\'c rscas 1n inistl) ' dt1ri ng part of
tl1is per iod, a fri e 11d a 11d coll,11Jora to r o f s11c l1 lcadi11g friars as Fath ers Font,
N,1\·arro, a11d Fe rn a11d cz Ari as, an d 0 11e , vl10 I1ad tl1e patro n age of a nd access
to tl1 c p ape rs of Go,1e rn o r-Gen eral \r\'e)1le r , his ,4.paralo is a sot1 rce of con ·icl-
e ra l) le fac tu;:11 i11fo rm a ti o n . Th e sam e m a)' be said of scver aJ o th e r ,vorks of
l1is, partict1la rly tl1e Arc/iivo de! bibliofilo .filipi110. 1\ l a11do def Cerieral l11ry ler, ,1visos
1 1

)' /Jrofecias, ar1d l1is bi ograp11)' o f Ri zal. Al l o f tl1 ese contai n nun1 erou s con tem -
po ral)' d ocu1n e n ts, n1 an y of tl1 e m n o lo 11ge r a\.-ailable to tl1 e rescc1rc h e r.
P.:1rdo d e 1~a\1e ra, th o t1 g l1 h e 11 evcr took a n )' ac ti,·e publi c ro le in th e Fil i-
pi110 campaig n , ,..,·as a close associ.:1te a n cl frie nd o f Rizal, tl1 e l ,t111a5. ancl
o tl1er FiliJ) i11os. Be ing likc,vise a J)rofessor a t tl1c l lni,·ersit)1 of San to T o m as
arid e mplo) e d b) tl1 e go, ern 111e r1t d uri11 g som e ti,ne , he a lso l1ad ,1ccess Lo a
1 1 1

g r ea t d eal of in fo r111 a ti o 11.

Bo th Re ta n a a nd Pardo d e T a,,e ra, l10,ve, 1er, sh o,ved ra tl1er co11side ra ble
bias a t ti111es, a11d asst1me d diffe ring attitt1des in clifferenl e r·as. T h e}' must
tl1e r efo re be t1sed , vith a certa i,1 car e in m a tte rs of in terpretati o n .

Prin1an, 1 Sot1rces: Books a11d Arti cles

Aleja11dri11 0, J ose. 17ie Price of l·1·eedom. (!Ja senda dPI sacrificio). T ra11s. J ose Yi.
Al ej a11drino, l\1a nila: Colcol, 1949.
Alo 11so La llave, Manriq t1e . Los Frailes en FilijJinas. Madrid : J . r\nto 11io Garcia,
1872.
A rcilla, J ose S., SJ. (ed .) "Doct11n e 11 ts Co11cern i11g the Cala mba De p o r tation s
of 189 1." Pliil1jJpine Stz1dies 18 (1970 ) : 577-633.
A t1be, Th . "Ma nille e t les Pl1ilippines.'' Revue des Deu.-.: 1'1onde.s. Se serie, 22
( 1848): 329-55.
Ba lagu e r . Victo r. Islas Fili/Jinns (1\tle1noria). Madrid: An g les, 1895.
_ _ ___ . !vferrzoria red.actada jJor el 1\1i·nistro de L'llra11zar D. \.'ictor B fzlaM.in·
0
acerca de su gesti6n l>71 Pl departa11zfn lo de si, cargo. 2 ,,o ls. ~fa drid: T e llo. 188R.
Ba rra ntes, Vicente. ''Secci6 11 Hispano-l lltra111a ri11a." !Ja f~p(11i<1 J\1{)(fn-, 1a 1 ( ept
1889): 133-148; 2 (Jan 1890): 16 1-90.
_____ . El IPatro lagalo. M;1drid: M a nt1e l G. H e rn a r1dez, 1889.
Bla ir, Emma H . a nd J a1nes A. Ro bc r tso11 (eds .) Tl,e Philippi11e lslar1ds, /4 93-
1898. 55 vols. Cleveland: Artl1 ltr 1--l. Cla rk , 19()3- 19()9.
Bla 11co y Erenas. Ram o n . l\1e111oria <Jue r,l Se11ado dingf ti Gnlrral Blar,ro ncerra
dews ultimo!J s11resos or1t111,lo.\· ,:,1i ln Isla (le Lt1z6r1. ~lad1i d : .. El l .iber~tl.... I 89i.
Bla 11co H erre ro , Mig t1 e l. Politirn de Espl11ia r11 Ultra,n<rr. 2d ed. ~l~ldrid: ~~r..11 , _
cisco G. P e r ez, 1890.
Bl Lt rn e n tri tt, Ferri a n cic>. G'o,z..\irlrrari,J11rs rzrerrn cir f<1 art 1, ,1 I Jil11anon /K>liti(a di'
Filipi11(1s. Barcelo na: I111pre r1 u1 lbc~ric~, clc l-~ra 11c isco f <>ss.ts, 1889.
_____ . t '/ .. Noli 11w lri11ge,,:· l fi:.r1/ )11~1,l,1 /1or f'l Ji.,vft'sar } '. Bl11"1r11triJt.
tit'
Ba rcelo n a: lmpre 11ta Ibe ri ra cle Fr;\1 lc i~co Fl>~sa."• I R89.
 '
'
'
'• 315
I Bibliograj;hy
t

l Bt1encamino, Felipe. "Sixty Years of Philippine I--IistOT)'," tra11s. Alfonso lJecaros

• '
• and ed. Mauro Garcfa. 1-fisto,rical B1tlleti1z 13 (1969) : 1-43 .
Ang cc1gamuta11, 1nacabubulzay o casaysa)1an nang 111,anga caltlltllia11ang rlapr1t
1naalanian. rtang man,ga tauo 11,ang 11zacajJag-i,ngat sila sa 11zanga hc1sagulo,
quin.atha nang isang Padre. Malabon: Asilo de Huerfanos d e Ntra. Sra. de
Consolacion, 1896.
t Canam aque, Francisco. Recuerdos de FilijJinas. Madrid: Anllo y Rodrfguez, 1877.
'
Caro, P. [Casimiro Herrero O.S.A.]. Filipinas ante la raz6n del indio. Madrid: A.
Gomez Fuentene bro, 1874.
Cha puli Navarro, Antonio. Siluetas y 1,zatices. Mad rid: Mint1esa de los Rfos,
1894.
Del-Pa11, Rafael. "Dos gigantes y un pigmeo: Ri zal, Cano,,as, y Pi y Margal l."
Dia Filipino (Manila), 30 Dec 191 3.
Dimas Alang Uose Rizal]. Par telefono. [Barcelona, 1889].
_____ . La vision de Fray Rodriguez. [Barcelona, 1889].
Feced , Pa blo. Filipinas: esbozos y pinceladas, por Qt1ioquiap. Manila: Ramf re z,
1888.
[Font, Salvador, O.S.A.]. Filipinas: prob/,ema fundamental, por un espanol d e
larga_residencia en aquellas islas. Madrid: Aguado, 1891.
Gainza, Francisco, O.P. Carta pastoral que el ll1no. y Rmo. Sr. Dr. D. Fr. Fra1zcisco
Gainza del Sagrado Ordert de Predicadores, Obis/Jo de Nueva Caceres, dirige a sus
71zity amados diocesan,os con niotivo de su consagraci611. Ma11ila: Estab. tip. de
Santo Tomas, 1863.
[ Giraudier, Baltasar]. Los Frai/,es de Filipinas. Breves consideracion,es de actualid.ad
escritas par un espaiiol peninsular. Madrid: A. Perez Dt1brull , 1888.
Grifol y Aliaga, Daniel. La instrucci6n primaria en Filipinas. Manila: Cl1ofre,
1894.
Jagor, Feodor. Reisen in den Philippine,i. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchl1andlur1g,
1873.
Lopez Jaena, Graciano. Discursos y arliculos varios. 2d edition b)' Jai1ne C. de
Veyra. Manila: Bureau of Printing, 1951.
Luna y Novicio, Anto nio. lmpresion,es, por Taga-Ilog. Madrid: lmpre 11ta de El
Progreso Tipografico, 1891.
Mabini, Apolinario. Las cartas f1oliticas de Apolin,a,rio 1\IJ.abini. Ed. T eoclo ro !\l.
Kalaw. Manila: n. p ., 1930.
_____. La Revol1.tci6n Filipina (con ot-ros docu1nentos dR la epora). 2 ,,o ls.
Manila: Bureau of Printing, 193 1.
Manapat, Do lores [Marcelo H . del Pilar] . Cai-igat ca,,o. N.p., 1888; in Epifa 11 io
de Jos Santos, "Marcelo H . d el Pilar," Tlie Pliili/Jpin~ Reuierv 3 (191 8): 961-
63.
Manifiesto que a la nob/,e nacion esfJariola, derigen [sic] los lea/es Filipinos n, defrnsa
de su lton·ra, y fidelittad grave1nente v11,l11eradas por el jJeriodito "/,a \,'rrtlad ., de
Madrid. [H ong Kong: n .p ., 1888].
Martin y de Castro, Luis. La 11iaso 11,e11:r1, er, la lsl<1 rw C11ba )' Los CtrnndeJ ()ri.rnlf s
de Espaiia. Gt1antanamo: l ,,1 Voz de Gt1a.~<>, 189{).
 316 Bibliograpliy

Marti11ez Vigil, Ramon, O. P. "La antigt1a ci\ ilizaci611 de las islas Fili pinas." f1L
1

ts jJaiicL Modema 3 (Apr 1891 ): 86-98; (May 1891): 4-15; (June 1891 ): 4-20.
Mascaro del Hierro, V. A ·mi sinipatico a1nigo N. residfnte en Manila. Malaga:
n.p., 1870.
Mauricio [pseud .]. La gran, traici6n. Barcelo na: Borras, 1899.
[Navarro, Eduardo, O.S.A.] Filipinas. £studio de algi1,nos asuntos de aclualidad.
Madrid: Mint1esa de los Rios, 1897.
Pardo de Tavera, Trinidad H. Biblioteca Filipina. Washington: Government
Pri11ting Office, 1903.
Pastells, Pablo., SJ. Misi6n de la Comj1a1iia de j estLS de Filif1inas en el siglo XIX. 3
vols. Barcelo na: Editorial Barcelo11esa, 1916-19 17.
[ _ _ _ _ ] . La 1naso1iizaci6n de Filipin,as. Rizal y su o/Jra. Barcelona: Librerfa
y Tipograffa Cat6lica, 1897.
Paterno )' de Vera Ignacio, Pedro AJexa11dro Molo. La antigua civilizaci6n
tagalog. Madrid: Manuel Hernandez, 1887.
_ _ _ _. El Barangay. Madrid: Cuesta, 1892.
_ _ _ _. El Cristia1iismo en la antigua civilizaci6n tagalog. Madrid: Impre nta
Moderna, 1892.
_ _ _ _ . La fa1nilia tagalog en la historia unive1-saL Madrid: Cu esta, 1892.
_ __ _ . Los itas. Madrid: Cuesta, 1890.
_ _ _ _ . Ninay. Costumbres filipinas. Madrid: Fortanet, 1885.
_ _ _ _ . Sampaguitas. (" Biblioteca Filipina," vol. I). Madrid: F. Cao y d e
Val, 1880.
Pilar, Marcelo H. del. Episto/,ario de Marcel,o H . del Pi/,ar. 2 vols. Manila: Imprenta
del Gobierno, 1955-1958.
[Pilar, Marcelo H. del]. Dasalan at toksohan. ("Banal na kasulatan ," no. XI) .
N.p., n.d.
[ _ _ _ _ ] . Pasiong dapat ipag-alab nang puso nang tauong babasa. N.p., n.d.;
in Santos, Philippine Review 3 ( 1918): 960-61.
[ _ _ _ _ ] . Sagot nang Espana sa hibik nang Filipinas. [Barcelona, 1889]; in
Santos, Philippine Review 3 (1918) : 869-73.
[ _ _ _ _ ] . (ed.) Filipinas en las Cortes. Discursos pro11unciados en el Congreso
de Diputados sabre la representaci6n. pa·rlamentaria del Archipielago Filipino. Ma-
drid: Jaramillo, 1890.
Plaridel, Mh. [Marcelo H. del Pilar] . La frailocracia filipina. Barcelona: Imprenta
Iberica de Francisco Fossas, 1889.
_ _ _ _ . La soberania 1nonacal en Filipi1ias. Barcelo n a: Imprenta Iberica de
Francisco Fossas, 1888.
Plauchut, Edmond. "L'Archipel des Philippines." Revu~ lU's DetLt M011dt-s, 3c
pe riode, 20 (1877): 447-64, 896-9 13; 21 (1877): 885-923.
Ponce, Mariano. Carias sobrf' la Revoluci6n, 1897-1900. Mar1iJa: Bt1reau of Print-
ing, 1932.
- - - - · "Sobre Filipi11as." In M. NJ . Norton, Bui'lders of a Natio,i (f\ianila:
n.p., [1914] ), 17-35.
 Bibliogra/Jll_)1 ~ 17

I
I
Po n ce , Maria110, a nd J ain1 e C. de Veyr,1. Efe111erirles Ji fi/Ji11rt'i. \ 'ol. 1. r\'la11ila:
I Morales, 19 14.
I
• Recopilaci6n de leyes de Los re;1nos de las /11,dias. 3 ,,ols. l\1a drid : Co11sejo cle
I
I
H isp a11idad , 1943 . Edi tio 11 of 179 1.
Retar1a, We n ceslao E . Aparo.to bibliog;rafico de la liistoria gerieral de Fili/Ji11a.s. 3
vols. Ma drid: Minuesa d e los Rfos, 1906.
.
' - -- --· Aj;un tes para la liiston·a (aniterias )' solidaridades). lYladrid: l\il int1esa
d e los Rios, 1890.
•
_ _ __ _ . Cuestiones fi lipirtas. Avisos ) I profecias. Mad ricl: J\llin t1esa d e los Rfos .
1892.
_ ____ . F,·ailes y clirigos. Mad rid: Minuesa d e los Rfos, 1890.
_____. Manda del General v''eyler ert Filipinos. Mad rid: !vlin uesa d e lo Rios.
1896.
'' _____. Reformas y otros excesos. Madrid: Mint1esa d e la s Rios, 1890.
J
' _____ . Sinapisnios (Bro1nistas y critiqu.illas). Ma drid: Minuesa d e los Rios.
• 1890 .
'
_ _ ___. Vida y escritos del Dr. Jose Rizal. Madrid: Victorian o St1arez, I 907.
_ __ __ . (ed .) A1·chivo del bibli6filo filzpino. 5 vols. Madrid : Min u esa d e las
Rios, 1895-1 898 (vols. 1-4); Victoria n o Sua rez, 1905 (vol. 5) .
Reyes y Flo re ntino, Isabe lo d e los. El Fo/,k-lore Filipirio. 2 vols. Ma nila: l mpren t.a
d e Sa nta C ruz, 1889.
_ _ _ __ . H isto·ria de Filipinas (vol . 1): Prehistoria de Filipinas. Manila : Balbas,
1889.
_ _ _ __ . H istoria de llocos. 2d e d . 2 vols. Ma nila: "La Opi11ion," 1890.
_ __ __ . L as Islas Visayas en la, epoca de la conquista. 2d e d . Manila: Ch ofre,
1889.
_ _ _ __ . La sensacional 1nemo1i a de Isabelo de los Reyes y Florentino sabre la
reuolucion filipina de 1896-1897. Madrid: J. Cor rales, 1899.
Rizal y Alonso , J ose. Barrantes y el Teatro Tagala. Barcelon a: Impre nta Ib e rica
d e Francisco Fossas, 1889.
_ _ __ _ . Documentos Rizalinos regalados por el pueblo espaiiol al pueblo filipino.
Manila : Impre nta Publica, 1953.
_ __ _ . Dos diarios d£ juventud, 1882- 1884. Ed. P. O r tiz Arm e n gol an d A.
Mo lina. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispanica, 1960.
_ _ _ _ . Epistolario Rizalino. 5 vols. Ma nila: Bureau of Pri11ting, 1930-1938.
_ ____ . Escritos de Jose Rizal. 10 to m os. Manila: Co1n isi6 11 Nacio11~tl d e l
Cente n ario d e J ose Rizal, 1961.
. El Filibusterismo. Navela fi lipina. Ge nt: F. Meye r-\ ' a11 Loo, 189 1.
- ----
- - - - - · Noli me ttingere. Novela tagaln. Be rli11 : Be rli11er Bucl1dru cke re i-
Actie n-Gese llsch aft , 1887.
_ _ __ . One Hundred Letters ofJose Rizal to liis Parrnts, Brotl,~r. Si.stm, Rela -
tives. Man ila: Philippine Natio n a l Historical Socit"l)', 1959.
_ __ _ _ . •'D ie Tran sc ription d es Tag--.1lo g. " Bijdra~" l ol de tnal-. /a,,<i-, ,,1
volkenkunde van. Netierlandsch-lndie, 42 (1893): 311 -20. T r.:,ns. F. Rlttme ittritt.
318 Bibliogra/Jliy

_____ . "Uber tagctlisch e Yersku11st." Verliandlungeri der Berliner Ge,se[L5c}irift

fur Anllrro/Jologi,P, Etli,iologie, 1,·n,d Urgescliiclile ]9 ( 1887), 293-296.
_____ . 1'Jie Young Rizal. A T·rarislation of "1\1e1norias de un estitdiarite de
1\1anila." Ed. Albe rto a11d T omas Barretto ; tra11s. and ed. Leon Ma.
Guerrero. Ma11ila: Bardavon Book Co., 1951.
_ _ __ _ . (ed.) Sucesos de las Islas Filipirias, por el Dr. Anto11io de Morga.
Obra publicada en Mejico el ano de 1609, nuevamente sacada a lt1z y
anotada por Jose Ri zal y precedida de un pr6logo del Prof. Fernando
Blun1entritt. Paris: Gar11ier, 1890.
Rodriguez, J ose, O.S.A. ;Guardaos de ellos.'-Pero ;./Jorqite? ("Cuestiones de sumo
i11teres," II). Manila: Peqt1ena imp. del Asilo de Huerfanos, 1888.
_ ____ . ;. Porq1,e no las lie de /,eer? ("Cuestiones d e sumo interes," I) . Ma-
nila: Peqt1ena i111p. del Asilo d e Hue rfa11os, [1888].
Roxas, Felix. Tlte v\lorld of Felix Roxas. Trans. Ai1gel Estrada and Vicente del
Carme11 . Ma11ila: Filipinia11a Book Gt1ild, 1970.
Sa11cianco y Goson , Gregorio. El progreso de Filipinas. £studios econ6micos,
admiriistrativos y politicos. ,101. l : Parte eco116 mica. Mad1id: J. M . Perez, 1881.
Serrano Lakta,v, Pedro. Diccionario liispano-tagalog. Primera parte. Manila: "La
Opi 11i611 ," 1889.
Sitcinla rn.emoria que coritiene el estado actual de las Islas Filipinas, por u11 verd adero
espanol. Valladolid: Roldan, 1838.
U.S. Senate. Land Held for Ecc/,esiastical or ReligioilS Uses in tlie Philij;pine Islands.
Document 110. 190. 56tl1 Congress, 2d Sessio11. Wasl1ington: Government
Printi11g Of~ce, 190 1.
Walls y Me1-ino, M. El General Despujol en Filipinas. Madrid: Fernando Fe, 1892.

Newspape1-s a11d Periodicals

La Ba1iclera Social (Madrid )

El Correo (Madrid)
La Correspondencia de Espaiia (Madrid )
El Dia (Madrid)
El Dia/Jlillo Suelto (Madrid)
El Dilitvio (Barcelona)
Las Do11iin.icales dfl Lib-re Pensa1niento (Madrid)
l,.,os Dos M'tt11dos (Maclrid)
l,a Aj1oca (Madrid)
Esf1aita en. Filipinas (Madrid)
Filipinas ante Europa (Madrid)
El Gloho (Maclrid )
El llocano (Manila)
El lrn/Jarcial (Madrid)
l,.,a~fusticia (Madrid)
El J,.,atigo Nacionr,l (Barcelona)
El l ,iberal (Madrid)
 l:'l i\1ot1inlie11to C'atolico (Madricl)
El 1Vacional (Madrid )
El 1VoticiPro U11iversa/ (Barcelo 11 a)
.Vuroo Regirrzen ( Maclri d)
E'l Pc,~ (Madrid )
Lt., Patria (Madrid)
Plaridel ( Malolos)
La Politica d.e Espana en }1lifJ1:nas (Mad r id)
EL Progreso (Madrid )
La Publicidad (Ba r celo na )
El Pt1eblo SobPra11.o ( Barcelona)
El Renacimiento (Nlanila)
La Rept'iblica (Maclrid )
El Res1111um (Madrid )
El Siglo Futuro (Madrid )
La Solidaridad (Barcelo n a, 1889; Madrid, 1889-1895)
Triibrin-'s Record (Lo11don)
La Vanguardia Filipina (Mad1id )
La Voz d.e la Patria (Madrid)

Secondary Sot1rces

Acke rk11echt, £1,.vin H. Rudolp/1 ,,·;rchour. Doctor, Statesman. Anthro/Jologist. ~ladi-

son: University of , i\Tiscon sin Press, 1953.
Agoncillo, Teodoro. T/1 e Rroolt of the Masses. Quezon Cil) LTni,·e rsit)' o f tJ1e
1
:

Philippines, 1956 .
•
• Anderson, Gerald H . (ed.) Studies i11 Pliilippine Cliurrll H istory. Ithaca: Cornell
University Press, 1969.
Artigas y Cu e n -a, Manuel. "Los peri6dicos fili1)i110s.'' Biblioleca 1Vacional f1li/1i11<1,
3 (Ma r 1910): 28-31.
Bonoan , Raul J ., SJ. Tlte Rizal-Pastells Correspondmce. Quezon City: Ate 11eo dt·
~tanila U ni,1ersity Press, 1994.
Brc nan, Gerald. 11ie SjJa11isli Lab-yrinlh. 2d e d . Cambriclge: L111i,·e rsit)· Pre s,
1950.
Cacho Yiu , Vicente. La /11slit11,ci611 l.ibre de Ensena11;,.r1. \ ' o l. 1. l\lad,id : E<licio tlt·s
Rbllp, 1962.
C..avan r1a ~, Manso, J esus M., C.M . Riz.r1,/'s (Jrifl1di11g Glory•. 2<l ('d. l\l;.111 il~1: <:.lcllt>.
1956.
•
(' raig, Austin . l .ife, J..,in-eal{f, n,zrl l.ahors of Justi Ri1.nl, J>J,ili/>pi11 P PntrioJ. ~latlil~,:
Philippine Ed11ra tion Co .. 1913.
CullL1m , Leo A., SJ ... Francisco cle P.ctttla S,i11c l1ez, l 8'-1~1- ) 9~8. ·· J>/1i/i/ipi,,r .\ Jti,I
iPS 8 ( J960): 334-(j ] ,
F~mand(•Z, P,1blo. O .P. / )01ni11iro5 c/1,,11/,· 1/ f l (f " ' .,o/. N.p. 19r,H.
Fernande, Almag-ro. M<.·lr l1clt . 1-/i\·/n,-i,, /10/iti,·,1 rf,, t,1 J,,_,JJ<11ic, r,,nte,r,pr>t<zn;•,,. ~
\'O)S. Madrid : Pef,'1.S(), I ~,rl()-:,~) .
320 Bibliograf;li) 1

Frau Ab ri r1 es, Lo ren zo , and Arus 1\rd e rit1, Rosen d o. Dirrio,1ario e11cirlo/Je,lico dP
la Maso11eria. 2d ed. rev. 3 vols. Bttenos Aires: Etl i to ri al Ki e r, [ 194 7].
Gt1errero, Leon Marfa . 11ie First. Filij1ino. Man ila : Natio na l H e roes Comm is-
sio n , 1963.
Kala,v, T eod o ro M. Gregorio H. del Pilar. Man ila: Bu reau of Printing, 1930.
_ _ _ _ . Pl1ilippine Mason,,,. Tra11s. a 11d ed. Fred e ric H. Stevens and Anto n io
Amech azurra. Manila, 1956.
Lietz, Paul S. Ca,lendar of Pliilij1pine Dorurnents iri the A_ver CollRrtion o_f tl1e Newhn 7) '
Library. Chicago: Newberf)' Libraf)', 1956.
Maj ul, Cesar A. A Critiqi,e of Rizal's Co ncept of a Filipi,no 1Vation. Diliman [Quezon
City] , 1959.
Ma11uel, E. Arsenio. Dictionary' of Pl1ilippin1 Biograpliy. Vol. 1. Que zo n City:
1

Filipiniana Publications, 1955.

Martinez, Bernardo, O .S.A. Provi11cia nguslinia11a d,el Santisi1no No ,n,bre ru Jesus
de Fili/1inas. Apuntes liist6ricos. Mad rid: Lo pez d el H orno, 19 13.
Mo n te ro y Vidal, J ose. Histo1ia general de Filipirias desde el descubrimiento de d ichas
Islas liasta nu,estros dias. 3 \'Ols. Madrid : Tello, 1887-95.
Norton, M. M. Builders of a Natio1i. Ma11ila: n .p . [1 9 14] .
Ocampo, Este ban d e. Rizal as Biblioph,ile. Manila : Bib liographical Society of
the Philippines, 1960.
O ssorio y Bernard, Manuel. Ensa)10 d,e un catalogo de periodistas espano/,es dRl
siglo XIX. Madrid: J . Palacios, 1903.
Palma, Rafael. Biografia de Rizal. Manila: Bureau of Prin ting, 1949.
Quirino, Carlos. Tlie Great 1\1alayan. Manila: Philippine Educa tio n Co. , 1940
Saniel, J osefa M. j apan and the Philippines, 1868- 1898. Quezon City: U ni\'ersit)'
of th e Philippines, 1963.
Santos, J ose P. Buhay at mga sinulat ni Plaridel. Maynila: Palimbag n g Da laga,
1931.
San tos Cristo bal, Epifania d e los. "Balagtas y su Fl01·ante," Tlze Philippine Review
I (Aug 19 16) : 36-64.
_ _ _ _ . ''Marcelo H . d el Pilar ." Tlie Pliilippi1ie Revin.u 3 (19 18): 775-803 ,
86 1-85, 947-75.
_ _ _ _ . "Mas sobre Ri zal.'' Tlze PliilipjJin e Rroiezo 1 (Dec 19 16): 2,1 ,14 .
Scl1umach e r, J o hn N., SJ. "Filipino Maso11I)' in ~1ad rid, 1889-1896." Philifr
pine H isto1i cal Review 1 (1966): 168-82 .
_ __ _ _ . The Mal,in,g of a Nation: Essa)1S in Ninetfrr1tll-Cnzlt,1)' Filipi,io ~\ ratio,,-
alism. Q uezon City: Ate n eo d e MLl11ila U11i, ersit)' Press, 199 l .
1

_ _ _ _ . "Philippin e Maso1111· to 1890." ,-\si<1n ,.;;11,cl ies 4 ( 1966): 328-t l .

- - - - · "Som e Notes t)t1 Rizal i11 Da pita n ." Pl1ilipPi11e Sl ttdieJ 11 ( l 9(i3) :
30 1- 13.
- - - - · ''Wcn ceslao E. Rc ta 11a: A.J1 l-listo rio graph ic~11 Stltd )·." l'l1ilipp111r
Stz,dies 10 ( 1962): 550- 76.
- - - -· .. We11ceslao E. R {' l Llll i.t i11 J•l1ili ppitlt' H isto11·," ir1 1nr ,\ laking of a
N ation, 134-55.
 Bibliograpli_v 32 1

Scl1umacl1er, ~John N. , SJ ., a11d Nicl1 o las P. Ct1shn er, S.J .. tra11s. ancl ed . B111p:os
a11(l the C<11.1ite Muti,1)1, r e printed fro 1n Pl1ilifJpine St11rli"S 17 ( I 969): 457-529.
Sitoy, T . \ ' alenti110. "An Aborted Spanisl1 Protestant Mission to tl1 c Pl1ilip-
pines." Silli11ta1i Jo1,1~11al 15 ( l 968): 243-80.
- - - - -· "Ni11e teentJ1 Centut")' E,1a11gelical Begin11ings in the Philippine\;j. ··
1ne Sout/1 Easl Asia J ou.rnal of· TheolOf!J' 9 (Oct 1967): 42-55.
Tapia Ozcariz, Enrique de. Luz y taquigrafos (Un siglo de parla1,zf>11to rn Espa11n ).
Madrid: Aguilar, 1961.
Tt1rin, Yvo11ne. L 'educatiori et l'ecole en Espagne de 1874 a 19()2: liberalis1nt' rt
t1·adition. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1959.
\ 'on der ~1ehden, Fred R. Religi.on and Nationalisrn i11 Soi1.Llieast Asia: B11nnn,
l 11donesia, tlie Pltilippines. Madiso11: Un i, ersil)' of \,Visco11sin Pre s. 1963.
1

\\Te}s11, Doris Varner. (ed.) A Catalogue of Pri,ited l\1alerials Rtlati11g to tlzr Pl1ili/r
pine lsl,arids, 1519-1900, in theNf!"lubert)' Libra1)'· Cl1icago: Ne,vberT)' Lit)raf)·.
1959.
\\1ckberg, Edgar. "The Chinese Mestizo in Pl1ilippine History." joun1al of .So11tl1-
east Asian History 5 ( 1964): 62-100.
 Index
A Arellano, Deodato, 124, 233n, 25911,
Abreu, Jose, 236
Administration, local , 10-11
Adrninistrative organization, 9-11
Adriano, Numeriano, 286, 293n
Aglipay, Gregorio, 225n
Agoncillo, Felipe, 230n
Aguilera, Gregorio, 237; 281
Aguilera y Arjona, Alberto, 210n
Aguirre, Evaristo, 59-61, 71 , 79n,
131n, 172, 184
Alcalde-mayor, 5n, 10
AJejandrino, Jose, 145n, 236, 271-74,
281
Alejandri110, Mariano, 271, 280, 284
Alfonso XII, 4, 20
AJ011so Lallave, Manrique. See Lallave,
Manrique Alonso
Amadeo of Savoy, king of Spain, 4, 7
Antifriar activities: and Manifestation
of 1888, 114-20; and writings,
125-27, 167-70, 202, 206-8, 279,
280n; in Manila, 107-14; motives
of, 302-6; pt1rpose of 168-69, 246-
49; success of, 300-1
Apacible, Galicano, 132, 144, 144n,
149, 174, 176
AraL1llo y Nonato, Salustiano, 239n
Arejola, Tomas, 294n
322
271
Argudin, Justo, 173
Arias Rodriguez, Manuel, 220
Asociaci6n Hispano-Filipina: 157-58,
188, 245, 250; and Del Pilar, 196-
97; and masonry, 178n, 180, 196n,
197; and Philippine representation
in the Cortes, 199, 201-5; and
police, 293-94; antifriar character
of, 183-86; decline of, 206-7 ;
founding of, 182-83; methods of,
197; nature of, 195-96, 206-7;
program of, 182-83; Rizal ' s
attitude toward, 252
Association Internationale des
Philippinistes, 231-33
Assimilation, x, 27, 39, 140
Assimilationisrn: 52-53, 58, 66, 70 ,
152, 187-88, 219, 228-29, 248-49,
251, 262, 292; and Lopez Jaena,
288-89; as strateg}' , 298-301;
failure of, 295-97
Atayde, Juan, 31
Ate11eo de Madrid, 52
Ateneo Municipal, 12, 33, 306
Atkinson, Fred W., 30311
Augustinians, 230n
Autonomists, 60-61
Ayllon, Ricardo, 172

Azcarraga y Palmero, Manuel, 2011 ,
24, 50, 79
Azcarraga y Pa lmero, Marcelo, 20n
B la tio n , 152, 251; as d efender of
Bag umbaya n , Agapito (Andres
Bo nifacio), 230n
Balagtas. See Baltazar, Francisco
Balagtas Masonic Lodge, 179
Balaguer, Victor, 67, 68n, 70, 72
Balbin de Unquera, Antonio, 196, 206
Baltazar, Francisco, 90n
Barrado, Pascual, SJ., 74n , 300n
Barrantes, Vicente, 89n, 104, 139,
140n, 141 , 218
Basa, Jose Maria: 121n, 189, 250-51 ,
255; and arrest of his agents, 158-
59; and Filipinos, 126, 137, 143,
220, 237; and propaganda works,
103, 126, 270
Basa, Matias, 252
Basalia, 73
Bathalis1no, 226n , 227
Bautista, Arist6n, 174, 239n
Becerra, Manuel: 136, 157-59, 167n,
174-75, 246, 288; and Filipinos,
238-39; anti-Catholic projects for
Philippines by, 162-63; attitude
toward Filipinos, 300; circular on
freedom of worship by, 163; on re-
presentation in Cortes for Philip-
pines , 196-200, 204-5; reform
prajects by, 162-64, 185, 188-89
Berliner Gesellschaft fur A nthropologi.e,
Ethnologi.e, und Urgeschichte, 233
Bianitz, 256
Binondo, 110-11
Bismarck, Prince Otto vo n , as
supporter of Rizal, 96, 104
Blanco, Agustin, 286n
Blanco, Ramon, 122n, 285, 286n, 291
Blumentritt, Ferdinand: 78n, 93, 103-
4, 168-69, 27 1; and Association
Index 323
Internationale des Philippinistes,
231-32; and Barrantes, 104; a nd
La Solidaridad, 140-41, 245, 258-
59; and Ri zal, 80n, 103-4, 141-42,
142n , 242; as advocate of assimi-
Spain, 140-4 1; d efense of
Filipinos, 140, 282; clefe11se of Noli,
103; on Bor11eo colony, 273n; o n
Catholicism, 223
Bo11ifacio, Andres, 229-30, 285, 301
Borneo, and Ri zal, 272-73
Bourg-Madame, 208n
Britisl1 and Foreign Bible Society,
161n, 165
British Ml1seum, and Rizal, 218-20
British North Borneo. See Borneo
Brt1no, Giordano, 56
Brussels, 256
Buencamino, Felipe, 247
Bureaucracy in the Philippin es,
Spanish , 4-5, 297-98
Burgos, Agustin de, 200
Burgos, Father Jose, 7-9, 33, 241
Bustamante, Fernando, 116
C
Cabeza de barangay, 10
Caiigat cayo, 121
Calamba, 48
Calamba deportations, 250, 270
Calamba hacienda, 233, 246 49, 269
Calvo y Munoz, Fra11cisco, 38, 106,
198-200, 203,242
Canalejas, .Jose, 202
Canga-Argiielles, Felipe, 108
Canlapan, Father Rafael, a nd De l
Pilar, 107n, 108
Ca11on, Fernando, 132
Canovas del Castillo, Antonio, 4, 20-
23, 205
Ca1i.amaque, Fra11cisco, 28, 2811, 194,
25 1
324 Index
Canarte, JuanJose, 143, 14311, 173
Capitan Tiago (Don Sa11tiago de los
Santos) , 84-85
Carlists, 3-4, 22
Carnicero, Ricardo, 279n
Casa:Jimenez, Marques de, 70
Casal y Ochoa, Eduardo P., 61, 77-
78, 81n
Castelar, Emilio, 21, 156
Castells, Francisco de P., 165n
Catholic Church conservatism,
304-5
Catholicism, and Filipino nationalism ,
301-6
Catholicism, identified with Spain,
212, 213n
Cavite Mutiny, 8-9, 46, 105-6, 231n,
252
Cecilio, Jose M., 48n, 51
Centeno, Jose, 108-13, 143, 152, 191
Chanco,Jose, 239, 239n
Charles IV, and Spanish friars, 305
Chirino, Pedro, SJ., 218
Church, i11 Spain, 20-24, 88, 109,
251, 298
Cfrculo Hispano-Filipino, 32-33, 39,
41, 64n, 186, 192
Civil Code (Spanish) and Philippines,
163n
Colin, Francisco, SJ., 218, 223
Comite de Propaganda: 123-24, 255-
56; activity in Manila, 147, 155;
and Japanese help, 292; and Rizal,
250, 256-57; renamed Her111andad
de San Patricio, 257n; schism in,
270-71, 283-90; strategy of, 147-
48. See also La Propaganda
Conrado, Candido (Deodato Arel-
lano), 257n
Conservati,1e Party, 201 , 205, 297n
Conservatives, Spanisl1, 20
Coria, Joaquin de, O.F.M., l 43n-44n
Corominas, Eusebio, 56, 95 ( of La.
Puhlicidad) , 210
Cortes, Domingo Marcelo, 174
Cortes, Dorotea: and Co mite d e
Propaganda, 125, 125n, 257n, 271;
and Del Pilar, 119-20; and Lallave,
164-65; as leader of antifriar mani-
festation , 114-16, 119-20; deporta-
tio11 of, 280, 284; in Japan, 292
Cortes, Philippine representation in ,
9, 41-42, 46, 52, 70, 153, 157, 178,
189,242, 242n, 245, 268-69, 297
Crame, L.O. (Del Pilar), 137, 137n
Creoles, 19-20, 64
Crisostomo, Manuel, 122
Cuba, 297, 297n, 293
Cubans, and Filipinos, 57, 59-60,
172
Cuerpo de Com promisarios, 181 ,
205n, 286,290,293
Cuevas, Jose, SJ. , 13n
Cunanan, Mariano, 200n, 243
D
Damaso, Fray, 85-88
Dapitan, and Rizal, 279n, 280
Dasalan at toksohan, 125-26
D'Ayot, Manuel Lorenzo, 77, 81n
De la Corte, Felipe (General), 196,
202,206
"Delegation," nature of, 147-48
Delorme, Rafael, 293n
De los Reyes, Isabelo. See Reyes,
Isabelo de los
Del Pan, Rafael , 172, 210n
Del Pilar, Luis, 291
Del Pilar, Marcelo Hilario: 38, 126,
236, 274, 280, 283, 288, 306; alli-
ance with Spanish Mason11', 161-
70; and Association Inter11ationale
des Philippinistes, 231; and a ttacks
of Lopez Jaena, 290, 290n; and
deportations fTom Calamba. 250;
and escape frorn Philippines, 122,
126; and Indios Bravos, 239, 239n;
and La ,Solidaridari, 135-36; and

Morayta, 185-86; and Rizal, 283,
299; antifriar acti,,ity of, 107, 117;
antifriar pamphlets of, 118-l 9,
123-26; antifriar writings b)', 149-
56; as activist, 160; as coordinator
and organizer of Filipino activities,
105-14, 182, 185-86, 192, 196-97,
245, 256; as deputy to Cortes, 243,
245; as editor of La Solidaridad
144-46, 245; as mason , 173-78,'
239n; as writer for El Globo, 292;
attitude toward independence ,
149; attitude toward religion, 168-
69; attitude toward Spaniards, 149,
160; deatl1 of, 293; disillusionment
with Spain, 217; fir1ancial diffi-
culties of, 283, 286, 290-91; in-
volvement in Manifestation of
1888, 119-20; Manila associates of,
123-24; on pacto de sangre, 228;
political aims and activity of, 127,
156-60, 161-67, 185-86, 201-4;
pseudonyms of, 121, 123n, 137;
reconciliation with Church, 294n;
relations with Spanish politicians,
209-11; religious attitude of, 186;
strategy of, 147-48
Del Pilar, Father Toribio H., 106n
Del Pilar, Marciana, 169
Del Rosario, Tomas, 40
Deportation of Filipinos, 157, 174-75
Despujol y Dusay, Eulogio: and
Catholicism, 273, 279-80; and La
Solidaridad, 275; and policy for
Philippines, 274-75; and Rizal 's
Borneo project, 273-74; as gover-
nor-general, 269, 275, 284
Diario de Manila, 45, 52
Diariong Tagalog, 38, 106
Dfaz, Olegario, 147n, 258n
Dilat, Piping (Del Pilar) , 121
Dimas Ala11g Qose Rizal) , 98n
Dominguez, Felipe , O .P., 247n
Dominicans, 12, 36n, 37, 47, 279. See
also Calamba hacienda
Index 325
E
Economic prosperity, and nationalist
movement, 16-18
Education, and Church, 12, 29, 76,
304
Edt1cation, Rizal 's ideas on, 38-39,
235-44
El Dia, a11d Filipinos, 159, 191, 192
El Diablillo Suelto, 275n
El Diluvio, 95
El Filibusterismo, 260-68, 274-75
El Clabo, 52n, 53, 55, 190, 192, 159,
197, 210n, 290, 292
El llocano, 225n
El lmparcicLl, 51, 51n, 53, 202
El Latigo Nacional, 289-90
El Libera~ 45-46, 52-53, 63, 190, 197
El Nuevo Regimen, 56n, 208n, 210
El Pais, 96, 190, 197, 208n, 209, 292
El Poroenir, 46, 55
El Progreso, 41 45
El Progreso de Filipinas, 25-30
El Resumen, 61-62, 62n, 73, 197, 202,
211
Elias, 85-87
Elejorde, Mateo, 249
Encinas, Santiago Gonzalez, 57n
Enriquez, Rafael, 125
Escuela Normal, 167-68, 306. See also
Normal School
Espana en Filipinas: 57, 65-71, 79-80,
187-88, 196, 300n; and criticistn of
friars, 68n, 69, 71; effects of, 81-
82, 182, 184; efforts toward re,,i,,al
of, 128-32
Evangelista, Edilberto, 236, 272
Exposici6n de Bellas A1·tes, 49
Exposici6n de Filipinas, 67-68, 72-77
F
Fabfe . Antonio, 163n , 204, 209, 250
Fat1r<1, Federico, 11 5n
 326 Index
Feced y Temprai10 , Jose, editor of La
Politica de Espana en Fili/Ji11,as, 282
Feced )' Temprano, Pablo, 62-64, 282
Federalist Republicans, 210
Fernandez Arias, E,1aristo, O.P. , 112n
Fernando Rios. Isaac, 155n
Fernando Vil, 2
Filibusterismo, 45-47, 103, 117, 133,
153, 155, 234, 300n
Filipinas dentro de cien aiios, 219-20
Filipi110 colo n)' in Madrid, 8 1-82,
256-58
Filipi110: civilization, 72-73 , 89-90;
clergy, 5-8; disu11ity amo11g, 33, 57-
58, 64-65, 129-32, 135, 184-87,
254-59, 270-74, 283-84; loyalt)' to
Spain, 139-40
Flores, Ambrosio, 179
Flo res, H ermenegildo , 154n
Folklore, Filipino, 225, 225n ; Ri zal
on, 233-34, 234n
Font, Father Salvador, O.S.A., 76n ,
94, 96-99, 103, 121 , 186, 282
Fran ciscans, 3()6
Francisco, Lorenzo, 241
Franco, Domingo, 27711 , 293n , 285
Franco, Ramiro, (Dominador Gomez),
190n, 282n
Francos Rodriguez, Jose, 209-10
Friars: a11d failure to discern change,
304-5; and teaching of Spanish ,
76, 11 6; as obstacles to Philippine
progress, 65 ; as parish priests, 1,
6, 11-1 5, 43-44, 75-77, 152; atti-
tude of, toward Filipinos, 47n;
campaign to ,,veaken position of,
299-300; charges against, 113-14,
116, 150-51 , 155, 302; demand for
expulsio n of, 11 7, 148; depe n -
dence on go, 1ernment, 3; depre-
• •
c1at1o n of Filipino civili7..ation bvI
I
72-76; Filipino attitude toward , 52·'
government support of, 117, 299:
influence of, 14-1 5; lands of, 52;
loss of prestige of, 300; pamphlets
. . ... . '
against, l 21; political dominance
of, 150-52; political power of, 43-
44; Rizal 's attitude to,-vard, 48-49,
89n ; subjection to Spanish govern-
ment of, 305-6;
Fusionis t Party. See Liberal Party,
Spanish
G
Gainza, Fran cisco, O .P. , 16n, 213-14
Gald6s, Benito Perez, 91n
Galindo, Julio, l 08
Gamazo, German, 61, 200n
Garn bet ta, 299
Garcia, Candido, 113
Garcia, Father Vicente, and Rizal,
100, 100n, 241
Garcia, Felipe, O.S.A., 121-22, 121 n
Garcia, Mariano, 241 , 241n
Gatmaitan, Vicente, 122, 291
Cella, Vicente, 36-37
Germany, Spanish fear of, 94-96, 102
Ghent, 236, 256
Giraudier, Baltasar, 152n
Gobernadorcillo, 1O
Gomez, Dominador, 184, 190, 202 ,
245, 250,282
Gomez Florio, Manuel, 108, 122 , 134
Gomez, Mariano, 8
Gonzalez Serrano, Valentin, 41
Govantes y Azcarraga, Pedro de: 42n
52, 60, 61, 297; and Espana e~
Filipinas, 65, 66-67 , 79, 79 n ;
reforms proposed by, 40 , 4 2-4 3
46, 52-53, 67 '
Gra11 Oriente Espanol. See Masonry
Spanish '
Gran Oriente Nacional, 173
GLiardia Civil, 11
H
l-Ieras, .Juan, SJ. , 13n

H ermandad d e San p atr1c10.
. . S ee
Comite de Propaganda
Her~ero, Casimiro, 0.S.A., 214, 214n
H~Vla, Campomanes, Jose, 11 0
H~dalgo, Felix Resurrecci6n, 49, 84n
Hidalgo, Manuel Timoteo d e 122n
246,254, 297n ' · '
Hong Kong Telegraph, 123
I
Ibarra, Juan Crisostomo, 84-85
Icasiano, Pe dro, 123n
Icasiano, Santiago, 174
Iglesia Filipina Independiente, 225n
lmpe1ial, Ramon, 174
Independence: x-xi, 39, ·51, 148, 228-
30, 269-72, 299; as aim of Rizal
a nd Del Pilar, 259-60, 299; prepa-
1-atio n for, 265-67; Rizal's attitude
toward, 251-54. See also Revolution
Indios Bravos, 237-39
"Indole nce of the Filipino," 28-29,
41, 223-24
Isabel II, 2
Izquierda Dinastica, 211
Izquierdo, Rafael de, 7
J La Guardia, Felipe, 61, 68
J acinto, Emilio, 301
J agor, Feodor, 54n, 233
Japan, and Filipino Propagandists,
290-93
J apanese, and Filipinos, 236, 292
J esuits: 6, 12, 13n , 15-16, 15n , 37,
140-42, 167-70, 243; and Noli,
100-1; and Philippin e education ,
306; and Propagandists, 306-7;
and Rizal, 95; attacked by Morayta,
167-68; attitude of, toward Filipino
nationalists, 307; exempted from
antifriar attacks, 306-7
Index 327
Joest, v\Tilhel1n, 233
Jose, Dorotea, 11 3n , l l 9n
Joson , Dr., 241
Jo,,ellar, J oaqufn , 45, 68n
Jugo Vidal , Simplicio, 184, 188-90,
196
Junoy, E1nilio, 186n, 204, 204n, 205n,
207, 210, 286
Ju11ta de Autoridades, 67-68
Jt1nta de Refor1nas Econ6micas, 27 .
K
Kahili, Gregorio, 202
Kalayaan, 229, 301
Kalipulako (Mariano Ponce), 281n
Kasalo (lsabelo de los Reyes), 225n
I<atipunan, 181, 230, 293, 300, 301
Kern, Hendrik, 232n, 234
Kikil (Gregorio Aguilera), 282n
L
La Correspondencia de Espana, 46
La Correspondencia Militar, articles of
Lete, 190
La Epoca, 45-46, 67, 275
La .frailocracia filipina, 153
"La Gran Bretana," 115n
La justicia, 197, 209
La Lectura Popular, 225n
La Paz, 70n, 187
La Politica de Espana en Filipinas,
anti-Masonic articles, 282, 289
La Propaganda. See Comite de
Propaganda
La Publicidad: 53-54, 95, 210, 288;
a nd Filipinos, 159, 185, 185n;
Ponce's articles in, 129, 129n
La Serna, J "1vier Gomez de. 66, 78n.
81n, 187
328 Index
La sobera·n ia nzonacal en Filipi·nas, 149-
52, 152
La Solidaridad: 134-36, 145, 158, 245;
a11d Del Pilar, 144-45, 197; and
difficulties in entering Philippines,
284, 290-91; and ri val Filipino
newspapers, 271-72, 282-83, 289;
attack on Rizal, 273-74; decline of,
281-93; disenchantment witl1, 270;
financial difficulties of, 283-84;
suspension of, 290-91
La Solidaridad, associatio11, 132, 157-
58, 184, 192
La Union Cat6lica, 6 7
La Vanguardia Filipina, 188
La Vision de Fray Rodriguez, 97-98
Labra, Manuel, 132, 183, 197
Labra, Rafael M., 49, 57, 60, 152, 158,
208
I .allave, Manrique Alonso, 161-68, 174
Lanuza, Timoteo, 110, 113n, 119n
Laong Laan Uose Rizal) , 137n
Las Dominica/,es del Libre Pensamiento,
190n
Laura, Diego (Lopez Jaena), 270
Legazpi, Miguel Lopez de, 1, 30, 150,
150n, 228-30
Leo XIII, 279, ·305
Leon y Castillo, Fernando de, 30-31
Lepore!, Edilberto de (Lete) , 190,
282n
Lete, Eduardo de: 52n·, 53, · 55, 64,
130-32, 133, 281, 287; and Filipino
problems, 70-71; and La Solida-
ridad, 281 , 287; and Rizal, 79-80,
273-74, 274n
Leyes de Indias, 9
Liberals, Spanish: 2-3, 4, 21-22, 44;
and Filipinos, 69-71, 196-206, 245,
250, 299-300, 307; attitude of
Filipinos toward, 137, 156
Liga Filipina, 181, 239, 250-51 , 274,
277-78, 285, 293
Limahong, 150n
Literacy, in Philippin es a ncl Spain ,
303-4
Llorente, Julio, 59, 64n, 80, J30- 31,
173, 176-77, 184, 197, 238, 239n
Lopez, Antonino, deported by Weyler,
249
Lopez Jaena, Graciano: 30-31, 31 n,
40, 50, 63-65, 132-33, 134-35,
187, 253, 256n , 270, 287-88, 293,
306-7; and break with Del Pilar,
283-84; and Comite de Propa-
ganda , 288-90; and Espana en
Filipinas, 71 , 77; and Filipino
clergy, 303n; and La Solidaridad,
145-46, 284, 287-90; and Partido
Rizalino , 271; and Progressist
Republicans, 287-88; and Rizal ,
260n; antifriar writings of, 42-45;
as mason, 173-75; as protege of
Juan Sol y Ortega, 209n; death of,
293; disinterest in Philippines of,
145-46; radicalism of, 64, 77;
reforms sought by, 41-42
Lopez, Leandro, 249
Los Dos Mundos, 41, 196
Lozano Montes, Fernando, 190n
Luna y Novicio, Antonio: 77n, 178,
194, 293n; and Asociacion His-
pano-Filipina, 183-86; and disi-
llusionment with Spain, 216-17;
and La Solidaridad, 143-44, 245,
281, 283-84; and revolution, 271-
72, 273n; and Rizal, 130-31 , 260n
Luna, Benedicto, 241n
Luna y Novicio, Juan, 49, 53, 194,
225n, 228, 293n
M
Mabini, Apolinario, 285n, 286, 286n,
291
Madrid, ·u niversity of, 55-56
Mage llan , 1, 30, 228

Malolos: antifriar activity in , 112-13,
ll4-l 7 , l 21-24, 127; as center of
nationalist activity, 106-8; women
of, 136-37
Manapat, Dolores (Del Pilar) , 121
Maranhal, Alejandro (Jose Alejan-
drina), 282n
Maria Clara, 84-85
Mariano, Mateo, 113
Marte (Dominador Gomez) , 282n
Martinez, Archbishop. See Meliton
Martinez
Martinez Vigil, Ramon, 227
Mas, Sinibaldo de, 251
Masonry, Filipino: 285-86 ; and
Philippine Revolution, 293; as
supporter of La Solidaridad, 285n ,
285-87; in the Philippines, 108,
115n, 171-81, 177-81 , 245, 289,
300; role in nationalist movement,
171-81
Masonry, Spanish: 55, 59, 144n, 162-
68, 197; aid to Filipinos of, 175-
76, 177, 196, 201, 220, 238-39;
and Philippine Revolution, 293-94,
303; Del Pilar and Ponce in, 197
Masons, Filipino propagandists'
connection with, 161
Maura, Antonio, 203, 228n, 299
Medieval Europe, compared with
Philippines, 302
Meliton Martinez, Gregorio, arch-
bishop of Manila, 19
Mendizabal, Juan Alvarez, 134, 134n
Mercado, Paciano. See Rizal, Paciano
Mestizos, Chinese, 20
Mestizos, Spanish, 20, 65
Meyer, Adolf B., 53n-54n
Mir Deas, Celso, 173, 185n-86n, 193-
94, 195n, 216
Molto, Antonio, 68n, 117
Mompe6n, Juan, 249
Montero y Gay, Claudio, 31
Montilla, M. (Dorotea Cort.es), 257n
Index 329
Morayta, Miguel: 23n, 55-56, 55 n,
129n, 133, 152, 157, 166, 171 , 189,
195n, 196,202, 207, 275n, 290-91 ,
294; as founder of Asociacion
Hispano-Filipina, 132, 182; as
help to Filipinos, 172-73 , 19011,
210, 238; role in Filipino mason ry,
172-73
Moret y Prendergast, Segismundo, 5-
7, 49, 109, 208
Morga, Antonio de, 220, 223-24, 229
Murgas, D.A. (Del Pilar), 137
Museo-Biblioteca de Manila, 228n
Muse, deputy to Cortes, 159
N
Naning (Mariano Ponce), 281n
National pride, of Filipinos, 217-18,
220,224, 234-35
National unity, 75, 301
Nationalism: x-xi, 2, 39, 75, 212, 301;
and religion, 301-2, 307-8; and
Spanish colonies, 212-13; different
concepts of, 53, 58, 65
Nationalist movement, beginnings of,
39, 105-15
Newspapers, role of, 209-11, 129-33,
187-94 .
Niemann, G.K., 232n
"Nilad" Masonic Lodge, 178-79, 284-
85
Noli me tangere: 53n-54n, 83-92 , 270,
306; attack in Spain against, 95-
96; attitude of Filipinos toward,
187-88; defe nse for, 95-104;
influence of, 91, 104; plot of, 84-
85; purpose of, 83-84, 90, 169;
reactions to, 92-97; tran slatio n
into Tagalog, 270
Nozaleda, Archbishop Bernardino,
0.P., 247, 278n
Nueva Caceres, 213
330 J1idex
0 Plauchut, Edrrltand, Sn , 23 1
Obach , Antonio, SJ., 243n
Ong:junco, 277
Ortiz de Pinedo, Manuel, 197
Overseas Ministry, 9
p Barcelo na, 128-30, 155, 194. 293;
Pacto de sangre, 150n , 153, 228-30
Paez, Tim o teo , 1 79 , 270, 272 n ,
277n
Pamphlets, of Propaganda, 152- 55
Pando , General, de put)' to Cortes,
159
Pando y Valle, J esus, 40
Pa11ganiban, Jose Ma., 132, 138, 173,
176
Pardo de Tavera, Felix, 20n
Pardo de Tavera, Trinidad H ., 20n,
32, 228n, 234-35, 235n
Paris, 256
Paris Exposition, 231 , 237
Partido Rizalino, 271, 277n
Pas tells, Pablo , SJ. , 34n, 9ln-92n,
216n
Paterno, Maximo, 24
Paterno, Pedro, 24-25, 39, 54, 55,
226-30, 226n
Payo , P e dro, O .P ., arcl1bishop of
Manila, 19, 67, 68n, 76n, 93, 127
Pazos, Pio de, and La Solidaridali, 143
Pelaez, Pedro, 611, 7, 241
Penal Code, 67-68
Pi y Margall, Francisco, 21, 56, 5611,
208, 210, 260n
Pidal y Mon, AJeja11dro , 49
Pilapil, Mariano, 24 I 11
Pilar, Ma rce l<) d e l. ,')f'e Del Pil a r ,
Marcelo J;ila rio
Pim pin, To m as ( Pi 11 pi11 , Tom "1s),
241n
Plaridel (Del J>ilar) , 121
Plasencia, Jtaan de, O .F.l\il., 227n
Pobres Frailes, J1andbill, 279, 279n
Political activity, efTecti,·eness of, 206-
11
Polo, 42
Pon ce, Damaso, 138, 173, 176
Ponce , Ma1iano: 97, 98n , 149, 2 11 ,
235, 250 , 288, 306; activit)' in
and Espa11a en F~lipinas, 81, 128-
29; and Indios Bravos, 238; and La
Solidaridad, 145, 245, 28 1; a nd
research into Philippir1e history,
287; arrest of, 294; as co lla borator
v.,ith Del Pilar, J07n , 120, 194-97;
as di s tributo r of ,vorks of
Propaganda, 98n , 102; as rnason ,
173, 177, 179; as write r for L a
Publicidad, 129; as wri ter of
Bulacan . folklore, 225n; in J apan ,
294; ,vith Hong Ko n g Junta, 294
Por lelefono, 99
Pre-Hispa nic Philippines: according
to Barrantes 139; according t o
Isabel o de los R eyes, 224-25;
according to Jose Ri zal, 2 17-18;
according to Pedro Pate rno, 226---
30; Spanish attitudes to\vard , 2 13-
15
Primo de Rivera, Fernando, 35, 106
Progressist republica11s, 209
Pro p aga nd a ca mp a ig 11 fin ar1ria l
Sllppo rt, 180-81, 283-84
Propaga11da literature , l 4~)-56
Pro pagc111da Mo,·e m e nt , ] 20, 29 ,l .
295-308
Pt1att1, Guillermo, 192, 19211, 193 11
Puerto Rico , 297
Q
Quioquiap, 14 1, 19 1, 2 18. 234,
25 1, 282. See 1-~ec-ed )' ~ft'tnpran<),
l'.1l)lo

Qt1iroga }' Ballesteros, Benigno: 108n '
129 , 134 , l91 ; and Filipinos 122
. ' 15 6-5 9, 208-9; role 1n
152 . ' an ti-
.'
friar campaign in Manila, 109-15
R
Racial distinctions, 42-43
Ra~:l disunity of Filipinos, 78, 78n,
Racism, Spanisl1, 62-63, 71, 191 , 274-
75
Ramos, Jose, 114-15, 115n, 124, 130n,
164, 172, 178, 292
Ramos Caldero11, Antonio , on
Philippine representation in the
Cortes, 198, 202
Rd. L .M., 237
Recoletos, 5-6
Reform laws, mu11icipal, 203
Reforms, 1880-1895, 295-97
Regidor y Jurado, Antonio, 20n, 92-
93, 131 , 143, 190, 231 , 251
Regidor )' Jurado, Manuel, 20n, 24,
61
Religious situation, 13-16
Reparaz, Gonzalo, 202
Republicans, Spanish: 21 , 44; and
Despujol, 275n-76n; and Filipinos,
189-91, 195n, 209-11; attitt1de of
Filipinos toward, 137, 156; attitude
toward Filipinos of, 196, 202, 209-
11, 250, 289, 299-300, 307; Fili-
pino alliance \vith, 45, 49-50, 55-
57, 60
Resurreccio n Hidalgo. See Hidalgo ,
Felix Resurreccion
Re tana, Wenceslao E., 88n, 141, 210n,
223-24, 275n , 282, 297n
Revista del C:irculo Hispano-Filipino, 32
Re\ o luci6n, Masonic lodge, 161, 173-
1
77, 186n
Revolution: 148, 285, 293, 301 ; and
Lopez Jae na , 288-89; a nd
Index 331
n1asonry, 180-8 1; attitude of Rizal
toward , 86-89;
Revolution of 1868 (Span ish ), 4-5
Reyes, Isabelo de los, 115n , 141 , 224-
25, 293n
Reyes, Jose, 27711
Reyes, Modesto, 192
Rian zares Bautista, Ambrosio, 124,
135, 163n, '
Rianzares, Pablo, 124n, 135, '144
Ricart, Juan , SJ., 74n , 300n
Riedel, Johan G.F., 232
Rios, Isaac Fernando, 155n
Rivas Moreno, 184, 19611
Rizal, Francisco, 249
Rizal, Jose : 33-39, 129-32, 148-49,
153n, 180, 184, 216n, 224-25, 254-
58, 298n, 299; and Becerra, 199-
201 , 254; and Blumentritt, 242 ;
and Calamba hacienda dispute,
246-50; and Catl1olicism , 223; a11d
Church, 294; and clergy, Filipino,
303, 303n; and Comite de
Propaganda, 260, 270-71 ; and Del
Pilar, 199-201 , 211, 243-44, 254-
60, 271-74, 278,283, 299-301; and
Despujol, 276-77, 279-80 ; and
education of Filipinos, 90, 130,
268; and Espana en Filipinas, 65,
70; and family, 269-70; and
Filipinos, 65, 223-24, 236-38, 250,
253-56, 268-69; and friars, 266-67;
and histo ry for 11ational re ge-
neration, 240-42; a11d J esuits, 34,
54n, 100-1 , 243, 243n , 252, 306-
7; and La Solidaridacl, 240, 245 ,
250. 270, 284-85 ; and Lete, 80;
a nd Li ga, 277-78; and Lopez
Jaena, 289; and Lt1na and Hidalgo.
50; and Mo rga 's l1istory, 2 I 9-23:
and pacto de sangre, 228-30; ar1d
Philippine campaigr1 , 25~1. 258-60;
a11d PJ1ilippi11c Re,·oluti o n , 293:
a 11d Pi y rvtarga ll , 2 1() ; and
propagru1da i11 Sp,1i11 , 13()-32: artd
332 In dex
reform, 70; and religion , 48-49 ,
5411 , 83, 168-7 1, 224; a nd
revolution, 264-68; and Spain,
251, 254-55, 266-67; and Spanish
politics , 187-88, 193 n , 200-1 ,
210n; and Tagalog, 233-34; anti-
friar activity in Philippines, 120n;
as editor of rival to La Solidaridad,
271-72; as "filibustero," 51-52, 93-
99; as mason, 175; as teacher, 242-
44; Borneo project of, 279n ;
deportation of, 269, 276, 280;
execution of, 294; idealism of, 186;
in Dapitan, 243; in Europe, 36; in
Germany, 53, 92; in Hong Kong,
269-76; in Madrid, 246; nationalist
ideals and program of, 88-90, 220,
265-69; on pre-Hispanic Philip-
pines, 217-25; opposition to
Manifesto of 1888, 119-20; propa-
ganda leaflets by, 270; return to
Philippines of, 250, 274-77; role
of, 268-69; scholarship of, 230-36;
writings of, 54, 138-39, 233-35
Rizal , Paciano, 29, 33, 37, 48, 52,
234n, 246 47, 247n, 249,250, 270
Rizal, Teodora Alonso, 49n, 52
Rodon y Avella, Jose, 190
Rodriguez, Francos, 21 On
Rodriguez, Jose, O .S.A. , and Rizal,
97-98, 121
Rogers, Enrique, 92, 144
Romero Ortiz, Antonio, 134
Rost, Reinhold, 231 , 234n
Roxas, Baldomero, 237
Roxas, Felix M., 93n, 218n
Roxas, Pedro, 148n
Ruiz de Leon, Eleuterio, 177n
Ruiz Zorrilla, Manuel, 21, 46, 55, 202n
s 177, 197, 239n,
Sagasta, Praxedes Mateo, 21, 156,
162,175,176, 176n, 201,204,208,
246
Sagot nang EsjJaiia sa H ibik nang
Filipinas, 154
Salcedo, Diego, 116, 116n
Salmeron, Nicolas, 21
Salvador, Ambrosio, de portation of,
280, 284
Salvador, Moises, 179, 256, 270-71,
271n, 280, 293n
Salvf, Fray, 85
Sampaguitas, 24
San Agustfn, Gaspar de, 71, 223, 251
Sanchez, Francisco SJ., 101, 243, 243n
Sancho, Joaquin, SJ., 112n
Sancianco y Goson, Gregorio, 25-30,
39, 46, 218, 223
Sandiko, Teodoro, 164, 167, 174, 176,
196
Santa Marfa, Manuel, 132
Santillan, Gregorio, aids Del Pilar,
124
Santo Tomas, University of, 7, 12, 27,
36, 37, 37n, 76, 138
Schiller, Friedrich von, Wilhelm Tell,
234
Serrano, Francisco, 4
Serrano Laktaw, Pedro: 123n , 137 '
143, 169; and Comite de Propa-
ganda, 123 , 161, 257n; and
Filipino masonry, 177-79, 284-85;
and Lallave, 164, 167, 236, 250,
280; co-author of antifriar pam-
phlets, 125, 126n
Sevilla, Father Mariano, I 06
Sikatuna (Sica tuna), 150, 228-29
Silvela, Francisco, 200n
Sino-Japanese War , effect on
Filipinos, 290
Sobre la indolencia de los filipinos, 223
Soldevilla, C., 202
"Solidaridad" Masonic Lodge, 172,
Sol y Ortega, J ua111 209n
Spain, Church in, 22, 88, 109, 251 , 298
Spanisl1, as language of independent
Philippines, 149, 150n
 Index 333

Spoils system, 297 V

Spoliarium, 49
Stole fees (arancel), 154
Ventura, Valentin , 131n, 184, 260
Stte, Eugene , 9 1
Vida, Fernando, 96, I 03
Vidal, Juan Bautista, SJ. , 13n
T Vidart, Luis, 196, 206
Villalva Hervas, 200n
Taga-Ilog (Antonio Luna), 194 Vindel, Pedro, 242n
Tagalog, 149, 235 Viola, Maximo, 95n, 124n-25n, 129
Taviel de Andrade, Enrique, 188-90 Virchow, Rudolf, 53n-54n, 233
Taviel d e Andrade, Jose, 94-95 Virgenes cristianas expuestas al
Tax system, 17n, 26 populaclio, 49
Tejada de Valdosera, Conde de, 49 Vivencio del Rosario, Salvador, 255
Teodoro, Basilio, 106, 270, 271n
Terrero y Perinat, Emilio: 68n, 152,
191; attitude toward Noli, 93-94,
w
96; role in antifriar campaign in
Walls y Merino, M., 275n
Manila, 109-11 , 117-18
Wandering Jew, and Rizal, 91
Tigbalang (Mariano Ponce), 281n
Weyler, Valeriano, 102, 108n, 122,
Tobacco monopoly, 30, 30n, 31n,
134, 189, 191n, 224, 248- 49, 269,
295-96
274,284
Torre, Carlos Marfa de la, 5
Tribute system, 11 , 25, 42
Trubner's Record, 233-34
z
Zaera Vazquez, Mariano, 210n
u Zamora, Jacinto, 8
Ubaldo, Silvestre, 249 Zorrillistas, 156
Ultramar, Ministerio de. See overseas Zulueta, Clemente J., 282n
ministry Zulueta,Juan, 111, 181, 257n, 273n