This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
, Vol. 51, No. 2 (May, 1971), pp. 250-274 Published by: Duke University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2512475 . Accessed: 19/04/2011 11:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact email@example.com.
Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Hispanic American Historical Review.
Aspects of Liberal Factionalism in Colombia, 1875-1885
the second half of the nineteenth century must grapple with the dissension that occurred among leaders of the Liberal party of that country in the 1870s. As a result of the intra-party discord, the Liberals finally lost control of the federal government, which they had dominated since i86i, and the regime known as the "Regeneration" came into existence in 1885-1886. Although the members of the two wings into which the party was divided are usually designated correctly as "Radicals" and "Independents," all too often the issues that set them apart are imprecisely described. The Radicals are usually depicted as overzealous reformers who sought to convert Colombia into a utopian republic overnight and were, in particular, committed to policies of extreme anti-clericalism, federalism, and laissez-faire. The Independents, on the other hand, are described as moderates who realized that the Radical program was inappropriate for a country like Colombia and served only to retard its political and economic progress. According to the standard account, the Radicals, their quixotic projects having failed, were driven from power by the Independent Liberals under the leadership of Rafael Nunez, who first occupied the presidency in 188o. Subsequently Nuifiez formed a coalition of Independents and Conservatives which became the nucleus of a new National party that governed the republic during the Regeneration under the centralist and authoritarian constitution promulgated in i886. While this depiction of nineteenth-century Colombian politics is partially accurate, it fails to indicate shadows and nuances that significantly alter the final portrait. This essay represents an attempt to clarify the origins and nature of the differences among Colombian Liberals in the decade 1875-1885.
* The author, Assistant Professor of History at Florida State University, Canal Zone, wrote this article while Assistant Professor of History at Indiana State University. Research for this article was made possible by grants from the Doherty Foundation and Indiana State University.
LL STUDENTS OF THE POLITICAL HISTORY
p. the Republic of Colombia. however. David Bushnell. 1965). and the necessity of restricting the rights of the individual in order to protect society as a whole. 19. Liberals endorsed federalism as the most nearly perfect form of political organization. Cauca. see Robert L. The nine "sovereign" states were Antioquia. 167. a fairly consistent and well-defined ideology. such as the artisans of Bogota' and the Negroes of the Cauca Valley. After the disintegration of Gran Colombia in 1830. though frequently disagreeing on the degree of autonomy which should be accorded to the nine states in the Colombian Union. For the sake of clarity. Bolivar. 18211870" (unpublished Ph. 8-9. 1955). and Leslie Lipson. but they placed greater emphasis than did the Liberals on order. and finally. During the period under consideration. dissertation. 1949). University of California. to i86i. 246-247. 181o-1858" (unpublished Ph. p. 3. Unless otherwise indicated. "Federalism in Colombia. Parties and Politics: An Institutional and Behavioral Approach (New York. the criteria for two-party systems set forth in Avery Leiserson. Panama. Boyaca'. 1958). to 1858.D. 315. Frank Safford. Columbia University.2 though Liberals tended to display greater interest in the problems of development than did Conservatives. The Conservatives' interpretation of Catholicism led them to accept republican forms and institutions. Luis Ospina Vasquez. IX:4 (Spring 1956). Granadine Confederation. to i886. and Tolima. particularly those who were politically articulate and had grievances or unsatisfied aspirations. but members of nonelite groups. The Democratic Civilization (New York. pp. and a cluster of shared memories and traditions. The ideological difference between the two parties lay primarily in the Conservative belief in the infallibility and universality of the moral precepts of Christ as transmitted by the Roman Catholic Church and in the insistence of Conservatives that only their party could speak for Catholicism in Colombia. 1810-1830 (Medellin. Magdalena. Berkeley. they were willing at times to accept federalism if only because this 1. Cundinamarca. were more likely to be found in the Liberal camp than the Conservative one.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 251 Colombia can be said to have possessed a two-party system by 1863. Cf. There was comparatively little disagreement on general economic policy between the two parties. . For federalism before 1858. Leadership of both parties was largely in the hands of the upper classes. Santander. Industria y protection en Colombia. Cf. the place of publication for all works cited hereafter is Bogota. dissertation. 1964). "Commerce and Enterprise in Central Colombia.3 The Conservatives ordinarily favored more highly centralized government.1 Each party-Liberal and Conservative-had a readily identifiable set of leaders. pp. the area that became the Republic of Colombia was known by various names: New Granada. Gilmore.D. the name of Colombia will be used throughout this article. "Two Stages in Colombian Tariff Policy: The Radical Era and the Return to Protection ( 1861-1885)." Inter-American Economic Affairs. authority. the United States of Colombia. 2.
for they felt that the reforms put into effect by his administration marked a definitive break with colonial traditions and institutions 4. i888. see Joaquin Posada Gutierrez. (1952-1963). 2 vols. La Tarde (Medellin). July 5. pp. 1889. 240-267. Vida de Rufino Cuervo y noticias de su epoca. (d ed. In 1888-1890 the administration made an attempt to break up the departments into smaller units on the grounds that such action was needed to extirpate completely the still powerful roots of federalism. but numerous memoirs and secondary works are of use for the period from the 182os to the 1840s. Historia de la Nueva Granada. pp. 1946-1948).6 To Liberals. Centralism under the Constitution of i886 is discussed in William Marion Gibson. Lopez' four-year term was a watershed in the nation's history. Angel Cuervo. "The First Mosquera Administration in New Granada. Among the former. see Jose Manuel Ruflno J. had bred strong regional loyalties-as well as local political machines-that resisted domination or elimination by any centralizing national government. (2d ed. intimo (Archivo-epistolariocomentarios) (1958). Memories hist6rico-politicas. in which the participants had but a single common aim-regional autonomy. among the latter.. Historia de un alma. June 4.D. and December 23. 2 vols. . see Joseph Leon Helguera.252 HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR system might afford them the opportunity of winning control of one or more states when Liberals dominated the federal government. For a recent account of this controversial election. There are no specialized studies of the early history of the Liberal party. The Constitutions of Colombia (Durham. especially La Nacio'n. and the boundaries of the states. especially in Antioquia and Cauca. (Paris. April 15 and July 20. Thus the constitution of i886. dissertation. 1929) and Jose Maria Samper. restored centralism but allocated limited powers to sectional and municipal governments. which was basically a Conservative document. 1889. Jose Maria Obando. Horacio Rodriguez Plata. Colombia's racial and economic diversity. Nor did the centralism favored by Conservatives include complete extinction of sectional self-government. but the proposal aroused such intense opposition. especially as a result of a confused and unsuccessful Liberal revolution (1839-1842). The course of the administration proposal to divide the departments can be traced in the press. 1890. were left unchanged.. December 17. November 6 and December 13. October 26 and November i6.. 2 vols. 1892). 1958). together with the difficulty of communication. henceforth to be known as departments. El Telegrama. 4 vols. and Restrepo.4 The polarization of Colombian politics began in the late 182os and was intensified during the following decade. University of North Carolina. 6. that it had to be abandoned. N. 306-310.C. 1889. 5. 290-301.5 In 1849 the Liberal party won control of the executive branch of the government when Jose Hilario Lopez defeated two Conservative candidates to be elected president in a closely fought contest. 1948). 1845-1849" (unpublished Ph.
and oratorical society founded on September 25. authorized division of the communal lands (resguardos) of the Indians.-Dec. For the events leading up to the Melo coup. Starting in 1850. anniversary of the unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Bolivar in 1828. "Federalism. [Avelino Escobar?]. These extremist Liberals came to be known as Go'lgotas. 9. the country was kept in an uproar not only by the socialistic declamations of Liberal youths inspired by the French Revolution of 1848. more moderate members of the party.9 Although a coalition of Go'lgotas and Conservatives was successful in ousting Melo by the end of the year. and Salvador Camacho Roldan. Gustavo Arboleda. 195-196. conflict between Go'lgotas and Draconianos continued. tariffs had been lowered. the Liberals. During the brief tenure of Lopez' successor. Meanwhile. a political. Memories Mercado]. literary. "El golpe de cartel del 17 de abril de 1854. and an end to the state tobacco monopoly had been decreed. Bogota are described in Venancio Ortiz. Tomas Cipriano de Mosquera. Jose Maria Obando. including Lopez himself. when Obando refused dictatorial powers offered to him by General Jose Maria Melo. Memorias sobre los acontecimientos del sur de la Nueva Granada durante la administration del 7 marzo de 1849 ( 1853). see the work cited above by Ortiz and Carlos Lozano y Lozano. Historia de la revolucio'n del 17 de abril de 1854 (i855). but also by a crime wave in Bogota' and by numerous outbreaks of class conflict and violence in the Cauca Valley of western Colombia. 185-206. (0193). XXXI: 361-362 (Nov. 254-256. III. older. desde el aiio de 1848 hasta el de 1855 inclusive (1856). the Liberals lost control of the government for the remainder of the decade.7 Under Lopez' reform-minded Conservative predecessor. I. see [Ramon ."pp. Alma. The institution used by young Liberals for the expression of their views was the Escuela Republicana. enacted a program of fiscal decentralization designed to increase provincial autonomy. See Samper. abolished slavery. For the disorders in Cauca. 1919).8 By 1852. pp. led by Secretary of Finance Manuel Murillo Toro. after an invocation of the Martyr of Golgotha by one of the Liberal firebrands. were expressing disapproval of the more extravagant proposals advanced by the followers of Murillo. Histoiia Conditions in contempordnea de Colombia (Popaya'n. 8. who thereupon assumed them himself. Resefia hist6rica de los principales acontecimientos de la ciudad de Cali. They in turn called their adversaries Draconianos. 1850. 1854.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 253 that had survived under the republic. and in other ways sought to remove barriers which were believed to be hindering the social and economic development of the republic. partly because of the reluctance of the latter to do away with capital punishment." Boletin de Historia y Antigiiedades. 151-157. 1944). culminating in the coup d'etat of April 17. 7. A discussion of Liberal ideology during the Lopez administration appears in Gilmore.
segi'n sus propios documentos (1862) and Angel Cuervo. many surviving Draconianos were now devoted followers of Mosquera. led to Mosquera's closure of the legislature on April 29. to June 30. The revolution of 1860-1862 is described from different points of view in Felipe Perez. Leon Helguera. Co'mo se evapora tn ejercito (2d ed. pp. XLIV: 510-518 (Apr. February 12. Manuel Murillo. "La Epistolario del Doctor Rtufino Cuervo restauracion constitutional de 1867. doubted the ex-President's commitment to constitutionalism and were critical of his intemperate anti-clericalism. 1863. and Aquileo Parra.10 Ospina won the election. io. Davis Ramdn Espina. Reacting to what they considered the imposition of a dictatorship. 1:2 (July-Dec. which was dominated by Radicals and Conservatives." Boletin de Historia y Antigiiedades. 573-618. 1953). winning by their action the plaudits of many Conservatives as well. but many Liberals. 415-432. Memorias. The discord between Radicals and Mosqueristas emerged during the constitutional convention of 1863 in Rionegro (Antioquia) that drafted a federal constitution severely limiting the powers of the executive and of the central government. as well as his defense. are contained in Causa contra el Presidente de los Estados . 271 ff. "El 'paquete chileno' del general Melo. On the other hand. 426-430.13 1074-1102.. and Luis Augusto Cuervo (ed. see Anales de la Convencio'n (Rionegro). 1867. but was faced in i86o by a revolution led by Mosquera. especially the Golgotas. 1933). ii. pp. Anales de la revol'uci6n.-Dec.254 IAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR In 1856 the Liberals. Mosquera was brought to trial for his misdeeds and sent into exile. The election of 1856 is discussed in Arboleda (Cali. pp. as well as two accounts by delegates: Camacho Roldan. see Pablo E. La convention de Rionegro (1937). A series of conflicts between the President and Congress. the Radicals effortlessly deposed the President on May 23. Leon Helguera and Robert H. is Ramon Correa. see J. 1967). For Mosquera's aims in 1849. IV. 393-439. (1922). see also J.). A secondary account containing many documents Memorias (1912). 1863. The charges against him. were able to present a single candidate.. 12." Archivos.12 The two factions of the party were still at odds when Mosquera took office in 1866 to begin a twoyear term as President. 165-205. 276 ff. 1957). Cardenas Acosta. in the presidential election of that year. 13. 435-436. who now broke definitively with the Conservatives and won the support of most Liberal leaders. who were now known as Radicals.). III. Archivo epistolar del General Mosquera: Correspondenciacon el General 209-212. 1835-1866 (1966). The Conservative nominee was Mariano Ospina Rodriguez. (eds. who had been talking since 1849 about the need for an electoral alliance of moderate progressives like himself. For the deposition of Mosquera.' The success of the revolution meant the restoration of Liberal rule. 248-249. ran as the candidate of a National party composed mainly of dissident Conservatives. On Melo. while ex-President Mosquera. having settled their former differences. For proceedings of the constitutional convention.
The use of the term "oligarchs" to designate the Parristas reflected one of the principal charges hurled at them by the Nufiistas: that they wished to monopolize political power in Colombia. ordinarily being called Nuiistas after their standardbearer. it was directed chiefly at Manuel Murillo. such as Parra. and the men most closely associated with them. It was the contention of the Nuhistas in 1875 that the oligarchs had Unidos de Colombia. and the party leadership was able to maintain a satisfactory level of cohesion. an election was held in each state every two years. a majority of five votes being needed for election. in many ways the most significant political contest to take place in nineteenth-century Colombia. and Felipe Zapata." Although this label was pinned indiscriminately on all Parristas. the President of the Union was elected by the votes of the nine states. Nevertheless. whom he had served as secretary of finance and development. Ms. 1875. Bogota'. most of them letters written to Conto in 1876-1877. Perez' younger brother Felipe. Ex-President Mosquera expressed the views of many Nuniistas when he wrote early in 1875 that he found it "intolerable that a circle should want to dominate the nation from Bogota. Biblioteca Luis- Angel Arango. disaffection was by no means absent from Liberal ranks during this period and was to burst forth during the presidential election of 1875. At this time the followers of Nuiiez were not yet known as Independents."14 As this statement suggests. Nicolas Esguerra. The Biblioteca Luis-Angel Arango will henceforth be cited as BL-AA. centralizing power and corrupting the electoral system. Mosquera to Cesar Conto. Ciudadano Jeneral Tomas Cipriano de Mosquera i otros altos funcionarios federales (1867). . In practice. this meant that it was the disposition of the chief executives of the states. it was the oligarchs' manipulation of the electoral process that provoked the angriest outcries from the Nuiiistas. and the winner in each contest received the vote of that state. not Radicals. This collection consists of 21 items. though their enemies usually referred to them as the "oligarchs. January 13. that is. In that election Rafael Nuifiez unsuccessfully challenged Aquileo Parra. who were also called presidents. and their local agents that determined the outcome of national presidential elections and that presidential aspirants and their backers had to assure themselves of the support of at least five of the state governments. Mosquera returned to Colombia in 1871 and became president of Cauca that same year. Parra's supporters were called Parristas. Under the constitution of 1863. choice of incumbent President Santiago Perez. Santiago Perez. #113.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 255 From 1867 to 1875 the federal government remained in the hands of Liberals formerly identified with Radicalism. 14.
1875. June 26. 18. Numerous biographies of Nti'ez have been written. Rafael Ns'iez (3d ed. 17. tavo Otero Munioz. and El Escudo Nacional (Cartagena). 1946). who had also been mentioned as a presidential possibility in 1873. Although Nufiiez had been identified with the Golgota-Radicals as a young man. see La Palestra (Mompox. all of them costefos. GusN'ifiez (1939). pp. 1875. 16. unanimously chose Nuifiez as their standard-bearer.15 Only two years before. #113. March 24. Mosquera to Cesar Conto. Manuel Murillo. in 1825. for this purpose.'9 Born in Cartagena. 1875. See also Parra. Un hombre y una epoca: La vida azarosa de Rafael Ntiiez (1951). when Julian Trujillo had run against Santiago Perez for the presidency with considerable Conservative support. 1875. the capital of Bolivar. where he had married the sister-in-law of a prominent Liberal leader. for the purpose of selecting a presidential candidate from the Coast. Ms. Memorias. January 20. had been accused of overthrowing the government of Panamai and of acting to nullify a Trujillo victory in Boyaca in order to win these states for Perez. the incumbent. Now the Trujillistas supported Nu'fiez almost to a man. and quickly had made his mark in Bogota. June 21. Bolivar). Besides his desire to end the hegemony of the oligarchs. BL-AA. the delegates. 19. 1874. . 1875.. Escrutinio hist6rico: Rafael NMifiez(1939). January 24. For Nuiiista editorials expressing this point of view. 1873. see El Correo de Colombia. was in many ways ideally suited to become the candidate of the costeios and of other dissatisfied Liberals.256 HAHR M TSAY I HELEN DELPAR used their positions in the federal government to interfere shamelessly in the affairs of the states in order to ensure the establishment or preservation of regimes friendly to their interests. 1875. No costeio had ever been elected to the presidency since independence was achieved. he had begun his political career in Panama. or national army. Joaquin Tamayo. La Union Colombiana.17 One of the earliest manifestations of support for Nuifiez came from a Liberal convention held in Barranquilla (Bolivar) in January. May 18. El Elector National (Barranquilla). among them Jose Ramon Vergara. December 12. El Progreso (Panama).18 Rafael Nuifiez. Indalecio Lievano Aguirre. 6o6-6io.16 This feeling was shared by many Liberal politicians from that region who resented the fact that costeios seemed to be excluded from serious consideration for the presidency and who believed that the coastal states had been systematically neglected and discriminated against by the federal government. even to the extent of using the Colombian Guard. or native of one of the Atlantic Coast states of Bolivar. ex-President Mosquera had at least one other reason for working on behalf of Nuifiez: the advisability of electing a President who was a costeijo. For a sampling of costefio dissatisfaction. he also had served in the cabinet under Obando in 1853 15. Magdalena. and Panamat.
where all men treated each other as equals. was a native of Santander. and where no form of labor was considered dishonorable. In endorsing Parra in 1875. La reforma political en Colombia (1944). who also had been born in 1825.20 He described his family as being good but of modest financial status. Aquileo Parra. Nuifiez' opponent. I. according to his own account-begun to take part in state and national politics and had been a delegate to the Rionegro convention. Forced to drop out of school at an early age. At the same time his frequent contributions to the Liberal press in Colombia had kept him in the public eye and had given further evidence of his impressive intellectual gifts. but costeios already smarting from the neglect of the federal government would have been quick to detect such an attitude if it did exist and become even more 20. the leading Bogota' spokesman for the Liberal administrations of the early 1870's. society was more egalitarian than in most other parts of Colombia and that inhabitants of the region were characterized by an industriousness matched only by that of the antioqueios. which end in 1876. i88i. remains a matter for speculation. His close political ties with Murillo and with Santiago Perez now led to his being branded the "official"or "palace" candidate. which was no doubt meant as a slur against Nunez' place of birth. he had embarked upon a series of commercial and agricultural ventures that eventually made him a man of considerable means. laid special stress on the fact that Parra had overcome poverty and adversity to attain his present eminence. reflected the contemporary belief that in Santander. Since 1863 he had lived in the United States and Europe and was therefore free of any direct responsibility for the acts of recent administrations.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 257 and under Mosquera in 1862. 22." as Nu'fiez charged. In 1881 Nuniez was to recall "the hateful designations of a personal character relative to the race and industrial habits" of the costeios that had been made during the 1875 campaign. 21. La Luz.22 Whether the oligarchs did in fact give themselves "airs of superiority. like Parra a native of Santander-also observed that Parra had been born in a region where there never had been slaves.2' The writer of the editorial-presumably Florentino Vezga. where the population was largely white and mestizo and where there had been few slaves at the time of abolition. He had simultaneously-though reluctantly. . November 15. Diario de Cundinamarca. 8i. the Diario de Cundinamarca. reprinted in Rafael Nulfiez. 1875. January 25. This statement. The best source of information on Parra's early life is his Memorias. part i.
258 HAR | MAY I HELEN DELPA13 embittered. CdeAP. 1877. Parra. i877. October 3. . Bogota (henceforth to be cited as CdeAP). ibid. the railroad. Vergara. in the possession of Horacio Rodriguez Plata. Escrutinio historico. Nuinfezevidently thought little of Murillo. and to Rico. Cf. #99. in Correspondencia de Aquileo Parra."28 Plans for the construction of this railroad took shape in 1872 shortly after Murillo's inauguration for his second presidential term. Murillo to Parra.23 It also has been asserted that the oligarchs regarded Nuiiiiezhimself with an irrational dislike that accounted for their unflagging opposition to his political ambitions in the 1870s and i88os. December 13. Nuifiez to Luis Carlos Rico. praising the latter's conduct in office and stating that the two shared identical ideas and sentiments. p. January 3. 1878. Parra in fact had accepted the post of secretary of finance and development in Murillo's cabinet in 1872 primarily to devote himself to the Northern Railroad. 146-147. which Murillo called "the greatest and most important enterprise for our country and above all for the state of Santander. September 6. they mounted a strong offensive against the project with which he was most closely associated-the Northern Railroad.26 Whatever his feelings toward Parra may have been. 176. ibid. Nuniez. Escrutinio historic. and January 22. Lievano Aguirre. This collection consists of 52 items. whom he described in 1876 as "corruption incarnate. 113-114. 1871. an occasion which he used to stress the importance of the telegraph. Nuifiez to Parra. Memorias. 1876. 28. 197. The event that is most frequently cited as evidence of the Radicals' personal hostility toward Nui'iez is their defeat of his appointment as Colombian minister to the United States when it was presented to the Senate for confirmation in 1879. which was to have linked Bogota' with the lower Magdalena River by way of Boyaca and Santander. 685-686. Parra relates in his memoirs that neither he nor Murillo felt particularly hostile toward Nifiez. See also Nunfiezto Parra. and Tamayo. See also Nui'iez to Miguel Camacho Roldain. Ms. 1866. 25. pp. 24. Cartas politicas publicadas en "El Correo Nacional" (1951). 26. pp.25 And despite the acrimony of the presidential election. See Vergara. and Carlos Holguin. mainly letters from Nuifiez to Rico.24 On this point there is no conclusive evidence. BL-AA. May 29. Rafael Nnfiez."27 Although the Nitiistas refrained from attacking Parra personally in 1875. 1872. One of Nuifiez' biographers has suggested that Santiago Perez did harbor a special antipathy for costeiios. 27. and other means of communication in stimulating the economic and intellectual development of a people and in creating the solidarity of interests and sympathies that he felt were needed to 23. Nunez was able to write to Parra in 1877. 78-79. December 17. p.
31 Other critics of the railroad used a combination of arguments: that the extent of federal participation in the enterprise violated the rights of the states and the canons of sound Liberal economic thought. El Ferrocarril del Norte (Duitama. reprinted in his Escritos varios (31892-1895). April 30. both financial and organizational.constitution. Boyaca). El Telegrafo (Palmira. passim. 1872-1873. an engineer in the employ of an English firm. . see a series of articles by Salvador Camacho Roldan in the Diario de Cundinamarca inl 1874.29 A few weeks later Murillo unveiled to Congress the project that he had in mind-an interoceanic highway. Some who approved of the railroad in principle objected to the specific route chosen in 1873 on the advice of William Ridley.30 Murillo thought that two portions of this great highway could be undertaken at once: a railroad linking the Pacific port of Buenaventura with Cali and the Cauca River. 31-go. El Tel6grafo. Murillo justified federal sponsorship of such a 29. and the Northern Railroad. and that the railroad. III. 1875. for a variety of reasons the project aroused great opposition from many Liberals. 31. consisting of both roads and railroad lines and financed at least in part by the federal government. for which a preliminary contract had already been approved. Cauca). but Diario Oficial. However. clause 6. Ibid. Memorias. pp. April 1. even if it could be built. 32. of the Rionegro. in his memoirs Parra referred to him as a supporter of the railroad. that the construction of such a railroad was beyond the financial capacity of the nation. February 3. highway by citing Article 17.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 259 perfect the federal system in Colombia. 1872. For Liberal criticism of the railroad. Parra. and negotiations were begun to obtain a twentymillion peso loan in Europe. and one contributor to a newspaper in Palmira (Cauca) went so far as to say that their attitude toward the Northern Railroad represented the only difference between the supporters of Parra and those of Nufez. 1875. The initial steps.. Boyaca. 1872. for the construction of the Northern Railroad were taken during the Murillo and Perez administrations. May 6. March 24.33 The position of Nifiez himself is somewhat unclear. 30. which gave to the federal government jurisdiction over existing and future inter-oceanic routes. would benefit only three states (Cundinamarca. La Union Colombiana. 627-648. 1875.32 All of these objections were aired repeatedly during the 1875 campaign. 1875. and Santander) while consuming virtually all of the revenue of the federal government. El Correo de Colombia. passim. Ridley had recommended that the line be built to a point on the Carare River near its confluence with the Magdalena. 33.
36. would write in 1893 that Mosquerismo had been the soul of the Independent movement. CdeAP. 1874. pp. 1870. i865. very few Parristas came from the coastal states or from Cauca. Jose Maria Quijano Otero. to name but a few-were Nuijistas in 1875. The challenge to the oligarchs in 1875 was serious precisely because 34. 1874. "Diario de Quijano Otero. January 25. 1864. that appeared in the party press. to suggest that the Nuiista ranks in 1875 were made up exclusively or even mainly of Mosqueristas. June 3 and July 26." Boletin de Historia y Antigiiedades. 35. including Parra himself. however. N'fiez to Parra. only four supported Nunez while nine. Holguin.26o HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR in a letter to Parra on February 2. p. Memorias. nicknamed el Sapo.37 It would be misleading. Andres Ceron. Jose Maria Rojas Garrido. If the Parristas are studied on the basis of regional origins. While data on the preferences of all the leading Mosqueristas with respect to the 1875 contest is not available. chief architect of the Independent-Conservative alliance of the i88os. El Liberal. Cartas political. XIX (1932). on the other hand. September 7. See La Opinio'n. there can be no doubt that the Liberals most closely associated with him in the i86os-Julian Trujillo. Carlos Holguin. or "the Toad. ii8.35 Of thirteen individuals who served in the cabinet between 1870 and 1874 and whose preference in 1875 could be ascertained. but it does become apparent that Parra had the support of the great majority of Liberal politicians from his home state of Santander. The only prominent Liberal identified as a Mosquerista in the 186os who is known to have supported Parra in 1875 was Ramon Gomez. In 1875 Nui'iez had the backing not only of Mosquera himself." who was boss of the most notorious political machine in nineteenth-century Colombia. 37. February 2. 685-686. Froilan Largacha. Parra. July 6 and July 21. no clear-cut national pattern emerges. The Gomez machine dominated the state of Cundinamarca at different times in the i86os and early 1870s. or endorsements of candidates.36 Indeed. The preferences of Liberal politicians in this or any presidential election in which Liberals competed can best be determined by examination of the dozens of adhesiones. 1863. 372-373.34 The leading Parristas of 1875 tended to be Liberals who were closely identified with policies of recent administrations such as that represented by the Northern Railroad. which had been and continued to be the bastion of Radicalism. but also of his followers. . Nunez indicated that his support was not unqualified since he warned that no "irrational" sacrifices should be made to build the railroad and asserted the necessity of showing beforehand that the railroad could be made to pay its way in the first few years of operation. ex-President Mosquera's bailiwick. were Parristas.
it provided that presidential elections be held on the same date throughout the country (El Tradicionista. it is simply to state that constitutional reform to strengthen the federal government was not a subject of debate among Liberals in 1875. 1876). 435-436. when he had carried the state of Panama and four of the six provinces that later made up the states of Magdalena and Bolivar. Historia contemporanea. Liberals were induced to support Nuifiez in 1875 for a variety of motives. such as Santos Acosta and Eustorgio Salgar. Approved in 1876. 40. Parra. pp. The desire to dislodge the oligarchs no doubt accounted for the support given by those who felt that they were being unjustly excluded from positions of influence in the federal government. Finally. that so little was done may be attributed to the difficulty of reconciling the conflicting political interests of the era and to the fact that amendment of the constitution was virtually impossible since the approval of all nine states as represented in the Senate was required.38 Some Nuijistas may have genuinely hoped for an end to "palace" candidates and to the fraud and violence that had marred recent elections. according to Parra. 663-679. IV.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 261 Nuifiez had the support of Liberals who had been closely associated with them in the past. June 9 and July 4. such as Salvador Camacho Roldan and Pablo Arosemena.39 There is no evidence that the Nuniistas as a group were distressed by the extreme federalism of the Constitution of 1863 or that they were concerned with the problem of strengthening the federal government at the expense of the states.40 38. In fact. Others. had strongly opposed the Northern Railroad. a few Nuniistas were motivated by personal grievances against him. such as Camacho Roldan. Arboleda. 39. This is not to imply that neither Nuiistas nor Parristas had reservations about the constitution. To some extent these two groups overlapped since Mosquera had a strong personal following in the Coastal states that can be traced at least as far back as the presidential election of 1856. The desirability of increasing federal powers had been asserted by Liberals of all factions almost from the moment the constitution was promulgated. or who had acted as intermediaries in the old RadicalMosquerista struggles. . Only one amendment succeeded in passing these hurdles while the Rionegro constitution was in effect. Memorias. one of the chief Nufiista charges against the oligarchs was that they had consistently violated the sovereignty of the states by unconstitutionally interfering in their internal affairs. Among these were individuals tainted by Mosquerismo as well as the costefios who believed that their interests and those of their region were being slighted.
Nor did the Nufiistas indicate a desire to carry state interventionism beyond the point favored by the oligarchs. These views were expressed in a speech delivered in 1872 (Diario Oficial. he had come to the conclusion that the government should be the prime mover of progressive enterprises of concern to the entire community. he believed. p.41 Aquileo Parra held somewhat similar views. 1859. "Liberal policy in recent years has been openly reactionary. The extent to which the government should intervene in the economy. would not have been an effective strategy for the Nuijistas since such a charge could have been easily refuted by the statements and actions of the oligarchs themselves. For Murillo's ideas in the early 1850's. for example. [Aquileo Parra]. going directly against the spirit and letter of our federal constitution. had shed his earlier conviction that economic development should come entirely from the efforts of the individual and that the state should confine itself to giving security to the citizenry. government support of education and of certain economic activities was essential. then. December 6. 43. This probably stemmed at least in part from the fact that both Liberal factions included within their ranks individuals of divergent views on the subject."43 During the campaign of 1875 the question of Church-State relations played a comparatively minor role in the debate between supporters of the two Liberal candidates.262 HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR Nor did the Nufistas of 1875 accuse their opponents of an unrealistic adherence to laissez-faire principles. For a country like Colombia. depended on the intellectual advancement and technical knowledge of the citizenry and. 1875. Murillo. As one Nuffista editorial put it. If anything. on the development of their spirit of cooperation. private enterprise would fill the void left by the state. . March 24. Nuifiez himself made various statements which were interpreted as indicating a desire for greater harmony between Church and State and provoked 41. both in the political and economic spheres.42 To attack the oligarchs as a group for excessive devotion to laissezfaire. 68. see his Memoria del Secretario de Hacienda de la Nueva Granada al Congreso Constitucional de 1850 (1850) and Informe del Secretario de Estado del Despacho de la Nueva See also El Tiempo. Memoria del Secretario de Hacienda i Fomento dirijida al Presidente de la Repuiblicapara el Congreso de 1873 (1873). above all. articles in the Nufista press were more likely to assail the oligarchs for violating traditional Liberal principles. 1872). 42. La Union Colombiana. As the paragraphs on the Northern Railroad may have suggested. April 19. instead. in the United States or England. Granada a las Cdmaras Lefislativas de 1852 (31852). by the early 1870s many one-time G61gotas had modified their youthful commitment to laissezfaire.
other Nuiistas believed that stringent State control over the clergy was necessary to prevent their conspiring against Liberal institutions." especially in Cauca. viewed Nuniez as a man who would respect the religious beliefs of the masses. 73. During Murillo had been conhis first term in the presidency (1864-1866) sistently conciliatory toward the Church and had revoked sentences of banishment under which the Archbishop of Bogota and the Bishop of Antioquia had been expelled from their sees by Mosquera. Tomo II. reprinted in Camacho Rolda'n. 45. #. 1874.113. but felt that excessive State control over the Church was contrary to Liberal principle and in any case self-defeating. 1872.45 Another prominent Nuffista. See also Mosquera to Conto. Arquidiocesis de Bogota': Datos biogrdficos de sus prelados. 1874. . for those who believe and for those who do not. ibid. over the Church-and had continued to express alarm over what he called "neo-Catholic fanaticism.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 263 the criticism of anticlerical Parristas. i875. Ibid. Some of his supporters were convinced that the clergy constituted a subversive element within Colombia. La Reforma. a relaxation of tension had occurred. the suppression of religious communities. like the other Radical-oligarch administrations of the i86os and early l870s. El Correo de Colombia. pp. 48. and the 44. 490-512. who had been responsible for the most strongly anti-clerical measures enacted in nineteenth-century Colombia-the nationalization of Church property.47 Anticlericalism had again flared after Mosquera took office in i866. Jose Restrepo Posada. 1823-1868 (1963). who wrote in 1878 that "what we seek in this country is not the repression of the Catholic idea but the complete emancipation of human thought. Ms. 467-471. and this requires freedom for Catholics and for non-Catholics. May 25. Mosquera used this expression in a letter to Conto." or protection. Echeverri. Among these was Mosquera.November 3o.."44 However.. 1878. 47. this was the position of Salvador Camacho Roldacn. February 3. and the assertion of the executive's right of "tuition. 46. 1872. had been comparatively moderate in Church matters.48 Prior to 1875 neither Parra nor Santiago Perez had ever been associated with extreme anti-clericalism. with his deposition by the Radicals the following year. in Diario de Cundinamarca. December 2. Escritos. but would end the "adulterous union" of Church and State that characterized the Perez administration. and an open letter from Mosquera to President Murillo on November 6. October 28. Camilo A. which he felt was a "subject" of the Catholic spiritual power. II. BL-AA. together with Murillo's reply.46 That such a statement could be made seriously was a reflection of the fact that the Perez government.
264 HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR latter was. In 1875 the former had a better record of relative moderation on the Church-State question than did most of the Nuniistas. Mufioz.49 To be sure. February 26. 354ff. Revista de Colombia. 194-198. hoped to see a reduction in the spiritual and temporal influence of the clergy over the Colombian people. As the elections of 1875 took place. Recuerdos hist6ricos: 184o a 1895 (1900). when they refused to sign a statement pledging the Guard to neutrality in the election. January 29. both of whom were Nuiistas.50 The former accused President Perez. For their part the Parristas held that the Nuiiistas were preparing to launch a revolution should their candidate be defeated. who received fortyeight votes. February 15. Solon Wilches. For relations between Ni'fiez and the Conservatives. El Tradicionista. as did Conservative Bartolome Calvo. 1876. who was the choice of the delegations from the Conservativecontrolled states of Antioquia and Tolima. Memorias autobiogrdficas. 248-258. 51i Calvo. In addition. pp. 50. probably with justification. is described in numerous works. de 1875. the balloting took place on February 21. all Liberals were likely to be particularly hostile to the clergy when they felt that the latter were allowing the Conservatives to exploit religious issues for political purposes. like Nufiez. Eduardo Rodriguez Pifieres. 1936). and the commander of the Colombian Guard. few of which are impartial. Nevertheless. Nutfiez. even during periods of comparative tranquility. 194-195. 1919). . for example. pp. After three weeks of uncertainty and intrigue. was a native of Cartagena. See also Diario de Cundinamarca. The balloting of February 21. Since neither Nuifiez nor Parra won the five state votes needed for election. according to contemporary accounts." Revista de America (September 1947). The election of 1875. hist6rico-politicas y de charactersocial (Grottaferrata. 1873. Italy. as Liberals. Ramon Santo Domingo Vila. is described in Jose Maria Quijano Wallis. Escrutinio hist6rico. Wilches y su epoca (Bucaramanga. and March 16-21. the Nuhistas became convinced that their worst charges about the oligarchs were all too well-founded. Vergara. particularly its episodes of violence and fraud.51 Parra tried to follow a 49. 1876. a practicing Catholic. hostility between the Liberal party and the Church never subsided entirely. "La gran derrota de Rafael Nn'fiez: La revolution Gustavo Otero 327-346. 58-63. 1876. and the Radicals. and President Perez dismissed the secretary of war. it is incorrect to label the Radicals as being consistently anticlerical in contrast to the more moderate Nuijistas. the contest had to be decided by Congress. Nuifiez received eighteen. February i8. and February 22. Anibal Galindo. February 14. 1876. and resulted in a victory for Parra. March 22. Cf. February i5. See. see Otero Munoz. of toppling the governments of Panamai and Magdalena in order to win those states for Parra and of using similarly underhanded tactics in Cundinamarca.
The most inflammatory of the issues which emerged after the Conservative defeat in 1877 was related to the ever-recurring religious question.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 265 conciliatory course as President. and some prelates. BL-AA. University of Wisconsin. Since 1870 relations between Church and State had become increasingly strained in many parts of the country as a result of the federal government's assumption of an expanded role in primary education and the establishment of several normal schools headed by Protestant professors imported from Germany.53 In Cauca. that by 1885 the Liberal division had been largely healed and the Radical wing of the party included many one-time Nufiistas who had become disenchanted with the leadership of Nuifiez. itself an important factor in bringing about the revolution. #97. Indeed. Ddmaso Zapata o la reforma educacionista en Colombia ( 1960). see Jane Meyer Loy. who became Arbelaez' successor as Archbishop of . 1896). 53. 1863-1886" (unpublished Ph. 1969).D. there was virulent cler52. Archbishop Arbelaez to Jose Telesforo Paul. Bishop of Panama. dissertation. the party's division was deepened by several new sources of controversy which arose in the wake of the Liberal victory over the Conservatives. proved willing to accept the secular schools provided they were not used for the dissemination of anti-Catholic doctrine. At the same time the failure of the Conservative attempt to regain power by force of arms convinced the leaders of that party that their best chance for future success lay in an alliance with one of the two Liberal factions. "Modernization and Educational Reform in Colombia. Although Conservative hopes in this respect proved unfounded and most of the Nuiiistas actively aided the government in its successful attempt to crush the revolution. 1876. then serving his second term in the presidency. It must be emphasized. Ramon Zapata. Nulfiez thereupon turned to the Conservatives for military assistance in quelling the insurrection. however. June 17. Enrique Cortes. This collection consists of 134 letters written from 1875 to 1888 to Bishop Paul. For the federal government's efforts on behalf of primary education and the Conservative-clerical reaction. Ms.52 Provision was made for religious instruction in the primary schools. As a result of these circumstances. II. notably Archbishop Vicente Arbelaez of Bogota. the years 1878-1885 saw a steady decline in Radical fortunes until in the latter year they rose in armed revolt against the government of Nuifiez. but the election had engendered such bitter feelings within the Liberal party that the Conservatives rose in revolt in 1876 in the expectation that the Nuijistas would refuse to support the government. Escritos varios (Paris. the fissure within the Liberal party was not permanently healed since the Nufiista grievances of 1875 remained unsatisfied. however. 79-185.
See also the reports (April 29 and May lo.. See also Jose Restrepo Posada.. and for the latter. where President Conto had anticipated the federal government by ordering on February 4. 1876. Ibid. informed Parra that the Conservatives had joined the clergy in an attempt to make federal education laws unenforceable in Cauca and warned that if the federal government did not take action to make itself obeyed. where the Conservative revolution began in July. sent by Parra to investigate the situation in Cauca. 1876) of Damaso Zapata. March 15.. 1876. 1868-1891 (1966). Los arzobispos y obispos colombianos desde el tiempo de la colonia hasta nuestros dias (1918). pp.57 By Law 37 of the same year four prelates accused of fomenting the revolution-the Bishops of Pasto. president of the state. which was by then composed exclusively of Liberals (Nufiistas as well as Parristas). .For the former. La Iglesia y el Estado en Colombia (London. See also Quijano Otero. meanwhile. Congress. La revolucio'n (1876-1877): Recuerdos para la historia (2d ed. see Manuel Bricefio. 59.55 In Cauca. passim. in CdeAP. especially in Cauca. For the conflict over the schools in Cauca. 58. the entire nation would find itself in the hands of the Papal Curia. 587. see Jose Maria Quijano Wallis. Indeed. Popaya'n. 1947). and Gonzalo Uribe V. Law 35 of 1877 was designed to prevent clerical opposition to laws of the federal and state governments and to acts of public authority. anti-clericalism was revived on the state level. resolved to end clerical interference in political matters once and for all by passing several severely restrictive pieces of legislation. Tomo III. Juan Pablo Restrepo. May 12. "Diario. May 15. pp. The two Nuiiista3 referred to were Solon Wilches of Santander and Pablo Arosemena of Panamai. the religious character of the revolt in Cauca and other sections of the country persuaded at least two prominent Nuijistas to support the Parra government. Conto to Parra.pp. the conflict resembled a Catholic crusade as well as a struggle for political ends. Cesar Conto. On March 15. 1877." p. 56. and Antioquia-were banished from Colombia for ten years and were forbidden ever again to exercise their ecclesiastical functions within the national borders. 1877. 83-86. Wilches.58 In addition. claimed that the furor was part of a Conservative conspiracy to regain political power. 181. 1885). p.54 Fanatic Liberals in that state. 109-310. and Bishop Carlos Bermudez of Popayan forbade parents to send their children to public elementary schools.266 HAHR I MAY HELEN DELPAR ical opposition to the Liberal educational program. 55. 57. Memorias atitobiogrdficas. 239-243. 54. 1877. Medellin.59 Bogota'.56 After the conclusion of the war. 1876. the expulsion of the Bishops of Pasto and Popayan from that state. 213-219. Diario Oficial. Arquidiocesisde Bogota: Datos biogrdficos de sits prelados. see Otero Mufioz. CdeAP.
Escritos politico-economicos (1925-1927). a standard by-product of civil war in nineteenth-century Colombia. particularly where real estate was involved. D. Biografta del Doctor Luis Maria Restrepo y datos sobre la revolucio'nde Antioquia (1876-1877) (1892). pp. 6o. pp. La Luz. for Antioquia. Post-war conditions in Cauca are vividly described by Parra's correspondents. Although he had been elected as a unity candidate. 1876. for example.6' Many persons also were shocked by the looting of Cali on December 24. pp. part 1. . became known as Independents while their Liberal adversaries revived the Radical label for themselves. 1877. even if he was-his property would be seized and frequently auctioned off at a fraction of its value to a deserving Liberal. 1877. from Modesto Garces. 1877. Uribe V. Eder (Recuerdos de su vida y anotaciones para la historia economic del Valle del Cauca) (1959). CdeAP."60 The situation was especially bad in Cauca. 401-413.La reformna 251. February 2o. if he was unable or unwilling to pay the required amount in cash-and in some cases. It was during his two-year term that his supporters and those of Nufiiez. 1882.I. where forced loans continued to be collected even after the federal government had ordered their suspension. according to one account. See. a Nuiiista in 1875. 1877. 42-43. El Fundador Santiago M. from Tomas Cipriano de Mosquera. II. September ii and 19. La revolucion. April 21 and October 23. Nuifiez later commented that during the revolution "the abuses committed with respect to real estate reached such alarming proportions that it could be perceived that the country was rapidly approaching the state of barbarism where this matter was concerned. of course. For forced loans in Cundinamarca.. CdeAP. probably pp. 62. Los Arzobispos. 283-299. August i.. dissension began almost immediately after he took office on April 1. Phanor James Eder. pp. were restrained by their superiors only when they began to attack the property of Liberals. 612ff. political. 6i. but contemporaries appeared to feel that the depredations of 1876-1877. reprinted in Ni'diez. 265-269. by Liberal troops who.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 267 Another source of controversy was the collection of forced loans from Conservatives during the recent revolution to raise funds to support the government's military effort. and Miguel Samiper. September 7 and ii.62 Division within the party reappeared during the administration of Julian Trujillo. see Bricenlo. who had added luster to his military reputation during the recent revolution. Such practices were. Conto to Parra. Monsalve. 84-91. The usual procedure was to demand a fixed sum from a Conservative. letters to Parra from Julian Trujillo. see J. 1878. exceeded anything that had occurred in the past. who served briefly as secretary of finance and development.
part 1. In another message Trujillo expressed a desire for an end to the collection of forced loans and requested authorization to return auctioned real estate to the original owners with reasonable compensation to purchasers and payment to the national treasury of the loan the nonpayment of which had resulted in the auction. 65. 1878. that all states would share equally in the benefits to be derived from such a loan and indicated that henceforth the federal government would play a more limited role in the development of transportation. in the future. Vergara.67 He made it clear. Leyes de los Estados Unidos de Colombia expedidas en el afo de 1882 (1882). 67. the Independent-controlled Congress revoked the sentence of exile against the bishops. May 8. 66a. including the extension of amnesty to the exiled bishops and the repeal of certain provisions of Law 35 of 1877. politely but firmly turned down the President's request. La Reforma.268 HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR to suggest a parallel between contemporary conditions and the struggle against Mosquera in 1866-1867.I. May i8. 63. he asked for changes in the ecclesiastical laws. 64. however. Nutfiez gave the Independent movement a sonorous if conveniently vague slogan in a speech delivered on the occasion of Trujillo's inauguration when he warned that catastrophe threatened Colombia unless a "fundamental administrative regeneration" were undertaken. Ibid. On April 27. In a message to Congress on April 25. April 29. .66a A third part of the Independent program of 1878 dealt with the federal government's role in promoting internal improvements. the Northern Railroad.63 Shortly afterwards Trujillo gave the Independents a program in a series of messages to Congress. declaring that it would be inopportune to legislate on religious matters at that time.. pp. 1878. 1878. La reforma political. where the Radicals had a majority. pp. 66. emphasis would be placed on more modest but perhaps more realistic enterprises designed to provide short. Trujillo stressed the need for such improvements and expressed the hope that a "moderate" foreign loan might be obtained to finance the construction of railroads.66 The following September Trujillo issued a decree permanently ending the collection of forced loans.65 In 188o. 70-72. Escrutinio hist6rico. This new policy meant in effect the abandonment of the favorite project of Parra and the Radicals. A law providing for the return of property that had been auctioned as a loan or contribution during and after the revolution of 1876-1877 was passed in L882. 249-253. 1878. 190-194. Nui'iez. and Law 35 was repealed two years later.64 Congress. Ibid. Diario Oficial. however.
See also La Defensa. I. which went into operation on January i.D. 1740-1940" (unpublished Ph. 46-55.276. i88o. . June 23. April i6. The Independent program was expanded in 188o when Nunfiez succeeded Trujillo in the presidency. 114-115. bills creating a protective tariff and a National Bank were passed by Congress in 188o.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 269 direct links between major towns and between the interior and the Magdalena. In his inaugural address on April 8.69 The Radicals directed even heavier fire at the proposed National Bank. and Diario de Cundinamarca. which can be blamed in part for the political agitation of the period. Escritos. having been elected with the support of the Independents and a sizable portion of the Conservative party. primarily for two reasons: the belief that Colombia was destined to remain an exporter of agricultural products. 12 of them in Cundinamarca and ii in Antioquia (Camacho Roldain. 195-291. the Colombian depression. The Banco de Bogota. "The Colombian Coffee Industry: Origins and Major Trends. 71. which began operations in 1871.71 Although the National Bank. 188o. La cuestio'n 291-292. 11-96. Safford. PP. 69." pp. which had been assessed on the basis of gross weight since i86i.68 Duties on imports. at least in the foreseeable future. Diario de Cundinamarca. i88o. 282-283. i88i. was largely the result of the low prices which the nation's exchange-earning exports. as a completely official institution issuing notes re68. had been rising during the 1870s. and Samper. Camacho Roldan. Nunez called for establishment of a protective tariff to stimulate domestic industry and for the creation of a National Bank to serve as a spur to economic growth. were commanding in European markets. Escritos. Industria y proteccio'n. was Colombia's first successful bank of issue. especially cinchona bark. In i88i there were 42 banks in existence. Escritos. See also Samper. i88o. 338-339). "Commerce and Enterprise. "Two Stages. 17-18. see Ospina Vasquez. Beyer. To some extent a reflection of unfavorable conditions in other parts of the world. I. II. May 27. but there was now considerable Radical opposition to the adoption of a frankly protectionist policy. and the undesirability of granting preferential treatment to a few Bogota artisans at the expense of the consumer.April 9. 117.70 Despite the objections of the Radicals. A sample of Radical objections to the National Bank can be found in La Defensa. It was the hope of Nunez that the National Bank would help lift the Colombian economy from the depressed state into which it had fallen in the late 1870s after a period of comparative prosperity earlier in the decade. pp. Robert C. 1905). III. Escritos. Carlos Calderon. For economic conditions in Colombia at this time. Bushnell. 70. University of Minnesota. 665-674. 1947). which they declared would be monopolistic and would drive private banks out of business." pp. dissertation. monetaria en Colombia (Madrid.
76 Despite the President's avowal of his devotion to liberalism. Diario Oficial. In addition. II. 305ff. August 30. Liberal importers and businessmen connected with the Banco de Bogota and other private banks could be expected to be critical of the legislation of i88o and hope for a reversal of policy with an end Ospina Vasquez. Le Cours Force' et Son Histoire en Colombie (Paris. pp. 75.74 To be sure.ooopesos and that the nation was in the midst of "the most serious industrial and monetary crisis" it had ever known. p. 74. Miguel Antonio Caro. see El Relator. but this issue never occupied a prominent place in their subsequent demands for reform. he reported to Congress that the federal treasury was running a monthly deficit of at least Loo. Colombian monetary policy in the 189os is discussed in numerous works. after its liquidation in 1894. 19LL). 76. pp. did not destroy the private banks as the Radicals had predicted. 1897 (1897). 73. 97-235. 278. 1884. Escritos sobre cuestiones econdmicas (1943). and the Independent party had been reduced to a shadow of its former self.. and Convention Nacional Eleccionaria del Partido Liberal. 1906).270 HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAB deemable in silver. May i6. however.72 Shortly after Nulfiez took office for the second time on August il.73 Despite the vigor of their blasts at the Bank and the tariff. 1884. 72. the National Bank did remain a major target for Liberal criticism. Subsequently. The Republic of Colombia (London. F[rancis] Loraine Petre. Escritos. Some of the defections can be ascribed to the thwarted political ambitions of Independent leaders in various states. Liberals and many Conservatives regularly inveighed against the shady financial manipulations of the Bank and. by 1884 he had lost the support of most of the top-ranking Liberals who had backed him in the 1870s. pp. L[uis] E[duardo] Nieto Caballero. it is likely that the Radicals were moved at least as much by political considerations as by devotion to the Liberal doctrine of the 1850s. 59-66. it did not produce an economic upturn. against the government's increasing emissions of paper money75 In his inaugural address in 1884. which dealt primarily with political matters. Nulfiez called himself an "irrevocable member of Colombian liberalism" and pledged to reconstitute the party's scattered forces. The Liberals retained a vague commitment to free trade during the rest of the century. 25-28. since they themselves had not hesitated to adulterate it in the past. August il. Diario Oficial. 1893. but this was mainly because after 1885 the Bank's notes were no longer convertible and were declared by the government to be the only legal tender in Colombia. Industria y proteccidn. 1884. among them Samper. . For Liberal programs in the 189os.
Escritos. "Revista politica. La Defensa. Francisco Javier Zalduia. Lievano Aguirre.-Mar. see their joint address to the Conservative convention of 1879. 8o. Cuervo. the party gave him significant support in the presidential election of 1879 and officially endorsed his candidacy in 1883. September 36. 11:12 (June 1879). Nuifiezto Juan de Dios Restrepo." El Repertorio Colombiano. July 8. had concluded that revolution had to be discarded as a method of regaining political power and that the most feasible route to this end would be through cooperation with the Independents. #99. 188i. 79. Ms. Memorias autobiogrdficas. In 1876 Nu'fiez himself had indicated that he was undecided as to the proper course. #31 consist of documents pertaining to Cuervo's life from 1854 to 3888. 312-315. [Carlos Martinez Silval. he asked one of his supporters.78 Although this policy encountered resistance from individual Conservatives who mistrusted Nuiiez. . XXXIV:387-389 (Jan. if not to Nuifiez. May 13. Rafael Nufiez. 82. 163. 412-416. 1883. El Deber. #30." El Repertorio Colombiano. Ms. 78. VI:34 (April i88i).pp. 1879. though 77. 188o. Santos Acosta and Eustorgio Salgar. Quijano Wallis. and proclaim him as their own choice. La Unio'n.81 An even more impressive set of defections took place the following year when the Radicals were able to capture the presidential candidate selected by Nuifiez and the Independents. of course. 94-95. "Revista politica. and Samper. "Cartas del Doctor N'uliez. 1947). 8i.79 The Independents.82 This attempt at "Liberal union" had the support of such prominent Independents as Julia'nTrujillo and Salvador Camacho Roldan. Cf. 26-27.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 271 of Independent rule. May 2.77 But the most important factor in the disenchantment of many erstwhile Nuijistas was probably their fear that the Independents would allow the federal government to fall into the hands of the Conservatives. when two former chief executives. and October 19. July 29. BL-AA. "Should we lean toward the oligarchs out of fear of the Conservatives?". By 1879 the leading Conservative party chiefs. III. For an expression of Holguin and Cuervo's thoughts on this matter. [Carlos Martinez Silva]. BL-AA. 1876. 474. had to balance their animosity toward the Radicals against the hazards of cooperation with the Conservatives. This folder and Ms. El Ccmservador."Boletin de Historia y Antigiiedades. the latter alternative was unacceptable. "Or should we unite as much as possible with the latter even though we may later be dominated by the theocratic element?"80 To most Independents. particularly Carlos Holguin and Antonio B. joined Radical ex-Presidents Santiago Perez and Aquileo Parra in a committee formed to direct the activities of Liberals willing to recognize their authority. The disintegration of the Independent movement was signalled as early as July 20. both of whom had been Nuijistas in 1875. April 24. i88o. p.
it is inaccurate to state that the Constitution of i886 and the regime which it established were the creations of both Independent Liberals and Conservatives. see La Nacion.. He called instead for the writing of a drastically different charter. Nuinhez. greatly expanded the powers of the chief executive. He was re-elected in 1892. the National party. only a few had been nationally known Liberals. giving advice when he was consulted" (Otero Mufioz. Miguel Antonio Caro. i88i. For a statement by Nunfiezoutlining his views on constitutional reform. respect for religious beliefs was now the order of the day. see Jose Maria Samper. but died in 1894. with many of the leading members of the movement having rejoined the Radicals. . 329ff. November 13. Derecho pftblico interno de Colombia (1886). was of Conservative background. 1881. Trujillo and Camacho Rolda'n warned of the dangers inherent in Conservative support for one of the Liberal factions and pointed out that the original reasons for the party's split had disappeared: both of the presidential aspirants of 1875 had served as chief executive. and gave preferential treatment to the Catholic Church. and the chief author of the new constitution. It should be pointed out that from 1886 to 1894 Ni'iiez wielded executive power himself only for about a year in 1887-1888. Nufiiez. and public funds were being spent on internal improvements of the second rank that would pave the way for the great enterprise that would one day link the states of the interior. the ranks of the Independents had been greatly thinned. this last statement being a reference to the new railroad policy then in effect. supporters of the Regeneration formed a new political organization. ended federalism. I. According to one of his biographers. being succeeded by Vice President Miguel Antonio Caro. as promulgated in i886. Consequently. On the drafting of the constitution. limiting himself to. 1885. was able or willing to exert influence on politicians The extent to which Nunfiez in Bogota' cannot be determined with certainty as yet. La Union. which. during the last four years of his life "the titular President allowed those entrusted with the government full liberty to dispose of the nation's fate according to their will.83 By the time Nuniez began his second term.84 Although nine of the eighteen men who attended the constitutional convention were Independents. who had long been in favor of constitutional reform. Nuniez was elected to a six-year presidential term in 1886 by the Council of Delegates which drafted the new constitution. took advantage of the opportunity to bury the Rionegro constitution. Estudios constitucionales (1951). In an effort to destroy the old partisan labels. and Miguel Antonio Caro. but it soon became evi83. composed of Independents and Conservatives.272 HAHB I MAY I HELEN DELPAB not that of Nu'iiez himself. 84. May 13. therefore. He spent most of this eight-year period in retirement in Cartagenawhile presidential alternates or vice presidents acted as chief executive. 384-385). When the revolution of 1885 broke out. In a manifesto to Independents on April 30. pp.
state and local issues that in85. November 22. May 2.in the Copiador Parra. which contains copies of the Center's correspondence. i888 to (sic. Ms.86 At the end of that year Nuniez tried to assure Luis Carlos Rico. 88. But other factors. but also that they may have occasionally received a less than cordial welcome from those who blamed them for the party's present plight..85 By mid-1888 the preponderance of the Conservative party had been assured: Conservatives held five of the seven ministries and headed six of the ninedepartments. 305 $f. also contributed to the Liberal debacle. 321.ASPECTS OF LIBERAL FACTIONALISM IN COLOMBIA 273 dent that the Independents would be overshadowed by their new associates. #99. "We especially urge. that Carlos Holguin. an Independent from Boyaca. among them Vice President Eliseo Payain." the statement continued. who was stripped of his title in 1887 for dallying with his former Liberal comrades. Robles. composed of Parra. We ought to recognize only Liberals. recommended that the party press avoid the revival of old quarrels that might discourage former adversaries who wanted to rejoin the party. 87. January 7. Circular from the Liberal Center. former Independents continued to return to the Liberal party. that our press omit the terms Radical and Independent. would save the Independents from "complete eclipse. p. and is in the possession of the Academia Colombiana de Historia. Otero Mui'oz. BL-AA. However. the Liberal split of the 1870s had led to a Conservative restoration and to the destruction of the institutions set up at Rionegro. among them the lack of effective Radical leadership. 1891-1892. 18giL. Several Independents who had played important roles in the events of 1885-1886 were discarded in the next few years. In the meantime. Camacho Roldan. the year was actually 1889). which cannot be discussed here. and Rico to Nufiiez. if it was in the Liberal interest to minimize past divisions. pp. Nunfiez Rico."88 These words indicate not only that the re-entry of Independents into Liberal ranks was continuing. 86. and Luis A. Impermanent though it was. 1888." but Rico hoped that Nufiiez himself would infuse the Independents with "new life" through his correspondence. In 1891 a newly formed Liberal Center. the Conservatives stood to gain as much by attempting to perpetuate the Radical-Independent split.87 Eventually the Independents became part of the Nationalist or National wing of the Conservative party. in a set of directives to be circulated confidentially in the departments. Nuifiiez. Among the Liberals these terms soon became extinct. . but the pro-administration press continued to refer to its non-Conservative opponents as Radicals well into the decade of the 189os. Ibid. Bogota'. then serving as chief executive in Nlufiez' absence.
must be considered by the historian who seeks an understanding of the decade 1878-1885 in Colombian history. together with the events sketched on the preceding pages. All of these.274 HAHR I MAY I HELEN DELPAR fluenced the course of national affairs. . and the changing views and inclinations of Rafael Nufiiez.