GEC 9: THE LIFE AND WORKS OF RIZAL

First Semester S.Y. 2022-2023

LEARNING MATERIALS

LESSON 5: Agrarian Disputes

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

a. Examine Rizal’s life in the Philippines within the wider context of the
developments in the 19th century;
b. Explain how the Hacienda de Calamba issue serves as an exemplary illusion of
agrarian conflicts in the late 19th century;
c. Describe the interplay of several factors that contribute to the changing
landscape of Philippine society and economy.

VOCABULARY:
Conquistador – a Spanish conqueror
Caballeria – a small tract of land included in a land grant
Canon – annual rent paid by the inquilino
Cavan – a measure equal to 75 liters
Hacienda – large estates that were used for raising livestock and agricultural
production
Inquilino – a tenant who rented land from the friars and subleased the land to
sharecroppers
Principales – a ruling elite class
Sharecropper (kasama) – an individual who rented the land from an inquilino and
worked the land
Sitio de Ganado mayor – a large tract of land included in a land grant

DISCUSSION:
Brief History of Friars Estates in the Philippines

Page 1 of 6
Revision: 0
 The origin of the friar estates can be traced back to land grants awarded to the
early Spanish conquistadores who arrived in the Philippines during the late 16 th and
early 17th centuries. Approximately 120 Spaniards were given grants that were often
composed of a large tract of land know as sitio de ganado mayor (measuring 42.5
hectares).
In time, the Spanish hacenderos failed to develop their lands for three reasons.
First, the Spanish population in the Philippines was transient. It was a common practice
for Spanish administrators to return to Spain after having served in the country. Second,
the market for livestock products, which haciendas offered, remained relatively small
until the latter part of the Spanish colonial period. Third, the Galleon Trade that was
based in Manila offered bigger economic rewards and attracted more Spaniards.
Because the Spanish hacenderos lacked the interest and inclination to develop their
lands, the religious orders soon took over the task.
Land was acquired by the religious orders through various means. Often, the
lands were donated by Spaniards seeking spiritual benefits. There were cases, too, in
which estates that had been heavily mortgaged to the ecclesiastics were eventually
purchased by the religious orders themselves. Records reveal that a number of Filipino
principales also contributed to the formation of the friar estates through donations and
sales. Despite these methods, there persisted a commonly held belief among the
Filipinos that the religious orders had no titles to their lands and that they had acquired
these lands through usurpation or other dubious means. Nevertheless, religious estates
in the Tagalog region continued to grow that by the 19 th century, they constituted
approximately 40 percent of the provinces of Bulacan, Tondo (presently Rizal), Cavite,
and Laguna.
The preoccupation in the estates was varied during the early centuries of
Spanish colonial rule. In the 16 th and 17th centuries, the estates primarily served as
cattle ranches as well as farms of subsistence crops. Rice and sugar later served as main
commodities produced in the haciendas and became important sources of income for
the religious orders especially during the 19th century.
Agrarian relations in the haciendas developed in the time. In the 16th and 17th
centuries, the social structure found in the haciendas was primarily composed of lay
brother administrators at the top and cultivating tenants below. Although the lay
brother administrators were under the direct authority of the heads of their religious
Page 2 of 6
Revision: 0
orders, they were relatively free to make their own decisions on administrative affairs.
The tenants, on the other hand, were expected to work the land and pay an annual rent,
which was usually a fixed amount of harvest and in later centuries, money.
By the mid 18th century, an expanding economy based on exporting agricultural
crops ushered in change and gradually put into place an inquilinato system. Under this
system, an individual rented land for a fixed annual amount, known as canon. Aside
from the rent, the inquilino or lesee was also expected to render personal services to his
landlords. If the inquilino failed to satisfy these requirements, he could face expulsion
from the land. Usually, the inquilino, in turn, would sub-lease the land to a kasama or
sharecropper who would then take on the task of cultivating the soil. Thus, a three-
tiered system emerged with the landlords at the top, the inquilinos at the middle, and
the sharecroppers at the bottom.
By leasing the land to an inquilino, the religious hacenderos freed themselves
from the social responsibilities borne from a direct interaction with the sharecroppers
since it was now the inquilinos who dealt directly with the kasama. The sharecroppers,
on the other hand, benefitted from the arrangement because their labor obligations to
the religious estates allowed them to be exempted from the responsibilities of forced
labor demanded by the Spanish government. The downside to this type of arrangement,
however, was that two non-cultivating groups further diminished the income of the
sharecroppers. After the inquilino paid his rent to the religious hacenderos and deducted
his own share, the remaining amount of income would then be divided among all the
sharecroppers.
The change in the social structure and land tenure practices would eventually
render the haciendas as sites of contestation among the Spanish religious hacenderos,
the inquilinos, and the sharecroppers. It is not surprising, then, that when the Philippine
Revolution broke out in 1896, the abuses in the friar estates were often identified as one
of the main causes that instigated the revolt.

Hacienda de Calamba Conflict

Not much is known about the Hacienda de Calamba prior to 1759 other than it
was owned by several Spanish laymen. In 1759, a destitute Spanish layman, Don Manuel
Jauregui, donated the lands to the Jesuits on the condition that he would be allowed to
live in the Jesuit monastery for the rest of his life. The Jesuits would claim ownership to
Page 3 of 6
Revision: 0
the land for a mere eight years before they were expelled from the Philippines through a
decree issued by King Charles III on February 27, 1767. As a result of the expulsion,
Hacienda de Calamba, along with other Jesuit properties, were confiscated by the
government and put under the management of the Office of Jesuit Temporalities.
In 1803, the government sold the property to a Spanish layman, Don Clemente de
Azansa, for 44,507 pesos. When he died in 1833, the Hacienda de Calamba, which
measured 16,424 hectares, was purchased by the Dominicans for 52,000 pesos. By this
time, many families from neighboring towns had migrated to the Hacienda in search of
economic opportunities. Among the families that arrived at the hacienda were Rizal’s
ancestors, who eventually became on the the principal inquilinos in the hacienda.
Although the lands in Calamba were leased to several families, it was Rizal’s
family that rented one of the largest leased lands, measuring approximately 380
hectares. Sugar was a main commodity planted in the hacienda as there was a demand
for the crop in the world market. Much of the wealth of Rizal’s family came from these
lands; hence, it is but natural that when the conflict began to manifest itself as early as
1883, there was much for the family to be concerned about.
In 1883, Paciano Rizal wrote that friars were collecting rents without issuing the
usual receipts. Two years later, the tenants failed to pay their rents because the rent had
supposedly increased while sugar prices had remained low. To punish tenants for not
paying the rent, the Dominicans declared the lands vacant and invited residents of other
towns to take over the tenancies. Because only a few outsiders responded to the
Dominican’s invitation, the friars weakened their position. Most tenants, except for four
or five, were spared from eviction.
The charges against the friars continued with Rizal’s brother-in-law, Mariano
Herboso, specifically complaining about the yearly increase in rentals, faulty irrigation
systems, and failure to issue receipts. Coupled with these problems was the fact that at
this time, the price of sugar continued to decline in the world market. The situation
became so dire that Paciano, at one point, considered giving back his lands to the friars
and clearing land elsewhere.
Problems continued to escalate when in 1887, the colonial government
demanded from the tenants of the hacienda a report on the income and production of
the estate because they suspected that the Dominicans were evading payment of their
taxes. The tenants complied and submitted a report, but they also attached a petition
Page 4 of 6
Revision: 0
authored by Jose Rizal. The petition presented a list of grievances against the hacienda
owners including a complaint on the increasing amount of rent. To show resistance,
some of the tenants be
gan to withhold rents.
As a form of retaliation, the friars began to evict tenants who refused to pay rent
in 1891. Those who persisted still in resisting the friars were eventually expelled.
Among those who were exiled to remote areas in the country were Rizal’s parents,
brother, and sisters. Although Rizal had worked on reversing the decision of the
Philippine courts, his family’s exile would only be lifted upon the issuance of a decree
from another governor-general. The experience affected Rizal deeply and the increasing
despair he felt from the event would be reflected in his second novel, El Filibusterismo.

TENANT GRIEVANCES AND RIZAL’S PETITION

Read the following excerpt from “Petition of the Town of Calamba”
Written by: Jose Rizal (January 1888)
From the declaration of the tenants interviewed, it turns out that the products of the
Estate – if by-products are to be understood everything that the land produces – have
increased for the Estate and diminished remarkably for the tenants, not only in the
years that have passed but also in the last three, as the enclosed account proves. Such a
statement needs to be explained. The products increase to the benefit of the Estate:
1. Because the wild forests which are given to the tenants for a low rent at the
beginning according as the tenants clear and clean them, investing large capital
in them, according as the fortune of the farmer becomes involved in them, the
contract is arbitrarily altered by the Estate, the rent rises enormously, there
being a case when 45 pesos became 900 in a few years through an annual forced
imposition.
2. Because some lands pay twice for two harvests of rice, where some bamboo
groves are found, the farmer pays for the land and for each bamboo groves
besides, regardless of whether it is useless or it has been felled. In the lands
where huts have been erected for the workers, one has to pay for the lots and the
huts besides.

Page 5 of 6
Revision: 0
 3. Because the rent of the town lots where houses or warehouses are erected
increases every time an official or servant of the Estate measure them. There
seems to exists either a supernatural power that invisibly extends the land or a
natural power that shortens the measure of the official, who after all is neither an
expert nor a surveyor, though he is very venal indeed. Without this trick, the rent
is also raised when the tenant makes improvement in the lot, or when he
replaces the bamboo fence with a stone one, or builds a wooden house, for
comfort and public embellishment; therefore, many do not improve their
dwellings even if they have the means to do so…
4. Because ricefields that are planted with only 3 or 4 cavanes of seed, pay as if
they have a capacity for 9.5 and 14 cavanes , on pain of being declared vacant and
given to others… The products for the tenants have decreased considerably in
spite of continuous labor, not only before but also these last years as proven by
the large number of ruined farmers, indebted and dispossessed of their
property… On the other hand, the desperate ones who wish to return a parcel of
land that in unproductive will not be allowed to do so and they face ruin as they
will be threatened of being despoiled of all their parcels. It arouses suspicion that
they do not want to write in the receipts the amount paid as rental and the total
absence of any record, especially in these last years…
Source: Rizal, J. 2007. “Petition of the town of Calamba.” In Political and Historical Writings. Manila: National
Historical Institute, pp. 37-41.

EVALUATION: (See the separate file for Learning Activity)

REFERENCES:
Rhodalyn Wani-Obias et. al., The Life and Works of Jose Rizal. C&E Publishing Inc. (2018)
Eugene Raymond P. Crudo et. al. The Life and Works of Jose Rizal. REX Book Store. (2019)

Prepared by:

John Rey R. Buan

Instructor

Page 6 of 6
Revision: 0