CASE STUDY:

CAVITE MUTINY?

A Case Study Presented to

Tertiary Education Department
Philippine Women’s College of Davao

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements in the Subject
ETE1A; Reading in Philippine History

By:

CATHERINE, PEREZ
ALBERT, COQUILLA
ANGELINE, ONIOT
MERNALYN, NAONG
SYLEM, CINCO
BUD, DOK
RICO, VILLANUEVA
JOHN MANUEL, CANSECO
PRINCESS, CURIMATMAT

1
CASE STUDY 2: WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CAVITE MUTINY? (1872): It is a historic year of
two events: the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of three priests:Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos,
and Jacinto Zamora (Gomburza). Spanish Accounts of the Cavite Municipality. The
documentation of Spanish historian Jose Montero y Vidal centered on how the event was an
attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. Although regarded as a
historian, his account of the mutiny was criticized as woefully biased and rabid for a scholar.
Another account from the official report written by Governor General Rafael Izquierdo implicated
the native clergy, who were then. Active in the movement toward the secularization of
parishes. These two accounts corroborated each other.PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPT FROM
MONTERO’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITEMUTINYSource: Jose Montero y Vidal, “Spanish
Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872” in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources
of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: NationalBook Store, 1990), 269–273. The abolition of
privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from the tribute was,
according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were, however,other causes.The
Spanish revolution which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on by an
unbridled press against monarchical principles, attentatory [sic] of the most sacred respect
towards the dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and
pamphlets; the speeches and preachings of the apostles of these new ideas in
Spain; the outbursts of theAmerican publicists and the criminal policy of the senseless
Governor whom the Revolutionary Government sent to govern the Philippines, and who
put into practice these ideas were the determining circumstances which gave rise, among
certain Filipinos, to the idea of attaining the their independence. It was towards this goal that
they started to work, with the powerful assistance of a certain section of the native clergy, who,
out of spite towards friars, made common cause with the enemies of the mother country.At
various times, but especially in the beginning of the year 1872, the authorities received
anonymous communication with the information that a great uprising would break out against
the Spaniards the minute the fleet at Cavite left for the South and that all would be
assassinated. Conspiracy had been going on since the days of La Torre with utmost secrecy. At
times, the principal leaders met either in the house of the Filipino Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de
Tavera, or in that of the native curate of Bacoor, the soul of the movement, whose energetic
character and immense wealth enabled him to exercise a strong influence.

2
PRIMARY SOURCES: EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL REPOST OF GOVERNOR
IZQUIERDO ON THE CAVITE MUTINY OF 1872 Source: Rafael Izquirdo, “Official Report on
the Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and SoniaZaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine
History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store,1990), 281-286.It seems definite that the
insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the mestizos and native
lawyers, and by those known here as bocadillos.The instigators, to carry out their
criminal project, protested against the injustice of the government in not paying the
provinces for their tobacco crop, and against the usury that some practice in documents that the
Finance department gives crop owners who have to sell them at a loss. They encouraged the
rebellion by pretesting what they called the injustice of having obliged the workers in the Cavite
arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1 and render personal service,from which they were
formerly exempt. Up to now, it has not been clearly determined if they planned to establish a
monarchy or a republic because the Indios have no word in their language to describe this
different form of government, whose head in Filipino would be called hari, but it turns out that
they would place at the head of the government a priest, and the head selected would be D.
Jose Burgos, or D. Jacinto Zamora: Such is the plan of the rebels, those who guided them, and
the means they counted upon for its realization.It is apparent that the accounts underscore the
reason for the “revolution”: the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the workers of the Cavite
arsenal, such as exemption from the payment of taxes and being employed in polos y servicios,
or forced labor. They also identified other reasons that seemingly made the issue a lot more
serious, which include the presence of the native clergy, who, out of spite against the Spanish
friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels.Izquierdo, in an obviously biased report, highlighted
that attempt to overthrow the Spanish Government in the Philippines to install a new “hari” in the
persons of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. According to him, native clergy attracted supporters by
giving them charismatic assurance that their fight would not fail because they had God’s
support, aside from promises of plenty of rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks in the
army.In the Spaniard’s accounts, the event of 1872 was premeditated and was part of a big
conspiracy among the educated leaders, mestizos, lawyers, and residents of Manila and
Cavite.They allegedly planned to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers, then kill the friars. The
signal they identified among these conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the rockets fired from
Intramuros.The accounts detail that on January 20, 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated
the feast of the Virgin of Loreto, and along with it were some fireworks displays. The Cavitenos
allegedly mistook this as the signal to commence with the attack. The 200-man contigent, led by
Sergeant Lamadrid, attacked Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal. Izquierdo, upon

3
learning of the attack, ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the
revolt.

THREE FILIPINO PROPAGANDISTS' CONTRIBUTION

CASE STUDY 2: WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CAVITE MUTINY?

(1872): It is a historic year of two events: the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of three priests:
Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora (GOMBURZA).

SPANISH ACCOUNTS OF CAVITE MUTINY

The documentation of Spanish historian Jose Montero y Vidal centered on how the event was
an attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. Although regarded as a
historian, his account of the mutiny was criticized as woefully biased and rabid for a scholar.
Another account from the official report written by Governor General Rafael Izquierdo implicated
the native clergy, who were then. Active in the movement toward the secularization of parishes.
These two accounts corroborated each other.

PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPT FROM MONTERO’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE MUTINY

Source: Jose Montero y Vidal, “Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872,” in Gregorio
Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National
Book Store, 1990), 269–273.

The abolition of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from the
tribute was, according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were, however, other
causes.The Spanish revolution, which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on by
an unbridled press against monarchical principles; the attentatory [sic] of the most sacred
respects towards the dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and pamphlets;
the speeches and preachings of the apostles of these new ideas in Spain; the outbursts of the
American publicists; and the criminal policy of the senseless governor whom the Revolutionary
government sent to govern the Philippines and who put into practice these ideas were the
determining circumstances that gave rise, among certain Filipinos, to the idea of attaining their
independence. It was towards this goal that they started to work, with the powerful assistance of

4
a certain section of the native clergy, who, out of spite towards friars, made common cause with
the enemies of the mother country.At various times, but especially in the beginning of the year
1872, the authorities received anonymous communication with the information that a great
uprising would break out against the Spaniards the minute the fleet at Cavite left for the South
and that all would be assassinated. A conspiracy had been going on since the days of La Torre
with utmost secrecy. At times, the principal leaders met either in the house of the Filipino
Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, or in that of the native curate of Bacoor, the soul of the
movement, whose energetic character and immense wealth enabled him to exercise a strong
influence.

PRIMARY SOURCES: EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL REPOST OF GOVERNOR

IZQUIERDO ON THE CAVITE MUTINY OF 1872 Source: Rafael Izquirdo, “Official Report on
the Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine
History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 281-286.

It seems definite that the insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the
mestizos and native lawyers, and by those known here as abogadillos.

The instigators, to carry out their criminal project, protested against the injustice of the
government in not paying the provinces for their tobacco crop and against the usury that some
practice in documents that the Finance Department gives crop owners who have to sell them at
a loss. They encouraged the rebellion by pretesting what they called the injustice of having
obliged the workers in the Cavite arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1 and render personal
service, from which they were formerly exempt. Up to now, it has not been clearly determined if
they planned to establish a monarchy or a republic because the Indios have no word in their
language to describe this different form of government, whose head in Filipino would be called
hari; but it turns out that they would place at the head of the government a priest, and the head
selected would be D. Jose Burgos, or D. Jacinto Zamora. Such is the plan of the rebels, those
who guided them, and the means they counted upon for its realization.It is apparent that the
accounts underscore the reason for the “revolution”: the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the
workers of the Cavite arsenal, such as exemption from the payment of tribute and being
employed in polos y servicios, or forced labor. They also identified other reasons that seemingly
made the issue a lot more serious, which include the presence of the native clergy, who, out of
spite against the Spanish friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels. Izquierdo, in an obviously
biased report, highlighted the attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines to

5
install a new “hari” in the persons of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. According to him, native
clergy attracted supporters by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight would not fail
because they had God’s support, aside from promises of lofty rewards such as employment,
wealth, and ranks in the army.In the Spaniard’s accounts, the event of 1872 was premeditated
and was part of a big conspiracy among the educated leaders, mestizos, lawyers, and residents
of Manila and Cavite. They allegedly plan to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers, then kill the
friars. The signal they identified among these conspirators in Manila and Cavite was the rockets
fired from Intramuros.

The accounts detail that on January 20, 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of
the Virgin of Loreto, and along with it were some fireworks displays. The Cavitenos allegedly
mistook this as the signal to commence with the attack. The 200-man contigent, led by Sergeant
Lamadrid, attacked Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal. Izquierdo, upon learning of
the attack, ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt.
However, the Central Spanish Government introduced an educational decree fusing sectarian
schools run by the friars into a school called the Philippine Institute. The decree aimed to
improve the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in these
schools to be filled by competitive examinations, an improvement welcomed by most
Filipinos.Another account, this time by French writer Edmund Plauchut, complemented Tavera’s
account and analyzed the motivations of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny.

PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPTS FROM PLAUCHUT’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE MUTINY

Source: Edmund Plauchut, “The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and the Martyrdom of Gom-Bur-Za,” in
Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila:
National Book Store, 1990), 251-268.

General La Torre created a junta composed of high officials, including some friars and six
Spanish officials. At the same time, the government in Madrid created a committee to
investigate the same problems submitted to the Manila committee. When the two finished their
work, it was found that they came to the same conclusions. Here is a summary of the reforms
they considered necessary to introduce:

6
Changes in tariff rates at customs, and the methods of collection.Removal of surcharges on
foreign importations.Reduction of export fees.Permission for foreigners to reside in the
Philippines, buy real state, enjoy freedom of worship, and operate commercial transports flying
the Spanish flag.Establishment of an advisory council to inform the Minister of Overseas Affairs
in Madrid on the necessary reforms to be implemented.Changes in primary and secondary
education.Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the Philippines, rendering
unnecessary the sending home of short-term civil officials every time there is a change of
ministry.Study of direct-tax system.Abolition of the tobacco monopoly.

The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo put a sudden end to all dreams of reform. The
prosecutions instituted by the now-Governor General were probably expected as a result of the
bitter disputes between the Filipino clerics and the friars. Such a policy must really end in a
strong desire on the part of the other to repress cruelly.

In regard to schools, it was previously decreed that there should be in Manila a Society of Arts
and Trades to be opened in March of 1871. To repress the growth of liberal teachings, General
Izquierdo suspended the opening of the school the day prior to the scheduled inauguration.

The Filipinos had a duty to render service on public road construction and pay taxes every
year. But those who were employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the engineering shops
and arsenal of Cavite, were exempted from this obligation from time immemorial. Without
preliminaries of any kind, a decree by the Governor withdrew from such old employees their
retirement privileges and declassified them into the ranks of those who worked on public roads.

The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy to cement their dominance, which
had started to show cracks because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They showcased the
mutiny as part of a greater conspiracy in the Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the Spanish
government. Unintentionally, and more so, prophetically, the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 resulted in
the martyrdom of GOMBURZA and paved the way for the revolution culminating in 1898.

These events are significant highlights in Philippine history and have caused ripples right
through time, directly influencing the decisive events of the Philippine Revolution toward the end
of the century. These are considered a major factor in the awakening of nationalism among the
Filipinos of that time and will continue to serve as one up until these present times.

7
8