1872 Cavite mutiny
Cavite mutiny | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Part of the Philippine revolts against Spain | |||||||
A historical marker installed in 1972 by the National Historical Commission at Samonte Park to commemorate the mutiny | |||||||
| |||||||
Belligerents | |||||||
Filipino mutineers | |||||||
Commanders and leaders | |||||||
Felipe Ginovés | Fernando La Madrid | ||||||
Strength | |||||||
One regiment, four cannons | Around 200 soldiers and laborers |
The Cavite mutiny (
Causes of the Cavite mutiny
The causes of the Cavite Mutiny can be identified through examining the different accounts in this historic event.
Spanish accounts of the mutiny
José Montero y Vidal was a Spanish historian who interpreted that the mutiny was an attempt to remove and overthrow the Spanish colonizers in the Philippines. His account, corroborated with the account of Governor-General Rafael Izquierdo, the governor-general of the Philippines at the time of the mutiny. Both mentioned that the mutiny was powered by a group of native clergy.
Account of Jose Montero y Vidal
The Cavite Mutiny was an aim of the natives to get of the Spanish government in the Philippines, due to the removal of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal at Fort San Felipe, such as exemption from the tribute and forced labor (polo y servicio). The democratic and republican books and pamphlets, the speeches and preaching of the apostles of these new ideas in Spain and the outburst of the American publicists and the cruel policies of the insensitive governor whom the reigning government sent to govern the country. Native Filipinos put into action these ideas where the occurring conditions which gave rise to the idea of achieving their independence.[3]
Account of Governor-General Izquierdo
Governor-General Izquierdo insisted that the mutiny was stimulated and prepared by the native clergy, mestizos and lawyers as a signal of objection against the injustices of the government such as not paying provinces for tobacco crops, pay tribute and rendering of forced labor. It is not clearly identified if the natives planned to inaugurate a monarchy or a republic because they do not have a word in their own language to describe this different form of government, whose leader in Filipino would be called "hari". However, it turned out that they would set at the supreme of the government a priest and that the leader selected would be José Burgos or Jacinto Zamora, which was the plan of the rebels who guided them; and the means they counted upon its realization.[4]
Other accounts of the mutiny
Account of Trinidad Pardo de Tavera
The event was just a simple mutiny since up to that time the Filipinos have no intention of separation from Spain but only secure materials and education advancements in the country. However, the mutiny was used at a powerful level. Also, in this time, the central government deprived friars of the powers of involvement in civil government and in governing and handling universities. This resulted in the friars' fear that their leverage in the Philippines would be a thing in the past, took advantage of the mutiny and reported it to the Spanish government as a broad conspiracy organized throughout the archipelago with the object of abolishing Spanish sovereignty. The Madrid government without any attempt to investigate the real facts or extent of the alleged revolution reported by Izquierdo and the friars believed the scheme was true.[4]
Account of Edmund Plauchut
Plauchut traced the immediate cause to a peremptory order from the Governor-General Izquierdo, exacting personal taxes from the Filipino laborers in the engineering and artillery corps in the Cavite arsenal, and requiring them to perform forced labor like ordinary subjects. Until then, these workers in the arsenal had been enjoying exemptions from both taxes and forced labor. January 20, the day of the revolt, was payday and the laborers found the amount of taxes as well as the corresponding fee in lieu of the forced labor deducted from their pay envelopes. It was the last straw. That night they mutinied. Forty infantry soldiers and twenty men from the artillery took over command of Fort of San Felipe and fired
Different accounts in the Cavite mutiny also highlighted other probable causes of the "revolution" which included a Spanish revolution which overthrew the secular throne, dirty propagandas proliferated by unrestrained press, democratic, liberal and republican books and pamphlets reaching the Philippines, and most importantly, the presence of the native clergy who out of animosity against the Spanish friars, "conspired and supported" the rebels and enemies of Spain.
In addition, accounts of the mutiny suggest that the Glorious Revolution in Spain during that time added more determination to the natives to overthrow the current colonial Spanish government.
Battle
Their leader was Fernando La Madrid, a
Aftermath
In the immediate aftermath, some Filipino soldiers were disarmed and later sent into exile on the southern island of
On January 27, 1872, Governor-General Izquierdo approved the
Finally, a decree was made, stating there were to be no further ordinations/appointments of Filipinos as
Behind the story of Cavite mutiny
During the short trial, the captured mutineers testified against Father Burgos. The state witness, Francisco Zaldua, declared that he had been told by one of the Basa brothers that the "government of Father Burgos" would bring a navy fleet of the United States to assist a revolution with which Ramón Maurente, the supposed field marshal, was financing with 50,000 pesos. The heads of the friar orders held a conference and decided to get rid of Burgos by implicating him to a plot. One Franciscan friar disguised as Burgos and suggested a mutiny to the mutineers. The senior friars used an una fuerte suma de dinero or a banquet to convince Governor-General Izquierdo that Burgos was the mastermind of the coup. Gómez and Zamora were close associates of Burgos, so they too were included in the allegations. Also, Zaldua had been the principal informer against the three priests. His statement had been the main basis for the convictions and he had been promised pardon in exchange for his testimony, however, he was condemned along with the three. He was the first to be executed among them on February 17, 1872.
The Central Government in Madrid proclaimed that they want to deprive the friars of all the power of intervention in matters of civil government and direction and management of educational institutions. The friars feared that their dominance in the country would become a thing of the past, and that they needed something to justify their perpetuation, with the mutiny providing such an opportunity. However, the Philippine Institute was introduced by the Spanish government as an educational decree fusing sectarian schools once ran by the friars. This 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 important step welcomed by most Filipinos.
Execution of Gomburza
On February 15, 1872, the Spanish colonial authorities charged the Fathers Burgos, Gomez and Zamora with treason and sedition, and subversion; and were sentenced to death by
The death of Gomburza awakened strong spirits of anger and resentment among the Filipinos. They grilled Spanish authorities and demanded reforms due to the prejudicial governance of the authorities. The martyrdom of the three priests, ironically, assisted in the creation of the Propaganda Movement which aimed to seek reforms and inform the Spanish people on the abuses of its colonial authorities in the Philippine Islands.[7]
Besides from Gomburza execution on January 28, 1872, the military court also sentenced 41 mutineers to death. However, the next day Izquierdo pardoned 28 mutineers and the rest were confirmed to sentence. On February 6, 1872, 11 mutineers were sentenced to death but Izquierdo commuted their death sentences to life imprisonment. Together with execution of the three martyrs, Enrique Paraiso, Maximo Innocencio and Crisanto de los Reyes were imposed ten years imprisonment.[8]
Furthermore, there were people being sentenced by the military court of Spain to exile them to the Marianas (now Guam): Fr. Pedro Dandan, Fr. Mariano Sevilla, Toribio H. del Pilar (brother of Marcelo H. del Pilar), Agustin Mendoza, José Guevara, Miguel Lasa, Justo Guazon, Fr. Aniceto Desiderio, Fr. Vicente del Rosario, Joaquín Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma. Regidor, José Basa y Enriquez, Mauricio de Leon, Pedro Carillo, Gervasio Sanchez, José Ma. Basa, Pío Basa, Balvino Mauricio, Maximo Paterno (father of Pedro Paterno) and Valentín Tosca.[7][8]
On the orders of Governor-General Izquierdo, a number of priests and laypeople were detained as a result of the uprising in Cavite. Among the priests detained in the days that followed were Fathers Jose Burgos, Jacinto Zamora, Mariano Gomez, and several Filipino lawyers and merchants. In Guam, further Filipinos were punished. The three priests, however, received a garrote death sentence.
The three priests were judged guilty of treason as the leaders of the mutiny by the Spanish court on the evening of February 15, 1872. Early the next morning, the verdict was announced at Fort Santiago.
An estimated 40,000 Filipinos gathered around the execution platforms on February 17, 1872. Father Burgos accepted his fate, Father Zamora had vacant eyes, and Father Gomez was holding his head high during the execution. Along with them, Saldua, an artilleryman, was put to death.
Public outrage over their executions eventually gave rise to the Propaganda Movement, a late 19th-century political reform movement in the Philippines that aimed to address issues including representation in the Spanish Cortes and the secularization of the clergy. In the Spanish colonial government, the movement aimed to promote more autonomy and representation for Filipinos.
References
- ^ Honshū. She arrived, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons
- ISBN 0-8248-1110-0.
- ^ "The Two Faces of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny". Archived from the original on November 24, 2021. Retrieved November 13, 2019.
- ^ a b Piedad-Pugay, Chris Antonette (April 10, 2013). "THE TWO FACES OF THE 1872 CAVITE MUTINY". National Historical Commission of the Philippines. Archived from the original on October 10, 2013. Retrieved October 12, 2023.
- ^ Schumacher, John (March 2011). "The Cavite Mutiny Toward a Definitive History". Philippine Studies. 59: 58 – via JSTOR.
- ISBN 1-85753-272-4.
- ^ a b "Gomburza and the Propaganda Movement". www.philippine-history.org. Retrieved November 13, 2019.
- ^ a b Ocampo, Ambeth R. (February 18, 2015). "Not just Gomburza". opinion.inquirer.net. Retrieved November 13, 2019.
- ^ "Life and Works of Rizal by Wani-Obias, Mallari, Estella PDF | PDF".