THE CONSTITUTION OF 1812
While this controversy was contributing to the greater enlightenment or obscuration of public opinion, the Córtes were engaged in framing a Constitution. The committee entrusted with this task had a majority of conservatives, including several ecclesiastics, but these were quite willing to circumscribe the royal power, while seeking to extend the privileges of the Church, and all the members signed the project as presented.[893]It commenced by asserting the sovereignty of the nation, which had the exclusive right to establish its fundamental laws, and could never be the patrimony of any person or family, and it affirmed that the religion of the nation was, and always forever would be the Catholic, Apostolic, Roman, the only true one, which the nation protects by wise and just laws, and prohibits the exercise of any other.[894]This apparent concession to intolerance was denounced, when too late, as a trap, for it placed in the hands of the representatives of the nation the power of deciding what the wise and just laws should be for the protection of religion. Be this as it may, the Córtes were resolved that there should be no refusal to accept the new frameworkof government. In secret session of March 16, 1812, it was decreed that whosoever should refuse to swear to it should be declared an unworthy Spaniard and be driven from Spain, and measures were taken to have it read in every parish church, where the assembled people should swear to obey it and to be faithful to the king. As the French armies were driven back, the Spanish commanders made it their first duty to see this ceremony performed, and where there was opposition, chiefly arising from the priests, force was employed. A priest of the Cádiz cathedral who alluded to it slightingly as alibelo, or little book, was prosecuted, and the irreconcileable Bishop of Orense, who refused to take the oath, was exiled and declared to be an unworthy Spaniard. As a whole, however, it was enthusiastically accepted as the dawn of a new era, though we may well question how many of those who took the oath comprehended the purport of its three hundred and eighty-four articles, covering all the complicated minutiæ of institutions based on an entirely new conception of the relations between the Government and the governed.[895]
It was inevitable that, in the effort to create a new Spain, the fate of the Inquisition should be involved, especially as its disabled condition invited attack. That a struggle was impending had long been evident to all parties, and that this was felt to be decisive as to the character of the future institutions of Spain is seen in the tenacity with which it was fought. The Inquisition was the conservative stronghold, to be defended to the last, after all the outer defences had been abandoned, and the deep roots which it had established are manifested by the tactics required for its overthrow, and by the fact that the contest was the bitterest and the most prolonged in the career of the Córtes, which had so unceremoniously converted Spain from absolutism to liberal constitutionalism.
Some preparation had been made for the struggle by the conservatives. The first Regency had endeavored to reconstitute all the old Councils of the monarchy and, on June 10, 1810, Ethenard, the Dean of the Suprema, addressed to it a memorial requesting it to order the reassembling of the Suprema, to which it responded, August 1st, by issuing such an order. The scattering of the members precluded this, but, when the early acts of the Córtes foreshadowed what was to come, on December 18th, Ethenard andAmarillas asked the new Regency to appoint as a member the fiscal Ibar Navarro and as fiscal the Madrid inquisitor, Galarza, thus enabling the body to resume its functions. As no attention was paid to this, an old member, Alejo Jimenez de Castro, who had been exiled to Murcia by Godoy, was brought from his retreat to Cádiz, so as to have material for a quorum present. The occasion to utilize this offered itself in January, 1811. The freedom of the press enabled Don Manuel Alzaibar to start “La Triple Alianza,” a frankly irreligious journal, in the second number of which there appeared an article ridiculing the immortality of the soul and suffrages for the dead. On January 28th advantage was taken of this to ask the Córtes to refer it to the Inquisition for censure, which was carried in spite of opposition. The next day the editors asked that the action be rescinded, leading to a three days’ debate in which the Inquisition was denounced as a mysterious, cruel and antichristian tribunal and, for the first time, its suppression was openly advocated. President Dou ruled that the inculpated journal must be passed to the Junta de Censura, for he understood that the Inquisition was not organized, when he was told that there were three members of the Suprema in Cádiz, and that the Seville tribunal was in Ceuta. This raised larger questions and the whole matter was referred to a committee so composed that it was expected to report against re-establishment, but it withheld its report for a long time and meanwhile there were other moves in the game.[896]
SKIRMISHING FOR POSITION
On May 16th, the members of the Suprema notified the Regency that they were prepared to act, in response to which the minister of Gracia y Justicia expressed his surprise that they should meet as a tribunal, without awaiting the decision of the questions submitted to the Córtes, and forbade them from forming a Council until they should have express authorization.[897]The matter was brought before the Córtes and Inquisitor Riesco vainly argued in favor of the Inquisition; his motion was referred to the committee,where it lay buried in spite of repeated calls for a report. The Liberals insisted that a National Council would be a more suitable body for the mature consideration of such questions; their object was solely to gain time, which was fighting on their side, but the idea was seriously entertained, even by the clericals. The committee on the external discipline of the clergy reported, August 22d, in favor of the project, with a list of matters to be submitted to the Council; on August 28th the Córtes ordered it to be convoked, but postponed consideration of the details. Other matters supervened and no further action was taken, which Archbishop Vélez assures us saved Spain from a schism, or at least from a scandal for, under the proposed program, it would have proved a second Synod of Pistoja. In fact, the journals naturally took a lively interest in the matter; thousands of pamphlets, we are told, appeared everywhere, pointing out the abuses and relaxed morals of the clergy and demanding a reform that was assumed to be necessary. It is easy to imagine that the ecclesiastical authorities were willing to let the project drop.[898]
The position of the Liberals was greatly strengthened by the adoption of the Constitution, in March 1812, as was abundantly shown in the next debate on the Inquisition. This was provoked by the publication, in April 1812, of the “Diccionario crítico-burlesco” of Gallardo, librarian of the Córtes, in which all that the mass of the population held sacred was treated with ridicule, neither refined nor witty. It created an immense sensation and was brought before the Córtes, which enabled Riesco, on April 22d, to call for the immediate presentation of the report of the committee on the Inquisition, for which the Córtes had been waiting for more than a year. The committee, in fact, had reached a decision, in July 1811, in favor of the Inquisition, and we are not told why it had been held back, for four members had concurred in it and only Muñoz Torrero had dissented. The report was accordingly presented, re-establishing the Suprema in its functions, with certain limitations as to political action; the debate was hot, but the Liberals had taken precautions to avoid a direct vote on the question. In a decree of March 25th, creating a supreme court of justice, they had introduced an article suppressing the tribunals known by the name of councils, and they pointed out that this embraced the Suprema, which gave abundant opportunityfor discussion. Even more important was a decision of the Córtes, adroitly planned for this especial purpose, December 13, 1811, during the discussion on the Constitution, that no propositions bearing on the fundamental law should be admitted to debate without previous examination by the committee on the Constitution, to see that it was not in opposition to the articles thereof. It was notorious that inquisitorial procedure was in direct contravention of the constitutional provisions to secure justice in criminal prosecutions and, after an exciting struggle and a postponement, the report was referred to the committee on the Constitution. The Conservatives were so exasperated that they proposed to dissolve the Córtes, and have a new election under the Constitution, to which the Liberals agreed, except that the new body should meet October 1, 1813, and the existing one should remain in session until then. Archbishop Vélez tells us that the policy of the Liberals was to gain time, for their personal safety was at stake if the Inquisition was re-established, nor does he recognize how monstrous was the admission involved in this, for an institution that could prosecute and punish legislators for their official acts was virtually the despot of the land. Doubtless the deputies felt this, and that the struggle was one for life or death.[899]
The flank of the enemy was thus skilfully turned. The committee on the Constitution was in no haste to report and occupied itself with collecting documentary material from the archives wherever accessible. Its conclusion was that the Inquisition was incompatible with the fundamental law and, on November 13th, it voted on a project for establishing “Tribunales protectores de la fe” in compliance with the constitutional requirements. Finally, on December 8th two reports were presented. That of the minority by Antonio Joaquin Pérez, who had been an inquisitor in Mexico, argued that the abuses of the Inquisition were not inherent; that its procedure conflicted with the Constitution and should therefore be modified accordingly.[900]
DEBATE ON SUPPRESSION
The majority report was a very elaborate document, tracing the treatment of heresy from the earliest times, and pointing out the irreconcileable incompatibility of the Inquisition with the constitutional provisions securing to the citizen the right of open trial and opportunities for defence. It concluded with the draft of a decree “Sobre Tribunales protectores de la fe,” in which such cautionwas deemed necessary that the Inquisition was nowhere mentioned. It appealed to the national pride, by simply reviving a law of the Partidas concerning the prosecution of heretics by bishops, it prescribed the form and procedure of the episcopal tribunals, the punishment by lay judges of those pronounced guilty, and it provided for appeals as well as for the suppression of writings contrary to religion. The reports were duly received and January 4, 1813, was appointed for the opening of debate.[901]
Probably no measure before the Córtes provoked so bitter and prolonged a debate. The Liberals had secured the advantage of position, and the Conservatives felt that the issue involved the whole future relations of Church and State. There was a preliminary skirmish on December 29th, when Sánchez de Ocaña asked for a postponement until the bishops and chapters could be consulted, on the ground that the Church was an independent body.[902]This was voted down and the debate was opened on the designated day, January 4, 1813. The friends of the Inquisition had not been idle; the Church organization was in good working order, and the Córtes were bombarded with memorials from bishops, chapters, ayuntamientos, military officers, towns and provinces, showing how active the canvass had been during the two years in which the subject had been mooted. Yet the Conservatives could only procure, out of the fifty-nine sees existing in Spain, protests from two archbishops and twenty-four bishops, the authorities of three vacant sees, and four chapters of those occupied by the French; while the number from officers of the army was not large, those from towns were but a small fraction of the municipalities, and only two provinces—Alava and Galicia—spoke through their authorities. Muñoz Torrero declared, January 10th, that every mail brought him mountains of letters in favor of the Inquisition and Toreno spoke of the reclamations that came in, showing how the signers of protests had been coerced.[903]
The debate was vigorous and eloquent on both sides but, while it took the widest range, embracing the history of the Church from apostolic times and the career of the Inquisition from the thirteenth century, the parliamentary question in reality turned upon the power of the Córtes to intrude in the sphere of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. After discussion lasting until January 22d on the preliminary propositions, the decree itself was taken up, article by article and strenuously fought over; amendments were presented and accepted or rejected, as they strengthened or weakened the measure, and hot resistance was offered to the clauses allowing appeals from the judgements of the bishops, which the Liberals supported on the ground that all the members who opposed the Inquisition had been denounced throughout Spain as heretics, and the safety of the citizen demanded that episcopal definition of heresy should not be final. The debate was prolonged until February 5th, when the last article was agreed to, and the decree in its final shape did not differ essentially from that proposed by the Committee. There was no formal suppression of the Inquisition; it was simply declared to be incompatible with the Constitution and the law of the Partidas was revived. This latter had been agreed to on January 26th by a vote of 92 to 30, and that date was assumed as determining the extinction of the Inquisition, regulating the disposition of its property. It is not worth while to recapitulate the details of the episcopal tribunals and the provisions for censorship, as the bishops took little interest in the exercise of their restored jurisdiction, though there are traces of their action in one or two cases—that of Joaquin Ramírez, priest of Moscardon and of Doña Antonia de la Torre of Seville.[904]During the seventeen months that elapsed until the re-establishment of the Inquisition, we are told that, although the land was full of Freemasons and other anticatholics, the bishops had no occasion to arrest any one, for no informers or accusers came forward—doubtless because they realized that their names would be known.[905]
THE INQUISITION SUPPRESSED
In the debate several ecclesiastics distinguished themselves by their able advocacy of the measure, among whom were pre-eminent Muñoz Torrero, who had borne a leading part in drafting the decree; Lorenzo Villanueva, who had defended the Inquisition against Bishop Grégoire, and Ruyz Padron, parish priest of Valdeorras in Galicia and formerly of the Canaries. How they fared in consequence we shall see hereafter. On the other side one of the most vehement was Pedro Inguanzo, who was rewarded with the see of Zamora, and ultimately with the archbishopric of Toledo.
The Liberals had won their victory by unexpectedly large majorities, indicating how great had been the advance in public opinion. No measure had created such intensity of feeling on either side; the rejoicing of the Liberals was extravagant, and the anger of the clerical party may be gauged by the declamation of Archbishop Vélez, who is as vehement as though the whole fate of Christianity was at stake—the abomination of desolation, he declares, seemed to have established its throne in the very house of God.[906]The clergy had already been alienated by various measures adverse to their interests—the appropriation of a portion of the tithes to the support of the armies, the escheating of the property of convents destroyed by the invaders, or having less than twelve inmates, and the abrogation of the Voto de Santiago, a tax on the agriculturists of some provinces based on a fraudulent tradition of a vow made by Ramiro I, when, by the aid of St. James, he won the suppositious victory of Clavijo.[907]The debate on the Inquisition had heightened the reputation of the Córtes as an irreligious body, and it was not wise to inflame still further the hostility of a class wielding such preponderating influence, but the Liberals, intoxicated by their victory, proceeded to render the measure as offensive as possible to the defeated clericals.
On February 5th, after the final vote, the committee on the Constitution was instructed to prepare a manifesto setting forth the reasons for the suppression of the Inquisition which, together with the decree, should be read in all parish churches for three consecutive Sundays, before the offertory of the mass; that in all churches the insignia of those condemned and penanced should be removed, and that a report should be made as to the dispositionof the archives of the tribunals. The preparation of the manifesto delayed the publication of the decree until February 22d, for it was a long and wordy document, in which the decadence of Spain was attributed to the abuses of the Inquisition; the ancient laws had therefore been revived, restoring their jurisdiction to the bishops, in whose hands the Catholic faith and its sublime morals would be secure; Religion would flourish, prosperity would return, and perchance this change might some day lead to the religious brotherhood of all the nations.[908]
It was not long before the imprudence of this step manifested itself, for it gave the Church a battle-ground on which to contest, not only the reading of the manifesto but the execution of the decree itself and, if defeated, of occupying the advantageous position of martyrdom. Opposition had for some time been in preparation. As early as December 12, 1812, the six bishops of Lérida, Tortosa, Barcelona, Urgel, Teruel and Pampeluna, in the safe refuge of Majorca, had prepared a manifesto widely circulated in private, representing the Church as outraged in its ministers, oppressed in its immunities, and combated in its doctrines, while the Jansenist members of the Córtes were described as adherents of the Council of Pistoja.[909]No sooner was the decisive vote of February 5th taken than the chapter of the vacant see of Cádiz prepared for a contest over the reading of the decree and manifesto. It had already appointed a committee of three with full powers, and it now instructed the committee to communicate secretly with refugee bishops in Cádiz, and with chapters elsewhere, with a view to common action. Letters were sent to the chapters of Seville, Málaga, Jaen and Córdova, representing that the Cádiz chapter was ready to be the victim, but would be strengthened by the union of others. Seville replied with promises to do the same; the rest more cautiously, for they felt that they were treading on dangerous ground.
RESISTANCE OF THE CLERGY
This dampened somewhat the ardor of the fiery Cádiz chapter and it sought for other support. On February 23d the parish priests and army chaplains of Cádiz were assembled and addressed the chapter at great length. To read the decree and manifesto would be a profanation and a degrading servility. The papal constitutions creating the Inquisition were binding on the consciences of the faithful, until revoked by the same authority, andfrom this obligation the secular power could not relieve them. To obey would be to incur the risk of a dreadful sacrilege, and the penalties for impeding the Inquisition imposed by Julius III and Sixtus V; it was better to fall into the hands of man than into those of God, and they were ready to endure whatever fate might befall them. This was rank rebellion, slightly moderated by the expression of a desire to learn the opinions of the holy prelates who were in Cádiz. The chapter duly transmitted this address to the prelates—the Bishops of Calahorra, Plasencia, San Marcos de Leon, Sigüenza and Albarracin (Calahorra and San Marcos were deputies in the Córtes and had signed the Constitution)—stating that it entertained the same sentiments and repeated the request for their opinion. The bishops replied cautiously, and in substance advised that representations be made to the Government, which might be induced to modify its decrees.[910]
Time was growing short, for March 7th had been designated as the first Sunday for reading the decree and manifesto. On March 3d a capitular meeting was assembled, in which it was unanimously resolved to obey, but to make use of the provisions which authorize citizens to obey without executing and to represent reverentially the reasons for suspending action until further determination.[911]This was the first step in the development of a somewhat formidable plot which was organizing. On March 5th the papal nuncio, Pedro Gravina, Archbishop of Nicæa, addressed to the Regency a very significant protest against the decree itself. The abolition of the Inquisition, he said, was contrary to the primacy of the Holy See; he protested against this and he asked the Regency to induce the Córtes to suspend its publication and execution until happier times might secure the consent of the pope or of the National Council. On the same day he was guilty of the indiscretion of writing to the Bishop of Jaen and to the chapters of Málaga and Granada, under strict injunctions of secrecy, advising them of the proposed resistance of the Cádiz chapter and inviting their coöperation.[912]The next day, March 6th, the chapter sent to the Regency the address of the priests and chaplains of Cádiz, with a communication setting forth the reasons which not onlyprevented the execution of the mandate of the Córtes, but imperiously required the secular power to protect the Church and relieve it from an act in contravention of its honor and sanctity. The Chapter, it argued, could not be accused of disobedience for insisting on the spiritual law which was more binding than the temporal.[913]
The Regency evidently was participating in the plot to overthrow the Córtes for the purpose of saving the Inquisition. The legislative and executive branches of the Government had become estranged. There had been dissension in the matter of the suppression of the convents, and an investigation made by the Córtes into the affairs of the Regency had led to a damaging report on February 7th. The Liberals were convinced that it was planning acoup d’étatwhen, on the night of Saturday, March 6th the rumor spread that it had dismissed the Governor of Cádiz, D. Cayetano Valdés, and had replaced him with D. José María Alós. Sunday passed without the reading of the decree and manifesto in the churches and, on Monday, the minister of Gracia y Justicia sent to the Córtes the communications of the chapter to the Regency. A permanent session was at once declared; the Córtes dismissed the regents and replaced them with the three senior members of the Council of State, Cardinal Luis de Bourbon, Archbishop of Toledo, D. Pedro Agar and D. Gabriel Ciscar, who forthwith took the oaths and at 9P.M.assumed possession of their office, the dismissed regents offering no resistance.[914]
RESISTANCE OF THE CLERGY
Harmony between the legislature and the executive being thus restored, on March 9th the Córtes ordered the Regency to compel obedience. Under threats of measures to be taken, the chapter yielded at 10P.M.and promised that the next morning, and on the two following Sundays, the decree and manifesto should be duly read. It was obliged to furnish authentic copies of all papers and correspondence, on the basis of which a sharp reprimand was addressed to the Seville chapter and, on April 24th, prosecution was commenced against the Cádiz capitular vicar and the three members of the committee, for treasonable conspiracy. Their temporalities were seized and for six weeks they were imprisoned, incomunicado. The trial dragged on until the restoration of Fernando VII rendered acquittal a matter of course and enabled them, in their defence, to declare that to destroy the Inquisitionor to impede its action in matters of faith was the same as prohibiting the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, thus trampling under foot a dogma established by Jesus Christ.[915]
The documents thus obtained showed that Nuncio Gravina had been active in furthering the plot of resistance. Now that it had been crushed, policy would have dictated dropping the matter but, on April 22d, the minister of Gracia y Justicia addressed him a sharp letter, expressing the confidence of the Regency that he would in future observe the limits of his office, as otherwise it would be obliged to exercise all its authority. To this he of course replied defiantly; whenever ecclesiastical matters were concerned he might find himself obliged to follow the same course, and the Regency could do as it pleased. Some further correspondence followed in the same vein and then, after an interval, his passports were sent to him, his temporalities were seized, and he was informed that the frigate Sabina was at his disposal to transport him whither he desired.[916]He declined the proffered frigate and established himself in Portugal, near the border, whence he continued busily to stir up disaffection, assuming that he still retained his functions as nuncio. On July 24th he addressed a protest to the Government and sent a circular to the bishops inviting them to apply to him in cases requiring his aid. This led to a lively controversy, in which the Government charged him with deceit and he retorted by accusing it of falsehood and challenging it to publish the documents.[917]
This was by no means the only trouble excited by the enforced reading of the decree and manifesto. Recalcitrant priests were found in many places, whose cases caused infinite annoyance and bad blood and the Bishop of Oviedo was recluded in a convent for refusing obedience.[918]The Government triumphed, but it was a Pyrrhic victory, multiplying its enemies, heightening its reputation for irreligion, and weakening its influence.[919]
The result was seen in the elections for the newCórtes ordinarias, when the deputies returned were largely reactionary, owing to clerical influence. There were many vacancies, however, which were filled by the old members for the corresponding places, and thus the parties were evenly balanced. The new Córtes met, September 26th and, on November 29th adjourned to meet in Madrid, January 15, 1814; the Regency transferred itself to Madrid, January 5th.[920]By that time the French were virtually expelled from Spain; Wellington was following Soult into France, and Suchet was barely holding his own against Copons in Catalonia.
The return of Fernando el Deseado was evidently at hand and was eagerly expected. The reaction following the prolonged excitement of the war was beginning to be felt. There was widespread misery in the devastated provinces, the relief of which was slow and difficult and was aggravated by a decree of the Córtes requiring those which had been subjugated to pay the arrears of the war contributions. Dissatisfaction with the Córtes was aroused by what were regarded as their sins both of commission and omission—the lowering of the value of French money caused great suffering and trouble; all who had served under the intruso were ejected from office; the parish priests were reinstated in their old cures, which turned into the streets the new incumbents; people began to grumble at the preponderance of the Liberals in the Córtes—in short, there was no lack of subjects of complaint.[921]Exhaustion and poverty, the inevitable consequences of so prolonged and desperate a struggle, produced discontent, and it was natural that those who had guided the nation through its tribulations should be held responsible, while their services should be forgotten. The military also were dissatisfied at finding that, at the close of a successful war, they had not the importance that they considered to be their due, while the clergy were outspoken in opposition and, through two widely circulated journals, “El Procurador de la Nacion y del Rey” and “ La Atalaya de la Mancha,” attacked the Government furiously.[922]
FERNANDO’S RETURN
During all this period, Fernando’s existence at Valençay had been as agreeable as was consistent with his safe-keeping. The only restriction on his movements was a prohibition to ride onhorseback; Napoleon is said to have kept him supplied with women to satisfy his strongly developed sensuality, and he manifested his characteristic baseness in letters to his captor congratulating him on his victories and soliciting the honor of a matrimonial alliance with his family. After the battle of Leipzig, Napoleon, striving to save what he could from the wreck, represented to Fernando that the English were seeking to convert Spain into a Jacobin republic; Fernando was ready to agree to any terms and, on December 11, 1813, there was signed what was known as the Treaty of Valençay, under which peace was declared between France and Spain, the English and French troops were to be withdrawn, the Afrancesados, who had taken refuge in France, were to be restored to their property and functions, and Fernando was to make a yearly allowance of 30,000,000 reales to his father and mother.[923]
Fernando sent the Duke of San Carlos with the treaty to Madrid for ratification, instructing him that, if he found the Córtes and Regency infected with Jacobinism, he was to insist on ratification pure and simple; if he found them loyal, he was to say that the king desired ratification, with the understanding that he would subsequently declare it invalid. The treaty excited general indignation. As early as January 1, 1811, the Córtes had decreed that they would recognize no treaty made by the king in captivity, and that he should not be considered free until he was surrounded by his faithful subjects in Córtes. Now the Córtes responded to Fernando’s message with a decree of February 2, 1814, reissuing the former one and adding that obedience should not be rendered to him until he should, in the Córtes, take an oath to the Constitution; on his arrival at the frontier this decree was to be handed to him, with a copy of the Constitution that he might read and understand it; he was to follow a route prescribed by the Regency and, on reaching the capital, he was to come directly to the Córtes, take the oath, and the government would then be solemnly made over to him. All this was agreed to with virtual unanimity; it was signed by all the deputies and was published with a manifesto denouncing the treaty and expressing the warmest devotion to the king. The publication aroused general indignation at the treaty and the manifesto elicited universal applause.[924]
To Fernando, trained in the traditions of absolutism, the Treaty of Valençay was vastly preferable to the reception prepared for him, but he uttered no word of dissent when, after Napoleon had liberated him without conditions on March 7th, he was transferred by Suchet, on the banks of the Fluviá, March 24th, to Copons, the Captain-general of Catalonia. He exercised volition however in deviating from the route laid down by the Regency, and made a detour to Saragossa on the road to Valencia, but he preserved absolute silence as to his intentions. Everywhere he was received with delirious enthusiasm; the people idealized him as the symbol of the nationality for which they had struggled through five years of pitiless war, and there were no bounds to their exuberance of loyalty.
To few men has it been given, as to Fernando, to exercise so profound and so lasting an influence on the destinies of a nation. His ancestor, Henry IV, had a harder task when he undertook to impose harmony on compatriots who, for a generation had been savagely cutting each others’ throats. Fernando came to a nation which had been unitedly waging war against a foreign enemy. Differences of opinion had grown up, as to the reception or rejection of modern ideas, and parties had been formed representing the principles of conservatism and innovation; mistakes had been made on both sides and bitterness of temper was rising, but a wise and prudent ruler, coming uncommitted to either side and enthusiastically greeted by both, could have exorcised the demon of faction, could have brought about compromise and conciliation, and could have gradually so trained the nation that it could have traversed in peace the inevitable revolution awaiting it. This was not to be. Unfortunately Fernando was one of the basest and most despicable beings that ever disgraced a throne. Cowardly, treacherous, deceitful, selfish, abandoned to low debauchery, controlled by a camarilla of foul and immoral favorites, his sole object was to secure for himself the untrammelled exercise of arbitrary power and to abuse it for sensual gratification. Cruel he was not, in the sense of wanton shedding of blood, but he was callously indifferent to human suffering, and he earned the name of Tigrekan, by which the Liberals came to designate him.[925]
REACTION
When Fernando entered Spain he was naturally undecided as to the immediate attitude to be assumed towards the changes made during his absence, but the enthusiasm of his reception and the influence of the reactionaries who surrounded him emboldened him in the determination to assert his autocracy. Several secret conferences were held during the journey to decide whether he should swear to the Constitution, and the negative opinion prevailed. In fact, to a man of Fernando’s character, voluntary obedience to the Constitution was an impossibility. Not only did it declare that sovereignty resided in the nation, with the corresponding right to determine its fundamental laws, but the powers of the crown were limited in many ways; the Córtes reserved the right to exclude unworthy aspirants to the succession, and to set aside the incumbent for any cause rendering him incapable—clauses susceptible of most dangerous interpretation. At this very time, indeed, the Córtes were deliberating on the appropriation to be made to the king for the maintenance of his court, which implied the right to subject him to the most galling conditions.[926]
If anything was needed to induce him to assert the full powers enjoyed by his predecessors it was afforded by a manifesto known as the Representation of the Persians, from an absurd allusion to the ancient Persians in the opening sentence. This was signed by sixty-nine deputies to the Córtes; at much length and with turgid rhetoric it set forth the sufferings inflicted on Spain by the Liberals; it argued that all the acts of the Córtes of Cádiz were null and invalid; it pointed out the limitations on the royal power prescribed by the Constitution, and it asserted that absolute monarchy was recognized as the perfection of government. It did not omit to declare that the Inquisition was indispensable to the maintenance of religion, without which no government could exist; it dwelt on the disorders consequent upon its suppression and it reminded Fernando that, from the time of the Gothic kingdom, intolerance of heresy was the permanent law of the nation. Even if the king should think best to swear to the Constitution, the manifesto protested that it was invalid and that its destructive principles must be submitted to the action of Córtes assembled according to the ancient fashion. This paper, dated April 12th, was drawn up and secretly circulated by Bernardo Moza Reales,who carried it to Valencia and presented it to Fernando, receiving as reward the title of Marquis of Mataflorida.[927]
Fernando reached Valencia April 16th and paused there until May 4th, while secret preparations were made to overthrow the government. The Córtes, unaware of the contemplated treachery, were amusing themselves in arranging the hall for the solemnity of the king’s oath and his acknowledgement as sovereign, and took no measures for self-protection. Troops were secretly collected in the vicinity of Madrid, under General Eguia, a violent reactionary, who was made Captain-general of New Castile. On the night of May 10th, when Fernando was nearing the capital, Eguia notified Joaquin Pérez, President of the Córtes, that they were closed; troops took possession of the hall and the archives were sealed, while police-agents were busy making arrests from a list of thirty-eight marked for proscription, including two of the regents, two ministers and all the more prominent liberal deputies.[928]No resistance was encountered and the precedent was established which has proved so disastrous to Spain.
DESPOTISM RE-ESTABLISHED
In the early dawn of the 11th, there was found posted everywhere a royal manifesto dated at Valencia on the 4th. In this, after a rambling summary of antecedent events, Fernando promised to assemble as soon as possible Córtes of the old fashion and, in conjunction with them, to establish solidly whatever was necessary for the good of the kingdom. He hated despotism; the enlightenment and culture of Europe would never permit it, and his predecessors had never been despots. But the Córtes of Cádiz and the existing body were illegal and all their acts were invalid; he did not intend to swear to the Constitution or to the decrees of the Córtes, but he pronounced them all void and of no effect, and any one supporting them in any manner or endeavoring to impede the execution of this manifesto was declared to be guilty of high treason and subject to the death-penalty.[929]It is perhapsneedless to say that the promised convocation of Córtes and the salutary legislation never took place. All the modernized institutions framed since 1810 were swept away at a word, the old organization of Government was restored, and Fernando was an absolute despot, disposing at his pleasure of the lives and property of his subjects who had fought so desperately for his restoration.
How he used this power was manifested in the case of the fifty-two prisoners who were arrested at the time of the coup d’état. Nineteen months were spent in endeavoring to have them condemned by tribunals and commissions formed for the purpose, but no crime could be proved that would not equally affect all who had voted with them, many of whom stood in high favor at court. The last tribunal convened for their trial advised Fernando to sentence them in the exercise of his royal omnipotence, and he did so, December 17, 1815, sending them to distant fortresses, African presidios and convents, with strict orders to allow them to see no one and to send or receive no letters.[930]As regards the three specially obnoxious clerical deputies, Villanueva was recluded for six years in the convent of la Salceda, from which we shall see him emerge and again play a brief part on the political stage. Muñoz Torrero was sent to the convent of Erbon, in Galicia. He finally fell into the savage hands of Dom Miguel of Portugal and perished, after severe torture, in 1829.[931]Ruiz de Padron was not on the list of the proscribed; he had not been elected to the new Córtes but was detained by sickness in Cádiz. On his return in May to his parish of Valdeorras, his bishop, Manuel Vicente of Astorga, made a crime of his absence from his cure without episcopal licence and prosecuted him for this and for sustaining in the Córtes projects adverse to religion and the throne. On November 2, 1815, he was sentenced to perpetual reclusion in the desert convent of Cabeza de Alba and, to prevent appeal, the bishop sent the process to the Inquisition of Valladolid. Ruiz appealed to the metropolitan, but the bishop refused to allow the appeal. Then arecurso de fuerzato the Chancellery of Valladolid was tried, which thrice demanded the process before the bishop, to escape exposure in a secular court, allowed the appeal. Finally the metropolitan annulled the proceedings and Ruiz was set at liberty, after four years’ imprisonment, broken in health andruined in fortune. This action probably superseded a prosecution against him for printing his speech in the Córtes against the Inquisition, a prosecution commenced by the Madrid tribunal and transferred to Valladolid.[932]
REORGANIZATION
It was at first thought that the manifesto of May 4th, by invalidating all the acts of the Córtes, in itself re-established the Inquisition. In fact, Seville, its birth-place, had not waited for this and, on May 6th, a popular tumult restored it. The next day its banner, piously preserved by Don Juan García de Negra, a familiar, was solemnly conducted to the castle of Triana by a procession, at the head of which marched Juan Acisla de Vera, coadministrator of the diocese; the Te Deum was sung in the cathedral, the houses were illuminated and splendidly adorned with tapestries.[933]All this was premature, as likewise were the attempts made by some tribunals to reorganize, for the absence of an inquisitor-general and Suprema rendered irregular the transaction of business. Representations were made to the king by Seville and other towns, by the chapter of Valencia, and by bishops, praying him to take action, and the scruples as to the intervention of the civil power in spiritual affairs vanished.[934]Fernando accordingly, by decree of July 21, 1814, recited the appeals made to him and announced that he deemed it fitting that the Holy Office should resume the exercise of its powers, both the ecclesiastical granted by the popes and the royal, bestowed by his predecessors. In both of these the rules in force in 1808 were to be followed, together with the laws issued at sundry times to restrain abuses and curtail privileges.
But, as other reforms might be necessary, he ordered that, as soon as the Suprema should assemble, two of its members, selected by him, and two of the Royal Council should form a junta to investigate the procedure and the methods of censorship and, if they should find anything requiring reform, they should report to him that he might do what was requisite.[935]Even the Córtes could not assert more authoritative domination.
The inquisitor-generalship was filled by the appointment of Francisco Xavier de Mier y Campillo, Bishop of Almería, and the vacancies in the Suprema were supplied. The junta of reform was organized and met and consulted. In 1816 we hear of their being still in session, but we are told that they found nothing requiring amendment.[936]
The Suprema lost no time in getting to work. A circular of August 8th, to the tribunals, enclosed the royal decree and announced that, in virtue of it, the council was that day restored to its authority and functions, which had been interrupted only by the invasion and the so-called Córtes. The tribunals were ordered to proceed, as in former times, with all business that might offer, and the officials were to discharge their accustomed duties, until the Bishop of Almería should receive his bulls. Lists of all officials were to be sent, with statements of their dates of service, and of popular report as to their conduct during the troubles, and whether they had publicly attacked the rights of the sovereign and of the Holy Office. A process of “purification” ensued, investigating the records of all officials, many of whom had bowed to the tempest during the short-lived triumph of Liberalism. April 7, 1815, a circular letter directed that any one who had petitioned the Córtes for the abolition of the Inquisition, or had congratulated them on their action, was no longer to be regarded as in office or entitled to wear the insignia, but considerable tenderness was shown to the erring. Thus Don Manuel Palomino y Lozano, supernumerary secretary of the Madrid tribunal, had signed an address of congratulation to the Córtes, but on his pleading coercion and fear he was allowed to retain office.[937]
Allusion has already been made (Vol. II, p. 445) to the difficulties experienced in re-constituting an institution which, duringfive years of war, had been exposed to spoliation and destruction, resulting, in some places, in the wrecking of its buildings, the purloining of its movables and the scattering of its papers. Thus, for instance, in September and October 1815, the Logroño tribunal, which had lost its habitation, was negotiating with the Marquis of Monasterio for his house, which he offered rent-free, if it would keep the premises in repair and make the necessary alterations; the Suprema instructed it to secure better terms if it could, and to be very economical with the alterations.[938]As late as 1817 we chance to learn that Santiago and Valladolid had no prisons and, in 1819, that Llerena was in the same plight.[939]
The financial question was even more serious. We have seen how, under Godoy, the tribunals had been obliged to convert all their available securities into Government funds, which of course had become worthless, and how the Córtes, by decree of December 1, 1810, had applied the suppressed prebends to the conduct of the war. It must therefore have been well-nigh starved when suppressed by the Córtes, but there was no disposition to expose individuals to suffering and, when its property was declared to belong to the nation, elaborate provision was made for the payment of salaries and the customary gratifications, though we may safely assume that in the majority of cases, these kindly intentions failed of effect.[940]