A Visit to the Philippine Islands

The “religiosity,” to use a Spanish word, of De Lara was followed by a very different temper in his successor, Salcedo, a Belgian by birth, nominated in 1663. He quarrelled with the priests, fined and condemned to banishment the archbishop, kept him standing while waiting for an audience, insulted him when he had obtained it; and on the death of the archbishop a few months afterwards, there were royal fiestas, while the services De Profundis, in honour of the dead, were prohibited as incompatible with the civil festivities. The Inquisition interfered in the progress of time, and its agents, assisted by an old woman servant, who held the keys, entered the palace, found the Governor asleep, put irons upon him, and carried him a prisoner to the Augustine convent. They next shipped him off to be tried by the Holy Office in Mexico, but he died on his way thither. The King of Spain cancelled and condemned the proceedings, confiscated the property of those who had been concerned in them, and directed all that had been seized belonging to Salcedo to be restored to his heirs.

Manuel de Leon, in 1669, obtained great reputation among the ecclesiastics. He governed for eight years and left all his property to obras pias. His predecessor, Manuel de la Peña Bonifaz (nominated provisionally), had refused to surrender his authority. He was declared an intruder, his goods were confiscated, and his arrest was ordered, but he sought refuge in the convent of the Recoletos, where he died. A quarrel took place between the competitors for the provisional government – the one appointed enjoyed his authority only for six months. He was, on his death, succeeded by his competitor, who was displaced by Juan de Vargas Hurtado in 1678. Great misunderstandings between the clergy and the civilians took place about this time. The governor was excommunicated, having been ordered on every holiday to appear in the cathedral and in the churches of Parcan and Binondo, barefooted and with a rope round his neck. Refusing to submit to such a degradation, he lived a solitary life, excluded from all intercourse, on the banks of the river, until he obtained permission to embark for New Spain; he died broken-hearted on the voyage.

It must be remembered, in looking over the ancient records of the Philippines, that the sole historians are the monks, and that their applause or condemnation can hardly be deemed a disinterested or equitable judgment. Hurtado is accused by them of many acts of despotism: they say that, in order to accomplish his objects, he menaced the friars with starvation, and by guards, prevented food reaching the convents; that he interfered with the election of ecclesiastics, persecuted and ordered the imprisonment of Bonifaz, his immediate predecessor (provisionally appointed), who fled to a convent of Recoletos (barefooted Augustines), and was protected by them. The Jesuits denied his claim to protection, but during the controversy Bonifaz died, and the records remain to exhibit another specimen of the bitterness of the odium theologicum and of the unity and harmony of which the Church of Rome sometimes boasts as the results of her infallibility. The archbishop was at this time quarrelling with the civil tribunals, to which he addressed his mandamus, and answered their recalcitrancy by reminding them that all secular authority was subordinate to ecclesiastical. The archbishop was placed under arrest and ordered to be banished by the Audiencia. He was conveyed by force in his pontifical robes to the vessel which transported him to Pangasinan. The Dominicans, to whose order the archbishop belonged, launched their excommunications and censures, and troops were sent to the convent to prevent the ringing of bells and the alarm and gathering of the people. The provincial, who had taken the active part in resistance, was, with other friars, ordered to be banished to Spain. When about to be removed, the dean commanded the soldiers present to kiss the provincial’s feet and do him all honour while he poured out his benedictions on the recalcitrant friars. In the midst of all this confusion a new governor (Curuzcalegui) arrived, in 1684, who took part with the clergy, and declared himself in favour of the banished archbishop, and condemned his judges to banishment. One of them fled to the Jesuit’s College, a sanctuary, but was seized by the troops. This by no means settled the quarrel, the following out of which is too complicated and too uninteresting to invite further scrutiny here.

In 1687 the King of Spain sent out a commissioner to inquire into the troubles that reigned in the Philippines. The Pope had taken up the cause of the more violent of the clergy, and Pardo (the archbishop), thus encouraged in his intemperance, declared the churches of the Jesuits desecrated in which the bodies of the civilians had been buried, who had adjudicated against the monks. Their remains were disinterred, but most of the judges who had defended the rights of the State against the ecclesiastical invasions were dead before the commissioner arrived; and, happily for the public peace, the turbulent prelate himself died in 1689. Curuzcalegui also died in 1689. After a short provisional interregnum (during which Valenzuela, the Spanish minister, who had been banished to the Philippines by Charles II., on his return homeward, was killed by the kick of a horse in Mexico), Fausto Cruzat y Gongora, was in 1690 invested with the government. His rule is most remarkable for its financial prosperity. It lasted for eleven years, for his successor, Domingo de Zubalburo, though nominated in 1694, did not arrive till 1701. He improved the harbour, but was dismissed by the King of Spain in consequence of his having admitted a Papal Legate à latere without requiring the presentation of his credentials. The Audiencia demanded them, and the Legate replied he was surprised at their venturing to question his powers. He frightened the people by this assumption, and proceeded to found a college in the name of St. Clement. The king was so exasperated that he ordered the college to be demolished, fined the Oidores (judges) a thousand dollars, and removed the dean from his office. Martin de Ursua y Arrimendi arrived in 1709, and died much regretted in 1715; he checked the influx of the Chinese, and thus conciliated popular prejudices. The interim governor, Jose Torralba, was accused of peculation to the amount of 700,000 dollars. He was called on by royal order to reimburse and find security for 40,000 dollars; but failing was sent to prison in fetters. He was ordered afterwards to be sent to Spain, but agreed to pay 120,000 dollars. He had not the money, and died a beggar. Fernando Bustillo (Bustamente) landed in 1717. He spent large sums in useless embassies, and lived ostentatiously and expensively. He set about financial reforms, and imprisoned many persons indebted to the State. He seized some of the principal inhabitants of the capital, menaced the judges, who fled to the convents for protection. The governor took Torralba into favour, releasing him from prison, and using him to undermine the authority of the Audiencia, by investing him with its powers. He ordered that on the discharge of a piece of artillery, all the Spaniards should repair to the palace: he arrested the archbishop, the chapter of the cathedral, several prelates and ecclesiastics, when a tumult followed; crowds rushed to the palace; they killed the governor and his son, who had hurried thither to defend his father. Francisco de la Cuesta was called upon to take charge of the government. The remaining children of Bustillo were sent to Mexico, and the Audiencia made a report of what had taken place to the king, who appointed Toribio José Cosio y Campo, and directed the punishment of those who had caused the former governor’s death; but under the influence of a Franciscan monk, Cosio was induced to consent to various delays, so that nothing was done in the matter, and the government in 1729 was transferred to Fernando Valdes y Tamon, who reformed the military exercises, sent an expedition to conquer the island of Palaos, failed in the attempt, and was succeeded by a Fleming, Gaspar de la Torre, in 1739. He dealt so severely with the fiscal Arroyo as to cause his death. He was disliked, became morose and solitary, and died in 1745. The bishop elect of Ilocos, father John Arrechedera, was the next governor, and the Sultan of Jolo, who desired to be baptized, visited him in Manila. The archbishop, to whom the matter was referred, declared that the Sultan had been received into the bosom of the Church by the Dominican friars of Panogui. The Marquis of Obando took possession of the government in 1750. The archbishop, whom he displaced, had received orders from the Spanish Cabinet to expel the Chinese from the islands; but whether from the honest conviction that the execution of the order would be pernicious to the permanent interests of the Philippines – in which judgment he was perfectly right – or (as the natives avow) from an unwarrantable affection for the Chinese, he, on various pretexts, delayed the publication of the royal mandate. Obando involved himself in quarrels with the Mussulman inhabitants of Mindanao, for which he had made no adequate preparation. He determined to restore the Sultan of Jolo, but on reaching Zamboanga he proceeded against the Sultan for unfaithfulness (infidencia), sent him to Manila, and caused him to be put into prison. The Mahomedans revolted. Obando desired to take the command against them. The Audiencia objected to the exposure of the person of the governor. The expedition failed, and disorders increased. He left the government in a most unsatisfactory state, and died on his way homewards. Pedro Manuel de Arandia assumed the government in 1754. He had some successes against the Mahomedans (or Moors, as they are generally called by Spanish writers). He intended to restore the Sultan of Jolo, but he involved himself in quarrels with the clergy, and his proceedings were disapproved by the Spanish Court. His unpopularity led to a fixed melancholy, under whose influences he died in 1759. Though he left his property for charitable purposes, the fact of its amounting to 250,000 dollars is urged as evidence of the corrupt character of his administration. The Bishop of Zebu, followed by the Archbishop of Manila, Manuel Royo, held the government provisionally on the death of Arandia. It was Royo who surrendered Manila, and transferred the island to the British in 1762.6 He was made a prisoner, and died in prison in 1764, of grief and shame it was said. Simon de Anda y Salazar, one of the judges of the Royal Audiencia, was charged with the government during the possession of the capital by the English, and established his authority in Pampanga, where he maintained himself till the arrival of Francisco de la Torre, who was provisionally appointed by the Crown, and who, through Anda, received back Manila from the British. José Raon took possession of the government in 1766.

The Sultan of Jolo, replaced on his throne by the English, caused great molestations to the island of Mindanao, against Raon, who was unable to protect his countrymen. The expulsion of the Jesuits having been determined on, the secret purpose was communicated to the Governor. He was accused of having divulged, and of concealing a writing-desk supposed to contain important documents. He was ordered to be imprisoned in his own house, where he died.

One of the monkish historians gives the following account of the manner in which the rebellious Indians were disposed of: – “Arza, with the efficacious aid of the Augustin fathers, and of the faithful (who were many), went to Vigan, and repeated what he had done in Cagallan; for he hanged more than a hundred, and among them Doña Gabriela, the wife of Silang, a mestiza of malas mañas (bad tricks), not less valiant than her husband, the notary, and a great many cabecillas (heads of groups of families), who fled to the mountains of Alva; as to the rest of the rabble of this revolted crew, he was satisfied with giving them each two hundred lashes, while exposed on the pillory. He sent 3,000 Ilocos triumphant and rich with booty to Pangasinan. This was in 1763.”7

After the capture of Manila by the British, they were naturally suspected and accused of fomenting and encouraging the many insurrections which followed that event. The impetuous and despotic character of Anda, who assumed the governorship of the islands, had made him many enemies, and he seems to have considered all opposition to his arbitrary measures as evidence of treacherous confederation with the English. No doubt their presence was welcomed, especially by the Mussulman population of the southern islands, as affording them some hopes of relief from Spanish oppression; but even the Philippine historians do justice to the British authorities, and state that they punished the piratical acts of their allies, without distinction of persons. The Spaniards, however, encouraged Tenteng, a Mahomedan dato (chieftain), to attack the British, whose garrison, in Balambangan, was reduced by sickness from 400 men to seventy-five infantry and twenty-eight artillery. But it was, says De Mas, “solely in expectation of booty.” From the woods in the night they stole down on the English while they were asleep, set fire to the houses, and murdered all but six of the garrison, who escaped in a boat with the English commandant; they then hoisted the white flag, and did not spare the life of a single Englishman left on shore. The Mahomedans seized much spoil in arms and money. The Sultan of Jolo and the datos, fearing the vengeance of the English, disclaimed all participation in the affair; but on Tenteng’s reaching Jolo, and delivering up his plunder to the authorities, they, “thinking there were now arms and money enough to resist both Spaniards and English,” declared Tenteng to be a hero, and well deserving of his country. A few months afterwards, a British ship of war appeared, and obtained such reparation as the case allowed.

Anda had won so much credit for resisting the English, that he was rewarded by his sovereign with many honours, made Councillor of Castile, and returned as governor to Manila, in 1770. He imprisoned his predecessor, many of the judges, the government secretary, a colonel, and other persons. He sent some to Spain, and banished others from the capital. He involved himself in ecclesiastical quarrels, met with many vexations, and retired to the estate of the Recoleto friars, where he died in 1766. De Mas says, in reference to this period: – “For more than two centuries, the Philippines had been for the crown of Spain a hotbed of so many disputes, anxieties, and expenses, that the abandonment of the colony was again and again proposed by the ministers; but the Catholic monarchs could never consent to the perdition of all the souls that had been conquered, and which it was still hoped to conquer, in these regions.” After a short interregnum temporarily filled by Pedro Sarrio, José Basco arrived in 1778. He established the tobacco monopoly, sent off to Europe three judges, and compelled other functionaries to quit the capital, but, after two years’ occupation of the gubernatorial seat, he returned to Spain, and obtained other employment from the crown. Pedro Sarrio was again invested with the temporary authority. Felix Berenguer de Marquina arrived in 1788, and ruled six years. He was accused of corruption, but absolved by the king. Rafael Maria de Aguilar was nominated in 1793.

In 1800 the governor-general having consulted the assessor on the conduct to be observed towards the Mussulman pirates who had entered the port of Manila, received a reply which is somewhat grandiloquent: – “It is time all the royal wishes should be fulfilled, and that these islands cease to be tributaries to a vile and despicable Mahomedan. Let him feel the direful visitations of a nation, whose reputation has been so often offended and outraged, but which has tolerated and concealed its wrongs the better to inflict its vengeance; let the crown be cleansed from the tarnish, which in this port, and in the sight of so many European nations, it has received from the low rabble (canalla). The repeated disasters of the Indians appear to have rendered Spaniards insensible; yet is there a man who, having witnessed the desolation, murders, ruin of families, has not his soul moved with a desire of revenge against the desolator and destroyer? Were they our wives, sons, fathers, brothers, with what clamour should we call on the authorities to punish the criminal, and to restore our freedom… Justice, pity, the obligation of your consciences, upon which the royal conscience reposes, all plead together… Eternal memory for him who shall release us from the yoke which has oppressed us for ages!”

A treaty was concluded between the government of Manila and the Sultan of Mindanao in 1805. The Sultan’s minister of state was a Mexican deserter; the ambassador of the Spaniards a Mexican convict. He was, in truth, hardly dealt with, for, after making the treaty, he was ordered to fulfil the term of his transportation.

In 1811, a conspiracy broke out in Ilocos, where a new god was proclaimed by the Indians, under the name of Lungao. There was a hierarchy of priests appointed in his honour. They made their first attempts to convert the idolaters in Cagayan, and to engage them to take part against the Spaniards. The Catholic missionaries were the special object of their dislike, but the information which these ecclesiastics gave to the authorities enabled them to suppress the rebellion and to punish the leaders.

The cholera invaded Manila in 1819. A massacre of foreigners and Chinese was the consequence, who were accused (especially the English) of poisoning the wells. Robberies and other excesses followed the murders. The Host was paraded in vain through the streets. The carnage ceased when no more victims were to be found, but Spanish persons and property were respected.

Under the government of Martinez, in 1823, a rising took, place, headed by Novales, a Manilaman in the Spanish service. As many as 800 of the troops joined the movement. They took possession of the palace, murdered the king’s lieutenant, and, according to all appearances, would have overthrown the government, had there been any organization or unity of purpose. But a few courageous men gathered around them numbers faithful to the king and the royalist party. Soldiers arrived; the insurgents faltered; the inconstant people began to distrust the revolutionary leaders, and Novales was left with one piece of artillery, and about 300 to 400 followers. Overpowered, he fled, but was compelled to surrender. He was brought to a drumhead court-martial, declared he had no accomplices, but was the sole seducer of the troops, and was shot with one of his sergeants the same day. Amnesty was proclaimed, after twenty non-commissioned officers had been executed.

A serious insurrection broke out in Tayabas during the short rule of Oraa (1841–43). The Spaniards say it was the work of a Tagál called Apolinano, lay-brother of the convent of Lucban, not twenty years old, who established a brotherhood (Cofradia) exclusively confined to the native Indians. The object does not seem to have been known, but the meetings of the Cofrades excited alarms and suspicions. The archbishop called on the captain-general to put down the assemblies, which in some places had sought legalization from the authorities. The arrest of Apolinano was ordered, upon which he fled to the mountains, where he was joined by 3,000 Indians, and it was reported in Manila that he had raised the cry of rebellion in Igsavan. On this the Alcalde mayor, accompanied by two Franciscan friars, a few troops, and two small pieces of artillery, marched upon the denounced rebels. They fired upon the Spaniards and killed the Alcalde. On the news reaching the capital, a force of about 800 men was collected. It is said the positions held by Apolinano were impregnable, but he had not kept the promises he had made to the Indians, that sundry miracles were to be wrought in their favour. Only a few advanced to meet the Spaniards, and many of these were killed and the rest took to flight. Almost without loss on their own side, the Spaniards left above 240 Indians dead on the field, and shot 200 whom they made prisoners. Apolinano, in endeavouring to cross a river, was seized by two of his own people, bound, and delivered over to the authorities. He was accused of aspiring to be King of the Tagálos. He averred that the objects of his Cofradia were purely and simply religious. He was shot on the 4th of November, 1841. De Mas says he knew him, and that he was a quiet, sober, unobtrusive young man, exhibiting nothing of the hero or the adventurer. He performed menial services at the convent of Lucban; and as far as I can discover, the main ground of suspicion was, that he admitted no Spaniards or Mestizos into his religious fraternity; but that so many lives should have been sacrificed to a mere suspicion is a sad story.’

Between 1806 and 1844 no less than fourteen governors followed one another. Among them Narciso Claveria (1844–49) is entitled to notice. He added the island of Balanguingui to the Spanish possessions. One of his declarations obtained for him great applause – that “he had left Spain torn by civil dissensions, but that he should make no distinctions between his countrymen on the ground of political differences, but forget all title except that of Español y Caballero (Spaniard and gentleman).” Since that time Ramon Montero has been their Governor ad interim, viz., in 1853, 1854, and 1856. The Marquis of Novaliches took possession of the government in 1854, but held it only for about eight months. Don Manuel Crespo arrived in November, 1854, and the present Governor-General, Don Fernando de Norzagaray, on the 9th of March, 1857.

It is worthy of note that during the period in which there have been seventy-eight governors, there have been only twenty-two archbishops; the average period of the civil holding being four years – that of the ecclesiastical, eleven and a-half years.