Saint Louis College

City of San Fernando, La Union

Beacon of wisdom in the North

Section 10: Controversies and Conflicting Views in Philippine History

 It has been said that the Philippines had “one past but many histories” is
true in this case. Different authors and writers of Philippine history books
vary in description of the Philippine’s physical features, its location,
number of islands, land area, river, systems, mountains, site of the first
mass, cry of Balintawak among others. With these conflicting views in
certain events and situations, they are subjected for debate.

The Cavite Mutiny Controversy

by Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay

 The 12th of June of every year since 1898 is a very important event for all
the Filipinos. In this particular day, the entire Filipino nation as well as
Filipino communities all over the world gathers to celebrate the
Philippines’ Independence Day. 1898 came to be a very significant year
for all of us— it is as equally important as 1896—the year when the
Philippine Revolution broke out owing to the Filipinos’ desire to be free
from the abuses of the Spanish colonial regime. But we should be
reminded that another year is as historic as the two—1872.
 Two major events happened in 1872, first was the 1872 Cavite Mutiny and
the other was the martyrdom of the three martyr priests in the persons of
Fathers Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos and Jacinto Zamora (GOMBURZA).
However, not all of us knew that there were different accounts in
reference to the said event. All Filipinos must know the different sides of
the story—since this event led to another tragic yet meaningful part of our
history—the execution of GOMBURZA which in effect a major factor in the
awakening of nationalism among the Filipinos.

1872 Cavite Mutiny: Spanish Perspective

 Jose Montero y Vidal, a prolific Spanish historian documented the event
and highlighted it as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish
government in the Philippines. Meanwhile, Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdo’s
official report magnified the event and made use of it to implicate the
native clergy, which was then active in the call for secularization. The two
accounts complimented and corroborated with one other, only that the
general’s report was more spiteful.
 Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of
privileges enjoyed by the workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment
of tributes and exemption from force labor were the main reasons of the
“revolution” as how they called it, however, other causes were
enumerated by them including the 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
 Saint Louis College
City of San Fernando, La Union
Beacon of wisdom in the North

out of animosity against the Spanish friars, “conspired and supported” the
rebels and enemies of Spain. In particular, Izquierdo blamed the unruly
Spanish Press for “stockpiling” malicious propagandas grasped by the
Filipinos.
 He reported to the King of Spain that the “rebels” wanted to overthrow
the Spanish government to install a new “hari” in the likes of Fathers Burgos
and Zamora. The general even added that the native clergy enticed
other participants by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight will
not fail because God is with them coupled with handsome promises of
rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks in the army. Izquierdo, in
his report lambasted the Indios as gullible and possessed an innate
propensity for stealing.
 The two Spaniards deemed that the event of 1872 was planned earlier
and was thought of it as a big conspiracy among educated leaders,
mestizos, abogadillos or native lawyers, residents of Manila and Cavite
and the native clergy. They insinuated that the conspirators of Manila
and Cavite planned to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers to be
followed by the massacre of the friars. The alleged pre-concerted signal
among the conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the firing of rockets
from the walls of Intramuros.
 According to the accounts of the two, on 20 January 1872, the district of
Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the Virgin of Loreto, unfortunately
participants to the feast celebrated the occasion with the usual fireworks
displays. Allegedly, those in Cavite mistook the fireworks as the sign for the
attack, and just like what was agreed upon, the 200-men contingent
headed by Sergeant Lamadrid launched an attack targeting Spanish
officers at sight and seized the arsenal.
 When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov. Izquierdo, he readily ordered
the reinforcement of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt. The
“revolution” was easily crushed when the expected reinforcement from
Manila did not come ashore. Major instigators including Sergeant
Lamadrid were killed in the skirmish, while the GOMBURZA were tried by a
court-martial and were sentenced to die by strangulation. Patriots like
Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma. Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and
other abogadillos were suspended by the Audencia (High Court) from the
practice of law, arrested and were sentenced with life imprisonment at
the Marianas Island.
 Furthermore, Gov. Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of artillery and
ordered the creation of artillery force to be composed exclusively of the
Peninsulares.
 On 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish government and
Frailocracia to instill fear among the Filipinos so that they may never
commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA were executed. This
 Saint Louis College
City of San Fernando, La Union
Beacon of wisdom in the North

event was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped
Filipino nationalism.

A Response to Injustice: The Filipino Version of the Incident

 Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and
researcher, wrote the Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite. In
his point of view, the incident was a mere mutiny by the native Filipino
soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal who turned out to be
dissatisfied with the abolition of their privileges. Indirectly, Tavera blamed
Gov. Izquierdo’s cold-blooded policies such as the abolition of privileges
of the workers and native army members of the arsenal and the
prohibition of the founding of school of arts and trades for the Filipinos,
which the general believed as a cover-up for the organization of a
political club.
 On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, laborers of the
arsenal, and residents of Cavite headed by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in
arms and assassinated the commanding officer and Spanish officers in
sight. The insurgents were expecting support from the bulk of the army
unfortunately, that didn’t happen. The news about the mutiny reached
authorities in Manila and Gen. Izquierdo immediately ordered the
reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite. After two days, the mutiny was
officially declared subdued.
 Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite
Mutiny as a powerful lever by magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy
involving not only the native army but also included residents of Cavite
and Manila, and more importantly the native clergy to overthrow the
Spanish government in the Philippines. It is noteworthy that during the
time, the Central Government in Madrid announced its intention to
deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention in matters of civil
government and the direction and management of educational
institutions. This turnout of events was believed by Tavera, prompted the
friars to do something drastic in their dire desire to maintain power in the
Philippines.
 Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the Central Government
of Spain welcomed an educational decree authored by Segismundo
Moret promoted the fusion of sectarian schools run by the friars into a
school called Philippine Institute. The decree proposed to improve the
standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in
such schools to be filled by competitive examinations. This improvement
was warmly received by most Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s zest for
secularization.
 The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines would be a thing of
the past, took advantage of the incident and presented it to the Spanish
Government as a vast conspiracy organized throughout the archipelago
 Saint Louis College
City of San Fernando, La Union
Beacon of wisdom in the North

with the object of destroying Spanish sovereignty. Tavera sadly confirmed

that the Madrid government came to believe that the scheme was true
without any attempt to investigate the real facts or extent of the alleged
“revolution” reported by Izquierdo and the friars.
 Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were
sentenced life imprisonment while members of the native clergy headed
by the GOMBURZA were tried and executed by garrote. This episode
leads to the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of
Philippine Revolution of 1896. The French writer Edmund Plauchut’s
account complimented Tavera’s account by confirming that the event
happened due to discontentment of the arsenal workers and soldiers in
Cavite fort. The Frenchman, however, dwelt more on the execution of the
three martyr priests which he actually witnessed.

Unraveling the Truth

 Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were some basic
facts that remained to be unvarying:
 First, there was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as
well as the members of the native army after their privileges were
drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo;
 Second, Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid and strict policies that
made the Filipinos move and turn away from Spanish government
out of disgust;
 Third, the Central Government failed to conduct an investigation on
what truly transpired but relied on reports of Izquierdo and the friars
and the opinion of the public;
 Fourth, the happy days of the friars were already numbered in 1872
when the Central Government in Spain decided to deprive them of
the power to intervene in government affairs as well as in the
direction and management of schools prompting them to commit
frantic moves to extend their stay and power;
 Fifth, the Filipino clergy members actively participated in the
secularization movement in order to allow Filipino priests to take
hold of the parishes in the country making them prey to the rage of
the friars;
 Sixth, Filipinos during the time were active participants, and
responded to what they deemed as injustices; and Lastly, the
execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish
government, for the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos
and the event inspired Filipino patriots to call for reforms and
eventually independence. There may be different versions of the
event, but one thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny paved way
for a momentous 1898.
 Saint Louis College
City of San Fernando, La Union
Beacon of wisdom in the North

 The road to independence was rough and tough to toddle, many patriots
named and unnamed shed their bloods to attain reforms and achieve
independence.
 12 June 1898 may be a glorious event for us, but we should not forget that
before we came across to victory, our forefathers suffered enough. As we
enjoy our freedom, may we be more historically aware of our past to
have a better future ahead of us. And just like what Elias said in Noli me
Tangere, may we “not forget those who fell during the night.”