The Emancipation of South America

by Bartolomé Mitre

The proclamation of a Liberal régime in the mother country produced in Mexico a split among the various parties who had upheld the colonial system. While Spaniards became Absolutists or Constitutionalists, the natives became Republicans or Monarchists. Apodaca was at that time Viceroy. He put himself at the head of a reaction, and is said to have been incited thereto by the King, who, fearful of the fate of Louis XVI., proposed withdrawing from Europe to Mexico, there to reign with absolute power, free from the trammels of a Constitution. This reaction could not triumph without the aid of the native Monarchists.

Among the Creoles who had served in the Royalist ranks, and had distinguished himself by cruelties to his own countrymen, was a man named Agustin Iturbide, then thirty-seven years of age. Unscrupulous in the pursuit of wealth, of life either dissolute or ascetic as best served his interests, and with some natural talent, he was possessed by a secret ambition, in which race-patriotism had a place. His sleep was broken by envious dreams of the laurels gained by Bolívar and San Martin, and though lacking the great qualities of either of them, he aspired to be the liberator of Central America. This was the man selected by Apodaca to aid his plan of reaction, by leading the natives to support his policy. He appointed him Commandant-General of the South, and sent him with a division of native troops to stamp out the embers of insurrection kept alive by Guerrero. Iturbide soon came to an understanding with Guerrero and threw off the mask.

On the 24th February, 1820, in the town of Iguala, one hundred and twenty-seven miles from the city of Mexico, Iturbide published a document known to history as the “Plan of Iguala.” In it he proclaimed the independence of Mexico, and at the same time hoisted a flag symbolic of the new revolution, a tri-colour, white, red, and green; white signifying religious purity, red signifying friendship with Spain, and green signifying the hope of emancipation. The plan was in three parts, from which it took the name of the plan of the “three guarantees,” a name which was also applied to the army which upheld it. The first part stipulated the establishment of the Catholic religion to the exclusion of every other; the second part declared Mexico an independent state, under a monarchical government tempered by a constitution; the third part stipulated the union of Americans and Europeans. King Ferdinand was recognized as Emperor of Mexico, if he would come and swear to the constitution, and after him his brothers in natural succession; in default of whom, Congress should name a prince of one of the royal houses of Europe. Further, the equality of all the races—indigenous, African, and European—was proclaimed, without other distinction between them than that given by individual merit or virtue.

The leaders of the insurrection, with Guerrero, abjuring for the moment their Republican principles, placed themselves under the orders of Iturbide for the sake of national independence. The Creoles who had opposed the revolution gave in their adhesion to the new “Plan.” The clergy adopted it in hatred of the reforms of the Spanish Liberals; the Spanish Absolutists in hatred of the Constitution; and the Constitutionalists for the sake of peace. The whole country pronounced in favour of the “Plan of Iguala.” The Royalists, conquered without fighting, held only the capital, the port of Vera Cruz, and the fortress of San Juan de Ulua. In July, 1821, Iturbide was acclaimed Liberator of the country.

By this means a solution was found for the dilemma—submission, or independence and war. The bond with the mother country was untied but was not broken. Thus was it understood by O’Donoju, the successor to Apodaca, who subscribed to the “Plan of Iguala” by treaty, in August, 1821.

In Brazil, about this time, took place an evolution similar to the plan proposed by Iturbide, while in Columbia the armistice was broken, and in Peru negotiations, based on ideas similar to those enunciated in the “Plan of Iguala,” came to an end.

We have nothing more to do with the history of Mexico. Suffice it that the Spanish Government rejected the treaty signed by O’Donoju; that Mexico was lost for ever to Spain; that Iturbide seated himself on the vacant throne and was crowned Emperor, only to be deposed soon afterwards and banished. On attempting to recover his dignity he was shot.

The negotiations initiated confidentially by the Viceroy in Peru were more formally carried forward by an official invitation from him. La Serna appointed Don Manuel de Llano y Najera and Don Mariano Galdiano, both of whom were Americans, as colleagues to Abreu. San Martin appointed Guido, Garcia del Rio, and José Ignacio de la Rosa, formerly Governor of San Juan, to represent the Patriots. The farm-house of Punchauca, fifteen miles from Lima, was made the meeting place of the Commissioners. Neither party made any preliminary stipulation, both professed to be anxious for peace and union.

The Royalist Commissioners were instructed to propose the acceptance of the Spanish Constitution, with some concessions in detail, in accordance with the spirit of the proclamation of King Ferdinand. Those of the Patriots were instructed by San Martin to reject the Spanish Constitution as a bond of union, and to insist upon the recognition of the independence of Chile, of the Provinces of the River Plate, and of Peru, without consenting to any armistice, except on this basis. In case it were proposed that the Patriots should send Commissioners to Spain to treat of this matter, they were to demand, as a preliminary, the evacuation of Lima, and were to refuse to enter into any treaty for the conduct of the war, which had been spoken of, as it had up to then been carried on in accordance with the law of Nations.

The Royalist Commissioners opened the discussion by presenting a note, on the 4th May, 1821, stating that in regard to the suggestion made by San Martin at Miraflores, that independence should be secured by the establishment of a monarchy with a sovereign from the royal house of Spain, they had no power to make any such arrangement, and recommended the adoption of the Spanish Constitution since it was a proof of the liberal sentiments of the Spanish Government and of their desire for reconciliation. Further, they proposed an armistice, while commissioners were sent by both parties to Spain, as had been done by Bolívar in Columbia. To this the Patriot Commissioners replied, on the day following, that no negotiations could be entertained except on the basis of the recognition of independence, but in view of the inability of the Spanish Commanders to make this recognition, they were willing to consent to a suspension of arms, with some guarantee, and that they hoped no further mention would be made of the Spanish Constitution, the very name being obnoxious to the liberties of the New World.