The Katipunan; or, The Rise and Fall of the Filipino Commune

by Francis St. Clair

IV. In his declaration made in Manila before the same judge, Pio Valenzuela y Alejandrino stated that he was one of the members of the Interior Supreme Council of the Katipunan, the aim of which was to collect a large amount of money and promote a general rising in order to declare the independence of the islands under the protectorate of the Empire of Japan. Further on he stated that the rising was to have taken place at 7 o’clock p. m. on the 29th of August, entry being made into Manila and its suburbs, the rebels “killing the Spaniards, and the natives and Chinese who did not wish to follow them, and then devoting themselves to the sacking of the town, to robbery and incendiarism and the violation of women.”

V. Romualdo de J., sculptor of Sta. Cruz, Manila, declared that he had founded the Katipunan in 1888, the year in which the manifestation against the Archbishop was made; he defined the aim of the society to be “the killing of all the Spaniards and the taking possession of the islands.”

VI. In his declaration made in Cavite, September 3, 1896, Alfonso Ocampo affirmed that according to the plans formulated, they were “to make the assault, killing and robbing all the peninsular Spaniards.” And moreover, that “the rebellion had for its object the assassination of all the peninsular Spaniards, the violation and beheading afterwards of their wives and of their children even to the youngest.”

Many others might be cited; with these six samples an idea may be gathered of the progressive idea advocated or fostered by Rizal, Pilar, Lopez, Ponce, the Lunas, Rosario, Cortés, and others who were inspired by Morayta, the Grand Master of the Gran Oriente Español.

Note 4. The then Civil Governor of Manila, in a report to the Colonial Minister concerning what was taking place in Manila says, speaking of this Corps:

“... this Corps of Vigilance which, although composed of no more than 45 persons including the inspectors of the same ... renders a service (to the Government in secret service work) which should be confided to 100 persons, considering the nature and the amount of the work undertaken and performed daily, from the day of the formation of the Corps to this day: a period of about a year. The interesting body of police which under my orders has performed such valuable services, is that which has attained greatest success in the fruitful labor of making clear the vandalistic events we have been experiencing.”

Note 5. Filibusters: more properly called separatists. Noah Webster describes a filibuster as a “lawless military adventurer, especially one in quest of plunder; a free-booter, a pirate.” Hence, taken in its true meaning, the word does not apply to the separatists of the Philippines. Retana classifies the filibuster in three groups: the first: he who, thinking little or nothing of the independence of his country, showed more or less aversion to the peninsular Spaniards. 2. He who, under the pretext or without it, of illustrating his countrymen, inculcated into their minds political ideas which, without meriting the qualification of subversive, tended to incite them against supposed oppressions of the Spaniards; against all things which appeared behind the times, hence according to their way of arguing, against the Religious Corporations, to which they owed everything except their anti-Spaniardism. As a rule those belonging to this group professed great love for the mother-country and did not preach ideas of independence; they held the belief that theirs was the duty to prepare the way for the emancipation which should be attained by their grandchildren. And 3. Those whose aim was to attain the emancipation of their country as soon as possible. This latter group were the true separatists. It is however difficult to distinguish between the filibuster so called, and the true separatist; perhaps the only admissible distinction is that the separatist is a man of peaceful methods whilst the filibuster is a man of struggles. Rizal was more or less a separatist, Andrés Bonifacio a veritable filibuster.

Note 6. Sr. Olive was a gentleman who well deserved the respect and honor paid to him by his nation, and the hatred of those whose plans of treachery he thwarted and who, in spiteful revenge, have gone so far as to accuse him of using torture and other forcible means of extorting confessions, many of which they claim to have been false. Sr. Olive was too kind-hearted a man to stoop to such methods even had the circumstances demanded the use of moderate physical persuasion.

At one time Sr. Olive was the Governor of the Marianas Islands concerning the which he wrote and published a very interesting memoir. He was at that time Lieut. Colonel.

Later on he was made Colonel and as such was placed at the head of one of the sections of the Guardia Civil of Manila. He was secretary of the sub-inspection of arms of the Philippines. When a state of war was declared, the charges which were at that time being prepared in connection with the insurrection, were handed over to Sr. Olive, who with a zeal worthy of praise, and an energy too seldom exerted, commenced to deal out strict justice to the enemies of their country. About a year and a half ago Sr. Olive was made General of Brigade.