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

by Francis St. Clair

As long as he held supreme influence Rizal was satisfied; but as the separatist element was becoming weary at the long absence of its “Moses” and had begun to worship the “calf” (not a golden one, by the way) “Moses” got angry and threw down, in disgust, the “tables of the law.”

In its beginning, Rizal was the idol of the Katipunan, in the same way as Morayta (note [13]) was the idol of the rebellious Filipinos in Madrid, and others parts of the Peninsular. Isabelo de los Reyes[46] would have us believe that the foundation of the Katipunan was a result of the indignation of the people, consequent upon the deportation of Rizal. This, in the face of facts, is a very poor argument and demonstrates either the ignorance or the bad faith of Reyes. And he himself contradicts it a few lines further on by saying “that without knowing Rizal, the Katipunan acclaimed him its honorary President.” This latter they certainly did but not “without knowing” him. They did so because they knew nothing of his disagreement with Pilar, the real founder of their society, and because the aim of the two societies was practically one.

Note 71. The similarity of character between the Liga and the Katipunan has always been a matter of discussion. Some writers would draw a hard and fast line between the two, considering them as oil and water, two bodies enemies one of the other; others looking upon them as two oils, the one vegetable and the other mineral which, although differing in nature, mix together thoroughly.

Reyes, in his oft-quoted “Memoria” to the then Gov. General, Primo de Rivera, in a mad attempt to prove that the insurrection was owing to the “friars” and that they attempted to invent the Katipunan plot to cover up their treason, says:

“Above all, the friars committed the criminal and suicidal infamy of calumniously including in the Katipunan the millionaire and aristocratic element, and the middle classes, the fact being that they had nothing in common with the plebeian association which they not only despised for its low condition, but which the few who knew of its existence must have hated, if not for egotism, for the socialistic tendencies of the said group.”

Such assertions scarcely deserve comment, for from beginning to end, the proceedings against the separatists were in the hands of the civil authorities, the members of the Religious Orders having no influence whatever in the matter, although it was they who, by their watchfulness over the interests of the country had detected symptoms which they, as true patriots, made known to the civil authorities. True it is also that a friar, Padre Mariano Gil, made known, at a critical moment, the plot of the diabolical society, in time to prevent the bloodthirsty fiends rising in a night and cutting the throats of those who had been their benefactors; but the “friar” was never a secret service agent of the Government. What he did was what every patriotic Spaniard would have done under the circumstances. It was the civil authorities who, upon the discovery of the plot, caused the arrest of those complicated, and who tried and passed judgement upon the guilty. If millionaires and others were counted among the members of the Katipunan it was because they were guilty of the same treason as the katipuneros and not because they were “included” by the “friar”.

“... Association which they not only despised for its low condition, but which the few who knew of its existence must have hated, if not for egotism, for the socialistic tendencies of the said group.”

So says Isabelo de los Reyes, the founder of the late Filipino Democratic Party, and the Workman’s Democratic Union, the most socialist movement in the history of the Philippines. So much for the Liberty, Equality and Fraternity which they all professed.

Another writer, C. de Valdez, a nom-de-plume under which I recognize as hidden one whose knowledge on this subject was very extensive, who for the study of the question had at his disposition innumerable documents of vital importance, gives as his opinion: “It has been said that the Liga was a society into the which there entered only elements of a certain culture, and the people of money; whilst the Katipunan was formed for the poor and laboring classes. If by this it is intended to signify that they were two close societies, the one which should comprehend what we might call the aristocracy and the other the common people, we cannot agree with the opinion, because it is in contradiction with the facts. There existed a free communication between both societies and the prominent personages of the Liga mixed with the humble ones of the Katipunan, taking active part in the labors and forming part of the reunions and assemblies[47]; in the same way the individuals of common class entered the files of the Liga without any distinction of class being drawn between them.”

The writer goes on to show that the three main things needed for the Revolution were 1st: an active propaganda of separatist ideas; 2nd: funds to cover expenses and to purchase arms, and 3rd: a considerable number of persons ready to take up arms in the field. The first two of these main things were to be attended to by the Liga and the third by the Katipunan.