History of Central America, Volume 3, 1801-1887 / The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, Volume 8

by Hubert Howe Bancroft

The assembly continued its labors. A coat of arms was decreed January 20, 1825, and on the 2d of May took place the installation of the executive council, whose prerogatives and duties were similar in state matters to those of the federal senate in national affairs. On the same date was also installed the superior court of justice. The framing of a state constitution was not completed till the 11th of October, on which date it was decreed.[VIII-5] After passing a law for the political division of the state into departments,[VIII-6] the assembly adjourned sine die one month later. Clouds had already appeared in the political horizon, the state authorities having transferred the seat of government from La Antigua to Guatemala, against the opposition of the national executive.

Arms of Guatemala.

BARRUNDIA AS JEFE.

The liberal party has been accused of having, with the connivance of the jefe Barrundia, committed frauds at the elections held in January 1826 for a partial renewal of the representative council. In the first ordinary legislature, which met on the 1st of February, a law was passed for new elections to fill the council. But these and other arbitrary measures of the liberal party gave rise to such warm discussions in the assembly, that Barrundia at last ignored the authority of the council as then existing.[VIII-7] The latter then denounced him, and called the vice-jefe to assume the government. But through the mediation of commissioners of the federal government, harmony was restored. This harmony was not to last long, new complications arising from another quarter. I have, in detailing federal affairs at this period, spoken of the plans attributed to president Arce to overthrow the liberal party, and the events which culminated with the deposal of Barrundia from his position as jefe of the state. The first resolution taken by the legislature and representative council was to remove the capital to Quezaltenango. The new jefe, Flores, was at the same time empowered to organize a military force, raise funds, and adopt other proper measures to uphold the state's sovereignty.[VIII-8] Flores had advocated the removal of the state capital, but strenuously opposed the selection of Quezaltenango as an unfit place for the seat of government of a liberal state.[VIII-9] The assembly paid some heed to his remonstrances, and tarried a while at San Martin Jilotepec, where it was resolved that Barrundia should resume the reins of government; but he declined, pleading ill health.[VIII-10] The assembly remained at that place till the 29th of September, and then concluded to repair to Quezaltenango, considering Jilotepec not quite safe.

PIERZON'S CAMPAIGN.

Flores, accompanied by a few deputies, arrived at Quezaltenango on the 8th of October, and was received with a shower of flowers. He at once set himself to complete the defence of the district, which had been already begun by Colonel José Pierzon,[VIII-11] who had mustered into the service of the state several hundred men.[VIII-12] Having reason to apprehend an attack from the federal authority, Pierzon was ordered to Patsun to watch the enemy. It was during his absence that the events occurred leading to the murder of Jefe Flores by an ungovernable fanatical mob, of which a description is given elsewhere. Upon hearing of those occurrences, and of the friars at Quezaltenango having called the Indians of the neighborhood to take up arms for the common defence, Pierzon retreated to Totonicapan,[VIII-13] encountering the Quezaltec rebels on the 18th of October near Salcajá, and easily defeated them. He gave no quarter. He demanded the immediate surrender of all arms in Quezaltenango, guaranteeing the lives of the inhabitants, otherwise he would destroy the place.[VIII-14] The rebel authorities had to submit, and on the following day Pierzon recovered possession of the place. Several draconic ordinances were issued to keep in check the spirit of rebellion.[VIII-15] The leaders of the riots had, however, fled, thus escaping the punishment they so richly deserved.

Juan Barrundia now made another effort, from Sololá, to resume his former authority, but his prestige was lost, and most of his friends had forsaken his cause.[VIII-16] Pierzon abandoned Quezaltenango on the 25th of October, and was pursued, overtaken, and defeated by the federals, under Brigadier Cáscaras, at Malacatan.[VIII-17] Pierzon, together with his friends Saget and Fauconnier, escaped, and were proscribed, but they managed to cross into Chiapas.[VIII-18] But it seemed that it had been preordained that he should perish at the hands of his foes. On his way to San Salvador to take part in the war against the federal government, he was taken prisoner, brought to Guatemala, and shot, on the 11th of May, 1827, without a trial.[VIII-19]

Another body of liberal troops, under Cayetano de la Cerda, not being aware of Pierzon's defeat at Malacatan, prepared to march from Los Altos to Guatemala, but the soldiers were induced to rebel, and thus the last armed force of the state disappeared. The members of the assembly and council who were not in prison either secreted themselves or emigrated, and the state was left without authorities. The federal president assumed power, and replaced the jefes políticos and military commanders with his own creatures. He published, on the 31st of October, a decree for new elections of state authorities. The new assembly met on the last day of the year, and on the 1st of March, 1827, Mariano Aycinena was chosen by popular vote chief of the state.[VIII-20] It is hardly necessary to state that the elections were wholly controlled by the servile party, whose views were reflected in the new jefe's policy. Lest the existing courts should not deal to the liberals subjected to criminal prosecution such punishments as their enemies desired, a military court, with three voting members, was created, to adjudicate verbally upon all causes for treason.[VIII-21] During the seven months of its existence—to the 29th of October, 1827—it sentenced to the death-penalty upwards of ten persons, but the sentence was carried out in one case only.[VIII-22]