[88] Filipinas dextro de cien años, in La Solidaridad, reprinted in Retana’s Archivo, v. [↑]
[89] Library of Congress List, pp. 99, 100; and Pardo de Tavera’s Biblioteca, nos. 307, 308, 339 and 341 (also 1087). [↑]
[90] As also their tendency to assume that every Spanish official who favored a more liberal political régime in the Philippines did so because he was a Mason. The books of Sastrón and Castillo y Jimenez (especially pp. 372–376, 382), also the friar pamphlets of García-Barzanallana (Library of Congress List, p. 103) and Navarro (Biblioteca, no. 1,811), are especially in point. See, for accounts from the same point of view, the report of the Spanish officer of the civil guard, Olegario Diaz, no. 77 of Documentos políticos in the Archivo, iii, and other documents in that series in vols. iii, and iv. Masones y ultramontanes, by Juan Utor y Fernandez (Manila, 1899), is a defense of Masonry by a Spaniard who founded lodges in the Philippines. V. Diaz Perez in the pamphlet Los frailes de Filipinas brings out from the same point of view some figures and other data on Masonry in the Philippines. [↑]
[91] In his Memoria al Senado (Madrid, 1897), pp. 158–163. [↑]
[92] See Biblioteca, no. 2,665. [↑]
[93] Cited in their original draft, somewhat skeletonized, in the notes furnished for Retana’s Vida y escritos de José Rizal by E. de los Santos, and by the latter also furnished in a manuscript copy to the writer (of which see the translation post, pp. 217–226). [↑]
[94] Notes, etc., in El Renacimiento, Manila, Aug. 11 and 18, Sept. 1 and 18, Oct. 13, 1906. [↑]
[95] This is especially true of the documents given by José M. del Castillo y Jimenez, El Katipunan ó el Filibusterismo en Filipinas (Madrid, 1897), pp. 114–117, 118–123, whence they have been quoted by various other writers. It is to be noted, first, that the source of these documents has never been given; they are not among the extracts from the official records of the courts-martial reproduced in Retana’s Archivo, iii, and iv; and, finally, certain passages in them read suspiciously as if prepared for the purpose of proving the most exaggerated statements about the Katipunan and of magnifying the scope and aims of the whole movement. [↑]
[96] See on this subject an article by J. A. LeRoy, Japan and the Philippine Islands, in Atlantic Monthly, January, 1906. Primo de Rivera, in his Memoria (1898), several times declares that the Cavite insurgents of 1896–97 never had more than 1,500 firearms, including rifles of all sorts, shotguns, and revolvers. [↑]
[97] This was allowed to appear even in the testimony as written down by the Spanish military court (Retana’s Archivo, iii, Documentos políticos, nos. 35, 46, and 55). [↑]