[98] Besides Castillo y Jimenez, the Katipunan will be found discussed in nearly all the sources to be cited on the 1896–97 insurrection. Data on Bonifacio are scanty, but see El Renacimiento, April 23, 1903; ibid., for the notes of Calderón, above cited, and of Aug. 30, 1906, for a letter by Pio Valenzuela; also comments by A. Mabini and notes by J. A. LeRoy in American Historical Review, xi, pp. 843–861. A pamphlet, The Katipunan (Manila, 1902), by Francis St. Clair (?), published in order to put before Americans the friar view of the Filipino revolutionists, contains an English version of the report of Olegario Diaz, cited above; its notes, drawn indiscriminately from Retana, Castillo y Jimenez, and others, are full of errors. [↑]
[99] Friar Zamora (Las corporaciones religiosas en Filipinas, pp. 334–325) says the forces of the Civil Guard sent to the Bisayas were recruited not from the best men in the Filipino infantry regiments, as the Governor-General ordered, but from the worst, because these were the men whom the infantry colonels would let go. “We parish-priests knew this, because the Civil Guard officers themselves so told us; we saw, a few days after the posts were established in the towns, that the majority of the Guards ought to be serving, not in that corps of prestige, but in some disciplinary corps or in the penitentiary. Nevertheless, from our pulpits we recommended and eulogized what caused us disgust and displeasure, because it was so ordered by the Governor-General to the provincial of the monastic orders, and directly to the parish-priests themselves through the medium of the governors of provinces.” [↑]
[100] Joaquin Pellicena y Lopez, a Spanish journalist of Manila, an admirer of the Jesuits (in some degree, perhaps, an exponent of Jesuit views on recent years in the Philippines), in the pamphlet Los frailes y los filipinos (Manila, Jan., 1901), defends the work of the friars as a historical whole, but condemns their unwillingness to progress with the times. As one proof that the rebellion of 1896 was against the friars, not against Spain, he says (pp. 27–28) that Governor-General Polavieja’s demand for 25,000 fresh troops in April, 1897, was, only a pretext to cover his resignation. Polavieja, who came out to succeed Blanco and under whom Rizal was almost immediately executed, had suddenly become convinced, says this journalist, by reading correspondence of Aguinaldo with the Jesuit superior, that the real cause of the trouble was the friars. As virtually emissary and appointee of the friars, the inference is, Polavieja concluded it would be impossible for him to settle the difficulties successfully. The letters of Aguinaldo to Pio Pí are most interesting, at least (See La Politica de España en Filipinas, vii, pp. 326–328). [↑]
[101] Notably the “removal” of Andrés Bonifacio in 1897 (regarding which the Bonifacio note above cites incomplete data), and the Biak-na-bató negotiation, treated below. [↑]
[102] Memoria que al Senado dirige el General Blanco acerca de los últimos sucesos ocurridos en la isla de Luzón (Madrid, 1897). [↑]
[103] Ibid., pp. 64–68, 163–169. The real Blanco expresses himself in these sentences: “For some people, proof of character and energy is given by ordering executions right and left, at the pleasure of the public, which is wont to be excited by passion; but, on the contrary, energy is shown by resisting all kinds of abuses, and this one most of all. To shoot men is very easy; the difficult thing is not to do it.” [↑]
[104] See also Senate Document no. 62 for hearsay testimony by foreigners at Paris regarding the “reign of terror,” tortures, etc.; and the books of Foreman and Sawyer for similar testimony. [↑]
[105] It is to be noted that some of the worst stories of Filipino outrages upon Spanish captives, especially friars, later proved to be rumors, or were exaggerated, though some brutalities were committed. See La Democracia, Manila, July 12, 1906, for an alleged confession by Friar Piernavieja (extorted from him, and dictated to him in bad Spanish); ibid., July 14, 1906, for data regarding the execution of him and two other friars in Cavite, in “reprisal” for the execution of Rizal. Isabelo de los Reyes’s pamphlet La religión del Katipunan (Madrid, 1900), as also other writings in Filipinas ante Europa and El defensor de Filipinas, a periodical edited at Madrid, 1899–1901 by Reyes, may be mentioned here, as to Aguinaldo and the revolutionary movement in general; statements therein are commonly unreliable. [↑]
[106] A few are in the List of the Library of Congress, under Political and Social Economy, and American Occupation, 1898–1903. Some may be found under the authors’ names in Pardo de Tavera’s Biblioteca. [↑]
[107] So also La soberanía nacional, by D. Paradada, a Jesuit (Barcelona, 1897), cited by Pardo de Tavera, as “stupid.” In this connection may be cited the following titles of Spanish writings on the events following May, 1898, which contain some backward glances upon the earlier phases of the Filipino revolution, also some Spanish imprevision; Juan y José Toral.—El sitio de Manila (Manila, 1898). José Roca de Togores y Saravia (secretary of Council of Administration of Philippines).—El bloqueo y sitio de Manila. V. M. Concas y Palau.—Causa instruida por la destrucción de la escuadra de Filipinas y entrega del arsenal de Cavite. Notas taquigráficas (Madrid, 1899). Isern.—Del desastre nacional y sus causas (Madrid, 1899). Luis Morero Jerez.—Los prisioneros españoles en poder de los tagalos (Manila, Dec., 1899). Carlos Ria-Baja (a prisoner of the Filipinos).—El desastre filipino (Barcelona, 1899). Antonio del Rio (a prisoner, Spanish governor of Laguna Province).—Sitio y rendición de Santa Cruz de la Laguna (Manila, 1899). El Capitan Verdades (Juan de Urquía).—Historia negra (Barcelona, 1899). Joaquín D. Duran (a friar prisoner).—Episodios de la revolución filipina (Manila, 1900). Ulpiano Herrero y Sampedro (a prisoner).—Nuestra prisión en poder de los revolucionarios filipinos (Manila, 1900). Graciano Martinez (a friar prisoner).—Memoria del cautiverio (Manila, 1900). C. P. (Carlos Peñaranda).—Ante la opinión y ante la historia (Madrid, 1900); a defense of Admiral Montojo. Bernardino Nozaleda (Archbishop of Manila).—Defensa obligada contra acusaciones gratuitas (Madrid, 1904); especially for communications to Blanco, 1895–96, in re Katipunan, etc. [↑]