CHAPTER 6

AGRARIAN DISPUTES

In 1891, José Rizal was in Hong Kong when he received distressing news about his family who
were, at that time, embroiled in a litigation case concerning the Hacienda de Calamba. He heard that the
Spanish authorities were summoning his mother, Doña Teodora, and two younger sisters, Josefa and
Trinidad, for further investigation. In a show of support, he wrote to his family, “I am following your
cavalry step by step. Do not be afraid, I am doing all I can... Patience, a little patience. Courage!”

Scholars and students of history agree that the conflict between his family and the Dominicans
over the hacienda greatly affected Rizal.

This chapter will attempt to show the historical context behind this incident that played a pivotal
role in Rizal's life. It will first provide a brief history of friar estates in the Philippines and will then look
closely into the Hacienda de Calamba conflict.

VOCABULARY

 conquistador - a Spanish conqueror

 caballeria - a small tract of land included in a land grant
 canon - annual rent paid by the inquilino
 covan - a measure equal to 75 liters
 hacienda - large estates that were used for raising livestock and agricultural production
 inquilino - a tenant who rented land from the friars and subleased the land to sharecroppers
 principales – ruling elite class
 sharecropper (kasamá) – an individual who rented the land from an inquilino and worked the
land
 sitio de ganado mayor – a large tract of land included in a land grant

Brief History of Friar Estates in the Philippines

The origin of the friar estates can be traced back to land grants awarded to the early Spanish
conquistadores who arrived in the Philippines during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries.
Approximately 120 Spaniards were given grants that were often composed of a large tract of land
known as sitio de ganado mayor (measuring 1,742 hectares) and smaller tracts of land known as
caballerias (measuring 42.5 hectares).

In time, the Spanish hacenderos failed to develop their lands for three reasons. First, the
Spanish population in the was transient. It was a common practice for Spanish administrators to return
to Spain after having served in the country. Second, the market for livestock products, which haciendas
offered, remained relatively small until the latter part of the Spanish colonial period. Third, the Galleon
Trade that was based in Manila offered bigger economic rewards and attracted more Spaniards. Because
the Spanish bacenderos lacked the interest and inclination to develop their lands, the religious orders
soon took over the task.
 Land was acquired by the religious orders through various means. Often, the lands were
donated by Spaniards seeking spiritual benefits. There were cases, too, in which estates that had been
heavily mortgaged to the ecclesiastics were eventually purchased by the religious orders themselves.
Records reveal that a number of Filipino principales also contributed to the formation of the friar estates
through donations and sales. Despite these methods, there persisted a commonly held belief among the
Filipinos that the religious orders had no titles to their lands and that they had acquired these lands
through usurpation or other dubious means. Nevertheless, religious estates in the Tagalog region
continued to grow that by the nineteenth century, they constituted approximately 40 percent of the
provinces of Bulacan, Tondo (presently Rizal), Cavite, and Laguna.

The preoccupation in the estates was varied during theearly centuries of Spanish colonial rule. In
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the estates primarily served as cattle ranches as well as farms
of subsistence crops. Rice and sugar later served as main commodities produced in the haciendas and
became important sources of income for the religious orders especially during the nineteenth century.

Agrarian relations in the haciendas developed in the time. In the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, the social structure found in the baciendas was primarily composed of lay brother
administrators at the top and cultivating tenants below. Although the lay brother administrators were
under the direct authority of the heads of their religious orders, they were relatively free to make their
own decisions on administrative affairs. The tenants, on the other hand, were expected to work the land
and pay an annual rent, which was usually a fixed amount of harvest and in later centuries, money.

By the mid-eighteenth century, an expanding economy based on exporting agricultural crops

ushered in change and gradually put into place an inquilinato system. Under this system, an individual
rented land for a fixed annual amount, known as canon. Aside from the rent, the inquilino or lessee was
also expected to render personal services to his landlords. If the inquilino failed to satisfy these
requirements, he could face expulsion from the land. Usually, the inquilino, in turn, would sub-lease the
land to a kasamá or sharecropper who would then take on the task of cultivating the soil. Thus, a three-
tiered system emerged with the landlords at the top, the inquilinos at the middle, and the sharecroppers
at the bottom.

By leasing the land to an inquilino, the religious hacenderos freed themselves from the social
responsibilities borne from a direct interaction with the sharecroppers since it was now the inquilinos
who dealt directly with the kasamá. The sharecroppers, on the other hand, benefitted from the
arrangement because their labor obligations to the religious estates allowed them to be exempted from
the responsibilities of forced labor demanded by the Spanish government. The downside to this type of
arrangement, however, was that two non-cultivating groups further diminished the income of the
sharecroppers. After the inquilino paid his rent to the religious hacenderos and deducted his own share,
the remaining amount of income would then be divided among all the sharecroppers.

The change in the social structure and land tenure practices would eventually render the
haciendas as sites of contestation among the Spanish religious hacenderos, the inquilinos, and the
sharecroppers. It is not surprising, then, that when the Philippine Revolution broke out in 1896, the
abuses in the friar estates were often identified as one of the main causes that instigated the revolt.

Hacienda de Calamba Conflict

 Not much is known about the Hacienda de Calamba prior to 1759 other than it was owned by
several Spanish laymen. In 1759, a destitute Spanish layman, Don Manuel Jauregui, donated the lands to
the Jesuits on the condition that he would be allowed to live in the Jesuit monastery for the rest of his
life. The Jesuits would claim ownership to the land for a mere eight years before they were expelled
from the Philippines through a decree issued by King Charles III on February 27, 1767. As a result of the
expulsion, Hacienda de Calamba, along with other Jesuit properties, were confiscated by the
government and put under the management of the Office of Jesuit Temporalities.

In 1803, the government sold the property to a Spanish layman, Don Clemente de Azansa, for
44,507 pesos. When he died in 1833, the Hacienda de Calamba, which measured 16,424 hectares, was
purchased by the Dominicans for 52,000 pesos. By this time, many families from neighboring towns had
migrated to the hacienda in search of economic opportunities. Among the families that arrived at the
hacienda were Rizal's ancestors, who eventually became one of the principal inquilinos in the hacienda.

Although the lands in Calamba were leased to several families, it was Rizal's family that rented
one of the largest leased lands, measuring approximately 380 hectares. Sugar was a main commodity
planted in the hacienda as there was a demand for in the world market. Much of the wealth of Rizal's
family came from these lands; hence, it is but natural that when the conflict began to manifest itself as
early as 1883, there was much for the family to be concerned about.

In 1883, Paciano Rizal wrote that the friars were collecting rents without issuing the usual
receipts. Two years later, the tenants failed to pay their rents because the rent had supposedly
increased while sugar prices had remained low. To punish the tenants for not paying the rent, the
Dominicans declared the lands vacant and invited residents of other towns to take over the tenancies.
Because only a few outsiders responded to the Dominican's invitation, the friars weakened their
position. Most tenants, except for four or five, were spared from eviction.

The charges against the friars continued with Rizal's brother- in-law, Mariano Herboso,
specifically complaining about the yearly increase in rentals, faulty irrigation systems, and failure to issue
receipts. Coupled with these problems was the fact that at this time, the price of sugar continued to
decline in the world market. The situation became so dire that Paciano, at one point, considered giving
back his lands to the friars and clearing land elsewhere.

Problems continued to escalate when in 1887, the colonial government demanded from the
tenants of the hacienda a report on the income and production of the estate because they suspected
that the Dominicans were evading payment of their taxes. The tenants complied and submitted a report,
but they also attached a petition authored by José Rizal. The petition presented a list of grievances
against the hacienda owners including a complaint on the increasing amount of rent. To show
resistance, some of the tenants began to withhold rents.

As a form of retaliation, the friars began to evict tenants who refused to pay rent in 1891. Those
who persisted still in resisting the friars were eventually expelled. Among those who were exiled to
remote areas in the country were Rizal's parents, brother, and sisters. Although Rizal had worked on
reversing the decision of the Philippine courts, his family's exile would only be lifted upon the issuance
of a decree from another governor-general. The experience affected Rizal deeply and the increasing
despair he felt from the event would be reflected in his second novel, El Filibusterismo.
 Tenant Grievances and Rizal's Petition

“Petition of the Town of Calamba” written by José Rizal in January 1888.

From the declaration of the tenants interviewed, it turns out that the products of the Estate—if
by-products are to be understood everything that the land produces have increased for the Estate and
diminished remarkably for the tenants, not only in the years that have passed but also in the last three,
as the enclosed account proves. Such a statement needs to be explained. The products increase to the
benefit of the Estate:

1. Because the wild forests which are given to the tenants for a low rent at the beginning according
as the tenants clear and clean them, investing large capital in them, according as the fortune of
the farmer becomes involved in them, the contract is arbitrarily altered by the Estate, the rent
rises enormously, there being a case when 45 pesos became 900 in a few years through an
annual forced imposition.

2. Because some lands pay twice for two harvests of rice, where some bamboo groves are found,
the farmer pays for the land and for each bamboo grove besides, regardless of whether it is
useless or it has been felled. In the lands where huts have been erected for the workers, one has
to pay for the lots and the huts besides.

3. Because the rent of the town lots where houses or warehouses are erected increases every time
an official or servant of the Estate measures them. There seems to exist either a supernatural
power that invisibly extends the land or a natural power that shortens the measure of the
official, who after all is neither an expert nor a surveyor, though he is very venal indeed. Without
this trick, the rent is also raised when the tenant makes improvement in the lot, or when he
replaces the bamboo fence with a stone one, or builds a wooden house, for comfort and public
embellishment; therefore, many do not improve their dwellings even if they have the means to
do so...

4. Because ricefields that are planted with only 3 or 4 cavanes of seed, pay as if they have a
capacity for 9.5 and 14 cavanes, on pain of being declared vacant and given to others... The
products for the tenants have decreased considerably in spite of continuous labor, not only
before but also these last years as proven by the large number of ruined farmers, indebted and
dispossessed of their property... On the other hand, the desperate ones who wish to return a
parcel of land that is unproductive will not be allowed to do so and they face ruin as they will be
threatened of being despoiled of all their other parcels. It arouses suspicion that they do not
want to write in the receipts the amount paid as rental and the total absence of any record,
especially in these last years.

Execution of Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora

 As a result of the revolt in Cavite, several priests and laymen were arrested on the orders of
Governor-General Izquierdo. Among the priests arrested in the succeeding days were Fathers Jose
Burgos, Jacinto Zamora, Jose Guevara, Mariano Gomez, Feliciano Gomez, Mariano Sevilla, Bartolome
Serra, Miguel de Laza, Justo Guazon, Vicente del Rosario, Pedro Dandan, and Anacleto Desiderio. Among
the laymen were and businessmen: Gervacio Sanchez, Pedro Carillo, Maximo Inocencio, Balbino
Mauricio, Ramon Maurente, Maximo Paterno, and Jose Basa. These Filipinos were sentenced to terms of
exile in Guam. The three priests, Burgos, Gomez, and Zamora, on the other hand, were condemned to
death by garrote on February 15, 1872.

A French writer-journalist named Edmund Plauchut gave an account of the execution:

Late in the night of the 15th of February 1872, a Spanish court martial found three secular
priests, Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez and Jacinto Zamora, guilty of treason as the instigators of a
mutiny in the Cavite navy-yard a month before, and sentenced them to death. The judgment of
the court martial was read to the priests in Fort Santiago early the next morning and they were
told it would be executed the following day... Upon hearing the sentence, Burgos broke into
sobs, Zamora lost his mind and never recovered, and only Gomez listened impassively, an old
man accustomed the thought of death.

When dawn broke on the 17th of February, there were almost forty thousand of Filipinos (who
came from as far as Bulacan, Pampanga, Cavite and Laguna) surrounding the four platforms
where the three priests and the man whose testimony had convicted them, a former
artilleryman called Saldua, would die.

The three priests followed Saldua: Burgos “weeping like a child,” Zamora with vacant eyes, and
Gomez head held high, blessing the Filipinos who knelt at his feet, heads bared and praying. He
was next to die. When his confessor, a Recollect friar, exhorted him loudly to accept his fate, he
replied: "Father, I know that not a leaf falls to the ground but by the will of God. Since He wills
that I should die here, His holy will be done."

Zamora went up the scaffold without a word and delivered his body to the executioner; his mind
bad already left it.

Burgos was the last, a refinement of cruelty that compelled him to watch the death of his
companions. He seated himself on the iron rest and then sprang up crying: “But what crime
have I committed? Is it possible that I should die like this. My God, is there no justice on earth?"

A dozen friars surrounded him and pressed him down again upon the seat of the garrote,
pleading with him to die a Christian death. He obeyed but, feeling his arms tied round the fatal
post, protested once again: “But I am innocent!”

“So was Jesus Christ,” said one of the friars. At this Burgos resigned himself. The executioner
knelt at his feet and asked his forgiveness. “I forgive you, my son. Do your duty.” And it was
done.

Although the public execution of the three priests was meant to instill fear in the Filipinos, it had
the opposite effect. In his work, La Revolucion Filipina, Apolinario Mabini stated:
 The friars wanted to make an example of Burgos and his so that the Filipinos should be afraid to
go against them from then on. But that patent injustice, that official crime, aroused not fear but
hatred of the friars companions and of the regime that supported them, and a profound for the
victims. This sorrow worked a miracle: it made the Filipinos realize their condition for the first
time. Conscious of pain, and thus sympathy and sorrow conscious of life, they asked themselves
what kind of a life they lived. The awakening was painful, and working to stay alive more painful
still, but one must live. How? They did not know, and the desire to know, the anxiety to learn,
overwhelmed and took possession of the youth of the Philippines. The curtain of ignorance
woven diligently for centuries was rent at last: fiat lux, let there be light, would not be long in
coming, the dawn of a new day was nearing.

Rizal and GOMBURZA

Without 1872 there would not be now either a Plaridel, or Jaena, or Sanciangco, or would there
exist brave and generous Filipino colonies in Europe; without 1872 Rizal would be a Jesuit now
and instead of writing Noli Me Tángere, would have written the opposite. At the sight of those
injustices and cruelties, while still a child, my imagination was awakened, and I swore to devote
myself to avenge one day so many victims, and with this idea in my mind I have been studying
and this can be read in all my works and writings. God will someday give me an opportunity to
carry out my promise. Good! May they commit abuses, let there be imprisonments,
banishments, executions, good. Let Destiny be fulfilled! The day they lay their hands on us, the
day they martyrize innocent families for our faults, goodbye, friar government, and perhaps,
goodbye Spanish government!

Chapter 8
Imagining a Nation
Vocabulary
 Cortes - the legislative or lawmaking body of the Spanish government
 Creole - a Spaniard born in the Philippines
 Mestizo - an individual born of mixed ancestry; may refer to a Spanish mestizo or a Chinese
mestizo
 Propaganda - information used to promote or publicize a particular cause or point of view
 Restoration - refers to the Spanish Restoration; a period in Spanish history spanning the years
1874–1931 that saw the restoration of the monarchy under Alfonso XII together with the
establishment of a bicameral legislature

Towards the end of the nineteenth century, economic conditions in the Philippines had
improved in such a way that it was possible for many creole and mestizo families to send to school not
only in Manila, but also in Europe. The young Filipino students' sojourn to the Peninsula would awaken
in their minds Ideas about progress and love for their motherland.
 Nineteenth century Spain was also going through several processes of change. Politically
speaking, the Restoration put back into place the monarchy of Alfonso XII and established a
constitutional monarchy with a bicameral legislature. The Constitution of 1876 ensured that political
stability relied on the rotation of the Liberal and Conservative parties in the government. The
parliamentary system of two parties, however, was weakened by managed elections and numerous
turnovers of government employees.
The young Filipino students also observed a difference in the position of the Church in Spain.
While the Constitution of 1876 declared Catholicism as the religion of the state, private practice of other
religions was tolerated. More significantly, the Church had little influence on political matters.
The environment where the Filipinos immersed themselves. therefore, was one where ideas of
progress could be expressed and exchanged freely. Political and religious institutions could be
questioned and attacked without fear of reprisal. It was an environment that allowed these

The earliest attempt to unite Filipinos studying in Spain was the formation of the Circulo
Hispano-Filipino, an organization under the leadership of a creole, Juan Atayde. It had the support of
Spaniards who were sympathetic towards the Filipinos. The Circulo published a bi-weekly newspaper
titled Revista del Circulo Hispano-Filipino in 1882, but the newspaper and the organization itself were
short-lived and lasted only until 1883.
Despite the demise of the Revista del Circulo Hispano- Filipino, the Filipinos in Spain continued
to write and engage in journalism. In 1883, a periodical called Los Dos Mundos came out with the
intention of demanding for the overseas Hispanic colonies equality of rights and equal opportunities for
progress. Although it could not be determined whether the newspaper was a Filipino project, Filipinos
such as Graciano Lopez Jaena and Pedro Govantes y Azcarraga were involved as staff members Other
Filipinos including Rizal and Eduardo de Lete also contributed articles concerned with socio-political and
economic reforms in the Philippines.
During the time Rizal's first novel, Noli me out in 1887, another newspaper titled España en
began its publication through the support of Filipinos, creoles, and mestizos in Madrid. The newspaper
was short-lived as well because of glaring differences and internal feuding among its staff. With the end
of the newspaper emerged a stronger Filipino community united in its purpose to continue working for
Filipino rights. By January 1889, the Filipino community in Barcelona began preparations for the
publication of a new periodical. Among the early supporters who helped with finances were Mariano
Ponce and Pablo Rianzares. On the other hand, Graciano Lopez Jaena offered his services as editor.
Marcelo H. del Pilar, having arrived from Manila at this time, also joined the efforts.
The newspaper, La Solidaridad, released its first issue on February 15, 1889. In its first article,
the staff defined its program as, "to combat all reaction, to impede all retrogression, to applaud and
accept every liberal idea, to defend all progress." Among the reforms the newspaper sought were:
Philippine representation in the Cortes, freedom of the press, and the end of the practice of exiling
residents without due process. The periodical placed particular emphasis on affairs dealing with the
Philippines because of all Spain's overseas provinces, it was the only one that lacked parliamentary
representation.
La Solidaridad often ran articles dealing with Spanish politics, attacks on friars, and reforms for
the Philippines, Sections were also assigned to accommodate and print letters from foreign
correspondents, all speaking of situations on the ground. Aside from the political and economic content,
the periodical gave space for the publication of literary works as well.
Support for the newspaper gradually increased and its roster of writers grew. Among those who
eventually contributed articles were José Rizal, Dominador Gomez, Jose Maria Panganiban, Antonio
Luna, and renowned Filipinist scholar Ferdinand Blumentritt. Other Filipinos who contributed articles did
so using assumed names.
In time, del Pilar gradually took on the active role of running the paper. Lopez Jaena, although
editor in name, spent most of his days in cafes and was known to be incapable of sustained work. By the
time del Pilar decided to move to Madrid, the paper went with him. The first issue printed in Madrid
came out on November 15, 1889. A month later, the periodical announced its change of editorship with
del Pilar now taking the helm.
By 1890, two of the most prominent members of the Filipino community in Spain began to
increasingly show differences in stance with regard to Philippine affairs. Rizal always held the opinion
that to serve the country better, one had to bring the issues closer to home. One had to speak to the
Filipinos, rather than the Spaniards. Del Pilar, on the other hand, was a skillful politician who felt that
efforts at persuading the Spanish leaders and officials needed to be continued and that this was the best
way to achieve the reforms Filipinos were seeking.
Things came to a head when at a New Year's Eve banquet in 1891, the Filipinos in Madrid
proposed that they elect a leader to unite their community. Rizal agreed with the proposal while del
Pilar expressed initial misgivings. Nevertheless, the voting took place resulting in three inconclusive
ballots on the first day and two more inconclusive ballots the next day. Rizal did eventually win the
position as Filipino leader but only through the manipulations of Mariano Ponce. In the end, Rizal felt his
triumph was shallow and left Madrid a few weeks later. From this point onwards, Rizal stopped from
contributing articles to La Solidaridad and focused instead on the writing of his novels.
The periodical continued to publish only until 1895. Because of lack of funds and internal
feuding, the newspaper released its final issue on November 15, 1895. In its final issue, its editor, del
Pilar, had written, "We are persuaded that no sacrifices are too little to win the rights and the liberty of a
nation that is oppressed by slavery."