CHAPTER I.

LAST DAYS OF SPANISH RULE.

1801-1818.

POPULAR FEELING IN CENTRAL AMERICA—EFFECT OF EVENTS IN SPAIN—RECOGNITION OF AMERICAN EQUALITY—REPRESENTATION IN THE SPANISH CÓRTES—DELUSIVE REFORMS—END OF SARAVIA'S RULE—PRESIDENT JOSÉ BUSTAMANTE—HIS DESPOTIC COURSE—DEMANDS IN THE CÓRTES—CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES—OFFICIAL HOSTILITY—CAMPAIGN IN OAJACA—REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS IN SALVADOR—WAR IN NICARAGUA—CONSPIRACY IN GUATEMALA—TREATMENT OF THE INSURGENTS—DISRESPECT TO THE DIPUTACION—THE CONSTITUTION REVOKED—ROYAL DECREES.

The opening century was pregnant with important events both in Europe and America. By 1808 affairs in Spain culminated in the French emperor's detention of the king and other members of the royal family at Bayonne, where he forced them finally to resign in his favor their rights to the Spanish crown. The circle surrounding the captain-general, audiencia, and archbishop of Guatemala was made up, not only of European Spaniards, but of Guatemalans belonging to the so-called noble families. Popular displeasure was manifested both against the Spaniards and against the provincial aristocracy.[I-1] The oligarchy was hated throughout the province of Guatemala proper, and still more in the other provinces of the presidency.

However, when the news of Napoleon's usurpation reached America, it caused a strong revulsion of feeling in Central America, as well as elsewhere in the Spanish dominions, even among the large class which had hitherto secretly fostered a warm desire for independent national existence. Creoles of pure Spanish descent, though yearning to be free from the old thraldom, could not bring themselves to discard the country which gave them blood, religion, and civilization. As to the educated Indians, who were also among the wishers for independence, like all of their race, they looked up to the ruling power with reverence and fear. Thus arose a struggle between the old veneration and the love of freedom; a struggle which was to last in Central America a few years longer, though the people were becoming more and more impatient, while leaning to the side of independent nationality. Circumstances seemed to demand that the old connection should not be ruptured till 1821, when decisive results in New Spain brought on the final crisis here. When the news of Napoleon's acts of violence and usurpations reached Guatemala, popular loyalty was aroused, and showed itself in various ways. Manifestations by the authorities, expressive of fealty to the mother country and the royal family, met with an apparently hearty response from the people.

Advices came on the 30th of June, 1808, of the occurrences at Aranjuez of March 19th.[I-2] July passed amid much anxiety about affairs in Spain, and the public mind became depressed by unfavorable news received on the 13th of August. Next day, at a meeting of the authorities,[I-3] the state of affairs was anxiously discussed. The mariscal de campo, Antonio Gonzalez Mollinedo y Saravia, had succeeded Dolmas on the 28th of July, 1801, in the offices of governor, captain-general, and president of the audiencia. He had seen forty years of service in the royal armies,[I-4] and had with him his wife, Micaela Colarte, and offspring.[I-5]

[Sidenote: SARAVIA AND FERNANDO VII.]

President Saravia read to the meeting a despatch from the viceroy of Mexico, and a copy of the _Gaceta_ giving an account of the abdication of Fernando VII., and of the surrender by other members of the royal family of their rights to the Spanish crown. After due consideration, the meeting declared these acts to have resulted from violence, being therefore illegal and unjust, and not entitled to recognition. It was further resolved that the authorities and people should renew their allegiance to the legitimate sovereign, continue upholding the laws hitherto in force, and maintain unity of action, for the sake of religion, peace, and good order. Instructions were received[I-6] to raise the standard of Fernando VII., and swear allegiance to him, which were duly carried out.[I-7]

The opportunity has now arrived for a radical change in the political status of Spanish America. The colonies have hitherto had no government, save that of rulers set over them by a monarch whose will was absolute, whose edicts constituted their code of laws; the subject being allowed no voice in public affairs, save occasionally as a timid petitioner. But troubles beset Spain at this time. Her king is powerless; the friends of constitutional government have now the control, and proceed to establish the desired liberal régime. In order to be consistent, and to some extent satisfy the aspirations of their fellow-subjects in America, the provisional government decrees, and the córtes upon assembling confirm, all the rights claimed for Spaniards dwelling in Spain, together with representation in the córtes and other national councils.

The Junta Suprema Central Gubernativa in the king's name declares on the 22d of January, 1809, the Spanish possessions in America to be, in fact, integral parts of the monarchy,[I-8] and, approving the report of the council of the Indies of November 21, 1808, in favor of granting to the American dominions representation near the sovereign, and the privilege of forming by deputies a part of the aforesaid junta, issues to the president of Guatemala an order to invite the people of the provinces to choose their deputy to reside at court as a member of the governing junta.[I-9] On the 3d of March, 1810, the electors assembled in Guatemala and chose for deputy the colonel of militia, Manuel José Pavon y Muñoz.[I-10] The powers given him by his constituents were general, but enjoined allegiance to the king and permanent connection with the mother country.[I-11]

[Sidenote: DIPUTACION AMERICANA.]

The supreme government, early in 1810, in its anxiety to be surrounded by the representatives of the people, hastened the convocation of córtes extraordinary. Fearing, however, that there might not be a sufficient number chosen for their timely attendance at the opening of the session, it apprised the provincial authorities, reiterating the decree a little later,[I-12] that deficiencies would be temporarily supplied until regularly elected deputies presented themselves to occupy their seats in the chamber. Guatemala, in common with the rest of America, was unable to send her deputies in time, and had to be represented at the inauguration by suplentes, or proxies. These[I-13] were Andrés del Llano, a post-captain, and Colonel Manuel del Llano. One of the first acts of the córtes[I-14] was to confirm the principle that all the Spanish dominions possessed the same rights, promising to enact at an early day laws conducive to the welfare of the American portion, and to fix the number and form of national representation in both continents.

At the suggestion of the diputacion americana, as the body of American members was called, a general amnesty for political offences was decreed, with the expectation of its yielding the best results in favor of peace and conciliation. Promises of reform, and of better days for Central America, were held out, but the provincial government paid little attention to them. Meanwhile a jealous and restless police constantly watched the movements of suspected persons. Informers and spies lurked everywhere, seeking for some one against whom to bring charges.

The promised blessings proved delusive. Instead of reforms, the people witnessed the installation of a tribunal de fidelidad, with large powers, for the trial and punishment of suspected persons.[I-15] This court was short lived, however, being suppressed about the middle of the following year, under the order of the supreme government, dated February 20, 1811. And thus Guatemala was kept quiet and apparently loyal, when the greater part of Spanish America was in open revolt.

Saravia's rule came to an end on the 14th of March, 1811. He was promoted to the rank of lieutenant-general, and appointed by the government at Cádiz to the command in chief of the forces in Mexico. On his arrival in Oajaca, the viceroy, who was chagrined at his powers having been thus curtailed, detained him at that place. In November 1812, the city being captured by the independents, Saravia was taken prisoner and shot.[I-16]

[Sidenote: BUSTAMANTE Y GUERRA.]

The successor of Saravia was Lieutenant-general José Bustamante y Guerra, appointed by the supreme council of regency, and soon after confirmed by the córtes generales extraordinarias. He was a naval officer, and had made several important cruises in the cause of science,[I-17] and latterly had been civil and military governor of Montevideo, a position that he filled efficiently. His zeal against the independents in that country pointed him out as the one best fitted to retard the independence of Central America. On his return to Spain from South America he refused to recognize Joseph Bonaparte.

Bustamante is represented to have been an inflexible, vigilant, and reticent ruler. He lost no time in adopting stringent measures to check insurrections, and displayed much tact in choosing his agents and spies. No intelligent native of the country was free from mistrust, slight suspicion too often bringing upon the subject search of domicile, imprisonment, or exile. He never hesitated to set aside any lenient measures emanating from the home government in favor of the suspected, and spared no means that would enable him, at the expiration of his term, to surrender the country entire and at peace to his superiors. He was successful, notwithstanding there were several attempts at secession.

Meanwhile the American representatives had been permitted to lift their voice in the national councils. They had called attention to the grievances of their people. In a long memorial of August 1, 1811, to the córtes, they had refuted the oft-repeated charge that the friends of independence in America were or had been under Napoleonic influence. They set forth the causes of discontent,[I-18] which they declared was of long standing, and called for a remedy. Reference was made to Macanar's memorial to Felipe V.,[I-19] wherein he stated that the Americans were displeased, not so much because they were under subjection to Spain, as because they were debased and enslaved by the men sent out by the crown to fill the judicial and other offices.[I-20]

The organic code was finally adopted on the 18th of March, 1812.[I-21] The instrument consisted of ten titles, divided into chapters, in their turn subdivided into sections, and might be considered in two parts: 1st, general form of government for the whole nation, namely, a constitutional monarchy; 2d, special plan for the administration of the Indies.[I-22]

[Sidenote: NEW ORGANIC CODE.]

In lieu of the old ayuntamientos, which were made up of hereditary regidores, whose offices might be transferred or sold, others were created, their members to be chosen by electors who had been in their turn chosen by popular vote. The ayuntamientos were to control the internal police of their towns, their funds, public instruction within their respective localities, benevolent establishments, and local improvements. They were to be under the inspection of a diputacion provincial, formed of seven members, elected by the above-mentioned electors, in each province, under the presidency of the chief civil officer appointed by the king; the chief and the diputacion were jointly to have the direction of the economical affairs of the province. No act of either corporation was final till approved by the national córtes. In America and Asia, however, owing to great distances, moneys lawfully appropriated might be used with the assent of the chief civil authority; but a timely report was to be made to the supreme government for the consideration of the córtes. Such were the chief wheels in the machinery of provincial and municipal administration. Now, as to popular rights, equality of representation in the provinces of the Spanish peninsula, Asia, and America was fully recognized. The descendants of Africans were alone deprived of the rights of citizenship. This exclusion was combated with forcible arguments by many of the American deputies setting forth the faithful, efficient services colored men had repeatedly rendered and were still rendering to the nation, and their fitness for almost every position. Many of them, they said, had received sacred orders, or had been engaged in other honorable callings, in which they had made good records; besides which, they comprised a considerable portion of the useful mining and agricultural population. Unfortunately for the negro race, the American deputies were not all of one mind. Larrazábal, from Guatemala, probably acting both on his own judgment and on the opinion expressed in 1810 by the real consulado, asserted the black man's incapacity, advocating that persons of African blood should be conceded only the privilege of voting at elections. This motion was supported by a Peruvian deputy. The peninsular members favored the admission to full rights of colored priests, and all colored men serving in the royalist armies. The measure was lost, however; but the article as passed authorized the admission to full political rights, by special acts of the córtes, of colored men proving themselves worthy by a remarkably virtuous life, good service to the country, talents, or industriousness, provided they were born in wedlock, of fathers who had been born free, married to free-born wives, and were residents of Spanish possessions, practising some useful profession and owning property.

Pursuant to the constitution, the córtes ordered, May 23, 1812, elections for members to the ordinary córtes of 1813.[I-23]

The constitution was received at Guatemala on the 10th of September, 1812, proclaimed on the 24th, and its support solemnly sworn to by the authorities and people on the 3d of November, with great satisfaction and evidences of loyalty. Gold and silver medals were struck off to commemorate the event.[I-24]

The installation of the córtes took place, with the apparent approval of Guatemala. The president, members of the audiencia, and other dignitaries who had thriven under absolutism, looking on Americans as 'our colonists,' became at once liberals and constitutionalists, pretending to recognize the wisdom of the national congress in declaring that the Americans were no longer colonists, but citizens of one common country. Their manifestation of September 15, 1812, was followed three days after by one from the ayuntamiento of Guatemala to Deputy Larrazábal, in the same strain, suggesting the creation of a board advisory to the córtes, on the reino de Guatemala legislation.

* * * * *

[Sidenote: EXPEDITION TO OAJACA.]

After the fall of Oajaca during the Mexican war of independence, the patriot chief Morelos regarded the rear of his military operations as secure. Sympathizing messages had reached him from men of weight in Guatemala, which lulled him into the belief that attack need not be apprehended from this quarter. To Ignacio Rayon he wrote: "Good news from Guatemala; they have asked for the plan of government, and I'll send them the requisite information." It was all a mistake. His cause had friends in Central America, and enemies likewise. Among the most prominent of the latter were Captain-general Bustamante and Archbishop Casaus. The ecclesiastic, with a number of Spanish merchants from Oajaca who had sought refuge in Guatemala, prompted the general, then anxious to avenge the execution of his predecessor, to fit out an expedition, invade Oajaca, and harass the insurgents even at the gates of the city.

About 700 men, mostly raw recruits, were accordingly put in the field, early in 1813, under the command of Lieutenant-colonel Dambrini, a man of little ability and unsavory record, and crossed the line into Tehuantepec. Dambrini could not abandon his money-making propensities; and having been led to believe he would encounter but little or no resistance, took along a large quantity of merchandise for trading. On the 25th of February a small insurgent force was captured in Niltepec, and Dambrini had its commander, together with a Dominican priest and twenty-eight others, shot the next day. This was the usual treatment of prisoners by both belligerents. But on April 20th the Guatemalans were flanked and routed at Tonalá by the enemy under Matamoros. Dambrini fled, and his men dispersed, leaving in the victors' possession their arms, ammunition, and Dambrini's trading goods. The fugitives were pursued some distance into Guatemalan territory.[I-25]

* * * * *

Germs of independence, as I have said, were fostered in secret by the more intelligent, and slowly began to develop, the movement being hastened by a few enthusiasts who were blind to the foolhardiness of their attempt. The government tried all means to keep the people in ignorance of the state of affairs in Mexico and South America, and when unsuccessful, would represent the royalist army as victorious. Other more questionable devices were also resorted to.[I-26]

Undue restraint and ill treatment, as practised under the stringent policy of Bustamante, soon began to produce effects. Restiveness and despair seized a portion of the people; the hopes for a government more consonant with the spirit of the age, which had been held out from Spain, evaporated. Men were unwilling to live longer under the heel of despotism; and the more high-spirited in Salvador and Nicaragua resolved to stake their fortunes upon a bold stroke for freedom. It was, indeed, a rash step, undertaken without concert, and almost without resources. It could but end as it did at every place where a revolutionary movement was initiated.

Matías Delgado and Nicolás Aguilar, curates of San Salvador, Manuel and Vicente Aguilar, Juan Manuel Rodriguez, and Manuel José Arce were the first to strike the blow for Central American independence. Their plan was carried into execution on the 5th of November, 1811, by the capture of 3,000 new muskets, and upwards of $200,000 from the royal treasury at San Salvador. They were supported by a large portion of the people of the city, and in Metapan, Zacatecoluca, Usulutan, and Chalatenango. But other places in the province of Salvador, namely, San Miguel, Santa Ana, San Vicente, and Sonsonate, renewed their pledges of fealty to the government, declaring the movement for freedom a sacrilege.[I-27]

The promoters of the revolt, which had been started in the king's name, became disheartened and gave up further effort, and with the dismissal of the intendente, Antonio Gutierrez Ulloa, and other officials, peace was soon restored. San Salvador had been quiet without other government than that of alcaldes during the disturbance.

[Sidenote: AYCINENA IN SALVADOR.]

Upon the receipt of the news of these occurrences, Bustamante despatched Colonel José de Aycinena with ample powers to take charge of the intendencia, and restore quiet. He had been getting troops ready to send down, but by the mediation of the ayuntamiento of Guatemala he had suspended preparations, and had adopted the former course. A member of that body, José María Peinado, was associated with Aycinena.[I-28] They reached San Salvador on the 3d of December, amid the acclamations of the fickle populace; their presence and the exhortations of the missionaries checked all revolutionary symptoms. The authors of the revolt were leniently treated under a general amnesty.[I-29] Peinado was a short time after appointed Aycinena's successor as acting intendente.[I-30]

Another and a still more serious attempt at revolution, which may be called a sequel to that of Salvador, had its beginning in the town of Leon, Nicaragua, on the 13th of December, 1811, when the people deposed the intendente, José Salvador. This action was seconded on the 22d at Granada, where the inhabitants, at a meeting in the municipal hall, demanded the retirement of all the Spanish officials. The insurgents, on the 8th of January, 1812, by a coup-de-main captured Fort San Cárlos. The officials fled to Masaya. Villa de Nicaragua—the city of Rivas in later times—and other towns at once adopted the same course.

Early in 1812, after the first excitement had become somewhat allayed, a board of government was organized in Leon, the members of which were Francisco Quiñones, Domingo Galarza, Cármen Salazar, and Basilio Carrillo. Bishop Fray Nicolás García Jerez was recognized as gobernador intendente by all the towns, and his authority was only limited in one point, namely, he was in no way to favor the deposed officials. The people of Granada resolved to send two deputies to the board.[I-31]

[Sidenote: REVOLUTION IN NICARAGUA.]

The royal officials at Masaya having called for assistance from Guatemala, Bustamante had 1,000 or more troops placed there under command of Sargento Mayor Pedro Gutierrez. The people of Leon had ere this accepted an amnesty from Bishop Jerez, and thereafter took no part in movements against the crown. Granada, more firm of purpose, resolved upon defence; caused intrenchments to be built to guard all avenues leading to the plaza, and mounted thereon twelve heavy cannon. A royalist force, under José M. Palomar, on the 21st of April approached Granada to reconnoitre, and reached the plazuela de Jalteva.[I-32] Early in the morning he opened a brisk fire on the town, and kept it up for several hours. After a parley, next day the citizens agreed to surrender, on Gutierrez solemnly pledging the names of the king and Bustamante, as well as his own, that they should in no wise be molested. But after the royal troops were allowed to enter the city on the 28th, Bustamante, ignoring the solemn guarantees pledged by his subordinate, ordered the arrest and prosecution of the leaders. The governor accordingly named Alejandro Carrascosa fiscal to prosecute the conspirators of Granada. The proceedings occupied two years, at the end of which the fiscal called for, and the court granted, the confiscation of the estates, in addition to the penalties awarded to those found guilty. Sixteen of the prisoners, as heads of the rebellion, were sentenced to be shot, nine were doomed to the chain-gang for life, and 133 to various terms of hard labor.[I-33] The sentence of death was not carried out, however. The condemned were taken to Guatemala, and thence transported to Spain, where the majority died as exiles. Four others were removed as convicts to Omoa and Trujillo. The survivors were finally released by a royal order of June 25, 1817.[I-34]

The conduct of the Leonese in leaving Granada to bear alone the consequences of the revolution had, as I remarked, a bad effect upon the country.[I-35] From that time dates a bitter feeling between Leon and Granada, and between Managua and Masaya on the one part and Granada on the other.[I-36]

Notwithstanding the existing grievances and the generally depressed condition of business, the people did not fail to respond to the calls from the home government upon all parts of the Spanish dominions for pecuniary aid to meet the enormous expenses of the war against Napoleon's forces, and other pressing demands. In 1812 there were collected and remitted as donations $43,538. The citizens of San Salvador also agreed to give $12,000 for 1812, and an equal sum in 1813, if they could obtain a certain reform for the benefit of indigo-planters.[I-37]

* * * * *

[Sidenote: FANATICISM.]

We have seen how the first steps toward independence failed. Nor could any other result have been expected from the degraded condition, socially and intellectually, of the masses. The people were controlled by fanaticism, in abject submission to king and clergy. Absurd doctrines and miracles were implicitly believed in; and every effort made to draw the ignorant people out of that slough was in their judgment treason and sacrilege, a violation of the laws of God, an attempt to rob the king of his rights; certain to bring on a disruption of social ties, and the wrath of heaven. The lower orders had been taught that freedom signified the reign of immorality and crime, while fealty to the sovereign was held a high virtue. Hence the daily exhibitions of humble faithfulness, the kneeling before the images of the monarch and before their bishops, and the more substantial proof of money gifts to both church and crown.[I-38]

The first efforts on behalf of emancipation were not wholly lost, as they led to definitive results in the near future. The next attempts also met with failure, and brought upon their authors the heavy hand of Bustamante. The first one, in 1813, was known as the Betlen conspiracy, which derived its name from the convent where the conspirators usually assembled. Much importance was given to this affair by the government and the loyalists. The meetings were presided over by the sub-prior Fray Ramon de la Concepcion, and were sometimes held in his cell, and at others in the house of Cayetano Bedoya, under the direction of Tomás Ruiz, an Indian.[I-39] All were sworn to secrecy, and yet the government suspected the plot, and arrested some persons who had the weakness to divulge the plan and the names of their associates.[I-40]

The conspirators, all of whom were men of character and good standing, soon found themselves in prison, excepting José Francisco Barrundia, who remained concealed six years, and afterward was one of the most prominent statesmen of Central America. Major Antonio del Villar was commissioned fiscal to prosecute the prisoners. He spared no one in his charges, and managed to bring into the meshes of the prosecution several persons who were innocent.[I-41] On the 18th of September, 1814, he asked the military court for the penalty of death, by garrote, against Ruiz, Víctor Castrillo, José Francisco Barrundia pro contumacia, and Joaquin Yúdice, who were hidalgos; and the same penalty, by hanging, against the sub-prior and ten others who were plebeians.[I-42] Ten years of hard labor in the chain-gang of the African possessions, and a life exile from America, were pronounced upon others against whom no guilt was proved. The prisoners were all set free, however, in 1819, under a royal order of the 28th of July, 1817.

[Sidenote: THE PLOT OF BETLEN.]

Among the men regarded as the most dangerous, and strongly suspected of being the real managers of the Betlen plot, was Mateo Antonio Marure, who had been confined two years in a dungeon for the part he took in the disturbances of 1811.[I-43] Bustamante dreaded his presence in Guatemala, and in 1814 despatched him as a prisoner to the supreme council of regency in Spain, with his reasons for this measure. After recounting the Betlen affair, and naming Marure as the real instigator and manager of it, he adds that the conspirators counted on him as a fearless man to carry it out, and that his bold language and writings rendered his sojourn in America a constant menace to Spanish interests.

Another and a worse planned attempt at revolution than the one of 1811 occurred in Salvador in 1814. The government quelled it, and the promoters were arrested, Manuel José Arce suffering an imprisonment of several years.[I-44]

* * * * *

The reader's attention is now called to matters concerning the capitanía general of Guatemala, which occupied the government both here and in Europe immediately before King Fernando's coup-d'état.

Bustamante, evidently hostile to constitutional government, and loath to suffer readily any curtailment of his quasi-autocratic powers, proclaimed, under the pressure of necessity, the national constitution, and permitted elections under it; but between this and allowing the diputaciones provinciales and ayuntamientos free action under the fundamental law, there was a wide chasm. He had no intention of tamely submitting to such innovations, whatever might be said of their merits in the abstract. In the first place, he postponed for three whole months the installation of the diputacion, and when it was installed, refused to honor the event with a high mass and te deum, which would have been the proper thing to do. Such a recognition of the importance of the diputacion might have shaken the faith of the populace in a one-man power. He next insisted on the diputacion having its sittings at the government house, where it would be at his mercy. He treated the body disrespectfully in several ways,[I-45] and as he could not make it subservient to his will, tried by all means in his power to destroy its influence and usefulness. In fact, he looked upon it as a mere consultative corporation, whose advice he might ask for or not, as suited his fancy. Lastly, he would not permit the acts of the diputacion to be published; and for the matter of that, there was no liberty of the press.

[Sidenote: END OF BUSTAMANTE'S RULE.]

These complaints were laid before the national córtes[I-46] for redress, coupled with a petition that the royal authority should remove Bustamante from office. But grievances were unredressed, and their author continued wielding power in the country several years more. Indeed, this was not to be wondered at. The Spanish government had rarely, if ever, shown inclination to do justice to the ruled against the high rulers it placed over them, or to punish the despotic acts of the latter. Residencias had of late become mere matters of form. If the complainants had wealth and influence at court, they might obtain the recall of the ruler obnoxious to them, but no other punishment. The prestige of authority must be upheld; such was the principle acted upon.[I-47] Guatemala was finally relieved of Bustamante's hated rule on the 28th of March, 1818.

The people of Central America, like the rest of the Spanish dominions, were soon invited to another view in the political kaleidoscope. Fernando VII., upon his release by Napoleon a few months after the treaty of Valençay,[I-48] returned to Spain without delay, and on arriving at Valencia, issued his manifesto of May 4, 1814, setting aside the constitution, and assuming the authority of an absolute sovereign. He did this with fair promises, which he carried out when and how it suited him.[I-49] Among many decrees issued by the monarch soon after, which were of interest to Central America, was one enjoining on the archbishop and bishops to see that their subordinates did their duty faithfully, and entertained only wholesome opinions. No associations or leagues were to be tolerated which might lead to a disturbance of the public peace; in other words, liberty and constitutional government were not to be thought of.[I-50] Another decree of June 17th, demanded of the deputies from America having in their possession petitions from their constituents to lay them before the royal government, in order that they might be acted upon. Several measures for the protection of morals and the advancement of civilization were also enacted.