In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

C H A P T E R F O U R T E E N The PaxCarrera THE DEFEAT OF THE FILIBUSTERS in Nicaragua ushered in several years of relative stability and peace in Central America, in which Rafael Carrera was the most powerful caudillo on the isthmus. The conservatives enjoyed their most secure tenure in the nineteenth century, lasting until 1893 *n Nicaragua and until 1871 in Guatemala. Elsewhere, where liberal resurgence occurred more quickly, Carrera took steps to check its return to power. Thus, although the late 18505 and early i86os appear more stable than the earlier years, they were not without conflict, civil disorder, and warfare in Central America. But recognizing Guatemala as essentially a monarchy that had applied the authority necessary to bring order to the country, European observers often praised Carrera's regime as one of the most orderly in Latin America and suggested that other Latin American states might well follow the Guatemalan example.1 Upon the conclusion of the Nicaraguan war, Carrera's power was absolute , although he depended heavily upon the educated and prosperous conservative elite who ran the government and the economy. In a series of articles at that point, Jose Milla emphasized Guatemala's stability and the absence of the political intrigue that characterized less authoritarian countries . He attacked parliamentary systems where the government simply carried out the will of a legislature that he regarded as "irresponsible in fact and in law." The public looked for someone to blame for the injustices , the incompetence, and the failures, Milla charged, "and that system resulted in no one taking the blame for anything. The executive and his 299 300 / The ConservativeCitadel ministers blamed the Constitution and the laws, which tied their hands, or the Congresses which wouldn't let them govern." But, he declared, "today that doesn't happen. The government has the power for everything and is responsible for its actions. It neither flees responsibility nor shuns the judgment of public opinion, nor tries to blame others for what corresponds to itself." This made Guatemala unique in Spanish America. Guatemala, he claimed, was ruled on the basis of public confidence rather than violence . If the masses were discontented they would rebel, but instead they enjoyed increasing prosperity. Milla also pursued the argument that the form of government was of considerably less importance than its dedication to "real" progress and to carrying out the will of the people. He went on at length comparing the governments of Russia, Great Britain, the United States, and Chile, which in spite of exterior differences, all had a "conservative spirit and maintain the peculiar structure of their societies."2 The Gaceta de Guatemala had a virtual monopoly on news reporting and analysis in Guatemala, with tight government censorship and a generally negative attitude toward other newspapers. The government did not altogether prohibit them, however, and occasionally independent papers and pamphlets appeared and were allowed to exist as long as they did not criticize directly the government or the church. The liberal 1845free press act had been under suspension since 25 May 1849, but on 30 April 1852 Carrera revoked it altogether with adecree designed to "suppress the abuses that are committed by means of the press." This decree declared that no one could use any printing press without permission of the government and without posting a bond of from five hundred to two thousand pesos, the amount to be determined by the government, which could confiscate the press if these rules were not observed. Moreover, the editor of any periodical had to post a bond of a quantity unspecified in the decree, but to be determined in each case by the government as equal to the responsibility involved. Owners or directors of printing presses were prohibited from printing anything, signed or unsigned, subversive, seditious, or contrary to the honor or reputation of any person, under penalty of six months to a year in prison or a fine of five hundred to one thousand pesos. No publication could circulate without the approval of the authorities, and two copies of any publication had to be submitted to the Ministry of the Interior for approval.3 It was under such restricted conditions that Luciano Luna solicited permission to begin publication of El Museo Guatemalteco on 15October 1856. The Gaceta, the country's only newspaper at that moment, had just published a lengthy series of essays attacking the work of the French anarchist, [3.21.104.109] Project MUSE (2024...

Share