Rafael Carrera and the Emergence of the Republic of Guatemala, 1821�1871

10. Arada

C H A P T E R T E N Arada CONSOLIDATING HIS POWER AT HOME also involved Carrera in affairs beyond the borders of Guatemala, for a genuine fear of his liberal opponents throughout the isthmus continued to preoccupy him. The relative strength and stability ofGuatemala in comparison to its isthmian neighbors gave him the ability to play an important role in the development of the entire isthmus during the remaining years of his life. It is not our intention here to detail the events in the other Central Americanstates, except asthey affect Guatemalan development, but in general, the struggles between liberals and conservatives continued, often violently, in the middle states of El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. The establishment of a moderate conservative administration in Costa Rica underJuan Rafael Mora in 1849, however, laid the foundation for a Guatemala-Costa Rica axis that would eventually help to bring a measure of unity to the whole region under conservative leadership. Costa Rican historians have often resisted the idea of Mora as a conservative, as they have developed a myth that all of Costa Rica's nineteenth-century leaders were liberals. They tend to emphasize Mora's friendliness to coffee cultivation, so long associated with the rise of the liberal party in Central America, and his willingness to allow liberal exiles from other states to reside there. Certainlyhis conservatism was considerably less reactionary than that of Carrera in Guatemala. Nevertheless, a closer examination of Mora's policies in Costa Rica suggests that he more properly should be classified as a moderate conservative. Certainly in foreign policy, of particular concern here, his close relations with both Great Britain and Guatemala suggest a conservativeallianceat the very least. 229 230 / The ConservativeCitadel Frederick Chatfield had, in fact, collaborated with the conservative upsurge . Chatfieldcultivated the conservatives throughout the isthmus, and his role is difficult to underestimate.1 Chatfield had been a player in Central American politics ever since he arrived in 1834, and British commercial hegemony had been rising on the isthmus since the eighteenth century. But the aggressive policy of Lord Palmerston peaked at mid-century, coincidentally with the return of Carrera to power in Guatemala. Upgrading of Chatfield's position from consul general to charge d'affaires in mid 1849 reflected London's concern for Central America and its reaction to the sudden entrance of U.S. interests on the isthmus.2 As Chatfield negotiated for British advantage, her majesty's naval presence became more evident on both coasts. Chatfield's aggressive machinations often exceeded his instructions and nearly brought Britain to war with the United States. Yet it is clear that Victoria's government sought to extend its commercial and strategic advantage, and hopes for an interoceanic canal heightened British interest in the isthmus.3 Britain's dominance in Central America following Spain's decline rested solidly on the strength of her merchant marine, her available capital, and her industrial growth. The roots of British colonialism in Central America date from the mid-seventeenth century.4 By 1850 the British had settlements all along the eastern coast of Central America, with particular strength at Belize, the BayIslands, and among the Miskito Indians of Nicaragua . Chatfield had furthered British ends by supporting conservatives in each state, thwarting the reorganization of the federation and building strong allianceswith the elites who werecoming to power. In Guatemala he developed especially close relations with a number of the local merchants and with Manuel F. Pavon. Yet Britishexpansionismhad also engendered nationalist reaction among Central Americans, a resentment that U.S. agents encouraged after the acquisition ofOregon and Californiastimulated U.S. interest in the isthmus and its potential interoceanic route. British seizure of SanJuan del Norte (Greytown), Nicaragua, on iJanuary 1848began several years of tense and sometimes violent confrontation between the two English-speaking powers in Central America. The British justified the seizure on the basis of their protection of the Mosquito Kingdom, but in reality they were looking toward control of the eastern terminus of the Nicaraguan transit route. Nicaraguan resistance proved inadequate, and by early February the British had driven up the SanJuan River and occupied San Carlos on Lake Nicaragua , forcing the Nicaraguans to recognize British control of the mouth of the river.5 The U.S. outcry was strong, especiallyafter the discovery of gold Arada / 231 in California later the same year intensified interest in a transit route. Liberals throughout Central America, but...