ACTIVITY 2: WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CAVITE MUTINY?

1. PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPT FROM MONTERO’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE MUTINY

Source: Jose Montero y Vidal, “Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872” in Gregorio Zaide and
Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990),
269-273.

The abolition of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from the
tribute was, according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were, however, other causes.

The Spanish revolution which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on by an
unbridled press against monarchical principles, attentatory [sic] of the most sacred respects towards the
dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and pamphlets; the speeches and preaching of
the apostles of these new ideas in Spain; the outbursts of the American publicists and the criminal policy
of the senseless Governor whom the Revolutionary government sent to govern the Philippines, and who
put into practice these ideas were the determining circumstances which gave rise, among certain
Filipinos, to the idea of attaining the their independence. It was towards this goal that they started to
work, with the powerful assistance of a certain section of the native clergy, who out of spite towards
friars, made common cause with the enemies of the mother country.

At various times but especially in the beginning of year 1872, the authorities received
anonymous communication with the information that a great uprising would break out against the
Spaniards, the minute the fleet at Cavite left for the South, and that all would be assassinated,
conspiracy had been going on since the days of La Torre with utmost secrecy. At times, the principal
leaders met either in the house of Filipino Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, or in that of the native
curate of Bacoor, the soul of the movement, whose energetic character and immense wealth enabled
him to exercise a strong influence.

2. PRIMARY SOURCES: EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL REPOST OF GOVERNOR IZQUIERDO ON

THE CAVITE MUTINY OF 1872

Source: Rafael Izquirdo, “Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 281-286.

It seems definite that the insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the
mestizos and native lawyers, and by those known here as abogadillos...The instigators, to carry out their
criminal project, protested against the injustice of the government in not paying the provinces for their
tobacco crop, and against the usury that some practice in documents that the Finance department gives
crop owners who have to sell them at a loss. They encouraged the rebellion by pretesting what they
called the injustice of having obliged the workers in the Cavite arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1
and render personal service, from which they were formerly exempted...
 Up to now it has not been clearly determined if they planned to establish a monarchy or
a republic, because the Indios have no word in their language to describe this different form of
government, whose head in Filipino would be called hari; but it turns out that they would place

at the head of the government a priest... that the head selected would be D. Jose Burgos, or D.
Jacinto Zamora...

Such is... the plan of the rebels, those who guided them, and the means they counted
upon for its realization.

It is apparent that the accounts underscore the reason for the “revolution”: the abolition of
privileges enjoyed by the workers of the Cavite arsenal such as exemption from the payment of tribute
and being employed in polos y servicios, or force labor. They also identified other reasons which
seemingly made the issue a lot more serious, which include the presence of the native clergy, who, out
of spite against the Spanish friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels. Izquierdo, in an obviously
biased report, highlighted that attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines to
install a new “hari” in the persons of Fathers Burgors and Zamora. According to him, native clergy
attracted supporters by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight would not fail because they
had God’s support, aside from promises of lofty rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks in the
army.

In the Spaniard’s accounts, the event of 1872 was premeditated, and was part of a big
conspiracy among the educated leaders, mestizos, lawyers, and residents of Manila and Cavite. They
allegedly plan to liquid ate high- ranking Spanish officers, and then kill the friars. The signal they
identified among these conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the rockets fired from Intramuros.

The accounts detail that on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the
Virgin of Loreto, and came with it were some fireworks display. The Cavitenos allegedly mistook this as
the signal to commence with the attack. The 200-men contingent led by Sergeant Lamadrid attacked
Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal. Izquierdo, upon learning of the attack, ordered the
reinforcement of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt. The “revolution” was easily crushed,
when the Manilenos who were expected to aid the Cavitenos did not arrive. Leaders of the plot were
killed in the resulting skirmish, while Fathers Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora were tried by a court-martial
and sentenced to be executed. Others who were implicated such as Joaquin de Tavera, Antonio Ma.
Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa, and other Filipino lawyers were suspended from the practice of law, arrested
and sentenced to life imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of
artillery and ordered the creation of an artillery force composed exclusively by Peninsulares.

On 17 February 1872, the GOMBURZA were executed to serve as a threat to Filipinos never to
attempt to fight the Spaniards again.

3. PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPT FROM PARDO DE TAVERA’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITEMUTINY

Source: Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, “Filipino Version of Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and SoniaZaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila; National Book Store, 1990),274—280.

This uprising among soldiers in Cavite was used a powerful level by the Spanish
residents and by the friars...the General Government in Madrid had announced its intention to
deprive the friars in these islands of powers of intervention in the matters of civil government
and of the direction and management of the university... it was due to these facts and promises
that the Filipinos had great hopes of an improvement in the affairs of their country, while the
friars, on the other hand, feared that their power in the colony would soon be complete a thing
of the past.

...Up to that time there had been no intention of secession from Spain, and the only
aspiration of the people was to secure the material and education advancement of the
country...

According to this account, the incident was merely a multiply by Filipino soldiers and laborers of
the Cavite arsenal to the dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies of Izquiedor, such as the
abolition of privileges and the prohibition of the founding of the school of arts and trades of Filipinos,
which the General saw as a smokescreen to creating a political club.

Tavera is of the opinion that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a way to
address other issues by blowing out proportion the isolated mutiny attempt. During this time, the
Central Government in Madrid was planning to deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention in the
matters of civil government and direction and management of educational institutions. The friars
needed something to justify their continuing dominance in the country, and the mutiny provided such
opportunity.

However, the Central Spaniards Government introduced an educational decree fusing sectarian
schools run by the friars into a school called the Philippine Institute. The decree aimed to improve the
standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in these schools to be filled by
competitive examinations, an improvement welcomed by most Filipinos.

4. PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPTS FROM PLAUCHUT’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE MUTINY

Source: Edmund Plauchut, “The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and the Martyrdom of Gom-Bur-Za,” in the
Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National
Book Store, 1990), 251-268.

General La Torre... created a junta composed of high officials...including some friars and six
Spanish officials...At the same time there was created by the government in Madrid a committee to
investigate the same problems submitted to the Manila committee. When the two finished work, it was
found that they came to the same conclusions. Here is the summary of the reforms they considered
necessary to introduced:

1. Changes in tariff rates at customs, and the methods of collection.

 2. Removal of surcharges on foreign importations.
3. Reduction of export fees.
4. Permission for foreigners to reside in the Philippines, buy real state, enjoy freedom of
worship, and operate commercial transports flying the Spanish flag.
5. Establishment of an advisory council to inform the Minister of Overseas Affairs in
Madrid on the necessary reforms to be implemented.
6. Changes in primary and secondary education.
7. Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the Philippines, rendering
unnecessary the sending home of short-term civil officials every time there is a change
of ministry.
8. Study of direct-tax system.
9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly.

The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo...put a sudden end to all dreams of reforms... the
prosecutions instituted by the now Governor General were probably expected as a result of the bitter
disputes between the Filipino clerics and the friars. Such a policy must really end in a strong desire on
the part of the other to repress cruelly.

In regard to schools, it was previously decreed that there should be in Manila a Society of Arts
and Trades to be opened in March of 1871...to repress the growth of liberal teachings, General Izquierdo
suspended the opening of the school...the day previous to the scheduled inauguration...

The Filipinos had a duty to render service on public roads construction and pay taxes every
year. But those who were employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the engineering shops and
arsenal of Cavite, were exempted from this obligation from time immemorial...Without preliminaries of
any kind, a decree by the Governor withdrew from such old employees their retirement privileges and
declassified them into the ranks of those who worked on public roads.

The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy to cement their dominance, which
had started to show cracks because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They showcased the mutiny as
part of a greater conspiracy in the Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the Spanish Government.
Unintentionally, and more so, prophetically, the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 resulted in the martyrdom of
GOMBUZA, paved the way to the revolution culminating in 1898.

5. What are the similarities and differences among the 4 accounts?

All of the accounts said and demonstrated that the Cavite mutiny actually occurred. According
to Trinidad Pardo de Tavera's testimony, Filipinos are being abused and their rights are being infringed,
resulting in a popular uprising against the government. According to Jose Montero y Vidal, the Filipino
people support authorities such as priests as government leaders, and it is on this basis that they
proceeded to remove the Spanish government. Meanwhile, according to Rafael Izquirdo, when the
GOMBURZA were executed, their statements before their death inflamed and galvanized the Filipinos to
retaliate against the Spanish rule. Furthermore, while the Spaniards continued to speculate about
revolution plans, it was publicized by the media, giving Filipinos the impression that a revolution was
imminent. The mutiny was sparked by Governor-general Rafael Izquidero y Gutierrez's imposition of
personal levies and forced labor on the soldiers and workers, according to French historian Edmund
Plauchut.

6. What is the significance of tearing the cedulas? What did the cedula signify?

During Spain's 300-year rule, Filipinos were labeled "Indios," and the cedula serves as a
reminder of the conquerors' cruelty. It's a piece of paper that represents the oppression of the
Spaniards, and ripping it signifies the beginning of our fight for freedom and independence.

7. How does the National Historical Commission of the Philippines verify or authenticate those
historical accounts?

The National Historical Institute (NHI) has initiated an investigation into the veracity of the
following accounts, based on an article published on the website of the National Commission for Culture
and the Arts (NCCA) titled "In Focus: Balintawak: The Cry for a Nationwide Revolution." After authorities
compared and reconciled Dr. Pio Valenzuela's statement with the other stories, it was determined that
the most likely location and date of the historical event were those described in Dr. Pio Valenzuela's
account. President Diosdado Macapagal eventually signed a law mandating that the Cry be
commemorated on August 23 every year, using Pugad Lawin as the site.

8. Watch the video 'Xiao Time: Ang Unang Sigaw ng Himagsikan sa Balintawak, Caloocan' thru
the link below, posted by PTV, then answer the following questions:

a. What does the video tell you about the many different accounts?

According to the video, Bonifacio convened a first meeting on Balintawak to tear the
cedula for the country's first fight for our independence. Historians, on the other hand, have
differing accounts of where the initial cry of freedom should have come from. It’s either on
Balintawak (August 26), Kangkong (August 22), Pugad Lawin (August 23), or Bahay Toro (August
24). All of these locations, however, are in Balintawak or Caloocan. So, if we combine all of their
statements, we can deduce that Bonifacio and his team were not in the same place at the same
time to avoid the Spaniards. As a result, historians have differing perspectives on the
occurrence.

b. Is there a chance that all sources are valid?

There's a possibility that all of the sources are correct. The only issue is that they lack
sufficient sources and supporting information. Primary sources that caught the genuine events
of the time are the best evidence. Perhaps they haven't done enough research into the subject's
history.
 c. What other information on the revolution did you learn from the video?

What I also learnt from the video is that the first cry of the incident is a fiesta, indicating
that the game has not yet begun. However, a hundred individuals were slaughtered in Tandang
Sora's yard following that. That's why Bonifacio convened a gathering to put the war into action
and elect him as the president. And according to his last message, “Kalayaan o kaalipinan,
kabuhayan o kamatayan. Mga kapatid, hali na’t ating kalabanin ang mga baril at kanyon upang
kamtin ang sariling kalayaan.” Furthermore, the war of Katipuneros is not always a loss. They
also won in the war at Banlak, which took place on August 35. As a result, I realized that in order
to achieve our own independence and justice, we must face obstacles with courage and
confidence.

REFERENCE:

 Ediza, K. (n.d.). PDFCOFFEE. Retrieved from pdfcoffee.com: https://pdfcoffee.com/cavite-

mutiny-case-studydocx-pdf-free.html

 Limlingan, D. (2013). SunStar Philippines. Retrieved from sunstar.com.ph:

https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/279100/Lifestyle/Limlingan-The-Cedula-and-the-National-
ID-System#:~:text=The%20cedula%20is%20a%20reminder,fight%20for%20freedom%20and
%20independence.

 Santos, J. D. (2021 ). StuDocu. Retrieved from studocu.com:

https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/bulacan-state-university/readings-in-ph/page-121-
readings-in-philippine-history-1st-year/17287698

 Wikipedia. (2021). Retrieved from wikipedia.org:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1872_Cavite_mutiny