Ms Norj and to my dear classmates a pleasant evening to each and every one.
The topic of this debate is all about the 1872 Cavite Mutiny. As first speaker
ourside firmly believes that Cavite Mutiny was merely a labor issue.

   1st speaker ( Kara): The 1872 Cavite Mutiny was an important event that
has happened in Philippine history. This mutiny paved way for a momentous
1898, the year the Philippines acquired its Independence. The mutiny also
awakens the nationalist and patriot hearts of Filipinos which encouraged them
to fight for their independence.

We the affirmative section believe that the Filipino version of Cavite Mutiny is
more reliable and as the first speaker I will tackle various reasons why Filipino
version is more acceptable.The first reason is based on the account of Edmund
Plauchut a French adventurer and a journalist,vice president of the board of
directors of Association Internationale des Philippinistes in Paris who was then
residing in Manila and a witnessed of GOMBURZA execution, who wrote an
account in the Parisian periodical Revue des deux mondes (Review of the Two
Worlds) about the event which was then published in La Solidaridad in 1892.

This makes his account a primary source because he is present in the said
event and thus reliable and has credibility. His version of the mutiny stated
that the uprising was because of the labor dispute and unfair decisions of the
Governor General regarding the tributes and forced labor and that the three
martyr priests were innocent and even included in his account of the then
secret letter of Archbishop Meliton Martinez to the Spanish Regent, written in
1870, which contains the reasons for the protest.Additionally, he refers to the
three priests on their way to execution as being cheered by the Filipinos as
“those who were going to die for having dreamed of the independence of their
country” as well as the conversation of Bosaca, the executioner of Gomez and
Padre Gomez and after the said protest, Plauchut continued to relay that the
Archbishop of Manila sent an invitation to P. Jose Burgos and his friends to
sign a pledge of fidelity and loyalty to Spain.

The second reason is the account of Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de

Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher. His version corroborated with
Plauchut’s version that the mutiny was because of the dissatisfaction of
Filipinos with the abolition of their privileges and that just reacted tthe harsh
policy of the new governor-general, Rafael de Izquierdo, who whimsically
terminated the old-time privileges such as the exemption from paying annual
tribute and from rendering forced labor or Polo y Servicio and not to overthrow
the Spanish rule.

They are too abusive of their power because they knew that we do not have the
power to fight. We Filipino are called Indios and know nothing but when it
comes to rights we fight for it. Spaniards are taking advantage of us in our own
land. We are forced to do labors and everything is not enough for them and
that was really injustice.Because of this, the will of the Filipinos to fight for
their freedom got stronger that they initiate an uprising.

Maybe this uprising is not a good way on fighting for what is right and just but
Filipinos left with no choice but to fight and give a shot in fighting their
work. Filipinos spread out the wrongdoings of Spanish. But is it bad to fight for
your rightsmore especially to your own country whether you know from the
start you have small chances on winning it? If only the Spanish treat us fairly,
there will be no mutiny but since they are unfair it forces the Filipino to do
what they think is right.

I do not speak because I am a Filipino but to the fact how Spanish see us as a
laborer and not a human. Yes, we do not have the power to rule our country,
accept it or not we have nothing to do with it but manipulating us in our own
land, that was too much. They are greedy! We Filipinos do not deserve this, we
are humans. In conclusion, I stand and believe at the version of the Filipino

Interpolation 1st    Speaker-  Affirmative (Lluvia): The  account of   Montero

that  the  speaker  of  theopposition mentioned, although considered as first
account or primary source is a biased one.Given that he is one of those
Spaniards who have position in the government.

The data of his account   could  be one-sided  and bias.   He   neither  

considered   nor   empathized   to the generalpublic’s feelings.  He  was  a
Spaniard  and  thus he  perceives,  represents and  stands  with theSpanish
community.

Just because it is a primary source doesn’t mean that it’s credible. Second,the
uprising is   not   an   act  of revolt  but   merely  an answer to  the   unfair  
government  of theSpaniards. In order to be free from this kind of government,
of course you have to take care ofthe hindrances. Besides,  it is  the duty of a
true patriot to protect his  country from its cruelgovernment.

Lastly, she stated is that the rebels are already planning the uprising even
beforegeneral Rafael Izquierdo became the successor of general La Torre.   That
is wrong becauseFilipinos did not plan any uprising even before just like what I
said earlier they initiated uprisingbecause it was unfair for them to work in the
amount that will be given to them is not enough forthe time that they invest.

2nd  speaker (Zel):  In line with this we stand that the Filipinoversion is more
reliable because of the work of Antonio Regidor  which appeared in 1900 in
theMadrid newspaper Filipinas ante Europa.

Obviously an account from one of those most involvedin the reformist

movement prior to 1872 is of the greatest value from the point of view of the
knowledge possessed by its author.
 He stated that the mutiny was the result of a plan originatingfrom a meeting of
leading friars of all the orders, at which it was decided to create such an
occasion so as to bring about the elimination of the anti-friar reformists,
particularly the leadersof the Filipino secular clergy.

The plot is attributed by Regidor to Fathers Castro and Treserra ofthe

Dominicans,  Father Huertas of the Franciscans, Father Herrero of the
Augustinians, andFather Cuartero of the Recoletos.

We stand that the Filipino version of Cavite munity is morereliable and it tells
about all the facts and issues that happened in that era, it includes
injusticesact that happen when Spaniard killed more than 200 local soldiers
including civilians that is notpart of the mutiny just like the GomBurZa.

The Spaniards executed the soldiers that has a lower ranking local soldiers
which is Filipino soldiers and the other soldiers that participated in themutiny
that have a high rank which is the Spaniards because only Spaniards are
allowed to sit,led, and to have a higher position in that time and that is also
one of the injustice.

The Spaniards don't have a fair treatment to Filipinos. The higher ranking
Spaniards or officers are thrown awayto different countries instead of executing
them, they just thrown away in different countries as apunishment.  It shows
here the unfair practices and injustice acts. Filipinos don’t deserve to betreated
as a slave, Filipinos are not a tools, if only the Spaniards gave the all the rights
and needsof Filipinos there would not be mutiny or revolution. If only the
Spaniards treated Filipinos fairlyand just. As a second speaker i stand and
believe at the version of the Filipino.

Interpolation (2nd  speaker- Affirmative side (Lluvia):  The written account

that you mentioned fromIzquierdo is none other than a biased, one-sided
version of a story, which of course they wouldeasily  consider   as  an  official 
statement  given  that   the Spaniards  are the   ones who   rule
thegovernment,   while   the   Filipinos  are   being   oppressed.   Also,  
Izquierdo’s   report   is   unreliablebecause there are errors on said document
just  like how he  address   that the rebels "barelyreached 200 men." In his
later account, nevertheless, he specified less: 38 artillerymen and 54marines.

3rd speaker ( Nica):  We, the affirmative side strongly stand the theFilipino  
version   is   more   reliable.   Our   last   reason   for   this   is   the  execution
of   three   priest (GomBurZa).

  The   Spaniard   used   this   mutiny   as   a   cloth   to   execute   those   who

are   up   for governmental reforms like secularization in which was led by
Padre Burgos. The three priestswere innocent but were executed.
We are already aware of what all Filipino suffered under thehands of Spaniards
rulings which Jose Rizal also provides an evidence about it, providing hisbooks
El Filibusterismo and Noli Me Tangere.

The Spanish government did not know and didnot want to know anything
about the friars in the Philippines. Anyone who act with
contradictingimplication   about   Spain   government,   considered   as  
personal   enemies   as   enemies   of   Spain,handling them over to the
constabulary to be tortured. When Father Burgos as the leader of Filipino
secular clergy, appealed to the Spanish throne for the recovery of the parishes
which theSpanish   government   had   taken   from   them   and   given   to  
the   friars,   confining   themselves   to missionary work.

Although Burgos and his companions, Gomez and Zamora, had worked for
therights, of a particular class and not of the people as a whole, yet they asked
for justice and diedfor having asked. Those in authority who refused to do what
the friars wished lost their jobs, andthe most liberal minister in Spain, when in
powers did whatever the friars wanted.

The friars wanted to make an example of Burgos and his companions so that
the Filipinos should be afraidto go against them from then on.

But that patent injustice, that official crime, aroused not fear buthatred of the
friars and of the regime that supported them, and a profound sympathy and
sorrowfor the victims. GomBurZa are proud of being executed disregards the
reason that Filipino are with the control of Spaniards but instead they believe
that they are innocent and they believe that by means of their execution,
Filipino’s will become free and this colonization will end. They accept the death,
as sentenced with them with their faith.

Interpolation 3rd  speaker  affirmative (Lluvia):  The   statement  of   Octavo

is  from  the  report   of  generalIzquierdo  which  again, cannot  be  said  as 
reliable  because  it  could  be  manipulated  and  one   sided.Therefore, we
conclude that the Cavite Mutiny happened because of the unfair labor
practices that theGovernor General implemented which then resulted to the
uprising of us, Filipinos to fight for our rightsand to get our independence.
Thus, we would like to end our stand with a quote from Martin LutherKing  
saying   that,   “Oppressed   people   cannot   remain   oppressed   forever.  
The   yearning   for   freedom eventually manifests itself.”