The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1874-02-21
N'tthlp &jtrald
.,rrlr,s clilnam rnnrnnra.

iounor, have rlthor bought or are nr2"ilhl- l
Ing 1r n Catholic cmhodual- seized hy she ,
,lexlcnn government from the Catholic
church purposes. II II right Is
Il high moral standard this hnylngo Of prop I
lrty robbed from another Because The /
Mexican government, with the strong ar1n Of +,
mower, was nblo 10 take by force the churches
Of the Catholics, In the city of Mexico, does
IL dive the government feo simple title to
tlcme Has any government any more rlght
TO rob and plumber It's own citizens than one
citizen has to rob and plumber another lslt
right TO purchase stolen property knowing
II TO be stolen?-l Houston Age
Our friends of the Houston Age, IN
the above brief paragraph, fall into an
error common in the United States In
regard to Mexican affairs. 1t is apnin-
full fact TO those well informed on the
subject, that the true history of the
struggle in which Mexico has been in
yolved since 1910 is so little understood
in this and other countries. The friends
of liberty in that country have never
had a fair audience Of the outside
world to hear their version of the is
sues at stake. But rather, the Demo-
cratic-Republican party ("Los Liber-
alesn) have been Unfortunately |
classei with the general turbulence of
the nation, and no line of demarcation
drawn in foreign minds between the
adherents of the old despotism and
those advanced patriots who have he
roically struggled for n half century to
liberate their people from slavery
equal to any in the dark ages. TO an
swer the tart statement of the Age and
let all see its injustice, as well as its in
correctness, the history of Mexico, at
least from the great struggle of 1873,
would have to be written. The merest
glance at facts is all we can give.
During the three hundred years of
Spanish domination in MeXico-from
1921 to 1S21-the natives of the coun-
try We're held in the most calling
chains of despotism, both in church
and state. All civil, military and
ecclesiastical offices and beneiices were
bestowed on native born Spaniards, to
the exclusion not only of the MeXicans
proper, but to a great extent of the
creole descendants of Spaniards. Vast
religious establishments churches,
chapels monastic houses, converts,
etc.--were erected through the sweat
and toll of the natives. The church,
as close corporation, enjoyed extra
ordinary privileges. They possessed
t'fueros" or exclusive privileges of
taxation to such an extent as, added to
the eXactions of the Spanish govern
ment, through its viceroys and royal
audiencies,, over and above the steal
ings, q la carpetbaggers, to make the
great toiling multitude the most miser-
able serfs on earth. The few natives
allowed to enter the priestly office were
assigned to the poorest villages on mere
pittances, while the imported ecclesi-
astics, with here and there glorious
exception, revelled in fatness. The
ecclesiastical establishment came to
own about one-third of the real estate
of the whole country, and one-half of
that in the city of Mexico. 1t receipts
from rents, special taxes and pious leg
acies of doubtful morality, up to within
a few years hack, were SO great that it
could at any time foment revolution or
revive the waning fortunes of any am
bilious chief willing to perpetuate its
privileges at the expense of liberty.
So it came to pass that the first pa
triOt to raise the standard of liberty in
1910, was q native Mexican priest, the
Immortal Hidalgo, curate of Dolores.
The most distinguished generals of the
ten years revolution, Morelos and
Matamoras, were native priests. All
three were captured and put to death
by the Spanish royalists. The native
priesthood have largely been in SYM
patty with the people and liberty all
these dreary years.
The domestic struggle between LID
erty and despotism, assuming form in
1923, continued till the triumph of free
dom in 1857. Then came the inter-
vention, with. five years foreign assis-
lance to the party in favor of an impe-
rial government, its failure, and at last,
in 1867 and for the first time in 1856
years, the natives of the country came
into full and absolute possession of
their own government, under free
constitution, guaranteeing civil and
religious liberty and equal rights to
all. So stands the case to-day.
But for nearly forty years past the
Liberal party have held to the doctrine
that the ecclesiastical establishments,
having been built by the money and
toll of the people, were the peoples
property, and as their vast wealth and
influence had been persistently used to
perpetuate the slavery of the people,
and as thousands of these establish
ments and so-called church estates were
lying idle and falling to ruin, the peo-
ple's government, as trustee of the
nation, should secularize the property
not used for religious purposes, and sell
it to help pay the revolutionary debt,
and, at the same time, open the way to
for the toiling multitude.
No church used for worship was to be
touched, nor any college or seminary.
This process was largely carried out in
1858, 1859, 1860 and 1861. Even Maxi
milan, the imported head of the. i'm
perialists, deemed this course not only
wise, but national necessity, and ac-
tually set apart many leagues of this
land-once the seat of
vast wealth in mansion houses and
sugar estates--for sale to American and
European colonists.
mn - ..l, 4. |