with the European Spaniards, and for several succeeding generations the ties of parentage prevailed over the distinctions of nationality. It has been claimed that even when these bonds of consanguinity were loosened by the ever increasing numbers of the Creole population and the divergence of interests, union between the two classes was still maintained as a security against insurrection of the native races. Indeed, Humboldt assigns this as a reason for the passive tolerance which the Spanish Americans exhibited during a long period of oppression.
But this was not all the reason; it was not in fact the chief or true reason. It had become so ingrained in their nature, the doctrine of loyalty, obedience to rulers, the divinity of kings, that to repudiate in any wise this idea was to defy the power of the almighty, and bring deserved death and the pains of hell. It was sin against God to disobey the king; and this rather than fear of uprisings held Mexico so long in servility. While such a state of things lasted, the Spaniards in Spain could deprive the Spaniards in America—or rather their descendants—of their legitimate political status, and aggrieve their rights with impunity; but none the less in due time did European pride and disdain provoke irritation and bitter jealousy. A mutual antipathy was thus gradually developed—an antipathy which was fostered by the action of the home government; for though by theory and law the privileges of all subjects of the crown were equal, in practice it was far otherwise.
Three prominent causes of disrupture were ever actively at work engendering hatred and thirst for independence. They were, in the inverse order of effect, social jealousies, exclusion from preferments, and the odious system of commercial monopoly enjoyed
