Page:Vol 4 History of Mexico by H H Bancroft.djvu/476

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
460
AMERICAN AFFAIRS IN SPAIN.

encia was reduced to nothing more than a superior court, and ceased to be the viceroy's council; all privileged courts must go out of existence; the special administrations of certain branches, such as drainage of the valley, were to be given in charge of the 'diputacion provincial.' Not the least important of these changes was that which placed the administration of justice exclusively in the ordinary courts, thus doing away with the junta de seguridad which had had exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings for treason. All these novelties would be fraught with serious consequences even in times of peace; it may well be imagined what the effect was with revolution raging throughout the land.

The most important innovations were yet to be put in practice, namely, freedom of the press, and election of the popular ayuntamientos to supersede the perpetual ones hitherto existing. Liberty of the press had been proclaimed, and a regulation decreed therefor by the córtes as early as the 10th of November, 1810, but the measure had not been carried into effect in Mexico. The regulation provided the appointment of a board in each province composed of five members, two of whom were to be ecclesiastics. From that board an appeal was allowed to a supreme board residing near the supreme government and composed of nine members. This supreme board had the power to nominate the members of the respect ive provincial boards, and its decisions were final.[1] It may easily be conceived how inconvenient this arrangement was of one single board for all Mexico, and how tardy must be the recourse to the supreme board in Spain. The revolution having broken out in Mexico when the law was issued, the viceroy, fear-

  1. To constitute the board in Mexico, the following persons were appointed: Archdeacon Beristain; José M. Fagoaga, a native of Spain, but in favor of Mexican independence; Pedro Fonte, who later became archbishop of Mexico; Guillermo Aguirre, regente of the audiencia; and Fernandez de San Salvador, some of whose writings about the revolution had been energetic, and others low and scurrilous. Alaman, Hist. Méj., iii. 281-5; Hernandez y Dávalos, Col. Doc., iv. 899-901; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, i. 374-5.