184
IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT.
Decrees fully as severe had frequently appeared in the course of Mexican revolutions[1] — instance only that by Juarez in January 1862 — so that this presented nothing very unusual. Unfortunately it was directed by a foreigner; and striking the national jealousy, as well as a rapidly growing sympathy among all classes, it was to rebound upon the author, to frame his own sentence. Maximilian's character was by no means cruel;[2] and in yielding here to what lay presented as an absolute necessity, he intended rather to convey a menace, as proved by more than one circumstance.[3]
- ↑ As shown in the preceding volume. Domenech brings together several instances, Hist. Alex., iii. 332-5, including the so-called mortuary law of Jan. 23, 1862. Orders for reprisals had been frequently issued before this by Juarists, to be carried out with bitter barbarity. Alluding to Gov. Escobedo's campaign in April in the north-eastern states, Castro reports calmly that he executed all prisoners 'para ejercer asi el derecho de retorsion.' La Estrella de Occid., July 7, 1865.
- ↑ Liberal journals had actually ridiculed his aversion for war and his ready leniency.
- ↑ Such as the modified decree of March 4th. The previous decrees of 1863 — 4 for treating guerrillas as robbers, and extending courts-martial, were little less severe, and could have been reaffirmed or applied. In fact, this would have been a better step. Further, Maximilian himself disapproved of a number of executions made in accordance with the decree, and gave orders to spare honorable soldiers, issuing on Nov. 4th a modified order to pass sentence of death only on leaders of armed bands, the rest being consigned to imprisonment, unless convicted of violence and robbery of person. Courts-martial were also restricted. Lefévre, Doc., ii. 290–3, seeks to distort the leniency of this decree. Rivera, the republican champion, is ready among others to regard the law rather as a menace, and to clear Maximilian of cruel intention. Hist. Jal., v. 658-9. The execution of General Arteaga and others in Michoacan was rather a retaliation by the commander there, notwithstanding the coloring applied in Legacion Mex., Circul., ii. 213-15, and which assisted to stir the U. S. to remonstrance. See U.S. Sen. Doc. 5, 39th Cong. Ist Sess., Chandler and Nye, Speeches, 1-8. Napoleon, while expressing his dissatisfaction with the decree, replied to the remonstrance that he was not responsible for Maximilian or his acts. Lefèvre, Doc., ii. 270-1; Legac. Mex., ii. 210-12. Kératry seeks to absolve Bazaine from connection with the decree, which he calls 'the suicide of the monarchy,' Max., 82-4; but the marshal issued on Oct. 11th a circular urging upon his officers the fulfilment of the decree, and that no quarter should be given. Maximilian claimed later, at his trial, that Bazaine not only added clauses to the decree, but actually suggested it, the ministry approving. Rivera, Hist. Jal., v. 660–3. In Lefévre, Doc. Maximiliano, ii. 266, 285-6, is given a list of sentences passed during the closing months, under the decree. The Belgians joined in protesting against it. La Voz de Méj., June 5, 1866; Iglesias, Interv., iii. 506-12. McSherry, Essays, 36-8, objects to the undeserved censure roused against Maximilian. Flint, Mex. under Max., 115, merely observes that the decree had an excellent effect. Arrangoiz attributes 'esta impolítica y bárbara ley'
delinquents were to be fined. All who surrendered before Nov. 15th received parcion.
