The Philippines A Century Hence by José Rizal (always you kirsty moseley TXT) 📖
- Author: José Rizal
- Performer: -
Book online «The Philippines A Century Hence by José Rizal (always you kirsty moseley TXT) 📖». Author José Rizal
“From the very beginning, when I first had notice of what was being planned, I opposed it, and demonstrated its absolute impossibility. This is the fact, and witnesses to my words are now living. I was convinced that the scheme was utterly absurd, and, what was worse, would bring great suffering.
“I did even more. When later, against my advice, the movement materialized, of my own accord I offered not alone my good offices, but my very life, and even my name, to be used in whatever way might seem best, toward stifling the rebellion; for, convinced of the ills which it would bring, I considered myself fortunate, if, at any sacrifice, I could prevent such useless misfortunes. This equally is of record. My countrymen, I have given proofs that I am one most anxious for liberties for our country, and I am still desirous of them. But I place as a prior condition the education of the people, that by means of instruction and industry our country may have an individuality of its own and make itself worthy of these liberties. I have recommended in my writings the study of civic virtues, without which there is no redemption. I have written likewise (and repeat my words) that reforms, to be beneficial, must come from above, that those which come from below are irregularly gained and uncertain.
“Holding these ideas, I cannot do less than condemn, and I do condemn, this uprising,—as absurd, savage, and plotted behind my back,—which dishonors us Filipinos and discredits those who could plead our cause. I abhor its criminal methods and disclaim all part in it, pitying from the bottom of my heart the unwary who have been deceived.
“Return, then, to your homes, and may God pardon those who have worked in bad faith.
José Rizal.
“Fort Santiago, December 15th, 1896.
The Spanish judge-advocate-general commented upon the address:
“The preceding address to his countrymen which Dr. Rizal proposes to direct to them, is not in substance the patriotic protest against separatist manifestations and tendencies which ought to come from those who claim to be loyal sons of Spain. According to his declarations, Don José Rizal limits himself to condemning the present insurrectionary movement as premature and because he considers now its triumph impossible, but leaves it to be inferred that the wished-for independence can be gained by procedures less dishonorable than those now being followed by the rebels, when the culture of the people shall be a most valuable asset for the combat and guarantee its successful issue.
“For Rizal the question is of opportuneness, not of principles nor of aims. His manifesto might be summarized in these words: ‘Because of my proofs of the rebellion’s certainty to fail, lay down your arms, my countrymen. Later I shall lead you to the Promised Land.’
“So far from being conducive to peace, it could advance in the future the spirit of rebellion. For this reason the publication of the proposed address seems impolitic, and I would recommend to Your Excellency to forbid its being made public, but to order that all these papers be forwarded to the Judge Advocate therein and added to the case against Rizal.”
“Manila, December 19th, 1896.”
These “Additions” were really Doctor Rizal’s defence before the court martial which condemned him and pretended to have tried him, on the charge of having organized revolutionary societies and so being responsible for the rebellion.
The only counsel permitted him, a young lieutenant selected from the junior Spanish army officers, risked the displeasure of his superiors in the few words he did say, but his argument was pitiably weak. The court scene, where Rizal sat for hours with his elbows corded back of him while the crowd, unrebuked by the court, clamored for his death, recalls the stories of the bloody assizes of Judge Jeffreys and of the bloodthirsty tribunals of the Reign of Terror. He was compelled to testify himself, was not permitted to hear the testimony given for the prosecution, no witness dared favor him, much less appear in his behalf, and his own brother had been tortured, with the thumbscrews as well as in other mediaeval and modern ways, in a vain endeavor to extort a confession implicating the Doctor.
Don José Rizal y Alonso respectfully requests the Court Martial to consider well the following circumstances:
First.—Re the rebellion. From July 6th, 1892, I had absolutely no connection with politics until July 1st of this year when, advised by Don Pio Valenzuela that an uprising was proposed, I counselled against it, trying to convince him with arguments. Don Pio Valenzuela left me convinced apparently; so much so that instead of later taking part in rebellion, he presented himself to the authorities for pardon.
Secondly.—A proof that I maintained no political relation with any one, and of the falsity of the statement that I was in the habit of sending letters by my family, is the fact that it was necessary to send Don Pio Valenzuela under an assumed name, at considerable cost, when in the same steamer were travelling five members of my family besides two servants. If what has been charged were true, what occasion was there for Don Pio to attract the attention of any one and incur large expenses? Besides, the mere fact of Sr. Valenzuela’s coming to inform me of the rebellion proves that I was not in correspondence with its promoters for if I had been then I should have known of it, for making an uprising is a sufficiently serious matter not to hide it from me. When they took the step of sending Sr. Valenzuela, it proves that they were aware that I knew nothing, that is to say, that I was not maintaining correspondence with them. Another negative proof is that not a single letter of mine can be shown.
Thirdly.—They cruelly abused my name and at the last hour wanted to surprise me. Why did they not communicate with me before? They might say likewise that I was, if not content, at least resigned to my fate, for I had refused various propositions which a number of people made me to rescue me from that place. Only in these last months, in consequence of certain domestic affairs, having had differences with a missionary padre, I had sought to go as a volunteer to Cuba. Don Pio Valenzuela came to warn me that I might put myself in security, because, according to him, it was possible that they might compromise me. As I considered myself wholly innocent and was not posted on the details of the movement (besides that I had convinced Sr. Valenzuela) I took no precautions, but when His Excellency, the Governor General, wrote me announcing my departure for Cuba, I embarked at once, leaving all my affairs unattended to. And yet I could have gone to another part or simply have staid in Dapitan for His Excellency’s letter was conditional. It said—“If you persist in your idea of going to Cuba, etc.” When the uprising occurred it found me on board the warship “Castilla”, and I offered myself unconditionally to His Excellency. Twelve or fourteen days later I set out for Europe, and had I had an uneasy conscience I should have tried to escape in some port en route, especially Singapore, where I went ashore and when other passengers who had passports for Spain staid over. I had an easy conscience and hoped to go to Cuba.
Fourthly.—In Dapitan I had boats and I was permitted to make excursions along the coast and to the settlements, absences which lasted as long as I wished, at times a week. If I had still had intentions of political activity, I might have gotten away even in the vintas of the Moros whom I knew in the settlements. Neither would I have built my small hospital nor bought land nor invited my family to live with me.
Fifthly.—Some one has said that I was the chief. What kind of a chief is he who is ignored in the plotting and who is notified only that he may escape? How is he chief who when he says no, they say yes?
—As to the “Liga”:
Sixthly.—It is true that I drafted its By-Laws whose aims were to promote commerce, industry, the arts, etc., by means of united action, as have testified witnesses not at all prejudiced in my favor, rather the reverse.
Seventhly.—The “Liga” never came into real existence nor ever got to working, since after the first meeting no one paid any attention to it, because I was exiled a few days later.
Eighthly.—If it was reorganized nine months afterwards by other persons, as now is said, I was ignorant of the fact.
Ninthly.—The “Liga” was not a society with harmful tendencies and the proof is the fact that the radicals had to leave it, organizing the Katipunan which was what answered their purposes. Had the “Liga” lacked only a little of being adapted for rebellion, the radicals would not have left it but simply would have modified it; besides, if, as some allege, I am the chief, out of consideration for me and for the prestige of my name, they would have retained the name of “Liga”. Their having abandoned it, name and all, proves clearly that they neither counted on me nor did the “Liga” serve their purposes, otherwise they would not have made another society when they had one already organized.
Tenthly.—As to my letters, I beg of the court that, if there are any bitter criticisms in them, it will consider the circumstances under which they were written. Then we had been deprived of our two dwellings, warehouses, lands, and besides all my brothers-in-law and my brother were deported, in consequence of a suit arising from an inquiry of the Administracion de Hacienda (tax-collecting branch of the government), a case in which, according to our attorney (in Madrid), Sr. Linares Rivas, we had the right on our side.
Eleventhly.—That I have endured exile without complaint, not because of the charge alleged, for that was not true, but for what I had been able to write. And ask the politico-military commanders of the district where I resided of my conduct during these four years of exile, of the town, even of the very missionary parish priests despite my personal differences with one of them.
Twelfthly.—All these facts and considerations destroy the little-founded accusation of those who have testified against me, with whom I have asked the Judge to be confronted. Is it possible that in a single night I was able to line up all the filibusterism, at a gathering which discussed commerce, etc., a gathering which went no further for it died immediately afterwards? If the few who were present had been influenced by my words they would not have let the “Liga” die. Is it that those who formed part of the “Liga” that night founded the Katipunan? I think not. Who went to Dapitan to interview me? Persons entirely unknown to me. Why was not an acquaintance sent, in whom I would have had more confidence? Because those acquainted with me knew very well that I had forsaken politics or that, realizing my views on rebellion, they must have refused to undertake a mission useless and unpromising.
I trust that by these considerations I have demonstrated that neither did I found a society for revolutionary purposes, nor have I taken part since in others, nor have I been concerned in the rebellion, but that
Comments (0)