Spain’s 1876 Constitution and the Canovista System
Understanding Spain’s 1876 Constitution
Source Analysis and Historical Context
Type of Source and Primary Nature
The document in question is a primary source, specifically the Spanish Constitution of 1876. It is a public and political document. The articles referenced within it pertain to the state’s confessional nature, fundamental freedoms (expression, assembly, association, and petition), and the legislative branch’s division into two houses of parliament: the Congress and the Senate.
Historical Context of the 1876 Constitution
This Constitution was drafted six years after the Democratic Constitution of 1869. It was designed to provide stability to the political system and achieve long-term duration, despite the challenges it faced during its operation.
Analysis of Key Articles: 11, 13, and 19
- Article 11 establishes the confessional nature of the state, while also allowing for religious freedom. However, it prohibited public demonstrations of non-Catholic cults, reflecting a policy of “tolerance of worship” rather than full religious liberty.
- Article 13 addresses fundamental freedoms, specifically:
- Freedom of expression without prior censorship.
- Freedom of assembly.
- Freedom of association.
- Freedom of petition.
- Article 19 refers to the separation of legislative powers, dividing them between the two chambers of the Cortes: the Congress and the Senate.
The Canovista System and Electoral Distortion
Origins and Functioning of the Canovista System
The Canovista System emerged with the return of King Alfonso XII, a restoration orchestrated by Antonio Cánovas del Castillo. This system, similar to the English model, was based on a shared sovereignty between the King and the Cortes. It was founded upon the new Constitution of 1876, which synthesized elements from the previous Constitutions of 1845 and 1869. A crucial concept was the shared legislative power between the King and the Cortes.
Key Parties and Leaders
A defining feature of the Canovista system was the existence of two dynastic parties that peacefully alternated in the governance of the State. The King decided who would rule and when. These two major political parties were:
- The Conservative Party, led by Antonio Cánovas del Castillo. It garnered support from Unionists, Moderates, the high industrial bourgeoisie, and the Catholic hierarchy.
- The Liberal or Fusionist Party, led by Práxedes Mateo Sagasta. This party counted on the support of Progressives, Democrats, and the small and middle bourgeoisie. While also monarchist, and despite similar core ideas to the Conservatives, the Liberal Party notably favored free trade and promoted religious freedom.
Opposition Forces
Although these two were the dominant political parties, when Sagasta’s first government legalized political parties in 1881, various opposition groups emerged. They presented candidates in elections, but the pervasive caciquism severely limited their results.
On the moderate left, different groups existed, such as Republicans, Progressives, and Centralist Federalists. On the more radical left, the PSOE (Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party) held a Marxist ideology (initially). On the extreme right, the Carlists were found.
Electoral System Distortion and Caciquism
Of the ten elections held between 1876 and 1899, the Conservatives won six and the Liberals won four, demonstrating a consistent alternation between the two parties for many years. However, unlike the United Kingdom, the government formed was not the result of the free choice of voters. The Restoration inverted the principles of a real parliamentary system.
In practice, the parliamentary minority often ruled when the majority lost the confidence of the chamber or the King. The King would then dissolve the Cortes, and the new president, after comfortably winning elections that were manipulated, would be summoned. In reality, the Minister of Interior prepared the list of members, ensuring some seats for the opposition as a facade.
Orders from the Ministry were carried out by civil governors who executed “tupinadas” (electoral fraud). This involved registering deceased individuals, adding or manipulating votes, and falsifying the count. All votes had to match the figures previously agreed upon by the Ministry, rendering the actual popular vote worthless and useless.