Spanish Disentailment: Mendizábal, Madoz, and Land Reform
Spanish Disentailment: Context and Phases
Liberal governments during the 19th century faced the pressing need to consolidate state finances amid severe economic crises. Facing a severe economic crisis, Spain opted to disentail Church properties, selling them to benefit the National Treasury. However, the introduction of liberalism involved a more ambitious goal: transforming the property system along capitalist lines to create a liberal society supportive of the monarchy. These objectives were evident in both major disentailment decrees, including Madoz’s.
Mendizábal Disentailment (First Phase)
The government led by Juan Álvarez Mendizábal confronted a significant public debt crisis and a lack of funds. A substantial amount of land was owned by the Church. Critics argued that the Church did not exploit these lands efficiently to achieve maximum economic benefit. These properties, often held in mortmain, were referred to as belonging to ‘dead hands’ (manos muertas), as they were typically inalienable. The disentailment process aimed to transfer these lands into private hands for active exploitation.
Liberal Ideology and Property
According to liberal doctrine, individual happiness was a fundamental right. Achieving this required the guarantee of private property ownership. Individuals looked to the State to guarantee and protect their property rights.
Causes and Phases
The disentailment was driven by several factors, primarily the urgent need for funds. Money was desperately needed to finance state debts and, crucially, the ongoing First Carlist War. The desamortización occurred primarily in two major phases:
- The first, targeting Church property, led by Mendizábal.
- The second, broader phase, including municipal lands, led by Madoz.
Mendizábal’s Role
Juan Álvarez Mendizábal, initially Prime Minister and later Finance Minister, arrived from London to lead the government. As a businessman, he believed winning the Carlist War was essential, but the Treasury lacked the necessary funds. He identified the seizure and sale of Church property as a necessary source of funding. The properties were auctioned publicly.
Goals of Mendizábal’s Disentailment
Mendizábal’s disentailment aimed to achieve several goals:
- Secure funds to pay public debt and finance the war.
- Expand the base of supporters for the liberal regime by creating new landowners invested in the system.
- Create a new agrarian class aligned with liberalism.
- Transform collective Church property into private, individual property, taxable by the Exchequer.
Properties were often assessed at low values to encourage quick sales. Payment terms typically involved a portion in cash (e.g., 20%) with the rest deferred or paid using public debt bonds.
Consequences of Mendizábal’s Disentailment
The removal of ecclesiastical lands often worsened the economic situation for parts of the peasantry who relied on them. It also caused a major rupture in relations between the Spanish State and the Catholic Church, seen by the Church as violating the Concordat. While some funds were notionally intended for goals like industrialization and railway expansion, much was consumed by war expenses and debt servicing. The primary beneficiaries of this process were members of the bourgeoisie and existing landowners who could afford to purchase the auctioned properties.
Madoz Disentailment (Second Phase)
Finance Minister Pascual Madoz spearheaded the second major phase of Spanish disentailment. A general confiscation law was applied, putting all types of rural and urban properties up for sale, including those belonging to municipalities. This aimed to complete the process initiated by Mendizábal. This desamortización was implemented rapidly. Payment often involved a deposit, with the remainder accepted primarily in cash or specific public debt instruments.
Consequences of the Madoz Disentailment
The results were often considered disappointing. While it significantly reduced Church and municipal property holdings and sources of wealth, it did not function as an effective land reform for many peasant workers. It contributed to the consolidation of large estates (latifundios) in southern Spain and reinforced small landholdings (minifundismo) in the north. New landowners often raised rents significantly, while investment in agricultural improvements remained minimal. Agricultural equipment and techniques were often outdated, hindering productivity.
The financial benefits for the Treasury were much lower than anticipated. Payment was often made using depreciated Public Debt bonds, whose market value was significantly below their nominal value. This method reduced the actual cash inflow to the state. A significant issue was that the funds raised did little to advance the country’s industrialization. Spain continued to lag behind other European nations industrially. The political objective of expanding the base of liberal supporters was only partially achieved.
Urban Consequences
Regarding urban land, the disentailment led to significant urban transformation and social stratification. The bourgeoisie acquired former church properties in city centers, displacing previous occupants. Working-class populations were often pushed towards the suburbs. Many convents and religious buildings were demolished to create public squares, widen streets, or house new institutions like archives and museums.