diced b Jos e S. Arc a, - non

kMadrid after the 1868 revolution, that he was "profoundly radical in hispolitical ideas and quickly joined the most progressive elements," that he wasan "implacable enemy of the regular clergy," whom he made the permanenttarget of his press campaigns in Madrid. Towards the end of 1869,Segismundo Moreta named him a member of the Consultative Board onPhilippine Reforms, before which he proposed the most audacious andradical ideas. In 1873, he succeeded in being elected deputy for Quadrillas,Puerto Rico, after which he was soon swallowed in silence, except when hehad to appear in court for a financial case in 1890. It seems he died a littleafter. See Enciclopedia universal ilustrada europeo-americana, XXIX, 160.63. The carriage was in the nineteenth century the normal vehicle oftransportation for all the ecclesiastics, even of recreation, and not just forFranciscans. Here is passage from a source earlier than the Noli, which isnevertheless just as interesting: "The Spaniards generally take the carriage,just as the parish priests of the Philippines, diocesan clergy or friars. So muchso that there is no friar who, besides keeping one or two carriages forrecreation with four or six horses to pull them, does not have also one or twoexcellent horses for riding. Although to avoid inconvenience they never puttheir foot on the stirrup, that is, they consider them a luxury." Antonio Garciadel Canto, Misterios de Filipinas (Madrid, 1859) I, 287.64. El Argos, I: (3 October 1871) 27.65. La Cruz, I (1872), 242. The acrimonious debates occasioned by thenewspapers articles written mainly by Labra, Regidor, and Arriaga, gaveplace to a heated parliamentary discussion during the sessions of the Cortesheld on 11 July 1871. Lopez de Ayala, Overseas Minister, faced Rafael M. deLabra and Patricio de la Escosura. The last explained his position in thedebate on the native Filipino clergy in these terms: ". . . member of theCommission on the alienation of the goods of the clergy from 1855 to 1856; Idefended that law, and today I profess the same doctrine on that matter whichI supported in the year 56. I believe that in this day the religious orders haveno reason for existing . . . . I do not understand their way of life in actualsociety, because it seems to me they are a contradiction to modem society,just as it seems to me that they have performed for this civilization veryimportant services in other epochs . . .. Who but those men [the missionaries]who can speak in God's name would be capable of making the natives adorethe Castilian name as they adore God's name.. .? What influence do you wantto substitute for this? It is impossible to find something else." La Cruz II280