Readings in Philippine History GE 102 Past Paper PDF

**MODULE** **GE 102** **ACADEMIC YEAR 2024-2025** ***(Retraction of Rizal)*** One of the most intriguing of all was the issues of Jose Rizal was his alleged retraction which was all about his reversion to the Catholic Faith and all other issues linked to it such as his marri...

**MODULE** **GE 102** **ACADEMIC YEAR 2024-2025** ***(Retraction of Rizal)*** One of the most intriguing of all was the issues of Jose Rizal was his alleged retraction which was all about his reversion to the Catholic Faith and all other issues linked to it such as his marriage to Josephine Bracken. That issue was claimed to be true by the Roman Catholic defenders but asserted to be deceptive by anti-retractonists. They claim that the retraction document is a forgery, but handwriting experts concluded a long time ago that it is genuine. Rafael Palma\'s opus on Rizal, titled \"Biografia de Rizal\" is so anti-Catholic that the Church successfully opposed its publication using government funds. In an article authored by Romberto Poulo, Rizal\'s affiliation in Masonry was accounted to have caused drastic change to his religious ideas. It was in the moment Rizal set foot on European soil when he was exposed to a great deal of distinctions between what was happening to his country, the discriminations, abuses, partialities, injustices, and some other things made to cause sufferings to his countrymen, and what was the actual scene of the European nations. He observed that Europe was a lot more different compared to the Philippines in terms of way of life, attitudes towards Roman Catholicism, and most importantly, the freedom all the citizens enjoy. The exact copy had been received by Fr. Balaguer in the evening immediately preceding Rizal\'s execution. Jose Rizal with the addition of the names of the witnesses taken from the texts of the retraction in the Manila newspapers. Fr. Pis copy of Rizal\'s retraction has the same text as that of Fr. Balaguer\'s \"exact\" copy but follows the paragraphing of the texts of Rizal\'s retraction in the Manila newspapers. In order to marry Josephine towards Roman Catholicism, and most importantly, the freedom all the citizens enjoy. The exact copy had been received by Fr. Balaguer in the evening immediately preceding Rizal\'s execution. Jose Rizal with the addition of the names of the witnesses taken from the texts of the retraction in the Manila newspapers. Fr. Pis copy of Rizal\'s retraction has the same text as that of Fr. Balaguer\'s \"exact\" copy but follows the paragraphing of the texts of Rizal\'s retraction in the Manila newspapers. In order to marry Josephine, Rizal wrote with the help of a priest a form of retraction to be approved by the Bishop of Cebu. This incident was revealed by Fr. Antonio Obach to his friend Prof. Austin Craig who wrote down in 1912 what the priest had told him; \"The document (the retraction), inclosed with the priest\'s letter, was ready for the mail when Rizal came hurrying I to reclaim it.\" Rizal realized (perhaps, rather late) that he had written and given to a priest what the friars had been trying by all means to get from him. **Jose Rizal\'s Retraction**: *I declare myself a catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and educated I wish to live and die.* *I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of the church, and as a society prohibited by the church. The diocesan may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the scandal which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me.* *Did Jose Rizal Retract?* *(Manila 29 of December of 1896)* ***Did Jose Rizal Retract?*** *No, Rizal did not retract. Although there were many opinions and evidences presented by various authors as to whether Rizal did or did not retract. Nonetheless, until now there is no proof or any justification to end the debate.* *The following assertions bring about the testimonies that Rizal did not retract before his execution.* *First was the copy of the retraction paper that was allegedly signed by Rizal that was even kept secret and was only published in newspapers. When Rizal\'s family requested for the original copy, it was said that it was lost. Could the Jesuits be this irresponsible to not know the value of the paper? Or was it just hidden? Thirty-nine years later the original copy was found in the archdiocesan archives. Ricardo Pascual Ph. D who was given permission by the Archbishop Nozaleda to examine the document and later concluded in his book, \"Rizal beyond the Grave\" that the documents presented was a forgery. The common rebuttal of this argument was either Father Balaguer or Father Pi had made errors in reproducing another copy of the original. Another evidence as to Rizal did not retract is that when Father Balaguer came to terms that he married Jose and josephine, after jose had signed the retraction paper, however, there were no marriage certificate or public record shown that could prove Father Balaguer\'s statements.* *Why would Rizal retract when he knows for a fact that even if he signs the retraction paper he would still be executed? Since the Archbishop and Jesults cannot do anything to mitigate his penalty because the judicial process involved was purely a military tribunal where civilian or church interference was uncommon and not allowed. Rizal was accused of participating in filibusterous propaganda where the penalty as provided by the Spanish Code is death. The same of what happened to the three priests who were garrotted years earlier, even though they were still a part of the church; they were still treated as rebellious and were also not given a proper burial.* *Furthermore, way back when Rizal was still exiled in Dapitan, Father Sanchez- Rizal\'s favourite teacher from Ateneo- was sent by the Jesuits superiors to try to convince his former student\'s allegation towards the Catholic religion and Spanish religious in the Philippines. Father Sanchez told him to retract in exchange of a professorship, a hundred thousand pesos and an estate (Laubach, 1936) however Rizal rejected the offer. It was argued that Rizal retracted in order to save his family from further persecution to, to give Josephine Bracken a legal status as his wife and to assure reforms from the Spanish government. It is more likely to be of Rizal\'s mentality however, come to think of it, would Rizal just simply neglect all the writing he conceived with his hard work? The same writings that brought him to the point of being executed? No. Rizal\'s behavior during his last hours in Fort Santiago does not point to a conversion- the Mi Ultimo Adios and letters-or indicate even a religious instability. In the evening where his sister and mother arrived, never had he mentioned about the retraction, contrary to what Father Balaguer claimed that even in the afternoon, Rizal was oblivious and was asking for the formula of the retraction.* *Rizal was fixated of the thought that he would die for the love of his country, he, himself had coveted death a long time ago. His character speaks so loud that even all of Rizal\'s friends do not believe that he have written a retraction.* *Let us look at Rizal\'s character as a man aged 33. He was mature enough to realize the consequences of the choice he had made even before he opposed to the Jesuits; he had been anticipating this to happen and would be unlikely if he had a behavior showing a threat from death. Anyone who has been studying his biography and had been acquainted with him knows this is so, even the priests had admitted that Rizal showed a behavior consistent of what he was throughout his mature years. Whatever further study that may emerge as to the truth about Rizal\'s retraction controversy, \".it detracts nothing from his greatness as a Filipino.\"* **Concluding Statement on Rizal's Controversial Retraction** Whether Rizal signed a retraction or not, Rizal is still Rizal. It did not diminish his stature as a great patriot, the hero who courted death "to prove to those who deny our patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our beliefs." (Jose Diokno's statement). Rizal\'s retraction or did not change the fact that his works and writings began the "wheels of change" in the Philippine colonial society -- a change that led to the Philippine independence. The retraction is just one aspect of the life, works, and writings of Rizal (Jose Victor Torres). Torres noted that the controversy in Rizal's retraction is irrelevant today. The way Rizal is taught today, the retraction means nothing at all, Torres added ***The Cry of Balintawak*** Cry of Balintawak or Pugad Lawin, where did Andres Bonifacio "Cry "?. The Cry of Balintawak is a contrived controversy. For nearly a century, the Cry of Balintawak or Cry of Pugadlawin has been the subject of many controversies. It is considered as a turning point of Philippine history. The main focus of controversy is the date and place of Bonifacio Cry. There were five dates for the Cry - August 20, 23, 24, 25 and 26 and the five different venues for the first cry: Balintawak, Pugadlawin, Kangkong, Bahay Toro, and Pasong Tamo. The first issue: It has been widely accepted and believed that the first cry of the revolution took place in Balintawak, Caloocan in August 23, 1896. The second issue: The first cry was in August 23, 1896 but the exact place is not in Balintawak but in Pugadlawin. Between these two controversies, the Balintawak tradition continues to thrive. The third issue: The cry occurred towards the end of August 1896 and that all the places mentioned above are in Caloocan which in those times was a district of Balintawak. But these controversies remain unresolved except in the Philippine History books. **Pio Valenzuela's Cry of Pugad Lawin** **( August 23, 1896)**       The controversial " Cry of Pugad Lawin" which has been confirmed by the other witnesses of the event that Dr. Pio Valenzuela is the second and later version of the first rally of the Katipunan by Dr.Valenzuela himself. The first version, which he gave, told of the " Cry of Balintawak" as the staging point of the Philippine revolution. He related the first version, when events were still fresh from his memory and he abandoned the revolutionary cause after its outbreak and fled to Binan, Laguna for safety. Taking advantage of Governor General Ramon Blanco's proclamation of amnesty of the revolutionists. Valenzuela returned to Manila on September 3, 1896, and surrendered to Blanco. He was imprisoned in Fort Santiago, where upon investigation, he told Francisco Olive, the Spanish investigator that the "Cry" was staged at Balintawak on Wednesday, august 26, 1896. \*       The first place of refuge of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Procopio Bonifacio, Teodoro Plata, Aguedo del Rosario and myself, was Balintawak, the first five arriving there on 19 August and I on 20 August 1896. The first place where some 500 members of the katipunan met was the house and yard of Apolinario Samson at Kangkong on 22 August. Aside from the person mentioned above, among those were Briccio Pantas, Alejandro Santos, Ramon Bernardo, Apolonio Samson and others. Here, views were only exchanged, and no resolution was debated or adopted. It was at Pugad Lawin, in the house, storehouse and yard of Juan Ramos, son of Melchora Aquino, where over 1000 members of the Katipunan met and carried out considerable debate and discussion on 23 August 1896. The discussion was on whether or not the revolution against the Spanish government should be started on 29 August 1896. Only one man protested and fought against war, and that was Teodoro Plata ( Bonifacio's brother in law). Besides the persons named above, among those present at this meeting were Enrique Cipriano, Alfonso Pacheco, Tomas Remigio, and Sinfroso San Pedro. After the tumultuous meeting, many of those present tore their cedula certificates and shouted " Long Live Philippine!".* **Gregoria de Jesus' Version of the First Cry** **(August 25, 1896)**       One of the participants in the drama of the Philippine Revolution of 1896 was Gregoria de Jesus, the wife of Supremo Andres Bonifacio, and the " Lakambini of the Katipunan". She was the custodian of the secret documents, seal and some weapons of the Katipunan, and constantly risked her life in safeguarding them. After the outbreak of the revolution , while bonifacio and his men gathered in the hills of Balintawak for the war of liberation. When warned that the Spanish authorities were coming to arrest her, she fled to manila and later joined her husband in the mountains and shared the hardships and sacrifices of a patriot's life with him. According to her version of the First "Cry". It occurred near Caloocan on August 25, 1896, as follows. \*      The activities of the Katipunan had reached nearly all corners of the Philippine Archepelago, so that when its existence was discovered and some of the members arrested,  we immediately returned to Caloocan. However, as we were closely watched by the agents of the Spanish authorities, Andres Bonifacio and other katipuneros left the town some days. It was then the uprising began, with the first cry for freedom on August 25, 1896. Meanwhile, I was with my parents. Through my friends, I learned that the Spanish were coming to arrest me. Immediately, I fled town at eleven o'clock at night, secretly going through the rice fields to La Loma, with the intention of returning to Manila. I was driven away as if the people therein were frightened for their own lives. Later, I found out that the occupants of the houses which I had visited were seizes and serevely punished and some even exiled. One of them was an uncle of mine whom I had on that night to kiss his hand, and he died in exile.* **The " Cry of Bahay Toro"** **(August 24, 1896)** *** By Santiago Alvarez***       Another version of the "Cry" which launched the Philippine Revolution is that written by Santiago Alvarez, a prominent Katipunan warlord of Cavite son of Mariano Alvarez, and relative of Gregoria de Jesus(wife of bonifacio). Unlike Masangkay, Samson and Valenzuela, Alvarez was not an eyewitness of the historic event. Hence, his version cannot be accepted as equal in weight to that given by actual participants of the event. Although Alvarez was in Cavite at that time, this is his  version of the first "Cry", as follows: Sunday, August 23, 1896 \*      As early as 10 o'clock in the morning, at the barn of Kabesang Melchora, katipuneros met together. About 500 of these  arrived, ready to join the "Supremo" Andres Bonifacio and his men....* Monday, August 24, 1896 \*      There were about 1000 katipuneros... the "Supremo" decided to hold a meeting inside the big barn. Under his leadership, the meeting began at 9 o'clock in the morning...* \*      It was 12 o'clock noon when the meeting adjourned amidst loud cries of " Long Live the Sons of the Country" ( Mabuhay ang  mga Anak ng Bayan).* **The "Cry of Balintawak"** **(August 26, 1896)** ***By Guillermo Masangkay***       The historic first rally of the Philippine Revolution of 1896 occurred at the rustic barrio of Balintawak, a few kilometers north of the city Manila. On August 26, 1896, according to this eyewitness account  by Katipunan General Guillermo Masangkay, Bonifacio's childhood friend. Similarly, this date and site were American regime, after having consulted the surviving katipuneros and prestigious historians at the time. A monument depicting the event was erected near the site, financed by funds donated by the people, and was inaugurated on September 11, 1911. In his memories, General Masangkay recounts the "Cry of Balintawak" as follows. \*       On August 26, 1896, a big meeting was held in Balintawak at the house of Apolinario Samson, then the cabeza of the barrio of Caloocan. Among those who attended, I remember, were Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Aguedo del Rosario, Tomas Remigio, Briccio Pantas, Teodoro Plata, Pio Valenzuela, Enrique Pacheco and Francisco Carreon. They were all leaders of the Katipunan and composed the board of directors of the organization. Delegates from Bulacan, Cabanstuan, Cavite and Morong (now Rizal), was also present.* \*       At about nine o'clock in the morning of August 26, the meeting was opened with Andres Bonifacio Presiding and Emilio Jacinto acting as Bonifacio's secretary. The purpose was to discuss when the uprising was to take place. Teodoro Plata     ( Bonifacio's brother in law), Briccio Pantas and Pio Valenzuela were all opposed to starting the revolution too early. They reasoned that  the people would be in distress if the revolution were started without adequate preparation. Plata was very forceful in his argument stating that the uprising could not very well be started without arms and food for the soldiers. Valenzuela used Rizal's argument about the rich not siding with the Katipunan organization. * \*      Andres Bonifacio, sensing that he would lose in the discussion then, left the session hall and talked to the people, who were waiting outside for the result of the meeting of the leaders. He told that the leaders were arguing against starting the revolution early, and appealed to them in a fiery speech in which he said: "You remember the fate of our countrymen who were shot in Bagumbayan. Should we return now to the  towns, the Spaniards will only shoot us. Our organization has been discovered and we are all marked men. If we don't start uprising, the Spaniards will get us anyway. What then do you say?"* \*      "Revolt!" the people shouted as one.* \*      Bonifacio then asked the people to give a pledge that they were to revolt. He told them that the sign of slavery of the Filipinos were the cedula tax charged on each citizen.* \*      " If it is true that you are ready to revolt." Bonifacio said, " I want to see you destroy your cedulas. It will be the sign that all of us declared our severance from the Spaniards." With tears in their eyes, the people as one man, pulled out their cedulas and tore them to pieces. It was the beginning of the formal declaration of the separation from Spanish rule. With their cedulas destroyed, they could no longer go back to their homes because the Spaniards would persecute them, if not for being katipuneros, for having no cedulas. And people who had no cedulas during thise days were severely punished. When the people's pledge was obtained by Bonifacio, he returned to the session hall and informed the leaders of what took place outside. " The people want to revolt , and they have destroyed thiercedulas," Bonifacio said,". " So now we have to start the uprising ; otherwise the people by  hundreds will be shot." " There was no alternative. The board of directors, inspite of the protest of Plata , Pantas and Valenzuela, voted for the revolution. And when this was decided, the people outside shouted: " Long Live the Philippine Republic!".* \*      At about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, while the gathering at Balintawak was celebrating the decision of the Katipunan leaders to start the uprising, the guards who were up in trees to watch for any possible intruders or the approach of the enemy gave the waring that the Spaniards were coming.* \*      Led by Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto and other leaders of the Katipunan, the men were distributed in strategic positions and were prepared for the attack of the civil guards. I was with a group stationed on the bank of a small creek, guarding the places where the Spaniards were to pass in order to reach the meeting place of the katipuneros. Shots were then fired by the civil guards, and that was the beginning of the fire which later became such a huge conflagration.* **HISTORY OF AGRARIAN REFORMS IN THE PHILIPPINES** **Pre-Colonial Times (before 16^th^ century)** The Philippines, even before being colonized by different countries, has already developed an organization for their communities. The land owned by these communities is known as barangay  which consists of 30-100 families which is administered by different chiefs. In these barangays, everyone regardless of status had access on the land and mutually shares resources, to the community. They believed in and practiced the concept of 'stewardship' where relationship between man and nature is important. Land cultivation was done commonly by *kaingin* system or slash and burn method wherein land was cleared by burning the bushes before planting the crops or either land was plowed and harrowed before planting. On the other hand, food production was intended for family consumption only at first but later on neighboring communities which were engaged in a barter trade, exchanging their goods with others. Some even traded their agricultural products with luxury items of some foreign traders like the Chinese, Arabs and Europeans. The only recorded transaction of land sale during that time was the Maragtas Code. This is the selling of the Panay Island to ten Bornean *datus* in exchange for a golden *salakot* and a long gold necklace. Although the Code of Luwaran was one of the oldest written laws of the Muslim society which contains provision on the lease of cultivated lands, there was no record how lease arrangement was practiced. **Spanish Era ( 1521-1896)** **             **When the Spanish came to the country in 1521, they introduced "*pueblo*", an agricultural system wherein the native rural communities were organized into0 * pueblo*  and each Christianized native family is given out  four to five hectares of land to cultivate, thus there is no landless class.             Nonetheless, these native families are merely landholders and not legitimate landowners. By laws, the land assigned to them was the property of the Spanish king where they pay their colonial tributes to the Spanish authorities in the form of agricultural products that they produce.             At the beginning of the 19^th^ century, the Philippines as a colony of Spain implemented policies that would mainstream the country into the world capitalism. The economy was opened to the world market as exporter o f raw materials and importer of finished goods. The agricultural exports were mandated and hacienda system was developed as a new form of ownership. More people lost their lands and were forced to become tillers.            Agricultural tenancy during that time originated when the Spanish crown implemented the Laws o f the Indies. The laws awarded vast tracts of land to the religious orders in the country. Some of them were awarded to the Spanish military as reward to their (also known as *repartiamentos*), and to the other Spaniards known as * encomienderos*  to manage and have the right to0 receive tributes from the natives tilling the lands also known as *encomiendas.* Because of this, the natives within these areas became mere tillers working for a share of crops. They did not have any rights to the land.           Ideally the purpose of the encomienda system is for the * encomienderos*  to protect the natives and further introduce them into Catholic faith in exchange for tribute from the natives. But abusive *encomienderos* collected more tributes that became the land rentals from the natives living in the area.           A *compras y vandalas*  system was practiced wherein tillers were made to compulsory sell at a very low price or surrender their agricultural harvests to Spanish authorities where to render personal sevices on public and religious work and as a household help to the *encomienderos.* \*           *In 1865, there was a law made by the Spanish crown ordering landholders to register their landholdings but only a few were aware of this decree so they were the only ones who were able to register their lands. Ancestral lands were claimed and registered in other people's names (Spanish officials, *inquilinos* and caciques or local chieftains).As a results, many peasant families were driven out from the lands they have been cultivating for centuries or were forced to become tillers.             In 1893, the *Ley Hipotecaria*  or the Mortgage Laws was introduced  that provides the systematic registration of titles and deeds as well as ownership claims. This law was mainly a law on registration of properties rather than a mortgage law.            In 1894, the last Spanish land law promulgated in the Philippines was the Maura Law or Royal decree of 1894. This law states that farmers and landholders were given one year to register their agricultural lands to avoid declaration of it as a state property.            With the * encomienda* system still being used despite the different laws passed by the Spanish crown more and more tillers were abused, exploited and deprived of their rights. The revolution of peasants and farmers in 1896 articulated their aspirations for  agrarian reform and for a just society. Women also fought for freedom  and played an important  role in the planning and implementing the activities of the revolutionary movements.             The results of this revolution has made the government confiscate the large landed estates, especially the friar lands and declared these lands as properties of the government (Malolos Constitution, 1896, Article XVII). **American Era (1898-1935)**                   Realizing that being landless was the main cause of social unrest and revolt at that time, the Americans sought to put an end to the miserable conditions of the tenant tillers and small farmers by passing several land policies to widen the base of small landholdings and distribute land ownership among the greater number of Filipino tenants and farmers.                 The first of which, the Philippine Bill of 1902 was passed which provided regulations on the disposal of public lands wherein a private individuals can own 16 hectares of land while the corporate land holdings can avail of 1, 024 hectares. This also gave the rights to the Americans to own agricultural lands.                  The Torrens system of land registration was also introduced during the American colonial period. This was made to replace the registration system that was implemented by the Spaniards. The reason why they made a different system of registration was that some 400,000 native farmers were without titles at the start of  the American era and this situation was also aggravated by the absence of records of issues titles and accurate land surveys.                The Lands Registration Act of 1902 or Act No. 496 placed all private and public lands under Torrens system. While the Cadastral Act or Act No. 2259 speeds up the issuance of Torrens titles. This was done by surveying a municipality and presented the result to the land registration court.                A program called the Homestead Program was introduced in 1903 that allowed an enterprising tenant to acquire a farm of at least  16 hectares to cultivate. However, the program was not implemented nationwide and was introduced only in some parts of Mindanao and Northern Luzon, where there were available public alienable and disposable lands.                There are also other agrarian laws that were introduced during the American era like the First Public Land Act or Act No. 926 which provided rules and regulations for selling and leasing portions of the public domain, completing defective Spanish land titles, canceling and confirming Spanish concessions. Another is the Second Public Land Act of 1919 or Act 2874 which limits the use of agricultural lands to Filipinos, Americans, and citizens of other countries. On the other hand, the Act  No. 141 amended the Second Public Act of 1919 or Act No. 2874. The revision consists of a temporary provision of equality on the rights of American and Filipino citizens and corporations. It also compiled all pre-existing laws relative to public lands into a single instrument.                There is also the Friar Land Act or Act No. 1120 which provided the administrative and temporary leasing and selling of friar lands to its tillers. The first legislation regulating the relationship of landlord and tenants and the first law to legalize a 50-50 crop sharing arrangement was also introduced in the American era and is known as the Rice Share Tenancy Act of 1933 or Act No. 4054. There is also the Sugarcane Tenancy Contract Act of 1933 or Act No. 4113 which regulated the relationship of landlord and tenants in the sugarcane fields and required tenancy contracts on land planted to sugarcane.                 However, despite the different land policies passed during that time, the farmers' situation did not improve at all. In fact, it further worsened the land ownership situation, where there was no limit on the size of landholdings one could possess. Landholdings were once again concentrated in the hands of fewer individuals who can afford to buy, register, and acquire fixed titles of their properties. Therefore, more lands were placed under tenancy.                  As a result, there were widespread peasant uprisings, headed by the armed peasants' groups known as * Colorum* and *Sakdalista* of Luzon and Northeastern Mindanao, respectively. These uprisings resulted to social disorder in 1920's and 1930's. Hence, more militant peasants and workers' organizations bonded together for a more collective action against the abuses of landlords and unjust land ownership situation. This gave birth to the Communist Party of the Philippines. **Commonwealth Years (1935-1942)** During these years the situation of land ownership and tenancy were characterized by the contrasting economic and political lifestyle between tenant and the landlord. Landlords became richer and powerful while the tenants were deprived of their rights, became poorer and absentee landowners increased. They preferred to go after new opportunities in the cities and left farms idle to the management of *'katiwalas'*. As a result, haciendas were poorly and unjustly managed. A small plot of land cultivated by an average peasant farmer could not sustain a decent living for his family. Tenants and farmers shouldered excessive fines, unfair taxation and usury. Systems for credit and marketing of rice were lacking thus, farmers received a very low selling price. Consequently, peasant uprising became widespread all over the country. As a response to these situations, the government under the stewardship of President Manuel L. Quezon realized that land reform programs should be implemented immediately. They saw the purchase of friar lands as a possible way to solve the problem of inequitable land ownership. They also saw that the Homestead Program could be transformed into a massive resettlement program if properly implemented. **Japanese Era (1942-1945)**                   During the Japanese occupation, peasants and workers organized the HUKBALAHAP (Hukbong Bayan Laban sa mga Hapon) on March 29, 1942 as an anti-Japanese group. They took over vast tracts of land and gave the land to the people. For them, the war was a golden opportunity for people's initiative to push pro-poor programs. Landlords were overpowered by the peasants but unfortunately at the end of the war, through the help of the military police and civilian guards, landlords were able to retrieve their lands from the HUKBALAHAP. **Evolution of Initiatives on Land Reform** **      **      Some of the agrarian reform laws were  passed during the administration of President Quezon. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.                But the implementation of land reform during Quezon's administration was hindered because of the budget allocation for the settlement  program made it impossible for the program to succeed. Also most landlords did not comply with the Rice Share Tenancy Act. Widespread peasant uprisings against abusive landlords also continued. In addition, the outbreak of the World War II put a stop to the land ownership and tenancy interventions during this period.  **Under Manuel Roxas Administration (1946-1948)**                  The Republic Act No. 34 was passed during the administration of President Manuel Roxas and it was enacted to established a 70-30 sharing arrangement between tenant and landlord. The 70% of the harvest will go to the person  who shouldered the expenses for planting, harvesting and for the work animals. With this, it reduced the interest of lando0wners' loans to tenant at not more than 6%.                   President Roxas also negotiated for the purchase of 8,000 hectares of lands in Batangas owned by the Ayala-Zobel family. These were sold to landless farmers.                  However, due to lack of support facilities, the farmers were forced to sell their lands to the landowning class. This failure gave basis to doubt the real meaning of land reform program. **Under Elpidio R. Quirino (1948-1953)** **    ** **                **During Elpidio Quirino's administration, the Executive Order No. 355, the Land Settlement Development Corporation (LASEDECO) was established to accelerate and expand the peasant resettlement program of the government. However due to limited postwar resources, the program was not successful. **Under Ramon Magsaysay (1953-1957)** **               **When President Magsaysay was elected as t he president of the country, he realized the importance of pursuing a more honest-to-goodness land reform. So he convinced the elite controlled congress to pass several legislation to improve the land reform situation in the country. Some of these are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Magsaysay implemented the Agricultural Tenancy Act by establishing the Court of Agricultural Relations in 1955 to improve tenancy security, fix the land rentals on tenanted farms and to resolve the many land disputes filed by the landowners and peasant organizations. He also created the Agricultural Tenancy Commission to administer problems arising from tenancy. Through this Commission, about 28, 000 hectares were issued to settlers. Under President Magsaysay, the Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Financing Administration (ACCFA) was created. This is a government agency formed to provide warehouse facilities and assist farmers market their products and established the organization of the Farmers Cooperative and Marketing Associations (FACOMAs). With the passing of R. A. 1160 of 1954, President Magsaysay pursued the resettlement program through the National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA). This law established the government's resettlement program and accelerated the free distribution of agricultural lands to landless tenants and farmers. It particularly aimed to convince the members of the HUKBALAHAP movement to return to a peaceful life by giving them home lots farmlands. This  administration also spearheaded the established of the Agricultural and Industrial Bank to provide easier terms in applying for homestead and other farmlands. With all programs and bills passed under his administration, out of the targeted 300 haciendas for distribution, only 41 were distributed after its 7 years of implementation. This was due to lack of funds and inadequate support services provided for these programs. As a results, landlords continued to be uncooperative and critical to the program and lando0wnership and tenancy problems continued. **Under Carlos P. Garcia (1957-1961)** **            **  There was no legislation passed in President Carlos Garcia's term but he continued to implement the land reform programs of President Magsaysay. **Under Diosdado Macapagal (1961-1965)**              It was during President Diosdado Macapagal that the Agricultural Land Reform Code or R.A. No. 3844 was enacted more especially on August 8, 1963. This was considered to be the most comprehensive piece of agrarian reform legislation ever enacted  in the country  that time. Because of this, President Macapagal was considered as the " Father of Agrarian reform".              The R.A. No. 3844 was considered the most comprehensive because this Act abolished share tenancy in the Philippines. It prescribed a program converting the tenant farmers to lessees and eventually into owner-cultivators. Moreover, it aimed to free tenants from the bondage of tenancy and gave  hope to poor Filipino farmers to own the land they are tilling. Finally, it emphasized owner-cultivator relationship and farmer independence, equity, productivity improvement, and the public distribution of land.             However, the landed Congress did not provide effort to come up with a separate bill to provide funding for its implementation. The act was piloted on the provinces of Pangasinan, Bulacan, Nueva Ecija, Pampanga, Tarlac, Occidental Mindoro, Camarines Sur, and Misamis Oriental. It acquired a total of 18, 247.06 hectares or 99.29 % out of the total scope of 18, 377.05 hectares. The program benefited 7, 466 farmer beneficiaries. **Under Ferdinand E. Marcos (1965-1986)** **            **When President Marcos assumed office, he immediately directed the massive implementation of the leasehold phase of the land reform program by signing into law the Code of Agrarian Reforms in the Philippines or  R.A. No. 6389 and its companion bill R.A. No. 6390. The Code of Agrarian Reforms or R. A. No. 6389 governed the implementation of the agrarian reform in the Philippines. This law instituted the Code of Agrarian Reforms and significantly amended several provisions of Agricultural Land Reforms Code or R. A. 3844 of President Macapagal. It created the Department of Agrarian Reform, a separate administrative agency for agrarian reform, replacing the Land Authority.               R.A. No. 6390 was enacted to accelerate the implementation of the agrarian reform program in the fields of land acquisition and agricultural credit. Through the Code, an AR Special Account in the General Fund was created that exclusively finance the agrarian reform program.              The core of the Agrarian Reform Program of President Marcos was Presidential Decree No. 2, proclaiming the entire country as land reform area and Presidential Decree No. 27, decreeing the emancipation of tenants from the bondage of soil, transferring to them the ownership of the land they till and providing the needed instruments and mechanisms. This law provided for tenanted lands devoted to rice  and corn to pass ownership to the tenants. It also lowered the ceilings for landholdings to 7 hectares. The law stipulated that share tenants who worked from a landholding of over 7 hectares could purchase the land they tilled, while share tenants on land less than 7 hectares would become leaseholders. This agrarian reform program was designed to uplift the farmers from poverty and ignorance and to make them useful, dignified, responsible and progressive partners in nation-building. This AR program was a package of services extended to farmers in the form of credit support, infrastructure, farm extension, legal assistance, electrification and development of rural institutions. President Marco's  Agrarian Reform Program is characterized by five major components and these are Land Tenure Program, Institutional Development, Physical development, Agricultural Development, and Human Resources. The Agrarian Reform Program was also labeled as "revolutionary" by some sectors because it was pursued under Martial Law and intended to make quick changes without going through legislature or technical processes and another reason is that it was the only law in the Philippines ever done in handwriting. Nevertheless, the program also posed some limitations which includes limited scope of the program since it was only directed for the tenanted, privately-owned rice and corn lands, there was monopoly of businessmen in both coconut and sugar industries, foreign and local firms were allowed to use large tracks of land for their business; and because of the declarations of Martial Law, several farmer leaders were arrested without due process of law.  The Spanish colonial policy was virtually designed not only to keep Philippines under control but also to exploit her rich natural resources. The onerous system of taxation, the arbitrary and unjust forced labor, the monopolistic galleon trade and stringent trade and agricultural policies, consequently brought about a distorted and unbalanced economy. **Taxation** is the power of the state to impose and collect revenue for public purpose to promote the welfare of the people of the particular society. One of the laws promulgated by the Indies promulgated by the Spanish crown was to require conquered inhabitants to pay tribute in recognition of the Spanish sovereignty. For so many years, the Filipinos paid tribute amounting to eight reales or one peso. In 1589, it was increased to ten reales and to twelve in 1851, but finally, abolished in 1884 and was replaced with a personal cedula tax. **Bandala**- natives were coerced to sell their harvest to the government at very low price. **Force Labor** **The Tobacco Monopoly of Basco** Established by **Jose Basco Y Vargas** in 1781the increase in revenues of the government through the cultivation of tobacco became a profitable venture that leads to Mexico to be independent. The cultivation of tobacco was confined to Nueva Ecija, Cagayan Valley, Marinduque, and Ilocos Provinces. The tobacco monopoly brought a considerable profit but the situation of Philippines didn't changed. Instead, it brought so much problem and hardness in life of every Filipinos. **The Galleon Trade (Manila- Acapulco)** Long before the Spaniards came into the Philippines, the Filipinos had been trading with different countries, by virtue of the doctrine of mercantilism; the Spanish authority closed trade relations with other countries and allowed only two countries, China and Mexico. **Obras Pias**- a Foundation where money from trade was invested and appropriated to be given to charitable institutions. **The Encomiendas** The **encomienda** was the right extended by the King upon a Spaniard who had helped to facilitate the settlement of the territory. By implication, it was a public office and the person was preferred to as encomiendero, a holder of encomienda and empowered to collect taxes from the people under his jurisdiction. In return, under the laws of the Indies, he was obliged to protect and defend the people under him against aggression and danger and helped to convert the natives to Catholicism. The **Encomienderos** abused their right by way of forcing the natives to pay tribute beyond what the law prescribed. The thunderous and public outcry against the behavior of encomienderos led to some humane ecclesiastical officials to inform the king about this unlawful practices. The clergy were **Domingo Salazar**, first bishop of Manila and **Martin de Rada**, superior of the Augustinians in the Philippines. They condemned these encomienderos and held them responsible for the various violence and atrocities committed against the natives. **The Abolition of Slavery** This was considered as one of the administrative accomplishments had done by Spain for the people of the colony. This move was affected by **Bishop Domingo Salazar** and various heads of religious orders to ask the King to abolish slavery. The Bishop and other religious orders signed a document accusing the Spaniards in the Philippines about the maltreatment of the Filipinos as slaves in the hands of the colonizers which was directly contrary to the law of God and the laws of the Indies. **King Philip II**, after hearing and evaluating the document, issued the *Royal Decree of August 9, 1589*, emancipating all slaves in the colony. **Cultural Development** Filipino Culture embraced language, art and religion. Only the wealthy and educated middle class Filipinos learned to write and speak in Spanish. **Philippine Literature** was predominantly *religious* in tone, character and moral quality. Among the Filipinos who distinguished themselves in the fields of Philippine literature were Jose Dela Cruz (Husing Sisiw 1746- 1829) and Francisco Baltazar (1789-1862). The Florante at Laura's "awit" allegorically exposed the Spanish wrong doings in the archipelago. The early Filipino printers were engravers and at the same time who were trained by Spanish missionaries. Among them was **Tomas Pinpin** of Mabatang, Abucay, Bataan, **Siete Infantes** and **Bernardo Carpio**. The first *printing press* was introduced by friars in Manila in 1593 and in the same year, printed the first book in the Philippines, the **Doctrina Christiana**. On visual arts like painting and architecture interests also focused on religion. Felix **Resurrection Hidaldo**, won a silver medal for his *Christian Virgins Exposed* and **Juan Luna** received his first gold medal for his *Spolarium* as their entries for *Madrigal Exposition of Fine Arts*. **Religion** On Religion With the help of the soldiers, the missionaries easily conquered territories of the colony and converted the natives to Christianity. The various missionaries who used their religious influence to facilitate the *teaching of Gospel* and *propagation of Catholic Christian faith* were the **Augustinians** (1565), the **Franciscans** (1577), the **Jesuits** (1581), the **Dominicans** (1587), and the **Recollects** (1606).  The following is an excerpt of the bull of Pope Gregory XIII creating the diocese and Cathedral Church of Manila: "\... Moreover by the aforesaid authority and tenor, we erect and establish forever the town of Manila into a city, and its church into a cathedral, under the title of the "the Concepcion of same Blessed Mary Virgin," to be held by one bishop as its head, who shall see the enlargement of its' buildings and their restoration in the style of a cathedral church." **Social Results** The Filipino conversion to Christianity inevitably meant the adoption of *fiesta* as a socio- religious event celebrating the feast day of the patron saint of the Catholic town as an occasion of thanksgiving for a bountiful harvest and other blessings. **Education** Education in the Philippines during the Spanish era was not open to all Filipinos. The Spanish government had absolutely no intention of training the natives for eventual independence and self- government. During this period, some schools were exclusively established for education of some Spanish nationals in the archipelago. They were open only for the people belonged to the upper social and economics class of society Schools in the Philippines that were established by the Spaniards: - Assumption Convent- 1892 - College of La Concordia- 1869 - Colegio De Sta. Isabel- 1632 - Colegio De Sta. Potentiana- 1589 - Colegio De San Juan De Letran- founded in 1601 - University of Santo Tomas- oldest pontifical university in the Philippines founded by Dominicans in 1611 **Economy** The abolition of **Galleon trade** in 1815 and the separation of Mexico from Spain made it necessary for the Spanish Government to engage in trading relations with other countries. The government also allowed foreign investors to establish residence in the Philippines. Spain opened its ports in Manila and other parts of the country. Foreign banking institutions and other lending and credit facilities were open. Roads and bridges were built, shipping lines, inter islands and overseas were improved and communication system were upgraded. The opening of the Philippines to world trade and with the emergence of multifarious forces, e.g., scientific and technological, industrial, economic, social, and political resulted in economic changes and prosperity that improved the quality of life of the Filipinos.