The New Mexico Constitution is a unique governance document
that reaffirms the cultural diversity of the state and its
varied history. In Article II, Section 5, for example, the
"Bill of Rights," there is a guarantee of
additional rights (beyond those already guaranteed by the
federal constitution). "The rights, privileges and
immunities, civil, political and religious guaranteed to the
people of New Mexico by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
shall be preserved inviolate." While the constitution
does not specify, it just says guaranteed to the people
of New Mexico, the guarantee is for the benefit of the
Mexican citizens who resided in New Mexico in 1848. There
are other sections in the Constitution that likewise reflect
this uniqueness and the multi-cultural facets of New Mexican
history.
Nevertheless, the comprehensive coverage afforded United
States citizens under the federal constitution and the broad
protection extended to all New Mexicans under the proposed
state constitution, why was it considered to be necessary by
the state founding fathers in 1910 to include these additional
guarantees in the state constitution?
I
The 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, like the state
constitution, served several purposes: it ended the war
between the United States and Mexico; it also incorporated
into the United States the northern states of Mexico and
the citizens residing there. For those citizens of
Mexico, the treaty became a document (much like those drawn
between the United States government and native Americans)
which was intended to establish relationships between
people, in this case between the conquerors and the
conquered. In a sense, through this extralegal tactic by the
Mexican commissioners who helped draft the treaty, the
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo became an interim bill of
rights for the Mexican people now residing in the United
States and now an incorporated part of the United States
citizenry. What then were the provisions of the treaty that
were so significant that they had to be reiterated in the
1910 state constitution?
Concerning the circumstances surrounding the drafting of
the treaty, Mexico, by January of 1848, was a nation
prostrate at the feet of the victorious army of the north.
In such a precarious position, she could hardly have been
expected to make demands upon the victors. Mexico was being
absorbed into the United States with only where the boundary
would be drawn to be determined. Uncertain, as to exactly
just what geography would be demanded and transferred, the
Mexican commissioners could be certain about the presumed
fate of the 100,000 or more Mexican citizens that were in
New Mexico, and they demanded a Bill of Rights for these
people. The Mexican commissioners did not want those Mexican
citizens, although a conquered people, to be demeaned to the
position of blacks in the United States, which had been
outlawed since the beginning of the Mexican Republic.
Articles VIII, IX and X were the basic three articles
which expressed the intent of Mexico to protect, to the best
of her compromised ability, her alienated children. (Had all
three of the articles been acceptable to the United States
Congress, it is possible that 20th century
politico-economic history might have been different.)
Article VIII asserted that the Mexicans residing in the
territories previously belonging to Mexico might continue to
reside there retaining their property, or return to Mexico
with their property. They might elect to continue their
Mexican citizenship or become United States citizens. Their
property of every kind was to be "inviolably
respected" as if the same belonged to citizens of the
United States." In either case they should be treated
with equal respect and be given full property and civil
rights afforded the citizens of the United States.
Article VIII was accepted, but articles IX and X were
not. Article IX was even more explicit on the citizenship
question. It demanded statehood (and hence full
participation in the democratic process) as soon as
possible. Article X dealt with land grants and was also
expunged, setting into motion decades of ambiguity for New
Mexico which resulted in land fraud and political corruption
which, ironically enough, became excuses for Congress not
granting statehood.
II
There was another point of view regarding the Mexican
citizens now a pert of the United States that many shared.
N. C. Brooks, who wrote and published a history of the war
in 1849, explains this Anglo-American position from the
vantage point of the conqueror:
"the consequences of the Mexican War must
necessarily be favorable to the inhabitants of the
territory ceded to the United States. Under a
fixed and stable form of government, relieved from
former extractions with ample guarantees for the
protection of person and property, they will have
additional inducements to industry and enterprise,
and by example of their northern neighbors, who
may settle among them, will be stimulated to
generous exertions, which will raise them from
their present ignorance and degradation, to all
the blessings of rational liberty and higher
civilization."
The United States Congress and others concurred with Brooks.
They recalled that only months earlier, Indian and Hispano
New Mexicans had murdered at Taos the first Governor under
United States Rule. Congress was not so sure about quick
admission for New Mexico to full citizenship status. And
accordingly, the change "shall be admitted at the
proper time…" was inserted. Congress further
substituted "as soon as Congress shall determine…"
And when did Congress determine? In 1912, after New Mexico
was kept out of the United States longer than any other
petitioning territory and in violation of the intent of
the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
The deletions and emendations in Article IX and X only
served to further heighten the apprehensions of the Mexican
Congress which feared Mexicans would become second class
citizens. And the New Mexican now temporized over ratifying
the treaty. The Secretary of State, James Buchanan (who had
a reputation for being a wily politician), however,
according to Robert W. Larson, "…gave full assurance
to his counterpart in Mexico by pledging that congress will
never turn a deaf ear to a people anxious to enjoy the
privilege of self-government."
III
How did Mexicans in New Mexico fare between 1848 and 1912
when statehood (and full citizenship) status was finally
achieved? The former citizens of Mexico and their
descendants became the adopted children of the United
States. It was a paternalistic relationship as the Great
Seal of New Mexico graphically portrayed in a publication by
the Territorial Bureau of Immigration:
"The seal of New Mexico it will be noticed is
the eagle, as represented on the seal of Mexico,
resting under the wing or shadowing care of the
American eagle. The reader we thing will say it is
not only highly interesting, but likewise most
appropriate."
In 1882, taking the Ritch description, there was an article
in the Daily New Mexican, which reiterated this
association between the peoples of New Mexico.
Furthermore, there is a curious paradox here in that the
treaty guarantees served to retard progress toward achieving
statehood, which was also promised under the treaty. For
example, there were congressional reports, which attacked
New Mexicans because of their lack of English. As the
historian Robert Larsen has written on this subject, a
report which accompanied the Territory’s 1893 petition for
statehood "attacked the contention that statehood
should be withheld until every inhabitant had learned to
read and write the English language, because this was
contrary to the understanding which had existed among those
who signed the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo."
There were other problems as well: the powerful chairman
of the Interior Affairs Committee, Senator Albert Beveridge,
Larsen continues, "embodied some of the common and
widespread prejudices of Easterners toward the Hispano,
Catholic population of New Mexico. The general feeling of
Anglo-Saxon superiority was certainly present in Beveridge,
a leading spokesman for the new American
imperialism."
Others apparently shared this "eastern
orientation." There were frequent newspaper articles
attacking New Mexicans which likewise indicated strong
prejudices against the Spanish-speaking people. Then there
were New Mexico’s defenders. Congressman William McAdoo,
Democrat from New Jersey, attacked the narrow mindlessness
of New Mexico’s critics, asserting that "Spanish
Americans of New Mexico were Americans by birth, sympathy
and education, furnishing more troops to the Union army
during the Civil War than some of the new states." And,
in the Spanish-American war of 1898, the Roughriders proved
their American-ness (as they would in World War I, World War
II, the Korean Conflict and Vietnam).
Nevertheless, Notwithstanding Buchanan’s vows to the
contrary, it would not be until the 1910 constitution and
statehood in 1912 that the intent of Article IX was finally
secured and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo’s promises
fulfilled.
IV
For those Hispanos (and others as well) who
assembled in Santa Fe in the fall of 1910 to draft the 1910
Constitution, given the poor record enforcement of the
"interim bill of rights," it was apparent that
there were levels of citizenship. It was not that the treaty
was faulty, or that the Mexican commissioners had erred in
there judgment. Quite to the contrary, they had been
extremely perceptive in the probable course of history. The
problem from 1848 to 1910 was how does an internal
colony demand and get compliance. This problem was among
those that the New Mexican founding fathers in 1910
addressed at the 1910 constitutional convention
addressed.
Given this brief historical background, it becomes more
apparent why New Mexicans wrote a unique document in 1910.
They included the "additional" bill of rights,
Article II, Section 5: "…the rights, privileges and
immunities, etc. of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo."
These rights are again reasserted in Article VII, Section 3,
which guaranteed the right to vote regardless of religion,
race, language, color or ability to speak the English
language. Article VIII, Section 8 mandated teacher training
for Spanish-speaking children. The Spanish-American Normal
School at El Rito, when the other normal schools did not
assume this responsibility, was founded for this specific
purpose. Article VII, Section 10 forbade racial
discrimination against children of Spanish descent, and
guaranteed equal access to an education. They were "…never
to be denied admission to the public schools, nor ever be
classed in separate schools, but shall forever enjoy perfect
equality with other children in public schools…"
In summary, the authors of the 1910 constitution drew
upon the experience of the 19th century and
drafted a document which incorporated all possible
protection of the ideals of the United States Constitution
and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Larsen says:
"The stringent provisions regarding equality for
the Spanish-speaking citizen were intended to overcome
fears and apprehensions of the native population that
they might be discriminated against by the Anglo
majority…"
They further established, as reiterated by Larsen, an
amendment process which would make it almost impossible to
strip these rights from the document at a later date. The
New Mexican agreed with the amendment procedure
hoping:
"that the protection given the Spanish-speaking
people would not be tampered with, for native New
Mexicans had the right to protest against being put in
the same status as the Negro in
Mississippi."
|