121
The ideological controversy between socialistas and individualistas is discussed at length by Hennessy, pp. 15-25.
122
The one area in which Galdós loses his objectivity and sense of proportion is in the realm of socioeconomic reform as seen by the federalist socialistas. Partially identifying with middle class intellectuals such as Pi y Margall, he was angered by what he conceived to be a sellout of the Republican Party to working-class interests (XXV, 296). He did not appear to be cognizant of a reality noted by Carr, Spain, p. 293; «Pi's 'socialism' did not get beyond wage arbitration, a minimum of state action to improve working But it was a betrayal for the members of the middle class to offer to help the workers make their revolution beyond the 'new feudalism' to the agrarian poor.» Galdós does not view the disentailments and the rise of a wealthy landed gentry as a «newfeudalism», and his own attitudes towards private property, coupled with an execrably paternalistic conception of the lower class, impell him to react defensively, almost hysterically, to such doctrine. It was bad enough for the workers themselves to advocate social revolution. But it was a betrayal for the members of the midle class to offer to help the workers make their revolution in exchange for votes. Such opinions are due of course to Galdós' personal view of the middle class which he considers to be Spain's hope, and therefore an entity not to be destroyed. It was evidently his opinion that such would be the case if Pi's «generalization of property» was carried through. For his views concerning desamortización, a revealing albeit admittedly incomplete personal vision is found in the first volume of Política española, Obras inéditas, III (Madrid, 1923), 207-208. It must be kept in mind that in this passage he discusses only Mendizábal, and not the later disentailment of Madoz.
123
Regalado's selective historicism is manifested quite clearly here. On p. 94, text and n. 17, he too quotes these same deprecatory statements (although he gives incorrect pagination) about the International. But he ignors the entire passage which follows the fragment just cited (v text below), the beginning of which is the same sentence mentioning the «personas sensatas.» See in addition my 'Historical Perspeetive...»
124
On 13 February, 1872, Galdós notes the poor treatment of the pueblo from the ruling classes, and its subsequent alienation, «...de que son responsables todos absolutamente los políticos españoles sin exceptuar los más avanzados. (XXIV, 458-459)» A year after the Paris Commune, he is still preoccupied by social problems (XXV, 297; 28 March, 1872), and on 28 April opines «El mundo civilizado encontrará quizás una triste explicacion de tales fenómenos en vicios innegables de la actual sociedad... (idem, 613)» Two weeks later (13 May) he again talks about the social problems besetting Europe (XXVI, 141-142). In Spain, the situation is less intense; however, «Se ha hablado tanto de la Internacional, se ha exagerado tanto la acción destructora del combustible usado por los incendiarios de la capital de Francia, que como último término de todas nuestras discordias nos suponemos envueltos en las pestíferas llamas del petróleo y atribuimos á los desesperados de esta sociedad mayor poder del que realmente tienen. (idem, 141)» This rumormongering about International activity and the danger of revolution is insidious not only because it is a gross exaggeration, but also because «...entre los partidos idólatras del órden [sic] hasta la exageracion no deja de haber alguno á quien principalmente convenga que la sociedad se vea expuesta á una crisis [sic] suprema para tener de ese modo ocasion y pretexto de salvarla... (idem, 142)»
125
On Ruiz Zorrilla's deep-rooted mistrust for any monarchical institution and his subsequent inability to work with Amadeo, v Hennessy, p. 144. Carr, Spain, p. 320, examines Zorrilla's reaction to the appointment of Unionists to the Serrano ministry. Galdós' accuracy and the extent to which he reveals Radical Party movements underscore the need for a thorough historical examination of that faction during these years.
126
Hennessy, pp. 146, 148. The joint efforts were usually cooperative alliances between Carlists and Federalists, both of whom, like the Alphonsists, opposed the Monarchy. The Radicals were of course a monarchical party: hence Galdós' indignation. Additionally, Carlists and Federals had also collaborated in planning an armed rising for December, 1870, which collapsed due to insufficient funds (ibid., 140).
127
Retraimiento consists of abstention from both elections and electoral campaigns, as well as from participation in the Cortes. The import of such an action by a political party lies in the implicit denial of its faith in the existing government and constitutional processes. The party therefore goes underground, and the next logical step is an attempt to overthrow the government.
128
On election results and consequent disillusion of the member parties of the coalición, v Hennessy, pp. 159-160. Both Hennessy, loc. cit., and Carr, Spain, pp. 337-339, examine the resultant split in the Carlist ranks between the legalists, led by Nocedal, and the militants or activists favoring retraimiento and armed rising. Against the advice of the aging General Cabrera, paradoxically the darling of the militants, Don Carlos at last opted for revolt and invaded from France; Nocedal bad to comply.
129
The dispute which brought down Sagasta's government concerned an unauthorized transfer of funds from the Cuban budget. Ironically, Sagasta was toppled and dishonored in attempting (and succeeding) to conceal a scandal in the king's private affairs (Carr, Spain, 332, n.).
130
Galdós' revista was in press prior to the elections on the twenty-fourth; hence the discrepancy in dates.