Let’s play a Filipino parlor game, probably picked up from Spain. Called Ganito Noon, Paano Ngayon, we will compare past and present. In obliging your request to share my views on the elections, I will narrate how Filipinos cast ballots in the late 19th century under Spanish rule. Try, in turn, to spot similarities with how we vote today. Ready?
Positions and participants. Municipal elections were held every year in the late 1800s for five posts: gobernadorcillo, equivalent of the present-day town mayor; teniente mayor, or vice; juez de policia, chief of police; juez de ganados, chief of livestock; juez de sementeras, chief of fields.
The elections were crucial to Spain. The colonial bureaucracy was not extensive enough to administer civil affairs down to the lowest levels. It needed assistance from indios in the task. Laws, decrees and circulars thus were designed to identify these deputies – through elections.
Not all indios could vote and be voted upon, however. They had to be of the principalia – men of sufficient means and community standing, with some sort of education, spoken Spanish, and leadership skills.
Election participants, aside from the incumbent municipal officers, were the cabezas de barangay, or barangay chiefs. Too, the capitanes pasados (past municipal officers), cabezas reformados (past barangay chiefs), and a few other enlisted principales.
Election rules. According to law, participants had to be up-to-date in tax payments, and must not be facing civil or criminal prosecution. Private meetings to discuss choices were forbidden; also spending by candidates or voters for anyone’s election. The legal bars were notable in their breaches than in observance. Prof. Glenn May, University of Oregon, studied 42 elections in eight western Batangas towns in 1887-92. Digging into records at the National Archives, he discovered numerous protests of illicit meetings and spending. Most prevalent were banquets held on the eve of election – all reported to the alcalde mayor (provincial governor) appointed by the gobernador general in Intramuros.
Forming of factions or parties was banned as well. Again, this rule often was broken. In his research on Batangas in the late 1800s, Prof. May noted three common factions.
Clans and factions. The first type of faction was economic in character. At stake in the elections were vast political powers, which could enhance fortunes. In western Batangas, noted for sugarcane, competing plantation families contested the polls. The winner would have power to levy more taxes on a business rival, or lobby the alcalde mayor to pave roads into his plantation. He could "volunteer" a foe for forced labor to the Spanish Crown, or have him fined and jailed for letting farm animals roam loose.
The second type of faction centered on the cura, or parish priest who dominated municipal affairs in the late 1800s. By legislation of the Cortes, the cura was imbued with civil responsibilities: inspecting schools; sitting in local health and tax boards; presiding over the council of agriculture and commerce. All this, on top of his spiritual duties. The cura would thus strive to influence the election of his favorites – those who can assist him in civil works, and in herding parishioners into Sunday mass and other church activities. But the cura was prone to temptation of power and perks. In one election in Taal, the gobernadorcillo was favored by the Augustinian padre. The gobernador general and alcalde mayor conferred to recall the result, for fear that the winner would be used to get back at the cura’s enemies.
The third – the anti-clerical, anti-Spanish faction – was perceptible in Batangas, from where many revolucionarios came. Notably, according to Prof. May, this type was usually led by clans whose menfolk had studied in nearby Manila.
Rituals and procedures. The municipal election was a solemn event, its format set by law. On the appointed day, the alcalde mayor and his scribe would arrive at the municipio, there to be met by the cura and the assembled principales. After fervent prayers for an enlightened voting, the scribe would read the election laws and circulars in the language of the province. Then came the sorteo, the selection of 13 voters from among the principalia.
The gobernadorcillo automatically could vote. The names of the other principales would be written on papeletas and placed inside two urns, one for incumbent municipal and barangay officers, the other for past officers. A boy, who by law should be no more than seven years old, would draw six names from each urn.
The 13 voters would then retreat to the voting room, with the alcalde mayor and scribe, for the torneo. This first round of voting, only for gobernadorcillo, used written ballots. The 13 electors were required to write the names of their first and second choices. After this, the voting for the four other officers was held by raising of hands. The ritual completed, the results were recorded and read to the waiting principales.
The results were not final, however. The alcalde mayor must render a formal report to Manila. The gobernador general had supreme authority to affirm or reject the results. With crude communication and transportation at that time, as well as frequent protests, it usually took months before the final outcome could be implemented.
Protests and charges. Of the 42 elections that Prof. May studied, the result of a good dozen were overturned by Manila, for various reasons. In one case previously mentioned, the alcalde mayor and the governor general feared that the cura might sic the winning gobernadorcillo on his detractors, mostly Freemasons. Winners suspected of involvement in anti-clerical or anti-Spanish activities were not ratified. Some were proved to have broken the rules against campaigning and spending. In two cases, gobernadorcillos were disqualified after their election, when losers protested that they were not of sufficient wealth after all.
On record, too, are losers protesting that the cura had manipulated the results, or the scribe had not recorded these correctly. Prof. May noted instances of election-related violence that led to postponement of voting or the nullification of the results.