# data[].attributes.body
The Foreign Miners’ Tax was a legislative Act passed by the Californian government in 1850. It mandated that all foreign, non-American miners had to pay $20 per month for the right to mine within the state’s borders. However, this policy was almost solely enacted upon Latinx and Chinese miners, foreigners who faced the most prejudice in this era. Most miners of European descent did not need to pay the tax. This Act was the first of many to follow which allowed for outright discrimination against Latinx populations.

# data[].attributes.body
James Buchanan, US Ambassador to Great Britain, signs the Ostend Manifesto, also known as the Ostend Circular, urging the purchase of Cuba for the United States. The US justified that due to national security, the US should claim Cuba from Spain's weak hands and enforce a war if they were not given Cuba. The US real intention however was to expand their slave trade.

# data[].attributes.body
With the rise of a liberal reform party, the Spanish government passed a law that granted freedom to all slaves age 60+ and all slaves that belonged to Spain. The law was really only enforced in Puerto Rico, meaning Cuba's population of slaves was much higher. This was mainly caused by the dependency of slave labor for sugarcane production in the country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Article 1. All children of slave mothers, born after the publication of this law, are declared free.

Article 2. All slaves born between the 18th of September, 1868, and the time of the publication of this law, are acquired by the state by the payment to the owners of the sum of twenty five dollars.

Article 3. All slaves who have served under the Spanish flag or who have in any way aided the troops during the present insurrection in Cuba are declared free. All those are equally recognized as free as shall have been so declared by the superior government of Cuba, by virtue of its jurisdiction. The state shall pay their value to their masters, if the latter have remained faithful to the Spanish cause; if belonging to insurgents, they shall receive no indemnity.

Article 4. Slaves, who, at the time of the publication of this law, shall have attained the age of sixty years are declared free, without any indemnification to their owners. The same benefit shall be enjoyed by those who shall hereafter reach this age.

Article 5. All slaves belonging to the state, either as emancipated, or who for any other cause are at present under the control of the state, shall at once enter upon the full exercise of their civil rights.

Article 6. Those persons freed by this law who are mentioned in articles 1 and 2, shall remain under the control of the owners of the mother, after the payment of the indemnity prescribed in Article 2.

Article 7. The control referred to in the foregoing article imposes upon the person exercising it the obligation to maintain his wards, to clothe them, care for them in sickness, giving them primary instruction, and the education necessary to carry on an art or trade. The person exercising the aforesaid control acquired all the rights of a guardian, and may, moreover, enjoy the benefit of the labor of the freedman, without making any compensation, until said freedman has reached the age of eighteen years.

Article 8. When the freedman has reached the age of eighteen years, 'he shall receive half the wages of a freedman. Of these wages, one half shall be paid to him at once, and the other half shall be reserved in order to form a capital for him, in the manner to be determined by sub- sequent regulations.

Article 9. On attaining the age of twenty-two years, the freedman shall acquire the full control of his civil rights and his capital shall be paid to him.

Article 10. The control will also be annulled: first, by the marriage of the freedman, when the same is entered into by females over fourteen years and males over eighteen years old; second, by a proved bad treatment on the part of the guardian or his noncompliance with his duty, as stipulated in Article 7; third, should the guardian prostitute or favor the prostitution of the freed- woman.

Article 11. The above mentioned control is transmissible by all means known in law, and is also resign- able when just motives exist. Legitimate or illegitimate parents who are free shall be permitted to assume the control of their children by the payment to the guardian of the same of any expense he may have incurred for account of the freedman. Subsequent regulations will settle the basis of this indemnification.

Article 12. The Superior civil government shall form, in the space of one month from the publication of this law, lists of the slaves comprised in articles 3 and 5.

Article 13. The freed persons mentioned in the fore- going article remain under the control of the state. This control is confined to protecting them, defending them and furnishing them the means of gaining a livelihood, without limiting their liberty in the slightest degree. Those who prefer to return to Africa shall be conveyed thither.

Article 14. The slaves referred to in article 4 may remain with their owners, who shall thus acquire control over them. When they shall have preferred to continue with their former masters it shall be optional with the latter to give them compensation or not, but, in all cases, as well as in that of the freed persons being unable to maintain themselves by reason of physical disability, it shall be the duty of the said former masters to feed them, clothe them, and care for them in sickness. This duty shall be a concomitant of the right to employ them in labors suitable to their condition. Should the freedman object to the compliance with his obligation to labor, or should he create disturbances at the house of his guardian, the authorities will decide the questions arising therefrom, after having first heard the freedman.

Article 15. If the freedman of his own free will shall leave the control of his former master, the latter shall no longer be under the obligations mentioned in the foregoing article.

Article 16. The Government shall provide the means necessary for the indemnifications made necessary by the present law, by means of a tax upon those who shall remain in slavery, ranging from eleven to sixty years of age.

Article 17. Any act of cruelty, duly justified as having been indicted by the tribunals of justice, will bring with it as a consequence the freedom of the slave suffering such excess of chastisement.

Article 18. Any concealment impeding the application of the benefits of this law shall be punished according to title 13 of the penal code.

Article 19. All those shall be considered free who do not appear enrolled in the census drawn up in the Island of Puerto Rico the 31st of December, 1869, and in that which will have been drawn up in the Island of Cuba on the 31st of December of the present year, 1870.

Article 20. The Government shall make a special regulation for the execution of this law.

Article 21. The Government will report to the Cortes when the Cuban deputies shall have been admitted, a bill for the compensated emancipation of those who remain in slavery after the establishment of this law. Meantime this emancipation is carried into effect; the penalty of the whip, authorized by chapter 13 of the regulations for Puerto Rico and Cuba, shall be abolished; neither can there be sold separately from their mothers' children younger than fourteen years, nor slaves who are united in matrimony.

By a resolution of the Congressional Cortes the foregoing is reported to the Regent of the Kingdom for its promulgation as a law.

MANUEL Ruiz ZORILLA, President.

MANUEL DE LIANGS Y PERSI, Deputy Secretary.

JULIAN SANCHEZ RUANO, Deputy Secretary.

Source: Willis Fletcher Johnson, The History of Cuba, Volume 3 (New York: B.F. Buck & Company, Inc., 1920).
* * *
Ley Moret

Artículo 1.° Todos los hijos de madres esclavas que nazcan después de la publicación de esta ley son declarados libres.

Artículo 2.° Todos los esclavos nacidos desde el 17 de Septiembre de 1868 hasta la publicación de esta ley son adquiridos por el Estado mediante el pago a sus dueños de la cantidad de 50 escudos.

Artículo3.° Todos los esclavos que hayan servido bajo la bandera española, o de cualquier manera hayan auxiliado a las tropas durante la actual insurrección de Cuba, son declarados libres. Igualmente quedan reconocidos como tales todos los que hubiesen sido declarados libres por el gobernador superior de Cuba en uso de sus atribuciones. El Estado indemnizará de su valor a los dueños si han permanecido fieles a la causa española; si pertenecieren a los insurrectos, no habrá lugar a indemnización.

Artículo 4.° Los esclavos que a la publicación de esta ley hubieren cumplido 60 años, son declarados libres sin indemnización a sus dueños. El mismo beneficio gozarán los que en adelante llegaren a esa edad.

Artículo 5.° Todos los esclavos que por cualquier causa pertenezcan al Estado, son declarados libres. Asimismo quellos que a título de emancipados estuviesen bajo la protección del Estado, entrarán desde luego en el pleno ejercicio de los derechos de los ingenuos.

Artículo 6.° Los libertos por ministerio de esta ley, de que hablan los artículos 1 y 2, quedarán bajo el patronato de los dueños de la madre.

Artículo 7.° El patronato a que se refiere el artículo anterior impone al patrono la obligación de mantener a sus clientes, vestirlos, asistirlos en sus enfermedades y darles la enseñanza primaria y la educación necesaria para ejercer un arte o un oficio.
El patrono adquiere todos los derechos del tutor, pudiendo a más aprovecharse del trabajo del liberto sin retribución alguna hasta la edad de 18 años.

Artículo 8.° Llegado el liberto a la edad de 18 años, ganará la mitad del jornal de un hombre libre. De este jornal se le entregará desde luego la mitad, reservándose la otra mitad para formarle un peculio, de la manera que determinen disposiciones posteriores.

Artículo 9.° Al cumplir los 22 años, el liberto adquirirá el pleno gozo de sus derechos, cesando el patronato, y se le entregará su peculio.

Artículo 10.° El patronato terminará también.

1. Por el matrimonio del liberto cuando lo verifiquen las hembras después de los 14 años y los varones después de los 18.

2. Por creer probado contra el patrono el abuso en castigos, o faltas a sus deberes consignados en el artículo 7.

3. Cuando el patrono prostituya o favorezca la prostitución del liberto.

Artículo 11.° El patronato es trasmisible por todos los medios conocidos en derecho, y renunciable por justas causas.
Los padres legítimos o naturales que sean libres, podrán reivindicar el patronato de sus hijos abonando al patrono una indemnización por los gastos hechos en beneficio del liberto.
Disposiciones posteriores fijarán la base de esta indemnización.

Artículo 12.° El gobernador superior civil proveera en el término de un mes desde la publicación de esta ley, las listas de los esclavos que estén comprendidos en los artículos 3 y 5.

Artículo 13.° Los libertos y libres a que se refiere el artículo anterior quedarán bajo el patronato del Estado, reducida a protegerlos y proporcionarles el medio de ganar su subsistencia sin cortarles de modo alguno su libertad.
Los que prefieran volver al África, serán conducidos a ella.

Artículo 14.° Los esclavos a que se refiere el artículo 4° podrán permanecer en la casa de sus dueños, que adquirirán en este caso el carácter de patronos.
Cuando hubieren optado por continuar en la casa de sus patronos, será potestativo en estos retribuirles o no; pero en todo caso, así como en el de imposibilidad física para mantenerse por sí, tendrán la obligación de alimentarlos, vestirlos y asistirlos en sus enfermedades, así como el derecho de ocuparlos en trabajos adecuados a su estado.

Artículo 15.° Si el liberto por su voluntad saliere del patronato de su antiguo amo, no tendrán ya efecto para con éste las obligaciones contenidas en el precedente artículo.

Artículo 16.° El Gobierno arbitrará los recursos necesarios para las indemnizaciones a que dará lugar la presente ley, por medio de un impuesto sobre los que aún permanezcan en esclavitud.

Artículo 17.° El delito de sevicia justificado y pensado por los tribunales de justicia, traerá consigo la consecuencia de la libertad del siervo que sufriere el exceso.

Artículo 18.° Toda ocultación que impida la aplicación de los beneficios de esta ley será castigada con arreglo al título XIII del Código penal.

Artículo 19.° Serán considerados libres todos los que no aparezcan inscritos en el censo formado en la isla de Puerto Rico en 31 de diciembre de 1869, y en el que deberá quedar terminado en la isla de Cuba en 31 de diciembre del corriente año de 1870.

Artículo 20.° El Gobierno dictará un reglamento especial para el cumplimiento de esta ley.

Artículo 21.° El Gobierno presentará a las Cortes al abrirse la próxima legislatura el proyecto de emancipación gradual de los que queden en servidumbre después del planteamiento de la presente ley.

Palacio de las Cortes 3 de Junio de 1870 - El ministro de Ultramar, Segismundo Moret y Prendergast.

Fuente: Dictamen de la Comisión, relativo al Proyecto de Ley sobre la abolición de la esclavitud (Palacio de las Cortes, 3 de junio de 1870).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Moret Law Article 1. All children of slave mothers, born after the publication of this law, are declared free. Article 2. All slaves born between the 18th of September, 1868, and the time of the publication of this law, are acquired by the state by the payment to the owners of the sum...

# data[].attributes.body
In 1898 Spain ceded Puerto Rico to the United States as part of the post Spanish American war treaty and after a successful invasion of the Island by the US. Despite not officially becoming a US territory until 1917, the attempted Americanization of its people began almost immediately. Public schooling was taught almost entirely in English and Spanish became a special/optional course despite Spanish culture being ingrained in the Puerto Rican way of life. Americans pushed their ideals onto Puerto Rican citizens as a way of "civilizing" them.

# data[].attributes.body
The Foraker act put into place a much clearer definition of Puerto Rico's relationship to the US. It became clear that Puerto Rico was a territory of the United States, but not a state. For the million people who lived there, one representative was given in Congress, and this representative did not get a vote. Similarly, the ctizens of Puerto Rico were not given the right to vote in US elections. This is important because it tied Puerto Rico to the US while silencing it's citizens.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The predominant development in the story of Hispanic-American Members of Congress during this era was the ambiguous absorption of Puerto Rico into the national fold. The island territory was neither fully part of the United States nor an independent country. "Since [Puerto Rico] was subject to the sovereignty of and was owned by the United States, it was foreign to the United States in a domestic sense," pronounced Justice Henry Brown in the Supreme Court's landmark Downes v. Bidwell (182 U.S. 244) decision in 1901-which was intended to clarify the island's position, but ended up only adding a new layer of uncertainty instead. ¹⁴ Primarily as a result of this contradic decision, Congress governed Puerto Rico through a series of statutes that enabled the United States to extract island resources and exploit its strategic location at the center of the Caribbean while paying little attention to the economic, cultural, and political realities on the island. Lawmakers found themselves in the position of "fabricat[ing] the jurisdictional fiction of an unincorporated territory," notes a scholar, effectively "relegating the island to the perpetual status of a ward who will never become part of his patron's family." ¹⁵

U.S. Expansionism and the Caribbean

Although the United States began acquiring Caribbean territories in the late 1800s, the impetus for such acquisitions was based on Manifest Destiny-the concept that the United States had a moral claim on territory stretching to the Pacific Ocean and beyond-and on the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, which asserted that European nations should not meddle in the Western Hemisphere. The desire for security and control of economic resources such as sugar and tobacco also fueled some U.S. policymakers' ambitions for Caribbean territory during the antebellum era. ¹⁶

Though the Civil War temporarily halted America's focus on the Caribbean, by the 1880s, large American businesses sought new markets, and the U.S. government desired influence beyond the North American continent. Within U.S. society, the emergence of a social elite and the travels of entrepreneurs, tourists, missionaries, and settlers also encouraged the public to look at expanding the United States' role in world affairs. Even anti-expansionists such as President Grover Cleveland had a mixed record as far as pursuing an aggressive foreign policy and checking U.S. expansionist initiatives in the early 1890s. ¹⁷ Territorial expansion was a key platform for President William McKinley during the 1896 and 1900 elections, especially the expansion southward into the Caribbean where an American-owned isthmian canal was being built to connect the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. ¹⁸

Spanish-American War

When Cuban revolutionaries began calling for independence from Spain in 1895, the United States found itself in an awkward situation given Cuba's proximity and its strategic Caribbean location. The American press began sensationalizing the events in Cuba, and popular opinion rallied behind the revolutionaries. McKinley and his deputies pressured Spanish officials to stop the uprising before it became uncontrollable, warning that failure to comply might precipitate American intervention. ¹⁹

By February 1898 the diplomatic situation had deteriorated and the relationship between the U.S. and Spain was tottering. The explosion on February 15 of the U.S.S. Maine, an American battleship newly arrived in Havana Harbor, killed 266 sailors and became the tipping point for American intervention. Though the circumstances of the explosion were unclear, many, including some in Congress, blamed Spain. ²⁰ President McKinley resisted the immediate calls for war, but with conditions in Cuba expected to worsen, he acknowledged the conflict in a message to Congress on April 11. ²¹ He blamed Spain and demanded an end to the war to protect U.S. interests and promote peace in the Caribbean. The House voted 325 to 19 in favor of war, passing a joint resolution that stopped short of recognizing an independent Cuban government. But the Senate added language to the House measure recognizing the Cuban Republic three days later on April 16, by a 67 to 21 vote. ²² When the conference committee convened, negotiations lasted until after one o'clock in the morning. The final resolution acknowledged Cuban freedom but did not acknowledge Cuba as a republic. Congress formally declared war on April 25. ²³

On July 25, 1898, the United States invaded Puerto Rico as part of an American strategy to capture Spanish holdings in the Caribbean. The Spanish Army put up little resistance to the invasion, and some rural peasants even formed mobile bands to resist their former colonizers. ²⁴ Two future Resident Commissioners watched the assault from different perspectives. As a leader in the Autonomist Party and having recently won home rule for Puerto Rico from the Spanish government, Luis Muñoz Rivera watched the invasion with dismay. His political rival, Santiago Iglesias, whom Muñoz Rivera had imprisoned for his labor agitation at the outbreak of the war, nearly died when an American shell struck the prison. Upon his release, he aided the American invaders by serving as an interpreter. Hostilities ended August 12, 1898, and the United States installed a military government in Puerto Rico on October 18. The Treaty of Paris, which was signed December 10, 1898, ended the war, with Spain ceding Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines to the United States. Among those present at the treaty's signing in France was future Resident Commissioner Federico Degetau.

Overview of Puerto Rican Politics, 1898-1900

Puerto Rican politics differed from those of the other islands in the Spanish Caribbean and from those of other U.S. territories. Unlike Cuba and the Dominican Republic-which were characterized by revolutionary militarism and authoritarianism, respectively-Puerto Rico followed a tradition of working within the existing colonial system to liberalize civil government on the island. ²⁵ By the time the United States acquired Puerto Rico at the end of the Spanish-American War the island's political elite, who would shape the first generation of relations with the United States, already had a long history of working within a colonial framework. By 1869 the Spanish Cortes in Madrid had seated the first Puerto Rican delegates. Over time Puerto Rican businessmen and politicians became inclined to favor "electoral and parliamentary solutions to its colonial dilemma," thus reinforcing "a defining characteristic of the island's political culture," relative economic stability with rigid class lines. ²⁶

Autonomists, who sought self-rule within the Spanish imperial orbit, dominated island politics by the 1880s. They formed Liberal and Conservative factions that often reflected the platforms of major parties in Madrid. Moreover, they constantly advanced their case for ever-greater measures of home rule by contrasting the island's record as a faithful outpost of the empire with Cuba's insurrectionist movement. For instance, the Autonomist faction, led by Luis Muñoz Rivera, contributed "loyalty and support for the Liberal Party in the Spanish Cortes in exchange for concessions of enhanced self-rule." Muñoz Rivera declared to Spanish officials, "We are Spaniards and wrapped in the Spanish flag we shall die." ²⁷ He and future Resident Commissioner Federico Degetau were among those who traveled to Madrid in 1895 to secure home rule for Puerto Rico from the Spanish government.

The United States' victory in the Spanish-American War moved Puerto Rico's trajectory away from self-rule, frustrating and traumatizing Puerto Rico's political elites "to the extent that more than a century later, those wounds continued to ooze with no end in sight." ²⁸ Instead of political autonomy, which Spain had promised, the United States implemented two years of military rule under three different governors: Major John Brooke, General Guy Henry, and General George W. Davis-all of whom had backgrounds as Indian fighters, leaving Puerto Ricans dismayed at the unlikelihood of their political recognition. ²⁹ After the United States occupied the island in 1898, Muñoz Rivera wrote a poem likening his efforts to achieve political autonomy for Puerto Rico to Sisyphus's eternal task of pushing a huge rock up a hill, only to have it roll back down. ³⁰

The Foraker Act and Its Discontents

In 1900 the U.S. ended its military occupation of Puerto Rico and attempted to define the island's position within the federal orbit. Beginning as H.R. 6883, a bill to apply U.S. customs and internal revenue laws in Puerto Rico, the Foraker Act was the first law to define Puerto Rico's territorial status in the early 20th century. The bill was introduced by its chief sponsor, House Ways and Means Chairman Sereno Payne of New York, in January 1900. ³¹ Senate bill S. 2264, introduced by Joseph Foraker of Ohio, simultaneously provided a "temporary civil government for Porto Rico." A report that accompanied the bill recommended "the election of a Delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives, who shall be allowed a seat but not vote in that body."

Two types of opposition emerged. Some Members argued that the legislation did not go far enough, challenging the notion that a single individual could represent more than one million, a constituency significantly larger than any House Member's. Also, the provision fell significantly short of Puerto Rico's representation in the Spanish Cortes, which included four senators and 12 deputies. ³² Other Members, such as Senator John C. Spooner of Wisconsin, believed the legislation went too far. Spooner felt territories such as Puerto Rico and Hawaii would never become states and that the election of a Delegate held out a false promise of eventual statehood. "There is no difference between a Delegate in Congress and a member except in the matter of a vote. It has always been considered a pledge of statehood," Spooner argued. "I am not yet ready, nor are we called upon now, to give that quasi pledge of statehood, or to imply that they will ever reach a condition where it shall be either for their interests, or certainly for ours, to let them be one of the members of this Union." ³³

A small Puerto Rican delegation representing a diverse range of political interests appealed for a civil government during debate on the Foraker Act. Among the members of the delegation was future Resident Commissioner Tulio Larrínaga, who was then a municipal engineer of San Juan and a member of the Puerto Rican Federal Party. Testifying before several House and Senate committees about conditions on the island, he called for free trade with the United States, advocated territorial status for Puerto Rico, and discussed universal male suffrage. ³⁴ "Puerto Rico needs a civil government even more than free trade," he told the House Committee on Ways and Means. "The people want to feel that they have become in a tangible manner attached to the United States and [that Puerto Rico is] not a mere dependency." ³⁵

The House passed Payne's bill by a vote of 172 to 160. The Senate replaced the language in the House bill with its own, adding such extensive amendments that the bill was eventually named for its Senate sponsor. President McKinley signed the Foraker Act (31 Stat. 77-86) on April 12, 1900. The law established a colonial regime, administered by the U.S. President and the Congress, and designated the island an "unorganized territory"; thus, while Puerto Ricans were not granted U.S. citizenship, those who swore loyalty to the United States would receive its protection. The act placed absolute power in the hands of a governor appointed by the President and an 11-member executive council that comprised a majority of U.S. appointees who directed the island's six principal administrative bureaus. The law also created a 35-member house of delegates that would be popularly elected every two years, but undermined its authority by vesting the executive council with unchecked veto power. Additionally, it provided that "qualified voters" would elect biennially a Resident Commissioner who would be "entitled to official recognition as such by all Departments" and given a seat in the U.S. House. Finally, the law anticipated, but stopped short of, instituting a system of free trade. Instead it established a reduced ad valorem tariff of 15 percent for all Puerto Rican merchandise entering the United States and all U.S. goods entering Puerto Rico. ³⁶ Although the Foraker Act was economically generous in some respects-it exempted the island from U.S. taxes, for example-many Puerto Ricans were bitterly disappointed because it left the island's political status unresolved and created an undemocratic administrative structure. ³⁷

Future Resident Commissioner Luis Muñoz Rivera emerged as the voice of mainstream discontent with the Foraker Act. Addressing the Puerto Rican house of delegates in 1908, he characterized American political leaders as "petty kings" and the house of delegates as an institution serving little purpose because its laws were "wrecked on that perpetual reef " of the U.S.-appointed governor's council. Even in oppressed countries like Ireland and Hungary, the lawmakers were natives, Muñoz Rivera noted, but "the members of the Porto Rican senate are Americans, and we are given the laws of Montana, of California.... The inventors of this labyrinth find pleasure in repeating that we are not prepared [for self-government]," he said. "I wish to return the charge word for word ... that American statesmen are not prepared to govern foreign colonies so different in character and of such peculiar civilization." ³⁸

Insular Cases

The Foraker Act also raised questions about American citizenship for Puerto Ricans. Since the passage of the Northwest Ordinance in 1787, most territories within the continental United States achieved statehood by following well-established guidelines. ³⁹ The Insular Cases, which were eventually heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, stemmed from debate about whether overseas territories such as Puerto Rico should be considered foreign or domestic for tax purposes, but the question on most Americans' minds, was whether Puerto Ricans would be entitled to full citizenship under the new civil government. ⁴⁰ Of the Insular Cases heard before the Supreme Court, scholars consider Downes v. Bidwell (182 U.S. 244, 1901), Dorr v. United States (195 U.S. 138, 1904), Balzac v. Porto Rico (258 U.S. 298, 1922), and Rasmussen v. United States (197 U.S. 516, 1925) to be the most important because they delineated the entitlements of incorporated versus nonincorporated territories. The Supreme Court ruled that nonincorporated territories would receive "fundamental" constitutional protections including "freedom of expression, due process of law, equal protection under the law ... [and] protection against illegal searches," but not the full range of constitutional protections enjoyed by U.S. citizens. ⁴¹ The Supreme Court classified Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Pacific territories acquired after 1898 as nonincorporated territories. Incorporated territories received full constitutional protections because they were considered part of the United States. ⁴² Puerto Ricans were considered "citizens of Porto Rico," a designation that gave rise to the term "U.S. national," a person who receives fundamental constitutional protections but is not entitled to full civil or constitutional rights.

The court was deeply divided over the groundbreaking decision in Downes v. Bidwell. In a 5 to 4 decision, the Justices wrote five different opinions (one majority, with two separate concurrences, and two dissenting), reflecting an array of views. ⁴³ In effect, the ambiguous ruling reinforced the Supreme Court's marginal role in territorial jurisdiction, thus preserving-and arguably strengthening-Congress's absolute authority over Puerto Rico's status.

The Jones Act of 1917: Origins and Discontents

Frustrated with the Foraker Act, the Puerto Rican Union Party led a revolt against then-governor Regis Post and the executive council in 1909, accusing them of deliberately resisting calls for political reform on the island. After a large portion of its legislative agenda was rejected, the Puerto Rican house of delegates submitted petitions protesting the Foraker Act to the U.S. Congress and to President William Howard Taft, and threatened to adjourn without passing vital budget and appropriations bills. Congress amended the Foraker Act to enable it to pass Puerto Rico's budget bills if the house of delegates failed to act, and American officials became newly aware of Puerto Rico's grievances with its governing legislation. ⁴⁴

Woodrow Wilson's ascent to the presidency increased the likelihood that the Foraker Act would be amended. In 1912 Wilson campaigned on a promise to ensure U.S. citizenship and home rule for Puerto Ricans. ⁴⁵ From 1912 to 1914, Insular Affairs Committee chairman William A. Jones of Virginia, who had previously opposed the Foraker Act, introduced bills on six occasions calling for a new constitutional government for Puerto Rico and U.S. citizenship for its residents. None of them gained any traction, but two events in 1914 added to the island's importance in the eyes of U.S. officials: the completion of the Panama Canal and the start of the First World War. The canal's role as a vital connection between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans highlighted Puerto Rico's strategic value as a stopover for maritime commercial traffic. This was especially the case for ships coming from Europe, but the start of World War I strengthened fears that the Caribbean would be dragged into the conflict. Puerto Rico had served for centuries as a Spanish outpost, and in the early 20th century it was crucial to U.S. plans to protect the Panama Canal from German U-boats patrolling Caribbean shipping lanes. ⁴⁶

Though the Wilson administration was preoccupied with events in Europe, the Bureau of Insular Affairs (BIA) argued that cementing the political bonds between Puerto Rico and the mainland would pay significant dividends. "The word loyalty will have a greater meaning [for Puerto Ricans] if we admit them to the conglomerate of our citizenship," read a 1912 internal BIA memo. "Otherwise, there will always be discontent[ed] elements that will agitate for breaking the bond." ⁴⁷ Also, U.S. military planners were eager to assemble a volunteer Puerto Rican home guard and a Puerto Rican regiment to protect the island and defend the Canal Zone, respectively. Puerto Ricans' newly acquired U.S. citizenship made recruitment easier. On an island with roughly one million inhabitants, hundreds of thousands of men registered for the draft; more than 17,000 were selected. ⁴⁸ The island also exceeded its fundraising quota for Liberty Loan bond drives. "We have been at your side in the hour of crisis and the people who are good to share the responsibilities, hardships, and sacrifices at any great emergency and who are quick to respond to the call of public duty, should also be good to share the prerogatives and advantages of your institutions and of American citizenship in normal times," said Resident Commissioner Félix Córdova Dávila. ⁴⁹

Introduced by House Insular Affairs Chairman Jones-and following on the heels of the First Jones Act (39 Stat. 545‐556), which in August 1916 had increased Filipino autonomy and pledged independence as soon as practicable-the Second Jones Act (39 Stat. 951‐968), which pertained to Puerto Rico, was less sweeping than the Foraker Act and retained much of the colonial structure. While the new legislation increased membership in the territorial house from 35 representatives to 39 and created for the first time a popularly elected senate with 19 members, it reserved Congress's right to annul or amend bills passed by the insular legislature and it required that directors of four of the six major government departments-agriculture and labor, health, interior, and treasury-be appointed by the U.S. President with the advice and consent of the territorial senate. The two remaining department heads, the attorney general and the commissioner of education, would be named solely by the President. ⁵⁰ As a scholar of Puerto Rican politics notes, the Jones Act "barely nodded in the direction of [the] American principle of government by consent of the governed," and though it provided some "coveted gains," it hardly fulfilled most Puerto Ricans' aspirations. ⁵¹ Most significant, rather than deferring to Puerto Ricans on the issue of citizenship, the final version of the Jones Act conveyed new constitutional obligations.

Citizenship was a controversial subject on an island whose political leaders struggled to define its relationship with the United States. For example, Luis Muñoz Rivera initially argued against granting Puerto Ricans U.S. citizenship in the debate over the Jones Act, following the lead of his Union Party, which eliminated statehood from its platform in 1912. However, he personally embraced the prospect of U.S. citizenship for Puerto Ricans. After eventually endorsing the Jones Act on the House Floor, Muñoz Rivera proceeded to explain why many Puerto Ricans rejected it. "My countrymen, who, precisely the same as yours, have their dignity and self respect to maintain, refuse to accept a citizenship of an inferior order, a citizenship of the second class, which does not permit them to dispose of their own resources nor to live their own lives nor to send to this Capitol their proportional representation," he said. ⁵² Muñoz Rivera never saw the Jones Act implemented; he died before President Wilson signed it into law on March 2, 1917.

Intended to pacify Puerto Rico's concerns and strengthen America's grip on the Caribbean Basin during wartime, the Jones Act only made Puerto Rico's political situation more complex. "Rather than solving the status question, the Jones Act intensified the status struggle," placing Resident Commissioners at the center of the debate observes historian Luis Martínez-Fernández." ⁵³

The Ongoing Question of Puerto Rican Status

What the Foraker Act, the Insular Cases, and the Jones Act failed to finally determine was Puerto Rico's political status as a nonincorporated American territory. According to Martínez-Fernández, the early decades of U.S. rule in Puerto Rico were driven by a policy of "bifurcation and fragmentation" as U.S. authorities played favorites with factions of the island's political elite in an attempt "to retain the island as a territorial conquest of ambiguous political status." ⁵⁴ Puerto Rican politicians were also split on the question of status. The popularity of three broad options-statehood, complete independence, and some measure of autonomy within the colonial structure-waxed and waned among Puerto Rico's political elites.

By virtue of their participation in the American federal government most Resident Commissioners either advocated a form of colonial autonomy or pursued statehood. At the heart of the matter was the constant struggle to achieve a balance between federal and local control of Puerto Rico's internal affairs. One scholar describes Luis Muñoz Rivera as a "master trapeze artist in Puerto Rico's ideological wars" because at one point in his career he embraced all three status options. ⁵⁵ But this balancing act was difficult for Muñoz Rivera, who was caught between his deep emotional and cultural attachment to his Hispanic heritage and Puerto Rican independence and his pragmatic impulse to accept U.S. citizenship. Here was the essential autonomist dilemma: Whereas statehood threatened to subsume local Puerto Rican issues, complete independence might limit the island's economic opportunities. ⁵⁶ The divisiveness of this issue both on and off the island led a Washington Post reporter to observe in 1924, "What the ultimate status of Porto Rico will be is a matter still lying in the capacious lap of the gods." ⁵⁷

Pivoting on the issues of autonomy, statehood, and independence, Puerto Rican political parties underwent a number of transformations in the early 20th century (see Political Parties of Puerto Rico). One scholar describes the insular political scene of the 1920s as a "kaleidoscope" with the "disappearance of some parties, the birth of new ones, and the merger of others" and as a jumble of "personality clashes, factions within parties, and changing political credos." Adding another layer of complexity, these developments always "operated within the framework of United States control." ⁵⁸ Félix Córdova Dávila discussed Puerto Ricans' quandary: testifying before the House Committee on Insular Affairs during the 70th Congress (1927-1929), "This uncertainty [in status] brings as a result a divided public opinion; some of the people advocating independence, others statehood, and others full self-government," he told his colleagues. "We are not to be blamed for the different views that are striking our minds. It is not our fault. If there is any fault at all, it belongs exclusively to the doubtful position we are left in through the failure of the American Congress to define our status." Continuing, Córdova Dávila delineated Puerto Rico's identity crisis:

Are we foreigners? No; because we are American citizens, and no citizen of the United States can be a foreigner within the boundaries of the Nation. Are we a part of the Union? No; because we are an unincorporated Territory under the rulings of the Supreme Court. Can you find a proper definition for this organized and yet unincorporated Territory, for this piece of ground belonging to but not forming part of the United States? Under the rulings of the courts of justice we are neither flesh, fish, nor fowl. We are neither a part nor a whole. We are nothing; and it seems to me if we are not allowed to be part of the Union we should be allowed to be a whole entity with full and complete control of our internal affairs. ⁵⁹

Shifting American policy had a direct influence on the confusing political alliances in Puerto Rico. "The political situation here is more complex and scrambled than it has been for many years," wrote Harwood Hull in the New York Times in 1932, a year that saw at least three party transitions. "Party lines have been broken and re-formed in recent months." ⁶⁰
Next Section

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Puerto Rico | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The predominant development in the story of Hispanic-American Members of Congress during this era was the ambiguous absorption of Puerto Rico into the national fold. The island territory was neither fully part of the United States nor an independent country.

# data[].attributes.body
The Platt Amendment established the terms in which the United States military would discontinue their occupation of Cuba in the Spanish American War that began in 1898. It was originally a treaty that the Cubans were pressured into making it an amendment in their constitution to ensure the United States would be the only ones with control over Cuba, not Spain. Cuba was no longer able to enter into any international treaties that would compromise their independence except for with the U.S.. They were required to lease some of their land to the U.S. for coal and mining purposed. They were also expected to maintain environmental upkeep so America could use their resources at their disposal. It granted Cuba their independence from Spain, but essentially made them dependent on the United States at the same time.

# data[].attributes.body
The Texas rangers were a law enforcement group which was founded in 1835. The rangers protected Texas and fought in battles while patrolling the frontier. After the Texas revolution, settlers came to Texas to settle, causing conflict with the native people. They violently pushed these people out with no remorse. The rangers tracked these people and attacked them for raiding settlements. They were known to execute the accused without trial and threaten the lives of Mexicans near the border. The Texas rangers burned their victims alive as well as lynched them for minor wrongs.

# data[].attributes.body
Isabel Gonzalez traveled to Ellis Island from Puerto Rico and was not allowed to enter the country. She sued, saying that she was American because the United States annexed Puerto Rico in 1899. The supreme court ruled that she was an American and could enter the US, but did not decide if she was a citizen. Because the court did not make a decision on her citizenship, the status of Puerto Ricans has been confusing since. Residents of Puerto Rico are citizens of the US, but they can not vote in elections and have no representation in the government.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1912, New Mexico joins the Union and becomes the 47th state as a bilingual state. New Mexico had been a territory of the US since the end of the Mexican-American War. Section 10 of Article XII of the New Mexico Constitution prohibits the segregation of schools or deny admission to those of Spanish descent in public schools or educational institutions within the state. Public schools hired teachers fluent in Spanish to provide a quality education.

# data[].attributes.headline
1917 -- Creating "Barred Zones" of Immigration

# data[].attributes.subject
1917 -- Creating "Barred Zones" of Immigration

# data[].attributes.body
In 1917, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1917, which was also known as the Asiatic Barred Zone Act for how it prohibited immigration from countries adjacent to Asia, but not "owned" by the United States. Additionally, anyone over 16 would have to pass a literacy test in English or some other dialect (if one's language didn't appear on the test, they were considered illiterate). With this act, they could deny migrants entry on the basis of them being an "imbecile," an alcoholic, criminals, prostitutes, and people just poor, to name a few. This ended up also especially affecting Mexican migrants, who might not have passed the literacy test or could not pay the head tax (which was raised from 50 cents to $8 with this law). Eventually, Mexicans who were inadmissible as immigrants according to this act were able to the United States, but only as temporary laborers in fields or on railroads.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Jones-Shafroth Act (aka Jones Act of Puerto Rico), which provided a civil government for Puerto Rico. It more specifically established the Senate of Puerto Rico, established a bill of rights, as well as parallel the government of Puerto Rico to that of the United States. The Puerto Rican government split its powers among the executive, judicial, and legislative branches. This act also granted U.S. citizenship to anyone born in Puerto Rico.

# data[].attributes.headline
1928: First Hispanic U.S. Senator, Octaviano Ambrosio Larrazolo, is sworn in to office. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1928: First Hispanic U.S. Senator, Octaviano Ambrosio Larrazolo, is sworn in to office. 

# data[].attributes.body
After the unexpired term of the New Mexican senator Andrieus A. Jones, who died in 1928, Octaviano Ambrosio Larrazolo was elected. When he took his seat on December 7, 1928 he became the first Hispanic American to serve in the US Senate. He was born in Mexico and was a gifted orator, and fought for civil rights. He was also a former teacher and principal, so he was dedicated to equality in education for Spanish-speaking Americans especially. In 1910 he played a key role in inclusion efforts which recognized the Spanish language and allowed it to be used while conducting public business. He also fought for ensuring equal citizenship rights for hispanics which led to him taking a break from the Democratic party in 1911. In 1918 he was then elected as a Republican to the office of governor of New Mexico. Being the first Hispanic American to serve in the Senate he was able to pave the way for other Hispanic Americans, and was a role model for all the work he did in obtaining rights for Hispanic Americans.

# data[].attributes.headline
1929 - League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)

# data[].attributes.subject
1929 - League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)

# data[].attributes.body
LULAC was formed after the Mexican-American War where Mexico lost one-third of its land and approximately 77,000 Mexicans became U.S. citizens. In Texas, discrimination against Mexicans was so high, defense groups had formed to protect themselves against prejudice. Eventually these groups came together to form LULAC. LULAC then fought for rights such as the integration of Mexican children into schools and having Mexicans serve as members of the jury in court rooms. LULAC is still fighting today, for rights not just for Mexicans, but for all Hispanic people in America. They hold seminars on anti-xenophobia, voter registration drives, citizenship awareness, and through the LULAC National Scholarship Fund have assisted 110,000 Hispanic college students.

# data[].attributes.headline
1930-1931 Mexican repatriation program, known as the Harris Bill

# data[].attributes.subject
1930-1931 Mexican repatriation program, known as the Harris Bill

# data[].attributes.body
A mass deportation of Mexicans and Mexican Americans from the U.S. during enacted by President Hoover. The amount of people deported during this could range from 400,000 to 2,000,000. Mexicans and Mexican Americans were blamed for the economic sate of the U.S. during the Great Depression.

# data[].attributes.body
During the Jim Crow era, people of Mexican descent  were recognized as Caucasians but they still experience segregation and discrimination. To address this problem, Governor Coke Stevensonissued a Texas Legislature called the Caucasian Race Resolution  on May 6, 1943. It stated that “ all persons of the Caucasian Race” were entitled to the same privileges. However, there was very little enforcement of this resolution as activists, like Alonso Perales, spoke about their disappointment with this legislature that had little effort to help the Mexican community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From: H-Texas Editor <tex-edit@MAIL.H-NET.MSU.EDU>
List Editor: H-Texas Editor <tex-edit@MAIL.H-NET.MSU.EDU>
Editor's Subject: Caucasian Race Resolution
Author's Subject: Caucasian Race Resolution
Date Written: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 21:22:00 -0400
Date Posted: Mon, 22 Apr 2007 21:22:00 -0400

(Posted by Ray Stephens)

Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: "List Editor (Gene Preuss)" <preuss@mail.h-net.msu.edu>
Subject: Caucasian Race Resolution

Here's an interesting primary source.

I stumbled across a comment in a book about the Caucasian Race Resolution
passed by the Texas House in 1943, and had to go out and find it.  By today's
standards, it is disturbing in several ways.  It's ridiculous enough to say
"hey, we'll treat all people we consider white well--unless the law says
otherwise," but that it says nothing about African Americans or other non-
whites is troubling.

The resolution was passed under duress, too.  When the United States signed
the Bracero Program agreement with Mexico in 1942, Texas was excluded from
the guest worker program because it had such a terrible track record of
discrimination against Mexican and Mexican-American residents.  But, during
World War II, with so many men away at war, or in cities working for the
military industries, few were left on the farms.  The farms were already
shorthanded because so many left the farms to look for work in the cities
during the Great Depression. Of course, 1/2 million Mexican and Mexican-
Americans left during the Repatriation.  So, when the war hit and the nation
needed agricultural workers to feed not only the US, but also the allies, we
needed agricultural laborers.

The Bracero Program, which allowed temporary laborers from Mexico to come in
during the harvest season was important for states like California.  Texas
did what it could to ease some of the problems.  Governor Coke Stevenson
started the Good Neighbor Commission to try to ease discrimination.  The
first director of the GNC, Pauline Kibbe, was pressured to resign, however,
when in 1946 she published The Latin American in Texas, which documented
the extent of discrimination in the Lone Star State.  So, as the resolution
says, Texans during World War II believed in treating all whites as Americans,
as long as they knew how to stay in their place.



EXPRESSING THE POLICY OF THE STATE IN REGARD TO THE CAUCASION [sic] RACE

     Mr. Dwyer offered the following resolution:

     H. C. R. No. 105, Expressing policy of the State in regard to Caucasian
Race.

     Whereas, All nations of the North American and South American continents
are banded together in an effort to stamp out Nazism and preserve democracy;
and

     Whereas, Our neighbors to the South are cooperating and aiding us in
every way possible; and

     Whereas, The citizens of the great State of Texas are interested in
doing all that is humanly possible to aid and assist the national policy
of hemispherical solidarity; now, therefore, be it

     Resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Teas, the
Senate concurring, That the Forty-eighth Legislature of the sate of Texas
go on record as declaring the following to be the public policy of the State:

     1.  All persons of the Caucasian Race within the jurisdiction of this
State are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages,
facilities, and privileges  of all public places of business or amusement,
subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and rules
and regulations applicable alike to all persons of the Caucasian Race.

     2.  Whoever denies to any person the full advantages, facilities, and
privileges  enumerated in the preceding paragraph or who aids or incites
such denial or whoever makes any discrimination distinction, or restriction
except for good cause applicable alike to all persons of the Caucasian Race,
respecting accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of all
public places of business, or whoever aids or incited such discrimination,
distinction, or restriction shall be considered as violating the good
neighbor policy of our State.

     The resolution was read second time and was adopted.

Texas House Journal, 48th Legislature, April 15, 1943, p. 1725.


-------------------------------
Gene B. Preuss, PhD
Assistant Professor of History
Department of Social Sciences
University of Houston - Downtown, S-610
One Main Street
Houston, TX 77002
713-222-5308

[END]

Humanities & Social
Sciences Online

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
H-Net Discussion Networks - Caucasian Race Resolution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From: H-Texas Editor List Editor: H-Texas Editor Editor's Subject: Caucasian Race Resolution Author's Subject: Caucasian Race Resolution Date Written: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 21:22:00 -0400 Date Posted: Mon, 22 Apr 2007 21:22:00 -0400 (Posted by Ray Stephens) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:23:20 -0700 (PDT) From: "List Editor (Gene Preuss)" Subject: Caucasian Race Resolution Here's an interesting primary source.