Cánovas System: Political Centralism in Spain
Cánovas System and Political Centralism
The Cánovas System was established with the Spanish Constitution of 1876. Cánovas aimed for stability, supporting the sovereignty shared with the Cortes (Parliament), and allowing, by constitutional provision, the principle of officially sanctioned political party activity.
Cánovas believed that the system should not be maintained by a single party. The reinstatement of a two-party system required respecting the Constitution, allowing for diverse opinions, and enabling shifts in government. Parties needed to be large, but mass movements related to the census were restricted, according to electoral law. Suffrage was set back in 1878, reducing citizen participation to 5% of the population.
Key Players and Parties
Cánovas, the founder of this system, led the Liberal-Conservative party. This party comprised high-bourgeois landowners, senior civil and military officials, and, especially, the southern nobility of the Peninsula.
The other major party was the Liberal Party, led by Práxedes Mateo Sagasta. This “fusionist” (liberal) party had supported the 1869 Constitution and Amadeo I, and included Liberal Democrats.
Centralism and its Consequences
The strengthening of political centralism through legislation was a key characteristic of this system. Centralism and uniform legal action led to the removal of the Basque provinces’ courts through a law in 1876. There was also a clear tendency towards centralism in the renewal of city councils and provinces. Citizen participation in elections was reduced, and in towns with over 30,000 inhabitants, the King appointed the mayor.
Freedom of the press was also restricted. Prior censorship was established for writings of less than 200 pages. The state controlled newspapers, pamphlets, and books, and the Church held power over censorship laws related to morality and good customs. In 1879, a printing system was established that defined attacking or questioning the political and social system as a crime.
Electoral Manipulation and Caciquismo
Cánovas established a system of alternating governments, provided the parties had the opportunity to meet peacefully. This relied on election manipulation and caciquismo.
Elections were consistently fraudulent, with prior agreement on the alternation of power. The Crown’s acceptance of this falsification and conspiracy was no exception, as it aligned with a social and economic approach that favored the development of capitalism and private property.
Provincial party organizations were controlled by local authorities through caciquismo, especially in rural areas. Candidates approved by the government were included on official lists, ensuring their victory. Electoral fraud was prevalent, including violence and vote-buying.
The Role of the *Cacique*
Caciquismo persisted until the first third of the 20th century. The caciques, or local lords, possessed three key characteristics:
- Rooted in a specific geographic, economic, and social situation.
- Generally part of a closed social circle.
- Served as social mediators to the State.
Caciques were most powerful in villages. They collaborated with the civil governor and local technical leaders to secure votes, often in exchange for favors.
The Pact of El Pardo
The death of Alfonso XII in 1895 endangered the continuity of the regime. However, the Pact of El Pardo, signed by Cánovas and Sagasta, ensured the alternation of power between the parties and secured the system under Queen Regent Maria Cristina.
Over the years, Sagasta’s government made efforts to “democratize” the system: the Press Law of 1883, freedom of assembly and speech in 1881, freedom of association in 1887, and, most importantly, universal male suffrage in 1890.