Spanish Political System: Late 19th Century Power Dynamics
Distortion and Chieftaincy in Elections
When the ruling party suffered political erosion and lost the confidence of the Cortes, the monarch called the head of the opposition party to form a government. This triggered elections to secure a sufficient number of deputies to form a parliamentary majority. This era was marked by peaceful electoral corruption and the use of power by certain individuals, known as “caciques,” over society.
Caciquismo was especially prevalent in Andalusia, Galicia, and Castilla. The caciques were notable individuals, particularly in rural environments, with a strong influence on local social and political life. They could also be lawyers, professionals, or officials. They manipulated elections in accordance with the authorities. This tampering with election results, called “pucherazo,” involved handling the census and even manipulating the votes of the deceased.
The Development of the “Turnismo” System
Between 1876 and 1898, the “turno” system, or the alternation of power between the two main political parties, functioned regularly until the Disaster of 1898, which eroded the political and dynastic parties.
Of all the elections held during this period, six were won by the Conservatives and four by the Liberals. The Conservative government remained in power from 1875 to 1881. They returned to power in 1884, but the fear of destabilizing the political system after the death of Alfonso XII in 1885 led to an agreement between Conservatives and Liberals: the Pact of Pardo. Its purpose was to support the regency of Maria Cristina and ensure the continuity of the monarchy against the pressures of Carlists and Republicans.
Under the regency, the Liberal Party, led by Sagasta, ruled longer than the Conservative government (1885-1890). The Liberals implemented significant reforms, including fiscal and military reforms, and a new Civil Code. However, the most far-reaching reform was the introduction of universal male suffrage for those over 25 years of age. Nevertheless, this novelty was invalidated by the continuation of corruption and electoral fraud, which prevented a true democratization of the system.
In the last decade of the 19th century, the “turno” system continued. The Conservatives returned to power in 1890, followed by the Liberals in 1892, and Cánovas’ Conservatives in 1895 until his assassination in 1897. However, the system deteriorated due to the parties’ dependence on the personalities of their leaders, causing internal dissent and the decay of both parties.
Politics and the Alternation of Power
The “turno” system designed by Cánovas functioned until the late 19th century, when the Crisis of 1898 posed a threat to the system.
The Dynastic Parties
Cánovas was the leader of the Alfonsino Party during the six years following the return of Alfonso XII. This party later became the Liberal-Conservative Party, which brought together the more conservative parties (excluding Carlists and fundamentalists) and became known as the Conservative Party.
Cánovas’ plan required another party with a more progressive, left-leaning stance. He proposed Sagasta for this role, who formed a party consisting of Unionists, Progressives, and some moderate Republicans. This party was initially called the Liberal-Fusion Party and later became the Liberal Party.
Both parties had to accept the Alfonsine monarchy and the alternation of power, hence the name “dynastic parties.”
Conservatives and Liberals agreed on:
- Defense of the monarchy
- The Constitution
- Private property
- A liberal, unitary, and centralist state
- Membership primarily from the economic elite and middle class (they were minority parties)
Key Differences:
- Conservative: Tended towards political stagnation, supported census suffrage, defended the Church and social order.
- Liberal: Defended universal male suffrage, inclined towards progressive social reform, and were secular.
The regular alternation in power was intended to ensure institutional stability.