Dr. Figueroa Alcorta’s crowning _coup d’état_ was, however, his shutting
Congress out of its own Palace in consequence of its conspired refusal to
pass one of his budgets. One fine day, the National Senators and Deputies
on reaching the Congress building found it in possession of troops who
refused them admission. Remonstrance was unavailing, and they perforce
returned home. Meanwhile, the President passed the Budget himself, as the
Constitution gives him power to do “when Congress is not sitting.”
In the result Dr. Figueroa Alcorta’s Budget (which was a perfectly
wise and necessary one) remained operative and the officer who had
commanded the troops was heavily fined for disrespect shown to the sacred
offices of Senator and Deputy. The gallant officer’s plea in defence
that the President whose orders he had obeyed on that occasion was, as
constitutional Commander-in-Chief of the Forces, his Military Superior,
availed him nothing. Nobody else was one penny the worse. Possibly, the
payment of Colonel Calazza’s fine came “de arriba” like the Revolutions.
Soon afterwards Dr. Figueroa Alcorta was the courteous and diplomatic
host of Personages (including the Infanta Isabella) at the 1910 Centenary
Festivities; and, shortly after that again, vacated the Presidential
chair in favour of Dr. Saenz Peña, his successor “by consent.” The usual
and graceful, though officially unacknowledged, custom in Argentina being
that the Presidential Election shall follow a prearranged course.[14]
With the matter of elections Dr. Saenz Peña’s name is, as has been said,
intimately and honourably associated, and it may be repeated that by his
death the Republic lost one of its most broad-minded and straightforward
statesmen.
Up to the passing of his Electoral Reform Law, no self-respecting private
citizen ever dreamed of voting: simply because if he favoured the
Government policy his doing so would be a mere work of supererogation,
while if he held opposition views it would be sheer waste of time and
trouble on his part; and if he were a provincial voter he would certainly
find himself the object of unpleasant attention by the police, whose
really chief duty was to “conduct” elections to the satisfaction of the
ruling party. Anyhow, his voting could not influence the preordained
result of the election one way or the other. Voting was done by the
mere deposit of a “Libreta” or certificate of citizenship, and libretas
deposited in favour of the ruling party were subject to little scrutiny
as to whether the persons named in them were alive or dead. They were
thrown in at the polling stations in bundles. Some were bought; though
at a low figure, because there were thousands of blank libretas at
Government House ready to be filled in by quick-writing clerks in
the very remote event of any booth being reported to have received a
disconcerting number of votes adverse to the Government.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account