Parliamentary committees in Spain during the First World War: a useful tool for the cortes in times of crisis?

ABSTRACT

This article focuses on the study of the parliamentary committees in Spain between 1914 and 1919, in the context of the consequences of the First World War experienced in Spain. This study is based on documentation preserved at the Historical Archive of the Congress of Deputies in Madrid, It aims to understand the modus operandi and the part that committees played in the complex balance of the relationship established with the plenum of the Spanish Congress and with the executive powers. This article examines in particular how parliamentary committees carried out their responsibilities, whether they had an influence on normative activity and whether they favoured the procedural process and the operational oversight of the various aspects of parliamentary life. Furthermore, we have attempted to measure whether parliamentary committees represented an efficient forum for mediation where there were ideological or technical conflicts, by facilitating resolutions with respect to what was achieved in the broader context of the plenum.

KEYWORDS:

• Parliamentary committees
• Spain
• Spanish liberalism
• First World War
• rules of deputies

Notes

1 Some writers wish to limit the concept of ‘parliamentary body’ strictly speaking to those institutions that deliberate in complete independence from a later approval on the part of the congress. By this definition, only committees with full legislative authority are considered as such. This is the view of A. Saiz Arnaiz, Los grupos parlamentarios (Madrid, 1989), p. 303. A different perspective is presented by A. García Martínez, El procedimiento legislativo (Madrid, 1987), p. 72 and B. Vila Ramos, Los sistemas de comisiones parlamentarias (Madrid, 2004), pp. 25–6, who include in this definition all parliamentary committees, in that they are bodies which are competent in their subject matter and enable the chambers to carry out their work.

2 For an overview of the effects of the First World War on Spain’s institutional system, see M. Aglietti, In nome della neutralità. Storia politico-istituzionale di Spagna durante la prima guerra mondiale (Rome, 2017).

3 This is the view of B. Vila Ramos, Los sistemas de comisiones parlamentarias (Madrid, 2004), p. 24.

4 The two chambers had identical functions, but while the Congress of Deputies was completely elected by universal male suffrage (introduced in 1890), the senate was only in part elected on a corporative basis and still included a good number of senators for life, either by hereditary right or nominated by the crown. M. Cabrera and M. Martorell Linares, ‘El Parlamento en el orden constitucional de la Restauración’, in M. Cabrera (ed.), Con luz y taquígrafos. El Parlamento en la crisis de la Restauración (1913–1923) (Madrid, 1998), pp. 21–65.

5 On the importance of parliamentary rules of order as a regulatory norm of the political activity of representative parliaments in modern constitutionalism, see J. de M. Bárcena, ‘El reglamento parlamentario en los orígenes del constitucionalismo europeo y español’, Historia Constitucional 17, (2016), pp. 54–81, who compares the Spanish case with those of the main European models.

6 Following the 1838 reform, new parliamentary rules of order were approved in 1847, 1854, 1867, 1873 and 1918. The 1847 rules of order, which were largely based on those of 1838 (and almost literally so as far committees were concerned), remained in effect as the ‘reformed rules’ during the years under consideration, even if further reforms were made in 1864, 1878, 1880, 1883, 1887, 1894, 1895 and 1896. Details are provided in Vila Ramos, Los sistemas de comisiones parlamentarias, p. 180.

7 On the 1871 rules of order for the senate, the 1867 rules of order for the congress, and especially the acting republican constituent courts of 1873, see J.F. Merino Merchán, ‘Los reglamentos parlamentarios durante el Sexenio revolucionario’, Revista de Derecho Político 55–56, (2002), pp. 295–342.

8 This bipartisan system of rotation took the name turnismo: for almost 40 years it gave Spain stability and a relatively peaceful socio-political order, in part for its ability to include other minority political forces (such as republicans, regional groups and extreme catholic and socialist parties). For a more detailed treatment of its mechanisms and results as well as a comprehensive bibliography, see M. Aglietti, Cortes, nazione e cittadinanza. Immaginario e rappresentazione delle istituzioni politiche nella Spagna della Restauración (1874–1900) (Bologna, 2011).

9 Merino Merchán, ‘Los reglamentos parlamentarios durante el Sexenio revolucionario’.

10 With the 1867 rules of order, the obligation of preliminary examination on the part of the sections was removed for bills (that is, for texts presented by the government or the senate); these could therefore pass directly to the examination of the congress and only be subject to a preliminary examination by a committee if requested by this chamber. On the other hand, for legislative proposals (that is, legislative texts proposed by one or more deputies) the procedure of preliminary analysis by the sections continued, with a minimum of five favourable opinions required for its reading to the plenum. This was a rather high quorum, which could only be met by agreement with the majority. Vila Ramos, Los sistemas de comisiones parlamentarias, pp. 185–7.

11 The work of the committees was quicker, and it largely reflected the political equilibrium between majorities and minorities. The latter’s participation was assured by the former, at least on the most important committees, in respect of the proportions of the chamber. Nonetheless, such a balance was only achieved through quite complex and varied concessions and negotiations and in any case resulted in the assigning of well over half of the committee positions to the group which supported the executive.

12 Archivo histórico del congreso de lo diputados, Madrid, (herein ACD), Serie General (herein SG), 435, ins. 10. The text of the response of the congress to the crown address was presented for the approval of the deputies on 5 June 1916. See, Aglietti, In nome della neutralità, pp. 63–6.

13 Diario de sesiones del Congreso de los diputados (herein DSC), no.1, March 19, 1918, pp. 12–13 and no. 32, 13 August 1919, p. 1152. See Aglietti, In nome della neutralità, pp. 118 and 317.

14 For this era, ‘legislative term’ refers to the period of parliamentary sessions in the course of the same calendar year: M.M. Fraile Clivillés, La comisión permanente de las Cortes (Madrid, 1974), p. 36.

15 J.L. Paniagua Soto, ‘El sistema de comisiones en el Parlamento español’, Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Complutense 10, (1986), pp. 11–142, and Vila Ramos, Los sistemas de comisiones parlamentarias, pp. 165–6.

16 The many criticisms directed at the parliamentary committees especially point to this inability to involve the ‘vital forces’ of Spain, which thereby betrayed their representative duties. This is the view of, for example, M. Cuevas y Cuevas, Las comisiones permanentes en los Parlamentos de Francia y España (Madrid, 1925), pp. 62–6, and, more generally, of M. Aglietti, ‘Cortes, Government and the “Vital Forces” of Spain during World War I: the Junta de Iniciativas (1914–1915)’, Studia Universitatis Cibiniensis. Serie Historica XII, (2015), pp. 149–58.

17 The 1917 legislative term lasted only several weeks between January and February, while that of 1916 could count seven months of parliamentary activity, from May to December. Aglietti, In nome della neutralità, pp. 30–3.

18 The Asamblea de Parlamentarios saw the participation of 59 parliamentarians, 39 deputies and 20 senators. D. Martínez Fiol and J. Esculies, 1917. El año en que España pudo cambiar (Sevilla, 2018), pp. 311–16.

19 For a detailed treatment of all these events, see F. Romero Salvadó, España, 1914–1918. Entre la guerra y la revolución (Barcelona, 2002), especially pp. 111–5, and to F. García Sanz, España en la Gran Guerra. Espías, diplomáticos y traficantes (Barcelona, 2014), especially pp. 259–64.

20 The relative files still contain the original signed letters, the summaries drafted by the congress secretariat and the report of the committee. ACD, SG, 439, ins. 41, files 1-4.

21 An idea of the different kinds of petitioners can be gained from a survey of the 25 petitions examined by the committee during the second semester of 1916. Four petitions came from public functionaries, six from military officers, and 13 from private citizens, including a graduate in philosophy and a solicitor; seven of the petitioners were women (of whom five were widows of public or military officers) and 16 men. Five petitions were signed by groups of people from different localities of Spain. ACD, SG, 439, ins. 126, f. 1-4.

22 ACD, SG, 439, ins. 126, file 5, petition n. 9, Plan de Regeneración Nacional, by José María Piñol, from Tortosa, dated 5 February 1917.

23 ACD, SG, 439, ins. 126, file 2, petition n. 7, plan presented by Francisco Lerma, from Madrid, dated 30 June 1916.

24 Together with the disposition of the royal decree of 27 October 1887.

25 For example, on more than one occasion the committee decided to overlook what was prescribed by the law concerning high-level positions in the public administration and the army, because of the esteem that they could lend to parliamentary debates. It was further rather lax in its interpretation of the letter of the norm in order to admit others that did not meet official requirements. This practice was subject to frequent criticism and often constituted the means of dangerous instances of connivance. See Cabrera, Con luz y taquígrafos, pp. 172–3.

26 The minimum age to become a deputy was 25 years. The deputies who were too young were Enrique Maria Arribas, Rafael Melgarejo y Tordesillas duque de San Fernando de Quiroga, and José Maria Rodriguez y Gonzales: ACD, SG, 439, ins. 1, int. n°. 7-9. For the legislation of 1918 as well, two deputies were excluded because of age: José Granda Torres and Carlos Merino Sagasta: ACD, SG, 445, ins. 15, int. n°. 17-18.

27 ACD, SG, 439, ins. 1, int. n°. 1–125. The constitution established the obligation to rescind the appointment of deputy for those who had obtained pensions, promotions and other types of honors from the crown, as such benefits ran the risk of compromising the impartiality of judgment with respect to the executive power.

28 Namely: Comisiones permanentes no legislativas (art. 62-64), comisiones especiales temporales legislativas (art. 67) and comisiones permanentes legislativas (art. 65).

29 M.V. Fernández Mera, ‘La evolución de las comisiones parlamentarias: la creación de las comisiones permanentes legislativas’, Cuadernos de Derecho Publico 33, (2008), pp. 113–8.

30 This point was made by the socialist deputy Indalecio Prieto, DSC, no. 31, April 30, 1918, p. 756. See also Fernández Mera, ‘La evolución de las comisiones parlamentarias’, p. 113.

31 M.V. Fernández Mera, ‘La reforma de los Reglamentos parlamentarios en 1918. La creación de las comisiones permanentes legislativas’, in M.B. Castellà i Pujols (ed.), Poders a l’ombra: les comissions de les institucions parlamentàries i representatives (segles XV-XX) (Barcelona, 2014), pp. 354–72, especially pp. 366–8. Until the beginning of the 20th century, the practice of parliamentary obstruction in Spain was considered a right and a guarantee of freedom for minority parties against the executive. Nonetheless, it hindered the government’s ability to make agreements with minorities. A broad historiography exists on the subject. See: Cabrera, Con luz y taquígrafos, pp. 218–9; M. Martorell Linares, ‘La crisis parlamentaria de 1913–1917. La quiebra del Sistema de relaciones parlamentarias de la Restauración’, Revista de Estudios Políticos 96, (1997), pp. 137–61.

32 DSC, no. 45, 28 May 1918, pp. 1220–1.

33 These other committees included the permanent committee of supplies (comisión de abastecimientos), established on 30 July 1919, and the permanent committee for social legislation, instituted on 19 August 1919, ACD, SG, 454, ins. 2 and ins. 65.

34 Art. 69 of the rules of order adopted by the congress on 24 May 1918 stated: ‘Each committee will appoint its president and secretary, reporting to the Congress of these appointments’, without recognizing any special pre-eminence to the president's vote.

35 ACD, SG, ins. 443, ins. 41, f. 3.

36 The mention of this amplio cambio de impresiones was in reference to the discussion on a legislative proposal about the organizations of the Juvenile Courts. Report of session held on 11 June 1918, ACD, SG, ins. 559, ins. 3, f. 2.

37 ACD, SG, ins. 559, ins. 3.1, f. 9. This session, held on 22 October 1918, lasted over four hours.

38 The mention of this amplio cambio de impresiones was in reference to the discussion on a legislative proposal about the organizations of the juvenile courts. Report of session held on 11 June 1918, ACD, SG, ins. 559, ins. 3, f. 2.

39 ACD, SG, ins. 559, ins. 3.1, f. 1. The final version of the ‘Ley de Organización y Atribuciones de los Tribunales para niños’ substantially modified Avelino Montero-Rios’s original proposal. On the topic, see: M. González Fernández, ‘Los tribunales para niños. Creación y desarollo’, Historia de la Educación 18, (1999), pp. 111–25 and, in particular, pp. 114–6.

40 ACD, SG, ins. 559, ins. 3, f. 7.

41 It was followed by the Committee on Foreign Relations on 21 June (ACD, SG, ins. 447, ins. 38), and by the Committee on Domestic Affairs at the end of November (ACD, SG, ins. 444, ins. 5, ff. 8r-v).

42 A. Carro Martínez, ‘La inmunidad parlamentaria’, Revista de Derecho político IX, (1981), pp. 99–100.

43 Committee membership was made up of nine deputies elected directly by the congress and chosen among the 30 most senior deputies. The discussion and preliminary examination are in ACD, 402, ins. 54, folio 1.

44 M. Aglietti, ‘«Cuando el Parlamento cierra, la nación es Parlamento». I parlamentari di Spagna durante la prima guerra mondiale’, in M. Meriggi (ed.), Parlamenti di guerra (1914–1945). Il caso italiano e il contesto europeo (Napoli, 2017), pp. 79–98; for more exact details on the political operation against deputies of the Tribunal Supremo in these years, see Aglietti, In nome della neutralità, pp. 259–74.

45 From the title of the law, which was drafted by the foreign minister under pressure from the belligerent countries, which were exasperated by the attacks against them in the Spanish press. The text was published in the Gaceta de Madrid, July 4, 1918, no.185, pp. 21–22.

46 ACD, SG, ins. 456, f. 2.

47 ACD, SG, ins. 456, f. 3.

48 The cortes rejected the requests to lift parliamentary immunity, obliging the supreme court to conclude its proceedings without any charges being made against deputies; meanwhile, amnesty was regularly granted by the executive in those few cases in which prosecutions were made for political criminal indictments or libel. In spite of this, the extensive controls carried out throughout the country by local authorities made free expression increasingly difficult for deputies, preventing them from holding meetings. Similarly, organs of the mass media were affected through confiscations of published copies or even forced closings in some cases, in addition to the imposition of severe censorship.

49 Vila Ramos, Los sistemas de comisiones parlamentarias, pp. 196–7.

50 For a broader argument along these lines, see F. Santolalla López, Derecho parlamentare español (Madrid, 2013), p. 220.

51 M.V. Fernández Mera, ‘La evolución de las comisiones parlamentarias: la creación de las comisiones permanentes legislativas’, Cuadernos de Derecho Publico 33, (2008), pp. 89–119, especially pp. 116–8.

52 M. Cabrera, ‘La reforma del Reglamento de la Cámara de Diputados en 1918’, Revista de Estudios Políticos 93, (1996), pp. 359–79 and especially p. 357.

53 ACD, SG, ins. 444, ins. 21, f. 1. It was formally constituted on 1 January 1919: in ACD, SG, 559, ins. 11.

54 Petition to the congress presented on 28 July 1919. ACD, SG, 454, ins. 2.

55 DSC, no. 105, 14/4/1920, p. 5961.

56 F. Villacorta Baños, ‘Intervencionismo y corporativismo. Estado y sociedad durante la Dictadura de Primo de Rivera, 1923–1930’, in F. Villacorta Baños and M.L. Rico Gómez (eds), Regeneracionismo autoritario. Desafíos y bloqueos de una sociedad en trasformación: España, 1923–1930 (Madrid, 2013), pp. 107–30.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Marcella Aglietti

Marcella Aglietti is Full Professor in the History of Political Institutions at the Department of Political Sciences of the University of Pisa, Italy. Her major research interests are in the comparative history of political institutions, with a special focus on ruling elites, government practices and representative activities, especially in Spain and Italy during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Her recent publications include: In nome della neutralità. Storia politico-istituzionale di Spagna durante la prima guerra mondiale (Rome, 2017) and Cortes, nazione e cittadinanza. Immaginario e rappresentazione delle istituzioni politiche nella Spagna della Restauración (1876–1898) (Bologna, 2011).