Pic Of Veins On Boobs

By Alberto Gonzalez Arzac


Access Juan Manuel de Rosas in the Argentine political scene happened on a time when the "constitutionalism" made their presence felt after major world events occurred in the late eighteenth century, as were the American Constitution of 1787 and the Declaration on the Rights of Man and the 1789-1791 French citizen.

In our country, the Assembly of the Year XIII could not enact a constitution and had failed two attempts unitary constitution in 1819 and 1826. Interprovincial pacts that were happening since the Treaty of Pilar in 1820 opened new prospects for federal organizaci6n, attempted in 1827 by Manuel Dorrego as governor of Buenos Aires, Juan B. Bustos (Córdoba) and Estanislao López (Santa Fe), but failed in December 1828 after the mutiny of Gen. Juan Lavalle.

However, constitutional law and doctrine was somewhat later: in 1834, the French minister Francois Guizot created the Chair of that discipline at the University of Paris to teach the monarchical constitution of 1830, and, coincidentally in our University of Córdoba , Santiago Derqui created the Public Law to teach the Federal Pact of 1831 and the provincial constitutions in force in the country as well as universal principles of the subject.

Rosas as a political thinker

Much has been reported the belief that Juan Manuel de Rosas lacked constitutional and political figure. An example is the claim segreti 'Roses was not a political thinker, for habits say, was a landowner that the altered circumstances of the situation pushed him into politics to defend their interests. " There are few who have departed this error, misjudgment and building on historic past Argentina. Sánchez Viamonte

made this generalization: "The leader is the leader rudimentary form, as the people-crowd is the rudimentary form of political party. Difference of degree, but degree of culture, and culture is always quality."

many have criticized it from that angle the political and constitutional thought Rose did so almost by inertia, based on the premise that "antiretroviral" to link Rose with the "barbarism." Arturo

Sampay, one of the most eminent political thinkers who had the country-wrote a book where you can read: "Roses, with a strong vocation for politics, formed early their ideal, after anxious studies and profound reflections. In his youth, on government plans conceived, expressed in writing their ideal, not so much, surely, to disseminate it, but, as happens to men politically true vocation for himself clarified. Sampay was not "Rosas" but a scholar of political thought with critical criterion Roses, to the point of qualifying as "reactionary" ideas. The term "reactionary" was used by the author "with the exact meaning given to the term political science, namely the doctrine that advocates or the politician who seeks to restore decayed no principles of social behavior objectively valuable, but hierarchical forms of collective life raided by social progress. "

Personally I respectfully disagreed with the teacher Arturo Sampay at that point of view, understanding that these forms of collective life were then still in full force in our country.

But questions do not fit that has been the most erudite author Sampay dedicated to the analysis of the literature on the subject in the archives of Rosas and the works he frequented, both in their early years for his political and exile in Southampton. This was made from the young Rose studied Cicero, Edmund Burke, Jose Maria de Maistre, Thomas Paine. Gaspar de Réal Curb and others, to the ruler Roses in a note to his colleague, the Neapolitan scholar Pedro de Angelis, commissioned him a "relationship of works of public law, with an expression of the best and most needed," so I order them as they come, "or the old Rose visited in 1873 by Vicente and Ernesto Quesada in Southampton, to whom he explained his constitutional thinking.


After his book The political ideas of Juan Manuel de Rosas, Sampay to refer back to it, calling it "one of the most far-sighted statesmen of the last century reactionaries", in analyzing its policy through some key milestones in the constitutional history of Argentina, particularly the Confederation pact of January 4, 1831: "Roses succeeded, after several years of civil wars and negotiations, all provinces adhere to the Covenant, which it Argentina became the Constitution in force until it passed the Federal Charter of 1853. " Despite the critical analysis, summarized his view on Sampay Rosas, stating that "imposing the political unification of the provinces under the hegemony of the Province of Buenos Aires and this entailed an even partial progress of the nation, as was the political union States Germans under the Prussian feudal subordination imposed Bismark. "

now do not wish to argue with the opinions of the teacher, because I have done in his life in still miss long talks. But I note the place given to Rose by who was an authority on political science and constitutional law. For him, Rose was not a "barbaric" and a leader uneducated. He was a statesman, a political thinker and a distinguished leader, which he guided the Province of Buenos Aires and the country towards clearly defined objectives.


Confederation


The big break-up of the provinces that formed the Viceroyalty Rio de la Plata was an incontrovertible fact that when Rose took over political dominance. Since 1810 the province of Paraguay had imposed an autonomous attitude, then a treaty agreeing interprovincial October 12 d 1811. The provinces of Upper Peru had declared its independence on August 6, 1825, forming the Bolivian Republic after the Argentine Congress as consent by Act of May 9, 1825. The Eastern Province had been in constant dispute with English and Lusitanian until it was declared independent by the treaty of 1828 between Argentina and Brazil. The remaining provinces, while recognizing their identity Argentina, were not outside the process of disintegration, giving local institutions from regulation made for Missions in 1810. The national government in 1813 and 1814 created the provinces of Cuyo, Corrientes, Entre Rios, Salta and Tucumán. In 1815 declared their independence Cordoba and Santa Fe and between 1820 and 1821 did the same Mendoza, San Juan, San Luis, Santiago del Estero, Catamarca, Buenos Aires had even given their own institutions in 1820, dragged down by that process. La Nación Argentina was not a state but a patchwork of states linked by historical, cultural and economic problems that had faced together the war of emancipation.

For that, the unquestioned realism led him to admit Roses that was before a federally structured country.

One of the authors being asked by Rosas, Gaspar de Réal Curb, said: "The state is composed of a set of states are joined by a loop, so that seems to be a single body, but each state retains its sovereignty particular . These governments are often composed of two species. The first is when two or more sovereign states, without joining each other, get together and have one and the same King, but sovereignty is exercised separately by each of the powers. " "The second kind is when several states are linked by a general confederation and perpetual union to take the forces that have seemed necessary to their common security. Confederate States join together to perform certain functions of sovereign power, as the right to make war and peace, while trade agreements, the establishment of taxes, the creation of the tribunals, the right to legislate in general, life and death of its citizens, are reserved to the power of each individual state, although with some dependence on the Confederacy. " "In the Confederation each member disposes of part of sovereignty, is general and perpetual, and the Confederates kept each his government but under a common head." Gaspar de Réal

Curb (1682-1752) had written for the French monarchs, but the Science du Gouvernement, according Sampay, was "the main source of political thought literary Roses" to the point that "a note of Rosas to public library director (from April 25, 1846 ) a copy of which is preserved in the Archivo General de la Nación (National Government Division Ministry of Roses, 1846, a. 5 SX c 26 n. 4), we know that the book of Gaspar de Réal was only consulted in the past of their government. "

is clear that Rosas had to adapt these lessons to the Republican reality of our provinces. Otto Bismark could do after proclaiming the Empire with the King of Germany Prussia by the Emperor, but our political nature required to adjust the ideas to the Republic. There

examples in Europe and America. The cantons of the Swiss Confederation had been recognized as a sovereign state by the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) before becoming Federal Republic (1803). The United States, independent of England in 1776, were organized into Confederation until issued its Federal Constitution (1787).

Undoubtedly, the Confederation was the system of government at the time appropriate to ensure unity and ensure our provincial government and its external representation, overcoming anarchy and disintegration. And that Confederation was not orchestrated by a "constitution" itself, but through a "Covenant" that served as her own, where the contracting states agreed rules of peaceful coexistence, military unit, common external personality, but they reserved their own independence to review the agreed conditions and terminate the agreement if necessary.


Federal Pact of 1831


After the battle of Oncativo (25 February, 1830), armed with the victory of Jose Maria Paz on Facundo Quiroga, the League established a strong militarily organized interior provinces Federal coastline. They were the "unit" that after the failure of the constitutions of 1819 and 1826 adopted a federal methodology to organize the country. Quiroga

thought that "guarantees and likely to secure peace can only be offered in the U.S. Constitution, but Rosas said in a letter dated January 10, 1830:" IE General and his brave company have vowed not to lay out weapons in the hands until the country is formed according to the expression and free vote of the Republic. "

Rosas took power in the Province of Buenos with strong political support, coordinate their activities on the coast with Estanislao López and inside with Facundo Quiroga and Juan Felipe Ibarra, all federal leaders. Meanwhile Peace, strengthened after the triumph of Oncativo, affected in the northern provinces after a single organization, a goal that did not leave until being taken prisoner, and even persevered in it afterwards.

On January 4, 1831, Buenos Aires, Santa Fe and Entre Rios signed the "Covenant of the Argentina Confederation, known as Federal Pact. It was one of the "pre-existing agreements" that would invoke the Preamble to the Constitution of 1853 and adopted the name "Argentina Confederation, one of those mentioned in article 35 of the Constitution of 1860 as the official name.

Joaquín V. Gonzalez said that the federal agreement "contains the basis of a federal order ... that was the same, ratified by the governors of other provinces in 1852, served as a starting point for the final organization of the Nation."

The Confederation was the great work constitutional Rosas, who managed to get the pact signed between Buenos Aires, Santa Fe and Entre Ríos in 1831 was ratified a year later by the remaining ten Argentine provinces (Jujuy recently declared its independence in 1835), adhering in 1831 Mendoza, Corrientes, Córdoba, Santiago del Estero and La Rioja; and in 1832 Tucumán, San Juan, San Luis, Salta and Catamarca.

Although some have maintained the idea of \u200b\u200bnation, above all interprovincial pacts had been partial, inspired by the dispute between groups of provinces: the Treaty of Pilar (1820), those of Vinará and Tucumán (1821), the Quadrilateral ( 1822), San Miguel of the gaps (1822), of Hanacache (1827) and offensive and defensive alliance of 1827, promoted to resist unitary constitution of 1826. By

Federal Covenant, its criteria imposed Rosas globalization to begin the final organization of the country: "All that is not made in friendly treaty they hold good faith, the sincere desire of unity and an accurate knowledge of the general interests with discretion to the particular circumstances, will always be ephemeral, for good and no one suitable to multiply our problems, "he said in a letter to Estanislao López.

Federal Pact included a clause which provided for "invite all other provinces of the Republic when in full freedom and peace to join in federation with the three littoral, since by means of a General Congress to settle government Federate general of the country under the federal system, its internal and external trade, navigation, collection and distribution of general revenues and the debt of the Republic, referring to the best possible safety and general enlargement of the Republic, its internal and external credit and sovereignty, freedom and independence of each of the provinces. " Rosas

attached a copy of the Covenant in a letter to Quiroga's February 3, 1831, saying the document "instructs the political leadership of Buenos Aires and its allies," he said, "I feel that should not rush into thinking Congress . First is to know peace talks and strengthen the rest, wait for the calm and inspire mutual confidence before venturing the public tranquility. " He agreed

Rose as described in his letter to Lopez, which blamed the attitude of those who would rush to Congress while the provinces were at war, "Congress!, Congress! So when will take place between these delusions that we have managed to fill our heads some men who have not thought but enslave us! ". Correspondence to register again Quiroga Rosas opinion opposing the attempt to "organize, keep order without slow, progressive, keeping with the work of nature and merely for everything to the circumstances of time and the competition of other things influencers. "

Shortly before the murder of Facundo Quiroga, Rosas exposes their essential ideas about the national organization in his famous letter from the estate of Figueroa (San Antonio de Areco), the December 20, 1834, from a basic agreement: "No one ... more than you and I could be more convinced of the need for a National Constitution. " Quiroga took that letter with him when he was killed in Barranca Yaco. In the original of the letter were patches of "some illustrious victim's blood," "that's because when he was sent to kill our enemies, the General had with them," Rose would say later.

also in a letter to Lopez on 6 March 1836, Rosas spoke disparagingly of "a notebook with the name of Constitution", saying get a Congress that "some are from the notebook" and "some of flunk at all."

not mean that Rosas has been contrary to the enactment of the "written constitution." He said in the letter to Facundo Quiroga of December 20, 1834: "Let the peoples concerned of their individual constitutions." And that's how constitutions enacted during his influence many provinces: Corrientes (1838), Jujuy (1835, 1839), San Luis (1832), Santa Fe (1841), Santiago del Estero (1835). Current

Genaro was then ruled by Beron de Astrada, who consulted on constitutional reform Rosas amid provincial serious international problems that Argentina gravitated over the Confederacy in 1838. On April 24 Rosas replied, apologizing for not issued in-depth by the circumstances and stating that "this very reason we have not even been in it (Buenos Aires) also take care of our particular letter, with less bad is not having to make before the real opportunity, risking mistakes and misfortunes difficult to repair in the later. "

The truth is that by then the "constitutionalism" tax was not even around the world and much less in federal republics, because the U.S. model of 1787 had no imitators.

By 1836, General Santa Cruz tried to give life to the Peru-Bolivian Confederation, which lasted only three years. In Europe, only in 1848 a constitution would seal the old covenant of marriage between the Swiss cantons.

The French Revolution (1789) had issued a unitary model that only lasted until 1804, but defined the system failed our Constitutions of 1819 and 1826 as well as that of the other American nations: Chile, Peru, Uruguay, Paraguay. Most European nations were still under monarchical forms are unitary by definition. Argentina Confederation (1815) was a union of kingdoms that made an exception to the rule, creating an empire and being irrelevant in our nations. France itself was then again monarchy, the republic will be proclaimed for the second time in 1848.

In America, Brazil was ruled by Emperor Pedro I and Mexico (to a decade of Iturbide's monarchy) would still experience the Second Empire.

legal systems in North America and Argentina were dissimilar. So were their cultures, their histories, their traditions, their religions. Why should adopt Roses? If, as said years later, "in the U.S. made them all very much to be desired ...". And truth is that the Constitution did not preserve this nation to civil war would erupt later.

But neither dreamed of the federal Constitution U.S. politicians nor the military unit. It was not the panacea the American model of Literary Hall Marcos Sastre, or the Association of Esteban Echeverría Mayo, where they met bright young people who avidly read European authors and where John B. Alberdi reported Lerminier historicism. Rather it was the federal Dorrego, Manuel Moreno who had invoked the U.S. Constitution in the Congress of 1824-27.

In the early 30's, that generation attracted by the French unit was far from thinking as it would in 1853, when Joseph B. Gorostiaga requested approval of a draft constitution "cast in the mold of the United States Constitution, the only model of true federation that exists in the world." Because they had not yet convinced "the impossibility in fact to reduce bloodless and without violence to the provinces or their rulers spontaneous abandonment" of the "power of self- address, local sovereignty and freedom, "as it would reflect on their bases Alberdi 1852.

Rosas was not an opponent of the constitution" written "because it was not influenced by British cultural formation, a nation which still prevails prevails a Constitution "unwritten", based mainly on tradition and custom, but its collection also consists of some documents as the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1629), The Bill of Rights (1689), the Act Establishment (1701). It was a solid keeper Rosas constitutional realism, as were other Argentine leaders, including East Gervasio Artigas, whose thinking on the subject was reflected in the instructions for 1813 (which is a history of our federalism).

Therefore, Guillermo Rawson would say years later that "Rose was a ruler of legal origin, and although there is no written constitution, there were a number of organic laws that formed a government, perhaps more perfect than that of many republics south American, although most of them had written constitutions. "

On May 17, 1832, Rose wrote to Estanislao López expressing their agreement with the confederal level achieved and its future steps to caution: "Federico with the coastal provinces and fix the country's administration by means of a General Congress Federated are two events may differ among themselves over a long period, without thereby losing its force any of the obligations contained in the Treaty of Jan. 4 to each and every one of the provinces that will accept it. "


1833 Constitution


Going back to December 1829, when Rose first took the government of the Province of Buenos Aires, it is good to note that already some of the thirteen provinces had enacted constitutions "written", it reveals that this process was in its infancy in our country life, even when had not yet been imposed on the world: Santa Fe (1819), Entre Ríos, Tucumán (1820), Córdoba, Salta (1821), etc., had already adopted constitutions.

Quiroga Rosas said: "V. and I prefer to take care of their peoples particular constitutions enacted so that after you go into work the foundation of the Constitution "because he considered that" a federal republic is the most chimerical and work than you can imagine, since not States composed of well-organized themselves. "

At that time the Province of Buenos Aires was governed by a regulation issued on June 6, 1820, during the brief government of Ildefonso Ramos Mexia, which established the powers and functions of provincial powers as a result of commitments made in the Treaty of Pilar. This regulation remained in effect during the first government of Rosas, but it was quite evident the need for a constitution to organize more effectively the provincial institutions.

In December 1832, the legislature appointed Governor General Juan Ramón Balcarce, while Rose was preparing his expedition to the south and continued to exert political influence no doubt.

"When I came to an end the period gubernatorial Rose began to speak insistently of Case (constitutional). Guido wrote on May 29, 1833, quite rightly, that the word constitution gained ground and made their way through it which claimed close to power. " Rep. Nicholas

Anchorena (cousin Rose and closely linked to it) motion in the Legislature by August 31 August 1833, the Committee on Constitutional Business draft a provincial constitution under the federal republican form. The draft was submitted only on 19 December that year by Mr Matthew Vidal, Diego Alcorta and Justo García Valdez. Rosas

learned of the initiative on the campaign Anchorena the desert, but obviously knew the idea before, it saved ordered to hold their relative motion, which was consistent with their wishes and issued a proclamation stating "the comforting hope of a prosperous letter to the federal system of the Republic" . "It is fast approaching the day we longed provincial Constitution and it is expected that all provinces under their penalized the same way." build the "foundations of the great National Federal Charter."

By then, Rose was elected provincial Lobos at the request of politicians who proposed the nomination without their consent. On 22 June he sent his resignation the Legislature, which was read on July 13, expressing that it would be "satisfactory play this new position of such honor, among other things of great price for the part that would fit on the sanction of the Constitution", but "great and laborious undertaking commissioned" rendering him incapable of performing. And in a letter to Pacheco said: "They shouted by the Constitution of the Province, they said I was opposed as despotic tyrant, but have been denied by the motion of my cousin Nicolas and what I say in my resignation."

Rosas Manuel Gálvez comment transcribed the motion "in order Day was read to the army on 25 June with the words to the author founded. "

The draft Constitution for the Province of Buenos Aires was presented during the government of General Juan José Viamonte. There was the delegation of authority provided by Congress, embodied popular sovereignty and separation of powers. The provincial legislature was bicameral and broad individual rights.

it responded to the expectations of Rosas, a concept the Province of Buenos Aires had "a serious sediment government personnel and orderly habits, and he hoped" little by little, to see that the other provinces do the same. "

Roses federal strategy addressed the particular rather than general, because in order to consolidate the Confederacy needed well organized provinces. The strategy unit, however, was drawn from the general to the particular subject because for provincial autonomy was essential to organize a central authority.

Roses That idea was clearly unrealistic, based on "elements of power," as he called in a letter to Facundo Quiroga: "If within individual states are not able to maintain elements of the respective order, does not serve rather than to put in turmoil throughout the republic, each disorder partial happen. And make the fire of any State not spread over all others. "

Although the Constitution proposed in 1833 was never sanctioned, public opinion Roses were not contrary to its approval, but definitely favorable.


The plebiscite


After the assassination of Barranca Yaco Facundo Quiroga (16 February, 1835), the Legislature of Buenos Aires that Rosas tried again assume the governorship of the province invested with the "sum of public power ".

Rosas said: "The undersigned begs to gentlemen, that to discuss on admission or resignation of high office and the extraordinary trust that have been designated to honor, please consider to room full delicate business, and agree on the means they consider most adaptable to every single citizen of this city, of every kind and condition as they are, express their needs and categorically vote on the matter, leaving it recorded so that at all times and circumstances may include the free delivery of the general opinion. "

words, was proposing a "referendum" that the Legislature agreed to do, noting the 26, 27 and March 28 for citizens went to vote. "From the records were elevated to the Legislature, it appeared that about 9,520 citizens (who composed the maximum of the voters in Buenos Aires) who voted, only citizens Jacinto Peña Rodríguez, Juan José Bosch, Juan B. Escobar, general Gervasio Espinosa, Colonel Antonio Aguirre, Dean Zavaleta, Castellone Pedro and Ramon Romero spoke out against the aforesaid Act. "

It was called "referendum" because as in plebiscites in Rome, voted the mob "of any kind and condition to be", as proposed by Rosas. With the particularity and breadth, was a referendum on the legislative decision.

Constitutionalism of the late eighteenth century had adopted the institution, where the principle of sovereignty of the people accepted a straightforward manner. France put to a referendum the constitutions of 1793 and 1795. Switzerland did the same in 1802. In the United States the state of Massachusetts had adopted in 1780 and then continued to New Hampshire and other states, except Delaware. The State of New York in 1822 had adopted the Constitution by this method.

Rosas joined the institution to the Argentine constitutional system to address a crucial moment in Argentina's history and ensure extraordinary powers granted accordingly. Because

the concept of Rosas, the sovereignty of the people was above the usual precepts of representative government: "I am what I am federal and the more so as I am convinced that the Federation is the form of government according to democratic principles" said in 1831 Rosas, Facundo Quiroga, noting that "even so, being intimate federal conviction, be subordinated to my unit if the people would vote for unity."

Perhaps this is why, Enrique M. Barba was to express: "A Rose may discutírsele anything but his strong consistency, hence not give a damn to be unitary or federal, was more that was Rosas. "

My friend and neighbor platense Barba was another Argentine historians complacent about the "theoretical background" Rose, what is often argued with him. Despite being an erudite scholar of the time of Rosas, simplified the issue so he came to a conclusion: "As good Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires or better ... (Rosas) could not accept a Constitution which, among other things, create powers beyond those of Buenos Aires, which federalized the city and nationalize the Customs. So opposed to the Constitution and refused to rule if it was with extraordinary powers first, and the amount of power public later, he attributed magical virtues. "

Strictly speaking, Rosas considered necessary for the passage from the Covenant of Confederation to the federal Constitution was secured by conditions that reality did not meet then Argentina, which is why the letter of 17 May 1832 said to Estanislao López "They must be convinced that if Congress does not reign in the Federal a feeling of brotherhood, peace and balance, will meet in the shadow of a higher authority, passions more or less exaggerated, but will never be stable and lasting organization with these springs give the republic. Federal Constitution would, Head had national organic laws would have, but everything would fall apart soon, as the federation broke up in Mexico and Guatemala. "

And obviously, when in 1853 the interior provinces of Argentina were given a Constitution without achieving those requirements, the division promoted by the Province of Buenos Aires, giving rise to a decade of conflict that should be dealt with in the fields of Mars.

Roses and warned that in his letter to Felipe Ibarra of December 16, 1832, considering "the mistaken idea that a charter would face the turbulent passions of innovators. In disputes festering political parties, highest code is nothing more than an argument that everyone does his duty in serving their interests. " "The provinces have not organized their representative system and strengthened his internal administration, until they have fulfilled the moderádose internal unrest and political passions that the last war is on, and while social relations and trade under the auspices of the country does not indicate the main points of interest which should occupy our attention, I think it would deal a fatal Federative Congress. "


Exile in Southampton


After two decades, on 3 February 1852, after the military defeat at the Battle of Caseros, Rosas started on the road of exile, it would take in Southampton (England) until the end of his days. From there he observed the Argentine historical process, built on the recognition of his great work: May 31, 1852 in San Nicolas de los Arroyos provincial governors ratified the Federal Pact of 1831 and argued that "being at present all provinces the Republic in full freedom and peace "are calling for a Constitutional Convention. The San Nicolas said: "As a fundamental law of the Republic to the Treaty concluded on January 4, 1831, between provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe and Entre Rios for having acceded to all the other provinces of the Confederation, be religiously observed in all its clauses. " Overlooking the anecdotal, this resulted in the enactment of the 1853 Constitution. Then came the secession between Buenos Aires and the Confederation, the battle of Cepeda, the constitutional reform of 1860, the Battle of Pavón, the chairs of Mitre, Sarmiento and Avellaneda, and Rose's death in 1877.

While all this was happening in Argentina, also in Europe constitutionalism evolved. When Rosas ruled

still in full force, the rapidly mutating world. 1848 had been a year of social revolution but also of constitutional innovation: the Second Republic in France and the Swiss federation. Fearful of the uprisings in Berlin, the Germanic Assembly had moved to Brandenburg, where the social tranquility guaranteed political peace. Five years later, defeated Rosas, General Urquiza in Buenos Aires harassed, would also seek refuge in the quiet provincial of Paraná, as well as the Constitutional Congress met her in the warm Santa Fe
visited
A Rosas Juan B . Alberdi, accused of being the father of the Constitution of 1853, who had served as ambassador to the European courts. Rose stressed to him the view that the provinces "must be linked only by treaties and conventions."

And Alberdi said: "General Rose is wrong in their doctrines," "can not govern in America today without a constitution." But the truth is that the Constitution of 1853 had divided the Argentina.

Alberdi is that still believed in the magic of the constitution "written", which Rosas pejoratively called "notebook" in 1836, and Ferdinand Lassalle called "strip of paper" to contrast it with the constitution "real", formed by the sum of factors real and effective governing society.

is possible, on time, both as Alberdi Roses have had access to broadcast lectures in Berlin in April 1862 written by the German speaker. At least that seemed to denounce the posthumous writings of Alberdi, when he said that our republic "is not a fact is a myth, a hallucination of names and words." Rose O concepts, when in 1873 Quesada told to make a constitution "was my ambition, but I spent my life and my energy without being able to perform," "because a Constitution should not be the product of a book dreamer but an accurate reflection a situation country. " "Whenever the charade is repugnant to the laws pompous in the role that could not be implemented." Lasalle

had taken his concept paper strip of a message to Frederick William IV, who opposed the adoption of a written constitution, saying he would never allow that between God and the King "to slide a written page." Rosas had taken his concept of the term gaucho Facundo Quiroga, who simply called "notebook." Strange coincidence between a Prussian monarch and a provincial leader to refer to the "written constitution."

If I had even Sarmiento amazed that the "barbarism" might be expressed as similar to "civilization." It happens that the Manichean interpretation Sarmiento distorted our reality, but neither were adjusted to other interpretations which she commended Rosas. Arturo

Jauretche, one of my favorite authors, highlighted in Rosas their struggle for nationhood, but wary of presenting it as "the forerunner of the Constitution", saying that a Rose "meditating future constitution" would be so devised as a "read Artigas Articles of Confederation U.S. and Lopez fought for federalism to Philadelphia. "

Sources:

segreti, Carlos SA: The Charter of the Hacienda de Figueroa, Córdoba, 1996.
Sánchez Viamonte, Carlos: The Last Caudillo, Buenos Aires, 1930.
Sampay, Arthur E.: The political ideas of Juan Manuel de Rosas, Buenos Aires, 1972.
Sampay, Arthur E.: The Constitutions of Argentina, Buenos Aires, 1975. Note
April 7, 1848, Archivo General de la Nación. S VII c. 3 to 1, No. 5, fol. 81 row.
Quesada, Ernesto: La Epoca de Rosas, Buenos Aires, 1923. Réal
Curb, Gaspar: La Science du Gouvernement, Paris, 1762.
Barba, Enrique M., "The first government of Rosas "in History of Argentina, Buenos Aires, 1957.
González, Joaquín V.: Manual of the Constitution Argentina, 1897. Rosas
Charter Urquiza, August 5, 1861. Arzac
González, Alberto: Warlords and constitutions. Buenos Aires, 1994.
Alberdi, Juan. B: Fragment preliminary study of law. Imp of Liberty. Buenos Aires, 1837.
General Congress, Santa Fe, session of April 20, 1853.
Barba, Enrique: "Origins and Crisis of Argentine federalism," Rev. of History, No. 2, Buenos Aires, 1957. Daily Record
the Senate of the Nation: July 8, 1875.
Charter Rose Quiroga of 12/20/1834.
Puentes, Gabriel A.: The Government of Balcarce. Buenos Aires, 1948.
H. Board of Representatives: Daily Record, No. 344, July 13, 1833.
Gálvez, Manuel: The Life of Don Juan Manuel de Rosas. Buenos Aires, ed. 1956.
H. Board of Representatives: Daily Record, No. 586, March 18, 1833.
Saldías, Adolfo: History of Argentina Confederation. Buenos Aires, ed. 1951.

Rosa, José María: The Indian municipality to the Province of Argentina. Buenos Aires, ed. 1974.
Barba, Enrique M., Quiroga and Rosas, Buenos Aires, 1974. Alberdi
Urquiza Letter of August 9, 1861.
Lasalle, Ferdinand: What is a Constitution? Ed Madrid, 1931.
Alberdi, Juan B.: The monarchy as the best form of government in South America. Ed Peña Lillo, Buenos Aires, 1970.
Jauretche, Arturo: National Policy and Historical Revisionism, ed. 1970.