Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
Hipólito da Costa would probably be quite content (perhaps even a little surprised) at being feted as the father of the Brazilian press and probably he would not demand the additional title of political philosopher. But, in the fashion of his age, he discoursed at length on politics, and the pages of the Correio Braziliense which he edited show the ideas on governmental theory of a particular, early nineteenth-century liberal, a Portuguese influenced by the English liberalism which seems so far from radical today as to be almost blatantly conservative.
This article is based on the dissertation “The Correio Braziliense: Critic of Portuguese Policy in Brazil, 1808–1822,” submitted to The Catholic University of America for the Master of Arts degree.
1 Cf.da Silva, Manoel Cícero Peregrino, O patriarcha dos jornalistas brasileiros (Hipólito Joseph da Costa Pereira Furtado de Mendonça) 1114–1823 (Rio de Janeiro, 1923).Google Scholar Hipólito did not speak of himself as a Brazilian. In a letter he wrote to Mr. Humphries Marshall when he was in Philadelphia, Hipólito described himself as a Portuguese traveller.
2 One of the advisors to the king, the Conde de Linhares held various ministerial posts during his lifetime. He went to Brazil with the Court and there served as Secretary of Foreign Affairs and of War. He died in Rio de Janeiro in 1812. Funchal, Marquês do, O Conde de Linhares. Dom Rodrigo Domingos António de Sousa Coutinho (Lisbon, 1908).Google Scholar
3 The primary, although publicly unavowed, purpose of the trip was to secure information about the cochineal industry in Mexico and to acquire some of the insects for introduction into Brazil. A survey of the United States was a means to this end. The cochineal specimens died before they reached Brazil, probably in Madeira. Linking the demise of these insects with the charges of freemasonry made against him later, Hipólito said “perdendo-se assim este importante ramo de commercio, antes do que ter cochinilha infestada pela Maçoneria.” Correio Braziliense, III (July, 1809), 105; “Memoria sobre a viagem aos Estados-Unidos por Hippólyto José da Costa Pereira,” Revista do Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasileiro, XXI (1858), 383.
4 Hipólito José da Costa, Narrative da Perseguição (London, 1811), I, 22. However, despite this positive statement on the part of Hipólito, his name is not included in the list of members of the Masonic Lodge in Philadelphia or of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania.
5 Correio Braziliense, XXIX (1822), 623.
6 Alcibíades Furtado, Biográphia de Hipólito José da Costa Pereira Furtado de Mendonça (Rio de Janeiro, 1910), p. ix.
7 Correio Braziliense, passim. For a particular example, cf. III (August, 1809), 175–182, (September, 1809) 303–311, (October, 1809) 371–383, (November, 1809) 528–536, (December, 1809) 621–634, where he tries to erect an unwritten Portuguese constitution similar to the English model.
8 Ibid., XXVI (May, 1821), 526.”
9 Ibid., XIX (September, 1817), 314.
10 Ibid., XXVI (May, 1821), J26–531.
11 Ibid.,IV (April, 1810), 215; XVI (February, 1816), 188–189.
12 The government in Portugal, which the journal termed a “Representative-Democratic-Monarchy,” was accepted as reasonable for the time being only. The Correio Braziliense expected that the political situation would so evolve that eventually the legislative body could handle affairs completely, the monarchial institution would gradually become unnecessary, and the government of Portugal would have the form of a “Representative-Democracy.” Ibid., XXVI (May, 1821), 531–532; XXVII (December, 1821), 527–529; XXIX (1822), 296.
13 Ibid., III (November, 1809), 527; X (April, 1813), 533–534.
14 Always jealous of personal liberty, the Correio Braziliense objected to the terms “liberal” and “liberalism” which were so widely used and so vaguely, if at all, defined. It had no sympathy with this “liberalism” which in practice seemed to deal largely with the restriction of personal liberty rather than with the increasing and protecting of it. [i. e., the “liberal” government in Portugal after 1820, particularly as it affected Brazil.] Ibid., XXVII (December, 1821), 529–530.
15 Ibid., IV (May, 1810), 313–314; XXVI (May, 1821), 568–569; XXVIII (1822), 441–442.
16 lbid., XXIII (July, 1819), 52. Cf. XXIII (September, 1819), 266.
17 Ibid., XVIII (June, 1817), 675; XXIII (September, 1819), 266.
18 Ibid., XVI (February, 1816), 187.
19 Ibid., XXIII (October, 1819), 431.
20 Ibid., VI (May, 1811), 573; XXIII (November, 1819), 556; XXIV (March, 1820), 272; (April, 1820), 421; (May, 1820), 467–468.
21 Ibid., XVIII (May, 1817), 557.
22 Ibid., XVIII (May, 1817), 553–559. This Uruguayan campaign grew out of the border patrol supposedly set up only to contain the unrest in Uruguay where Artigas was trying to set up a nation independent of both Spain and Portugual. As a result of it, Brazil re-acquired control of the Cis-Platine Province for a time.
23 Ibid., XVIII (June, 1817), 672–673.
24 Manuel Carlos Piar (1782–1817) was one of the leaders in the revolutionary forces in Venezuela. Ostensibly, under Bolivar, he often pursued his own course. Eventually Bolivar had him condemned to death by a military court and he was executed at Angostura, October 16, 1817.
25 Correio Braziliense, XXIII (October, 1819), 425–426.
26 A royal decree of February 6, 1818, pardoned all the participants in the Pernambuco Revolution except the top leaders. de Silva, António Delgado, Collecção da legislação portugueza desde a ultima compilação das ordenações, 1811–1820 (Lisbon, 1825), pp. 611–612.Google Scholar
27 Correio Braziliense, XX (June, 1818), 609–611.
28 Ibid., XIX (July, 1817), 105–107.
29 On December 16, 1815, by order of the Prince Regent the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves was created. However, no real governmental unity accompanied this apparent reorganization, and the duplication of governmental departments in Lisbon and in Rio gave the administration the guise of a two-headed monster.
30 Correio Braziliense, XXVI (April, 1821), 462; XXV (December, 1820), 707.
31 Ibid., XXVI (February, 1821), 167–175.
32 When the Cortes finally got around to providing for the government of Brazil, it set up independent juntas in each province, directly responsible to the Cortes at Lisbon. This cut Rio off from the rest of the country and left the regent, Dom Pedro, with practically no authority in Brazil. Ibid., XXVIII (1822), 268.
33 The governador das armas was responsible directly to the Cortes in Lisbon. Ibid., XXVIII (1822), 70, 575, 580; XXIX (1822), 267.
34 Ibid., XXVI, XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX (1821–1822), passim.
35 In January, 1822, Dom Pedro agreed to defy the order of the Cortes that he return to Portugal (the Fico, January 9, 1822). Independence is dated from the Qrito de Ipiranga of September 7, 1822.
36 Correio Braziliense, III (July, 1809), 108.
37 Ibid., XXIX (1822), 476.
38 Ibid., XXIX (1822), 595.
