A democracia coroada is a strong defense of the empire of Dom Pedro II, and on the whole, rather successful, if one accepts the author’s definition of the problem. For Oliveira Tôrres, the central issue of the nineteenth century was that of liberty and liberalism, rather than that of equality and democracy, which were still in evolution. The policies and techniques of the emperor’s government were intended to make it possible for him to remain both inside the political scheme of things and yet outside—judging, balancing, and correcting, seeking to preserve liberties and achieve welfare. The effort would have required a supremely unusual person—one who could reign, rule, and administer while seeking to satisfy the desires of those who believed that the king should “reign but not rule.”
In the first section, Oliveira Tôrres gives us a short essay on the “Ideological and Historical Roots” of the empire. He then follows with a very long (twenty-two chapters) and exhaustive analysis of “Imperial Institutions.” In this second section he sketches the theory of the imperial state in Brazil, examines the legislative power, the “Poder Moderador,” the Council of State, executive and judicial powers, the voting and other rights of the citizens, and electoral reforms. He then discusses the political parties with special attention to the Liberal Party, its program, and its leadership. Following this he describes political life and process in the provinces and in the municípios and concludes the section with chapters on the aristocracy and on relations between Church and State in Brazil.
In a moderately written third section, the author describes the development of the Brazilian constitution from the time of Pedro I down to 1889. He continues with a favorable, even kind assessment of Pedro II, as ruler, and as political tutor of Brazil. He states that however many causes can be given for the fall of the Empire, the so-called military question was preeminent and fundamental, so that other causes were either unreal or unnecessary. He does not believe that the abolition of slavery can be considered a cause of the fall of the Empire, and statements to that effect he dismisses as mere rhetoric. He likewise plays down the importance of the religious question and the problem of “federalism” or, as we would say, “states’ rights.” He discusses the broad economic changes that were slowly but surely creating a middle class in Brazil, but he does not consider them crucial in this connection. The emperor, and by inference, the empire, welcomed these changes and understood them better than did the Republicans. (Admirers of the Barão de Mauá might not agree with the latter opinion.)
In dealing with the military question, Oliveira Tôrres admits that the increasing physical frailty of the emperor and his obvious desire to return to civil bases of power after the Paraguayan War were important sources of dissatisfaction to the army. From the theoretical and historical point of view, however, the empire had been founded and rested upon the army, the Church, and the nobility. Feudalism, old style, had been liquidated during the first twenty years of independence; the Church had been alienated by the Emperor’s Liberalism; the army was apparently fated to become the servant rather than the master of society. Hence the events of the quinze de novembro. Romantically, perhaps sentimentally, the emperor believed that because of its devotion to the liberties and welfare of Brazilians, the empire deserved to survive yet a while. The Republicans chose egalitarianism, and thereby (believes the author) opened the way to tyranny and the selfish pursuit of power in Brazil. He quotes Ruy Barbosa as a sample of disillusionment among those who had made the Republic and repeats with relish the paradox of President Rojas Paul: “They have done away with the only republic that existed in America, the empire of Brazil” (p. 464).
An appendix contains the texts of the imperial constitution, the Ato adicional of 1834, and several important reform laws, including the Lei Saraiva. There is an index and an excellent, though unannotated bibliography. Many of the more interesting and sardonic re marks of the author may be found in his notes.
