“MONSTROUS AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS”: LAW ...

over the recognition of property rights in the new Uruguayan Republic. 97 By drawing upon
notions of local autonomy and identity, it also reinforced the ideologies underpinning
Artigas’ early borderlands sovereign project. This ensured their continuing salience for the
region’s inhabitants even as states struggled to consolidate their hold on the contested
ground.
The 1828 conflict between Carlos Anaya, a prominent merchant and politician in
Montevideo, and the “vecinos of Rocha” offers a good example of the continuing importance
of vecindad for defining identities and securing property rights in the decades following
independence. 98 In the case, Anaya attempted to claim a tract of land located near the
eastern Uruguayan city. The property in question apparently formed part of the town’s
communal holdings (the ejido). Anaya received the property in recognition of his “constant
services” to Uruguay during its struggle for independence. 99 When Rocha’s vecinos learned
that the new government in Montevideo had granted Anaya the tract, they immediately filed
a collective petition demanding that the Montevideo courts overturn the erroneous
donation. They argued that the national government lacked the power to alienate locally
held properties, particularly without first consulting the assembled vecinos. They further
seized upon the fact that Anaya was not a vecino in the town. They declared: “[Anaya] is not
entitled to the onerous title of vecino domicilado because he has only arrived here by chance.” 100
97 Ibid.: 666.
98 Expediente promovido por D. Carlos Anaya, denunciando por su propiedad pública y pidiendo en
enfiteusis el terreno denominado Rincon de Rocha, AGN-SJ. Montevideo. Civil: 1º Turno, A-10
(1828).
99 Ibid., 3bis.
100 Ibid., 43bis-44.
112