“MONSTROUS AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS”: LAW ...

Operating within this relationship, Berro proved a much more willing judicial partner
in Saldaña’s campaign to secure Lafitte’s property. When Vior brought civil charges against
Lafitte for unpaid debts, Berro promptly ordered an embargo of the Frenchman’s assets.
When Lafitte challenged the order, Berro arrested him. Once again, Sañudo attempted to
block the action. The attorney argued that the accusations and Lafitte’s subsequent arrest
were simply “pretexts” to compel Lafitte “to once again present his property titles” to Vior. 54
Berro agreed to release Lafitte. He did so, however, solely upon the condition that his lands
and possessions be sold at a public auction to satisfy his creditors. Interestingly, Tomas
Leal, the former rival of Malta and Guimaraens, purchased the property for an extremely
favorable price. 55 Leal then requested that the court “eject the debtor and expropriator
[Lafitte] who according to reports absolutely refuses to abandon the property.” 56 Emilio
Thevenet then appeared to object. He claimed that Leal had no right to take possession of
the property in question until he tendered a bond. Citing the Civil Code, Berro flatly refused
Thevenet’s request for a delay. He finally ordered Lafitte’s immediate removal from his
former lands. 57
As Berro’s appointment permitted Saldaña and his allies to consolidate their
economic position, Guimaraens completed his efforts to isolate Thevenet and his other
rivals on the JEA. In early 1879, El Salteño reprinted several articles from the 1876 dispute
between the JEA and Thevenet impugning the latter’s reputation and demanding
54
José Maria Fernandez Vior c. D. Teodoro Lafitte por cobre egecutivo de pesos, 56bis.
55
The documents indicated that the auction produced “a low return for the assets.”
Ibid., 122.
56
Ibid., 125bis.
57
Berro cited art. 1691 of the Uruguayan Civil Code, noting that under its provisions
“the first cannot be obligated to comply on his part with the obligations declared in a
contract while danger is still present or contingencies have been financed that will be
preserved through his actions.” Ibid.
353