“MONSTROUS AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS”: LAW ...
“MONSTROUS AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS”: LAW ... “MONSTROUS AND ILLEGAL PROCEEDINGS”: LAW ...
As Guarch had used these elements to deepen his trading ties to the borderlands during the Farrapos Rebellion, Lemos Pinto similarly used his commercial and political associations to expand his operations during the war. Throughout the late 1830s and early 1840s, Lemos Pinto supplied rebel forces. His operations centered particularly around Alegrete. There, he maintained correspondence with important local elites like Prado Lima and Domingos José de Almeida. 48 Almeida in particular interceded on Lemos Pinto’s behalf, ensuring the safe passage of his goods even as Lemos Pinto attempted to cross enemy lines from the borderlands into Rio Pardo and Porto Alegre. 49 Through this assistance, Almeida once again bolstered his own political position. He acted as an important resource in facilitating commercial relationships while hardening connections with traders stretching from Montevideo to Porto Alegre. Much like Guarch and Picant had availed themselves of personal connections and reciprocal relationships borne through cross-border transactions during periods of acute crisis for their commercial operations, Lemos Pinto adopted a similar stance when his partner died in the Farrapos conflict in 1838. Lemos Pinto alleged that while he worked to maintain his commercial enterprise during the war, Menezes’ widow Maria Guedes de Menezes, had exploited the conflict in an attempt to control as much of the partnership’s assets as possible. In particular, Menezes arranged for her brother-in-law, Antonio Rodrigues da Fonseca Aranjo, to seize both the charqueada in Triumpho, as well as cattle in Uruguay in the early 1840s. Fearing that the partnership’s assets would be looted, Lemos 48 CV-5469 (November 9, 1838); CV-2165 (December 6, 1841). 49 CV-1752 (May 22, 1841). 88
Pinto sought to have the property declared his in Triumpho in 1846. His legal action, however, became bogged down in a prolonged probate proceeding over Menezes’ estate. 50 Faced with a dead-end in the Triumpho courts, Lemos Pinto turned to his personal reputation within the merchant community in Porto Alegre and his commercial and political allies in the borderlands to protect his legal rights. In 1849, Lemos Pinto appeared before the juiz de direito in Porto Alegre seeking to have the partnership’s assets frozen. In support of his claim, Lemos Pinto presented the testimony of several “vizinhos” in Porto Alegre. They detailed the scope of the partnership and noted that its assets had yet to be liquidated. 51 As we will see more fully in the next section, summoning these witnesses represented an important mechanism for establishing legal claims in local fora throughout the borderlands. It also embodied the reciprocal relationships underpinning trading connections along cross- border chains. Lemos Pinto then proceeded to use his trading relationships out in the borderlands in order to leverage his evidence from the Porto Alegre proceeding to protect his assets. Not waiting for a final judgment in the riograndense capital, Lemos Pinto took his petition and testimony and traversed his entire trade network. He registered it with public notaries in Triumpho and Alegrete. 52 Not satisfied with this, Lemos Pinto further presented his 50 Francisco de Lemos Pinto c. Maria Guedes de Menezes e outros, APRGS. Triumfo. Cartório Civil e Crime. Orphãos e Ausentes. Inventarios, N. 10, Maço 1 (1844). 51 APRGS. Alegrete. Tabelionato. Registros Diversos, Lançamento de huns documentos (May 14, 1849), 30. 52 In contrast to the common law system in the United States, public notaries in Civil law systems were and continue to be important judicial officials. Civil law countries generally require notaries to record nearly all transactions involving real estate, marriage, and many corporate acts. Notaries equally conduct a number of functions frequently handled by judicial officials in the United States such as the sale of real property. For a survey tracing the history of the modern notarial institution from Roman to contemporary Civil law systems, see P.A. Malavet, "Counsel for the Situation: The Latin Notary, A Historical and Comparative Model," Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 19 (1996). 89
- Page 47 and 48: They requested that the Junta appoi
- Page 49 and 50: manufactured products for the Andea
- Page 51 and 52: The Paraguayan government proposed
- Page 53 and 54: Montevideo in January of 1811, he i
- Page 55 and 56: Ríos. From there, he continued to
- Page 57 and 58: easoning. 25 They had rejected the
- Page 59 and 60: military headquarters along the ban
- Page 61 and 62: sovereignty rooted in borderlands p
- Page 63 and 64: Artigas’ defeat did not spell the
- Page 65 and 66: economy. By 1822, the powerful merc
- Page 67 and 68: universal laws that would further r
- Page 69 and 70: Pedro abdicated the throne in 1831,
- Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 2 THE (RE)EMERGENCE OF BORD
- Page 73 and 74: operate throughout the borderlands
- Page 75 and 76: and staple exports instead of the o
- Page 77 and 78: Ríos in particular witnessed a dra
- Page 79 and 80: goods as far north as the cities of
- Page 81 and 82: simmering struggles. By 1840, local
- Page 83 and 84: merchants, traders and landowners.
- Page 85 and 86: earning the faction’s colorado ti
- Page 87 and 88: Guarch’s deal with Carvalho revea
- Page 89 and 90: web of reciprocal relationships tha
- Page 91 and 92: the border in Brazil. In this way,
- Page 93 and 94: In short, over the course of a deca
- Page 95 and 96: that he had employed to first arran
- Page 97: opposite direction from Porto Alegr
- Page 101 and 102: dealings with Vázquez and the Carv
- Page 103 and 104: Ríos or by ship to Montero’s out
- Page 105 and 106: alliances with the blancos to open
- Page 107 and 108: connections up and down the river t
- Page 109 and 110: With his money now in limbo and his
- Page 111 and 112: honorable merchant. His associates
- Page 113 and 114: meant more than establishing a docu
- Page 115 and 116: Uruguaiana and Salto. 80 Chaves and
- Page 117 and 118: complex laws “that they only unde
- Page 119 and 120: were considered suspect, particular
- Page 121 and 122: status. Public recognition of one
- Page 123 and 124: They reasoned that “one has to re
- Page 125 and 126: unanimous and respected testimony o
- Page 127 and 128: powerful figures like Urquiza, depe
- Page 129 and 130: CHAPTER 3 SOVEREIGN CONFLICTS THE R
- Page 131 and 132: conflicts between peripheral ranche
- Page 133 and 134: further agreed to provide payments
- Page 135 and 136: Sosa almost immediately responded.
- Page 137 and 138: funds, the imperial government took
- Page 139 and 140: Throughout the early 1830s, the Uru
- Page 141 and 142: Fernandes Braga, the provincial pre
- Page 143 and 144: Frustrated by the lack of progress,
- Page 145 and 146: cataloguing illegal property confis
- Page 147 and 148: also provided prominent local elite
Pinto sought to have the property declared his in Triumpho in 1846. His legal action,<br />
however, became bogged down in a prolonged probate proceeding over Menezes’ estate. 50<br />
Faced with a dead-end in the Triumpho courts, Lemos Pinto turned to his personal<br />
reputation within the merchant community in Porto Alegre and his commercial and political<br />
allies in the borderlands to protect his legal rights. In 1849, Lemos Pinto appeared before<br />
the juiz de direito in Porto Alegre seeking to have the partnership’s assets frozen. In support<br />
of his claim, Lemos Pinto presented the testimony of several “vizinhos” in Porto Alegre.<br />
They detailed the scope of the partnership and noted that its assets had yet to be liquidated. 51<br />
As we will see more fully in the next section, summoning these witnesses represented an<br />
important mechanism for establishing legal claims in local fora throughout the borderlands.<br />
It also embodied the reciprocal relationships underpinning trading connections along cross-<br />
border chains.<br />
Lemos Pinto then proceeded to use his trading relationships out in the borderlands<br />
in order to leverage his evidence from the Porto Alegre proceeding to protect his assets.<br />
Not waiting for a final judgment in the riograndense capital, Lemos Pinto took his petition and<br />
testimony and traversed his entire trade network. He registered it with public notaries in<br />
Triumpho and Alegrete. 52 Not satisfied with this, Lemos Pinto further presented his<br />
<br />
50 Francisco de Lemos Pinto c. Maria Guedes de Menezes e outros, APRGS. Triumfo. Cartório<br />
Civil e Crime. Orphãos e Ausentes. Inventarios, N. 10, Maço 1 (1844).<br />
51<br />
APRGS. Alegrete. Tabelionato. Registros Diversos, Lançamento de huns documentos<br />
(May 14, 1849), 30.<br />
52<br />
In contrast to the common law system in the United States, public notaries in Civil<br />
law systems were and continue to be important judicial officials. Civil law countries<br />
generally require notaries to record nearly all transactions involving real estate, marriage, and<br />
many corporate acts. Notaries equally conduct a number of functions frequently handled by<br />
judicial officials in the United States such as the sale of real property. For a survey tracing<br />
the history of the modern notarial institution from Roman to contemporary Civil law<br />
systems, see P.A. Malavet, "Counsel for the Situation: The Latin Notary, A Historical and<br />
Comparative Model," Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 19 (1996).<br />
89 <br />
Change language