Presentación de Red

7 Bishop J. Pallegoix, D escription s o f the Thai K ingdom , p. 391. 8 B.J. Terwiel, Thailand's P o litica l H istory, p. 56.

Following the establishment o f the Chakri dynasty in 1782, the missionaries were allowed to return. Nevertheless, the dispute over the oath ceremony had not been satisfactorily resolved for either side. Eventually a compromise was agreed. Catholics would be able to give their oaths of allegiance to the state (that is, the monarch) in the ceremony, so long as they could swear in the Catholic manner. Even so, the dispute regarding this matter continued to the time o f Vicar-Apostolic Perros, as the ceremony grew to involve ordinary citizens. In addition, other newly introduced bureaucratic formalities required oaths, such as giving testimonies in court, thereby making the practice more widespread, where previously it would have been administered only to select officials of the court.

As more and more state organs from the various government ministries to the local administration were coming into contact with ordinary citizens, some of whom were Catholics, the problems regarding the oaths reoccurred. While by the late

1920s, the court and the central ministries were familiar with Catholic sensitivities as well as the solutions that had been worked out between the two parties, it was a different matter for the provincial authorities who did not seem to be aware of the religious sensitivity, some thinking that reluctance on the part o f the Catholics was actually recalcitrance. Although, when complications arose, the Vicar-Apostolic communicated with the relevant central ministries to remind them o f existing arrangements, thereby solving the immediate problems, the alternative procedures were not as well known as the Church assumed. This discrepancy indicates that, although the amelioration o f Catholic grievances concerned the central government, it did not see the matter as relevant to provincial administration, despite the

indicate a loose central grip on the local state apparatus in terms o f policy implementation.

Even as late as 1916, local missionaries in the northeast still cited the oath ceremony as one o f the major obstacles in the Church’s relationship with the local state apparatus, an indication perhaps o f the ceremony’s late introduction into the area, since no mission station in other areas reported problems to such an extent. On the other hand, the situation in the northeast was not helped by what could be perceived, from the local authorities’ perspective, as ‘imperialistic’ behaviour 011 the

part o f the missionaries themselves. Indeed, in some cases, rather than ignorance 011

the part o f the local authorities, it was the priests who did not know the procedures that had been established between the Thai state and the Church. This ignorance was arguably a consequence o f these missionaries being subject to the Mission o f Laos rather than the Mission o f Siam. The situation was especially volatile given the Thai authorities’ paranoia over Catholic citizens working with the French colonial

authorities to annex territory. At the same time, the local authorities’ resentment that threatened to spill over into harassment could well have furnished local French colonial agents with the necessary pretext to intervene and ‘protect’ their fellow Catholics from ‘persecution’.

One case raged for three months, from July to September 1916. The case involved alleged coercion by local authorities against a village headman who was supposedly coerced to go to a Buddhist site to give his oath o f allegiance. The general situation was outlined in a memorandum submitted to the Mission o f Siam by Wolcott Pitkin, a General Advisor in Foreign Affairs to the government o f Siam, who was investigating the incident. According to Pitkin’s memorandum, Nai Siha Butr, the village headman o f Seisang had been compelled by the district chief officer

to go to a Buddhist temple and was ordered to take the oath and drink the water of allegiance in front o f a portrait o f the king. Compulsion was necessary because the headman “had previously failed at the proper time to apear [sic] for this purpose at Ubol [sic] Town”. Nevertheless, the parish priest, Fr. Leon Quentin complained bitterly to the authorities and “alleged that the headman had already taken the oath at the monthon”? contrary to the evidence presented by the district official. To make matters worse, the memorandum states that: “The father is said on this occasion to have made use of extremely insulting language and gestures” .10

However, according to Fr. Leon Quentin via the Vicar-Apostolic o f the Mission o f Laos, the headman had not failed in his duty, and had duly taken the oath at Ubon, with a priest as his witness. Nevertheless, for some unknown reason, the district chief officer o f Lum Phuk insisted on getting the headman to drink the water o f allegiance again, apparently through the use of threats:

At length, by means o f threats and lies, the [district chief officer] succeeded in inducing him to the Court. From the Court, he was led to the Pagoda and there, under new threats, yielding to them, he drank the water o f allegiance.

The priest then defended his subsequent actions as “verbal representations worthy o f the case”. More worrying, the priest also cited another case o f harassment by the district chief officer of Sasunthon on similar grounds, adding ominously that “people there being more sensible and less timid, nothing as yet has occurred”. 11 The situation thus was threatening to degenerate into a volatile clash over the word o f the foreign priest and the word of the local authorities.

9 A monthon was a country subdivision o f Thailand, being essentially a collection o f provinces. The system was adopted in 1897 but had been abolished by 1933.

10 B .A .A ., General A dvisor in Foreign Affairs to Fr. Colombet, 15 July 1916, 4 6/1/34.