When two Xuetes said enough: the Cartagena lawsuit that shook 19th-century Mallorca

PalmaTo be scorned, insulted, or even attacked; this is what the Xuetes endured for three centuries, the bearers of the fifteen surnames pointed out by the rest of the Majorcans as the sole descendants of Jews converted to Christianity. They did not always endure it stoically: two of them, Gabriel Fuster and Ignasi Forteza, expelled from a ball, took their discrimination to court and won the lawsuit, called 'of Cartagena' due to the jurisdiction that took charge of it. 175 years ago, on September 1, 1851, the defendants decided to appoint a representative to pursue that case.

The first thing to clarify about the Xuetes is that there is a monstrous falsification, favored by the ruling classes, which has been in effect practically until our days. Everyone admitted that only those who bore the well-known fifteen surnames – Aguiló, Bonnín, Cortès, Forteza, Fuster, Martí, Miró, Picó, Pinya, Pomar, Segura, Tarongí, Valentí, Valleriola, and Valls– were the descendants of Jews. Because they corresponded to the medallions of those condemned at the acts of faith of 1691, deposited in the now-disappeared convent of Sant Domingo in Palma, where the Parliament is today.

The truth is that it was not just fifteen who were adopted by Jews upon converting to Christianity. Almost two hundred have been documented – yes, Rotger, you too. But the forgery worked. The Xuetes had to remain in the ghetto: in Palma, on Argenteria street and that is why they were called 'the people of the Street'; they had to resign themselves to marrying amongst themselves, or, in any case, with outsiders, unaware of the shameful stain, and they had to submit to the prohibition of accessing professional guilds, higher education and, even, public charity for those who were poor, which of course some were.

It was Charles III, not very admirable in other aspects, who, at the request of a group of 'street' ambassadors, put an end to that discrimination, in 1782, establishing that they could reside wherever they wished and prohibiting them from being insulted or mistreated, under penalty of imprisonment. Of course, that was a done deal: until 1829 they were still barred from accessing the Majorcan University, and until 1835 they could not access secondary education.

It is not surprising that, to a large extent, the xuetes identified with the new liberal values of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, those that proclaimed equality among all citizens. When in 1820 a revolt of this kind broke out in Palma, not only was the 'Casa Negra', headquarters of the Inquisition, in the current Plaça Major, stormed, but the portraits of those condemned by the Holy Office that were in Sant Domingo were torn down and burned.

The culprits of everything

But not only the attitude of contempt towards the xuetes was maintained, but, during that same period, Carrer de l'Argenteria was the scene of two attacks. In 1809, because they were blamed for the Peninsular War. And in 1823, after the brief liberal period had failed, because they were attributed with having drafted the now hated Constitution of 1812, 'la Pepa'. It seems that, whatever it was, it was all the fault of the xuetes, just as happens with a certain Spanish prime minister of our times. By the way, the author of the Constitution, at least of the preamble, seems to have been a Majorcan: Bishop Bernat Nadal, who, moreover, ordained priests from 'the Street', despite a scathing report against doing so.

Towards the mid-19th century, liberalism had already triumphed in the State and liberal ideas inspired societies such as the Casino Balear, which was located in the current Carrer de Sant Feliu, in Palma. And it was here that, on February 6, 1850, that episode occurred which became the topic of conversation for all of Mallorca for months, and years – as there probably weren't many topics.

According to the dates, it was a carnival costume ball, to which two young bearers of the cursed surnames presented themselves: Ignasi Fortesa and Gabriel Fuster. Both, especially Fuster, of good economic standing and "persons of accredited conduct, notorious honesty and careful education", according to the chronicler Joaquim Maria Bover. They were not members, but they used the invitations that had been ceded to them by two other people who were: Miquel Serra and Benet Cortès, this one a xueta, too.

That is to say, the Casino admitted xuetes. Even so, Ignasi Forteza, to be on the safe side, had approached the president of the entity, Agustí Sorà, himself a liberal, to consult him whether, in case Fuster and he attended the party, they could receive any insult or disfavor. It was not an exaggerated precaution: there had been balls, shortly before, in which some attendees did not join in for fear of shaking hands with a xueta, by accident. Sorà replied that he should come with a mask and the problem would be solved.

Invite them to leave

At the time of truth, when Fuster and Forteza appeared, there was, as the minutes of the Casino board later recorded, "an animation and effervescence" among those present that smelled of trouble. Faced with this situation – adds the document – the president ordered the concierge to "with all courtesy" and discreetly tell them both to "have the kindness to leave". And they left. They could have left, tails between their legs, resigned and forgotten that episode. Another insult, however... But they did not resign themselves.

Besides the idiotic racist prejudice, there was another reason why Gabriel Fuster's presence would have been uncomfortable for some of the ballroom attendees. His father was the most prominent money lender, so the public humiliation of the son constituted a kind of small – and wretched – revenge. Incidentally, Gabriel Fuster, one of the first xuetes to enter the then-new Balearic Institute, now Ramon Llull, would abandon the Argenteria ghetto to settle in a much more distinguished environment: the street of the Royal Palace.

Román Piña Valls suspects that the minutes were drafted in a certain way to give the impression that Sorà and the Casino had conducted themselves impeccably. If all that had gone so Versailles-like, it is very strange that Fuster and Forteza had denounced Sorà for insults, which is what they did. It seems much more likely that they had been expelled "without any explanation and with more than a few laughs from those present".

The first instance then was the mayor of Palma, and he acquitted Sorà. Furthermore, the two partners who had passed them their invitations, Cortès and Serra, were accused of misusing them, by leaving them to Fuster and Forteza to attend the ball in their place. The truth is that the Casino's regulations did not establish anything regarding the use of said cards.

Forteza and Fuster did not give up and took their case to the Military Court of the Navy of Palma. This may seem strange to us now, but both Sorà and the two aggrieved parties belonged to the shipping world and, therefore, this was the jurisdiction that concerned them. In July 1851, the president of the Casino was sentenced to seven months of exile at least five leagues – about 38 kilometers – from the City and suspension of public office, a fine of one hundred duros, and payment of costs.

An expense of 600,000 euros

Neither the convict nor the accusers were satisfied and they took the matter to the next instance, the court of Cartagena, and from there the name of 'Cartagena lawsuit', by which this process is known. Fuster and Forteza appointed a representative to follow the case. On September 1, 1851, 175 years ago, the board of the Casino, which had just become Círculo Mallorquín by merging with another entity, decided to do the same, not without discrepancies being recorded from those who thought it had all been a colossal blunder.

From Cartagena they confirmed the sentence in 1852, and the same was done, in 1854, by the superior instance: the Supreme Court of Navy and War. The total expenses generated by the process amounted to an astronomical figure: according to Piña's calculation, the equivalent of 600,000 euros today, which was paid by the old Casino, now Círculo Mallorquín. In addition, Agustí Sorà had no choice but to serve the sentence of exile: he did so in Alcúdia, where he had to reside compulsorily, until shortly before his death.

It gives the impression that a cloak of silence was desired to be spread over that affair. The minutes of what was then the new Círculo Mallorquín do not record the outcome of the lawsuit, which is not so surprising given that they lost it. The documentation of the process disappeared, thanks to a timely fire that occurred at the Supreme Court of Navy in 1855. It is only thanks to a summary of the case by lawyer Miquel Ignasi Perelló i Socies that the contents of the lawsuit in which two young men from 'the Street' said 'enough is enough' have reached our days.

Information elaborated from texts by Román Piña Homs, Jaume Munar Arrom, Julio Sanmartín Perea, Miquel Forteza i Pinya, Francesc Riera i Montserrat, Lleonard Muntaner, Onofre Vaquer Bennàssar, Laura Miró Bonnín and Baltasar Porcel.