was not so young), today President of the Republic, they may not be used to compromise in his post, nor it should be assumed that the head of a State bind it ideas that belonged to another country adds that it is true that a newspaper (of Chile), held These ideas, but they carry no author’s name. I, Lopez (referring to Vicente Fidel) and Vial redactabamos journal. Articles were anonymous and those that do not bear his name not can be cited as author doctrine. All out of there argument against me is simply against a Chilean newspaper. With the intention of escaping the title of traitor that assigned Irigoyen expressly from the illustration Argentina and then Mitre implicitly, from La Nacion, Sarmiento left side its appreciation of the facts, justified in the fight against Rosas, to now opt for a negative rotunda of his authorship. The new defensista argument was unacceptable, since he intended to hold that articles formerly strongly defended by the same Sarmiento, now were to be anonymous and in the worst cases of shared authorship. The first confession that supports the relief of foolproof, joined this inatendible attempt, condemn the father of the classroom.
Although Sarmiento asks Frias to intercede in his defense in Chile and to keep in private correspondence, is too late, your guilt is undeniable and the treason is proven. With sublime disregard for their homeland, Sarmiento had sustained ideologically Patagonia belonged in Chile and with that same sentiment, also had given approval samples the Falklands English usurpation, to write that their invasion is useful to civilization and progress, fogging with it his later work. At the end of the Decade of the 70s Sarmiento performs his last defense to try to escape the status of traitor who chases him. In the presence of documents from the beginning of the 19th century contributed by Guido Spano, recognizes his mistake to manifest that it is proven that land usurped by Chileans, belonged to the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata. However, it avoids its responsibility to assign absolute blame the Government of Chile, forgetting that had been the own Sarmiento who urge the occupation. It cannot be denied that his work has been interesting in the Argentina, but it darkens forehead the position adopted in Chile. For my part, I accept his first defense, but his hatred of roses does not justify its contribution, which has undoubtedly been the cause of the Chilean claim. Glory and praise to the great among the great, father of the immortal Sarmiento classroom.