they could do was to secure the compromise by which Walloon Luxemburg
was given to Belgium in exchange for territorial compensation in
Limburg. Belgian feeling was strong against surrendering any part either
of Luxemburg or Limburg; but King Leopold saw that surrender was
inevitable and by a threat of abdication he managed to secure, though
against vehement opposition, the acceptance of the Treaty of the XXIV
Articles by the Belgian Chambers (November 1). The treaty was signed at
London by the plenipotentiaries of the Five Great Powers and by the
Belgian envoy, Van de Weyer, on November 15, 1831; and Belgium was
solemnly recognised as an independent State, whose perpetual neutrality
and inviolability was guaranteed by each of the signatories
severally[13].

Once more the obstinacy of King William proved an insuperable obstacle
to a settlement. He had expected better results from the Ten Days'
Campaign, and he emphatically denied the right of the Conference to
interfere with the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, as this was not a Belgian
question, but concerned only the House of Nassau and the Germanic
Confederation. He also objected to the proposed regulations regarding
the navigation of the river Scheldt, and refused to evacuate Antwerp or
other places occupied by Dutch troops. He was aware that Great Britain
and France had taken the leading part in drawing up the treaty, but he
relied for support upon his close family relations with Prussia and
Russia[14], with whom Austria acted. But, although these Powers bore him
good will, they had no intention of encouraging his resistance. Their
object in delaying their ratification of the treaty was to afford time
to bring good advice to bear upon the unbending temper of the Dutch
king. The Tsar even sent Count Alexis Orloff on a special mission to the
Hague, with instructions to act with the Prussian and Austrian envoys in
urging William to take a reasonable course. All their efforts ended in
failure.

During the first nine months of the year 1832 a vigorous exchange of
notes took place between London and the Hague; and the Conference did
its utmost to effect an accommodation. At last patience was exhausted,
and the Powers had to threaten coercion. The three eastern Powers
declined indeed to take any active share in coercive measures, but were
willing that Great Britain and France should be their delegates.
Palmerston and Talleyrand, however, were determined that the King of
Holland should no longer continue to defy the will of the European Great
Powers; and on October 22 the English and French governments concluded a
Convention for joint action. Notice was given to King William (November
2) that he must withdraw his troops before November 13 from all places
assigned to Belgium by the Treaty of the XXIV Articles. If he refused,
the Dutch ports would be blockaded and an embargo placed upon Dutch
ships in the allies' harbours. Further, if on November 13 any Dutch
garrisons remained on Belgian soil, they would be expelled by armed
force. William at once (November 2) replied to the notice by a flat
refusal. In so acting he had behind him the practically unanimous
support of Dutch public opinion. The allies took prompt measures. An
Anglo-French squadron set sail (November 7) to blockade the Dutch ports
and the mouth of the Scheldt; and in response to an appeal from the
Belgian government (as was required by the terms of the Convention) a
French army of 60,000 men under Marshal Gérard crossed the Belgian
frontier (November 15) and laid siege to the Antwerp citadel, held by a
garrison of 5000 men commanded by General Chassé. The siege began on
November 20, and it was not until December 22 that Chassé, after a most
gallant defence, was compelled to capitulate. Rear-Admiral Koopman
preferred to burn his twelve gunboats rather than surrender them to the
enemy. Marshal Gérard offered to release his prisoners if the Dutch
would evacuate the forts of Lillo and Liefkenshoeck, lower down the
river. His offer was refused; and the French army, having achieved its
purpose, withdrew. For some time longer the blockade and embargo
continued, to the great injury of Dutch trade. An interchange of notes
between the Hague and London led to the drawing up of a convention,
known as the Convention of London, on May 21, 1833. By this agreement
King William undertook to commit no acts of hostility against Belgium
until a definitive treaty of peace was signed, and to open the
navigation of the Scheldt and the Meuse for commerce. The Convention was
in fact a recognition of the _status quo_ and was highly advantageous to
Belgium, as both Luxemburg and Limburg were _ad interim_ treated as if
they were integral parts of the new kingdom.

The cessation of hostilities, however, led to a fresh attempt to reach a
settlement. In response to an invitation sent by the western Powers to
Austria, Prussia and Russia, the Conference again met in London on July
15. The thread of the negotiations was taken up; but the Belgian
government insisted, with the full support of Palmerston, that as a
preliminary to any further discussion the King of Holland must obtain
the assent of the German Confederation and of the Nassau agnates to the
proposed territorial rearrangements. William declined to ask for this
assent. The Conference on this was indefinitely suspended. That the
king's refusal in August was a part of his fixed policy of waiting upon
events was shown by his actually approaching the Confederation and the
agnates in the following November (1833). Neither of these would consent
to any partition of Luxemburg, unless they received full territorial
compensation elsewhere. So matters drifted on through the years
1834-1837. Meanwhile in Holland a change of opinion had been gradually
taking place. The heavy taxes consequent upon the maintenance of an army
on a war footing pressed more and more upon a country whose income was
insufficient to meet its expenses. People grew tired of waiting for a
change in the political position that became every year more remote.
Luxemburg was of little interest to the Dutch; they only saw that
Belgium was prosperous, and that the maintenance of the _status quo_ was
apparently all to her advantage. The dissatisfaction of the Dutch
people, so long patient and loyal, made itself heard with increasing
insistence in the States-General; and the king saw that the time had
arrived for abandoning his obstinate _non-possumus_ attitude.
Accordingly, in March, 1838, he suddenly instructed his minister in
London (Dedel) to inform Palmerston that he (the king) was ready to sign
the treaty of the XXIV Articles, and to agree _pleinement et
entièrement_ to the conditions it imposed.

The unexpected news of this sudden step came upon the Belgians like a
thunderclap. From every part of the kingdom arose a storm of protest
against any surrender of territory. The people of Luxemburg and Limburg
appealed to their fellow-citizens not to abandon them; and their appeal
met with the strongest support from all classes and in both Chambers.
They argued that Holland had refused to sign the treaty of 1831, which
had been imposed on Belgium in her hour of defeat; and that now, after
seven years, the treaty had ceased to be in force and required revision.
The Belgians expected to receive support from Great Britain and France,
and more especially from Palmerston, their consistent friend. But
Palmerston was tired of the endless wrangling; and, acting on his
initiative, the Five Powers determined that they would insist on the
Treaty of the XXIV Articles being carried out as it stood. The
Conference met again in October, 1838; and all the efforts of the
Belgian government, and of King Leopold personally, to obtain more
favoured terms proved unavailing. An offer to pay sixty million francs
indemnity for Luxemburg and Limburg was rejected both by King William
and the Germanic Confederation. Such was the passionate feeling in
Belgium that there was actually much talk of resisting in the last
resort by force of arms. Volunteers poured in; and in Holland also the
government began to make military preparations. But it was an act of
sheer madness for isolated Belgium to think of opposing the will of the
Great Powers of Europe. The angry interchange of diplomatic notes
resulted only in one modification in favour of Belgium. The annual
charge of 8,400,000 francs placed upon Belgium on account of her share
in the public debt of the Netherlands was reduced to a payment of
5,000,000 francs. The Dutch king signed the treaty on February 1, 1839.
Finally the proposal that the treaty should be signed, opposition being
useless, met with a sullen assent from the two Belgian Chambers. On
April 19, 1839, the Belgian envoy, Van de Weyer, affixed his signature
at the Foreign Office in London and so brought to an end the long
controversy, which had lasted for nine years. There were still many
details to be settled between the two kingdoms, which from this time
became two separate and distinct political entities; but these were
finally arranged in an amicable spirit, and were embodied in a
subsidiary treaty signed November 5, 1842.

*       *       *       *       *



CHAPTER XXXII

WILLIAM II. REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION.

1842-1849


The Dutch nation welcomed the final separation from Belgium with
profound relief. The national charges had risen from 15 million florins
in 1815 to 38 million florins in 1838. Taxation was oppressive, trade
stagnant, and the financial position growing more and more intolerable.
The long-tried loyalty of the people, who had entrusted their sovereign
with such wide and autocratic powers, had cooled. The king's Belgian
policy had obviously been a complete failure; and the rotten state of
public finance was naturally in large part attributed to the sovereign,
who had so long been practically his own finance minister. Loud cries
began to be raised for a revision of the constitution on liberal lines.
To the old king any such revision was repugnant; but, unable to resist
the trend of public opinion, he gave his assent to a measure of
constitutional reform in the spring of 1840. Its limited concessions
satisfied no one. Its principal modifications of the Fundamental Law
were: (1) the division of the province of Holland into two parts; (2)
the reduction of the Civil List; (3) the necessary alteration of the
number of deputies in the Second Chamber due to the separation from
Belgium; (4) abolition of the distinction between the ordinary and the
extraordinary budget; (5) a statement of the receipts and expenditure of
the colonies to be laid before the States-General. Finally the principle
of ministerial responsibility was granted most reluctantly, the king
yielding only after the Chambers had declined to consider the estimates
without this concession. But William had already made up his mind to
abdicate, rather than reign under the new conditions. He knew that he
was unpopular and out-of-touch with the times; and his unpopularity had
been increased by his announced intention of marrying the Countess
Henriette D'Oultremont, a Belgian and a Catholic. On October 7 he issued
a proclamation by which he handed over the government to his son William
Frederick, Prince of Orange. He then retired quietly to his private
estates in Silesia. He died at Berlin in 1843.

William II was forty-eight years of age on his accession to the throne.
He was a man of a character very different from that of his father.
Amiable, accessible, easily influenced, liberal-handed even to
extravagance, he was deservedly popular. He had shown himself in the
Peninsula, at Quatre Bras and Waterloo and later in the Ten Days'
Campaign, to be a capable and courageous soldier, but he possessed few
of the qualities either of a statesman or a financier. He had married in
1816 Anna Paulovna, sister of the Tsar Alexander I, after his proposed
marriage with the Princess Charlotte of England had been broken off.

He entered upon his reign in difficult times. There was a loud demand
for a further sweeping revision of the constitution. Religious
movements, which had been gathering force during the reign of William I,
required careful handling. One minister after another had tried to
grapple with the financial problem, but in vain. In 1840 the public debt
amounted to 2200 million florins; and the burden of taxation, though it
had become almost unendurable, failed to provide for the interest on the
debt and the necessary expenses of administration. The State was in fact
on the verge of bankruptcy. The appointment in 1842 of F.A. van Hall
(formerly an Amsterdam advocate, who had held the post of minister of
justice) to be finance minister opened out a means of salvation. The
arrears to 1840 amounted to 35 million florins; the deficit for 1841-3
had to be covered, and means provided for the expenditure for 1843-4.
Van Hall's proposals gave the people the choice between providing the
necessary money by an extraordinary tax of one and a half per cent, on
property and income, and raising a voluntary loan of 150 million florins
at 3 per cent. After long debates the States-General accepted the
proposal for the voluntary loan, but the amount was reduced to 126
millions. The success of the loan, though at first doubtful, was by
March, 1844, complete. The Amsterdam Bourse gave its utmost support; and
the royal family set a good example by a joint subscription of 11
million florins. By this means, and by the capitalisation of the annual
Belgian payment of five million francs, Van Hall was able to clear off
the four years' arrears and to convert the 5 and 4-1/2 per cent. scrip
into 4 per cent. He was helped by the large annual payments, which now
began to come in from the Dutch East Indies; and at length an
equilibrium was established in the budget between receipts and
expenditure.

In the years preceding the French Revolution the Reformed Church in the
United Provinces had become honey-combed with rationalism. The official
orthodoxy of the Dort synod had become "a fossilised skeleton." By the
Constitution of 1798 Church and State were separated, and the property
of the Church was taken by the State, which paid however stipends to the
ministers. Under King Louis subsidies were paid from the public funds to
teachers of every religious persuasion; and this system continued during
the union of Holland and Belgium. A movement known as the _Reveil_ had
meanwhile been stirring the dry-bones of Calvinistic orthodoxy
in Holland. Its first leaders were Bilderdijk, De Costa and Capadose.
Like most religious revivals, this movement gave rise to extravagancies
and dissensions. In 1816 a new sect was founded by a sea-captain,
Staffel Mulder, on communistic principles after the example of
the first Jerusalem converts, which gathered a number of followers
among the peasantry. The "New Lighters"--such was the name they
assumed--established in 1823 their headquarters at Zwijndrecht. The
first enthusiasm however died down, and the sect gradually disappeared.
More serious was the liberal revolt against the cut-and-dried orthodoxy
of Dort. Slowly it made headway, and it found leaders in Hofstede de
Groot, professor at Groningen, and in two eloquent preachers, De Cocq at
Ulrum and Scholte at Deventer. These men, finding that their views met
with no sympathy or recognition by the synodal authorities, resolved
(October 14,1834) on the serious step of separating from the Reformed
Church and forming themselves and their adherents into a new church
body. They were known as "the Separatists" (_de Afgescheidenen_). Though
deprived of their pulpits, fined and persecuted, the Separatists grew in
number. In 1836 the government refused to recognise them as a Church,
but permitted local congregations to hold meetings in houses. In 1838
more favourable conditions were offered, which De Cocq and Scholte
finally agreed to accept, but no subsidies were paid to the sect by the
State. William II, in 1842, made a further concession by allowing
religious teaching to be given daily in the public schools (out of
school hours) by the Separatist ministers, as well as by those of other
denominations. All this while, however, certain congregations refused
to accept the compromise of 1838; and a large number, headed by a
preacher named Van Raalte, in order to obtain freedom of worship,
emigrated to Michigan to form the nucleus of a flourishing Dutch colony.

The accession of William II coincided with a period of political unrest,
not only in Holland but throughout Europe. A strong reaction had set in
against the system of autocratic rule, which had been the marked feature
of the period which followed 1815. Liberal and progressive ideas had
during the later years been making headway in Holland under the
inspiring leadership of Johan Rudolf Thorbecke, at that time a professor
of jurisprudence at Leyden. He had many followers; and the cause he
championed had the support of the brilliant writers and publicists,
Donker-Curtius, Luzac, Potgieter, Bakhuizen van der Brink and others. A
strong demand arose for a thorough revision of the constitution. In 1844
a body of nine members of the Second Chamber, chief amongst them
Thorbecke, drew up a definite proposal for a revision; but the king
expressed his dislike to it, and it was rejected. The Van Hall ministry
had meanwhile been carrying out those excellent financial measures which
had saved the credit of the State, and was now endeavouring to conduct
the government on opportunist lines. But the potato famine in 1845-46
caused great distress among the labouring classes, and gave added force
to the spirit of discontent in the country. The king himself grew
nervous in the presence of the revolutionary ferment spreading
throughout Europe, and was more especially alarmed (February, 1848) by
the sudden overthrow of the monarchy of Louis Philippe and the
proclamation of a republic at Paris. He now resolved himself to take the
initiative. He saw that the proposals hitherto made for revision did not
satisfy public opinion; and on March 8, without consulting his
ministers, he took the unusual step of sending for the President of the
Second Chamber, Boreel van Hogelanden. He asked him to ascertain the
opinions and wishes of the Chamber on the matter of revision and to
report to him. The ministry on this resigned and a new liberal ministry
was formed, at the head of which was Count Schimmelpenninck, formerly
minister in London. On March 17 a special Commission was appointed to
draw up a draft scheme of revision. It consisted of five members, four
of whom, Thorbecke, Luzac, Donker-Curtius and Kempenaer, were prominent
liberals and the fifth a Catholic from North Brabant. Their work was
completed by April 11 and the report presented to the king.
Schimmelpenninck, not agreeing with the proposals of the Commission,
resigned; and on May 11 a new ministry under the leadership of
Donker-Curtius was formed for the express purpose of carrying out the
proposed revision. A periodical election of the Second Chamber took
place in July, and difficulties at first confronted the new scheme.
These were, however, overcome; and on October 14 the revised
constitution received the king's assent. It was solemnly proclaimed on
November 3.

The Constitution of 1848 left in the hands of the king the executive
power, i.e. the conduct of foreign affairs, the right of declaring war
and making peace, the supreme command of the military and naval forces,
the administration of the overseas possessions, and the right of
dissolving the Chambers; but these prerogatives were modified by the
introduction of the principle of ministerial responsibility. The
ministers were responsible for all acts of the government, and the king
could legally do no wrong. The king was president of the Council of
State (15 members), whose duty it was to consider all proposals made to
or by the States-General. The king shared the legislative power with the
States-General, but the Second Chamber had the right of initiative,
amendment and investigation; and annual budgets were henceforth to be
presented for its approval. All members of the States-General were to be
at least 30 years of age. The First Chamber of 39 members was elected by
the Provincial Estates from those most highly assessed to direct
taxation; the members sat for nine years, but one-third vacated their
seats every third year. All citizens of full age paying a certain sum to
direct taxation had the right of voting for members of the Second
Chamber, the country for this purpose being divided into districts
containing 45,000 inhabitants. The members held their seats for four
years, but half the Chamber retired every second year. Freedom of
worship to all denominations, liberty of the press and the right of
public meeting were guaranteed. Primary education in public schools was
placed under State control, but private schools were not interfered
with. The provincial and communal administration was likewise reformed
and made dependent on the direct popular vote.

The ministry of Donker-Curtius at once took steps for holding
fresh elections, as soon as the new constitution became the
fundamental law of the country. A large majority of liberals was
returned to the Second Chamber. The king in person opened the
States-General on February 13, 1849, and expressed his intention of
accepting loyally the changes to which he had given his assent. He
was, however, suffering and weak from illness, and a month later
(March 17) he died at Tilburg. His gracious and kindly personality
had endeared him to his subjects, who deeply regretted that at this
moment of constitutional change the States should lose his experienced
guidance. He was succeeded by his son, William III.

*       *       *       *       *




CHAPTER XXXIII

REIGN OF WILLIAM III TO THE DEATH OF THORBECKE, 1849-1872


William III succeeded to the throne at a moment of transition. He was
thirty-two years of age, and his natural leanings were autocratic; but
he accepted loyally the principle of ministerial responsibility, and
throughout his long reign endeavoured honestly and impartially to fulfil
his duties as a constitutional sovereign. There were at this time in
Holland four political parties: (1) the old conservative party, which
after 1849 gradually dwindled in numbers and soon ceased to be a power
in the State; (2) the liberals, under the leadership of Thorbecke; (3)
the anti-revolutionary or orthodox Protestant party, ably led by G.
Groen van Prinsterer, better known perhaps as a distinguished historian,
but at the same time a good debater and resourceful parliamentarian; (4)
the Catholic party. The Catholics for the first time obtained in 1849
the full privileges of citizenship. They owed this to the liberals, and
for some years they gave their support to that party, though differing
from them fundamentally on many points. The anti-revolutionaries placed
in the foreground the upholding of the Reformed (orthodox Calvinistic)
faith in the State, and of religious teaching in the schools. In this
last article of their political creed they were at one with the
Catholics, and in its defence the two parties were destined to become
allies.

The liberal majority in the newly elected States-General was
considerable; and it was the general expectation that Thorbecke would
become head of the government. The king however suspected the aims of
the liberal leader, and personally disliked him. He therefore kept in
office the Donker-Curtius-De Kempenaer cabinet; but, after a vain
struggle against the hostile majority, it was compelled to resign, and
Thorbecke was called upon to form a ministry.

Thorbecke was thus the first constitutional prime-minister of Holland.
His answer to his opponents, who asked for his programme, was
contained in words which he was speedily to justify: "Wait for our
deeds." A law was passed which added 55,000 votes to the electorate; and
by two other laws the provincial and communal assemblies were placed
upon a popular representative basis. The system of finance was reformed
by the gradual substitution of direct for indirect taxation. By the
Navigation Laws all differential and transit dues upon shipping were
reduced; tolls on through-cargoes on the rivers were abolished, and the
tariff on raw materials lowered. It was a considerable step forward in
the direction of free-trade. Various changes were made to lighten the
incidence of taxation on the poorer classes. Among the public works
carried to completion at this time (1852) was the empoldering of the
Haarlem lake, which converted a large expanse of water into good pasture
land.

It was not on political grounds that the Thorbecke ministry was to be
wrecked, but by their action in matters which aroused religious passions
and prejudices. The prime-minister wished to bring all charitable
institutions and agencies under State supervision. Their number was more
than 3500; and a large proportion of these were connected with and
supported by religious bodies. It is needless to say the proposal
aroused strong opposition. More serious was the introduction of a
Catholic episcopate into Holland. By the Fundamental Law of 1848
complete freedom of worship and of organisation had been guaranteed to
every form of religious belief. It was the wish of the Catholics that
the system which had endured ever since the 16th century of a "Dutch
mission" under the direction of an Italian prelate (generally the
internuncio) should come to an end, and that they should have bishops of
their own. The proposal was quite constitutional and, far from giving
the papal curia more power in the Netherlands, it decreased it. A
petition to Pius IX in 1847 met with little favour at Rome; but in 1851
another petition, much more widely signed, urged the Pope to seize the
favourable opportunity for establishing a native hierarchy. Negotiations
were accordingly opened by the papal see with the Dutch government,
which ended (October, 1852) in a recognition of the right of the
Catholic Church in Holland to have freedom of organisation. It was
stipulated, however, that a previous communication should be made to the
government of the papal intentions and plans, before they were carried
out. The only communication that was made was not official, but
confidential; and it merely stated that Utrecht was to be erected into
an archbishopric with Haarlem, Breda, Hertogenbosch and Roeremonde, as
suffragans. The ministry regarded the choice of such Protestant centres
as Utrecht and Haarlem with resentment, but were faced with the _fait
accompli_. This strong-handed action of the Roman authorities was made
still more offensive by the issuing of a papal allocution, again without
any consultation with the Dutch government, in which Pius IX described
the establishment of the new hierarchy as a means of counteracting in
the Netherlands the heresy of Calvin.

A wave of fierce indignation swept over Protestant Holland, which united
in one camp orthodox Calvinists (anti-revolutionaries), conservatives
and anti-papal liberals. The preachers everywhere inveighed against a
ministry which had permitted such an act of aggression on the part of a
foreign potentate against the Protestantism of the nation. Utrecht took
the lead in drawing up an address to the king and to the States-General
(which obtained two hundred thousand signatures), asking them not to
recognise the proposed hierarchy. At the meeting of the Second Chamber
of the States-General on April 12, Thorbecke had little difficulty in
convincing the majority that the Pope had proceeded without Consultation
with the ministry, and that under the Constitution the Catholics had
acted within their rights in re-modelling their Church organisation. But
his arguments were far from satisfying outside public opinion. On the
occasion of a visit of the king to Amsterdam the ministry took the step
of advising him not to receive any address hostile to the establishment
of the hierarchy, on the ground that this did not require the royal
approval. William, who had never been friendly to Thorbecke, was annoyed
at being thus instructed in the discharge of his duties; and he not only
received an address containing 51,000 signatures but expressed his great
pleasure in being thus approached (April 15). At the same time he
summoned Van Hall, the leader of the opposition, to Amsterdam for a
private consultation. The ministry, on hearing of what had taken place,
sent its resignation, which was accepted on April 19. Thus fell the
Thorbecke ministry, not by a parliamentary defeat, but because the king
associated himself with the uprising of hostile public opinion, known as
the "April Movement."

A new ministry was formed under the joint leadership of Van Hall and
Donker-Curtius; and an appeal to the electors resulted in the defeat of
the liberals. The majority was a coalition of conservatives and
anti-revolutionaries. The followers of Groen van Prinsterer were small
in number, but of importance through the strong religious convictions
and debating ability of the leader. The presence of Donker-Curtius was a
guarantee for moderation; and, as Van Hall was an adept in political
opportunism, the new ministry differed from its liberal predecessor
chiefly in its more cautious attitude towards the reforms which both
were ready to adopt. As it had been carried into office by the April
Movement, a Church Association Bill was passed into law making it
illegal for a foreigner to hold any Church office without the royal
assent, and forbidding the wearing of a distinctive religious dress
outside closed buildings. Various measures were introduced dealing with
ministerial responsibility, poor-law administration and other matters,
such as the abolition of the excise on meat and of barbarous punishments
on the scaffold.

The question of primary education was to prove for the next half-century
a source of continuous political and religious strife, dividing the
people of Holland into hostile camps. The question was whether the State
schools should be "mixed" i.e. neutral schools, where only those simple
truths which were common to all denominations should be taught; or
should be "separate" i.e. denominational schools, in which religious
instruction should be given in accordance with the wishes of the
parents. A bill was brought in by the government (September, 1854) which
was intended to be a compromise. It affirmed the general principle that
the State schools should be "neutral," but allowed "separate" schools to
be built and maintained. This proposal was fiercely opposed by Groen and
gave rise to a violent agitation. The ministry struggled on, but its
existence was precarious and internal dissensions at length led to its
resignation (July, 1856). The elections of 1856 had effected but little
change in the constitution of the Second Chamber, and the
anti-revolutionary J.J.L. van der Brugghen was called upon to form a
ministry. Groen himself declined office, Van der Brugghen made an effort
to conciliate opposition; and a bill for primary education was
introduced (1857) upholding the principle of the "mixed" schools, but
with the proviso that the aim of the teaching was to be the instruction
of the children "in Christian and social virtues"; at the same time
"separate" schools were permitted and under certain conditions would be
subsidised by the State. Groen again did his utmost to defeat this bill,
but he was not successful; and after stormy debates it became law (July,
1857). The liberals obtained a majority at the elections of 1858, and
Van der Brugghen resigned. But the king would not send for Thorbecke;
and J.J. Rochussen, a former governor-general of the Dutch East Indies,
was asked to form a "fusion" ministry. During his tenure of office
(1858-60) slavery was abolished in the East Indies, though not the
cultivation-system, which was but a kind of disguised slavery. The way
in which the Javanese suffered by this system of compulsory labour for
the profit of the home country--the amount received by the Dutch
treasury being not less than 250 million florins in thirty years--was
now scathingly exposed by the brilliant writer Douwes Dekker. He had
been an official in Java, and his novel _Max Havelaar_, published in
1860 under the pseudonym "Multatuli," was widely read, and brought to
the knowledge of the Dutch public the character of the system which was
being enforced.

Holland was at this time far behind Belgium in the construction of a
system of railroads, to the great hindrance of trade. A bill, however,
proposed by the ministry to remedy this want was rejected by the First
Chamber, and Rochussen resigned. The king again declined to send for
Thorbecke; and Van Hall was summoned for the third time to form a
ministry. He succeeded in securing the passage of a proposal to spend
not less than 10 million florins annually in the building of State
railways. All Van Hall's parliamentary adroitness and practised
opportunism could not, however, long maintain in office a ministry
supported cordially by no party. Van Hall gave up the unthankful task
(February, 1861), but still it was not Thorbecke, but Baron S. van
Heemstra that was called upon to take his place. For a few months only
was the ministry able to struggle on in the face of a liberal majority.
There was now no alternative but to offer the post of first minister to
Thorbecke, who accepted the office (January 31, 1862).

The second ministry of Thorbecke lasted for four years, and was actively
engaged during that period in domestic, trade and colonial reforms.
Thorbecke, as a free-trader, at once took in hand the policy of lowering
all duties except for revenue purposes. The communal dues were
extinguished. A law for secondary and technical education was passed in
1863; and in the same year slavery was abolished in Surinam and the West
Indies. Other bills were passed for the canalising of the Hook of
Holland, and the reclaiming of the estuary of the Y. This last project
included the construction of a canal, the Canal of Holland, with the
artificial harbour of Ymuiden at its entrance, deep enough for ocean
liners to reach Amsterdam. With the advent of Fransen van de Putte, as
colonial minister in 1863, began a series of far-reaching reforms in the
East Indies, including the lowering of the differential duties. His
views, however, concerning the scandal of the cultivation-system in Java
did not meet with the approval of some of his colleagues; and Thorbecke
himself supported the dissentients. The ministry resigned, and Van de
Putte became head of the government. He held office for four months
only. His bill for the abolition of the cultivation-system and the
conversion of the native cultivators into possessors of their farms was
thrown out by a small majority, Thorbecke with a few liberals and some
Catholics voting with the conservatives against it. This was the
beginning of a definite liberal split, which was to continue for years.

A coalition-ministry followed under the presidency of J. van Heemskerk
(Interior) and Baron van Zuylen van Nyevelt (Foreign Affairs). The
colonial minister Mijer shortly afterwards resigned in order to take the
post of governor-general of the East Indies. This appointment did not
meet with the approval of the Second Chamber; and the government
suffered a defeat. On this they persuaded the king not only to dissolve
the Chamber, but to issue a proclamation impressing upon the electors
the need of the country for a more stable administration. The result was
the return of a majority for the Heemskerk-Van Zuylen combination. It is
needless to say that Thorbecke and his followers protested strongly
against the dragging of the king's name into a political contest, as
gravely unconstitutional. The ministry had a troubled existence.

The results of the victory of Prussia over Austria at Sadowa, and the
formation of the North German Confederation under Prussian leadership,
rendered the conduct of foreign relations a difficult and delicate task,
especially as regards Luxemburg and Limburg, both of which were under
the personal sovereignty of William III, and at the same time formed
part of the old German Confederation. The rapid success of Prussia had
seriously perturbed public opinion in France; and Napoleon III, anxious
to obtain some territorial compensation which would satisfy French
_amour-propre,_ entered into negotiations with William III for the sale
of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg. The king was himself alarmed at the
Prussian annexations, and Queen Sophie and the Prince of Orange had
decided French leanings; and, as Bismarck had given the king reason to
believe that no objection would be raised, the negotiations for the sale
were seriously undertaken. On March 26, 1867, the Prince of Orange
actually left the Hague, bearing the document containing the Grand
Duke's consent; and on April 1 the cession was to be finally completed.
On that very day the Prussian ambassadors at Paris and the Hague were
instructed to say that any cession of Luxemburg to France would mean war
with Prussia. It was a difficult situation; and a conference of the
Great Powers met at London on May 11 to deal with it. Its decision was
that Luxemburg should remain as an independent state, whose neutrality
was guaranteed collectively by the Powers, under the sovereignty of the
House of Nassau; that the town of Luxemburg should be evacuated by its
Prussian garrison; and that Limburg should henceforth be an integral
part of the kingdom of the Netherlands.

Van Zuylen was assailed in the Second Chamber for his exposing the
country to danger and humiliation in this matter; and the Foreign Office
vote was rejected by a small majority. The ministry resigned; but,
rather than address himself to Thorbecke, the king sanctioned a
dissolution, with the result of a small gain of seats to the liberals.
Heemskerk and Van Zuylen retained office for a short time in the face of
adverse votes, but finally resigned; and the king had no alternative but
to ask Thorbecke to form a ministry. He himself declined office, but he
chose a cabinet of young liberals who had taken no part in the recent
political struggles, P.P. van Bosse becoming first minister.

From this time forward there was no further attempt on the part
of the royal authority to interfere in the constitutional course of
parliamentary government. Van Bosse's ministry, scoffingly called by
their opponents "Thorbecke's marionettes," maintained themselves
in office for two years(1868-70), passing several useful measures, but
are chiefly remembered for the abolition of capital punishment. The
outbreak of the Franco-German war in 1870 found, however, the
Dutch army and fortresses ill-prepared for an emergency, when
the maintenance of strict neutrality demanded an efficient defence
of the frontiers. The ministry was not strong enough to resist the
attacks made upon it; and at last the real leader of the liberal party,
the veteran Thorbecke, formed his third ministry (January, 1871).
But Thorbecke was now in ill-health, and the only noteworthy
achievement of his last premiership was an agreement with Great
Britain by which the Dutch possessions on the coast of Guinea
were ceded to that country in exchange for a free hand being given
to the Dutch in Surinam. The ministry, having suffered a defeat
on the subject of the cost of the proposed army re-organisation, was
on the point of resigning, when Thorbecke suddenly died (June 5,
1872). His death brought forth striking expressions of sympathy
and appreciation from men and journals representing all parties
in the State. For five-and-twenty years, in or out of office, his had
been the dominating influence in Dutch politics; and it was felt on
all sides that the country was the poorer for the loss of a man of
outstanding ability and genuine patriotism.

*       *       *       *       *




CHAPTER XXXIV

THE LATER REIGN OF WILLIAM III, AND THE REGENCY OF
QUEEN EMMA, 1872-1898


The death of Thorbecke was the signal for a growing cleavage between the
old _doctrinaire_ school of liberals, who adhered to the principles of
1848, and the advanced liberalism of many of the younger progressive
type. To Gerrit de Vries was entrusted the duty of forming a ministry,
and he had the assistance of the former first minister, F. van de Putte.
His position was weakened by the opposition of the Catholic party, who
became alienated from the liberals, partly on the religious education
question, but more especially because their former allies refused to
protest against the Italian occupation of Rome. The election of 1873 did
not improve matters, for it left the divided liberals to face an
opposition of equal strength, whenever the conservatives,
anti-revolutionaries and Catholics acted together. This same year saw
the first phase of the war with the piratical state of Achin. An
expedition of 3600 men under General Köhler was sent out against the
defiant sultan in April, 1873, but suffered disaster, the General
himself dying of disease. A second stronger expedition under General van
Swieten was then dispatched, which was successful; and the sultan was
deposed in January, 1874. This involved heavy charges on the treasury;
and the ministry, after suffering two reverses in the Second Chamber,
resigned (June, 1874), being succeeded by a Heemskerk coalition
ministry.

Heemskerk in his former premiership had shown himself to be a clever
tactician, and for three years he managed to maintain himself in office
against the combined opposition of the advanced liberals, the
anti-revolutionaries and the Catholics. Groen van Prinsterer died in
May, 1876; and with his death the hitherto aristocratic and exclusive
party, which he had so long led, became transformed. Under its new
leader, Abraham Kuyper, it became democratised, and, by combining its
support of the religious principle in education with that of progressive
reform, was able to exercise a far wider influence in the political
sphere. Kuyper, for many years a Calvinist pastor, undertook in 1872 the
editorship of the anti-revolutionary paper, _De Standdard_. In 1874 he
was elected member for Gouda, but resigned in order to give his whole
time to journalism in the interest of the political principles to which
he now devoted his great abilities.

The Heemskerk ministry had the support of no party, but by the
opportunist skill of its chief it continued in office for three years;
no party was prepared to take its place, and "the government of the king
must be carried on." The measures that were passed in this time were
useful rather than important. An attempt to deal with primary
instruction led to the downfall of the ministry. The elections of 1877
strengthened the liberals; and, an amendment to the speech from the
throne being carried, Heemskerk resigned. His place was taken by Joannes
Kappeyne, leader of the progressive liberals. A new department of State
was now created, that of Waterways and Commerce, whose duties in a
country like Holland, covered with a net-work of dykes and canals, was
of great importance. A measure which denied State support to the
"private" schools was bitterly resisted by the anti-revolutionaries and
the Catholics, whose union in defence of religious education was from
this time forward to become closer. The outlay in connection with the
costly Achin war, which had broken out afresh, led to a considerable
deficit in the budget. In consequence of this a proposal for the
construction of some new canals was rejected by a majority of one. The
financial difficulties, which had necessitated the imposing of unpopular
taxes, had once more led to divisions in the liberal ranks; and
Kappeyne, finding that the king would not support his proposals for a
revision of the Fundamental Law, saw no course open to him but
resignation.

In these circumstances the king decided to ask an anti-revolutionary,
Count van Lynden van Sandenburg, to form a "Ministry of Affairs,"
composed of moderate men of various parties. Van Lynden had a difficult
task, but with the strong support of the king his policy of conciliation
carried him safely through four disquieting and anxious years. The
revolt of the Boers in the Transvaal against British rule caused great
excitement in Holland, and aroused much sympathy. Van Lynden was careful
to avoid any steps which might give umbrage to England, and he was
successful in his efforts. The Achin trouble was, however, still a
cause of much embarrassment. Worst of all was the series of bereavements
which at this time befell the House of Orange-Nassau. In 1877 Queen
Sophie died, affectionately remembered for her interest in art and
science, and her exemplary life. The king's brother, Henry, for thirty
years Stadholder of Luxemburg, died childless early in 1879; and shortly
afterwards in June the Prince of Orange, who had never married, passed
away suddenly at Paris. The two sons of William III's uncle Frederick
predeceased their father, whose death took place in 1881. Alexander, the
younger son of the king, was sickly and feeble-minded; and with his
decease in 1884, the male line of the House of Orange-Nassau became
extinct. Foreseeing such a possibility in January, 1879, the already
aged king took in second wedlock the youthful Princess Emma of
Waldeck-Pyrmont. Great was the joy of the Dutch people, when, on August
31, 1880, she gave birth to a princess, Wilhelmina, who became from this
time forth the hope of a dynasty, whose history for three centuries had
been bound up with that of the nation.

The Van Lynden administration, having steered its way through many
parliamentary crises for four years, was at last beaten upon a proposal
to enlarge the franchise, and resigned (February 26, 1883). To Heemskerk
was confided the formation of a coalition ministry of a neutral
character; and this experienced statesman became for the third time
first minister of the crown. The dissensions in the liberal party
converted the Second Chamber into a meeting-place of hostile factions;
and Heemskerk was better fitted than any other politician to be the head
of a government which, having no majority to support it, had to rely
upon tactful management and expediency. The rise of a socialist party
under the enthusiastic leadership of a former Lutheran pastor, Domela
Nieuwenhuis, added to the perplexities of the position. It soon became
evident that a revision of the Fundamental Law and an extension of the
franchise, which the king no longer opposed, was inevitable. Meanwhile
the death of Prince Alexander and the king's growing infirmities made it
necessary to provide, by a bill passed on August 2,1884, that Queen Emma
should become regent during her daughter's minority.

Everything conspired to beset the path of the Heemskerk ministry with
hindrances to administrative or legislative action. The bad state of the
finances (chiefly owing to the calls for the Achin war) the subdivision
of all parties into groups, the socialist agitation and the weak